Sens Lounge: "Pleeease won't you be.....my neighbour"

[mysens]

Ah the warhammer store haha.

Got into that shit last year. Being middle aged with disposable income is dangerous for addictive expensive hobbies.

Geez, this sounds like golf...another expensive hobby. I suppose if you walk the course, it could be healthy lol.

 

[Stylizer1]

Those lovely 15 minute cities in Europe are a result of "bottom-up" growth. The cities grew over centuries; they existed before cars existed. That's why the streets are narrow and everything is bunched up. It seems that every time city planners in North America get to make a top-down decision we end up with something ugly and soulless as a result. In Europe it seems that they treasured what they had, and so their downtown cores are still pretty and a tourism attraction. The big ugly megastores exist there too, but they're usually on the outside, out of sight of the tourists.

Also, everything built here post 1980 seem to meet minimum standards as a rule because they can make more profits. I remember watching an episode of Holmes on Homes where he brought it up saying that that is why older homes have such better bones. Setting a minimum standard really hurt the construction business.

Gastown in Vancouver is a perfect example of character with elements of modern construction. Used to be a bunch of 2-3 story buildings until they started revitalizing it in the 70's.

 

[BigRig4]

Anyone have any laptop recommendations? Or specs I should be looking for?

I need just very basic functionality. I prefer Windows OS ideally. I don’t mind spending a bit if it’ll last a long time.

 

[jbeck5]

Those lovely 15 minute cities in Europe are a result of "bottom-up" growth. The cities grew over centuries; they existed before cars existed. That's why the streets are narrow and everything is bunched up. It seems that every time city planners in North America get to make a top-down decision we end up with something ugly and soulless as a result. In Europe it seems that they treasured what they had, and so their downtown cores are still pretty and a tourism attraction. The big ugly megastores exist there too, but they're usually on the outside, out of sight of the tourists.

To be fair they are on the outside here too. You have to go out to the suburbs for the big box stores. No Costco, Walmart, Canadian Tire, home Depot, etc downtown.

 

[DrEasy]

To be fair they are on the outside here too. You have to go out to the suburbs for the big box stores. No Costco, Walmart, Canadian Tire, home Depot, etc downtown.

Oh for sure, my point was that the European cities also have those ugly things.

 

[Stylizer1]

To be fair they are on the outside here too. You have to go out to the suburbs for the big box stores. No Costco, Walmart, Canadian Tire, home Depot, etc downtown.

Depends what you consider downtown vs suburbs. Inside the greenbelt there are all of those things.

I wouldn't consider Beacon hill south nor the Glebe the burbs

 

[Cosmix]

Geez, this sounds like golf...another expensive hobby. I suppose if you walk the course, it could be healthy lol.

Hey, they have fancy golf carts for that!

 

[Micklebot]

Anyone have any laptop recommendations? Or specs I should be looking for?

I need just very basic functionality. I prefer Windows OS ideally. I don’t mind spending a bit if it’ll last a long time.

If you aren't gaming and are just using it as a daily driver for web surfing word processing and such, a used Business laptop is a really solid option, like an HP Elite book or a ThinkPad.

They tend to be more repairable, and have better build quality, not to mention higher quality keyboards, screens and speakers.

keeps e-waste out of the landfill and is just a nicer user experience than a lot of the consumer grade trash out there.

 

[maclean]

Of course! Who hasn't? Great to visit...awful to live in. That's my opinion.

Of course the cities are very different for the reasons mentioned. Population density...surrounding population...city landsize.... All these play a huge roll that has nothing to do with culture and lifestyle and regulations.

I worked in the mall for 16 years. I know for a fact that box stores came to Orleans and the mall still thrived...what killed the mall is online shopping. You can say what you want about anchor tenants, and losing them does have an affect, but nowhere as much as online shopping.

Place dorleans filled their anchor tenants...still had the bay...had GoodLife...had sportchek...still dead..why? Online sales.

The point is quite clear that having a bunch of specialty little stores all within walking distance all reachable by public transit is NOT a winning recipe...or else malls would be thriving.

The tax loopholes from the video are interesting, but not substantiated...we have no evidence that that is actually happening here. Their examples were all a small town getting a Wal Mart...well, what about a city of 2 million getting 6 Wal marts spread out...they didn't really explain that or how it might be good to have options of big box stores and smaller stores...which ones do better and why? What's the solution?

