Lemieux Island area (ii)

A few years ago the City ran one of its high pressure water mains along the north side of the Ottawa River Commuter Expressway (said expressway being at the top of this slope) from Lemieux Island towards the downtown.

The city contractors re-landscaped the dug up areas. Surprise, surprise, the shrub beds withered away, the trees languished ... and for the last few weeks the NCC has be re-doing the city work. Shown above are new shrubs on the slope between the expressway and the river edge bike path near the Prince of Wales bridge.

The shrubs are planted, mulched, and being watered.

The NCC also replaced a number of the trees the city planted.

I wonder how the NCC views the City's attempts at landscaping? Like a little child, trying, but failing and inept? Like a recalcitrent child, who goes through the motions but sullenly and without interest in the result? Or like a pesky mosquito, just brush it aside and do what needs to be done, properly?

Interprovincial Transit Link

Earlier this week, the NCC held a public open house on proposals for improving interprovincial transit. I blogged on my general preferences (a LRT link using the Prince of Wales  bridge) a few days ago, http://westsideaction.blogspot.com/2010/07/interprovincial-transit-opportunity-to.html. 

At the meeting, a number of matters came up that caused me to ponder.

Bridge repairs... the cost of the LRT on the loop was much much higher than that of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). I inquired as to why the order of magnitude numbers for LRT were so much higher since both were surface crossings. Well, to use the Chaudiere, Alexandra, or Prince of Wales bridges, massive rebuilding would be "required" of these older structures. This rebuilding cost was added to the LRT cost.

But wouldn't these repairs and rebuildings still be required if there was no LRT and the bridges continued to be used by cars and buses like they are today? Yup, I was told, they would require the same rebuilding, at the same costs.

So why do the planners add the reconstruction cost into the LRT option cost when it is a cost that has to be met anyway, even if LRT is not built? The bridge repair costs are not unique to choosing the LRT option. [hint: by adding bridge rebuilding costs, costs might be divided three ways - city, province, feds - instead of remaining 100% to the bridge owner. Nice try for shared dollars, but it makes LRT scarily expensive when the bridge cost will be paid whether we stick with roads or go with whatever form of transit we choose].

Something similar comes up for the Preston Extension. Preston is to be extended out meet the intersection of Vimy Place in front of the War Museum. This road link will be built early in the DOTT process so cars can avoid construction on Booth. After LRT is running, motorists continue to benefit from having a new four lane road built across the Flats. Surely this cost should be stuck in the road budget, but no, its put into the LRT construction budget.

DOTT Capacity: In the many DOTT meetings I have attended over the past years, the consultants always use passenger forecasts that INCLUDE ALL THE STO passengers in the tunnel. They do not assume there is any STO bus service left through the downtown.

There are several options for Quebec links if the linkage is by LRT. One is for Quebec-bound residents to go into downtown Ottawa subway stations and take an LRT to Bayview, and then transfer to a separate LRT service to Gatineau. If their destination was other than downtown Gatineau, they would then need to transfer again to bus service.

The other option was for a separate Gatineau-bound LRT train to run through the downtown tunnel, across the Flats, and then over to Gatineau, making the whole interprovincial trip in the same vehicle. This is a more attractive option than having to transfer LRT trains, and ties in nicely I thought with the design of the Bayview Station which allows trains leaving the downtown to go west  or north/south without transfers, ie same car service from the downtown to airport, or downtown to Baseline. I was really surprised then to hear some of the experts at the event declare that the tunnel would be full to capacity with OC Transpo LRT trains and there simply would not be room for Gatineau-bound trains unless another tunnel was bored just for the "loop" service.

While I confess to some scepticism about this advice, I do wonder if the DOTT planning team is planning their station designs so that someday a third or fourth track could be added to the two originally planned, ie, keep the same stations and escalators and mezannines but increase the carrying capacity by adding additional tracks.

Bus noise: I am concerned to see some of the interprovincial transit options including running way more STO buses through the downtown than before. Way to go ... Ottawa residents will pay to go deep underground while Quebecers inherit the streets. Result: despite the reputed superior fashion-sense of Quebecers, there would be no net improvement to the street environment.

And, the NCC evaluation criteria did not seem to consider the noise of BRT on adjacent residents or quality of life in downtown neighborhoods. Traffic noise is a big factor for downtown residents, it is bizarre to be planning for major increases in bus use without even mentioning the noise and dirt and deteriorated quality of life that would engender.

Almost as bad, and taking some sort of prize for short-term thinking, was the suggestion to run STO buses across the Prince of Wales bridge to a transfer station on the Flats at Bayview. It was a mistake made decades ago to convert the Alexandra bridge from rail to car, and now we are looking at mega-bucks to convert it back ... why on earth would we do the same mistake to the POW knowing that in 20 to 30 years we would be converting it back to rail?

