Future Transit System Ideas - Ottawa/Gatineau | Fantasy

[McC]

Lincoln Fields to Baseline?

[MoreTrains]

Originally Posted by McC

Lincoln Fields to Baseline?

Part of the bus network. I dont like spurs or interlining so I didnt put any in. Suppose I could have run the Base-Line to Bayshore up Richmond so that its western tail was as connected as the eastern tail is...

[Hybrid247]

I just wrote my term paper on the lack of interprovincial transportation infrastructure between Ottawa and Gatineau and figured I'd share my proposal with you guys. I proposed an extension of the Trillium line that would form a makeshift downtown circulator system to better connect the downtown cores. I also took into account the future possibility of converting the Rapibus corridor to LRT and proposed the interlining of the line with the Trillium line extension.




This is the rapid transit network I'd like to see in 2031

[Aylmer]

I've always thought that extending the (eventually electrified and low-floor) Trillium line through Hull and back across the Alexandra Bridge would be a great solution to its current lack of a meaninful terminus.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

I've always thought that extending the (eventually electrified and low-floor) Trillium line through Hull and back across the Alexandra Bridge would be a great solution to its current lack of a meaninful terminus.

In order to do this, the Trillium Line needs to be electrified first and we have to be willing to give up the Interprovincial Bridge as a general traffic bridge. We have to consider that we will have trains every 2.5 minutes in each direction to offer desirable levels of service both southward and to Gatineau. And the question remains whether the Prince of Wales Bridge could handle this many trains (a train every 5 minutes in each direction).

[Hybrid247]

Ya i probably should have mentioned that the proposal involves the double tracking and electrification of the Trillium line. Also, there would have to be an add-on to the PoW bridge to make it double-tracked as well. One of the things I like most about this idea is the fact that tourists will not only have direct access to the heart of the city from the airport, but they would also likely have great sight lines of Parliament Hill from Hull.

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

In order to do this, the Trillium Line needs to be electrified first and we have to be willing to give up the Interprovincial Bridge as a general traffic bridge. We have to consider that we will have trains every 2.5 minutes in each direction to offer desirable levels of service both southward and to Gatineau. And the question remains whether the Prince of Wales Bridge could handle this many trains (a train every 5 minutes in each direction).

Although that would be the preferred option as it would certainly make the project more affordable, I can't see it happening. There would be too much opposition. Unfortunately I think an LRT-exclusive bridge would have to be built directly adjacent to the Alexandra Bridge.

[Aylmer]

I actually think that a car-free Alexandra Bridge could be sold if you argue that removing a lane per direction on the Alexandra for transit will free a lane per direction on Portage and fewer (no?) buses on Wellington, plus a huge increase in the overall capacity of interprovincial transportation.

I'd even argue that it would improve traffic: the Braess Paradox is a real-world phenomenon by which the strategic removal of certain problematic road links can actually improve traffic flow and capacity and, conversely, how poorly-placed links can make it worse. In the case of the Alexandra Bridge, the turns to get on/off the bridge on the Ottawa side backs up traffic and causes delays getting to the underutilised Macdonald-Cartier Bridge (which is a rather small detour by car and is better suited to handle traffic). By removing the left turns off of Sussex and relieving Mackenzie, you could not only improve northbound traffic, you could probably unclog the Rideau/Sussex/Wellington/Elgin clusterfuck. It wouldn't just be better for transit, it would probably also be faster for drivers.

And that's even before you consider the potential modal shift away from the car. Or the non-traffic related improvements such as how we could finally un-isolate Nepean Point by joining it with Majors Hill Park or how Murray and St.Patrick could be de-highway-ized.

