The future of Ottawa's Transit

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

-

This is exactly when you will get voters and councilors from various parts of the city objecting to the plan. As I said before, setting priorities will be one big mine field.

In my opinion, there is going to have to be justification in the way of a ridership gain payback for each major phase of the project. The reason being that there is no guarantee that funding will be available to complete the whole plan.

It will be a all or nothing situation. Since the loan will be on 25 years, why not build everything in one shot? It's not like construction costs go down... I suspect Guinty will do like Toronto, set the priorities of funding for the city. I absolutely don't see anything being done without being it done all at once. BRT extensions will come later.

A commuter train system from Kanata to Orleans would be a great way to shut up people too. Since a GO-Train system is wanted for exurbs, it could be a start that's cheap to make.

For proponents of option 3, remember that option 4 is cheaper after 20 years, due to lower operation costs. If we get an automatic train system, costs will get dramatically cheaper.

I talked about 10 minutes with mayor O'Brien, I mentioned that Vancouver scrapped their LRT plans because it was too expensive to run. When I said they saved hundreds of millions with the SkyTrain, I got his interest. Vancouver save about 200M$ in operating costs annually.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Option 3 is really shortsighted. If people were looking at some of the charts concerning population and employment growth until 2031, the fastest growth for both will be in the southern community. Option 3 does not prepare for this nor does it address the peculiar transportation issues created by the airport (the lack of north-south roads).

The consultant in our group the other night also indicated that efficiency declines as you increase the number of passing tracks on a single track system. Each passing track requires a train to wait for the train coming the other way. The chances of delays increases with the number of passing tracks. If we are increasing frequency and lengthening the route, the number of passing tracks will increase from one today, to 4 or 5. With the number of trains increasing on such a system, there are increasing possibilities of a breakdown (maybe not a regular occurrance but the chances do increase) which would shutdown the entire line. This is the explanation of the consultant concerning this.

Once we upgrade the diesel O-Train, we are essentially making it permanent. We see the complaints concerning the shutdown of the O-Train mainly from Jeanes & Co. Can you imagine what would happen if we tried to convert an upgraded system? And if we did, there is no viable alternative route for moving those passengers during construction. Remember, this will not be a simple matter of paving shoulders as with a Transitway conversion. I am not so sure about shoulders in the case of the bridge at Hurdman.

Then there is the practical matter of what to do with 285 passengers arriving at Bayview all at once. Jeanes & Co. had also suggested that Talent trains could be piggybacked to increase capacity. Well, then you have 500+ passengers having to transfer all at once. Will this not create practical issues with trains travelling east and west?

I can't imagine Talent trains running on Sparks Street and then there is the grade requirement to bring the Talent trains up the escarpment at Bronson Avenue. If we don't want diesel buses running on downtown streets, why would we want even bigger diesel trains.

Lastly, if we are using a diesel O-Train not going downtown, it is really pointless in having service to the airport. Transit service for visitors at the airport really needs to be direct to downtown hotels otherwise it will not be attractive.

Thanks for the comments. I'm not promoting Option 3 either, but this is something Jeanes&Co. will argue for and we need clear arguments for why it won't work.

Extending the DLRT O-Train to Bowesville is probably easy to do short-term so it is politically attractive, but screws us in the longer term.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

Thanks for the comments. I'm not promoting Option 3 either, but this is something Jeanes&Co. will argue for and we need clear arguments for why it won't work.

Extending the DLRT O-Train to Bowesville is probably easy to do short-term so it is politically attractive, but screws us in the longer term.

Well not only it's near-sighted, it's basically costlier after 20 years. That's why I really don't understand the point of these people.

Using Via rail tracks? Sure, I'm all for it for city to city travelling. Frequent service? How will they manage that?

The Transportation Task Force's plan worked because it was all interconnected. You can't just make one line Diesel and think it will work. And why diesel anyways? Wouldn't it cost 5M$ to make it electric? I'm so tired of cheap ways that don't save money at all, just put more problems.

The Sun had a good article yesterday about how much people are fed up about the whole situation. And the Kanata people seem to be there too. If the Transitway will need to be converted again in 50 years, why not build rail right now?

[TransitZilla]

I want to get comments on my modification of Option 4: let's call it "Option 4A":



I've made the following changes:

1)Retain the East Transitway from Hurdman to Blair as BRT. This significantly simplifies implementation, since bus transitway operation can continue here during construction of other parts of the network.

