Future Transit System Ideas - Ottawa/Gatineau | Fantasy

[1overcosc]

I think we're all on the same page here--those Kanata & Barrhaven lines are something that should be looked at, but not in the way that Maguire wants (peak period trains only, almost zero stations, as a replacement for Phase 2 LRT).

My concept for Phase 3 has always been to bring LRT past Baseline & Bayshore to meet up with the Beachburg sub in both spots (ie. one junction at Woodroffe and another at QCH) to create an interchange with a DMU line going from Kanata North to Greenboro, then interlined with the existing O-Train (aka the Trillium Line) up to Bayview. Double-track Trillium north of Greenboro at the time too, that will be needed at some point anyway especially as Carling station intensifiation continues. There can be then be 4 minute combined service Greenboro-Bayview (assuming 8 minute service for the Beachburg line)

But without that LRT connection to it, the value of the Beachburg sub is quite limited.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by Catenary

I would have thought it was because MUP crossings only involve pedestrians and cyclists, and if a train hits one of them you clean it off and put it back in service (a harsh reality). Rail crossings are protected by interlocking signals, and with Automatic Train Protection, the Talents and Lints can't blow past a signal like a car could at a grade crossing. FRA compliance is largely about making the trains capable of smashing into cars and trucks, and the Lints and Talents aren't compliant.

Except that rationale breaks down when we consider that Transport Canada had authorized a series of at-grade crossings for the O-Train replacement project, the N-S LRT, in Riverside South and Barrhaven. The vehicles contemplated for that project were even smaller than the Talent and Lint DMUs.

It's possible to rationalize it in isolation, but once you look at it holistically, the prohibition breaks down logically.

I happen to know for a fact that the DMU grade-crossing exclusion is entirely due to the City of Ottawa, and that comes from two different sources. I can tell you that in what turned out to be its final days, Ottawa Central had begun to look into operating passenger services, including DMUs, on its lines. It didn't present an obstacle to them.

If you listen from about 1:30 to the end, you can hear the GM of Ottawa Central explicitly mention light rail vehicles on his tracks:

• Video Link

He wouldn't be saying this kind of thing if he definitively knew it wasn't possible.

I personally think the FRA rules are ridiculous, but since we're joined at the hip with the States, Toronto ends up with hideous, expensive one-off DMUs to run to the airport, all in the name of compliance. Never mind the fact that UP Express lacks grade crossings all together.

Although there seems to be general agreement that the plan Maguire presents is terrible (the quality of the maps really gets me, with Carleton south of the river)

Awful doesn't cover it - it's like a freehand job with MS Paint or something. The straight lines aren't even straight.

the idea isn't terribly far-fetched, and I do like that it is being brought forwards into the public consciousness. If nothing else it will hopefully help protect these lines from being abandoned, and might inspire ideas for post 2025. The Orleans idea is ridiculous, but the Barrhaven and Kanata connections show some promise, especially with the Renfrew sub continuing to Carp and Arnprior. The city already has 3 spare trainsets waiting to be used for something, it seems that Barrhaven and Kanata could get mainline rail connections a lot faster than LRT.

Probably have to pick just one of those - and Barrhaven seems a better candidate to me unless we're aiming for a bypass line, in which case Kanata-Tremblay or even Cyrville (near Innes) could work.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

I think we're all on the same page here--those Kanata & Barrhaven lines are something that should be looked at, but not in the way that Maguire wants (peak period trains only, almost zero stations, as a replacement for Phase 2 LRT).

It's too bad we didn't have another candidate willing to put forward a sane plan that builds on Phase 2 but also leverages the rail assets in place.

Instead we get Maguire's half-assed plan versus Watson flooding Twitter with inane "Don't reset" messages.

My concept for Phase 3 has always been to bring LRT past Baseline & Bayshore to meet up with the Beachburg sub in both spots (ie. one junction at Woodroffe and another at QCH) to create an interchange with a DMU line going from Kanata North to Greenboro, then interlined with the existing O-Train (aka the Trillium Line) up to Bayview. Double-track Trillium north of Greenboro at the time too, that will be needed at some point anyway especially as Carling station intensifiation continues. There can be then be 4 minute combined service Greenboro-Bayview (assuming 8 minute service for the Beachburg line)

But without that LRT connection to it, the value of the Beachburg sub is quite limited.

