Ottawa Rapid Transit Network developments

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Suzie

We should be able to achieve similar capacity as 7th Avenue in Calgary. In that case, the maximum achievable capacity has been estimated at approximately 36 trains per hour in each direction (at least, that’s what page 3 of [url]
• Perhaps the surface option would force the City to reconsider its enthusiasm for the more expensive O-Train corridor.
Further, some surface bus routes would remain and could absorb some of the demand.

You understand that it's still a short term solution. The price of a tunnel will surely not drop by then, and it affects the design of the rest of the system too. The current problem is the downtown capacity, having surface LRT does little to change this. The city would be better to keep the buses in that case.

With the protests and last's year delivery truck stuck downtown, what a lovely transit system it would result... Like I mention every time, there's a limit on being cheap. Especially when being cheap now costs 10x more in the future.

[Suzie]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

You understand that it's still a short term solution. The price of a tunnel will surely not drop by then, and it affects the design of the rest of the system too. The current problem is the downtown capacity, having surface LRT does little to change this. The city would be better to keep the buses in that case.

With the protests and last's year delivery truck stuck downtown, what a lovely transit system it would result... Like I mention every time, there's a limit on being cheap. Especially when being cheap now costs 10x more in the future.

26,000 pphpd would increase current capacity in the Albert/Slater corridor by a factor of two and a half. That’s more than a short-term fix.

2031 is more than 20 years away and even assuming the absolute worst-case scenario (transportation planning decisions are made that result in a huge imbalance of traffic of 24,100 peak-hour riders from the West and 11,300 peak-hour riders from the East), it would still be sufficient. Under a more balanced and realistic scenario, the line would be sufficient for another 20 years (2050). This would give us more than enough time to properly plan for another corridor, taking into account the travel patterns of the day and the transportation technology available. Frankly, right now, I don’t know what Ottawa and the urban transportation world will look like during the second half of this century – we’ll have a much better idea in 25 years. What happens if Ottawa (or more importantly downtown employment) does not grow as fast as predicted? Or if a new transportation technology comes along? We’d be stuck with an over-built, expensive, deep tunnel that provides poor accessibility. Building a tunnel should only be done as a last resort.

As for reliability, what has been the real-world experience in Calgary with an at-grade alignment? Has it been good or poor?

To me, funnelling all demand into a single tunnel with only two downtown stations located deep underground sounds more risky, especially from a security, safety and redundancy perspective. This would be on top of the well-known financial risks (overall cost and exposure to cost overruns).

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

... It is inconceivable that we would transport all Gatineau transit riders from downtown to Lebreton by subway and then transfer everybody to a bus. I vote firmly against having a major bus transfer station on Lebreton Flats....

Have you looked at the Staff recommendations? LeBreton Station is being designed as the major transfer station from the W-E rail line to OC Transpo buses going between Gatineau and Ottawa.

From the Staff report (http://ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/cit...S-PLA-0069.htm)

The Buses on Booth/Albert configuration accommodates bus operations on the new Booth Street bridge over the LRT Corridor, which will be wide enough to accommodate bus lanes and waiting areas for passengers. The lack of dedicated bus facilities at this location will require that bus service either loop on-street or at an alternative bus terminal location. Bus operations will need to be developed and confirmed as part of the functional design process. Transit users transferring at this location will be well served from either direction with minimal travel time between stations and platforms. This configuration is recommended as it has fewer infrastructure requirements and would allow residential development south of the aqueduct to proceed more quickly. This option also allows for flexibility in the implementation of decisions that will arise from the Interprovincial Transit Strategy.

In the above image, I have added in the blue bus lanes and passenger infrastructure which will be needed.

Assuming that Booth Street will still have two lanes of general traffic in each direction (3.75m each = 15m), plus a single transit lane in each direction (4m each = 8m), plus a 4 metre wide passenger waiting area on each side (8m), then the bridge will be about 30 metres wide. If there needs to be the customary transit passing lanes, then add in another 8 metres. Then there will be the vertical transfer facilities (elevator and stairs) which will be built from the sides of the bridge down to the centre platform of the train station.

