The future of Ottawa's Transit

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Dado

A press release from Clive Doucet... looks like the cat is out of the bag now...

There is absolutely no new information on this. It's the same old comments he has been reharshing. Did he propose other solutions besides the Carling streetcar? No.

The only way to get rail fast, is to use heavy rail trains to run on existing tracks.

Any other project, tunnel or not, is 6 years from now (EAs + studies + construction).

[Cre47]

More ridiculousness from OC. Why OC just doesn't comply with the Ontario, who cares about the fact some routes crossed into Quebec. We have more pressing issues in regards to transit, but the city is more willing to do stuff that will benefit an infirm minority at the expense of thousands others. Let's concentrate on the more pressing issues, like overcrowding, reliability and improvements rather then just concentrating on accommodations for a very few - in this I find it are to believe it is/could be a service animal. But I have to admit, this must be a slow news day if it makes headlines. Sorry to be tough.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/stor...et-080722.html



Nothing new here too, just stating that the mayor opposes light rail on Carling, although pretty much everyone knew or thought that (Sorry it's in French)

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/article/20...3/6790/CPDROIT

[waterloowarrior]

Light rail (Transit city style) on Carling would be a great idea.

Putting almost the entire system on Carling (if it wasn't grade separated) would not be a good idea. Even with excellent signal timing it couldn't handle trains coming every 2-3 minutes in each direction to and from Barrhaven and Kanata and perhaps to Orleans (basically a constant flow) during rush hour. A car-train accident doesn't just halt service on one line temporarily until cleanup, it would back up almost the entire system. It would have to be grade separated, which increases the cost quite a bit compared to the Transitway/ORP option. Councillor Leadman at least is not calling for a grade separated system (end of interview).

[Cre47]

How much time it would be longer on Carling if grade-separated and also if avoiding all the traffic lights then on the Parkway.

I guess Leadman wants commuters to have an additionnal 20 minute travel time (at least) with the traffic lights and more stops not to mention it will not solve the congestion downtown.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

There is absolutely no new information on this. It's the same old comments he has been reharshing. Did he propose other solutions besides the Carling streetcar? No.

That's not entirely true... he claims to have supporting responses from city staff, so there is something new coming tomorrow.

And while it is true that it is the same comments and same solutions, the fact remains that the public awareness and perception does not match the reality: the public thinks we're getting rail, but we're just getting another decade of buses.

The only way to get rail fast, is to use heavy rail trains to run on existing tracks.

You're sounding sort of like David Gladstone... but, speaking of the idea, I gather we will be getting just that soon. VIA is doing track upgrades in the area and some of those upgrades include things like a new siding at Fallowfield Station. The excuses against putting in rail-based downtown bypass services are fast disappearing and in the coming crunch we need to remove as many people as possible from going through downtown who aren't actually going to downtown.

Any other project, tunnel or not, is 6 years from now (EAs + studies + construction).

We have an EA and study for downtown on the surface, so it's ready to go with only minor modifications (mainly to lengthen the platforms for 3-car instead of 2-car trains). We know that part won't take more that 3 years. Transitway conversion is relatively easy and certainly doesn't require 6 years to accomplish - a serious push would get it done in one summer season (May-August). The only significant hang-up is the missing West Transitway/Ottawa River Parkway section, which will require a study and an EA. For that reason, the City should start on a study and EA for that ASAP. We could be riding trains downtown in 4 years - if we got on with it.

[lrt's friend]

A press release from Clive Doucet... looks like the cat is out of the bag now...

http://www.clivedoucet.com/


Press Release July 23, 2008
No Tunnel for 7 to 11 years -
Special Tax Levy needed

Well, the 7 to 11 year time frame shouldn't surprise any of us here but for the general public, this has likely not sunk in yet. No rail for at least 7 to 11 years and it isn't going to service the suburbs either for at least 25 years.

The special tax levy is new and this is surely to shock many who have been thinking of billions as if they were 5 dollar bills, and now the mayor is also dismissing light rail on Carling, eventhough it was recommended by the peer review panel. This all points to the liklihood that the city really can't afford even its primary transit network let alone a secondary network, even if we receive matching funds from the province and federal government.

I have said it here before many times, that the process appears to be predetermined and the studies and public involvement is all designed to support the original premise. For this, we are going to pay dearly through our property taxes (if it ever happens), with a second shock wave yet to hit, when the lawsuit is finally settled. I expect the full extent of all of this will finally become apparent after Larry O'Brien has left office in the next year or two.

And what happens when a plan is unaffordable? It never gets implemented.

At a time when Ottawans are ready to flock to transit, the city has nothing to offer, besides a bus added here and there to just barely keep the existing transit network going. This is not the fault of OC Transpo, but of our politicians who have been stewarding our transit plans since the original Transitways were completed in the early 1990s.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Dado

That's not entirely true... he claims to have supporting responses from city staff, so there is something new coming tomorrow.

And while it is true that it is the same comments and same solutions, the fact remains that the public awareness and perception does not match the reality: the public thinks we're getting rail, but we're just getting another decade of buses.

I'm all for rail, but I'm a realistic guy. The EAs for much of the Transitway are done. Why would I wait 5 years to start building rail instead? I find it childish to push for rail when EAs are not done.

And supporting answers for what, that it will cost 900M$ for Transitway? If it's the same kind of presentation he had at Lansdowne, then he won't lose my time twice. OMG, financing is not secured, let's all panic, we'll never receive money! (BTW, if transit was only the responsibility of one level of governement, we wouldn't have to beg for that).

You're sounding sort of like David Gladstone... but, speaking of the idea, I gather we will be getting just that soon. VIA is doing track upgrades in the area and some of those upgrades include things like a new siding at Fallowfield Station. The excuses against putting in rail-based downtown bypass services are fast disappearing and in the coming crunch we need to remove as many people as possible from going through downtown who aren't actually going to downtown.

Well it's a cheap way to achieve fast results, but for suburbs only. You don't need one type of transit system, like most of councillors seem to think, but you need a variety of options for different needs.

We have an EA and study for downtown on the surface, so it's ready to go with only minor modifications (mainly to lengthen the platforms for 3-car instead of 2-car trains). We know that part won't take more that 3 years. Transitway conversion is relatively easy and certainly doesn't require 6 years to accomplish - a serious push would get it done in one summer season (May-August). The only significant hang-up is the missing West Transitway/Ottawa River Parkway section, which will require a study and an EA. For that reason, the City should start on a study and EA for that ASAP. We could be riding trains downtown in 4 years - if we got on with it.

Minor modifications need EA updates. Plus to modify all engineering studies and such. A tunnel study is easier to do than a surface route study. Even if we would be riding trains downtown in 4 years. That short stretch would be only used for 2 years, and actually would cost more to run than buses because of the low level of passengers of these trains. The ridership studies showed that the N-S route has the lowest level of ridership, so yeah, I'm still happy that the first project was cancelled.

If people assumed that they would ride a train in a tunnel in 3 years, with the current lack of leadership, well they just have to wake up. It won't happen. Even for the Transitway construction, it takes an eternity to be done.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Well, the 7 to 11 year time frame shouldn't surprise any of us here but for the general public, this has likely not sunk in yet. No rail for at least 7 to 11 years and it isn't going to service the suburbs either for at least 25 years.

It will be two years this fall since the first project was cancelled. Time goes by fast. If construction starts in two years, time will go on by much faster, as people will have something to look forward to.

The special tax levy is new and this is surely to shock many who have been thinking of billions as if they were 5 dollar bills, and now the mayor is also dismissing light rail on Carling, eventhough it was recommended by the peer review panel. This all points to the liklihood that the city really can't afford even its primary transit network let alone a secondary network, even if we receive matching funds from the province and federal government.

The budget as been made for a 1.2G$ contribution from the city. The levy will kick out the same way it would have been for the previous plan, because more than 200M$ weren't include in the real price tag.

As for the peer review panel, it was a STREETCAR LINE, which I'm all for too. The ridership will bet too high to call for Calgary or Edmonton style LRT in Ottawa. It will need to be grade separated. Which something city staff got, but councillors really don't get yet.

