Confederation Line (Stage 1) | In Service 1.0

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

The artwork in Lyon station looks like a bunch of drunk people falling down the stairs or puking in boxes

Good Day.

Thank You ! Utterly Totally Completely Appropriate !

EnJoy.

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

....... Fencing and wide pillars at platform level make it feel enclosed. Depressing fluorescent looking lighting. And yes, platforms look extremely narrow. Narrow to the point two people can't walk side by side. And based on Kontinuum, seems pretty accurate.

Capacity of the trains and lines shouldn't be our concern, but the capacity of the platforms.

Hoping Parliament and Rideau are better.

Good Day .

Thank You. This has been my greatest fear since the very first renderings, and exacerbated by the photos out of both Lyon and Parl all along.
(Parl looks virtually identical to Lyon at platform level, excepting the artworks.)

Crowded, Claustrophobic, Dangerous.

NoJoy!

[daud]

well, I kind of liked the lyon station actually.

The only concern was the actual platform space. The whole station seems huge until you hit the platform.

The art is meh, but better than the bowling pins in Little Italy.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by daud

well, I kind of liked the lyon station actually.

The only concern was the actual platform space. The whole station seems huge until you hit the platform.

The art is meh, but better than the bowling pins in Little Italy.

One thing that's very different about our stations versus Toronto or Montreal is the amount of vertical circulation from the platform. In Toronto typically the exits are only at opposite ends, and Montreal typically in the middle of the platform. I wonder if that negates the narrowness a bit, as you won't be walking up and down the platform as much.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

https://twitter.com/KatePorterCBC/status/1095343228541231104

24 was reported on Twitter.

CBC radio reporting 14 are ready, 10 are close but they are bringing in engineers from France to address remaining problems.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

One thing that's very different about our stations versus Toronto or Montreal is the amount of vertical circulation from the platform. In Toronto typically the exits are only at opposite ends, and Montreal typically in the middle of the platform. I wonder if that negates the narrowness a bit, as you won't be walking up and down the platform as much.

Actually, looking at the Parliament pictures, the platform is laid out differently. The vertical circulation is pushed to the ends, making a wider waiting area, even though dimension wise both stations are very similar. I think Parliament may end up being the gem of the system

[OTSkyline]

That Parliament station colorful ceiling is nice! Agreed it would have made more sense to have it at Rideau given that that's supposed to be the arts/culture/theater district.

The art/painting in Lyon isn't anything amazing but I kinda like it. At least it livens up and adds color to the walls and staircases. Face it, that looks like a lot of pretty narrow corridors for stairs to go up/down the levels, not like they had much space to add statues or physical items (space is already tight).

The other stations mostly have 1 or 2 small art pieces on the OUTSIDE of the station. Meaning the inside (and most busy parts) of the actual stations will remain bare-bones, concrete and white panels. Very plain, sterile and boring.

Glad to hear about RTG saying March 31st should be good to go. Fingers crossed!

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

Actually, looking at the Parliament pictures, the platform is laid out differently. The vertical circulation is pushed to the ends, making a wider waiting area, even though dimension wise both stations are very similar. I think Parliament may end up being the gem of the system

You're right. If you watch the video from the November FEDCO meeting, and pause through the underground stations, we can see the layouts quite well. The middle of Parliament's platform has more space thanks to the vertical circulations placement.

• Video Link

[rocketphish]

LRT, the train to someday, looks to miss third deadline

Kelly Egan, Ottawa Citizen
Updated: February 12, 2019

Well, it’s becoming laughable.

As a deadline for our $2.1-billion light rail system, March 31 was always a little too close to April Fool’s Day for comfort. No worries now. The joke arrived early. It became apparent at a meeting of city councillors on Tuesday the city has little confidence the system will be handed over on that date, the third deadline to be missed.

Three strikes, still not out of construction. Given the initial closing date of May 24, 2018, the opening of the 12.5-kilometre system is closing in on a year-long delay.

