Confederation Line (Stage 1) | In Service 1.0

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Can we ever build a subway down Bank Street or Rideau Street or are we forever left with buses increasingly being held up in worse and worse traffic congestion?

Apparently not: the Watson city council has already locked us into having no more higher-order transit in the core, beyond the Confederation Line and some small additions to the Trillium line, for the rest of the century.

There are other improvements that can be made that does not require the expense of a subway.

None of which the city is willing to pay for, in cash or in political road-rage from motorists. Or even cyclists: the main street reconstruction projects recently done or now in progress put cycling ahead of transit, both in terms of timeline and in terms of political priority.

Not only that, not burying all transit downtown will demonstrate that Ottawa is a transit city and downtown is accessible.

Yes, a transit city that is now removing all transit from Wellington Street because it considers buses - but not cars - to be a blight on Confederation Bullshitvard.

The Confederation Line is not the solution for all our transit needs downtown.

Other than removing buses from Albert and Slater streets, it's not a solution for any transit problem in the downtown core and inner residential neighbourhoods at all.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Is there enough traffic in the area to even justify a transit mall? The LRT is going to 🞵🞵🞵🞵 a lot of transit traffic off the streets.

It is going to 🞵🞵🞵🞵 transit traffic off Albert and Slater.

It will not 🞵🞵🞵🞵 one ounce of transit traffic off any other downtown street, whose transit - in purpose, function, design, ridership, and every other respect - is entirely different from the crosstown distance-commuter transit users who ride the Transitway buses.

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

It is going to 🞵🞵🞵🞵 transit traffic off Albert and Slater.

It will not 🞵🞵🞵🞵 one ounce of transit traffic off any other downtown street, whose transit - in purpose, function, design, ridership, and every other respect - is entirely different from the crosstown distance-commuter transit users who ride the Transitway buses.

Riding the 6 southbound every day, I wonder if it will help a bit though, as they bus takes forever to get from Queen to Laurier. Without the transitway on Albert/Slater, they might change the traffic light cycles to be a bit more balanced.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Other than removing buses from Albert and Slater streets, it's not a solution for any transit problem in the downtown core and inner residential neighbourhoods at all.

Other than speed up service through downtown core for suburban residents, it won't do much of anything. That was always the rationale.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

Riding the 6 southbound every day, I wonder if it will help a bit though, as they bus takes forever to get from Queen to Laurier. Without the transitway on Albert/Slater, they might change the traffic light cycles to be a bit more balanced.

Don't they have Bank Street constricted to only 2 lanes in that area. That may have something to do with the slow pace.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Other than removing buses from Albert and Slater streets, it's not a solution for any transit problem in the downtown core and inner residential neighbourhoods at all.

I wouldn't dismiss the removal of buses from Albert and Slater streets as unimportant for those downtown (Granted STO will be running buses along them instead, but a lot fewer than OC Transpo currently run). If those buses get replaced by more cars, we are no further ahead, but if we can use it as an opportunity to reduce the quantity of traffic downtown, that is of benefit.

It is indirect, but by moving the STO buses to Albert and Slater, we can narrow Wellington to put in the proposed cycle track. A narrower Wellington means fewer motorized vehicles on it.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I wouldn't dismiss the removal of buses from Albert and Slater streets as unimportant for those downtown (Granted STO will be running buses along them instead, but a lot fewer than OC Transpo currently run). If those buses get replaced by more cars, we are no further ahead, but if we can use it as an opportunity to reduce the quantity of traffic downtown, that is of benefit.

It is indirect, but by moving the STO buses to Albert and Slater, we can narrow Wellington to put in the proposed cycle track. A narrower Wellington means fewer motorized vehicles on it.

Our plans for restricting traffic downtown actually have been very successful. It drove retail and entertainment out of downtown to the suburbs. In my lifetime, there has been a dramatic shift. People don't have to go downtown anymore, and I would say, most go much less often than a generation or two ago. If we restrict traffic but don't offer a comparable alternative, this is the inevitable outcome. The one corridor Confederation Line is better than nothing but don't expect people to return downtown in droves. It will still be far too inconvenient.

