Ottawa Rapid Transit Network developments

[Mille Sabords]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

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.

"Open up the south end" ?? So, you think it's a good idea to continue "opening up" suburbs at the expense of crawling, unpleasant and unreliable service downtown?

What about convenience to transit riders?
What about intensification?
What about rewarding those who use transit with climate-protected stations?
What about civic pride in our downtown core?
What about caring more about the heart of the city than its edges for a change?
What about the troubling contradiction that we would service a new suburb with LRT before giving the service to established burbs like Orleans, kanata and Barrhaven (which is still the plan, by the way)
What about the fact that the Riverside South CDP remains a completely suburban and car oriented piece of garbage that an LR line will not save from its road addiction?

Should downtown take it up the ass AGAIN? For all that?

I'm sorry.

[lrt's friend]

"Open up the south end" ?? So, you think it's a good idea to continue "opening up" suburbs at the expense of crawling, unpleasant and unreliable service downtown?

How do these things relate to each other? I guess developing a more transit-oriented suburb is a bad idea. Don't worry. That idea is dead. You would rather that we continue to develop suburbs far away from rapid transit instead, just like Stittsville? Maybe in 25 years, a busway will reach there, if we are lucky. Not everybody wants to live in a more expensive downtown condo.

What about the troubling contradiction that we would service a new suburb with LRT before giving the service to established burbs like Orleans, kanata and Barrhaven (which is still the plan, by the way)

As far as I can see, it isn't in the plan. LRT extension to Kanata, Barrhaven and Orleans is well beyond the 2031 scope of the plan. The only suburb that will be served by LRT will continue to be Riverside South. The main reason why Orleans and Kanata will not be served by LRT is the cost of running it that far from downtown. It is unaffordable. At the current pace, LRT will finally reach Kanata decades after 2031. Why is it a bad idea to direct development around where rapid transit is most feasible?

Should downtown take it up the 🞵🞵🞵 AGAIN?

I remind you that the vast majority of taxpayers live away from downtown. The main purpose of transit is to move people to downtown from elsewhere in the city. We should make sure that our transit plan accomplishes this. If we are going to spend $5B, we better end up with something a whole lot better than we have today. This is the problem. Will the new transit system be a whole lot better? Improvements downtown must come with improvements in reaching downtown.

[Mille Sabords]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

How do these things relate to each other? I guess developing a more transit-oriented suburb is a bad idea. Don't worry. That idea is dead. You would rather that we continue to develop suburbs far away from rapid transit instead, just like Stittsville? Maybe in 25 years, a busway will reach there, if we are lucky. Not everybody wants to live in a more expensive downtown condo.

Developing a transit-oriented suburb is a great idea. But we haven't done that. And it should not take precedence over downtown.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

As far as I can see, it isn't in the plan. LRT extension to Kanata, Barrhaven and Orleans is well beyond the 2031 scope of the plan.

And so it should be. Those areas aren't dense enough, while other more central areas that are on the existing Transitway are, or are next in line to become, dense enough, and they are closer o downtown, which is and is supposed to be the heart of the system.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The only suburb that will be served by LRT will continue to be Riverside South.

This is a mixed blessing. It may spare the City the need to basically have a 4-lane freeway from the south end, but it is not a transit-friendly suburb the way it's designed.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The main reason why Orleans and Kanata will not be served by LRT is the cost of running it that far from downtown. It is unaffordable. At the current pace, LRT will finally reach Kanata decades after 2031. Why is it a bad idea to direct development around where rapid transit is most feasible?

It isn't a bad idea. I agree with it.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I remind you that the vast majority of taxpayers live away from downtown. The main purpose of transit is to move people to downtown from elsewhere in the city. We should make sure that our transit plan accomplishes this. If we are going to spend $5B, we better end up with something a whole lot better than we have today. This is the problem. Will the new transit system be a whole lot better?

I remind you that the vast majority of the population in EVERY MAJOR CITY IN THE WORLD does not live downtown. It doesn't make their downtowns any less special, on the contrary. There is only one downtown. There is only one centre. What are the suburbs suburban to, anyway? It's like refusing to feed the brain because the majority of the body's cells are elsewhere below the neck.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

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.

