[micheal_can]

To recap what several people have already pointed out about the downtown Ottawa station:

• The trainshed and associated infrastructure are gone.
• They cannot be rebuilt without demolishing several other buildings, including National Defence Headquarters and Ottawa's principal convention centre.
• While you can tunnel instead, this would be extremely expensive compared to the alternatives. (And the Department of National Defence may have views on whether they want a rail tunnel under their headquarters building.)
• You will not be allowed to do any work which endangers the Rideau Canal as a cultural and environmental entity. You cannot mess up the view, you cannot add noise, you cannot do major construction in the vicinity, you cannot obstruct pedestrian or vehicular access, thou shalt not.
• Any alignment which runs through to the old station would piss off a ton of well-connected NIMBY types who have historically been very successful at getting the city to prioritize them.
• Most (all?) ALTO trains through Ottawa will be through trains, meaning that having a terminus will create ongoing operational issues. (Whereas most trains to Montreal will terminate there.)
• Ottawa already has an under-utilized rail station which is connected to their metro system, adjacent to the Trans-Canada Highway, and surrounded by cheap industrial and ex-industrial land for expansion.

At this point, I'm inclined to assume that the people who are still pitching for the downtown station are drunk on nostalgia and ignoring the rest of what they're really proposing.

There are people still pitching it because it is part of their study area. Notice how no one has been talking about the North Toronto station or corridor? I feel that is mainly due to the fact that the study area did not include it. Had it been included, on here we would be seeing pages of back and forth on it too.

We do not know how they will be running the trains. The service schedule and the destinations each train will serve has not been released. So, we do not know which stations will or will not be served by which trains.

A lot of this would be cleared up if a detailed public release on what they are studying happened. That did not happen. So, creative minds are working through all the options and how they would do it. Remember that video they released? Why would they release a video showing something that some think may not happen, even though it is depicting one of the many options? ALTO, it seems is still pitching a downtown Ottawa station.

So many posters talking about so little, LOL

****

Let me drop a little something in here.........

Notices to property owners where Alto may be looking to take an interest will be heading out shortly. That should make a wee bit of news. Don't have the exact dates, but will be relatively soon.

.. and on here, it should make for great posts on speculation and whining of:
"Why are they doing that?"
"Why aren't they doing this?"
"That is going to be horrible for _____"
And so on....

Till then,the speculation on everything is interesting to read.

 

[kEiThZ]

I really hope this project doesn't devolve into another political tennis ball - "such and such hamlet DESERVES ALTO SERVICE!!!!!!!"

There's already people arguing that Ottawa "deserves" a downtown station, just like Toronto and Montreal, regardless of what it does to the cost of the line and the speed of thru services.

 

[Mihairokov]

While you can tunnel instead, this would be extremely expensive compared to the alternatives. (And the Department of National Defence may have views on whether they want a rail tunnel under their headquarters building.)

Should note that any tunnel in Ottawa would have to be exceptionally deep because of whatever soil/rock condition they have. Ottawa's LRT has some of the deepest stations you'll find because of it. ALTO would have to be deeper. It's not happening.

 

[legoswmonkey]

Cut-and-cover and trenching has been used extensively on the LRT west extension, and I think that would work well for a potential double track spur into Ottawa Union. Trenched (or even elevated) through the 417/Nicholas interchange, then rip out Colonel By for a few years and either reopen it or expand the greenspace and trails next to the canal on top of the tracks.

 

[reaperexpress]

It would only make sense to build a detour to a downtown station in Ottawa if there are separate Montreal-Ottawa, Ottawa-Toronto and Montreal-Toronto services. But for the first decade(s) of operation it would make most sense to have Montreal-Ottawa-Toronto through services to enable higher frequencies on the individual segments in the meantime until ridership builds to the point that we can run high frequencies between each individual pair.

So for an initial rollout it makes most sense to use the existing railways and stations that the federal government already owns. A downtown station is something to start talking about a decade after the line opens, in combination with a bypass around the south side of the city for Toronto-Montreal direct services.

The fact that Alto is already getting the public talking about a downtown station in Ottawa suggests to me that they'll fall down the same rabbit hole as California HSR, proposing pie-in-the-sky ideas, trying to please everyone, and spending decades and billions of dollars on project planning, followed by unreasonable requirements that inflate project costs. Another example of their self-sabotage is their requirement to pass by Peterborough even if they choose an alignment closer to the lake north of Kingston.

What they would ideally do is develop a pragmatic initial operating segment with provisions for future upgrades (like Brightline East & West), keeping project requirements for NIMBY placation as low as possible to avoid cost spiraling that would put the entire project in jeopardy.

 

[ShonTron]

In which I argue for the existing VIA station, despite its location.