Although Peter Lauch, the chief executive at Rideau Transit Group — the consortium building the city’s most expensive piece of infrastructure — said he’s confident they can meet the deadline, his words were cautious, a stroke of weasel on an easel.

Mayor Jim Watson made it clear he had invited Lauch — who rarely, if ever, has appeared before councillors in a public venue — to explain the consortium’s position. In effect, to face the music.

He reminded Lauch about the $1-million penalty for missing the March 31 deadline and asked how confident he was in meeting it, which would clear the way for a late April launch for actual passengers.

“We don’t contemplate any other scenario than handover on the 31st of March.”

Isn’t that an odd way to make a promise?

For the first 45 minutes, it looked as though all was well — On Track, even! — until Coun. Diane Deans asked transportation general manager John Manconi whether he shared RTG’s optimism.

“I’m highly skeptical that they’re going to achieve March 31,” said Manconi, and immediately reporters were retweeting their earlier tweets and doing a 180 on their story angles. Then he went further.

“Based on our assessment, there is no probability they are going to make March 31, from our perspective, without deviation from the project agreement.”

After the meeting, the mayor concurred.

“I think the March 31 deadline is not achievable at this point. RTG is going to wear that. They told us today, you heard loud and clear, that they believe they can meet the 31st. I hope they’re right. I don’t think they are.”

There is a checklist of eight outstanding issues, and they’re big ones, in various stages of completion. But one easily understood fact leaped out: the fleet of trains is not even ready and a major test has yet to be passed.

The committee heard that only 14 of 34 trains have been fully commissioned and approved for use. Manconi said some of the issues are very minor, like a handrail missing here or there, but it was hardly reassuring to hear half the fleet isn’t green-lighted only 47 days before it was all to be signed, sealed and delivered.

Alarmingly, Manconi was asked by a CBC reporter about a report of a train panel “flying off” and striking something at Bayview Station. Manconi said it was true and that, during “a tornado”, a second panel had lifted from a stationary train.

“Did a panel come off? Yes, it’s not a big deal.”

Bit of an odd response, but then OC Transpo is the same outfit that assures us double-decker buses are perfectly safe, though nine people have died on them in less than six years.

There is one major upcoming test for the system that fed the committee’s skepticism.

The city is insisting that, for 12 days in a row, the trains run consistently and at full operation: 15 double-trains running from Blair to Tunney’s stations, all day, without any major problems. If there is an important failure, the test starts again at Day 1.

So councillors around the table could be seen pulling up mental calendars: When does the test start? What if it has to be restarted after March 19th? Does RTG have to give the city proper notice of a pass/fail, or call on March 30? When is the drop-dead date for March 31 launch?

Eventually, the mayor cut off the line of inquiry, as it was getting pointless. “Our history of giving a specific date hasn’t been great around here.”

There was an admission, an apology even, from Manconi about the massive disruption that LRT has caused for commuters across the city, the altered routes, the lack of capacity, the thousands of passengers who are getting lousy service every day, and motorists who are dealing with mucked-up roads with displaced buses.

So, LRT can’t come too soon.

But remember this. The city and its mayor can blame RTG all it wants. It doesn’t wash. Peter Lauch, who evaporated after the meeting, wasn’t elected by the people of Ottawa. The council was.

Their project, their pride, their folly. And wear it they shall.

To contact Kelly Egan, please call 613-726-5896 or email [email protected].
Twitter.com/kellyegancolumn

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/column...-to-someday-looks-to-miss-third-deadline

[rocketphish]

'I am concerned': City and mayor skeptical RTG can meet LRT handover deadline

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Updated: February 12, 2019

Despite assurances from Rideau Transit Group the $2.1-billion rail line is on track to meet its handover deadline on March 31, the mayor and the city’s transportation head don’t believe it, raising the possibility that the LRT will miss a third construction deadline.

The schism between supplier and customer was revealed Tuesday during a meeting of council’s finance and economic development committee, with the head of RTG telling the mayor and councillors that the consortium can meet the handover date, and the city’s transportation boss saying he doesn’t buy it.

“I am concerned about March 31,” transportation general manager John Manconi said.

“I’m happy to be wrong, but I’m highly skeptical that they’re going achieve March 31, and I’m not suggesting RTG is proposing this, but there is no way, unless I’m directed by council, to accept a subpar system,” Manconi said.

Peter Lauch, the chief executive of RTG, said the consortium isn’t contemplating any other handover date, even though he agrees with Manconi that there are eight critical issues that need to be resolved soon.

In answering pointed questions from Mayor Jim Watson, Lauch said: “We don’t contemplate any other scenario than a handover of the 31st of March.”

The eight critical issues are “trending in the right direction,” Lauch said, emphasizing his confidence in meeting the March deadline.

But Watson wanted to know why the city should believe Lauch after RTG missed two handover deadlines in 2018.

“There’s always some uncertainties,” Lauch said. “As we get closer and closer to the finish line, those uncertainties are less and less. Tracking those eight key, critical items, we’re confident now that the level of uncertainty in those items is slowly diminishing to zero and that’s what makes us confident we can still meet that date.”

Still, Watson echoed Manconi’s doubt after the meeting, noting that RTG is running out of days.

“I think the March 31 deadline is not achievable at this point. RTG is going to wear that,” Watson said. “They told us today, you heard loud and clear, they believe they can meet the 31st. I hope they’re right. I don’t think they are.”

Lauch’s involvement in the meeting Tuesday was a rare occasion when an RTG rep appeared at the finance committee, which receives the city’s regular LRT construction updates.

According to Watson, he asked Lauch to appear at the committee and answer questions from councillors, but the RTG head didn’t stick around afterwards to answer questions from reporters.

RTG would be on the hook for another $1-million penalty if it doesn’t deliver the system by March 31. It already faces a $1-million penalty for missing a Nov. 2, 2018 handover. The first handover RTG missed was May 24, 2018, but the penalty doesn’t apply in that instance under the contract.

Residents should know by the next finance committee on March 5 if RTG can deliver the LRT system on March 31. If there’s one thing the city is happy about, it’s that RTG provides decent advance warning if the consortium isn’t going to meet the handover deadline.

Manconi said there’s no way to skirt delivering a working, safe LRT system on the handover date. If the checkboxes aren’t ticked for safety and commissioning, the system can’t be turned over to the city.

One of the nagging problems involves the Alstom Citadis Spirit trains.

Of the 34 vehicles, 14 vehicles have final sign-off for operations and 10 more are getting close to certification. On the other end of the spectrum, 10 vehicles are incomplete and have glitches that need to be resolved. Technicians are trying to fix deficiencies on emergency door releases and power units.

The city has only counted between four and eight train vehicles on the track at one time during the tests so far. It needs to see 30 vehicles running on the track to have confidence in the operations (there are 34 vehicles, but four are spares).

By now, the city expected to see 15 doubled-up trains being tested on the 12.5-kilometre line between Tunney’s Pasture and Blair Station, but that hasn’t happened.

Lauch said Alstom has brought to Ottawa more technical staff from France and Montreal to help work on the trains.

Without having a full fleet of trains, RTG can’t complete the necessary tests that would replicate real transit schedules.

Under the contract, RTG needs to run 12 days straight of continuous LRT operations and show that the system is working before handing the keys to the city. If there’s one bad day of tests, the clock resets to the first day.

Manconi and Lauch played down the non-conformance reports chronicled by this newspaper on three occasions since last summer after the mayor and councillors brought up the flagged construction deficiencies. They both said the reports show that the inspection program is working.

