2023 Transportation Master Plan

[J.OT13]

Moffatt: Zombies, fairies and dragons in Ottawa’s new transportation plan
This fantasy document won't solve our traffic problems. But other cities have found a way to slay bottlenecks.

Author of the article:By Jordan Moffatt, Ottawa Citizen
Published May 01, 2025

Long-range transportation planning always involves some element of fantasy. The future is impossible to predict: Who would have anticipated the upheaval in transportation patterns we’ve seen since 2020? But even with that caveat, Ottawa’s draft new Transportation Master Plan (TMP), released April 1, is an unusually fantastical document.

And much like other classics in the fantasy genre, the new TMP is filled with zombies, fairies, and dragons.

Let’s start with the zombies. These are transportation plans that aren’t quite alive, but never seem to die. Take the Alta Vista Transportation Corridor (AVTC), a proposed four-lane arterial extending Conroy Road north to Highway 417 at Nicholas Street. It’s been in the city’s planning books since the 1950s, but has never been built (save for a small Hospital Link stub). In the new TMP, the AVTC lives again — though Coun. Shawn Menard took a proverbial machete and chopped off one of its arms (the north section through the so-called “People’s Park,” a bare field on Lees Avenue).

Even in this compromised form, the zombie trudges on, hungry for brains — or, in this case, hungry to pave over the Kilborn Allotment Gardens. Will this undead foe never be vanquished?

Next, the fairies: transportation projects with magical powers despite their possible non-existence. The 2013 TMP called these part of the “Ultimate Network”; the 2025 edition places them in the “Needs-Based” network. In plain English, they are projects without any funding or timeline attached to them.

Yet even though these might not be real, they still carry real power. For years, the city has been approving highrises on Carling Avenue under the pretence that their residents would be one day served by an LRT line. This was obviously never built and the new TMP has replaced it with bus rapid transit (BRT), expected construction … to be determined. All that’s actually planned for Carling by 2046 are regular bus lanes of the non-rapid variety. It’s transit-oriented development without the transit: magic! Time will tell if the Stage 3 LRT to Kanata-Stittsville and Barrhaven is a fairy or the real thing.

Finally, the most terrifying mythical creatures lurking in the shadows of the TMP: the dragons of cost and congestion.

Ottawa is set to grow from one to 1.4 million people in the next 25 years. We can handle that many people, but we sure can’t fit that many new cars on the roads. That’s why Ottawa’s Official Plan set the target of shifting the majority of trips to walking, cycling, transit and carpooling by 2046. The new TMP throws cold water on that idea — calling it “difficult to achieve.” And what’s the point of trying something difficult? Instead, the TMP keeps the majority of travel to be done by drivers, which will add an anticipated 542,000 car trips per day to Ottawa’s roads. More cars mean more traffic and slower commutes.

The problem is we can’t afford the infrastructure required to substantially increase sustainable transportation under the city’s current revenue framework. Implementing the transit projects identified in the “Needs-Based” network would cost more than $13 billion. Daunting costs or standstill traffic: Here be dragons.

But these twin beasts can be slain with one sword: road pricing. As New York City recently discovered, charging drivers for using the currently free-to-use streets eases congestion by shifting people to trains, buses and bikes while simultaneously raising revenues to build more needed infrastructure. Unfortunately, it takes courageous political leadership to pull that excalibur from the stone (i.e. opposition from car commuters).

The City of Ottawa needs to get real with transportation planning for a future that relies less on cars. Instead, it has produced a draft master plan full of zombies, fairies and dragons. But if you’re into that sort of thing and have some time to spare, pour a cup of tea, sit in your comfiest chair, and give the new plan a read. It’s just like Onyx Storm, only without the romance.

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/zombies-fairies-dragons-transportation

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Multi-modal

Recent history would say you may be right, but I hope you are wrong.

I hate being right. Sometimes.

