O-Train Line 2/4 [Stage 2 | Greenboro to Limebank/Airport] | In Service

[OCCheetos]

How long do people think it might take for the Trillium Line's peak capacity to be exceeded again after Stage 2 is complete? (this is a genuine question, i'm wondering what the people who have been posting here think).
As it is now, the Trillium Line can just barely handle all of the passengers in the AM peak but it's not that uncommon to see passengers left behind at Mooney's Bay heading towards Carleton (it's happened to me before). Stage 2 will double (quite precisely) the capacity of the line with trains that are twice as long, but still the same frequencies with no flexibility to increase frequencies at all.

The line will be extended to serve two park and rides (basically replacing the existing buses that run into downtown/Hurdman I guess?) and a growing neighbourhood, as well as two infill stations, and it's possible the new hospital campus will be built which will also increase ridership noticeably.

My concern is that this additional ridership will grow to beyond what the Trillium Line will be able to handle sooner than the city will be able to invest in upgrading it again, or at least soon enough that not investing in it now would be looked back upon as being a huge mistake.

I understand and agree with why the opted to extend the line because of the return on investment in comparison to upgrading the existing line, but that isn't going to change the fact that the Trillium Line is going to be in a tight spot possibly within years of being upgraded... and whenever that does I sure as hell hope they don't need to shut the entire thing down again.

Random tidbit: The Trillium Line will have been closed for approximately 10% of its existence by the time Stage 2 is complete.

One more thing, I understand that the city probably doesn't have the resource to invest in a bigger upgrade now even if they wanted to, but right now it's easy for the city to justify shutting the line down for extended periods for upgrades since ridership isn't that high and they have a guaranteed revenue stream from the primary users of the line (via the upass) and shutting it down is likely much faster and cheaper than trying to perform upgrades while the line is still running, but later on down the road, when ridership is much higher, there are going to be a hell of a lot more unhappy customers who would have to deal with a shutdown, possibly enough to the point where the city may consider trying to do the upgrade while keeping the line running which will make the whole thing more expensive than what it would be now while they can still justify the closure. Maybe they won't, i don't know but someone is going to be unhappy about that upgrade and it's either going to be the passengers or the city for having to accommodate the other.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Just remember we will need new grade separations at Lester, Leitrim, Earl Armstrong, Bowesville, and Limebank Roads and Uplands Drive and a new bridge at Hunt Club Road. That is a lot of work.

But that work can begin next summer. I suppose I don't really have a good sense as to how long that work should take, but at least they're not trying to fit it into 16 months.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

How long do people think it might take for the Trillium Line's peak capacity to be exceeded again after Stage 2 is complete? (this is a genuine question, i'm wondering what the people who have been posting here think).
As it is now, the Trillium Line can just barely handle all of the passengers in the AM peak but it's not that uncommon to see passengers left behind at Mooney's Bay heading towards Carleton (it's happened to me before). Stage 2 will double (quite precisely) the capacity of the line with trains that are twice as long, but still the same frequencies with no flexibility to increase frequencies at all.

The line will be extended to serve two park and rides (basically replacing the existing buses that run into downtown/Hurdman I guess?) and a growing neighbourhood, as well as two infill stations, and it's possible the new hospital campus will be built which will also increase ridership noticeably.

My concern is that this additional ridership will grow to beyond what the Trillium Line will be able to handle sooner than the city will be able to invest in upgrading it again, or at least soon enough that not investing in it now would be looked back upon as being a huge mistake.

I understand and agree with why the opted to extend the line because of the return on investment in comparison to upgrading the existing line, but that isn't going to change the fact that the Trillium Line is going to be in a tight spot possibly within years of being upgraded... and whenever that does I sure as hell hope they don't need to shut the entire thing down again.

Random tidbit: The Trillium Line will have been closed for approximately 10% of its existence by the time Stage 2 is complete.

Findlay Creek is currently exploding. Three new subdivisions are currently under construction, which will likely double the population. A fourth subdivision is about to be introduced and I know two more are coming soon.
Riverside South is growing but at a slower pace. Once rail arrives there, expect it also to explode. It will be closer to downtown than Barrhaven.

