Rapid Transit

[thistleclub]

Unlike the B-line, where the LRT was replacing the 10 Express, the James North LRT spur wasn’t going to be replacing any bus lines. It was a 1km, two-stop route with a starting ridership of essentially zero, serving a train station that is only operational for two hours a day, in a neighbourhood pretty much synonymous with walkability. Hard to see the value.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

Originally Posted by thistleclub

Unlike the B-line, where the LRT was replacing the 10 Express, the James North LRT spur wasn’t going to be replacing any bus lines. It was a 1km, two-stop route with a starting ridership of essentially zero, serving a train station that is only operational for two hours a day, in a neighbourhood pretty much synonymous with walkability. Hard to see the value.

Yeah, I think this is a case of people liking the idea of it but, practically speaking, it just doesn't make much sense.

[King&James]

Originally Posted by thomax

I made a couple maps outlining the old and new plans...

Old plan:

Google Maps

New Plan:

Google Maps

thanks for maps! would be great news if it happens an the augment that with an extension of the B-Line (LRT sytle) to upcoming Centennial GO station

[Dr Awesomesauce]

But what does BRT look like on James S and North? Do you not end up with the same challenges as LRT?

Content removed

[CaptainKirk]

Originally Posted by thomax

From the top of the James Street mountain access all the way down to the pier it will most likely just run in mixed-traffic with limited stops.

That's not BRT. That's just an express bus. Isn't here an express A-line now?

I'm confused.

[NortheastWind]

A gondola on the A-Line would be best. There would be no traffic issues.

[SteelTown]

Depending how much money is left they could run the BRT along Upper James from Fennell to the Airport, remove the centre turning lanes for BRT.

From Fennell to the waterfront, BRT will likely be mixed since there isn't much space unless you have to remove curb side parking.

[Jon Dalton]

I'd rather see it go all the way to Eastgate than add buses to the airport. And screw Chad Collins - it's not his decision anyway.

[markbarbera]

For it to be a true city-building conduit, the rapid transit project should touch more than just the lower city

[Jon Dalton]

I agree but it's better to build one line right and then focus on the next than to half-— two lines at the same time. I also don't get what they're proposing other than more service on the existing A-line express bus.

[drpgq]

Originally Posted by Jon Dalton

I agree but it's better to build one line right and then focus on the next than to half-— two lines at the same time. I also don't get what they're proposing other than more service on the existing A-line express bus.

Yeah I don't get what is different here either.

[Beedok]

It'd be nice if they could build something similar to Ottawa's Baseline BRT plans.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

I know we've had this conversation before but I just don't see the demand for rapid transit along Upper James. And I definitely don't see the need to run lots of buses out to the airport - nothin' happening there. I'll happily change my tune if the data proves me wrong.

And if this is going to happen, then I'd like to see the City develop a comprehensive urban plan for Upper James, so that one day it might resemble something other than the suburban wasteland that it is.

[CaptainKirk]

Originally Posted by Dr Awesomesauce

I know we've had this conversation before but I just don't see the demand for rapid transit along Upper James. And I definitely don't see the need to run lots of buses out to the airport - nothin' happening there. I'll happily change my tune if the data proves me wrong.

And if this is going to happen, then I'd like to see the City develop a comprehensive urban plan for Upper James, so that one day it might resemble something other than the suburban wasteland that it is.

Agreed. This is what B-line is ahead on A-line. B-line already has the ridership. Maybe this helps quell Whitehead and Skelly a bit.

[ScreamingViking]

Politically and economically it's the smart move. The A-line LRT spur was a nice throw-in but would have been a lot of money for a short trip and a difficult implementation.

Operationally, it's a chance for the HSR to rationalize its north-south service. Instead of having as many Mountain routes meander their way downtown, an express trunk service will let them provide more connecting routes that would speed up trips despite the transfer.

As for the airport, there may not be a lot happening there yet in terms of passenger traffic, but this service may be more useful for employees at the airport and surrounding employment land. It makes that area more accessible, and that's a good thing provided the city moves smartly on supporting commercial/business development.

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by CaptainKirk

Agreed. This is what B-line is ahead on A-line. B-line already has the ridership. Maybe this helps quell Whitehead and Skelly a bit.

The thing is, ridership on the B-Line on its own is not at the level that will sustain higher order transit. The LRT study used the cumulative ridership of routes 1, 5, 10, and 51 along King and Main to arrive at this conclusion. Personally, I have always thought the assumption that every trip on all of these bus routes would move to LRT once it is established is a very dangerous assumption to make.

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

Operationally, it's a chance for the HSR to rationalize its north-south service. Instead of having as many Mountain routes meander their way downtown, an express trunk service will let them provide more connecting routes that would speed up trips despite the transfer.

Agreed. There is a definite opportunity to improve overall service on the mountain by re-configuring the service grid so that the mountain is serviced by east-west routes that feed a central higher order transit mode running north/south to a central hub.

[NortheastWind]

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

Operationally, it's a chance for the HSR to rationalize its north-south service. Instead of having as many Mountain routes meander their way downtown, an express trunk service will let them provide more connecting routes that would speed up trips despite the transfer.

There would have to be a much higher frequency of busses on the A-Line for it to work. I was born, raised and still reside on the east mountain and only take a bus on the odd occasion. I would rather meander my way downtown than transfer to another bus on Upper James if I have to wait for very long, especially if there's harsh weather.

[HillStreetBlues]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

The thing is, ridership on the B-Line on its own is not at the level that will sustain higher order transit. The LRT study used the cumulative ridership of routes 1, 5, 10, and 51 along King and Main to arrive at this conclusion. Personally, I have always thought the assumption that every trip on all of these bus routes would move to LRT once it is established is a very dangerous assumption to make.

Can you point to the report with the assumption that 100% of trips on those routes would be made by LRT? That seems odd to me, too, since there will still be some local bus service on the corridor, and some trips on (in particular) the 51 could not be served by LRT.

My understanding was that projected growth in ridership on the B Line justified LRT in the long term, and that day one ridership would be significant. It does seem that adding more buses to the B Line is no longer a solution: going to Mac from downtown during peak periods now involves frequent instances of pass-bys, despite very high frequency of service.