Ottawa Rapid Transit Network developments

[waterloowarrior]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

And for Michael, I don't see the point, since it was specifically clear that trains wouldn't stop at interstections. It just shows how the public is not informed, since this would be the case for every stop on the line. OMG, I have to walk to my stop. That's the whole point of RAPID transit.

So there are the 3 intersections that would be tunneled.... what about the 10+ other ones with through traffic? and then the 10+ other ones that let people do left turns... ? Are they all going to be closed?

Trains will be coming every 2 minutes in two directions by 2031.. (unless we stop the East Trains after downtown...) is this possible without a fully or almost fully grade-separated system? What is the Calgary experience kyle_olsen? The systems I have gone on with median LRTs still have the train stopping at intersections sometimes, and can't go as fast as a grade separated system, but maybe I've gone on the wrong ones.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

So there are the 3 intersections that would be tunneled.... what about the 10+ other ones with through traffic? and then the 10+ other ones that let people do left turns... ? Are they all going to be closed?

Trains will be coming every 2 minutes in two directions by 2031.. (unless we stop the East Trains after downtown...) is this possible without a fully or almost fully grade-separated system? What is the Calgary experience kyle_olsen? The systems I have gone on with median LRTs still have the train stopping at intersections sometimes, and can't go as fast as a grade separated system, but maybe I've gone on the wrong ones.

1 or 2 minor roads are to be closed (there are alternate routes for those) The rest will have synchronized traffic signals.

The Transitway is still there for express buses and local service I would expect, so the numbers are a bit divided over the 2 alignments. I'm always told that the beauty of rail is you can "simply" add another car onto the train as ridership increases (within some limits).

[lrt's friend]

So there are the 3 intersections that would be tunneled.... what about the 10+ other ones with through traffic? and then the 10+ other ones that let people do left turns... ? Are they all going to be closed?

Trains will be coming every 2 minutes in two directions by 2031.. (unless we stop the East Trains after downtown...) is this possible without a fully or almost fully grade-separated system? What is the Calgary experience kyle_olsen? The systems I have gone on with median LRTs still have the train stopping at intersections sometimes, and can't go as fast as a grade separated system, but maybe I've gone on the wrong ones.

At grade intersections would have gates. Some less important intersections would be closed to crossing traffic (right turns only). Other intersections would allow crossing traffic, where LRT has to stop at a station anyways (Carlingwood, Maitland, Churchill, Merivale). The busiest intersections with lots of crossing traffic will have LRT underpasses (Woodroffe, Queensway/Kirkwood, Island Park/Holland). The number of stations and the number of underpasses will be subject to a cost/benefit analysis obviously.

[Mille Sabords]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

At grade intersections would have gates. Some less important intersections would be closed to crossing traffic (right turns only). Other intersections would allow crossing traffic, where LRT has to stop at a station anyways (Carlingwood, Maitland, Churchill, Merivale). The busiest intersections with lots of crossing traffic will have LRT underpasses (Woodroffe, Queensway/Kirkwood, Island Park/Holland). The number of stations and the number of underpasses will be subject to a cost/benefit analysis obviously.

Sounds like a lot of ugliness on what should really become a beautiful urban avenue, in the name of saving whatever little grasses and shrubs along the parkway which could easily accommodate rail on grass.

Gates? Underpasses? How will the pedestrian manage on such a mishmash? Sounds like an El-Cheapo way to ram light rail through whatever alignment will "save the green" along the Parkway, at the price of beautifying our own natural habitat, the city.

Have we become so blinded by our guilt over the environment that we are completely unable to do the right thing?

[Kitchissippi]

If the city is to subscribe to the Pedestrian-Cyclist-Transit user-Motorist priority hierarchy, it should just commit to completely grade separated rapid transit. Unlike a streetcar scenario I think rapid transit at-grade will be a detriment to whatever pedestrian potential Carling has because it becomes a conduit more than a destination. This is the exactly case with Albert and Slater downtown where inconvenience to pedestrians far outweigh the advantages of proximity to transit. Carling will end up with long blocks where the opportunity to cross will be rare.

