Rural Commuter Rail

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

Evrn though that makes sense MOOSE already stated that wouldn't be enough. Its either they can do their whole plan or nothing. Well I guess its nothing for a long time.

Yes. MOOSE certainly couldn't do that plan. We would likely need GO Transit to come in and start providing regional service.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by GoTrans

Bravo! This is the crux of the whole idea of using existing rail infrastructure. Here we have a right of way on the Beachburg sub that is basically fully grade separated to double track standards from Kanata to Tremblay.

The Beachburg sub was ripped up west of the junction with the Renfrew sub. It does have a level crossing with Corkstown, but that is neither here nor there. As for the Renfew Sub, it has several at grade crossings in Kanata.

The Smiths Falls sub will also be basically grade separated once the overpasses are built between the Jct of the Beachburg sub and the Smiths Falls sub. These overpasses will be built regardless of whether Moose or any other entity runs commuter trains due to the volume of automobile traffic and existing train traffic.

Yes there are plans to grade separate the crossings between Merival and Strandheard, but west of that, all of the level crossings will remain.

The bigger problem for either route is sharing track with VIA Rail. Double tracking would be necessary on any section shared with them. The most crucial section would be east of the junction of the Smiths Falls and Beachburg subdivisions, and that would be very expensive, as few if any of the grade separations support double track. Maybe VIA will do it eventually, but that would likely be decades away.

Both of these routes would provide faster service from Barrhaven and Kanata than LRT depending upon where you are going.

For Barrhaven, there is a potential advantage, if the stop is at Fallowfield station. However, as Truenorth00 showed earlier, there would be no travel time advantage for Kanata residents but there would be a frequency of service disadvantage.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Name a city the size of Ottawa/Gatineau (in terms of CMA population) that use commuter rail in addition to buses and some type of LRT/light metro. In most parts of the world, a city our size would be much more compact making commuter rail pointless. Only if there was a separate large town/small city nearby (which Ottawa doesn't have) would there be any point to having some type of regional rail service, but that would be on the verge of being intercity rail.

San Jose, California
Oslo
Cardiff (partially proposed)
Albeuquerque (although it uses BRT)
Bremen
Minneapolis
Nashvillle
Thessaloniki
Adelaide

I have refrained from mentioning countries that are so small it would be difficult to draw a distinction between commuter rail and other types of rail (Netherlands, Latvia, etc).

I would also note that Vancouver was of a similar population to Ottawa when it had a light metro and commuter rail (metro population about 300k bigger).

[FFX-ME]

Originally Posted by acottawa

San Jose, California
Oslo
Cardiff (partially proposed)
Albeuquerque (although it uses BRT)
Bremen
Minneapolis
Nashvillle
Thessaloniki
Adelaide

Bay area is around 7 million people
Europe
Europe
More of an intercity rail
Europe (and 2.4 million people)
4 million people
2 million people
Europe
OK

But come on, comparing twin cities and the Bay area to Ottawa is ridiculous. Comparing it to European cities which have completely different structure is also ridiculous.

[OCCheetos]

The city did a study of a Fallowfield - Tremblay/Bayview O-Train line back in 2008. They concluded that there weren't enough time advantages for it to be worth the trouble.

I think if a line were to run between Smiths Falls and Tremblay/Blair, it could end up being beneficial for residents of Smiths Falls and Richmond (and maybe a few residents of Barrhaven).


One idea I want to bring up again is the Pontiac/Renfrew branch (along the old Beachburg subdivision). Back when it was first announced that the Beachburg Subdivision would be torn up one of the efforts to save the track was Pontiac and Renfrew. They were interested in reintroducing freight services in the area, but also setting up some form of commuter rail system.

Now, it never ended up being clear if either the freight or commuter rail services would be financially viable (although the former management of the Ottawa Central Railway was involved, so it's possible it was) because CN basically said "we're going to rip it up anyway because CWR blablabla". But, considering that commuter rail was a serious consideration back then, the idea of commuter rail in the NCR may not be as far-fetched as some are suggesting.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

San Jose, California
Oslo
Cardiff (partially proposed)
Albeuquerque (although it uses BRT)
Bremen
Minneapolis
Nashvillle
Thessaloniki
Adelaide

I have refrained from mentioning countries that are so small it would be difficult to draw a distinction between commuter rail and other types of rail (Netherlands, Latvia, etc).

I would also note that Vancouver was of a similar population to Ottawa when it had a light metro and commuter rail (metro population about 300k bigger).