The Southwest Transitway through Barrhaven was to be built anyway, N-S LRT or not. The N-S LRT plans even showed a combined LRT/BRT station (at-grade, I might add) at the so-called South Nepean Town Centre. So, even as they were going to send LRT to Barrhaven by the most circuitous route possible, they were also going to be improving Ottawa's "real" rapid transit connection to Barrhaven.


On the topic of Stittsville, it was added by the OMB to the urban area, not the City. The City now has no choice but to plan for it. Arguably though, the City should never have been planning for anything in Riverside South at all and to limit growth in Barrhaven while focussing it in Kanata/Stittsville and Orleans so as to make LRT to those existing suburbs more viable. Instead, we're heading out in all directions at once.

[Franky]

City Expects Transit Funding Announcement This Fall

Josh Pringle
Thursday, August 27, 2009

City Staff believe a funding announcement for the Rapid Transit Network will be made in mid-to-late Fall.

The Transit Plan Implementation Critical Path report for the Transit Committee outlines a "structured schedule" for key dates, implementation processes, and related timelines for the plan.

The City of Ottawa has made an official request to the upper levels of government asking for a contribution agreement for funding for the $1.8 billion Phase One of the plan.

The report says further refinement to the cost estimates for the Downtown Transit Tunnel project are currently being undertaken, and an amended funding request will be submitted to the Federal and Ontario governments this fall.

Councillor Alex Cullen told CFRA's Afternoon Edition with Rob Snow discussions between the city and the Ontario and Federal Governments have been "going well."
http://www.cfra.com/?cat=1&nid=67458

[Franky]

Private AMO Briefing Notes: Light Rail

By Kenneth_Gray 08-24-2009 COMMENTS(2) The Bulldog

Filed under: Larry O'Brien, light rail, City of Ottawa, AMO

The following are private briefing notes obtained by the Citizen concerning Ottawa light-rail plans prepared for civic officials for meetings with provincial Transport Minister Jim Bradley and Infrastructure Minister George Smitherman at the Association of Municipalities of Ontario meetings in Ottawa last week:

Key Messages

➢ The City of Ottawa continues to seek a funding agreement with senior levels of government. This funding agreement must include funding for the Downtown Ottawa Transit Tunnel (DOTT) project, as it is the cornerstone of the City's rapid transit network.

➢ The City of Ottawa requests that the Province of Ontario use its powers to ensure the successful implementation of the Rapid Transit Network. (eg. Use of 417 lanes during transitway conversion)

➢ The City of Ottawa continues negotiations with Infrastructure Ontario (IO) to determine suitability as the City's procurement agenda for the DOTT project.

➢ All numbers provided as part of the official funding request will be updated and refreshed this fall as more accurate estimates become available.

Transit Plan - Phase 1 - Project Funding

Background
On March 16, 2009, Mayor O'Brien and the City Manager, as per Council's direction, sent a joint letter to federal and provincial government officials requesting an agreement in principle in support of Phase 1 of the City's transit network. This agreement in principle would provide for a high-level funding commitment for the cost of Phase 1 of the rapid transit network, which totals $3.2 billion.
On June 5, 2009, pursuant to receiving the City's Council approved priority project stimulus list, the Federal and Provincial governments announced a combination of stimulus funding and a Build Canada grants totalling $375M for City of Ottawa Infrastructure. Of the $375M announced, $105.6M was for Phase 1 transit infrastructure projects, as detailed below:
Phase 1 projects funded from Stimulus Amount
Southwest Transitway (Baseline - Norice) $38M
Southwest Transitway (Fallowfield-Barhaven TC) $52.6M
Strandherd Armstrong Bridge (transit component) $16M
Total $106.6M

Current ask

In a motion passed on November 28, 2008 Ottawa City Council directed City staff to seek funding for the entire first phase of our Transportation Master Plan.

