West Gatineau Tramway & Downtown Loop | Proposed

[J.OT13]

At this point, I hope the Feds can allocate the funds for the Gatineau side (25% or 30%) and take over the Portage and Ottawa side of the project, planning and financing. That way, Gatineau can focus entirely on the bulk of the Tramway infrastructure while the Feds determine the best route for the Ottawa side because ultimately, they are the ones most effected by it, more so than the City of Ottawa. I hope the Feds can go beyond Wellington surface vs Sparks tunnel to come up with a hybrid plan that better suits everyone's needs. And of course, the loop is essential for the ultimate capacity of the system.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Making Wellington a tram mall offers so much opportunity to put up pop up vendors and make it lively. It's the cars that are wasting space on Wellington.

Vendors?!??!

There are not enough smelling salts in Ontario and Quebec combined for the NCC if you were to suggest c- c- co- com- comm- commercial activity anywhere within 500 metres of sacred "Confederation Boulevard".

[rocketphish]

Council OKs controversial Barrhaven LRT route and Gatineau's tram vision for Ottawa

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Publishing date: Nov 25, 2020 • Last Updated 3 minutes ago • 3 minute read

<snip>

On a separate matter, council was a good neighbour and voted in support of the City of Gatineau’s plan to run electrified rail into Ottawa.

Both potential routes — a surface tram on Wellington Street and a tram tunnel under Sparks Street — received council’s endorsement, with the tunnel identified as the “optimal corridor.”

Gatineau and the Société de transport de l’Outaouais is planning a new transit system between Aylmer and downtown Ottawa using the Portage Bridge as the interprovincial connection point.

The Wellington Street option would cost $3.032 billion, while the Sparks Street tunnel option would be between $3.532 billion and $3.899 billion.

Gatineau needs financial help from the Quebec government and the federal government to build the transit system. No City of Ottawa money would be used.

Council backed a call for a federally funded study on a transit “loop” that could connect the downtowns of Ottawa and Hull. The study could also examine the idea of creating a pedestrian mall on Wellington Street.

Council also called on any federal money to be prioritized for Stage 3 LRT projects, such as Barrhaven LRT.

[email protected]
twitter.com/JonathanWilling

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-new...ute-and-gatineaus-tram-vision-for-ottawa

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

I'd be very concerned for a surface alignment on all those streets. Unless there's a real desire to limit car traffic north of Albert, the significant cross-traffic would throttle the line's capacity and speed to an unreasonable extent.

Would it? I can't imagine downtown cross streets having worse traffic than Calgary's, and the capacity for both the red and blue lines seems fine.

[Aylmer]

Touché. I hadn't considered the parallels. And if it were just the western LRT lines, there would be few enough trains for cross-traffic to co-exist reasonably.

But the way that I think about the downtown link goes beyond that. Because of the complexity of building new corridors across provinces and cities, it's reasonable to assume that this may be the only inter-downtown project, perhaps this century. We don't have the luxury of other cities with surface downtown segments like Calgary, Portland, or pre-LRT Ottawa, all of which are now proceeding with capacity upgrades or establishing new corridors. We've likely got one shot.

So I ask myself whether a link would be able to support not just today's demand, but another two or three lines and 75 years of population and demand growth. From that lens, the careful cohabitation of surface rapid transit and car cross-traffic starts to become more doubtful. I'm not saying that it couldn't be done, but it would require increasing compromise on the part of Ottawa for the benefit of Gatineau transit operations. And if there's one thing we can rely on... it's probably not that.

Sticking to the cross-traffic-free loop would have enough capacity and flexibility for the future.

[Kitchissippi]

Wellington isn't exactly cross-traffic-free, instead of going straight through traffic just has to make more left turns that also cross the tracks and interrupt flow. The signal cycles still have to account for that volume.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

Would it? I can't imagine downtown cross streets having worse traffic than Calgary's, and the capacity for both the red and blue lines seems fine.

Calgary isn't a perfect comparison because train sets are longer than what the STO's system is capable of considering it runs on streets nearly the entire way. STO hasn't confirmed as far as I know, but I'm guessing 50-60 meters compared to Calgary's 100 meters.

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

Wellington isn't exactly cross-traffic-free, instead of going straight through traffic just has to make more left turns that also cross the tracks and interrupt flow. The signal cycles still have to account for that volume.

From what I understand, the tram line would run on the north end of Wellington (STO study, not the conceptual loop renderings), so no traffic going over the tracks other than access to Parliament, which could be reduced to Bank and maybe the Judicial Triad entrances.

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Touché. I hadn't considered the parallels. And if it were just the western LRT lines, there would be few enough trains for cross-traffic to co-exist reasonably.

But the way that I think about the downtown link goes beyond that. Because of the complexity of building new corridors across provinces and cities, it's reasonable to assume that this may be the only inter-downtown project, perhaps this century. We don't have the luxury of other cities with surface downtown segments like Calgary, Portland, or pre-LRT Ottawa, all of which are now proceeding with capacity upgrades or establishing new corridors. We've likely got one shot.

