VIA Rail

[robmausser]

Here's one of the references to REM not abiding by their originally presented business plan:

http://montrealgazette.com/opinion/opinion-caisses-rem-train-isnt-what-west-island-commuters-need

I actually tend to agree with this opinion.

I see no reason to completely transform the Deux Montagnes line into a new technology. It should simply be upgraded with new EMU's and more trackage, PTC signalling much like the GO RER network is being done. They can still build the infill stations they wanted, just don't change the train technology. That way the Mascouche line can go straight to Central Station, and VIA could even use the tunnel for HFR.

As for the other parts of the system, I don't see why they couldn't create a UPX like airport train along the Vaudreuil–Hudson line (its CPR owned so they would have to add dedicated track) or the CN track adjacent (that VIA uses) with a spur to the airport, a spur that is on the right side of the airport, and a direct shot to downtown, not some weird line that goes in a weird roundabout way to downtown.

The South Shore could just be served with a separate LRT that goes into or near Central Station.

There is no reason for all this technology to be the same system, and by doing that they are forcing a square peg into a round hole.

This is the Scarborough line all over again. The plan to refurbish the ICTS technology was the most affordable and adequate plan, but then it "had" to be converted to LRT simply because it didnt fit in with the Transit City plan. Which we all know how well that went.

Keep it simple stupid.

 

[Euphoria]

I agree, as long as there's a plan B, and perhaps a plan C and D ready for deployment. Bombardier has demonstrated a fairly mercenary approach, taking money and contracts where and when it could find them without necessarily delivering to the home country that has backstopped the losses, which is typical for international companies. If open, international competition brings investment, jobs for Canadians, and quality infrastructure to Canada in a predictable timely manner, I don't think we're stuck on the idea that it has to be a Canadian company or investment bank making this happen. Economies are necessarily too interdependent to simply shut that trade down.

If the health care repeal and replace failure has taught us anything, it's that legislators don't want to upend the status quo without a compelling reason and public support. I just don't see a consensus around an upheaval of trade deals. The practice of cutting off your nose to spite your face is falling out of fashion. If Brexit causes economic grief for Britain, and potentially breakup of the U.K., I think the mercantilist approach will have its final nail in the coffin. Proceed with sensible plans and don't worry too much about the blow hard destroyers who come and go. We find ways of working around them.

 

[steveintoronto]

I see no reason to completely transform the Deux Montagnes line into a new technology. It should simply be upgraded with new EMU's and more trackage, PTC signalling much like the GO RER network is being done. They can still build the infill stations they wanted, just don't change the train technology. That way the Mascouche line can go straight to Central Station, and VIA could even use the tunnel for HFR.

I even one-up that: CBTC. That may preclude the few temporal freight movements through the tunnel due to the cost of adapting freight locos to comply, or a backward compatible signalling system could be devised, the problem there is REM is touted to run 24 hrs. On the point of compatibility of the two formats, that's already up and running in Europe, and has been for years. REM is using a "scorched earth" policy. Deny everyone else access to make theirs thrive, denying commuters the option in the process. Serious questions abound..on many points, including the Feds funding the REM share ostensibly committed. They might be waiting for a court test before doing so, and rightly so.

As for the other parts of the system, I don't see why they couldn't create a UPX like airport train along the Vaudreuil–Hudson line (its CPR owned so they would have to add dedicated track) or the CN track adjacent (that VIA uses) with a spur to the airport, a spur that is on the right side of the airport, and a direct shot to downtown, not some weird line that goes in a weird roundabout way to downtown.

In fact the RoW is already built for exactly this for a good part of the route. I'll dig out the details and post later.

 

[steveintoronto]

Tripped across the latest news dated today (updated less than an hour ago) while looking for reference the airport dedicated RoW being built, but now suspended due to REM.

