Rural Commuter Rail

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Well, I'm writing this near the peak of the Ottawa rush hour. Bank and Laurier to Palladium/417 is 25 km and takes 36 minutes by the fastest route, 50 if you take the Queensway (which is under construction).

King and Bay to Scarborough Town Centre (also 25 km) takes 50 minutes by the fastest route and 56 minutes by the DVP/401.

So unless people are remapping routes all the time, it'll take about 50 mins to do 25km. There's days you could get from King/Bay STC in about 40 mins using Danforth, Kingston Rd. etc. But people don't tend to map out a different route everyday.

What matters far more here is not how long it takes to drive per se, but the travel time difference between transit and driving. That's what largely determines the choice. What's the marginal utility of the time saved to the individual and can they afford/are they willing to incur the cost for that.

What drives the choice to take transit in Toronto is not the time it takes. It's the cost. It's $20 per day to park. At least. Not many people can afford that. I drove to work daily when I got a spot paid for. And took transit when I didn't. The only people I know who drive to the Financial District either had a subsidized/free spot or carpooled.

If Ottawa imposes a $5 per space parking spot tax in the downtown core, watch what happens to transit ridership.

[lrt's friend]

The most sensible approach to commuter rail is to have Via run one or two local trains during peak periods from Alexandria and Brockville via Smiths Falls. Add a few extra station stops that don't currently get VIA service, such as Richmond, Maxville, Vars, Carlsbad Springs. Just put up a bus shelter, a paved platform and a small parking lot. If this doesn't work, nothing will.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

You're assuming those bus routes stay as they are if/when LRT is extended to Kanata. There's no way that happens. Why would OC Transpo spend extra money on added capacity on a parallel route?

No I'm not. Re-read what I said (emphasis added):

Originally Posted by roger1818

Except the Connexion buses from Stittsville won't stop after they hop on the 417 at either Carp Rd or Paladium Dr until they get to Moodie station. An extension to Terry Fox will add to the number of stops, but it is offset by the stops providing useful connections for some commuters. The stops west of Terry Fox aren't as useful that way.

In other words, currently the buses don't stop between Stittsville an Moodie (and before Moodie station opened it was Bayshore, BTW). After LRT is extended to Terry Fox, they will stop there instead and the LRT will also have stops at Campeau and Eagleson/March (so three new stops). Not a big deal as 2 of the 3 stops are useful to some Stittsville commuters.

If, however, it is extended to Hazeldean, those buses will stop there and people will have 8 more stops than they currently do. That is more significant, especially since most are not all that useful. So even ignoring the expense, it is better to have the train stop at Terry Fox than it is to have it extended to Hazeldean.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

This is nitpicking. A fish hook, on a rail line not subject to traffic, is adding a few hundred metres of extra travel. It's not really relevant when we're talking about traveling 25 km to downtown Ottawa. For all intents and purposes, my comment stands, it's the same 25 km. LRT extensions just move the transfer point closer to them.

Fair enough, though with the overbuild of the 417, traffic won't be a problem between Stittsville and Kanata for a very, very long time. It is just frustrating to have an east bound train travel west, just like the 2006 plan had north bound trains travel south.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Don't get me wrong. I'm no fan of extensions outside the greenbelt. But that ship has now sailed when we committed to going to Trim, in Stage 2, for Orleans.

I wasn't either until I realized how many buses drive through the Greenbelt. That is a long way to drive with no stops. If we can trade an average of 4 or more buses for 1 train, that is saving a lot of money and greenhouse gases. When it is closer to 1 for 1, I don't see a compelling argument.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I don't have an issue with going past Terry Fox (my broader reservations on going outside the Greenbelt aside). I just don't like their routing. I would have done a much straighter routing:

Eagleson -> Terry Fox -> CTC/Huntmar -> Hazeldean/Stittsville Main

For me, until we know the future of the CTC, why does it have to be an important part of our plan. We did the EA and discovered that extending to Terry Fox is cheap and beyond it is expensive (on a per km basis). Next do an EA on extending from Baseline to Barrhaven so we know what it will cost. Then we can make an informed decision on where our priorities should be.

