Councillor Peggy Feltmate in her letter to the Ottawa Citizen June 14, 2010 (It is a choice of downtown transit mall or tunnel) compares the options of a downtown LRT tunnel with the alternative of turning Albert or Slater Streets into a transit-only mall. The transit mall should save considerable expense and make the project affordable. However, it would need to be sold to the federal government’s current mouthpiece on this file, John Baird. This is likely to be a difficult task.
Also this approach assumes that the present plan to establish a core LRT link between Blair and Tunney’s through the downtown core is the right way to go in the first place. As I noted in my earlier post on this topic a great deal more analysis and planning is needed before a shovel is put in the ground for the light rail project.
Some will argue that the transit plan has been studied to death already. However as I previously noted, studies undertaken to date have largely addressed preconceived solutions. Broadly based investigations to determine the overall needs of the community have still not been undertaken.
Showing posts with label public transit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label public transit. Show all posts
Monday, June 14, 2010
Friday, June 11, 2010
It is time to rethink Ottawa’s transit options before spending billions on the wrong solution
With the municipal election campaign gaining momentum Ottawa’s proposed light rail project appears likely to become a serious issue again (Watson accused of playing to people’s fears, Alex Cullen, Ottawa Citizen, Letter to the Editor, June 9, 2010). As well there was something of a slanging match between Mayor Larry O’Brien and mayoralty candidate Jim Watson on the same issue. This all happened the same week that the Feds announced they will contribute up to $600M to the project, matching the provincial government’s commitment.
Some new entrants to the municipal elections have concerns about the municipal government’s current spending priorities. Plans for the proposed light rail system are high on their list of concerns.
James O’Grady, candidate for councillor in Ward 9 (Knoxdale-Merivale) has launched an on-line policy discussion group to interchange ideas with supporters and members of his campaign team. Transit and transportation are high on the list of priorities under discussion right now and some interesting ideas are being presented. some observations made by “Agnes of the Glens” particularly caught my attention:
“The issue is not whether we want LRT but whether we can afford it and also where it would go. In most European cities suburbs are connected to avoid driving cars and then they have metro. In our model the downtown area, where you can actually walk, gets all kinds of transit option but the suburbs will only get connected if they intensify….Provide train rail to downtown from major suburban areas (Kanata, Barrhaven, Orleans) and later work on other options. The way the tunnel is propose I do not see any change for the suburbs. I do not condone policy that people should know when they move, it is unrealistic. The tunnel has many issues; costs and security are the main constraints. Until design engineering studies are done we may not learn about what else might be there.
“As a taxpayer I see very little in actual clearing of the gridlock unless there is easy accessible transit from suburbia to downtown like the go- train in Toronto and after this is done consider the metro options and the digging. I have not seen anything in existing plans to make me a convert although I would love to see a train getting me downtown.”
Clinton Cowan, candidate for councillor in Ward 18, Alta Vista/Canterbury/Riverview, makes the following observations in a column in the June 2010 issue of Riverview Park Review:
“Light rail dependent on expropriation is a symptom of poor planning. That approach cannot continue in our city if we hope to shape it properly for future growth.
“The greatest challenge is not where transit goes but who uses it…. To encourage ridership in the short term what is needed is an expansion of the Eco Pass program and to tip the balance in favour of transit use versus car use. A shift in the funding ratio is needed and this requires innovative thinking. If the current council were truly sincere about encouraging ridership, they would minimize new road building. There is a piecemeal approach to road use, development of corridors, and traffic…. Communities are willing to share growing pains but they must be able raise awareness to what is not feasible or sustainable or acceptable to a community.”
The enlightened comments offered by these new candidates and by members of the public lead me to think that a great deal more analysis and planning needs to be done before a shovel is put in the ground for the light rail project. For instance, if priority were given to providing rail links from suburban areas to downtown, maybe we could make use of existing rail line infrastructure minimizing the need for costly expropriation and reducing construction costs as well as construction time.
Notwithstanding that all levels of government have now put a great deal of money on the table, the scope of studies undertaken to date appears to have been focused on strictly defined goals that have prevented serious consideration of alternatives. To my knowledge there have been no broadly based investigations and cost/benefit trade-offs that look at the overall needs of the municipality undertaken.
Maybe we need to go back to the drawing board and take a fresh look. This might even result in significant cost savings and free up money for other high priority needs within the municipality, water and sewer infrastructure renewal for example.
Some new entrants to the municipal elections have concerns about the municipal government’s current spending priorities. Plans for the proposed light rail system are high on their list of concerns.
James O’Grady, candidate for councillor in Ward 9 (Knoxdale-Merivale) has launched an on-line policy discussion group to interchange ideas with supporters and members of his campaign team. Transit and transportation are high on the list of priorities under discussion right now and some interesting ideas are being presented. some observations made by “Agnes of the Glens” particularly caught my attention:
“The issue is not whether we want LRT but whether we can afford it and also where it would go. In most European cities suburbs are connected to avoid driving cars and then they have metro. In our model the downtown area, where you can actually walk, gets all kinds of transit option but the suburbs will only get connected if they intensify….Provide train rail to downtown from major suburban areas (Kanata, Barrhaven, Orleans) and later work on other options. The way the tunnel is propose I do not see any change for the suburbs. I do not condone policy that people should know when they move, it is unrealistic. The tunnel has many issues; costs and security are the main constraints. Until design engineering studies are done we may not learn about what else might be there.
“As a taxpayer I see very little in actual clearing of the gridlock unless there is easy accessible transit from suburbia to downtown like the go- train in Toronto and after this is done consider the metro options and the digging. I have not seen anything in existing plans to make me a convert although I would love to see a train getting me downtown.”
Clinton Cowan, candidate for councillor in Ward 18, Alta Vista/Canterbury/Riverview, makes the following observations in a column in the June 2010 issue of Riverview Park Review:
“Light rail dependent on expropriation is a symptom of poor planning. That approach cannot continue in our city if we hope to shape it properly for future growth.
