The future of Ottawa's Transit

[p_xavier]

Wish me good luck, I have a transit system planner job interview on Friday .

[Franky]

Good luck!

[c_speed3108]

.

[c_speed3108]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

Wish me good luck, I have a transit system planner job interview on Friday .

Hey that's excellent news! Good luck.

I trust from this discussion you have a pretty darn good grasp of:

Light Rail, Heavy Rail, Personal Rail, Buses, Street Cars, Trains, Trams, Street cars

Regular buses, electric buses, hybrid buses, double decker buses, articulated buses, express buses, local buses, slow buses, fast buses, crappy buses,

Cut and cover tunnels, bored tunnels, boring tunnels, cuts, transit ditches, at grade, below grade, above grade, poor grade, high grade

High frequency, low frequency, never shows up frequency,

and political interference.

[AuxTown]

You really should mention how the Big Dig was an incredibly complex, and very poorly managed project. Sub-standard materials were used, and corners were cut. Not to mention, the Big Dig was mostly a cut, and cover job. TBM's were not used.

You still haven't learned, have you?

The big was also a massive project whose scale is completely in another league from our little LRT.

"Big Dig is the unofficial name of the Central Artery/Tunnel Project (CA/T), a megaproject that rerouted the Central Artery (Interstate 93), the chief controlled-access highway through the heart of Boston, Massachusetts, into a 3.5 mile (5.6 km) tunnel under the city. The project also included the construction of the Ted Williams Tunnel (extending Interstate 90 to Logan International Airport), the Leonard P. Zakim Bunker Hill Memorial Bridge over the Charles River, and the Rose Kennedy Greenway in the space vacated by the previous I-93 elevated roadway." (from Wikipedia)

It's unbelievable that they even imagined only budgeting ~$6B for this project. That is what I call a massive lowball. Crossing the Rideau Canal will not be of any significance. A lot of the problems with the Boston Project had to do with the huge tunnel underneathe the Charles River.

Charles River


Rideau Canal

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

Hey that's excellent news! Good luck.

I trust from this discussion you have a pretty darn good grasp of:

Light Rail, Heavy Rail, Personal Rail, Buses, Street Cars, Trains, Trams, Street cars

Regular buses, electric buses, hybrid buses, double decker buses, articulated buses, express buses, local buses, slow buses, fast buses, crappy buses,

Cut and cover tunnels, bored tunnels, boring tunnels, cuts, transit ditches, at grade, below grade, above grade, poor grade, high grade

High frequency, low frequency, never shows up frequency,

and political interference.

Well I had made all simulations for my website, so I know the numbers. Basically it's the company that made the transportation simulations for the Canada Line, and the Hong Kong system. So yeah, I used to teach system simulation, and they said that they were looking for someone with strong interest in transit systems so.

I applied this morning and got a call this afternoon. And 3/4 of them have Ph.D.s, so I finally won't be looked down because I have higher eduction.

[c_speed3108]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

Well I had made all simulations for my website, so I know the numbers. Basically it's the company that made the transportation simulations for the Canada Line, and the Hong Kong system. So yeah, I used to teach system simulation, and they said that they were looking for someone with strong interest in transit systems so.

I applied this morning and got a call this afternoon. And 3/4 of them have Ph.D.s, so I finally won't be looked down because I have higher eduction.

Yah I know that drill. I used to hate working my part time job I had in undergrad and high school because it was really hard talking to people who were doing what I was doing part time as a career.

My first better spot was a co-op placement at Statcan. There I actually found myself in a meeting where I was the only one in the room without a PHD...much better. :-)

Good luck.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by O-Town Hockey

The big was also a massive project whose scale is completely in another league from our little LRT.

"Big Dig is the unofficial name of the Central Artery/Tunnel Project (CA/T), a megaproject that rerouted the Central Artery (Interstate 93), the chief controlled-access highway through the heart of Boston, Massachusetts, into a 3.5 mile (5.6 km) tunnel under the city. The project also included the construction of the Ted Williams Tunnel (extending Interstate 90 to Logan International Airport), the Leonard P. Zakim Bunker Hill Memorial Bridge over the Charles River, and the Rose Kennedy Greenway in the space vacated by the previous I-93 elevated roadway." (from Wikipedia)

It's unbelievable that they even imagined only budgeting ~$6B for this project. That is what I call a massive lowball. Crossing the Rideau Canal will not be of any significance. A lot of the problems with the Boston Project had to do with the huge tunnel underneathe the Charles River.

