OC Transpo

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by TransitZilla

There will be frequent service available at Fallowfield, just like there will be frequent service (and Line 2) available at South Keys & Greenboro for those connecting from Blossom Park. Needing to make a connection does not automatically make transit lousy.

You missed my point. There is a disparity of service between the east side and west side of Barrhaven. Whereas, the east side gets direct service into the city whether by frequent service routes or connexion routes, the west side is forced to transfer at Fallowfield and again a second time further towards the city.

Two transfer service is a big deterrent for transit use. I am very conscious of the hours when two transfers are currently required in my neighbourhood, and I avoid those hours. Two transfers are too difficult to plan for and too unreliable. The future requires two transfers in all hours, so I will avoid transit most of the time going forward.

It is as simple as this. Provide too unpredictable service, then only those who have no other choice will use transit.

You also present the inbound concept of low frequency to high frequency, forgetting that each such trip requires the reverse trip outbound when you go from higher frequency to low frequency and potential long wait times, often where no one really wants to wait.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

With all due respect, I can not agree with your argument. Absolutely, I can agree, though, that the current # 88 is a very busy route that suffers from unreliability.

Baseline bus routes have been ‘my route’ since early days. I’m going back to the OLD 53 that ran Baseline to Clyde/Maitland, to Carlingwood. I have been on the routes as they were extended along Baseline, and beyond. The 78, 117, 118, 88 routes were all mine. All this is to point out that I am aware of Baseline being a major transit corridor.

But back to your argument:



I remember when ‘The Baseline Bus’ actually DID stay on Baseline. People used to walk from Baseline through the old Shopper’s City West mall to get to Algonquin College. Later, the Baseline Station opened on the Transitway, and the bus was diverted from Baseline to service it. The turns between Baseline and Woodroffe were terrible because of the traffic; thus, the diversion along Navaho. By looping around the Baseline-Woodroffe intersection, reliability was improved. It also better serviced the college. It was a win-win – but it added time to the route. The benefit was that it was fairly predictable time.



Reliability penalties come from unpredictability. While it is true that increasing the length of a route might add in additional randomness, it needn’t necessarily do so.

The majority of the disruption to the schedule of the current 88 is due to traffic along Baseline Road. In the morning, it can take ‘forever’ to travel from Richmond Road to Baseline Station; and in the afternoon, going from the Heron Road Workers Memorial Bridge to Baseline Station can seem to take an ‘eon’. Yes, there are also some delays west of Richmond Road, but they are relatively minor, compared with those along Baseline. Alas, splitting the 88 so that it continues to travel the entire length of Baseline will do little to increase reliability in that critical segment. And adding a relatively predictable loop around Centre Pointe will have minimal effect – except increasing the functionality of transit for those in the Centre Pointe area.

I will point out that the 68 will be subject to the Baseline congestion in the mornings, too. There will also be the lesser congestion through Bells Corners and Kanata in the afternoons.

Your comment is also interesting because the future 88 will deviate through the Queensway-Carleton Hospital instead of staying on Baseline and turning directly onto Richmond Road. This is a new deke for the route, and appears to necessitate that the new 68 also deviate through the hospital. This will add extra time to both routes.

I also note that the 68 will continue to deviate from Hazeldean down to the Hazeldean Mall. If it is important to minimize straying from the main roads, why was this loop kept? Because it serves a function. It connects people to their local stores without making them transfer. I am suggesting that the same is true for taking the 88 around Centre Pointe.

Your argument seems based on the current ridership pattern of the 88. I suggest that things will change once the route is split. For example, Carleton students will no longer have a single-seat (single-stand, more like it) ride to Kanata. They will need to transfer to the 68. Anyone who is not directly destined for a stop along the western portion of Baseline (or the future destination of the Bayshore Mall) will need to transfer. I suggest that there are going to be a large number of people transferring from the 88 to the 68. If they do that transfer at Baseline Station, then they are unaffected by looping the 88 around Centre Pointe.

Because the 88 will no longer perform the same function west of Baseline Station, I don’t think that it is valid to try to use the argument that it needs to remain as it is. The western end of the future 88 will act more like a Local route, bringing people to their homes along that stretch of Baseline, or to the hospital or the mall. The 68 will be taking over the cross-regional function west of Baseline Station. That is why I suggest that the 68 continue to access Baseline Road quickly.

We all know the reason why this will never happen.

