Rural Commuter Rail

[1overcosc]

Even if the CTA did order the Trillium line kicked off its tracks or its service frequency downgraded, the federal cabinet would almost certainly override its decision.

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

In a normal universe where we don't allow private investors to upend regional planning

@Truenorth00

Can you please provide a link to a whole-region transportation plan? Please identify anything in it that MOOSE's plans would get in the way of.

Here's the NCC's new 50-Year Plan. We're aligned there, indeed we're the only ones offering to provide transit between the core and Gatineau Park. And the only ones offering to link the whole NCR by transit. Like it was prior to the 1960s railway dismantlement episode..

Here is a link to part of the RMOC's original plan for the O-Train in 2000. See how the O-Train was actually supposed to connect all the way through Gatineau, right out to the Gatineau Airport? It's interesting to reflect on how that plan got upended. But MOOSE would provide a connection between the Trillium Line through Gatineau and out to its airport. We're offering to complete what was promised to Ottawa taxpayers but not delivered. Don't you agree?

The 2013 "Interprovincial Transit Strategy for Canada's Capital Region", which was co-authored by staff and consultants for the City of Ottawa, City of Gatineau and the NCC, described the need for "an O-Train extension to Hull via the Prince of Wales Bridge" by 2018 (pages 51, 75 and 82). It's interesting to reflect on how that plan got upended. MOOSE has been working hard to arrange high-volume interprovincial rail transit asap. Gatineau want's the connection asap. Ottawa puts it years away, and then literally upended the required track connecting Bayview to the PoWB. Somehow you think that's okay, and it's MOOSE's bad to call the regulator.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

we don't build rail transit to towns of a few thousand people unless they happen to be on the rail line to a larger terminus.

No, certainly not in your business model.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

And of course, the only way Mr. Potvin can come even the slightest bit close to his vision to promote massive amounts of sprawl around those small towns to boost their populations to a point where transit is economically viable.

You believe that financing rail transit commercially via property value added is impossible. We reckon it is possible, and that it would bring concentrated dev around stations, not sprawl.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Ask him if transit is feasible with today's populations level in those communities. He won't say yes.....(more than likely he'll just ignore the question and refuse to answer it).

Um... "yes" via our PPR business model; "no" via the taxpayer/passenger funded business model.

Joseph Potvin
Director General | Directeur général
Moose Consortium (Mobility Ottawa-Outaouais: Systems & Enterprises) | www.letsgomoose.com
Consortium Moose (Mobilité Outaouais-Ottawa: Systèmes & Enterprises) | www.onyvamoose.com

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by Charles5

I don't see Joseph Potvin actually ever accepting the fact that a regional rail line under this proposed plan is simply not viable.

If the feasibility study comes back with the conclusion that it's not viable, I'll be entirely fine with that. The decision I and other colleagues made was to give it our best shot. Somehow you and a few of the others seem to think it's either stupid or somehow socially wrong to even try to redesign how metropolitan rail transit is financed.

Joseph Potvin
Director General | Directeur général
Moose Consortium (Mobility Ottawa-Outaouais: Systems & Enterprises) | www.letsgomoose.com
Consortium Moose (Mobilité Outaouais-Ottawa: Systèmes & Enterprises) | www.onyvamoose.com

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Even if the CTA did order the Trillium line kicked off its tracks or its service frequency downgraded, the federal cabinet would almost certainly override its decision.

Upgraded, actually, "for the general advantage of Canada". And no, OC-Transpo can't be kicked off its tracks.

Joseph Potvin
Director General | Directeur général
Moose Consortium (Mobility Ottawa-Outaouais: Systems & Enterprises) | www.letsgomoose.com
Consortium Moose (Mobilité Outaouais-Ottawa: Systèmes & Enterprises) | www.onyvamoose.com

[Charles5]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

If the feasibility study comes back with the conclusion that it's not viable, I'll be entirely fine with that.

Can we expect an announcement in the next few weeks then concerning the results of the due diligence review currently being conducted by Lemine-Consortia N.A.?

If the due diligence review comes to the conclusion that there is insufficient merit to subsequently fund a full feasibility study, what then? For example, will you drop all ongoing challenges against the City of Ottawa and the Town of Chelsea regarding their current plans and methods for utilizing the rail corridors within their jurisdictions?

[Charles5]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

Here is a link to part of the RMOC's original plan for the O-Train in 2000. See how the O-Train was actually supposed to connect all the way through Gatineau, right out to the Gatineau Airport? It's interesting to reflect on how that plan got upended. But MOOSE would provide a connection between the Trillium Line through Gatineau and out to its airport. We're offering to complete what was promised to Ottawa taxpayers but not delivered. Don't you agree?

