HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum.

Since 1999, SkyscraperPage.com's forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web.  The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics.  SkyscraperPage.com also features unique skyscraper diagrams, a database of construction activity, and publishes popular skyscraper posters.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > SSP: Local Ottawa-Gatineau > Transportation

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #4641  
Old Posted: Jun 28, 2012, 3:31 PM
Kitchissippi Kitchissippi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 1,690
Quote:
Originally Posted by KHOOLE View Post
No need for a tunnel downtown. A Carling line connecting with the Transitway at Lincoln Fields and the O-Train at Preston will be more functional and will increase ridership while there is no guarantee that a Blair Rd to Tunney's Pasture LRT using established bus lines and building a downtown tunnel will increase ridership by even one person! You don't build a bigger store if you have no idea if your sales will even increase!

Why so much emphasis with Tunney's Pasture? There may be no one working there in a few years. It was built in 1968 and many buildings are decrepit and are up for major repairs or demolition.

Better to have a Carling line that will go to the old Nortel campus where 10,000+ National Defense employees will find themselves in the near future.

A LRT tunnel through the downtown core will be useful for a few hours in the morning and afternoon Monday to Friday and be absolutely useless in the evenings and on weekends, just like the Sparks Street Mall.

Does the City have a business plan for the LRT tunnel? How long will it take to break even or make a profit? Probably never! Just like the baseball stadium or the municipal golf course or riding school. Lansdowne Park was profitable until the City took the management away from CCEA.

The City is a municipality created to provide sevices to its residents. The City is not a business and it has never proven itself to have business acumen.
Good Grief, where have you been hiding all these years. There is a business case for the DOTT, it's all about significant operating cost reduction. Drivers salaries and fuel and maintenance costs for individual buses will continue to rise and possibly double in 15 years or so while investment in LRT infrastructure will be amortized at a stable rate. The analogy of the present situation is like opting to stay at a hotel for $150 a night because the thought of shelling out $300,000 for a house seems exorbitant.

Why are you spreading such falsehoods such as building a downtown tunnel will not increase ridership by even one person — have you done a business plan yourself that proves this? While the tunnel itself won't add ridership, you can't increase ridership without increasing capacity downtown, so what's the logical way forward?

Quote:
Forget the tunnel and put taxpayers money into projects like a Carling line that taxpayers will use and appreciate 24/7 all year round. Hell, it might even turn a profit for OC Transpo!
I live not too far from Carling Avenue and I must have been missing out on the legendary winter nightlife there!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4642  
Old Posted: Jun 28, 2012, 5:25 PM
Acajack Acajack is offline
Libre penseur
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Ottawa Rive-Gauche
Posts: 7,596
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kitchissippi View Post


I live not too far from Carling Avenue and I must have been missing out on the legendary winter nightlife there!
What time is closing time at Monkey Joe's and the Lucky Key anyway?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4643  
Old Posted: Jun 28, 2012, 5:52 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 1,103
Quote:
Originally Posted by KHOOLE View Post
There are not that many important cross-road intersections along Carling Ave and when there are, such as at Woodroffe or Holland, why not "cut and cover" for the LRT to go through.

Also, a lot of people shop and work at Carlingwood and Westgate areas as well as having to work or being patients and visitors at the Royal Hosp and the Ottawa Civic Hosp. There would be a greater opportunity to revitalize Carling with more stores and residential high rises, such as SOHO Italia and others.

Morever, why does it have to be a fast LRT train along Carling or any other built-up areas? Speed should be for transporting passengers across the Green Belt but built up areas should have stops every 500 meters to be serviceable to passengers and increase ridership. This is Canada and we have foul weather, rain and snow probably half of the time throughout the year. Nobody wants to walk a Km in freezing rain to get to work so they will keep on using their cars.

No need for a tunnel downtown. A Carling line connecting with the Transitway at Lincoln Fields and the O-Train at Preston will be more functional and will increase ridership while there is no guarantee that a Blair Rd to Tunney's Pasture LRT using established bus lines and building a downtown tunnel will increase ridership by even one person! You don't build a bigger store if you have no idea if your sales will even increase!

Why so much emphasis with Tunney's Pasture? There may be no one working there in a few years. It was built in 1968 and many buildings are decrepit and are up for major repairs or demolition.

