Optimizing Ottawa’s Core Rapid Transit System

Dr. J.K. Walker

88 Starwood Rd. Nepean, ON, K2G 1Z5

Next Steps/Summary

Mr. Jarrett Walker, an international public transit expert is in “broad agreement” with the author’s BRT plan. Battery electric buses that can travel 50 km on a ten minute charge are now available from Proterra in the US. These are ideal for public transit.

· The proposed 4 lane shallow bus subways for Ottawa’s downtown core with battery electric or plug-in hybrid, articulated, bi-articulated and eventually double-decker buses provides quicker and better service to both the local and the suburban commuters and at much less cost than the LRT being considered by the city. It also provides better service to the Rideau Centre, Conference Centre and downtown business and offices and future adjacent sub grade shopping malls.  Furthermore the LRT cannot go into a community and pick up passengers like a regular or smart bus can and therefore most commuters would have to waste time transferring from a local bus to the proposed LRT system as well as ascend/descend three escalators which are both inconvenient and inefficient for the riders. Some commuters in the suburbs would have to transfer from a local collector bus to an express bus (twice) and then to the train which wastes even more time. It also provides better service to those riders connecting with Gatineau. In view of these facts and the uncertain economic future it is strongly suggested that the city also investigate the BRT Tunnel/Transitways for a plan B as one mayoral candidate and several councillors and numerous taxpayers are now looking for affordable and efficient transit.

· The city’s proposed $2.1 b LRT first stage appears to be more expensive than a comparable BRT (~$1.3 b). The LRT plan causes huge traffic and passenger jams at each end of the line for transferring riders on and off the awkward LRT system.  These traffic and human jams will cause about a ten minute delay and ascending and descending 3 levels of stairs or escalators to the deep tunnels will cause another ten minute delay in commute time during peak periods.  Hence most commuters will spend at least 30 minutes more and more hassle (transfers) commuting to and from the downtown core each day and would be very frustrated.  The commuter will also have to pay more for this degraded service as will the property tax payer and also the provincial and Federal taxpayers.  Possibly 20% or more of the riders will probably be completely frustrated and use other methods of commuting such as car pooling or using electric bikes and scooters or possibly work at home.

· The expensive LRT only reduces the bus traffic by 30% on Albert and Slater while the proposed BRT system removes nearly all the bus traffic on both Albert and Slater to one subway under Albert. Note this 4 lane BRT system uses the skip and stop technique so it is faster than LRT. It also saves about 380,000 tonnes of GHGs annually vs 38,000 tonnes for the LRT. The LRT proposal does not appear to be the optimum solution to Ottawa’s downtown congested streets, pollution and cost problems and the already long commute time for many riders.

· The city’s proposed LRT with the large boring machine provides limited opportunities for local contractors and workers and hence most of the resources for this ~$800 m aspect of the project will not remain in Ottawa. The cut and cover method with precast sections or the Komatsu rectangular boring machine makes more accessible and neater tunnels and they are about 1 km shorter and hence less expensive. They can also be constructed in stages and in a couple of years by local contractors.

· The first proposed 4 lane tunnel for an expanded BRT system is under Albert Street and linked to Nicholas with eventually a two layer suspension bridge over the canal.  These tunnels could be made by the cut and cover technique with precast sections or with the new Komatsu rectangular boring machine. The latter technique does not disrupt as much traffic and is relatively easy to construct with preformed sections. However, they are smaller and not as open and warm as the larger precast sections. These tunnels are readily accessible to the street for the commuter.  They also provide good access to businesses along Albert and adjacent streets and to the Rideau Centre, NAC and also to the expanded Conference Centre which the proposed LRT does not.  The proposed BRT plan readily accommodates future transitways under Waller-Dalhousie to the Alexandra Bridge, and Slater - Elgin to Lansdowne Park and the Southeast Transitway.

· The proposed electric BRT system can also readily accommodate plug-in hybrid buses which the city could upgrade to with the new hybrid buses. It is recommended that the city acquire a hundred or so plug-in electric or plug-in hybrid articulated and eventually bi-articulated buses when they become available. No new expensive trains and associated tracks, overhead power lines and service garage(s) and associated test track are required which are at least twice the capital cost of similar plug-in bi-articulated buses and twice the operating cost and are inflexible. The LRT system would possibly double the cities debt and degraded the service because of the extra transfers and the 3 escalator trip to and from the surface.

· The proposed electric BRT with 4 lane express tunnels can be constructed block by block and in stages as resources become available while the LRT must be made in one big dig and would take longer. The LRT system is not operational until the tunnel and all the stations are completely finished so the old bus transitway would be disrupted at each end of the line for several years.

· The proposed BRT system does not need to have the Tunney’s Pasture, Campus, Lees, Hurdman, St. Laurent, Cyrville and Blair stations revamped at this time and thereby saves a few hundred million dollars. It can also provide a smooth ride with inexpensive ball-in-tube inclinometer which the driver can use to control the speed when on curves to minimize the lateral forces on the riders.

· The proposed LRT route swings north across Confederation Square and other potential routes which limits the further expansion of transitway tunnels in this critical region of the downtown core.  Furthermore the city’s proposed rail tunnels do not provide a safe side track in the event of an accident, breakdown or a fire so the passengers may wait several hours until the tracks are cleared.  Such trains must be spaced at least one minute apart while comparable buses with radars could be 20 seconds apart as they have better traction and therefore could carry more passengers.

· The proposed LRT will require a new fleet of expensive trains which are not well supported by the Federal Government.  This and the expensive tracks and associated overhead power system and a new rail garage will add about half a billion dollars to the first stage of this transit system verses the proposed BRT plan which could use the city’s new modified hybrid buses and the new and also older garages.  Each of the next stages of the proposed LRT system will also waste another half billion or so of tax payer’s precious money.  The city’s proposed LRT system appears to be inconsistent with the present BRT and the city’s resources and the city should explore the proposed plug-in electric or hybrid BRT and tunnel system this fall to compare with the LRT system and then optimize the downtown transitways and associated vehicles with a view to costs (taxes and fares) and commute time and transfer hassles. This study should be available to the public by late September so that more informed discussions can be made during the election campaigns. It is important that the voters have a sound understanding about the two proposed transit systems.

· The proposed system of BRT subways in the downtown core, new double decked Alexandra and Chaudière bridges and some new tunnels under the Ottawa River provides better opportunities than the LRT plan for improved speedy links for both vehicles and buses between Ottawa and Gatineau.

· The environmental assessment should also be done on both proposals this fall so that a fair comparison can be made of the different systems.  The vehicle capital and operating costs and amount of greenhouse gas production should also be compared for the two proposals.  The pros and cons of each system should then be discussed by an independent transit expert in the evaluation of the two systems.  Such an evaluation is important for optimizing both systems and could be of considerable benefit to council, the taxpayers and the senior levels of government who will be providing much of the funding.  It could probably save hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer’s money as well as considerable commuting time, fees and taxes for many riders and rate payers for many years. It also provides better business opportunities along the subway and transit routes.  This study would provide an objective measure of the quality of service and commuting time of the two different proposals.

· Council should fully debate the two options and the NCC Interprovincial Transit Study this fall so that a tentative decision can be made in the late fall after the election.  The city and new council could then review the options for the optimum system and tweak it up for further consideration and support in January 2011 subject to approval by the citizens in the November election.  The first stage of the BRT tunnel system under Albert Street from Bronson to Elgin is straight forward and construction might begin in the spring of 2011 for either the cut and cover system or later for the triple bored rectangular tunnels system.

