West Gatineau Tramway & Downtown Loop | Proposed

[Multi-modal]

Originally Posted by Tesladom

WTF? What planet are you from? I said it will never happen because there is no will to make it happen.

OK, I'll put on my pro-driver hat on... "We need another bridge crossing between Ottawa and Gatineau, but we know this will never happen"

There you go! I'm now anti driver and anti Gatineau!

You would not be anti-driver if you wanted to build a bridge that is never going to happen - you would be anti-driver if you advocated for not building any other road until that bridge was built (even through the bridge is never going to happen). Do you see how that works now?

Originally Posted by Tesladom

And for the record, I do about 25% of my commutes from the Gatineau side (remember the cottage mention?), so calling me anti-gatineau is very mis-informed

I didn't call you anti-gatineau, I called you anti-gatineau-transit

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Tesladom

And for the record, I do about 25% of my commutes from the Gatineau side (remember the cottage mention?), so calling me anti-gatineau is very mis-informed

Less anti-Gatineau than anti-transit. But your anti-transit viewpoint seems pretty sharply aimed at Gatineau. At 400k, Gatineau is ~40% the size of Ottawa. Imagine saying, LRT should not ever serve any of the West End. This would be the equivalent argument in Ottawa.

Also, you talk a lot about your commutes. You still aren't answering how much of your commute or any other travel is by transit.

[AuxTown]

The integrated approach sounds great except for the fact Gatineau def could not (and probably should not) afford any of the solutions suggested. As much as we try to think about Ottawa-Gatineau as one city they are really two cities that happen to have A LOT of commuters between the two of them. People from Gatineau tend to shop and live on their side of the river and same goes for Ottawans. Any system they decide on the Gatineau side should serve destinations on their side of the river first and if it happens to easily link into the Confederation line then all the better! A loop is an excellent dream but I really don't see that as the next step in Ott-Gat transit connectivity. For a city its size I can envision a line that mirrors the Confederation line stretching from Vanier on the edge of Aylmer and stretching as far as Labrosse or Paiment in the North-East. Given the population served, it probably does not justify the costs of tunelling or maybe even grade-separation. I know we have started to abandon the idea, but both the Aylmer line and the Gatineau lines would meet up very nicely at either Tache or Allumettieres after crossing POW. Could those lines cross the POW and connect to Bayview? Why not? It's such a huge transfer station already and would be a perfect connection between the Ott and Gat systems.

[Tesladom]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Less anti-Gatineau than anti-transit. But your anti-transit viewpoint seems pretty sharply aimed at Gatineau.

Really? How you are incoherent. I never wrote that.

I can't use public transit to get to my work, so sue my employer!

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Multi-modal

I don't want to assume too much about Tesladom and I have nothing against electric cars per say - but "electric car environmentalists" or "electric car urbanists" have always struck me as wolves in sheep's clothing

Tesladom is sadly typical of most Tesla drivers these days, particularly the come lately $50k Model 3 buyers. Model S and Model X buyers were usually well off folks who knew better than to try and convince everyone that the planet could be saved with cars costing six figures. Model 3 buyers are the same set that used to cut you off in traffic with their entry level BMW 3 a few years ago. Only now they get to lecture you on how they're saving the environment.

I assume the worst about our friend because his views are quite specific. He is arguing that a city of 400 000 can't support two at-grade tram lines. He then goes on to argue that a trip like Aylmer to Les Promenades by LRT would be "ludicrous" because it would "take too long". So arguing that it takes too long while arguing specifically against any higher-order transit that would make the same trip faster. And then proceeds to suggest that the only valuable transit is a small loop connecting downtown Hull and Ottawa, a fraction of the proposed network. All because Gatineau does not meet his personal definition of "urban" and "dense".

I will suggest that Tesladom's anti-transit viewpoints arise mostly from a lack of actual experience with public transit and particular ignorance of how transit works in Gatineau. If he knew how easy it was to reach Les Promenade on a Rapibus route, he wouldn't be making the argument he is.

