Confederation Line (Stage 1) | In Service 1.0

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by JCL

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-new...-so-long-lrt-passengers-comment-on-day-1

Picture 31??

That's them!

[Truenorth00]

I've seen concerns about platform size at the underground stations and I agree with them. Those platforms are going to be crowded at rush hour or after big events (like Canada Day).

[TheMatth69]

One thing is for sure ... Appart from the trains themselves this system has nothing of an LRT ... It's literally a Metro.
Only one thing I noted, having lived in France where Citadis a very common, one of my fears was confirmed. The Citadis suspensions. In France Citadis are known for having pretty soft suspensions, it's useful at slow speed and sharp turns, but as soon as the trains picks up speed the ride can get a little bumpy. And from what I saw and felt during the time I was riding the system, we have the same problem here. Also I feel like the trains slows down too much when going over switchs and entering sharp turns, got me a little fustrated.
The Underground stations are much more intimidating then I thought. Especially that long escalator at Rideau station, feels almost like London's Tube. Concerning the escalator I find it pretty inconvenient to have only one direction sets (probably a cost concern I guess).
I stumbled across CBC reporter Chianello a couple times at Lyon, Rideau and Tunney's. She seemed sad or unhappy ... Probably cause she was expecting to cover a huge breakdown during the day to sell papers full of — like she likes them ... Sadly for her it didn't happen :') , she almost made me cry for a second. She can gently retire and never publish again ... I hope (: .

[TheMatth69]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I've seen concerns about platform size at the underground stations and I agree with them. Those platforms are going to be crowded at rush hour or after big events (like Canada Day).

Having been on systems around the world (London, Paris, Lyon, Montreal or Bruxelles just to name these few) I can assure you that the platforms are not bigger or smaller then any of these networks.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by TheMatth69

Having been on systems around the world (London, Paris, Lyon, Montreal or Bruxelles just to name these few) I can assure you that the platforms are not bigger or smaller then any of these networks.

Oh I get that they aren't atypical of these kinds of systems. I just wonder if they're adequate for the level of traffic at these downtown stations. Especially if people start crowding near the stairs. And at rush hour and major events.
.

[k.evans]

People really do forget that the reason such an expansive LRT system was possible, was because the existing Transitway was converted from BRT to LRT. The areas you think should have gotten rail, would have required completely grade-separated systems at $200-300M per km. Stage 1 would have been 8-10km if built with your vision. Probably less than half the ridership without buses feeding it.

Maybe. Maybe not. I wouldn't make such definitive statements without actually seeing any studies or numbers. My point was that our train primarily doesn't serve anyone or anything. Let's not forget, the Confederation Line will be fed constantly by busses at its terminuses after all the cross-town routes are removed. I would be curious to see how busy the line would be without the force-fed routes as many of the stations are probably not going to be that busy as they don't serve places of work or places where people live and can easily access the LRT. Maybe quality/location over quantity was my point.

This topic underlies the tension seen in this forum a lot: what is the point of the LRT system? Is it to serve the suburbs as quickly and cheaply as possible? Or should it serve the densest parts of the city proper first and act as a catalyst for further and denser development?

I come out on the side of the city proper. Is my suggestion the best option? Maybe not. What I do know is that I couldn't care less about what Barrhaven, Kanata, or Orleans want or think they deserve. If the balancing act you chose was the time/money wasted in a long commute in order to get a (cheaply built) semi-detached Claridge house with a postage stamp yard, in the name of having 'low taxes', then that's your problem. The rest of the city shouldn't subsidize their wastefulness or encourage more sprawl. Those times are done. Time for Ottawa and Canada to move into 21st Century city planning.

Regardless, the O-Train expansion will change many things about Ottawa, most likely for the better. Does it align with my own personal views? No. But then again, I am not paid the big bucks to make those decisions for the city. Time will tell.

[Prometheus188]

Originally Posted by k.evans

I was most surprised about how the train primarily serves empty fields. I wish we had had a visionary city council who paid the money to put the train where people already live and would use it, and not theoretical future neighbourhoods like Tunney's, Pimisi, Hurdman, and Cyrville. I imagined what it would have been like had the train, after UOttawa, turned and served Vanier, or after Lyon, tunneled under Richmond Road. We walked from Tunney's into Wellington West and I realized that this neighbourhood will never see high-order transit, despite its relative density since the Confederation Line is a 10-15 minute walk away instead of serving where already people live. I think the same about Stage 2 and its primary service routes of more fields and highways. People came second in both stages.

