2023 Transportation Master Plan

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

1) Transfers are a normal part of a transit system, so get over the idea that you deserve a one seat ride somewhere.

2) Even if those extension were train there would still be a transfer from bus to a train.

Unnecessary transfers are never a good idea.

Rapid transit routes should allow you to go from one end to the other without a transfer. Only when you go off the rapid transit route should you need to transfer.

My comment was made because of what other cities are doing.

Toronto's SRC is to be eliminated along with the extra transfer and replaced with a Line 2 subway extension. Proposals to replace the SRC with LRT would not provide as direct a route into the city centre.

Vancouver is extending the Skytrain to Langley when the original proposal was to require a transfer to LRT in Surrey. LRT would have been sufficient for ridership but created an unnecessary transfer on the corridor.

Brampton did not originally support an extension of the Hurontario LRT line but a BRT connection at Steeles adds a transfer. Bramption is now going back to planning an LRT extension.

Kitchener-Waterloo's Ion LRT has a BRT transfer to Cambridge, but it has decided to proceed to eliminate that transfer and extend LRT into Cambridge despite ridership considerations.

Toronto was originally planning an extension of the Sheppard subway with a mode change to LRT. Those plans have been put on indefinite hold. I expect in due course, that a plan will be developed to use the same rapid transit mode for the entire Sheppard corridor.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Unnecessary transfers are never a good idea.

Rapid transit routes should allow you to go from one end to the other without a transfer. Only when you go off the rapid transit route should you need to transfer.

My comment was made because of what other cities are doing.

Toronto's SRC is to be eliminated along with the extra transfer and replaced with a Line 2 subway extension. Proposals to replace the SRC with LRT would not provide as direct a route into the city centre.

...

That might be the first time I've heard anyone hold up the Scarborough Subway as an example that we should emulate...

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Unnecessary transfers are never a good idea.

Rapid transit routes should allow you to go from one end to the other without a transfer. Only when you go off the rapid transit route should you need to transfer.

My comment was made because of what other cities are doing.

Toronto's SRC is to be eliminated along with the extra transfer and replaced with a Line 2 subway extension. Proposals to replace the SRC with LRT would not provide as direct a route into the city centre.

Vancouver is extending the Skytrain to Langley when the original proposal was to require a transfer to LRT in Surrey. LRT would have been sufficient for ridership but created an unnecessary transfer on the corridor.

Brampton did not originally support an extension of the Hurontario LRT line but a BRT connection at Steeles adds a transfer. Bramption is now going back to planning an LRT extension.

Kitchener-Waterloo's Ion LRT has a BRT transfer to Cambridge, but it has decided to proceed to eliminate that transfer and extend LRT into Cambridge despite ridership considerations.

Toronto was originally planning an extension of the Sheppard subway with a mode change to LRT. Those plans have been put on indefinite hold. I expect in due course, that a plan will be developed to use the same rapid transit mode for the entire Sheppard corridor.

That is just your personal view, that the only rapid transit is the one that give you a single seat ride to your destinations. Reality is transfering is par for the course even between forms of rapid transit, and the examples your using are not being done for the reasons you state, but that is par for the course with your comments.

If you insist on one mode for the whole route, then in this case your insisting on nothing being done until demand in that section meets that required for LRT.

[roger1818]

The idea that you can get from anywhere, to anywhere in the city on transit, without ever having to transfer is a total fantasy. Even the idea that every home can be within walking distance of a transit station is crazy. The really is for most, a bus connection will be necessary to get to the nearest transit station and having transit priority measures for many of those buses makes sense, so that they won’t get stuck in traffic.

The key to a good transfer is frequent, reliable service. That is what OC Transpo really needs to focus on.

[Horus]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Unnecessary transfers are never a good idea.


Kitchener-Waterloo's Ion LRT has a BRT transfer to Cambridge, but it has decided to proceed to eliminate that transfer and extend LRT into Cambridge despite ridership considerations.

ION LRT was always planned to be implemented in phases, with phase 1 encompassing the current routing and Phase 2 being the upgrade of Cambridge BRT to an LRT extension. This was the plan from day 1 to keep the project affordable and to shorten the timeline of the phase 1 implementation. The implementation of this Phase 2 has nothing to do with transfers.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by roger1818

The idea that you can get from anywhere, to anywhere in the city on transit, without ever having to transfer is a total fantasy. Even the idea that every home can be within walking distance of a transit station is crazy. The really is for most, a bus connection will be necessary to get to the nearest transit station and having transit priority measures for many of those buses makes sense, so that they won’t get stuck in traffic.

