Confederation Line (Stage 1) | In Service 1.0

[phil235]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The same with me. When South Keys Cinemas opened (a 5 minute drive from my house), I thought I would go to the cinema more often. I have gone less often, and most of the time now, I travel to other cinemas. Going elsewhere including the World Exchange was more enticing because it was more of an evening out and the restaurant choices were better. Despite the convenience of chain restaurants, they get tiresome pretty quickly.

I agree as well. I much prefer heading to a movie downtown and grabbing a drink afterwards. Suburban multiplexes just can't replicate that. Lansdowne does a decent job, and is a beautiful theatre, so it tends to be my go to.

In terms of supporting downtown cinemas, without looking at numbers, I believe that the reason for the decline was twofold. First, there was a broad migration trend to the suburbs and car-oriented shopping beginning in the 50s, and second, there was a general decline in household size beginning just after that. While there were a good number of residential units downtown, they contained fewer people in the 70s and 80s than they had before.

On the flipside, that trend is clearly reversing now. While household sizes are still smaller, the number of units downtown has increased significantly (i.e. by thousands in the broader downtown) in the past decade, and continues to do so. With that influx, there may be a case for a theatre again, but land values make it tough. I think the best case scenario is a theatre as part of a larger complex that sits on the train and draws from all the adjacent neighbourhoods.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by OTownandDown

Tell that to my mother and law and I, when we waited in a line get this: after hours on a Thursday (!!) to get a seat at one of your so-called 'low-activity' bars.

A gang of us used to haunt the patios near Bank and Sparks (Cock and Lion, Brixtons, less so Farm Team) until recently. Even on rainy days, people would be out there huddled under umbrellas.

The last two years, the days and hours that these places have had their patios open is down significantly, and of course Farm Team is no more (no great loss).

The level of patio activity on Sparks has fallen off in the past half-decade.

My wallet thanks it.

And couple that in the summer with 5k people nightly taking in the 'Northern Lights' on parliament hill, absolutely FLOODING sparks street with patrons, and you've got a fantastic summer lineup.

Again, flooding the patios that are actually open.

Many of them are not, or aren't any more, or aren't as many nights or as late as they used to be ca. 2012-2015.

Uhuniau, when's the last time you took in an NAC show and tried to get a drink at D'Arcy Mcgees afterwards? I guarantee you that its difficult to find a seat upstairs and you're stuck with the mop-water smelling basement,

I'd rather the mop-water basement any day, thanks. Cooler and more secluded.

unless you keep walking to wait in line at Biermarkt for a table, or heaven forbid try to go to Riviera and get laughed at for not making reservations a month in advance.

How do I know this? Experience.

Does your experience also include the bars and restaurants which have scaled back their patio operations in recent years? Mine does.

And with that, some of these posts should be moved to the Sparks Street discussion.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I was looking at an old streetcar schedule and streetcars ran every 12 minutes until after midnight. Now, most central bus routes don't even run to midnight and service is often every half hour in the evening.

And many of those half-hour routes are not even staggered, which would have effectively increased the frequencies for many origin-destination pairs. There is almost nothing more infuriating than seeing late-evening 6 and 7 buses running together south on Bank.

[OTownandDown]

Originally Posted by acottawa

That’s a few hundred units, which will not impact Sparks much (if at all).

Thanks for the tip.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

This is not even remotely the case on Sparks, where patio activity has dropped off quite noticeably in the past four or five years.

Disagree. Patio activity on Sparks feels up compared to when I moved here five years ago.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Disagree. Patio activity on Sparks feels up compared to when I moved here five years ago.

There are more restaurants on Sparks than there have been in years, so I suspect that you are right.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

And many of those half-hour routes are not even staggered, which would have effectively increased the frequencies for many origin-destination pairs. There is almost nothing more infuriating than seeing late-evening 6 and 7 buses running together south on Bank.

