Alto High Speed Rail

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

For anyone have information on what they plan for security at the stations?

It will suck of they go overboard with it causing security delays to be a concern when planning & pushing time to arrival up.

There's an online consultation this saturday. Good place to ask. But it's probably a bit too early for them to nail down exact details. And security posture should scale with threat.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

There's an online consultation this saturday. Good place to ask. But it's probably a bit too early for them to nail down exact details. And security posture should scale with threat.

Good to know, and thank you.

I'd say security should scale with threat & casualty levels. But there are ways to scale security for a threat that aren't permanent issues to speed.

Since casualty levels for high-speed rail are mostly limited to those on the train there shouldn't be the need to be as stringent as flying. To me at least I'm thinking more akin to attending a sens game.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Harley613

Not to mention that Alberta is looking towards HSR between Calgary and Edmonton in the future, and there is literally no other corridor in the country, and never will be in the next 100+ years, that could or should support HSR.

I agree. We could and should extend it to Windsor once we're done with this initial project, but passed that, assuming Calgary-Edmonton is sorted out by then, there's no other designation that is worth the investment.

I could see the a US west coast HSR that connects up to Vancouver.

Any expansion to the US might have been desirable up until they elected the insane orange garbage the first time.

[TheBrain]

First of many of these I'm guessing. I kind of get it as well, having to give up part of your land for something only used by the big cities or those nearby. One thing though is the mayors comments in the interview that the presentation was just a slideshow with no substance. I hope this isn't always the case...

Le projet de train à grande vitesse (TGV) reliant Québec à Toronto suscite de vives inquiétudes dans l'Est ontarien, particulièrement à Champlain où les agriculteurs craignent l'expropriation.

https://www.fm1047.ca/audio/753276/trace...eurs-de-l-est-ontarien-craignent-le-pire


Le maire Normand Riopel a vivement critiqué les récentes consultations publiques, déplorant le manque flagrant d'information et de respect envers les résidents locaux.

Selon le maire, le projet menace de diviser inutilement des terres agricoles productives alors que des alternatives plus simples existent.

Monsieur Riopel a d'ailleurs lancé un message clair aux promoteurs.

«Séparez pas une autre fois nos terres; utilisez le corridor de la 417, quitte à ce que ça coûte un milliard de plus, plutôt que d'endommager la vie quotidienne de nos cultivateurs.»

Normand Riopel

[Truenorth00]

Just a reminder there's an online consultation in English today for anybody who wants to attend.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by TheBrain

First of many of these I'm guessing. I kind of get it as well, having to give up part of your land for something only used by the big cities or those nearby. One thing though is the mayors comments in the interview that the presentation was just a slideshow with no substance. I hope this isn't always the case...

Le projet de train à grande vitesse (TGV) reliant Québec à Toronto suscite de vives inquiétudes dans l'Est ontarien, particulièrement à Champlain où les agriculteurs craignent l'expropriation.

https://www.fm1047.ca/audio/753276/trace...eurs-de-l-est-ontarien-craignent-le-pire

Le maire Normand Riopel a vivement critiqué les récentes consultations publiques, déplorant le manque flagrant d'information et de respect envers les résidents locaux.

Selon le maire, le projet menace de diviser inutilement des terres agricoles productives alors que des alternatives plus simples existent.

Monsieur Riopel a d'ailleurs lancé un message clair aux promoteurs.

It's entirely possible that Alto dumbed down its consultations for the rural area since their focus is urban dwellers that will be using the service. I do hope Alto finds routing that minimizes impacts (splits as few agricultural lands as possible) while maximizing speed.

That said, I'm getting tired of the Conservative attitude of "if it doesn't benefit me, I'm opposed". There are plenty of Governmental programs and projects that will never benefit me that I support because I know other Governmental programs and projects do benefit me. That's part of living in a modern, just society.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

It's entirely possible that Alto dumbed down its consultations for the rural area since their focus is urban dwellers that will be using the service. I do hope Alto finds routing that minimizes impacts (splits as few agricultural lands as possible) while maximizing speed.