So I ask myself whether a link would be able to support not just today's demand, but another two or three lines and 75 years of population and demand growth. From that lens, the careful cohabitation of surface rapid transit and car cross-traffic starts to become more doubtful. I'm not saying that it couldn't be done, but it would require increasing compromise on the part of Ottawa for the benefit of Gatineau transit operations. And if there's one thing we can rely on... it's probably not that.

Sticking to the cross-traffic-free loop would have enough capacity and flexibility for the future.

True, it could certainly become an issue for future capacity if there is increased interlining of STO tram lines (up to 3 lines maybe?). You're absolutely right that this will likely be the only major transit infrastructure linking both sides of the river for many decades to come, and we need a design that can accommodate significant enhancements in the future. It's the reason why I prefer the tunnel option and why I think the extra cost is worth it. Wellington can be designed in such a way to limit or eliminate street-level crossing for vehicles - no disagreement there - but not pedestrian crossings, and pedestrian flows there can reach extreme levels at times. I feel that aspect of it is downplayed a lot amongst the pro-Wellington bunch on this forum. At the end of the day funding may not make the tunnel option possible, but until then we should be pushing for that over anything else IMO. We've all seen the headaches and messes that come from picking the low-hanging fruit for transit in this city. I think it's time we learn from that.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Calgary isn't a perfect comparison because train sets are longer than what the STO's system is capable of considering it runs on streets nearly the entire way. STO hasn't confirmed as far as I know, but I'm guessing 50-60 meters compared to Calgary's 100 meters.

No doubt, but that downtown corridor in Calgary also accommodates much higher levels of ridership than the STO Tram would, which means the headways probably wouldn't be all that different at the end of the day.

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

True, it could certainly become an issue for future capacity if there is increased interlining of STO tram lines (up to 3 lines maybe?). You're absolutely right that this will likely be the only major transit infrastructure linking both sides of the river for many decades to come, and we need a design that can accommodate significant enhancements in the future. It's the reason why I prefer the tunnel option and why I think the extra cost is worth it. Wellington can be designed in such a way to limit or eliminate street-level crossing for vehicles - no disagreement there - but not pedestrian crossings, and pedestrian flows there can reach extreme levels at times. I feel that aspect of it is downplayed a lot amongst the pro-Wellington bunch on this forum. At the end of the day funding may not make the tunnel option possible, but until then we should be pushing for that over anything else IMO. We've all seen the headaches and messes that come from picking the low-hanging fruit for transit in this city. I think it's time we learn from that.

For me the scenario of 300 people getting off a tram, all wanting to cross the street at the same time, many of who will have to walk 2 blocks to transfer to the O-Train does not seem like a pleasant thing especially in winter or if it's raining. Picture present day Tunney's Pasture hell with lipstick on it.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

For me the scenario of 300 people getting off a tram, all wanting to cross the street at the same time, many of who will have to walk 2 blocks to transfer to the O-Train does not seem like a pleasant thing especially in winter or if it's raining. Picture present day Tunney's Pasture hell with lipstick on it.

Or picture Wellington today. This isn't some terrifying new thing, it's literally how it works today. As someone who walks those 130 metres frequently, I can assure you it's far less dramatic that you imagine it. If you want an Apples-to-Apples, imagine Tunneys or Hurdman. But less than 10% or so of passengers are actually transferring. And they have to cover less than half the distance to the station, about equivalent to the distance between Tremblay at the Train Station.

It's 30 people per train at peak. Walking 130 metres.

__

That said, there are some practical improvements which can make the experience better.

• Lyon: The STO floated the idea of an underground escalator from Lyon Station directly to the STO platform. This is the logical transfer point for passengers heading west (which represents a very small percentage of transit riders, despite whatever anecdote comes to mind) and the one station where passengers would have to cross traffic to head south. I think it's a sensible idea.
• Parliament: O'Connor would be pedestrianized north of Queen, so this would be a pleasant, traffic-free stroll. If the Winners entrance at Sparks can be a bit more formalized, it's also only 80 metres from the top of the escalator to the tram platform. If I really had to improve something here, it might be some glass awnings on O'Connor. But for 80 metres, it's definitely a nice-to-have, not a need-to-have.
• Rideau: This is part of the Loop proposal, so there aren't any details on implementation yet. In an ideal world, trams would replace traffic on Sussex. So a station on Sussex right at the corner with Rideau would place passengers directly across the street from the LRT entrance.

[J.OT13]

NCC Board meeting presentation and submission.

https://ncc-website-2.s3.amazonaws.com/d...cal=none?mtime=20210121102650&focal=none

https://ncc-website-2.s3.amazonaws.com/d...cal=none?mtime=20210121102657&focal=none

[J.OT13]

Jon Willing
@JonathanWilling

NCC board is considering Gatineau's tram plan for crossing into Ottawa. Surface tram on Wellington is "the most closely aligned option with NCC Plans," agency observes. City of Ottawa leaned more toward Sparks St. tunnel.

