Kanata LRT EA - Bayshore to Palladium

[rocketphish]

Originally Posted by eltodesukane

"Why light rail transit will completely bypass the high-tech corridor in Kanata North where thousands of people work in the west end of Ottawa
and why a LRT station is planned near the Canadian Tire Centre that may cease to exist in the not too distant future
were among the issues raised by residents... "
"The plans for the Kanata expansion are still earmarked for as far out as 2031... "
https://www.ottawacommunitynews.com/news...ay-and-relies-on-funding-coming-through/

I think it's worth putting the entire article here, as this newspaper will soon cease to exist.

LRT target route into west still years away and relies on funding coming through
Open house reviews plans for LRT’s route into Stittsville and Kanata

by Brian Dryden, Stittsville News
Dec 12, 2017

Why light rail transit will completely bypass the high-tech corridor in Kanata North where thousands of people work in the west end of Ottawa and why a LRT station is planned near the Canadian Tire Centre that may cease to exist in the not too distant future were among the issues raised by residents at an open house into the city’s preferred LRT route into Kanata that is still more than a decade away from becoming reality.

City representatives — both staff and councillors for Kanata and Stittsville — and staff of companies involved in the planning process for the eventual LRT expansion into Kanata attended a public open house and question and answer session at the Kanata Recreation Complex Dec. 7 to explain the rational for the route that now appears to be the preferred way to hook up the western end of Ottawa to the city’s new light rail transit system.

The plans for the Kanata expansion are still earmarked for as far out as 2031, although if funding from other levels of government comes through earlier, the city wants to be ready with a plan to put into action.

The preferred option is the most direct route to the Canadian Tire Centre, just north of Highway 417 to Palladium Drive. Staff have also included the possibility of extending the line down Maple Grove Road to Hazeldean Road in Stittsville.

There is no funding available for the Kanata-Stittsville portion as of yet, but the city is hoping the provincial and federal governments will pitch in for the cost of a western extension, which could begin construction any time after 2023, when light-rail is expected to reach the Moodie station.

David Hooper of Parsons, one of the companies working on the project, said that the addition of the Maple Grove and Hazeldean Road stations in Stittsville may not be completed at the same time as the project running to the CTC, as it depends on how much funding is available.

“They may be completed later,” Hooper said, but added that concerns raised at the public meeting about the service to Kanata’s high tech corridor would be handled by buses.

A plan to create a Transitway style route along March Road in Kanata to shuttle people to Kanata North’s high tech business corridor and the LRT station earmarked for Eagleson Rd. has already been approved.

Residents at the public meeting also questioned why a station would go beside the existing Canadian Tire Centre, even though the Ottawa Senators hope to move downtown to Lebreton Flats in the coming years.

Hooper said regardless of whether there is a hockey arena at the site in the future, the area is a prime location for development and the idea is to have LRT stations act as development hubs along its route.

“Those lands are extremely valuable for development. If that (arena) disappears, it is a prime site for intense development in the future,” he said.

The federal government and City of Ottawa announced last year it would split the estimated $3 million cost for the Kanata LRT environmental assessment that is currently under way thanks to a fast-tracked Stage 2 from Tunney’s Pasture to Moodie Station, which is set for service by 2023.

Stittsville Coun. Shad Qadri said staff will work on preparing a report to the Transportation Committee for Spring 2018 with projected costs and phasing plan.

The city’s Angela Taylor said residents still can comment on the plan.

“There is still time, this is not it.”

by Brian Dryden
Email: [email protected]

https://www.ottawacommunitynews.com/news...ay-and-relies-on-funding-coming-through/

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by AndyMEng

Sorry, I lump car traffic into a transitway. A gigantic highway is my transitway equivalent. Just because buses jump off at Eagleson and the intersection isn't configured to put the bus back on doesn't make it less of a transitway.

A simple extension of the bus lanes would do the trick, exactly where the train line is going in these new design plans. Force everyone to walk 250m across the highway.

I see where you are coming from, but there is a big difference between converting an existing transitway to LRT and building LRT close to what could be converted to a transitway one day.

