Kanata LRT EA - Bayshore to Palladium

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

More cheap crappy-looking TOD, but TOD nonetheless.

Probably more like DITGVOT (Development in the General Vicinity of Transit), if Ottawa's 30-year failed experiment with bus crappid transit is anything to go on.

[MaxHeadroom]

Having a station at Moodie and 417 is a waste. Just move the station north to serve DND.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by MaxHeadroom

Having a station at Moodie and 417 is a waste. Just move the station north to serve DND.

Would mean building a new corridor through the Greenbelt. NCC would have a fit.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

But hey, seven stations for Kanatans. w00t!

No seven stations for those who live inside the greenbelt and want to go to one of the retail and entertainment businesses in Kanata. The vast majority of Kanata residents will be stuck with crappy hourly bus service and a slower commute.

[Arcologist]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Given those 3 stations, no walk in passengers, no walk in passengers, and no walk in passengers. Doesn't sound ideal to me. And I am talking about people actually living within reasonable walking distance of a station without having to cross anti-pedestrian development and roadways. It is bad when transit is entirely based on big business interests and automobile access.

As a resident of Kanata, will you actually use LRT if that is the station locations? During off-peak hours? And if you will, how will you access the stations?

So let's say for a moment that we did go ahead with 7 stations instead of 3 primary stations... what are the benefits? Very few, if you ask me. For starters, cost of construction and maintenance goes way up. And all for what? So that the few residents that live within walking distance of those four extra stations can easily access a bus without having to walk too far? What about the other 99% of residents in Kanata who will not benefit from those added stations?

Three "central" stations located on the Transitway and fed by frequent local bus service would be much more efficient in terms of dollars AND it would cut-down travel times on the Transitway.

I, for one, would make use of any of the three primary stations, though, because of Kanata's suburban sprawl layout, I'd have to rely on my car, bike or local bus service to get me there. I do it often enough as it is now: friends and I who live in Kanata South frequently carpool to Terry Fox Station or Eagleson Station to catch the bus to RedBlacks games. My wife also parks at the Park n Ride and buses to work everyday. Not sure how adding four stations will make things any better...

[Arcologist]

At most, Kanata could use 4 stops, but 7 is definitely overkill.

Eagleson Park n Ride
Pedestrian Overpass (would serve the new William's Court residential towers on North side of 417)
Terry Fox Park n Ride
Huntmar (combine both the Tanger and CTC stop into one stop at Huntmar/417 overpass)

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Would mean building a new corridor through the Greenbelt. NCC would have a fit.

I suspect that is less of an issue. The biggest issue is finding a convenient location for a station that is outside of DND's security perimeter (I don't think DND would want LRT to travel straight through the middle of their campus) and not too much of a detour. The reality is a shuttle to DND will likely be necessary and the current station location is probably fine for that.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Would mean building a new corridor through the Greenbelt. NCC would have a fit.

Good. The Brownbelt fetishism needs to be challenged.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by roger1818

No seven stations for those who live inside the greenbelt and want to go to one of the retail and entertainment businesses in Kanata. The vast majority of Kanata residents will be stuck with crappy hourly bus service and a slower commute.

Both the inside-the-greenbelters I know who have any inclination to visit Kanata are waiting until Air Canada or Porter put on a direct flight.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Arcologist

So let's say for a moment that we did go ahead with 7 stations instead of 3 primary stations... what are the benefits? Very few, if you ask me. For starters, cost of construction and maintenance goes way up. And all for what? So that the few residents that live within walking distance of those four extra stations can easily access a bus without having to walk too far? What about the other 99% of residents in Kanata who will not benefit from those added stations?

Three "central" stations located on the Transitway and fed by frequent local bus service would be much more efficient in terms of dollars AND it would cut-down travel times on the Transitway.

I, for one, would make use of any of the three primary stations, though, because of Kanata's suburban sprawl layout, I'd have to rely on my car, bike or local bus service to get me there. I do it often enough as it is now: friends and I who live in Kanata South frequently carpool to Terry Fox Station or Eagleson Station to catch the bus to RedBlacks games. My wife also parks at the Park n Ride and buses to work everyday. Not sure how adding four stations will make things any better...

I think there needs to an assessment of station locations, however, having only 3 stations all located at desolate oversized parking lots will not recreate Kanata into a more urban community. There needs to be one or two stations that actually serve residences and not just businesses. Whether we need 7 stations, that is another question, however, the popular three choices is not enough.

