Results 1 to 94 of 94

Thread: Ottawa LRT

  1. #1

  2. #2

  3. #3

    Default

    http://www.ottawalightrail.ca/

    The Downtown Tunnel
    We have reached the limit. We can no longer add buses to accommodate increasing ridership through the downtown core. During peak hours, buses are often bumper to bumper, moving slowly as they navigate 14 traffic lights, and compete with pedestrian, bicycle and car traffic. The Confederation Line graduates Ottawa to a traffic-separated downtown tunnel, following the success of major cities around the world.
    The largest single undertaking of the light rail project, the downtown tunnel will be 2.5 kilometers long with three stations—Downtown West, Downtown East, and Rideau Station. During construction, day-to-day life will continue as normal, as state-of-the-art mining techniques will minimize impacts on residents and businesses.

  4. #4

    Default

    The Alstom Citadis offers a scalable solution that meets our needs today and thirty years into the future. The vehicle can run as a single car, or be joined with multiple cars to meet fluctuations in ridership.

    • Each single car measures 49 metres and can accommodate 300 passengers.
    • 30 vehicles will enter service on opening day—a peak capacity of 10,700 passengers per hour in each direction.
    • With a projected 25 additional vehicles in service in 2031, the system could move over 18,000 passengers per hour in each direction.
    • The system can run trains as often as 1 minute and 45 seconds.
    • Travel time from Tunney’s to Blair will be less than 24 minutes.
    .

  5. #5
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,976

    Default

    Good on Ottawa. That looks great.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  6. #6
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    2,458

    Default

    Station designs are superior to the SELRT in my opinion.

  7. #7

    Default

    The maintenance/storage facility looks like the RAM proposal

  8. #8
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    What a surprise. Brand new project, with maintenance facilities, roadway expansion, land aquisition, thirteen stations with three underground and over 3 km of underground tunnel for $58 million per km less than Edmonton is paying to go to NAIT.
    If anyone can show me a comparable project (substantial ground level) anywhere in North America, being built for more per km than Edmonton's NAIT line I will never comment on LRT cost here again.

  9. #9

    Default

    See final numbers on Calgary WLRT... $313 M/ km. I'd also wager that once you add on the other phases of NAIT LRT, the price tag of the full line (per km) will come down quite a bit.

    Let's also take into account that the Ottawa LRT line will be built in an existing ROW for BRT for a lot of the way.
    Last edited by Medwards; 13-12-2012 at 06:14 PM.

  10. #10

    Default

    I currently live in Ottawa and while this is great news and will definitely be a great new addition to a very good transit system, it boggles my mind why they would choose the same route as the existing BRT line. The BRT line is already quite effective and efficient with buses coming every 15 during non peak hours, and 5-10 during peak hours (OC Transpo bus drivers seem to have their own personal timings these days). That would relatively be the same as the LRT timings, I'm assuming. It's my understanding that they won't be removing the BRT line either. IMO, they could have put off an east-west line and built a more efficient north-south line, but that's just my two cents haha.
    "What we achieve inwardly will change outer reality" - Plutarch

  11. #11
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,158

    Default

    What I like about the Ottawa example is that they probably experimented with BRT to find the route that people like to take. Now their BRT is under capacity and they go to the next big step.

    Also, a station called "Train"? That's so cute. I would love to try that on a tourist, it would be like "Who's on first".

    Eve

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EveB View Post
    What I like about the Ottawa example is that they probably experimented with BRT to find the route that people like to take. Now their BRT is under capacity and they go to the next big step.

    Eve
    They did create a BRT system first, it helped build ridership habits and they have a very different road and railway ROW system that allows lower cost construction using existing infrastructure like underpasses etc.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60 View Post
    What a surprise. Brand new project, with maintenance facilities, roadway expansion, land aquisition, thirteen stations with three underground and over 3 km of underground tunnel for $58 million per km less than Edmonton is paying to go to NAIT.
    If anyone can show me a comparable project (substantial ground level) anywhere in North America, being built for more per km than Edmonton's NAIT line I will never comment on LRT cost here again.
    Calgary tried something like that with their 700 million west lot line that cost o..... 1.4 billion

    It's also a p3 model so those numbers aren't the total cost... You have to sift through the P3 to get all the actual details.

    It's being built on a design build finance maintain model. This means, generally speaking, that the winning bidder will be responsible for designing the facility, constructing the facility, arranging financing for its construction and maintaining over a 30 year period.
    Upon substantial completion of construction, the government will pay monthly, performance-based payments to the management company over the term of the agreement. Performance standards will be included in the contract with an agreed mechanism for measuring this performance. If necessary, payments will be withheld if performance standards are not met.

    The city may or may not get revenue from the system and or the train will be a separate charge from the bus.

