Ottawa Rapid Transit Network developments

[Cre47]

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/le-droit/actua...ulte-la-population-de-hull-et-aylmer.php

The article is in French, but in this article the STO president is not ruling out a tramway or train in a future rapid transit corridor from Aylmer. I would wage more on a Rapibus extension instead than a train even though it would great having an LRT corridor, although the big obstacle would be east of St-Raymond.

[waterloowarrior]

RFQ - Baseline Road Transit Intensive Corridor Planning and Environmental Assessment Study
http://www.merx.com/English/SUPPLIER_Men...E=Y&hcode=IUJmUfrZzZ%2fL3OSyAra9PQ%3d%3d
Addendum #1 has been issued.

Requirement:
The City of Ottawa, hereinafter referred to as the City, is seeking qualification submissions to provide professional engineering services to conduct a Planning and Environmental Assessment Study for the Baseline Road Transit Intensive Corridor (Bayshore Station to Prince of Wales Drive).

Period of Proposed Contract:
The proposed period of contract will be eighteen (18) months from the date of award.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Dado

Never mind Bloess's comparison to the Rideau Canal. Let's find a more contemporary example.

The Channel Tunnel received approval in the UK and France in 1987.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_Tunnel

Yes. And just like a real transit system for Ottawa, a Channel tunnel had been talked about for hundreds of years. Ottawa's LRT will be shovel-ready in about the year 2664. Of course, by then, there will be no semblance of the current Ottawa remaining, the national capital having been moved to Moose Jaw. But by God, there'll be a lot of Shoppers Drug Marts.

[McC]

minor news from CTV and the Sun today:

NCC cool to having light rail on Ottawa River Parkway

One of three plans to extend light rail transit to the west include putting trains on the Ottawa River Parkway.

National Capital Commission CEO Marie Lemay (right) says running light rail transit along the Ottawa River Parkway is not guaranteed, Wednesday, April 6, 2011.

Updated: Wed Apr. 06 2011 5:26:32 PM

ctvottawa.ca

The National Capital Commission is reminding the city that building light rail transit on the Ottawa River Parkway is not a done deal.

"(City officials) have been told numerous times, don't assume it's the cheapest way and don't assume it's the easiest way," NCC CEO Marie Lemay said Wednesday.

The western portion of the Ottawa River Parkway is one of three options for extending the city's light rail transit plan to the west.

The other options would involve light rail on either Byron Avenue or Carling Avenue.

An ongoing environmental assessment will explore all three options. The NCC says even after that's complete, nothing is guaranteed.

"Before you can do anything on federal land, it has to be a last resort. It has to be a very compelling and powerful reason," said Lemay.

While the NCC is cool to the idea of having light rail on the parkway, the board approved plans Wednesday that would allow light rail transit between Blair Road and Tunney's Pasture.


With a report from CTV Ottawa's John Hua

NCC approves land realignment for LRT
By SUSAN SHERRING, City Hall Columnist

Last Updated: April 6, 2011 5:31pm

StoryCommentsEmail Story Print Size A A A Report Typo Ottawa’s light rail project got a little encouragment from the NCC on Wednesday, when the commission gave its approval to a part of the LRT route.

Despite voicing several concerns about the project, including feeling rushed by the process, the NCC board of directors unanimously accepted the staff recommendation to approve the LRT alignment from Tunney’s Pasture to Blair Rd.

The present route for the LRT uses or abutts on federal land, hence the need for the NCC’s approval.

While an important step, the NCC’s CEO Marie Lemay made it clear the decision has nothing to do the city’s request to use the Ottawa River Parkway.

“We’ve been saying that all along and it’s just a fact that we want to make sure isn’t forgotten by anyone,” Lemay told reporters.

“But approving the alignment is very important. We’ve been working very closely with the city and we want to make sure we integrate our steps together.”

The NCC has consistently said approval for using the parkway shouldn’t be considered a given and that being federal lands, the city should consider it as a last resort and not its first option.

[email protected]

[lrt's friend]

In a radio interview this morning, an NCC official urged that the terminus be moved from Tunney's Pasture to Bayview. The thinking of course that the Tunney's Pasture terminus biases the assessment of the three western extension options.

Also, comments were made suggesting that a parkway route would not be the cheapest. Reading between the lines perhaps, this suggests that the only way a parkway route would be approved would be if it were underground.

[eternallyme]

I still strongly prefer the Richmond/Byron alignment as it has the most catchment potential and is much more cost-effective than along Carling.

