Confederation Line (Stage 1) | In Service 1.0

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by hwy418

No, the stations were dirty and look unmaintained. Some things falling apart - not what a 4-year-old system should look like. God help us if this is as good as it gets! Unacceptable.

Yeah, there's a lot of rust-out and grime accumulation.

[DarthVader_1961]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Yeah, there's a lot of rust-out and grime accumulation.

I’ve been on subways in Shanghai that where better maintained than Ottawa

[Fading Isle]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Yeah, there's a lot of rust-out and grime accumulation.

And all of the painted concrete walls in tunnel stations are filthy looking with clear signs of water damage. Special mention also goes to the stairway entrance to Blair Station, where the original transitway station has been bolted to the new LRT station. Absolutely disgusting.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by hwy418

No, the stations were dirty and look unmaintained. Some things falling apart - not what a 4-year-old system should look like. God help us if this is as good as it gets! Unacceptable.

Imagine what the system will look like when they dump it on the City after the 30 year contract is done. The whole thing will be held together with duct tape. "Hold on, just a couple more years, couple more years!"

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

mixing single and double trains is inevitably going to create problems when passenger levels reach a certain level. This is obvious.

What is going to happen when Line 2 opens? `Those coming from the south face the biggest problems, where the trains will be the most crowded at Bayview and Hurdman.

We have enough vehicles. Are enough functional? But there is no excuse to have crowding problems if we have additional trains that can be deployed.

This just poisons customer views of the system, a situation that has existed since 2019 when they couldn't deploy the planned number of trains, which led to crowding issues that became acute when trains failed.

Stage 2 will have a similar problem with the four doors Lints vs. the eight door Flirts. Eight doors is a big improvement, aisles are wider, but I can still envision some crowd control issues. And then, well yeah, the Lints...

Would be nice if they could announce over the speakers and on the board what if the next train is a double or single so riders can adapt before the train arrives.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Imagine what the system will look like when they dump it on the City after the 30 year contract is done. The whole thing will be held together with duct tape. "Hold on, just a couple more years, couple more years!"



Stage 2 will have a similar problem with the four doors Lints vs. the eight door Flirts. Eight doors is a big improvement, aisles are wider, but I can still envision some crowd control issues. And then, well yeah, the Lints...

Would be nice if they could announce over the speakers and on the board what if the next train is a double or single so riders can adapt before the train arrives.

How many single and double trains are in use at peak periods at the present time? If the next 2 trains are singles, it could be quite a wait before you can board.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

How many single and double trains are in use at peak periods at the present time? If the next 2 trains are singles, it could be quite a wait before you can board.

I believe it's one for one right now. So every second train is a double.

[OTSkyline]

Is there any reason why? It seems like volume of passengers has picked up quite a bit since the start of September and back-to-school.

I would think that all trains have been inspected and/or fixed by now for the issues that were uncovered this summer.

Why not go back to double trains? Again a cost cutting measure?

[DogsWithJobs]

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

Is there any reason why? It seems like volume of passengers has picked up quite a bit since the start of September and back-to-school.

I would think that all trains have been inspected and/or fixed by now for the issues that were uncovered this summer.

Why not go back to double trains? Again a cost cutting measure?

My understanding is that it is just to avoid wearing out 2 trains if they can get away with 1. But if the city doesn't need to cover the cost of the extra maintenance their focus should be on providing the service, not reducing wear and tear. Let RTG worry about repairing 2 trains instead of 1 and let the city focus on meeting service levels.

I used the train yesterday and got a double, so I actually had thought they were back to full service. I noticed that the train went very slowly on the turn between uottawa and Rideau, whereas I only noticed it previously in the turns around hurdman. I've now found myself waiting to tap into the station so not to lose some of the transfer window on my initial wait on the platform. It would be nice if the transfer window was extended given all the slowdowns and cancelled connections right now.

[Andrew_G]

Why is there still a speed restriction eastbound out of Rideau Station? Last I recall they were to install the restraining rail there within a week or so of opening service, and yet here we are many weeks later and the job has not been done. It is frankly embarrassing that they continue to allow service to run in such a degraded state for extended periods.

I'm also sick of this alternating single and double car arrangement, it's just silly at this point. I fail to understand why the city is so obsessed and desperate to run service at the bare minimum that they can get away with - especially when you consider that the provided reason is just about making RTGs life easier.

[SidetrackedSue]

Originally Posted by DogsWithJobs

But if the city doesn't need to cover the cost of the extra maintenance their focus should be on providing the service, not reducing wear and tear. Let RTG worry about repairing 2 trains instead of 1 and let the city focus on meeting service levels.

