News   Mar 31, 2026
City Council March, 2026: Plenty of Rental, Mutli-Phase Redevelopments Approved
 1.3K     2 
News   Mar 31, 2026
Building Toronto’s Skyline Podcast Event to Feature Brad Bradford in Concord
 220     3 
News   Mar 31, 2026
Glittering Forma Rises Higher in the Entertainment District
 1.2K     0 

VIA Rail

micheal_can said:
There are 2 stations between Ottawa and Montreal that are in ON; Casselman and Alexandria. Why not just build on the edge of those towns? It sounds like it would be easier than a greenfield build.
Click to expand...
Then you have to deal with local politics and NIMBYs. I doubt that those towns would appreciate Mattamy putting up a few thousand homes nearby. Transportation amenities have a very large positive externality (basically the option value of being able to take the train/plane/bus or ship with it), but you need to be close for those amenities to matter. The Station itself is the most valuable real estate.
 
Frank_Lee said:
Wow this is quite conservative. Seems to basically prohibit any kind of new large scale development outside of existing municipalities, regardless of the existing use of the land.

"The establishment of new permanent townsites shall not be permitted."
Click to expand...
Not that I believe this government cares about or has even read the document, a part of the reason for that position is in relation to resource-based or single industry areas, particularly in the north. In the past, a town would spring up around a mine or mill, then the industry would close and the province is left servicing what and who remains behind. Now, when a new mine opens, they will be permitted to have a temporary or transient camp, but it has to go when it inevitably shuts down and the area remediated per the terms of the mine licence.

Frank_Lee said:
Then you have to deal with local politics and NIMBYs. I doubt that those towns would appreciate Mattamy putting up a few thousand homes nearby. Transportation amenities have a very large positive externality (basically the option value of being able to take the train/plane/bus or ship with it), but you need to be close for those amenities to matter. The Station itself is the most valuable real estate.
Click to expand...
Many would argue that "local politics" - the people who actually live there - should be the final arbiter in land use planning, so long as it within provincial guidelines. Otherwise, who should make these decisions? Queen's Park? Ottawa? "NIMBY" can either be viewed as a derogatory epithet or a desire to ensure the character and economic foundation of a community is respected as circumstances evolve.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T3G
lenaitch said:
Many would argue that "local politics" - the people who actually live there - should be the final arbiter in land use planning, so long as it within provincial guidelines. Otherwise, who should make these decisions? Queen's Park? Ottawa? "NIMBY" can either be viewed as a derogatory epithet or a desire to ensure the character and economic foundation of a community is respected as circumstances evolve.
Click to expand...
NIMBYism is one of the worst thing that has ever come out of politics. Ask someone if they want a homeless shelter, and they are for it. Ask if they want it in their neighbourhood and they will fight tooth and nail to stop it.
 
If CN is being such a pain in the A$$ in the corridor, would CP be open to having VIA run trains on the Belleville Sub? In some places you would need to build a station behind the current station or build a siding for the station.

Is that something that should be considered?
 
Bordercollie said:
If CN is being such a pain in the A$$ in the corridor, would CP be open to having VIA run trains on the Belleville Sub? In some places you would need to build a station behind the current station or build a siding for the station.

Is that something that should be considered?
Click to expand...

Moving from a 2- and sometimes 3-track line to a mostly 1-track line would be a real problem.

CN is not the problem, it’s the loose regulatory and legal environment that lets CN get away with things - I’m not sure CP would behave any differently.

We might see some limited involvement of CPKC if any of the HxR proposals come to be.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
Moving from a 2- and sometimes 3-track line to a mostly 1-track line would be a real problem.

CN is not the problem, it’s the loose regulatory and legal environment that lets CN get away with things - I’m not sure CP would behave any differently.

We might see some limited involvement of CPKC if any of the HxR proposals come to be.

- Paul
Click to expand...
CN is still the problem:

in 2023 CN spent $1,160,000 lobbying the US government. I don't have figures on the Canadian amount, but one can assume it would be a lot too.

This is why our politicians will never do anything to make passenger rail along CN better. CN basically pays them not to do anything.
 
crs1026 said:
Moving from a 2- and sometimes 3-track line to a mostly 1-track line would be a real problem.

CN is not the problem, it’s the loose regulatory and legal environment that lets CN get away with things - I’m not sure CP would behave any differently.

We might see some limited involvement of CPKC if any of the HxR proposals come to be.

- Paul
Click to expand...
You are assuming that CPKC would be any better to deal with. Via 185/1186 runs only on CPKC tracks and it is just as late as any other train. If your assumption were correct, it would not be late. This is a case of whoever is in charge does what is best for them.
 
Bojaxs said:
CP24 link. No paywall.
Click to expand...
"The vast majority of Via trains run on CN-owned tracks, which the Crown corporation pays to access. Via warns that its “captive client” status and CN’s “quasi-monopolistic position” mean the country’s largest railway can prioritize its own locomotives over passenger trains."

Frankly embarrassing that we are in this situation.
 
Received from a friend;

I have a friend who has been riding the new Venture trains & VIA has removed the bike rack & VIA is overwhelmed with a lack of checked baggage so they are using a spare car in the set for luggage on seats. Not building a baggage car in the set was a mistake.
Click to expand...
 
Allandale25 said:
Received from a friend;

I have a friend who has been riding the new Venture trains & VIA has removed the bike rack & VIA is overwhelmed with a lack of checked baggage so they are using a spare car in the set for luggage on seats. Not building a baggage car in the set was a mistake.
Click to expand...
I don't think i've ever seen someone take a bike with them on a Corridor train. Maybe once.

The rest of this I don't entirely understand. Overwhelmed with a lack of checked baggage? On a lot of trains i'm on I don't really see a lack of space for baggage, and typically when i'm storing my larger luggage at the end of the train there's room for it with room to spare, same as it was with the older trainsets. Don't believe i've seen any issues with overhead luggage as there would be on a plane.
 
micheal_can said:
NIMBYism is one of the worst thing that has ever come out of politics. Ask someone if they want a homeless shelter, and they are for it. Ask if they want it in their neighbourhood and they will fight tooth and nail to stop it.
Click to expand...
It's not politics; it's human nature, somebody just put an acronym to it. What has changed is social media facilitating a wider net.

I'm not sure many would roll over to a scrap yard or slaughterhouse proposed next to their house. That's what land use planning is supposed to prevent.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top