[green22]

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=5d76b73a-8af8-4c34-ad48-2d3b404e9fab&k=71797

Transportation report: Build a tunnel, use diesel-hybrid trains by 2017



Long awaited mayor's task force submits report outlining $900M rail plan

Jake Rupert, The Ottawa Citizen

Published: Wednesday, June 06, 2007

The long-awaited report on the future of transit in Ottawa was tabled Wednesday morning, calling for a downtown tunnel and a 30-year plan to expand commuter-rail travel throughout Eastern Ontario.



Mayor Larry O'Brien's task force on light rail, led by former federal transportation minister David Collenette, recommends phasing in a dedicated light-rail network, mainly on existing rights of way, powered by diesel-electric hybrid vehicles.



By 2014, it calls for a tunnel to be built downtown and a rejuvenation of the old train station; by 2017, the main routes downtown from the east and west should go through the Via station from the east, and roughly Bank and Walkley from the west, the report says.



The task force estimated that its proposals be implemented by 2017 and the complete system, including the tunnel, would cost roughly $900 million.



This is about the same cost of phase one of what was supposed to be a multi-phase electric light-rail system that city council rejected earlier this year.



The task force estimates a tunnel of three kilometres would be needed from Lebreton Flats to the University of Ottawa at a cost of roughly $143 million per kilometre.



The plan will now be incorporated into the city's current review and revamping of its long-term transit plan, a process that started earlier this year when council rejected the earlier plan.



City council is scheduled to decide on a new course of action for mass transit by the fall of 2008.

-------
Today you can access the maps from the article. Looking at the 2010 plan (what has the best chance of being built) this plan seems to have been designed by a highway rather than transit planner. The first major problem is that the two terminals are Bayview and Via station, meaning that over 90% of commuters will need to transfer to buses to get where they are going. The second problem is that they have designed this as a commuter system, with terminuses proposed at Smith Falls, Earl Armstrong and Alexandria.

While developers may be happy to have trains expressing around (now) low to no-density areas I expect that this lrt system will have to adopt GO's frequencies and price structures to avoid huge financial losses. Transit needs to continually pick up and drop off customers to keep the fares down. Commuter rail generally takes 30 to 60 minutes to fill up the car (once) but charges users higher prices to make up for it. The proposed lines remind me of Baltimore's unsuccessful combination of a local central lrt combined with commuter like serice in the suburbs, but unlike in Baltimore these commuters are expected to transfer to the bus. For the most part these lines fail the test of taking people from origins to destinations.

 

[ShonTron]

Hey Green22 - good to have you back.

Here's the link www.moving-ottawa.ca

I need a closer look before I comment too much, but I looked at the maps, and I must say, this is near useless for most existing transit users. A commuter train to Alexandria in three years? A nexus in the middle of bureaucatic nowhere (Confederation). I'd say it was developed by highway planners and rail foamers.

They have the whole idea of bus transfers all wrong - the buses are supposed to be the feeders, but this makes the rail lines feeders to the bus. Something that could be material for Monty Python.

I really still can't believe the deep-six of the original, superior LRT plan (see my earlier rants against supposed transit advocates like David Jeanes that helped derail the line).

 

[simply Dan]

http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2007/06/06/siemens-lawsuit-070605.html

Siemens sues for $175M over Ottawa's cancelled LRT

The City of Ottawa faces a $175-million lawsuit from the companies contracted to build the north-south light rail line that city council cancelled in December.

Siemens Canada, PCL Constructors and Ottawa LRT Corp. filed the lawsuit late Tuesday afternoon seeking damages from the cancellation of the $778-million contract they were awarded last July, the City of Ottawa confirmed Wednesday.

"Right now, we're leaving it with the city solicitor," said Mike Patton, spokesman for Mayor Larry O'Brien.

The lawsuit came less than 24 hours before the mayor's task force on transportation was to release its new transit plan for the region. O'Brien assembled the task force just after the light rail contract was cancelled.

"The timing is interesting," said Coun. Steve Desroches on CBC's Ottawa Morning on Wednesday, but he added that it should not impede the city's future transit planning. "Lawsuit or not, we've got to get to work and start implementing solutions."

Desroches said councillors were not surprised by the lawsuit and are being briefed on its implications.

The city council led by former mayor Bob Chiarelli approved the contract with Siemens-PCL/Dufferin to design, build and maintain an electric light rail line running from Barrhaven to the University of Ottawa. The federal and provincial governments had each committed $200 million to the plan.

In December, a newly elected city council led by Mayor Larry O'Brien cancelled the contract.

In February, Siemens offered to settle out of court for $175 million or revive the original plan for $70 million. The city declined.