It is really important that the city focus on improving service levels because that will maintain, and possibly but not likely, ridership levels and stop the death spiral the whole system is in.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by SidetrackedSue

It is really important that the city focus on improving service levels because that will maintain, and possibly but not likely, ridership levels and stop the death spiral the whole system is in.

We don't have the funds for it. Barring a miracle from another level of government which looks increasingly unlikely we are in deep trouble. We need to bite the bullet and increase transit taxes in a big way and show tangible results. We will have to increase them just to keep a barebones system in 5 years when phase 2 comes online and we start servicing that debt. We need to join the Toronto discussion as we are just as broke. A city land transfer tax for transit or something might be another option.

Other choice is some massive cost cutting exercise. There might be a way to do this without destroying ridership but I don't see it. I guess outside rush hour reducing bus to a dependable hourly service on most routes. Maybe eliminate a lot of the curly Q routes as well as evening service on many routes and set a goal of putting a bus within an $8 Uber right or something instead of service to where everyone is.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

We don't have the funds for it. Barring a miracle from another level of government which looks increasingly unlikely we are in deep trouble. We need to bite the bullet and increase transit taxes in a big way and show tangible results.

This is a subset of: city governments need to stop being cheapskates and cowards. It's not just Ottawa or Ontario, it's across the country and probably the entire federal anglosphere (possibly the unitary anglosphere, too.)

If cities want more money, your own-source revenue tools are right there. Use them.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Other choice is some massive cost cutting exercise. There might be a way to do this without destroying ridership but I don't see it. I guess outside rush hour reducing bus to a dependable hourly service on most routes. Maybe eliminate a lot of the curly Q routes as well as evening service on many routes and set a goal of putting a bus within an $8 Uber right or something instead of service to where everyone is.

Since they have already destroyed ridership, I guess the good news is that it doesn't have that far to fall.

The only way to build ridership in a serious, sustainable way is to abandon the coverage goal and focus on creating a frequent, reliable grid on major streets with an emphasis on the denser, central parts of town. Any other plan is doomed to fail from a ridership perspective.

[Takingoff]

Originally Posted by phil235

The only way to build ridership in a serious, sustainable way is to abandon the coverage goal and focus on creating a frequent, reliable grid on major streets with an emphasis on the denser, central parts of town. Any other plan is doomed to fail from a ridership perspective.

This is political suicide for the mayor and most of city council. But what is the alternative? Death by a thousand cuts? Fix the basic backbone (timeliness and consistency and frequency), support options for the last mile (e.g. secure bike storage, bixi type) and provide crappy feeder service until ridership starts to improve.

There is low hanging fruit - make it walkable in all seasons to get to rapid transit, priority bus lanes to speed up buses (and slow cars down), more realistic schedules for drivers, fewer cross town bus milk run routes that really no longer keep to any schedule, new frequent connector buses linking suburbs (e.g. express linking Barrhaven, Riverside South, Kanata). It's a start, but we just can't keep doing what we're doing.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Takingoff

This is political suicide for the mayor and most of city council. But what is the alternative? Death by a thousand cuts? Fix the basic backbone (timeliness and consistency and frequency), support options for the last mile (e.g. secure bike storage, bixi type) and provide crappy feeder service until ridership starts to improve.

There is low hanging fruit - make it walkable in all seasons to get to rapid transit, priority bus lanes to speed up buses (and slow cars down), more realistic schedules for drivers, fewer cross town bus milk run routes that really no longer keep to any schedule, new frequent connector buses linking suburbs (e.g. express linking Barrhaven, Riverside South, Kanata). It's a start, but we just can't keep doing what we're doing.

Low hanging fruit for sure makes sense. There is a politically palatable solution too if we prioritize suburban rush hour express routes and main grid routes. Suburbanites don't care about service that doesn't get them to work. Express routes especially to areas not covered by LRT would make sense. Portage, RCMP are two that come to mind Hospitals possibly. If Blair had an express bus to each of those for example. Slash and burn the milk runs and non peak service.

[Takingoff]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Express routes especially to areas not covered by LRT would make sense. Portage, RCMP are two that come to mind Hospitals possibly. If Blair had an express bus to each of those for example. Slash and burn the milk runs and non peak service.

Just to be clear, this is all VERY FAR from my ideal transit system. In the Netherlands, transit is exceptional but the further from the core, the more you walk (or for them, cycle). But the buses almost always run on time.

