Alto High Speed Rail

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by pattherat

Interesting timing of the article considering he stepped back the moment his wife got hired….months ago.

Partisan hacks pretending not to understand what a recusal means. See here for a member who usually is better:

Originally Posted by acottawa

Stepped back how? He is still the finance minister.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

But, surely you aren't just in favour of any project. The math is very tough on this even as we throw money at everything else making the cost less daunting. We are still cutting the food inspection folks and supports for exporters because of budget cuts so it's not like money is free.

Funny how "the math is very tough" for anything but something you support. If somebody had said drop TMX because the price tag rose to $30B would have said that's a great idea? Somehow I doubt it. In this case, we don't even know the exact price tag, because we don't even know the exact route, expropriation costs and constructions methods. Opponents like you are going off one quote and regurgitating what their favourite politician tells them to say.

We are spending the high end of the estimate that people are complaining about every year on OAS. A program which doesn't even start phasing down till ~$90k. Apparently the math is alright on beer money for seniors with six figure incomes. But not decent infrastructure for their grand kids. It is this reality that has convinced that a lot of fiscal conservatives aren't actually serious about saving money. Just about preserving their entitlements while f'king over everybody else and every other priority.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Funny how "the math is very tough" for anything but something you support. If somebody had said drop TMX because the price tag rose to $30B would have said that's a great idea? Somehow I doubt it. In this case, we don't even know the exact price tag, because we don't even know the exact route, expropriation costs and constructions methods. Opponents like you are going off one quote and regurgitating what their favourite politician tells them to say.

We are spending the high end of the estimate that people are complaining about every year on OAS. A program which doesn't even start phasing down till ~$90k. Apparently the math is alright on beer money for seniors with six figure incomes. But not decent infrastructure for their grand kids. It is this reality that has convinced that a lot of fiscal conservatives aren't actually serious about saving money. Just about preserving their entitlements while f'king over everybody else and every other priority.

But neither party is proposing to fund HSR out of seniors’ beer money, and politicians are tripping over themselves to add to the cost with expensive tunnels under cities, expensive underground stations, etc.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Partisan hacks pretending not to understand what a recusal means. See here for a member who usually is better:

So the finance minister is recusing himself from the most expensive infrastructure project in Canadian history? How would he possibly be able to make any responsible budget decisions? It would be like the CDS having to recuse herself from anything to do with NATO.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Funny how "the math is very tough" for anything but something you support. If somebody had said drop TMX because the price tag rose to $30B would have said that's a great idea? Somehow I doubt it. In this case, we don't even know the exact price tag, because we don't even know the exact route, expropriation costs and constructions methods. Opponents like you are going off one quote and regurgitating what their favourite politician tells them to say.

We are spending the high end of the estimate that people are complaining about every year on OAS. A program which doesn't even start phasing down till ~$90k. Apparently the math is alright on beer money for seniors with six figure incomes. But not decent infrastructure for their grand kids. It is this reality that has convinced that a lot of fiscal conservatives aren't actually serious about saving money. Just about preserving their entitlements while f'king over everybody else and every other priority.

Just listen to many Albertans who complain about the government funded Trans-Mountain. The private sector could have built it much cheaper. True? We will never know. This is just more naysayers who complain about every important country building project.

Why would any westerner or rural person support Alto no matter how the corridor is choking on traffic, often more freight on the highways than anything else? We should build more pipelines or give tax cuts, while Albertans receive a windfall from very high oil prices at the expense of the rest of the country.

What happens in 2.5 years when Trump and his merry band of fools leave office? This is the uncertainty of pipeline economics, whereas traffic on the 401 will continue to get worse.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by acottawa

So the finance minister is refusing himself from the most expensive infrastructure project in Canadian history? How would he possibly be able to make any responsible budget decisions? It would be like the CDS having to recuse herself from anything to do with NATO.

Champagne recused himself even though the Ethics Commissioner said he didn't have to.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/article/...er-working-for-alto-ethics-commissioner/

[Ottawacurious]

Probably not selling related to Alto but - I know if I owned a home here I'd def considering selling before it became closer to reality.

https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/29611...13-mer-bleuebradley-estatesanderson-park

[dougvdh]

Originally Posted by Ottawacurious

Probably not selling related to Alto but - I know if I owned a home here I'd def considering selling before it became closer to reality.

https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/29611...13-mer-bleuebradley-estatesanderson-park

Just down the road from a dump? I'm not sure that the potential of ALTO is the bigger negative here.