    Don't just look at numbers without questioning... Do your research
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 13-12-2012 at 10:56 PM.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  14. #14

    Default

    Some more info on the project from an industry standpoint

    The total cost is $2.13 billion, with the federal and provincial governments contributing $600 million each. Work on the project will begin in February, and be completed in time for testing followed by full revenue service in May 2018.

    http://www.dcnonl.com/article/id53157
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 13-12-2012 at 11:10 PM.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  15. #15

    Default

    Nice Downtown tunnel. Fully grade separate. High capacity high speed high frequency system. Too bad edmonton is going to opposite direction...

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Nice Downtown tunnel. Fully grade separate. High capacity high speed high frequency system. Too bad edmonton is going to opposite direction...
    And they will probably be done years ahead of Edmonton.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  17. #17
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    4,175

    Default

    They are decades behind us. They have a lot of catching up to do.
    “Canada is the only country in the world that knows how to live without an identity,”-Marshall McLuhan

  18. #18

    Default

    Disagree. Their BRT system is extensive, and gets you around most parts of the city already on a grade separated BRT system.

    15 Minutes from downtown to the Airport?

    Ottawa also boosts the highest transit usage for a city its size in all of North America.

    Last edited by Medwards; 14-12-2012 at 10:22 AM.

  19. #19
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    4,175

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    http://www.ottawalightrail.ca/

    The Downtown Tunnel
    We have reached the limit. We can no longer add buses to accommodate increasing ridership through the downtown core. During peak hours, buses are often bumper to bumper, moving slowly as they navigate 14 traffic lights, and compete with pedestrian, bicycle and car traffic. The Confederation Line graduates Ottawa to a traffic-separated downtown tunnel, following the success of major cities around the world.
    The largest single undertaking of the light rail project, the downtown tunnel will be 2.5 kilometers long with three stations—Downtown West, Downtown East, and Rideau Station. During construction, day-to-day life will continue as normal, as state-of-the-art mining techniques will minimize impacts on residents and businesses.
    Seems to me you are just being contrary. BRT has serious short comings especially when it snows.
    “Canada is the only country in the world that knows how to live without an identity,”-Marshall McLuhan

  20. #20
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,135

    Default

    Amazing what billions of Alberta tax dollars will buy other provinces.

  21. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Glenco View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    http://www.ottawalightrail.ca/

    The Downtown Tunnel
    We have reached the limit. We can no longer add buses to accommodate increasing ridership through the downtown core. During peak hours, buses are often bumper to bumper, moving slowly as they navigate 14 traffic lights, and compete with pedestrian, bicycle and car traffic. The Confederation Line graduates Ottawa to a traffic-separated downtown tunnel, following the success of major cities around the world.
    The largest single undertaking of the light rail project, the downtown tunnel will be 2.5 kilometers long with three stations—Downtown West, Downtown East, and Rideau Station. During construction, day-to-day life will continue as normal, as state-of-the-art mining techniques will minimize impacts on residents and businesses.
    Seems to me you are just being contrary. BRT has serious short comings especially when it snows.
    Ottawa has been very well served by BRT. They have now reached a point where a tunnel is needed. BRT or LRT.

  22. #22
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    YEG
    Posts
    1,499

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Disagree. Their BRT system is extensive, and gets you around most parts of the city already on a grade separated BRT system.

    15 Minutes from downtown to the Airport?

    Ottawa also boosts the highest transit usage for a city its size in all of North America.

    Why can't Edmonton take a que from the nations capital? Instead we are waiting and then buying and building the LRT at the same time, why can't we buy the ROW's and pave them for dedicated grade separated BRT service in Edmonton? Then when the time comes that financially and ridership wise the city can afford to lay track they install a LRT system?

  23. #23

    Default

    Installing BRT is likely what held back the creation of a LRT system in Ottawa.. AND because BRT is in place and now expected one of the first big spends of this project will be to widen other roadway so BRT can be diverted during construction. Which likely isn't included in the published LRT figure if I were to guess and is likely mixed into some roadwork budget some place.

    The more I read and researched BRT the more I understand why BRT to the west end was killed here in Edmonton and the more I understand how BRT should be a compliment to the LRT system and not a place holder for it
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  24. #24
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    YEG
    Posts
    1,499

    Default

    Reading can only do so much...there comes a point and time where you need to step out from behind the books and experience real life and how things really work. I think BRT would have been (and still could be) an awesome solution for rapid transit in Edmonton without spending billions in the process. Be awesome if they would paint the BRT buses a different color from the regular collector buses.

    When the time comes to build LRT just use your space wisely. Instead of having pretty berms and trees along your construction zone put in temporary BRT lanes until the track is ready for LRT. Then with your LRT running you can remove the temporary lanes and install your pretty flower gardens that will be covered with snow for 6 months of the year.

    I think BRT was passed on in Edmonton so people wouldn't get used to RAPID transit and would just accept the street car that's been proposed and planned...

  25. #25

    Default

    ^ in your opinion only. BRT didn't hold Ottawa back though. In fact, it gave them the HIGHEST transit usage in the continent for a city it's size.

    Nothing wrong with that.

