West Gatineau Tramway & Downtown Loop | Proposed

[Multi-modal]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

How do you see a loop being routed?

I guess I am not following what STO is proposing to get trains even to Lyon Station. How do they get there? They are not going through the Garden of the Provinces. They can't be going through the cliff because that is where the Confederation Line tunnel is. They must be using Wellington and turning onto Lyon and then reversing. Still a pretty sharp turn for all those trains. This is awful long way from key destinations including the Rideau Centre, Byward Market and the U of O. Lots of transfers taking place and unhappy customers.

Ya that's a good questions. Its not very clear what the STO has in mind. I'd favor Sparks. As you say getting to Sparks is a challenge, but there is no easy solution.

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I see the need for federal investment if we ever want to see an interprovincial loop. I see the need of federal investment if we want any sort of proper interprovincial transit connectivity especially if trains are involved.

How do you see a loop being routed?

I guess I am not following what STO is proposing to get trains even to Lyon Station. How do they get there? They are not going through the Garden of the Provinces. They can't be going through the cliff because that is where the Confederation Line tunnel is. They must be using Wellington and turning onto Lyon and then reversing. Still a pretty sharp turn for all those trains. This is awful long way from key destinations including the Rideau Centre, Byward Market and the U of O. Lots of transfers taking place and unhappy customers.

Good Day.

Federal investment for sure, big time. Neither Provincial will invest in any cross-province build-outs.

As for getting from the Portage to Sparks / Lyon, as Kitchissippi posted for his plan
( http://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?p=8164337#post8164337 )
and I similarly posted in reading the preliminary coverage of the reports from Gatineau
( http://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=214731&page=38 , post 749 )

That leaves the question of surface .vs. tunnel open to costs and negotiation,
esp. if OC-T co-ordinated planning a T-Line extension past Zibi/Chaudiere through/under/to the north end of Portage Br., a natural intersect/station.

And if the Gat line runs the Portage Br., it could drive through or dive under the interchange to the SJAM intersection, or dive just to the south to head for Sparks and Lyon/Parl.
(Surface to Lyon/Parl will not be tolerated, and the additional cost will have to be ponied up by the Feds, as neither Prov will consider it, reasonably.)

So if Ott and Gat negotiate a STO to Lyon/Parl,
in conjunction with a T-Line to Chaudiere/Portage,
and if the Feds rebuild Alexandra to include LRT/MUP, allowing STO to Rideau at the Chateau,
(or deeper to allow a turn to join the STO at Lyon/Parl, but that's a really big IF, and again, surface just ain't gonna pass)......

That gets you to Lyon or Parl station, and as for Ottawa, surface LRT into and in downtown just ain't gonna pass muster -
- it has to be tunneled (IMO) for any dependability and traffic concerns and demonstrators concerns (purposeful blockages).

As for the Loop, any consideration is rife with complexities - a big headache.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

Good Day.

Federal investment for sure, big time. Neither Provincial will invest in any cross-province build-outs.

As for getting from the Portage to Sparks / Lyon, as Kitchissippi posted for his plan
( http://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?p=8164337#post8164337 )
and I similarly posted in reading the preliminary coverage of the reports from Gatineau
( http://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=214731&page=38 , post 749 )


That gets you to Lyon or Parl station, and as for Ottawa, surface LRT into and in downtown just ain't gonna pass muster -
- it has to be tunneled (IMO) for any dependability and traffic concerns and demonstrators concerns (purposeful blockages).

As for the Loop, any consideration is rife with complexities - a big headache.

So, surface rail is out of the question. I am not sure why this would be especially on Albert and Slater, after all or most of the buses are gone. Countless cities run surface rail in their downtowns. Albert and Slater and the MacKenzie King bridge have been designated transit routes for decades and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. Is Ottawa now too prestigious to have a surface rail line downtown?

