Rural Commuter Rail

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The whole point of the project is that people will move to exurban exurban subdivisions and use property value increases to pay for the service. Sprawl isn’t a side effect of this plan, it is the entire objective of this plan.

There is also another side effect this plan will bring. If, as Moose hopes, that having commuter rail in the communities it serves increases property values, it could have the opposite effect of pushing people away from those towns. A lot of people move to places that far away because they want the biggest house they can get for their budget. People can be very price sensitive over home purchases (understandably). And there will be lots of towns without a rail connection that they can go to instead.

The only way it could truly be effective is if the whole entire region, not just the NCR and beyond, was under a single planning body. But with Moose serving so many local municipalities that are independent of each other, they can adapt and compete with others. Within the City of Ottawa they can properly plan for transit oriented development. Beyond the city limits, there will some local council ready to sell itself to perspective buyers as soon as those Moose linked towns start to see an increase in real estate values.

Edit: And thinking about that made also made me think that there is another reason why the economy of scale argument for needing to build it all at once is kind of nonsense. If you consider the price sensitivity of people moving to the exurbs, there is likely only a limited market for those kind of home buyers that want to be in an exurb 50, 60, 80 km away from where they work, but don't mind paying higher prices, or buying something smaller, so that they could have a commuter rail station to take a 60 - 90 minute trip into work everyday. If you have just one or two lines, then your potential market is limited to perhaps 8 or 10 locations as possible choices, as opposed to 30, which would give a higher population to those locations, and perhaps make Moose less of a losing proposition.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

There is also another side effect this plan will bring. If, as Moose hopes, that having commuter rail in the communities it serves increases property values, it could have the opposite effect of pushing people away from those towns. A lot of people move to places that far away because they want the biggest house they can get for their budget. People can be very price sensitive over home purchases (understandably). And there will be lots of towns without a rail connection that they can go to instead.

The only way it could truly be effective is if the whole entire region, not just the NCR and beyond, was under a single planning body. But with Moose serving so many local municipalities that are independent of each other, they can adapt and compete with others. Within the City of Ottawa they can properly plan for transit oriented development. Beyond the city limits, there will some local council ready to sell itself to perspective buyers as soon as those Moose linked towns start to see an increase in real estate values.

Moose or no Moose, there is no way it makes sense to encourage people to live further away, unless the central city is overcrowded (which Ottawa clearly isn’t.)

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Moose or no Moose, there is no way it makes sense to encourage people to live further away, unless the central city is overcrowded (which Ottawa clearly isn’t.)

I am not saying that sprawl should be encouraged. But, people will ultimately do what they want to do. And the more choices you can offer, the better.

If, and that is big if, there is actually a market for people that want to live in a town well away from the city centre, but, also have regular, or at least commuter rail access, to the city, then I don't see the harm in offering that. How many people might actually fit that profile? That is really hard to say, because that isn't something that is being offered right now (you could sort of get that living in Casselman or Alexandria, but they don't really have the kind of service that would attract a broad range of commuters, at least not right now).

It is probably a niche market. It might only be a single line worth of people. But it would probably mean that at least some people who would have chosen auto-centric exurbs now choose rail-centric ones instead. Despite my criticism of Moose (which is totally valid), I think the idea of some rail-centric exurbs are worth exploring. I just think that you need to scrap Moose's ideas and start from scratch, and involve local municipalities in it from the start, in order for a potentially decent plan to actually emerge.

[CityTech]

Originally Posted by acottawa

It is a school bus for Algonquin students, it is too slow and to short to provide effective crosstown service.

Yeah. It really is just a speed improvement for the existing local bus service on Baseline. While it will be a huge boon to commute times for people in that area of the city, it's still slower than genuine rapid transit as the stops are pretty close together. (IIRC, they're only eliminating every other stop as part of the conversion from local bus to BRT).

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

I am not saying that sprawl should be encouraged. But, people will ultimately do what they want to do. And the more choices you can offer, the better.

If, and that is big if, there is actually a market for people that want to live in a town well away from the city centre, but, also have regular, or at least commuter rail access, to the city, then I don't see the harm in offering that. How many people might actually fit that profile? That is really hard to say, because that isn't something that is being offered right now (you could sort of get that living in Casselman or Alexandria, but they don't really have the kind of service that would attract a broad range of commuters, at least not right now).

It is probably a niche market. It might only be a single line worth of people. But it would probably mean that at least some people who would have chosen auto-centric exurbs now choose rail-centric ones instead. Despite my criticism of Moose (which is totally valid), I think the idea of some rail-centric exurbs are worth exploring. I just think that you need to scrap Moose's ideas and start from scratch, and involve local municipalities in it from the start, in order for a potentially decent plan to actually emerge.

