Barrhaven LRT | Proposed

[J.OT13]

Reduce the number of stops. Problem solved.

My point was that Egli's comment that rail would give Barrhaven residents another option than the private car to get to Centrepoint and Algonquin is BS. They already have the Transitway running the exact same route. We could easily make simple improvements to the existing bus system to accomplish whatever it is we're trying to do here without blowing $3B. That money could be invested in other areas of the City that desperately need transit improvements.

EDIT: I don't oppose the $400 million for the grade separations.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Reduce the number of stops. Problem solved.

How does that fix the issue of all the traffic lights?

My point was that Egli's comment that rail would give Barrhaven residents another option than the private car to get to Centrepoint and Algonquin is BS. They already have the Transitway running the exact same route. We could easily make simple improvements to the existing bus system to accomplish whatever it is we're trying to do here without blowing $3B. That money could be invested in other areas of the City that desperately need transit improvements.

EDIT: I don't oppose the $400 million for the grade separations.

As I keep saying, if we assume the $400M for grade separations will be spent anyway and the extra $1B for the extension to Barrhaven Centre is not needed, then the cost for the important bit is reduced to $1.6B.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by roger1818

How does that fix the issue of all the traffic lights?

As I keep saying, if we assume the $400M for grade separations will be spent anyway and the extra $1B for the extension to Barrhaven Centre is not needed, then the cost for the important bit is reduced to $1.6B.

Barrhaven doesn't need rail. The ridership doesn't warrant it now, probably even less so post-Covid.

For a few dozen million, they could add transit priority at traffic lights up Woodroff, remove a few stops and build better shelters at stops that remain.

Even with the $1.6B to Fallowfield, it still ends up costing $267 million/km, far more expensive than much more complicated Stage 1 or any comparable project in Canada (except Crosstown, which is mostly tunneled).

[Multi-modal]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Barrhaven doesn't need rail. The ridership doesn't warrant it now, probably even less so post-Covid.

For a few dozen million, they could add transit priority at traffic lights up Woodroff, remove a few stops and build better shelters at stops that remain.

Even with the $1.6B to Fallowfield, it still ends up costing $267 million/km, far more expensive than much more complicated Stage 1 or any comparable project in Canada (except Crosstown, which is mostly tunneled).

Exactly, we have to ask how much does this improve travel times, reliability, and operating costs, and is that worth $1.6B dollars. IMO - even an extension to Fallowfield is not worth it (or at least it should be much further back on the City priority list).

[Richard Eade]

The grade separation plan for Woodroffe and Fallowfield strikes me as odd. If the goal is to simply grade separate the VIA tracks and the roadways, why not elevate the ‘single-lane’ tracks over the four-lane roads?

Let’s estimate that it costs $100M per kilometre for elevated tracks. (This is an estimate that I have seen for the REM, for example.) The distance, along the VIA tracks is about one kilometre between Woodroffe and Fallowfield. Add in about 500 metres of ‘ramp’ on either end and we have about two kilometres of elevated track – so about $200M. Even adding $50M more for a complete rebuild of the VIA station, the cost is less than elevating the two large roads over the tracks.

There would need to be a VIA detour around the construction, but, if they used the rapid assembly techniques that are being employed for the REM (Two days for a 40-metre span between piers!)) putting in the piers will be the most time-consuming part of the job.

The new VIA station could include an ‘Ottawa Signature’ circular ramp up to the platform. And, with the VIA tracks elevated for a short bit east of Woodroffe and south of Fallowfield, there can be better pedestrian, cycling, and equestrian connections that don’t need to go out to the road-side.

The LRT would go beside Woodroffe under the VIA tracks and rise to an elevated, central-platform, station with a central-platform bus loop under it. From there, the LRT would stay elevated over Fallowfield, beside the VIA bridge. Add in $50M for the LRT going over Fallowfield, and the cost is still $100M less than the current $400M estimate.

There can still be a new intersection for the P&R on Woodroffe, but now it would be at the current grade and not coming off of a ramp.

(If we are really keen to spend all $400M on grade separation, then we could use the ‘saved $100M’ to take the VIA track over Merivale Road.)

[J.OT13]

That's a good point Richard; why can't we simply elevate the VIA tracks over Woodroffe and the O-Train...

Another strange Egli quote from the CBC article:

He's also not entirely convinced the below-grade options in the Woodroffe corridor need to be off the table.

The estimated price is already off the charts. Burying or trenching the line would probably add another $50 to $100 million per kilometer, if not more. It would also expose the City to possible complications during and after construction.

