OC Transpo

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

We know that they are doing capacity planning to save money. It is not a good way to build ridership.

It wasn't that long ago when Route 95 ran every 5 minutes during the daytime as far as Place d'Orléans. A good way to build ridership? I would say so. That is called strategic investment. Then we went through the construction period, which allowed a variety of hidden service cuts to be implemented through all the route variations. Then they cut service to every 30 minutes on October 6th. Now back to 15 minutes. But is this another example of being short sighted?

We run a bus every 15 minutes on a route destined to have rail service every 5 minutes???? High frequency trunk service is a necessity if we expect people to transfer further to local low frequency routes. Otherwise, the whole trip is unreliable.

I don't disagree... but part of the reason frequency to Place d'Orleans is less is because Place d'Orleans is no longer the hub it was in the past- Blair is the hub. There are routes from large sections of Orleans (e.g. 30, 38) that run directly to Blair and bypass Place d'Orleans. In the past it would have been necessary to transfer to the 95 from these routes.

When LRT is extended to Orleans, the trunk frequency will be higher, and local routes will connect at all 4 stations in Orleans.

[lrt's friend]

I am going to tell everybody a little of my story. I was the poster child for enabling myself to live without a car. I bought my first car only so I could travel elsewhere.

My dentist office, bank, pharmacy were all accessible on my neighbourhood bus route. My office and doctor's office by one easy transfer. My office could access my bank, pharmacy, dentist and doctor's office all on the same bus route. The local indoor mall (Billings Bridge) was on my bus route. I previously could go to university with one easy transfer.

Then changes happened and I quit using transit. Oddly, the only thing that changed for myself was that my doctor's office relocated. That is the only place I go by transit now.

What happened? OC Transpo changed the routes. Bus routes were redirected, truncated or eliminated entirely. Routes that ran in straight lines were made indirect. The fast bus route that served the Ottawa Business Park that could get me to Walkley Station in 5 minutes was eliminated as the very last route to be cut in a round of cuts in early 2000s and then was never restored. All of OC Transpo's monkeying around meant that to conveniently access anything required a car.

Just today, I took the Trillium Line to my doctor's office and I needed to go to my pharmacy. The Trillium Line goes right by my pharmacy but does not stop there (Walkley Station has been planned for almost 20 years) so I had to go home and take the car back there. My neighbourhood bus route used to pass there for decades then they decided to truncate it at Greenboro.

So transit became next to useless because it doesn't go where I need it to go, even though all these services are on the natural trip desire line for my entire neighbourhood. The bus route goes around all these things except the big boxes at South Keys or stops short. Originally the bus route went to Billings Bridge and before that to the old Bank and Grove transfer station.

Yes, this is about me, but it isn't. It is just like the lady who expressed on this board recently, that her bus route was re-routed around local shopping just to get commuters to the C-Line a few minutes faster. It is no different from Route 11 being routed into Tunney's Pasture resulting in much slower access to local shops on Richmond Road, Wellington and Somerset for those living in the area.

Our increasing focus on downtown commuting cannot grow ridership because that has already been pretty well maxed out. The transit network needs to be reviewed to reflect that not everybody is going downtown.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

I don't disagree... but part of the reason frequency to Place d'Orleans is less is because Place d'Orleans is no longer the hub it was in the past- Blair is the hub. There are routes from large sections of Orleans (e.g. 30, 38) that run directly to Blair and bypass Place d'Orleans. In the past it would have been necessary to transfer to the 95 from these routes.

When LRT is extended to Orleans, the trunk frequency will be higher, and local routes will connect at all 4 stations in Orleans.

Blair isn't the hub for Orleans. Innes Road is now. Gloucester Centre was also failing. For a short time, people from Orleans were arguing that LRT should run along or near the Innes Road corridor but the experts overruled them. Part of the cost of Phase 2 was to pay for widening the competing Highway 174. That would not occur by running LRT along Innes Road.

