Confederation Line (Stage 1) | In Service 1.0

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by JM1

Uhuniau,

Ignore the haters and keep making your points. But I would encourage you take them to City Hall as well as to the skyscraper forums.

Keep up the good work!

I have spent 20 years taking my pro-urban points of view to city hall, including to my various central city councillors in New Edinburgh, Vanier, the Glebe, Centretown, and Sandy Hill.

I have yet to have a city councillor, even in those central neighbourhoods where i have lived, who espouse an urban vision for their own communities. They have all, at various times, bought into green space fetishism, pointless street closures in the name of "traffic calming", cutting artics from local bus routes in favour of 40-footers because of spurious noise and "fumes" complaints.

I have come to the conclusion that it is futile. Downtown Ottawa has become a suburb of itself, and is fat and happy being that way, and being milked and bled for the benefit of the outer suburbs.

Nothing changes. Nothing will ever change. I pretty much give up.

Oh and yay! the city is going to rush ahead with that horrible anti-pedestrian pedestrian bridge over the canal. Another victory for suburbanism.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Buggys

What does splitting routes mean?

Totally agree about #8. The OCTranspo Customer Service # is virtually always busy.

The old 2, for example, used to go all across town, from Blair to Westboro or Bayshore.

In 2008 it got split into the 2 (west side) and 12 (east side), ostensibly for reasons of schedule improvement, but really it was thinly-disguised classism on the part of west-end people who didn't like sharing a bus with Vanier.

There has been no improvement to schedule adherence on the 12 portion of the route, and in fact a decline as more runs have been assigned to 40-footers which fall behind as people jostle for a spot on an overcrowded bus. I suspect there has been little to no improvement on the former 2, either, judging by the number of three-bus trains you still see on Wellington-Somerset.

Further, if you want to cross town on that axis, you have to transfer, something you didn't used to have to do.

Similarly, the old 3 used to serve Preston, pass through downtown, then continue through Lowertown, New Edinburgh, and Vanier-Overbrook on what is now the 9. That route was chopped in two, again without noticeable improvement in adherance on the eastern end.

In both cases, the 9 and 12 also don't even cross the Rideau Canal westbound outside of weekday daylight hours; evening and weekend trips all require a forced transfer.

In LRT-related open houses a couple years ago, the planners gleefully told me they were going to further "improve" service post-LRT by splitting more of the routes that currently cross the central area, such as the 1, 7, and 5.

This is not an improvement, except in the minds of transit planners who don't actually ride their own buses.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Radster

Uhuniau, your tone is getting quite annoying, post after post. We all heard your dissatisfaction, what's the point of repeating yourself like a broken record?

Squeaky wheels supposedly get the grease.

Ottawa is not NYC, Toronto, MTL, London or Paris.

Neither, once upon a time, where Toronto or Montreal, both of which had metro populations comparable to that of Ottawa's now when they started building rail-based mass transit that actually serve residents of their cores. Ditto Vancouver. Ottawa is quite exceptional in its suburban-focused first steps towards rail-based transit among the six largest Canadian metro areas.

The geography of this city, low density, and large suburban sprawl all factor into transit planning. Sadly, as some have shown in their posts over the past few pages, most of the population that depends on public transit is outside of the core, so this is why the LRT is built more for them, while the downtown folks, in most part, will live with the status quo. There is just no need for RT downtown other than perhaps a Bank Street subway, and Carling tram.

Nope: the number one need for mass transit within the old city is on the Rideau-Montreal corridor, a decision which has been punted to the 22nd century at the earliest.

If you feel so strongly about the lack of RT downtown, then instead of repeating the same negative and snarky comments on here, put your energy elsewhere and start a movement, a petition, get involved in more ways than just behind a screen on skyscraperpage.

I have done so, as have others, for decades, and gotten nowhere. The last round of efforts resulted in a cancelled series of LRT studies for projects that would have served downtown residents, followed by a substantial downgrade in local service dolled up, in typically Orwellian fashion, as "service improvement".