“You’re going to get reports of issues. That happens on every construction site. This one happens to have a big spotlight on it, but I challenge you to go out to any other construction site, private or public sector, and you’re going to have instances on the sites,” Manconi said after the meeting.

More important is that builders have health-and-safety protocols set up for workers, he said.

The city has held back $262 million in construction payments to RTG because of the delays. The money is supposed to be delivered in two parts: at substantial completion of construction and at the successful handover of the system to the city.

As for the $25-million and counting in city expenses attributed to the delays, the city and RTG continue to negotiate, but for the first time, Watson is acknowledging that the dispute will likely end up in court. It might be years until it’s resolved.

[email protected]
twitter.com/JonathanWilling


Eight critical elements informing LRT handover of March 31

Fleet availability for full service requirements
Occupancy permits for all 13 stations
Tests of the tunnel ventilation system
Tests of the train control system
Final tests for main control system for transit operations
Final tests of the power system to the track alignment and trains
Sign-off by city’s safety auditor on RTG’s safety assurance documents
End-to-end practise running

— Source: City of Ottawa


https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/end-of-march-lrt-handover-still-on-builder-says

[lrt's friend]

A big lesson for all other cities. Do not build busways with the idea of converting to LRT later. If LRT will eventually be needed, then build LRT from day one.

We are seeing enormous disruption that does not end with the opening of the Confederation Line. We are going to see enormous disruption again with Phase 2, and to a lesser degree with Phase 3.

Rapid transit should not change modes on the same corridor. There needs to be an upgrade path without changing modes. Upgrades also should not require shut down of the system for lengthy periods of time. An upgrade path needs to be considered in initial planning.

For whatever reason, Ottawa has chosen to implement both rail lines in a way that has required lengthy disruptions with unpredictable shutdown extensions.

Ottawa provided an excellent example of rapid transit implementation (the Transitways) with one failing, not completing the downtown section. On the other hand, Ottawa's conversion to LRT should be a warning to other cities. Whether, Ottawa's final product is a shining example for the future, we will find out soon but the process of getting there has been poor and will continue to be poor.

[Ottawaresident]

Oh my oh dear, are they ever going to get LRT done?

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

A big lesson for all other cities. Do not build busways with the idea of converting to LRT later. If LRT will eventually be needed, then build LRT from day one.

We are seeing enormous disruption that does not end with the opening of the Confederation Line. We are going to see enormous disruption again with Phase 2, and to a lesser degree with Phase 3.

Rapid transit should not change modes on the same corridor. There needs to be an upgrade path without changing modes. Upgrades also should not require shut down of the system for lengthy periods of time. An upgrade path needs to be considered in initial planning.

For whatever reason, Ottawa has chosen to implement both rail lines in a way that has required lengthy disruptions with unpredictable shutdown extensions.

Ottawa provided an excellent example of rapid transit implementation (the Transitways) with one failing, not completing the downtown section. On the other hand, Ottawa's conversion to LRT should be a warning to other cities. Whether, Ottawa's final product is a shining example for the future, we will find out soon but the process of getting there has been poor and will continue to be poor.

The Transitway opened in 1983, with planning started for it at least a few years before that. I don't think anyone at that time would have guessed it would have become so widely used and successful that it would outgrow its capacity in just a few decades.

Even if a tunnel had been built downtown, for buses, there still would have been issues with the system, the primary one being that the operating costs for even more buses and drivers would have been massive (not to mention the challenge of finding even more bus drivers). Maybe in hindsight you could justify an LRT instead of the Transitway, but at the time, it was a totally logical decision.

I do agree that the ease of conversion, from busway to LRT, that was originally trumpeted turned out not be true (which should surprise no one). But the biggest problem with this project is that RTG has failed to live up to its contract. If they had completed the project by fall, as the public expected it to be, then we wouldn't be having these kinds of discussions.

