Rural Commuter Rail

[waterloowarrior]

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

As much as I'd like to see a "GO" transit system for Ottawa and eastern Ontario, its simply not warranted right now as there are very little communities in the surrounding area that would make it viable.

For example, in Toronto with GO, you have:
Niagara Falls (85,000)
St Catherines (135,000)
Hamilton (600,000)
Burlington (180,000)
Kitchener (225,000)
Barrie (140,000)
Pickering (90,000)
Oshawa (150,000)
Etc... Total of 1,600,000 potential commuters in surrounding area

In Ottawa, you have maybe:
Hawkesbury (12,000)
Clarence/Rockland (25,000)
Casselman (4,000)
Carleton Place (10,000)
Kemptville (4,000)
Arnprior (8,500)
Total of around 65,000 potential commuters - very little.

If Ottawa (approx. 1/5th of Toronto's population) had around 300,000 to 400,000 people in surrounding communities then it would make more sense to develop an eastern Ontario transit plan. But the reality it's mostly OTTAWA then nothing around... so the status quo (in my opinion) works fine for now.

It's a bit larger than that, the surrounding population on the Ontario side is about 150k (OMATO - Ontario Municipalities Adjacent to Ottawa, plus those with 25%+ of their population working in Ottawa - Carleton Place and Casselman). Cities and towns on the current or former rail lines like Smiths Falls, Brockville, Cornwall, Perth, Renfrew, Alexandria etc would add another 100k. Plus there are another 50-100k in other Townships along the way like North and South Stormont, Drummond-North Elmsley, etc

http://ottwatch.ca/meetings/file/299965/...nning_Committee_Date_2015_06_23_09_30_00

We aren't at GTA populations anytime soon, but Whitchurch–Stouffville was 13k when the GO Train line started there... Georgetown was around 17k, Bradford 8k....

[ACmodels]

Wilkinson wants existing rail preserved for future commuter trains
O-Train-like service to Kanata before LRT a possibility:

Kanata Kourier-Standard
By Adam Kveton
2015-09-24

Kanata North Coun. Marianne Wilkinson is hoping the city will move to preserve existing rail lines so they could eventually be converted into an O-Train-like transit system, she said at a community meeting on Sept. 14.
Though Wilkinson said she has yet to broach the subject at city hall, she said existing rail conversion could be quicker and cheaper than light rail transit.
The idea of using existing rail for commuter train use was recommended by former Ottawa mayor Larry O’Brien’s task force on transportation in 2007, and has continued to receive support, including during 2014’s city elections where a mayoral candidate and several councillor candidates pushed for existing rail use over light rail transit.

FASTER BUILD
In a subsequent interview, Wilkinson said she is not suggesting an existing rail transit system could replace the light rail transit plan, but that it could complement the electrified train system.
However, as a light rail transit connection to Kanata is not due until 2031 at the earliest, converting existing rail for diesel train use could be a quicker, cheaper way of getting Kanata and Nepean some commuter train service in the meantime, she said.
Then again, getting light rail transit to Kanata sooner is preferable, said Wilkinson, who admitted she doesn’t have a good idea of when an existing rail system could be up and running.
“I just think it should be in the master plan,” she said of the diesel option.
Wilkinson had opposed the existing rail idea multiple times at candidates’ events in the 2014 election, but said some new information has convinced her it’s an opportunity the city shouldn’t overlook.
For starters, CN Rail – which still owns the track from near March Road, across Nepean to near Hurdman Station and the east end – is going to stop using those rails, said Wilkinson.
The alleviates the problem of trying to schedule commuter trains around freight train usage, and could allow the city to acquire the land and put in track suitable for commuter train use.
Furthermore, the city is now looking into a new official plan amendment that would allow it to place setbacks (potentially up to 30 metres) on railway corridors to both preserve them and to keep buildings at a safe distance should there be a derailment.
“That gave me the idea,” said Wilkinson.
While the existing rail doesn’t go downtown, it would provide service to Algonquin students living in Kanata, for example who could ride a commuter train using the city-owned line from March Road to Woodroffe Avenue just south of the college. The rails reach the existing O-Train line near Confederation Heights.
“There is a lot of merit in looking at it,” said Wilkinson. “It would be complementary to what we are doing with the light rail and the buses. But I think we need to have it in our plan, so we can protect it to do it in the future.”

