Future Transit System Ideas - Ottawa/Gatineau | Fantasy

[Nowhere]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I do tend to agree that if we were to do this, rail would make more sense than a busway. I don't think there is space to have the busway beside the tracks so you would need to have the tracks imbedded in the busway. While theoretically possible since the line only sees about 3 trains a week each way, it really wouldn't be optimal.

The big issue is east of the junction with the Smiths Falls Sub. The Canadian Northern Ontario Railway Federal Bridge would need to be twinned, as would the overpass over Prince of Wales Dr.

Personally, I think building the Baseline BRT (including the extension to Bayshore) is a higher priority and would serve much of the same purpose (providing a bypass from Hurdman to Bayshore).

Looking at Winnipeg where they built a transitway right beside a railroad, you need a roughly 18m wide right-of-way for a transitway and a single rail track (I checked with Google Earth). The right-of-way west of Woodroffe is roughly 31m wide. I'm no engineer, but I guess it could be done.

I doubt that a line that bypass downtown would get enough ridership to warrant LRT, especially if it adds an extra transfer at Walkley Station, assuming that the Walkley-Blair part would still be built as BRT.

I was thinking of running it along the power lines east of Merivale instead of the railway, which would require a new bridge entirely over the river, which could also be a great link for cyclists. It would serve better the Colonnade Business Park and the new condos north of Colonnade.

I agree that the Baseline BRT should be done first, looking at the miserable state of the 88. Again, I'm no engineer, so don't take my proposal too seriously. Just something I did out of boredom.

[Nowhere]

Originally Posted by GeoNerd

Who would this serve though? People going from Oglivie to South Keys? Or Craig Henry to Herongate? It would run through pretty low density subdivisions and be VERY under-utilized. There are would need to be massive development along this line to make it viable. Plus there are existing dense neighbourhoods (Vanier) that could use mass-transit well before this. I understand this is just fantasy, but I don't think there will be much demand for ridership from the south going far-west or far-east in the future.

I was thinking of it mostly as a route to facilitate suburban transfers. For people transferring at Walkley Station heading to Confederation Heights or Billings Bridge. The people of the Walkley area heading to Algonquin College could transfer at Woodroffe, while people coming from Hurdman or Billings would use the Baseline transitway to get there. Or for people transferring at Blair heading to Collège La Cité. People could also transfer on Merivale, towards the surrounding industrial areas and retail.

Post-covid, we can expect transit to be less oriented toward 8-5 downtown office jobs, which will be increasingly done remotely or simply automated. On the other hand, increasing poverty might considerably decrease car ownership, so we can expect more people to use transit for shopping, appointments or leisure. Future transit planning should reflect these trends and spending billions to extend the LRT as far away as possible in the suburbs should maybe not be our first priority.

I'm no engineer and it's just something I did out of boredom, so it shouldn't be taken too seriously. I agree that Vanier should be a priority.

[silvergate]

Originally Posted by Nowhere

Post-covid, we can expect transit to be less oriented toward 8-5 downtown office jobs, which will be increasingly done remotely or simply automated. On the other hand, increasing poverty might considerably decrease car ownership, so we can expect more people to use transit for shopping, appointments or leisure.

Both these things seem unlikely, at least in ottawa. That said, expanding new corridors for development like this would do will definitely be needed in the future.

[Nowhere]

Originally Posted by silvergate

Both these things seem unlikely, at least in ottawa. That said, expanding new corridors for development like this would do will definitely be needed in the future.

The Feds are already planning to allow far more remote working in the future for public servants. With the skyrocketing debt of the federal government, I totally expect job cuts for public servants in the following years, especially if a Conservative government is elected, on top of all the bankrupted businesses that aren't coming back. I think we can expect a lot of people to sell their car.

Considerable changes in transit use patterns seem to be pretty much unavoidable.

[GeoNerd]

Originally Posted by Nowhere

The Feds are already planning to allow far more remote working in the future for public servants. With the skyrocketing debt of the federal government, I totally expect job cuts for public servants in the following years, especially if a Conservative government is elected, on top of all the bankrupted businesses that aren't coming back. I think we can expect a lot of people to sell their car.

Considerable changes in transit use patterns seem to be pretty much unavoidable.

