Kanata LRT EA - Bayshore to Palladium

[J.OT13]

Way too many stops on the route. How many people do they expect will take transit if it takes over an hour* to get downtown?

The LRT shouldn't be going to Stittville. The area is already built up low-density and there is no room for a decent N/S road corridor (which is needed in a high density area regardless of transit access). And we know what's going to happen; if Stittsville gets LRT, then Kanata North will want it to. How many times can we split the line before the capacity and frequency becomes an issue?

*We ca't just calculate the speed without stations and add a minute for each station. We have to take into account the acceleration and deceleration. Average speed for Stage 1 will be around 32 km/h which is just about in line with other systems. So about an hour+ to get downtown from Kanata/Stittsville

[J.OT13]

Regardless of my opposition (and the opposition of many others I'm sure), the current transit master-plan is miles better than what was proposed by Bob Chiarelli. Basically build as much lrt as possible for the cheapest possible price . Absolutely no thought around capacity (trams and only trams), origin and destination or the fact that the Transitway would have still been, even after billions spent on rail, the best way for most of us to get downtown.


http://ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/citycou.../ACS2004-DEV-POL-0006%20revisedjan19.htm

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Way too many stops on the route. How many people do they expect will take transit if it takes over an hour* to get downtown?

OC Transpo expects me to ride their buses. It regularly takes me an hour to get downtown. Front porch to office door is about 5100 metres.

[zzptichka]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

OC Transpo expects me to ride their buses. It regularly takes me an hour to get downtown. Front porch to office door is about 5100 metres.

Seems like a perfect distance to bike. Come to the dark side

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

The LRT shouldn't be going to Stittville.

I agree. LRT to Terry Fox and then have buses fan out to the the different communities to the north, south and west.

*We ca't just calculate the speed without stations and add a minute for each station. We have to take into account the acceleration and deceleration.

The 1 minute includes extra time for acceleration and deceleration. Dwell times will be less than 30 seconds (7 to 20 seconds according to 1overcosc). I do agree that it is just a ball park and not accurate (to get an accurate number, you would need to know the normal rate of acceleration and deceleration that will be used). Considering my result was in the same as Vancouver's SkyTrain, I don't think I don't think my result is all that far off.

Average speed for Stage 1 will be around 32 km/h which is just about in line with other systems. So about an hour+ to get downtown from Kanata/Stittsville

The two big flaws I see with your calculation are:

• Stage 1 will be 12.5 km with 13 stations, so the stations will be an average of 12.5/(13-1) = 1.04 km. Stittville to downtown will be 25 km and 21 stations (if you include Lyon), so 1.25 km. That extra distance while it doesn't seem like much, will allow it to travel at full speed for longer, significantly increasing the average speed.
• The stage 1 average speed includes the downtown stations, which will have longer dwell times than the suburban ones. Since after stage 1,
  the downtown stations are a significant percentage of the total number of stations, this will negatively affect the average speed of the line as a whole.

While maybe my initial estimate of 38 minutes is a bit low, I certainly don't think it will be even close to an hour.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by zzptichka

Seems like a perfect distance to bike. Come to the dark side

Far from scientific, but it has been my observation that regular bicycle commuters eventually get hit by a car. That does point to improving cycling infrastructure to reduce car-bike conflicts.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Far from scientific, but it has been my observation that regular bicycle commuters eventually get hit by a car. That does point to improving cycling infrastructure to reduce car-bike conflicts.

As a regular bicycle commuter, I'd have to agree, and say that I too had an accident because of a car. I got cut off by a car that suddenly swerved into my lane and ended up going over the handle bars.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Regardless of my opposition (and the opposition of many others I'm sure), the current transit master-plan is miles better than what was proposed by Bob Chiarelli. Basically build as much lrt as possible for the cheapest possible price . Absolutely no thought around capacity (trams and only trams), origin and destination or the fact that the Transitway would have still been, even after billions spent on rail, the best way for most of us to get downtown.


http://ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/citycou.../ACS2004-DEV-POL-0006%20revisedjan19.htm

I still think the Montreal Rd Streetcar would have been a good idea...if done right in the European style where it gets priority over cars. As for the rest, we all know the problems with the Trillium Line 2 and it's by far the best of the leftover freight corridors in the city. If we hadn't spent so much effort bulldozing Ottawa's industrial past, we probably would have had some better options to route LRT on existing track.