[Richard Eade]

There is a bigger picture that people often forget to look at. Let’s take running the LRT along the OR174 as an example:

OR174 was originally built as concrete slabs by the Province. The road got down-loaded to the City. Over time those slabs shifted and tilted. The upkeep of the OR174 has become almost impossible. The City will now have to completely dig up the OR174 to remove the slabs and build a whole new road, starting with a new roadbed. This is very expensive work.

Enter the need to get a train out to the east end. The Federal and Provincial governments are willing to spend money on an electric train, but not necessarily major road work.

By combining the transit and the road reconstruction, it can all be deemed as spending for the train, since laying the tracks requires the road to move; as long as the tracks are where the road runs. Thus, the train gets built and the roadway gets rebuilt for less than the cost of doing each project separately. And the bonus for the City is that the upper two levels of government are putting in cash so the cost to the City is 40¢ dollars.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Blair isn't the hub for Orleans. Innes Road is now. .

This is true for most aspects of life in Orleans but there is no transit hub anywhere near Innes nor is there an obvious future location for one.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Acajack

This is true for most aspects of life in Orleans but there is no transit hub anywhere near Innes nor is there an obvious future location for one.

Doesn't this point to another issue? Shouldn't Orleans have a grand circular route that connects Innes Road and St. Joseph corridors via Place d'Orleans so that most of the major destinations within Orleans are connected on the same route. I said St. Joseph simply because 174 will be soon converted to rail.

Something like Blair Station, Ogilvie, Montreal Road, St. Joseph, Trim, Innes Road and back to Blair Station via Blackburn with a reverse route as well. Sort of like Route 25 and 39 linked together so there is continuous service on a loop.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Blair isn't the hub for Orleans. Innes Road is now.

God help us... Innes is anything but a “hub”, it is a sprawling, disconnected big-box hellscape strip that is a nightmare to drive, let alone use transit. Maybe the biggest urban planning mistake in the city in the last 20 years that Innes was allowed to turn out this way.

Innes is extremely difficult to serve well with transit. But there is the 25 the length of the corridor, plus the 131 local route that loops around Orleans and down a stretch of Innes. And with the October 6 changes, there is a new local route connection to Innes in the 138.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

God help us... Innes is anything but a “hub”, it is a sprawling, disconnected big-box hellscape strip that is a nightmare to drive, let alone use transit. Maybe the biggest urban planning mistake in the city in the last 20 years that Innes was allowed to turn out this way.

Innes is extremely difficult to serve well with transit. But there is the 25 the length of the corridor, plus the 131 local route that loops around Orleans and down a stretch of Innes. And with the October 6 changes, there is a new local route connection to Innes in the 138.

At least its linear unlike Kanata Centrum, which is just a jumbled up mess. But I agree, we don't learn to make our retail areas more pedestrian and transit friendly.

I would argue that St. Joseph Boulevard was even more poorly designed than Innes and totally gutted the old village of Orleans.

[OCCheetos]

A random observation I've had over the last few months is that the 46 seems better scheduled than the 44.

As in, the 46 is more likely to depart on-time from both Hurdman and Billings Bridge, while the 44 will usually leave a few minutes late.


Also, why was the 140 named "Heron Park"? There was a 112 Heron Park back in the day, but it was renamed to "Kaladar" to avoid confusion with the 112 Herongate which serves a whole other route. The 112 Herongate somehow became the 140 Heron Park, while the 112 Kaladar is now the 141 Kaladar...?

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

A random observation I've had over the last few months is that the 46 seems better scheduled than the 44.

As in, the 46 is more likely to depart on-time from both Hurdman and Billings Bridge, while the 44 will usually leave a few minutes late.


Also, why was the 140 named "Heron Park"? There was a 112 Heron Park back in the day, but it was renamed to "Kaladar" to avoid confusion with the 112 Herongate which serves a whole other route. The 112 Herongate somehow became the 140 Heron Park, while the 112 Kaladar is now the 141 Kaladar...?