My problem is that Katimavik would get a meh amount of passengers,

There isn't a stop at Katimavik. Do you mean Eagleson? That's a pretty major park and ride and would become a major bus transfer station.

and the Centrum (Which nobody on earth walks to, except for a guy I saw the other day who walked to his house behind the Signature Centre in his track pants).

By that argument, we shouldn't ever build LRT stations at the train station or Airport because no one ever walks to those locations either. What you are forgetting is the Centrum is a valid destination in its own right. True the far end of the Centrum (near the Walmart and Loblaws) are pretty car-centric, but the part nearest the transitway station (and the theatre) is very pedestrian friendly. Building LRT there could influence additional changes to make the pedestrian friendly portion even larger. There may even be some TOD opportunities (the strip mall that the Future Shop was in could be torn down and replaced with high density residential). It is also a major park and ride and bus transfer station.

The train is so much more expensive, and doesn't go to the population centers. Leave the bus lanes as they are, maybe make a Centrum line a future Phase 4 priority, and get the train to the bedroom communities to alleviate crazy March Road and Terry Fox traffic patterns in the morning/evening.

It would be much more expensive to build two lines (one to the north and one to the south) than it would be to build a single, central line. Even if you did build the two lines, most people would not be within walking distance of a station, so you would still need bus transfers (or park and rides).

Every other city in the world makes branching train lines because it makes logical sense. Why can't we?

We are already branching the line at Lincoln Fileds. If we split it another two times like your map proposes, the service frequency on each branch will be reduced. Not a big deal in peak periods where the frequency on the central line is high, but in off peak, the train would become very infrequent in the suburbs if you want to maintain direct service. The alternative is to have transfers off peak, but since the splits are at different locations, that will force multiple transfers.

The reality is demand in Kanata won't be high enough to support multiple lines so it is better to have one central one for now and then keep the option open to build northern and southern branches when the demand will support it.

The big thing a Kanata extension will provide is a reduction in the number of vehicles driving through the greenbelt. IMHO, we should be aiming to achieve that objective. Once that has been achieved, extend the LRT south to Barrhaven to achieve that objective there.

[roger1818]

I stumbled across an old article on Stittsville Central. I don't understand why they went with the extension to Trim Rd over an extension to Kanata:

Business leaders ask mayor to accelerate light rail to west end
by Stittsville Central Staff May 1, 2016

---

West end business leaders say that Kanata’s poor transit service is hindering their ability to attract talented employees, and they’re asking the mayor to extend light rail to Kanata before 2031.

Earlier this month the Kanata North BIA sent a letter to Mayor Jim Watson, co-signed by other business associations, west end politicians, and a bevy of business executives including Sir Terence Matthews. (There are nearly four pages of signatures attached to the end of the letter, which you can read below.)

“We have been approached many times from local businesses who have said that they had difficulty in hiring tech workers because they couldn’t get there due to a lack of transit,” wrote Jenna Sudds, executive director of the Kanata North BIA.

The letter asks the city to “immediately fund and undertake” an environmental assessment (EA) for light rail transit from Bayshore to Terry Fox, and to make that segment part of the second phase of light rail, scheduled to start construction in 2018. They say having a completed EA would mean that the project would be ready to go if federal infrastructure money comes available.

Cyril Leeder of the Ottawa Senators wrote a separate letter covering similar points, and asked to extend light rail even further to Canadian Tire Centre. He wrote that even if the Senators move to Lebreton Flats, the redevelopment they have planned for arena would benefit from improved transit.

As it stands, the city isn’t planning to build light rail past Bayshore until at least 2031, although Kanata South Councillor Allan Hubley is optimistic it will happen sooner than that.

“Last June I moved the motion at Council, with full support, for staff to go away and take a year and look at ways to move that date ahead,” says Hubley. “We expect this year to get something back from staff to give us the way forward.”

“I’m a big believer in taking small steps towards a big project and getting everything right. My first target is going to be Moodie. I think we have a really good business case for getting it out to Moodie,” says Hubley.

Hubley says the City has already approved extending the bus Transitway past Bayshore, and that it’s being constructed so that it can be easily converted to light rail.

