Confederation Line (Stage 1) | In Service 1.0

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

That's with Ottawa and Edmonton both vying for 5th place in the size for CMA. This really shows the power of Ottawa deploying BRT first and then converting to LRT. We got to build up the bones of the infrastructure for lower cost. And then convert as needed later.

I'm not convinced. If we would have built LRT in the first place, all that would have been needed as part of today's Stage 1 would have been the 600 million dollar downtown tunnel. And the current total system, though shorter than the total Transitways, would have been continuous instead of the fragmented mess we have now, for example, the huge gap in service we have now between Dominion (which is a glorified bus stop added in the 2000s) and Lincoln Fields. Today, that gap will be replaced with a tunnel.

And as someone mentioned, Calgary's current system, in service a few years after Edmonton's, is 60 kms. The two things that impacted Edmonton's expansion was 1. the expensive tunnel, built in stages from the very beginning. Many would argue that that wasn't necessary when the city was only a half million at the time, and 2. political will for many years later.

Calgary's street level LRT allowed more funds to be invested in expanding further, faster. Some could argue however, that they should have replaced the surface section with a tunnel about 10 years ago. Such a solution is still not being considered as far as I know.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

So, comparing ourselves with the least, not the most? Sad.

Considering how fast we're catching up in just 10 years, it's pretty impressive. Toronto and Montreal's systems weren't a whole lot more expansive that that for decades.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Nobody has forgotten Calgary. The comparison to Edmonton is because, that city has about the same population as Ottawa. Compare the CMAs.

Umm. Calgary has a similar CMA populstion to Ottawa and Edmonton. A bit higher yes, but close. From 2016 Census:

4	Calgary		1,392,609

5	Ottawa–Gatineau	1,323,783

6	Edmonton	1,321,426

Now if we only look at the Ontario Portion of CMA (since OC Transpo doesn't serve Quebec) we are well behind both at 991,726.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I'm not convinced. If we would have built LRT in the first place, all that would have been needed as part of today's Stage 1 would have been the 600 million dollar downtown tunnel.

Except we would have had an extreemly fragmented LRT system in the west:

• LRT to Westoro,
• bus to Lincoln Fields*,
• LRT to Baseline,
• bus to Huntclub,
• LRT to Marketplace

* We had to fight tooth and nail to have the NCC let us put tracks beside the parkway and are having to basically tunnel from Dominion to Lincoln Fields.

Now in reality they would have never done that, but instead had Westboro a major transfer point and it would likely have stayed like that for decades.

Now the other question is, would transferring to an LRT system have attracted as many riders in the first place as having direct "express" service to downtown? While we are now loosing that express service:

1. BRT is allowing a rapid deployment of LRT, allowing transfers near the suburbs.
2. Our infrastructure (roads and parking) is dependent on a large number of people using transit to/from work. The average transit user wouldn't be able to find (let alone afford) parking downtown or want to deal with the increase in congestion that would ensue.

And the current total system, though shorter than the total Transitways, would have been continuous instead of the fragmented mess we have now, for example, the huge gap in service we have now between Dominion (which is a glorified bus stop added in the 2000s) and Lincoln Fields. Today, that gap will be replaced with a tunnel.

The question is, had we gone to LRT, when would it have been extended beyond Westboro? Without that extension, how would people in Nepean and Kanata get to the LRT for all that time?

Had we gone LRT in the 80's, our transit usage would probably be similar to Calgary and Edmonton's.

Considering how fast we're catching up in just 10 years, it's pretty impressive. Toronto and Montreal's systems weren't a whole lot more expansive that that for decades.

Agreed. We can thank the transitway for that.

[J.OT13]

We can agree to disagree. I still feel the Calgary model would have been more beneficial in the long run. Yes, the Dominion to Lincoln Fields section would have been more complicated at the time with an NCC that would never budge on their "vision".

LRT might have been built down the SE Transitway and down to Orleans though.

[acottawa]

Lots of counting of unhatched chickens.

[J.OT13]

Unhatched chickens? The eggs were never laid. A big part of this forum is about the what-ifs of urban planning, both past, present and future.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Unhatched chickens? The eggs were never laid. A big part of this forum is about the what-ifs of urban planning, both past, present and future.