I know costs. But I wish Route 44 and 46 did a complete loop from Hurdman. They both almost do that with both ending at Billings Bridge. That is about 5 minutes from Hurdman via the Transitway. I know that it would be a whole lot faster to get to Herongate via the southeast Transitway than the milk runs via Alta Vista and Elmvale that currently exist. Speed is important to people and would make transit more attractive especially when Herongate/Heatherington is a modest neighbourhood with high transit usage. That gap between Billings Bridge and Hurdman is just a no go in off-peak hours when frequency is poor. Who wants to transfer again at Billings Bridge and potentially wait another 30 minutes?

Loops are something that Calgary Transit does a lot of, and it can be very beneficial if you offset the loop in each direction so there is a departure every 15 minutes, even though frequency in each direction is every 30 minutes. Bus departing on the hour and half hour clockwise and at 15 and 45 counterclockwise. Calgary Transit assigns different route numbers to each direction for clarity.

This is another example of strategic investment with minimal cost but might pay for itself with ridership gains.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

At least its linear unlike Kanata Centrum, which is just a jumbled up mess. But I agree, we don't learn to make our retail areas more pedestrian and transit friendly.

I would argue that St. Joseph Boulevard was even more poorly designed than Innes and totally gutted the old village of Orleans.

Yes the old heart of Orleans was totally gutted but I'd argue not much "planning" at all went into St-Joseph. Other than piecemeal roadway changes over three decades to adapt what was once a village main street to steadily increasing vehicular traffic.

But sure, the City of Ottawa was complicit in the decline of St-Joseph (and the immediate vicinity) as a viable commercial area by simply rubber-stamping a gazillion strip and big box developments along Innes Road, with zero thought given to any community impacts.

St-Joseph was (potentially, remotely) Orleans' only hope for a village-style main street, but that ship sailed long ago.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Yes the old heart of Orleans was totally gutted but I'd argue not much "planning" at all went into St-Joseph. Other than piecemeal roadway changes over three decades to adapt what was once a village main street to steadily increasing vehicular traffic.

But sure, the City of Ottawa was complicit in the decline of St-Joseph (and the immediate vicinity) as a viable commercial area by simply rubber-stamping a gazillion strip and big box developments along Innes Road, with zero thought given to any community impacts.

St-Joseph was (potentially, remotely) Orleans' only hope for a village-style main street, but that ship sailed long ago.

Actually it was Gloucester that was the main culprit for the haphazard development on St. Joseph.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Actually it was Gloucester that was the main culprit for the haphazard development on St. Joseph.

What "development" did Gloucester actually carry out on St-Joseph anyway? (Other than, as I said, upgrading the roadway for more and more cars.)

As for Innes Road, now I can't recall if the hyper-development began when it was Cumberland-Gloucester or if it was post-merger.

[Multi-modal]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I know costs. But I wish Route 44 and 46 did a complete loop from Hurdman. They both almost do that with both ending at Billings Bridge. That is about 5 minutes from Hurdman via the Transitway. I know that it would be a whole lot faster to get to Herongate via the southeast Transitway than the milk runs via Alta Vista and Elmvale that currently exist. Speed is important to people and would make transit more attractive especially when Herongate/Heatherington is a modest neighbourhood with high transit usage. That gap between Billings Bridge and Hurdman is just a no go in off-peak hours when frequency is poor. Who wants to transfer again at Billings Bridge and potentially wait another 30 minutes?

Loops are something that Calgary Transit does a lot of, and it can be very beneficial if you offset the loop in each direction so there is a departure every 15 minutes, even though frequency in each direction is every 30 minutes. Bus departing on the hour and half hour clockwise and at 15 and 45 counterclockwise. Calgary Transit assigns different route numbers to each direction for clarity.

This is another example of strategic investment with minimal cost but might pay for itself with ridership gains.

+1, when I lived around Albion/Walkley it was frustrating late at night having to take the "milk run" down Alta Vista or else risk the transfer at Billings.

I also think the 40 should do the full loop (Hurdman to St. Laurent), even during off-peak.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I know costs. But I wish Route 44 and 46 did a complete loop from Hurdman. They both almost do that with both ending at Billings Bridge. That is about 5 minutes from Hurdman via the Transitway. I know that it would be a whole lot faster to get to Herongate via the southeast Transitway than the milk runs via Alta Vista and Elmvale that currently exist. Speed is important to people and would make transit more attractive especially when Herongate/Heatherington is a modest neighbourhood with high transit usage. That gap between Billings Bridge and Hurdman is just a no go in off-peak hours when frequency is poor. Who wants to transfer again at Billings Bridge and potentially wait another 30 minutes?

