2023 Transportation Master Plan

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by bartlebooth

Sure, and that might be all they want. But that's not really the point I guess. The point is that building/fostering a community of like minded people is one way of challenging the status quo. Does it mean the city will magically change as a result of some sort of community initiative, obviously not. But there is certainly a zero percent chance you'll see anything improve if you don't change your current approach (filling out survey's). At the very least, you might find people with similar views that think, "Oh, cool, Ottawa has a community of people that also want less suburbia. I never expected that. Fun."

I agree. The biggest take-away from O-Train Fans is that it didn't even exist 5 years ago and look at how much they have accomplished in that short amount of time. If Shane hadn't stepped up and founded it, it wouldn't even exist today. I admit it would be nice if they could expand their focus to include other forms of public transit (not just trains).

In terms of actual accomplishments, the cycling community is likely an even better example though. If you look back 20-30 years ago, cycling wasn't getting any attention. I remember when the SJAM Parkway was being rebuilt about 20 years ago, there was a push to have cycling lanes put on it, and the NCC said no because there are "bike paths." Now look at the congested mess the recreational pathways are. Having cycling lanes for commuter cyclists on the parkway just makes sense. And before you say that was just the NCC, the RMOC and the cities under it weren't any better (likely worse). Today, any road project needs to consider cycling, though unfortunately often to the detriment of transit.

The most important thing is though is education. If all you do is bitch and complain about how bad things are, taking a holier-than-thou attitude, and judging people for their decisions, you aren't going to get very far. However, having a positive attitude and talk about how we can do things better, people are more likely to listen and take you seriously (you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar).

Now I realize that not everyone has the time, energy and skills to form a successful, new advocacy group, but if you can support and encourage someone who does to form one, many of the victories that group will achieve can be attributed back to you. This forum is a great place to start, but it is only a starting place.

[Nowhere]

I don't get the Heron/Walkley/Elmvale transitway. The southern part of Herongate should be among the most densely populated areas in Canada in 20 years, yet this transitway would avoid the area entirely. Assuming that this transitway would replace the 46, that's a major bus service cut for the poorest neighbourhood of the city.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by Nowhere

I don't get the Heron/Walkley/Elmvale transitway. The southern part of Herongate should be among the most densely populated areas in Canada in 20 years, yet this transitway would avoid the area entirely. Assuming that this transitway would replace the 46, that's a major bus service cut for the poorest neighbourhood of the city.

I think it's wayyyy too early to tell if that would "replace" the 46.

But I would bet that it would be in addition to the 46, and then take advantage of the dedicated bus lanes to get in/out of Herongate faster.

[Multi-modal]

Originally Posted by Nowhere

I don't get the Heron/Walkley/Elmvale transitway. The southern part of Herongate should be among the most densely populated areas in Canada in 20 years, yet this transitway would avoid the area entirely. Assuming that this transitway would replace the 46, that's a major bus service cut for the poorest neighbourhood of the city.

I agree, there is no reason the Transitway couldn't follow the 46 routing (east on Heron, south on Baycrest, east on Walkley). I commented as much during the Herongate Secondary Plan consultation.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Nowhere

I don't get the Heron/Walkley/Elmvale transitway. The southern part of Herongate should be among the most densely populated areas in Canada in 20 years, yet this transitway would avoid the area entirely. Assuming that this transitway would replace the 46, that's a major bus service cut for the poorest neighbourhood of the city.

Has an Environmental Assessment been performed on the Heron/Walkley/Elmvale transitway? That is where the exact routing would be evaluated and recommended. The official plan is more about the bigger picture as to if such a transitway should exist.

Even if it does follow the exact route shown, transitways are roads/lanes not bus routes. Once the transitway is complete, there would likely be a redesign of the various routes in the area (including route 46) to take advantage of the new transitway. There may be a route that runs from one end of the transitway to the other, but there will likely also be routes that only use a section of it.

As for the southern part of Herrongate, I would argue that it is currently much better served by route 44, as it runs along Heatherington, thus closer to the southern parts of the community. I could certainly see it modified, to use the new transitway to get to Herron Station, rather than running up Alta Vista to Hurdman (which could be done by a different route).

