O-Train Line 1 [Stage 1 | Confederation Line] | In Service

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by phil235

I'm not a fan of P3s, but there is no reason that they have to be so opaque. That is a choice that the City is making. They could easily be sharing more information about the status of the system.

As for there being no hope, not sure I agree. The path for a mayoral candidate who has a plan for transit and is willing to implement a specific transit levy is wide open. It would be crazy if that isn't the number one issue in the next election.

I hope you are right.

Given how municipal politics works, is there a path towards a concrete proposal, that a mayor and a number of councilors can get behind? I will be watching with interest.

[Richard Eade]

I can’t agree that a ‘Transit-Oriented’ candidate can run on a platform of increasing the amount paid for public transit.

There are two reasons that I don’t think it would fly, right now:

• The first is the ‘Affordability Issue’. Although I think that many in Ottawa could afford to pay a bit more taxes, I think that there has been so much media attention on the politics of how EVERYONE is struggling with the EXTREME high costs of EVERYTHING, that any proposed extra levy will be summarily rejected. Whether it is true or not, when the media keeps telling people, over and over, that NOTHING is AFFORDABLE, people start to believe it. (Although I can still go to the store and buy $0.69/lb bananas.) There has definitely been a trend towards politicians doing little but sowing the seeds of discontent.
• And, second, the general public in Ottawa has the opinion that the entire transit system is irreparably broken – so increasing the money that flows toward it is simply throwing good money after bad. And this is the belief of both people who ride (or used to ride) public transit, and those who never have, but ‘hear’ how bad it is.

Thus, I fear that any candidate that puts forth the idea of spending more on transit will be dismissed by the majority from a valid option.

[Richard Eade]

And in a startling reversal of past behaviour, the Provincial and Federal Governments announced that they are funding 2/3 of the cost of Toronto’s Waterfront East transit line. They are each putting $1B towards the new 3.8 km LRT line.

How is that a reversal of behaviour?

Well, it is true that Toronto is getting a huge amount of money for transit – while Ottawa can’t even get funding for BRT lanes – so that is ‘par-for-the-course’. What is different, however, is that the City of Toronto is also putting in $1B. That is, the Province is not paying the full cost for a new transit line in Toronto.

(PS $3B for a 3.8 km LRT line? Seems like an inflated cost to me. And Infrastructure Ontario isn’t even involved. The TTC is going to be in charge of this project.)

[bartlebooth]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

I can’t agree that a ‘Transit-Oriented’ candidate can run on a platform of increasing the amount paid for public transit.

There are two reasons that I don’t think it would fly, right now:

• The first is the ‘Affordability Issue’. Although I think that many in Ottawa could afford to pay a bit more taxes, I think that there has been so much media attention on the politics of how EVERYONE is struggling with the EXTREME high costs of EVERYTHING, that any proposed extra levy will be summarily rejected. Whether it is true or not, when the media keeps telling people, over and over, that NOTHING is AFFORDABLE, people start to believe it. (Although I can still go to the store and buy $0.69/lb bananas.) There has definitely been a trend towards politicians doing little but sowing the seeds of discontent.
• And, second, the general public in Ottawa has the opinion that the entire transit system is irreparably broken – so increasing the money that flows toward it is simply throwing good money after bad. And this is the belief of both people who ride (or used to ride) public transit, and those who never have, but ‘hear’ how bad it is.

Thus, I fear that any candidate that puts forth the idea of spending more on transit will be dismissed by the majority from a valid option.

I'm not sure I agree with your basic premise. Last I saw, the average Canadian spends somewhere around $1300 per month to have a car. That's a lot of money to spend to move around. Ottawa by and large forces car ownership on most people given the city's car-centric design coupled with a lack of viable alternative that includes transit. Call it crazy but to me, that's a mobility tax.

Try going a year without a car in this city. You'll see pretty quickly that it's a requirement if you want to have a decent life. I think any candidate that takes affordability seriously has to factor in the insane amount that's spent moving people by car.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

I can’t agree that a ‘Transit-Oriented’ candidate can run on a platform of increasing the amount paid for public transit.

There are two reasons that I don’t think it would fly, right now:

• The first is the ‘Affordability Issue’. Although I think that many in Ottawa could afford to pay a bit more taxes, I think that there has been so much media attention on the politics of how EVERYONE is struggling with the EXTREME high costs of EVERYTHING, that any proposed extra levy will be summarily rejected. Whether it is true or not, when the media keeps telling people, over and over, that NOTHING is AFFORDABLE, people start to believe it. (Although I can still go to the store and buy $0.69/lb bananas.) There has definitely been a trend towards politicians doing little but sowing the seeds of discontent.
• And, second, the general public in Ottawa has the opinion that the entire transit system is irreparably broken – so increasing the money that flows toward it is simply throwing good money after bad. And this is the belief of both people who ride (or used to ride) public transit, and those who never have, but ‘hear’ how bad it is.

