News   Apr 24, 2024
Latest Iteration of 50 Eglinton West Proposes 46- and 58-Storey Towers
 969     1 
News   Apr 24, 2024
Sustainability Month: Mass Timber Construction Showing Long-Term Economic Benefits
 1.6K     1 
News   Apr 24, 2024
Aspen Ridge Freehold Townhomes at Crosstown in Master-Planned Community
 627     0 

Ottawa Transit Developments

They aren't going to cut Riverside South but build the airport. The airport plan is an awkward vanity project that (as I read somewhere) OC Transpo expects to have about 10% as many riders as Riverside eventually will. It will be no faster, and less convenient, than the current bus service which seldom carries more than 100 pax per hour. How on earth is a priority?
 
CapitalSeven said:
They aren't going to cut Riverside South but build the airport. The airport plan is an awkward vanity project that (as I read somewhere) OC Transpo expects to have about 10% as many riders as Riverside eventually will. It will be no faster, and less convenient, than the current bus service which seldom carries more than 100 pax per hour. How on earth is a priority?
Click to expand...
It was requested by the airport authority (even if it meant needing a transfer). It's being funded entirely by higher levels of government, so the City wasn't about to try to stop it.
 
lrt's friend said:
Cutting the Riverside South extension means we should cancel Trillium Line Phase 2 entirely.
Click to expand...

I'd like to know the insanity behind this logic. Since when does cutting an extension mean that investment on the rest of the corridor is not justified?
 
CapitalSeven said:
They aren't going to cut Riverside South but build the airport. The airport plan is an awkward vanity project that (as I read somewhere) OC Transpo expects to have about 10% as many riders as Riverside eventually will. It will be no faster, and less convenient, than the current bus service which seldom carries more than 100 pax per hour. How on earth is a priority?
Click to expand...

The airport is being built as a strategic priority to connect it to the rapid transit network. It won't ever have the same ridership as an entire suburb. And it's moronic to expect that. What needs to be figured out is if the airport needs a spur of the LRT or whether a people mover that connects to the Trillium Line would be cheaper and more effective. Would be great to see analysis on that.
 
gweed123 said:
I wouldn't say it's toast, I would just say that the City needs to find a way to remove $1B worth of projects from the scope. I would start with the extensions to areas that voted PC in the last election. That would mean the extension to Ottawa South, Moodie (stop at Bayshore), and the Baseline BRT would be scrapped. Elections have consequences (and I say this as a former resident of Ottawa West-Nepean).
Click to expand...

I like your thinking. But a few points here.....

The point of the Moodie extension was to help the feds, with the thousands of public servants and military personnel who now have to commute to the Carling campus. Whether explict or not, the fed contribution is sort of linked to making it easier for the largest rejigging of public servants in Ottawa in decades. They aren't going to take kindly to targeting a direct priority for the federal government. And all over literally one stop that has actual operational benefits for OC Transpo.

Politically, Confederation West does go through and services liberal ridings too. It's not entirely about benefiting conservative leaning suburbs. The Riverside South extension on the other hand.....

You also really aren't going to save a billion bucks by cutting Moodie and Riverside South. There's only one way to cut a billion. And that's to make cuts in Orleans. If the city wants to play the political game, Riverside South is a nice addition. Heck, if Watson was smart, he could use this opportunity as a shakedown to get a fully funded twin tracked and electrified Trillium.
 
kEiThZ said:
The airport is being built as a strategic priority to connect it to the rapid transit network. It won't ever have the same ridership as an entire suburb. And it's moronic to expect that. What needs to be figured out is if the airport needs a spur of the LRT or whether a people mover that connects to the Trillium Line would be cheaper and more effective. Would be great to see analysis on that.
Click to expand...
The airport spur is already going to be barebones as a single track line with one passing loop and will reuse the existing LINTs. I don't think there'd be much of an advantage to using a people mover system once you consider the costs and complications of maintaining a 4th type of rail vehicle in the city and the other complications a people mover line would have with any potential plans to interline the spur into the mainline in the future. The airport spur is going to cost ~$155 million and just looking briefly at the kinds of cost associated with APM's it doesn't really look like there's much to be saved on those $155 million.
 
Agreed on a peoplemover not making much sense given whats available. I'll go a step farther though, and suggest that given the transfer involved the Airport spur should, perhaps, be the first thing deferred if savings are needed. Route 97 to Hurdman is arguably a better service so long as capacity isn't an issue, especially if aggressive steps are taken to ensure it doesn't get tied up in traffic south of the transitway proper. I do want to see the airport branch, but given what sections of the transitway survive I really do question is being a particularly high priority when the reality is that Trillium south is likely to be a downgraded experience for airport passengers on opening day. If we MUST start cutting bits, deferring the airport until another round of Trillium upgrades can get through service to the airport seems the least painful option; doubly so if we get Airport Parkway buslanes in the meantime.
 
kEiThZ said:
I like your thinking. But a few points here.....

