Rural Commuter Rail

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by Norman Bates

What non-paper-based things have you created to this date?

Do you mean besides this particular initiative which is, logically, in planning/feasibility phase? As any successful 'maker' will agree: "measure twice, cut once".

Originally Posted by Norman Bates

What other operators? What steps have you already taken to substantiate your statement that discussions are in fact proceeding at this time?

Well, go ahead and ask them. Substantiate your dismissiveness.

Originally Posted by Norman Bates

Speaking as someone who was a Director General with enterprise-wide infrastructure responsibilities I find that what you've written reads more like marketing rhetoric than sober facts and figures.

You're right. Most of the sober facts and figures are being shared or co-drafted with in-kind and financial investors.

I was hoping your critique of what we've published so far would be more targeted to particular errors or omissions, nor just broad cynicism.

Bug reports are welcome.

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

[Norman Bates]

Originally Posted by Athens

What non-paper based thing is there to do at this point? Start construction? Because it can't be done without all the hurdles out if the way.

Precisely why this reads as vapourware:

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

MOOSE is creating a whole-region transit integration service where none exists, filling a gap in the market.

More correctly MOOSE proposes to create, or seeks to create. But it does not appear to have created anything beyond such intents.

[ars]

It's quite refreshing to see someone directly involved with the planning of a particular project engaging users directly.

I have a couple of questions for you Mr Potvin.

To preface, the city of Ottawa and (some of?) its officials(including the mayor) seem, at best, uninterested in working with MOOSE and, at worst, hostile to even the idea of this consortium. According to a spokeswoman of Mayor Watson, he does not know of any "viable proposal from Moose". On the Quebec side, a Hull-Aylmer Liberal MP recently proclaimed the project as "exciting".

So the question is, how serious and how deep are the ongoing talks and negotiations, at this point in time, between MOOSE and each of the different levels of Government(federal, provincial and municipal)? How feasible is this project if the municipal government stonewalls it?

[Norman Bates]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

Well, go ahead and ask them. Substantiate your dismissiveness.

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

I'll ask you a second time to identify them.

Surely a person of your office understands that continued obfuscation simply adds another layer of doubt to this initiative's viability.

This is not a venue to present a marketing prospectus to potential investors. Rather we are stakeholders and willing supporters of a rail initiative with a reasonable chance of success based in reality.

To treat us otherwise would be a miscalculation.

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by ars

It's quite refreshing to see someone directly involved with the planning of a particular project engaging users directly.

Thanks.

Originally Posted by ars

How feasible is this project if the municipal government stonewalls it?

As an inter-provincial railway plan, as per Section 92(10)(a) and (c) of Canada's Constitution, our proposal goes to the Canadian Transportation Agency. The applicable rules are under the Canada Transportation Act, and the Railway Safety Act. For example, in the current spat over the track dismantlement and obstruction at Bayview, the City of Ottawa is facing the federal regulator, not MOOSE specifically. See: http://www.ottawalife.com/article/ca...y-scandals?c=9

As a railway development affecting the National Capital Region, the NCC also has a key role (e.g. under NCC Capital Urban Lands Plan).

We do not expect the opposition to last very long, unless it finds its footing in something more logically solid than "just say no".
https://www.letsgomoose.ca/wp-conten...ttawaPrint.pdf

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

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by Norman Bates

continued obfuscation simply adds another layer of doubt to this initiative's viability ... we are stakeholders and willing supporters of a rail initiative with a reasonable chance of success based in reality

MOOSE publishes plenty of information online. For example:
https://www.letsgomoose.ca/letter-of...ta-2016-06-29/

Otherwise, you've just gotta wait. The formal peer-reviewed feasibility study should be done by end of October.

If you dismiss statements that I or my colleagues make here, the onus is on you to provide contrary evidence. Instructing us to prove every statement to your particular satisfaction is not a reasonable expectation.

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

[Norman Bates]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

If you dismiss statements that I or my colleagues make here, the onus is on you to provide contrary evidence. Instructing us to prove every statement to your particular satisfaction is not a reasonable expectation.

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

Who are you? Donald Trump?

If you make a statement in a public fora it is you who had better be prepared to back it up with fact. Not alternate fact.

With every response you've simply continue to reinforce the impression that this is vapourware.

I truly wish the MOOSE initiative well and hope that it can find the right people to make its proposals a reality.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

If you dismiss statements that I or my colleagues make here, the onus is on you to provide contrary evidence. Instructing us to prove every statement to your particular satisfaction is not a reasonable expectation.

Presumably you're on this forum to try to drum up support for your initiative. That's great, but long before you joined, people raised a number of issues related to both the supply side (condition of existing infrastructure, support of various public bodies, financing) and the demand side (the number of proposed willing participants in your proposed business model, number of people willing to undertake the length of commute you are proposing).

