Canadian LRT/RT projects U/C

[rdaner]

I was counting the VIA and regional rail service that Montreal has to Trudeau. A bit sneaky but I think that it makes the grade.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by rdaner

I was counting the VIA and regional rail service that Montreal has to Trudeau. A bit sneaky but I think that it makes the grade.

Well... trains to Dorval near the airport aren't exactly the same as trains to the airport. A 1km gap makes a big difference with luggage, especially with visitors unfamiliar with the area. And given the hassle to get there and the low rail frequency it's basically null as a rail link imo.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Well, I wouldn't call it direct. It will be a three train ride to Downtown. The pre-Confederation Line bus was faster and more convenient.

Nothing stopping an extension of the 97 beyond Hurdman.

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

'Well, I wouldn't call it direct. It will be a three train ride to Downtown. The pre-Confederation Line bus was faster and more convenient.'

That's what I don't get and likely never will.

You build and replace infrastructure to improve things, not the opposite.

Seems idiotic.

The genesis of the rail replacement was a need for capacity and cost containment. It wasn't about improving service.

[IRT_BMT_IND]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Sadly it's not the only such instance of service actually declining as a result of "new" stuff being rolled out as part of Ottawa's O-Train adventure.

I believe the idea is that ultimately when all is in place things will actually be better.

We shall see.

A big goal of the O-Train was to reduce the extreme bus congestion in downtown Ottawa. Of course the pandemic and subsequent move to work-from-home was a huge black swan event. I do wonder if Ottawa would do it all again if they got the chance from today's perspective.

FWIW I also do think closing the Trillium line for years for an expansion and major rebuild but not electrifying it at the same time is typical Canadian cheapness, and there's a good chance it ends up getting closed again for electrification some time in the future.

[craner]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Nothing stopping an extension of the 97 beyond Hurdman.



The genesis of the rail replacement was a need for capacity and cost containment. It wasn't about improving service.

Originally Posted by IRT_BMT_IND

A big goal of the O-Train was to reduce the extreme bus congestion in downtown Ottawa. Of course the pandemic and subsequent move to work-from-home was a huge black swan event. I do wonder if Ottawa would do it all again if they got the chance from today's perspective.

FWIW I also do think closing the Trillium line for years for an expansion and major rebuild but not electrifying it at the same time is typical Canadian cheapness, and there's a good chance it ends up getting closed again for electrification some time in the future.

To repeat what Cold said: Seems idiotic.

[niwell]

When everything is finished the Ottawa system will make a lot more sense. As it happened phase 1 of the LRT actually made things more convoluted in many instances and probably added time to a lot of commutes. I'm only familiar with the transfer at Tunney's which while not the worst isn't exactly seamless. The airport situation is also unfortunate but really airports aren't as significant trip generators as often portrayed, particularly in a city like Ottawa where those travelling on business aren't taking transit.

[casper]

Originally Posted by niwell

When everything is finished the Ottawa system will make a lot more sense. As it happened phase 1 of the LRT actually made things more convoluted in many instances and probably added time to a lot of commutes. I'm only familiar with the transfer at Tunney's which while not the worst isn't exactly seamless. The airport situation is also unfortunate but really airports aren't as significant trip generators as often portrayed, particularly in a city like Ottawa where those travelling on business aren't taking transit.

Well, I am in Ottawa around two to three times a year on business. About half the time I am just downtown and do uber. If the train went to the airport I would use it. About the other half of the time I need a rental car so would not.

On my last trip to Ottawa (stayed downtown, most of my meeting were in walking distance to the hotel but I had one that was in walking distance to one of the train stations) what I found odd about the system was how slow it was and jerky the ride is. Perhaps I am spoiled having more experience with Skytrain in Vancouver. That said, both those issues are minor and I would choice to use it.

[caltrane74]

GO Transit is bringing back 15 minute service to the Kitchener / Milton Line and they also are bringing in Bike cars to deal with the demand

https://www.facebook.com/share/kwttR...ibextid=oFDknk

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Nothing stopping an extension of the 97 beyond Hurdman.

What? Route 97 is going to be cancelled.