[lrt's friend]

That is what happens when you hire an anti-rail city planner.

I know that places like London and Paris got rid of streetcars way back when, but they have developed more modern and efficient rail infrastructure in its place.

Just dumping all rail and all industrial development for that matter, not only eliminated transportation options for the future but also eliminated much of Ottawa's blue collar workforce

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

That is what happens when you hire an anti-rail city planner.

I know that places like London and Paris got rid of streetcars way back when, but they have developed more modern and efficient rail infrastructure in its place.

Just dumping all rail and all industrial development for that matter, not only eliminated transportation options for the future but also eliminated much of Ottawa's blue collar workforce

Yup. Ottawa (according to Grebber) was supposed to only ever be a government town with offices scattered all over the city to eliminate congestion even though everyone would drive their car to work. As a government town it would never grow above 800,000 people so no need to ever extend beyond the Greenbelt.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Just dumping all rail and all industrial development for that matter, not only eliminated transportation options for the future but also eliminated much of Ottawa's blue collar workforce

This right here.

And the prettyism and anti-industrial, anti-commercial mindset is still entrenched, making it hard to diversity the economy out of the public sector.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I agree. LRT to Terry Fox and then have buses fan out to the the different communities to the north, south and west.


The 1 minute includes extra time for acceleration and deceleration. Dwell times will be less than 30 seconds (7 to 20 seconds according to 1overcosc). I do agree that it is just a ball park and not accurate (to get an accurate number, you would need to know the normal rate of acceleration and deceleration that will be used). Considering my result was in the same as Vancouver's SkyTrain, I don't think I don't think my result is all that far off.


The two big flaws I see with your calculation are:

• Stage 1 will be 12.5 km with 13 stations, so the stations will be an average of 12.5/(13-1) = 1.04 km. Stittville to downtown will be 25 km and 21 stations (if you include Lyon), so 1.25 km. That extra distance while it doesn't seem like much, will allow it to travel at full speed for longer, significantly increasing the average speed.
• The stage 1 average speed includes the downtown stations, which will have longer dwell times than the suburban ones. Since after stage 1,
  the downtown stations are a significant percentage of the total number of stations, this will negatively affect the average speed of the line as a whole.

While maybe my initial estimate of 38 minutes is a bit low, I certainly don't think it will be even close to an hour.

AS long as they can keep it under 45 minutes from terminus to downtown, then I'm moderately satisfied.

Originally Posted by kmcamp

I still think the Montreal Rd Streetcar would have been a good idea...if done right in the European style where it gets priority over cars. As for the rest, we all know the problems with the Trillium Line 2 and it's by far the best of the leftover freight corridors in the city. If we hadn't spent so much effort bulldozing Ottawa's industrial past, we probably would have had some better options to route LRT on existing track.

Building surface rail on the Rideau-Montreal corridor might increase the capacity slightly, but it will do nothing to improve reliability or congestion. Way too busy, too many traffic lights, too narrow. If we're going to spend a billion to improve transit slightly, might as well spend 3 billion for a solution that will last 100 years+.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

One thing I don't understand is why they're spending so much money to develop a transitway extension to the middle of a field in Kanata. Oh, the development will come? Where are the services? Roads? Commercial centres?

And then we're going to convert it to rail later? That just makes it more inefficient or useless in the meantime as a lost transit artery!

Use the existing rail ROW that touches Kanata North, and create a spur north if you must. Don't put many stops. The suburbs are still dominated by cars and frankly, are more suitable to local bus routes because of all the winding and curved roads in these areas.