Local neighbourhoods like Centrepointe are very low priority going forward regardless of density. Token service is enough. People should walk 1 or 2 kms to Baseline or Woodroffe, regardless of ability to walk that distance.

Talk about memories, the old 53. I have an old 53 schedule from the 60s when they were still waiting for the Heron Road bridge to open.

[Multi-modal]

Originally Posted by Lakeofthewood

I get where you're coming from, but the 88 (and new 68) should have as little diversion as possible from Baseline / Hazeldean as possible, besides through Algonquin College. The current 88 is one of the busiest routes in the city, and is shockingly unreliable given how important it is. Splitting it into the 68 and 88 should have a huge benefit to its reliability, and we shouldn't be doing anything that might negatively impact that.

To your point, I would argue that they should extend the 84 from Baseline Station to Bayshore Station. One more route on Baseline can only be beneficial in the long run, especially with Baseline BRT coming in... 2090?

A friend of mine suggested extending the new 112 to take over the Centrepointe route for the 84, then further extending it to Pinecrest & Bayshore. I think using the 112 makes a lot more sense as a local route rather than using the "mainline" Route 88.

[acottawa]

We were in Tbilisi recently. There is a fairly extensive network of bus lanes. It makes a huge difference in the functionality of transit.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

We were in Tbilisi recently. There is a fairly extensive network of bus lanes. It makes a huge difference in the functionality of transit.

That is quite the trip in such times, a place with lots of Russian refugees.

Ottawa was quite innovative with bus lanes back in the 1970s, but that has gone by the wayside. If we were to do as you have observed, we have to give up car lanes. If we can only deliver a bus every 15 minutes, that will never sell to the public, and will not convince the public to use transit.

The problem is that we have cut overlapping bus routes to keep costs to a minimum, whereas bus lanes would require multiple bus routes to create true high frequency. Overlapping bus routes would reach where people live instead of requiring transfers for the simplest trips even if individual bus routes only ran every half hour. The last mile problem is truly a barrier to using transit and it is getting worse in Ottawa.

I look at history and our current plans. The southeast transitway will only have one bus route (98) going north of South Keys, whereas prior to the Transitway, back in the 1980s there was more frequency on Bank Street between Billings and Hunt Club. That was when the population was much less than today and guess what, the bus routes went into neighbourhoods.

Ottawa has moved so far away from single seat rides even for short trips, that there is little hope to reverse this.

[Richard Eade]

So Premier Ford mentioned funding the Kanata North Transitway, at the Mayor's Breakfast this morning, but no mention of the Baseline BRT. What do you want to bet that staff didn't even present the Baseline BRT for funding? Despite the need for a second west-east transit crossing, the city has really avoided moving on this. Even getting a dedicated bus lanes on the north side of Baseline, between Prince of Wales and Navaho, and a south-side lane between Richmond and Constellation would be a huge help. These would handle a lot of the rush-hour delays. And, building those new lanes would not be wasted, since they will be where the cars are when the central BRT lanes are eventually built.

In fairness, staff is being pushed to add a extra car lanes to March Road. If they can turn that into bus-only lanes, it might encourage additional transit usage, instead of more cars. Unfortunately, March Road is on the eastern side of Kanata North, with Greenbelt on one side. With all of the development west and south, it might be better to re-evaluate where a more centralized Transitway could go. For example; now that the golf course is to be redeveloped, could a Transit corridor be established there? Would it be better to use existing roads like Huntmar to Campeau?

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

So Premier Ford mentioned funding the Kanata North Transitway, at the Mayor's Breakfast this morning, but no mention of the Baseline BRT. What do you want to bet that staff didn't even present the Baseline BRT for funding? Despite the need for a second west-east transit crossing, the city has really avoided moving on this. Even getting a dedicated bus lanes on the north side of Baseline, between Prince of Wales and Navaho, and a south-side lane between Richmond and Constellation would be a huge help. These would handle a lot of the rush-hour delays. And, building those new lanes would not be wasted, since they will be where the cars are when the central BRT lanes are eventually built.

In fairness, staff is being pushed to add a extra car lanes to March Road. If they can turn that into bus-only lanes, it might encourage additional transit usage, instead of more cars. Unfortunately, March Road is on the eastern side of Kanata North, with Greenbelt on one side. With all of the development west and south, it might be better to re-evaluate where a more centralized Transitway could go. For example; now that the golf course is to be redeveloped, could a Transit corridor be established there? Would it be better to use existing roads like Huntmar to Campeau?

