HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Business, Politics & the Economy


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #161  
Old Posted Sep 23, 2014, 6:06 PM
Dado's Avatar
Dado Dado is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1overcosc View Post
It's not like hydro is an issue ignored in provincial politics. It's one of the biggest issues in provincial elections and has been for decades now. No need for mayors to being attention to it.
Somehow I doubt that specific hydro-related issues like Ottawa Hydro's customer area and non-ability to buy from Quebec are going to be the stuff of provincial election campaigns.

To the extent that hydro features in provincial election campaigns, it's on things like pricing overall and to some extent the nature of the generation source (coal, nuclear, wind, etc). Or a swing riding specific issue like a new generation plant. It's just not going to be on the operating conditions of individual utilities.
__________________
Ottawa's quasi-official motto: "It can't be done"
Ottawa's quasi-official ethos: "We have a process to follow"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #162  
Old Posted Sep 24, 2014, 3:41 PM
JeffB JeffB is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 179
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
Somehow I doubt that specific hydro-related issues like Ottawa Hydro's customer area and non-ability to buy from Quebec are going to be the stuff of provincial election campaigns.

To the extent that hydro features in provincial election campaigns, it's on things like pricing overall and to some extent the nature of the generation source (coal, nuclear, wind, etc). Or a swing riding specific issue like a new generation plant. It's just not going to be on the operating conditions of individual utilities.
It might be an issue for the local candidates, the ones running in a riding where there it might be in question. But even if the local candidates want to push for beneficial conditions in their riding's utility, they probably won't get much traction in the Provincial Parliament.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #163  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2014, 3:31 PM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 12,377
Watson has officially brought out the R word: "Reset Button".

This campaign email was send out earlier:

Quote:
I’m writing to you because you’ve expressed your support for Ottawa’s LRT expansion. I wanted to alert you to something very troubling.

Several other candidates are proposing to press the reset button on the Stage 2 LRT expansion. Yes, again.

We can’t let that happen. We’ve come too far together to turn back the clock.

I’ve launched an urgent call-to-action for people to pledge their support FOR light rail and AGAINST the reset button:

http://www.jimwatson.ca/reset_button

Please SIGN and SHARE to show that you support moving Ottawa forwards, not backwards. One tweet or Facebook post can make a huge difference.

Thank you for your continued support.

Sincerely,

Jim
I'm starting to get why Watson is such a successful politician. That's a really smart move. The shitshow over Chiarelli's LRT and the fallout from cancelling it stirred up so much anger in this city and associating it with Maguire is a very powerful smear.

It's not a fully fair comparison, as last time around the new mayor literally cancelled a signed construction contract, whereas this time around it would just be cancelling a series of EAs, but it's still discarding work done.

Also, the way Watson simply says "some other candidates" is quite a low blow too, its basically discrediting Maguire by not recognizing him as an actual entity... just part of a blob of "other candidates". Basically pushing him into the fringe candidate category along with Sayed, Wood, etc. And to be fair his appeal is limited to a small chunk of the city but he's beyond a fringe candidate at this point.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #164  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2014, 4:11 PM
Dado's Avatar
Dado Dado is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,521
I thought it an odd tactic on Watson's part though, since it potentially opens him to all sorts of lines of attack (were his opponents capable of it, mind you):

So Jim, you support mixing buses and LRT in the same lane?

So Jim, does that mean your Phase I project is worse than the N-S LRT project?

So Jim, you think the residents of the east and west ends would be better served with continued bus service than the LRT of Phase I?


It's just really odd when you start to think through the implications of his attack against Maguire as a contributing factor to O'Brien's cancelling of the N-S LRT.
__________________
Ottawa's quasi-official motto: "It can't be done"
Ottawa's quasi-official ethos: "We have a process to follow"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #165  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2014, 7:59 PM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 12,377
So Maguire has announced his transit plan.. and its even more ridiculous than I expected.

