News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 4.8K     0 

archited said:
BRT has been an unmitigated failure in Los Angeles and other large cities.
Click to expand...
It's actually been a huge success in many South American cities, including cities fairly large, such as Bogota (Colombia), Curitiba (Brazil). It doesn't do well in megacities, but anywhere in the range from 500k inhabitants to 2million, it does the job fairly well, as long as it's well designed.
 
^^^^ on the contrary, @Daveography, the "success" in Ottawa was over-hyped by the manager of the system to pump up his creds as a consultant -- https://www.lightrailnow.org/myths/m_otw001.htm Besides the established myth of its success Ottawa does have a higher bus ridership than other cities of similar size due to a few factors -- 1. the City has a preponderance of mid- and low-level office workers who have no choice but to take transit (no other options). I recall that the two years that I lived there, Ottawa was known as "Girl City" because females outnumbered males by a 3-to-2 margin; these numbers were largely due to Federal Government employment opportunities at steno-level occupations. 2. Parking in Ottawa has been very restrictive for autos with rules in the NCC limiting parking to 1 stall per 10 employees (lack of choice does not mean people enjoy the lack of alternatives). 3. Ottawa in the main is largely a linear City stretching along the Ottawa river, so east-west runs are easier to achieve in the uni-direction of the City and therefore easier to plan from a bus perspective. I am all for as many alternative choices as can be had in transit possibilities, but forcing people into a singular option doesn't seem or feel very democratic. Montreal's grid system for transit is much more people friendly.
 
@archited I think your point is getting lost when you say that its success was overhyped, then talk about the factors that led to its success.

I have many friends who grew up in, schooled in, worked in, and still live in Ottawa. I myself have spent the equivalent of several months in the city, and used the Transitway near daily when I was there. I assure you it was not overhyped, it was a great system that worked well and efficiently, and was only replaced when it reached a breaking point of capacity - a victim of its own success really.

I don't think anything you just wrote is an indictment of any kind of BRT itself, it just says to me that you still need other factors to ensure the success of a transit system, regardless of the technology used. One could easily argue that even our own LRT system was not truly successful until the SLRT extension to Century Park opened, 32 years after the system went online. Up until then, the entire system was arguably underutilized for such a massive investment.
 
Perhaps Edmonton should introduce a couple of BRT lines, perhaps in locations where bus service is frequent or prospective LRT lines. Whyte Avenue could be one prospect, perhaps from Bonnie Doon to U of A and into WEM (much like the #4).
 
@Daveography you misread what I was trying to get across -- if you read the planning article you will see that the the BRT was instituted after "normal" bus service and that ridership was already high for the factors that I mentioned. I wasn't arguing numbers against bus ridership, simply against the "miracle" of BRT ridership. I lived in Ottawa for two years while attending Carleton University and my girl-friend at the time always pleaded with me to pick her up so that she didn't have to take the bus. I now work closely with Doug Cardinal whose office is in Ottawa and his staff continually complain about bus service (both yours and my experiences are anecdotal so they kind of erase each other out from an argument standpoint). Many bus routes in Los Angeles are packed to over capacity and for one+ weeks when my car was out of service and I had to take the bus (after a few miscalculations) from where I lived to where I worked as a consultant I had to enjoy the horror of sweaty, crowded, stinky bus rides that could not be counted on for destination accuracy time-wise, typically a 3+ hour ride one way. The indelible imprint of that experience has left a memory-tissue scar that will never go away. These were not rickety old buses (although some were artlessly covered in graffiti); the last leg was BRT and these exacerbated the inconveniences. Finally, I highly doubt that Edmonton could solve any convenience issues with BRT. A better solution would be on-call automated buses that are now available in several cities and are beginning to crop up in many civic jurisdictions.
 
archited said:
@Daveography you misread what I was trying to get across -- if you read the planning article you will see that the the BRT was instituted after "normal" bus service and that ridership was already high for the factors that I mentioned. I wasn't arguing numbers against bus ridership, simply against the "miracle" of BRT ridership. I lived in Ottawa for two years while attending Carleton University and my girl-friend at the time always pleaded with me to pick her up so that she didn't have to take the bus. I now work closely with Doug Cardinal whose office is in Ottawa and his staff continually complain about bus service (both yours and my experiences are anecdotal so they kind of erase each other out from an argument standpoint). Many bus routes in Los Angeles are packed to over capacity and for one+ weeks when my car was out of service and I had to take the bus (after a few miscalculations) from where I lived to where I worked as a consultant I had to enjoy the horror of sweaty, crowded, stinky bus rides that could not be counted on for destination accuracy time-wise, typically a 3+ hour ride one way. The indelible imprint of that experience has left a memory-tissue scar that will never go away. These were not rickety old buses (although some were artlessly covered in graffiti); the last leg was BRT and these exacerbated the inconveniences. Finally, I highly doubt that Edmonton could solve any convenience issues with BRT. A better solution would be on-call automated buses that are now available in several cities and are beginning to crop up in many civic jurisdictions.
Click to expand...
I think as far as on-demand autonomous buses go, it would definitely replace most suburban bus routes. The LRT stops would become transfer points for those on-demand vehicles while trains itself become automated. Main trunk bus routes would become fixed automated routes.
 