One month earlier, O'Brien assembled his task force on transportation, led by former transport minister David Collenette. It released its recommended light rail plan Wednesday morning.

 

[green22]

New lrt plan Ottawa

"One month earlier, O'Brien assembled his task force on transportation, led by former transport minister David Collenette."

Who would hire Collenette considering his track record. Blue $22,
Perhaps we will get SNC lavelin to build it and lead the EA.

 

[ShonTron]

LOL.

Of course David Jeanes also supports Blue 22.
Harry Gow, another T2000 Ottawa member, and Jeanes' predessor was on the panel that put this ridiculous plan together.

Terrible, just terrible. It is obvious that the plan is to maintain the Transitway bus network given the concept shown (as if we'll get 2017 Phase III implemented with its token reference to the main transitway corridor).

 

[AnarchoSocialist]

The plan itself is total garbage. I could comment at length about everything that is wrong with it, but it should be obvious why this plan is a total failure.

The good thing about all this is that this process and this task force mean almost nothing. What they have developed is simply a recommendation and nothing else. It still has to be incorporated into the official transportation plan which means that qualified planners who actually understand all the details of creating an LRT network, and useful transit network as a whole, will be allowed to do there job eventually.

And this also has to meet council approval, which means that it has to be agreed upon by the public. Luckily most of the public tends to look at these plans in a fairly practical way and will ask questions about how the system will function and make travel better for them on a daily basis. Once the public starts to coment on this plan, it will fail, as it should because it is a plan that does a terrible job serving the public.

As I have said before, there is no need to worry about David Jeanes. He is irrelevant. It doesn't matter what pretty lines he puts on a map, in the end it is the public at large who will make the final decision and since this plan obviously does not meet the task of serving the public, it, and his ideas, will properly fade away (with the exception of a few obvious elements such as a downtown tunnel).

 

[Hydrogen]

Completion by 2014 means there is plenty of time to cancel this sucker.

 

[Ummagumma66]

if its completed its going to be an excellent addition to Ottawa's transit system.

 

[EnviroTO]

Some of the proposed stations proposed even in the early stages are surrounded by greenfields. The plan seems pretty far fetched considering the speed by which they expect to roll it out and the fact that currently there is only the O-Train running a very short route on a single track with passing tracks at stations.

 

[AnarchoSocialist]

^The plan is by and large total nonsense. Normally I would just let something like this pass by but after reading through it further and looking at the plan I've decided to waste an evening sending my long list of comments off to city hall and perhaps even the Citizen (futile yes but at least I will feel better trying).

I might be a strong advocate for public transit, and especially rail transit, but Seans reference too Monty Python could not be more fitting for this whole affair (just imagine the architect sketch with the combustible building, replaced by a model railroad).

Edit: So after wasting some of my evening I put together just a few of my thoughts on the plan. I figured I might as well post them here as well as sending them off to the city. I could have gone on much longer but this seems to at least get across my main points.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The release of Moving Ottawa; The Mayor of Ottawa's Task Force On Transportation final report is something I find to be of great interest. While I reside in Gatineau, I work and study in Ottawa and as such have a strong interest in the health and future of both cities. I am also a strong advocate of public transit, sustainable transportation solutions, and sustainable development of city as a whole. It is this interest and an academic background in urban and transportation issues that has made the release of this report all the more disappointing.

There are three aspects of the report that I think are worth discussing. The first deals with the general processes and mandate of the task force. The second focuses on the positive aspects of the plan, since there are some too be found, and the third looks at just some of the questions and concerns the plan raises.

The Process

While I understand that a limited amount of time meant that the report could not go into great depth in a number of issues there were many aspects of the report that did in fact suffer because of lack of detail. In particular the discussion on the specifics of the various LRT lines, where they would be located, and most importantly, the cost of the project. Without many of the specifics it becomes more difficult to make a fair judgment and assessment on the recommendations. As such, I find it the attention and credibility given to the report to be somewhat unwarranted.

This leads to my second concern which is public consultation. In the report the task forces specifically makes a point in saying that “Meaningful participation is based on an inclusive process, where input can actually influence or impact a decision, and where the outcome is not predetermined” (p. 64). But this report seems to do just that. With such a short time frame for the report public consultation has been greatly limited, and yet, it seems as though this report is being presented as a final recommendation. I do hope this is not the case, and that this will be turned over for a full public review and integrated into the Transportation Master Plan through the proper processes and under the guise of planning professionals.

A final aspect of the process that I find to be questionable is the inclusion of plans for jurisdictions and regions which are not part of the City of Ottawa. While from a regional point of view it does make sense to consider the needs and transportation flows from Gatineau or Smiths Falls, these are cities and municipalities which are not under the control of the City of Ottawa and, as such, should not be of concern to this task force. Acknowledging the need to work with other stake holders is important, but unless the are explicitly involved in the planning process (which in the future I hope they will be included and integrated to a greater degree) they should not be included in the plan in any great detail.

