HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #14701  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2020, 4:12 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
Knowing, not winning
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Rogue Canada
Posts: 50,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamincan View Post
I think a lot of people forget how cheap the Trillium Line was when they built it. It was initially a pilot project costing $21 million. The political reality is that it was never a choice between its present alignment and Bank St.

The lesson, though, is that decisions we make now that may seem like cheap low hanging fruit may end up being decisions we have to live with for the rest of our lives. It's something that should be considered when they initially make the decision.
Yes the Trillium line was the lowest-hanging fruit possible. Almost like Sir Isaac Newton sitting under the tree and having the proverbial apple fall from a branch and hit him on the head.
__________________
"Tout ce qui est exagéré est insignifiant." - Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14702  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2020, 4:31 PM
MalcolmTucker MalcolmTucker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamincan View Post
I think a lot of people forget how cheap the Trillium Line was when they built it. It was initially a pilot project costing $21 million. The political reality is that it was never a choice between its present alignment and Bank St.

The lesson, though, is that decisions we make now that may seem like cheap low hanging fruit may end up being decisions we have to live with for the rest of our lives. It's something that should be considered when they initially make the decision.
Which is why old EAs needed option analysis, like Quebec City's project just had published. Unfortuantely, EAs have the tendency to recommend either too expensive or politically unfeasible options. Plus the time needed derails projects by making idea to contract signing not fit in a single electoral cycle. Perfect enemy of the good and all that.


I imagine if there was a full EA for the original Ottawa LRT pilot that the EA would have recommended saving the $21 million to use on a future project.

Last edited by MalcolmTucker; Nov 27, 2020 at 4:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14703  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2020, 5:27 PM
swimmer_spe swimmer_spe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 3,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker View Post
Which is why old EAs needed option analysis, like Quebec City's project just had published. Unfortuantely, EAs have the tendency to recommend either too expensive or politically unfeasible options. Plus the time needed derails projects by making idea to contract signing not fit in a single electoral cycle. Perfect enemy of the good and all that.


I imagine if there was a full EA for the original Ottawa LRT pilot that the EA would have recommended saving the $21 million to use on a future project.
Would that have actually been good for the city?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14704  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2020, 6:07 PM
MalcolmTucker MalcolmTucker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by swimmer_spe View Post
Would that have actually been good for the city?
Probably not. But you have to take the good (projects that are affordable and take advantage of opportunities) with the bad (building entirely out of scale infrastructure for political reasons) when you bypass /get rid of option analysis. Have to trust our elected officials to not bad tremendously bad decisions.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14705  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2020, 11:31 PM
FrAnKs's Avatar
FrAnKs FrAnKs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ville de Québec / Quebec city
Posts: 5,301
The design guidelines for Québec City' structuring transit system...with hundred of pictures.
Courtesy - Ville de Québec

https://reseaustructurant.info/docs/...s%20design.pdf (French)
__________________
PROVINCE OF QUEBEC ==> 8 600 000
MONTREAL METRO ==> 4 300 000
QUEBEC CITY METRO ==> 830 000

Last edited by FrAnKs; Nov 27, 2020 at 11:49 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14706  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2020, 12:43 AM
wave46 wave46 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker View Post
Which is why old EAs needed option analysis, like Quebec City's project just had published. Unfortuantely, EAs have the tendency to recommend either too expensive or politically unfeasible options. Plus the time needed derails projects by making idea to contract signing not fit in a single electoral cycle. Perfect enemy of the good and all that.


I imagine if there was a full EA for the original Ottawa LRT pilot that the EA would have recommended saving the $21 million to use on a future project.
$21 million is a rounding error on a $2 billion project.

Given the knowledge gained inside of OC Transpo for rail operations, $21 million was a bargain probably.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14707  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2020, 6:48 PM
ue ue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by swimmer_spe View Post
The city is doing what makes sense. LRT is a huge cost, especially when there is no clear demand. By doing BRT, they are copying Ottawa's success. Expect 10-30 years from now that parts will be shut down and converted.



