Chief William Commanda Bridge (former Prince of Wales Bridge)

[dougvdh]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

You can't slowly assume it unless the public authority lets you, tacitly or otherwise. There are solutions to such "assumption".

I still think the city should have stuck it to the back-lane appropriators.

Quebec Law would award you property rights after having 'possession' of the corridor for 10 years. Possession has been found in court to be as simple as parking a vehicle on a parcel.

In Ontario the law is similar. 'Possessory Title' can be claimed after 10 years of 'Adverse Possession', and after 20 years, a claim for ownership can be made.

The City would probably run into legal challenges if it were to attempt eviction of adjacent landowners encroachment onto many of the back alleys.

Anyways, somewhat off topic.

[OCCheetos]

The Courts will hear the City's case on April 10th with regards to the bridge.

https://twitter.com/CBCOttawa/status...49157007822848

[qprcanada]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...inet-1.5091286

Cabinet overturns order to repair Prince of Wales Bridge

The federal cabinet has rescinded a government agency's decision that would have forced the City of Ottawa to repair the Prince of Wales Bridge to make it suitable for rail traffic.

City solicitor Rick O'Connor informed Mayor Jim Watson, transit commissioners and other members of council of the cabinet order in a memo Tuesday afternoon.

According to O'Connor, the order-in-council means the city will no longer have to fight the decision at the Federal Court of Appeal, a hearing that was scheduled to take place later this week.

In February 2019, the Canada Transportation Agency ordered the city to repair tracks leading up to the bridge that had been ripped up duringLRT construction.

Against national policy
An order-in-council dated April 5 said the agency's decision went against national policy because it would force a railway company to invest in an "unused and non-profitable railway line," or discontinue it permanently.

The order-in-council said such a decision could discourage railway companies from buying available rail lines for future use.

Cabinet also rejected a petition from Moose Consortium Ltd., which wanted to use the bridge as part of a commuter rail project spanning the Ottawa River.

The consortium filed the initial complaint about the bridge's state of disrepair in 2016.

[rocketphish]

Federal cabinet rescues city over Prince of Wales Bridge repair order

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Updated: April 9, 2019

The City of Ottawa won’t be forced to fix the Prince of Wales Bridge anytime soon.

In an Order in Council dated April 5, the federal Liberal cabinet rescinded an order by the Canadian Transportation Agency that would have forced the city to make repairs to the historic bridge over the Ottawa River.

The CTA in February 2018 told the city to make the bridge ready to use within 12 months of receiving notice or discontinue the rail line and bridge.

The CTA order came after a complaint was filed by Mobility Ottawa-Outaouais: Systems and Enterprises, or Moose, which noticed the city stopped using the rail line. Moose has a vision of creating a regional rail network using the Prince of Wales Bridge as a crossover point to the Outaouais.

The city has built Bayview Station for the O-Train network. The Trillium Line’s northern terminus is Bayview Station.

The rail line north of the station isn’t in use and the city is regularly trying to keep people off the rickety bridge over the river.

The city bought the bridge from CP Rail in 2005 to protect it for a future transit expansion. The structure could provide a rail link between Ottawa and Gatineau, but there’s currently no money to repair the bridge for trains. The bridge has been seen as part of a Stage 3 O-Train expansion sometime down the road.

The City of Ottawa isn’t interested in spending money to install a temporary multi-use path on the bridge.

The Order in Council suggests forcing the city to invest in an unused rail line is against the national transportation policy in the Canada Transportation Act.

The city was prepared to fight the order in court first before appealing to the federal cabinet. In fact, city lawyers were getting ready to oppose the order in a hearing scheduled for Wednesday at the Federal Court of Appeal. The hearing now won’t be necessary.

One grassroots group last year urged Transport Minister Marc Garneau to not let cabinet rescind the order, fearing nothing would be done to repair the bridge.

[email protected]
twitter.com/JonathanWilling

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...e-repair-order

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by dougvdh

Quebec Law would award you property rights after having 'possession' of the corridor for 10 years. Possession has been found in court to be as simple as parking a vehicle on a parcel.

