News   Apr 18, 2024
Long Term Care Facility to be Built at Hennick Bridgepoint Hospital
 436     0 
News   Apr 18, 2024
Canada's Tallest Tower to be Taller, Again
 3.2K     1 
News   Apr 18, 2024
Originate Developments Achieves Zoning Approval for Two Ambitious Residential Projects
 2.1K     4 

Ottawa Transit Developments

kEiThZ said:
The only thing "light" about the Confederation Line is the rolling stock. I wonder if people who call it Light Rail have actually ridden the thing.
Click to expand...
Low floor vehicles were a mistake for Ottawa, based a pseudo comparative that Iris would be at grade and garages would need to be upgraded for a low-floor vehicle for the Carling LRT. Both of which didn't happen.
 
kEiThZ said:
Run trains at 2 min headways and you only need 667 riders in each train to meet 20k per hour. That is easily achieved with 120m trains. Should be noted that they built all the stations with 120m platforms or simple knockout walls to enable the capacity.




30 years is just fine. Especially if the alternative was no rail transit at all. People forget that there was a ton of skepticism in Ottawa about rail transit because they practically pioneered high capacity and frequency BRT.

I wouldn't be all that worried about them maxing out either. Ottawa's population and ridership would have to grow spectacularly while commute patterns stay the same for that to happen. And all of that seems a stretch. The largest employer in town, for example, is encouraging more telecommuting and moving offices out of the core. Trends that work very much against the Confederation Line maxing out.

And if they do see that growth? They can start planning and talking to upper level governments about funding a parallel line through the core.
Click to expand...

Given that Vancouver, with double the population of Ottawa hasn't hit 18K with the Expo line (though it's approaching it) I don't see us hitting even that in the near future. Ottawa isn't Toronto, it's growing but not at that kind of pace. We definitely aren't going to be maxed out by 2030.

But of course I could be wrong.... Looks like the Canada Line might be maxed out already

dailyhive.com

Canada Line nearing maximum ability to add more trains for higher frequencies | Urbanized

With 12 additional trains, SkyTrain's Canada Line will begin to approach the limit of its maximum feasible operating frequency.
dailyhive.com dailyhive.com
 
Last edited:
So on a topic other than capacity, I'm trying to understand how a group that promised experience for maintenance has made so many obvious mistakes. The shutdown on New Year's eve due to dirt buildup on the pantographs and then this shortage due to wheel flats are well known and understood winter maintenance items. Unlike earlier glitches due to doors and computers this was entirely avoidable. OC Transpo of course is inexperienced in running this kind of system, but that's what RTM is for.
 
The likelihood of reaching capacity on the Confederation Line depends on build out at Bayview and Lebreton Flats and whether the condo boom downtown continues. It is true that the federal government has been diversifying its locations in Ottawa, but this creates other transit problems that have been buried because of the cost of the C-Line.
 
kEiThZ said:
This would never happen. There's no way all the folks north of Carleton who have existing rail service would tolerate losing it. And there's a lot of development going in now that will count on that transit being there. Even more opposition.

There's also the cost and time issue. It would cost maybe a billion to electrify and twin the entire Trillium corridor. It's a project that would take maybe 2 years. Would be minimally disruptive if Stage 3 to Barrhaven was already in place. A Bank St. Subway would be massively disruptive and would cost well over a billion just to get from Parliament Station to Carleton. When the Trillium Line is 1-2 km away from Bank for a lot of its length, I have my doubts that this kind of multi-billion dollar rail tunnel will be defensible.
Click to expand...

What I actually had in mind was to keep that corridor from Carleton north to Bayview, and to upgrade the Southeast Transitway from Heron to Hurdman to LRT as well. The result would be a V-shape line that would run from Bayview to Hurdman via Carleton and Billings Bridge, in effect forming a bypass route of downtown. The Trillium Line would use the current alignment to Carleton and then veer over to Bank to head into downtown that way.
 
gweed123 said:
What I actually had in mind was to keep that corridor from Carleton north to Bayview, and to upgrade the Southeast Transitway from Heron to Hurdman to LRT as well. The result would be a V-shape line that would run from Bayview to Hurdman via Carleton and Billings Bridge, in effect forming a bypass route of downtown. The Trillium Line would use the current alignment to Carleton and then veer over to Bank to head into downtown that way.
Click to expand...