[Uhuniau]

Oh, I also note that part of the watered-down ambitionless vision for central Ottawa includes isolated "tactical improvements" to bus stops or other street features, with Elgin Street being identified as a candidate for such "tactical improvements".

The same Elgin Street that was rebuilt within the past decade. With some features that us bus riders said, at the time, would be problematic. And now the street is a "candidate" for tactical improvement because the transit still sucks.

Great going, guys. At least you sacrificed transit in the name of cycling infrastructure that the cyclists also complain isn't enough.

[Lakeofthewood]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Oh, I also note that part of the watered-down ambitionless vision for central Ottawa includes isolated "tactical improvements" to bus stops or other street features, with Elgin Street being identified as a candidate for such "tactical improvements".

The same Elgin Street that was rebuilt within the past decade. With some features that us bus riders said, at the time, would be problematic. And now the street is a "candidate" for tactical improvement because the transit still sucks.

Great going, guys. At least you sacrificed transit in the name of cycling infrastructure that the cyclists also complain isn't enough.

Proposed new slogan. The City of Ottawa: "Where everyone loses".

[phil235]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Oh, I also note that part of the watered-down ambitionless vision for central Ottawa includes isolated "tactical improvements" to bus stops or other street features, with Elgin Street being identified as a candidate for such "tactical improvements".

The same Elgin Street that was rebuilt within the past decade. With some features that us bus riders said, at the time, would be problematic. And now the street is a "candidate" for tactical improvement because the transit still sucks.

Great going, guys. At least you sacrificed transit in the name of cycling infrastructure that the cyclists also complain isn't enough.

Elgin Street doesn't have any cycling infrastructure, except for a block at the very south end. Transit speed was "sacrificed" for wider sidewalks and patios. Personally, I still think that tradeoff makes sense. Elgin is a great street now, and the clearest sign of that is that it really flourished through the pandemic.

If faster transit speeds are the goal, why not route transit up Metcalfe? You're never going to have fast transit on a street like Elgin, unless you go underground.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by phil235

Elgin Street doesn't have any cycling infrastructure, except for a block at the very south end. Transit speed was "sacrificed" for wider sidewalks and patios. Personally, I still think that tradeoff makes sense. Elgin is a great street now, and the clearest sign of that is that it really flourished through the pandemic.

If faster transit speeds are the goal, why not route transit up Metcalfe? You're never going to have fast transit on a street like Elgin, unless you go underground.

For a restaurant district like Elgin, what was done makes sense. Montreal Road though should have been transit first.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

For a restaurant district like Elgin, what was done makes sense. Montreal Road though should have been transit first.

Agreed. There needs to be a transit corridor to the east that is north of the Queensway. It's crazy that the powers that be have ignored that entire area.

[lrt's friend]

30 kph speed limits are ridiculous. By all means, 40 kph, but at 30, you are basically riding your brakes.

As someone who lives inside the Greenbelt and transit is no longer viable for going downtown (now 2 transfers required), we keep putting roadblocks up to reach downtown. Why go there?

This is a sad statement but true.

I usually participate in Heritage Day at City Hall, but access gets worse every year. Now, we need to be searched with our exhibits. Oh my. What a pain. After this year's horrible parking and traffic experience, I can't imagine going with the new added hassle.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

30 kph speed limits are ridiculous. By all means, 40 kph, but at 30, you are basically riding your brakes.

As someone who lives inside the Greenbelt and transit is no longer viable for going downtown (now 2 transfers required), we keep putting roadblocks up to reach downtown. Why go there?

This is a sad statement but true.

I usually participate in Heritage Day at City Hall, but access gets worse every year. Now, we need to be searched with our exhibits. Oh my. What a pain. After this year's horrible parking and traffic experience, I can't imagine going with the new added hassle.

I agree that the security at city hall is a shame. On the other hand, I think you are vastly overstating how much 30 kmph speed limits are a roadblock. They are basically exclusively on residential streets, or on the odd commercial street with tonnes of pedestrians and traffic speeds that rarely exceed 30 kmph anyway.

