Canadian LRT/RT projects U/C

[kool maudit]

Transfers can be alienating to people who are in a new city, or a city they seldom visit, with bags in hand and all that. There is a big "— it let's just get a cab" factor here.

Airport transfers should go to the central station. Last week, I booked a five-hour stopover in Geneva when I could have done 25 minutes; I did so because the rail situation is so easy that I thought it would be fun to stash my bag and go into town.

I wound up spending about 100 CHF while in town on food and a gift. This money, while small, would never have gone into Switzerland without the easy transfer.

How it works is, you collect your free ticket into town from the heavily advertised dispenser, exit customs and walk 200 metres, indoors, to a train station. There are lockers at the top of the escalator for your bag should you want such a thing. You get on the train and ride for 15 minutes into town, and get off into the heart of everything.

It's so easy that I book connecting flights through this city specifically to use this service.

[MolsonExport]

^exhibit A for why I love Switzerland/Austria/Germany.

[jmt18325]

Minus the lockers, that's basically UPX. It's $12 if you're staying downtown for 7 hours or less, and takes you quickly into the heart of Toronto. I used it on a 7 hour layover a couple of weeks ago.

[Aylmer]

I agree that, in isolation, not transferring is preferable to transferring. However, it has a lot to do with the quality of the connection; In Montreal, I avoid the cumbersome transfer at Jean-Talon with its long stairways and walkways. However, transferring at Lionel-Groulx is a breeze - just walk across the platform and the Metro will be there in a minute or two at most.

The Ottawa situation will be much more akin to the latter; It's a short escalator ride in a covered and heated/air-conditioned station with an average wait time of 90-240 seconds depending on the hour. It's dead simple, fast and comfortable, even with a suitcase or two.

That said, the proposed transfer at South Keys is just confusing - depending on the hour, you might need to transfer, not need to transfer or you might be on the wrong train. The problem here isn't that there might be a transfer (though that isn't ideal, as I said), it's that it's not simple or intuitive.
I'm of the opinion that we should forgo the Trillium Line extension to Leitrim (which would be a P&R lot in the middle of absolutely nowhere) and instead move the transfer point to Lester Rd (along the way to the Airport) thanks to some reserved bus lanes to bypass the traffic on Albion Rd. Long-term, LRT could run under the airport runways to reach Riverside South, which would avoid the whole frequency-splitting problem in the first place.

[Acajack]

Having been in that situation many times, often the way decision-making happens at the airport goes like this:

- I'd like to get to the city centre.
- Well, you can take the train/subway/metro/s-bahn, etc.
- OK, how do you do that?
- Just walk down the hall to the station, hop on the first car and you'll be in the centre of town in 20 minutes.

OR

- I'd like to get to the city centre.
- Well, you can take the train/subway/metro/s-bahn, etc.
- OK, how do you do that?
- Just walk down the hall to the station, then take the first car, get off at — station (often with a name in a language you don't understand), then cross the platform to take the X line, which will take you directly to the centre of town. All in all it should take you 20 minutes.

The second scenario is not a hindrance to me, but I can you that it is for a LOT of people, who aren't so adventurous. Under the second scenario, a large chunk of travellers will simply take a taxi or a shuttle bus that will take them downtown directly.

There is nothing like hearing the word "direct" when you are talking about transportation in an unfamiliar city.

[Aylmer]

But if done right, then it goes like this:

- Take the train to the end of the line, then go up the escalator and take line 1 towards Downtown.

It's not exactly rocket science. I spend my summers directing tourists around the capital and I know all too well that visitors often have a very low threshold for confusion. But the explication above is definitely on the low end of the complication spectrum.

[kwoldtimer]

Has the economic case for running the LRT to the Ottawa airport been clearly made? IIRC the airport itself was offering to pay for the station, no? I confess I have trouble imagining it heavily used.

[MalcolmTucker]

The airport link will be so underused I doubt they will have higher than 15 minute frequency in any case. The St. Louis Airport LRT services ~5,000 people per day. The Portland airport (albeit dated) record is 4,200 on a single day.

[niwell]

Even in big cities most airports are actually pretty bad trip generators. A place like Ottawa isn't likely to see much transit usage. Many tourists will take a cab unless it's prohibitively expensive, particularly if they are in a group. The largest group of potential transit users are actually airport workers, and they aren't as likely to live downtown.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by niwell

Even in big cities most airports are actually pretty bad trip generators. A place like Ottawa isn't likely to see much transit usage. Many tourists will take a cab unless it's prohibitively expensive, particularly if they are in a group. The largest group of potential transit users are actually airport workers, and they aren't as likely to live downtown.