Every startup faces lots of skepticism. Sometimes it is well-placed, sometimes it turns out to be wrong. While many of the questions you are being asked are proprietary information, you are not going to drum up support if you have few details. Perhaps it would be better to wait until your feasibility study is complete to try to engage in forums like this.

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Presumably you're on this forum to try to drum up support for your initiative.

No, actually, where there are questions or critiques of what we've published so far, we'll be pleased to answer.

Originally Posted by acottawa

That's great, but long before you joined, people raised a number of issues related to both the supply side (condition of existing infrastructure, support of various public bodies, financing) and the demand side (the number of proposed willing participants in your proposed business model, number of people willing to undertake the length of commute you are proposing).

Excellent. I hope you and others will take the time to review what's been published on our site, while formulating your questions and critiques.

Originally Posted by acottawa

Every startup faces lots of skepticism. Sometimes it is well-placed, sometimes it turns out to be wrong.

And sometimes the skeptic has to just wait, without equating that with evasiveness.

Originally Posted by acottawa

While many of the questions you are being asked are proprietary information, you are not going to drum up support if you have few details.

We're not here to "drum up support". We're here to reply to thoughtful questions about the work-in-progress plan, and to hear ideas from people. If some participants on this list believe that we must immediately supply every detail that they want, we're not here to do that either.

Originally Posted by acottawa

Perhaps it would be better to wait until your feasibility study is complete to try to engage in forums like this.

We borrow our attitudes from the free/libre/open source software motto "Release early; release often."

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

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

As an inter-provincial railway plan, as per Section 92(10)(a) and (c) of Canada's Constitution, our proposal goes to the Canadian Transportation Agency. The applicable rules are under the Canada Transportation Act, and the Railway Safety Act.

Yes, you have the right to go to the CTA to gain access to the lines, but that doesn't mean you can run as many trains as you want whenever you want on someone else's track. VIA Rail's operational challenges are proof of that.

The biggest problem I see is that the Trillium line is at 100% capacity and the passenger load is high enough that I can't imagine the CTA forcing Ottawa to cancel one or more trains to make room for Moose. They could give Moose access during off peak (which means it couldn't provide service to commuters) or they might allow Moose to pay to have the line double tracked, in which case capacity becomes a nonissue, but that would be ridiculously expensive. Is that in the budget?

Similarly Pont Noir (the rail bridge across the Gatineau river) is currently being used by Rapibus. Obviously trains cannot share a ROW with buses. What is your solution for this? Are you planning on building a new bridge? If so, it would probably be cheaper to build a new bridge for Rapibus than it would be to build a new rail bridge.

My other question for you is are you aware that the Beachburgh subdivision has been torn up west of the junction with the Renfew Subdivision? Are you planning on replacing the tracks? Similarly are you planning or replacing the washed out track on the Maniwaki Subdivision?

If you are going to the expense of laying new track, why not resurrect the Carleton Subdivision to provide service to Bridalwood, Stittsville and Carleton Place?

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

See Section 138 of the Canada Transportation Act.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/a...e-20.html#h-72

But also, see our first submission to the Competition Bureau.

https://www.letsgomoose.ca/wp-conten...-06-29_PDF.pdf


Basically, every serious hockey game needs a referee.

No ref? Gotta stick to model railway toys.

Just so I am clear, your entire business plan is based on regulators forcing VIA Rail and OC Transport to give you access to their infrastructure? Given VIA Rail's own challenges with CN, how do your prospects stack up?

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Yes, you have the right to go to the CTA to gain access to the lines, but that doesn't mean you can run as many trains as you want whenever you want on someone else's track. VIA Rail's operational challenges are proof of that.

Of course. But VIA and Moose are mutually beneficial. And yes, we communicate with them.

Originally Posted by roger1818

or they might allow Moose to pay to have the line double tracked, in which case capacity becomes a nonissue, but that would be ridiculously expensive. Is that in the budget?

Ridiculously expensive? Perhaps it would be cheaper to tunnel! Just kidding.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Similarly Pont Noir (the rail bridge across the Gatineau river) is currently being used by Rapibus. Obviously trains cannot share a ROW with buses. What is your solution for this?

That's just a grade level crossing. Trains have the right of way.

Originally Posted by roger1818

My other question for you is are you aware that the Beachburgh subdivision has been torn up west of the junction with the Renfew Subdivision? Are you planning on replacing the tracks? Similarly are you planning or replacing the washed out track on the Maniwaki Subdivision?

Yes. And yes.

Originally Posted by roger1818

If you are going to the expense of laying new track, why not resurrect the Carleton Subdivision to provide service to Bridalwood, Stittsville and Carleton Place?

That's after the main lines are running. Add those places, and Kemptville, Aylmer, Buckingham etc.

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

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Yes, you have the right to go to the CTA to gain access to the lines, but that doesn't mean you can run as many trains as you want whenever you want on someone else's track. VIA Rail's operational challenges are proof of that.

