Kanata LRT EA - Bayshore to Palladium

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

There is a big difference between PAY and CHOOSE.

Not in my scenario, there isn't.

[HighwayStar]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Regardless, Hazeldean would be about 20 stops and 25km from downtown. Is that the best location in the city for TOD?

That's the first thing I thought of... 20 stops to downtown?? Doesn't anybody else think that is a little much for this system? I'd rather drive than endure 20 stops on that train twice a day.

I guess this could encourage a Kanata Centric TOD... i.e. pulling people in from Suburban Kanata to a new highrise office core near the pedestrian overpass

[gjhall]

Originally Posted by HighwayStar

That's the first thing I thought of... 20 stops to downtown?? Doesn't anybody else think that is a little much for this system? I'd rather drive than endure 20 stops on that train twice a day.

I guess this could encourage a Kanata Centric TOD... i.e. pulling people in from Suburban Kanata to a new highrise office core near the pedestrian overpass

Wondering what you'd propose as a solution?

Obviously trains need stations so that riders can board the train. 20 stations for 25 km is pretty bang on the 1.2km between stations that allows a short ~7 minute walk to any station along the line.

[HighwayStar]

Originally Posted by gjhall

Wondering what you'd propose as a solution?

Obviously trains need stations so that riders can board the train. 20 stations for 25 km is pretty bang on the 1.2km between stations that allows a short ~7 minute walk to any station along the line.

I guess I'm thinking what the cutoff point is for a "subway" type system vs commuter rail (i.e. express or GO Train). And yes... I know the ROW and money is just not there... but what's the upper limit riders will accept in terms of stops to get from a distant suburb to downtown??

If this line is extended to Stittsville (it's been mentioned), someone would be looking at a 25+ stop commute... where it would probably be faster to drive... even in rush-hour traffic.

Even Toronto subway is a maximum of 20 stops from the furthest reaches of the city to downtown.

As is often mentioned in these threads, why are we not looking at beefing up transit in the core, rather than provide "walk up" train service to fewer and fewer homes at the edge of the city?

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by gjhall

Wondering what you'd propose as a solution?

My solution is to have LRT end at Terry Fox and use buses beyond that. Capacity isn't an issue beyond Kanata for the foreseeable future. Even congestion in Stittsvile isn't that bad (though admittedly with all the growth it will get worse), and could be addressed by adding bus lanes to roads when they are widened.

Obviously trains need stations so that riders can board the train. 20 stations for 25 km is pretty bang on the 1.2km between stations that allows a short ~7 minute walk to any station along the line.

But you can't expect every single family home in the city of Ottawa to be within a 7 minute walk of an LRT station.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by roger1818

My solution is to have LRT end at Terry Fox and use buses beyond that. Capacity isn't an issue beyond Kanata for the foreseeable future. Even congestion in Stittsvile isn't that bad (though admittedly with all the growth it will get worse), and could be addressed by adding bus lanes to roads when they are widened.



But you can't expect every single family home in the city of Ottawa to be within a 7 minute walk of an LRT station.

If we want to get away from a car culture, this needs to be our ultimate goal, or something similar like a 10 or 15 minute walk.

As it stands, we are just treading water, perhaps even falling back a little more with time.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

If we want to get away from a car culture, this needs to be our ultimate goal, or something similar like a 10 or 15 minute walk.

Maybe as a long term goal, but the first priority is to get it within walking distance of all high and medium density housing and within a 10 minute bus ride of single family homes.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Maybe as a long term goal, but the first priority is to get it within walking distance of all high and medium density housing and within a 10 minute bus ride of single family homes.

