Optimizing Ottawa’s Core Rapid Transit System
Dr. John. K. Walker
88 Starwood Rd. Nepean, ON, K2G 1Z5
See http://pages.istar.ca/~jwalker for links and updates.
Next Steps/Summary
Public transit is still the main issue of the council in Ottawa and the region. Mr. Jarrett Walker, an international public transit expert is in “broad agreement” with the author’s bus rapid transit (BRT) plan as is Mr. A. Haydon. The NCC transit and traffic officials also have some concerns about the proposed LRT and Minister J. Baird is keen on a less expensive plan. Battery electric transit buses that can travel 70 km on a quick ten minute charge are now available from Proterra in the US and they are now in 7 U.S. cities. Bombardier has a PrimoveCity inductive charger for buses. Vossloh Kiepe now has some smart bi and tri-articulated hybrid Diesel buses that can go half a kilometre on their batteries. They also have trolley-diesel and fuel cell hybrid articulated buses. Such green buses are important and ideal for Ottawa’s and STO’s BRT transit systems and with new subways they could improve the service, save at least $0.5 billion and make it greener and faster than the city’s proposed LRT plan.
· A recent study has found that BRT service is a third the capital and also operating cost of LRT systems which is being only considered by the city. Furthermore LRT typically travel at half the speed of buses. Hence buses provide faster and better service for downtown business and offices and future adjacent sub grade shopping malls. The authors’ proposed 4 lane bus subways for Ottawa’s downtown core with battery electric or plug-in hybrid, articulated, bi-articulated and eventually double-decker tri-articulated electric buses provides quicker and better service to both the local and the surrounding suburban commuters. Because the LRT must have two minute headway its maximum capacity is about 25,000 ppdph while a bus needs only 10 seconds or so and its maximum capacity is about 50,000 ppdph. The city will have a train every 5 min. so they can only double this capacity and the line will be a full capacity of ~25,000ppdph. Furthermore the LRT cannot readily 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. The authors’ BRT plan also provides better service to those riders travelling to Gatineau and for the STO buses that bring riders to Ottawa.
· The LRT plan causes huge traffic and passenger jams at each end of the line for transferring riders on and off the awkward and slow LRT system. These traffic and human jams will cause about a ten minute delay and ascending and descending 2 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 new electric bikes and scooters or possibly work at home more often.
· The expensive LRT only reduces the bus traffic by 50% on Albert and Slater while the proposed BRT system removes nearly all the bus traffic on both Albert and Slater to initially one subway under Queen. Note this 4 lane BRT system permits the use of local buses as well as cross town, express and intercity buses. It also permits the proven skip and stop technique so it is faster than LRT which must stop at every station. Furthermore it saves about 380,000 tonnes of GHGs annually versa 94,000 tonnes for the city’s LRT. This is an important factor as the world is headed for several centuries of wild and wacky weather. GHG emissions need to be reduced to one tonne per capita per year ASAP. The LRT is also about 5 times more expensive on a per rider basis than the BRT option. Obviously the LRT is not the optimum solution to Ottawa’s downtown congested streets, pollution and financial problems and the already long commute time for many riders.
· Ottawa’s proposed LRT with the large boring machine also 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. Furthermore the machine cannot make sharp turns and thereby limits the choice of an efficient route in the canal/Rideau Centre region. The deep tunnels are also adjacent to the Chaudičre fault and there is a good chance of an earthquake in the 100 year life of the tunnels. In particular, a recent study by Atkinson and Pal found that the downtown region just west of the canal is at high risk for nearby earthquakes (magnitude 6) owning to the soil and bedrock. The risks and liabilities of such an event are enhanced by tunnelling near numerous large buildings and are of some concern. The proposed cut and cover method with precast sections is safer and makes more accessible and neater tunnels and corners than the proposed LRT tunnel. 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 Queen Street as it avoids disrupting the heavy traffic on the Albert and Slater streets. It is linked to Rideau with a two lane tunnel under Elgin, confederation Square and the canal. The subway would then turn up Dalhousie and then move over to Waller St. and then onto the old transitway. The subway could be made by the cut and cover technique with precast sections so it does not disrupt much traffic and is relatively easy to construct with preformed sections. Note these subways are readily accessible to the street for the commuter. They also provide good access to businesses along Queen and adjacent streets and to the NAC and the Rideau Centre. The proposed BRT plan would also be the first stage of a “Confederation BRT Subway” linking Ottawa and Hull. The second phase would be under Dalhousie to St. Patrick and then to a new two layer Alexandra Bridge for commuters going to and from Gatineau. The NCC might provide a third of the cost of the “Confederation Subway” and the platforms and stairs could be finished in red granite like the Confederation Boulevard. This BRT subway could readily accommodate hybrid or green STO buses.