[Hybrid247]

I absolutely agree with you. I would also add that, in theory, implementing this plan and using the Alexandra Bridge also has the potential to greatly reduce interprovincial car traffic. As a large portion of interprovincial commuters are Gatineau residents working in Ottawa, and 75% of them commute by car, perhaps providing direct, efficient, and fast transit to central Ottawa will incentivize many of them to leave their car at home and take transit to work. Not to mention that rush hour traffic on the bridges is terrible, and a faster alternative might just get them to switch transportation modes.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

I looked at using QCH as the terminus, but it would require the line to double back, as Bayshore is further west than QCH, meaning that in a long-term scenario where the Confederation Line does go to Kanata Centre (which I don't think will be necessary in the foreseeable future as BRT can do that well enough, but I still want to protect for as an ultimate goal), the line would be awkwardly circuitous. It would also requiring tunnelling or elevation to get across the highway. I figured to save money Corkstown would be preferred. But QCH is definitely a better choice in the infinite-fiscal-resources scenario and assuming that there's no plan to build Confederation Line to Kanata Centre at any point in the near future / a little bit of circuitous routing is thought to be no big deal.

IMHO, Bells Corners would be an even better terminus. While the QCH is a good destination, it isn't that great a starting point for commuters. Bells Corners would also be a better location should the decision ever be made to re-lay the tracks along the TCT through Bridalwood to Stittsville.

If you look at this satellite image on Google Maps, you can see a row of trees where the old CPR line ran that would nicely connect from Bayshore to near the corner of Moodie and Timm Dr. You can even see where they backfilled the underpass under the CN line. The LRT platform could be north of the CN Line, and a pedestrian underpass could be dug to connect to a bus interchange/park and ride on the south side. You would still need to dig under the 416/417 interchange, but it would be much easier than trying to circle back to the QCH.

Regarding your proposed Baseline extension, I would merge your Meadowlands and Knoxdale stations. They just seem too close together. The merged station could be north of the CN tracks and recreational paths could link both roads to the station. The bus exchange could be south of the tracks and a park and ride could possibly be put on the north side.

I don't think it would be feasible to have the Barhaven trains run down the Trillium lines until an investment is made to double track the entire line (including the bridge over the Rideau River and the tunnel under the Rideau Canal). Even then, I am not convinced it is a good idea.

At the other end of the line, I would save the money and just use the VIA Rail station instead of creating a new station at Hurdman. VIA Rail doesn't use all of the platforms, so it shouldn't be a problem. In the long run, I would like to see it re-routed to the old the old Union station downtown, but we would need the Department of Public Works to agree to give it up.

The resistance to this proposal will be the argument that Ottawa isn't large enough for "Commuter Rail." I agree that Ottawa is too small for large commuter trains (like GO Trains) but we lean more towards "Heavy Rail" and use DMUs. I would design the platforms to handle (or be easily expanded to handle) 4 car trains, but initially we would likely only see 1 or 2 car trains (depending on the time of day).

The other big issue is double tracking. At a minimum we would need to see double tracks from the VIA Rail station to where the tracks split near Colonnade. The expensive part for this would be the Canadian Northern Ontario Railway Bridge.

Since I am replying to an older post, here is the map that I am referring to:

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

[Richard Eade]

So if the City saw fit to run a DMU service along the (mostly) existing rail RoW between Kanata North and Greenboro, it might look something like this:



Note that I have chosen to extend the line into the airport. This provides a direct link between the airport and the high-tech sector. Travelers from the airport to downtown would either take the # 97 bus or transfer twice between trains. It would also be possible for the Trillium Line to go to the airport and the Riverside South people to be connected directly to Kanata North. That way, everyone coming from the airport will need to change trains to get anywhere.

The biggest issue I see is the conflict with VIA across the Rideau River. VIA says that their single track is already causing them scheduling problems. However, the problem is that their single track extends for a long way; meaning that a train between the Fallowfield and Ottawa stations blocks any train from entering from the other direction along that entire length. That might not be the case for a DMU slipping in to use the short length of the bridge. I hesitate a bit to suggest that idea since it would mean reconfiguring the signals along both sets of tracks – and we know how competent the City is with changing rail signals.

Remember, too, that just because there might be a rail RoW that might be available, starting up a DMU service would not be free. First of all, the tracks would need to be replaced with continuously welded rail on a reconditioned bed, including proper passing sidings. And, then there is the design of a new signaling system for the line; so it might never actually work right.