“Everything is done at grade so we can just pop trains onto that Transitway and lower our cost big time,” says Hubley. “If the government goes ahead with the DND (Department of National Defence) move (to the former Nortel Campus on Moodie near Carling)…. I think Moodie is realistic in the next decade – in the 2020s.”

“The beauty of Moodie for residents in Stittsville/Kanata is it will be a whole lot easier. We can run buses from Canadian Tire Centre or Eagelson park-and-ride to Moodie. You can create a lot more parking at Moodie than at Bayshore. I see it working for the residents out here – we can truly say that this system is a city-wide system,” he says.

https://stittsvillecentral.ca/business-leaders-ask-mayor-to-accelerate-light-rail-to-west-end/

[J.OT13]

The short extension from Place to Trim is a whole lot cheaper than Bayshore (or Moodie) to Kanata. If you mean "why Orleans", the east end has few jobs and a much higher transit ridership. And again, cheaper (surface track along highway median as opposed to trenches, tunnels and elevated rail).

The thing with Kanata is that they have plenty of jobs all over (Palladium and Kanata North). People can easily drive short distances from home to work and back. Investing in rail (or BRT) to efficiently move people around Kanata would be prohibitively expensive and not worth the investment. Not to say it's not worth extending Confederation all the way to Palladium or maybe Hazledean (as is the new plan).But a spur to Kanata North would be ridiculous.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

The short extension from Place to Trim is a whole lot cheaper than Bayshore (or Moodie) to Kanata. If you mean "why Orleans", the east end has few jobs and a much higher transit ridership. And again, cheaper (surface track along highway median as opposed to trenches, tunnels and elevated rail).

The thing with Kanata is that they have plenty of jobs all over (Palladium and Kanata North). People can easily drive short distances from home to work and back. Investing in rail (or BRT) to efficiently move people around Kanata would be prohibitively expensive and not worth the investment. Not to say it's not worth extending Confederation all the way to Palladium or maybe Hazledean (as is the new plan).But a spur to Kanata North would be ridiculous.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again; The west and SW end of the city should instead use existing rail infrastructure (with perhaps a few new spurs) rather than have new lines built or converted. It should essentially be like the original O-Train line but for commuters. There should be fewer stops but the service will be faster.

[GoTrans]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

I've said it before, and I'll say it again; The west and SW end of the city should instead use existing rail infrastructure (with perhaps a few new spurs) rather than have new lines built or converted. It should essentially be like the original O-Train line but for commuters. There should be fewer stops but the service will be faster.

I concur 100% with you. Run DMU's that are FRA compliant on the rail line from Tremblay to Carp and possibly Arnprior with a stops at Station Rd in Kanata, Moodie, Cedarview ( across from the Queensway Carleton hospital) , Woodroffe, Merivale, Walkley, either Confederation or Billings Bridge and Ottawa Station. Extend the Confederation Line to the CNR overpass on Woodroffe and to the CNR overpass on Corkstown Road to allow for direct connections between the LRT and the ex CNR rail line.

The cost of this would be quite minimal since the track already exists, most of the line is grade separated all the way to Ottawa Station. The route would need to be re-ballasted,some sidings re-installed and signalling reinstalled.Most of the line could be double tracked if required because most of the overpasses were built for 2 tracks. If the Confederation station could be shifted further south then there could be direct connections to the Trillium line to Carleton, Bayview and also the Airport.

This is much, much cheaper than extending the LRT further to Kanata.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

The short extension from Place to Trim is a whole lot cheaper than Bayshore (or Moodie) to Kanata.

Is it really all that cheaeper? They are having to shift and repave the entire 174 to do this. The plan was to widen the 174 at the same time to kill 2 birds with one stone, but that isn't happening.

In Kanata, there is already an unused transit underpass under Kanata Ave, and they are already part way under Moodie Dr, so that just leaves Eagleson. Everything else is on unused land, with one overpass over the Beachwood Subdivision.

If you mean "why Orleans", the east end has few jobs and a much higher transit ridership. And again, cheaper (surface track along highway median as opposed to trenches, tunnels and elevated rail).

