Bank Street Subway | Fantasy

[JHikka]

Or just build a Bank subway and get things over with.

Parliament (Confederation)
Somerset
Gladstone
First
Lansdowne
Hopewell
Billings (BRT)
Heron
Walkley (Trillium)

[funforgot]

Originally Posted by On Edge

This would help clear one huge bus bottleneck for sure. It is also easy to strip away the street parking out all the way along Bank from Wellington to Billings. And have reliable and relatively rapid transit.

This is probably the most cost effective, easiest, and quickest way to speed up transit, even if it's not truly rapid transit. Business owners will likely be against it, but if they accepted full Saturday street closures for months, maybe they would be open to having bus lanes during cerrain time periods. Test it out in a trial period.

[DarthVader_1961]

Originally Posted by funforgot

This is probably the most cost effective, easiest, and quickest way to speed up transit, even if it's not truly rapid transit. Business owners will likely be against it, but if they accepted full Saturday street closures for months, maybe they would be open to having bus lanes during cerrain time periods. Test it out in a trial period.

A few strategically locate automated parking garages could replace the on street parking.

[Richard Eade]

Since this thread is entitled “A modest Bank Street Subway proposal | Fantasy” (and not “Arguments against a Bank Street Subway” or “Bank Street Bus-Lanes”), I’ll contribute an idea:

There seems to be a bunch of people out there, apparently including the two local Mayors, who feel that the $2B that the Feds will pay for a bridge should be spent on public transit instead, So how about this; take that $2B from the bridge plus the portion of the Aylmer Tram funding that would go into the new line east of Montcalm (i.e., the bridgework and tunneling under Sparks) and build a relatively shallow TBM-bored, twin-tube subway under Bank with cheap stations?

Create the INTERPROVINCIAL LINE – the BLUE Line.

The path would include a station in front of Terrasses de la Chaudière and Place du Portage (maybe a ‘stacked’ station on the edge of the underground parking garage). The line would then sweep a wide arc under the river (about where the ‘no-tree-island’ is) and then rise to a station under Bank, between Sparks and Queen (with potential ramp connections down to both Lyon and Parliament/Parlement Stations), and over the Confederation Line (which has about 16 metres of overburden, which should allow two 4.5 metre (finished inside dimension) side-by-side tunnels below the under-road utilities). Continuing along under Bank Street, the stations would be shallow so that you only need to go down a single flight of stairs from the proper side of the street. The $2B would certainly be enough to get the line down to Lansdowne, which as about five kilometres from Montcalm.

However, if at all possible, the line should be extended to, at least, Billings Bridge. Then, it could, once more money is available, hop over Heron Road and steal some space from the SE Transitway so that it can run, on the surface, down to South Keys. Here’s the nice part; because it would not be a ‘mass-transit’ line, from South Keys it could it would take over the low-volume Airport Link to provide a direct train link from the airport to downtown Ottawa and downtown Gatineau. (I would expect, though, a number of people would transfer from the Trillium Line to this line at South Keys, so that they wind up downtown without having to transfer onto a crowded Confederation Line.)

Several ‘problems’ solved:
• $2B not spent on a new bridge for vehicles;
• Additional public transit crossing the river;
• Better downtown-to-downtown connection;
• Aylmer Tram has an extra station in downtown Gatineau;
• Aylmer Tram has a better downtown Ottawa location, with, potential, connections to BOTH Lyon and Parliament/Parlement Stations;
• Bank Street gets a subway;
• Lansdowne has a north-south ‘medium-transit’ line;
• There is a more direct connection between downtown and the Baseline BRT; and
• There is a direct train connection between the airport and the two downtowns.

(It would also be possible to loop the line on the Gatineau side from Place du Portage under Laurier to the History Museum before cutting back to under Bank Street. This would slow commuting by a small amount but would be useful for tourism and developing more of Gatineau’s downtown.)

[On Edge]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

Since this thread is entitled “A modest Bank Street Subway proposal | Fantasy” (and not “Arguments against a Bank Street Subway” or “Bank Street Bus-Lanes”), I’ll contribute an idea:

There seems to be a bunch of people out there, apparently including the two local Mayors, who feel that the $2B that the Feds will pay for a bridge should be spent on public transit instead, So how about this; take that $2B from the bridge plus the portion of the Aylmer Tram funding that would go into the new line east of Montcalm (i.e., the bridgework and tunneling under Sparks) and build a relatively shallow TBM-bored, twin-tube subway under Bank with cheap stations?

