OC Transpo botches partial implementation of Hub and Spoke Model

[lrt's friend]

A lady working in my office made a casual comment yesterday about OC Transpo's service changes being implemented this Sunday. Part of the changes include a major route restructure in the southeast part of the city, which effectively implements the Hub and Spoke model.

The lady commented that no matter which way she goes, she ends up with an added transfer or a much longer walk and inevitably a significantly longer trip. She explained that she will now have to take a much more round about way to work and still encounter another transfer.

After listening to her, I looked at the service changes, and realize that many passengers in this part of the city will have a transfer added to their trips, and OC Transpo is not delivering any service improvements to compensate. Is this the future that we are going to see in other parts of the city when the hub and spoke model is implemented? What is particularly notable is that Elmvale Shopping Centre is being turned into a major transfer station eventhough there are no plans for it to be part of the future rapid transit network. This adds significant inconvenience for many passengers. Direct bus routes to St. Laurent Station are being replaced by a short 114 shuttle between Elmvale and St. Laurent.

My predictions are that this will drive away ridership and that particularly the short 114 shuttle runs (some runs are extended to Greenboro) will run virtually empty.

If this is a sign of things to come, expect virtually zero transit ridership in Riverside South during off-peak hours when Option 4 is implemented. Off-peak transit service should deliver you to an off-peak transit destination such as a major shopping centre. With rail likely to end at Bowesville, away from shopping and other services, a connecting local shuttle bus running on an hourly or half-hourly schedule will generate little ridership. Likewise, the Option 4 plan for a Transitway between Bowesville and Barrhaven Town Centre (the nowhere to nowhere Transitway) will also generate little ridership (it doesn't take you anywhere you want to go to), will be relegated to the lowest priority and will likely never be built. No wonder Mayor Larry O'Brien is desparately searching for another way to fund the Strandherd Bridge.

[Dado]

Could you elaborate a bit more on your coworker's apparent problem? Did she used to take the #85? Hurdman has plenty of buses inbound to transfer to, including expresses which become regular fare at that point. We simply can't afford to be sending any more routes than are needed into downtown anymore, and, unfortunately, the downtown congestion and elsewhere along the route has probably made adherence to schedule of buses like the #85 problematic, leading to its termination at Hurdman. The #84 is now gone and the #86 ought really to meet the same fate as the #85 by knocking off either its eastern or western non-Transitway routing, with the other being assigned to another route (say the #84). The #87 might just be tolerable as is because the short run to Carlingwood ought not cause too much grief.

There are certainly some stupidities in the changes, including the fact that the new #112 doesn't go to St. Laurent like the #111 that it replaces did (the #114 seems to be replacing the #111, the #84 and the #85 in that regard). Then there's the #121 serving the Trainyards development (so much for it being at the Train (VIA) Transitway station) and the #106 serving the hospitals which, frankly, should be combined into one looping route (Hurdman - Smyth Rd Hospitals - Elmvale - St. Laurent - Trainyards - Hurdman), but I don't think OC Transpo does loops ("CW" and "ACW"/"CCW" designators would probably drive them insane - just call them #121A and #121B for simplicity). I don't get the #98 at all - if they're going to introduce these 90-series buses they should run straight along an arterial - in this case Hunt Club - and onto the Transitway. No messing around exploring suburbs. The #98 is really dumb though because unlike the other 90-series buses, its non-transitway portion does not generally follow a future transitway. Really, the #84 should have been shortened with the route number retained.

I wonder how it is that Tunney's Pasture got to be the west-end terminus for so many routes? It ought to be Lincoln Fields because from there it would be easier to run (and transfer to) other buses to the business parks in Kanata and Nepean.

All that said, as silly as some of these changes are, they're more likely to affect daytime travel rather than commuter travel - except for the changes to the #85.

[lrt's friend]

The lady is travelling from Orleans and transferring to the 111 at St. Laurent. This is where the stupidity is. All the routes terminating at St. Laurent have been changed to terminate at Elmvale and they have been replaced with short 114 Elmvale-St. Laurent shuttles. Most people had a direct trip to St. Laurent will now have to transfer a second time, or take a more indirect trip.

Regarding the 98, just take a drive down Hunt Club. Almost all houses face away from Hunt Club with few pedestrian accesses. This is why the 98 meanders. It is the only way to serve the community. The logic behind converting the 84 into the 98 is sensible. The buses are busy even during off-peak hours and the vast majority of the passengers were going beyond Greenboro Station. At least they got this right, serve the customer better by helping reduce the number of transfers. Big Box Shopping Centres such as South Keys Shopping Centre are not exactly big transit destinations. In all the times that I have transferred at Greenboro or South Keys, I don't think I once walked to the shopping centre while I was there. Billings Bridge is another matter, because it is an indoor mall and the layout is suitable for pedestrian access.

