Alto High Speed Rail

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

Actually, of all the airports Quebec's Jean Lesage (YQB) is the one that's right in the path of HSR and could be a candidate for a transportation hub especially if they extend the tramway to it. Since QC is at the end of the line adding an HSR stop there wouldn't be much of a time penalty.

Jean Lesage has even less potential utility than YOW. The only airport connection that is genuinely beneficial to residents of multiple cities would be Dorval?

How many airlines would increase flights or capacity to YQB just because of an HSR connection? How many Ottawa or Montreal residents would take an hours long train ride to YQB for a flight? YUL makes sense because it's a major airport that people outside Montreal already drive and train to.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I think definitely more than other Canadian cities. Height restrictions prevent tall office buildings in the downtown core (as exist in Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary, etc). The tech sector (one of the larger private sector employers, and one likely to be a source of trips for an HSR system) has traditionally preferred to locate in the West end, past the greenbelt. The federal government (by far the largest employer in the region) has had a policy since the 1950s of spreading employment nodes all over the region, with major hubs in Hull, the West End (Tunney's, Dow's lake), the Greenbelt, Vanier, Gloucester, Barrhaven, etc.).

Downtown is not the centre of population in the area. The population skews heavily west (i.e. Nepean, Barrhaven, Kanata Stittsville are much more populous than Orleans and Gloucester). Residents of the city who do not live in the downtown/market (probably 95% of the population of the city) would be getting on transit, ubers, taxis, etc. to get to and from the station, all of which are not convenient from the Senate.

There is no Quebec rapid transit through downtown Ottawa. There has long been talk of some sort of LRT, but I believe that is still in the talk phase. I have never heard of local buses being characterized as a "transportation hub." If you want to get to the Senate from almost anywhere in the city you have to get on the LRT, which is on the same line as the train station, four stops away.

This ignores Gatineau which is ostensibly part of the NCR....

I would think when Gatineau is included the centre of population is probably not that far from Parliament Hill.

That said, there's no absolute need for the centre of population and railway station to coincide.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I think definitely more than other Canadian cities. Height restrictions prevent tall office buildings in the downtown core (as exist in Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary, etc)

I had a look at the stats. According to AI, the downtown core of Ottawa has 18 million sq ft of office space out of 44 million sq feet in the city, or about 41% of all office space in the region. Other major cities ranged from high 40s to about 55% of office space being downtown. So you are right - Ottawa is lower. But I still don't think that changes the fact that downtown is by far the largest concentration of offices in the region, its commercial hub, and the primary destination for business visitors.

The tech sector (one of the larger private sector employers, and one likely to be a source of trips for an HSR system) has traditionally preferred to locate in the West end, past the greenbelt.

The tech sector isn't as concentrated in the west end outside the greenbelt as one might think. If you look at the link that I sent you, only 30% of tech employment is in the west end. 20% is downtown and 35% more is inside the greenbelt generally.

The federal government (by far the largest employer in the region) has had a policy since the 1950s of spreading employment nodes all over the region, with major hubs in Hull, the West End (Tunney's, Dow's lake), the Greenbelt, Vanier, Gloucester, Barrhaven, etc.).

Again, I'd point out that the fact that things are spread out doesn't make a central location less important, it makes it more important as travel distances are longer. Also, downtown is still the biggest node by far of the ones that you mentioned and many of the others you list (Hull, Tunney's, Dow's Lake) are downtown adjacent.

Downtown is not the centre of population in the area. The population skews heavily west (i.e. Nepean, Barrhaven, Kanata Stittsville are much more populous than Orleans and Gloucester). Residents of the city who do not live in the downtown/market (probably 95% of the population of the city) would be getting on transit, ubers, taxis, etc. to get to and from the station, all of which are not convenient from the Senate.

If downtown is not the absolute centre of population (and you forgot Gatineau on your list), then it is very close to being that. And I really don't understand your claim that downtown isn't convenient for transit or for taxis/ubers. It's the centre of both transit systems and is the shortest drive for the largest number of people. Where exactly is more convenient location for multiple modes of transportation?

There is no Quebec rapid transit through downtown Ottawa. There has long been talk of some sort of LRT, but I believe that is still in the talk phase.

Three Rapibus routes pass through downtown Ottawa, plus a bunch of others that use the rapid transit corridor. Plus about 25 local STO routes.

