[nfitz]

Downtown was always a pipedream and Tremblay is the only realistic, good option.

I have no idea how Tremblay isn't a great location. It's what - 2 stops from the Rideau Centre --- maybe 3?

When I lived in Ottawa and took VIA nearly every weekend and worked/lived near downtown, I thought the train station was incredibly convenient. The bus station however, despite the location being much more flexible - completely sucked.

 

[micheal_can]

Gare du Palais is a nice station in a good location and it'd be a shame not to use it. I don't see the point of stopping at the edge of the city at all. People want to go to the middle of cities, not the edge.

Lets look at it from a future proofing stance. If there is ever the plan of extending ALTO eastward,how do you cross the St Lawrence?

 

[StreetcarRider]

Some more coverage as of this evening.

More coverage of station choices, this time in English:

• "Ottawa train station isn’t ideal location for high-speed rail terminal, Transport Minister says"

Ottawa train station isn’t ideal location for high-speed rail terminal, Transport Minister says

Steven MacKinnon says historic station is too close to the Rideau Canal and former sinkhole

www.theglobeandmail.com

• "Officials dim hopes for downtown Ottawa high-speed rail station"

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/alto-high-speed-rail-downtown-ottawa-station-9.7184621

CBC is also covering the expected expropriations process:

• "How Alto plans to buy out property owners for its high-speed rail plans"

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/how-alto-plans-to-buy-out-property-owners-for-its-high-speed-rail-plans-9.7184084

 

[Erich Nelson]

Going back to Toronto's second urban station - I overlaid the CPKC alignment onto Toronto's Future Rapid Transit map to see what an Agincourt station might look like.
If we are judging by intersecting lines alone, it seems Sheppard-McCowan and even Don Mills might be equal contenders. East Harbour doesn't seem feasible being opposite the Don River.

 

[micheal_can]

Going back to Toronto's second urban station - I overlaid the CPKC alignment onto Toronto's Future Rapid Transit map to see what an Agincourt station might look.
If we are judging by intersecting lines alone, it seems Sheppard-McCowan and even Don Mills might be equal contenders. East Harbour doesn't seem feasible being opposite the Don River.

View attachment 733539

Maybe by the time construction begins between Ottawa and Toronto, Sheppard gets an extension east.

 

[AJhyett]

 

[north-of-anything]

I don't care if it costs $200 billion. Build it.

 

[Frank_Lee]

View attachment 733559

I don't know where you're getting this data from (clearly not here, which is the best existing source on high speed rail costs). For Canadian purposes, though, the biggest problem is the cost projection for the 401. Following the 401 even at a 200 km/h design speed would cost a hell of a lot more than 19 million dollars per km. As many others have noted, this route would have probably the highest costs in terms of expropriation, many more necessary grade separations, and also wouldn't hit Ottawa, which would drive a very large fraction of the traffic in this system.


A reminder on geography, going through Ottawa isn't actually much longer than going through Kingston, because maps don't show the curvature of the earth.

 

[stfeinberg]

Going back to Toronto's second urban station - I overlaid the CPKC alignment onto Toronto's Future Rapid Transit map to see what an Agincourt station might look.
If we are judging by intersecting lines alone, it seems Sheppard-McCowan and even Don Mills might be equal contenders. East Harbour doesn't seem feasible being opposite the Don River.

View attachment 733539

great chart, so in the future Agincourt could theoretically be connected to Stouffville GO, Line 4, Midtown GO and Alto. Which is absolutely insane for a non DT interchange if you think about it.

 

[lenaitch]

Going back to Toronto's second urban station - I overlaid the CPKC alignment onto Toronto's Future Rapid Transit map to see what an Agincourt station might look like.
If we are judging by intersecting lines alone, it seems Sheppard-McCowan and even Don Mills might be equal contenders. East Harbour doesn't seem feasible being opposite the Don River.

View attachment 733539

Using the CPKC North Toronto sub and Don branch would assume that CPKC is provided another right-of-way to everybody's liking and most likely a new yard - somewhere.

 

[bpbpbpbp]

Using the CPKC North Toronto sub and Don branch would assume that CPKC is provided another right-of-way to everybody's liking and most likely a new yard - somewhere.

I summon @Bojaxs and the CPKC reroute lol, and the new route and probably tons of cash being the price.

Can’t say I’m an expert but I honestly think freight bypassed of some sort are gonna be built in the next 30 or so years, not for GO, but to enable HSR, with GO benefitting as a result.

North Toronto if explored would probably need freight kept at a distance. Would a shared corridor work? There certainly is tons of space.

Also in the future, if HSR goes to southwestern Toronto via Halton towards KW->London, CN probably needs to get relocated, and a full quadtrack through Brampton is needed.

 

[lenaitch]

I summon @Bojaxs and the CPKC reroute lol, and the new route and probably tons of cash being the price.

Can’t say I’m an expert but I honestly think freight bypassed of some sort are gonna be built in the next 30 or so years, not for GO, but to enable HSR, with GO benefitting as a result.

North Toronto if explored would probably need freight kept at a distance. Would a shared corridor work? There certainly is tons of space.

Also in the future, if HSR goes to southwestern Toronto via Halton towards KW->London, CN probably needs to get relocated, and a full quadtrack through Brampton is needed.

I'm not sure there is "tons of space" along the full length. The corridor would likely have to be taken out of CPKC's hands , both because they (and CN) seem to be not keen on electrification, and a shared corridor just continues with VIA's main problem.. Alto obviously won't be high-speed within the GTA but speeds might be high enough that the alignment doesn't work. No engineer but I suspect electrification requires a wider footprint.

The issues surrounding a freight bypass are for another existing thread, but keep in mind that other cities have also been trying some similar for years with limited success. It mostly boils down to money - the railways are generally quite happy where they are so don't want to pay for it.

 

[Bojaxs]

I summon @Bojaxs and the CPKC reroute lol, and the new route and probably tons of cash being the price.

Can’t say I’m an expert but I honestly think freight bypassed of some sort are gonna be built in the next 30 or so years, not for GO, but to enable HSR, with GO benefitting as a result.

North Toronto if explored would probably need freight kept at a distance. Would a shared corridor work? There certainly is tons of space.

Also in the future, if HSR goes to southwestern Toronto via Halton towards KW->London, CN probably needs to get relocated, and a full quadtrack through Brampton is needed.

The 413 freight bypass for CPKC. (CN would use the 407 freight bypass)

I originally proposed it for the intention of taking CPKC trains off the Milton line. But perhaps it could be used for ALTO?

I never proposed the bypass to go east of CPKC's Mactier sub. But perhaps they can find a way? Open up the Midtown line to both ALTO and GO.

GTA Track map with the CPKC and CN freight bypasses.

 

[micheal_can]

Using the CPKC North Toronto sub and Don branch would assume that CPKC is provided another right-of-way to everybody's liking and most likely a new yard - somewhere.

How many tracks would be needed at that yard if a station was put there?

 

[crs1026]

I am normally not a fan of value engineering, but in the case of Alto I hope it is happening, and we UTers might want to keep those principles in mind while we imagine, er, anticipate what Alto is planning. The proposal needs some rigourous scope control if it is going to meet public approval and get built expeditiously.

Does this system really need to be 300km/h end to end, or could land and construction costs be greatly reduced by allowing sections of 200 km/h - or even specific slow ordered curves - and would that really harm the end to end timimg all that much ?

Planning more expensive terminals in central locations may be prudent, but allowing scope to expand by including major diversions of freight lines seems unlikely to get approved.

With the sticker price so high, we need to be focussed on how to get the most value for the least cost.

- Paul