Rideau Street Renewal

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Lightspotting

Not saying this is a bad idea but fundamentally I disagree with the idea of pushing bicycles away from a street filled with shopping/employment. Rideau street is a destination for cyclists, not just a pass through.

Why, then, are cycling advocates always quite keen, or at very least, deliberately blind and deaf, to the same problem when it involves pushing transit off to parallel streets?

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by JayBuoy

It is a matter of what is politically salient, not what is possible. Remove cars from Rideau and you will have plenty of space for transit lanes and active transportation. But this is not currently possible given the political climate.

It's also not possible given simple geometry. Cars aren't going away, and whether we want them to or not, they still need room. They don't need all of it, but on streets like Rideau-Montreal, given the constraints, we can have better bus transit, better cycling space... but it is physically impossible to have both.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

No one is saying that there'd be no through-traffic routes. It's just that Rideau isn't actually a major car route.

It might not be a major car route for movements between disparate parts of the city, but yes, it is still a major car route. Not all car movement is regional.

On the other hand, measures to create a usable avenue for other modes would not only be better for those modes, but also shift people out of cars (and reduce congestion) on the other routes.

That's all well and fine until those "measures to create a usable avenue for other modes", as they inevitably have done in Ottawa, start resulting in even worse transit service in the urban area that most needs excellent transit service.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by JayBuoy

Montreal is getting rebuilt as well. Its not exactly the ideal route for crossing town.

Which is not really what Montreal Road has been for in any event since the Queensway was built and sprawl began to sprawl, but the fact that Montreal Road, or any other urban main route, isn't a crosstown route, is not reason enough to do stupid things to those streets, by design, which make urban transit even worse.

But that's what Ottawa keeps doing to its urban communities. If you want to live in a neighbourhood with high-quality transit in Ottawa, the perverse incentive is that you have to leave the city centre and move outside the Greenbelt.

This needs to stop, but between the political right's pro-sprawl, pro-suburb ethos, and the political left's fixation on bike lanes everywhere, there's not a lot of room left in the geographical middle for public transit. And some of us are starting to get mad about that.

[JayBuoy]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Which is not really what Montreal Road has been for in any event since the Queensway was built and sprawl began to sprawl, but the fact that Montreal Road, or any other urban main route, isn't a crosstown route, is not reason enough to do stupid things to those streets, by design, which make urban transit even worse.

But that's what Ottawa keeps doing to its urban communities. If you want to live in a neighbourhood with high-quality transit in Ottawa, the perverse incentive is that you have to leave the city centre and move outside the Greenbelt.

This needs to stop, but between the political right's pro-sprawl, pro-suburb ethos, and the political left's fixation on bike lanes everywhere, there's not a lot of room left in the geographical middle for public transit. And some of us are starting to get mad about that.

I was simply replying to LRT's friend who suggested it is vital to keep space for car traffic because it is one of the few ways of crossing town. Otherwise it seems like we mostly agree. I'm mainly arguing that we could further provide dedicated space for buses on Rideau-Montreal by eliminating through traffic of cars.

Ottawa keeps "doing that" to its urban communities because it refuses to stop privileging the personal automobile in its planning. Ottawa also refuses to effectively fund OCTranspo. Imagine if the choice is between cars+buses and cars+active transportation. Which is cheaper and which requires added funding for OCTranspo.

Also I think you might be shoehorning anyone pro-bike lanes as left wing. I'm not so sold on that idea. Left wing urban planning is so much more holistic than adding a few bike lanes.

[lrt's friend]

I want to mention that we tried the bus mall idea before on Rideau with disastrous consequences for business.

Do local residents want to re-route traffic onto less commercial and more residential streets? It appears that they simply want downtown to themselves. This is not going to make downtown the vibrant people place that everybody wants nor will it help businesses downtown to succeed. It is not going to make downtown the meeting place of the city. There needs to be balance.

I have seen on this board that downtown is going to be a people place by getting more people to live there. That is fine, but if downtown is not the meeting place for the whole city, then Ottawa is going to be decentralized sprawl, even more than it is today. Meeting places will be everywhere which requires a car to get there. It will be worse than today, much worse.

Our transit plans are not going to change this fundamentally. Transit on one route into downtown is not going to bring enough people downtown. I live inside the Greenbelt and it makes using transit to go downtown less convenient, not more convenient. This has nothing to do with one seat express buses. I do not need to commute.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by JayBuoy

I was simply replying to LRT's friend who suggested it is vital to keep space for car traffic because it is one of the few ways of crossing town. Otherwise it seems like we mostly agree. I'm mainly arguing that we could further provide dedicated space for buses on Rideau-Montreal by eliminating through traffic of cars.

