VIA Rail network developments

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

But, that doesn't change the fact that all of sudden, in 2016, ridership suddenly increased, in a pretty substantial way, after decades of stagnation or decline.

I believe VIA added service and improved on time performance with the Kingston project and rejigged fares a little.

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

The way I interpret that is that it is 9.9 million for all service in the corridor.

I may have seen an infographic that said 9.9 mil "ridership" and misinterpreted that. Fair enough.

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

This is why talking about numbers is hugely challenging. There is no breakdown of numbers beyond these lump sump figures. Based on numbers I have access to at this moment in time I do take a slightly skeptical view of how much ridership will actually increase (especially if there is no Montreal-Quebec north shore segment). But better data could prove me wrong.

I go back to the above. Every time VIA adds trains, they've been able to sell the seats. What they haven't been able to do is sell them profitably. And that's in large part because of operating model that does not enable a profitable operation.

I have no doubt they'll be able to hit 10 million. I actually think they might be low-balling it to not seem ridiculous. Consider that the GTA alone will add a million more residents by 2030. Think of what that will do to regional traffic and in due turn, inter-city travel times. Provide an alternative and people will take it.

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

If the full HFR project gets built then yes I would agree that it becomes something larger than just a proof of concept.

It's starting to sound like you don't really understand what the term "proof of concept" actually means.

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

What are the odds that is going to happen though? The situation in Montreal with Mont-Royal tunnel and REM is a total mess and dealing with it properly probably wont be cheap, so that hot mess is putting that segment in jeopardy.

1) It's not insurmountable to come up with an operational plan to share the tunnel.

2) They can do HFR on just Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal if there are issues with REM and the Mount Royal Tunnel.

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

It will allow for more trains, but increased frequency isn't a big show piece,

"Show piece"? I don't know what that's supposed to mean, but frequency is a huge deal. Just ask any of the airlines operating hourly flight schedules in the Corridor.

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

make waves with the public

You seem to have this obsession with public perception. Governments don't spend billions on PR stunts.

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

That is why I say HFR is a proof of concept.

What concept is HFR trying to prove? Like I said, I'm not entirely sure you understand what the term "proof of concept" means.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Gat-Train

The comments in that article are truly disheartening... people should really take a trip to Europe and see what is possible.

When they do, you end up with folks like acottawa who will then tell you that trains are a uniquely European cultural thing.

Not everybody who goes to Europe learns from their experiences there or has the ability to see application over here.

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

That was already tried with zero success and it went way over budget at the same time. No sense in repeating failed history.

They were paying to upgrade CN's infrastructure. I am not suggesting they do that again. I don't think any reasonable person would as it was a clear waste of money for VIA in the end.

What I was getting at is that at the end of the day passenger rail on busy routes (something like Northlander service would be different) needs it own tracks. To do that they need a right of way. If it happens to be the case that an existing freight corridor is also the best route (from Coteau to Cornwall, and much of the way to Brockville, is super straight and through a less developed area and would be pretty ideal as a dedicated passenger rail route) then VIA will need to negotiate to build its own line in that corridor. That is what I was specifically referring to.

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Whether it is quicker or less costly depends entirely on what the solution is for the urban areas.

CN and CP have so far proved willing to sell off surplus or lightly-used tracks. They have not been willing to sell mainline, and it would be incredibly stupid to do so. The whole reason why we are in this situation is that freight is worth way more than passengers.

Of course they aren't going to sell of their existing infrastructure. GO or VIA will have to build their own infrastructure but they will need to negotiate space within some freight corridors to do so. And yes, that land is very valuable which is why it will take a very strong need for the agencies to pay the price I am sure the freight companies would demand.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

They were paying to upgrade CN's infrastructure. I am not suggesting they do that again. I don't think any reasonable person would as it was a clear waste of money for VIA in the end.

What I was getting at is that at the end of the day passenger rail on busy routes (something like Northlander service would be different) needs it own tracks. To do that they need a right of way. If it happens to be the case that an existing freight corridor is also the best route (from Coteau to Cornwall, and much of the way to Brockville, is super straight and through a less developed area and would be pretty ideal as a dedicated passenger rail route) then VIA will need to negotiate to build its own line in that corridor. That is what I was specifically referring to.