FOCUS ON LRT
Wilkinson’s interest in existing rail conversion has come about three months after Kanata South Coun. Allan Hubley’s motion which asked city staff to look at bringing light rail transit to Kanata earlier than 2031.
Despite Hubley’s motion passing with Wilkinson’s support, Wilkinson said she is not as certain as Hubley that light rail transit can be brought to Kanata any sooner.
“Frankly, it’s a comfort motion,” said Wilkinson, who said she wasn’t convinced the city would have the money to finance the Kanata connection, short of getting 100 per cent funding from other levels of government.
“I just think (existing rail conversion) needs to be looked into,” she said.
Hubley disagrees.
“I think that might have been a great idea 20 years ago. It’s not (a good idea) in the future,” said Hubley, adding that Wilkinson “tends to think in the past.”
Hubley said he was confident light rail transit can reach to Kanata before 2031 for many reasons.
For one, the rapid bus transit work currently being done between Bayshore and Moodie Drive is being engineered so it can be converted quickly and cheaply to light rail.
“All that would be left is (laying) the tracks,” said Hubley.
The same thing will be done for the rapid transit connection to Terry Fox Drive, which is already funded, said Hubley.
Costs will also be much lower than past light rail transit stages as much of the land needed to build on is already city owned, and almost all of the track will be above ground, so no digging is required.
With the city’s west end expected to continue to grow, and many businesses located there, the Kanata extension is a good candidate for funding from other levels of government, he said, pointing to other transit projects – like Hamilton’s light rail transit system – that have been 100 per cent funded by the Ontario government.
He said Wilkinson’s interest in existing rail conversion is a distraction to that end, especially if she pushed for the conversion to be done before light rail transit was finished.
“We have to stay focused on the LRT piece and get it done,” Hubley said. “If we start confusing staff and the public by talking about all different ideas, who knows what else she will come out with. Maybe a zipline from Bayshore to Kanata. You are only confusing people.”
Wilkinson said she plans to speak with Mayor Jim Watson in October about getting a feasibility study done on converting existing rail to a commuter train service, “so that when we have enough money to do it, we actually could do it,” she said.

http://www.ottawacommunitynews.com/news-...il-preserved-for-future-commuter-trains/

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

It's a bit larger than that, the surrounding population on the Ontario side is about 150k (OMATO - Ontario Municipalities Adjacent to Ottawa, plus those with 25%+ of their population working in Ottawa - Carleton Place and Casselman). Cities and towns on the current or former rail lines like Smiths Falls, Brockville, Cornwall, Perth, Renfrew, Alexandria etc would add another 100k. Plus there are another 50-100k in other Townships along the way like North and South Stormont, Drummond-North Elmsley, etc

http://ottwatch.ca/meetings/file/299965/...nning_Committee_Date_2015_06_23_09_30_00

We aren't at GTA populations anytime soon, but Whitchurch–Stouffville was 13k when the GO Train line started there... Georgetown was around 17k, Bradford 8k....

And don't forget the Québec side. Even if you bypass Gatineau (300,000) you can still serve 40,000+.

[lrt's friend]

I have always supported the idea of using the existing cross-town railway for a diesel O-Train type service. As Marianne Wilkerson suggested, this would not replace LRT but complement it. Also, as we saw with the original O-Train, it could be built quite inexpensively and it would generate real new transit riders since it is a new and faster route across the city with nothing really comparable today. It would be a real shame if we allow CN to abandon this line and pull up the tracks. There is already so much grade separation on this route that will potentially go to waste. This would be a valuable addition to a transit grid that I have been advocating and would improve transit service to a decentralizing Ottawa.

What Allan Hubley is advocating is putting all our eggs in the Confederation Line basket. We need to consider more than one corridor for some investment or we will be restricting the usefulness of transit. I realize that the Confederation Line will be the prime corridor but it should not eliminate transit investment everywhere else.

[J.OT13]

Agreed. Kanata doesn't even need a Confederation Line type system:

- Corel Centre might move Downtown;
- Queensway is widest in Kanata and will soon be widened between Bayshore and Downtown;
- Many people in Kanata work in Kanata.

IMO opinion, the Confederation Line should not go any further than the old Nortel Campus (assuming the Sens do move Downtown). Kanata can be well served with nothing more than buses and a diesel O-Train type commuter rail.