In recognition of that motion and subsequent to the initial March 16, 2009 funding request; the City Manager, sent a letter on July 24, 2009 to the ministries of Infrastructure and Energy and Transportation with two alternative Phase 1 funding groupings for consideration . This was undertaken in order to comply with Council's direction and in anticipation that current and future programs will have time restrictions as conditions on the funding.

Staff have grouped projects from the first and second increments of Phase 1 that can be reasonably completed within the next ten years and that, when completed, will grow our transit ridership consistent with the City's TMP.

Transit Investment Option 1: comprises the remaining unfunded projects of the first increment of Phase 1, as identified by Council, and includes a Light Rail Transit (LRT) tunnel through the downtown core, the conversion of a portion of the existing bus Transitway to LRT, and expanded bus rapid transit (BRT) in the east, west, and south-ends of the city. (Projects that already received Economic Stimulus Funding are not included in this grouping.)

Project Cost
Transit Tunnel & Transitway conversion to LRT from Blair - Tunney's Pasture $ 1.4B
West Transitway Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) from Bayshore - Moodie $ 45M
Southwest Transitway Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) from Baseline - Norice $ 210M (Total cost)
- $ 38M (Stimulus Fund)
$ 172M
TOTAL $ 1.7 B

Transit Investment Option 2: consists solely of LRT projects identified in the first two increments of Phase 1 as identified by Council that are in an advanced state of readiness. This includes an LRT tunnel through Ottawa's downtown core, the conversion of a portion of the existing bus Transitway to LRT, and the conversion of the current O-Train corridor to dual-track LRT. In evaluating this option, City staff are examining the capital and operating cost-effectiveness of an all-rail approach. (The western corridor expansion project was not included in this grouping, given the current early stages of the related environmental assessment (EA) and the extensive work required to complete it.)

Project Cost
Transit Tunnel & Transitway conversion to LRT from Blair - Tunney's Pasture $ 1.4 B
O-Train conversion to LRT from Bayview - South Keys $ 400M
TOTAL $ 1.8 B


The costs referenced are high-level estimates developed to support decisions at the master planning level. As part of the work on the Downtown Ottawa Transit Tunnel Environmental Assessment, the consultant is completing functional design work that will allow for the development of more precise Class D cost estimates by the fall. At that time, we will be in a position to share these cost estimates with you.

Negotiations with Infrastructure Ontario (IO)

In the meantime, as directed by Council, initial discussions have been taking place with Infrastructure Ontario to facilitate a detailed Value for Money Assessment. This assessment process will include a risk assessment and also requires updated cost estimates to support the analysis. Staff expects it to be completed later this fall and it will inform procurement recommendations to Council.

City Manager Kent Kirkpatrick and Deputy City Manager Nancy Schepers continue negotiations on funding with both senior government partners.

Use of 417 Lanes During Transitway Conversion

During the construction of the Transit Tunnel & Transitway conversion to LRT from Blair - Tunney's Pasture LRT project, it is necessary that 12.5km of the transitway be closed during conversion.

In order to minimize the resulting transit disruption staff have undertaken negotiations with the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) to secure a commitment to convert the new 417-commuter lane, constructed as part of MTO's 417 widening project, to a dedicated transit lane during this construction.

City and Ministry staff have had many discussions regarding the benefits and possibility of using the proposed widened Queensway lanes for interim bus operation during the conversion of the Transitway and in May 2009 John Moser, General Manager, Planning and Growth Management sent an official ask.

If the new Queensway lanes were made available as temporary transit lanes, it would allow the City to maintain a high level of transit service to/from the east during the Transitway conversion (currently there are more than 6,000 transit trips from the east in the peak hour, and this number will grow to 8,500 by 2031).