Look at Toronto and how much is not near the subways. What is the difference?
No, the city is cheaping out. If Edmonton, Calgary, Kitchener-Waterloo, and potentially soon Quebec City and Hamilton can build light rail with less population than Winnipeg, then so can Winnipeg.

Also if the current RT is indicative of what the entire system hopes to be, then no, Winnipeg won’t be copying Ottawa’s success as the current RT sucks. It’s a half-assed, cheap solution perfectly befitting a do-nothing city.

The funding is all about priorities. As I said the city/province could request more federal funding. The federal government funds transit projects across the country all the time. The ridiculous police budget could be significantly curtailed, too. Taxes could be raised. Money going into highway infrastructure could be rerouted. There’s plenty of things that could be done. It isn’t exactly impossible for a city like Winnipeg to have LRT, it’s just the city’s priorities.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14708  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2020, 6:56 PM
ue ue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere View Post
Ottawa went for a “cheap system buildout” - creating as many km of line for as little money as possible. This means it’s going to have a ridiculous size metro system for a city it’s size, but it runs in less ideal locations.

Honestly, I’m fine with it. Ottawa could have put these stops in “prime” locations but it would have needed a lot more tunnelling and it would have cost a whole lot more. REM will be similar. You get a whole lot more bang for your buck by running in surface corridors, even if it results in some sub-prime station locations.
Ok, so obviously it isn’t as black-or-white as this. For example, as another poster noted, the build out of the Trillium and Confederation Lines will hit many key Ottawa destinations.

However, if we look at it as purely as you’re saying (or at least how I’m interpreting your words), Ottawa is doing a cheap build out which will enable it to have a very large light rail system even if they don’t hit ideal locations. What is the benefit of this? Surely any cost benefit to the cheaper build out will be lost if you’ve got an inconvenient track route that misses a large sum of people.

Just build the track where people are and where people want to go. You’ll get a better ROI even if it’s more expensive.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14709  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2020, 7:01 PM
savevp savevp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrAnKs View Post
The design guidelines for Québec City' structuring transit system...with hundred of pictures.
Courtesy - Ville de Québec

https://reseaustructurant.info/docs/...s%20design.pdf (French)
Merci bien! This is basically an hour or two of transport pornography (transporn?) for SSP. Looks like big thinking at least in terms of the public realm and design components.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14710  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2020, 8:30 PM
Peggerino's Avatar
Peggerino Peggerino is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by savevp View Post
Merci bien! This is basically an hour or two of transport pornography (transporn?) for SSP. Looks like big thinking at least in terms of the public realm and design components.
Lol true. I'd love to have something like this for Winnipeg to gawk at too. Some of the shots in here though are gorgeous, reminds me of places in Europe like Germany and Belgium.
__________________
Keep it simple stupid
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14711  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2020, 8:31 PM
FrAnKs's Avatar
FrAnKs FrAnKs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ville de Québec / Quebec city
Posts: 5,301
Quote:
Originally Posted by savevp View Post
Merci bien! This is basically an hour or two of transport pornography (transporn?) for SSP. Looks like big thinking at least in terms of the public realm and design components.
LOL. Yeah! They seems pretty serious!
__________________
PROVINCE OF QUEBEC ==> 8 600 000
MONTREAL METRO ==> 4 300 000
QUEBEC CITY METRO ==> 830 000
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14712  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2020, 8:35 PM
wave46 wave46 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by ue View Post
Ok, so obviously it isn’t as black-or-white as this. For example, as another poster noted, the build out of the Trillium and Confederation Lines will hit many key Ottawa destinations.

However, if we look at it as purely as you’re saying (or at least how I’m interpreting your words), Ottawa is doing a cheap build out which will enable it to have a very large light rail system even if they don’t hit ideal locations. What is the benefit of this? Surely any cost benefit to the cheaper build out will be lost if you’ve got an inconvenient track route that misses a large sum of people.

