LeBreton Flats 2.0 (RendezVous LeBreton) | Cancelled

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I think the concern is that while most developers put up modest parks that are affordable to maintain (maintain the grass, replenish the sand and repair the play structures), the LeBreton group will have a much bigger budget and could put up some sort of grandiose Taj Mahal version of a park that could be very expensive to maintain. To me it is reasonable for the city to have a say in what is installed that they will have to support.

Yes, but Lebreton will also generate a lot more tax revenue for the city than a typical suburban subdivision will.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I disagree. If they don't have a transit surcharge on tickets (like they do at Lansdowne) and give ticket holders free transit, a lot more people will drive to events, putting extra stress on the road infrastructure and add to the congestion. One of nice things about this location is that it is at the intersection of the two LRT lines, allowing people to take trains to and from the east, west and south (plus north if they open the POW bridge) before and after events. Providing free transit will maximize transit ridership to events. Now maybe there is an argument that the surcharge should be smaller than Lansdowne's, as the cost of running extra trains for events is much smaller than the cost of running all of those extra event buses (one double train carries the equivalent of 6-8 articulated buses), but there should be one.

Also, don't forget RendezVous LeBreton want to cap the Confederation line so that they can use the land on top of it. Giving them permission to do this is a huge bargaining chip as it amounts to a lot of free land for the developers, and greatly improves the development.

I don't think anybody cares if they get a free transit ticket. Those who want to drive do and those that want/need to take transit will do so. If I walk why should I have to pay a transit surcharge?

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

I don't think anybody cares if they get a free transit ticket. Those who want to drive do and those that want/need to take transit will do so.

I disagree. The cost of transit can be a factor when deciding the mode of transport to use. I have taken transit to Lansdowne because it was free. Had it not been free, the group I was with would likely have driven (there were 3 of us). As I said before, for a family of 4, transit will cost $27. Now as J.OT13 said, parking at LeBreton will likely be more expensive, so that will help.

If I walk why should I have to pay a transit surcharge?

The surcharge would be likely be small. We live in a society where the group pays for things that we believe are for the collective good. That argument is no different from people wanting to not have to support public schools because they don't have any children.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I disagree. The cost of transit can be a factor when deciding the mode of transport to use. I have taken transit to Lansdowne because it was free. Had it not been free, the group I was with would likely have driven (there were 3 of us). As I said before, for a family of 4, transit will cost $27. Now as J.OT13 said, parking at LeBreton will likely be more expensive, so that will help.

A transit surcharge was necessary at Lansdowne because there are huge transportation challenges in the Glebe (plus the spectator capacity is 33% larger). Lebreton doesn't have such problems. If you want to park downtown and walk to the arena then the city has no skin in the game.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

A transit surcharge was necessary at Lansdowne because there are huge transportation challenges in the Glebe (plus the spectator capacity is 33% larger). Lebreton doesn't have such problems.

Your point about capacity is well taken, but there will certainly be transportation challenges at LeBreton. Booth and Rochester aren't designed to handle that kind of traffic to the 417.

If you want to park downtown and walk to the arena then the city has no skin in the game.

While some will, most won't want to walk up Nanny Goat Hill, so free transit would be of benefit to them as well.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Your point about capacity is well taken, but there will certainly be transportation challenges at LeBreton. Booth and Rochester aren't designed to handle that kind of traffic to the 417.



While some will, most won't want to walk up Nanny Goat Hill, so free transit would be of benefit to them as well.

On site parking will probably be more expensive than transit. People who are price sensitive and want to drive will have to park in Centretown (where there are about 12,000 parking spots, so that won't be a problem in the evening).

Free transit would be a benefit to many people in many circumstances. I find it hard to see how people dropping hundreds of dollars for tickets, beer, egg rolls, etc. are in "need."

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

On site parking will probably be more expensive than transit.