[Uhuniau]

Come on and abolish the NC bloody C already.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Come on and abolish the NC bloody C already.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?p=5234952

[Cre47]

Ottawa Transit blog has extra images from the Longfields Station

http://www.transitottawa.ca/2011/04/longfields-station-all-shiny-and-new.html

[MountainView]

I was at Fallowfield Station today around 1pm and it seemed like no one had any idea that OC Transpo had modified a large chunk of the Barrhaven local routes. People were asking other people how to get from Fallowfield to certain parts of Barrhaven, and it seemed like most people who normally take the 176 from Fallowfield to the Crestway part of Barrhaven had no clue that the 176 no longer ran to Fallowfield Station. I personally pointed out to a handful of people that the 94 would take them to Woodroffe and Strandherd where they could transfer to the 176, or they would have to take the 95 to Barrhaven Centre to catch the 176 there.

Judging by what I saw today, I'm thinking OC Transpo didn't do the best job making sure riders knew the changes were taking place April 17/18 and what exactly those changes were. About 66% of the people seemed very puzzled as to what bus to take ... especially the 176 and the 170 that now only covers western Barrhaven.

Also ... does anyone have any idea when a Woodroffe Park and Ride will be built? (Woodroffe at Strandherd in the SE corner) or are they waiting for the Strandherd-Armstrong bridge to be completed first?

[Cre47]

Originally Posted by MountainView

I was at Fallowfield Station today around 1pm and it seemed like no one had any idea that OC Transpo had modified a large chunk of the Barrhaven local routes. People were asking other people how to get from Fallowfield to certain parts of Barrhaven, and it seemed like most people who normally take the 176 from Fallowfield to the Crestway part of Barrhaven had no clue that the 176 no longer ran to Fallowfield Station. I personally pointed out to a handful of people that the 94 would take them to Woodroffe and Strandherd where they could transfer to the 176, or they would have to take the 95 to Barrhaven Centre to catch the 176 there.

Judging by what I saw today, I'm thinking OC Transpo didn't do the best job making sure riders knew the changes were taking place April 17/18 and what exactly those changes were. About 66% of the people seemed very puzzled as to what bus to take ... especially the 176 and the 170 that now only covers western Barrhaven.

Also ... does anyone have any idea when a Woodroffe Park and Ride will be built? (Woodroffe at Strandherd in the SE corner) or are they waiting for the Strandherd-Armstrong bridge to be completed first?

A lot of the media didn't do that either. If I remember only CTV seem to have done that. However, they haven't mentionned the changes to the 176, nor the cuts to local service and other routes. The article has dropped fast on the headlines.

CFRA did had an article, but they have rapidly dropped from the headlines.

I didn't remember seeing anything on CBC and the Citizen.

It's not even in the EMC Barrhaven page right now.

While the Ottawa Sun, well they are more busy with their new look page (very ugly BTW), the launch of Fox News North, throwing flowers at Conservatives and the upcoming royal wedding.

[MountainView]

I don't recall which local paper had it, it very well could have been the Barrhaven EMC or the Nepean this Week (if the latter still exists) and it had a full page colour map of the new Barrhaven service map... but I'm sure no one bothered to look at it based on the confusion I saw earlier today.

On a positive note ... I do enjoy the 94 service to Barrhaven because the 95 is still packed and the 94 is empty because people don't know where it goes yet lol

[lrt's friend]

Just magnify this many fold come September. It is inevitable that there will be mass confusion when the optimization is implemented. Just watch. Only those who made themselves informed know what is happening. The average bus rider will be in for a shock and some will be literally left at the bus stop wondering why no bus is coming. Of course, OC Transpo will make mistakes too and some routes will likely not have adequate capacity. It has happened before. It will happen this time.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by MountainView

I don't recall which local paper had it, it very well could have been the Barrhaven EMC or the Nepean this Week (if the latter still exists) and it had a full page colour map of the new Barrhaven service map... but I'm sure no one bothered to look at it based on the confusion I saw earlier today.

On a positive note ... I do enjoy the 94 service to Barrhaven because the 95 is still packed and the 94 is empty because people don't know where it goes yet lol

I'm not really a fan of the 94 extension, unless they were to extend the 94 more to Barrhaven Centre. During long periods of the day, there is no connection between a large part of Barrhaven and the central area of the community without a transfer to the 95 at Fallowfield. I would have extended the 170 instead, even though it would require a transfer to leave Barrhaven. Such would also make the service hours reduction on the 171 more reasonable as well.

The same issue is going to come up - at ALL times of day - soon with the 160/93 in Kanata North. I'd have eliminated the 169, made the 160 a limited-service route to the area to keep some service at least to Kanata Centrum and still had the 93 do most of the work.

[MountainView]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

I'm not really a fan of the 94 extension, unless they were to extend the 94 more to Barrhaven Centre.

Hmm.. I never thought of that idea... 94 Barrhaven Centre via Woodroffe and Champan Mills Drive (when completely built). But OC's eventual plan is to extend the 94 to Riverside South and I assume a Park and Ride will be built at Woodroffe and Strandherd.

