Ottawa Rapid Transit Network developments

[lrt's friend]

Subways beat buses any day of the week

That is only true if your entire trip is made by subway.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Everything I've read so far indicates that the city is doing exactly that with respect to provincial funding (not sure about federal funding)--including using the YOU'RE PAYING 100% ON TORONTO PROJECTS SO WHY NOT US rant. We've got a byelection going on in Ottawa South. Right now would be the perfect time to demand an immediate funding commitment. It would force Wynne to put-up-or-shut-up regarding province-wide fairness especially with all the fearmongering about the Big Move being paid for with provincewide tax revenues.

Funding commitment for what? To build LRT to the west end or the east end? Remember this riding is in the south end and LRT is not coming this way anytime soon. So we are demanding things for the benefit of other parts of the city when we know how we got double crossed in 2006. As far as I can see nobody is offering this kind of funding as part of their platform and I don't see the Conservatives as being any more generous. More likely they will behave like Conservatives of days past and stop funding rapid transit expansion entirely.

[DarkArconio]

As I understand it, the reason we went with rail is it's so much cheaper than buses in a tunnel, and a tunnel was the best way to get grade segregated transit downtown. All further decisions on technology and routes has come from that initial choice.

If our system is built out such that we have buses everywhere but downtown for rapid transit, and from any part of the city it only takes one bus to get to the rail line, then I think that's an appropriate compromise for overall quality of service.

Simply put, segregated rail is cheaper to build in urban areas where space is at a premium (see discussion on the western lrt extension), while brt is more favourable for being more flexible in less dense areas where space is cheap.

Investments in computer rail along existing lines may be another way to square this conflict faster, though ridership and feasibility studies would need to be conducted.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by matty14

The problem with doing that is that it eliminates one of the major selling points for BRT over LRT and that is its so called "flexibility", i.e. local buses can operate on small sections of transitway to service major trip generators, express buses can cover a residential neighbourhood and then boot it downtown

Where they will clog up the designated transit route and destroy any time advantage that the non-express portion of the system has over the unbuilt rail transit that BRT was the alternative to, or private automobiles.

The "flexibility" of Bus Crappid Transit is also its fatal flaw: everyone expects their bus to pick them up outside their house and deposit them downtown, then repeat, in reverse, in the evening.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Funding commitment for what? To build LRT to the west end or the east end? Remember this riding is in the south end and LRT is not coming this way anytime soon. So we are demanding things for the benefit of other parts of the city when we know how we got double crossed in 2006. As far as I can see nobody is offering this kind of funding as part of their platform and I don't see the Conservatives as being any more generous. More likely they will behave like Conservatives of days past and stop funding rapid transit expansion entirely.

The Tory candidate in Ottawa South is making fearmongering over Ottawans taxpayer money being used for Toronto transit one of the centerpieces of his campaign. A funding announcement for any new transit project in Ottawa, regardless of which riding its in, would head him off. Conversely, if the City demanded funding now and the province didn't give it, it would give him ammo which the Liberals don't want. Remember that even the Tories are arguing we need more transit.

What I'm saying is that the City should demand funding NOW at a time when it would be very politically awkward for Wynne to say no.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Funding commitment for what? To build LRT to the west end or the east end? Remember this riding is in the south end and LRT is not coming this way anytime soon.

Four of the LRT stations on the current project - Hurdman, St-Laurent, Train Thing, and Cyrville - are in the riding of Ottawa South.

Instant correction: Cyrville is outside Ottawa South by a few tens of meters.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by DarkArconio

Simply put, segregated rail is cheaper to build in urban areas where space is at a premium (see discussion on the western lrt extension), while brt is more favourable for being more flexible in less dense areas where space is cheap.

Flexible BRT is an oxymoron.

Bus transit is either flexible (buses can jump on an off the system, convert from "rapid" to "local" mode with ease, etc.), or it is rapid.

But it is not simultaneously both.

Flexible bus transit is not rapid.

Rapid bus transit is not flexible.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Funding commitment for what? To build LRT to the west end or the east end? Remember this riding is in the south end and LRT is not coming this way anytime soon.

That's in no small measure thanks to the small-c conservative-minded voters in Ottawa South who helped set transit back in Ottawa by decades, by consistently voting for bus crappid transit promoters and voting for Larry O'Brien.

Ottawans are cheap, small-minded bastards, and Ottawa South are among the cheapest and most small-minded of all.

[Millennium2002]

OK, I'm from Vancouver, but ignoring that...

I'm looking at the preferred alignment for the Richmond Underground corridor, and see that there's Richmond Road just to the south of it...

I also see that the road has a wide median at which LRT vehicles could be run in the middle of; or, in the case that residents complain, a cut and cover tunnel can still be substituted. Therefore, I propose this:

Richmond Underground without NCC Lands, Confederation Line Western Extension

Having cross-checked with the NCC lands map (PDF), I don't think any part of this runs through a substantial chunk of their lands, so they will have no say. Instead, there's just individual landowners / stratas to deal with, but that will probably be many times easier.

In addition to this, I think that this proposal allows for new developments and an increase of density on both sides of the corridor, rather than having one side of it be blocked off by parkland or the river. This in itself should translate to a few thousand more potential commuters and associated revenues for the city.

[gjhall]

Originally Posted by allan_kuan

OK, I'm from Vancouver, but ignoring that...

I'm looking at the preferred alignment for the Richmond Underground corridor, and see that there's Richmond Road just to the south of it...

I also see that the road has a wide median at which LRT vehicles could be run in the middle of; or, in the case that residents complain, a cut and cover tunnel can still be substituted. Therefore, I propose this:

Richmond Underground without NCC Lands, Confederation Line Western Extension

Having cross-checked with the NCC lands map (PDF), I don't think any part of this runs through a substantial chunk of their lands, so they will have no say. Instead, there's just individual landowners / stratas to deal with, but that will probably be many times easier.