Personally I think the wisest solution is a cut and cover tunnel on the Byron corridor for rapid transit and the city should just bite the bullet. When you think of the fact that it would carry all the transit traffic to and from Kanata and most of Barrhaven, not to mention the entire urban west end, it is worth the money considering two rapid transit lines are being planned for Orleans alone.

[lrt's friend]

Sounds like a lot of ugliness on what should really become a beautiful urban avenue, in the name of saving whatever little grasses and shrubs along the parkway which could easily accommodate rail on grass.

Gates? Underpasses? How will the pedestrian manage on such a mishmash? Sounds like an El-Cheapo way to ram light rail through whatever alignment will "save the green" along the Parkway, at the price of beautifying our own natural habitat, the city.

Have we become so blinded by our guilt over the environment that we are completely unable to do the right thing?

The theory here is that Carling will serve more people along the route and there are more parking lots that provide opportunities for intensification and more transit destinations.

Gates are commonly used on LRT such as in Calgary, and are designed to protect vehicles and pedestrians from collisions. Some sort of right of way security will be needed whether along Carling or along the Parkway. Underpasses will also be needed along the parkway in order to provide pedestrian access to the river. On Carling, the underpasses will obviously have pedestrian crossings at grade. We should remember that an underpass for light rail will be very narrow in comparison to your typical arterial boulevard.

I see light rail as the way to make Carling into the grand urban avenue that you refer to. Rather than deterring pedestrian traffic, I see it promoting it.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by Mille Sabords

Sounds like a lot of ugliness on what should really become a beautiful urban avenue, in the name of saving whatever little grasses and shrubs along the parkway which could easily accommodate rail on grass.

Gates? Underpasses? How will the pedestrian manage on such a mishmash? Sounds like an El-Cheapo way to ram light rail through whatever alignment will "save the green" along the Parkway, at the price of beautifying our own natural habitat, the city.

Have we become so blinded by our guilt over the environment that we are completely unable to do the right thing?

Have you seen Carling? It's a 4 lane road with a median. The glossy rail picture shows pristine manicured grass growing between the rails. I don't think "ugly" would be a fair qualifier. I wouldn't use beautiful either. At least not when compared to asphalt with yellow lines painted on them...

Pedestrians cross at intersections, just as they did before.

[Kitchissippi]

People keep on referring to Calgary as an example of rapid transit running at grade. Someone please show me a photo where it goes along a pedestrian friendly "grand urban boulevard", because from what I've seen it looks like this:

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

So there are the 3 intersections that would be tunneled.... what about the 10+ other ones with through traffic? and then the 10+ other ones that let people do left turns... ? Are they all going to be closed?

Trains will be coming every 2 minutes in two directions by 2031.. (unless we stop the East Trains after downtown...) is this possible without a fully or almost fully grade-separated system? What is the Calgary experience kyle_olsen? The systems I have gone on with median LRTs still have the train stopping at intersections sometimes, and can't go as fast as a grade separated system, but maybe I've gone on the wrong ones.

Yes, basically it's like a normal Train, with the crossings being closed when the train passes. Since the frequency is so high, there needs to be intersections open all the time, since traffic would be accumulating. Carling is still mostly a W-E corridor, so it shouldn't affect much.

Anyways, city staff has won, it will be another half baked plan with a technology that tries to do everything at the same time. I don't think there's hope for anyone in this city to try to do things better.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

If the city is to subscribe to the Pedestrian-Cyclist-Transit user-Motorist priority hierarchy, it should just commit to completely grade separated rapid transit. Unlike a streetcar scenario I think rapid transit at-grade will be a detriment to whatever pedestrian potential Carling has because it becomes a conduit more than a destination. This is the exactly case with Albert and Slater downtown where inconvenience to pedestrians far outweigh the advantages of proximity to transit. Carling will end up with long blocks where the opportunity to cross will be rare.

