West Gatineau Tramway & Downtown Loop | Proposed

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by gjhall

I would definitely want to see bi-directional service but why add a 3rd transit provider?

Feds could simply mandate and fund a combined fare structure across STO and OC Transpo - long overdue and much discussed!

Because this loop does not figure into any City of Ottawa transit plan. How would OC Transpo even get vehicles onto this loop from a storage/maintenance facility? This concept is not even based on a business case or origin/destination study, nor is it linked to our biggest transit investment, the O-Train.

All the effort to remove STO buses from Wellington, only to replace them with heavier trams does not make sense. We don't even have a plan for the tour buses that continue to plague the street. The only plan that fits with this is the Aylmer tram, so basically it's like redesigning downtown Ottawa to give priority access to a suburb of 50,000. Somehow $3B for the Barrhaven extension is starting to make more sense.

I'm all for limiting traffic on Wellington. Limit it to 2 lanes with segregated bike lanes. Proposing a rail loop without a big-picture transit plan that connects it to the rest of the city is putting the cart before the horse.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Québec's 60% would fund the Gatineau side of the project exclusively. Ottawa would fund the loop, but could still contribute for some of the project on the Gatineau side.

By "Ottawa" I assume you mean the federal government, not the City of Ottawa? It always bothers me when the federal government is referred to as "Ottawa" especially when discussing local issues.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by roger1818

By "Ottawa" I assume you mean the federal government, not the City of Ottawa? It always bothers me when the federal government is referred to as "Ottawa" especially when discussing local issues.

Yes, the Feds, sorry about that. I understand the confusion. After typing "Québec" I guess I was thinking about Québec City, and then typed "Ottawa". My bad.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Horus

Could this be implemented in such a way that STO trams navigate the loop in one direction, (i.e. clockwise) and similar "NCC" trams navigate the same loop in the opposite direction? You'd have bi-directional traffic around the loop and the option to 'short-circuit' the loop if you chose, by transferring to the other tram if you wanted to.

Personally, I see no reason not to have the Gatineau trams from operating in both directions. You could still also have a circle tram that just does the loop in one or both directions. If in one direction, I would have it run clockwise so that it is always making right turns.

[gjhall]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

Because this loop does not figure into any City of Ottawa transit plan. How would OC Transpo even get vehicles onto this loop from a storage/maintenance facility? This concept is not even based on a business case or origin/destination study, nor is it linked to our biggest transit investment, the O-Train.

All the effort to remove STO buses from Wellington, only to replace them with heavier trams does not make sense. We don't even have a plan for the tour buses that continue to plague the street. The only plan that fits with this is the Aylmer tram, so basically it's like redesigning downtown Ottawa to give priority access to a suburb of 50,000. Somehow $3B for the Barrhaven extension is starting to make more sense.

I'm all for limiting traffic on Wellington. Limit it to 2 lanes with segregated bike lanes. Proposing a rail loop without a big-picture transit plan that connects it to the rest of the city is putting the cart before the horse.

WRT operators:
Given that STO would be operating in one direction, I would propose they operate in both directions, rather than adding OC Transpo into the mix. At frist blush, I see two natural ways to do this:
a) half the STO trams would go clockwise via Portage, the other half counter-clockwise via Asinabka;
b) all regular STO trams go one way, then a dedicated set of STO set of trams goes the other way;

WRT business cases, O/D studies, strategic aligment - good thing this is at a discussion stage and not a Memorandum to Cabinet being table dropped. Of course all those are needed before it could be funded and built! That being said, the argument seems pretty straightforward: connect central neighbourhoods, transit systems, two downtown employment zones, recreation and shopping districts together allowing easier movement for people.

WRT buses on Wellington, I think that's part of the argument for this, but not the whole of it. See above. For tour buses in particular, this proposal would force them off Wellington, so we would then be forced to make a solution. What comes to mind right away is a zone on Vittoria and the adjoining parking areas near the vehicle security check.

