Confederation Line (Stage 1) | In Service 1.0

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

So im guessing you never taken the route 12 or even travel along that corridor to see things for yourself to know how badly transit needs to be improved.

I live nearby. So yes, fairly familiar.

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

Every time i go that way the bus is always full so the ridership is there.

A full bus does not indicate high ridership per se. Only total ridership does.

Let me illustrate with an example:

If you have to move 1000 passengers per hour per direction (pphpd - term used by planners), and you have articulated buses which carry 200 passengers each. That would be 5 buses an hour in each direction, which would be packed with 200 riders. If, instead, I run 6 buses an hour, to achieve a 10 min frequency, I will now have 167 passengers in each bus. If I run 5 buses they will seem packed. If I run 6 buses, they won't seem packed. Yet, the total number of riders has not changed.

This is why saying the buses are packed, is pointless. You have to look at total ridership (# of buses per hour x capacity of the buses).

Metrolinx in Toronto says buses are good till a max of 5000 pphpd. And that streetcars are not usually considered until 2000 pphpd. To put this in context, 2000 pphpd is a fully packed articulated bus every 6 minutes (if we are generous and assumed 200 pax per bus). Do you see a packed to the gills articulated #12 arriving every 6 mins at Rideau Centre? I don't.

So, while the #12 is busy, it's not anywhere close to warranting conversion to a streetcar. That does not mean no improvements are warranted. If they want to stick with buses on there, they should be implementing transit priority, queue jump lanes, bus lanes and higher frequency articulated bus service.

Reference to explain all this:
http://www.metrolinx.com/thebigmove/...chnologies.pdf

And you can hand wave all this if you want, but this is exactly what Queen's Park and the feds are looking at when they decide where to invest billions.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

It really isn't an either/or. Street level LRT is very complementary to a metro system. That's why many European cities have both or a hybrid. Nor does the city need Hong Kong level densities to justify it. The ridership is already there on the Montreal and Bank St corridor, more so than many LRT lines in the US. We are not "done" after stage 2, there's still lots to be improved.

Nor does street level LRT have to work like the King St streetcar (before the pilot). Toronto isn't the example to emulate.

I agree that Toronto is not the one to emulate. But again, the Europeans don't just randomly build tram lines and transit malls wherever they feel like it. They build them where ridership warrants it.

So why would you over invest in a corridor if the ridership level does not need it yet? Buses can handle quite a bit of ridership before you absolutely need to move to streetcars or light rail. And the corridors we're talking about, are barely; at a point where you need transit priority.

[rocketphish]

Amid calls for transparency, mayor and councillors ask for monthly LRT updates until launch

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Published on: February 14, 2018 | Last Updated: February 14, 2018 3:39 PM EST

Councillors could phone the bosses at city hall to receive more information about the Confederation Line LRT rather than writing opinion pieces in the newspaper complaining about being in the dark, Mayor Jim Watson said Wednesday.

Coun. Tobi Nussbaum called for more transparency on the $2.1-billion project in a piece published in the Citizen after council learned details about the nearly six-month delay and potential costs.

“I know councillor Nussbaum has never asked to meet me or my office on this issue. I’ve confirmed with (city manager Steve Kanellakos) he has never asked for a briefing,” Watson said after a council meeting.

“Every member of council has every right to ask for more information and it’s really up to them to go and pick up the phone and call me or call the city manager. I’m not sure an op-ed actually is the right approach. You’re entitled to write what you want but if you’re serious about wanting more information, you should pick up the phone and ask for a briefing. That’s really the responsibility of all members of council to do that.”

Nussbaum, however, joined Coun. Jeff Leiper in sending a letter to the city manager on Dec. 19 asking for clarification on issues brought up in a Dec. 15 briefing on LRT construction and the transit budget. The councillors asked 10 questions in that letter and received a response from the city manager’s office.

There were more questions this month when council members learned the LRT handover date would be pushed from May 24 to Nov. 2 because of the 2016 sinkhole on Rideau Street and that the Rideau Transit Group won’t have to pay a $1-million penalty for missing the contracted deadline.

Perhaps the bigger question is how much more the city will have to pay to keep buses running on detours through the core and operate an LRT construction office.

Council members received memos Wednesday morning with a bit more information on the financial impact of the LRT delay, but it could take several months, possibly more than a year, until taxpayers learn the full extent of the extra costs.

Until now, the final payment to RTG for building the LRT system has been secret. Kanellakos told council members in one memo that RTG will get $200 million when the consortium achieves “revenue service availability,” which essentially means handing the keys over to the city. The final payment is part of the $2.1 billion.