Actually I don't agree. This is not a "promise to Ottawa taxpayers". This is simply a study of a 'conceptual' route. The city is simply doing what all governments should do, that is to take different ideas, vet them, study them, determine what is feasible or not; then prioritize them and determine which ones provide greatest value. This is simply one of those cases where a study was done and it was subsequently determined that this was not a priority. In fact, while parts of this have been overtaken by events with the implementation of the Gatineau BRT it's interesting that even that does not go all the way out to the airport, likely because it's not viable at this time due to insufficient demand.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

Upgraded, actually, "for the general advantage of Canada". And no, OC-Transpo can't be kicked off its tracks.

You know the declaratory power hasn't been used since 1961, right?

If you don't want OC transpo kicked off its tracks where do you you think the Moose trains can fit in? There are currently trains every 11 minutes in each direction. Even a minimal Moose schedule (say hourly in rush hour) would require another 6 trains an hour during peak periods.

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by Charles5

Can we expect an announcement in the next few weeks then concerning the results of the due diligence review currently being conducted by Lemine-Consortia N.A.?

We'll work out a communications approach with LeMine-Consortia N.A., of course, one way or the other.

Originally Posted by Charles5

If the due diligence review comes to the conclusion that there is insufficient merit to subsequently fund a full feasibility study, what then?

They might determine that they need more time. Or they may proceed partially. They may back out. There are lots of possibilities. Gotta wait.

Originally Posted by Charles5

For example, will you drop all ongoing challenges against the City of Ottawa and the Town of Chelsea regarding their current plans and methods for utilizing the rail corridors within their jurisdictions?

You evidently haven't picked up on the straitforward fact that the railway infrastructure of the Trillium Line through to the Prince of Wales Bridge, while owned by the City of Ottawa, are under federal jurisdiction. Moose can't stop the Agency's enforcement action even if it wanted to. That genie is out of that bottle. Regarding the line through Chelsea, even if Moose did not exist, it would be my view that Rails-WITH-Trails supports a greater public interest and a more ecologically sound approach than Rails-TO-Trails; and that federal jurisdiction persist on that line. So yes, as a conscientious citizen and taxpayer, as well as having worked professionally both in Canada and internationally in applied ecologically sound economic instruments and policy, I'd raise the same issue here in my home town. You think one shouldn't?

Joseph Potvin
Director General | Directeur général
Moose Consortium (Mobility Ottawa-Outaouais: Systems & Enterprises) | www.letsgomoose.com
Consortium Moose (Mobilité Outaouais-Ottawa: Systèmes & Enterprises) | www.onyvamoose.com

[Charles5]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

Regarding the line through Chelsea, even if Moose did not exist, it would be my view that Rails-WITH-Trails supports a greater public interest and a more ecologically sound approach than Rails-TO-Trails; and that federal jurisdiction persist on that line. So yes, as a conscientious citizen and taxpayer, as well as having worked professionally both in Canada and internationally in applied ecologically sound economic instruments and policy, I'd raise the same issue here in my home town. You think one shouldn't?

As conscientious citizens and taxpayers I expect folks to provide their input to their elected officials through various means and forums, then allow their elected officials to make the decisions as to what they feel is in the best interests of their constituents. If you don't like the way your elected officials are operating it's your prerogative to not vote for them. However, I don't see taking the township to court simply because you don't agree with them as being a "conscientious citizen".

[Charles5]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

Moose can't stop the Agency's enforcement action even if it wanted to. That genie is out of that bottle.

So, I get from that that you will accept the decision of the CTA even if it isn't what you would like it to be. You won't proceed to subsequent actions like the Competition Bureau or the courts?

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by Charles5

Actually I don't agree. This is not a "promise to Ottawa taxpayers". This is simply a study of a 'conceptual' route. The city is simply doing what all governments should do, that is to take different ideas, vet them, study them, determine what is feasible or not; then prioritize them and determine which ones provide greatest value.

Can you explain then why the Certificate of Fitness under which the O-Train has always operated says that it goes to Quebec?

Having spoken directly with people involved in development of the O-Train at that time, I can say with confidence that the intention was indeed to provide this interprovincial connection, and the logic of this connection was clearly confirmed in 2013 and 2017 strategies I linked to.

Originally Posted by Charles5

This is simply one of those cases where a study was done and it was subsequently determined that this was not a priority.

Agreed, you're bang on there! As I have cited in this blog previously, when the Interprovincal Transit Strategy was published in the spring of 2013 Mr. Watson made the following statement to a Le Droit reporter: « Ce n'est pas notre priorité d'offrir un service ferroviaire à une autre ville, dans ne autre province. »
Source: http://www.lapresse.ca/le-droit/actualit...pour-rester-insiste-le-maire-dottawa.php

He's changed his tune in recent months, as we all know. But with what rationale can anyone suggest that when Moose plans to actually complete this interprovincial link using a business model that does not depend upon large sums from taxpayers, this runs counter to regional plans? Granted, yes, some taxpayer resources will certainly be used to accommodate the business development we're describing. But this would be the case also if we were planning a plaza or an industrial park. It costs taxpayer resources when you apply for a reno permit for your house too.