Just build the track where people are and where people want to go. You’ll get a better ROI even if it’s more expensive.
The benefit is that you hit more people with fewer dollars. For $5 billion Ottawa will have almost built a city-wide system. Is it perfect? No.

The TTC subway extension to Vaughan cost $3.2 billion and accomplished far less.

Value per dollar is an important metric, especially when you're selling this to people. Expensive lines within the city exclusively are a political hard sell when there are large contingent of voters in the suburbs. If the suburban voters outnumber the core city voters and one repeatedly tells them to fly a kite, one's political fortunes might not survive long enough to accomplish any transit at all.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14713  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2020, 10:01 PM
ue ue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by wave46 View Post
The benefit is that you hit more people with fewer dollars. For $5 billion Ottawa will have almost built a city-wide system. Is it perfect? No.

The TTC subway extension to Vaughan cost $3.2 billion and accomplished far less.

Value per dollar is an important metric, especially when you're selling this to people. Expensive lines within the city exclusively are a political hard sell when there are large contingent of voters in the suburbs. If the suburban voters outnumber the core city voters and one repeatedly tells them to fly a kite, one's political fortunes might not survive long enough to accomplish any transit at all.
And this isn't still flawed?

I get that transit systems are built via political will, which comes from politicians who are out of touch with what transit users need or want because they don't actually ride it themselves (in most cases). So instead of getting transit where it's most effective and needed, or even just routed or designed in a way that is pleasant (i.e. not in the middle of a highway far from anything of note) and useful, we're building lines out to the sticks because that's where a growing share of voters are. That's flawed.

But also, it doesn't have to be an either/or. For the Confederation Line eastbound from the core, the current extension is more-or-less effective and from there could turn into a loop at Gloucester and head back into the city via Montreal Road and Rideau Street, hitting areas with denser, pre-existing populations, including a lot of multi-unit developments and a walkable main street, as well as that infill opportunity developers love. Win-win. That way you're not building a less useful line to Orleans that may buy politicians some votes out there, but will not be used for anything other than commuting to work or school, and the denizens will continue driving to their friends, the park, the supermarket, the mall, etc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14714  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2020, 10:21 PM
wave46 wave46 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by ue View Post
And this isn't still flawed?

I get that transit systems are built via political will, which comes from politicians who are out of touch with what transit users need or want because they don't actually ride it themselves (in most cases). So instead of getting transit where it's most effective and needed, or even just routed or designed in a way that is pleasant (i.e. not in the middle of a highway far from anything of note) and useful, we're building lines out to the sticks because that's where a growing share of voters are. That's flawed.

But also, it doesn't have to be an either/or. For the Confederation Line eastbound from the core, the current extension is more-or-less effective and from there could turn into a loop at Gloucester and head back into the city via Montreal Road and Rideau Street, hitting areas with denser, pre-existing populations, including a lot of multi-unit developments and a walkable main street, as well as that infill opportunity developers love. Win-win. That way you're not building a less useful line to Orleans that may buy politicians some votes out there, but will not be used for anything other than commuting to work or school, and the denizens will continue driving to their friends, the park, the supermarket, the mall, etc.
I think somebody said here that perfect was the enemy of good.

It comes down to this: How much does it cost to route it up Montreal Road? Those billions add up, especially when there's not a convenient right-of-way. Tunneling is pricey and it's a largely a low-density neighbourhood.

Does catering to longer distance commuters do a better job of getting cars off the road? Keep people in Orleans living daily life out there, but use the train to shuttle them into the core. GO Transit, writ small.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14715  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2020, 10:29 PM
ue ue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by wave46 View Post
I think somebody said here that perfect was the enemy of good.

It comes down to this: How much does it cost to route it up Montreal Road? Those billions add up, especially when there's not a convenient right-of-way. Tunneling is pricey and it's a largely a low-density neighbourhood.