Cancel Phase 2 of LRT in favour of peak period only commuter rail--with just 4 trips to downtown in the morning and 4 back in the evening on each route. Four lines:
-One from Riverside South to Bayview. Basically the city's Phase 2 plan. With an airport spur too.
-One from Kanata North to Bayview. Two stations in Kanata North, then nothing at all until Bayview except for an intermediate stop at Carleton.
-One from Orleans to Bayview... the most ridiculous transit route I've ever seen in my life. Insanely circutious and the Orleans stations are in the middle of nowhere.
-Barrhaven to Bayview. A reasonable route but VIA takes up a huge amount of track time.

And somehow building all that for $355M . Yep, grade separations, track, the inevitable double tracking of the O-Train corridor that would be required including a new Dows Lake Tunnel, building brand new track through swamp to Orleans. Oh, and getting Transport Canada to let talents run on active freight & intercity railway routes.

The Barrhaven & RS routes are useful. But the Orleans and Kanata ones are ridiculous. Taking the express buses to Tunney's/Blair and then LRT'ing to downtown from there would be faster for almost everybody who lives in those areas. The Kanata route would be really useful if it had actually had stations in Nepean or had reverse direction service to get people to Kanata for the morning, but alas it doesn't.

We already have express buses for downtown commuters from the suburbs. And once we replace the Albert/Slater disaster with LRT it will work very well.

And the insane part, is that Maguire admits that Watson's Phase 2 plan is way better and more efficient... he claims his plan is good only because Phase 2 is unaffordable. Did he not read all the city's financial reports which state that it is provided the province & feds pony up? And that the province has confirmed they well, the feds almost certainly will too?

This election is so frustrating. The incumbent's only credible challenger is an idiot.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #166  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2014, 10:24 PM
Uhuniau Uhuniau is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1overcosc View Post
But the Orleans and Kanata ones are ridiculous.
The Kanata one would be much less ridiculous with stops all along that rail corridor through Nepean.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #167  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2014, 10:38 PM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 12,377
^ Agreed. In fact, in my opinion, if had O-Train like station spacing, ran two way all day at 15 minute frequency, and the LRT was extended south from Baseline to meet it, it would be a really good, decently affordable rapid transit line. But that's not what Maguire wants at all... idiot.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #168  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2014, 10:55 PM
eternallyme eternallyme is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,243
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1overcosc View Post
So Maguire has announced his transit plan.. and its even more ridiculous than I expected.

Cancel Phase 2 of LRT in favour of peak period only commuter rail--with just 4 trips to downtown in the morning and 4 back in the evening on each route. Four lines:
-One from Riverside South to Bayview. Basically the city's Phase 2 plan. With an airport spur too.
-One from Kanata North to Bayview. Two stations in Kanata North, then nothing at all until Bayview except for an intermediate stop at Carleton.
-One from Orleans to Bayview... the most ridiculous transit route I've ever seen in my life. Insanely circutious and the Orleans stations are in the middle of nowhere.
-Barrhaven to Bayview. A reasonable route but VIA takes up a huge amount of track time.

And somehow building all that for $355M . Yep, grade separations, track, the inevitable double tracking of the O-Train corridor that would be required including a new Dows Lake Tunnel, building brand new track through swamp to Orleans. Oh, and getting Transport Canada to let talents run on active freight & intercity railway routes.

The Barrhaven & RS routes are useful. But the Orleans and Kanata ones are ridiculous. Taking the express buses to Tunney's/Blair and then LRT'ing to downtown from there would be faster for almost everybody who lives in those areas. The Kanata route would be really useful if it had actually had stations in Nepean or had reverse direction service to get people to Kanata for the morning, but alas it doesn't.

We already have express buses for downtown commuters from the suburbs. And once we replace the Albert/Slater disaster with LRT it will work very well.

And the insane part, is that Maguire admits that Watson's Phase 2 plan is way better and more efficient... he claims his plan is good only because Phase 2 is unaffordable. Did he not read all the city's financial reports which state that it is provided the province & feds pony up? And that the province has confirmed they well, the feds almost certainly will too?

This election is so frustrating. The incumbent's only credible challenger is an idiot.
$355M for THAT??? More express buses would be much more beneficial, despite overcrowding downtown!

