Ottawa Rapid Transit Network developments

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

Scrapping the existing tunnel under the Queensway and building another one with a 90 degree bend would likely cost way more than what can be saved.

The 90 degree bend I'm not thrilled with, but it is of 45-50 metre radius and right beside a station so the train will be going slowly any way. Since most new LRVs can handle 15-20m radius curves there should be little problem getting around the curve.

As for the cost, there is the construction of a single rail line, most of which can be at grade, although it might be better to put the east part into a trench to remove the up/down of the 417 underpass then the VIA underpass. I would suggest that the Belfast Overpass could be lengthened to accomodate a surface line under it.

My route has roughly 2600m of rail line, while the Staff plan has 3200m, including the 700m spur to the Yard.

I expect that the total cost of putting a new tunnel under the 417 is not going to eat up a huge amount of money: The estimate for adding a rail tunnel under the Queensway for the Lincoln Fields to Baseline stretch was $20M. I expect that this tunnel would not be more than $50M.

So, $150M saved from not building the BRT lanes, a shorter length of rail, but an extra $50M spent for the new underpass. Still sounds as if my plan comes out ahead.

[Kitchissippi]

When that tunnel at St-Laurent was being built, we went through 3 years of hell on that part of the Queensway. If the buses are supposed to use lanes on the Queensway while the LRT is being built, it would end up being an unbelievable nightmare digging another tunnel just so a big box centre is served.

[waterloowarrior]

the presentations/video from the LRT forum are online
http://www.ottawa.ca/residents/public_consult/tmp/lrt/presentations_en.html

[rocketphish]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

the presentations/video from the LRT forum are online
http://www.ottawa.ca/residents/public_consult/tmp/lrt/presentations_en.html

I'm surprised that there was no presentation from Siemens. Surely they would like to be considered for this project (even though the potential for litigation still exists due to the cancellation of the earlier plan)? Or is their presentation from the earlier project still valid in this new context? Or are they going to win the bidding for the new project without even showing up? Hmm.

[adam-machiavelli]

I was biking in Barrhaven today and noticed that work has begun on the Transitway extension between Fallowfield and Strandherd stations. They've cleared a path through the grass for the future roadway.

[Deez]

^Noteworthy construction considering that this is the first stretch of grade-separated transitway built outside the greenbelt.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Deez

^Noteworthy construction considering that this is the first stretch of grade-separated transitway built outside the greenbelt.

No doubt to make sure that the Barrhaven portion of the old LRT plan never gets built. We will have the abandoned LRT corridor as a permanent monument to the city's stupidity, whether we had agreed with the old plan or not.

[lrt's friend]

The current CFRA poll (for what its worth, which is very little but sort of reflects O'Brien's voter base) ranks 5 different possible priorities for the remainder of the current council term. The transit plan ranks last and a bad last at that.

[Ciemny]

Come on its CFRA...some of the people that call............well their comments speak for themselves......the ranting and raving....especially with Lowel Green.

[waterloowarrior]

some capacity graphs from the LRT technology forum




ttc
[/quote]

[Franky]

Funny charts. Many BRT systems run at over 10,000 phd.


http://www.ottawa.ca/residents/public_consult/beyond_2020/papers/white/rapid_transit_en.html

[Franky]

Province worried Ottawa's transit tunnel will become a money pit

By Patrick Dare, The Ottawa CitizenAugust 17, 2009 1:01 PMComments (12)

OTTAWA — Ontario Municipal Affairs Minister Jim Watson says he wants to make sure Ottawa's proposed transit tunnel is not a money pit before committing to the city's ambitious transit plan.

Watson, speaking to reporters after addressing the Association of Municipalities of Ontario annual convention in Ottawa, said provincial government staff are continuing to scrutinize the proposed plan, which includes a tunnel downtown for a light rail service.

He said he is concerned about the affordability of the plan because the city's original plan for north-south rail - scrapped by the current council - was a $1-billion project but the current plan is close to $5 billion.

Specifically, Watson said he does not want to see costs for the tunnel to be two or three times the projected cost.

The tunnel element of the city's plan has been estimated to cost up to $600 million. But firm figures on such costs are only obtained when detailed engineering reports are carried out.

Alta Vista Councillor Peter Hume, president of the municipal association, said he understands Watson's concerns about cost. He said the city's credibility would be seriously harmed if tunnel costs turn out to be much higher than originally advertised.

Hume said the city is meeting with provincial officials monthly and he is confident that both governments will soon be confident enough to push ahead with the plan.

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Provin...nel+will+become+money/1901642/story.html

[Deez]

He said he is concerned about the affordability of the plan because the city's original plan for north-south rail - scrapped by the current council - was a $1-billion project but the current plan is close to $5 billion.

This level of ignorance at the decision-making level is absolutely staggering. "North-South rail" was a 1B$ project as part of a 4B$ plan. The City is now requesting funding for a 1.7B$ project as part of a 5B$ plan. Let's hope that provincial staff are less clueless than this.

[lrt's friend]

The provincial government has consistently been reluctant to support a downtown tunnel. As they have said repeatedly, they need a better idea of the cost of the tunnel and really this is responsible thing to do. How can you do a proper cost/benefit analysis without more certainty on the cost side?

You notice that the feds have been strangely silent on this project as well.

I suspect that there are other reasons why the province is not enthusiastic.

[MalcolmTucker]

^ Everyone wants the lawsuit settled before any money is pledged. Until then it would be irresponsible to do so, since the city's ability to pay its share might be drastically effected.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Sir.Humphrey.Appleby

^ Everyone wants the lawsuit settled before any money is pledged. Until then it would be irresponsible to do so, since the city's ability to pay its share might be drastically effected.