Also remember, that there is a reserved corridor going south from CTC that will eventually reach Stittsville. And with the Kanata north Transitway, we will eventually be reaching a much wider part of the population.

Unfortunately, the likelihood of having frequent local bus service is highly unlikely. And encouraging people to use Park n Rides does not make a less car dependent community.

The relatively frequent stops was exactly what I liked about the old N-S plan. A significant portion of both Riverside South and Barrhaven would have been within walking distance of a station. Yes, the trains would have been a little slower, but local hourly buses are a whole lot slower. It has often been said that many will walk up to 1 km to a frequent train over an infrequent bus. But, if we don't make that possible and put stations in the most anti-pedestrian locations, our success will be limited. That is why deferring a Jasmine station is not great news. It is an opportunity to make transit more attractive in that area, over the current very slow Route 12 (that I believe should continue to serve the area regardless).

[passwordisnt123]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I think there needs to an assessment of station locations, however, having only 3 stations all located at desolate oversized parking lots will not recreate Kanata into a more urban community.

I completely agree with you. However I'd only add that more stations also won't make Kanata into a more urban community. Nothing short of a significant earthquake or a nuclear bomb or a dramatic flood combined with a massive reconstruction effort could make Kanata into a more urban community.

Kanata is so fundamentally broken as a community, it is beyond repair. All the worst aspects of suburbia are baked into the recipe from the beginning and the best we can do as a city is to not throw good money after bad by building 7 (!) stations instead of a more sensible number like 3 stations with numerous bus collector lines and Park n Rides.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by passwordisnt123

I completely agree with you. However I'd only add that more stations also won't make Kanata into a more urban community. Nothing short of a significant earthquake or a nuclear bomb or a dramatic flood combined with a massive reconstruction effort could make Kanata into a more urban community.

Kanata is so fundamentally broken as a community, it is beyond repair. All the worst aspects of suburbia are baked into the recipe from the beginning and the best we can do as a city is to not throw good money after bad by building 7 (!) stations instead of a more sensible number like 3 stations with numerous bus collector lines and Park n Rides.

Then you are permanently baking in more suburban design philosophy. Not only will you have a permanently suburban form as view from behind the wheel of a car, you'll have it from the point of view of a transit user, too.

Repairing the suburbs has to start somewhere. I would recommend it start with an urban-planning version of the Hippocratic oath: First, do no harm.

[passwordisnt123]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Then you are permanently baking in more suburban design philosophy. Not only will you have a permanently suburban form as view from behind the wheel of a car, you'll have it from the point of view of a transit user, too.

Repairing the suburbs has to start somewhere. I would recommend it start with an urban-planning version of the Hippocratic oath: First, do no harm.

Repairing the suburbs is an almost impossible task. I seriously question whether it's even possible. However, if it is possible, I think it needs to start with improved connectivity and realigning streets to more closely resemble a standard grid plan.

In short, this is the reason why 7 stations is both obscene for Kanata and won't actually help make it into a more urban community:



When you design an entire community so as to make it impossible and unpleasant to walk anywhere, there's no point in putting 7 Confederation Line stations there since everybody is going to have to drive or bus to the station to begin with. Give it a try sometime. Try walking 1 km downtown and it'll feel like you haven't walked at all. Try walking 1 km in Kanata and you'll despair for existence and begin to look forward to the sweet release of death.

[lrt's friend]

If we want to make the suburbs more urban, we have to break with traditional suburban design including transportation. If we continue to do what we have always done, then 90%+ trips in the suburbs will continue to be by car. And we will pay dearly to support the infrastructure designed almost exclusively around cars. As the costs to maintain those wide boulevards continues to grow, there will be increasing pressure to cut transit service across the city and reduce other services such as snow removal. These cuts will not be limited to the parts of the city creating the additional costs, but the pain will be shared equally everywhere. That is why there was a trial balloon on reducing snow removal service recently. That is why we had a transit service rationalization a few years ago. The cost of expanding public services to the new car oriented suburbs is increasing faster than tax revenues. The only way to bring this under control is to reduce car dependence, which will allow us to build more compact communities.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by passwordisnt123

Repairing the suburbs is an almost impossible task. I seriously question whether it's even possible. However, if it is possible, I think it needs to start with improved connectivity and realigning streets to more closely resemble a standard grid plan.