So, as long as the handover is delayed, RTG won’t get that major, final payment.

The city is also reviewing the timelines for sending RTG regular payments for meeting project milestones now that the schedule has changed.

Kanellakos told council that the LRT-related bus detours cost about $1.9 million monthly, but there will be additional expenses that won’t be fully known until construction is finished.

The city manager estimated RTG is absorbing between $8 million and $10 million in extra costs each month because of the delay, not including costs associated with fixing the sinkhole.

Kanellakos’s memo acknowledges “there may be ongoing disputes and lengthy negotiations” over the city’s costs related to the LRT delay, but Watson still seems sure that taxpayers will be financially insulated.

“I have full confidence in our staff, both legal and operational staff, that we will ensure taxpayers are fully protected and our costs as a result of RTG not meeting the deadline that we all agreed to (May, 24, 2018) will be borne by RTG and not the taxpayers of Ottawa. That’s my No. 1 goal in all of these negotiations,” Watson said.

Nussbaum said the memo sent by Kanellakos is an indication that the city is prepared to be more transparent and clear about the details of the LRT project.

“I was encouraged to see the memo,” Nussbaum said.

The memo didn’t stop Nussbaum, Leiper and Coun. Catherine McKenney from submitting pointed questions during the council meeting about the cost of the delay and the impact of the sinkhole. McKenney said she expects staff to provide answers to their written inquiry during future LRT updates.

Council members will now receive monthly updates on the Confederation Line LRT construction until the system opens in November. The updates will happen during meetings of the finance and economic development committee.

Updates haven’t been as frequent over the course of construction. The city has largely relied on written summaries after each quarter to keep politicians in the loop.

Watson said the majority of residents with whom he’s talked are just happy the city has identified a month for the launch of LRT.

Questions over the city’s extra costs, however, could linger long after the trains hit the rails.

Asked if he’s willing to go to court over the extra costs, Watson said, “that’s always an option, absolutely.”

[email protected]
twitter.com/JonathanWilling

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-...ovember-launch

[rocketphish]

Here's the link between the health of democracy and the LRT delay

Tobi Nussbaum
Published on: February 9, 2018 | Last Updated: February 9, 2018 2:30 PM EST

This week’s developments on the light-rail transit file have left me pondering questions about core roles and responsibilities in our democratic system.

Much ink has been spilled about the $1 million penalty that many residents and councillors, including me, had understood to be in play the minute the handover date moved beyond May 24, 2018.

It turns out the project agreement actually provided the contractor the ability to push the handover date as far back as a year later – with no penalty.

Of far more significant cost to taxpayers, however, is the delayed handover will mean increased costs and decreased revenues for OC Transpo. This delay will mean the forecasted budget numbers passed by city council – 48 hours before senior staff publicly revealed the likely LRT delay back in mid-December, and three weeks after they first became aware of the risk – will clearly not be achieved.

What should be made of the public assurances by Mayor Jim Watson and senior staff that the contractor will fully reimburse the costs? As much as I wish that to be true, I have not seen any evidence that the contractor is required to repay the city for additional costs incurred due to a new, permitted, handover date.

Previously, I might have taken those assurances at face value, but the events of the last weeks have made me skeptical – and I’ve realized how dependent municipal legislators are on the executive branch of government to provide clear and accurate information.

In the federal government, the public service reports to the executive and not the legislature. Municipally, public servants report through the city manager to both the mayor, as the chief executive officer, as well as to the council, the legislated body charged with ensuring the “accountability and transparency of the operations of the municipality, including the activities of the senior management of the municipality.”

Cities lack the kind of independent officers who act as checks on the executive branch in other levels of government. So, while federal legislators can turn to a Parliamentary Budget Office or the extensive assets of the Library of Parliament for independent policy analysis and research, municipal legislators have no such resources.

This has two implications.

The first is that the municipal public service must scrupulously carry out its statutory obligation to “undertake research and provide advice to council on the policies and programs of the municipality” without fear or favour. This is admittedly easier said than done. One can imagine that providing advice to council that contradicts the public statements or positions of the mayor (such as “on time, on budget”) would make for awkward moments.

Yet this is the obligation that the Ontario Municipal Act has imposed on city managers and their senior officials.

The second implication is that municipal legislators must always exercise significant and vigilant due diligence, particularly on big projects that the public cannot be expected to follow in detail.

