The future of Ottawa's Transit

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

Good to hear that he has changed his mind on the POW bridge and intends for it to be used for rail and not an idiotic pedestrian bridge.

Watson himself intends no such thing.

I don't see why it would have to wait so long though, or why Ottawa would have to pay for it. Have the city of Gatineau and the Québec government pay for the Gatineau extension, that way it could be done much more quickly.

They won't without Ottawa and Ontario participation, and rightfully so: it would be a service for Ottawa as much as for Gatineau.

The time to do it is when there is a non-PQ government in power in Quebec City and when there is some appetite in the public to do so (no matter how tepid the appetite might be in the two city halls). But just watch this opportunity get squandered, too.

[YOWflier]

Sorry, not trying to start a crapstorm, but to argue "equal benefits" (to both cities of train service connecting Gatineau to Ottawa's transit network) is craziness.

75/25

In my mind, that's the percentage split of the costs that Gatineau(Quebec)/Ottawa(Ontario) should absorb to get this to happen.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by ac888yow

Sorry, not trying to start a crapstorm, but to argue "equal benefits" (to both cities of train service connecting Gatineau to Ottawa's transit network) is craziness.

75/25

In my mind, that's the percentage split of the costs that Gatineau(Quebec)/Ottawa(Ontario) should absorb to get this to happen.

I don't disagree with you, but it is a complex issue. First of all, does anyone have any hard numbers as to the percentage of Gatineau residents commuting to Ottawa by transit as compared to the Ottawa residents commuting to Gatineau?

Even then, while the service would likely be used by Gatineau residents more than Ottawa residents, there is more to the story as the serviced employers would also benefit from this service and they also pay property taxes (either directly or indirectly). There is also something to be said about the benefit of having many (not all) buses on the downtown streets replaced by trains.

[passwordisnt123]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Now that we have the Civic going in next to Carling station, Phase 3 should include double-tracking the Trillium line. That should be the first priority after Phase 2. If the city wants to do Kanata or Gatineau at the same time, sure, but Trillium has to be in the first batch of work after Phase 2.

I think double-tracking the Trillium Line shouldn't be left until Phase 3. I think it should be done either as a part of Phase 2 (lose the extension to Leitrim if you must to make it fit in the budget) or some sort of a "Phase 2 ½".

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by ac888yow

Sorry, not trying to start a crapstorm, but to argue "equal benefits" (to both cities of train service connecting Gatineau to Ottawa's transit network) is craziness.

75/25

In my mind, that's the percentage split of the costs that Gatineau(Quebec)/Ottawa(Ontario) should absorb to get this to happen.

If - as makes sense - the idea is to extend the existing O-train north to downtown Hull, the lion's share of traffic will be Ontario residents who work in INAC, Environment Canada, or whatever the hell HRSDC is called now.

That takes traffic off Ottawa streets and frees capacity on OC Transpo buses.

Benefit.

Yay, benefit.

[YOWflier]

I doubt very much that the scales would be tipped so heavily in the direction you suggest. I'd be interested in seeing data.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by ac888yow

I doubt very much that the scales would be tipped so heavily in the direction you suggest. I'd be interested in seeing data.

I would, too.

But the simple fact is that an O-Train extension into downtown hull would have the office complexes there as its principle generator of origins and destinations. Transit-using workers who already live in Gatineau would be taking RapiBus or other STO routes to downtown Hull. The main beneficiary of an extension would therefore be Ontario-side residents.

It could, and should be studied. Hell, it could and should have been done at any time in the 16 years that the O-train has existed. The fact that it hasn't goes to the inertia, conservatism, and lack of vision of both city governments, and their respective provinces, over many changes of administration.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

But the simple fact is that an O-Train extension into downtown hull would have the office complexes there as its principle generator of origins and destinations. Transit-using workers who already live in Gatineau would be taking RapiBus or other STO routes to downtown Hull. The main beneficiary of an extension would therefore be Ontario-side residents.

That is assuming it goes to downtown Hull. It could end up going to the Alexandre-Taché-UQO Rapibus terminal. If that's the case, it would be better for most Gatineau residents as it would force an extra transfer for Ottawa residents. Who knows, maybe Gatineau will buy the bridge and convert it for bus use.

Regardless, the problem with the POW bridge for Ottawa residents, is those in Central and east Ottawa have to travel about a kilometre too far west before crossing the river and then heading about a kilometre east. For Gatineau residents, it lines up nicely with the Rapibus line for those coming from the east and is an easy connection for those in Aylmer.

[lrt's friend]

The only good use of the POW bridge would be to have Gatineau trains run across it and turn and run into the downtown tunnel. It would be ridiculous to suggest that people take a bus to Rapibus, then Rapibus to the Trillium Line, then cross the POW bridge and transfer a third time to a Confederation Line train. Totally unacceptable in a city this size. Transit should require no more than one transfer to reach downtown and a maximum of two transfers to get anywhere in the city.

[Acajack]

An extension of train service across the POW and then to Portage-Terrasses would be of little use to Gatineau residents as others have said.

Downtown Hull has a relatively small population, though it is set to increase. But even so, most of the people there won't be going to places in Ottawa along the Trillium line very often, or making a detour via the Trillium and Confederation lines at Bayview to go to central Ottawa when they live directly across the river from it. There are far better options for them to get to Ottawa.

Also, unless there is a serious and unlikely rejigging of transit options in Gatineau, people from other parts of Gatineau (east or west) aren't going to transfer at Terrasses-Portage and then go back to the POW, and then back east a few km to central Ottawa, as their transit routing of choice. Again - not when there are better options.

I do agree that Quebec and Gatineau should pay their share of any line which runs on their territory. The question is - would they agree to this POW-Terrasses-Portage line? Likely not.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The only good use of the POW bridge would be to have Gatineau trains run across it and turn and run into the downtown tunnel. It would be ridiculous to suggest that people take a bus to Rapibus, then Rapibus to the Trillium Line, then cross the POW bridge and transfer a third time to a Confederation Line train.

Good point. Tell that to someone who is suggesting that thing.

[roger1818]

What could be done is run it in a triangle. In the morning run it from Bayview to Portage-Terrasses to Alexandre-Taché-UQO and back to Bayview. In the evening the train could run in the reverse direction. It would likely be mostly empty between Portage-Terrasses and Alexandre-Taché-UQO but it would satisfy the needs of most. The only problem with this idea is it would mean expropriating some land to build a wye (or have it back onto the bridge, in which case it might as well go back to Bayview and have it alternate between destinations).

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The only good use of the POW bridge would be to have Gatineau trains run across it and turn and run into the downtown tunnel.

And let me guess, have the trillium line run down the tunnel as well. Might be good for the bridge, but it wouldn't be good for the tunnel. Off peak you would end up with one train every hour on the 4 different spurs to have service every 15 minutes downtown and east.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by roger1818

And let me guess, have the trillium line run down the tunnel as well. Might be good for the bridge, but it wouldn't be good for the tunnel. Off peak you would end up with one train every hour on the 4 different spurs to have service every 15 minutes downtown and east.

Why would a train every 15 minutes downtown be enough if you are serving the entire city? That is not even the case at midnight with the Transitway buses.

The limiting factor is during peak hours but with 4 branches, you could have a train every 8 minutes on each branch.

Regardless, if you send all those passengers to the train tunnel, you still have to handle the same number of passengers. The nice thing with branches is that you keep the number of transfers to a reasonable level.

I don't like the bus-train-train scenario. That just does not encourage people to make optional trips to downtown for shopping, festivals, concerts etc.

If we really want to enliven downtown, we need to make it easy to get there.

[swimmer_spe]

I wonder if having lines like an X would work.

Lets say the Trillium line is extended over the POW bridge. Lets say that is extended along the current Rapibus route.

Then, lets say the LRT for Hull/Alymer crossed over and then went under Bank to where the current Transitway is near Billings Bridge Shopping centre.

Those 2 lines would cover much of the area.

Who pays for what?
- That is why a Capital province would be best.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

If we really want to enliven downtown, we need to make it easy to get there.

And yet... from most neighbourhoods close to downtown, we keep making it harder to do so by public transportation by inflicting crappier and crappier local service on the old streetcar suburbs.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I don't like the bus-train-train scenario. That just does not encourage people to make optional trips to downtown for shopping, festivals, concerts etc.

That's assuming everybody wants to go to the "old" downtown. I live in an old suburb, within walking distance of Greenboro. I currently do take the train frequently to Little Italy (and the future station at Gladstone would make it better). Assuming all the grandiose things about Lebreton come true, I would also take it frequently to get to there and the Zibi development. I don't work downtown, and so I have no real reason to go visit the boring government office towers in the middle of downtown, and I'm not a tourist visiting parliament. Rideau Centre is nice occasionally, but I hardly ever go to the market. Lansdowne is both closer and nicer for me to visit (and that's one place I really wish had rapid transit access)

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

That's assuming everybody wants to go to the "old" downtown. I live in an old suburb, within walking distance of Greenboro. I currently do take the train frequently to Little Italy (and the future station at Gladstone would make it better). Assuming all the grandiose things about Lebreton come true, I would also take it frequently to get to there and the Zibi development. I don't work downtown, and so I have no real reason to go visit the boring government office towers in the middle of downtown, and I'm not a tourist visiting parliament. Rideau Centre is nice occasionally, but I hardly ever go to the market. Lansdowne is both closer and nicer for me to visit (and that's one place I really wish had rapid transit access)

In a way, you are proving my point. You go to Little Italy because it is single train ride. You would like to go to the future Lebreton development because it would be a direct train ride. You would like a better direct transit connection to Lansdowne.

But downtown is too far and too difficult to get to, so you are not interested. Nothing like a couple of transfers to make going downtown unpalatable to an even wider audience, who may actually want to go there.

The question must be asked. Do we want to make downtown more attractive than it is today? If so, we need to make it easy to get there. The alternative is that downtown will bleed people to Lansdowne and Lebreton and Little Italy and Westboro and the suburbs in general and what do we end up with? This bleeding has been going on for a couple of generations. To a degree, that is fine but we don't want downtown to turn into a ghost town. The loss of the last true downtown movie theatres really show how bad things have become.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

In a way, you are proving my point. You go to Little Italy because it is single train ride. You would like to go to the future Lebreton development because it would be a direct train ride. You would like a better direct transit connection to Lansdowne.

But downtown is too far and too difficult to get to, so you are not interested. Nothing like a couple of transfers to make going downtown unpalatable to an even wider audience, who may actually want to go there.

The question must be asked. Do we want to make downtown more attractive than it is today? If so, we need to make it easy to get there.

I don't find it especially hard to get to downtown Montreal starting a transit trip on the blue line.

[gjhall]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

I don't find it especially hard to get to downtown Montreal starting a transit trip on the blue line.

Which brings us to the point. Are single rides preferable to transfers? Of course. Would everyone like a point to point trip? Sure thing. Can a growing city service a growing downtown spanning two provinces, deliver people to work, leisure, and home all in a single line? No.

Some places are going to be more convenient from certain places, others from different places. Some trips will require transfers because life.