[OtrainUser]

This is just a guess on my part but extending Confederation line south from Baseline im guessing maybe 8km. So assuming 100 million per km that 800 million dollars, plus the planned 8 station adds another 100 million per station which is another 800 million dollars. Add in the Fallowfield and Woodroffe grade separations 200 million each which adds another 400 million dollars. When i total that up it brings the total at least 2 billion dollars. Its no wonder why they looked at Kanata first before Barrhaven

The costs to bring the Trillium line to Barrhaven will be much lower since the main issue was addressed already plus it helps having to cover a shorter distance.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I don't see how you could make that assertion with any real data. The BRT system in the west end is very much constrained by running on the Parkway. As the population increases in the west end, can OC Transpo be sure that the NCC will let them run as many buses as needed to keep up?

I also don't see how you can say it will be slower. The limited stop buses are not express. Any rider can request a stop. And on most days, they will stop at most of the Transitway stops on the way to the core. I honestly cannot see there being significant travel time difference.

Lastly, and most importantly, you ignore operating costs and efficiency. Moving riders on a bus carrying 50 riders is nowhere near as efficient or cheap as moving them on an LRV with 300 pax capacity. There's a reason OC Transpo can layoff hundreds after the Confederation Line comes into service. And that's with only 12.5 km. Imagine the gains in efficiency after Stage 2.

Have you ever seen the outer transitway near capacity? The busiest parts get maybe 10-15 buses per hour outside of rush hour and a half dozen Connexion routes in rush hour. That is nowhere near the capacity of a BRT system or dedicated transit lane.

Well, I said past Lincoln Fields, so that would include the parkway. But I have never noted the parkway to be a significant constraint. The two lights probably cause and average delay of 30 seconds?

The Connexion routes are only request stop in the morning. PM connexions skip over a lot of local stops. An LRT (at least the way they are set up on Ottawa) has to stop at every stop.

I agree there are some operating cost efficiencies, but I don't think it is clear they justify the price tag. Phase 1 will yield a lot of efficiencies because you are not paying for buses to sit in a downtown traffic jam. Phase 2 doesn't have that sort of scale. Also, LRT service will have to be the same in both directions so a lot of vehicles will have to make every stop in the counterflow direction, which is much less efficient than driving empty buses directly to the start of their routes.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

So unless people are remapping routes all the time, it'll take about 50 mins to do 25km. There's days you could get from King/Bay STC in about 40 mins using Danforth, Kingston Rd. etc. But people don't tend to map out a different route everyday.

What matters far more here is not how long it takes to drive per se, but the travel time difference between transit and driving. That's what largely determines the choice. What's the marginal utility of the time saved to the individual and can they afford/are they willing to incur the cost for that.

It's the parkway, not the Kessel Run and it is probably the fastest route every day unless there is an accident or something. I agree with you that the difference in driving and transit time is a key consideration, which is why a train that stops 20something times between downtown and Kanata is not going to encourage many people to switch when the drive isn't that bad.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

No I'm not. Re-read what I said (emphasis added):


In other words, currently the buses don't stop between Stittsville an Moodie (and before Moodie station opened it was Bayshore, BTW). After LRT is extended to Terry Fox, they will stop there instead and the LRT will also have stops at Campeau and Eagleson/March (so three new stops). Not a big deal as 2 of the 3 stops are useful to some Stittsville commuters.

If, however, it is extended to Hazeldean, those buses will stop there and people will have 8 more stops than they currently do. That is more significant, especially since most are not all that useful. So even ignoring the expense, it is better to have the train stop at Terry Fox than it is to have it extended to Hazeldean.

Concur with most of that. However, again this is a tradeoff between a longer bus ride, including getting to the highway, and a longer LRT ride, including the additional stops. I agree that it'll probably be longer. But I don't think the net will be as significant as you think. Few minutes max.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Fair enough, though with the overbuild of the 417, traffic won't be a problem between Stittsville and Kanata for a very, very long time. It is just frustrating to have an east bound train travel west, just like the 2006 plan had north bound trains travel south.

The traffic issue will probably on access roads to the 417, rather than the highway itself.