The crosstown route has SOME merit, but with stops along the way for places like Bells Corners, Greenbank, Colonnade, transit junctions, etc. But not at $355M.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #169  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2014, 11:33 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is online now
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,660
Ditch long-term LRT plans in favour of commuter rail, Maguire says

David Reevely, Ottawa Citizen
Published on: September 29, 2014, Last Updated: September 29, 2014 6:18 PM EDT


Mayoral candidate Mike Maguire presented his transit plan Monday, the really big policy distinguishing him from incumbent Jim Watson. Here’s the rundown.

The premise

The city’s “Phase 2″ plan to extend light rail in all directions makes good transportation sense but at $3 billion, it’s much too expensive and relies on funding from the federal and provincial government we might not get, Maguire says. Add increasing electricity costs and following through on Phase 2 would mean “economic devastation,” in his view.

So Maguire has a rail alternative that’s much less ambitious and would serve a lot fewer people, but would also be a lot less expensive.

“Let’s utilize something we already have, because it’s an amazing asset,” Maguire says. If everything went smoothly (with no political problems or long studies), he says the first trains could be running in as little as a year.

What’s different about it

Rather than building new rail lines that take direct routes and include multiple stations, Maguire’s plan would rely heavily on existing tracks and each line would have just a couple of stops — if Phase 2 would be a replacement for Transitway bus services, Maguire’s vision is more like a rail version of express-bus service. His stated goal is to take cars off the Queensway and major arterial roads. “This is not a solution to all of our transit woes,” Maguire says. “This is a solution … to get bulk traffic out of Orléans and Kanata.”

Where it would go

Primarily through lightly populated industrial areas (that’s where existing train lines are) to the edges of suburban communities. The heart of the network would be the north-south O-Train line from Bayview station to a junction just north of the airport. From there, trains would head northwest to the Kanata North Research Park, southwest to a park-and-ride lot at Strandherd Drive in Barrhaven, south to a park-and-ride at Earl Armstrong Road in Riverside South (with a spur to the airport) and northeast along a meandering route to Orléans. Maguire’s map has words on it saying the line would go to Place d’Orléans but the map itself shows the line ending at Innes and Tenth Line, well to the south.

Maguire's rail plan:


Only the Orléans route would require laying new track, on an existing right-of-way the city owns. The other routes would require track upgrades and agreements with owners like Via Rail to let the city share their tracks.

Maguire would also fix up the Prince of Wales Bridge across the Ottawa River for a Gatineau connection, though how it would be used would depend on a deal with Gatineau.

Who it would be for

Commuters travelling between outside-the-Greenbelt suburbs and major inside-the-Greenbelt job centres on predictable schedules. The suburban ends would be anchored by park-and-ride lots. Maguire’s calculations assume his lines would each run four trips each morning and evening, not all day. Assuming each 200-passenger train were full, the service would carry 3,200 riders into and out of downtown, for a total of 6,400 rides a day.

What it would cost

Maguire says his plan would cost $205 million to build and equip; that’s a back-of-the-envelope estimate based on average costs of a kilometre of track and simple outdoor stations, not detailed engineering work. So he’s added $150 million in contingency funds to produce a price of $355 million. He’d ask the federal and provincial governments to pay for it all, seeking $180 million from each of them, much less than the city would seek for the Phase 2 LRT plan.

The tricky parts

With Bayview as the main hub where all the Maguire trains would end up, every trip to the downtown core would require a transfer to the light-rail system the city is building now.

Since it would be explicitly commuter-oriented, this system wouldn’t be of any use to people who want to live centrally and without cars. It’s more like Toronto’s far-flung GO Train system than its TTC subways.

Making it reality would require solving some problems the city has previously found insurmountable, like working out the logistics of an airport spur and getting national freight carriers’ agreement to let city passenger trains share their tracks (there’s not much in it for them except risk). The logistics of running trains in two directions on single lines are also daunting.

“Everything we do will require multiple levels of negotiation,” Maguire says. “You don’t say ‘I quit.’ “

[email protected]
twitter.com/davidreevely
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #170  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2014, 11:40 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is online now
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,660
City Hall Blog: What about those green roofs?

