The future of Ottawa's Transit

[lrt's friend]

From what I have heard, the signals are automated and controlled from Montreal. To switch to manual control is something that the city and the railways did not want to take on for safety reasons. As a result, the O-Train as presently designed is an all or nothing service. This tells us the folly of making a 'temporary' design for the O-Train permanent. It is a very vulnerable component of our rapid transit network that cannot replace the southeast Transitway as the main route into the city from the south end.

A priority for the O-Train is to eliminate the diamond near Confederation Heights. That takes us back to some of the design elements from the cancelled 2006 plan. That diamond is the major source of having an all or nothing service. This is also another argument for not extending the O-Train as it is presently designed. At some point, train frequency demands that a diamond be made grade separated.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

From what I have heard, the signals are automated and controlled from Montreal. To switch to manual control is something that the city and the railways did not want to take on for safety reasons.

That issue relates to the two diamonds. Currently they are automated based on the relay circuits at the diamonds themselves. Basically, at the VIA crossing, whoever gets there first gets to go across the diamond first. At the Walkley diamond the freights have to wait until a northbound O-Train has cleared the diamond, with the idea being that the freight will have cleared the diamond by the time the southbound O-Train arrives.

The automation can be manually overridden from the control centre in Montreal to change who gets the clear signal and who gets the stop signal. That would allow for a freight to go through when it normally couldn't, with the consequence of blocking the O-Train.

That's it, that's all. That issue is completely separate from whatever imagined problem it was we had on Tuesday.

There was no signalling-related issue that would have prevented a partial Greenboro-Carleton or Greenboro-Carling service from operating. No intervention from Montreal was required.

As a result, the O-Train as presently designed is an all or nothing service. This tells us the folly of making a 'temporary' design for the O-Train permanent. It is a very vulnerable component of our rapid transit network that cannot replace the southeast Transitway as the main route into the city from the south end.

Yes, go ahead, blame the physical system and its initial design for what is in actuality a management problem. That problem could probably be solved by a management purge.

Shutting things down is the bureaucratically "safe" thing to do. Trying to figure out a workaround requires some creativity and taking a bureaucratic risk. It's not bureaucratically "safe", regardless of how physically safe it is.

A priority for the O-Train is to eliminate the diamond near Confederation Heights. That takes us back to some of the design elements from the cancelled 2006 plan. That diamond is the major source of having an all or nothing service. This is also another argument for not extending the O-Train as it is presently designed. At some point, train frequency demands that a diamond be made grade separated.

From the foregoing, it's pretty clear you have not the faintest idea what you're writing about. Of the two diamonds, the Ellwood (Confederation/VIA) diamond is the least problematic for the simple reason that relatively short VIA trains don't take very long to clear the diamond. Under the present circumstances of CN pretty much dismantling the rail network west of Walkley Yard there's not a lot of freight traffic going across the Walkley diamond, but from an operational perspective dealing with long, slow-moving freight trains crossing your track is far and away more problematic than dealing with short, fast-moving passenger trains. Indeed, that very problem goes a long way to explaining why the Beachburg Sub has a number of road overpasses along it whereas the Smiths Falls Sub used mainly by VIA has virtually none at all (only Hunt Club and Hwy 416).

Had OCR not been taken over by CN, it would still be operating out to Pembroke (in CN's bizarre world, profitable isn't always profitable enough). With the CPR abandonment, OCR would probably have taken control of the CP track beyond Pembroke, and with it the possibility of extra freight trains coming through. That might actually have caused a problem at Walkley diamond where grade-separation might have had to be considered. That was the only diamond worth worrying about, and we're basically past that now.

