Ottawa Rapid Transit Network developments

[Capital Shaun]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

OMG, really!? Well that's news to me! Who would have thought?

Maybe, just maybe, the city should catch the hint and not continue studying the Parkway route and save some money. And while we’re at it, let’s not study Carling cause we know there just yanking our chain. Just study/build a damn tunnel under Richmond.

I agree. Richmond was the likely choice all along.

[lrt's friend]

I gotta ask; are you advocating a bus tunnel as the best alternative vs. lrt or are you simply trying to show that a brt tunnel is an alternative if the lrt falls thrue for some yet uknown reason?

I just don't buy all the arguments used to justify the current plan. My interest is making transit more attractive to more people. I don't care if it done by buses or trains or whatever. I feel that it is time that trains play a bigger role but I am not sure if we are making wise choices concerning that role. We are planning to spend a ton of money and what are really accomplishing? Getting rid of the bus lineups on Albert and Slater to create a more pristine setting? For what? More trucks? To make downtown even more deserted away from commuting hours? Albert and Slater are downtown canyons. It will never be a good environment for outdoor patios. The office buildings were never designed for streetfront retail. Is it really desireable when Sparks Street is begging to be revitalized?

We have a transit congestion problem downtown but shouldn't we find the most economical way of solving this? Is a rail tunnel the way to do this in the most economical manner? And we should consider the total cost of implementing a tunnel based rail network, not just the cost of the tunnel itself.

And if we spend billions on a rail network feeding into the tunnel, what other transportation issues are we de-priortizing in the process? There is an interesting discussion about Ottawa's congestion ranking and whether our LRT plan really addresses the overall congestion issue as employment becomes increasingly suburbanized. Does LRT really address congestion on Hunt Club or Baseline or other major streets away from downtown? Not likely. Will congestion away from downtown get worse? Yes. Is the solution to not build roads? No. Is the solution to intensify? Yes and No. There is limits to what intensification can accomplish and a large portion of the population does not want to live in condos. We have to understand this. We are not in a communist country where people are not given much choice. We also have to understand that the condo market is limited because that kind of housing is quite expensive and not designed for young families of modest means.

In a way, it is disturbing that as our city becomes more diverse and employment becomes more spread out, we are designing a transit system that is becoming more focused on downtown. How can that make transit more attractive in the long-term? It won't. Ridership may increase but modal share will continue to decline. The Transportation Master Plan addresses suburban mobility to some degree but universally they are low priority and will be the first things to be axed when money does not become available. And the congestion spiral will get worse and our overall quality of life will decline.

But the questions also relates to downtown accessibility. I recently got into a nasty debate with someone when I pointed out that there are increasing rumblings that North-South LRT will not make use of the downtown tunnel. What does this do to downtown accessibility in the longer-term if only one transit route runs through downtown?

And then the question of tunnel problems. The flood in Toronto was a bigger problem than many suggest. Buses cannot replace subways, simply because road capacity does not exist and there is a limit to the number of buses and drivers that are available. That incident left people stranded for hours. Of course, rail is part of the solution and these problems will happen but there is no sense in denying it either. I get nervous however, when we become so dependent on just one transit line and if it does shut down, people will have to walk out of downtown.

[McC]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The office buildings were never designed for streetfront retail

and yet look what the Delta is doing to the old Skyline, they've punched open the old blank wall on Albert and it's now going to be full of street-oriented, small-format retail. Old buildings get retrofitted all the time. In fact, in the dottmo presentation, there was a slide that colour codes all of the buildings in the study area, evaluating them for their suitability for street interaction, and there were lots of buildings with potential on Slater, Albert and Queen.

[eternallyme]

The only question for a potential Westboro route - should it stay in the park, then go straight to Lincoln Fields? or should it deviate via Carlingwood? The latter would be my preference - an elegant TOD opportunity exists at Carlingwood and in the immediate area. If the YMCA (which would be rebuilt at the same time) and the two schools can be expropriated (need to check student counts), that allows an easy route on the surface to Carlingwood before having to go into an elevated structure, tunnel or trench at Carling.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I just don't buy all the arguments used to justify the current plan. My interest is making transit more attractive to more people. I don't care if it done by buses or trains or whatever. I feel that it is time that trains play a bigger role but I am not sure if we are making wise choices concerning that role. We are planning to spend a ton of money and what are really accomplishing? Getting rid of the bus lineups on Albert and Slater to create a more pristine setting? For what? More trucks? To make downtown even more deserted away from commuting hours? Albert and Slater are downtown canyons. It will never be a good environment for outdoor patios. The office buildings were never designed for streetfront retail. Is it really desireable when Sparks Street is begging to be revitalized?

We have a transit congestion problem downtown but shouldn't we find the most economical way of solving this? Is a rail tunnel the way to do this in the most economical manner? And we should consider the total cost of implementing a tunnel based rail network, not just the cost of the tunnel itself.