In Ontario the law is similar. 'Possessory Title' can be claimed after 10 years of 'Adverse Possession', and after 20 years, a claim for ownership can be made.

The City would probably run into legal challenges if it were to attempt eviction of adjacent landowners encroachment onto many of the back alleys.

Anyways, somewhat off topic.

Adverse possession doesn't apply against crown lands or municipal road "allowances".

[dougvdh]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Adverse possession doesn't apply against crown lands or municipal road "allowances".

I guess that closes off the question of (legal) risk to using the bridge as a cycling and pedestrian link in the interim before the city decides what to do with it in terms of light rail or transit.

Also, with the announcement of the replacement of Alexandra, I think there's a legitimate question as to whether this bridge will ever see another train.

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by dougvdh

I guess that closes off the question of (legal) risk to using the bridge as a cycling and pedestrian link in the interim before the city decides what to do with it in terms of light rail or transit.

Also, with the announcement of the replacement of Alexandra, I think there's a legitimate question as to whether this bridge will ever see another train.

It will be 30, 40, maybe even 50 years before the LRT networks are built out enough for it to make sense for the POW to be used for LRT. And by the time that happens, the bridge will just flat out need to be replaced. At this point they should turn it into a cycle/pedestrian link and call it a day.

[corynv]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

It will be 30, 40, maybe even 50 years before the LRT networks are built out enough for it to make sense for the POW to be used for LRT. And by the time that happens, the bridge will just flat out need to be replaced. At this point they should turn it into a cycle/pedestrian link and call it a day.

If gatineau gets their way, it'll only be about 10 years before its used.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

It will be 30, 40, maybe even 50 years before the LRT networks are built out enough for it to make sense for the POW to be used for LRT. And by the time that happens, the bridge will just flat out need to be replaced. At this point they should turn it into a cycle/pedestrian link and call it a day.

Meanwhile, the line ups on the Booth Street bridge bus stops continue to get longer, and longer, and longer.

Something needs to be done about transit across the river, and from the City of Ottawa's point of view, the PoW bridge is their next target (within the next 15 years).

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

Meanwhile, the line ups on the Booth Street bridge bus stops continue to get longer, and longer, and longer.

Something needs to be done about transit across the river, and from the City of Ottawa's point of view, the PoW bridge is their next target (within the next 15 years).

The POW bridge always seems to be "on the radar" and something that could happen in 10 or 15 years since the O-Train pilot project was launched in 2001. There is a need to address interprovincial transit, but if using the POW was a good way to tackle the issue, why wouldn't they have done it by now? Obviously that was a rhetorical question and the answer is because it wouldn't be an effective connection for the amount of money they would have to spend on it.

I know lots of people out there are keen on keeping the idea of using the bridge alive. But outside of leisurely weekend railfan trips across the bridge, how many of those advocates would actually use it on a daily basis, especially when using a new Alexandra bridge for LRT is an idea that is suddenly in play.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRenton

The POW bridge always seems to be "on the radar" and something that could happen in 10 or 15 years since the O-Train pilot project was launched in 2001. There is a need to address interprovincial transit, but if using the POW was a good way to tackle the issue, why wouldn't they have done it by now? Obviously that was a rhetorical question and the answer is because it wouldn't be an effective connection for the amount of money they would have to spend on it.

That's not necessarily a good measure of how effective it would be.
The relief line in Toronto was first proposed over 100 years ago and "effectiveness" definitely isn't the top reason it still hasn't been built.

It's all politics. For most of the last two decades getting 5 governments to agree on this one project was straight up impossible (Gatineau was anti-LRT for a while). Although it still might be impossible, the political environment has definitely shifted in favour of LRT and transit in general.

I know lots of people out there are keen on keeping the idea of using the bridge alive. But outside of leisurely weekend railfan trips across the bridge, how many of those advocates would actually use it on a daily basis, especially when using a new Alexandra bridge for LRT is an idea that is suddenly in play.

A sensible system would use both bridges, whether it's Gatineau's LRT or the Trillium Line (on either).

Do you really want to keep every single person commuting to Gatineau coming from the western side of the city to stay on a Confederation Line train through the downtown core just so they can transfer to another train at Rideau to get to Gatineau? That will not help capacity on the Confederation Line through the core.