· The possibility of upgrading the 177 new hybrid buses to plug-in ones with quick charge ultra capacitors or quick charge batteries should be explored this summer.  If successful then numerous buses should be upgraded with such storage systems for a trial experiment.  The garages and a few terminals should then be equipped with hefty chargers so that these buses can travel most of the time on inexpensive and clean electricity.  Proterra have recently developed light battery electric buses, the EcoRide BE35 & 45, with fast charging (10 min) lithium titanate batteries which provide a range of 50 - 60 km. Some should be obtained for testing once work on the tunnel has started. Articulated and bi-articulated plug-in electric or hybrid buses should be available in a few years and a hundred or so should be acquired to alleviate the congestion in the heavy routes, especially in the east end.  Eventually double-decker articulated plug-in buses should be available and acquired and used for very congested routes. Such plug-in hybrid buses will reduce the fuel consumption and associated costs and pollution by eventually ~80% or more.

· The proposed LRT and BRT systems and associated tunnels and stations are major capital, operating and commute challenges with associated fees and taxes.  An international transit expert should review the plans and hopefully further optimize them before any more commitments are made. The options and costs for each system should be clearly identified this fall so the citizens of Ottawa are able to vote on the two alternatives in the municipal November election.

Economic, Environment and Political Challenges

The forthcoming climate and oil crisis will probably see an increase in the use of public transit as the cost of fuel and carbon taxes escalate (see transportation section in ‘Mitigating Power, Oil and Climate Disasters’ at http://pages.istar.ca/~jwalker ).  Canada should endeavour to cut its high GHG emissions by ~25% by 2020 and by ~70% by 2050 to meet the international standards.  The poorly regulated US financial system has triggered a global recession and disaster that will last for several years.  The U.S. government now has a debt of ~$12 trillion dollars which is increasing and the American consumer has also lost about ~$12 trillion dollars in the melt down.  Prime Minister Harper has focused the G20 on deficit reduction so it might take only a decade or so for the U. S., Japan, the U.K. and the EU to fully recover.  These weak economies will drag down the Canadian economy for several years as we export 72% of our goods to the U.S.  Hence the Canadian economy will follow the recovery of the US and EU economies.  The Federal government had a recent deficit of $47 billion and a debt of $500 billion and it will have a debt of $600 billion by the time it has a balanced budget. The Ontario government’s debt is $175 billion and the deficit is over $21 billion and it will have a debt of $250+ billion by the time it is free of deficits. It has wisely put on hold any further expansion of the GTA transit system. The Federal government hopes to reduce its deficit by frugal management and the Ontario government will have to do the same so they can both eventually attack their whopping debts.

The Ottawa-Gatineau economy could lose almost 10,000 government jobs over the next three years as the new budget spending restraints cast a pall over the region. Generation X is now retiring and that will further limit resources for all three levels of government. Consequently council should not expect much more support in the next decade from these senior levels of government.  Hence the cities, the provincial and the federal governments must all be prudent, frugal and wise for the next two decades to keep our economy rolling and keep lowering deficits and eventually debts without raising taxes significantly. They should certainly not waste any of the tax payer’s precious money on unnecessary or extravagant projects. One mayoral candidate, Jim Watson, and some councillors are wisely looking for an affordable transit upgrade.

The Zussman report on Ottawa municipal governance failed to recognize the main causes of friction in council and that is the imbalance of representation between the core and suburbs and also the lack of community accountability.  This imbalance undoubtedly contributed to the lopsided transit plan. The city should be divided into six districts with six standing community councils of four councillors this summer (2010).  This requires an additional councillor in the suburbs and realignment of some wards.  This system will engage the councillors and citizens in each community/district much more than the present system and thereby significantly improve accountability and governance as recently suggested by some councillors.  Each district should gradually become a borough in a decade or so and should oversee and pay for most of its own services much like those in Toronto.  However, they should still work together in the regular standing committees to optimize the common services.  The citizens should have the opportunity at the election in 2010 to vote on this governance system as well as the proposed options for the core transit system.  It is important that the city and the boroughs optimize all their services to reduce energy and especially fossil fuel requirements and the associated costs and greenhouse gases. It is also of concern that some councillors are seemingly fixated on LRT and possibly a bit too friendly with some vendors. The city really needs to have a lobbyist registry to ensure citizens have a glimpse of what’s going on in City Hall.

The city is a bit slow paying off its present~$860 million debt and the present 2010 budget does not include much debt repayment.  The city also has a tarnished reputation handling significant contracts.  Consequently all options should be considered, including firm support from the senior governments which are now both in difficult financial situations.  The city’s planned expansion of the present bus system will already require a 2% increase in the property tax each year for the next decade. Hence, the city should first optimize its present transit system before implementing a costly and possibly dysfunctional light rail system on the main transit way.  Optimizing a transit system requires the consideration of capital and operating costs, fares including taxes, travel time including transfers, congested traffic regions, vehicle types, capabilities and features including GHG emissions. It is also suggested that council consider a pay-as-you-go per stage system unless significant upper level resources have been fully secured. Unfortunately the proposed LRT first stage is pretty much a one shot deal and cannot be done in steps.

The city’s expensive $6.6 billion light rail transit (LRT) plan is ill suited for Ottawa which has good bus service with several rapid transitways.  It would probably saddle the city with eventually a 2+ billion dollar debt and an inefficient core transit system as most riders will have to transfer on and off the rail service which takes at least 5 min and another 5 min. to ascend/descend 3 long escalators.  The plan also does not have any routes into any of the three distant suburban communities which is the main advantage of LRT. This discrepancy probably stems from the imbalanced council. The LRT first stage is now ~$2 billion and perhaps half a billion dollars more than a comparable expanded bus rapid transit (BRT) and note the Federal government’s infrastructure program does not support the acquisition of trains.  However, it now supports some research into hybrid and electric vehicle research and technology. The McGuinty government indicated the plan is too expensive and have provided only $600 million so the city will have to scale back the plans or provide additional funding for the first stage. The Federal government has contributed a similar amount but also seems infatuated with LRT systems. The city would undoubtedly need to increase the transit rate on the property tax and also the rider fees significantly more for this LRT option.  Mr. Jarrett Walker, an international public transit expert is in “broad agreement” with the author’s BRT plan.

The LRT plan does not really solve the bus congestion problems on Albert and Slater streets but puts only 30% of it underground as the local buses cannot go in the rail tunnels.  Furthermore it would increase transit times by about 20 minutes on the main transitway as most users during peak conditions must connect/wait for the train/bus at each end of the rail line and also ascend/descend three levels of stairs or escalators at the deep downtown stations.  This delay in commute time and the increased fares would cause considerable irritation to perhaps a hundred thousand passengers every day and consequently would not gain much support from the public.  Such transfers, delays and increased fares significantly reduce ridership.  Hence this plan could become a white elephant and consequently it is strongly recommended that the city should at least explore an expanded BRT system with tunnels and carefully compare it with their proposed LRT system.

The steel wheels of rail vehicles on steel tracks result in a low coefficient of friction and the trains will need to be spaced at least twice (>1 min.) the distance of rubber wheeled buses, especially when wet or snow covered, for safety considerations.  Hence rail systems are less safe than buses and their capacity for moving people is less than a comparable BRT.  The recent light rail accidents in Washington, San Francisco and Toronto and the tie-up of 5 trains in the Chunnel for 18 hours and loss of service for four days and the recent Brussels LRT collision are of some concern and interest. The LRT proposal will eventually have steel tracks on roads which are a hazard to cars and particularly to motorcycles, mopeds and bicycles. The overhead power lines for the trains and the tracks are also an eyesore. The city should realize that the proposed LRT does not have any advantages (click on A. Haydon’s presentation and his study and also see the BRT advantage site) but numerous disadvantages for Ottawa. It will probably double the city’s debt and put other significant projects in limbo for a decade or more. Mr. Haydon has found serious discrepancies in some of the cities studies and these should be reviewed and reconciled forthwith.