And if we spend billions on a rail network feeding into the tunnel, what other transportation issues are we de-priortizing in the process? There is an interesting discussion about Ottawa's congestion ranking and whether our LRT plan really addresses the overall congestion issue as employment becomes increasingly suburbanized. Does LRT really address congestion on Hunt Club or Baseline or other major streets away from downtown? Not likely. Will congestion away from downtown get worse? Yes. Is the solution to not build roads? No. Is the solution to intensify? Yes and No. There is limits to what intensification can accomplish and a large portion of the population does not want to live in condos. We have to understand this. We are not in a communist country where people are not given much choice. We also have to understand that the condo market is limited because that kind of housing is quite expensive and not designed for young families of modest means.

In a way, it is disturbing that as our city becomes more diverse and employment becomes more spread out, we are designing a transit system that is becoming more focused on downtown. How can that make transit more attractive in the long-term? It won't. Ridership may increase but modal share will continue to decline. The Transportation Master Plan addresses suburban mobility to some degree but universally they are low priority and will be the first things to be axed when money does not become available. And the congestion spiral will get worse and our overall quality of life will decline.

But the questions also relates to downtown accessibility. I recently got into a nasty debate with someone when I pointed out that there are increasing rumblings that North-South LRT will not make use of the downtown tunnel. What does this do to downtown accessibility in the longer-term if only one transit route runs through downtown?

And then the question of tunnel problems. The flood in Toronto was a bigger problem than many suggest. Buses cannot replace subways, simply because road capacity does not exist and there is a limit to the number of buses and drivers that are available. That incident left people stranded for hours. Of course, rail is part of the solution and these problems will happen but there is no sense in denying it either. I get nervous however, when we become so dependent on just one transit line and if it does shut down, people will have to walk out of downtown.

You do raise some good points. Your right that Albert/Slater will never amount to any sort of livable environment, but McC also raises a good point about the Delta renos as an example of potential revitalization (and a few new buildings like the EDC and Lorne 2.0).

I also worry about the rumors about the N/S LRT terminating at Bayview. Making people from the south transfer onto packed trains 3 stations away from downtown won't encourage ridership. And we can forget about the airport link; if it's not direct to downtown, it's worthless. With the maximum capacity LRT will provide us (40,000 phpd), we can easily split the downtown line a few times (Airport/South, Baseline, Bayshore/Kanata). That’s how they do it in Calgary and as I mentioned before, Oslo has 6 lines converging together in a common downtown tunnel. It’s a very popular way to maximize the potential by splitting multiple times when heading into less dense areas.

That being said, I figure terminating at Bayview is just another classic Ottawa cheap out (like using the ORP for the west extension). They figure that they can have shorter platforms in the south thus saving on capital costs. They are not thinking about the operational waste of money by having half empty trains from Kanata/Baseline all the way to Bayview (or the loss of transit ridership pissing off the citizens of the south end having to transfer onto already packed trains at Bayview).

[KHOOLE]

[QUOTE=lrt's friend;5763350]
In a way, it is disturbing that as our city becomes more diverse and employment becomes more spread out, we are designing a transit system that is becoming more focused on downtown. How can that make transit more attractive in the long-term? It won't. Ridership may increase but modal share will continue to decline. The Transportation Master Plan addresses suburban mobility to some degree but universally they are low priority and will be the first things to be axed when money does not become available. And the congestion spiral will get worse and our overall quality of life will decline.

Dear lrt's friend,

Thank you for such a well thought-out appraisal of the presently planned transportation system in our city. Your ideas are clear, analytical and well written and presented. Kudos to you.

I may not always agree with you but I do learn from you, nevertheless, and I hope that others are, also. Your comments, I am sure, are well read and circulated because they are so convincing and well articulated.

A forum such as this one should be a means of exchanging information and to debate ideas and not be a channel for denigration and deragatory remarks.

Thanking you again and looking forward to more of your wise words.

[KHOOLE]

[

[McC]

Federal EA approval
http://www.ottawalightrail.ca/en/newsroo...deral-environmental-assessment-approval/

[Cre47]

Not sure if you have seen this old article that Gray put up in his blog. Obviously grossly underestimating the costs and travel time. Those two figures will likely be more then twice than that.

http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2012/07/1...on-460-million-17-minutes-to-downtown-1/

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Cre47

Not sure if you have seen this old article that Gray put up in his blog. Obviously grossly underestimating the costs and travel time. Those two figures will likely be more then twice than that.

http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2012/07/1...on-460-million-17-minutes-to-downtown-1/

These costs always get underestimated but there was more of a genuine effort to build LRT in a more economical way back at that time. We have changed course a lot since then and we are now demanding a system that is equivalent to a subway. With that comes much higher costs.

The assumption was that trains would run at 5 minute frequency and that makes some level crossings feasible as there are in Calgary. Level crossings do not necessarily slow down service if the rail line is protected with gates always giving trains priority. At 2 to 3 minute frequency, total grade separation becomes imperative.

