[Edward Skira]

...... and the puts and takes of the accounting don't leave GO somehow footing the bill for this?

- Paul

Ivanhoe Cambridge is paying here. Of course they will recoup over time from the rent.

 

[rbt]

They brought in all that fill just for a photo op ????

This is where I rant about the media having a conflict of interest. The more knowledgeable journalists know that's a waste of money that will find its way back to the taxpayer. But - it will undoubtedly create a more spectacular photo op, and that sells more papers and generates better ratings. So - they and their publishers/editors say nothing and enjoy the view. The media and the politicos have a codependency that aligns them against the taxpayer. So much for journalism claiming to be 'for the people'. Journalism and politics and theatre are all sides of the same coin.

Private development photo-ops have been showy since the invention of the camera. I'm sure you've heard of Golden Railway Spikes

This amount of prep for a photo-op is inline with what Four Seasons, Shangri-la, and other similarly showy projects spent. The party that follows is typically very very well catered. The entire event is to make the early investors/tenants feel like they're a part of something big (make them excited again) and actually reduces buyers remorse.

 

[crs1026]

Private development photo-ops have been showy since the invention of the camera. I'm sure you've heard of Golden Railway Spikes

This amount of prep for a photo-op is inline with what Four Seasons, Shangri-la, and other similarly showy projects spent. The party that follows is typically very very well catered. The entire event is to make the early investors/tenants feel like they're a part of something big (make them excited again) and actually reduces buyers remorse.

As a function between a private business and its investors or customers, that's their business and none of mine. It's the crossover to the public involvement that raised my eyebrows. Is GO strictly a tenant, or do they have capital invested?

Any private vendor that sells to government at a profit is likely to spend some of the profits on showy advertising, or parties for staff, or something. That's no big deal. But - if they invite the government officials that signed the deal to the lavish party? Or, if they provide an expensive podium for the use of elected officials who gave them business? Do they declare it as a campaign donation?

I'm likely just bitter about all the free hockey tickets that I had to turn down when I worked in the public sector, but the lines do get blurred ;-)

- Paul

 

[rbt]

Is GO strictly a tenant, or do they have capital invested?

I'm not even sure if the GO agreement is available to read. I know they expected the cost to be around $100M and to sell the current GO terminal for about $30M; with Metrolinx providing the difference. Whether that's setup as an outright purchase (like TTC platform) or as a 50+ year lease I don't know. Nothing in the papers has mentioned an investment beyond the bus terminal component. Given government borrowing rates versus what developers get; I hope GO bought the space out-right as it'll be cheaper.

I think TTC got a great deal; seemed very close to construction cost. Of course, GO is also taking prime ground/PATH level retail space while TTC just relocated a few parking spots.

 

[Dan416]

As a function between a private business and its investors or customers, that's their business and none of mine. It's the crossover to the public involvement that raised my eyebrows. Is GO strictly a tenant, or do they have capital invested?

Any private vendor that sells to government at a profit is likely to spend some of the profits on showy advertising, or parties for staff, or something. That's no big deal. But - if they invite the government officials that signed the deal to the lavish party? Or, if they provide an expensive podium for the use of elected officials who gave them business? Do they declare it as a campaign donation?

I'm likely just bitter about all the free hockey tickets that I had to turn down when I worked in the public sector, but the lines do get blurred ;-)

- Paul

Having to turn down things like free sports tickets isn't limited to the public sector. I work in the private sector and we aren't allowed to accept things like that, it's a violation of our code of conduct; we're not allowed to accept gifts.

 

[crs1026]

I'm not even sure if the GO agreement is available to read. I know they expected the cost to be around $100M and to sell the current GO terminal for about $30M; with Metrolinx providing the difference. Whether that's setup as an outright purchase (like TTC platform) or as a 50+ year lease I don't know. Nothing in the papers has mentioned an investment beyond the bus terminal component. Given government borrowing rates versus what developers get; I hope GO bought the space out-right as it'll be cheaper.

I think TTC got a great deal; seemed very close to construction cost. Of course, GO is also taking prime ground/PATH level retail space while TTC just relocated a few parking spots.

My knee jerks on principle when there is no public disclosure on a major deal, but at the end of the day I doubt that public disclosure would accomplish much. It would take a very good legal and real estate mind to understand the terms, and there are likely some wins in either direction whose value isn't easily quantifiable. Too easy for opposition parties or lazy reporters to overlook the context and sensationalise some select aspect of the deal.

To this layman's eye from the top of the 500-level bleachers, a net of $70M for a downtown bus terminal plus a TTC platform is dirt cheap compared to the cost of, say, the Kirby GO station. I just hope it has enough capacity for the future and the agreement gives GO what it needs to use the investment appropriately (unlike, say, its deal with CN for use if the Halton Sub).

Having the bus terminal in the basement will mean lots of retail business, and profile for CIBC, so there are wins in both directions. I hope it's a good relationship over the long run.

