Ottawa Rapid Transit Network developments

[waterloowarrior]

Politics delaying light rail

Ministers having difficulty saying the magic word -- 'yes'

BY RANDALL DENLEY, THE OTTAWA CITIZENMARCH 19, 2009 1:16 PM


The long wait for federal and provincial political approval of Ottawa's transit expansion is starting to get a bit silly. The key ministers at both levels are not against the plan, but they can't quite bring themselves to say the word "yes."

The city got a little flurry of media coverage this week when it formally released its request for money, but the real negotiations have been going on for months behind closed doors. Given the high level of awareness of this plan, the latest public comments from federal Transport Minister John Baird and provincial Municipal Affairs Minister Jim Watson were discouragingly familiar.

Baird repromised the $200 million federal ministers have been promising since the time of the previous Liberal government. The cheque must be getting worn out with handling by now.

It's "not a question of whether or not we will support the plan, it's how much," Baird said. That puts the question succinctly, but it doesn't provide the answer. The $200 million the federal government is offering as a one-third share of a rail project isn't enough to do anything meaningful.

Baird is still more positive about rail than Jim Watson. The Ottawa MPP is taking the same wait-and-see attitude that he's had for some time. Provincial government experts are poring over the details of the project and will get back to Watson at some unspecified future date.

Would these be the same provincial experts who examined the city's previous rail plan and found it worthy? That plan extended service to a suburb that is still mostly a concept, offered little in ridership gains and proposed a downtown transit congestion solution that would only last a few years.

City bureaucrats muddied the waters this week when they began describing the transit expansion as a $3.2-billion program. This is a plan with multiple phases and increments within those phases, but what's actually in play now is

$600 million from each government over an eight-to-10-year period to add 15 kilometres of busway, build the downtown tunnel and construct the first phase of light rail.

There are only two real questions for Baird and Watson. Do they like the concept and can they get the money? If the answer is yes, then we can refine the details. If no, there is no use wasting more time and money on expensive transit plans.

The money required for Ottawa's transit expansion sounds like a lot, but compared to the $11.5 billion the provincial government has promised for the same kinds of things in the Greater Toronto Area, Ottawa is asking for peanuts. Our transit requirement looks even smaller in the context of the federal budget.

On the provincial side, petty politics could be playing a part in the delay of the announcement. Provincial politicians liked the old north-south plan that was to be the legacy of former Liberal MPP and mayor Bob Chiarelli. They blame Conservative Baird for screwing up that plan and that legacy. It has left a bitterness that's combined with an unwillingness to give Mayor Larry O'Brien a win on the plan he has championed. These are not what you'd call good reasons for delay.

Baird could put the provincial government on the spot by announcing full federal support, but he's enjoying the new era of co-operation with the provincial government. The two governments have found common cause in their enthusiasm for borrowing billions of dollars and spending it on building stuff. Baird won't want to spoil the party by playing hardball with the province. OK, but leaders don't wait to follow.

It will take some good political work by Ottawa municipal politicians to get the light-rail deal done. They signalled this week that they might be able to pare down the $1.8-billion cost by using short-term federal and provincial stimulus money to pay for some of the busway extensions. Others could be delayed. That would leave the

$1.4-billion cost of the downtown tunnel and first stage of the rail. Baird has told councillors privately that he could come up with as much as $435 million for rail projects. That would put the federal share pretty close to what's required.

Nothing will happen, though, until the province gets serious. This light-rail plan promotes a more compact, denser city and heavier reliance on public transit. That's completely in line with the province's rhetoric. Watson's talk about needing advice from experts is baloney. One needn't be an expert to say yes or no to the concept and the funding. Maybe Watson just doesn't have the clout to get the deal done for Ottawa, but what ever happened to Ottawa South MPP Dalton McGuinty? Mr. Premier, it's time to say yes.

Contact Randall Denley at 596-3756 or by e-mail, [email protected]

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

[Franky]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The Light blue represents transit movement from the SE Transitway to downtown. What I was wondering was movement in the opposite direction, ie from downtown and how transfers would work between the the two former Transitways? I don't think this really addresses this.

The Nicholas on-ramp (going east) and the Vanier off-ramp are the same stretch so no merging onto the 417 is needed. I'm pretty sure a bus-only lane could be added in there but there would be no shoulder left. The rest of the route would be the same as a temporary Hurdman station in the current location I suppose. 417 widening could also be part of this equation but isn't strictly necessary. I guess it would depend on the time frame. I think any way you slice this, building the LRT will be very messy from a traffic point of view. A bunch of trucks carrying the excavated tunnel dirt/rock will also clog up and destroy our streets.

