Rural Commuter Rail

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by 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.

Thanks for the suggestion.

We've not yet examined the former NYC route that briefly parallels the current VIA Alexandria Sub and then travels to South-East to Russel/Embrun and eventually Finch and the shores of the St. Lawrence. This is a long gone ROW and while we think it possible to consider for our service eventually, there are likely structures and highways now that would make some portions prohibitive.

For start-up, we're going with existing operational (or close to operational) lines. Once that's running, several additional lines become interesting.

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

[lrt's friend]

The old New York Central right of way is obliterated by Highway 417 between south of Walkley and west of Anderson. The rest of the way as far as Embrun is pretty much intact. The Castor River bridge crossing at Embrun is gone but you have already covered the main territory of interest. The route between Russell and Embrun is now a recreational trail.

Many are concerned about sprawl being encouraged by commuter rail, but you can look at it this way that it also gives a shot in the arm to struggling valley towns. I would be very pleased if we began adopting a more European transportation model.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

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.

There's really no advice to offer you other than negotiate with VIA and the City. But from where I (and I presume the others see it this way too) sit, this comes off as a lot of talk and very little substance, when you say you're negotiating, but we have city politicians being dismissive (or even hostile) and you seem to (sometimes) lack substantive knowledge (like calling a rail bridge used by Rapibus an at-grade crossing).

Mostly, I think we all want to know if you're actually having substantive discussions with OC Transpo and VIA. That's the stuff urbanists and transitions get excited over. The regulatory stuff can be worked out. The infrastructure problems is one of money and time. What is the real unknown for us here is how interested VIA and OC Transpo are in your plan, how seriously they are taking it, and how interested they are in an actual partnership.

Certainly, the combative positions Moose is taking against OC Transpo doesn't exactly inspire a lot of confidence that VIA and OC Transport are eager to work with you . You're taking them to the CTA on several fronts. You're suggesting that rather negotiating access in good faith, you'll be able to bully them into negotiation with a regulator ruling. What should the rest of make of that?

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Many are concerned about sprawl being encouraged by commuter rail, but you can look at it this way that it also gives a shot in the arm to struggling valley towns. I would be very pleased if we began adopting a more European transportation model.

Why exactly is giving "a shot in the arm to struggling valley towns" automatically taken to be good thing? What makes these towns any more special than say the small fishing towns and villages we let dry up in NFLD when the fisheries went under? Sprawl is expensive. And mostly, it's an expense borne by taxpayers. It's a valid question, I think, to ask, why sprawl shouldn't be discouraged. Especially after three levels of governments will have spent nearly $4 billion combined in Gatineau and Ottawa on LRT and BRT networks that put over 70% of residents within 5km of rapid transit.

Citing the European model is also a cop-out. In Europe, those small towns are pretty dense. And those small towns don't exactly allow giant subdivisions or huge acre lots for homeowners. If we put on those restrictions, I'd wholeheartedly support more rail services to these small towns. Also, the Europeans are pretty strict on putting rail where there's demand. They don't build rail hoping to generate demand by compelling development in small towns (as is being proposed here). I also can't see Europeans thinking it's a great idea to prioritize growth in rural areas over cities, right after putting in billions in transit investment.

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

and you seem to (sometimes) lack substantive knowledge (like calling a rail bridge used by Rapibus an at-grade crossing).

Funny you should say that. It was the Canadian Transportation Agency which suggested to us that it's just a lengthwise grade level crossing when we discussed the Pont Noir with them. Our team saw that as a reasonable way to work with it.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Mostly, I think we all want to know if you're actually having substantive discussions with OC Transpo and VIA.

Sure, but we don't report interim business discussions via blogs.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Certainly, the combative positions Moose is taking against OC Transpo doesn't exactly inspire a lot of confidence that VIA and OC Transport are eager to work with you.

We're fighting with VIA? Where'd you get that idea?

