Ottawa Rapid Transit Network developments

[Kitchissippi]

While Carling has hospitals and malls, it is farther away from the traditional main street pedestrian environments that are more conducive and attractive for high density residential development. I think light rail along Scott/Byron has the potential of a better transformative and human-scale effect on the neighbourhood than on Carling where high traffic and general scale is more impersonal.

[eemy]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

While Carling has hospitals and malls, it is farther away from the traditional main street pedestrian environments that are more conducive and attractive for high density residential development. I think light rail along Scott/Byron has the potential of a better transformative and human-scale effect on the neighbourhood than on Carling where high traffic and general scale is more impersonal.

On the other hand, are Scott/Byron really going to be improved by high rise condominiums? Carling is near the bottom of the barrel and therefore has loads more potential.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

While Carling has hospitals and malls, it is farther away from the traditional main street pedestrian environments that are more conducive and attractive for high density residential development. I think light rail along Scott/Byron has the potential of a better transformative and human-scale effect on the neighbourhood than on Carling where high traffic and general scale is more impersonal.

Doesn't Carling have that centre median that can be used? I don't see the advantage of having stations on 2 streets either (even downtown).

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Franky

Doesn't Carling have that centre median that can be used? I don't see the advantage of having stations on 2 streets either (even downtown).

Yes, plus underpasses so not stuck in traffic. That is what is proposed.

Alex Cullen emailed me back, seriously, his negative points about the projets are actually positive points.

He said, converting the SE Transitway will cost more money. Well it costs less than converting the O-Train, with a higher ridership... Using Carling as a rapid transit ROW also removes the need for two corridors in the short term, so you save money there. Well he said it will cost twice as more as than the Parkway... so what, you have more users!

It seems that incompetence is finally being out to broad light. He finally said that there numbers are highly underestimated. I replied, well they're the same that you guys used for the Transitway conversion.

They just don't have a clue...


I wonder how many councillors will vote for this plan. Seriously, I'm thinking that it'll be more than the official plan.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

Yes, plus underpasses so not stuck in traffic. That is what is proposed.

Alex Cullen emailed me back, seriously, his negative points about the projets are actually positive points.

He said, converting the SE Transitway will cost more money. Well it costs less than converting the O-Train, with a higher ridership... Using Carling as a rapid transit ROW also removes the need for two corridors in the short term, so you save money there. Well he said it will cost twice as more as than the Parkway... so what, you have more users!

It seems that incompetence is finally being out to broad light. He finally said that there numbers are highly underestimated. I replied, well they're the same that you guys used for the Transitway conversion.

They just don't have a clue...


I wonder how many councillors will vote for this plan. Seriously, I'm thinking that it'll be more than the official plan.

The parkway isn't even on the table AFAIK.

Somehow, I doubt councillors will vote for this plan or even delay voting for the TMP Wednesday (current plan). I'd love to be wrong on this.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Franky

The parkway isn't even on the table AFAIK.

Somehow, I doubt councillors will vote for this plan or even delay voting for the TMP Wednesday (current plan). I'd love to be wrong on this.

Same here. There was so much grumble from councillors concerning the lack of rail in their wards. People were pretty pissed about it too.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

While I sincerely hope that this plan is the catalyst for bringing some good LRT to Ottawa in a short amount of time, I do have my qualms with it.

First. Okay, so we can electrify the O-Train for a peasly $10M, but expanding the trench from Carling to Bayview...Are there not homes and facilities in the way of such an operation?

Second. What happens to Tunney's Pasture? It's one of the busiest stations and employment areas in the city outside of Downtown. And while we're at it, what happens to the trendy neighbourhood of Westboro? How are buses and two types of trains going to get things done at Bayview? I'm somewhat concerned...

Third. If this goes to Gatineau, how will it tie into the Rapibus project and while thinking about that, what is really the point of going to Gatineau if you need to take the Rapibus to Portage, then the O-Train to Bayview, and then another train or a bus to get you to downtown? How is all this going to work and tie together?

[Suzie]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

While I sincerely hope that this plan is the catalyst for bringing some good LRT to Ottawa in a short amount of time, I do have my qualms with it.

First. Okay, so we can electrify the O-Train for a peasly $10M, but expanding the trench from Carling to Bayview...Are there not homes and facilities in the way of such an operation?

Second. What happens to Tunney's Pasture? It's one of the busiest stations and employment areas in the city outside of Downtown. And while we're at it, what happens to the trendy neighbourhood of Westboro? How are buses and two types of trains going to get things done at Bayview? I'm somewhat concerned...

Third. If this goes to Gatineau, how will it tie into the Rapibus project and while thinking about that, what is really the point of going to Gatineau if you need to take the Rapibus to Portage, then the O-Train to Bayview, and then another train or a bus to get you to downtown? How is all this going to work and tie together?