San Jose is only 70 km from San Fransisco so there is a lot of synergy there. One could almost call it a distant suburb.

As for Vancouver, the West Coast express didn't start running until 1995, when it's CMA population was about 1,800,000. You are thinking of 1986, when SkyTrain opened. Also, Vancouver is different from Ottawa, as geography forced them to grow up the Fraser Valley, increasing the distance required to commute (we can grow in any direction the NCC lets us). Foreigners buying homes and leaving them vacant doesn't help either.

I am guessing Oslo will be similar to Vancouver in its limitations in directions it can sprawl. I'm not familiar with the others to comment.

[1overcosc]

I can think of two more examples - Haifa (bit smaller than Ottawa) and Glasgow (a bit bigger) - although in both cases the commuter rail network is operated by the national rail network, albeit with distinct lines and services that are very clearly commuter-oriented within that network.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

San Jose is only 70 km from San Fransisco so there is a lot of synergy there. One could almost call it a distant suburb.

Yes, but San Jose has a commuter rail system (Altamont Corridor Express) and a light rail system distinct than any other system in the Metro San Francisco Area (the BART, which also goes go San Jose) which is why I included it.

[GoTrans]

Originally Posted by roger1818

The bigger problem for either route is sharing track with VIA Rail. Double tracking would be necessary on any section shared with them. The most crucial section would be east of the junction of the Smiths Falls and Beachburg subdivisions, and that would be very expensive, as few if any of the grade separations support double track. Maybe VIA will do it eventually, but that would likely be decades away.

For Barrhaven, there is a potential advantage, if the stop is at Fallowfield station. However, as Truenorth00 showed earlier, there would be no travel time advantage for Kanata residents but there would be a frequency of service disadvantage.

Laying double track is a lot cheaper than building over or under passes. Why not take advantage of all the railway infrastructure built between Kanata and Tremblay? To improve the viability of it the LRT would have to be extended from Algonquin to the CNR overpass on Woodroffe. Not every form of transport has to go downtown, but it should connect to other transit such as the LRT that does go downtown. Building a network is a better goal than extending one line to the far extremities of the city with one line.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

Well, MOOSE's plan is outright impossible unless they do. If MOOSE ever gets their feasibility study done, it would be a better question to ask then.

Right. And yet they get to hamper the city in its efforts while essentially being a paper house cat.

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

(A link would be helpful)

You can dig through. I can't be bothered. He's not just said it to me either. But take it as you will.

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

I've personally always felt the best solution would be for the city and MOOSE to share tracks, and for that reason I wouldn't be supportive of MOOSE using the confederation line in any way. (And probably for other reasons too).

People act like this is kids sharing candy or something. Is transit that fucking trivial to you? Do you actually use transit? I am genuinely curious now.

Sharing tracks is not some trivial matter. Especially not when lines like the Confederation Line are running every few minutes at peak. And the Trillium Line is maxed out on the capacity it has.

And again, the broader question. When Moose is proposing sprawl that is massively detrimental to the City of Ottawa, why should the City of Ottawa facilitate them?

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

Fair enough. The financial feasibility report (if it is ever done) might shine some more light on how likely that would be.

Mr. Potvin going quite should tell you everything you want to know about Moose's status today. If actually had funding and could buy PR, he wouldn't be relying on internet posters to defend his "company".

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

MOOSE's proposal including many stops in Ottawa is more of a fact than an assumption.

What they propose and what they might build if they got funding are two very, very different things. By their own admission, they won't service where they can't get subscription fees. What happens if no areas in Ottawa want to pay their fees?

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

As of now they're still proposing them.

Dots on a map are free.

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

Tax-wise that money would still go to the city.

The city does not care about taxes on a few station zones. What's far more damaging is seeing 100 000 residents leave Ottawa and start doing a lot of their daily residential spending elsewhere.

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

That may change in the future, and if it does so might my opinion.

I doubt your opinion will ever change. You don't seem the least bit concerned about sprawl at all. It's trivial to you. It's why you don't see substantial downside to what Moose is proposing.

Who cares about urbanity and reducing the carbon footprint of the city, amirite? You won't be around to see the after-effects. Tell me...are you a baby boomer by any chance?

Originally Posted by AndyMEng

Can we turn the conversation into constructive points now that Potvin has stopped debating with us all?

IF you could develop a commuter rail line to the outer towns and villages, how would you do it? I know we've discussed before, but I like to dream...

What's the basis for building commuter rail? That's what we should discuss first. Anybody here have a ridership case that shows there are more riders for the same dollar spent on commuter rail vs. light rail?

