Kanata LRT EA - Bayshore to Palladium

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

I quickly made an example of what a rail expansion to Kanata/Stittsville and Barrhaven would look like if I were in charge:



Fewer stations, but the ones that exist are in areas of suburban residence or employment zones heading into the city.

I'm quite partial to the idea of having three transit types:
- Local (short distances, slow speeds, mixed traffic; for getting around a neighbourhood)
- Express (medium-long distances, high speeds, RoW, but lots of stations; for getting around the city)
- Regional (long distances, high speeds, RoW, and very few stations; for crossing the city).

With BRT and LRT, we cover the 'Express' category pretty well, but your plan adds a 'Regional' component, where people can get from Bayview to Kanata or Barrhaven with only a few stops.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

The trains would continue to Bayview. The Trillium Line needs to be double tracked anyway (hell, it should have already been done) but the city could set up passing stations along the new routes like they did with Carleton University.

Assuming the Trillium Line was double tracked, it might be feasible, but it would be a stretch as it would be a 5 way split (Riverside South, Airport, Barrhaven, Stittsville, and Kanata North). you certainly wouldn't want to add any more branches than that.

I never said this option was cheap; simply that it would be cheaper/more economical than the current plan to expand the O-Train to Kanata while converting newly-built transitway into rail beds. My plan also accounts for the fact that suburban riders are largely commuting into the city centre so fewer stops means a faster ride.

Under the assumption that LRT is already at Bayshore/Moodie, I disagree with your claim that it would be cheaper than the current plan, even if the Trillium line was already double tracked. Double tracking between the junction of the Beachwood and Smiths Falls subdivisions and the Ellwood diamond (a minimum requirement) would be extremely expensive. They would need to twin/replace the Canadian Northern Ontario Railway Federal Bridge plus the bridges over Prince of Wales Drive, Walkley Rd, and the Airport Parkway plus 2 pedestrian underpasses. There is also the issue of switching onto the Trillium Line. With the high frequency of traffic (due to the 5 way split), you would also need to build a fancy overpassing interchange onto it instead of using a simple crossover, as the later would tie up both tracks.

As for it being faster, the trains having to share track with VIA Rail would likely necessitate the need for slower, heavier equipment (probably something like the Nippon Sharyo DMUs used on the UP Express), negating many of the speed improvements gained by having fewer stops. For reference, it is about 27 km from March Rd and Terry Fox to Bayview Station along the proposed route. That is further than 23km of the UP Express from Union to Person and it only has 2 intervening stops (unlike your 9). It takes 25 minutes, so we say it takes 35 minutes instead (for the 7 extra stops and 4 extra km), and you aren't even downtown yet. I'm not convinced that it is a big enough time savings to be worth it, considering the massive expense to build it.

Edit: As a comparison, The original Expo Line in Vancouver is just under 29km and takes 39 minutes from Waterfront to King George with 20 stops. The Confederation Line will be about 23km from Terry Fox to Rideau with 19 stops. It will have similar automation and faster trains, so it will likely take even less time.

[Uhuniau]

It is still so bloody infuriating to see that map with so many higher-order-transit deserts in the inner areas.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

It is still so bloody infuriating to see that map with so many higher-order-transit deserts in the inner areas.

I just watched a video about the resurgence of the streetcar in North America, which included light rail.

In many cases, these new lines were not about serving people and moving them to their destination effectively. How can it? Rail by its very nature greatly increases the last mile problem. It was more about serving developers in order to promote their projects.

It is what private developers did in the early 20th century. Streetcars were loss leaders in order to sell real estate. Once the real estate was all sold, the streetcars eventually became uneconomical. At that time the private sector funded the streetcars, now the public funds it and the developers benefit. It is win win for the developers because they don't have to pay for the rail lines. For the taxpayer, however, the rail lines will not serve people where there is not enough potential for developers. That is why plans for Montreal Road and Carling Avenue have been scrapped. This has already been discussed off and on here but those discussions were not as clearly to the point.

