Trillium Line Upgrades & Extension (Stage 2) [Greenboro to Airport/Limebank] | U/C

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

We are so consumed with getting the Confederation Line to Trim Road and Stittsville first,

This statement always bothers me. There are no plans to extend the line to Stittsville. Yes there is talk about extending it as far as the CTC in Kanata, but I can't see that happening once it is official that the Senators are moving (I don't think it should extend beyond Terry Fox as buses would be adequate beyond that). I do agree that the extension to Trim Rd is ridiculous though. I think the park and ride lot there was too tantalizing for the politicians.

IMHO, our priorities should be (in approximate order of priority, though some are close, and priorities could change over time):

1. Extend Confederation line to Baseline/Bayshore(Moodie?)
2. Extend Confederation line to Place d'Orléans
3. Extend south-eastern transitway to Earl Armstrong Dr.(and add bus lanes to Earl Armstrong Dr.)
4. Upgrade and extend Trillium Line to Airport
5. Baseline BRT (Baseline to Hurdman)
6. Extend Confederation Line to Terry Fox
7. Extend Baseline BRT to Bayshore
8. Carling LRT (only this high because it is low hanging fruit)
9. Extend Confederation Line to Fallowfield (or Marketplace Station)
10. New north/south LRT line to downtown (Bank St or similar),
11. New north-east LRT line Rideau to Vanier Parkway
12. Extend north-east LRT line to Blair Rd or Montreal Rd Station.
13. Extend new north/south LRT line to Earl Armstrong Dr.

A Gatineau LRT extension should be inserted there somewhere. I am also missing a few of the suburban busways that are planned.

[lrt's friend]

Perhaps Stittsville is an exaggeration however the right of way is already in the books from CTC to Stittsville. I agree that shows some wisdom. My concern that we are not building out rapid transit in a more orderly and equal way from the city centre, which means in multiple directions.

Ottawa is peculiar in that we have the Greenbelt, which presents atypical transportation problems. This is pushing the need to get rapid transit to the far side of the Greenbelt to reduce traffic pressures on the very limited number of roads that cross the Greenbelt. However, the need to go further needs to be balanced to the three major communities outside the Greenbelt. Our goal should first get to a reasonable terminus outside the Greenbelt, then make sure that all routes equally reach that point, before start trying to build to the edge of development. Even the CTC is the edge of development.

We are spending money to go to Trim Road, when we can't build out on the other 3 major corridors to a good point beyond the Greenbelt. That money should be redirected to accomplish that. But we know the Trim Road decision was all politics. In the east, Place d'Orleans should have been good enough in the next phase, when we should be getting to at least Eagleson in the west, Fallowfield in the southwest and Riverside South Town Centre (not yet built) in the south as soon as possible. And of course, we need to rectify the single track problem on the Trillium Line which is going to be a headache for at least another generation.

[Vixx]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I don't have any opinion on the mechanics of the line, but in terms of users, tons of people will drive some distance from places like Greely and Metcalfe and beyond in order to take the train into town.

Transitway lines coming into town from places like Orleans and Kanata have a lot of people using them from places that are far outside the city limits.

I completely agree.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Ottawa is peculiar in that we have the Greenbelt, which presents atypical transportation problems. This is pushing the need to get rapid transit to the far side of the Greenbelt to reduce traffic pressures on the very limited number of roads that cross the Greenbelt. However, the need to go further needs to be balanced to the three major communities outside the Greenbelt. Our goal should first get to a reasonable terminus outside the Greenbelt, then make sure that all routes equally reach that point, before start trying to build to the edge of development. Even the CTC is the edge of development.

I agree with you 100%. It isn't feasible to build to all three major communities at once but we should be doing it as a balanced approach. Initially the Confederation Line is under-built in the west (for understandable reasons), so fixing that should be the top priority. Instead, it will be the last to be completed.

We are spending money to go to Trim Road, when we can't build out on the other 3 major corridors to a good point beyond the Greenbelt. That money should be redirected to accomplish that.

I agree. The money being spent to go to Trim Rd, could easily cover an extension to Eagleson (or maybe Terry Fox). Once that is done, the money that was going to go towards the CTC extension could be used towards an extension from Baseline to Fallowfield.

And of course, we need to rectify the single track problem on the Trillium Line which is going to be a headache for at least another generation.

Until we can double track the line, we shouldn't be extending it. If we have to do something before then, an airport extension is the most we should be looking at.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Until we can double track the line, we shouldn't be extending it. If we have to do something before then, an airport extension is the most we should be looking at.

