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

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Yes, that is me. I had brought up the sidewalk issue before but got nowhere. A couple of weeks ago, I walked to Tim Hortons and faced a mountain of snow, so I approached the reporter. I took a number of pictures along Bank Street that day showing all the obstacles that pedestrians face along Bank Street and sent them to both Diane Deans and the reporter.

Cool! Loved the article.

This is a bit OT for this thread, but I've also lobbied Councillor Deans for improvements and I've made a blog post about my proposal for a Bank Steet Bikeway from Blossom Park to South Keys: https://bradsworld613.blogspot.com/2019/03/bank-street-bikeway-blossom-park-to.html

I'm a bit flabbergasted that fixing these sidewalk gaps aren't a higher priority. The article mentions that it's because they aren't close to schools, but the OSTA actually recommends walking to St Bernard school along a stretch of Bank St with no sidewalks (http://www.ottawaschoolbus.ca/wp-content...%20KM%20Walk%20Zone-Walking%20Routes.pdf).

The only alternatives if you're coming from the north are Sixth street (which has lots of bus traffic and no sidewalks) or the path through Russel Boyd Park, which is OK in the warmer months but is not winter maintained.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

Cool! Loved the article.

This is a bit OT for this thread, but I've also lobbied Councillor Deans for improvements and I've made a blog post about my proposal for a Bank Steet Bikeway from Blossom Park to South Keys: https://bradsworld613.blogspot.com/2019/03/bank-street-bikeway-blossom-park-to.html

I'm a bit flabbergasted that fixing these sidewalk gaps aren't a higher priority. The article mentions that it's because they aren't close to schools, but the OSTA actually recommends walking to St Bernard school along a stretch of Bank St with no sidewalks (http://www.ottawaschoolbus.ca/wp-content...%20KM%20Walk%20Zone-Walking%20Routes.pdf).


The only alternatives if you're coming from the north are Sixth street (which has lots of bus traffic and no sidewalks) or the path through Russel Boyd Park, which is OK in the warmer months but is not winter maintained.

Thanks Brad for sharing the extra information and your proposal.

I used to bike quite a bit but the Bank Street corridor has become increasingly dangerous for cyclists.

I used to go via quiet back streets, but the biggest challenge is to get through all the traffic in the Albion, Bank and Hunt Club triangle. This is a very unpleasant location and much worse than it used to be, and I am talking about quite a while ago.

I have used the Sawmill Creek pathway, but somehow you have to be able to get across the Hunt Club mess. The Hunt Club/Bridle Path intersection and to get to the beginning of the Sawmill Creek MUP north of Hunt Club is not for the faint of heart.

One thing that did not come out of Thursday's meeting is the trail connections. I know the Hunt Club rail bridge has to be improved or replaced. Will it include a MUP and a connection into the Blossom Park neighbourhood?

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Thanks Brad for sharing the extra information and your proposal.

I used to bike quite a bit but the Bank Street corridor has become increasingly dangerous for cyclists.

I used to go via quiet back streets, but the biggest challenge is to get through all the traffic in the Albion, Bank and Hunt Club triangle. This is a very unpleasant location and much worse than it used to be, and I am talking about quite a while ago.

I have used the Sawmill Creek pathway, but somehow you have to be able to get across the Hunt Club mess. The Hunt Club/Bridle Path intersection and to get to the beginning of the Sawmill Creek MUP north of Hunt Club is not for the faint of heart.

One thing that did not come out of Thursday's meeting is the trail connections. I know the Hunt Club rail bridge has to be improved or replaced. Will it include a MUP and a connection into the Blossom Park neighbourhood?

It did on the EA so let's hope that didn't get value engineered out. The original plan had an MUP bridge directly east of the trillum line overpass over hunt club

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

It did on the EA so let's hope that didn't get value engineered out. The original plan had an MUP bridge directly west of the trillum line overpass over hunt club

How do people get to the east side? This is where the population is.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

How do people get to the east side? This is where the population is.

Meant to say east, corrected my mistake.

It's spelled out on this presentation:

https://www.stage2lrt.ca/wp-content/uplo...ey-Greenboro-South-Keys-updated-EN-s.pdf

[Multi-modal]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I find it odd that a good portion of the so called Main Street is going to face a large community park. Is that good design?

I agree. Nothing wrong with a large central community park, but such a large portion of "Main Street" frontage taken up by park will inevitably lead to a sort of dead zone. Ignoring, for a minute, the negative effects of all these proposed overpasses, I would say Collector road D is more likely to develop as a main street purely based on zoning.

[PHrenetic]

Good Day. An FYI.

Upon examination of the Contract proposed, we have a detail....

https://www.stage2lrt.ca/wp-content/uplo...of-Ottawas-Stage-2-LRT-Project_Final.pdf

on pg. 39-40 (of 106) :

"Grade separating the Ellwood Diamond allowing VIA trains to pass below the Trillium Line with no impact to service."

and

"All three existing passing sidings at Gladstone, Carleton and Brookfield will be lengthened to enhance operations. The entire 6-kilometre section of track from Leitrim Station to Limebank Station will also be double-tracked. The terminal stations at Bayview and Limebank will be double-tracked such that an out-of-service train could be parked at the station while the line remains in operation."

and from Appendix 1 - Deals (pg.19 of 23) :

https://www.stage2lrt.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/1.-Deal-Summaries-for-Stage-2-Report.pdf

"The functional design which has been incorporated in the Crossing Agreement describes a potential future freight bypass (the “Bypass”) which may be required in future should there be a need to accommodate freight trains on the Trillium Line. As neither the City nor VIA are currently aware of any such demand, the Bypass is not included as part of the Construction Works."


More tid-bits. EnJoy!

[Multi-modal]

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

"All three existing passing sidings at Gladstone, Carleton and Brookfield will be lengthened to enhance operations. The entire 6-kilometre section of track from Leitrim Station to Limebank Station will also be double-tracked. The terminal stations at Bayview and Limebank will be double-tracked such that an out-of-service train could be parked at the station while the line remains in operation."

The way this is written makes me think that they won't normally be using the east platform at Bayview for passenger service, but rather just using it to store trains.. or only using it when the west platform is out of commission for some reason. This way the concern that the east platform isn't well connected to the Confederation Line doesn't matter during regular service.

[PHrenetic]

Good Day.

yes.... way too much still way too open to interpretation, re-interpretation, and mis-interpretation.

Still a Massive Lack of Info.

[Kitchissippi]

It also makes one wonder how extending it to Gatineau will ever work without a massive station overhaul at Bayview.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

It also makes one wonder how extending it to Gatineau will ever work without a massive station overhaul at Bayview.

At Thursday's meeting, they claimed that the west track at Bayview will enable an extension across the POW bridge.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

At Thursday's meeting, they claimed that the west track at Bayview will enable an extension across the POW bridge.

Only the west track?

An extension of the Trillium Line or some kind of link with Gatineau's LRT?

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

Only the west track?

An extension of the Trillium Line or some kind of link with Gatineau's LRT?

How is that to happen?

Think about it. We have decided on DMUs on the Trillium Line for decades to come. In theory, they can be converted to electric operation but that seems to be a distant possibility and it was mentioned that the extra cost of electrification is not warranted by the ridership any time soon.

So, how is Gatineau LRT to ever tie in with the Trillium line? There is no way that enormous FLIRT trains are going to operate on a semi-segregated Gatineau route. We are looking at the type of train being used in Kitchener-Waterloo or modern Toronto streetcars. Gatineau will use low-floor electric trains of more modest length.

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

How is that to happen?

Think about it. We have decided on DMUs on the Trillium Line for decades to come. In theory, they can be converted to electric operation but that seems to be a distant possibility and it was mentioned that the extra cost of electrification is warranted by the ridership any time soon.

