John Bisan
New Member
RER On Corridor RFP to be released around June
|
|
|
GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
crs1026
Superstar
Stay tuned for the upcoming provincial budget. I expect we will see the numbers then.
- Paul
steveintoronto
Superstar
"Everything's open to review"...brace yourself.
Here's what I expect: Private Initiative to fill the vacuum. It won't even be solicited by the present regime, it will be proposed by consortiums, most likely through the federal infrastructure bank. Think REM in Montreal, albeit a more robust rolling stock.
Last edited:
steveintoronto
Superstar
It's essential in my view, and the Georgetown Corridor, but Ford Cantation Nation have an exquisite 'get out of jail free' card by their terms, and it's the Quebec example with REM. I can't believe they're not going to use it. They've already resorted to the "Notwithstanding Clause". They'll do whatever it takes to suck the oxygen out of the room. Oxygen is money.
Neutrino
Senior Member
The infra bank may help fund much needed projects in Toronto, but let's not forget maintenance. As recently revealed, the TTC needs $23 billion to essentially just keep the lights on. Is there a strong business case to be made for private enterprise funding maintenance? It would appear that grand new announcements are "sexier" than nuts and bolts maintenance. And it seems to me that the TTC will still need a stable and substantial revenue source for SOGR, the backlog for which will only grow if private enterprise helps build more transit lines. That being said, I assume contracts will be structured to ensure the private consortium will also fund ongoing maintenance for whatever they build. However, what of current SOGR needs on existing infra?
steveintoronto
Superstar
All excellent points. I see it being essential that these questions be answered and the context more widely discussed, because like it or not, it's not a matter of 'if this coming', it's 'when' and 'how much'?.
First question:
There's an excellent case to be made in most instances for contracting out maintenance. That's already here and now, but needs a lot more discussion.
Second:
That will all be part of the contract, and by far, again in most instances for the higher tech maintenance, best those who build it, and own it, maintain it. The advantage there is that it's in the interest of the owners to protect their investment. What's up in the air is whether, like CP and CN, they continue owning the asset, or if it reverts to the 'commonwealth' after a certain amount of time, like Hwy 407. (which is just a lease)
Third:
This shouldn't be affected. I highly suspect when Ford team see the choices in front of them, they won't upload anything. Consider this from their stated ideology ("subways, subways, subways" besides, which is just maniacal ranting): If Enterprise can go around them, and deal with only the Feds (at arm's length, which the Feds will also like, through the InfraBank, but the Feds get credit for it in the Public's eye) then it gives QP far more reason to step back rather than forward.
They will have the perfect excuse, even dealing with their own sycophants, to say: "It's out of our hands, but we will consider being part of that particular consortium project".
I have to repeat, and only a few will take issue with this: In light of the attitude and approach the QP Cons are taking now, and will continue to take, things don't look rosy, and the vision is precarious at best.
I'd much rather trust a consortium under the aegis of the InfraBank who have the Feds at their back to judge situations on a case-by-case basis for a business plan. The plan comes in under a considered threshold to be profitable and sustainable? Then the Feds and/or the Province can step in with a contribution of size to gain voting shares on the board for the building of the project, and in the lease to run the operation, or in part if the lease is private also, then a subsidy determined by contract for operating expenses is also included.
It would behoove VIA Rail and CN/CP to also partake in such consortiums, with agreed priority for passenger of course, but now we're getting down to nuts and bolts. Will discuss that further in an appropriate string if opened at this site. I think such a string would not only host excellent discussion on this, but also educate some readers on the differences between DBFOM and the many other forms of P3, right up to totally private, with no public shareholders.
We have to get in front of this, because it's coming folks. It's already well-handled in Oz, Japan and other nations. Studies and precedents already exist.
Addendum: There's a lot of lit on-line for the Ozzie model, I've just scanned through a number, but this one is particularly neutral and analytical:
The Entrepreneur Rail Model: Funding urban rail through majority private investment in urban regeneration
The 21st century has seen an unprecedented expansion of urban rail as a response to urban congestion, low carbon mobility and as a seed for urban rege…
www.sciencedirect.com
Download PDF
See also:
Transport projects have now replaced mining infrastructure spending in Australia
New engineering and commercial construction activity increased by 12% in the last year, reaching its highest level since the start of 2016, according to the Deloitte Access Economics Investment Monitor for the December quarter. “The improvement is partly due to the fact that the overhang of...
www.businessinsider.com.au
Latter article above isn't an academic one, but it does give an overview of the scale of investment underway in Oz (a lot of it is P3, some completely private), but to put a perspective on this...what Ottawa has just paid for the Trans-Mountain Pipeline could alone build the full Missing Link to radically transform the ease of Private Finance 'buying into' GTHA rail projects.
And do it without court hearings and other very clumsy moves on the part of certain actors.
To put that into very biased and subjective terms: "They owe us" the Missing Link. What's "good for Alberta" has to apply even more for Ontario, that no matter how you cut it, provides a much greater slice of GDP. Oddly, the Ont-Cons are very silent on that. I blame dogma myself.
https://en.wikipedia.org/.../List_of_Canadian_provinces_and_territories_by_gross_dome...