“The greatest challenge is not where transit goes but who uses it…. To encourage ridership in the short term what is needed is an expansion of the Eco Pass program and to tip the balance in favour of transit use versus car use. A shift in the funding ratio is needed and this requires innovative thinking. If the current council were truly sincere about encouraging ridership, they would minimize new road building. There is a piecemeal approach to road use, development of corridors, and traffic…. Communities are willing to share growing pains but they must be able raise awareness to what is not feasible or sustainable or acceptable to a community.”
The enlightened comments offered by these new candidates and by members of the public lead me to think that a great deal more analysis and planning needs to be done before a shovel is put in the ground for the light rail project. For instance, if priority were given to providing rail links from suburban areas to downtown, maybe we could make use of existing rail line infrastructure minimizing the need for costly expropriation and reducing construction costs as well as construction time.
Notwithstanding that all levels of government have now put a great deal of money on the table, the scope of studies undertaken to date appears to have been focused on strictly defined goals that have prevented serious consideration of alternatives. To my knowledge there have been no broadly based investigations and cost/benefit trade-offs that look at the overall needs of the municipality undertaken.
Maybe we need to go back to the drawing board and take a fresh look. This might even result in significant cost savings and free up money for other high priority needs within the municipality, water and sewer infrastructure renewal for example.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
An interview with Clinton Cowan
Clinton Cowan a Candidate for Councillor in Ward 18
I recently interviewed Clinton Cowan on behalf of my community newspaper, Riverview Park Review. People living outside Riverview Park who might be interested in learning more about Mr. Cowan. Here is a copy of the article.
Clinton Cowan, a long-time resident of Alta Vista, is running for councillor in Alta Vista/Canterbury/Riverview Ward in the upcoming October municipal election. Clinton is a husband and father with a determination to improve the quality of living in Ottawa. Clinton has worked in the public, private, and non-profit sectors helping to build vibrant communities and he currently works in the field of labour relations. His education includes Carleton University - Public Administration and University of Ottawa - Communications. Clinton has served the community in many volunteer roles including: South-East Ottawa’s Community Health Centre; Ottawa Valley Autistic Homes; Byward Market Safety and Security Committee; CHEO, the Ottawa Food Bank and the Salvation Army.
Mr. Cowan made the decision to run for councillor in the upcoming election because he has observed that there is a broken relationship between the community and the current councillor. Clinton wants to work with residents to return strong leadership to City Hall by repairing the disconnect and using every avenue in keeping the people informed so that residents can participate in shaping our unique community.
Riverview Park Review asked each of the three candidates running for council in Ward 18 questions on several issues. Here are Clinton’s responses:
Some members of council have proposed that referendum questions on homelessness be included in the 2010 ballot. What are your thoughts about homelessness in Ottawa? “We have a tremendous amount of intellectual and, at times, financial resources available but we have challenges in addressing the populations at risk because of the competitive duplication in providing services. Competing, or near-competing, groups could be brought together to work on a strategic long term approach. Individual cases are unique, requiring a holistic consistent approach to people at risk. The most important thing we can do is to show individuals what support is available to them and where to find support. Interestingly, in Ward 18, one in four people lives at or below the government defined poverty line.”
What can be done to improve local transit links within the community and accelerate a comprehensive light rail plan for the city while making public transit affordable to everyone?
“Light rail dependent on expropriation is a symptom of poor planning. That approach cannot continue in our city if we hope to shape it properly for future growth.
“The greatest challenge is not where transit goes but who uses it. It is now a competition for people to decide whether to use personal transportation with personal music and climate control which contributes to traffic congestion and air pollution, or use the bus. To encourage ridership in the short term what is needed is an expansion of the Eco Pass program and to tip the balance in favour of transit use versus car use. If the current council were truly sincere about encouraging ridership, they would minimize new road building. A shift in the funding ratio is needed and this requires innovative thinking. There is a piecemeal approach to road use, development of corridors, and traffic. The new bus garage at Industrial Ave. and Russell Road will likely saturate roadways in the area but only token notice and communication to community have occurred during this major development. Communities are willing to share growing pains but they must be able raise awareness to what is not feasible or sustainable or acceptable to a community.
What are your views on intensification projects within the community? How can changes be effectively integrated while respecting existing communities (residents and infrastructure)? “Wonderful communities have developed over many years and intensification decisions need to respect the nature of communities. The City over-inflated projected populations within planning time-horizons. We must be honest about intensification targets and we must look at all the options if intensification is to be kept in scale with what we need and if we are to make it truly successful. There is a history of poor planning resulting in increased traffic, increased pollution and a community divided by major arterial walls.”
Some construction projects being funded under the governments’ Economic Action Plan have been fast forwarded so that they can be completed within the deadlines imposed. What are your views on this approach? “This financial opportunity was put in place to help mitigate the effects of a global crisis. We cannot ignore this; however the municipality should have requested an amendment asking that the city be allowed to implement its normal practices. Rushed projects provide minimal opportunity for community participation. Good decisions take time.”
What do you think can be done to build neighbourhoods where people can live, work and play? “Neighbourhoods matter. I am a supporter of sustainable communities that enhance quality of life. Currently I am working on a movement to increase the capacity of home care spaces in our community, which has one of the highest unfulfilled demands for spaces in the city. Changes in land use occur frequently and we rarely look at the need to support the current mix of residential, commercial, institutional land use that makes them sustainable. Not counting gas stations, Alta Vista has three convenience stores. The corner store does not exist. Walmart is not a corner store. There is a lot of room for improvement; any change must involve the community.”
Do you think that tax increases can be set at or below inflation with a balanced focus on economic, social, and environmental sustainability? “In an ideal setting it would be wonderful if there were no need for continual tax increases. However, the challenge to predetermining a tax rate does not account for the needs and wants of the community. Ottawa has greater needs than wants. We are looking at capital expenditures for our transit system, to resolve neglected waste water infrastructure, to build a new public library, and to develop Lansdowne. We need to take a look at what is needed today, to minimize stress on taxpayers. Currently we have a 3.7% increase to our taxes but we still have increasing user fees, including higher water rates coming shortly, and we have to deal with levy after levy. Most of it is money required to fix problems that should have been addressed or avoided a long time ago. It is apparent that we need a Fresh Start at the council table.”