Note the Ottawa property taxpayer is already paying about $515 each year for the bus service that is used by only 30% of the residents.  The taxpayer does not subsidize hydropower users or for the potable, waste and storm water services.  Only low income riders should be subsidized.  Some BRT transit systems have become self sufficient and Ottawa should strive to do better. Hence the fares should gradually be increased from the present 50% to at least 60% of the city’s cost of the different transit services and possibly more in succeeding years to be fair to these taxpayers.  The O-Train service could in theory be extended to Gatineau over the Prince of Wales Bridge. However, it would cost $40 million to refurbish this bridge which is prohibitive. Fair charge for the present service would probably reduce the use of this expensive rail system which could eventually be replaced with a less expensive BRT service.  The proposed LRT system is well known (U.S. studies) to be about twice as expensive as BRT for capital costs and three times more expensive for operating costs.  Fares for the proposed LRT service itself will probably have to be double the current BRT fares.  Also note the bus transitways and some bus stops should be available to private operators with suitable buses for a token fee to provide better service to some remote non-serviced communities and some relief to the taxpayer. There are now 60,000 people who cross the Ottawa River every day and they could use an efficient intercity transit system. In view of a few strategic errors I would strongly suggest that a transit specialist from the NCC sit on both the STO Board of Directors and Ottawa’s Transit Committee to ensure the two systems can operate efficiently on the others’ routes, transitways and subways and thereby maintain a speedy intercity service.

Smart RFID bus cards should be explored to reduce loading time, improve passenger service and control and have a pay per distance travelled and vehicle type as well as intercity capability. The popular presto card is being used by numerous transit systems. All of the rider information should be used to develop smart routes that take most of the riders to and from their destinations in the region at the right time and with a minimum amount of time and cost and with as few transfers as possible. Riders on thin routes should be encouraged to cooperate with their neighbours, the transit authority and others on the route for establishing an optimum route and common times to optimize the (smart) service. This method should also be used for those who commute to Gatineau so that the number of transfers can be minimized. All city buses should be outfitted with GPS NextBus data technology, allowing transit riders to track buses online and on their cell phone, so they can be at a stop just in time rather than waiting outside in the rain and cold often for tens of minutes.

Green Vehicles

The carbon tax may soon be ~$50 per tonne of greenhouse gases (GHG) so all vehicles should be as efficient and clean as possible. A new small electrical device introduced just before the fuel injection of an engine, which produces a strong electric field to reduce the fuel viscosity, results in much smaller fuel droplets for atomization.  Because combustion starts at the droplet surface, smaller droplets lead to cleaner and more efficient combustion.  Both laboratory tests and road tests confirm this theory and indicate that such a device improves fuel mileage by 20% and some of these devices should be available in 2011.  It also reduces the smell and particulate pollution (soot) of diesels.

A Dutch company has recently developed and tested powered bus wheels with a built in electric motor in the hub which is more efficient than using a single motor with a differential.  This technology could be expanded to a four wheel drive system for heavy and articulated buses and thereby provide better traction and control of the bus during the often icy conditions in Ottawa in the winter.  Note such electric buses with batteries and/or the new ultra capacitor power units are relatively clean and quiet and do not require expensive overhead trolley lines or of course expensive rails and thereby save millions of capital dollars and repair costs.  Only 12% of the hydropower in Ontario is now from fossil fuels and a new 1250 MW link from Hydro Quebec this spring and the completion of the big tunnel around Niagara Falls and further astute management by OPG may reduce the fossil fuel content of Ontario’s power to about 5%.

Ferrous ion batteries are becoming available and they are more rugged and less expensive than the lithium ion batteries but most batteries cannot be charged quickly.  However, EcoloCap have had some success with carbon nanotube lead acid batteries (CNT batteries) which can be charged in 5 – 10 minutes and are 8x the capacity of conventional lead acid batteries and 2.5 times the energy density of lithium-ion batteries. They have just tested a powder nanotube lithium battery with even better characteristics and it is expected to be about half the price of other Li ion batteries. It stores 185 Wh/kgm which is presently better than any other Li ion battery. Lithium air batteries are also being developed as they are lighter and more powerful but can catch fire.

A Chinese and an American partner have had some success with plug-in buses using small ultra capacitors in Shanghai. The Sinautec bus has a 6 kWh ultra capacitor which provides a range of ~10 km and 50 new buses will go into service this year. EEstor in Texas, are developing large ultra capacitors, EESU (electrical energy storage units or ultra capacitors), which can store three times the power of comparable lithium-ion batters and can be charged quickly.  One of these units can hold 52 kilowatt-hours of electric power at 3500 V and are now expected to be comparable to Li-ion batteries.  However, a similar 50 kWh CNT battery is expected to cost about $1500 and is also ideal for a vehicle. Electrovaya have made 40 kWh 700 V Lithium ion SuperPolymer batteries that may eventually be quick charge capable and hence viable for transit buses. At 10 cents a kilowatt-hour it will cost about $5 per full charge of the CNT battery or the EESUs as opposed to ~$20 for gas or diesel fuel for a similar 40 km trip.  Comparable savings are possible by using the CNT batteries or the EESU in a plug-in hybrid bus.

It is suggested that parking be limited in the downtown core from 7 A.M. to 6 P.M. so that the buses can readily move about on most streets.  However, a few parkades for vehicles should be implemented near bus terminals, possibly with PPP operations, to alleviate the limited curb parking in the downtown core and along transit ways.  The new electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles generally have a range of only 20 - 100 km or so. Hence the parkades should have numerous 120 V and some 240 V plugs to recharge electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles and electric scooters.  Vancouver has a new regulation that requires 20% of any new parking facility to have plug-ins.  New parking meters should also have 120 V plugs which shut down when the time has expired. Car pooling with plug-in electric or plug-in hybrids cars will soon be the smart and inexpensive way to commute to the downtown office or for shopping.

Some scooters, keen cyclists, mopeds and e-bikes now travel at ~35 km/hr and they can readily commute 40 or more kilometres. They should be on separate bikeways with as few stops as possible and much like those in the Netherlands and Denmark. If they are on the shoulder of a busy road then they might be “protected” with a rumble strip as well as a white line. These express bikeways could be ploughed into November until there is a major snow fall and also in late March during the first warming spell. The proposal for an east-west segregated bike route on Somerset Street is commendable but the city should first establish a few nearby parking facilities (PPP?) along the street where parking is removed for the bikeway. The outside lane for bikeways might be separated into two lanes with a dashed line. The curb lane could be for the slower Sunday cyclist and the inner lane for the fast cyclists, fast e-bikes and for scooters.

The old buses or light rail trains (LRT) are heavy and hence generally use more energy and cause more pollution per passenger kilometre than the average car. However, a bus typically carries 5-20 times more passengers than a car and thereby eases congestion on the roads and parking in congested centres.  Light rail might eventually be clean, light and efficient but it is at least twice the capital cost of bus rapid transit and is inflexible.  A Bombardier 3 unit LRT cost about $5.5 million, while a similar bi-articulated bus costs about $1.5 million.  Furthermore the operating costs for LRT systems are about three times that of BRT. The proposed LRT system would also be completely inoperative during a power outage whereas a battery electric or plug-in hybrid BRT system would still function normally.

