There seems to be a preponderance of people who just can't handle major infrastructure additions, or major changes to existing infrastructure, in this city.
Examples include: freakouts over Lansdowne, the casino project, LRT, highway lane increases, even electronic billboards for heaven's sake.
In my opinion, Ottawa is lagging hard behind similar sized cities such as Calgary, Edmonton, and Winnipeg.
All these cities have full length LRT systems, new or at least substantially functional major sporting/entertainment infrastructure, and a thriving business sector.
In my opinion Ottawa is falling behind, despite its higher population; honestly this is a problem with the city's mindset. I have never in my life seen NIMBYism as intense as here in this city.
I feel the same way. This city was paralyzed by NIMBYism. It's changing slowly, but in favour of developers. The current city can't be bothered to really listen to citizens and only do token changes before full approvals.
Also, the LRT will not be full length, not even close. It will go downtown to just outside downtown.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdTheSabresFan
I don't particularly care about third world countries in this discussion. Yes, by all accounts Ottawa is a first world city. Agreed. However, if that was the topic at issue here, we wouldn't be on a hockey forum board.
No I'm comparing Ottawa to SIMILAR first world cities, and in my opinion we're lagging behind.
Yah fine Calgary may have a bad LRT, but it exists. Ottawa has a bad, overpriced bus system, and NO real LRT (except the 6 stop joke O train).
My problem is more so with the city's attitude. For example, the city is considering putting large electronic billboards (a la Times Square or Toronto) which overlook key pieces of city infrastructure like the Jetform Park.
The purpose of these billboards is to show sports related advertising, and city information.
The uproar has been outrageous with people complaining that the billboards are too bright, too distracting, too tall, too short, not 'green' enough, too "big city esque". Honest to god, go to any Ottawa Sun/Citizen/Metro article about this and you'll see the above comments. That is absolutely unbelievable to me.
Can't wait to move to Toronto.
1. the O-Train has 5 stops
2. It's not LRT - it's a mainline with modified rules.
3. It incredibly busy with Carleton students that it can be impossible to get a seat at rush hour. So busy, the city has to shut down the line to do major upgrades to increase 2x the capacity and frequency.
People everywhere complain about what council is doing. Ask Toronto about the Fords and company.
[QUOTE=gmyx;55017261]3. It incredibly busy with Carleton students that it can be impossible to get a seat at rush hour. So busy, the city has to shut down the line to do major upgrades to increase 2x the capacity and frequency./QUOTE]
The doubling of capacity is being done in anticipation of the transitway being shut down to put the rails in. Christ, that's gonna be a mess...
And this is attributed to being "scared" of change? Or are their financial/resource allocation aspects to it?
Maybe that's what it starts out as, but just looking at the landsdowne fiasco tells me that it's just a self serving group opposing change on that site...
Look at Westboro with the LRT, it's the same thing going down again...
3. It incredibly busy with Carleton students that it can be impossible to get a seat at rush hour. So busy, the city has to shut down the line to do major upgrades to increase 2x the capacity and frequency./QUOTE]
The doubling of capacity is being done in anticipation of the transitway being shut down to put the rails in. Christ, that's gonna be a mess...
Indeed. Because the current system is at capacity. UPass made things worse becuase many more people use it now. You can park at Greenboro and be at Carleton in 10 minutes and pay much less than you would for parking at Carleton.
While we need a proper LRT, I don't like the current plans. It's also the reason for widening the hyway - to allow a bus lane to repalce the Transitway. Once LRT is going, that lane will be converted to carpool (HA!).
Indeed. Because the current system is at capacity. UPass made things worse becuase many more people use it now. You can park at Greenboro and be at Carleton in 10 minutes and pay much less than you would for parking at Carleton.
While we need a proper LRT, I don't like the current plans. It's also the reason for widening the hyway - to allow a bus lane to repalce the Transitway. Once LRT is going, that lane will be converted to carpool (HA!).
Honestly, one of Ottawa's biggest follies was the green belt which essentially divides suburbia from downtown. Without it the city wouldn't have sprawled across such a wide area and the LRT could actually be long enough to form a useful link.
Honestly, one of Ottawa's biggest follies was the green belt which essentially divides suburbia from downtown. Without it the city wouldn't have sprawled across such a wide area and the LRT could actually be long enough to form a useful link.
