***The Official Rapid Rail Thread***

[EmilioA]

What azz you taking about bro. I brought shares in Euro Tunnell

The tunnel is a build-own-operate-transfer (BOOT) project with a concession.[31] TML would design and build the tunnel, but financing was through a separate legal entity, Eurotunnel. Eurotunnel absorbed CTG/F-M and signed a construction contract with TML, but the British and French governments controlled final engineering and safety decisions, now in the hands of the Channel Tunnel Safety Authority. The British and French governments gave Eurotunnel a 55- (later 65-) year operating concession to repay loans and pay dividends. A Railway Usage Agreement was signed between Eurotunnel, British Rail and SNCF guaranteeing future revenue in exchange for the railways obtaining half of the tunnel's capacity.

Private funding for such a complex infrastructure project was of unprecedented scale. An initial equity of £45 million was raised by CTG/F-M, increased by £206 million private institutional placement, £770 million was raised in a public share offer that included press and television advertisements, a syndicated bank loan and letter of credit arranged £5 billion.[12] Privately financed, the total investment costs at 1985 prices were £2600 million. At the 1994 completion actual costs were, in 1985 prices, £4650 million: an 80% cost overrun.[14] The cost overrun was partly due to enhanced safety, security, and environmental demands.[31] Financing costs were 140% higher than forecast.[32]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_Tunnel


Sydney Opera House was paid for selling tickets .

The Sydney Opera House cost some $160 million to build and was paid for by the public who bought $10 tickets in a series of lotteries with a first prize of $1 million.

As I said all private enterprise , Here in Trini the PNM wants you to pay for racket rail via direct taxes.

Learn to use Wikipedia properly boy.

ahem

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TransManche_Link

In April 1985 the British and French governments invited proposals for the construction of a link between the two countries to be privately funded. In January 1986 the two governments selected the Channel Tunnel Group/France Manche (see below) proposal for the construction of two undersea tunnels. At Canterbury Cathedral on 12 February 1986 the governments signed a treaty approving construction of the Channel Tunnel. In March the concession for the operation of the tunnel was given to Channel Tunnel Group (CTG) and France Manche (FM).

You own shares in company after govt transfer ownership to them.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Opera_House

By 1954, Goossens succeeded in gaining the support of NSW Premier Joseph Cahill, who called for designs for a dedicated opera house.

An international design competition was launched by Cahill on 13 September 1955 and received 233 entries, representing architects from 32 countries. .

Private Corporations designed and funded those projects but Govt was the Project Manager. It is good when the private sector cooperates with Govt.

[zoom rader]

^^^ All paid for via indirect taxes and IOPs

Here the PNM wants you to pay for it via direct taxes

[EmilioA]

^^^ All paid for via indirect taxes and IOPs

Here the PNM wants you to pay for it via direct taxes

Ahh so admit you were wrong about Govt involvement. Good Good. Now we could quibble the details of financing.

[zoom rader]

^^^ All paid for via indirect taxes and IOPs

Here the PNM wants you to pay for it via direct taxes

Ahh so admit you were wrong about Govt involvement.

I have said long before citizens should not have to pay for Racket rail.
It must be paid for via private funding.
All government have to do is to let private enterprise build and operate it while the government sits back and collects taxes from profits made and the employed person on the rail.
A win win situation

Here the PNM whats YOU and your kids to pay for this. There is difference

[Allergic2BunnyEars]

ecord high oil prices but the company has debt due to not only wgtl but also ulsd and the gasoline optimization program. The headquarters were started when the company was flush with money. It was payin for the headquarters out of its own pockets. No loan. When oil prices dropped in 2008/2009 the company had cash flow problems ever since. It is not a case of the company having money now and the PP refusing to allow the finishing of the project.

Oil prices were below 70 for about only 8 months. After a spike to 120+
They didnt hit 70 again till Nov 2014
Spending most of its time north of 90.

How the ULSD and GO projects going???

