VIA Rail

[Nouvellecosse]

Anyone know if there's been any talk or movement on the HFR plan recently?

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Ottawa is doing the same thing as Edmonton and Calgary. They are all in the same boat as none of them are large enough to support commuter rail (the exurb communities are tiny). Vancouver is a special case in this regard, since the mountains and ocean have forced much of its growth up the Fraser Valley.

The development patterns are just different here and don't suit commuter rail very well. There are 5 major cities and where they exist the surrounding areas do not have much in the way of sizeable settlements. If there were strings of towns along a railway, sure, commuter rail would work. But that isn't the case and trying to use solutions from elsewhere where things are different here is not helpful.

Of course, most people who actually live here know this. That's why we have built out sizeable LRT networks and foregone heavy passenger rail. I think Alberta is not doing enough on regional transportation, but for now the direction to go in on that is buses, which are far more flexible and far more affordable. If it turns out we can fill up those buses, then that's great evidence that trains could be useful.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Yes. So we'll have another one in time. This one is the most interesting and feasible to me.

It certainly is very interesting. While Banff's population is tiny, it is a major, year round, environmentally sensitive, tourist destination. Widening the highway to handle the traffic would then require more parking, neither of which are good plans for a National Park. A train could be very popular and would remove a lot of the strain off of the roads and parking lots. People not having a car in Banff would then stimulate business for the tour operators (rather than having people drive themselves in their rental car), which adds to the business case for the line.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Ottawa is doing the same thing as Edmonton and Calgary. They are all in the same boat as none of them are large enough to support commuter rail (the exurb communities are tiny). Vancouver is a special case in this regard, since the mountains and ocean have forced much of its growth up the Fraser Valley.

All three LRT cities are also using LRT in ways that are closer to light metro than a tram and with stop spacing that is closer to a metro (and even commuter rail in some cases). This is what negates the case for commuter rail in all these cities.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

All three LRT cities are also using LRT in ways that are closer to light metro than a tram and with stop spacing that is closer to a metro (and even commuter rail in some cases). This is what negates the case for commuter rail in all these cities.

This is getting way off topic (not sure what it has to do with VIA Rail), but even without their "LRT" systems, the case for commuter rail isn't there. A 25 km long commuter rail line with only 2-4 stations doesn't make a lot of sense. The fact that neither Ottawa nor Edmonton have downtown train stations (or tracks) anymore doesn't help their cases either.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

This is getting way off topic (not sure what it has to do with VIA Rail), but even without their "LRT" systems, the case for commuter rail isn't there. A 25 km long commuter rail line with only 2-4 stations doesn't make a lot of sense. The fact that neither Ottawa nor Edmonton have downtown train stations (or tracks) anymore doesn't help their cases either.

I think there's this view that VIA should get into the commuter rail business as a way of bolstering their brand and improving rail service. But as you point out, the case is rather weak. And that's aside from the whole question of whether VIA should do it.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Anyone know if there's been any talk or movement on the HFR plan recently?

AFAIK, there hasn't been any news since the budget.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I think there's this view that VIA should get into the commuter rail business as a way of bolstering their brand and improving rail service. But as you point out, the case is rather weak. And that's aside from the whole question of whether VIA should do it.

If VIA operated the trains, it would be because the city/province contracted them to do it. Even then, it would only make sense to pick VIA if it's on a line that VIA is already operating trains on, and a synergy between the existing trains and the commuter trains could be built.

For example, VIA already operates trains between Smiths Falls and Ottawa, but there isn't a train early enough in the morning to get to work. VIA could be contracted by the Smiths Falls council (with the town covering all the extra expenses) to operate a weekday, morning train starting at Smiths Falls, to make the commute feasible. I am not convinced it is a good idea since Smiths Falls is very small (its population is only 8,780), Ottawa's station isn't downtown, and it would mean deadheading a train out to Smiths Falls in the morning (which costs money), but it is a theoretical example of where it could be done.

[hipster duck]

I don't know if commuter rail in Ottawa makes sense. Beyond not having much of a hinterland, Ottawa's rail station isn't downtown and requires a transfer.

