1311 replies to this topic

[Cats4Hire]

Buses are so much more versatile.

For the initial $2.x billion Ottawa and Canadian taxpayers spent on their first line they could have purchased thousands of buses (literally 8,000 regular buses).

Now their second line has increased in cost by a billion dollars and will land at $3.5 billion or thereabouts. It’s absurd.

but how is Ottawa's current infrastructure for supporting those buses? I have no idea what main street is so I'm not going to bother checking how they have Transit set up but do they have a way for even the 250 to 1. not bunch up 2. not get stuck in traffic or cause traffic jams and 3. be fully supplied with drivers. There's no point in buying a bunch of buses if they have to cancel most the trips due to not enough drivers or if there's a huge line all the way down the main street of buses waiting their turn to get into the stop with space for 3 or 4 (I regularly see buses for Douglas/Fort lined up to or even past Courtney here and I imagine Ottawa already has more routes/frequency than us).

[Victoria Watcher]

Sure for now but in 5 years would it still? I have no idea what Ottawa's situation is so I can't even guess. Also what happens when those 250 buses are all stuck in traffic or there's a line of buses trying to cram into a stop meant for 3? We get that here (especially downtown during rush hour) so I imagine Ottawa has it too.

 

ottawa doesn't have so much traffic jams as it does long distances.    but that's what you use some buses for express runs on the highway with limited stops.  ottawa doesn't have s tight central core like toronto or montreal or even winnipeg has. 

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 15 October 2019 - 07:40 AM.

[Mike K.]

but how is Ottawa's current infrastructure for supporting those buses?

 

Their LRT line runs along what was a dedicated busway. It just replaced buses with rail.

 

So now when a train can't move the whole system shuts down. And that's what has plagued their LRT since it launched last month.

[vortoozo]

Buses are so much more versatile.

 

Busses don't get as many people out of cars as LRT, though.

Look at what happened to Richmond when the Canada Line opened.

Rider projections were continually beat. People actually stopped commuting using their cars.

Add another 2000 busses or whatever and that doesn't mean that people would stop using their cars.

[FogPub]

Alstom is the vehicle supplier, not Bombardier. SNCL is one of the partners in Rideau Transit Group, the consortium in charge of building the LRT Confederation Line. Ellis-Don, ACS and Dragados (the latter two Spanish-based) are the other partners.

 

LRT projects are extremely complicated given their big footprint and the volume of utility re-locations and signalized crossings required. Add in a few tunnels, unexpected geo-tech conditions, and system integration issues, and project costs increase and in-service delays result.

 

Do you have a better solution? Major contractors and engineering firms are now refusing to take on linear projects on a fixed cost basis. If government must share the risks, that means sharing the pain when unforeseen issues arise. Pay now or pay later.

Signalized crossings?

 

Who in their right mind would build an at-grade LRT any more in an urban area?

 

Tunnels and system integration ought to be foreseen at the design stage and factored into the bids.  Unexpected geo-tech conditions?  Given the available modern technology for through-ground scanning and remote sensing, hitting any major geological surprises these days means either a) intentional BS on the part of the builder in order to pad the profits or b) failure of the public agency to conduct proper surveys before opening the bidding. (I think we've seen some of both a) and b) in play on the McKenzie interchange project)

[Mike K.]

In Ottawa's case the buses already ran in a dedicated busway, so a train duplicating that route might actually be more of an inconvenience as it can't leave the tracks to end its route in a half dozen different ways (which means riders must transfer as opposed to catching a bus that exits the busway and heads into their neighbourhood).

 

There are plusses and minuses, for sure.

[vortoozo]

 

 

Who in their right mind would build an at-grade LRT any more in an urban area?

 

 

Seattle?

[laconic]

And an awful lot of places in Europe.

[Mattjvd]

Edmonton?

[Greg]

It's a lot easier to get on and off of street-level transit. 

[Intercontinental]

Kitchener. I’ve heard developers are lining up.

[FogPub]

It's a lot easier to get on and off of street-level transit. 

That's fine for buses and the like; they also tend to have stops every block or two. 

 

With LRT, though, you want off-grade track and relatively infrequent stations, with escalators/elevators at each station to get you to-from street level.   Skytrain.

 

I mean, if we ever get LRT from town to the Swartz Bay ferry dock - elevated above grade all the way -  I could see it only having about 7 or 8 stations in total: in-town terminus (at/near the arena?); Mayfair; Uptown; Royal Oak; Keating; Sidney; ferry dock terminus; with maybe one at Saanichton and a separate spur going to the airport.

 

For vortoozo: the part of the Seattle LRT I recently saw - from U of W terminus to Pioneer Square - is all underground.  I think it comes to the surface somewhere south of the stadiums but I'm not sure if it stays on-grade or is elevated.

[Mike K.]

It’s underground in the busway, but street level north and south of the busway, then elevated near the airport.

