The future of Ottawa's Transit

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

What is considered a reasonable walking distance to LRT for someone's daily commute? To me 400-500m is the max I'd expect people to walk to catch the train. Especially with Ottawa's often harsh weather of heavy winds/rain or the freezing winters, asking people to walk possibly 800m-1km to catch the train and possibly another 800m-1km walk to reach their destination after getting off to their closest stop is a bit much. It's doable, but it shouldn't be expected.

Yet High School students (grades 9-12) in Ontario who live within 3.2 km of their school are expected to walk. For younger grades (1-8) it drops to 1.6 km and is 0.8 km for kindergarten students.

Either the school system is out to lunch, or our society has unreasonable expectations for our transit systems. I suspect both are true.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Yet High School students (grades 9-12) in Ontario who live within 3.2 km of their school are expected to walk. For younger grades (1-8) it drops to 1.6 km and is 0.8 km for kindergarten students.

Either the school system is out to lunch, or our society has unreasonable expectations for our transit systems. I suspect both are true.

These types of thresholds (transit vs. school) are not just based on discomfort or physical exertion. Time also enters into it.

A 3-km walk for an able-bodied teenager going to high school will probably take between 20 and 30 minutes. But once the walk is over, that's the end of his or her trip.

If you're going to walk a half hour or 3 km to get to a transit station, and then have to spend several minutes waiting, and spend another half hour or more on buses or a train, that's starting to eat quite a bit of time out of your day, twice a day. You'll lose a lot of people with that type of commute duration.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

What is considered a reasonable walking distance to LRT for someone's daily commute? To me 400-500m is the max I'd expect people to walk to catch the train. Especially with Ottawa's often harsh weather of heavy winds/rain or the freezing winters, asking people to walk possibly 800m-1km to catch the train and possibly another 800m-1km walk to reach their destination after getting off to their closest stop is a bit much. It's doable, but it shouldn't be expected.

For me, 400-500 m to a local bus stop with, say, 15-minute frequencies (later linking to a larger transfer point) seems reasonable. I'd be willing to walk a longer distance (maybe up to 1 km) if it's a station that offers high-frequency fairly direct train service to my destination.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Acajack

For me, 400-500 m to a local bus stop with, say, 15-minute frequencies (later linking to a larger transfer point) seems reasonable. I'd be willing to walk a longer distance (maybe up to 1 km) if it's a station that offers high-frequency fairly direct train service to my destination.

I believe the research indicates that once you get past 400m, the number of people who will use transit starts to decline rather quickly.

It is not so much a matter of being capable of walking that distance, although that can be an issue for some people, but whether the service is sufficiently convenient. When we expect people to walk long distances, then transit is only useful for longer distance riders. If we want to service those making short trips, who are the most inexpensive to serve, you don't want them walking 3.6 km or even 1 km to a stop.

In assessing walking distances, we have to consider that transit is operating in a competitive market. Transit is competing with private vehicles, taxis and Uber. If we make people walk long distances, we are pushing people into other transportation modes and the remainder are just those who cannot afford alternatives. This is the case in most American cities where transit is just a social service and nothing more.

I think there has been a long-term trend (since after World War II) towards transit only serving the poor and rush hour commuters. Is this really what we want to achieve in the long-term?

If we really look at statistics, I expect that transit mode share continues to spiral downward in most cities including Ottawa. If that was not the case, then ridership would not be as flat as has been for several years. Making people walk longer distances is not going to reverse that trend.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Acajack

A 3-km walk for an able-bodied teenager going to high school will probably take between 20 and 30 minutes.

I think those times are a bit optimistic for a 3 km walk. Here is what Wikipedia says about walking speeds:

Many people tend to walk at about 1.4 m/s (5.0 km/h; 3.1 mph). Although many people are capable of walking at speeds upwards of 2.5 m/s (9.0 km/h; 5.6 mph), especially for short distances, they typically choose not to.

From this a "typical" time would be 36 minutes, so I would say 30-40 minutes would be a more reasonable range. A time of 20 minutes would be possible at a walking speed of 2.5 m/s, it would be a real push, especially given the distance.

These times assume no other delays, such as traffic lights or deep snow.