[SF Thomas]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I have always supported the idea of using the existing cross-town railway for a diesel O-Train type service. As Marianne Wilkerson suggested, this would not replace LRT but complement it. Also, as we saw with the original O-Train, it could be built quite inexpensively and it would generate real new transit riders since it is a new and faster route across the city with nothing really comparable today....

I agree with the general sentiment. You would have to figure out some way to deal with the Via Trains where the line merges near Prince of Wales and the Rideau River or double track the bridge if you wanted to make it into a full crosstown route though.

There is some interesting potential along the line for development. What immediately came to mind is that there is a lot of open space near the Colonade and Prince of Wales area. In addition there are actually some town home and appartment complexes already up and more under construction near Nepean Creek within potential walking or biking distance of the rail line right now.

[silvergate]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I have always supported the idea of using the existing cross-town railway for a diesel O-Train type service. As Marianne Wilkerson suggested, this would not replace LRT but complement it. Also, as we saw with the original O-Train, it could be built quite inexpensively and it would generate real new transit riders since it is a new and faster route across the city with nothing really comparable today. It would be a real shame if we allow CN to abandon this line and pull up the tracks. There is already so much grade separation on this route that will potentially go to waste. This would be a valuable addition to a transit grid that I have been advocating and would improve transit service to a decentralizing Ottawa.

What Allan Hubley is advocating is putting all our eggs in the Confederation Line basket. We need to consider more than one corridor for some investment or we will be restricting the usefulness of transit. I realize that the Confederation Line will be the prime corridor but it should not eliminate transit investment everywhere else.

I'd like to see ridership numbers before we go ahead with something like that. It's a nice thought but all of the existing rail tracks in Ottawa seem like they will end up in direct competition with rapid transit (the via line and SE transitway) or very nearly irrelevant (the tracks north of the airport).

[SF Thomas]

Originally Posted by silvergate

I'd like to see ridership numbers before we go ahead with something like that. It's a nice thought but all of the existing rail tracks in Ottawa seem like they will end up in direct competition with rapid transit (the via line and SE transitway) or very nearly irrelevant (the tracks north of the airport).

I agree about studying potential ridership numbers first, but the amount of overlap with other rapid transit depends a bit on what part of the city you are in. The cross town portion of the rails through most of Nepean really doesn't have anything competing for rapid transit at the moment. If they eventually build it the Baseline BRT might compete to some extent but even then the line offers another transit option further south.

You also don't necessarily have to use the tracks the Via passenger trains use. If you just double track the bridge over the Rideau river and use the line that continues east you could have the them connect with the Trillium Line and South Keys transit station. This eliminates any competition with the SE transitway. That could either be the terminus or you could continue the line past the Train Yard as far as Russel Rd.

The obvious drawback is that most of these areas are at least currently not very dense so ridership might be an issue, but I think you might be able to justify it based on providing a fast crosstown route from South Keys to Woodroffe.

[JM1]

In fairness though, GO Transit already had a limited network going in Toronto decades ago when Toronto was more comparable to current Ottawa in size.

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

As much as I'd like to see a "GO" transit system for Ottawa and eastern Ontario, its simply not warranted right now as there are very little communities in the surrounding area that would make it viable.

For example, in Toronto with GO, you have:
Niagara Falls (85,000)
St Catherines (135,000)
Hamilton (600,000)
Burlington (180,000)
Kitchener (225,000)
Barrie (140,000)
Pickering (90,000)
Oshawa (150,000)
Etc... Total of 1,600,000 potential commuters in surrounding area

In Ottawa, you have maybe:
Hawkesbury (12,000)
Clarence/Rockland (25,000)
Casselman (4,000)
Carleton Place (10,000)
Kemptville (4,000)
Arnprior (8,500)
Total of around 65,000 potential commuters - very little.

If Ottawa (approx. 1/5th of Toronto's population) had around 300,000 to 400,000 people in surrounding communities then it would make more sense to develop an eastern Ontario transit plan. But the reality it's mostly OTTAWA then nothing around... so the status quo (in my opinion) works fine for now.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by JM1

In fairness though, GO Transit already had a limited network going in Toronto decades ago when Toronto was more comparable to current Ottawa in size.

