O-Train Line 2/4 [Stage 2 | Greenboro to Limebank/Airport] | In Service

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

Not it isn't. All we want are trains every 8 minutes, something we were promised not even 5 years ago and it's certainly possible to achieve that without needing to completely double track the entire corridor.

I'd love to see 8 minute service too, but sadly I don't think it's possible without spending perhaps hundreds of millions more.

The person who promised 8 minute service years ago (Alain Mercier) is no longer here.

[rocketphish]

Ottawa airport rail link would cost Transpo $4M annually compared to current bus service

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Updated: February 27, 2019



OC Transpo will have to eat $4 million in annual operating costs for running trains on a Trillium Line spur to the Ottawa International Airport, but the city still views an airport rail link as a must-have for Canada’s capital.

The four-kilometre airport rail link is part of the $4.6-billion Stage 2 transit package that will be up for discussion at council meeting Wednesday before council votes on the construction contracts on March 6. The city wants to lay 44 kilometres of new track in the O-Train expansion program, bringing LRT service to Moodie Drive, Algonquin College and Trim Road, and Trillium Line service to Riverside South.

The city is sticking with a decision to run the spur to the EY Centre and airport as an offshoot of the main line.

That means air travellers arriving at the airport would need to take three trains to get to Ottawa’s downtown core. Travellers would haul their luggage onto a Trillium Line spur train at the airport, transfer to another Trillium Line train at South Keys Station and finally transfer to a Confederation Line LRT train at Bayview Station to get downtown.

Chris Swail, the city’s director of O-Train planning, said new infrastructure will allow trains to run directly between the airport and Bayview Station if there’s a need for it in off-peak hours. It’s more likely the need would come from a major event at the EY Centre, rather than from the airport, he said.

In designing the Trillium Line expansion and airport spur, the city has been careful not to impact train service between Bayview Station and Riverside South, where the terminus will be Limebank Station. There was some thought early in the planning process to possibly send the odd train from the main line to the airport, but the growing southern suburb needs the rapid transit capacity.

If it was strictly a dollars-and-cents exercise, the airport spur might not be very attractive for all three levels of government funding the Stage 2 program.

The ridership numbers for the airport link aren’t expected to blow anyone away and Transpo will have to pay millions more to run trains to the airport rather than buses.

Swail said the efficiencies generated by the rail system as a whole will “more than help offset that additional pressure.”

“For us it’s really more about city-building than a business case that was going to be hugely beneficial on Day 1,” Swail said. “We’re the only G7 capital without LRT going to its airport. It’s something people have been talking about for a long time in terms of providing that convenient connection linking to the airport.”

Land around the airport could also become more interesting to developers with rail service in the area, he added.

Only the current single-vehicle 1 will run on the airport spur. The main Trillium Line will be getting new Stadler trains, along with an existing Alstom train with two vehicles linked.

Swail said the city’s goal is to make the wait at South Keys Station as short as possible for airport-bound customers or customers coming from the airport.

“We’ve timed operations so you’re not waiting more than two or three minutes on that platform,” Swail said.

There will be a train every 12 minutes on both the main Trillium Line and the airport spur line. However, the city only has to run that frequency for two years on the spur line before making any changes.

For now, the city anticipates it will take people about 35 minutes to get from the airport to Bayview Station via two Trillium Line trains.

The airport preferred to have some trains go directly to Bayview Station, but it’s not in charge of operating the rail line.

“A direct link would be the preferred scenario, however, it’s their system and we do appreciate the fact they’ve built the flexibility in the system to allow for off-peak service to Bayview. Hopefully the ridership will warrant that,” airport spokeswoman Krista Kealey said.

Kealey said the airport is investing $25 million in linking the terminal to the rail spur. That includes the full cost of the airport station located on the north side of the terminal at the departures level.

The city recommends that SNC-Lavalin, under the name TransitNEXT, build the Trillium Line expansion and airport spur, but the airport is responsible for contracting and constructing the airport train station. Both the main Trillium Line and the airport spur are scheduled to be done in 2022.