I have said it here before many times, that the process appears to be predetermined and the studies and public involvement is all designed to support the original premise. For this, we are going to pay dearly through our property taxes (if it ever happens), with a second shock wave yet to hit, when the lawsuit is finally settled. I expect the full extent of all of this will finally become apparent after Larry O'Brien has left office in the next year or two.

And what happens when a plan is unaffordable? It never gets implemented.

What is more unaffordable, do nothing? There is a lack of solutions. We are starting to live in a 3rd world country with infrastructures crumbling down, lousy service, overflowing sewers but yet, people seem to be content with their lives.

The first plan was actually more expensive to run, and went basically nowhere. I'm still waiting for the magical cheap, high ridership plan that all these councillors seem to be happily taking about.

At a time when Ottawans are ready to flock to transit, the city has nothing to offer, besides a bus added here and there to just barely keep the existing transit network going. This is not the fault of OC Transpo, but of our politicians who have been stewarding our transit plans since the original Transitways were completed in the early 1990s.

If there's anything, I blame the one who designed the Transitway, and the old mayor who refused to allow tall buildings and cancell the original subway under Bank St.

[lrt's friend]

I have to agree with Dado on almost every point. We have a fixation on a tunnel, which is delaying transit progress. A surface rail line downtown doesn't have to be the long-term solution but it can help get a rail network up and going much sooner while we study and find funding for a tunnel. Ultimately, surface track will serve a function even when a tunnel is opened. We have let the downtown business lobby dictate the city's agenda far too long. We also need to look at existing track on the south perimeter of the city to deliver a cheaper way to deliver a service that doesn't presently exist while at the same time diverting some transit traffic away from downtown. We could have a useable rail transit network going east-west and north-south long before a tunnel is ready if we really wanted it and it could be funded by not replacing things such as exclusive bus lanes with expensive parallel running busways. There are other cities which are now building multiple rail lines simultaneously and they will all be open before our first line is ready.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I have to agree with Dado on almost every point. We have a fixation on a tunnel, which is delaying transit progress. A surface rail line downtown doesn't have to be the long-term solution but it can help get a rail network up and going much sooner while we study and find funding for a tunnel. Ultimately, surface track will serve a function even when a tunnel is opened. We have let the downtown business lobby dictate the city's agenda far too long. We also need to look at existing track on the south perimeter of the city to deliver a cheaper way to deliver a service that doesn't presently exist while at the same time diverting some transit traffic away from downtown. We could have a useable rail transit network going east-west and north-south long before a tunnel is ready if we really wanted it and it could be funded by not replacing things such as exclusive bus lanes with expensive parallel running busways. There are other cities which are now building multiple rail lines simultaneously and they will all be open before our first line is ready.

There is nothing preventing us for starting building a streetcar system in the meantime, but that will add hundreds of millions on top. We need an efficient transit backbone, with cheap operating costs. The key here is with cheap operating costs. I would gladly like to see the Carling to MTL road streetcar via Sparks St. going up soon, but the reality is that it's not sufficient for Ottawa's need, and we need more. The LRRT is needed in Ottawa, as it offers much capacity, but still won't be enough in 30 years.

We have about a 10G$ backlog in transit projects, the problem is that they shouldn't be tight on budget, but some level of governments rather give us a measly GST rebate than actually invest in the future. I was never for short term gain. For the city of Ottawa, 7 years is a joke. But where is Clive when he should put for a 6 month tunnel EA, or request commuter trains that could be up and running soon? Right, he still cries about the old plan's cancellation.

[waterloowarrior]

just to repeat what d_jeffery said, the Carling line was recommended as a streetcar line. Councillor Leadman went on CFRA saying "We had the peer review panel say this is a route we should be considering as well" but leaves out that it was for a streetcar, not for the main line.

An east-west Streetcar following Carling and Rideau/Montreal Road. The streetcar would utilize a mix of alignments including segregated right-of-way (e.g. median) and mixed traffic operation. The purpose of the LRT line was to provide opportunities for compact transit-oriented development within the greenbelt

[Dado]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

I'm all for rail, but I'm a realistic guy. The EAs for much of the Transitway are done. Why would I wait 5 years to start building rail instead? I find it childish to push for rail when EAs are not done.