Better to have a Carling line that will go to the old Nortel campus where 10,000+ National Defense employees will find themselves in the near future.

A LRT tunnel through the downtown core will be useful for a few hours in the morning and afternoon Monday to Friday and be absolutely useless in the evenings and on weekends, just like the Sparks Street Mall.

Does the City have a business plan for the LRT tunnel? How long will it take to break even or make a profit? Probably never! Just like the baseball stadium or the municipal golf course or riding school. Lansdowne Park was profitable until the City took the management away from CCEA.

The City is a municipality created to provide sevices to its residents. The City is not a business and it has never proven itself to have business acumen.

Forget the tunnel and put taxpayers money into projects like a Carling line that taxpayers will use and appreciate 24/7 all year round. Hell, it might even turn a profit for OC Transpo!
As much as I am not a fan of Mega Huge Ottawa, it is the reality and we have to serve everyone from city to suburbs to rural. In the case of this LRT, it is designed to (eventually) bring people from the suburbs to downtown as fast as possible while still giving the city some service.

The LRT isn’t as much about increasing ridership as decreasing operating cost and greatly increasing capacity (from 10000 phpd BRT to 40000 phpd with 150 meter LRT platforms) to serve the suburbs for the next 50-100 years.

Why so much emphasis with Tunney's Pasture you ask? No more jobs within the next few years you say? Even if they decide to demolish most of Tunney’s, it will be redeveloped as mixed use residential/office/retail, therefore ridership is guaranteed for the long run, not to mention significant development on Parkdale and Holland

As for the old Nortel campus, it will likely be served within 20 years.

A LRT tunnel through the downtown core will be useful for a few hours? Ever been to the By Ward Market? I’m pretty sure it’s bustling til’ 2 am.

And as Kitchissippi said; what nightlife on Carling?

And for everyone obsessed with streetcars;
a.they don’t have much more capacity than buses
b. we had streetcars, we removed em’ in 58’
c. time to move on; if we build something, it should be subways (after the lrt is completed)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4644  
Old Posted: Jun 28, 2012, 6:43 PM
MountainView MountainView is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
What time is closing time at Monkey Joe's and the Lucky Key anyway?
Lucky Key closed down last year and the building itself was torn down prior to Christmas 2011 ... used to be one of my favourite Chinese restaurants. I've driven by Monkey Joe's around midnight many times and there isn't a car in sight.... Carling Night Life = nonexistent. I was even surprised to see barely a sole at the Boston Pizza beside the CT during the Stanley Cup Playoffs; I was there 3 times throughout the playoffs and it was almost empty after 11/11:30pm.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4645  
Old Posted: Jun 29, 2012, 12:58 AM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 6,033
Benefits Case
http://www.ottawalightrail.ca/en/benefits

FWIW the predicted ridership increase is 9% (on top of reduced cost and time etc savings)

Big OBJ story about LRT and development
http://obj.newspaperdirect.com/epaper/viewer.aspx
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4646  
Old Posted: Jun 29, 2012, 1:11 AM
Capital Shaun Capital Shaun is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by McC View Post
It's been like that for at least a decade.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4647  
Old Posted: Jun 29, 2012, 5:35 AM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,652
Quote:
on top of reduced cost and time etc savings
I have always found that the time saving argument has been presented in a misleading way. It was always based on eliminating the worst case scenario rather than normal travel times. It is also based on excessive bus congestion becoming the norm, which is fair enough. However, it has never meant that your 45 minute trip in 2012 will become 30 minutes in 2018. I believe we are building false expectations and we are trying to deflect potential criticism. However, when the 15 minute time savings do not become a reality, there is the potential for a significant negative reaction from transit riders.

I also remember performing a calculation that revealed that the total minutes saved actually only amounted to a 1 minute saving per passenger trip. A bit of a discrepancy, isn't it?