But GO was for the most part taking over existing VIA services (Stouville, Richmond Hill, Bradford) following Trudeau's massive cuts to via rail or running parallel to VIA (Georgetown and lakeshore). I think Milton line was the only truly new service, and that uses the CP mainline. There is a big difference between assuming an existing line and trying to resurrect a line that has not seen passenger service for decades.

[GoTrans]

Originally Posted by silvergate

I'd like to see ridership numbers before we go ahead with something like that. It's a nice thought but all of the existing rail tracks in Ottawa seem like they will end up in direct competition with rapid transit (the via line and SE transitway) or very nearly irrelevant (the tracks north of the airport).

I would envisage the DMU service on the ex CN trackage from Kanata and Stittsville to the Via station on Tremblay as starting out at 30 minute frequency, resulting in 15 minute frequency between Bells Corners and the Via station. As ridership increases the frequency and the amount of double track could be increased at extremely low costs. A maintenance yard for the Confederation Line is proposed south of Baseline station on the east side of Woodroffe with the line crossing the CN tracks to gain access to the yard. The line should be an express service with few stops. I would recommend the following stops; Bells Corners, Woodroffe, Merivale,Confederation and Via Rail. Stops west of Bells Corners should be located at Eagleson, Terry Fox and Stittsville and Station Road/March Road in Kanata. A possible future extension could be to Carp. More stations could be added at a later date when there is higher frequency, supported by more double track and more ridership and density in terms of residential and commercial development. On the Kanata route no new construction would be required with the exception of some sidings between Bells Corners and the Via Station. The track would have to be relaid from Bells Corners to Stittsville, but the City already owns the right of way.
This should be implemented before there is bus transitway construction from Bayshore to Kanata.There would be very little duplication of service with bus routes or LRT. It would bring rapid crosstown transit to western and southern parts of the city. The Via line is not currently competition with the city's transit system.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by SF Thomas

I agree about studying potential ridership numbers first, but the amount of overlap with other rapid transit depends a bit on what part of the city you are in. The cross town portion of the rails through most of Nepean really doesn't have anything competing for rapid transit at the moment. If they eventually build it the Baseline BRT might compete to some extent but even then the line offers another transit option further south.

You also don't necessarily have to use the tracks the Via passenger trains use. If you just double track the bridge over the Rideau river and use the line that continues east you could have the them connect with the Trillium Line and South Keys transit station. This eliminates any competition with the SE transitway. That could either be the terminus or you could continue the line past the Train Yard as far as Russel Rd.

The obvious drawback is that most of these areas are at least currently not very dense so ridership might be an issue, but I think you might be able to justify it based on providing a fast crosstown route from South Keys to Woodroffe.

I think there is potential for a fast route across the city substantially south of the Confederation Line. Since the city mostly backs away from this line at present, it would need to be reasonably frequent (every 15 minutes) so it could serve as a reliable transfer route across the city with stations at every major cross road. I could see it running from Kanata to South Keys and eventually extended across to Russell Road and possibly run it around and back to the Via Rail Station. The value of the latter part would come if you use the old CPR corridor (and there is an existing underpass under the 417) and then connect it to the South Orleans Transitway corridor.

You could then have a fast crosstown train from Trim Road to the Kanata Business Park and a train from Trim Road to the Via Rail Station servicing the whole south part of Orleans. This would get Orleans residents pretty close to the new RCMP headquarters and avoid a whole lot of congested roads along the way. It would also start creating more two way ridership on Orleans local routes.

Of course, there would be the need of a feasibility study, but this would not cost in the billions like the Confederation Line and therefore could be justified with much less ridership. And the nice thing about this, a lot of the ridership will be new since it provides a completely new and faster service for most of its route.

[MaxHeadroom]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

Commuters from Embrun, Russell, Alexandria, Casselman, St. Isidore, Vars, Limoge, Moose Creek etc are numerous. I used to do that commute every day and it can get prety congested. Sometimes is bumper to bumber before the Anderson exit.

Oh, you silly city folk. Unless the train leaves from my house in Russell and goes non-stop to my Ottawa office, it will never be faster than a car. Even with traffic. Bumper to bumper before Anderson you say, LOL maybe in a snowstorm or if there is a rare accident. I can usually do 110-120 the whole way on the 417 to the split, just to keep up with traffic!