This is not some cheap effort. Make sure the corridors are in shape, building stations and buying rolling stock. Easily half a billion dollars to startup. Can anybody show that building commuter rail with that money would get more ridership than say spending that half billion on extending the LRT from Baseline to Fallowfield?

Originally Posted by roger1818

True, but the situation would be even worse in Barrhaven.

Not disagreeing here.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Um, not quite sure why you picked Solandt.

To show an extreme test point. From Solandt to Rideau Centre is about as far a commute as most people would undertake with transit. And it's somewhat competitive with commuter/suburban rail. The travel time gap becomes even smaller, the closer you get to the Greenbelt.

I want to show how ridiculous this discussion is. People are acting as though commuter/suburban rail will cut commutes substantially. They won't. 15-20 mins tops. And for that the city would have spending hundreds of millions or even billions. If the province wants to pay for a GO type of system, sure. But I don't see why the City of Ottawa should.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Not quite as easy as you think. As discussed before, there is a 500m gap in the ROW between Knoxdale and Hunt Club.

I pointed this out in my post. In less detail. My point is that this not complex work. It's not something that requires tons of expropriation. They could even do cut and cover and trench deck right beside Woodroffe. And it's a project that could be finished within 2 years of construction. It's not like building the downtown tunnel or the tunnel to Cleary for Stage 2.

Originally Posted by roger1818

I agree it should be done anyway, but this is why the city is hesitating.

Yeah. Barrhaven got kinda screwed. Strange to me that they are already mapping out the next phase in Kanata, yet not talking about extending into Barrhaven. The councillors in that area must be total tools.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

San Jose, California

Really? Are we just going to ignore the fact that Caltrain serves the whole Bay Area which has 7 million people in it?

This is like arguing that Mississauaga is the same size as Ottawa and has commuter rail.

You're one of the better posters on this forum. Please don't resort to such intellectual dishonesty.

Originally Posted by acottawa

Oslo
Cardiff (partially proposed)
Bremen
Thessaloniki

The context in Europe is vastly different. Aside from more funding which allows frivolities like suburban rail, their urban regions are more concentrated. They don't have to build commuter rail lines 50km out. Especially in some of those smaller cities. They are also never starting from scratch or sharing with freight since rail has been passenger focused from the beginning.

In certain cases, like the UK, old and highly developed rail networks have meant they never developed any other rapid transit. Cardiff would be such an example. Their suburban rail network is denser than we could imagine anything with BRT and LRT. And so they never bothered with BRT or LRT.

And just a note, Oslo is 1.6 million and Bremen is 2.4 million. The latter is like comparing Ottawa to Montreal.

Originally Posted by acottawa

Albeuquerque (although it uses BRT)
Minneapolis
Nashvillle

Adelaide

Lots of American cities have commuter rail too. Ditto Australia. And their transit usage is trash. Because they only use transit to commute twice a day. Why should Ottawa residents want this?

Also, Nashville 1.9 million. And Minneapolis 4.2 million. Comparisons to Ottawa? Really?

Originally Posted by acottawa

I have refrained from mentioning countries that are so small it would be difficult to draw a distinction between commuter rail and other types of rail (Netherlands, Latvia, etc).

And that lack of distinction means funding to pay for this. Ottawa does not have this luxury. The federal government is not going to pay to build and operate regional rail for commuters to save 10-15 mins. Especially when you can bet that an LRT extension of a few km will probably have more ridership than an entire commuter rail system.

Originally Posted by acottawa

I would also note that Vancouver was of a similar population to Ottawa when it had a light metro and commuter rail (metro population about 300k bigger).

Great for them. Can you prove it's more beneficial to Ottawa, compared to the alternatives?

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Yes, but San Jose has a commuter rail system (Altamont Corridor Express) and a light rail system distinct than any other system in the Metro San Francisco Area (the BART, which also goes go San Jose) which is why I included it.

Does Barrhaven want 4 trains in the morning to Ottawa and 4 train in the evening back from Ottawa and no other service, like ACE provides between Stockton and Diridon?

Let's also ignore that minor detail that Stockton at one end has 800 000 residents, with 1.9 million in Santa Clara on the other end, or that you have intermediate stops like Freemont with 230 000 residents. Let's also ignore the fact that ACE is part of a transportation system that includes BART and CalTrain and the VTA, and is not some standalone commuter line serving San Jose.....

