Was Transit Planning run Like a Dictatorship?

[lrt's friend]

I find it strange that when the possibility of Cullen's and O'Brien's defeat was becoming more and more likely, east end councillors have suddenly become vocal that LRT be extended to Orleans quickly while they remained silent about this for the last 3 or 4 years.

Remember all the density rules imposed that were designed to prevent (or justify) decisions to not extend LRT to any suburb for decades, if ever. Was Cullen's and O'Brien's vision for rapid transit really what most councillors wanted? Was the tight ship that led to the 22 to 2 vote on the current plan based on the fact that descent and alternate ideas were being severely discouraged? Were there really opportunities for councillors to express what their dreams for rapid transit were since we blew away the Chiarelli plan and the 2003 TMP? Were councillors' wishes being stifled by the process imposed by Cullen and O'Brien and the consultant reports that eliminated all alternatives so quickly?

[Dado]

Good question.

Something peculiar was definitely going on in the last Council. For all the acrimony and alleged dysfunction, on transit virtually the entire lot of them behaved as sheep. Only perennial dissenter Doucet and newcomer Leadman generally opposed the direction being taken.

Kanatan councillors seem to have rolled over and accepted the limited rail network in the west end in exchange for a few transitway extensions in Bay ward, which Cullen enthusiastically championed.

Harder got a transitway of her own and her constituents along with those of most of the rest of Nepean would at least benefit from access to empty trains at Baseline (unlike those of Kanata facing full trains at Lincoln Fields).

The eastern councillors must have thought they were getting off pretty well with light rail going as far as Blair compared to their compatriots in the rest of the city. They must be dreaming in technicolour though if they think that Orleans is going to get rail before Baseline does.

But overall, it's insane. They went from a TMP with light rail from Kanata to Orleans and downtown to Riverside South and Barrhaven in 2003 to one with precious little in 2008. All they really needed to do was change the colour of the blue lines in the 2003 TMP to red, sort out the downtown problem, and get on with it. Instead, they basically converted the oldest parts of the Transitway and swapped the rest of the lines from red to blue.

It's as if, having cancelled the N-S LRT, they lost their backbone.

Apart from the manipulated public consultation process, the one thing I remember most about the update was the complete lack of diagrams of the existing TMP that was being changed. That thing never appeared anywhere. I think that everyone had become so fixated on the N-S LRT (for, against, whatever) and where it went that everyone forgot what the rest of the TMP looked like, and staff were happy to let it stay that way.


It will be interesting to see what this new council does, and Watson in particular. I suspect that many of the incoming councillors will have some distrust of city staff (after all, they can't possibly all believe that the wasteful spending they like to rail about is entirely the fault of the outgoing councillors alone). If Watson were to choose to go to war against staff, he'd probably be followed. His good friend Bob Chiarelli had to in the late 90s.

[Kitchissippi]

Transportation planning was far more of a dictatorship under Bob Chiarelli.

[lrt's friend]

I know that I briefly sat on a consultation committee with others and our councillor, Diane Deans. There was generally great disappointment with the plan and not just because the N-S plan had been cancelled. Generally, it was seen that there would be little benefit to our ward even after everything was completed in 2031. There would be no improvements in travel times to get anywhere except for a small number of residents in the south end of the ward who would benefit from a new Leitrim LRT station. There was also resignation that we had to move forward in hope that improvements would be made at the next planning stage. That proved to be incorrect. By the time the 22 to 2 vote took place, there was no appetite to restart again.

[Davis137]

I agree with the obove statement. As a new resident to Ward 10 of less than a year, I can already say that this area seems disconnected from the rest of the city. I mean, there ARE the Greenboro and South Keys transitway stations, but there's not anything south of there, or east of there. Call me crazy, but I don't forsee there NOT being more residential development out towards Hawthorne and the Hunt Club extension and interchange. This area is going to eventually need an established transitway corridor. Perhaps some kind of arrangement can be made with CN or Via to use one of the rail lines that crosses the northern portion of Greenboro into a LRT line that would link up with a N-S line in the future?