On OC-Transpo, take a look at the 2013 Interprovincial Transportation Stategy that staff actually co-wrote. MOOSE has the only plan on any table presently to implement that strategy. But there are strong barriers to inter-provincial trade. Jim Watson dismissed it with: « Ce n'est pas notre priorité d'offrir un service ferroviaire à une autre ville, dans ne autre province. » Source: http://www.lapresse.ca/le-droit/actu...re-dottawa.php

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Rather negotiating access in good faith, you'll be able to bully them into negotiation with a regulator ruling. What should the rest of make of that?

Dismantling the approach track without Division V authorization, and blockading it, is what, in your view? An oversight?

All we did is call mom, because they didn't want to share their toys. In your view, that makes us the bully. Accuse of us being the crybabies if you will, but hardly the bullies.

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

We're fighting with VIA? Where'd you get that idea?

I wasn't referring to VIA there.

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

Dismantling the approach track without Division V authorization, and blockading it, is what, in your view? An oversight?

All we did is call mom, because they didn't want to share their toys. In your view, that makes us the bully. Accuse of us being the crybabies if you will, but hardly the bullies.

Wasn't referring to the POW bridge. Was referring to your citation of Section 138 of the Canada Transportation Act.

But while we're at it, I can't see any organization being suddenly gleeful to work with a counterparty that just got a regulator to impose massive financial costs on them. You were within your rights to complain of course. And they'll be within their rights to insist that you don't run any trains during peak hours. What then?

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

Sure, but we don't report interim business discussions via blogs.

I don't think anybody is looking for specific details of your discussion here. I think it's more of, "We've talked with VIA. They are definitely interested in sharing their track. We're discussing how traffic flow will work and how we'll share the cost of building a second track on that sub." Etc.

VIA is less of a concern than OC Transpo here. The Trillium Line is critical to your proposal. The City, the Province and the Feds are proceeding with a massive plan which includes hundreds of millions spent on upgrading this corridor with tenders out in less than a year. And they are also on the verge of signing contracts for a fleet to operate on there. If they are taking Moose's plans into account, it's certainly not evident from their actions at all. If you are talking with them, surely you can share some details as to how open they are to Moose's proposal. Otherwise, I don't think the rest of us are wrong in assuming that there's conflict coming for you.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Why exactly is giving "a shot in the arm to struggling valley towns" automatically taken to be good thing? What makes these towns any more special than say the small fishing towns and villages we let dry up in NFLD when the fisheries went under? Sprawl is expensive. And mostly, it's an expense borne by taxpayers. It's a valid question, I think, to ask, why sprawl shouldn't be discouraged. Especially after three levels of governments will have spent nearly $4 billion combined in Gatineau and Ottawa on LRT and BRT networks that put over 70% of residents within 5km of rapid transit.

Citing the European model is also a cop-out. In Europe, those small towns are pretty dense. And those small towns don't exactly allow giant subdivisions or huge acre lots for homeowners. If we put on those restrictions, I'd wholeheartedly support more rail services to these small towns. Also, the Europeans are pretty strict on putting rail where there's demand. They don't build rail hoping to generate demand by compelling development in small towns (as is being proposed here). I also can't see Europeans thinking it's a great idea to prioritize growth in rural areas over cities, right after putting in billions in transit investment.

We have a choice now. We can continue to choose to make the hinterland 100% car dependant or we can look at a different model.

We cannot put up a fence around the city. That is foolish.

Yes, we need to spend a lot of money on city transportation but that does not mean we shouldn't reassess regional transport as well.

Obviously, for political reasons, the City of Ottawa has no interest in the needs beyond its boundaries but its policies are also and inevitably going to create growing communities just beyond the boundaries. We see this in places like Rockland, Kemptville, Carleton Place, Casselman and Arnprior. The transportation needs of these communities are growing.

Up to this point, the province has built highways to address this, but now the City of Ottawa is resisting this. There are 50,000 already living in these boundary communities and most are commuting into Ottawa. Something has to give. The City of Ottawa does not hold all the cards on this. Ottawa planners cannot prevent people from moving there.

