Chief William Commanda Bridge (Prince of Wales Bridge) | Closed for Winter

[GoTrans]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

It's not about how the train station is serviced, it's about how the train station services.

A return to downtown would be another major game-changer for Ottawa, and would support an eventual regional commuter rail project, a more modest version of what Montreal or Toronto has; perhaps along the lines of West Coast Express in Vancouver.

Ottawa's intercity rail transport future is grim as long as the train station is that abortion of a building in that crappy location.

If Ottawa is ever to have HSR, the current station is the most practical option as it will have direct access to higher level transit (LRT), access to the 417 and space to build parking garages at a lower cost than downtown. You can dream that Ottawa will be the terminus for HSR but reality is it will only ever be a way point between Toronto and Montreal. The main goal will be to save time between Toronto and Montreal which can be done more easily by having a run through station rather than a stub station. The Via station acts like a suburban station but is close to downtown by transit or taxi. The cost of tunnelling and converting Union station to a run through station would be prohibitive. I am also sure that from a security perspective the government would prefer to keep it where it is.

[J.OT13]

For those questioning the airport link, I'd like to point out that Vacnouver has a rapid transit line to their airport. Just because TO and MTL are behind, doesn't mean the rest of us should wait on them.

And the fact that Ottawa's airport-downtown distance is shorter than TO and MTL's (and the fact that we have a line by-passing it by half a kilometer) is more reason to get it built.

I would oppose any surface airport-downtown line. People coming into the city with a shit load of baggage should be able to wait on an enclosed, climate controlled platform at the MCA, jump on the train, get off at a downtown subway station and walk directly into their hotel (or through the indoor pedestrian passages (PdV, Rideau) to their hotel) without ever going outside.

I agree that the feds should not pay cabs for their employee's heading to transit friendly destinations. That is a simple way to follow through with austerity measures; here's a bus ticket, now buzz off!

[harls]

Park and Fly costs $83 a week (if you google a discount code, probably even less if you are more internet savvy than I am).

A cab from my house in Aylmer to the airport costs at least $50 one way.

I would use a rail link to the airport if it existed, and if my company didn't allow me to expense it (what company does that, though? Everything is paid for in the corporate world. Who would voluntarily go out of their way to save their company money especially if they want you to be at X place at such and such time?).

[Marcus CLS]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

For those questioning the airport link, I'd like to point out that Vacnouver has a rapid transit line to their airport. Just because TO and MTL are behind, doesn't mean the rest of us should wait on them.

And the fact that Ottawa's airport-downtown distance is shorter than TO and MTL's (and the fact that we have a line by-passing it by half a kilometer) is more reason to get it built.

I would oppose any surface airport-downtown line. People coming into the city with a shit load of baggage should be able to wait on an enclosed, climate controlled platform at the MCA, jump on the train, get off at a downtown subway station and walk directly into their hotel (or through the indoor pedestrian passages (PdV, Rideau) to their hotel) without ever going outside.

I agree that the feds should not pay cabs for their employee's heading to transit friendly destinations. That is a simple way to follow through with austerity measures; here's a bus ticket, now buzz off!

I disagree with your comment regarding the feds not covering cab fare(to the airport) Try taking the No. 97 with a load of luggage on a bus that is already packed when you have a flight to catch. On the few business trips I take I have taken a cab to the airport and used my bus pass upon return. Upon return the 97 is empty so it is easier to get on with your luggage for the final trip home and on return there is no flight to miss. So on my travel expense I save the taxpayer 1 cab fare. The departure just does not make sense. Also not every FED employee lives on the transit way. What if you live outside the greenbelt. Seriously, make them take the bus to the airport to catch a flight when you live in Stittesville? Get real. You buzz off. So does the private sector make their emplyees take the bus to catch a flight?

[Aylmer]

Though I wouldn't take a bus unless I really had to, if the O-Train went to the airport, I would take a taxi to Bayview instead of the Airport: it would probably end up being faster because of the traffic and it would certainly be cheaper than continuing to the airport.

[eternallyme]

Re: the airport and Route 97, ridership on that section (below South Keys) is pretty good, but it is much more heavily used by airport employees than travellers.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Marcus CLS

I disagree with your comment regarding the feds not covering cab fare(to the airport) Try taking the No. 97 with a load of luggage on a bus that is already packed when you have a flight to catch. On the few business trips I take I have taken a cab to the airport and used my bus pass upon return. Upon return the 97 is empty so it is easier to get on with your luggage for the final trip home and on return there is no flight to miss. So on my travel expense I save the taxpayer 1 cab fare. The departure just does not make sense. Also not every FED employee lives on the transit way. What if you live outside the greenbelt. Seriously, make them take the bus to the airport to catch a flight when you live in Stittesville? Get real. You buzz off. So does the private sector make their emplyees take the bus to catch a flight?