Staff anticipate that these widened lanes need to be in place by 2013/2014 for interim transit operations. Buses would be running in these lanes for about three years. Staff are still formulating the roll out plan and by September 2009 will have a better understanding of the timelines for implementation. Staff hope that through collaboration, both highway and LRT projects can be delivered in an efficient, effective, and coordinated manner to maximize the benefits of these public investments.
http://communities.canada.com/ottawaciti...ivate-amo-briefing-notes-light-rail.aspx

[Kitchissippi]

Just got back from Vancouver and took a ride on the new $2B Canada Line. To put it mildly, I was underwhelmed. If we are complaining about how far apart our downtown stations are going to be, theirs are so spaced out that that they are out of practical walking distance from each other. I also wonder where their head was with capacity because the trains and stations are so small. Compared to trains in Toronto and Montreal, it's like riding a SmartCar. The transfer situation on the Skytrain system is also assenine. I guess the lesson here is that we should think far ahead in terms of capacity and flexibility of the infrastructure.

Here's a video I took of a portion of the route that goes over the Fraser River on a new cable stayed bridge. Great views from the train, but otherwise, the overhead structure looks really ugly and heavy from the ground level.

• Video Link

[MalcolmTucker]

^ Vancouver is in a much different situation, as its CBD is close to full build out. The city decided to concentrate on residential uses in the core so they have much different needs.

Despite your concerns over capacity, the system is designed for ultimate capacity at just under 16,000 p/d/h, which is more than enough for the community it serves. Richmond is only designed for so much density, since it is liable to liquify in an earthquake.

As for transfers being crazy, a new line will connect the M-Line and the C-Line south of False Creek. Since their downtown is not centric, it does not make sense to have everyone transfering lines in downtown, completly unlike Calgary or Ottawa.

Perhaps the opposite argument could also be made if you believe all the points above to be false: At least ehy got it built, which will cause political will to fix it when and if any of the problems you alluded to arrive.

[Mille Sabords]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

Just got back from Vancouver and took a ride on the new $2B Canada Line. To put it mildly, I was underwhelmed. If we are complaining about how far apart our downtown stations are going to be, theirs are so spaced out that that they are out of practical walking distance from each other. I also wonder where their head was with capacity because the trains and stations are so small. Compared to trains in Toronto and Montreal, it's like riding a SmartCar. The transfer situation on the Skytrain system is also assenine. I guess the lesson here is that we should think far ahead in terms of capacity and flexibility of the infrastructure.

Interesting observations. Did you ride it into the downtown subway portion?

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by Mille Sabords

Interesting observations. Did you ride it into the downtown subway portion?

Yes I did, and the underground stations even seem smaller than the elevated ones since they are enclosed. Most of them also only had one street access point which are so poorly visible (unlike the Montreal Metro stations which are obvious from a block or two away). One thing that boggled me was the Canada line actually crosses the other lines under Granville street but there is no convenient transfer there (it's a 3 minute walk outside between the old Granville station (E and M lines) and the new Vancouver City Centre (C-line). Instead, the transfers all happen at the terminus Waterfront station which is also the Seabus and West Coast Express stations. I would have thought that they would have tried to diffuse the transfer points to alleviate one bottleneck.

[waterloowarrior]

More planning is needed’: NCC
http://www.yourcarletonplace.com/article/NepeanThisWeek/news/article/15768
City geared to begin geotechnical survey on proposed routes
September 09, 2009
BY JENNIFER MCINTOSH

Bay Coun. Alex Cullen talks to residents of Crystal Beach and Lakeview about the west Transitway extension at an open house held by the city on June 25. Jennifer McIntosh photo
While city staff have pinpointed a route along the north side of the Queensway as the most direct and cost effective of the four options for the west transitway extension from Holly Acres Road to Moodie Drive, project manager Jeffrey Waara said nothing is decided yet.
“We will be doing geotechnical survey work and probably holding another open house before we present the option to council in February,” Waara, who took over the project from Darryl Shurb in July, said.

Waara’s response comes after a letter from Marie Lemay, CEO of the National Capital Commission to Crystal Beach-Lakeview Community Association president Ruth Tremblay. In the letter she told Tremblay that she echoed some of the concerns expressed by the community association and had asked the city to do some more planning before selecting a route.

“The NCC believes that more thorough study of all the proposed options presented is necessary,” Lemay said in the letter. “We have communicated to the City the need to undertake more planning work, and to revisit the selection of the preferred corridor in order to provide a more detailed analysis and comparison of the different options.”

