Ottawa Rapid Transit Network developments

[eemy]

I'm going to have to agree with people that city staff is not necessarily neutral in the whole process and don't necessarily respect the principles behind public consultation.

Just as an example, does anyone really believe that the public wants only two stations downtown? I'm willing to bet that the public is almost universally opposed to that; however, apparently due to insurmountable engineering reasons, the core simply cannot have anymore. Nevertheless, most people are well aware that the subway in Toronto operates at very high frequencies through the core with stations spaced very closely together and negotiating extremely tight curves and thus are rather suspicious of the staff assessment.

The planning has to be shifted away from guessing what people want, showing them their options (which reastically are usually just a single option), and then saying this constituted public consultation. It's time that the engineering and technical planning waited and staff listened to what the public actually wants first, developing the solutions after the public consultation. Instead, we're presented with watered down proposals that the city staff might think makes the most sense to them, but which offers nothing appealing to the public.

While the Doucet-Leadman report might not meet the engineering and technical rigor which the staff desire, I do think it is more responsive to public opinion and presents a better starting point. I also think that Doucet in particular, seems to have a broader sense about public transit's position within the urban framework as a tool for shifting land use practices while staff seems to be entrenched in analysing it exclusively from its transportation utility and cost. The Carling corridor may not be the quickest (I suspect this would be due to more stations and the need to slow down for tighter curves) or cheapest route downtown from the west end and thus be a poor choice from an engineering and financial point of view; however, the potential for rail along that corridor to influence the land use along Carling is far greater than along Richmond and Byron when you consider that the potential growth in employment and population along that corridor is far less than along Carling. Consider also the city's goals for main arterial streets and which streets are slated for the most growth and thus require the greatest supportive measures. I think Carling was near the top in that regard.