Personally I think the wisest solution is a cut and cover tunnel on the Byron corridor for rapid transit and the city should just bite the bullet. When you think of the fact that it would carry all the transit traffic to and from Kanata and most of Barrhaven, not to mention the entire urban west end, it is worth the money considering two rapid transit lines are being planned for Orleans alone.

Express buses are faster than LRT because rail doesn't typically have sidings at stations, they just block the track, so no passing ability exists.
The Transitway will still be available for express and local buses AFAIK.

[DecoyOctopus]

Originally Posted by Franky

We had a plan. Contracts were signed, then an election (which has allegations of influence peddling) happened an now we have this BS "I want a tunnel" mayor.

Sorry, hello. ;-)

I moved to Ottawa just as the Election race was happening. I think O'Brien is a tool but North to South definitely was a dumb plan. I work out in Kanata travel from College Square everyday to and from work and I can speak for my g/f who travels to and from Blair Rd. everyday when I say LRT should run East to West first.

The Queensway is packed everyday with cars coming and going to Downtown from Kanata and Orleans in the AM and to Kanata and Orleans in the PM. Not to mention the additional traffic congestion when there is an event going on at Scotiabank place.

I would also be in favor of removing lights from Hunt Club and having that as another parkway type of road with on/off's at the major intersections only.

Thanks for the Welcome, I've been reading the forums for a while now.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

Yes, basically it's like a normal Train, with the crossings being closed when the train passes. Since the frequency is so high, there needs to be intersections open all the time, since traffic would be accumulating. Carling is still mostly a W-E corridor, so it shouldn't affect much.

Anyways, city staff has won, it will be another half baked plan with a technology that tries to do everything at the same time. I don't think there's hope for anyone in this city to try to do things better.

There is still one week left before the actual decision is made. This meeting was committee recommendations (as I understand it). Write your councillors and tell them you want the better Doucet-Leadman plan properly studied at least. We've seen that until it's built, it's not a done deal - even if contracts were signed.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by DecoyOctopus

I moved to Ottawa just as the Election race was happening. I think O'Brien is a tool but North to South definitely was a dumb plan. I work out in Kanata travel from College Square everyday to and from work and I can speak for my g/f who travels to and from Blair Rd. everyday when I say LRT should run East to West first.

The Queensway is packed everyday with cars coming and going to Downtown from Kanata and Orleans in the AM and to Kanata and Orleans in the PM. Not to mention the additional traffic congestion when there is an event going on at Scotiabank place.

I would also be in favor of removing lights from Hunt Club and having that as another parkway type of road with on/off's at the major intersections only.

Thanks for the Welcome, I've been reading the forums for a while now.

I agree, the ring around town is the part of the plan that made no sense to me. Nobody out there, nobody would use it.
Edit: North South without digging under Dow's lake makes more sense to me. Using the South-East transitway later. I guess doing the short track to Leitrim(?) without the Airport spur would be way cheaper. The Doucet-Leadman plan isn't exactly the same as the old plan, though it's very similar.

I think it's inevitable that the 417 must be widened. It would be best if the extra lane was an HOV lane though. Don't know enough about Hunt Club to even take a guess.

[lrt's friend]

I would also be in favor of removing lights from Hunt Club and having that as another parkway type of road with on/off's at the major intersections only.

That decision is 25 years too late. Anyways, who wants another 'parkway', which effectively is an expressway? Hopefully this city realizes that we need to invest in grade separated transit, not grade separated roads.

As it has been pointed out on CFRA this hour as part of the municipal panel, Carling as a rapid transit route has been defeated. The plan calls for use of the Parkway. Only if that fails, will other options be considered, namely Byron. Seems like we are putting all our eggs in one basket, when we don't own the right of way.

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

As it has been pointed out on CFRA this hour as part of the municipal panel, Carling as a rapid transit route has been defeated. The plan calls for use of the Parkway. Only if that fails, will other options be considered, namely Byron. Seems like we are putting all our eggs in one basket, when we don't own the right of way.

Byron is part of the Western Parkway Corridor assessment according to the Staff Report

[Franky]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

Byron is part of the Western Parkway Corridor assessment according to the Staff Report

Where on Byron, say, will the grade-separated LRT run? In a trench or on elevated posts? How much will that cost?