2)Construct LRT on an alignment from Hurdman-Hospitals-Blair/Innes-Blair. This does a number of things:
-provides a direct access from Orleans to the hospitals. In the 2031 projected demand lines slide, the Orleans-Alta Vista line is the largest travel demand not heading downtown. A large number of hospital workers live in Orleans.
-Connecting to Blair via Blair/Innes provides a direct connection with both the north and south Orleans BRT corridors.
-Compatible with construction/conversion of the Cumberland transitway as LRT, which would be a more appropriate LRT corridor than the one along Hwy 174.
-Provides a redundant corridor to the east when/if the Transitway from Hurdman to Blair was converted to LRT.

3)Retain the BRT link between Baseline and Lincoln Fields (in addition to LRT). Advantage of this:
-Allows buses to continue from Baseline to Lincoln Fields for better connections and fewer transfers
-Provides a continuous Transitway connection to the Pinecrest garage for the BRT network to the south
-allows a cross-town east-west BRT route to be created via: Kanata, Bayshore, SW Transitway, Basline station, Baseline/Heron roads, SE Transitway, Hurdman, East Transitway - Place d'Orleans

What do you think?

[lrt's friend]

I think Baseline is an important destination for LRT with the College expanding and other intensification planned. Is there a way to have the Transitway and LRT run parallel to each other between Baseline and Lincoln Fields, to prevent the severing of important east-west transit links?

My other concern is at Hurdman and the link between Hurdman and downtown. What do we do with all the buses during Transitway conversion? I can't imagine rerouting essentially every bus that crosses downtown onto to the Queensway between the Vanier Parkway and Nicholas Street. That would be a disaster waiting to happen. It starts making you think that we need another transit bridge across the Rideau for rail, possibly using the Alta Vista Parkway allignment. This would tie directly into a Hospital/Innes/Blair route or it could just bend back to the existing Transitway at Hurdman.

[lrt's friend]

why not build everything in one shot?

Besides the money issue, we may not be able to find enough labour and machinery to do it all at once.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I think Baseline is an important destination for LRT with the College expanding and other intensification planned. Is there a way to have the Transitway and LRT run parallel to each other between Baseline and Lincoln Fields, to prevent the severing of important east-west transit links?

I agree, I would have both BRT and LRT from Lincoln Fields to Baseline.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

My other concern is at Hurdman and the link between Hurdman and downtown. What do we do with all the buses during Transitway conversion? I can't imagine rerouting essentially every bus that crosses downtown onto to the Queensway between the Vanier Parkway and Nicholas Street. That would be a disaster waiting to happen. It starts making you think that we need another transit bridge across the Rideau for rail, possibly using the Alta Vista Parkway allignment. This would tie directly into a Hospital/Innes/Blair route or it could just bend back to the existing Transitway at Hurdman.

The Hurdman-downtown link is a problem under any of the alternatives. I'm not sure about that one. What you're suggesting is interesting, and maybe doable, but there would still be a problem continuing bus operations if the east tunnel portal is built within the current Transitway ROW- I'm not sure how they'd detour buses around that.

[lrt's friend]

The Hurdman-downtown link is a problem under any of the alternatives. I'm not sure about that one. What you're suggesting is interesting, and maybe doable, but there would still be a problem continuing bus operations if the east tunnel portal is built within the current Transitway ROW- I'm not sure how they'd detour buses around that.

Locate the east tunnel portal just south of the Queensway on the Alta Vista Parkway ROW, which was designed to connect into Nicholas Street. This would be between the Queensway and Lees Avenue.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Besides the money issue, we may not be able to find enough labour and machinery to do it all at once.

That is usually the private company building the project's issue. With the slowdown in construction, it could help a recession easier.

For plan 4A, I don't like it. It removes St-Laurent as a major transfer station, removes a link to the train station, removes a planned link to theLynx stadium. Density is also lower, and roads are suburb style instead of in a grid, so that makes having large transfer stations there being complicated. There's a major part that is industrial area, thus having no life most of the time, while the 417 is nearby the northern path, where drop offs are at least possible.

My 2 cents anyways.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Locate the east tunnel portal just south of the Queensway on the Alta Vista Parkway ROW, which was designed to connect into Nicholas Street. This would be between the Queensway and Lees Avenue.

What about having the portal between the Transitway and Nicholas, south of Greenfield Ave?

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&hl=en&geo...75.674901&spn=0.003253,0.005697&t=h&z=17

This would allow the transitway to continue operation while the tunnel is being built, and while the LRT connection to Hurdman is under construction, buses would go from Hurdman-Vanier Pkwy-Queensway-Mann Ave. exit-Transitway.

[p_xavier]

The more I look at it, the more I think that LRT should go to Eagleson, Fallowfield and Montréal and have the major transfer stations there. It would resolve Transitway/LRT duplication, while having only local routes for suburbs. Construction of the Transitway for the suburbs would also be optional for now, awaiting money to complete the LRT for these suburbs.