[OCCheetos]

The idea of rebuilding Fallowfield station to accommodate rail over road is a non-starter for VIA.

Unless you expect a massive rise in ridership through that station (at which point we really should be extending the Confederation Line) that requires a true reconfiguration of the station, then why would you bother elevating the whole thing?

[J.OT13]

I sometimes question the need for the Fallowfield VIA station. I would think that the proposed HFR project would benefit greatly from its elimination.

[Mikeed]

I feel like we have to call phase 3 as currently envisioned as dead in the water. Let's recall how phase 3 came about:
The last Transportation Master Plan made extending the Confed.Line phase 2 the number one priority. This is because it had to be as the Confed.Line can't work without phase 2. Watson came up with the political solution of saying we're going east/west and south all at once to get wide spread support. This was about getting general political support in both the population and in the specifics of getting phase 2 built fast. However, this made phase 3 really an aspirational idea, which was more of lines on a map. This 'lines on a map' reality was most evident in the Kanata phase, which ironically is the more affordable segment. Like many have commented, it is hard to wrap your head around how Fallowfield to BTC is a billion dollars, or the total cost being $3 billion. Considering this phase will most certainty require greater then 50% coming from the Feds and Province (likely 75-100%), when they do their cost benefit analysis how is this going to be a responsible use of very limited resources? I know we are use to massive spending numbers right now, but there are a lot of priorities around both Ontario and Canada, in a ever growing challenging fascial situation with the end of demographic growth around the OECD as the boomers retire, and the world grapples with growth in the face of climate change. Clearly the plan for phase 3 is not well thought-out. Especially as the Feds and Province will most certainly look at the running tally for all phases of the Otrain, and the cost/benefits. This is what now, a $12 billion dollar commuter rail line? or is it a $7 billion urban metro?

Considering that Kanata is home to a growing research hub of autonomous vehicles I think it would be better to focus more resources back into the transitway plans the city had as priority back before last Transportation Master Plan made extending the Confed.Line phase 2 the number one priority. (Which was a good thing).

The downtown transitway bus jams were directly related to the well know (for a long time by everyone in power and oc transport) capacity crunch the central segment would go through. This is directly related to the canceled tunnel plan, including the early 90s bus tunnel plan. The whole reason they acquired the double decker's was to try and avoid the crunch that could lead to the complete grid lock in the central transitway, by getting the shortest wheel base for the most seats essentially. Without the downtown grid; this grid lock is not a problem.

The extra costs of phase 3 for going past Fallowfield and Terry Fox (multiple billions) should go into building the transitways we need to feed the Confed.Line. For the cost of extending the Confed.Line from Fallowfield to BTC we could build the 14km Baseline Crosstown BRT SIX and 3/4 times. We could build a transitway from (LRT) Terry Fox > Teron > Innovation > Kanata North > DND HQ > Moodie (LRT) and use it as a testing ground to develop expertise in autonomous buses in order to develop this technology for domestic and export opportunities. Considering New Flyer in Winnipeg is a global leader in buses. BlackBerry QNX and Ford both have autonomous research sites in Kanata.

And the beautify of BRT is it can be built entirely conventional and then upgraded as development in the tech progresses and then expand across the city, country...

We know autonomous vehicles are coming, and getting them on the road in the form of a bus fleet in a mostly controlled environment seems very logical. I am a little bearish on autonomous personal cars, but very bullish on autonomous BRT. There's also no reason we can't build BRT with greater fair-paid stations. We also can leverage in these satellite cities and crosstown busways the strengths of request-a-stop at stops that are not full fair-paid stations, which gives more flexibility in actually improving mobility and the lives of citizens.

We also know we are on the precipitous of electrification. Electrification of buses is coming and will make buses even better, as their ride becomes better. They become quitter. AND they will actually be awesome in winter. Think about it. Every axil or wheel could have it's own induction motor, you have a long wheel base, and you have instant torque. This is technology made for Canada. We are quickly approaching the point where we won't even have to worry about induction charging roadways as rapid charging can already give 100s of KMs of range ~10-15mins. Which can easily accommodated with dwell times at stations.

We could build this transitway entirely conventional, and use the physical infrastructure to serve multiple use cases. For example, the phase 1 auto-BRT could just be the DND>Moodie shuttle. Eventually this could be a dedicated AM/PM peak route that when the autos are not needed they disperse to serving other routes in the area.

I think we have the opportunity to seize the future here.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Barrhaven doesn't need rail. The ridership doesn't warrant it now, probably even less so post-Covid.

For a few dozen million, they could add transit priority at traffic lights up Woodroff, remove a few stops and build better shelters at stops that remain.

