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

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

So it is okay for things to be slid under the radar if the ends justify the means?

My objections are not just about money. It is about value for money. It is about the plan being half-baked with no real forethought to the future. It was slap-dashed together by committee so that it could provide something to parts of the city not served by the C-Line. It is actually quite a long list if I were to go on.

Not every plan is a good plan. And yeah, maybe if they had released more information sooner the plan wouldn't even have gotten this far once people started to look into the details. $600 million is a lot of money to spend on a project that might not bring a lot of benefits in its planned form.

The travesty of any talk of interlining the tunnel is really about the Confederation Line train running every 4 minutes instead of every 3 minutes. Yet, peak load will be between Bayview and Hurdman anyways.

Service quality to the south end is constrained (and compromised) by the number of transfers and the frequency on the worst leg of the trip. As it stands, during peak hours my local bus will run considerably more frequently than the Trillium Line. How does that actually promote transit ridership and specifically ridership on the Trillium Line itself.

When you talk to city officials from the rail office, there is no talk of service quality, just capacity. It is completely different tune than for those who will be using the Confederation Line where frequency is always highlighted. They even pass the buck on whether transfers will be optimized between the Trillium Line and local buses.

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Diane Deans wants the SE Transitway converted to LRT at some point down the road. This would not involve cancelling Phase 2.

Further south, it may be possible to build temporary stations during a conversion to low floor technology.

And that is where questions of how redundant work, and network infrastructure, is going to be done in the next 15 years as a result of the current T-Line plan? Does the city end up with two rail lines parallel to each other from roughly Heron to South Keys if the SE Transitway is converted? What is the cost of converting stations to low floor LRVs? Do they stop the T-Line at Mooney's and route a converted SET onto it? What is the cost of replacing a fleet of DMUs with EMUs that are C-Line compatible? Could the city be saving more money by reducing bus with a SET conversion versus what it will continue to spend, even with an upgraded T-Line? How much cheaper would an SET to LRT conversion be versus the current T-Line plan?

As many people here have said, money doesn't grow on trees, and the whole N-S line debacle just smells of wasted money.

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Service quality to the south end is constrained (and compromised) by the number of transfers and the frequency on the worst leg of the trip. As it stands, during peak hours my local bus will run considerably more frequently than the Trillium Line. How does that actually promote transit ridership and specifically ridership on the Trillium Line itself.

And that goes back to a very simple question. Does the T-Line plan actually make transit better for those along the current T-Line and in the south end? I don't really see how anyone that will benefit, other than edge cases like someone living in Riverside going to Carleton University.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

The plan is good based on RIDERSHIP, that is what transit planners look at. When line 2 gets increased ridership and it will after stage 2, then further upgrades will be made when the funds are available.

I didn't like the fact they slid it under the radar but when guys like you react the way you do then I wont hold it against them. Stage 2 is needed as is with no cuts. Just calm your emotions and accept it.

My point is that there is no realistic upgrade path for the Trillium Line. Once ridership warrants an upgrade, they will be using baler twine to keep the system somewhat functional. We cannot run trains more frequently north of Greenboro.

As I said already, the likely upgrade scenario will be to extend the length of trains again. But at some point, we end up having too many people transferring at Bayview at the same time.

[Davis137]

Has anyone else been wondering if the recently clear-cut forest on both sides of the Airport Parkway, have anything to do with the extension of the O-Train/Trillium line south of Greenboro? The change was obvious as of Monday Afternoon, as there is an area at least 50 yards wide on both the east and west side of the Airport parkway (South of Huntclub), that looks as though it is going to go straight through. I have also seen workers and engineers doing work at the railroad crossing on Lester Road, across from the NRC property.

I was told by personnel from city council that the O-train is going to be extended as far south as Findlay Creek, and that an additional Park and ride lot for that area, and Riverside south residents was going to be built at some point soon too.

Anyone care to chime in on this?

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

wrong again my family lives within a 10 min walk of one of the stations

How many transfers do you require to get to your destination?

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Davis137

Has anyone else been wondering if the recently clear-cut forest on both sides of the Airport Parkway, have anything to do with the extension of the O-Train/Trillium line south of Greenboro? The change was obvious as of Monday Afternoon, as there is an area at least 50 yards wide on both the east and west side of the Airport parkway (South of Huntclub), that looks as though it is going to go straight through. I have also seen workers and engineers doing work at the railroad crossing on Lester Road, across from the NRC property.

I was told by personnel from city council that the O-train is going to be extended as far south as Findlay Creek, and that an additional Park and ride lot for that area, and Riverside south residents was going to be built at some point soon too.