[rocketphish]

Phase 1 of public outreach on proposed high-speed rail network wraps Friday night
Deadline for online comments is 11:59 p.m.

Dan Taekema · CBC News
Posted: Apr 24, 2026 2:05 PM EDT | Last Updated: 2 hours ago

The first phase of public consultations on Canada's proposed high-speed rail network wraps up Friday night.

The deadline for online comments to Alto, the Crown corporation behind the massive project, is 11:59 p.m.

Over the past few months, thousands of "open and constructive exchanges" have taken place and will help Alto understand local concerns and needs, it wrote in a blog post earlier this week.

"The feedback collected plays a key role in refining the study corridor, particularly in identifying areas and issues that require special attention," the corporation added.

Alto said a more detailed corridor for the initial section of the network — a line between Ottawa and Montreal — is expected by the fall, with a second round of consultations to follow by the end of the year.

It's anticipated the process for the western and eastern sections will follow the same pattern of public outreach after that.

The roughly 1,000-kilometre rail line is expected to cost between $60 billion and $90 billion.

Consultation was scheduled to close at the end of March but Alto extended it until April 24 given a high level of participation and "sustained public interest."

In an interview with CBC’s Ottawa Morning last month, CEO Martin Imbleau said roughly 15,000 comments had been made online and around 10,000 people showed up to in-person events.

"It's about to become the largest consultation in the history of the country," he said at the time.

<more>

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/de...h-speed-rail-midnight-april-24-9.7176086

[rocketphish]

Consultation link:

https://en.consultation.altotrain.ca/shaping-the-canada-of-tomorrow-with-high-speed-rail

[J.OT13]

Gare du Palais in Quebec City and Union in Ottawa have been eliminated. For Ottawa, he said Union would be too challenging due to the underground infra needed and it would instead be built "near" downtown. He did not mention Tremblay.

Clip is somewhere in this newscast.

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/tele/le-tele...pisodes/1167732/episode-du-30-avril-2026

I guess Hurdman could be a possibility, but it seems (imo) it would require a whole rebuild of the Hurdman curve and station to accommodate HSR and better integrate the three modes. This would also give a more direct link to the aiport via the SE Transitway. Although that would be great for the O-Train, to fix the Hurdman curve, Tremblay still seems more logical.

[Truenorth00]

Sad for the people who deluded themselves into thinking that billions should be spent and a whole train line slowed down for a handful of people in downtown Ottawa who found 10 mins on the LRT too much.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Sad for the people who deluded themselves into thinking that billions should be spent and a whole train line slowed down for a handful of people in downtown Ottawa who found 10 mins on the LRT too much.

We're slowing down the line with suburban stations in Montreal and Toronto.

Money is no object, Ottawa Union would absolutely be the best location. It's not just about a 10 min O-Train ride, it's just the best location full stop.

I can understand the cost reasoning, less so the time reasoning considering the added stations in suburban Montreal and Toronto.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

We're slowing down the line with suburban stations in Montreal and Toronto.

Those stations are enroute. And have catchment populations that appraoach the population of Ottawa. The downtown option here imposes a time penalty to everybody for very questionable gains. The likely outcome could well be losing service as trains from Toronto to Montreal get prioritized and are run through. I would prefer half hourly service at Tremblay over hourly service at Union.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Money is no object, Ottawa Union would absolutely be the best location. It's not just about a 10 min O-Train ride, it's just the best location full stop.

I can understand the cost reasoning, less so the time reasoning considering the added stations in suburban Montreal and Toronto.

The article below lists the considerations:

• the price to build the station location
• the increase in ridership at the proposed locations
• inconvenience during construction

Downtown really fails across several of these. And really most of these have been obvious for a while here. It's only stupid Toronto and Montreal envy that had people thinking otherwise.

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/225...tesse-gare-ottawa-centre-ville-difficile

[phil235]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Downtown really fails across several of these. And really most of these have been obvious for a while here. It's only stupid Toronto and Montreal envy that had people thinking otherwise.

