O-Train Line 2/4 [Stage 2 | Greenboro to Limebank/Airport] | In Service

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by DTcrawler

The botched Line 2 <-> Line 4 transfer situation still has me absolutely enraged. The original plan would’ve made the extra transfer basically a non-factor. The pocket track plan was supposed to be the saving grace of the whole decision to run airport service as a spur line.

As I said before, this better be a temporary measure simply to finally get the delayed project open, because I’m not going to let them get away with trying to let us forget what the original plan was.

I have been waiting for 18 years, and overall, there will be more transfers, longer walks and slower travel times. I have long ago given up.

Sorry to say this, but you are much more likely to get a lump of coal than the fix you are hoping for. Their plans didn't work out. Too bad to the public. Most won't notice or care.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

We really ought to be engaging in, at minimum, some future-proofing about this (and a few other transit-connected transportation issues), if it's too early to do any actual planning.

Unless we have a miracle and get a transit bonanza from Phase 2, don't expect any further major transit projects in our lifetime. Losing as much ridership as we have just won't justify further investment. You better buy an EV or E-bike.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I have been waiting for 18 years, and overall, there will be more transfers, longer walks and slower travel times. I have long ago given up.

Sorry to say this, but you are much more likely to get a lump of coal than the fix you are hoping for. Their plans didn't work out. Too bad to the public. Most won't notice or care.

Many people will, in fact, see a noticeable improvement to their transit service and transit options (and I don't just mean compared to the R2).

Don't ever forget that.

Constantly projecting your issues with your local bus route onto the LRT isn't going to change the fact that an alternate design for Stage 2 wouldn't have magically solved the issue of austerity in the way bus routes are being rerouted and scheduled— or that the issue can still be solved with or without future expansions of Line 2 and 4.

[lrt's friend]

I will continue to remind you that transit is a network. Buses have to work with rail. If the connections are not reliable, how popular will this be? We saw the same issue when Line 1 opened which has left a sour taste for many former transit riders from the east and west. It is not just about me but thousands of my neighbours who will also experience worse service. Quit being an apologist for bad design. I know that it is too late to fix this especially on the rail side. Maybe you are right that more will have a good experience than a bad one. Time will tell. But if many will have longer travel times, you can't hide it.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by zzptichka

True, it's not UPX. Transferring from UPX to TTC requires 20x walking compared to transferring from Line 2 to Line 1. And you get to pay 3x more for that.

All these folks complaining about a 6 minute wait to transfer at South Keys - you'll spend at least 6 minutes just walking from the UPX platform to the TTC subway platform at Union.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I will continue to remind you that transit is a network. Buses have to work with rail. If the connections are not reliable, how popular will this be? We saw the same issue when Line 1 opened which has left a sour taste for many former transit riders from the east and west. It is not just about me but thousands of my neighbours who will also experience worse service. Quit being an apologist for bad design. I know that it is too late to fix this especially on the rail side. Maybe you are right that more will have a good experience than a bad one. Time will tell. But if many will have longer travel times, you can't hide it.

You keep treating these design flaws as if they're going to be fatal to the success of the project, as if thousands of housing units aren't going to be built right along the line in the coming decade and as if the expansion isn't opening up more connections for people whom the line would never have made sense to use before (e.g. all of Herongate)— but more importantly you yourself keep ignoring the "network" aspect of the project more than anyone else I've seen on this forum.

I've (repeatedly) emphasized the fact that connecting bus services could be improved and fixed at any time without requiring any additional work to be done on the Trillium Line, and I've also emphasized my point that you keep acting as if this can't be done— and you just keep proving my point.

What am I being an apologist for? The fact that your neighbourhood could receive better service and better connections by investing more in transit operations..? Because I'm certainly not suggesting that 10 minute headways on Line 2 would somehow make those cuts any more acceptable.

There's no use for your defeatist attitude here— because if you're going to acknowledge that it's "too late to fix this on the rail side" but constantly ignore the potential for investment in bus service, then what are you even doing?
It's exhausting when every post is just bemoaning the lack of some specific design element that would allegedly solve everything when there are so many other solutions right in front of your face that you refuse to ever properly acknowledge. What do any of us gain from this except a toxic atmosphere of negativity from someone who offers nothing but problems?

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Unless we have a miracle and get a transit bonanza from Phase 2, don't expect any further major transit projects in our lifetime. Losing as much ridership as we have just won't justify further investment. You better buy an EV or E-bike.

That doesn't preclude the necessity of at least roughly identifying, in broad terms, corridors of interest, and ensuring that decisions we (or the province of Ontario, NCC, etc.) make between now and any future transit projects don't preclude, in particular:

- future underground alignments, particularly in the urban core
- repurposing the Chief Commanda bridge or its corridor for an interprovincial extension, or
- doubling the Dows Lake tunnel and the rock cut

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

You keep treating these design flaws as if they're going to be fatal to the success of the project, as if thousands of housing units aren't going to be built right along the line in the coming decade and as if the expansion isn't opening up more connections for people whom the line would never have made sense to use before (e.g. all of Herongate)— but more importantly you yourself keep ignoring the "network" aspect of the project more than anyone else I've seen on this forum.