[1overcosc]

Here's my rough concept for Phase 3 using the Beachburg & Smiths Falls subdivisions:



Two new lines follow rail corridors almost exactly, except I had the line from Kanata/Nepean deviate to Hurdman instead of terminating in Tremblay. Avoids using up VIA's platforms. I also combined Confederation & Heron stations--how exactly, not sure, but I would like to see that. The SE Transitway would remain; it and the Kanata line would parallel.

Between Confederation Heights & Bayview the line would be double tracked. Both it and the Barrhaven line would have 8 minute frequency allowing for combined 4 minute frequency at Carleton, Carling, and Gladstone.

Yes, I removed the Trillium Line to Riverside South and put to the Airport instead. I honestly think Riverside South is better served by a transitway extension down the old N-S LRT corridor instead, it allows for direct service instead of an awkward transfer at Bowesville. And yes, I did plan for the Baseline spur to short turn at Tremblay. Orleans doesn't need 90 second service.

[Catenary]

Originally Posted by Dado

Except that rationale breaks down when we consider that Transport Canada had authorized a series of at-grade crossings for the O-Train replacement project, the N-S LRT, in Riverside South and Barrhaven. The vehicles contemplated for that project were even smaller than the Talent and Lint DMUs.

It's possible to rationalize it in isolation, but once you look at it holistically, the prohibition breaks down logically.

Continuing to rationalize it in isolation, the Siemens vehicles were trams, and would have been crash worthy in mixed traffic. It wouldn't have been a grade crossing, it would have been a traffic signal. Doesn't change the fact that this is stupid, but it is at least theoretically possible to order a mainline DMU that meets these requirements (Toronto, Budd Cars) and would have the benefit of being wider to use the entire track gauge, eliminating platform extenders.

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Here's my rough concept for Phase 3 using the Beachburg & Smiths Falls subdivisions:

Two new lines follow rail corridors almost exactly, except I had the line from Kanata/Nepean deviate to Hurdman instead of terminating in Tremblay. Avoids using up VIA's platforms. I also combined Confederation & Heron stations--how exactly, not sure, but I would like to see that. The SE Transitway would remain; it and the Kanata line would parallel.

Between Confederation Heights & Bayview the line would be double tracked. Both it and the Barrhaven line would have 8 minute frequency allowing for combined 4 minute frequency at Carleton, Carling, and Gladstone.

Yes, I removed the Trillium Line to Riverside South and put to the Airport instead. I honestly think Riverside South is better served by a transitway extension down the old N-S LRT corridor instead, it allows for direct service instead of an awkward transfer at Bowesville. And yes, I did plan for the Baseline spur to short turn at Tremblay. Orleans doesn't need 90 second service.

This is almost exactly what I had in my head. I'm not sure about the terminating at Hurdman since I think Tremblay has extra platforms, but that's minor. I'm also not sure whether terminating at Tremblay or Hurdman plays better into the dream long term plan of restoring downtown mainline rail service. Hurdman would protect a corridor, but it might be in the wrong spot.

Every day when I go past Confederation I try to visualize combining it with Heron and grade-separating the diamond. My current scheme involves swapping the Transitway and train tracks between Confederation and Walkley to get the grades needed for the crossover, and moving the Transitway from south of the tracks to north of the tracks at Heron. I think this, combined with new development and the elimination of some road ramps should yield enough space for a nice interchange.

In my opinion the Baseline spur should be extended to St. Laurent. There is space past the station for the crossover and pocket track to reverse trains.

This is now far off the topic of the thread.

[1overcosc]

Hey waterloowarrior, if you could move this discussion over to a transit thread that would be great

I chose Tremblay for the short turn because the rail yard is there. It seems convenient for at least one line to end at the rail yard, it should make it easier to swap trains in and out of service. Agree that a higher ridership location like St. Laurent or Blair would be better, though.

Some more thoughts on my Phase 3 plan...

As part of my idea, I'd like to add that I propose some sort of method for buses to access Corkstown Station from the 417; that way, it can serve as a major bus hub allowing for connections between Transitway buses to Kanata Centre, local buses in Kanata (I'd like for all local routes in Kanata to terminate at Corkstown), and the two rail lines.

