Ken Gray: NIMBY watch

[S-Man]

I know that when I go in for a colonoscopy, I'm looking forward to the quiet, leisurely stroll back home. Transit be damned!

[McC]

Originally Posted by S-Man

I'm sure Ken supports the perfectly rational attitude expressed in his latest letter-turned-blog-post:

http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2012/...woes/#comments

The highlight: "No neighborhoods should have to put up with rapid transit next to their homes and schools and hospitals."

That pretty much sums up the mindset of "progressive, urban Ottawans" like Ken.

when I read that line I was sure the letter was ironic, and Ken was punk'd, but then I re-read it, and ... I can't tell!

[JeffB]

Originally Posted by McC

when I read that line I was sure the letter was ironic, and Ken was punk'd, but then I re-read it, and ... I can't tell!

If only the letter were ironic. The fact is there are people who actually believe statements like that. As if the transit system needs to be separated from the people.

Unless this fellow's driveway is a half-mile long, he has one right outside his front door.

[S-Man]

I know - it seems to be too over the top to be delivered with a straight face, but I actually think this guy is legit.

Hmmm, 'isolationism' as a transit planning principle. Amazing.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by JeffB

If only the letter were ironic. The fact is there are people who actually believe statements like that. As if the transit system needs to be separated from the people.

In fairness though, consider the experience of the average Ottawan with rapid transit: the Transitway. For three decades, we have designed and built our rapid transit system as a highway for buses that takes up an inordinate amount of space and whose stations are essentially bunkers. We have tended to shove the thing into spaces out of the way like highway, railway and river corridors to mitigate its effects.

It's little wonder that people have the views that they do since our current rapid transit system really is one that has to be separated from the people.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by S-Man

What is it with Orleans?Is this the street that petitioned to have a Habitat for Humanity project move out of their neighbourhood, then succeeded in LOWERING the number of built units?

Is that any worse than any of the other narrow-minded NIMBY douchebagginess in Ottawa?

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Dado

In fairness though, consider the experience of the average Ottawan with rapid transit: the Transitway. For three decades, we have designed and built our rapid transit system as a highway for buses that takes up an inordinate amount of space and whose stations are essentially bunkers.

I wish they were bunkers! Bunkers are sheltered from the wind, rain, and summer sun.

[S-Man]

God, Ken's been going nuts lately on the Bullshit Blog. He even tried to hold an online "debate" where he called people who disagreed with him a troll. He also compares the western LRT to King Edward (just as damaging, just as unwanted...apparently), and claims the city doesn't understand people (unwritten but implied: Ken understands people).

Well, he doesn;t seem to get that besides his usual three cheerleaders,people have no time for his opinion and blog.

[S-Man]

In which Ken states - once again - that he's all for intensification, et al, but only if done with 'smart growth' principles. He has never explained what he thinks that means, just that he never sees it in Ottawa:

http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2012/...-part-of-city/

Dredging up ghosts of FOL and JE Martin with claims from an advocacy group. After decrying the LRT tunnel for so long, Ken no longer seems to think throwing in an extra billion is a big deal, as long is it moves the line further from his house:

http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2012/...-part-of-city/

And.....Toronto did it cheaper. Where this "comparable" line is, someone will have to research it. Ken's simply spouting off what he's been told:

http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2012/...-part-of-city/

[Dado]

All your links are pointing to the same article.

And to my knowledge, Ken doesn't live in Westboro. For some reason I think he lives in the area north of the Transitway and east of Island Park, which isn't in anyone's definition or historical understanding of Westboro. I can't recall exactly why I think that, but I'm pretty sure it was due to something he had written some time ago.

[McC]

Originally Posted by Dado

All your links are pointing to the same article.

And to my knowledge, Ken doesn't live in Westboro. For some reason I think he lives in the area north of the Transitway and east of Island Park, which isn't in anyone's definition or historical understanding of Westboro. I can't recall exactly why I think that, but I'm pretty sure it was due to something he had written some time ago.

Yes, he said he lives in West Welli in at least a couple of blog posts on Our Lady of the Condos, for full disclosure.

[Harley613]

LIGHT RAIL:


WHAT KEN GRAY THINKS LIGHT RAIL LOOKS LIKE:

[McC]

Originally Posted by Harley613

LIGHT RAIL:


WHAT KEN GRAY THINKS LIGHT RAIL LOOKS LIKE:

I'm not defending KG here (trust me, please), but it's not without reason: it's the City that's started referring to the western LRT as "commuter rail." I haven't a clue why they want to use a term that is such a lightning rod that gives a completely inaccurate picture of what the Western LRT could* look like

*I say "could" because the you hear a lot of talk of the need for fencing and other barriers from the people involved in the project.

[S-Man]

I apologize for posting the same link repeatedly. I blame Ken Grey!

Harley: Those pics are priceless.

As for the city using the term 'commuter', well, that's a big slip-up on their part, but anyone with half a brain could look at the copious amount of documentation that exists on the LRT project and see what it is for and how it would look.

Of couse, doing so wouldn't help Ken Grey's argument that the sky is falling, so he prefers to obscure the project's specifics in every way possible.

