Rural Commuter Rail

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by Charles5

Have to disagree. The wording is pretty specific. It doesn't say "if CTA doesn't reply". It specifically says "Failing timely issuance of a railway reconstruction order from the Agency" and "Failing timely issuance of the specified railway reconstruction order from the Minister of Transport Canada, Moose will apply to the Federal Court of Canada".
https://www.letsgomoose.ca/wp-content/up...eNo16-03784_210-R-2012_2016-08-15PDF.pdf

The article @acottawa linked to said

Potvin says if the CTA doesn’t respond to its request for a ruling on the matter

The conclusion that @acottawa drew from that article (which is what he referenced) didn't seem to match the article, but I do see that it does say otherwise in MOOSE's documents.

In other words, MOOSE wants the City to be ordered to change their construction plans and expects the CTA to issue that order. If CTA or TC don't do what MOOSE wants (ie: issue the order to the City), then MOOSE is threatening legal action.

A reply that simply dismisses MOOSE's complaint, or responds in a manner other than an order to reconstruct does not meet the requirements set by MOOSE in its escalation sequence.

I think that there is adifference between this CTA case and the other three CTA cases that MOOSE has filed. The other three leaned towards clarification of jurisdiction and the status of the PoW bridge (as a railway). In both the Maniwaki and Chelsea cases, jurisdiction was determined to be non-federal, and no one threatened legal action (again, the Chelsea court case was filed before the CTA complaint).

On the other hand, this case in particular is seeking some kind of action from the CTA. Why? Because the city hasn't followed the law or proper procedures in either one of the cases:
a) The city has not included the PoW bridge in its three-year plan for some reason, which could indicate that they don't intend to keep it as a railway. However, they have not gone through the proper procedures to abandon the railway. That combined with the fact that the city has maintained that they intend to keep the bridge as a railway for the future (which contradicts what is stated in their three-year plan)
b) The city dismantled part of the railway without following the proper procedures outlined in the law.

Perhaps I can restate what you said about MOOSE "expecting" and "wanting" this and that in a more neutral manner

MOOSE expects the CTA to fulfill its mandate, and also expects the city to follow railway laws since it is in ownership of and operating a federal railway. Failure to do either of those could very well lead to a court case since the CTA wouldn't be fulfilling its mandate of enforcing transportation laws, and the city would have broken the law.

Is the CTA ordering the city to rebuild the track what MOOSE "wants"? Well, yeah. That's pretty obvious. But you seem to want to frame this as an example of MOOSE being some kind of "CTA complaint troll" that just continuously spams the CTA with complaints until it gets what it wants, but that really isn't the case. As I've mentioned, the other three CTA cases did not result in any legal threats. This particular case only includes legal threats because neither of the other parties seems to be doing what they are legally required to do.

Edit: A quote from Mr. Potvin himself (emphasis mine):

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

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

That letter you refer to as a diplomatic action, I'm not sure if you've actually read it. It's simply a back door approach to try and get the City in essence to sign a blank cheque. It tries to have Council agree to something that MOOSE has proposed or drafted, without any real oversight or review, that essentially creates a contractual type of agreement. The City staff is smarter than that and that's why the motion was never passed, but I see don't put that in the category of "diplomatic" by any means.

I don't see how any of that make it any less "diplomatic". They made a proposal to the city, and the city said no (and as you say, probably for good reason. something like this should be thoroughly reviewed). So, MOOSE can now go back, change some things, gather more information and make another proposal to the city later on. What part of this do you see as non-diplomatic?

As for the rest of your examples, yes, Joseph Potvin has said that he talks to a lot of people, that simply makes him a salesman.

I get the feeling that you don't really like salesmen. But again, what part of this makes MOOSE any less diplomatic in the actions mentioned above?

Originally Posted by Allandale25

^ Key word: "Once".

*"at least once".

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

So, MOOSE can now go back, change some things, gather more information and make another proposal to the city later on.

You keep ascribing strategies to Moose that are not reflected in their activities. Moose has been peddling the same plan for 6 years, they have not given any indication in anything they have put out (or any comment their Director General has written on this forum) that they have any interest in changing some things, gathering information or making another proposal to the city. What you think Moose should do and what Moose does are not the same thing.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by acottawa

You keep ascribing strategies to Moose that are not reflected in their activities. Moose has been peddling the same plan for 6 years, they have not given any indication in anything they have put out (or any comment their Director General has written on this forum) that they have any interest in changing some things, gathering information or making another proposal to the city. What you think Moose should do and what Moose does are not the same thing.