Where do you hit a 30 kmph speed limit going downtown from the south end to city hall? I would have thought you could use Riverside to the 417 to Nicolas to Laurier. None of those are 30 kmph streets. And even if you decide to take Elgin, how much time does it actually add to your trip? 60 seconds?

[lrt's friend]

My comment was general combining both transit and car travel. Both ways are becoming a royal pain. No way am I going to use the 417 from where I live. I experienced Nicholas, the last time and it was a total nightmare. Besides, City Hall is too far from Line 1 when you are trying to carry an exhibit.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

My comment was general combining both transit and car travel. Both ways are becoming a royal pain. No way am I going to use the 417 from where I live. I experienced Nicholas, the last time and it was a total nightmare. Besides, City Hall is too far from Line 1 when you are trying to carry an exhibit.

I get that transit doesn't work well for those purposes. But car travel to city hall on the weekend is generally a breeze, unless its Race Weekend or Canada Day. It's my go-to lot when I need to park downtown.

I would much rather drive around downtown on the weekend than spend a second on Merivale or Innes.

[Uhuniau]

The latest sad-sack update.

https://engage.ottawa.ca/transportation-...tation-master-plan-phase-5-consultations

[rocketphish]

Projects Screened From Needs-Based Network (among others)

https://engage.ottawa.ca/11511/widgets/45934/documents/154224

Bank Street Subway
Subway under Bank Street and Wellington Street connecting Parliament Station and Walkley Station. Enables higher capacity event service to Lansdowne Park. Could serve as an alternative to double tracking O-Train Line 2 from Walkley to Bayview.

• Adequate ridership levels for surface rapid transit but does not meet ridership levels for underground rapid transit. Extremely high cost; complex and constrained urban context. Corridor will be reviewed for isolated transit priority measures through lane conversion or parking removal.

Rideau Street / Montreal Road Subway - 1
Subway along Rideau and Montreal Road, from Rideau Station and St Laurent Blvd

• Adequate ridership levels for surface rapid transit but does not meet ridership levels for underground rapid transit. Extremely high cost; complex and constrained urban context. Corridor will be reviewed for isolated transit priority measures through lane conversion or parking removal.

Rideau Street / Montreal Road Subway - 2
Subway along Rideau and Montreal Road, from St Laurent Boulevard to Montreal Road Station

• Adequate ridership levels for surface rapid transit but does not meet ridership levels for underground rapid transit. Extremely high cost; complex and constrained urban context. Corridor will be reviewed for isolated transit priority measures through lane conversion or parking removal.

[J.OT13]

Wow, they actually sort of looked at these subway options!?

• Adequate ridership levels for surface rapid transit but does not meet ridership levels for underground rapid transit: ridership levels could be higher if the current transit wasn't terrible.
• Extremely high cost; complex and constrained urban context: cause Stage 3 doesn't have an extremely high cost? And wouldn't a constrained urban context call for a subway?
• Corridor will be reviewed for isolated transit priority measures through lane conversion or parking removal: and how would you do that with Montreal Road that was just rebuilt with only three lanes?

I think with Bank we could start with bus lanes or a QED Transitway as a proof of concept before moving on a subway in 20 years, but Montreal has no chance of decent surface transit with the current configuration. You'd think Rideau Street and Vanier would have enough density (and more coming) to really consider the option. Instead we have station in farm fields. Great use of funds.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Wow, they actually sort of looked at these subway options!?

Very superficially, I think. But it really doesn't seem to me that they have looked at ANYTHING to help fix the urban bus schmozzle.

[Richard Eade]

I think that this revision is really indicative about how much thought staff put into creating this TMP in the first place. What did they get? Somewhere around 450 comments, and those resulted in a number of technical re-evaluations that over-turned the original plan.