If that is your view, then that is fine, as long as you are looking at the actual costs.

I do agree would be good to see the how transit usage will look when things return to a new normal after COVID. Having said that, it would be a shame to miss the opportunity to receive post COVID stimulus money.

Even with the $1.6B to Fallowfield, it still ends up costing $267 million/km, far more expensive than much more complicated Stage 1 or any comparable project in Canada (except Crosstown, which is mostly tunneled).

I suspect the issue is that with more and more cities building LRT systems, the cost is going up as it is difficult to hire the talent needed.

[Acajack]

What is the population of Barrhaven anyway?

It just seems odd to prioritize that and not inner areas like Sandy Hill-Vanier-New-Edinburgh, etc., or Glebe and Centretown, or a huge swathe of the west end (basically all of it south of Richmond Rd between Woodfroffe and Bronson).

These are all areas that almost certainly have more population than Barrhaven, and definitely much higher density.

Of course, going out to Trim Rd and the reaches of Kanata with the train isn't very logical either.

And BTW Barrhaven is already arguably better served by transit due to segments of Transitway, bus only lanes and priority signals.

[TheMatth69]

Just with the cost of both extensions to Barrhaven and Kanata you could probably afford a Bank Street Subway and upgrade the existing bus network in the denser Ottawa core. But hey... Politics got in the way of simple logic. The "important peoples" are in the suburbs not Centretown ...

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by roger1818

If that is your view, then that is fine, as long as you are looking at the actual costs.

I do agree would be good to see the how transit usage will look when things return to a new normal after COVID. Having said that, it would be a shame to miss the opportunity to receive post COVID stimulus money.

I suspect the issue is that with more and more cities building LRT systems, the cost is going up as it is difficult to hire the talent needed.

The cost is my biggest concern. Yes, I think that Barrahven is well served by the Transitway, and a few small/cheap improvements could stretch that for many more years, but I understand the City's desire to bring rail to all three (or four if we count RSS as it's own thing) suburbs. That said, I can't support the Barrhaven extension at a cost of $250-300+ million per kilometer.

I understand that costs have gone up due to supply and demand, and that's partly how we ended up at $111 million per kilometer for Stage 2. As McC pointed out, Vancouver estimates the Surrey extension for $188 million/km, far cheaper than Barrhaven.

Originally Posted by Acajack

What is the population of Barrhaven anyway?
.

Barrhaven should be pushing 100,000 by now, just about the same as Orleans and Kanata.

To Mikeed, I agree that automated buses on its own RoW could be beneficial to society but automated private vehicles could be problematic for a slew of reasons.

It would be amazing if the City and the private sector could team-up on an automated bus loop around Kanata. I might make some slight modifications to your proposed route, staying on Terry Fox after passing Kanata North and maybe a little extra loop to serve the high-tech sector on Palladium, along with the CTC, before going back to DND to complete the loop. Automated buses would be running both ways around the loop.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I sometimes question the need for the Fallowfield VIA station. I would think that the proposed HFR project would benefit greatly from its elimination.

On what basis do you make that statement? For anyone traveling west who lives west of downtown, Fallowfield is the better option.

In 2018 at least, Fallowfield was VIA's 8th busiest station (with 233,893 passengers boarding and deboarding), behind Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa, London, Kingston, Quebec City and Windsor, and ahead of Oshawa and Dorval.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by roger1818

On what basis do you make that statement? For anyone traveling west who lives west of downtown, Fallowfield is the better option.

In 2018 at least, Fallowfield was VIA's 8th busiest station (with 233,893 passengers boarding and deboarding), behind Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa–Gatineau, London, Kingston, Quebec City, & Windsor and ahead of Oshawa & Dorval.

I stand corrected.

I must say I'm quite surprised Fallowfield has a higher ridership than Dorval and isn't that far back from Quebec City. Quite impressive.

[Mikeed]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

To Mikeed, I agree that automated buses on its own RoW could be beneficial to society but automated private vehicles could be problematic for a slew of reasons.

It would be amazing if the City and the private sector could team-up on an automated bus loop around Kanata. I might make some slight modifications to your proposed route, staying on Terry Fox after passing Kanata North and maybe a little extra loop to serve the high-tech sector on Palladium, along with the CTC, before going back to DND to complete the loop. Automated buses would be running both ways around the loop.

In this vision the assumption is made we have both a North Kanata Transitway and a South Kanata Transitway (essentially what has already been sketched out for phase 3, but with less elevation and non-continuous grade separation)

The strength of BRT is putting it closer to where people actually need to go March Rd doesn't seem to have a lot of destinations directly on it. And different routes can join and leave this transitway when needed to serve the needs the individual bus routes are designed to serve.