The flaw that I see with this plan is that airport service never gets interlined. And you end up with no actual service on Bank south of the 417. But I guess it does work to relieve Bayview.
 
kEiThZ said:
The flaw that I see with this plan is that airport service never gets interlined. And you end up with no actual service on Bank south of the 417. But I guess it does work to relieve Bayview.
Click to expand...

With a completely double-tracked and electric Trillium Line corridor the Airport Spur wouldn't need to be a spur. It could be operated like the Canada Line in Vancouver (minus the capacity issues and extra fare to get to the airport). That would also mean a direct connection between downtown and the airport.

And it would be no direct service on Bank south of Lansdowne, as that's where the line would veer west under the Canal (or under the parkways on either side, as they both have generous ROWs) in order to reach Carleton.
 
A Bank Street subway could be extended along the south east Transitway from Billings Bridge to South Keys and then extended to the airport along the currently under construction airport spur. This would provide one seat ride from the airport to downtown. This would also allow us to avoid the need for double tracking the Trillium Line at any point in the future. The Trillium Line would remain as is, providing service through Carleton University and as a downtown by-pass. Diverting part of the Trillium Line would leave the remainder next to useless.
 
Kyle Campbell said:
Given that Vancouver, with double the population of Ottawa hasn't hit 18K with the Expo line (though it's approaching it) I don't see us hitting even that in the near future. Ottawa isn't Toronto, it's growing but not at that kind of pace. We definitely aren't going to be maxed out by 2030.

But of course I could be wrong.... Looks like the Canada Line might be maxed out already

dailyhive.com

Canada Line nearing maximum ability to add more trains for higher frequencies | Urbanized

With 12 additional trains, SkyTrain's Canada Line will begin to approach the limit of its maximum feasible operating frequency.
dailyhive.com dailyhive.com
Click to expand...

Not maxed out. There are provisions in place to extend the above ground stations by 10m and the underground stations already are 50m long, enough for a 3rd car on each train. Adding 33% service increase.

This isn't considered warranted for another decade at the minimum. Then once that 3rd train is added, will last another decade.

By that time the LRT in the Arbutus corridor will take some demand off the Canada Line.

dailyhive.com

Light rail transit is coming to Vancouver's Arbutus Corridor | Venture

The City of Vancouver says it has a contractual obligation for light rail on the Arbutus Corridor.
dailyhive.com dailyhive.com
 
lrt's friend said:
A Bank Street subway could be extended along the south east Transitway from Billings Bridge to South Keys and then extended to the airport along the currently under construction airport spur. This would provide one seat ride from the airport to downtown. This would also allow us to avoid the need for double tracking the Trillium Line at any point in the future. The Trillium Line would remain as is, providing service through Carleton University and as a downtown by-pass. Diverting part of the Trillium Line would leave the remainder next to useless.
Click to expand...
I refer you back to my post the other day here. Not only is the massive grade change between a tunnel under Billings to above grade at Heron a huge technical challenge, but the transit benefits of building a line on top of the existing transitway are not nearly as great as just building it straight down the Bank Street corridor.
 
OCCheetos said:
I refer you back to my post the other day here. Not only is the massive grade change between a tunnel under Billings to above grade at Heron a huge technical challenge, but the transit benefits of building a line on top of the existing transitway are not nearly as great as just building it straight down the Bank Street corridor.
Click to expand...
LRT cannot handle grades? How did streetcars run up Nanny Goat hill on Somerset Street for 60 years? Doesn't Bank Street also face the same grade change?. In fact, Bank Street continues to go uphill until near Walkley Road (this is why this area was once known as Ridgemont), and much of this is bypassed by the south-east Transitway that runs around that hill in the Sawmill Creek valley. Yes, there are opportunities along Bank Street that don't exist along the Transitway, but those opportunities are fairly limited, mostly between Billings Bridge and Heron Road. By the time we reach Alta Vista, we are within walking distance of the Transitway. I am not sure how a subway can be justified south of Billings Bridge with single family homes universally existing behind the commercial strip. The purpose of rail south of Billings Bridge is to serve feeder buses from the many surrounding subdivisions.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top