I will add one more thing. The City of Ottawa cannot be the steward of a regional transportation plan. It is a miracle that they purchased the POW bridge. It is not surprising that it is languishing unused. There needs to be another public body with a wider mandate in control or it needs to be a private project or a combination of the two. It will not work any other way.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

We have a choice now. We can continue to choose to make the hinterland 100% car dependant or we can look at a different model.

We cannot put up a fence around the city.

Oh but we can. Make it prohibitively expensive to lead a car-dependent rural lifestyle. The coming wave of carbon taxes will actually do that in due course. Gas will be $2 per litre in less than 10 years. And the way Ontario power rates are going, driving electric isn't going to be cheap either.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Yes, we need to spend a lot of money on city transportation but that does not mean we shouldn't reassess regional transport as well.

Re-assess is one thing. Building a whole regional rail system largely aimed at facilitating their growth is another matter altogether. We can agree they need better services. In a sane world that would be more akin to regular GO bus service. Not hourly bi-levels.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Obviously, for political reasons, the City of Ottawa has no interest in the needs beyond its boundaries but its policies are also and inevitably going to create growing communities just beyond the boundaries.

Rightly so. None of us pays taxes and elects councillors to serve communities outside Ottawa. That's rightfully in the province's bailiwick. They should be arranging and setting up regional transport, or subsidizing OC Transpo to provide it.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Up to this point, the province has built highways to address this, but now the City of Ottawa is resisting this.

Huh? Did you just miss the massive amount of money that has and will be spent on 417 expansion? I don't see the City of Ottawa resisting highway expansion at all. In fact, many of us would argue that the City is far too accommodating on this front.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

There are 50,000 already living in these boundary communities and most are commuting into Ottawa. Something has to give.

You're right that we should serve them better. But I think it's entirely fair game to ask to whether incentives to grow those communities further should be accommodated. Moose plan could easily have that 50 000 becoming 150 000 over the coming decades. Why should that impact not be contested?

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The City of Ottawa does not hold all the cards on this. Ottawa planners cannot prevent people from moving there.

Two words: congestion charge. Might actually help Moose's business case....

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I will add one more thing. The City of Ottawa cannot be the steward of a regional transportation plan.

You're right on this. Queen's Park has dropped the ball badly. Ditto the feds and Quebec.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

It is a miracle that they purchased the POW bridge. It is not surprising that it is languishing unused.

The bridge being unused is really not the fault of the City of Ottawa. Had Gatineau chosen LRT, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

There needs to be another public body with a wider mandate in control or it needs to be a private project or a combination of the two. It will not work any other way.

I don't think you'd find any sort of regional body getting an easier ride. See the NCC.

[lrt's friend]

I think we are just beginning to see the resurgence of rail transport.

I am not so sure that energy costs are going to go through the roof. I was thinking that 10 years ago when gas got to $1.40 but the price actually has gone down. I think congestion and the enormous cost of expanding roads is what is going to drive people to want alternate transport. And that is where buses have no advantage. They also get caught up in congestion. That is the appeal of rail with its separate right of way.

I am far from convinced that the Moose proposal is serious, however, we should not entirely dismiss regional rail.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I think we are just beginning to see the resurgence of rail transport.

Remains to be seen. I would have thought that, but then the government only gave VIA $3 million to study HFR. So I am on the fence about whether we are actually turning the page here or the Trudeau government is yet another in a long line of Canadian governments that just use studies for optics rather than actually enacting change.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I am not so sure that energy costs are going to go through the roof. I was thinking that 10 years ago when gas got to $1.40 but the price actually has gone down.

We haven't had carbon taxes over the last 10 years. That's the difference.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I think congestion and the enormous cost of expanding roads is what is going to drive people to want alternate transport. And that is where buses have no advantage.

I am surprised somebody from Ottawa would say this. Build one LRT and people already forget how successful Ottawa's BRT was. Bus lanes on the highway are far cheaper than building and running regional rail.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I am far from convinced that the Moose proposal is serious, however, we should not entirely dismiss regional rail.