Numbers often can be easily manipulated to suggest something more positive than reality.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4648  
Old Posted: Jun 29, 2012, 2:13 PM
McC's Avatar
McC McC is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,356
I think making trip times reliable to within a few seconds, vs. situation today where worst case scenarios happen fairly frequently on peak (i.e., moving from say a 30-45 highly variable commute time to a 36.5 minute commute 99% of the time), is a big time savings, IMO.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4649  
Old Posted: Jun 29, 2012, 3:23 PM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by McC View Post
I think making trip times reliable to within a few seconds, vs. situation today where worst case scenarios happen fairly frequently on peak (i.e., moving from say a 30-45 highly variable commute time to a 36.5 minute commute 99% of the time), is a big time savings, IMO.
I think there is merit in that but to suggest a 15 minute time saving is really being dishonest. I would rather see it put into terms of more consistent and reliable trip times and eliminating expected future delays. I am sure that a good sales pitch can be prepared base on that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4650  
Old Posted: Jun 29, 2012, 3:53 PM
McC's Avatar
McC McC is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,356
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrt's friend View Post
I think there is merit in that but to suggest a 15 minute time saving is really being dishonest. I would rather see it put into terms of more consistent and reliable trip times and eliminating expected future delays. I am sure that a good sales pitch can be prepared base on that.
One more thing to add to the list of messages that SHOULD be in the damn communications strategy for this thing:
- NEED: system is beyond capacity in the core and the operating costs of all of these buses is quickly trending to budget-breaking unsustainability
- Investment will reduce operating costs (even more if it's driverless MetrO!)
- Investment will increase reliability, especially on peak. Even if the average trip time will be a little longer, this will ALWAYS be your trip time: on time no matter what the conditions (weather, buildings shedding glass panes, Bell Canada digging up Slater, etc.)!
- don't call it commuter rail (maybe call it MetrO if in favour trench/cutncover?)
- call it Richmond Rd, not Richmond/Byron, don't reference the Linear Park
- Richmond Rd is also a "commercial corridor" and "where people live"
- Well-located stations are a benefit to the system, not a cost, or time waster
others?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4651  
Old Posted: Jun 29, 2012, 4:35 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 1,103
Quote:
Originally Posted by McC View Post
One more thing to add to the list of messages that SHOULD be in the damn communications strategy for this thing:
- NEED: system is beyond capacity in the core and the operating costs of all of these buses is quickly trending to budget-breaking unsustainability
- Investment will reduce operating costs (even more if it's driverless MetrO!)
- Investment will increase reliability, especially on peak. Even if the average trip time will be a little longer, this will ALWAYS be your trip time: on time no matter what the conditions (weather, buildings shedding glass panes, Bell Canada digging up Slater, etc.)!
- don't call it commuter rail (maybe call it MetrO if in favour trench/cutncover?)
- call it Richmond Rd, not Richmond/Byron, don't reference the Linear Park
- Richmond Rd is also a "commercial corridor" and "where people live"
- Well-located stations are a benefit to the system, not a cost, or time waster
others?
City must specify and emphasise;

-Intensification will go around stations, NOT the whole track (Preston won't end up as Queen St cannyon 2.0)
-Intensification will stay on main roads; it will not spill over into established post-war suburbs (McKellar/Highland Park won't be destroyed)
-Trains aren't just "passing thru" the old west end, they will actually stop and serve it for the first time since the 50's

Last edited by J.OT13; Jun 29, 2012 at 4:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4652  
Old Posted: Jun 30, 2012, 2:32 AM
Cre47's Avatar
Cre47 Cre47 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Gatineau, QC
Posts: 1,541
Rapibus update: They have started to build the structure for Montclair Station (I think it is also known as The Galeries de Hull Station)
__________________
"However, the Leafs have not won the Cup since 1967, giving them the longest-active Cup drought in the NHL, and thus are the only Original Six team that has not won the Cup since the 1967 NHL expansion." Favorite phrase on the Toronto Maple Leafs Wikipedia page.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4653  
Old Posted: Jun 30, 2012, 3:28 AM
Uhuniau Uhuniau is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capital Shaun View Post
It's been like that for at least a decade.
There have been bus lineups like that since I first visited Ottawa in the late 1980s... 88 or 89. The year I visited relatives and was astonished to find that Ottawa, the nation's capital, instead of having a subway, had... this crap.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4654  
Old Posted: Jun 30, 2012, 4:28 AM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,652
Quote:
this crap.
This crap has been so rotten that it has produced the highest ridership figures of any similar sized city in North America. Something has been done right. And we better be careful that our 'improvements' actually improve transit.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4655  
Old Posted: Jun 30, 2012, 2:49 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 1,103
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrt's friend View Post
This crap has been so rotten that it has produced the highest ridership figures of any similar sized city in North America. Something has been done right. And we better be careful that our 'improvements' actually improve transit.
You should change your name to BRT's freind.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4656  
Old Posted: Jun 30, 2012, 2:55 PM
d_jeffrey d_jeffrey is offline
Quartier International
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrt's friend View Post
This crap has been so rotten that it has produced the highest ridership figures of any similar sized city in North America. Something has been done right. And we better be careful that our 'improvements' actually improve transit.
You're implying domething that hasn't been proven. Ridership in Canada is high no matter what the means of transportation.
__________________
If only "common sense" people had any.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4657  
Old Posted: Jun 30, 2012, 7:38 PM
Uhuniau Uhuniau is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,289
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrt's friend View Post
This crap has been so rotten that it has produced the highest ridership figures of any similar sized city in North America. Something has been done right. And we better be careful that our 'improvements' actually improve transit.
Ottawa has achieved that despite Bus Crappid Transit, not because of it. If people didn't have to contend with 45-60 minute delays because it's snowing too much, or raining, or too sunny, ridership would likely be even higher.

