Trillium Line (O-Train) Updates

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

All I got from that article was "Wah, difficulties and challenges! We'd rather not face them, so we're going to inconvenience more citizens who will turn to non-environmentally-friendly options. Because the ones we give them are crap. Because we're timid."

We'll have problems and congestion with an O-Train expansion right now! Better not build it! Never mind the fact that it would cost little to nothing in the grand scheme of things, would increase public transit ridership, keep more cars off the road (which helps ease our traffic problems, as well as helping the environment somewhat), and brings cost-effective Rapid Transit to a far flung suburb that is poorly served by public transit in general. But no, because we might face problems and challenges, it is therefore not worth it.

You said it!

$75 million is a bargain for significant ridership growth but the Confederation Line is all consuming both for planning and financially. The city is afraid of what is going to happen in the next 5 years.

It is 'the sky is falling, the sky is falling' syndrome.

I think they should be worrying more about what happens after the Confederation Line opens. It is going to impact 100,000s of riders with more transfers for most of them. They better have a really good plan to move those people around the city once all the direct bus routes are gone. If poorly executed, a lot of politicians and transit planners will be looking for another job.

[J.OT13]

I still don't understand why they want to build rail to Leitrim and continue the rapid transit route as BRT. Just build rail, that will save millions in the long run both in operational and capital costs (possibly billions by the time of conversion) as well as massive headaches during conversion. Look at the pain in the ass the Confederation line construction is causing just by having to widen the Queensway, and they haven't even started conversion, now that's going to be hell!

Here is the planned extension, don't know why they don't put the passing tracks at stations when possible, or in the case of Gladstone, if you have passing tracks, might as well build platforms.

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Intensification means for the most part high income housing as there is little affordable housing being built in those situations. Just look at the McMansions that are replacing modest bungalows in many older neighbourhoods. There is nothing comparable in the suburbs unless you getting outside the urban boundary.

I'm not going to argue on the other fronts, there seems to be no chance of getting anywhere with that, but this bothers me too much. McMansions are not intensification. They're building a bigger house on the lot, but they don't increase density in the slightest. Intensification is increasing density, and a McMansion doesn't do that. (Now as to whether or not they're present in Ottawa, I don't really go into the suburbs that much however randomly selected streetviewing on Kanata, Orleans, and Barhaven all showed streets filled with McMansions.)

[lrt's friend]

I still don't understand why they want to build rail to Leitrim and continue the rapid transit route as BRT.

I have been saying this ever since the 2008 TMP was approved. As far as I can see, this was part of a backlash regarding the cancellation of the 2006 plan. It had to be different even if it made no sense.

I have been complaining for years about the opening of a planned massive park n ride lot next to the Armstrong-Strandherd bridge, when the plan was changed and it will no longer be directly connected to the O-Train.

So the lovely community of Riverside South originally planned as a transit suburb will have its town centre planned around a busway if even that gets built. I am fully expecting the Riverside South Town Centre to be no more than Kanata Centrum II.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Beedok

I'm not going to argue on the other fronts, there seems to be no chance of getting anywhere with that, but this bothers me too much. McMansions are not intensification. They're building a bigger house on the lot, but they don't increase density in the slightest. Intensification is increasing density, and a McMansion doesn't do that. (Now as to whether or not they're present in Ottawa, I don't really go into the suburbs that much however randomly selected streetviewing on Kanata, Orleans, and Barhaven all showed streets filled with McMansions.)

It all depends on your definition of McMansions. I grant you there is Kanata Lakes. And you are right, replacing a bungalow with a large house is not intensification but that is happening a lot in older neighbourhoods. But I still contend that intensification is not offering affordable housing.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Beedok

I'm not going to argue on the other fronts, there seems to be no chance of getting anywhere with that, but this bothers me too much. McMansions are not intensification. They're building a bigger house on the lot, but they don't increase density in the slightest. Intensification is increasing density, and a McMansion doesn't do that. (Now as to whether or not they're present in Ottawa, I don't really go into the suburbs that much however randomly selected streetviewing on Kanata, Orleans, and Barhaven all showed streets filled with McMansions.)

Sometimes they even tear down two modest, but yet quality mid-century bungalows to build these cheap chip board and stucco McMansions.

[Beedok]

Affordable housing would be intensification if it were built. Whether it be a townhouse project or apartment building. I still think the best system is to have mixed accomidations, with a few affordable units intermixed with regular rent ones to avoid ghetto creation.

Of course if you're talking about regular houses that the middle class can afford rather, most apartment condos and such are in that price range. (Though some people like to do yard work for some reason and so don't want apartments.)

[RTWAP]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

We should be starting the planning for the south O-Train extension immediately so that it can open the same day as the Confederation Line!

Definitely.