1:26 PM · Jan 21, 2021·Twitter Web App

https://twitter.com/JonathanWilling/status/1352321791587446786

[J.OT13]

National Capital Commission
@NCC_CCN

The Board of Directors received a presentation on the alignment of the Société de transport de l’Outaouais (STO) transit system linking Gatineau’s west end with downtown #Gatineau and #Ottawa.

Details: https://ncc-ccn.gc.ca/events/virtual-pub...021?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

National Capital Commission
@NCC_CCN

Replying to
@NCC_CCN

They support the at-grade tram on Confederation Boulevard, via the Portage Bridge on Wellington Street, which fits advantageously with the public transit loop favoured by the NCC.

https://twitter.com/NCC_CCN/status/1352331584251297797

[J.OT13]

At the end of the day, the Feds and NCC have the final say on the Downtown Ottawa and loop alignment.

[zzptichka]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

National Capital Commission
@NCC_CCN

Replying to
@NCC_CCN

They support the at-grade tram on Confederation Boulevard, via the Portage Bridge on Wellington Street, which fits advantageously with the public transit loop favoured by the NCC.

I assume they like the idea pushed by a group led by ex-board member Bob Plamondon.

Supporters of the Loop envisions a rail line, starting from the southern part of the Portage Bridge, going east on Wellington Street and curving north down an undetermined corridor, which could be Mackenzie Avenue, Sussex Drive or Dalhousie Street, before crossing the Alexandra Bridge to Gatineau and heading west on Laurier Street back to the Portage Bridge.

This is great. Let's go!

[rocketphish]

NCC board: Tram preference on Wellington, new pathways at LeBreton Flats, master plan for Gatineau Park

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Publishing date: Jan 21, 2021 • 50 minutes ago • 4 minute read

The NCC prefers a Gatineau-based interprovincial tram system running on the surface of Wellington Street in Ottawa, rather than in a tunnel under Sparks Street.

The agency doesn’t mind both of the options proposed by the Société de transport de l’Outaouais for running a tram over the Portage Bridge and into Ottawa, but it sees the Wellington Street route as an opportunity to pursue an interprovincial transit loop between the two downtowns.

The NCC board on Thursday approved in principle the STO’s idea to run a tram on the surface of Wellington Street “as the most closely aligned option with NCC plans.”

The City of Ottawa has expressed preference for the Sparks Street tunnel option, worried about Wellington Street’s ability to accommodate several modes of transportation.

Board member Michael Foderick voiced several reservations about the STO’s plans, arguing that there are several details needing attention, especially when it comes to the prospect of altering Wellington Street.

Gatineau Mayor Maxime Pedneaud-Jobin defended his city’s plan, acknowledging there are still outstanding questions. Pedneaud-Jobin warned the board that there are no viable alternatives to the proposed tram system when it comes to moving commuters between cities.

<snip>

[email protected]
twitter.com/JonathanWilling

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-new...eton-flats-master-plan-for-gatineau-park

[Hybrid247]

This is kind of funny considering the NCC was vehemently against above-grade rail along the SJAM parkway. What a change of tune.

[hwy418]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

This is kind of funny considering the NCC was vehemently against above-grade rail along the SJAM parkway. What a change of tune.

It's for Gatineau where 90% of its employee live, so I'm not surprised.

[Acajack]

I suppose a big factor is also money.

The federal infrastructure people who will be shelling out a lot of whatever this costs and the NCC both have the same bank account.

[Aylmer]

The insinuation of a pro-Gatineau, anti-Ottawa NCC conspiracy is, erm, interesting

I think it's a combination of factors. One is definitely that the times have changed, even since 2014. The NCC's leadership and its overseeing government are both much less hostile than they were under Kristmanson and the Harper government. Nussbaum and the Liberal government have seen the NCC steer quickly more pro-urban and pro-transit in a number of their projects.

There two projects are also radically different. They share the same vehicles and purpose, but is meant to carry trains at high speeds requiring a fully fenced-off right-of-way, and the other will run at 20-30 km/h with no separation. It was definitely rich of the NCC to bring up the argument considering they operate a highway not metres away, but it's also hard to make the argument that the railway-style LRT tracks would have improved the landscape either.

That actually brings me to the final reason why I think the NCC is more bullish on the tram option; the NCC likely sees it as a vehicle for radically improving the landscape. From their submission, it's clear that they're less interested in the transportation aspect and far more intrigued by the prospect of being able to completely refresh Confederation Boulevard in its look and function. Not only can they get rid of the tourist buses, SUVs, and tractor-trailers running in front of Parliament, but they'd get hundreds of millions of dollars to re-do the somewhat tired-looking boulevard for the first time in almost half a century. They'd probably love it more if the trams weren't there, but they know that they wouldn't get the opportunity nor the financial means without the transit component.


All that being true, I still think that burying LRT on the parkway was a bad move. But it's a bit misleading to automatically equate the two projects on the basis that they both have tracks.