At what cost though? In most places commuter rail services are implemented in places with tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of people. Most of these communities we’re talking about have hundreds or at most a few thousand residents. Spending hundreds of millions to provide service that few people are likely to use makes no sense for any level of government.

A township like a North Glengary has has 400 commuters to Ottawa. Even if a hypothetical train service got a really high uptake (say 25%). That would be that would be 100 customers. Even with a minimal service (say 4 trains per rush hour) that would be 25 people per train. If any sort of public transit is needed it should be provided with a cube van, not a commuter train.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

It is a school bus for Algonquin students, it is too slow and to short to provide effective crosstown service.

And a train on track that has a maximum speed rating of 24 and 40 km/h is fast? To fix that would be extremely expensive for a route that isn't going to serve many people.

Even if they upgraded the Renfrew and Beachburg subdivisions to class 3 or 4 track and twinned the track shared with VIA Rail, we are looking at 25 km from March Rd to Tremblay station. That's further than Union to Pearson and with only 2 intervening stops the UP Express takes 25 minutes ref. That's the same as it will be from Moodie to Bayview after Stage 2 on the Confederation Line.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

And a train on track that has a maximum speed rating of 24 and 40 km/h is fast? To fix that would be extremely expensive for a route that isn't going to serve many people.

Even if they upgraded the Renfrew and Beachburg subdivisions to class 3 or 4 track and twinned the track shared with VIA Rail, we are looking at 25 km from March Rd to Tremblay station. That's further than Union to Pearson and with only 2 intervening stops the UP Express takes 25 minutes ref. That's the same as it will be from Moodie to Bayview after Stage 2 on the Confederation Line.

Bayview isn’t across town. I think the track upgrades aren’t particularly expensive. I agree the problem is the Via tracks and such a system probably wouldn’t be feasible unless they were upgraded as part of a separate project.

[GoTrans]

Originally Posted by roger1818

And a train on track that has a maximum speed rating of 24 and 40 km/h is fast? To fix that would be extremely expensive for a route that isn't going to serve many people.

Even if they upgraded the Renfrew and Beachburg subdivisions to class 3 or 4 track and twinned the track shared with VIA Rail, we are looking at 25 km from March Rd to Tremblay station. That's further than Union to Pearson and with only 2 intervening stops the UP Express takes 25 minutes ref. That's the same as it will be from Moodie to Bayview after Stage 2 on the Confederation Line.

You are comparing apples and oranges when you compare the time from March Road to Tremblay with the time from Moodie to Bayview. Moodie is not Kanata just as Bayview or Tremblay is not downtown either. The goal should be to provide semi express service from Kanata to connect with Lines 1 and 2 in different locations. This would faster overall trip times to locations close to connection points even with a transfer to another line or bus. As a result it would not be necessary to upgrade to class 4 trackage until the volume grows. The greatest time saving would come from long sidings at every station so station dwell time can be incorporated into minimizing meeting time.

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by acottawa

At what cost though? In most places commuter rail services are implemented in places with tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of people. Most of these communities we’re talking about have hundreds or at most a few thousand residents. Spending hundreds of millions to provide service that few people are likely to use makes no sense for any level of government.

A township like a North Glengary has has 400 commuters to Ottawa. Even if a hypothetical train service got a really high uptake (say 25%). That would be that would be 100 customers. Even with a minimal service (say 4 trains per rush hour) that would be 25 people per train. If any sort of public transit is needed it should be provided with a cube van, not a commuter train.

You make good points. And just to be clear, I am not saying that funds should be moved from the LRT projects that Ottawa has underway, and that Gatineau may push forward, or anything like that. I dont think commuter rail warrants any kind of large scale capital investment, today. To address the NCR's sprawl problem, the O-Train network is the best way to start tackling it, as it brings the most impact for the money being spent.

And, as I mentioned in other posts, there are fundamental problems with the passenger rail network in Ottawa. The fact that there is no downtown station is a problem, just as the lack of a station on the Gatineau side is. And any kind of service increase for existing, or future, passenger rail, is not going to be cheap. This means there are no easy ways to bring effective commuter rail, or increased passenger rail to Ottawa, without a rethink of what rail looks like across the NCR and beyond.

But, just as in the mid 00's, when the downtown had lines of buses a dozen blocks long, and building an LRT network wasn't just a possibility, but an inevitably, once the details got sorted out, the same is becoming more and more true of the passenger rail network (which will form the backbone of a commuter rail network). It is getting more investment (across all of Ontario and other provinces), and being discussed a lot more (and not just in the context of cutbacks either).