And btw, I too live downtown, Hintonbourg, right by the 14, and near the future Gladstone station.

Good. You are one of the few downtown neighbourhoods that will actually get LRT service designed with service to and from your area in mind.

I too share your views, but I remain hopeful and confident that with the LRT, will come improvements to downtown service (even if this has not been announced)

The opposite has already been announced:

• More local routes in the core will be split or truncated.
• The goal is to have fewer buses operating on downtown streets (and not just on the former transitway streets.
• Anti-bus fetishism is the driving factor behind plans for Wellington Street.
• Bus-rail transfers will be forced through the Rideau Centre, not at Rideau Street.

None of these things constitute "improvement".

For now bus transit is there, and is adequate, yes its not perfect, but it works and is doing an ok job at moving the population within the core.

I agree, it does an OK job of moving people within the core west of the canal.

It does a lousy job of moving them from one side of the canal to the other, or within neighbourhoods east of the canal. Absolutely miserably lousy. And getting worse, without any concern on the part of the powers that be, who have continued to oversee "service improvements" that worsen the service. We are now in Year Eight of that decline which began with the schedule changes that coincided with the strike.

Aylmer had made some good points, regarding walking vs taking public transit or RT when looking to get from point A to B in the core, sometimes you're just better off walking. Or biking in the summer.

Yes, and there are times where my 5 km bus commute in the morning has taken an hour... which is about five-ten minutes longer than it would take me to walk. But I am not a sucker for the punishment of walking in winter slush and summer humidity. (there are a few months in the spring and fall where walking is an option, and one which I take up.)

But the thing is, that bus trip that now can take up to an hour... used to take 20-25 minutes. As non-transit auto traffic has increased in the core, there has been no effort - NONE - made to improve the situation for transit vehicles, and many measures taken to worsen the situation. Fewer artics on runs. Fewer runs. Temporary traffic measures during the interminable construction season that favour private auto movements over bus movements. (There have been times it has taken an hour to cross the Cummings Bridge, or 20 minutes to get through one light, even as the traffic cop waves through hundreds of other vehicles on the opposite side or in the cross directions.)

The city has shown, time and time again, that it simply does not care.

The local councillors have shown, time and time again, that they simply do not care.

OC Transpo? Even more so.

And yet my property taxes, including the transit levy, keep going up, in effect subsidizing real service improvements in other neighbourhoods, esp. in the suburbs.

Maybe some day central neighbourhoods will be invited to the party. But it won't be in either of our lifetimes. Ottawa is a suburb of itself, and fat and happy being that way. It's an awful way for Canada's capital to be, for one of its largest metros to be, and for one of the three oldest of its largest metros to be, but that's the way it is.

There is no urban vision here, only a suburban one, and even among the downtown councillors.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Buggys

Totally agree about #8. The OCTranspo Customer Service # is virtually always busy.

It's not just that the line is busy.

It's that when you report an issue, there's never any feedback or follow-up.

You can research and write up or document a problem, submit it to OC Transpo.... and poof, it vanishes into the ether, never to be spoken of again.

I know that not EVERY issue is going to get, or even merit, a real response... but for the 20 years that OC Transpo has had an email address, the case is that not ANY issue ever gets one.

There is no feedback, no response, no follow-through or follow-up; customer concerns are shouted into a void and that's where they remain. I have never seen an institution, public or private, short of perhaps a cloistered religious institution, that so jealously guards its right to ignore you.

[Vanier]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

I don't think that his message is the problem - I agree with almost everything on his list, but I've found myself tuning out regardless because the bitterness gets in the way of the arguments.

Some church ladies in the west end managed to have the LRT realigned because they expressed themselves similarly. I don't see a problem with his approach.

[Kitchissippi]

Snapped this pic today, I'm guessing they're just about done with the excavation at the old Scotiabank site. Interesting to see how deep exactly the concourse level is for Rideau Station, the track platform even deeper. They must have nudged the station a few metres to the east, the last layout I saw had the platform and concourse not extending past William Street.

