Ottawa Rapid Transit Network developments

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by RTWAP

Apparently the longest escalator in North America is in a Washington Metro station, and it takes about 3 minutes to cover a vertical distance of 70m.

Perhaps Mr. Jeanes doesn't know what he's talking about.

Your information appears to be correct. Interestingly, the Washington Post also had an article dated May 14th indicating that 3 of the 4 Wheaton station escalators had been repaired. While 3 of 4 escalators were previously out of commission, shuttle bus service was offered to neighbouring stations. 9600 passengers use the station each day.

[Ottawan]

Originally Posted by Dado

In all honesty, I think John Baird would much rather hand a cheque over to Jim Watson and whoever replaces Alex Cullen as Transit Committee Chair than to hand one over to O'Brien and Cullen. Party differences notwithstanding, Watson and Baird generally seem to get along. Another point to remember is that the initial plan doesn't touch Baird's (and Watson's former) riding... but if Watson comes up with a plan to extend the initial system westwards rather than building a tunnel, that would be of much more interest to Baird.

The longer he puts it off, the closer it comes to being nearer to a new federal election as well.

Even if Jim Watson loses, the worst outcome for Baird is that he only has to hand the cheque over to one of Cullen and O'Brien...

In other words, Baird has every reason to wait until after the municipal election.

This sounds about right. It's the nature of politics that when possible politicians will use whatever power they can leverage to reinforce their position in their riding, and help potential political allies over foes.

Baird takes this to the extreme: an announcement will only be made if it is of direct and immediate benefit to him, and the timing will be calculated to maximize such benefit.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by RTWAP

Apparently the longest escalator in North America is in a Washington Metro station, and it takes about 3 minutes to cover a vertical distance of 70m.

But we are not going to have a single escalator. We will have three on switchbacks and a fourth from the mezzanine where fare control will be handled. The time taken for fare control (including queueing) has to be included in the analysis.

And once you're onto the platform you've got a 30+ m walk just to get to the end of the train since the platforms are going to be built for 180 m trains while it will be running 120 m trains initially. That walk will take you 20 seconds.

Perhaps Mr. Jeanes doesn't know what he's talking about.

That would really depend on how he came to his numbers. If he did an extrapolation of the time taken by the escalators at St. Laurent Station I could well see his number being correct. It all depends on the assumptions one makes as to what kind of escalators they're going to use.

[waterloowarrior]

Would something like Westminster Station on the Jubillee Line in London be a similar example in terms of depth/timing? (starting at about 1:10). Wikipedia says the platforms are 32 metres deep.

• Video Link

Beautiful station by the way!

[lrt's friend]

For our timing, are we assuming that we are going to be walking up the escalators to increase their speed? The video takes a little over 2.5 minutes to reach street level if we do that. And if we don't?

[Kitchissippi]

One thing I find lacking in Ottawa is "escalator etiquette". People never seem to stand aside for people who want to walk up.

This whole "OMG escalators!" thing reminds me of this commercial:

• Video Link

People will complain about the climb up these stations and then blow $500 on a stair stepper exercise machine for their basement.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

For our timing, are we assuming that we are going to be walking up the escalators to increase their speed? The video takes a little over 2.5 minutes to reach street level if we do that. And if we don't?

How long does it take to go up the stairs at any Transitway station if you don't walk? You could be stuck there forever!

As much as I'm not 100% convinced on the tunnel, I don't think this is a big issue.

[RTWAP]

Originally Posted by Dado

But we are not going to have a single escalator. We will have three on switchbacks and a fourth from the mezzanine where fare control will be handled. The time taken for fare control (including queueing) has to be included in the analysis.

And once you're onto the platform you've got a 30+ m walk just to get to the end of the train since the platforms are going to be built for 180 m trains while it will be running 120 m trains initially. That walk will take you 20 seconds.

Fare control is nearly instantaneous with modern transit systems. Of course it won't be in the first week the system operates, but it's mostly a user education and habit issue.

Talking 5 or 6 steps around a corner to the next escalator takes about 3 seconds. It's insignificant. And having shorter escalators helps with usability in the event of failure. Many more people are willing to walk up a 15m escalator than are willing to do the same on a 45m escalator.