Loops are something that Calgary Transit does a lot of, and it can be very beneficial if you offset the loop in each direction so there is a departure every 15 minutes, even though frequency in each direction is every 30 minutes. Bus departing on the hour and half hour clockwise and at 15 and 45 counterclockwise. Calgary Transit assigns different route numbers to each direction for clarity.

This is another example of strategic investment with minimal cost but might pay for itself with ridership gains.

This is certainly something worth considering. One of the many things that would be best properly considered by a full bus network review exercise, including a review of minimum council service standards of coverage vs. frequency.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Multi-modal

+1, when I lived around Albion/Walkley it was frustrating late at night having to take the "milk run" down Alta Vista or else risk the transfer at Billings.

I also think the 40 should do the full loop (Hurdman to St. Laurent), even during off-peak.

Run the 40 down Coventry and you can make a full loop.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Acajack

What "development" did Gloucester actually carry out on St-Joseph anyway? (Other than, as I said, upgrading the roadway for more and more cars.)

As for Innes Road, now I can't recall if the hyper-development began when it was Cumberland-Gloucester or if it was post-merger.

I live in Orleans today, though I was barely aware of it as a kid/teen (90s and 00s). Based on what I know and see today, Gloucester/Cumberland was responsible for the suburban look of St-Joseph (reminds me Gréber in Gatineau) with fast food restaurants, car dealerships, medium box stores (as opposed to big-box on Innes) and Place d'Orléans Mall. The few historic buildings left seem lonely and out of place.

Innes as a big-box store suburban nightmare is 100% a post-amalgamation beast. Cumberland started some of that type of development on 10th Line in Fallingbrook (pretty sure Canadian Tire (now GoodLife) was pre-amalgamation), but Ottawa went gunz-a-blazin' with Innes starting around the mid-2000s.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

This is certainly something worth considering. One of the many things that would be best properly considered by a full bus network review exercise, including a review of minimum council service standards of coverage vs. frequency.

We seem to have a locked in view of how to do things especially when we adopted capacity planning in 2011. We need some creative thinking and I think we will be rewarded with ridership growth and a good portion of the strategic investment will be covered by the new ridership revenue generated.

This is really needed since our focus has become too oriented towards feeding the Confederation Line. We know that passengers need to go elsewhere and we need to make it easier for them.

The opening of the Confederation Line is begging for the introduction of looping routes to make it faster to get places whether part of the trip is on the Confederation Line or not.

I have mentioned before of the grand Orleans loop connecting Route 25 and 39. A while back, I suggested that Route 9 and 10 be connected with the current gap only between Lyon and Rideau Stations and before October 6th there was no gap at all.

[caveat.doctor]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I am going to tell everybody a little of my story.

I was the poster child for enabling myself to live without a car. I bought my first car only so I could travel elsewhere.

My dentist office, bank, pharmacy were all accessible on my neighbourhood bus route. My office and doctor's office by one easy transfer. My office could access my bank, pharmacy, dentist and doctor's office all on the same bus route. The local indoor mall (Billings Bridge) was on my bus route. I previously could go to university with one easy transfer.

Then changes happened and I quit using transit. Oddly, the only thing that changed for myself was that my doctor's office relocated. That is the only place I go by transit now.

What happened? OC Transpo changed the routes. Bus routes were redirected, truncated or eliminated entirely. Routes that ran in straight lines were made indirect. The fast bus route that served the Ottawa Business Park that could get me to Walkley Station in 5 minutes was eliminated as the very last route to be cut in a round of cuts in early 2000s and then was never restored. All of OC Transpo's monkeying around meant that to conveniently access anything required a car.

