high-speed rail in Canada

High-speed rail has been extensively studied in Canada.  The latest study was a joint Federal-Ontario-Quebec investigation.  The links below are all to the same “EcoTrain” report, just distributed from the websites of the three different partners.

Available from Ontario MTO: English, French

Available from Transports Québec: English, French (site also includes 1995 study of the same corridor)

Sort-of-kinda available (requires you to request full report via email) from Transport Canada: English press release, English “Executive Summary”, French PR, French Exec Summary

There is also a Library of Parliament summary HillNote Number 2012-06E “High-Speed Rail in Canada” (also available in French “Le train à grande vitesse au Canada“)

and Wikipedia has a page of course: High-speed rail in Canada

There have also been separate studies of other corridors, including Montreal-New York and Montreal-Boston (PDF, via Transports Québec)

We are not understudied in this area.  But no one wants to spend any money.

Toronto to Montreal

The bottom line of the 2011 study: “Developing the section between Montreal-Ottawa-Toronto could cost between $9.1 billion for 200 km/h and $11 billion for 300 km/h” and “as a whole, the Montréal-Toronto segment of the project would provide a positive economic impact“.

Nine billion is not a lot of money for HSR connecting Toronto to Montreal, particularly considering you get a net positive economic impact (you get more back overall in the economy than you spend to build the infrastructure).

For the two speed options, which in the study are E300+ (electric, 300+km/h) and F200+ the specific dollar figures are $869 million net benefit and $817 million respectively, and that’s counting as “losses” the reduction in revenue to airlines and airports (report page S-21).

hsr-npv

And that is with modal shares I consider ridiculous. At 300km/h, the modal share for business travel in 2031 would be 17%? Seriously? In 2031, 72% of business people are going to choose to drive rather than go 300km/h in first class on a train? (from page 58 of the EcoTrain report)

hsr-modalshare

This is in a world where today, Amtrak’s “high-speed” train (which only goes an average 120km/h, with a top speed of 240km/h) and its much slower regular train service together get seventy-five percent of the Washington-New York modal share.

In other words, even with ridiculously low modal shares and even inexplicably counting the diversion of traffic from airlines as a “loss”, Toronto-Montreal HSR still has a net positive benefit.

But no one will build it.  All it would take is some outreach to external funding sources (Chinese government? Richard Branson?) and some political will.  We have neither.

This post inspired in part by Tyler Brule in the Financial TimesMaple leaves on the line (April 26, 2013).  Brule manages to say things like “Have neither the government nor the private sector ever thought about the economic benefits?” without mentioning any of the Canadian political context or any of the multiple studies (including repeated studies of the Quebec-Windsor corridor).

UPDATE 2013-05-02: I left a comment on Mr. Brule’s article.  Here is the text in full:

Mr. Brule makes excellent points about high-speed rail (HSR): convenient for getting from city centre to city centre and more convenient than flying for short distances.  However his question “Have neither the government nor the private sector ever thought about the economic benefits?” is somewhat puzzling in the Canadian context.  The Quebec-Windsor corridor has been extensively studied for HSR, with the most recent report released in 2011.  A copy of the report is available at e.g. Transports Québec: http://www.mtq.gouv.qc.ca/portal/page/portal/entreprises_en/transport_ferroviaire/thv_quebec_windsor

Key findings: the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal route (the specific route that would have provided HSR for Mr. Brule’s trip to Ottawa) would cost $9.1 billion for 200km/h service and $11 billion for 300km/h service, and in both cases the investment produces an overall net positive economic benefit.  Other routes such as Montreal to New York have also been analyzed (available on the Transports Québec site).

What is needed is not more study of the economic benefits, instead what is missing is political will and private sector interest.  Perhaps Richard Branson or other transportation entrepreneurs are needed, in order to invest in this well-documented opportunity to improve Canadian inter-city travel options.

building the post-car city: Liveable Ottawa policy proposals

The city has provided a set of preliminary policy proposals for the Official Plan review.

I really like them.  The language is clear, and the overall message is about how to plan and build a post-car city.  This is something I have been asking for as a core theme from the city for a while, and it is great to see the planners really understand this.

It doesn’t get any clearer than this language and graph in the Affordability section, right on the second page of the document:

It is estimated that the annual cost of travel in Ottawa is as much as $2.9 billion without including personal travel costs and as much as much as $4.8 billion when the costs of travel time and auto ownership/use and transit fares are included. The largest proportion of these costs is attributable to the private automobile. Therefore, as the graph below shows, the best way to keep the cost of transportation affordable for both citizens and government over the long term is to find ways to reduce the use of private automobiles.

preliminary-proposals-car-chart

Emphasis mine.

(You can also point to the above chart any time a private car user talks about other modes “paying their fair share”.)

We as citizens have a few jobs:

1) Reward these proposals by sharing them, talking about them, telling council we like them (including at tonight’s Liveable Ottawa consultation).

2) Do everything we can to have the actual final plans reflect these proposals.

3) Just as importantly: HOLD COUNCIL TO THESE PLANS.  Every time council makes a decision, we need to remind them that citizens asked for these principles and citizens supported these proposals.  Every time council makes a decision that goes against these planning principles, we need to hold their feet to the fire.  Write them.  Go to meetings.  Get media coverage.

There are a few parts to “why didn’t council follow its own plans”?

a) The councillors are not experts on the plans

b) The councillors are not experts on the planning process

c) The councillors are not planners

d) General principles get lost in the details of particular cases that appear before council

We need to support the voice of the city’s already good planners, push against the bad ideas of the city’s traffic engineers, and remind council again and again that it has to follow its own planning guidance.

There have to be consequences to not following their own guidance: media attention and citizen questions.  Ultimately, lost elections, lost council seats.  Otherwise they will just continue as they have, defaulting to the suburban city / traffic engineer mode we’ve been operating in for decades.

So:

  • Answer the survey (go to ottawa.ca/liveableottawa – it’s on the top right)
  • Tweet what you like about the proposals to #liveableottawa (the city really does track every tweet on this hashtag)
  • Blog what you like about the proposals, and tag with liveableottawa
  • Let your councillor know what you like about the proposals
  • Email planning@ottawa.ca with what you like about the proposals
  • And then when the plans are finalised, keep repeating the same steps for relevant council decisions over the next five years: contact your councillor, contact the planners, go to council meetings and consultations, tweet and blog.

Liveable Ottawa – Feb 13, 2013 – at City Hall

Reminder of the context: this is a review of all the highest-level plans in the city, including the Official Plan, the Transportation Master Plan, the Cycling Plan and the Pedestrian Plan.

There is a survey you should complete before March 1, 2013, it’s available on the website (on the right, click the link “Complete our survey”).

The Liveable Ottawa mailing list sent this invite:

Building a Liveable Ottawa 2031 – Official Plan and Master Plan Review
Community Forum for Discussion

Wednesday February 13, 2013
Andrew Haydon Hall and Jean Pigott Place
Ottawa City Hall
110 Laurier Avenue West
7 to 9 pm

On January 29, 2013, the City of Ottawa launched Building a Liveable Ottawa 2031 which is a city-wide review of the policies and projects that will influence how our neighbourhoods grow and how we will travel around the City in the years to come.

Join us at 7 pm on February 13 to discuss the City’s policy proposals to update its Official Plan, Transportation Master Plan, Infrastructure Master Plan and Cycling and Pedestrian Plans.

Opening remarks by Councillor Peter Hume, Chair, Planning Committee followed by focused policy discussions with staff and colleagues.

·         RSVP before February 12, 2013 by e-mailing planning@ottawa.ca
·         Prepare yourself for this event by reading the Preliminary Proposals available on the city’s website ottawa.ca/liveableottawa
·         Answer our survey before March 1, 2013 and follow the conversation on Twitter @ottawacity  #liveableottawa

Seating is limited, so please RSVP before February 12, 2013.

Liveable Ottawa – launch event

I attended the launch of the Liveable Ottawa consultation on January 29, 2013.

The next step, and an important one, is for everyone to fill out the online survey.  This will be a big input to support the planning direction of the city.

Go to ottawa.ca/liveableottawa and click “Complete our survey” (link is currently in the upper right).

I liked the presentation by Dr. David L. Mowat, Medical Officer of Health, Region of Peel, setting urban design in the context of health.  He said we have learned from the health trends (physical activity, obesity and diabetes) that we have designed all effort out of our daily lives.  We need to restore routine activity (walking to school, cycling to work, taking the stairs) as part of daily life.

I also liked the presentation by Colin Simpson on the Transportation Master Plan themes (including the Pedestrian Plan and the Cycling Plan).  Lots of good ideas about measuring better, and measuring more things.  Measuring pedestrian, cycling and transit level of service will have a huge impact on how we plan our roads and buildings.

Neither presentation is online yet but you can get a sense of the Transportation directions by looking at the display boards for the Transportation Master Plan.

Overall I think the direction is good.  Changing what we measure is a key element of changing the results we get.  For decades we have been measuring only traffic level of service, which is based only on maximizing the flow of cars.  Measuring the flow of humans, and designing roads not for peak hour but for average of three peak hours, will be a huge step in the right direction.

Liveable Ottawa – Consultation on City of Ottawa master plans

The National Capital Region has so many layers of consultations it can be hard to understand what is important.

But the City of Ottawa is starting a review of all of its master plans, including the Official Plan.  This is actually the key set of documents that are the foundation for all development and planning in the city.  If you only contribute to one Ottawa consultation, this is the one to contribute to.

The theme they’re using is Liveable Ottawa (note the spelling).

The shortcut is ottawa.ca/liveableottawa

and the hashtag is #liveableottawa

There is a launch event January 29, 2013 at City Hall, starting with display boards to view at 5:30pm and then presentations at 6:30pm.

You can keep track of the progress on the plans by signing up for a mailing list.

You can provide feedback through:

The city provides free Planning Primer courses if you want to understand more about how thinks work.

They have structured the consultation around 12 themes.

You should pick the themes that interest you and focus your feedback around those themes.

This is a difficult process.  All levels of the NCR consult again and again and again, and bring in expert after expert, and write reports and studies, and it’s often hard to see that any progress is being made on modern planning when it comes time to implement anything.

The reality is Ottawa was a prosperous lumber town.  With emphasis on town.  It never was a city, with city built form and culture.  The NCC wanted to turn it into a monumental capital, a sort of sterile display piece.  And the leading thinking of the era was all about separation of functions.  Work separate from residential.  Recreation (riding a bicycle) separate from transportation (driving in a car).  Everything in its own space for its own purpose, isolated.

So they deliberately built a suburban city, with a dropped-in Central Business District for M-F 9-5 work and suburbs around for all of the residents, and a highway and highspeed arterials in the heart of the city, to move people between the two.  This was not an accident or a mistake.  This was the leading planning theory of the time.

It will be a long struggle, particularly with a giant amalgamated city that spans all the suburbs and out into total rural areas, to get from suburban city to compact walkable mixed-use urbanism.

It’s easy to get caught up in fights of suburban vs. urban or cars vs. pedestrians, and I don’t think that’s useful.  Focus on a few key areas:

Key Areas: Cars

1) Fast cars in a city are incompatible with residential life and comfortable pedestrian and cyclist circulation.  Many cars in a city take up huge amounts of space, often public space.  Within the city boundaries the goal must be fewer cars, going much slower (ideal speed for urban core is 30km/h or less).  Many fast cars on highway good.  Many fast cars in city bad.

Key Areas: Start Experimenting

2) Stop theories and start experiments.  Ottawa likes to write endless plans and have endless debates about every possible change.  One way streets, what will happen, blah blah blah blah.  This is ridiculous.  You can make a one-way street with some paint and signs and traffic cones.  Just fucking do it, for six months, and MEASURE WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS.  I have to give huge kudos to the city for actually doing this with the Laurier Separated Bike Lanes.  Temporarily build.  Measure.  Decide.  We need to do much much more of this, for all kinds of things, all over the city.

Key Areas: Report on Walkability, Cycling Access, Transit Access

3) Be honest about what you’re building.  If we’re building unwalkable, uncyclable, transit-unfriendly buildings in the 21st century, let’s at least tell the truth about what we’re doing.  Ottawa is very big on “city spirit means never questioning”.  This is bullshit.  The CE Centre (Ernst & Young Centre) may be a necessary building.  It may serve a useful function.  But let’s be honest.  Its front porch is a sea of parking.  It is built to be driven to.  Try walking to it (even from the nearby airport).  Try cycling to it.  Try transit to it.  We built yet more 20th century car infrastructure.  If we’re going to be honest, EVERY building, EVERY refurb, EVERY new construction needs to have, upfront, some real measures: pedestrian level of service, cycling level of service, transit level of service.  (And maybe walkscore, bikescore, transitscore.)   And everyone who plans and cheerleads for the building should have to walk to it, cycle to it, and take transit to it, at least once, to see what the actual experience of the real building is.  And every building should have a one-year review, to see if the levels of service, and the traffic studies were ACTUALLY TRUE.  If we’re lying to ourselves about the city we’re building, we will never make any progress.

This also applies to “transit-oriented development”.  Step off the bus at Blair Station (or in future, step off the train).  Do you feel like anyone thought about you walking or biking from the station?  Or that you’ve been dropped at a mall in a sea of parking where no one considered you might not be in a car?  Go to Pinecrest Station and try to walk south to the mall and see if you don’t feel both terrified and marginalised as a pedestrian, in an environment built entirely for cars.  We need our planners and councillors and developers to walk and cycle the real city, wherever they build.  TOD is not just dropping towers at stations.  It’s making those stations part of a connected network for pedestrians and cyclists.

Key Areas: Just Build Mixed-Use Walkable

4) There is no magic bullet.  We need to stop thinking that if we can just consult enough, write enough reports, bring in enough experts, we will find some easy solution to our flawed urban design.  There are hard changes to make, against decades of established ideas and built form.  There is no magic: Always build compact, mixed-use, walkable urbanism, mostly six storeys or lower.  That’s it.  Don’t build single-purpose buildings surrounded by parking that are only reachable by car.  Again and again we have an opportunity to do this: at Lebreton, at CLC Rockcliffe, at Lansdowne (which at least an attempt at this), at the Booth Street Complex, at Tunney’s Pasture, at NRC Montreal Road, at Bayview Yards, and again and again we build 20th century buildings designed for cars instead.  If we never stop building 20th century buildings connected by ever-increasing, ever-expanding 20th century roads, we will never have a 21st century city.  Not in 2017, not in 2031, not in 2067, not ever.

Key Areas: Change the Built Form and the Culture

5) We are not a “world class city”.  I don’t even know what that means.  But we must remember we were a small town.  A lumber town.

Lumber piles in Ottawa

The NCC erased all traces of the trainyards and lumberyards, but that is our DNA.  A small town, with brick houses for prosperous people, and department stores for shopping on Sparks and Rideau.  We were never Montreal, or Toronto, or New York, or Paris, or London and we never will be.  We can be a 21st century capital, but we need to look to small Scandinavian capitals, to Helsinki and Copenhagen, and we need to BUILD LIKE THEM.  With bike lanes, and trams, and trains.  With stairs in the centre of low-rise or mid-rise buildings, and the elevator tucked around the corner.  But more importantly, we need to ACT LIKE THEM.  We need not just the right built form, we need an urban culture.  Otherwise we can build all the towers we want, people will just sit in them staring at their giant TVs, instead of living in the spaces of the city.  In New York you could open a tiny pocket park, not advertise it, and it would fill with pedestrians within minutes.  In Ottawa we already have green space that sits empty even on beautiful summer days.  That means hard work of changing the culture.  Face the truth of our empty streets and bleak storefronts and work, year by year, to reurbanise not just our form, but how we function.

We know the dysfunction: a (crumbling) train station that the LRT will pass right under, that will never be a train station again.  A museum in the centre of a downtown that takes park space and turns it over to paid parking (while subsidizing its employees to park).  A reconstructed street that has just as many crashes as before it was reconstructed.  A brand-new recreation centre that will only be reachable by car.  A national library downtown surrounded by parking.  A riverfront transportation space that denies access to a commuter train.  A brutalist arts centre that turns its face away from the sidewalk.  And on and on and on.

We not what not to do.  We need to actually make the right choices.  That means dollars and leadership, year after year, FOR DECADES.  We have lots of money.  We have a billion dollars every decade for roads (at a minimum).  How about we use that money for things people actually want instead?

Or Ottawa 2031 will be Ottawa 2000 which was Ottawa 1980 which was Ottawa 1960 which was the same disaster car-centric clustercuss as every single other city that did urban redesign in the 1960s.  And as a consequence of that Futurama city we will have generation after generation of fat sick kids.

Downtown Moves final presentations – Jan 17, 2013

January 17, 2013 – Ottawa City Hall, 110 Laurier Avenue West

What is Downtown Moves?

Downtown Moves is an urban design and transportation study that will identify ways to create vibrant, safe and accessible streets for pedestrians, cyclists and transit riders by pursuing a balance among street users and by improving the streetscape environment.

This study was formerly referred to as the Downtown Ottawa Mobility Overlay…

  • 5 to 7:00 pm  – Open House drop-in event with exhibits, newsletters, comment sheets, in Jean Piggott Hall.
  • 7 to 8:30 pm – Presentations with special guest speakers and the Downtown Moves consulting team in Andrew Haydon Hall
  • 8:30 to 9:00 pm – Informal small group discussions around the exhibits in Jean Piggott Hall

Guest Speakers will include:

  • Amanda O’Rourke, 8-80 Cities
  • Donna Hinde, the Planning Partnership
  • Ron Clarke, Delcan Corp, and
  • Ken Greenberg, Urban Design Consultant

More information: Study Completion – Open House and Presentation and http://ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/public-consultations/downtown-moves

If you scroll down on Open House #2 – June 13, 2012 you can find the slides from the last open house.

Hashtag: #dottmo

Previously:
June 4, 2012  Downtown Moves – Ottawa CBD post-LRT

Hurdman before and after

Here’s the artist concept Hurdman from December 2011

675_x_0-148-hurdman

171-hurdman-interior

and here’s what we actually got in Dec 2012

[Dec 2012 Hurdman Station exterior rendering]

[Dec 2012 Hurdman Station interior rendering]

Which makes me wonder what the point is of having the artist concept, since it looks nothing like the actual station they will build.  From soaring arc of wood, to flat roof with some wooden slats.  Plus which the trains better be frequent, because it’s going to be plenty cold waiting on those platforms in winter.