I think it would go further. An attempt to tender the new project without settling the lawsuit may have a negative effect on the outcome of the lawsuit.

Again, this is a cost certainty issue. The lawsuit is part of it. And, this directly impacts the city's ability to pay, since the city will pay the entire settlement. No settlement means no pledge from the province and feds. How many more years will this drag on?

In the meantime, we will have no choice but to invest in busways only. At least something is being done.

It is ironic that the province has said in the past to look big when it came to the transit project and now that a project is on the table, they are complaining about the cost of the project. The province simply does not like the proposal. Of course, the province has also said in the past that they will only fund transit projects that will substantially increase ridership. How do we sell a LRT plan that many say will 'lack uplift in ridership' ?

The province has given a basic framework to follow and the city has decided not to follow it.

If you look at Transit City and Metrolinx proposals in the Toronto area, every project is designed to increase transit speed, increase service frequency and increase ridership. Compromises were made to keep costs reasonable (that are not always popular) but still they will be accomplishing the three goals.

[Mille Sabords]

Alta Vista Councillor Peter Hume, president of the municipal association, said he understands Watson's concerns about cost. He said the city's credibility would be seriously harmed if tunnel costs turn out to be much higher than originally advertised.

Hume said the city is meeting with provincial officials monthly and he is confident that both governments will soon be confident enough to push ahead with the plan.

Played like a master by Hume. Don't get all defensive, agree with the basic concern, and "remain confident" that the City has done its homework.

After all, in my morning Citizen, I read this:

In an interview later, Watson said he has not been told by Ministry of Transportation officials of any major problems with Ottawa's transit plan. But he said tunneling projects in cities like Boston and Montreal show how costs can rise dramatically.

"We don't want to set the city up for failure," said Watson.

Watson recently criticized the city for its handling of the sewage spills into the Ottawa River and he wasn't backing away from it Monday.

"It seems to be taking an awfully long time to get this issue resolved," said Watson, saying that citizens are thanking him for raising the sewer-spill issue. In 2006, one billion litres of sewage were spilled into the Ottawa River during a malfunction of equipment that went unreported for many months.

Watson is considered to be a possible candidate for mayor next year and was asked by reporters about his intentions. He responded by saying: "I have no announcement today. I'm very happy where I am."

"I have no announcement today"? Maybe tomorrow, though? Talk about a crystal clear non-announcement...

In other words, we have an outsider who is possible contender for the Mayor's chair trying to make political hay out of a big project... does this sound familiar to anyone? Watson is an outsider as much as O'Brien was last time around. Attacking a city-building project like this one will, I hope, permanently discredit him.

Because after all, if after all is said and done, and planned, some politician deems the project to be "too expensive" and cancels it, what are we left with? More money for roads? From who's budget?

The transit plan is now beyond politics. It should be embraced by all candidates. Candidates who attack it should be viewed by the electorate with the highest suspiscion.

[MalcolmTucker]

I wonder what the odds are restoring the original plan with some form of the new tunnel as a settlement to the lawsuit. It would fix the 'no new service' argument, it would prepare for further directions of LRT construction.

If it gets stretched until the next municipal election, I could see council accepting this as a settlement.

[lrt's friend]

If the province's cost/benefit analysis deems this project not worthy of funding, we can only blame our city politicians for designing it this way and not doing their homework. We have known all along that the process that created this project was slanted from day one and the outcome was predetermined. I am sorry, but if a proper analysis reveals that it is not worthy of being built, then we should thank the province for saving us the billions of tax dollars. It is too bad if we have to again go back to the drawing board and for the lost years, but this is better than flushing billions down the toilet. If this LRT plan dies, we can thank O'Brien directly since his vote killed the last plan and he personally restricted the debate that led to this plan. It is sad that this may be our last kick at the can when it comes to LRT but there are alternatives that will deliver improved transit in this city. We may have to listen to Andy Haydon after all.

I know there are many supporters of this transit plan here, but there are others besides myself who have been critical. I would love to see LRT in this city, but I am not going to support LRT simply for the sake of having LRT. I need to see legitimate benefits from having LRT.

If you really look at it, we had a plan designed to open up the south end of the city for development (instead we plan on building hundreds of houses on flood plains in Stittsville, which will not be served by LRT in our lifetime), which was to be uniquely transit oriented, and we had other rail supporters wanting to leverage use of existing rail corridors. We have decided to do neither. Instead, we became obsessed with downtown and everything became focused on that. Downtown is the destination. You don't speed through the destination, instead you speed transit on the way to the destination. That is why subways have more frequent stops downtown. Convenience is the priority at your destination, not speed. So we decide to invest enormous amounts of money to speed transit through downtown with distant stations placed at great depth. This seems to be totally contrary thinking.

If the LRT plan dies, we are still left with something other than roads. What we are left with are the Transitway components, which are substantial. Remember what Clive Doucet said. We have designed a bus plan. Time will tell if he is right. The EA on the tunnel will tell the tale. If the province continues to stall after the EA is completed or if costs are substantially higher, LRT is in big trouble.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Sir.Humphrey.Appleby

I wonder what the odds are restoring the original plan with some form of the new tunnel as a settlement to the lawsuit. It would fix the 'no new service' argument, it would prepare for further directions of LRT construction.

If it gets stretched until the next municipal election, I could see council accepting this as a settlement.

It would have made sense at the time since it resolved the biggest flaw with the original plan, but the original plan was so discredited in the eyes of the public, I can't see it happening.

We have really put ourselves in a box. Something like this may solve the lawsuit issue, but it is politically unacceptable.

At the pace that our legal system operates, and with complexity of the issue, and the amount of money involved, this could just go on and on and on.