This is exactly the time that there should be discussion about what commuter/regional rail could look like, and how can it benefit the region, and counteract sprawl. I don't think you need lines heading into Bristol or Arnprior, But for communities already on the two VIA lines, maybe you can mold them into rail-centric towns. Maybe they become a more sustainable option for people that want exurban living, but don't want to rely on their car either. And maybe the ideal way to offer rail service isn't through some traditional commuter rail model. Perhaps it is a modified regional VIA rail service. Maybe some lines, like the one to Wakefield, are actually better suited for LRT. The NCR and beyond is basically a blank slate when it comes to rail service right now. Its a chance to get creative, build something modern, really think about the long term benefits rail can begin. And, if there is a way to offer rail service to some exurban communities, that isn't a giant, sinking money pit, then why not.

[OCCheetos]

With regards to how much these types of projects cost, there is a good breakdown of the $20.7 million spent on the original O-Train pilot here (Exhibit 5).

Of the $20.7 million, only around $3 million were spent on track/bridge/tunnel upgrades.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

With regards to how much these types of projects cost, there is a good breakdown of the $20.7 million spent on the original O-Train pilot here (Exhibit 5).

Of the $20.7 million, only around $3 million were spent on track/bridge/tunnel upgrades.

But those upgrades were almost immediately deemed insufficient (too slow and too uncomfortable) and additional upgrades were required almost immediately. It would be better to look at the total investment rather than the pilot project phase.

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by acottawa

But those upgrades were almost immediately deemed insufficient (too slow and too uncomfortable) and additional upgrades were required almost immediately. It would be better to look at the total investment rather than the pilot project phase.

I remember that very first iteration of the O-Train very well. I actually skipped a class and waited at Bayview Station for the first train that pulled in there when they launched the service. The train itself was great, I still remember a lot of the labels were still in German. But the ride was pretty rubbish. It was just so slow and lumbering.

Though I was excited that there was "a train" in Ottawa, it felt rather useless. Almost like a toy train going through some old timey industrial area. All the money they spent after the initial launch was very much needed, and even then its a fraction of what is really needed to make the line truly modern and useful.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

But commuters from those exurbs do contribute to traffic, and as they grow it'll only get worse.

Give me a number. What is the traffic from those places and how much worse will it get?

You have to tell us that before asking to spend hundreds of millions or even billions or surrender control of a corridor essential to serving Ottawa taxpayers.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

It is a school bus for Algonquin students, it is too slow and to short to provide effective crosstown service.

I don't get why people discount BRT in the city that truly made the best of it. This BRT is pretty much like the HWY 7 VIVA BRT in York Region. And more than appropriate for Ottawa. If ridership demands it, they can convert it to at-grade LRT later.

Originally Posted by acottawa

Moose or no Moose, there is no way it makes sense to encourage people to live further away, unless the central city is overcrowded (which Ottawa clearly isn’t.)

Thank you. Every single problem in this city, from traffic to rising taxes to crumbling infrastructure can be traced back to suburban sprawl. People are saying we can't stop it. That's not correct. We don't have the political will to stop it. But that aside, I don't see why we should pour gasoline on the fire and move heaven and earth to facilitate exurban sprawl.

I will happily donate to any councillor who goes out of his way to make it difficult for an exurban resident to commute.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I don't get why people discount BRT in the city that truly made the best of it. This BRT is pretty much like the HWY 7 VIVA BRT in York Region. And more than appropriate for Ottawa. If ridership demands it, they can convert it to at-grade LRT later.

On street BRT is fine for medium distance trips, it is not a solution for crosstown trips.

[Catenary]

Originally Posted by acottawa

On street BRT is fine for medium distance trips, it is not a solution for crosstown trips.

I live near Greenboro, and Train/Bus or Bus/Bus to Baseline daily.

A crosstown train from Greenboro to Woodroffe and then the option of any bus heading to Baseline would be great for me, but it wouldn't have a very high day 1 ridership potential. On the other hand, the 88 already has a strong demand, and is hampered by slow service at rush hour. Riding each day, I estimate that maybe 25% of the people on the bus at Heron/Mooney's Bay ride to Baseline, where much more turnover occurs. The 88 serves a significant local population and some high density pockets along Baseline. BRT would allow the route do do double duty: reasonable local service and good speed across town.

[Joseph Potvin]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Every single problem in this city, from traffic to rising taxes to crumbling infrastructure can be traced back to suburban sprawl. People are saying we can't stop it. That's not correct. We don't have the political will to stop it. But that aside, I don't see why we should pour gasoline on the fire and move heaven and earth to facilitate exurban sprawl. I will happily donate to any councillor who goes out of his way to make it difficult for an exurban resident to commute.

