OC Transpo

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Politics had almost all to do with what is happening. The current course of action and the several billion needed to build it properly can be directly linked to Larry O'Brien and his 'my way or the highway' term of office of total chaos that led the councillors to take most control of our rapid transit plan, which in the end, amounted to a total about face from previous planning. The chaos and lack of control by the mayor was most evident when his 'Task Force on Rapid Transit' report was promptly relegated to the garbage can.

I think voters (who gave Charelli a pretty crushing defeat and convinced council to flip flop) didn't trust:

1) the decision to prioritize upgrading the o-train over upgrading the transitway
2) the decision to run trams on Albert and Slater (which were already facing serious bus congestion)
3) the lack of any plan for the central portion of the transitway (after the tunnel was abandoned in the early 90s, staff put their heads in the sand for 15 years).

I think they might have got away with it if there was a more limited "phase 1" that didn't go downtown and didn't go to Barrhaven with a promise that "phase 2" was doing something about the central transitway, but they couldn't adapt to public concerns.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I think voters (who gave Charelli a pretty crushing defeat and convinced council to flip flop) didn't trust:

1) the decision to prioritize upgrading the o-train over upgrading the transitway
2) the decision to run trams on Albert and Slater (which were already facing serious bus congestion)
3) the lack of any plan for the central portion of the transitway (after the tunnel was abandoned in the early 90s, staff put their heads in the sand for 15 years).

I think they might have got away with it if there was a more limited "phase 1" that didn't go downtown and didn't go to Barrhaven with a promise that "phase 2" was doing something about the central transitway, but they couldn't adapt to public concerns.

Where did that mistrust come from? There was a lot of political shenanigans going on that bolstered public fears, people with axes to grind, and people who simply oppose because that is what they do. They have always been around. I know there were issues with the downtown plan. The Barrhaven issue was pure silliness. It would have been used and let's face it, Barrhaven was much further advanced than Riverside South, so Barrhaven would have provided an almost instant ridership base. It was not a perfect plan but it would have been a bargain. It would have been crazy to end the line at Bayview. In a city this size, who would build LRT and not go downtown? It was insanity to think otherwise and as we saw, the truncated route could not have been done. The surface LRT route into downtown would have likely been the only possibility of a direct connection to downtown for the whole south part of the city in our lifetimes. It was a missed opportunity.

I remember Bob Chiarelli saying that Council was smart and they would find a way to deal with downtown issue. That would have pushed a downtown tunnel forward pretty quick and so be it. But what happened killed 30 km of LRT that would have been operating 5 years ago and wasted $100M to boot. Instead, we end up with a plan for the Trillium Line that is limping along heading for disaster that routinely shuts down with every little problem and every little patch up that tries to improve things slightly. You cannot operate a rapid transit line in this manner.

What is is what is but there is no denying that we lost something in the process.

Perhaps it took Larry O'Brien to really make a go of the tunnel but he was also foolish to cancel the 2006 project. It would have come in very handy now given the crappy plan for the Trillium Line.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by acottawa

But isn't that sort of the problem? Everything OC Transpo does is experimental. Rolling stock for which they are the only customer, only mass transit system in Canada where most of the stations are outdoors, world's only use of DMUs designed for rural rail service in Germany as a rapid transit system, probably the world's only attempt to run frequent service rapid transit on a single track, possibly the world's most expensive and overbuilt implementation of BRT (a failed experiment that is now being ripped up), possibly the only use of trams for a metro-like service. Just once I would like to see OC Transpo do something that aligns with existing best practices.

This one is actually fairly common. Using LRT vehicles for "pre-metro" type systems is common enough. An example that immediately comes to mind is the Tel Aviv LRT project. It has long subway and surface grade separated portions like our system does.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Li...iv_Light_Rail)

Where Ottawa truly is unique, is in having an entire LRT line be grade separated. Tel Aviv like all the others is metro-like in some sections of the line and more traditional LRT in others.

[HighwayStar]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

This one is actually fairly common. Using LRT vehicles for "pre-metro" type systems is common enough. An example that immediately comes to mind is the Tel Aviv LRT project. It has long subway and surface grade separated portions like our system does.

I was in Edmonton over the holidays and took what they call the LRT, but is actually a full-fledged high-floor subway. Large, spacious underground stations downtown.

The locals were saying it was "overbuilt", but it's very nice and will certainly last for a long time (and truly accommodate the new Arena in the middle of downtown).

I truly hope that our low-floor, narrow and staircase filled LRT cars will not begin with the opposite impression...