I've (repeatedly) emphasized the fact that connecting bus services could be improved and fixed at any time without requiring any additional work to be done on the Trillium Line, and I've also emphasized my point that you keep acting as if this can't be done— and you just keep proving my point.

What am I being an apologist for? The fact that your neighbourhood could receive better service and better connections by investing more in transit operations..? Because I'm certainly not suggesting that 10 minute headways on Line 2 would somehow make those cuts any more acceptable.

There's no use for your defeatist attitude here— because if you're going to acknowledge that it's "too late to fix this on the rail side" but constantly ignore the potential for investment in bus service, then what are you even doing?
It's exhausting when every post is just bemoaning the lack of some specific design element that would allegedly solve everything when there are so many other solutions right in front of your face that you refuse to ever properly acknowledge. What do any of us gain from this except a toxic atmosphere of negativity from someone who offers nothing but problems?

I am speaking of reality. I have no control over transit plans, so what more can i do but vent. If line 2 could run every 10 minutes, this would greatly improve transfer reliability and trip times. I am in full agreement, but current plans will not allow for it. There is no appetite for another protracted shut down of Line 2 to make the required changes.

What the city has invested our tax money in is pretty shoddy and deserves criticism.

If you are tired of my comments, don't read them. I live in the area served by Line 2 so I have a direct interest in what is happening.

You have criticized my observations about Line 2 delays yet I was spot on the whole time. I even said that a 2024 opening required October final testing. This did happen.

I am happy that opening is imminent and we will see how this all works. But as you can read, others are also concerned with the quality of service to be delivered.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I am speaking of reality. I have no control over transit plans, so what more can i do but vent. If line 2 could run every 10 minutes, this would greatly improve transfer reliability and trip times. I am in full agreement, but current plans will not allow for it. There is no appetite for another protracted shut down of Line 2.

What the city has invested our tax money in is pretty shoddy and deserves criticism.

Agreed. Stage 2 South is a very poor replacement of the 2006 plan (flawed downtown section aside) and doesn't really do anything for existing riders. That said, major TOD projects along Line 2 (and Line 1/3), along with the new Civic Hospital, will be a major boost to ridership. I suspect we'll be back to 2019 ridership levels within 10 years, bar any major service cut beyond what has already been implemented. Line 2 will probably match 2019 ridership within a year.

[dougvdh]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

. . .
- doubling the Dows Lake tunnel and the rock cut

A second Dow's lake tunnel should be built, roughly parallel. This could be done without interrupting rail service and would provide redundancy to maintain the the currently proposed service intervals in the future event of needing to repair/replace the existing tunnel. It's much better long-term option than building a double wide tunnel.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Agreed. Stage 2 South is a very poor replacement of the 2006 plan (flawed downtown section aside) and doesn't really do anything for existing riders. That said, major TOD projects along Line 2 (and Line 1/3), along with the new Civic Hospital, will be a major boost to ridership. I suspect we'll be back to 2019 ridership levels within 10 years, bar any major service cut beyond what has already been implemented. Line 2 will probably match 2019 ridership within a year.

I am hoping we can get back to prepandemic ridership levels in 3 to 5 years especially if we can invest in improving bus reliability in general and frequency on key corridors. But it seems, we just keep going backwards on bus reliability. It is a no-brainer that Line 2 ridership should rebound quickly. R2 was not very dependable and there is pent up demand from Carleton students. If we could just get the Baseline project going again, which would be Ottawa's version the West Finch project. Fast, frequent on Baseline will be a ridership winner.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I am hoping we can get back to prepandemic ridership levels in 3 to 5 years especially if we can invest in improving bus reliability in general and frequency on key corridors. But it seems, we just keep going backwards on bus reliability. It is a no-brainer that Line 2 ridership should rebound quickly. R2 was not very dependable and there is pent up demand from Carleton students. If we could just get the Baseline project going again, which would be Ottawa's version the West Finch project. Fast, frequent on Baseline will be a ridership winner.

There's some money now to do some work on the Baseline BRT next year, but it's pretty minimal. I agree, should be the top priority to help improve our transit system and increase ridership.

[DTcrawler]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

All these folks complaining about a 6 minute wait to transfer at South Keys - you'll spend at least 6 minutes just walking from the UPX platform to the TTC subway platform at Union.

The 6-minute wait at South Keys isn’t a huge problem on its own. It’s the fact that it’s a 6-minute wait at South Keys after trundling along on a slow Line 2 due to single-tracked segments. And that’s after a potential 12-minute wait for Line 2 in the first place. And that’s after a potential 10-minute wait for Line 1 due to midday service cuts. And that’s after a potential 30-min wait for your bus connection to the O-Train if you live further out.

The point is that the possibility of good service keeps being sabotaged by small cost-saving measures which the planners believe that, alone, won’t have a big impact on service quality or ridership, but they fail to look at the big picture. How much money was saved by not double tracking at Walkley? Pennies, relative to the overall project cost. And now what if the money we spent on building the pocket track is wasted because single-tracking constraints prevent the pocket track plan from working as designed?