Originally Posted by roger1818

I wasn't either until I realized how many buses drive through the Greenbelt. That is a long way to drive with no stops. If we can trade an average of 4 or more buses for 1 train, that is saving a lot of money and greenhouse gases. When it is closer to 1 for 1, I don't see a compelling argument.

Sure, I just wish they had far stricter growth plans that went with those transit investments. Especially from the province. Nothing prevent the growth of ex-urbs like Rockland or Manotick.

Originally Posted by roger1818

For me, until we know the future of the CTC, why does it have to be an important part of our plan.

If we're going beyond Terry Fox, it makes sense in my books. Either there's an arena there of some kind of high density node if it's redeveloped.

Originally Posted by roger1818

We did the EA and discovered that extending to Terry Fox is cheap and beyond it is expensive (on a per km basis). Next do an EA on extending from Baseline to Barrhaven so we know what it will cost. Then we can make an informed decision on where our priorities should be.

Personally, would rather see them end at Terry Fox and spend any extra money extending to Barrhaven, and/or double tracking Trillium.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The Connexion routes are only request stop in the morning. PM connexions skip over a lot of local stops.

Right. And you're making an assumption that they don't stop at any. That's clearly not true.

Originally Posted by acottawa

I agree there are some operating cost efficiencies, but I don't think it is clear they justify the price tag. Phase 1 will yield a lot of efficiencies because you are not paying for buses to sit in a downtown traffic jam. Phase 2 doesn't have that sort of scale. Also, LRT service will have to be the same in both directions so a lot of vehicles will have to make every stop in the counterflow direction, which is much less efficient than driving empty buses directly to the start of their routes.

An empty LRT stopping at every stop is still more energy efficient than an empty bus repositioning. That's just basic thermo.

Also, that train got there by delivering the equivalent of 6-7 buses to the core. So it's not just 1 bus repositioning, as you portray it.

Originally Posted by acottawa

It's the parkway, not the Kessel Run and it is probably the fastest route every day unless there is an accident or something. I agree with you that the difference in driving and transit time is a key consideration, which is why a train that stops 20something times between downtown and Kanata is not going to encourage many people to switch when the drive isn't that bad.

Again. You're acting like this is all happening in an information vacuum.

All these commuters take the bus today. Their commuter is not getting worse with the LRT. So why would ridership drop?

The only point that concerns me is the end of Stage 1 and the forced transfer at Tunney's and Bayview. That will cause ridership to drop. Along with Stage 2 construction. Once, you move that transfer point to Moodie or Bayshore, I just don't see what the complaints would be.

As for new ridership? Like I said, that can be cranked up anytime. Just make driving more expensive. Driving time is not the only consideration. And most cities are moving to such charges.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

This is just a guess on my part but extending Confederation line south from Baseline im guessing maybe 8km. So assuming 100 million per km that 800 million dollars, plus the planned 8 station adds another 100 million per station which is another 800 million dollars. Add in the Fallowfield and Woodroffe grade separations 200 million each which adds another 400 million dollars. When i total that up it brings the total at least 2 billion dollars. Its no wonder why they looked at Kanata first before Barrhaven

The costs to bring the Trillium line to Barrhaven will be much lower since the main issue was addressed already plus it helps having to cover a shorter distance.

I assume by "Fallowfield and Woodroffe grade separations" you mean the VIA Rail crossing. If so, I am not sure where you got that estimate from. According to this study, to grade separate Woodroffe Avenue, the Transitway, Fallowfield Road, Merivale Road and Jockvale Road (5 locations, most of which are 4 lane roads) would cost a total of $430 million ($75 million to $145 million per crossing), so I would guess since the LRT track is narrower than a 2 lane road and the LRT trains are lighter than a transport truck, the cost would be on the lower end.

Also, the transitway VIA Rail crossing going to be built regardless, so by including it in the budget, it is being counted twice. In fact if we combine the two projects together, there is an opportunity to save money as the LRT crossing would likely be cheaper than the Transitway crossing.