Do you think that debate and citizen engagement on governance issues (amalgamation, borough councils, and ward councils) should be encouraged? “Should I have the honor of representing Alta Vista Ward I will make every effort to encourage community engagement, using every tool available to a councillor. The fact is that our city was not amalgamated by our choice. As a city we exist by a legislative act from the province. Dialogue must be brought up to the provincial level to initiate change. I have talked to community associations and business improvement associations across the city and it is clear that a lot more interchange between civic leaders and members of the community is needed.”
What are your views on the OSEG/Lansdowne Live proposal? Do you agree that projects of the magnitude of Lansdowne Live should be contracted on a sole-source basis and have so much financial risk transferred to the City? Do you think Lansdowne Live fits in with the neighbourhood? “At this point we will likely never know if this proposal represents the best possible use of this land. It is worrisome that the city has not looked at other alternatives. Do we have the right eyes at the table? Seven of ten architects review panel resigned. In a hiccup our councillor was able to pull his team from across country; locals are only minimally involved. Will they do this with other developments (e.g. the downtown tunnel)?”
At all levels of government voters complain that they only hear from their elected representative at election time. What would you do to engage community members regularly, to listen to their concerns and to respond constructively? “As a candidate I believe I have broken new ground for how residents can become and stay involved and I will provide uncensored opportunities for people to communicate, not just on election day, every day. That commitment is on my website (http://www.clintoncowan.ca/). I make the effort to come to people; I do not expect them to take time off to come to me. I will attend community associations and I will always try to maximize opportunities for community engagement. I have the commitment, the vision and the energy to bring City Hall to the people.”
Friday, January 15, 2010
City handling of public consultations on development projects is less than fair
On January 11, 2009, along with a number of Riverview Park residents and people from outside the community, I attended an open house to review and respond to an amended environmental assessment that will facilitate expansion to the OC Transpo Garage that is currently under construction on Industrial Avenue.
The site currently under construction will accommodate some 145 or more articulated buses and the planned expansion is to provide parking space for an additional 80 buses. The first phase of the project is now well advanced and a new garage facility is projected to start operations this fall.
The open house specifically addressed the expansion but many of the Riverview Park residents attending were quite surprised to learn about the size and the potential impact of the facility that is currently approved and under construction.
People expressed concern about potential noise and air pollution. Heavy bus traffic along Industrial Avenue at certain hours is also a concern as well as the number of busses idling for long periods before going into service.
Councillor Peter Hume sent out community invitations to this event, but apparently many residents living closest to the new facility did not receive them. Councillor Hume was in attendance. There were a number of OC Transpo representatives and City consultants present to address specialized concerns - noise levels, pollution levels, architecture, etc. These people went to some length in describing the detailed analysis they had performed and the measures that will be introduced to mitigate undesirable effects.
One factor revealed by the consultants is that the planned facility meets all provincially mandated standards for an industrial facility. The problem is that this “industrial facility” is immediately adjacent to a large residential community. The community will likely be seriously affected by the facility in many ways and the city does not seem inclined to do much more to mitigate them. Rather, it appeared that the City (Councillor Hume at least) is more interested in mediation – providing other facilities/services in the neighborhood (sidewalks etc.) that will do nothing to mitigate damage to residents’ quality of life and home values from noise and pollution.
Information on the project was presented on storyboards but there were no handouts to take away, the information is not immediately available on-line, and the unrealistic timeline for submitting comments (January 29, 2010) was not clearly identified. Fortunately, Riverview Park Community Association (RPCA) was able to obtain electronic copies of the storyboards from the consultants after the meeting. Time is of the essence for this project and OC Transpo wants to move on quickly and damn the torpedoes.
OC Transpo did not invite anyone from the consulting group doing an environmental assessment for the proposed Cumberland Bus Transit-way to the open house. This is disturbing as the preferred route for the transit-way encroaches on the bus garage expansion being planned. Neither have they held proactive meetings with RPCA or communicated with them throughout the process?
It has taken nearly 8 months for this open house to be arranged. The consultation process is reminiscent of that used for Lansdowne Live. It is interesting to contrast this to the speed with which Councillor Hume moved when it was learned that a site for parole office was being considered on Industrial Avenue.
Many residents left the open house feeling less than happy and are unsure of the next step. Fortunately RPCA was well represented at the open house and they are following up aggressively on a number of issues.
Questions beyond specifics of the site that need to be answered include:
- How was this proposed garage presented to the public in the first place?
- What of the specifics of bus ingress and egress to/from the OC Transpo site?
- Why is the process for consulting with local stakeholders not more proactive?
- Why was a site with close proximity to an established residential area selected (the existing OC - Transpo Garage and St. Laurent is located in an area that is exclusively industrial)?
- Is any OC Transpo follow-up with members of the Riverview Park community planned?
The site currently under construction will accommodate some 145 or more articulated buses and the planned expansion is to provide parking space for an additional 80 buses. The first phase of the project is now well advanced and a new garage facility is projected to start operations this fall.
The open house specifically addressed the expansion but many of the Riverview Park residents attending were quite surprised to learn about the size and the potential impact of the facility that is currently approved and under construction.
People expressed concern about potential noise and air pollution. Heavy bus traffic along Industrial Avenue at certain hours is also a concern as well as the number of busses idling for long periods before going into service.
Councillor Peter Hume sent out community invitations to this event, but apparently many residents living closest to the new facility did not receive them. Councillor Hume was in attendance. There were a number of OC Transpo representatives and City consultants present to address specialized concerns - noise levels, pollution levels, architecture, etc. These people went to some length in describing the detailed analysis they had performed and the measures that will be introduced to mitigate undesirable effects.
One factor revealed by the consultants is that the planned facility meets all provincially mandated standards for an industrial facility. The problem is that this “industrial facility” is immediately adjacent to a large residential community. The community will likely be seriously affected by the facility in many ways and the city does not seem inclined to do much more to mitigate them. Rather, it appeared that the City (Councillor Hume at least) is more interested in mediation – providing other facilities/services in the neighborhood (sidewalks etc.) that will do nothing to mitigate damage to residents’ quality of life and home values from noise and pollution.