The wild card will be the number of Barrhaven residents who will cross the Vimy Bridge to use the Park n Ride near the end of the line. The lack of rail service to Barrhaven could be an unexpected driver of ridership, just like the Vimy Bridge suddenly caused road capacity problems east of the river.

There may already be pent up demand given the limitations of the road network and congestion that makes current transit unappealing.

As I pointed out before, we are also inviting down wind problems at Bayview especially if more big buildings go up in Little Italy.

It will not be an option to continually shut down the Trillium Line south of Greenboro as it has been possible in the past north of Greenboro. There will simply be too many regular commuters affected and no viable alternative transit routes.

I have spoken with councillors and it is already on their radar that it may be necessary to convert the SE Transitway to rail as it may no longer be viable to double track the existing Trillium Line north of Greenboro.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

But AM peak ridership gives you the best measure of commuter usage, which are the bread and butter.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Weekday ridership would be better than annual ridership, but not as good as AM peak.

If we can get reliable annual/yoy data, sure....

Originally Posted by roger1818

Do you have links for those stats? Not that I don't beleive you, just I haven't seen them.

http://www.octranspo.com/about-octranspo/reports_and_stats

Originally Posted by roger1818

I agree that most likely most that are currently taking the bus will start taking the train. I don't share you optimism about those who started driving because of the construction. That switch usually involves buying a car (or a second one), and it is unlikely they will all decide to sell it overnight. It will probably take time to win them back.

You think people just went out and bought a car to start driving to work? I don't doubt that happened. But I think the vast majority were people who own cars and used to take transit to work and switched to driving because of construction. They'll park their cars once construction is done.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I have told you this before. I live within 5 km of the Trillium Line but realistically, it is a 40 minute bus ride to usable LRT.

Your personal experience is not universal by any measure. Nor is it an issue that can't be fixed. Bus routes can most certainly be changed.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Could it be that Calgary Transit bus network is not that great? Could it be about the last mile problem that is a problem with rail transit everywhere?

But I thought you were saying how I bus network sucks and that we have so much to learn from Calgary? Which is it?

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

However, it is also true that Calgary's modal share has been increasing, Vancouver's modal share has passed Ottawa while Ottawa has been falling.

Vancouver's modal share should be higher than Ottawa. Modal share rises with the size of cities. That Vancouver was even close to Ottawa is pathetic for Vancouver.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Ottawa's problems are more than the current disruption. We also had a pointless strike that drove away riders, a service optimization that drove more away and the silent service reductions, round after round of them. Why run two buses, when we could substitute one artic or double-decker. Oh by the way, that means frequency will be cut.

And yet, modal share remains on par with cities that have several million more residents. Not to say we can't do better, but the Chicken Little routine is laughably false.

We've had massive disruption in the core part of the BRT network for half a decade and seen only a 5% hit in annual ridership. That to me is damn decent performance.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

We need to stop resting on laurels when clearly our transit system is deteriorating.

You expect people to take you seriously when you say something like this...on the verge of the largest capacity expansion in the city's history.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I have studied and used Ottawa transit for over 40 years.

Reading articles and commenting from your couch doesn't count as "study". I'll stick with the analysis of professionals who get paid to do it for a living.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I have seen the deterioration.

"Somebody messed with a bus route in my 'hood. Ergo, the whole city's transit infrastructure is failing! I do declare!"

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

We should never be satisfied with the status quo.

Nor should we deny our successes and act out of some self-induced inferiority complex. In my military career, I've seen a lot of Canada. For a metro of its size, Ottawa is arguably one of, if not the, best metro in North America. I can't think of a single city of 800 000 - 1.3 million with this high mode share, in Canada or the US. And total annual ridership is one of the highest for a city of its size. I expect Ottawa to have the highest of a city of about a million, after Stage 2.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

We deserve more when we are spending billions.

Translation: "I'm not happy because they didn't spend most of those billions on a route I take."