From the start the city has made its plans clear, which is they want to build a modern, long lasting and flexible LRT system from the start. And to do that would mean disruptions and delays for commuters, in particular during the first two phases. The public knew what was coming, the city communicated this all along, and basically everyone agreed that those disruptions were a trade off worth making for the long term benefit of the city. No one likes the delays construction causes, but people knew exactly what to expect (so long as RTG was on time with its progress).

As far as the Trillium Line goes, it was started as a pilot project and the city has wanted to upgrade and extend it pretty much since the day it opened. And the city has never really hid the fact that converting it from the cheapo line that it is, to something modern, will mean some shutdown time. The only reason that hasn't happened is because the political power of the suburbs has made it the number two project, after the Confederation and its extension into the 3 main suburbs.

I think the biggest lesson of this whole saga is that there is a lack of Canadian companies with the ability to build these kind of complex, large scale transit projects, on time and on budget. Bombardier cant deliver trains to other projects fast enough. RTG will be at least 6 months behind. Edmonton is struggling with its own LRT expansion project. Transit projects are booming across the country and the private sector cant keep up with it. And unless there is an investment in education, training, and assistance to help these kinds of companies grow and develop talent, the situation is only going to continue, and possibly get worse, as the demand for more transit grows.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

The Transitway opened in 1983, with planning started for it at least a few years before that. I don't think anyone at that time would have guessed it would have become so widely used and successful that it would outgrow its capacity in just a few decades.

Even if a tunnel had been built downtown, for buses, there still would have been issues with the system, the primary one being that the operating costs for even more buses and drivers would have been massive (not to mention the challenge of finding even more bus drivers). Maybe in hindsight you could justify an LRT instead of the Transitway, but at the time, it was a totally logical decision.

I do agree that the ease of conversion, from busway to LRT, that was originally trumpeted turned out not be true (which should surprise no one). But the biggest problem with this project is that RTG has failed to live up to its contract. If they had completed the project by fall, as the public expected it to be, then we wouldn't be having these kinds of discussions.

From the start the city has made its plans clear, which is they want to build a modern, long lasting and flexible LRT system from the start. And to do that would mean disruptions and delays for commuters, in particular during the first two phases. The public knew what was coming, the city communicated this all along, and basically everyone agreed that those disruptions were a trade off worth making for the long term benefit of the city. No one likes the delays construction causes, but people knew exactly what to expect (so long as RTG was on time with its progress).

As far as the Trillium Line goes, it was started as a pilot project and the city has wanted to upgrade and extend it pretty much since the day it opened. And the city has never really hid the fact that converting it from the cheapo line that it is, to something modern, will mean some shutdown time. The only reason that hasn't happened is because the political power of the suburbs has made it the number two project, after the Confederation and its extension into the 3 main suburbs.

I think the biggest lesson of this whole saga is that there is a lack of Canadian companies with the ability to build these kind of complex, large scale transit projects, on time and on budget. Bombardier cant deliver trains to other projects fast enough. RTG will be at least 6 months behind. Edmonton is struggling with its own LRT expansion project. Transit projects are booming across the country and the private sector cant keep up with it. And unless there is an investment in education, training, and assistance to help these kinds of companies grow and develop talent, the situation is only going to continue, and possibly get worse, as the demand for more transit grows.

But these were all projects involving global companies, and all of them have fallen flat, and not just in Canada. I'm trying to figure out what we could have done differently (other then time-travelling to the late 70's and saying "build a train instead"). The city had watched projects all over North America and Europe balloon on time and cost, and made what seemed like a sensible contract and plan to defend itself.

They did build an alternate transitway with this project (Scott St and Queensway Widening), and outside of the core buses still move fine. The core is where everything is jammed up, and we didn't even touch the bus alignment through the core during construction. The core would have still been totally jammed today as it always was, even if they built the LRT on an entirely new alignment.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

But these were all projects involving global companies, and all of them have fallen flat, and not just in Canada. I'm trying to figure out what we could have done differently (other then time-travelling to the late 70's and saying "build a train instead"). The city had watched projects all over North America and Europe balloon on time and cost, and made what seemed like a sensible contract and plan to defend itself.

