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

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by GoTrans

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.

Not at all. My view is that the city should look at and cost the "do it absolutely right" option to weigh the possibilities. The problem with a piecemeal approach is that it will actually end up costing much much more with a stretched out timeline and no economies of scale in construction, and result in annoying periodic disruption and lingering general mediocrity from starting out cheap. It's inefficient and expensive to retain equipment and workers to only work a few hours each night; half their job will be tidying up so that the line is usable in the morning. If it looks like borrowing money to do it right and paying interest on the amount is cheaper than doing it bit by bit over a number of years, the choice is clear.

[lrt's friend]

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.

Where have I heard the bolded part before?

What possible justification is there for doing that after building ridership over a 20 year period on the south east transitway?

We all know the market for the Trillium Line and Southeast Transitway are completely different.

I went the Red Blacks game today. How was I to get there if it weren't for the Southeast Transitway? Or do you want me to go back to using my car to get to Lansdowne?

I thought we were supposed to spending our money to actually 'improve' transit.

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.

We have just gone through this exercise with additional double tracking. And what did it buy us? We were able to move from 15 minute frequency to the less than expected 12 minute frequency, with little hope of improving on that.

So we double track other little sections and throw on even more trains. If we continue to do that, there will be diminishing returns. More disjointed double tracks just means more places for trains to have to slow down to wait for a passing train. And we end up with longer trip times and not much of an improvement in frequency. Furthermore, the limits of the track are determined by the longest stretch of single track. If the difficult parts remain from the Dow's Lake tunnel to near Gladstone Avenue and the Rideau River Bridge, then our service cannot be improved significantly beyond what we have today.

Let's face it, if we want 5 minute frequency (the original proposal from a decade ago), you need full double tracking. If you want to deliver fast and reliable service, you need full double tracking absolutely.

And the more we tinker with this line, the more money will be wasted, and the more service closures will have to happen.

The time for double tracking should be sooner than later, otherwise costs will escalate as we need to take more and more costly actions in order to keep the line open as much as possible or to provide an adequate alternative.

[Catenary]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Where have I heard the bolded part before?

What possible justification is there for doing that after building ridership over a 20 year period on the south east transitway?

We all know the market for the Trillium Line and Southeast Transitway are completely different.

I went the Red Blacks game today. How was I to get there if it weren't for the Southeast Transitway? Or do you want me to go back to using my car to get to Lansdowne?

I thought we were supposed to spending our money to actually 'improve' transit.



We have just gone through this exercise with additional double tracking. And what did it buy us? We were able to move from 15 minute frequency to the less than expected 12 minute frequency, with little hope of improving on that.

So we double track other little sections and throw on even more trains. If we continue to do that, there will be diminishing returns. More disjointed double tracks just means more places for trains to have to slow down to wait for a passing train. And we end up with longer trip times and not much of an improvement in frequency. Furthermore, the limits of the track are determined by the longest stretch of single track. If the difficult parts remain from the Dow's Lake tunnel to near Gladstone Avenue and the Rideau River Bridge, then our service cannot be improved significantly beyond what we have today.

Let's face it, if we want 5 minute frequency (the original proposal from a decade ago), you need full double tracking. If you want to deliver fast and reliable service, you need full double tracking absolutely.

And the more we tinker with this line, the more money will be wasted, and the more service closures will have to happen.

The time for double tracking should be sooner than later, otherwise costs will escalate as we need to take more and more costly actions in order to keep the line open as much as possible or to provide an adequate alternative.

To be honest I have no idea where you heard that before. I didn't really throw that in because I believe it's a terrific, justifiable idea. Indeed, I live within walking distance of Greenboro, so the Southeast Transitway is an important utility. I can see a future though where ridership from the south end moves onto the Trillium Line, especially with the bus -> train transfer at Hurdman coming soon. As the Trillium Line is extended south to South Keys, parallel to the existing Transitway, and further south to Leitrim and Bowesville, even more traffic will be diverted off of the buses and onto the train. As it is, most buses on this stretch get off the Transitway to travel along Heron, or end at Greenboro/South Keys. Only the 97, 98, 8 and express routes use the Transitway between Greenboro and Heron. With the express buses modified to serve train stations, 97 service cut back with a train to the airport, and 98 ending at Greenboro often as it currently does, it's not inconceivable that this stretch of Transitway could see low passenger numbers in the future.

