News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.5K     0 

The Oakville sub already is rated for LRC+ so could you not upgrade the Grimsby sub to the same standard? You would be able to go Toronto to Niagara in 90min?
The two main problems are that there is no space in Toronto Union Station for border facilities and that the Welland Canal crossing on the Grimsby Sub in unreliable. Both issues point at building the border facility in Buffalo and making use of the CPKC line through the rail/road tunnel in Welland.
 
Last edited:
The two main problems are that there is no space in Toronto Union Station for border facilities and that the Welland Canal crossing on the Grimsby Sub in unreliable. Both issues point at building the border facility in Buffalo and making use of the CPKC line through the rail/road tunnel in Welland…
That would require a new station in Niagara Falls.
 
That would require a new station in Niagara Falls.
No, Niagara Falls is irrelevant for cross-border travel (Canadians and Americans stay on their respective sides of the border). The only workable route for fast&frequent train service from Toronto to Buffalo is via the CPKC route from Hamilton to Welland and Fort Erie. American trains can continue to operate from NYC beyond Buffalo to Niagara Falls, but passengers to Toronto would change trains at a new border facility in Buffalo…
 
I am going to need some context. Do they own the entire route and any other route that could be used? Are the as bad as CPKC is when dealing with Via?
There is plenty of context out there if you are willing to go and do the reading about high speed rail in NYS, rather than throw out your wild suggestions and require others to fact check it for you.
 
The two main problems are that there is no space in Toronto Union Station for border facilities and that the Welland Canal crossing on the Grimsby Sub in unreliable. Both issues point at building the border facility in Buffalo and making use of the CPKC line through the rail/road tunnel in Welland.
There's place for the Blue Bovine and what appears to be the world's biggest food court - but they couldn't use a portion of the station for a custom's facility, like they do at the much much smaller station in Vancouver?

It's a solvable problem if they wanted to do it.

Ditto for Welland - if they want to be serious about rail transit past St. Catharines we need to build another tunnel.
 
There's place for the Blue Bovine and what appears to be the world's biggest food court - but they couldn't use a portion of the station for a custom's facility, like they do at the much much smaller station in Vancouver?

It's a solvable problem if they wanted to do it.

Ditto for Welland - if they want to be serious about rail transit past St. Catharines we need to build another tunnel.
The platform would need an enclosed waiting area with a customs facility for a platform only used a few times a day.
 
There's place for the Blue Bovine and what appears to be the world's biggest food court - but they couldn't use a portion of the station for a custom's facility, like they do at the much much smaller station in Vancouver?

It's a solvable problem if they wanted to do it.

Ditto for Welland - if they want to be serious about rail transit past St. Catharines we need to build another tunnel.
If we're talking about space at Union, I'd point you to a post I made yesterday on the Union revitalization thread - and I agree that there probably is still underused space at Union.

That would require a new station in Niagara Falls.
I figure Niagara Falls will probably need a new station closer to the falls eventually. The more realistic of the two ideas I had was to rebuild the old CN lift bridge over the canal south of Thorold that was demolished in 1998, and then extend the industrial spur off of Port Robinson a couple kilometres south-east over the Welland river, where you'd join the CP Montrose spur and end in a station south of the Fallsview casino, just 200 metres from the falls.

That would work for a GO station, but wouldn't allow for VIA through service. I did have an idea about creating VIA service through Niagara Falls, but it's a bit fantastical, so I hesitate to mention it.
 
There's place for the Blue Bovine and what appears to be the world's biggest food court - but they couldn't use a portion of the station for a custom's facility, like they do at the much much smaller station in Vancouver?
If we're talking about space at Union, I'd point you to a post I made yesterday on the Union revitalization thread - and I agree that there probably is still underused space at Union.
At Vancouver, cross-border trains account for 87.5% of all departures and they have an entirely dedicated platform for these trains. In Toronto Union, you would need to seal off an entirely dedicated platform platform for barely 1% of daily departures. Whatever space there is 10 meters below the platform is irrelevant: you need it adjacent to the platform in an area which can be sealed off public foot traffic. Have a look at the plans of stations used by the Eurostar (e.g., London STP, Lille-Europe, Bruxxelles-Midi, Rotterdam C or Amsterdam C) to get an idea of the footprint of these border facilities. Sealed and non-seal trains must not share a platform, which eliminates everything apart from Track 1 (Platform 3), so good luck hunting for space there…

It's a solvable problem if they wanted to do it.
Sure, they just need to cancel 4 departures for every cross-border train. Or build a new station somewhere else. Or expand Exhibition station with a cross-border facility. Or Oakville. All totally doable if the only thing you care about is a cross-border facility and you are willing to accept any price.