    Bus and Bus rapid transit isn't the boogeyman Edmonton Daily Photo makes it out to be.

  26. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GranaryMan View Post
    Reading can only do so much...there comes a point and time where you need to step out from behind the books and experience real life and how things really work. I think BRT would have been (and still could be) an awesome solution for rapid transit in Edmonton without spending billions in the process. Be awesome if they would paint the BRT buses a different color from the regular collector buses.

    When the time comes to build LRT just use your space wisely. Instead of having pretty berms and trees along your construction zone put in temporary BRT lanes until the track is ready for LRT. Then with your LRT running you can remove the temporary lanes and install your pretty flower gardens that will be covered with snow for 6 months of the year.

    I think BRT was passed on in Edmonton so people wouldn't get used to RAPID transit and would just accept the street car that's been proposed and planned...
    The time HAS come to build LRT here. I understand what you are saying but think i live with my nose in a book. I travel and experience. I was just in Ottawa this fall..

    The time for BRT as the back bone of an EDM transit system system was 20-30 years ago not today.

    Brt could best be used to connect places like fort sask, leduc to edm at this point (IMO) Or places like the far west to the Uni so that people have quick and fast access to the LRT and the UofA
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 14-12-2012 at 12:46 PM.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  27. #27
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,562

    Default

    Nice stations. Maybe it's just me but I would rather have these type of stations for our future LRT lines although I know that our LRT planners are going for the minimalistic look. I like how they combine an LRT station with the VIA Rail station.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  28. #28

    Default

    I I don't think its fair to say our admin is going after a minimalist "look"... its about being barrier free and reduced operating/maintenance costs.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  29. #29

    Default

    BRT can still be used in places where we wont see LRT for a very long time (West End, River Bend, Windermere, St Albert)

    Build up the ridership.

    And EDP, sure, you travel. So do a lot of us. Keep that in perspective. You're not the only one on has left Edmonton.

  30. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    I I don't think its fair to say our admin is going after a minimalist "look"... its about being barrier free and reduced operating/maintenance costs.
    LRT Stations proposed in Ottawa and the existing ones are already barrier free.

    I'd like to know how they will reduce operating/maintenance costs. Is this just something you say without giving it any thought? Maybe you can expand on this idea of how these stations cost less to maintain and operate (while keeping in mind how many people they serve)

  31. #31

    Default

    I can only imagine what Medwards is writing after every time i post but I want to say this.. I have said nothing bad about the Ottawa project.

    But you may want to review what the people of Ottawa are saying.. there is talk about not enough DT stations etc. Like all projects of this size that effect people there are many opinions and questions people would like answers to.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  32. #32

    Default

    You may want to take a further review of what people in Ottawa are saying, because many of them back the plan... You've said nothing bad about the project, but you knock the tunnel, you knock the BRT, and continue with the below...

    I'm not sure what you are imaging. Is it different that what I write? I know you're not blocking me, because you'll respond to my points in my post when you address someone else who hasn't even made that point. But go on, you play this game because you don't want to answer real questions poised to you. If you want to play this childs game, have at it. Just stop trying to imagine what I'm saying (for once) and actually read what I'm saying, and maybe you wouldn't be the 'go gryl go' you are.
    Last edited by Medwards; 14-12-2012 at 01:32 PM.

  33. #33

    Default

    http://www.ottawalightrail.ca/media/...T_20120306.pdf

    Wow station lengths will have the ability to handle trains 180 M in length... longer than most NYC subway trains and the Toronto Subway. It seems the platforms that will actually be built will be about 90 M. and will move apx 10,000 people per hour each way. (about the same as edm is building)

    Perhaps a little over engineered?! Under the p3 we will see what actually gets built as the operator may have more of a say than the city.

    In 2 short years this has gone from 2.1 Billion to 2.4 billion... it will be interesting to see what happensd by 2017 when it is supposed to open.

    more fun facts
    2.4 billion for 12.5 KM in Ottawa (Over 190 Mill/ km)
    3.3 billion for 27 km in Edmonton (apx 122 Mill/km)

    Ride time from one end of the ottawa system apx 24 min.
    Ride time of apx half of our system apx 30 min.

    Kinda cool that theoretical headway could be as low as 1.75 min but Ottawa would have to undergo an amazing population explosion before that is ever realized. We are talking Toronto subway headways and possible station lengths.
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 14-12-2012 at 02:21 PM.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  34. #34

    Default

    Over engineered or future friendly.

    Lets talk edmonton. Edmonton built its lrt to five car standard from the start. It only needed 2 cars when it opened but now at peak periods you can see 4 or 5 car lengths.

    Most transit planners and armchair engineers plan with tomorrow's demands in mind, not just today's needs.
    Last edited by Medwards; 14-12-2012 at 02:20 PM.

  35. #35

    Default

    Price escalation is not something edmonton is immune to either...