[waterloowarrior]

Barrhaven to Riverside South Rapid Transit Environmental Assessment
http://ottawa.ca/en/city_hall/planningprojectsreports/public_consult/barrhaventransitea/index.htm

West Transitway Connections > Highway 417/Eagleson Road to Old Carp Road > Open house #3 display boards
http://www.ottawa.ca/en/city_hall/planni...eagleson_carp/oh3displayboards/index.htm

Median transit lanes on March Road is the preferred option

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

Barrhaven to Riverside South Rapid Transit Environmental Assessment
http://ottawa.ca/en/city_hall/planningprojectsreports/public_consult/barrhaventransitea/index.htm

West Transitway Connections > Highway 417/Eagleson Road to Old Carp Road > Open house #3 display boards
http://www.ottawa.ca/en/city_hall/planni...eagleson_carp/oh3displayboards/index.htm

Median transit lanes on March Road is the preferred option

Bus ways then convert!! Bus ways then convert!!!

Bunch of idiots!!!!

LRT should be built to Barrhaven Town Centre (via old N-S rail corridor) and Kanata North should be served by the Carling Tram; forget the all damn bus ways

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Bus ways then convert!! Bus ways then convert!!!

Bunch of idiots!!!!

LRT should be built to Barrhaven Town Centre (via old N-S rail corridor) and Kanata North should be served by the Carling Tram; forget the all damn bus ways

Meanwhile, it will be in our grandchildren's lifetimes, at the earliest, before there is rapid transit anywhere near dense inner-city neighbourhoods other than the downtown core, the west side of Sandy Hill, and the north edge of the Wellington-Richmond boroughs.

You know: places were mass transit actually makes economic and planning sense.

The suburbs still call the friggin' shots.

Rail to Kanata, rail to Barf Haven, rail to Orleans.

But the Montreal Road corridor, the Bank Street axis... you people can take the damn bus.

What an ass-backwards shit town.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Meanwhile, it will be in our grandchildren's lifetimes, at the earliest, before there is rapid transit anywhere near dense inner-city neighbourhoods other than the downtown core, the west side of Sandy Hill, and the north edge of the Wellington-Richmond boroughs.

You know: places were mass transit actually makes economic and planning sense.

The suburbs still call the friggin' shots.

Rail to Kanata, rail to Barf Haven, rail to Orleans.

But the Montreal Road corridor, the Bank Street axis... you people can take the damn bus.

What an ass-backwards shit town.

Yet another example of the failures of amalgamation.

[Ottawan]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Yet another example of the failures of amalgamation.

It may be a problem, but it's certainly one that has zip-all to do with amalgamation. Transit was a regional concern already pre-amalgamation. Why do you think it is called "Ottawa-Carleton Transpo".

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Ottawan

It may be a problem, but it's certainly one that has zip-all to do with amalgamation. Transit was a regional concern already pre-amalgamation. Why do you think it is called "Ottawa-Carleton Transpo".

I realize that OC Transpo was the responsibility of the Regional Government of Ottawa-Carlton.

They amalgamated a bunch of responsibilities to form the Regional Government of Ottawa-Carlton in 1969, and eventually, in 1973, they formed OC Transpo. Failure.

If old Ottawa was still old Ottawa and they would have always ran their own transit system, they wouldn't give a damn about the far flung suburbs and build a subway system to serve the central city (like in Montreal) and maybe invest in commuter rail for the suburbs.

And btw, the current transit plan isn't an OC Transpo proposal, it's a City of Ottawa proposal; so again, If old Ottawa was still its own city, they might have been planning a subway to serve Ottawa and not everyone else. The only time OC will have a say in the lrt line is when the city hands them the responsibility of running it in 5 years or so.

[eternallyme]

If there was no OC Transpo and the other former municipalities had to rely on transit themselves, most likely there would be very little transit in some of them, perhaps because voters would not want to add the taxes necessary. That is especially true outside the Greenbelt.

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

The suburbs still call the friggin' shots.

I would love to see the figures that show how much in property taxes each ward pays into the city's coffers, and how much infrastructure spending, especially transit investment has been dropped in each over the years. I bet central wards, especially Somerset, are heavy contributors but have been getting the short end of the stick, while the suburbs rake in much more than they contribute. Anyone got sources?

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

I would love to see the figures that show how much in property taxes each ward pays into the city's coffers, and how much infrastructure spending, especially transit investment has been dropped in each over the years. I bet central wards, especially Somerset, are heavy contributors but have been getting the short end of the stick, while the suburbs rake in much more than they contribute. Anyone got sources?

I haven’t found sources on the whole city but;

http://www.canurb.com/sites/default/file...%20FRONT%20SECTION%20%26%20COVERPAGE.pdf

Page 14, stats on downtown Ottawa say that 18 % of property tax revenues come from downtown, which is only 0.1% of the land area.

To see what is considered downtown Ottawa, according to the city check out page 9.

[lrt's friend]

I wish we would stop this urban/suburban nonsense. How does this solve anything? If we had not regionalized transit, we would have built more roads instead. There would not be a subway. Without the suburban tax base and suburban transit ridership, we would not be considering a subway now. And the comment about 18% of property tax coming from downtown. Big Deal. More than 18% of transit is oriented towards downtown.