What Is Positive About The Plan

It is worth pointing out some of the positive aspects that do exist within the plan. While the plan does have a number of deficiencies that I think are of concern, some aspects of it are an improvement over the previous and failed LRT.

1 – Recommending electrification – Electrification is something I am strongly in favour of and find it encouraging to see that the report does indicate that this should be undertaken as quickly as possible wherever possible. The use of bimodal trains is also a reasonable solution for lines that may have limited service (such as those extending into rural areas). Though I do support and believe electrification should be the rule and not an exception.

2 – The Downtown Tunnel – This addresses one of the primary failings of the previous plan and as such I am glad to see the idea of a tunnel being recommended. The report has made a reasonable case as too why this is the best solution.

3 – Union Station – Using Union Station for rail service once again is a wonderful idea. Its location is ideal for many reasons and it would certainly be a great boost to that neighborhood to have it being used on a daily basis.

4 – Integration with VIA – One of the current aspects of the transit network I find to be frustrating are the poor connections with VIA Rail. Using Ottawa Station as a transit hub would not only allow the station to be used to a much greater degree but also benefit VIA by providing better access and making its service more attractive. The same is true of integrating Barrhaven Station with the LRT network.

Questions and Concerns

There are a number of aspects of the plan that raise questions and concerns. These are a few of what I would consider to the most important concerns.

1 – The Lack Of Focus On Transit Within The Greenbelt – The plan has eliminated the Montreal Road and Carling Avenue corridors and even the existing Transitway is not addressed until the end of the 30 year planning period. I find this too be very troubling as providing service to suburban and rural regions seems to contradict the goals of smart growth in the region. While there is a need to offer better public transit service in the form of LRT to outlying neighborhoods and regions, the almost total disregard for inner city transit is unacceptable.

2 – Missing an Opportunity to Move VIA Rail Downtown – In the report there is an historical overview of rail service in Ottawa that laments the lose of a downtown station by stating “closure of the historic Union Station denied Ottawa the opportunity, enjoyed by cities like Montreal, Toronto, New York, Boston and Chicago, to have a vibrant downtown transportation hub. The new station at Alta Vista has for many years discouraged rail use because it is in an industrial area a number of kilometres from the core.” (11) The plan also talks about reinstating Union Station as a rail station for the LRT network and the construction of a tunnel downtown.

Yet the idea of also using the opportunity to accommodate VIA into these plans and reintroducing inter-city service to downtown Ottawa seems to have been totally overlooked. Perhaps this was in part due to the limited time given to the task force but it seems rather obvious that this is an idea that should be explored given that it would an ideal opportunity for VIA as well as Ottawa and could be done in partnership with each other. I know there are a number of issues that would have to be resolved but the total omission of the idea is rather surprising.

3 – The Current Transitway – Perhaps again due to time constraints a more detailed and thorough investigation into the current Transitway and conversion could not be done which is why the disregard towards upgrading the current portions has been left to the end of the 30 year plan. The original intention of these routes was too upgrade them to LRT when demand was sufficient. It is rather surprising that a portion of the system with proven demand is virtually ignored by the plan. I can understand the need to ensure that service disruptions are kept to a minimum during conversion, though I am not convinced that the only way too do this is by constructing a large scale, alternate network first. It really seems that a more detailed investigation into converting existing BRTs into LRTs is warranted as it seems likely that workable solutions that would minimize service disruptions would exist.

4 – The Current O-Train – This is also another issue that really seems to warrant more investigation. While I understand that service disruptions should be kept to a minimal, it seems somewhat short sighted to not simply upgrade what is to be an integral part of the network properly from the start instead of in a piecemeal approach. While stopping service is never ideal, it seems a small price to pay to shut down the current O-Train for perhaps a number of months to properly upgrade the line before the system becomes so large and busy that upgrading becomes much more difficult.

5 – Lack Of Research and Data – The plan that has been assembled fails to support many of its proposed routes with sufficient data. While it refers to a telephone survey, which is obviously useful, many of the routes seem to be chosen simply because tracks are already there as opposed to being backed up by ridership estimates and detailed studies. This would not be as much of a problem if the report was a rather lose set of recommendations on which to build, but that it has built a rather ambitious network without much support is of concern.