I think you're under the impression that rich people drive and poor people don't, which isn't the case. Data shows car ownership is actually lower in affluent urban neighbourhoods than in lower income suburban or outer-urban neighbourhoods. If you live in the Glebe, Westboro, or another affluent urban neighbourhood where you have access to all amenities by foot, you're less likely to need a car than in say Barrhaven, Britannia, Blossom Park, etc.

It will be interesting to see what Phase 2 & 3 LRT and the rise in car share programs does to car ownership stats along the lines.

[silvergate]

Originally Posted by Nowhere

The Feds are already planning to allow far more remote working in the future for public servants. With the skyrocketing debt of the federal government, I totally expect job cuts for public servants in the following years, especially if a Conservative government is elected, on top of all the bankrupted businesses that aren't coming back. I think we can expect a lot of people to sell their car.

Considerable changes in transit use patterns seem to be pretty much unavoidable.

If all of that does come true, I think it points to a real need for 15-minute neighbourhoods, definitely more focus on access to needed services within walking distance of everybody. If nobody has money, not really any need for them to be bussing around the city looking to spend it.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Nowhere

Looking at Winnipeg where they built a transitway right beside a railroad, you need a roughly 18m wide right-of-way for a transitway and a single rail track (I checked with Google Earth). The right-of-way west of Woodroffe is roughly 31m wide. I'm no engineer, but I guess it could be done.
.

Not sure how wide the ROW is, but basically the entire Rapibus corridor in Gatineau from Taché-UQO to Labrosse is a BRT right next to a single rail line.

EDIT: Judging from page 31 of this report the railway ROW in which the Rapibus was inserted is just under 30 m wide: http://www.bv.transports.gouv.qc.ca/mono/1073016.pdf

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Nowhere

Looking at Winnipeg where they built a transitway right beside a railroad, you need a roughly 18m wide right-of-way for a transitway and a single rail track (I checked with Google Earth). The right-of-way west of Woodroffe is roughly 31m wide. I'm no engineer, but I guess it could be done.

I doubt that a line that bypass downtown would get enough ridership to warrant LRT, especially if it adds an extra transfer at Walkley Station, assuming that the Walkley-Blair part would still be built as BRT.

I was thinking of running it along the power lines east of Merivale instead of the railway, which would require a new bridge entirely over the river, which could also be a great link for cyclists. It would serve better the Colonnade Business Park and the new condos north of Colonnade.

I agree that the Baseline BRT should be done first, looking at the miserable state of the 88. Again, I'm no engineer, so don't take my proposal too seriously. Just something I did out of boredom.

Think of where we started, the original O-Train It bypassed downtown and didn't cost a mint. Rail transit is possible if we can avoid overbuilding and consider using diesel commuter trains, single track with passing sidings as we originally did with the Trillium Line.

As we move to a post-COVID period, we need to give service workers scattered all over the city more priority than in the past compared to downtown office workers who may more often work from home in the future.

[Hybrid247]

I've been working on a Ottawa-Gatineau interactive fantasy map for fun and figured I'd share with people here. It mostly includes all the ongoing and future rapid transit projects on both sides of the river along with a few fantasy projects, such as the Bank subway, downtown loop, Carling-Vanier streetcar, and some BRT corridors.

Check it out here: [removed]

A few notes:

Gatineau and the Downtown Loop

• The downtown loop includes a new Tram/LRT line that would replace the majority of the rapibus corridor
• The Aylmer and Le Plateau tramways would run counter-clockwise in the loop and the Gatineau East tramway would run clockwise
• I used the Sparks Street tunnel alignment for the loop as it's currently the preferred route for the tram (not sure how possible it'd be to continue the tunnel eastward towards Major's Hill Park in the future to complete the loop)

New Bank Subway

• This conceptual line would tunnel under the entirety of Bank between Queen Street and Billings Bridge, and would replace the Southwest Transitway ROW south of that point
• The segment of the Trillium Line that is currently U/C south of South Keys would become part of the Bank subway line
• The line would preferably be fully automated and high floor, with moderate length stations (75-80 meters)

Carling-Vanier Streetcar

I was indecisive on this part of the map for long time. I wanted to keep the map, which is set in the year 2050, somewhat realistic. So as much as a grade-separated RT solution would be nice along Rideau and Montreal roads, I decided a on a streetcar solution instead that would connect to the Carling streetcar/LRT via Wellington and Bronson.