Charles River
http://parts.mit.edu/igem07/images/1/1b/BU_charles_river.jpg

Rideau Canal
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/08/22/travel/v-canal-view395.1.jpg

The Big Dig, a modern endeavour, illustrates that things aren't often "a piece of cake". Our project is also 1/16th (or more) the price, but the cost overruns may be of a similar percentage. Our Transitway was also also an example of a many fold cost overrun.

[Aylmer]

And having you see reason will be much less than a peice of cake.

[lrt's friend]

Ottawa City Hall Report

Alex Cullen

Your Community Councillor in Bay Ward

City Council approves New Transit Vision

City Council's recent approval of a new Rapid Transit Plan for Ottawa will see some significant changes to public transit in our city over the next 25 years (visit the City's web site at www.ottawa.ca for more on this Plan). Most people are aware that this involves a tunnel downtown and a mixture of electric light rail inside the Greenbelt and bus transitways (convertible to light rail) outside the Greenbelt, but not all are aware that the current Transitway running along the Ottawa River Parkway would be ultimately converted to electric light rail.

There is logic to Council's approach - part of the Parkway is currently used for public transit, there are transitway conncections at both Dominion Station (on the Parkway near Westboro) and at Lincoln Fields at the western end that cannot be ignored, and the alternative (the Byron strip between Richmond Road and Byron Avenue) would be much more costly to construct a grade-separated rapid transit rail line (over half a billion $ more).

However, many people have expressed concerns about the impact of light rail on the Ottawa River Parkway - on its beauty, on its access to the riverfront, on its bike paths, etc. So, how will this be handled?

The good news is that both the City of Ottawa and the National Capital Commission (who owns the Ottawa River Parkway) share the same values regarding the Parkway as do residents that border it. All of us want to preserve the Parkway's beauty, vistas, bike paths, public access, etc. What this means is getting the design for electric light rail right for this part of the rapid transit system, and that will occur during the Environmental Assessment process - a public consultative process that is required to review all reasonable alternatives before any decision is made. It is also a necessary step not only for this project's development but to develop the business case to qualify for federal and provincial funding needed to bring this plan into fruition.

For example there are alternatives to the location of the tracks - within the median or taking up one traffic lane each way on the existing roadway, for example. The bike paths would remain (a sine qua non), and the opportunity exists to improve public accessibility (currently the only safe pedestrian access to the riverfront between the Dominion stop and Lincoln Fields Station is at the New Orchard underpass). Overhead wires is not the only choice for these electric trains as the possibility exists for electrified third rail, or using batteries for this section. The possibility of 2 transitway stations on the Ottawa River Parkway (already provided for in the current Ottawa/NCC Parkway lease) would not only provide for community access to rapid transit (plus provide more opportunities to access the riverfront), but could make more accessible this part of the Ottawa River to residents (and tourists) from other parts of our City.

The key to all this is design - good design - which will be subject to extensive public scrutiny through the Environmental Assessment process. The International Peer Review Panel that was assembled to review the City's proposed rapid transit plans did show City Council examples in Europe where such electric light rail can be tastefully and aesthetically designed to fit into urban greenspace (including rails running through grass!). It was their view that through good design the same can be done here.

As Chair of the City's Transit Committee I am confident that we - the City, its transit planners and engineers - will be successful in integrating a modern rapid transit system into the Ottawa River Parkway without sacrificing the elements that make the Parkway one of the jewels of our City. This is our challenge and our responsibility, and I look forward to meeting it.

Published The News EMC June 13, 2008

So, now you have heard it from Alex Cullen

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Why do I get a sickening feeling in my gut that the Parkway is gonna end up breaking this deal, and we'll have to wait another ten years for LRT?

