Ottawa Rapid Transit Network developments

[lrt's friend]

Surprise vote kills transit plan
By SUSAN SHERRING


After almost 14 hours discussing and debating the future of the city's transit system yesterday, River Coun. Maria McRae effectively killed the plan at committee by voting against the phase-in program for the city's transit and road projects.

The vote lost on a tie, leaving Mayor Larry O'Brien and his staffers wondering what hit them.

Visibly upset while talking with both McRae and his office staff, O'Brien remained calm talking to reporters.

"Yes, I feel pretty blindsided by this," O'Brien said, refusing to speculate on what might have lead McRae to vote against the plan.

"It was quite a surprise. As the person who is ultimately responsible for this project, as the chair of the transportation committee, I had no idea she was going to do that," he continued.




Following the surprise vote, McRae quickly left the committee out a side door and avoided talking to reporters.

She wasn't answering her cellphone last night -- leaving most wondering what her vote meant.

McRae had been a big booster of the north-south plan under former mayor Bob Chiarelli.

While a blow to O'Brien, it doesn't mean the plan is anywhere near dead.

Instead, a motion to introduce and approve a phasing-in program will brought to city council next week.

Without a phasing -in plan, city staff would effectively had no mandate to proceed on one project over the next.

Earlier in the evening, a proposal by Capital Coun. Clive Doucet and Kitchissippi Coun. Christine Leadman which called for more emphasis on light rail with little investment in buses failed to garner enough support at the committee.

Calls last night to defer staff's recommendations and to explore their idea in more depth was met with resistance from both staff and politicians, who said further study would be detrimental to proceeding with their proposals.

Too bad.

The likes of deputy city manager Nancy Schepers and city manager Kent Kirkpatrick might understand the intricacies of both the staff report and the Doucet/Leadman plan, but impossible to believe the majority of council or the general public get the nuances.

TRIED IN VAIN

Leadman tried in vain to get her colleagues onside -- and clearly felt the process was being rushed.

"This is a true light rail plan. If you want to show we are a city with vision, we need to take the leap and do it right from the beginning. This is our second chance, and we're going to blow it again.

"Let's invest smartly, or we really missed the boat ."

But Innes Coun. Rainer Bloess didn't appear to be in the mood to learn anything new, suggesting the Leadman-Doucet plan was putting forth some misleading information.

"You say this is exactly the plan that staff have brought forward. That is not the case and it's that kind of misinformation that's generated so many e-mails from the public," he said.

From personal experience, Rainer Bloess' reaction is not surprising. He has been very supportive of the current process and is not prepared to listen to other views, whether from councillors or the public.

[lrt's friend]

More attractive

The Ottawa Citizen


Thursday, November 20, 2008


Finally, there is a light-rail transit plan that makes good sense.

The Leadman-Doucet plan looks like it was designed by people who might actually use rapid transit. It's based on rail -- faster, greener and more attractive to users. The routes follow logical paths people actually travel to logical destinations people actually go to -- the whole city is included.

It's the first plan that envisions an Ottawa of the future -- a major city that needs an efficient, attractive, up-to-date transit system.

I would add a few missing stations such as the airport, west Orléans and Moody Avenue areas. But these are minor issues.

Affordability? Any plan is affordable if the implementation timeframe is properly structured and it will be more affordable if it attracts users. This plan will. Good work. Keep fighting. This is a winner.

David Porter,

Ottawa

© The Ottawa Citizen 2008

A rail plan that makes a lot of sense

The Ottawa Citizen


Thursday, November 20, 2008


Re: Councillors pitch quicker rail remedy, Nov. 18.

I like the alternative light-rail transit plan proposed by Capital Councillor Clive Doucet and Kitchissippi Councillor Christine Leadman far more than the existing city staff plan.

Shifting people out of diesel buses onto electric light rail and streetcars decades sooner makes a lot of sense environmentally and economically.

A rail line on Carling Avenue, where people live instead of a longer route along the deserted Ottawa River Parkway, will both preserve the riverside scenery and encourage more people to use public transport. Reducing cross-river bridge traffic by extending the O-Train is very sensible.

In contrast, the city's "old-is-new" plan of expanding bus networks and delaying light-rail transit will result in 20-year delays in bringing rail to the suburbs. And who is to say the city will even be able to find or afford diesel fuel for its buses in 20 years. Hasn't the city's planning department factored in the forthcoming end of relatively cheap, dependable oil supplies into their thinking? And the objection that rail should only go where population densities are high enough is simply silly. Population growth can be made to follow transit nodes. Otherwise why bother having a planning department at all?

Peter Outridge,

Ottawa

© The Ottawa Citizen 2008

Moving congestion

The Ottawa Citizen


Thursday, November 20, 2008


I reject the proposed plan by Clive Doucet because it creates deteriorating transit service levels.