But the funny thing, when the north-south line was approved, there was considerable criticism that the plan was to support developers. We should not kid ourselves. The Confederation Line does the same thing and we are setting our zoning to support it. It is always about supporting business interests. The individual taxpayer is well down the list of priorities even though we are footing the bill.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

I'm quite partial to the idea of having three transit types:
- Local (short distances, slow speeds, mixed traffic; for getting around a neighbourhood)
- Express (medium-long distances, high speeds, RoW, but lots of stations; for getting around the city)
- Regional (long distances, high speeds, RoW, and very few stations; for crossing the city).

With BRT and LRT, we cover the 'Express' category pretty well, but your plan adds a 'Regional' component, where people can get from Bayview to Kanata or Barrhaven with only a few stops.

The problem is, there isn't sufficiant population outside of the greenbelt (and the population we do have is spread out too much) to support a dedicated rail service. Even if we could, we don't have a downtown rail station anymore.

One thing I could see happening is if they put in carpool lanes on the central 417 (between the 416 split and the 174 split) they could run express buses in them from Orleans to DND/Kanata, bypassing downtown. By the time they build them, the need for that might be gone though.

[Aylmer]

I wouldn't necessarily mind that either. Regional service can be a bus just as much as it can be rail so long as it's protected from traffic. Although in this particular case, running trains down an underused but existing track might actually be less costly than adding dedicated lanes in the Queensway (mostly because of overpass/underpass reconstruction).

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

I wouldn't necessarily mind that either. Regional service can be a bus just as much as it can be rail so long as it's protected from traffic. Although in this particular case, running trains down an underused but existing track might actually be less costly than adding dedicated lanes in the Queensway (mostly because of overpass/underpass reconstruction).

My thought was if they were building the carpool lanes anyway (which I think they should), have OC Transpo use them.

I know some here don't like carpool lanes because they feel they are underused, but having buses use them as well would improve their usage. Also, to be effective, they need to be continuous. Having carpool lanes from the 416 to Kanata and beyond but none in the central 417 does little to encourage carpooling as you don't have them where you need them most.

[Aylmer]

Also, carpool lanes aren't effective if they're used TOO much
That's the irony of automobile infrastructure - the more they're used, the less useful they are

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Also, carpool lanes aren't effective if they're used TOO much
That's the irony of automobile infrastructure - the more they're used, the less useful they are

The corollary to that is they aren't useful if there isn't significant congestion in the first place.

They are also more effective if you have a reasonably large base of HOVs to work with.

Interesting story. After Vancouver added HOV lanes to Hwy 1 west of the Port Mann Bridge (thus increasing from 4 to 6 lanes (2 were HOV)), they immediately saw a decrease in congestion in the regular lanes, since all of the HOVs moved out of them and into the HOV lanes. The HOV lanes were still less congested than the regular ones, but they saw an overall improvement.

Contrast that to the 417, where they went from 4 lanes to 8 lanes (2 of which were HOV). That change completely eliminated all congestion on day 1, making the HOV lanes redundant.

[JHikka]

Carpool lanes are hit-or-miss. Depending on the time and day they can either be very useful or completely useless. Kanata's carpool lanes seem similar to the QEW's (say, through Oakville) at times - useful during rush hour but mostly empty any other time. If they're too busy (or you're stuck behind someone deciding to drive 100kph) they can be a bit of a burden.

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

It is still so bloody infuriating to see that map with so many higher-order-transit deserts in the inner areas.

Still waiting on that Bank Street Subway through Lansdowne and Billings. Any day now.

[J.OT13]

Highway widening in Kanata was overkill. They should have only added two HOV and be done with it.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Carpool lanes are hit-or-miss. Depending on the time and day they can either be very useful or completely useless. Kanata's carpool lanes seem similar to the QEW's (say, through Oakville) at times - useful during rush hour but mostly empty any other time. If they're too busy (or you're stuck behind someone deciding to drive 100kph) they can be a bit of a burden.

I had the "privilege" of experiencing the QEW HOV lanes through Oakville and Burlington last summer at PM rush hour on a Friday.

I found them to be mostly useless to be honest; the highway was so jammed that cars were unable to pull out of the HOV lane to reach their exits, so the congestion backed up into the HOV lane.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

I found them to be mostly useless to be honest; the highway was so jammed that cars were unable to pull out of the HOV lane to reach their exits, so the congestion backed up into the HOV lane.