The Good
- Conversion of the Southeast Transitway, instead of the O-Train corridor.

The Bad
- LRT lines to the suburbs sooner rather than later (instead of in 50 or 100 years when demand justifies it). The only way you will save anything on operating costs with four-car trains on those segments is if you run your rail system with absolutely brutal headways, particularly off-peak. To keep the headways reasonable (e.g., 10 minutes off-peak), you’ll need to run trains that are almost empty. You won’t save a dime.
- The Cumberland Transitway is gone.

The Ugly
- Carling instead of the Parkway/Byron. Why you would bypass Tunney’s Pasture and Westboro, two of your busiest stations, is beyond me. I can understand Doucet since he is a bit of a flake, but Leadman just baffles me. Carling has already lost Agriculture Canada’s headquarters (to Baseline) and is likely to lose the Civic Hospital and Natural Resources Canada’s headquarters. In addition to higher ridership, the Parkway/Byron route would be considerably cheaper.
- STO riders would probably be forced to transfer onto that circuitous O-Train extension to reach downtown Ottawa. For them, it would be an absolute nightmare and many would simply choose to get off at Portage and walk across the Bridge. For OC Transpo riders, it would also be a significant downgrade (much higher headways) and the Gatineau stations would be farther away from the major office buildings.

Conclusion
With one exception, a terrible plan.

[Deez]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

I wish I had more time to dissect this, but I'll throw out a few points that will hopefully get you bandwagon-hoppers thinking a little harder.

- This is a lines-on-paper plan. There is no detailed evaluation presented, even though they claim they are using what is presented in the staff TMP. It was prepared by people who are not familiar with the city's official plan and community design plans. A good example of this is in Barrhaven: why on earth would you have LRT travel at-grade along Fallowfield and Greenbank when there is a perfectly good, and extra-wide, rail corridor that runs through a planned high-density area? Stupid.

- The cost for their first phase would be staggering...it's unclear (limited to what I've read) if there would be sub-phases.

- Regardless of what is claimed, the price for this plan will far exceed the number they claim...they are underestimating the cost of the suburban extensions.

- As I understand it, travel time from LF to downtown is faster via the "parkway route" (which includes the Byron corridor).

- I fail to see how the O-train will be routed through downtown Hull in any useful way without spending an ass load of money.

- Re: new transitways. I'm not super keen on building them either, BUT...think about it: population in suburban areas will increase whether we like it or not, road capacity will remain relatively stable, therefore congestion will increase, therefore surface transit level of service will suffer. Building this infrastructure now is a method of ensuring that an adequate transit service level can be achieved over the next 20-ish years without spending as much capital. I know it's not perfect, but I'm on staff's side (at least to a certain extent).

- How did they cost the SE transitway? (Did they? I didn't have time to check)

- A FOTO member went AWOL when I was talking to him about the airport spur because of the right angle that it had to take. I wonder what he would think about the one from the Carling to O-train corridor? (Not to mention how much that would cost...)

- I'm skeptical of the logistics of running a very high frequency LRT service on the same tracks as the O-train, which must maintain a very strict schedule so that trains meet up at sidings.

- Everybody is entitled to their own opinions, but take it from me: this thing is a game to politicians. They have their own agendas, biases and priorities. Staff are (in theory) neutral...and actually have experience in and knowledge of planning and engineering. Think twice before believing a couple of talking heads.

[Deez]

Originally Posted by Suzie

The Good
- Conversion of the Southeast Transitway, instead of the O-Train corridor.

The Bad
- LRT lines to the suburbs sooner rather than later (instead of in 50 or 100 years when demand justifies it). The only way you will save anything on operating costs with four-car trains on those segments is if you run your rail system with absolutely brutal headways, particularly off-peak. To keep the headways reasonable (e.g., 10 minutes off-peak), you’ll need to run trains that are almost empty. You won’t save a dime.
- The Cumberland Transitway is gone.

The Ugly
- Carling instead of the Parkway/Byron. Why you would bypass Tunney’s Pasture and Westboro, two of your busiest stations, is beyond me. I can understand Doucet since he is a bit of a flake, but Leadman just baffles me. Carling has already lost Agriculture Canada’s headquarters (to Baseline) and is likely to lose the Civic Hospital and Natural Resources Canada’s headquarters. In addition to higher ridership, the Parkway/Byron route would be considerably cheaper.
- STO riders would probably be forced to transfer onto that circuitous O-Train extension to reach downtown Ottawa. For them, it would be an absolute nightmare and many would simply choose to get off at Portage and walk across the Bridge. For OC Transpo riders, it would also be a significant downgrade (much higher headways) and the Gatineau stations would be farther away from the major office buildings.