Ottawa’s Union Station problem

The idea of returning passenger trains to Ottawa’s beautiful downtown Union Station is very attractive. However, the current VIA station offers several key advantages for Alto that the old te…

seanmarshall.ca

 

[White Pine]

It would only make sense to build a detour to a downtown station in Ottawa if there are separate Montreal-Ottawa, Ottawa-Toronto and Montreal-Toronto services. But for the first decade(s) of operation it would make most sense to have Montreal-Ottawa-Toronto through services to enable higher frequencies on the individual segments in the meantime until ridership builds to the point that we can run high frequencies between each individual pair.

So for an initial rollout it makes most sense to use the existing railways and stations that the federal government already owns. A downtown station is something to start talking about a decade after the line opens, in combination with a bypass around the south side of the city for Toronto-Montreal direct services.
View attachment 711125

The fact that Alto is already getting the public talking about a downtown station in Ottawa suggests to me that they'll fall down the same rabbit hole as California HSR, proposing pie-in-the-sky ideas, trying to please everyone, and spending decades and billions of dollars on project planning, followed by unreasonable requirements that inflate project costs. Another example of their self-sabotage is their requirement to pass by Peterborough even if they choose an alignment closer to the lake north of Kingston.
View attachment 711144
What they would ideally do is develop a pragmatic initial operating segment with provisions for future upgrades (like Brightline East & West), keeping project requirements for NIMBY placation as low as possible to avoid cost spiraling that would put the entire project in jeopardy.

I feel like if the station is to be downtown, it may as well be done now. There's no point in doing it later especially if the initial segment is between ottawa and montreal. I think that tremblay is probably the most pragmatic of the two (probably), and don't really support a bypass (though could see a case If Union is being used).

 

[reinventingthewheel]

In which I argue for the existing VIA station, despite its location.

Ottawa’s Union Station problem

The idea of returning passenger trains to Ottawa’s beautiful downtown Union Station is very attractive. However, the current VIA station offers several key advantages for Alto that the old te…

seanmarshall.ca

Couldn’t agree more with your concluding statements, I’ve been trying to put it in the right words myself.

The Alto stations gain much more value from intermodal access as opposed to immediate walk-up residences, jobs, and tourism.

It may be possible to affordably deliver a simple few platforms and amenities in the old Ottawa Union Station but it will incur a certain technical debt. Any future connectivity will come at a huge cost due to the constraints of the area.

Montreal and Toronto are obviously different stories as they have massive intermodal hubs in their downtowns. They see tons of traffic already and have room to grow even further through service increases.

 

[generalcanada]

this guy went to the open house. not too much we didnt know for the first 13 minutes. Except maybe the use of continuous welded rail

but this piqued my attention at 12:30. ""there will be 0 level crossings through the entire route" thats crazy right?

 

[McGillicuddy]

but this piqued my attention at 12:30. ""there will be 0 level crossings through the entire route" thats crazy right?

It's unusual for a Canadian heavy rail corridor, but it's the global standard for dedicated high-speed rail lines.

 

[generalcanada]

It's unusual for a Canadian heavy rail corridor, but it's the global standard for dedicated high-speed rail lines.

When MX charges 250mil per grade crossing thats going to be quite expensive

 

[urbanclient]

It's unusual for a Canadian heavy rail corridor, but it's the global standard for dedicated high-speed rail lines.

Incoming Umm Aktchualy-ers pointing out that France has level-crossings (on non-dedicated segments) Don't forget they also hit 320 km/h on some of their lines

All the more reason to lobby Alto for scope creep to 320 km/h. Take the money we save from keeping some level-crossings and invest it in higher top speeds that can save minutes in the low single-digits from Toronto to Montreal... /s

 

[Allandale25]

When MX charges 250mil per grade crossing thats going to be quite expensive

Some of them will likely be closed.

 

[Urban Sky]

Incoming Umm Aktchualy-ers pointing out that France has level-crossings (on non-dedicated segments) Don't forget they also hit 320 km/h on some of their lines

Indeed, there are level crossings on conventional lines which are used by only a few TGV trainsper day, but all main corridors (Paris-Lille/Brussels, Paris-Strasbourg, Patis-Lyon-Marseilles, Paris-Bordeaux) should be free of any level crossings. As a near-universal safety standard, level crossings are generally banned for design speeds in excess of 160 km/h (100 mph)…

 

[reaperexpress]

Indeed, there are level crossings on conventional lines which are used by only a few TGV trainsper day, but all main corridors (Paris-Lille/Brussels, Paris-Strasbourg, Patis-Lyon-Marseilles, Paris-Bordeaux) should be free of any level crossings. As a near-universal safety standard, level crossings are generally banned for design speeds in excess of 160 km/h (100 mph)…

Obviously we're not talking about level crossings on the high-speed segments, we're talking about the approaches into Toronto and Montreal where trains will be travelling below 160 km/h.

Anyway, considering the routes that seem to be the frontrunners (Toronto via the Don Branch or Stouffville line, and Montreal via a new tunnel), there aren't many places where you'd consider a level crossing anyway, so it's not that much of an ask to just rule them out entirely.