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

How long do people think it might take for the Trillium Line's peak capacity to be exceeded again after Stage 2 is complete? (this is a genuine question, i'm wondering what the people who have been posting here think).
As it is now, the Trillium Line can just barely handle all of the passengers in the AM peak but it's not that uncommon to see passengers left behind at Mooney's Bay heading towards Carleton (it's happened to me before). Stage 2 will double (quite precisely) the capacity of the line with trains that are twice as long, but still the same frequencies with no flexibility to increase frequencies at all.

The line will be extended to serve two park and rides (basically replacing the existing buses that run into downtown/Hurdman I guess?) and a growing neighbourhood, as well as two infill stations, and it's possible the new hospital campus will be built which will also increase ridership noticeably.

My concern is that this additional ridership will grow to beyond what the Trillium Line will be able to handle sooner than the city will be able to invest in upgrading it again, or at least soon enough that not investing in it now would be looked back upon as being a huge mistake.

I understand and agree with why the opted to extend the line because of the return on investment in comparison to upgrading the existing line, but that isn't going to change the fact that the Trillium Line is going to be in a tight spot possibly within years of being upgraded... and whenever that does I sure as hell hope they don't need to shut the entire thing down again.

Random tidbit: The Trillium Line will have been closed for approximately 10% of its existence by the time Stage 2 is complete.

One more thing, I understand that the city probably doesn't have the resource to invest in a bigger upgrade now even if they wanted to, but right now it's easy for the city to justify shutting the line down for extended periods for upgrades since ridership isn't that high and they have a guaranteed revenue stream from the primary users of the line (via the upass) and shutting it down is likely much faster and cheaper than trying to perform upgrades while the line is still running, but later on down the road, when ridership is much higher, there are going to be a hell of a lot more unhappy customers who would have to deal with a shutdown, possibly enough to the point where the city may consider trying to do the upgrade while keeping the line running which will make the whole thing more expensive than what it would be now while they can still justify the closure. Maybe they won't, i don't know but someone is going to be unhappy about that upgrade and it's either going to be the passengers or the city for having to accommodate the other.

Ridership is somewhat fungible. A lot of Trillium Line riderhipship is from feeder buses and park and rides. Less so from walk-ins. In that sense, they can redirect some of it to the Confederation Line. And a lot of their plans rely on that. For example, Barrhaven buses connect at Baseline. And after Stage 3, if they go to Barrhaven, that ridership will almost be entirely diverted.

I think they'll have to the discussion about twinning soon. Will need to be done later in the next decade. I think they've largely avoided it, because the bang for the buck is somewhat poor. A billion dollars for nothing but a capacity increase. Not adding an upgrade to most riders. Not saving operational costs. And not even that much increase in ridership compared to the expansion in capacity twinning would bring. But hopefully, twinning follow right after Stage 3 to Barrhaven (which would provide some relief if they have to close Trillium for construction).

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

Random tidbit: The Trillium Line will have been closed for approximately 10% of its existence by the time Stage 2 is complete.

For a line that costs $21 million dollars to launch and has delivered 18 out of 20 years of services, that's amazing return. Capital costs of around 21-25 cents per passenger.

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

But that work can begin next summer. I suppose I don't really have a good sense as to how long that work should take, but at least they're not trying to fit it into 16 months.

None of the contractors have even procured long lead items or spent any serious resources on designing the grade separations. They won't do that before they get a tender. An optimistic estimate would be six months from contract award, they get shovels in the ground for prep work. At the pace we're going, I wouldn't expect any movement on the ground till mid to late summer, at the earliest.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

If we can get reliable annual/yoy data, sure....



http://www.octranspo.com/about-octranspo/reports_and_stats



You think people just went out and bought a car to start driving to work? I don't doubt that happened. But I think the vast majority were people who own cars and used to take transit to work and switched to driving because of construction. They'll park their cars once construction is done.



Your personal experience is not universal by any measure. Nor is it an issue that can't be fixed. Bus routes can most certainly be changed.