As for why I chose the Barrhaven line to go Bayview and the Kanata-Nepean one to Hurdman. I don't want 3 lines going to Bayview as that could create scheduling issues along the route and also overload Bayview Station at peak periods. I also don't want 2 lines going to Hurdman/Tremblay as that would overload the VIA tracks. I figure the Barrhaven line will probably be used mostly for core-area bound commutes (to downtown, Tunneys, U of O, etc.) and Bayview is a better transfer point for those. Whereas the Kanata line, while still seeing downtown commuters, will probably see fewer of those and more crosstown & reverse commute trips as there's the connection at Corkstown that Kanatans will probably use for downtown travel, plus it serves lots of employment areas along its route (Colonnade, Kanata North, Merivale, etc.)

[OTSkyline]

^ Very nice phase 3 transit plan. Here are my added ideas or "wishlist items".

*Blue line extended past VIA to Blair and then go south to run down Innes to serve Orleans South

*Green Airport line could, in the future, be extended, dip under the airport and runways, to go back to surface on the south side of the airport to serve Riverside South and the cross to Barrhaven to connect to the gold line.

*Last but not least, a future Subway/LRT to run from Bilings Bridge to Parliament under Bank St, then go east under Rideau Street, followed by Montreal Road to connect with Cite Colegiale and finally dip back down to connect with the blue and red lines at Blair.

[Aylmer]

Perhaps an acknowledgment of Gatineau, too
You could extend the lines terminating at Bayview to Portage via the Windmill lands in the (perhaps covered) trench beside Laurier.


If there were to be a Bank St. Line, I still maintain that an extension to Gatineau under the Ottawa river would be transformative in how the two cores interact with each other.

I would also tweak the western end of the red line so that it terminates at the Queensway-Carlton Hospital (major employment centre) instead of at Corkstown (middle of an undevelopable field by a highway). It would still allow for a transfer.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

^ Very nice phase 3 transit plan. Here are my added ideas or "wishlist items".

*Blue line extended past VIA to Blair and then go south to run down Innes to serve Orleans South

*Green Airport line could, in the future, be extended, dip under the airport and runways, to go back to surface on the south side of the airport to serve Riverside South and the cross to Barrhaven to connect to the gold line.

*Last but not least, a future Subway/LRT to run from Bilings Bridge to Parliament under Bank St, then go east under Rideau Street, followed by Montreal Road to connect with Cite Colegiale and finally dip back down to connect with the blue and red lines at Blair.

Agreed with every single of those ideas. However, I made my Phase 3 map to be a realistic picture of what Phase 3 might very well look like. Phases 1 & 2 used a lot of municipal debt capacity. According to the city's documents, only $550M of municipal money would be available for use in the 25 year period following the completion of Phase 2. Assuming matching with federal & provincial dollars again that's $1.65B available for Phase 3. My plan above could probably be built for that.

The Bank-Rideau-Montreal subway, barring some new fiscal reality, wouldn't be pursuable until after 2048, when Phases 1 & 2 are paid off. So barring a new fiscal reality (which is actually quite likely--who knows what the world will be like in 20 years), here's my proposal:
-Phase 2 complete in 2023
-Phase 3 (my map, roughly) complete in 2030
-Phase 4 (Bank-Rideau-Montreal subway, south Orleans route, finish loop from Airport to Barrhaven) complete in 2053

2053 is not insanely far away--it's 39 years. I do think that timeline should be moved up as much as possible though. That debt limit is based on property taxes growing with inflation and no other sources of new municipal revenue. The city could finance something beyond that $550M limit by adding a special 2-3% extra to property tax increase one year and using that as a dedicated fund to borrow against (which is how Toronto is financing the Scarborough subway), or by introducing a municipal land value transfer tax or municipal vehicle registration fee--which the City of Toronto is allowed to do but it shouldn't be that hard to convince the province to let Ottawa do so as well if Ottawa wanted it.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Perhaps an acknowledgment of Gatineau, too
You could extend the lines terminating at Bayview to Portage via the Windmill lands in the (perhaps covered) trench beside Laurier.


If there were to be a Bank St. Line, I still maintain that an extension to Gatineau under the Ottawa river would be transformative in how the two cores interact with each other.

I would also tweak the western end of the red line so that it terminates at the Queensway-Carlton Hospital (major employment centre) instead of at Corkstown (middle of an undevelopable field by a highway). It would still allow for a transfer.

