General STO News and Rapibus System

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Maybe in a century when they have the funds to build another subway in Ottawa, mere kms from where there is one today.

Do people in this forum think transit dollars rain from the sky?

No, it only does that for nice, suburban communities.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Acajack

There is traffic for sure but to suggest it's nightmarish most of the time is a great exaggeration. There are lots of "outs" available to drivers on side streets and such, and as a result I never really plan for a lot of extra time for the portions of my trip that includes Vieux-Hull when I drive there during rush hour.

(Where I plan for extra time on rush hour trips are the Gatineau River crossings: Pont des Draveurs, Alonzo-Wright, Lady-Aberdeen. But not really in central Hull.)

The relatively moderate congestion that people complained about 25 years ago on the "Upper and Slower Aylmer Roads" has nothing on the severe congestion that clogs downtown Ottawa every evening for two or three hours for the past six or seven years.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

Just being fair, the Canadian government thinks so too

$28.7 billion over 11 year averages to $2.6 billion per year, which is 0.7% of government spending.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

I guarantee you, the ridership on even a single-station extension across PoW to the downtown Hull civil-servant Borg Cube would far exceed projections.
.

Perhaps but this would be a project that would half of its development on Gatineau/Quebec with very little impact for Gatineau/Quebec residents.

It would primarily be used by federal civil servants employed in central Hull who reside in Ontario.

How high on the priority list would this realistically end up for Gatineau/Quebec in terms of transit funding?

It would involve at a minimum adapting Bayview station with new platforms and concourses, major work on the PoW bridge, laying or upgrading/refurbishing track on both sides of the river, the construction of a new station near Terrasses de la Chaudière, and the purchase of rolling stock.

For a fairly comparable amount, Gatineau could probably implement Rapibus-style BRT on the northern route westwards all the way through to the Plateau and northern Aylmer districts.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

A great article on why transferring is actually preferable over interlining in many cases (from a professional transit planner):

http://humantransit.org/2009/04/why-...your-city.html

Ottawa-Gatineau residents need to get over the ridiculous fetish for one-seat rides. That will not work in a city of 1+ million.

I don't think people are expecting one-seat rides. I think as we move from one-seat ride express services, the expectation is not having to go to a transfer twice system. This is when there are objections. People should not need to transfer in the suburbs and then again near downtown. Some of the ideas being presented will require two transfers on not necessarily high frequency routes, that are going to take people on less direct routes.

I have seen the theory presented in the article countless times. For most people, it does not represent reality. Not many people have a choice of multiple routes from their homes so how does consolidation of routes benefit anybody when there is nothing to consolidate? When people do have a choice of multiple routes, it is because they are near a major intersection and routes run perpendicularly. A trunk route to some central point such as downtown or other major transit hub can mean that any gain from route consolidation would be lost in the extra distance travelled to reach one's destination on a less direct route. With perpendicular routes, consolidation simply means that service is eliminated on one of the streets completely and your trip may become so awkward, that most wouldn't bother.

I am sure there are a few cases where it would be beneficial to consolidate routes, but haven't we already done that with route optimization, which simply meant a service cut as they usually do.

I know that Houston did implement this model but this was after years of failing to modernize their transit network.

[Acajack]

It's not unreasonable for people living in built-up areas of the city of Ottawa to expect to only have to transfer once if they are going downtown.

[Acajack]

I am also often critical of the one-seat obsession but I understand where it comes from.

Transfers are generally where problems can and will most often arise on any trip. It's like joints in piping in your house: if there is a leak it's very likely to be there.

That's why when we travel by air we generally prefer direct flights.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Acajack

It's not unreasonable for people living in built-up areas of the city of Ottawa to expect to only have to transfer once if they are going downtown.

A corollary is that it kinda is unreasonable to expect people living in the densest and most central areas of the city of Ottawa to have to transfer at all if they are going downtown, but that's been the impact of "optimization" and the route-splitting that has resulted in exactly zero improvement in reliablity or bus movement speeds.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

A corollary is that it kinda is unreasonable to expect people living in the densest and most central areas of the city of Ottawa to have to transfer at all if they are going downtown, .

Yes, I totally agree.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Perhaps but this would be a project that would half of its development on Gatineau/Quebec with very little impact for Gatineau/Quebec residents.

It would primarily be used by federal civil servants employed in central Hull who reside in Ontario.

I'm cool with that.

How high on the priority list would this realistically end up for Gatineau/Quebec in terms of transit funding?

Can't be much lower than the dismal priority that Gatineau transit has been given, until recently, in the broad Quebec picture.

It would involve at a minimum adapting Bayview station with new platforms and concourses, major work on the PoW bridge, laying or upgrading/refurbishing track on both sides of the river, the construction of a new station near Terrasses de la Chaudière, and the purchase of rolling stock.

Why would Bayview need new platforms or concourses?

The bridge and track work, station at Terrasses, and a new trainset, would back-of-envelop cost about a mid-sized road or highway project.

For a fairly comparable amount, Gatineau could probably implement Rapibus-style BRT on the northern route westwards all the way through to the Plateau and northern Aylmer districts.

So let's do some work and get a handle on the costs.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

Just being fair, the Canadian government thinks so too

Since when? As long as I've been alive, transit and more broadly infrastructure funding has been woefully inadequate. And I'm in my mid-30s.

Originally Posted by acottawa

$28.7 billion over 11 year averages to $2.6 billion per year, which is 0.7% of government spending.

Thank you. And yet, people here think it's completely reasonable to expect a multi-billion dollar subway to be built in a city of just over 1 million mere years after the first one. Maybe in some European paradise where they spend $30 billion per year on transit.....

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Acajack

It's not unreasonable for people living in built-up areas of the city of Ottawa to expect to only have to transfer once if they are going downtown.

Depends on your definition of downtown. If you are going from Kanata to Bank and Fifth, why is it not reasonable to expect two transfers: one at the Confederation Line terminus and again on to the bus on Bank?

More broadly on our current discussion, two transfers suck, but there's no way to avoid it when crossing the river, unless we integrate STO and OC Transpo. In our current discussion, at least one of the transfers is entirely a result of switching systems. If you were planning an integrated system, the Trillium Line would continue across and run along the whole the length of the Rapibus Corridor, as one continuous LRT.

Originally Posted by Acajack

Perhaps but this would be a project that would half of its development on Gatineau/Quebec with very little impact for Gatineau/Quebec residents.

It would primarily be used by federal civil servants employed in central Hull who reside in Ontario.

Ridership is ridership. Who cares where it comes from?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Depends on your definition of downtown. If you are going from Kanata to Bank and Fifth, why is it not reasonable to expect two transfers: one at the Confederation Line terminus and again on to the bus on Bank?

More broadly on our current discussion, two transfers suck, but there's no way to avoid it when crossing the river, unless we integrate STO and OC Transpo. In our current discussion, at least one of the transfers is entirely a result of switching systems. If you were planning an integrated system, the Trillium Line would continue across and run along the whole the length of the Rapibus Corridor, as one continuous LRT.

I wasn't really talking about Gatineau in this instance, but about somewhat-outlying-Ottawa-to-downtown-Ottawa travel.

My definition of downtown in this case is CBD plus the Rideau-Market district.

Bank and Fifth is not downtown to me.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

A corollary is that it kinda is unreasonable to expect people living in the densest and most central areas of the city of Ottawa to have to transfer at all if they are going downtown, but that's been the impact of "optimization" and the route-splitting that has resulted in exactly zero improvement in reliablity or bus movement speeds.

What neighbourhood(s) in "densest and most central areas of the city of Ottawa" do not have routes that go downtown? I can't think of any.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Ridership is ridership. Who cares where it comes from?

Taxpayers and the people they elect to represent them sure care where the riders come from.

With transit dollars scarce on both sides of the river and so many critical needs likely to go unmet for decades to come, do you really think Gatineau would fund even half of what would amount to a dedicated rail shuttle for Ontario-resident federal public servants between Bayview and their Hull offices?

The only scenario where I could see something like this happening is if we had a kind of cross-jurisdictional body like PATH (Port Authority Trans-Hudson) that operates both in New Jersey and in New York City.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

What neighbourhood(s) in "densest and most central areas of the city of Ottawa" do not have routes that go downtown? I can't think of any.

Outside of workday-days (i.e., weekends and evenings), coming from the east, routes 12 and 9 terminate at Rideau. Route 18, which formerly provided cross-core connectivity, long ago ceased to cross the canal at all. The split of the 5 into the 5 and 19 severed single-ride connections between certains sets of inner-Ottawa neighbourhoods. And transit users had to push back, and very, very hard, against the LRT-reconfigured proposals to split the 6 and 7, and even that battle may not be over: more and more 6s and 7s than ever before are shorted at Rideau, which looks suspiciously like conditioning for an eventual permanent split. Even the weekday daytime continuations of the 12 and 9 from Rideau into the downtown core are likely not safe from further rounds of "optimization".

If you are coming in from the south (Centretown south, Glebe, OOS, OOE), or west (Chinatown, Hintonburchanisboro, Richmond Road) the local routes are seamless. But from the east, OC Transpo loves throwing transfers in your way.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I wasn't really talking about Gatineau in this instance, but about somewhat-outlying-Ottawa-to-downtown-Ottawa travel.

My definition of downtown in this case is CBD plus the Rideau-Market district.

Bank and Fifth is not downtown to me.

The only double transfers in this case are on the Trillium Line. The vast majority of Ottawa will be traveling to the core on the Confederation Line, or buses, if they are close enough.

In this case, I don't see how it benefits the majority of riders to have Trillium Line interlined. That would mean lower frequencies on the Confederation Line and probably short-turning at Hurdman (or rather termination of the Trillium Line there).

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Taxpayers and the people they elect to represent them sure care where the riders come from.

No they don't. I've never seen any taxpayer complain that public servants are riding transit.

Originally Posted by Acajack

It would primarily be used by federal civil servants employed in central Hull who reside in Ontario.With transit dollars scarce on both sides of the river and so many critical needs likely to go unmet for decades to come, do you really think Gatineau would fund even half of what would amount to a dedicated rail shuttle for Ontario-resident federal public servants between Bayview and their Hull offices?

You forget that no transit infrastructure gets built without provincial and federal dollars. Ottawa doesn't even pay for half of its LRT construction. So yes, if the feds and Queen's Park want a connection to Gatineau, it will happen. The alternative is not money to another part of Ottawa. The alternative is that money going to another city in Ontario.

Originally Posted by Acajack

The only scenario where I could see something like this happening is if we had a kind of cross-jurisdictional body like PATH (Port Authority Trans-Hudson) that operates both in New Jersey and in New York City.

Arguably, what Ottawa-Gatineau should have. But we live in a country and region where people get all touchy about language and culture, even when it comes to transit planning.

This is why I keep hoping that the feds will step in and help make the bridge compatible for buses or help Gatineau convert the Rapibus to LRT and extend it to Bayview.

Extending the Trillium Line to the other side is a sub-optimal solution, given the other options here.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Extending the Trillium Line to the other side is a sub-optimal solution, given the other options here.

It might be "sup-optimal" compared to other, more politically-difficult and financially costly options, sure.

Compared to nothing, it it not sub-optimal.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

No they don't. I've never seen any taxpayer complain that public servants are riding transit.

.

It all depends on who has to pay for it and how much.