Alto - High Speed Rail (Toronto-Quebec City)

[crs1026]

It's always damned if you do, damned if you don't with consultation.

If the proponent comes out with a very general vision, and no specifics, the doubters will ask, " how can we comment without knowing your plan ? " plus many people who in the end aren't impacted will react on fear alone.

But if the proponent starts with more detailed options, those impacted on those routes and general doubters will cry, "wait a minute. Why did you prejudge the options before you consulted with us?" plus there will be allegations that a preferred route has already been decided on and the consultation is a sham.

I'm not clever enough to know how to navigate this. I can't fault Alto for starting general and then proposing to cone back with more focussed analysis. But transparency is a golden rule.

- Paul

 

[micheal_can]

When you are operating in a bubble and do not disclose other things that you may not see as important, but others do, then this mess happens. Those communities do not know what is to happen the Via's Corridor service once ALTO is up and running. Via, ALTO, nor the government have said anything. So, lack of information means fearing the worst.

 

[lenaitch]

It's always damned if you do, damned if you don't with consultation.

If the proponent comes out with a very general vision, and no specifics, the doubters will ask, " how can we comment without knowing your plan ? " plus many people who in the end aren't impacted will react on fear alone.

But if the proponent starts with more detailed options, those impacted on those routes and general doubters will cry, "wait a minute. Why did you prejudge the options before you consulted with us?" plus there will be allegations that a preferred route has already been decided on and the consultation is a sham.

I'm not clever enough to know how to navigate this. I can't fault Alto for starting general and then proposing to cone back with more focussed analysis. But transparency is a golden rule.

- Paul

The perennial danger in public consultation is always the difference between being heard and being listened to. People who hold what are, to them, legitimate concerns, will always walk away mumbling 'the fix was in' when the final product doesn't reflect their concern.

 

[just east of the creek]

The perennial danger in public consultation is always the difference between being heard and being listened to. People who hold what are, to them, legitimate concerns, will always walk away mumbling 'the fix was in' when the final product doesn't reflect their concern.

Man, its hard to believe that my well thought out ideas are not considered the Holy Grail by those on the 'board'......it is a lot like proposing the ultimate fixes to any problem on a UT forum!

And I still think that to bring that line from Ottawa right down through Kingston and then blast along the Lakeshore corridor, next to the 401 wherever possible (self promoting advertising at 280 kmh or so), giving the metaphorical middle finger salute as we pass the HWY 135 cutoff area, and coasting into Union at GO+ speeds.

And will we use the J slab system for track laying? If it is robust enough for Japanese seismic activity, that along, plus its factory made precision, should theoretically be robust enough for our climate and alleviate the chronic Metrolinx record of pouring concrete, followed by hammers and chisels to remove all, and then a repour or two to re do it....probably to be followed by rail issues leading them to bring in the TTC shuttle buses.....(and yes, I do know that this is not a Metrolinx project... yet)

 

[TwoWheelPoli]

Per the Kingston Whig-Standard, Alto's CEO urged caution against making too many changes to the proposed alignment, as well as clarified that running Alto along existing railway lines is not feasible as it would involve expropriating too many properties. Basically, don't count on a station at or near Kingston.

Changes to high-speed rail route could derail project, Alto head says

The high-speed rail route is expected to be finalized later this year.

www.thewhig.com

 

[David_Brown]

I live in Tweed, and there are a lot of local Facebook groups up in arms about ALTO. I suspect a lot of them have never been on a VIA train, as I’ve seen a number of comments along the lines of “We already have trains that go 100mph, why do we need high speed trains?” While I’m in favour of it, it won’t benefit me in any way as there are no stops near here…which is one of the reasons locals are against it. I do take VIA every couple of months from Belleville, and worry about what will happen to that service.

 

[just east of the creek]

Per the Kingston Whig-Standard, Alto's CEO urged caution against making too many changes to the proposed alignment, as well as clarified that running Alto along existing railway lines is not feasible as it would involve expropriating too many properties. Basically, don't count on a station at or near Kingston.

Changes to high-speed rail route could derail project, Alto head says

The high-speed rail route is expected to be finalized later this year.

www.thewhig.com

This is a very general defensive reply. I would not make that statement until there was a plan that included Kingston and defined a route. I am now already suspicious of ALTOS plans and the so-called consultations.

As for expropriation…..we have not ever built significant infrastructure in any country without expropriation, we have never built any significant infrastructure in an urban area without displacing existing structures and people. And so be it. This is a major game changing piece of transportation. Let’s do it right and having a station within Kingston (for instance) makes far more sense then in the boonies. And yes, people will be displaced, landscapes will change ….. as the 401 did, as the 416 did, as the railways did, as the Seaway did, as hydroelectric dams did, as any major airport has done, as the GTA has done.

We are going to see the greatest level of NIMBY whining we have ever seen over any issue from snails to single family homes. The leadership group is going to have to grow a backbone. Hard choices are going to have to be made. If not, are going to end up with a project to rival Transmountain

 

[EnviroTO]

I'm confused by all the nonsense around this project. Maybe someone can help me:

1. Why would the train be built on the southern route (i.e. what benefit is there)? It seems that the north route is more direct so what is the expected benefit of taking a longer route? The southern route doesn't go to Kingston so was it proposed solely to stoke flames?
2. How can people be upset with all the land impacts when (a) the specific lands are unknown, and (b) it is known that a rail corridor is approximately 12m wide (just a bit more than the width of three car lanes on a road and thinner than most of the road allowances through rural areas)? Zoom out on a map of the area and think about a thin line drawn across it. Oh my gosh... all the land???
3. Mayors complaining the HSR will go through their town?? Of course it won't, unless you are in Greater Montreal, Greater Ottawa, Peterborough, or Greater Toronto. This plan is not a convert the Trans Canada Trail back to rail plan... that was before when it was HFR (high-frequency), but now they are proposing HSR (high-speed) and that can't even contemplate that route.