So as we merrily go along restricting traffic more and more, there will be other consequences beyond beautifying the streets. One wonders why the Byward market is struggling with its traditional role as a farmer's market. Look no further than traffic restrictions, lack of parking and poor general public access.

When comparing North American and European cities, the differences are dramatic. While transit flows into downtowns from everywhere in Europe, our cities encourage people to avoid downtowns by design.

[acottawa]

Ottawa has the most car-friendly downtown in Canada. If car friendliness drove retail and entertainment success then downtown should be booming.

[KingofNannyGoatHill]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

It will not 🞵🞵🞵🞵 one ounce of transit traffic off any other downtown street, whose transit - in purpose, function, design, ridership, and every other respect - is entirely different from the crosstown distance-commuter transit users who ride the Transitway buses.

I mostly agree with this, as the Confederation line is remarkably self-contained, but I do think there may be a significant number of West Wellington / Hintonburg downtown-bound commuters who will walk an extra 5 to 7 mins to Scott LRT stations to avoid the packed number 11 bus.

Of course, the 11 ( the old number 2) is already so random and sporadic -- especially at rush hour -- that few will notice if its frequency is lowered due to the LRT poaching some of its ridership.

[KingofNannyGoatHill]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Ottawa has the most car-friendly downtown in Canada. If car friendliness drove retail and entertainment success then downtown should be booming.

Sympathize with the sentiment - we do provide an awful lot of amenities to the automobile - but I think the downtowns of most prairie cities ( say, Winnipeg, Saskatoon, Edmonton) have us beat for surface parking, multi-lane too-wide streets, and the stubborn presence of strip-mall built form.

[scryer]

Originally Posted by KingofNannyGoatHill

Sympathize with the sentiment - we do provide an awful lot of amenities to the automobile - but I think the downtowns of most prairie cities ( say, Winnipeg, Saskatoon, Edmonton) have us beat for surface parking, multi-lane too-wide streets, and the stubborn presence of strip-mall built form.

I mostly just read this thread but I agree with you.

The 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 at-grade LRT systems that some of those cities have is horrendous. Ottawa is miles ahead in that regard.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Ottawa has the most car-friendly downtown in Canada. If car friendliness drove retail and entertainment success then downtown should be booming.

That was not my point. My point was that if we want to restrict car traffic downtown more and more, we have to provide alternative transport. That cannot possibly be provided by a single transit line. So be careful.

The past 50 years demonstrates how retail and entertainment have left downtown as we have made it more difficult to drive downtown. You may not think we have made it more difficult, but we certainly have. The biggest example is creating a parking shortage. This has induced commuters to use transit but shoppers have fled to the suburbs.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by KingofNannyGoatHill

Sympathize with the sentiment - we do provide an awful lot of amenities to the automobile - but I think the downtowns of most prairie cities ( say, Winnipeg, Saskatoon, Edmonton) have us beat for surface parking, multi-lane too-wide streets, and the stubborn presence of strip-mall built form.

None of the prairie cities have downtown freeways or parkways to funnel cars into the city centre. Parking might be a toss up but I don't think I have seen garages with free parking in cities comparable in size to Ottawa like Calgary or Edmonton (although maybe I don't know where the free parking is).

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

That was not my point. My point was that if we want to restrict car traffic downtown more and more, we have to provide alternative transport. That cannot possibly be provided by a single transit line. So be careful.

The past 50 years demonstrates how retail and entertainment have left downtown as we have made it more difficult to drive downtown. You may not think we have made it more difficult, but we certainly have. The biggest example is creating a parking shortage. This has induced commuters to use transit but shoppers have fled to the suburbs.

Where did people park downtown 50 years ago?

WEP is enormous, free on weekends and hardly ever full. City hall is enormous and dirt cheap outside office hours. The NAC has a huge garage. In addition to the multiple garages in the Rideau Centre there are 3 garages in the market, the city garage on Nepean is free on weekends, there is on-street parking on almost every street downtown (free evenings and weekends) and side-street parking is always free. Plus many downtown office buildings have public parking. Except for a major special event I can't imagine anyone having trouble finding parking downtown.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I wouldn't dismiss the removal of buses from Albert and Slater streets as unimportant for those downtown (Granted STO will be running buses along them instead, but a lot fewer than OC Transpo currently run). If those buses get replaced by more cars, we are no further ahead, but if we can use it as an opportunity to reduce the quantity of traffic downtown, that is of benefit.