The "Compact City" idea was first formally expressed by George Dantzig in 1973.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_city#Origins
https://archive.org/details/compactcityplanf00dant
(...who also, of interest to the technically-inclined here, designed the very clever Simplex Algorithm. When I first learned it in algebra class in the early 1980s my reaction was: "Cool, who thought this up?" When I learned about Dantzig, my next reaction was: "I wonder what he did next". As it turned out, his next step was to consider the optimal configuration of cities: how high+dense, vs how spread+spacious?)

Here is a 1996 review of the concept:
https://content.taylorfrancis.com/books/...bn=9781135816995&format=googlePreviewPdf

Empirical studies show mixed results:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0739456X04270466

In this study from Sweden, the "compact city" and regional rail linkage with towns is considered complementary:
http://www.un.org/ga/Istanbul+5/7-Sweden.doc

"A further spread of the urban sprawl is not positive from a point of view of sustainability. On the other hand a network of fast regional and commuting trains make it possible to develop a multi-core network region of smaller and bigger towns and cities around the Mälar Valley, which is the larger region of Stockholm, comprising three or four counties. Developing a multi-core region served by a train system like this could make it possible to avoid further development of edge cities served by cars. This train network is under development. The first part, the Svealandsbanan, which knits together towns like Eskilstuna, Strängnäs and Södertälje with Stockholm, is a great success. The railway makes it convenient to travel daily the110 kilometres from Eskilstuna to Stockholm. The passenger figures are widely over the prognoses. And, the car traffic on the motorway parallell with the railroad is decreasing."

FWIW here is a recent study on rural multi-modal transit:
http://www.vtpi.org/rmp.pdf

Joseph Potvin
Director General | Directeur général
Moose Consortium (Mobility Ottawa-Outaouais: Systems & Enterprises) | www.letsgomoose.com
Consortium Moose (Mobilité Outaouais-Ottawa: Systèmes & Enterprises) | www.onyvamoose.com

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Catenary

I live near Greenboro, and Train/Bus or Bus/Bus to Baseline daily.

A crosstown train from Greenboro to Woodroffe and then the option of any bus heading to Baseline would be great for me, but it wouldn't have a very high day 1 ridership potential. On the other hand, the 88 already has a strong demand, and is hampered by slow service at rush hour. Riding each day, I estimate that maybe 25% of the people on the bus at Heron/Mooney's Bay ride to Baseline, where much more turnover occurs. The 88 serves a significant local population and some high density pockets along Baseline. BRT would allow the route do do double duty: reasonable local service and good speed across town.

A cross-town train would mostly serve a new market, for those needing to travel longer distances across town. Depending on the routing, I see for those whose destinations would be the Trainyards area, the General Hospital/CHEO, Billings Bridge, Confederation Heights, Carleton University (with transfer to Trillium Line), Colonade Business Park, Algonquin College, Centrepointe, Queensway-Carleton Hospital, Kanata Business Park and maybe a few other locations with a quick bus shuttle. It may take a few riders from Route 88 but as you mention, it already has a well established market for local users. I see them as being mostly complementary services. I can understand the priority of serving the existing market, but for years, it was suggested that we re-use the crosstown tracks. At the present time, there is no fast way to cross the south tier of the city. Both transit and automobiles are delayed by both congestion and heavily signaled arterial roads. Use of the cross-town railway will allow riders to bypass all of that.

[acottawa]

Eskilstuna has 100,000 people, it is hardly “rural”

I would like to see an example where the principal settlement on the route is comparable in population to the rural towns and villages surrounding Ottawa.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Bayview isn’t across town. I think the track upgrades aren’t particularly expensive. I agree the problem is the Via tracks and such a system probably wouldn’t be feasible unless they were upgraded as part of a separate project.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I quoted Moodie to Bayview because that is the figure I had from the Stage 2 team. The line does continue to Tremblay and it will take an extra 10-15 minutes for that. Similarly, to continue on to Kanata (either by bus or a Stage 3 extension) will be 5 minutes or less (regardless of the route, few will be within walking distance of a Kanata station, so a transfer will likely be necessary). So that works out to 40-45 minutes for the crosstown route.

Considering the UP Express 25 minutes is for a shorter route with fewer stops, it isn't achievable. Add a few kilometres and a few more stops and we have a best case scenario of 30 minutes assuming major track upgrades to match the upgrades done in Toronto. Without those, we are looking at an even longer travel time.

At the opposite extreme, the Trillium line takes 16 minutes to travel 8 km, so if we matched that speed, it would take 50 minutes to travel the 25 km from Kanata to Tremblay. In reality we will likely end up with something between the two extremes, but if we split the difference, we are saving little to no time.

On top of that, how much demand will there be for a crosstown route that doesn't serve downtown? With little demand, how often will it run? Every 30 minutes? How much time will you actually save if you have to wait longer for it?