The future of Ottawa's Transit

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

as long as our mass transit plan is focussed entirely on serving far-flung, low-density post-war suburbs with declining populations, as the current plans do.

Which "low-density post-war suburbs" have declining populations? Using the OTTAWA PUBLIC LIBRARY FACILITIES INVESTMENT AND GROWTH PLANNING STUDY (2010), pp. 21-24 as a reference, Ottawa's 3 main "far-flung" suburbs (generically called East, West and South) have (projected) populations as follows:

	2006	2011	2021	2031
East	99,131	105,286	117,599	123,580
West	88,437	104,949	137,978	162,233
South	65,477	83,549	119,697	148,814
Central	532,209	538,301	550,487	584,697

Granted the data is old, but I don't see any evidence of the suburbs shrinking.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Which "low-density post-war suburbs" have declining populations? Using the OTTAWA PUBLIC LIBRARY FACILITIES INVESTMENT AND GROWTH PLANNING STUDY (2010), pp. 21-24 as a reference, Ottawa's 3 main "far-flung" suburbs (generically called East, West and South) have (projected) populations as follows:

	2006	2011	2021	2031
East	99,131	105,286	117,599	123,580
West	88,437	104,949	137,978	162,233
South	65,477	83,549	119,697	148,814

Granted the data is old, but I don't see any evidence of the suburbs shrinking.

The latest census data shows that the low-density post-war suburbs with declining populations are actually largely those inside the Greenbelt. These are the places we need to try to intensify.

http://wpmedia.ottawacitizen.com/2017/02/0209-ottawa-gatineau-cma.jpg?quality=55&strip=all

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

Just to illustrate this "issue" people keep obsessing with the picture below shows Urban Ottawa's footprint with the Glebe in red and the business district in green. That doesn't seem like a huge transportation hurdle. Like many of the people have said it's walkable. 2.5 km is no big deal, I walk that every day to get to work.

Therefore by your logic, the Confederation line should not have stops at Lyon, Pimisi and Bayview as they are too close to downtown and everyone should just walk from those locations. We also shouldn't have built it west to Tunnies Pasture as even it is too close to downtown.

Several of us have said it before and I will say it again. A north/south downtown transit link is not to serve The Glebe nor is Billings Bridge its final destination. It would be a stepping stone for further extensions to Ottawa South. There is plenty of black south of the Glebe on your footprint map for the line to extend to.

[Lakeofthewood]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Therefore by your logic, the Confederation line should not have stops at Lyon, Pimisi and Bayview as they are too close to downtown and everyone should just walk from those locations. We also shouldn't have built it west to Tunnies Pasture as even it is too close to downtown.

Several of us have said it before and I will say it again. A north/south downtown transit link is not to serve The Glebe nor is Billings Bridge its final destination. It would be a stepping stone for further extensions to Ottawa South. There is plenty of black south of the Glebe on your footprint map for the line to extend to.

Well said. The Glebe and Old Ottawa South were brought up due to their relatively low transit usage numbers. Some of us were defending those numbers due to the poor travel times in the downtown area that make it more reasonable to walk than to take the bus.

Yes I (and many others) are capable of walking 1 - 3 km for errands/jobs/gym/whatever, but it is rather silly that that is actually a faster option to walk than taking transit to the same location.

[OTSkyline]

I also believe the Bank St Subway should be a top priority for transit expansion, but unfortunately I'm sure they'll expand to Stittsville and the likes before that happens.

Ideally I would see the following stops on the Bank St Subway from the confed line to Billings Bridge:

-Downtown Queen St (connecting to confed. line)
-Somerset St W
-Catherine St
-Holmwood Ave / Lansdowne
-Belmont / Glen Ave
-Bilings Bridge

One can only dream I guess. I actually live in Centretown right by Bank/McLeod and I can say that I do not use transit because transit is poor (the Bank St buses are horrible), therefore I Uber around. So I guess this is sort of a chicken/egg scenario, transit ridership might be low but not because people don't want to use transit, it's because the transit options 🞵🞵🞵🞵.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

The latest census data shows that the low-density post-war suburbs with declining populations are actually largely those inside the Greenbelt.