The buses that travel at high speed to the suburban communities should be streamlined to reduce the drag and hence improve their efficiency.  A half pyramid (bottom) box can be added to the rear of a bus which can improve the efficiency by at least 10% and should be explored.  NRC has a large wind tunnel that might be used to develop the best shape for this “bustle”.  Furthermore any new buses should have individual ventilation for each row of seats to reduce the spread of communicable diseases.  Air sanitizers are also becoming available for jets and they should be explored.  Cooper has been found to significantly shorten the life of microbes on its surface and hence all hand holds, doors and other surface on the bus and in terminals should be clad in cooper. An efficient heat pump for electric vehicles could provide both cooling during summer and efficient heating during the winter for plug-in hybrid or electric buses.  The bus should also be equipped with an inexpensive ball-in-tube inclinometer which the driver can use to control the speed when on curves to minimize the lateral forces on the riders. The curves should also be marked with the optimum speed measured with such special instruments. The buses should also have airbags to protect the passengers in the event of a major collision and at least two doors per coach so they can load and unload quickly.

Ottawa’s buses should eventually all be plug-in clean diesel hybrids and/or electric which use quick charge CNT or lithium titanate batteries or EEStor’s or other ultra capacitors to supplement the working battery.  Hence they could be quickly recharged at any transitway station and the buses should be able to run most of the time on inexpensive and clean electricity and thereby save millions of dollars for diesel fuel and the associated pollution.  The new fleet of 177 hybrid buses the city has ordered should have space to install these new batteries or the ultra capacitors.  The CNT batteries or the EEStor ultra capacitors should be available in the fall of 2010 and the city and the vendor (Daimler Bus) should acquire some for testing on their new hybrid buses.  The ultra capacitors store much of their energy at a high voltage so they need a step down transformer to charge it to the working battery voltage for the motor/generator so that it can still absorb most of the regenerative surge power from the generator while braking.  A fully charged 50 kWh CNT battery or EESU ultra capacitor should provide about a half hour range (~40 km) for the city’s new hybrid buses.  Two such units in a plug-in hybrid bus should provide enough clean electric power for about 90% of the time, depending on the route and load and the number of charging stations.  Because ultra capacitors can take and deliver charge very fast for breaking and acceleration it is best that a vehicle have both an ultra capacitor and quick charge battery for improved efficiency. See the Sinautec and ISE links for details of ultra capacitors and hybrid buses. The CNT batteries or ultra capacitors could be recharged at garages, major terminals and some selected stops thereby significantly reducing fossil fuel consumption and the associated pollution and costs. They would also keep the tunnels clean which is important as it would be difficult to clean them of the soot, oil and odour from the diesel exhaust. Proterra have recently developed light battery electric buses, the EcoRide BE35 & 45, with fast charging (10 min) lithium titanate batteries which provide a range of 50 – 60 km. Buses are much lighter than rail systems and therefore more efficient. They would also reduce fuel cost by 90% (~$200,000 over lifetime) and emissions by ~90% when in the electric mode in Ontario.

The charging stations need a hefty 3 phase charger of ~150 kW and should have an electrical storage capability so that they can rapidly recharge a vehicle in about 10 min. However, the storage unit itself should be replenished slowly to avoid fluctuations on the power lines.  Solar cells have come down in price and have improved in efficiency. Large tracking and concentrating solar panels made by Amonix can produce 50 kW of power. They might be considered for terminals/stations with a large roof or nearby open field for an array of high voltage cells to supply some power for the charger.  Modest wind generators could also be considered for remote stops. An overhead catenary system like that on the buses in Shanghai could be used to automatically recharge the CNT battery or the EESU when the bus pulls into selected spots at a terminal.  A battery electric or plug-in hybrid bus with these devices is possibly 70% more efficient than a conventional diesel bus and hence this technology should be considered for any new buses. When the city has numerous charging stations then some of the buses could be all electric and thereby save on the capital and maintenance costs. Such a fleet can be just as clean as an electric LRT system but has the advantage of lower capital and maintenance costs and flexibility on all routes and capability of passing other vehicles on its route which a train does not have.

Bi-articulated plug-in hybrid buses should be considered for dense routes as the latter can carry more than 250 passengers and are comparable to a three unit light rail train.  Volvo has some bi-articulated buses and also Neoplan and plug-in hybrid ones should be available in a few years.  Double decked bi-articulated plug-in buses should also be available in a few years and should be able to carry 400 or more passengers. These buses would probably require a 150 kWh battery or three EESU units so the charger should be about 300 kW or have a large storage capability. A hundred or so of these busses would undoubtedly help reduce the congestion to and from the suburban communities and in the downtown region.  Such buses every 30 seconds or so could deliver 30,000 riders per hour from each transitway to and from the downtown core. Vehicle radars are now available and it should be possible to have a bus travelling at high speed every 100 m, if necessary, on the transitways.  It is urgent that such buses service the Orleans region soon as the congestion on the buses and highways is unacceptable.  However, these routes are long and the commute time is often an hour or more so the new buses for these routes should have as many seats as possible. Plug-in hybrid and electric buses are quiet and free of vibration so the drivers should endeavour to make the ride as smooth as possible so riders can read or work. The roads should also be smooth and the buses should have good efficient tires for safety considerations.

N.B. the city’s new hybrid buses should be upgraded with quick charge batteries or ultra capacitor electrical storage units ASAP and numerous bus terminals equipped with hefty chargers so these buses can travel on inexpensive and clean electricity most of the time.  Articulated and bi-articulated plug-in hybrid buses should be available in a few years and a hundred or so should be acquired when available.  Such buses would be ideal for use in the new tunnels as they would not cause nearly as much pollution as the old buses and thereby make the task of keeping the tunnel clean with fresh air significantly easier.  They are also much less expensive than rail systems and much more flexible and versatile and fit in very well with the present transitways in Ottawa and Gatineau.

The proposed battery electric BRT system will significantly reduce greenhouse gas emission much more than the LRT proposal. The electric LRT only reduce the bus traffic on Albert and Slater streets by 30% and only goes from Tunney’s Pasture to Blair Road thereby saves only 38,000 tonnes of GHG annually. However, the proposed BRT moves all of the Albert St. and Slater St. bus traffic into one 4 lane tunnel under Albert St. thereby saving about 125,000 tonnes of GHG a year. Furthermore these buses only spend about a third of the time on this route and they can readily travel to the three suburban communities and hence save about 380,000 tonnes while a diesel bus would initially have to complete the journeys for the LRT system. Hence, the use of battery electric buses instead of rail vehicles provides about ten times the reduction of GHG and a comparable saving in fuel costs. The LRT will reduce the fuel consumption by 10 million litres a year but the BRT proposal will reduce the fuel consumption by about 100 million litres per year. The next step would be the Waller-Dalhousie-St. Patrick and Alexandra Bridge route to Gatineau which would require about a dozen each of OC Transpo and STO buses and save about another 20,000 tonnes of GHG. Such a fleet of clean buses and several chargers would save about $80 million a year on fuel costs.

Transitways

There isn’t much space left in the downtown core for more high offices and we are probably in the first phase of a long recession and Nortel has failed so the estimate of 296,000 morning trips in 2031 may be high. However it could be readily managed with numerous bi-articulated hybrid buses, a few more transitways and some tunnels in the downtown core.  Buses on a transitway can slip off the route and service several different communities in the core and in the suburbs along the route and then use the transitway for a rapid return to the centre of the city.  The stations on a transitway should be 4 lanes wide so that an express bus can slip by any loading/unloading bus. LRT cannot go about a community or a suburb and pick up or drop off passengers and hence is not nearly as convenient or as efficient for the commuter as a bus and transitways.  The STO in Gatineau are implementing a transitway and its best that Ottawa expand its present excellent transitways rather than develop a light rail system that significantly disrupts this efficient and effective bus system which is perhaps the best in North America.  