The alignment for the streetcar between Blair and La Cité was also tough to decide on, as I'm not sure how receptive/dismissive CSEC, CSIS and the NRC would be towards a transit ROW running on their properties. In the end I just went with the most direct and practical route.

Stations

I only added stations to the Major LRT lines so as to not clutter the map too much. I'm not too familiar with the Aylmer and Le Plateau areas so if the station locations and names seem odd, that's why.

Always down for some feedback so feel free to share your opinions or suggestions.

[OCCheetos]

A few comments:

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

New Bank Subway

• This conceptual line would tunnel under the entirety of Bank between Queen Street and Billings Bridge, and would replace the Southwest Transitway ROW south of that point
• The segment of the Trillium Line that is currently U/C south of South Keys would become part of the Bank subway line
• The line would preferably be fully automated and high floor, with moderate length stations (75-80 meters)

I personally still don't understand why replacing the transitway with a subway is the default for most people. If we're already building a subway on Bank, why can't we continue that through the stretch of Bank that has a lot of redevelopment potential?

I think we'd get more out of it as a tram (I guess swapping Bronson and Bank in this case as at-grade/subway), but anyway.

Carling-Vanier Streetcar

I was indecisive on this part of the map for long time. I wanted to keep the map, which is set in the year 2050, somewhat realistic. So as much as a grade-separated RT solution would be nice along Rideau and Montreal roads, I decided a on a streetcar solution instead that would connect to the Carling streetcar/LRT via Wellington and Bronson.

Realistically, I don't think Bronson would be suitable for anything at-grade. It's too narrow north of Carleton and is still a car sewer. I've always felt like the option of using QED/Elgin is a decent alternative, unless tunneling down Bronson is feasible (with the added bonus of being a direct E/W line serving Lansdowne)


Looking at the map as a whole, poor poor Kanata South and Stittsville aren't left with much. Extending the March Road BRT down Eagleson would be a reasonable thing to do by 2050 in my opinion.

Also with the Heron/Walkley BRT, is there any real advantage to having it go up St Laurent instead of Russel? I guess it's a bit more direct, but I think Russel offers higher ridership.

Overall, great map!

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

Realistically, I don't think Bronson would be suitable for anything at-grade. It's too narrow north of Carleton and is still a car sewer. I've always felt like the option of using QED/Elgin is a decent alternative, unless tunneling down Bronson is feasible (with the added bonus of being a direct E/W line serving Lansdowne)

Ya, I think you're right, it'd be very tough to squeeze in there. Probably not do-able.

I like the idea of a streetcar along Elgin, but I'm bearish on the QED idea, simply because I think the NCC and NIMBY crowd would never allow it. Aside from that, though, I think it'd be pretty cool, especially for Lansdowne.

Perhaps I should just drop the link between the Carling and Vanier lines, and have them be standalone lines that terminate at Dow's Lake and Rideau?

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

I personally still don't understand why replacing the transitway with a subway is the default for most people. If we're already building a subway on Bank, why can't we continue that through the stretch of Bank that has a lot of redevelopment potential?

I think we'd get more out of it as a tram (I guess swapping Bronson and Bank in this case as at-grade/subway), but anyway.

I agree that it may be worth extending the line along Bank, south of Billings, instead of replacing the SW transitway, especially for the stretch north of Heron. And obviously, an at-grade LRT would make the most sense for that stretch.

My only thing with the Bank tram idea, like your view on Bronson, is space. I have doubts Bank could accommodate at-grade rail. I know a lot of people on here advocate for a car-free Bank, but I really can't see that happening, no matter how much merit the idea may have.

My line of thinking with the Bank subway is to provide a missing rapid transit link to downtown from the south, mostly because I anticipate the south will take on a large proportion of the metro's population growth in coming years and, as a result, that Bayview and Hurdman will become overly strained by peak-hour transfers (barring huge changes in commuting flows post-covid). I feel any at-grade solution along Bank (Billings to DT) would be too slow for a rapid transit role.

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

Looking at the map as a whole, poor poor Kanata South and Stittsville aren't left with much. Extending the March Road BRT down Eagleson would be a reasonable thing to do by 2050 in my opinion.