The proposal to have only seven stops on Carling Avenue will deter transit riders. The proposal to have light-rail transit on Carling will mean lines of trains at the intersections, where there are numerous stop lights compared to the other alternatives (Byron and the Ottawa River Parkway). The proposal to have light-rail transit on Carling amounts to the suggestion of moving transit congestion out of downtown Ottawa, onto Carling.

Carling is too slow for rapid transit, will not remove a significant number of buses from Ottawa streets, and will increase travel time for residents and businesses along the corridor (unless you happen to live at the precise stops it would make).

Michael Mielke,

Ottawa

© The Ottawa Citizen 2008

I had extensive debates with Michael during the on-line public consultations. His views were thoughtful.

The mayor just indicated on CFRA that the environmental assessment for the western Transitway will include the Carling Avenue alternative route. Is he being entirely truthful about this?

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

From personal experience, Rainer Bloess' reaction is not surprising. He has been very supportive of the current process and is not prepared to listen to other views, whether from councillors or the public.

But see how moronic they are.

Calls last night to defer staff's recommendations and to explore their idea in more depth was met with resistance from both staff and politicians, who said further study would be detrimental to proceeding with their proposals.

It's the whole point!

I said that the Doucet plan would bring concensus with the public, I stand by my point.

And for Michael, I don't see the point, since it was specifically clear that trains wouldn't stop at interstections. It just shows how the public is not informed, since this would be the case for every stop on the line. OMG, I have to walk to my stop. That's the whole point of RAPID transit.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

She said earlier that the public didn't want more buses.

Thump! That was the sound of me falling off my chair.
Maria McRae seems to have voted with some integrity - councillors are supposed to have an open mind, though they may represent a particular position held by their ward (something like that). I have to give her a big thumbs up for breaking ranks. That must have been a difficult decision.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Franky

Thump! That was the sound of me falling off my chair.
Maria McRae seems to have voted with some integrity - councillors are supposed to have an open mind, though they may represent a particular position held by their ward (something like that). I have to give her a big thumbs up for breaking ranks. That must have been a difficult decision.

At this stage, I would just do a referendum. Which plan do you prefer?

[Franky]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I had extensive debates with Michael during the on-line public consultations. His views were thoughtful.

The mayor just indicated on CFRA that the environmental assessment for the western Transitway will include the Carling Avenue alternative route. Is he being entirely truthful about this?

I don't have numbers to back this up, but it seems to me that transferring to a BRT from a local route to then transfer to LRT inside the greenbelt will deter many from using public transit from outside the greenbelt. Having the LRT go outside the greenbelt means local collector buses can transfer directly to LRT. It also means that park&ride lots make sense - not the case with LRT inside the greenbelt. It would be nice if staff got those numbers so that councillors could consider them.

There was some mumbling about expanding the mandate of the westerly route EA at a later time (we shall see, it probably requires another vote?). It was unclear (to me) if the rapid Carling route would be studied or just the streetcar or full grade-separated version which are pretty much useless. A motion had been put forward to study the rapid Carling route in particular, but it was defeated (as usual).

[Franky]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

At this stage, I would just do a referendum. Which plan do you prefer?

You mean let the public decide? I think a serious study needs to be done first. Councillors claimed the numbers for the South East Transitway were suspect, but refused to admit the NCC route numbers were also suspect (and at risk of being rejected!).

Another aspect that floored me was that we have no agreement or understanding with STO WRT operations with the new plan!? How can this be?

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Franky

You mean let the public decide? I think a serious study needs to be done first. Councillors claimed the numbers for the South East Transitway were suspect, but refused to admit the NCC route numbers were also suspect (and at risk of being rejected!).

Another aspect that floored me was that we have no agreement or understanding with STO WRT operations with the new plan!? How can this be?

Because city staff and councillors don't listen to their citizens. I haven't heard someone saying that they want more Transitway. I don't trust the public, but at this stage, they seem to be better informed than many.

And yes, the STO numbers are not included. I made that point many times. It makes things even more complicated with the unbalanced load, if there's another West route.

[lrt's friend]

Wow, Christine Leadman has called into the mayor who is now fielding calls on CFRA.

Christine is pretty upset with the mayor's statements this morning. She claims that Carling Avenue is not going to be considered as part of the environmental assessment for the western route, contrary to the mayor's prior statement. The mayor asked why this alternative was presented at the last minute. Of course, did the process really offer any opportunity to do this at an earlier date? The mayor made it perfectly clear that the Doucet-Leadman proposal was defeated. One gets the impression that the mayor is determined to surpress descent and make it appear that the dramatic defeat last night is but of minor significance.

[Franky]

One more poser is what about the more than $200 million the city is being sued for? Presumably, adopting the Doucet-Leadman plan with it's North-South rail line would avoid this large expenditure and potential damage to the city's reputation.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Franky

One more poser is what about the more than $200 million the city is being sued for? Presumably, adopting the Doucet-Leadman plan with it's North-South rail line would avoid this large expenditure and potential damage to the city's reputation.

I doubt that anything will stop this lawsuit now, aside from a costly settlement. I still see this as a LOSE-LOSE situation. If the city loses, we pay an enormous settlement for nothing. If we win, nobody will bid on a new contract or they will jack up the price substantially to make up for their losses. In any event, Ottawa will be considered a significant risk in doing business with and this risk will have a dollar figure attached, just like higher risks increase interest rates.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I doubt that anything will stop this lawsuit now, aside from a costly settlement. I still see this as a LOSE-LOSE situation. If the city loses, we pay an enormous settlement for nothing. If we win, nobody will bid on a new contract or they will jack up the price substantially to make up for their losses. In any event, Ottawa will be considered a significant risk in doing business with and this risk will have a dollar figure attached, just like higher risks increase interest rates.

Wouldn't it be better to hand over the contract to the parties involved (as had been agreed) with a small "bonus", perhaps in line with interest lost for the delay and litigation fees.

[Franky]

"The chair of the separate committee that handles transit issues, Bay Councillor Alex Cullen, who voted for the phasing plan, said Ms. McRae told him Thursday night she made "a mistake.""

Thursday night?
So, she isn't breaking ranks, she made a mistake. I might have to take back my thumbs up.
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=b78c331d-64c8-4b53-bbb2-3e28b8abebdc

[lrt's friend]

If that is the case, why did Alex Cullen make his other comments about Maria McRae making a protest because the last plan was killed? Something doesn't make sense here.

[MalcolmTucker]

An interesting plebiscite would be to do a preferential ballot for an all rail plan, a hybrid plan, and an all bus plan, all with the same budget for capital costs.

The wisdom of the group is sometimes needed on things such as these, especially when council can't make up its mind.

[waterloowarrior]

Transit plan not in danger: Cullen

By Jake Rupert
Ottawa Citizen

Thursday, November 20, 2008

OTTAWA - The chair of city council's transit committee is vowing that the phasing plan for a $5.1-billion mass-transit system will be approved by a healthy vote at next week's city council meeting.

Late Wednesday, elected officials at joint meeting of the city's transportation and transit committees voted to approve a new municipality-wide $7.2 billion road, walking, cycling and transit plan that will shape how people and goods move around the city until 2031.

But when it came to picking the first phase of the light-rail-based mass-transit system, the committee deadlocked five votes to five, with the transportation committee chair, River Councillor Maria McRae, casting the last vote.

The vote doesn't mean the defeat of the plan. It simply goes to city council next week without a committee recommendation. But with provincial and federal governments being asked to contribute billions to the system, proponents are hoping for council to speak with a nearly unanimous voice.

Ms. McRae's vote angered Mayor Larry O'Brien and others, and she hasn't commented since the vote.

The chair of the separate committee that handles transit issues, Bay Councillor Alex Cullen, who voted for the phasing plan, said Ms. McRae told him Thursday night she made "a mistake."

Mr. Cullen said regardless of Ms. McRae's reasons for voting, he expects the phasing plan to be approved.

"We will fix this," he said.

The transportation plan, along with a new land-use plan to be debated in coming months, is designed to create a more compact, environmentally and financially sustainable city that limits sprawl and sees people move from private vehicles to public transit.

City planning staff recommend the first phase of the transit plan include a $1.7-billion east-west light-rail line from Blair Road to Tunney's Pasture on the current bus transitway, crossing downtown in a tunnel, and improvements to bus transitways to the suburbs. It is a reduction from a previous goal of having a north-south line built in the first phase as well, a line that would have run through Ms. McRae's ward.

This line, and several other aspects of the system, are to be built when the city has the money and the regions the lines would serve have reached higher population densities.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

If that is the case, why did Alex Cullen make his other comments about Maria McRae making a protest because the last plan was killed? Something doesn't make sense here.

He said "mistake", not "misspoke" I would think that if she misspoke, she could have changed her vote?

Based on the lies I heard spread around on CFRA this morning, a plebiscite might be simply a battle of media resources.

[DecoyOctopus]

Ottawa's back and forth deliberations on moving forward makes me wish I lived in Toronto and think of the TTC and Go-Train appeal. Sure there is a lot more population in the Golden Horseshoe but that's not to say we could have something like that here.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by DecoyOctopus

Ottawa's back and forth deliberations on moving forward makes me wish I lived in Toronto and think of the TTC and Go-Train appeal. Sure there is a lot more population in the Golden Horseshoe but that's not to say we could have something like that here.

Welcome to the board. Thanks for your contribution!

[Franky]

Originally Posted by DecoyOctopus

Ottawa's back and forth deliberations on moving forward makes me wish I lived in Toronto and think of the TTC and Go-Train appeal. Sure there is a lot more population in the Golden Horseshoe but that's not to say we could have something like that here.

We had a plan. Contracts were signed, then an election (which has allegations of influence peddling) happened an now we have this BS "I want a tunnel" mayor.

Sorry, hello. ;-)