  36. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    Installing BRT is likely what held back the creation of a LRT system in Ottawa.. AND because BRT is in place and now expected one of the first big spends of this project will be to widen other roadway so BRT can be diverted during construction. Which likely isn't included in the published LRT figure if I were to guess and is likely mixed into some roadwork budget some place.

    The more I read and researched BRT the more I understand why BRT to the west end was killed here in Edmonton and the more I understand how BRT should be a compliment to the LRT system and not a place holder for it

    Quote Originally Posted by GranaryMan View Post
    Reading can only do so much...there comes a point and time where you need to step out from behind the books and experience real life and how things really work. I think BRT would have been (and still could be) an awesome solution for rapid transit in Edmonton without spending billions in the process. Be awesome if they would paint the BRT buses a different color from the regular collector buses.

    When the time comes to build LRT just use your space wisely. Instead of having pretty berms and trees along your construction zone put in temporary BRT lanes until the track is ready for LRT. Then with your LRT running you can remove the temporary lanes and install your pretty flower gardens that will be covered with snow for 6 months of the year.

    I think BRT was passed on in Edmonton so people wouldn't get used to RAPID transit and would just accept the street car that's been proposed and planned...
    I was one of the opponents of the West BRT plans for a particular reason. The plan was so hobbled together with very bad cost information, misleading route information, the plan included buying expensive high tech buses and a huge budget. This was just after the first LRT route was killed by Mandel and just before the Hybrid Diesel Fraud. ETS's BRT plans was an very ill conceived big high cost project. To many opponents it was like ETS was attempting to Gild the Lily on BRT to create a pseudo-LRT system and spend almost as much money on BRT as the LRT plans. (IMHO, they are doing the same with streetcars, looking to spend Billions on capital projects instead on spending millions on improving services) What people and Councilors were looking for and all what was needed to create a BRT system, (Read: BUS RAPID TRANSIT) was to:

    BUS: Select a group of regular buses and place a large sign on each side that says "ETS - Bus Rapid Transit"

    RAPID: Create some more express routes on arterials like the Route #100 but reduce the number of stops it makes downtown to 4-6 total. Create BRT routes to Callingwood and Teralosa etc. Where possible, paint lines and add signage for dedicated bus lanes, give signal priority, clearly mark express stops, etc.

    TRANSIT: Operate it efficiently and increase the quality of the routes over time by adding real time information at stops, more dedicated lanes, larger buses. Increase transit demand and ridership nodes by providing excellent service to lay the foundation of a well thought out LRT plan based upon BRT experience.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  37. #37
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Medwards, read your link. Calgary's cost is $313million per mile, or $195 million per KM. still more than $30 million per km less than Edmonton.

  38. #38
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    EDP, show me a project more expensive than Edmonton. You ask me to do research, I've brought up numerous comparable projects in numerous threads on this forum, all cheaper than Edmonton. Use the search function, my research is evident and shown.
    As far as maintenance and operational costs, those are a seperate issue. The issue I have raised over and over again is Edmonton's approach to construction.

  39. #39

    Default

    Sorry Ralph, you are right. I read the m an though km

    According to Frontier Centre policy analyst Steve Lafleur, the $195 million per kilometre ($313.5 million per mile) is likely the most expensive LRT line ever constructed in North America.

  40. #40
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,384

    Default

    Great to see that Ottawa's Confederation Line is going ahead. The final design is even more impressive than the earlier plans. The stations are not only functional but look beautiful.

    A good template for how light rail rapid transit needs to be designed to maximize ridership, and to be built not only with the present but also the future in mind.

  41. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60 View Post
    EDP, show me a project more expensive than Edmonton. You ask me to do research, I've brought up numerous comparable projects in numerous threads on this forum, all cheaper than Edmonton. Use the search function, my research is evident and shown.
    As far as maintenance and operational costs, those are a seperate issue. The issue I have raised over and over again is Edmonton's approach to construction.
    And Ralph... How much do ya think it cost to force one of Edmonton's busiest McDonald's to close, tear down their building and rebuild a new one? This line was not an easy line to build. On top of the line there is the power upgrades, the multi use trails and new digital station signage, new signals and signal system..

    Choosing a number without the comprehensive awareness of what that number makes up is just silly. In the nearly 800 million dollar price tag there are upgrades that go beyond the line. When they build the little spur to the cca lands do we get to then exclaim how cheap our lrt is to build, because it will be cheap!

    So... Are we done now?
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  42. #42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    Great to see that Ottawa's Confederation Line is going ahead. The final design is even more impressive than the earlier plans. The stations are not only functional but look beautiful.

    A good template for how light rail rapid transit needs to be designed to maximize ridership, and to be built not only with the present but also the future in mind.
    That is quiet the statement.. All the pretty pictures in the world are great but it will be design build so let's see what they get . As for encouraging ridership... Well there was already one hotel that was willing to give Ottawa 2 million to contribute towards a station dt as many people feel that there are not enough stops dt... But at 40 to 50 million a station Ottawa declined.