[Dado]

Ah, I see. I had thought she was inbound to downtown, not inbound to the St. Laurent Rd corridor. OC Transpo doesn't seem to be all that interested in providing transit service to people heading to places off the Transitway*. The #114 does go south of Elmvale, but only every 30 minutes vs 10 minutes on the shuttle run north of it and 20 minutes on the old #111. Presumably extending the #112 to St. Laurent would have helped?

On the #84/#98, I agree that the route changes themselves were good ones and I see your point about Hunt Club, but what I was saying was that it was inappropriate to rename it to the #98 - 90 series buses are supposedly our rapid transit routes in existing and future transitway corridors. The #98 doesn't adhere to this, which is why I said it should have been left as the #84 but with the truncated route the #98 now has.


*The peak period non-peak direction (there's a mouthful needing a better term) services to the Kanata business parks is disgraceful considering the number of deadheading express buses that could be used for this (service to Nortel on Moodie is much better, but then David Jeanes once worked there...)).

[lrt's friend]

Ah, I see. I had thought she was inbound to downtown, not inbound to the St. Laurent Rd corridor. OC Transpo doesn't seem to be all that interested in providing transit service to people heading to places off the Transitway*. The #114 does go south of Elmvale, but only every 30 minutes vs 10 minutes on the shuttle run north of it and 20 minutes on the old #111. Presumably extending the #112 to St. Laurent would have helped?

On the #84/#98, I agree that the route changes themselves were good ones and I see your point about Hunt Club, but what I was saying was that it was inappropriate to rename it to the #98 - 90 series buses are supposedly our rapid transit routes in existing and future transitway corridors. The #98 doesn't adhere to this, which is why I said it should have been left as the #84 but with the truncated route the #98 now has.


*The peak period non-peak direction (there's a mouthful needing a better term) services to the Kanata business parks is disgraceful considering the number of deadheading express buses that could be used for this (service to Nortel on Moodie is much better, but then David Jeanes once worked there...)).

Yes, extending the 112 to St. Laurent (like the 111 used to) would have solved the problem.

You are right about the numbering issue and that the 90s should be reserved to Transitway or future Transitway routes. I think this has happened with the 84 being renumbered 98 because the 98 for the most part is replacing 97 runs and continuing to use '84' would have confused too many people, who are not bound for the Greenboro community. What bugs me though is OC Transpo's suggestion that the 98 is supplementing 97 service. I think a linguist is playing games with the public since there really is no improvement in service frequency. Really the 98 is the 97 with Greenboro tacked onto the end.

Until we provide a much faster cross connection between the southeast and southwest Transitway, only the most desparate will use transit from my part of town to work at the Kanata Business Park. It is ridiculously slow, like 90 minutes, maybe even more.

[p_xavier]

You're new in Ottawa, you look at the Transit map. You think to yourself, who is the child who drew all of these lines on the map? Oh wait! These are the bus routes!

http://www.octranspo.com/mapscheds/S...m_map_2008.pdf


It's silly. First of all, why not start by renaming the Transitway routes by a non-normal bus number, like T-01 for example. There is no way to know if 106 is a Transitway route or not, besides looking at the map. And yes, the hub and spoke system needs to be implemented, but WELL implemented.

Remember that some routes were to be cut, as to save property taxes increase. Again, this shows that linking transit operational costs to city taxes is bad, because when your ridership goes up, well you're screwed financially. Not adding that people from other cities don't pay the equivalent in taxes for Ottawa's transit system.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Yes, extending the 112 to St. Laurent (like the 111 used to) would have solved the problem.

It's funny, in the original Transplan proposals, the 112 was originally going to go to St. Laurent and Hurdman, like the 114. See here: http://www.octranspo.com/mapscheds/S...s84_85_111.htm

For some reason, when they were scheduling the service, they decided to make the 112 end at Elmvale. Why, I'm not sure... it made much more sense as originally proposed.

[Dado]

Normally revisions are supposed to make things better, but the revisions to the above plan have made them worse. There's not much need for the #112 to go all the way to Hurdman, but it should not have been shortened to Elmvale either. Still, the fact that the original plan did call for the #112 to go to St. Laurent and Hurdman ought to make it a bit easier to get it to go there in a future revision.

And the #98 (truncated #84) was in fact to have remained as the #84.