[Dado]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

So, now you have heard it from Alex Cullen

Yes, including this tidbit of wisdom:

For example there are alternatives to the location of the tracks - within the median or taking up one traffic lane each way on the existing roadway, for example.

I'd like to know why anyone would even consider either of these for more than a minute. I couldn't believe when they started discussing the one-lane-in-each-direction option at Transit Committee a few weeks back as if it was something to seriously consider. Let's examine the corridor, shall we?

At Dominion Station, the Transitway leaves the Parkway on the south side of the Parkway. At Lincoln Fields, the Transitway also leaves the Parkway on the south (east) side of the Parkway. Between the two there is but one road joining the Parkway, Woodroffe.

Since I doubt that at-grade crossings would be acceptable to the powers-that-be, we would need to grade separate at Dominion and at Lincoln Fields to get the line into the median, and something pretty freaky would be needed at Woodroffe. For the lane option, eastbound shouldn't be too difficult but westbound would have all the same problems as using the median.

On the other hand, we could look at two realistic options: 1) run the line south of the Parkway (shifting the eastbound lanes here and there where necessary) and build only a structure at Woodroffe; 2) take over the eastbound carriageway from Lincoln Fields to Dominion for LRT (i.e. convert it) and turn the Parkway into a two-lane road using the westbound carriageway (widening it for three lanes is also possible), with a simple structure at Woodroffe.


I have to agree with you, 'Phoenix; if councillors are already talking only about the worst 2 of the 4 all-Parkway options, we really are headed for trouble.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

It would be possible, I suppose, to start the second bore beside the exit of the first bore. This would remove the trucking/transportation time and cost. Also, once the TBM was away on its second trip, the recovery pit could be closed in and finished as part of the cut and cover portion of the tunnel. This would mean that the recovery pit would not have to be open until the TBM returned at the end of its second trip. But I don't suppose the planners will think of that option.

Ya, that would probably make too much sense, just like using a few empty hopper cars on the mainline beside Bayview Station to take tunnel spoil for removal along the O-Train line at night rather than trucking the stuff up Bronson and/or Preston all day long...

From the Laurier end they can just truck it along the Transitway and dump it at Hurdman - hey, it's not like they haven't done it before...

[lrt's friend]

What I worry about the most is the status of federal and provincial finances when we are finally ready to go ahead with the plan. We have gone through a 10 year period of surpluses. How much longer will this last? I hope the window of opportunity doesn't close on us with another period of austerity and cutbacks.

[c_speed3108]

Underground economy

Downtown businesses line up for subway stops

By SUSAN SHERRING, CITY HALL BUREAU (OTTAWA SUN)

Some of the downtown's major landowners are jumping on board the city's plans for a tunnel.

At a news conference yesterday, Hume Rogers, spokesman for the Downtown Coalition, said the group is looking at public-private partnerships in the development of tunnel stations.

"There's a great deal of interest to host these stations," said Rogers of area businesses.

The group presented station options for three downtown streets -- Queen, Albert and Slater.

"It's not our place to say one street or another is the way to go. The city has to determine which way they want to go. The criteria for that decision will be based on a number of things," he said.


Rogers said all three streets and routes have advantages and disadvantages to them.

But whichever route is taken, Rogers said work must start as quickly as possible.

"We believe the environmental assessment for the tunnel should be started immediately."

The Downtown Coalition represents more than 12 million square feet of office space and 2,500 hotel rooms in the downtown core, and has a membership which contributes about 10% of the property tax collected in the city.

Rogers called for the tunnel to be under one street.

"There will be cost savings there," he said.

The group pegs the 3.1-km tunnel at no more than $500 million if built under a single roadway.

"It's important for the city to have a list of willing participants to help aid in the planning and to reduce the cost of the overall project," Hume said.

With the downtown bus system already at capacity, Rogers said the city simply can't afford not to move ahead. And he believes a tunnel system will spark business -- both at a street level and an "underground economy."

"In the early '80s, these streets were not empty as they are now. There was street level retail that will come back. We all know how many thousands are working in our office buildings. That type of commerce will come back and become more people-friendly. People will be able to walk downtown and not be poisoned by diesel fumes."