    Because this is the nations capital I think they placed aesthetics ahead of ultimate userability but they are also dealing with a reality that there is a huge central employment centre...

    Give me lrt access over big huge fancy stations that make people climb up one around and under the destination you want to get to.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  43. #43
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,384

    Default

    ^I agree that Edmonton will still have bragging rights over Ottawa. We have 6 underground stations compared to Ottawa's 3. Edmonton's grade separated Downtown to University tunnel will still be twice as long as Ottawa's. The problem is Edmonton's stations and tunnel only operate at a fraction of their capacity.

    So let's optimize the use of these underground stations and tunnel by having 2 complete lines servicing them, rather than the 1.5 lines currently planned.
    Last edited by East McCauley; 14-12-2012 at 09:14 PM.

  44. #44
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    EDP, are you serious? Tearing down a McDonalds makes the difference? Give your head a shake. The Ottawa line is brand new and included in the cost is $300 million for land aquisition.
    http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2012/...-lrt-contract/
    I will be done when someone can show me a comparable project to Edmonton's that costs more money.

  45. #45

    Default

    I listed more than a mc d's... I notice that you didn't mention any of these points. The mc Donald's is simply on of the factors in the whole equation. Take it to the north LRT thread..
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  46. #46

    Default

    Ralph. The problem is your using 3.3 km for the Nait line, when its much longer than that.The NAIT line will extend to Health Science station and also contains various upgrades along the existing portion of the line.
    Also not included in your equation for the NAIT line is the full length of the line when extended further north, will see the overall price per km drop. How is it fair to only look at this small portion when your looking at a much longer line else where that doesn't only travel in the center of the city?

  47. #47
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,562

    Default

    ^Before returning to discussions about the Ottawa LRT, one thing that will end up increasing the price of the NLRT past NAIT will be the bridge that has to span over the Yellowhead and the train yard.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  48. #48

    Thumbs down

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60 View Post
    EDP, show me a project more expensive than Edmonton. You ask me to do research, I've brought up numerous comparable projects in numerous threads on this forum, all cheaper than Edmonton. Use the search function, my research is evident and shown.
    As far as maintenance and operational costs, those are a seperate issue. The issue I have raised over and over again is Edmonton's approach to construction.
    Actually, even forgetting about the cost as gouging in various sectors is what we've come to expect in Edmonton, let's talk about how inefficient the LRT is. In fact, since they built the SLRT and destroyed the relatively efficient bus routes, I've been forced to adopt a car for transportation. I seriously doubt Ottawa will build a short-term thinking grade level gong show where drivers wait for hours waiting for barriers.

    I would be willing to personally donate to LRT construction even if ridiculously overpriced, but not an inefficient grade level gong show for kids to ride. Who's running this comedy show?

  49. #49
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Medwards and EDP, Every project on earth has mitigating factors. As shown, Ottawa's line cost includes $300 million for incidentals. That is included in the cost per km.
    Yes there is a portion of Edmonton's line going through downtown, and also underground. There is also a large chunk going across the open space by Victoria School with no impediments at all.
    If it were just this section of line and this one project that was priced out of line I would understand.
    It is undeniable that virtually every project built by the City of Edmonton in the last two decades has cost substantially more than similar projects built at the same time elsewhere in Canada.
    Like I said, show me an example of anyone building for more.
    There are numerous LRT projects going on throughout North America. Surely you can find a comparable one somewhere that is more expensive.

  50. #50

    Default

    Show me where you've made calculations on the full line and not just phase I, and I'll answer your question

  51. #51

    Default

    Ottawa train contract gets 24-0 approval from council
    http://www.ottawacitizen.com/touch/s...tml?id=7721545
    “Today we start a process of change and a process of growth … from a small-medium-sized city, to a big city,” Alta Vista Coun. Peter Hume said.
    Way to go Ottawa!

  52. #52
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,039

    Default

    They have 24 people on city council? Whoa. Why?

  53. #53

    Default

    Might be because Ottawa is an almagmatipn of several towns and cities

  54. #54
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,562

    Default

    Which if you look at the Capital city region here we could become something like that too if the political will was there to do it.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  55. #55
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,384

    Default

    Anyone still clinging to the belief that a street level system such as the one being proposed for the SE to West line is good enough for Edmonton, really needs to invest the time to take a look at the entire presentation for the Ottawa Confederation Line. Link: http://www.ottawalightrail.ca/#&panel1-2

    Ottawa's LRT line will be superior to Edmonton's approved SE to West line in every respect. This includes travel times, grade separated guideway design, station design and functionality, integration with other transportation modes (buses, trains, bicycles, pedestrians), minimizing/eliminating conflicts with other transportation modes, TOD potential, and fitting stations in to the surrounding neighbourhoods.

    Before billions of dollars are wasted on a slow, inferior system, Edmonton City Council really needs to look to Canadian cities like Vancouver, Calgary, and Ottawa for real life examples of how to build modern urban rapid transit correctly.