And I have kids to pick up and drive around to different stuff all over. I have meetings all over the city, often on my way to or from home or work. And groceries to buy. Of course transit planners including those of the office chair variety can't get their head out of the box that every vehicle on the road is either a commuter or annoying truck, and everyone works downtown in the core. "There simply can't be any other purpose for having a vehicle on the road."

And I didn't move my family to the country so I could take a bus or train to work. Some people do take the bus into the city but it's almost more expensive than driving, takes twice as long, and there are only a couple of runs a day that all leave before my kids can be dropped off.

IMHO Rural commuter rail is simply not an issue in rural areas. What is an issue is the disjointed system of regional roads and counties, and the absence of a strategy to effectively move people, goods, and services among the rural areas. For us country folk, roads are where it's at. The New York Central rail line through Russell, Embrun, Crysler, Finch, was ripped up long ago and it's not coming back.

Sorry if any of you think that this is a giant thread crap and it very well may be, but it's important to understand regional needs in this huge diverse country. I do agree the LRT should be built and I'm glad to see it going in a tunnel where it belongs.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by MaxHeadroom

Oh, you silly city folk. Unless the train leaves from my house in Russell and goes non-stop to my Ottawa office, it will never be faster than a car. Even with traffic. Bumper to bumper before Anderson you say, LOL maybe in a snowstorm or if there is a rare accident. I can usually do 110-120 the whole way on the 417 to the split, just to keep up with traffic!

And I have kids to pick up and drive around to different stuff all over. I have meetings all over the city, often on my way to or from home or work. And groceries to buy. Of course transit planners including those of the office chair variety can't get their head out of the box that every vehicle on the road is either a commuter or annoying truck, and everyone works downtown in the core. "There simply can't be any other purpose for having a vehicle on the road."

And I didn't move my family to the country so I could take a bus or train to work. Some people do take the bus into the city but it's almost more expensive than driving, takes twice as long, and there are only a couple of runs a day that all leave before my kids can be dropped off.

IMHO Rural commuter rail is simply not an issue in rural areas. What is an issue is the disjointed system of regional roads and counties, and the absence of a strategy to effectively move people, goods, and services among the rural areas. For us country folk, roads are where it's at. The New York Central rail line through Russell, Embrun, Crysler, Finch, was ripped up long ago and it's not coming back.

Sorry if any of you think that this is a giant thread crap and it very well may be, but it's important to understand regional needs in this huge diverse country. I do agree the LRT should be built and I'm glad to see it going in a tunnel where it belongs.

Agreed.

There were reasons why all the commuter rail lines that fed into Ottawa stopped operating in the 1950s and 1960s. It was improved roads and higher car ownership that did them in. The roads have been further improved and car ownership has increased since then and Union Station downtown closed. With these conditions, commuter rail will remain only a dream.

[waterloowarrior]

City of Clarence-Rockland Transit Feasibility Study
http://www.clarence-rockland.com/images/crtreport.pdf

[ACmodels]

Coun. Wilkinson's call for Kanata commuter rail 'reckless' : Hubley

BY JON WILLING, OTTAWA SUN
FIRST POSTED: SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2015 02:43 PM EDT | UPDATED: SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2015 03:20 PM EDT

Coun. Marianne Wilkinson’s theory of using existing train tracks for a Kanata commuter line has a suburban colleague calling the idea “reckless.”

“I’m not impressed,” Kanata South Coun. Allan Hubley said Friday.

“We have a motion that she voted for, as did the entire council, that we’re going to study the LRT to Kanata and try to expedite it.”

Wilkinson, who represents Kanata North, said she’s simply giving more thought to a plan from when Larry O’Brien was mayor to provide rail service to the west.

It’s also an idea that resurfaced last year when mayoral candidate Mike Maguire was seeking office.

The election was partly based on Maguire’s diesel train blueprint versus Mayor Jim Watson’s $3-billion Stage 2 LRT plan.

Wilkinson said a diesel train commuter service on CN tracks could complement LRT.

“It’s not talking away from light rail. Light rail is going to a different location,” Wilkinson said.

The first phase of LRT opening in 2018 will run between Tunney’s Pasture and Blair station.

The city wants extensions to Bayview Shopping Centre, Place d’Orléans and Algonquin College, plus a Trillium Line diesel train extension to Riverside South, by 2023.