Where are we going to get all this money to build another subway, potentially within 10 years? Gatineau won't pay for it, which means Ottawa has been screwed all along when we had to pay 40% of our tunnel and will be moving more Gatineau passengers in the future if their trains stops at Lyon.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by Multi-modal

Something I think people are missing when they say H1 or H2 are cheaper is the cost of new vehicles and electrification. The announcement says that no matter what option is chosen it will be fully electric. This means that

1. even the bus options will require caternary poles and wires, and/or
2. the bus options will require new garages with charging infrastructure and other charging at points along the line

So it follows that H1 or H2 will require a new MSF for trams, as well as a new garage for the electric buses.

I haven't forgotten that, H1 or H2 serves more people for the price of T1 and would have higher ridership as a result.

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

So, surface rail is out of the question. I am not sure why this would be especially on Albert and Slater, after all or most of the buses are gone. Countless cities run surface rail in their downtowns. Albert and Slater and the MacKenzie King bridge have been designated transit routes for decades and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. Is Ottawa now too prestigious to have a surface rail line downtown?

Where are we going to get all this money to build another subway, potentially within 10 years? Gatineau won't pay for it, which means Ottawa has been screwed all along when we had to pay 40% of our tunnel and will be moving more Gatineau passengers in the future if their trains stops at Lyon.

Good Day.

Not too prestigious......just real.

Talk about serendipity and co-incidence, per @kmcamp in the other thread is the reply to your point;
along with all-so-many-numerous incidents in Calgary, Houston, and other surface LRT cities : Kitchener's ION :

https://www.kitchenertoday.com/local-news/ion-train-involved-in-a-crash-1483536

Idiot drivers are bad enough elsewhere in cities used to surface LRT; Kitchener's incident is only the beginning for them.
And to try and do the same in Ottawa - full of idiots, morons, self-centered inattentive jerks.....
and then there are the weekly if not daily parades of demonstrators and purposeful traffic-blockers.....

These are why I always was aghast/against surface rail in the downtown core, right from the start, even in the Chiarelli N-S line.
It would have been a neverending traffic congestion and unreliability nightmare. No.

As I mentioned before, as soon as the river is crossed, QueensPark and QuebecCity are out of the funding. It would have to fall totally to the Feds.
Particular to that is also, as I mentioned, that this would constitute the best opportunity for both Gat to LRT into Ottawa and Ott to LRT into Gatineau.
As a quid-pro-quo on both cities' part, it would be the master element of a trade to get both done,
and the Feds would jump at the opportunity for equal cooperation and a PR look-and-feel-good shot.

And yes, you are correct, Ottawa has always been screwed for our funding, with other municipalities getting 60 to 80 to 100 percent out of QueensPark.
IMO this is just a City of Ottawa reality, and always has been, and will be.

As for moving Gatineau passengers on the C-Line.....well that was going to be in one way or another anyway.
As reflection of this, just look at the streams of STO buses in Ottawa, AND the streams of OC-T buses in Gatineau.
It's up to our political doorknobs to - make the best of it - grab the opportunity -.

NoJoy!

[Nowhere]

Another issue I with the LRT option is that it's gonna considerably slow traffic if we use transit priority. Traffic needs to be stopped roughly one minute for every train. This might cause major traffic jams around Aylmer Road, which is one of the only way to get out of Aylmer. We would also likely have to remove some lanes from car and ban left turns on Aylmer Road where there's no traffic lights. All this would make motorists angry, which might very well get us a mayor like Rob Ford.

There's also the issue that both the Rapibus and the LRT would use the Portage bridge. How would all the Rapibus buses share Ottawa downtown with the trams ? Using the Alexandra Bridge would force us to either close the bridge to cars or to tear down a part of the Major Hill park, which would both face massive opposition. Using the POW bridge would force people to do an additional transfer to get to either Ottawa or Hull downtown and would cause extreme overcrowding on the Confederation Line east of Bayview.

The city of Ottawa also excluded the possibility of running a LRT on Wellington in the 2006 plan because of frequent events and protests so I find it weird that the city of Gatineau wants to run their LRT there.