You are correct, but I think we both realize that a lot of what MOOSE is currently doing isn't going to be able to get them very far. If they realistically want a better chance at getting any kind of city approval or any other approval from other municipalities and such, then it would seem that they'd have to change their proposal slightly to be more "palatable", if you will, to them.

Regarding MOOSE's proposal to the city, I don't think they've tried going back to the city with an identical offer, or any other formal offer at all yet. So in that case, I wouldn't say they've been peddling the same idea for the last 4 years, at least not directly to the city (in the form of proposals like the one that's been linked to).

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

You are correct, but I think we both realize that a lot of what MOOSE is currently doing isn't going to be able to get them very far. If they realistically want a better chance at getting any kind of city approval or any other approval from other municipalities and such, then it would seem that they'd have to change their proposal slightly to be more "palatable", if you will, to them.

Regarding MOOSE's proposal to the city, I don't think they've tried going back to the city with an identical offer, or any other formal offer at all yet. So in that case, I wouldn't say they've been peddling the same idea for the last 4 years, at least not directly to the city (in the form of proposals like the one that's been linked to).

Mr. Potvin told the CBC in 2011 he met with local mayors to present plans.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/ottawa-area-commuter-rail-gathers-steam-1.1003316

You will note from the map in the 2011 article that the plan is almost identical, except there are a few changes in the terminal stations.

When the governments didn't provide money (which was the business plan in 2011) Moose came up with the "property powered rail" concept, although none of the plans changed.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Mr. Potvin told the CBC in 2011 he met with local mayors to present plans.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/ottawa-area-commuter-rail-gathers-steam-1.1003316

You will note from the map in the 2011 article that the plan is almost identical, except there are a few changes in the terminal stations.

When the governments didn't provide money (which was the business plan in 2011) Moose came up with the "property powered rail" concept, although none of the plans changed.

Except they did change...

They came forward with a plan in 2011, presented it to municipalities, and didn't get a result. So, they changed it and went back with a modified proposal (that involved no public funding) in 2013, and didn't get a result then.

Beyond that, I don't think they've tried again yet.

[Charles5]

Topic of the Day: Transfers between lines

This one's for OCCheetos although any else with comments is welcome to join in on the discussion.

Issue: In order to get the metropolitan connectivity that Joseph Potvin is claiming, it will be necessary for some passengers to transfer from line to line. So, that begs the question, since the trains only travel on an hourly frequency, what is the best sequencing of trains to allow for minimal transfer times.

So. Starting with a simple scenario with only two trains, the one from Bristol (Green Line) and the one from Arnprior (Red Line). The transfer point would be at Greenboro. Some of the passengers on the train from Bristol will want to transfer and head North towards Bayview and beyond. Some of the passengers on the train from Arnprior will want to transfer and head East towards Tremblay and points further on.

Do you....

A. Stagger the trains so they arrive at Greenboro 30 minutes apart. In that manner it's fair and equal to everyone. The folks transferring from the Red Line to the Green Line wait 30 minutes and the folks transferring from the Green Line to the Red Line also wait 30 minutes; OR
B. Have the train from Bristol arrive first with the train from Arnprior arriving a short time after (5 min). That way folks from Bristol heading downtown would only wait 5 minutes to transfer but the folks from Arnprior heading east would have to wait 55 minutes. OR
C. Have the train from Arnprior arrive first with the Bristol train shortly thereafter. Arnprior passengers heading east would have the 5 minute wait and th Bristol passengers heading north would have to wait 55 minutes. OR
D. Something else.

Link to network map for reference purposes (link).

@OCCheetos What would you suggest?

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

Except they did change...

They came forward with a plan in 2011, presented it to municipalities, and didn't get a result. So, they changed it and went back with a modified proposal (that involved no public funding) in 2013, and didn't get a result then.

Beyond that, I don't think they've tried again yet.

But it was basically the same plan - the 2011 mOOse map looks almost identical to the 2017 map. Same conflict with the Trillium line, same obsession with the Prince of Wales bridge, and the same lines. They just projected massive demand for rail housing (without any analytical basis as far as I can tell) to match the service they wanted to provide.

[OtrainUser]

Quite frankly i have no idea why they obsess over the POW bridge. They should alter the route to go north under bank street and re-connect back to the trillium line tracks after the tunnel crosses into gatineau or they could use the Alexandria bridge for that matter.

They should alter their north-south route. If anyone can draw the kind of map im talking about it would be welcome since i have trouble doing those things.

