HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1681  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2009, 9:47 PM
Suzie Suzie is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franky View Post
That's PAT/PRT.
Excellent point, Franky!!!

Alas, it looks like we’ll have to make do with old, tired transit technologies that involve a lot of waiting, walking, stopping and transferring for decades to come (remember, this great plan is supposed to set us up for the next 100 years). And people will continue to wonder why it is so difficult and costly for transit to attract people away from the automobile...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1682  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2009, 10:53 PM
p_xavier p_xavier is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathgrith View Post
If there for more stations, there would be more stops and thus slowing the system down. Walking for a few minutes should not be an issue. I think its fine. The East downtown station is a short walk to Bank. Not a big issue.

I think you are expecting the subway to go into a building, drop you off, and then kiss your ass as you sit down.
Of course, adding 5 minutes walk to a majority of users, vs. 30 seconds for an extra stop is a much better deal. And yes, it's that bad for other cities having a subway. People working on René-Levesque in MTL prefer taking their cars, instead of taking the subway, and there are TWO lines two blocks away. This is the reason why they are planning to build a LRT line there.

How many of you see people taking their cars to change stores in a suburban city centre? Yup.


Anyways, all of this showed that the city lost 2 years studying plans that were already predetermined. The choice of the cross-country aligment plus the loss of 3 core stations reflects that well. I just don't want to think how expensive it will be to dig a station under the canal, bordering a cliff plus at one of the busiest intersection in the city. JOY! Of course, the Queen-Daly line wouldn't have those great engineering aspects to spend 300M$ more.

Message to city planners: most efficient design doesn't mean to pack the more users into a station, it means to have the shortest route for users, while maintaining low costs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1683  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2009, 11:19 PM
eternallyme eternallyme is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,243
If there were 3 stations downtown, would they be too closely spaced for things to work well operationally? That would assume a station around Bay, a station around Bank/Kent and a station around Metcalfe/O'Connor.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1684  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2009, 11:31 PM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,254
Quote:
Originally Posted by eternallyme View Post
If there were 3 stations downtown, would they be too closely spaced for things to work well operationally? That would assume a station around Bay, a station around Bank/Kent and a station around Metcalfe/O'Connor.
It would be similar to other cities in Canada, about 400-500 metre distance between stations.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1685  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2009, 11:45 PM
eternallyme eternallyme is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,243
As for the rest of the stations, my opinions:

Tunney's Pasture - Definitely the best choice IMO. It avoids a slowing sharp left turn, and the resulting terminal creates a permanent bus terminus (the current one is quite cramped). I'd keep it with the current side platforms to reduce costs.

Bayview - I think the direct-to-downtown is best, simply to keep the tracks in place for maintenance and service issues and avoid requiring an extra, fully-developed yard or trucking cars for maintenance. In the short term, the O-Train should extend into downtown, and in the long term, the upper-level platform would provide the link on the Gatineau routes (via a twinned Prince of Wales Bridge). I think it should be a centre-loading station on both levels.

LeBreton - Agreed with the proposal, since a bus terminal would likely not be necessary if all the express buses are eliminated, as only a couple routes terminate at LeBreton normally. I'd make it a centre-loading platform.

Downtown - I think the alignment is probably the best one. The gap between the Rideau Centre and Campus is unavoidable due to the long curve. If operationally suitable, three stations could be warranted between LeBreton and the Rideau Centre. All the downtown stations should be centre-loading platforms.

Campus - Agreed with the proposal, getting it underground would make things a lot easier on the University campus, and set things up better for the curve ahead. I'd make it a centre-loading platform.

Lees - It is probably not the best place for the station, but keeping it in its current location is undesirable due to the curve right out of the station, and blasting would be expensive. As a result, under the Queensway is probably the best choice. Agreed with side platforms, it is not that busy.

Hurdman - Disagreed 100% with the proposal. I definitely think the rotated alignment is best, as that sets things up best for a conversion of the Southeast Transitway. If built as proposed, they would have to either shift the alignment onto the OVR corridor (throwaway construction from Hurdman to Pleasant Park) or have a second platform with the split before the station, which would make transfers slower and less convenient. No matter what, Hurdman should have a centre-loading platform.