All this definitely requires a big-picture transit plan that connects it to the rest of the city! Seems to me that it's an excellent spark to do just that, including integrated fares and (to some degree) service across STO and OC Transpo so that people can move about their city(ies) with greater ease to benefit all!

[Aylmer]

For the direction of service, a simple solution would just be to run the two tram lines around different ends of the loop.
- Plateau Line runs Taché-Alexandra-Wellington, ending at Asinabka
- Aylmer Line runs Taché-Portage-Wellington-Alexandra, ending at Portage
- Loop Line runs in both directions

The reasoning being:

- It's easier to understand at a glance since you're not having to parse out which line goes in which direction.
- It still enables through-running: an inbound Plateau tram can change its banner coming into the loop to outbound Aylmer. At the same time that it's dropping off Plateau passengers, it's picking up Aylmer-bound passengers.
- It's less confusing when a train needs to dead-head because lines have an actual end point. You won't have anyone getting on a train only to find that it's dead-heading one station later.

[Baybreeze12]

I actually think this is such a great idea, for many of the aforementioned reasons, that I wrote Catherine McKenna to express my support. She seemed to take on a holding pattern during questions at the Mayor's Breakfast on the 27th, saying "we need to hear back from the community," so I figured I'd make my voice heard. I'd encourage everyone who wants to see some form of this project happen to contact her at either [email protected] (local constituency) or [email protected] (minister of infrastructure).

I doubt Watson has the vision or interest to put more transit in the core (or *gasp* to Gatineau) while there's still suburban votes to chase and backs to scratch. Plus this concerns interprovincial crossings, so the feds would have to jump in with both feet. I hope they do.

[rocketphish]

Wellington Street loop shouldn't be Ottawa's focus right now
A local group wants electric cars to run along Confederation Boulevard and cross back and forth into Gatineau. It's touted as a capital-building project, but it's time has probably passed.

Mohammed Adam, Ottawa Citizen
Publishing date: Nov 05, 2020 • Last Updated 13 hours ago • 3 minute read

A rail loop connecting Ottawa and Gatineau has caught the imagination of many people – and exciting as the idea is, it’s not what we need right now. The city has more important priorities. What we need to focus on are the light rail projects that would truly define the city. A rail loop is a nice idea, but it’s not a must-have, not now anyway.

“I have to be very clear and consistent that my next priority for transit of any kind in our city is Phase 3, which goes to Stittsville and Kanata and Barrhaven,” Mayor Jim Watson said recently, pouring cold water on the idea. “That will continue to be my preoccupation, and my priority is to secure the funding for that project.” He is right to focus on the rail projects that really matter to the city.

The idea of a rail loop around downtown Ottawa and Gatineau has been around for decades. It was resurrected after Gatineau recently released its interprovincial transit plan, at the heart of which is a rail line to Ottawa. One option is to build a 1.2-kilometre tunnel under Sparks Street to Metcalfe Street, and connected to the Confederation Line. The other option is to run trams from Gatineau along the Portage bridge on to Wellington Street, up to Elgin Street.

Latching onto the opportunity provided by Gatineau, a group of Ottawa residents, backed by a trio of former mayors, is pushing the old rail loop into the mix. The group wants electric cars to run along Confederation Boulevard across both the Portage and Alexandra bridges. Supporters believe such a loop would be a transformative, capital-building project.

It might well be, but the thing is that the idea of a loop may have passed its time. Ottawa is in the middle of a rail renaissance and a loop right now seems like a distraction.

With the completion of the Confederation Line and work now in progress on the Trillium Line to Riverside South and the airport, the next challenge is to lock in the $4.7-billion funding for the extensions to Barrhaven and Stittsville. That’s the city’s transit vision, and should be the focus of the mayor and council. The provincial and federal governments are both running huge deficits and there is no guarantee that funding for infrastructure projects will last forever. Let’s make sure we secure funds for what we need before the taps are turned off – and that’s east-west and north-south rail projects.