Finally, a comment on how we treat transit users. A certain percentage of users have limited transportation choices, due to income constraints. They'll take the bus because they don't have a {second, third} car. They are captive. They will suffer through buses that get caught in traffic. Or are routed into giant ditches, while motorists get millions of dollars spent to have "scenic" routes into the core.

But if we want transit to be a viable, lifetime option for individuals who do not have cars (the young, elderly, lower income, students, enviro-nuts, etc) or who can choose to drive but don't, or if the city wants to shift modal split onto transit to avoid building ever more roads, then it has to offer attractive amenities to induce the ridership that has a choice.*

 For the downtown loop, I love the idea of the LRT taking the Prince of Wales bridge because it offers great views to riders; and if the other part of the loop used the surface of the Alexandra bridge (which was designed and built, like the POW, as a railway bridge) then there would be even greater views. Imagine, taking the loop would be a scenic, attractive activity bringing sensory pleasure to the ridership. It would even induce tourist traffic just because it would be so nice. Sane tourists going to big cities use transit and avoid bringing their private car downtown -- or does Ottawa want to remain small-town with acres of its core dedicated to storing automobiles?

If transit is to be a viable competitor to surface roads and private cars, then it can't always be shoved onto the least-attractive corridors or into ditches. As far as I know, LRT trains won't shrivel up in the sunlight, passengers won't morph into zombies if they have a nice view. Maybe the comatose cubicle farm inhabitants snoozing in their LRT trains will wake up with some of that famous NCC landscaping.



*[I kinda like the Ottawa River Parkway routing option for the west LRT just for that reason: it gives transit users a first class view. And it might even do that by bumping two lanes of the Ottawa River Commuter Expressway off the waterfront.]

Interprovincial transit opportunity to choose your mode

Prince of Wales rail bridge from Ottawa to Gatineau

Tuesday from 5.30 to 8.30 at City Hall (main floor) there will be a public display of the options for interprovincial transit between Ottawa and Gatineau.

Options include which mode of transit to use: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) or LRT. Route options include connections via the Alexandra Bridge (or under it, in a tunnel under the river, and remember the tunnel under downtown Ottawa is already very deep down so this doesn't require a steep slope, and the Rideau station has been designed with this connection in mind); a west connection on the Prince of Wales Bridge or Chaudiere Bridge; and maybe connecting these two crossings to make a loop.

Mode: Ottawa is growing out of its BRT system and converting it to an LRT system including a downtown tunnel. Gatineau, smaller than Ottawa, is just building its Rapibus BRT which will last it 30 years until it too is converted to a LRT.

It just doesn't seem logical to me to opt for a BRT linking the two cities. The idea behind the tunnel is get the buses off the downtown streets (so the streets can be redeveloped and landscaped for pedestrians and cyclists), and this means getting the STO buses off the streets too.

And we don't want large BRT stations at LeBreton Flats or near the National Gallery to transfer passengers to the LRT. So, my choice for the mode is LRT for the loop. In Gatineau's small downtown, it is probably premature to run the LRT in a tunnel; I suggest it would be fine to run it on the surface for the next several decades where it would serve to animate the street life.

Route: in the west, either the Chaudiere crossing or the Prince of Wales Bridge will work. But since the LRT route will help intensify development, it makes the most sense to me to run it on the POW bridge so it services all of  LeBreton-Bayview redevelopment areas, and connects with the future North/South line along the O-Train corridor (which might extend right over to Gatineau on the POW). While a bit further than the Chaudiere, the POW bridge would be car-free so service would be faster. The already-planned Bayview Station has been designed to handle east-west and north-south traffic and all its transfers, permeatations and combinations.

I also don't think they would need to double track the Prince of Wales bridge at the beginning, five or seven minute scheduling should be possible even with a single track bridge. Indeed, it might be possible to initially run the whole loop only in one direction on one track, and later expand it to two ways on two tracks.

On the east side, it intrigues me that the LRT could run on the old Alexandra Bridge rather than in a tunnel under it. Of course, car traffic would be booted off, and the bridge would revert to its original rail function. It is sort of poetic justice that rail structures were converted to roads in the 50's and 60's and now they could be converted to LRT service*. And the views from the LRT would be fantastic from both bridges, which can be a great feature attracting ridership.

City hall is air conditioned, so its a great time to come down and tell the City and NCC what you want to see for the interprovincial transit connection.

If you can't get there, you can go to this web site and make your comments. If you are really lazy, you can just copy and paste the shortcut to this blog posting: www.http://interprovincial-transit-strategy.ca/

*expanding on this idea of converting rails to roads and back to rails, the parkway along the canal would be a great conversion back to surface LRT (streetcar service) which would include Lansdowne Park, the Glebe, Main Street, Ottawa South, to Billings.

Bushwacking for cyclists

Last week a group of concerned citizens participated with the City and its consultants on the routing exercise for the O-Train corridor cycling path (cyclopiste de Preston). Participants represented the NCC, Dalhousie and Hintonburg Community Associations, CfSC and Cycle Vision Ottawa members, a landscape architect, engineer, planner, and others.