[OTSkyline]

Cool picture! Yeah, I didn't realize the tunnel at Rideau would be that deep.

[Kitchissippi]

The track level is at least 5 storeys underground, just hope the elevators don't break down too often. It won't be the most convenient transfer point, and if you have to catch a bus at the M-K bridge, it'll be 7 storeys plus a walk across the mall.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Nope: the number one need for mass transit within the old city is on the Rideau-Montreal corridor, a decision which has been punted to the 22nd century at the earliest.

Even if there was political will for such a project (which is unlikely given that local politicians have no interest in transit and Ottawa Vanier is one of the least competitive ridings in the country), what's the mechanism to put asses in seats? Those are low density neighbourhoods with mostly single family, row houses and walkup apartments. There's a little density around Vanier, but it certainly isn't enough to fill a subway or other type of mass transit. Yes the local bus route is overcrowded much of the time, but the solution to an overcrowded bus route is not to build a mass transit system. I know you don't like suburban transit, but it is a way to concentrate riders, which makes mass transit feasible. This doesn't exist in the "urban" areas (mostly postwar suburbs) on the east side of the city.

[Vanier]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Even if there was political will for such a project (which is unlikely given that local politicians have no interest in transit and Ottawa Vanier is one of the least competitive ridings in the country), what's the mechanism to put asses in seats? Those are low density neighbourhoods with mostly single family, row houses and walkup apartments. There's a little density around Vanier, but it certainly isn't enough to fill a subway or other type of mass transit. Yes the local bus route is overcrowded much of the time, but the solution to an overcrowded bus route is not to build a mass transit system. I know you don't like suburban transit, but it is a way to concentrate riders, which makes mass transit feasible. This doesn't exist in the "urban" areas (mostly postwar suburbs) on the east side of the city.

Vanier is low density? Maybe you should drive/live these areas before making these statements. Yes, Vanier has a lowish population but it is dense. There are 20k people living in a area of less than 3 square kms (or close to that). Drive along Montreal and count the highrises and also consider the government buildings along Montreal Road (CMHC, Place Vanier). Go further up Montreal Rd and it all high rises and the NRC. Those small suburban houses? They often house 3 or 4 apartments. Add to that, people who live here actually use transit. The 60 foot buses are over capacity as it is while running 7-8 minutes apart during rush hour. If there is any area in Ottawa that can benefit from "mass" transit, it is the central east area of the city.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Vanier

Vanier is low density? Maybe you should drive/live these areas before making these statements. Yes, Vanier has a lowish population but it is dense. There are 20k people living in a area of less than 3 square kms (or close to that). Drive along Montreal and count the highrises and also consider the government buildings along Montreal Road (CMHC, Place Vanier). Go further up Montreal Rd and it all high rises and the NRC. Those small suburban houses? They often house 3 or 4 apartments. Add to that, people who live here actually use transit. The 60 foot buses are over capacity as it is while running 7-8 minutes apart during rush hour. If there is any area in Ottawa that can benefit from "mass" transit, it is the central east area of the city.

I'm reasonably familiar with the area, I live fairly close to Montreal road. I think I noted there was an increase in density around Vanier (but as you said, it is a small area and not sustained along the the corridor). After that it is a large cemetery district, some postwar suburbs, a few highrises-in-a-park type developments, a few institutional buildings (usually in a campus type setting), plus a lot of vacant land owned by the federal government and strip malls.

[FFX-ME]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I'm reasonably familiar with the area, I live fairly close to Montreal road. I think I noted there was an increase in density around Vanier (but as you said, it is a small area and not sustained along the the corridor). After that it is a large cemetery district, some postwar suburbs, a few highrises-in-a-park type developments, a few institutional buildings (usually in a campus type setting), plus a lot of vacant land owned by the federal government and strip malls.