No. I don't mean why Orleans. It is the closest suburb to downtown and as you say has the highest transit usage. I am strictly objecting to the Trim Rd. extension. I agree that getting to Bayshore is expensive, but as I said above though, I dispute that extending beyond that is as expensive as you make it out to be.

The thing with Kanata is that they have plenty of jobs all over (Palladium and Kanata North). People can easily drive short distances from home to work and back. Investing in rail (or BRT) to efficiently move people around Kanata would be prohibitively expensive and not worth the investment. Not to say it's not worth extending Confederation all the way to Palladium or maybe Hazledean (as is the new plan).But a spur to Kanata North would be ridiculous.

I agree with you on that one, though feel it should only go as far as Terry Fox for now. Anything beyond that should be a low priority (like Trim Rd should be). Our priorities should be Place d'Orleans, Terry Fox and Marketplace Station, in that order.

[J.OT13]

Response to two comments which combined might seem somewhat of an oxymoron.

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

I've said it before, and I'll say it again; The west and SW end of the city should instead use existing rail infrastructure (with perhaps a few new spurs) rather than have new lines built or converted. It should essentially be like the original O-Train line but for commuters. There should be fewer stops but the service will be faster.

That could actually be interesting. More so if Kanata North High-Tech companies would be willing to pitch in some funds to help with this.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Is it really all that cheaeper? They are having to shift and repave the entire 174 to do this. The plan was to widen the 174 at the same time to kill 2 birds with one stone, but that isn't happening.

They promised the Trim extension before the plans for widening was eliminated, so they couldn't go back on their promise at that point. Regardless, by shifting and re-paving the 174, they will still be a step closer to the future widening anyway, so it's not a total loss.

In Kanata, there is already an unused transit underpass under Kanata Ave, and they are already part way under Moodie Dr, so that just leaves Eagleson. Everything else is on unused land, with one overpass over the Beachwood Subdivision.

When they promised Trim, the Moodie extension (lrt) was not part of the plan at that point, so extending from Bayshore to Eagleson or Terry Fox would have been much more expensive than the short extension to Trim.

No. I don't mean why Orleans. It is the closest suburb to downtown and as you say has the highest transit usage. I am strictly objecting to the Trim Rd. extension. I agree that getting to Bayshore is expensive, but as I said above though, I dispute that extending beyond that is as expensive as you make it out to be.

Just checking.

I agree with you on that one, though feel it should only go as far as Terry Fox for now. Anything beyond that should be a low priority (like Trim Rd should be). Our priorities should be Place d'Orleans, Terry Fox and Marketplace Station, in that order.

After reading your full response, I kind of agree with you. Even more so now considering the Moodie extension tacked on later. The cost of extending from Moodie yards to Eagleson probably wouldn't have been much more expensive (if at all) than the Trim extension. If they would have done that, they probably could have squeezed a little more money from the Feds and Province (to cover Moodie Yards 100%) and left the east and west lines alone for after Stage 2 to focus on Barrhaven (and PoW) for Stage 3.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

They promised the Trim extension before the plans for widening was eliminated, so they couldn't go back on their promise at that point.

The two should have been tied together so that one couldn't be announced without the other.

Regardless, by shifting and re-paving the 174, they will still be a step closer to the future widening anyway, so it's not a total loss.

I'm not convinced there will be much if any savings. True if they have to replace any of the overpasses, they can make them wide enough for a wider highway, but for the road work, I doubt if they do all the ground preparation needed to add an extra lane in each direction as part of the LRT project. Most likely they will only prepare the ground for the amount they have to divert the highway.

This brings up another question. The Trim Rd extension is supposed to be fully funded by the provincial and federal governments, but the cost estimates this was based on were likely assuming sharing costs with the widening of the 174. If the cost of the extension goes up (which it probably will), who pays the difference? The city?

When they promised Trim, the Moodie extension (lrt) was not part of the plan at that point, so extending from Bayshore to Eagleson or Terry Fox would have been much more expensive than the short extension to Trim.

True, but they had committed to the Moodie transitway extension, and I recently read somewhere that it was designed with conversion to LRT in mind.

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by roger1818

The two should have been tied together so that one couldn't be announced without the other.