I have never heard of local buses being characterized as a "transportation hub." If you want to get to the Senate from almost anywhere in the city you have to get on the LRT, which is on the same line as the train station, four stops away

Isn't that exactly what a transportation hub is, where a bunch of bus routes converge? There are literally about 15 routes that converge in and around the Rideau Centre/Senate. Buses from almost every part of the inner urban area (Vanier, the Glebe, Old Ottawa South, Old Ottawa East, Rockcliffe and New Edinburgh) connect to that location.

I think there are arguments for Tremblay or maybe some other spot in the city, but none of them are based on the fact that those locations are bigger hubs for people or transit than downtown is.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by phil235

I had a look at the stats. According to AI, the downtown core of Ottawa has 18 million sq ft of office space out of 44 million sq feet in the city, or about 41% of all office space in the region. Other major cities ranged from high 40s to about 55% of office space being downtown. So you are right - Ottawa is lower. But I still don't think that changes the fact that downtown is by far the largest concentration of offices in the region, its commercial hub, and the primary destination for business visitors.



The tech sector isn't as concentrated in the west end outside the greenbelt as one might think. If you look at the link that I sent you, only 30% of tech employment is in the west end. 20% is downtown and 35% more is inside the greenbelt generally.



Again, I'd point out that the fact that things are spread out doesn't make a central location less important, it makes it more important as travel distances are longer. Also, downtown is still the biggest node by far of the ones that you mentioned and many of the others you list (Hull, Tunney's, Dow's Lake) are downtown adjacent.



If downtown is not the absolute centre of population (and you forgot Gatineau on your list), then it is very close to being that. And I really don't understand your claim that downtown isn't convenient for transit or for taxis/ubers. It's the centre of both transit systems and is the shortest drive for the largest number of people. Where exactly is more convenient location for multiple modes of transportation?



Three Rapibus routes pass through downtown Ottawa, plus a bunch of others that use the rapid transit corridor. Plus about 25 local STO routes.



Isn't that exactly what a transportation hub is, where a bunch of bus routes converge? There are literally about 15 routes that converge in and around the Rideau Centre/Senate. Buses from almost every part of the inner urban area (Vanier, the Glebe, Old Ottawa South, Old Ottawa East, Rockcliffe and New Edinburgh) connect to that location.

I think there are arguments for Tremblay or maybe some other spot in the city, but none of them are based on the fact that those locations are bigger hubs for people or transit than downtown is.

If 15 local bus routes is a transportation hub then there are probably several dozen “transportation hubs” in the region.

Where do the taxis line up at the Senate? If the train works as theorized there is going to be 500 passengers arriving every hour. Look at how much taxi space taxes up at the train station or the airport, and this will be more. On top of that you need somewhere for Ubers and other pickups, and space for people who want to park. Every square metre of pavement anywhere near the Senate is spoken for. There are no side streets. There is no regional train network to absorb passengers. There is no underground city to absorb pedestrians

It is not conveniently located to get to any of those hubs from the senate. The area is a maze of no turns, dead ends, one way streets. It would take 10-15 minutes in most traffic conditions just to get pointed in the right direction. If you are going north or east google maps actually tells you to walk to the third lane from the curb to get picked up there (where it would be possible to get a left turn onto Sussex). If you’re picked up are going west to tunneys google maps suggests the that same left turn, then a detour through Quebec via the Alexandra and Portage bridges.

[Nouvellecosse]

I do think there needs to be some reasonable auto access to the HSR in each region since that is still an essential mode in most parts of NA. In metro areas that are large enough to justify more than one stop, the central urban stop wouldn't need much or any since people arriving by car could use the suburban location. But since an Ottawa-sized metro really isn't big enough for that, the single stop does need to be somewhat of a compromise. The intermediate location of the current VIA site actually represents that quite well. Based on the land use around it, there should be room for a good-sized parking garage and additional loading areas.

Technically it would be possible to have a single downtown station if the LRT was able to act as a shuttle to and from one or more parking locations outside the city centre but that would require the local transit service to be very reliable, not too crowded to comfortably handle people with luggage, and impeccably connected to the HSR stop. With those caveats being satisfied the central location might actually be better, but only if the extra cost and effort weren't too extreme. If say, an ideal version of the downtown station with LRT as a shuttle might be 20% better than the compromise location, it would only be worth it if it didn't add much more than 20% additional cost. If it doubled the cost then no.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by acottawa

If 15 local bus routes is a transportation hub then there are probably several dozen “transportation hubs” in the region.