Regardless, these back of the napkin estimates don't really tell us much as they don't go into all the details. As done with the Kanata EA, the project could be broken up into stages with one being Baseline to Fallowfield (about 6km with 3 or 4 stations) and a second stage of Fallowfield to Strandheard, Marketplace or Barrhaven Centre (additions 3-4 km with 2-4 stations). Those last three stations seem awfully close together for LRT. Knowing the city, they would want a third stage that would run down to Manotik.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I assume by "Fallowfield and Woodroffe grade separations" you mean the VIA Rail crossing. If so, I am not sure where you got that estimate from. According to this study, to grade separate Woodroffe Avenue, the Transitway, Fallowfield Road, Merivale Road and Jockvale Road (5 locations, most of which are 4 lane roads) would cost a total of $430 million ($75 million to $145 million per crossing), so I would guess since the LRT track is narrower than a 2 lane road and the LRT trains are lighter than a transport truck, the cost would be on the lower end.

Also, the transitway VIA Rail crossing going to be built regardless, so by including it in the budget, it is being counted twice. In fact if we combine the two projects together, there is an opportunity to save money as the LRT crossing would likely be cheaper than the Transitway crossing.

Regardless, these back of the napkin estimates don't really tell us much as they don't go into all the details. As done with the Kanata EA, the project could be broken up into stages with one being Baseline to Fallowfield (about 6km with 3 or 4 stations) and a second stage of Fallowfield to Strandheard, Marketplace or Barrhaven Centre (additions 3-4 km with 2-4 stations). Those last three stations seem awfully close together for LRT. Knowing the city, they would want a third stage that would run down to Manotik.

Your right thats why i said it was a guess but you never know costs have a tendency to go up so i was only trying to get at the worst possible case. You also may be right too about the cost as well but your numbers say up to 430 million whereas im estimating 400 million so we both are not far off in our numbers.
There were othere costs like expropriation that i didn't include so my overall estimate may be correct anyway.

And yeah i wouldn't be surprised if they wanted to extend LRT to Manotik.

I based my numbers on the discussion on Kanata LRT and the number of stations is based on the 2013 transportation master plan ultimate network.

With all things considered i'd rather extend Trillium line to Barrhaven first before confederation line

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Concur with most of that. However, again this is a tradeoff between a longer bus ride, including getting to the highway, and a longer LRT ride, including the additional stops. I agree that it'll probably be longer. But I don't think the net will be as significant as you think. Few minutes max.

But why spend money to degrade service (even if it is by only a few minutes) when you can keep service the same at no cost?

The traffic issue will probably on access roads to the 417, rather than the highway itself.

True, but since Hazeldean station would be at eastern most edge of Stittsville, running buses to it rather than the 417 actually increases the amount of travel on access roads (the 417 is closer than the station for most).

If we're going beyond Terry Fox, it makes sense in my books. Either there's an arena there of some kind of high density node if it's redeveloped.

As I have said before, a suburban arena is a poor destination for an LRT system for two reasons:

1. There are 41 regular season home games plus an average of maybe 5 post season games, so lets round that up to a total of 50. Then there might be 30 other events but lets round that up to 50 as well, for a total of 100 events. Compare that to about 250 work days a year downtown (ignoring weekend and holiday use).
2. The crush volume of people after an event might make traffic bad, but even if everyone used LRT, it is actually fewer than 20,000 people each way. In rush hour, the LRT will easily transport double that each way (plus all the people using other routes and forms of transport).

If the arena is downtown, by all means add a stop or two for it (they will probably have other uses anyway as other businesses will be nearby), even if it means a detour, but to intentionally extend the line to a station dedicated for events doesn't make sense.

If the arena is repurposed or redeveloped, I highly suspect the demand will be even lower than it is as an arena.

I often travel along Paladium Dr. during rush hour and it is a 4 lane highway with fewer than 60 cars a minute travelling on it (probably less than half that).

Personally, would rather see them end at Terry Fox and spend any extra money extending to Barrhaven, and/or double tracking Trillium.

Agreed.

[OtrainUser]

I just had another thought, if the Trillium line is extended to barrhaven or even Manotik after the extension to Gatineau is done then a transfer is eliminated. Residents could take a short bus ride to a Trillium line station and get off at Terraces du chaudieres or place du portage whatever the terminus will be which will be walking distance to work or even right at their workplace.

