Ottawa Rapid Transit Network developments

[lrt's friend]

What would be the cost savings if it were shallow (i.e. 1 story below the surface) cut and cover tunnels under Albert and/or Slater, re-use the existing Mackenzie King Bridge and build an elevated section over Waller and Laurier before returning to grade before Campus Station?

The blocks are too small for effective surface LRT operation in the downtown core, especially the Lyon-Bay block.

What do we do with the buses while all this is happening? I am sure there is a way but not sure what. One of the reasons why this is not being considered is because of the Albert/Slater coalition. They didn't want the surface disruption when rails were being laid, so they would want a cut and cover tunnel even less, which would be more disruptive to their businesses. Incidentally, I know I suggested a variation of what you are suggesting a while back. Interesting to know whether these ideas are feasible or not.

If you leave the Transitways in place on Albert and Slater, and use Laurier for LRT, there will no longer be the need for 6 car trains. If transit ridership downtown continues to increase, the tunnel concept will return at some point. But there is value in delaying this very expensive option as long as possible.

It seems to me that there are a number of alternatives that were never seriously considered when the current tunnel choice was made.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

The blocks are too small for effective surface LRT operation in the downtown core, especially the Lyon-Bay block.

Sigh. You have got to be an Ottawa engineer. You've got that "it can't be done" thought process. Is there something about Ottawa that causes its engineers to imagine all sorts of reasons things can't be done that are done elsewhere? You clearly didn't even compare our blocks to Calgary's.

Our blocks are 600' (~180 m) long. Calgary's are 500' (~150 m). So our blocks are longer than Calgary's, yet here you are telling us that they're too small. Lyon-Bay is 400' (~120 m, actually 122 m), so even the shortest of our blocks is long enough to hold a 4-car train. Is that kind of precision stopping possible? Why yes! The O-Train drivers have been doing it for 9 years (Friday was the 9th anniversary of opening!) at every single station to get the doors lined up with the platform extenders. And what amazing device do they use to achieve this awesome feat? Some kind of sophisticated GPS system perhaps that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars? No... a line painted on the window and a strategically-placed trackside pole which the drivers line up. This simple solution was not dreamt up by Ottawa's engineers but rather the operators, which is probably why it (1) was inexpensive and (2) actually works.

As it happens, Calgary too has an 'odd' block: 3rd St SW (Barclay) to 4th St SW. It's so short (~60 m) that it can't even fit a train in it. How does Calgary deal with this horrific problem, the likes of which would send our engineers into fits of apoplexy? Simple: they don't stop there. So even if Bay-Lyon proved to be some kind of insurmountable engineering problem, the solution of just not stopping there still exists.

[acottawa]

[QUOTE=eternallyme;5017577]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

What would be the cost savings if it were shallow (i.e. 1 story below the surface) cut and cover tunnels under Albert and/or Slater, re-use the existing Mackenzie King Bridge and build an elevated section over Waller and Laurier before returning to grade before Campus Station?
.

While I'm not an engineer, I'm not sure why everyone assumes a shallower tunnel would be cheaper. There would be a whole mess of underground infrastructure to deal with (look at how many years Bank Street reconstruction took and they didn't need to put a transit system below the sewers). I don't think anybody builds cut/cover transit tunnels anymore - the Canada line in Vancouver was mostly bored, the recent Toronto subway lines have been bored (as will the Eglinon LRT). A deep tunnel takes the most direct route from the Lebretton Flats to the U of O (by not climbing the downtown hill), doesn't interfere with the navigable, UNESCO-protected canal, causes minimal surface disruption, avoids archaeological sites, would allow a longer construction season and (I would assume) work to go on around the clock. Deep tunnels are the norm for almost all urban transit systems built after about 1970. If the Swiss can built a 57km tunnel under the alps, surely we can build a 2km tunnel under downtown Ottawa.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

While I'm not an engineer, I'm not sure why everyone assumes a shallower tunnel would be cheaper. There would be a whole mess of underground infrastructure to deal with (look at how many years Bank Street reconstruction took and they didn't need to put a transit system below the sewers). I don't think anybody builds cut/cover transit tunnels anymore - the Canada line in Vancouver was mostly bored, the recent Toronto subway lines have been bored (as will the Eglinon LRT). A deep tunnel takes the most direct route from the Lebretton Flats to the U of O (by not climbing the downtown hill), doesn't interfere with the navigable, UNESCO-protected canal, causes minimal surface disruption, avoids archaeological sites, would allow a longer construction season and (I would assume) work to go on around the clock. Deep tunnels are the norm for almost all urban transit systems built after about 1970. If the Swiss can built a 57km tunnel under the alps, surely we can build a 2km tunnel under downtown Ottawa.