Also with the Heron/Walkley BRT, is there any real advantage to having it go up St Laurent instead of Russel? I guess it's a bit more direct, but I think Russel offers higher ridership.

Overall, great map!

Thanks, much appreciated! It's a work in progress and I'll definitely be adding to it. You're certainly right about Kanata and Stittsville. Russell may also be a better alternative now that you mention it.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

I've been working on a Ottawa-Gatineau interactive fantasy map for fun and figured I'd share with people here. It mostly includes all the ongoing and future rapid transit projects on both sides of the river along with a few fantasy projects, such as the Bank subway, downtown loop, Carling-Vanier streetcar, and some BRT corridors.

Check it out here: https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1AlH_6aOexXNDPLs_wCmBuIccZyU&usp=sharing

Good concept. A few changes I would make for my own fantasy map:

Gatineau and the Downtown Loop

Although combining the tunnel and loop would be the ultimate solution, the possibility of that happening is most certainly non-existent. I would therefore change it to surface Wellington or a hybrid, underground Sparks to Bank and surface Sparks west of Bank (which I know, also never going to happen).

Mackenzie is likely the most viable route through the Market, as per the route you chose. I imagine the trams would have to share the road with cars from Rideau to the new parking entrance of the expanded Château Laurier.

New Bank Subway and modifications to Trillium

As per OCCheetos, I would continue down Bank. The line would be elevated south of Billings Bridge and make a turn through the South Keys Mall to link with South Keys Station. The Bank Line would then take over both the Airport and Riverside South branches of the Trillium Line. Eighty meter platforms as per your proposal would surely meet the demand with proper light-metro trains.

Trillium would become a short urban line from South Keys to Bayview, with upgrades to achieve 6 or 8 minute frequencies (no double tracking of Dow's Lake tunnel or Rideau River Bridge). Based on the ridership numbers before the shut-down of 20,000 a day, I could see the line achieve 50,000 a day quite easily with the significant TOD proposed along the corridor, including the new Civic and possible redevelopment of Confederation Heights, within 2 or 3 decades. Those are Sheppard Subway ridership numbers for a fraction of the cost.

Carling-Bronson

Carling as a surface tram from Lincoln Fields Station to the Booth Complex. I'm intrigued by the idea of running it up Bronson as well, which I perceive as more feasible than surface trams down traditional main streets like Bank or Elgin. If that option were to be chosen, I would terminate the line at Queen and Lyon or Sparks and Lyon for easy transfers to Confederation and the Loop.

An alternative could be to turn it south on Bronson and up the Queen Elizabeth to terminate at Laurier.

Montreal Road Subway

Yes, I would make it a subway. With the new three lane configuration of Montreal Road, a tram or streetcar could never get through in a timely or reliable manner. This is also one of the densest (and getting denser) corridors in the city.

I would keep the route exactly as you propose however, it would form one line with the Bank Street Subway. Urban east-end to Lansdowne and the Airport with no transfer.

Kanata

I would add a Terry Fox/March/Eagleson BRT or automated vehicle loop to better serve what is Ottawa's most self sufficient community. A second such line down Palladium and Katimavik between Palladium Station and Eagleson would provide service to Kanata Town Centre and a few more high-tech offices.

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Gatineau and the Downtown Loop

Although combining the tunnel and loop would be the ultimate solution, the possibility of that happening is most certainly non-existent. I would therefore change it to surface Wellington or a hybrid, underground Sparks to Bank and surface Sparks west of Bank (which I know, also never going to happen).

Mackenzie is likely the most viable route through the Market, as per the route you chose. I imagine the trams would have to share the road with cars from Rideau to the new parking entrance of the expanded Château Laurier.

I'm torn on the surface vs tunnel scenario tbh. While it would certainly be less complicated and costly to run on the surface, I can't help but be bothered by the prospect of major service interruptions caused by Parliament Hill events/protests. I know a lot of people don't think it'd be a big deal to short-turn trains at the edge of downtown in those situations, but I think it would be less than ideal, especially if/when it's a full loop.

As for the surface loop route, Mackenzie would certainly be the most ideal, but, as you mentioned, access to the chateau would be an issue. At best, they'd only be able to fit a single lane, but even that might unfeasible.

