West Gatineau Tramway & Downtown Loop | Proposed

[Acajack]

Bobino

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

I don't like the Wellington option tbh. It would make the line susceptible to numerous service disruptions, including disruptions from protests and other major events on Parliament Hill.

It removes a ton of flexibility for every national event. Think of Canada Day at the Hill. Or a Royal visit. I really wonder if they've been talking to the NCC. If they haven't, they are in for a real surprise.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

It removes a ton of flexibility for every national event. Think of Canada Day at the Hill. Or a Royal visit. I really wonder if they've been talking to the NCC. If they haven't, they are in for a real surprise.

It’s a couple of days a year... trams could short turn at Lyon on those days.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

It’s a couple of days a year... trams could short turn at Lyon on those days.

If it has to short turn at Lyon then it's pretty useless on Wellington then.

[Acajack]

They picked the worst and most controversial surface route possible in Wellington. May as well say the tunnel is the only option!

Sparks, Queen or even Albert would be perfectly fine for a surface route. Certainly more sellable than Wellington.

I know they say that as straight a line as possible coming off the bridge is essential but why would a surface tramway have to make right angle turns? We're talking about a 2 km tunnel to Elgin in the underground scenario, so surely a short 200-300 m tunnel under the Garden of the Provinces would be workable?

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Again, although Sparks is closer on the map, having it in a tunnel means that it's still a longer walk to destinations. The tunnel option also has one less station, meaning longer walks.

The connection argument is valid. But I think that Ottawans overestimate how many STO riders use the Confed Line. I don't dispute that some do, but the vast majority of STO users are headed to destinations that don't require a transfer. We should build the system to make transfers easy, of course. But the relatively slim percentage of transferring passengers shouldn't be the overriding concern.

The surface option can still accommodate easy transfers. At Lyon, the STO appears to be contemplating an underground passage from the CL platform directly to the STO platform. It's 100m and a 15m descent, easily covered in 1-2 minutes. At Parliament, passengers will walk for less than 30 seconds outdoors along a newly-pedestrianized O'Connor to access the Sparks/O'Connor LRT entrance.

Both of these transfers seem totally fine. In fact, they're much better than any of the Confederation Line's train/bus transfers where the walk is often twice as long. Would they be better in a tunnel? Yes. Are they so bad that they justify spending likely $500M+ to build a tunnel? I just don't see it.


As for the underground city, it's moot. Two fare-controlled, 50-metre tunnels doesn't really do anything for us one way or another. I just don't see anyone going down flights of stairs, paying $3.50 and going up five flights of stairs just to get from Sparks to Queen.

Not true, most people at parliament station use either the escalators or elevators which is alot faster than using the stairs. When winners allowed people to cut through their store to get to Wellington, the time difference was 1 min 30 sec not 30 seconds to get to an sto bus from parliament station.

So if we put an underground station at sparks then I can see the time drop to 30 seconds then since there will be nothing to slow down passengers who use the elevators and escalators.

[Aylmer]

I stand corrected for the transfer time. But the point still stands: even for transfers - arguably the biggest argument in favour of a tunnel - the time savings are marginal at best.

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Again, although Sparks is closer on the map, having it in a tunnel means that it's still a longer walk to destinations. The tunnel option also has one less station, meaning longer walks.

The connection argument is valid. But I think that Ottawans overestimate how many STO riders use the Confed Line. I don't dispute that some do, but the vast majority of STO users are headed to destinations that don't require a transfer. We should build the system to make transfers easy, of course. But the relatively slim percentage of transferring passengers shouldn't be the overriding concern.

The surface option can still accommodate easy transfers. At Lyon, the STO appears to be contemplating an underground passage from the CL platform directly to the STO platform. It's 100m and a 15m descent, easily covered in 1-2 minutes. At Parliament, passengers will walk for less than 30 seconds outdoors along a newly-pedestrianized O'Connor to access the Sparks/O'Connor LRT entrance.

Both of these transfers seem totally fine. In fact, they're much better than any of the Confederation Line's train/bus transfers where the walk is often twice as long. Would they be better in a tunnel? Yes. Are they so bad that they justify spending likely $500M+ to build a tunnel? I just don't see it.


As for the underground city, it's moot. Two fare-controlled, 50-metre tunnels doesn't really do anything for us one way or another. I just don't see anyone going down flights of stairs, paying $3.50 and going up five flights of stairs just to get from Sparks to Queen.

A tunnel under Sparks does not have to be so deep, it can even be cut-and-cover. The only reason the O-Train tunnel is so deep is that it had to go under the Rideau Canal.

There could also be several new entrances and a separate concourse with a fair paid connection, improving access greatly even to Wellington street. The station could even be renamed either Archives or Justice which are both bilingual.

Here's a possible scenario:


I think it could go just up to Lyon, an extension to Parliament is rather extravagant when it is well within walking distance. Or if it did, it could be just a single track / single platform station at Parliament so the train could switch tracks.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Acajack

They picked the worst and most controversial surface route possible in Wellington. May as well say the tunnel is the only option!