While it is very direct, the problem is it bypasses Ottawa. Without being able to "combine the three major routes (toronto-ottawa, toronto-montreal, ottawa-montreal) into a single line" (as mister f put it so well), you loose the HF in HFR, since keeping the proposed frequency of service but splitting it into 3 separate routes would significantly increase operational costs. Once demand has increased to the point where they can fill hourly trains on all three routes separately, then VIA can look at doing that.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

Of course they aren't going to sell of their existing infrastructure. GO or VIA will have to build their own infrastructure but they will need to negotiate space within some freight corridors to do so. And yes, that land is very valuable which is why it will take a very strong need for the agencies to pay the price I am sure the freight companies would demand.

Then the likelihood it is a cheaper solution goes down. If Via calls up CP, tells they they want to have priority access through the Agincourt yard, and on the CP mainline between the yard and the Don Valley, on a line that probably carries hundreds of millions of goods every day, CP is going to want significant compensation, and if Via is given money to significantly compensate CP, then the financial reasons for prioritizing this project are gone, or at least highly questionable.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Then the likelihood it is a cheaper solution goes down. If Via calls up CP, tells they they want to have priority access through the Agincourt yard, and on the CP mainline between the yard and the Don Valley, on a line that probably carries hundreds of millions of goods every day, CP is going to want significant compensation, and if Via is given money to significantly compensate CP, then the financial reasons for prioritizing this project are gone, or at least highly questionable.

Are you suggesting that we simply abandon everything regarding HFR or any VIA improvements?

It seems to me that the issue that you describe between Agincourt and Toronto Union is a lot simpler to deal with than trying to do the same on the CN Lakeshore route covering a much longer distance.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

They were paying to upgrade CN's infrastructure. I am not suggesting they do that again. I don't think any reasonable person would as it was a clear waste of money for VIA in the end.

What I was getting at is that at the end of the day passenger rail on busy routes (something like Northlander service would be different) needs it own tracks. To do that they need a right of way. If it happens to be the case that an existing freight corridor is also the best route (from Coteau to Cornwall, and much of the way to Brockville, is super straight and through a less developed area and would be pretty ideal as a dedicated passenger rail route) then VIA will need to negotiate to build its own line in that corridor. That is what I was specifically referring to.

I am not sure how VIA would accomplish this without CN cooperation and probably an enormous price tag. The alternative is to expropriate a completely new ROW through many urban areas, requiring many new grade separations. Even on the CN corridor, many grade separation will likely need to be rebuilt. This sounds enormously expensive, and CN may simply say NO and a completely new ROW will likely be totally out of the question.

We are already seeing that extending GO to Bowmanville is not a simple project. Can you imagine similar negotiations all the way to Montreal?

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Are you suggesting that we simply abandon everything regarding HFR or any VIA improvements?

It seems to me that the issue that you describe between Agincourt and Toronto Union is a lot simpler to deal with than trying to do the same on the CN Lakeshore route covering a much longer distance.

No, I am suggesting they take a realistic look at what the costs are and what the alternatives are. If the proposal is based on big side payments to railways for priority access to freight lines or expensive infrastructure to bypass the CP lines then there is far less rationale for pursuing an isolated routing.

[Gat-Train]

If they're willing to spend $73 million on a study, I don't see why they don't just go ahead and spend the 91M on HFR from Ottawa to Montreal. That's basically peanuts compared to the billions to get from Ottawa to Toronto.

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I am not sure how VIA would accomplish this without CN cooperation and probably an enormous price tag. The alternative is to expropriate a completely new ROW through many urban areas, requiring many new grade separations. Even on the CN corridor, many grade separation will likely need to be rebuilt. This sounds enormously expensive, and CN may simply say NO and a completely new ROW will likely be totally out of the question.

We are already seeing that extending GO to Bowmanville is not a simple project. Can you imagine similar negotiations all the way to Montreal?