Does catering to longer distance commuters do a better job of getting cars off the road? Keep people in Orleans living daily life out there, but use the train to shuttle them into the core. GO Transit, writ small.
A lot of Montreal Road is this and this, not exactly the middle of a highway or the neighbourhoods like this, which abut it.

Up until Vanier (at St Laurent Blvd) there absolutely would be room for a surface-level LRT easily. For the rest there could be a tunnel, which is of course costly, I know, but possible if prioritized.

I'd argue that, no, catering to long-distance commuters doesn't do a better job at getting cars off the road. It does a good job at getting them off the road for one thing -- commuting. But it isn't going to get people to ditch their car, as they will be continuing to live in an environment purpose-built for cars. This means that you're going to get rid of cars at their most visible (rush hour traffic) which looks good but only superficially addresses the problem at one level.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14716  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2020, 11:12 PM
jamincan jamincan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: KW
Posts: 339
Optimization problems are difficult in the best circumstances; mixing politics into the equation, and it's hopelessly difficult. At the end of the day, the transit line that gets built will take more cars off the road than the one that doesn't.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14717  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2020, 11:13 PM
Dengler Avenue's Avatar
Dengler Avenue Dengler Avenue is offline
Mr. Four Seventeen
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Back in GTA
Posts: 5,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamincan View Post
Optimization problems are difficult in the best circumstances; mixing politics into the equation, and it's hopelessly difficult. At the end of the day, the transit line that gets built will take more cars off the road than the one that doesn't.
I’m not sure if we can say that for ION...
__________________
My Proposal of TCH Twinning in Northern Ontatio
Disclaimer: Most of it is pure pie in the sky, so there's no need to be up in the arms about it <unless you own properties along Whiteshell (MB) - Shabaqua Corners and/or Sault Sainte Marie - Renfrew Corridor(s)>.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14718  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2020, 12:49 AM
swimmer_spe swimmer_spe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 3,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by ue View Post
No, the city is cheaping out. If Edmonton, Calgary, Kitchener-Waterloo, and potentially soon Quebec City and Hamilton can build light rail with less population than Winnipeg, then so can Winnipeg.

Also if the current RT is indicative of what the entire system hopes to be, then no, Winnipeg won’t be copying Ottawa’s success as the current RT sucks. It’s a half-assed, cheap solution perfectly befitting a do-nothing city.

The funding is all about priorities. As I said the city/province could request more federal funding. The federal government funds transit projects across the country all the time. The ridiculous police budget could be significantly curtailed, too. Taxes could be raised. Money going into highway infrastructure could be rerouted. There’s plenty of things that could be done. It isn’t exactly impossible for a city like Winnipeg to have LRT, it’s just the city’s priorities.
The old Transitways suck. People on here have been stating how bad the LRT is and how it doesn't touch everything they think it will.

I would argue that once the full build out of each are done, they will be decent enough.

And before you start mentioning cities... Mississauga built a transitway like BRT.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14719  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2020, 1:01 AM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is online now
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 26,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrAnKs View Post
The design guidelines for Québec City' structuring transit system...with hundred of pictures.
Courtesy - Ville de Québec

https://reseaustructurant.info/docs/...s%20design.pdf (French)
This is much nicer looking and more ambitious than what I originally thought the Quebec City tramway would be like. The underground stations look nice. It makes perfect sense to build a system like this in Quebec City; it would have made sense years ago. It'll complement the core areas nicely plus it transitions to being a more suburban line at the ends so it'll make sense as both a commuter line and a way to get around the core while removing vehicles from surface streets.

I wish Canada would move a bit farther away from everything being so utilitarian and transit being so value engineering focused. Quality of life is important and the spaces people spend their time in matter. This includes transit stations and the areas around them.

Some of this comes down to funding though. It looks like the feds alone have promised $1.2B toward construction of the Quebec City tramway. Could Winnipeg attract $1.2B in federal dollars for a tram project?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14720  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2020, 11:42 AM
jamincan jamincan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: KW
Posts: 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue View Post
I’m not sure if we can say that for ION...
What makes you say that?
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:49 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.