The federal and provincial governments are paying $155 million for the airport link, which covers almost all the cost of the spur under the project scope.

[email protected]
twitter.com/JonathanWilling

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-new...annually-compared-to-current-bus-service

[BenYOW]

As someone who currently takes transit to Ottawa International, I still view the three-train concept as a net gain versus the current circumstances. While it would be preferable to travel from downtown to the airport with just one connection, I still view light rail access to the airport as being preferable to having my luggage aboard a Route 97 bus. While the articulated buses that generally operate Route 97 are good, it becomes a real headache to find space when non-articulated buses operate the route. With that said, I understand the concerns voiced in the above article.

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

Its not popular because it makes no sense to shelve a section of the project even though its on budget. Name me one company or government that would ever do that you wont find any. The whole project needs to go foward and thankfully the city is doing exactly that. If you really beleived that the original pricetag of 3.4 billion was going to be the final well i cant help with you with that, its your fault for believing a lowball number. Even at 4.7 billion, its still a good deal for stage 2 so everyone just need to calm down a notch and realise it wont get any cheaper just be happy stage 2 will move foward and it will make transit usage easier for more people.

I never said anything about the price tag of the projects. And projects do get shelved. When Ottawa cancelled its first attempt at LRT there was even a penalty that they had to pay for doing so.

I am not suggesting they cancel everything. I am not even suggesting they cancel the Trillium Line. I just think that the TL plan is staged and phased poorly and that taking a year to fix those problems, and redo the request for proposals, would benefit the city in the long run. Bad transit can linger a long time, and be costly.

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The problem is that we have Phase 2 of the Confederation Line not complete until 2025 at least and then Phase 3 which will take us to 2031 or later. This creates a big mess in the south end if we delay another 15 years.

There cannot be another 15 year wait unless we are prepared to spend $100Ms for new roadways that will feed directly into the centre of the city. That is twinning the Airport Parkway feeding double the traffic onto Bronson, building the Alta Vista Parkway and connecting to Nicholas Street and building some more east-west boulevards.

Originally Posted by Gat-Train

I agree. I'd rather wait a bit longer if it meant double tracking from the Dow's Lake tunnel to Bayview and an extension into Gatineau. As others have pointed out, current capacity will be outgrown quickly without double tracking.

Both of you make good points. And what I am suggesting isn't that the Trillium Line be delayed another 5 or 10 years. I wont go through the list again, but as I have pointed out in many posts on this forum, the Trillium Line is critical to Ottawa's continued, affordable, growth. It needs to be started very soon.

And maybe I didn't make it clear in my original post, but, the key problem I have with the Trillium Line project is that it seems to be poorly phased. We know the line is going to be shut down for 22 months (lets just call it 2 years). In those 2 years, are they going to do everything they need to in order to make sure that when they go back to double track the line, they can do so without any major shutdowns (a Sunday here or there wouldn't be a big deal)? Are they avoiding redundancy, and making sure that most everything being built will be permanent (a few temporary structures is not the end of the world)? Can the line be upgraded to the same automated systems that the Confederation Line will have?

I know this is going off topic for the thread, so I wont say much else here. But I do think that once the Confederation Line opens, and people see just how efficient and fast an advanced, and modern, LRT system can be, people will look at the Trillium Line differently, and see the true potential in it. If it is 10 years from now before the Trillium Line is fully modernized, that is fine. Even the strategy to keep it as a single track line during the first wave of expansion and upgrades isn't necessarily bad. The city can get away with shutting the line for 2 years right now because it's still basically just a five stop, pilot project. It needs to make the most of those 2 years and leave themselves in a spot to easily go back and upgrade. Right now, it doesn't seem like that is what they are doing. Nor does it seem like there is a clear, mid- to long-term vision for the line (at least not in the same way there has been for the Confederation Line). If it took one extra year for these concerns, and sorting out the details that are currently on the vague side, before shovels went into the ground, that would be a huge win for the line in the long run.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

Both of you make good points. And what I am suggesting isn't that the Trillium Line be delayed another 5 or 10 years. I wont go through the list again, but as I have pointed out in many posts on this forum, the Trillium Line is critical to Ottawa's continued, affordable, growth. It needs to be started very soon.

