Dynamic Ottawa. What would it take?

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

A long video on transit with Jarrett Walker.

It's funny you cite Jarrett Walker. You should look up his thoughts on having to transfer and on suburban sprawl.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by CityTech

Honestly it would have made way more sense to have a station at Jasmine Crescent instead of at Montreal Road. Montreal has very little walkup demand and isn't well positioned as a transfer station (for both Blackburn and Beacon Hill, Blair is better suited), whereas a Jasmine location would have lots of walkup traffic

I can think of several stations that should have taken a back-burner to Jasmine, and Montreal could have been one of them. That said, I assume the City opted to build it now since the 174/Montreal/St-Joseph intersection had to be rebuilt anyway. Easier to include the station as part of the initial project than shoehorn it in later considering the complexity of the area.

I could see Montreal station becoming a busy hub for those cycling to transit. Depending on new bus routes, it could serve as a secondary (or maybe tertiary) bus-rail transfer. Until they start building TOD in the Canotek Business Park, I don't think we'll see a whole lot of walk-up traffic.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

It's funny you cite Jarrett Walker. You should look up his thoughts on having to transfer and on suburban sprawl.

I fully support building much better suburbs. I support 15 minute communities.

His views on transfers are nuanced. You should note his comments on transit freedom. Transfers only work well with a high frequency network. I have spoken about transit grids, which is something that Jarrett Walker speaks about and what he implemented in the Houston transit re-design. I don't mind transfers if they are efficient. Note that a transit grid only requires one transfer to get practically anywhere.

Your comments tell me that you don't fully understand my viewpoint.

[lrt's friend]

We all know why Ottawa was never a waterfront city. Downtown faced cliffs and waterfalls, and the Rideau Canal was built as a military canal, which restricted use along its shore-line. The waterfalls made them industrial sites. Navigation was very limited and what little there was became obsolete as soon as railways came on the scene.

How do we invigorate our waterfront when there has been so little history to make use of the waterfront other than for green-space or in very limited locations, for industry?

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I fully support building much better suburbs.

Who doesn't? The reality though is that we still don't have walkable suburbs. The Mac's is now closer. That's about it.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I support 15 minute communities.

By car or foot? Because most Ottawa suburbs are the former.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

His views on transfers are nuanced. You should note his comments on transit freedom. Transfers only work well with a high frequency network. I have spoken about transit grids, which is something that Jarrett Walker speaks about and what he implemented in the Houston transit re-design. I don't mind transfers if they are efficient. Note that a transit grid only requires one transfer to get practically anywhere.

Your comments tell me that you don't fully understand my viewpoint.

If you knew his views, you'd know exactly what he'd say about wasting billions on another subway in the core just to avoid transfers, while most of the city still doesn't have decent bus service.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Who doesn't? The reality though is that we still don't have walkable suburbs. The Mac's is now closer. That's about it.



By car or foot? Because most Ottawa suburbs are the former.



If you knew his views, you'd know exactly what he'd say about wasting billions on another subway in the core just to avoid transfers, while most of the city still doesn't have decent bus service.

I have said many times that a Bank Street subway is but a dream and I will never see it, so it isn't about me. If anything, it is about serving our most urban parts of the city and our most important commercial street. Bank Street is Ottawa's equivalent of Yonge Street.

We have been designing transit to serve suburban commuters as the top priority and not serving and promoting the most urban parts of the city. We have been relegating all our urban commercial streets to substandard service. How will those streets ever achieve their potential? Isn't this part of making the city more lively and dynamic? How this will be accomplished is another question knowing the huge expense of building a subway. Are there alternatives that will work? All I know is that Bank Street north of Billings Bridge is becoming increasingly congested, which makes transit more and more inefficient.

[lrt's friend]

By car or foot? Because most Ottawa suburbs are the former.

I am fortunate because I have two grocery stores, two pharmacies, 5 schools, several restaurants (both sit down and fast food), a public swimming pool and many other services within a 15 minute walk of where I live. It still could be better, because sidewalks are not complete. I have complained about that to my councillor and have had a story published in the community newspaper about it. Also, the city removed our public library after amalgamation, something our community was not pleased about.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by wave46

Everything is so segregated and cocooned unto its own thing, especially in very new suburbs like Kanata. You have industrial parks, malls/shopping and housing at such scale and segregation to make exploring a pain, even on something like a bicycle.