I am not dismissive of regional rail at all. But let's be clear what Moose is. It's a real estate development proposal using rail to bring customers to the developments. A serious regional rail proposal wouldn't be looking at bi-levels. In fact, a serious regional rail proposal would be offering to basically take over the Trillium Line, to twin track it and promising to run DMUs to keep costs low and boost frequencies.

In Moose's paper they have all kinds of far out ideas. From daycare subsidized by the railway at stations, to enhanced train interiors with services to presumably make the commute so attractive that people choose to live in the boonies. It's a bit fanciful for my taste. But who knows, maybe they have market research to back all that up.

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Bus lanes on the highway are far cheaper than building and running regional rail.

That's context-dependent. In our context, the rail service on existing tracks is entirely complementary with bus services, so it's not really framed by the choice you are describing.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I am not dismissive of regional rail at all. But let's be clear what Moose is. It's a real estate development proposal using rail to bring customers to the developments.

Specifically to bring realized "value added" based on market demand.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

A serious regional rail proposal wouldn't be looking at bi-levels.

Bi-levels are explicitly designed for regional rail markets. You're entitled to your preferences though.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

In fact, a serious regional rail proposal would be offering to basically take over the Trillium Line, to twin track it and promising to run DMUs to keep costs low and boost frequencies.

Paid for how?

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

In Moose's paper they have all kinds of far out ideas. From daycare subsidized by the railway at stations

Yes, we got that cool idea from the Japanese private sector railways. These will also be logical places for VirtuCar. And walk-in medical clinics. ... oh, and impeccably maintained public washrooms!! (Imagine that!)

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

to enhanced train interiors

Industry contacts have indicated we're on exactly the right path for the "future of rail". We do discuss widely with rail service providers.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

with services to presumably make the commute so attractive that people choose to live in the boonies

Rather, to make mobility throughout the region by rail so attractive that households and business really want to locate within an easy walk of any of the 50 stations. Half of these Linked Localities will be urban.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

It's a bit fanciful for my taste. But who knows, maybe they have market research to back all that up.

And excellent feedback from other professionals in the passenger transportation and real property industries.

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

[Marshsparrow]

Is it just me or does Joseph Potvin just join and everybody has jumped all over him and his responses - he said he would take some time to read the older entries and further respond - perhaps that would be the polite thing to let him do!

Welcome to the board Joseph!

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Was referring to your citation of Section 138 of the Canada Transportation Act.

Section 138 exists due to railway industry insistence. It establishes a reasonably fair market environment.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

But while we're at it, I can't see any organization being suddenly gleeful to work with a counterparty that just got a regulator to impose massive financial costs on them. You were within your rights to complain of course.

The PPR (and MOOSE's enagement of it) is based on a diplomatic but strong assertion of a rules-based legal and administrative environment in which all stakeholders are empowered by and constrained by their lawful prerogatives and obligations. When required, the courts are to the PPR what referees are to team sports, which is to say, recourse to legal action is to bring in neutral authority when required, not to exercise hostility.

In spite of our legal action in relation to both Ottawa and Gatineau, we have respectful and collaborative interactions with elected representatives and professional staff. For example, MOOSE was invited to give the keynote address at the all-candidates debate in Kanata during the last municipal election, and at that event, Marianne Wilkinson mentioned our plan very favourably more than three times.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

And they'll be within their rights to insist that you don't run any trains during peak hours. What then?

Ottawa's transit professionals are not taking that view, nor would that be consistent with their mandate, or with Section 138.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I don't think anybody is looking for specific details of your discussion here. I think it's more of, "We've talked with VIA. They are definitely interested in sharing their track. We're discussing how traffic flow will work and how we'll share the cost of building a second track on that sub." Etc. ... If you are talking with them, surely you can share some details as to how open they are to Moose's proposal.

Well, I can speak on behalf of MOOSE, but I cannot speak for VIA or other companies. I have mentioned earlier that we communicate with all operators in the region.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I don't think the rest of us are wrong in assuming that there's conflict coming for you.