I think there is a gap for a passenger operator to fill in terms of commuter services that are just a bit too express or a bit too far for GO or Exo in Toronto or Montreal. Something like a morning train in from London and Kingston, or high frequency service from Kitchener or Niagara Region that only makes a handful of stops and has comfortable, intercity-style seating.

I'm not sure if VIA is the one that will rise to that challenge, though. At least in Southern Ontario, I think that will be another Metrolinx product, if it ever happens.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Calgary and Edmonton are building LRTs because they are more useful for their purposes than commuter rail. They essentially are commuter rail anyway, but they don't have to deal with running on other people's infrastructure. No one here wants a train to Regina and it's pretty insulting to keep being told that's what is best for us.

Commuter rail in Toronto and Montreal are not about the cities of Toronto or Montreal. It is about the communities outside the city.

Can you show me evidence that there is no desire for rail to Regina besides the lack of the train to Regina?

Originally Posted by hipster duck

Nobody drives from Toronto Union station to Montreal Central station in 5 hours. It's 554 km, so you're not going to do this unless you average 111 km/h including obligatory stops to fill gas and pee.

I have done it a few times. I set my cruise to the traffic speed, fill up and piss before I leave and in about 5 hours, I am visiting a friend on the South Shore. Ignoring wear and tear, in my car, that's about $50 with today's gas prices. With my truck it would be closer to $100.

Originally Posted by milomilo

I'm on my phone so I'm not digging up the links, but there are studies publicly available on passenger rail from Calgary to Banff and Calgary to Edmonton, both suggesting fairly frequent, high quality service, not the decrepit daily trains you suggest.

There are no studies on a Calgary - Winnipeg route, as it is so obviously a terrible idea.

So, no study to say it is a terrible idea? So, we need to just take your word that it is a terrible idea? That is not how building ANYTHING works.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Isn't the CIB examining a Calgary-Banff proposal right now?

Yes there is. Another land yacht, but much shorter. Don't get me wrong, I think doing it would be a good thing, but it doesn't help anyone else besides the people from Calgary go to there. At least extend it to Edmonton.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Exactly. And if no one has ever acted on those intra Alberta studies (not even when the NDP was in power), what is the point of funding a study of a longer inter provincial route that serves a smaller population?

Calgary+Regina is more population than Edmonton+Saskatoon. How is it a smaller population?

Originally Posted by milomilo

Yes. So we'll have another one in time. This one is the most interesting and feasible to me.

Why? It won't be HFR.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Ottawa is doing the same thing as Edmonton and Calgary. They are all in the same boat as none of them are large enough to support commuter rail (the exurb communities are tiny). Vancouver is a special case in this regard, since the mountains and ocean have forced much of its growth up the Fraser Valley.

Vancouver is reaching the max length of routes before the distance is not feasible anymore as a commuter route. Problem is they are trying to do more than they can. A victim of their own success, but also of their own financial woes. Surrey should have a commuter rail station in it. So should Langley. However, that is for another thread....

Originally Posted by milomilo

The development patterns are just different here and don't suit commuter rail very well. There are 5 major cities and where they exist the surrounding areas do not have much in the way of sizeable settlements. If there were strings of towns along a railway, sure, commuter rail would work. But that isn't the case and trying to use solutions from elsewhere where things are different here is not helpful.

Of course, most people who actually live here know this. That's why we have built out sizeable LRT networks and foregone heavy passenger rail. I think Alberta is not doing enough on regional transportation, but for now the direction to go in on that is buses, which are far more flexible and far more affordable. If it turns out we can fill up those buses, then that's great evidence that trains could be useful.

And have built out more highways. What if instead of wasting more money on yet another ring road, you took that same money and invested in commuter rail? Toronto has learned that building more highways can only go so far. The 401 by the airport is the widest highway in Canada by the number of lanes, and every day, pre pandemic, it would crawl for much of the day. GO Transit has been added on, not only in lengths of trains, and in frequency, but by distance as well. Niagara Falls, Kitchener and Barrie are all new in the last decade or so. You are seeing similar expansions in Montreal.