I suspect the population is declining because of an aging population. The kids have left home and the parents are now alone. Eventually they will move out and new families will move in.

These are the places we need to try to intensify.

Agreed, and a good transit network is a great way of inducing growth in these neighbourhoods.

I know it is unpopular to say, but Ottawa's biggest contributors urban sprawl is the Greenbelt itself. The ironic thing is it was designed to limit urban sprawl. The problem is the Greenbelt was designed for a population of 500,000 within its bounds and we currently have about 550,000 and thus the overall the growth is relatively stagnant. I've added an "Inside Greenbelt (central)" line to my table above to illustrate this.

[swimmer_spe]

Ottawa has a lot of places it needs to improve.

The priority should focus on moving the most people the most effectively. That means that the future construction of LRT should be the conversion of all Transitways/BRT routes.

You can whine all you want, but those established corridors are where the traffic is and where needs the LRT sooner.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Ottawa has a lot of places it needs to improve.

The priority should focus on moving the most people the most effectively. That means that the future construction of LRT should be the conversion of all Transitways/BRT routes.

You can whine all you want, but those established corridors are where the traffic is and where needs the LRT sooner.

No, no, no. This has been our mistake all along. Replacing the remaining Tranistways with LRT accomplishes what? Not much. It is just the cheap way to deliver rail service without actually delivering anything significantly new or faster. We had to do this downtown because of congestion but the remaining transitways do not have this issue.

If we really want new people to leave their cars at home, then we need to build new routes, not regurgitate old routes. New routes is the way to move people faster and make transit better.

[lrt's friend]

Regarding walking 2.5 km, great, but it is more than being 'able' to do it, but also having the time to do it. Our transit system shouldn't be so cumbersome that people feel they are better off walking 2.5 km. I guess we forget that transit also has customers and if we want to have customers (and fares) then the service has to be way more efficient than this. Sure walk 2.5 km, but you should be seeing transit flying by you frequently so there is actually a choice. Convenience also has to be a consideration in designing a transit system.

As far as a Bank Street subway, stops should be at Queen, Somerset, Gladstone, Queensway, 2nd or 3rd Avenue (middle of the Glebe), Lansdowne, the middle of Old Ottawa South and Billings Bridge with extensions beyond to make it the North-South trunk line.

I think this is the reasonable compromise between rail speed and efficiency and reasonable walking distances to a station in a dense area.

Route number 7 would run from Carleton to Old Ottawa South with a convenient transfer to the subway. This shuttle bus needs to run frequently, more frequently than today to make up for the added transfer.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

No, no, no. This has been our mistake all along. Replacing the remaining Tranistways with LRT accomplishes what? Not much. It is just the cheap way to deliver rail service without actually delivering anything significantly new or faster. We had to do this downtown because of congestion but the remaining transitways do not have this issue.

If we really want new people to leave their cars at home, then we need to build new routes, not regurgitate old routes. New routes is the way to move people faster and make transit better.

So, building a LRT to Algonquin College is a bad idea?

[acottawa]

I think part of the problem here is the city went ahead to plan phase 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 before Phase 1 opens. People have taken this cue and want to plan phases 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11. Nobody knows how the transfer stations will work, nobody knows how the connexxion routes will work, nobody knows how the confederation line will change usage of existing routes. It would be interesting to see what this thread will look like in 2 years. Maybe it won't seem necessary to spend billions to avoid a transfer.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I think part of the problem here is the city went ahead to plan phase 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 before Phase 1 opens. People have taken this cue and want to plan phases 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11. Nobody knows how the transfer stations will work, nobody knows how the connexxion routes will work, nobody knows how the confederation line will change usage of existing routes. It would be interesting to see what this thread will look like in 2 years. Maybe it won't seem necessary to spend billions to avoid a transfer.

The whining about not serving certain neighbourhoods will not change.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

So, building a LRT to Algonquin College is a bad idea?

We have already made that commitment. Once we started the Confederation Line the way we have, we have no choice to finish it, no matter how many billions we have to invest. Of course, that means there is no money for anything else. That is why the Trillium Line plan is simply 🞵🞵🞵🞵.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I think part of the problem here is the city went ahead to plan phase 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 before Phase 1 opens. People have taken this cue and want to plan phases 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11. Nobody knows how the transfer stations will work, nobody knows how the connexxion routes will work, nobody knows how the confederation line will change usage of existing routes. It would be interesting to see what this thread will look like in 2 years. Maybe it won't seem necessary to spend billions to avoid a transfer.