It really bothers me when people make unsupported anecdotes to support their bogus points of view. As can be seen in the density map here, northeastern Ottawa is clearly the most dense part of the city, period.

http://ajverster.github.io/blog/2013/09/16/population-density-maps-in-canadian-cities/

[Capital Shaun]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

It really bothers me when people make unsupported anecdotes to support their bogus points of view. As can be seen in the density map here, northeastern Ottawa is clearly the most dense part of the city, period.

http://ajverster.github.io/blog/2013/09/16/population-density-maps-in-canadian-cities/

[McC]

Riding by this morning, it looks like the new Booth Street Bridge has a deck now.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

It really bothers me when people make unsupported anecdotes to support their bogus points of view. As can be seen in the density map here, northeastern Ottawa is clearly the most dense part of the city, period.

http://ajverster.github.io/blog/2013/09/16/population-density-maps-in-canadian-cities/

I can't open your link, but along the Montreal Road corridor, the google cache seems to show an area of higher density in Vanier and then a lot of pink and white after that, with the odd cluster of dark red (presumably where highrise apartments are). I think that is how I described the situation.

When I sort this list by density, the only Northeast nieghbourhood on the top 10 is Lindenlea, which is nowhere near Montreal Road (Vanier does not appear because it was not in the former city of Ottawa, but would also appear in 7th at 5500/sqkm).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_neighbourhoods_in_Ottawa

Let's be realistic here. If there were many neighbourhoods with vanier-like densities in a row then the Northeast might support mass transit. If the road network of the NCR were configured differently then the Northeast side may be able to support mass transit. But the way it is now (small islands of medium density surrounded by a lower density suburbs, with few arterial roads that could bring buses from more distant neighbourhoods) there is no justification to build a mass transit system designed to carry 20-30k pax per hour (so more than the population of Vanier every hour). Montreal road needs more consistent application of bus lanes, more consistent use of Artics, a more consistent spacing of stops and more frequent service, it doesn't need a subway.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I can't open your link, but along the Montreal Road corridor, the google cache seems to show an area of higher density in Vanier and then a lot of pink and white after that, with the odd cluster of dark red (presumably where highrise apartments are). I think that is how I described the situation.

When I sort this list by density, the only Northeast nieghbourhood on the top 10 is Lindenlea, which is nowhere near Montreal Road (Vanier does not appear because it was not in the former city of Ottawa, but would also appear in 7th at 5500/sqkm).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_neighbourhoods_in_Ottawa

Let's be realistic here. If there were many neighbourhoods with vanier-like densities in a row then the Northeast might support mass transit. If the road network of the NCR were configured differently then the Northeast side may be able to support mass transit. But the way it is now (small islands of medium density surrounded by a lower density suburbs, with few arterial roads that could bring buses from more distant neighbourhoods) there is no justification to build a mass transit system designed to carry 20-30k pax per hour (so more than the population of Vanier every hour). Montreal road needs more consistent application of bus lanes, more consistent use of Artics, a more consistent spacing of stops and more frequent service, it doesn't need a subway.

So if Vanier's density doesn't justify rapid transit, how in the hell is the current plan justified when it passes through the lowest density areas in the city? Suburbs could have been served with single track commuter rail for a fraction of the price, making it possible to allocate the rest of the budget to subways in the densest parts of Ottawa (Bank-Rideau-Montreal, maybe even across to Hull), a corridor which also has massive potential for further density.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Even if there was political will for such a project (which is unlikely given that local politicians have no interest in transit and Ottawa Vanier is one of the least competitive ridings in the country), what's the mechanism to put asses in seats? Those are low density neighbourhoods with mostly single family, row houses and walkup apartments.

So... much denser and more diverse than most of the corridor that LRT is actually being built in, in other words.

There's a little density around Vanier, but it certainly isn't enough to fill a subway or other type of mass transit.

So why are we building mass transit through, and to, even lower-density parts of the city, then?

Yes the local bus route is overcrowded much of the time, but the solution to an overcrowded bus route is not to build a mass transit system.

That's exactly what they are planning in Vancouver.

I know you don't like suburban transit

I like suburban transit.