Also, on a more trivial note, can't help but think how strange and ironic it'd be for STO trams with their generic liveries running in front of Parliament while Line 1 trains with their maple leaf liveries remain completely out of sight.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

New Bank Subway and modifications to Trillium

As per OCCheetos, I would continue down Bank. The line would be elevated south of Billings Bridge and make a turn through the South Keys Mall to link with South Keys Station. The Bank Line would then take over both the Airport and Riverside South branches of the Trillium Line. Eighty meter platforms as per your proposal would surely meet the demand with proper light-metro trains.

Trillium would become a short urban line from South Keys to Bayview, with upgrades to achieve 6 or 8 minute frequencies (no double tracking of Dow's Lake tunnel or Rideau River Bridge). Based on the ridership numbers before the shut-down of 20,000 a day, I could see the line achieve 50,000 a day quite easily with the significant TOD proposed along the corridor, including the new Civic and possible redevelopment of Confederation Heights, within 2 or 3 decades. Those are Sheppard Subway ridership numbers for a fraction of the cost.

Fully agree with all of the above except for one small thing, and that's interlining the Airport spur with the Bank line. I used to favour that concept as well purely because of the direct airport-downtown connection, but now I wonder if it's really worth splitting the frequency in half for what will inevitably be a very low-use segment of the line. Ya, forcing a transfer to downtown isn't the most ideal, but it isn't that bad if it's a seamless transfer, whether at Bayview or South Keys IMO.

And who knows, with Tewin and Findlay Creek set to grow substantially, perhaps splitting the line after Leitrim to serve some of those growth areas towards the east will make more sense than a split for the airport.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Carling-Bronson

Carling as a surface tram from Lincoln Fields Station to the Booth Complex. I'm intrigued by the idea of running it up Bronson as well, which I perceive as more feasible than surface trams down traditional main streets like Bank or Elgin. If that option were to be chosen, I would terminate the line at Queen and Lyon or Sparks and Lyon for easy transfers to Confederation and the Loop.

An alternative could be to turn it south on Bronson and up the Queen Elizabeth to terminate at Laurier.

I like both the Bronson and QED ideas, but I'd lean towards Bronson for the same reason I mentioned to OCCheetos earlier. Hard for me to imagine both the NCC and the glebe-area NIMBY's letting a QED tram happen.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Montreal Road Subway

Yes, I would make it a subway. With the new three lane configuration of Montreal Road, a tram or streetcar could never get through in a timely or reliable manner. This is also one of the densest (and getting denser) corridors in the city.

I would keep the route exactly as you propose however, it would form one line with the Bank Street Subway. Urban east-end to Lansdowne and the Airport with no transfer.

You're quite right. At worst, a streetcar is completely unfeasible and, at best, it would be pretty unreliable and slow.

I would love for a subway to go down Rideau and Montreal one day. It's certainly one of the most deserving areas in the city for such infrastructure. Where I hit a bit of a mental roadblock with the Bank-Vanier subway idea is the Rideau station area. Building a tunnel and a new station under the existing Rideau station sounds like it'd be extremely complex and risky. Not sure how deep it'd have to be but I think it'd have to be considerably more deep than the existing tunnel and station, which is already pretty deep.

What do you think? Am I overblowing the potential complexity and risk of such a project?

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Kanata

I would add a Terry Fox/March/Eagleson BRT or automated vehicle loop to better serve what is Ottawa's most self sufficient community. A second such line down Palladium and Katimavik between Palladium Station and Eagleson would provide service to Kanata Town Centre and a few more high-tech offices.

Agreed. I really like the idea of an automated vehicle loop for that area. I think there are ongoing talks for exploring such a service along March and near the new DND HQ.

Thanks for your input! I thought it'd be pretty cool to make a map that reflects some of the ideas we discuss on this forum, so I appreciate the feedback. I'll make some changes to the map over the next few days based on your and OCCheetos' comments.

Cheers!

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

I'm torn on the surface vs tunnel scenario tbh. While it would certainly be less complicated and costly to run on the surface, I can't help but be bothered by the prospect of major service interruptions caused by Parliament Hill events/protests. I know a lot of people don't think it'd be a big deal to short-turn trains at the edge of downtown in those situations, but I think it would be less than ideal, especially if/when it's a full loop.