I don't see any other option than a LRT tunnel under the Ottawa River. I would keep Aylmer Road transit as buses to avoid the issue I described above and the tunnel would be used by a converted Rapibus and the Plateau LRT. We might as well extend the Plateau LRT to Galeries Aylmer using Wilfrid-Lavigne boulevard to reduce the amount of buses on Aylmer Road.

Considering that Québec has an anti-transit provincial government, I guess that Gatineau will choose a cheaper bus only option and that Ottawa downtown will keep having massive bus jams. Gatineau might have to switch to a hub-and-spoke system, using only articulated buses on the Rapibus to reduce bus congestion in Ottawa downtown. At some point, a tunnel will be needed.

[Baybreeze12]

Maybe I'm missing something in all of this, but with the frequencies that the C-line is going to be capable of, why wouldn't any Gatineau proposal just connect (via tunnel or surface) to west of Lyon or therabouts and interline with the Ottawa system through the downtown stations? Does the STO really need to run a parallel system into the Ottawa CBD? Plus, if a future loop was desired the interlined route could split again after Rideau and the STO leg could continue either at surface or underground back to Hull.

Granted this would require a higher level of ops cooperation between our two transit comissions, but I see that as both desirable and (hopefully) inevitable.

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

So, surface rail is out of the question. I am not sure why this would be especially on Albert and Slater, after all or most of the buses are gone. Countless cities run surface rail in their downtowns. Albert and Slater and the MacKenzie King bridge have been designated transit routes for decades and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. Is Ottawa now too prestigious to have a surface rail line downtown?

Where are we going to get all this money to build another subway, potentially within 10 years? Gatineau won't pay for it, which means Ottawa has been screwed all along when we had to pay 40% of our tunnel and will be moving more Gatineau passengers in the future if their trains stops at Lyon.

The transfers between the two systems need to be seamless, so having the G-Train underground at Lyon would be ideal, directly connected to the fare-paid zone. I don't get your pettiness about Gatineau passengers using the O-train. You need to remember that a lot Ottawans who work in Gatineau will be using this as well, so the advantage goes both ways. OC Transpo could save millions not having to run buses into Hull. I think the Federal government should fund 100% of the cost of a Lyon to Place-d'Accueil link much like they do for the inter-provincial bridges.

[Horus]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

The transfers between the two systems need to be seamless, so having the G-Train underground at Lyon would be ideal, directly connected to the fare-paid zone. I don't get your pettiness about Gatineau passengers using the O-train. You need to remember that a lot Ottawans who work in Gatineau will be using this as well, so the advantage goes both ways. OC Transpo could save millions not having to run buses into Hull. I think the Federal government should fund 100% of the cost of a Lyon to Place-d'Accueil link much like they do for the inter-provincial bridges.

Well said.

There is no reason for STO to have their LRT advance anywhere beyond the first logical transfer point to the OC Transpo system. Having a connected underground concourse to Lyon station would accomplish that. A substantial percentage of STO riders would not even need to use the C-line from that point anyway.

These STO proposals are not part of a grand scheme to develop this fantastical Hull-Ottawa downtown loop. That is outside STO's mandate and jurisdiction, just as it is for OC Transpo to do likewise. That type of vision and ownership of that file should fall to the NCC or similar federal-level body.

It's not STO's job to deliver Quebec-based commuters to their chosen workplaces in Ottawa, but rather to a logical stepping off point where Ottawa's system can provide the rest. This works the same in reverse for OC Transpo to bring Ontario residents to Quebec as well. Despite all the hand-wringing over transfer penalties and so on, I would expect that most interprovincial commuters would still prefer a slightly inconvenient transfer than the alternative of wasting away in traffic on a fully congested bridge.

[Aylmer]

NOTE: I actually started writing this before the STO announced the Portage Bridge as their preferred alignment. It was intended for the Dream Transit System thread, but it now seems relevant here.

Procrastination has produced a modified Gatineau LRT concept. I've gotten thinking about how it could work with the NCC loop concept with the Alexandra and Portage bridges.