This appears more...errr...'odd' with every mention of it. I bite my lip to prevent typing what's under my breath:

Light-rail system is full-steam ahead, Couillard says
Presse Canadienne
More from Presse Canadienne
Published on: March 26, 2017 | Last Updated: March 26, 2017 4:29 PM EDT

Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard said he did not want to wait for a “definitive engagement” from the federal government on Montreal’s proposed light-rail train system, adding he has heard more encouraging news since the federal budget was deposited Wednesday, concerning two other infrastructure projects dear to his administration.

During a regional meeting of the Quebec Liberal Party on Saturday in Laval, Couillard said federal funding in the Réseau électrique métropolitain (REM), overseen by provincial pension fund manager Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, could not wait until the federal government completes its overall federal infrastructure planning.

He said a detailed financial framework for the light-rail system will be part of the Quebec budget to be deposited Tuesday, and that Quebec wants to “start work soon to finish on schedule.”

http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/light-rail-system-is-full-steam-ahead-couillard-says

Meantime:

BAPE is right to ask questions about the Caisse's light-rail project

Allison Hanes, Montreal Gazette
More from Allison Hanes, Montreal Gazette
Published on: January 25, 2017 | Last Updated: January 25, 2017 9:39 AM ED

If the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec builds a $5.9-billion light-rail line in Greater Montreal, will you take it?

The Quebec pension fund manageris essentially staking its reputation on the fact that many Montrealers will hop its 67-kilometre Réseau électrique métropolitain to the airport or the Dix30 shopping centre in Brossard; that South Shore commuters sick of getting stuck on express buses on the Champlain Bridge will get on board; that residents of the West Island will opt for a new rail artery along the Highway 40 corridor; and that passengers from Deux-Montagnes, fed up with having to stand on overcrowded commuter trains run by the Agence métropolitaine de transport, will relish more frequent departures.

In many ways, the REM is the answer to the Montreal region’s public transit prayers.

It’s the biggest investment in decades and ticks off several of the region’s transit priorities in one fell swoop. Most of the project — $3.1-billion — would be privately financed by the Caisse. The aggressive timeline would have it up and running by 2020, hence the urgency to get shovels in the ground later this year.

But as the Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement correctly notes, the REM also amounts to a “paradigm shift,” in that it would allow a private entity to operate a crucial public service. To the surprise of many the BAPE has given the REM a yellow light. The environmental review board has raised questions about the projected ridership, financing and ownership of the Caisse project.

For that the BAPE, is under fire for overstepping its mandate.

But I would argue public transit, by its very nature, is an environmental issue. So the BAPE has the right to do a deep dive on the viability of this project — even if its findings don’t please the Caisse, the Board of Trade, Premier Philippe Couillard or Mayor Denis Coderre.

The BAPE report suggested that the REM won’t draw many new riders beyond those who already use existing express buses and AMT trains. It says it won’t help the region reach its goals of getting 30 per cent of commuters on public transit by 2021 or reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by more than a meagre 0.15 per cent.

The Caisse disputes some of the BAPE’s assertions that the REM merely duplicates existing transit offerings. Indeed, the express buses that are currently offered to get to and from the South Shore or to the airport from downtown just don’t cut it in a modern city. An electric train is the way to go and it is much needed.

But is this the right way to do it? The BAPE worries handing the Caisse the keys to a big chunk of greater Montreal’s public transportation infrastructure could come at the expense of other agencies.

For instance, the taxpayers just financed the new Mascouche line of the AMT at the cost of $671 million. But when the REM is built, the Caisse-run trains would have exclusive access to the strategic tunnel under Mount Royal. To get downtown, passengers on the Mascouche train, who now enjoy a direct route to downtown, would have to transfer to the REM at Highway 40. That doesn’t seem like much of an incentive to take transit.

We need more Montrealers to use transit because traffic in this city is a nightmare. Montreal has three of the country’s 10 worst highway bottlenecks according to a recent study by the Canadian Automobile Association. Reducing congestion is good for the environment. It is also good for economic productivity and our quality of life, too.

Just because private money is going to finance a big chunk of the REM (albeit with a sizable contribution from the Quebec government) does not negate the project’s public interest. Public transit is after all a public good, no matter who owns and operates it.

