West Gatineau Tramway & Downtown Loop | Proposed

[Horus]

Aylmer Road/Taché is already the de facto western "Rapibus" but without the "Rapi" part. All routes originating in Aylmer and Plateau that are headed to downtowns Hull and Ottawa are funneled along that road. Pre-pandemic, I had a couple of years' worth of ridership from Aylmer to Ottawa. The routings themselves are reasonably efficient but it was consistent that 50% of the travel time was taken on the last 20% of the distance of the route. (Conversely, the same disproportion for the return trip). The area around UQO was demarcation point for that zone between reasonably free-flowing bus mobility and overcongestion.

So just as routes originating in Gatineau and points east all converge on the Rapibus corridor, the west network of routes all converge onto Taché, but without the benefit of the dedicated ROW provided by the Rapibus route.

Essentially, the only difference between taking the bus and driving to downtown was the cost/hassle of parking.

[Acajack]

For those concerned about routing the tram south of Alexandre-Taché and a potential impact on ridership, keep in mind that the Val-Tétreau neighbourhood (in the area of UQO in particular) is very compact in terms of blocks. From Taché itself there are only 3-4 short blocks, generally.

No one who would have walked to a tram station on Taché is going to decide not to walk to a tram station a couple of blocks away due to the difference in distance.

[Acajack]

I also have to say that in spite of all of the confident pronouncements on here, I am not sure that this project gets off the ground in the current context. Maybe not ever.

I do wish for it to happen, and if it does, will definitely tip my hat to Greg Fergus and company.

They will have pulled a huge rabbit out of a tiny hat.

[Aylmer]

One thing to not forget in the BRT vs LRT question is that capacity isn't just a question of "how many people can I transport". It's "how many people can I transport in a given ROW".

BRT can have a higher capacity than LRT when it's grade-separated with two passing lanes at stations, limited intersections, and a high possible frequency. Barrhaven's BRT has a fabulously high capacity, not because it's buses, but because the context it operates in allows for high-capacity infrastructure. And as many have pointed out, that means that your buses can carry upwards of 9k pphpd in this context.

This isn't true, however, of the western part of Gatineau. Due to the various pinch-points and constrained ROWs (Gatineau Park, Wrightville, Chemin d'Aylmer), there's no easy or cheap corridor that can accommodate the kind of BRT that we find elsewhere. Unless we tunnel or elevate it, it has to fit on only seven lateral metres, deal with regular intersections, and have a maximum effective frequency of no more than every 3-4 minutes. In that context, rail can transport about 10k pphpd, but a bus can only eke out 2k before it starts to succumb to self-congesion.

And that's why rail makes sense here even while it doesn't necessarily make sense in Barrhaven. Whether it's rail or bus, the context cuts x% off the maximum capacity compared to a more exclusive ROW. So to transport the same number of people, you need a higher-capacity vehicle. The alternative to a 10k pphpd tram in Aylmer isn't a 9k BRT - it's a 2k bus lane.

[J.OT13]

The convoy protests this weekend (and ongoing) has really shown us the importance of the Confederation Line tunnel. Imagine if we still relied on the bus Transitway? That said, I'm reconsidering my position that the Wellington surface could suffice. As we've seen, the protests did not just effect Wellington itself, but the bridges as well, so terminating the trains at Lyon (from Portage) and Rideau (from Alexandra) might not be enough.

Some may say that closing Wellington to traffic would have prevented trucks from parking on the tracks, but protesters can still block the tracks on foot or set-up camp.

I think we need to revisit the plan to ensure a fully grade separated system in the two downtown cores. A tunnel in downtown Ottawa, transit only corridors everywhere else. That may mean using the old Chateau Laurier tunnel and closing Alexandra to cars and somehow making the tram tacks on Portage and Hull's Laurier inaccessible to pedestrians.

[zzptichka]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

The convoy protests this weekend (and ongoing) has really shown us the importance of the Confederation Line tunnel. Imagine if we still relied on the bus Transitway? That said, I'm reconsidering my position that the Wellington surface could suffice. As we've seen, the protests did not just effect Wellington itself, but the bridges as well, so terminating the trains at Lyon (from Portage) and Rideau (from Alexandra) might not be enough.