So, how is Gatineau LRT to ever tie in with the Trillium line? There is no way that enormous FLIRT trains are going to operate on a semi-segregated Gatineau route. We are looking at the type of train being used in Kitchener-Waterloo or modern Toronto streetcars. Gatineau will use low-floor electric trains of more modest length.

This is just another example of what a mess the Trillium Line has become. Not that I necessarily think that sending the O-Train LRTs across the river is the best idea. But at some point in time interprovincial transit will need to be upgraded and there is absolutely zero plan or coordination between the cities and the NCC to put together a road map for it.

As for the low ridership estimates, it seems like that is more likely a case of function following form. In other words, it will have low ridership because that is what it is being designed for. But, consider the option where the Trillium Line is interlined at Bayview and continues through downtown. As it is right now, and will be after the next upgrade, if you are downtown and looking to get to South Keys or the airport, the 97 is still going to be the best option. But, if the Trillium Line went downtown, you could funnel more of the 97 ridership onto the LRT. And by having a one seat trip, you could attract more people from Barrhaven to use the Trillium Line to commute into work, instead of the Confederation Line.

A modernized Trillium Line wont be an overnight success (though it would do well). If a fully capable and modern line were built, it would still take a decade or two for all the other pieces to fall into place (increased urban development, finding the best routing for bus routes feeding the station, a change in citizens perceptions and attitudes about transit and commuting, etc). But if the city thinks small, that is what it will get in return. The Trillium Line needs the same long term, modern thinking and planning that the Confederation Line is getting.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

This is just another example of what a mess the Trillium Line has become. Not that I necessarily think that sending the O-Train LRTs across the river is the best idea. But at some point in time interprovincial transit will need to be upgraded and there is absolutely zero plan or coordination between the cities and the NCC to put together a road map for it.

As for the low ridership estimates, it seems like that is more likely a case of function following form. In other words, it will have low ridership because that is what it is being designed for. But, consider the option where the Trillium Line is interlined at Bayview and continues through downtown. As it is right now, and will be after the next upgrade, if you are downtown and looking to get to South Keys or the airport, the 97 is still going to be the best option. But, if the Trillium Line went downtown, you could funnel more of the 97 ridership onto the LRT. And by having a one seat trip, you could attract more people from Barrhaven to use the Trillium Line to commute into work, instead of the Confederation Line.

A modernized Trillium Line wont be an overnight success (though it would do well). If a fully capable and modern line were built, it would still take a decade or two for all the other pieces to fall into place (increased urban development, finding the best routing for bus routes feeding the station, a change in citizens perceptions and attitudes about transit and commuting, etc). But if the city thinks small, that is what it will get in return. The Trillium Line needs the same long term, modern thinking and planning that the Confederation Line is getting.

You are playing the tune I have been playing for the last 10 years on this board. Generally, I have received little sympathy and all kinds of excuses. The original plan had weaknesses, but we have ended up with something worse.

I asked about interlining again, but that will never be in the cards now. There is no possible upgrade path from FLIRTs to interlining. FLIRTs are incompatible with the Citadis trains. Platform heights don't match, which is critical.

As it stands, the city realizes that the Trillium Line does not serve the population inside the Greenbelt in order to access downtown. That is probably 100,000 to 150,000 people south and east of the Rideau River, all with a transit tradition. So, they use that as well to say that the ridership is inadequate because that 100,000+ is excluded. The people inside the Greenbelt are mostly ignored, and permanently sent to Hurdman, even if we pass the Trillium Line every day.

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

This is just another example of what a mess the Trillium Line has become. Not that I necessarily think that sending the O-Train LRTs across the river is the best idea. But at some point in time interprovincial transit will need to be upgraded and there is absolutely zero plan or coordination between the cities and the NCC to put together a road map for it.

.........

But if the city thinks small, that is what it will get in return. The Trillium Line needs the same long term, modern thinking and planning that the Confederation Line is getting.

Good Day.