I find this will make people use transit more.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

I just had another thought, if the Trillium line is extended to barrhaven or even Manotik after the extension to Gatineau is done then a transfer is eliminated. Residents could take a short bus ride to a Trillium line station and get off at Terraces du chaudieres or place du portage whatever the terminus will be which will be walking distance to work or even right at their workplace.

I find this will make people use transit more.

If you want people to use the Trillium Line in off peak hours, it needs to go to downtown Ottawa. A Hull extension will only be used in peak periods and will be empty the rest of the time. This is why I suggested a downtown loop connected to STO LRT. Gatineau residents will use it to access downtown Ottawa and Ottawa residents can reach Hull offices using the same route.

[1overcosc]

It doesn't need to go downtown. It connects with a frequent rapid transit line that already does (or more appropriately; it will when that line opens in a few months). Saying the Trillium line needs to have a direct connection downtown to be used makes no sense. By that logic the Blue line of the Montreal metro would be empty, and it certainly isn't.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

But why spend money to degrade service (even if it is by only a few minutes) when you can keep service the same at no cost?

I would suspect if they are extending beyond Terry Fox, the planners have other concerns other than shaving a few minutes off bus rides. Either they anticipate development going there, or there's concern about supporting certain sectors (ie tech).

Could also be that Barrhaven's councillors are asleep at the switch. And Kanata's are managing to get the jump on them.

I hope there's at least some consideration for the ridership numbers for their prioritization matrix. As it stands, I can't see how this would get more riders than extending to Barrhaven.

Originally Posted by roger1818

True, but since Hazeldean station would be at eastern most edge of Stittsville, running buses to it rather than the 417 actually increases the amount of travel on access roads (the 417 is closer than the station for most).

You're assuming all Stittsville buses will run to Hazeldean. If there's stations at other locations that are closer, feeder service will run to them.

Originally Posted by roger1818

As I have said before, a suburban arena is a poor destination for an LRT system for two reasons:

1. There are 41 regular season home games plus an average of maybe 5 post season games, so lets round that up to a total of 50. Then there might be 30 other events but lets round that up to 50 as well, for a total of 100 events. Compare that to about 250 work days a year downtown (ignoring weekend and holiday use).
2. The crush volume of people after an event might make traffic bad, but even if everyone used LRT, it is actually fewer than 20,000 people each way. In rush hour, the LRT will easily transport double that each way (plus all the people using other routes and forms of transport).

If the arena is downtown, by all means add a stop or two for it (they will probably have other uses anyway as other businesses will be nearby), even if it means a detour, but to intentionally extend the line to a station dedicated for events doesn't make sense.

If the arena is repurposed or redeveloped, I highly suspect the demand will be even lower than it is as an arena.

I often travel along Paladium Dr. during rush hour and it is a 4 lane highway with fewer than 60 cars a minute travelling on it (probably less than half that).
.

Three things with any sort of arena:

1. They can be limited service stops which are only open when needed.
2. They can be developed as higher density entertainment and shopping nodes that attract riders byeond just eventgoers.
3. Arenas like malls have potential. When their life ends, they offer a ton of land that can be freed up to develop a high density neighbourhood. Putting a station there ensures it. Developers will just on it.

[Truenorth00]

I will change my tone somewhat here. I do see some validity for a case of using DMUs (as on the Trillium Line) to extend to Barrhaven, Kanata, etc. for suburban rail. As long as the costs are reasonable and can be offset by severely limiting LRT extensions into the burbs. No more extensions beyond the edge of burb. So Eagleson would the terminus in the West to serve Kanata and Stittsville, and Fallowfield to serve Barrhaven. And that would be the end of Confederation Line extensions.

It's not necessarily going to be preferred for riders, since it's one more transfer to use suburban rail. But if it can save the city money and give them an excuse to twin track and max out the Trillium Line, why not? Make Bayview a great hub.

And at least the government building such a system instead of Moose ensures that stations go where riders benefit, rather than developers.

Still opposed to servicing all the outlying communities though, unless they want to share the costs with Ottawa and are willing to impose strict restrictions on sprawl.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

With all things considered i'd rather extend Trillium line to Barrhaven first before confederation line

Why? The Trillium Line does nothing for anyone unless they are bound for the core.