It's not just a pain... it's boring as hell.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by CityTech

Not surprising. All the things I mentioned as attributes (mixed housing types, neighbourhood-focused retail, good all-day transit) are seen as negatives by the suburban types.

I'd say Blackburn Hamlet has a better future ahead of it - assuming any re/development proposals that emerge over time don't get NIMBYed to death - than Orleans or any of the rest of that irredeemable suburban garbage to the east.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

How do we invigorate our waterfront when there has been so little history to make use of the waterfront other than for green-space or in very limited locations, for industry?

Sacred cows make the best hamburgers. This is why we need to kill Ottawa's "green space" fixation with fire.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

We have been relegating all our urban commercial streets to substandard service. How will those streets ever achieve their potential?

The short answer is.. they won't. We have committed all our resources, both financial and political, into building an urban transit system for the least urban parts of the city. And we have built political institutions that are overtly anti-urban. Four years of O'Brien and now too many years of Watson Club in charge are baking anti-urbanity into the fabric of Ottawa even more than it already was before (and it was bad before.)

All I know is that Bank Street north of Billings Bridge is becoming increasingly congested, which makes transit more and more inefficient.

And transit, more and more, gets relegated in the priority whenever we rebuild any of our main streets, and is treated as expendable.

Increasingly, if you're in Ottawa, and you want to be urban, your best bet is going to be to move to a city that knows and thinks it's a city, and acts like it.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

We all know why Ottawa was never a waterfront city. Downtown faced cliffs and waterfalls, and the Rideau Canal was built as a military canal, which restricted use along its shore-line. The waterfalls made them industrial sites. Navigation was very limited and what little there was became obsolete as soon as railways came on the scene.

How do we invigorate our waterfront when there has been so little history to make use of the waterfront other than for green-space or in very limited locations, for industry?

This is true almost everywhere. At least most colder industrial cities. The way to invigorate it is just do it. The aversion to anything private in Ottawa makes this difficult but still doable.

[On Edge]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

The short answer is.. they won't. We have committed all our resources, both financial and political, into building an urban transit system for the least urban parts of the city. And we have built political institutions that are overtly anti-urban. Four years of O'Brien and now too many years of Watson Club in charge are baking anti-urbanity into the fabric of Ottawa even more than it already was before (and it was bad before.)



And transit, more and more, gets relegated in the priority whenever we rebuild any of our main streets, and is treated as expendable.

Increasingly, if you're in Ottawa, and you want to be urban, your best bet is going to be to move to a city that knows and thinks it's a city, and acts like it.

The odd fixation on bike lanes over transit shows how clued out our planners and leaders are. Somebody read somewhere that bike lanes mean urban, as in Amsterdam and Copenhagen. They forgot to turn the page in My First Book of Urban Planning to note that lively urban places prioritize transit first, in subways, streetcars, etc.

[Aylmer]

Although they're both related to mobility, the question of bike infrastructure and transit infrastructure are actually different in important ways. Transit infrastructure is generally a transportation question - capacity, speed, service. Bike lanes and sidewalks are mainly about safety.

The idea that people build bike lanes out of an aesthetic preference is a strawman that can't be taken seriously. Instead, think of bike lanes like sidewalks. No one questions whether the sidewalks on Elgin should be turned into a bus lane. This is true even in places where a bus lane would have a much higher throughput than the sidewalks. But that's because bus lanes are a transport question, and it's accepted that a sidewalk is necessary for safety.

The problem is that there's always been a missing middle ground for modes which are faster than walking, but still vulnerable. Bikes, scooters, motorized wheelchairs and other mobility aids all fall into this category. They're not safe on roads, but they don't fit on sidewalks either. With the increasing uptake of all of these modes, we're expanding what we consider to be the minimum elements of safety on streets.

Transit infrastructure will always be essential to the functioning of a city. But that doesn't negate the fact that it's more important for someone to get to work alive than to get there fast.

[Truenorth00]

Well at least Ottawa talks about being a 15 min city while expanding the suburban boundary....

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...plan-1.5256386

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Although they're both related to mobility, the question of bike infrastructure and transit infrastructure are actually different in important ways. Transit infrastructure is generally a transportation question - capacity, speed, service. Bike lanes and sidewalks are mainly about safety.

The idea that people build bike lanes out of an aesthetic preference is a strawman that can't be taken seriously. Instead, think of bike lanes like sidewalks. No one questions whether the sidewalks on Elgin should be turned into a bus lane. This is true even in places where a bus lane would have a much higher throughput than the sidewalks. But that's because bus lanes are a transport question, and it's accepted that a sidewalk is necessary for safety.