But I thought you were saying how I bus network — and that we have so much to learn from Calgary? Which is it?



Vancouver's modal share should be higher than Ottawa. Modal share rises with the size of cities. That Vancouver was even close to Ottawa is pathetic for Vancouver.



And yet, modal share remains on par with cities that have several million more residents. Not to say we can't do better, but the Chicken Little routine is laughably false.

We've had massive disruption in the core part of the BRT network for half a decade and seen only a 5% hit in annual ridership. That to me is damn decent performance.




You expect people to take you seriously when you say something like this...on the verge of the largest capacity expansion in the city's history.



Reading articles and commenting from your couch doesn't count as "study". I'll stick with the analysis of professionals who get paid to do it for a living.



"Somebody messed with a bus route in my 'hood. Ergo, the whole city's transit infrastructure is failing! I do declare!"



Nor should we deny our successes and act out of some self-induced inferiority complex. In my military career, I've seen a lot of Canada. For a metro of its size, Ottawa is arguably one of, if not the, best metro in North America. I can't think of a single city of 800 000 - 1.3 million with this high mode share, in Canada or the US. And total annual ridership is one of the highest for a city of its size. I expect Ottawa to have the highest of a city of about a million, after Stage 2.



Translation: "I'm not happy because they didn't spend most of those billions on a route I take."

I chuckle at how you constantly twist my words. It is not worth further comment.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I chuckle at how you constantly twist my words. It is not worth further comment.

There's no twisting of your words. Your claim to authority based on nothing more than what everybody else here does, needs to be rebuffed. Especially, when you decide that your personal experiences are somehow the universal truth about the state of transit in Ottawa. Quit your bullshit.

[lrt's friend]

My comments are opinion not authority and I expect most people understand this. There is no need to insult me.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

If we can get reliable annual/yoy data, sure....

Ya. That is the problem. We might have to make do with the Weekday ridership.

http://www.octranspo.com/about-octranspo/reports_and_stats

Thanks. Interesting that between 2015 and 2016 total ridership stayed flat but weekday ridership dropped 3%. That means, assuming 252 work days a year, weekend and holiday ridership went up 18.9% (from 13.3 to 15.9 million). That doesn't seem right.

Also interesting they haven't published the 2017 stats yet.

You think people just went out and bought a car to start driving to work? I don't doubt that happened. But I think the vast majority were people who own cars and used to take transit to work and switched to driving because of construction. They'll park their cars once construction is done.

Not impulsively as you are implying, but yes, many people will have bought a car because they were frustrated with the bus service. Those are the ones who it will be harder to win back.

Vancouver's modal share should be higher than Ottawa. Modal share rises with the size of cities. That Vancouver was even close to Ottawa is pathetic for Vancouver.

I look at it the opposite way. Vancouver is still well above the North American average for cities its size, so it isn't pathetic for Vancouver, but an indication of how good Ottawa's performance has been (glass half full not half empty viewpoint).

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

How long do people think it might take for the Trillium Line's peak capacity to be exceeded again after Stage 2 is complete? (this is a genuine question, i'm wondering what the people who have been posting here think).
As it is now, the Trillium Line can just barely handle all of the passengers in the AM peak but it's not that uncommon to see passengers left behind at Mooney's Bay heading towards Carleton (it's happened to me before). Stage 2 will double (quite precisely) the capacity of the line with trains that are twice as long, but still the same frequencies with no flexibility to increase frequencies at all.

The line will be extended to serve two park and rides (basically replacing the existing buses that run into downtown/Hurdman I guess?) and a growing neighbourhood, as well as two infill stations, and it's possible the new hospital campus will be built which will also increase ridership noticeably.

My concern is that this additional ridership will grow to beyond what the Trillium Line will be able to handle sooner than the city will be able to invest in upgrading it again, or at least soon enough that not investing in it now would be looked back upon as being a huge mistake.

I understand and agree with why the opted to extend the line because of the return on investment in comparison to upgrading the existing line, but that isn't going to change the fact that the Trillium Line is going to be in a tight spot possibly within years of being upgraded... and whenever that does I sure as hell hope they don't need to shut the entire thing down again.