The point of the Moodie extension was to help the feds, with the thousands of public servants and military personnel who now have to commute to the Carling campus. Whether explict or not, the fed contribution is sort of linked to making it easier for the largest rejigging of public servants in Ottawa in decades. They aren't going to take kindly to targeting a direct priority for the federal government. And all over literally one stop that has actual operational benefits for OC Transpo.

Politically, Confederation West does go through and services liberal ridings too. It's not entirely about benefiting conservative leaning suburbs. The Riverside South extension on the other hand.....

You also really aren't going to save a billion bucks by cutting Moodie and Riverside South. There's only one way to cut a billion. And that's to make cuts in Orleans. If the city wants to play the political game, Riverside South is a nice addition. Heck, if Watson was smart, he could use this opportunity as a shakedown to get a fully funded twin tracked and electrified Trillium.
Click to expand...

Yes there would certainly need to be some math done on how to achieve a $1 billion savings. And your point regarding the Moodie extension is well taken.
 
kEiThZ said:
The Riverside South extension is low ridership and single track. It can be self-funded later as long as the right-of-way is reserved. What's needed on Trillium is capacity boosting on the existing corridor and enabling some connection to the airport. So if more cuts are needed after cutting Orleans, everything beyond the airport should be on the chopping block.

That said, the western and southern extensions heavily favour PC voting areas. I really can't see the PC caucus agreeing to cut those so easily. They'll be more willing to toss Orleans under the bus.
Click to expand...
Assuming cuts do happen and Riverside South gets axed, some money for the Trillium Line extension could be shifted around and go towards fixing the signalling issues on the existing line that were created in the last upgrade. They could spend that money to finally bring the frequency on the line down to 8 minutes which would provide the capacity boost required... at least to last until a more transit-friendly government takes power again. Also Walkley and Gladstone could finally be built.
 
This is all assuming the funding gets cut entirely. Wouldn't it be more likely that Ford cuts the amount by some amount (say 25%) and claim "efficiencies" will make up the rest? We're dealing with a populist government here, not a true conservative one. Harris was obsessed with actually cutting back. Ford just wants to look good with his base, his dedication to financial belt tightening is nebulous at best
 
OCCheetos said:
Assuming cuts do happen and Riverside South gets axed, some money for the Trillium Line extension could be shifted around and go towards fixing the signalling issues on the existing line that were created in the last upgrade. They could spend that money to finally bring the frequency on the line down to 8 minutes which would provide the capacity boost required... at least to last until a more transit-friendly government takes power again. Also Walkley and Gladstone could finally be built.
Click to expand...

Exactly how does this get accomplished without full double tracking? Very little extra double tracking is taking place in Phase 2. All additional double tracking is going to be very expensive because of the need to replace bridges, build tunnels and excavate the rock cut. The flaw with any partial double tracking plan is that frequency is constrained by its weakest link, the longest stretch of single tracking.

So we take the $600M for double tracking without an extension and what does this give us? We end up substantially increasing the capacity of what still will be a student train. And we still have a traffic mess to south.
 
lrt's friend said:
Exactly how does this get accomplished without full double tracking? Very little extra double tracking is taking place in Phase 2. All additional double tracking is going to be very expensive because of the need to replace bridges, build tunnels and excavate the rock cut. The flaw with any partial double tracking plan is that frequency is constrained by its weakest link, the longest stretch of single tracking.

So we take the $600M for double tracking without an extension and what does this give us? We end up substantially increasing the capacity of what still will be a student train. And we still have a traffic mess to south.
Click to expand...
Extend the existing passing tracks slightly and fix the issues with the signalling system. Grade separating Ellwood helps too. IIRC there's huge delays in the signalling system updating which slows trains down a lot. Longer passing tracks will also allow for running meets. Brookfield can be extended on both ends without significant corridor work and Gladstone was purposely cut short for some reason. The former Gladstone siding stretched from where Bayview is all the way past the 417 while the current one barely covers half that distance.

They weren't that far off with the last upgrade, and obviously it came up short but that also means that there isn't that much more work that would need to be done to bring it down to the desired frequencies.

Assuming the developments at Gladstone take shape and the new hospital campus is built at Carling (and maybe other developments at Walkley) then the line will still become more than just a student train. Remember, this is the scenario where the city has lost all its provincial funding and had no choice but to axe the southern extension. Luckily that corridor would still be fully preserved for future use..
 
Last edited:
Well it's already looking like a hot mess.

Completion pushed back to 2025
Increase in price tag to $4.6 billion (in which the city will swallow the additional $1 billion in costs)
Trillium Line closure extended from 16 months to 27/28 22 months
SNC Lavalin
etc.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top