While Lemay was unavailable for comment, Jean Wolf, communications officer for the NCC, said that he could confirm that a request was made to the city to look into the other proposed routes.

“This is certainly something that NCC is looking into,” he said. “And if a significant area of NCC lands is needed for the project, then that will impact the greenbelt master plan that is currently under review.”

Ottawa-West Nepean MP John Baird echoed the NCC’s concerns. “I've talked with Marie Lemay and agree that the city should look at all implications before making a final decision,” he said. “I know the city is looking to improve transit for all users. I'm also very aware of and listening to the concerns of area residents over the proposed routing of this Transitway extension.”

A preliminary study of noise, air quality and ground vibrations have been done along the four routes by Gradient Microclimate Engineering (GmE).

The study took noise level measurements at Corkstown Road, Moodie Drive, Carling Avenue and Holly Acres Road. It found the daytime noise levels varied from 46 to 62 A-weighted decibels (dBA). The nighttime levels are between 40 and 55.

The measurements are consistent with a Ministry of Transportation study done previously. The City of Ottawa has a 60-decibel cap for outdoor living areas.

“We finally convinced the province that we need a noise barrier,” Tremblay said of the north route in an earlier interview. “Now this is just going to add more noise.”

Another corridor alternative included following the property line from Bayshore Shopping Centre, along the highway, and curving south at Corkstown Road. to Moodie Drive. The consultants assessed two additional corridors along the median of the 417 and along the south side of the highway.

The favoured route, along the north side of the 417, may require the cutting of the berm on the west side of Holly Acres Road. The study also shows that the route could cause some damage to the regionally-rare Black Maple.

The route along the south side of the highway would have the least impact on possible heritage or archeological sites, but the study shows it has poor access and a small catchment area. During the June open house, 14 residents pointed to that as their favoured route.

“We still have a lot of design and planning work to do,” Waara said. “We are looking at proposed routes but that doesn’t say whether it will be at grade or below grade.”

Waara said he met with members of the Crystal Beach-Lakeview Community Association and welcomes public input into the route and alignment selection.

In the near future there will be an environmental site assessment, geotechnical survey work and more noise level studies.

“The planning work follows the Ontario transit regulation 231/08,” Waara said.

“We are also working very closely with the NCC and have experience working within their requirements.”

Planners will be making their recommendations to council in February and then having another open house in March or April.

If all goes well, the project could be tendered in August 2010.

“We just want what’s best for our community,” Tremblay said.

[email protected]

[harls]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

'More planning is needed’: NCC

Shocking.

[eternallyme]

Another benefit of the southern route: it could help spur TOD in the useless part of the Greenbelt there south of Highway 417 along Moodie, although as more of an industrial/institutional area than a residential area.

[waterloowarrior]

Light rail lawsuit discussion behind closed doors
By DEREK PUDDICOMBE, CITY HALL BUREAU
Last Updated: 9th September 2009, 5:44pm
City council is ready to offer Siemens $36.7 million to settle its outstanding $217-million lawsuit stemming from the light rail plan council cancelled in 2007.

Lawyers are briefing council on the details of what might be a resolution to the lawsuit during a closed-doors meeting at City Hall.

As previously published in the Sun, Siemens Canada and St. Lawrence Cement, who are suing the City of Ottawa after council cancelled the proposed $1-billion north-south LRT line two years ago, may settle out of court.

The meeting is expected to last most of the afternoon.

[email protected]


Lengthy secret briefing on LRT lawsuit derails Ottawa council meeting


THE OTTAWA CITIZENSEPTEMBER 9, 2009 6:02 PMBE THE FIRST TO POST A COMMENT


OTTAWA — A private briefing of city councillors on the legal fight with the contractors who were to build the north-south commuter rail project went on all afternoon on Wednesday.

The city is being sued by firms over the light rail project that was agreed to by the former city council but cancelled by the current council. The lawsuit, in the range of $200 million, has been hanging over city council for three years.

City council is formally in session, but because the briefing concerns a lawsuit against the city, it can legally be held behind closed doors.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

[waterloowarrior]

Light-rail settlement to cost $36.7M

City taxpayers on hook in proposed payout to Siemens over scrapped project

BY PATRICK DARE, THE OTTAWA CITIZENSEPTEMBER 9, 2009 11:16 PMCOMMENTS (24)


STORYPHOTOS ( 1 )



File photo of Ottawa Mayor Larry O'Brien
Photograph by: Julie Oliver, The Ottawa Citizen
Ottawa taxpayers will pay $36.7 million to settle the lawsuit over the north-south commuter rail project that was approved by one city council, then scrubbed by the next.

City council spent all of Wednesday afternoon in a closed session going over the proposed settlement with Siemens and other contractors that were to build the electric light-rail service from Barrhaven to the University of Ottawa. Those companies sued the city for about $215 million after the $1-billion project was cancelled by the city council headed by Mayor Larry O’Brien, who was elected in the fall of 2006.

The city made an offer to settle the suit in August and the building consortium came back with the $36.7-million figure, one which city councillors are ready to accept.

O’Brien refused to comment on the issue at the close of Wednesday’s council meeting.

Each side has conditions it wants in the deal and if those can be sorted out by early today, an emergency meeting could be called by O’Brien for Friday.

The timelines on a settlement are tight because of the limited availability of some lawyers involved and a concern that, if left for a month or longer, the momentum for settlement could be lost.

Politically, the sooner councillors dispose of the issue, the better, since they face re-election in the fall of 2010.

The issue is a potentially huge one in the municipal election because of the amount of wasted funds, not just for the $36.7-million legal payout but also the $54 million the city has sunk into costs for the north-south rail line.

Councillors who voted to kill the north-south project — which had been approved by the previous city council led by Bob Chiarelli — hope that much of the work done will eventually be used once the city eventually builds a north-south rail link as part of its new transit plan, but it’s not certain how much can be used.

The proposed legal settlement includes $30 million in direct costs for the consortium and several million in lost profits.

While the tab was causing discomfort among some at the council meeting on Wednesday, councillors support the deal because a trial on the issue, and a resulting payout, could be far higher; perhaps approaching $100 million. Legal costs, so far, in the case are $2 million, but would be millions more in a long trial.

The consortium wants some conditions on the deal, including a lump-sum payment and some restrictions on what city councillors could say about it. Most importantly, the companies want an assurance that they will have an equal chance to compete for future work with the city. The city wants to pay out the settlement over several years and councillors want to be able to discuss the matter freely.

The city held all of its discussions in private on Wednesday on the grounds that it was a legal matter, no votes were held and that council was getting updated on the issue and instructing its legal team. Councillors spent about five hours asking questions and going over different legal scenarios with its outside legal team for the case, led by Peter Doody, of Borden Ladner Gervais.

Councillors filed out of the chamber with little comment. College Councillor Rick Chiarelli said he couldn’t comment on details of the discussions, but he is hopeful that the three-year-old legal dispute will end soon.

“It’s looking like a much better deal than it could have been,” said Chiarelli.

He said that while the decision to scrap the former north-south project was painful, it allowed the city to move on to the new more comprehensive transit plan. That plan — a much more elaborate system that includes a tunnel downtown for trains and involves a major expansion of the bus transitway — is now awaiting approval of the Ontario government.

The provincial government strongly supported the former north-south project that was killed and has made it clear to the city that no provincial funds are to be used to cover legal costs for the cancelled project. City taxpayers will pay the whole bill.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

[Franky]

Wow. Larry Zero is getting expensive.

[waterloowarrior]

$36.7M tab for killing light rail a cost of doing business, O'Brien says


BY PATRICK DARE, THE OTTAWA CITIZENSEPTEMBER 10, 2009 1:01 PMCOMMENTS (8)


STORYPHOTOS ( 1 )



File photo of Mayor of Ottawa Larry O'Brien.
Photograph by: Julie Oliver, The Ottawa Citizen
OTTAWA — Mayor Larry O’Brien says the proposed $36.7 million to be paid by Ottawa taxpayers to settle a light-rail lawsuit is the price that must be paid for “pressing the reset button” on public transit in Ottawa.

Speaking to reporters at an event where new technology was announced for the city’s bus fleet Thursday, O’Brien said he wants to clear away the three-year-old legal fight as swiftly as possible, but there is a cost.

“We did make a political decision to move away from the old, tragically flawed LRT plan and move on to something the citizens of Ottawa would really embrace,” said O’Brien. “They have done that. There’s a cost to that.”

“The last election was a referendum on mass transit. The citizens weren’t happy,” he said. “We pushed the reset button as I promised we would do during the election campaign.”

City council spent five hours on Wednesday going over the proposed settlement with the consortium of companies that has sued it over cancellation of a deal to build a north-south rail system from Barrhaven to the University of Ottawa. If the Siemens-led consortium agrees to some conditions, city council could endorse the settlement on Friday at an emergency meeting.

The former city council reached a deal to build the north-south line but it became a big issue in the municipal election campaign of 2006 and O’Brien was elected in part on his promise to scrap the deal. The consortium quickly started legal proceedings and the suit has hung over the council.

In addition to the $36.7-million legal settlement, the city would be writing off at least some of the $54 million it spent on preparations for the project to go ahead, such as planning and engineering, legal costs and land acquisition.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

[waterloowarrior]

Cost of New Light-Rail Plan Being Re-Estimated
http://communities.canada.com/ottawaciti...-light-rail-plan-being-re-estimated.aspx
By KENNETH_GRAY THU, SEP 10 2009 COMMENTS(0) THE BULLDOG

Filed under: light rail, Jim Watson, Maria McRae, Transport Canada
Municipal Affairs Minister Jim Watson says city staff is re-evaluating the cost of the new $5-billion light-rail plan.

Speaking after attending a basketball game at Carleton University on the weekend, Watson said staff is looking at raising the cost of the part of the plan that does not include the tunnel.

Meanwhile, River Councillor Marie McRae said Thursday that senior staff members have been meeting with city manager Kent Kirkpatrick about the re-evaluation, but she does not know the details of those talks. McRae said she will be seeking more information from Kirkpatrick Thursday.

Recently, Transport Canada officials said they believed city staff had under-estimated the cost of burrowing a tunnel under downtown Ottawa -- a critical part of the new light-rail plan.

The new plan is slated to be completed in 2031.

This post will be updated with new information as it becomes available.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

Another benefit of the southern route: it could help spur TOD in the useless part of the Greenbelt there south of Highway 417 along Moodie, although as more of an industrial/institutional area than a residential area.

How in blazes could it do that? It's GREENBELT! It's owned by the NCC. They don't generally respond to incentives. As for useless bits of Greenbelt, there are several that are higher up the list than that. The patch at Moodie and Carling opposite Nortel for example, or the bit sandwiched between Baseline, Richmond and the CN Beachburg subdivision, as well as the bit opposite the Q-C Hospital between Baseline, Cedarview and the CN Beachburg subdivision.


The best place for it, in my view, is in the median of the 417. Moodie already has a three-span bridge (built when the MTO briefly had a notion of creating a metro for Ottawa in the 1970s) that can easily accommodate the Transitway. Since Moodie is going to be a desolate, isolated station wherever it is built, it doesn't particularly matter that it will be in the middle of the freeway. It could even be made as an island platform using cross-overs to save on costs (and once it is LRT, it won't matter). Then all that needs to be done is to get the MTO to do a lane swap west of Moodie and make the lanes nearest the median into bus lanes rather than using the shoulder lanes for that purpose.

If it goes on the north side, they'll likely have to reconfigure/rebuild the interchange and the intersection with Corkstown Road (again), as well as reconstruct the stormwater ponds (again).

[Dado]

Originally Posted by Franky

Wow. Larry Zero is getting expensive.

Except remember we were being led to believe for years it was a $200M lawsuit?

Perhaps the concrete that would have been bought will be used in the Baseline tunnel instead... it will cost $200M, after all.