· The Queen St. subway will be at capacity in a decade or so and a second 4 lane BRT subway could be under Slater to Elgin. Initially some traffic could use ramps to the surface and then cross Elgin to the Mackenzie-King Bridge and with more ramps to the main subway. Some of the Slater traffic could also be routed down a new Elgin–Metcalfe–O’Conner-Lansdowne Park–Main subway to the Southeast Transitway for rapid access for Ottawa south and Riverside South commuters. These extra lines are not possible with expensive LRT systems. These two subways will be at capacity in a few decades and a third BRT subway could be under Albert St. and then with a two lane tunnel under Elgin St. and the canal and also Nicolas and then under Daly to Waller and the main subway.
· The proposed plug-in hybrid BRT system can also readily accommodate hybrid buses which the city could upgrade to with their new hybrid buses. It is recommended that the city acquire a hundred or so plug-in hybrid and bi-articulated hybrid buses ASAP to relieve the congestion to and from Orleans and Kanata. No new expensive trains and associated tracks, overhead power lines and special train service garage(s) and associated test track are required. Such facilities are about three times the capital cost of similar plug-in bi-articulated buses and three times the operating cost and are inflexible. The LRT system would possibly double the cities debt and degraded the service because of the extra transfers, slower trains and the 2 escalator trip to and from the surface.
· The proposed plug-in hybrid BRT subways with 4 lane (2 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 until 2018+ to complete. The LRT system is not operational until the tunnel and all the stations are finished so the old bus transitway would be disrupted along the eastern and western part and at each end of the line for several years.
· The proposed plug-in hybrid 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 several hundred million dollars. However, the smaller stations should be on a second lane so that express bus can readily pass a loading bus. Such buses can also provide a smooth ride 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 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 in the cars until the tracks are cleared. Such trains must be spaced at least two and a half minutes apart while comparable buses with radars and better traction tires could be 10 seconds apart and therefore could carry more passengers on a route. Typically LRT speeds are about half those of a BRT system and a peak load for rail is also about half (25,000 ppdph) that for buses (50,000 ppdph).
· Ottawa’s proposed LRT will require a new fleet of expensive but quaint trains which are of concern for some officials and the Federal Government. This and the expensive tracks and associated overhead power system and a new rail garage and also 12 refurbished stations will add half a billion dollars over that of a bus system for the first stage of this transit system. However the proposed BRT plan which could use the city’s new hybrid buses and the new as well as the older garages and transitways. Each of the next stages of the proposed LRT system will also waste another half billion or so of tax payer’s precious money and increase the congestion and accidents on many streets. The city’s proposed LRT system does not work well with the present Ottawa and STO BRT systems and compromises the city’s resources. The city should explore the proposed plug-in hybrid BRT and tunnel system this summer 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 early fall so that more informed discussions can be made on the optimum transit system. It is important that the citizens and council have a sound understanding about the two proposed transit systems.
· A supplemental environmental assessment could be done on the BRT proposal this summer 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 than the deep LRT proposal. 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 also the NCC Interprovincial Transit Study this summer so that a sound tentative decision can be made in late summer. The city and council could then review the options for the optimum system and tweak it up for further consideration and support in late 2012. The first stage of the BRT tunnel system under Queen Street from Bronson to Elgin is straight forward and construction might begin in the spring of 2013 for either the cut and cover system or possibly with the new Komatsu rectangular tunnelling system.
· Ottawa’s proposed initial phase of the LRT system and associated tunnels are a $2.1 billion cost for the city and certainly does not improve service but sets a bad trend for the next few decades. Quick charge battery buses or fuel cell buses are the way of a low carbon and frugal future. It is strongly suggested that the city have bids from both BRT and LRT vendors so that the city and international transit experts can review the different options and then grade them for public discussion this fall. The options and costs for the different systems and an intercity management of the capital transit should be available for discussions and town hall meetings in Ottawa and Gatineau late summer. The best price will result from proposals from both bus and train vendors.
· If Ottawa does adopt the LRT system then it should go under Albert and the canal and then under Daly so that it does not interfere with the Confederation BRT Subway system. It should also be built after the Confederation Subway.
· The proposed system of BRT subways in the downtown core, new double decked Alexandra and Chaudičre 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. In view of all these facts and the uncertain economic and environmental future it is strongly suggested that the city also investigate the BRT Subway/Transitways forthwith for a plan B as several councillors and many taxpayers are now looking for affordable, efficient and green transit. It is possible to build a transitway and subway that can be used by either a BRT or LRT. In view of the difficult future it is strongly recommended that the city start with the less expensive BRT system. The Mayor and council will get just as much credit for a good but modest BRT system and the big tax saving as for an expensive tax laden and slow LRT which hinders operations for years.