Regarding walking to trains, for some reason you're assuming that the escalators will deposit people at the extreme ends of the station, which would be a stupid design. Instead if there are exit points at the 45 meter and 135 meter marks, and the 120m trains arrive centered along the length of the station then you'll probably be walking somewhere between 0 and 45 meters, which is mostly irrelevant because people only walk a long way down the platform when there's no train present.

Originally Posted by Dado

That would really depend on how he came to his numbers. If he did an extrapolation of the time taken by the escalators at St. Laurent Station I could well see his number being correct. It all depends on the assumptions one makes as to what kind of escalators they're going to use.

True.

[eemy]

Originally Posted by RTWAP

Fare control is nearly instantaneous with modern transit systems. Of course it won't be in the first week the system operates, but it's mostly a user education and habit issue.

Talking 5 or 6 steps around a corner to the next escalator takes about 3 seconds. It's insignificant. And having shorter escalators helps with usability in the event of failure. Many more people are willing to walk up a 15m escalator than are willing to do the same on a 45m escalator.

Regarding walking to trains, for some reason you're assuming that the escalators will deposit people at the extreme ends of the station, which would be a stupid design. Instead if there are exit points at the 45 meter and 135 meter marks, and the 120m trains arrive centered along the length of the station then you'll probably be walking somewhere between 0 and 45 meters, which is mostly irrelevant because people only walk a long way down the platform when there's no train present.



True.

I don't recall the exact location for each station, but for at least the Rideau Station, one of the exits appeared to be at the very end of the station. I could be wrong though.

[Kitchissippi]

In the renderings, Rideau Station has three exits, on at each end and one in the centre into the old Union Station building. Although it is not shown and will add huge costs, I hope they will connect the concourse levels so pedestrians can use it to walk from Elgin to the Rideau Centre.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Ottawan

It was needed yesterday, that's why we're hoping it will be built sometime this decade.

And that's also why it likely won't be built this century.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by RTWAP

Regarding walking to trains, for some reason you're assuming that the escalators will deposit people at the extreme ends of the station, which would be a stupid design.

Ummm.... this is the city that gave us such brilliant designs as little red greenhouses where humidexes can reach into the 50s in summer, the Lincoln Fields monstrosity, the abortion that is Temporary Baseline, the lengths taken to maximize walk distances at stations like Campus and Bayview.

If there's a Stupid that can be designed into a transit facility in Ottawa, some fucktard will find a way to ensure that the Stupid gets cast in concrete.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

In an interview yesterday, David Jeanes disagreed with the presented time in order to descend 10 to 12 storeys to the LRT platform. The predicted time has been presented as 2.5 minutes but David indicated that this is more likely to be 5 minutes. Mr. Jeanes also expressed concern about maintenance of escalators and elevators given the city's track record in Transitway stations. With an aging population, it is imperative that escalators and elevators be functional at all times when the platform is that much underground.

A question and a point

You would think that a rail advocacy group that is always complaining about highways and busways would be in favour of a rail-based transit project (especially one that links downtown with the train station and the o-train). What's their angle?

The way some people are talking, escalators are some new-fangled contraption to go with those horseless carriages. Almost every transit system in the world built in the last 50 years is built at a deep level that requires some time on escalators. This does not seem to involve more time on escalators than an average visit to the Rideau Centre or Bayshore. Personally I would prefer one long escalator to many switchbacks, but I assume there are good reasons (perhaps repairs are easier or cheaper).

[RTWAP]

Originally Posted by acottawa

A question and a point

You would think that a rail advocacy group that is always complaining about highways and busways would be in favour of a rail-based transit project (especially one that links downtown with the train station and the o-train). What's their angle?

The way some people are talking, escalators are some new-fangled contraption to go with those horseless carriages. Almost every transit system in the world built in the last 50 years is built at a deep level that requires some time on escalators. This does not seem to involve more time on escalators than an average visit to the Rideau Centre or Bayshore. Personally I would prefer one long escalator to many switchbacks, but I assume there are good reasons (perhaps repairs are easier or cheaper).

To your question, I'd guess that they want their rail plan. When you've been tilting at windmills for long enough it becomes a habit I guess.