Although the LRT project was approved in 2013, before I arrived on council, in hindsight, I wish I had asked more detailed questions and requested clearer answers earlier than I did. I acknowledge this shortcoming in part because I believe we need to build a greater culture of accountability at city hall.

We are extremely fortunate in the City of Ottawa to have a workforce of dedicated and conscientious staff who serve the residents of our city with professionalism. The public expects neither municipal employees nor their elected officials to be perfect. The public does expect, however, that when mistakes of consequence or misleading statements are made, those in positions of responsibility account for them.

Protecting and promoting the public interest is what binds the executive and legislative branches of government together. For that shared objective to be achieved, we need to constantly be guided by shared principles of transparency and accountability along with a strong dose of courage and humility.

Nothing short of public trust in the democratic process is at stake.

Tobi Nussbaum is the councillor for Rideau-Rockcliffe.

http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/col...-the-lrt-delay

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

articulated buses which carry 200 passengers each.

Except articulated buses don't carry 200 passengers. Maybe if you took out all of the seats, but with OC Transpo's seating arrangement you would be lucky to fit 100 people in the bus (maybe a bit more on Canada Day).

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Except articulated buses don't carry 200 passengers. Maybe if you took out all of the seats, but with OC Transpo's seating arrangement you would be lucky to fit 100 people in the bus (maybe a bit more on Canada Day).

Very true Articulated buses max capacity is 133 passengers while double deckers can fit 137 people. I got this info from OC Transpo's own website.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Except articulated buses don't carry 200 passengers. Maybe if you took out all of the seats, but with OC Transpo's seating arrangement you would be lucky to fit 100 people in the bus (maybe a bit more on Canada Day).

That was for illustration. You can use 100 and 150 and run the same exercise.

My point stands. Ridership is not determined by how packed s bus is. It is determined by your total ridership.

How many people are on the bus is a function of bus capacity and frequency.

The fact that the 12 is not running buses every 5 minutes at peak, tells you all about demand east of the Vanier Parkway.

[Truenorth00]

Uhuniau had some numbers for ridership in the other thread. 14500 riders per weekday for the 12.

A rough rule of thumb is about half the ridership is peak on most routes. And if you say Ottawa's peak is 2 hrs each in the morning and evening, that works out to a little over 1800 pphpd.

If you see the reference I posted earlier, that's within the bounds of conventional bus service capacity.

The issue here isn't Montreal Rd. It's Rideau, where all the buses funnel to. I'd even argue that Rideau should be turned into a transit mall for buses.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

The issue here isn't Montreal Rd. It's Rideau, where all the buses funnel to. I'd even argue that Rideau should be turned into a transit mall for buses.

The issue is Montreal Road and the Cummings Bridge. Inbound 12s in the morning move fairly well west of the river now that the Rideau and Cummings projects are done. Cummings was a bottleneck during reconstruction.

Montreal has a pinch point from the parkway to the river, but even that's not the real problem. The real problems are bad signals which give priority to almost everything but transit, right from Blair on out, and the high level of boardings east of St. Laurent or the Montfort hospital, which result in buses being already packed by the time they get to Vanier, which slows down dwell times, causes bunching, and forces people to wait multiple bus cycles for a vehicle to come along that can actually board the load.

The problem is further compounded by the post-2008 reduction in capacity through cutting runs and cutting the number of remaining runs which operate on artics. The "optimized" 12 still has far less capacity than the old 2 did. That's... not optimal. So, OC Transpo won't restore capacity to what it was, and - double strike - can't even commit to adding short-starting capacity to relieve the crush-loading problem that starts to accumulate west of St. Laurent.

So, again: cheap solutions, the city won't do. It "needs" those buses for suburbanites.

Expensive solutions: out of the question financially and politically. All the cash has been committed to the suburbs for a century anyway.

Where does that leave the east end?

Caught in a trap made of classism.

[lrt's friend]

It is called providing the minimum level of service to meet the demand. And the end result when people get frustrated because of crowding and ongoing delays, is that people abandon transit and look for other ways to get around. It is a sign that we are a forward looking city.

[lrt's friend]

Rideau Street can never be a transit mall. It is the main street for entering downtown from the east, just as Bank Street serves the same purpose from the south. There are few alternatives given the natural barriers of the Rideau River and Rideau Canal.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

It is called providing the minimum level of service to meet the demand. And the end result when people get frustrated because of crowding and ongoing delays, is that people abandon transit and look for other ways to get around. It is a sign that we are a forward looking city.