I guess it depends on what you want it to do. Lets pretend the protestors would stay off the tracks. Are you moving people locally or regionally? If money was unlimited, a return to the streetcars of olden days would be nice with major routes underground.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

I'm torn on the surface vs tunnel scenario tbh. While it would certainly be less complicated and costly to run on the surface, I can't help but be bothered by the prospect of major service interruptions caused by Parliament Hill events/protests. I know a lot of people don't think it'd be a big deal to short-turn trains at the edge of downtown in those situations, but I think it would be less than ideal, especially if/when it's a full loop.

As for the surface loop route, Mackenzie would certainly be the most ideal, but, as you mentioned, access to the chateau would be an issue. At best, they'd only be able to fit a single lane, but even that might unfeasible.

From my perspective, I'm happy as long as a loop is built to maximize capacity. If the tram terminates at the end of a tunnel under Metcalfe (and it's built in a way that precludes a loop), it will cripple all possible capacity upgrades unless a second line, surface or underground, is built. The tunnel as envisioned by the STO today ends up costing an extra $1B for half the capacity.

As for protests and events, that is a concern however, having the tram loop within its own narrow RoW might help. At the moment, the the entire street has to be closed. With a fenced-off tram, we might be able the service running as long as police/bylaw direct people at crossing lights and stations. In any case, short-turning trains at Rideau and Lyon is a feasible solution to the problem, as you and others have mentioned.

Also, on a more trivial note, can't help but think how strange and ironic it'd be for STO trams with their generic liveries running in front of Parliament while Line 1 trains with their maple leaf liveries remain completely out of sight.

When the City agreed to surface Wellington as a an acceptable route, Tierney passed a motion that the tram be branded in a way that would “reflect the colours and symbolism of our country.”. I could see the Feds and NCC make that same demand for Confederation Boulevard.

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...neau-tram-line

Fully agree with all of the above except for one small thing, and that's interlining the Airport spur with the Bank line. I used to favour that concept as well purely because of the direct airport-downtown connection, but now I wonder if it's really worth splitting the frequency in half for what will inevitably be a very low-use segment of the line. Ya, forcing a transfer to downtown isn't the most ideal, but it isn't that bad if it's a seamless transfer, whether at Bayview or South Keys IMO.

Though Airport-Bayview is far better than the current situation, and Bayview will be a destination on its own by then, I can't bring myself to accept a non Downtown-Airport transit link in perpetuity. I would avoid a 50/50 split between the airport and Riverside South branches. I'd think the airport would never need anything beyond a 10 minute frequency, so all other train could go down to R.S.S.

And who knows, with Tewin and Findlay Creek set to grow substantially, perhaps splitting the line after Leitrim to serve some of those growth areas towards the east will make more sense than a split for the airport.

That's a tough one. A few options are available to serve Tewin, such as new bus or carpool lanes along the 417, the old rail corridor that goes through the area or splitting Trillium. I think Tewin may need that transit link sooner rather than later, so one of the non-Trillium solutions may be quicker and easier to implement in the mid-term.

I like both the Bronson and QED ideas, but I'd lean towards Bronson for the same reason I mentioned to OCCheetos earlier. Hard for me to imagine both the NCC and the glebe-area NIMBY's letting a QED tram happen.

Agreed.

You're quite right. At worst, a streetcar is completely unfeasible and, at best, it would be pretty unreliable and slow.

I would love for a subway to go down Rideau and Montreal one day. It's certainly one of the most deserving areas in the city for such infrastructure. Where I hit a bit of a mental roadblock with the Bank-Vanier subway idea is the Rideau station area. Building a tunnel and a new station under the existing Rideau station sounds like it'd be extremely complex and risky. Not sure how deep it'd have to be but I think it'd have to be considerably more deep than the existing tunnel and station, which is already pretty deep.

What do you think? Am I overblowing the potential complexity and risk of such a project?

I've thought of Rideau Station as well. The City made no effort to plan Rideau Station to accommodate a major underground transfer into the future. Looking ahead beyond current projects has never been Ottawa's strong-suit.

I would propose turning the Bank-Rideau-Montreal Subway under Albert, with a transfer station at Parliament (ped tunnels under the SunLife Building, WEP or O'Connor between the two concourses). The Bank-Rideau-Montreal Subway could then have its Rideau Station under Daly Avenue to avoid the existing deep Rideau Station. With direct transfers between Parliament Stations, it may not be necessary to built the same transfer infrastructure at Rideau if not feasible. After crossing Waller and Confederation, the tunnel could then head back north to serve a new King Edward Station under Rideau.