Baseline BRT should be the next priority to better serve the public inside the Greenbelt and to provide better overall connectivity. I have said for years that it is the missing link. Nothing better to advertise transit than to have transit moving faster than cars in adjacent lanes. Instead, we have buses stuck in traffic on a key corridor.

[Acajack]

I remember when Ottawa was mentioned in the same breath as Curitiba, Brazil when it came to BRT excellence.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I remember when Ottawa was mentioned in the same breath as Curitiba, Brazil when it came to BRT excellence.

And we had public buy in to match. I remember friends visiting from South Carolina in July 2015 (mid summer) and they were shocked how successful transit was in Ottawa. It has gone down hill steeply since then. It is funny how rail was designed to solve the downtown bottleneck, but has badly failed to meet public expectations. Rail is slower, and transfers too inefficient. I would never take those same people on transit today. It has failed that much.

Ottawa's success was based on suburban buy in. You cannot have success while ignoring the majority of the population.

[rocketphish]

Want people to use Ottawa's LRT? Make it safer to get there
Poorly lit pathways around the stations, transit stops that are not cleared of snow, or ones that sit between a ditch and a busy road — all pose serious risks to residents.

Dave Williams
Published Mar 27, 2024 • Last updated 22 hours ago • 2 minute read

Recent safety issues surrounding the LRT station by Blair Station in the Pineview neighbourhood are of great concern and deserve the immediate attention of city officials.

Imagine crossing the bridge over the Queensway, with multiple burned-out lights, as a senior, single person, or student returning from a late class. After that harrowing crossing, you are travelling in one direction for approximately 600 metres on a completely dark, unlit pathway lined by trees that could conceal anyone, or on the other hand, passing a construction site with 600 metres of poorly lit paths crossing several roads.

And this is not just a local neighbourhood issue. Each area of Ottawa has transit stations where there are concerns about accessibility, safety and comfort. When will the city prioritize access to the very infrastructure it’s basing its long-term plans on?

Public transit, especially light rail, is promoted as an affordable, efficient form of transportation that also benefits our environment. But when we are forced to navigate poorly lit areas and neglected infrastructure, the supposed benefits of LRT quickly lose their appeal. Safety should be a top priority for any public works, and it is disappointing to see such neglect in the infrastructure of the city.

The poorly lit pathways around the LRT stations, transit stops that are not cleared of snow, or ones that sit between a ditch and a busy road all pose a serious risk to residents, especially in the evening and at night. Pedestrians walking in these dark areas are more vulnerable to accidents, theft and other crimes. Mothers with strollers or seniors with walking aids need to be able to easily access the stations and stops.

These missing connections to our transit network create an atmosphere of fear and uneasiness and discourage people from using public transportation at all. I want my children to grow up using public transportation and feel safe doing so. The lack of safety considerations not only undermines the city’s efforts to promote sustainable transportation, but it also deprives the public of a safe and reliable way to get around.

Despite repeated complaints to 311, consultation with the city councillor and staff, and even city staff that have been brought on-site, these issues remain unaddressed, leaving transit users fearful about the potential danger when travelling early in the morning and late in the evening.

I ask again: When will the city prioritize access to transit, the very infrastructure it’s basing its long-term plans on, to ensure it’s accessible and safe to access?

Dave Williams is a community advocate in East Ottawa, and a member of several community and advocacy boards. He can be found on social networks at @RedSignPromos

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/wi...r-to-get-there

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

Want people to use Ottawa's LRT? Make it safer to get there
Poorly lit pathways around the stations, transit stops that are not cleared of snow, or ones that sit between a ditch and a busy road — all pose serious risks to residents.

Dave Williams
Published Mar 27, 2024 • Last updated 22 hours ago • 2 minute read

Recent safety issues surrounding the LRT station by Blair Station in the Pineview neighbourhood are of great concern and deserve the immediate attention of city officials.

Imagine crossing the bridge over the Queensway, with multiple burned-out lights, as a senior, single person, or student returning from a late class. After that harrowing crossing, you are travelling in one direction for approximately 600 metres on a completely dark, unlit pathway lined by trees that could conceal anyone, or on the other hand, passing a construction site with 600 metres of poorly lit paths crossing several roads.

