News   Feb 11, 2026
Television City Climbs Skyward in Hamilton’s Durand Neighbourhood
 704     1 
News   Feb 11, 2026
31-Storey Rental Tower to Replace Civitan Arena at Shops at Don Mills
 1.1K     2 
News   Feb 11, 2026
News Roundup for February 11, 2026
 499     0 

Alto - High Speed Rail (Toronto-Quebec City)

lenaitch said:
I don't know how other jurisdictions handle a topic like this, but I think liability would be a concern.

As for intersecting trails, I think a lot would depend on the grade of the HSR in relation to the surrounding terrain at any particular point. A suitable solution might have a trail link go over or under, depending, or even divert to a nearby road grossing. There will also be calls for wildlife corridors.

I saw a FB post for 'save South Frontenac'. Some people want HSR to serve their town; others want it nowhere near them. Interesting times.
Click to expand...
"We need a stop at Tweed!"
"We want it as far away from Tweed possible."
"It should not be built."

It reminds me of how Boaty McBoatface was the name of a boat people voted on. Sometimes it is best to not listen to the public.
 
lenaitch said:
I don't know how other jurisdictions handle a topic like this, but I think liability would be a concern.
Click to expand...

The one point I would add is, when I have ridden on high speed trains elsewhere, one thing that stood out was how elaborate the measures were to ensure that no road, farm, or even ATV vehicle could ever inadvertently find itself on the tracks. Even very minor dead end roads and farmers lanes had very substantial guard rails to prevent vehicle intrusion. Same for access points build specifically for railway maintainers. Far more steel and concrete used to block access. There are simply no weak links in that protection. Alto will likely be similar.

I would think that Alto designers would want no part of any sort of pedestrian or cycle paths near the right of way. In places where that is unavoidable, eg highway crossings, the security fencing will be massive. (For that matter, fencing will likely be uniformly high enough to prevent animals leaping over them - we have plenty of fleet footed creatures in our woods)

I would expect that our trail network would simply be diverted over roads, the long way round, until land could be acquired and new connections built. That's likely a spin-off activity that could take decades, at whatever pace government and local agencies can manage.

- Paul

PS: At the risk of sounding a bit crusty: including the TransCanada Trail in the arena of Active Transportation is a bit akin to including kayaking down the Grand River as an element of the St Lawrence Seaway system. Both TCT and kayaking on rivers are good things, but when there is a need to put in a dam or wier on a river such as the Grand, the kayakers get a portage trail, and not a lift lock. I think expectations about how the trails are replicated by virtue of Alto should not get oversold.
 
Last edited:
micheal_can said:
It reminds me of how Boaty McBoatface was the name of a boat people voted on. Sometimes it is best to not listen to the public.
Click to expand...
Either don't ask or run with it.

1770330989913.jpeg
 
lenaitch said:
I saw a FB post for 'save South Frontenac'. Some people want HSR to serve their town; others want it nowhere near them. Interesting times.
Click to expand...
Not to give these people the time of day but I read through their pamphlet. If HSR is built people will be "forced from their homes, neighbouring property will be devalued, livelihoods will be desvastated, and ecological habitats destroyed."

I don't agree with the message but I agree with the demand which is no southern corridor for HSR. I'd rather it just plow through the woods on the most direct route to Ottawa imaginable.
 
I went to this evening's consultation and though I did not learn too much new versus what is on the website, there were still some interesting tidbits to hear. Since many of the people at each station were planning and engineering staff, they were quite well-informed and sometimes their opinions and the leanings of the project team could be gleaned. The interactive (ArcGIS Online) maps presented were detailed than the ones online, that showed the locations of things like existing railways, provincial parks, First Nations reservations and city landmarks.

At one of the presentation stations, one engineer explained the choice between the south and north options between Peterborough and Ottawa - it was "people or rocks" - each with their own challenge. As an engineer, he preferred the northern route as it's easier to deal with geology than society. It also sounded like CPKC did not want anything to do with sharing an alignment with Alto, which all but rules out the Leaside/Half Mile Bridge approach into downtown Toronto.

Expect a second round of consultations in October, especially as the Montreal-Ottawa section is narrowed down and they look at more detailed design.
 
ShonTron said:
It also sounded like CPKC did not want anything to do with sharing an alignment with Alto, which all but rules out the Leaside/Half Mile Bridge approach into downtown Toronto.
Click to expand...
The first bit aligns with what I heard as well, but I wouldn’t jump to that conclusion so quick. Very few options are out of consideration at this point.
 
ShonTron said:
I went to this evening's consultation and though I did not learn too much new versus what is on the website, there were still some interesting tidbits to hear. Since many of the people at each station were planning and engineering staff, they were quite well-informed and sometimes their opinions and the leanings of the project team could be gleaned. The interactive (ArcGIS Online) maps presented were detailed than the ones online, that showed the locations of things like existing railways, provincial parks, First Nations reservations and city landmarks.