Didn't you argue that the commuting populations of Findlay Creek and Riverside South are well under the capacity of the Phase 2 line? Playing Devil's advocate here, but the bean counter types would then say single tracking is sufficient. Looking at the Trillium Line as a form of commuter rail, rather than rapid transit which is what our planners seem to be doing there would be some method in their madness. Several GO lines do end with a big parking lot in a field, and we're starting off with RER type frequencies. The big problem is that our commuter rail ends to the west of what we currently consider downtown. If the full grand Lebreton vision comes to pass it might be less important as "downtown" will be much bigger than it is today, but that's a long ways away.

[Guideway]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Until we can double track the line, we shouldn't be extending it. If we have to do something before then, an airport extension is the most we should be looking at.

I totally agree with you. Double tracking the entire line is very costly, but what they should do is start double tracking areas where the space is provided. If you go on google maps, you can see that they can easily lay a second track between Bayview and the passing track right after. Now that might not seem like a whole lot, but it's a start. And if they did that with every part of the line, quite a bit of the line would be double tracked.

Now if they ever will build a second track under the canal, that is a whole other question.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by Guideway

I totally agree with you. Double tracking the entire line is very costly, but what they should do is start double tracking areas where the space is provided. If you go on google maps, you can see that they can easily lay a second track between Bayview and the passing track right after. Now that might not seem like a whole lot, but it's a start. And if they did that with every part of the line, quite a bit of the line would be double tracked.

Now if they ever will build a second track under the canal, that is a whole other question.

That part is planned as part of phase 2. There's a lot more passing track (all the way from Bayview to just past the queensway). You can see it on geoottawa

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

Didn't you argue that the commuting populations of Findlay Creek and Riverside South are well under the capacity of the Phase 2 line?

Looking at it from purely a capacity perspective, I still say that. There are many other factors though that make it a bad plan.

Playing Devil's advocate here, but the bean counter types would then say single tracking is sufficient. Looking at the Trillium Line as a form of commuter rail, rather than rapid transit which is what our planners seem to be doing there would be some method in their madness. Several GO lines do end with a big parking lot in a field, and we're starting off with RER type frequencies.

The distances are too short and the populations are too small to make commuter rail effective anywhere in Ottawa. Sure the main three suburbs outside of the greenbelt are a decent size, but the population drops drastically beyond them.

The big problem is that our commuter rail ends to the west of what we currently consider downtown.

That is certainly one of the big problems with the Trillium line. What made it successful is that it goes through Carleton University. Not only are students heavy users of transit, but its location made Carleton difficult to get to so having an alternate route was highly beneficial.

If the full grand Lebreton vision comes to pass it might be less important as "downtown" will be much bigger than it is today, but that's a long ways away.

Agreed. If for no other reason than that, we should definitely keep our options open for the Trillium Line, but it doesn't justify making it our top priority.

I have said it before, but the communities south of the airport are growing and are undeserved by transportation services, so something needs to be done, but I don't think the Trillium line extension is the right thing to do at this time.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

That part is planned as part of phase 2. There's a lot more passing track (all the way from Bayview to just past the queensway). You can see it on geoottawa

Agreed, and I agree that these incremental upgrades should be made, though not by shutting the line down for 16 months.

[GoTrans]

Originally Posted by Guideway

I totally agree with you. Double tracking the entire line is very costly, but what they should do is start double tracking areas where the space is provided. If you go on google maps, you can see that they can easily lay a second track between Bayview and the passing track right after. Now that might not seem like a whole lot, but it's a start. And if they did that with every part of the line, quite a bit of the line would be double tracked.

Now if they ever will build a second track under the canal, that is a whole other question.

You are quite right, but the city does not want to commit to a plan that requires consistent investment over the long term to the line. As a result they do everything on the cheap but do not get a bang for their buck. While they are addressing some of the double tracking in the rock cuts with Stage 2 they should have picked off more of the low hanging fruit south of Confederation where the cost of double tracking is relatively inexpensive.

[Multi-modal]

Originally Posted by GoTrans

You are quite right, but the city does not want to commit to a plan that requires consistent investment over the long term to the line. As a result they do everything on the cheap but do not get a bang for their buck. While they are addressing some of the double tracking in the rock cuts with Stage 2 they should have picked off more of the low hanging fruit south of Confederation where the cost of double tracking is relatively inexpensive.

As others have pointed out, the biggest issue going forward is the fact that Walkley Station isn't going to be double tracked. They need to not cheap out and spend the money on re-building the structure at Walkley so they can double-track the station.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Looking at it from purely a capacity perspective, I still say that. There are many other factors though that make it a bad plan.