It is indirect, but by moving the STO buses to Albert and Slater, we can narrow Wellington to put in the proposed cycle track. A narrower Wellington means fewer motorized vehicles on it.

I cant wait until the move the STO buses onto Albert and Slater. I hate it when i have to get off on Wellington because Wellington in not even close to where i have to get to. Id rather get off on either Albert or Slater since it brings me closer to my downtown destinations.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The past 50 years demonstrates how retail and entertainment have left downtown as we have made it more difficult to drive downtown. You may not think we have made it more difficult, but we certainly have. The biggest example is creating a parking shortage. This has induced commuters to use transit but shoppers have fled to the suburbs.

I'm not sure your statements ring true. First, I fail to see how "entertainment" has moved to the suburbs. If you mean movies, I suppose that is the case, but no more than in any other Canadian city. And I'm not sure that has much to do with making driving downtown difficult. It's far more a result of car-friendly suburban development patterns.

Second, the 50 year timeframe doesn't coincide with policies to prioritize transit and other modes of transportation (what you refer to as making driving more difficult). Those are much more recent phenomena. The move of retail to the suburbs started in the 50s and picked up steam in the 60s when car-oriented planning was at its peak.

I really don't think that the facts support the cause and effect that you are describing. In fact, in the era of more balanced planning, downtowns have become more vibrant.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Where did people park downtown 50 years ago?

WEP is enormous, free on weekends and hardly ever full. City hall is enormous and dirt cheap outside office hours. The NAC has a huge garage. In addition to the multiple garages in the Rideau Centre there are 3 garages in the market, the city garage on Nepean is free on weekends, there is on-street parking on almost every street downtown (free evenings and weekends) and side-street parking is always free. Plus many downtown office buildings have public parking. Except for a major special event I can't imagine anyone having trouble finding parking downtown.

There were plenty of surface lots back in the day. Very cheap or free parking was offered by department stores and that included on weekdays. My mother used to drive downtown all the time. There was a reason why WEP has special parking arrangements. It replaced an old parkade between Albert and Queen. And back then, bus routes were more frequent and more efficient. The city also had no traffic control measures that ended up blocking streets. I remember the quick routes that they blocked off.

I am not saying we should go back to that. I am saying that we have not been successful in providing an alternative designed to allow people to easily get downtown.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by phil235

I'm not sure your statements ring true. First, I fail to see how "entertainment" has moved to the suburbs. If you mean movies, I suppose that is the case, but no more than in any other Canadian city. And I'm not sure that has much to do with making driving downtown difficult. It's far more a result of car-friendly suburban development patterns.

Second, the 50 year timeframe doesn't coincide with policies to prioritize transit and other modes of transportation (what you refer to as making driving more difficult). Those are much more recent phenomena. The move of retail to the suburbs started in the 50s and picked up steam in the 60s when car-oriented planning was at its peak.

I really don't think that the facts support the cause and effect that you are describing. In fact, in the era of more balanced planning, downtowns have become more vibrant.

Downtown is more vibrant? Rideau Street and Sparks Street have been struggling for decades. The Byward Market is struggling relating to its original purpose. Even retail is struggling in the market area. Yes, things are probably improving but downtown has a long way to go to recover its former lustre.

Retail in the suburbs thrived under car oriented planning but traffic measures in centretown encouraged the move as well and those began around 1970 so that 50 year time frame is quite valid.

[acottawa]

I think the types of businesses you're describing don't really exist anywhere, no matter the state of parking or road access. Independent department stores are gone everywhere, department stores in general are in decline, most types of specialty stores are in decline. Most types of independent stores are in decline. People have demonstrated a preference for big-box retail, outlet-type retail and the internet.

Meanwhile a range of stores, restaurants and entertainment venues have opened in suburbs closer to where people live and supermarkets have drastically improved (e.g. you don't need to go to the Market to buy cheese to the extent you once did).

To the extent downtowns are going to survive they need to cater to local residents, visitors or offer an experience to people from the suburbs. Bringing back surface parking or super wide streets will not offer that experience.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]