The cycling arterial will connect the Ottawa River cycling paths to the Otrain at Bayview, run along the tracks behind the City Centre complex, under Somerset via a new underpass, behind the PWGSC complex at 1010 Somerset, and come out at ground level again at Gladstone. Then a short overground stretch would take it beside the city signals yard annex, under the existing Qway overpasses, to Young Street, where it would join a rebuilt existing path along the east side of the Otrain cut all the way to Carling. The NCC person was present on the bushwacking expedition to consider, amongst other things, where it goes at Carling and how it connects to the Farm paths.

The areas behind the City Centre and 1010 Somerset proved to be very dense bush, with constant surprises hidden in the tall grass, weeds, and shrubbery: the odd half truckload of asphalt or cement, bits of rail, sleeping bags, laptop computers, etc. It is difficult to imagine a safe-feeling path there given the area's current appearance, but with tree thinning, opening up vistas, improved fencing, path lighting, and some suggested alignment and elevation mods, it will work well with current and future developments proposed along the corridor.

The cycling underpass under Somerset is also planned to handle the possibility of a LRT station at that location. If all goes to plan, the underpass would be constructed in 2011 with the path completed in 2012.

If you click on the word cloud to the right of this blog posting, select Cyclopiste de Preston to read earlier posts on each segment or use the search button.

Navy Monument Sod Turning

2010 is the 100th anniversary of the Royal Canadian Navy. This accounts for all the banners and display panels on Confederation Boulevard and down by the war memorial.

A monument is being errected to this anniversary at Richmond Landing, the original origin point of Richmond Road, at the Ottawa River below Chaudiere Falls where the Bronson Creek/Tailrace/Kayak course enters into the Ottawa River.

The banners behind the tent are some of the ones decorating Confederation Boulevard.

There was a large collection of navy-types there. I haven't seen this many navy uniforms in decades (a navy brat, I grew up down east).

As for the monument itself ... well, it hasn't been constructed yet, but they hope to have it finished in 2011, which will be less-late than the navy gets its new gear. I asked a couple of the old salt types at the ceremony what they thought of the monument [slightly curved concrete wall with gold ball stuck on the top edge]. Let's just say they missed the symbolism, meaning, representation, purpose ... and so did I. Old Salts still have a good vocabulary.

Where cyclists cross ...

Multipurpose path, aka a bike path, crosses a parking lot entrance. This is a crossing, not an intersection. Notice no painted crosswalk for the pedestrian users, as the crossing is not at an intersection. If at an intersection, there would be a painted crosswalk for peds, and cyclists are supposed to dismount and walk their bike across the road...

I like off-road cycling facilities like the NCC bike paths. I like painted bike lanes too. I think I would like physically segregated bike lanes along roads, too, but Ottawa has too few to experience.

One of the things I like about the NCC paths is they are set back from roads for the most part, and have grades and turns suited for cyclists rather than motorists. I like the set back way the Ottawa River path crosses River Street (road to the Lemieux Island filtration plant), then the Kitchissippi lookout road, then the Westboro Beach road, then the road to Britannia Beach.  What is in common for all of these crossings is that they are set well back from the nearest intersection. Cyclists and motorists can see each other well before they cross; there are no surprises from fast-turning-then-accelerating vehicles at intersections that whip around the corner then come face to face with a soon-to- be-roadkill cyclist or biped. It has been my experience that most motorists are polite and alert for cyclists at these crossings.

I recently wrote to the NCC suggesting that at least some of these bike-road crossings should be rebuilt a bit so the cycle path has the right of way over the entrance to a parking lot, for eg, the bike path could be raised on a speed bump that forces vehicles to slow to a crawl, and perhaps appropriate signage added.

The NCC response: Giving cyclist and pathway users priority over motorists is a new concept that needs to be closely studied, taking into consideration various factors, in order to ensure the safety of all pathway users. We understand the concept you are proposing of promoting the development of barrier-free utilitarian cycling facilities. We will re-examine the pathway crossings configuration with roadways at future rehabilitation projects for each pathway. That is a good answer, and is not a "no".

In contrast, correspondence with the city regarding how cycling paths cross roads, elicited this: There is even greater potential for dangerous situations where cyclists use these midblock crossings as they move faster and make it more difficult for a motorist to see them approaching. Both the city and NCC tend to be removing midblock crossings (by rerouting facilities) for the above reasons.

I remain puzzled at how rerouting a cycling path from a crossing a hundred meters from an intersection to being located at the intersection improves anything. When at an intersection, the cyclist is supposed to dismount and walk his or her bike across the offending parking lot entrance or roadway since cyclists cannot (legally) ride on a crosswalk. This rule is likely to be flouted. The turning vehicles are less likely, not more likely, to see cyclists.* And don't 70% of cycling collisions occur at intersections? That strikes me as a good reason to avoid them.

I prefer the NCC response to the City's.