Funny thing is, I'm likely going to get posted out of Ottawa before any drastic changes happen...

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Davis137

I agree with the obove statement. As a new resident to Ward 10 of less than a year, I can already say that this area seems disconnected from the rest of the city. I mean, there ARE the Greenboro and South Keys transitway stations, but there's not anything south of there, or east of there. Call me crazy, but I don't forsee there NOT being more residential development out towards Hawthorne and the Hunt Club extension and interchange. This area is going to eventually need an established transitway corridor. Perhaps some kind of arrangement can be made with CN or Via to use one of the rail lines that crosses the northern portion of Greenboro into a LRT line that would link up with a N-S line in the future?

Funny thing is, I'm likely going to get posted out of Ottawa before any drastic changes happen...

The use of the rail lines that cross the city including running through Walkley Yards immediately adjacent to Greenboro and the Ottawa Business Park was included in the Chiarelli plan and supported by the Friends of the O-Train and others who believed that use of existing rail was an inexpensive way to deliver service as an alternative to the existing Transitways, a main LRT line and the Queensway. This was totally abandoned by the most recent TMP. I believe that the expected ridership was not considered high enough yet we have already proven that completely new links like the O-Train when it opened can be quite successful. We seem to have completely forgotten this. For some reason, this city has lost its desire to be innovative in trying to attract new ridership. Eventhough growth is moving south across the city, it is generally considered a low priority in transit planning and transportation planning in general. Consequently, transit ridership is low and there is little desire to make improvements that would bring ridership levels up to those that exist in other parts of the city. There is a prevailing attitude that only those who live in the east and west ends are worthy of service improvements eventhough there is a potentially significant untapped transit market when we look southward and this will only grow over time.

[Ottawan]

All of this talk had me go out and find a map of the former plan. This has me grieving once again - it would have provided such better service, with new connections and routes, and far less cost. It would have been more in line with principles of smart growth in the suburbs and intesification in the city. Really the only problem was the lack of tunnel, which could have been remedied without throwing away the whole plan.



Another benefit of the diesel rail route (lrt was going to be used for the N/S line and the northern light rail lines, but the O-train technology was going to be used on existing track for the southern cross-city line) was an express purpose of directly connecting those commuting from Orleans to Kanata. Looks particularly far-sighted today - look carefully at the alignment and you'll quickly realize that it would have been an excellent way to get Orleans commuters straight to the former Nortel (future DND) campus.

[McC]

Originally Posted by Ottawan

All of this talk had me go out and find a map of the former plan. This has me grieving once again - it would have provided such better service, with new connections and routes, and far less cost. It would have been more in line with principles of smart growth in the suburbs and intesification in the city. Really the only problem was the lack of tunnel, which could have been remedied without throwing away the whole plan.

I would have been good with the old plan if there had also been another slide for 10 years after that one (2030-something?), where the solid Blue BRT would be replaced with light metro or metro, once the red LRT was fully built out. oh well.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by Ottawan

All of this talk had me go out and find a map of the former plan. This has me grieving once again - it would have provided such better service, with new connections and routes, and far less cost. It would have been more in line with principles of smart growth in the suburbs and intesification in the city. Really the only problem was the lack of tunnel, which could have been remedied without throwing away the whole plan.



Another benefit of the diesel rail route (lrt was going to be used for the N/S line and the northern light rail lines, but the O-train technology was going to be used on existing track for the southern cross-city line) was an express purpose of directly connecting those commuting from Orleans to Kanata. Looks particularly far-sighted today - look carefully at the alignment and you'll quickly realize that it would have been an excellent way to get Orleans commuters straight to the former Nortel (future DND) campus.

O-Train technology wasn't to be used at all. It was to be completely abandoned - too imaginative, I guess. All the corridors were to be double-track electric light rail. Rail corridors would see the heavy rail track relocated to one side where required.