I honestly cannot understand why OC Transpo cannot properly stagger trips where routes share substantial sections. We have seen several complaints about this on a whole variety of routes. OC did this much better years ago. Surely, modern computing power should allow better scheduling. In most cases, frequency is more important than transfers for a couple of people at the route extremity. Perhaps, it is a sign that frequency has become so problematic for transfers, that we are trying to time too many transfers when improved frequency would address this much more effectively. And with so many drivers being axed, you would think it would be possible within budget. We have heard repeatedly that improved local transit should be possible when the Confederation Line was going to eliminate so many buses downtown. Instead, we are seeing further cutbacks where the Confederation Line provides little or no current benefit.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I honestly cannot understand why OC Transpo cannot properly stagger trips where routes share substantial sections. We have seen several complaints about this on a whole variety of routes. OC did this much better years ago. Surely, modern computing power should allow better scheduling. In most cases, frequency is more important than transfers for a couple of people at the route extremity. Perhaps, it is a sign that frequency has become so problematic for transfers, that we are trying to time too many transfers when improved frequency would address this much more effectively. And with so many drivers being axed, you would think it would be possible within budget. We have heard repeatedly that improved local transit should be possible when the Confederation Line was going to eliminate so many buses downtown. Instead, we are seeing further cutbacks where the Confederation Line provides little or no current benefit.

I think it is one of those things where you can please some of the people some of the time but you can't please all of the people all of the time. By having all of the bus routes (not just the 6 and 7) meet at Rideau at the same time during the off peak, you can transfer from any route to any route. My guess is they were getting complaints about poor transfer times, so they tried to fix that by sacrificing the staggering along Bank St. Now they are probably getting complaints about the loss of staggered service. The question is which affects more people. I know you have your opinion, but I am curious what reality is.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I think it is one of those things where you can please some of the people some of the time but you can't please all of the people all of the time. By having all of the bus routes (not just the 6 and 7) meet at Rideau at the same time during the off peak, you can transfer from any route to any route.

You are talking about pulse scheduling. That may be appropriate for smaller cities and possibly suburban transit nodes, but it doesn't make sense for a city the size of Ottawa with multiple destinations and transfer points.

As lrt's friend notes, enhanced frequency solves the problem far more effectively, as it maximizes services for the greatest number of people. Far better to stagger routes to maximize frequency and limit transfer times than to try to arrange (usually unsuccessfully) for routes to terminate at the same time.

But OC Transpo continuously prioritizes convenience for riders at the end of routes over the urban portions which have much higher ridership. Hence the declining ridership numbers.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by phil235

You are talking about pulse scheduling. That may be appropriate for smaller cities and possibly suburban transit nodes, but it doesn't make sense for a city the size of Ottawa with multiple destinations and transfer points.

While there are other places you can transfer, I would argue that in downtown Ottawa, the Rideau Centre is still the largest transfer point.

As lrt's friend notes, enhanced frequency solves the problem far more effectively, as it maximizes services for the greatest number of people. Far better to stagger routes to maximize frequency and limit transfer times than to try to arrange (usually unsuccessfully) for routes to terminate at the same time.

Agreed, but the issue of frequency off peak it isn't a problem unique to Ottawa. I frequently use transit in Montreal and many downtown bus routes drop to 30 minute service in the evenings.

[lrt's friend]

I do not expect all routes to be frequent, however, by having a frequent network on key routes, we facilitate transfers at the most popular connections.

In saying this, I want a frequent network to be defined as 15 minute frequency or better from 6 am to 9 pm on weekdays, 9 am to 9 pm on Saturdays and 9 am to 6 pm on Sundays. We need to invest to hook people on transit and allow people to rely on it. It is the path to ridership growth.

I further would like to see certain key routes having 10 minute frequency or better from 6 am to 6 pm on weekdays. This would include key Transitway routes, and main street routes. For example, routes on Montreal Road, Bank Street, Somerset-Wellington-Richmond, Baseline, Carling.

Review the frequent network by itself to make sure it creates a reasonable grid across the entire city and at a minimum reaches a major transfer point in each of the main suburbs to facilitate easier transfers.

If we create a frequent network, we will see that people will be attracted to it. That is exactly what happened on Innes as frequent service was introduced.

