kEiThZ
Superstar
The planned frequencies:
https://imgur.com/a/uQoKd#BenoqHO
You tell me if those riders will be comfortable using the Confederation Line.
|
|
|
Ottawa Transit Developments
- Thread starter Reecemartin
- Start date
The planned frequencies:
https://imgur.com/a/uQoKd#BenoqHO
You tell me if those riders will be comfortable using the Confederation Line.
OCCheetos
Active Member
Of course you must know how much outrage from the Glebe there would be if anyone dared to try and touch street parking?
kEiThZ
Superstar
Should add. This person is complaining about the Trillium Line not being interlined. But it's not any different than riders transferring onto Transitway buses today.
So really, what they're upset about is the fact that they aren't getting a one-seat ride from South Keys to the core. Ridership numbers and allocation of resources to maximum benefit be damned.
Something tells me they bought in to some developer's promise in the South. And are pissed the O'Brien hit the reset button on them.
Last edited:
lrt's friend
Active Member
How many transfers do you think are satisfactory for a city the size of Ottawa in order to reach downtown?
What do you think Toronto is doing? They are realizing that they cannot continue to be dependent on only one line to service the downtown core. Montreal understood this long ago.
Have I objected to building the Confederation Line in my comments? No I don't think so. Did I suggest that we build the Bank Street subway tomorrow? No, I don't think so. I am not sure what the skin would be off your nose if the Trillium Line were to be ever interlined into the downtown tunnel. I know it isn't going to happen, but nevertheless, you get very excited about objecting to it. So, 250,000 people might have a little easier journey into downtown. I don't get why this gets you so riled up.
On the subject of ridership, just remember Ottawa's plan is to force people to use the Confederation Line even if it is just for a couple of stops.
Ottawa's record on ridership has not been good since 2011. Modal share is falling significantly. I am not sure how the Confederation Line solves this when the city has implemented widespread service cuts on the buses that they are dependant on reaching the Confederation Line. Just remember the big caveat of rail transit. How is the last mile problem dealt with? This will determine how successful rail transit will be.
And no, I did not buy into a developer's promise. I know it is hard for you to believe but I am a long-time resident. It is now a big joke amongst my neighbours that we are actually just phantoms because apparently nobody lives in the south part of the city. I guess the one-third of Ottawa's population that will live south of the Confederation Line are not worthy of decent service. Other cities seem to understand that service should be delivered widely to grow ridership. Ottawa is now forgetting this.
smallspy
Senior Member
I don't know. Do those same tourists hold their nose at the thought of having to get on a bus rather than any much-vaunted rail-based transit?
If they do, maybe Ottawa doesn't need those tourists.
Dan
Toronto, Ont.
steveintoronto
Superstar
@lrt's friend: Regulatory issues prevent run-through of the Trillium and Confederation lines. One is LRT, the other heavy rail. One is federally regulated, the other provincial. (There might be a complicating angle on this due to the NCR) There are waivers for the O-Train from Transport Canada to allow 'drivers' rather than 'engineers' to operate them, temporal separation is required. Many other details in the waivers also apply. Just checked my old records, that Transport Canada link is now dead, but here's a very informative page from the City:
http://www.ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/citycouncil/ttc/2002/12-04/ACS2002-TUP-TRN-0012.htm
Your question is discussed at Reddit here, albeit only a few posters are aware of the regulatory separation, and why:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ottawa/comments/5jm4vw/connecting_trillium_line_with_confederation_line/
Addendum and Clarification: The "NCR" reference prior applies further than I thought:
Very interesting. Regs still won't permit the through running connection between the two systems, but this regulatory angle is fertile for exploration. What's 'delicious' for me is that the Province *apparently* isn't involved at all. Federal jurisdiction trumps them, but also note this is a case (and this is a hot discussion now for Toronto 'dealing directly with the Feds' on some issues to spite QP) of a municipality doing exactly that, albeit it must be to conform with the National Capital Act.
I tripped across this paper looking for the disappeared yet again Transport Canada extensive examination of the O-Train. It first disappeared when Harper took power...it had 'sensitive' implications that Harper et al were uncomfortable with, but emerged again in TC 'Archives'. Here's quotes I saved:
Got to point out that this is incorrect:
http://www.ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/citycouncil/ttc/2002/12-04/ACS2002-TUP-TRN-0012.htm
Your question is discussed at Reddit here, albeit only a few posters are aware of the regulatory separation, and why:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ottawa/comments/5jm4vw/connecting_trillium_line_with_confederation_line/
Addendum and Clarification: The "NCR" reference prior applies further than I thought:
http://app05.ottawa.ca/sirepub/cache/2/kzdhyi4qk42fnxlc5shvfuss/30890509012018095706206.PDF
Very interesting. Regs still won't permit the through running connection between the two systems, but this regulatory angle is fertile for exploration. What's 'delicious' for me is that the Province *apparently* isn't involved at all. Federal jurisdiction trumps them, but also note this is a case (and this is a hot discussion now for Toronto 'dealing directly with the Feds' on some issues to spite QP) of a municipality doing exactly that, albeit it must be to conform with the National Capital Act.
I tripped across this paper looking for the disappeared yet again Transport Canada extensive examination of the O-Train. It first disappeared when Harper took power...it had 'sensitive' implications that Harper et al were uncomfortable with, but emerged again in TC 'Archives'. Here's quotes I saved:
http://data.tc.gc.ca/archive/eng/programs/environment-utsp-otrainlightrailproject-973.htm
Got to point out that this is incorrect:
I believe the San Diego Trolley predated this by almost a decade, and the federally regulated track portion had catenary added too, the old Southern Pacific line to San Ysidro (and beyond) and still used temporally for freight on the San Diego Trolley used section.
Obviously they did have plans to build a single system using 'O-Trains'...but electrification must have severely complicated that. So who put the kibosh on the idea? Transport Canada?
Last edited:
OCCheetos
Active Member
There's an argument that could be made that the Trillium Line should remain heavy rail in case of the eventual need for broader commuter rail. It is the only heavy rail line left to run anywhere near downtown (and the only one that crosses into Gatineau) and while others have said that Tremblay could handle the role of "commuter hub" well (and it would, for any trains coming from the south), there's still the cross-river commuter traffic to consider.
Again, not anytime soon, but it's something to think a little about.
Again, not anytime soon, but it's something to think a little about.
jamincan
Active Member
I don't think there's a clear answer how transit should serve the south-east part of Ottawa. The Trillium Line provides needed service to Carleton, but I don't think it's a good idea to make it the trunk service to the south-east. You then would have the west, south-west and south-east parts of Ottawa all feeding into downtown from a single line. Effectively service would be split along three lines to the west and only a single line to the west. Balancing service would be very difficult. Bank Street would be nice, but I have a feeling that ship has sailed long ago.
My gut feeling is that converting the South-East Transitway to light rail is the best long-term solution. Keep the Trillium Line largely as it is and instead extend the service into Riverside South/the Airport via the South-East Transitway through Hurdman to downtown. I have a feeling, though, that as long as the Trillium Line exists, people will try to find a way to make it work in that role instead.
My gut feeling is that converting the South-East Transitway to light rail is the best long-term solution. Keep the Trillium Line largely as it is and instead extend the service into Riverside South/the Airport via the South-East Transitway through Hurdman to downtown. I have a feeling, though, that as long as the Trillium Line exists, people will try to find a way to make it work in that role instead.
kEiThZ
Superstar
For a city of Ottawa's massive geography, depending on starting point, 2-3 is just fine. Most riders will have a single transfer in Ottawa (bus to LRT). Some will have 2 (bus-lrt-lrt). This is still less total transfers than most cities with metro systems.
To start off with, not all 250 000 people in Ottawa South are heading downtown. Next, not all are reliant on the Trillium Line. Lots will also be travelling by the Southeast Transitway with a forced transfer at Blair. But somehow, that is okay with you but a transfer at Bayview is a problem?
Personally, I have nothing against interlining were it possible. But looking at 3 min frequencies on the Confederation Line, that looks pretty challenging. Aside from all the issues of compatibility. So really, this comes down to you asking for a degradation of service on the Confederation Line to eliminate a single transfer for a fraction of transit users.
Congestion on the core of the network and crap bus service will limit ridership. That's why it's really good that the old plan was not carried forward. Fixing that congestion will reduce travel times, particularly in the East. And since the Confederation Line replaces the routes with the most riders at launch, those freed up buses can be deployed to improve feeder service, which only gets better after Stage 2.