Just today, I took the Trillium Line to my doctor's office and I needed to go to my pharmacy. The Trillium Line goes right by my pharmacy but does not stop there (Walkley Station has been planned for almost 20 years) so I had to go home and take the car back there. My neighbourhood bus route used to pass there for decades then they decided to truncate it at Greenboro.

So transit became next to useless because it doesn't go where I need it to go, even though all these services are on the natural trip desire line for my entire neighbourhood. The bus route goes around all these things except the big boxes at South Keys or stops short. Originally the bus route went to Billings Bridge and before that to the old Bank and Grove transfer station.

Yes, this is about me, but it isn't. It is just like the lady who expressed on this board recently, that her bus route was re-routed around local shopping just to get commuters to the C-Line a few minutes faster. It is no different from Route 11 being routed into Tunney's Pasture resulting in much slower access to local shops on Richmond Road, Wellington and Somerset for those living in the area.

Our increasing focus on downtown commuting cannot grow ridership because that has already been pretty well maxed out. The transit network needs to be reviewed to reflect that not everybody is going downtown.

Thanks for sharing - I think one of the problems with how the system is being "planned" is the lack of insight on the different ways people use transit. Commuting downtown is one, and is being reasonably well served, but serving the natural trip desire lines within neighbourhoods is not. Another missing piece is travel across the city through places not downtown - my former transit commute from Civic Hospital to NDHQ Carling, for example.

Besides a review of the entire network, it would also be helpful to revisit how we fund transit through our taxes. Those in "full service" zones pay a property tax rate of 0.153484% for transit, whereas those in "commuting" zones pay only 0.046301% - even though the system (with park-and-rides, Connexion buses, etc) is more geared to the latter. I don't think the premium for "full service" is warranted when you still end up car-reliant.

(To be clear - I'm not suggesting a tax reduction: I'm perceiving the gap between "full service" and "commuting", given the system's focus on commuting, to be unwarranted. Something like 1/2 to 2/3 seems more reasonable, given the proportion of your trips you could benefit from transit, and the operational costs. I get that there isn't service outside Connexion routes in these areas.)

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by caveat.doctor

Thanks for sharing - I think one of the problems with how the system is being "planned" is the lack of insight on the different ways people use transit. Commuting downtown is one, and is being reasonably well served, but serving the natural trip desire lines within neighbourhoods is not. Another missing piece is travel across the city through places not downtown - my former transit commute from Civic Hospital to NDHQ Carling, for example.

Besides a review of the entire network, it would also be helpful to revisit how we fund transit through our taxes. Those in "full service" zones pay a property tax rate of 0.153484% for transit, whereas those in "commuting" zones pay only 0.046301% - even though the system (with park-and-rides, Connexion buses, etc) is more geared to the latter. I don't think the premium for "full service" is warranted when you still end up car-reliant.

(To be clear - I'm not suggesting a tax reduction: I'm perceiving the gap between "full service" and "commuting", given the system's focus on commuting, to be unwarranted. Something like 1/2 to 2/3 seems more reasonable, given the proportion of your trips you could benefit from transit, and the operational costs. I get that there isn't service outside Connexion routes in these areas.)

My personal story shows the sham of planning your life around transit. I have made choices but the city has let me down. In a way, a death by a thousand cuts.

I have also argued that we are building a non-sustainable transit system by the way we are funding it. Our city has three major satellite cities and a gap in between and is crying out for zone fares. Even if we charge just $1.00 more to cross the Greenbelt, think what we could do.

We used to have express fares because of the extra distance but we have thrown it out arguing that the express service was premium and that is now gone. Still those passengers on average cost us more and our fares need to reflect that. The people living in those suburbs are getting the biggest bargain of all compared to those living in the central city and who pay the exact same fare for much shorter trips..

Because more and more are living out there, our losses mount and we have no choice but to increase fares faster than inflation and cut service frequency.

So, beyond a complete review of the route structure, we also need a review of the fare structure. As I said, the alternative is a non-sustainable transit system in the long run.

We are now seeing that light rail is not necessarily going to save us operational costs. It is enormously expensive to run those trains. So, we need to look at other ways to make the system sustainable preferably without cutting service further.