Yeah, but people aren't talking in hypothetical terms. There are talking as if every word that comes out of every lying politician's mouth is as good as a done deal.

[roger1818]

The other thing to consider is the transitway was built only about 15 years after the NCC tore up all of Ottawa's downtown rail lines (to "beautify" the city) and about 25 years after the city the city tore up all of the street car lines. To build an LRT line back then would have looked bad politically.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Yeah, but people aren't talking in hypothetical terms. There are talking as if every word that comes out of every lying politician's mouth is as good as a done deal.

We talking about Stage 2? Because that's happening. No doubt they will find "efficiencies" and "cost savings" that will reduce the value to users, as they've already done, but it will happen. the final stretch to Riverside South is the only thing that is not ensured so far.

Originally Posted by roger1818

The other thing to consider is the transitway was built only about 15 years after the NCC tore up all of Ottawa's downtown rail lines (to "beautify" the city) and about 25 years after the city the city tore up all of the street car lines. To build an LRT line back then would have looked bad politically.

The same can be said for Calgary and Edmonton though. Focus just changed from urban to suburban in these three cases. Vancouver made the same shift as the mid-sized three, but went with true rapid transit instead of light rail (or in the case of Ottawa, buses). Toronto maintained its streetcars and built subways to upgrade its busiest routes, and later shifted to a suburban state of mind. Montreal is the odd one out here, building a subway to serve the urban area.

[MichaelC]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Nobody has forgotten Calgary. The comparison to Edmonton is because, that city has about the same population as Ottawa. Compare the CMAs.



I'd be willing to bet that between LRT and BRT, Ottawa will have a larger rapid transit network than Calgary after Stage 2. And their large LRT network has not been effective in getting people to actually use transit. Ottawa wins where it counts.

http://humantransit.org/2010/10/further-cause-for-canadian-triumphalism.html



This is exactly my point. Ottawa's strategy has proven right. Deploy BRT first. Switch to LRT when population and transit usage justifies it.

There are many here who complain and argue that Ottawa should have built LRT sooner. And there is some truth to that. The current Confederation Line is about 15 years late. And really should have been started when bus congestion in the downtown core was becoming obvious.

However, the strategy of building BRT, at a lower cost first, and converting later is proving it's worth. It effectively allowed Ottawa to right-size transit infrastructure investment and deploy substantially higher quality transit service in the suburbs than is typical for a North American city. They city got to build BRT in those parts for a rather reasonable cost. That enabled the provision of rapid transit to the suburbs for decades, while protecting those corridors for conversion later. And when due, it's been a relatively quicker and lower cost conversion to almost subway-grade service.

I actually think Ottawa might have had lower transit usage and a smaller rapid transit network if the city had relied only LRT from the beginning. There's a lesson here for smaller cities around the 500k mark, like London.

I think that is what Winnipeg is doing

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

We talking about Stage 2? Because that's happening. No doubt they will find "efficiencies" and "cost savings" that will reduce the value to users, as they've already done, but it will happen. the final stretch to Riverside South is the only thing that is not ensured so far.

We'll see.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Umm. Calgary has a similar CMA populstion to Ottawa and Edmonton. A bit higher yes, but close. From 2016 Census:

4	Calgary		1,392,609

5	Ottawa–Gatineau	1,323,783

6	Edmonton	1,321,426

Now if we only look at the Ontario Portion of CMA (since OC Transpo doesn't serve Quebec) we are well behind both at 991,726.

That's not a minor detail. 25% of the CMA is in another province and does not contribute to the city or province's tax base. In effect, OC Transpo builds transit for about a million residents. That's very different from Calgary and Edmonton. And seen from that perspective Ottawa has done a phenomenal job.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Except we would have had an extreemly fragmented LRT system in the west:

• LRT to Westoro,
• bus to Lincoln Fields*,
• LRT to Baseline,
• bus to Huntclub,
• LRT to Marketplace

* We had to fight tooth and nail to have the NCC let us put tracks beside the parkway and are having to basically tunnel from Dominion to Lincoln Fields.

Now in reality they would have never done that, but instead had Westboro a major transfer point and it would likely have stayed like that for decades.