Create the INTERPROVINCIAL LINE – the BLUE Line.

The path would include a station in front of Terrasses de la Chaudière and Place du Portage (maybe a ‘stacked’ station on the edge of the underground parking garage). The line would then sweep a wide arc under the river (about where the ‘no-tree-island’ is) and then rise to a station under Bank, between Sparks and Queen (with potential ramp connections down to both Lyon and Parliament/Parlement Stations), and over the Confederation Line (which has about 16 metres of overburden, which should allow two 4.5 metre (finished inside dimension) side-by-side tunnels below the under-road utilities). Continuing along under Bank Street, the stations would be shallow so that you only need to go down a single flight of stairs from the proper side of the street. The $2B would certainly be enough to get the line down to Lansdowne, which as about five kilometres from Montcalm.

However, if at all possible, the line should be extended to, at least, Billings Bridge. Then, it could, once more money is available, hop over Heron Road and steal some space from the SE Transitway so that it can run, on the surface, down to South Keys. Here’s the nice part; because it would not be a ‘mass-transit’ line, from South Keys it could it would take over the low-volume Airport Link to provide a direct train link from the airport to downtown Ottawa and downtown Gatineau. (I would expect, though, a number of people would transfer from the Trillium Line to this line at South Keys, so that they wind up downtown without having to transfer onto a crowded Confederation Line.)

Several ‘problems’ solved:
• $2B not spent on a new bridge for vehicles;
• Additional public transit crossing the river;
• Better downtown-to-downtown connection;
• Aylmer Tram has an extra station in downtown Gatineau;
• Aylmer Tram has a better downtown Ottawa location, with, potential, connections to BOTH Lyon and Parliament/Parlement Stations;
• Bank Street gets a subway;
• Lansdowne has a north-south ‘medium-transit’ line;
• There is a more direct connection between downtown and the Baseline BRT; and
• There is a direct train connection between the airport and the two downtowns.

(It would also be possible to loop the line on the Gatineau side from Place du Portage under Laurier to the History Museum before cutting back to under Bank Street. This would slow commuting by a small amount but would be useful for tourism and developing more of Gatineau’s downtown.)

Excellent idea. This would really make Ottawa work better.

[Acajack]

Apologies if it's been mentioned before but if it's a north-south subway through Centretown and the Glebe, I wouldn't align it with Bank.

I'd align it with a street slightly to the west like Lyon all the way from the CBD to Lansdowne. Then I'd align it a bit more eastwards (possible on Bank) for the stretch in Old Ottawa South to Billings Bridge.

Lyon is basically one block over from Bank so it's not going to hurt your catchment area from that street. Plus if you move it a bit west you can enlarge your catchment area to streets that are over towards Bronson.

If it's an underground set-up, there is no reason it absolutely has to align with Bank.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Apologies if it's been mentioned before but if it's a north-south subway through Centretown and the Glebe, I wouldn't align it with Bank.

If it's an underground set-up, there is no reason it absolutely has to align with Bank.

Bank makes the most sense, though, ideally. Lyon is almost purely low density residential for its entire length, and Bank has much better options for retail-integrated station options at ground level. The catchment areas for commercial and residential would be far better on Bank directly.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Bank makes the most sense, though, ideally. Lyon is almost purely low density residential for its entire length, and Bank has much better options for retail-integrated station options at ground level. The catchment areas for commercial and residential would be far better on Bank directly.

How about running it down Lyon with entrance/exit portals running in both directions towards Bank to the east and Kent/Percy to the west?

[J.OT13]

If ever we build a n/s subway in Centertown, Bank to me is the hands down best option. Central to Centretown, retail, restaurants, one of few streets that cross the Queensway, straightest alignment to Lansdowne and Billings.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

If ever we build a n/s subway in Centertown, Bank to me is the hands down best option. Central to Centretown, retail, restaurants, one of few streets that cross the Queensway, straightest alignment to Lansdowne and Billings.