[Seriously, about 450 written comments? Obviously, Engage Ottawa really doesn’t. With so few comments, staff’s first thought should be that the results are insignificant, and they should be working to get a MUCH bigger sample.]

Don’t get me wrong. I think that adjusting the plan based on public feed-back is a good thing. But if the technical evaluation changed so dramatically after a comment, how solid was the original evaluation?

Then there is the problem of allowing the public to ‘drive’ the TMP recommendations. Sure, a lot of those written comments were from Orleans – and they are complaining about how congested the drive into the city has been – therefore, there NEEDS to be road widening, and it needs to be NOW.

The construction of the eastern leg of the LRT has really screwed up traffic for years. Of course roads are congested when highway lanes are closed off and the alternative, the bus service, is unreliable. But the LRT is scheduled to be up and running fairly soon. Give the train a chance, and see if a reliable transit link can reduce the road traffic. Also, I expect that the re-opening of the highway lanes will also help. Don’t rush to build more road-lanes based on the last few years of turmoil.

There is no value in building new roads and widening others just to funnel more traffic onto an already crowded 417. Also, there will be major head-aches for traffic on the 417 as bridges get replaced in the near future – especially the one over the canal.

The best solution for Orleans is to create frequent, reliable transit into the core. This should relieve congestion from the main road links so that those who actually need to drive have roads that function. This is more of a ‘Carrot’ than a ‘Stick’. By providing much better transit, it becomes the preferred method of transportation.

I am using Orleans as an example of how technical evaluation really doesn’t seem to have been the driving force in selecting what is included in this TMP. It seems that they simply took the 2013 TMP and started cutting out things that they feel are too expensive. This TMP is no longer a vision toward the future. It has become a ‘Where can we slap a Band-Aid on so that we get fewer complaints’ operation. This is more of a medium-range spending document – if another level of government helps with the funding.

I simply don’t know how the Councilors can accept this type of thing from staff.

[I recognize that this post sounds critical of city staff. I am ‘venting’ my frustration with the entire process. It is not a critique of any individual. This type of thing is what staff has been guided to do by Council’s blind acceptance of what it has received in the past.]

[lrt's friend]

The solution on Bank is 30 kph speed limits and more bike lanes, both which definitely offer transit priority

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by phil235

Elgin Street doesn't have any cycling infrastructure, except for a block at the very south end. Transit speed was "sacrificed" for wider sidewalks and patios. Personally, I still think that tradeoff makes sense. Elgin is a great street now, and the clearest sign of that is that it really flourished through the pandemic.

If faster transit speeds are the goal, why not route transit up Metcalfe? You're never going to have fast transit on a street like Elgin, unless you go underground.

Faster speeds aren't the goal in and of themselves. Our urban transit plan, since the only urban transit urban Ottawa is permitted to have is buses running on surface streets, has to be to keep buses reliably moving. But we are not willing to do anything that might aid in that goal, and some of our idiot councillors keep doing things that have actually made things worse.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Faster speeds aren't the goal in and of themselves. Our urban transit plan, since the only urban transit urban Ottawa is permitted to have is buses running on surface streets, has to be to keep buses reliably moving. But we are not willing to do anything that might aid in that goal, and some of our idiot councillors keep doing things that have actually made things worse.

Correct. The first thing that was said when it was suggested to install bus lanes on Bank Street was to encourage bike use in those lanes. This constrains bus speeds by the slowest cyclists. So what is gained by eliminating street parking is lost again. Do we really have a coherent plan for transit and cycling? It sounds more like appeasement to those with loudest lobby group.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Correct. The first thing that was said when it was suggested to install bus lanes on Bank Street was to encourage bike use in those lanes. This constrains bus speeds by the slowest cyclists. So what is gained by eliminating street parking is lost again. Do we really have a coherent plan for transit and cycling? It sounds more like appeasement to those with loudest lobby group.

I am trying to remember when a political dispute between the "transit" and "cycling" camps during mainstreet-rebuild projects was ever resolved in favour of transit in this city.