That said, I'm getting tired of the Conservative attitude of "if it doesn't benefit me, I'm opposed". There are plenty of Governmental programs and projects that will never benefit me that I support because I know other Governmental programs and projects do benefit me. That's part of living in a modern, just society.

That's not just a conservative thing. See oil pipelines out west. NIMBYs are the same everywhere.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

That's not just a conservative thing. See oil pipelines out west. NIMBYs are the same everywhere.

Or oil & gas pipelines to the east, or Leiper & co (and more then one posters here) continued fight against high density in Central Ottawa....

Anyways, Alto first priority should be speed, if that means splitting a bunch of rural property then so be it, and if that raises costs then so be it. Better to spend money on straightening the route then adding a station that increasing travel times.

[Kitchissippi]

A Facebook page of rural naysayers showed up on my feed. I just rolled my eyes at someone posting : “Farmers are an endangered species. These trains should not be passing through agricultural areas. It might make the construction of the line easier for the proponents, but it would make farmers’ lives even more difficult or impossible.”

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

Or oil & gas pipelines to the east, or Leiper & co (and more then one posters here) continued fight against high density in Central Ottawa....

Anyways, Alto first priority should be speed, if that means splitting a bunch of rural property then so be it, and if that raises costs then so be it. Better to spend money on straightening the route then adding a station that increasing travel times.

I don't think opposition to pipelines is as high as you think in the east.

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

A Facebook page of rural naysayers showed up on my feed. I just rolled my eyes at someone posting : “Farmers are an endangered species. These trains should not be passing through agricultural areas. It might make the construction of the line easier for the proponents, but it would make farmers’ lives even more difficult or impossible.”

What's the alternative, forests? That would be far more destructive.

[rocketphish]

'Once in a lifetime': Exploring high-speed rail station options in Ottawa

Austin Lee, CTV News
Published: February 02, 2026 at 6:31PM EST

It has been 60 years since visitors to Ottawa had the option of taking the train directly into the heart of the nation’s capital.

Now, decades later, there is talk of bringing the Senate of Canada Building back to its Union Station roots as a hub for a proposed high-speed rail system from Quebec City to Toronto.

Alto, the Crown corporation behind the high-speed rail project, recently moved into a new phase of the plan kicking off a public engagement process aimed at shaping how the rail line could transform travel in Ontario and Quebec.

Ottawa Mayor Mark Sutcliffe says bringing a high-speed rail station to the heart of the downtown core is something that must be considered.

“We have a once in a century opportunity to get this right. We’re only going to build a project like this once and if there is a way to get it downtown so that people are disembarking from the trains right in the heart of downtown Ottawa, we have to explore that,” said Sutcliffe.

“There’s a lot of logistics involved. There are lots of considerations, including cost and the speed of the trains, but I think this is a once in a lifetime opportunity and if we have a chance to bring it downtown, we should bring it downtown.”

Sutcliffe says it is early in the process, and all options are on the table, but the old Union Station seems like the frontrunner for a downtown station.

“That seems like the most logical place given that it was a train station before and it currently is only being used on a temporary basis by the Senate,” he said.

“It’s obviously very complicated and it is a federal project; it’s not a municipal project. We will be involved, obviously, if it’s coming to our city, but it is a federal project.”

The Senate of Canada Building, originally known as Grand Trunk Central Station, opened in 1912.

It has not operated as a train station since 1966.

Between 2014 and 2019, the building underwent roughly $200 million worth of rehabilitation and modernization work.

“It’s a lovely building and not only a lovely building, but the $190 million which was spent for the Senate has brought it up to modern standards. So, once the Senate moves out, it will be crying out for a new public role,” said David Jeanes, a retired engineer and director of Transport Action Canada.

Jeanes adds converting the building back into a train station would take time and it would be costly, but he says it’s an idea that should be taken seriously.

“You would probably want to tunnel,” he said.

“That’s a huge task. The tunnel would be a little bit shorter than the LRT tunnel but remember all the difficulties that we had digging that under downtown Ottawa. It could be done. It is feasible. It would cost a couple of billion dollars, I expect.”