Where do the taxis line up at the Senate? If the train works as theorized there is going to be 500 passengers arriving every hour. Look at how much taxi space taxes up at the train station or the airport, and this will be more. On top of that you need somewhere for Ubers and other pickups, and space for people who want to park. Every square metre of pavement anywhere near the Senate is spoken for. There are no side streets. There is no regional train network to absorb passengers. There is no underground city to absorb pedestrians

It is not conveniently located to get to any of those hubs from the senate. The area is a maze of no turns, dead ends, one way streets. It would take 10-15 minutes in most traffic conditions just to get pointed in the right direction. If you are going north or east google maps actually tells you to walk to the third lane from the curb to get picked up there (where it would be possible to get a left turn onto Sussex). If you’re picked up are going west to tunneys google maps suggests the that same left turn, then a detour through Quebec via the Alexandra and Portage bridges.

To be clear, it is 15 local routes, 25 Quebec routes, and an LRT station. If there are several dozen similar-sized hubs in the city, I would really like to hear where they are, because that is news to me. Even if they did exist, none of them would be as centrally located.

There is no doubt that the Senate itself is a tight location, but no one is suggesting that it wouldn't require reconfiguration for pick ups and drop offs. Presumably if we are spending 90 billion dollars on this project, there would be a few dollars dedicated to infrastructure upgrades. I so note that the same point you are making about Union could be made about Union Station in Toronto. Car access there is far worse than it is for Union here. It will also require massive changes for HSR, as will Gare Centrale in Montreal.

I think the points about the suitability of the site and the risks associated with tunnelling there are entirely valid. I was taking issue with the point that downtown isn't the hub of the regional transit system.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by phil235

To be clear, it is 15 local routes, 25 Quebec routes, and an LRT station. If there are several dozen similar-sized hubs in the city, I would really like to hear where they are, because that is news to me. Even if they did exist, none of them would be as centrally located.

There is no doubt that the Senate itself is a tight location, but no one is suggesting that it wouldn't require reconfiguration for pick ups and drop offs. Presumably if we are spending 90 billion dollars on this project, there would be a few dollars dedicated to infrastructure upgrades. I so note that the same point you are making about Union could be made about Union Station in Toronto. Car access there is far worse than it is for Union here. It will also require massive changes for HSR, as will Gare Centrale in Montreal.

I think the points about the suitability of the site and the risks associated with tunnelling there are entirely valid. I was taking issue with the point that downtown isn't the hub of the regional transit system.

Yes there is some weird idea we will use the same tracks straighten things out a bit and poof HSR. There is no point in blazing and expropation path through Farmland or Canadian Shield just to slow down and meander through the last 10 km of each stop. A downtown station below the Senate could have a direct path the Rideau station and and multiple exits from underground allowing taxi ranks at say the back of the Rideau station but really a 60 minute train from Montreal isn't worth much if you still need a 30 minute taxi ride. Why not just drive directly? The idea is to add totally new patterns. You can now work downtown 3 days a ween in one city or the other. You can go to a Canadiens game after work etc. It is also presumedly meant to soldify a downtown urban oriented pattern of development.

[sclement12]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

This ignores Gatineau which is ostensibly part of the NCR....

I would think when Gatineau is included the centre of population is probably not that far from Parliament Hill.

That said, there's no absolute need for the centre of population and railway station to coincide.

Just doing some rough AI work, if we do not include populations outside of the City of Ottawa and Gatineau boundaries (CP, Arnprior, Val des Monts), the centre of population is predicted to be right at Tom Brown arena in Mechanicsville - roughly 2km from Parliament.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by sclement12

Just doing some rough AI work, if we do not include populations outside of the City of Ottawa and Gatineau boundaries (CP, Arnprior, Val des Monts), the centre of population is predicted to be right at Tom Brown arena in Mechanicsville - roughly 2km from Parliament.

Thanks for the information. Interesting that the centre of population is right at the junction of our LRT lines - maybe that was well-planned. Also a good argument for the location of the new Sens arena.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Yes there is some weird idea we will use the same tracks straighten things out a bit and poof HSR. There is no point in blazing and expropation path through Farmland or Canadian Shield just to slow down and meander through the last 10 km of each stop. A downtown station below the Senate could have a direct path the Rideau station and and multiple exits from underground allowing taxi ranks at say the back of the Rideau station but really a 60 minute train from Montreal isn't worth much if you still need a 30 minute taxi ride. Why not just drive directly? The idea is to add totally new patterns. You can now work downtown 3 days a ween in one city or the other. You can go to a Canadiens game after work etc. It is also presumedly meant to soldify a downtown urban oriented pattern of development.