This alignment also has complications, going under the NAC, the Confederation Line tunnel and a few high-rise buildings however, it would be easier than building under the existing Rideau Station.

Alternatively, the Rideau Subway could be built under Besserer, with station entrances on Rideau. Montreal used this approach on several segments of the Metro to avoid disrupting major streets.

Agreed. I really like the idea of an automated vehicle loop for that area. I think there are ongoing talks for exploring such a service along March and near the new DND HQ.

Fingers crossed. It would be a great opportunity for the tech sector to step-up for their own community, and further test their technologies in real-world settings.

Thanks for your input! I thought it'd be pretty cool to make a map that reflects some of the ideas we discuss on this forum, so I appreciate the feedback. I'll make some changes to the map over the next few days based on your and OCCheetos' comments.

Cheers!

No prob. Great discussion!

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I guess it depends on what you want it to do. Lets pretend the protestors would stay off the tracks. Are you moving people locally or regionally? If money was unlimited, a return to the streetcars of olden days would be nice with major routes underground.

Ideally, we would have a greater variety of dedicated local, rapid and regional transit lines with seamless connections, but it seems we find ourselves attempting to create hybrid urban/regional lines due to limited transit funding, which is pretty much what we're getting with new rail infrastructure on both sides of the river.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

From my perspective, I'm happy as long as a loop is built to maximize capacity. If the tram terminates at the end of a tunnel under Metcalfe (and it's built in a way that precludes a loop), it will cripple all possible capacity upgrades unless a second line, surface or underground, is built. The tunnel as envisioned by the STO today ends up costing an extra $1B for half the capacity.

As for protests and events, that is a concern however, having the tram loop within its own narrow RoW might help. At the moment, the the entire street has to be closed. With a fenced-off tram, we might be able the service running as long as police/bylaw direct people at crossing lights and stations. In any case, short-turning trains at Rideau and Lyon is a feasible solution to the problem, as you and others have mentioned.

When the City agreed to surface Wellington as a an acceptable route, Tierney passed a motion that the tram be branded in a way that would “reflect the colours and symbolism of our country.”. I could see the Feds and NCC make that same demand for Confederation Boulevard.

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...neau-tram-line

Oh wow I had no idea that such a motion was passed for the colours/livery. That's great, thanks for sharing.

I also concede that temporary fencing and carefully managed crossings could go a long way in preventing service disruptions along Wellington during major events. I still prefer the tunnel idea, as long as it doesn't preclude a future loop extension, but I'm slowly warming up to the surface option.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Though Airport-Bayview is far better than the current situation, and Bayview will be a destination on its own by then, I can't bring myself to accept a non Downtown-Airport transit link in perpetuity. I would avoid a 50/50 split between the airport and Riverside South branches. I'd think the airport would never need anything beyond a 10 minute frequency, so all other train could go down to R.S.S.

Ya, that's always an option, although the random gap in headways it would cause would be kind of strange. Not the end of the world though.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

That's a tough one. A few options are available to serve Tewin, such as new bus or carpool lanes along the 417, the old rail corridor that goes through the area or splitting Trillium. I think Tewin may need that transit link sooner rather than later, so one of the non-Trillium solutions may be quicker and easier to implement in the mid-term.

True. The bus lanes and rail corridor ideas remain the best options for Tewin for the foreseeable future IMO.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I've thought of Rideau Station as well. The City made no effort to plan Rideau Station to accommodate a major underground transfer into the future. Looking ahead beyond current projects has never been Ottawa's strong-suit.

I would propose turning the Bank-Rideau-Montreal Subway under Albert, with a transfer station at Parliament (ped tunnels under the SunLife Building, WEP or O'Connor between the two concourses). The Bank-Rideau-Montreal Subway could then have its Rideau Station under Daly Avenue to avoid the existing deep Rideau Station. With direct transfers between Parliament Stations, it may not be necessary to built the same transfer infrastructure at Rideau if not feasible. After crossing Waller and Confederation, the tunnel could then head back north to serve a new King Edward Station under Rideau.

