HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1801  
Old Posted May 5, 2009, 6:50 PM
Richard Eade Richard Eade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nepean
Posts: 2,044
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
Are you sure they're going to be filling-in the trench? I thought they were going to widen it a bit on the north side west of the current access-ramp to provide a straighter path to the upper level.
Yup, the trench will be partly back-filled in that area to make a much more gentle grade for the articulated buses. Once the ramp meets the lay-up area, it will be at that level - the ramp portion will be within the trench area. This will be re-dug when the train is extended.

Quote:
...
Why not go one step further and put it under the tracks/platform nearest the station itself? It would align better with the bridge over the Vanier Parkway and make for a better curve on the east side.
Well, I was trying to contain the costs a bit. I figured that my route has three new structures and a buried station which would match what their route would need.

If money were no object, I think that your idea is a good one. It better integrates the two transportation modes. I don't know if VIA would want that much disruption to their system however; remember there is a tunnel under the VIA platforms that is used for passengers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1802  
Old Posted May 5, 2009, 9:04 PM
Franky's Avatar
Franky Franky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
Yep... your only real option is to get to the councillors and/or the senior government officials that pay the bills. Consultation in Ottawa with respect to transportation is still carried out in the "we the engineers know best" mentality.

Figure out where we are on the ladder of citizen participation:

http://lithgow-schmidt.dk/sherry-arn...icipation.html

For the long term, we need to get corporate and union contributions to municipal election campaigns stopped. Politicians should represent Ottawa citizens and so their campaigns should be solely funded by Ottawa citizens.
__________________
Francois

Last edited by Franky; May 5, 2009 at 10:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1803  
Old Posted May 5, 2009, 9:49 PM
Dado's Avatar
Dado Dado is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,521
How far we've come

It's enough to make one despair, it really is:


Railway Gazette
Ottawa backs light rail
01 Mar 1998

TRAMS could be running in the Canadian capital before the millennium, if a fast-track plan adopted in January goes ahead. The regional government's transportation committee unanimously backed the proposals to develop an initial network by December 1999. The project has also been endorsed by 11 of the city's 19 regional councillors including new Chairman Bob Chiarelli.

The first route would use 8 km of Canadian Pacific Railway alignment running south from Lebreton Flats on the Ottawa River waterfront. It would serve the Dows Lake area, Carleton University campus and the government offices at Confederation Heights, and could terminate at either the Billings Bridge Plaza or South Keys shopping centre. Chiarelli sees light rail as an alternative to widening the busy Airport Parkway which parallels the route near South Keys.

A second line 31 km long is also envisaged, mostly using Canadian National alignments. This would run from the VIA station southeast of the city centre through Nepean to the high-tech business park at Kanata, west of the capital. Both routes would be closely integrated with the OC Transpo bus network, with its dedicated transitways created in the 1960s; these could be converted to light rail in the future.

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news_v...ight_rail.html


There looks to be a bit of a typo in the last line as the transitways were created in the 1980s (they probably seemed like a 1960s idea to the British-based Railway Gazette though). No sign yet of that 31 km bypass line either...
__________________
Ottawa's quasi-official motto: "It can't be done"
Ottawa's quasi-official ethos: "We have a process to follow"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1804  
Old Posted May 6, 2009, 12:15 AM
Rathgrith's Avatar
Rathgrith Rathgrith is offline
I'm just joking.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 1,176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Eade View Post
I looked at the recommended Tunneys Pasture Station and I'm confused:



From what I see, buses from the Western Transitway do not have an option as to where they go; there is a single path (two lanes in each direction) from the new Transitway ramp (the trench will be partly back-filled) to the exit/entrance at the top-right of the bus area. There is a fence between the lanes and no opportunity to loop around the island.

So a bus coming from the west will drop off passengers at the narrow platform along the edge of the trench and then exit onto Yarrow. If the bus is to go into Lay-up, it turns left onto Yarrow, and then left again into the lay-up area: If it is simply to turn around and head west again, it turns right onto Yarrow, right onto Holland, right onto Scott, right onto the transit bridge, left onto the west-bound lanes, picks up passengers from the island and then down the ramp to the Transitway: If the bus is continuing east, it turns right onto Yarrow, right onto Holland, then left onto Scott.

Buses from the lay-up will enter service by turning into the east-bound lanes as if they have just come up the ramp.

The island needs to be wide to accommodate stairs/escalator/elevator down to an underground tunnel which leads to the train platforms. I am assuming that this below grade crossing will also need to be below the grade of the tracks so people won't need to cross the tracks. Would people like the idea of going down 10 metres underground, or would they rather cross above grade? (I understand that there is a LARGE box culvert under the Transitway so an underpass might not be possible.)