I agree. Which is why putting resources towards priorities which don't let you redirect buses to feeder services is boneheaded.
Because a transfer at Bayview for the small proportion that takes the Trillium Line somehow makes the it not "decent service"? You expect people to take you seriously with hyperbole like that?
Other cities don't throw good money after bad and double down on lower ridership corridors.
drum118
Superstar
Sorry, but other systems do throw good money at low ridership line for high order.
Transferring is a fact of life, as single seat rides does not fit everyone trip needs, as well taking longer to do it.
I should had made a video of the transit at "Bay" Bus Stop off peak, to show why an LRT is need.
I am not surprise to see this, as it was my assessment based on what I was seeing first hand for the first time that the line wouldn't see service until 2019, regardless doing 7/24 work.
I am about a day or so from having photos on line for the line.
Alstom is behind schedule to have all cars for service in Nov, if the line does start.
Ottawa's light rail transit delayed once again
Transferring is a fact of life, as single seat rides does not fit everyone trip needs, as well taking longer to do it.
I should had made a video of the transit at "Bay" Bus Stop off peak, to show why an LRT is need.
I am not surprise to see this, as it was my assessment based on what I was seeing first hand for the first time that the line wouldn't see service until 2019, regardless doing 7/24 work.
I am about a day or so from having photos on line for the line.
Alstom is behind schedule to have all cars for service in Nov, if the line does start.
Ottawa's light rail transit delayed once again
kEiThZ
Superstar
With regards to a Bank St Subway, my preference would actually be to run on the Trillium Line tracks from the Airport to Carleton, then veer under the Canal and surface in the median of the Queen Elizabeth Driveway. The line can run on the surface beside the Canal, then head into a tunnel at Pretoria. Veer around the Museum of Nature, then head north of Bank into Downtown, terminating at a T-station at Parliament.
While this does cut out the section of Bank St from Billings to the Queensway, the Glebe is still served on the far eastern end, as is Lansdowne Park. Plus, visitors would have a great view of the Canal as they head into downtown. It would also save at least a billion in tunnelling costs.
While this does cut out the section of Bank St from Billings to the Queensway, the Glebe is still served on the far eastern end, as is Lansdowne Park. Plus, visitors would have a great view of the Canal as they head into downtown. It would also save at least a billion in tunnelling costs.
mdrejhon
Senior Member
That is a great idea, there used to be tracks along the canal.
But....NCC.
It will have to be NCC-fancy and possibly wireless PRIMOVE type technology in that section, since NCC removed tracks to beautify the canal in those days. It would have to be a very pretty canal LRT running slightly slower as nobody will put up with fences at the canal. NCC forced the burial of a section of Phaee 2 LRT, and that was in a location with fewer tourists.
But....NCC.
It will have to be NCC-fancy and possibly wireless PRIMOVE type technology in that section, since NCC removed tracks to beautify the canal in those days. It would have to be a very pretty canal LRT running slightly slower as nobody will put up with fences at the canal. NCC forced the burial of a section of Phaee 2 LRT, and that was in a location with fewer tourists.
Yes, the NCC is definitely a concern. I had envisioned the N-S LRT being more of a streetcar type of operation as opposed to the Light Metro that the Confederation Line is, since the extra capacity won't be as required. With that in mind, the QE Drive could be reconstructed with LRT in the median for the stretch along the Canal, or potentially between the road and the Canal (in order to not impede vehicle movements).
The NCC is big on showcasing the Capital though, and what could be better than the train from the Airport taking you right alongside the Canal on your way into Downtown?
kEiThZ
Superstar
Vehemently disagree. Tracks along the canal. Why? Most of those neighbourhoods are nice fancy rich hoods. And they will never densified. Let's be honest.
My preference is simple.
1) Twin track the Trillium Line.
2) More capacity needed from the South? Convert the Southeast Transitway.
3) Still need more? Bank St. subway. 8 km from Queen to Greenboro.
Good enough.
My preference is simple.
1) Twin track the Trillium Line.
2) More capacity needed from the South? Convert the Southeast Transitway.
3) Still need more? Bank St. subway. 8 km from Queen to Greenboro.
Good enough.