What's this 30 min taxi ride?

To Parliament Hill from Tremblay
Transit: 18 mins
Car: 20 mins
Bike: 19 mins (5.4 km)
Walk: 57 mins (4.2 km)

The Senate is building is say a 3 min walk from the Hill.

So to save 15-20 mins total, we'd spend billions and add in untold amounts of risk?

I am glad that the rumours coming out say they are not interested in this.

[sseguin]

We Visited the Alto High-Speed Rail Open House : Here's What We Learned


Explore the Alto High-Speed Rail (HSR) project in Ottawa! In this video, we take you on a full walkthrough of the Alto Open House, visiting each booth to learn about routes, plans, engineering and security, environmental studies, and project timelines. Hear directly from the project spokespeople and get an inside look at Canada’s future high-speed rail initiative.

Whether you’re interested in Alto HSR, Canadian infrastructure, or transit planning, this guided tour shows you what the consultation is all about.

Filmed at the Alto Open House at Bayview Yards in Ottawa.

• Video Link

[rocketphish]

Ottawa's new high-speed rail project isn't life-changing
This "nation-building" megaproject would be a sound idea if the nation began at Quebec City and ended at Toronto.

By Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen
Published Jan 28, 2026 | 3 minute read

Wow, are we Ottawans lucky or what? Ours will be one of the first two cities to reap the apparently enormous benefits of the federal government’s new high-speed rail project. For once, we’re ahead of Toronto.

The Ottawa to Montreal line will be the first leg of a project that will eventually link Toronto to Quebec City. Ottawans still suffering the effects of our own electric rail service might not want to rejoice prematurely, but if everything goes according to plan, they will eventually be able to get to Montreal in one hour instead of two.

Not to spoil the excitement of something new that goes fast, but that doesn’t seem like a life-changing improvement, certainly not for the cost.

Perhaps it’s just my natural inclination toward sensible government spending, but when I look at the cost of the whole project I immediately see sixty to ninety billion reasons why it’s a bad idea.

The entire rail project cost is estimated at $60 billion to $90 billion. The $30 billion gap between the figures suggests it’s a rough number, at best, but you can safely bet that the end cost will be higher than what the public is told on the day the contract is finally announced.

That’s a lot of money, even by the standards of Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government. Let’s put that $60-90 billion in context of other big Carney spending plans. For example, the expansion of Canada’s military will cost $81.8 billion over five years. Carney’s plan to build government-subsidized housing will cost $13 billion to start.

Not that the Carney government is entirely unaware of thrift. Its plan to cut, not cap, the public service is expected to reduce operations cost by $39 billion when fully implemented. The reduction might be overdue, but it has to be somewhat disheartening for laid-off public servants to know that a train is seen as more important than their continued services.

The decision to proceed with high-speed rail was one of the stranger decisions by Carney. Sure, the rail concept has been around for a long time. That doesn’t make it a good idea, but rather one no previous government cared to implement.

The current iteration of the plan was a Justin Trudeau project involving planning money only. It could easily have been dropped along with some of the former PM’s other clunkers like the carbon tax.

Instead, the Carney government is including the new rail line as one of its “nation-building” megaprojects. That would be a sound idea if the nation began at Quebec City and ended at Toronto.

Some do see high-speed rail as having benefits. The federal government, naturally, is one. It claims that the rail project will increase “GDP by up to $35 billion and create tens of thousands of high-quality jobs.” Maybe so, but spending the money on something useful would have the same economic impact.

A study by the C.D. Howe Institute think-tank says the high-speed rail line would create between $15 billion and $27 billion in value over 60 years, about one-third of that in time savings and greater reliability for users. It seems a modest return for the dollars spent.

Just to add to potential concerns, the rail project is being run by a new federal Crown corporation called Alto. Being new, it has never built even a kilometre of high-speed rail before, but by definition its first project will be its best ever.

One can easily see why Alto officials and the federal government are eager to direct the public’s attention to the exact route the train will take, while at the same time saying there is little flexibility there because a train that runs at 300 kilometres per hour doesn’t really like curves.

One thing we know for sure, the speedy train will have only seven stops and will run for hundreds of kilometres through lightly-populated areas. That would seem to limit its utility.

Unfortunately, the train of rationality has already left the station.