Would you rather wait an hour in the winter for a bus that may not even show up, or every 20 minutes for a guaranteed bus 350 metres farther away. I stay warmer walking than standing waiting for a no-show bus.

Lastly, get rid of the bus stop every 100 metres (or less in many parts of the city). With obvious exceptions such as seniors centres etc.

Any savings (and there won't be much if any) can be reinvested in para-transpo or other last mile solutions for those that are mobility challenged.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Takingoff

Just to be clear, this is all VERY FAR from my ideal transit system. In the Netherlands, transit is exceptional but the further from the core, the more you walk (or for them, cycle). But the buses almost always run on time.

Would you rather wait an hour in the winter for a bus that may not even show up, or every 20 minutes for a guaranteed bus 350 metres farther away. I stay warmer walking than standing waiting for a no-show bus.

Lastly, get rid of the bus stop every 100 metres (or less in many parts of the city). With obvious exceptions such as seniors centres etc.

Any savings (and there won't be much if any) can be reinvested in para-transpo or other last mile solutions for those that are mobility challenged.

Yes it's not ideal and we aren't going to have Rotterdam's transit system even with massive tax increases as our lifestyle for anyone that can afford it is car based.

The point is we are seriously broke. I have been saying this as early as the approval of phase 2 as we took on a greater share of the cost and explicitly stated the math only worked with low interest rates and growth in ridership as predicted. Now maybe the better course is to wait to be truly broke and hope for a bailout and sadly that is probably the case but only a bailout can save us from either bankruptcy or painful cuts.

[Takingoff]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Yes it's not ideal and we aren't going to have Rotterdam's transit system even with massive tax increases as our lifestyle for anyone that can afford it is car based.

The point is we are seriously broke. I have been saying this as early as the approval of phase 2 as we took on a greater share of the cost and explicitly stated the math only worked with low interest rates and growth in ridership as predicted. Now maybe the better course is to wait to be truly broke and hope for a bailout and sadly that is probably the case but only a bailout can save us from either bankruptcy or painful cuts.

The wheels off the wagon (er. bus) approach. Nothing motivates a politician like a house (er. bus) on fire...not sure if there is the pollical will to address this though. Its the same reason we continue to build another lane for car traffic rather than make the harder decision to allocate it to bus priority.

It seems like the average Joe is years away from the eureka moment.

[lrt's friend]

First, how can we focus transit only on the urban area? All home owners in urban transit area pay transit tax. Can we assess a tax and deliver little or no service? Also, the urban area now amounts to the minority of Ottawans. It seems to me that this just promotes the death spiral.

Our next generation of transit riders are our student population particularly those in post-secondary institutions. Students have flexible hours, therefore, reducing or eliminating service in off-peak hours particularly in the evening just shoots ourselves in our own foot. If we don't serve the student population, how can a compulsory student pass continue? If the majority of students can no longer use transit daily even when classes end at 10 pm, we have eliminated another transit market.

If we run expensive trains to the suburbs and offer poor connecting bus service, we are also shooting ourselves in the foot. Just like in many American cities, rail ridership will plummet because we have made the last mile problem much worse.

The solution, but hardly easily implemented under the current circumstances, is to spend infrastructure money only on projects that actually speed up service. This makes transit more efficient and makes it more attractive to increase ridership. The Confed Line has failed to accomplish this so far.

[Takingoff]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

First, how can we focus transit only on the urban area? All home owners in urban transit area pay transit tax. Can we assess a tax and deliver little or no service? Also, the urban area now amounts to the minority of Ottawans. It seems to me that this just promotes the death spiral.

Our next generation of transit riders are our student population particularly those in post-secondary institutions. Students have flexible hours, therefore, reducing or eliminating service in off-peak hours particularly in the evening just shoots ourselves in our own foot. If we don't serve the student population, how can a compulsory student pass continue? If the majority of students can no longer use transit daily even when classes end at 10 pm, we have eliminated another transit market.

If we run expensive trains to the suburbs and offer poor connecting bus service, we are also shooting ourselves in the foot. Just like in many American cities, rail ridership will plummet because we have made the last mile problem much worse.

The solution, but hardly easily implemented under the current circumstances, is to spend infrastructure money only on projects that actually speed up service. This makes transit more efficient and makes it more attractive to increase ridership. The Confed Line has failed to accomplish this so far.

Never said cut suburban exclusively. There will be many cuts to go around and plenty of pain to share. Suburbs could actually get improved service by implementing suburb to suburb fast and frequent service. Not everyone needs to go downtown. Solving the last mile issue and housing density go hand in hand. Why encourage low density living.