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Where did that mistrust come from? There was a lot of political shenanigans going on that bolstered public fears, people with axes to grind, and people who simply oppose because that is what they do. They have always been around.

I don't think the politics were that complicated. The state of the downtown transitway (rows of buses lined up to stop at crappy little shelters) has long been a source of frustration in the city, even for those who do not take transit. The city was proposing a transit project that primarily benefited one neighbourhood (Riverside South, which had maybe 1-2% of the city's population) and secondarily benefited a few other groups (southeast Barrhaven, Carleton students whose final destination was downtown) to the detriment (i.e. even more congestion on the central transitway) of other transit users (from Kanata, Orleans, North Gloucester, Nepean, etc - hundreds of thousands of voters) and to the detriment of people who live or work downtown (increased congestion).

Chareli never made the case why, after a long period with limited transit investments, the number one priority should be providing a tram from Barrhaven (via Riverside South) to downtown (which was not an obvious priority for most residents). Nor did he explain in any detail (or with concrete actions like amending the TMP) what his plan for the central transitway was (which I think most residents thought should be the top priority for a major transit investment). O'Brien, despite being a very flawed candidate was able to successfully exploit these public concerns.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I don't think the politics were that complicated. The state of the downtown transitway (rows of buses lined up to stop at crappy little shelters) has long been a source of frustration in the city, even for those who do not take transit. The city was proposing a transit project that primarily benefited one neighbourhood (Riverside South, which had maybe 1-2% of the city's population) and secondarily benefited a few other groups (southeast Barrhaven, Carleton students whose final destination was downtown) to the detriment (i.e. even more congestion on the central transitway) of other transit users (from Kanata, Orleans, North Gloucester, Nepean, etc - hundreds of thousands of voters) and to the detriment of people who live or work downtown (increased congestion).

Chareli never made the case why, after a long period with limited transit investments, the number one priority should be providing a tram from Barrhaven (via Riverside South) to downtown (which was not an obvious priority for most residents). Nor did he explain in any detail (or with concrete actions like amending the TMP) what his plan for the central transitway was (which I think most residents thought should be the top priority for a major transit investment). O'Brien, despite being a very flawed candidate was able to successfully exploit these public concerns.

What you are saying is not really true. It was going to serve the entire south of the city, not just Riverside South. The ridership studies (there are no ridership studies done for the current plan, we just assume that ridership will grow massively for unknown reasons) indicated that there were going to be over 40,000 riders per day in the fairly short term. It was not going to negatively impact other parts of the city because express routes from Barrhaven, Hunt Club and elsewhere would have been directed to this LRT line automatically reducing the number of buses downtown. Furthermore, much of Barrhaven and Riverside South were to be within walking distance of LRT, especially newer areas reducing the need for local transfers.

What about Gloucester North, etc., etc. etc.? That would come with Phase 2 and 3 and the timing of that would have been about the same as the current Phase 1. The fact of the matter is that we were buying 30 km of LRT for about $900 M. To build a similar length of track east-west is costing $5B+. And what are we doing for the underserved south end? Next to nothing! The crap plan poorly serves Riverside South, doesn't serve Barrhaven at all, and leaves most of the more interior suburbs still busing to Hurdman to board overcrowded trains there.

Yes, the politics were very simple. We let certain politicians appeal to the majority to create insecurities so he (O'Brien) would get elected. The end result is that we are demolishing hundreds of millions of rapid transit infrastructure and spending billions to replace it, to end up with something only slightly better and appealing to the exact same market that was already very well served. Meanwhile we are leaving everybody else out in the cold because we are pretty well bankrupting the city in the process, making it impossible to improve transit significantly in other parts of the city. Note how so many rapid transit routes have been deferred indefinitely or removed outright from our Transportation Master Plan since 2006.

Yes, a tunnel was going to be needed sooner than later but we chose the most expensive possible solution to build the absolute least away from downtown and to deliver the absolute minimum amount of real new rapid transit. And in the process, we have are reducing downtown transit connectivity by at least 75%, even excluding express routes, which we all know are not sustainable. Even after Phase 2 is completed, downtown connectivity will be reduced by at least 50%.

[1overcosc]

The way I see it, the old N-S LRT plan was a good plan. Just not as a first phase. It should have been built as a second phase after the tunnel, or at the same time.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

What about Gloucester North, etc., etc. etc.? That would come with Phase 2 and 3 and the timing of that would have been about the same as the current Phase 1. The fact of the matter is that we were buying 30 km of LRT for about $900 M. To build a similar length of track east-west is costing $5B+. And what are we doing for the underserved south end? Next to nothing! The crap plan poorly serves Riverside South, doesn't serve Barrhaven at all, and leaves most of the more interior suburbs still busing to Hurdman to board overcrowded trains there.

