Ottawa Pedestrian Plan

[waterloowarrior]

The City of Ottawa has completed a Pedestrian Plan study to develop a vision and policy framework for pedestrian travel, planning, designing and implementing pedestrian facilities, and establishing actions and policies for better integrating pedestrian travel into the transportation system as a viable alternative transportation mode.

The City is committed, through policies in both the Official Plan and Transportation Master Plan to changing public travel choices and reducing dependence on the automobile through the advancement of alternate travel modes, including walking, to reach sustainable transportation objectives.

The City invites you to attend a public open house to:
view the findings of the Pedestrian Plan study
provide your comments on the Draft Ottawa Pedestrian Plan

Tuesday, March 3, 2009
4 to 7 p.m.
Jean Piggott Hall
Ottawa City Hall, 110 Laurier Ave. West

Please review the draft Ottawa Pedestrian Plan. Your feedback is an important part of the consultation process. Community participation will form a part of the report when the Plan and associated recommendations are presented to City Council for consideration.

For more information and/or to submit comments, please contact:
Gill Wilson, Coordinator Pedestrian Facilities
Mobility & Area Traffic Management Division
Infrastructure Service and Community Sustainability
City of Ottawa
100 Constellation Cres.
Ottawa ON K2G 6J8
Tel: 613-580-2424, ext. 13766
Fax: 613-560-6069
E-mail: Gill.Wilson@ottawa.ca
Comments regarding the Draft Ottawa Pedestrian Plan should be submitted by Wednesday March 18, 2009.


http://ottawa.ca/residents/public_co.../index_en.html


here's a direct link to the proposed network

[electricron]

I like trails. They are very popular, amongst kids of all ages. Most like to walk, jog, bike, or skate on them, and that includes all age groups.

[Ottawade]

Sorry this is way off topic and my second light-hearted post in a row, but something about the irony of a person with a bear as her avatar recommending more trails for people of all walks of life made me laugh!

If you'd had the the word "secluded" I would have had to claim a conspiracy.

[AuxTown]

Trails, bears, kids of all ages....who let the NCC join our conversation?

[waterloowarrior]

I haven't read the plan yet, but it would be nice to have wider pathways along the canal and other high traffic areas. There should be separate lanes for bikes/bladers to keep slow and faster moving traffic apart. some examples just to show the general concept of separating the bikes/peds

nice, fr


missisippi

[Rathgrith]

Bears are nothing but godless killing machines you know.

[rocketphish]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

The City of Ottawa has completed a Pedestrian Plan study...

The Draft Ottawa Pedestrian Plan content on the City's website has all been moved, any many of the links on the new site are broken.

The content can now be found here:

Draft Ottawa Pedestrian Plan main page
Ottawa Pedestrian Plan
The Pedestrian Network

[Cre47]

Latest document

http://www.ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa...S-PGM-0065.htm

[Richard Eade]

Can any one explain the costing of this plan to me?

From what I got at the Wednesday Transportation Committee meeting; there are 300 sidewalk 'missing links' in older, established neighbourhoods totalling about $70M. In order to fill in the gaps, Staff suggest $3.5M per year for 20 years.

By the end of the meeting, the value of the 'missing links' was down to $50M but the funding request was still for $3.5M every year for 20 years. There were no additions or deletions to the list of 300 projects, the cost simply dropped by $20M. Clive tried to increase the annual spending to $5.2M per year to match the 5 year spending on the Cycling Plan ($26M over 5 years) but this was voted down since Staff said it wasn't necessary.

Along comes the Infrastructure funding and $3M drops into the New Sidewalks in Older Areas Fund. (As far as I know, this is over and above the City paying $3.5M per year to do the same thing; but it is quite possible the City will simply replace $2M of the $3.5M with some-one elses money and pocket the difference - as they have recently been doing with money from upper levels of government.)

Any way, the $3M is apparently funding 20 of the most needed, highest cost projects from the list of 300. (The money was requested without any specific projects assigned to it so when it was approved, Staff had to choose which sidewalks it would build.)

So if that $3M will cover 20 of the most costly projects, shouldn't the total cost be less than $45M? And shouldn't all 300 projects be finished in less than 15 years at only $3M per year? At $3.5M, we could be finished in less than 13 years.