*all right, I confess to being a criminally reckless parent. I always taught my kids to do as I do: cross mid-block rather than at intersections. There is usually fewer lanes of traffic, and it's coming from predictable directions at predictable speeds. (The exception to this is downtown core crossing, where everywhere is too dangerous). I used to be a rare loony with this attitude, but find more and more people expressing the same thought. Conventional traffic planning wisdom is all in favour of cars and penalizes those idiots who ride or walk. Rerouting cycle paths to meet roads only at intersections is more car-centric thinking.

More Cycling Advice

I attended a small group meeting of cycling advocates with Inge Molenaar, cycling honcho from Den Hague, the bureaucratic capital of The Netherlands, who was brought to Ottawa by the NCC to share cycle planning lessons. The instructing was made more pleasant by the Embassy treating attendees to hospitality afterwords.

Some observations:

The Hague will have 6 to 9000 indoor bike parking spaces in their new central rail station. I wonder if there will be any safe or secure bike parking facilities at Ottawa's new LRT stations, or will there be a bent-paperclip rack stuck on the lawn? I also wondered how many indoor spaces there currently are in downtown Ottawa office buildings. I know the indoor bike parking facility in Constitution Square is huge, and wonder how many other such facilities there are.

The Hague has a grid-like network of designated bicycle routes criss-crossing the city. Most of these have no special facilities for cyclists, like Ottawa they consist of signs posted along car-cluttered streets. However, The Hague has indentified a smaller number (coarser grid) of key arterial cycling routes they call the Star Network, on which they are focussing their efforts to improve the cycling environment. These measures include painted lanes, counter-flow lanes, cycle signals at intersections, and some cycle priority measures.

A number of years ago the national government in The Netherlands passed laws requiring dynamo-operated front and rear lights on all bicycles. The fines are stiff, and police (wo)man checkpoints to issue tickets. The result: almost all bikes now have working lights. Older bikes have clip-on lights, which are subject to theft. On newer bikes, lights are permanently affixed so theft (of the lights) is not a problem.

At the same time, they issued regulations requiring all bike tires to be constructed with reflective white material on the sides. This results in every bike wheel glowing brightly in the dark when illuminated by street lights or car lights or the working lights on other cycles. These reflective strips have been very effective in Canada on school bags, running shoes, casual jackets, etc and the benefits seem high to me compared to the rather modest cost imposed on buyers.       [I have some  flashing lights that screw onto the inflating thingy on the tires that is supposed to flash and glow when cycling, but of a dozen such gizmos only one or two work, intermittently at best.]

Many new bikes come with radio frequency identifying tags (RFIDs), which are cheap tags like the UPC bar codes on everything we buy, but they respond electronically to monitoring devices. It was unclear at the meeting if these are national, compulsory, or what, but they should aid in recovering stolen bikes. At popular bike parking areas, like schools or transit stations, police can scan the lot for stolen cycles. 

In Holland cycling is so popular they need huge bike parking facilities. Like car parks, they take up valuable urban space (even if there are more bikes per sq m than the equivalent number of cars). I wondered if a bixibike or rental system mightn't reduce the need for every cyclist to own multiple bikes.

I talked to Inge about the value of her trip, compared to conferences, tourism, or blogging. She thinks blogging is amazingly effective at reaching people, citing a number of blogs including one of my favorites,  David Hembrow's AView from the Cycle Path.

The visit of Inge was definitely worthwhile. The program of the NCC to bring in experienced people for other places is good. I hope the city officials and politicians that met with her learned something that will be applied here. The single biggest point I learned was that on-street cycling is good when the speed limit is 30km/hr or below; if above that, go for segregated facilities.

The Den Hague experience

The NCC invited Inge Molenaar, chief cyclist of the Den Hague city bureaucracy, to tell the NCC what it should do to make the National Capital Region cycling friendly. As part of that visit, she gave a public presentation Monday night.

A few of her points stood out to me:

-- ebikes will extend the comfortable cycling range from 8km now to 16km. The Hague will continue to let ebikes mix with pedal bikes on bike paths. Mopeds, on the other hand, being faster, are kept on the roads.

-- they have a practical policy guideline for where segregated bike paths should be built. If the speed limit is 50km/h or higher, there should be a segregated parallel bike path. If the speed limit is 30km/hr or lower, bikes can mix with cars or have painted bike lanes. (their common speed limit postings are 15, 30, 50, 60, 80, 100, 120 km/hr). In the Ottawa context, this means the City would not expect cyclists to play with trucks, buses, and cars on Scott-Albert but would build a segregated safe facility a la BikeWest.

-- in some locations, it is possible to switch roads to being cyclist priority with cars the guest vehicle that must travel slowly and yielding always to cyclists.

-- merchants will stop complaining about losing car parking spots for cycling facilities (lanes or parking spaces) when they appreciate the purchasing power of cyclists more than that of motorists. This is somewhat similar to what Geller said of Portland: when cycling hits a tipping point, merchants switch to catering for cyclists rather than cars as its cheaper (10+ bikes per single car parking spot).

Dalhousie Community Assoc responds ...