[Kitchissippi]

One thing I wish they would do is schedule for the ripping up of the Carling Avenue bridge to double track and actually put the station underneath so that there are entrances on either side of the street. The fact that there is no logical transfer between the O-Train and well used routes 85 and 101 severely affects the utility of this line. With all the condos slated for this area, a walkway/pathway connection towards Dows Lakewould be really useful as well.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

One thing I wish they would do is schedule for the ripping up of the Carling Avenue bridge to double track and actually put the station underneath so that there are entrances on either side of the street. The fact that there is no logical transfer between the O-Train and well used routes 85 and 101 severely affects the utility of this line. With all the condos slated for this area, a walkway/pathway connection towards Dows Lakewould be really useful as well.

At least you have a station at Carling. Route 8 goes right next to the O-Train tracks at Walkley Road, but you can't transfer there or any other location on the route. Maybe sometime after 2031? Just 18 short years from today.

[S-Man]

[QUOTEI'm not going to argue on the other fronts, there seems to be no chance of getting anywhere with that, but this bothers me too much. McMansions are not intensification. They're building a bigger house on the lot, but they don't increase density in the slightest. Intensification is increasing density, and a McMansion doesn't do that. (Now as to whether or not they're present in Ottawa, I don't really go into the suburbs that much however randomly selected streetviewing on Kanata, Orleans, and Barhaven all showed streets filled with McMansions.)
][/QUOTE]

If you're looking for examples of urban 'Non-intensification McMansions', look no further than Westboro and Champlain Park (Dominion Ave., Northwestern Ave., Berkley Ave.). No one tears down two 1998 homes in the suburbs to put up a McMansion.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by S-Man

If you're looking for examples of urban 'Non-intensification McMansions', look no further than Westboro and Champlain Park (Dominion Ave., Northwestern Ave., Berkley Ave.). No one tears down two 1998 homes in the suburbs to put up a McMansion.

Have you heard of houses being burned down in order to build the McMansion? That is what some claim to have happened to my grandparent's house.

[J.OT13]

In the new suburbs they don't demolish to build McMansions because those houses are already McMansions.

[McC]

Originally Posted by S-Man

If you're looking for examples of urban 'Non-intensification McMansions', look no further than Westboro and Champlain Park (Dominion Ave., Northwestern Ave., Berkley Ave.). No one tears down two 1998 homes in the suburbs to put up a McMansion.

I'd say that a good half of the massive redevelopment in Champlain Park and the Westboro beach area is a bare minimum of intensification, though: (giant) semis replacing singles on 50ft wide lots, or on reoriented corner lots. I'm not a huge fan of these million dollar semis -- though they beat 1.4M McMNsion singles which are the alternative, I suppose, given he economics -- but their large size and contemporary layouts could allow for further micro-scale intensification in a generation or two, as the many bedrooms and bathrooms, etc., make sharing with a mortgage helper more comfortable, which in turn make these homes more affordable for future buyers if the place gets a little run down and fixtures need replacing, etc. this is very common in Vancouver, and I know at least one good friend who bought his big old house in Westboro the same way: by renting out two extra bedrooms.

[Beedok]

Wait, isn't 1.4 million moving into Mansion territory? I thought McMansions were more like 500k? (Note that I'm poor as dirt, so I really don't know housing prices.)

[McC]

Dunno, maybe, can it be a mansion when it's on a 50x100 (or smaller) lot?

In the west side neighbourhoods S-Man and I were referring to, 500K is pretty much the price of the land alone.

(East of Holland or west of Woodroffe, you can still get a decent home for your half a mil, though it might look more like Grandma's house than any mansion).

[J.OT13]

I finally read the Citizen's "built the damn O-Train extension already" and what is interesting is that they are talking to people in Riverside South who go to Counterpointe/Algonquin. A 70 million dollar O-Train extension wouldn't do much for them, the Strandherd-Armstrong Bridge is what will really make a difference.

The O-Train should not get extended to Riverside South now or anytime in the near future (not as diesel or double track electric). I we do extend the current line, we should a. add stations at Gladstone and Walkley (priority number 1) and extend to the airport (priority number 2) not as much to serve the airport but to serve the CE Centre. The airport can have a basic station, building ridership until electrification when we would build a fully enclosed/integrated station.

[Buggys]

How about we get the O-train to loop around going South of the airport, across the Strandherd-Armstrong Bridge, run past Baseline Station near the college, and connect to Bayshore station via the Confederation Line.

...Might as well, if the plan is to have rail that far South on both sides of the bridge anyway. Gosh, how hard is it to contract a bridge-builder with enough insurance to ensure construction without delays & the City loosing money.

[MountainView]

If they are only doubling the track up until the Galdstone bridge (I could be mistaken) they why don't they double the track into Bayview station and have a central platform? Seems silly to me to have a train leave the station slowly as the north bound one slowly makes its way onto the passing track, they pass each other, and then the north bound one switches back onto the main track and into the station. If the north bound one is early/South bound leaving Bayview is late, it could simply pull into the station without waiting if it was doubled into the station.

Anyways... pictures by me from yesterday - Aug 31/2013

[J.OT13]

The design lacks efficiency. Passing tracks should be at stations both for system efficiency and so passengers don't feel like time is wasting away.