Confederation Line (Stage 1) | In Service 1.0

[MalcolmTucker]

It is inevitable that stories about travel time will ignore saved waiting time, and compare the best travel time possible with first week problems.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by bikegypsy

You sound like a lonely pathetic loser living in his mom's basement.

Cool ad hominem, bro.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

Luckily, buses can leave the Transitway (a benefit that LRT can’t match)

It's a very limited benefit if it results in a scatterbrained transit system that has exceptionally limited ability to drive the development of anything other than itself.

Ottawa's failed BRT experiment has been dismal at generating transit-oriented development. The corridors and station locations are bad enough, but the dismally unimaginative development industry, and the pliant and conservative political and bureaucratic masters, have not helped, either.

[quotr]The change to an LRT system is a philosophical change in how the system is to be used, along with the technological change. I’m not sure that the City understands that yet.[/QUOTE]

The populace certainly doesn't understand it, judging by the nimbyism that has already attended both the current and future LRT projects, and private-sector developments that are being proposed in anticipation of LRT stations being built.

Ottawa is still, fundamentally, unimaginative and cheap.

And the urban neighbourhoods which could really use heavier-duty public transit will not be getting any in this century, because the entire future anticipated build-out is oriented towards rail-for-the-suburbs (which I first, freudianly but perhaps more accurately, typed as "shruburbs").

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

This really tells us that as much as LRT is an important change for the city, the way we rework the bus network to feed LRT (and bypass LRT in some cases) is equally important. We have to do this right otherwise we will end up with horror stories of trips taking much longer than with the Transitway. The end result has to produce a net benefit in better travel times for more people than not. This can be produced from shorter trip times and/or shorter waits.

There is not one central-to-central trip in my life that will be improved by the LRT. In fact, given the proposed severing of crosstown routes and the elimination of the Rideau Street hub, most trips within and between central neighbourhoods is going to end up taking longer, thanks to the transit-planning genius of people who don't actually use the transit system they run.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

I know you like to be cynical, but it's not really warranted in this case. The reason for Lincoln Fields' terrible location was already explained in this thread.

Yes, and that lengthier explanation is perfectly encapsulated by my pithier one: the Lincoln Fields problem is the kind of BS that other cities don't have to put up with, because they don't have an NCC in dire need of abolition, and they don't have quite the same culture of rampant nimbyism and small-town cheapism.

[monkeybongo]

[QUOTE=passwordisnt123;7260754]I totally agree. Even though I'm a huge supporter of the Confederation Line, my big worry is that I think when it finally opens, the end result will be an initial increase in the average travel time for some commuters. The reason why this worries me is because I think we can expect the Ottawa Citizen and the CBC will each run stories about how the city spent $2.1 billion on the confederation line only to have it "take longer" and these stories may have the effect of hammering public support for future LRT and rail transit expansion projects going forward.[QUOTE]

The only positive for OCTranspo will be that it will be so terrible when they detour the Transitway for construction for 2-3 years, that the LRT will seem like a massive improvement.

20 mins(2014) -> 40 mins (2016) -> 30 mins (2018) = Success!

[eternallyme]

The big challenges are how to draw the new bus routes. The least impact would be in the inner city, since most routes to those areas already go downtown without the Transitway, and those routes would largely be unchanged.

The inner east (i.e. east of St. Laurent, inside the Greenbelt) would largely be unchanged as well, since most bus routes from that area largely converge on Blair or St. Laurent. I do recommend a few changes to mitigate transfer connections lost, however.

Orleans would see enormous change - the expresses and locals should merge together, with all service converging at Blair. There would be little need for Route 95 in the east end, although timing could be an issue to ensure a good frequency between Blair and Place d'Orleans since it would be served by multiple local routes instead of a dedicated route (having them all converge at Blair does not work since that creates a 30 minute gap). The frequency between Blair and the local communities would generally be the same or greater than it is now with the expresses.

Kanata and Barrhaven would see a partial restructuring of local routes, with all express routes tied to them. They would be numbered as an express extension of local routes to enable 2-digit numbers to be used within the Greenbelt (i.e. 161E, 170E). The same would also hold true in west end urban communities. Having peak extensions to Tunney's Pasture would avoid the need to transfer more than once. The Transitway routes would still operate as they do now though, except only to Tunney's Pasture, with some trips turned over to other routes during peak periods. It is much easier after Phase 2 though.

In the south end, more routes without a Confederation Line connection would be extended to Hurdman, at least during peak periods, to ensure additional connections.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

There is not one central-to-central trip in my life that will be improved by the LRT. In fact, given the proposed severing of crosstown routes and the elimination of the Rideau Street hub, most trips within and between central neighbourhoods is going to end up taking longer, thanks to the transit-planning genius of people who don't actually use the transit system they run.