The problem with going back to the drawing board on the Trillium Line plan is that you run the risk of delaying it by 5 or 10 years, even if by accident.
Your point that the last time we reset on an LRT plan we got something better is true, but it also pushed it back by 10 years.

SNC Lavalin's proposal moved up a lot of line maintenance into upfront construction (infrastructure-related) so we can cross our fingers that they're putting in a bit of future-proofing.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

Its not popular because it makes no sense to shelve a section of the project even though its on budget. Name me one company or government that would ever do that you wont find any. The whole project needs to go foward and thankfully the city is doing exactly that. If you really beleived that the original pricetag of 3.4 billion was going to be the final well i cant help with you with that, its your fault for believing a lowball number. Even at 4.7 billion, its still a good deal for stage 2 so everyone just need to calm down a notch and realise it wont get any cheaper just be happy stage 2 will move foward and it will make transit usage easier for more people.

It wasn't a lowball number it was meant to be a good estimate and based on this they asked higher level of governments for a specific amount of money. The city is on the hook for the whole overrun so we are essentially doubling our cost over previous estimates. This is very serious. I think it most probably will go ahead but we may rue the day when property taxes soar and we end up with unsustainable finances in 10 years. We will end up with by far the highest per capita debt of any municipality in Ontario and unless some other city has a huge borrowing binge planned probably the highest in Canada.

I would also agree to cancelling the N/S if we can keep the rest of the funding which even though earmarked for airport I can't see the Feds backing away in an election year when the East West still serves the swing ridings in the area (well just west actually).

[Ottawaresident]

Well other than the airport and EY Center, there are a few employment places for the national gov ... Hopefully that gets used for it too.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

It wasn't a lowball number it was meant to be a good estimate and based on this they asked higher level of governments for a specific amount of money. The city is on the hook for the whole overrun so we are essentially doubling our cost over previous estimates. This is very serious. I think it most probably will go ahead but we may rue the day when property taxes soar and we end up with unsustainable finances in 10 years. We will end up with by far the highest per capita debt of any municipality in Ontario and unless some other city has a huge borrowing binge planned probably the highest in Canada.

I would also agree to cancelling the N/S if we can keep the rest of the funding which even though earmarked for airport I can't see the Feds backing away in an election year when the East West still serves the swing ridings in the area (well just west actually).

You are not looking at the big picture. Stage 2 will save money than the city would have to either spend on upgrading roads and so forth. The extra 700 million is easily affordable.

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

.........

Or maybe ask the province if they're willing to pay for the Moodie extension instead of the Airport Link, and drop the Airport Link. The city could probably buy some special buses with luggage racks and operate a shuttle service from the Airport to Hurdman for less than the increased operating costs of the Airport Link, and service would be just as effective.

Good Day.

and IIRC, the Airport link is the Fed 100%, with the Trim extension from Pd'O being the Prov 100%.

[lrt's friend]

The whole premise of the article is worrisome. The suggestion that some runs of the Trillium Line could be redirected to the airport makes no sense. We are maxing out the capacity of the main line. We cannot insert extra trains. There is no space for them. And if we redirect a train to the airport, how does this impact schedules on the main line going to Riverside South?

The original thinking was to have direct trains going to Riverside South in peak hours and to the airport in off-peak hours. The reason this was done away with is the confusion it would create for both destinations. People will end up on trains going to the wrong destination even if announcements are made, which will have to be made on every trip. Also consider that the airport spur will be designed for LINT trains only. A direct train to the airport means that we will operate half length trains on the main line. That could potentially create capacity problems on the main line. In other words, the suggestion that some airport trains might run to Bayview sounds like nonsense.