Curitiba in Brazil, with a population of 2.2 million, has a very nice and efficient BRT and feeder system and good supporting private bus lines that use the public facilities.  Bogotá, Columbia have recently replaced 7000 private buses with seven Bus Rapid Transit lines and numerous contracts which handle 1.6 million trips a day and this reduced fuel consumption by 59%. Brisbane also has an efficient Bus Rapid Transit system which has been updated with exclusive right of ways. The new Health BRT line in Cleveland, the Orange BRT line in Los Angeles and BRT extensions of LRT systems in Mexico city, Calgary and in Beijing are the method of choice now for new rapid transit systems. These and other BRT systems should be studied by the planners.  Bus transitways can carry just as many passengers as light rail systems.

Generally light rail systems should not replace excellent transitways but be on separate routes and compliment the bus transit system.  The city’s proposed light rail system and downtown tunnels does not meet these important criteria and should not be considered until all the possible bus transitways with associated tunnels in the core are near capacity and independent LRT routes identified.  Unfortunately, there are several single minded light rail lobby groups and even some media and also some outspoken individuals and politicians who are seemingly obsessed with this expensive form of public transit.  They obviously have little regard for the poor taxpayer and the extra hassle and costs for the many commuters.  It is best that the city develop and review both the BRT and LRT options to have an informed opinion on the costs and merits of each system before any decision is made. An independent authority on transit should then analyse the two options and then comment on the different pros and cons of each system and also provide an objective overall assessment. This study and review should be available for the public to peruse by September so that more informed discussions on the best system can be made during the campaigns and the election in November.

Because LRT is much more expensive than BRT and is inflexible it is best used for connecting very high density locations some distance apart on existing tracks or right of way if at all possible.  However, the Superbus, which is being developed in the Netherlands, is more efficient and better for high speed transit than LRT for most new routes.  Ottawa, at present, does not have even two high density locations and only a few rail lines to some suburbs and rural communities.  The proposed expensive light rail system with the deep tunnel and the 12 updated or new stations from Tunney’s Pasture to Blair Rd. would significantly increase the commute time and cost and hence frustration for all passengers travelling to the downtown sector.  Such frustration would decrease the ridership by perhaps 20% or more.  Furthermore it would still require a bus transitway through the downtown core for the local buses within the Greenbelt as these buses cannot travel on the rail system.

The extra bus transitway for local vehicles should probably be on top of the proposed light rail tunnel and on the old transitways where possible.  Hence there would still be numerous local buses on the old transitways of Albert and Slater streets.  Consequently the LRT only reduces the downtown noise, congestion and pollution problems of buses.  It also cannot provide a fast service because of the many stops and curves in the proposed plan.  Furthermore, it does not connect with the O-train line.  It also does not provide service to the south side of the Rideau Centre and to the new Ottawa Convention Centre which is of considerable concern to the proprietors and the businesses in these centres.  It is an expensive misguided idea based on old and awkward technology which would significantly degrade the service for the commuters and for downtown business and would be a very large financial burden for the riders and the taxpayer.  Incidentally, most of these light rail stations should have a large parking lot or parkade as many of the core commuters will probably have to drive or cycle to the proposed light rail stations to save time commuting.

Note the city is in an earthquake zone so the deep tunnels should be resilient to large tremors.  The transit control lights for the tunnel should be connected to the local seismic network at the Seismic Observatory on Carling Ave. as well as smoke, fire and intrusion detectors throughout the tunnel.  The deep tunnels for the LRT will probably have water infiltration as the concrete ages which may cause problems. The region also has pockets of leda clay and sand and these sections would require piles to the bed rock. Travelling in a deep tunnel is not pleasant and the walls should be some distance from the coaches and with good lighting to provide a more pleasant ambience.  The present transit security force might be supplemented by bus radars, smart passes, fences, monitoring systems and, when necessary, the city’s police service to reduce costs and conflicts.

Ottawa has several good transitways and the system should first be expanded and improved with good quiet, efficient and comfortable battery electric or plug-in hybrid buses and tunnels in congested regions.  However, more curb transitways might be established on Carling, Elgin, Bronson, Rideau, Montreal Road and other wide arterial roads.  It is somewhat disconcerting when in a small car to have big busses pass on the parkway.  The present sunken transitway along Scott might be extended via a shallow (~1 m) sunken road alongside the parkway or swing over beside Byron with short tunnels at intersections and to the Lincoln Heights transit terminal.  This route would be more accessible for riders near Richmond St. and to shoppers headed for the Carlingwood Mall. Such transitways should generally be just below the average terrain so that passengers can see the pleasant parkway and where they are going.  This sunken transitway would also reduce the noise and pollution for nearby communities. The buses on the transitways should also have right-of-way at most intersections which will reduce the commute time by 10-20 minutes depending on the route and traffic.

The city should explore the development of smart buses that have a communications capability so they can be diverted to pick up or drop off riders near a route during slack periods. This could be especially useful for the handicapped and for women at night as it would provide them with more security.

The National Capital Commission is developing an Interprovincial Transit Strategy and this study should be completed in the summer of 2010. Any proposed enhancement to STO or OC Transit systems that will have Federal support should fit in with these concepts for improved commuting between the cities. In particular it is desirable to limit the bus traffic on congested Wellington and Rideau streets so that visitors, tour buses and others can readily traverse this import part of the city. A light rail inner core loop that the NCC is reviewing would be extraordinarily expensive and dysfunctional and would increase the congestion in the downtown sector which both cities are trying to reduce with expensive bus transit systems and tunnels in the core region. An improved BRT system in each city could readily accommodate the buses from either municipality with core loops and tunnels anchored by the bridges in the east and west. Some of the present bridges need to be replaced and some additional bridges or tunnels are needed for more loops across the Ottawa River. Hence the riders would not waste time transferring to other buses or rail which would save them time and money. However, tourist routes with stops for buses and cars at vantage points for pictures and by the museums and other points of interest would be welcomed by many visitors.

To optimize the Albert and Slater transitways in the interim, they could be changed to two way streets in the spring (2011) so that 2 lane bus transitways could be on both sides of each street.  The use of 2 lanes permits the buses to use the faster skip and stop technique to reduce the travel time in crowded sections as has been found in Portland and in Minneapolis. This would double the present two routes or lanes across the downtown core to four routes.  This change and the use of clean and quiet bi-articulated electric or plug-in hybrid buses on the heavy routes would relieve the congestion, noise and pollution in the downtown region for a few years.  This system would also help during the construction of the tunnel under Albert. Hence the congestion excuse used by many is weak and should not be used to justify a rush to light rail at this time.

Tunnel Options

The tunnels will be in use for many decades and should be designed to accommodate considerable traffic and different types of busses and double-decker vehicles. Furthermore the road bed should have gradients of less than 3% so that it could be readily converted for articulated light rail vehicles if they should eventually prove to be more efficient and effective than comparable battery electric or plug-in hybrid buses. The first tunnel should be under Albert St. and should eventually be four lanes wide and ~5.5 m high and of either the cut and cover type or made with the new rectangular boring machines. A four lane tunnel permits the use of the skip and stop technique which has proven to speed up buses travelling on congested streets. It should be somewhat like the cut and cover tunnels for the Metros in Montreal and Washington.  Montreal has done a marvellous job of integrating the Metro stations with numerous underground shopping malls. Toronto also has excellent underground shopping malls integrated with their subways and linked together with PATH. Ottawa should endeavour to do the same but their proposed LRT is far too deep for these scenarios. However, the Montreal Metro is presently being harassed by Bombardier over contracts for many more of its rubber wheeled trolleys. Two way bus traffic on Slater and vehicles on Queen St. could be used to carry the Albert St. traffic during construction.