There will also need to be major work on the Booth/Albert intersection to accommodate the bus traffic. Currently almost all west-east bus traffic is along the Transitway. In order to run those buses along Albert through the intersection at Booth, Albert will need to be modified. Remember the buses will still need to run to downtown during conversion of the Transitway.

So now we have Booth being a 6-lane road north and south of the canal, as it passes through the new residential area. This sounds inviting.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

... Bayview is also not an option, being so far west, and since the Prince of Wales Bridge cannot handle two way traffic as presently configured.

Don't let David Gladstone hear you saying this.

[lrt's friend]

Any recommendation that forces all Gatineau residents to transfer at Lebreton to reach downtown Ottawa is not worth the paper it is printed on. How will the trains be able to handle all those additional passengers over such a short distance? Or is this all designed to make it so inconvenient that people will just walk into downtown from Lebreton? I can understand transferring passengers to buses bound for the Hull government complexes, but really, wouldn't this be a perfect application for a local streetcar service?

When I see things like this, have we forgotten about customer convenience in all of this?

I guess we consider downtown transit riders a captive market and therefore, we can do with them what we want. But, if we want people to use the system during off-peak hours and on weekends, it better be convenient, or downtown business will suffer.

Again, does nobody pay attention to the Calgary success story? Their main transit routes whether LRT or BRT all go directly into downtown. There is no transferring just outside of downtown. Their planning makes a whole lot more sense.

[Dado]

I'm not convinced that a tunnel will be more expensive in real (i.e. inflation-adjusted) terms. Tunneling technology is not going to get less efficient than it is right now. One major cost of the tunnel is going to be utility relocations and another is station access. Assuming we do some long term planning with a good tunnel design (ok, there goes my argument in an Ottawa context, but bear with me), as streets are rebuilt and new buildings built, utilities and accesses can be dealt with as part of a regular renewal process rather than as an urgency. That means it'll be easier to slip the tunnel into place when the need arises. One definite downside of the demise of the bus tunnel from 1988 was that no further planning or implementation was carried out for it so we're in no better a position to build a tunnel now than then, and we may be worse - and that's definitely not something that wants to be repeated. The tunnel should definitely be planned, but it need not be built for quite awhile yet.


It's mentioned that surface LRT is a temporary solution. Yes and no. Even with a tunnel it'll always be there. Don't forget that we're supposed to get a Carling LRT line and how it gets through downtown hasn't been determined (there's that lack of long term planning again - why isn't *that* part of the downtown transit study as well?). It'll become an important part of the daytime transportation infrastructure. Few are going to make use of a tunnel that is 10 storeys down to travel from the Rideau Centre to the downtown core - but they would with a surface LRT. A surface LRT would enhance downtown mobility in a way that a tunnel simply can't.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Dado

It's mentioned that surface LRT is a temporary solution. Yes and no. Even with a tunnel it'll always be there. Don't forget that we're supposed to get a Carling LRT line and how it gets through downtown hasn't been determined (there's that lack of long term planning again - why isn't *that* part of the downtown transit study as well?). It'll become an important part of the daytime transportation infrastructure. Few are going to make use of a tunnel that is 10 storeys down to travel from the Rideau Centre to the downtown core - but they would with a surface LRT. A surface LRT would enhance downtown mobility in a way that a tunnel simply can't.

It is included in the West LRT EA. But no Preston nor no Rideau/King Edward, which could have made a great line.

[Richard Eade]

Well, unfortunately, this system is being designed as a short rail link from Baseline to Blair with the express purpose of getting commuter traffic from those locations (and Lincoln Fields) to downtown. There has been very little consideration of the passengers or needs of non-commuters.

Take, for instance, the recommended design for Hurdman Station - it precludes any idea of ever converting the S-E Twy to rail and interlining it with the W-E line. Unless the buses will still be running through downtown, almost 4,000 pph will need to transfer at Hurdman to get to UofO and downtown.

The new Cumberland Transitway is being designed to take the new commuters from the south of Orleans and transport them to Blair where they will transfer to the train to be whisked downtown. Notice that the Cumberland Transitway is sitting along the south of Orleans. Can you guess where future development is going to be? This line is not even recommended to go to Blackburn Hamlet - it is to follow the Bypass so commuters are not slowed down picking up other passengers.