1) In the current setup, yes I agree it's inconvenient. But we were talking about a future hypothetical downtown-airport rail link.
2) I was talking about taxis from workplaces, not from employees homes. I agree that the latter, if required, should be taxis or parking fee reimbursement (whichever cheaper) if the employee does not live in a transit friendly location
3) I was also talking about the federal practice of using cabs to get workers to meetings within the city. The example I gave of a group of scientists from Tunney's Pasture who were given cab rides to attend a meeting at the Convention Centre downtown. That trip is laughably easy by transit.

[GoTrans]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

For those questioning the airport link, I'd like to point out that Vacnouver has a rapid transit line to their airport. Just because TO and MTL are behind, doesn't mean the rest of us should wait on them.

And the fact that Ottawa's airport-downtown distance is shorter than TO and MTL's (and the fact that we have a line by-passing it by half a kilometer) is more reason to get it built.

The other reason for going ahead with this in the near future is the unnecessary added cost in the future. When Pearson was built, there was no development between it and the railway tracks. When the UPX was built the only access was either tunnelling or building viaducts between the railway tracks and the airport at considerable expense. The distance between Dorval and YUL is even closer than In Toronto and yet no direct access exists to the railway at the airport. The same mistake should not be made in Ottawa. We should build the LRT to the airport or at a minimum reserve a right of way to the airport.

[TransitZilla]

I'm on the public consultation group for the O-Train extension study, which is also studying an airport spur.

There is a public open house coming up in mid-January, so you will be able to see that an alignment is being looked at that would bring rail right to the front door of the airport.

However in the meeting it was indicated that due to the design of Bayview station, "the ship has sailed" on extending the N/S corridor right into downtown. Anyone heading from downtown to the airport or vice-versa will need to transfer at Bayview.

[ACmodels]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

I'm on the public consultation group for the O-Train extension study, which is also studying an airport spur.

There is a public open house coming up in mid-January, so you will be able to see that an alignment is being looked at that would bring rail right to the front door of the airport.

However in the meeting it was indicated that due to the design of Bayview station, "the ship has sailed" on extending the N/S corridor right into downtown. Anyone heading from downtown to the airport or vice-versa will need to transfer at Bayview.

Hmm I was just wondering if you have a website for this? Id like to see these pictures of the alignment you have planned!

[eternallyme]

In the short to medium term, yes, a transfer at Bayview will be required.

The only corridor I can see to downtown Ottawa from the south working would be the Bank Street subway idea. But that is a long way off...

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

I'm on the public consultation group for the O-Train extension study, which is also studying an airport spur.

There is a public open house coming up in mid-January, so you will be able to see that an alignment is being looked at that would bring rail right to the front door of the airport.

However in the meeting it was indicated that due to the design of Bayview station, "the ship has sailed" on extending the N/S corridor right into downtown. Anyone heading from downtown to the airport or vice-versa will need to transfer at Bayview.

What B.S. We've been looking at the possibility for 6 years. Up until Fall 2013, the City was looking at a N/S to downtown line (along with the extension to Baseline, but no other rapid transit). This should have been in the RFP; make sure that the direct N/S to downtown option stays open at Bayview. Plus, construction hasn't even started yet. A quick re-design to allow this shouldn't be all that hard.

It's classic City of Ottawa. Quit before you even trying. Might as well drop the airport spur study.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

In the short to medium term, yes, a transfer at Bayview will be required.

The only corridor I can see to downtown Ottawa from the south working would be the Bank Street subway idea. But that is a long way off...

I'm a huge advocate of the Bank Street subway. Bu that idea, along with the idea of the loop through Hull, will never happen.

[lrt's friend]

Yes, one of Jim Watson's little gifts to the city when he eliminated the downtown connection for the North-South line (with really no public consultation) and now it is officially permanent. This really eliminates the need for an airport connection. I know many here our advocates of transfers, but people who are not familiar with city and carrying a couple of pieces of luggage are not going to want to transfer to reach downtown. That should eliminate the majority of the tourist and business users so why waste our money on it? I'd rather invest in the missing link, the Baseline Transitway.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

I'm on the public consultation group for the O-Train extension study, which is also studying an airport spur.

There is a public open house coming up in mid-January, so you will be able to see that an alignment is being looked at that would bring rail right to the front door of the airport.

However in the meeting it was indicated that due to the design of Bayview station, "the ship has sailed" on extending the N/S corridor right into downtown. Anyone heading from downtown to the airport or vice-versa will need to transfer at Bayview.

I think maybe I will attend this meeting and express my displeasure about this. I know it will be pointless but somebody needs to feel a little uncomfortable about making Bayview the permanent terminus. Not a lot of forethought went into this decision other than to make some short-term savings.