The western part of Centretown just always seems forsaken in terms of transit, in spite of its high population density.

I mean, I don't even think there is an east-west bus route through the area!

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by Acajack

How about running it down Lyon with entrance/exit portals running in both directions towards Bank to the east and Kent/Percy to the west?

Why? You haven't provided a compelling reason for a Lyon alignment other than to shift catchment further West. As JOT pointed out, with a Bank alignment you keep direct access to Lansdowne and Billings and as I pointed out the current integration options are far better with retail on Bank.

Originally Posted by Acajack

The western part of Centretown just always seems forsaken in terms of transit, in spite of its high population density.

I mean, I don't even think there is an east-west bus route through the area!

Somerset, Gladstone, and Sunnyside all have E/W bus routes.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Acajack

The western part of Centretown just always seems forsaken in terms of transit, in spite of its high population density.

I mean, I don't even think there is an east-west bus route through the area!

The OC Transpo transit network is a joke. Bus routes are denser in the suburbs than Centretown. That's nothing new. If we built a Bank subway, we could improve east-west transit connectivity to link Trillium with the Bank Line.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Why? You haven't provided a compelling reason for a Lyon alignment other than to shift catchment further West. As JOT pointed out, with a Bank alignment you keep direct access to Lansdowne and Billings and as I pointed out the current integration options are far better with retail on Bank.
.

Oh, I definitely had in mind it would swing east to get close to Lansdowne, and then follow Bank to Billings. (And said so in my post.)

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Or just build a Bank subway and get things over with.

If you have $2 billion feel free. I don't want my tax dollars going to a redundant line while so many other transit priorities remain.

[On Edge]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

If you have $2 billion feel free. I don't want my tax dollars going to a redundant line while so many other transit priorities remain.

What priorities inside the greenbelt?

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by On Edge

What priorities inside the greenbelt?

For starters, Baseline BRT, Carling BRT/LRT, Montreal RD Bus Lanes/Bus priority signaling, and any of the hundreds of small Bus improvements that don't have funding throughout the city.

As for that 2Bn budget by cost/km equal to that of the Broadview subway of ~500million/km (that is probably out of date), would get you from Parliament to Billing bridge no further, with a station every ~900 metres... 4-5 in total.

Parliament, Gladstone, First, Lansdowne, and Billings.....not exactly well serving those living on or near bank street without the bus service to feed it......

[CityTech]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

If ever we build a n/s subway in Centertown, Bank to me is the hands down best option. Central to Centretown, retail, restaurants, one of few streets that cross the Queensway, straightest alignment to Lansdowne and Billings.

Honestly I think they should pick whatever street has the lowest cost - Lyon, Kent, O Connor, Metcalfe, Bank - that's really the most important issue.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by CityTech

Honestly I think they should pick whatever street has the lowest cost - Lyon, Kent, O Connor, Metcalfe, Bank - that's really the most important issue.

Maybe 10% difference max. The cost is driven by the need to tunnel primarily.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by CityTech

Honestly I think they should pick whatever street has the lowest cost - Lyon, Kent, O Connor, Metcalfe, Bank - that's really the most important issue.

I would imagine Bank would be the cheapest as it's the most direct route. Anytime a subway has to make a tight turn (say, to serve towards Lansdowne), it's more expensive to build and causes issues when in operations (slow down, more maintenance). Unless soil conditions vary significantly, Bank would most likely be the best bet financially and in terms of service.

Kent is a no go due to the CSST. I would say Elgin and Metcalfe are too close to Confederation (uOttawa station). Lyon is too far west.

[Richard Eade]

Based on the recent TBM boring of the CSST, I imagine that the cost to bore two 4.5 metre (finished I.D.) tunnels from Montcalm to Billings Bridge would be about $1.1B. Shallow stations, where a person would descend one flight of stairs to the train platform, with the direction of the train being determined by which side of the street they descend from, could be estimated at $30M each, with an additional $30M contingency. Thus, a cost of about $300M to add nine stations. Add rail infrastructure for about $700M more and a $100M contingency, and you have a total price of about $2.2B for the following:



That is the cost of a $2B bridge and $200M from the Aylmer Tram.