Wearing my other hat, and with much input from other members of the Dalhousie Community Association board, the DCA sent two letters. One to the Marie Lemay of the NCC regarding the bad idea for bringing Rapibus to Ottawa over the POW bridge; and the other is detailed comments on the current state of the Downtown Ottawa Transit Tunnel study.

You can read both of these letters at http://www.dalhousiecommunityassociation.blogspot.com/

Multi-user bike paths

All sorts of creatures use the NCC Ottawa River bikepaths. This user usually shares the path at a wide berth from other users.

It was limping, clearly injured in one leg.

I cycled past it when it did not move off the path and I tired of watching it. No smell.

Lansdowne Live

Some misc observations on Lansdowne Live, and in particular the meeting last night at arena Tom Brown arena.

1. Opponents are well organized, sporting custom printed apparel and carry bags (made of recycled hemp, I hope) and handing out reams of photocopied green paper that may have required the souls of every tree in the Glebe. Of course, the Glebe trees are still there (at least along Ralph and Percy when I walked up those streets yesterday) so trees from some other place were sacrificed. Sacrificing somewhere else seems a common theme.

2. The green shirters took off their shirts to sit among the audience or ask questions at the mike, at last night's Live meeting, thus appearing as 'unaffiliated' citizens when they hissed and boo'd answers and people they didn't like. As the meeting ended, the team uniforms were pulled on again. We require lobbyists to register so we know who is meeting whom, it might be nice if citizen lobbyists for one particular cause did the same by keeping their shirts on. (I wore a sweater and jacket throughout the meeting, the air conditioning worked well and continuously despite the crowded room).

3. Cullen, running for mayor, repeatedly referred to Bayview as the best site. He did not mention any alternative sites, certainly none in the Glebe or Ottawa South. He did not mention whether the local residents should have any voice in the matter. He gave every impression his mind was completely made up.

4. I am amazed at the ability of residents and politicians  to call for consultative planning but conveniently ignore the fact that the Bayview site already has a plan for 1600 medium density housing units and a 300,000 sq ft civic building (envisioned in the 2004 study final to be the library, which is now going elsewhere). But no where was a 25,000 seat stadium mentioned. I reviewed this with city planning staff and other community groups, and they confirm a stadium was not on the books. I also reread the Bayview report. Nary a stadium in sight, despite Martin claiming that residents have been consulted.

5. Getting into the Live meeting at Tom Brown was like running a gauntlet of time share salespeople in Mexico, with hyper-ventilating sales people pushing the merits of their real estate dreams. The alternatives to Lansdowne only look attractive because they are not fleshed out, they are conceptual ideas only, being compared to a detailed Lansdowne plan. Of course it is easy to pick at the detailed plan and fantasize about the vague one. Sell the sizzle.

6. I am constantly amazed at the people - politicians, architects, professors - who use one set of words to tell us why Lansdowne is Bad Plan (parking horrors! ugly stadium! sensitive neighborhood!) but then switch vocabulary when suggesting alternatives such as Bayview (civic structure! pedestrian paradise! transit nirvana!).  Residents of the Bayview area may be lower income than the Lansdowne area but we are not stupid.

 7. I am surprised how many people latch onto flimsy straws that support their views without thinking it through. Parking around Lansdowne - now and in the future - will be a problem. So will transit access. So people jump to the Bayview site as solving all this because its on one or more LRT lines (so would the Carleton site, but hey, that's too close to ... ). Well, Bluesfest is located just a few hundred meters east of Bayview, equally right on the transit line, and the neighborhood was plagued with parking problems as thousands of attendees drove to the event and tried to park on lawns, bouelevards, and park space when they couldn't find free on-street parking in the first block off the site. What will make all these people suddenly decide to take transit to the stadium?

8. People at the meeting derrided the park and ride schemes proposed in the Lansdowne Live plan, saying no one would park at Carleton U ($$) or Billings Bridge (because the mall is open 7 days a week and most evenings). But then, how would transit work for Bayview if people aren't expected to park at Lincoln fields, College Square, St Laurent and other shopping centres to take the LRT? Is the City expected to provide new larger park and ride lots for 24,000 cars? If so, shouldn't we consider where and at what cost?

9. Martin proposes a Bayview stadium that is sunk into the ground to partially hide it. As a resident of the Bayview area, and a walker, I can certainly attest to what planners know but seldom boast about: Bayview and LeBreton are low lying areas subject to cold winds from the west and north. They are, in short, thermal sinks. This might be a contributing reason they have always been low income areas. A sunken sadium would be even lower. Can Mick Jagger say "Brr"; Can Kiss-y cats fluff their fur? Surely outdoor concerts would be more comfortable at Lansdowne.

10. And just where does the Bayview parking structure go? Under the sunken stadium, five stories below the River level? And all those people leaving Bayview in their cars ... are they using the Ottawa River Commuter Expressways, even though using the Driveways is disparaged for Lansdowne? Which is it: NCC roads are usable, or not?