Another option for the station could be the VIA Rail station on Tremblay Road, which Jeanes suggests could even serve as a temporary hub until the old Union Station is ready for the high-speed rail system.

“There are many cities where high-speed rail has been built in stages into the city centres,” said Jeanes.

In a statement to CTV News Ottawa, Alto said it’s still too early to commit to any locations in Ottawa or anywhere else along the proposed rail line.

“Public consultations on the Alto high-speed rail project are currently underway across Ontario and Quebec. Input that we gather at these open houses will help inform, among other things, the selection of the rail network alignment and station locations,” read part of the statement.

“While it’s too early to speculate on or confirm station locations at any of the seven stops, including Ottawa, we will consider all viable options for each. As well, the locations will be determined by their ability to meet key criteria such as safety, connectivity, accessibility, and social acceptability.”

Public consultations are underway on Alto’s website until March 29.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/ottawa/article/on...gh-speed-rail-station-options-in-ottawa/

[J.OT13]

TGV Alto: un expert privilégie l’ancienne gare au centre-ville d’Ottawa

Par Sébastien Pierroz, IJL - Le Droit
2 février 2026 à 04h12

L’emplacement de l’arrêt du futur train à grande vitesse (TGV) n’est pas encore arrêté, dans la capitale fédérale, mais un expert de l’Université d’Ottawa privilégie la gare Union, au centre-ville, au détriment de l’actuelle gare de VIA Rail.

«Avoir la station directement au centre-ville aurait des avantages et augmenterait directement l’accessibilité», plaide le directeur et fondateur du nouvel Observatoire des grands projets de l’École de gestion Telfer, Lavagnon Ika.

«L’accessibilité fait partie de l’intérêt public. Si on doit se rendre à la gare et qu’il y a déjà des bus, c’est plus facile pour les résidents d’Ottawa», soutient-il.

Selon lui, l’ancienne gare Union profiterait d’un meilleur ancrage dans le réseau existant, notamment grâce au train léger, tandis que la gare de VIA Rail du chemin Tremblay, bien que desservi, incite davantage les usagers à privilégier la voiture.

«On est dans un monde qui favorise de moins en moins les autoroutes. C’est moins pratique.»

ALTO, la société d’État fédérale chargée de piloter le projet, mène en ce début d’année une série de consultations dans les villes concernées afin de mieux cibler, notamment, le tracé optimal.

Dans la capitale, le choix de la gare terminus — tout comme celui du tracé du tronçon Ottawa–Montréal, première étape du vaste projet visant à relier Québec à Toronto — ne sera tranché qu’au cours des 12 prochains mois.

«Je vois ça comme des travaux d’investissement, renchérit M. Ika. Il faut adapter la gare, faire des travaux qui vont occasionner, certes, des nuisances pour les gens autour et coûter de l’argent, mais il faut sacrifier quelque chose pour arriver à un résultat.»

L’expert y voit aussi un potentiel économique.

«C’est un choix qui peut permettre de revitaliser davantage le centre-ville d’Ottawa et d’amener la création de petits commerces», dit-il, en évoquant l’exemple de plusieurs villes européennes où «les gares sont situées au centre-ville et intégrées aux réseaux de transport en commun».

La gare Union, sur la rue Rideau, devant le Château Laurier, accueille temporairement le Sénat du Canada, dont l’édifice est en travaux.

Deux enjeux globaux sur le projet

Les travaux de la ligne Ottawa–Montréal pourraient commencer dès 2029. À terme, vers 2036, Ottawa se trouverait à environ deux heures de Toronto et à environ deux heures et demie de Québec, selon les estimations diffusées par Alto. Il faudrait autour de quatre heures et demie pour relier la Ville Reine à la Vieille Capitale.

«Il s’agit d’un projet structurant, le plus grand projet de l’histoire moderne du Canada», renchérit l’expert, qui voit tout de même deux obstacles.

«Premièrement, il y a les dépassements de coûts faramineux. On parle d’un coût total entre 60 et 90 milliards de dollars, mais un projet sur deux de cette envergure comporte des dépassements de coûts. Le gouvernement Carney doit veiller à cela.»

