Ottawa Confederation Line LRT (City of Ottawa, U/C)

[kEiThZ]

It was my understanding that a huge benefit of the "cross-country" route was the requirement to position stations further south to reduce the need for most transit users to walk. This matters in Ottawa's harsh winter. The distance from Queen to Laurier is about 260m. But to Nepean is about 425m. If you work at Bank and Laurier, that's 600m from Queen and O'Connor. That's quite the hike in the winter. I would have hoped for at least an extra station in the downtown if they were going to move things so far north.

And with most riders now having to travel south from the line, are we going to what we see in Toronto with huge masses heading south in the morning and then north in the evening?

In any event, at least it's good that final planning stages are over and construction will start soon. Also good that they want this thing done by 2017.

Here's the announcement docs:

http://www.ottawalightrail.ca/en/ne...lignment-and-city’s-lrt-project-under-budget/

 

[gweed123]

It was my understanding that a huge benefit of the "cross-country" route was the requirement to position stations further south to reduce the need for most transit users to walk. This matters in Ottawa's harsh winter. The distance from Queen to Laurier is about 260m. But to Nepean is about 425m. If you work at Bank and Laurier, that's 600m from Queen and O'Connor. That's quite the hike in the winter. I would have hoped for at least an extra station in the downtown if they were going to move things so far north.

And with most riders now having to travel south from the line, are we going to what we see in Toronto with huge masses heading south in the morning and then north in the evening?

In any event, at least it's good that final planning stages are over and construction will start soon. Also good that they want this thing done by 2017.

Here's the announcement docs:

http://www.ottawalightrail.ca/en/ne...lignment-and-city’s-lrt-project-under-budget/

Hopefully there will be some sort of an underground connection to buildings further south. But I think that unlike Union, it will be split between 2 stations, and it will be coming up 3 different streets instead of just one.

 

[Markster]

I'm a bit disappointed that they didn't mention anything regarding the possibility of future interlining at Bayview station, but I can't say I'm not surprised. It would be a nice-to-have, but is not strictly necessary.

 

[gweed123]

I'm a bit disappointed that they didn't mention anything regarding the possibility of future interlining at Bayview station, but I can't say I'm not surprised. It would be a nice-to-have, but is not strictly necessary.

IIRC, Bayview is being built as a dual-level station with platforms one on top of eachother, with the E-W trains using the upper level and the N-S trains using the lower level. They will merge east of the station. However, a problem with this is that for people getting on at Bayview, the problem will be determining which train will be coming next if you're going eastbound. The plus however is that N-S riders get a transfer-free ride into downtown. Given that Bayview will be more of a transfer station as opposed to a walk-in station, I think it's a pretty decent trade-off.

However, until the N-S LRT is electrified the diesel trains will be running at 8 min intervals and will require a transfer from the N-S platform to the E-W platform.

 

[Markster]

Yes, I recall that plan too.
What worries me is that they make no mention of it in this revised plan.

 

[Mapleson]

Yes, I recall that plan too.
What worries me is that they make no mention of it in this revised plan.

All future works (such as platform extensions) were removed from the interim plan. The design for interlining still exists, but they don't want to publish anything that might conflict with whatever is finalized for the N-S LRT on Bayview.

 

[unimaginative2]

This is definitely a positive change. Oh how I wish this kind of value engineering could be done on the TTC's projects. They could've knocked hundreds of millions, if not billions, off the Spadina and Sheppard projects.

The Queen alignment is just fine. It would be the same distance from Laurier for the East station and only two blocks more in the west compared with the previous design, not including the benefits of the shorter trip from platform to surface. This is nothing a good skywalk/underground city couldn't solve. It might also help to reanimate Sparks a little bit. Queen has more than its fair share of office space as well (Place de Ville), and there are several development sites that might be stimulated by the stations. I'm glad that the Rideau station will be unchanged and it makes perfect sense to use the existing transitway alignment along Nicholas rather than tunnelling under it.

While the plan overall is fantastic and I wouldn't want to do anything to jeopardize it, I can't help but think that if they're going to grade separate the whole thing, automated light metro would make more sense.