6 – Disregard for the Previous Plan – While the previous plan did have its flaws (primarily the downtown portion) a great deal of research and work by professionals did go into it. As well there was a good deal of public consultation done. But this plan seems to virtually ignore all the work that was previously done. It is very unfortunate that this is the case as the previous was very detailed, well researched and had many positive aspects about it that should still be integrated into a new LRT plan. Or perhaps better yet, the original plan should be used as the template with some of the Task Forces recommendations built into it.

Summary

While this plan does have some positive aspects, many of those aspects could have easily been integrated into the previous plan, which was in a number of ways superior. While I do support the expansion of LRT in Ottawa, I do not support the recommendations of the Task Force. While time for producing the report may have been limited, the task force should have then reduced it scope to produce a more detailed and useful plan instead of a rather ambitious vision which lacks support and leaves many questions and concerns. The issues I have raised are only the most obvious ones and there are far more that could be added to the list. I do hope that this report will be subjected to full public scrutiny and extensive research undertaken by a group of planning professionals and in conjunction with all the stakeholders in the region to produce a detailed and comprehensive final report. The Task Forces plan does offer some useful and interesting recommendations but should not serve as the basis for an LRT network master plan.

 

[Hydrogen]

Integration with VIA

The Transitway passes right in front of the main train station. Fallowfield is also fed by a Transitway line as well.

 

[AnarchoSocialist]

^Yes they have service, and for Fallowfield it is probably adequate. But for Ottawa Station you have one route serving it (there is a second route but I have never seen one if its buses at that stop yet). There is little you can do about it at the moment just because of how the transitway is designed, but, if they are going to expand transit and they can use Ottawa Station as an important hub of the LRT network and create a busy and efficient intermodal station (which they can) then it should be done and would do a lot to make the station more accessible and useful.

 

[green22]

Ottawa lrt

Baltimore's Central Light Rail Line -- Second Time A Charm?
Maryland | Transportation
Posted by: David Gest
Thanks to: C. P. Zilliacus

28 February 2006 - 8:00am
Nearly all of the Maryland Transit Administration's Central Light Rail Line is now double tracked -- at long last.

"Baltimore's Central Light Rail Line is getting its second chance to win the hearts of commuters."

"The light rail will assume its full role in the region's transportation network tomorrow as the 14-year-old transit system operates for the first time as a two-track line for virtually all its route from Hunt Valley to Anne Arundel County."

"The renovation will increase the system's capacity and eliminate the delays caused by single-track bottlenecks."

"Still up in the air is whether double-tracking is the charm that will make Baltimore finally embrace light rail - a system that critics contend was built 'on the cheap' -- with the same fervor that such cities as Denver and Portland, Ore., have. At station after station along its route, abundant empty parking spaces in free lots tell a story of an underused transit resource."

"But aboard a near-empty light rail train heading south from Timonium last week, lawyer Paul Hazlehurst said the double-tracking project is already paying big dividends in terms of reliability. He said he used to have to wait 20 to 30 minutes for a train. But no more."

Source: Baltimore Sun, Feb 25, 2006
Full Story: Light rail back on tracks
http://www.planetizen.com/node/18920

Like Ottawa Baltimore used existing rights-of-ways and one-track lines to distant sprawl because it was a cheap way to build a big system. Unfortunately an expensive one to operate, with few benefits, but that will be the next politicians problem. Ottawa's system has many kilometres running through empty areas, less stations, more single tracking, bus connections and diesel operation. Who needs density around the stations when the transit agency can subsidize free parking lots next to the stations?

If anyone should be aware of the problems of building a system with the hopes of upgrading it later it should be Ottawa. Despite supposedly building the Ottawa busway to be upgraded to lrt, it reached levels (capacity) where this made sense long ago and this plan predictabley ducks the major delays and costs associated with conversion and instead creates more conversion headaches for the future.
Wasn't the single track diesel pilot project also supposed to be upgraded (rather than perpetuated as this proposes?). Politics and transit don't always mix well.

 

[AnarchoSocialist]

Wasn't the single track diesel pilot project also supposed to be upgraded (rather than perpetuated as this proposes?)

Yes it was. The project was supposed to last for two years after which point if what was deemed successful it would be upgraded. The actual outcome is obviously well known.

I used to think that building a project a portion of the way in the hopes that its success would bring about further upgrades was a good idea. After seeing what has happened in Ottawa as well as other cities, I now see that idea is a total failure and almost never brings about pressure to expand. If you are going to develop a project, it should be done right from the start. That is one of the biggest problems with the task forces plan, it is an incredible collection of mediocre and incomplete lines, which, is a disaster in the making.

 

[ShonTron]

The project was supposed to last for two years after which point if what was deemed successful it would be upgraded.

There was one upgrade - the continious welded rail that allows the O-Train to have 15 minute headways instead of 20 minutes, and somewhat faster service. Wasn't this done about 2 years in?