[lrt's friend]

After reading today's article on proposed infrastructure projects for federal and provincial funding, I find it rather disturbing how the Baseline 'tunnel' has become the most expensive item on the list. A project that really was off the radar screen a couple of years ago has somehow been fast tracked, while other more meaningful transit projects take forever to be planned and built. So we end up with this tunnel within 2 years designed for LRT, while LRT itself will still be many years down the road. The whole history of this project bugs me, since intensification is driving transit costs way up in this case. I hope other parts of the LRT corridor do not develop in a similar manner. We simply can't afford it.

[Dado]

Add to that what I fear about Tunney's Pasture becoming a runaway disaster with all sorts of temporary facilities. There was even a suggestion by the consultants to sink a shaft for elevators and escalators from a temporary island station north of the current station down to the transitway level to avoid having pedestrians crossing the paths of circulating buses!

http://ottawa.ca/residents/public_consult/transit_tunnel/getinvolved/op_1/images/15_tunneys_3.jpg

How is it the City poured cold water on the idea of temporary transfer station at Bayview (where there is at least space to get a good layout) but a far more complicated one at Tunney's a kilometre away is now acceptable?

For the cost of the Baseline tunnel (including the trenching to Norice and the new city archives) and the Tunney's add-ons, we could probably get to Baseline in the first round.


I dispute though that it's intensification that is causing the run-up in costs... it's the City's "bury it" mentality, likely egged on by Algonquin College. Other cities put up with surface LRT in much more intensively developed areas. It's all the more galling when one considers that theoretically there should be only half as many trains at Baseline as at Lincoln Fields and points east due to the split in the Transitway (and ridership) at Lincoln Fields (indeed, the projections suggest far more riders will be coming from West Nepean and Kanata than from Centrepointe and Barrhaven). Even at peak periods you're likely looking at 6 minute headways so Baseline is really being overbuilt for what it needs to handle.

[waterloowarrior]

"An interim report that advances a technically preferred alignment and station design will be presented at the Transit Committee meeting on May 6, 2009.
The next open house will be held in June."

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

"An interim report that advances a technically preferred alignment and station design will be presented at the Transit Committee meeting on May 6, 2009.
The next open house will be held in June."

If they keep the current Transitway stations, I'm gonna throw up. Is there anyone in this city capable of handling rail projects? It would be so easy to have great looking pictures, just by reusing the current concrete structures and removing the glass.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

If they keep the current Transitway stations, I'm gonna throw up. Is there anyone in this city capable of handling rail projects? It would be so easy to have great looking pictures, just by reusing the current concrete structures and removing the glass.

Remember, they quit after the cancellation of the last plan.

Also, those Transitway Stations were designed at the same time as the disasterous Rideau bus mall. The answer is to ship them off to Perth, where they might be able to make something attractive out of them.

[lrt's friend]

Any plans for the grandiose stations at Hurdman and Blair yet? When you really think about it, even Baseline station should be designed to be temporary if we are really serious about extending LRT beyond that point or maybe the idea is to never extend LRT. Has Calgary built any $200M stations?

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Dado

Add to that what I fear about Tunney's Pasture becoming a runaway disaster with all sorts of temporary facilities. There was even a suggestion by the consultants to sink a shaft for elevators and escalators from a temporary island station north of the current station down to the transitway level to avoid having pedestrians crossing the paths of circulating buses!

http://ottawa.ca/residents/public_consult/transit_tunnel/getinvolved/op_1/images/15_tunneys_3.jpg

How is it the City poured cold water on the idea of temporary transfer station at Bayview (where there is at least space to get a good layout) but a far more complicated one at Tunney's a kilometre away is now acceptable?

For the cost of the Baseline tunnel (including the trenching to Norice and the new city archives) and the Tunney's add-ons, we could probably get to Baseline in the first round.


I dispute though that it's intensification that is causing the run-up in costs... it's the City's "bury it" mentality, likely egged on by Algonquin College. Other cities put up with surface LRT in much more intensively developed areas. It's all the more galling when one considers that theoretically there should be only half as many trains at Baseline as at Lincoln Fields and points east due to the split in the Transitway (and ridership) at Lincoln Fields (indeed, the projections suggest far more riders will be coming from West Nepean and Kanata than from Centrepointe and Barrhaven). Even at peak periods you're likely looking at 6 minute headways so Baseline is really being overbuilt for what it needs to handle.

If a surface Baseline station is feasible and can be built considerably cheaper, then why aren't we doing it? The price of this one station is coming close to 25% of the cost of the original project with 30km of track and rolling stock. This doesn't sound like good value for money.

[MalcolmTucker]

^That station even as designed shouldn't cost anywhere near the projections that are being thrown around. Are all the local contractors controlled by the mafia or something?

Sounds like they need to bring someone into the project office to stop scope creep. Council should set a budget and what they want (where to service) and the projects office job should be to do whatever they can to get in at that budget.

Who convinced them that they need showpiece stations everywhere?

[Dado]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

If they keep the current Transitway stations, I'm gonna throw up. Is there anyone in this city capable of handling rail projects? It would be so easy to have great looking pictures, just by reusing the current concrete structures and removing the glass.

You mean like this?



You can go and throw up now...

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Remember, they quit after the cancellation of the last plan.

In fact a lot of the external rail experts left following the O-Train pilot because of the way the City treated them. More than one vowed never to work for the City of Ottawa ever again.

Also, those Transitway Stations were designed at the same time as the disasterous Rideau bus mall. The answer is to ship them off to Perth, where they might be able to make something attractive out of them.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Any plans for the grandiose stations at Hurdman and Blair yet?

Yes (I'm only showing one from each):

Hurdman:
http://www.ottawa.ca/residents/public_co...nvolved/op_1/segments/12_hurdman_en.html

The Hurdman station designs don't look too outrageous, really. Blair though...

Blair:
http://www.ottawa.ca/residents/public_co...tinvolved/op_1/segments/16_blair_en.html

When you really think about it, even Baseline station should be designed to be temporary if we are really serious about extending LRT beyond that point or maybe the idea is to never extend LRT. Has Calgary built any $200M stations?

Go with the latter sentiment. The Town Centres will not reach the required density of 120 population and jobs per hectare by 2031. Never heard of such a requirement? Well it was alluded to in the autumn during the time of the TMP update but it hasn't formally been approved of yet in the Official Plan. Theoretically we could be moving 10,000 people per hour by bus across the Greenbelt and that would still not be sufficient for LRT if the Town Centre doesn't have that aforementionned density.

Some of Calgary's expressway median stations are on the pricey side, but nothing even approaching $200M.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

If a surface Baseline station is feasible and can be built considerably cheaper, then why aren't we doing it? The price of this one station is coming close to 25% of the cost of the original project with 30km of track and rolling stock. This doesn't sound like good value for money.

As best as Richard and I can tell, Algonquin College is partly to blame. They didn't want an at-grade station blighting their new developments, despite being handed over land and money (for the skywalk) for them.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by kyle_olsen

^That station even as designed shouldn't cost anywhere near the projections that are being thrown around.

Sorry for the confusion but we were discussing two stations simultaneously. The illustrated station, Tunney's Pasture, is only going to have large cost overruns due to unnecessary modifications. The other one we were talking about, Baseline, is already having titanic cost overruns and it's barely been designed.

Are all the local contractors controlled by the mafia or something?

I wouldn't like to say, but they're not the problem at this stage.

Sounds like they need to bring someone into the project office to stop scope creep. Council should set a budget and what they want (where to service) and the projects office job should be to do whatever they can to get in at that budget.

There is no project office as there is no project yet.

Who convinced them that they need showpiece stations everywhere?

If only they were going to be showpiece stations. It's just about digging big holes and filling them with concrete. Baseline - the $207M one - will consist of a trench some 30 m wide dug into unstable ground with the following cross-section:

(thank you Richard)
The red is rail and the blue is bus (Red = Rail, Blue = Bus). Naturally we need a shoulder for when the buses break down or run out of fuel, hence the 7.5 m for the buses.

This concrete-walled trench will then be covered over with more concrete to make a tunnel and then grass thrown on top of it (because we, or at least our leaders, love grass in Ottawa). The southernmost section of this trench will have a bus terminal on top of it:

(the tunnel portion is to the left of the blue and north of the yellow/pink, which is the bus terminal)

If that weren't enough, where the trench emerges from the overhead structures it's even wider to accommodate some side-loading bus platforms (the barely visible bits of pink either side of the main north-south yellow lines - so we have something like 4.5 metres each for the two bus platforms, 4 metres each for the two bus lanes, 3 metres each for the two rail lanes and one 9 metre rail platform, for a total of 32 metres). And to top it off, we have ramps on either side as well because south of here the Transitway continues to be below grade in a trench and buses need to get out of it to the transfer station above while other buses can continue to drive on through beside the future/new LRT.