[lrt's friend]

Here is a very relevant study on transit and walking distance because the study was done in Montreal.

tram.mcgill.ca/Research/Publications/Transit_service_area.pdf

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by Acajack

For me, 400-500 m to a local bus stop with, say, 15-minute frequencies (later linking to a larger transfer point) seems reasonable. I'd be willing to walk a longer distance (maybe up to 1 km) if it's a station that offers high-frequency fairly direct train service to my destination.

Surely a direct bus service is just as good as a train?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Beedok

Surely a direct bus service is just as good as a train?

A bus cannot hold as many people as a train.

[rocketphish]

We're on track for Stage 2. Now where?

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Published on: February 23, 2017 | Last Updated: February 23, 2017 4:36 PM EST

After council gives the go-ahead to find contractors for the $3-billion Stage 2 LRT expansion, the city will start turning its mind to a Stage 3.

The finance and economic development committee will vote on the Stage 2 plan on Friday and council will vote March 8.

The city likes to talk about the 2031 “affordable network.” It’s pretty much Stage 1 and Stage 2, plus bonus rail extensions to Moodie Drive, Trim Road and the Ottawa International Airport.

A proposed long-range financial plan crafted by the city’s finance department says there will be $3 billion for transit growth projects between 2031 and 2048. That’s the most the city can afford to properly manage its debt levels, the plan says.

There’s a dream blueprint for rapid transit in Ottawa. The city calls it the “ultimate network” and you can check out the map here.

We’re to assume a Stage 3 will be part of the city’s next transportation master plan, which doesn’t have a start or completion date yet.

Where should the city extend the rail network next?

Here are some possibilities based on the ultimate transit blueprint.


Extending the Trillium Line to Gatineau

The interprovincial transit goal is to use the Prince of Wales Bridge over the Ottawa River to connect the systems in Ottawa and Gatineau. The City of Ottawa owns the bridge but isn’t keen on upgrading it on its own, especially since it would cost $40 million (and that’s a 2009 estimate). Gatineau Mayor Maxime Pedneaud-Jobin and Hull-Aylmer MP Greg Fergus have talked up the rail extension. There has been no point for the City of Ottawa to spend energy on it if other governments don’t help pay. If the city can combine its resources with several other governments – potentially two provincial governments, the feds and the City of Gatineau – there could be momentum to finally pursue an interprovincial rail link in the National Capital Region.


Cutting through the greenbelt into Kanata

Crossing the greenbelt west of Moodie Drive would be a huge milestone for the city’s LRT network. The Stage 2 tweak to extend rail to Moodie Drive by 2023 could be the push the western suburb needs to get an LRT station sooner than later. The likelihood of Kanata LRT happening in the medium term is a bit higher than some of the options below since an environmental assessment is already in the works.


Inviting Barrhaven to the LRT party

Remember when Barrhaven was on the cusp of getting an LRT connection? There are still hard feelings over the city cancelling that north-south LRT plan 10 years ago. Heck, there are even in-your-face reminders. While Orléans and Riverside South are getting rail service over the next six years, and Kanata is getting closer, the booming suburb of Barrhaven could be feeling train envy. The ultimate LRT plan calls for rail extended from Baseline station to Barrhaven. But there’s all sorts of fun sending LRT down a Woodroffe Avenue corridor, considering major intersections and close property lines north of Hunt Club Road.


Building LRT on the southeast Transitway

It’s something Gloucester-Southgate Coun. Diane Deans has been pitching to improve transit service for residents in the south end, but the scenario would probably replace the Trillium Line extension into Riverside South. With the city on the fast track to sending diesel trains to the southern suburb, it’s unlikely that a Hurdman-to-Riverside South LRT line would be in the cards.


Making the Cumberland Transitway an LRT line

It’s another unlikely priority, but as the city continues to build bus rapid transit roads, there might be a tiny thought given to building LRT instead. The Cumberland Transitway is being designed to serve south Orléans, but making it an LRT line isn’t part of the ultimate plan. If the east end gets two LRT lines and the other suburbs don’t even have one, well, you can imagine how that would go over in Kanata and Barrhaven.


Electrifying the Trillium Line

It would be a major undertaking to turn the diesel Trillium Line service into electrified LRT and it’s hard to know what the appetite would be on council to replace a technology, which will be beefed up in 2021. The train tunnel under Dow’s Lake is for one track, so you can imagine what kind of work would be needed to carve out room for another track under the lake. Tracks would need to be twinned for the entire line. Getting involved in this kind of work would also affect the coveted rail link to Gatineau.