Bayview will be a little weird once they interline it for the reasons gweed mentioned, but I agree that it's an acceptable trade-off if they can't merge the tracks west of the station. I'm sure that the interim transfer won't be too problematic either, and it leaves open the possibility of expansion into Gatineau. I'd also take the extension to Barrhaven over the interlining, in the short term.

 

[gweed123]

This is definitely a positive change. Oh how I wish this kind of value engineering could be done on the TTC's projects. They could've knocked hundreds of millions, if not billions, off the Spadina and Sheppard projects.

I can't help but notice that the projected cost of the 2.4km tunnel is $493 million, or $205 million/km. Granted that's not including stations, but nearly $100 million/km less than Eglinton? Seriously? Factor in the 3 underground stations and that would bring it up to maybe $230 million/km, if that. All 13 stations are costing $284 million ($21 million per station).

While the plan overall is fantastic and I wouldn't want to do anything to jeopardize it, I can't help but think that if they're going to grade separate the whole thing, automated light metro would make more sense.

I was thinking this. I was thinking this would have been a perfect opportunity to use ICTS. I think the LRT decision came from a) the fact that LRT is "in vogue", and b) the first plan used LRT, and it had at-grade parts, so the technology was just kept through. I read through the Technology Selection Report, and really they didn't have much of a scoring difference between LRT and Light Metro. The choice was purely political and asthetic.

Bayview will be a little weird once they interline it for the reasons gweed mentioned, but I agree that it's an acceptable trade-off if they can't merge the tracks west of the station. I'm sure that the interim transfer won't be too problematic either, and it leaves open the possibility of expansion into Gatineau. I'd also take the extension to Barrhaven over the interlining, in the short term.

I hope the extension to Gatineau can happen sooner rather than later. Hopefully it'll also be a completely Quebec-funded extension, because really the only thing they have to do on the Ontario side is re-lay the tracks on the bridge and the 100m or so leading into Bayview, a nominal cost to say the least.

And the O-Train extension is only going to Riverside South (Letrim actually), not to Barrhaven. Extending the N-S LRT to Barrhaven doesn't make sense, because it would actually be slower to reach downtown than the current Transitway option, especially with BRT the extension to Barrhaven Town Centre now open.

 

[nfitz]

I can't help but notice that the projected cost of the 2.4km tunnel is $493 million, or $205 million/km. Granted that's not including stations, but nearly $100 million/km less than Eglinton? Seriously?

That's odd that they include design, electrification, signals, and vehicles ... but not stations. Why?

 

[gweed123]

That's odd that they include design, electrification, signals, and vehicles ... but not stations. Why?

They actually have that separate too: "LRT Systems (power, ventilation, signals, etc) and Vehicles: $523 million". The tunnel apparently is just the tunnel.

Source: http://www.ottawalightrail.ca/media/pdf/ACS2011-ICS-RIO-0002.pdf (Page 13)

 

[unimaginative2]

I can't help but notice that the projected cost of the 2.4km tunnel is $493 million, or $205 million/km. Granted that's not including stations, but nearly $100 million/km less than Eglinton? Seriously? Factor in the 3 underground stations and that would bring it up to maybe $230 million/km, if that. All 13 stations are costing $284 million ($21 million per station).

Exactly. And these per km costs are a little high by comparison to some other recent projects, likely because of the shortness of the tunnel. A longer tunnel (ahem, Eglinton) should be able to produce significant economies of scale.

I was thinking this. I was thinking this would have been a perfect opportunity to use ICTS. I think the LRT decision came from a) the fact that LRT is "in vogue", and b) the first plan used LRT, and it had at-grade parts, so the technology was just kept through. I read through the Technology Selection Report, and really they didn't have much of a scoring difference between LRT and Light Metro. The choice was purely political and asthetic.