The distances are too short and the populations are too small to make commuter rail effective anywhere in Ottawa. Sure the main three suburbs outside of the greenbelt are a decent size, but the population drops drastically beyond them.



That is certainly one of the big problems with the Trillium line. What made it successful is that it goes through Carleton University. Not only are students heavy users of transit, but its location made Carleton difficult to get to so having an alternate route was highly beneficial.



Agreed. If for no other reason than that, we should definitely keep our options open for the Trillium Line, but it doesn't justify making it our top priority.

I have said it before, but the communities south of the airport are growing and are undeserved by transportation services, so something needs to be done, but I don't think the Trillium line extension is the right thing to do at this time.

You are looking at it from a capacity issue while ignoring the cost for the need of more buses if they were to lengthen the SE transitway.

The city is doing it correctly by extending Trillium line while leaving the option open for double tracking. Its cheaper to operate a few trains instead of many buses that would be needed to cover the same distance.

[lrt's friend]

The two transfer scenario that we are creating is going to limit ridership potential. Similarly for the airport. Yes, it may be a 'cheap' option from both the capital and operating cost sides, but in the end there will be lower transit modal share than elsewhere in the city. The experts and our politicians believe that is good enough. Based on the plans I have seen for Bayview and Lebreton, there is no indication that it will be like downtown. It is going to be mainly high rise residential and a sports venue. The main destination for office workers and shoppers will continue to be east of Bronson and really east of Bank.

The limited amount of additional double tracking is not going to make much difference as far as train scheduling is concerned. It just addresses the two car trains and the new stations. To make any significant further difference will require full double tracking. Further fiddling around will just serve to shut down service yet again with little to show for it. The reason being that the biggest gap in the double tracking will be the limiter for the whole line. There is really no more low hanging fruit on the Trillium Line (at least that will make a difference) since so many bridges need to be replaced or expanded as well the rock cut and tunnel.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The two transfer scenario that we are creating is going to limit ridership potential. Similarly for the airport. Yes, it may be a 'cheap' option from both the capital and operating cost sides, but in the end there will be lower transit modal share than elsewhere in the city. The experts and our politicians believe that is good enough. Based on the plans I have seen for Bayview and Lebreton, there is no indication that it will be like downtown. It is going to be mainly high rise residential and a sports venue. The main destination for office workers and shoppers will continue to be east of Bronson and really east of Bank.

The limited amount of additional double tracking is not going to make much difference as far as train scheduling is concerned. It just addresses the two car trains and the new stations. To make any significant further difference will require full double tracking. Further fiddling around will just serve to shut down service yet again with little to show for it. The reason being that the biggest gap in the double tracking will be limiter for the whole line. There is really no more low hanging fruit on the Trillium Line (at least that will make a difference) since so many bridges need to be replaced or expanded as well the rock cut and tunnel.

I guess im one of the few people who will have the number of transfers reduced with stage 1 coming in. Right now it takes me 2 transfers for to get to southern part of Ottawa fast (bus, bus train 30 min or bus to bus in 1hr)
After stage 1 i will only have to take bus then train from downtown gatineau to get where i want in 30 min or less.

I do believe stage 1 will have chaos and it wont get resolved until after stage 2. Im just guessing the money they save off of stage 2 will eventually be used to double track the Trillium line but that will be a long way off since all the money has been spent on the first 2 stages and will be spent on stage 3a Kanata and 3b Gatineau extensions

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

I guess im one of the few people who will have the number of transfers reduced with stage 1 coming in. Right now it takes me 2 transfers for to get to southern part of Ottawa fast (bus, bus train 30 min or bus to bus in 1hr)
After stage 1 i will only have to take bus then train from downtown gatineau to get where i want in 30 min or less.

I do believe stage 1 will have chaos and it wont get resolved until after stage 2. Im just guessing the money they save off of stage 2 will eventually be used to double track the Trillium line but that will be a long way off since all the money has been spent on the first 2 stages and will be spent on stage 3a Kanata and 3b Gatineau extensions

There will be winners with Phase 1 and I am glad you are one of them. In my case, Phase 1, 2 and 3 will make no difference and I will be long retired anyways. I don't think Phase 3b should impact other plans since that will have to be funded by the Quebec and Gatineau but your overall point is what I expect to happen.