Creating the Carling tram

We dumped the Carling Avenue LRT idea when the city decided on the western LRT design. Carling Avenue is still on the books to someday get an LRT line with at-grade crossings between Lincoln Fields and the Trillium Line in Little Italy. The idea has been studied fairly closely in the context of western LRT, but an inner-city LRT line would likely take a back seat to LRT service for the outer areas.


jwilling@postmedia.com
twitter.com/JonathanWilling

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-...ge-2-now-where

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I believe the research indicates that once you get past 400m, the number of people who will use transit starts to decline rather quickly.

400m seems too short. In Kingston, one of the unexpected consequences of implementing a network of express buses is that they took a lot more ridership away from local buses than the planners expected. In their modelling, the planners expected that:
-most riders within 450m of an express route stop would choose express over closer local routes
-between 450m-800m of an express stop, people would choose a closer local route unless the express bus had a significant advantage in wait time and/or travel time (ie. enough to at least double the offset of extra walking time)
-past 800m, very few would choose the express service over a closer local route unless there was a very significant service difference
-past 1.2km, nobody would pick express, ever. If local routes weren't usable for their trip they just wouldn't take transit at all

It turned out that those walking thresholds were way too low and express buses attracted far more ridership among those further away from the stops. This caused a problem as many express buses became quickly overcrowded while many locals saw their ridership plummet. Unwilling to cut local service, the city instead shelled out more money to up express frequencies.

Once the Confederation Line actually opens, I think people will be surprised at how much walk-up ridership the train gets from 500m-1km away.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

400m seems too short. In Kingston, one of the unexpected consequences of implementing a network of express buses is that they took a lot more ridership away from local buses than the planners expected. In their modelling, the planners expected that:
-most riders within 450m of an express route stop would choose express over closer local routes
-between 450m-800m of an express stop, people would choose a closer local route unless the express bus had a significant advantage in wait time and/or travel time (ie. enough to at least double the offset of extra walking time)
-past 800m, very few would choose the express service over a closer local route unless there was a very significant service difference
-past 1.2km, nobody would pick express, ever. If local routes weren't usable for their trip they just wouldn't take transit at all

It turned out that those walking thresholds were way too low and express buses attracted far more ridership among those further away from the stops. This caused a problem as many express buses became quickly overcrowded while many locals saw their ridership plummet. Unwilling to cut local service, the city instead shelled out more money to up express frequencies.

Once the Confederation Line actually opens, I think people will be surprised at how much walk-up ridership the train gets from 500m-1km away.

I don't expect there will be significant changes from the Transitways.

The study that provided indicated logically that ridership pickup declines with distance. Obviously, with frequent rail service (which is not significantly different from BRT) compared to usually less frequent bus service, people will walk somewhat further, but not a whole lot further.

People will walk significantly further for commuter rail, which we do not have in Ottawa. In this case, it makes sense, because commuter rail is usually very limited it terms of frequency and the number of trips so depending on a transfer may not be reliable.

In all cases, ridership declines to 0 not matter the mode of transit at about 1.5 km. The study also indicated that 85% of the ridership walked 525 m or less and 50% is under 300 m. This demonstrates how quickly ridership declines with distance especially beyond 525 m.

[lrt's friend]

I am looking forward to my own 'in your face' protest when the stupid Trillium Line expansion (that does not deliver anything significant) opens after yet another massive closure.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I am looking forward to my own 'in your face' protest when the stupid Trillium Line expansion (that does not deliver anything significant) opens after yet another massive closure.

Ya. I don't get it. They are doing practically nothing to the existing line (just adding a couple stations). Why does it need to be closed for so long? Why not wait until they can do the job right instead of constantly applying band-aids to a broken leg?

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Ya. I don't get it. They are doing practically nothing to the existing line (just adding a couple stations). Why does it need to be closed for so long? Why not wait until they can do the job right instead of constantly applying band-aids to a broken leg?

They are rehabilitating the Rideau River bridge and Dow's lake tunnel, doubling the platform length of the existing stations, building 2 new stations, lengthening passing tracks, grade-separating the VIA junction, installing a new signalling system and building a new maintenance yard. It's not nothing, and the grade-separated VIA junction should make the schedule more reliable.