You may be right about cost but the bigger problem is that it is taking so d**m long to get this thing planned and built. We could have had surface rail in place NOW and would cut and cover taken this long to get started? The other big problem is that the rest of plan is so vulnerable to further lengthy delay and even then we have no real plans to extend service to our suburbs. We end up with a half assed hybrid system that requires you to use local buses, Transitways and LRT to get downtown. Crap!

And if costs escalate, we may have to press the reset button again. An entire plan totally dependent on one very expensive element (the downtown tunnel) was foolhardy. If that very expensive element doesn't get built, the rest of the plan collapses like a house made of cards. We may have no alternatives but to start over again, losing more years. Another concern is that no other transit projects will be built over the next decade. We will continue to have an incomplete Transitway to Kanata.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Another concern is that no other transit projects will be built over the next decade. We will continue to have an incomplete Transitway to Kanata.

There's a bunch of other transit projects that could be built relatively quickly and cheaply if everything else falls apart (or even if it doesn't), and if there was any political will.

To start with, extend the O-Train to Hull already.

Then an infill station between Carling and Bayview, ideally at Gladstone.

Then do a radical makeover of Lincoln Fields, since, in case no one has noticed, trees and shrubs don't take the bus.

[DubberDom]

[QUOTE=acottawa;5018711]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

If the Swiss can built a 57km tunnel under the alps, surely we can build a 2km tunnel under downtown Ottawa.

You forgot a part, you should read: If the Swiss can built a long 57km tunnel under the alps for $10Billion, surely we can build a short 2km tunnel under downtown Ottawa for under a Billion!

[Dado]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

There's a bunch of other transit projects that could be built relatively quickly and cheaply if everything else falls apart (or even if it doesn't), and if there was any political will.

To start with, extend the O-Train to Hull already.

Then an infill station between Carling and Bayview, ideally at Gladstone.]

Funny, Sakto had once proposed to build a station there - free of charge - in exchange for a reduction in parking spaces at one of their nearby developments.

Well we can see how well that worked out.

Then do a radical makeover of Lincoln Fields, since, in case no one has noticed, trees and shrubs don't take the bus.

The station needs to be relocated more than given a makeover. Either that or fill in the field with some kind of real development (preferably leaving behind the orchardy thing, which is about the only thing of any aesthetic appeal in the entire area).

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Dado

The station needs to be relocated more than given a makeover. Either that or fill in the field with some kind of real development (preferably leaving behind the orchardy thing, which is about the only thing of any aesthetic appeal in the entire area).

Relocation would be part of it. Kind of like a facelift, where you move the face to the next block.

[Richard Eade]

I have been doing some thinking about the S-W Transitway and how it will connect to the Western Transitway after the conversion to LRT + BRT along the S-W Transitway corridor. It seems that it is important for buses to also run beside the LRT between Baseline Station and Lincoln Fields Station. There is apparently enough desire for buses to travel from Barrhaven to Kanata and back to justify the need for both modes to run in parallel. (Although I question whether this is the best thing to do, I have taken it as a given.) Also, people coming from the west will likely want to go downtown so a direct connection to Lincoln Fields Station is a must.

The Western Transitway will travel beside the 417 and connect to the bus lanes of the S-W Transitway. Baseline Station’s tunnel is being built with the rail lines in the middle and the bus lanes on either side so this will be the configuration of the S-W Transitway. Based on this limit, I have sketched a couple of intersection options below; one using the Connaught Tunnel and the other replacing the homes along the south of Roman Avenue. (Only one of those options will be used.) Based on the current ideas, there will be need for buses to go to/from the Western Transitway to both Baseline Station, and Lincoln Fields Station. Thus there will need to be overpass structures and four ramps at the intersection.



I have tried to use large radius curves so that a future conversion of the Western Transitway to rail would be easier, but in some cases, notably trying to bring overpasses closer to the perpendicular, this was not possible. If future conversion occurs, there will need to be much more land taken.

Things could be simplified if the buses to/from the Western Transitway (and future trains) only came/went from one of the stations, either Lincoln Fields or Baseline. For example, all buses could travel the Western Transitway to/from Lincoln Fields, which would reduce the intersections to one turn-out, and one overpass and merge. Barrhaven folks would transfer to north-south buses (trains) at Lincoln Fields.

Like-wise, if the bus lanes had been on the west side of the rails, then a simple ‘T’ intersection with Stop signs might have been sufficient for buses: A ‘T’ would not be a suitable arrangement for future conversion to rail, however.

Another area which will need consideration along the S-W Transitway is the crossing of the railway/busway and Iris Street. Since there would be about 80 metres on either side of the transit lanes, it should be possible to raise Iris Street over the buses and trains. A six metre rise over an 80 metre distance is a 7.5% grade, but cars should be able to handle that.

