Future of NCC Parkways

[LRTeverywhere]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

This is typical Ottawa though. Very little was done to support transit riders while the east Transitway was closed for conversion. Even less during multi year shutdowns of Line 2. But 3 days with no Queensway, and people flip.

We don't even get more frequent removal of snowbanks on the R2 route so that it can use its traffic skip (one that we built literally for this) and its bus lanes on Carling during the winter! Such a simple fix but we don't bother.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Glad Leiper's standing up against this. Even Watson never asked QED to reopen while a Queensway overpass was replaced.

This is typical Ottawa though. Very little was done to support transit riders while the east Transitway was closed for conversion. Even less during multi year shutdowns of Line 2. But 3 days with no Queensway, and people flip.

Agreed that there has been an overreaction, but in fairness many of the complaints are specific to the Bronson closure. The effects weren’t really comparable when Rochester or Booth closed.

[Dzingle Bells]

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/su...nefit-decision

Sutcliffe: Closing the Queen Elizabeth Driveway should be a cost/benefit decision
Transportation decisions ought to be based on their risks and rewards, benefits and drawbacks. Closing The Driveway at certain times inconveniences more residents than it benefits.
Mark Sutcliffe

The debate over closing a specific stretch of Queen Elizabeth Driveway is not about whether or not the city supports active transportation. It’s about where and when are the best opportunities for it.

Everyone agrees that walking, running and biking are healthy. As a runner and cyclist, I don’t just believe in active transportation; I practise it. And I support closing certain roads to vehicular traffic at opportune times to provide more space for recreation.

For example, I agree with the National Capital Commission’s decision to close the Kichi Sibi Mikan (formerly the Sir John A. Macdonald Parkway) and the Sir George-Étienne Cartier Parkway for active transportation on summer weekends. And I have no objection to closing Queen Elizabeth Driveway north of the Pretoria Bridge, where the impact on the community is minimal.

So this is not, as some people have framed it, a binary, simplistic ideological discussion about cars versus bicycles. It’s a practical consideration about one section of road that serves a busy neighbourhood and is home to a major event centre, and about making wise traffic planning decisions that support all forms of transportation and take into account the needs of all residents who live in and are moving around the area.

Transportation decisions should be evaluated based on their risks and rewards, benefits and drawbacks. Closing Queen Elizabeth Driveway from Pretoria Bridge to Fifth Avenue, or further to Bank Street, or even as far as Preston Street, and in particular closing it on weekdays and major event days, inconveniences more residents than it benefits.

By the way, this is not just the random personal view of a politician; it’s the highly informed, evidence-based opinion of the professional staff at the City of Ottawa, the experts who manage Ottawa’s transportation network.

Because of the geography of the Glebe, and the location of one of the city’s biggest attractions, Lansdowne Park, closing Queen Elizabeth Driveway at certain times creates significant, sometimes overwhelming pressure on neighbourhood streets. That pressure creates a troublesome logistical challenge for emergency responders travelling into the area, increasing their response times and the risks for the people they serve. It poses safety concerns for pedestrians and children playing on what would otherwise be quiet residential roads.

And it means that both commuter and tourist vehicles, including private cars and tour buses that would normally travel along the Rideau Canal for its breathtaking views, have to take detours through the Glebe, adding time to their trips and increasing emissions.

This year in particular, the challenges of closing Queen Elizabeth Driveway have increased because of construction on nearby Colonel By Drive and Bronson Avenue.

City staff have frequently warned the NCC of the traffic pressures created by closing the QED, have provided comprehensive traffic data and studies, and have asked for the stretch south of Pretoria to be kept open to vehicles during peak times. The NCC has chosen to disregard city data and proceed with the road closures in spite of it.

Closing the QED might be justifiable if all of the problems and risks were outweighed by a game-changing benefit for cyclists and walkers. But the upside of closing Queen Elizabeth Driveway is not significant, since there are already well maintained, attractive pathways along the Rideau Canal. When Queen Elizabeth Driveway is closed, many people continue to choose the pathways over the road, because they are more suitable, more intimate, and closer to the canal. Like many, I prefer to walk, run and cycle on the pathways because they were designed for that purpose and the view is better.

Closing the road between Pretoria and Fifth Avenue, therefore, creates only a small enhancement for active transportation. But it creates significant problems for emergency vehicles, drivers and residents of surrounding neighbourhood streets. Those risks aren’t worth the reward of additional space for walking and cycling in an area already well served by excellent pathways.