Information on the project was presented on storyboards but there were no handouts to take away, the information is not immediately available on-line, and the unrealistic timeline for submitting comments (January 29, 2010) was not clearly identified. Fortunately, Riverview Park Community Association (RPCA) was able to obtain electronic copies of the storyboards from the consultants after the meeting. Time is of the essence for this project and OC Transpo wants to move on quickly and damn the torpedoes.
OC Transpo did not invite anyone from the consulting group doing an environmental assessment for the proposed Cumberland Bus Transit-way to the open house. This is disturbing as the preferred route for the transit-way encroaches on the bus garage expansion being planned. Neither have they held proactive meetings with RPCA or communicated with them throughout the process?
It has taken nearly 8 months for this open house to be arranged. The consultation process is reminiscent of that used for Lansdowne Live. It is interesting to contrast this to the speed with which Councillor Hume moved when it was learned that a site for parole office was being considered on Industrial Avenue.
Many residents left the open house feeling less than happy and are unsure of the next step. Fortunately RPCA was well represented at the open house and they are following up aggressively on a number of issues.
Questions beyond specifics of the site that need to be answered include:
- How was this proposed garage presented to the public in the first place?
- What of the specifics of bus ingress and egress to/from the OC Transpo site?
- Why is the process for consulting with local stakeholders not more proactive?
- Why was a site with close proximity to an established residential area selected (the existing OC - Transpo Garage and St. Laurent is located in an area that is exclusively industrial)?
- Is any OC Transpo follow-up with members of the Riverview Park community planned?
Friday, December 11, 2009
Make Alta Vista Transportation Corridor (AVTC) a 2010 City Budget Issue
Yesterday the following message was posted to the Our-Ottawa discussion group, courtesy of Michael Richardson. Now is a good time for Ottawa city councillors to discuss the need for this road and to put any design/development work on hold pending a decision to have the road removed from the official plan at the earliest opportunity. The Ottawa Hospital, General Campus would be better served by simply providing improved bus services along existing corridors. Contact you ward councillor on this issue today. Have the AVTC removed from the 2010 city budget.
“The first phase is a $70+ million for a 1.2 km link from Riverside Drive to the General Hospital (on Smyth) -- $5 million is set aside in the 2010 budget for design work. The lead consultant is Delcan -- who also conducted the EA recommending that the road go ahead (while declining to include a transit-only option in the study) despite the Ottawa 2020 Plan that included a goal of trying to get people to use other means of transportation besides private vehicles. Ironically, as I understand it, the hospital that this link is supposed to service has never formally come out in favour of the road -- and in fact has made it clear that it does not want a transit corridor road to bisect the hospital grounds per se (which kind of defeats the purpose of having a dedicated transit link to the hospital).
“It's worse than that. There is $45M in the ‘LRT tunnel’ plan to build a second transit bridge across the Rideau River next to the current one so that buses can ‘temporarily’ use that bridge while the tracks are being laid. ‘Temporary’ is something like 10 years.
“That bridge aligns with Nicolas and the AV parkway. Delcan is also one of the leads on parts of the LRT tunnel work. It's important to understand that the current "LRT tunnel" plan isreally just an excuse to build a lot of really expensive roads.”
“The first phase is a $70+ million for a 1.2 km link from Riverside Drive to the General Hospital (on Smyth) -- $5 million is set aside in the 2010 budget for design work. The lead consultant is Delcan -- who also conducted the EA recommending that the road go ahead (while declining to include a transit-only option in the study) despite the Ottawa 2020 Plan that included a goal of trying to get people to use other means of transportation besides private vehicles. Ironically, as I understand it, the hospital that this link is supposed to service has never formally come out in favour of the road -- and in fact has made it clear that it does not want a transit corridor road to bisect the hospital grounds per se (which kind of defeats the purpose of having a dedicated transit link to the hospital).
“It's worse than that. There is $45M in the ‘LRT tunnel’ plan to build a second transit bridge across the Rideau River next to the current one so that buses can ‘temporarily’ use that bridge while the tracks are being laid. ‘Temporary’ is something like 10 years.
“That bridge aligns with Nicolas and the AV parkway. Delcan is also one of the leads on parts of the LRT tunnel work. It's important to understand that the current "LRT tunnel" plan isreally just an excuse to build a lot of really expensive roads.”
Thursday, April 16, 2009
First Open house for the proposed Hospital Link/Cumberland Corridor study
It is reported that the first open house for the "Hospital Link/Cumberland Corridor study" will take place on Wed. April 29th, 18:00-21:00 at Ellwood Hall in the Jim Durrell Rec. Centre on Walkley Road. There is no confirmation of this on the City of Ottawa web site with less than 2 weeks to go before the event. Very strange!
These meetings will provide some of very few limited opportunities to challenge the planned Browning corridor being used as a transitway. This is an alert to everyone who would like to be heard on the matter.
These meetings will provide some of very few limited opportunities to challenge the planned Browning corridor being used as a transitway. This is an alert to everyone who would like to be heard on the matter.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
A great public forum on city governance
Councillor Clive Doucet sponsored an excellent forum, “Governing Ottawa Better”, last evening in the council chamber at City Hall. It was very well attended; there was a well informed panel of speakers; and there was lots of opportunity for individual citizens to speak and make their views known.
I think that a majority of people attending were likely in favor of some form of re-amalgamation of the city from its present structure. However, we also learned that getting the mission accomplished might not be easy.
There a couple of ways that a re-amalgamation (sounds more positive than de-amalgamation!) could be pursued by:
- local referendum or
- direct legislative change initiated by City Council.
Both options have pros and cons, but either way the provincial government has to buy in. The past history of attempts to de-amalgamate in the Province of Ontario shows that the government has rejected past attempts on the basis of uncertainty regarding fiscal sustainability, adverse property tax shifts (property tax fairness) and lack of council endorsement. Any proposal to change the present municipal structure would have to address the first two issues effectively. This requires a lot of effort.
If this initiative moves forward Clive and his team will need a lot of help and support.