[rocketphish]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

So if the City saw fit to run a DMU service along the (mostly) existing rail RoW between Kanata North and Greenboro, it might look something like this:

Unfortunately, only you can see that image. Perhaps it needs to be made public?

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

First of all, the tracks would need to be replaced with continuously welded rail on a reconditioned bed, including proper passing sidings. And, then there is the design of a new signaling system for the line; so it might never actually work right.

Is continuously welded rail an actual requirement?

[Kitchissippi]

You could build a bit of track along the the hydro corridor through the Colonnade loop and a new bridge across the Rideau to address the VIA conflict

A long time ago before Hunt Club was widened and extended west, there was actually a plan to build a highway north of Colonnade (referred to as the Inner Provincial By-Pass) to a new bridge and continue east north of Johnston towards the 417 . Bits of that ROW are now built on (like CitiPlace), after it was decided that Hunt Club would function as the east-west arterial.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

You could build a bit of track along the the hydro corridor through the Colonnade loop and a new bridge across the Rideau to address the VIA conflict

A long time ago before Hunt Club was widened and extended west, there was actually a plan to build a highway north of Colonnade (referred to as the Inner Provincial By-Pass) to a new bridge and continue east north of Johnston towards the 417 . Bits of that ROW are now built on (like CitiPlace), after it was decided that Hunt Club would function as the east-west arterial.

This was actually planned as a federal parkway creating a semi-circular route from Lincoln Fields to the Aviation Parkway across the south part of the city. My family's homestead was expropriated for it near Greenboro Station. It is now a park. This was part of the Greber Plan and only the Aviation Parkway portion was ever built.

[SF Thomas]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

You could build a bit of track along the the hydro corridor through the Colonnade loop and a new bridge across the Rideau to address the VIA conflict

Being a bit optimistic using the hydro corridor to run a rail line could be a good thing for ridership and potentially spur a bit of transit friendly development in the area.

If you added a station on the east end of the Colonnade loop before Prince of Wales it would provide a station near the CitiPlace developments. The only transit connection is the 86 which is fairly infrequent and doesn't provide good connections to other bus routes. A rail line in that area would provide more direct service to shopping or transit connections like South Keys or Baseline/Algonquin station.

It would be convenient to have transit stations at both ends of the business park and would give people a real option to use transit over a car to get to work.

Most of the residential development at CitiPlace is a mix of condos and row homes, so it is reasonably dense for a suburban style development and there is some room to expand a bit south of the hydro corridor or potentially re-appropriate and redesign a bit of the business park (change a few buildings close to the station to apartments and/or gradually add a few levels to some of the business park buildings for more office/business space if there is demand).

There is also a recreational path that connects to Coolsprings Cresent (near Viewmount Dr), which would place rapid transit within somewhat reasonable walking/biking distance for people living there (about 10 to 15 minutes). There are a couple of apartments and row homes in the area as well.

[Buggys]

"straddling buses" -- like streetcars that roll above cars: http://m.huffpost.com/ca/entry/10121112

[MoreTrains]

Originally Posted by Buggys

"straddling buses" -- like streetcars that roll above cars: http://m.huffpost.com/ca/entry/10121112

Yeah, works well until you have vehicles over 2 metres. Like semis, cube vans, pick up trucks. I don't forsee a future in Canada for these without some major redesign.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by MoreTrains

Yeah, works well until you have vehicles over 2 metres. Like semis, cube vans, pick up trucks. I don't forsee a future in Canada for these without some major redesign.

Or even cars with bicycles on the roof. It might work in China (where they are trialing it) or Europe where most vehicles are small (even the trucks).

Then there is also the issue of a driver panicking because a bus is driving over top, and loosing control and plowing into one of the side supports of the bus, causing it to derail.

Looks to me like a solution looking for a problem to me.

[Arcologist]

Phase 3 of the LRT should be the Rideau Line.

It would begin at the Rideau Centre with a connection to the Confederation Line, then run beneath Rideau Street all the way to the new Rockcliffe Airport redevelopment lands (which would in turn see greater densification.)