Rail service to Kanata isn’t in the city’s plans before 2031.

Hubley is particularly peeved because he won council’s blessing over the summer to have staff study ways to bring LRT to Kanata as soon as possible.

He accused Wilkinson of “confusing the issue.”

“She didn’t talk about diesel trains in June. She voted for the LRT,” Hubley said.

“What she is doing is reckless and is going to cause problems for the residents of Kanata.”

But Wilkinson said she wants the city to protect the CN line that connects Arnprior with the Trillium Line tracks in Ottawa. It’s a good time to consider it since the city is going through an official plan amendment to establish setbacks along future rail corridors, she said. A report is scheduled to go to council in November.

According to Wilkinson, only a polymer manufacturer in Arnprior uses the CN tracks one day a week. Adding commuter trains during peak periods would just be a scheduling exercise, she said.

However, the biggest hurdle might be the level rail crossings through Kanata before a train goes east through the greenbelt.

Wilkinson concedes it’s just an idea for now. She hasn’t discussed it with the mayor.

But she knows the daily commute from the west is at a snail’s pace and Kanata needs more public transit infrastructure.

“The traffic on the Queensway right now is unreal,” she said.

Twitter: @JonathanWilling

http://www.ottawasun.com/2015/09/27/coun-wilkinsons-call-for-kanata-commuter-rail-reckless--hubley

[GoTrans]

Originally Posted by ACmodels

Coun. Wilkinson's call for Kanata commuter rail 'reckless' : Hubley

BY JON WILLING, OTTAWA SUN
FIRST POSTED: SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2015 02:43 PM EDT | UPDATED: SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2015 03:20 PM EDT

Coun. Marianne Wilkinson’s theory of using existing train tracks for a Kanata commuter line has a suburban colleague calling the idea “reckless.”

“I’m not impressed,” Kanata South Coun. Allan Hubley said Friday.

“We have a motion that she voted for, as did the entire council, that we’re going to study the LRT to Kanata and try to expedite it.”

Wilkinson, who represents Kanata North, said she’s simply giving more thought to a plan from when Larry O’Brien was mayor to provide rail service to the west.

It’s also an idea that resurfaced last year when mayoral candidate Mike Maguire was seeking office.

The election was partly based on Maguire’s diesel train blueprint versus Mayor Jim Watson’s $3-billion Stage 2 LRT plan.

Wilkinson said a diesel train commuter service on CN tracks could complement LRT.

“It’s not talking away from light rail. Light rail is going to a different location,” Wilkinson said.

The first phase of LRT opening in 2018 will run between Tunney’s Pasture and Blair station.

The city wants extensions to Bayview Shopping Centre, Place d’Orléans and Algonquin College, plus a Trillium Line diesel train extension to Riverside South, by 2023.

Rail service to Kanata isn’t in the city’s plans before 2031.

Hubley is particularly peeved because he won council’s blessing over the summer to have staff study ways to bring LRT to Kanata as soon as possible.

He accused Wilkinson of “confusing the issue.”

“She didn’t talk about diesel trains in June. She voted for the LRT,” Hubley said.

“What she is doing is reckless and is going to cause problems for the residents of Kanata.”

But Wilkinson said she wants the city to protect the CN line that connects Arnprior with the Trillium Line tracks in Ottawa. It’s a good time to consider it since the city is going through an official plan amendment to establish setbacks along future rail corridors, she said. A report is scheduled to go to council in November.

According to Wilkinson, only a polymer manufacturer in Arnprior uses the CN tracks one day a week. Adding commuter trains during peak periods would just be a scheduling exercise, she said.

However, the biggest hurdle might be the level rail crossings through Kanata before a train goes east through the greenbelt.

Wilkinson concedes it’s just an idea for now. She hasn’t discussed it with the mayor.

But she knows the daily commute from the west is at a snail’s pace and Kanata needs more public transit infrastructure.

“The traffic on the Queensway right now is unreal,” she said.