And this is not just a local neighbourhood issue. Each area of Ottawa has transit stations where there are concerns about accessibility, safety and comfort. When will the city prioritize access to the very infrastructure it’s basing its long-term plans on?

Public transit, especially light rail, is promoted as an affordable, efficient form of transportation that also benefits our environment. But when we are forced to navigate poorly lit areas and neglected infrastructure, the supposed benefits of LRT quickly lose their appeal. Safety should be a top priority for any public works, and it is disappointing to see such neglect in the infrastructure of the city.

The poorly lit pathways around the LRT stations, transit stops that are not cleared of snow, or ones that sit between a ditch and a busy road all pose a serious risk to residents, especially in the evening and at night. Pedestrians walking in these dark areas are more vulnerable to accidents, theft and other crimes. Mothers with strollers or seniors with walking aids need to be able to easily access the stations and stops.

These missing connections to our transit network create an atmosphere of fear and uneasiness and discourage people from using public transportation at all. I want my children to grow up using public transportation and feel safe doing so. The lack of safety considerations not only undermines the city’s efforts to promote sustainable transportation, but it also deprives the public of a safe and reliable way to get around.

Despite repeated complaints to 311, consultation with the city councillor and staff, and even city staff that have been brought on-site, these issues remain unaddressed, leaving transit users fearful about the potential danger when travelling early in the morning and late in the evening.

I ask again: When will the city prioritize access to transit, the very infrastructure it’s basing its long-term plans on, to ensure it’s accessible and safe to access?

Dave Williams is a community advocate in East Ottawa, and a member of several community and advocacy boards. He can be found on social networks at @RedSignPromos

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/wi...r-to-get-there

Completely agree. Other than the walking/cycling path from Hurdman to uOttawa, the City didn't really make any improvements on access to stations on foot or bike. The focus was really just on access by bus for suburbanites.

They seem to have done a better job with Stage 2, but some improvements like Orleans Boulevard were killed by local councillors who prioritize driving.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I remember when Ottawa was mentioned in the same breath as Curitiba, Brazil when it came to BRT excellence.

I mean, it was a lie then, too.

[DTcrawler]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

And we had public buy in to match. I remember friends visiting from South Carolina in July 2015 (mid summer) and they were shocked how successful transit was in Ottawa. It has gone down hill steeply since then. It is funny how rail was designed to solve the downtown bottleneck, but has badly failed to meet public expectations. Rail is slower, and transfers too inefficient. I would never take those same people on transit today. It has failed that much.

Ottawa's success was based on suburban buy in. You cannot have success while ignoring the majority of the population.

I assume when you talk about slow rail and inefficient transfers you're talking about Line 2, in which case I don't understand how the current is much different/worse than it was in 2015?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

And we had public buy in to match. I remember friends visiting from South Carolina in July 2015 (mid summer) and they were shocked how successful transit was in Ottawa. It has gone down hill steeply since then. It is funny how rail was designed to solve the downtown bottleneck, but has badly failed to meet public expectations. Rail is slower, and transfers too inefficient. I would never take those same people on transit today. It has failed that much.

Ottawa's success was based on suburban buy in. You cannot have success while ignoring the majority of the population.

Unlike Curitiba, Ottawa never followed through all the way with BRT development, (in)famously with the missing downtown link of course.

At the time one of the main reasons given was that buses polluted way more than trains, though with electric vehicles coming online more and more that point would have ended up being moot.

That said, I do like trains more than buses, but the transition in Ottawa from BRT to LRT hasn't been a great one.

[Lakeofthewood]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

With all due respect, I can not agree with your argument. Absolutely, I can agree, though, that the current # 88 is a very busy route that suffers from unreliability.

Baseline bus routes have been ‘my route’ since early days. I’m going back to the OLD 53 that ran Baseline to Clyde/Maitland, to Carlingwood. I have been on the routes as they were extended along Baseline, and beyond. The 78, 117, 118, 88 routes were all mine. All this is to point out that I am aware of Baseline being a major transit corridor.

But back to your argument:



I remember when ‘The Baseline Bus’ actually DID stay on Baseline. People used to walk from Baseline through the old Shopper’s City West mall to get to Algonquin College. Later, the Baseline Station opened on the Transitway, and the bus was diverted from Baseline to service it. The turns between Baseline and Woodroffe were terrible because of the traffic; thus, the diversion along Navaho. By looping around the Baseline-Woodroffe intersection, reliability was improved. It also better serviced the college. It was a win-win – but it added time to the route. The benefit was that it was fairly predictable time.



