Quote:
Originally Posted by MolsonExport
|
Thanks everyone for these responses. You're right that I had misinterpreted this as being the current reality (that Via passes through the tunnel, which it does not). Rather, Via doing so is an integral part of the plans for high frequency rail. Based on the two sites that I linked to, the savings for Via of going through the tunnel would be 50-60 minutes (this would use the northern route via Trois Riviere, rather than the southern route that I understand is currently being used). The alternative, once the tunnel is switched to light rail, would be to build an entirely new tunnel. In other words, it isn't going to happen. As one commentator notes (I'm paraphrasing): "VIA [will lose] access to the North Shore and a possible fast, modernized, low-freight-traffic route to Quebec City & Trois Riviere forever".
So seems like this isn't on anyone's radar at the moment?
Here's some additional relevant quotes:
"The REM proposed by the Caisse de Depot adds a giant snag to this plan. Instead of adding to the synergy of the regional rail network, the Caisse is doing its own thing and destroying regional network opportunities.
The big issue is the sharing of the Mount Royal tunnel. VIA, AMT & REM could all use the tunnel, which could provide a high-capacity trunk line through Montreal serving the whole region and cities beyond.
But the Caisse wants to privatize the tunnel and monopolize it. They insist on converting it to an incompatible technology, citing regulation and the need for frequency. But the automated light rail technology to be used by the REM and the heavy rail technology used by the other lines could be made compatible with each other and provide service at high frequency.
Some might say it’s crazy to have all these lines share a single tunnel. But consider that the REM and AMT will each only need a capacity of about 20,000 passengers per hour per direction (PPHD). Since two-track rail tunnels can accommodate 40,000 to 60,000 PPHD, it makes a lot of economic sense to have all lines share the same tunnel.
But the Caisse stubbornly refuses to consider this option, and its privatization and monopolization plan appears currently supported by all levels of government.
If the Caisse monopolizes the tunnel, the synergies between VIA and the AMT fall apart, and so will the chance for a large regional network.
...
However, despite all the obfuscation, VIA’s CEO eventually did admit that their plans included the use of the Mont-Royal tunnel to reach Quebec City, and that it would have significant time savings, “we have an edge of one hour".
...
It would be especially cynical if the reason that VIA will allow the cutting of the Quebec-Windsor corridor in half, adding two transfers for anybody travelling through Montreal, if it is done to ensure funding of the HFR project in the short term — after Desjardins-Siciliano’s big pronouncement that we should not lose “sight of the longer-term objective”.
...
How a private equity firm suddenly has so much power to make public infrastructure decisions against the long-term best interest of the public, against the warnings of expertise, how heads of big public agencies are made to make pronouncements against the interest of the people they serve – that’s the truly scary part.
We could go ahead and build a shared system. The technical and regulatory hurdles aren’t even that big. But we don’t, because we are in the process of moving decisions affecting the public for decades outside of the democratic control of our public institutions and into the control of private equity.
And we will only understand the impact of these decisions when it’s too late."
Threaded Mode