11. When the City first faced two competing stadium bids, I was surprised at how quickly centretown residents ruled out Kanata. Much of this is a knee jerk reaction, an antipathy to suburban development which must be derrided as dormitory land and forbidden to diversify. To my mind, the Scotiabank site was pretty attractive: it's far away from me, residents who move in will know they are getting the open air concerts forbidden to the sensitive ears of downtown residents, and it might be enough incentive to extend the LRT to Kanata sooner than later, so we can get rid of BRT in favour of LRT. And it has plenty of parking already.

12. Will the Green Shirt fiscal-hawks be around when alternative stadium sites are being planned for? Or are they really just opponents of a stadium at Lansdowne disguising their opposition in the guise of fiscal and procedural rectitude?

13. If a stadium is bad for established neighborhoods, such as the Glebe/Ottawa South, why is good for other residential areas? Wouldn't honesty require Lansdowne location opponents to oppose stadiums in other residential or urban areas and favour industrial locations? Alas, no such subtle thinking was apparent last night.

14. Questioners focussed on the long term viability of Lansdowne Live: what will become of the stadium in 30 or 60 or 100 years? The obvious answer is that sole city ownership has proven itself a failure as the stadium is crumbling around itself; the Live plan delivers a cash stream to keep the stadium maintained. Would that people were so concerned with the long-term consequences of all city decisions and expenditures.

15. Three politicans were present last night. Cullen took every opportunity to promote himself and Bayview, although Bayview is far from his ward (maybe that's why...). Kitchissippi ward councillor Leadman was there. She represents Bayview area, but said nary a word pro or con Bayview or even that maybe, just maybe, the surrounding community should be consulted and impacts on the area considered. Such admirable restraint! Wilkinson was there too, and did not embarass herself. Holmes was not there to put in a word for her ward which abuts the Bayview site.

16. The city manger Kent Kirpatrick handled hostile questions with grace and skill and in-depth knowledge. It was in marked contrast to the three politicans present. Kirpatrick for mayor !


Finally, a note on my own personal view: I do not think stadiums are easily integratable into urban areas, anywhere. I think stadiums are a component of a vital urban area that offers diverse entertainments and environments, even though I cannot recall ever attending a Lansdowne stadium event.  I am not adverse to looking at Bayview as a stadium site. I am adverse to being stuck with a stadium because an affluent bureaucracy-savy neighorhood gets a below-mediocre council to suddenly jump off a hot stove onto the nearest, ill-thought-out alternative. If Lansdowne Live is killed, what is the alternative?

BikeWest - part vii - westward from Westboro

The previous posts followed BikeWest from the downtown at Bronson westwards along Albert, past Bayview, then along Scott to Dominion Station. This straight route is the crucial portion of BikeWest. To extend the route further west becomes more complicated, since it would involve other agencies such as the NCC, and depend on LRT routing and timing.

The essence of BikeWest from downtown to Westboro was that it is almost entirely along a straight right of way owned by the City where major planning studies and reconstruction projects will be underway for the next decade. Incorporating BikeWest into these plans is a rare opportunity.

 If the western LRT route extends west from Dominion like the BRT,  along the Ottawa River parkway, then the BikeWest route should be built along the LRT  all the way to Lincoln Fields. The bike route would be on the inland-side of the parkway, leaving the current bike path along the river edge for recreational users. The bike route could double as a service road for accessing the LRT tracks for maintenance. Note that running the LRT along the parkway is returning the parkway land to its origins – it incorporated the former CPR right-of-way, a few traces of which can still be spotted.


At approximately McEwan Avenue, BikeWest would split in two: one grade-separated route would cross under the Ottawa River Commuter Expressway lanes to pick up the existing western bikepath by Mud Lake en route to Britannia and points west.

The other branch of BikeWest would swing south to Lincoln Fields and link up with the existing Pinecrest Creek bike path that goes on to Algonquin College/Baseline and points further south.

The cycling time from Baseline to downtown along the LRT route and BikeWest would be about half the current Parkway path route time, expanding the comfortable safe cycling zone to tens of thousands of new households. The speedier travel time is due to the straighter configuration and shorter route distance than the current riverside paths.

The portion of new bike route closely aligned to  the LRT from Dominion to where it turns inland at Lincoln Fields would be a straighter and faster commuter route than the river edge recreational pathway. The routes west past mud lake and south from Lincoln would be existing NCC paths. Click map to enlarge.

If the LRT route does not follow the parkway, the BikeWest route could be left to end at Dominion Avenue, or it could be extended further west along the Byron right of way. Unfortunately, the Byron strip has a lot of cross streets and the existing path has been designed to make it unappealing to cyclists (it meanders, and is full of sharp turns). The success of BikeWest however does not depend on where it might be extended to, it is justified on its own merits for the downtown-Westboro length.

The opportunity to extend the BikeWest project west is just that, an opportunity. And it should be considered as another project to be examined and addressed separately. BikeWest is a viable concept running from the downtown to Westboro and is not dependent on a westward extension, however logical that extension might seem.