If Ottawa ends up with 7 million residents like the Bay Area, then we should have just as many, or more commuter rail lines. But when people are talking about spending tens of millions or even hundreds of millions to build commuter rail to an Ottawa suburb with less residents that most Toronto ridings, I think skepticism is valid.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

The city did a study of a Fallowfield - Tremblay/Bayview O-Train line back in 2008. They concluded that there weren't enough time advantages for it to be worth the trouble.

Their estimate was only a couple of minutes off mine. With the same conclusion.

Suburban and/or commuter rail just does not work for the Ottawa suburbs for two major reasons.

1. 1) Ottawa does not have a downtown train station, and so most passengers invariably half to transfer onto the LRT network.
   
2. 2) The suburbs are too close and the LRT too fast to really have substantial time savings difference. If the difference in average speeds between LRT and Commuter rail is about 20 kph and you're only traveling 20 km, the savings on that rail portion is 10 mins. With distances this short so many other factors dominate including:

   • Distance to the station
   • Frequency of rail service (basically wait time for the train)
   • Frequency of bus service

   And all of those factors favour LRT extensions over suburban rail with 5 km stop spacing or commuter rail with even higher stop spacing.
   

The fact that their estimate was only 1000 riders in total at peak says it all. And that's to Barrhaven. If we're talking communities beyond the Ottawa suburbs, as this thread likes to ruminate on, the numbers get substantially worse very quickly. 1000 riders for a community of 75 000. Imagine what a community of 9000 in Smiths Falls will generate.

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

I think if a line were to run between Smiths Falls and Tremblay/Blair, it could end up being beneficial for residents of Smiths Falls and Richmond (and maybe a few residents of Barrhaven).

It looks more and more debatable how much Barrhaven residents would actually benefit. And if those benefits are anything notable at all.

And while Richmond or Smiths Falls residents would benefit, why should Ottawa pick up the tab for that? I don't pay taxes to have my municipal government provide services for other towns.

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

But, considering that commuter rail was a serious consideration back then, the idea of commuter rail in the NCR may not be as far-fetched as some are suggesting.

On a long enough timeline, anything is possible. In about two centuries, when Ottawa is the size of Montreal today, I am sure there will be lots of suburban rail lines.

But when it comes to our lifetimes, there's no business case for suburban rail or rural rail. Not when we're talking about peak ridership from each of these small towns that can only fill 1-2 coach buses in each direction.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by GoTrans

Laying double track is a lot cheaper than building over or under passes.

Not if that line is not taking riders where they want to go.

Originally Posted by GoTrans

Why not take advantage of all the railway infrastructure built between Kanata and Tremblay?

Because the time savings are minimal vs. Stage 2 LRT. And because Tremblay is not the destination of most riders from Kanata.

Originally Posted by GoTrans

To improve the viability of it the LRT would have to be extended from Algonquin to the CNR overpass on Woodroffe.

The Confederation Line is not suffering from any viability issues. On day one it will be the highest ridership LRT line in North America. And that will only go up with Stage 2.

Originally Posted by GoTrans

Not every form of transport has to go downtown, but it should connect to other transit such as the LRT that does go downtown.

Sure. Not every transit line has to go downtown. But the transit lines should take riders where they actually want to go. How many riders from Kanata or Barrhaven want to go to Tremblay?

Originally Posted by GoTrans

Building a network is a better goal than extending one line to the far extremities of the city with one line.

Why is it that people think the Confederation Line will be the only rapid transit line in the city post-November? Did all the Transitway infrastructure suddenly vanish? Ottawa has and will have one of the best rapid transit networks for a city of its size in North America after Stage 2. Confederation Line, Trillium Line, all the existing BRT lines and the new BRT come online (such as Baseline). A transport network is not defined by only one mode of transport.

Also, we don't build networks for the sake of building networks. Transport networks are built to move the most riders to their preferred destinations as cheaply and efficiently as possible. There's no case for shunting people across town just to put them on an LRT at Tremblay to backtrack. All you'll accomplish is shift demand along the Confederation Line eastward, creating a whole new bunch of issues with unbalanced ridership. So now trains from the East will be even more packed, while trains from the West will reach downtown with far fewer riders. Move enough riders (and it doesn't take much to create an imbalance) and now we have an artificial peak that defines the whole network's capacity. Unless, we have a Yonge/Bloor type of situation somewhere along the Confederation Line, there's no justification to simply shift the passenger loads like that. And especially not to save a few minutes over LRT.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

And while Richmond or Smiths Falls residents would benefit, why should Ottawa pick up the tab for that? I don't pay taxes to have my municipal government provide services for other towns.