I wanted to use two bridges which allow both downtowns to be adequately served no matter which way you go around instead of forcing transfers, as would be the case with PoW. This way, you can route an equal number of lines in opposite directions, allowing for a more even distribution of trains and passenger loads. Instead of having all of Gatineau-bound passengers at rush hour waiting on the same platforms, you have half going in one direction, half in the other.

As a service concept, I'm thinking that this distribution of lines can allow trains to run through the loop, ensuring that trains aren't just leaving empty. To do this, some trains could change their lines after crossing one of the bridges. For example:

- a Plateau line (yellow) near the end of its line is crossing the Portage Bridge towards Ottawa.
- Before it gets to Victoria Island, the train stops announcing itself as "Jaune, direction Ottawa via Portage" and starts announcing "Bleue, direction Buckingham".
- As it runs through downtown Ottawa, it's both dropping off Plateau passengers and picking up Gatineau/Buckingham-bound passengers

It's meant to be straightforward for passengers. Anyone heading downtown will know which stations their line will serve. Anyone downtown will know where their train is heading.

Infrastructure

- Chaudière to Portage: Cut and cover triple-tracked tunnel just to the south of rue Laurier. It's the section which has the highest number of lines running through it at peak (since none of the lines are through-running like in the loop), so I would recommend this section be both underground and triple- or four-tracked. Thankfully, there's plenty of space and nothing facing Laurier, so cut-and-cover would be possible.



- Portage Bridge: I see this using the two centre lanes of the bridge with a shallow tunnel on both ends; one at the Gatineau end joining up with the Laurier tunnel. The other to pass under the Wellington/Portage intersection and head south towards Sparks. Victoria station would be on Victoria Island, serving both the possible (eventual?) indigenous centre, as well as Zibi via a short new pedestrian bridge between Victoria and Chaudière Islands.

[IMG][/IMG]

- Sparks Street: On the western end, I see a couple of possible ways it could join up with Portage. Either it could dip under the Wellington/Portage intersection and head up beside the Escarpment parallel to Sparks, emerging either through the Garden of the Provinces or through a shallow tunnel under Sparks with a portal on Sparks itself.
I'm conflicted about using Sparks. On the one hand, it would take up about 7 of the 18 lateral metres of the street, precluding any large events such as Ribfest. On the other, bringing passengers to Sparks has the potential to generate a lot more everyday traffic with thousands of people waiting and alighting. And with more than 5 metres of sidewalk on each side, it would remain a generous pedestrian space. On the whole, I think Sparks would benefit from the addition of trams. Amsterdam's Leidsestraat is an interesting example of a street which, despite being *much* busier and narrower than Sparks, manages to have both very high tram frequencies and a lively pedestrian presence.

• Video Link

- Confederation Square : Streetcars did run along the square for decades in the past, but we can do a lot better than "Confusion Square" by simplifying the road geometry; Trams on the eastern side, both directions of traffic to the west (which is already four lanes wide considering the tourist parking lane). Especially with trams now being able to operate without catenaries, I think this has the potential to not only avoid crowding the Memorial, but improve it. Instead of being penned in by busy roads on all sides, it would be more seamlessly connected with its surroundings.
There are also benefits for Ottawa transit users; the transit lanes could also be used by Ottawa buses to bypass the bottleneck between Rideau and Downtown (via a connection between Confed Sq and Queen). If Ottawa ever decides to upgrade Bank or Rideau/Montreal to surface rail, they could use a portion of the loop. I illustrated this as a line 3 on my map for giggles and shits.



- Mackenzie: This road would be reduced to one lane, but could be compensated by adding a counterflow lane to Sussex between Murray and York. I envision a loop station at the top of the York Steps or at Murray to serve the National Gallery and, more importantly, the Market.