Some may say that closing Wellington to traffic would have prevented trucks from parking on the tracks, but protesters can still block the tracks on foot or set-up camp.

I think we need to revisit the plan to ensure a fully grade separated system in the two downtown cores. A tunnel in downtown Ottawa, transit only corridors everywhere else. That may mean using the old Chateau Laurier tunnel and closing Alexandra to cars and somehow making the tram tacks on Portage and Hull's Laurier inaccessible to pedestrians.

My thought was actually that if they were trying to block the rails, cops would've been more eager to move them out. And who knows, maybe protesters wouldn't be blocking them at all like they don't seem to be blocking sidewalks.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by zzptichka

My thought was actually that if they were trying to block the rails, cops would've been more eager to move them out. And who knows, maybe protesters wouldn't be blocking them at all like they don't seem to be blocking sidewalks.

Why give protestors a target?

[J.OT13]

Nouvel argument pour le tramway de Gatineau

MATHIEU BÉLANGER
Le Droit, 8 mars 2022 19h00

L’idée d’étendre les limites de la cité parlementaire jusque sur la rue Laurier, dans le centre-ville de Gatineau, est «intéressante», selon la mairesse France Bélisle. Une telle éventualité lui donnerait un nouvel argument de taille, dit-elle, lors des prochaines discussions sur le financement du tramway avec le gouvernement fédéral.

La mairesse de Gatineau entend d’ailleurs aborder le sujet directement avec la ministre fédérale des Services publics et de l’Approvisionnement, Filomena Tassi, jeudi lors d’une rencontre. «C’est tout le démarchage que je fais pour le tramway avec le fédéral qui vient de prendre une autre dimension», a affirmé Mme Bélisle en réaction à la lettre envoyée la semaine dernière par les députés de Hull-Aylmer, Greg Fergus, et d’Ottawa-Centre, Yasir Naqvi, au Comité permanent de la procédure et des affaires de la Chambre des communes.

L’occupation du centre-ville d’Ottawa pendant presque tout le mois de février a poussé les deux députés à proposer d’inclure les rues Wellington et Sparks, à Ottawa, ainsi que la rue Laurier, à Gatineau, dans les limites de la cité parlementaire afin de mettre en place des protocoles de sécurité «plus robustes». L’idée de faire de la rue Wellington un axe piétonnier a d’ailleurs été de nouveau souligné par les deux députés libéraux.

«L’idée [d’étendre la cité parlementaire et de piétonniser Wellington] est intéressante parce qu’elle permet de réfléchir à la façon dont on souhaite travailler la boucle du boulevard de la Confédération, explique la mairesse. L’ouverture à une telle réflexion change la donne et moi je vais mettre mon pied dans la porte. […] Comment puis-je avoir une discussion sur le financement du tramway avant même d’avoir le feu vert du fédéral pour le faire passer devant le parlement? J’ai d’abord besoin d’un gouvernement fédéral qui reconnaît que Gatineau fait partie de la capitale du Canada et que pour que son appareil gouvernemental fonctionne bien, il doit aider les fonctionnaires qui sont du côté québécois à bien circuler.»

a réflexion sur les limites de la cité parlementaire arrive à un moment idéal, note la mairesse, alors que l’enjeu de la gouvernance du projet de tramway est au centre des préoccupations de bien des intervenants dans le dossier actuellement. «On a confié un rôle de leadership en transport interprovincial, il y a presque un an, à la Commission de la capitale nationale (CCN) et il ne s’est encore rien passé, dénonce la mairesse. Gatineau se fait barouetter à travers toute la famille des ministères fédéraux sur la question des ponts. Je comprends que ce projet est unique, mais notre capitale aussi est unique, il n’y en a qu’une seule au pays. Il doit commencer à y avoir du leadership dans ce dossier. Le fédéral doit reconnaître que Gatineau fait aussi partie de la capitale.»

https://www.ledroit.com/2022/03/09/nouve...atineau-9b6939ffe742528586c157e33a60540d

[Admiral Nelson]