The problem is that there's always been a missing middle ground for modes which are faster than walking, but still vulnerable. Bikes, scooters, motorized wheelchairs and other mobility aids all fall into this category. They're not safe on roads, but they don't fit on sidewalks either. With the increasing uptake of all of these modes, we're expanding what we consider to be the minimum elements of safety on streets.

Transit infrastructure will always be essential to the functioning of a city. But that doesn't negate the fact that it's more important for someone to get to work alive than to get there fast.

I think your analysis is at best half true and is equally a straw man. Sidewalks already exist. Where they don't exist we don't generally add them at the detriment of transit. So a walking and bike path along the 417 would make it safer to walk and cycle along that route but the volume of cars that would be displaced and the alternative route that exists means we don't even consider that. While not as extreme a bike lane on Montreal Road or even Beechwood is similar. By your get there safe logic bikers can use the Rockcliffe Parkway. Even with a bike lane on Montreal there will be numerous dangerous crossings. The dozens of bikers who might save a minute or two and feel a bit safer will slow down the hundreds of transit riders who depend on the route. Meanwhile the 150+ days a year in Ottawa when only crazy people bike the bike lane will sit mostly empty.

Money and space is limited so it is always a trade-off.

[Blackburnian]

Originally Posted by CityTech

Montreal station is actually useless for Blackburn. Transit in Blackburn is concentrated as an east west corridor on Innes that connects to Blair.

There is a bus route that connects to Montreal station (the 28) but it's far less frequent than the 25 and during weekdays daytime it runs as a long slow winding route through Blackburn. From the community core, it's a 9 minute trip to Blair on the 25 but a 16 minute trip to Montreal on the 28. And that's not even factoring in the frequency difference. So even if you're going east to Orleans it's faster to connect at Blair.

The 28 is often more convenient around morning and afternoon rush, as 25 will often be packed with people headed for/from orleans. Also in winter especially I much prefer walking to my nearby busstop for the 28 than walk the 8-ish minutes over to innes road and wait for the 25, in fact most of the year (until covid changed the 28 schedule to hourly most of the day, which is now back to the normal 20-30 min intervals)

Originally Posted by CityTech

During evening and weekends the 28 is a lot better as it runs as a straight line on Bearbrook, making the travel times faster. But even then, it's only 1-2 minutes faster to Montreal than Blair, and the 25 is still way more frequent.

I feel the schedule is definitely going to change with the opening of montreal stn, if a more frequent 28 comes through the hamlet, (even if its coming to and from beacon hill) I can imagine many transit riders (students and government workers) here taking advantage of that.

Originally Posted by CityTech

I suppose they could adopt the straight line routing all the time and use the time savings to make the 28 a frequent route but even then Montreal will only be better than Blair for trips to northern Orleans.

I think there actually used to be two routes down Bearbrook road, one that was more direct, and the one that snakes around Blackburn

Originally Posted by CityTech

tl;dr - the addition of Montreal station won't make Blackburn any more transit accessible than the construction of Blair station already has.

I do agree it won't make much difference for us, but time will tell i guess.

It will making biking to and from the train easier(not always a bike rack on every bus), and with the apparent bike storage facilities (if theres enough) I could see montreal stn be an intermodal station for beaconhill and (maybe some) blackburn residents (though the trip up the hill on st.joseph may be a challenge)

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

I think your analysis is [...] is equally a straw man.

I... think I've made my point.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Transit infrastructure will always be essential to the functioning of a city. But that doesn't negate the fact that it's more important for someone to get to work alive than to get there fast.

It's not just about getting to work.

And we can get bikists to and from "work" without continuing to make local transit in the urban core slower, less convenient, more convoluted, and indirect. But those solutions are never, ever, EVER enough for the bikists.

[Acajack]

Regarding Montreal Station vs. Blair Station for Blackburn residents, I agree that while Blair offers more stuff around it, for a lot of people who aren't interested in shopping and such, and simply want to get to and from downtown, Montreal Station will be a better option provided that OC Transpo changes the routes to and from the Hamlet to make that work. (Which I expect them to do.)

It's barely over a five-minute drive (or 3.5 km) from the heart of the Hamlet to the future location of Montreal Station, with relatively few stoplights on the route.