And what of the NEED for those new sidewalks? A big part of the extra $3M for the most required and most expensive projects is going for a new sidewalk along Baseline, bordering the Farm, and another along Merivale, again, bordering the farm. Each of these will cost an estimated $332,000.

Neither of these is necessary in my opinion: There are no destinations along the farm, and indeed, there is a fence along both stretches. In the case of Baseline, there is ONE bus stop and the only place you would want to walk from that stop is directly across Baseline, not along it. Along Merivale there are a few bus stops, each at a traffic signal. Any one alighting from the bus will simply stand at the bus stop until the signal changes so they can cross the road to get to their destination. There are no destinations along that side of the road. (Yes, there are homes farther north, but you would just stay on the bus until you were closer to those homes - where there IS a sidewalk.)

(Councilor Cullen brought up that there was already an NCC path along Merivale, but stopped any further questions when he was told that there was a fence between the proposed sidewalk and the path; as if it were an insurmountable problem to add openings in the fence. It is true though, that the NCC path is not currently plowed; which I suppose would be another insurmountable difficulty.)

If these are examples of where we NEED to fill in missing sidewalk links, then we are wasting money. No wonder the amount which has been given to new sidewalks has been dropping over the last few years; we are running out of places that more sidewalks are REALLY needed.

I am not against sidewalks where they are needed, but to add sidewalks where they will not be used is a waste of money.

The list of 300 required sidewalks did not exist before the new Pedestrian Plan came up with a list of criteria which could justify sidewalk construction. For example, both Baseline and Merivale have transit running along them, ergo, there must also be unbroken sidewalks along them. Q.E.D. There does not seem to be any thought used to actually verify the need for a sidewalk; as long as it meets one of the criterion.

Now, something to remember is that these sidewalks are for OLDER neighbourhoods; new developments have Development Charges to pay for their new sidewalks. In existing neighbourhoods, apparently now children are not supposed to learn to walk along the residential streets, facing traffic; they must be on sidewalks. Thus, we must add sidewalks in residential neighbourhoods that have schools - for any age kids.

So back to the costs: Is it $70M or $50M for the 300 projects? If it is $50M over 20 years, shouldn't the annual budget be only $2.5M? Shouldn't the $3M affect the total, especially if it covered the most expensive projects?

Oh, for those enquiring minds who just have to know; the annual $3.5M is to be broken down as follows:
$3,350,000 for new sidewalk construction,
$ 100,000 for studies and design of sidewalks,
$ 50,000 for pedestrian education programs.

[Richard Eade]

OK, the Transit Committee will be getting a report about and Statement of Work for building a pedestrian bridge over the 417 from the Train Station to the empty Baseball Stadium.

4) Multi-Use Pathway Connection – Coventry Road To Train Station: Environmental Assessment Study

Sentier polyvalent – du chemin coventry à la station d’O-Train : Étude d’évaluation environnementale

ACS2009-ISC-PGM-0187

Is this just an attempt to justify spending a huge sum of money for a new (transit) Train Station? I checked the APPROVED 2009 Pedestrian Plan and it does not show a new link, but uses Belfast as the connection across the 417.



The old 2003 TMP mentioned the link, but that was in better times, when the Lynx were playing I think. Now there is really nothing of any density along Coventry. On the south side, there are poor pathway connections, and the VIA tracks to contend with. People will be walking/riding to Belfast to go south any way; so why not just use Belfast to start with?

Is there much on either side of the 417 that people will be walking to? Why is this being pushed through?

[Kitchissippi]

My thoughts exactly. I think money would be better spent on a Somerset East-Donald street pedestrian/cycling bridge. Cyclists in the area already have the choice of going under Hurdman bridge or over the Belfast Road overpass to cross the Queensway

[lrt's friend]

Interestingly enough, there was a pedestrian bridge across the Rideau River near the Rideau Tennis Club years ago. Something that was lost during the austerity of the Depression or war years.

Funny how a pedestrian bridge to the empty baseball park has suddenly become a priority. Another frill to add to the bloating LRT project costs.

[waterloowarrior]

It's not a new/sudden priority. In the 2003 TMP it was planned for completion in the first phase, for a City population of 975,000 (by 2008). The link is also in the new TMP (2008) as a priority project to be completed in 2009-2015. The staff report refers to it orginially being planned in 1995, and it was talked about even earlier when the baseball stadium was built. EMC has a recent article about the bridge http://www.emcottawaeast.ca/20091009...ote+this+month