- Paul

 

[TOareaFan]

To this layman's eye from the top of the 500-level bleachers, a net of $70M for a downtown bus terminal plus a TTC platform is dirt cheap compared to the cost of, say, the Kirby GO station. I just hope it has enough capacity for the future and the agreement gives GO what it needs to use the investment appropriately (unlike, say, its deal with CN for use if the Halton Sub).

Having the bus terminal in the basement will mean lots of retail business, and profile for CIBC, so there are wins in both directions. I hope it's a good relationship over the long run.

- Paul

Couple of things/comments/add ons

1. The relationship will be between GO/ML and CDPQ/Hines.....CIBC is just a tenant (albeit a significant one) in the building...not the owner.
2. I like the moving/revamping of the bus terminal....I just don't understand the need to expand it
3. So when you look from your 500 level seat.....if $70MM is the net cost ....it is not for a downtown bus terminal....it is the cost of the increase in size and relocation.....we already had a downtown bus terminal.

 

[innsertnamehere]

expansion is to accomodate the interregional buses. (greyhound, etc.)

 

[TOareaFan]

expansion is to accomodate the interregional buses. (greyhound, etc.)

wouldn't that space be created naturally by the reduction in buses serving the lines that are converting to 15 minute rail service? GO says they operate 600 buses a day out of there now.....what does that number drop to in 2021 when this depot is fully up and running.

 

[innsertnamehere]

existing GO Bus terminal has 7 bays, and operates far above its preferred level of service. To "normally" accommodate that amount of buses, you probably need more like 10 or 11 bays.

The existing Interregional terminal also has at least 14 bays. Not sure how busy these are, I have never used the terminal personally.

The new terminal will combine all these services under one roof with 14 bays. Once you leave space for interregional, GO, and some room for growth, 14 seems small to me.

 

[TOareaFan]

existing GO Bus terminal has 7 bays, and operates far above its preferred level of service. To "normally" accommodate that amount of buses, you probably need more like 10 or 11 bays.

sure....but if you are planning to reduce that number of buses by 50% (or more?) why now plan to build so much more space? Like you said, there may be a move to bring the other bus terminal under the same roof....but as much as that has been rumoured....has it ever actually been announced?

 

[muller877]

existing GO Bus terminal has 7 bays, and operates far above its preferred level of service. To "normally" accommodate that amount of buses, you probably need more like 10 or 11 bays.

The existing Interregional terminal also has at least 14 bays. Not sure how busy these are, I have never used the terminal personally.

The new terminal will combine all these services under one roof with 14 bays. Once you leave space for interregional, GO, and some room for growth, 14 seems small to me.

Does the new terminal have room for idling bus service as well? Inter-city bus lines often have a larger dwell time then GO.

It will be interesting what happens with the Toronto Coach Terminal. It's owned by the TTC. Will the sale of this land give them enough money to re-build the streetcar loop?

 

[rbt]

... serving the lines that are converting to 15 minute rail service?

I may be a little less confident about a project that's at the beginning of the EA stage than you. GO will probably have plenty of buses heading to Union for the immediate future; and if they somehow dry up, then TTC (waterfront East service) and Greyhound can fill the spots.

GO's construction tenders thus far has been mostly suitable for McGuinty's hourly service promise; a huge amount of useful work.

 

[crs1026]

wouldn't that space be created naturally by the reduction in buses serving the lines that are converting to 15 minute rail service? GO says they operate 600 buses a day out of there now.....what does that number drop to in 2021 when this depot is fully up and running.

You raise an interesting scenario. One would hope that GO Bus and Go Rail have an integrated system plan which lays out the impact of building RER on bus demand and includes a business case analysis for capital spending (on buses as well as the new bus depot) based on whatever the numbers are. This certainly ought to be a public document, even if the commercial terms of the bus terminal lease/sale is confidential. It would be unfortunate if GO is busily buying new vehicles, let alone a terminal, to meet a demand that is going to disappear before the life cycle of these assets concludes. (a bus is good for - what, 12 years? So some of the current fleet ought to be needed until 2029, or money is being wasted)

In reality - since RER is only a notional target system that has no committed funds, completion accountability, or reliable delivery date, it's prudent to assume that those buses will keep rolling for years to come. My gut says that bus ridership on non RER routes will grow also, so it may all work out. Certainly, consolidating the intercity and GO terminals adjacent to the rail terminal is a step forward that is worth say $50M of the total spend. So my napkin BCA is still happy.

It speaks to just what a flimsy, non-fact based, non-oversight based, non-accountable decision process we have behind our transit infrastructure. What value does ML deliver beyond pure operations?

- Paul

 

[TOareaFan]

In reality - since RER is only a notional target system that has no committed funds, completion accountability, or reliable delivery date, it's prudent to assume that those buses will keep rolling for years to come. My gut says that bus ridership on non RER routes will grow also, so it may all work out. Certainly, consolidating the intercity and GO terminals adjacent to the rail terminal is a step forward that is worth say $50M of the total spend. So my napkin BCA is still happy.


- Paul

What? RER is only notional? The provincial government has said repeatedly in the past it is fully funded and, recently, the Federal government gave them a big whack of cash to re-allocate some of those funds to other projects.....if we are to believe our two levels of government.......RER is, if anything, overfunded.