The area where the VIA line, Trillium Line, Transitway and Sawmill Creek meet is very tight, and as I mentioned, grade separating the two rail lines would likely require massive reconstruction in the area. Should this reconstruction occur, it would be an opportunity to reconsider the entire connection of bus routes. With low usage on the buses heading south from Heron, and the new Baseline BRT ending here, it may be possible to merge the southeast Transitway and Baseline BRT into one corridor, with a corresponding transfer to the Trillium Line and possible commuter rail should it ever come to fruition on either line. This doesn't eliminate the Transitway to the south, but it does allow it to be reduced to a secondary status, making it easier to reconfigure the bridges in the area with tighter curves and ramps. Direct Lansdowne service to Greenboro could be provided on Bank Street, which is a fairly free-flowing arterial from Johnston to Billings Bridge anyways.

I think in the end I don't disagree with any of your points, but as you say, 20 years is a long time. With the current TMP to 2031, I don't foresee any major changes before that, but things will be different by then, and we must keep an open mind. Obviously a full double tracking and electrification is the best option, but if the Trillium Line can be modified to run a 5 minute service without full double tracking, which I believe is possible even with pinch points at the Rideau River and Canal, then we should consider it.

[1overcosc]

If the Trillium Line was actually upgraded to a level comparable to the Confederation Line (electrified, full double tracking, the works), the SE Transitway probably could be removed south of Heron (and the remaining stub merged with the Baseline transitway to provide a Hurdman<->Baseline through routing, as suggested), provided frequencies on both the remaining Transitway and Trillium line were high enough. It would depend on demand patterns. If the Trillium Line became a full metro line, ridership on the SE Transitway could very well fall back to a small trickle of people moving between South Keys area and Alta Vista/Gloucester/Orleans, which would be a small enough number that requiring a transfer at Heron is justifiable... in fact, it could very well be a small enough number that frequent bus service from South Keys to Hurdman may no longer be justifiable. Especially considering that by replacing the South Keys-Heron transitway with rail, boom, you have a ready made grade separated corridor right there.

But if the majority of demand continues to go through Hurdman (which would definitely be the case with the current Trillium Line), it's a horrible idea.

[Catenary]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

If the Trillium Line was actually upgraded to a level comparable to the Confederation Line (electrified, full double tracking, the works), the SE Transitway probably could be removed south of Heron (and the remaining stub merged with the Baseline transitway to provide a Hurdman<->Baseline through routing, as suggested), provided frequencies on both the remaining Transitway and Trillium line were high enough. It would depend on demand patterns. If the Trillium Line became a full metro line, ridership on the SE Transitway could very well fall back to a small trickle of people moving between South Keys area and Alta Vista/Gloucester/Orleans, which would be a small enough number that requiring a transfer at Heron is justifiable... in fact, it could very well be a small enough number that frequent bus service from South Keys to Hurdman may no longer be justifiable. Especially considering that by replacing the South Keys-Heron transitway with rail, boom, you have a ready made grade separated corridor right there.

But if the majority of demand continues to go through Hurdman (which would definitely be the case with the current Trillium Line), it's a horrible idea.

Exactly this. It's just to early right now to predict what would happen.

[lrt's friend]

For many people, the southeast Transitway will remain the preferred route into downtown. Since we decided that the Trillium Line will not go downtown, we are imposing two transfers for most people. At least, the transitway will get rid of one of those transfers. Also, why would we force everybody to go through downtown if their travel is to the east? Remember, one of the reasons for the Trillium Line's success was because it allowed many people to bypass downtown, for example, workers at Tunney's Pasture. Also, why would we impose an additional transfer to access the southeast's only indoor shopping centre, Billings Bridge? I live only perhaps 5 km from Billings Bridge, a 10 minute drive. Should I have to transfer twice to get there? Also, if you are going to the University of Ottawa, do you really think your trip would be faster via the Trillium Line?

As I said, the Trillium Line serves a completely different purpose and connectivity than the southeast transitway. You just have to look at a map which shows a substantial different routing.

So, I can't agree that traffic would be reduced to a trickle under any circumstance. And I don't think it is in the city's best interest to direct all traffic from the south to Bayview. Just remember we need a degree of passenger balance on the Confederation Line from the east and the west or our trains will be underutilized.

And my comment about where have I heard this before, well, I have heard it right here, time and again, and thankfully no where else. Closing rapid transit lines in order to build some mega station in one of the most pedestrian hostile locations in the city makes no sense. No matter what, this area is going to be a mess as it serves as major arterial junction, railway junction and a rapid transit line, all superimposed on each other.

[Richard Eade]

I have to agree with Catenary here. If the Trillium Line gets extended to Bowesville with a reasonable frequency, then that will be the place where all local buses will dump their passengers for transfer to the train. There will not be buses coming from the south onto a SE Transitway. Remember, during peak periods, the trains from Bowesville will be the ones that run continuously to Bayview; so in the morning, people get on their local bus, transfer to the Trillium Line at Bowesville, then transfer to the Confederation Line at Bayview, to get downtown. (Yes, I know that people go other places than downtown.) The plan is to move people onto the extended Trillium Line, and away from the SE Transitway. The hope is that they will stay on the Trillium Line until they transfer to the Confederation Line and not transfer back to buses at South Keys or Walkley. If Kitchissippi’s desire comes to fruition, and the Confederation area is redesigned for better bus/train transfers, then it should be possible to have people transfer to buses at the Confederation Station.

As Catenary points out, there should be very few buses remaining on the SE Transitway between Confederation and Greenboro; no # 99, no # 97. Even the Greenboro Park & Ride has been destined for in-fill; i.e., there will no longer be a Park & Ride at Greenboro. (Personally, I think that the construction of the new South Keys Station on the Trillium Line will also mean the closure and removal of the Greenboro Station; especially if the Walkley Station is added.)

If we accept this premise, that passengers will be on the trains and that the SE Transitway will have few buses, then the next step of upgrading the Trillium Line becomes easier – the old SE Transitway, with its existing width and full grade separation, could become the electrified, double-tracked rail corridor. And this stretch can be converted without any shut-down of the Trillium Line. If the new extension, Greenboro to Bowesville, is built properly (i.e., ‘roughed-in’ for twin-track electric), then its conversion could be relatively fast with minimum shut-down. The problem would be north of Confederation; assuming that the same rail alignment is kept.

[Of course, if the City had buried empty tunnel sections (or at least cast a reinforced concrete slab to act as an umbrella to later dig under) when they did the rebuilding of Bank Street, they could have had most of a tunnel from Wellington Street to Billings Bridge. That would have made a dandy alternate alignment north of Confederation, allowing for a branching of north-bound train service. Lrt’s friend could have taken a train directly to future RedBlack games.]

[lrt's friend]

I visited a friend at the Civic Hospital this evening and again the Trillium Line was not running on schedule, instead departing exactly mid way between the scheduled times. I was lucky that I arrived a little early so it all worked out, but I am glad that I was not depending on a transfer to a local bus on a Sunday evening. It would have been a long wait.

The single track system is unable to correct itself after it goes off schedule, as the chain reaction on all the trains on the line prevents that unless you delay the trains for a whole cycle.. The return trip was equally off schedule.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

I have to agree with Catenary here. If the Trillium Line gets extended to Bowesville with a reasonable frequency, then that will be the place where all local buses will dump their passengers for transfer to the train. There will not be buses coming from the south onto a SE Transitway. Remember, during peak periods, the trains from Bowesville will be the ones that run continuously to Bayview; so in the morning, people get on their local bus, transfer to the Trillium Line at Bowesville, then transfer to the Confederation Line at Bayview, to get downtown. (Yes, I know that people go other places than downtown.) The plan is to move people onto the extended Trillium Line, and away from the SE Transitway. The hope is that they will stay on the Trillium Line until they transfer to the Confederation Line and not transfer back to buses at South Keys or Walkley. If Kitchissippi’s desire comes to fruition, and the Confederation area is redesigned for better bus/train transfers, then it should be possible to have people transfer to buses at the Confederation Station.

As Catenary points out, there should be very few buses remaining on the SE Transitway between Confederation and Greenboro; no # 99, no # 97. Even the Greenboro Park & Ride has been destined for in-fill; i.e., there will no longer be a Park & Ride at Greenboro. (Personally, I think that the construction of the new South Keys Station on the Trillium Line will also mean the closure and removal of the Greenboro Station; especially if the Walkley Station is added.)

If we accept this premise, that passengers will be on the trains and that the SE Transitway will have few buses, then the next step of upgrading the Trillium Line becomes easier – the old SE Transitway, with its existing width and full grade separation, could become the electrified, double-tracked rail corridor. And this stretch can be converted without any shut-down of the Trillium Line. If the new extension, Greenboro to Bowesville, is built properly (i.e., ‘roughed-in’ for twin-track electric), then its conversion could be relatively fast with minimum shut-down. The problem would be north of Confederation; assuming that the same rail alignment is kept.

[Of course, if the City had buried empty tunnel sections (or at least cast a reinforced concrete slab to act as an umbrella to later dig under) when they did the rebuilding of Bank Street, they could have had most of a tunnel from Wellington Street to Billings Bridge. That would have made a dandy alternate alignment north of Confederation, allowing for a branching of north-bound train service. Lrt’s friend could have taken a train directly to future RedBlack games.]

I used the Greenboro Park n Ride both last night and tonight. Can you explain to me why I should use transit if they get rid of it? What is my alternative? Drive of course. It is becoming quite apparent.

The extension of the Trillium Line to Bowesville does not help me one iota. Most of my trips are not in the direction of the Trillium Line, this evening being an exception.

The plan you are advocating just makes transit totally unusable to my office, not that it is good now.

Nobody seems to consider the impact on the Walkley, Greenboro, Hunt Club, Blossom Park area, which will be greatly hurt by closure of the southeast Transitway. These are the neighbourhoods that are feeding the southeast Transitway and will not benefit from an extension of the Trillium Line. The ridership coming from Bowesville and the airport is minimal at the present time.

If the only consideration are trips to downtown and back, then we are doomed to falling ridership.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

So, I can't agree that traffic would be reduced to a trickle under any circumstance. And I don't think it is in the city's best interest to direct all traffic from the south to Bayview. Just remember we need a degree of passenger balance on the Confederation Line from the east and the west or our trains will be underutilized.

If this is true, I would agree that the line should remain open.

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

If we accept this premise, that passengers will be on the trains and that the SE Transitway will have few buses, then the next step of upgrading the Trillium Line becomes easier – the old SE Transitway, with its existing width and full grade separation, could become the electrified, double-tracked rail corridor. And this stretch can be converted without any shut-down of the Trillium Line. If the new extension, Greenboro to Bowesville, is built properly (i.e., ‘roughed-in’ for twin-track electric), then its conversion could be relatively fast with minimum shut-down. The problem would be north of Confederation; assuming that the same rail alignment is kept.

You're forgetting the fact that Carleton University provides the majority of users of the Trillium line, not south-enders trying to get downtown. Switching the line so that it runs Bowesville to Hurdman is tantamount to a shut-down in the eyes of thousands of students and new condo owners near Dows Lake.

To me, if nothing much is done to the Trillium Line north of Heron, they should just extend the SE Transitway as BRT to Bowesville and build the Airport spur as the TL terminus. This will give people in Riverside south a single bus ride to Hurdman to connect with the Confederation Line, or have a choice of transferring on to the Trillium line at South Keys, Greenboro or Walkey. A logical solution if one has no bias regarding the flavour of rapid transit. This is actually an appropriate implementation of BRT, as the routes can branch out past South Keys or Bowesville to the different lower density communities in the south, offering them a single transfer journey to get downtown just like the rest of the suburbs.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

I have to agree with Catenary here. If the Trillium Line gets extended to Bowesville with a reasonable frequency, then that will be the place where all local buses will dump their passengers for transfer to the train. There will not be buses coming from the south onto a SE Transitway. Remember, during peak periods, the trains from Bowesville will be the ones that run continuously to Bayview; so in the morning, people get on their local bus, transfer to the Trillium Line at Bowesville, then transfer to the Confederation Line at Bayview, to get downtown. (Yes, I know that people go other places than downtown.) The plan is to move people onto the extended Trillium Line, and away from the SE Transitway. The hope is that they will stay on the Trillium Line until they transfer to the Confederation Line and not transfer back to buses at South Keys or Walkley. If Kitchissippi’s desire comes to fruition, and the Confederation area is redesigned for better bus/train transfers, then it should be possible to have people transfer to buses at the Confederation Station.

As Catenary points out, there should be very few buses remaining on the SE Transitway between Confederation and Greenboro; no # 99, no # 97. Even the Greenboro Park & Ride has been destined for in-fill; i.e., there will no longer be a Park & Ride at Greenboro. (Personally, I think that the construction of the new South Keys Station on the Trillium Line will also mean the closure and removal of the Greenboro Station; especially if the Walkley Station is added.)

If we accept this premise, that passengers will be on the trains and that the SE Transitway will have few buses, then the next step of upgrading the Trillium Line becomes easier – the old SE Transitway, with its existing width and full grade separation, could become the electrified, double-tracked rail corridor. And this stretch can be converted without any shut-down of the Trillium Line. If the new extension, Greenboro to Bowesville, is built properly (i.e., ‘roughed-in’ for twin-track electric), then its conversion could be relatively fast with minimum shut-down. The problem would be north of Confederation; assuming that the same rail alignment is kept.

[Of course, if the City had buried empty tunnel sections (or at least cast a reinforced concrete slab to act as an umbrella to later dig under) when they did the rebuilding of Bank Street, they could have had most of a tunnel from Wellington Street to Billings Bridge. That would have made a dandy alternate alignment north of Confederation, allowing for a branching of north-bound train service. Lrt’s friend could have taken a train directly to future RedBlack games.]

I do wish to apologize to you for my rather hasty comments done late at night.

What you are describing would take many decades to accomplish, the southeast transitway conversion and the Bank Street subway. I don't see any of this happening in my lifetime.

My concern still remains about those of us who live in the inner suburbs, for whom the southeast transitway was built in the first place. All of the changes that you described will be painful for us during their construction.

And I am not sure how the city would ever justify, nor the logistics of having three rail lines all running north-south and all merge at Confederation. I am not clear from what you said what would happen between Confederation and South Keys and where a converted southeast transitway rail line will end nor a Bank Street subway would end.

If Confederation is the main terminus, then your bus network needs to be substantially reworked so that most of the buses serving the inner suburbs terminate their instead of at Billings Bridge and South Keys as presently designed. We need to keep transfers to a reasonable level. This suggests that the southeast Transitway south of Heron needs to be kept open to allow local buses to connect to the Confederation megastation efficiently. The plans for the future also call for substantial intensification along south Bank Street meaning that efficient movement of buses cannot happen there.

f the Bank Street subway and southeast route, were to merge onto the Trillium line as far south as South Keys, we will have train congestion issues. If however, a Bank Street subway and southeast transitway line were to run along the southeast transitway as far as South Keys, then this will work. Given that the Bank Street subway is the only rail line that will run downtown, you have to wonder whether the airport line should be connect to it.

A conversion of the southeast transitway is not as simple as presented. There is already talk of running two car trains on the Trillium Line as we move downtown commuters onto it. However, what will happen with the Bayview transfer? Once you fill those trains with commuters instead of students, you will run into the likelihood of overwhelming Confederation Line trains at Bayview. As long as we have single track service and a train every 12 minutes, means that every 4th Confederation Line train will face a whole lot of extra passengers at Bayview. And once you close the southeast Transitway for conversion, this will get a whole lot worse.

Just consider today with the construction of the Confederation Line. They needed to upgrade the Trillium Line (less successfully than planned) and they couldn't open stations at Gladstone and Walkley for fear of overwhelming the system. The likelihood of overwhelming the system is far greater when you move all downtown commuters over to a very limited Trillium Line.

So double tracking the Trillium Line based on a conversion of the southeast Transitway first is problematic, as it requires that you move all commuters over to the single track Trillium Line even before that.

I know the city has all kinds of plans for south Bank Street intensification. Plans to fill in Billings Bridge and South Keys parking lots and closure of the Greenboro Park n Ride. One has to question how this will take place until we substantially change our transportation habits in suburban areas from cars to public transit. It will not be enough to build these rail lines. There also needs to be a substantial upgrade in bus service in suburban areas, if we wish people to go to the local shopping mall by transit rather than by car. Is the city willing to invest in this? As it stands, it is not enough to build a subway down Bank Street to Lansdowne Park. I also need to be able to get to my home from the subway terminus. If we continue to offer only half hour service or worse in the suburbs, how do we have confidence that transit will allow us to make the whole trip? And if there is no longer a park n ride, then how do we use transit at all during off peak hours if we want to be able to get home in a reasonable time after an evening event such as a Red Blacks game. The success of the Red Blacks transit plan is based on access to Park n Ride lots in suburban locations.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

You're forgetting the fact that Carleton University provides the majority of users of the Trillium line, not south-enders trying to get downtown. Switching the line so that it runs Bowesville to Hurdman is tantamount to a shut-down in the eyes of thousands of students and new condo owners near Dows Lake.

To me, if nothing much is done to the Trillium Line north of Heron, they should just extend the SE Transitway as BRT to Bowesville and build the Airport spur as the TL terminus. This will give people in Riverside south a single bus ride to Hurdman to connect with the Confederation Line, or have a choice of transferring on to the Trillium line at South Keys, Greenboro or Walkey. A logical solution if one has no bias regarding the flavour of rapid transit. This is actually an appropriate implementation of BRT, as the routes can branch out past South Keys or Bowesville to the different lower density communities in the south, offering them a single transfer journey to get downtown just like the rest of the suburbs.

The way we have altered and re-altered the plans for the Trillium Line and the half baked branching at South Keys, perhaps what you are suggesting is the only way to move forward.

Unfortunately, it means total defeat on building rail to the southern suburbs and planning a transit based suburb. It also means defeat as far as making the Trillium Line the main rapid transit route to the south. It will remain a niche service as it was when it was first created. But we can then move forward and accept the limited service that it offers and not worry about all the issues surrounding double tracking.

Since the 2006 cancellation, we have gradually scaled back the rail plan, first excluding a downtown link, then the Barrhaven connection and now anything beyond Bowesville. I have questioned the wisdom of operating a single rapid transit corridor without continuous no-transfer service. It stunts potential ridership. Extending the southeast transitway will satisfy the need of commuters in a reasonable way and we don't need to worry about grade separation at Lester Road and Leitrim Road.

I have always questioned extension of the Trillium Line until we get the central portion right, which meant double tracking at the very least. But even then, I question the wisdom of a $100M+ investment to extend the line to even the airport if we cannot provide direct service to downtown hotels, like offered by UPX and the Canada Line. Maybe, if the airport authority throws a lot of money at it, but for a pittance of extra ridership, why bother? I guess it would be a feather in our caps but not much else.

[passwordisnt123]

Somebody should email pretty much Catenary's entire post to City Hall.

It's somewhat amazing how Ottawa managed to take a rail transit line that was an overwhelming success (far exceeding expected ridership numbers) and then dump millions and millions of dollars into it only to end up making it worse or at least no better.

Originally Posted by Catenary

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.



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.

[Andrew_G]

The Trillium Line has been down multiple times in the past couple of weeks due to mechanical issues. The current system does not seem much more reliable than the old one, and we only improved frequency by a few minutes. Does anyone know if this is due to switches or the vehicles? (Noticed some guys in hardhats wearing vests riding with the operators today, not sure if related. There also looked to be an OC Transpo manager there as well.)

Also a separate and probably stupid quesiton but why do we not convert the transitway between Southkeys and Hurdman to light rail as we are doing for Confederation line? Have the line connect up at Hurdman as a main transfer hub as opposed to Bayview. It would be a little easier to double track. Carleton students could get off at the redone Billings Bridge station and get on a more frequent 111 (or something similar). I just have a hard time finding the justification for the existing Trillium Line. I love it as a Carleton student myself, but outside of that ridership seems kind of low. By doing this we would be gaining a significant number of new stations in established areas at the expense of Carling and Carleton, both of which could be served with bus service. Confederation would still be served (Heron Station) and Walkley would also be served (we want to put a trillium line station there anyways). And to add to this, it would be great if the new South Keys shopping area was built around a new central South Keys station (say half way between the current South Keys station and Greenboro). This plan would also allow us to avoid the signifigant costs of double tracking the Dows Lake tunnel, blasting the rock between the tunnel and Carling, and remodeling/or building a new bridge over the Rideau River.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Andrew_G

The Trillium Line has been down multiple times in the past couple of weeks due to mechanical issues. The current system does not seem much more reliable than the old one, and we only improved frequency by a few minutes. Does anyone know if this is due to switches or the vehicles? (Noticed some guys in hardhats wearing vests riding with the operators today, not sure if related. There also looked to be an OC Transpo manager there as well.)

Also a separate and probably stupid quesiton but why do we not convert the transitway between Southkeys and Hurdman to light rail as we are doing for Confederation line? Have the line connect up at Hurdman as a main transfer hub as opposed to Bayview. It would be a little easier to double track. Carleton students could get off at the redone Billings Bridge station and get on a more frequent 111 (or something similar). I just have a hard time finding the justification for the existing Trillium Line. I love it as a Carleton student myself, but outside of that ridership seems kind of low. By doing this we would be gaining a significant number of new stations in established areas at the expense of Carling and Carleton, both of which could be served with bus service. Confederation would still be served (Heron Station) and Walkley would also be served (we want to put a trillium line station there anyways). And to add to this, it would be great if the new South Keys shopping area was built around a new central South Keys station (say half way between the current South Keys station and Greenboro). This plan would also allow us to avoid the signifigant costs of double tracking the Dows Lake tunnel, blasting the rock between the tunnel and Carling, and remodeling/or building a new bridge over the Rideau River.

We cannot outright close either the southeast transitway or the Trillium Line when we have created a significant ridership base on each line and both are complementary to each other. A transfer at Billings Bridge to a bus at Carleton takes us back to the days before the O-Train and at least doubles travel times, probably more. If your destination is other than Carleton, travel times will be even worse.

In order to convert the southeast transitway to rail, you need a way to move the buses during conversion. I would think that involves adding lanes to the Airport Parkway and Riverside Drive.

If they ever consider doing this, I just wish they would really consider interlining from Hurdman to Bayview. There will always be higher demand on the Confederation Line between those 2 locations than on the rest of the route and if the Trillium Line does ever get double tracked and electrified, then the interlined trains could return on the Trillium Line forming a loop of sorts. But, I know there are so many here who are opposed to interlining even though it is successful in countless other cities.

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The way we have altered and re-altered the plans for the Trillium Line and the half baked branching at South Keys, perhaps what you are suggesting is the only way to move forward.

The SE Transitway as BRT could actually be vastly improved with not that much money, like making the station fare-paid zones. There's even been a lot of improvements in guidance systems that can economically convert it to a tram-bus line and make it operate just as good as LRT, especially given the relatively lower volume on that corridor. A Hurdman-Bowesville trunk line that diverges to 2 or 3 endpoints further on (Riverside south, Findley Creek, R-C Raceway, etc) using special tram-bus vehicles could even be rebranded as the "Rideau Line", sort of like the way Boston has its Silver Line.

The semi-automated tram-bus lines in France seem to be doing well. Maybe imbedding a metal strip on the Transitway that can be magnetically sensed even if obscured by snow could be used here.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

The SE Transitway as BRT could actually be vastly improved with not that much money, like making the station fare-paid zones. There's even been a lot of improvements in guidance systems that can economically convert it to a tram-bus line and make it operate just as good as LRT, especially given the relatively lower volume on that corridor. A Hurdman-Bowesville trunk line that diverges to 2 or 3 endpoints further on (Riverside south, Findley Creek, R-C Raceway, etc) using special tram-bus vehicles could even be rebranded as the "Rideau Line", sort of like the way Boston has its Silver Line.

The semi-automated tram-bus lines in France seem to be doing well. Maybe imbedding a metal strip on the Transitway that can be magnetically sensed even if obscured by snow could be used here.

I know there are all kinds of creative things that can be done that have already proven to work in other cities.

But, do you really think that city hall is listening, that we need to do the Trillium Line right or look at a different approach?

I really don't care if it is rail or buses, as long as the end result is better service.

[Catenary]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I visited a friend at the Civic Hospital this evening and again the Trillium Line was not running on schedule, instead departing exactly mid way between the scheduled times. I was lucky that I arrived a little early so it all worked out, but I am glad that I was not depending on a transfer to a local bus on a Sunday evening. It would have been a long wait.

The single track system is unable to correct itself after it goes off schedule, as the chain reaction on all the trains on the line prevents that unless you delay the trains for a whole cycle.. The return trip was equally off schedule.

You clearly don't ride the Trillium Line often because the trains never follow a schedule, and there is no posted schedule at the stations, only a rough frequency guideline. The schedule shown on the website and in the data feeds is just a placeholder estimate, the trains operate as quickly as possible. As you mention this is an issue with the single track system, but only because of it's current poor design and failed upgrade. The old single track system had no issue maintaining schedule, and if it got too far behind would be able to regain 2-3 minutes per trip to get back on time.

Originally Posted by Andrew_G

The Trillium Line has been down multiple times in the past couple of weeks due to mechanical issues. The current system does not seem much more reliable than the old one, and we only improved frequency by a few minutes. Does anyone know if this is due to switches or the vehicles? (Noticed some guys in hardhats wearing vests riding with the operators today, not sure if related. There also looked to be an OC Transpo manager there as well.)

Also a separate and probably stupid quesiton but why do we not convert the transitway between Southkeys and Hurdman to light rail as we are doing for Confederation line? Have the line connect up at Hurdman as a main transfer hub as opposed to Bayview. It would be a little easier to double track. Carleton students could get off at the redone Billings Bridge station and get on a more frequent 111 (or something similar). I just have a hard time finding the justification for the existing Trillium Line. I love it as a Carleton student myself, but outside of that ridership seems kind of low. By doing this we would be gaining a significant number of new stations in established areas at the expense of Carling and Carleton, both of which could be served with bus service. Confederation would still be served (Heron Station) and Walkley would also be served (we want to put a trillium line station there anyways). And to add to this, it would be great if the new South Keys shopping area was built around a new central South Keys station (say half way between the current South Keys station and Greenboro). This plan would also allow us to avoid the signifigant costs of double tracking the Dows Lake tunnel, blasting the rock between the tunnel and Carling, and remodeling/or building a new bridge over the Rideau River.

With the initial track issues worked out, most of the issues are now related to the trains. Aside from some frozen switches which can delay service in the morning for a few minutes, most of the recent shutdowns have taken less than an hour to correct. With twice the number of trains on the track, more failures can be expected, and this will cause problems up and down a line of this length regardless of if it is single or double tracked. The doors seem to be causing some of these issues, as they are more sensitive than the old ones, and there is an onboard marketing campaign to keep people from holding the doors. I have a feeling that rail supervisors are also quicker to activate route 107 in case of trouble, whenever the potenttial length of delay is unknown. The people in vests are likely Bombardier employees riding the trains on some trips but this has always been the case. Supervisors have white hard hats and vests, often with the Capital Rail pickup truck. They are also out frequently for a number of reasons, often at Greenboro.

There are issues with the tight curves along the Southeast Transitway being converted to rail. Trillium Line ridership is growing, and is critical at Carleton because bus access to campus is very poor. Forcing all buses on campus through a loop on and off of Bronson causes significant delays.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

We cannot outright close either the southeast transitway or the Trillium Line when we have created a significant ridership base on each line and both are complementary to each other. A transfer at Billings Bridge to a bus at Carleton takes us back to the days before the O-Train and at least doubles travel times, probably more. If your destination is other than Carleton, travel times will be even worse.

Route 107 from Greenboro to Carleton takes easily twice as much time as the train, which is why I find it funny that people complain that buses race past the train where they run in parallel. On that note Route 107 will be running November 21 and 22 for preventative maintenance.

[silvergate]

Has the city ever looked at extending the SE transitway north, perhaps onto bus lanes on the Vanier Pkwy? I'm not sure how much of a mess the Riverside-417 interchange would become then, but it would give quick access to residents north of the 417 to the Confederation Line, in an area that doesn't appear very well served currently