Thus, I fear that any candidate that puts forth the idea of spending more on transit will be dismissed by the majority from a valid option.

Moving forward on Baseline BRT and demonstrate the benefits. It should be obvious while getting funding from higher levels. We will be able to get faster travel times and therefore lower operating costs, or more frequent service for the same operating costs.

Extend LRT one stop to Eagleson, so all the Kanata/Stittsville bus routes can connect to the rail head and a proper Park n Ride. This is so obvious, but is the obvious is being lost in all the negativity.

We need some simple bus plans that can demonstrate clear benefits.

The city is choking on traffic, and here is part of the solution. We need some salesmanship instead of the constant negativity. I am tired of it.

Our train plans have been a failure but part of this failure is a poorly designed supporting bus network. If they work hand in hand better, everything will start working better. Ridership should finally start growing.

We have to start reversing the death spiral. There has to be honesty even about that.

[golfguy9]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Moving forward on Baseline BRT and demonstrate the benefits. It should be obvious while getting funding from higher levels. We will be able to get faster travel times and therefore lower operating costs, or more frequent service for the same operating costs.

Extend LRT one stop to Eagleson, so all the Kanata/Stittsville bus routes can connect to the rail head and a proper Park n Ride. This is so obvious, but is the obvious is being lost in all the negativity.

We need some simple bus plans that can demonstrate clear benefits.

The city is choking on traffic, and here is part of the solution. We need some salesmanship instead of the constant negativity. I am tired of it.

Our train plans have been a failure but part of this failure is a poorly designed supporting bus network. If they work hand in hand better, everything will start working better. Ridership should finally start growing.

We have to start reversing the death spiral. There has to be honesty even about that.

Is the city really choking on traffic? Outside of rush hour, which doesn’t really last that long, I’d say we have a below normal congestion level in the city.

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by bartlebooth

I'm not sure I agree with your basic premise. Last I saw, the average Canadian spends somewhere around $1300 per month to have a car. That's a lot of money to spend to move around. Ottawa by and large forces car ownership on most people given the city's car-centric design coupled with a lack of viable alternative that includes transit. Call it crazy but to me, that's a mobility tax.

Try going a year without a car in this city. You'll see pretty quickly that it's a requirement if you want to have a decent life. I think any candidate that takes affordability seriously has to factor in the insane amount that's spent moving people by car.

Unfortunately, I think that you put forward the biggest argument against your own point:

Try going a year without a car in this city. You'll see pretty quickly that it's a requirement if you want to have a decent life.

The way things are, right now, as you point out, it is very difficult lead a full, rich, life in Ottawa without a car. Ergo, MOST families already have at least one vehicle. And if they already have that sunk cost, then the additional cost of paying more for transit – that most will not be using – is nothing more than an additional cost burden.

This is a ‘Catch-22’ scenario: Transit in Ottawa is not good enough for the majority of people to live car-free, so they will need to pay for a vehicle; thus, if they are paying for a vehicle anyway, they are not interested in also paying for transit.

I absolutely agree that Ottawa NEEDS MUCH BETTER PUBLIC TRANSIT. If some-one ran on a platform of putting a massive effort into developing transit infrastructure, I would likely vote for them. (But then, I voted for the ‘Transit-Oriented’ candidate last time, too.)

Only by having a viable transit option already in place will people be able to choose to not own a vehicle. Ottawa is certainly not there – yet. And it won’t get there unless someone takes a massive initiative to properly install transit infrastructure (and fund its operations).

This is not a single- or even two-term thing. A candidate needs to have the desire to improve transit, but this also needs to come from a change in the attitude of City Staff. As I see it, Staff has not supported the politicians anywhere nearly hard enough when it comes to transit. I mean REAL transit projects, not the ‘let’s call it a Transit Project so that we can add bike lanes to make it a Complete Street’ charade that Staff has been playing. And, yes, in my opinion, Staff has been playing this game. For example, they did not come to Council with a costed minimized plan for ONLY adding bus lanes to Baseline Road. The sole option that was presented to Council was a ‘Take-it-or-Leave-it’ plan for a very expensive Complete Street. There has been no cost-benefit analysis for adding the additional Bike Tracks, and the associated required land acquisition. The bus lanes would move tens-of-thousands of people. The bike tracks – maybe hundreds, on a very good day. The majority of the existing corridor is wide enough to include bus lanes now. Adding the bike tracks forces additional expropriation and, thus, added cost for the Transit Project.