The key to a good transfer is frequent, reliable service. That is what OC Transpo really needs to focus on.

Did I say that? No. All I am saying is that a rapid transit route should not have a mode change mid-route and I gave several examples from other cities where mode changes are being eliminated or the plans are being changed to use only one mode.

In Ottawa, we seem to think that 2 or 3 transfers are acceptable for a normal trip. When we create that kind of service, few people will make those complicated trips no matter the frequency. Of course, in Ottawa, frequency is usually pretty crappy as well.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Horus

ION LRT was always planned to be implemented in phases, with phase 1 encompassing the current routing and Phase 2 being the upgrade of Cambridge BRT to an LRT extension. This was the plan from day 1 to keep the project affordable and to shorten the timeline of the phase 1 implementation. The implementation of this Phase 2 has nothing to do with transfers.

It still eliminates a transfer once Phase 2 is completed.

In Ottawa, our plans specifically include mode changes as part of our long-term plan. That is the difference. We are planning for extra transfers that Kitchener will eventually eliminate.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Did I say that? No. All I am saying is that a rapid transit route should not have a mode change mid-route and I gave several examples from other cities where mode changes are being eliminated or the plans are being changed to use only one mode.

Except it isn’t a mode change mid route, it is the intersection of 2 routes that happen to be of different modes. I don’t see people complaining that Montreal’s Orange, Green, Yellow and Blue lines intersect each other, or London’s 11 different tube lines intersect each other, or Paris’s 14 different Metro lines intersect each other.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

In Ottawa, we seem to think that 2 or 3 transfers are acceptable for a normal trip. When we create that kind of service, few people will make those complicated trips no matter the frequency. Of course, in Ottawa, frequency is usually pretty crappy as well.

No, we think that 1 or 2 transfers are acceptable. Don’t forget that not all bus routes have to travel along the entire transitway, but instead can leave or join the transitway mid way to provide direct service to a transfer station. Both Hurdman and Blair stations are large enough to buses on many different routes.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

The idea that you can get from anywhere, to anywhere in the city on transit, without ever having to transfer is a total fantasy. Even the idea that every home can be within walking distance of a transit station is crazy. The really is for most, a bus connection will be necessary to get to the nearest transit station and having transit priority measures for many of those buses makes sense, so that they won’t get stuck in traffic.

The key to a good transfer is frequent, reliable service. That is what OC Transpo really needs to focus on.

The TTC is a leader in North America for bus service. The outer 416 really isn't that different from a lot of Ottawa neighbourhoods. Yet, most their routes have headways under 10 mins at rush and usually under 20 mins outside rush. Major avenues are high frequency all day.

The idea that transit can only be delivered with billion dollar LRT lines is nonsense. Toronto proves that. Their transit culture is just as much because of the bus service as the subway network. We are only building half the solution.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

The TTC is a leader in North America for bus service. The outer 416 really isn't that different from a lot of Ottawa neighbourhoods. Yet, most their routes have headways under 10 mins at rush and usually under 20 mins outside rush. Major avenues are high frequency all day.

That’s my point. The key is not to avoid transfers but to increase the frequency of service so that the average wait when transferring is small.

The idea that transit can only be delivered with billion dollar LRT lines is nonsense. Toronto proves that. Their transit culture is just as much because of the bus service as the subway network. We are only building half the solution.

I would even argue that building LRT instead of a transitway along Baseline/Herron would increase the number of transfers. As all the local bus routes along the route would end at the nearest station, rather than continuing along the transitway to Hurdman, so instead of 1 transfer from downtown, you would end up with 3.

[Floppa]

Here's my proposal for the Trillium Line. Couple two FLIRTs/LINTs between Bayview and South Keys. At SK, they decouple, with one going to the airport and the other to Limebank. That way, you have 12 minute frequency on both branches and two instead of three trains from airport to downtown. Not great but still a major improvement.

Logistically it's a bit more complex but doable with proper announcements and signage.

[Floppa]

Rising tax writeoffs cost Ottawa over $4 billion last year

Just think what could be done with that money. You could build an entire Bank-Montreal subway/LRT with that, and have direct airport-downtown service, with plenty left over for busways on Carling and Baseline-Heron and overall improved bus service.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

That’s my point. The key is to not avoid transfers but to increase the frequency of service so that the average wait when transferring is small.

Avoiding transfers is a bonus. But that should come far behind increased frequencies. And Ottawa is nowhere close on that front.

Originally Posted by roger1818

I would even argue that building LRT instead of a transitway along Baseline/Herron would increase the number of transfers. As all the local bus routes along the route would end at the nearest station, rather than continuing along the transitway to Hurdman, so instead of 1 transfer from downtown, you would end up with 3.