Potvin better realize that the city will never allow MOOSE to share the tracks so he better take my idea more seriously since its more realistic to accomplish.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by acottawa

But it was basically the same plan - the 2011 mOOse map looks almost identical to the 2017 map. Same conflict with the Trillium line, same obsession with the Prince of Wales bridge, and the same lines. They just projected massive demand for rail housing (without any analytical basis as far as I can tell) to match the service they wanted to provide.

I'm not sure what argument you're trying to present now... your last post straight up contradicted itself and provided evidence against your original argument.

The funding of MOOSE's plan is a very significant change. (At least, probably from the perspective of the people who would have had to pay for it).

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by Charles5

Topic of the Day: Transfers between lines

This one's for OCCheetos although any else with comments is welcome to join in on the discussion.

Issue: In order to get the metropolitan connectivity that Joseph Potvin is claiming, it will be necessary for some passengers to transfer from line to line. So, that begs the question, since the trains only travel on an hourly frequency, what is the best sequencing of trains to allow for minimal transfer times.

So. Starting with a simple scenario with only two trains, the one from Bristol (Green Line) and the one from Arnprior (Red Line). The transfer point would be at Greenboro. Some of the passengers on the train from Bristol will want to transfer and head North towards Bayview and beyond. Some of the passengers on the train from Arnprior will want to transfer and head East towards Tremblay and points further on.

Do you....

A. Stagger the trains so they arrive at Greenboro 30 minutes apart. In that manner it's fair and equal to everyone. The folks transferring from the Red Line to the Green Line wait 30 minutes and the folks transferring from the Green Line to the Red Line also wait 30 minutes; OR
B. Have the train from Bristol arrive first with the train from Arnprior arriving a short time after (5 min). That way folks from Bristol heading downtown would only wait 5 minutes to transfer but the folks from Arnprior heading east would have to wait 55 minutes. OR
C. Have the train from Arnprior arrive first with the Bristol train shortly thereafter. Arnprior passengers heading east would have the 5 minute wait and th Bristol passengers heading north would have to wait 55 minutes. OR
D. Something else.

Link to network map for reference purposes (link).

@OCCheetos What would you suggest?

That's certainly a tough question.

A is certainly the fairest, but it obviously would suck to wait 30 minutes for a train. (But such is the nature of commuter rail )

B or C could be the ideal case depending on how passengers might actually transfer between vehicles. If, on a typical day, it turns out that 6 people transfer from Bristol -> Arnprior, but no one does the reverse then B would make more sense. But what would require a lot more data to work with.

I'm just going to throw a wild idea out for D (I fully realize that this is impossible, but). Have two platforms at Greenboro and have them both pull in one after the other and wait for each other long enough for two way transfers. 10/10 for practicality, 1/10 for possibility!



I'm assuming you're talking about the extreme case where someone would want to be going from Bristol all the way to Montebello or something, but unfortunately that's just not something MOOSE's plan can really easily optimize for (although neither GO or the RTM can with their own systems either). If they had solid data on the transfer flow between trains, they could implement a schedule that would look more like B or C, but it'd be still difficult.

Considering a less extreme case where someone just wants to get from Bristol do somewhere in Gatineau, they could get off at Greenboro and transfer to either of the other MOOSE lines, which could be staggered to every 20 minutes (or less) instead of 30 minutes.

(And, the special case where they only want to get to Bayview: they could also just go to Tremblay and catch the LRT too)

These are all also assuming that the green line will actually stop at Greenboro, which I'm still not sure how it would..

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

Quite frankly i have no idea why they obsess over the POW bridge. They should alter the route to go north under bank street and re-connect back to the trillium line tracks after the tunnel crosses into gatineau or they could use the Alexandria bridge for that matter.

They should alter their north-south route. If anyone can draw the kind of map im talking about it would be welcome since i have trouble doing those things.

Potvin better realize that the city will never allow MOOSE to share the tracks so he better take my idea more seriously since its more realistic to accomplish.

I think they "obsess" over the PoW bridge because it's literally the only (realistic) way for a train to cross the river in the city.

Gaining access to the PoW bridge is infinitely more likely than MOOSE tunneling under Bank Street (let alone the Ottawa River) or relaying track on the Alexandria Bridge.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

I'm not sure what argument you're trying to present now... your last post straight up contradicted itself and provided evidence against your original argument.

The funding of MOOSE's plan is a very significant change. (At least, probably from the perspective of the people who would have had to pay for it).