A dedicated line on the Lakeshore corridor would be one of the biggest infrastructure projects in Canadian history, and a lot of that would be because of the amount of negotiations, right of way acquisitions, and dealing with built up areas. It really would be an impressive project, once in a generation project.

We also do not know what is going on behind the scenes. No idea if negotiations are taking place as we speak, or if there is some sort of long term plan in VIA's backroom for the corridor. Canadian media doesn't really dig into things like that so unless there is some sort of leak we almost never know until one day an official announcement comes out of nowhere.

Just because it would be a brutally challenging project doesn't mean it wouldn't be worth it, and for all we know the initial plan and deals are being put together as we speak.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

No, I am suggesting they take a realistic look at what the costs are and what the alternatives are. If the proposal is based on big side payments to railways for priority access to freight lines or expensive infrastructure to bypass the CP lines then there is far less rationale for pursuing an isolated routing.

I think if this was at all an option we would have heard something by now. But the Kingston project and the terrible outcome of that has probably proven, once and for all, that CN has zero interest in facilitating VIA to a level that is required.

Keep in mind that the previous G&M article says $2.1 billion was budgeted for Toronto-Ottawa. And that $2.1 billion buys a corridor that could be expanded to run dozens of trains a day. How much would CN ask to even prioritize 15 trains in each direction per day? How long are they willing to guarantee priority for? 10 years? 20? 30? Would they tolerate electrification if there were a business case for VIA? What about if demand pushes the need up to 20 trains a day? I just can't see CN being flexible enough to make the case. Even for $2.1 billion.

Originally Posted by Gat-Train

If they're willing to spend $73 million on a study, I don't see why they don't just go ahead and spend the 91M on HFR from Ottawa to Montreal. That's basically peanuts compared to the billions to get from Ottawa to Toronto.

Yep. And this is where the government's management of VIA is mind-boggling. Why was this not started years ago so they could at least have a demo line?

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

A dedicated line on the Lakeshore corridor would be one of the biggest infrastructure projects in Canadian history, and a lot of that would be because of the amount of negotiations, right of way acquisitions, and dealing with built up areas. It really would be an impressive project, once in a generation project.

....

Just because it would be a brutally challenging project doesn't mean it wouldn't be worth it....

How long are you willing to wait? We've now had discussions about higher performing intercity rail for nearly half a century. Many of those plans even involved serving lakeshore communities like Kingston. This effort is probably the furthest of any actual proposal in that time period and largely because VIA has been able to make the case that it's at least worth looking at a cheaper proposal. And yet here you think adding more obstacles (from cost to track sharing) won't result in the same outcome as the last century.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

While it is very direct, the problem is it bypasses Ottawa. Without being able to "combine the three major routes (toronto-ottawa, toronto-montreal, ottawa-montreal) into a single line" (as mister f put it so well), you loose the HF in HFR, since keeping the proposed frequency of service but splitting it into 3 separate routes would significantly increase operational costs. Once demand has increased to the point where they can fill hourly trains on all three routes separately, then VIA can look at doing that.

It's amazing and mind boggling how fixated people are on Toronto-Montreal when Toronto-Ottawa is probably a larger and higher yielding market for VIA. Likewise, Ottawa-Montreal and Montreal-Quebec City probably have better yields than most of their other segments. Indeed, it'd be more profitable for VIA to sell a Toronto-Ottawa fare and then a Montreal-Ottawa fare than a Toronto-Montreal fare on the same route. So what's the obsession with Toronto-Montreal?

Not every segment has to be served with the same level for the project to succeed. And with HFR, every single segment sees substantial improvement, except one (Toronto-Montreal), which will see some improvement with more frequencies, higher reliability and a smaller reduction in trip time.

I don't get the obsession with chasing marginal business cases. HFR as we know it today is a fairly decent proposition for VIA to capture low hanging fruit. Let them start there.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I think if this was at all an option we would have heard something by now. But the Kingston project and the terrible outcome of that has probably proven, once and for all, that CN has zero interest in facilitating VIA to a level that is required.