  56. #56
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    ^ right. we need to tunnel under jasper and out to west end, past WEM and onto Callingwood). If there is no cash, presently approved route is best (save for Callingwood piece and possibly not using 95 ave)...

  57. #57
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,384

    Default

    ^I would encourage you to read the posting in the blog below about why 87 Avenue remains the best route for West LRT. You can leave a reply on the blog itself itself or we can continue the discussion in the appropriate thread since this one deals with the Ottawa LRT.

  58. #58
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,384

    Default

    As much as I like the Ottawa LRT overall, the choice of low floor LRVs is surprising. Nothing against the Alstom vehicles per se, but Ottawa's system seems to be completely grade separated (I couldn't identify any at grade crossings at least).

    High floor vehicles remain the standard for metro style grade separated systems because they send a clearer message to stay off the tracks. Honolulu recently opted to go with a high floor LRV for its rapid transit system. Link: http://www.honolulutransit.org/rail-...d-figures.aspx

    More info about the LRV selected by Honolulu: http://www.ansaldohonolulurail.com/

  59. #59

    Default

    ^There are no LRT systems being built from the ground up with high floor LRV's that I have encountered.

    Honolulu is a raised guide way Unless you have wings I think the track being 30 feet above you is what says "Stay off the track" not the LRV. Bombardier was pushed out of the bidding process but their LRVs are hardly "high Floor". The contact has gone through an Italian company who is working with other local partners and Siemens. The parent company has continually been late on delivery and Their LRVS are heavier, less efficient and pretty much outdated compared to others on the market.

    I would choose a new example to hitch your argument to. Honolulu has been a VERY problematic project that has included lawsuits and a lot of delay as well as a very vocal call for different systems designs entirely.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  60. #60
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    The opposition to the Honolulu project is from anti- public transit folk primarily, and the lawsuit was about archeological surveys of the construction sites being rushed.

    There are loads of light rail projects with high-floor. they're just called mini-metros and they don't have streetcar segments to compromise them. The only benefit of the low-floor designs is that they are low floor. Period. They are not lighter, they are not cheaper.

  61. #61

    Default

    ^ that isn't true.. there were a lot of people calling for at Grade service. its not just anti public transit.

    In regards to the veh wieght you have to read what I wrote.... The contact has gone through an Italian company who is working with other local partners and Siemens. The parent company has continually been late on delivery and Their LRVS are heavier, less efficient and pretty much outdated compared to others on the market.

    I am talking about the company they choose to tender the contract to. There are numerous newspaper articles on it.. there are numerous articles on the entire project which has been very contentious. Infact of all the 3 major overhead systems they have all been contentious and dogged with delays and issues. Mumbai, Jakarta (I think) and Honalulu.
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 03-01-2013 at 12:29 PM.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  62. #62
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,384

    Default

    ^^^Incredibly you managed to miss what I thought was a rather straightforward point.

    The extra platform height commonly used by metro style systems sends the underlying message to passengers to stay off the tracks. In its guideway and station design, Ottawa's system functions more like a light metro (rather than street level light rail) making the choice of low floor somewhat surprising.

    Your underlying claim of a wordwide shift to street level light rail, and away from metro systems, is not supported by the facts. The most recent project listing by railway-technology.com shows almost as many metro projects as light rail projects. And many of the light rail projects being built are close to or even achieve metro standards. Link: http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/category/

  63. #63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    ^ that isn't true.. there were a lot of people calling for at Grade service.
    And there's lots of people calling for skytrain service for surrey instead of at grade street cars.
    Not sure what your point is here? That is, outside of ignoring anything that doesn't support your agenda.

  64. #64

    Default

    Light rail is simply a vehicle classification. It's a tool.... not a system design.

    My claim is that there are no new LRT systems (that I have encountered) using High Floor LRV's. The claim you are claiming I claimed were not claimed by me. If you do see High Floor LRT in the news its for extensions to existing systems.

    High Floor LRV's are pretty much dead. Low floor is where the research is going and is the product that is being adopted. Why would it be surprising that Ottawa is using low floor? They choose Alstom as one of the business partners and alstom doesn't make a High floor LRV. Alstrom even has a Commuter Train/Tram hybrid and it's all low floor. Able to do 100 KM / Hr

    http://www.alstom.com/transport/prod...regio-citadis/

    Please if you are going to write a blog on this know the lingo and it's proper use.
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 03-01-2013 at 04:05 PM.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  65. #65

    Default

    Calgary's WLRT is new high floor... there are many more that are new/expanding.

    What does it matter? it doesn't. Low floor, high floor. They can both accomplish the same tasks as it each other. They both can be used in the same manner.

    I'm not sure what new research you are refering to though. Nothing has really changed in the LRT world in 30 years. Station design may have changed a bit... but both high floor and low floor can use new type station designs.

  66. #66
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,158

    Default

    As a matter of curiosity (because I really don't know), is there a substantial difference in the rail design / construction between low and high floor LRT? That is, could a low floor train travel on a high floor track?