Carys Mills, Ottawa Citizen
Published on: September 29, 2014, Last Updated: September 29, 2014 6:14 PM EDT


At least one council candidate has suggested Ottawa adopt a green roof.

That might sound familiar and not just because the idea is based on Toronto’s bylaw that requires green roofs, which have environmental benefits including reducing energy consumption, on new developments of a certain size.

Jim Watson, who is running to serve another term as mayor, has been talking about a green roof bylaw for a few years. In 2011, he addressed the Ecology Ottawa annual dinner, saying the city ought to move towards a bylaw for large low-rise institutional, commercial and industrial buildings.

So what’s the hold up?

Watson campaign spokesman Ryan Kennery said Watson wrote to Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing Linda Jeffrey earlier this year to request a change to the City of Ottawa Act, which would give the city more enforcement of green roof initiatives. “He has not yet received a response, as the government was defeated and a new Minister has been named,” Kennery said in an email.

The letter basically asks for a section in the City of Ottawa Act similar to one in the City of Toronto Act. “This is something that is currently missing from the City of Ottawa Act, but, which may be necessary in order to enable forward-thinking legislation that encompasses green technologies in our City,” Watson wrote.

Here’s the whole letter:

Letter Jim Watson sent to the Minister of Municipal Affairs in February 2014
.


[email protected]
twitter.com/CarysMills

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/city-hall-blog-what-about-those-green-roofs
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #171  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2014, 11:43 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is online now
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,660
Ashcroft planner hosts meet-and-greet for Kitchissippi councillor

David Reevely More from David Reevely
Published on: September 29, 2014Last Updated: September 29, 2014 6:37 PM EDT


The chief planner for the most controversial developer in Kitchissippi ward organized a meet-and-greet for the incumbent councillor there because he likes her approach to politics and wanted to help more people meet their local politician, he says.

Ashcroft Homes’ redevelopment of a former convent site on Richmond Road has been the subject of fiery arguments in Kitchissippi for years. It helped do in Coun. Katherine Hobbs’s predecessor, Christine Leadman, and Hobbs has faced criticisms for her dealings with Ashcroft, too.

The company has sought exemptions from the usual noise bylaws governing constructions sites and a temporary construction driveway across the Byron Linear Park south of its big project, which Hobbs has helped with in the interests of getting the work done sooner.

Monday night, in the middle of Hobbs’ re-election campaign Ashcroft invited people to meet her in the party room at 360 Patricia Ave., offering wine and nibblies. Ashcroft also built the condos at 360 Patricia, across from the convent site.

https://twitter.com/LiveHintonburg/status/516638210429288448/photo/1

“I’ve known Katherine and like her approach to the politics in the community,” explained Paul Rothwell, Ashcroft’s director of planning and development.

“She doesn’t always say yes to us at Ashcroft. She has an open mind, and is straightforward, which you might say is a refreshing change. So I thought we’d make this gesture, invite people, (help her) meet some constituents.”

He lives in the building, he said, and rented the party room for the event himself. RSVPs for the event went to another Ashcroft urban planner, May Pham, because he’s been busy and Pham volunteered to help him. But it’s a personal project, he said, not an Ashcroft-organized affair.

Rothwell has lobbied Hobbs on development issues, according to the city’s lobbying registry, but his last recorded lobbying contact with her was in 2012. Pham has lobbied the city’s planning department.

The Citizen couldn’t reach Hobbs’ campaign by phone or email Monday afternoon. Facebook and Twitter posts indicated she was out canvassing and was looking forward to meeting people at 360 Patricia on Monday evening. Condominium buildings are difficult to canvass in, she wrote.

“I expect along with me, my fellow candidates are also making every attempt they can to meet and talk to all residents of the ward no matter their housing type,” she wrote.

Rothwell said he couldn’t think why anybody might be upset about his organizing an event for Hobbs. It’s just a chance for people to met their councillor, he said, with no fundraising element. He hadn’t given any thought to organizing similar events for other candidates, he said. (Challenger Jeff Leiper, a former president of the Hintonburg Community Association, has been particularly tough on Hobbs’ dealings with Ashcroft.)