This is what a ‘Transit-Oriented’ candidate needs to work on. Yes, bike infrastructure needs to be added – where warranted and appropriate – but it should not be the thing that holds up improvements in transit. EVERYTHING that the City does should be looked at through a transit lens. Imagine if empty box segments had been dropped under Bank Street while it was being completely rebuilt. Yup, the $30M (very rough ballpark) per year would probably have jumped to, maybe $100M/y. And maybe it would have taken 4 years instead of 3. But in the end, there would have been a subway tunnel from Wellington to the Rideau River. It would have been relatively cheap, and it would actually be there. Now such a tunnel will need to be bored and be much deeper, likely at a cost of a few Billion-dollars (based on $3B for 3.8 km of LRT in Toronto).

Regardless of how I feel about much of what Premier Ford has done, I give him huge credit for pumping BIG money into adding new transit infrastructure in Toronto – whether Toronto approved or not. Is it the ‘Right’ infrastructure? Maybe it isn’t perfect, but it is better than what was there – which was buses caught in traffic, while another study was done.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

I can’t agree that a ‘Transit-Oriented’ candidate can run on a platform of increasing the amount paid for public transit.

There are two reasons that I don’t think it would fly, right now:

• The first is the ‘Affordability Issue’. Although I think that many in Ottawa could afford to pay a bit more taxes, I think that there has been so much media attention on the politics of how EVERYONE is struggling with the EXTREME high costs of EVERYTHING, that any proposed extra levy will be summarily rejected. Whether it is true or not, when the media keeps telling people, over and over, that NOTHING is AFFORDABLE, people start to believe it. (Although I can still go to the store and buy $0.69/lb bananas.) There has definitely been a trend towards politicians doing little but sowing the seeds of discontent.
• And, second, the general public in Ottawa has the opinion that the entire transit system is irreparably broken – so increasing the money that flows toward it is simply throwing good money after bad. And this is the belief of both people who ride (or used to ride) public transit, and those who never have, but ‘hear’ how bad it is.

Thus, I fear that any candidate that puts forth the idea of spending more on transit will be dismissed by the majority from a valid option.

I think you are underestimating the sophistication of the Ottawa electorate. Yes, it is a cheap electorate, but people are educated and well-traveled enough to understand that transit can work properly, and is a necessity for a functioning city. The traffic impacts on commuters are becoming more and more obvious with RTO - Ottawa is not generally choked on traffic, but commutes are bad and worsening, and people care about that.

Ottawa's tax increases have been very (too) low in recent years. There is lots of room to increase taxes and stay below the increases in other cities in Ontario. To the extent that a candidate makes it clear that he/she has a plan and that the extra money will go directly to transit improvements that have an immediate impact (as lrt's friend suggests, some bus lanes on arterials like Carling and Baseline would be a quick win), I think a lot of people would buy in. After all, people aren't skeptical of transit generally, just the way it was implemented here.

[lrt's friend]

We have a council that has been riding the coat tails of LRT for 15 years. We have been spending billions and got few results.

I have been speaking about how for the most part this is not new transit. Yes. we got a new tunnel but the rest was replacing Transit ways and bus lanes that actually offered faster transit. Not much has been spent on improving the transit network especially inside the Greenbelt. In many respects. we have been de-investing.

I will be looking for candidates who show some creativity on the transit issue, as I did the last time. The status quo has been a failure.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by phil235

I think you are underestimating the sophistication of the Ottawa electorate. Yes, it is a cheap electorate, but people are educated and well-traveled enough to understand that transit can work properly, and is a necessity for a functioning city. The traffic impacts on commuters are becoming more and more obvious with RTO - Ottawa is not generally choked on traffic, but commutes are bad and worsening, and people care about that.

Ottawa's tax increases have been very (too) low in recent years. There is lots of room to increase taxes and stay below the increases in other cities in Ontario. To the extent that a candidate makes it clear that he/she has a plan and that the extra money will go directly to transit improvements that have an immediate impact (as lrt's friend suggests, some bus lanes on arterials like Carling and Baseline would be a quick win), I think a lot of people would buy in. After all, people aren't skeptical of transit generally, just the way it was implemented here.

