Ottawa Rapid Transit Network developments

[Capital Shaun]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

2. There were never streetcars on Montreal Road.

I've been commuting (bus/bicycle) along that stretch of Montreal road for a decade. In many spots in Vanier it's barely wide enough for cars to be side by side. There's no room to segregate a tram there. And if it is in mixed traffic it'll be just as slow as the 12.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

1. Why?

2. There were never streetcars on Montreal Road.

1. There is absolutely no point in spending billions on rebuilding the limited capacity transit system of ore, one that provides limited capacity. The only real advantage of streetcars is cheap, clean electric power; any operational savings would be grossly outset by the cost of capital infrastructure.

2. As mentioned before, Montreal Road isn't all that wide and so the trains would have to run with traffic or cause major traffic jams by handing over its own lanes. Creating bus lanes would likely provide the same capacity for nothing but the cost of painting diamonds on the road. Either way, bad idea.

And although streetcars never ran on Montreal, you have to get them downtown. Rideau, now one of the busiest, densest and continually growing part of the city, had streetcars. Re-instating them would cause nothing but clutter and more traffic jams. If we invest capital infrastructure for Rideau, it has to be a subway. If we don't have the money, the best we can do for now is eliminate the STO traffic and bury the truck traffic.

Here is an old streetcar map; another point of argument is if we build one streetcar line, more will come which will eventually mean "re-instating" large parts of the old system. We should take a page from Montréal and upgrade our system, not go back in time.

[Buggys]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

1. There is absolutely no point in spending billions on rebuilding the limited capacity transit system of ore, one that provides limited capacity. The only real advantage of streetcars is cheap, clean electric power; any operational savings would be grossly outset by the cost of capital infrastructure.

2. As mentioned before, Montreal Road isn't all that wide and so the trains would have to run with traffic or cause major traffic jams by handing over its own lanes. Creating bus lanes would likely provide the same capacity for nothing but the cost of painting diamonds on the road. Either way, bad idea.

And although streetcars never ran on Montreal, you have to get them downtown. Rideau, now one of the busiest, densest and continually growing part of the city, had streetcars. Re-instating them would cause nothing but clutter and more traffic jams. If we invest capital infrastructure for Rideau, it has to be a subway. If we don't have the money, the best we can do for now is eliminate the STO traffic and bury the truck traffic.

Here is an old streetcar map; another point of argument is if we build one streetcar line, more will come which will eventually mean "re-instating" large parts of the old system. We should take a page from Montréal and upgrade our system, not go back in time.

Why was this old streetcar system removed in the first place?

[eternallyme]

Interesting that the streetcar and bus map still has some recognizable bus routes:

Britannia Streetcar - today's 16
Somerset Streetcar - today's 2
Bank Streetcar - today's 1 and 7
St. Patrick Streetcar - today's 1 (eastern part)
Rockcliffe Streetcar - today's 9
Preston Streetcar - today's 85
Elgin Bus - today's 5
Carling Bus - today's 6
Templeton Bus - today's 16 (eastern part)

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Buggys

Why was this old streetcar system removed in the first place?

Gréber, NCC. During the mid century, nearly all cities in North America were taking out their streetcar systems to do away with clutter and allowing more space for cars. While some cities replaced the streetcars with higher grade transit (Montreal), others did not. In Toronto, they opted to replace the lines running at overcapacity (Yonge) with underground transit while keeping the other, adequate lines.

[Buggys]

Ah, they removed high capacity transit from surface routes where people desired public transit, so that car traffic can travel more smoothly. Instead of making plans back then, to eventually put such high-traffic routes underground, we are stuck with slower buses that get jammed with car traffic during rush hour. Blah! ...I hope we don't repeat these mistakes when the 2013 TMP comes out for consultation!

[lrt's friend]

It wasn't that simple actually. There was excellent article written on the demise of Ottawa's streetcars. There were many reasons why they went. One being the Greber Plan but hardly the only one.

