Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin
Not in our model, which is based on property value-added and service quality, not direct passenger volume. Our approach is to make the railway passenger experience such that people will really prefer to take the train, which is a very different approach to planning only for those who for one reason or another have to take the train.
|
And this leads into some of the main criticisms I have of the project.
Nothing about the vision indicates that it will be some superb, modern, passenger experience. It is some used diesel locomotives and bilevel coaches with some fancy looking bus shelters that look vaguely reminiscent of Central Station in Ottawa. When I look at Moose, I don't see the Porter of commuter rail. I don't see fast, comfortable, modern trains. I don't see a network where getting to all the major employment areas in Ottawa is even easy. It looks like the first iteration of the O-Train back in 2001.
And even then, you can make the train stations like Porter lounges. You could use sleek, new, Euro styled DMUs. The trains could be fitted with ultra-fast wifi, and stations could have the finest coffee in the NCR. You could basically turn commuter rail into something similar to UP Express in Toronto.
But none of that would matter. At the end of the day people will choose their method of commuting based on cost, time, and convenience. If a train is slower than driving, that is a point against the system. If you have to (and Moose riders will) transfer to public transit once you get to Ottawa because major employment nodes are not served, that is an inconvenience. If it doesn't save much money, or worse, ends up costing more (once you factor in fares and however much they are paying from increased property values), that is a point against it.
People make very rational, calculated decisions when it comes to commuting. Most people are going to pick the fastest way, so that they can have more free time at the end of their work day.
And the notion that planning is only done for people who have to take a train or public transit is nonsense. Yes, there are some people who rely on the service, and it is great that they have that option so that they have more opportunities for employment so they can improve their lives. But a lot of people make the choice to use trains, subways, LRT, or busses, because it makes sense. Because it is the fastest, cheapest, and/or most convenient way to get to work. You could even make the argument that in Ottawa, transit planning is far more centered around those that have a choice, as opposed to those that do not.
It wouldn't be hard to be see what peoples thoughts about commuting are either. You could poll people with a set of questions to see what trade offs they are willing to make. Would you rather a 20 minute commute, but had to stand, or a 40 minute commute, but got to sit? What if the sitting commute was 30 minutes, which would you pick then? If taking a commuter train and then public transit was half the cost of driving, but took longer and involved at least 1 transfer, would you switch? Would you rather a 30 minute commute by bus, or a 40 minute commute by LRT? Would you rather a 30 minute commute by a single bus, or a 20 minute commute that involved LRT and then a transfer to a bus?
And those are only a few of the questions you could ask. The point to all this is that experience and branding is helpful. But unless you can provide commuters with a clear advantage (be it price, speed, or simplicity) none of the glitz matters. And right now, the vision and plan for Moose does not seem to hit any of those marks (maybe it could on price, but we haven't seen those numbers yet).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin
This narrow market reach results from the O-Train having been politically blocked from running its intended route through to Gatineau. Even today, Capital Railway's certificate of fitness says that it operates through to Quebec.
|
The problem with the O-Train going over to Gatineau is that it doesn't actually serve any meaningful employment centres or neighborhoods to make it worthwhile. It totally skirts around the downtown area and means that anyone going to work there would have to transfer to a bus in order to get anywhere meaningful. If you work in Gatineau, or are commuting to Ottawa, a bus would still be a better option even with the O-Train extended across.
From Bayview to the Airport the Trillium line has an incredible amount of value. And if the city had unlimited funds I am sure they would have started upgrading it to a two-track electrified system. But the Confederation line is far more important right now. At the end of the day plans are allowed to change. The O-Train started out as "well there is a rail line there so what the hell" kind of project. It (the O-Train system as a whole) has evolved into something more modern, and urban, since those early days.
There is no political interference. A half baked idea went into the bin. That is thoughtful, rational planning at work.
----------------------
I still have lots more questions for you but there are two in particular I would be curious to get an answer on.
1. Why does the Moose network need to be built all at once? I know economies of scale is referenced. But can you explain that in more detail. Are there cost savings for building it all at once? Are there cost savings from an operations standpoint? Maybe I am missing something, but I don't understand why it has to be an all or nothing approach, as opposed to a phased plan?
2. Is VIA working with you, or simply saying they think regional rail is a good idea and that is about it? I see that you said you are getting generally positive feedback from them. What is that feedback? What are they saying that is less than positive? Have they unequivocally said that there is no problem using their tracks? Have they inquired about using any of the other lines you want to rehabilitate/build?
Prev
Linear Mode