[Franky]

Key city planner among those laid off

Lindsay one of 25 managers to be let go

By Patrick Dare, The Ottawa CitizenMarch 27, 2009Comments (17)


OTTAWA-One of Ottawa’s most experienced planners is among the managers being laid off this week by the city administration.

Grant Lindsay, the manager in charge of development approvals for the western and central parts of the city, was one of 44 employees — including 25 managers — who lost their jobs.

Lindsay had been in the thick of city planning issues for many years. Last year, he was one of several planners to warn city councillors against permitting residential development on rural land that has substandard water supply. The councillors eventually went ahead and allowed the development.
...
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Business/city+planner+among+those+laid/1432422/story.html

[MalcolmTucker]

Umm, why are they trying to design the station to provide cross platform loading/unloading from buses to the train? Especially since they are island loading the trains, why does it matter if the transitway buses drop off at the same level? It creates an additional stair trip vs just an oversized transfer station.

Why shouldn't all the buses use a temporarily larger transfer station?

Going only half way LRT in building this transfer stations seems to be eating up enough cash that could otherwise be used for more track.

Why are they wasting money building transitway south of baseline that will just need to be converted later? I hope they are least ran back of the napkin CBA compared to building LRT to hunt club where there is lots of land, or to fallowfield.

If they build or plan this station, every other LRT-Transitway transfer station will want similar build quality.

Man-o-man this is fraked up.

Good luck.

[waterloowarrior]

Originally Posted by Franky

Key city planner among those laid off

Lindsay one of 25 managers to be let go

By Patrick Dare, The Ottawa CitizenMarch 27, 2009Comments (17)


OTTAWA-One of Ottawa’s most experienced planners is among the managers being laid off this week by the city administration.

Grant Lindsay, the manager in charge of development approvals for the western and central parts of the city, was one of 44 employees — including 25 managers — who lost their jobs.

Lindsay had been in the thick of city planning issues for many years. Last year, he was one of several planners to warn city councillors against permitting residential development on rural land that has substandard water supply. The councillors eventually went ahead and allowed the development.
...
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Business/city+planner+among+those+laid/1432422/story.html

what does that have to do with rapid transit?
also we already have a thread on this
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=160775

[Franky]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

what does that have to do with rapid transit?
also we already have a thread on this
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=160775

That was sort of what I was asking, what impact does losing 44 employees including 25 managers have on transit planning? These layoffs will cost $5M and save ???/year while we are to build extravagant stations - does this make sense?

Thanks for the link, I'll check it out.

[AuxTown]

I like that Hurdman Station. It's not extravagent by any means and is very functional. I don't see why places like Blair and Baseline can justify such ridiculous plans when something like this would do the trick just fine. It's not like our beautiful new LRT vehicles will be an eyesore or anything. Great rendering of Tunney's! Are these all part of the official proposal? What is the next decision-making step and when is the vote?

[waterloowarrior]

Originally Posted by Franky

That was sort of what I was asking, what impact does losing 44 employees including 25 managers have on transit planning? These layoffs will cost $5M and save ???/year while we are to build extravagant stations - does this make sense?

Thanks for the link, I'll check it out.

I don't think very many (if any) were involved in the transit planning... the city planner mentioned does development approvals. I don't think you can really compare ongoing operating expenses like salaries with one-time capital projects (although I don't like this whole temporary station too much either).

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by O-Town Hockey

I like that Hurdman Station. It's not extravagent by any means and is very functional. I don't see why places like Blair and Baseline can justify such ridiculous plans when something like this would do the trick just fine. It's not like our beautiful new LRT vehicles will be an eyesore or anything. Great rendering of Tunney's! Are these all part of the official proposal? What is the next decision-making step and when is the vote?

I'm new here, but I agree with your thoughts. Such mega-stations are pointless and a huge rip-off when you consider that they are not the ultimate endpoints of the lines and considering the size of Ottawa (even in 2035, the metropolitan area will likely have under 2 million people). The amount extra spent on just those two stations (about $200-300 million over a "normal" at-grade station design) could at least buy an extension to Bayshore to the west.

I think Baseline would be best built at-grade with a centre-loading platform, immediately to the west of the bus platforms (with an elevated connection between the two).

Blair should use the existing Transitway, with a reconfiguration of the interchange should an Orleans extension be built.