Any EAs that are done for a Transitway means that it's also available for light rail. It's just an alteration to the EA. It's seriously not a big deal. I mean you can get a Schedule B Municipal Class EA to switch an existing transit facility's vehicle technology... and they're pre-approved subject to a screening! It really is not a big deal.

And supporting answers for what, that it will cost 900M$ for Transitway? If it's the same kind of presentation he had at Lansdowne, then he won't lose my time twice.

The fact that we won't be getting any rail for 7+ years. WE all know that but the public doesn't generally. It will finally be out in the open.

Minor modifications need EA updates. Plus to modify all engineering studies and such. A tunnel study is easier to do than a surface route study.

We don't need another surface route study! We've already got one from the N-S LRT! Take that EA and amend it to chop off anything south of Bayview, chop off the other addendum to the University of Ottawa and add an addendum to get it from McKenzie King to Campus or Hurdman stations. After that, you just need a Schedule B Municipal Class EA or two for the Transitway conversion. Big whoopee.

The big one we're missing is the West Transitway - and frankly it's inexcusable that this EA has not been done already, especially since various corridor options (including the best one, the former CPR corridor) have or are being steadily closed down.

Anyway, we've got a winter ahead of us to modify all the studies and EAs before next year's construction season. What we're really lacking at City Hall is a sense of urgency.

Even if we would be riding trains downtown in 4 years. That short stretch would be only used for 2 years, and actually would cost more to run than buses because of the low level of passengers of these trains.

3-car trains running on the surface downtown sans buses would cost more to run than the buses?!

Once we've put out the immediate fire we can think of doing a tunnel. Make no mistake about this: surface downtown is a stop-gap measure as far as the primary network is concerned. We only need 5-10 years out of it, after which it can do other things (like serve Carling/Rideau and/or Hull in the future) once the tunnel is built. If we had started on the track to conversion back in 2003 using a tunnel it wouldn't even be worth considering surface for the primary network but right now things are too far gone to wait for a tunnel.

If people assumed that they would ride a train in a tunnel in 3 years, with the current lack of leadership, well they just have to wake up. It won't happen.

That's kind of the point: hopefully Clive will be waking people up.

[Rathgrith]

Why isn`t Franky complaining about this right now?

[Dado]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

There is nothing preventing us for starting building a streetcar system in the meantime, but that will add hundreds of millions on top. We need an efficient transit backbone, with cheap operating costs. The key here is with cheap operating costs. I would gladly like to see the Carling to MTL road streetcar via Sparks St. going up soon, but the reality is that it's not sufficient for Ottawa's need, and we need more. The LRRT is needed in Ottawa, as it offers much capacity, but still won't be enough in 30 years.

You've missed both my and LRT Friend's point: run the primary Transitway rail network downtown on the surface initially, then move it into the tunnel once it becomes available. The surface tracks can then be used for the Carling-Rideau line. Yes, that requires a little bit of advance planning in the Laurier and Booth areas to ensure things can link up properly to allow a switchover, but of all the problems I can think of it's pretty far down the list. In the meantime it's time to start putting in place O-Train extensions on existing tracks to divert people from downtown who aren't headed there.

We don't need the tunnel's capacity yet - we'll need it soon, maybe in a decade or so, but not yet. What we do need is a fix for the current problems and we need it ASAP. We no longer have the luxury of thinking exclusively long term - the bus nuts have seen to that - we now have to think short and long term simultaneously and we can't allow the world of the perfect from discounting options.

[waterloowarrior]

.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Dado

You've missed both my and LRT Friend's point: run the primary Transitway rail network downtown on the surface initially, then move it into the tunnel once it becomes available. The surface tracks can then be used for the Carling-Rideau line. Yes, that requires a little bit of advance planning in the Laurier and Booth areas to ensure things can link up properly to allow a switchover, but of all the problems I can think of it's pretty far down the list. In the meantime it's time to start putting in place O-Train extensions on existing tracks to divert people from downtown who aren't headed there.

We don't need the tunnel's capacity yet - we'll need it soon, maybe in a decade or so, but not yet. What we do need is a fix for the current problems and we need it ASAP. We no longer have the luxury of thinking exclusively long term - the bus nuts have seen to that - we now have to think short and long term simultaneously and we can't allow the world of the perfect from discounting options.