As I said, it all depends how many people are in the group. For one it would be definitely cheaper to take transit (how many go to events alone though?). For two or three it would be close. For four or more it would likely be cheaper to drive.

People who are price sensitive and want to drive will have to park in Centretown (where there are about 12,000 parking spots, so that won't be a problem in the evening).

Families (the ones most likely to be price sensitive) will be the least likely to want to walk up Nanny Goat Hill, especially if they have small children.

Free transit would be a benefit to many people in many circumstances.

It isn't free. It is included in the cost of the ticket and sold at a bulk discount (kind of like the U-Pass which is included in student's tuition). In this case, the purpose is to influence behaviour, not to give out a freebee.

I find it hard to see how people dropping hundreds of dollars for tickets, beer, egg rolls, etc. are in "need."

The same argument could be made that those dropping hundreds of dollars can afford to pay a couple extra dollars on their ticket to pay for transit service even if they choose not to use it.

[acottawa]

^
But what is the problem we're trying to solve?

If somebody wants to drive because they have mobility issues or young kids or want to store bags in their car then they will drive whether or not transit is free, and in addition to parking fees they will be charged for transit they're not using.

If somebody is trying to minimize the cost of the venture, they can park in centretown for free evenings and weekends. This is still cheaper than the transit surcharge.

If somebody already has a bus pass they are being charged twice for transit.

If somebody walks from the local area they are being charged for transit they are not using.

If somebody doesn't fit into any of these categories and is looking for the most convenient way to get to the game they will take transit. They can pay a few dollars for this convenience.

But if we're adding surcharges to the tickets, I would like a beer surcharge, where everyone pays a beer surcharge and beer is free.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by acottawa

^
But what is the problem we're trying to solve?

If somebody wants to drive because they have mobility issues or young kids or want to store bags in their car then they will drive whether or not transit is free, and in addition to parking fees they will be charged for transit they're not using.

If somebody is trying to minimize the cost of the venture, they can park in centretown for free evenings and weekends. This is still cheaper than the transit surcharge.

If somebody already has a bus pass they are being charged twice for transit.

If somebody walks from the local area they are being charged for transit they are not using.

If somebody doesn't fit into any of these categories and is looking for the most convenient way to get to the game they will take transit. They can pay a few dollars for this convenience.

But if we're adding surcharges to the tickets, I would like a beer surcharge, where everyone pays a beer surcharge and beer is free.

Well, transit is a public good. As much as I like where you are taking this, beer is a harder argument to make.

The issue is moving thousands of people to and from events in a short period of time. That doesn't work without a large transit component. Everyone benefits in some measure. Those who drive benefit from the reduced congestion and closer parking. Everyone else, including those who walk and those in surrounding neighbourhoods who don't go to the game, benefit from the reduced environmental impact. Those with mobility challenges etc. who can't drive or walk benefit from the additional funds that flow to the system. The list goes on.

[lrt's friend]

Parking and traffic problems will be worse at Lebreton than at Lansdowne. Lansdowne is surrounded with residential streets whereas at Lebreton not so much.

The issue is moving people. Yes, Lebreton will have trains versus Lansdowne's buses, but buses get people across the city whereas trains are much more limited as far as where they will take you. We need to encourage people to use transit otherwise congestion will become unmanageable especially on week nights when people will be still commuting when people are heading to the arena. The Lansdowne experience has proven that including transit fare in your ticket price is effective to encourage the use of transit. A big deterrent to using transit is more than the money (although paying extra is a deterrent for many people) but actually figuring out how to get a ticket if the person is not a transit rider. With so many non-transit riders going to the games, just getting a ticket or not having enough ticket machines will turn off too many people. In the long-run, it is a good strategy for city as it exposes people to transit who otherwise would never use the service. At least a small number will become more frequent transit riders as a result.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

But what is the problem we're trying to solve?

We are trying to influence behaviour and encourage more people to use transit. Many (most?) people are price motivated even if they can afford to pay more. Even a 10% increase in transit use would be a good thing in my mind.