Train - It's a no-brainer - the proposed alignment is by far the best one, as it uses the most existing resources without requiring expropriation to the east. A covered walkway to the train station would be useful. Due to the lower volumes, a side-loading station is appropriate.

St. Laurent - Since it is already in a tunnel, using the existing infrastructure is probably the best idea. I agree with the proposal, and I think side platforms - although not the most desirable - are definitely much more cost-effective. The bus terminal doesn't need to change at all.

Cyrville - Agreed with the proposal. Side platforms make most sense due to the access from Cyrville Road and the low ridership.

Blair - I'm not sure about this one. The costs are much higher to tunnel the station, but keeping it at-grade without an immediate eastern extension would create significant problems in extending eastward to Orleans (the 174/Blair interchange would have to be completely reconstructed and major construction would have to be done twice instead of once). I'd look over this one since there are pros and cons to both. Any alignment should be centre-loading.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1686  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2009, 12:13 AM
Dado's Avatar
Dado Dado is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suzie View Post
I would also question the recommendation to move the Lees stop northward and putting it under the Queensway.
This makes sense when you look at it. The platforms at Lees have to be extended from ~60 m to ~180 m. There isn't much room to extend the platforms south due to the curve and rising grade but there is room to the north under the Queensway. I don't think this will be a moving of Lees per se but rather a shifting of its centre northwards.

It's in a pretty miserable part of the city though, regardless of its exact location.
__________________
Ottawa's quasi-official motto: "It can't be done"
Ottawa's quasi-official ethos: "We have a process to follow"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1687  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2009, 1:10 AM
ikerrin ikerrin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 335
I am surprised that there is so much debate about where the stations are going to be and none a about, when the stations will be.

Quote:
The study is expected to wrap up in January 2010. The start of construction is anticipated for 2012 and could take four to five years to complete.
Is it just me, or does this seem to be a downright leisurely pace? In the first place, how can you justify stimulus money for this project unless its the next economic downturn you are planning to address and not the current one. Second, what are they planning to do between finishing the study and starting the project. I know they have to select a project team but that shouldn't take more than a year, and how can it take five years to drill a short hole and lay tracks. That part of the project sounds like 2 years max (although, I guess judging from how long it takes them to pave Bank Street its less surprising).

I think it would be realistic to say that we will finish the EA by January 2010, have the project team in place by January 2011, have a working downtown tunneled subway operating by July 2012 call it the Independence Line (with stations named after War of 1812 heros Brock Station, Tacumseh Station, Secord Station, etc). Then by every six months through to July 2014 open a new War of 1812 themed station. Now there is a project to get ambitious about finishing on an ambitious time frame
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1688  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2009, 2:53 AM
Rathgrith's Avatar
Rathgrith Rathgrith is offline
I'm just joking.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 1,164
Has the city brought up the potential to use the old Union Station as an entrance to the proposed Sussex/Rideau Station? I know being the federal government makes it unlikely but it would be such a great entrance to the downtown with visitors who arrive from the airport (whenever the line gets extended) and the train station. Maybe its just a pipe dream for me.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1689  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2009, 2:54 AM
AuxTown's Avatar
AuxTown AuxTown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 4,639
Just for reference as the question was never fully answered:

http://www.barbarellas.ca/barb_home.asp (viewer discretion is advised)

Really happy to see the plan but I'll reiterate the two things that bug me the most. First, Bank Street is Ottawa's Main Street and officially supposed to be the pedestrian focus of our downtown. How they can justify putting the station 300-400m down the road completely eludes me. At least put it between O'Connor and Bank, not Metcalfe and O'Connor. The loss of the Laurier station and the proposed placement of the Sussex/Rideau one is a huge loss to the U of O and it's students. I guess someone forgot to tell transit planners that univeristy students make up one of the largest single groups of transit riders in the city. They live in central areas, have little to no money, and are more environmentally conscious than the general population so why not make it completely inconvenient for them to use transit?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1690  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2009, 3:01 AM
Dado's Avatar
Dado Dado is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikerrin View Post
I am surprised that there is so much debate about where the stations are going to be and none a about, when the stations will be.
Easy. We expect very little out of the City. We've become used to it.