The net result is .....failed projects.
Root cause ....bad planning and execution.
Oil prices fluctuate.
This isnt new.
And definitely should not be a surprise to Petrotrin

DB project would be handled differently than what you keep alluding to.

Upon what are you basing this on??
Expand nah.

Clarify the repayment conditions as yuh there.
tenks

IDB works differently to what we accustomed doing locally. They do the feasibility studies you clamor for. They give out money in tranches and have continuous reviewing of performance of stakeholders. The types of contracts handed out to contractors have bonus and penalty clauses so as not to place the burden on the populace ( as opposed to cases where petrotrin hands out contracts that place cost overruns on the company).

Surprises are kept to a minimum due to better planning and project management. Surprises include change of government coming in and stopping the project as well. Like I said it's not a case of IDB handing is the money and we just do as we please with bad management/planning.

As for the repayment conditions I don't know details offhand but I would not be surprised it followed a similar model as that for the highways built decades ago.

[EmilioA]

^^^ All paid for via indirect taxes and IOPs

Here the PNM wants you to pay for it via direct taxes

Ahh so admit you were wrong about Govt involvement.

I have said long before citizens should not have to pay for Racket rail.
It must be paid for via private funding.
All government have to do is to let private enterprise build and operate it while the government sits back and collects taxes from profits made and the employed person on the rail.
A win win situation

Here the PNM whats YOU and your kids to pay for this. There is difference

Ahh good good. So you have no issues with the rail itself. Good. Now we should let private sector finance this . Correct. So Massy and Ansa and Republic and Royal and Intercommercial and leh we not forget SIS and Junior Sammy too right . and Elias and Kallco and thing.

Progress. I feel better already.

[Habit7]

It would have moved along like......

Brian Lara Stadium?...on yuh right
or Petrotrin HQ...on yuh left.
Or the Govt Campus...

Or get hit with a 50% increase like the Highway.

You could imagine Kamla and Co with a that kinda project?

The budget now is 10B TTD...I know there was argument over the currency..hence the ??

So by your logic we shouldn't do the BRT either because it would be overpriced and behind schedule too.

Also the Sydney Opera House, the Channel Tunnel and the Boston Big Dig should not have been done because of cost overruns and not being on schedule. Because we all know major infrastructural projects are always on time and on budget in developed countries right?

It is only us knuckle dragging, third world, colonial backwater dwelling, banana republicans that are destined to drive our foriegn used cars on pothole ridden roads. Again because only we have pothole ridden roads, all roads in US and UK are smooth as glass.

BY YOUR LOGIC what we should so is take on the project ignoring the factual experiences we have had...Lets not creep before we walk.Build it we will be fus world with a bess train...cause it work elsewhere.
We should use the same methods as the BLS and Petrotrin and ignore that the 5 year change will break up the project flow.

NONE of the countries youve cited executed the plan without proper analysis.

None of the projects were done in an environment that lacked the accountability and transparency that plagues us NOW.

None were without proper checks and balances...which we know we weak on.

What has changed since the PNM started the BL and PHQ...or the unc the Highway.????????

Not one fack.

Ive stated that what we need is PROPER ANALYSIS.
and a POLICY

and a cohesive PLAN.

If an independent study says do it and the proper management can be put in place so the project is properly executed the do it.
I think we could look at alternatives while we doing the study

in the same way you have to prove yourself to your employer by how you execute your job on an ongoing basis...BEFORE a promotion.....GORTT as an entity(not a party) needs to demonstrate the maturity and ability to do this....OR the willingness to set controls in place to get it done properly.

Analysis, study and plan doesn't eliminate the chance of cost overrun and tardiness. There are several factors that affect projects which are out of the control of any plan.

There are ways to mitigate problems from happening and you can advocate for them. But you cant say in spite of the several infrastructural projects that shape T&T into what we have grown accustom to, there are some that went bad therefore we must mash brakes and achieve an indescript state of readiness then we can move forward, is not practical. We can walk and whistle, in the same way that other countries around us have faced this challenge and surmount it.

