Ottawa Rapid Transit Network developments

[Buggys]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

1500m is a lot less than 30 minutes (it's 15-20), unless 1500m is an as-the-crow-flies number.

Who would want to take the time and effort to walk 1500 (15-20 mins) in the winter or rainstorm on a morning getting to an office job -- a big chunk of Ottawa's working/commuting population.

[CanadaGoose]

Originally Posted by Buggys

Who would want to take the time and effort to walk 1500 (15-20 mins) in the winter or rainstorm on a morning getting to an office job -- a big chunk of Ottawa's working/commuting population.

I walk about 1100m from Blair stn, it takes 1/3 of my commute, only takes 2/3 of my commute to get downtown

[FFX-ME]

I walk 2700m every day to go to work. Not a big deal. I bike in the summer though. I'm cheap and refuse to pay for parking.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

It's probably around 2.5km, then.

That's definitely beyond reasonable walking distance to rapid transit for everything but very niche uses like overnight service.

I'd say that I do that on a fairly regular basis, but only as a larger program of walk to groceries, walk to the pharmacy, walk to the liquor store, etc., etc.

A walk that long, broken down into sub-tasks, isn't psychologically nearly as long as a dedicated walk for that purpose, or, even worse, a walk that long on a dedicated "path" that has nothing except nationally-significant grass and shrubs along it. I'd much rather walk the 2.5km from Landsdowne to the Transitway along Bank Street than 2.5km through the Brownbelt. The linear distance is the same; the psychological distance isn't nearly as far, even if the Bank Street walk takes longer because you have to wait at many intersections.

[1overcosc]

Why does the City of Ottawa keep using EAs for new transit projects?

A few years ago the province passed a new law speeding up transit planning by creating the Transit Project Assessment Process (TPAP), an alternative to EAs for new transit proposals that is much faster--about 6-8 months instead of the 2-3 years it takes for an EA.

New projects in Toronto have been using TPAPs for years now. Why aren't we doing that here? We could have made Phase 2 shovel ready two years earlier!

[MalcolmTucker]

If they still want to do an option analysis?

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Why does the City of Ottawa keep using EAs for new transit projects?

A few years ago the province passed a new law speeding up transit planning by creating the Transit Project Assessment Process (TPAP), an alternative to EAs for new transit proposals that is much faster--about 6-8 months instead of the 2-3 years it takes for an EA.

New projects in Toronto have been using TPAPs for years now. Why aren't we doing that here? We could have made Phase 2 shovel ready two years earlier!

The TPAP doesn't start until the whole project is pretty much ready to go (studies done, route chosen, partners on board, preliminary design done, etc). For example the relief line process started in 2010
http://reliefline.ca/the-project/the...s-of-reference
and is still nowhere near the TPAP stage.

A TPAP is really good for a GO Transit project where the objective is to double the track, and the only real option is double the track and they submit a TPAP to double the track. But if a city doesn't know exactly what it wants (as was the case with the extensions where the route was still TBC), I'm not sure a TPAP offers a lot of speed advantage over a traditional EA which can be used to narrow options. Also, the TPAP can't be used for a lot of ancillary projects (Albert widening, etc).

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The TPAP doesn't start until the whole project is pretty much ready to go (studies done, route chosen, partners on board, preliminary design done, etc). For example the relief line process started in 2010
http://reliefline.ca/the-project/the...s-of-reference
and is still nowhere near the TPAP stage.

The relief line is projected to begin its TPAP in June.

Originally Posted by acottawa

A TPAP is really good for a GO Transit project where the objective is to double the track, and the only real option is double the track and they submit a TPAP to double the track. But if a city doesn't know exactly what it wants (as was the case with the extensions where the route was still TBC), I'm not sure a TPAP offers a lot of speed advantage over a traditional EA which can be used to narrow options. Also, the TPAP can't be used for a lot of ancillary projects (Albert widening, etc).

That makes sense. Thanks. Knew there had to be a reason other than the city being silly.

[Catenary]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The TPAP doesn't start until the whole project is pretty much ready to go (studies done, route chosen, partners on board, preliminary design done, etc). For example the relief line process started in 2010
http://reliefline.ca/the-project/the...s-of-reference
and is still nowhere near the TPAP stage.

A TPAP is really good for a GO Transit project where the objective is to double the track, and the only real option is double the track and they submit a TPAP to double the track. But if a city doesn't know exactly what it wants (as was the case with the extensions where the route was still TBC), I'm not sure a TPAP offers a lot of speed advantage over a traditional EA which can be used to narrow options. Also, the TPAP can't be used for a lot of ancillary projects (Albert widening, etc).

The Trillium Line is currently undergoing the TPAP. We're in the 30 day review period now. Since the EA for the N-S LRT already covers much of the work, the TPAP is pretty simple, with most of the decisions related to station placement north, south, or under cross streets.