I fully support the intention behind everything you said, but the cost is prohibitive. In order to build an underground LRT through Vanier and even 5 km of Montreal road, you'd have to cancel the entire stage 2 project to pay for it. Yup, cancel all 44 km of stage 2 and the 24 stations to build 5 km of LRT at montreal road. It's that expensive. You'd have to tunnel the entire length of Vanier. There's no above ground option there. Even 3 km through Vanier, would be more expensive than the entire 11 km through Orleans. The reason stage 2 is so dirt cheap through Orleans, is that the train runs in the median of highway 174. No need to build costly over/underpasses, no need to forcefully buy properties from existing owners, no need to build any tunnels. This is also why the Kanata extension and the Orleans extension are both 11-12 km, but the Kanata extension is twice as expensive as Orleans. That's not hyperbole. It's literally twice as expensive. Kanata has no existing corridor, and requires plenty of grade separations.

Stage 2 west involves tunnelling under the SJAM. It's cut and cover, but that's still way more expensive than not tunnelling at all (Like we can for Orleans). There's a reason they didn't go through Vanier. It's ridiculously expensive. And whether we like it or not, 70% of Ottawans live in suburbs, and 10% live in exurbs/rural areas. Only 20% live in the urban central area. We can't build transit that solely serves the central urban area. That's not where most of the residents are, nor is it the type of transit that will generate the most transit ridership.

I can understand not wanting to send rail to the middle of bumfuck nowhere, but the major suburbs should be served by rail. Orleans has higher ridership than anywhere else in the city. It's worth sending rail there. Kanata currently does not have any grade separation, so a LRT would be a massive improvement, and would skyrocket ridership. This would also massively reduce car traffic, congestion and emissions. Ditto for Barrhaven.


I absolutely support improved transit, including rail service to the inner urban areas, but we can't just, not send rail to suburbs. That's where all the ridership is.

edit: Stage 2 construction costs including expropriating properties, but excluding the Trillium Line maintenance.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by k.evans

This topic underlies the tension seen in this forum a lot: what is the point of the LRT system? Is it to serve the suburbs as quickly and cheaply as possible? Or should it serve the densest parts of the city proper first and act as a catalyst for further and denser development?

This has been discussed as nauseam. The point of the LRT system is to replace the BRT system that was running beyond capacity. They did this by literally replacing The existing Transitway with LRT. It's all on the same existing Transitway corridor.

You slam the Confederation Line for getting ridership from feeder buses as though this is a negative. It's a trunk line being fed. A third of the stations have large bus terminals. And a third have tons of bus routes connecting at street level. You are confusing a design feature for a flaw.

If you want to argue that it should have served denser neighborhoods first, I'd like to see a proposal for what you would have done to end the lack of capacity on the existing BRT at the same time. The bus parade on Albert and Slater has to end. Anybody who takes transit at rush hour knows how big the problem is, and how unsustainable that is.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by k.evans

Maybe. Maybe not. I wouldn't make such definitive statements without actually seeing any studies or numbers.

I would. The places that people in Ottawa think are "urban" are fairly suburban by the standard of most planners. And walk on ridership would be nowhere close to justifying the cost of grade separation.

Anybody who sees the half of Montreal road east of St-Laurent and see an urban corridor probably hasn't left Ottawa. And even most of Rideau is about as dense as some Midtown areas of Toronto. Many with corridors that just have buses on them. It seems like in Ottawa, if people see two buildings more than 5 storeys high beside each other, they think it deserves rail to it.

[lrt's friend]

I'm in Toronto at the moment and enjoying how effective urban transit can be. The key is frequency, something Ottawa does not know how to do, even on the more key routes in the city. Making people walk 10 or 15 minutes is not the answer. People expect convenience. I will be riding the TTC streetcars for the next number of days and they are so convenient, because of frequency even late at night and because they go where people want to travel along the key urban corridors, think the equivalent of Bank, Rideau, Somerset, Wellington West and Richmond Road. And then those streetcars are so very quiet, compared to what we were presented a few weeks ago. Why can't our LRT be as quiet as Toronto streetcars?

The Confederation Line has always been a compromise but skewed towards suburban commuters. I had suggested another way years ago that would have emphasized rail in our more urban areas without ignoring the needs of commuters and without ignoring the Albert/Slater congestion issue. It is going to cost the city all it can manage for decades, $10B at least, while urban transit continues to languish. How about a little investment for those key routes to complement the Confederation Line? Why is it so critical to remove virtual all buses out of downtown? Making almost everybody transfer to reach downtown is not going to make downtown more accessible? I am talking about the inner neighbourhoods, which between poor off-peak frequency and an added transfer will not encourage ridership.

Nevertheless, I look forward to my return and my first ride and I know it is major step forward for our city. Congrats Ottawa, my home town.

[lrt's friend]

It seems like in Ottawa, if people see two buildings more than 5 storeys high beside each other, they think it deserves rail to it.

Much of King and Queen Street in Toronto outside of the immediate downtown area is also low rise. The difference is that Toronto has made transit the preferred transport option on those corridors.

[JHikka]

Had a great time taking the LRT yesterday. Rideau to STL in 11 minutes and never having to step outside for either. So much better than bumbling around on buses for a half hour for the same trip. LRT is really going to improve my commute, but i'm worried about how packed the trains are going to be on morning commutes.