Rogers said the cost of the tunnel could be reduced "significantly" with the public-private partnerships.

"This tunnel will resolve problems for generations to come," he said, suggesting while it's a hefty price tag, it's essential.

Bernie Myers, with Morguard Investments, said it's far too early in the process to talk dollars and cents in regards to potential stations, and what his company might be willing to do to be involved in such a venture.

"We're really doing this as private citizens who care about the future of light rail," Myers said, adding he'd hate to see an over-emphasis placed on the cost. "This is a 100-year project."

Somerset Coun. Diane Holmes was on hand for yesterday's newser and said she was encouraged by the business alliance support.

.

Time to comment:

There might be a cconsiderable savings (particularly in the time=money way) if both east bound and west bound can be done in a single bore.

It has two other good advantages:

1) It leaves more streets open for tunnel # 2, some time in the distant future

2) The tunnel would perhaps end up big enough to accommodate either double level trains or a second set of tracks above (perhaps for commuter trains) - again way in the future.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

.

Time to comment:

There might be a cconsiderable savings (particularly in the time=money way) if both east bound and west bound can be done in a single bore.

It has two other good advantages:

1) It leaves more streets open for tunnel # 2, some time in the distant future

2) The tunnel would perhaps end up big enough to accommodate either double level trains or a second set of tracks above (perhaps for commuter trains) - again way in the future.

You're saying that in less than 100 years (probably 30 to 50), we will have to go through the exercise again to either add a second tunnel or add a new deck?!

If we must build a tunnel, why not build a oval bus tunnel that can be converted to a proper metro in 30 to 50 years?

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by Dado

Ya, that would probably make too much sense, just like using a few empty hopper cars on the mainline beside Bayview Station to take tunnel spoil for removal along the O-Train line at night rather than trucking the stuff up Bronson and/or Preston all day long...

From the Laurier end they can just truck it along the Transitway and dump it at Hurdman - hey, it's not like they haven't done it before...

I like the idea of using the track to remove the spoil. Based on a 6m bore, and a daily advance rate of 20m, there would be about 565m³ per day to move. That’s about 1050t, based on 1.85t/m³. I think the average hopper car carries 100t, so 11 cars should do it. Would there be space for 8 cars (the night cars would not need to be stored) between the Bayview spur and the Prince of Wales Bridge? (I’m not keen on the idea of storing 100t cars on the bridge, although it probably wouldn’t be a problem for the bridge.)

(Of course, I’d still prefer to bore one oval tunnel; which would double the amount of muck produced daily - assuming an advance rate of 13m; but the tunnel would be finished in one pass, shortening the tunnelling time by about 40%, provide an infinite number of cross-connections and access points, and excavate half of the stations at the same time.)

Perhaps the first piece of rail built should be between the O-Train head at Bayview and the Bronson Escarpment. (The Transitway buses would be re-routed along Wellington, east of the O-Train.) We will need to build it at some time and I think it would make sense to do it when the major construction of the Lebreton Flats homes is being done. That way, the new residents are not subjected to the mess of the Lebreton trench construction later. Also, it would allow the backup train and muck removal to run directly into/from the new tunnel. (In my opinion, it is shear lunacy to permit the homes to be built before the tunnel is constructed, but they didn’t ask for my views.)

If I might expand on your idea a bit: If the first tunnel is made from the Bronson side, and then the TBM turned at the Laurier pit, the muck from the second bore could just be transferred to hoppers running through the completed first tunnel back to Bayview. There would be no need to truck the muck along the Transitway and dump it at Hurdman.

Too bad we didn’t get our act together much sooner. The muck from the tunnel would have been great fill for the Lebreton Flats. In fact, if the spoil is broken rock, as I suspect it will be, it could still be used to do a lot of building right on the flats and surrounding area. The now closed Snow Dump and it’s adjacent City Yard, the Tom Brown Arena, and the City Center property could be redeveloped into a huge Civic Centre, featuring a 25,000+ seat stadium, a library, a theatre, several ice surfaces, City offices, commercial offices, conference space, concert space, etc., all run as a PPP with the current owners of the City Center. - Development money could come from the sale of the Frank Claire Stadium (since it is being replaced with a new stadium) and development of Landsdowne Park.