Phase 3 should be LRT to Fallowfield & Terry Fox.
The North Kanata Transitway
The South Kanata Transitway (Terry Fox to Fernbank)
Finishing the Fallowfield > Limebank Transitway Link
Carling BRT (or LRT)

I feel with a $5 billion dollar spending ask these projects can all be funded and we actually can see the Network Concept largely completed.

Barrhaven already has good transit, with a transitway running through the core. And combined with Riverside South will have 2 commuter rail links instead of one. Add in the significant costs required to get the rail link to Fallowfield. I suspect Riverside South + Barrhaven have largely the same footprint/demand as Kanata North & South.

Again, we can build all this BRT conventionally and use some key routes (like the DND Link) to develop autonomous BRT.

Kanata also has very wide ROWs that allow these modifications rather painlessly. Running BRT through the core of the Kanata Research Park makes a lot of sense considering how wide the right of way is and how you can chew into the sea of parking lots to accomplish a transitway-in-median design that doesn't require any building destruction. We could even see a future where some of these parking lots are developed.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Acajack

What is the population of Barrhaven anyway?

According to the 2016 Census, the South Nepean "sub area" (which according to this map is all of Barrhaven) had a population of 83,997 and is growing rapidly.

NOTE: Barrhaven Ward doesn't include all of Barrhaven, so I chose to use the sub area instead, as it is a better reflection.

Originally Posted by Acajack

It just seems odd to prioritize that and not inner areas like Sandy Hill-Vanier-New-Edinburgh, etc., or Glebe and Centretown, or a huge swathe of the west end (basically all of it south of Richmond Rd between Woodfroffe and Bronson).

These are all areas that almost certainly have more population than Barrhaven, and definitely much higher density.

The same census says Ward 12, Rideau-Vanier (which includes Sandy Hill and Vanier plus Lower Town) had a population of 48,536, and Ward 13, Rideau-Rockcliffe (which includes New-Edinburgh plus Rockcliffe Park, Manor-Park, Overbrook and others) had a population of 38,154. The total of the two wards (which includes more communities than you mentioned) is 86,690.

Ward 14, Somerset (which includes Centretown plus a bit more to the west) had a population of 41,569 and Ward 17, Capital (which includes the Glebe plus Old Ottawa East, Old Ottawa South and Alta Vista west of Bank) had a population of 37,440. The total of the two wards (which also includes more communities than you mentioned) is 78,969.

The Merivale "sub area" (basically everything south of the 417 to the Greenbelt between Woodroffe and the Rideau River/Trillium Line) had a population of 77,641.

Your point about population density is true, but either Barrhaven is larger than you expected or the inner communities are smaller.

Originally Posted by Acajack

Of course, going out to Trim Rd and the reaches of Kanata with the train isn't very logical either.

I agree! Trim was silly and anything west of Terry Fox doesn't make sense.

Originally Posted by Acajack

And BTW Barrhaven is already arguably better served by transit due to segments of Transitway, bus only lanes and priority signals.

[Acajack]

Has the Kanata extension been costed yet? Just looking at the proposed map it's going to be insanely expensive. Perhaps moreso than Barrhaven.

There are tons of grade separations needed and (count 'em) 8 stations planned right now.

8 stations just for little old Kanata.

For the sake of comparison, the first segment of the Confederation Line, that runs from Blair in what was once North Gloucester, through the east end of the city, across downtown, and then across part of the west end to Tunney's, has just 13 stations.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Has the Kanata extension been costed yet? Just looking at the proposed map it's going to be insanely expensive. Perhaps moreso than Barrhaven.

There are tons of grade separations needed and (count 'em) 8 stations planned right now.

8 stations just for little old Kanata.

For the sake of comparison, the first segment of the Confederation Line, that runs from Blair in what was once North Gloucester, through the east end of the city, across downtown, and then across part of the west end to Tunney's, has just 13 stations.

Stage 3 Kanata (2018)
11 km - 8 stations
Station spacing - 1.4 km
Central feature - mostly elevated
$1.85B or $168 million per kilometer

[Truenorth00]

Post Covid financial holes, investment will be limited. I would argue funds will also have to be freed up to simply maintain and operate the bus fleet. So extensions will be all about reducing deadheading and reducing bus usage. From that perspective going to Fallowfield in Barrhaven and Eaglson in Kanata may be enough. And none of this is probably getting a shovel in the ground before 2030. Probably 2035.