At least that’s what I recall. It’s most an at-grade system.

[On the Level]

Ottawa might have it's issues, but Victoria is chopped up by the ocean which makes any corridors much more valuable.  The logistics of creating another artery into town are almost insurmountable, yet here we have one paid for by previous generations.  This might not be the LRT from this thread, but it is available which offloads traffic from all corridors.

 

I think the main issue with the E&N is that it goes to Esquimalt and the Westshore, which are are not attractive areas for  CoV inhabitants.  However it would deal with congestion and the route could be branched and extended to other areas in the CRD.

[Mike K.]

Indeed it would be, but I don’t think View Royal would be particularly happy to have constant trains running through its turf again. They quite like the little trail that’s there now.

[On the Level]

Indeed it would be, but I don’t think View Royal would be particularly happy to have constant trains running through its turf again. They quite like the little trail that’s there now.

 

Which is why they are trying to stop Transit from establishing a Handydart facility in the muni.  Also why Screech choked the Island Highway and created the Concrete Pimple to block a lane of traffic beside Vic General.

 

Also why he tried to create a regional "CRD" controlled transit system.

[On the Level]

 

On Tuesday, a rider pried open closing doors at one station and caused disastrous backups. A repeat performance at two stations on Wednesday led to a similar slowdown.

 

https://www.timescol...elated_articles

[FogPub]

It’s underground in the busway, but street level north and south of the busway, then elevated near the airport.

At least that’s what I recall. It’s most an at-grade system.

Are you referring to Seattle or Ottawa here?

[Torrontes]

With LRT, though, you want off-grade track and relatively infrequent stations, with escalators/elevators at each station to get you to-from street level.   Skytrain.

 

I mean, if we ever get LRT from town to the Swartz Bay ferry dock - elevated above grade all the way -  I could see it only having about 7 or 8 stations in total: in-town terminus (at/near the arena?); Mayfair; Uptown; Royal Oak; Keating; Sidney; ferry dock terminus; with maybe one at Saanichton and a separate spur going to the airport.

 

If we apply generally accepted transit planning terminology, what you are referring to is regional, metro or commuter rail, not LRT.  A light rail line is used to serve a route that has medium capacity needs and that has more frequent service than regional, metro or commuter rail. LRT systems allow more options for passengers because their stops are more frequent than commuter rail systems and they are closer together. There is a significant amount of overlap between tram/streetcar technologies and LRT, and it is common to classify trams/streetcars as a subtype of light rail rather than as a distinct type of transportation. The two general versions are:

1. The traditional type, where the tracks and trains run along the streets and share space with road traffic. Stops tend to be frequent, and little effort is made to set up special stations. Because space is shared, the tracks are usually visually unobtrusive. The new TTC streetcars (Bombardier Flexity) are an example.
2. A more modern variation, where the vehicles tend to run along their own right-of-way and are often separated from road traffic. Stops are generally less frequent, and the passengers are often boarded from a platform. Tracks are highly visible, and in some cases significant effort is expended to keep traffic away through the use of special signalling, and even grade crossings with gate arms. The Region of Waterloo's new ION LRT system (a variant of the Bombardier Flexity) is an example.

Many LRT systems — even fairly old ones — have a combination of the two, with both on-road and off-road sections. In some countries, only the latter is described as light rail. In those places, trams running on mixed right of way are not regarded as light rail, but considered distinctly as streetcars or trams. However, the requirement for saying that a rail line is "separated" can be quite minimal — sometimes just with concrete curbs or "buttons" to discourage automobile drivers from getting onto the tracks.

 

Commuter rail in North America refers to urban passenger train service for local/regional short-distance travel operating between a central city and its suburbs. Such rail service, using either locomotive-hauled or self-propelled railroad passenger cars, is characterized by multi-trip tickets, specific station-to-station fares, and usually only one or two stations in the central business district. It does not include heavy rail, rapid transit, light rail, streetcar, tram, or intercity rail service.

 

"Elevated" is a railway built on supports over other rights of way, generally city streets. The term "Overhead" tends to be used in Europe. Some examples include:

• Chicago 'L' The best known elevated transit system in the United States.
• Vancouver SkyTrain.

Elevated systems are now often using rubber tired vehicles, monorail guideways, and driverless vehicles.

 

Hard to believe given population numbers that the CRD could ever support cost-effective development of an LRT or commuter rail network. Bus rapid transit and HOV lanes would seem to be the better approach, potentially coupled with parking taxes and CBD access fees, even though our politicians have no appetite for the latter two options.

 

Finally, Toronto's Finch West LRT and Eglinton Crosstown LRT, as well as the Region of Waterloo's ION LRT, all have signalized, at-grade crossings; Montreal's REM system will be above-grade.

[Mike K.]

^^Seattle.

Even the Skytrain extension into PoCo is at-grade, at least through town. Or was that Port Moody? Can’t remember where exactly I saw it running through town.