I looked at using QCH as the terminus, but it would require the line to double back, as Bayshore is further west than QCH, meaning that in a long-term scenario where the Confederation Line does go to Kanata Centre (which I don't think will be necessary in the foreseeable future as BRT can do that well enough, but I still want to protect for as an ultimate goal), the line would be awkwardly circuitous. It would also requiring tunnelling or elevation to get across the highway. I figured to save money Corkstown would be preferred. But QCH is definitely a better choice in the infinite-fiscal-resources scenario and assuming that there's no plan to build Confederation Line to Kanata Centre at any point in the near future / a little bit of circuitous routing is thought to be no big deal.

There's also the fact that the NCC may not like a large bus transfer station in the middle of the Greenbelt, so that's another case for QCH.

I didn't put in the Gatineau line but I do support it. I don't think the City of Ottawa should fund it, though--ideally federally funded in entirety due to its national capital significance--but I still want it to exist.

I've never been an expert on Gatineau transit planning, so I wasn't really sure what the smart thing to do with a Gatineau extension would be--up to Montcalm, towards Portage, Aylmer?

[silvergate]

Since they are tight on funds wouldn't it be easier if phase 3 were to try and combine the Baseline and Innes BRT ways through Walkley? That line could then be extended all the way to Kanata South and potentially meet the south end of the N-S Kanata transitway. Since the city already plans to fund three dedicated transitways, connecting them might actually be the easiest way to open rapid transit across the south of the city. It would also hopefully start to promote development along a very low density stretch of the city. It would also ensure full connectivity across the city, rather than funneling everybody downtown.
The hardest part would be figuring out how to stick rapid bus lanes between the 417 at Walkley and Heron at the Airport Parkway.

[Catenary]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Agreed with every single of those ideas. However, I made my Phase 3 map to be a realistic picture of what Phase 3 might very well look like. Phases 1 & 2 used a lot of municipal debt capacity. According to the city's documents, only $550M of municipal money would be available for use in the 25 year period following the completion of Phase 2. Assuming matching with federal & provincial dollars again that's $1.65B available for Phase 3. My plan above could probably be built for that.

I like your map because it seems feasible - the Bank St. Subway is not going to happen anytime soon.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Here's my rough concept for Phase 3 using the Beachburg & Smiths Falls subdivisions:

Your magenta line can continue eastwards past the VIA station as Maguire's Orleans line does to the Cyrville/Blair area, then into South Orleans along the Cumberland Transitway corridor.

In time, as funds allow, the indigo line could be extended to the same Cumberland corridor but by sending it through the Alta Vista/Hospitals corridor instead.

Two new lines follow rail corridors almost exactly, except I had the line from Kanata/Nepean deviate to Hurdman instead of terminating in Tremblay. Avoids using up VIA's platforms. I also combined Confederation & Heron stations--how exactly, not sure, but I would like to see that. The SE Transitway would remain; it and the Kanata line would parallel.

Between Confederation Heights & Bayview the line would be double tracked. Both it and the Barrhaven line would have 8 minute frequency allowing for combined 4 minute frequency at Carleton, Carling, and Gladstone.

Yes, I removed the Trillium Line to Riverside South and put to the Airport instead. I honestly think Riverside South is better served by a transitway extension down the old N-S LRT corridor instead, it allows for direct service instead of an awkward transfer at Bowesville. And yes, I did plan for the Baseline spur to short turn at Tremblay. Orleans doesn't need 90 second service.

In the short term, I'd leave the Trillium Line heading to Riverside South (and I mean to Leitrim, not Bowesville). Entering the Airport is going to be a bit of a PITA.

In time, I would propose a bit of a switcheroo: convert the SE Twy to LRT with a line going through downtown via Hurdman, and off to somewhere like Aylmer. This line would also extend to Riverside South. That frees up the Trillium line to go to the airport, whereupon it becomes a direct run to downtown Ottawa at my dream downtown railway station on LeBreton Flats.

[eternallyme]

How I would do it:

* Approve Phase 2 as proposed, except for the Bowesville link which would be removed south of Lester Road, replaced with an airport connection and a link to Gatineau via the Prince of Wales Bridge

* Phase 3 (2024-2031) would include Baseline to Barrhaven Centre, Bayshore to Kanata Centre and the Crosstown corridor, plus peak-only extensions via dual-mode trains (fully compatible with the other O-Train lines) to distant areas

* Phase 4 (beyond 2031) would include the Rideau-Montreal line (due to its high cost), Place d'Orleans to Trim, Airport to Barrhaven Centre via Riverside South and Kanata Centre to Fernbank.