You missed my point I guess, because I said that the studies are not done, it's not a no big deal like you make it to be. Lots of the EAs could be done in 6 months too but aren't. The St-Clair streetcar route is the perfect example how a "simple" surface option can take years just to finalise. I remember city staff arguing that major EA modification would be required if diesel trains would be used, and it is a big change in noise, pollution, ect. I don't know where you get that it's easy to do an EA for other segments that aren't done, it's just, eh, do the same for the tunnel and start building the tunnel next year too! There's no reason why a surface route can begin next year where a EA is not finished when the tunnel could be done as fast.

The streetcar would have to be on Albert and Slater, mixed with buses, just there it doesn't add much capacity. The issue with capacity is not running trains, it's about using express routes downtown. Streetcars don't add much capacity then buses, especially 3-car long trains.

And yes, a streetcar costs more to run per user than buses, the cost advantage of trains over buses is at 4-cars +.


Everything is perment in this city, soon we'll get save our streetcar group, that said that a tunnel will cost too much and a surface route is fine, then we'll wait ten years for a tunnel and endure lousy service, all over again. DON'T GIVE THEM IDEAS

[harls]

http://www.ottawasun.com/News/Ottawa...47921-sun.html

Tax needed to pay for LRT: Doucet

By DEREK PUDDICOMBE

Capital Coun. Clive Doucet says commuters might not see a downtown transit tunnel for seven to 11 years, and a dedicated tax will be needed to pay for it.

But senior staff say that isn't exactly the case.

Doucet said he received the "alarming" information during a recent meeting with Nancy Schepers, the city's deputy manager for planning, transit and the environment.

"The answers I received are very revealing," said Doucet, who will host a press conference today to make his question-and-answer session with staff public.

Doucet has been a strong advocate of light rail transit and remains disappointed that council reversed its 2006 decision to build a $1-billion north-south rail line from Barrhaven to the University of Ottawa.

SPECULATION

"We started planning this 10 years ago and we won't see light rail in the city for another 10 years," said Doucet.

Schepers said Doucet is speculating on both the tunnel time frame and the need for a special tax to pay for it, because council has yet to make important decisions concerning the project.

She said the $200 million the city set aside for the now-cancelled north-south LRT line is still available.

"His statements are speculative at this point," Schepers said. "It's impossible for him to say that's the conclusion when council hasn't made that conclusion."

If the city had proceeded with the north-south LRT line, Doucet said, then planning would already be underway for an east-west route.

"We would not only have the north-south locked down, we would be seeking funding for the east-west line," he said. "But what we're getting is a 1970s bus plan."

Coun. Alex Cullen, chairman of the city's transit committee, disagrees with Doucet's assessment.

TUNNEL 'IS COMING'

"Clive is wrong to say it's a bus-based system," said Cullen. "There is more light rail in the new plan than the last."

Cullen expects it could take five to seven years before a tunnel is built.

"One way or another, a tunnel is coming," he said. "It's misleading to say what he's said."

[Cre47]

Well the feds have some cash and a lot (despite the waste on Afghanistan and the Parliament Buildings), including that $4.25 billion cellphone sale. They can afford on using some of the money for the transit project. Unfortunately with the lack of vision of the Conservatives, as always, they will use it for the debt.

[lrt's friend]

We have EAs ready right now for the N-S Route. Whether we build the whole thing right away is something that can be debated, but at least we could have something up and running in 3 years. Every other route still requires further study and it is unfortunate that we shut down EAs on all the E-W routes in 2006, as this has also delayed progressing in that direction also. People who objected to the original plan forget an important point. The opening of the first line would have built enthusiasm and even demand to get more lines built faster. We are seeing this in cities like Portland, Denver, Salt Lake City and even an anti-transit city like Houston. What we did by pushing the reset button, has built up frustration and unrealistic expectations, and the frustrations will become magnified as the priortization debate begins this fall.