Beyond that, there’s no reason to even believe that Gatineau wants a loop. What the city has proposed to serve its growing population is either a rail tunnel or trams on Wellington to Elgin to carry hundreds, perhaps thousands of commuters. The loop, as originally proposed, was largely a means to boost tourism in the capital, but Gatineau wants much more.

So the question is why Ottawa would want to turn Wellington into a rail corridor that dumps hundreds of commuters daily on Parliament Hill. The city would simply be exchanging the current Gatineau bus traffic for rail traffic. What good would that do?

Results from public consultations undertaken by Gatineau on its plan show, tellingly, that 60 per cent of participants preferred the tunnel option. That’s going to be very expensive and controversial. Cost aside, there’s already a 2.5-km tunnel under Queen Street; would a 1.2-km second one in the same vicinity work?

Gatineau is certainly growing and has to find a better transit solution to how to get its residents to Ottawa. In a cooperative world, a rail line connecting Gatineau to Ottawa along the Prince of Wales bridge to Bayview Station would be the best option, but it was rejected. It still offers the best solution to the interprovincial transit problem if there’s the will to do it. But we don’t live in a cooperative world in Ottawa-Gatineau.

A rail loop is nice, but it’s not what we should expend energy and resources on. And rail on Wellington should be a non-starter. That should be council’s position.

Mohammed Adam is an Ottawa journalist and commentator. Reach him at: [email protected]


https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/ad...ocus-right-now

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

[B][SIZE="4"]In a cooperative world, a rail line connecting Gatineau to Ottawa along the Prince of Wales bridge to Bayview Station would be the best option, but it was rejected. It still offers the best solution to the interprovincial transit problem if there’s the will to do it. But we don’t live in a cooperative world in Ottawa-Gatineau.

I advance the "POW Test"; If someone advances POW as the be-all and end-all of transit solutions, completely glossing over the resulting capacity and infrastructure issues that have been explained to death, their opinions on the file are not worth listening to.

[J.OT13]

First off, the loop, for maybe $1B, including the Alexandra Bridge set to be replaced anyway, would probably attract more riders than the nearly $5B Barrhaven and Stittsville extensions. Furthermore, the loop, and Gatineau's tramway as a whole, are not in competition with Ottawa's projects. In the grand scheme of things, it would not take significantly more funds to take Gainteau's proposal and complete it with the loop, instantly doubling the capacity.

Gatineau's current proposal (Wellington option) with or without the loop would be en improvement over status quo. Trains arriving every three minutes like clockwork is far better than a lineup of dozens of buses.

And finally, the elimination of Bayview as the STO's only transfer point has been explained to death. For the love of God people (and journalists, and politicians), STOP BRING-UP BAYVIEW.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

I advance the "POW Test"; If someone advances POW as the be-all and end-all of transit solutions, completely glossing over the resulting capacity and infrastructure issues that have been explained to death, their opinions on the file are not worth listening to.

We had the same thought.

[Aylmer]

I sometimes wish the damn thing would just fall into the river, just so we didn't have to hear about it

You just know that all of the loudest POW-pushers will also be the ones to lose their minds when Ottawa'd have to spend money to upgrade the C-Line's capacity to accommodate the transfer.

[J.OT13]

A more accurate estimated cost for the Tramway has been released.

$2.4B for the Aylmer-Hull portion

+

$585M for the Wellington surface option
$1.4B for the Sparks tunnel option

Estimates are in 2026 dollars and include the contengency.

La facture du tramway de Gatineau pourrait atteindre 4 milliards $

MATHIEU BÉLANGER, 6 novembre 2020
Le Droit

Les coûts réels du projet de tramway à Gatineau commencent à se préciser. Grossièrement estimé à 2,1 millards $ lors de son dévoilement en 2018, le projet est maintenant évalué à entre trois et quatre milliards $, selon si l’insertion à Ottawa se fait en surface sur la rue Wellington ou dans un tunnel sous la rue Sparks.



Ces chiffres ont été rendus publics pour la première fois, vendredi matin, lors d’un breffage technique organisé par la Société de transport de l’Outaouais (STO) dans le cadre de la présentation de son étude complémentaire sur le projet de tramway.