Random tidbit: The Trillium Line will have been closed for approximately 10% of its existence by the time Stage 2 is complete.

One more thing, I understand that the city probably doesn't have the resource to invest in a bigger upgrade now even if they wanted to, but right now it's easy for the city to justify shutting the line down for extended periods for upgrades since ridership isn't that high and they have a guaranteed revenue stream from the primary users of the line (via the upass) and shutting it down is likely much faster and cheaper than trying to perform upgrades while the line is still running, but later on down the road, when ridership is much higher, there are going to be a hell of a lot more unhappy customers who would have to deal with a shutdown, possibly enough to the point where the city may consider trying to do the upgrade while keeping the line running which will make the whole thing more expensive than what it would be now while they can still justify the closure. Maybe they won't, i don't know but someone is going to be unhappy about that upgrade and it's either going to be the passengers or the city for having to accommodate the other.

I seem to remember hearing the planners saying it should provide enough capacity for at least 30 years (sorry I don't have a reference), and using some back of the napkin math, that seems reasonable. Here is my thinking:

Growth in Trillium Line usage can be lumped into two categories: Growth of its existing ridership base and growth of its new ridership due to the extension.

For the existing ridership base, assuming it is 5% above capacity right now (you said people can't always catch the first train), that means current peak ridership is 1418 pphpd (270 x 1.05 x 5). Assuming a 1% growth per year, the existing ridership base will grow to 1911 pphpd in 30 years.

As for the new ridership due to the extension, things get a bit more murky, as I don't know how full any of the exiting buses are (any feedback would be useful), but let me give it a go. The two main routes that currently travel north from Leitrim are the 99 (4 buses per hour) and 299 (1 bus per hour)*. The 294 (2 buses per hour) will also likely be rerouted to go to Leitrim Station as well. That is a total of 7 buses per hour. Assuming each one has 50 on board when they leave "the south" (an over estimate IMHO), that is a total ridership of 350 pphpd. If we assume 3% growth per year (because of massive growth though not likely sustainable for 30 years), that will grow to 850 pphpd in 30 years.

*the 93 also travels to Leitrim, but it is a much slower route than the 294, so I can't imagine many in Findley Creek using it during peak periods, unless they want to get off before South Keys, so LRT won't be an option for them.

As for the airport spur, much of its traffic will be more evenly distributed over the entire day and any peaks it does have be contraflow, so I assumed it will have minimal impact to peak capacity.

If we combine those two figures together (1911 + 850) we get 2761 pphpd in 30 years, which is slightly above the future capacity of 2700, but given that I believe that I overestimated some of my numbers, I don't figure it will be a problem. Even if i am spot on, it becomes an issue in 28 years, not 30.

Now to try and boost ridership and save money, I am sure OCTranspo will initially try to encourage some Barrhaven and South Keys residents to use the Trillium Line instead of the Southern Transitway, but once they start getting close to capacity, most of those can be diverted away again (especially once the Confederation line is extended to Barrhaven).

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by roger1818

As for the new ridership due to the extension, things get a bit more murky, as I don't know how full any of the exiting buses are (any feedback would be useful), but let me give it a go. The two main routes that currently travel north from Leitrim are the 99 (4 buses per hour) and 299 (1 bus per hour)*. The 294 (2 buses per hour) will also likely be rerouted to go to Leitrim Station as well. That is a total of 7 buses per hour. Assuming each one has 50 on board when they leave "the south" (an over estimate IMHO), that is a total ridership of 350 pphpd. If we assume 3% growth per year (because of massive growth though not likely sustainable for 30 years), that will grow to 850 pphpd in 30 years.

*the 93 also travels to Leitrim, but it is a much slower route than the 294, so I can't imagine many in Findley Creek using it during peak periods, unless they want to get off before South Keys, so LRT won't be an option for them.

I'm not sure why you are excluding the 93 since it is the only route that currently travels from Findlay Creek to Letirim Station today. (The 294 does not go to Leitrim and I doubt that it will be extended; its purpose is to connect Findlay Creek to the Confederation Line at Hurdman).

Ridership on the 93 from Frindlay Creek is heavier toward South Keys. Today there is not much benefit to head from Findlay Creek to Leitrim; the only route to connect to is the 99 and it gets stuck in traffic on Albion. The extra rush hour trips on the 93 are to/from South Keys, not to Leitrim. That said, there are people at the west end of Findlay Creek (close to Albion) who do this today. There are also people who walk from Findlay Creek to Albion/Leitrim to catch the 99.

I would expect that when LRT service is available at Leitrim, that will change and ridership from Findlay Creek to Leitrim will be much heavier and service frequency will be increased.
I also wouldn't be surprised to see a new route created to act as a shuttle from the new subdivisions to Leitrim.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

I'm not sure why you are excluding the 93 since it is the only route that currently travels from Findlay Creek to Letirim Station today.

Because, as I said, the 93 "a much slower route than the 294, so I can't imagine many in Findley Creek using it during peak periods, unless they want to get off before South Keys, so LRT won't be an option for them." For those further north (Blossom Park, Sawmill Creek, etc), the 93 could easily be extended along the SW Transitway to Hurdman if capacity became an issue on Trillium Line. They may even want to do that before then to balance the east/west load on the Confederation Line. You optimally want to have the same number of people traveling from Bayview east as you do from Hurdman west to ensure trains in both directions are equally full.

(The 294 does not go to Leitrim and I doubt that it will be extended; its purpose is to connect Findlay Creek to the Confederation Line at Hurdman).

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I expect they will reverse the direction of the 294 and have it run from Finley Creek and Bank to Leitrim Station in the morning (and back in the evening). It may or may not end up being faster, but it will be a lot cheaper to have a shorter route and force them to take the LRT.

Ridership on the 93 from Frindlay Creek is heavier toward South Keys. Today there is not much benefit to head from Findlay Creek to Leitrim; the only route to connect to is the 99 and it gets stuck in traffic on Albion.

Today, yes. But we are talking about when the Trillium Line is extended. It won't get stuck in traffic.

The extra rush hour trips on the 93 are to/from South Keys, not to Leitrim.

I only see 2 AM and 3 PM on the schedule, but as I said, the 93 could easily be extended to relieve the Trillium Line.

That said, there are people at the west end of Findlay Creek (close to Albion) who do this today. There are also people who walk from Findlay Creek to Albion/Leitrim to catch the 99.

I am sure, but I can't imagine it is more than a few pphpd and thus not a significant factor in determining the loading of the

I would expect that when LRT service is available at Leitrim, that will change and ridership from Findlay Creek to Leitrim will be much heavier and service frequency will be increased.

Maybe, but I suspect that my over estimate of current ridership and assumed massive 3% annual growth over 30 years will cover any of those potential gains.

I also wouldn't be surprised to see a new route created to act as a shuttle from the new subdivisions to Leitrim.

I am sure there will, but I did include 3% annual growth in demand from the south to include those new subdivisions. It is not as if the existing subdivisions would more than double in population over the next 30 years without any new development.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Ya. That is the problem. We might have to make do with the Weekday ridership
....
Thanks. Interesting that between 2015 and 2016 total ridership stayed flat but weekday ridership dropped 3%. That means, assuming 252 work days a year, weekend and holiday ridership went up 18.9% (from 13.3 to 15.9 million). That doesn't seem right.

Also interesting they haven't published the 2017 stats yet.

I think it's more a format/dead link kind of thing. They do present those stats to Council. I think the city needs a better data transparency system.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Not impulsively as you are implying, but yes, many people will have bought a car because they were frustrated with the bus service. Those are the ones who it will be harder to win back.

The reason I think people will go back to transit is simple. Operating costs. Parking isn't cheap in Ottawa. Gas is getting more expensive with the carbon tax. Also, traffic is only getting worse since road capacity in the core isn't improving.

Originally Posted by roger1818

I look at it the opposite way. Vancouver is still well above the North American average for cities its size, so it isn't pathetic for Vancouver, but an indication of how good Ottawa's performance has been (glass half full not half empty viewpoint).

As Jarrett Walker at Human Transit pointed out years ago, Canadian cities are substantially better than equivalent US and Australian cities:

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

So Vancouver having better modal share than American cities is no big achievement at all. Saying you're doing great getting Cs because the other kid in the class got Fs isn't impressive.

And Ottawa's probably more a B student. I'm sick of the constant portrayal of Ottawa's transit as some kind of seriously failed policy. It's pretty damn clear that there's no city our size that comes close in Canada or the US. We should be fully capable of talking about how we can do better without constantly shitting on our accomplishments or downplaying successes.

[lrt's friend]

I am sure there will, but I did include 3% annual growth in demand from the south to include those new subdivisions. It is not as if the existing subdivisions would more than double in population over the next 30 years without any new development.

Development has been repressed by bad transportation. I have already indicated that Findlay Creek is right now in a development boom. I have no doubt that it is possible for it to double in population in the next 5 years. Findlay Creek residents will have a speed advantage to go to Leitrim Station once rail opens so expect a substantial reversal of transit ridership.


Once the Trillium Line extensions open, doubling of the population of Riverside South can be expected quite quickly. We already know this because the city wants development fees to pay for the Limebank extension. Furthermore, both Findlay Creek and Riverside South are closer to downtown than Barrhaven, so once the transport problems are eased, development will accelerate.

The other wild card is how Barrhaven residents will react to the extension of the Trillium Line. I have no doubt that a significant number will cross the bridge to use the Trillium Line just as they drove across the new bridge when it opened.

Do not expect Blossom Park residents to use the Trillium Line more than they do today. It is the slower route to downtown.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Because, as I said, the 93 "a much slower route than the 294, so I can't imagine many in Findley Creek using it during peak periods, unless they want to get off before South Keys, so LRT won't be an option for them."

I thought the original point of your post was to estimate the potential feed in ridership at Leitrim Station. Why would you exclude the route that currently carries the majority of the ridership from Findlay Creek?

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I expect they will reverse the direction of the 294 and have it run from Finley Creek and Bank to Leitrim Station in the morning (and back in the evening). It may or may not end up being faster, but it will be a lot cheaper to have a shorter route and force them to take the LRT.

I actually very much doubt that this will happen. The 294 will remain as-is because it is a connection to Hurdman and because it will also serve development along Lester Rd. It also provides extra capacity on Albion and Bridle Path in Blossom Park.

I do expect that more trips will be added from Bank/Leitrim to Leitrim station on Route 93, however. I also expect a new route will be added (293? 295?) to feed Leitrim Station from new subdivisions east of Bank St and north of the cemetery.

I only see 2 AM and 3 PM on the schedule, but as I said, the 93 could easily be extended to relieve the Trillium Line.

???
Route 93 Greenboro AM departures from Findlay Creek:
6:34 6:47 7:04 7:18 7:32 7:58 8:02 8:32 9:02

I am sure there will, but I did include 3% annual growth in demand from the south to include those new subdivisions. It is not as if the existing subdivisions would more than double in population over the next 30 years without any new development.

The point that lrt's friend is (correctly) making is that growth rates are far higher than 3%, so 3% is actually an unreasonably low forecast.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

I thought the original point of your post was to estimate the potential feed in ridership at Leitrim Station. Why would you exclude the route that currently carries the majority of the ridership from Findlay Creek?

Because the transfer from the 93 to 99 is so poor, no one would use it. On Weekday mornings the 93 arrives at Leitrim at X:25 and X:55, shortly after the 99 has departed, guaranteeing at least a 10 minute wait. Ignoring that, the 93 from Findlay Creek / Willowmere (the most western stop) and the 99 takes 11 minutes from Leitrum to South Keys, for a total of 18 minutes, if you had a perfect transfer. From Findlay Creek / Willowmere to Leitrum on the 294 is only 24 minutes, so only 6 minutes longer and no transfer needed.