Coming up next: an alternative route opportunity, from the Albert-Slater split to Bayview, and a few elaborations.

Last traces of former rail line

What may at first glance seem to be a jersey barrier*  in the woods is really one abutment of a culvert crossing on the former CPR (?) tracks that ran west along the Ottawa River where the Ottawa River Commuter Expressway is now.

The rail right of way was expanded and converted into a car road allowance in the early 1960's following Greber's plans for scenic drives throughout Ottawa. Many of these drives were never completed, but the NCC still holds numerous rights of way undeveloped, waiting for LRT, other transit, or a serious non-recreational cycling network. Toronto, not blessed with the NCC holding open rights of way, is examining if it can convert hydro-electric rights of way into a commuter cycling network.

The right most abutment in the above photos shows up well because it has been painted cream, probably to cover grafitti. The left abutment is au naturel.

Also missing is the creek it crossed. It has long since been redirected into a storm sewer, to the detriment of birds and other natural life systems it should be supporting.

*a jersey barrier is one of those portable concrete barriers used to block off lanes during construction. they can be linked together and provide physical safety to workers and successfully intimidate car drivers. They help ensure cyclists have no room between cars and the side of the road. Popularized by the NJ Dept of Transport.

NCC Oversight ?

roof deck


spiral ramp up



in all its majestic ugliness


Scene of the crime: Remic Scenic Overlook, along the Ottawa River Commuter Expressway at Tunney's Pasture, between the parking lot and the river
-
Object: brutal concrete round structure with spiral ramp up to viewing area on its "roof". The Guggenheim museum it is not.
-
Function: cobwebby door to interior. Sound of large pumps or motors working constantly. Probably pumps cool Ottawa River water through heat exchangers to chill the cubicle farms located in high rises immediately to the south (in area called a "Pasture").
-
Worth climbing to viewing platform? No, not really. The roofscape is ugly, utilitarian. The view not worth the climb.
-
Alternative attractions: geese, ducks in river. Sculptures in river. People watching. Picnicing while warding off gulls. Bird feeding. Smooching. Social relationships unfolding in the surrounding bush areas.
-
Not known as The Canadian Area 51. No recent sitings of UFO's.
-
Conclusion: the NCC has forgotten this ugly structure exists. Our national gardeners could not possibly view this structure as an asset to the site. It is too brutal, too man made, too coarse, too plopped down.
-
Audacious Hope: NCC garden crews are on their way, sirens blaring, bearing truckloads of shrubs to plant around this abandonned foreskin and hide it from civilian eyes. If they cannot afford shrubs, then the old perennial fallback to hide architectural blots on the landscape should be dragged out: boston ivy.

Large Dead Tree

This large dead tree is along the Ottawa River parkway. Closer inspection reveals that busy beaver had removed most of the bark from the base of the tree.

Contrary results ...

NCC path (foreground); City path beyond


what will the yellow line do?



There must be a law or maxim somewhere that the more planning is done, the more expensive the administration, the worse the results.
-

A few blogs ago I lamented the apparent mismatch between the NCC section of the bikepath from new Wellington that goes south along the aquaduct behind the new Claridge condo at 200 Lett Street in LeBreton Flats.
-

I still cannot believe that despite all the planners, all the coordination, the high city taxes ... that the City-spec'd path is two feet narrower than the NCC path it continues.
-

I remain curious as to what the yellow line will do ... jog to the centre of the city section? continue straight on leaving one lane wider than the other? Or maybe the city won't have a yellow line, because their path isn't a bike path, its a pedestrian only path?

Edit: 25 August 2009: as noted in the comments, it is an illusion that the NCC path is wider than the City path. Both measure the same with a tape measure at several points along the paths. However, there is a side path joining the NCC path just a few feet north of the switchover to City path, and the problem lies at the junction. Basically, the NCC contractor did not build a proper radius or curve on the side path and it joins the NCC path rather sloppily, leaving only the few feet from the where the paths join to the joint with the City path being too wide by about a foot. The correct solution is to trim the NCC path back for about 10' on its radius so it blends into the main path better. So, the City and NCC are coordinating their paths correctly. Whew.
-Eric Darwin

Alternatives to pathway apartheid,ii

worn dirt trail along path. Arrow indicates NCC will sod this strip to repair it.




sod laid last August, presumably to be removed and replaced agin this year as joggers wear it out





typical worn jogging path along asphalt




I am always curious when cycling the path as to why joggers run along side the path instead of on it. (Being a non-jogger, I can only believe people who claim the gravel, dips and hollows, and hard-packed dirt path is softer than the asphalt).

-
Eventually, they wear a complete dirt trail along the path, killing the green stuff that grows along the path in an effort to jog amongst the green stuff ... what was that song about pave paradise and put up a parking lot?

-
Anyhow, the NCC eventually takes umbridge at the dirt paths, and removes the compacted soil, adds new topsoil, and then sod. The pictures above show some sections along the western parkway.