Joseph Potvin
Director General | Directeur général
Moose Consortium (Mobility Ottawa-Outaouais: Systems & Enterprises) | www.letsgomoose.com
Consortium Moose (Mobilité Outaouais-Ottawa: Systèmes & Enterprises) | www.onyvamoose.com

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by Charles5

So, I get from that that you will accept the decision of the CTA even if it isn't what you would like it to be. You won't proceed to subsequent actions like the Competition Bureau or the courts?

We expect the Agency to fulfill its mandate. See the escalation sequence in our original request for enforcement.

Joseph Potvin
Director General | Directeur général
Moose Consortium (Mobility Ottawa-Outaouais: Systems & Enterprises) | www.letsgomoose.com
Consortium Moose (Mobilité Outaouais-Ottawa: Systèmes & Enterprises) | www.onyvamoose.com

[Charles5]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

We expect the Agency to fulfill its mandate. See the escalation sequence in our original request for enforcement.

So no. Despite your assertion that the CTA is the authority, you still intend to escalate this even if they rule against you. In other words, they only fulfil their mandate if they support your position.

[Buggys]

I don't know whether MOOSE will be the answer that we'll end up wanting. However, I do feel that the Trillium line should be double-tracked & cross the Ottawa river, and rail ROWs should be used for rail (even if trails are added alongside them).

[Charles5]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

Can you explain then why the Certificate of Fitness under which the O-Train has always operated says that it goes to Quebec?

From the same document: "the application indicates that the initial construction and operation will take place only in the province of Ontario" but "has the capacity to ultimately operate an interprovincial passenger railway service"

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by Charles5

In other words, they only fulfil their mandate if they support your position.

Well, as you know our position is simply that the Canada Transportation Act must be followed, and that both the Agency and the City are bound by it. You're entitled to the view that it doens't matter.

Joseph Potvin
Director General | Directeur général
Moose Consortium (Mobility Ottawa-Outaouais: Systems & Enterprises) | www.letsgomoose.com
Consortium Moose (Mobilité Outaouais-Ottawa: Systèmes & Enterprises) | www.onyvamoose.com

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by Charles5

From the same document: "the application indicates that the initial construction and operation will take place only in the province of Ontario" but "has the capacity to ultimately operate an interprovincial passenger railway service"

Correct.

So back to my question to the 4 or 5 of you here who seem to be upset that a serious plan has arisen to do exactly that.

What do you think upended that long-standing plan, such that the City of Ottawa proceeded merely a year ago to dismantle and obstruct the only section of railway that provided already-constructed fully-intact "capacity to ultimately operate an interprovincial passenger railway service"?

And let me add: "And why aren't you complaining about that?"

Joseph Potvin
Director General | Directeur général
Moose Consortium (Mobility Ottawa-Outaouais: Systems & Enterprises) | www.letsgomoose.com
Consortium Moose (Mobilité Outaouais-Ottawa: Systèmes & Enterprises) | www.onyvamoose.com

[Charles5]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

And let me add: "And why aren't you complaining about that?"

Well, speaking for myself, I'm not complaining about the city's current actions and plans as I am happy in my understanding that the current Trillium line construction is simply a realignment of the track and the capacity continues to exist (and the intent) to subsequently operate a "light rail commuter service" as per the CTA's decision. I also agree with the City's priorities in regard to the planned phases of LRT extension and agree that the cross border portion is a lower priority to the extensions to the East/West and South.

[Charles5]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

So back to my question to the 4 or 5 of you here who seem to be upset that a serious plan has arisen to do exactly that.

Probably because we don't believe it actually is a "serious plan". At the moment you have a concept. Despite years of promotion you still aren't at the point of someone coming forward to fund a proper feasibility study.

I comment here because I strongly disagree with your concept (see my earlier comments in this thread about why that is) and I am concerned that your ongoing interference is a distraction from the real efforts that folks are making to improve the various transit systems within the NCR be those LRT, BRT, regional buses, etc.

I might actually consider this "serious" once someone comes forward to put some real money on the table and a proper feasibility study has been completed.

[Charles5]

Joseph,

I'm just doing some more reading on the subject. In your letter of 25 Nov 2016 to CTA regarding your request for a Certificate of Fitness you indicate that Phase 1b of your Research was "underway as of July 2016" and was funded by $5.0M of Convertible Promissory Notes (top of page 8).

Can you clarify please as this seems to clash with your Press Release of 1 July 2017 which seems to suggest that Lemine was about to spend the following 120 days doing a due diligence review prior to considering funding for a feasibility study.

Specifically, was your statement in your CTA letter of 25 Nov 2016 factually correct? If yes, can you provide any insight into the results of that research.