In addition to this, I think that this proposal allows for new developments and an increase of density on both sides of the corridor, rather than having one side of it be blocked off by parkland or the river. This in itself should translate to a few thousand more potential commuters and associated revenues for the city.

That "median" is a converted streetcar path, but is now a linear park and when there was discussion of the LRT being even next to the park, there was huge opposition.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

The Tory candidate in Ottawa South is making fearmongering over Ottawans taxpayer money being used for Toronto transit one of the centerpieces of his campaign. A funding announcement for any new transit project in Ottawa, regardless of which riding its in, would head him off. Conversely, if the City demanded funding now and the province didn't give it, it would give him ammo which the Liberals don't want. Remember that even the Tories are arguing we need more transit.

What I'm saying is that the City should demand funding NOW at a time when it would be very politically awkward for Wynne to say no.

I partially agree with your sentiment, but the thing is, we don't know the true cost of the western extension yet so we might actually end up being short changed if we ask to early.

Also, I can't think of any other shovel ready transit projects.

[McC]

I think gjhall meant to say "but is NOW a linear park" in response to Allan.

[gjhall]

Originally Posted by McC

I think gjhall meant to say "but is NOW a linear park" in response to Allan.

Woops, yes! Now corrected.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

The Tory candidate in Ottawa South is making fearmongering over Ottawans taxpayer money being used for Toronto transit one of the centerpieces of his campaign. A funding announcement for any new transit project in Ottawa, regardless of which riding its in, would head him off. Conversely, if the City demanded funding now and the province didn't give it, it would give him ammo which the Liberals don't want. Remember that even the Tories are arguing we need more transit.

What I'm saying is that the City should demand funding NOW at a time when it would be very politically awkward for Wynne to say no.

We can have all the Tory double speak that we want, but their obsession with tax cuts, and spending cuts and lack of desire to use other funding mechanisms to fund rapid transit makes the Tory argument for more transit very hollow. These are expensive projects and austerity, which is the central platform of the Tories will quickly override the claim that they support more transit.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I partially agree with your sentiment, but the thing is, we don't know the true cost of the western extension yet so we might actually end up being short changed if we ask to early.

Also, I can't think of any other shovel ready transit projects.

Which is why the ask shouldn't be a dollar amount. It should be a formula. If the city is prepared to spend X on a transit project, it should be predictable that the province and feds will contribute P(X) and F(X) towards that project.

There's also the chicken-and-egg problem of funding for "shovel-ready" projects. Projects can't get to the "shovel-ready" stage until the city knows whether, and how much, upper-tier goverment funding contributions will be available. If those contributions aren't available until the projec is "shovel-ready", then transit development inertia.

Ottawa, and other major cities in Ontario and Canada, can't build transit systems this way.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Four of the LRT stations on the current project - Hurdman, St-Laurent, Train Thing, and Cyrville - are in the riding of Ottawa South.

Instant correction: Cyrville is outside Ottawa South by a few tens of meters.

Yes on the very northern periphery, and separated by a large industrial area from where the voters actually live. For the most part, Ottawa South residents will receive minimal benefit from the Confederation Line. I do realize that my comment was being a bit contrary and I also realize that we do need to move forward. I just don't see any option that will leverage more provincially funded transit spending in Ottawa at the moment. Certainly the Tory alternative is less transit friendly.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Which is why the ask shouldn't be a dollar amount. It should be a formula. If the city is prepared to spend X on a transit project, it should be predictable that the province and feds will contribute P(X) and F(X) towards that project.

There's also the chicken-and-egg problem of funding for "shovel-ready" projects. Projects can't get to the "shovel-ready" stage until the city knows whether, and how much, upper-tier goverment funding contributions will be available. If those contributions aren't available until the projec is "shovel-ready", then transit development inertia.

Ottawa, and other major cities in Ontario and Canada, can't build transit systems this way.

I wish it were that simple.

But we could maybe use the by-elections to further put pressure on the Province to allow 2 gambling sites in Ottawa or, maybe we should ask for funding for the Arts Court project.

[lrt's friend]

Flexible BRT is an oxymoron.

Bus transit is either flexible (buses can jump on an off the system, convert from "rapid" to "local" mode with ease, etc.), or it is rapid.

But it is not simultaneously both.

Flexible bus transit is not rapid.

Rapid bus transit is not flexible.

I do not see the logic in any of this. The only issue that we have with our BRT is that it has reached capacity downtown. Otherwise, it has accomplished what it set out to do, that is to make transit more attractive to those living in the suburbs.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

That's in no small measure thanks to the small-c conservative-minded voters in Ottawa South who helped set transit back in Ottawa by decades, by consistently voting for bus crappid transit promoters and voting for Larry O'Brien.

Ottawans are cheap, small-minded bastards, and Ottawa South are among the cheapest and most small-minded of all.

Good grief. Ottawa South residents voted consistently for councillors and a MLA that supported rail transit.

The Larry O'Brien vote was city wide based on some nonsense that he could reign in spending at city hall, eliminate tax increases and maintain services.

Don't put the blame on us.

Now tell us how you feel about John Baird? He is not from Ottawa South. He was behind the 2006 debacle that flushed $100 million down the toilet.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I do not see the logic in any of this. The only issue that we have with our BRT is that it has reached capacity downtown. Otherwise, it has accomplished what it set out to do, that is to make transit more attractive to those living in the suburbs.

If we had three cross town bus lines using articulated vehicles every 30 seconds as opposed to a miss mash of 40-50+ routes using standard, articulated and double deckers, the system would a little more efficient. We would still need the rail tunnel, but the wait would be a little more bearable.