Ditto for Welland - if they want to be serious about rail transit past St. Catharines we need to build another tunnel.
That would work for a GO station, but wouldn't allow for VIA through service. I did have an idea about creating VIA service through Niagara Falls, but it's a bit fantastical, so I hesitate to mention it.
Sure. All doable if you are willing to pay billions of dollars just to have your Toronto-NYC serve Niagara Falls, a city which will already be sufficiently served by GO.

I figure Niagara Falls will probably need a new station closer to the falls eventually. The more realistic of the two ideas I had was to rebuild the old CN lift bridge over the canal south of Thorold that was demolished in 1998, and then extend the industrial spur off of Port Robinson a couple kilometres south-east over the Welland river, where you'd join the CP Montrose spur and end in a station south of the Fallsview casino, just 200 metres from the falls.
The GO Station is fine. All what is missing is a proper, frequent bus shuttle to the actual falls…
 
Last edited:
At Vancouver, cross-border trains account for 87.5% of all departures and they have an entirely dedicated platform for these trains. In Toronto Union, you would need to seal off an entirely dedicated platform platform for barely 1% of daily departures. Whatever space there is 10 meters below the platform is irrelevant: you need it adjacent to the platform in an area which can be sealed off public foot traffic. Have a look at the plans of stations used by the Eurostar (e.g., London STP, Lille-Europe, Bruxxelles-Midi, Rotterdam C or Amsterdam C) to get an idea of the footprint of these border facilities. Sealed and non-seal trains must not share a platform, which eliminates everything apart from Track 1 (Platform 3), so good luck hunting for space there…
I disagree. You simply put staff on the platform to make sure everyone is guided to the correct stairs. Which is exactly how it works/worked at Waterloo, St. Pancras, and Gare du Nord (well, you need less people at Gare du Nord with only the access to the platform from the one end).

Knock down part of that ugly trainshed, and build the customs facility above it. Or a thousand other options. This "we can't do it" attitude is the reason that little gets built in this country.
[/QUOTE]

Sure. All doable if you are willing to pay billions of dollars just to have your Toronto-NYC serve Niagara Falls, a city which will already be sufficiently served by GO.
A customs facility doesn't have to be massive. Even in Vancouver, despite the relative size, they have most people standing in a line on the outdoor platform.

The required modifications at Union would cost a $billion. Probably a lot cheaper per passenger than the modifications to start the unneeded train to North Bay.

And of course you don't build a tunnel at Welland for the New York City service. It's required if Metrolinx is serious about rail service to Niagara Falls, rather than terminating most trains at St. Catharines, with a bus connection to points further east.
 
I disagree. You simply put staff on the platform to make sure everyone is guided to the correct stairs. Which is exactly how it works/worked at Waterloo, St. Pancras, and Gare du Nord (well, you need less people at Gare du Nord with only the access to the platform from the one end).
This is exaxtly not how Eurostar stations operate: There is a hermetical separation between the “international” zone and the “domestic” zone, just like at any airport. And that needs space, lots of it.

Knock down part of that ugly trainshed, and build the customs facility above it. Or a thousand other options. This "we can't do it" attitude is the reason that little gets built in this country.

