Ottawa Rapid Transit Network developments

[MalcolmTucker]

Astronomical cost in Calgary and Edmonton to extend the stations? Don't make be laugh. Even if Calgary's were built to 4 car specs on day one, the downtown ones would have still needed to be replaced, and the others refurbished. Eventually most stations will be extended again to 125m (5 cars).

The main problem with the Vancouver system is the Millennium Line was never contemplated to interline when Expo was originally built. You can think of the station extensions as building the Millennium Line's downtown tunnel.

It makes sense to build lots of extra capacity in, but does Ottawa really need room for almost 4 times today's traffic? In my opinion the extra marginal cost isn't worth it today vs extra track on the transit way. I would rather have a long system crammed with people, than a short system with tonnes of extra capacity.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

How much larger is the Vancouver tax base, adjusted for population?



That's funny; I could have sworn that the third line, the Canada Line, travelled under peninsular Vancouver in a tunnel the last time I rode it. Maybe it was an elevated section, but I was hanging upside down in the car.

It isn't about adjusted for population, it is all about absolute amount. Vancouver compared to Calgary, Edmonton, and Ottawa has at least twice the base to fund from. That means more federal money, and more provincial money too. More is more.

As for the third line not requiring tunneling, the earlier sentence defined two lines by major events, so the third line is the Millennium Line.

[GoTrans]

Originally Posted by Sir.Humphrey.Appleby

It makes sense to build lots of extra capacity in, but does Ottawa really need room for almost 4 times today's traffic? I would rather have a long system crammed with people, than a short system with tonnes of extra capacity.

It will not take a long time for the transit ridership to increase through the downtown. Most LRT systems recently built have far exceeded their ridership projections much earlier than planned. Anything that improves the current problems even if only for the short term is a benefit. The DOTT LRT plan is a completely grade separated system which will allow higher speeds between station, greater reliability and increase in capacity as you have noted. This will also be of benefit in the near future when the N-S line is double tracked and electrified. The system should be planned for the long term, 50 years out not just 20 years out. The amount of on street running should be kept to a minimum in order to maintain this advantage. When you start interlining trains off different routes onto one downtown section it becomes more crucial to maintain schedule reliability. So yes I would rather wait and have the system done right even though I won't be a beneficiary now.

[MalcolmTucker]

With a simple modification in the planning documents, you can maintain similar future capacity by changing to high floor LRT. It helps to realize 6 car low floor trains do not exist, and hence will be exceedingly expensive, and in the future can never hold as many people as a train that can be configured with side seating.

You would save a boat load of cash all the while maintaining the same capabilities.

Even just cutting the station size down to 150m would save a bunch and still provide for more than enough capacity without automation (30,000 ppdph). To get even close to needing that much capacity would be amazing, and I doubt even 50 years of growth would do so. I'm sure you could get more than enough capacity when you start to have troubles by changing the signaling system.

[Ottawan]

I agree.

I would also add that when looking at the capacity of the tunnel we should be looking not only at the capacity of the current transitway but also of the STO buses on Wellington, since one of (and in my opinion the clearly best) interprovincial transit solutions is to have the cross-border traffic merge at Bayview, use the tunnel, split at Rideau, and cross over at Alexandria (I'd prefer MacDonald-Cartier).

[MalcolmTucker]

Why would you let STO use the tunnel? There would be more than enough surface capacity for buses once OC Transpo is largely underground. It would be an elegant solution, but it is politically untenable for a number of reasons.

[Ottawan]

Originally Posted by Sir.Humphrey.Appleby

Why would you let STO use the tunnel? There would be more than enough surface capacity for buses once OC Transpo is largely underground. It would be an elegant solution, but it is politically untenable for a number of reasons.

I would turn this around and ask Why would we want STO buses to operate on the surface when there is any viable other option.

I've always thought that this would be the best way (about a year ago I posted this to the "transit dreams" thread somewhere) but it has also been endorsed as an option by the NCC lead study on interprovincial transity (see: http://www.interprovincial-transit-strategy.ca/)

[MalcolmTucker]

The financial, interjurisdictional, and operational issues are just too great. Why would STO pay to use a tunnel, when they can use the streets for free (I assume that is what they do now, I could be wrong)? There is also only so much capacity, and there are plans for enough interlining already!

[Ottawan]

I am no expert and do not know what STO pays to use the surface route (if anything) but they shouldn't be allowed to use it fullstop, let alone for free, when there is another option. I would have them transfer by bus to the tunnel at Bayview or Lebreton if no other option went forward. That said, with the preferred future interprovincial route being LRT, I see no reason why it should not connect with the tunnel - certainly the two sides of the river + NCC can coordinate enough to use the same technology.

[lrt's friend]

There are some assumptions being made about passenger capacities for a downtown tunnel. Just because the tunnel has a certain capacity, we have be careful about the number of routes we plan to interline through the tunnel. The more interlining that we plan, the lower the service frequency on each line that can be offered. This can be self-defeating if one of the selling pitches for LRT is short transfer wait times.