It was the NCC's doing, but the city of Ottawa (at least since 2001, when they amalgamated with all these greenbelt cities) has gleefully allowed suburban expansion in Kanata, Orleans, and Farhaven, and has only very recently started endorsing intensification in the core - while still rubber-stamping suburban development that's closer to Kingston than it is to Ottawa.
Honestly, one of Ottawa's biggest follies was the green belt which essentially divides suburbia from downtown. Without it the city wouldn't have sprawled across such a wide area and the LRT could actually be long enough to form a useful link.
Because, you know, urban greenspace is such a horrible thing.
Because, you know, urban greenspace is such a horrible thing.
When people have to drive an extra 6km to work, twice a day (there and back), five times a week, that's 3120 extra kilometers that people have to drive in a year. At 28 miles per gallon, that's 261 more litres of gas (yeah, I swapped out my units....), which costs commuters $340 per year. Now multiply that by the tens of thousands of communters that make that trip every day.
When people have to drive an extra 6km to work, twice a day (there and back), five times a week, that's 3120 extra kilometers that people have to drive in a year. At 28 miles per gallon, that's 261 more litres of gas (yeah, I swapped out my units....), which costs commuters $340 per year. Now multiply that by the tens of thousands of communters that make that trip every day.
I'm sure Petro-Canada loves the Greenbelt...
So, we should live in an endless expanse of city with no greenspace, because people who choose to live in Kanata, or Orléans, or Farhaven (etc.) have a problem with how far their houses are from downtown?
When people have to drive an extra 6km to work, twice a day (there and back), five times a week, that's 3120 extra kilometers that people have to drive in a year. At 28 miles per gallon, that's 261 more litres of gas (yeah, I swapped out my units....), which costs commuters $340 per year. Now multiply that by the tens of thousands of communters that make that trip every day.
I'm sure Petro-Canada loves the Greenbelt...
So are you saying that having a beautiful forest/ amazing greenspace pretty much in the middle of the city isn't worth a 6km drive? Seriously?
I used to do the drive all the time, and didn't mind it whatsoever, especially knowing I could take my kids on awesome nature hikes every weekend on a trail that was literally just down the road. I used the greenbelt trails all the time (Bruce Pit / Lime Kiln / Beaver Trail / etc...).
When people have to drive an extra 6km to work, twice a day (there and back), five times a week, that's 3120 extra kilometers that people have to drive in a year. At 28 miles per gallon, that's 261 more litres of gas (yeah, I swapped out my units....), which costs commuters $340 per year. Now multiply that by the tens of thousands of communters that make that trip every day.
I'm sure Petro-Canada loves the Greenbelt...
If there would be no green belt, how much more congestion would there be? Would there be room to increase the roads or would we have go Innes road on everybody? It's easy to say that the green belt may cost 340 per year to traverse, but what about the cost of not having it? Orleans is poorly planned as-is, having no greenbelt would of made it worse.
On the flip, there are those like myself who travel much farther everyday to get to work and there are those who live withing walking distance.
While I'm sure that some of you may be city planners, or have some city planning experience, there are undoubtedly an ton of factors that no one knows about that went into what the NCC and the City of Ottawa considered when making the greenbelt. From what I've heard, the Greenbelt was initially conceived as a way to combat and slow down urban sprawl, and, while there's no way to tell whether or not it worked as an idea, since every city is unique, it's certainly conserved some great environmentally and culturally significant places for folks to play sports, see wildlife, and generally get a piece of the Canadian wilderness that you might not see in similar cities without a greenbelt.
The extra time for a morning commute, or an early evening hockey game is a pain, but I'm of the opinion that it's worth the sacrifice to have our greenbelt there. Transportation issues are another thing entirely, and one that I don't feel I have enough knowledge to accurately comment on, but having lived in Toronto, Guelph, and Ottawa, and having visited Montreal quite extensively, I can't really see that ours so so far inferior to any other city as to warrant the browbeating it seems to have taken thus far.
I'm glad to see Lansdowne is going ahead as planned, and I hope that everything turns out as optimistically as folks in favour are wont to believe. Now let's get ready for some football of both designations.
