Moose Rail (National Capital Region)

[steveintoronto]

They say it’s going to drive up the property values so much it’s going to pay for itself. No, it’s not.”

A fascinating quote. Except that's not the dynamic at play. It's the *demand* from communities built on what is now undervalued land. Consider the costs assigned to builders in an urban area for roads and transit infrastructure, let alone taxes raised annually from there on. (If they are rentals, that is in the rent, if the houses are owned, the owner pays) That's fair and reasonable...*if* the return per cost is realized.

Now say you build communities where planning regs don't require an up front charge for roads sparsely used, let alone later assessments on that for road and transportation infrastructure. The builder supplies those, with far less parking and less road capacity as a result, and instead, invests into the cost of transit infrastructure to replace it. Surveys have shown that the demand for cars and parking, let alone the daily driving slog into the city, is a low priority for this upcoming generation (within cities, even Calgary is displaying this characteristic now) and sales increase as a result.

I can certainly understand why that's abstract for some. Taking your bike to work on the train, even during rush-hour? My God, next they'll be giving women equality...

 

[Allandale25]

A fascinating quote. Except that's not the dynamic at play. It's the *demand* from communities built on what is now undervalued land.

"Those astronauts weren't heroes, they wore the wrong socks".

Just to be clear, you didn't properly quote my post. The text you included is from Professor Lee, not me.

 

[kEiThZ]

The Moose folks estimate it would be $50 million. It's referenced in the September 2016 article noted above.

A promise to pay without an actual timeline is useless.

This article is interesting because for the first time I've seen operating costs are listed at $200 million year.

Forget the $200 million in operating costs. What's the capex and how much real estate will they have to put in these towns to recover that? Depending on the state of the tracks, demands of corridor owners, issues with zoning and NIMBYs, building 400 km and 50 stations would be billions. How many homes do you have to put in Wakefield and Smiths Falls to recover that. And why the heck would the province (on both sides) want this? Those far flung communities mean more costs for the provincial authorities, when Ottawa and Gatineau aren't exactly running out of land to develop any time soon. We're talking easily a quarter million homes just to have enough riders to help pay construction and operating costs for this. For comparison, the Ottawa CMA is at 1.3 million.

I assume that means they hope the CTA issues it's decision by then on the bridge issue it has taken the City of Ottawa to the CTA on.

I don't get why anybody thinks this will be huge for MOOSE. The CTA merely gets the city to fulfill their maintenance obligations. But that does nothing at all for MOOSE actually getting access to the corridor and the bridge. The city could easily initiate the administrative process to decertify the bridge and other portions as a rail line.

This comment in the article by Professor Lee touches on some of the items we've been discussing in this thread

The numbers look funny. Imagine that. Until they release better numbers, I'm with the Professor on this. Looks to me like a proposal to boost real estate values and then offload an expensive (and unnecessary) rail operation on to the province. They are proposing a system on the scale of GO Transit in Toronto. And Toronto had a population nearly double what Ottawa has today, when GO Transit was launched. Why any provincial authority (on either side, and people really are forgetting there are two provincial governments who have a much bigger stake than the City of Ottawa) would want to support budget busting sprawl is beyond me. Let alone in a place where there are no real land availability constraints on development in this lifetime and the provincial governments have just plunked down several billion for LRTs and BRTs to put the majority of the population within 5 km of an RT corridor.

 

[Allandale25]

A promise to pay without an actual timeline is useless.

This Citizen article from yesterday has a quote from a Moose proponent with a higher range to upgrade the bridge:

"“It cannot be done unless there is one section that economically makes sense to take it up first,” he said. “That is from Gatineau to Bayview. It’s also the most expensive one because the Prince of Wales bridge requires $50 … $60 … $70 million in capital expenditure.”" (Mir Ali, president of Consortia N.A. which partnered with LeMine Investment Group on the letter of intent.)


http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...ailway-plan-study-attracts-investor-attention

 

[kEiThZ]

This Citizen article from yesterday has a quote from a Moose proponent with a higher range to upgrade the bridge

It's obvious that the bridge is critical since the only way they avoid provincial regulations is to have every line cross the river. But for investors, that means huge amounts of capital upfront (unless the government picks up the tab), which in turn means the first line has to have a ton of development to succeed. With the amount of real estate that need to make this work.....