I find it worrisome that some suggest that Gatineau run LRT trains through our tunnel, which was paid by Ottawa taxpayers at great expense, and further that Gatineau will eventually require an east and west branch. Add this to the prospects that our LRT plan will some day branch to Barrhaven and Kanata and we have the N-S route with a second branch to the airport and some will no doubt want a Carling route connected to downtown as well. Too much interlining is potentially being planned in the long-term resulting in poor service for everybody.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Sir.Humphrey.Appleby

Astronomical cost in Calgary and Edmonton to extend the stations? Don't make be laugh. Even if Calgary's were built to 4 car specs on day one, the downtown ones would have still needed to be replaced, and the others refurbished. Eventually most stations will be extended again to 125m (5 cars).

The main problem with the Vancouver system is the Millennium Line was never contemplated to interline when Expo was originally built. You can think of the station extensions as building the Millennium Line's downtown tunnel.

It makes sense to build lots of extra capacity in, but does Ottawa really need room for almost 4 times today's traffic? In my opinion the extra marginal cost isn't worth it today vs extra track on the transit way. I would rather have a long system crammed with people, than a short system with tonnes of extra capacity.

If they stations weren't built to last, that's another issue altogether. The fact that hundreds of millions (more than a billion) dollars are being spent to upgrade stations, is shortsightness.

And yes, Ottawa needs 4 times the room, since the "room" didn't account for Gatineau. The cost to build longer stations is minimal compared to rebuilding stations at a later time. Short term pain for long term gain, but again, people don't want any pain at all.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I find it worrisome that some suggest that Gatineau run LRT trains through our tunnel, which was paid by Ottawa taxpayers at great expense, .

Sleep well. Gatineau has no rail plans for the foreseeable future.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Ottawan

I am no expert and do not know what STO pays to use the surface route (if anything) but they shouldn't be allowed to use it fullstop, let alone for free, when there is another option. .

I am almost positive that the STO pays nothing to use Ottawa streets, and OC Transpo pays nothing to use Gatineau streets.

STO buses are exempted from the requirement to have an Ontario commercial vehicle operator's registration because they are plated "in another Canadian jurisdiction". This type of reciprocity is applied by all provinces to all trucks and buses from other provinces.

Basically, you can drive anywhere you want.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Ottawan

I would turn this around and ask Why would we want STO buses to operate on the surface when there is any viable other option.

I've always thought that this would be the best way (about a year ago I posted this to the "transit dreams" thread somewhere) but it has also been endorsed as an option by the NCC lead study on interprovincial transity (see: http://www.interprovincial-transit-strategy.ca/)

Regardless of whether people think it is fair or not, whether people like Quebec or not, it is nonetheless desirable for Ottawa to have as few buses as possible on its downtown streets, especially a showcase street like Wellington.

That said, there isn't a city in the world, regardless of the expansiveness of its underground transit system, that doesn't have a significant amount of bus traffic above ground on its streets.

Perhaps the reduction in the number of OC Transpo buses because of the tunnel (regardless of mode) might allow for the movement of STO buses from Wellington onto Albert and Slater, something which is not feasible at this point because of the insane number of OC Transpo buses on these streets. It would at least be an improvement over having the STO use Rideau and Wellington.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Ottawan

I agree.

I would also add that when looking at the capacity of the tunnel we should be looking not only at the capacity of the current transitway but also of the STO buses on Wellington, since one of (and in my opinion the clearly best) interprovincial transit solutions is to have the cross-border traffic merge at Bayview, use the tunnel, split at Rideau, and cross over at Alexandria (I'd prefer MacDonald-Cartier).

And that will happen.

In the 26th century.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

Short term pain for long term gain, but again, people don't want any pain at all.

There you go.

People in Ottawa — largely civil servants who exist based on the taxes paid in the country as a whole — don't want to pay municipal taxes for anything, ever.

They are probably the most conservative civil servants in any western democracy.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Perhaps the reduction in the number of OC Transpo buses because of the tunnel (regardless of mode) might allow for the movement of STO buses from Wellington onto Albert and Slater, something which is not feasible at this point because of the insane number of OC Transpo buses on these streets. It would at least be an improvement over having the STO use Rideau and Wellington.

Why do so many people accept it as axiomatic that having buses on Wellington constitutes a problem?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Why do so many people accept it as axiomatic that having buses on Wellington constitutes a problem?

Interesting way of looking at it. I and most people tend to find it unfortunate to have many buses spewing diesel on Ottawa's grand allée right on front of the Parliament Buildings were all the tourists are, but when I think of it there are tons of buses and other large vehicles in Times Square, or on the Champs-Élysées. You see the same thing pretty much on any major street in the downtown of any major city.

Another good point is that having the STO buses on Wellington keeps them out of "the hair" of the core of Ottawa's transit system, since the vast majority of OC Transpo buses use other downtown streets. Only 4 OC Transpo routes use Wellington I believe, and no OC Transpo routes use Wellington west of Bank St.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Why do so many people accept it as axiomatic that having buses on Wellington constitutes a problem?

The problem to me isn't Wellington, it's Rideau. It's a much denser urban environment and having tons of loud, smelly buses going through there makes it that much more unpleasant.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

There you go.

People in Ottawa — largely civil servants who exist based on the taxes paid in the country as a whole — don't want to pay municipal taxes for anything, ever.

They are probably the most conservative civil servants in any western democracy.

It's the same thing in other provincial capitals, namely Quebec City and Fredericton. These people complain the most about bloated and corrupted governments, but they represent their workers. Go figure.