“There’s always the naysayers in the community. But they’re slowly being outnumbered, but those who want to get to the front of the line always manage to get heard somehow,” he said.

[email protected]
twitter.com/davidreevely

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news...r-just-civic-spiritedness-developer-says
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #172  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2014, 1:49 AM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is online now
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,660
Maguire's transit 'plan' is simply off the rails

Joanne Chianello, Ottawa Citizen
Published on: September 29, 2014, Last Updated: September 29, 2014 8:57 PM EDT


Let’s start with what’s right about Mike Maguire’s plan to scrap the second phase of LRT and replace it with a commuter rail service. It won’t take long.

The mayoral candidate wants to extend O-Train service north across the Ottawa River to Gatineau, using the existing Prince of Wales Bridge, and south to Earl Armstrong Road. The Ottawa-Gatineau link is already on the long-term agendas of both cities’ mayors, but it’s still an idea worth looking into further.

But then we’re left to contemplate Maguire’s plan to use existing rails and rights-of-way to run a $355-million suburban commuter service, instead of extending the light-rail system for $3 billion, a concept so fraught with problems that the hurdles seem insurmountable.

Let’s start with the timing. Maguire says that at least parts of his plan can start to be addressed in 2015, with the entire system up and running in two or three years.

Optimistic? No, delusional. Just convincing council, which last year unanimously voted to expand light rail, would take at least a year, likely longer. Then there are the environmental assessments needed for the new routes. Maguire contends that EAs aren’t necessary for existing rail lines, so has built neither time nor money for the assessments into his plan.

But the city’s manager of transportation planning, Vivi Chi, says that “The fact that the rail corridor exists does not reduce the (need for) environmental investigation, including inventory of what’s in the corridor, and compliance with current environmental policies.”

Maguire also glossed over the big challenge of getting the green light from other levels of government and beyond. Both CN and Via Rail would have to give the city permission to run commuter-passenger trains on their tracks. Maguire’s plan is to run a train north from Strandherd Drive through the Via station in Barrhaven, eventually merging with the existing O-Train system at the Carleton University station.

CN is obliged to consider requests to share its tracks, but is notorious for being reluctant to do so. Indeed, a city-commissioned report from 2008 found that “There are substantial infrastructure and regulatory issues to be overcome” in sharing the tracks. That’s why the city didn’t do it. And even with the necessary agreements, what would sharing the track mean for commuters’ schedules? Maguire himself admits that CN and Via service would both take priority over his proposed city-rail service. What would a Via delay mean for Ottawa commuters trying to get to work on time? It doesn’t make sense.

As for his proposed routes, Maguire’s map for a commuter train from Place d’Orleans to Bayview Station is a mystery. He calls for using what is now a recreational path so close to homes that council banned snowmobiles on it, and his map doesn’t show the rail line actually reaching Place d’Orleans. It stops abruptly at something called Orleans Mall south of Innes Road, nowhere near Place d’Orleans.

The Orleans lines also go through the Via station at Tremblay Road. See above for issues with Via.

From the west, Maguire would bring Kanata commuters in on a line that veers south-east and across the Rideau River, before connecting with the existing O-Train line. However, this line would have to cross multiple major roads at grade — Greenbank, Woodroffe, Merivale, to name a few. How many exactly? Maguire couldn’t say. (There are another dozen or so crossings on the Orleans line, too.)

It would be folly to imagine that Ottawa, of all cities, isn’t acutely concerned about at-grade crossings. And if these crossings are to be separated, how much would that cost? (Hint: hundreds of millions of dollars.) On a final technical point, Maguire’s three new rail lines — from Orleans, Barrhaven and Kanata — would all be merging onto the north-south O-Train line, which would take some doing.

All these obstacles, and yet Maguire is proposing to run just four trains per line in each of the morning and evening rush hours. By his own estimate, this plan would serve a mere 3,200 people — or provide 6,400 rides — per day.