You mention the Glebe as walkable...my gf lived there. It was convenient in some ways, yes, but also a pain in many other ways...

Was nice to wake up and walk to kettlemans bagels and enjoy a breakfast...but was also a pain in the ass to get many things....need supplies at a Canadian Tire/home Depot...well, good luck. Nothing in the downtown core. Wanted some cheap cereal. Wal Mart always has a 3 boxes for $9...but the local store was selling boxes for like $7-8 each...instead of $3.33...said f*** that and didn't get cereal.

They lack a lot of options. Grocery shopping at the metro Glebe is like shopping for groceries at a 7-11...no options...

Walkable cities are trash BECAUSE they lack options, in my opinion.

I would rather be able to own land with a pool and hot tub and patio and have a multi car garage and drive 5 mins down the road in my FUN car to get anything I need...rather than have to live in a tiny place sharing walls with neighbours, have to walk, have to pay more for everything, and lack a lot of options. That sounds fun for a one week trip, but sounds awful for many others.

Like I said, my gf lived right near bank street and she is much happier living in Orleans with a car and able to drive wherever she wants than living in the Glebe without a car having to walk or bus or be out of luck to go somewhere.

It's not even close.

I've visited many people who live in central apartments where you're walking distance from all the store and downtown...cool for a 22 year old...complete nightmare for someone raising a family.

Where I live, I can easily have 10 of my closest couples over for a nice big dinner party. Everyone can get ther easily and park for free...there's space of having many different rooms so you're not claustrophobic in some tiny apartment kitchen or dining room.

People prefer different things, sure, but I live in a European city core with no car and I don't find it a pain in the ass to get anything and don't need to overspend on anything. There's supermarket chains everywhere around me including a giant one in walking distance, plus tiny convenience stores that even have some things cheaper than the big stores. A few bus stops away there's even a big hardware/garden store. My kids grew up in the city walking to school and now they can meet with friends whenever they want, don't need dad to drive them.

 

[jbeck5]

People prefer different things, sure, but I live in a European city core with no car and I don't find it a pain in the ass to get anything and don't need to overspend on anything. There's supermarket chains everywhere around me including a giant one in walking distance, plus tiny convenience stores that even have some things cheaper than the big stores. A few bus stops away there's even a big hardware/garden store. My kids grew up in the city walking to school and now they can meet with friends whenever they want, don't need dad to drive them.

We have that here too...but then we have spread out areas with even bigger box stores and even cheaper items and even more options.

Most people I work with in my office walk to work (right infront of parliament) and don't own a car or drive and they are very happy and loving life.

Doesn't mean some people also don't prefer having bigger space and yards and having even more options and cheaper prices.

When I live downtown, and I go look for cereal, yeah...there's several stores within walking distance for cereal....but they have the same 20 kinds, and they're twice the price of Wal Mart. I go to the giant Wal Mart in the suburbs and there's a whole 100m row with like 120 different kinds of cereal and they're half the price.

That's an example of what I mean. Sure, downtown, there's 5 stores selling food within a 5 minute walk...but they're twice the price and half the options. Wal Mart will have like 40 kinds of frozen French fries...80 kinds of frozen pizzas...and half the price. Chips? A whole wall of every company and every flavour 80 different kinds...$4 or less...then go to the stores downtown...you have these 20 chips to choose from and theyre $7.

If I want fresh produce, I go to farm boy of buy it off the side of the road (fresh picked apples...corn..etc)

 

[Stylizer1]

We have that here too...but then we have spread out areas with even bigger box stores and even cheaper items and even more options.

Most people I work with in my office walk to work (right infront of parliament) and don't own a car or drive and they are very happy and loving life.

Doesn't mean some people also don't prefer having bigger space and yards and having even more options and cheaper prices.

When I live downtown, and I go look for cereal, yeah...there's several stores within walking distance for cereal....but they have the same 20 kinds, and they're twice the price of Wal Mart. I go to the giant Wal Mart in the suburbs and there's a whole 100m row with like 120 different kinds of cereal and they're half the price.

That's an example of what I mean. Sure, downtown, there's 5 stores selling food within a 5 minute walk...but they're twice the price and half the options. Wal Mart will have like 40 kinds of frozen French fries...80 kinds of frozen pizzas...and half the price. Chips? A whole wall of every company and every flavour 80 different kinds...$4 or less...then go to the stores downtown...you have these 20 chips to choose from and theyre $7.

If I want fresh produce, I go to farm boy of buy it off the side of the road (fresh picked apples...corn..etc)

The thing is that we don't have that here. We are talking about cities and not neighborhoods. What Maclean is describing is a symbiotic environment where you have many stores owned by many people within a community. What we have here is a system where you have to drive everywhere even if you live in the city to do shopping because we are not a walkable city. The transit system is terrible, the retail choices are terrible, and the majority of the restaurants are open a can, heat, and serve. European cities have suburbs too but even then they are designed a lot different than here.

This quote you made sums it up:

The point is quite clear that having a bunch of specialty little stores all within walking distance all reachable by public transit is NOT a winning recipe...or else malls would be thriving.

What you are talking about isn't even an ingredient in our recipe.

 

[maclean]

When I live downtown, and I go look for cereal, yeah...there's several stores within walking distance for cereal....but they have the same 20 kinds, and they're twice the price of Wal Mart. I go to the giant Wal Mart in the suburbs and there's a whole 100m row with like 120 different kinds of cereal and they're half the price.

That's an example of what I mean. Sure, downtown, there's 5 stores selling food within a 5 minute walk...but they're twice the price and half the options. Wal Mart will have like 40 kinds of frozen French fries...80 kinds of frozen pizzas...and half the price. Chips? A whole wall of every company and every flavour 80 different kinds...$4 or less...then go to the stores downtown...you have these 20 chips to choose from and theyre $7.

I specifically mention chain supermarkets. Their prices are standardised. The larger one I mention is as big and cheap as you're going to get, there's no magic store with half the price and twice the selection on the outskirts of town. It's not the same thing as what you describe. If anything you're more likely to have to pay more and get less choice outside the city proper.

 

[Stylizer1]

Taking a quick look at Metro in the Glebe and the Metro on Innes their prices are identical as well as the sale price. Now, variety could vary but that can occur with any store

The fact Walmart may have them at half price is due to their deceptive pricing tactics in how they attract customers.
.

 

[Stylizer1]

I specifically mention chain supermarkets. Their prices are standardised. The larger one I mention is as big and cheap as you're going to get, there's no magic store with half the price and twice the selection on the outskirts of town. It's not the same thing as what you describe. If anything you're more likely to have to pay more and get less choice outside the city proper.

That pretty much how chain restaurants work. The profitable locations help subsidize and support less successful ones maintaining market presence to keep generating profits.

 

[Stylizer1]

Those lovely 15 minute cities in Europe are a result of "bottom-up" growth. The cities grew over centuries; they existed before cars existed. That's why the streets are narrow and everything is bunched up. It seems that every time city planners in North America get to make a top-down decision we end up with something ugly and soulless as a result. In Europe it seems that they treasured what they had, and so their downtown cores are still pretty and a tourism attraction. The big ugly megastores exist there too, but they're usually on the outside, out of sight of the tourists.

Trying to squeeze bike paths on major routes downtown.

 

[Micklebot]

Trying to squeeze bike paths on major routes downtown.

Not sure what that has to do with what he posted, but when done right, segregated bike lanes can and has lead to safer streets for bikers and pedestrians, all the while reducing car accidents and increasing bike ridership. It's not without its challenges though, accounting for deliveries, and parking can be tricky.

Half assed bike lanes suck though, ideally they are incorporated into the original design rather that retrofitted into a car-centric design.

 

[Stylizer1]

Not sure what that has to do with what he posted, but when done right, segregated bike lanes can and has lead to safer streets for bikers and pedestrians, all the while reducing car accidents and increasing bike ridership. It's not without its challenges though, accounting for deliveries, and parking can be tricky.

Half assed bike lanes suck though, ideally they are incorporated into the original design rather that retrofitted into a car-centric design.

It has to do with his Bottom-up, top-down perspective which was spot on was spot on. We have 100' of kilometers of bike paths around the city that have been installed with ample space. We have streets designed in the 1900's we use for automobiles. Our population has grown x18 since then and we are reducing capacity to serve an extreme minority? I am not against bike lanes just where they put them and the congestion they cause. Bank Street is 1 of 3 major North- South corridors(Main & Bronson) for people to come in and get out of the downtown core and they decided to remove one lane going over the bridge for cyclists but then leave the street on either side still 4 lanes. How does that make any sense. The amount of cars to bikes that travel that stretch is at least 200 to 1 if not a larger gap. They tore up Main Street to add more sidewalk, permanent parking, and bike path and reduced the lanes from 4 to 2. They could have kept 4 lanes and fit in the bike paths. Before there was only paring allowed outside of rush hour. Who ever came up with that design should lose their job.

 

[Micklebot]

It has to do with his Bottom-up, top-down perspective which was spot on was spot on. We have 100' of kilometers of bike paths around the city that have been installed with ample space. We have streets designed in the 1900's we use for automobiles. Our population has grown x18 since then and we are reducing capacity to serve an extreme minority? I am not against bike lanes just where they put them and the congestion they cause. Bank Street is 1 of 3 major North- South corridors(Main & Bronson) for people to come in and get out of the downtown core and they decided to remove one lane going over the bridge for cyclists but then leave the street on either side still 4 lanes. How does that make any sense. The amount of cars to bikes that travel that stretch is at least 200 to 1 if not a larger gap. They tore up Main Street to add more sidewalk, permanent parking, and bike path and reduced the lanes from 4 to 2. They could have kept 4 lanes and fit in the bike paths. Before there was only paring allowed outside of rush hour. Who ever came up with that design should lose their job.

So part of the problem is thinking that bike lanes serve only bicyclers. They serve everyone; getting a cars off the road because someone decided to bike or bus benefits the remaining cars, getting bikes out of busy traffic and into segregated lanes serves all the cars that would have been competing with those bikes for that same lane. Everybody benefits from a transit system that gives viable, safe options.

There's also lots of research out there that shows more lanes doesn't actually benefit traffic flow, things like induced demand result in a short lived improvement, followed by the exact same traffic issues you had before adding the lanes, and the reverse happens too, you take away lanes and people opt for alternative options, you end up with the same amount of traffic.

The question shouldn't be how many cars to bikes use bank street currently, it should be how do we design our infrastructure as a whole to meet the requirements of the population. That means looking at the entire system, not one street in a vacuum.

 

[Beech]

It has to do with his Bottom-up, top-down perspective which was spot on was spot on. We have 100' of kilometers of bike paths around the city that have been installed with ample space. We have streets designed in the 1900's we use for automobiles. Our population has grown x18 since then and we are reducing capacity to serve an extreme minority? I am not against bike lanes just where they put them and the congestion they cause. Bank Street is 1 of 3 major North- South corridors(Main & Bronson) for people to come in and get out of the downtown core and they decided to remove one lane going over the bridge for cyclists but then leave the street on either side still 4 lanes. How does that make any sense. The amount of cars to bikes that travel that stretch is at least 200 to 1 if not a larger gap. They tore up Main Street to add more sidewalk, permanent parking, and bike path and reduced the lanes from 4 to 2. They could have kept 4 lanes and fit in the bike paths. Before there was only paring allowed outside of rush hour. Who ever came up with that design should lose their job.

By 2077 a great deal of the oil in Saudi Arabia and other Khaleege (Gulf nations) will dramatically be reduced. That is in 52 years.

By 2077, a great deal of sources of Western oil will be dramatically reduced.

We are using it at insane rates. Way quicker than assumed or ever conceived. Emerging 3rd world nations have sucked it up at rates way higher than ever before.

Pharmaceuticals, evolution in health care will reduce human mortality and the earth's population will grow. It has doubled the last 50 years, even though, we are in an era when families are significantly smaller than ever before. Few families have 4-10 kids as they once did. Even the 3rd world has slowed in terms of birth rate.

So..by 2050 and beyond, this world will look like something out of a Hollywood sci-fi/sci-fi-horror movie.

Fuel, streets, transport must be preserved for global society's use. Effectively for services only. Vehicle must no longer be used for human transport, but for work/business/social need (Ambulance, police, fire, city crews, and so on).

And so, we need to begin to alter our lives to produce a society that is somewhere between life in 1825 and 2025.

Close proximity living, walking everywhere, riding bikes, horses and so on. All the while leaving cars, planes, trucks, etc. for "necessary" living.

Less it, we will meet 2050 and beyond head on and be Unpleasantly surprised.

They no longer pave roads in Ottawa. There is no money. And so, roads must now go from 25-27 years of service life to double that, 50-55 years. Meaning that, they can no longer have many vehicles on them. Otherwise, in 25 years and beyond, an Ambulance may not be able to get to you.

The road the ambulance may take could be so chewed up that an ambulance can not or will not traverse it.
A litre of fuel may be so expensive that a hard decision may be made as to whether you merit/deserve/can afford saving
Roads could be so congested that an ambulance may take too long to get to you and too long to get you to medical care.
Rising energy costs could mean that hospitals are now for the wealthy

Essentially Stylizer, we may be heading towards life as depicted by the movie Soylant Green.

2.5 - 3 % of society will be autistic. And so by 2050, some 2-3 MILIION Canadians will require chronic care
2.5 - 3 % of society will be battling cancer. Another 2 -3 million
2.5 - 3 % will be battling other chronic health issues.. A further 2 -3 million

by 2050.. 6-9 MILLION of the 50 million in this country will need chronic care. Thus consuming a fantastic amount of resources/money/energy. We need to start planning for this.. And returning to a life far closer to 1825 than today.

A day will come when we will rue the SUV trip to the local grocery store that was 1 km away. And rue the day when we idled in traffic, all the while it was nice outside and the bike lane was empty.

I hope humanity is enjoying itself today. The bill will be handed down in 25 years.

Those younger than 60, good luck to you. It will come to you. It has started already.

 

[Stylizer1]

So part of the problem is thinking that bike lanes serve only bicyclers. They serve everyone; getting a cars off the road because someone decided to bike or bus benefits the remaining cars, getting bikes out of busy traffic and into segregated lanes serves all the cars that would have been competing with those bikes for that same lane. Everybody benefits from a transit system that gives viable, safe options.

There's also lots of research out there that shows more lanes doesn't actually benefit traffic flow, things like induced demand result in a short lived improvement, followed by the exact same traffic issues you had before adding the lanes, and the reverse happens too, you take away lanes and people opt for alternative options, you end up with the same amount of traffic.

The question shouldn't be how many cars to bikes use bank street currently, it should be how do we design our infrastructure as a whole to meet the requirements of the population. That means looking at the entire system, not one street in a vacuum.

For future builds I would agree like all of the new developments going up in the outskirts of the city but we are talking about corridors that get people to and from parts further out and are not using those bike lanes. In Ottawa in 2021, the average cyclist traveled an average distance of approximately 20 minutes/ 4-5 kilometers (2.5-3 miles). This represents people who live in the inner core of the city who travel from Hintonburgh/Ottawa South/Vanier. The people driving would most likely be from further away as the proximity to downtown is easily accessible by public transit and wouldn't require paying for parking for those in that 5 km radius.

The reason people choose cars is because public transit has gotten worse since the implementation of the LRT. Even when the LRT is running 100% it is still not as efficient as the system before it. It will take generations before we have a transit network that actually serves the majority of people that makes it more convenient than driving. By then we will have flying cars and laugh at the thought human powered bicycles.

Keeping traffic lanes may not improve congestion but reducing traffic lanes only slows down traffic and leads to more congestion everywhere else.

 

[Stylizer1]

By 2077 a great deal of the oil in Saudi Arabia and other Khaleege (Gulf nations) will dramatically be reduced. That is in 52 years.

By 2077, a great deal of sources of Western oil will be dramatically reduced.

We are using it at insane rates. Way quicker than assumed or ever conceived. Emerging 3rd world nations have sucked it up at rates way higher than ever before.

Pharmaceuticals, evolution in health care will reduce human mortality and the earth's population will grow. It has doubled the last 50 years, even though, we are in an era when families are significantly smaller than ever before. Few families have 4-10 kids as they once did. Even the 3rd world has slowed in terms of birth rate.

So..by 2050 and beyond, this world will look like something out of a Hollywood sci-fi/sci-fi-horror movie.

Fuel, streets, transport must be preserved for global society's use. Effectively for services only. Vehicle must no longer be used for human transport, but for work/business/social need (Ambulance, police, fire, city crews, and so on).

And so, we need to begin to alter our lives to produce a society that is somewhere between life in 1825 and 2025.

Close proximity living, walking everywhere, riding bikes, horses and so on. All the while leaving cars, planes, trucks, etc. for "necessary" living.

Less it, we will meet 2050 and beyond head on and be Unpleasantly surprised.

They no longer pave roads in Ottawa. There is no money. And so, roads must now go from 25-27 years of service life to double that, 50-55 years. Meaning that, they can no longer have many vehicles on them. Otherwise, in 25 years and beyond, an Ambulance may not be able to get to you.

The road the ambulance may take could be so chewed up that an ambulance can not or will not traverse it.
A litre of fuel may be so expensive that a hard decision may be made as to whether you merit/deserve/can afford saving
Roads could be so congested that an ambulance may take too long to get to you and too long to get you to medical care.
Rising energy costs could mean that hospitals are now for the wealthy

Essentially Stylizer, we may be heading towards life as depicted by the movie Soylant Green.

2.5 - 3 % of society will be autistic. And so by 2050, some 2-3 MILIION Canadians will require chronic care
2.5 - 3 % of society will be battling cancer. Another 2 -3 million
2.5 - 3 % will be battling other chronic health issues.. A further 2 -3 million

by 2050.. 6-9 MILLION of the 50 million in this country will need chronic care. Thus consuming a fantastic amount of resources/money/energy. We need to start planning for this.. And returning to a life far closer to 1825 than today.

A day will come when we will rue the SUV trip to the local grocery store that was 1 km away. And rue the day when we idled in traffic, all the while it was nice outside and the bike lane was empty.

I hope humanity is enjoying itself today. The bill will be handed down in 25 years.

Those younger than 60, good luck to you. It will come to you. It has started already.

They no longer pave roads in Ottawa. There is no money. And so, roads must now go from 25-27 years of service life to double that, 50-55 years. Meaning that, they can no longer have many vehicles on them. Otherwise, in 25 years and beyond, an Ambulance may not be able to get to you.

What are you specifically talking about? We pave roads every 25 years?

 

[Beech]

What are you specifically talking about? We pave roads every 25 years?

not even close.

Riverside south has not had a road repaved in 28 years now.

My street as well as the bulk of all streets in the Northern section (Due North of Earl Armstrong) were built and paved in 1997/1998.

It is today 2025.

Making them 27-28 years old.

There is no plan to repave them. Not according to city hall.

If you walk around, as I do. You will notice the severe damage. Pitting has been occurring for 3-4 years now. And I mean severe. So much so that all lawns have between 1 and 2 litres of gravel and the petroleum binder strewn on them from the pressure washer that passed and from the snow plough and snow shoveling that occurs in winter.

The pitting in now at 10-20 mm deep. Creating a perfect egg carton shape.

Now at areas that span driveways, there is way more damage from, salt application, private snow plough (those that clean driveways) damage and vehicle impact. Those 5-10 meters are nearly fully damaged for the majority of streets in that Northern section.

Civil structure flotation (Buoyancy) is now catastrophic. Many structures have risen between 10 and 20 mm and have destroyed the pavement above them. The result is a spiderweb of cracks that propagate outwards. That is now for all structures and is fairly consistently every 30-40 meters.

Settling of ground over all "below ground services" (pipes, conduits, cables) had resulted in linear (more like jagged) cracks that are now from curb to curb. And shifting and buckling has now produced cracks that are at 20-30 mm wide. And these will only grow.

Essentially RSS North is 1-2 years away from having streets that Honduras would be ashamed of.

And in 1-2 years, these streets will be a full 29-30 years old. 4-5 years past their service life and will still be 1-5 years away from repaving...and at 950 K to 1 Million dollars per KM. These 100 to 150 km, will cost a whopping 100-150 million dollars to do. Meaning each RSS resident (man, woman and child) will owe $680.

In and out roads from this community are some 150 km... so another $680.. we are up to $1300 per man, woman and child. A family of 4 will owe ~ $6000.

RSS only.. The rest of Ottawa, well another $1000 or so per RSS resident.

Highways... in the world's second largest nation.... a cool $1000

Every RSS (they need to add a 4th S for sucker). we will be up to a cool $3300.. a family of 4, a measly $15,000. All due some time in 2027-2030 and/or, we are not paving roads.

So tell me; what roads are being paved?

Come and visit us. I can take you around. You can see the gravel on peoples lawns. And you can take pictures and send them to Mark S.

My friend, what is waiting for you in 2030 is going to make you shudder.