Regarding surface rail, d_jeffrey is right that it doesn't add greatly to capacity downtown, but it may allow more people to be moved with the same number of vehicles. The whole point is getting some of the advantages of rail transit sooner, even if congestion downtown is not immediately resolved. I have believed for quite some time that a surface line through downtown will be needed even when a tunnel is built so there will be no loss in doing this. I have concluded that no more than 2 rail lines can share the tunnel, unless we are prepared to double decker the tunnel and that seems highly unlikely. Now, I am not saying to stop work on the tunnel. It should move full speed ahead, but in the meantime we should get a rail network started so we don't have to wait 7 years or more. Whether we are dragging our feet on the tunnel, that is another matter. I remember the process was outlined here at one point and it seems that there are many steps still to occur before construction can begin. Settlement of the lawsuit with Seimens is mandatory or none of the rail manufacturers will do business with this city. This alone could delay progress. I have said that we need a champion for light rail in this city, and Bob Chiarelli filled that role very effectively in the past. In fact, he clearly was criticized for moving forward too fast. A political champion will push through light rail much faster. It is really unfortunate that a big supporter of light rail, Clive Doucet, is not presently on side, but I think everybody should listen to him, whether you support the current plan or some other incarnation of light rail. He does have some objections to the route, but his main concern is about the likely priorities (and money) given to busways, which may delay or kill the light rail components of the plan if we cannot secure full funding.

Regarding operating cost benefits, yes, the longer the train the lower the operating costs per passenger, but clearly Calgary's C-Train has shown very significant operating cost benefits with only 3 car trains and even that was built up towards over a number of years. Again, get light rail started fast, and work towards the tunnel. Provide new service, attract new customers. This is the whole point of what we are trying to do.

I can't see any 'Save the Streetcars' campaign for a number of reasons. First of all, building a tunnel should not and must not shut down surface LRT, especially for 3 years. Second, the intent will be to continue to use the surface route, whether for a N-S route, a Gatineau Route, or a Carling-Montreal route. The debate about the cost of the tunnel will be ongoing regardless, the difference being, if we have surface rail, we will have LRT in this city even if a tunnel is deemed too expensive. If LRT is totally dependent on a tunnel, then we could easily end up with an all bus system for another generation. I guess I am of the feeling that we shouldn't put all our eggs in one basket, and furthermore, we need to show progress on rail in less than 10 years.

I know there are many supporters of an O-Train extension, but as d_jeffrey experienced, nobody wants to ride it on weekends if it means double transfers to reach downtown. We simply don't have a good enough supporting bus network during off-peak hours to make a double transfer system attractive, and as I pointed out before, you are kidding yourself, if you believe that local bus routes will have service frequencies better than 30 to 60 minutes during off-peak hours after LRT is introduced. I think we are taking a big step backwards if southenders like myself are left with a choice of transfering both at South Keys and at Hurdman or Bayview. Extending the O-Train means:
1. It becomes permanent for a generation or more.
2. We provide no rapid transit service directly into the southern urban community. The closest stop will be outside the community which will mean that a large proportion of the users will drive to use rail and virtually nobody will use it during off-peak hours.
3. It becomes even more difficult and costly to electrify and double track at any point in the future.
4. It becomes pointless to run trains to the airport with no direct service downtown.

Extending the O-Train is a choice of last resort and will demonstrate that the city has run out of ideas and cash.

Now in saying all this about the O-Train, I can definitely see an application crosstown on existing track where we don't have sufficient potential ridership demand to justify a double tracked electric system for the forseeable future.

I have to say that I find Alex Cullen very annoying. He personifies a city that is not listening to the public. I have always been under the impression that for him, the transit plan is the downtown tunnel and the rest really doesn't matter that much. The tunnel is his pet project, and I am sure that is why he was an opponent of the previous plan. I cannot share his optimism about a 5 year completion for a tunnel, especially considering that we are just starting a 20 month environmental assessment. This is much like Marianne Wilkinson's comment, about the shovel being in the ground within a year of killing the last plan. Ridiculous and very naive.

[lrt's friend]

including that $4.25 billion cellphone sale

Ha! Some are already talking about using this money for tax cuts. Typical Conservative rhetoric, and we all know that they really don't believe in supporting cities because it is 'Provincial Jurisdiction'. As with the bus pass tax credit, it will all be designed to make the Conservatives look good and let the other levels of government look bad if they try to claw it back in some manner. Of course, in the case of bus passes, we all know that the city has been clawing it back by increasing bus passes faster than cash fares.