|
3. Rail System Selection
Rapport Sur La Seléction D’un Système Ferroviaire |
That
Council approve that the Rail technology for the City’s Rapid Transit Plan be
Light Rail Transit (LRT).
Que le Conseil approuve
que la technologie ferroviaire pour le Plan de transport en commun rapide de la
Ville soit celle du transport en commun par train léger sur rail (TLR).
Documentation
1. Deputy City Manager Report, Infrastructure Services and Community
Sustainability dated 20 October 2009 (ACS2009-ICS-TRA-0017).
2. Extract of Minute, 21
October 2009
3. Extract of Draft Minute,
18 November 2009
Comité du transport en commun
and Council / et au Conseil
20 October 2009 / le 20 octobre 2009
Submitted by/Soumis par : Nancy Schepers, Deputy City Manager/Directrice municipale adjointe,
Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability/Services d
'infrastructure et Viabilité des collectivités
Contact Person/Personne
ressource : Alain Mercier, General Manager/Directeur général, Transit Services/ Services de Transport en commun
613-842-3636 x2271, alain.mercier@ottawa.ca
SUBJECT:
|
|
|
|
|
OBJET :
|
RAPPORT SUR LA SELÉCTION D’UN SYSTÈME
FERROVIAIRE
|
That Transit Committee recommend
that Council approve that the Rail technology for the City’s Rapid Transit Plan
be Light Rail Transit (LRT).
Que le Comité du transport en
commun recommande au Conseil d’approuver que la technologie ferroviaire pour le
Plan de transport en commun rapide de la Ville soit celle du transport en
commun par train léger sur rail (TLR).
The selection of the appropriate rail system
technology for the City of Ottawa is a major component of the 2008
Transportation Master Plan (TMP) process.
To select the appropriate transit system for
the City of Ottawa a set of principles that reflect the goals of the Council
approved TMP were applied. The recommended rail system technology must:
·
Accommodate the predicted passenger
volumes: Ensuring that operational efficiency and running costs are optimized.
·
Provide conditions to easily
implement the first increment and all subsequent phases of the system.
·
Fit into Ottawa’s urban environment:
Ensuring that the vehicle and system design support achieving the City’s urban
and environmental vision.
·
Minimize capital costs: To ensure
that stakeholders and citizens have a good return on investment.
·
Minimize the lifetime operating and
maintenance costs while maximizing ridership: Ensuring low fares and taxes.
·
Be able to respond to future land
use changes within the City: Providing flexibility of operations to accommodate
future city planning and operational changes.
·
Take advantage of the most current
proven technologies: Providing operational efficiencies and high reliability.
·
Be proven in service: Minimizing
implementation risk and increasing operational reliability.
·
Be suitable for the climate in
Ottawa: Ensuring that the vehicle can withstand the weather extremes in
Ottawa.
June Technology Forum
On June 19 and 20, 2009 the City hosted a LRT Technology Forum to
discuss light rail transit technology options in the development of the new
transit vision. The Forum brought together representatives of manufacturers and
transit agencies from across North America to discuss various types of transit
systems, best practices and lessons learned, with the objective of identifying
optimal rail technology solutions for Ottawa. This event was attended by a
number of City Councillors, senior City staff, and a number of key stakeholders
from various federal,
provincial and municipal agencies (NCC, Transport Canada, Infrastructure
Ontario, Société de transport de l’Outaouais, etc)
This forum also gave an opportunity for the public to participate in
mini-workshops to help define the goals and requirements of the system that
helped form the principles necessary for successful rail technology selection.
The result of this technology forum was the identification of the two
rail technology options appropriate for City of Ottawa for further
consideration: Light Rail Transit (LRT) and a Light Metro technology.
To determine which rail technology will best
serve the City’s future transportation needs the City commissioned Delcan to
undertake a study to examine the rail technology options – LRT and Light Metro
– and also to consider whether the systems should incorporate a driverless or
driver-based operational control technology.
DISCUSSION
The Delcan rail technology study
compares the two rail technology options based on a set of criteria that
reflected the above noted principles. The following table summarizes the
comparison of the technology options:
|
Criteria |
Description |
Light Metro |
LRT |
Manual Driver |
Automated Driverless |
|
Maximum passenger capacity in the core |
>20,000 pphpd |
Best |
Fair |
Poor |
Best |
|
Low passenger capacity in the extensions |
>5,000 pphpd |
Good |
Best |
Good |
Poor |
|
Ability to build a non-segregated system
in low-density areas |
|
Poor |
Best |
Required |
N/A |
|
Comparative total system capital cost |
All Phase 1 network, infrastructure and
vehicle fleet |
Good |
Best |
Good |
Fair |
|
Comparative life time operating and maintenance
costs |
All Phase 1 network, infrastructure and
vehicle fleet |
Best |
Good |
Poor |
Good |
|
Proven in service |
At least 5 years in revenue service |
Good |
Good[1] |
Good |
Good1 |
|
Suitable for the climate in Ottawa |
Operated in a climate similar to Ottawa |
Good |
Good |
Good |
Good |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
study reveals that the implementation of a high capacity Light Metro style
system could, as LRT is implemented in suburban areas, divide Ottawa’s
transportation network which would result in a fragmented network. This dual
mode network is not desirable given the overall associated costs.
The
choice of a Light Metro system would effectively increase overall lifecycle
costs due to the higher capital costs of segregation in the western corridor,
which would offset any operational efficiencies.
In
contrast, an LRT system permits a more efficient capacity match for the
ridership prediction throughout the main core and outlying regions maximizing
the overall flexibility in continuing to grow the system up to and beyond 2031.
The
LRT system provides capacity in the downtown core, but will necessitate the use
of automatic operation to maintain operational efficiency with higher ridership
in later years.
The
rail systems technology recommendation also reflects Council’s direction in
approving the North-South LRT EA and the Riverside South Community Design Plan
(CDP). These documents identified the technology selection for the future North
South Corridor as LRT. The integration of this technology to the Tunney’s
Pasture to Baseline corridor was an important consideration in the development
of a technology recommendation.
In
conclusion, Light Rail (LRT) is recommended as the preferred technology choice
for deployment in Ottawa as it:
·
Has
less impact on the urban fabric and allows the ability to integrate both
non-segregated and segregated systems
·
Provides
the necessary capacity for the ridership predictions in the main core,
·
Can
accommodate low passenger capacity in the extensions outside of the main core,
·
Has
lower total system capital costs than Light Metro,
·
Can
accommodate Ottawa weather conditions
Public consultation on the design principles was sought as
part of the June 2009 LRT Technology Forum. At the same forum, representatives
of manufacturers and transit agencies from across North America were consulted.
Tabling this report will provide an opportunity for the public to comment on
the recommendation as part of the October 26, 2009, DOTT Open House and at the
November 18, 2009, Transit Committee meeting.
LEGAL/RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS
There are
no legal/risk management impediments to the tabling of this report at the
Transit Committee meeting of October 21, 2009.
Once implemented, as shown in the Transit Services 10-Year Tactical Plan, the implementation of the rapid transit plan will realize $25 Million annual operational saving.
The rapid transit plan, in concert with future Council decisions, will combine to realize the $100 Million in annual operating savings identified in the Transit Services 10-Year Tactical Plan and the goal set out in the City’s fiscal framework of moving to a 55 per cent revenue/cost ratio.
Document 1 October
2009 Rail System Selection Study prepared by Delcan, previously distributed and held on file with the City Clerk.
With Council approval, staff will continue
the development of the City’s Rapid Transit Plan with LRT as the technology for
implementation.
Extract Draft Minutes: October 21,
2009
RAIL
SYSTEM SELECTION REPORT
RAPPORT
SUR LA SÉLECTION D’UN SYSTÈME FERROVIAIRE
ACS2009-ICS-TRA-0017 CITY WIDE / À L'ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE
Nancy Schepers, Deputy City
Manager, Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability provided a verbal
update on the Transit Plan and the timelines associated with various aspects of
the project. Her presentation also
included a selection of drawings that would be shown at the open house
scheduled for 26 October, featuring the various stations with rail.
Councillor Legendre made note of
the fact that the current VIA Rail Station includes a covered walkway for
pedestrians between the bus and train, but the proposed station drawing does
not include such a protected walkway.
He urged staff not to diminish the standard of that connection that
exists today, in the future. He was
also seeking assurance that senior staff would be available to answer questions
of the public at the open house. The
Manager of Transportation Planning confirmed they will be advertising the fact
that there is a presentation at the open house, to be followed by a question
and answer period.
In her presentation on the report,
Ms. Schepers advised that light rail transit (LRT) is the recommended preferred
technology choice for deployment in Ottawa as it:
·
Has
less impact on the urban fabric and allows the ability to integrate both
non-segregated and segregated systems
·
Provides
the necessary capacity for the ridership predictions in the main core
·
Can
accommodate low passenger capacity in the extensions outside of the main core
·
Has
lower total system capital costs than Light Metro
·
Can
accommodate Ottawa weather conditions
A copy of each presentation is
held on file.
The Chair noted that electric rail
comes in a variety of types and wanted assurance that the choices that will be
before Council will still be consistent with electric rail technology. Ms. Schepers confirmed this
understanding. The Chair presumed
therefore, that when Council makes its choice, it will have an impact on some
of the environmental assessments currently being dealt with because of the
nature of the system, land requirements et cetera. Ms. Schepers confirmed that it is a consequence of the technology
decision.
Councillor Legendre wanted
assurances that the preferred technology choice will be made clear because it
was evident at the forum in June as well as in the presentation given today,
that there is some confusion between what that choice would be, i.e., heavy,
light, metro. He wanted to make sure
the language was clear and consistent with respect to what Metro and LRT
mean. The Chair agreed that the
Technology Forum held in June was very informative with respect to what the
best practices were across the continent and he too recognized the unfortunate
confusion surrounding the preferred technology. He complimented staff on the amount of work done to date on this
important file.
1.
That
the Rail System Selection Report be received and tabled at the October 21, 2009
Transit Committee Meeting, for subsequent consideration on November 18, 2009,
followed by deliberation and consideration by Council at a subsequent meeting.
2.
That
Transit Committee recommend that Council approve that the Rail technology for
the City’s Rapid Transit Plan be Light Rail Transit (LRT).
RECEIVED
AND TABLED
The Chair referred to the Council-adopted process
of having councillor sponsors for major reports, who will work with staff and
report back on 18 November. Councillors
Bédard and Leadman agreed to be the co-sponsors.
Extract
Draft Minutes: November 18, 2009
RAIL
SYSTEM SELECTION REPORT
RAPPORT SUR LA SÉLECTION D’UN SYSTÈME
FERROVIAIRE
ACS2009-ICS-TRA-0017 CITY WIDE / À L'ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE
Nancy Schepers, Deputy City Manager,
Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability, provided a brief overview
of the item since it was last tabled at the Committee meeting of 21
October. A copy of the presentation is
held on file.
Ms. Schepers further advised that the councillor
sponsors (the Chair and Councillors Legendre, Leadman and Bédard) met with
staff to work on this report.
David Jeanes, Transport 2000 expressed particular concern
about the lack of public consultation on this matter, noting the public had no
access to the presentations made at the June technology symposium; the staff
presentation(s) given to the Committee have not been provided to any of the
public advisory groups; and, he was not aware if the Pedestrian and Transit
Advisory Committee has seen his material yet.
Mr. Jeanes was also concerned about having a
single vehicle model fleet, adding that the expert panel questioned this
concept when they commented on the plan, because they felt a different vehicle
would be required for lower traffic to the south as compared to the
east-west. Further, the numbers of
conclusion are based on looking at projects that have yet to happen, i.e.,
Evergreen in Vancouver, a downtown transit tunnel in Calgary do not exist
yet. Mr. Jeanes did not believe
that some statements belonged in the report, i.e., removing STO buses from
downtown Ottawa and the potential use of the Prince of Wales Bridge for those
buses, because they are to be addressed in the Interprovincial Transit Study,
and there has been no public report or discussions on this matter.
Mr. Jeanes concluded his statements by
reminding Committee that LRT is being introduced because only rail can meet the
capacity requirements of the downtown and it is the only way to control soaring
labour costs. However, he did not see
enough discussion about this in the report.
When asked to comment on the delegation’s
comments about having a single vehicle type fleet, Ms. Schepers explained that
having more than one type of vehicle raises the question of where they would be
housed and maintained. She offered that
it also becomes problematic with the number of spares that would have to be on
hand in order to provide continual service.
The City is fortunate that the LRT technology being recommended can
accommodate both higher and lower capacities.
In response to questions posed by Committee
members, Mr. Jeanes did not believe having one vehicle type would be of benefit
because it would deny Council the advantages of other vehicle types and new
technologies (e.g., double-decker buses were acquired for use in the city to
address a specific need). He offered
that European maintenance facilities service light rail vehicles from different
manufacturers in the same yards.
Mr. Jeanes also noted that the type of
technology being recommended was not ‘catenary’ as described by staff, because
that term applies to the more intensive infrastructure normally found on
mainline electrified railways or on high speed sections of light rail. Ottawa’s LRT will operate with a single
conductor wire that would be very visually un-intrusive. When asked to comment on which groups should
have seen this report, he explained that it was on the published agenda for the
agency consultation group and the public consultation group for the DOTT, which
was prior to the Open House, but it was not actually presented at that Open
House. In addition to PTAC, which he
mentioned earlier, it should have been presented at these venues, as well as
the business consultation group for the DOTT.
He also suggested that because of the potential impact on the
Interprovincial Transit Study, it should go to the advisory committee for that
group as well, since this report is prejudging the outcome of that study.
David Gladstone made reference to the O-Train and it’s
success and commented that Council should be extending this service on existing
railway lines rather than moving to a new technology. He reminded Committee that the thousands of people that use the O-Train
are not using buses through the downtown core or using private
automobiles. He could see no feasible
replacement for the current O-Train, and suggested that any kind of replacement
is going to cause major disruptions.
The Chair noted that this report was tabled
on 21 October to permit circulation. It
was posted to the City’s website and was part of the Public Open House on 26
October for the DOTT. He noted that
there was a technical briefing open to the media and councillors on 12 November
and it is here before the Committee after allowing almost a month for the
public to review and provide their feedback.
That Transit Committee
recommend that Council approve that the Rail technology for the City’s Rapid
Transit Plan be Light Rail Transit (LRT).
CARRIED
[1] In order
to meet the 2031 core capacity requirement, the vehicles associated with the
LRT
system will require operation with less distance between them. This requires a modern Automatic Train Control (ATC) system based on a Communications Based Train Control (CBTC) system.