I have expressed my concern about this sort of thing over and over again, and this applies for both central and suburban locations. Since we are not really introducing new rapid transit routes at all, there is a great risk that transit will not actually be improved after spending billions. Years ago, I was advocating that we should be investing in new routes that will deliver real transit improvements. It has been folly to build busways and then spend a fortune to switch to LRT.

[lrt's friend]

[QUOTE=monkeybongo;7260893][QUOTE=passwordisnt123;7260754]I totally agree. Even though I'm a huge supporter of the Confederation Line, my big worry is that I think when it finally opens, the end result will be an initial increase in the average travel time for some commuters. The reason why this worries me is because I think we can expect the Ottawa Citizen and the CBC will each run stories about how the city spent $2.1 billion on the confederation line only to have it "take longer" and these stories may have the effect of hammering public support for future LRT and rail transit expansion projects going forward.

The only positive for OCTranspo will be that it will be so terrible when they detour the Transitway for construction for 2-3 years, that the LRT will seem like a massive improvement.

20 mins(2014) -> 40 mins (2016) -> 30 mins (2018) = Success!

Ha! If that is success then city council should all be fired. It demonstrates total incompetence in delivering rapid transit that is not rapid at all. Sounds like Rapibus II to me if that is the end result.

[passwordisnt123]

Travel times aren't the only important measure determining whether the confederation line is considered a success or not. They're one of the most important measures the public cares about, but they're not necessarily the only measure.

From a public administration perspective, the Transitway is hugely inefficient and the labour costs of paying dozens and dozens of bus drivers to sit bumper to bumper on the MacKenzie King bridge during rush hour is certainly a good public administration reason for considering the confederation line a success even if travel times increase.

Similarly, because the buses can jump on and off the transitway, it's too convenient so it doesn't spur a lot of TOD (as was mentioned earlier in this thread).

Additionally, there might be an initial increase in travel time with the confederation line but that's not necessarily the real measure. The real measure will be travel times and operating costs for the confederation line in 10 years vs. what would have been the travel times and operating costs for an at-grade transitway downtown had nothing been done.

The public isn't generally known for looking at the bigger picture in each of these cases.

[Kitchissippi]

Took some photos of the progress at Cyrville station on Sunday. It's ironic that this is probably one of the most logically designed stations for transfers — centre platform, beneath a road with entrances on both sides — but it's not on a main bus route. Nice to see so much track being laid.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by passwordisnt123

Travel times aren't the only important measure determining whether the confederation line is considered a success or not. They're one of the most important measures the public cares about, but they're not necessarily the only measure.

From a public administration perspective, the Transitway is hugely inefficient and the labour costs of paying dozens and dozens of bus drivers to sit bumper to bumper on the MacKenzie King bridge during rush hour is certainly a good public administration reason for considering the confederation line a success even if travel times increase.

Similarly, because the buses can jump on and off the transitway, it's too convenient so it doesn't spur a lot of TOD (as was mentioned earlier in this thread).

Additionally, there might be an initial increase in travel time with the confederation line but that's not necessarily the real measure. The real measure will be travel times and operating costs for the confederation line in 10 years vs. what would have been the travel times and operating costs for an at-grade transitway downtown had nothing been done.

The public isn't generally known for looking at the bigger picture in each of these cases.

I realize there are other issues such as operating efficiency and TOD, however, those have to be secondary benefits of rapid transit.

Let's face it, no matter what we do, 90% or more of the population is not going to live within walking distance of the Confederation Line even after Phase 2 is completed. Providing top quality neighbourhood transit will be critical to the success of the Confederation Line and Ottawa transit as a whole. We also have to remember that TOD is going to attract the wealthier portion of the population, not those of very limited income.

A series of maps has recently been posted in this forum on another thread that clearly shows that generally speaking, the poorest portion of your population live away from the best rapid transit lines and they continue to be dependent on bus service. Ottawa will not be an exception to this. You are not going to see rail transit near Heatherington or Dynes Road.

It is critical to the future of Ottawa transit, that we neither botch the re-imagining of bus service nor that we make it slower than today.

Portland Oregon is often considered North America's LRT poster child yet service actually became slower when LRT was introduced and overall transit ridership decreased. There is a correlation between speed of service (and competitiveness with cars) and ridership. We shouldn't forget this.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I realize there are other issues such as operating efficiency and TOD, however, those have to be secondary benefits of rapid transit.

Let's face it, no matter what we do, 90% or more of the population is not going to live within walking distance of the Confederation Line even after Phase 2 is completed. Providing top quality neighbourhood transit will be critical to the success of the Confederation Line and Ottawa transit as a whole. We also have to remember that TOD is going to attract the wealthier portion of the population, not those of very limited income.