Ottawa keeps "doing that" to its urban communities because it refuses to stop privileging the personal automobile in its planning. Ottawa also refuses to effectively fund OCTranspo. Imagine if the choice is between cars+buses and cars+active transportation. Which is cheaper and which requires added funding for OCTranspo.

Also I think you might be shoehorning anyone pro-bike lanes as left wing. I'm not so sold on that idea. Left wing urban planning is so much more holistic than adding a few bike lanes.

That was not what I was saying. I said it was the best, and perhaps only east-west route through downtown assuming your destination was in or near downtown. Obviously, you would use the Queensway to cross the city. Closing Rideau to general traffic means that this traffic will go through the market, Besserer or Laurier. Is that really more desirable?

[Aylmer]

Geez, it seems like space, time, and Western Civilization are held up by a single lane per direction on one little street in Ottawa

[caveat.doctor]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

the problem on Rideau is lack of width and most importantly, transit. Any reduction in the number of lanes on Rideau Street would mean giving up the transit lanes. Given how important transit is on this corridor, I don't think that would be acceptable.

Having a cycling facility on Besserer would allow cyclists to park within a block of almost all destinations on Rideau.

This would be the most feasible solution to 1) provide transit priority on Rideau, 2) improve cyclist safety by removing conflict with vehicle traffic, 3) accepting that, as much as reducing car traffic is an ideal, it is still the means of choice for many of our neighbours. Adjusting Rideau to add both bike lanes and transit priority by removing traffic lanes would shift cars to the neighbouring streets, which would be less desirable for the people who actually live there.

I think of the Vancouver example of Broadway as a sustainable main street for all modes, functional for both car traffic and a bus rapid transit line - the busiest bus route in Canada and the US - with a safe and useful cycling route parallel to it on the mainly-residential street just one block north. This keeps vehicle traffic on the main road and quieter bike traffic around people's homes.

[Aylmer]

It's worth pointing out that if we were to restrict the Cummings Bridge to transit and bikes only at rush hour, there's no way for traffic to jump the Rideau river to clog up Besserer or whatever. Insofar as it might, traffic would move to St Patrick and the Queensway, neither of which are local streets.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

That was not what I was saying. I said it was the best, and perhaps only east-west route through downtown assuming your destination was in or near downtown. Obviously, you would use the Queensway to cross the city. Closing Rideau to general traffic means that this traffic will go through the market, Besserer or Laurier. Is that really more desirable?

Travelling by car between the east and west sides of the canal downtown is huge PITA, and it gets progressively worse as you move southwards from the market.

The area around the Union Mission (Waller-Daly-Besserer) and also around Laurier is a mess of no turn signs, one-way streets, buses only lanes and trucks only lanes.

If making Rideau St. more attractive is truly a goal of the city (which it should be IMO) then there are measures that could be taken in order to make crossing downtown easier on those streets away from Rideau.

As it stands now with Rideau closures in recent years and the confusing mess south of Rideau, the market is probably the go-to east-west route for many drivers in that area.

I don't think that's desirable either.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Travelling by car between the east and west sides of the canal downtown is huge PITA, and it gets progressively worse as you move southwards from the market.

The area around the Union Mission (Waller-Daly-Besserer) and also around Laurier is a mess of no turn signs, one-way streets, buses only lanes and trucks only lanes.

If making Rideau St. more attractive is truly a goal of the city (which it should be IMO) then there are measures that could be taken in order to make crossing downtown easier on those streets away from Rideau.

As it stands now with Rideau closures in recent years and the confusing mess south of Rideau, the market is probably the go-to east-west route for many drivers in that area.

I don't think that's desirable either.

When I'm south of the Market and heading east, I generally use Laurier to Charlotte, although that's less attractive right now with the Montreal Rd exercise in futility.

[J.OT13]

When I was attending La Cité Collégiale and driving (2008-2014) to and from the west end, I would often use Montréal-Rideau-Wellington-Ottawa River Parkway to avoid Queensway traffic. It was at the time quite convenient. Plenty of lights, but at least we were moving. I would sometimes use Laurier or St-Patrick, but those streets had more j-walkers and cyclists so I would try to avoid them as much as possible.

[JayBuoy]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

That was not what I was saying. I said it was the best, and perhaps only east-west route through downtown assuming your destination was in or near downtown. Obviously, you would use the Queensway to cross the city. Closing Rideau to general traffic means that this traffic will go through the market, Besserer or Laurier. Is that really more desirable?

does anyone have a source for statistics on Montreal-Rideau traffic volumes/origin/destination? I'm curious now.
I'm certainly aware that its basically impossible politically to close Rideau to cars, that said, yes I think it would be more desirable. Especially if there is a strong delineation between the areas that are pedestrianized (e.g. the core market) and the areas that are not (currently everywhere). If it increases congestion, the congestion itself would discourage people from driving. And I'm also suggesting a transit-dominated street. Full protected bus lanes. Maybe service would be better . Perhaps they would evaluate other modes of transportation, and select a different way of getting around.