This is not a transit plan. Maguire’s three proposed routes would only have a stop or two at the end of each line and nothing until Carleton. The idea is to get those 3,200 commuters in Orleans, Kanata and Barrhaven out of their cars and onto a train that takes them to Bayview station. Does this improve transit for people living in the Greenbelt? No, it does not. Does it help people living in Orleans get to their jobs at defence HQ? No, it does not.

In fact, by orphaning the first phase of light rail to the 12.5 kilometres already being built in the middle of the city, Maguire wouldn’t just be wasting the $2.1 billion spent on that portion of the plan, he’d be worsening the commute for thousands of suburban residents who would have to take a bus to either Blair or Tunney’s Pasture station, and then transfer onto the light-rail system to get into the core.

In other words, the current light-rail plan only makes sense is if we keep expanding it once the first phase is completed in 2018.

Even Maguire admits that Phase 2 of LRT is “more efficient” than his plan. He just doesn’t believe we can afford its $3-billion price tag. But there is a sound plan to pay for Phase 2 — it involves gas tax money, using reserve funds and, yes, some new debt, assuming property taxes grow with inflation.

Maybe that’s too rich for some people’s blood. But for those who want to see the city grow, who want a rapid-transit system that connects us, it looks like an unavoidable price. In fact, by proposing such an unconvincing alternative, Maguire may unintentionally have made the most powerful case yet for the light rail plan he hopes to scrap.

[email protected]
twitter.com/jchianello

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/0930-col-chianello
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #173  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2014, 1:51 AM
Capital Shaun Capital Shaun is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 862
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocketphish View Post
Ditch long-term LRT plans in favour of commuter rail, Maguire says
That map says it all. The stations are few and far between and nowhere near where many people live. Start adding more stations and the price obviously goes up. I guess you do get what you pay for. A full fledge system for $2B or an extremely bare bones commuter system for $355M.

And I find that $355M an overly conservative estimate.

Last edited by Capital Shaun; Sep 30, 2014 at 1:51 AM. Reason: formating
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #174  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2014, 4:05 AM
Kitchissippi's Avatar
Kitchissippi Kitchissippi is offline
Busy Beaver
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,691
Because of its limited capacity, McGuire's plan would likely cost almost 3 times on a per passenger basis as Phase 2.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #175  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2014, 1:52 PM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 12,377
There's absolutely no way that could be built for $355M. The grade separations at Woodroffe alone is supposed to cost about $100M. Anyone with an engineering background care to make a more accurate cost analysis?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #176  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2014, 2:10 PM
JeffB JeffB is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 179
I think some people need to realize that there is more to fiscal conservatism than just not spending money. It seems to me that Maguire is thinking "How can we do this cheaply?" rather "How can we do this effectively, at a reasonable price?" Now, there could be an argument made that our LRT isn't effective or reasonably priced, but this plan definitely misses the mark.

Last edited by JeffB; Sep 30, 2014 at 3:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #177  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2014, 2:44 PM
HighwayStar's Avatar
HighwayStar HighwayStar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: PHX (by way of YOW)
Posts: 1,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffB View Post
It seems to me that Maguire is thinking "How can we do this cheaply?" rather "How can we do this effectively, at a reasonable price?"
This is really too bad... as I much prefer Maguires thinking of "Lets build our budget requirements and see how that fits into our revenues"... as opposed to Watson "Lets increase taxes by 2% and figure out how to spend it".

LRT stance is a show-stopper though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #178  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2014, 2:53 PM
Dado's Avatar
Dado Dado is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1overcosc View Post
There's absolutely no way that could be built for $355M. The grade separations at Woodroffe alone is supposed to cost about $100M. Anyone with an engineering background care to make a more accurate cost analysis?
Sorry, why would you need grade separations at Woodroffe, at all? His plan is to send all of four trains per peak period that way. That's just not enough to warrant going nuts on grade separation.

Indeed a case could be made that if we replaced Barrhaven-to-downtown express bus service with O-Train service instead (which would have to be more than running just four trains during the peak period - probably more like 4 per hour), most of the Transitway crossing traffic would evaporate - basically down to a few 94/95s to serve people going to Algonquin and maybe Tunney's Pasture.


