Confederation Line (Stage 1) | In Service 1.0

[Kitchissippi]

The Confederation Line is really a quasi-urban system, it still basically caters to the suburban demography. The best thing in it for the inner city is that it will clean out the bus crap out of downtown to make it more liveable. Hopefully this will open the way in the future for a real urban-focused strategy that actually serves inner city neighbourhoods.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by JM1

Can someone explain why Ottawa went with low floor trams? If we have full grade separation and the platforms are being rebuilt anyway, wouldn't it have been better just to go with regular trains? I would understand if we planned on running street or surface LRT, but it doesn't sound like that is in the works.

It's because when the city did all the studying and planning that went into the Confederation Line, back in 2008/2009ish, the plan was to a bunch of trams in the suburbs all interlining as a metro in the trunk from Lincoln Fields to Blair. The tech we have now is just a holdover from that earlier vision.

One thing that using tram vehicles lets us do is it keeps open the option of at-grade extensions in the future.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

The Confederation Line is really a quasi-urban system, it still basically caters to the suburban demography. The best thing in it for the inner city is that it will clean out the bus crap out of downtown to make it more liveable. Hopefully this will open the way in the future for a real urban-focused strategy that actually serves inner city neighbourhoods.

Yes, the entire LRT plan, both phases 1 & 2, is catered for the suburbs but it will nonetheless be quite a useful piece of infrastructure for inner city residents too. My work & my soon-to-be-home are both within the pre-war city and yet my commute will be entirely by rail come 2018 assuming I have the same commute then.

[JM1]

Thanks for this answer. I guess if the low floors are not more expensive and the operating/maintenance costs are the same, it doesn't matter much to me whether we use low floor or high floor (although high floors feels roomier without the bogie protrusions).

Regarding the advantages of low floor, I see the argument about the suburbs, burt for me, the key advantage of these trams is wasted in a tunnel or on a segregated ROW. In Europe, low floor trams allow you to step out, go to a shop, pick something up, and step right back onto another tram, all without parking a car, getting into or out of the car, etc.... They invite you to visit the high street without a car. If properly situated, they facilitate life over private vehicles. It is far easier to board a low-floor tram with a dog, a stroller, a bicycle, or a wheelchair than it is to get into a car with one of the above. Of course, much of this advantage is lost if the low floor tram is operated in a tunnel or on a segregated ROW where one must navigate elevators, tunnels, platforms, etc. between the shops and the tram. Then the advantage over private vehicles is lost.

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

It's because when the city did all the studying and planning that went into the Confederation Line, back in 2008/2009ish, the plan was to a bunch of trams in the suburbs all interlining as a metro in the trunk from Lincoln Fields to Blair. The tech we have now is just a holdover from that earlier vision.

One thing that using tram vehicles lets us do is it keeps open the option of at-grade extensions in the future.

[Kitchissippi]

The sad thing about the low-floor trains in our case is that it usually makes it tempting (and feasible) to cross the tracks, which is why most of the stations have ugly barriers designed in to prevent people from doing so. I think this makes the stations feel more cramped, and it's unfortunate that the underground stations are not centre platform as was proposed in the pre-bidding renderings. I'm also disappointed that Hurdman and Bayview aren't centre platform as I think they work better as exchange stations.

[MalcolmTucker]

Until there is interlining, there will be no reason to switch platforms at track level, so beyond phase 2 no? Or is the split to Algonquin in phase 2?

[Aylmer]

It's also worth pointing out that low-floor trams means lower-ceiling tunnels which means lower-cost as well.

I would have thought that they would take advantage of the tech's surface-running ability in the suburbs, but Phase 2 has made me doubt that. Now I figure that if surface LRT were ever to come about, it would be on its own lines (Carling, St.Laurent, etc.) as opposed to interlining in the Confederation line.

Originally Posted by JM1

Imagine Bank (billings Bridge to Wellington), or Richmod/Wellington (Bayview to Churchill) or Montreal Road (from Sussex to St Laurent) as pedestrianized tram and bicycle streets. Can't imagine it? Neither could the Europeans in the 1970's.

I would absolutely love that. At the very least, if they were to tunnel under these streets, a much larger portion of the road should be dedicated to pedestrians (think two 9-foot, curbless lanes).