Ah, wouldn’t it be nice to have City ‘Planners’ and political leaders who were capable of looking at a bigger picture. Alas! Maybe we need another Greber who was given a couple of years to just develop a grand scheme for the city. I’m not saying that I agree with all of his vision of a ‘Garden City’, but at least there was an over-all plan which could be worked toward in a co-ordinated fashion. It seems as if all current ‘planning’ is done in a piece-meal fashion with no concept that each project is part of a larger system. - But I’m just ranting again.

Any suggestions as to what to do with the muck? I fear that just piling it would create a huge mound. (Maybe a ski hill?) Gatineau is in the middle of a building boom - and is rail accessible via the Prince of Wales Bridge. I wonder if it will be needing crushed rock in a few more years? Or whether the City can make a deal with one of the local aggregate extractors to set up a rock crusher on site to produce gravel? The company could then buy the gravel (revenue stream for the City) at a very good price and reduce the amount it needs to mine from open pits. Or do we need to increase the size of any of the islands in the Ottawa River - a la St. Helen in Montreal? Maybe we are planning to host the 2017 World’s Fair.

[AuxTown]

The Ottawa Citizen website has an interesting section where they have compiled all of the articles about Ottawa's public transit planning: http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/features/gettingthere/index.html

While it's interesting discussing options (and fighting about them) here on the forum, it's much more important what kind of spin the media is putting on the plan and, of late, they've been very positive. Whether their numbers are right or not ($500M), I'm really happy that the business community is jumping on board here. It's nice to see Ottawa finally realizing that not everything in the world is government run and funded, a notion that other big cities threw out a long time ago.

[c_speed3108]

Originally Posted by Franky

You're saying that in less than 100 years (probably 30 to 50), we will have to go through the exercise again to either add a second tunnel or add a new deck?!

If we must build a tunnel, why not build a oval bus tunnel that can be converted to a proper metro in 30 to 50 years?

Well I don't think this will be last tunnel we ever dig in the city...particularly because there is a bit of a bottle neck in our entire system design. Even if we stay with the current buses on a surface transitway, I have no doubt a second downtown transitway street will be required sometime soon.

Sometimes a bit of planning ahead for scalability can make things a bit easier the next time. Imagine how easy this exercise would have been if the bus tunnel had been built back in the 80's or 90's.

One of the biggest problems downtown is getting transit vehicles into that area. There are very few corridors that work...particularly from the east. If we have the chance to make a corridor do double duty (ie my commuter trains on a different level idea), it is something we should give some side thoughts to. Obviously it depends on cost. The biggest the hole, the more material to cart out so that would add some cost, but the boring cost would probably no be much more.

That said...I will leave the tunnel design to tunnel design experts...which I am not

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

....There might be a cconsiderable savings (particularly in the time=money way) if both east bound and west bound can be done in a single bore.

It has two other good advantages:

1) It leaves more streets open for tunnel # 2, some time in the distant future

2) The tunnel would perhaps end up big enough to accommodate either double level trains or a second set of tracks above (perhaps for commuter trains) - again way in the future.

A larger round bore could be used to provide future capacity, but you are paying for that now.

For example, a 12m bore should allow four tracks (2+2 stacked), with the stations on the sides. It would also allow two stacked tracks with the stations included in the bore.

(Dragados is pushing 12m tunnels because, despite the higher boring cost, the lower station costs results in a lower total cost, according to them. I don't think they have discovered oval tunnels yet. )

Two round 6m bores costs about $45M/Km, according to MRC/Delcan.
An oval bore (6m X 18m) would cost about $67.5M/Km.
A single 12m bore would be about $90M/Km.
Twin 10m round bores cost $125M/Km, according to MRC/Delcan.

Add the cost of rail and electricity at $55M/Km, or
the cost of asphalt and ventilation at $35M/Km.
For the 12m bore, there would be higher structure cost since there is a 'second floor' along the entire length of the tunnel. The cost per Km of the finished tunnel will be significantly higher than the boring costs.