That isn't going to happen. Even though lower income need transit the most, we specifically don't run rapid transit to those areas. I am thinking of Vanier, Herongate, Hog's Back and Jasmine Crescent. No plans for those locations, right? Or if there are plans, they will be delayed for decades if they are ever built at all. We prefer to connect to high end condos, park and ride lots for those living in the suburbs and business interests. We very much pick and choose who receives priority. It isn't about need and it isn't necessarily about density either.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

That isn't going to happen. Even though lower income need transit the most, we specifically don't run rapid transit to those areas. I am thinking of Vanier, Herongate, Hog's Back and Jasmine Crescent. No plans for those locations, right? Or if there are plans, they will be delayed for decades if they are ever built at all. We prefer to connect to high end condos, park and ride lots for those living in the suburbs and business interests. We very much pick and choose who receives priority. It isn't about need and it isn't necessarily about density either.

It's about cost and votes. The periphery generates more bang-for-the-buck for politicians because high density areas get their votes discounted to be more "fair" to the less populated but geographically larger suburbs. At the same time, it's way cheaper to build shiny new things in the suburbs where there's empty land versus the built-up core. Likewise, if you build an expensive new subway in a place like Vanier, those same suburbs will whine about subsidizing something they will never ride on, and it's easier to swing the votes in those areas than in the inner city which has the vote dilution effect (which is why it doesn't work when inner city residents complain about road widening in Barrhaven).

Really everyone needs to subsidize everyone in a merged city like Ottawa. The suburban road and the urban transit user are really equally important, as is the country road (the far out countryside is as equally ignored as the inner city), but it's really hard to get a political system that would be fair to everyone.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

That isn't going to happen. Even though lower income need transit the most, we specifically don't run rapid transit to those areas. I am thinking of Vanier, Herongate, Hog's Back and Jasmine Crescent. No plans for those locations, right? Or if there are plans, they will be delayed for decades if they are ever built at all. We prefer to connect to high end condos, park and ride lots for those living in the suburbs and business interests. We very much pick and choose who receives priority. It isn't about need and it isn't necessarily about density either.

Maybe that isn't going to happen, but that doesn't mean we should be extending the line to low density neighbourhoods instead.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

It's about cost and votes. The periphery generates more bang-for-the-buck for politicians because high density areas get their votes discounted to be more "fair" to the less populated but geographically larger suburbs. At the same time, it's way cheaper to build shiny new things in the suburbs where there's empty land versus the built-up core. Likewise, if you build an expensive new subway in a place like Vanier, those same suburbs will whine about subsidizing something they will never ride on, and it's easier to swing the votes in those areas than in the inner city which has the vote dilution effect (which is why it doesn't work when inner city residents complain about road widening in Barrhaven).

How does that explain why Stittsville is getting priority over Barrhaven? Extending to Kanata and Barrhaven would result in more votes than Kanata and Stittsville.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by roger1818

How does that explain why Stittsville is getting priority over Barrhaven? Extending to Kanata and Barrhaven would result in more votes than Kanata and Stittsville.

I'm pretty sure Barrhaven is going to get lumped into Stage 3. Kanata just got the announcement first, and of course if you go to Kanata the politicians will want to get the Stittsville votes too. On the south side, I would expect the train to also get a green light to go just to the outside of Manotick. They wouldn't want the train to sully up their village by travelling into it, but probably would want a giant park and ride just outside of it.

[lrt's friend]

Barrhaven is not getting anything, partly because of the 2006 debacle and also because of the cost of fully grade separating the route south from Baseline. There is no convenient highway to build next to and there is no way they are building LRT until they can find the money to clean up the grade crossings on both sides of Fallowfield station.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Barrhaven is not getting anything, partly because of the 2006 debacle and also because of the cost of fully grade separating the route south from Baseline. There is no convenient highway to build next to and there is no way they are building LRT until they can find the money to clean up the grade crossings on both sides of Fallowfield station.