- Alexandra: I have this idea of a transit/bike/ped bridge, sort of like Portland's Tilikum Crossing. The advantage of not having cars on the bridge is that it reduces the cost and wear significantly. Portland's green bridge was built for a scant $150M for a distance about equivalent to that of the Alexandra (with clearance for ships below to boot), whereas adding car lanes would've increased that cost several times over.
I'd love to see this bridge with a transit deck below and an open ped/bike deck above with greenery, space to stop and relax, maybe even a "Tavern-on-the-Bridge". Basically creating a continuous park link between Jacques-Cartier/Museum and Nepean Point/Majors Hill. It would be a tremendous addition to the core and the region.

[corynv]

Originally Posted by Baybreeze12

Maybe I'm missing something in all of this, but with the frequencies that the C-line is going to be capable of, why wouldn't any Gatineau proposal just connect (via tunnel or surface) to west of Lyon or therabouts and interline with the Ottawa system through the downtown stations? Does the STO really need to run a parallel system into the Ottawa CBD? Plus, if a future loop was desired the interlined route could split again after Rideau and the STO leg could continue either at surface or underground back to Hull.

Granted this would require a higher level of ops cooperation between our two transit comissions, but I see that as both desirable and (hopefully) inevitable.

For the interlining. That'd only be available in the short-medium term, not longer term. The plan is to eventually get the confederation line itself down to 90 second frequency (whenever we get the ridership) and at the point OC Transpo would need to stop allowing the STO route to use the tunnel during peak times.

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

[B][I]
- Confederation Square : Streetcars did run along the square for decades in the past, but we can do a lot better than "Confusion Square" by simplifying the road geometry; Trams on the eastern side, both directions of traffic to the west (which is already four lanes wide considering the tourist parking lane). Especially with trams now being able to operate without catenaries, I think this has the potential to not only avoid crowding the Memorial, but improve it. Instead of being penned in by busy roads on all sides, it would be more seamlessly connected with its surroundings.
There are also benefits for Ottawa transit users; the transit lanes could also be used by Ottawa buses to bypass the bottleneck between Rideau and Downtown (via a connection between Confed Sq and Queen). If Ottawa ever decides to upgrade Bank or Rideau/Montreal to surface rail, they could use a portion of the loop. I illustrated this as a line 3 on my map for giggles and shits.

A lot has changed since streetcars used to run across Confederation Square. It now houses the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, his interred remains representing any and every soldier who died in war. The idea of running a rumbling tram a few feet away would be viewed by some as inappropriate to a hallowed grave. There was even concern that the tunnel not directly pass under it. The honour guards posted are not for the War Memorial, they are for the Tomb.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

A lot has changed since streetcars used to run across Confederation Square. It now houses the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, his interred remains representing any and every soldier who died in war. The idea of running a rumbling tram a few feet away would be viewed by some as inappropriate to a hallowed grave. There was even concern that the tunnel not directly pass under it. The honour guards posted are not for the War Memorial, they are for the Tomb.

I partially agree. I'm well aware of the significance - I actally worked for several years as an interpreter on the site. And I agree that it would be far preferable to have the Memorial and the Tomb in more respectful, tranquil surroundings. When I worked at the Memorial, I would see every day how jarring the contrast was between people coming to pay respects and the rumbling Tim Horton's tractor-trailers and cars just metres away. But that isn't a fluke; Mackenzie King, the instigator of the whole project, wanted Confederation Sq to be Ottawa's answer to Picadilly Circus, a monument in full view of city life in order to remind people of the sacrifices made during the War as they go about their business. I don't necessarily think that it's succeeded at doing that, nor do I think it's worth the constant disturbance of the site. Iirc, there was a Gréber-era proposal to move the entire monument to Majors Hill Park. I would completely agree with that move. But in any case, I don't forsee that happening.

EDIT: I found it. Urbsite has a great write-up on the topic with sketch-ups of what it might've looked like.



I'm getting a bit off-topic here. Basically, I agree that the Memorial should be in more tranquil surroundings. But I disagree that electric trams would somehow be less respectful than the current phalanxes of cars, 16-wheelers, buses, and taxis which currently parade around the Memorial around the clock. If anything, it would at least be less noisy.