Rapid Rail full speed ahead
By VERNE BURNETT Wednesday, October 7 2015

Imbert yesterday said Government is moving “full speed ahead” with plans for a Rapid Rail project as he responded to a comment by businessman Frank Mouttet at a post budget analysis organised by the TT Chamber of Industry and Commerce at the Hyatt Regency Hotel, Port-of- Spain.

Mouttet said he thought the Rapid Rail was a project whose time had “long come and hopefully not long gone.” He said it was absurd that the country was subsidising fuel for people who are stuck in traffic for six hours a day. He also asked why Government was consulting with the Inter- American Development Bank (IDB) over the project when the previous government of the People’s National Movement (PNM) had commissioned a study and had stated that it would be financed on the build, operate, lease, transfer (BOLT) system and would have no immediate impact on the economy of the country.

Mouttet said whatever has to be done regarding the Rapid Rail project has to be done right away and asked why the Government couldn’t just pick up from where the previous PNM Government left off.

But Imbert said the government wanted the IDB to validate its numbers for the Rapid Rail project. He said there was a lot of confusion about the cost, adding that during the election campaign the People’s Partnership claimed it would cost $60 billion to build but the Government’s figure was $10 billion.

“There is a great disparity between the numbers, so we thought the best thing to do was to validate the cost that we have put on the system by getting the IDB to examine all the components of a railway system and just confirm that our costs are within the ballpark and then we will move forward. But it is our intention to do it through a public/ private partnership so that there will be no immediate impact on the Treasury.” He added that if the country could get a good mass transportation system going it could eventually look toward further reductions in the fuel subsidy which would pay for the system. “So we are going full speed ahead with this project, we are just being cautious. We just want to make sure we are not accused of being recklesss and getting involved in a vanity project.” Imbert said the Government is convinced that its costs and estimates of the numbers of persons who would use the service are accurate “and we simply want an international agency to confirm and validate our numbers but our target is to initiate the construction of this project by the end of September 2016.” He said the Government was giving itself a year to make sure all the costings were correct, that the approach was correct, to get a contractor and to get moving.

In fact, Imbert said the IDB had offered to finance the project “and the IDB does not finance projects of this nature unless they are satisfied that it makes sense.” He said large projects such as the Rapid Rail will need international funding or a combination of local and foreign funding “and anytime you approach the multinational organisations, you have to come good.”

http://www.newsday.co.tt/news/0,218086.html

ZR it will be a BOLT arrangement, so now will you give it your support?

[zoom rader]

^^^ All paid for via indirect taxes and IOPs

Here the PNM wants you to pay for it via direct taxes

Ahh so admit you were wrong about Govt involvement.

I have said long before citizens should not have to pay for Racket rail.
It must be paid for via private funding.
All government have to do is to let private enterprise build and operate it while the government sits back and collects taxes from profits made and the employed person on the rail.
A win win situation

Here the PNM whats YOU and your kids to pay for this. There is difference

Ahh good good. So you have no issues with the rail itself. Good. Now we should let private sector finance this . Correct. So Massy and Ansa and Republic and Royal and Intercommercial and leh we not forget SIS and Junior Sammy too right . and Elias and Kallco and thing.

Progress. I feel better already.

I have said all along that a rail service is needed. However the public should not have to pay for this. I also said you cannot trust PNM to carry out this project as their past history of doing projects always ends in problems where you the tax payer is abused.

Meanwhile PNM MPs rushing to buy tax free cars and you left paying for Racket rail.

