Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa
I don't know. The mayor may be a "good guy" in general (I wouldn't mind having him as an uncle or neighbour or something) and I enjoy his sarcastic tweets but on transit issues he has been quite duplicitous over the last few years. When the Confederation Line was Larry O'Brian's idea he was going out of his way to undermine it (terrorism fear mongering, doing a particularly bad job of getting provincial funding while he was in cabinet - to the extent it is the worst funded transit project in the province) then when he realized it was popular with voters he flip flopped and campaigned in favour of it for mayor. Then just before the last election he scrapped the city's staged transit expansion plan with a giant "phase 2" with lines all over the city. Obviously it was a cheap election stunt (since there is little chance of getting funding together for a multipart phase 2) but he was running unopposed (basically) and didn't need a cheap election stunt. On the western line (and I just mentioned this so sorry for duplicating) he has only looked for the "low cost" solution on land owned by the NCC. On city land he is pushing for a particularly high cost solution (a tunnel) despite there being plenty of room for an at-grade or open cut line. Moreover (again sorry for duplicating) he has pushed out options that use the transit RoW (the co-called linear park) near where he lives. Good guy, maybe, good guy in the transit debate, not so much.
|
Everybody knows I have been quite critical of the decisions that have been made concerning LRT, however, I am more sympathetic towards Jim Watson's role in all of this.
Jim Watson, while a provincial politician, was skeptical of the cost of a downtown tunnel and was frustrated by Larry O'Brien's decision to skuttle the first plan, which cost the city millions. The provincial government could not condone the cancellation of a signed contract of this size. After all, this was not the example that was to be encouraged in other projects or in other cities. There was a penalty to be paid for being irresponsible and pressure to rein in costs in what had exploded into a much larger project than had originally been intended. This is why a less than ideal funding arrangement was offered.
Yes, Jim Watson had a change of heart when he became mayor but it wasn't really about the popularity of the new plan but rather that the city could not possibly press the reset the button a second time in four years. If any progress was to be made, the second plan had to proceed. The credibility of the city of Ottawa depended on it. As we saw, Jim Watson also put his stamp on it by rationalizing the original tunnel plan in order to keep costs under control.
But the first phase also dictated the route of the second phase and there was a need to get this moving as soon as possible after completion of the first phase. LRT ending at Tunney's Pasture in the long-term would simply not be acceptable to the public. So he had to find a way to extend LRT westward at a cost that the city could afford. This involved trying to satisfy as many people as possible that LRT would have a minimum of disruption while not breaking the bank. This became the route that the NCC rejected. Realistically, a surface LRT route along Byron would never sell to the community as a similar Transitway could not be sold 30 years ago. In this day and age, you cannot force a busy railway line through a residential area as could be done 100 or 150 years ago. Times have changed and communities will challenge unpopular decisions as we saw at Lansdowne Park. This could be much worse with the wrong plan.
From what I see, Jim Watson is doing what is possible. He has demonstrated an ability to work through complex issues to come up with a reasonable solution and bring projects to completion. Jim Watson is a skilled politician and I expect he will find a way to work towards a solution for the western LRT extension.
Threaded Mode