As for where the extra train capacity will come from for the folks transferring at LeBreton and Hurdman, there will likely be extra trains running only between those two stations (stopping at downtown stations, of course). This will mean that there will likely need to be train storage areas at these two locations, as there is now for buses. The other option is to drag empty cars all the way to the ends of the line and back again. There is also talk of starting extra trains at Lincoln Fields for the Kanata people, which would mean storage there too.

Basically, this system has not been well planned out at all. Even the downtown is being done poorly for a commuter line and that is a pretty big factor in this entire project. In fact, it is supposedly the reason for the whole thing. The removal of the bus congestion is to be accomplished by adding a train tunnel. This will speed up the trip to your downtown destination, it is claimed.

Then they go and ‘plan’ effectively two, deep stations in the core. I say effectively two stations because I think that Downtown-west is a little too far west to be a major destination point, and Campus is obviously going to be virtually a single function station; that leaves Downtown-east (at O’Connor) and Rideau (under the north end of the Rideau Centre). I am not saying that there will be NO transit traffic at Downtown-west, but just nowhere near as much as at the other two.

For some reason, Staff has chosen O’Connor as the main destination west of the canal, despite Bank being the main north-south artery where surface buses (and maybe someday LRT) will travel. This station will handle almost all of the traffic west of the canal; it is going to need to be BIG to handle, say, 5,000 pph per direction.

Rideau Station is the other worry; look at how crowded Rideau Street is already. Now add in all the passengers from Mackenzie-King, and a good portion of those from Laurier. Can you see all those people or even most of them all using the sidewalks on Rideau?

In short, I am not impressed by the plan, but I expect it can be made to work if enough future money is thrown at it. Staff has listened to public consultation so they can form their arguments about why their system will be the best thing since the invention of the locomotive, but none of the suggestions or comments have changed what Staff had planned.

[lrt's friend]

I agree with Dado, that a surface LRT route through downtown will have value whether we build a tunnel or not. The problem is that the Albert/Slater coalition has been so opposed to this, that it will be difficult to get it back in the plan. I may be wrong, but my impression is that the Carling streetcar as proposed will simply shuttle passengers between the present O-Train route and Lincoln Fields and not go downtown.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

Well, unfortunately, this system is being designed as a short rail link from Baseline to Blair with the express purpose of getting commuter traffic from those locations (and Lincoln Fields) to downtown. There has been very little consideration of the passengers or needs of non-commuters.

Take, for instance, the recommended design for Hurdman Station - it precludes any idea of ever converting the S-E Twy to rail and interlining it with the W-E line. Unless the buses will still be running through downtown, almost 4,000 pph will need to transfer at Hurdman to get to UofO and downtown.

The new Cumberland Transitway is being designed to take the new commuters from the south of Orleans and transport them to Blair where they will transfer to the train to be whisked downtown. Notice that the Cumberland Transitway is sitting along the south of Orleans. Can you guess where future development is going to be? This line is not even recommended to go to Blackburn Hamlet - it is to follow the Bypass so commuters are not slowed down picking up other passengers.

As for where the extra train capacity will come from for the folks transferring at LeBreton and Hurdman, there will likely be extra trains running only between those two stations (stopping at downtown stations, of course). This will mean that there will likely need to be train storage areas at these two locations, as there is now for buses. The other option is to drag empty cars all the way to the ends of the line and back again. There is also talk of starting extra trains at Lincoln Fields for the Kanata people, which would mean storage there too.

Basically, this system has not been well planned out at all. Even the downtown is being done poorly for a commuter line and that is a pretty big factor in this entire project. In fact, it is supposedly the reason for the whole thing. The removal of the bus congestion is to be accomplished by adding a train tunnel. This will speed up the trip to your downtown destination, it is claimed.

Then they go and ‘plan’ effectively two, deep stations in the core. I say effectively two stations because I think that Downtown-west is a little too far west to be a major destination point, and Campus is obviously going to be virtually a single function station; that leaves Downtown-east (at O’Connor) and Rideau (under the north end of the Rideau Centre). I am not saying that there will be NO transit traffic at Downtown-west, but just nowhere near as much as at the other two.