Or, we find that we actually gain not much of anything after spending $2B+

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Or, we find that we actually gain not much of anything after spending $2B+

As someone with the nickname "LRT's Friend", yyou are not very friendly to anything dealing with the LRT.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

As someone with the nickname "LRT's Friend", yyou are not very friendly to anything dealing with the LRT.

As I said, we have to proceed with what we are doing and hope for the best, but I have the right to be a skeptic about rebuilding exactly the same route when it comes to ridership growth. I hope it is a roaring success but I will only be convinced when I see the numbers.

As you have seen, I am all in favour building new routes, so don't say I am against LRT. If we had the money, I would want it on Baseline from Day one.

There needs to be healthy degree of skepticism. We are not doing what any other Canadian city is doing. We are rebuilding existing rapid transit. Think about other cities such as the recently opened Evergreen Line in Vancouver, Edmonton plans for completely new routes, the new planned SE to North route in Calgary, Eglinton Crosstown, Montreal's REM. All new routes designed to capture new ridership from the get go. Even Toronto's Go RER, although existing routes, will deliver faster and more frequent service and therefore more ridership. Our plans call for no improvement in frequency and a slight time saving that will be entirely lost for the majority who will now have an extra transfer.

I know I have been very critical about our plans. I have been very consistent about this for years. We needed the tunnel, no question, but investing almost everything in rebuilding the exact same route as we had before is questionable when it comes to growing ridership. I think our politicians are also quietly nervous to see the reaction of Ottawa residents in 2018.

This is a big 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵.

You are not the first to criticize me for my stance. Which is fine.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Which "low-density post-war suburbs" have declining populations?

Per the 2016 census, large swathes of built-out 1970s- and 80s-era Nepean, Orleans, Kanata, and Farrhaven now have declining populations. See the map I posted in the census thread.

Populations are growing where there is greenfield (or even brownfield) development. Existing suburban areas are stagnant or declining.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

The latest census data shows that the low-density post-war suburbs with declining populations are actually largely those inside the Greenbelt. These are the places we need to try to intensify.

http://wpmedia.ottawacitizen.com/2017/02/0209-ottawa-gatineau-cma.jpg?quality=55&strip=all

Orleans: outside the Brownbelt.
Kanata: outside the Brownbelt.
Farrhaven: outside the Brownbelt.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Ottawa has a lot of places it needs to improve.

The priority should focus on moving the most people the most effectively. That means that the future construction of LRT should be the conversion of all Transitways/BRT routes.

You can whine all you want, but those established corridors are where the traffic is and where needs the LRT sooner.

The Rideau-Montreal corridor is one of the highest-ridership transit axes in the city.

No one cares. The city is running transit along it, and other downtown main streets, into the dirt.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Which "low-density post-war suburbs" have declining populations? Using the OTTAWA PUBLIC LIBRARY FACILITIES INVESTMENT AND GROWTH PLANNING STUDY (2010), pp. 21-24 as a reference, Ottawa's 3 main "far-flung" suburbs (generically called East, West and South) have (projected) populations as follows:

	2006	2011	2021	2031
East	99,131	105,286	117,599	123,580
West	88,437	104,949	137,978	162,233
South	65,477	83,549	119,697	148,814
Central	532,209	538,301	550,487	584,697

Granted the data is old, but I don't see any evidence of the suburbs shrinking.

Also, some of that data isn't data: 2021 and 2031 haven't happened yet.

The suburbs, inside and outside the Brownbelt, are growing in population mainly where there is new construction.

Mature, already-built-out cookiecutterland is generally shrinking in population. This is a widespread trend in Canada and the U.S.

Our current LRT and Bus Crappid Transit plans are, for the most part, aimed at extending rapid transit to these declining areas. Yes, it may help turn the demographics around to have new transit lines, but this should not be at the expense of having absolutely no new URBAN transit in the city any time this century.

Yet that's what is on order.