Calgary has enough rail lines going the right directions that running a few trains a day during the morning and evening would provide better service, not just for the city of Calgary but for the surrounding communities. Edmonton is not much different, however,, without a downtown connection, something would need to be done.

Originally Posted by roger1818

It certainly is very interesting. While Banff's population is tiny, it is a major, year round, environmentally sensitive, tourist destination. Widening the highway to handle the traffic would then require more parking, neither of which are good plans for a National Park. A train could be very popular and would remove a lot of the strain off of the roads and parking lots. People not having a car in Banff would then stimulate business for the tour operators (rather than having people drive themselves in their rental car), which adds to the business case for the line.

9 million people visit Banff in the peak season. That is why they are looking into this.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

All three LRT cities are also using LRT in ways that are closer to light metro than a tram and with stop spacing that is closer to a metro (and even commuter rail in some cases). This is what negates the case for commuter rail in all these cities.

So, we should just extend the Yonge line north and ignore the GO expansions? I'll wait for you to realize how silly that would be. The other cities are lucky. They are not at crush loads yet. In the 1960s, I doubt the Toronto Subways were at crush load either.

Originally Posted by roger1818

This is getting way off topic (not sure what it has to do with VIA Rail), but even without their "LRT" systems, the case for commuter rail isn't there. A 25 km long commuter rail line with only 2-4 stations doesn't make a lot of sense. The fact that neither Ottawa nor Edmonton have downtown train stations (or tracks) anymore doesn't help their cases either.

What it has to do with Via is that people do not look to tomorrow. They look at today and the dollar in their hand. If the Ontario government wanted to, they could built a 2-3 km tunnel to get trains to downtown Ottawa. The challenge would be working with the government of Quebec to connect across the river.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I think there's this view that VIA should get into the commuter rail business as a way of bolstering their brand and improving rail service. But as you point out, the case is rather weak. And that's aside from the whole question of whether VIA should do it.

Some people do use it along the Corridor for Toronto.

Originally Posted by hipster duck

I don't know if commuter rail in Ottawa makes sense. Beyond not having much of a hinterland, Ottawa's rail station isn't downtown and requires a transfer.

I think there is a gap for a passenger operator to fill in terms of commuter services that are just a bit too express or a bit too far for GO or Exo in Toronto or Montreal. Something like a morning train in from London and Kingston, or high frequency service from Kitchener or Niagara Region that only makes a handful of stops and has comfortable, intercity-style seating.

I'm not sure if VIA is the one that will rise to that challenge, though. At least in Southern Ontario, I think that will be another Metrolinx product, if it ever happens.

GO eventually will be extended to London, likely within the next decade. Maybe Kingston too.If Via added an earlier train, that work potentially work well.

[milomilo]

Honestly, I can't be bothered with you. At least if you'd stick to one line of conversation it would be less exhausting. You're just wrong, and everyone should know you're wrong. Hopefully anyone else reading the last few pages can see that, but in a few months I bet there's someone else who starts this pointless discussion and we'll have to go over the same tired points.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Honestly, I can't be bothered with you. At least if you'd stick to one line of conversation it would be less exhausting. You're just wrong, and everyone should know you're wrong. Hopefully anyone else reading the last few pages can see that, but in a few months I bet there's someone else who starts this pointless discussion and we'll have to go over the same tired points.

I did not realized I cold force you or anyone to reply.... I am better than I thought.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

I don't know if commuter rail in Ottawa makes sense. Beyond not having much of a hinterland, Ottawa's rail station isn't downtown and requires a transfer.

I think there is a gap for a passenger operator to fill in terms of commuter services that are just a bit too express or a bit too far for GO or Exo in Toronto or Montreal. Something like a morning train in from London and Kingston, or high frequency service from Kitchener or Niagara Region that only makes a handful of stops and has comfortable, intercity-style seating.

I'm not sure if VIA is the one that will rise to that challenge, though. At least in Southern Ontario, I think that will be another Metrolinx product, if it ever happens.

This brings up a good point. It's entirely possible for Metrolinx with GO or some other entity, to take over VIA's Corridor business.