For some reason, Staff has chosen O’Connor as the main destination west of the canal, despite Bank being the main north-south artery where surface buses (and maybe someday LRT) will travel. This station will handle almost all of the traffic west of the canal; it is going to need to be BIG to handle, say, 5,000 pph per direction.

Rideau Station is the other worry; look at how crowded Rideau Street is already. Now add in all the passengers from Mackenzie-King, and a good portion of those from Laurier. Can you see all those people or even most of them all using the sidewalks on Rideau?

In short, I am not impressed by the plan, but I expect it can be made to work if enough future money is thrown at it. Staff has listened to public consultation so they can form their arguments about why their system will be the best thing since the invention of the locomotive, but none of the suggestions or comments have changed what Staff had planned.

Man, you are making me very discouraged. I don't understand all this short turning of trains. Doesn't this create scheduling and signalling complications? Does Toronto short turn its subways? I assumed that they shuttle from one end of the subway line to the other. Doesn't this also create confusion for passengers if the subways terminate at Lebreton, Lincoln Fields, Baseline? If we have all these short turning trains, so much for the 3 minute service that was promised and the minimal transfer delays at the end of the line.

[lrt's friend]

So, funding has been approved for the SW Transitway extension and the Baseline megastation through the infrastruture program.

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

So, funding has been approved for the SW Transitway extension and the Baseline megastation through the infrastruture program.

Is there a value given for the Baseline Station?

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

Is there a value given for the Baseline Station?

The first thing I read made reference to the Baseline pedestrian overpass and the tunnel, but now I see in the Citizen that $104 M has been designated for transit projects including the SW Transitway extension and changes to Baseline Station.

[Dado]

I wouldn't rely on speculation from the Citizen, which is what this morning's article was. Big numbers seem to confuse them. $104M isn't enough for the entire Baseline megastation, and it most certainly is not if that amount is also including the SW Transitway extension through Barrhaven.

That latter requires about ~$57M iirc (Richard?). There are also three park and rides of $5M each that are to be built in Riverside South and Orleans. They'll probably throw in a bunch of Transitway renewal projects while they're at it.

I think the Baseline component is the new temporary/semi-permanent station and the pedestrian overpass. I don't think we've yet got to a point of no return at Baseline - luckily.

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Man, you are making me very discouraged. I don't understand all this short turning of trains. Doesn't this create scheduling and signalling complications? Does Toronto short turn its subways? I assumed that they shuttle from one end of the subway line to the other. Doesn't this also create confusion for passengers if the subways terminate at Lebreton, Lincoln Fields, Baseline? If we have all these short turning trains, so much for the 3 minute service that was promised and the minimal transfer delays at the end of the line.

It is quite inefficient to drag extra cars from Blair to Baseline and back when the crunch is really between LeBreton and Hurdman. Imagine running a 4-car train 2/3 empty from Baseline just so there is room for 1/3 more people at Lincoln Fields. Finally the train gets filled at LeBreton and then empties through downtown and at Hurdman. Now you are running a nearly empty 4-car train all the way out to Blair where you pick up 3/4 of a load and head back downtown. At Hurdman you lose 1/3 of your passengers but pick up 2 cars worth to take your full train into the core to empty. Then you take your 1/4 full train west to all but empty it at LeBreton and Tunneys Pasture before going all the way to Baseline in your empty train. And this is scheduled to happen every 3 minutes during rush-hour. (Just to note, the off-peak frequency will probably be more like 7 minutes, evenings probably 10 minutes and sundays maybe 15 minutes. There might be 30 minute service over night, but I don't know about that since there would need to be a bus at each end to get people to the suburbs, i.e., three operators will need to work. It is possible the new over night service will disappear or be completely done by bus.)

One of the big draws of one of the previous LeBreton Station designs was that, once the buses were removed, there would be room for train storage between the platforms.



I am wondering if train storage is one of the reasons that the new recommended station is so far from the little canal.

Then there is the Hurdman Station; they are planning to move the bus lay-up to the south-west of the station to make it more convenient for buses, but that also leaves siding room where the lay-up currently is.



