jks
Continuous Lurker
Exactly WHY are connections to Buffalo, Windsor, and Ottawa/Montreal shown as regular rail?? Couldn't they have coordinated this with the Ontario-Quebec Study??
|
|
|
- Thread starter waterloowarrior
- Start date
RedRocket191
Senior Member
kEiThZ
Superstar
This could easily be the template for a more advanced GO train system. And I'd prefer this to spending billions on Ontario-Quebec HSR. This is far more achievable. And far more beneficial from an environmental and developmental perspective.
AnarchoSocialist
Active Member
^In an indirect way this is part of an Ontario-Quebec HSR project. If a HSR project for the corridor were proposed tomorrow, a lot of these upgrades proposed would have to be done anyways to ensure that the trains did not lose a lot of time in the urban areas. And if for example a similar plan were proposed for Montreal and its surrounding environs then those projects would suddenly make an HSR line in the corridor a lot easier as the project would not have to worry about urban centers and would only have to focus on building HSLines (at TGV speeds) outside the two urban areas which reduces the overall costs directly related too the project which always helps when it comes to public support.
Edit: The same is also true, too a lesser extent, of proposed commuter rail in the Ottawa region, especially a line east of Ottawa, towards Montreal. The existing line (or a configuration close to it) could concern itself with providing access to the smaller communities between Ottawa and Montreal to the two cities that is currently served by VIA and a HSR service could simply focus on Ottawa-Dorval-Montreal.
Edit: The same is also true, too a lesser extent, of proposed commuter rail in the Ottawa region, especially a line east of Ottawa, towards Montreal. The existing line (or a configuration close to it) could concern itself with providing access to the smaller communities between Ottawa and Montreal to the two cities that is currently served by VIA and a HSR service could simply focus on Ottawa-Dorval-Montreal.
Last edited:
Whoaccio
Senior Member
No country has 'hsr' (even of the 140-160km/h variety) to towns the size of Orillia unless they are a.)en route to a substantial metropolis or b.)so ridiculously subsidized that normal circumstances don't apply. Not Japan, not England and not France. As the crow flies, Toronto-North Bay is about 300-320 km. Excluding the Toronto area, that corridor has a year round population of, maybe, 150k. As far as potential rail customers go, there might as well be 100 people there. The last time I took the ONR to North Bay, literally, about 20 people got off. Would that number increase with better rail service? Probably. Would it top a few hundred people a day? Doubt it.
MisterF
Senior Member
Barrie alone has that many people. The whole corridor is double that easily. Regardless, ONR and VIA's Canadian already use that corridor, they're not going anywhere. Both trains completely bypass Barrie and Orillia, a flaw that should be fixed regardless of commuter rail. Going through those two cities would consolidate ONR, VIA, and GO on one corridor and maximize ridership and cost recovery. The fact that it presents the opportunity for commuter rail to Orillia (40,000 in the CA) is another benefit.
adma
Superstar
Though one other problem with rail to those towns, versus a lot of those foreign jurisdictions where "rail works", is that there isn't much of a backup/connective public transpo infrastructure, i.e. decent interurban bus networks. Ideally, if things worked "the Euro way", you wouldn't just have regular rail to Bracebridge, you might have a whole slew of regular local/postal/whistle-stop bus routes going to Port Carling, Windermere, Bala, Dorset, wherever--the sort of stuff which might conceivably justify going to Muskoka sans automobile...
All this talk about rail. Yet we keep forgetting that *buses* might be essential, too--and in a way that North American culture is so terminally unaccustomed to considering...
All this talk about rail. Yet we keep forgetting that *buses* might be essential, too--and in a way that North American culture is so terminally unaccustomed to considering...
CDL.TO
Moderator
Very, very, very true (very), and too often forgotten.
kEiThZ
Superstar
I agree that this proposal would be a good phase 1 for a future HSR. This is also where my skepticism towards inter-provincial HSR comes in. This proposal for example would do far more to improve productivity and take cars off the road than the inter-provincial HSR. Likewise, Ottawa desperately needs some kind of GO train system. The 23 billion to be spent on inter-provincial HSR could provide the system proposed here and the needed transit investment for Ottawa and Montreal.