Closing the road on Saturday and Sunday mornings would be fine. Closing other streets for active transportation is also worth considering if it generates a greater benefit for the community and the impacts can be mitigated. But closing Queen Elizabeth Driveway during rush hour on weekdays or when major events are taking place at Lansdowne Park creates many more problems, for more people, than benefits. It’s simply more trouble than it’s worth.

Mark Sutcliffe is the mayor of Ottawa.

[stolenottawa]

What a load of bullshit.

[Jay31]

Originally Posted by phil235

We have to be careful about confusing “active transportation” with “cycling”. In my experience, cyclists are a relatively small percentage of the overall users of the QED when it’s closed. And neither the walkers/joggers nor the cyclists skew young, so that is a big red herring.

100%. It's a very diverse crowd using QED...old, young, rich, poor, local, from other parts of the city... and in far larger numbers than the "recreational pathway" beside the canal could ever accommodate - especially on the weekends. My kid learned to ride his first bike on their during covid, because we lived in an apartment and didn't have any other safe streets nearby to ride on.

There are a ton of not so wealthy people downtown in apartments who don't have the wide open quiet streets of the suburbs to ride on... nor is an overcrowded MUP a substitute. Frankly, some weekends even the QED was too crowded with people, so we would try to go earlier in the morning when it was less crowded. When you actually give a safe space for active transport it tends to get used heavily... When you stick a few flex posts or pain on the ground and call it a "cycle track" it usually just annoys both cyclists and motorists alike.

I find it a bit unusual the mayor wrote a column in the paper basically lobbying for the route as a transportation corridor to Landsdowne. I mean, it's not surprising, given his base and that he was largely put in his place due to his business connections... but it's definitely galling. Like, you might as well just have Roger Greenberg sitting on council rather than a puppet kind of galling...

[lrt's friend]

My brother commented on how he cycled on the south east transitway just before it originally opened and how it speeded up his office commute by bicycle. Should we have left it for 'active transportation' and never opened it as a busway?

Referring to the mayor's comments on assessing costs and benefits as BS is ridiculous.

OSEG had approached the mayor and complained on how QED closures were negatively impacting business at Lansdowne Park and the same has happened with tour bus operators.

But who cares if we create a positive business environment.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by phil235

We have to be careful about confusing “active transportation” with “cycling”. In my experience, cyclists are a relatively small percentage of the overall users of the QED when it’s closed. And neither the walkers/joggers nor the cyclists skew young, so that is a big red herring.

I’m relatively neutral on the 8-8 closures, though I definitely support closures at some times. But I really don’t think that the QED should be viewed as a key commuter route to get downtown. That was never the intention, and putting a heavily trafficked roadway right next to the canal makes no sense to me. Particularly when there is a heavily trafficked roadway right on the other side.

My latter comment related to comments in this discussion group about closing multiple streets leading into downtown Ottawa, not just the QED. It is no different than certain desires to convert every key property in downtown into another park. We need a coherent plan allowing people to move around the centre of the city efficiently. In this case, the NCC is making decisions without considering an overall transportation plan.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

My latter comment related to comments in this discussion group about closing multiple streets leading into downtown Ottawa, not just the QED. It is no different than certain desires to convert every key property in downtown into another park. We need a coherent plan allowing people to move around the centre of the city efficiently. In this case, the NCC is making decisions without considering an overall transportation plan.

I agree in principle. Ultimately I’d like to see something closer to 40% of the network dedicated to transit, 40% cars and 20% cycling (at least in the warmer months). We are still a long way from that kind of split.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by phil235

I agree in principle. Ultimately I’d like to see something closer to 40% of the network dedicated to transit, 40% cars and 20% cycling (at least in the warmer months). We are still a long way from that kind of split.

What's current split? Cars 50% 40% split 10% bikes? The city would have to become total gridlock removing that much car capacity. Look what happens when you close a few roads. 3 hours from Barhaven to Aylmer. I know if we had the political will people would move their residences, switch to transit and the like but more likely they vote the bums out who destroyed their lifestyle.

[roger1818]

If we have agreement that QED can be closed north of Pretoria, then rather than getting upset about the stretch south of Pretoria, lets run with it and "Make it so."

As much as it pains me to say so, Sutcliffe is correct in as far as we need to fix the transportation options for Lansdowne before we can start closing roads that access it. Diverting more traffic to Bank St. would negatively affect transit as well. Eventually a Bank St. subway would be optimal, but we aren't ready for that and we can't wait the decades for that to happen. A good alternative would be to convince the NCC to allow for a tram to be built to replace QED.

[lrt's friend]

A tram is not the solution. Lansdowne is a regional facility. People come from all over the city and beyond for events there. A tram only serves a narrow corridor and still blocks general access to Lansdowne, unless it runs in mixed traffic. I would never want to spend money on a tram running in mixed traffic.