Quote:
Is it just me, or does this seem to be a downright leisurely pace?
It's Ottawa. See my signature.

Quote:
In the first place, how can you justify stimulus money for this project unless its the next economic downturn you are planning to address and not the current one.
We're not going to be using stimulus money for this project.

Quote:
Second, what are they planning to do between finishing the study and starting the project.
They still have to carry out a design study.

Quote:
I know they have to select a project team but that shouldn't take more than a year, and how can it take five years to drill a short hole and lay tracks. That part of the project sounds like 2 years max (although, I guess judging from how long it takes them to pave Bank Street its less surprising).
Beats me. We built the CPR in 5 years through the mountains and the unforgiving pre-Cambrian shield of Northern Ontario back in the 1880s. As recently as the late 1980s CPR built a 14.7 km tunnel through Mount McDonald in 4 years. Not that these are comparable, of course. Though the physical obstacles were great and there were rebellions, labour troubles, logistical nightmares and financing problems to contend with in the former, neither had to face the City of Ottawa.

Quote:
I think it would be realistic to say that we will finish the EA by January 2010, have the project team in place by January 2011, have a working downtown tunneled subway operating by July 2012 call it the Independence Line (with stations named after War of 1812 heros Brock Station, Tacumseh Station, Secord Station, etc). Then by every six months through to July 2014 open a new War of 1812 themed station. Now there is a project to get ambitious about finishing on an ambitious time frame
Ya, not going to happen.
__________________
Ottawa's quasi-official motto: "It can't be done"
Ottawa's quasi-official ethos: "We have a process to follow"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1691  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2009, 3:12 AM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,254
Tunnel misses mark: business leaders

Planned route will hurt Rideau Centre, future ridership, critics say
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Tunnel+misses+mark+business+leaders/1547243/story.html
BY PATRICK DARE, THE OTTAWA CITIZENAPRIL 29, 2009 11:01 PM


Ottawa • Downtown Ottawa business people wanted a subway for commuter rail, but now that the project is chugging ahead some are questioning the route of the train.

The proposed alignment for Ottawa’s downtown tunnel made public Wednesday — and cheered by several city councillors — could miss a substantial number of potential riders in the downtown business district and could hurt the Rideau Centre, business leaders said Wednesday.

The city’s downtown train subway should run farther south than city planners have plotted, said Hume Rogers, of the Downtown Coalition. He said the city’s proposed route, gradually turning north beginning at Kent Street, takes the commuter rail line too far north downtown too early. Rogers says the Downtown Coalition property owners believe a better route is to continue under Albert Street for another three blocks, then turn north at Metcalfe Street.

Rogers said the problem with veering northward at Kent Street is that it will reduce the rail line’s future potential ridership because there will be new development on streets like Slater and Laurier Avenue, rather than farther north on Queen and Sparks. Rogers said that by staying farther south, the city would be able to include buildings such as the Bell Canada tower within reasonable walking distance of the subway. City officials, however, say that their proposed gradual turn beginning at Kent Street is a better route because it’s best to avoid the creation of sharp turns, not only because of a nicer ride, but reduced wheel squealing and wear. As well, the city’s proposed route includes large stations with multiple access points.

The planners aren’t sure that stations with such good access would be possible in a route farther south.

The twin-tunnel route proposed Wednesday would run 3.2 kilometres and have stations at LeBreton, Downtown West, Downtown East, Rideau and the University of Ottawa. The Rideau Station would have three entry ports to increase convenience for riders: one near the National Arts Centre, one near the Government Conference Centre and one farther east near Rideau Street.

The Rideau Centre is concerned that it could be harmed by the proposed alignment of the subway because it would put an end to the heavy public transit traffic that goes into the centre from the Mackenzie King Bridge.

Rideau Centre general manager Cindy Van Buskirk said the centre was built 26 years ago to be integrated into the transit system, open 20 hours a day to accommodate riders and was highly successful at reviving a failing neighbourhood.

She said that if the transit corridor were no longer on or under the Mackenzie King Bridge, the centre would lose a lot of traffic.

