Comments on: How VIA Rail Torpedoed its Own â€œHigh-Frequency Railâ€ Project and Montreal’s chance for Regional Rail

By: Peter Horn

Peter Horn — Wed, 24 Jul 2019 20:52:02 +0000

There is on snag that would (might) make it difficult for Via ever to to use the tunnel. The REM cars are only 116 inches or 2946 mm wide. Main line coaches are 120 inches or 3048 mm wide. The difference of 4 inches or 102 mm which would be problematic 2 inch or 51 mm difference at the Rem’s high level platforms
.
Via Rail does not really need the tunnel though it would be more convenient. The route would be Quebec Lava via Trois Rivieres on the former CP line, now the Quebec and Gatineau. From Laval Via would run by way of the EXO line to the CN main line. That would mean a bridge OVER/ABOVE the Home Depot to replace the interchange track that was once located there. Then follow CN tracks and enter Central Station from the south entrance. From Central Station south entrance use CN/Via tracks to Ottawa and Toronto.
The Caise claims that it would take a 3 tonne (3,000 kg) on board transformer to allow a train to run, in turn, under 1,500 Volt DC and the present in tunnel 25 kV AC. Cute story The Siemens AG Desiro , Germanysiemensrailsystemscontact.ic@siemens.com http://www.siemens.co.uk/pool/news_press/news_archive/2013/desiro-city-datasheet-high-res.pdf of Thameslink which runs, in turn on 759 Volt DC and 25 kV AC. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thameslink

By: Keith C

Keith C — Thu, 14 Feb 2019 18:24:10 +0000

This is a very interesting post. As we are well into REM construction a few years later, the decision is moot now, and no doubt the writer and several commenters are disappointed by the outcome.

I have two questions for anyone who knows anything!

1.) I am intrigued by the comment from the Quebec City resident frustrated that VIA would drop him off in north-end Montreal, rather than downtown. But more than that, he seems frustrated that he wouldn’t have any prospect of the long-distance intercity services you see in Europe: a one seat ride on the same train from Quebec City to Toronto, that comes into Gare Centrale through the tunnel, loads and unloads, and then pops out on that Pointe St Charles curve, stops at the existing Via Dorval for the airport, and heads on to Ottawa and Toronto.

While I admire the line-on-the-map simplicity of the concept, realistically, how many people in Quebec City want to do the latter? I would have thought that 90% of the train is getting off in Montreal, with relatively few people wanting to go on to Ottawa, let alone Toronto. Even with a faster rail system, that’s got to be a 6 hour trip to Toronto best case. Is that competitive with direct Air Canada flights from Lesage Airport to Pearson? or Porter to the Island?
If 90 percent of the train gets off in Montreal, and then those seats are immediately filled by Montreal traffic heading to Ottawa and TO, aren’t we talking about a half-hour stop, minimum, in Montreal? Can all those dark, narrow Dickensian tunnels under Central Station handle all that 2-way foot traffic loading and unloading?

A station at “Correspondance A-40” immediately adjacent to the REM doesn’t sound so bad to me. Quebec City VIA traffic gets off there and be on a super frequent shuttle to the core that can’t take more than 15 minutes. Plus the A-40 VIA station itself would be more accessible to the entire Montreal metro region, more scope for long-term car parking, etc. PLUS, if you’re going to YUL airport from Quebec City, again the REM could get you there very quickly.

2) Does anyone know if the Caisse has bought up, or will buy up, the industrial land where “Correspondance A-40” is? (I see a Parasuco factory on Google Maps, for instance.) There is quite a bit of low-intensity industrial park land I see there, ripe for redevelopment and densification.

I like the idea of VIA combining regional rail and the idea of two-for-the-price-of-one federal funding as conceived in this blog post is interesting, but the Caisse has been so bloody-minded on this that Montrealers seem likely to have actual trains to ride on much sooner than I would have thought — which is supposedly one of the upsides of privatization, if executed well. (If we count the Caisse as “private”).

Best regards, Keith

By: Yogi

Yogi — Tue, 22 Aug 2017 15:05:37 +0000

Matthew, I suppose you mean Canora at the end of the tunnel? Currently, that would mean going through the CSL train yards (nightmare for passenger trains on a schedule), go through a single-track loop that looks like it can only accept low speeds, make sure no AMT trains are crossing (St-Jerome line), and then above Canora there is no space to build a VIA Rail station and it has no metro connection and only a small bus line.

More so, removing VIA Rail from the current Gare Central will make life a lot more complicated for business travellers that come to downtown Montreal for meetings / conferences / etc. which is a large group of travellers (= revenue). VIA lines from/to/through Montreal are 66% of the revenue (quick calculation based on 2015 report) for VIA Rail, so way too risky to experiment with an out-of-center central station.

I’d love to see a second tunnel under the Mt Royal and have a large station underneath the new Outremont campus that l’UniversitÃ© de MontrÃ©al has started constructing. This way we can allow the St-Jerome line to actually advertise real time savings bringing suburbians to downtown Montreal and sharing the cost doing this. It also allows UdeM to finally allow people to come directly to work, instead of forcing the off-island people to make rediculous number of transits (my spouse used to live in Mont-Saint-Hilaire and going to/from work at UdeM was crazy long with public transit).

