[Mihairokov]

NGL that sounds pretty bad. This means someone travelling from Kanata to central Ottawa will have to transfer twice when they previously had a one seat bus ride on the old transitway system. And they could potentially have to wait 10 minutes for each transfer too.

This is common throughout the system. One bus ride became one transfer or even two. What was previously a bus from Downtown to Kanata is now train to Tunney's, waiting for a bus, then that bus to Kanata. Ditto for Orleans. The train is more pleasant than waiting on packed busses in rush hour on Slater and Albert but the trade-off is that the rest of the system is worse now than it was prior to LRT.

 

[Kyle Campbell]

This is common throughout the system. One bus ride became one transfer or even two. What was previously a bus from Downtown to Kanata is now train to Tunney's, waiting for a bus, then that bus to Kanata. Ditto for Orleans. The train is more pleasant than waiting on packed busses in rush hour on Slater and Albert but the trade-off is that the rest of the system is worse now than it was prior to LRT.

There wasn't any more capacity in the old BRT system. In fact, before the Confed line opened, I was already at a bus->bus transfer at Hurdman as they had to stop running all peak services downtown due to bus-jams on Albert/Slater.

My trip in is a bit slower than before 2015, but my trip home is far, far faster. It could take up to 15-30 minutes just to get from Bank St to Campus(now uOttawa) station at the worst of rush hour. The transitway had become a victim of it's own success

For the Kanata folk, Stage 2 may or may not improve much. But for others along Line 1, Stage 2 should improve things considerably from the interim step we're at, and should be comparably back to the good ol' days of the 95 transitway bus from Orleans to Baseline

 

[bearcat]

There wasn't any more capacity in the old BRT system. In fact, before the Confed line opened, I was already at a bus->bus transfer at Hurdman as they had to stop running all peak services downtown due to bus-jams on Albert/Slater.

My trip in is a bit slower than before 2015, but my trip home is far, far faster. It could take up to 15-30 minutes just to get from Bank St to Campus(now uOttawa) station at the worst of rush hour. The transitway had become a victim of it's own success

For the Kanata folk, Stage 2 may or may not improve much. But for others along Line 1, Stage 2 should improve things considerably from the interim step we're at, and should be comparably back to the good ol' days of the 95 transitway bus from Orleans to Baseline

this is probably going back years, but was there ever a consideration of a bus tunnel in downtown? instead of converting the Transitway to LRT? I assume it was felt that would not be enough capacity?

 

[Kyle Campbell]

this is probably going back years, but was there ever a consideration of a bus tunnel in downtown? instead of converting the Transitway to LRT? I assume it was felt that would not be enough capacity?

It was thought of back in the 80s. By the 2000s, the city decided it was unfeasible. It would be a greatly more expensive tunnel then the confed line, and it would also be near capacity on day 1. Bus jams typically ran for 2km or more downtown. Putting it underground would have removed waiting at traffic lights, speeding things up a bit, but still wouldn't have been solved the problem of shoving that many buses through the core.

So, we knew exactly what were were getting with Stage 2 south, what's been delivered is exactly what they told us, there's no surprises there. In fact, I was expecting it to be worse than what it is, which might explain why I'm fairly positive on the line.

Stage 1 though is far below what was promised. It started out at 22 minutes end-end, and now is around 30ish with tons of slow zones. If they could get it back to it's original operating speeds, plus complete Stage 2 (Stage 1 was always just a stub of a future line), then we should be pretty good.

 

[Kyle Campbell]

Blindingly obvious poll of the year

OC Transpo receives poor scores for bus reliability, frequency and travel time

www.ctvnews.ca

 

[CapitalSeven]

The bus plan was twin tunnels under Albert and Slater, with the stations connecting them on the cross streets. It would be expensive because each tunnel was two lanes, and a lot of ventilation was required. That was part of the rationale for switching to rail. I was sure I had a copy of the 80s or 90s plan but I can't locate it. There is a paper copy at the OPL main branch. This image is from the 2008 report that moved the city forward on LRT.

 

[nfitz]

The bus plan was twin tunnels under Albert and Slater, with the stations connecting them on the cross streets. It would be expensive because each tunnel was two lanes, and a lot of ventilation was required. That was part of the rationale for switching to rail.

The impression I got in the 1980s, was that the bus tunnel(s) was a medium-term plan to replace the on-street running between the two grade-seperated legs. With the intent for long-term conversion to LRT if the demand required that.

The impression I get, is that without the through connections from the bus routes into downtown, and with post-Covid, is that the bus capacity was too stretched, so they went for LRT. But with LRT demand has reduced, and they'd have been better off with buses.

Ultimately, significantly improving the LRT frequency and travel time, along with better connections to buses would I think be the solution. I haven't seen any of the stations since they built the LRT, so I don't know how well integrated they are any more. Hopefully better than the GO and TTC integration at Kipling!

 

[reaperexpress]

The impression I got in the 1980s, was that the bus tunnel(s) was a medium-term plan to replace the on-street running between the two grade-seperated legs. With the intent for long-term conversion to LRT if the demand required that.