-
But the new sod doesn't last long, the relentless pounding of Nike beats it back into dirt. Now I see paint markings on the path showing the NCC is about to dig out last year's sod and put in new sod. The cycle of life...

-

In other cities I have used bike paths on which the outermost 1 foot portion of asphalt was over laid with a yellow or brown softer material just for joggers. In Curacao, this material was embossed with a wood pattern, like a boardwalk. Elsewhere, it had a raised dot pattern, presumably for grip and drainage.

-
Maybe we don't need a separate set of pathways and the grief that comes from trying to regulate who rides or jogs on (or beside) which pathway. A softer edge strip won't affect my cycling on the central lane of the asphalt path, and might keep joggers off the greenery and in an expected location, to the better cooperation, sharing, and enjoyment of all. This won't solve all our conflicts, but it should be cheaper than doubling the paths.

Alternatives to pathway apartheid,i

through-cycling path interrupted by car access to parking lot


typical pedestrian-only path leaves main path


There are a number of things that can be done to existing multipurpose paths (which I normally call bike paths, because that is how I use them) to make them more user friendly.
-
For example, a Remic Rapids the riverside path is congested with families visiting the ducks, geese, and sculptures, and others accessing erotic pleasures in the remaining shrubbery (I no longer see the city social worker at this site handing out condoms... ).
-
To deal with the volume of slow moving pedestrian traffic and through-traffic cyclists, the NCC installed a bypass around the most congested part. The path begins a few metres east of the road access to the parking lot, continues around behind the lot, and rejoins the path at the west edge of the parking lot. The yellow line and signage encourage cyclists to use it.
-
Both path segments are of similar length, and the inland one is much less busy so cyclists can build up some velocity. But then it is lost, because when the path crosses the access road to the parking lot, the cycling path bumps over both curbs, and there is an explicit command to yield to car traffic accessing the parking lot.
-
If the segregated path is to achieve its potential, it must cross the parking lot access road without a curb, and vehicles must climb a raised crossing/speed hump which will self-police vehicles to yield to cyclists. Thus cyclists will be attracted to the bypass instead of being ticked off at an inferior path option.

(as an aside,in my experience the vast majority of motorists yield to cyclists at these crossing points, Ottawans are so polite ... but with tinted windows and lack of signalling, cyclists cannot depend on cars to stop, so they loose momentum, stop, then get waved on from a stopped position, making the stop mostly for nothing...)

A similar crossing is possible at New Orchard, where once again the parking lot access road is inexplicably given the right of way over the through traffic on the cycle path. Unlike the Westboro Beach access road which is short, the New Orchard and Remic access roads have several car lengths between the Ottawa River Commuter Expressway and the bike path, so there is not excuse for the cars not to be able to slow down and yield the right of way. A good steep bump over the bike path would make the intersection self policing.

Double your bike paths ....

Double your pleasure, double your fun, double your bike paths ...



Our society is prone to leap to solutions before clearly identifying problems or examining alternatives. Recent blogs on safe injection sites, green roofs, intensification ... all have elements to me of being solutions searching for a problem.



Before we go off parallelling our bike paths with yet more asphalt, we should examine the success of those segments of paths that are already segregated. Pathway apartheid may or may not work.



For many years, the bike path along the Ottawa River Commuter Expressway was on the inland side of the freeway from a point near Island Park all the way up to New Orchard Avenue. The riverside path was reserved for pedestrians. Turns were sharper, there were even the odd stairs. Cylists still preferred the waterside route, ignoring the no bike signs. At Westboro Beach, there was even no paved path over the sands.



Then, the NCC widened the river side paths, and fixed the geometry to better suit cycling (gentler grades, gentler curvers, long sight lines). As part of this, they built a number of new segments suitable for cycling but left the pedestrian-only paths in place. The best example of this is from Island Park to almost New Orchard where the path is almost completely double-tracked, ie there is a bike path and a pedestrian path.

I still see cyclists on the pedestrian paths, and pedestrians (espcially joggers) not using the pedestrian only paths. We should determine why users use which path they do, and not install acres more asphalt and then wonder if we did right.

What Blight is This?

I had occasion to cycle along the canal several times this weekend, from Dows Lake to the NAC end, using the NCC bike paths.

I was really struck by how many trees have dried up, brown, crunchy leaves. First noticed on the south side of the canal, from Bronson to east of Bank, whole swaths of tree branches, entire sides of trees, exhibit dried branches. I presume it is not from lack of water.

Then some became apparent on the north side of the canal too, along the Golden Triangle area. Once looking, they were frequent. Usually on mature trees.

This week, I cut down one of my back yard peonies right to the ground, and threw out the leaves and stems which had, seemingly overnight, gone spotted and brown. A virus, a friend and better gardener told me, put them in your regular garbage and not leaf collection or composting.

Anyone know what blight this is, and whether the trees and shrubs will come back next year or are permanently dead?