Much is at stake with the REM. It will be the maiden project of the Caisse’s new infrastructure arm, which could launch the Quebec pension fund manager into new endeavours. It will be the first test of a new way of financing public transit in Quebec, with the Caisse assuming more than half the risk for building and operating the new light-rail line.

The pressure is on to get it done. But the BAPE report is a reminder of the need to get it right.

http://montrealgazette.com/opinion/...uestions-about-the-caisses-light-rail-project

Be sure to read the comments following the article above.

Excellent analysis here with charts, maps and comparisons:

How the Caisse’s Light Rail System will Crumble under its own Weight
May 18th, 2016 by ant6n A second, more sobering look at the Caisse’s “REM” proposal to replace the Deux-Montagnes Commuter Rail line with an extended light rail line: how the Caisse had good ideas but is executing it badly, which will cause trains to be overcrowded from day 1.
[...]

http://www.cat-bus.com/2016/05/how-the-caisses-light-rail-system-will-crumble-under-its-own-weight/

 

[steveintoronto]

Bombardier has demonstrated a fairly mercenary approach, taking money and contracts where and when it could find them

This is where the Investment Bank politics and VIA rail diverge in this string, but until we do have a separate string for the Investment Bank, I agree, caveats pending. Looked at from the Chinese point of view, Canada (and other nations) wants China's investment monies, but on their own terms. Trade Agreements minimize that level of accountability, for better or worse. Canada can't have her investment cake and eat it too. I forwarded that article to a few persons in the business press, even though it is on a newswire now, it seems to be coming in under the radar of many Cdn journos in terms of China's aspirations.

BBD is much larger a corporate entity outside of Canada than within, and as much as BBD gets very favourable status from the Gov't here, declares most of the profits overseas.

I look forward to discussing this in greater depth in a more appropriate string, it's only a matter of time until one opens here at UT.

 

[steveintoronto]

Here's more on Infrastructure Funds, and the two phased approach which is testing some people's patience. I have a lot of empathy with Paul's frustration, hopefully this will help him be optimistic:

Federal officials ready for avalanche of infrastructure paper work
By: Jordan Press The Canadian Press Published on Mon Mar 27 2017

[...]
The Canadian Press obtained a copy of the briefing note under the Access to Information Act.

The issue with the leftover money from the New Building Canada Fund is part of a larger concern among federal officials that Infrastructure Canada won't be able to handle the number of applications rolling in under old and new programs, that combined will dole out some $186 billion in spending over the next 11 years.

The concern was part of the reason the government split its infrastructure promise into two phases.

The first, outlined in last year's budget, set aside $11.9 billion through to 2019 on projects that could be completed quickly. The second phase, which had a few more details outlined in this year's budget, is aimed at large transit, drinking water and housing projects and comes with a price tag of about $81 billion.

What the two-part approach also did was give the Liberals a chance to learn from the approval process under the new infrastructure program so as not to make the same mistakes when applications open for the second and more lucrative phase of the program.

The department still has time before the complicated funding applications roll in.

The Liberals first need to sign funding agreements with the provinces with negotiations expected to begin by the summer. The government doesn't expect to have agreements finalized for another 12 months.

http://www.metronews.ca/news/canada...r-avalanche-of-infrastructure-paper-work.html

I have a few questions on that, to be sure, and obviously we're still much in the 'murky' dark on just what is in the pipeline, and this *is not* the Investment Bank, for which I highly suspect will be funded separately as per seed money.

Now the FOI request has daylighted the briefing note, we'll probably be reading a lot more in the next while as to what the framework is, let alone the finer details.

 

[Northern Light]

[QUOTE="steveintoronto, post: 1205799, member: 65910"The Liberals first need to sign funding agreements with the provinces with negotiations expected to begin by the summer. The government doesn't expect to have agreements finalized for another 12 months.[/QUOTE]

For the life of me, I cannot fathom how it could take 12 months to get the provinces to agree to take 'free money' to the tune of tens of billions on a national scale.

Let's be real, Ottawa will have some basic conditions (percentage paid on projects, and what what areas monies are allocated to, ie. transit, housing etc.).