Keep in mind that the previous G&M article says $2.1 billion was budgeted for Toronto-Ottawa. And that $2.1 billion buys a corridor that could be expanded to run dozens of trains a day. How much would CN ask to even prioritize 15 trains in each direction per day? How long are they willing to guarantee priority for? 10 years? 20? 30? Would they tolerate electrification if there were a business case for VIA? What about if demand pushes the need up to 20 trains a day? I just can't see CN being flexible enough to make the case. Even for $2.1 billion.


Yep. And this is where the government's management of VIA is mind-boggling. Why was this not started years ago so they could at least have a demo line?



How long are you willing to wait? We've now had discussions about higher performing intercity rail for nearly half a century. Many of those plans even involved serving lakeshore communities like Kingston. This effort is probably the furthest of any actual proposal in that time period and largely because VIA has been able to make the case that it's at least worth looking at a cheaper proposal. And yet here you think adding more obstacles (from cost to track sharing) won't result in the same outcome as the last century.

I am not sure there is evidence CP would be more cooperative. They have not been with Go. Single track is about 3M per km, so 2.1B, is pretty much track-only, with no money for a CP bypass. To put things in perspective, the Metrolinx study estimated 1.5B for a 2 hour service to Peterborough, in 2010 money.

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

How long are you willing to wait? We've now had discussions about higher performing intercity rail for nearly half a century. Many of those plans even involved serving lakeshore communities like Kingston. This effort is probably the furthest of any actual proposal in that time period and largely because VIA has been able to make the case that it's at least worth looking at a cheaper proposal. And yet here you think adding more obstacles (from cost to track sharing) won't result in the same outcome as the last century.

I'm not saying we should halt HFR and do a Lakeshore route. HFR should go ahead, in whatever form it takes. It's a smart idea. No question about that. I also don't think that it should put an end to planning for an upgraded Lakeshore route. There is also value in that.

As far as there having been a half century of discussion about higher speed passenger rail, yeah that's kind of true. And there have been lots of studies. And there were attempts like the Turbo Train and LRC's to bring higher speeds to the existing network. But the past half century was all about the car. Cities were designed around cars. Money went into infrastructure for cars. Canada has been a society dominated by the car and suburbs for a half century. And consider how recent it has actually been that we are seeing even a modest change away from that. Public transit has only seen real substantial investment in it for the past 10 or 15 years. It wasn't until around 2005-06 that GO actually starting to develop a long term vision to own and modernize its rail network. Cities like Toronto and Vancouver are definitely undergoing a lot of urbanization now, but even a city like Ottawa is still dominated by suburban growth. The cultural inertia needed to make large scale rail projects a priority is starting, but it still has a way to go.

I know I have a counter opinion to most people on this forum, and railfans and rail advocates in general, but I would rather wait for a project to be built, and be done right then invest in something compromised and rubbishy. I don't care about trains for trains sake. If building regional or intercity rail is the right solution for providing people with safe, fast, economical travel, great. If it isn't, bin the idea. Any investment should attract a whole new variety of people who wouldn't have considered the train before, or start to take the train regularly rather then once every 5 years when the weather is too terrible to drive or fly. At this point that might be my favorite aspect of HFR, simply seeing how the public responds to it and what exactly it does for ridership.

[lrt's friend]

I don't see a big issue in Toronto for the Peterborough route. I just looked on Google satellite view and the distance between Agincourt and the Stouffville line crossing is very short and the CP has room for 4 or 5 tracks on all overpasses between their and their yards. Even within their yards, it obvious that many tracks have been lifted, so there should be no problem running through there without interfering with CP's current or future operations. All that is needed is a connection between the Stouffville and CP line and at first glance that looks feasible. Given the fact that the Stouffville line is presently being double tracked, there should be ample capacity to offer local 15 minute frequency, + hourly HFR and perhaps a few additional Peterborough GO Trains.



https://www.google.com/maps/place/Kawart...c031e0358!8m2!3d44.2956773!4d-78.3232796

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I don't see a big issue in Toronto for the Peterborough route. I just looked on Google satellite view and the distance between Agincourt and the Stouffville line crossing is very short and the CP has room for 4 or 5 tracks on all overpasses between their and their yards. Even within their yards, it obvious that many tracks have been lifted, so there should be no problem running through there without interfering with CP's current or future operations. All that is needed is a connection between the Stouffville and CP line and at first glance that looks feasible. Given the fact that the Stouffville line is presently being double tracked, there should be ample capacity to offer local 15 minute frequency, + hourly HFR and perhaps a few additional Peterborough GO Trains.



https://www.google.com/maps/place/Kawart...c031e0358!8m2!3d44.2956773!4d-78.3232796

There is a discussion on page 93

http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/projectevaluation/studies/Peterborough_Rail_Study.pdf

There are certainly options, they are just expensive compared to Via’s proposed budget for the entire line.