If anybody thinks that's extreme, than I will remind people of the Ontario Liberals Toronto-Kitchener-London HSR proposal that was said to not be a part of VIA. If something like this ever does come to pass, I would question why VIA is needed, at least in the Corridor. I would much prefer a rail service that is fully integrated in Ontario with GO and Exo in Quebec.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

This brings up a good point. It's entirely possible for Metrolinx with GO or some other entity, to take over VIA's Corridor business.

If anybody thinks that's extreme, than I will remind people of the Ontario Liberals Toronto-Kitchener-London HSR proposal that was said to not be a part of VIA. If something like this ever does come to pass, I would question why VIA is needed, at least in the Corridor. I would much prefer a rail service that is fully integrated in Ontario with GO and Exo in Quebec.

So, you would want Via to give up on it's cash cow? The only real way the Ontario government would take it on is if the federal government downloaded it to them. Now, HSR, if it were ever constructed would most likely be done between Montreal and Toronto to be able to receive federal funding. I don't see it being owned by the province. HSR for the C-E route would be a different story all together.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

So, you would want Via to give up on it's cash cow? The only real way the Ontario government would take it on is if the federal government downloaded it to them. Now, HSR, if it were ever constructed would most likely be done between Montreal and Toronto to be able to receive federal funding. I don't see it being owned by the province. HSR for the C-E route would be a different story all together.

VIA has no legal monopoly on the route. And if the feds aren't willing to the build the necessary infrastructure, I don't see why the provinces should (or more accurately could) be stopped. It's not just the TKL proposal. The previous HSR study was also jointly funded by the provincial governments of Ontario and Quebec. It's getting clear that both those provincial governments don't see VIA has having any exclusivity on providing intercity rail services.

At a certain point, the federal failure to deliver appropriate intercity rail services in the Corridor is going to have economic consequences for Ontario and Quebec. If they are willing to invest to remedy this, it's a valid question why VIA is necessary.

Heck, maybe the only way to get the feds to actually pay attention to the Corridor is to threaten to outbuild and displace VIA from the Corridor permanently.

Lastly, federal funding is even more likely if Ontario and Quebec take over the Corridor and insist on treating it just like other transit corridors. If London and Kingston were seen as falling under GO's mandate, for example, we'd be having very different discussions on the kind of service they'd get. So, while it might suck for the rest of Canada if VIA lost the Corridor, I don't see a downside for Ontario and Quebec.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

VIA has no legal monopoly on the route. And if the feds aren't willing to the build the necessary infrastructure, I don't see why the provinces should (or more accurately could) be stopped. It's not just the TKL proposal. The previous HSR study was also jointly funded by the provincial governments of Ontario and Quebec. It's getting clear that both those provincial governments don't see VIA has having any exclusivity on providing intercity rail services.

At a certain point, the federal failure to deliver appropriate intercity rail services in the Corridor is going to have economic consequences for Ontario and Quebec. If they are willing to invest to remedy this, it's a valid question why VIA is necessary.

Heck, maybe the only way to get the feds to actually pay attention to the Corridor is to threaten to outbuild and displace VIA from the Corridor permanently.

Lastly, federal funding is even more likely if Ontario and Quebec take over the Corridor and insist on treating it just like other transit corridors. If London and Kingston were seen as falling under GO's mandate, for example, we'd be having very different discussions on the kind of service they'd get. So, while it might suck for the rest of Canada if VIA lost the Corridor, I don't see a downside for Ontario and Quebec.

I know that Via has no legal monopoly.
I also know that there is a HSR study that may or may not be done with Via.
The reality is, so long as they can fly bigger planes, there won't be a big enough economic hit to make Via look that bad.

[SIGSEGV]

If I may interject as a non-Canadian:

1) For Calgary, the obvious places where intercity rail service make sense are to Red Deer/Edmonton (duh), Lethbridge, and Lake Louise. I've been on the Calgary to Lake Louise bus (attending a conference at Lake Louise) and while it was ok (and crowded/relatively frequent), a train trip would be more comfortable/scenic, even if it wasn't faster than the bus. It could have ski racks, space for hiking gear, etc, and obviously would link up with shuttles. It's unlikely that it would make sense to extend such a train to Kamloops/Vancouver though, even though it's tempting.