[Tesladom]

Originally Posted by O-Town Hockey

The integrated approach sounds great except for the fact Gatineau def could not (and probably should not) afford any of the solutions suggested. As much as we try to think about Ottawa-Gatineau as one city they are really two cities that happen to have A LOT of commuters between the two of them. People from Gatineau tend to shop and live on their side of the river and same goes for Ottawans. Any system they decide on the Gatineau side should serve destinations on their side of the river first and if it happens to easily link into the Confederation line then all the better! A loop is an excellent dream but I really don't see that as the next step in Ott-Gat transit connectivity. For a city its size I can envision a line that mirrors the Confederation line stretching from Vanier on the edge of Aylmer and stretching as far as Labrosse or Paiment in the North-East. Given the population served, it probably does not justify the costs of tunelling or maybe even grade-separation. I know we have started to abandon the idea, but both the Aylmer line and the Gatineau lines would meet up very nicely at either Tache or Allumettieres after crossing POW. Could those lines cross the POW and connect to Bayview? Why not? It's such a huge transfer station already and would be a perfect connection between the Ott and Gat systems.

Let's say I live in Gatineau and work at 101 Col By NDHQ, so from work I would need to take LRT west to Bayview, O-Train to Gatineau and then take Train to Gatineau, and probably a local connection there to get me home?
It seems too complicated and long. That's why I think the downtown loop is the way to go, link existing tunnel line and loop it both ways to downtown Hull sector where you could have an east-west basic LRT going to Aylmer and Gatineau, no need for these 30+ stations, have 2-3 stops in Hull, 2 in Aylmer and 3 in Gatineau, with feeder local bus routes to the stations... a hub and spoke system

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Tesladom

Really? How you are incoherent. I never wrote that.

You were quite specific on your viewpoint that Gatineau can't support these tram lines:

Originally Posted by Tesladom

These Gatineau LRT ideas are out of this World? Let's be realistic, Confederation Lines will have over 10,000 passenger/hour capacity in each direction, even in a scaled down version, say 5000 passengers per hour, there is nowhere close to the population density along these proposed corridors to justify this.

It's pretty clear to us that you don't think Gatineau can support any higher order transit than a small loop through downtown servicing mostly commuters.

Originally Posted by Tesladom

I can't use public transit to get to my work, so sue my employer!

There's a difference between can't and don't want to. Unless your employer is outside OC Transpo and/or STO range, I strongly suspect it is a matter of the latter. Also, there's more to public transit usage than just commuting. If you supported public transit, you'd get that.....

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Tesladom

Let's say I live in Gatineau and work at 101 Col By NDHQ, so from work I would need to take LRT west to Bayview, O-Train to Gatineau and then take Train to Gatineau, and probably a local connection there to get me home?

Ah yes, transit is an utter failure if it doesn't work for my particular case or random example. Here's a great article that calls out your elitist nonsense by a transit planner:

http://humantransit.org/2017/07/the-dangers-of-elite-projection.html

By the way, am military here. There's folks who live in Gatineau and commute to 101 today. 1-2 buses. Heck, a simple peek on Google Maps would have told you how easy this is. The LRT isn't meant to service every trip in Gatineau. Just like the Confederation Line won't service every core bound trip in Ottawa.

And in your example, the person would walk to Rideau station, take the Gatineau LRT from there to their stop in Aylmer and then take a short bus ride home. So, a short walk from 101 and then one transfer to their local bus in their neighbourhood.

Originally Posted by Tesladom

It seems too complicated and long. That's why I think the downtown loop is the way to go, link existing tunnel line and loop it both ways to downtown Hull sector where you could have an east-west basic LRT going to Aylmer and Gatineau, no need for these 30+ stations, have 2-3 stops in Hull, 2 in Aylmer and 3 in Gatineau, with feeder local bus routes to the stations... a hub and spoke system

How about leaving the transit planning to people who actually do it for a living and will make data-driven decisions?

And leave the discussion on transit to people who actually take transit.

[Tesladom]

Here's a population density map of Ottawa-Gatineau, as a priority, I would like up red areas using subway/LRT.
No need to go the the far reaches of Buckingham

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Tesladom

Here's a population density map of Ottawa-Gatineau, as a priority, I would like up red areas using subway/LRT.
No need to go the the far reaches of Buckingham

Before you embarrass yourself further, I urge you to look up exactly where the proposed tram routes go in Gatineau.

Hint: Nobody has proposed LRT to Buckingham.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Tesladom

Nothing's gonna happen until at least 2036 on this front, maybe by then the concept of public transit will be very different with self driving pods/people movers etc...

Don't want to let this gem pass without comment. Anybody who believes this really doesn't get how cities work. And isn't willing to apply any critical thinking at all to the nonsense coming from Silicon Valley tech bros....

Take a bus of 40 people and put them all in pods of two seats. Does anybody think these pods would take up less road space than the bus with 40 riders? Now do that for every transit vehicle out there and add more traffic than today as induced demand kicks in from people who otherwise dislike driving and you quickly see what a traffic nightmare automated pods would become. Even with full-automation, putting everyone in personal pods is likely to result in longer trips for everyone.