At one of the presentation stations, one engineer explained the choice between the south and north options between Peterborough and Ottawa - it was "people or rocks" - each with their own challenge. As an engineer, he preferred the northern route as it's easier to deal with geology than society. It also sounded like CPKC did not want anything to do with sharing an alignment with Alto, which all but rules out the Leaside/Half Mile Bridge approach into downtown Toronto.

Expect a second round of consultations in October, especially as the Montreal-Ottawa section is narrowed down and they look at more detailed design.
Click to expand...
Had a similar experience tonight to yours. Not much new info but nice to see people and see some tangible, physical progress on the project. The interactive maps had existing rail lines/subs added onto them for context with the proposed route options. Had a nice chat with one of the staff over the (IMO) potential infeasibility of Ottawa Union to which they stressed that it's preliminarily included for the sake of proposal and optioning and given where we are in the timelines most things can still be considered, as @reinventingthewheel mentions above.
 
I also went to the Alto consultation and just about expired from happiness when the rail design engineer in an Alto lanyard, unprompted, raised the possibility of an elevated approach to Union Station from along the lakeshore (among many, many, many other possibilities for Toronto stations and approaches). Probably won't happen, but I personally would love to see it, and I'm still a little sore from how badly this suggestion went over on the Union Station Revitalization thread a while ago.

Anyway, it was nice to hear that the Alto people seem interested in building something that facilitates extensions to Windsor or Niagara. Tunnelling under Union would not fit that bill for a lot of reasons, including the need to go deep under the TTC.

I also heard loud and clear that CP is uncooperative for anything to do with passengers in the city. Options like terminating at the Summerhill LCBO, or terminating at the Don Valley station on the Ontario Line, are theoretical possibilities but would require CP cooperation, which (apparently) nobody expects to get. (Also, not to be a downer, but the Ontario Line neither exists nor works yet).

CN is apparently more open to negotiation, but their lines are less convenient for downtown access. You would need to build a station in the north part of the GTA and find out a way to get into Union Station to drop off and pick up passengers. This concept allows people to drive in from car-dependent areas and make use of the service, without having to get to Union Station for every voyage.

Seems like there might be an interest in using something like Langstaff station as a primary station (containing support services and parking), with Union as a secondary station (just short stops with no added services), because of the connection to GO and eventually the TTC subway and, I suppose, the future Ontario Northlander. If not Langstaff, then something similar.

Another visitor, a civil engineer, mounted a passionate argument for why the federal government should finally stand up to the big railways for the Alto project. If there was ever a time to put the public interest first, it would be now, considering that local governments failed to protect any other corridors for railway expansion in and out of downtown Toronto. The rail design engineer, however, essentially said that the railways have ultimate power and not to expect Parliamentary intervention. As an example, the engineer spoke of past work on Kitchener expansion, and how much accommodation CN got for spurs, even though Metrolinx owned the line.

The engineer also had something else to say about the small-town side of things, which frankly I hadn't considered and think they should mention more often. Building the line will be a major undertaking with lots of jobs, etc. Maintaining the line on a daily basis will be an even greater, and perpetual, undertaking. All that maintenance will likely be done on contract with small, local businesses. So each small town might not get a stop, but will get a lot of new and constant business keeping the line working properly, and (hopefully) will get some kind of public transit to the nearest Alto station.
 
Tonight I got confirmation at the ALTO consultation that an underground station at Toronto Union is under consideration.

The clearance issues all around Union make me think elevated is “on the table” but not under serious consideration. There’s absolutely no way to elevate the line west of Yonge Street unless you go like 7 storeys in the air to avoid the elevated parks and roads.
 
WB62 said:
unless you go like 7 storeys in the air to avoid the elevated parks and roads.
Click to expand...

Great, now I'm picturing a Toronto version of Berlin's Hauptbahnhof.
 
WB62 said:
Tonight I got confirmation at the ALTO consultation that an underground station at Toronto Union is under consideration.

The clearance issues all around Union make me think elevated is “on the table” but not under serious consideration. There’s absolutely no way to elevate the line west of Yonge Street unless you go like 7 storeys in the air to avoid the elevated parks and roads.
Click to expand...
Hello friend - to be honest, my main reason for attending the event was to tell the Alto staff that I hope the final recommendations on all aspects of the project will be as efficiency-focused as the REM. So maybe Union Station will be elevated, or tunnelled, or at grade, or entirely absent because the train stops somewhere else. I'll be happy as long as the project gets built on a reasonable budget and within a reasonable time and basically still makes sense.
 
WB62 said:
Tonight I got confirmation at the ALTO consultation that an underground station at Toronto Union is under consideration.

The clearance issues all around Union make me think elevated is “on the table” but not under serious consideration. There’s absolutely no way to elevate the line west of Yonge Street unless you go like 7 storeys in the air to avoid the elevated parks and roads.
Click to expand...
My own personal contacts with the project has said that they could dig down to bedrock and it would be the better option to get to Union. The challenge is will this fit in the budget for this project. And if not, something north of the city is being considered.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top