[Trinispougla]

Actually ZR, the Sydney Opera House was commissioned by the New South Wales Government. An international competition for a design of the facility was launched by the NSW premier, Mr Cahill. When the architect who won fell out with the trust(a board designed to oversea the construction of the facility) and resigned, it was the NSW government who used a government architect to complete the facility. The Sydney opera house is really one of the finest examples of local government development. Utzon became embroiled in a big row when the Government refused to pay him. In fact, the project almost came to a stop in 1965 when the NSW government was deliberating the massive costs resulting in a withholding of progress payments by the NSW. The lottery paid for the majority of the costs, specifically, 100 million dollars. When Utzon was fired, the budget ballooned from 18.2 million to 102 billion, for essentially the same design by government architects.

[Trinispougla]

http://www.australia.gov.au/about-austr ... pera-house

[Redman]

The IDB is checking the numbers on a project that it wants to finance...
secured against?
The consolidated fund?
the success of the project...KPIs?

Cuz the IDB is in the BUSINESS of lending money.Of course they want us to take the most expensive route.

MY point remains....before we get the IDB involved....what document justifies the choice of RR???

allyuh see this doc?
or just oblique references to the study by RITES that has been severely criticized and made assumptions based on certain conditions????

Habits article quotes Imbert sounding like its a done deal...just like he was in 2010..

http://www.trinidadexpress.com/commenta ... 50429.html

Later this year, one of the most costly public projects in the history of Trinidad and Tobago may start. Or it may not. Either way, the Government is keeping citizens in the dark. That project is Rapid Rail, for which estimates have ranged from $9 billion to $15 billion. And the very fact that no final figure is publicly known even at this late stage reveals the secretive manner in which the Government has pursued this project.

In her 2009-2010 Budget, Finance Minister Karen Nunez-Tesheira announced that "planning and engineering work continued apace on the Trinidad Rapid Rail Project in fiscal 2009...In fiscal 2010, the final costing and detailed scope of works for the project will be determined, thus allowing the Government to make an informed investment decision on the construction phase of the project."
Mere weeks later, however, the public was told that the Rapid Rail was on hold. Yet it appears that negotiations for land are still underway, and that the Government will make a final decision within a few months, [b]assuming a favourable outcome of the environmental feasibility.[/b] This week, however, consultations toward obtaining a Certificate of Environmental Clearance were abruptly, inexplicably, and indefinitely postponed.
The Government has not told citizens whether research had determined the economic wisdom of beginning this project during a time of global economic contraction. Nor has the administration even confirmed that a rapid rail is feasible at all within the confines of this island's land space and economy.

Works and Transport Minister Colm Imbert keeps repeating that a proper economic feasibility study has been done, but he has also denied the public access to the findings.

As far back as 2006, the Association of Professional Engineers of Trinidad and Tobago (APETT) had released a position paper expressing concern that "the Government is about to commit the country (and taxpayers) to an expenditure of tens of billions of dollars, without doing the necessary analysis to determine if this is the best and most cost-effective way of achieving the stated goals." The Joint Consultative Council also worried that the project was being started by the Government "without the various checks and balances, controls, the institutions, the laws and regulations".

The Government scornfully dismissed all such comments. Three years later, the Rapid Rail continues to enjoy a status akin to that of a top-secret military operation.
Given the huge outlay of taxpayers' dollars, to say nothing of the certain disruptions during the construction years, the Government must operate with decent respect for transparency. In particular, it is obliged to explain to the people of T&T the Rapid Rail project's feasibility, and its long-term costs.
To keep doing otherwise will be to reinforce perceptions of dictatorial tendencies, heighten suspicions of corruption, and support conclusions of fiscal irresponsibility. Let there be light—long before the end of the Rapid Rail tunnel

So tell me what has changed???

Between Jan 22 2010, and now???

[zoom rader]

Actually ZR, the Sydney Opera House was commissioned by the New South Wales Government. An international competition for a design of the facility was launched by the NSW premier, Mr Cahill. When the architect who won fell out with the trust(a board designed to oversea the construction of the facility) and resigned, it was the NSW government who used a government architect to complete the facility. The Sydney opera house is really one of the finest examples of local government development. Utzon became embroiled in a big row when the Government refused to pay him. In fact, the project almost came to a stop in 1965 when the NSW government was deliberating the massive costs resulting in a withholding of progress payments by the NSW. The lottery paid for the majority of the costs, specifically, 100 million dollars. When Utzon was fired, the budget ballooned from 18.2 million to 102 billion, for essentially the same design by government architects.