Sparks, Queen or even Albert would be perfectly fine for a surface route. Certainly more sellable than Wellington.

I know they say that as straight a line as possible coming off the bridge is essential but why would a surface tramway have to make right angle turns? We're talking about a 2 km tunnel to Elgin in the underground scenario, so surely a short 200-300 m tunnel under the Garden of the Provinces would be workable?

Is that their plan? Some bureaucratic jujitsu? Which ends with this is an inter-provincial link so the feds should pay for all of it.

It seems beyond crazy to me that a tunnel is even being considered. The slow tram out to Aymler means the few minutes you save on the last mile will mostly be pointless. I guess a tunnel means everyone would transfer on to it eventually? Would this be the most expensive transit project per passenger in the history of Canada?

Also if it goes all the way to Elgin wouldn't the transfer to Line 1 be very low? Tunney's pasture maybe but most would take a bus further west I assume. U of Ottawa is one further stop but not much else to the east.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

A tunnel under Sparks does not have to be so deep, it can even be cut-and-cover. The only reason the O-Train tunnel is so deep is that it had to go under the Rideau Canal.

There could also be several new entrances and a separate concourse with a fair paid connection, improving access greatly even to Wellington street. The station could even be renamed either Archives or Justice which are both bilingual.

Here's a possible scenario:


I think it could go just up to Lyon, an extension to Parliament is rather extravagant when it is well within walking distance. Or if it did, it could be just a single track / single platform station at Parliament so the train could switch tracks.

Love your graphics!

I agree Lyon could be cut-and-cover and this layout could be interesting. Alternatively, the STO concourse could connect to the PdV concourse, though I'm not sure if they would be willing to give-up more space.


That said, the tunnel needs to extend to Parliament because the volume of passengers is too high for one station. Furthermore, the tunnel would need to be mined past Kent to avoid major disruptions to businesses. And even though the potential plan for the tunnel is to terminate at Parliament for perpetuity, it would have to loop around to Alexandra one day for the sake of capacity.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Bit of a mouthful.

I don't see Fleur-de-lis as being any more of a mouthful than Trillium, and it is less of a mouthful than Confederation (3 syllables vs 5).

In the long run, I see the track across the Portage bridge and into Ottawa as being a branch, not a line. STO Stage 2 would likely see tracks along either Laurier or Maisonneuve.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I don't see Fleur-de-lis as being any more of a mouthful than Trillium, and it is less of a mouthful than Confederation (3 syllables vs 5).

In the long run, I see the track across the Portage bridge and into Ottawa as being a branch, not a line. STO Stage 2 would likely see tracks along either Laurier or Maisonneuve.

Think about an anglophone trying to say "Fleur-de-Lis Line". It's the "lis-line" that some might trip over..

[Horus]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Think about an anglophone trying to say "Fleur-de-Lis Line". It's the "lis-line" that some might trip over..

I'm sure something simpler will evolve, much like how Confederation Line is being replaced by "Line 1" or "O-train" or "that broken thing"

My money's on "STO-train"

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by Horus

I'm sure something simpler will evolve, much like how Confederation Line is being replaced by "Line 1" or "O-train" or "that broken thing"

My money's on "STO-train"

Osti'train if it breaks down

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I'd say that surface Wellington options likely better serves the STO customers who work in Ottawa's CBD, while the Sparks tunnel option is better for the few STO customers who work/study outside of the CBD and the few hundred (thousands?) of Ottawa transit riders who work in Hull. Ultimately, the system is built for the convenience of Gatineau passengers, not Ottawa passengers.

It depends who is paying for the Ottawa extension. If it is Gatineau/Quebec, then you are correct. If it is being payed for by the Feds, then the extension should be built for the convenience of all passengers.

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

The only reason the O-Train tunnel is so deep is that it had to go under the Rideau Canal.

Nitpicking, but it wasn't so deep because of the canal but because of the sand under Rideau (they were trying to prevent sinkholes, though kind of failed on that). I have argued that a shallower tunnel that was bored through the CBD and cut and cover under Rideau would have been better, but hindsight is 20/20.

Originally Posted by YOWetal

It seems beyond crazy to me that a tunnel is even being considered. The slow tram out to Aymler means the few minutes you save on the last mile will mostly be pointless.

The point is not to save time but to avoid drama and improve connections to the Confederation Line.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

That said, the tunnel needs to extend to Parliament because the volume of passengers is too high for one station.

Is it? The trains will have less than half the capacity of the Confederation line trains and will be a lot less frequent. As a result, I expect the number of passengers that would be travelling across the river to be smaller than the number of people currently using either Lyon or Parliament stations.

I figured the extension was to get more passengers closer to their destination without having to transfer.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Furthermore, the tunnel would need to be mined past Kent to avoid major disruptions to businesses.

But Spark street is pedestrian only. It would not be difficult to maintain pedestrian access to the businesses along it. I don't see this being any more disruptive than the Elgin Street Renewal (probably a lot less).