All non-peak routes should have a minimum of hourly service. Either provide service or not. Get rid of the token service, which gives the impression of all day service on a map or sign when it really isn't. That is nothing more than the welfare level of service so typically found in American cities with very poor transit and very poor ridership.


Perhaps this is better in the OC Transpo thread but the Confederation Line is part of the frequent network.

[acottawa]

How much of the network's resources do we want to expend on a small number of users late at night?

I take your point that local services were better in the streetcar era, but the structure of the city was very different back then.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I do not expect all routes to be frequent, however, by having a frequent network on key routes, we facilitate transfers at the most popular connections.

In saying this, I want a frequent network to be defined as 15 minute frequency or better from 6 am to 9 pm on weekdays, 9 am to 9 pm on Saturdays and 9 am to 6 pm on Sundays. We need to invest to hook people on transit and allow people to rely on it. It is the path to ridership growth.

I further would like to see certain key routes having 10 minute frequency or better from 6 am to 6 pm on weekdays. This would include key Transitway routes, and main street routes. For example, routes on Montreal Road, Bank Street, Somerset-Wellington-Richmond, Baseline, Carling.

Review the frequent network by itself to make sure it creates a reasonable grid across the entire city and at a minimum reaches a major transfer point in each of the main suburbs to facilitate easier transfers.

If we create a frequent network, we will see that people will be attracted to it. That is exactly what happened on Innes as frequent service was introduced.

All non-peak routes should have a minimum of hourly service. Either provide service or not. Get rid of the token service, which gives the impression of all day service on a map or sign when it really isn't. That is nothing more than the welfare level of service so typically found in American cities with very poor transit and very poor ridership.


Perhaps this is better in the OC Transpo thread but the Confederation Line is part of the frequent network.

On pretty much all these points I'd agree 100%

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by SkeggsEggs

Didn't they close the Trillium Line periodically when building the Carleton parking garage?

They will be closing it again next summer for three weeks to build a temporary culvert over the line next to the 417 overpass. It would also be closed again the following summer to remove it if the line weren't already going to be closed for Stage 2 work.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

You don't think the subways in Toronto and Montreal don't help animate downtowns in those cities?

Having grown up and lived in Toronto, I absolutely don't think the subways do anything for activity levels in the core. The condo boom has done that. I remember what downtown Toronto was like in the 90s and it was nowhere close to the level of activity you see today. Toronto hasn't built a lot more subways over the last two decades. But it has built a lot more condos in the core.

In the last two decades, look at the subways built: the Sheppard Line and TYSSE. What exactly are those subways going to do for activity in the downtown core of Toronto?

And some of Toronto's most vibrant newer districts aren't actually close to any subway line. Look at the Distillery District. Or Liberty Village. What subways are close to them?

This idea that transit lines are dramatically going to improve Ottawa's downtown core is truly some bizarre thinking to me. People travel to areas that are vibrant and busy. They don't travel to them to make them vibrant and busy. You have to a certain level of activity there to entice suburbanites to get downtown, in the first place.

Also, when it comes to transit, the biggest driver for something like entertainment access is not the number of transfers or some silly metric like that. It's how close the line is to your destination and how late it runs. That's all that matters when you're stumbling out of a bar drunk.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Historically, there were not tremendous numbers of residences within easy walking distance of Sparks or downtown Rideau. Sure, many residences were displaced with office buildings and parking lots, but most of those residences were low rise houses.


Where did downtown get all its patrons in the old days? I will tell you. My mother walked to the streetcar from the outskirts of semi-rural Billings Bridge and took it downtown. It was more than commuting. It was also for fun activities as well.

Your mother also didn't have Amazon for shopping and big box stores, and more ethnic restaurants in the suburbs. And Billings Bridge decades ago is nothing like Billings Bridge today. Pretending that what worked decades ago is relevant today is spectacularly naive. The dying malls, and the steady decline of movie theatres should tell you that shopping, dining and entertainment patterns are changing. Fewer people go to movies because everyone's got a half-decent big screen at home. Amazon and the suppression of disposable income has done a real number on shopping malls. And whereas a generation ago the interesting ethnic or fine dining restaurants might have been almost exclusively in the core or in ethnic neighbourhoods, we even see that changing. As the population gets more diverse, it's getting easier for such ventures to open outside the core.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I have been commenting that we have to make it easy to go downtown for as many people as possible.