Yeah and that is why this government should seek private & public investors and operators . They need to learn from the failures above.
Let's the investors take the risk rather that you and your kids having to pay to fund this. Your taxes should not have to pay for this.

[Allergic2BunnyEars]

The IDB is checking the numbers on a project that it wants to finance...
secured against?
The consolidated fund?
the success of the project...KPIs?

Cuz the IDB is in the BUSINESS of lending money.Of course they want us to take the most expensive route.

MY point remains....before we get the IDB involved....what document justifies the choice of RR???

allyuh see this doc?
or just oblique references to the study by RITES that has been severely criticized and made assumptions based on certain conditions????

Habits article quotes Imbert sounding like its a done deal...just like he was in 2010..

http://www.trinidadexpress.com/commenta ... 50429.html

Later this year, one of the most costly public projects in the history of Trinidad and Tobago may start. Or it may not. Either way, the Government is keeping citizens in the dark. That project is Rapid Rail, for which estimates have ranged from $9 billion to $15 billion. And the very fact that no final figure is publicly known even at this late stage reveals the secretive manner in which the Government has pursued this project.

In her 2009-2010 Budget, Finance Minister Karen Nunez-Tesheira announced that "planning and engineering work continued apace on the Trinidad Rapid Rail Project in fiscal 2009...In fiscal 2010, the final costing and detailed scope of works for the project will be determined, thus allowing the Government to make an informed investment decision on the construction phase of the project."
Mere weeks later, however, the public was told that the Rapid Rail was on hold. Yet it appears that negotiations for land are still underway, and that the Government will make a final decision within a few months, [b]assuming a favourable outcome of the environmental feasibility.[/b] This week, however, consultations toward obtaining a Certificate of Environmental Clearance were abruptly, inexplicably, and indefinitely postponed.
The Government has not told citizens whether research had determined the economic wisdom of beginning this project during a time of global economic contraction. Nor has the administration even confirmed that a rapid rail is feasible at all within the confines of this island's land space and economy.

Works and Transport Minister Colm Imbert keeps repeating that a proper economic feasibility study has been done, but he has also denied the public access to the findings.

As far back as 2006, the Association of Professional Engineers of Trinidad and Tobago (APETT) had released a position paper expressing concern that "the Government is about to commit the country (and taxpayers) to an expenditure of tens of billions of dollars, without doing the necessary analysis to determine if this is the best and most cost-effective way of achieving the stated goals." The Joint Consultative Council also worried that the project was being started by the Government "without the various checks and balances, controls, the institutions, the laws and regulations".

The Government scornfully dismissed all such comments. Three years later, the Rapid Rail continues to enjoy a status akin to that of a top-secret military operation.
Given the huge outlay of taxpayers' dollars, to say nothing of the certain disruptions during the construction years, the Government must operate with decent respect for transparency. In particular, it is obliged to explain to the people of T&T the Rapid Rail project's feasibility, and its long-term costs.
To keep doing otherwise will be to reinforce perceptions of dictatorial tendencies, heighten suspicions of corruption, and support conclusions of fiscal irresponsibility. Let there be light—long before the end of the Rapid Rail tunnel

So tell me what has changed???

Between Jan 22 2010, and now???

IDB is in the business of SUCCESSFULLY developing infrastructure. Again I don't know why you keep insisting it will be no different or that it's just a case of funding.

IDB has NOT chosen the more expensive option yet so again I don't know why you assume they are going to choose the most expensive option when comparing the figures as suggested by Imbert.

