News   Apr 01, 2026
Lombard Canyon
 121     0 
News   Mar 31, 2026
City Council March, 2026: Plenty of Rental, Mutli-Phase Redevelopments Approved
 1.4K     2 
News   Mar 31, 2026
Building Toronto’s Skyline Podcast Event to Feature Brad Bradford in Concord
 235     3 

VIA Rail

The Province's cancellation of the Missing Link project was justified based on the fact that CN would permit all-day GO service to Kitchener on an upgraded CN Halton sub, presumably 1 or 2 GO trains per hour.

But the Missing Link wasn't just a way to bring an hourly service to Kitchener, it would have been a total game-changer for passenger rail west of Toronto, creating a passenger-rail-controlled corridor from Toronto to London. HFR West would become totally practical, as well as frequent local service which actually makes it from Toronto to downtown Brampton rather than turning back one stop short at Bramalea. As @crs1026 mentioned, CN's traffic is pretty light between London and Kitchener, so they probably wouldn't mind selling that segment to ML or VIA (while retaining trackage rights). The main reason that hasn't happened yet is that without the bypass in place, the passenger agencies can't count on running enough trains to justify their investment in the line.

Here's how that dedicated passenger line could fit into our mainline rail network:
Green = Metrolinx/GO
Red = CP
Blue = CN
Capture.JPG


In this scenario I showed ML owning the line all the way to London, but VIA could equally own the segment west of Kitchener if that works out better logistically.
 
Last edited:
reaperexpress said:
The Province's cancellation of the Missing Link project was justified based on the fact that CN would permit all-day GO service to Kitchener on an upgraded CN Halton sub, presumably 1 or 2 GO trains per hour.

But the Missing Link wasn't just a way to bring an hourly service to Kitchener, it would have been a total game-changer for passenger rail west of Toronto, creating a passenger-rail-controlled corridor from Toronto to London. HFR West would become totally practical, as well as frequent local service which actually makes it from Toronto to downtown Brampton rather than turning back one stop short at Bramalea. As @crs1026 mentioned, CN's traffic is pretty light between London and Kitchener, so they probably wouldn't mind selling that segment to ML or VIA (while retaining trackage rights). The main reason that hasn't happened yet is that without the bypass in place, the passenger agencies can't count on running enough trains to justify their investment in the line.

Here's how that dedicated passenger line could fit into our mainline rail network:
Green = Metrolinx/GO
Red = CP
Blue = CN
View attachment 305492

In this scenario I showed ML owning the line all the way to London, but VIA could equally own the segment west of Kitchener if that works out better logistically.
Click to expand...
It's a shame really that despite all the posturing about improving passenger rail, CN still has us by the balls in one of the most critical corridors. At this point I rather the country or province just build the track and force CN to move onto that track. Obviously no one has the political spine to touch this corporation while they can hold Canadian passenger rail hostage to their whims
 
reaperexpress said:
But the Missing Link wasn't just a way to bring an hourly service to Kitchener, it would have been a total game-changer for passenger rail west of Toronto
Click to expand...

Would the missing link also have allowed some CP trains to use the CN line to by-pass Toronto freeing up part of the Milton like for all-day service? Or was it focused only on CN trains?
 
trebello said:
Would the missing link also have allowed some CP trains to use the CN line to by-pass Toronto freeing up part of the Milton like for all-day service? Or was it focused only on CN trains?
Click to expand...
The missing link was only between Milton and Brampton. To free up the midtown line it would require paralleling of the CN track from Brampton to Scarborough.
 
EnviroTO said:
With CP's Yards where they are, I would have VIA HFR connect to the Stouffville on a new east-west connection just north of Major Mackenzie Dr.
Click to expand...

While that certainly is an option, I am not convinced it is the best one for the following reasons:
  1. Passing through the CPR Toronto Yard won't be as hard as it would have been a decade ago. Under Hunter Harrison's leadership (starting 2012), CP removed the yard's hump and its 72 classification tracks (C Yard). This leaves lots of room for VIA to build a bypass.
  2. North of the 407, the Stouffville Sub is single track and has a lot of level crossings. I'm not sure how feasible it would be to share single track with GO, and while double track level crossings are possible, they do tend to be problematic, especially with higher speed trains in an urban setting. By comparison, that section of the Havelock Sub has fewer crossings and, more importantly, they are more rural, and thus will have fewer cars crossing it.
 
roger1818 said:
While that certainly is an option, I am not convinced it is the best one for the following reasons:
  1. Passing through the CPR Toronto Yard won't be as hard as it would have been a decade ago. Under Hunter Harrison's leadership (starting 2012), CP removed the yard's hump and its 72 classification tracks (C Yard). This leaves lots of room for VIA to build a bypass.
  2. North of the 407, the Stouffville Sub is single track and has a lot of level crossings. I'm not sure how feasible it would be to share single track with GO, and while double track level crossings are possible, they do tend to be problematic, especially with higher speed trains in an urban setting. By comparison, that section of the Havelock Sub has fewer crossings and, more importantly, they are more rural, and thus will have fewer cars crossing it.
Click to expand...

Interleaving into the flow on the Stouffville line (which is planned to absorb a ginormous volume of closely-spaced RER trains) will be complicated enough over the short stretch from the CP overpass down to Kennedy and on to Scarborough Jct. Joining the line further north, and having to follow GO trains that will be stopping all the way down, would be very painful.

There is now plenty of room to build a dedicated main line track for HFR skirting along the north side of the Agincourt Yard. It will be interesting to see how a connecting track would be built to reach the Stouffville line. Curvature will be tight, which means trains will have to run slowly. Ideally one would have an underpass under the CP line, but that's expensive and could take time to build. If the connecting track isn't an underpass, it will have to cross CP's freight line at grade, similar to how VIA transits Smiths Falls at the moment. That's a recipe for CP to undermine the whole premise of improving reliability by removing conflict with freight...... doubly so if VIA intends to carry on along the Belleville Sub to Leaside and down the Don Branch. And if VIA does choose the GO line, trains will cross over at grade to join that line....inevitably this will conflict with GO movements. All doable, but the useable high speed portion of the line will likely end around Tapscott.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
Interleaving into the flow on the Stouffville line (which is planned to absorb a ginormous volume of closely-spaced RER trains) will be complicated enough over the short stretch from the CP overpass down to Kennedy and on to Scarborough Jct. Joining the line further north, and having to follow GO trains that will be stopping all the way down, would be very painful.

There is now plenty of room to build a dedicated main line track for HFR skirting along the north side of the Agincourt Yard. It will be interesting to see how a connecting track would be built to reach the Stouffville line. Curvature will be tight, which means trains will have to run slowly. Ideally one would have an underpass under the CP line, but that's expensive and could take time to build. If the connecting track isn't an underpass, it will have to cross CP's freight line at grade, similar to how VIA transits Smiths Falls at the moment. That's a recipe for CP to undermine the whole premise of improving reliability by removing conflict with freight...... doubly so if VIA intends to carry on along the Belleville Sub to Leaside and down the Don Branch. And if VIA does choose the GO line, trains will cross over at grade to join that line....inevitably this will conflict with GO movements. All doable, but the useable high speed portion of the line will likely end around Tapscott.

- Paul
Click to expand...

Totally see what you're saying but given the estimate of $6B for HFR (I think that's what I've seen), one would hope the JPO will include a grade separation to deal with the CP Belleville Sub cross. Generally, the more rail/rail grade separations they can throw in the better. As for dealing with GO, definitely see the challenge and again hope the JPO addresses how this can be dealt with.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top