Here is s.8.2 from RTES, in 2002 (page 8-8):

Key assumptions with respect to network design include the following:

• LRT is on twin tracks and will not be run on existing freight track;
• Existing freight tracks to be relocated within the ROW to accommodate LRT;
• LRT will be located on new continuous welded rail;
• Existing structures will be retained, modified, or replaced where necessary;
• Exclusive ROW will be grade-separated with all other means of transportation;
• Semi-exclusive ROW will have controlled access and may be co-located with other means of transportation;
• Transit priority measures will be employed on all facilities that share roadway rights-of-way; and
• Reduction in road capacity for non-transit vehicles is acceptable.

Unfortunately, that plan didn't do anything to fix the downtown problem. It retained the primacy of BRT with LRT providing a secondary, supporting role, leaving most existing rapid transit users to continue using BRT. That's where our problems for the last half dozen years started.

It also didn't do anything to lower the cost of operating the system, either.

With respect to both, take a look at RTES Option A, below, and the Recommended plan that follows it:





Note the one crucial difference: Option A has an LRT link from downtown to Hurdman and thence through the Hospital corridor. This was painted blue in the recommended plan.

Why is that significant? Because Option A opened the door to replacing all BRT service downtown with LRT. People from Orleans south of St. Joseph would flock to the LRT line to go downtown. Sooner or later some curious councillor would ask why not replace the buses downtown entirely with light rail between Bayview and Hurdman, both to remove the buses and to save money on duplication of services. Before long, conversion of the Transitway would be talked about, and the demise of BRT would look increasingly likely. So somehow this little bit of LRT got removed, even though it would serve the hospital area, and with it the connection to downtown.

lrt's friend may also note a curious change with respect to the light rail route around Blackburn Hamlet...

[lrt's friend]

One thing you will note is that each rapid transit corridor used the same technology, either busway or LRT. This eliminates unnecessary transfers and makes sure that our investment concentrates on expanding the network instead of rebuilding. Our current plan has each corridor a combination of busway and LRT. This is plain stupid.

I agree with Dado on a number points and particularly that the hospital corridor should have been LRT. For some reason or other, making use of any part of the Alta Vista Parkway corridor is off limits eventhough it was created to be a transportation corridor all along. This could be the future of the Riverside South/Barrhaven LRT corridor if we wait too long.

I think that the old plan was flawed but could have been improved instead of throwing it out and ending up with something considerably inferior except for that little section between Lebreton and Hurdman.

[Kitchissippi]

It’s easy to be sentimental about the old TMP but it was really, really shoddy on details, like it was rushed to justify the N-S LRT. For example, it shows LRT running through downtown on Wellington to continue on Montreal Road, and then it was suddenly revealed that N-S LRT was going on Slater/Albert with a dead-end at U of O and no provisions for eastward expansion. How was the Carling streetcar going to negotiate traffic clogged Bronson and its chaotic Queensway interchange, nobody knew. There was a lot of wool being pulled in people’s eyes with this scheme, meanwhile a piece of it was already being plotted in the name of creating green communities in the south end that apparently would need fewer roads. Yeah, right.

That plan would have been great if the red and blue lines were reversed, with the exception of the O-Train line.

E-W LRT on the the existing railway would have bled money for the next few decades, a high capacity line only used during rush hours by a few while the buses on the Transitway remain packed to the gills, and downtown still plagued by the onslaught of buses and diesel fumes. LRT on that railway route might have provided an alternative to cross town but if you think transferring from a bus to a train is ridiculous, going from a train onto a bus or slower streetcars to get downtown is moronic.

It is laughable that they called this a Rapid Transit plan when it contained absolutely no exclusive rapid transit ROW downtown. They even deceived us by not making the blue lines dotted through downtown unless they meant a bus tunnel.

[lrt's friend]

Why waste billions rebuilding what we already have? It doesn't really accomplish much and it actually prevents us from expanding the network and actually attracting new riders. This is what is disappointing about the new plan. We also have to remember that old plan only took us to 2020. Some of the flaws described would likely have been fixed during the Environmental Assessment and planning processes. Can you imagine if even half of what was planned would have been in operation by 2020? Thousands of people would have benefitted. We would have doubled our rapid transit network. As it stands, other than the tunnel itself and the Barrhaven Transitway extension, no new rapid transit mileage will have been added by 2020. It is truly a sad statement.

But really this is all off topic.

[Dado]

The experience of the N-S LRT is that project Environmental Assessments don't fix problems with the underlying TMP. With the new transit regulation and the 6-month process, hoping for EA-time fixes is even less likely than it was before.

As we've seen with both the N-S LRT EA and the DOTT EA, the planning and EA process itself can add even more problems.

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

It’s easy to be sentimental about the old TMP but it was really, really shoddy on details, like it was rushed to justify the N-S LRT. For example, it shows LRT running through downtown on Wellington to continue on Montreal Road,

In fairness, the accompanying text does indicate that the corridors were not exact and that the actual routes were to be studied in detail.

and then it was suddenly revealed that N-S LRT was going on Slater/Albert with a dead-end at U of O and no provisions for eastward expansion. How was the Carling streetcar going to negotiate traffic clogged Bronson and its chaotic Queensway interchange, nobody knew.

In Option A, it appeared to go north on Booth, not Bronson. That link was eliminated in the Recommended Plan.

There was a lot of wool being pulled in people’s eyes with this scheme, meanwhile a piece of it was already being plotted in the name of creating green communities in the south end that apparently would need fewer roads. Yeah, right.

I tend to agree. I'm of the view that the entire notion of building out Riverside South at all is a mistake, and I definitely wouldn't support development along the Rideau River where we're currently doing it. If they had to develop south of the airport, the place to do it was along the old rail line to Prescott, south of the Falcon Ridge Golf Club to Mitch Owens Rd, effectively turning Greely into an exurban extension of the new suburb.

That plan would have been great if the red and blue lines were reversed, with the exception of the O-Train line.

Well not all red lines would need to go blue, and laying down asphalt in rail corridors is a mistake we've already made enough of.

More fundamentally though, it seemed that LRT was to be mainly an urban development tool, while BRT was to carry on in a metro-like role

...

It is laughable that they called this a Rapid Transit plan when it contained absolutely no exclusive rapid transit ROW downtown. They even deceived us by not making the blue lines dotted through downtown unless they meant a bus tunnel.

No bus tunnel. It wasn't believed to be necessary. Also, while this plan was for 2021, the population estimates have since been revised such that the population previously expected by 2021 won't now arrive until 2031, so what was thought to be good for 2021 then ought to still be good for 2031 now. That today we're sure that surface BRT won't cut it out to 2031 shows how misguided that part of the previous TMP really was.

Nevertheless, I agree with lrt's friend that the old plan could have been fixed rather than trashing it completely.


Anyway, to get closer back to topic, things will potentially be quite different now.

Transit committee will be entirely new and with a more centre-right council there will probably be a desire to start cost cutting on both capital and operations. I suspect there will be greater distrust of staff. At the same time, there is a general consensus that light rail is needed and most councillors seem to nominally support the tunnel, while eastern councillors have a newfound desire to extend light rail to Orleans. How this all pans out should be interesting.

[Mille Sabords]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

It’s easy to be sentimental about the old TMP but it was really, really shoddy on details, like it was rushed to justify the N-S LRT. For example, it shows LRT running through downtown on Wellington to continue on Montreal Road, and then it was suddenly revealed that N-S LRT was going on Slater/Albert with a dead-end at U of O and no provisions for eastward expansion. How was the Carling streetcar going to negotiate traffic clogged Bronson and its chaotic Queensway interchange, nobody knew. There was a lot of wool being pulled in people’s eyes with this scheme, meanwhile a piece of it was already being plotted in the name of creating green communities in the south end that apparently would need fewer roads. Yeah, right.

That plan would have been great if the red and blue lines were reversed, with the exception of the O-Train line.

E-W LRT on the the existing railway would have bled money for the next few decades, a high capacity line only used during rush hours by a few while the buses on the Transitway remain packed to the gills, and downtown still plagued by the onslaught of buses and diesel fumes. LRT on that railway route might have provided an alternative to cross town but if you think transferring from a bus to a train is ridiculous, going from a train onto a bus or slower streetcars to get downtown is moronic.