A series of maps has recently been posted in this forum on another thread that clearly shows that generally speaking, the poorest portion of your population live away from the best rapid transit lines and they continue to be dependent on bus service. Ottawa will not be an exception to this. You are not going to see rail transit near Heatherington or Dynes Road.

It is critical to the future of Ottawa transit, that we neither botch the re-imagining of bus service nor that we make it slower than today.

This is true for all cities. Jane and Finch, and Downtown Eastside are 2 of the worst neighbourhoods in Canada. Both are not served by rail transit.

Most landlords will raise their rent if they are closer to transit.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

This is true for all cities. Jane and Finch, and Downtown Eastside are 2 of the worst neighbourhoods in Canada. Both are not served by rail transit.

Most landlords will raise their rent if they are closer to transit.

Isn't that natural? That is the market economy in play. You improve the amenities for particular properties and land values increase and rents increase. TOD will do that very well and increasing land values and possible sale values and rents for condos and apartments is the incentive to build there. We can expect no difference surrounding Confederation Line stations.

People have to live somewhere and it is not as if the areas far away from rapid transit suddenly become vacuums. Instead, what happens is that those areas become less attractive for gentrification, and that is where the lower classes end up living. Ironically, they are the ones most in need of transit and it becomes very easy to let transit deteriorate there as well in order to pay off the poster child projects. This is exactly what happens in American cities. LRT is introduced and bus service is cut even in other parts of the city.

[Horus]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

This is true for all cities. Jane and Finch, and Downtown Eastside are 2 of the worst neighbourhoods in Canada. Both are not served by rail transit.

Most landlords will raise their rent if they are closer to transit.

Yet...

http://www.metrolinx.com/en/projectsandprograms/transitexpansionprojects/finch_west.aspx

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Horus

Yet...

http://www.metrolinx.com/en/projectsandprograms/transitexpansionprojects/finch_west.aspx

With Rob Ford, Transit City was cancelled.

New government and it is back. It is slated to be started next year, and be done in 2021.

Yes, it will be good. It will cause gentrification. However, look how long they have been planning to do this - 2007. It could still be cancelled.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Horus

Yet...

http://www.metrolinx.com/en/projectsandprograms/transitexpansionprojects/finch_west.aspx

We can applaud Toronto for finally considering serving one the poorest parts of the city. But it is a glorified streetcar and not really rapid transit. It will be real improvement in service and that is progress.

Regardless, TOD cannot be the main motivator. Better service needs to be the main reason for spending billions.

And while we can argue about TOD and the possibilities that exist with rail transit that didn't exist with the Transitways, we really have to consider how much the city actually pushed TOD with the Transitways. I think the effort was close to non-existent. They are only getting it now with the Confederation Line. I think it is a sign of the time as the city moves to a new level. Lansdowne Park illustrates this point after considerable resistance.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

And while we can argue about TOD and the possibilities that exist with rail transit that didn't exist with the Transitways, we really have to consider how much the city actually pushed TOD with the Transitways. I think the effort was close to non-existent. They are only getting it now with the Confederation Line. I think it is a sign of the time as the city moves to a new level. Lansdowne Park illustrates this point after considerable resistance.

The city (or cities and RMOC, back in the day) did almost exactly nothing to promote TOD around the Bus Crappid Transitway. Even more recently, projects have been approved at or near Transitway stations that could have been so much more transit-oriented than what ended up being built.

Ottawa plans a good plan, but consistently falls down on the execution.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

Took some photos of the progress at Cyrville station on Sunday. It's ironic that this is probably one of the most logically designed stations for transfers — centre platform, beneath a road with entrances on both sides — but it's not on a main bus route. Nice to see so much track being laid.

All the stations are being designed like that. LF, Lees, Bayview, etc. The city is caring about street access a lot more with these LRT stations than they did when planning the original Transitway.

I only used Cyrville station on a handful of occasions, to get to the Value Village near there, and crossing the street to get to the platforms was a pain. Glad to see that being fixed.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

The city (or cities and RMOC, back in the day) did almost exactly nothing to promote TOD around the Bus Crappid Transitway. Even more recently, projects have been approved at or near Transitway stations that could have been so much more transit-oriented than what ended up being built.

Ottawa plans a good plan, but consistently falls down on the execution.

I think the city fails to create neighbourhoods. Cyrville (for example) has lots of potential TOD land nearby, but the pedestrian infrastructure is terrible (narrow, unlit sidewalks on one side of the street) and beyond a pub and chinese restaurant there is nothing walkable nearby, so these sites are likely to attract Car-Oriented Development.