It's best to make use of both bridges and divert anyone going to Gatineau off of trains heading into the core to leave as much capacity there as possible.
(Note that "commuters coming from the 'West' and heading to Gatineau" also includes Trillium Line users transferring at Bayview).

[JohnnyRenton]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

That's not necessarily a good measure of how effective it would be.
The relief line in Toronto was first proposed over 100 years ago and "effectiveness" definitely isn't the top reason it still hasn't been built.

It's all politics. For most of the last two decades getting 5 governments to agree on this one project was straight up impossible (Gatineau was anti-LRT for a while). Although it still might be impossible, the political environment has definitely shifted in favour of LRT and transit in general.

You could also point to the 2nd Avenue Subway in New York, and probably lots of other projects proposed in the 20's and 30's that collected dust on the shelves for 80, 90, even 100 years. A lot of those old projects died with the automobile age. And the reason they are/may come to fruition today is that they make sense in todays context, not because cities are finally getting around to finishing up generations old transit plans.

I think much the same is true of Ottawa. When LRT was originally discussed, using the POW bridge wasn't the worst idea in the context of where transit was. Almost 20 years later, transit is being taken several fold more seriously all across the country and there is less of a need to find cheap options, and more of a need to develop the most beneficial ones, even if the cost is a lot more (ie the C-Line). The politics of Ottawa/Gatineau will never change, its just part of the nature of the region (for better or worse). It will just take a great idea, one that makes both sides go "yes, that's the right solution" to get them to co-operate just enough to make something happen.

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

A sensible system would use both bridges, whether it's Gatineau's LRT or the Trillium Line (on either).

Do you really want to keep every single person commuting to Gatineau coming from the western side of the city to stay on a Confederation Line train through the downtown core just so they can transfer to another train at Rideau to get to Gatineau? That will not help capacity on the Confederation Line through the core.

It's best to make use of both bridges and divert anyone going to Gatineau off of trains heading into the core to leave as much capacity there as possible.
(Note that "commuters coming from the 'West' and heading to Gatineau" also includes Trillium Line users transferring at Bayview).

Using the POW bridge only makes sense if the line can extend all the way into the core of Gatineau, instead of just stopping at the edge of the employment centre. But that would escalate the cost of the line beyond even the $200 million bare bones proposal that is anticipated.

I do agree that there should be connections for both east end and west end travellers. But, if the Gatineau SLR ends up being a go, that presents the opportunity for a lot of other options to be explored instead. As I said in the commuter rail thread, and it applies equally to interprovincial transit, there are still a lot of unknowns in terms of what transit will look like in 5 or 10 years. Having the C-Line and the Gatineau SLR would create a totally different scenario for planning future transit network plans than what existed even 5 years ago. And I could be wrong (I was wrong about Ottawa going ahead with such a trash Trillium Line plan), but I think that with the direction transit is headed in the region, the POW bridge just doesn't make sense, or would be very useful, as part of a modern LRT network.

[OCCheetos]

MOOSE posted a video showcasing what the engineering students at uOttawa came up with for a revitalized PoW bridge.

https://d2ddoduugvun08.cloudfront.ne...2019-04-08.mp4

[Gat-Train]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

MOOSE posted a video showcasing what the engineering students at uOttawa came up with for a revitalized PoW bridge.

https://d2ddoduugvun08.cloudfront.ne...2019-04-08.mp4

Would be a lot better if I could actually read the info without pausing

[zzptichka]

Wow. Gatineau doesn't want POW bridge and wants Portage for the train: https://www.ledroit.com/actualites/g...medium=twitter

I guess we won't be seeing trains on POW bridge in our lifetime.
And given the complexity of linking Portage bridge I doubt we'll see trains there any time soon either.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by zzptichka

Wow. Gatineau doesn't want POW bridge and wants Portage for the train: https://www.ledroit.com/actualites/g...medium=twitter

I guess we won't be seeing trains on POW bridge in our lifetime.
And given the complexity of linking Portage bridge I doubt we'll see trains there any time soon either.