I actually very much doubt that this will happen. The 294 will remain as-is because it is a connection to Hurdman and because it will also serve development along Lester Rd. It also provides extra capacity on Albion and Bridle Path in Blossom Park.

AFAIK, the 294 doesn't have any stops between Bank / Orville Kemp and Albion / Goth, so while it drives along Lester Rd, it isn't served. Post Stage 2, I don't see anyone south of Blossim Park having direct service to Hurdman (with the exception of a possible future extension to the 93 to Hurdman).

They could split the 294 into two routes (north and south) but since the 294 mirrors the 93 north of Queensdale Ave, I can't see the value in keeping that portion as a separate route. Those stops were likely only added to help fill the bus from Findlay Creek.

I do expect that more trips will be added from Bank/Leitrim to Leitrim station on Route 93, however. I also expect a new route will be added (293? 295?) to feed Leitrim Station from new subdivisions east of Bank St and north of the cemetery.

Quite possible.

???
Route 93 Greenboro AM departures from Findlay Creek:
6:34 6:47 7:04 7:18 7:32 7:58 8:02 8:32 9:02

Sorry. I wasn't clear (and maybe I misunderstood your original post). What I was saying is that only 2 runs of the 93 northbound don't depart from Leitrim (in the morning) and only 3 runs of the 93 southbound don't travel all the way to Leitrim (in the afternoon).

The point that lrt's friend is (correctly) making is that growth rates are far higher than 3%, so 3% is actually an unreasonably low forecast.

A 3% annual growth is 243% growth over 30 years. I really doubt if Riverside South will be significantly larger than 35,500 30 years from now. Findlay Creek, it is a lot smaller to begin with, so it might grow to be more than 21,500 in that time period, but its rate of growth will slow significantly once the denominator gets bigger.

Regardless, I believe I significantly over-estimated the current ridership from Leitrim Station.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The other wild card is how Barrhaven residents will react to the extension of the Trillium Line. I have no doubt that a significant number will cross the bridge to use the Trillium Line just as they drove across the new bridge when it opened.

Initially they may use it, especially during the construction of Stage 2 west, but once capacity becomes an issue, they can easily divert back to the Confederation Line, especially once it is extended to Barrhaven, which should be well within the next 30 years.

[lrt's friend]

Initially they may use it, especially during the construction of Stage 2 west, but once capacity becomes an issue, they can easily divert back to the Confederation Line, especially once it is extended to Barrhaven, which should be well within the next 30 years.

I think many Barrhaven residents will continue to use it if their destination is better served by the Trillium Line. That will be the main reason for those choosing that route in the first place.


OC Transpo will be fools to force Blossom Park residents onto the Trillium Line, which is known to be the slower route into downtown from Greenboro. That is a ridership killer measure. Going from one seat express service to two transfers on a lower frequency train line is unacceptable.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I think many Barrhaven residents will continue to use it if their destination is better served by the Trillium Line. That will be the main reason for those choosing that route in the first place.

Some of those Barrhaven residents may already be using the trillium line, though admittedly some may currently find it faster to use an alternate route. The question is, how easy will it be for those Barrhaven residents to get to Limebank Station? The 99 (or its replacement) will, but most aren't within walking distance of it, so a transfer would be necessary. The Confederation line will likely be the fastest route downtown, so the Connexion buses will likely all go to Baseline.

OC Transpo will be fools to force Blossom Park residents onto the Trillium Line, which is known to be the slower route into downtown from Greenboro. That is a ridership killer measure. Going from one seat express service to two transfers on a lower frequency train line is unacceptable.

I tend to agree and glad that you admit that the Trillium line will be the slower route downtown.

[daud]

I've noticed some diggers and activity along the proposed Trillium extension, notably at the start of the Osgoode Path at leitrim (north side of the road) and an area just north of Earl Armstrong on the same path.

Any idea what work they are doing and am I correct to assume its LRT related?

It seems like testing to me.