If you are willing to help lobby your local MPP for municipal reform in Ottawa, or participate in working groups looking at alternate governance structures, please visit Clive’s web site. Electronic copies of a governance questionnaire are also available at Clive’s web site: http://www.clivedoucet.com/.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Why so much rush over the stadium?
It is difficult to understand why there appears to be such urgency in coming to a decision over a new sports stadium. The deadline is being driven by the plans of corporate enterprises and not by the city’s agenda. The city has higher priorities than a sports stadium and has no resources to invest in such an endeavor at this time anyway!
A project of this scale requires considerable research and planning before council can make an informed decision. Importantly, the site for such a facility needs to be well served by public transit (both now and in the future).
According to the Ottawa Citizen, Stadium site report confuses issue – Randall Denley, Feb. 24, 2009, “Council needs to narrow its focus to make a decision.” Denley criticizes Councillor Peter Hume for favoring a consultant’s report that brings several other sites into play. I tend to agree with Hume on this issue. However, I also agree with a comment on the article posted by Massey Mail today; here it is:
“Hume -- the "most sensible guy on council"? If true, that is a sad commentary on council. More likely, he is just the one who plays it safest -- and follows the winds and developers whims. If he ends up being mayor, we will be stuck with four years of visionless leadership (e.g. where was Hume during the bus strike and the time leading up to it?). You may not agree with everything Clive Doucet says (I know I don't), but at least he dares to think about the long term and outside the box.”
A project of this scale requires considerable research and planning before council can make an informed decision. Importantly, the site for such a facility needs to be well served by public transit (both now and in the future).
According to the Ottawa Citizen, Stadium site report confuses issue – Randall Denley, Feb. 24, 2009, “Council needs to narrow its focus to make a decision.” Denley criticizes Councillor Peter Hume for favoring a consultant’s report that brings several other sites into play. I tend to agree with Hume on this issue. However, I also agree with a comment on the article posted by Massey Mail today; here it is:
“Hume -- the "most sensible guy on council"? If true, that is a sad commentary on council. More likely, he is just the one who plays it safest -- and follows the winds and developers whims. If he ends up being mayor, we will be stuck with four years of visionless leadership (e.g. where was Hume during the bus strike and the time leading up to it?). You may not agree with everything Clive Doucet says (I know I don't), but at least he dares to think about the long term and outside the box.”
Friday, January 30, 2009
The transit strike is over; really?
I just read on the CBC Ottawa website that the O-train should be running onMonday (Feb 2) but busses will not be in service for a further week (Feb 9)! Give us a break, surely OC Transpo can do better than this?
At least get transit moving along the main corridors from Orleans, Barrhaven, Kanata. This would help make many peoples lives easier again; surely a hundred or mor busses can be put into service by mid week?
The city should also be flexible and forgiving with parking tickets if park & rides overflow until full service levels are restored. A much better idea than several weeks more of the high level of downtown congestion we have experience over the past 51 days.
At least get transit moving along the main corridors from Orleans, Barrhaven, Kanata. This would help make many peoples lives easier again; surely a hundred or mor busses can be put into service by mid week?
The city should also be flexible and forgiving with parking tickets if park & rides overflow until full service levels are restored. A much better idea than several weeks more of the high level of downtown congestion we have experience over the past 51 days.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
An "inconvenient" strike
Here is an excellent letter from today's Ottawa Citizen http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/todays-paper/Inconvenient+strike+disaster/1221003/story.html. I agree entirely with the views expressed.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Some musings on the OC Transpo strike
The transit strike is now into its 46th day with no apparent settlement on the horizon. There is no doubt fault to be found on both sides but I am particularly concerned about the city's side of the debate and the poor leadership being provided by mayor Larry O'Brien. Council appear to be united behind him; something that would normally be considered laudable, but in this case is an unfortunate mistake.
Only one councillor, Clive Doucet, has taken any initiative to stand up to the mayor and even he was made (forced) to withdraw his comments, apologize and get back in line.
Because all council deliberations on the strike are being held in camera it is not possible to learn the positions of individual councillors. Contacting my own ward councillor (Peter Hume) revealed that "..City Council by unanimous resolution has designated spokes persons with respect to various aspects of the dispute and I am not one the spokespersons and I will abide by the unanimous will of Council" - wonderful!
The federal government has indicated it will not force strikers back to work at this time and that the two sides should come together and negotiate an agreement. What I don't understand is why this is so different from the last Toronto transit strike when the provincial government made transit an essential service and had transit workers back at work in short order.
I hope we all remember this come election time in 2010, "its time for change" - a mantra that is very popular nowadays!
Only one councillor, Clive Doucet, has taken any initiative to stand up to the mayor and even he was made (forced) to withdraw his comments, apologize and get back in line.
Because all council deliberations on the strike are being held in camera it is not possible to learn the positions of individual councillors. Contacting my own ward councillor (Peter Hume) revealed that "..City Council by unanimous resolution has designated spokes persons with respect to various aspects of the dispute and I am not one the spokespersons and I will abide by the unanimous will of Council" - wonderful!
The federal government has indicated it will not force strikers back to work at this time and that the two sides should come together and negotiate an agreement. What I don't understand is why this is so different from the last Toronto transit strike when the provincial government made transit an essential service and had transit workers back at work in short order.
I hope we all remember this come election time in 2010, "its time for change" - a mantra that is very popular nowadays!
Federal Budget - Jan 27, 2009 edition
Peter Simpson provides some interesting commentary on the upcoming budget (Short-term stimulus will just repeat errors of the past - Globe & Mail Sat. Jan 24, 2009). He suggests that if Bank of Canada projections are correct, then Canadian governments are about to make a series of mistakes.
Commenting on infrastructure funding he notes that money for these projects (even "shovel ready ones) cannot really start flowing until mid-2009. He is particularly scathing about "shovel ready" projects on the City of Ottawa's wish list because they are largely of the wrong kind. Most of Ottawa's big ticket items are road enlargements and paving projects in the suburbs - exactly the wrong kind for an urban area that needs to intensify growth in the inner city and build even one rapid transit system.