Reliability penalties come from unpredictability. While it is true that increasing the length of a route might add in additional randomness, it needn’t necessarily do so.

The majority of the disruption to the schedule of the current 88 is due to traffic along Baseline Road. In the morning, it can take ‘forever’ to travel from Richmond Road to Baseline Station; and in the afternoon, going from the Heron Road Workers Memorial Bridge to Baseline Station can seem to take an ‘eon’. Yes, there are also some delays west of Richmond Road, but they are relatively minor, compared with those along Baseline. Alas, splitting the 88 so that it continues to travel the entire length of Baseline will do little to increase reliability in that critical segment. And adding a relatively predictable loop around Centre Pointe will have minimal effect – except increasing the functionality of transit for those in the Centre Pointe area.

I will point out that the 68 will be subject to the Baseline congestion in the mornings, too. There will also be the lesser congestion through Bells Corners and Kanata in the afternoons.

Your comment is also interesting because the future 88 will deviate through the Queensway-Carleton Hospital instead of staying on Baseline and turning directly onto Richmond Road. This is a new deke for the route, and appears to necessitate that the new 68 also deviate through the hospital. This will add extra time to both routes.

I also note that the 68 will continue to deviate from Hazeldean down to the Hazeldean Mall. If it is important to minimize straying from the main roads, why was this loop kept? Because it serves a function. It connects people to their local stores without making them transfer. I am suggesting that the same is true for taking the 88 around Centre Pointe.

Your argument seems based on the current ridership pattern of the 88. I suggest that things will change once the route is split. For example, Carleton students will no longer have a single-seat (single-stand, more like it) ride to Kanata. They will need to transfer to the 68. Anyone who is not directly destined for a stop along the western portion of Baseline (or the future destination of the Bayshore Mall) will need to transfer. I suggest that there are going to be a large number of people transferring from the 88 to the 68. If they do that transfer at Baseline Station, then they are unaffected by looping the 88 around Centre Pointe.

Because the 88 will no longer perform the same function west of Baseline Station, I don’t think that it is valid to try to use the argument that it needs to remain as it is. The western end of the future 88 will act more like a Local route, bringing people to their homes along that stretch of Baseline, or to the hospital or the mall. The 68 will be taking over the cross-regional function west of Baseline Station. That is why I suggest that the 68 continue to access Baseline Road quickly.

Agree to disagree on this one I think, since it's basically two different ideals on how the "Frequent" routes should operate. I think what you're proposing would be great in a perfect world, or in a city that actually cared to fund transit, but in Ottawa I think any small piece of reliability you can get by avoiding diversions is worth it. I don't necessarily agree that the 88's function is changing with the shorter routing, as it will still be the main route for any students at Algonquin or Carleton who live between Baseline and Billings Bridge Stations. The only detours both the 68 and 88 are proposed to make from the main arterials are to serve major generators, like the Hazeldean Mall, Queensway Carleton Hospital, and Algonquin College / Baseline Station. So I think detouring to serve a neighbourhood, no matter what ridership it might capture, isn't OC's goal with either route. (Note again here that I think the idea itself makes sense, just not for OC at this time).

[Lakeofthewood]

Originally Posted by Lakeofthewood

Agree to disagree on this one I think, since it's basically two different ideals on how the "Frequent" routes should operate. I think what you're proposing would be great in a perfect world, or in a city that actually cared to fund transit, but in Ottawa I think any small piece of reliability you can get by avoiding diversions is worth it. I don't necessarily agree that the 88's function is changing with the shorter routing, as it will still be the main route for any students at Algonquin or Carleton who live between Baseline and Billings Bridge Stations. The only detours both the 68 and 88 are proposed to make from the main arterials are to serve major generators, like the Hazeldean Mall, Queensway Carleton Hospital, and Algonquin College / Baseline Station. So I think detouring to serve a neighbourhood, no matter what ridership it might capture, isn't OC's goal with either route. (Note again here that I think the idea itself makes sense, just not for OC at this time).

Quoting myself here since the below point ended up being a big tangent, but wanted to see how people here felt.