The impression I get, is that without the through connections from the bus routes into downtown, and with post-Covid, is that the bus capacity was too stretched, so they went for LRT. But with LRT demand has reduced, and they'd have been better off with buses.

Ultimately, significantly improving the LRT frequency and travel time, along with better connections to buses would I think be the solution. I haven't seen any of the stations since they built the LRT, so I don't know how well integrated they are any more. Hopefully better than the GO and TTC integration at Kipling!

I think you're right that now demand has dropped such that the old bus system would actually serve the city better than the current "LRT". But if Line 1 actually operated at the speed of other comparable rapid transit systems (35 km/h average), the ridership wouldn't have dropped as severely as it did and the ridership might still exceed BRT capacity. As we've see in Toronto, a network structure transfering people to/from rapid transit can work very well despite the added transfer, as long as frequencies are high and the speed of the rapid transit line makes it worth going out of your way to use. The frequency reductions also wouldn't have been as severe since they would have had more fare revenue.

 

[bearcat]

The bus plan was twin tunnels under Albert and Slater, with the stations connecting them on the cross streets. It would be expensive because each tunnel was two lanes, and a lot of ventilation was required. That was part of the rationale for switching to rail. I was sure I had a copy of the 80s or 90s plan but I can't locate it. There is a paper copy at the OPL main branch. This image is from the 2008 report that moved the city forward on LRT.

View attachment 637578

I guess with battery electric buses there would have been less need for a lot of ventilation? Not that those really existed in the 80's. And trolley buses would need extensive overhead infrastructure.

 

[bearcat]

I think you're right that now demand has dropped such that the old bus system would actually serve the city better than the current "LRT". But if Line 1 actually operated at the speed of other comparable rapid transit systems (35 km/h average), the ridership wouldn't have dropped as severely as it did and the ridership might still exceed BRT capacity. As we've see in Toronto, a network structure transfering people to/from rapid transit can work very well despite the added transfer, as long as frequencies are high and the speed of the rapid transit line makes it worth going out of your way to use. The frequency reductions also wouldn't have been as severe since they would have had more fare revenue.

What was the average speed for buses on the Transitway sections that were replaced by Line 1? Ignoring the section downtown that has traffic lights.

 

[Kyle Campbell]

The impression I got in the 1980s, was that the bus tunnel(s) was a medium-term plan to replace the on-street running between the two grade-seperated legs. With the intent for long-term conversion to LRT if the demand required that.

The impression I get, is that without the through connections from the bus routes into downtown, and with post-Covid, is that the bus capacity was too stretched, so they went for LRT. But with LRT demand has reduced, and they'd have been better off with buses.

Ultimately, significantly improving the LRT frequency and travel time, along with better connections to buses would I think be the solution. I haven't seen any of the stations since they built the LRT, so I don't know how well integrated they are any more. Hopefully better than the GO and TTC integration at Kipling!

Ottawa copied the idea from the TTC of putting buses in the fare paid zone at most stations, except in a couple places like South Keys and St Laurent where the existing bus station couldn't easily be put behind faregates.

In terms of facilities though, for the newer stations it's more like the bus loops you see attached to Skytrain stations rather than the large terminal buildings attached to subway stations

 

[Kyle Campbell]

I think you're right that now demand has dropped such that the old bus system would actually serve the city better than the current "LRT". But if Line 1 actually operated at the speed of other comparable rapid transit systems (35 km/h average), the ridership wouldn't have dropped as severely as it did and the ridership might still exceed BRT capacity. As we've see in Toronto, a network structure transfering people to/from rapid transit can work very well despite the added transfer, as long as frequencies are high and the speed of the rapid transit line makes it worth going out of your way to use. The frequency reductions also wouldn't have been as severe since they would have had more fare revenue.

The actual promised average by OCTranspo was 43km/h back when it opened... hopefully those days return.

 

[Kyle Campbell]

What was the average speed for buses on the Transitway sections that were replaced by Line 1? Ignoring the section downtown that has traffic lights.

I don't think that data is available, but it varied wildly. For some buses it would have been very high, as the express buses didn't stop at most stations, unlike the 95/96/97 mainline Transitway buses

Then if you had a bad day on the return trip (which happened to me a lot) the average return speed would be very low as the bus literally crawled at 5kph through downtown, and woe for the people getting on in the middle rather than the end

 

[Kyle Campbell]

When I say that the Transitway was full, this is a jam from 2014. These scenes were the norm in rush hour. So while the transitway used to be fast, the delays were getting incredibly long. The confed line is way faster than that was

 

[Thaboss]

When I say that the Transitway was full, this is a jam from 2014. These scenes were the norm in rush hour. So while the transitway used to be fast, the delays were getting incredibly long. The confed line is way faster than that was

Holly molly...my eyes can't believe what it is seeing...

Makes it more jarring that ottawa didn't go with rem like tech for its lrt...yea I know the story behind it ...but wow