The thing they want to do hasn't changed, despite all of your comments that Moose's adaptability. Their imaginary source of funds has changed from "surely the federal government will pay a billion dollars to benefit a few hundred commuters" to "surely tens of thousands of people want to pay enormous premiums in rent and property cost for the privilege of sitting on a train for two hours a day."

If I went around telling people I was buying a Ferrari and telling people I am going to get government grants to pay for it, and then I tell people I am going to buy a Ferrari and gofundme is going to pay for it then have I come up with a new plan?

[Charles5]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

...

@OCCheetos

You're line of thought is similar to mine. Unfortunately it gets more complicated as you add more lines into the equation.

Looking at the three lines. It is highly unlikely that anyone who was heading east or west would transfer and go in the opposite direction at Greenboro. For example, going from Arnprior to Smith Falls via Greenboro is highly improbable.

So, we really only need to look at three trains, and not six. The red line and the purple line both travel the north-south portion along the Trillium Line. Therefore the logical solution in my mind is to stagger those by 30 minutes so that you balance the traffic along that portion of the route as much as possible. (Edit: You probably need to look at 4 lines since the green line from both directions may want to go north. I haven't included that in my discussion, it just gets even messier.)

Unfortunately, that now means that anyone who needs to transfer from red to purple or vice versa is stuck waiting for 30 minutes.

Transferring from the green line is the more complicated one, both physically and schedule wise. As you said, the best way to do it would be to look at traffic flow and make the shortest time for the greatest number of people. Unfortunately that really sucks for the others who then have to wait the better part of an hour to do a transfer.

The general conclusion I'm making is that any trip that requires a transfer will almost of necessity mean that there will be a lengthy wait between trains.

July 18, 2017, Ottawa Citizen: "Potvin sees a future commuter who rides into downtown Ottawa from Arnprior, heads up to Wakefield after work for a show at the Black Sheep Inn, then heads home to Arnprior, all by commuter train."

Using the assumption that the transfers between the red lines and purple lines are 30 minutes, how long do you think that the trip Joseph Potvin uses as his example would take?

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

I think they "obsess" over the PoW bridge because it's literally the only (realistic) way for a train to cross the river in the city.

Gaining access to the PoW bridge is infinitely more likely than MOOSE tunneling under Bank Street (let alone the Ottawa River) or relaying track on the Alexandria Bridge.

But why is it necessary for a train to cross the river? (Other than the so-called "loophole" which is complete and utter nonsense). Moose's plan is to bring passengers to a place where they can transfer to local transit to get downtown. There are numerous intersections of the rail lines Moose plans to use and local transit that goes downtown.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The thing they want to do hasn't changed, despite all of your comments that Moose's adaptability. Their imaginary source of funds has changed from "surely the federal government will pay a billion dollars to benefit a few hundred commuters" to "surely tens of thousands of people want to pay enormous premiums in rent and property cost for the privilege of sitting on a train for two hours a day."

If I went around telling people I was buying a Ferrari and telling people I am going to get government grants to pay for it, and then I tell people I am going to buy a Ferrari and gofundme is going to pay for it then have I come up with a new plan?

Well... yes?

But why is it necessary for a train to cross the river? (Other than the so-called "loophole" which is complete and utter nonsense). Moose's plan is to bring passengers to a place where they can transfer to local transit to get downtown. There are numerous intersections of the rail lines Moose plans to use and local transit that goes downtown.

As I mentioned in a previous post, MOOSE doesn't "need" the PoW bridge to become an interprovincial railway. The Fitzroy to Pontiac bridge would accomplish that without any kind of trouble.

MOOSE is proposing contiguous transit lines. Sure, MOOSE could just bring passengers from the Ontario side to Greenboro, have them transfer to the O-Train, then transfer back to a MOOSE train at Bayview to get into Gatineau (where their workplace might be) but at that point, you'd have to realize that anyone using this transit service would wonder "Why do I need to transfer twice along a single continuous piece of rail??"
That's what MOOSE is proposing anyway.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by Charles5

July 18, 2017, Ottawa Citizen: "Potvin sees a future commuter who rides into downtown Ottawa from Arnprior, heads up to Wakefield after work for a show at the Black Sheep Inn, then heads home to Arnprior, all by commuter train."

Using the assumption that the transfers between the red lines and purple lines are 30 minutes, how long do you think that the trip Joseph Potvin uses as his example would take?