[kmcamp]

"We are spending money to go to Trim Road, when we can't build out on the other 3 major corridors to a good point beyond the Greenbelt"

It will be popular with point-east commuters such as Rockland. While they are outside of Ottawa's tax base, the fact is we have to pay for them one way or the other, since we're stuck with the maintenance of the 174. Not sure what the savings are, but transferring a good portion of those Rockland commuters to the train might reduce the amount of money we have to spend on the highway. We might even come out ahead.

On the west side, the province pays for the 417 so we don't have the same incentive to help communities like Arnprior or Carleton Place

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

You are looking at it from a capacity issue while ignoring the cost for the need of more buses if they were to lengthen the SE transitway.

The city is doing it correctly by extending Trillium line while leaving the option open for double tracking. Its cheaper to operate a few trains instead of many buses that would be needed to cover the same distance.

Since LINT 41 trains used on the Trillium line are more expensive to operate than a bus (they use more fuel and I assume the engineers are paid more than a bus driver), the only way you will save money is if we can greatly reduce the number of buses in operation.

Currently on weekdays there are about 90 round trip trains a day on the Trillium line and I don't see that changing significantly after stage 2. The only regular buses that run south of the airport are the 93 (46 round trips), 99 (42 round trips) and 189 (7 trips to/from Greenboro). That totals 95 round trips. From that I would say the LRT southern extension will actually cost more to operate than the existing buses on weekdays. Weekends will likely be even worse.

[Multi-modal]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Since LINT 41 trains used on the Trillium line are more expensive to operate than a bus (they use more fuel and I assume the engineers are paid more than a bus driver), the only way you will save money is if we can greatly reduce the number of buses in operation.

Currently on weekdays there are about 90 round trip trains a day on the Trillium line and I don't see that changing significantly after stage 2. The only regular buses that run south of the airport are the 93 (46 round trips), 99 (42 round trips) and 189 (7 trips to/from Greenboro). That totals 95 round trips. From that I would say the LRT southern extension will actually cost more to operate than the existing buses on weekdays. Weekends will likely be even worse.

I'd agree with that (and I agree overall that the Transitway should have been extended), but the number of buses will grow as Riverside South and Letrim develop. I wouldn't be suprised if in 20 years they need 200-250 buses per day south of the Airport.

Another thing to think about is if you intend to eventually convert the extended Transitway to LRT you will have to overbuild the structures (in width primarily) for buses. A side-effect of this is they tend to build Transitway stations away from major cross-roads so the bridges aren't 4-lanes wide (see Billings, Heron, Smyth, etc.. etc...). You will also have to build the stations as side platforms, whereas with lrt you have the option for centre platforms.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Since LINT 41 trains used on the Trillium line are more expensive to operate than a bus (they use more fuel and I assume the engineers are paid more than a bus driver), the only way you will save money is if we can greatly reduce the number of buses in operation.

Currently on weekdays there are about 90 round trip trains a day on the Trillium line and I don't see that changing significantly after stage 2. The only regular buses that run south of the airport are the 93 (46 round trips), 99 (42 round trips) and 189 (7 trips to/from Greenboro). That totals 95 round trips. From that I would say the LRT southern extension will actually cost more to operate than the existing buses on weekdays. Weekends will likely be even worse.

It still doesn't make sense to extend the transitway when the city already owns the tracks right next to it. To me Gatineau has already made a mistake by building a rapibus corridor next to the Trillium line tracks and eventually they will have to convert the whole area to light rail.

I find the city of Ottawa made the right decision by extending the Trillium line south since it would bring it closer to Barrhaven. This at least shortens my travel times a good bit.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Multi-modal

I'd agree with that (and I agree overall that the Transitway should have been extended), but the number of buses will grow as Riverside South and Letrim develop. I wouldn't be suprised if in 20 years they need 200-250 buses per hour south of the Airport.

I agree they will grow, and once we are running 200-300 buses per day, then we can consider upgrading to LRT.

Another thing to think about is if you intend to eventually convert the extended Transitway to LRT you will have to overbuild the structures (in width primarily) for buses. A side-effect of this is they tend to build Transitway stations away from major cross-roads so the bridges aren't 4-lanes wide (see Billings, Heron, Smyth, etc.. etc...). You will also have to build the stations as side platforms, whereas with lrt you have the option for centre platforms.

True, but on this particular route there is not much need to grade separate the transitway from the few roads it crosses. The Hunt Club overpass has already been built so the only crossings are Lester and Leitrim. Traffic lights with bus priority would be more than adequate. For Earl Armstron, all that is needed a traffic light with left turn lanes for buses. The stations need not be fancy (with even a bus every 5 minutes you can still use crosswalks) so once we do migrate to LRT, we aren't loosing anything significant by rebuilding them.