OC Transpo

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

About 300,000 people in the old city of Ottawa and neighbouring areas such as Vanier will not have a rail system to switch to, and no meaningful improvements - even some serious dis-improvements - to their local bus network.

Hopefully, OC sees that they need to run better bus service WITHIN downtown, but I have absolutely no hope of that.

Good Day....

quite so.. see the latest east-side post-LRT OC route plans ? The area between Beechwood and Coventry from Vanier Pkwy eastward is being turned into a disjointed nightmare. I refuse to rant on it, since I will not give myself an ulcer. and as for frequency ? good luck.
One LRT selling point at the very beginning was the re-allocation of buses into local service improvements. yeah, right, like paranoid me believed THAT. Then came the announcement of service re-alignments and re-allocations - and CUTTING 600. so much for THAT. bye-bye, so long, so nice to have never seen ya. Now we see the end-of-lifespan statements starting to come out...... reinforcing the plan of NO service improvements. Yup.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

Good Day....

quite so.. see the latest east-side post-LRT OC route plans ? The area between Beechwood and Coventry from Vanier Pkwy eastward is being turned into a disjointed nightmare. I refuse to rant on it, since I will not give myself an ulcer. and as for frequency ? good luck.
One LRT selling point at the very beginning was the re-allocation of buses into local service improvements. yeah, right, like paranoid me believed THAT. Then came the announcement of service re-alignments and re-allocations - and CUTTING 600. so much for THAT. bye-bye, so long, so nice to have never seen ya. Now we see the end-of-lifespan statements starting to come out...... reinforcing the plan of NO service improvements. Yup.

The city and OC Transpo have been working towards not offering more than 15 minute frequency on all bus routes, preferably less. They will use artics and DDs whenever possible to avoid increasing frequency beyond that level. It is no wonder that ridership is declining. And the wonders of a 13 station Confederation Line will not stem that decline because the vast majority still have to take a bus (with a trend towards poorer frequency).

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The city and OC Transpo have been working towards not offering more than 15 minute frequency on all bus routes, preferably less. They will use artics and DDs whenever possible to avoid increasing frequency beyond that level. It is no wonder that ridership is declining. And the wonders of a 13 station Confederation Line will not stem that decline because the vast majority still have to take a bus (with a trend towards poorer frequency).

The calculus in their mindset runs as follows (math is imaginary, by way of example):

- Demand on route 123 in direction X is 180 people per hour.
- This demand can be met by two 90-person vehicles, one every 30 minutes; three 60-person vehicles, one every 20 minutes; four 45-person vehicles, one every 15 minutes; or five 36-person vehicles, one every 12 minutes.
- Given the fuel and labour costs, we'll go with the first one. Demand met!

Passenger comfort, convenience, or time do not matter. Despite all the pretty talk about a "frequent" network, frequency is not a design value that matters. If they could run one bus a day that held ALL TEH PASSENJERS, then mathematical demand is met, and that's all that matters.

Related example: OC Transpo's stubborn insistence that the only performance metric that matters is peak-period, peak-direction. Contra-flow, evening, and weekend performance either is not measured, or is measured but not published. This values the transit commuter, and especially the suburban one, over all other users of the system.

[dougvdh]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

The calculus in their mindset runs as follows (math is imaginary, by way of example):

- Demand on route 123 in direction X is 180 people per hour.
- This demand can be met by two 90-person vehicles, one every 30 minutes; three 60-person vehicles, one every 20 minutes; four 45-person vehicles, one every 15 minutes; or five 36-person vehicles, one every 12 minutes.
- Given the fuel and labour costs, we'll go with the first one. Demand met!

Passenger comfort, convenience, or time do not matter. Despite all the pretty talk about a "frequent" network, frequency is not a design value that matters. If they could run one bus a day that held ALL TEH PASSENJERS, then mathematical demand is met, and that's all that matters.

Related example: OC Transpo's stubborn insistence that the only performance metric that matters is peak-period, peak-direction. Contra-flow, evening, and weekend performance either is not measured, or is measured but not published. This values the transit commuter, and especially the suburban one, over all other users of the system.

This is why all the development effort in autonomous vehicles should be focus on transit. Smaller autonomous buses on more frequent local routes could make transit much more appealling and accessible to the masses without significantly increasing operational cost.

[Multi-modal]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

The calculus in their mindset runs as follows (math is imaginary, by way of example):

- Demand on route 123 in direction X is 180 people per hour.
- This demand can be met by two 90-person vehicles, one every 30 minutes; three 60-person vehicles, one every 20 minutes; four 45-person vehicles, one every 15 minutes; or five 36-person vehicles, one every 12 minutes.
- Given the fuel and labour costs, we'll go with the first one. Demand met!

Passenger comfort, convenience, or time do not matter. Despite all the pretty talk about a "frequent" network, frequency is not a design value that matters. If they could run one bus a day that held ALL TEH PASSENJERS, then mathematical demand is met, and that's all that matters.

Related example: OC Transpo's stubborn insistence that the only performance metric that matters is peak-period, peak-direction. Contra-flow, evening, and weekend performance either is not measured, or is measured but not published. This values the transit commuter, and especially the suburban one, over all other users of the system.

This is perfectly exemplified in their response to people asking them to double track the Trillium Line for increased frequency, which is: "We don't need to increase frequency or speed in the near future because we are going to double the capacity of the train-sets, demand satisfied". Thanks OC Transpo, I'm so glad I get a longer train.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by Multi-modal

This is perfectly exemplified in their response to people asking them to double track the Trillium Line for increased frequency, which is: "We don't need to increase frequency or speed in the near future because we are going to double the capacity of the train-sets, demand satisfied". Thanks OC Transpo, I'm so glad I get a longer train.

To be fair, a lot of delays on the Trillium line are caused by long deboarding/boarding times. If trains were doubled in length and the number of passengers remained similar to what they are now, you'd have twice as may doors and fewer delays. (Although in my opinion they should consider tossing the LINT 41s and getting LINT 54s or something else with more doors.)

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

Good Day....

quite so.. see the latest east-side post-LRT OC route plans ? The area between Beechwood and Coventry from Vanier Pkwy eastward is being turned into a disjointed nightmare. I refuse to rant on it, since I will not give myself an ulcer.

I thought the reaction to the Vanier-area service changes had been pretty positive? The biggest change is the split of the 19/20 but that allows for a more direct service from Marier to St Laurent and new service on Donald...

What don't you like about it? Honestly curious.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

I thought the reaction to the Vanier-area service changes had been pretty positive? The biggest change is the split of the 19/20 but that allows for a more direct service from Marier to St Laurent and new service on Donald....

Which in turn allows for Route 18 to be straightened by keeping it on Queen Mary, cutting travel time in the area.

Overall Overbrook and Vanier are actually probably getting the greatest per-capita investment in additional bus service in the whole city.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

I thought the reaction to the Vanier-area service changes had been pretty positive?

Mixed, at best, I think.

The biggest change is the split of the 19/20 but that allows for a more direct service from Marier to St Laurent and new service on Donald...

There was a postering and petition campaign in the Beechwood area against the 19/20 split, so someone's not entirely pleased.

The major flaw in the plan is that, for all the tinkering with routings and schedules, there are absolutely no plans to deal with the real problems with transit on the east side: road capacity, congestion, lack of physical transit infrastructure, and service habits which fundamentally disadvantage people who live in that dismal grey zone about 2.5 km from, say, the Peace Tower, out to the inner edge of the Greenbelt.

As long as those things are unaddressed, all the slight realignments, and bloody route-splits in the world, are not going to give inner urban residents the same level of transit convenience and comfort that the outer suburbs are getting.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Which in turn allows for Route 18 to be straightened by keeping it on Queen Mary, cutting travel time in the area.

Overall Overbrook and Vanier are actually probably getting the greatest per-capita investment in additional bus service in the whole city.

What investment is that? They are realigning routes. That costs jack. There is nothing on paper yet about actually adding service. Any additional runs that they add to the 12 will still be only bringing service back up to where it was before the 2008 split of the old 2.

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

I thought the reaction to the Vanier-area service changes had been pretty positive? The biggest change is the split of the 19/20 but that allows for a more direct service from Marier to St Laurent and new service on Donald...

What don't you like about it? Honestly curious.

Good Day.....

yeah... it looks pretty, but the usual reality kicks in.
as mentioned elsewhere, the good idea of having a route go origin at a station, wander the neighbourhood it serves, and terminate at another station, so that frequency is at least kinda maintained somehow by going in either way, as the 19 was to have earlier between St.L. and downtown (whicheverstation) in either direction, has been cut, severed, decapitated.
The route to St.L. is disconnected from the route to downtown, and thus allow for drastic frequency cuts beyond what we have already suffered and are about to suffer again. Also looks good on the old 'get-service-delays-caused-by-downtown-fixed-by-a-split-route' box ticked off. It boils down to appearance .vs. reality - frequency, frequency, frequency. 15 min. is reasonable. 20 is bearable. 30 is poor. 60 is lousy. and do not tell me 60 does not exist - cancellations and delays and re-routes. How many times have we all seen 3 buses of the same route go by in 1 minute, after waiting 45, and they are all full, so we wait another 45. So - split the service. Looks Good.
BUT - some history.
Useless has been trying to kill the 19 (the eastern side of the 5) for several years. He canned it several years ago in the route 'optimizations', when there were some modifications to the western side (the 5) as well. When there were screams, he told us it was 'too late'. Then the western side users had some complaints, and gee, it wasn't too late. More and bigger screams to his mentor finally got service back, but at reduced frequency, and a streamlined route (beginning the 'walkability' train - oh,gee, it's only a 10 minute walk..... yeah, try that in the middle of winter with 40 pounds of groceries at 65 years old, turkey.) Nibbles and salami slices later, less service, less frequency. and now this. I repeat - looks nice. Paranoid me says, right - but at what frequency. and dependable ? Doubtful.

Also mentioned elsewhere, people walk longer to get to transit stations rather than wait for a bus and transfer, even in the opposite direction to their destination - yup - me too - no brainer - it's more dependable, and virtually guaranteed faster.

IE - emphasis - Dependability and Frequency - the two strong legs of a satisfied and growing clientele. anything less is guaranteed failure.

Sorry about the rant - I said I was not going to give myself (or you, dear reader) an ulcer, but - you did ask, and these are the facts and (justifiable) fears.

NoJoy.

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Overall Overbrook and Vanier are actually probably getting the greatest per-capita investment in additional bus service in the whole city.

Good Day.....

I really have to fear not. It would really, really, be nice, if true, but paranoid me has to believe not !

At best I have to think it restores services to the level of the 'route optimization' fiasco. At worst - the route-split and cut-frequency norm will rule. And as I mentioned elsewhere, with both of, the cut of 600, and the 'end-of-lifetime' statements, I do not see any frequency improvements nor route enhancements. And if you read their statements between the lines with a prejudiced eye (as mine is on this), this is what they are in effect also saying.

If I am wrong, and improvements do come to pass, - -! We shall see.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

What investment is that? They are realigning routes. That costs jack. There is nothing on paper yet about actually adding service. Any additional runs that they add to the 12 will still be only bringing service back up to where it was before the 2008 split of the old 2.

The 18/19/20 reconfiguration is a net addition to service.

The section of the 19 from Marier to St. Laurent is being taken over by Route 20, at the same frequency as today.. but then the remainder of Route 19 is being extended to St. Laurent again with a different route. That means the entire new Route 19 along the Donald corridor is completely new service. Shortening Route 18 to keep it on Queen Mary will not be enough to offset this cost so it's a net addition of service to the area. Plus every single route in the whole east-of-Rideau area is now going to end at Parliament station in the CBD, whereas a lot of the routes now (like the 18) terminate at Rideau. That's a net increase in service.