[silvergate]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Yes, one of Jim Watson's little gifts to the city when he eliminated the downtown connection for the North-South line (with really no public consultation) and now it is officially permanent. This really eliminates the need for an airport connection. I know many here our advocates of transfers, but people who are not familiar with city and carrying a couple of pieces of luggage are not going to want to transfer to reach downtown. That should eliminate the majority of the tourist and business users so why waste our money on it? I'd rather invest in the missing link, the Baseline Transitway.

I know a connection to the airport is important but I agree with you on investing on Baseline at this point. While we have the chance we might as well connect the whole city, since take it or leave it Ottawa includes the suburbs. Baseline would be a great test-case for BRT, extending from Hazeldean in Stittsville all the way to the South-East transitway and then up to Hurdman. The largest amount of vehicular traffic should be taken down first.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by silvergate

I know a connection to the airport is important but I agree with you on investing on Baseline at this point. While we have the chance we might as well connect the whole city, since take it or leave it Ottawa includes the suburbs. Baseline would be a great test-case for BRT, extending from Hazeldean in Stittsville all the way to the South-East transitway and then up to Hurdman. The largest amount of vehicular traffic should be taken down first.

Connecting the whole city also means connecting the residential inner city, most of which, outside Sandy Hill and a few condo clusters, will never have non-bus transit this century.

Rail transit plans are reserved for the suburbs. Urban peasants, enjoy your buses.

[silvergate]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Connecting the whole city also means connecting the residential inner city, most of which, outside Sandy Hill and a few condo clusters, will never have non-bus transit this century.

Rail transit plans are reserved for the suburbs. Urban peasants, enjoy your buses.

Well getting suburban cars out of the urban core would open up a lot of space for better bike lanes, bus routes, and pedestrian friendly streets. It's an unfortunate fact of life that subways are 1) prohibitively expensive and 2) Ottawa has little to no real options for raising revenues to build them anyways. The best way I can think of to promote better mobility in the core is tolls for entering designated areas, which many people on here doubt would work.
Perhaps the City should try and break the stigma on busses, to drive up ridership numbers, and beyond that building a solid movement for better transit in the core.

[J.OT13]

I estimate that a subway from Billings Bridge to Blair station via Bank-Rideau-Montreal would be somewhere around 4.5 billion. This is using the concept of surface when possible (but 100% grade separated), underground/elevated where necessary. Add an airport connection via the S/E Transitway and a spur to CFB Rockliff, and your looking at maybe 6 billion.

That sounds like a huge number, but we can phase it out. Start with Billings to Rideau Centre. 2 Billion maybe. That's not too bad. If we take the Liberals transit promise for cash, 15 billion for the whole of Ontario outside the GTA, Ottawa's share would be 2 billion. 1 billion for Stage II of the overbuilt commuter rail and 1 billion for Phase I of the Bank Street subway.

[Catenary]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

What B.S. We've been looking at the possibility for 6 years. Up until Fall 2013, the City was looking at a N/S to downtown line (along with the extension to Baseline, but no other rapid transit). This should have been in the RFP; make sure that the direct N/S to downtown option stays open at Bayview. Plus, construction hasn't even started yet. A quick re-design to allow this shouldn't be all that hard.

It's classic City of Ottawa. Quit before you even trying. Might as well drop the airport spur study.

I don't know why it would be impossible to connect the tracks at some point in the future, but switching from a line-line connection to a split line design will always involve either removing or rebuilding the station in a different place, or having a sub-par station design, with one destination having two separate platforms. In the TMP, the O-Train goes across the PoW bridge, which the station is designed for. By the time we get around to contemplating running the Trillium line through downtown, Bayview station would have major components nearing end of life and we would be deciding what to do with it.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Yes, one of Jim Watson's little gifts to the city when he eliminated the downtown connection for the North-South line (with really no public consultation) and now it is officially permanent. This really eliminates the need for an airport connection. I know many here our advocates of transfers, but people who are not familiar with city and carrying a couple of pieces of luggage are not going to want to transfer to reach downtown. That should eliminate the majority of the tourist and business users so why waste our money on it? I'd rather invest in the missing link, the Baseline Transitway.

Ignoring the fact that nothing is permanent, I do not feel that having a transfer devalues an airport connection in the slightest. I have traveled to a number of places that have required multiple connections to their airports with a family of 5 people and it's never been a reason not to take transit. BWI, London, and Paris all come to mind. If we don't invest in an airport link when we have the chance now, when another opportunity opens up in the future (extending the line to downtown or Quebec, or converting the South-east Transitway to rail) we will regret it, all in the name of the fractional percentage of users who won't use it now.