The issue of traffic flow was an important one but it worked both ways. Not only was car traffic being blocked by streetcars but also streetcars being blocked by cars. It was felt that buses would enable better traffic flow in general and that would benefit transit as much as cars. I believe that there was validity to this argument. The inflexibility of streetcars in dense neighbourhoods was becoming a big problem. A single car accident could shut down a large portion of the transit network or even a fire in a neighbouring building on a streetcar line. On-street streetcars were a design of the horse and buggy era.

And we have to also understand that there has been major technology improvements since the days of Ottawa's streetcars. 1950s buses were considered an improvement over 1920s streetcars from a noise perspective. Old streetcars were very noisy and this was noted in the article. I didn't realize that until I rode the heritage streetcars in San Francisco. Modern streetcars or LRT are much quieter but still can be noisy when turning.

Then there was the cost of the infrastructure and the need for renewal. Ottawa's streetcar system was warn out from overuse and lack of reinvestment during the war years. They couldn't reinvest at that time because of shortages and large profits by the private OER were taxed heavily for the war effort. After the war, pressure existed to hold fares down, which made renewal impossible and eventually resulted in the system being bought out by the city. This basically ended any renewal of the streetcar system. An order for new streetcars was never filled and then the Greber Plan kicked in. Like so many things owned by the city that have not been properly maintained (Lansdowne, etc., etc.), the warn out streetcar system continued to wear out even more, which affected reliability.

Then the city in its wisdom sold the streetcar's power plant at Chaudière and with it the system lost its cheap source of electricity.

On top of that the OER did not invest in the much improved PCC streetcars that became available in the late 1930s and in a way, that was another death knell on our streetcars. With only earlier technology in use, there was a best before date for our streetcars and that was the 1950s. But by the 1950s, the North American streetcar industry was dead. Toronto was only able to keep their system operating by buying up PCC streetcars from other cities. The fact that the streetcar industry was dead made maintaining existing streetcars much more expensive. Replacement parts had to be custom made.

With declining ridership after the war, and declining revenue, and increasing costs of operations because of electricity costs and parts costs, and the need for expensive renewal of the rail and electrical infrastructure, the streetcar system was doomed to closure. We can look at this through rose coloured glasses but nothing could have saved it.

[J.OT13]

I didn't know how deep seeded that was. I still think they should have replaced the busier routes with subways though. It's one thing taking out the streetcars for maintenance and flexibility issues, it's another to not replace it with a logical upgrade.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I didn't know how deep seeded that was. I still think they should have replaced the busier routes with subways though. It's one thing taking out the streetcars for maintenance and flexibility issues, it's another to not replace it with a logical upgrade.

Subways were not the next logical upgrade, given the financial limitations of the city at the time. We have to remember that at the time of the streetcar shutdown in 1959, Ottawa's population was perhaps 1/3 of what it is today. Toronto was still comparatively speaking a much larger city and the Yonge Street subway was the dividend from massive war profits. You see, the TTC got to keep their war profits because the TTC was municipally owned. The OER was private and was heavily taxed. Not fair perhaps, but we can't cry over spilt milk. Regardless, the size of Ottawa in 1958-59 did not warrant conversion to subways.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

1. There is absolutely no point in spending billions on rebuilding the limited capacity transit system of ore, one that provides limited capacity. The only real advantage of streetcars is cheap, clean electric power

1. Limited capacity? Huh?

2. Smoother ride, greater incentive for changes in surround land usage, prevents constant changes to the routing at the whim of whoever's in charge of planning in any given month.

2. As mentioned before, Montreal Road isn't all that wide and so the trains would have to run with traffic or cause major traffic jams by handing over its own lanes. Creating bus lanes would likely provide the same capacity for nothing but the cost of painting diamonds on the road. Either way, bad idea.

So, if not LRT (and I am NOT arguing for surface trams, at least not west of St-Laurent, BTW), and if not bus priority... what? Magic carpets? "Nothing" is not an option.

And although streetcars never ran on Montreal, you have to get them downtown. Rideau, now one of the busiest, densest and continually growing part of the city, had streetcars. Re-instating them would cause nothing but clutter and more traffic jams.

Traffic jams? Good.

Clutter? Huh?

If we invest capital infrastructure for Rideau, it has to be a subway.

Agree.

[quote]If we don't have the money, the best we can do for now is eliminate the STO traffic and bury the truck traffic./quote]

STO traffic is not the problem on the Rideau-Montreal corridor.

an old streetcar map; another point of argument is if we build one streetcar line, more will come which will eventually mean "re-instating" large parts of the old system. We should take a page from Montréal and upgrade our system, not go back in time.

I do not understand your "back in time" fixation. I do not.

[kevinbottawa]

NCC, city not on same track over western LRT

By Chris Hofley, Ottawa Sun

First posted: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 02:46 PM EST | Updated: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 02:56 PM EST

The City of Ottawa on Wednesday presented its response the NCC's concerns about the western LRT line.

But it wasn't enough for the NCC, who reiterated its issues with having light rail crossing federal land and infringing on the view across the parkway, while at the same time blasting the city for what it sees as a lack of communication.

After the NCC rejected the city's preferred plan of running the LRT line along the Sir John A. Macdonald Parkway, the city moved the Richmond underground option to the front of the line. That option would still require some federal land use along 1.2 km of what was the CP Rail line. The NCC asked the city to look into the idea of having the light rail trains go underground for that entire stretch.

At Wednesday's meeting, the city pointed out the environmental assessment on the tunnel was still ongoing, but noted it had made some changes to the plan to address with the NCC's concerns, such moving the Cleary station slightly to ensure it didn't infringe on the view from a nearby condo. Other changes, like better areas to cross the Parkway, have also been made, said Deputy City Manager Nancy Schepers.

The city also spoke of combining the construction of the western LRT with the LRT extension to Bayshore to "remove the need for continued bus lanes in the corridor along with the future LRT track and therefore reduce the physical footprint of transportation facilities through the corridor."

While that was seen as a good idea, NCC board members wondered aloud if that was something of a diversion to draw attention away from their more pressing concerns along the Parkway.

"Your presentation today takes the focus off what we discussed in June," said Kay Stanley.

Stanley said the board had asked the city for "very specific" information on how much it would cost to put the rail section between the Dominion and Cleary stations underground, as well as supporting studies.

"We don't seem to have that today," she said.

Richard Jennings accused the city of "not being 100% forthright" when it came to the exchange of information between both groups.

Schepers, for her part, said the city was going above and beyond what's required of this type of environmental assessment and that it would take time. When the assessment is filed -- sometime in early 2015 -- that will be the time to take a decision on the corridor.

"(This is) the logical time to be in front of you," she said.

[email protected]

Twitter: @chrishofley

http://www.ottawasun.com/2014/01/22/ncc-city-not-on-same-track-over-western-lrt

[rocketphish]

NCC board grumpy over city’s failure to provide LRT answers

By Don Butler, OTTAWA CITIZEN January 22, 2014 8:00 PM

OTTAWA — Members of the National Capital Commission’s board vented their frustration Wednesday over the City of Ottawa’s failure to provide more information about how it plans to meet NCC conditions for approval of a key section of the western leg of the light rail line.

After a presentation by deputy city manager Nancy Schepers, board members took turns criticizing the city, accusing it of being reluctant to share information with NCC staff. One board member even suggested that Schepers was using “bait-and-switch tactics.”

The flashpoint is a 1.2-kilometre section of the proposed $980-million Richmond Underground line that would cross NCC land along the Sir John A. Macdonald Parkway near Rochester Field.

The city wants to run the line through a trench, only 700 metres of which would be partly covered. But the NCC board declared in June that it would not approve the line unless it allows unimpeded access to the Ottawa River shoreline and has a “minimal visual impact” on the parkway corridor landscape.

At the same time, the board asked the city to present a detailed proposal for placing the entire 1.2-kilometre portion between Dominion and Cleary stations underground.

If board members expected to hear that Wednesday, they were disappointed.

Schepers said more technical work is required before the city can evaluate the feasibility and cost of burying that section of the line.

That didn’t sit well with board member Kay Stanley.

“Six months ago we asked for very specific information with regards to what it would cost to put the section between Dominion and Cleary into a tunnel and the relevant geotechnical studies,” she said. “We don’t seem to have that today.”

Instead, Stanley complained, Schepers focused much of her presentation on changes to another part of the proposed LRT line running through federal land along Pinecrest Creek.

Schepers told the board the city’s decision to extend the western LRT to Bayshore allowed it to shift the Lincoln Fields station to a new location south of Carling Avenue and drop plans to run both buses and trains through the Pinecrest Creek corridor.

Those changes, she said, will significantly reduce the LRT’s footprint in NCC lands.

But Stanley questioned whether Schepers wasn’t stressing the positive changes in Pinecrest Creek to shift the focus away from the contentious segment along the parkway.

“I’ve been around this city for a long time,” she said. “I’m very familiar with the tactic of bait and switch.”

Another board member, Richard Jennings, said NCC staff have only received “summaries with minimal information” of some city LRT reports.

“We have to make sure that both sides have all the information that’s available,” he said. “Otherwise, I don’t call that working together.”

Schepers replied that much of what’s being done now is technical analysis. “When appropriate, that is absolutely shared with your staff,” she said.

That didn’t please Jennings, either.

“I can’t accept that,” he said. “If I was working with a partner who was withholding things from me, I’d very quickly dissolve the partnership.”

Board member Robert Tennant, a partner in private planning consultancy FoTenn, urged the city to be as open as possible in sharing its documents and reports with NCC staff. It should also brief the board more often, perhaps quarterly, about progress, he said.

“Don’t come back some day and tell us we don’t really have the money to do what the NCC wants,” he told Schepers. “If there’s a show-stopper, somebody should be saying so now.”

NCC chair Russ Mills asked Schepers if the city still believes it can meet the NCC’s conditions within the $980-million budget. She said it could, but added: “It’s going to be a challenge and we are going to have to be resourceful.

“There may be trade-offs that we have to incorporate within the entire corridor,” she said. “Maybe we invest more in (the Dominion to Cleary) section but reduce our investment somewhere else.”

[email protected]

twitter.com/ButlerDon

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/ottawa...ilure+provide+answers/9418555/story.html

[rocketphish]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

NCC board grumpy over city’s failure to provide LRT answers

By Don Butler, OTTAWA CITIZEN January 22, 2014 8:00 PM

OTTAWA — Members of the National Capital Commission’s board vented their frustration Wednesday over the City of Ottawa’s failure to provide more information about how it plans to meet NCC conditions for approval of a key section of the western leg of the light rail line.

<snip>

"...board members took turns criticizing the city, accusing it of being reluctant to share information with NCC staff."

That's pretty rich, coming from the NCC

[Aylmer]

I think that it's great that the NCC is fighting, fighting for unimpeded access to the Ottawa River. LRT would eliminate the freedom of all Ottovians and indeed all Canadians to skip freely to the water's edge.

Oh give me a break. Until they get rid of all of their parkways (which are basically commuter roads in most cases and a full-on highway for the Ottawa River Parkway), the NCC has absolutely zero credibility.

[S-Man]

Apparently the board members' mandate is to be 'difficult', wait out the clock, and cash that well-earned pay cheque.

Who are these people, and what kind of an organization has this become? It's like a dusty monarchy from another strata of life (and reality) that exists solely to meddle in your affairs.

[m0nkyman]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Until they get rid of all of their parkways (which are basically commuter roads in most cases and a full-on highway for the Ottawa River Parkway), the NCC has absolutely zero credibility.

quoted for truth

[Capital Shaun]

Originally Posted by m0nkyman

quoted for truth

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

"...board members took turns criticizing the city, accusing it of being reluctant to share information with NCC staff."

That's pretty rich, coming from the NCC

I'm surprised the resulting irony explosion didn't obliterate much of the CBD.

[1overcosc]

Early 2015 to finish the EA? Hmm, just in time to make it a mini-federal election issue for the Ottawa area.

Wonder if that's deliberate.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Early 2015 to finish the EA? Hmm, just in time to make it a mini-federal election issue for the Ottawa area.

Wonder if that's deliberate.

The City never figured out how to deal with the NCC in such a strategic way, so I'm betting the timing is just a coincidence.