[Cre47]

Rather then putting it on the election thread, I think I should put this here.

Residents support light rail: Poll

By JON WILLING, City Hall Bureau

Last Updated: October 20, 2010 11:18pm

Set the track and roll out the trains.

Ottawa residents are ready to embrace light rail as the transit solution for a growing national capital, but they’re not keen on moving the system underground.

A new Leger Marketing poll commissioned by the Sun says 39% of people believe light rail is the best option for the city, compared to 24% who say it’s bus rapid transit.

Leger Marketing VP Rick Hobbs pointed out that people aren’t invested in the idea of a downtown tunnel for any transit solution.

Only 17% say they think a tunnel, for trains or buses, will work best to mitigate transit problems.

It could be that residents have money on the mind.

“It certainly is a large budget hit,” Hobbs said of the tunnel.

A 3.2-km tunnel is currently part of the $2.1-billion light-rail plan the city has on the books. The tunnel alone is estimated to cost $735 million.

The first phase of the light-rail project would connect Tunney’s Pasture with Blair station.

Mayor Larry O’Brien and challenger Jim Watson both support the project.

The other two leading candidates, Clive Doucet and Andy Haydon, have different visions.

Doucet wants to scrap the tunnel and run surface light rail between Kanata and Preston St. on Carling Ave. His proposal would involve the O-Train and run surface light rail on Laurier Ave. and eventually out to Orleans.

Meanwhile, Andy Haydon wants to forget about the trains and use the downtown tunnel for buses to expand the current transit system.

Both Doucet and Haydon believe their plans are cheaper than the light-rail tunnel the city is pursuing.

Hobbs said residents have been consistent in expressing worry over the pricey tunnel.

“Our previous research has shown people are fairly split on the issue, and this speaks to that,” he said.

A poll conducted in August asking a direct question about the tunnel showed 53% believing it’s a nice idea, but unaffordable and unnecessary. Another 43% said the tunnel is an essential part of the light-rail plan.

In the recent poll, only 13% say a ring road should be the city’s transit solution.

O’Brien and Haydon support a ring road, but if the mayor wants to catch up to Watson, he might want to consider downplaying the proposal.

“That’s not going to be the winning issue for him,” Hobbs said.

Leger Marketing conducted a telephone survey of 601 adults aged 18 and over between Oct. 13 and 17. The results are considered accurate to within +/- 4%, 19 times out of 20.

[email protected]

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

For once, can it NOT be about the money? The tunnel is long-term and will ultimately prove beneficial for our growing city. Why can't people see that? Sometimes, it's necessary to go through short-term pain for long-term gain.

[adam-machiavelli]

I would've preferred to see elevated light rail than a tunnel. But I suppose daylight is for the privileged car drivers.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by adam-machiavelli

I would've preferred to see elevated light rail than a tunnel. But I suppose daylight is for the privileged car drivers.

And the pedestrians walking under the elevated track.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

For once, can it NOT be about the money? The tunnel is long-term and will ultimately prove beneficial for our growing city. Why can't people see that? Sometimes, it's necessary to go through short-term pain for long-term gain.

You are right if it is implemented properly. I am not convinced that we are implementing it properly.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by adam-machiavelli

I would've preferred to see elevated light rail than a tunnel. But I suppose daylight is for the privileged car drivers.

The last thing you want is visual pollution downtown. Even Vancouver's Skytrain is not elevated downtown.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

For once, can it NOT be about the money?

Nope. This is Ottawa. Poor, pathetic, listless, visionless, craptacular Ottawa.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by adam-machiavelli

I would've preferred to see elevated light rail than a tunnel. But I suppose daylight is for the privileged car drivers.

Elevated along what route?

[eternallyme]

Elevated would work in the eastern part of downtown (i.e. Mackenzie King to Campus). But not in the downtown core - it would look awful in a G8 capital. It could either be at-grade (Lyon Street would need to be closed north of Laurier to allow for safe operation since the Lyon-Bay block is too small, the rest would be acceptable) or underground.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

Elevated would work in the eastern part of downtown (i.e. Mackenzie King to Campus). But not in the downtown core - it would look awful in a G8 capital. It could either be at-grade (Lyon Street would need to be closed north of Laurier to allow for safe operation since the Lyon-Bay block is too small, the rest would be acceptable) or underground.

I don't think G8 capital has anything to do with it. It would just look awful.

How long is Lyon-Bay, and how does it compare to the length of Vancouver trains?

[adam-machiavelli]

Regarding the comment that it would look awful in a G8 capital: I don't care whether it's in a G8 capital or some rust belt city, if there is sufficient demand, elevated trains are worth it for the cost and accessibility. I doubt even one tourist or god forbid a business person or politician would fault Ottawa for wanting an "El" train.