I.e., if the rapid transit system had been rail-based from the start.

Bus Crappid Transit is the god that failed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4658  
Old Posted: Jul 1, 2012, 1:44 AM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by d_jeffrey View Post
You're implying domething that hasn't been proven. Ridership in Canada is high no matter what the means of transportation.
What did I imply? Someone said that our Transitways are crap. I disagreed. After all, the motivation for LRT and the tunnel is that BRT has become too successful.

So why do I get the sarcastic responses? I favour building LRT. In fact, I have complained that the current plan is too much about buses. I want to build rapid transit once as LRT and forget about the process of building Transitways and do conversions later.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4659  
Old Posted: Jul 1, 2012, 2:01 AM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,652
Quote:
Ottawa has achieved that despite Bus Crappid Transit, not because of it. If people didn't have to contend with 45-60 minute delays because it's snowing too much, or raining, or too sunny, ridership would likely be even higher.

I.e., if the rapid transit system had been rail-based from the start.

Bus Crappid Transit is the god that failed.
What nonsense. Ottawa has achieved higher transit modal share than Calgary with the most successful LRT network on the continent and planning that concentrates employment in downtown Calgary. Ottawa did not have the money, population or the tax base to build LRT in the 1980s. We had the courage to do something innovative when LRT was unaffordable. And why do we not have LRT already? Because we couldn't make up our minds how we wanted to do it for the last 15 years. We get what we deserve.

I highly doubt LRT would have achieved higher ridership simply because, for the money that was available, it would have not reached the suburbs and it would be facing the same capacity crunch in downtown. There seems to be this belief that triple the funding would have been available in the 1980s and 1990s to build the same amount of track as BRT and a downtown tunnel. This is not a credible assumption. Ottawa did what it could with the money that was available during that era.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4660  
Old Posted: Jul 1, 2012, 4:10 AM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 1,103
BRT was better than nothing and wasn’t a total failure. The problem lies in the patchy way they built the thing as an avoiding technique to dodge criticism and NIMBYism. And now it's biting us in the ass. Case in point;

-Downtown bus tunnel canceled in the early 90s, not sure how it happened,
Closest thing to an explanation we have (right above conclusion);
http://spacingottawa.ca/2010/01/26/t...ottawa-subway/

-Originally, they were supposed to build another BRT tunnel under the Byron strip, but NIMBYism (sound familiar?) and likely financial constraints put it on "hold"; that’s when they started using the Parkway as a "temporary" measure. Well that worked out just fine!

-Lincoln Fields to Pinecrest extension; in the early 90s, they recommended a tunnel, last council (2006-2010) they re-studied (thank you very much for wasting our tax dollars Cullen) and decided they should expropriate Roman Ave instead and now staff realized that the tunnel better suits LRT due to the smoother curves. If they would have built the damn tunnel in the first place, it probably would have been half the price!

If they would have done all of this in the first place, it would have been way cheaper and we probably wouldn’t have to convert to LRT for another decade+. But now, it’s more economical to build these missing links as LRT right off the bat and convert the rest.

And this brings us to why are they still obsessed with building more BRTs in the burbs; if we drop all BRT projects and focus on LRT, we could probably extend it to all suburban town centres.
Reply With Quote
     
     
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > SSP: Local Ottawa-Gatineau > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:52 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.