Bordercollie
Senior Member
Is the ROW owned by the Crown? Is there a cost to transfer that ownership?
P3s pick from a menu of items:
Design
Build
Finance
Operate
Maintain
Own
Transfer
Three main reasons for doing P3s. Optimizing projects in a way that is rare for governments to be able to do. Transferring risk (cost overruns, new technology, delays). Cost discovery (lock in and know up front cost over 30, 50 years).
The objective is since the winner makes money from building, operating and maintaining, that they can better optimize among all three to find the ‘best price’. It also ensures enough maintenance is done (government is bad at this).
A government may design to ensure low enough upfront cost at a higher operating and maintenance costs—not because they want to but because the project has a hard budget cap.
A government typically wouldn’t take a technological risk even if there is a good chance at huge maintenance and or operational savings. There is also assigning a price to various risks (geotechnical, design) so they’re known up front. Can also transfer things like demand risk (ensure project isn’t compromised in ways which reduce demand—or ensure project isn’t a white elephant).
Cost discovery is another one. A risk world wide has been lines being built and the original economic models being way optimistic. So you set a minimum service level, and ask for subsidy needed to pay for it. Then you know up front. the great thing is the builder can make decisions a government would rarely do. Like add way more service speculatively. Deep discounting to build a market. Spend more money to make a service faster because it will generate more demand. Making choices that lead to large early losses to support future profits.
I don't think much or any of the proposed route has been assembled yet (outside of the existing operating CP subdivision). The way I understand expropriation legislation, I'm not sure land can be expropriated on behalf of a non-public entity. As far as I know - and stand to be corrected - the Hwy 407 land and infrastructure is in the name of the Crown, and leased to the consortium to operate.Is the ROW owned by the Crown? Is there a cost to transfer that ownership?
Isn't most of the ROW in tact? The only thing they would need to adjust is curves. When CP abandoned the route did the ROW return to the ownership of crown?I don't think much or any of the proposed route has been assembled yet (outside of the existing operating CP subdivision). The way I understand expropriation legislation, I'm not sure land can be expropriated on behalf of a non-public entity. As far as I know - and stand to be corrected - the Hwy 407 land and infrastructure is in the name of the Crown, and leased to the consortium to operate.
Isn't most of the ROW in tact? The only thing they would need to adjust is curves. When CP abandoned the route did the ROW return to the ownership of crown?
Private railway companies can expropriate with government approval IIRC - though that's a unique clause dating back from the 19th century that essentially never gets used anymore. Back then expropriation had to be allowed for railways to get their services running as they couldn't reasonably assemble corridors otherwise.I don't think much or any of the proposed route has been assembled yet (outside of the existing operating CP subdivision). The way I understand expropriation legislation, I'm not sure land can be expropriated on behalf of a non-public entity. As far as I know - and stand to be corrected - the Hwy 407 land and infrastructure is in the name of the Crown, and leased to the consortium to operate.
Land and rights can be expropriated on behalf of corporations. In this case, it would be expropriating for a publicly owned piece of infrastructure, so even if there was an issue, there isn't in this case.I don't think much or any of the proposed route has been assembled yet (outside of the existing operating CP subdivision). The way I understand expropriation legislation, I'm not sure land can be expropriated on behalf of a non-public entity. As far as I know - and stand to be corrected - the Hwy 407 land and infrastructure is in the name of the Crown, and leased to the consortium to operate.
I think that is key; or at least for a public benefit. A developer can't expropriate a farmer off his land to build a subdivision.Land and rights can be expropriated on behalf of corporations. In this case, it would be expropriating for a publicly owned piece of infrastructure, so even if there was an issue, there isn't in this case.
Expropriating for private purposes is much more fraught in the USA.
While it is somewhat challenging terrain, the ROW was originally built using the technology of the day and aiming to accommodate the speeds of the day, both with an eye to return on investment.If there were an easy way to adjust all of those curves, the original builders would have done it. That area is full of swamps, ponds, rocks, and hills, and straightening most of it out would be prohibitively expensive.
If there were an easy way to adjust all of those curves, the original builders would have done it. That area is full of swamps, ponds, rocks, and hills, and straightening most of it out would be prohibitively expensive.
Come off it now. You're comparing 19th Century builders who simply wanted a cheap and easy route for freight and slow passenger trains, and 21st Century builders who want to create an express track. Perhaps prohibitively expensive in the 19th Century but people here with expertise have already shown how straightening a lot of the tracks curviest sections will not be that huge of a deal.
Certainly no more expensive than buying out the CN mainline.
News about the HFR
Hello,
First of all, the Integrated High Frequency Rail Project Team would like to thank you for your interest in the HFR.
This is a project that has the potential to provide an enhanced passenger experience by reducing travel times, increasing frequencies and improving on-time performance. The HFR would support regional growth and economic development by providing new services to communities. It could also contribute to Canada's greenhouse gas reduction goals by providing a greener rail system and a cleaner travel option through electrified technology.
By registering on the project website, you agree to receive the latest project information and site update alerts.
On March 9th, the Government of Canada announced the launch of an important step in the evolution of the project. The Request for Expression of Interest (RFEOI) supports the next phase of procurement for the HFR project - a multi-year process that is expected to include a Request for Qualifications and a Request for Proposal. This is an important step that signals the Government of Canada's readiness to consider the selection of a private developer partner for an innovative and collaborative approach to all aspects of the HFR project, including design, construction, financing, operations and maintenance.
We are therefore very excited to invite you to visit our new website at www.tgf-hfr.ca to learn more about the project.
Thank you again for your interest in the HFR.
The liberals made a deal with the NDP to stay in power until 2025 so hopefully we can make some progress between now and then.I just received the following email from the HFR Project Team which includes a link to their new website: