Ottawa Cycling Advisory Committee's Comments on “Ottawa 20/20: Charting a Course”

 

Introduction

 

The Ottawa Cycling Advisory Committee (OCAC) is composed of a group of citizens that have a particular interest in cycling (recreational and commuting).   OCAC builds on the work of earlier more informal advisory committees that worked with the Region and the cities of Nepean, Gloucester and Orleans.  OCAC’s mandate is to provide advise to Ottawa City Council and its departments on issues that impact a citizen’s ability to cycle in the new city.  The goal of OCAC is to provide a liveable and environmentally friendly city that is accessible and safe to get around by bicycle and where cycling is an integral part of a publicly supported balanced transportation system.

 

The purpose of this submission is to provide comments on the Ottawa 2020: Charting a Course document as they relate to the mandate and goal of the Ottawa Cycling Advisory Committee.

 

General Comments

 

The OCAC strongly supports the vision, principles and strategies outlined in the document.  The vision of Ottawa as a “city of villages” acknowledges the past while integrating new principles and approaches for a better more interconnected future for its citizenry. From our reading, elements of this vision seem to be motivated by external drivers which while valid should be secondary to internal motivators.  To this end we would like to add the following phrase to the vision statement: “...and to develop livable, socially cohesive communities for the benefit of citizens.” Perhaps another basic principle to be considered is “to maximize the freedom of mobility choice without endangering the lives and health, or restricting the choices of others”.

 

The principles seek to integrate and balance some key challenges: balancing the benefits of economic and infrastructural growth while sustaining increasing Ottawa’s social, political and cultural diversity and respecting and preserving the environment.  We agree and support all of these principles and many of the suggestions or strategies.  We are particularly impressed with the focus on ending the division between business and living spaces: this is a huge step in encouraging people to convert to non-automobile forms of transportation We are very concerned with the projected number of vehicles for the city of Ottawa (400,000 new residents and 200,000 more cars and trucks which translates into a vehicle for every second person!).  

 

We would suggest that there may be room to add accessibility as it relates to mobility.  A large number of Ottawa citizens don’t drive (here we are thinking of children and seniors as well as people with lower incomes).   We would argue that their accessibility and mobility to the City should be one of the basic starting principles. In addition the accessibility section would benefit from indicating the different ways people move around the city which include: foot, skateboards, rollerblades, strollers, bikes, mass transit and finally cars.  Accessibility should include the need to respect (and cater to) each of these modes of transport.

 

In addition, we believe that the document should explicitly promote the Green Hierarchy (walking, cycling, transit, and then cars in that order). It should recognize that research in Europe and North America has clearly indicated that any reduction in car use or increase in the safety of non-car modes requires a cocktail of measures, which includes education of users of all modes, enforcement of traffic laws, lower traffic speeds through measures like traffic calming, encouragement of other modes, infrastructure that makes it easier to do without a car (better access to important services including, for example, daycare), better placement of transit stations), and finally improvements in roads, paths, and other facilities. If you just build the roads or paths, the users won't necessarily come.

 

 

OCAC is fully supportive of the provisions for measurement and evaluation.  We would hope that a status report on progress based on the targets in 1997 Official Plan would form the basis for establishing new targets.  Progress to date should also be communicated to the citizenry, perhaps as part of the early consultation process.  Ideally there should be a section in the new Official Plan entitled lessons learned where a full and frank discussion of the City’s successes and failures would be included.

 

It is clear that the document is very cycling/pedestrian/urban transit friendly.  As we are all aware, the design/engineering ethic in North America is to create a separate path or area for each mode of transport while the European ethic seems to try to design streets where all of these modes can be used in a safe and effective way.  Our City needs to find a balance between these two approaches. In some cases it makes sense to separate the different modes of transport; in others, a more integrated approach should be pursued.  In the case of the integrated approach different modes must be able to co-exist in the same right of way safely and efficiently.  Principles and guidelines to help City planners achieve this balance are essential. We are pleased therefore to see that the City intends to develop an overall set of design guidelines which start with the basic premise of freedom of choice of access and mobility at the least cost to society, including health and environmental costs.  OCAC would be like to be involved in this exercise. 

 

OCAC agrees with many of the strategies and suggestions in the document.  However, we would like to encourage the city to assess and build on lessons learned elsewhere.  Some of these “best practices” would significantly challenge existing behaviour, with particular reference to our high level of car-dependency.  Many of these suggestions will require a level of collaboration between all three levels of government and the private sector; this remains a significant challenge for the City, but one which must be pursued if we are to achieve the vision articulated in the document.

 

Some “best practices” that could be examined include:

 

Ÿ         The incentive structure.  While the document has outlined some key strategies to encourage more people to use public transit, including better public transit infrastructure and partnership with employers to provide transit passes, this is simply not enough to change people’s attitudes.  Currently there is no incentive to use public transit and no cost (other than traffic jams) of continuing to use private vehicles to commute to work.  More innovative approaches need to be considered. 

ð     To discourage car use, the City may wish to consider taxing car use, particularly for those suburban commuters that travel downtown and perhaps using the additional taxes to contribute to the cost of providing free transit.  Some ideas to consider include:

Ÿ         A municipal levied per/km or gas tax

Ÿ         fixed fees for commuters (each car must display a sticker indicating they have paid their fee)

Ÿ         fines for single drivers who commute downtown

Ÿ         encouraging drivers to use their cars on alternating days (based on even and odd licence plate #’s)

Ÿ         reducing access to downtown street parking, significantly raising downtown parking fees (by taxing private lot owners and increasing parking meter fees)

Ÿ         increasing parking ticket fines. 

ð     To encourage the use of public transit and cycling, the City should deepen their partnership with the employers (particularly the Federal Government) to provide highly subsidized transit passes (if there is no commitment to the idea of free transit for everyone).  To encourage cycling, there is an urgent need to improve the cycling infrastructure including providing better, safer and more visible bike parking for public and private places of employment and major destinations (including schools). Employers need to be encouraged to provide access to showers and change facilities.

 

The City should consider developing and publicising an new award which recognizes those employers that actively discourage the use of the private car for employment purposes.[1]

 

Ÿ         Car-hostile physical infrastructure.  Over the past few years, the shift towards bus (and bike)only lanes on major aterial routes is to be commended.  A more vigorous approach is required however.  Increasing the number of bus-specific lanes (including 3+ car-pools) that are friendly to cyclists, expansion of traffic calming measures in denser areas in the downtown as well as cycling friendly suburbs  (including in the downtown core, preventing commuters from using certain streets and/or  assigning a full lane or certain streets for bike and pedestrian-specific travel only), adding traffic signals that improve access for pedestrians and cyclists without increasing cut-through car traffic and reducing significantly, or eliminating the use of salt on residential streets (snowplow only) are some ideas that could be explored.

Ÿ         The Design Guidelines should be comprehensive and include all elements of the City infrastructure (sidewalks, bike lanes, roads, bike racks etc.).  They should also seek to balance the needs of each different mode of transport (see above). The current Regional Road Design Guidelines (developed by the former RMOC) are a start, but need to be expanded.

 

 

OCAC has developed a core set of issues that we believe should be integrated into the new Official Plan, the Design Guidelines and and any other core planning documents.  These issues are summarised below.

 

Main Issues for Cyclists

 

Infrastructure Related Issues

Ÿ         Better links between cycling paths including the NCC recreational bike paths, where appropriate, recognizing that paths cannot go everywhere

Ÿ         Homogenous bike racks: better designed racks are required; all new racks should respect that design and old racks should be replaced every “5” years. Bike racks should accommodate all types of bicycles, including children's bikes, recumbents, folding bikes, and adult tricycles).

Ÿ         Sufficient bike parking for all public and private buildings and on all main streets and major destinations, including large festivals during the summer months

Ÿ         Better maintenance of city-owned recreational pathways

Ÿ         Better winter maintenance for links to transit

Ÿ         Better maintenance near curbs on all streets

Ÿ         More consistency on what has been determined as bike lanes: consistent language and signage, lane type and marking etc.

Ÿ         Better road cleaning during winter months (can the bike link roads be snowplowed regularly AND NOT SALTED?

Ÿ         More off-road maintained paths for bikes

Ÿ         Paths or routes for differently abled cyclists (young children, seniors) or other modes of transport (skateboards, rollerbladers etc.)

Ÿ         Road designs that are not cycling-hostile.

Ÿ         Bicycle-specific signals and signage to allow cyclists to avoid road restrictions designed to limit car traffic.

Ÿ         Linkages to handle specific cycling-difficult areas: for example, Queensway overpasses, cyclist/pedestrian bridges over the Rideau Canal or the Rideau River.

Ÿ         Specific signed and improved routes for children to enable them to walk or cycle to local schools.

Ÿ         Encouragement and expansion of multi-modal trips, specifically Rack and Roll on OC Transpo.

 

Bylaw related issues

 

Ÿ         All employers (public and private sector, including schools and City service centres) should be required to provide one bike rack for every 50 employees and/or clients/customers

Ÿ         Better enforcement of traffic and bylaws; more ticketing

Ÿ         Bylaws to regulate recreational bike path use (collaboration with NCC?)

 

Development planning issues

 

Ÿ         All major destinations (shopping centres, schools and City services) should provide bike parking  (could be related to square footage and type of usage). Many other jurisdictions in North America and Europe have this type of bylaw so the City should have no problem finding suitable models to emulate

Ÿ         It is not enough, as the Charting the Course document says, to provide pathways to destinations for cyclists. There will never be enough space for sufficient pathways, and many will have personal safety issues, particularly for women at night. Rather, we need to ensure that cyclists can access the destinations they need on the road, meaning that destinations must not only be accessible by 400-series highways, nor only by 16-lane-wide intersections. Road design must consider all users, and capacity must take second place to safety and accessibility.

 

Educational and bicycle awareness issues

 

Ÿ         Mandatory safety cycling courses for children in schools ie.  Offering the Can-Bike program which can help to teach the kids and possibly have them influence their parents.  With things like after-school sports and PE disappearing, maybe we can encourage biking since the majority of children own a bike at some point in their childhoods.  Give them the proper skills, the confidence to use it as a vehicle.

Ÿ         Increased support for effective cycling courses in community centre recreation programs

Ÿ         Increased promotional and educational efforts on cycling safety

City Level Activities: to effectively “walk the talk”

 

Ÿ         Set annual targets for increasing the number of Police, Bylaw and Parking Control Officers

Ÿ         Set annual targets for the number of city employees who ride, walk or take the bus

Ÿ         Levy a high parking fee for those managers, particularly senior managers, who drive to work

 

Extent to which these issues are addressed

 

Over the next few months we would like to work closely with City staff to ensure that the main issues for Ottawa’s bicycle community are addressed.

 

 


[1] Possibly there needs to be more publicity for the Bruce Timmermans Award which has a section that applies to companies within Ottawa and the Region who, if they fulfill the requirements, can get a "Bike-Friendly" sticker.  Possibly this can be expanded - say, instead of a sticker, maybe a more substantial award or a small tax break, etc. to give more incentive.