Anyone care to chime in on this?

They clear cut the line south of Leitrim Road last November, so your observation is probably correct. This is some preliminary work to ready the corridor for construction.

[lrt's friend]

The public is now starting to notice the Trillium Line design inadequacies. In the last couple of days, at least three letters to the editor complained about the need to ride three different trains in order to get to the airport.

[zzptichka]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The public is now starting to notice the Trillium Line design inadequacies. In the last couple of days, at least three letters to the editor complained about the need to ride three different trains in order to get to the airport.

Just like in most cities with rail service to airport.

[OCCheetos]

I don't see the SET ever being converted to LRT because there's just no point to it. Interlining was never taken into consideration at Hurdman and will make an absolute mess of the bus station and the future development plans in the area.

In a previous post you (@JohnnyRenton) said that the distance from South Keys to Bayview is less than the distance from Bayview to Hurdman, not to mention that Hurdman is further from downtown than Bayview, so it would make sense that the Trillium Line becomes the main method of getting downtown for anyone in the far south end of the city, or who live along the line.

The SET provides very good transit connections to the neighbourhoods in the southern end of the city. Think of routes like the 40, 45, 48, 49, 92, 93, 96, 87, 291 etc. I know one bus trips are frowned upon when discussing effective transit systems because hub and spoke is usually more effective... but the SET is no where close to needing to be concerned about that issue. Converting the SET would really mess up the effective transportation already being provided, for what? a bunch of people living in a faraway suburb. Doesn't really work well in my opinion.

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

And that goes back to a very simple question. Does the T-Line plan actually make transit better for those along the current T-Line and in the south end? I don't really see how anyone that will benefit, other than edge cases like someone living in Riverside going to Carleton University.

Walkley and Gladstone are long overdue. While the upgrades don't increase frequency, they might increase end-to-end running times since they'll be required to stop less (or at least they won't be pointlessly stopped in a siding).

Setting it up for an extension, or some other type of connection to Gatineau will be very beneficial. The south end apparently has some sort of preference for working in Gatineau judging by the long-time existence of the route 44 and 293...
A bit of a tangent, but I have a feeling that the City of Ottawa will strong-arm their way into extending the Trillium Line into Gatineau regardless of whether that makes the most sense because they own the infrastructure and the benefits to Ottawa residents (especially those in the south) are too great to pass up, right?

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

I don't see the SET ever being converted to LRT because there's just no point to it. Interlining was never taken into consideration at Hurdman and will make an absolute mess of the bus station and the future development plans in the area.

In a previous post you (@JohnnyRenton) said that the distance from South Keys to Bayview is less than the distance from Bayview to Hurdman, not to mention that Hurdman is further from downtown than Bayview, so it would make sense that the Trillium Line becomes the main method of getting downtown for anyone in the far south end of the city, or who live along the line.

The SET provides very good transit connections to the neighbourhoods in the southern end of the city. Think of routes like the 40, 45, 48, 49, 92, 93, 96, 87, 291 etc. I know one bus trips are frowned upon when discussing effective transit systems because hub and spoke is usually more effective... but the SET is no where close to needing to be concerned about that issue. Converting the SET would really mess up the effective transportation already being provided, for what? a bunch of people living in a faraway suburb. Doesn't really work well in my opinion.

Interlining at Hurdman wouldn't be a simple job, since it wasn't set up for it. But, it wouldn't be terrible either.

Your point about the SET being good for local bus routes is taken. But I would also counter that this was the case with other sections of the Transitway as well. If buses had an easy way downtown after Hurdman, so that those in the south could still have one trip rides, then yeah, continuing to use the SET for busses would totally make sense (I am certainly not anti-bus, they have a lot of value). But with the way the network will be, it seems like having the SET join the hub and spoke makes a bit more sense at this point.

As for the difference in distance between the SET and T-Line, it is a pretty marginal difference. And using the T-Line as the main N-S route pretty much precludes the option of interlining for direct to downtown trips.

It all comes down to the same issue, plans for the future of the transit network in the south, and the T-Line itself have just never been given the thought and consideration they need. It seems like the city was so obsessed with shoe-horning the T-Line into some kind of N-S LRT route, to give it some value, that it really just made a massive mess of everything.

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

Walkley and Gladstone are long overdue. While the upgrades don't increase frequency, they might increase end-to-end running times since they'll be required to stop less (or at least they won't be pointlessly stopped in a siding).