Barrhaven is served by the Southwest Transitway, which provides fairly good services to link with the Confederation Line. Much of the South end is served by either the Southeast Transitway or the Trillium Line (which despite its flaws provides fairly frequent service and linkage with the confederation line)

It is totally understandable that people in Riverside South would be pissed off. Many of them bought houses based on the fact that a line that went all the way downtown had been approved by Council and then they had the rug pulled out by O'Brien (riding a wave of voter discontent), and then had the rug pulled out again by Watson (who removed the possibility that an updated Trillium Line could eventually go downtown and then promised new transit services further east and further west with little for the south) and by staff (who promised upgrades would bring benefits that it did not).

But it is hard to imagine any neutral party looking at Ottawa in 2006 would have concluded that building tram line from Downtown to Barrhaven via Riverside South should be the city's highest transit priority.

It's also hard to imagine that if the proposed route had been built many people would have found it very useful (with 29 stops, partial grade separation, shared lane with buses downtown, and reverse-zed-shaped route, this was hardly a proposal for "rapid" transit).

[Kitchissippi]

Why do we have to go though "Groundhog Day" all over again when the subject of the old N-S LRT comes up? It was a terrible plan, it would have made things worse downtown, and it would have used up the same funding that has now been redirected to build the tunnel. The trains were no larger than the new TTC streetcars, about the same capacity as a couple of Express buses. It would have not made downtown any better (probably worse) for pedestrians and cyclists.

In short, more downtown congestion and the tunnel would have been pushed back another 20 or so years. Just as a reminder here's the video of that lovely downtown scenario we would have been stuck with for decades more:

• Video Link

[McC]

I love the part at the 1:00 mark where the 3 buses get to queue jump the tram at Metcalfe, and then the camera races ahead of the tram at the 1:20 mark so that you don't see how those same 3 buses then block the tram from reaching its station when they hit the red light at O'Connor St. This video was created to show whatever the authors wanted, and it shows the system failing on a blue sky traffic-free day!

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

The way I see it, the old N-S LRT plan was a good plan. Just not as a first phase. It should have been built as a second phase after the tunnel, or at the same time.

And as we see, it will never be built or anything approaching equivalency.

[Capital Shaun]

Originally Posted by McC

I love the part at the 1:00 mark where the 3 buses get to queue jump the tram at Metcalfe, and then the camera races ahead of the tram at the 1:20 mark so that you don't see how those same 3 buses then block the tram from reaching its station when they hit the red light at O'Connor St. This video was created to show whatever the authors wanted, and it shows the system failing on a blue sky traffic-free day!

I wasn't a fan of that project because the trams would have run on Albert & Slater in mixed bus traffic. Recipe for poor performance. Maybe if the cars & trucks had been kicked off Albert & Slater completely it might have worked. But I'm sure there's parking garages & loading docks here & there that would have prevented this. Had the city recommended the tram run on a different E-W road downtown I'd have been much more receptive to the idea. That would have involved removing the street parking from a road like Queen or Laurier for example.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by acottawa

only mass transit system in Canada where most of the stations are outdoors

I believe Calgary, Edmonton, and Vancouver are also cities in Canada, and most of their rail transit stations are also "outdoors".

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Barrhaven is served by the Southwest Transitway, which provides fairly good services to link with the Confederation Line. Much of the South end is served by either the Southeast Transitway or the Trillium Line (which despite its flaws provides fairly frequent service and linkage with the confederation line)

It is totally understandable that people in Riverside South would be pissed off. Many of them bought houses based on the fact that a line that went all the way downtown had been approved by Council and then they had the rug pulled out by O'Brien (riding a wave of voter discontent), and then had the rug pulled out again by Watson (who removed the possibility that an updated Trillium Line could eventually go downtown and then promised new transit services further east and further west with little for the south) and by staff (who promised upgrades would bring benefits that it did not).

But it is hard to imagine any neutral party looking at Ottawa in 2006 would have concluded that building tram line from Downtown to Barrhaven via Riverside South should be the city's highest transit priority.

It's also hard to imagine that if the proposed route had been built many people would have found it very useful (with 29 stops, partial grade separation, shared lane with buses downtown, and reverse-zed-shaped route, this was hardly a proposal for "rapid" transit).

We are beating a dead horse, because the city is doing next to nothing.

I have said since the Confederation Line was first conceived around 2008, that an extension of the Trillium Line as presently designed is a waste of money because it is going to provide lousy, unreliable service.