[Nowhere]

I know that these are only early plans, but I don't see the point of building a rapid transit line that avoids a future very high density low income neighbourhood. roger1818 is right that there would probably be a redesign of the bus routes in the area, but since it's OC Transpo, I doubt that they would add new buses on top of the existing service, without making cuts to other routes in the area. It would surely be instead of the existing service rather than being on top of it.

I would rather see a Walkley/Baycrest/Heron transitway, like Multi-modal said, or simply a transitway that keeps running on Walkley and then use the existing transitway to Billings Bridge.

It's once again transit planning that benefits the suburbs rather than low income neighbourhoods.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by Nowhere

I know that these are only early plans, but I don't see the point of building a rapid transit line that avoids a future very high density low income neighbourhood. roger1818 is right that there would probably be a redesign of the bus routes in the area, but since it's OC Transpo, I doubt that they would add new buses on top of the existing service, without making cuts to other routes in the area. It would surely be instead of the existing service rather than being on top of it.

I would rather see a Walkley/Baycrest/Heron transitway, like Multi-modal said, or simply a transitway that keeps running on Walkley and then use the existing transitway to Billings Bridge.

It's once again transit planning that benefits the suburbs rather than low income neighbourhoods.

I think part of the intention of this is to create an east-west transit spine across the south end of the city. Running on Walkley kind of defeats that purpose, in addition to failing to serve the north part of Heron Gate and new developments like the Federal Study Centre.

[Multi-modal]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Has an Environmental Assessment been performed on the Heron/Walkley/Elmvale transitway? That is where the exact routing would be evaluated and recommended. The official plan is more about the bigger picture as to if such a transitway should exist.

Even if no EA has been completed, the route shown in the OP matters. It governs how much right of way is protected along the corridor. The Herongate redevelopment would have been the opportunity to reserve ROW if the route was to follow Heron-Baycrest-Walkley. In any case, it is past time an EA is completed. A little certainty is needed - even if the business case isn't there yet.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Even if it does follow the exact route shown, transitways are roads/lanes not bus routes. Once the transitway is complete, there would likely be a redesign of the various routes in the area (including route 46) to take advantage of the new transitway. There may be a route that runs from one end of the transitway to the other, but there will likely also be routes that only use a section of it.

As for the southern part of Herrongate, I would argue that it is currently much better served by route 44, as it runs along Heatherington, thus closer to the southern parts of the community. I could certainly see it modified, to use the new transitway to get to Herron Station, rather than running up Alta Vista to Hurdman (which could be done by a different route).

I agree Route 44 will benefit, but it would benefit more and more the longer it can stay on the Transitway. A Heron-Baycrest-Walkley alignment would cover a much longer portion of Route 44's routing.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Multi-modal

Even if no EA has been completed, the route shown in the OP matters. It governs how much right of way is protected along the corridor. The Herongate redevelopment would have been the opportunity to reserve ROW if the route was to follow Heron-Baycrest-Walkley. In any case, it is past time an EA is completed. A little certainty is needed - even if the business case isn't there yet.

True, but I don't know how much ROW they will be saving without having done an EA. I do agree that they should be doing an EA sooner than later.

Originally Posted by Multi-modal

I agree Route 44 will benefit, but it would benefit more and more the longer it can stay on the Transitway. A Heron-Baycrest-Walkley alignment would cover a much longer portion of Route 44's routing.

A Heron-Baycrest-Walkley would result in only 900m of additional coverage on the transitway for Route 44. 500m would be on Baycrest, which isn't likely to have much traffic congestion, and 400m (1 block) would be on Walkley. If that block is problematic, having a transitway on Heron Rd. wouldn't preclude the installation of transit priority measures on that block of Walkley.

Meanwhile the detour would be forcing through buses to take a more meandering route. This proposal might have some merit if we were talking about an LRT line, which buses can't easily use (though it isn't impossible to have a shared BRT/LRT lane), or even a grade separated transitway line (which are harder to enter/leave) but for an at grade Transitway, I just have troubles seeing the benefits outweighing the disadvantages.