We're trying to do two very different things with our transit system, and it's gonna hurt us when we finally acknowledge that two functions can't be served by a single plan or train. A bulk of our transit usage is essentially commuter based. "Get me to the core, then get me out." People living within the greenbelt (where there's density) generally want ease and frequency of service rather than speed. On some level, our transit board has recognized this because I don't fret when I miss a 6 or 7 because I know another will be along in a few minutes, and we have a tonne of express buses that show up in the mornings and evenings around work hours.

If they seem to understand this basic principle, then why in God's name are we doing what we're doing? The LRT won't help the dense interior much, and the LRT has too many stops to be an effective express train which is what people will want and need. Furthermore, by simply converting the Transitway we're creating massive transfer nodes that will still rely on a bus-based solution.

You're telling me someone from Barrhaven or Kanata is going to seriously consider crowding onto a bus, then joining a bigger crowd at Baseline or Moodie to get onto a packed and slow-moving train? That's not going to happen, especially if the time is comparable with a car. At least a car would be comfortable in that situation.

Additionally, the city also seems to want to keep the suburbs content, which means rail AND road extensions which make no. damn. sense. The system we're building in order to please the suburbs is ultimately going to hurt everybody and please no one.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Building surface rail on the Rideau-Montreal corridor might increase the capacity slightly, but it will do nothing to improve reliability or congestion. Way too busy, too many traffic lights, too narrow.

Narrow?

King Street in Toronto is narrower.

Where on earth does this persistent idea about Ottawa's streets being especially narrow come from? What's the point of comparison? Oklahoma City? Las Vegas?

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

People living within the greenbelt (where there's density) generally want ease and frequency of service rather than speed.

My co-workers who bus it in from beyond the Greenbelt, do so in MUCH better time than me, an inside-the-Greenbelter, so yes, I would like to see some solutions that will give me a bit of speed in my transit, please, because my time is no less valuable than theirs.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

One thing I don't understand is why they're spending so much money to develop a transitway extension to the middle of a field in Kanata. Oh, the development will come? Where are the services? Roads? Commercial centres?

AFAIK there are no firm plans to build any transitways in Kanata. Yes the TMP has some lines drawn on paper, but those are out of date. Instead they plan on building an LRT extension to the middle of a field in Kanata instead. Much better.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by roger1818

AFAIK there are no firm plans to build any transitways in Kanata. Yes the TMP has some lines drawn on paper, but those are out of date. Instead they plan on building an LRT extension to the middle of a field in Kanata instead. Much better.

There is a degree of merit to build LRT before full build out of the surrounding area. That way and with proper zoning, LRT can better influence what is built around it. The way we are conducting ourselves today building LRT after development is mostly complete often means that LRT serves suburban low density wastelands, which will take a long time to intensify, if ever.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

AS long as they can keep it under 45 minutes from terminus to downtown, then I'm moderately satisfied.



Building surface rail on the Rideau-Montreal corridor might increase the capacity slightly, but it will do nothing to improve reliability or congestion. Way too busy, too many traffic lights, too narrow. If we're going to spend a billion to improve transit slightly, might as well spend 3 billion for a solution that will last 100 years+.

The key phrase was "European style" which means abandon the sacrosanct on street parking for dedicated lanes, maybe even a lawned right of way, and signal priority

[SkeggsEggs]

Based on some photos I have seen, the train will go below grade briefly at Eagleson and then at-grade until after Terry Fox. It will go below grade until after Didsbury and be elevated the rest of the way. There will be a small at-grade section between Palladium and Maple Grove.

[J.OT13]

You know where we could find those photos. Best I can come up with is the picture below. Different colours might represent elevated, surface, trench underground? God forbid they a. show the full diagram and b. add a key to the table.


https://www.ottawacommunitynews.com/news-story/7966631-kanata-lrt-preferred-route-announced/