But it will be maxed out at a 10 minute frequency, and I agree that not double tracking the entire line will be a missed opportunity.

In the long run, it will probably end up being simpler and cheaper to build LRT on the SE Transitway and have a Riverside South-Hurdman double-tracked electrified line, and truncate the Trillium line to run between Bayview and the Airport.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I think there has been a long-term trend (since after World War II) towards transit only serving the poor and rush hour commuters. Is this really what we want to achieve in the long-term?

If we really look at statistics, I expect that transit mode share continues to spiral downward in most cities including Ottawa. If that was not the case, then ridership would not be as flat as has been for several years. Making people walk longer distances is not going to reverse that trend.

Compounded by the poor statistics we keep on transit usage. The census only tracks what mode people use to get to/from work. Statscan only keeps ridership stats at the CMA or possibly transit agency level. OC Transpo itself only counts on-time performance of morning peak routes. No one is measuring how the transit system is used, or performed, in other ways, at other times, or for other purposes.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

They are rehabilitating the Rideau River bridge and Dow's lake tunnel, doubling the platform length of the existing stations, building 2 new stations, lengthening passing tracks, grade-separating the VIA junction, installing a new signalling system and building a new maintenance yard. It's not nothing, and the grade-separated VIA junction should make the schedule more reliable.

I didn't realize they were doing all that. I get why double tracking the tunnel is cost prohibitive, but if they could double track everything else it would make a huge difference. I do agree with you on the grade-separated VIA junction making the biggest difference.

In the long run, it will probably end up being simpler and cheaper to build LRT on the SE Transitway and have a Riverside South-Hurdman double-tracked electrified line, and truncate the Trillium line to run between Bayview and the Airport.

Or, if they don't want to convert the SE Transitway to LRT, just extend the Transitway to Bowesville This needn't be any thing fancy, just 2 lanes of pavement and traffic lights at Lester and Leitrum roads. I think this would actually be better for Ottawa South as it would allow continuous bus service from their local street to Hurdman (or any other station in between).

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Compounded by the poor statistics we keep on transit usage. The census only tracks what mode people use to get to/from work. Statscan only keeps ridership stats at the CMA or possibly transit agency level. OC Transpo itself only counts on-time performance of morning peak routes. No one is measuring how the transit system is used, or performed, in other ways, at other times, or for other purposes.

I know the mode of transport to work in the census was a major win for people in that field, but the numbers have always seemed a bit wonky to me. Especially when it comes to cycling where it's hard to gauge the true impact of bike commuting over the course of a year.

I might put down that I commute by bike, so I am counted in the 2% figure for this CMA. But obviously I don't do it most of the year, nor do most cyclists commute by bike year round. This would be true of every CMA in the country except Vancouver and Victoria.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

In all cases, ridership declines to 0 not matter the mode of transit at about 1.5 km. The study also indicated that 85% of the ridership walked 525 m or less and 50% is under 300 m. This demonstrates how quickly ridership declines with distance especially beyond 525 m.

That is for the bus. For the metro it was 873m for the 85th percentile and the median was 527m.

[Catenary]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

They are rehabilitating the Rideau River bridge and Dow's lake tunnel, doubling the platform length of the existing stations, building 2 new stations, lengthening passing tracks, grade-separating the VIA junction, installing a new signalling system and building a new maintenance yard. It's not nothing, and the grade-separated VIA junction should make the schedule more reliable.

But it will be maxed out at a 10 minute frequency, and I agree that not double tracking the entire line will be a missed opportunity.

In the long run, it will probably end up being simpler and cheaper to build LRT on the SE Transitway and have a Riverside South-Hurdman double-tracked electrified line, and truncate the Trillium line to run between Bayview and the Airport.

Do you have a source or page number in the report for the VIA Grade separation? I haven't heard it mentioned and didn't notice it in the report.

With over 200 train movements per day, as far as I am aware the Ellwood Diamond is the busiest level crossing in North America.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

That is for the bus. For the metro it was 873m for the 85th percentile and the median was 527m.

Yes, I did say it was somewhat further to a rail station, but in the conclusions, they said the overall 85% percentile was the 527m figure or something very close to that. Regardless, we are mostly maxed out at the 873m figure. I believe the 85% percentile for commuter rail was 1.25 km. All modes reach 100% at a little less than 1.5 km.