OK if we had a 10% increase in taxes which for many would be a substantila hit that would be a 20% increase in transit funding from taxes and about $120 million. Freeze fares, restore 6 minute all day trains and add shorter bus headways outside of peak hours. How many people you think notice this as much as the $600 a year their taxes go up. How many people stop driving and make traffic better? Very few is my answer.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by bartlebooth

Try going a year without a car in this city. You'll see pretty quickly that it's a requirement if you want to have a decent life. I think any candidate that takes affordability seriously has to factor in the insane amount that's spent moving people by car.

I have a decent life and have never driven here.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by phil235

I think you are underestimating the sophistication of the Ottawa electorate. Yes, it is a cheap electorate, but people are educated and well-traveled enough to understand that transit can work properly, and is a necessity for a functioning city.

They are. Ottawa people will travel to Singapore or DC or Munich or wherever, and observe, and think, and ponder how the things they liked about those cities could be applied here and wonder why we can't be more like whichever destination they jetted off to last August.

And they second anyone comes up with even a half-baked idea of applying any of those lessons here, those same people engage their carbrains and their anti-tax reflexes and vote for Larry O'Brien and Jim Watson and Mark Sutcliffe and any of a hundred gormless councillors and utterly useless provincial MPPs.

Even the supposedly progressive and pro-transit councillors aren't that progressive or pro-transit for fear of bleeding support and losing in the next election. (Ranked ballots would have helped with that problem, which is why the Ontario PCs murdered the idea while it slept.)

[phil235]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

OK if we had a 10% increase in taxes which for many would be a substantila hit that would be a 20% increase in transit funding from taxes and about $120 million. Freeze fares, restore 6 minute all day trains and add shorter bus headways outside of peak hours. How many people you think notice this as much as the $600 a year their taxes go up. How many people stop driving and make traffic better? Very few is my answer.

That's not exactly what I had in mind - neither a 10% increase, nor the types of operating changes you mention, other than adding frequency to the LRT, which is inexpensive in the context of the overall transit budget.

I referenced bus lanes on certain streets as being an easy win, as well as transit priority measures to enhance reliability and speed of key routes. Those are cheap and effective changes that can help rebuild confidence in transit and increase ridership (and fare revenue). If the plan is clear and communicated well, I think that a significant number of people will notice and be willing to pay for specific improvements. Then build incrementally from there.

And to be clear, the goal isn't to make traffic better. It's to provide a reasonable alternative to driving.

[rocketphish]

OC Transpo closes all Line 1 station bathrooms due to vandalism, needles
'We're trying to get them open as soon as possible,' transit official says

Guy Quenneville · CBC News
Posted: Mar 31, 2026 1:39 PM EDT | Last Updated: 17 minutes ago

OC Transpo says it has temporarily closed bathrooms at all Line 1 LRT stations due to a broad increase in vandalism and "needle use."

Sabrina Pasian, the transit service's chief safety officer, confirmed the move in an emailed statement to CBC on Tuesday.

Pasian said OC Transpo is mulling both short- and long-term measures including "enhanced "monitoring" — though stations are already regularly patrolled by special constables and monitored by CCTV cameras — and the installation of secure needle disposal boxes "as part of a harm reduction approach."

"Our Special Constables Unit continues to focus on maintaining a safe transit system while also supporting vulnerable individuals," according to the statement.

"We recognize the inconvenience caused to customers and transit riders when the washrooms are closed and will continue to keep them informed as we work to restore access."

Barrhaven East Coun. Wilson Lo said a few residents have asked him over the past couple weeks about the closed bathrooms at Tunney's Pasture station.

"Unfortunately, OC Transpo's washrooms are frequent targets of vandalism, drug use, and more," Lo wrote on Facebook.

In one "particularly severe case" of vandalism, Lo said the floor at Bayview station had to be excavated after concrete was flushed down the toilet.

In another incident, needles were found in a Bayview station bathroom on Feb. 20. The city is doing a "risk assessment," and timelines and "associated costs" are still being determined.

OC Transpo announced on Feb. 20 that it was temporarily closing all Line 1 station washrooms.

LRT station washrooms are maintained and repaired by Rideau Transit Maintenance (RTM), according to the city.

That's the same arm of the consortium that's currently working with the city to resolve the root issues behind two wheel assembly problems on Line 1. The latest of those issues has resulted in reduced service on Line 1 since it was detected in January.

On top of that, the city and RTM are assessing the scope of repairs needed to repair the station bathrooms.

"[We'll] notify customers once facilities reopen," the city said in an email on Monday.