The councillor for the area, Georges Bédard, said business at the Rideau Centre dried up during the winter transit strike and would be similarly threatened if transit riders no longer go through the place.

“This approach will basically kill the Rideau Centre,” Bédard said.

Both Bédard and Van Buskirk said that one solution — if the subway takes all of the heavy regional transit traffic off Mackenzie King Bridge — is for all of the local transit traffic that currently runs on Rideau Street to be shifted over to the bridge.

City manager Kent Kirkpatrick, attending a briefing on the transit project, said the city will develop alternatives to assist the Rideau Centre.

Van Buskirk stressed that Viking Rideau Corporation, which owns the Rideau Centre, still strongly supports the city’s commuter rail project.

Rogers, of the Downtown Coalition, said downtown business people feel the city’s subway plan is still good, “light years” ahead of the city’s former surface rail plan. The old plan was opposed by downtown property owners and killed by the new city council elected in 2006.

City councillors on Wednesday unveiled drawings of the proposed downtown train subway beside the National Arts Centre, at one of the potential subway entrances.

Councillor Alex Cullen, head of the transit committee, predicted that cost of the downtown tunnel project will not exceed $600 million. The total commuter rail project, from Tunney’s Pasture through downtown to Blair Station, will run 12.5 kilometres and include major stations for riders to transfer onto buses.

Total cost of this first portion of the rail line is estimated at $1.4 billion, though the city will need detailed estimates confirmed in an environmental assessment study. That study, to be done within six months, is to be started in July.

A spectator at the event, Bernie Geiger, questioned the wisdom of the city’s rail plans, saying it will cost too much money for the service delivered and won’t be extended to Baseline Station soon enough to be of use to western commuters. Geiger said the city should instead be looking at building surface rail and go underground only when there is the large population to support a subway.

But Cullen spoke confidently that the city’s new transit plan will work and win funding from the federal and provincial governments.

“We need it desperately. Our downtown is choked,” said Cullen. “This is going to be built. This is a train that’s not going to be stopped.”

Councillor Peter Hume said the city is increasingly confident of funding from the federal and provincial governments. He said the province is more challenging because the city wants funding from it and wants the province to run the procurement for construction.

But Hume said that monthly meetings with provincial officials are advancing the project.

“Our plan will prevail,” said Hume. “We’re making steady and positive progress.”

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1692  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2009, 3:15 AM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 12,805
Quote:
“The twin-track tunnel will provide a quick, convenient and comfortable trip that creates an enjoyable ride and improves the daily commute for thousands of downtown passengers.
For the minority who get a seat during peak periods

Quote:
LRT is the next generation of transit and will help to expand ridership toward 30 per cent of commuter trips as Ottawa’s population approaches one million.”
Some councillors admit that LRT as planned will not generate significant new ridership.

Quote:
The estimated cost to construct the entire LRT line is $830 million.
Hmmm, only if we plan to have no trains running on it.

Quote:
LRT riders will enjoy a faster trip, without having to stop at cross streets, or deal with delays from motorists travelling through the bus only lanes.
Any time savings will be lost because of the transfer penalty, lengthy escalator rides and longer walking distances to reach a station.

Quote:
Motorists, cyclists and pedestrians will appreciate the reduced volumes on Albert and Slater that will increase their movement through the core.”
More cars will quickly fill the void. It is always the case. I recall reading that was one of the selling points for removing streetcars from Ottawa.

Quote:
An attractive alternative to commuting by single occupant vehicle
I am not convinced of this. It really doesn't provide any new service over what is provided today.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1693  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2009, 3:58 AM
lrt's foe lrt's foe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2
Welcome to the dark side, my friend! Keep at it and maybe we can get this one cancelled, too. Then this city will never see another train for decades!

Diesel fumes forever! MWAHAHAHAHA!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1694  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2009, 4:06 AM
Dado's Avatar
Dado Dado is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,521


Weird... you've been registered since March 2008 yet the above is your first post?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lrt's friend View Post
Hmmm, only if we plan to have no trains running on it.

Some of the things you write are not grounded in reality.