Setting it up for an extension, or some other type of connection to Gatineau will be very beneficial. The south end apparently has some sort of preference for working in Gatineau judging by the long-time existence of the route 44 and 293...
A bit of a tangent, but I have a feeling that the City of Ottawa will strong-arm their way into extending the Trillium Line into Gatineau regardless of whether that makes the most sense because they own the infrastructure and the benefits to Ottawa residents (especially those in the south) are too great to pass up, right?

I just don't see any extension across the river, from either side, unless the NCC and Feds get in on the planning, and provide a lot of money towards it. Pushing LRT across the POW bridge could, maybe, potentially be a valuable transit link. But a lot depends on how it is integrated on the other side of the river, which is out of Ottawa's hands. Same with Gatineau wanting to push its LRT across the river. Before anything can happen, there needs to be a lot more coordination between the two agencies on the issue.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

wrong again my family lives within a 10 min walk of one of the stations

As do I

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

How many transfers do you require to get to your destination?

between 0 and 3 transfers

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

between 0 and 3 transfers

Usually 1 for me

[J.OT13]

Sorry if this was already asked/answered, but why is Trillium double tracked south of Leitrim. One would think that double tracking from South Keys heading north would be a priority considering that will be the busiest stretch of the line. That could also open the door to a direct Bayview-Airport shuttle, outside rush-hour at least.

[J.OT13]

Don't have the full context, but I'm assuming a councillor asked the question to Swail. This is classic;

"Dow's Lake tunnel won't be twinned for LRT2, Swail says because Dow's Lake is not a pinch point. #ottcity"
https://twitter.com/KatePorterCBC/status/1103363309695193088

Well no — Sherlock! You're running the trains at the low-low frequency of 12 minutes. We should be striving to increase the frequency to deliver better service. We should be doing everything we can as part of this 2 year shut-down to prevent any further long-term shut-down in the future!

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Don't have the full context, but I'm assuming a councillor asked the question to Swail. This is classic;

"Dow's Lake tunnel won't be twinned for LRT2, Swail says because Dow's Lake is not a pinch point. #ottcity"
https://twitter.com/KatePorterCBC/status/1103363309695193088

Well no — Sherlock! You're running the trains at the low-low frequency of 12 minutes. We should be striving to increase the frequency to deliver better service. We should be doing everything we can as part of this 2 year shut-down to prevent any further long-term shut-down in the future!

I am following the discussion as much as I can and it just makes me shake my head. I get wanting to push Stage 2 of the C-Line forward, but lumping the T-Line into it is such a poor decision. You can already see the struggles and controversy that will be ahead for this line based on how little people seem to understand the details of it. (Contrast that with the C-Line where the vision and understanding is super clear and has been well communicated the whole time).

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Don't have the full context, but I'm assuming a councillor asked the question to Swail. This is classic;

"Dow's Lake tunnel won't be twinned for LRT2, Swail says because Dow's Lake is not a pinch point. #ottcity"
https://twitter.com/KatePorterCBC/status/1103363309695193088

Well no — Sherlock! You're running the trains at the low-low frequency of 12 minutes. We should be striving to increase the frequency to deliver better service. We should be doing everything we can as part of this 2 year shut-down to prevent any further long-term shut-down in the future!

Better service is irrelevant. The only concern is capacity and of course, we are deliberately discouraging bums in the seats to make sure we maintain within the planned capacity.

My question about service last Thursday was flipped over to capacity and nothing else.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

I am following the discussion as much as I can and it just makes me shake my head. I get wanting to push Stage 2 of the C-Line forward, but lumping the T-Line into it is such a poor decision. You can already see the struggles and controversy that will be ahead for this line based on how little people seem to understand the details of it. (Contrast that with the C-Line where the vision and understanding is super clear and has been well communicated the whole time).

It has gotten to the point that these are the only crumbs available. A decision to delay Phase 2 of the Trillium Lines means that the south end gets absolutely nothing for the foreseeable future. There will be no better plan.

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

It has gotten to the point that these are the only crumbs available. A decision to delay Phase 2 of the Trillium Lines means that the south end gets absolutely nothing for the foreseeable future. There will be no better plan.

I think the best they can do right now is to tweak some of the details of the plan with SNC so that they can try to reduce some of the redundant work they will need to do when they go back to the line in 5 or 10 years. Cancelling would result in a $36 million payment, and at 6% of the projected cost of the project, I can see it being a hard sell to spend that money on nothing. I wont lie. I will probably take a bit of pleasure in watching all these "unforeseen" problems pop up, and the surprise of citizens and politicians alike. It will still be sad, and an unnecessary waste of some of the money, but totally predictable.