But Gare Central definitely is a very crappy station and the long and decelerated approach slinging through St-Henri, PSC and Griffintown is a pain.

By: Matthew

Matthew — Wed, 09 Aug 2017 18:08:46 +0000

Build VIA a new Gare Central at Canore, (there are train tracks from the airport to Canore)VIA trains don’t have to go downtown, and taking REM will allow access to all the other lines, and downtown… WIN-WIN-WIN.

By: Nathanael

Nathanael — Wed, 05 Jul 2017 07:19:16 +0000

I think bluntly that Quebec City is being abandoned. It is a much smaller market than Toronto-Kingston-Ottawa-Montreal, so it’s simply not worth it for VIA to pick a fight over it. Montreal will be the end of teh line.

By: Danny

Danny — Fri, 19 May 2017 22:23:36 +0000

What a thorough analysis, thanks man

By: Ben Novak

Ben Novak — Mon, 24 Apr 2017 17:07:32 +0000

Having read this entire exchange, I as a holder of a Masterâ€s Degree in urban planning can only shudder at the "tunnel vision" (no pun intended) of the various participants, but mostly at the effrontery of the REM promoters, who for private commercial gain, want to destroy the flexibility inherent on the present infrastructure facilities of Montreal. I was a resident of Montreal for over 25 years and did my Engineering Degree at McGill. After doing Planning at the University of Manitoba, I realized that we had a fabulous resource in older rights of ways from the various railways that operated in and around our great Canadian cities (many of which acquired these properties with government-public help). I wrote several articles in the seventies on that subject (yes, the seventies). Some cities have seen the light (Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver) and others wasted these assets for commercial and ill advised planning decisions. (Ottawa comes to mind). The Mount Royal Tunnel is such an asset. It is incomprehensible why any public minded politician would allow such a resource to fall into private hands, which would frustrate future transit planning.

By: Bruce Budd

Bruce Budd — Thu, 24 Nov 2016 18:45:58 +0000

Hi Anton, Just started reading your blog – good stuff. We at Transport Action have a member writing a report on how to create a dedicated rail line for VIA along the Lakeshore route which we’re about to send to Transport Canada so it can be evaluated at the same time VIA’s HFR proposal is analyzed. Would you be able to do a Peer Review of it before it’s sent off?

By: smutsig

smutsig — Mon, 31 Oct 2016 23:58:22 +0000

Your concern here seem to be Montreal commuter trains…. Commuter trains are “presently” the 2nd cause of headaches for VIA trains, just after freight trains, as VIA trains often have to zigzag around stopped-at-station commuter trains. REM projetwill win the 1st position about treats to VIA trains. Hope that if VIA pays to have its own tracks and as much as possible on its own right-of-way, that it will not allow commuter trains to run on it!!!
“My” concern is about my home town of Quebec City. It’s the REAL TREAT there. If the REM is built, it will kill definitely all hopes for decent passenger services to Quebec City in the future, and that, with Quebec City’s citizens’s money.
It’s completely stupid to have a train running on an isolated line, leaving Quebec City downtown and terminating in a suburban transfer station, and doesn’t go anywhere else. It will be a flop.
Quebec City train does not only need direct access to Montreal downtown (using the tunnel, please don’t talk me about loosing an hour running around the mountain), but also continue its run directly to Dorval airport (access to a lot of international flight that will never been available from small Quebec airport), Ottawa & Toronto without having to transfert to another train (or worst, to a REM + another train). In two words, I want the Quebec train connected to the continental network, not just Montreal or… its suburbs.
Montreal is not the epicenter of the world, if Montreal don’t want us (or try to deliberately exclude us), we’ll simply go elsewhere. We’ll completly bypass Montreal and link directy to Dorval and Ontario cities, that’s it. If so, we’ll also save about 30 minutes entering/existing downtown Mtl, and another 15 minutes if we don’t stop at Mtl at all. Montreal will be completely excluded from the HFR network if they prefer their REM over interurban passenger services. Else, Mtl can refuse the REM itself…
The REM project need about 45% of federal and Qc provincial governments subsidies, one is owner of VIA, the other is owned at 10% by Quebec City residents and 40% of other non-montrealers. Note also that the money CDPQ considers “his money” is owned at 10% by Quebec City residents too.
Don’t be surprised if Quebec City opposes to the REM project and contribute to kill that project. We’re maybe just 10%, but it’s hardly enough to make politicians backing up, those politicians who by default, try to find reasons to avoid spending billions everybody ask for.
I read somewhere that Desjardins-Siciliano expect to retire in only 2-3 years. The “phase 1” of its HFR project, Toronto to Ottawa, will take at least 2 years to build. I don’t know if he had some promises by CDPQ for shutting its mouth about the tunnel treat, but I think his main concern is to avoid delays for its “phase 1” being able to start ASAP. He will not be there for the other phases, he has nothing to do about it…

By: Krystel

Krystel — Tue, 11 Oct 2016 15:11:24 +0000

This is incredibly frustrating. Just about the only advantage VIA rail had over flights was direct downtown to downtown access. If I cannot leave Montreal from Gare Centrale I’ll never take a train again. Sad!

Comments on: How VIA Rail Torpedoed its Own â€œHigh-Frequency Railâ€ Project and Montreal’s chance for Regional Rail