I was frustrated at first after reading this, but it makes sense now. It's true that Bayview was ill-conceived by Ottawa transit planners. They chose the absolute cheapest design instead of optimizing transfers between Line 1, Line 2 (with potential for interlining) and the eventual Gatineau Line. They even made it much more complicated to cross Trillium to Gatineau by offsetting the old CP tracks and the new Trillium track.

As I've said before, I think having Trillium cross the PoW and terminate at Zibi is the only possible alternative for that particular bridge.

As for Portage, it makes sense to cross the STO train to Lyon via Portage, minimizing transfers, but the route would be very complicated. There is plenty of space for a STO train station on Sparks, however.

As for Alexandra, I'm still hopeful to one day see an STO train run across. This would be a partial, yet critical part of the long fabled transit loop.

EDIT: If it comes to Portage, then the route needs to change. Trains should go up Maisonneuve and take Allumettière down to the west end. If the Alexanrdra Bridge is also used, they could join with the Portage Trains at the Maisonneuve/Allumettière intersection. Both corridors are wide enough to easily accommodate LRT, unlike Alexandre-Taché.

[Acajack]

Aside from the bridge recommendation, a huge take away for me in that report is... BRT is back!

LRT only
Part LRT part BET
BRT only

Are all being considered now.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I was frustrated at first after reading this, but it makes sense now. It's true that Bayview was ill-conceived by Ottawa transit planners. They chose the absolute cheapest design instead of optimizing transfers between Line 1, Line 2 (with potential for interlining) and the eventual Gatineau Line. They even made it much more complicated to cross Trillium to Gatineau by offsetting the old CP tracks and the new Trillium track.

As I've said before, I think having Trillium cross the PoW and terminate at Zibi is the only possible alternative for that particular bridge.

As for Portage, it makes sense to cross the STO train to Lyon via Portage, minimizing transfers, but the route would be very complicated. There is plenty of space for a STO train station on Sparks, however.

As for Alexandra, I'm still hopeful to one day see an STO train run across. This would be a partial, yet critical part of the long fabled transit loop.

EDIT: If it comes to Portage, then the route needs to change. Trains should go up Maisonneuve and take Allumettière down to the west end. If the Alexanrdra Bridge is also used, they could join with the Portage Trains at the Maisonneuve/Allumettière intersection. Both corridors are wide enough to easily accommodate LRT, unlike Alexandre-Taché.

Finally some common sense prevails and the funny part is that Kitchissppi had already posted an idea similar to what you just said awhile back.

This is for Kitchissppi, can you repost you idea for what the Gatineau LRT route should be actually? I found it was the best and most realistic option.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Aside from the bridge recommendation, a huge take away for me in that report is... BRT is back!

LRT only
Part LRT part BET
BRT only

Are all being considered now.

Changing to Portage certainly makes it easier to fall back to BRT. I wonder if that also had something to do with it?

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

Finally some common sense prevails and the funny part is that Kitchissppi had already posted an idea similar to what you just said awhile back.

This is for Kitchissppi, can you repost you idea for what the Gatineau LRT route should be actually? I found it was the best and most realistic option.

Here it is. I agree, this is a good option. I might use Allumettière instead of St-Raymond for its TOD potential and more central location, especially the Robert Guertin site. It would also be cheaper. Though both options are good.

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

Here's an idea for a roughly 9 km LRT route for Gatineau that could be extended westward along the 148 corridor and incorporate the future conversion of the Rapibus to LRT. I think this has more TOD potential than the river route, and the investment would be useable by more residents in the short and long term.



Excuse the size of the following diagrams as I wanted to have them all at the same scale. 60m platforms would probably be sufficient for a long time, using a train similar to the expanded version of Ottawa's Citadis



I imagine this sort of integration with the Confederation Line at Lyon, and either using the Portage Bridge or just excavating a tunnel under the river:



Continuing in a cut-and-cover along Maisonneuve:



And then westward either along the highway or by implementing some road diets:



It would service Galleries de Hull and The St-Joseph main street:



It would make the hospital more accessible, and imagine being able to ski Gatineau Park coming off the LRT



It would terminate BRT plaza near the cinemas in the Plateau until a future phase to extend it all the way to Old Aylmer: