Confederation Line (Stage 1) | In Service 1.0

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by JM1

European cities use lrt in mixed traffic where necessary. It works well. The trains need priority though. You are right that busy streets like Bank present problems. The solution is to dedicate the lanes there or tunnel segments. That is what they do elsewhere.

I dint like hearing that things can't be done when there are admirable examples of just how they are being done elsewhere,

In most places surface trams work well usually have some combination of towns are really small (say in small French cities like Reims), streets that are really wide (Vienna) and/or the trams are a local supplement to the metro or commuter rail (Berlin). In Ottawa Carling might work or Elgin if it were pedestrian south of Nepean.

[MountainView]

I think the worst for stop frequency has to be Meadowlands Drive. I used to live in that area and there are so many stops within 150-200m of each other. It was ridiculous. I actually work on Carling now and use the Carling/Maple stop. I think the two stops by the Civic are a little close together but this is nothing in comparison to other 'close stops' around the city.

[1overcosc]

On Laurier Avenue East, the bus stops at Laurier/Waller, again at Cumberland, again at King Edward, and again at Sweetland. 4 stops in 700 metres.

[1overcosc]

The problem with removing stops of course is that people get VERY angry when you remove their local stops. In Toronto, the city is currently doing a major stop reduction on the streetcar network to improve speed--adopting a rule of no stops within 300 metres of each other and the NIMBY (or rather... YIMBY?) revolt is intense. (Remember that Toronto's streetcars are essentially local buses on tracks, not rapid transit).

I had a conversation with the head of planning at Kingston Transit about stop frequency (Kingston's got it quite bad on many streets too with overfrequent stops). Kingston has fairly low standards for its bus stops; most are just a signpost nailed in the grass even in urban areas. He said that his plan for local stop reductions was to upgrade about two-thirds of stops and then use that as an excuse to close the remaining one-third. In Ottawa that strategy won't work because our bus stops are generally of higher standards already; but we need to do something.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

The problem with removing stops of course is that people get VERY angry when you remove their local stops. In Toronto, the city is currently doing a major stop reduction on the streetcar network to improve speed--adopting a rule of no stops within 300 metres of each other and the NIMBY (or rather... YIMBY?) revolt is intense. (Remember that Toronto's streetcars are essentially local buses on tracks, not rapid transit).

I had a conversation with the head of planning at Kingston Transit about stop frequency (Kingston's got it quite bad on many streets too with overfrequent stops). Kingston has fairly low standards for its bus stops; most are just a signpost nailed in the grass even in urban areas. He said that his plan for local stop reductions was to upgrade about two-thirds of stops and then use that as an excuse to close the remaining one-third. In Ottawa that strategy won't work because our bus stops are generally of higher standards already; but we need to do something.

With the LRT there is an opportunity to make lots of changes. Some cities use express busses that stop every 3 stops and use similar numbers so the 7 express becomes the 107 etc. Most rush hour busses would become expresses and this way commuters don’t have to stop at every stop and the elderly can still have their local bus stop at 11 am on Tuesday.

[JM1]

Vienna and Berlin both use a combination of segregated, reserved, and mixed traffic tram lines. Almost all tram lines use all three of these. In Vienna, the only lines that are fully segregated to my knowledge are the clockwise and counterclockwise ring routes. In Berlin, the tram network is more limited because it is really only operational in the north east (the old East Berlin), but even there, you really only have segregated or dedicated routes in the core and down the medians of a few large avenues.

So, I think Elgin and Bank (north of gilmour) would need reserved lanes. Rideau would need them from Colonel By to Dalhousie or King Edward. But I think the rest of Rideau, Montreal Road, Carling, and Bronson could get by without dedicaed lanes.

Originally Posted by acottawa

In most places surface trams work well usually have some combination of towns are really small (say in small French cities like Reims), streets that are really wide (Vienna) and/or the trams are a local supplement to the metro or commuter rail (Berlin). In Ottawa Carling might work or Elgin if it were pedestrian south of Nepean.

[rocketphish]

Same thing with the 7, at the same intersection (Montreal and St. Laurent)!

The 9 does the same thing along the Vanier Pkwy, with stops on either side of McArthur, a distance of about 140m.

Even worse is the 7 (St. Laurent bound), where along Beechwood there are 3 stops in 250m, between Marquette and the Beechwood Cemetery entrance. Ridiculous.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by phil235

Yep, stop frequency is ridiculous on some routes, like the 12. My favourite is the stops on either side of the St. Laurent intersection.

That's a very important feature, given the pedestrian conditions there. It dissuades people from racing across the intersection for the bus, as they would if there was only a stop on one side of St. Laurent.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by JM1

This is a huge problem. OCTranspo (or maybe City Council) needs to reduce the number of stops. People can walk a little further to their stop in return for a faster, smoother, more fuel efficient ride that also keeps general traffic moving better.

Ha! Funny!

We could also use on street LRT. With the new long vehicles, multiple doors make loading and unloading more efficient. The ride is smoother than buses. The operating costs are lower too. Carling, Bank, Rideau and Montreal Road would be my first choices.

For starters, OC Transpo could start putting artics (or more artics) on these routes. The crowding on Bank Street 1 and 7 is ridiculous, but OC Transpo doesn't give a shit about customer safety or convenience if it's not a suburban express.

There are also way too few guaranteed-artic trips assigned on the 12, and very few on the 2.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by DarkArconio

On street lrt isn't faster without dedicated lanes. It's in fact slower as it can't avoid stopped vehicles. Only makes sense on roads where you can dedicate full lane. It's a similar reason OC Transpo uses short buses on busy roads like bank.

No, OC Transpo uses short buses on Bank because they are suburban-oriented idiots who don't care about people who live and work along downtown arterial routes.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

On Laurier Avenue East, the bus stops at Laurier/Waller, again at Cumberland, again at King Edward, and again at Sweetland. 4 stops in 700 metres.

Is this a problem?

(Suggested answer: no.)

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

The 9 does the same thing along the Vanier Pkwy, with stops on either side of McArthur, a distance of about 140m.

Even worse is the 7 (St. Laurent bound), where along Beechwood there are 3 stops in 250m, between Marquette and the Beechwood Cemetery entrance. Ridiculous.

Yeah, one of those could go for shore.

More imporant problem on this portion of Beechwood, though, is the lack of any controlled pedestrian crossing east of Marier. If you need to catch the bus on the other side of Beechwood from where you are standing, it can take a very long time for traffic to clear long enough for an able-bodied person to dart across.

Too bad the councillors for either side of Beechwood don't give a shit.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

That's a very important feature, given the pedestrian conditions there. It dissuades people from racing across the intersection for the bus, as they would if there was only a stop on one side of St. Laurent.

Isn't that an issue at all major intersections? Why are pedestrians in other cities capable of stopping themselves from racing into traffic, even though they don't place two bus stops 30 m apart?

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Is this a problem?

(Suggested answer: no.)

Yes, it is a problem because it slows down the bus and makes the trip take longer. More stops also harms reliability by adding more varability to travel time, and thus significantly contributes to bunching which we all know is a huge problem on these inner city routes.

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

That's a very important feature, given the pedestrian conditions there. It dissuades people from racing across the intersection for the bus, as they would if there was only a stop on one side of St. Laurent.

The solution is to make the traffic light timings more pedestrian friendly, such that pedestrians aren't waiting 2-3 minutes to cross. We should adopt city-wide rapid cycling like they have downtown to make it easier to cross suburban arterials. The solution is NOT a billion bus stops.

[1overcosc]

On the topic of street crossing and traffic lights being pedestrian unfriendly, I attended the Rideau-Vanier transportation debate on Monday night and one of the things that Marc Aubin brought up is the need for shorter cycle times to enhance pedestrian mobility, and for pedestrian push buttons that actually let you cross the street instead of waiting a minute or more before getting that walk light. If he's elected we'll start seeing movement on this area which in my opinion is a HUGE element of pedestrian mobility and urban experience that nobody to date has ever really brought up.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by phil235

Isn't that an issue at all major intersections? Why are pedestrians in other cities capable of stopping themselves from racing into traffic, even though they don't place two bus stops 30 m apart?

I suppose.

But it is still a useful feature to have. It's not a flaw in this case.

I really do not understand the fixation some people in this corner have with ZOMG TEH STAWPS ARE TOO CLOASE TOGEVVER.

[Uhuniau]

[QUOTE=1overcosc;6733386]Yes, it is a problem because it slows down the bus and makes the trip take longer. More stops also harms reliability by adding more varability to travel time, and thus significantly contributes to bunching which we all know is a huge problem on these inner city routes.
[quote]

It wouldn't be as much of a problem if OC Transpo would put more rear-loading buses on these routes instead of frickin' 40-footers, and if there were more time-point stops like the one they wisely instituted at Bank and James (?) southbound the other year.

The solution is to make the traffic light timings more pedestrian friendly, such that pedestrians aren't waiting 2-3 minutes to cross.

Ha ha funny! This is Ottawa you're talking about.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

On the topic of street crossing and traffic lights being pedestrian unfriendly, I attended the Rideau-Vanier transportation debate on Monday night and one of the things that Marc Aubin brought up is the need for shorter cycle times to enhance pedestrian mobility, and for pedestrian push buttons that actually let you cross the street instead

No.

The answer is lights that (A) give a pedestrian a walk light automatically when traffic has a green in the same direction, and , ONLY IN THE ALTERNATIVE, (B) pedestrian push buttons that actually let you cross the street.

It is infuriating that Ottawa adopted this supposedly transit-pedestrian-cycle hierarchy thing, right before it started replacing walk-as-of-right signals with walk-on-request ones on major downtown main streets.

Make the drivers push a button if they want a green light. That'll prove that our official plan isn't a big steaming pile of lies and crap.

[c_speed3108]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

No.

The answer is lights that (A) give a pedestrian a walk light automatically when traffic has a green in the same direction, and , ONLY IN THE ALTERNATIVE, (B) pedestrian push buttons that actually let you cross the street.

It is infuriating that Ottawa adopted this supposedly transit-pedestrian-cycle hierarchy thing, right before it started replacing walk-as-of-right signals with walk-on-request ones on major downtown main streets.

Make the drivers push a button if they want a green light. That'll prove that our official plan isn't a big steaming pile of lies and crap.

I get the idea that some light cycles can be made fast by not providing time for a pedestrian that maybe doesn't exist. What I don't understand is why does it have to be a button and not something more automatic?

In my early years at the U of O (around 2000) the pedestrian crossing on Laurier had automatic detectors on the polls similar to those used on an automatic door at the grocery store. When Laurier was redone a few years later they replaced the automatic eyes with push buttons.

[gjhall]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Make the drivers push a button if they want a green light. That'll prove that our official plan isn't a big steaming pile of lies and crap.

That basically happens at lots of intersections where they have a sensor to tell if a car is waiting for the light to turn.