    Eve

  67. #67

    Default

    ^ yep...

    Most rail is a standard gauge (4 Feet 8.5 Inches)....Toronto's street cars are a very unique gauge which results in them needing skinny trains on unique bogies see pic below, but if you are looking at our rail system the only thing that really prevents the low floor from running on our existing system is station design and the only thing that would prevent a CN locomotive from running on our city rail network would be the weight capacity of the rails. Keeping things standard keeps things cheap(er).



    PS Toronto has such skinny track because it was built for horse drawn wagons

    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 03-01-2013 at 04:58 PM.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  68. #68

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EveB View Post
    As a matter of curiosity (because I really don't know), is there a substantial difference in the rail design / construction between low and high floor LRT? That is, could a low floor train travel on a high floor track?

    Eve
    If the cars have the same gauge, it shouldn't be a problem. Most use a standard gauge, like Edmonton. However, a low floor train wouldn't be able to use a high floor station, and vice versa, as the doors would open below or above the platform.

  69. #69
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,158

    Default

    Oh I know about the stations. I'm just pondering. The rails (and the rights of way, property acquisition, etc.) are, as near as I can tell, the permanent part of the business. Stations (high or low floor) can be renovated and adjusted. Hence my curiosity.

    Eve

  70. #70

    Default

    If we were to run Low Floor in the Tunnels the engineer reports said they would need pretty extensive overhaul.

    What that means.. I don't know.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  71. #71

    Default

    It would be a big undertaking to convert the tunnel and all existing high floor stations to low floor levels...

    First you would need to lower the platform of the station. You would then need to somehow install longer stairs, elevators, escalators... which likely means in terms of the last two, ripping out and putting in brand new. You would probably also have to relocate station utilities that run under the station platform...

  72. #72
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Everything that EDP wrote about Toronto above is false. Toronto gauge is actually a couple inches wider than standard gauge, and was put in place to prevent mainline freight railways from using the street railways when they were first installed.

    On the other hand, he's correct that there is usually nothing in technical to prevent low-floor trains from using normal tracks, and tram-trains do it all the time in Europe. There can be issues with some low-floor designs, particularly the earlier ones, making them incompatible with some switches used on streetcar systems like in Toronto, but that doesn't apply to the most common designs.

    Low floor would be incompatible with significantly narrower gauges, like 3-foot or meter-gauge railways, where a low-floor vehicles would have to be completely re-designed, and would leave an unacceptably narrow passage between the wheel-wells.

  73. #73

    Default

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto_streetcar_system

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexity...oronto_LRT_car)


    And right from TTC's website.

    History
    We’ve got history. From horses to electricity to the “Red Rocket” to today’s modern low-floor accessible vehicle, Toronto’s streetcars have a proud heritage.

    https://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Pro...work/index.jsp

    It’s true. Standard railway gauge is 4 feet, 8 1/2 inches, whereas the TTC uses a decidedly non-standard 4 feet 10 7/8 inches. The TTC is the only railway in the world to use this gauge (they and the Halton County Railway Museum, which runs equipment retired from the TTC). The gauge used by Toronto’s streetcars and by its subways but not by the Scarborough RT (which uses standard gauge, just to confuse matters), and the gauge has existed since streetcars began operation in Toronto, back in 1861.


    The only part t that was wrong was the track dictates the skinny vehicles. It's not.. It's tunnels and turns and other infrastructure that does that. Torontos street cars are not 2.65 M wide
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 03-01-2013 at 08:17 PM.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  74. #74
    Administrator *
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Queen Mary Park, Edmonton
    Posts
    2,665

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    and the only thing that would prevent a CN locomotive from running on our city rail network would be the weight capacity of the rails. Keeping things standard keeps things cheap(er).
    Actually the weight of the rails would be no problem for heavy freight locomotives. Most yard track is 100 lb rail, and the LRT rails are definitely 100 lb or heavier. One of the most restrictive aspects of the LRT line for locomotives would be the tight curves.

  75. #75

    Default

    ^ do you think the low floor lines will be built with the same weight of track?!
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  76. #76
    Administrator *
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Queen Mary Park, Edmonton
    Posts
    2,665

    Default

    Most likely yes. 100 lb rail is pretty small and most likely the weight they would use. They might use 85 lb but nothing lighter than that. And 85 lb rail is still fairly common in old parts of railway yards and spur lines. It's still strong enough to support the weight of almost any locomotive.

  77. #77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chrisvazquez7 View Post
    Most likely yes. 100 lb rail is pretty small and most likely the weight they would use. They might use 85 lb but nothing lighter than that. And 85 lb rail is still fairly common in old parts of railway yards and spur lines. It's still strong enough to support the weight of almost any locomotive.
    But your limited to something like 15 Miles an hour are you not?!... I know the rail around stettler had these types of limitations. Now I don't know if it was the weight of the track, old ties or what.. but my guess would be old track.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  78. #78
    Administrator *
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Queen Mary Park, Edmonton
    Posts
    2,665

    Default

    ^ speed limits are not usually based on the weight of the rail. It may have a factor, but usually the reasons for speed limits are: the type of dispatching used, space between signals, quality of road bed and ties, level of maintenance, the frequency of inspections, the load limitations of bridges or structures, or the sharpness of a curve.