That is one of the beauties of Vancouver's HOV lanes. At lest some interchanges have separate HOV ramps that connect directly to the HOV lane.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Highway widening in Kanata was overkill. They should have only added two HOV and be done with it.

Yup, especially when you consider that there are 2 bus lanes that after stage 3 LRT will become available for general use. Do we really need (or want) a 10 lane highway in Ottawa? Likely the best use would be to add HOV passing lanes between Moodie and Eagleson and then barricade the HOV lanes from the regular lanes to prevent people from cutting in and out of them.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by j.ot13

highway widening in kanata was overkill. They should have only added two hov and be done with it.

"but we gotta please the suburban voters!"

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

"but we gotta please the suburban voters!"

The 417 is owned by the province so it was a provincial project. I don't think Queen's Park cares that much about Ottawa's "suburban voters" in the grand scheme of things.

[HighwayStar]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Highway widening in Kanata was overkill. They should have only added two HOV and be done with it.

I think we're missing the point with these HOV lanes.... I mean HOW MANY PEOPLE have changed their behaviour to use these lanes???

Some people would have carpooled anyway... most people don't carpool.

It needs to be asked:
1) How many people started carpooling because of these lanes? and
2) How many would stop carpooling if the lanes were removed?

I'd be willing to bet the answer to both questions is pretty close to zero.

So we have these "green" sounding HOV lanes, which actually create more pollution by forcing 4 lanes of traffic onto 3 lanes.... hence increasing almost everyone's drive time and spewing more pollution in the process.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by roger1818

The 417 is owned by the province so it was a provincial project. I don't think Queen's Park cares that much about Ottawa's "suburban voters" in the grand scheme of things.

Au contraire; the only Ottawa voters the PC and Liberal parties at Queen's Park care about are the suburban ones; there are several suburban Ottawa seats that tend to swing with the political winds.

To a slightly lesser degree, Ottawa Centre falls into this role for the NDP-Liberal fringe of a provincial campaign, but Centre has also become less NDP leaning than it used to be 10 or 15 years ago.

[zzptichka]

Originally Posted by HighwayStar

I think we're missing the point with these HOV lanes.... I mean HOW MANY PEOPLE have changed their behaviour to use these lanes???

Some people would have carpooled anyway... most people don't carpool.

It needs to be asked:
1) How many people started carpooling because of these lanes? and
2) How many would stop carpooling if the lanes were removed?

I'd be willing to bet the answer to both questions is pretty close to zero.

So we have these "green" sounding HOV lanes, which actually create more pollution by forcing 4 lanes of traffic onto 3 lanes.... hence increasing almost everyone's drive time and spewing more pollution in the process.

Obviously with the way it's implemented it's close to zero because it ends at Moodie and people driving downtown still have to sit in the same traffic. Essentially it's useless.

BTW are they going to add HOV lane between Maitland and 416 that's being widened right now?

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by zzptichka

Obviously with the way it's implemented it's close to zero because it ends at Moodie and people driving downtown still have to sit in the same traffic. Essentially it's useless.

BTW are they going to add HOV lane between Maitland and 416 that's being widened right now?

No. They concluded that HOV lanes are not practical east of the 416 because exits are too closely spaced.

I like HOV lanes as a concept but I do agree that unless they extend all the way into downtown they're rather useless. If we were going to do them, it should have HOV lanes from Kanata all the way to Kent, with a separate exit from the left-hand HOV lane onto Kent (to avoid having to move all the way right), and perhaps some of the minor exits (like Maitland or Rochester) would not have access to the HOV lane (ie. the HOV lane would be solid lined at both sides through those interchanges). To do this, the new lanes between 416 and Carling would be built as HOV and the inner lanes from Carling to Kent would be converted from regular traffic to HOV.

They should have just left the HOV lanes out of it. Instead of a 8 lane highway from the 416 to Kanata (6 regular lanes + 2 HOV) it should have been just 6 regular lanes. They also should have never widened the 7 out to Carleton Place. That just encourages out-of-city sprawl.