Komatsu have developed machines that can bore rectangular tunnels up to 6.2 m X 4.3 m which might be suitable for a two lane tunnel or one lane and a wide platform. However, it is too low for a double-decker vehicle. Nevertheless they might be used to make two parallel tunnels with long narrow platforms. There should probably be either a ramp over the proposed extension of the Pont du Portage road to Bronson and then over Wellington St. or a tunnel to the entrance of the Albert tunnel at the west side of the cliff.  The east end of the Albert Street tunnel should go just under the NAC garage or beside it which is under the road. It should have stairs and escalators for a modest flag stop station there. It should then be linked to the Mackenzie King station with a second level transitway under the Mackenzie King Bridge but over the canal, if possible.  The present bridge support system might be used to make a two lane lower level for the buses much like the Danforth Bridge in Toronto. However, it may eventually require a new two layer bridge over the canal which could be a suspension bridge to minimize structure under the bridge for tall boats.  Otherwise a rectangular type tunnel under the canal could be constructed from Elgin to the Mackenzie King station and then to the Laurier station.

The boring machine could also be used to make one tunnel under Albert St. and at a later date when the tunnel is at capacity add two adjacent tunnels on either side of this tunnel. However, it is expected that the tunnel will be at capacity shortly after it is finished so it is probably best that the three tunnels be constructed concurrently. These extra tunnels should increase the capacity by about 30%. The inside walls between the tunnels should be replaced with pillars so that it is more pleasant and so that the buses could readily move between the inside lane and outside lane. The tunnel machine could be started at the ramp on the west end of Albert St. so that they would not obstruct traffic during operation but the lanes above the machine should be protected from traffic. This is probably more efficient than a cut and cover system, but these tunnels are not as useful as they cannot accommodate double-decker vehicles. The four lane tunnel could continue just to the Campus terminal as it is on a transitway. This subway could be constructed in three stages with curb ramps to the surface route: from Bronson to Elgin; Elgin to Campus and then to Hurdman somewhat later if necessary.

The tunnels are probably best made with cut and cover techniques and lined with precast blocks and roofs much like those used to make some interchanges. The precast blocks could be designed to just fit the walls (~5.5 m high) and the roof sections could just fit the width of the span of the tunnel (~18 m wide) with one support in the middle of the span. All three options for the tunnel should be explored to determine the most cost effective solution.

The underground utilities would need to be relocated and probably updated before the tunnelling operation which could be expensive ($100+ m) as the communication utilities generally charge 100% for this service. However, with cooperation these lines could be rerouted during construction and then located in the upper corners of the tunnel and thereby be much more accessible than in the ground. Consequently there should be no charge for such support and cooperation. However, at least two local contractors, Greenbelt Construction and Taggart Construction, are both very adept at working in the region’s rocky terrain and around such lines and pipes if a utility fails to cooperate. The city could then lease space in the tunnel if the utility later wanted to use it for its lines or pipes.

The outside tunnels should be used for the various stops with ~3 m wide platforms and stairs to the sidewalks above.  The platform should continue for most of the length of the tunnel so passengers can readily switch from one stop or route to another without having to go above to the street level.  The platforms could have moving sidewalks to speed up the transfer of passengers. Some elevators and stairs or escalators should be available at each intersection and the tunnel should be bright and attractive as they will be used for many decades.  The inside lane should be used by the buses for traveling much the same as at present on the Albert and Slater Streets.  The outside lane could also be used for deceleration and acceleration of the buses to their stations and for emergency stops so other buses could continue to function efficiently on the transitway.  This system of skip stop is faster than the shuttle method and accommodates slow loading and unloading buses which could tie up a single lane of buses or trains.  There should be charging capabilities at most bus stops in the tunnel. A high speed express bus could possibly save ten minutes or so of commute time over light rail which has to stop at each station.  There should be at least two stops for the long express buses and three for shorter and local buses. The light rail system cannot accommodate a high speed express train on a single track system. The four lane tunnels can also accommodate all types of plug-in hybrid buses, articulated plug-in hybrid buses and bi-articulated hybrid buses, plug-in electric buses, double decked buses and also Superbuses.  It is much flexible and safer than a single lane or rail tunnel and emergency service vehicles could quickly slip in behind any disabled bus.

Note, the bored or cut and cover tunnels can be done in sections of a few blocks as needed and as resources become available.  The 4 lane tunnels and the two platforms for the tunnel should be at least 18 m wide and 5.5 m high. However, the Komatsu tunnel is only 4.3 m high which would be tight for a double decked bus. The first section could be from Bronson to Elgin.  Access to the tunnel can be made with a curb ramp on each side of the street.  The space under the platforms could also be used to run some of the utility lines. These large tunnels could be made by several local contractors working on different blocks and thereby complete the job in a couple of years. The big dig for the proposed LRT requires a large boring machine and mostly likely an outside contractor, workers and staff and will take several years.

The second stage could be from Elgin to Laurier and should occur when the traffic on the Mackenzie King Bridge and at the adjacent intersections is excessive and slows down the bus traffic significantly even with bus controlled lights.

The proposed shallow rectangular tunnels are more inviting than the cities’ proposed deep round twin tunnels and are readily accessible from the street and thereby help to reduce commute time.  They are also more resilient to earthquakes. Stores along the route could also provide access and have display windows at the platform level for shopping so that customers would not have to go above and outside in the sometimes challenging weather of the Ottawa region.  The proposed LRT system is far too deep and adjacent stores cannot provide such an opportunity to commuting customers.   The cut and cover tunnels could be constructed in “block by block stages” with precast sections for the rectangular sections that can be quickly installed so that it does not impede traffic for very long.  The precast reinforced water resistant concrete sections could be interlocked and held together with cables passing through each section.  Smaller precast sections for the 3 bored rectangular tunnels are also installed as the tunnels progresses. The large sections could be made in nearby LeBreton Flats or at Bayview so that they could be readily transported to the Albert – Nicholas street construction sites. These sections should be made of green concrete if at all possible to help reduce GHG. The first stage would probably cost about $600 million and might be completed and in operation in a couple of years. The second stage with a new bridge would also cost about $500 million and the new fleet of plug-in articulated buses and chargers about $200 million for a total of $1.3 billion which is a saving of nearly a billion over the city’s LRT proposal.

Both Ottawa and Gatineau could benefit from an inner loop connecting a new Alexandra bridge and eventually a new Chaudière bridge with transitways and tunnels linking to the new Albert St. tunnel and to the Gatineau transitways. The old Alexandra Bridge should be replaced with a 4 lane two layer bridge soon so that more traffic could move across the Ottawa River and in particular buses should be on the lower level. On the Ottawa side this would require a short tunnel from the new Chaudière Bridge to the LeBreton station with a flag stop by the War Museum. A second tunnel from the new Interprovincial Bridge and under St. Patrick to Dalhousie could have a flag stop by the National Gallery and a curb ramp on St Patrick for buses connecting with the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge and the north eastern section of Ottawa. The two lane tunnel would turn and continue under Dalhousie with another curb ramp on Murray for buses connecting with King Edward and the MacDonald-Cartier Bridge and north eastern section of Ottawa. It would continue with a 4 lane station at the Byward Market and then on to Rideau with another station and then under Waller to join up with the main transitway with a T junction.

The new and improved links permit riders in most any part of the east or west end of Ottawa to catch a smart bus that would rapidly take them along the Ottawa transitways and over either of the two bridges to the core of Gatineau without having to transfer. Tunnels from the Chaudière Bridge in Gatineau should link up with ones across the downtown core that connect to the new RAPIBUS transitway. The eastern end of this transitway should have a station on Laurier at the Museum of Civilization and then connect up with the lower level of the Alexandra Interprovincial Bridge. Similarly riders in Gatineau could have smart buses pick them up in the eastern and eventually in the western part of Gatineau and using the RAPIBUS transitway and these new bridges quickly take them into the downtown core of Ottawa using the Albert St. transitway/subway without having to transfer. A LRT could not make any of the sharp turns on these routes and it would be very expensive and awkward to make it swing into such places.