I just like URBAN transit even more, and hope that some time in the 23rd century Ottawa actually builds some, because right now, Ottawa isn't.

but it is a way to concentrate riders, which makes mass transit feasible. This doesn't exist in the "urban" areas (mostly postwar suburbs) on the east side of the city.

Actually, yes it does: the near east side of the city is one of the densest and most diverse areas.

But there is no mass transit in the area, none planned, and the little that was being considered has been punted to at least the next century in favour of LRT to even lower-density, lower-diversity areas.

It is a frustrating, appalling, ass-backwards situation, and one that no one at OC Transpo, no one at city hall, not even the local councillor, cares about. There is an entire swathe of the city that is, by design, being relegated to second-class transit (and other) citizenship for a century to come.

BTW, this:



is just the northern half of the "low density neighbourhood" whose taxes are being collected to pay for mass transit in the much more worthy Orleans, Kanata, Nepean, and Farrhaven for the rest of this century.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

It really bothers me when people make unsupported anecdotes to support their bogus points of view. As can be seen in the density map here, northeastern Ottawa is clearly the most dense part of the city, period.

http://ajverster.github.io/blog/2013/09/16/population-density-maps-in-canadian-cities/

Hoo boy I am gonna be lost in those maps for days. Thanks... I think.

And look at that small but intense cluster of residential density at Jasmine, where Ottawa is considering maybe building a possibly mass transit station perhaps in four or five decades potentially kinda.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

So if Vanier's density doesn't justify rapid transit, how in the hell is the current plan justified when it passes through the lowest density areas in the city? Suburbs could have been served with single track commuter rail for a fraction of the price, making it possible to allocate the rest of the budget to subways in the densest parts of Ottawa (Bank-Rideau-Montreal, maybe even across to Hull), a corridor which also has massive potential for further density.

Mass transit needs a mechanism to put asses in seats. There are a number of ways to do this.

1) Large park and ride lots (the Go Transit model)
2) Have many bus routes that transfer into it (essentially the Confederation Line model)
3) Have high density neighborhoods where there are enough local people to fill trains without 1) and 2).

Ottawa has no high density neighbourhoods. The "densest parts of Ottawa" really aren't that dense. Except for Centretown, no neighbourhood in Ottawa has a density higher 6.3k/km, compared to 20k for the City of Paris, or 15k for Barcelona.

Even higher density neighborhoods like Lindelea, Centretown West, Sandy Hill and Lower Town are mostly single family homes and row houses. Ottawa neighborhood associations, politicians and community groups have put significant efforts into preserving this.

There's nothing wrong with that, but there's no way to fill trains designed to carry tens of thousands of people per hour with the medium density neighborhoods along streets like Bank or Montreal, particularly when many people in those neighborhoods walk or bike to work much of the time.

If Ottawa was building transit completely from scratch (or if the province funded transit fairly) it probably wouldn't follow the current transitway corridors as much with the LRT system, but this is the situation we're in.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Mass transit needs a mechanism to put asses in seats. There are a number of ways to do this.

1) Large park and ride lots (the Go Transit model)
2) Have many bus routes that transfer into it (essentially the Confederation Line model)
3) Have high density neighborhoods where there are enough local people to fill trains without 1) and 2).

Ottawa has no high density neighbourhoods. The "densest parts of Ottawa" really aren't that dense. Except for Centretown, no neighbourhood in Ottawa has a density higher 6.3k/km, compared to 20k for the City of Paris, or 15k for Barcelona.

Did you check out that population density map?

If Ottawa was building transit completely from scratch (or if the province funded transit fairly) it probably wouldn't follow the current transitway corridors as much with the LRT system, but this is the situation we're in.

No matter what Ottawa builds, when, or how, it will always go with the path of cheapest and least resistance.

And no matter what Ottawa builds, when, or how, the structure of the city now bakes in the idea that it must primarily serve the interests of, or at least not unduly offend, suburbanites who drive. (Which is why, for example, photo radar is DOA.)