You ask what has changed since 2010 but it's already been stated to you multiple times that the IDB is looking at the numbers in this instance as opposed to that in 2010 when the government was going it alone with their figures.

[j.o.e]

Had to go to port of Spain today to deliver an important document. Due to my schedule water taxi was not an option, I had to drive from south, fight up for parking only to be caught in hellish traffic at 1pm due to an accident by courts. How different things could've been.

[Allergic2BunnyEars]

Had to go to port of Spain today to deliver an important document. Due to my schedule water taxi was not an option, I had to drive from south, fight up for parking only to be caught in hellish traffic at 1pm due to an accident by courts. How different things could've been.

i'm sure a rapid bus would have sorted you out.

[Redman]

IDB is in the business of SUCCESSFULLY developing infrastructure. Again I don't know why you keep insisting it will be no different or that it's just a case of funding.

A2B....

this is the article that Habit posted...

http://www.newsday.co.tt/news/0,218086.html

But Imbert said the government wanted the IDB to validate its numbers for the Rapid Rail project. He said there was a lot of confusion about the cost, adding that during the election campaign the People’s Partnership claimed it would cost $60 billion to build but the Government’s figure was $10 billion.

Government is convinced that its costs and estimates of the numbers of persons who would use the service are accurate “and we simply want an international agency to confirm and validate our numbers but our target is to initiate the construction of this project by the end of September 2016.” He said the Government was giving itself a year to make sure all the costings were correct, that the approach was correct, to get a contractor and to get moving.

It seems that the IDB Terms of reference are limited to the the question ...is our math correct...yes /no.

Validate : to check or prove accuracy.

The IDB is NOT being asked...SHOULD we build a RR...or better for us...please determine the best mass transit solution OR solutions that will be best fit for our country and its plethora of issues.

So what has changed?
they building the RR...(Full Speed ahead)
No additional info published...(only a PRE feasibility study was done up to 2010)
They asking IDB to check their arithmetic.

IDB has NOT chosen the more expensive option yet so again I don't know why you assume they are going to choose the most expensive option when comparing the figures as suggested by Imbert.

As a company in the business of lending money...in a global environment of negative real interest rates and awash in unbacked currency.......for fcuk sure the IDB happy to lend as much as possible us at 2-5% against the consolidated fund backed by Oil and Gas revenues.

So we are in a place here where the GORTT saying look IDB say we right the numbers correct....IDB says the numbers right ...can we please lend you the money.

You seem to be hearing that the IDB managing and VALIDATING the PROJECT....

despite Colm explicitly saying that the IDB only request the financing part.
So we dont know if the IDB actually involved.

[Allergic2BunnyEars]

Ok well you can take Imbert's words as literally IDB coming to check the figures but they don't just accept figures put forward to them by the borrowers. They make sure the figures are sound. What you're saying is if the GOTT said 100 billion the IDB would just say ok sure. I don't agree because that's not how the IDB works regardless of how some things come across in the article. The GOTT said 60 and IDB says 45 because it does its own analyses. You don't get 60.

[Redman]

Im saying that. the IDB isnt going to say dont build the RR cuz it doesnt make sense.

Especially if repayment has first call on the consolidated fund....

cuz they in the biz of lending money.

[Lance]

You know things bad when we praying that the IDB police the project and save us from crooked politicians.

Politicians should fear the citizens, not the IDB.

[Allergic2BunnyEars]

Im saying that. the IDB isnt going to say dont build the RR cuz it doesnt make sense.

Especially if repayment has first call on the consolidated fund....

cuz they in the biz of lending money.

So if IDB says RR can be done for way less that would not make you happier? You are anti RR?

[Allergic2BunnyEars]

You know things bad when we praying that the IDB police the project and save us from crooked politicians.

Politicians should fear the citizens, not the IDB.

Why would they fear citizens when we don't protest for sheit? You can basically do wtf you want for five years and the only repercussions would be you might lose the next general elections.