The biggest problem I see is that the Trillium line is at 100% capacity and the passenger load is high enough that I can't imagine the CTA forcing Ottawa to cancel one or more trains to make room for Moose. They could give Moose access during off peak (which means it couldn't provide service to commuters) or they might allow Moose to pay to have the line double tracked, in which case capacity becomes a nonissue, but that would be ridiculously expensive. Is that in the budget?

Similarly Pont Noir (the rail bridge across the Gatineau river) is currently being used by Rapibus. Obviously trains cannot share a ROW with buses. What is your solution for this? Are you planning on building a new bridge? If so, it would probably be cheaper to build a new bridge for Rapibus than it would be to build a new rail bridge.

My other question for you is are you aware that the Beachburgh subdivision has been torn up west of the junction with the Renfew Subdivision? Are you planning on replacing the tracks? Similarly are you planning or replacing the washed out track on the Maniwaki Subdivision?

If you are going to the expense of laying new track, why not resurrect the Carleton Subdivision to provide service to Bridalwood, Stittsville and Carleton Place?

Maybe Moose is going to pay to double track the Trillium Line and to build a new Gatineau River crossing?

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Just so I am clear, your entire business plan is based on regulators forcing VIA Rail and OC Transport to give you access to their infrastructure

Our entire business plan is based on what we call the Property-Powered Rail Open Market Development Model.
Summary: https://www.letsgomoose.ca/business-model/
Details: https://www.letsgomoose.ca/wp-conten...7-03-05PDF.pdf

A basic working premise in a regulated business is that the regulator performs their statutory mandate. If the ref doesn't bother to get off the bench, it won't be much of a hockey game. You will surely agree that there's more to "the entire playbook" of the hockey team than an assumption that the referee performs his/her functions.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Given VIA Rail's own challenges with CN, how do your prospects stack up?

Quite good. We're not going to be running on busy freight lines. And our service is synergistic with VIA's interests.

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

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

A basic working premise in a regulated business is that the regulator performs their statutory mandate.

Sure. But your interpretation of the regulator fulfilling their statutory duties is the regulator ruling entirely in your favour. As others have pointed out here, that's quite the assumption. Compelling VIA and OC Transpo to share tracks is not the same thing as getting access during the times you want. So what's your solution there? Are you going to pay to double track the Trillium Line? Or is Moose going to offer to provide the entire service on the Trillium Line and relieve the city of all transit costs on that corridor?

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

Quite good. We're not going to be running on busy freight lines. And our service is synergistic with VIA's interests.

Arguably, your situation is worse. You want to run on a corridor where the owner is operating at 100% capacity during peak hours. That is certainly a more challenging situation than dealing with freight companies which have far less time-sensitive customers. It's why I am curious how you plan to get around this.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

Well, go ahead and ask them.

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

In the interest of transparency can you tell us which government entities you are currently in discussions with?

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

Ridiculously expensive? Perhaps it would be cheaper to tunnel! Just kidding.

Don't you need to tunnel to double track north of Carleton to cross the Rideau Canal at Dow's Lake?

Can I take from this quip that you plan to pay to double track the Trillium Line between Confederation and Bayview? I'm also not sure how you plan to connect from the Beachburg Subdivision to the Trillium line. The tracks cross, but there isn't a switch and I don't think there is room to add on. The only connection I see is from the Walkley line but you would have to cross the line and then back onto it.

That's just a grade level crossing. Trains have the right of way.

Its more then a level crossing. Buses are running along the rail line to use the bridge. That is quite different from a simple level crossing. If a bus and a train meet head to head, are you expecting the bus to back off the bridge?

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

Quite good. We're not going to be running on busy freight lines. And our service is synergistic with VIA's interests.

VIA's interests, yes. It is the Trillium line I am concerned about.

[Joseph Potvin]

roger1818 and TrueNorth00,

For specific operational details, you'll need to wait for the technical feasibility study, around the end of October, and more importantly, the Certificate of Operation once all negotiations for running rights are worked out.

When I can I'll check some of the earlier posts this month to address questions or comments that are usefully answerable at this time.

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

[FFX-ME]

Hi Joseph,

Since a very significant fraction of the rural commuters to Ottawa come from Russell-Embrun, why not use the still-existing right of way from the Ottawa-New York railroad and build a commuter rail line there? This would have the highest probability of success.

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Don't you need

roger1818,

Let me ask you to look at all these issues the way we've been looking at them. Imagine you really had to solve all these issues in, say, a year. What would you do? Would you declare each of these issues to be utterly unsolvable? Or would you just solve them. Get'r done?

If you absolutely commit to solving them, well, that's MOOSE.

Each of the MOOSE Consortium member firms signed up that basis, and the recent investors* share our attitude.

Rather than asking us all these details, why not offer your thoughts about how to just get'r done? I reckon you know how. Yes our team has work underway, but there's a millions ways to each thing wrongly, and always a few ways to do it well.

________
* pending their due diligent assessment!

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