The new Interprovincial links would significantly improve the traffic, transit and bicycle links for the Confederation Ceremonial Route and consequently should have extra Federal support. A new Alexandra Interprovincial bridge should be a high priority for NCC and should have full support of the cities of Ottawa and Gatineau for the supporting subways and roads. Hence there would be fewer buses on Rideau or the downtown Wellington section in front of the Parliament buildings.  The STO buses should also be battery electric or plug-in hybrid buses so that they would not pollute the tunnels. A few of the new OC Transpo plug-in hybrid buses could also use this subway system to provide an alternative route to Gatineau which would return over the Chaudière bridge and then back on the transitway at the LeBreton terminal.

The Albert St. tunnel will be near capacity shortly after completion and a third main transitway should be considered. By having the Barrhaven transitway extend over the new Standherd Bridge and linking up with the Southeast Transitway at South Keys it could form a loop.  The buses on this line when in the core of the city should be on a second transitway from Bayview to the LeBreton stations then to Slater and then to the Mackenzie King Bridge via a tunnel under Elgin St.  When the Mackenzie King – Hurdman section of the tunnel is at capacity then the local buses should be diverted to the surface route of this transitway.  Some could also return via a tunnel under Elgin, the Queensway and O’Conner to Main and the Southeast Transitway at the Smyth station. The underground sections of the Slater St. Tunnel should also be 4 lanes and of the triple bored rectangular type or the cut and cover type. The Elgin section could eventually be a 4 lane tunnel to Catherine then 2 lanes under the Queensway to Metcalf and then to O’Conner. This tunnel could then go to the northeast corner of Lansdowne Park and then under the canal to Mutchmor and then to Main and finally along Smyth to the Southeast Transitway to complete the loop. A LRT cannot make a sharp turn at Slater and Elgin and would have to go deep and swing north under Parliament Hill to come out along Elgin and consequently would be more expensive and the city would soon have a ridiculous spaghetti system of tunnels in the core using such an awkward system.

A fourth transitway under Laurier might be explored in the future for buses on an inner loop for the core region to reduce the congestion of buses on the core streets and on other transitways and tunnels.  It could also be used to accommodate private buses from remote communities travelling along high speed lanes on the Queensway.  Hence with transitways also under Albert and Slater it should be possible to eventually have three 4 lane transitway tunnels in the downtown core rather than the present two surface single lane routes or the proposed deep 2 lane LRT tunnel.  Also note that these transit ways do not cross over each other but are all parallel and on adjacent streets in the downtown section so that commuters can readily move from one transitway route to another one with interconnecting pedestrian tunnels and moving sidewalks.  However, note the city’s proposed awkward LRT system swings north across some future routes and thereby cuts off the possibility of a Rideau – Queen St. tunnel in the downtown core.

These tunnels will significantly reduce the bus traffic on the downtown core streets and improve the access to this region for visitors, shoppers, commuters and for cyclists.  They will also reduce the commute time while the proposed LRT only reduces bus traffic by 30% and it will significantly increase the commute time, costs and stress (transfers). Similarly a cut and cover tunnel could be under Maisonneuve or Eddy in Gatineau to relieve the congestion on these streets. The platforms and stairs for these two intercity transitway tunnels could be finished in red garnet much like Confederation Boulevard to indicate a link between the two cities. This optimized system of transitways and tunnels should be able to efficiently handle the commuter traffic for several decades whereas the proposed awkward LRT will probably require higher fares and more subsidies just to survive. The buses could be diverted to the surface route if there are any repairs or emergency conditions in the tunnels which is not possible with a LRT system. These large tunnels also provide a secure shelter for the nearby office workers and shoppers during a catastrophic failure of our security system such as that during 9/11 and the Air India tragedy.

The excavated material from the tunnel could be screened and the dirt used to construct a modest dam (~8 m) and dikes just below Remic Rapids to raise the water to that of Lac Deschênes.  The rocks could be used to protect the dam from water and wind erosion. Pipes could then be used to carry the water to turbines by the Chaudière dam and associated power stations.  The enhanced hydraulic pressure and extra generators would significantly increase the hydro power of the three generating facilities by about 50 MW during peek flows. This extra power would be available for a couple of months during the spring runoff and it could also be used for peak demand or emergency periods as the new reservoir could store enough water for several weeks at full power. Locks could be installed in the Chaudière dam and the new Remic dam so that boats from Montreal and Kingston would then have direct access to the upper Ottawa River some 400 km to Lake Timiskaming.

Ottawa - Gatineau Transit and Vehicle Loops

It is important that Ottawa and Gatineau have several good bridges for commercial use, for commuters, shoppers and travellers and for transit links to assist the 60,000 people who cross the Ottawa River every day so that riders can move quickly and efficiently between the two cities. This requires similar transit systems so that the vehicles can readily move on the other’s transitways. The STO have no plans to have a LRT system in Gatineau even though there are old tracks nearby. The core streets in both cities are narrow and frequently congested and sometimes gridlocked during rush hour. Consequently it does not seem possible or wise to have an expensive and somewhat inefficient and awkward LRT system to link the two cities. Both cities presently have short bus routes in the other city that have proven effective in transferring riders to the core of the other city however they often require the riders to transfer to the other system. These routes could be improved with transitways and subways where the streets are narrow and/or congested. The STO in Gatineau are developing a new bus transitway, RAPIDBUS, which may eventually have a subway across the core of Gatineau that could speed local riders downtown and across the core and also help those coming from Ottawa. However, OC Transpo is considering only LRT for the downtown core transitway which would impede both the local transit system and the buses coming from Gatineau.

The inner core loop could consist of new Chaudière and Interprovincial (Alexandra) double-decker bridges with the lower deck reserved for the STO and OC Transpo BRT systems. The Alexandra Bridge should be replaced first and then the Chaudière Bridge should eventually be replaced. Both should be four lane double layer bridges with transit lanes, sidewalks and cycle lanes to be part of an inner core and intercity subway loop.  The subways on both sides of the Ottawa River could link up for an inner core loop of the two downtown regions.

If Ottawa does adopt the LRT system then the city should also develop a second core transitway tunnel under Rideau St. and linked to Queen St. and then to a bridge over the proposed Bronson road extension to the Pont du Portage Bridge then to the LeBreton transit station.  This subway could be made in two stages: King Edward to Confederation Square and Elgin, then from Elgin along Queen St. to the Albert St. ramp. Returning buses from Gatineau could join this transitway via the Chaudière Bridge at Booth St. and an underground junction at King Edward so that there would be fewer big buses on Rideau or the downtown Wellington section in front of the Parliament buildings.  The STO buses should also use battery electric or plug-in hybrid buses so that they would not pollute the tunnels.  The subways on both sides of the Ottawa River should link up for an inner core loop of the two downtown regions. The subway linking Queen St. and Rideau St. should pass under the southern end of Confederation Square but over the canal if at all possible.

A second loop could be developed with a two lane road that could be put on the proposed dam at Remic Rapids. This loop could be used by the STO buses to connect with the Tunney’s Pasture terminal and by the OC Transpo buses to connect with the RAPID bus transitway. The Albert Street - Dalhousie tunnel connection and the Murray Street ramp to King Edward and then to the MacDonald-Cartier Bridge could be used as a second loop for either bus system.