Conclusion
With one exception, a terrible plan.

Glad to see I'm not alone

[Kitchissippi]

Doucet and Leadman are playing a stupid and dangerous game that could actually delay LRT instead of accelerating it. This is pure grandstanding - they have had numerous ways to provide input into this project especially since they are council members. Transit plans do not need "tah-dah!" moments.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Suzie

The Good
- Conversion of the Southeast Transitway, instead of the O-Train corridor.

The Bad
- LRT lines to the suburbs sooner rather than later (instead of in 50 or 100 years when demand justifies it). The only way you will save anything on operating costs with four-car trains on those segments is if you run your rail system with absolutely brutal headways, particularly off-peak. To keep the headways reasonable (e.g., 10 minutes off-peak), you’ll need to run trains that are almost empty. You won’t save a dime.
- The Cumberland Transitway is gone.

The Ugly
- Carling instead of the Parkway/Byron. Why you would bypass Tunney’s Pasture and Westboro, two of your busiest stations, is beyond me. I can understand Doucet since he is a bit of a flake, but Leadman just baffles me. Carling has already lost Agriculture Canada’s headquarters (to Baseline) and is likely to lose the Civic Hospital and Natural Resources Canada’s headquarters. In addition to higher ridership, the Parkway/Byron route would be considerably cheaper.
- STO riders would probably be forced to transfer onto that circuitous O-Train extension to reach downtown Ottawa. For them, it would be an absolute nightmare and many would simply choose to get off at Portage and walk across the Bridge. For OC Transpo riders, it would also be a significant downgrade (much higher headways) and the Gatineau stations would be farther away from the major office buildings.

Conclusion
With one exception, a terrible plan.

Again, this is compared to the current plan:

LRT to the suburbs sooner. You would rather pay for Transitway, THEN convert it to rail in 20 years? Also this is LRT, it won't be 4-car trains all the time, it's not like a subway. Don't be surprised if there is 1-car train at night.

Carling instead of Byron. Again, would you have a streetcar on Carling or not? This is pretty the only chance NOT to spend to have a slow streetcar on carling, for a minor price difference. Byron can always be built at a later stage. Carling is still included in the current plan, I'd rather have it as rapid transit.

The planned headways are 7.5 minutes for the O-Train extension, at least it will for the STO to find a better solution.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

Doucet and Leadman are playing a stupid and dangerous game that could actually delay LRT instead of accelerating it. This is pure grandstanding - they have had numerous ways to provide input into this project especially since they are council members. Transit plans do not need "tah-dah!" moments.

The projet was not improved in anyway, it's still the same projet as it always was. 2 years were pratically lost. I had been to many open houses. It was basically consultants arguing with citizens on what they need, not the other way around. So if councillors can fight city staff up, good. I would be pissed if it was a bad plan, but it's obviously not the case. Seeing comments on other websites, it has more concensus than the plan presented by staff.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

With some minor tweaking and more detail and information, I would support this plan.

It's good to see that I'm not the only one noticing things and asking questions, although the prospect of getting LRT sooner...no matter what....is rather appealing...

[Franky]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

Doucet and Leadman are playing a stupid and dangerous game that could actually delay LRT instead of accelerating it. This is pure grandstanding - they have had numerous ways to provide input into this project especially since they are council members. Transit plans do not need "tah-dah!" moments.

I would agree if the game was not fixed. The mayor was elected with a mandate to change the transit plan (the circumstances of which are still questioned - allegations of bribery) asked for a tunnel and got a study to support his desire - weird. Our councillors have no backbone and don't seem to think for themselves - we have a bunch of "yes" men and women or some similar force makes them all lemming or puppets - something isn't right.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by Deez

...
- I fail to see how the O-train will be routed through downtown Hull in any useful way without spending an ass load of money.
...
.

There is an abbandoned railroad track that goes from POW bridge to Terrace de Chaudière (across the street from). They could use that historic stone building as a station.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by Suzie

The Good
- Conversion of the Southeast Transitway, instead of the O-Train corridor.

Yes, no wasted Dow's lake dig up.

Originally Posted by Suzie

The Bad
- LRT lines to the suburbs sooner rather than later (instead of in 50 or 100 years when demand justifies it). The only way you will save anything on operating costs with four-car trains on those segments is if you run your rail system with absolutely brutal headways, particularly off-peak. To keep the headways reasonable (e.g., 10 minutes off-peak), you’ll need to run trains that are almost empty. You won’t save a dime.
- The Cumberland Transitway is gone.