2) The next logical place to connect Winnipeg to is not Regina/Calgary, but probably cooperating with Amtrak to get a Winnipeg/Grand Forks/Fargo/Minneapolis/(Chicago?) train running. Amtrak already operates the Empire Builder between Grand Forks and Chicago, so it would be relatively little additional trackage (would probably require restoring some now abandoned track though). Even though it would likely be an 8-hour train ride to MSP, flights between YPG and MSP seem to be ridiculously expensive (though still popular). If the train were significantly cheaper it could probably do well.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I also know that there is a HSR study that may or may not be done with Via.

The question is why bother with an agency that has so many other priorities and is subject to political pressures forcing them to downplay or underinvest in the Corridor.

Integration also means what GO and Exo could run parallel services on the same track. So a regular all-stop service from Toronto to London. And then an express limited stop higher speed service that runs say once an hour. And they could build it all without having to worry about multiple agencies conflicting for track slots.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

The reality is, so long as they can fly bigger planes, there won't be a big enough economic hit to make Via look that bad.

Except that this is not just about flying. What proportion of travelers to London, Kitchener, Kingston and Peterborough fly to those cities? They would all massively benefit from a more regionally focused rail service, which VIA can't provide.

Hopefully, Queen's Park grows a pair someday and figures out that it can do better cooperating with Quebec.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

2) The next logical place to connect Winnipeg to is not Regina/Calgary, but probably cooperating with Amtrak to get a Winnipeg/Grand Forks/Fargo/Minneapolis/(Chicago?) train running. Amtrak already operates the Empire Builder between Grand Forks and Chicago, so it would be relatively little additional trackage (would probably require restoring some now abandoned track though). Even though it would likely be an 8-hour train ride to MSP, flights between YPG and MSP seem to be ridiculously expensive (though still popular). If the train were significantly cheaper it could probably do well.

Just a couple of notes: it would be tough to get Winnipeggers heading down to Minneapolis out of their cars. It is a long but relatively easy drive and driving gives you the benefit of having a car in MSP which is pretty much a necessity... MSP is not the kind of town where you can easily get around without a car like NYC or even Chicago. It's the same going the other way, I think Minnesotans heading north would be inclined to take their cars with them.

You are correct that DL's fares on YWG-MSP are very high... it's funny, but you can often fly to another DL hub like ATL via MSP for less than just flying to MSP itself. YWG-MSP is basically the domain of business travelers, unless they're connecting to somewhere else.

Tracks between Winnipeg and Fargo are secondary lines which would probably have some impact on operating speed.

Winnipeg-Minneapolis trains haven't operated since the late 60s and trains basically ceased being a mainstream form of transportation in Winnipeg with the 1990 VIA cuts, so it would be really tough to get people into the habit of taking the train again. Perhaps Minnesotans might be a bit more used to the idea?

This isn't to say that it couldn't be done, just that it would be very difficult.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

The question is why bother with an agency that has so many other priorities and is subject to political pressures forcing them to downplay or underinvest in the Corridor.

Integration also means what GO and Exo could run parallel services on the same track. So a regular all-stop service from Toronto to London. And then an express limited stop higher speed service that runs say once an hour. And they could build it all without having to worry about multiple agencies conflicting for track slots.

Except that this is not just about flying. What proportion of travelers to London, Kitchener, Kingston and Peterborough fly to those cities? They would all massively benefit from a more regionally focused rail service, which VIA can't provide.

Hopefully, Queen's Park grows a pair someday and figures out that it can do better cooperating with Quebec.

GO Transit seems to have a stronger mandate for its services than VIA. Maybe because it's more focused? I wonder if expanding its writ to include from Windsor to Ottawa might actually give service a boost. That, combined with Ontario Northland, provides a comprehensive travel network through the province.

If VIA still wants to run a train across the country, let them run one without all the hassle of trying to be a regional service. Just make life easier for someone coming from London (or wherever) and going to Toronto by way of giving control to the province instead of a distant federal government. It might also improve GO's image as a truly Ontario-based network, instead of a GTA-centric thing.

Eventually cooperate with Quebec and voila! A useful inter-region transport option.