I'm not convinced there will be much if any savings. True if they have to replace any of the overpasses, they can make them wide enough for a wider highway, but for the road work, I doubt if they do all the ground preparation needed to add an extra lane in each direction as part of the LRT project. Most likely they will only prepare the ground for the amount they have to divert the highway.

This brings up another question. The Trim Rd extension is supposed to be fully funded by the provincial and federal governments, but the cost estimates this was based on were likely assuming sharing costs with the widening of the 174. If the cost of the extension goes up (which it probably will), who pays the difference? The city?

True, but they had committed to the Moodie transitway extension, and I recently read somewhere that it was designed with conversion to LRT in mind.

Good Day.

1) The two were tied together in the first announcements as the same project, in an' inclusive' arrangement similar to the 417/174 widening, pending approval and agreement with MTO and the prov for additional shared funding for the widening - but they both literally said <whoa - hold on a minute here, let's see a traffic analysis that ties the LRT to a -reduced- traffic load, as in was this not part of the justification for the LRT ?> .... So they basically sent the 174 widening back to the city (lo-key) for re-analysis. (plus the fact that the expansion this time is purely 174 !city-owned! (not re-uploaded yet) as opposed to Phase 1 being 417 and 174, so the inclusion was <allowed>.)

2) If there is no widening, then there are a few slim savings in that the shifted traffic lanes will only be narrowed and slid onto the shoulders, not a full ground prep for new permanent lanes. MTO may throw a few additional bucks into the pool for the bridge replacements, with a view to future 174 widening.

3) If the cost goes up for being purely LRT, then two cents say the City is totally on the hook. City was on the hook for the cost rises in Phase 1, and the way these funding agreements go, I see no reason that the feds nor the prov would change that.

4) I always hate that phrase, in that the 'savings' are never as comprehensive as made out during the cost-reduction reasoning for justifying the BRT first - like the Acres Rd. overpass being delayed, and now has to go in (the worst possible extreme as the example, but valid nonetheless). As far as I have ever seen, the only design factor saving any cost is in the designed-in bridge over/underpass clearances and widths. Everything else is farce.

EnJoy.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

As far as I have ever seen, the only design factor saving any cost is in the designed-in bridge over/underpass clearances and widths.

I disagree. At a minimum, the sound barriers that were installed will be re-usable. One can argue the need for such barriers (I doubt if they would hear anything above the highway noise that is already there), but the way Crystal Beach residents have been complaining one would think heavy, freight trains will be rumbling through their back yards. Also, much of the clearing, ground preparation and drainage work will be reusable. Sure they will have to scrape off the asphalt, and likely have to redo the top layer, but they won't have to dig back down to hardpan/bedrock.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

I quickly made an example of what a rail expansion to Kanata/Stittsville and Barrhaven would look like if I were in charge:

https://imgur.com/a/OER3X

Fewer stations, but the ones that exist are in areas of suburban residence or employment zones heading into the city.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I am strictly objecting to the Trim Rd. extension. I agree that getting to Bayshore is expensive, but as I said above though, I dispute that extending beyond that is as expensive as you make it out to be.

Without the Trim Rd extension, the 174 impact won't be that much and the widening will still be required. I have a feeling the province is trying to force Rockland and points east onto the Confed line, and save the need to widen the highway for those users. Consider it another form of downloading, just like transferring the highway to the city in the first place was.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

Without the Trim Rd extension, the 174 impact won't be that much and the widening will still be required. I have a feeling the province is trying to force Rockland and points east onto the Confed line, and save the need to widen the highway for those users. Consider it another form of downloading, just like transferring the highway to the city in the first place was.

I don't believe that the Trim Road extension will make any difference as far as those coming from Rockland and beyond. If the end result is that more people will use the Trim Road Park n Ride, they will still be driving in on that part of the road that is not being expanded. If anything, it might make traffic worse if enough are heading to the Confed Line that otherwise might try to come into the city via another route.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by roger1818

True, but they had committed to the Moodie transitway extension, and I recently read somewhere that it was designed with conversion to LRT in mind.

They said the same thing about the original Transitway, which basically ended up being a re-build.