True, but there's lots of time left still for them to find money from higher levels of government. Neither the Feds nor the Province would say anything about money for a project that's years away from starting. There's another point....money is only forth coming around election time for "sexy" projects. That's why the Feds and the province are willing to rain money on us for the confed line and Montreal's RER project, but nobody wants to cough up dollars for things like Toronto's signalling upgrade or the general falling apart condition of Montreal's 70s era infrastructure. This is a problem we will face too down the road when it comes time to actually maintain the confederation line.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Barrhaven is not getting anything, partly because of the 2006 debacle

How so? The 2006 debacle had little to do with Barrhaven. The extension to Barrhaven was a way an attempt to fund the Vimy Memorial Bridge and the city managed to find a way of getting that built without having to steal money from OC Transpo.

and also because of the cost of fully grade separating the route south from Baseline.

The 1 km from the Beachburg Sub crossing to West Hunt Club will require tunnelling, but the rest will be easy as they already own the ROW.

There is no convenient highway to build next to

Woodroffe is a highway and has few crossings.

and there is no way they are building LRT until they can find the money to clean up the grade crossings on both sides of Fallowfield station.

To me LRT to Fallowfield could be the solution the the transitway rail crossing issue (the LRT would be grade separated as part of its construction costs). Extending further south would best be done by piggybacking on the Fallowfield Rd's rail crossing.

[HighwayStar]

Originally Posted by roger1818

How does that explain why Stittsville is getting priority over Barrhaven? Extending to Kanata and Barrhaven would result in more votes than Kanata and Stittsville.

These are all informative posts and provide great insight into the subtleties of how all this works. However, I repeat my concern from earlier in this thread.... at what point does this silliness of extensions to low density end?

How many people in Stittsville will actually be converted to transit with the LRT?? I mean at this point it will be a 25 stop slog to downtown... and back at the end of the day. Driving in rush hour will almost certainly be faster.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by HighwayStar

That's the first thing I thought of... 20 stops to downtown?? Doesn't anybody else think that is a little much for this system?

I do not.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

That isn't going to happen. Even though lower income need transit the most, we specifically don't run rapid transit to those areas. I am thinking of Vanier, Herongate, Hog's Back and Jasmine Crescent. No plans for those locations, right? Or if there are plans, they will be delayed for decades if they are ever built at all. We prefer to connect to high end condos, park and ride lots for those living in the suburbs and business interests. We very much pick and choose who receives priority. It isn't about need and it isn't necessarily about density either.

We are also really fond of running our rapid/mass transit lines, whether Bus Crappid Transit or LRT, along the edges of, or right through, "green space" which generates zero passenger traffic but lots of capital and operating expense, or along the edges of the Queensway.

No cost-cutting measure can be spared to ensure that higher-order transit only ever serves the suburban-work-commute-to-and-from-downtown market, at the expense of all the others. Meanwhile, the most densely-populated parts of the city, which are the most conducive to transit use, get nothing but buses and the pleasure of seeing the next sixty or seventy years worth of their property taxes go to underwriting the push to the burbs. No expense for the benefit of that segment of Ottawa is too low for the suburban councillors to deem too expensive; no measure too small to reject on the basis that it inconveniences single-occupant auto drivers.

All the stuff in the official plan about favouring non-car modes of transportation and halting sprawl? Utter crap. Every syllable of it.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by HighwayStar

These are all informative posts and provide great insight into the subtleties of how all this works. However, I repeat my concern from earlier in this thread.... at what point does this silliness of extensions to low density end?

How many people in Stittsville will actually be converted to transit with the LRT?? I mean at this point it will be a 25 stop slog to downtown... and back at the end of the day. Driving in rush hour will almost certainly be faster.

When the actual motive is votes and increased property taxes from densification, the silliness never stops. It might be hearsay, but I'm told a surprising number of people that live near the skytrain in Vancouver don't actually take public transit, but want a stop nearby to boost their property values

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

The suburban road and the urban transit user are really equally important, as is the country road (the far out countryside is as equally ignored as the inner city), but it's really hard to get a political system that would be fair to everyone.

We could start by having a ward system that doesn't deliberately dilute the voting power of Vanier (and the fastest-growing suburbs) and hand it, for no good reason, to rural cornfields.