I am not that thrilled with the suggestion that travel time will be 35 minutes to the airport. Note that this is not from downtown, but from Bayview. With transfer time, this will be 50 minutes to downtown if we define that as being Rideau Station. Considering that it used to take just 12 minutes from Greenboro to Bayview, and it should take no more than 10 minutes from South Keys to the airport, we have been adding a lot of inefficiency.

For those who think that transferring twice is great because buses are not ideal, think again. At least today, the person boards the bus at the terminal station. There will be seats and places to put luggage. With two transfers, trains get progressively get more crowded as you get closer to downtown. If it is a peak period, the airport passenger may face a crush loaded train at Bayview. That is not a good experience for someone carrying luggage. My experiences with rail service from the airport in other cities have been good, because I can get a seat easily and a place for my luggage and I get taken directly downtown. Airport service typically is set up so there is not overcrowding but that will not be the case with our rail plans.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

Good Day.

and IIRC, the Airport link is the Fed 100%, with the Trim extension from Pd'O being the Prov 100%.

I think it's 50/50 for each with the Airport authority chipping in a bit for the airport link.

[J.OT13]

The City should have designed Trillium Stage 2 to allow the capability of 8 minute frequencies from Bayview to South Keys with trains south of there splitting between the airport and Riverside South. Even if it was every third train to the airport, that would have offered a better service. The current plan is a mess, but no one at City Hall seems to understand or even care.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

I'm just saying we are doubling the current capacity of the trillium line in stage 2, and you can expand it again by extending the platforms a 3rd time, which wouldn't require a shutdown.

When expanding capacity, increased frequency is always the better option and the best way to serve riders. Furthermore, lengthening the platform would mean buying a new car for each of our train sets. Better frequency means buying one or two additional train sets at a time.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The whole premise of the article is worrisome. The suggestion that some runs of the Trillium Line could be redirected to the airport makes no sense. We are maxing out the capacity of the main line. We cannot insert extra trains. There is no space for them. And if we redirect a train to the airport, how does this impact schedules on the main line going to Riverside South?

The original thinking was to have direct trains going to Riverside South in peak hours and to the airport in off-peak hours. The reason this was done away with is the confusion it would create for both destinations. People will end up on trains going to the wrong destination even if announcements are made, which will have to be made on every trip. Also consider that the airport spur will be designed for LINT trains only. A direct train to the airport means that we will operate half length trains on the main line. That could potentially create capacity problems on the main line. In other words, the suggestion that some airport trains might run to Bayview sounds like nonsense.

Your point about confusion is well taken, but I suspect the thinking is that if due to an event at the EY Centre there are 200 people on the airport line and only 20 going on the main line south of South Keys (many of whom are probably going to/from the EY Centre anyway), it would make sense to have trains continue on to the Airport.

It doesn't mean they will do it (these are the designers talking, not the operators), but it only makes sense to keep the option open. I assume you aren't suggesting that it be designed to make it impossible for trains to/from the airport be extended to Bayview.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

If we're going to cut anything, my vote would be the Moodie extension. Bayshore is a more natural transfer point anyway since it is a place people actually want to go and there is other connecting bus service.

The Moodie extension is a scope increase that the city is solely paying for, not other levels of government.

Or maybe ask the province if they're willing to pay for the Moodie extension instead of the Airport Link, and drop the Airport Link. The city could probably buy some special buses with luggage racks and operate a shuttle service from the Airport to Hurdman for less than the increased operating costs of the Airport Link, and service would be just as effective.

If we are going to buy special buses for the airport, we should provide direct to downtown service. Calgary Transit has airport express buses, as well as local service to the C-Train. People do not want to be dumped at a very busy transfer station with luggage in hand.

There is absolutely no reason whey airport buses cannot go downtown after the opening of the Confederation Line. It will have almost no impact on Confederation Line ridership and probably will be cheaper than operating a shuttle train.