We have to get passed this mindset that transit is only for commuting and only for people who work downtown.

Being able to get on the Confederation Line in Barrhaven makes transit practical for most destinations in the west end. Not saying the Confederation Line needs to go right to Barrhaven Centre. But at least Fallowfield.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I would suspect if they are extending beyond Terry Fox, the planners have other concerns other than shaving a few minutes off bus rides. Either they anticipate development going there, or there's concern about supporting certain sectors (ie tech).

Or someone's pocket is being lined?

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Why? The Trillium Line does nothing for anyone unless they are bound for the core.

We have to get passed this mindset that transit is only for commuting and only for people who work downtown.

Being able to get on the Confederation Line in Barrhaven makes transit practical for most destinations in the west end. Not saying the Confederation Line needs to go right to Barrhaven Centre. But at least Fallowfield.

There are a lot of people from Barrhaven that work at Place du Portage and Terrace du Chaudiere. Since the Confederation line doesn't go to the Quebec side while the Trillium line would and would be cheaper to extend to Barrhaven then it makes more sense to extend Trillium line to Barrhaven which also would eliminate a transfer in the process.

[Horus]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I will change my tone somewhat here. I do see some validity for a case of using DMUs (as on the Trillium Line) to extend to Barrhaven, Kanata, etc. for suburban rail. As long as the costs are reasonable and can be offset by severely limiting LRT extensions into the burbs. No more extensions beyond the edge of burb. So Eagleson would the terminus in the West to serve Kanata and Stittsville, and Fallowfield to serve Barrhaven. And that would be the end of Confederation Line extensions.

It's not necessarily going to be preferred for riders, since it's one more transfer to use suburban rail. But if it can save the city money and give them an excuse to twin track and max out the Trillium Line, why not? Make Bayview a great hub.

And at least the government building such a system instead of Moose ensures that stations go where riders benefit, rather than developers.

Still opposed to servicing all the outlying communities though, unless they want to share the costs with Ottawa and are willing to impose strict restrictions on sprawl.

I agree with this idea. Using DMUs to reach the outer suburbs for commuter purposes (think S-Bahn model) with limited stops within the Greenbelt, might be a better use of funding and resources than extending a milk-run LRT to those areas.

Hypothetically, suppose you ran a double tracked DMU down the median of the Queensway from Carp Rd to Trim Rd. There could be a few stops at both the Kanata and Orleans ends to use as collection points, but there would be minimal stops within the Greenbelt, only to serve as connections to Confederation Line (at Bayshore, Tremblay, and Blair) and to Trillium Line (shifting Gladstone station slightly south to be accessible from a Queensway/Trillium line junction). This way, suburban commuters could choose where to interact with the higher-stop-frequency LRT lines at a location that best suits them. Tremblay would serve as the central station of this network.

This arrangement would then eliminate the need to run Confed line beyond Bayshore or Blair and definitely eliminate the requirement to run it beyond the Greenbelt where it will be almost exclusively be used by commuters anyway. You could run up frequencies during the rush periods , and run it at low frequency (40min?) during off-peak times.

A Kanata commuter heading downtown would have a choice:
a)Board a DMU at Terry Fox - Exit at Bayshore and ride Confed Line downtown OR
b)Board a DMU at Terry Fox, - Ride 2 stops longer to Tremblay, and backtrack on Confed line to downtown.

Option A may not be that much different that the current Kanata LRT plan, but couldn't option B be much more efficient for the downtown-bound Kanata resident?

[roger1818]

I was looking at old aerial photos on geoOttawa and discovered something interesting. Historically the Prescott Subdivision (now Trillium line) did not directly connect to the Prince of Wales Bridge. Instead, they both fed into the Ottawa West Yard. The direct connection was only added after the NCC tore up the Ottawa West Yard in the late 60's

Interestingly, there was a direct connection from the Prince of Wales Bridge to the Carleton Place Subdivision, which later became the western Transitway and will soon be used for the Confederation Line.

This may not change anything as a connection was later added, but it is interesting. Below is an aerial photo from 1965 with the O-Train lines highlighted (click to enlarge).