Twitter: @JonathanWilling

http://www.ottawasun.com/2015/09/27/coun-wilkinsons-call-for-kanata-commuter-rail-reckless--hubley

Wilkinson is on the right track; no pun intended. This would cost less as the right of way exists, the track exists, the track is currently in service and it would provide options and could connect with the proposed Stage 2 expansions while improving transit to a wider part if the city. All it needs is some rehabilitation and signalling since the Bombardier DMU's are still in storage at Walkley yard.
I wouldn't trust the staff at city hall to honestly evaluate this option in their study. This study will come up with forgone conclusions just as it did to rule out the LRT option along Carling. They will come up with every excuse in the book not to give this option a fair hearing.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by GoTrans

Wilkinson is on the right track; no pun intended. This would cost less as the right of way exists, the track exists, the track is currently in service and it would provide options and could connect with the proposed Stage 2 expansions while improving transit to a wider part if the city. All it needs is some rehabilitation and signalling since the Bombardier DMU's are still in storage at Walkley yard.
I wouldn't trust the staff at city hall to honestly evaluate this option in their study. This study will come up with forgone conclusions just as it did to rule out the LRT option along Carling. They will come up with every excuse in the book not to give this option a fair hearing.

We have really come a long way since the opening of the O-Train. And that is not a complement. We were taking a big chance when we opened the O-Train since we were thinking out of the box. It was called the train from nowhere to nowhere but it immediately found a market. There were a lot of critics that were proven wrong.

We have reverted back to safe traditional thinking about transit, something that plagued this city in the 1960s. Ottawa was very adventurous compared to most cities from around 1975 until 2006. We tried new things, many new things and we kept Ottawa's transit from falling into the pit as was happening in most cities south of the border.

For whatever reason, and I think the enormous price tag of the Confederation Line is a big part of it, we now have to play it safe. There is no longer a desire to experiment with transit. We figure that the Confederation Line will solve all our problems including declining ridership. It won't. It is only part of the solution, a big part, but only part.

The city has now grown well beyond the rail line in question so this begs the question of why it is not considered a viable option? Variations of Marianne Wilkenson's idea were part of the Chiarelli plan and Larry O'Brien's task force report. We have three trains mothballed that could run on this track. We even had a trial run that ran way out into the countryside, as a dream for the future. Yet, despite all of this, the use of this rail line has completely fallen off our future plans without a whimper of protest. We were so consumed with the subway that nobody complained that this was removed from the TMP.

Of course, some investment is needed but in the grand scheme of things, it isn't a whole lot.

I have expressed concern on how the Confederation Line has sucked up not only all the money (possibly until 2050) but also the political will of City Council. It is too bad.

A transit plan needs to serve the entire city not just a 1 km band along one route that is consuming billions of dollars.

[MoreTrains]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

A transit plan needs to serve the entire city not just a 1 km band along one route that is consuming billions of dollars.

Uh, it actually serves a 2.5 km band.

But this is true, I think part of the reason that these tracks are scoffed at is because they would take away ridership in the west from the confederation line. Also, they dont go directly downtown. But that doesnt mean that an experimental service shouldnt be introduced. If they took and ran the three trains from the Trillium line for a 12 month period, I am sure they would find that there would be a good amount of ridership, and new ridership at that. But you know, too much work.

[GoTrans]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

For whatever reason, and I think the enormous price tag of the Confederation Line is a big part of it, we now have to play it safe. There is no longer a desire to experiment with transit. We figure that the Confederation Line will solve all our problems including declining ridership. It won't. It is only part of the solution, a big part, but only part.

The city has now grown well beyond the rail line in question so this begs the question of why it is not considered a viable option? Variations of Marianne Wilkenson's idea were part of the Chiarelli plan and Larry O'Brien's task force report. We have three trains mothballed that could run on this track. We even had a trial run that ran way out into the countryside, as a dream for the future. Yet, despite all of this, the use of this rail line has completely fallen off our future plans without a whimper of protest. We were so consumed with the subway that nobody complained that this was removed from the TMP.

Of course, some investment is needed but in the grand scheme of things, it isn't a whole lot.

I have expressed concern on how the Confederation Line has sucked up not only all the money (possibly until 2050) but also the political will of City Council. It is too bad.

A transit plan needs to serve the entire city not just a 1 km band along one route that is consuming billions of dollars.

The main thing is that the city needs to examine all options, give them similar scrutiny and not skew the outcome to support the administration's preferred plan unlike what happened with Phase 2 of the LRT expansion from Tunney's Pasture. This option is available now, with very little costs. It would require very little in upgrades to run a demonstration project since the equipment is available.