(personal speculation) Long escalators are less friendly when they fail (minor point) and shorter escalators can be placed above each other in a vertical space excavated from below or above. Having one long escalator effectively requires a much larger excavation. I'm sure there would be times when it's still the right thing to do though.

[RTWAP]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Ummm.... this is the city that gave us such brilliant designs as little red greenhouses where humidexes can reach into the 50s in summer, the Lincoln Fields monstrosity, the abortion that is Temporary Baseline, the lengths taken to maximize walk distances at stations like Campus and Bayview.

If there's a Stupid that can be designed into a transit facility in Ottawa, some fucktard will find a way to ensure that the Stupid gets cast in concrete.

Laughably true.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by RTWAP

To your question, I'd guess that they want their rail plan. When you've been tilting at windmills for long enough it becomes a habit I guess.

(personal speculation) Long escalators are less friendly when they fail (minor point) and shorter escalators can be placed above each other in a vertical space excavated from below or above. Having one long escalator effectively requires a much larger excavation. I'm sure there would be times when it's still the right thing to do though.

I was bewildered by their opposition to the previous rail plan and it has been ironic how the new plan has ended up even further from their plan. I have sometimes wondered if they are just masquarading as a rail advocacy group because their criticism at times has been as effective as any anti-rail group.

I suspect you are right about the escalators. Huge excavations downtown to avoid switchback escalators are not practical.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I was bewildered by their opposition to the previous rail plan and it has been ironic how the new plan has ended up even further from their plan. I have sometimes wondered if they are just masquarading as a rail advocacy group because their criticism at times has been as effective as any anti-rail group.

I suspect you are right about the escalators. Huge excavations downtown to avoid switchback escalators are not practical.

City hall had asked the city planning staff to get a cheaper version of the tunnel. Remember that the cross-country route was chosen because of a potential of 1000 more users per day, whatever the cost of the tunnel might be.

The cross country route left the city with no choice to have deep stations. A cut and cover solution might have been possible if other routes would have been selected, and probably at a cheaper price.

Again, cost wasn't an issue when designing the tunnel. Same thing as with the choice of the vehicles (light metro versus LRT), operating costs weren't a factor (at least it supported my original point that it needs to be automated to allow such high passenger numbers).

This is why I'm surprised about David Jeanes comments being on the depth of the tunnel itself, instead of the reasons on why it got so deep.

I was also extremely surprised when I reviewed the "Benefits of Light-Rail" document. It brings nothing new to the table, besides doing another two year of studies.

It has been far too long so far for the quantity of work that has been brought up forward.

[Richard Eade]

It appears to me that the depth is not only a function of the route chosen (Cross Country), but is also a factor of where the stations were pre-chosen to be.

For example, the placement of the Rideau Station was arbitrarily chosen to be directly under two large sewer lines. Because the actual station volume is to be blasted out from underneath, there needs to be a sizable buffer between the blasting and the sewer pipes. If there had been a proper itterative process which was open to variation, the Rideau Station could have been moved about 100 metres to the west. This would have allowed the station depth to rise about 10 metres (one escalator 'zag' less).



The dark blue is the Staff's station position, while the light blue is where it could have been. Because this station could have been less deep, all of the other stations could also have been raised. The down-side is that it would not have connected so well with the Rideau Centre. Alternatively, the curve could have been pushed farther east so that the Rideau Station could have also been moved east to avoid the sewers and better serve Rideau Street. The south leg of the tunnel could then have been under King Edward which could have been Cut & Covered as part of the rehabilitation of that street. Again, this would not satisfy the Staff's preconceived idea of keeping along the Transitway alignment, though.

It seems that Staff guessed at where the alignment and stations were to be before much research was done, and in typical Staff fashion, the "Council Approved" guess could not be altered by the facts.

[p_xavier]

DP (not in the kinky way)

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

It appears to me that the depth is not only a function of the route chosen (Cross Country), but is also a factor of where the stations were pre-chosen to be.

This is a good point. The savings made by removing one station from the CBD gave such stations' location, which carried a heftier price tag. Proper planning could have given an extra station for less money overall, since the tunnel whould have been shallower. These things were not studied. Actually, for the nearly 4 years of studies, there wasn't much new information gotten from them.