If somebody wants to drive because they have mobility issues or young kids or want to store bags in their car then they will drive whether or not transit is free, and in addition to parking fees they will be charged for transit they're not using.

I would argue that most of those would be fine with transit as well.

If somebody is trying to minimize the cost of the venture, they can park in centretown for free evenings and weekends. This is still cheaper than the transit surcharge.

Driving is never free, though the costs are hidden. There is limited street parking downtown (and many spots will likely have limited parking to keep it available for local use) and western downtown parking lots are unlikely to be free on a game night. A couple dollars per ticket is probably going to be the cheapest option overall.

If somebody already has a bus pass they are being charged twice for transit.

That is very true but it is the same at Lansdowne.

If somebody walks from the local area they are being charged for transit they are not using.

The locals would probably appreciate not having all of their parking spots filled up on event nights, so would be willing to pay a small fee when they attend an event.

If somebody doesn't fit into any of these categories and is looking for the most convenient way to get to the game they will take transit. They can pay a few dollars for this convenience.

If they live in the east, definitely (the eastern Stage 2 will have the line extended to Trim Rd by 2022). If they live in the south, partially (the frequency of service will limit the capacity of the Trillium line). If they live in the west, it is debatable (if the arena opens in 2022 as the Sens hope, western stage 2 won't be complete until 2023, so everyone will be transferring at Tunnies Pasture. Even when complete, it won't go to any park and rides, so a transfer will still be necessary for most).

But if we're adding surcharges to the tickets, I would like a beer surcharge, where everyone pays a beer surcharge and beer is free.

And how is it desirable for society to encourage people to drink more beer at events?

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by phil235

Well, transit is a public good. As much as I like where you are taking this, beer is a harder argument to make.

The issue is moving thousands of people to and from events in a short period of time. That doesn't work without a large transit component. Everyone benefits in some measure. Those who drive benefit from the reduced congestion and closer parking. Everyone else, including those who walk and those in surrounding neighbourhoods who don't go to the game, benefit from the reduced environmental impact. Those with mobility challenges etc. who can't drive or walk benefit from the additional funds that flow to the system. The list goes on.

These things are only true if the free transit shifts behaviour in a noticeable way. Since the alternatives of paying very high on-site parking fees or parking a considerable distance away are clearly inferior to transit, the most likely to shift such a policy would encourage would be to encourage people to take transit from downtown instead of walking, which puts more pressure on the transit system and makes transit a worse experience.

On the other hand free beer would make the games more lively, which would be a huge improvement over the funeral-like atmosphere that often permeates the CTC.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

These things are only true if the free transit shifts behaviour in a noticeable way. Since the alternatives of paying very high on-site parking fees or parking a considerable distance away are clearly inferior to transit, the most likely to shift such a policy would encourage would be to encourage people to take transit from downtown instead of walking, which puts more pressure on the transit system and makes transit a worse experience.

On the other hand free beer would make the games more lively, which would be a huge improvement over the funeral-like atmosphere that often permeates the CTC.

The Lansdowne experience clearly demonstrated that free transit shifted behaviour.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The Lansdowne experience clearly demonstrated that free transit shifted behaviour.

But Lansdowne is not on a rapid transit line and required an elaborate system of shuttle buses. Lebreton is on two rapid transit lines. Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, New York, Washington, Boston, etc. do not need free transit to get a significant number of their ticket holders to take transit.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

But Lansdowne is not on a rapid transit line and required an elaborate system of shuttle buses. Lebreton is on two rapid transit lines. Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, New York, Washington, Boston, etc. do not need free transit to get a significant number of their ticket holders to take transit.

Do we need to get a "significant number of their ticket holders to take transit?" No.