[…]

The required modifications at Union would cost a $billion. Probably a lot cheaper per passenger than the modifications to start the unneeded train to North Bay.
Sure, if neither money nor heritage status (this is a listed building, after all) play any consideration, we could build anything! But as long as we are bound to the boring constraints of reality, such proposals belong into fantasy threads, to not distract from real-world discussions…

A customs facility doesn't have to be massive. Even in Vancouver, despite the relative size, they have most people standing in a line on the outdoor platform.
Exactly: passengers block the platform until the last passenger has been processed and cleared for entry. Time in which no other train or passemger can use the platform. Works great with 16 arriving trains per week - works much less well with that amount of trains serving the station in less than an hour…

And of course you don't build a tunnel at Welland for the New York City service. It's required if Metrolinx is serious about rail service to Niagara Falls, rather than terminating most trains at St. Catharines, with a bus connection to points further east.
This won’t be necessary at the frequencies Metrolinx proposes. Brightline runs hourly services over drawbridges…
 
What about building an underground platform that is below the train shed and existing underground structures? Have a 1 or 2 track tunnel that leads to a platform that leads to a newly dug out area that handles all international trains. There are not going to be any easy and cheap solutions. So,what is the most realistic options?
 
I'll be honest, I didn't mean to suggest a customs check at Union was necessarily a great idea, just that I thought there was space for it. I'd place more faith personally on a Schengen-type deal or some way of speeding up the current border checks.

You could maybe have people fill out questions on an app and scan their passports ahead of time, and then (EDIT: This would be at the border as a way of speeding up current checks, not at Union, to be clear.) a team of border agents, one per car, could go and scan people's phones to make sure they had filled out the forms, similar to the ticket scans now. Then they could do random checks by pulling a handful of people and bags off the train at random, instead of making everyone get off. They have cameras on trains I think, so it should be possible to identify who brought a bag onboard even if no one claims it as theirs. You could speed up the current process a lot I bet.

That said, while it wouldn't be my first choice, I do think customs at Union is workable, if not ideal. In my post on the Union revitalization thread, I explained why I thought the Metrolinx office space could be repurposed. There are a lot of things, such as retail, that I think you could do with that space, but the most appealing to me is to move the VIA Rail concourse up there, and build a pedestrian bridge over to VIA's usual platforms, either overtop the heritage train shed roof, or around its edges. Then you could open up the walls of the current VIA concourse to create a more seamless connection between the new York and Bay concourses while separating commuters from long-distance domestic passengers.

If you built a customs area up there as well, you'd have to build a separate waiting area to hold international passengers after they cleared customs, and perhaps a second pedestrian bridge. The problem, credit to @Bordercollie and @Urban Sky for pointing it out to me, would be the platforms. Even a full 300 km/h line to New York might not see enough trains to justify a dedicated platform, let alone two, if you had to keep the second part of an island platform clear as well. But I don't think this is an insurmountable issue. VIA doesn't normally have two departing trains loading at the same time from the same island platform anyway, so if you were careful to only use the platform for departing trains (sealing off the access from below) and have a customs officer clear the platform of objects (cameras help with that) before bringing in international passengers after a domestic train had departed, I think it might work. You could bring up the next domestic train to the platform as you load the international one, so I don't even think you'd lose much capacity. (There's also the UP solution of building a side-platform nearby.)

I just don't think a customs facility would be worth the cost (though I doubt it would be $1 billion), or the logistical headache, but I think it could be done.

(EDIT: P.S. Level boarding on a high-level platform would help a lot too, which you could do with a VIA-exclusive platform.)
 
Last edited:
You could maybe have people fill out questions on an app and scan their passports ahead of time, and then a team of border agents, one per car, could go and scan people's phones to make sure they had filled out the forms, similar to the ticket scans now. Then they could do random checks by pulling a handful of people and bags off the train at random, instead of making everyone get off. They have cameras on trains I think, so it should be possible to identify who brought a bag onboard even if no one claims it as theirs. You could speed up the current process a lot I bet.
The whole concept of 'pre-clearance' is that passengers are approved to enter the other country before the train departs, not during the trip but before the border. Assuming no Canadian stops before the border (otherwise, what's the point), what would they do if, after departure, someone is determined to be ineligible for entry or they are carrying prohibited goods?

Border control with the US is only going to get tighter, not looser, and agents will always reserve the right to interview and inspect anyone they feel like.

A pre-clearance facility is essentially a government exercising their sovereign authority within a foreign country and with its agreement, and will always demand the concept of 'cordon sanitaire'.
 

Back
Top