Originally Posted by eternallyme

During long periods of the day, there is no connection between a large part of Barrhaven and the central area of the community without a transfer to the 95 at Fallowfield. I would have extended the 170 instead, even though it would require a transfer to leave Barrhaven. Such would also make the service hours reduction on the 171 more reasonable as well.

Although if you live in Eastern Barrhaven (East of Greenbank and South of the Railway tracks... you have routes 171 and 176 to bring you to Barrhaven Centre, which I assume is what you mean by 'central area of the community'

In my opinion, it seems like the Stonebridge area (Barrhaven South of Jock River) has a lot of service for such a low population, with routes 175 and 177. I don't see why those routes just couldn't be combined.

[McC]

Darwin has a post on last week's LRT briefings, would like to hear the perspective of any forumers who might have been there!
http://westsideaction.wordpress.com/2011/05/03/western-lrt-part-i/
(he posts some slides from the City's presentation)

Western LRT (part i)
Posted on May 3, 2011 by westsideaction

Last week, city staff offered some briefings on the western LRT options. Recall that the current downtown Ottawa transit tunnel study, now renamed Ottawa Light Rail Transit/Tunnel (OLRT), covers that portion from Blair Road in the east to Tunney’s Pasture in the west. However, the first components of the LRT system includes a service from Tunney’s to Lincoln Fields, but under a different Environmental Approval process. The western portion might be completed at the same time as the downtown portion, or shortly thereafter.

City council directed that staff consider various options running west from Bayview Station (Council selected Bayview in order to include the O-Train corridor and full Carling Avenue options; a leg would still be required to Tunney’s, as it is the second largest employment node in the city).

Obviously, the WLRT has to connect with the downtown portion, and somehow with the O-Train, and possibly a connection to Gatineau (either rail or bus) via the Prince of Wales Bridge. And at its western end, Lincoln Fields, there will be a major bus transfer point for buses to Kanata. All trains that run through the downtown will run to Lincoln Fields. The rail line would eventually extend further south to College Square, where underground station facilities are already being built as part of the new Algonquin trades building. From there,Nepean south and Barrhaven customers would transfer to buses.

Note that the bus transitway’s current connection to the Queensway will be closing when MOT widens the Queensway, in part to carry all the buses being moved off the transitway during conversion to LRT tracks. Eventually, the LRT could be extended west from Lincoln Fields to Bayshore and then to Kanata.

As shown in the following slide, the downtown commuter drives the system. They require a high level of service from Lincoln Fields east to the downtown. The reverse flow, ie, people commuting out of the downtown, is only 25% of the downtown-oriented flow, but that is enough to provide good revenue (the lack of backhaul on current express buses to the far suburbs is a financial killer for BRT).

The LRT system will be as grade-separated as possible. However, in a significant clarification from previous descriptions, the track is not being described as fully-fenced off. Just as buses can travel along a road at 80kmh and not be separated from pedestrians by a fence, the LRT line need not be fenced. Crossings can still be controlled by careful landscaping and berming, and a discrete chain or similar “crossable” barrier will permit people to cross the tracks much like they cross the street or the Ottawa River Commuter Expressway lanes now. Underpasses and overpasses will also be provided and crossing traffic will be gently steered towards those. The exclusive right of way, therefore, is exclusive of cars, but not of pedestrians. Similar permitted crossings occur now across the transitway at the Preston extension, across the O-train south of Confederation Hts, and along the ORP.

Here are the corridors for the Western LRT. Over the next few posts, I’ll run through each set of the major options.

[reidjr]

Originally Posted by MountainView

Hmm.. I never thought of that idea... 94 Barrhaven Centre via Woodroffe and Champan Mills Drive (when completely built). But OC's eventual plan is to extend the 94 to Riverside South and I assume a Park and Ride will be built at Woodroffe and Strandherd.



Although if you live in Eastern Barrhaven (East of Greenbank and South of the Railway tracks... you have routes 171 and 176 to bring you to Barrhaven Centre, which I assume is what you mean by 'central area of the community'

In my opinion, it seems like the Stonebridge area (Barrhaven South of Jock River) has a lot of service for such a low population, with routes 175 and 177. I don't see why those routes just couldn't be combined.

I would not say its lot of service for a low population and with it growing etc that population will only grow.

[McC]

Part II on the Carling route options:
http://westsideaction.wordpress.com/2011/05/03/western-lrt-part-ii/

[McC]

Part III on Richmond-Byron route options
http://westsideaction.wordpress.com/2011/05/04/western-lrt-part-iii-richmond-byron-options/

[McC]

Part III on Richmond-Byron route options
http://westsideaction.wordpress.com/2011/05/04/western-lrt-part-iii-richmond-byron-options/