Troy Charter, who has just left his job as interim general manager of transit services but remains with OC Transpo, told CBC on Tuesday that the extent of damage varies from washroom to washroom.

"It's damaging the toilet, ripping the sink faucets out of the wall, those types of things," he said. "Obviously we need to fix those washrooms, but at the same time, what measures can be put in place to try to curtail the behavior that we're seeing?"

"We're trying to get them open as soon as possible," Charter added.

Lo said it's prudent for OC Transpo to only reopen them on a "sustainable" basis.

"You don't want to open it for a week then have to close it again for a long time," he said.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/lrt-line-1-bathrooms-closed-9.7148490

[Richard Eade]

It wasn't long ago that I was at Limebank, on Line 2, and there was a "Closed due to Vandalism" sign on that lockeded washroom. I suspect that Line 1 might not be the only victim of vandals.

[rocketphish]

LRT shutdown 'a possibility' to fix spalling, OC Transpo union says
The O-Train has been left to operate with 21 cars on the east-west rail line, leading to longer wait times and crowded station platforms

By Aedan Helmer, Joanne Laucius, Ottawa Citizen
Published Mar 31, 2026 | 5 minute read

An extended shutdown of the LRT Line 1 “remains a possibility,” according to the union representing OC Transpo operators, after Mayor Mark Sutcliffe did not rule out the “contingency plan” during a recent news conference.

Rumours of a Line 1 shutdown have surfaced as OC Transpo and the Rideau Transit Group continue to search for a solution to the “spalling” issue that has hampered rail service for more than two months.

“The information I have is that, although (a shutdown) remains a possibility, every effort is being made to avoid it,” Noah Vineberg, president of the Amalgamated Transit Union Local 279, said in an email Tuesday, March 31.

During a news conference on March 27 introducing Rick Leary as the new general manager of transit services, Sutcliffe was asked about rumours of a Line 1 shutdown as part of a fix for spalling.

The technical issue with the cartridge bearing assemblies in train axles that have exceeded 100,000 kilometres, first identified in January, forced OC Transpo to remove 41 of 59 train cars from service for analysis and repairs. Three train cars have since returned to service, leaving the O-Train to operate with 21 cars on the east-west rail line and leading to longer wait times for riders and crowded platforms at stations.

“We know we’ve had some challenges with the spalling issues on Line 1, and of course we have to have contingency plans in place,” Sutcliffe told reporters. “There’s a limit of 100,000 kilometres on every vehicle, so, if we reach a point sometime in the future where it’s no longer possible to have enough vehicles in order to provide the service, we may have to look for a period of time at using R1 (replacement buses), and we have to have those contingency plans in place.

“We plan for all kinds of different eventualities, and many of them never come to pass. As we said (Friday) morning, the number one job for Rick as he takes on this role is to do a full assessment of the situation with Line 1 and make recommendations on the best way forward to restoring full service for our passengers, and that’s what he’s going to do.”

<more>

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/lrt-shutdown-spalling-union

[pattherat]

Welp, that’s 2 trial balloons floated. We’re getting an extended shutdown some time this summer I bet.

Fuck this is a huge mess. Love that nobody is really responsible, shit just happens eh?

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by phil235

That's not exactly what I had in mind - neither a 10% increase, nor the types of operating changes you mention, other than adding frequency to the LRT, which is inexpensive in the context of the overall transit budget.

I referenced bus lanes on certain streets as being an easy win, as well as transit priority measures to enhance reliability and speed of key routes. Those are cheap and effective changes that can help rebuild confidence in transit and increase ridership (and fare revenue). If the plan is clear and communicated well, I think that a significant number of people will notice and be willing to pay for specific improvements. Then build incrementally from there.

And to be clear, the goal isn't to make traffic better. It's to provide a reasonable alternative to driving.

Traffic priority adds some key seconds even if annoying for cars. Losing a whole lane for busses would be problematic almost anywhere it would help.

Are these improvemnts of a few minutes from Kanata to Bayshore going to get people out of their cars?

[Richard Eade]

This is a great discussion. The debate about when transit infrastructure should be added, and how much / what type is appropriate is something that really needs to be opened up. However, this is the Confederation Line (Stage 1) thread, so we should probably jump to a more appropriate thread when talking about other topics.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

It wasn't long ago that I was at Limebank, on Line 2, and there was a "Closed due to Vandalism" sign on that lockeded washroom. I suspect that Line 1 might not be the only victim of vandals.

Surprise, surprise. It is really a lack of proper ongoing maintenance of these washrooms and the cost associated. How often were they being checked and cleaned? It should be multiple times per day.