It is laughable that they called this a Rapid Transit plan when it contained absolutely no exclusive rapid transit ROW downtown. They even deceived us by not making the blue lines dotted through downtown unless they meant a bus tunnel.

I agree with Kitchissippi. For those just joining us and who don't have the time to read the 750 screens of posts that have been written on the topic, I can excuse your amazement that we are still even debating this. I guess Ken Gray does have an audience after all, as astonishing as that is.

In my own opinion, the former north-south plan's sole advantage was how quickly it could be put in service. Its huge disadvantage is that it didn't grade-separate the downtown section, so it was a big investment with too short a shelf life. The disadvantage far outweighed the advantage. With time, we will see that cancelling it was the right thing to do. (It would've been better to plan a grade-separated downtown section from Day One, but as Ottawa goes, I guess we needed a slower progress into that notion)

Our current plan is the right plan. It grade-separates the downtown. Once that's done, it's done for ever. We'll never have to worry about downtown bottlenecks again. Ken Gray keeps harping on how it's just a short line... he's intellectually dishonest. The entire plan is far more comprehensive. It goes from Blair to Baseline and from Bayview to the Airport and onto Riverside South. Plus, it adds a Carling streetcar line. That's a pretty good base network. Future generations will add onto it, but within a 20-year time frame, that's a decent program. Let's not forget, that's roughly comparable to how long it took to get our Transitway network in place as we know it today.

Whining that "it's not an immediate total network from one end of the city to the other" is, I'll repeat, intellectually dishonest. These things take time. They have to start at the right place for it all to make sense. This plan starts downtown, as it should. It goes east first, as we wait for the western leg to be figured out, and then it goes west. East and west, where most people and jobs are. Then, it goes south. Just makes sense.

The suburbs will continue to have rapid transit: the Transitway. It works. And it is the right technology for areas that have less density, and where you want the flexibility of combining hub-and-spoke with perhaps some feeder service into major neighbourhoods without a transfter at the BRT hub, just one at the LRT hub. When the suburbs have the density to justify crossing the greenbelt with rail service, the City has said they will. What's so controversial about that? It's just sound fiscal management.

[lrt's friend]

It’s easy to be sentimental about the old TMP but it was really, really shoddy on details, like it was rushed to justify the N-S LRT.

It is really funny how this is mentioned when exactly the same thing could be said about the new TMP. The western route is still so up in the air and the hospital corridor has been completely revised since the TMP was approved.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

It is really funny how this is mentioned when exactly the same thing could be said about the new TMP. The western route is still so up in the air and the hospital corridor has been completely revised since the TMP was approved.

Is there still a hospital corridor? I thought it had been NIMBied out of existence.

[Mille Sabords]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Is there still a hospital corridor? I thought it had been NIMBied out of existence.

You're right, it has been... at least for the time being.

[acottawa]

The East-West Line in the old plan bypassed every medium/high density area of the city, every major employer, every shopping centre, every post-secondary institution. It may have been one of the dumbest mass transit ideas ever proposed, anywhere.

[Davis137]

Regardless of good plans that have been put forth in the past (or bad ones), I'm sure that nothing good will come anytime soon. This city is going to be plagued by greater single-occupant-vehicle volume than there already is.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The East-West Line in the old plan bypassed every medium/high density area of the city, every major employer, every shopping centre, every post-secondary institution. It may have been one of the dumbest mass transit ideas ever proposed, anywhere.

I wish to point out that it was intended to be an alternate east-west line (we would have more than one) and there were variations of the route under consideration to better access transit destinations such as Algonquin College and the Queensway-Carleton Hospital. There is some disagreement on the purpose of this route. Some believe it should be a cross-town express route strictly following existing rail lines while others believe there should be some deviations to connect transit destinations.

I wish those who state that this is 'one of the dumbest mass transit ideas ever proposed, anywhere' would look at a map of the city and look at where the current proposed east-west LRT line is proposed in relation to the built up area. There is a huge area that will continue to not have decent east-west transit connections.