[lrt's friend]

More attractive

The Ottawa Citizen


Thursday, November 20, 2008


Finally, there is a light-rail transit plan that makes good sense.

The Leadman-Doucet plan looks like it was designed by people who might actually use rapid transit. It's based on rail -- faster, greener and more attractive to users. The routes follow logical paths people actually travel to logical destinations people actually go to -- the whole city is included.

It's the first plan that envisions an Ottawa of the future -- a major city that needs an efficient, attractive, up-to-date transit system.

I would add a few missing stations such as the airport, west Orléans and Moody Avenue areas. But these are minor issues.

Affordability? Any plan is affordable if the implementation timeframe is properly structured and it will be more affordable if it attracts users. This plan will. Good work. Keep fighting. This is a winner.

David Porter,

Ottawa

© The Ottawa Citizen 2008

A rail plan that makes a lot of sense

The Ottawa Citizen


Thursday, November 20, 2008


Re: Councillors pitch quicker rail remedy, Nov. 18.

I like the alternative light-rail transit plan proposed by Capital Councillor Clive Doucet and Kitchissippi Councillor Christine Leadman far more than the existing city staff plan.

Shifting people out of diesel buses onto electric light rail and streetcars decades sooner makes a lot of sense environmentally and economically.

A rail line on Carling Avenue, where people live instead of a longer route along the deserted Ottawa River Parkway, will both preserve the riverside scenery and encourage more people to use public transport. Reducing cross-river bridge traffic by extending the O-Train is very sensible.

In contrast, the city's "old-is-new" plan of expanding bus networks and delaying light-rail transit will result in 20-year delays in bringing rail to the suburbs. And who is to say the city will even be able to find or afford diesel fuel for its buses in 20 years. Hasn't the city's planning department factored in the forthcoming end of relatively cheap, dependable oil supplies into their thinking? And the objection that rail should only go where population densities are high enough is simply silly. Population growth can be made to follow transit nodes. Otherwise why bother having a planning department at all?

Peter Outridge,

Ottawa

© The Ottawa Citizen 2008

Moving congestion

The Ottawa Citizen


Thursday, November 20, 2008


I reject the proposed plan by Clive Doucet because it creates deteriorating transit service levels.

The proposal to have only seven stops on Carling Avenue will deter transit riders. The proposal to have light-rail transit on Carling will mean lines of trains at the intersections, where there are numerous stop lights compared to the other alternatives (Byron and the Ottawa River Parkway). The proposal to have light-rail transit on Carling amounts to the suggestion of moving transit congestion out of downtown Ottawa, onto Carling.

Carling is too slow for rapid transit, will not remove a significant number of buses from Ottawa streets, and will increase travel time for residents and businesses along the corridor (unless you happen to live at the precise stops it would make).

Michael Mielke,

Ottawa

© The Ottawa Citizen 2008

I had extensive debates with Michael during the on-line public consultations. His views were thoughtful.

The mayor just indicated on CFRA that the environmental assessment for the western Transitway will include the Carling Avenue alternative route. Is he being entirely truthful about this?