But really, 29 stops in 30 km is not anything different than what we are doing for the Confederation Line. 13 stops in 12 km, and likely something pretty close to the same for Phase 2.

I suppose the highest demand must receive priority but if you really think about it, ridership growth is more likely in areas that are underserved or where service is currently slow.

At this point, the best course of action would be to extend the southeast Transitway right to Barrhaven and leave the Trillium Line as a student train. At least we stop having these regular shut downs for changes that accomplish very little. This whole business of running buses on part of the route between South Keys and Barrhaven and trains on another part is silly. We need some common sense.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Good questions that I don't know the answers to. I imagine however the TTC in Toronto does it.

Terribly, in other words; or par for the course in Ottawa.

The TTC's emergency bus service to replace downed subway lines is pretty atrocious most of the time.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

There were no plans for an elevated busway through downtown that I remember.

The elevated option was bandied about, yes. I saw some illustrations from back issues of the Citizen at the time. It was pretty hideous... a major bullet got dodged when that idea died its ignominious deaths.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I think voters (who gave Charelli a pretty crushing defeat and convinced council to flip flop) didn't trust:

1) the decision to prioritize upgrading the o-train over upgrading the transitway
2) the decision to run trams on Albert and Slater (which were already facing serious bus congestion)
3) the lack of any plan for the central portion of the transitway (after the tunnel was abandoned in the early 90s, staff put their heads in the sand for 15 years).

I think they might have got away with it if there was a more limited "phase 1" that didn't go downtown and didn't go to Barrhaven with a promise that "phase 2" was doing something about the central transitway, but they couldn't adapt to public concerns.

I don't think voters at the time gave two hoots about any of the technical specs. They just went - as Ottawa voters always do, especially in the suburbs who run the roost - ERMAGERD TERXES! - and voted in O'Brien.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

I believe Calgary, Edmonton, and Vancouver are also cities in Canada, and most of their rail transit stations are also "outdoors".

It seems to me that if your rail service runs at grade or above grade, stations will be at least to some degree outdoors. The alternative will be pretty expensive and will likely need private sector involvement to construct buildings over stations. That may be possible in certain situations but that would be very difficult to coordinate at most stations.

As you recall, the original North-South plan did have building integration at Carleton and Walkley in the works so indoor stations may have been possible. That is a lost opportunity now.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Terribly, in other words; or par for the course in Ottawa.

The TTC's emergency bus service to replace downed subway lines is pretty atrocious most of the time.

The one thing we'll have over the TTC is that our system should have a higher availability rate. IIRC, most sections of the Toronto subway have an availability rate of about 98%, whereas we'll likely be at 99.5%, at least for the first 30 years when RTG is responsible for maintenance.

The thing is that 100% availability is unattainable as shit always happens. I believe 99.0% is the industry standard, and anything above that is considered acceptable.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

Why do we have to go though "Groundhog Day" all over again when the subject of the old N-S LRT comes up? It was a terrible plan, it would have made things worse downtown, and it would have used up the same funding that has now been redirected to build the tunnel. The trains were no larger than the new TTC streetcars, about the same capacity as a couple of Express buses. It would have not made downtown any better (probably worse) for pedestrians and cyclists.

In short, more downtown congestion and the tunnel would have been pushed back another 20 or so years. Just as a reminder here's the video of that lovely downtown scenario we would have been stuck with for decades more:

• Video Link

The current plan for the Trillium Plan is equally terrible. We want to expand it, yet we cannot significantly improve the frequency with the current plans. So, now we are thinking of putting two car trains on the route. And if we look at the mathematics of it, we are talking about trains with potentially over 500 passengers being dumped at Bayview, almost 100% transferring to Confederation Line trains. How will Confederation Line trains be able to absorb that number of passengers in the peak direction without overflows onto subsequent trains (in other words, significant delays). We will want to move passengers from the southern suburbs onto the Trillium Line and as we build massive towers in Little Italy, this does not look like this will work in the long-term. At least, if we had the original double tracking and the surface route into downtown for the Trillium Line, we would not face potential problems at Bayview going forward. Of course, the current tunnel would have to be built no matter what.

I don't buy the assumption that we would have put ourselves back by 20 years if we had gone ahead with the original plan. On the contrary, we were set back 10 years by not doing it. We would have had functioning LRT in 2009 or 2010. It would have directed suburban growth to where rapid transit was available instead of the far reaches of Cumberland and Stittsville and it would have built momentum towards subsequent lines being built. I think it would have become abundantly clear that a downtown solution was needed sooner than later.