La portion québécoise du projet allant d’Aylmer jusqu’au pont du Portage équivaut à 2,4 milliards $, alors que la partie insertion en surface sur la rue Wellington à Ottawa représente des coûts évalués à 585 millions $. L’insertion du tramway dans un tunnel qui est actuellement l’option privilégiée par la Ville d’Ottawa coûterait à elle seule un peu plus de 1,4 milliard $. Il est à noter que ces estimations comprennent les montants réservés à la contingence du projet et ont été indexées en fonction des prix prévus en 2026.

Questionné à savoir si ces nouvelles évaluations rendront plus difficile le bouclage du financement du projet, le maire de Gatineau, Maxime Pedneaud-Jobin, a affirmé que les différents partenaires financiers, à savoir Québec et Ottawa, savent maintenant un peu plus à quoi s’en tenir. «Ça précise les enjeux, a-t-il dit. Et je le répète, c’est quoi le plan B si on ne va pas de l’avant avec ce projet qui fait consensus des deux côtés de la rivière et qui a une capacité de croître pendant 50 ans? Est-ce qu’on s’autocongestionne avec des autobus? Est-ce qu’on revient à l’automobile? Je crois que personne ne veut ça.»


Le gouvernement du Québec a déjà confirmé sa participation au projet à la hauteur de 60 %, mais c’était au moment où les coûts étaient estimés à 2,1 milliards $. M. Pedneaud-Jobin n’a pas voulu se prononcer à la place du gouvernement du Québec quant à sa volonté de financer la même proportion du projet dont les coûts pourraient passer du simple au double. «Ce qui est clair, c’est que Québec veut qu’on fasse ce qui doit être fait le plus rapidement possible, a-t-il affirmé. On est devant un projet qui a une dimension interprovinciale […] et le fédéral doit avoir une responsabilité très grande là-dedans.» Actuellement, en fonction du programme d’infrastructures de transport en commun du fédéral, Ottawa ne verserait pas plus de 173 millions $ dans le projet, ce qui est nettement insuffisant aux yeux de Québec.

La présidente de la STO, Myriam Nadeau, a rappelé que l’option du tunnel et de l’insertion en surface sont toutes deux viables et acceptables pour la Ville d’Ottawa. «Si le fédéral veut un tunnel, on ne dira pas non à ça, c’est une décision qui ne revient pas uniquement à la STO, a-t-elle indiqué. Pour nous, l’important c’est que le projet se réalise afin de répondre aux besoins identifiés et aux impératifs de mobilité et de croissance de la région.»

La boucle ferroviaire

L’idée de la boucle ferroviaire relancée la semaine dernière par un groupe de gens d’affaires et de politiciens de la région de la capitale fédérale n’est pas contradictoire avec le projet de tramway de la STO, ont insisté M. Nadeau et M. Pedneaud-Jobin. Si le fédéral tient toutefois à ce projet de boucle comme l’a laissé entendre le député de Hull-Aylmer, Greg Fergus, l’option d’une insertion en tunnel à Ottawa devra vraisemblablement être abandonnée.

«C’est clair que si cette boucle devait aller de l’avant, il faudra alors privilégier une insertion en surface sur Wellington, a prévenu Mme Nadeau. Un bout de cette boucle est déjà compris dans l’option d’insertion en surface puisque le tramway se rendrait jusqu’à la rue Elgin. La boucle deviendrait donc un prolongement de cette option vers le pont Alexandra et la rue Laurier. Si le fédéral est prêt à mettre plus d’argent pour financer aussi cette boucle, on ne sera pas contre ça.»

Le maire de Gatineau a abondé dans le même sens en affirmant n’avoir aucun problème à concevoir le projet de tramway en prévision d’une future boucle. «Si la conception de cette boucle aide à faire bouger le fédéral, nous on sera tout à fait content, mais l’important c’est qu’il bouge, a-t-il ajouté. Je suis content si ce projet de boucle stimule le fédéral à agir. Je considère toutefois que les besoins de Gatineau en eux-mêmes sont suffisants pour que le fédéral réagisse au plus vite et prenne position sur notre projet, il y a urgence.»