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

You might be right on that one. And the Aylmer route is better suited for LRT due to the straighter alignment and lack of space (LRT takes up less room than BRT, as demonstrated by the Transitway conversion).

Those are good points, but I have to say I prefer H1 for the simple fact that a large part of central Hull gets LRT service, namely the busy Portage-Maisonneuve-Allumettieres corridor. That would bring much better service to many of the government buildings there which would be huge trip generators for the line.

H1 also works better for STO service to Tunney's pasture, as the buses can simply branch off of the BRT alignment at Champlain bridge.

[Aylmer]

Besides the two smallish office buildings at Allumetières/Crémazie, I can't think of any other trip generators which would be served by H1 but not T1. As these two offices are served by the existing Montcalm Rapibus station, even those would be served in a T scenario anyhow.

Along Taché, however, there are some very sizeable destinations, notably Terraces Chaudière (7000 employées) and UQO (which is set to swell by over 10 000 employees and students in the next decade iirc).

Allumetières is indeed a busy corridor. But we should be careful not to mistake a busy road for a destination. The SJAM Parkway is very busy, but it isn't a destination in itself.

[TheMatth69]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

NOTE: I actually started writing this before the STO announced the Portage Bridge as their preferred alignment. It was intended for the Dream Transit System thread, but it now seems relevant here.

Procrastination has produced a modified Gatineau LRT concept. I've gotten thinking about how it could work with the NCC loop concept with the Alexandra and Portage bridges. [/INDENT]

I Actually did the same while procratinating too haha.
Mine looks different and much simpler but it's interesting to make a comparaison.



- For Aylmers LRT I actually went for a route passing by Lucerne Blvd instead of Chemin d'Aylmer with a brench going to Rivermead. Also I went for a Underground segment from Terrasses de la Chaudière to Rideau and no loop. I also thought of a full refurbishment of the old building just across the bus station at Terrasse de la Chaudière. It would be converted into a station using the building as the main hall (this isn't the final render btw).

- I also extended the Wakfield line all the way to Wakefield.

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Besides the two smallish office buildings at Allumetières/Crémazie, I can't think of any other trip generators which would be served by H1 but not T1. As these two offices are served by the existing Montcalm Rapibus station, even those would be served in a T scenario anyhow.

Along Taché, however, there are some very sizeable destinations, notably Terraces Chaudière (7000 employées) and UQO (which is set to swell by over 10 000 employees and students in the next decade iirc).

Allumetières is indeed a busy corridor. But we should be careful not to mistake a busy road for a destination. The SJAM Parkway is very busy, but it isn't a destination in itself.

I was strictly comparing H1 and H2, not T1. T1 would certainly be great but it's likely too expensive.

[Aylmer]

Sorry, I put words in your mouth. However, the principle (Allumetières vs Taché) still applies; Allumetières has few destinations close to it because it was designed to be a thoroughfare.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Sorry, I put words in your mouth. However, the principle (Allumetières vs Taché) still applies; Allumetières has few destinations close to it because it was designed to be a thoroughfare.

T1 is still too expensive to do so in that case a good comprimise would be H2 IMO. Anyway we are talking about the wrong thing, the point of the all the plans is to decide how to move Gatineau residents into OTTAWA and get STO busses of thier streets. T1 wont completely do that but H1 and H2 have a better shot at doing it.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by TheMatth69

I Actually did the same while procratinating too haha.
Mine looks different and much simpler but it's interesting to make a comparaison.


- For Aylmers LRT I actually went for a route passing by Lucerne Blvd instead of Chemin d'Aylmer with a brench going to Rivermead. Also I went for a Underground segment from Terrasses de la Chaudière to Rideau and no loop. I also thought of a full refurbishment of the old building just across the bus station at Terrasse de la Chaudière. It would be converted into a station using the building as the main hall (this isn't the final render btw).

- I also extended the Wakfield line all the way to Wakefield.

This is really cool! It's interesting to see different perspectives.
I've always thought that it would be great to give that old EB Eddy building on Taché a second life as a station. I'd love to see the your render whenever it's finalized.