Given Ottawa's modal share for transit, it's hard to argue that Ottawa is doing poorly compared to its peers. It's not doing as good as it can, sure. But having the third highest modal share in Canada, with no real rail service to date is an accomplishment.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Rideau Street can never be a transit mall. It is the main street for entering downtown from the east, just as Bank Street serves the same purpose from the south. There are few alternatives given the natural barriers of the Rideau River and Rideau Canal.

It can be done. The only downside, of course, is that you'll displace traffic to parallel streets. With all the development on Rideau though this might actually be sellable proposition.

Probably do need a bridge at Laurier-Macarthur though, if the Cumming's bridge becomes transit only.

[rocketphish]

City staff recommend no bicycles on LRT during peak hours

CBC News
Posted: Feb 15, 2018 4:00 AM ET Last Updated: Feb 15, 2018 4:00 AM ET

Once light rail arrives you'll be able to cycle to the nearest station, and walk your bike onboard...unless...you happen to commute during rush hour.

The city's General Manager of Transportation Services John Manconi is recommending implementing a few restrictions on cyclists.

Bicycles will not be allowed on the LRT trains duringpeak hours from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. and from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m.

Some commuters said that's the wrong approach for a city trying to encourage cycling as a viable form of transportation.

"It might decrease cyclists from using the LRT. You see a lot of cyclists commuting between the hours of 7 and 10 or 7 and 9:30 if they're taking the LRT they need more space," said cyclist Meika Ellis.

The report recommends cyclists walk their bikes onto one designated area at the front of the train. If that area is full, cyclists would have to wait for the next train.

"If I come at the wrong time and I have to wait for the next ones to come along, that could really severely impact my life. If I'm having to wait around all the time and kind of treated like a bit of a second class person," said cyclist Jason Shortt.

Another option for cyclists is to lock up their bikes. Each LRT station will have a bicycle parking facility.

The city report says the recommendations "are being made to balance the needs of all transit customers and to ensure that travelling on transit is a safe, comfortable and enjoyable experience."

Some cycling advocates said they understand the delicate balancing act, but if the end goal is increased ridership the recommendations fall short.

"If we make it possible to be able to take your bike on LRT during rush hour it will massively increase the number of people who take LRT and the number of people who bike there," said Alex deVries, speaking for the advocacy group Bike Ottawa.

deVries adds that for many commuters like himself, who do not live or work near an LRT station, leaving their bike locked at the station's bicycle parking facility will not be feasible.

"Certainly in my bike commute it means transit will never be practical for me, biking will always be faster unless they make it easier to bike to LRT and from LRT, so I'm afraid that transit is just not going to work for my commute and that's disappointing," he said.

The report recommendations are expected to go to the city's transit commission on February 21 for approval.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa...ours-1.4536252

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

Here's the link between the health of democracy and the LRT delay

Tobi Nussbaum
Published on: February 9, 2018 | Last Updated: February 9, 2018 2:30 PM EST

...

Tobi Nussbaum is the councillor for Rideau-Rockcliffe.

http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/col...-the-lrt-delay

I certainly agree with this.

But also I think a big part of the problem is the contract is confidential. The city shouldn't have confidential contracts for major projects. If the contract had been on the city website from the beginning someone would have actually read the contract and pointed out everything coming out of Manconi's mouth was complete nonsense.

[Buggys]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

City staff recommend no bicycles on LRT during peak hours

CBC News
Posted: Feb 15, 2018 4:00 AM ET Last Updated: Feb 15, 2018 4:00 AM ET

Once light rail arrives you'll be able to cycle to the nearest station, and walk your bike onboard...unless...you happen to commute during rush hour.

The city's General Manager of Transportation Services John Manconi is recommending implementing a few restrictions on cyclists.

Bicycles will not be allowed on the LRT trains duringpeak hours from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. and from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m.

Some commuters said that's the wrong approach for a city trying to encourage cycling as a viable form of transportation.

"It might decrease cyclists from using the LRT. You see a lot of cyclists commuting between the hours of 7 and 10 or 7 and 9:30 if they're taking the LRT they need more space," said cyclist Meika Ellis.

The report recommends cyclists walk their bikes onto one designated area at the front of the train. If that area is full, cyclists would have to wait for the next train.

"If I come at the wrong time and I have to wait for the next ones to come along, that could really severely impact my life. If I'm having to wait around all the time and kind of treated like a bit of a second class person," said cyclist Jason Shortt.

Another option for cyclists is to lock up their bikes. Each LRT station will have a bicycle parking facility.