I don’t know, I think the fact that no other city in the developed world thought a transitway was a good idea for the core of a rapid transit network says a lot. At the time the province was paying 75% of capital costs so there was a lot more flexibility.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

But these were all projects involving global companies, and all of them have fallen flat, and not just in Canada. I'm trying to figure out what we could have done differently (other then time-travelling to the late 70's and saying "build a train instead"). The city had watched projects all over North America and Europe balloon on time and cost, and made what seemed like a sensible contract and plan to defend itself.

They did build an alternate transitway with this project (Scott St and Queensway Widening), and outside of the core buses still move fine. The core is where everything is jammed up, and we didn't even touch the bus alignment through the core during construction. The core would have still been totally jammed today as it always was, even if they built the LRT on an entirely new alignment.

That has not been my experience. I have taken 30 minutes to get from Hurdman to the Rideau Centre in good weather and in a reverse commute. Pre-construction, it was normally a 5 minute trip. I groan every time I ended up on Route 98 that does not use Nicholas Street.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

I do agree that the ease of conversion, from busway to LRT, that was originally trumpeted turned out not be true (which should surprise no one). But the biggest problem with this project is that RTG has failed to live up to its contract. If they had completed the project by fall, as the public expected it to be, then we wouldn't be having these kinds of discussions.

I am not convinced that the issues were with conversion of the transitway to rail. The biggest issue was with the tunnel, which wasn't part of the transitway. Unfortunately, delays in other parts of the project resulted in the parts of the transitway being converted to be held hostage.

[lrt's friend]

Rail conversion, which was a point of discussion since day one back in the early 80s was always oversold. It was never really considered properly.

Rail was discussed back in the 70s when Edmonton and Calgary chose LRT and Ottawa chose busways. The difference was that Edmonton and Calgary had access to Alberta's special Heritage fund from oil royalties.

For its period of usefulness, Ottawa's Transitways were the most successful of the three. Edmonton's tunnel proved to be an anchor for a generation, with the system failing to gain high ridership that really negatively affected public support for expansion.

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I don’t know, I think the fact that no other city in the developed world thought a transitway was a good idea for the core of a rapid transit network says a lot. At the time the province was paying 75% of capital costs so there was a lot more flexibility.

Ottawa isn't a city that had the same kind of industrial development that cities like Toronto, Montreal, and even places Winnipeg had. It was largely a provincial city, as many capital cities are. By the 80's it was basically a huge suburb with a bit of a downtown, urban core. The kind of urban development that we are used to seeing in Ottawa now didn't start to happen until probably a decade after the Transitway was built. A busway made sense for trying to improve transit in a suburban city. And it did its job. So well that it created urban growth along with booming ridership.

If an LRT had been built in the 80's, it is unlikely it would have looked like the current network plan. Maybe there wouldn't have been as many grade separations, to mitigate the higher cost of building LRT. They might only be getting around to constructing a downtown tunnel now. It would have created a totally different set of transit problems for the city to be facing.

The Transitway also did a lot of work in creating a right of way that will ultimately let LRT run free of interference. Consider how much more expensive the Confederation Line would be if it had to construct even more grade separations and tunnels. The Transitway had its faults, and it ultimately wasn't scalable, but it also did one thing right, it got people onto transit, and helped launch more urban, transit centric development. This is a frustrating moment in time because of the delays caused by RTG. But in the long run, it will be a small blip in what has been a relatively successful attempt by Ottawa to continue to develop transit in a still largely suburban, though increasingly urbanized, city.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Rail conversion, which was a point of discussion since day one back in the early 80s was always oversold. It was never really considered properly.

Yup, I still remember city staff proposing BRT for Orléans so it could be converted to LRT later a few years back. It's Council that asked for LRT right away.