Quick geography lesson: Richmond is in the City of Ottawa (it isn’t even all that close to the boarder) but your point is valid for Smiths Falls.

Having said that, it’s population is half of Smiths Falls, and given that the 283 to Richmond only runs 4 times a day each way, demand doesn’t seem terribly high.

[Truenorth00]

@roger1818

You're right about Richmond. My mistake.

And demand from there....

People here seem clueless about demand and just want to draw lines on map and play train conductor fantasies. No planner is going to take any of these suggestions seriously. And when transit advocates are this nuts, there is nobody credible left advocating in the public interest.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

@roger1818

You're right about Richmond. My mistake.

And demand from there....

People here seem clueless about demand and just want to draw lines on map and play train conductor fantasies. No planner is going to take any of these suggestions seriously. And when transit advocates are this nuts, there is nobody credible left advocating in the public interest.

Thats what gets me mad. There are more deserving places who need LRT like Barrhaven and at mininmum better bus service like Rideau-Montreal corridoor which is what I think we should be talking about. IMHO urban issues should be solved first before there is any talk about commuter rail.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Does Barrhaven want 4 trains in the morning to Ottawa and 4 train in the evening back from Ottawa and no other service, like ACE provides between Stockton and Diridon?

Let's also ignore that minor detail that Stockton at one end has 800 000 residents, with 1.9 million in Santa Clara on the other end, or that you have intermediate stops like Freemont with 230 000 residents. Let's also ignore the fact that ACE is part of a transportation system that includes BART and CalTrain and the VTA, and is not some standalone commuter line serving San Jose.....

If Ottawa ends up with 7 million residents like the Bay Area, then we should have just as many, or more commuter rail lines. But when people are talking about spending tens of millions or even hundreds of millions to build commuter rail to an Ottawa suburb with less residents that most Toronto ridings, I think skepticism is valid.

Somebody asked for a list of cities of similar size that have LRT and commuter rail systems and I made a list. I recognize that every city is not exactly the same. Silicon Valley is extremely car-centric; it is a bit of a miracle they have any public transit at all.

To me none of the LRT extensions (beyond maybe Lincoln Fields) has a transit rationale. The existing BRT system is nowhere near capacity and travel time will likely increase as limited-stop buses are replaced with milk-run LRT. These extensions are purely driven by politics. In that context, Kanata/Stittsville is Ottawa's most populous suburb and is going to get higher order transit.

As an alternative to a $2B LRT extension that would be slower than the bus and would be unlikely to drive new ridership, IMHO, a commuter rail system could be set up that would 1) be cheaper, potentially allowing resources to go into other transit priorities 2) be faster for a lot of people, potentially actually driving ridership and 3) could serve areas not well served by the Queensway corridor, particularly Stittsville and the March Road Tech corridor (where there might be some reverse-commuting possibilities).

Do I think it will happen? No. Ottawans are zealous transferphobes and a 40km tram will sound way better to most people.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by GoTrans

Laying double track is a lot cheaper than building over or under passes.

Huh? Double tracking between Tremblay and the junction between the Smiths Falls and Beachburg subdivisions would require the following to be upgraded/replaced from west to east.

• Overpass, Prince of Wales Dr.
• Canadian Northern Ontario Railway Federal Bridge
• Pathway, near Upper Otterson Place
• Overpass, Walkley Rd
• Pathway, connecting Springland Dr and Cromwell Dr.
• Overpass, Airport Parkway
• Brookfield Pathway, Level Crossing
• Overpass, Heron Rd
• Pathway, Heron Station
• Overpass, Transitway
• Overpass, Bank St.
• Level Crossing, Pleasant Park Rd
• Pathway, near Rodney Cres., Level Crossing

It also crosses a couple streams that I didn't include.

I did include the level crossings because double track level crossings are more dangerous than single track ones and the increase in rail traffic might make it more important. Grade separating Pleasant Park Rd will be particularly difficult since there isn't much room to build a temporary diversion.

The pathways won't be very expensive to deal with, but they won't be free either.

So assuming everything is grade separated, that is:

• 1 bridge
• 6 roads
• 5 pathways

And that is just that 9km of track.

Why not take advantage of all the railway infrastructure built between Kanata and Tremblay?

Because using it would cost more than an LRT extension and provide service that is no better (and possibly worse).

[lrt's friend]

I am curious why the Bank Street overpass did not make allowances for double tracking when it was rebuilt in the 90s. there was not much forward thinking going on. I can understand this for bridges built in the 70s when rail was considered passé.