Elaborating on my point from earlier a bit more, MOOSE is optimized well enough as a commuter rail system (bringing people in from areas around Ottawa and Gatineau and into the city, where they may work), but otherwise, yeah, getting around by MOOSE between branches likely isn't very quick. Arnprior to Wakefield by hourly train would probably take a while longer than by car (which is ~1hr 15min)

Now, the other day I was trying to do some calculations in relation to the Arnprior -> Wakefield trip (after your post on UrbanToronto) and I calculated that a typical fast train (going around ~130km/h at top speed) would take roughly 35 minutes to go from Arnprior to Bells Corners (this includes station wait times and the time it would take a train to accelerate to its top speed). I never finished the calculations because I thought I had made some sort of error in my math (although I haven't found one yet) but I'd estimate that it would take around an hour to get from Arprior to Bayview, not 1.5 hours.
(This is assuming MOOSE upgrades tracks to Class 4 or 5 along the Arnprior branch which currently is a Class 1 track)

Edit: After going through the rest of the math, it would take around 1:16 to reach Bayview and those are best case scenario calculations. So 1.5 hours is reasonable.

[Charles5]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

..Now, the other day I was trying to do some calculations in relation to the Arnprior -> Wakefield trip (after your post on UrbanToronto) and I calculated that a typical fast train (going around ~130km/h at top speed) would take roughly 35 minutes to go from Arnprior to Bells Corners (this includes station wait times and the time it would take a train to accelerate to its top speed). I never finished the calculations because I thought I had made some sort of error in my math (although I haven't found one yet) but I'd estimate that it would take around an hour to get from Arprior to Bayview, not 1.5 hours.
(This is assuming MOOSE upgrades tracks to Class 4 or 5 along the Arnprior branch which currently is a Class 1 track)

Are you taking into account the current Ellwood subdivision where max speeds are between 35-50km/hr, and the Beachburg subdivision which is at 60-90km/hr. Much of it is single tracked as well meaning you'd have to account for passing tracks etc (unless the plan is to double track everything all along the route).

I'm just trying to make the point that virtually everyone I know would chose to drive vs take the train in that scenario. I'll accept your 1hr 15 min to drive, but since the train is at least 2.5 hrs and probably closer to 3 hrs or even more (especially if you take into account wait time in Wakefield and transfer time between lines). And yet Joseph Potvin uses that specific example of why this railway network is such a great idea.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by Charles5

Are you taking into account the current Ellwood subdivision where max speeds are between 35-50km/hr, and the Beachburg subdivision which is at 60-90km/hr. Much of it is single tracked as well meaning you'd have to account for passing tracks etc (unless the plan is to double track everything all along the route).

I'm just trying to make the point that virtually everyone I know would chose to drive vs take the train in that scenario. I'll accept your 1hr 15 min to drive, but since the train is at least 2.5 hrs and probably closer to 3 hrs or even more (especially if you take into account wait time in Wakefield and transfer time between lines). And yet Joseph Potvin uses that specific example of why this railway network is such a great idea.

For the Ellwood subdivision I just used existing Trillium Line run times and added a few minutes for good measure. The O-Trains do 65-70km/h in some sections of the line (at least from what I've measured with my phone and a speedometer app).

I made an edit to my post^ about some of the inaccuracies of my calculations.

But yes, I agree that going between branches on the MOOSE system would be rather slow.

[Charles5]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

MOOSE is proposing contiguous transit lines. Sure, MOOSE could just bring passengers from the Ontario side to Greenboro, have them transfer to the O-Train, then transfer back to a MOOSE train at Bayview to get into Gatineau (where their workplace might be) but at that point, you'd have to realize that anyone using this transit service would wonder "Why do I need to transfer twice along a single continuous piece of rail??"

The issue is rather pointless as there are almost no commuters that travel from the extremes of the lines in Ontario to work in Quebec. As examples, according to StatsCan 2016 census, there were 0 from Smith Falls, 0 from North Glengarry, and only 20 people from Arnprior that actually worked in Gatineau.

[Charles5]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

a) The city has not included the PoW bridge in its three-year plan for some reason, which could indicate that they don't intend to keep it as a railway. However, they have not gone through the proper procedures to abandon the railway. That combined with the fact that the city has maintained that they intend to keep the bridge as a railway for the future (which contradicts what is stated in their three-year plan)

You may wish to check out para 2.2 (b) of the City's response to CTA which clearly indicates that the 3 year plan now and in the past has stated the intention to retain the POW bridge.
https://www.letsgomoose.ca/wp-content/up...Show-Cause-Response-Case-No-17-01....pdf