Since its unlikely to budge on these, there isn't much to negotiate.

I'm sure Ottawa may have a favourite project or two, that probably can't be put in writing, but will be 'understood'; everything else is simply what projects are applied for...........

Or so I would have thought.

But apparently they've found a way to make this considerably more complex!

 

[steveintoronto]

For the life of me, I cannot fathom how it could take 12 months to get the provinces to agree to take 'free money' to the tune of tens of billions on a national scale.

It isn't being disseminated as "free money". It's being used as a multiplier (return for infrastructure investment is claimed to typically be 1.5 : 1, GDP yield to investment in monetary value terms. The Feds will want to realize their monies showing that, and the provinces doing same. The figure announced for disbursements in the latest budget was max 40% of entire project value, the other 60% ostensibly being 40% match by province, 20% elsewhere.

Since its unlikely to budge on these, there isn't much to negotiate.

That's quite a presumption. I was having a heated argument with another poster in this very string who now claims to have put me on his "ignore list" as to the Feds running a continuing deficit, and now you're arguing the complete opposite. The Feds *want* this money to go to work, but wisely, they have to see a business plan for it. And I should frickin' hope so.

I'm sure Ottawa may have a favourite project or two, that probably can't be put in writing, but will be 'understood'; everything else is simply what projects are applied for...........

Not worth answering. You're going to have to learn to research before making claims like that. Been following the Scarborough Subway debate by any chance?

But apparently they've found a way to make this considerably more complex!

More complex than what? Due dilligence? Some of this investment is for the next decade. The $11B spent already was for the "shovels ready" projects. The sizable ones are still in the oven.

I also have issues on some of the answers, but I'm not going to pick beefs out of thin air. They better get this right, and it will take time and review. Investment doesn't happen with a hand-shake overnight, unless it's Donald Duck Trump slipping some sticky duck bills under the table. Even 'helicopter money' isn't dropped from helicopters...

I'm willing to wait to get the story straight. And ostensibly have the plans independently reviewed/audited before the money is spent.

Unlike Toronto City Hall, for instance...

 

[Northern Light]

It isn't being disseminated as "free money". It's being used as a multiplier (return for infrastructure investment is claimed to typically be 1.5 : 1, GDP yield to investment in monetary value terms. The Feds will want to realize their monies showing that, and the provinces doing same. The figure announced for disbursements in the latest budget was max 40% of entire project value, the other 60% ostensibly being 40% match by province, 20% elsewhere.

That's quite a presumption. I was having a heated argument with another poster in this very string who now claims to have put me on his "ignore list" as to the Feds running a continuing deficit, and now you're arguing the complete opposite. The Feds *want* this money to go to work, but wisely, they have to see a business plan for it. And I should frickin' hope so.

Not worth answering. You're going to have to learn to research before making claims like that. Been following the Scarborough Subway debate by any chance?

More complex than what? Due dilligence? Some of this investment is for the next decade. The $11B spent already was for the "shovels ready" projects. The sizable ones are still in the oven.

I also have issues on some of the answers, but I'm not going to pick beefs out of thin air. They better get this right, and it will take time and review. Investment doesn't happen with a hand-shake overnight, unless it's Donald Duck Trump slipping some sticky duck bills under the table. Even 'helicopter money' isn't dropped from helicopters...

I'm willing to wait to get the story straight. And ostensibly have the plans independently reviewed/audited before the money is spent.

Unlike Toronto City Hall, for instance...

First: You and I have had respectful exchanges in the past; having read my past posts you should know well they are never ill informed, or poorly thought out; I focus overwhelmingly on post quality, not quantity; while once in a while indulging in overt opinion, always stated as such.

Your tone in your response was disrespectful and unmerited, and betrays you as not having read past funding agreements, or being familiar w/the process by which they operate. I work closely w/gov't and have for many years...............

***

Second, the article clearly states that applications for specific projects are NOT to be taken in until funding agreements are finalized.

In other words there are no business cases for any projects until such time as the over-arching funding agreements are completed.