Well, that is what I've figured out so far; the rest I need help with:

The bus facilities appear to be set up for a number of purposes; first, to provide a linear, side platform, bus station along the Transitway; second, to direct buses onto and off of Scott via Holland and the transit bridge; and third, to provide a large bus lay-up area for a small number of buses.

Why is the station designed to facilitate buses continuing east? Is it true that most western buses will continue towards downtown?

Why can't buses simply loop around the island and stay off the road system? Why is the north side of the island not used for pickup/drop-off at all?

Do we really need an underground tunnel, or would a cross-walk from the right side of the island to the existing pedestrian overpass work as well? Maybe a cross-walk at the transit bridge? How are passengers to get to the island if they don't take the tunnel?

Does the Lay-up area look to be a VERY inefficient layout? Do we need all of this area to park buses on?

Should the train platforms be shifted west, starting from the existing pedestrian overpass, so that the new building planned by Public Works can be integrated with the station? The new building was to go where the lay-up area is. Maybe the new building could extend over the train to provide access to both side platforms.

Since this is an interim measure, would you suggest any modifications or alternatives?
What about building one of these at the end of the bus transitway?:

Flickr

There could be painted lines on the roundhouse turnstyle to tell the driver where to park their model of bus to rotate with the most ease.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1805  
Old Posted May 6, 2009, 12:40 AM
Aylmer's Avatar
Aylmer Aylmer is offline
Still optimistic
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montreal (C-D-N) / Ottawa (Aylmer)
Posts: 5,384
I just found this awesome:



How to carry 240 people?

1 tramway = 3 buses = 180 cars

__________________
I've always struggled with reality. And I'm pleased to say that I won.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1806  
Old Posted May 6, 2009, 3:00 AM
Franky's Avatar
Franky Franky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,551
Two councillors go toe-to-toe over subway plan
Cullen likes proposed route; Bédard calls for more study
By Jake Rupert, The Ottawa CitizenMay 5, 2009 10:30 PM
"...
However, Rideau-Vanier Councillor Georges Bédard, who sits on the committee and represents an area the subway would run through, says planning staff have not sufficiently looked at the economic impacts of the route or how it will work in conjunction with buses.

He says if he doesn’t get good enough information and answers from planning staff on these topics, the decision should be deferred until the impacts, and ways to mitigate them, are fully fleshed out.

“We need to know all the facts on all the aspects of this before we go putting $600 million into a hole,” Bédard said. “I don’t want this to fail. So if it means taking more time, take more time.”
..."
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/council...619/story.html

Seems we have someone who wants to do things right the first time.
__________________
Francois
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1807  
Old Posted May 6, 2009, 3:02 AM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 12,166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Eade View Post
How about rotating the station a bit more like this:



Does that allay your fears?

That also adds more to the green lands and makes the bus access easier. The curves are at the ends of the station where slow speed will be a must any way.
Absolutely not. This will never fly as a replacement of Rapidbus. It is far from rapid for Gatineau residents. Where are the Gatineau trains going? Not downtown with this alignment. This makes it appear that Bayview is our main transit destination instead of downtown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1808  
Old Posted May 6, 2009, 3:05 AM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 12,166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
There looks to be a bit of a typo in the last line as the transitways were created in the 1980s (they probably seemed like a 1960s idea to the British-based Railway Gazette though). No sign yet of that 31 km bypass line either...
The 31km bypass line was part of the Chiarelli plan that we voted down. It should be no surprise that it is now gone.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1809  
Old Posted May 6, 2009, 3:15 AM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 12,166
Quote:
In a way then, it's almost pointless to have the ability to route trains from the south into downtown.
And the experts have said that we have ample tunnel capacity until well beyond 2031???????

If it pointless to have N-S trains run downtown, then why should southend residents use transit? I find this kind of response inconceivable. It suggests that we are designing a short-sighted transit system that will not be able to handle future capacity. Nothing better than the congestion issues that we have today. And we still have to squeeze those southend passengers into those E-W trains. Think about this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1810  
Old Posted May 6, 2009, 3:31 AM
Dado's Avatar
Dado Dado is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franky View Post
"Open House Display Boards #1" are up:
http://ottawa.ca/residents/public_co...erview_en.html
Try visiting this link now and see what you get...


We used those documents in our discussions; we linked to them and put them in our posts. Now those posts (~p.70) are lacking their images.

It's been reduced to this PDF, lacking in the accompanying text of the original pages:
http://ottawa.ca/residents/public_co...nhouse1_en.pdf

I think this is the point at which this study went out of control. A siege mentality has set in.
__________________
Ottawa's quasi-official motto: "It can't be done"
Ottawa's quasi-official ethos: "We have a process to follow"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1811  
Old Posted May 6, 2009, 12:59 PM
Franky's Avatar
Franky Franky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
Try visiting this link now and see what you get...