I think one of the more interesting changes coming out of OC's new service plan, is the 'straightening' out of some frequent routes across the city. One of the big problems (imo) with OC's service plans in the past (besides the obvious underfunding) is that they often times tried to do too much with their frequent/rapid routes by detouring away from main arterials, adding time to frequent reduces and increasing potential delays due to stops, traffic, turns, etc. It seems they have fixed that on a good number of frequent routes, where people will now have a 5-10 minute walk to the frequent route, or will be served by a local route instead.

Some examples include: Route 7 (no detour to Brittany), Route 25 (no detour to Charlton or Aviation Museum), Route 40 (no detour to Johnston or to Trainyards), Route 41 (replaces old local 46/140 routes and doesn't detour to Featherston or Baycrest), Route 51 (no longer Frequent with 11 and 85 providing parallel service), Route 80 (no detour down MacFarlane), and Route 111 (no detour to Viewmount). Notably the change to Route 11 to bring it up to Tunney's Pasture and Bayview Stations runs contrary to this change, which I think some here have pointed out is bad and I agree with them.

I feel like this is a commonly debated topic - is it better to have theoretical frequent service a 2 minute walk away, or have to walk further for more reliable service. I've always found the latter to be preferable in Ottawa, but I'm sure not everyone here will agree. In a perfect world we wouldn't have to choose, but I think with what OC Transpo is working with (persistent lack of funding and unreliable service), this could be an interesting opportunity to improve reliability on Frequent routes.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Lakeofthewood

Quoting myself here since the below point ended up being a big tangent, but wanted to see how people here felt.

I think one of the more interesting changes coming out of OC's new service plan, is the 'straightening' out of some frequent routes across the city. One of the big problems (imo) with OC's service plans in the past (besides the obvious underfunding) is that they often times tried to do too much with their frequent/rapid routes by detouring away from main arterials, adding time to frequent reduces and increasing potential delays due to stops, traffic, turns, etc. It seems they have fixed that on a good number of frequent routes, where people will now have a 5-10 minute walk to the frequent route, or will be served by a local route instead.

Some examples include: Route 7 (no detour to Brittany), Route 25 (no detour to Charlton or Aviation Museum), Route 40 (no detour to Johnston or to Trainyards), Route 41 (replaces old local 46/140 routes and doesn't detour to Featherston or Baycrest), Route 51 (no longer Frequent with 11 and 85 providing parallel service), Route 80 (no detour down MacFarlane), and Route 111 (no detour to Viewmount). Notably the change to Route 11 to bring it up to Tunney's Pasture and Bayview Stations runs contrary to this change, which I think some here have pointed out is bad and I agree with them.

I feel like this is a commonly debated topic - is it better to have theoretical frequent service a 2 minute walk away, or have to walk further for more reliable service. I've always found the latter to be preferable in Ottawa, but I'm sure not everyone here will agree. In a perfect world we wouldn't have to choose, but I think with what OC Transpo is working with (persistent lack of funding and unreliable service), this could be an interesting opportunity to improve reliability on Frequent routes.

I'd rather have reliable service a bit further away but the choices are not equal as the cost is also lower in labour and gas to avoiding all the curlies curlies. It's not just reliability. The bulk of the 7 riders for example getting on and going the full distance will now get there 3 minutes faster. That will make a few less decide to buy a car and give them all more time to work or be with their familes. There are other changes that could make that 5 6 or 7 minutes.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Lakeofthewood

Agree to disagree on this one I think, since it's basically two different ideals on how the "Frequent" routes should operate. I think what you're proposing would be great in a perfect world, or in a city that actually cared to fund transit, but in Ottawa I think any small piece of reliability you can get by avoiding diversions is worth it.

And yet, we continue to build things which require buses to deviate, change lanes, and turn against traffic, all of which are transit-killers.

Express deviation-avoidance principles need to start being built into policies and infrastructure.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by DTcrawler

I assume when you talk about slow rail and inefficient transfers you're talking about Line 2, in which case I don't understand how the current is much different/worse than it was in 2015?

With Line 2 not actually running, why would I be talking about that? The main access route has been via Hurdman since the mid 80s. It is that which is deteriorating tremendously. Line 1 is the culprit with slow running trains, as we all know (slower than the buses that were replaced), and deteriorating frequency on many connecting bus routes, if they even connect anymore.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

I'd rather have reliable service a bit further away but the choices are not equal as the cost is also lower in labour and gas to avoiding all the curlies curlies. .

Are the "curlies curlies" what I think they are?