[rspann]

A rapid rail might be a good thing but that is not going to solve our problem. We have a traffic problem ,not a transportation problem per se. There are people in Trinidad who not going to travel on train for two reasons,we like the convenience and two it is not feasible for everyone. Think about leaving Bumuto or Biche with three children, your work things and lunch etc to go to Arima to catch the train to go to POS and then get out and go up to work at Stanmore ave. after dropping the children off to school.

The train replaces the maxis and buses along two axes ,E-W and S-N what about the outlying areas? The train will target the same people who use the bus right now. We have a serious traffic problem caused by traffic lights and bottlenecks. Even if we start the Rapid Rail project now ,it will take a few years to complete. What we doing about the ever increasing traffic till it's completed?What we really need is a proper highway from Sangre Grande to Chaguaramas, and North/ South, Without traffic lights and that racket cable barriers. All the traffic on the south highway (except for the occasional accident,) is caused by repairs to the cables.What so hard about widening Bhagwansinghs to Chag,with roundabouts?

When the traffic is addressed ,then the rail could come next and if it takes five or ten years ,at least we won't be sitting in standstill traffic for three hours every morning and evening.

[Redman]

Im saying that. the IDB isnt going to say dont build the RR cuz it doesnt make sense.

Especially if repayment has first call on the consolidated fund....

cuz they in the biz of lending money.

So if IDB says RR can be done for way less that would not make you happier?

My issue isnt what it cost....Ive said a couple posts ago financing isnt the issue.

You are anti RR?

Well I dont know.

Simply because like ALL here ...I have not done the analysis.

Im happy to see a proper approach to solving the problem.

I would find the top 3 companies world wide that have a track record of developing National Transportation policies and implementing solutions.

Publicly tender/reverse auction out with a local content clause for transfer of knowledge.
The Tender would be for the Development of a National Transportation System Policy

Engage the winner to develop a National Transportation Policy. This cant be done on the basis of a manifesto.

In this process the Public will have to be engaged to provide feedback on some of the inputs.

While this is happening and in support of its development I will get
1) PTSC properly managed.....with a focuss on optimizing capacity in the East/ West corridor
2) The water taxi concept optimized for the west coast/South coast
3) Get into a policy marketing move on Car pooling/telecommuting/flexi time to public and private sector
4)Referendum on a decentralization/development policy ...do we continue with the Highway development?
5) Timed and Adaptive Light control systems to manage the existing and future road traffic
6)Consultation and feedback from stakeholders will be ongoing and used.

All the above will provide short and long term data for the end use in terms of quantities of cars on the road at rush hr.And will show the direction that the people want to take the country in.

1-5 can be sourced,implemented and optimized quickly without major expense.If they work we keep them ...if not go next.

If we get 1-5 in place and the commute times are reduced we can THEN decide....based on that data...

If we need a monolithic solution,what that solution should be and where it should be.

So at that point we have an integrated policy, implementation plan and are testing solutions that COULD provide immediate relief to commuters.

Once the policy is done publish and allow feedback before implementation.

[RASC]

Rspann -sometimes I wonder about you. I fear for your children.

[j.o.e]

A rapid rail might be a good thing but that is not going to solve our problem. We have a traffic problem ,not a transportation problem per se. There are people in Trinidad who not going to travel on train for two reasons,we like the convenience and two it is not feasible for everyone. Think about leaving Bumuto or Biche with three children, your work things and lunch etc to go to Arima to catch the train to go to POS and then get out and go up to work at Stanmore ave. after dropping the children off to school.

The train replaces the maxis and buses along two axes ,E-W and S-N what about the outlying areas? The train will target the same people who use the bus right now. We have a serious traffic problem caused by traffic lights and bottlenecks. Even if we start the Rapid Rail project now ,it will take a few years to complete. What we doing about the ever increasing traffic till it's completed?What we really need is a proper highway from Sangre Grande to Chaguaramas, and North/ South, Without traffic lights and that racket cable barriers. All the traffic on the south highway (except for the occasional accident,) is caused by repairs to the cables.What so hard about widening Bhagwansinghs to Chag,with roundabouts?