I don't think any other area in the whole city is actually getting a net increase of all day service hours as part of the changes.. this clearly is one. (Some of the outer suburbs are getting more peak-period service hour. Other areas are getting off-peak service improvements but they mostly seem offset by shortening routes to eliminate overlap with the LRT, or as part of consolidations/reorganizations, rather than a net increase in transit service).

[MoreTrains]

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

Also mentioned elsewhere, people walk longer to get to transit stations rather than wait for a bus and transfer, even in the opposite direction to their destination - yup - me too - no brainer - it's more dependable, and virtually guaranteed faster.

IE - emphasis - Dependability and Frequency - the two strong legs of a satisfied and growing clientele. anything less is guaranteed failure.

I can speak simply to this, when I lived on St Patrick street near the Chinese Embassy, the stop for the 1 was less than half a block away, but time and again I would walk to the old station near Desmarais with all my military kit to get to the Walkley Armouries. It was 100% more reliable and timely catching a 97. The time it took me to walk to the Transitway was less than the amount of time it took me to wait for a 1 to come on time (say to catch a 1630 bus, Im there are 1620 and it arrives at 1650).

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

The section of the 19 from Marier to St. Laurent is being taken over by Route 20, at the same frequency as today..

I was not under the impression that the 20 would have anything near the same frequency as the existing 19/former 5, and given the bizarre fixation on terminating it at the community centre loop, and thereby making it as useless as possible, even if it started out with the typical half-hourly service of the 19, it will very quickly be pared back, causing a service/clientele death spiral that will see the northern Vanier portion of the route further cut back to end at the Montfort Hospital instead.

Plus every single route in the whole east-of-Rideau area is now going to end at Parliament station in the CBD, whereas a lot of the routes now (like the 18) terminate at Rideau. That's a net increase in service.

Last plan I saw, this was not the case for the 20, which will be entirely east of the Rideau.

[acottawa]

The 19 (former 5, future 20) could be better served with other routes, but it serves a political objective of linking central Vanier to the library and the Montfort. In that regard, truncating it to the political requirement makes sense.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

I was not under the impression that the 20 would have anything near the same frequency as the existing 19/former 5,

According to this document, the new route 20 is proposed to have 30 minute service all day every day. The new 19 route will have 15 minute service during peak periods (in both directions) and 30 minute service at all other times.

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Last plan I saw, this was not the case for the 20, which will be entirely east of the Rideau.

Yup. Nor will the 9 nor 27 (according to the same document).

Also, the 18, 19, 20 and 27 won't serve Rideau.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Also, the 18, 19, 20 and 27 won't serve Rideau.

The 18 will; through the local councillor's intervention, the plan has been revised to keep the 18 on Rideau Street instead of moving it to Laurier and the Mackenzie King bridge. Both the 18 and 19 will also extend through to Parliament station. The 18 currently ends at Rideau station for all trips, while the 19 does extend to roughly where Parliament station will be currently.

[Uhuniau]

I would love to know what our illustrious transit planners have against Rideau Street.

One of the best features of the OC Transpo bus system in the inner city was that all the local routes converged on Rideau, making all kinds of bus-to-bus trips possible. The reconfigurations, and the anti-Rideau gotta-get-the-buses-off-Wellington idiocy is destroying connectivity within the core, to what end? What is the benefit to the transit-using public?

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

I would love to know what our illustrious transit planners have against Rideau Street.

One of the best features of the OC Transpo bus system in the inner city was that all the local routes converged on Rideau, making all kinds of bus-to-bus trips possible. The reconfigurations, and the anti-Rideau gotta-get-the-buses-off-Wellington idiocy is destroying connectivity within the core, to what end? What is the benefit to the transit-using public?

The 6, 7, 9, 12, 14, 17 and 18 are insufficient?