Even with the frequency doubling later this year, the Ellwood diamond will still function without recourse to grade separation. But on the outside chance that we were to grade separate it, the sensible thing to do would be to convert the Southeast Transitway to rail (even if to run just O-Trains) and then convert the current O-Train trackage between the VIA line and Walkley to a bike path. The idiotic 2005-era plan concocted by busway engineers to build two massive overpasses was just that: idiotic.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by Dado

That issue relates to the two diamonds. Currently they are automated based on the relay circuits at the diamonds themselves. Basically, at the VIA crossing, whoever gets there first gets to go across the diamond first. At the Walkley diamond the freights have to wait until a northbound O-Train has cleared the diamond, with the idea being that the freight will have cleared the diamond by the time the southbound O-Train arrives.

The automation can be manually overridden from the control centre in Montreal to change who gets the clear signal and who gets the stop signal. That would allow for a freight to go through when it normally couldn't, with the consequence of blocking the O-Train.

That's it, that's all. That issue is completely separate from whatever imagined problem it was we had on Tuesday.

There was no signalling-related issue that would have prevented a partial Greenboro-Carleton or Greenboro-Carling service from operating. No intervention from Montreal was required.



Yes, go ahead, blame the physical system and its initial design for what is in actuality a management problem. That problem could probably be solved by a management purge.

Shutting things down is the bureaucratically "safe" thing to do. Trying to figure out a workaround requires some creativity and taking a bureaucratic risk. It's not bureaucratically "safe", regardless of how physically safe it is.



From the foregoing, it's pretty clear you have not the faintest idea what you're writing about. Of the two diamonds, the Ellwood (Confederation/VIA) diamond is the least problematic for the simple reason that relatively short VIA trains don't take very long to clear the diamond. Under the present circumstances of CN pretty much dismantling the rail network west of Walkley Yard there's not a lot of freight traffic going across the Walkley diamond, but from an operational perspective dealing with long, slow-moving freight trains crossing your track is far and away more problematic than dealing with short, fast-moving passenger trains. Indeed, that very problem goes a long way to explaining why the Beachburg Sub has a number of road overpasses along it whereas the Smiths Falls Sub used mainly by VIA has virtually none at all (only Hunt Club and Hwy 416).

Had OCR not been taken over by CN, it would still be operating out to Pembroke (in CN's bizarre world, profitable isn't always profitable enough). With the CPR abandonment, OCR would probably have taken control of the CP track beyond Pembroke, and with it the possibility of extra freight trains coming through. That might actually have caused a problem at Walkley diamond where grade-separation might have had to be considered. That was the only diamond worth worrying about, and we're basically past that now.

Even with the frequency doubling later this year, the Ellwood diamond will still function without recourse to grade separation. But on the outside chance that we were to grade separate it, the sensible thing to do would be to convert the Southeast Transitway to rail (even if to run just O-Trains) and then convert the current O-Train trackage between the VIA line and Walkley to a bike path. The idiotic 2005-era plan concocted by busway engineers to build two massive overpasses was just that: idiotic.

That creates an interesting question on how, in the long term, to treat the Southeast Transitway and O-Train. Most likely, two more pieces of the pie need to be considered:

* Bank Street subway from downtown to Billings Bridge (likely an extension of the Rideau-Montreal Road-Rockcliffe subway, although likely using LRVs so could be extendable to the suburbs)

* BRT corridor along Baseline/Heron Roads

That leaves an ultimate setup as follows I think:

* Southeast Transitway would end at Heron Road, link into the Baseline BRT as one continuous crosstown route. Since that corridor is orphaned at Hurdman, it makes more sense IMO to run as an east-west crosstown (basically, today's Route 118 turned rapid) than as a shuttle or duplicating route. Although it COULD be converted to rail, it would be best done together and is not recommended until the very long term.

* The Bank Street subway would continue to Heron Road under Bank, make a slight shift between Heron and Walkley and join today's Southeast Transitway at Walkley Road (emerging from its long tunnel to downtown).

* The Southeast Transitway between Heron and Walkley gets abandoned and converted to nature or a bike path.

* The O-Train is basically left alone, double-tracked if necessary, on its current routing from Bayview to Greenboro.

* Extensions to the airport and Riverside South could be done either along the Bank Street corridor or the O-Train corridor (both could be compatible depending on future uses). Nothing precludes an extension of the O-Train to Gatineau either.

[lrt's friend]

I do not pretend to be a rail expert, however, the O-Train has been operational for several years and we seem to not be able to deal with what appears to be small problems. If the bureaucracy at the city or the police or the railways are unwilling to solve them, then we need some sort of alternative solution. We cannot be held hostage by the bureaucracy because of some signalling issue. It is all well and good to suggest that the problems are minor but the impression I am getting is that the O-Train will shut down again if there is any problem on any portion of the line. This has been acceptable to date because of the relatively small number of riders who are mostly university students, but this will be different if we expect commuters paying full fare to have to put up with this. The O-Train has had many shutdowns since its inception and every time maintenance is needed, those shutdowns can last for months. This is Ok when working around the university year but it is not OK to impose this on workers who need to be at their place of employment every day.

We hear over and over again how much more reliable rail is but the perception of this event does not build a great deal of confidence. We need a solution so that this does not happen again. On Tuesday, while the O-Train was not operational, the buses were slow but at least they were moving.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I do not pretend to be a rail expert, however, the O-Train has been operational for several years and we seem to not be able to deal with what appears to be small problems. If the bureaucracy at the city or the police or the railways are unwilling to solve them, then we need some sort of alternative solution. We cannot be held hostage by the bureaucracy because of some signalling issue. It is all well and good to suggest that the problems are minor but the impression I am getting is that the O-Train will shut down again if there is any problem on any portion of the line. This has been acceptable to date because of the relatively small number of riders who are mostly university students, but this will be different if we expect commuters paying full fare to have to put up with this. The O-Train has had many shutdowns since its inception and every time maintenance is needed, those shutdowns can last for months. This is Ok when working around the university year but it is not OK to impose this on workers who need to be at their place of employment every day.

We hear over and over again how much more reliable rail is but the perception of this event does not build a great deal of confidence. We need a solution so that this does not happen again. On Tuesday, while the O-Train was not operational, the buses were slow but at least they were moving.

Maintenance would need to be done frequently on a mainline corridor, section by section. Minor maintenance would be at night, while major projects would have to be done on weekends (by single-tracking or replacing sections with buses). Such is not feasible on weekdays though.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by Dado

That issue relates to the two diamonds. Currently they are automated based on the relay circuits at the diamonds themselves. Basically, at the VIA crossing, whoever gets there first gets to go across the diamond first. At the Walkley diamond the freights have to wait until a northbound O-Train has cleared the diamond, with the idea being that the freight will have cleared the diamond by the time the southbound O-Train arrives.

The automation can be manually overridden from the control centre in Montreal to change who gets the clear signal and who gets the stop signal. That would allow for a freight to go through when it normally couldn't, with the consequence of blocking the O-Train.

That's it, that's all. That issue is completely separate from whatever imagined problem it was we had on Tuesday.

There was no signalling-related issue that would have prevented a partial Greenboro-Carleton or Greenboro-Carling service from operating. No intervention from Montreal was required.



Yes, go ahead, blame the physical system and its initial design for what is in actuality a management problem. That problem could probably be solved by a management purge.

Shutting things down is the bureaucratically "safe" thing to do. Trying to figure out a workaround requires some creativity and taking a bureaucratic risk. It's not bureaucratically "safe", regardless of how physically safe it is.



From the foregoing, it's pretty clear you have not the faintest idea what you're writing about. Of the two diamonds, the Ellwood (Confederation/VIA) diamond is the least problematic for the simple reason that relatively short VIA trains don't take very long to clear the diamond. Under the present circumstances of CN pretty much dismantling the rail network west of Walkley Yard there's not a lot of freight traffic going across the Walkley diamond, but from an operational perspective dealing with long, slow-moving freight trains crossing your track is far and away more problematic than dealing with short, fast-moving passenger trains. Indeed, that very problem goes a long way to explaining why the Beachburg Sub has a number of road overpasses along it whereas the Smiths Falls Sub used mainly by VIA has virtually none at all (only Hunt Club and Hwy 416).

Had OCR not been taken over by CN, it would still be operating out to Pembroke (in CN's bizarre world, profitable isn't always profitable enough). With the CPR abandonment, OCR would probably have taken control of the CP track beyond Pembroke, and with it the possibility of extra freight trains coming through. That might actually have caused a problem at Walkley diamond where grade-separation might have had to be considered. That was the only diamond worth worrying about, and we're basically past that now.

Even with the frequency doubling later this year, the Ellwood diamond will still function without recourse to grade separation. But on the outside chance that we were to grade separate it, the sensible thing to do would be to convert the Southeast Transitway to rail (even if to run just O-Trains) and then convert the current O-Train trackage between the VIA line and Walkley to a bike path. The idiotic 2005-era plan concocted by busway engineers to build two massive overpasses was just that: idiotic.

Here's my ultimate idea for the central north-south spine. It requires one new corridor and a short abandonment. The second map is the Heron Road area zoomed in.





The yellow line is the O-Train (with a couple infill stations, nothing stopping extensions to Gatineau and the airport or Riverside South but they are beyond the thought here). Not much change, it stays on its current corridor. Double-tracking or grade separations may be warranted ultimately.

The orange line is the east-west BRT corridor via Heron/Baseline (likely with on-street bus lanes initially pending the Baseline Road transit corridor study), entering near Data Centre Road. I decided to use the Southeast Transitway (basically as is, with a relocation of the Billings Bridge bus station to improve access to Bank Street) as part of the secondary rapid transit corridor rather than waste it as a shuttle or tear it down. The line ends at Prince of Wales but it really continues onward to Bayshore or Bells Corners/Kanata.

The green line is my idea for the Bank Street subway to downtown (it ties directly into the Rideau/Montreal Road subway idea). Despite being called a subway, it would likely use light rail vehicles. Since I find that ridership from the southeast is low between Pleasant Park and Lycee Claudel, it becomes the primary route to downtown with improved access to Lansdowne and Bank Street. It would run beneath Bank Street as far as Billings Bridge, then hook slightly through Heron Park just to the west, meeting the current Southeast Transitway at Walkley Road (which would need some depressing to accommodate the tunnel portal). After that, it becomes a surface line to South Keys along the current Southeast Transitway, with extensions to the airport or Riverside South possible.

The red line is the section of the Southeast Transitway (no stations) that gets abandoned and converted to greenspace.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

Here's my ultimate idea for the central north-south spine. It requires one new corridor and a short abandonment. The second map is the Heron Road area zoomed in.





The yellow line is the O-Train (with a couple infill stations, nothing stopping extensions to Gatineau and the airport or Riverside South but they are beyond the thought here). Not much change, it stays on its current corridor. Double-tracking or grade separations may be warranted ultimately.

The orange line is the east-west BRT corridor via Heron/Baseline (likely with on-street bus lanes initially pending the Baseline Road transit corridor study), entering near Data Centre Road. I decided to use the Southeast Transitway (basically as is, with a relocation of the Billings Bridge bus station to improve access to Bank Street) as part of the secondary rapid transit corridor rather than waste it as a shuttle or tear it down. The line ends at Prince of Wales but it really continues onward to Bayshore or Bells Corners/Kanata.

The green line is my idea for the Bank Street subway to downtown (it ties directly into the Rideau/Montreal Road subway idea). Despite being called a subway, it would likely use light rail vehicles. Since I find that ridership from the southeast is low between Pleasant Park and Lycee Claudel, it becomes the primary route to downtown with improved access to Lansdowne and Bank Street. It would run beneath Bank Street as far as Billings Bridge, then hook slightly through Heron Park just to the west, meeting the current Southeast Transitway at Walkley Road (which would need some depressing to accommodate the tunnel portal). After that, it becomes a surface line to South Keys along the current Southeast Transitway, with extensions to the airport or Riverside South possible.

The red line is the section of the Southeast Transitway (no stations) that gets abandoned and converted to greenspace.

I approve! LRT vehicules in the subway would work great since they can handle steep hills and sharper turns than full heavy rail systems. As long as it is fully grade seperated, it would work just fine. The possibility of extending the Bank subway to the airport is also a nice touch, making an O-Train extension to Gatineau and the Southern suburbs (without an extra spur line or essential direct to downtown connection (though still desirable)) easier.

The extra two O-Train stations realy should be built with the doubling of service; talk about another one of the city's obvious oversights.

[eemy]

I like the idea of having the SE Transitway extend as the Baseline BRT and abandoning the SE Transitway south of Heron entirely, replacing service there with the O-Train. One possibility for a Bank Street subway would be to have it divert from Bank at Lansdowne Park, turning east and continuing along the seemingly forgotten Alta Vista transportation corridor.

[Dado]

Taking passengers from the south end directly into downtown rather than via either Bayview (O-Train) or Hurdman (SE Twy & Confed Line) definitely has some appeal since it also frees up the SE Twy for use as part of an east-west corridor. Further extend the Bank line north to Hull and you've got a very useful line.


One issue this city has to decide on at some point is how the airport is going to be served with rapid transit. As a spur off the line to Riverside South? As its own dedicated line?


My preference/idea would be to build a train station at the foot of the escarpment just west of Bronson in the vicinity of the tunnel portal. The O-Train trackage would then be extended to this station (through the Phoenix property next to the City Centre...), along with connecting track from the Prince of Wales Bridge (this would also nullify the need for Bayview Station, or provide a rationale to move it east to Preston, and move LeBreton east to the new train station). The O-Train or any electrified successor would then run between this station and the Airport. The station could also be used in the future for longer distance commuter services (including Barrhaven and Kanata) and for HSR.

Unfortunately the time to decide on that configuration is fast running out.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by Dado

Taking passengers from the south end directly into downtown rather than via either Bayview (O-Train) or Hurdman (SE Twy & Confed Line) definitely has some appeal since it also frees up the SE Twy for use as part of an east-west corridor. Further extend the Bank line north to Hull and you've got a very useful line.


One issue this city has to decide on at some point is how the airport is going to be served with rapid transit. As a spur off the line to Riverside South? As its own dedicated line?


My preference/idea would be to build a train station at the foot of the escarpment just west of Bronson in the vicinity of the tunnel portal. The O-Train trackage would then be extended to this station (through the Phoenix property next to the City Centre...), along with connecting track from the Prince of Wales Bridge (this would also nullify the need for Bayview Station, or provide a rationale to move it east to Preston, and move LeBreton east to the new train station). The O-Train or any electrified successor would then run between this station and the Airport. The station could also be used in the future for longer distance commuter services (including Barrhaven and Kanata) and for HSR.

Unfortunately the time to decide on that configuration is fast running out.

It would be difficult to extend the Bank Street line to Gatineau due to the elevation change and steep drop to get under the Ottawa River, plus running it directly under Parliament Hill could be a security issue as well. I tried to turn the line carefully to keep it from being under the Parliament grounds downtown.

[Aylmer]

The steep escarpment north of Bank st. could be an interesting opportunity though - If you can't go under, go over! I don't know of any examples of this, but the tunnel could open straight onto a bridge over the river and on to Hull. I have no idea how feasible it would be, but the NCC can't do anything about dreaming, now can they!



However, I'm not that sympathetic to the idea of a Bank st. subway. Though Bank is arguably the spine of Ottawa, I don't think that the cost or the use would warrant it. A lot of the traffic on Bank goes through it (to south of Billings), not to Centretown or the Glebe, so a subway would most probably be used in the same way. This would be fine, but there are much cheaper solutions. As I've said before, I think that a Canal-Carling Tramway would give transit access to the Glebe (and, more importantly, Lansdowne), all the while solving the double-transfer problem for a Carling line (Carling - OTrain - Confederation) and requiring very little new infrastructure and being a very scenic ride (for what it's worth).

Much of the traffic which currently uses Bank could be diverted onto a SE LRT line along the current 97 Transitway. An idea that I think remains unexplored is to use the former Rail bed that runs parallel to Bank from Walkley to Heron. It would have a much larger catchment than the current O-Train route.

[Dado]

Like Aylmer suggests, I wouldn't take it under the river but over it. Take it right out of the side of the cliff (there's a parking lot down there) and across on a bridge. I'm sure the NCC would have a fit but with a pedestrian pathway on the east side it would provide for stunning views of Parliament

Any number of routes are possible on the Gatineau side, depending on where else it goes.

If it goes up Maisonneuve, then the line can access that via the Portage-Laurier intersection, or via Courcelette.

If it heads to the Rapibus corridor or Aylmer it can follow the old rail line parallel to Laurier.

[Capital Shaun]

Any transit idea that has to involve the NCC is probably dead from the start in our current political environment.

Running the Bank St subway north through the Parliament district to Hull and/or running LRT/trams along NCC parkways will never fly under the current NCC leadership.

It would probably take a federal government, which wants transit improved in Ottawa, to start interfering with the NCC for any of this to change.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

The steep escarpment north of Bank st. could be an interesting opportunity though - If you can't go under, go over! I don't know of any examples of this, but the tunnel could open straight onto a bridge over the river and on to Hull. I have no idea how feasible it would be, but the NCC can't do anything about dreaming, now can they!



However, I'm not that sympathetic to the idea of a Bank st. subway. Though Bank is arguably the spine of Ottawa, I don't think that the cost or the use would warrant it. A lot of the traffic on Bank goes through it (to south of Billings), not to Centretown or the Glebe, so a subway would most probably be used in the same way. This would be fine, but there are much cheaper solutions. As I've said before, I think that a Canal-Carling Tramway would give transit access to the Glebe (and, more importantly, Lansdowne), all the while solving the double-transfer problem for a Carling line (Carling - OTrain - Confederation) and requiring very little new infrastructure and being a very scenic ride (for what it's worth).

Much of the traffic which currently uses Bank could be diverted onto a SE LRT line along the current 97 Transitway. An idea that I think remains unexplored is to use the former Rail bed that runs parallel to Bank from Walkley to Heron. It would have a much larger catchment than the current O-Train route.

The rail corridor bolded is no longer intact. Housing was built near Walkley Road.

[eternallyme]

Rail would be king on a day like today...especially underground rail.

OC Transpo needs to stop running the articulated buses in major snowstorms - especially heavy, wet snow. There are about 60 buses - as of now - that have required a tow, some of which were in collisions. Although 40-foot buses are not immune, they are far less likely to get stuck.

However, pulling 359 buses from service would necessitate a significant peak period reduction. Evening service could easily be done with only 40-footers (perhaps keep the double deckers out on some regular trips on routes like the 95 as an exceptional case).

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The rail corridor bolded is no longer intact. Housing was built near Walkley Road.

Snap. Well, Bank is definitely wide enough there to support rail ROW, but alas. Still, I'm a big supporter of surface rail, just because you can do a lot more for the same price: done right, you could have a city-wide surface network for the price of a Bank st. Subway. That said, I think it's a good idea to build a trunk Downtown tunnel as they are now because it would be very hard to accommodate the volume of cars, bikes, pedestrians and trams there, but for most other areas, it isn't all that necessary.


My network idea would be to have surface trams on ROW on Carling (and continue along the Canal to Downtown), Bronson, St. Laurent; ROW along Riverside, the current O-Train stretch down to the airport, the rail corridor in Nepean and down to Barrhaven and a tram along Montreal Rd, above ground where possible (probably until it becomes Rideau). Of course, the heavyweights would be the E-W line along the current Transitway.
We could even run some O-Train-style regional trains out to Renfrew (or maybe even Pembroke and Petawawa), Carleton Place, Perth and Casselman and Buckingham, Hawkesbury and Wakefield on the Quebec side, just by building some platforms and passing tracks for peanuts.

We could cover the region in rail and make buses an optional, local leg of the trip and cars a last resort, but it would take a whole revolution in how we think about our modes of transportation, one which I think will come once we make LRT the backbone of transit in Ottawa and once City Hall really commits itself to transportation of people, not just cars. Blessed as we are with overly-wide boulevards and a relatively intact rail network, I'm convinced we could become a world-class transit city.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Snap. Well, Bank is definitely wide enough there to support rail ROW, but alas. Still, I'm a big supporter of surface rail, just because you can do a lot more for the same price: done right, you could have a city-wide surface network for the price of a Bank st. Subway. That said, I think it's a good idea to build a trunk Downtown tunnel as they are now because it would be very hard to accommodate the volume of cars, bikes, pedestrians and trams there, but for most other areas, it isn't all that necessary.


My network idea would be to have surface trams on ROW on Carling (and continue along the Canal to Downtown), Bronson, St. Laurent; ROW along Riverside, the current O-Train stretch down to the airport, the rail corridor in Nepean and down to Barrhaven and a tram along Montreal Rd, above ground where possible (probably until it becomes Rideau). Of course, the heavyweights would be the E-W line along the current Transitway.
We could even run some O-Train-style regional trains out to Renfrew (or maybe even Pembroke and Petawawa), Carleton Place, Perth and Casselman and Buckingham, Hawkesbury and Wakefield on the Quebec side, just by building some platforms and passing tracks for peanuts.

We could cover the region in rail and make buses an optional, local leg of the trip and cars a last resort, but it would take a whole revolution in how we think about our modes of transportation, one which I think will come once we make LRT the backbone of transit in Ottawa and once City Hall really commits itself to transportation of people, not just cars. Blessed as we are with overly-wide boulevards and a relatively intact rail network, I'm convinced we could become a world-class transit city.

Surface trams provide little advantage over buses, still in mixed or semi-mixed traffic, and cost a great deal of money that would be better spent on bus lanes. I'm not a fan of them for that reason.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

Surface trams provide little advantage over buses, still in mixed or semi-mixed traffic, and cost a great deal of money that would be better spent on bus lanes. I'm not a fan of them for that reason.

Sorry- In my mind, trams are trams in the European sense of LRT, but LRT has come to mean almost a light metro here in North America. So whereas streetcars are street-running trains with stops, trams are completely (or almost completely) ROW (but not grade-separated) with stations. See Montpellier's system.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

Surface trams provide little advantage over buses, still in mixed or semi-mixed traffic, and cost a great deal of money that would be better spent on bus lanes. I'm not a fan of them for that reason.

Except a much smoother ride, and quieter, and less vibratey, and more comfortable, and no tailpipe, and an inducement for the city and developers to plan around a permanentlyl fixed transit route rather than "flexible" bus service that ends up trying to be all things to all people and spaghetti-stringing all over creation.

[Kitchissippi]

My thought for a Carling-Downtown streetcar line would go something like this, a dedicated surface row along one side of Carling, then along the QE Driveway, and then into a one-way loop into downtown (Catherine-Kent-Queen-O'Connor-Isabella). It could have a short tunnelled section at the messy Kirkwood/Queensway interchange, allowing it to switch to the north side of Carling as it continues west. It would link five large shopping centres (if you count Lansdowne as one) and a couple of hospitals. OC Transpo could even test this out with a bus route (maybe modify the 85).



The purple line is part of my thought for an eastern counterpart streetcar travelling along Laurier-MacArthur (with a new transit/ped/bike bridge across the Rideau) towards La Cité Collegiale and the Rockcliffe Base.

Something like Alstom's Citadis Compact would be good for this