At the last Redblacks game, there were several chartered buses waiting on the east side of the park. Those have to access the park by QED. They cannot run or wait on Bank Street on top of OC special event and regular service. There is no room.

[Kelnoz]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

A tram is not the solution. Lansdowne is a regional facility. People come from all over the city and beyond for events there. A tram only serves a narrow corridor and still blocks general access to Lansdowne, unless it runs in mixed traffic. I would never want to spend money on a tram running in mixed traffic.

At the last Redblacks game, there were several chartered buses waiting on the east side of the park. Those have to access the park by QED. They cannot run or wait on Bank Street on top of OC special event and regular service. There is no room.

QED reserved for transit, be it tram or bus, sounds like exactly the solution to your problem.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

A tram is not the solution. Lansdowne is a regional facility. People come from all over the city and beyond for events there. A tram only serves a narrow corridor and still blocks general access to Lansdowne, unless it runs in mixed traffic. I would never want to spend money on a tram running in mixed traffic.

At the last Redblacks game, there were several chartered buses waiting on the east side of the park. Those have to access the park by QED. They cannot run or wait on Bank Street on top of OC special event and regular service. There is no room.

So the better option is to close QED to all vehicles without a tram?

Or are you of the viewpoint that the only solution to traffic is to build more roads until Ottawa is a 100 lane highway with no buildings?

[Catenary]

Originally Posted by Kelnoz

QED reserved for transit, be it tram or bus, sounds like exactly the solution to your problem.

The issue during RedBlacks is that Exhibition is closed at Bank, so the only way into/out of the parking garage is from QED. At the very least, a portion of it has to remain open for access.

[Richard Eade]

It seems to me that this conversation has veered a bit away from 'Cycling in Ottawa'.

[Jay31]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

OSEG had approached the mayor and complained on how QED closures were negatively impacting business at Lansdowne Park and the same has happened with tour bus operators.

But who cares if we create a positive business environment.

I really don't get the tour bus operator angle - like, why don't they just use Colonel By drive? It's more scenic and goes downtown from the airport...and also rarely has any traffic. The QED was never meant to be a route for large vehicles anyway...or even significant vehicle traffic. It was always meant to be a scenic driveway.

The issue is the fact that Landsdowne's actual transportation needs have never been considered (or funded) by the city and they are looking to use NCC land to bail them out. If there was actual transit on Bank Street - where it should be, this wouldn't be an issue.

But... the NCC back in car-loving 60s built mini-highways along Ottawa's water ways (which could have provided more space for active usage, public transit or even small scale commercial such as cafes). Covid allowed the NCC to experiment with closing the mini-highways for active transit and it turns out a lot more people come and use them for that purpose than ever came to use them as mini-highways!

Unfortunately, now there's an expectation that they should always be mini-highways rather than places that a lot more people can use/enjoy....and that's seen as bad for business.

[lrt's friend]

I am being portrayed as a car zealot.

But, I go to Lansdowne quite regularly by transit, occasionally by car when I go to a restaurant or to the theatres. Transit is not good except for special events.

Let's look at this rationally.

We have competing visions.

1. We want QED closed for active transportation. The current desire.
2. We want QED closed and replaced by a tram.
3. We want to build hundreds of new residential units on site.
4. We want to renew the stadium and arena, which will hopefully bring more people to Lansdowne in the long run.

Are these competing visions really compatible?

First, we have an underground parking garage used by business customers and local residents. We want hundreds of additional residents. Any formula that closes QED, creates access problems to the parking garage. New local residents are occasionally going to want to use a car, like it or not.

Second, a QED closure for active transportation is not the same as QED closure for a tramway. The latter means the status quo for active transportation, in fact, there will be no cyclists on QED if there is a tramway. Bicycles and cars and not ideal, but bicycles and trams is not going to be allowed. So, a tramway is less usable for active transportation than an open QED. My main point here is that options 1 and 2 are not at all the same. 1 and 2 are mutually exclusive. To be fair, we could build a new bikeway along the tramway, but we could do that today as well.

Third, we want to increase use of Lansdowne by adding residences and additional use of public venues. We assume, that these additional people will all arrive or depart by active transportation or public transit. Is this realistic? I don't think so. I cannot think of a way that additional use will by 100% active and public transit. And then we say that a subway is 50 years off, the most viable way to increase access to Lansdowne and the Bank Street corridor in general.

I just can't square any of this with real human behaviour. We close QED and make Lansdowne more difficult to access and we see fewer people wanting to come to Lansdowne. We are effectively choking the life out of it. This is the gist of what the mayor is saying.