I would suggest inter-provincial HSR should only be built after these systems are in place. Having these systems in place will remove the need for anybody to take their car on a trip. It should also reduce the cost of the inter-provincial HSR like you've pointed out. I would consider inter-provincial HSR a phase 4, after Toronto builds this system, Ottawa gets a GO train like service and Montreal improves service to its outer suburbs (the latter won't take much).
Anyway, I am really digging this proposal....
AnarchoSocialist
Active Member
Even if HSR corridor service were announced tomorrow it would still take 5 - 7 years of planning before a single shovel would be in the ground. Though I think dealing with urban areas is more important now, with the amount of planning that is needed for intercity HSR connections that aspect of it could be started soon since the majority of the cost of the project would still be several years away.
Just an aside about Ottawa. I do think the city needs commuter rail service. And though there are a number of proposals on the board right now, the city (and region) are so incredibly dysfunctional that I can see it all going very wrong. Part of it has to do with the rather hard-right edge the city currently has. Part of it also has to do with the fact that a number of proposals are interprovincial in nature and that means not only playing nice (which doesn't happen often), but long term cooperation through an interprovincial agency which will make planning very interesting to say the least.
Getting back to Toronto the one thing I do hope that Metrolinx and a proposal like this do address properly is integrating Pearson into the network. And not through theme park, cable car thingies and distant stations or limiting onsite access to private interests but making a station that can be used by all the rail agencies. If that were to happen, then I think the GTA would be well on its way to actually making rail effective and efficient in a way that would really change how people view, and most importantly, use it.
Edit: If there is one project that I think should start tomorrow it would be creating dedicated passenger lines into Central Station in Montreal which would not cover a large area, but would really challenging. The Mont Royal tunnel would need to be rebuilt, access to the South Shore would have to be improved (either through a new bridge expanding Victoria), and the corridor roughly St-Anne de Bellevue, to Dorval, and into Central Station would have to be totally rebuilt and reconfigured, which is complicated by multiple track ownership. All the areas outside of this these sections are really not that difficult to expand, and it will be these small sections on the island and access to the South Shore that will make all the difference. Oddly enough, local opposition to the proposed changes to the Turcott interchange in Dorval have put on hold plans for an airport shuttle and a station directly connected to Dorval. Because of that those projects have fallen to the side and there is more discussion of that corridor as a whole. Sometimes NIMBYism can work out for the best.
Just an aside about Ottawa. I do think the city needs commuter rail service. And though there are a number of proposals on the board right now, the city (and region) are so incredibly dysfunctional that I can see it all going very wrong. Part of it has to do with the rather hard-right edge the city currently has. Part of it also has to do with the fact that a number of proposals are interprovincial in nature and that means not only playing nice (which doesn't happen often), but long term cooperation through an interprovincial agency which will make planning very interesting to say the least.
Getting back to Toronto the one thing I do hope that Metrolinx and a proposal like this do address properly is integrating Pearson into the network. And not through theme park, cable car thingies and distant stations or limiting onsite access to private interests but making a station that can be used by all the rail agencies. If that were to happen, then I think the GTA would be well on its way to actually making rail effective and efficient in a way that would really change how people view, and most importantly, use it.
Edit: If there is one project that I think should start tomorrow it would be creating dedicated passenger lines into Central Station in Montreal which would not cover a large area, but would really challenging. The Mont Royal tunnel would need to be rebuilt, access to the South Shore would have to be improved (either through a new bridge expanding Victoria), and the corridor roughly St-Anne de Bellevue, to Dorval, and into Central Station would have to be totally rebuilt and reconfigured, which is complicated by multiple track ownership. All the areas outside of this these sections are really not that difficult to expand, and it will be these small sections on the island and access to the South Shore that will make all the difference. Oddly enough, local opposition to the proposed changes to the Turcott interchange in Dorval have put on hold plans for an airport shuttle and a station directly connected to Dorval. Because of that those projects have fallen to the side and there is more discussion of that corridor as a whole. Sometimes NIMBYism can work out for the best.