[lrt's friend]

Herongate/Heatherington would greatly benefit if Routes 44 and 46 did a full loop to Hurdman rather than both terminating at Billings Bridge. Using the Southeast Transitway is much faster access to the south ends of both routes but forcing an additional transfer between and Hurdman and Billings Bridge just discourages people to use this faster access.

The transitway plans do not well serve existing riders because of its east-west orientation. Most riders are going more or less north-south.

Actually, the proposed transitway route replaces a route that was cancelled a few decades ago and most of that ridership has disappeared. I expect that they will try to replace existing north-south service with this east-west Transitway which will again disrupt and decimate ridership while maintaining a token service on only parts of the existing routes.

[vtecyo]

Originally Posted by Nowhere

The new "A series" plan shows a fully segregated transitway west of Tenth Line and an at-grade transitway east of Tenth Line, which is exactly the same as the 2013 transportation master plan.

I don't know what's the point of the 2 stations along the Blackburn Hamlet Bypass. There is exactly 0 people living in the area.

They would be on the north side of the bypass - right beside Blackburn Hamlet - which has over 8000 residents.

[silvergate]

Originally Posted by vtecyo

They would be on the north side of the bypass - right beside Blackburn Hamlet - which has over 8000 residents.

The bypass is a fairly significant distance away from most of Blackburn, would have to run a bus on Innes to actually reach the community

[vtecyo]

Originally Posted by silvergate

The bypass is a fairly significant distance away from most of Blackburn, would have to run a bus on Innes to actually reach the community

I assume they intent to build it as a separate two way road beside the bypass - and not just transit priority lanes. In which case I think they could get it as close ~300 to ~350 meters of Innes. Although they would have to run it through the forest and possibly around the allotment gardens. There might be a tinge of NIMBYism if they do that...

It seems like the stations could go near any of these locations, I'd prefer the ones in the middle - but if they're only built at the outer ones they could just divert a few buses per hour down Innes and not bother with anything other than transit priority lanes on the bypass.



On another note - it it would be an opportunity to run a proper MUP/ bike path connecting east and west instead of the current painted bike gutters on Innes. Inside the neighbourhood they're not too bad due to slower traffic - but once you're in the greenbelt - it's better to just ride on the grass.

[GradualFuture]

Sorry for the trouble, could someone link the TMP 2023 update? I can't find the document with my normal google-fu. Would be appreciated.

[rocketphish]

Originally Posted by GradualFuture

Sorry for the trouble, could someone link the TMP 2023 update? I can't find the document with my normal google-fu. Would be appreciated.

Is this what you're looking for?

https://engage.ottawa.ca/transportation-master-plan

[GradualFuture]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

Is this what you're looking for?

https://engage.ottawa.ca/transportation-master-plan

Yeah, but where on this page is the actual document that contains the 2023 TMP map? I'm feeling silly for not being able to find it.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by GradualFuture

Yeah, but where on this page is the actual document that contains the 2023 TMP map? I'm feeling silly for not being able to find it.

You can find it in Schedule A of The City of Ottawa's Official Plan. Given that the official plan will be released before the TMP, it is likely in very much a draft state.

[lrt's friend]

Bus Transitways as a continuation of rail is plain stupid. It just adds transfers for relatively short distances. Rapid transit corridors should be all rail or all busway.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Bus Transitways as a continuation of rail is plain stupid. It just adds transfers for relatively short distances. Rapid transit corridors should be all rail or all busway.

1) Transfers are a normal part of a transit system, so get over the idea that you deserve a one seat ride somewhere.

2) Even if those extension were train there would still be a transfer from bus to a train.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Bus Transitways as a continuation of rail is plain stupid. It just adds transfers for relatively short distances. Rapid transit corridors should be all rail or all busway.

If you maintain this stance, you should expect a lot less rail in Ottawa. The mode has to match demand. Your argument for a single continuous mode effectively sets a very high bar for corridors to get rail.