I'm left confused as to why there would be contemplation of extending the parliamentary precinct to Rue Laurier on the Gatineau side

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by Admiral Nelson

I'm left confused as to why there would be contemplation of extending the parliamentary precinct to Rue Laurier on the Gatineau side

To ensure the security of the Kruger Plant in the event of the next toilet paper buying frenzy

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Admiral Nelson

I'm left confused as to why there would be contemplation of extending the parliamentary precinct to Rue Laurier on the Gatineau side

It's part of Confederation Boulevard. Many of the Feds assets are on Laurier. Occupations could spill over the Gatineau, even more so with a pedestrianized Wellington. It would cover the entire tram loop. And, as always, what the Feds give to Ottawa, they have to offer to Gatineau.

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

To ensure the security of the Kruger Plant in the event of the next toilet paper buying frenzy

Don't laugh; Kruger plant is essential to providing heating and cooling to Zibi!!

[Kelnoz]

Portage already had to modify its operations because of the Farfadaas camping at Zibi during the convoy, it would make sense for the feds to want more control over the surrounding area.

[Uhuniau]

Stop "Parliamentary Precinct" Creep!

[J.OT13]

Councillor Jocelyn Blondin, president of the STO, is putting pressure on the Feds regarding the tramway. He says that if the tramway is not part of the next Federal Budget, the City of Gatineau might need to "make some decisions".

https://www.ledroit.com/2022/03/28/quebe...0074adb1746e5a51b3bf8d81703df28?nor=true

[J.OT13]

Des «signaux positifs» pour le tramway, dit la mairesse France Bélisle

MATHIEU BÉLANGER
Le Droit, 29 mars 2022

De budget fédéral en budget fédéral, depuis quelques années, Gatineau s’attend à obtenir la confirmation de la participation financière du gouvernement dans son projet de tramway. Cette fois-ci pourrait cependant être la bonne, laisse entendre la mairesse, France Bélisle.

«Je pense que les signaux qu’on a sont assez positifs à l’heure actuelle, donc je me croise positivement les doigts, a-t-elle lancé, mardi matin. Je m’attends à des nouvelles positives pour Gatineau. Ce que j’entends, c’est que les propos que j’ai tenus devant la Commission de la capitale nationale (CCN) sur les attentes face à son leadership dans ce dossier ont fait leur bonhomme de chemin et je suis confiante que ça se traduise en résultats au cours des prochains jours.»

La date du budget fédéral a été dévoilée en chambre, mardi, par la ministre des Finances, Christian Freeland. Le budget sera déposé le 7 avril prochain. La semaine dernière, le président de la Société de transport de l’Outaouais (STO), Jocelyn Blondin, a voulu mettre de la pression sur le gouvernement en affirmant que si Gatineau était toujours sans nouvelle de la participation fédérale lors du prochain budget, le temps sera venu de «prendre des décisions».

«Minuit moins une»

«Est-ce qu’on peut en venir là [abandonner le projet], la réponse est oui, mais nous n’en sommes pas encore là, a indiqué Mme Bélisle. Il est minuit moins une et comme M. Blondin, je m’attends aussi à ce que le gouvernement fédéral se positionne et j’espère voir des mesures concrètes. Il n’y a pas grand monde qui n’est pas au courant qu’on tape du pied pour avoir cet engagement pour le tramway.»

Lundi, le ministre responsable de l’Outaouais, Mathieu Lacombe, a rappelé que Québec a confirmé sa participation financière au projet de tramway il y a déjà plusieurs lunes. Il a toutefois tenu à rappeler qu’un «budget n’est pas garant de tout» et que les avancées dans un projet ne doivent pas toujours être mesurées par sa simple présence au budget. «Bien des dossiers se règlent autrement que par une mention dans un budget», a-t-il affirmé.

https://www.ledroit.com/2022/03/29/des-s...belisle-f891baccf72c49beec767f0de6300617

[phil235]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I think we need to revisit the plan to ensure a fully grade separated system in the two downtown cores. A tunnel in downtown Ottawa, transit only corridors everywhere else. That may mean using the old Chateau Laurier tunnel and closing Alexandra to cars and somehow making the tram tacks on Portage and Hull's Laurier inaccessible to pedestrians.