Last edited:
kEiThZ
Superstar
^AS
You have highlighted the problem that I have with implementing HSR. Building HSR is a massive commitment. 5-7 years lead time and the construction time of another few years, coupled with the immense amount of capital involved is sure to imperil regional rail developments throughout Ontario and Quebec.
I agree with your other proposals, however, with one exception: Ottawa. I am one of the voters who rejected the original light rail proposal. And I attended many public consultations for the new master transportation plan. The previous system made no sense at all. It makes Toronto's Transit City look like a paragon of transit planning. It would have tied up immense amounts of transit dollars to serve the least amount of commuters, many of whom are already adequately served by express buses and o-train service. Meanwhile, the most committed east-west commuters (where transit usage rates are double that of the south) would have faced another decade (at best) without light rail service. And the city's downtown core would continue to face the threat of choking on transit buses. The main beneficiaries of the original proposal: developers. Many of them tacked on huge premiums for the new developments in Riverside South.
The new east-west rail proposal is strongly supported. Polls show, that even riverside south residents support the plans. It takes buses off the road and increases capacity through the core. In the long run, the city has also proposed building a regional rail system centered on the old train station downtown. These are sensible proposals. It's unfortunate that the previous left-leaning council made poor decisions regarding transit. It's part of the reason they lost the election. Voters saw a transit proposal benefitting a select few, potentially stalling future transit projects for years to come and threatening to require heavy support from taxpayers in the years to come. The new plan is a complete reversal of that horrid plan.
You have highlighted the problem that I have with implementing HSR. Building HSR is a massive commitment. 5-7 years lead time and the construction time of another few years, coupled with the immense amount of capital involved is sure to imperil regional rail developments throughout Ontario and Quebec.
I agree with your other proposals, however, with one exception: Ottawa. I am one of the voters who rejected the original light rail proposal. And I attended many public consultations for the new master transportation plan. The previous system made no sense at all. It makes Toronto's Transit City look like a paragon of transit planning. It would have tied up immense amounts of transit dollars to serve the least amount of commuters, many of whom are already adequately served by express buses and o-train service. Meanwhile, the most committed east-west commuters (where transit usage rates are double that of the south) would have faced another decade (at best) without light rail service. And the city's downtown core would continue to face the threat of choking on transit buses. The main beneficiaries of the original proposal: developers. Many of them tacked on huge premiums for the new developments in Riverside South.
The new east-west rail proposal is strongly supported. Polls show, that even riverside south residents support the plans. It takes buses off the road and increases capacity through the core. In the long run, the city has also proposed building a regional rail system centered on the old train station downtown. These are sensible proposals. It's unfortunate that the previous left-leaning council made poor decisions regarding transit. It's part of the reason they lost the election. Voters saw a transit proposal benefitting a select few, potentially stalling future transit projects for years to come and threatening to require heavy support from taxpayers in the years to come. The new plan is a complete reversal of that horrid plan.
AnarchoSocialist
Active Member
^I should just clarify that I was referring to the regional rail plans in Ottawa, not the more local transit plans. But in that respect I agree with you, the old plan was terrible and I am glad to see it replaced by something much more logical and long term. The transit tunnel and service out to Kanata, Orleans, Barrhaven, all those places, are very important to ensuring to helping HSR become viable and useful in the region.
More distant commuter rail to places like Perth, the Pontiac, out east towards Montreal are not as important, and not what I would consider a prerequisite like the Toronto plan, or a Montreal plan, but would offer a lot of benefit, so here is hoping the current looney toon political scene in that region mellows out a little.
More distant commuter rail to places like Perth, the Pontiac, out east towards Montreal are not as important, and not what I would consider a prerequisite like the Toronto plan, or a Montreal plan, but would offer a lot of benefit, so here is hoping the current looney toon political scene in that region mellows out a little.