I have made one unpopular previous comment a few months back about how we want to make urban Ottawa exclusive to local residents and this is a perfect example. Sure, come if you are willing to cycle from the suburbs or if you park in someone else's neighbourhood and walk in. By the way, we will continue to make transit crappier in the process.

Our mayor is making a point. Are our urban neighbourhoods really open for business? Local residents can only support so much business and Lansdowne is not designed to be a local facility mainly for the enjoyment of Glebe residents.

When we look at plans for Lansdowne, we need to make it friendly to visitors and on-site residents. Any changes need to offer net improvements that reflect the needs of both visitors and residents. There needs to net gains that will enhance the success of Lansdowne, while being friendly to the greater neighbourhood. This is the challenge and we cannot be making decisions based on jurisdiction that ignore all vested interests.

[Lakeofthewood]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

But, I go to Lansdowne quite regularly by transit, occasionally by car when I go to a restaurant or to the theatres. Transit is not good except for special events.

Isn't this the biggest concern from OSEG and the City? Special events? So if it works fine for special events, and that's the biggest concern, what's the big deal?

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I just can't square any of this with real human behaviour. We close QED and make Lansdowne more difficult to access and we see fewer people wanting to come to Lansdowne. We are effectively choking the life out of it. This is the gist of what the mayor is saying.

If closing the back door to Lansdowne is all that is required to choke the life out of it, doesn't that speak to a bigger problem with Lansdowne?

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I have made one unpopular previous comment a few months back about how we want to make urban Ottawa exclusive to local residents and this is a perfect example. Sure, come if you are willing to cycle from the suburbs or if you park in someone else's neighbourhood and walk in. By the way, we will continue to make transit crappier in the process.

Our mayor is making a point. Are our urban neighbourhoods really open for business? Local residents can only support so much business and Lansdowne is not designed to be a local facility mainly for the enjoyment of Glebe residents.

The only time that this is required is for special events, when people are asked to take transit or park and take shuttles. Otherwise I can't think of a time that access to Lansdowne is that difficult. Where are people driving to / from that it is actually significantly faster to get in via QED versus Bank? Coming off the highway in either direction the difference is very little, coming from the south you're already on Bank St. I think the idea of QED being open to traffic is much more appealing to people than it actually being open.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

When we look at plans for Lansdowne, we need to make it friendly to visitors and on-site residents. Any changes need to offer net improvements that reflect the needs of both visitors and residents. There needs to net gains that will enhance the success of Lansdowne, while being friendly to the greater neighbourhood. This is the challenge and we cannot be making decisions based on jurisdiction that ignore all vested interests.

I agree wholeheartedly with your last paragraph here, but I think the issue is that Sutcliffe is trying to blame the NCC for bad access when the root of the problem is actually transit on Bank Street not being frequent and/or reliable enough. And instead of putting efforts in to fix that issue as the mayor of our city, he is instead writing op-eds to the local newspaper complaining.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Jay31

But... the NCC back in car-loving 60s built mini-highways along Ottawa's water ways (which could have provided more space for active usage, public transit or even small scale commercial such as cafes). Covid allowed the NCC to experiment with closing the mini-highways for active transit and it turns out a lot more people come and use them for that purpose than ever came to use them as mini-highways!

QED is actually much older than that. The 1928 aerial photograph on geoOttawa, shows QED running along the canal south of Pretoria. Interestingly there was causeway to cut off the northern corner of Dows Lake, running just south of what is now the Pavilion, to have it become Preston. The 2021 aerial photograph must have been taken when the water level was low, as you can see bits of the old causeway poking above the lake.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by roger1818

QED is actually much older than that. The 1928 aerial photograph on geoOttawa, shows QED running along the canal south of Pretoria. Interestingly there was causeway to cut off the northern corner of Dows Lake, running just south of what is now the Pavilion, to have it become Preston. The 2021 aerial photograph must have been taken when the water level was low, as you can see bits of the old causeway poking above the lake.

The QED dates back to early 1900s, part of the original Ottawa Improvement Commission projects, although it originally cut through the middle of Lansdowne and as you said, cut across Dow's Lake to get around the Booth piling yards on the east side of Dow's Lake. The current configuration of QED dates to the late 1920s after the piling yards closed and a lot of the exhibition buildings along the canal were removed and a former inlet at Lansdowne was filled in. So, it goes back the horse and buggy era. At one time, there was a plan to extend the Elgin Street streetcar to Lansdowne along the QED (in mixed traffic) but this was deemed unaffordable for the number of residents served and then the Depression came and the streetcar era gradually came to a close.