The city report says the recommendations "are being made to balance the needs of all transit customers and to ensure that travelling on transit is a safe, comfortable and enjoyable experience."

Some cycling advocates said they understand the delicate balancing act, but if the end goal is increased ridership the recommendations fall short.

"If we make it possible to be able to take your bike on LRT during rush hour it will massively increase the number of people who take LRT and the number of people who bike there," said Alex deVries, speaking for the advocacy group Bike Ottawa.

deVries adds that for many commuters like himself, who do not live or work near an LRT station, leaving their bike locked at the station's bicycle parking facility will not be feasible.

"Certainly in my bike commute it means transit will never be practical for me, biking will always be faster unless they make it easier to bike to LRT and from LRT, so I'm afraid that transit is just not going to work for my commute and that's disappointing," he said.

The report recommendations are expected to go to the city's transit commission on February 21 for approval.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa...ours-1.4536252

This is shortsighted. People don't always go & return on the same route, so having to lock bikes will deter a lot of users.

[lrt's friend]

This tells us that they are expecting crush loading on the Confederation Line during peak hours.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Given Ottawa's modal share for transit, it's hard to argue that Ottawa is doing poorly compared to its peers. It's not doing as good as it can, sure. But having the third highest modal share in Canada, with no real rail service to date is an accomplishment.



It can be done. The only downside, of course, is that you'll displace traffic to parallel streets. With all the development on Rideau though this might actually be sellable proposition.

Probably do need a bridge at Laurier-Macarthur though, if the Cumming's bridge becomes transit only.

While comparing with other cities is fine, our priority should be to do better instead of being satisfied with the status quo.

Rideau Street is a wide street. To convert it to a transit mall for buses only brings us back to the mess that we created when we opened the Rideau Centre on a bigger scale. And that brings us back to King Edward truck mess and forces us to spend billions on a truck tunnel instead of transit.

Oddly enough, Cummings Bridge was originally built to accommodate streetcars that were to run on Montreal Road. It did not happen. Likewise for Billings Bridge.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I certainly agree with this.

But also I think a big part of the problem is the contract is confidential. The city shouldn't have confidential contracts for major projects. If the contract had been on the city website from the beginning someone would have actually read the contract and pointed out everything coming out of Manconi's mouth was complete nonsense.

It's not popular to say but you do need discretion sometimes. It's easy to argue for transparency. And it's easy to just blame the contractor. But are we willing to accept higher bids for all future projects after bidders take into account that any incident will result in outsized penalties because of some populist sentiment?

This build was complex. Particularly given the soil conditions. Some flexibility is called for. And this is exactly why projects have contingency.

As long as the city works out something reasonable in the end, I'm happy.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

It's not popular to say but you do need discretion sometimes. It's easy to argue for transparency. And it's easy to just blame the contractor. But are we willing to accept higher bids for all future projects after bidders take into account that any incident will result in outsized penalties because of some populist sentiment?

This build was complex. Particularly given the soil conditions. Some flexibility is called for. And this is exactly why projects have contingency.

As long as the city works out something reasonable in the end, I'm happy.

But under the actual contract (not the imaginary one council was told about) the consortium has every incentive to slow down the project (avoid overtime, avoid paying a premium to speed up supplies.)

That is not a sensible way to structure a contract, particularly since the city paid a huge premium to get a fixed price and when the city has high operating costs to run buses in the interim. My concern is they knew it was not a sensible way to structure the contract and therefore hid the real terms of the contract from council. At the very least the city should have had the option to spend extra to speed up the process. I'm sure the province would have paid to have the opening before the election.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

This tells us that they are expecting crush loading on the Confederation Line during peak hours.

It's why I keep saying they should use longer trains and boost frequencies instead of coupling trains together.

Just look at the configuration:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citadis_Spirit

It will be busy. Using their own numbers and assuming no spare trains, they have 10 200 pphpd capacity. That's ridiculous when they are anticipating 10 000 - 11 000 pphpd.

It will be busy when they plan 300 pax per train with the 48.5m version. They need trains with one more centre section to boost capacity to 330 per train (59m version). The extra 30 pax per train would add 1020 pphpd with the 34 trains being operated at peak. And even 34 trains will 330 pax means 11220 pphpd. Barely enough.

As it stands they are planning on running every train at max capacity. No spare trains at all. I don't think that's very prudent. I have inquired about this in the past. Never got a straight answer.

Coming from the East, it'll be packed leaving St. Laurent. And possibly crush after Hurdman. Every day.

This also shows why going with LRT was moronic. A light metro would have more capacity for the same cost.