Thinking about the recent push for a pedestrianized Wellington, I'm wondering if there isn't an opportunity to re-think the tram. A tunnel really isn't necessary west of Kent or east of Elgin, so would it be possible to have the route on Wellington, but have it duck under a pedestrian street at Kent and pop back up at Elgin. I know that there would be some technical issues with the canal, but are they really insurmountable? I'm thinking that a ramp in that spot would not be that obtrusive, and definitely less intrusive than an over-ground tram.

The advantage would be that the tram would bring lots of people to Wellington, which would help with the concern that the street might be empty after hours. (I actually don't think it would, as there are always people on Wellington, and a decent pedestrian environment would attract more, but this would give it a buzz.)

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by phil235

Thinking about the recent push for a pedestrianized Wellington, I'm wondering if there isn't an opportunity to re-think the tram. A tunnel really isn't necessary west of Kent or east of Elgin, so would it be possible to have the route on Wellington, but have it duck under a pedestrian street at Kent and pop back up at Elgin. I know that there would be some technical issues with the canal, but are they really insurmountable? I'm thinking that a ramp in that spot would not be that obtrusive, and definitely less intrusive than an over-ground tram.

The advantage would be that the tram would bring lots of people to Wellington, which would help with the concern that the street might be empty after hours. (I actually don't think it would, as there are always people on Wellington, and a decent pedestrian environment would attract more, but this would give it a buzz.)

I love the idea of a partially underground route as to preserve the loop while maximizing speed of the tram, minimizing disruption to pedestrians and cutting down on possible conflicts with cars. Why does it need to be all or nothing?

[J.OT13]

Mona Fortier, MP and President of the Treasury Board, saying that she doesn't know if the tramway will be part of the budget - «n’a pas de boule de cristal»/"no crystal ball". Considering her position, one would think she would have some info.

Fergus is optimistic as always, despite the lack of movement from the Feds.

https://www.ledroit.com/2022/03/31/tramw...rudente-41200a247c70e09ef994a945d70701c6

[lrt's friend]

Confederation Square is a key meeting place for various events. How does a surface tram work reliably? Are there any existing tunnels under Wellington?

I continue to argue that Wellington is a bad place for a trunk transit route. It should be on Albert and/or Slater. There is a reason why all the buses ran there for decades.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I love the idea of a partially underground route as to preserve the loop while maximizing speed of the tram, minimizing disruption to pedestrians and cutting down on possible conflicts with cars. Why does it need to be all or nothing?

I mean, if Wellington's not gonna have cars between Bank and Elgin anyhow, there's not really any conflicts to speak of along that stretch. And considering removing cars could more than double the (already generously wide) sidewalks, I don't see it as much of a disruption to pedestrians either. There'll be a handful of events where the trams might have to dead-end for a few hours per year, but if we're being realistic, it's not enough disruption to justify the cost and complication of a tunnel.

But I'm not dogmatic about it being on the surface. I think there are some places where grade-separation might be worth looking into to avoid more regular conflicts or disruption. If I had to choose some stretches, I'd choose these two:

- Wellington from Portage to Kent. This is a stretch with potentially disruptive car traffic and vehicular access points to the Parliamentary Precinct. Although the disruption to tram traffic is relatively minor, passengers still have to cross. Again, I don't think that this is something that requires a tunnel to solve - we know how to make good crosswalks. But having an underground Court station with interior access to Lyon could be a light argument in favour of it. But my actual opinion is that it could be far more easily solved by improving the crosswalks and also offering an underground pedestrian connection from a surface station.

- Portage at Laurier (Hull). This is a lot more important from an infrastructure point of view. With the loop, there would be a high frequency of full trams turning from Laurier onto Portage in all directions. We can't have cars in the way without turning it into the Achille's heel of the entire system. In this case, it would be far simpler to have vehicular traffic on Portage/Maisonneuve go from the bridge into an underpass beneath Laurier, with trams and people above. It means undisrupted tram operations, no traffic backups on Portage, and would turn one of the most awful intersections in the region into a plaza with an unbeatable view over Parliament and the river.