 

[nfitz]

I'm confused by all the nonsense around this project. Maybe someone can help me:

1. Why would the train be built on the southern route (i.e. what benefit is there)? It seems that the north route is more direct so what is the expected benefit of taking a longer route? The southern route doesn't go to Kingston so was it proposed solely to stoke flames?

The edge of that southern corridor is about 6 km north of the city limits, passing through Sydenham. To pass within local bus distance of Kingston without a station is beyond absurd, and simply demonstrated the gross incompetence of those working on this project.[/list]

 

[crs1026]

I'm confused by all the nonsense around this project. Maybe someone can help me:

[*]Why would the train be built on the southern route (i.e. what benefit is there)? It seems that the north route is more direct so what is the expected benefit of taking a longer route? The southern route doesn't go to Kingston so was it proposed solely to stoke flames?

There is a line of thought that the terrain might allow cheaper, faster construction. I Won't argue one way or the other (read up, lots posted already about this) but that possibility is compelling enough on paper to make it important to explore, even if it proves a dead end. Of course, that investigation has to have as many bells and whistles as the northern route (which has a lot fewer potential objectors). So we are studying a swath of land and not a narrow row. Serving Kingston is not an agenda here, that is just where anyone's mind will go when they realise how close by that southern route will pass.

[*]How can people be upset with all the land impacts when (a) the specific lands are unknown, and (b) it is known that a rail corridor is approximately 12m wide (just a bit more than the width of three car lanes on a road and thinner than most of the road allowances through rural areas)? Zoom out on a map of the area and think about a thin line drawn across it. Oh my gosh... all the land???

Because the southern route does have a lot more pricey cottages and country homes on it. Pricey country homes = people with the means to oppose. And if Alto isn't in a position to state definitively whose cottage will be impacted, everyone fears the worst, and of necessity needs to get their oar in to protect their financial and emotional impact. Nothing gets people to say "go away" like threatening a family cottage.

[*]Mayors complaining the HSR will go through their town?? Of course it won't, unless you are in Greater Montreal, Greater Ottawa, Peterborough, or Greater Toronto. This plan is not a convert the Trans Canada Trail back to rail plan... that was before when it was HFR (high-frequency), but now they are proposing HSR (high-speed) and that can't even contemplate that route.

Politically, a mayor who declines to advocate for local benefit for a project like this would not get reelected. In our system, the first question that individual citizens generally ask is, what's in it for me.

The difficulty for Alto is that all the adverse impact lands on these local communities, and they gain no direct benefit. Giving them local stations is wrongheaded for the design and value proposition for Alto, but it's a credible response to WIIFM.

- Paul

 

[Mihairokov]

The edge of that southern corridor is about 6 km north of the city limits, passing through Sydenham. To pass within local bus distance of Kingston without a station is beyond absurd, and simply demonstrated the gross incompetence of those working on this project.[/list]

Think it's difficult to be this hyperbolic when they haven't gone public with any decisions yet.

 

[nfitz]

Think it's difficult to be this hyperbolic when they haven't gone public with any decisions yet.

I don't think it's that difficult at all. And I don't blame Kingston for being hyperbolic; making a lot of noise would at least help them get more assurances that at least current service to Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal from Kingston be mostly maintained.

 

[kEiThZ]

I live in Tweed, and there are a lot of local Facebook groups up in arms about ALTO. I suspect a lot of them have never been on a VIA train, as I’ve seen a number of comments along the lines of “We already have trains that go 100mph, why do we need high speed trains?” While I’m in favour of it, it won’t benefit me in any way as there are no stops near here…which is one of the reasons locals are against it. I do take VIA every couple of months from Belleville, and worry about what will happen to that service.

This is exactly why I don't buy that opposition is primarily motivated by leverage seeking to get benefit. It's not "what's in it for me". I suspect most of these people are flat out NIMBYs. There's a few legit people along the Lakeshore who have genuine service concerns. And may be TC should get cracking on a proper VIA service plan for post-ALTO.

But the rest? Straight up NIMBYs. And let's not forget the last Member of Parliament for this area was this guy:

Derek Sloan - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

That should tell us something about the politics of these areas.

 

[kEiThZ]

I don't think it's that difficult at all. And I don't blame Kingston for being hyperbolic; making a lot of noise would at least help them get more assurances that at least current service to Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal from Kingston be mostly maintained.

This is not an ALTO problem. This is a government problem. TC should be working on the post-ALTO VIA service plan.

 

[lenaitch]

The edge of that southern corridor is about 6 km north of the city limits, passing through Sydenham. To pass within local bus distance of Kingston without a station is beyond absurd, and simply demonstrated the gross incompetence of those working on this project.[/list]

To be clear for those who don't know, the northern municipal boundary of Kingston is about 15 Euclidian kilometers north of downtown (about 5-ish km north of the 401). Present days Kingston absorbed a couple of surrounding townships several years ago.

Some of the arguments I see on social media revert to the point that 'people moved to' rural areas to avoid noise, vibration, pollution, etc. etc. I often get the sense that many people who 'move to' the rurals want time to stop the day after they get there