Now the other question is, would transferring to an LRT system have attracted as many riders in the first place as having direct "express" service to downtown? While we are now loosing that express service:

1. BRT is allowing a rapid deployment of LRT, allowing transfers near the suburbs.
2. Our infrastructure (roads and parking) is dependent on a large number of people using transit to/from work. The average transit user wouldn't be able to find (let alone afford) parking downtown or want to deal with the increase in congestion that would ensue.

This. Thanks for adding meat to my argument. I sincerely doubt we'd have the transit to the suburbs we do if we'd have focused on LRT exclusively. I also doubt we'd have seen the quality of LRT we're getting now with fully segregated and exclusive ROWs. Building LRT when the city was 500k would have resulted in the cutting corners and going with street level LRT and mixed running.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Had we gone LRT in the 80's, our transit usage would probably be similar to Calgary and Edmonton's.......We can thank the transitway for that.

Proof is in the pudding. Ottawa has transit modal share that's close to TMV. Calgary and Edmonton aren't close.

Counting km as some kind of dick measuring contest is moronic. The purpose of building transit is to actually move residents. And for a city of its size, Ottawa punches above its weight. And well beyond any other comparable city on this continent. Forget looking at Calgary or Edmonton. Let's look at similar sized cities in Europe and aim to get transit ridership to those levels.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

That's not a minor detail. 25% of the CMA is in another province and does not contribute to the city or province's tax base. In effect, OC Transpo builds transit for about a million residents.

Umm... Gatineau isn't so sure Ottawa is building LRT for us

But for the sake of the dick measuring contest, our side of the river might end up contributing 15-20km of LRT and another 15-20 of BRT before 2030.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

We can agree to disagree. I still feel the Calgary model would have been more beneficial in the long run. Yes, the Dominion to Lincoln Fields section would have been more complicated at the time with an NCC that would never budge on their "vision".

LRT might have been built down the SE Transitway and down to Orleans though.

You are looking at it with rosy coloured hindsight goggles. When the Transitway was started, the city was a little over half a million residents. There is no way they could afford, what would have been a half billion dollar tunnel through the downtown core and all the other segregation and grade separation we have today.

Calgary doesn't have a tunnel for this reason. Edmonton built one and as a result is on the verge of falling behind Ottawa in rapid transit development, while having crap ridership number.

With half a million residents, Ottawa's LRT network would have been handful of street running "LRT" (streetcar) lines. Very little segregation and grade separation. And poor service to the suburbs. I would bet none of the lines would have left the Greenbelt. And no exclusive ROW would mean higher travel times, prompting suburban residents to drive, or for the city to maintain express buses into the core anyway. Instead, Ottawa used the BRT for 30 years and is now building a light metro on top of the BRT network.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by MichaelC

I think that is what Winnipeg is doing

Winnipeg has a unique motivation for maintaining BRT. It's the home of New Flyer Industries. They need to be a showcase for BRT. And IMHO, they are doing poorly at that. Their first transitway only opened in 2012. Ottawa has done a way better job at the same population level showcasing what BRT could do.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

You are looking at it with rosy coloured hindsight goggles. When the Transitway was started, the city was a little over half a million residents. There is no way they could afford, what would have been a half billion dollar tunnel through the downtown core and all the other segregation and grade separation we have today.

Calgary doesn't have a tunnel for this reason. Edmonton built one and as a result is on the verge of falling behind Ottawa in rapid transit development, while having crap ridership number.

With half a million residents, Ottawa's LRT network would have been handful of street running "LRT" (streetcar) lines. Very little segregation and grade separation. And poor service to the suburbs. I would bet none of the lines would have left the Greenbelt. And no exclusive ROW would mean higher travel times, prompting suburban residents to drive, or for the city to maintain express buses into the core anyway. Instead, Ottawa used the BRT for 30 years and is now building a light metro on top of the BRT network.

The ETS ridership is actually quite good on the North American scale, just a touch less than LRT darling Portland. Calgary is in a league of it's own, the third highest in North America after Guadalajara (which really is a light metro) and the TTC streetcars. And those two cities are many times Calgary's size. If Ottawa has the ridership claimed, we'll also be punching way above our weight

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

That's not a minor detail. 25% of the CMA is in another province and does not contribute to the city or province's tax base. In effect, OC Transpo builds transit for about a million residents. That's very different from Calgary and Edmonton. And seen from that perspective Ottawa has done a phenomenal job.