I've actually come to the point where I think Carling should be BRT to allow for feeder buses to use it for some portion. Ditto Baseline/Heron like you said. Really Carling, Baseline/Heron and Hunt Club should all have protected curbside bus lanes and frequent all-day service, with feeder routes using them to access the LRT network.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I've actually come to the point where I think Carling should be BRT to allow for feeder buses to use it for some portion. Ditto Baseline/Heron like you said. Really Carling, Baseline/Heron and Hunt Club should all have protected curbside bus lanes and frequent all-day service, with feeder routes using them to access the LRT network.

And we could do this in no time with minimal disruption. Instead, the Carling BRT is in some sort of "pause", presumably to make sure that it isn't ready when the new Civic opens.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Floppa

Here's my proposal for the Trillium Line. Couple two FLIRTs/LINTs between Bayview and South Keys. At SK, they decouple, with one going to the airport and the other to Limebank. That way, you have 12 minute frequency on both branches and two instead of three trains from airport to downtown. Not great but still a major improvement.

Logistically it's a bit more complex but doable with proper announcements and signage.

While that would have been a good idea, that shop has sailed, as the FLIRTs are twice as long as the LINTs and the platforms aren’t long enough for 2 FLIRTs (or even a FLIRT and a LINT.

I think the reason they ruled out this option is that they were afraid that people might get confused that different cars go to different destinations and either get in the wrong car or keep waiting for the right train. A bit of education would and signage would have helped with that.

Originally Posted by Floppa

Rising tax writeoffs cost Ottawa over $4 billion last year

Just think what could be done with that money. You could build an entire Bank-Montreal subway/LRT with that, and have direct airport-downtown service, with plenty left over for busways on Carling and Baseline-Heron and overall improved bus service.

You do realize that to the National Post, Ottawa isn’t a city, but their name for the federal government. Seems like Toronto is in denial that Ottawa exists, which explains a lot.

[SkeggsEggs]

Originally Posted by roger1818

You do realize that to the National Post, Ottawa isn’t a city, but their name for the federal government. Seems like Toronto is in denial that Ottawa exists, which explains a lot.

I hate when articles use Ottawa in the headline as a shorthand for the Feds!

"Ottawa says so & so" No we didn't! Stop!

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by SkeggsEggs

I hate when articles use Ottawa in the headline as a shorthand for the Feds!

"Ottawa says so & so" No we didn't! Stop!

[rant]Agreed. They never use Toronto to describe the provincial government, they say “Queen’s Park.” Makes me want to create a petition to have Queen’s Park officially renamed to “Toronto.” [/rant]

[Nowhere]

I don't see the point of a Carling LRT, since people would have to transfer twice over a short distance to get downtown, including a Trillium Line transfer that might take 12 minutes. As long as the Trillium Line is single-tracked, I'm not sure that it would be able to handle the extra ridership anyway. There's also the issue of service shutdowns caused by people crashing their cars in trains, like in Waterloo or Calgary.

I doubt that we're going to see a Carling BRT either, since the city and voters are probably not willing to pay hundreds of millions to move curbside bus lanes to the median, even if it would improve service, not having to deal with turning cars. Maybe a BRT will happen when Carling will need a full rebuild.

[Nowhere]

Also, as Truenorth00 said, a Carling BRT would benefit routes 50, 51, 55, 56 and 80, while a Carling LRT would add transfers for many people due to truncated bus routes.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by Nowhere

I don't see the point of a Carling LRT, since people would have to transfer twice over a short distance to get downtown, including a Trillium Line transfer that might take 12 minutes. As long as the Trillium Line is single-tracked, I'm not sure that it would be able to handle the extra ridership anyway. There's also the issue of service shutdowns caused by people crashing their cars in trains, like in Waterloo or Calgary.

I doubt that we're going to see a Carling BRT either, since the city and voters are probably not willing to pay hundreds of millions to move curbside bus lanes to the median, even if it would improve service, not having to deal with turning cars. Maybe a BRT will happen when Carling will need a full rebuild.

BRT doesn't necessarily need to mean "median" BRT (though even Carling is getting a little bit of that, between Dow's Lake and Bronson).

Just look at the way Albert and Slater used to be arranged. In that regard, Carling will have sans-transit priority BRT in just a few years.

Originally Posted by Nowhere

Also, as Truenorth00 said, a Carling BRT would benefit routes 50, 51, 55, 56 and 80, while a Carling LRT would add transfers for many people due to truncated bus routes.

You've missed the biggest one of all: The 85.