«Et puis, il y a le dilemme de la légitimité», ajoute-t-il.

Selon lui, les consultations devront permettre d’entendre les propriétaires de terrains et les communautés autochtones, tout en évitant que les délais ne fassent exploser la facture.

«C’est un équilibre à trouver entre la réalisation rapide du projet et le temps nécessaire pour écouter afin de légitimer le projet.»

«Essayer d’avoir la gare au centre-ville», dit Sutcliffe

Questionné mercredi dernier sur le sujet, peu après le conseil municipal, le maire d’Ottawa Mark Sutcliffe semblait aussi privilégier l’ancienne gare Union.

«C’est bien compliqué, et il est très important de considérer les différentes options du site. Mais on sait que la gare à Montréal pour le projet se situera au centre-ville, de même que la gare à Toronto. Ici à Ottawa, pour l’économie du centre-ville, pour le développement et revitaliser le centre-ville, c’est nécessaire d’avoir cette gare, ou au moins essayer d’avoir cette gare au centre-ville.»

https://www.ledroit.com/actualites/actua...ar-un-expert-3KUOPWTAOFG33LS37IK7ATKHJY/

[RuralCitizen]

It looks like they are planning to take over the PR Trail. I'm curious on how they propose to cross the main roads that links the little town in Prescott-Russell, and especially the town of Bourget where the PR Trail directly crosses the middle of the town and its streets.

Are they planning to dig a trench or build something elevated?

I know a few are not happy that their 72km recreational trail is being taken away. Bourget also uses a pavilion along that path for events.

To me it makes sense to use this existing path, but I'm concerned about the safety considerations for a train running at 300km/h crossing the middle of a town.

-------------

Another aspect of the the high speed train that isn't really discussed, is that even though this project will have great economic impact for Canada's most populated area, it will have some consequences too. I suspect Ottawa properties will have their value increase, making buying housing in Ottawa even less affordable. People who live in the GTA might consider moving to Ottawa if it is more affordable for them and it takes them the same amount of time to work downtown Toronto. Ottawa could become a dormitory city for Toronto. More demand, but not more offer directly increases price.

What do you guys think?

[RuralCitizen]

On the topic of where to place the Ottawa station, I personally value the Tremblay station best.

The estimated population of the Ottawa-Gatineau CMA is 1.5 million. I wonder what the ratio/percentages is for each means of transportation to get to the airport, the via stations, or the bus station. I'm pretty sure a big chunk of the Ottawa residents who travel to Montreal and Toronto use a car or taxi to be dropped off. Access to the station via cars is as important of a consideration as public transportation users. People living in Rockland or Casselman, or Findley Creek will certainly consider using the High Speed train to go to Toronto, or Quebec city if the travelling time is more advantageous for them than driving directly there. And those users will certainly not be using the LRT to get there. So parking and drop off area logistics should be part of the main considerations, along with LRT connectivity. It's not about who's more important, everyone is important because we are in a car-centric city.

Also, we should be getting a bridge in the East end eventually (I know, it's been discussed for 70+ years). So Gatineau travellers might not all need to cross ottawa's downtown to get to the station. Tremblay station is well located to become a node of multi-modal transportation. Highspeed train, VIA rail, Bus Station, LRT station, Car parking/drop off. It has the space for development and growth.

I think people are stuck with the idea and Nostalgia of the former Union Station without really knowing the exact benefits and disadvantages. Excluding the tourists, how many people would truly find an advantage from arriving/departing from the Colonel By/Rideau intersection? (taking the entire scope of the Ottawa-Gatineau travellers, and taking into account how this specific intersection gets gets very busy with cars and pedestrians).

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by RuralCitizen

It looks like they are planning to take over the PR Trail. I'm curious on how they propose to cross the main roads that links the little town in Prescott-Russell, and especially the town of Bourget where the PR Trail directly crosses the middle of the town and its streets.

Are they planning to dig a trench or build something elevated?

I know a few are not happy that their 72km recreational trail is being taken away. Bourget also uses a pavilion along that path for events.