No assumptions are needed. It's well documented.
https://www.letsgomoose.ca/moose-con...nadas-capital/

However, to go further with the hockey game metaphor, yes there's 'confllct'. But punching is hostile, whereas calling in the referee is just rules-based engagement. These are in no way equivalent.

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by Marshsparrow

Is it just me or does Joseph Potvin just join and everybody has jumped all over him and his responses - he said he would take some time to read the older entries and further respond - perhaps that would be the polite thing to let him do! Welcome to the board Joseph!

Thanks Marshsparrow! I anticipated the kerfuffle.

Now that our story has broken through the general media threshold (and that took quite a while), it seemed worthwhile to re-engage some of the active blogs to respond openly to questions and comments. We cannot provide all the information some want -- in some cases it's just too early; in other cases we are careful not to implicitly speak for others; and in other cases, it would just take far to long to type out all the nuanced complexities. BTW, I certainly won't be able to keep up this level of participation, due to ongoing commitments.

The MOOSE core team has taken the time to comprehensively document our rationale, both for the financing dynamic, and for the general public interest. We've elaborated on these in our Canada Day announcement.

It's understood that only a few blog members will take the time to read and reflect on those documents. But they are far more important than the finicky details. MOOSE is pursuing a macro-level transformation in the Greater National Capital Region. There really are profound issues to discuss.

Let me share one of the messages that arrived last week from an Ottawa resident -- similar to various others that have started to arrive from both urban-based and town-based people:

From: Xxxx Xxxxxx <xxxxxxxxxx@bell.net>
Date: Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 8:11 PM
Subject: Private Transit Network
To: jpotvin <jpotvin@letsgomoose.com>

Good evening,

I just read the article in the Metro regarding the subject matter.

I will tell you a little bit about my story and why my interest in your study: I live in Ottawa and my daughter moved to Kemptville 9 years ago. I don't have a car so I depend on her or her husband to pick me up and bring me back to Ottawa every weekend. I go every week to support her and the kids and to visit at the same time. She had a young daughter at the time and was expecting another in a few months. I can't express the stress I went through trying to get to and back from Kemptville. I even contacted the mayor's office in Kemptville to no avail. Just last week I read an article in the North Grenville Times about the results of a survey to have a bus service. 76% showed interest. There were buses leaving in the morning going to Ottawa (government workers) and coming back at night but I was leaving Ottawa in the morning to go to Kemptville so nothing was available. Anyways, 9 years later and still no service. I'm beyond frustrated. My daughter has a business and her husband as well so it's complicated to plan who will get me and bring me back, especially in the winter months.

So needless to say I am very much in support of this transit network. Via Rail stops in Smith Falls but it's quite expensive and about 20 minutes away from Kemptville. The interesting part is that the train passes right behind my daughter's house every day, several times a day!

If you need more information or my support in your study I would be more than pleased to do so. I'm also on OC Transpo all the time and I use STO as all my family (sisters, brothers etc.) live in Gatineau.

Good luck with your study,

Xxxx Xxxxxxx

Skyscrapers, could we perhaps talk about the significance and the best ways to achieve whole-region mobility other than by car? MOOSE is designing and working to put in place an option, but it's not the only way. For those of you who prefer not to see easier whole-region mobility by means other than car, can you help others to understand your rationale?

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

Let me share one of the messages that arrived last week from an Ottawa resident -- similar to various others that have started to arrive from both urban-based and town-based people:

From: Xxxx Xxxxxx <xxxxxxxxxx@bell.net>
Date: Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 8:11 PM
Subject: Private Transit Network
To: jpotvin <jpotvin@letsgomoose.com>

Good evening,

I just read the article in the Metro regarding the subject matter.

I will tell you a little bit about my story and why my interest in your study: I live in Ottawa and my daughter moved to Kemptville 9 years ago. I don't have a car so I depend on her or her husband to pick me up and bring me back to Ottawa every weekend. I go every week to support her and the kids and to visit at the same time. She had a young daughter at the time and was expecting another in a few months. I can't express the stress I went through trying to get to and back from Kemptville. I even contacted the mayor's office in Kemptville to no avail. Just last week I read an article in the North Grenville Times about the results of a survey to have a bus service. 76% showed interest. There were buses leaving in the morning going to Ottawa (government workers) and coming back at night but I was leaving Ottawa in the morning to go to Kemptville so nothing was available. Anyways, 9 years later and still no service. I'm beyond frustrated. My daughter has a business and her husband as well so it's complicated to plan who will get me and bring me back, especially in the winter months.