There's still the Transitway stretch from Hurdman to Confederation that looks weird, but if semi exclusive BRT is put on that corridor, that will at least strengthen the "receptor" corridor for LRT.

[lrt's friend]

What about having the portal between the Transitway and Nicholas, south of Greenfield Ave?

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&hl=en...05697&t=h&z=17

This would allow the transitway to continue operation while the tunnel is being built, and while the LRT connection to Hurdman is under construction, buses would go from Hurdman-Vanier Pkwy-Queensway-Mann Ave. exit-Transitway.

I wish I could show you properly on google maps. Just move the portal straight south on the other side of the interchange at Lees Avenue, and bridge over the Rideau. This can then link directly to Hurdman Station or continue towards the Hospital complex and beyond or both.

This will allow LRT construction to proceed without obstructing the Transitway. I think rerouting hundreds of buses onto the Queensway between the Vanier Parkway and Nicholas (or Mann), will create too much extra congestion on the Queensway.

[lrt's friend]

This is so discouraging, listening the Marianne Wilkinson and Rainer Bloess on CFRA. Again the N-S versus E-W debate is going on without any sort of overall city vision.

Here are the priorities according to Marianne:

Complete the Western Transitway
Extend the O-Train
Build the Tunnel
Build LRT East-West
Replace the O-Train (will never happen if we upgrade the O-Train)

How many years before we actually see useful eLRT with these priorities?

[Ciemny]

For Wilkinson is all about the West. As long as the transitway is finished to Kanata, not only that it has to be LRT or nothing and the rest of the city can wait.

I listened to CFRA as well today and she stated something along the lines of "why build LRT or finish transitway to Barrhaven when Kanata and the "east" are priority".

Extending the current O-train is her cheap way of trying to make south end residents happy, even though its not practical.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Ciemny

For Wilkinson is all about the West. As long as the transitway is finished to Kanata, not only that it has to be LRT or nothing and the rest of the city can wait.

I listened to CFRA as well today and she stated something along the lines of "why build LRT or finish transitway to Barrhaven when Kanata and the "east" are priority".

Extending the current O-train is her cheap way of trying to make south end residents happy, even though its not practical.

She is only one councillor. Tomorrow it will be in the news, how the South is the priority for the city and blah blah. She's not a third of council. Don't overreact now, and contact her if you don't agree with her point of view.

[Deez]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

The more I look at it, the more I think that LRT should go to Eagleson, Fallowfield and Montréal and have the major transfer stations there.

I'm pretty sure there's no real estate available to build a major transfer station at Montreal Rd. Even if there was, it's not exactly a great place for TOD...Blair Station is much more attractive to mixed use development.

As for the other two, I think it would be a pretty tough sell to spend that kind of capital to extend LRT to the inner fringe of the burbs where people would have to transfer regardless.

[Deez]

Originally Posted by Ciemny

Extending the current O-train is her cheap way of trying to make south end residents happy, even though its not practical.

Not only is it not practical, it's not cheap either. If O-train is in the game plan for 2031, it needs to be able to accomodate the 4300 riders that would use the corridor. Based on OC Transpo's design capacity for the O-Train (135 seated plus 1/2 of 150 standing=210), 21 northbound trips would have to be made during the AM peak hour. That means 3 minute headways, which means double tracking is inevitable as you get closer to Bayview. Can you guess where the bulk of the costs for N/S LRT are? Double tracking and its associated structural/geotechnical costs. Not to mention having to buy quite a few more Talents or their future equivalents at about 6M$ apiece.

Her idea makes no sense.

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

The more I look at it, the more I think that LRT should go to Eagleson, Fallowfield and Montréal and have the major transfer stations there. It would resolve Transitway/LRT duplication, while having only local routes for suburbs. Construction of the Transitway for the suburbs would also be optional for now, awaiting money to complete the LRT for these suburbs.

There's still the Transitway stretch from Hurdman to Confederation that looks weird, but if semi exclusive BRT is put on that corridor, that will at least strengthen the "receptor" corridor for LRT.

If that's the case why not go a few more kilometres and service each of the three existing Town Centres?

I would like to see something like this, where very little new BRT is built and instead have dedicated lanes along arterials and a more extensive LRT:



Can't the BRT money be spent on the extensions?

[Deez]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

This is so discouraging, listening the Marianne Wilkinson and Rainer Bloess on CFRA. Again the N-S versus E-W debate is going on without any sort of overall city vision.

Thankfully, Bloess' constituents aren't on the same page as he is. Almost everyone that I spoke to in Orleans had no qualms with ending at Blair.

[waterloowarrior]

^are you posting from the Barrhaven open house right now? :p