Jarrett Walker does a great job explaining why mass transportation is a space problem, not a technology problem:

https://humantransit.org/2016/07/elon-musk-doesnt-understand-geometry.html

So if anyone is trying to argue against public transit citing some future technology which will make public transit obsolete, they are either ignorant of how that tech would play out or opposed to public transit for some selfish reason, or both.

[DarkArconio]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Don't want to let this gem pass without comment. Anybody who believes this really doesn't get how cities work. And isn't willing to apply any critical thinking at all to the nonsense coming from Silicon Valley tech bros....

Take a bus of 40 people and put them all in pods of two seats. Does anybody think these pods would take up less road space than the bus with 40 riders? Now do that for every transit vehicle out there and add more traffic than today as induced demand kicks in from people who otherwise dislike driving and you quickly see what a traffic nightmare automated pods would become. Even with full-automation, putting everyone in personal pods is likely to result in longer trips for everyone.

Jarrett Walker does a great job explaining why mass transportation is a space problem, not a technology problem:

https://humantransit.org/2016/07/elon-musk-doesnt-understand-geometry.html

So if anyone is trying to argue against public transit citing some future technology which will make public transit obsolete, they are either ignorant of how that tech would play out or opposed to public transit for some selfish reason, or both.

It is fundamentally a space problem, agreed. However, autonomy would make both the the use of the space more efficient for cars (eg allowing cars to form trains in dedicated autonomous highway lanes), while reducing the cost of spending time in your car as you could start work earlier, sleep, or spend the time any other way. Cars would become rooms on wheels. To say this wouldn’t impact transit usage requires quite a large set of assumptions that I’m not sure will hold up should the tech become available. This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t invest in transit. The tech isn’t ready and may not be safe any time soon, we need transit in the mean time. But it *will* change things when it comes.

[TheMatth69]

Here's the final renders of the transformation of the Eddy building I thought of. The goal is to keep the external structure almost intact with a few modernisations:
- The top roof would be removed and replaced by a large trasnparent PFTE or Glass roof supported by large steel arcs to let a maximum of light penetrate the station.
- The sides of the building would be replaced mostly by large glass bay windows; again to let a maximum of natural light enter the main hall.
- The station would have 3 tracks and 3 platforms. The two tracks going in the building would be use for trains going to or from Ottawa. The third track is a pocket track used for rush hour trains doing short missions between suburbs (Aylmer or Labrosse) to the Portage. The two main tracks are served by 3 platforms, one platform would be used for bording the train and the other for people getting of it (Spanish Model).
- The station is the border point from where trains would go Underground/Re-surface.
- The building's side roof would be illuminated with multicolour LED lights that would shine during nights making the building a marker of the area.






If you guys have any idea of a station or place you would like to modelise I'll be glad to see what I can do

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by DarkArconio

It is fundamentally a space problem, agreed. However, autonomy would make both the the use of the space more efficient for cars (eg allowing cars to form trains in dedicated autonomous highway lanes), while reducing the cost of spending time in your car as you could start work earlier, sleep, or spend the time any other way. Cars would become rooms on wheels. To say this wouldn’t impact transit usage requires quite a large set of assumptions that I’m not sure will hold up should the tech become available. This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t invest in transit. The tech isn’t ready and may not be safe any time soon, we need transit in the mean time. But it *will* change things when it comes.

This is a strawman argument. Nobody has suggested that transit usage won't change. What is being disputed is the fantastic assumption by techno-utopians (particularly the Cult of Musk) that transit investment is unnecessary and can be forestalled because this automated personal transport utopia is just around the corner. That is exactly the point that Walker is arguing. That in his professional work, he's increasingly coming up against views like Teslafandom: people who think that higher order transit is unnecessary because we're all going to be commuting by pod from our suburbs in 15-20 years.

Aside from the shit urbanity that vision would create, achieving autonomy to the point that it's perfectly normal to just push a button and have a pod show up to whisk you from doorstep to doorstep, is probably over a half century away at best when you consider all the regulatory issues involved. And by then, it's even debatable if work patterns will be the same? In 50 years, will people still commute to cores 9-5 to sit in a cubicle? Or will 6G/7G have us all conducting 3D projected hologram telecons daily?

What we do know that won't change is the strong preference for fixed transit lines, especially among those with a preference for urban living. And we know that ridership today is a good predictor of ridership tomorrow. That makes Gatineau's LRT lines a reasonable idea, even in the face of evolving transportation technology.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by DarkArconio

It is fundamentally a space problem, agreed. However, autonomy would make both the the use of the space more efficient for cars (eg allowing cars to form trains in dedicated autonomous highway lanes), while reducing the cost of spending time in your car as you could start work earlier, sleep, or spend the time any other way. Cars would become rooms on wheels. To say this wouldn’t impact transit usage requires quite a large set of assumptions that I’m not sure will hold up should the tech become available. This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t invest in transit. The tech isn’t ready and may not be safe any time soon, we need transit in the mean time. But it *will* change things when it comes.

Wrong, cars will never replace buses as an effecient use of space or trains for that matter.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by DarkArconio

It is fundamentally a space problem, agreed. However, autonomy would make both the the use of the space more efficient for cars (eg allowing cars to form trains in dedicated autonomous highway lanes), while reducing the cost of spending time in your car as you could start work earlier, sleep, or spend the time any other way. Cars would become rooms on wheels. To say this wouldn’t impact transit usage requires quite a large set of assumptions that I’m not sure will hold up should the tech become available. This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t invest in transit. The tech isn’t ready and may not be safe any time soon, we need transit in the mean time. But it *will* change things when it comes.

It doesn't matter how close you pack the cars together if there's only 1 person in each of them. A car takes up much more space than a person.

The only way to move a large number of people when space is a constraint is to put people on very small vehicles (i.e., bikes) or to put a lot of people onto big vehicles (buses or trains).

Where autonomy will be a game-changer is driverless buses. Since the cost of running buses is mostly labour, driverless buses fundamentally changes the cost equation for buses. Meaning they could be dramatically cheaper, or there could be far more, or both.

[Multi-modal]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

... achieving autonomy to the point that it's perfectly normal to just push a button and have a pod show up to whisk you from doorstep to doorstep, is probably over a half century away at best when you consider all the regulatory issues involved.

While I agree with most of what you're saying - I do think you're underestimating how fast self-driving cars may become common-place... still your central thesis is sound: cities should not shy away from investing in high-order transit - as this is the type of transit that is not and will not be vulnerable to self-driving autos for years to come. What cities should be considering when it comes to self-driving and transit are:

• As bradnixon points out, driverless vehicles reduce operating costs for many smaller vehicles - largely negating one of big negatives of BRT systems
• Similarily, with driverless technology bus operators may opt to utilize many smaller buses the size of large vans to service less dense suburban environments
• The convenience (and reduced cost) of driverless taxis will conversely result in the elimination of many suburban low-frequency routes
• Something we should be thinking about as we design our system now is not over-investing in park and ride lots (will not be well-used in a world with driverless cars) and instead reserving space for PPUDOs (Kiss and Rides) - this is something the City of Ottawa is already doing at stations like Hurdman.

That is just a quick list, there are many more small ways cities and transit agencies should at least think about adapting, but to reiterate, they should NOT curtail high-order transit investment.

This is all a bit off-topic.

[Multi-modal]

Originally Posted by TheMatth69

Here's the final renders of the transformation of the Eddy building I thought of. The goal is to keep the external structure almost intact with a few modernisations:
- The top roof would be removed and replaced by a large trasnparent PFTE or Glass roof supported by large steel arcs to let a maximum of light penetrate the station.
- The sides of the building would be replaced mostly by large glass bay windows; again to let a maximum of natural light enter the main hall.
- The station would have 3 tracks and 3 platforms. The two tracks going in the building would be use for trains going to or from Ottawa. The third track is a pocket track used for rush hour trains doing short missions between suburbs (Aylmer or Labrosse) to the Portage. The two main tracks are served by 3 platforms, one platform would be used for bording the train and the other for people getting of it (Spanish Model).
- The station is the border point from where trains would go Underground/Re-surface.
- The building's side roof would be illuminated with multicolour LED lights that would shine during nights making the building a marker of the area.

If you guys have any idea of a station or place you would like to modelise I'll be glad to see what I can do

Very cool!

[Multi-modal]

Back on topic... check out all the new videos put out by the STO:

http://www.sto.ca/index.php?id=799&L=fr

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Before you embarrass yourself further, I urge you to look up exactly where the proposed tram routes go in Gatineau.

Hint: Nobody has proposed LRT to Buckingham.

I suspect Tesladom is confusing Gatineau's LRT with Moose Rail. He might want to move his discussion to the Rural Commuter Rail thread.