Something the articles suggests will run well into 2018.

At no time did I suggest that individual applications not be subject to scrutiny and merit-based award. You're reading into that is entirely unreasonable, you didn't read the article!

The article may have it wrong, but that is the way it reads.

***

I did suggest that 'criteria' might be tweaked to favour certain projects; which not only can happen, but does happen under governments of all political stripes.

Its not ideal; it shouldn't be that way, it was, it is, and it shall be well into the foreseeable future.

The list of examples based on publicly available information is nearly endless.

Regardless, my point was that it doesn't take that long to figure out what will be 'pushed' through the envelope.

Of course the comprehensive list, and subsequent processes (tenders etc.) will take a good deal longer. My argument was that the pre-process is bloated.

***

I would also suggest, for the most part, that projects that already been vetted by 2 levels of gov't needed have that process rehashed by a third.

The Federal government really shouldn't be in the business of determined which subways should the priority in Toronto; Toronto should, and Ontario can be the 'double-check'.

The Scarborough Subway does indeed provide a pertinent example that a third party doesn't actually change the outcome. (for better or worse)

Toronto may well fail in correctly picking its priorities, but that simply is not Ottawa's problem.

 

[steveintoronto]

Excellent reply, we have fodder to discuss in referenced detail further. My apologies if I was too curt. I'm about to fall into bed, so will offer a referenced and considered reply tomorrow, but will quote the last sentence you post for now, as it sets the tone of a deserved and considered reply:

Toronto may well fail in correctly picking its priorities, but that simply is not Ottawa's problem.

This is a crucial point! And I'm going to make a wild and unreferenced projection on this: To make it short, you are right and wrong on that, it's their *responsibility* to see that investment reap returns, just as a bank manager wants to know all the details before granting a loan.

It's not beyond the realm of possibility, especially following how incredibly surreal the SSE has become, (Star will have a bombshell story Tuesday if Pagliaro gets her copy in in time) that the Feds pull away from the SSE, double check their thinking to be sure (politically as well as practicably)....and then say "No" to any further funding beyond the $600,000 or so already committed.

They have to spend this money wisely...remember, that ratio of investment to return: (1.5 : 1 ) has to be their religion on this, or they simply have to walk away. It's not just voters watching this, it's also the Investment Community, and they're watching this all very closely. The Investment Bank will be built on how the Feds handle this. This isn't to 'curry favour'...it's to show a value of GDP value growth 1.5 times the cost of investment. That's the language of the investors.

And the Investment Community is also looking at long term and *stable* returns. Morneau is a banker by profession, he knows the protocol that's required to give this whole exercise inertia.

Nuff said for now, look forward to a more detailed response Tuesday. And again my apologies, your latter post is the stuff of quality debate.

Edit to Add: We're not hearing the professional and private discussions behind closed doors in Ottawa. Guaranteed that Garneau has Morneau's ear for VIA. And for other Crown corporations that can play a huge multiplier role by investment.

This just up, and here's a prime case of damned if you do, and damned if you don't, and I disagree with Morneau's sop to these people, oil isn't going to recover, quite the opposite, but if the oil patch is so 'virile'...then why are investors leaving, not coming in? Don't want to dwell on that, but note the incredible duplicity of the 'gifted' when their gamble goes south:

Morneau defends federal budget tax changes for oilpatch
James Wood, Calgary Herald
More from James Wood, Calgary Herald
Published on: March 27, 2017
[...]
Conservative MP Tom Kmiec, who attended the chamber luncheon, said Morneau delivered a “stock speech” that should give little reassurance to Albertans.

He slammed the budget’s $28.5 billion deficit and said the energy sector tax changes are “a disaster.”

“That’s going to hurt people … and he tried to sugarcoat it here,” said Kmiec, the MP for Calgary-Shepard.

“(The tax deduction) did exactly what it was intended to do. I’ve got lots of small and medium-sized business guys in my riding — this was their sole focus area.”