Take your comment about the $830M cost. That cost has to include vehicles. There's no other way for it to get to that amount. It will see the conversion of about 9 km of transitway. Even assuming an insane cost of $40M/km (Richard and I have established that this is actually only about $10-15M/km), that's only $360M. Throw in $100M for a yard and you're left with another $370M. That's enough to buy over 90 LRVs.
__________________
Ottawa's quasi-official motto: "It can't be done"
Ottawa's quasi-official ethos: "We have a process to follow"

Last edited by Dado; Apr 30, 2009 at 4:12 AM. Reason: Message above interrupted mine
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1695  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2009, 4:22 AM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,254
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrt's foe View Post
Welcome to the dark side, my friend! Keep at it and maybe we can get this one cancelled, too. Then this city will never see another train for decades!

Diesel fumes forever! MWAHAHAHAHA!
haha... great first post!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1696  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2009, 4:25 AM
eemy's Avatar
eemy eemy is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikerrin View Post
I am surprised that there is so much debate about where the stations are going to be and none a about, when the stations will be.



Is it just me, or does this seem to be a downright leisurely pace? In the first place, how can you justify stimulus money for this project unless its the next economic downturn you are planning to address and not the current one. Second, what are they planning to do between finishing the study and starting the project. I know they have to select a project team but that shouldn't take more than a year, and how can it take five years to drill a short hole and lay tracks. That part of the project sounds like 2 years max (although, I guess judging from how long it takes them to pave Bank Street its less surprising).

I think it would be realistic to say that we will finish the EA by January 2010, have the project team in place by January 2011, have a working downtown tunneled subway operating by July 2012 call it the Independence Line (with stations named after War of 1812 heros Brock Station, Tacumseh Station, Secord Station, etc). Then by every six months through to July 2014 open a new War of 1812 themed station. Now there is a project to get ambitious about finishing on an ambitious time frame
You have to remember that they have to account for the fact that city council still has to change their mind another four or five times before construction can actually begin. 2012 is maybe a bit *too* optimistic.

FWIW, I'm just relieved a decision has been made. It's pretty sad that that is the definition of success for this council.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1697  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2009, 11:28 AM
Aylmer's Avatar
Aylmer Aylmer is offline
Still optimistic
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montreal (C-D-N) / Ottawa (Aylmer)
Posts: 5,407
I think it's reasonable, but I would like to see a station between Rideau and Campus...

__________________
I've always struggled with reality. And I'm pleased to say that I won.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1698  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2009, 11:41 AM
highdensitysprawl's Avatar
highdensitysprawl highdensitysprawl is offline
Highrise
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterloowarrior View Post
It would be similar to other cities in Canada, about 400-500 metre distance between stations.
Is that what the separation is in Toronto or Montreal with their CBD stations.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1699  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2009, 11:43 AM
highdensitysprawl's Avatar
highdensitysprawl highdensitysprawl is offline
Highrise
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by harls View Post
What are the names of the stations going to be, or will that be decided later? I'm assuming Sussex and Campus will stay, as will LeBreton. The other two - Lyon and Metcalfe? 'Dowtown West' and 'Downtown East' seem like placeholders.



We need to talk, sir.
Well, they can't be as bad as St. Patrick or whatever it is at the south end of the University line in Toronto....I don't think anybody has any connection to that name.

Believe me I am aware of the line of business that Barbarella's is in.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1700  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2009, 1:39 PM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 12,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post


Some of the things you write are not grounded in reality.

Take your comment about the $830M cost. That cost has to include vehicles. There's no other way for it to get to that amount. It will see the conversion of about 9 km of transitway. Even assuming an insane cost of $40M/km (Richard and I have established that this is actually only about $10-15M/km), that's only $360M. Throw in $100M for a yard and you're left with another $370M. That's enough to buy over 90 LRVs.
Read the original statement again. It is poorly written. It can be interpretted to mean a total cost of $830M (it does say the cost of the entire line), of which, $600M is for the tunnel. As I said, badly written. It should have said the entire line costs $1430M, of which, $600M is for the tunnel.

My comments about the news release are based on the fact that it comes across as propaganda. A news release that is upbeat and sticks to the facts without stretching reality is what I would have preferred to see.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Transportation
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:04 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.