The genesis of the rail replacement was a need for capacity and cost containment. It wasn't about improving service.

This is craziness. Spending $600M for worse service, and it will be worse. We are adding capacity on Line 2 but no improvement in frequency where it is needed the most and reducing capacity on the southeast Transitway, and the end result, trip times will be longer. There is also no cost containment here either. The cost of operating and maintaining Line 2 is going way up, and the trains running south of South Keys are going to operate at a tremendous loss. We are spending a tremendous amount of money and delivering very little to make transit more attractive. It is simply bad design.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by IRT_BMT_IND

A big goal of the O-Train was to reduce the extreme bus congestion in downtown Ottawa. Of course the pandemic and subsequent move to work-from-home was a huge black swan event. I do wonder if Ottawa would do it all again if they got the chance from today's perspective.

FWIW I also do think closing the Trillium line for years for an expansion and major rebuild but not electrifying it at the same time is typical Canadian cheapness, and there's a good chance it ends up getting closed again for electrification some time in the future.

I would argue that 'part' of the reason why people don't want to go back to work, is that the transit system for downtown commuters has been ruined since the opening of Line 1 in 2019. It was an awful implementation for commuters, and the system has been made worse since then. For a lot of people, working from home is the only reasonable option, with transit commuting times getting much worse and limited and expensive parking downtown.

The bigger issue with the Trillium Line was not double tracking the original phase during the 4+ year closure. We would not have needed 400 seat trains, when there may be 10 or 20 passengers coming from the south extension in off-peak hours. We could have actually improved frequency and had airport trains run through to Bayview, eliminating one transfer. The trains also could have run at faster speeds, not needing to constantly enter and exit passing tracks.

I live near the Trillium Line and I am not optimistic about the outcome of opening Phase 2. The new stations are in terrible locations, in the middle of nowhere, away from almost all the 150,000 people living south of the airport.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

What? Route 97 is going to be cancelled.

Again. That's a choice the city has made.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

This is craziness. Spending $600M for worse service, and it will be worse. We are adding capacity on Line 2 but no improvement in frequency where it is needed the most and reducing capacity on the southeast Transitway, and the end result, trip times will be longer. There is also no cost containment here either. The cost of operating and maintaining Line 2 is going way up, and the trains running south of South Keys are going to operate at a tremendous loss. We are spending a tremendous amount of money and delivering very little to make transit more attractive. It is simply bad design.

Not disagreeing that it's a poor design and will offer poor service. But Ottawa's rail system is designed to do what it was meant to do: offer sufficient capacity to be future-proofed as cheaply as possible. You will notice that there is no mention of improved service in there. That was never a goal. The fact that Ottawa is halving is it's pre-rail bus fleet instead of improving feeder bus service should speak what the original goals were.

Ottawa is a suburb masquerading as a city. Its residents vote in politicians who are pro-car. And transit is viewed as a service meant to help public servants avoid parking fees at their downtown jobs. Shouldn't surprise anyone that these are their priorities.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by IRT_BMT_IND

A big goal of the O-Train was to reduce the extreme bus congestion in downtown Ottawa. Of course the pandemic and subsequent move to work-from-home was a huge black swan event. I do wonder if Ottawa would do it all again if they got the chance from today's perspective.

FWIW I also do think closing the Trillium line for years for an expansion and major rebuild but not electrifying it at the same time is typical Canadian cheapness, and there's a good chance it ends up getting closed again for electrification some time in the future.

They cheaped out in so many ways.

1) Didn't electrify the Trillium Line. Not even with BEMU or Hydrail where this would have been the perfect application.

2) Didn't double track the Trillium Line when they were going to shut down service for a year anyway. And now it's turned out to be years more.

3) For only a little bit more could have built fully enclosed stations like the REM, with a fully automated rail system.

I won't even get into the whole trying to build a metro with a theoretical peak capacity of something like the Sheppard Subway using trams.

Sure. Ottawa got kind of a worse deal having to pitch in so much for its own rail network, compared to say the GTA. But there's some very obvious own goals that were driven entirely by the city's own decision-making.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Again. That's a choice the city has made.