Randall Denley is an Ottawa journalist and author. Contact him at [email protected]

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/new-high-speed-rail

[rocketphish]

Sutcliffe backs downtown station for high-speed rail
Former Union Station on Rideau Street among potential sites under consideration by Alto

Cameron Mahler · CBC News
Posted: Jan 28, 2026 1:04 PM EST | Last Updated: 3 hours ago

Mayor Mark Sutcliffe wants Alto's new high-speed rail station in Ottawa to be downtown.

"I believe the people of Ottawa will be best served by a station that is located right downtown," Sutcliffe said Wednesday during a city council meeting.

While no location for a station in the capital has been selected, public consultations earlier this month pointed to a number of potential sites including the VIA Rail station on Tremblay Road and the former Union Station on Rideau Street, which now houses the Senate while a major renovation continues on Parliament Hill.

The CEO of Alto, the Crown corporation overseeing the high-speed rail project, told CBC earlier this month that number of locations are under consideration.

Martin Imbleau said the former Union Station "is of great interest" among local business partners, but noted it also poses significant challenges for high-speed rail.

<more>

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/su...wn-station-for-high-speed-rail-9.7065062

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Ottawa Citizen Article

Instead, the Carney government is including the new rail line as one of its “nation-building” megaprojects. That would be a sound idea if the nation began at Quebec City and ended at Toronto.

That's gotta be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. If something that serves a region containing nearly half the country's population can't qualify as a nation building project because it doesn't serve the whole thing, then what project does? That's why there are multiple projects across the country.

The only thing of any relevance in the article is the cited cost-benefit ratio. It does make me wonder what inputs and assumptions the C.D. Howe Institute used for that.

[Harley613]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

That's gotta be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. If something that serves a region containing nearly half the country's population can't qualify as a nation building project because it doesn't serve the whole thing, then what project does? That's why there are multiple projects across the country.

The only thing of any relevance in the article is the cited cost-benefit ratio. It does make me wonder what inputs and assumptions the C.D. Howe Institute used for that.

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.

[skyscraperaccount]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

Ottawa's new high-speed rail project isn't life-changing
This "nation-building" megaproject would be a sound idea if the nation began at Quebec City and ended at Toronto.

By Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen
Published Jan 28, 2026 | 3 minute read

Wow, are we Ottawans lucky or what? Ours will be one of the first two cities to reap the apparently enormous benefits of the federal government’s new high-speed rail project. For once, we’re ahead of Toronto.

The Ottawa to Montreal line will be the first leg of a project that will eventually link Toronto to Quebec City. Ottawans still suffering the effects of our own electric rail service might not want to rejoice prematurely, but if everything goes according to plan, they will eventually be able to get to Montreal in one hour instead of two.

Not to spoil the excitement of something new that goes fast, but that doesn’t seem like a life-changing improvement, certainly not for the cost.

Perhaps it’s just my natural inclination toward sensible government spending, but when I look at the cost of the whole project I immediately see sixty to ninety billion reasons why it’s a bad idea.

The entire rail project cost is estimated at $60 billion to $90 billion. The $30 billion gap between the figures suggests it’s a rough number, at best, but you can safely bet that the end cost will be higher than what the public is told on the day the contract is finally announced.

That’s a lot of money, even by the standards of Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government. Let’s put that $60-90 billion in context of other big Carney spending plans. For example, the expansion of Canada’s military will cost $81.8 billion over five years. Carney’s plan to build government-subsidized housing will cost $13 billion to start.

Not that the Carney government is entirely unaware of thrift. Its plan to cut, not cap, the public service is expected to reduce operations cost by $39 billion when fully implemented. The reduction might be overdue, but it has to be somewhat disheartening for laid-off public servants to know that a train is seen as more important than their continued services.

The decision to proceed with high-speed rail was one of the stranger decisions by Carney. Sure, the rail concept has been around for a long time. That doesn’t make it a good idea, but rather one no previous government cared to implement.

The current iteration of the plan was a Justin Trudeau project involving planning money only. It could easily have been dropped along with some of the former PM’s other clunkers like the carbon tax.

Instead, the Carney government is including the new rail line as one of its “nation-building” megaprojects. That would be a sound idea if the nation began at Quebec City and ended at Toronto.

Some do see high-speed rail as having benefits. The federal government, naturally, is one. It claims that the rail project will increase “GDP by up to $35 billion and create tens of thousands of high-quality jobs.” Maybe so, but spending the money on something useful would have the same economic impact.

A study by the C.D. Howe Institute think-tank says the high-speed rail line would create between $15 billion and $27 billion in value over 60 years, about one-third of that in time savings and greater reliability for users. It seems a modest return for the dollars spent.