Do you think that the two-car trains running from the O-Train line through downtown will continue all the way to Blair? I expect that they will be reversed at Hurdman, which will probably mean a siding/storage area which has not been mentioned.

Will the 3 minute frequency be met? Yes, probably, but only through downtown during rush-hour. East of Hurdman, there will be some trains missing due to the interlining of the O-Train and any other trains short turned at Hurdman. West, there will be trains missing due to the O-Train interlining and any short turned trains. (There might even be thoughts of short turning trains at Tunneys, but I haven't heard about that yet. There would obviously not be any need to short turn a train at Bayview.) West/south of Lincoln Fields there would be fewer trains since half the people will be transfering to buses to go to Kanata.

The talk I heard was that the trains would be designated as 'LeBreton' or 'Lincoln Fields' or 'Baseline', similar to the current 95 being flagged for how far it goes, Baseline, Fallowfield, or Strandherd.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Man, you are making me very discouraged.

I think Richard's assessment is spot on. That downtown East station is going to be packed. I can't help but think that within a year of it opening there'll be demands to open another downtown station at Bank to relieve passenger congestion there.

I don't understand all this short turning of trains. Doesn't this create scheduling and signalling complications?

That depends on how they do it. If the station is using centre platforms then a third track can be installed between the main two upstream of the station (i.e. on the side away from downtown). There's a new station in Edmonton, South Campus, with such an arrangement:

source: flickr, leendertvdb

That third track would give a place to take a train out of service without getting in the way and then back into service. There would be additional signalling required, but it's not an operational complication.

I don't know if they would short-turn on the west side; it doesn't really make sense to short turn before Tunney's (the entire rationale for going to Tunney's is to avoid extra transfers, so short turning before there would be idiotic) but once the line extends to Lincoln Fields who knows what they'll do. The end of the short-turning should be Lincoln Fields once it is built.

Of course, SE Transitway and West Transitway (to Bayshore) conversion would pretty much avoid the issue of short-turning altogether but we're not planning that far ahead.

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by Dado

I wouldn't rely on speculation from the Citizen, which is what this morning's article was. Big numbers seem to confuse them. $104M isn't enough for the entire Baseline megastation, and it most certainly is not if that amount is also including the SW Transitway extension through Barrhaven.

That latter requires about ~$57M iirc (Richard?). There are also three park and rides of $5M each that are to be built in Riverside South and Orleans. They'll probably throw in a bunch of Transitway renewal projects while they're at it.

I think the Baseline component is the new temporary/semi-permanent station and the pedestrian overpass. I don't think we've yet got to a point of no return at Baseline - luckily.

Oh, I think the temporary Baseline Station will go as planned as contracts have already been started. As for the final station, alas, I think it is pretty firm also.

You will be happy to know, though, that the cost of the temporary station is less than the estimated $6.35M - it was tendered at $5.23M.

It is expected that the temporary station will be in service for 7 years. And the structures, I am assured, will be portable so they can be used in the future, unlike the current ones.

And before Suzie asks, it is being designed as a 'regular' transit station. It is not going to test any innovative ideas such as high curbs so wheelchairs can just roll on and off, and no 'Fare Paid' area with pre-payment machines. It is a shame that new ideas were not incorporated into the design of the temporary station; it would have made a good 'test-bed' without having to worry about the cost of removing failures, since the station is only temporary.

The Bridge over Woodroffe is still estimated at $5M.

The article mentions that the $104M includes the S-W Transitway extension and the Baseline Station and bridge, but there could be more projects covered by that money.

Is this our money for the list of 'Shovel-Ready' projects we submitted?

[lrt's friend]

Partial published lists

READY TO DIG (from the Ottawa Sun)

Transitway extension (Fallowfield to Barrhaven). Cost: $52.6 million
Baseline Station tunnel, College Ave. overpass. Cost: $38 million
Woodroffe Ave. pedestrian overpass to Baseline Station. Cost: $5 million
Hunt Club extension to Hwy. 417. Cost: $51 million
New sidewalks. Cost: $5.12 million.
Rural pathways. Cost: $3.4 million
St Joseph Blvd. streetscaping. Cost: $2.5 million
Renovating city buildings. Cost: $3.5 million
Integrated Road Water Sewer Program. Cost: $63 million

Some of the projects that will get funding include: (from CBC Ottawa)

$47,700,000 for an extension of Terry Fox Drive in Kanata.
$12 million for an expansion of the Centrepointe Theatre Facilities.
$20 million for an extension of Hunt Club Road near Walkley Road.
$65 million to widen Hazeldean Road near Terry Fox Drive in Kanata.
$52,600,00 for a four-kilometre extension of the Transitway in Barrhaven.
$38 million to construct a tunnel to connect light rail with rapid transit.