Not disagreeing that it's a poor design and will offer poor service. But Ottawa's rail system is designed to do what it was meant to do: offer sufficient capacity to be future-proofed as cheaply as possible. You will notice that there is no mention of improved service in there. That was never a goal. The fact that Ottawa is halving is it's pre-rail bus fleet instead of improving feeder bus service should speak what the original goals were.

Ottawa is a suburb masquerading as a city. Its residents vote in politicians who are pro-car. And transit is viewed as a service meant to help public servants avoid parking fees at their downtown jobs. Shouldn't surprise anyone that these are their priorities.

I really don't think our councillors really understood what the end result of various decisions was going to be. The experts were giving bad advice and the mayor alone was setting the budget. And that was an even bigger problem for voters. They were told that we would end up with a better transit system. Right up to opening, everybody was told that commute times were going to be the same or better than the Transitway system.

I don't believe that suburban voters had a pro-car agenda per se. They were seduced with low tax increases, which is easy to fall prey to. They were not told of the implications regarding transit. It was sort of bait and switch when Line 1 opened with the guise of better service, when it in fact was delivering worse service. It was too late, and transit riders responded accordingly when they saw how poor the train-bus transfers were.

It was all hidden in closed door meetings and contract dealings that were often beyond transparent access by councillors, let alone the voting public. My own city councillor (Diane Deans) was one of the few who questioned what was going on, and she was almost excommunicated as a result.

Now everything is spiralling downward, and the opening of Phase 2, will be that much worse. I almost cry when I hear the commercials from the Provincial Conservatives patting themselves on the back for the biggest transit 'expansion' in North America. I guess Ottawa is not in Ontario.

[Nouvellecosse]

I have to wonder if some of the blame is down to Ottawa waiting too long to do a rail system. Calgary and Edmonton which are of a similar size did their first downtown LRT segments decades ago rather than doing a BRT with busway and waiting until that system was congested to the max before upgrading. Converting your existing core system as a metro of 1.5 million is going to be harder than designing and building a new system as a smaller city. You already have a high existing ridership base that depends on it and who are used to something else whereas a city that builds its first LRT or metro line after just having buses or streetcars won't have that issue. Plus, I wonder if the long-term intention of upgrading to LRT gave a certain locked-in mentality that caused them to ignore the option of a metro. Makes me wonder how things would have turned out if they forked out for LRT back when they were the size of Calgary or Edmonton were when they did it.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

I have to wonder if some of the blame is down to Ottawa waiting too long to do a rail system. Calgary and Edmonton which are of a similar size did their first downtown LRT segments decades ago rather than doing a BRT with busway and waiting until that system was congested to the max before upgrading. Converting your existing core system as a metro of 1.5 million is going to be harder than designing and building a new system as a smaller city. You already have a high existing ridership base that depends on it and who are used to something else whereas a city that builds its first LRT or metro line after just having buses or streetcars won't have that issue. Plus, I wonder if the long-term intention of upgrading to LRT gave a certain locked-in mentality that caused them to ignore the option of a metro. Makes me wonder how things would have turned out if they forked out for LRT back when they were the size of Calgary or Edmonton were when they did it.

Calgary and Edmonton built Phase 1 of LRT with oil boom money back in the late 1970s and Edmonton's plan was not a big success. It took a generation before they started building Phase 2. Ottawa was not rolling in cash to build LRT at that time. In the end, BRT was actually more successful than LRT in the Alberta cities. The problem was our failure to address the downtown issue sooner. This was politics as this should have been built in the 1990s but Mike Harris became premier and transit investment ground to a halt. Then we really messed up with the 2006 plan, again, politics got in the way, and this really screwed Ottawa. We got into this whole thing about what should be built first, and we switched the original plan for something entirely different and started making major changes, while still having components from the original plan mixed in, for example LRT. It became a fixation that we were just modifying the original plan, which was not 100% grade separated, but suddenly that changed, but our choice trains did not. In the end, we completely changed the plan, and started making crazy decisions about rolling stock, and we are still doing that by choosing a regional train instead of LRT for Line 2. It was all about cost instead making a proper long-term investment. The city's contribution was higher than it should have been and as a result, the city was going broke with its part of the rail investment. This contributed to making bad choices.