Yup. A severe case of never ever thinking beyond the tip of the nose. No future proofing, no co-ordinated thinking, no advanced thought at all, at each and every step / stage.
No surprise at all - the T-Line has always been a poor neglected second cousin.

Sigh.

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

You are playing the tune I have been playing for the last 10 years on this board. Generally, I have received little sympathy and all kinds of excuses. The original plan had weaknesses, but we have ended up with something worse.

I asked about interlining again, but that will never be in the cards now. There is no possible upgrade path from FLIRTs to interlining. FLIRTs are incompatible with the Citadis trains. Platform heights don't match, which is critical.

As it stands, the city realizes that the Trillium Line does not serve the population inside the Greenbelt in order to access downtown. That is probably 100,000 to 150,000 people south and east of the Rideau River, all with a transit tradition. So, we use that as well to say that the ridership is inadequate. The people inside the Greenbelt are mostly ignored, and permanently sent to Hurdman, even if we pass the Trillium Line every day.

Going into this latest round of RFPs I had some faith that the city would come up with a plan for the Trillium Line that was forward thinking. It seemed reasonable to assume that the same city that came up with the Confederation Line plan would do something excellent with the Trillium Line as well.

Looks like I was quite wrong on that front.

At this point, I think the Trillium Line portion of phase 2 should be cancelled. Even if it takes another 2 years before they put a shovel in the ground for it, it will ultimately be worth it if they can come up with a better plan. They don't even need to do it all at once. They just need to make sure that whatever they do going forward allows the line to get to the same standard as the Confederation Line. And while they are at it, figure out what they want to do about a connection with Gatineau, if a connection via the Trillium Line even makes sense, once and for all.

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

Good Day.

Yup. A severe case of never ever thinking beyond the tip of the nose. No future proofing, no co-ordinated thinking, no advanced thought at all, at each and every step / stage.
No surprise at all - the T-Line has always been a poor neglected second cousin.

Sigh.

At one point it wasn't just a second class transit project. After the pilot project launched, and plans for LRT expansion began, an upgraded Trillium Line, along with a then surface line downtown, was going to be the first project out the door. Then the satellite suburbs became vocal about wanting the first LRT projects to be about replacing the Transitway. Since then, the city has tried hard to find ways of still getting the Trillium Line done, but this has just resulted in a compromised project. I know people really want to see something, anything, done with this line (myself included), but at this point I fully support cancelling the Trillium Line plans as they are, and having an RFP reissued where upgrades ultimately lead to a line equal to that of the Confederation Line. Anything less than that would be a huge mistake that will take decades, and a lot of money, to correct.

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

At one point it wasn't just a second class transit project. After the pilot project launched, and plans for LRT expansion began, an upgraded Trillium Line, along with a then surface line downtown, was going to be the first project out the door. Then the satellite suburbs became vocal about wanting the first LRT projects to be about replacing the Transitway. Since then, the city has tried hard to find ways of still getting the Trillium Line done, but this has just resulted in a compromised project. I know people really want to see something, anything, done with this line (myself included), but at this point I fully support cancelling the Trillium Line plans as they are, and having an RFP reissued where upgrades ultimately lead to a line equal to that of the Confederation Line. Anything less than that would be a huge mistake that will take decades, and a lot of money, to correct.

Good DAy.

Basically agreed. The pilot project was in spite of the bus lobby, and proved them well wrong. Well Done. But the 2006 plan was in effect a full relacement of the pilot project - as it well should have been, and well should be. Notwithstanding the actual or perceived flaw (the surface downtown), it was a fully viable plan.
But since then, I disagree that the City has been attempting to get it done - IMO it has been and is a slap-dash, hap-hazard, piece-meal, let's-take-another-spitball-upgrade-at-it, silence-the-critics repeated and ongoing farce.
As you said, it needs - ".... upgrades ultimately lead to a line equal to that of the Confederation Line. Anything less than that would be a huge mistake that will take decades, and a lot of money, to correct" . It even before now needed a full pot of properly defined -replacement- project money to it, and will need even more so in the future.
But what do we know.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]