I was looking at an old streetcar schedule and streetcars ran every 12 minutes until after midnight. Now, most central bus routes don't even run to midnight and service is often every half hour in the evening.

This comes down to how much taxpayers are willing to pay in this city to provide that level of service. Once you start talking about service outside peak hours, the level of subsidy goes up very quickly. I'd happily pay more in taxes to get a solid frequent service network. But I doubt most Ottawa ratepayers share my sentiment.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

There should be more to this city's transit system than the 13 station Confederation Line.

There is.

[lrt's friend]

On most points I agree, but just remember that I made that exact point. That we need a variety of attractions downtown to draw people downtown. Also, isn't the Distillery district on a streetcar line with frequent service even later in the evening?


I understand the need to have people living in the downtown area. There is a need for multiple solutions.

Also, when it comes to transit, the biggest driver for something like entertainment access is not the number of transfers or some silly metric like that. It's how close the line is to your destination and how late it runs. That's all that matters when you're stumbling out of a bar drunk.

On this point, I don't agree. The number of transfers do matter, drunk or not. If you are that drunk, chances are you will call a cab or uber. Transit will be too difficult to navigate. Why would you consider it a silly metric when there are all kinds of studies indicating that ridership declines with each transfer?

[lrt's friend]

This comes down to how much taxpayers are willing to pay in this city to provide that level of service. Once you start talking about service outside peak hours, the level of subsidy goes up very quickly. I'd happily pay more in taxes to get a solid frequent service network. But I doubt most Ottawa ratepayers share my sentiment.

One has to ask the question why there is no money to do this if we are eliminating so many drivers. Where are the savings (that could be re-invested in better service) that everybody has been claiming were coming?

Your mother also didn't have Amazon for shopping and big box stores, and more ethnic restaurants in the suburbs. Pretending that what worked decades ago is relevant today is spectacularly naive.

Yes, times have changed. However, we cannot make progress on car dependency if we don't really try. There are things to learn from the past.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

On most points I agree, but just remember that I made that exact point. That we need a variety of attractions downtown to draw people downtown. Also, isn't the Distillery district on a streetcar line with frequent service even later in the evening?

I don't know of any streetcar line in the downtown core that isn't frequent in Toronto. But with the exception of St.Clair they are also slow as molasses because they don't have exclusive ROWs.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I understand the need to have people living in the downtown area. There is the need to multiple solutions.

My point is that there's very little evidence that transit drives vibrancy in a particular area. It's largely about who and how many people live near by.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

On this point, I don't agree. The number of transfers do matter, drunk or not. If you are that drunk, chances are you will call a cab or uber. Transit will be too difficult to navigate.

If you're stumbling drunk and can't walk. Sure. You'll be cabbing. In most cities, if you've just got a good buzz on and heading home, you take transit. Do people not take buses home from downtown Ottawa today after a few glasses of wine? This is what I was getting at.

I've used the TTC in Toronto after a night out. As a college student, a young professional and a young married chap. I've taken the bus, the subway, the streetcar and the SRT in those adventures. And in all of them, the driving factor was often simple proximity to transit and cost avoidance of a $70 cab ride. I've transferred while having a good buzz on. It's really not that hard and in most of the world this would be entirely normal.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

One has to ask the question why there is not money to do this if we eliminating so many drivers.

Are they saving anything from the LRT in the next few years, at all? They are still running a pile of express buses from the suburbs in the west. And they will still have plenty of detours. All while having the added cost of maintaining an LRT system that will be low on efficiency till properly built out in Stage 2.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Yes, times have changed. However, we cannot make progress on car dependency if we don't really try. There are things to learn from the past.

That all sounds nice until hard money is put up for a vote at council.