My reaction to Line 2 Phase 2 from the beginning is that we are asking for trouble. More trains running on more segments of single track is a potential scheduling nightmare. Watching train testing so far has not built my confidence, but I hope they prove my fears wrong.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Calgary and Edmonton built Phase 1 of LRT with oil boom money back in the late 1970s and Edmonton's plan was not a big success. It took a generation before they started building Phase 2. Ottawa was not rolling in cash to build LRT at that time. In the end, BRT was actually more successful than LRT in the Alberta cities. The problem was our failure to address the downtown issue sooner. This was politics as this should have been built in the 1990s but Mike Harris became premier and transit investment ground to a halt. Then we really messed up with the 2006 plan, again, politics got in the way, and this really screwed Ottawa. We got into this whole thing about what should be built first, and we switched the original plan for something entirely different and started making major changes, while still having components from the original plan mixed in, for example LRT. It became a fixation that we were just modifying the original plan, which was not 100% grade separated, but suddenly that changed, but our choice trains did not. In the end, we completely changed the plan, and started making crazy decisions about rolling stock, and we are still doing that by choosing a regional train instead of LRT for Line 2. It was all about cost instead making a proper long-term investment. The city's contribution was higher than it should have been and as a result, the city was going broke with its part of the rail investment. This contributed to making bad choices.

My reaction to Line 2 Phase 2 from the beginning is that we are asking for trouble. More trains running on more segments of single track is a potential scheduling nightmare. Watching train testing so far has not built my confidence, but I hope they prove my fears wrong.

What do you think would have been the outcome if they built a Seattle-style bus tunnel downtown rather than converting to LRT? They're a similar length and Seattle operated theirs with just buses for 15 year before doing an LRT conversion.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I really don't think our councillors really understood what the end result of various decisions was going to be.

This isn't really an excuse. It's their job to know and debate the various options.

Also, they were willing to campaign on and cancel the previous plan. So I'm not sure they are all that ignorant or innocent.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The experts were giving bad advice and the mayor alone was setting the budget.

It wasn't the experts that told them to run the first plan through the downtown core in mixed traffic. And it wasn't the experts that told them to build a metro with trams. Ottawa politicians got fixated on LRT and then decided they had to ram a round peg into a square hole.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I don't believe that suburban voters had a pro-car agenda per se. They were seduced with low tax increases, which is easy to fall prey to. They were not told of the implications regarding transit.

Ottawa voters must just be dumber and more gullible than elsewhere than. Because if the same cuts were proposed in any major GTA municipality most of the council would have lost their seats at the next election. Or....maybe the voters in Ottawa just don't care about transit. And given the politicians they elect, I don't think that's a stretch to say. Ottawa's current mayor somehow cares less about transit than Rob Ford did in Toronto. That's quite an accomplishment.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Now everything is spiralling downward, and the opening of Phase 2, will be that much worse. I almost cry when I hear the commercials from the Provincial Conservatives patting themselves on the back for the biggest transit 'expansion' in North America. I guess Ottawa is not in Ontario.

Ottawa got billions from the provincial and federal governments and driven by their suburban mindset they prioritized reaching as much of suburbia as possible over building a high quality service. Nobody is going to want to put in more money until Ottawa demonstrates substantial ridership after Stage 2. Throwing good money after bad, would be highly irresponsible. Especially, when it costs them nothing to wait and see how Stage 2 pans out.

Personally, I don't think investing more into Ottawa rail transit makes sense until Stage 2 is complete, the future of HFR (and possible integration into Fallowfield and Tremblay) is known and Ottawa shows some willingness to provide a feeder service that grows ridership.

[Doady]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

GO Transit is bringing back 15 minute service to the Kitchener / Milton Line and they also are bringing in Bike cars to deal with the demand

https://www.facebook.com/share/kwttR...ibextid=oFDknk

Not happening any time soon, if ever. Even hourly two-way service to Meadowvale would be ambitious, let alone 15-minute all the way to Milton.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

What do you think would have been the outcome if they built a Seattle-style bus tunnel downtown rather than converting to LRT? They're a similar length and Seattle operated theirs with just buses for 15 year before doing an LRT conversion.