"Not all municipalities, thank heaven, are as lacking in imagination" he opines. Still, too many of the municipal projects are either the wrong kind or will inject additional spending into the economy at the wrong time.
Commenting on infrastructure funding he notes that money for these projects (even "shovel ready ones) cannot really start flowing until mid-2009. He is particularly scathing about "shovel ready" projects on the City of Ottawa's wish list because they are largely of the wrong kind. Most of Ottawa's big ticket items are road enlargements and paving projects in the suburbs - exactly the wrong kind for an urban area that needs to intensify growth in the inner city and build even one rapid transit system.
"Not all municipalities, thank heaven, are as lacking in imagination" he opines. Still, too many of the municipal projects are either the wrong kind or will inject additional spending into the economy at the wrong time.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Fed’s real estate plans could make stage one of Ottawa’s light rail development a white elephant
A news posting on the CBC website http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2009/01/09/ot-090109-real-estate.html indicate the possibility of Federal government departments moving out of Tunneys Pasture over the next few years – for renovations, possibly for ever? If this was to occur, the first stage of Ottawa’s light rail plan, Blair road to Tunney’s through a down-town tunnel, would be a mass-transit link to nowhere!
While government real estate plans are likely not firm and only speculative at this time, one would hope that the Feds would communicate the possibility of such a move to the municipality before it embarks on developing planned light rail links. It would indeed be unfortunate if an underutilized ($1 billion plus) light rail link was put in place while leaving areas in urgent need of light rail waiting for years to come.
Articles like this serve to highlight the need for effective and ongoing communications between all levels of government in the National Capital area.
While government real estate plans are likely not firm and only speculative at this time, one would hope that the Feds would communicate the possibility of such a move to the municipality before it embarks on developing planned light rail links. It would indeed be unfortunate if an underutilized ($1 billion plus) light rail link was put in place while leaving areas in urgent need of light rail waiting for years to come.
Articles like this serve to highlight the need for effective and ongoing communications between all levels of government in the National Capital area.
Friday, January 9, 2009
A worrisome consequence of the Ottawa transit strike
The transit strike is now into its fifth week and, given the rejection of the city’s latest offer by the driver’s union, will likely continue on for some time. We mostly have strong opinions on the strikers, the city or both and I do not intend to comment further on this, other than to suggest that reason has to return on both sides.
What concern me more are possible long term consequences of the dispute once it is settled? One of my concerns is that proponents of ongoing road development (on city council and elsewhere) will see this as an opportunity to promote and accelerate the city’s road building agenda.
Development of the transit plan must address long term staffing and labour issues as well as infrastructure and route planning. Provisions that will ensure continuity of transit services while labour negotiations are in process are essential. It is unclear to me that this can be accomplished through the current organization. City should remove itself from day-to-day issues and once again consider establishment of an arms length transit authority.
What concern me more are possible long term consequences of the dispute once it is settled? One of my concerns is that proponents of ongoing road development (on city council and elsewhere) will see this as an opportunity to promote and accelerate the city’s road building agenda.
Development of the transit plan must address long term staffing and labour issues as well as infrastructure and route planning. Provisions that will ensure continuity of transit services while labour negotiations are in process are essential. It is unclear to me that this can be accomplished through the current organization. City should remove itself from day-to-day issues and once again consider establishment of an arms length transit authority.
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Ethical Issues at Play in the TMP Debate
Yesterday’s City of Ottawa Council meeting saw the start of debate on the draft Transportation Master Plan (TMP), as recommended by the joint Transport/Transit Committees last week. Motions to open up the scope of the debate presented by opponents of the plan in its present form were defeated and strict time limits were placed on councillors’ questions to staff about details of the plan. Even with this limitation in place questions to staff took up several hours.
It was evident from staff responses to questions on the Carling Avenue LRT options the Leadman/Doucet proposal has not been reviewed seriously. Staff presented deliberately misleading details of technical assessments of the various options that have been analyzed.
There was also evidence of collusion between TMP supporters on council and members of staff. Questions to staff from some plan supporters were phrased to elicit copy book answers. It looked rehearsed. The more difficult questions asked by plan opponents could not be fully explored because of imposed time limits. Consequently, many important issues remain unexplored.
The debate is not yet done. Many motions remain to be debated before the plan is voted on. I can’t imagine the TMP being approved in its present form, given uncertainties in funding from provincial and federal government funding, as well as the City’s fragile financial position. It’s time to take a step back and to reexamine the many options that are on the table.
At best I believe that there are ethical issues that need to be addressed. I’ll have more to say about this later.
It was evident from staff responses to questions on the Carling Avenue LRT options the Leadman/Doucet proposal has not been reviewed seriously. Staff presented deliberately misleading details of technical assessments of the various options that have been analyzed.
There was also evidence of collusion between TMP supporters on council and members of staff. Questions to staff from some plan supporters were phrased to elicit copy book answers. It looked rehearsed. The more difficult questions asked by plan opponents could not be fully explored because of imposed time limits. Consequently, many important issues remain unexplored.
The debate is not yet done. Many motions remain to be debated before the plan is voted on. I can’t imagine the TMP being approved in its present form, given uncertainties in funding from provincial and federal government funding, as well as the City’s fragile financial position. It’s time to take a step back and to reexamine the many options that are on the table.
At best I believe that there are ethical issues that need to be addressed. I’ll have more to say about this later.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Democracy at Work – Not
Here is the text from a letter I wrote to the Ottawa Citizen today:
At yesterday’s joint Transport/Transit meeting to review and approve the updated City of Ottawa draft Transportation Master Plan (TMP), some 25 delegations presented comments and in some cases alternative visions for elements of the plan. Several things became evident as the day progressed. Firstly the nature of many of the delegate presentations revealed significant inconsistencies in the draft TMP, suggesting that it is not yet ready for presentation to council. Secondly, it was clear from questions and comments from councillors that many of them already have their minds made up notwithstanding the validity of delegates’ input. Thirdly, an alternative vision of the Light Rail Transit (LRT) system offered by Councillors Doucet and Leadman was rejected without providing time for the serious consideration it clearly deserves.