[eternallyme]

They definitely need to plan the route better.

There is NO provision for a potential link to the Southeast Transitway via rail right now, which definitely needs to be addressed. As it stands now, to connect would require a Y-shaped station, and that would look ugly, not serve transfers well and use up precious space that could be redeveloped. After crossing the bridge between Lees and Hurdman, the line should bend west slightly to allow more room to setup a connection, with the station somewhat to the west.

Also, they should abolish the Carling LRT plan - too much expropriation required and too expensive for something that basically duplicates Route 85 which could easily be supplemented/converted to a Rapid Transit bus route through priority lanes. The money would be better spent finishing the main line to Baseline, and getting started on the southeast and west extensions (at least to Heron/Confederation - connection/expansion of the O-Train - and Bayshore)

The priority order IMO after Tunney's Pasture to Blair is completed (some could be decades away):

1) Baseline to Tunney's Pasture

2) Double-tracking the existing O-Train

3) Airport to Greenboro

4) Bayshore to Lincoln Fields

5) Hurdman to Heron/Confederation (providing a connection)

6) Bayview to Chaudiere (across the Prince of Wales Bridge, connection to Gatineau)

7) Blair to Place d'Orleans

8) Scotiabank Place to Bayshore

9) Barrhaven Centre to Baseline

10) Riverview to South Keys

11) Blair to Millennium

12) South Keys to Hawthorne/beyond?

(Additional Gatineau connections are not included but could go anywhere in the late stages as well)

[Dado]

Ever have an experience when things just don't add up? Like, this $38M tunnel at Baseline...


From back in November:

http://ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/cit...S-DCM-0007.htm

(I'd put this in a table if I could figure out how to do it with bbCode)

Item Description
Estimate

Temporary Baseline Station
$6.35 m

Tunnel (covered) – College Avenue to Navaho Drive
$27.4 m

Excavation for tunnel and underpasses
$2.6 m

College Avenue underpass
$2.8 m

Navaho Drive underpass
$3.5 m

S.W.M. sewers – College Avenue to Navaho Drive
$2.6 m

Watermain relocation
$1.75 m


Add it all up and what do we get?

$47M


Richard says that the temporary station came in under budget, so that can knock off a little over a million. Perhaps they were able to slip the watermain in with something else, so that saves about $3M in total. Even if they got the SWM pond with something else, they're only at $5.47M down, or $41.53M total. So they're at least $3.5M short with the $38M. There's also no contingency or engineering (gasp!) in this amount.

The worst part, and contrary to my earlier post today on this subject, this essentially commits us to another $150M+ to complete the rest of the actual station (which escalated in price between November and this spring) and the depressed (depressing?) transitway to Tallwood (no scenery for you lowly transit users from Barrhaven - it's not like you can see out the filthy windows in the winter anyway...).

None of this grade separation is actually required for LRT; train headways aren't going to be less than about 5 min at Baseline due to it being upstream of the split at Lincoln Fields. Given that there are no crossroads of any significance in the area - and that busier roads are crossed in Calgary and Edmonton at grade - the requirement for grade separation is entirely BRT-derived.

Another fine Ottawa BRT success story: a BRT station and transitway - and all done in the name of LRT.

[lrt's friend]

I hate to say it, but this provides 129,000,000 more reasons that LRT will be further delayed. That is the city portion of the money for all the approved projects which are being prioritized ahead of LRT. Also, more city funding will likely be needed to be found for the city's share of the Strandherd-Armstrong Bridge which finally seems to be moving forward politically. Another road and bus project. Many here dislike Clive Doucet but please remember his comments about the TMP being about more buses and not LRT.