If we were to do this, there should be a premium fare but still less than what Uber would charge.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

Both of you make good points. And what I am suggesting isn't that the Trillium Line be delayed another 5 or 10 years. I wont go through the list again, but as I have pointed out in many posts on this forum, the Trillium Line is critical to Ottawa's continued, affordable, growth. It needs to be started very soon.

And maybe I didn't make it clear in my original post, but, the key problem I have with the Trillium Line project is that it seems to be poorly phased. We know the line is going to be shut down for 22 months (lets just call it 2 years). In those 2 years, are they going to do everything they need to in order to make sure that when they go back to double track the line, they can do so without any major shutdowns (a Sunday here or there wouldn't be a big deal)? Are they avoiding redundancy, and making sure that most everything being built will be permanent (a few temporary structures is not the end of the world)? Can the line be upgraded to the same automated systems that the Confederation Line will have?

I know this is going off topic for the thread, so I wont say much else here. But I do think that once the Confederation Line opens, and people see just how efficient and fast an advanced, and modern, LRT system can be, people will look at the Trillium Line differently, and see the true potential in it. If it is 10 years from now before the Trillium Line is fully modernized, that is fine. Even the strategy to keep it as a single track line during the first wave of expansion and upgrades isn't necessarily bad. The city can get away with shutting the line for 2 years right now because it's still basically just a five stop, pilot project. It needs to make the most of those 2 years and leave themselves in a spot to easily go back and upgrade. Right now, it doesn't seem like that is what they are doing. Nor does it seem like there is a clear, mid- to long-term vision for the line (at least not in the same way there has been for the Confederation Line). If it took one extra year for these concerns, and sorting out the details that are currently on the vague side, before shovels went into the ground, that would be a huge win for the line in the long run.

There is no easy path to double tracking that doesn't require yet another lengthy shutdown. Preparing for later double tracking to avoid a further shutdown is beyond the scope of Phase 2 with the possible exception of the Ellwood grade separation.

[lrt's friend]

I have already stated that the likely outcome is that eventually Trillium Line trains will be lengthened again because full double tracking is going to be so problematic in 10 or 20 years. But consider if we moved to 120 m trains and the implications this will have at the Bayview transfer. There is no way this will work efficiently.

Let us hope that a Bank Street subway will be moving forward before that becomes necessary. At that point, ridership would be sufficient to warrant a subway.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

When expanding capacity, increased frequency is always the better option and the best way to serve riders. Furthermore, lengthening the platform would mean buying a new car for each of our train sets. Better frequency means buying one or two additional train sets at a time.

Agreed. I don't think lengthening the trains even further is a good option.

Originally Posted by bradnixon

The documents state that, with 12 minute service and double length trains, there will be sufficient capacity until 2048.

That is the thing. People on here don't seem to have a concept of how much of an increase in capacity the Trillium line is getting. With 240 additional passengers per train and 5 trains an hour, that is an additional 1200 pphpd. That is equivalent to a double decker bus every 4 minutes.

The pinch point will be between Mooney's Bay and Carleton. If that starts to be a problem, they can extend more buses along the south-eastern transitway to Hurdman to divert people going downtown off of the Trillium Line.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Your point about confusion is well taken, but I suspect the thinking is that if due to an event at the EY Centre there are 200 people on the airport line and only 20 going on the main line south of South Keys (many of whom are probably going to/from the EY Centre anyway), it would make sense to have trains continue on to the Airport.

It doesn't mean they will do it (these are the designers talking, not the operators), but it only makes sense to keep the option open. I assume you aren't suggesting that it be designed to make it impossible for trains to/from the airport be extended to Bayview.

No matter what, the spur line has to be connected to the main line for access to the maintenance facility at Walkley Yards. You would hope that some day they would be able to run both train routes directly to Bayview. But I have no confidence in an upgrade path for the Trillium Line. Basically, whatever will happen beyond 2048 is not their problem.