We keep wringing every ounce of slack out of the system, and that’s never a recipe for success. I was willing and excited to use Line 4 for airport trips, despite the two transfers necessary, because at least it looked like they had devised a solid plan to make South Keys transfers seamless. Now even that’s gone. And at this point it’s fair to assume that if another area of slack is identified as a frivolous luxury for customers, that’ll be axed too. My bet is that we’ll see Line 4 service halted on evenings and weekends in favour of bus service to/from the airport. Maybe they’ll even cut Line 2 frequency to 24-min off-peak to account for the added capacity of the longer trains.

[lrt's friend]

My favourite, capacity planning. This is why we didn't invest a relatively small amount to deliver 10 minute frequency, which incidentally match up with Line 1 allowing potentially seamless transfers. As was the case with Line 1, frequency of Line 2 will be set for an initial period then reduced at a later date to 'better match ridership'. A later service cut could easily apply south of South Keys on both lines. I would not be surprised if this happened in 2 or 3 years.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

My favourite, capacity planning. This is why we didn't invest a relatively small amount to deliver 10 minute frequency, which incidentally match up with Line 1 allowing potentially seamless transfers. As was the case with Line 1, frequency of Line 2 will be set for an initial period then reduced at a later date to 'better match ridership'. A later service cut could easily apply south of South Keys on both lines. I would not be surprised if this happened in 2 or 3 years.

I doubt that, the line has used 12 minute frequency for years now, there's no reason to do a service cut, except maybe on weekends to 15 minutes, which is the same as the old line 2.

Does anybody have the original travel time for Line 2 from Bayview to Greensboro? I was trying to find an old schedule online but couldn't. Watching the trains during the trial running, I feel like it will be a bit faster than before

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

I doubt that, the line has used 12 minute frequency for years now, there's no reason to do a service cut, except maybe on weekends to 15 minutes, which is the same as the old line 2.

Does anybody have the original travel time for Line 2 from Bayview to Greensboro? I was trying to find an old schedule online but couldn't. Watching the trains during the trial running, I feel like it will be a bit faster than before

In a schedule from 2018, Line 2 was scheduled to take 16 minutes to run from Greenboro to Bayview.

The New Ways to Bus trip planner has the same segment taking 17 minutes.
Assuming that's accurate, 1 additional minute while stopping at two new stations is completely fine.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by DTcrawler

We keep wringing every ounce of slack out of the system, and that’s never a recipe for success. I was willing and excited to use Line 4 for airport trips, despite the two transfers necessary, because at least it looked like they had devised a solid plan to make South Keys transfers seamless. Now even that’s gone. And at this point it’s fair to assume that if another area of slack is identified as a frivolous luxury for customers, that’ll be axed too. My bet is that we’ll see Line 4 service halted on evenings and weekends in favour of bus service to/from the airport. Maybe they’ll even cut Line 2 frequency to 24-min off-peak to account for the added capacity of the longer trains.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

My favourite, capacity planning. This is why we didn't invest a relatively small amount to deliver 10 minute frequency, which incidentally match up with Line 1 allowing potentially seamless transfers. As was the case with Line 1, frequency of Line 2 will be set for an initial period then reduced at a later date to 'better match ridership'. A later service cut could easily apply south of South Keys on both lines. I would not be surprised if this happened in 2 or 3 years.

Of course, double tracking the line would not prevent these kinds of cuts from happening. In fact, it would just make it an even bigger waste of the investment given how supposedly inevitable this will be.

As I keep repeating, this isn't a problem with the LRT, even though the topic is nearly always relegated to the LRT threads for some reason.


And another thing: the primary reason the headways on Line 2 are no longer being reduced outside of peak hours is because the new track layout no longer supports lower headways (other than a straight cut to every 24 minutes).

[kmcamp]

While we wait for the official date this week, OC Transpo seems to have updated more virtual station tours.

I'm actually kind of surprised how narrow the Corso Italia stairs seem, but it might just be the VR pic

https://my.matterport.com/show/?m=4743iqvFYUv

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

While we wait for the official date this week, OC Transpo seems to have updated more virtual station tours.

I'm actually kind of surprised how narrow the Corso Italia stairs seem, but it might just be the VR pic

https://my.matterport.com/show/?m=4743iqvFYUv

Launch date won't be in November, that's for sure. December is in play.

As for the stairs, the fish eye effect of the camera makes them look narrower than they are in reality. To give you a better idea of the actual width, those tactile tiles at the top of stairs are about 0.6m wide each, so the stairs appear to be at least 1.8m wide (probably about 2m between handrails). All stairs were sized to accommodate peak hour ridership forecasts in the project agreement.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

Launch date won't be in November, that's for sure. December is in play.

As for the stairs, the fish eye effect of the camera makes them look narrower than they are in reality. To give you a better idea of the actual width, those tactile tiles at the top of stairs are about 0.6m wide each, so the stairs appear to be at least 1.8m wide (probably about 2m between handrails). All stairs were sized to accommodate peak hour ridership forecasts in the project agreement.

Why wouldn't it be in November? They said they needed about 3 weeks from end of trial, that still puts it mid November. The only regulatory thing is the Transport CNada Certificate