Chamber of commerce president Adam Legge said business welcomed the budget’s focus on competitiveness and innovation but want Ottawa to accelerate its timetable for returning to surplus budgets instead of living with potential decades of deficits.

“There is a long road back to balance,” he said.

But Morneau touted the government’s debt to GDP ratio, which he said gave it the best balance sheet in the G7.

“We don’t want to miss the opportunity to make investments at a time it makes sense,” he said during a question and answer session with Legge.

Morneau toured SAIT in the company of Mayor Naheed Nenshi, who again pitched the idea of locating in Calgary the planned new Canada Infrastructure Bank — an institution aimed at leveraging dollars from large institutional investor and pension funds to be used for capital projects.

“Calgary is the right place,” said Nenshi.

“The minister highlighted some of his considerations around the infrastructure bank. Location is not at the top of those.”

Morneau, former president of human resources giant Morneau Shepell, said in an interview he is focused on getting the infrastructure bank up-and-running this year and acknowledged he is not thinking of location at this point.

“We’ve hired an adviser … likely one of the things he will be considering is geography and that will be purely a decision based on ‘how can the bank have the biggest impact?’ Not focused on the local economy but focused on, what’s the decision on geography that allows the bank to be most successful.”

http://calgaryherald.com/news/politics/morneau-defends-federal-budget-tax-changes-for-oilpatch

The entitled, wanting more, for a losing proposition. Morneau is going to have to read the Investor Riot Act to these people. Their lunch has gone, and it's not coming back. Morneau is going to have to back winners, not losers.

And the SSE? An absolute loser, I can't think of a more apt 'disaster' to axe funding for, and it will be a feather in Morneau's 'investor cap' to say no to it...to be continued.

 

[steveintoronto]

Just up: (This may appear tangential to this string, but it could also be a profound clue of what's about to unfold...what next? Mark Carney called back from Threadneedle Street to run it? It's not that abstract actually, albeit it would be a secondary job to other international forums)

Oliver Moore Retweeted
Rahul Gupta‏@TOinTransit 26m26 minutes ago



Rahul Gupta Retweeted Metrolinx

official release on McCuaig's departure

Rahul Gupta added,


Metrolinx@Metrolinx
Bruce McCuaig to leave Metrolinx to accept new role at Canada Infrastructure Bank http://bit.ly/2nrjbUO
0 replies 1 retweet 0 likes

Edit to Add:

Just up on InsideToronto:

[...]
McCuaig accepted a new federal role in the Privy Council Office as Executive Adviser (Infrastructure Bank) to support the launch of the Canada Infrastructure Bank. He starts in his new role on Monday, April 24.

“Bruce's decision is a big loss for Metrolinx, but an equally big win for Canada's ambitions to finance and build infrastructure nationally for the 21st Century. Bruce came to Metrolinx after 26 years in the Ontario public service‎ that culminated in his three years as Deputy Minister of Transportation,” Metrolinx chair J. Robert S. Prichard said in a news release. "When he arrived at Metrolinx in 2010, he took the helm of an organization in its early days with a mandate to build a fully integrated organization able to deliver on our mission to champion, develop and implement an integrated transportation plan for the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area.”[...]

http://www.insidetoronto.com/news-s...-bruce-mccuaig-stepping-down-after-six-years/

As much as I have questions about McCuaig, albeit there might be very good answers...what's clear is the obvious emphasis that the Investment Bank is going to have on transportation infrastructure, especially rail, and not just passenger. The Missing Link comes to mind as much as VIA's HFR.

Late Edit to Add: Just up at Globe, haven't had time to digest this yet:

Ottawa hires Metrolinx CEO to advise on Canada Infrastructure Bank
Bill Curry


OTTAWA — The Globe and Mail

Published Tuesday, Mar. 28, 2017 12:45PM EDT

Last updated Tuesday, Mar. 28, 2017 12:48PM EDT

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...n-canada-infrastructure-bank/article34444724/

 

[jys]

I don't see why they couldn't create a UPX like airport train along the Vaudreuil–Hudson line (its CPR owned so they would have to add dedicated track) or the CN track adjacent (that VIA uses) with a spur to the airport, a spur that is on the right side of the airport, and a direct shot to downtown, not some weird line that goes in a weird roundabout way to downtown.

Totally agree. It might be easier to just build a people mover system from the terminal to the train station though. The can even route close it to the hotels and put a station there.

 

[steveintoronto]

Totally agree. It might be easier to just build a people mover system from the terminal to the train station though. The can even route close it to the hotels and put a station there.

I Googled to get a bit more background on Rob's point, and got lucky with the search tags this time, here's the story I'd hoped to post a few days back:

Train corridor to nowhere
Transport Quebec paying for unneeded $136-million project

• Montreal Gazette
• 28 May 2016
• ANDY RIGA ariga@montrealgazette.com twitter.com/andyriga

Remember the Dorval Circle ramps to nowhere?

For an encore, Transport Quebec is paying for a $136-million train corridor to nowhere.

When it was planning the $3.7-billion Turcot reconstruction project, Quebec included a rail corridor between the South-West borough and Montreal West.

The corridor, including a concrete tunnel under a highway ramp, was to accommodate commuter trains and an airport shuttle, with tracks running near the Falaise St-Jacques, Canadian National freight tracks and Highway 20.

Problem is, the province just chose a different route for the long-awaited airport shuttle and improvements to West Island train service.

The $5.5-billion Réseau électrique métropolitain, announced in April, will link the South Shore, the West Island and Deux-Montagnes to both the airport and downtown Montreal. The new plan does away with the idea of linking the airport and downtown via trains running along Highway 20.

Instead, trains will use the Mount Royal tunnel and part of the DeuxMontagnes train corridor, with the airport shuttle branching off toward Trudeau, and a West Island train branching off and running along Highway 40 to Ste-Anne-deBellevue.

That means a Turcot airport/ commuter rail corridor is no longer needed.

Since CN’s freight tracks had to be moved due to the new Turcot’s configuration, Quebec is paying to relocate them. As part of that contract, Quebec also agreed to pay for an adjacent rail corridor.

Transport Quebec spokesperson Sarah Bensadoun said it’s impossible to break out the cost of the five-kilometre commuter/airport rail corridor from the rest of the Turcot project.

She would not comment on a document obtained by Radio-Canada indicating Transport Quebec budgeted $136-million for the corridor.

The rail corridor was conceived as a whole so it’s difficult to calculate such a figure, Bensadoun said. The foundations for tracks and overhead structures were designed to include both the CN freight trains, which will definitely roll along the corridor, and passenger trains, which may never use it.

Though no airport/commuter tracks will be installed, Bensadoun said the land for the corridor will remain in place for a possible, unspecified future public transit project.

At the Dorval Circle near Trudeau Airport, work on two new ramps was stalled for years due to bickering between Transport Quebec, CN, Canadian Pacific and two nearby hotels.

Now, under a plan announced on May 2, about 10 per cent of one of the unfinished ramps will be demolished. The cost of demolishing and rebuilding part of the ramp is included in a $344-million contract to rebuild the interchange, now scheduled to be completed in 2019.

In another embarrassing twist, in March Transport Quebec was ordered to pay a hotel more than $5.7 million for expropriating part of its parking lot for the Dorval Circle makeover. The new ramps will provide direct links between the airport and Highways 20 and 520.

https://www.pressreader.com/canada/montreal-gazette/20160528/281621009583223

As far as I can tell, those questions about the province paying those costs 'for nothing' have never been answered. But it gets even more curious with the following:

Electric light-rail train network to span Montreal by 2020
Jason Magder, Montreal Gazette
More from Jason Magder, Montreal Gazette
Published on: April 22, 2016 | Last Updated: April 22, 2016 9:27 PM EDT
[...]
The Caisse (REM) has promised trains will leave every three to six minutes from the South Shore and every six to 12 minutes on the West Island and Deux Montagnes Line, for the duration of its 20-hour operation schedule from 5 a.m. to 1:20 a.m. The Caisse estimates it will take 40 minutes to take the train from either Ste-Anne-de-Bellevue or Deux-Montagnes to downtown. It will take 30 minutes to go from Central Station to the airport. It will take between 15 and 20 minutes to travel from Brossard to downtown.

Tall said the decision to follow Highway 40 was made because of work going on in the Turcot Interchange. That work would have prevented crews from building dedicated lines for the next five years. He said building along that corridor would also cost $1 billion more because it would require a track dedicated to passenger traffic. [...]

http://montrealgazette.com/news/loc...-update-for-montreals-west-island-south-shore

There's a lot about REM and associated 'fudges' by the province that still haven't been answered.

Btw: Note "the duration of its 20-hour operation schedule from 5 a.m. to 1:20 a.m.". I'd mistakenly stated it is 24 hr, it isn't, which means that the few overnight temporal freight operations through the Montreal Tunnel *can* continue, RER's stolid intransigence besides.

To illustrate Rob's description:

Questions abound...

Here's the CBC's article on it:

Will a $136M Turcot rail corridor be built for nothing? New LRT wouldn't use it
Transports Québec says rail corridor could still have future uses
CBC News Posted: May 27, 2016 8:51 AM ET Last Updated: May 27, 2016 8:51 AM ET

Montreal's new light rail network will bypass a $136-million train corridor under the Turcot Interchange that Quebec's Transport Ministry had designed for that purpose.

The corridor was written into the new Turcot's design with the expectation it would serve a planned rail shuttle between downtown Montreal and Pierre-Elliott-Trudeau International Airport.

The cost of including it in the Turcot development was estimated at $136 million by the ministry, according to documents obtained by Radio-Canada.

However, on April 22, the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, which is fronting $3-billion of the new light rail network's $5.5 billion price tag, announced the airport train would not use the Turcot corridor.

• Ambitious light rail project for Montreal proposed by Caisse de dépôt
• Montreal's proposed light rail system misses mark, critics say
• ANALYSIS: New light rail system for Montreal by 2020. Seriously?

The pension fund said it wants the rail network to be in service by 2020-2021, but work on the Turcot is only scheduled for completion in 2020.

As a result, LRT planners have three possible routes to the airport in mind, and the Turcot corridor isn't one of them.

"The LRT project announcement doesn't change the pertinence of maintaining a rail corridor for future use," said Transports Québec spokeswoman Sarah Bensadoun.

The ministry said it's impossible to estimate the cost of the Turcot's rail corridor.

However, documents obtained by Radio-Canada clearly show that from the moment of its inclusion in the plans, the cost was pegged at $136 million.

The corridor was envisioned as part of series of measures aimed at encouraging public transit.

Designers included the rail corridor in plans for the new Turcot Interchange thinking it would serve a planned airport shuttle train. (Radio-Canada)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/turcot-rail-corridor-bypassed-by-lrt-1.3602871

I'm resisting blurting out how 'stereotypical' this is for Montreal and 'fiddling finance' to fit the finagled foot....until putting it against the perspective of of the Scarborough Subway Existential crisis.

There's that peculiar odour again...
---------------
Northern: Apologies for not following on with a proper answer yet to your post. I suspect announcements in the next few days will make it easier to frame my response more accurately and with fuller reference. Details about the Investment Bank are becoming much more substantial.

 

[SaugeenJunction]

CANADA 150 YOUTH PASS:
http://www.viarail.ca/en/150-pass

THIS IS AWESOME! I guess I know what I'm doing in July. I've always wanted to take the train across Canada (I've only done chunks so far), and I think this is fate telling me to do the whole trip.

 

[steveintoronto]

CANADA 150 YOUTH PASS:
http://www.viarail.ca/en/150-pass

THIS IS AWESOME! I guess I know what I'm doing in July. I've always wanted to take the train across Canada (I've only done chunks so far), and I think this is fate telling me to do the whole trip.

It looks like a lot of others thought same Alex:
"Due to technical difficulties, this rail pass is temporarily unavailable. Stay tuned for more updates."

I suspect the site was swamped.