Significant effort made by individual delegates is largely unappreciated and valuable suggestions go ignored. Council decisions regarding the direction the TMP will take are formed even before staff effort is completed. City staff clearly worked hard to develop the draft plan presented to the committee. Unfortunately, the work they do is based on direction from councillors some of whom have unbending political agendas and allegiances.
Council members are not experts in the complex fields of transportation and transit, so are not qualified to take a final decision on the TMP without independent expert overview. A plan of this complexity should be subject to arm’s length review by a panel of experts before being presented for approval. Why the hurry to approve this important plan without taking the time to get it right?
At yesterday’s joint Transport/Transit meeting to review and approve the updated City of Ottawa draft Transportation Master Plan (TMP), some 25 delegations presented comments and in some cases alternative visions for elements of the plan. Several things became evident as the day progressed. Firstly the nature of many of the delegate presentations revealed significant inconsistencies in the draft TMP, suggesting that it is not yet ready for presentation to council. Secondly, it was clear from questions and comments from councillors that many of them already have their minds made up notwithstanding the validity of delegates’ input. Thirdly, an alternative vision of the Light Rail Transit (LRT) system offered by Councillors Doucet and Leadman was rejected without providing time for the serious consideration it clearly deserves.
Significant effort made by individual delegates is largely unappreciated and valuable suggestions go ignored. Council decisions regarding the direction the TMP will take are formed even before staff effort is completed. City staff clearly worked hard to develop the draft plan presented to the committee. Unfortunately, the work they do is based on direction from councillors some of whom have unbending political agendas and allegiances.
Council members are not experts in the complex fields of transportation and transit, so are not qualified to take a final decision on the TMP without independent expert overview. A plan of this complexity should be subject to arm’s length review by a panel of experts before being presented for approval. Why the hurry to approve this important plan without taking the time to get it right?
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
RPCA Elects a New President
At the RPCA annual general meeting on October 15 nobody appeared willing to stand for nomination as president. So the matter was put to the board to select a president from within its ranks at the next board meeting. In the meantime one person, Brant Scott, came forward indicating he was willing to stand. The board voted to accept Brant as president. RPCA now has an official point of contact for communications with our city ward representative, Councillor Peter Hume.
The elephant in the room is conflict of interest resulting from accepting Brant Scott as president of RPCA. Susan Scott, Brant’s wife, is Councillor Peter Hume’s assistant at City Hall. This is unfortunate, particularly given some of the development, transportation and transit issues that are of concern in the Riverview Park community right now. It will be interesting to learn how Brant Scott and Councillor Peter Hume propose to avoid potential conflicts when these and other issues arise. For too long RPCA leadership has cooperated with their Ward representative and has failed to effectively reflect the concerns of the community.
Councillor Hume has stated that he will produce letters from RPCA, and other community associations in his ward, in support of the Hospital Lands Plan. Formal support by the board is premature. Individual members of RPCA have expressed opposition, the membership as a whole needs to be consulted. Not only must opinions of the entire membership be reflected in any letter but it should be noted that the RPCA does not and cannot reflect the majority view of Riverside Park.
It should be remembered that RPCA membership is small relative to the size of the Riverview Park community. RPCA has some fence mending, and dare I say “bridge building,” to do so its membership can grow to a level where it can effectively represent the community.
The elephant in the room is conflict of interest resulting from accepting Brant Scott as president of RPCA. Susan Scott, Brant’s wife, is Councillor Peter Hume’s assistant at City Hall. This is unfortunate, particularly given some of the development, transportation and transit issues that are of concern in the Riverview Park community right now. It will be interesting to learn how Brant Scott and Councillor Peter Hume propose to avoid potential conflicts when these and other issues arise. For too long RPCA leadership has cooperated with their Ward representative and has failed to effectively reflect the concerns of the community.
Councillor Hume has stated that he will produce letters from RPCA, and other community associations in his ward, in support of the Hospital Lands Plan. Formal support by the board is premature. Individual members of RPCA have expressed opposition, the membership as a whole needs to be consulted. Not only must opinions of the entire membership be reflected in any letter but it should be noted that the RPCA does not and cannot reflect the majority view of Riverside Park.
It should be remembered that RPCA membership is small relative to the size of the Riverview Park community. RPCA has some fence mending, and dare I say “bridge building,” to do so its membership can grow to a level where it can effectively represent the community.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Planning and Environment Committee meeting, Oct 28, 2008
I sat in on this meeting today. In particular I was interested in the discussion and vote on the Hospital Lands Area Plan and the proposed zoning by-law amendment.
At the start of the discussion Councillor Clive Doucet asked for a deferral of this item to the next meeting as he had only received the report the previous day and needed time to review it with community groups. In his usual arrogant style Councillor Peter Hume "Chair" noted that the report had been available for over a week and this was sufficient reiew time.
Doucet noted that one of the reasons that review time is needed is that the hopital lands conceptual design assumes that the AVTC is in place, so it is important to review the report with his community. Hume indicated that community associations in his ward support the plan and that he would present letters of support from them to council when they are asked to vote on it. He also suggested that Doucet would have time for a review within his community before the next council meeting. no other committee members would agree to a deferral, notwithstanding that the plan and the report have taken years to get to this point. Doucet noted that there are "thousands" of people in the Alta Vista community who are opposed to current transportation plans (AVTC, Browning, etc.).
Speaking as a member of an RPCA committee on planning issues Francois Allard noted that many Riverview Park residents are opposed to the plan as well as the AVTC and the proposed Browning Rapid Transit Corridor both of which are assumed to be in place as a basis for the plan. He noted that Hume was on record as opposing the Browning corridor, so it was "mind boggling" that he wanted to proceed to approval without these issues being addressed properly. People do not easily make the connection between a planned community development and the transit/transportation implications. Hume said the City made every effort to inform the community and to encourage comments.
Doucet believes this is a "rogue" plan; the concept of building a $62M, 1.8Km hospital link and later following through spending staggering amounts to bridge the Rideau River in later stages of AVTC construction will make the $62M look like "child's play." Doucet said he will abstain from voting on this issue today.