Bike lanes will be a God send, they will be the only thing flat and passable.

 

[Stylizer1]

not even close.

Riverside south has not had a road repaved in 28 years now.

My street as well as the bulk of all streets in the Northern section (Due North of Earl Armstrong) were built and paved in 1997/1998.

It is today 2025.

Making them 27-28 years old.

There is no plan to repave them. Not according to city hall.

If you walk around, as I do. You will notice the severe damage. Pitting has been occurring for 3-4 years now. And I mean severe. So much so that all lawns have between 1 and 2 litres of gravel and the petroleum binder strewn on them from the pressure washer that passed and from the snow plough and snow shoveling that occurs in winter.

The pitting in now at 10-20 mm deep. Creating a perfect egg carton shape.

Now at areas that span driveways, there is way more damage from, salt application, private snow plough (those that clean driveways) damage and vehicle impact. Those 5-10 meters are nearly fully damaged for the majority of streets in that Northern section.

Civil structure flotation (Buoyancy) is now catastrophic. Many structures have risen between 10 and 20 mm and have destroyed the pavement above them. The result is a spiderweb of cracks that propagate outwards. That is now for all structures and is fairly consistently every 30-40 meters.

Settling of ground over all "below ground services" (pipes, conduits, cables) had resulted in linear (more like jagged) cracks that are now from curb to curb. And shifting and buckling has now produced cracks that are at 20-30 mm wide. And these will only grow.

Essentially RSS North is 1-2 years away from having streets that Honduras would be ashamed of.

And in 1-2 years, these streets will be a full 29-30 years old. 4-5 years past their service life and will still be 1-5 years away from repaving...and at 950 K to 1 Million dollars per KM. These 100 to 150 km, will cost a whopping 100-150 million dollars to do. Meaning each RSS resident (man, woman and child) will owe $680.

In and out roads from this community are some 150 km... so another $680.. we are up to $1300 per man, woman and child. A family of 4 will owe ~ $6000.

RSS only.. The rest of Ottawa, well another $1000 or so per RSS resident.

Highways... in the world's second largest nation.... a cool $1000

Every RSS (they need to add a 4th S for sucker). we will be up to a cool $3300.. a family of 4, a measly $15,000. All due some time in 2027-2030 and/or, we are not paving roads.

So tell me; what roads are being paved?

Come and visit us. I can take you around. You can see the gravel on peoples lawns. And you can take pictures and send them to Mark S.

My friend, what is waiting for you in 2030 is going to make you shudder.

Bike lanes will be a God send, they will be the only thing flat and passable.

show me a few examples.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

It has to do with his Bottom-up, top-down perspective which was spot on was spot on. We have 100' of kilometers of bike paths around the city that have been installed with ample space. We have streets designed in the 1900's we use for automobiles. Our population has grown x18 since then and we are reducing capacity to serve an extreme minority? I am not against bike lanes just where they put them and the congestion they cause. Bank Street is 1 of 3 major North- South corridors(Main & Bronson) for people to come in and get out of the downtown core and they decided to remove one lane going over the bridge for cyclists but then leave the street on either side still 4 lanes. How does that make any sense. The amount of cars to bikes that travel that stretch is at least 200 to 1 if not a larger gap. They tore up Main Street to add more sidewalk, permanent parking, and bike path and reduced the lanes from 4 to 2. They could have kept 4 lanes and fit in the bike paths. Before there was only paring allowed outside of rush hour. Who ever came up with that design should lose their job.

Agreed.

I think bike lanes are a good thing...but not every street or area with existing infrastructure is able to convert space into a bike lane that makes sense. Reducing lanes on Bank Street is a horrific choice by whoever planned this.

They would've been better off going 2-3 blocks to the east or west where there is less traffic and congestion instead.

 

[Stylizer1]

Agreed.

I think bike lanes are a good thing...but not every street or area with existing infrastructure is able to convert space into a bike lane that makes sense. Reducing lanes on Bank Street is a horrific choice by whoever planned this.

They would've been better off going 2-3 blocks to the east or west where there is less traffic and congestion instead.

There isn't ever a bike lane on Bank street. It starts and ends just before and after the bridge. They messed up Wellington too but dropping a bike lane right in the middle of the road and permanent street parking creating more congestion. Bank Street used to have no parking during rush hour to open up those roads for optimal usage by cars.