[McC]

Originally Posted by S-Man

but anyone with half a brain could look at the copious amount of documentation that exists on the LRT project and see what it is for and how it would look.

that's not how modern communications is done; you don't wait for other people to figure things out on their own! you frame the issue for them, and try your darndest to get them to use the terms you have chosen, ones that describe things in the way most favourable to your cause/position. The City is completely abandoning the field of communications. Darwin said it very well today:

I think the City falls short in its communication of the LRT options. Many of the complaints about each proposed alignment are eminently predictable, or have been already expressed (repeatedly !) in the media. If I were running the show, these complaints / concerns would be addressed right up front, either acknowledged or countered. Instead we have endless rehashing of shallow comments.
http://westsideaction.wordpress.com/...e-western-lrt/

This isn't even a case of "amateur hour", there's no communications strategy whatsoever around the western LRT process. Decision around, and consistent use of, language to describe the options, along with artist sketches of what each of the options might look like is a bare minimum!

[Dado]

The light rail precedents we have in Canada both use fencing.

Here's as similar a locale as I can find in Calgary, on the Northwest line. Ignore the grade crossing and look instead at the barrier separating the road (think Richmond) from the LRT line and the fence separating the LRT line from the park behind (the Byron tramway park).

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&sourc...,114.62,,0,2.9

Also in Calgary, the Sunnyside area has barriers, which are relatively tasteful as barriers go, but still barriers (again, ignoring the grade crossing, which we may or may not get):

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&sourc...98.93,,0,11.81


From Edmonton, we have a couple more examples. This one shows two types of barrier; a masonry wall in the background alongside a pathway (the pedestrian is walking on it, as on the Byron side) while on the near side against the road (Richmond side) is a barrier consisting of a two chains suspended between poles:

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&sourc...329.12,,1,4.47

Edmonton seems particularly partial to this suspended double chain fencing, at least on their newest extension. Here's another example further south:

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&sourc...2,75.08,,0,0.3

That fence isn't going to outright prevent anyone determined to cross from crossing, but it ought to give them pause before doing so. Still, I do wonder how the "think of the children" types would react to this.

I really doubt we'd be able to get away from fencing here in Ottawa. I would not be surprised if the Carling supplementary line ends up with fencing too. I think I would go with the Edmonton double chain fencing since it is the least obtrusive and acts least as a full barrier and more like a warning, but I don't know if we can overcome the fact that it can be overcome.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by S-Man

As for the city using the term 'commuter', well, that's a big slip-up on their part, but anyone with half a brain could look at the copious amount of documentation that exists on the LRT project and see what it is for and how it would look.

That's a bit rude because truth be told we really have no idea from what we have seen from the City what a line along Richmond or the Parkway would look like. Anything from open tracks in grass to a trench fenced-in with chainlink fencing is a fair guess.

We have images of the LRT downtown in the stations, of entering the portals, of a few stations along the to-be-converted transitway, and we even have a couple of what a supplementary line might look like on Carling, but we do not have any of LRT running in a residential or park setting, as McC pointed out:

Originally Posted by McC

This isn't even a case of "amateur hour", there's no communications strategy whatsoever around the western LRT process. Decision around, and consistent use of, language to describe the options, along with artist sketches of what each of the options might look like is a bare minimum!

At this point, we're left to figuring it out for ourselves, and in a city like Ottawa where the Transitway is most people's experience with rapid transit, it doesn't make for a terribly good starting point.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Dado

The light rail precedents we have in Canada both use fencing.

Here's as similar a locale as I can find in Calgary, on the Northwest line. Ignore the grade crossing and look instead at the barrier separating the road (think Richmond) from the LRT line and the fence separating the LRT line from the park behind (the Byron tramway park).

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&sourc...,114.62,,0,2.9

Also in Calgary, the Sunnyside area has barriers, which are relatively tasteful as barriers go, but still barriers (again, ignoring the grade crossing, which we may or may not get):

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&sourc...98.93,,0,11.81


From Edmonton, we have a couple more examples. This one shows two types of barrier; a masonry wall in the background alongside a pathway (the pedestrian is walking on it, as on the Byron side) while on the near side against the road (Richmond side) is a barrier consisting of a two chains suspended between poles:

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&sourc...329.12,,1,4.47

Edmonton seems particularly partial to this suspended double chain fencing, at least on their newest extension. Here's another example further south:

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&sourc...2,75.08,,0,0.3

That fence isn't going to outright prevent anyone determined to cross from crossing, but it ought to give them pause before doing so. Still, I do wonder how the "think of the children" types would react to this.

I really doubt we'd be able to get away from fencing here in Ottawa. I would not be surprised if the Carling supplementary line ends up with fencing too. I think I would go with the Edmonton double chain fencing since it is the least obtrusive and acts least as a full barrier and more like a warning, but I don't know if we can overcome the fact that it can be overcome.

I vote for a modern interpretation of Calgary #2. Masonry walls, jersey barriers and concrete shouldn’t even be considered.

[McC]

Originally Posted by Dado

At this point, we're left to figuring it out for ourselves, and in a city like Ottawa where the Transitway is most people's experience with rapid transit, it doesn't make for a terribly good starting point.

indeed.

[McC]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I vote for a modern interpretation of Calgary #2. Masonry walls, jersey barriers and concrete shouldn’t even be considered.

I liked the examples pulled from YEG, myself. Simple. Flexible. Clear that you ought not cross, unless...