Coincidentally, there is news out today about increased UPX ridership since the fares were dropped. Averaging 8200 trips on weekdays.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/up...th-shiny-new-ridership-numbers-1.3615689

[lrt's friend]

What is disturbing about the Ottawa plan is that it is being built as extension of a 'temporary' initial rail plan. At some point electrification and double tracking will be needed and everything will be shut down (yet again) for a year or two.

As it stands, we are going to pump in over $100M for an airport spur which will not serve anybody well. The main markets will be airport workers and business and tourist visitors bound for downtown hotels. In both cases, we are adding transfers over what exists today and throwing in a confusing shuttle system that changes depending on the time of day.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by niwell

Even in big cities most airports are actually pretty bad trip generators. A place like Ottawa isn't likely to see much transit usage. Many tourists will take a cab unless it's prohibitively expensive, particularly if they are in a group. The largest group of potential transit users are actually airport workers, and they aren't as likely to live downtown.

Yes, and they have access to cheap parking, and have odd hours.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Coincidentally, there is news out today about increased UPX ridership since the fares were dropped. Averaging 8200 trips on weekdays.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/up...th-shiny-new-ridership-numbers-1.3615689

8,200 riders a day is pretty impressive. That's not far from Vancouver's West Coast Express.

Of course, an airport of Ottawa's size doesn't really need a rail connection. I don't know what's there now, but an express downtown coach service that runs every half an hour and a regular bus service that comes off the transitway would suffice.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

8,200 riders a day is pretty impressive. That's not far from Vancouver's West Coast Express.

Of course, an airport of Ottawa's size doesn't really need a rail connection. I don't know what's there now, but an express downtown coach service that runs every half an hour and a regular bus service that comes off the transitway would suffice.

At the present, there is a Transitway bus every 15 minutes from the airport to downtown Ottawa (and it continues to the west end of the city).

[lrt's friend]

When I was in Berlin and there was no obvious direct transit from the rail station to my hotel, I took a taxi. Transfers are a pain at the best of times in an unfamiliar city unless you have done your research in advance. Think about hauling luggage at the same time.

[1overcosc]

When I went to Israel a few months back, it ended up being a two-transfer bus trip from the airport to my hotel. I did it, but I think I must have been the only non-local doing the trip.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

When I went to Israel a few months back, it ended up being a two-transfer bus trip from the airport to my hotel. I did it, but I think I must have been the only non-local doing the trip.

I did something similar going into the Sonoma Valley north of San Francisco, luggage and all. It was OK if you have the time and you have done all the necessary research. The transfer wait times were terrible though, a good part of an hour for each bus. Thankfully, the weather was nice. We were the only tourists being this venturesome.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

When I was in Berlin and there was no obvious direct transit from the rail station to my hotel, I took a taxi. Transfers are a pain at the best of times in an unfamiliar city unless you have done your research in advance. Think about hauling luggage at the same time.

Meh, I took the bus from tegel. It was a bus + 2 subway lines for me, but I only had a carry on too. I followed the bus signs in the airport to the spot they pick people up, purchased a ticket from the machine which had an English option, then hopped on the bus off to the subway.

Seriously, transfers only require looking at a map to figure out where you are going, then following signs in the stations. You can look at the map while you wait for your train too - it's not like it takes extra time. That's all I did in Berlin.

Mind you I spent 3 weeks in Europe and didn't take a taxi once - managed the whole thing on public transit over several countries and probably 10 different systems. It's not difficult stuff if you are patient.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

what is so bad with a friggen transfer? its hardly a huge deal, thats why nobody is making a stink about it.

Forget the transfer for one second. The reliability of the single track O-Train is terrible as it is. It often shuts down for a few hours or a day, maybe even a week at times. They can't get it to work with 8 kilometers, imagine 16 kilometers and a spur to the airport.

Back to the transfer, would you have been cool with the UPX terminated at Bloor? What about the Skytrain Canada Line, if instead of heading north past the Olympic Village to downtown, it would have turned right and stopped at Broadway. And Montreal's new REM, why not just drop people off at Edouard-Montpetit? Why not, because these three cities have enough vision to drop people downtown, not in an empty field where tourists and business people have to freeze their asses or sweat in 35 degree heat dragging their luggage up an escalator and into a packed train where they will likely have to stand for another 5-10 minutes before they finally get out at the proper station.

Do it right or don't do it at all.

[Innsertnamehere]

no, as all those respective lines have easy ways of getting downtown. The only equivalent here to Ottawa's situation is Vancouver's airport rail link. REM and UPx are express rail services running on rail corridors right into the downtown, and the UPx is used exclusively as an airport shuttle. The Trillium line will be part of the mass transit network, like Vancouver's. What I WOULD have been fine with is if the Bloor line ran to the airport, transferring at St. George. Of course the UPx stopping at bloor would have been absurd, as the whole point of that train would be to get people from the airport to downtown. The Trillium line doesn't do that however, the aiport is just another stop on the mass transit line.