We used those documents in our discussions; we linked to them and put them in our posts. Now those posts (~p.70) are lacking their images.

It's been reduced to this PDF, lacking in the accompanying text of the original pages:
http://ottawa.ca/residents/public_co...nhouse1_en.pdf

I think this is the point at which this study went out of control. A siege mentality has set in.
Wow. How do we get them to put it back at least until the tunnel is built?
__________________
Francois
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1812  
Old Posted May 6, 2009, 1:41 PM
YOWetal YOWetal is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franky View Post
Two councillors go toe-to-toe over subway plan
Cullen likes proposed route; Bédard calls for more study
By Jake Rupert, The Ottawa CitizenMay 5, 2009 10:30 PM
"...
However, Rideau-Vanier Councillor Georges Bédard, who sits on the committee and represents an area the subway would run through, says planning staff have not sufficiently looked at the economic impacts of the route or how it will work in conjunction with buses.

He says if he doesn’t get good enough information and answers from planning staff on these topics, the decision should be deferred until the impacts, and ways to mitigate them, are fully fleshed out.

“We need to know all the facts on all the aspects of this before we go putting $600 million into a hole,” Bédard said. “I don’t want this to fail. So if it means taking more time, take more time.”
..."
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/council...619/story.html

Seems we have someone who wants to do things right the first time.
Let's be realistic. More study=no tunnel=another delay on decision until after the next election.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1813  
Old Posted May 6, 2009, 2:00 PM
Franky's Avatar
Franky Franky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by YOWetal View Post
Let's be realistic. More study=no tunnel=another delay on decision until after the next election.
Given the current mess (allegations of influence peddling etc...) with Larry "zero means zero" O'Brien, it would not be a bad idea to think of the last 3 years as a really bad dream.
__________________
Francois
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1814  
Old Posted May 6, 2009, 2:00 PM
Ryersonian Ryersonian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by AylmerOptimist View Post
I just found this awesome:



How to carry 240 people?

1 tramway = 3 buses = 180 cars

I remember the TTC had the same thing!! Copy Cats! Where was this from? I agree it is an amazing ad!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1815  
Old Posted May 6, 2009, 3:03 PM
p_xavier p_xavier is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryersonian View Post
I remember the TTC had the same thing!! Copy Cats! Where was this from? I agree it is an amazing ad!
I'll pre-empt Franky, but these 180 people are not even going to the same distanation!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1816  
Old Posted May 6, 2009, 5:33 PM
Franky's Avatar
Franky Franky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by d_jeffrey View Post
I'll pre-empt Franky, but these 180 people are not even going to the same distanation!
Oh, good one, I was not going to comment. Different destinations at different times, true.

Also, it's a 6 car Urbanaut monorail (45m) or a 3 car Hitachi medium monorail (about 43m).
__________________
Francois
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1817  
Old Posted May 6, 2009, 6:55 PM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 12,166
Are all 240 people standing on that tram? Couldn't resist.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1818  
Old Posted May 6, 2009, 8:03 PM
Franky's Avatar
Franky Franky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrt's friend View Post
Are all 240 people standing on that tram? Couldn't resist.
Urbanaut: 118 seated, 135 standing (207 crush)
http://www.urbanaut.com/Vehicle%20Co...cities%204.htm

SD160 and U2: 60 seated, (256 theoretical max., 200 practical) packed into a 25m long vehicle.
http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/t...formation.html

Wonder what Tram they are referring to?
__________________
Francois
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1819  
Old Posted May 6, 2009, 8:35 PM
harls's Avatar
harls harls is offline
Mooderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Aylmer, Québec
Posts: 20,166
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrt's friend View Post
Are all 240 people standing on that tram? Couldn't resist.
Which way are they facing, though.. that is the question.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1820  
Old Posted May 6, 2009, 9:39 PM
Franky's Avatar
Franky Franky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
Try visiting this link now and see what you get...


We used those documents in our discussions; we linked to them and put them in our posts. Now those posts (~p.70) are lacking their images.

It's been reduced to this PDF, lacking in the accompanying text of the original pages:
http://ottawa.ca/residents/public_co...nhouse1_en.pdf

I think this is the point at which this study went out of control. A siege mentality has set in.
Seems the URL has changed it's got "getinvolved" in the path now:
http://ottawa.ca/residents/public_co..._const_en.html

Doesn't help finding stuff though and it's very bad for discussion groups.
__________________
Francois
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Transportation
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:04 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.