Is it a low cost way of getting even more ticket holders to take transit? Yes

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

But Lansdowne is not on a rapid transit line and required an elaborate system of shuttle buses. Lebreton is on two rapid transit lines. Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, New York, Washington, Boston, etc. do not need free transit to get a significant number of their ticket holders to take transit.

I will argue that Lebreton will also require an elaborate system of shuttle buses. Whether they start at the arena or at the end of the rail lines will have to be determined. The current Confederation Line plan lacks Park n Ride lots in the west end which means it will be more difficult to get tickets buyers to use regular transit if their destination is Kanata, Barrhaven or beyond. This is especially important given that current ticket holders are skewed to the west end of the city based on the location of CTC.

I think the success of the Lansdowne transit plan (just read that transit modal share is 56% - where else do we even come close to this?) suggests that it is a good model. Why do we have to follow what is happening in other cities if we already have a good model?

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I will argue that Lebreton will also require an elaborate system of shuttle buses. Whether they start at the arena or at the end of the rail lines will have to be determined. The current Confederation Line plan lacks Park n Ride lots in the west end which means it will be more difficult to get tickets buyers to use regular transit if their destination is Kanata, Barrhaven or beyond. This is especially important given that current ticket holders are skewed to the west end of the city based on the location of CTC.

I think the success of the Lansdowne transit plan (just read that transit modal share is 56% - where else do we even come close to this?) suggests that it is a good model. Why do we have to follow what is happening in other cities if we already have a good model?

Why do we want to de-normalize transit for the destination that has the most natural appeal for people to use? The city spends hundreds of millions of taxpayers' money to construct an elaborate city-wide transit network.
People should use this system. Encouraging people to drive to distant parking lots to get on special shuttle buses undermines the entire transit system.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Why do we want to de-normalize transit for the destination that has the most natural appeal for people to use?

How on earth is encouraging people to take transit de-normalizing it?

The city spends hundreds of millions of taxpayers' money to construct an elaborate city-wide transit network.
People should use this system.

I agree. You are the one who is saying we should encourage people to drive downtown and walk instead of taking transit.

Encouraging people to drive to distant parking lots to get on special shuttle buses undermines the entire transit system.

The problem is many people don't live close to a frequent, off peak transit route. I highly doubt if OC Transpo will run the Connexion buses after events. The only reasonable alternative is for them to use the park and ride that is closest to their home.

I think what lrt's friend was trying to say is that if you dump 600 people off every three minutes at Tunnies Pasture after an event, you will need extra buses to get them to their final destination. They could be extra of the normal Rapid routes or they could be special routes that go directly to the appropriate region without stopping.

[lrt's friend]

The 'normal' transit system is not equipped to handle major sporting events in the evening or on weekends. If Lansdowne didn't offer special shuttles to RedBlack games, I would drive as we did for years when we had the Renegades and Rough Riders. The old model of just adding a few extra runs to the existing bus routes simply does not work. I remember the complaints back in the old days. This is not unprecedented in other cities. I saw it in Calgary for Stampeders games. I saw it in Atlanta for an Atlanta Braves game that I attended. The point of having special transit service is to encourage people to use transit in order to limit congestion. If this was not done at Lansdowne, Bank Street would be a parking lot. Likewise at Lebreton when the new arena is eventually built. We cannot promote intensification without improving transit as needed. For major events, it is needed and needs to be encouraged.

Perhaps in very large cities where multiple rapid transit lines continue to operate very frequently in the evening and near a major sports venue this is not necessary. But even then, I recall last year in the hockey playoffs in Washington, they made an announcement that the subways were shutting down at midnight during an overtime game. There is a city that is not prepared and would have allowed thousands to have no way home. This is not a good way to encourage people to rely on transit. Of course, Washington has had a lot of problems in the last few years with maintenance of its subway lines that has negatively impacted ridership.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

How on earth is encouraging people to take transit de-normalizing it?

A shuttle bus from a re-purposed parking lot is not transit. Frankly many bars offer this service; there is no reason for the city to get involved.