I know it was only opening day and lots of casuals show up to check things out but Ottawans are really going to have to learn to stand to the side of train doors when they're opening so people can get off the train and to stand on the right hand side of escalators if they're not walking up them.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Much of King and Queen Street in Toronto outside of the immediate downtown area is also low rise. The difference is that Toronto has made transit the preferred transport option on those corridors.

The difference in Toronto is that those low rise neighborhoods are actually dense. Most of Ottawa's "dense" neighborhoods aren't like that.

And as you observe in Toronto, those neighborhoods don't have multi-billion dollar subways serving them. Just streetcars. On that I agree. Rideau-Montreal and Bank could be adequately served with streetcars.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Making people walk 10 or 15 minutes is not the answer.

You're a tourist. Not a commuter. You should ask all those getting off the GO Train at Union how much they have to walk. Walking 10-15 mins from a station in Toronto is just not unusual. Usually faster to walk than to get on a rammed streetcar at rush.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

People expect convenience. I will be riding the TTC streetcars for the next number of days and they are so convenient, because of frequency even late at night and because they go where people want to travel along the key urban corridors, think the equivalent of Bank, Rideau, Somerset, Wellington West and Richmond Road.

I'll agree with this. Service frequency sucks in Ottawa. Buses should be under 10 mins during rush for every route. Major routes should never be greater 15 mins off-peak. Are people willing to pay taxes to have that kind of service? I'm not sure. I'm hoping the savings from LRT ops will let OC Transpo do this on major routes. Toronto wasn't always like this. Over time, major avenues were targeted for improvement and then secondary routes. Hopefully, Ottawa goes down the same path.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

And then those streetcars are so very quiet, compared to what we were presented a few weeks ago. Why can't our LRT be as quiet as Toronto streetcars?

Different league completely. If we bought streetcars instead of LRT and ran them slowly on rail embedded on pavement they'd be just as quiet.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Making almost everybody transfer to reach downtown is not going to make downtown more accessible?

While in Toronto, you should tell Torontonians that people in Ottawa are massively bothered by a single transfer. And that you think spending hundreds of millions (Interline) or billions (parallel tunnels) to eliminate the sole rail transfer in the city is a good idea. Do it at Yonge&Bloor at rush and get folks on the Yonge platform coming from Scarborough. Let us know the reaction.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

.

While in Toronto, you should tell Torontonians that people in Ottawa are massively bothered by a single transfer. And that you think spending hundreds of millions (Interline) or billions (parallel tunnels) to eliminate the sole rail transfer in the city is a good idea. Do it at Yonge&Bloor at rush and get folks on the Yonge platform coming from Scarborough. Let us know the reaction.

Maybe don't bring that one up... The Scarborough subway debate over on Urban Toronto is currently 16 thousand posts long....

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

Maybe don't bring that one up... The Scarborough subway debate over on Urban Toronto is currently 16 thousand posts long....

And that's over a second rail-rail transfer, that's linear and nearly three floors at Kennedy. Comparing that to Bayview would be hilarious.

[Kitchissippi]

It was great finally riding the trains yesterday. The downtown tunnel definitely is a game changer. I think being closer to Sparks Street will make a huge difference over the sterile environment of Albert/Slater. Looking forward to the improvements this will bring.

The army of red-vested information people was nice, but almost overkill. I wish they had used some of that budget to hire cleaners as the floors of the underground stations needed a good washing. Maybe they just don’t have those maintenance contracts in place. There’s a also a weird sewer smell in Parliament Station, I hope the find the cause.

I think the bus loop at Tunney’s is a disaster. They should have all buses dropping off passengers by the station door before picking riders at the designated stop. Transferring to and from the 11 is like a 100m walk between bus and train.

The retrofitting at Blair showed its shortcomings. It’s weird accessing the new station from the mall through the old winding steps of the Transitway. It was clogged by people lining up to buy tickets.

It will be interesting to see how the system will handle rush hour tomorrow

[CityTech]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

I think the bus loop at Tunney’s is a disaster. They should have all buses dropping off passengers by the station door before picking riders at the designated stop. Transferring to and from the 11 is like a 100m walk between bus and train.

That actually is the plan after October 6.. All buses do drop offs at stop C.

[RomanR27]

I was out with a some friends in the market last night and it was surreal going down the escalators into Rideau. It felt (and smelt!) like I was in Toronto. Got off at Hurdman to transfer to the S/E Transitway right around 2am, and there were still two trains listed on the board. Unfortunately the red vest wouldn't let my girlfriend use the washroom because it was 2am and he said the cages would close any second and trap us in.

[Razor]

I also mentioned this in the thread in the main Canada transit section.
Another bonus, is that commuters will soon be able to take advantage of the newly widened highway, as those temporary buses will soon be taken off, and those bus lanes turned into actual lanes..I know it's kind of ironic mentioning a highway widening in a light rail thread