The proposed Kettle Island bridges are a good way to link the eastern parts of Ottawa and Gatineau and transit curb lanes may help speed riders along their way. However, the two cities need a ring road and the east end link could be a route linking Highway 366 in Quebec across lower Duck Island to an interchange near Green Creek on Highway 174. This readily links up with the Queensway to form the east end of a loop or bypass road. A transitway curb lane could be on this bridge and linked to one along Montreal Rd. to King Edward to improve access along Montreal Rd. and for commuters to/from Gatineau via this Duck Island Bridge.  This curb transitway could eventually be extended to Orleans with a multilane road on St Joseph Blvd. to help relieve the congestion on the main transitway and on the 174 Highway.

Ottawa does not have a good link between the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge and the Queensway. It is proposed that the city explore either a 4 lane cut and cover tunnel or a bored one under King Edward Ave. with curb ramps from about Clarence St. to about Templeton St. The curb ramps should be adjacent to the outside lane if possible. This would improve the link to Gatineau and also get most of the through vehicles off the surface route which passes right by the University of Ottawa and hence it also reduces congestion and associated pollution.

The west transitway at Island Park Drive could have ramps for the STO buses to reduce the commute time for riders from Aylmer to Tunney’s Pasture and Ottawa’s downtown core. This would also help to reduce the congestion on the Champlain Bridge. Similarly the RAPIDBUS route to Aylmer could have ramps for the OC Transpo buses from the west travelling over the Champlain Bridge that need to use this route to take Ottawa riders to the west side of Gatineau.

There could be a high bridge or initially a 2 lane tunnel at the Lac Des Chênes narrows and Des Chênes rapids to improve access to western Ottawa and the 416 and 417 highways for those in western Gatineau and in Aylmer. This also improves access for those in Nepean to the western Gatineau, Gatineau Park and to highways 148 and 5.

Kanata is now a significant city as is the nearby city of Aylmer but they do not have a readily accessible connecting road for travellers, commuters or for commerce. A high bridge across the Ottawa River just west of Aylmer Island could alleviate this problem. However, such a bridge would be expensive and a bit of an eye sore in the nice tranquil country side of the region. The supports would probably be a hazard to the hundreds of sailors that use Lac Des Chênes for recreational and competitive sailing. A 2 lane tunnel would probably be less expensive and could handle the traffic for several decades when it could be supplemented by another 2 lane tunnel. The tunnel(s) could of course be used for a smart bus transit route linking the cities by both the STO and OC Transpo services. The tunnel could start at say Chemin Latton in west Aylmer and cross to say the Maxwell Bridge Road then cross the March road and then to Old Carp Road which should link up with Terry Fox Drive. This tunnel and a corresponding tunnel across Lower Duck Island and an interchange on Highway 174 in the east form an extended loop for the two cities.

Incidentally, there could also be a pipeline across Upper Duck Island to link the Pickard waste water plant with the Gatineau plant in order to divert the sewage to the other in the event of overflow or failure at either plant. The potable water supplies in both cities should also be linked in the event of a catastrophic failure, fire or earthquake in either city. A recent fire in Gatineau was not contained because of the limited water supply for the extra Ottawa fire equipment that came to help the Gatineau Fire Dept.

Optimizing Multilane Highways

The Queensway is congested and slow nearly every morning and evening in both directions. Furthermore it is very difficult to add more lanes to the Queensway in the core of the city. Hence a 417 bypass around the Capital Region is needed to relieve the congestion on the Queensway especially during peak periods. It could also improve the accessibility of core and remote communities in and around the region. A first step for a bypass would be a 2 lane extension of the West Hunt Club road across the Greenbelt and around the northeast corner of Glen Cairn to Eagleson Road. This would permit travellers and truckers to exit/join the Queensway at Eagleson and then to Hunt Club and then merge/exit onto the Queensway at the Walkley Road 417 interchange which would save time during the rush hour periods. Together with the Lower Duck Island Gatineau link and the Aylmer link it would also form a basic ring road for the National Capital Region as well as a bypass for the Queensway.

The Provincial Government should provide for a multilane highway bypass around the Queensway. This road could be from the new Hazeldean 407 interchange around the southwest part of Stittsville to Fallowfield Rd. then across the Rideau River to Leitrim Rd. and then to the 417 Anderson road and interchange #104. The Anderson Rd. could then be extended around Blackburn Hamlet to link up with the Lower duck Island road at the Highway 174 interchange to form a ring road around most of the capital region. It could also be extended around Mer Bleue to the Tenth Line Rd. in Orleans. A short route from the Hazeldean 407 interchange around the west side of Stittsville to Fallowfield Rd and using the Standherd Drive and bridge and then Armstrong Rd. to Leitrim Rd. could provide a temporary bypass route. This option should be should be explored by the province and the city this fall.

The speed limits and vehicle types on multilane highways should be segregated and staggered for the different lanes to optimize the efficiency of highways and thereby reduce commute time and also save fuel and reduce GHG emissions.  The outside lane(s) should be for trucks and slow vehicles and could initially be at 90 km/h and in a few years lowered to ~80 km/h as trucks are not streamlined and hence are inefficient at high speeds.  The middle lane(s) should be at ~100 km/h and for most vehicles.  However, the inside lane should be for multi (3+) occupancy vehicles and for green (2+) vehicles and could initially be at ~110 km/h and in a few years raised to 120 km/h.  A green vehicle should initially have a highway capability of ~4.5 l/100 km (0.9 l/passenger/100 km) which would then qualify it for a green license plate.  The segmented sections should be marked with solid white lines most of the way except when vehicles need to cross over to exit or move to the express lane. However, efficient Superbuses could travel at say initially 140 km/hr on special express lane(s) with flashing yellow lights or on long stretches of open transitways and express lanes.  If super green buses and green minibuses become popular then special high speed inner lanes (150 – 200 km/h) could be implemented on long routes.  Special naturally heated Super-roads could also be made on hills, curves and where snow drifts occur on highways and transitways to melt the snow and ice for safe high speed travel during wet and icy conditions. This system of special lanes is less expensive and more versatile than special transit lanes beside highways or high speed rail.  It might be gradually implemented on the Queensway and the new 407 highway to Carleton Place on a trial bases and could significantly reduce the commute time for suburban buses and those travelling to/from the surrounding towns and villages.

The Superbus is being developed at TU Delft with the support of Connexxion in the Netherlands.  The bus is light, streamlined, attractive and powered by in-wheel electric motors supplied with energy from quick charge batteries or ultra capacitors and possibly some fuel cells for backup.  It can travel at 250 km/h on Supertracks and is quiet and comfortable.  It can also travel on the local roads, arterial roads, highways and transit ways and hence is very flexible.  Every passenger has a seat in a compartment.  Each of the seven compartments has a door for rapid loading and unloading of passengers.  The Superbus can be called up and could deviate from a regular route to pick up several passengers at a station or nearby intersection during off peak times.  Similarly, the passengers can give a destination and the bus will drop them off at a nearby intersection near the regular route during off peak travel.  Hence, it is more efficient, flexible and comfortable than the present system or any inflexible light rail system and would be ideal for segregated highways.  The Dutch are presently planning a system of north-south Supertracks to join the various towns, cities and airports in the Netherlands for this bus.  It should not be expensive to implement the Superbus into the present transitways in Ottawa.  Such buses are best used on the residential routes in the suburbs of Kanata, Barrhaven, Orleans and Stittsville and on rural routes to the surrounding towns and rural park and ride lots as well as for servicing the Ottawa International Airport. They would also be good for smart bus routes that pickup passengers in one city that work in the other adjacent city and then reverse the routes for the return trips to provide a smart service. See Superbus for details of this sleek and efficient vehicle.