Also, let's dispense with the fantasy that this will all be transit oriented development. Ain't nobody moving to Arnprior to live in a condo by the station. Anybody moving to the exurbs is moving to gain space. Which means these towns will sprawl out. And since, none of them have any notable transit, the MOOSE stations will be fed by giant parking lots. The idea that we'll see dense towns built around these stations is laughably ridiculous.

This quote is also quite fanciful, "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."

Last I checked they were proposing a handful of trains. They won't have anywhere near the frequencies to make that vision practical.

Like I said, I'm waiting to see what the two provinces say. Ultimately, the bills are going to hit them more than anyone else. Ottawa ratepayers can avoid most of the tab here and push it up to Queen's Park (though I personally think Ottawa shouldn't pitch in a dime). Are Queen's Park and Quebec willing to push essentially all development over the next few decades out to the exurbs after just spending billions on transit in the urban and suburban core?

I do sympathize with their core frustration though. Cities the size of Ottawa would have some sort of EMU or DMU regional rail service in other parts of the world. The difference, however, is that they wouldn't be trying to direct a massive amount of population growth to the himelands to pay for a rail line.

 

[Allandale25]

Like I said, I'm waiting to see what the two provinces say. Ultimately, the bills are going to hit them more than anyone else. Ottawa ratepayers can avoid most of the tab here and push it up to Queen's Park (though I personally think Ottawa shouldn't pitch in a dime). Are Queen's Park and Quebec willing to push essentially all development over the next few decades out to the exurbs after just spending billions on transit in the urban and suburban core?

The one thing I haven't seen a lot of coverage of is what the municipal elected officials, or residents, on the Hull side think of all this. Are they in favour? How does it fit with their transit master plans? Also, isn't it the municipal government in the Wakefield area that's trying to get rid of the track? If they don't have any interest in supporting commuter rail to their area, isn't that a challenge for Moose? I realize from another article posted that the MP for the Hull area seems to be in favour. Since Moose claims they don't need any public funds, does that mean he doesn't need to ask the Minister of Finance or Transportation for financial support?

I note that a lot of cities have had announcements where their share of the federal gas tax was announced and there was a specific list of projects it went to. I believe it was based on ridership. Has anyone seen what Hull decided to fund?

 

[kEiThZ]

@Allandale25

Gatineau is expanding the Rapibus BRT. So I believe their federal funding is probably aimed at that effort.

Their MP and the mayor have been supportive of pursuing LRT and would likely want the bridge as part of that:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/tramway-ottawa-gatineau-proposal-1.3769612

I will add, it's been interesting to see the difference in opinions between here (UT) and SSP. The latter has lots of Ottawa residents in their SSP Ottawa forum. And with few exceptions, most are dismissing this proposal, while pointing out several flaws beyond what I've noted here.

 

[Joseph Potvin]

Moose Files Affidavit in Quebec Superior Court RE: Injunction against the dismantling of Chelsea track.
https://www.letsgomoose.ca/moose-co...rotect-essential-railways-in-canadas-capital/

Take a stand in this 150th year since Confederation. Choose one of the following:
[ ] Canada: A country of civic-minded entrepreneurs.
[ ] Canada: A country of cynically-minded saboteurs.

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

 

[Allandale25]

@Allandale25


I will add, it's been interesting to see the difference in opinions between here (UT) and SSP. The latter has lots of Ottawa residents in their SSP Ottawa forum. And with few exceptions, most are dismissing this proposal, while pointing out several flaws beyond what I've noted here.

Link available?

 

[steveintoronto]

steveintoronto said: ↑
A fascinating quote. Except that's not the dynamic at play. It's the *demand* from communities built on what is now undervalued land.

Just to be clear, you didn't properly quote my post. The text you included is from Professor Lee, not me.

Which is exactly why I stated "A fascinating quote" and not "Allandale states".

 

[steveintoronto]

Up today at the Ottawa Sun:

Editorial: Sometimes, privatization is exactly the right track
First posted: Saturday, July 22, 2017 05:24 PM EDT | Updated: Saturday, July 22, 2017 05:31 PM EDT

The fenced-off Prince of Wales Bridge across the Ottawa River is featured in the Moose Consortium proposal for interprovincial rail service.
“I’m an economist. It bugs me when I see perfectly valuable resources sitting there unused,” Joseph Potvin says.
Which explains his brainchild – a company called Moose Consortium – and its vision for a privately financed rail system knitting together small communities in eastern Ontario and western Quebec. This mini-interprovincial rail system would use what are now abandoned rail lines, and be linked by the currently unused Prince of Wales Bridge over the Ottawa River.
Now, we know what you’re thinking: This sounds utterly fanciful. And it may well be. But how refreshing to hear someone other than government talk about a commuter rail network. How refreshing to think that LRT, as important as it is, might not be the only way you could offer practical rail service to people who want to get around the region.
Here’s the pitch from Potvin and Moose: a privately financed system with six branch lines that include Bristol, Wakefield and Montebello in Quebec; then Arnprior, Smiths Falls and Alexandria in Ontario. The network would partially repurpose old or abandoned lines. Yes, they do exist.
A group of investors tied to India, Singapore and China says it will offer initial technical expertise and some limited financing to see how solid the proposal truly is. No one is at the stage of a full-blown feasibility study.
That’s logical: Who’d rush forward on such a plan without knowing basics such as the state of the old rail, the potential demographic that could be served, what sort of price point would be contemplated, whether local and provincial governments would even endorse or allow it, or whether they’d contribute to infrastructure, such as building a modest train station or refurbishing an old, abandoned one? And would governments be able to reach any working arrangement with a private company over the Prince of Wales Bridge, surely the most expensive part of any plan?
What we do like, very much, is the imagination and sheer entrepreneurial gumption involved in thinking up such a plan.
Canadians habitually assume that transportation infrastructure projects can only be planned and financed by governments. The LRT is, of course, an example of this, and everyone looks forward to seeing it operational next year. But not everything has to be government-initiated. Private companies can sometimes accomplish big projects more quickly because they are not as bound by red tape as government is. The profit motive can be a powerful tool for getting things done on time and on budget.
Potvin’s dream includes 400 kilometres of tracks in total, which seems hugely ambitious. Understandably, there is skepticism from analysts. All the same, we hope the money rolls in for that full-scale study. It’ll tell everyone whether rail can thread this region together more tightly.
Keep the project on track, at least for a while.

http://www.ottawasun.com/2017/07/22/editorial-sometimes-privatization-is-exactly-the-right-track

 

[Allandale25]

Which is exactly why I stated "A fascinating quote" and not "Allandale states".

You missed the first quote symbol which is why I clarified it was the Professor's quote.

 

[kEiThZ]

I wonder what the Chinese investors will say once they look at the population numbers in play (< 30 000 at exurban station towns), the level of investment required (apparently up to $400 million as per their Chelsea track court filing), and the fact that the city owns the rail corridor that has to form the spine of their operation. And ironically, property powered rail works in all those investors home countries because the road network is usually sub-par there and/or very congested. Not so in the Ottawa Valley where there are decent roads and they are uncontested for most of the drive. It'll be interesting to see what their initial reports say.

Even sharing is going to be quite challenging when they're proposing running massive double-decker trains while OC Transpo runs DMUs on there. I can't see Transport Canada being all that enthused about such an arrangement. Boggles my mind why Potvin et al. didn't at least propose DMUs.

Link available?

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=140086

 

[kEiThZ]

Take a stand in this 150th year since Confederation. Choose one of the following:
[ ] Canada: A country of civic-minded entrepreneurs.
[ ] Canada: A country of cynically-minded saboteurs.

Somehow I think courts and government agencies do not give a rat's behind about guilt trips.

 

[Joseph Potvin]

I wonder what ... investors will say once they look at the population numbers in play

kEiThZ,

As you are convinced that the Property Powered Rail Open Market Development Model (PPR) is unworkable where service would include semi-rural areas, please share your specific critique. By now I presume you'll have read the whitepaper so you will already know that the only density that matters in a PPR undertaking is within the 0.8 km of each station. Given that πr2 gives 2 square km, and in the Greater National Capital Region we're planning on about 50 stations, you already know that this is a 100 square km property value optimization project (i.e. the train is just the method). So, when you do the arithmetic on, say, a 5% average increment in property income and asset value (assuming, say, 20% of each circle is unusable for generating value-added, and assuming 30% of the usable area involves rental properties), do your aggregate numbers across the 100 square km come out to anywhere near enough to run a train and to make a profit at the same time? Since you're joining Prof. Ian Lee in drawing conclusions about the core rationale without any need to reserve judgement until the feasibility study, may we please take a look at your preliminary numbers? (This invitation is open to anyone, of course. ...well except Allandale25, unless he promises to read the whitepaper.)

Boggles my mind why Potvin et al. didn't at least propose DMUs.

Since MOOSE has not yet selected trains, how did you conclude what we've not chosen?