Originally Posted by J.OT13

And even though the potential plan for the tunnel is to terminate at Parliament for perpetuity, it would have to loop around to Alexandra one day for the sake of capacity.

Even with the tunnel, I don't see looping around to the Alexandra Bridge as being impossible. The turn radius would be no smaller than shown coming off of the Portage bridge onto Spark Street. Sure they would need to tunnel under the War Memorial and the canal to just north of The Chateau, but that wouldn't be all that difficult.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

A tunnel under Sparks does not have to be so deep, it can even be cut-and-cover. The only reason the O-Train tunnel is so deep is that it had to go under the Rideau Canal.

There could also be several new entrances and a separate concourse with a fair paid connection, improving access greatly even to Wellington street. The station could even be renamed either Archives or Justice which are both bilingual.

Here's a possible scenario:

Cool graphic!

I wonder if some sort of hybrid option would work. A shallow cut-and-cover under Wellington between Portage and Kent or Bank, then surface running east of there without vehicle lanes.

It would presumably be easier to construct the tunnel on account of Wellington's more generous right-of-way and the lack of significant obstacles west of BoC. It also avoids some of the surface-level issues related to the presence of vehicular lanes. Lyon/Archives/Justice can be the one underground station, built to be the main transfer point between the two lines.

Re-emerging on the surface to the east allows for more stations, loop future-proofing, and a beautification of Wellington. It also avoids many of the complications and costs of building the tunnel in the downtown core.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Think about an anglophone trying to say "Fleur-de-Lis Line". It's the "lis-line" that some might trip over..

In French, it's "fleur-de-liss" but in my experience anglophones generally say "fleur-de-lee" for some reason.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by roger1818

It depends who is paying for the Ottawa extension. If it is Gatineau/Quebec, then you are correct. If it is being payed for by the Feds, then the extension should be built for the convenience of all passengers.

That's a fair assessment.

Is it? The trains will have less than half the capacity of the Confederation line trains and will be a lot less frequent. As a result, I expect the number of passengers that would be travelling across the river to be smaller than the number of people currently using either Lyon or Parliament stations.

Frequency will be better than Line 1, as the STO envisions 25 trains per hour, so every two a half minutes roughly. And at 7,500 per hour coming into Ottawa (call it 6,500 due to a reduced workforce in the downtown post-covid), that's about half the volume of Confederation one way, on a train half the size (taking into consideration the higher frequency).

I figured the extension was to get more passengers closer to their destination without having to transfer.

STO pointed to both the convenience and volume as the reasoning for the number of stations.

But Spark street is pedestrian only. It would not be difficult to maintain pedestrian access to the businesses along it. I don't see this being any more disruptive than the Elgin Street Renewal (probably a lot less).

Not to minimize the pain that retailers and restaurants on Bank, Elgin, Preston and others have gone through, a cut-and-cover tunnel is far more disruptive. We also need to consider terraces. While Elgin restaurants have small terraces on the street, Sparks restaurants' are far larger, so the impact of losing them would be more pronounced. And we now know more than ever how important terraces are.

Even with the tunnel, I don't see looping around to the Alexandra Bridge as being impossible. The turn radius would be no smaller than shown coming off of the Portage bridge onto Spark Street. Sure they would need to tunnel under the War Memorial and the canal to just north of The Chateau, but that wouldn't be all that difficult.

I agree with this, but at this point, STO is only considering a loop for the surface option. And that's my concern; will they have the foresight to build the tunnel in a way that maintains that option?

Ottawa built not just the tunnel, but the entire system in a way that limits future expansions beyond east-west; no stub at Rideau to extend to Vanier, terrible layout at Bayview that limits extension to Gatineau and makes it impossible to interline Trillium, layout and positioning of Hurdman makes it impossible to interline future Hospital line or S/E conversion. Even at Blair, I'm not sure how the Cumberland LRT will plug-in.

[Kitchissippi]

Here's a version of the diagram in OC Transpo's Escheresque style :



Here's the perfect spot for a connecting tunnel, right after the west fare gates:


From a previous idea, one way to go would be to have a short ramped tunnel past the busy intersection, then run on surface to a tunnel portal at Sparks.



Going beyond Lyon or a surface loop is a bit of a head-scratcher for me. Providing extensive service within Ottawa isn't really STO's mandate. The reason buses currently loop around is there is little space to turn them around and avoid heavy traffic flow. The routing of this tram offers little to Ottawa residents but closing down Wellington is a huge impact on how most of us get around downtown.

I personally don't find the deep rumble of a surface tram or streetcar to be all that pleasant. There are plenty of daily events on the Hill that could be affected by this — Changing the Guard, Sound and Light Show etc.

[J.OT13]

Good job! That's basically what I was imagining for an underground interchange at Lyon, minus the pedestrian tunnel to Judicial Triad. I agree that a tunnel or underpass at the Wellington-Portage intersection is probably the best way to go