Hume noted that the report is a "land use plan" only, for use in the future. In other words, what is in the plan will not necessarily be implemented, that will be up to the developers! The plan was carried with one abstention. Several people including Diane Holmes and Gordon Hunter were absent from this session.
At the start of the discussion Councillor Clive Doucet asked for a deferral of this item to the next meeting as he had only received the report the previous day and needed time to review it with community groups. In his usual arrogant style Councillor Peter Hume "Chair" noted that the report had been available for over a week and this was sufficient reiew time.
Doucet noted that one of the reasons that review time is needed is that the hopital lands conceptual design assumes that the AVTC is in place, so it is important to review the report with his community. Hume indicated that community associations in his ward support the plan and that he would present letters of support from them to council when they are asked to vote on it. He also suggested that Doucet would have time for a review within his community before the next council meeting. no other committee members would agree to a deferral, notwithstanding that the plan and the report have taken years to get to this point. Doucet noted that there are "thousands" of people in the Alta Vista community who are opposed to current transportation plans (AVTC, Browning, etc.).
Speaking as a member of an RPCA committee on planning issues Francois Allard noted that many Riverview Park residents are opposed to the plan as well as the AVTC and the proposed Browning Rapid Transit Corridor both of which are assumed to be in place as a basis for the plan. He noted that Hume was on record as opposing the Browning corridor, so it was "mind boggling" that he wanted to proceed to approval without these issues being addressed properly. People do not easily make the connection between a planned community development and the transit/transportation implications. Hume said the City made every effort to inform the community and to encourage comments.
Doucet believes this is a "rogue" plan; the concept of building a $62M, 1.8Km hospital link and later following through spending staggering amounts to bridge the Rideau River in later stages of AVTC construction will make the $62M look like "child's play." Doucet said he will abstain from voting on this issue today.
Hume noted that the report is a "land use plan" only, for use in the future. In other words, what is in the plan will not necessarily be implemented, that will be up to the developers! The plan was carried with one abstention. Several people including Diane Holmes and Gordon Hunter were absent from this session.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
I'm Back!
The election is over, it was hard work and quite rewarding. We didn't get quite the share of votes we had hoped for, but not too bad considering the numbers whom apparently "voted strategically" whatever that really means. We increased the Green Party vote share in Ottawa South significantly and I am sure we will do even better next time.
Anyway, back to community and municipal government issues for a while:
The pending Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Browning Avenue section of the eastbound transit link has been an issue lately. Peter Hume has supported the community in having the scope of the EA expanded to encompass alternative options. But I can't help thinking that the whole thing is a red herring to distract Riverview Park residents who oppose construction of the hospital link section of the AVTC.
Clive doucet is promoting a Rail Row initiative that proposes Carling Avenue as a key link for westbound light rail. I think this is a great idea. It has never been given serious consideration by council to date. It's time they took a serious look at it! Today I emailed Peter Hume, asking if he supports Clive's initiative. I will let you know his answer.
I was very sorry to see that David Chernushenko resigned from the Green Party. Although he denies it, I still believe it is "sour grapes" and I hope he will reconsider. However, every cloud has a silver lining and this one is that David is considering entering municipal politics in 2010.
It has been suggested that he might run in Capital Ward, presumably with Clive Doucet's blessing? I would prefer that Clive stay on for one more term and that David run against Peter Hume in Alta Vista Ward. It's time we had a viable candidate to run against Hume. If Hume decides to run for mayor, the seat could be wide open for David, he would do great things in this ward and on council generally.
I will be attending council and committee meetings over the next couple of weeks and will report my views and findings on this blog.
Anyway, back to community and municipal government issues for a while:
The pending Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Browning Avenue section of the eastbound transit link has been an issue lately. Peter Hume has supported the community in having the scope of the EA expanded to encompass alternative options. But I can't help thinking that the whole thing is a red herring to distract Riverview Park residents who oppose construction of the hospital link section of the AVTC.
Clive doucet is promoting a Rail Row initiative that proposes Carling Avenue as a key link for westbound light rail. I think this is a great idea. It has never been given serious consideration by council to date. It's time they took a serious look at it! Today I emailed Peter Hume, asking if he supports Clive's initiative. I will let you know his answer.
I was very sorry to see that David Chernushenko resigned from the Green Party. Although he denies it, I still believe it is "sour grapes" and I hope he will reconsider. However, every cloud has a silver lining and this one is that David is considering entering municipal politics in 2010.
It has been suggested that he might run in Capital Ward, presumably with Clive Doucet's blessing? I would prefer that Clive stay on for one more term and that David run against Peter Hume in Alta Vista Ward. It's time we had a viable candidate to run against Hume. If Hume decides to run for mayor, the seat could be wide open for David, he would do great things in this ward and on council generally.
I will be attending council and committee meetings over the next couple of weeks and will report my views and findings on this blog.
Monday, August 4, 2008
More support for integrated planning in the city
There was an interesting story by Leonard Stern in Saturday’s Citizen (Aug 2, 2008). The article shows support for my concern about the City’s inability to consider the many road developments it is considering in concert with new community development, intensification and smart growth initiatives before final decisions are made. The writer observes that even councilors who sit on the same side of the table politically seem to disagree on transit and community development issues.
The article notes that “The sprawl to which cities like Ottawa succumbed.....was made possible only by lavish and exorbitant supplies of cheap fossil fuel....Light rail, and the related conversation about intensification – a conversation based on the idea that ‘home’ doesn’t necessarily have to be a single family detached house – is taking us father away from the era …..of the ‘megaburbs,’ places that ‘have all the congestion of a city but none of the human contact.’ Prohibitive gas prices (might) have many bad consequences, but more human contact could be one of the good ones.”
The article notes that “The sprawl to which cities like Ottawa succumbed.....was made possible only by lavish and exorbitant supplies of cheap fossil fuel....Light rail, and the related conversation about intensification – a conversation based on the idea that ‘home’ doesn’t necessarily have to be a single family detached house – is taking us father away from the era …..of the ‘megaburbs,’ places that ‘have all the congestion of a city but none of the human contact.’ Prohibitive gas prices (might) have many bad consequences, but more human contact could be one of the good ones.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