I had the nerve to suggest that a bus tunnel was probably the cheapest way to solve the downtown congestion problem on the Ottawa board, probably around $1B. You can imagine the ridicule I got with my screen name. When we decided to build an LRT tunnel, it became inevitable that the Transitways had to be converted at a cost of $5B+ and if we want to reach Kanata and Barrhaven, we just keep on adding to that. In addition, Ottawa has been suffering from over a decade of transit disruption on its most critical route.

A bus tunnel would have bought us 20 years and post-pandemic, probably 50 years. There would have been minimal disruption during construction. There was a problem. Instead of focusing on moving people, it also became an urbanist project, that required the removal of all OC buses off of Albert and Slater Streets, with the idea of making them urban paradises. We would have ample capacity for years, by using both a tunnel route and a surface route. But a bus tunnel alone would be at capacity, so that option was automatically eliminated. Total bus removal on the surface became a necessary project requirement. We were going to have a multitude of outdoor cafes all along Albert and Slater. Unfortunately, the buildings are not designed for street facing retail and restaurants and both streets are urban canyons, shaded most of the day. This was never going to happen and it hasn't happened in 5 years since the removal of the bus jam.

A bus tunnel would have freed up a lot of money to make other transit improvements, that would have grown ridership, whether new rail lines or busways. All these other projects have now been indefinitely postponed or simply deleted from the Transportation Master Plan.

What I cannot fathom, is proceeding with projects that were not going to move people faster. Is that not the point of rapid transit investment? And many of the problems that we are seeing were predictable, but why did our decision makers not see it? Part of it, is that they don't use transit, and also, they did not see the limitations of rail in comparison to grade separated BRT. Rail could give you capacity but not faster service. As it turns out, rail offers slower service especially where the old bus jam did not exist. But shiny new trains were irresistible to our politicians and the general public, until they did not meet expectations.

Can you imagine building the Eglinton Crosstown, or the Hurontario LRT or Montreal's REM without some expectations that passengers would be moved faster?

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

This isn't really an excuse. It's their job to know and debate the various options.

Also, they were willing to campaign on and cancel the previous plan. So I'm not sure they are all that ignorant or innocent.



It wasn't the experts that told them to run the first plan through the downtown core in mixed traffic. And it wasn't the experts that told them to build a metro with trams. Ottawa politicians got fixated on LRT and then decided they had to ram a round peg into a square hole.



Ottawa voters must just be dumber and more gullible than elsewhere than. Because if the same cuts were proposed in any major GTA municipality most of the council would have lost their seats at the next election. Or....maybe the voters in Ottawa just don't care about transit. And given the politicians they elect, I don't think that's a stretch to say. Ottawa's current mayor somehow cares less about transit than Rob Ford did in Toronto. That's quite an accomplishment.



Ottawa got billions from the provincial and federal governments and driven by their suburban mindset they prioritized reaching as much of suburbia as possible over building a high quality service. Nobody is going to want to put in more money until Ottawa demonstrates substantial ridership after Stage 2. Throwing good money after bad, would be highly irresponsible. Especially, when it costs them nothing to wait and see how Stage 2 pans out.

Personally, I don't think investing more into Ottawa rail transit makes sense until Stage 2 is complete, the future of HFR (and possible integration into Fallowfield and Tremblay) is known and Ottawa shows some willingness to provide a feeder service that grows ridership.

You don't think Ottawa politicians and voters are easy to fool?

Who flip/flopped on transit decisions that cost the city many millions? Who claimed that breaking a signed contract would cost nothing? Who chose untested transit vehicles? Who approved Trillium Line improvements that did not even come close to what was promised?

Who voted in politicians who said they could freeze taxes, or contain tax increases well below inflation without impacting services? Think about Larry O'Brien, and earlier, Mike Harris and now Mark Sutcliffe. The public routinely votes in politicians based on tax policy without considering what would be impacted as a result. Often, there is no discussion of the impacts of tax policy until after an election.