O-Train Line 2 [Stage 1 | Bayview to Greenboro] | In Service

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

We really need to dedicate ourselves to the O-Train at this point. No more half-measures. It's clearly going to be a major part of Ottawa's transportation future, so let's not half-ass this and drag it out.

good luck. The half-assed Phase 2 already appears to be engraved in stone especially with possible Liberal funding for the airport spur and the mess of a transfer station at South Keys. But isn't it a good idea to have to take a bus and three trains to reach downtown in some cases? Now that is half assed. And if we think service is not reliable now. Maybe we need to coin a new term, 'quarter assed' because this is less than 'half assed'.

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

This is exactly the same argument that caused so much problem in 2006. It is why we are stuck with a very crappy compromise for the Trillium Line.

The current transit service south of South Keys is totally inadequate and follows convoluted routes on inadequate roads that are over congested during peak periods.

And you want to perpetuate this?

Once again you are misunderstanding the argument. What's the point of growing the ridership on the Trillium Line if it is not double tracked? If you extend it south to some fantasy TOD community, there will still come a time when you'll have to address the Achilles Heel of the old track portions and shut it down for a number of years to do it right. So my point is, if you don't do the double-tracking, don't go past the Airport. If going farther south is important, then spend more money to do it right and double track now.

And maybe, if there is no money to do it right, development in that part of the city should not be encouraged yet. You'll only get 30% transit usage in any suburb at best, so for every 10 people who move out there, 7 will take their cars no matter what. Building transit out to green field development will result in more roads having to be built regardless.

[GoTrans]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

good luck. The half-assed Phase 2 already appears to be engraved in stone especially with possible Liberal funding for the airport spur and the mess of a transfer station at South Keys. But isn't it a good idea to have to take a bus and three trains to reach downtown in some cases? Now that is half assed. And if we think service is not reliable now. Maybe we need to coin a new term, 'quarter assed' because this is less than 'half assed'.

I agree with both yourself and Jamaican-Phoenix, the Trillium line is half assed and carved in stone until the city starts to feel some pressure to double track the line. Clearly only double tracking the new section does not help with increasing frequency and speed on the rest of the line. Shutting down the system for complete double tracking would be faster but it can also be done in segments with very little disruption of service with the exception of the portion between the Queensway and the exit to the tunnel near the new parking garage at Carleton. What is required is public pressure to double track new and existing sections. A lot of the engineering for this should be in the possession of the city since this was to be double tracked as part of the original Charelli LRT proposal. Write your city councillor and members of the Transportation Committee.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by GoTrans

I agree with both yourself and Jamaican-Phoenix, the Trillium line is half assed and carved in stone until the city starts to feel some pressure to double track the line. Clearly only double tracking the new section does not help with increasing frequency and speed on the rest of the line. Shutting down the system for complete double tracking would be faster but it can also be done in segments with very little disruption of service with the exception of the portion between the Queensway and the exit to the tunnel near the new parking garage at Carleton. What is required is public pressure to double track new and existing sections. A lot of the engineering for this should be in the possession of the city since this was to be double tracked as part of the original Charelli LRT proposal. Write your city councillor and members of the Transportation Committee.

I really don't see being able to double track the Trillium line with very little disruption. And even then, a phased approach would involve substantial additional costs.

The reason why I am saying this is because of the substantial number of bridges (and the tunnel) need to be either replaced or twinned. You may be able to get away with a shutdown north of Carleton and then a shutdown south of Carleton but a less disruptive process requires extra costs because you will need to build temporary bridges at a number of locations in order to maintain service. That is exactly the same thing that is presently happening with the replacement of the Eastern Transitway with the buses being detoured to a new Queensway lane. What we have done to relocate the transitway to the Queensway temporarily has cost countless millions. North of the Dow's Lake tunnel, you have the additional challenge of widening the rock cut. I am not sure how you could blast the bedrock while maintaining service and there is no where to relocate the trains during this operation.

[Aylmer]

I think there's actually enough space in the trench for two LRT vehicles, but you'd need to find a way to deal with drainage if you take away the little ditches which are currently on both sides of the track.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I really don't see being able to double track the Trillium line with very little disruption. And even then, a phased approach would involve substantial additional costs.

The reason why I am saying this is because of the substantial number of bridges (and the tunnel) need to be either replaced or twinned. You may be able to get away with a shutdown north of Carleton and then a shutdown south of Carleton but a less disruptive process requires extra costs because you will need to build temporary bridges at a number of locations in order to maintain service. That is exactly the same thing that is presently happening with the replacement of the Eastern Transitway with the buses being detoured to a new Queensway lane. What we have done to relocate the transitway to the Queensway temporarily has cost countless millions. North of the Dow's Lake tunnel, you have the additional challenge of widening the rock cut. I am not sure how you could blast the bedrock while maintaining service and there is no where to relocate the trains during this operation.

The section south of Carleton can probably be done with only modest disruption (i.e. occasional weekend closures). Most likely the Rideau River bridge will need to ultimately be replaced, and it could be done adjacent to the current bridge. Likewise, a grade separation of the VIA line can be done on an adjacent alignment with little disruption.

North of Carleton, the impacts will be much greater. The Dow's Lake tunnel would need a long full closure, and blasting the rock cuts will be challenging as well with a full closure required.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

The section south of Carleton can probably be done with only modest disruption (i.e. occasional weekend closures). Most likely the Rideau River bridge will need to ultimately be replaced, and it could be done adjacent to the current bridge. Likewise, a grade separation of the VIA line can be done on an adjacent alignment with little disruption.

North of Carleton, the impacts will be much greater. The Dow's Lake tunnel would need a long full closure, and blasting the rock cuts will be challenging as well with a full closure required.

The situation south of Carleton is also quite bad. Many of the bridges and overpasses only support a single track presently and will need to be replaced. I mean, even adjacent to Greenboro, a bridge over the Transitway does not support double tracking. The bridge at Carleton University will likely need a temporary replacement or a total shutdown. You would not want a permanent realignment to build a new bridge adjacent to the current bridge as this may compromise long-term train speeds.

[Kitchissippi]

With a proper re-think/rebuild of the line, Gladstone, Carling and Heron stations should be built beneath the bridges with entrances on both sides of the street. Full double tracking also means that the station intervals will no longer matter, and it would be nice to have a station at Somerset West as well to serve Chinatown and Hintonburg.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

With a proper re-think/rebuild of the line, Gladstone, Carling and Heron stations should be built beneath the bridges with entrances on both sides of the street. Full double tracking also means that the station intervals will no longer matter, and it would be nice to have a station at Somerset West as well to serve Chinatown and Hintonburg.

well, we can wish. And double tracking means we can branch and deliver reasonable service on both branches and eliminate the crazy proposed transfers at South Keys. Is anybody really listening?

[1overcosc]

An additional station at Somerset is a complete non-starter unless the line is electrified, as with slower-to-accelerate diesel operation the trains would be slowed to a complete crawl north of Carling with so many stations in the area (Carling, Gladstone, Somerset, Bayview).

[1overcosc]

In Toronto the UPX was built through massive upgrades of a rail line including adding extra tracks, many bridge replacements including new grade separations and replacing at-grade sections with trenched sections... all of this was done while keeping the rails open for GO service, however it required the elimination of midday service during the construction period. It would definitely be possible to retain peak period service on the Trillium Line during a full-scale double tracking project, but possibly not much else.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The situation south of Carleton is also quite bad. Many of the bridges and overpasses only support a single track presently and will need to be replaced. I mean, even adjacent to Greenboro, a bridge over the Transitway does not support double tracking. The bridge at Carleton University will likely need a temporary replacement or a total shutdown. You would not want a permanent realignment to build a new bridge adjacent to the current bridge as this may compromise long-term train speeds.

This would be a lot of work, but it probably wouldn't require a closure of the line. Bridges can be expanded or even fully replaced without closures, as we've seen from the rapid replacement techniques employed on the 417.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

This would be a lot of work, but it probably wouldn't require a closure of the line. Bridges can be expanded or even fully replaced without closures, as we've seen from the rapid replacement techniques employed on the 417.

A river bridge is a different proposition than a road bridge. You cannot roll a river bridge into place. I read earlier this week that the Carleton university bridge was replaced at one point in the past exactly in the manner that I described, by building a temporary bridge first, then demolishing the original bridge and then building the new one. I think that it is standard practice that you temporarily relocate roads or rail lines when a new bridge is needed. Sometimes you can rebuild and expand bridges part by part, if they are salvageable. But it becomes a lot more difficult when a bridge only supports one track. Rapid replacement is probably very expensive but necessary with the Queensway because you cannot relocate 8 lanes of traffic or have extended periods of rebuilding.

[1overcosc]

^ It is very easy to build a new river bridge right next to an old one through slight realignment, though. The Champlain Bridge in Montreal is an example.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

^ It is very easy to build a new river bridge right next to an old one through slight realignment, though. The Champlain Bridge in Montreal is an example.

Perhaps, but there is very little room for both a realignment and double tracking on the Carleton University side of the river. When the bridge was replaced before, this was still open countryside.

[Catenary]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The situation south of Carleton is also quite bad. Many of the bridges and overpasses only support a single track presently and will need to be replaced. I mean, even adjacent to Greenboro, a bridge over the Transitway does not support double tracking. The bridge at Carleton University will likely need a temporary replacement or a total shutdown. You would not want a permanent realignment to build a new bridge adjacent to the current bridge as this may compromise long-term train speeds.

There are issues in both directions. North of Carleton is obvious, but south of Carleton there are not only issues at the river and the Transitway at Greenboro, but probably most importantly there's the VIA crossing. Grade separating that diamond would not be easy, as VIA line can't be lowered as it must clear Heron Road. Lowering the Trillium Line would interfere with the nearby Transitway and Sawmill Creek, so if the Transitway were then raised to cross over the Trillium Line, 3 bridges would need replacement. Raising the Trillium line would cause issues with the Airport Parkway overpass. Raising the VIA line and possibly slightly lowering the Trillium line may work, but would likely require replacement of the VIA bridges over the Airport Parkway, Heron Road and Heron Station with taller bridges. If any work was to take place in the area, I would rather see it take place in conjunction with a complete review and rethink of the Transitway Corridor and Heron to Airport Parkway ramps. Those ramps take up a vast amount of valuable real estate, and the Transitway swerves under the VIA line between Billings Bridge and Heron. With the Baseline BRT ending here and the talk of commuter rail in the future, there is an opportunity to rethink the entire area and take all options into account for a future transit hub. There is also the possibility of eliminating the bus Transitway from Heron to Greenboro or even South Keys. This would merge the existing South East Transitway into the Baseline BRT corridor. If the area were cleaned up a bit there is quite a bit of developable land on both sides of Heron Road that would be extremely well-served by transit.

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

In Toronto the UPX was built through massive upgrades of a rail line including adding extra tracks, many bridge replacements including new grade separations and replacing at-grade sections with trenched sections... all of this was done while keeping the rails open for GO service, however it required the elimination of midday service during the construction period. It would definitely be possible to retain peak period service on the Trillium Line during a full-scale double tracking project, but possibly not much else.

I think the biggest issue with that plan is that there is no real peak period for the Trillium Line. The trains around 8:15 tend to be the busiest of the day, which lines up with the start of 8:30 classes at Carleton and the regular workday elsewhere, but beyond that there is a very steady flow throughout the day. Classes ending at 2:30 or 4 make the trains busy again, but spread the afternoon peak out quite a bit.

I think there is a lot of focus on a complete double tracking of the Trillium line, but we are missing an important intermediate step. If we started double tracking as much as possible, and left the most difficult sections for later, it would be possible to run a very effective and frequent service, much better than today's. Rather than having mostly single track with some passing points, there would be mostly double track with some pinch points.

Bridges at Heron Road and Walkley Road are around 50 years old, and are both simple concrete structures between retaining walls. These will likely need refurbishment or replacement in the next 5-15 or so years, so opportunity exists to make them wide enough to accommodate stations at a lower cost. The Riverside Drive bridge is also getting older, and I do not believe it would accommodate double tracking as it currently stands. If it were also replaced, double track would then exist from just north of Greenboro to the north end of the current Brookfield signal siding, and from north of the Ellwood Diamond to the Rideau River bridge, with both Confederation Heights and Walkley stations being on double tracked sections.

The Trillium Line currently functions well as a largely symmetrical system around Carleton, and this could be maintained. Unless the siding at Carleton needs to lengthened for longer platforms, it doesn't make much sense to change the track in this area. If longer platforms became necessary, then it may be prudent to double track as much from the bridge to the tunnel as is possible while work is already being done, although the Campus Avenue bridge is of the same design as the Riverside Drive bridge and is unlikely to be wide enough for two tracks. North of the tunnel, work would be required to widen the cut from the tunnel entrance to Carling Station, including Prince of Wales bridge replacement. This is likely to be the toughest part of this idea, and would likely require a summer closure of the tracks north of Carleton.

From Hickory st. to the 417, the track would remain single, mirroring the single track over the Ellwood Diamond and Sawmill Creek in the south. Gladstone stations is already planned to be double tracked, with widening of the cut required, mirroring Walkley. Although I propose leaving a single track section north of Greenboro, I would not suggest mirroring this in the north, as the distance from Gladstone to Bayview is too short, and Bayview can easily be a double tracked terminus. It would be necessary to widen the gap in the Somerset to allow this, as only one track can currently fit.

This system would allow a much higher frequency to be obtained, potentially every 5 minutes. Combined with longer trains, I see no reason why it would not have the capacity to accommodate growth well into the future, without the cost of dealing with the Dow's Lake Tunnel, Sawmill Creek, Rideau River, or most of the rock cut. These issues could then be tackled one by one or two at a time as timing and finances permit.

[Buggys]

Caternary:
"
If we started double tracking as much as possible, and left the most difficult sections for later, it would be possible to run a very effective and frequent service, much better than today's. Rather than having mostly single track with some passing points, there would be mostly double track with some pinch points.
"

Hear, hear!

[Kitchissippi]

The problem with leaving the difficult sections for later is that you'll end up shutting down the line to do them eventually. Build up ridership and then undermine and compromise it later because: cheap — I think we've been there done that already.

[GoTrans]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

The problem with leaving the difficult sections for later is that you'll end up shutting down the line to do them eventually. Build up ridership and then undermine and compromise it later because: cheap — I think we've been there done that already.

The problem with this is you provide an excuse for the city not to do anything. Pick off the low hanging fruit first where you get the biggest bang for the buck. You do not have to shut the line down to do the remaining sections. The Rideau River bridge can be double tracked with no shutdown. The Dow's Lake tunnel can be built without shutdown except for the entrance in the rock cut on the north end through to the 417. The rail crossing south of Confederation can be double tracked for both the O Train and Via at the same time without shutdown just as the tracks to the maintenance facility were built under the Via tracks accessing the train station without shutdown. Using rapid bridge replacement techniques and road detours, the remaining road and rail bridges can be built with no shutdowns. It is only the drilling and blasting in the rock cut that may cause shutdowns but some of this could be done at night, on weekends and using special mitigation measures.

[1overcosc]

At the very least I'd like to see a full study done to see what the scope of work required to double track is and what measures can be used to keep the line running as much as possible during any such construction.

Who knows, the feds and the province or both could foot the bill. We won't know until we try.