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by acottawa

There is a discussion on page 93

http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/projectevaluation/studies/Peterborough_Rail_Study.pdf

There are certainly options, they are just expensive compared to Via’s proposed budget for the entire line.

There is a pretty wide variety of options presented, and overall costs. To start with a lot of the costs associated with going all the way to Union are probably no longer an issue due to GO's modernization program. The Havelock sub itself is estimated at $329 - $384 million, of which $6 million of for GO related layover and maintenance facilities, which wont be necessary for the HFR project. There is also $121 - $141 million in contingency included, for that section alone so the true final cost could fall a bit lower than what this report estimates.

The connection from the Havelock sub to the Stouffville line, or whatever option they choose, is the big question mark in it all. The option that uses the Stouffville line is pegged at $145 million, including $55 million in contingency. All the other options would double, and in some cases, increase the price by 6 times. At just over $500 million, for the Stouffville option, that doesn't seem unreasonable, given that it is just over 100km of track we are talking about, and through the most built up part of the proposed line. And with that line actually being modernized now, it might well be the most suitable, and quickest way for VIA trains to get into Union from the HFR line.

Obviously connecting into whatever part of the GO network cant be done cheaply. And you need to account for inflation. But at least from what I see, when you break down the report into the parts that are actually relevant to HFR, today, I don't see it is as being a black eye against the project. Seems about right really.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

There is a pretty wide variety of options presented, and overall costs. To start with a lot of the costs associated with going all the way to Union are probably no longer an issue due to GO's modernization program. The Havelock sub itself is estimated at $329 - $384 million, of which $6 million of for GO related layover and maintenance facilities, which wont be necessary for the HFR project. There is also $121 - $141 million in contingency included, for that section alone so the true final cost could fall a bit lower than what this report estimates.

The connection from the Havelock sub to the Stouffville line, or whatever option they choose, is the big question mark in it all. The option that uses the Stouffville line is pegged at $145 million, including $55 million in contingency. All the other options would double, and in some cases, increase the price by 6 times. At just over $500 million, for the Stouffville option, that doesn't seem unreasonable, given that it is just over 100km of track we are talking about, and through the most built up part of the proposed line. And with that line actually being modernized now, it might well be the most suitable, and quickest way for VIA trains to get into Union from the HFR line.

Obviously connecting into whatever part of the GO network cant be done cheaply. And you need to account for inflation. But at least from what I see, when you break down the report into the parts that are actually relevant to HFR, today, I don't see it is as being a black eye against the project. Seems about right really.

That could be a possibility, although the reason Go is planning to upgrade the line is to support 15 minute frequency GO service. If the purpose of the project is to avoid conflicts, sharing track with 800 weekly trains which will have priority may not help to reach these goals.

[Mister F]

Whichever route is chosen into downtown Toronto, there's one key difference between this proposal and any GO proposal to use the CP mainline. CP doesn't gain anything by letting GO trains use their tracks. But with HFR, they gain a completely rebuilt Havelock sub, transforming it from the barely usable state it's in today to mainline standard. That means faster trains, lower costs, higher profits, potential new clients, etc. And they get that for free. Even if it means giving up control to Via, that's a small price to pay when the existing line is clearly marginal as is.

As the Metrolinx report states, if the route along the CP mainline through Toronto is chosen there would be a new track built that wouldn't interfere with CP's operations. If the connection to the Uxbridge sub is chosen then the trains wouldn't affect CP at all. In any case, this concept goes back 9 years to the Peterborough report. None of this is anything that Via and CP don't already know.