Ce que le maire Pedneaud-Jobin et la STO redoutent, c’est que ce projet de boucle vienne retarder l’évolution du projet de tramway.

Réaction à Ottawa

Dans une réponse écrite, le maire d’Ottawa, Jim Watson, a indiqué appuyer fortement les plans de Gatineau qui permettraient de réduire le nombre d’autobus de la STO dans son centre-ville. «Notre personnel a identifié les deux corridors comme étant viables, a-t-il ajouté. Peu importe lequel ira de l’avant dans quelques années, je sais que ce tramway électrique nous aidera à améliorer l’expérience pour les usagers du transport en commun des deux côtés de la rivière, tout en réduisant le montant de gaz à effet de serre qui est émis dans notre ville.»

Quelques étapes restent à franchir avant la recommandation d’un scénario complet et final en juin 2021. Le comité des transports de la Ville d’Ottawa sera d’abord saisi de l’étude complémentaire le 16 novembre prochain, alors que le conseil municipal aura une présentation la semaine suivante. Le tracé final du projet du côté québécois doit être finalisé au cours de l’hiver prochain.

https://www.ledroit.com/actualites/l...e2cb1eddc0f26e

[J.OT13]

My estimate a few weeks ago was pretty damn close.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I suspect that Gatineau's estimate today is way off, especially if they end up choosing the Sparks tunnel option. If I were to guess, I'd say Gatineau's proposal could be (if they chose the all tram option) $3B with the Wellington route or $3.8B with the Sparks tunnel, so $115 million/km or $146 million/km -SNIP-

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

A more accurate estimated cost for the Tramway has been released.

$2.4B for the Aylmer-Hull portion

+

$585M for the Wellington surface option
$1.4B for the Sparks tunnel option

Estimates are in 2026 dollars and include the contengency.



https://www.ledroit.com/actualites/l...e2cb1eddc0f26e

Get those signed cheques now!

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

We had the same thought.

Add me to the list.

[gjhall]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

First off, the loop, for maybe $1B, including the Alexandra Bridge set to be replaced anyway, would probably attract more riders than the nearly $5B Barrhaven and Stittsville extensions. Furthermore, the loop, and Gatineau's tramway as a whole, are not in competition with Ottawa's projects. In the grand scheme of things, it would not take significantly more funds to take Gainteau's proposal and complete it with the loop, instantly doubling the capacity.

Gatineau's current proposal (Wellington option) with or without the loop would be en improvement over status quo. Trains arriving every three minutes like clockwork is far better than a lineup of dozens of buses.

I think you're absolutely right.

When you zoom out you can see that the loop + Alexandra Bridge + West Gatineau LRT = advantages far greater than the sum of their parts.

It's a pleasant surprise for Ottawa as a once in a generation opportunity to make a big leap forward as a city and as a region.

You get a radically more integrated central area across the river, and a new icon of the capital as profoundly more urban place.

[Gat-Train]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

I sometimes wish the damn thing would just fall into the river, just so we didn't have to hear about it

You just know that all of the loudest POW-pushers will also be the ones to lose their minds when Ottawa'd have to spend money to upgrade the C-Line's capacity to accommodate the transfer.

We probably wouldn't, since at Bayview you'll get a lot of people detraining to take the Trilliium to Carleton. And even if what you say is true, more trains is a good thing.

[biguc]

Why is the POW such an impossibility anyway?

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by Gat-Train

We probably wouldn't, since at Bayview you'll get a lot of people detraining to take the Trilliium to Carleton. . .

Can I assume that you do realise that the Trillium Line will also be bringing a lot of people up to the Confederation Line, and not just taking people away from it? With Line 2 extended to Riverside South, it is likely that the number of people arriving at Bayview will out-number those alighting from Line 1.