Absolutely. I wholeheartedly agree. The decision was made because of the fashion for LRT, which is somewhat surprising considering the close and pragmatic examination of other aspects of the project. ICTS, with or without LIM, would make the most sense for this route. People could claim that LRT preserves the option for future at-grade extensions but with this length of grade-separated route, an at-grade segment would have too negative an effect on reliability to be justifiable. It doesn't look like they're planning any at-grade extensions, either. The Western extension will be completely grade-separated.

I hope the extension to Gatineau can happen sooner rather than later. Hopefully it'll also be a completely Quebec-funded extension, because really the only thing they have to do on the Ontario side is re-lay the tracks on the bridge and the 100m or so leading into Bayview, a nominal cost to say the least.

Quite true, though I suspect Quebec would want a little bit more cost-sharing than that since Ottawa would be getting significant benefits from the increased accessibility.

And the O-Train extension is only going to Riverside South (Letrim actually), not to Barrhaven. Extending the N-S LRT to Barrhaven doesn't make sense, because it would actually be slower to reach downtown than the current Transitway option, especially with BRT the extension to Barrhaven Town Centre now open.

Good point, and I hope that extension to Leitrim does go through. The original O-Train is a pretty amazing project for the cost. That kind of arrangement has a lot of potential for quick and cheap rapid transit in many other locations.

I'm also quite hopeful about their choice of a Design-Build-Finance-Maintain arrangement. It has worked very well for cost containment on a number of routes, including the Canada Line. I hope we can look at such arrangements (or at least Design-Build) in Toronto.

 

[nfitz]

They actually have that separate too: "LRT Systems (power, ventilation, signals, etc) and Vehicles: $523 million". The tunnel apparently is just the tunnel.

Source: http://www.ottawalightrail.ca/media/pdf/ACS2011-ICS-RIO-0002.pdf (Page 13)

That doesn't sound less than Eglinton. The Spadina tunnel is much less than $200 million per kilometre - the two construction contracts for the 8.6 km of twin-tunnels came to about $680 million - and that includes two of the stations. Only about $80-million per kilometre.

Why do you think Eglinton will be so much more expensive for the tunnels? I'd thought it would be pretty similar to Spadina.

 

[gweed123]

That doesn't sound less than Eglinton. The Spadina tunnel is much less than $200 million per kilometre - the two construction contracts for the 8.6 km of twin-tunnels came to about $680 million - and that includes two of the stations. Only about $80-million per kilometre.

Why do you think Eglinton will be so much more expensive for the tunnels? I'd thought it would be pretty similar to Spadina.

Why only 2 of the stations? That seems weird. And really, only $80M/km? I guess when you factor in all the admin and engineering costs into it it does skew it a little bit.

EDIT: I did the math on it. I took each of the breakdown items (except for the tunnel itself) and divided it by 12.5 (the length of the line) to get the per km number, and then multiplied it by 2.4 (the length of the tunnel). The all-in cost is $350 million per km. That's including: the tunnel, the stations, the storage facility, the track work, the LRT systems (including the trains, that's the biggest non-tunnel expense right there), the civil works, and the city costs (property procurement, planning, risk, etc).

 

[nfitz]

Why only 2 of the stations? That seems weird. And really, only $80M/km? I guess when you factor in all the admin and engineering costs into it it does skew it a little bit.

Each of the two tunelling contracts includes a single station. The four other station contracts are tendered separately. Only two of those have been awarded to date - Vaughan Centre at $197,821,000 and Finch West at $125,630,118. If you assume each of the two stations included in tunnels contracts (Sheppard West and Highway 407) are only $100,000,000 then the actual tunnel cost drops to under $56 million per kilometre.

This is why the great debates of cut-and-cover versus TBM and even tunnel versus open trench make little sense to me ... the tunnel in itself isn't a huge cost. We keep hearing how Montreal subway tunnels are so much cheaper ... but then we don't account for that they haven't needed to purchase any rolling stock since the 1970s (which also means no new garage costs) and likely bury all the design stuff, etc., in other pots.

 

[unimaginative2]

Why only 2 of the stations? That seems weird. And really, only $80M/km? I guess when you factor in all the admin and engineering costs into it it does skew it a little bit.

Which shows where the problem lies.