You aren't wrong about the cons, but I don't think that makes good urbanism stupid. There are a lot more cities than Toronto and Montreal that have great central train stations.

[Richard Eade]

So, 12 Eastern Ontario Mayors have made it formal that they oppose the ‘planned’ route for ALTO. It appears that these Mayors are specifically targeting the southern possible route between Peterborough and Ottawa.

Frankly, I think that the northern routing is better anyway. Alto should agree and only look at the northern potential routing.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/ottawa/article/12...r-opposing-alto-high-speed-rail-project/

And, in other news, BlogTO seems to feel that, based on an interview that The Canadian Press did with Martin Imbleau (CEO of ALTO), Toronto might get a suburban station, as well as the terminus at Union Station.

Apparently, this would allow ALTO to build the rail to Toronto-ish, and then take its time pushing a tunnel (or similar segregated corridor) through to Union.

https://www.blogto.com/travel/2026/04/toronto-area-two-stops-canadas-high-speed-rail-line/

This makes me wonder if that is the same logic that is driving a stop in Laval. Is it possible that the Laval station will be built – with a connection to the REM, to generate additional traffic on the REM, of course – while the link to Gare Central is being designed.

I wonder what the chances are that the final links into Montreal’s and Toronto’s central stations would never get constructed?

Regardless, this tells me that there is already some re-thinking of the routing going on. I wonder if “near” downtown could possible mean beside the Ottawa airport?

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by phil235

You aren't wrong about the cons, but I don't think that makes good urbanism stupid. There are a lot more cities than Toronto and Montreal that have great central train stations.

What would have been good urbanism would have been to put Rideau station there. And 20 years ago when they were going through consultation I put in my submissions on exactly that idea.

For HSR, it just doesn't make sense. Not when Tremblay or Hurdman are so close and Union is a branch. It's billions that could literally lead to less total ridership if the delays and cost aren't made by Ottawa riders themselves.

[lrt's friend]

The whole concept of using Union is about visitors arriving right downtown. True.

The other half of the equation are Ottawa residents who may want to use Alto. We have not designed our local transit system to reach Union efficiently. An hour or an hour and a half from any of the suburbs by transit defeats the usefulness of Alto for half the population or more. (Compare that to a 10 minute LRT ride from Tremblay to downtown). No local parking at a reasonable rate, no close by highway, and limited access by car for drop offs, and limits to space for taxi and Uber pick ups.

Then, what happens to traditional trains? Do they still go to Tremblay? If so, we end up with three disconnected rail stations.

Our Alto station location needs to consider both visitors and local needs.

Just like placing stations in Montreal and Toronto, not only away from downtown, but possibly at a very questionable destination points. For very few, that will be their destination.

The reason why Tremblay is a success is based on 60 years of work providing rapid transit access, attached parking, local drop-off, taxi service and close by access to the Queensway.

Improper station location will affect ridership. This has to be a compromise to find the best option.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

Regardless, this tells me that there is already some re-thinking of the routing going on. I wonder if “near” downtown could possible mean beside the Ottawa airport?

For the love of God no. That would be absolutely terrible for HSR ridership. Bad enough for the airport, but HSR shouldn't require another three trains to get Downtown.

Having HSR at Pearson and Trudeau would make sense (but ain't happening) because they are major hubs where people from the entire Quebec-City Windsor Corridor drive or fly to take a long-haul flight. Far less so with Ottawa.

Imbleau did say that Jean-Lesage Airport in Quebec City is basically off the table, so I highly doubt Macdonald-Cartier would be on the table.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The other half of the equation are Ottawa residents who may want to use Alto. We have not designed our local transit system to reach Union efficiently. An hour or an hour and a half from any of the suburbs by transit defeats the usefulness of Alto for half the population or more. (Compare that to a 10 minute LRT ride from Tremblay to downtown). No local parking at a reasonable rate, no close by highway, and limited access by car for drop offs, and limits to space for taxi and Uber pick ups.

Transit inefficiency isn't an argument against Union. It applies anywhere in Ottawa. If anything Union is the best spot because you not only have Line 1 (like Tremblay), but dozens of bus routes nearby.

The rest of your arguments are mostly solid.