When the traffic is addressed ,then the rail could come next and if it takes five or ten years ,at least we won't be sitting in standstill traffic for three hours every morning and evening.

So you want to address the traffic and bottlenecks first? Has it occurred to you that too many cars is the problem ? Due to cheap fuel, cheap Cars because of foreign used and no option other than driving. Any young person as they start working buys a car because there is no reliable public transport. Good luck building more road and overpasses and moving bottlenecks bruh.

[Habit7]

A rapid rail might be a good thing but that is not going to solve our problem. We have a traffic problem ,not a transportation problem per se. There are people in Trinidad who not going to travel on train for two reasons,we like the convenience and two it is not feasible for everyone. Think about leaving Bumuto or Biche with three children, your work things and lunch etc to go to Arima to catch the train to go to POS and then get out and go up to work at Stanmore ave. after dropping the children off to school.

The train replaces the maxis and buses along two axes ,E-W and S-N what about the outlying areas? The train will target the same people who use the bus right now. We have a serious traffic problem caused by traffic lights and bottlenecks. Even if we start the Rapid Rail project now ,it will take a few years to complete. What we doing about the ever increasing traffic till it's completed?What we really need is a proper highway from Sangre Grande to Chaguaramas, and North/ South, Without traffic lights and that racket cable barriers. All the traffic on the south highway (except for the occasional accident,) is caused by repairs to the cables.What so hard about widening Bhagwansinghs to Chag,with roundabouts?

When the traffic is addressed ,then the rail could come next and if it takes five or ten years ,at least we won't be sitting in standstill traffic for three hours every morning and evening.

The RR will serve the major population density corridors of the E-W and N-S, that's like 75% of the island. For the small number of ppl who live in Biche and work in uptown POS they would drive or travel to Grande and take the train to POS and arrive in 35 mins. Currently the Water Taxi is serviced by buses that carry ppl all over POS, with the RR it should be no different.

When I leave Sando I have no traffic lights to POS, but I fave traffic for 2-3hrs. Eliminating traffic lights and optimizing traffic arrangements are good and necessary but it doesn't resolve our problem. We have too much vehicles on the road running on subsidized cheap fuel. A mass transit system is needed to provide an effiicient and dependable way to get the nation to work.

[Mr. Red Sleeper]

When I leave Sando I have no traffic lights to POS, but I fave traffic for 2-3hrs. Eliminating traffic lights and optimizing traffic arrangements are good and necessary but it doesn't resolve our problem. We have too much vehicles on the road running on subsidized cheap fuel. A mass transit system is needed to provide an effiicient and dependable way to get the nation to work.

You were going good until that last part.
Im saying it clearly again. Using our existing roadways and "mass transit system(s)" that are already in place there is absolutely no reason why our deplorable traffic situation cannot be remedied.
Its going to take some minor adjustments as far as traffic rules and routes are concerned and most importantly, the greatest repair needed to our existing system is the educating of the masses as to what can and cant happen and why. Making them to understand that the changes, once effected, are for the betterment of the public- at large,- socially & economically.
With this done,I guarantee that there'll be no need for an additional mass transport system on this small island.
Another scheme IMO, to continue the rape of the countries' inhabitants and finances.

[rspann]

@ Habit.What causes the traffic you encounter when coming from south? And as I asked ,how long will the rail take to implement and what we doing while waiting for it to be completed? The train going to Chag? down west have serious traffic problems too .

[Habit7]

Too much cars.
8 years.
I don't know which Chag you are talking about but the RR furthest western station is Westmoorings.

[Mr. Red Sleeper]

Thats really what you think is the reason for traffic?
Too much cars?
Based on some of your comments, which seem intelligent at times, i know you can come up with a better answer than that.