This. Thanks for adding meat to my argument. I sincerely doubt we'd have the transit to the suburbs we do if we'd have focused on LRT exclusively. I also doubt we'd have seen the quality of LRT we're getting now with fully segregated and exclusive ROWs. Building LRT when the city was 500k would have resulted in the cutting corners and going with street level LRT and mixed running.



Proof is in the pudding. Ottawa has transit modal share that's close to TMV. Calgary and Edmonton aren't close.

Counting km as some kind of dick measuring contest is moronic. The purpose of building transit is to actually move residents. And for a city of its size, Ottawa punches above its weight. And well beyond any other comparable city on this continent. Forget looking at Calgary or Edmonton. Let's look at similar sized cities in Europe and aim to get transit ridership to those levels.

I would like to add to your argument.

http://www.cat-bus.com/2010/10/transit-ridership-higher-in-canada-than-in-us-australia/


http://humantransit.org/2010/10/request-for-information-canadian-ridership.html

[lrt's friend]

OK, first Winnipeg has just gone through a couple of decades of stagnation. They didn't have the money to build much of anything. Now that the city's economy is improving, we will see what they come up with.

We should never compare ourselves with Alberta. Edmonton's and Calgary's first LRT stage was funded by oil royalties. When this went bust in the early 80s, there was no money to extend the lines for a while. Also, Edmonton was really experimental and they were hosting the Commonwealth games. This was their demonstration project. They got the money for the downtown tunnel but the line was designed for the games and not Edmontonians. The line had disappointing ridership and with this policitians had little incentive to build more. Calgary got their priorites right to serve the population with an imperfect system with street running and some protected road crossings. They would not have been able to build it 100% grade separated back in the 80s and 90s.

Ottawa did not have access to oil royalties so our politicians recognized that we could accomplish more by building BRT and skipping the tough parts, ie downtown, and using the Ottawa River Parkway. I doubt that Ottawa would have built much of an LRT system with the money available and it would have been street running through downtown and how would they have got out to the west end? Would we have been happy with LRT running from St. Laurent to Westboro and downtown street running? The disappointing ridership would have made it politically difficult to keep expanding.

We are building quickly now (sort of) but we are still cutting corners, which will have long term impacts. As a few of us have been pointing out, the focus seems to be suburban commuters at the expense of those living inside the Greenbelt. Projects serving the inner neighbourhoods (2/3 of the population) have either been shelved or delayed or have uncertain futures, while we have a frenzy to serve Kanata, Orleans and admittedly Riverside South.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I also doubt we'd have seen the quality of LRT we're getting now with fully segregated and exclusive ROWs.

That, I agree with.

Proof is in the pudding. Ottawa has transit modal share that's close to TMV. Calgary and Edmonton aren't close.

I think Calgary and Edmonton's heavy reliance on the Oil sector might have played a role in slightly lower modal share.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

You are looking at it with rosy coloured hindsight goggles. When the Transitway was started, the city was a little over half a million residents. There is no way they could afford, what would have been a half billion dollar tunnel through the downtown core and all the other segregation and grade separation we have today.

Calgary doesn't have a tunnel for this reason. Edmonton built one and as a result is on the verge of falling behind Ottawa in rapid transit development, while having crap ridership number.

I think you misunderstood. I think we should have built LRT with the downtown portion at grade, hence the "Calgary model". That way, we would only have to build the tunnel today instead of shutting down the entire backbone of our transit system for conversion.

The rest of the system could have used the same Tranistway ROW we are converting now.

[MichaelC]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

The ETS ridership is actually quite good on the North American scale, just a touch less than LRT darling Portland. Calgary is in a league of it's own, the third highest in North America after Guadalajara (which really is a light metro) and the TTC streetcars. And those two cities are many times Calgary's size. If Ottawa has the ridership claimed, we'll also be punching way above our weight

Keep in mind Portlands System is about 4 times larger than Edmonton's and their CMA population is nearly twice as great.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by acottawa

We'll see.

The person likely to become Premier next month has made it very clear that Phase 2 is happening, so...