In short, this is the reason why 7 stations is both obscene for Kanata and won't actually help make it into a more urban community:

I doubt that you can sell the grid to house buyers, but you can sell pedestrian connectivity by having walkways cross these disconnected cul de sacs and crescents at strategic locations. We are already doing better at that. Our design of retail in the suburbs is still very anti-pedestrian for the most part and needs great improvement. The big box model is very anti-pedestrian. The city needs to put their foot down on better design.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by passwordisnt123

Repairing the suburbs is an almost impossible task.

Just as happens in the older part of the city, infrastructure and buildings in the burbs are going to reach the end of their useful lives, and need to be replaced, starting later this century.

That task is going to be massive, and massively expensive. But it will have to happen.

When it does, and as it does, we can make better decisions. Or, you know, we can keep on building or rebuilding more of the same suburban crap that our official plans rail against, and yet which our politicians and municipal bureaucrats rubber-stamp.

Our call.

I seriously question whether it's even possible. However, if it is possible, I think it needs to start with improved connectivity and realigning streets to more closely resemble a standard grid plan.

This needs to be a policy in every city: as opportunities arise to do "repair" to suburbs by making them less post-war-suburban, those opportunities need to be taken.

Sadly, as noted in another thread, we keep approving suburban-style crap in otherwise urban settings. That needs to stop, too. It does not bode well for future suburb repairs that we are making the urbs more like suburbs.

In short, this is the reason why 7 stations is both obscene for Kanata and won't actually help make it into a more urban community:

It won't, immediately. But doing the opposite will do the opposite. So we shouldn't do the opposite.

When you design an entire community so as to make it impossible and unpleasant to walk anywhere, there's no point in putting 7 Confederation Line stations there since everybody is going to have to drive or bus to the station to begin with. Give it a try sometime. Try walking 1 km downtown and it'll feel like you haven't walked at all. Try walking 1 km in Kanata and you'll despair for existence and begin to look forward to the sweet release of death.

I am very familiar with the vastly different psychology of walking in an urban setting versus walking in the garbage suburbs of Ottawa and other cities.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

If we want to make the suburbs more urban, we have to break with traditional suburban design including transportation. If we continue to do what we have always done, then 90%+ trips in the suburbs will continue to be by car. And we will pay dearly to support the infrastructure designed almost exclusively around cars. As the costs to maintain those wide boulevards continues to grow, there will be increasing pressure to cut transit service across the city and reduce other services such as snow removal.

As a pilot project, let's cut snow clearing out in, oh, Bell's Corners.

The cost of expanding public services to the new car oriented suburbs is increasing faster than tax revenues. The only way to bring this under control is to reduce car dependence, which will allow us to build more compact communities.

And to re-engineer the way municipalities are financed so that the true cost of building and maintaining garbage suburbs is borne by those who want to live or do business there.

You want a squat one-storey commercial plaza surrounded by acres of parking and pointless "green" space? Great. Here's your bill.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I doubt that you can sell the grid to house buyers,

There's no evidence on which to base that doubt, given:

a) we don't build new grids any more, so there's no point of comparison, and
b) the value of land and resale homes in traditional grid neighbourhoods, and the year-over-year increase in those values, tends to outstrip that of garbage suburbs.

The city needs to put their foot down on better design.

Yip. Either stop approving garbage suburbs, or stop feigning surprise when the garbage suburbs you approve result in the city deviating further and further from its stated urban planning goals.

[zzptichka]

Originally Posted by passwordisnt123

When you design an entire community so as to make it impossible and unpleasant to walk anywhere, there's no point in putting 7 Confederation Line stations there since everybody is going to have to drive or bus to the station to begin with. Give it a try sometime. Try walking 1 km downtown and it'll feel like you haven't walked at all. Try walking 1 km in Kanata and you'll despair for existence and begin to look forward to the sweet release of death.

FYI this is Kanata between Eagleson and Terry Fox:



Why would people living here choose to drive 100m to their LRT station you are proposing to ditch?

[Arcologist]

Originally Posted by passwordisnt123

I completely agree with you. However I'd only add that more stations also won't make Kanata into a more urban community. Nothing short of a significant earthquake or a nuclear bomb or a dramatic flood combined with a massive reconstruction effort could make Kanata into a more urban community.

Kanata is so fundamentally broken as a community, it is beyond repair. All the worst aspects of suburbia are baked into the recipe from the beginning and the best we can do as a city is to not throw good money after bad by building 7 (!) stations instead of a more sensible number like 3 stations with numerous bus collector lines and Park n Rides.

Amen to that.

3 stations with numerous bus collectors. There, done.