· It is also strongly recommended that the Ontario and Quebec governments explore the possibility of a National Capital Transit Commission much like Vancouver’s TransLink system which integrates the transit and main traffic systems for 21 municipalities. This transit/traffic system is over seen by the mayor’s council, a board of directors and a commissioner. It has a good operating, environmental and sustainability record. The National Capital Transit Commission should have a similar council, board and commissioner. The commissioner’s office could be supported by the NCC.
Economic, Environment and Political Challenges
The forthcoming climate, oil and demographic crisis will 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 ~20% by 2020 and by ~70% by 2050 to meet the international standards. However, the ineffective Harper program indicates we will increase our GHG emissions by about 17 % by 2020. Recent studies indicate mankind is slated for a few centuries of very warm (~+6C) and wacky (expensive) weather unless there are drastic reductions in GHG.
The poorly regulated US and EU financial systems triggered a global recession and disaster that will last for several more years. The U.S. government now has a debt of ~$15 trillion dollars which is increasing. It might take a decade or so for the U. S., Japan, the U.K. and the EU just to move out of their deficits. These weak economies will drag down the Canadian economy for many years as we export 70% of our goods to the U.S. Hence the Canadian economy will probably follow the recovery of the US and EU economies. The Federal government had a recent deficit of ~$28 billion and a debt of $550 billion and it will have a debt of $600+ billion by the time it has a balanced budget. The Ontario government’s debt is ~$230 billion and the deficit is over $15 billion and it will have a debt of $270+ billion by the time it is free of deficits. The combined Federal and provincial debts are now about a trillion and comparable to our GDP. Ontario has wisely put on hold any further expansion of the GTA transit system and the TTC is in a bind because of Mayor Ford’s and Metrolinx’s fixation on expensive rail subways and because of its costs and debt. It is suggested that Ontario consider a GHG tax similar to that of B.C. but strictly for the GTHA and Ottawa regions to cover most of the new transit costs. The Federal government hopes to reduce its deficit by frugal management and the Ontario government must do the same so they can both eventually attack their whopping debts. Hence more resources for transit from either government will probably be limited for a decade or so.
Note the steel wheels of rail vehicles on steel tracks result in a low coefficient of friction and the trains will need to be spaced several times (>2.0 min.) the distance of rubber wheeled buses (~10 sec), 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 and dangerous. They also significantly increase the congestion as they cannot share a lane like buses can. The quaint single axle bogies squeal when rounding a corner and they are noisy and cumbersome on the street. The city should realize that the proposed LRT does not have any advantages (See A. Haydon’s study and also see the BRT vs LRT site and the US National BRT site) but numerous disadvantages for Ottawa. BRT systems can move about twice ~50,000pph as LRT ~25,000pph and at about 35% of the operating cost of LRT. The LRT proposal will probably double the city’s debt and put other significant projects in limbo for a decade or more.
Note the Ottawa property taxpayer is already paying about $565 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 operating cost of the different transit services and possibly more in succeeding years to be fair to these taxpayers. The TTC fares cover about 70% of the operating costs. 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 single track 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 and better BRT system. 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 would appreciate a more efficient intercity transit system. In view of some strategic errors it is strongly suggest for the present that a transit specialist from the NCC sit on both the STO Board of Directors and Ottawa’s Transit and Traffic Committees to ensure the two systems can operate efficiently on the others’ routes, transitways and subways and thereby maintain a speedy intercity service. It is also suggested that the NCC review all Federal infrastructure programs and support for the capital region to ensure they fit into a viable future for the region and they should provide explicit approval of each project.
The cost of using the transit system during peak periods could be enhanced by about 20% to discourage such use and save resources. The peak hours could be from say 8-9:30 A.M. and from 4 to 5:30 P.M. Evening and weekend use could be reduced by 20 % to encourage use during slack periods. Hence student, adult and senior, monthly and seasonal passes should not be encouraged as they do not optimize use of the system. The new presto card could accommodate such variables. 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 to establish 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. The smart system could also be used to assist secondary students commuting to high schools as it is expensive for school boards to invest in clean school busses which are only used for a few hours a day and only on school days. 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.
The carbon tax may soon be ~$30 per tonne of greenhouse gases (GHG) so all vehicles should be as efficient and clean as possible. The cost of carbon fiber has recently come down and it could be used for vehicle production and provide a weight reduction of about ~25%. This in turn can improve fuel efficiency by perhaps15%.
The buses that travel at high speed to the suburban communities should be streamlined to reduce the drag and hence improve their efficiency. They should also be at least tapered in the front and rear so that they can readily manoeuvre in a tight subway. 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 and for emergency use.
Ottawa’s buses should eventually all be clean battery electric which use quick charge CNT or lithium titanate batteries or ultra capacitors to supplement the working battery: see electric buses. 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 should have space to install these new batteries or the ultra capacitors. The CNT batteries or ultra capacitors should be available in 2012 and the city and the vendor (Daimler Bus) should acquire some for testing on their new hybrid buses. A fully charged 50 kWh CNT battery or 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. 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 subways 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 and soon the EcoRide BE45, with fast charging (10 min) lithium titanate batteries which provide a range of 50 – 60 km loaded. Such 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. Proterra have also developed the FastFill automatic connecting charger for these buses and each unit can charge 6 buses per hour.
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 and some triple junction cells are about 40% 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 when the bus pulls into selected spots at a terminal. A battery electric or plug-in hybrid bus with these devices is possibly 80% 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. These buses could also go to some of the nearby (~30km) towns and thereby save on fuel and trip time.
Bi-articulated plug-in hybrid buses or battery electric 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 and Vossloh Kiepe have some bi-and tri-articulated buses and also Neoplan and plug-in hybrid ones are also available. Double decked bi-articulated electric or plug-in buses should also be available in a few years and should be able to carry 300 or more passengers. These buses would probably require a 150 kWh battery 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 and Kanata regions 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 economy and for safety considerations.
There isn’t much space left in the downtown core for more high offices and we are probably in the first phase of a slow growth period so the estimate of 296,000 morning trips in 2031 may be high. However it could be readily managed with numerous bi-articulated plug-in hybrid or battery electric buses, a few more transitways and some subways in the downtown core. Buses on a transitway can slip off the route and service several adjacent 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 one of 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%. Some lines move 45000 riders per hour per direction and twice that of LRT systems. Brisbane also has an efficient Bus Rapid Transit system which has been updated with exclusive bus 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, Calgary, Mississauga, Las Vegas, Eugene, Delhi (16 transitways) 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.
The National Capital Commission is developing an Interprovincial Transit Strategy and this study should be completed in summer 2012. Any proposed enhancement to STO or OC Transit systems that will have Federal support should fit in with these concepts and support 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 surface light rail inner core loop would be extraordinarily expensive and dysfunctional. It would increase the congestion in the downtown sector which both cities are trying to reduce with expensive bus transit systems and subways in the core region. An improved and smart BRT in each city could readily accommodate the buses from either municipality with core subways and loops anchored by double layer 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. The inner loop could be the “Confederation BRT Subway”. 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 scenic points for pictures and by the museums and other points of interest would be welcomed by many visitors.
The subways will be in use for a hundred years or more 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 4% so that it could readily be 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 articulated buses. The first tunnel should be four lanes wide and ~5.2 m high and of either the cut and cover type or made with the new rectangular boring machines. A four lane subway 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 too deep for these scenarios.
The Swiss railway has just completed a 57 km tunnel at a cost of $9 billion or ~160 million per kilometre. The TTC in Toronto find it costs about $300 million per kilometre for subways. They are having problems with loads on their Young St. subway and should probably change it to a trolleybus system to double its capability. 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. The limestone rock in the core region is readily broken up with large excavators and they are probably more efficient than boring machines. Furthermore much of the underground infrastructure must be relocated before tunnelling and this can be done more efficiently with the cut and cover method.
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 Queen St. subway at the west side of the cliff. The subway should be four lanes wide and with platforms on both sides all the way to Elgin. However, the east end of the Queen Street tunnel should be two lanes wide and go under Elgin and then with a lift bridge over the canal to the railway route under the bridge. The lift bridge would only be used at night when there is little traffic on the transit way. An alternative is to line the canal with reinforced concrete and then have a tunnel just skim under the canal to Rideau so it’s not so deep. It should then go along Rideau with four lanes and a station near the Rideau Centre then to Dalhousie and then turn up and move over to Waller with two lanes. There should be ramps on both sides of the subway to the surface on Rideau St. so that OC Transpo buses could go along Montreal Rd. and STO buses could turn up to King Edward and go to/from Gatineau. The Rideau subway should eventually extend eastward under Rideau to Montreal Rd and then with transit lanes to Orleans for a second transitway. The main tunnel should then follow the old transitway but go under Laurier and then move on to the Campus station and be four lanes wide. The platform at Campus and other heavy use stations should be about two blocks long so numerous local, articulated buses and bi-articulated can be transferring passengers simultaneously.
The outside lanes should be used for the various stops with ~3 m wide platforms with moving sidewalks, escalators and stairs to the sidewalks above. The platform should continue for most of the length of the subway so passengers can readily switch from one route to another without having to go above to the street level. The moving sidewalks would speed up the transfer of passengers. Some elevators, stairs and escalators should be available at each intersection and the subway 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. The stops should have two bays and approach lanes and acceleration lanes so that a bus can stop at different but adjacent bays and can leave immediately once it is loaded and recharged if necessary. This system of skip and stop is faster than the shuttle method and accommodates slow loading and unloading buses which could tie up a single lane of buses or bus-trains.
There should be charging capabilities at most bus stops in the subway. A high speed express bus could possibly save twenty minutes or so of commute time over light rail which has to stop at each station. There should be at least four blocks on Queen for the long express buses and three for the shorter and local buses. Each block should have several stops or more bays. The light rail system cannot accommodate a high speed express train on a single track system. The four lane subways can also accommodate all types of battery electric buses, articulated plug-in hybrid buses and bi-articulated hybrid buses, plug-in electric buses, double decked buses and also Superbuses. It is much more flexible and safer than a single lane or rail tunnel and emergency service vehicles could quickly slip in behind any disabled bus.
The proposed shallow rectangular subways are more inviting than the cities’ proposed deep round 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. The large sections could be made in nearby LeBreton Flats or at Bayview so that they could be readily transported to the Queen-Rideau-Waller streets construction sites. These sections should be made of NRC’s new durable and green concrete if at all possible to extend their life and also to help reduce GHG. The first stage would probably cost about $700 million and might be completed and in operation in a few years. The second stage with the lift bridge or tunnel might cost about $500 million and the new fleet of ~200 hundred plug-in bi-articulated buses and chargers about $200+ million for a total of $1.5 billion which is a saving of about $600 million over the city’s latest LRT proposal.
The subway should probably have a charger on each platform/block or about 14 in the subway to top up the batteries if necessary. These could charge about 84 buses per hour with the Proterra FastFill chargers but Vossloh Kiepe systems should also be explored. There should also be numerous chargers at each of the park and ride stations at Kanata, Orleans and Barrhaven and at other main stops and at the garages for a total of 100 or so chargers which might cost about $20 million. The platforms at these major stations should also be about two blocks long so that numerous buses can be transferring loads and charging their batteries at the same time. They should at least have some shelter from the sometimes wild elements in Ottawa and also benches.
The subway on Rideau should be extended to Montreal Road and then Orleans as resources become available and the stations should be 4 lane wide. These links and the Queen St subway to LeBreton Lincoln Heights Carling and Kanata north could form another cross town high speed transitway
These subways 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 50% 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 “Confederation Subways” could be finished in red garnet much like Confederation Boulevard to indicate a link between the two cities. This optimized system of transitways and subways 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. It would also be at capacity shortly after completion. 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 the 9/11, Lockaby and the Air India tragedies.
Ottawa - Gatineau Transit and Vehicle Loops
The inner core loop could consist of new Chaudičre 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 Chaudičre 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 “Confederation Subway” loop connecting the two downtown regions. This could be similar to the Confederation Boulevard and the cost of this subway might be shared with the two municipalities, senior governments and the NCC.
If Ottawa does adopt the LRT system then it should go under Albert and the canal and then under Daly so that it does not interfere with the Confederations BRT Subway system.
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 other half of this loop could be the MacDonald Cartier Bridge.
.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 for most vehicles. However, the inside lane should be for multi (4+) 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 l/100 km (0.8 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 150 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 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 commuters and those travelling to/from the surrounding towns and villages
Driverless technology is now available and this could be
used to guide fleets of trucks in convoys but with a driver in the first
vehicle for safety considerations. Such
convoys should always be in the slow outside lane. The technology should be standardized so that
different trucks and fleets can linkup and work together. This would save fleet operators money and
provide a safer flow of traffic on congested highways.
A good way to reduce traffic congestion in cities and on highways is to up the price of fuel with a GHG tax. Such a tax in Vancouver has significantly reduced the traffic in the city where B.C. now has a GHG tax of $30 a tonne. Ontario should consider a GHG of say $10 a tonne on the big emitters in the province that burn coal, bitumen, bunker C and heating oil and for jp4 fuel for private jets. A similar gasoline tax (~2c/l) for the two congested regions of GTA and Ottawa should also be considered.
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. It also has geo-heated road beds to remove snow and ice. Every passenger has a seat in a compartment. 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. See Superbus for details of this sleek and efficient vehicle.