I don't find the dollar amount out of line for what he is proposing to do. There are considerable savings to using an existing RoW with rails already in place. Even if you have to lay an entirely new track next to the existing one and completely replace the track already in place, you're still far ahead. What a lot of people who have no background in railways fail to understand is that an existing track is also a mighty useful construction tool. Need to bring in gravel for a widened railbed? Easy - bring in a train of hopper cars that just tip their load in place. Compare that to scores of dump trucks that have to go through all sorts of turning and backing up movements on site, not to mention traffic just to get there. The rails can be dropped in place from a rail train in lengths of 400 m. In a new alignment, they need to be brought in in short lengths of about 25 m, lifted off individually and positioned by some kind of crane and then welded on-site. Basically, if you're able to work from or off an existing rail RoW, there's considerable money-saving opportunities because it's just a lot less labour-intensive.
__________________
Ottawa's quasi-official motto: "It can't be done"
Ottawa's quasi-official ethos: "We have a process to follow"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #179  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2014, 2:56 PM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 12,377
It should be emphasized that Watson's plan is a fiscal scaleback, too. No airport link, O-Train left at single track for most of its route, Orleans route truncated at Place, many BRT corridors truncated (for example, the Baseline Transitway doesn't go all the way to St. Laurent anymore, Kanata North ends at Solandt), many routes eliminated entirely (like Carling, Orleans South, Fernbank). It's already the bare minimum set of projects from the TMP--except for the Orleans extension which is really not needed, but vital to secure political approval and thus funding.

Last edited by 1overcosc; Sep 30, 2014 at 3:07 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #180  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2014, 2:58 PM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 12,377
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
Sorry, why would you need grade separations at Woodroffe, at all? His plan is to send all of four trains per peak period that way. That's just not enough to warrant going nuts on grade separation.

Indeed a case could be made that if we replaced Barrhaven-to-downtown express bus service with O-Train service instead (which would have to be more than running just four trains during the peak period - probably more like 4 per hour), most of the Transitway crossing traffic would evaporate - basically down to a few 94/95s to serve people going to Algonquin and maybe Tunney's Pasture.

I don't find the dollar amount out of line for what he is proposing to do. There are considerable savings to using an existing RoW with rails already in place. Even if you have to lay an entirely new track next to the existing one and completely replace the track already in place, you're still far ahead. What a lot of people who have no background in railways fail to understand is that an existing track is also a mighty useful construction tool. Need to bring in gravel for a widened railbed? Easy - bring in a train of hopper cars that just tip their load in place. Compare that to scores of dump trucks that have to go through all sorts of turning and backing up movements on site, not to mention traffic just to get there. The rails can be dropped in place from a rail train in lengths of 400 m. In a new alignment, they need to be brought in in short lengths of about 25 m, lifted off individually and positioned by some kind of crane and then welded on-site. Basically, if you're able to work from or off an existing rail RoW, there's considerable money-saving opportunities because it's just a lot less labour-intensive.
Transport Canada regulations prohibit DMU vehicles like the O-Train from making level crossings with roadways. If you look at the City's Phase 2 plan to extend the O-Train south, they include grade separations at Lester, Leitrim, and Bowesville, because they have to. Similar deal with the UPX service about to start in Toronto, they had to grade separate the entire Weston subdivision to be allowed to run it (although in Toronto's case that was desired anyway to allow the speed limit to be increased for GO). You could use full locomotives instead like GO, but then they'd lose the ability to run on the O-Train tracks to Bayview, so you'd have to change the hub to Tremblay. That's probably doable although VIA may have objections to using platform time there.

The Barrhaven line would certainly need double tracking, VIA takes up way too much track time. You're saying that's its not expensive to lay another track. You know a lot more about railways then me, so I'm going to say you're right. but you'd need to replace the Rideau River bridge near Colonnade--I can't see that being dirt cheap.

Also, his plan would depend on fitting a bunch more trains on the O-Train corridor north of Confederation. You would need full double tracking of the O-Train to do that, meaning a new bridge on the Rideau River and a new tunnel at Dows Lake.

Last edited by 1overcosc; Sep 30, 2014 at 3:08 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Business, Politics & the Economy
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:01 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.