To me it makes sense to use this existing path, but I'm concerned about the safety considerations for a train running at 300km/h crossing the middle of a town.

-------------

Another aspect of the the high speed train that isn't really discussed, is that even though this project will have great economic impact for Canada's most populated area, it will have some consequences too. I suspect Ottawa properties will have their value increase, making buying housing in Ottawa even less affordable. People who live in the GTA might consider moving to Ottawa if it is more affordable for them and it takes them the same amount of time to work downtown Toronto. Ottawa could become a dormitory city for Toronto. More demand, but not more offer directly increases price.

What do you guys think?

Let's have a reality check here.

When CP abandoned the rail line in the 1980s, it was sold to VIA rail specifically for a possible high speed rail line.

Low and behold, 40 years later this may become a reality. We may be in shock, but it is what it is.

I looked in Google maps and there are two roads affected. This may result in a underpass or overpass for one or both roads. If one only, then the other would be closed to through traffic just to like you would get with a 400 series highway.

The rail line could be surface running or trenched and sound barriers installed within the village.

Regarding the recreational trail, I would focus on fighting for a new trail adjacent to the tracks rather than fighting the whole project. You completely lose in the latter case

Regarding commuters, few if any would commute from Toronto. Peterborough would be a more likely location. We might see some Montreal commuters but it will likely work both ways. I can't see Ottawa being overwhelmed with new residents.

[harls]

I listened to Bill Carroll on the car radio this morning talking about what a bad idea it would be to put the high speed rail station at Fallowfield. This guy phones in his CFRA morning show in pyjama pants from his home in Manotick.

[RuralCitizen]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Let's have a reality check here.

When CP abandoned the rail line in the 1980s, it was sold to VIA rail specifically for a possible high speed rail line.

Low and behold, 40 years later this may become a reality. We may be in shock, but it is what it is.

I looked in Google maps and there are two roads affected. This may result in a underpass or overpass for one or both roads. If one only, then the other would be closed to through traffic just to like you would get with a 400 series highway.

The rail line could be surface running or trenched and sound barriers installed within the village.

Regarding the recreational trail, I would focus on fighting for a new trail adjacent to the tracks rather than fighting the whole project. You completely lose in the latter case

Regarding commuters, few if any would commute from Toronto. Peterborough would be a more likely location. We might see some Montreal commuters but it will likely work both ways. I can't see Ottawa being overwhelmed with new residents.

I don't need a reality check, I'm aware of the trail agreements with the railway. Was making an observation.

I wasn't complaining about the affected roads, I was simply asking how it would be handled. It's not only 2 roads throughout Ottawa and Prescott Russell (Frank Kenny, Rockdale, Dunning, Sarsfield, Gendron, Bouvier... just to name a few). I took Bourget as an example because this project would affect this town directly compared to the rest of the segments. Regardless, I'm hopeful none of the streets will end up cut in half by the train, and that the rails are in a trench will little overpasses along the way. This would be the least impactful solution as many of these roads are important for these communities, and would require detours for the users.

For the recreational trail aspect, I agree with you. The reality is this would require expropriation elsewhere, and most of the property tax money gets spent within Rockland itself and not the smaller surrounding towns. These residents will just have to accept the loss.

For the Toronto commuter, i disagree. Has anybody made the calculation to check an affordability comparison? if Alto proposes a 2hr commute from Ottawa to Toronto, anybody in the GTA who currently has more than 2 hour commute to downtown Toronto may consider a move to Ottawa. It might not be a huge amount of people, but it is still a possible consequence of this project. Another possibility is if someone may now start working in both Toronto and Montreal (2 offices).

[DarthVader_1961]

If we put the station downtown, how much room for expansion would there be?

Ass Ottawa grows, the downtown station may need to be expanded I would imagine.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by harls

I listened to Bill Carroll on the car radio this morning talking about what a bad idea it would be to put the high speed rail station at Fallowfield. This guy phones in his CFRA morning show in pyjama pants from his home in Manotick.

What is his rationale?

[harls]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

What is his rationale?

To rile shit up?