When they convert the Moodie Transitway, they'll have to build a viaduct over Holly Acres. Sure, some of the infrastructure might be able to be re-used (passed the future viaduct), but we'll still be millions in the hole just a few years after the extension opened.

I'm not complaining about the extension to Moodie. I think it's necessary. I'm just ticked they didn't go straight to LRT and save a bundle.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

I've said it before, and I'll say it again; The west and SW end of the city should instead use existing rail infrastructure (with perhaps a few new spurs) rather than have new lines built or converted. It should essentially be like the original O-Train line but for commuters. There should be fewer stops but the service will be faster.

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

I quickly made an example of what a rail expansion to Kanata/Stittsville and Barrhaven would look like if I were in charge:

https://imgur.com/a/OER3X

Fewer stations, but the ones that exist are in areas of suburban residence or employment zones heading into the city.

Interesting. One question though. In your plan, would the trains end at Mooney's Bay/Heron, or would they continue north along the Trillium Line? The former would result in a double transfer (neither the Trillium Line nor the SW Transitway will go downtown), plus any transfers to get onto the train and the latter would reuquire double tracking of the Trillium Line (at considerable expense). The train could continue to Tremblay, but that would be a long, roundabout route, especially for those coming from Kanata North.

The other issues relate to congestion. First of all the Trillium line suffers from delays whenever a VIA train crosses the Ellwood diamond. There is talk that it will be grade separated during stage 2, but if it isn't, adding more trains would compound the problem.

Secondly, you are having three routes travel along the same track east of junction of the Beachwood and Smiths Falls subdivisions. On top of that VIA is running well over 20 trains a day (each way) between Tremblay and Fallowfield (if you include the trains to Montreal that start/end at Fallowfield). There is no way you could get anything close to a decent frequency without double tracking this section. Unfortunately the bridge over the Rideau and the vast majority of the over/underpasses don't support double tracking, so it would be a very expensive venture.

Taking all this into account and realizing we don't have a downtown train station, I just have troubles seeing this as a viable option.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I'm not complaining about the extension to Moodie. I think it's necessary. I'm just ticked they didn't go straight to LRT and save a bundle.

Hind sight being 20/20, it would have been the better option. It was just when the decision was made, an extension to Moodie wasn't on the table until after 2031 according to the affordable TMP.

[1overcosc]

It would definitely make sense to scrap the Trim extension, leave Place d'Orleans as the eastern terminus, and use the savings to extend from Moodie to Eagleson.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

It would definitely make sense to scrap the Trim extension, leave Place d'Orleans as the eastern terminus, and use the savings to extend from Moodie to Eagleson.

This is not about valid planning but politics instead.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Interesting. One question though. In your plan, would the trains end at Mooney's Bay/Heron, or would they continue north along the Trillium Line? The former would result in a double transfer (neither the Trillium Line nor the SW Transitway will go downtown), plus any transfers to get onto the train and the latter would reuquire double tracking of the Trillium Line (at considerable expense). The train could continue to Tremblay, but that would be a long, roundabout route, especially for those coming from Kanata North.

The other issues relate to congestion. First of all the Trillium line suffers from delays whenever a VIA train crosses the Ellwood diamond. There is talk that it will be grade separated during stage 2, but if it isn't, adding more trains would compound the problem.

Secondly, you are having three routes travel along the same track east of junction of the Beachwood and Smiths Falls subdivisions. On top of that VIA is running well over 20 trains a day (each way) between Tremblay and Fallowfield (if you include the trains to Montreal that start/end at Fallowfield). There is no way you could get anything close to a decent frequency without double tracking this section. Unfortunately the bridge over the Rideau and the vast majority of the over/underpasses don't support double tracking, so it would be a very expensive venture.

Taking all this into account and realizing we don't have a downtown train station, I just have troubles seeing this as a viable option.

The trains would continue to Bayview. The Trillium Line needs to be double tracked anyway (hell, it should have already been done) but the city could set up passing stations along the new routes like they did with Carleton University.

I never said this option was cheap; simply that it would be cheaper/more economical than the current plan to expand the O-Train to Kanata while converting newly-built transitway into rail beds. My plan also accounts for the fact that suburban riders are largely commuting into the city centre so fewer stops means a faster ride.