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by Franky

Where on Byron, say, will the grade-separated LRT run? In a trench or on elevated posts? How much will that cost?

In a covered trench and I don't personally care how much it costs. Just don't tell me it's "impossible".

[DarkKeyo]

Wow. What an incredible mess Ottawa's transit planning has become over the last year or so that I've been lurking in this thread.

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

I think this plan would be a good ultimate configuration for Ottawa's transit plan. The current plan from Tunney's to Blair would work as a starting point for this ultimate plan. I would go for a cut-and-cover on Byron instead of Carling (I can tell you that Calgary's NE line, which runs in the median of a road, and would probably be what a train down Carling would end up being like, is one big mess and is an example of how not to do an LRT. It is not pedestrian friendly, car friendly, or train friendly.) or the Parkway (Since Ottawa's train plan intends to be a combination of commuter train and LRT, having the line go in a place where it can have stations that aren't surrounded by nothing but park is good for ridership. The Parkway route is too contentious a route anyways).

This map makes the lines look like they follow roads in certain places like Barrhaven... They should just use the already-existing transitway corridors and keep the line as grade-separated as possible (Calgary's lack of grade separation often causes problems). I would still add some sort of rapid transit on the Cumberland Transitway, Carling, and to Stittsville, as well as what they've proposed here.

That's just my two cents... As someone who enjoys transit as a hobby, I just wish the city of Ottawa would get past all the arguing about how they're going to build the train and onto the actual building, which is already going to take forever.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by DarkKeyo

Wow. What an incredible mess Ottawa's transit planning has become over the last year or so that I've been lurking in this thread.



I think this plan would be a good ultimate configuration for Ottawa's transit plan. The current plan from Tunney's to Blair would work as a starting point for this ultimate plan. I would go for a cut-and-cover on Byron instead of Carling (I can tell you that Calgary's NE line, which runs in the median of a road, and would probably be what a train down Carling would end up being like, is one big mess and is an example of how not to do an LRT. It is not pedestrian friendly, car friendly, or train friendly.) or the Parkway (Since Ottawa's train plan intends to be a combination of commuter train and LRT, having the line go in a place where it can have stations that aren't surrounded by nothing but park is good for ridership. The Parkway route is too contentious a route anyways).

Interesting. Calgary is used as a model of the best LRT plan, and you tell me this NE line 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵. Won't cut and cover on Byron be expensive with all those utilities to move?

Originally Posted by DarkKeyo

This map makes the lines look like they follow roads in certain places like Barrhaven... They should just use the already-existing transitway corridors and keep the line as grade-separated as possible (Calgary's lack of grade separation often causes problems). I would still add some sort of rapid transit on the Cumberland Transitway, Carling, and to Stittsville, as well as what they've proposed here.

That's probably what makes the Calgary LRT cheap. In a way, if you go with grade separated everywhere, why not just use buses or trolley-buses? You don't need "big bunch" ability, smaller bunches will do.

Originally Posted by DarkKeyo

That's just my two cents... As someone who enjoys transit as a hobby, I just wish the city of Ottawa would get past all the arguing about how they're going to build the train and onto the actual building, which is already going to take forever.

I have a problem with spending over $5 Billion on a half-baked plan. Especially when our taxes will be paying for their mistakes.

The Doucet-Leadman plan does away with spending money on buses and pavement and brings in rail much faster by focusing effort. I have to repeat how upset I am they won't even consider this plan. It smells like corruption.

[Deez]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

From the City of Toronto directly:

Q4) What is the projected annual ridership of the route?
In 2021, forecast ridership for the Jane Street LRT is 19 million riders a year. More recent forecasts (premised on expected development levels to 2031) suggest ridership of 1,700 to 2,200 people per hour in a single direction at the busiest point on the line.

I don't disagree with your source, but I contend that bi-directional annual boardings is a better indicator of need for higher order transit than phpd volumes (unless of course there's a capacity crunch like in the downtown).