Just to add to potential concerns, the rail project is being run by a new federal Crown corporation called Alto. Being new, it has never built even a kilometre of high-speed rail before, but by definition its first project will be its best ever.

One can easily see why Alto officials and the federal government are eager to direct the public’s attention to the exact route the train will take, while at the same time saying there is little flexibility there because a train that runs at 300 kilometres per hour doesn’t really like curves.

One thing we know for sure, the speedy train will have only seven stops and will run for hundreds of kilometres through lightly-populated areas. That would seem to limit its utility.

Unfortunately, the train of rationality has already left the station.

Randall Denley is an Ottawa journalist and author. Contact him at [email protected]

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/new-high-speed-rail

Disengenuous drivel.

[skyscraperaccount]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

Sutcliffe backs downtown station for high-speed rail
Former Union Station on Rideau Street among potential sites under consideration by Alto

Cameron Mahler · CBC News
Posted: Jan 28, 2026 1:04 PM EST | Last Updated: 3 hours ago

Mayor Mark Sutcliffe wants Alto's new high-speed rail station in Ottawa to be downtown.

"I believe the people of Ottawa will be best served by a station that is located right downtown," Sutcliffe said Wednesday during a city council meeting.

While no location for a station in the capital has been selected, public consultations earlier this month pointed to a number of potential sites including the VIA Rail station on Tremblay Road and the former Union Station on Rideau Street, which now houses the Senate while a major renovation continues on Parliament Hill.

The CEO of Alto, the Crown corporation overseeing the high-speed rail project, told CBC earlier this month that number of locations are under consideration.

Martin Imbleau said the former Union Station "is of great interest" among local business partners, but noted it also poses significant challenges for high-speed rail.

<more>

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/su...wn-station-for-high-speed-rail-9.7065062

Ottawa politicians sticking their nose into transportation planning. That'll end well.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by phil235

To be clear, it is 15 local routes, 25 Quebec routes, and an LRT station. If there are several dozen similar-sized hubs in the city, I would really like to hear where they are, because that is news to me. Even if they did exist, none of them would be as centrally located.

There is no doubt that the Senate itself is a tight location, but no one is suggesting that it wouldn't require reconfiguration for pick ups and drop offs. Presumably if we are spending 90 billion dollars on this project, there would be a few dollars dedicated to infrastructure upgrades. I so note that the same point you are making about Union could be made about Union Station in Toronto. Car access there is far worse than it is for Union here. It will also require massive changes for HSR, as will Gare Centrale in Montreal.

I think the points about the suitability of the site and the risks associated with tunnelling there are entirely valid. I was taking issue with the point that downtown isn't the hub of the regional transit system.

What infrastructure upgrades can you make? The Senate building is about he worst configuration for a railway station in the world. It is sandwiched between the canal, a bridge, a narrow road and an existing shopping mall/convention complex. Underground it is beside an LRT line and a giant block of concrete (former sinkhole). The geology of the area is a mess (hence the sinkhole). There are no side streets, there is no piazza, there is nowhere to expand, there is nowhere to reroute existing roads or traffic. Plus almost everything in the area has some sort of heritage designation, further compounding the grief. There is also little space to put any development, commercial space, etc. that might help to defray some of the project's cost.

Union Station in Toronto has about 200m of curbside space for taxis, a side street (station street) that is good for uber and private pickups (Maple Leaf Square is good for this purpose too if there is no event). It also has a myriad of potential options for arriving passengers for diverting them away from taxis, ubers, parking, etc. including GO Trains and Buses, Via, Amtrak, Ontario Northland, intercity buses, the airport train, streetcar, TTC, and the PATH network. Gare Centrale has a good side street (Rue Belmont) to meet ubers or private pickups. They also have a large taxi stand (by the McDonalds) and like Toronto there are many potential options to divert passengers away from the station including the Metro, RER, Via, Amtrak and the underground city. The same is mostly true of train stations in Europe with intercity service such as St Pancras, Rome Termini, Gare de Nord, etc.

The Senate Building is the complete opposite of any best practice for High Speed Rail service, particularly in a city like Ottawa that is very car centric.

[pattherat]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

That's gotta be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. If something that serves a region containing nearly half the country's population can't qualify as a nation building project because it doesn't serve the whole thing, then what project does? That's why there are multiple projects across the country.

The only thing of any relevance in the article is the cited cost-benefit ratio. It does make me wonder what inputs and assumptions the C.D. Howe Institute used for that.

Well Denley is not generally known for his ‘smart’ takes.

[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.