Though I agree with this assessment, it does open up the possibility of developing along the corridor in the greenbelt as is being done in the South of Ottawa. From an environmental perspective, this would be better than skipping the greenbelt for all commuters. From a greenery perspective, it's bad.
I will not miss the Cumberland Transitway. Doesn't this transitway go against the idea of extending out to the suburbs?
Also, adding a transfer on long-distance commutes (from the suburbs) would kill those commutes. Having trains out to the suburbs means peple can drive to park&ride lots and take the train directly to the city core. The other way makes little sense to me.

Originally Posted by Suzie

The Ugly
- Carling instead of the Parkway/Byron. Why you would bypass Tunney’s Pasture and Westboro, two of your busiest stations, is beyond me. I can understand Doucet since he is a bit of a flake, but Leadman just baffles me. Carling has already lost Agriculture Canada’s headquarters (to Baseline) and is likely to lose the Civic Hospital and Natural Resources Canada’s headquarters. In addition to higher ridership, the Parkway/Byron route would be considerably cheaper.

I wondered if going up Churchill (or similar north-south street) to hook up Tunney's and use the transitway as a LRT line would make sense?
In any case the transitway is still there to pick up passengers.

Originally Posted by Suzie

- STO riders would probably be forced to transfer onto that circuitous O-Train extension to reach downtown Ottawa. For them, it would be an absolute nightmare and many would simply choose to get off at Portage and walk across the Bridge. For OC Transpo riders, it would also be a significant downgrade (much higher headways) and the Gatineau stations would be farther away from the major office buildings.

I don't see how adding a bridge and linking up high volume areas can be bad. Some will choose to continue using buses, but a good number would choose that train. Perhaps the devil is in the details here.

Originally Posted by Suzie

Conclusion
With one exception, a terrible plan.

I think it's a better plan that could stand a bit of tweeking and work. It certainly delivers more electrified track for the money and won't result in a big transitway expansion. It's still VERY expensive and mass transit, but it's the best plan I've seen from the city yet.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

The projet was not improved in anyway, it's still the same projet as it always was. 2 years were pratically lost. I had been to many open houses. It was basically consultants arguing with citizens on what they need, not the other way around. So if councillors can fight city staff up, good. I would be pissed if it was a bad plan, but it's obviously not the case. Seeing comments on other websites, it has more concensus than the plan presented by staff.

I seem to recall the old plan had this track going all the way around the city in the greenbelt. That would have been a waste of money. Mass transit is necessary to get into the very congested area of the city core.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Deez

- Everybody is entitled to their own opinions, but take it from me: this thing is a game to politicians. They have their own agendas, biases and priorities. Staff are (in theory) neutral...and actually have experience in and knowledge of planning and engineering. Think twice before believing a couple of talking heads.

Who do you want to believe? There were many good points brought by the transit review committee, none of them were addressed, besides puting a streetcar line down Carling, and that was probably there in case the Parkway corridor wasn't approved.

Was there a reason for the line to go to Riverside South, besides the EA already done? No, it was an excuse by staff. Same thing can be said about the rail yard, and same thing can be said that a tunnel wasn't "supposed" to be needed.

Remember when there was supposed to be 3 stations in the core? Well the consultants had made a study decades earlier that showed two, they put two in the new plan. Did residents agree to that? Hell no.

There were 2 YEARS of consultation, the plan is still the same as it was first presented. Yes it's a political game, but come on, there is no way for criticism at city hall, I emailed Alex Cullen, and he can't even agree on numbers... that was produced by his own staff. There would have been higher ridership in the SE Transitway conversion, and without duplicating 3km of route (rollercoaster infrastructure), plus the system would have been balanced. The reviewers put that in their review, nothing was changed in the plan. It's been like that for two years.

There's LRT being put in place at a much lower ridership level in Toronto than what will for suburbs in Ottawa. If city staff were doing their planning right using the ministry of transportation methods, it would be a subway not LRT for Baseline to Blair.

Do I trust politicians? No, but more than city staff. How many of them work at Delcan now? Too many to count?

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Franky

I seem to recall the old plan had this track going all the way around the city in the greenbelt. That would have been a waste of money. Mass transit is necessary to get into the very congested area of the city core.

I was talking about the plan presented in early 2007, not the 2003 one. My bad for the understanding.

I will say it, we lost two years of LRT, but to finally end up with Transitway conversion, which was OBVIOUSLY, the cheapest way to get rapid transit accross the city. The only part that isn't agreed on, is the part that has no plan for Transitway to be built on, the Parkway and Carling. Millions of dollars for that simple conclusion. And Deez, by city staff number, the Carling route is 1 minute slower than the Parkway one, so it's not really an issue.

You can always stop the LRT at Dominion, plus add an airport spur, that way, your system would still be equalized to 3-3.