[1overcosc]

Lincoln Fields better have a good platform design for transferring.

[eemy]

Even if they only used surface operations on a hypothetical Carling/Rideau route, at least they would benefit from being able to use a common vehicle between the lines.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Lincoln Fields better have a good platform design for transferring.

Will there be transferring? I thought the frequency would just be split between Bayshore and Baseline.

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

It's also worth pointing out that low-floor trams means lower-ceiling tunnels which means lower-cost as well.

Doesn't the overhead wire negate that though? Looking at the photos of the excavated tunnel, the ceiling doesn't seem any lower than any metro I've seen. The road headers are definitely more efficient than a TBM, as the bottom of the tunnel is already flat

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

It's interesting how the city will react if federal funding comes up short. The Orleans extension is the least needed/useful of Phase 2, but it's also the most politically precious one. At an absolute minimum, though, Tunneys-Lincoln Fields has to be built. If push comes to shove the city could finance that one all on its own (it would cost ~$750M or so--the whole way to Baseline at ~980M).

Orleans is also probably the easiest to build - city owns the 174 ROW, no debate with the NCC, no disagreement on where the route should go, plus it provides a political incentive for both the federal Tories and provincial Liberals to pony up (each winning Orleans by a smallish margin). It allows Wynne to put up the mission accomplished banner on her promise to fund the "next phase" of Ottawa LRT from the massively oversubscribed 1.4B/y non-GTA transportation fund.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

Doesn't the overhead wire negate that though? Looking at the photos of the excavated tunnel, the ceiling doesn't seem any lower than any metro I've seen. The road headers are definitely more efficient than a TBM, as the bottom of the tunnel is already flat

An overhead wire would still be there with a high level train though, but there is likely to be more stuff mounted on the roof of a low floor train that they couldn't fit elsewhere, such as the A/C units so you're right that there isn't likely to be much difference.

[Norman Bates]

Where is the excelsior going?

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Orleans is also probably the easiest to build - city owns the 174 ROW, no debate with the NCC, no disagreement on where the route should go, plus it provides a political incentive for both the federal Tories and provincial Liberals to pony up (each winning Orleans by a smallish margin). It allows Wynne to put up the mission accomplished banner on her promise to fund the "next phase" of Ottawa LRT from the massively oversubscribed 1.4B/y non-GTA transportation fund.

Massively oversubscribed? There's not much committed from it. Aside from Ottawa's LRT, there's some money for an HSR to London--which won't cost much as the bulk of the capital costs are already committed as part of other projects--parts of the GO RER promise (the confirmed service to Kitchener, the likely service to Niagara, the maybe service to Barrie), a few hundred million to expand Kitchener's LRT, a billion or two to speed up northern highway work... and that's about it.

Now that's not to say the $29B commitment is a magical pill that funds everything. The $15B GTA fund is massively overcommitted. GO RER is sucking up almost everything, and when the DRL is thrown in there's not much for anything else. Wynne is dreaming when she says she can pay for RER, DRL, the Mississauga LRT, Durham BRT, the Hamilton LRT, and the Yonge subway to Steeles with $15B.

It's somewhat ironic that a fund whose raison d'etre is to solve the GTA's gridlock hell ends up with the GTA's needs only partially met and the government having to invent things to spend the non-GTHA fund on (like an HSR to London that no one asked for). But I digress.

The Orleans extension is easy, both technically and politically. Not only that but now that its been promised, it's politically impossible to remove. Orleans is a swing seat, for decades whoever wins it has done by a slim margin. Even in the last federal election when the Conservatives won huge in Ontario and the Liberals flopped to their third place ruin, Galipeau's lead over the Liberal challenger wasn't very big. But in this provincial election, Wynne becomes the LRT candidate, and... poof. She wins Ottawa-Orleans by a massive 10,000 vote margin bigger than the margin by which the PCs won the bulk of their rural strongholds.

But it's definitely least beneficial or useful of the three extension projects.

From the perspective of Orleans residents, LRT won't actually do much. It will only be marginally faster than the BRT link to Blair. And Blair is far enough east that it would make a decent transfer point for Orleans locals. In other words, transferring to/from your local bus at Place D'Orleans instead of Blair, while definitely nice, won't be that much of an improvement other than maybe a minute or two of saved travel time. Phase 1 provides a good deal already to Orleans given how quick it is to get to Blair.

Now, on the other side of the city, having all that funnel into Tunneys is just not fun. Bringing it to Lincoln Fields is a must, Baseline & Bayshore is a plus. When that's done, it will bring the west to roughly the same level that the east already has with Phase 1.

In the south, the O-Train extension to Leitrim & Bowesville is dirt cheap (much cheaper than even the Orleans extension), and it brings a great deal of service improvement to an area of the city that arguably has both the worst transit and least road capacity.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Will there be transferring? I thought the frequency would just be split between Bayshore and Baseline.

Not for most as yes the line is evenly split between the two spurs. But to go from one spur to the other--for example to get from Baseline to Bayshore--you have to get off in Lincoln Fields and switch. For now, there's going to be a BRT link between the two nodes so there's not going to be many people doing that switch, but in the future when LRT is extended outwards from Bayshore & Baseline towards Kanata & Barrhaven that transfer is going to become more common.

[S-Man]

It's interesting how the city will react if federal funding comes up short. The Orleans extension is the least needed/useful of Phase 2, but it's also the most politically precious one. At an absolute minimum, though, Tunneys-Lincoln Fields has to be built. If push comes to shove the city could finance that one all on its own (it would cost ~$750M or so--the whole way to Baseline at ~980M).

This thought crossed my mind, too - ie, what if funding happens in chunks? There will be a federal surplus to play with in the coming year, and votes to secure, so I consider the funding a likely thing.

In the event of a series of funding chunks, obviously the Baseline link needs to be done first and foremost. It's a big, busy hub, with a completely finished underground station.

Orleans loves its persecution complex, which is why it bleated for LRT to go there as well (I recall some ridiculous ridership numbers tossed around last year to back up the claim that Orleans is uber transit-friendly). Frankly, it is the least important at this point (though easy to pull off compared to the other lines).

[S-Man]

Oh, I'd also like to add....

HIGH SPEED RAIL TO LONDON??!!

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Massively oversubscribed? There's not much committed from it. Aside from Ottawa's LRT, there's some money for an HSR to London--which won't cost much as the bulk of the capital costs are already committed as part of other projects--parts of the GO RER promise (the confirmed service to Kitchener, the likely service to Niagara, the maybe service to Barrie), a few hundred million to expand Kitchener's LRT, a billion or two to speed up northern highway work... and that's about it.

You're only counting Metrolinx projects, the budget says "The Province would create two dedicated funds – one for the GTHA with up to $15 billion available for investment in transit and one for the rest of the province with nearly $14 billion available for investment in roads, bridges, transit and other critical infrastructure." [bold is mine]

and

"Priority projects outside the GTHA could include local and regional transit, roads and bridges, infrastructure development in the Ring of Fire, funding for bus and rail infrastructure delivered by the Ontario Northland Transportation Commission, strategic highway improvements and other projects to be identified through the Building Canada Plan negotiations with the federal government."

http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/budget/ontariobudgets/2014/bk2.html

So Ottawa phase 2 is getting in line, particularly if the "high speed rail" actually means high speed rail.

[Mikeed]

Originally Posted by S-Man

Oh, I'd also like to add....

HIGH SPEED RAIL TO LONDON??!!

The key to that HSR project is that it connects the tech. hub of Kitchener-Waterloo to the global gateway that is the GTA- making it much more attractive for Ontario to court Google/FB to build campuses in Waterloo if it's only 60 mins from Pearson.

Developing that tech. hub is very important to the success of the Ontario econ. going forward.

More or less.

But there's still a lot of questions about this project.

"We will likely amalgamate the Union-Pearson Express into the high-speed system because it would be a duplication otherwise, which is one of the other reasons it is less expensive," said Murray.

"It will probably generate, over the next 10 to 15 years, over $2 billion. So we expect the net cost over the next 10 to 15 years would be about $500 million — at least, that's what the experts say," he said.

That seems to suggest they're thinking it will cost 2.5 billion.