This alignment also has complications, going under the NAC, the Confederation Line tunnel and a few high-rise buildings however, it would be easier than building under the existing Rideau Station.

Alternatively, the Rideau Subway could be built under Besserer, with station entrances on Rideau. Montreal used this approach on several segments of the Metro to avoid disrupting major streets.

Never thought about the Daly option but it's admittedly an intriguing idea that never crossed my mind. As you said, there's other potential issues with that route but it's certainly worth exploring. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts

[Nowhere]

If we build a LRT along Bank south of Billings, we're going to end up with 3 rapid transit lines side by side, so I don't see the point.

If a Bank Street subway or LRT ever happens in several decades, I would rather see it go east south of Billings Bridge to serve Herongate, which might be among the densest neighbourhoods in the country by then. Anyway, that's not anytime soon.

[J.OT13]

I posted this on the Canada thread. I'll post it again here. My train of thought (no pun intended) covers a few fantasy threads (Bank and Montreal).

Originally Posted by Beedok

Well, I suppose we’ll have to wait to see how well Edmonton and Hamilton’s surface LRT lines serve their urban areas to see if it would be a good fit for Ottawa.

Plus, I think a Montreal Road subway line makes more sense than a Bank Street one anyhow. Lower Town and Sandy Hill have fewer roads connecting to the CBD than Glebe or Centretown (meaning you can’t run new bus alignments as easily), and then Vanier is far larger than Old Ottawa South (and far less dominated by students making the short trip to a nearby university).

For sure, there's been a lot of focus and debate on a potential future/fantasy/maybe somewhat plausible Bank light-metro.

Discussions on Rideau-Montreal, which would serve denser and lower income areas along with a mid-sized hospital, federal campuses and the only major post-secondary institution not currently served by rapid transit in Ottawa, has not materialized in the same way. I assume that may be because there's more more consensus among rail fans and transit advocates that the corridor has a better justification for rapid transit and therefore, does not ignite passions quite the same way.

As others have said, the Bank Subway discussion has evolved to include a transit system reorganization for the south end in order to solve future capacity issues on Trillium and transfer volumes at Bayview and Hurdman, with serving Centretown and the Glebe as a very beneficial, but secondary "bonus". A Rideau-Montreal light-metro would be heavily urban focus and not serve any upcoming system wide problems. There is the potential of extending a future Rideau-Montreal line to Orleans via the Cumberland Transitway, which would make for an easier sell to suburban focused politicians. That as well could help the Hurdman transfer issues (by running emptier Confed trains through Hurdman), delaying the need for Bank.

Side note: I imagine both projects as a fully grade separated light-metro along a single line when fully built out. Starting at Millennium in Orleans, it would run surface, road over rail to Blair Station. It would then run elevated to reach Bathgate, up the road to Montreal and turn east, heading underground past St. Laurent. Rideau Station would be under Daly to avoid conflicts with the existing deep Rideau Station. From there, it would run under Albert with a transfer station at Parliament, pedestrian tunnels connecting the two concourses under O'Connor, SunLife or the World Exchange Plaza. The line would then turn south under Bank to Billings, before emerging from the depths to become elevated, following Bank to South Keys where it would take over for Trillium towards the Airport and Riverside South.

Timelines, assuming the current TMP is fully complete by 2031, construction-completion:

2036-2041 Parliament to Blair
2041-2046 Blair to Millennium
2046-2051 Parliament to Airport/Riverside South

[Truenorth00]

Thankfully, none of these insanely expensive ideas will ever get past this forum.

But I do hope our planners get around to using LRT more. Not in the Confederation Line light metro sense. But more like what Toronto is doing on Finch and Eglinton. Those projects are real bang for buck. And so much more appropriate for a lot of corridors in Ottawa, most of which will never need the 10 000 pphpd that automatically comes from an exclusive fully segregated right of way.

[Truenorth00]

It is going to be really interesting to see how transit demand changes going forward.

A lot of the government and tech offices are starting to canvas lessons learned from Covid and evolve their workflows going forward for more remote work.

This is going to substantially change demand. Most notably peak demand. And possibly even some directionality as more remote co-working spaces are set up.

I think the transit system in Ottawa might finally evolve to one focusing more on mobility across the city, then one focused on moving commuters. And hopefully with that we'll get a more Europeanesque system that is much more pedestrian centric.