[JayBuoy]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I want to mention that we tried the bus mall idea before on Rideau with disastrous consequences for business.

Do local residents want to re-route traffic onto less commercial and more residential streets? It appears that they simply want downtown to themselves. This is not going to make downtown the vibrant people place that everybody wants nor will it help businesses downtown to succeed. It is not going to make downtown the meeting place of the city. There needs to be balance.

I have seen on this board that downtown is going to be a people place by getting more people to live there. That is fine, but if downtown is not the meeting place for the whole city, then Ottawa is going to be decentralized sprawl, even more than it is today. Meeting places will be everywhere which requires a car to get there. It will be worse than today, much worse.

Our transit plans are not going to change this fundamentally. Transit on one route into downtown is not going to bring enough people downtown. I live inside the Greenbelt and it makes using transit to go downtown less convenient, not more convenient. This has nothing to do with one seat express buses. I do not need to commute.

Sprawl has little to do with ethereal questions of a place's desirability. In the last ten years there has been a huge rejuvenation of interest in cities, but that has not been met with a big reduction in sprawl. Sprawl will continue so long as it is legally allowed.

Removing car lanes to privilege transit and active transportation would not only improve transit, but turn the street into a destination in and of itself. A "meeting place".
Currently, our transit system is designed to shuttle people from the suburbs to and from downtown. The central area also has a much higher concentration of services as a result of its density. It will always be a destination or meeting place in some capacity as a result of that.

Balance, in my humble opinion, is not unfairly advantaging cars in the street geometry. For example, in the market some 40% walked to work at the 2016 census, while a further 25% took transit, and 25% drove. Urban policy does not reflect how people downtown get around. Downtown residents are right to demand that transit and active transportation be privileged.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by JayBuoy

does anyone have a source for statistics on Montreal-Rideau traffic volumes/origin/destination? I'm curious now.
I'm certainly aware that its basically impossible politically to close Rideau to cars, that said, yes I think it would be more desirable. Especially if there is a strong delineation between the areas that are pedestrianized (e.g. the core market) and the areas that are not (currently everywhere). If it increases congestion, the congestion itself would discourage people from driving. And I'm also suggesting a transit-dominated street. Full protected bus lanes. Maybe service would be better . Perhaps they would evaluate other modes of transportation, and select a different way of getting around.

You wouldn't even really need to outright ban cars from Rideau to get a street with reliable transit and adequate sidewalks and bicycle infrastructure. All you need is to limit car traffic to those trips which are headed *to* Rideau and local destinations.

Maybe even just during the handful of congestion-prone hours of the day (6-9h, 15-18h), only pedestrians, buses, and bicycles are allowed to cross the Cummings Bridge and perhaps another line around King Edward. Any cars heading to or from buildings on Rideau itself can still use the street. But local traffic isn't enough to significantly affect transit performance. That allows the street to be narrowed to just two vehicular lanes. The leftover 7-8m of space can then be allocated to safe cycling infrastructure, wider sidewalks, trees, patio space, etc. It can even help to make driving more convenient with street parking and delivery bays in some areas.

A lot of people bring up the fact that not 100% of people can access shops without a car 100% of the time. It's hard to disagree with that assertion - it could apply to pretty much anything at all. But that doesn't mean that anyone's entitled to use any street as a through-route. Between full pedestrianization/transit mall-ification and unrestricted vehicular movement, there's the seldom-used option of filtering the kind of car traffic that uses the street. Yes, let people drive to shops, but no, you can't use this street to cross town at rush hour. And in exchange, we give local traffic/deliveries, bikes, transit, pedestrians, and patio patrons the space they need.

[eltodesukane]

Rideau Street 2020 august 15

[Harley613]

It would be nice if they built a little courtyard and high wall around the entrance of that Mcdonald's like they are doing at the entrance of the new Salvation Army shelter in Vanier.

[FutureWickedCity]

Could the city just zone fast food off that entire block? The Timmies is almost as sketchy as the McDonalds

[OTownandDown]

I still have a problem with the logic of keeping the bridge 4-lanes of car traffic, when the 'before' and 'after' in both directions is cut down to just two lanes. Yes, during rush hour there's 4 lanes on Montreal Road, but most of the time only two lanes are available. Would reducing the bridge to 2 lanes *really* create a pinch point that would shut down traffic?

At locations where left and right turns are needed, expand the traffic lanes. Otherwise why do we need 4 lanes?