* Corridors not mentioned would still be targeted for BRT corridors. The primary ones would be the cross-Kanata corridor (Kanata North to Hope Side Road), the Baseline corridor, the South Orleans corridor to name three. The Southeast Transitway from Hurdman to Heron would REMAIN a BRT corridor for crosstown use, from Heron to Walkley would be decommissioned, from Walkley southward would become part of the Rideau-Montreal line.

* Other than a Trillium Line (misnamed now?) extension to Terrasses de la Chaudiere, no corridors in Gatineau are identified, although if they desire there could be lines drawn there.

Working on a drawing for it now.

[JM1]

A Rideau-Montreal line would help to build density and bring urban renewal to Vanier and Gloucester and help to alleviate the need for more Rideau road crossings. This should be a priority.

The other parts of your plan risk developing far flung suburbs (while I do like the idea of suburbs from which people commute to downtown by train, I think Ottawa should prioritize densification which places a lesser strain on infrastructure costs).

Originally Posted by eternallyme

How I would do it:

* Approve Phase 2 as proposed, except for the Bowesville link which would be removed south of Lester Road, replaced with an airport connection and a link to Gatineau via the Prince of Wales Bridge

* Phase 3 (2024-2031) would include Baseline to Barrhaven Centre, Bayshore to Kanata Centre and the Crosstown corridor, plus peak-only extensions via dual-mode trains (fully compatible with the other O-Train lines) to distant areas

* Phase 4 (beyond 2031) would include the Rideau-Montreal line (due to its high cost), Place d'Orleans to Trim, Airport to Barrhaven Centre via Riverside South and Kanata Centre to Fernbank.

* Corridors not mentioned would still be targeted for BRT corridors. The primary ones would be the cross-Kanata corridor (Kanata North to Hope Side Road), the Baseline corridor, the South Orleans corridor to name three. The Southeast Transitway from Hurdman to Heron would REMAIN a BRT corridor for crosstown use, from Heron to Walkley would be decommissioned, from Walkley southward would become part of the Rideau-Montreal line.

* Other than a Trillium Line (misnamed now?) extension to Terrasses de la Chaudiere, no corridors in Gatineau are identified, although if they desire there could be lines drawn there.

Working on a drawing for it now.

[eternallyme]

Here it is:



Lighter colours indicate later phases. Distant peak extensions with dual-mode vehicles are not included.

Green - existing O-Train/Trillium Line (note in late phases two routings to Riverside South, that is an OPTION, either extend from the airport via tunnel to Limebank, or along the currently proposed routing), in Phase 1 (actually existing), Phase 2 and Phase 4

Red - Confederation Line under construction (the eastern and western routes are being proposed to keep this name), in all phases

Blue - Southwest extension of Confederation Line to Baseline and beyond (could use a new name) - note Phase 1 blue barely visible, in Phases 1 to 3

Orange - Crosstown route (likely would use existing O-Train type vehicles, less frequently), entirely a Phase 3 project

Yellow - Bank Street-Rideau-Montreal route (likely would use standard electric light rail vehicles, mostly underground), entirely a Phase 4 project - It could also extend beyond South Keys to Riverside South and Barrhaven Centre instead of the existing O-Train/Trillium Line (an option).

[Aylmer]

I can't see your image :/

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

I can't see your image :/

Changed the hosting link, see if you can see it now.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

How I would do it:
* Phase 4 (beyond 2031) would include the Rideau-Montreal line (due to its high cost), Place d'Orleans to Trim, Airport to Barrhaven Centre via Riverside South and Kanata Centre to Fernbank.

A line like this needn't have a "high cost" IF additional revenues from property taxes induced by the line were captured and credited towards the cost of building the line, at least until the capital cost and carrying cost of any borrowing was discharged.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

A line like this needn't have a "high cost" IF additional revenues from property taxes induced by the line were captured and credited towards the cost of building the line, at least until the capital cost and carrying cost of any borrowing was discharged.

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

A line like this needn't have a "high cost" IF additional revenues from property taxes induced by the line were captured and credited towards the cost of building the line, at least until the capital cost and carrying cost of any borrowing was discharged.

Rob Ford talked about this for a while, I don't think he got much buy in.

The city portion of property taxes on residential property is a little over 1%. To fund a $2B line (as an example) the property values along the line would have to increase by $200B/(whatever number of years you want to amortize it for) (actually more, because a property value increase of that magnitude would change the mill rate for the entire city) and that is assuming all of the specialized charges on the tax bill are diverted to transit. )