  79. #79

    Default

    Ya I remember being taken on an old CP train back when the line was in use. The infrastructure was so old we had to putz along at a snails pace. I love trains but that particular train trip was such a zzzzzzz lol
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  80. #80

    Default

    Things continue to move forward on time and on budget for the Confederation Line light rail transit (LRT) project! Chewrocka, Crocodile Rouge and Jawbreaker, the three excavators carving out the LRT tunnel, have now completed 10% of the job. Check out the map below to track their progress on the 2.5 kilometre tunnel.



    At the West Portal in LeBreton Flats, Jawbreaker has carved out 228 metres of tunnel and is currently digging under Queen Street just west of Bay Street.



    At the East Portal near uOttawa and Laurier Avenue East, Crocodile Rouge has mined 22 metres towards Rideau Street.



    Mining at the Central Shaft near Queen and Kent streets by the machine called Chewrocka has just begun over the last two weeks with 7 metres of the gallery that will lead from the construction shaft to the tunnel excavated to date.

  81. #81

    Default




    A sinkhole eight metres wide and 12 metres deep has opened up at the construction site digging the eastern entrance to Ottawa's light rail tunnel.

    The cause isn't yet known, city officials said. No one was injured.
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa...site-1.2546074[/QUOTE]

  82. #82

    Default

    Opps! Looks like a money pit.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  83. #83

    Default

    ^ did the same thing happen in New York??

    On another note Ottawa is not getting warm replies to fund phase two of their 3 billion dollar plan. They have not had a no yet however.



    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa...plan-1.1930671

    They want to have it all built out by 2023......

    ooo how familiar this all sounds.
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 21-02-2014 at 05:07 PM.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  84. #84
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,135

    Default

    Sinkholes have happened in other NATM projects, Dulles Airport comes to my mind, I remember something similar when they were building the Eurostar tunnels from Stratford to St. Pancras but that might have been a TBM not NATM.
    http://www.nce.co.uk/natm-failures-t.../83520.article

  85. #85
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,562

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    ^ did the same thing happen in New York??

    On another note Ottawa is not getting warm replies to fund phase two of their 3 billion dollar plan. They have not had a no yet however.



    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa...plan-1.1930671

    They want to have it all built out by 2023......

    ooo how familiar this all sounds.
    Well I wouldn't mind seeing more of that kind of attitude for Edmonton LRT
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  86. #86

    Default

    ^ you can have all the attitude you want but if it's unfundable it's just attitude.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  87. #87

    Default

    Some new pictures of the Confederation Line tunnel underneath downtown Ottawa:

    Inside the tunnel near the western portal:


    Excavation of the future Lyon Station. Unlike most subway construction projects in which cut and cover is used to dig out the stations even when the tunnel itself is bored, the Confederation Line's underground stations are being dug out from inside the tunnel.


    Installation of the support umbrella at the future Parliament station:


    Roadheader hard at work just west of Parliament station:

    http://wpmedia.ottawacitizen.com/

  88. #88

    Default

    Here's to 55.5 km of metro lines by 2023!


    http://www.transitottawa.ca/2013/10/...ight-rail.html

    Looks like Ottawa will go from next to nothing to surpassing Edmonton in terms of length and quality/reliable LRT...

  89. #89
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,384

    Default

    ^Agree that Ottawa's LRT is a vastly superior system design (fully grade separated I believe) compared to Edmonton's future LRT. In terms of value for money, Ottawa's is a much superior investment.

    Very skeptical they will they will achieve full build out by 2023 though for the same reason as Edmonton (insufficient federal and provincial funding).

  90. #90

    Default

    So, do I get this right?

    Initial 12.5 km with portions underground for just over $2B?

    Expansion to a 55.5km network (43 additional kilometers) for $2.5B?
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  91. #91

    Default

    the expansion costs are ballpark estimates, with probable ranges of +/- a cool B and a lot of the expansion seems to follow rail rows (old or existing) or the busway.

    Clearly this is a modern example of how to do LRT right, taking many queues from LRT systems around the world, including Edmonton.
    Last edited by Medwards; 27-06-2014 at 12:34 PM.

  92. #92

  93. #93

    Default

    pretty good short video on whats happening here in Ottawa...

    http://vimeo.com/69315201

  94. #94

    Default

    2.1 Billion for 12.5 Km and Phase 2 is to cost 3 billion.

    As the feds are more than likely going to offer tax cuts and for the upcoming elections It will be very interesting to see If the Feds will fund anf of the massive asks that will be coming. Vancouver, Ottawa, Calgary, Toronto and Edmonton

    Hamilton is currently in the funding bundle.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •