Chief William Commanda Bridge (former Prince of Wales Bridge)

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

There's probably an order of magnitude difference between making the bridge a bike path or operable as a railway. These are not the same thing.

There's also some very strict legalities here. I don't think the City can just turn a railway into a bike path on a whim.

I agree, it would have to discontinue the railway (or add to the bridge).

But even under the category of transit there is no consensus on what sort of service should be offered or what improvements/changes need to be made to the bridges.

[DarthVader_1961]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I agree, it would have to discontinue the railway (or add to the bridge).

But even under the category of transit there is no consensus on what sort of service should be offered or what improvements/changes need to be made to the bridges.

Out of curiosity... if would be used for rail transit, would double tracking not be looked at?

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by DarthVader_1961

Out of curiosity... if would be used for rail transit, would double tracking not be looked at?

I imagine that is the long term plan when funds become available

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by DarthVader_1961

Out of curiosity... if would be used for rail transit, would double tracking not be looked at?

That's a good question. And I think that is another reason why fixing/upgrading the bridge without a plan to use it (or an overall interprovincial transit plan) makes little sense.

[OtrainUser]

I was also thinking that it would be a better idea that the Trillium line terminates at Montcalm station instead of Tache that way a lot more STO buses can be removed from downtown Ottawa.

In my case that would mean LRT would be within walking distance

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

I was also thinking that it would be a better idea that the Trillium line terminates at Montcalm station instead of Tache that way a lot more STO buses can be removed from downtown Ottawa.

For Gatineau commuters, I agree that it would be a much better option. For ottawa commuters, an extension to Terrasses de la Chaudière would be best.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by roger1818

For Gatineau commuters, I agree that it would be a much better option. For ottawa commuters, an extension to Terrasses de la Chaudière would be best.

And this spells out the problem, doesn't it? Until there an interprovincial transit plan that both Ottawa and Gatineau agree on (don't hold your breathe), any piecemeal plans for the POW bridge are a waste of money.

[rocketphish]

Don't let the city off the hook over Prince of Wales Bridge, group tells transport minister

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Published on: March 19, 2018 | Last Updated: March 19, 2018 11:42 AM EDT



A group advocating for the Prince of Wales Bridge is asking federal Transport Minister Marc Garneau to not let the City of Ottawa off the hook so easily when it comes to the interprovincial crossing.

The grassroots Ottawa River Bridge (ORB), which has a core group of about five people organizing the effort, wrote to Garneau on Monday suggesting that the federal cabinet shouldn’t rescind an order from the Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA).

The order compels the city to restore the rail line north of Bayview transit station so that it would be operable within 12 months of the agency giving running rights to another rail company. The order also applies to the city-owned bridge spanning the river. The other option offered by the CTA is for the city to discontinue the line, effectively removing the city’s control.

The city wants Garneau to step in, and is also asking the Federal Court of Appeal to consider hearing a challenge to the CTA’s decision.

“The concerns expressed by the City of Ottawa are legitimate. Still, we believe that rescinding this decision would allow for the city’s inaction on the bridge and railway to continue,” ORB member Elena Prokopenko says in the letter to Garneau.

The ORB would rather Garneau vary the order. The group suggests a one-year extension that would see the city return to the CTA and explain its intended use of the bridge. By April 30, 2019, the city should present a three-year strategic plan to bring the bridge to a state where it can be operational within 12 months, the ORB says.

“In addition, you may wish for the City of Ottawa and Ville de Gatineau to report back to your office in April 2019 to provide an update on their discussions regarding interprovincial transit, an activity that Mayor Watson committed to in his 2018 State of the City address,” Prokopenko tells Garneau in her letter.

The city doesn’t have the money to fix the bridge and return it to an operational rail line. It’s part of the city’s long-term transit plans — Mayor Jim Watson calls it “Phase 3B” of the third stage of LRT, with Phase 3A being LRT to Kanata — but there’s no timeline. The mayor is against spending $10 million to temporarily repurpose the bridge as an interprovincial pedestrian and cycling path.

In his own letter to Garneau earlier this month, Watson complained that the CTA made its decision without considering the discussions between local politicians about connecting the Ottawa and Gatineau transit systems using the bridge.

The CTA started the investigation after receiving information from the Moose Consortium, which raised concerns about the city removing tracks near Bayview station during the construction of the joint Confederation Line and Trillium Line station. Moose (standing for Mobility Ottawa-Outaouais: Systems and Enterprises) has ambitions of starting an interprovincial rail network using the Prince of Wales Bridge.

[email protected]
twitter.com/JonathanWilling

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news...es-bridge-group-tells-transport-minister

[acottawa]

Five people is "grassroots organization" now?

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Five people is "grassroots organization" now?

Doesn't get much grassrootsier than that.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Five people is "grassroots organization" now?

I was thinking the same thing. Here is their Facebook page FYI:

https://www.facebook.com/pg/blackbridgeottawa/posts/

[acottawa]

They better hope these guys don't have a trademark.

http://blackbridgebrewery.ca/

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I was thinking the same thing. Here is their Facebook page FYI:

https://www.facebook.com/pg/blackbridgeottawa/posts/

Interesting choice of name. The STO bridge (shared with rails) over the Gatineau River is called the Pont Noir. Did they do this on purpose or is it just a coincidence?

[J.OT13]

I agree with this. It shouldn't be an all-or-nothing approach. The Feds should extend the order.

I'm curious as to why ORB wouldn't have copied MP Greg Fergus, arguably the biggest champion of interprovincial rapid-transit.


https://www.facebook.com/pg/blackbridgeottawa/posts/

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I agree with this. It shouldn't be an all-or-nothing approach. The Feds should extend the order.

I'm curious as to why ORB wouldn't have copied MP Greg Fergus, arguably the biggest champion of interprovincial rapid-transit.


https://www.facebook.com/pg/blackbridgeottawa/posts/

Doesn't he want to use the Alexandria bridge?

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Doesn't he want to use the Alexandria bridge?

He wants to use both.



https://twitter.com/GodefroyChabi/status/913578752797528064

[AndyMEng]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I agree with this. It shouldn't be an all-or-nothing approach. The Feds should extend the order.

I'm curious as to why ORB wouldn't have copied MP Greg Fergus, arguably the biggest champion of interprovincial rapid-transit.


https://www.facebook.com/pg/blackbridgeottawa/posts/

lol and in who's dream does a 120 year old bridge have the capacity for a double-bike path, let alone high volumes of train traffic? I mean, this rendering looks beautiful, but:

1. The bridge is old and deteriorated, and footings are made from low-strength, large aggregate concrete that hasn't been maintained in decades. The entire thing will vibrate into pieces without massive intervention, even if it did have the theoretical capacity to carry these loads. I can almost guarantee you that nobody has seen what the footings look like under the water, and with such a big question mark, how is this going to be accomplished?

2. If the federal government wanted to offload costs to the City when they decided to sell the bridge in the first place, this was definitely not the way to go about it. Sure we can fix the bridge, but who's going to pay for it? This job is going to be well over $100-500 million when it's done (on a good day).

3. Here's an idea, if the people from MOOSE really want their bridge back, and still estimate it'll cost $45 million, why not sell it to them, and then THEY can fix it with their increased condo fees?

4. The mayor doesn't want to spend the $10M on making the bridge pedestrian safe. But I think this is a small fraction of the overall costs, and might actually be a good deal.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by AndyMEng

2. If the federal government wanted to offload costs to the City when they decided to sell the bridge in the first place, this was definitely not the way to go about it. Sure we can fix the bridge, but who's going to pay for it? This job is going to be well over $100-500 million when it's done (on a good day).

AFAIK, the federal government never owned the PoW bridge. It was was built by the Quebec, Montreal, Ottawa and Occidental Railway, which was later purchased by the CPR. The city bought the bridge from the CPR as part of the O-Train project.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by AndyMEng

lol and in who's dream does a 120 year old bridge have the capacity for a double-bike path, let alone high volumes of train traffic? I mean, this rendering looks beautiful, but:

1. The bridge is old and deteriorated, and footings are made from low-strength, large aggregate concrete that hasn't been maintained in decades. The entire thing will vibrate into pieces without massive intervention, even if it did have the theoretical capacity to carry these loads. I can almost guarantee you that nobody has seen what the footings look like under the water, and with such a big question mark, how is this going to be accomplished?

This is probably why the city says it will take longer than a year to repair, especially if pedestrian walkways are to be added to it.

3. Here's an idea, if the people from MOOSE really want their bridge back, and still estimate it'll cost $45 million, why not sell it to them, and then THEY can fix it with their increased condo fees?

a) the mayor doesn't want to
b) In MOOSE's plan they were going to pay for it anyway?

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

a) the mayor doesn't want to
b) In MOOSE's plan they were going to pay for it anyway?

Also, Moose's assets appear to be a rounding error of zero.