So needless to say I am very much in support of this transit network. Via Rail stops in Smith Falls but it's quite expensive and about 20 minutes away from Kemptville. The interesting part is that the train passes right behind my daughter's house every day, several times a day!

If you need more information or my support in your study I would be more than pleased to do so. I'm also on OC Transpo all the time and I use STO as all my family (sisters, brothers etc.) live in Gatineau.

Good luck with your study,

Xxxx Xxxxxxx

Nice letter, but I am a little confused. VIA Rail doesn't pass through Kemptville. I doesn't even pass through North Grenville. I suspect the trains that pass through the daughter's backyard are CPR freight trains on the Winchester Subdivision. Given that it is an east/west line that runs south of Ottawa, it likely won't be of much use for Moose.

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Nice letter, but I am a little confused. VIA Rail doesn't pass through Kemptville. I doesn't even pass through North Grenville. I suspect the trains that pass through the daughter's backyard are CPR freight trains on the Winchester Subdivision. Given that it is an east/west line that runs south of Ottawa, it likely won't be of much use for Moose.

The Canadian Pacific main track between Montreal and Smiths Falls just touches the southern end of the city. Potentially a small platform or terminus could be constructed a three minute drive from "downtown". The route would follow a westerly direction through Merrickville and then a hard turn "button-hook" at Smiths Falls towards Ottawa.

It would be a good extension once our core service is underway, as would Carleton Place, Buckingham and Aylmer.

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

The Canadian Pacific main track between Montreal and Smiths Falls just touches the southern end of the city.

Yes. That is the Winchester Subdivision I was talking about.

Potentially a small platform or terminus could be constructed a three minute drive from "downtown". The route would follow a westerly direction through Merrickville and then a hard turn "button-hook" at Smiths Falls towards Ottawa.

It could, but that is a roundabout route. If you could, a better route would be to reactivate the Prescott Subdivision south of the Trillium Line to Kemptville. Potentially you could then connect to the Winchester Subdivision there.

The nice thing about the Winchester Subdivision is it is double tracked, but the CPR only have single track west of Smiths Falls (now that the north-western part of the Brockville Subdivision has been torn up) so I can't imagine the Winchester Subdivision is terribly busy. The disadvantage is it is the CPR and they are notorious for charging outrageous rates to use their track.

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Nice letter, but I am a little confused. VIA Rail doesn't pass through Kemptville. I doesn't even pass through North Grenville. I suspect the trains that pass through the daughter's backyard are CPR freight trains on the Winchester Subdivision. Given that it is an east/west line that runs south of Ottawa, it likely won't be of much use for Moose.

The only tracks that used to run through Kemptville were part of the same CPR that the Trillium Line runs on, today the Osgoode trail. That ROW is now interrupted by the 416, and would cost a lot of money to reinstate

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

The only tracks that used to run through Kemptville were part of the same CPR that the Trillium Line runs on, today the Osgoode trail. That ROW is now interrupted by the 416, and would cost a lot of money to reinstate

The CP mainline runs just south of Kemptville. There are also several spur lines in the area and writer may be using a broader geographic definition. There is no obvious routing to Ottawa though.

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Ironically, Ottawa is about the worst possible place to establish proof of concept for "property powered rail." The rail network is highly degraded, road access for rural exurbs is relatively good and housing costs are relatively low.

Someone just commented on this post during a meeting.

Funny enough, as far as we're concerned, all those factors (plus the mess of jurisdictional boundaries and rivalries) make it an excellent place to do a PPR proof-of-concept, for the same deep reasons that significant biological adaptations seem to emerge from places like caustic hot sea vents. If it can be made to work here, it'll probably work anywhere.

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