At the very least, the Feds could put their share required under the Railways Relocations...Act into the Infra-Bank to spur private investment for the remaining 50%. It is guaranteed Section 92 status under the Constitution and various acts, Transportation, Railway Acts over the years, and used some 400 times already in Canada's history to be "Federally Regulated" "for the general advantage of Canada". And the cherry on the cake is that it's been tested and accepted by the Supreme Court many times, also to cover "street railways and tramways" if so desired.
Example (there are many more decisions that quote the Acts)
Let Ford be hoisted by his own differential! We can work around him. If we pay the piper, we can choose who we wish to pipe.
Last edited:
rbt
Senior Member
A few more IO tidbits on GO RER:
canada.constructconnect.com
It also appears IO will be doing a whole lot more tenders in the future, including handling the smaller stuff, on behalf of other departments.
New government, new way of delivering infrastructure: IO - constructconnect.com - Daily Commercial News
Since being elected less than a year ago, Ontario’s Conservative government is aiming to make it easier to deliver infrastructure projects across the province, says the president of project delivery at Infrastructure Ontario (IO). “This government has ta
canada.constructconnect.com
“The one thing I can say from my vantage point right now, even though we have a Conservative government and they are watching their pennies, they are also willing to invest in infrastructure.”
...
Transit is the major focus, Gauer noted, with the GO Regional Express Rail expansion being the big one coming down the pipe.
“Those who have been bidding the work have seen about a dozen early works contracts through us but there are many more smaller projects that are being done through direct delivery or traditional delivery through Metrolinx itself,” said Gauer.
“The big one is really the expansion of the electrification. It’s going to be a new type of contract. In the past we said here is the scope, go build it and give us your best price. On this one we’re saying we want you to operate a railway for 30 years, this is what we think you need to build to make it happen.
It also appears IO will be doing a whole lot more tenders in the future, including handling the smaller stuff, on behalf of other departments.
raptor
Senior Member
rbt
Senior Member
Maybe, but it's also possible sending everything through IO could slightly shorten delays by eliminating the "do we tender this direct or via IO?" decision process.
It's pretty clear Metrolinx struggles to write and enforce quality tenders. I don't know if IO can fix that or not, but Metrolinx needs quite a bit of help.
steveintoronto
Superstar
Read further:A few more IO tidbits on GO RER:
New government, new way of delivering infrastructure: IO - constructconnect.com - Daily Commercial News
Since being elected less than a year ago, Ontario’s Conservative government is aiming to make it easier to deliver infrastructure projects across the province, says the president of project delivery at Infrastructure Ontario (IO). “This government has ta
“The one thing I can say from my vantage point right now, even though we have a Conservative government and they are watching their pennies, they are also willing to invest in infrastructure.”...Transit is the major focus, Gauer noted, with the GO Regional Express Rail expansion being the big one coming down the pipe.“Those who have been bidding the work have seen about a dozen early works contracts through us but there are many more smaller projects that are being done through direct delivery or traditional delivery through Metrolinx itself,” said Gauer.“The big one is really the expansion of the electrification. It’s going to be a new type of contract. In the past we said here is the scope, go build it and give us your best price. On this one we’re saying we want you to operate a railway for 30 years, this is what we think you need to build to make it happen.
It also appears IO will be doing a whole lot more tenders in the future, including handling the smaller stuff, on behalf of other departments.
The "P3" was perhaps somewhat subtle?
Now I'm very much in favour of Private Investment, I see it as the only way forward at this time, but not by the likes of the leaking Ford crankcase grease pan...
So by-pass Metrolinx altogether. In fact, by-pass Queen's Park altogether. Time for the InfraBank to step in "for the general advantage of Canada" and offer federal charters to massive projects to do what the pretend construction friendly (read Ford "buddies") are chomping at like piranhas for the DBFOM morsels thrown their way.
Last edited:
Transportfan
Senior Member
Anybody walking would be able to see there are still gates down though, and flashing lights...
No ? required!
SaugeenJunction
Senior Member
On the Kitchener livestream, Phil Verster said that GO Expansion (GO RER) is going before the Treasury Board this week. Would make sense, so it could be considered for the spring budget. Phil is giving some really great and in-depth answers, it's awesome.
Garuda
Active Member
Im currently at this town hall, they also touched on the $75 million investment for the Kitchener alone and building slidings between Georgetown and Kitchener for counter morning service.
There are currently 33 at grade crossings Westward from Georgetown. They touched on the need to either close or grade separate to increase service levels.
I’m really excited by the answers Phil and his team are giving. They’re going in depth. Once the video is posted, I encourage watching it.
SaugeenJunction
Senior Member
Update, in a later question Phil said he presented GO Expansion/RER to the PC Cabinet today. He mentioned how RER will save $35 billion in operational costs. He said that they were "switched on" to the idea. Also, it's still up to the bidders to determine catenary or hydrogen. Seems we're close to a decision on this.
