Quote:
Originally Posted by kyle_olsen
Statscan studies show Ottawa in a very postive light since Calgary's autodependent suburbs are included, warts and all, while Ottawa's are in Quebec.
The Statscan studies also have problems due to their self reporting nature, and are divergent compared to real world results in some cases. For Example:
Statcan measured the total number of transit commuters in Calgary to be higher than Ottawa (Ontario side only of the CMA) in 2006. We both know these numbers do not reflect reality, as Ottawa did have more transit users in 2006. The Ottawa CMA numbers would also not reflect transfers onto OC from STO.
Even if we count every sustainable commuter four times (one transfer on each trip) we still don't hit ridership numbers for either systems. This means that like the transit number does not take into account park and riders, and station drop offs. It ia a given that non-employment based trips are not counted either, which skew the numbers aswell with Ottawa having Carleton and UOttawa right on major trainst, and Calgary having the same for UCalgary, Mount Royal, SAIT and ACAD.
Adding in the Quebec side of the CMA, it is obvious where Ottawa's suburb type development went, look at that auto number jump!:
If I was a transit planner for a unified Ottawa - Gatineau, these numbers tell me the first priority should be transit to the Quebec side, and that it would be rather hard to intice a marginal user onto most improvements on the Ottawa side. Ottawa side should look for operational improvements on what they have already (speed, frequency, cost, node creation) while expanding the network in a way that will not overburden it. From an Ottawa only prespective the push for rail is only to reduce operational costs to make expansion more palletable, while hopefully spuring further node creation. The cost element in Ottawa is so high, that it is likely worth it to rationalize core servicem to pull it in.
Has any councillor ever proposed creating a transit only street in downtown, or giving transit a second lane on both Albert or Slater?
As for ticket machines, they are bloody expensive, especially to winterize, and you need to bring in electricity to them which raising the costs insanely. Instead of this, I would suggest innovation, text this number, we send you back a transit pass, and charge a credit card or your telephone.
Edit: Looking at the numbers more closely, the different transit results could be from solely the sexes of the sample that is working. Calgary's workforce is alot more male, females tend to take transit more, carpool more, and walk less.
Interesting. |
Unless the data is skewed by a strike (e.g., Vancouver in 2001), I still think that the Census data is the best source to compare cities. Not only does Ottawa-Gatineau do well in transit, its performance with regard to carpooling, bicycling and walking is very good for a large city. Going from memory, I thought Ottawa had one of the lowest, if not the lowest, proportion of commuters driving to work.
Although data is lacking, I suspect that Ottawa also does well with regard to non-commuting transit trips (school, shopping, etc.), although not as well as Toronto and Montreal.
On the specific issue of the Quebec side, I was hoping that the construction of Rapibus would lead to a much better integration of OC/STO services.
In particular, I was hoping that:
- All transit routes would cross the Rideau Canal using the Mackenzie King Bridge, which would be reserved for transit. The bridge has lots of room and would make a greater transfer station.
- Some mainline STO routes (e.g., the #67) would be extended deep inside the Transitway system and/or combined with some OC mainline routes such as the #94 and the #98 (which currently end at Tunney’s Pasture). This, I think, would provide much more direct service for users on both sides of the River and allow for a better utilization of bus capacity (i.e., less overlap of routes and fewer empty buses downtown).
However, such integration would not be possible under the LRT plan.
I don’t know the cost of ticketing machines, but you now see them in many places outside (e.g., to pay for parking). Regardless, we would need those machines for the LRT, so why not put them in now. But you may right that with innovation and pervasive use of cellphones a simpler system could be developed.
Prev
but from what I read Deez was talking about crossings, not grade separations... as a comparison: a freeway could be in a trench, elevated, or just on the ground... but it's not a freeway when you have grade crossings and lights (unless you are in Calgary lol)
Linear Mode