archited said:
@Daveography you misread what I was trying to get across -- if you read the planning article you will see that the the BRT was instituted after "normal" bus service and that ridership was already high for the factors that I mentioned. I wasn't arguing numbers against bus ridership, simply against the "miracle" of BRT ridership. I lived in Ottawa for two years while attending Carleton University and my girl-friend at the time always pleaded with me to pick her up so that she didn't have to take the bus. I now work closely with Doug Cardinal whose office is in Ottawa and his staff continually complain about bus service (both yours and my experiences are anecdotal so they kind of erase each other out from an argument standpoint). Many bus routes in Los Angeles are packed to over capacity and for one+ weeks when my car was out of service and I had to take the bus (after a few miscalculations) from where I lived to where I worked as a consultant I had to enjoy the horror of sweaty, crowded, stinky bus rides that could not be counted on for destination accuracy time-wise, typically a 3+ hour ride one way. The indelible imprint of that experience has left a memory-tissue scar that will never go away. These were not rickety old buses (although some were artlessly covered in graffiti); the last leg was BRT and these exacerbated the inconveniences. Finally, I highly doubt that Edmonton could solve any convenience issues with BRT. A better solution would be on-call automated buses that are now available in several cities and are beginning to crop up in many civic jurisdictions.
Click to expand...

Hey! First time poster here.

Thought i'd chime in as former resident of Ottawa haha

I'm 50/50 on the efficacy of BRT in Ottawa but I think in specific cases with purposeful intent, it could work In Edmonton. I grew up in Edmonton and live in the NW and from my neighbourhood I only needed 1 Bus and 1 Transfer to basically get anywhere (shoutout to the 151!). So when I moved to Ottawa in 2009, the scale of bus service and usage in Ottawa was incredibly fascinating to me. After living there for 4 years and only using Transit, I will say, on one hand (and the negative side), busses were overcrowded and bus drivers would not stop lol, they'll just blow right past you, much to everyone's sadness and...anger. Service inconvenience, depending on where you live. I didn't live in the suburbs (Orleans, Barrhaven aka Farrhaven, Kanata), but to get out there was an absolute pain, even with BRT. Multiple transfers, extremely long rides. Was a 1.5 hour trip from South Keys to Bayshore. The East-West leg of the BRT (which is now partially LRT) was especially notorious for this. Now on the other hand, if you live centrally, it is fast and convenient and accessible. They even began rolling out their contactless smart card system (Presto) in 2010-2011. I lived in South Ottawa and was primarily serviced by the North-South BRT line from South Keys to Downtown, which was amazing. Feeder lines were efficient and intersected multiple times along the line with the BRT line. The dedicated ROW infrastructure was easy to navigate and very accessible.

I think that's why I think purposeful and well thought out BRT could work in Edmonton, especially to connect to existing/future the LRT network. The new LRT lines planned for the West and NW, along with the Bus Network Redesign seems to sort of address the areas that seem underserved, but I really think if you want to make transit a viable option for a car-centric city, you have to make it simple and I think BRT can complement LRT very well.
 
The mass transit study affirmed the demand for transit along the Whyte Avenue corridor and further determined the service could also be accommodated by non-LRT technologies. Administration will return to council in 2021 with recommended next steps.

The LRT expansion projects approved by City Council will necessitate a substantial growth in the light rail vehicle fleet in the upcoming years. This, combined with the need to replace 37 of the oldest fleet of trains that are already operating well past their design life, results in the need to procure a considerable number of light rail vehicles in the near term. Continuing to operate and maintain the older fleet of trains beyond a 5 year horizon will pose a risk to providing in-service LRVs to meet ridership demands.

As many as 142 new high-floor vehicles may be required to support the extension to the Capital Line south and Metroline north, to provide the required service frequency on the existing Capital and Metro lines, and to address the upcoming fleet replacements. This could result in a funding requirement of over $900 million in the short-to-medium term. Administration is having conversations with the City of Calgary about possible joint procurement of light rail vehicles and continues to explore alternatives for long-term funding with potential partners.
Click to expand...
From the LRT Network Expansion and Renewal Update going to Executive Committee on November 9.

LRT Network Expansion and Renewal Update - Executive Committee - November 09, 2020

pub-edmonton.escribemeetings.com pub-edmonton.escribemeetings.com
(Item 6.22)
 
Either an LRT alignment underground on Whyte Ave and/or ERRS Streetcar, those are the only two sensible options for the centre corridor. BRT may work fine at first but it will fall short in providing the needed demand for the long term.
 
Last edited:
I'd be interested in seeing how BRT fares in this area. it might not be a totally future-proof solution, but a dedicated busway with high frequencies would imporve transit capacity, and BRT's flexibility and closer stop spacing would serve the Old Strathcona Area well. TBH i think the centre line (the LRT over the high level into whyte ave and out to Sherwood park, whatever that one was) was not the best bit of planning, especially with the likely chance of the Gondola running parallel to the route. exploring all options for this area seems prudent to me.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top