HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 2:02 PM
c_speed3108 c_speed3108 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,806
Confederation Line West LRT Extension (Stage 2) [Tunney's to Baseline/Moodie] | U/C

The NCC has rather suddenly called a press conference for 11 AM regarding the western LRT route options....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 2:20 PM
ACmodels's Avatar
ACmodels ACmodels is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: NCR
Posts: 123
Really... I wonder if its bad or good...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 2:59 PM
MoreTrains MoreTrains is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 858
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACmodels View Post
Really... I wonder if its bad or good...
Knowing the previous stances of the NCC it wont be good, but it could be that them and the City have come to an agreement that costs a few hundred million more to bury it all and allow the 'barrier' to the waterfront to continue to be the parkway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 3:19 PM
c_speed3108 c_speed3108 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,806
One of the city hall reporters says the people around city hall don't appear to know what they are planning to announce...

That makes me less optimistic than I was the first time. I am guessing it will be either "no" or some sort of a list of conditions.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 3:24 PM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 11,452
Ever since Kristmanson came into the picture, the NCC has been completely silent on the issue with Kristmanson dodging the question ever time it came up. I wonder what's about to happen... with municipal election season over, but federal election season just ramping up, it's an interesting time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 3:28 PM
c_speed3108 c_speed3108 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1overcosc View Post
Ever since Kristmanson came into the picture, the NCC has been completely silent on the issue with Kristmanson dodging the question ever time it came up. I wonder what's about to happen... with municipal election season over, but federal election season just ramping up, it's an interesting time.
The other thing is we seem to have entered an era of what John Baird wants in Ottawa, John Baird gets. He has remaned parkways, given a chunk of land to the hospital etc..

We have had a couple LRT elections now (city and provincial). I am wondering if there has been some reading the tea leaves and they have felt they better put this issue to bed in some form.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 4:18 PM
c_speed3108 c_speed3108 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,806
Basically it is sounding like they want the city to use a route through Rochester Field.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 4:21 PM
Capital Shaun Capital Shaun is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 860
Reading the tweets as they come in. Basically the NCC is telling the city to look into the Rochester field alignment which the city has previously stated would cost millions more.
This picture shows the city's routing vs the NCC's routing: https://twitter.com/mpearson78/statu...29646349447168
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 4:25 PM
c_speed3108 c_speed3108 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,806
NCC is also open to "deep tunnel" along the SJAM alignment
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 4:29 PM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 11,452
Apparently the NCC is claiming the two options cost the same. Not exactly sure how.

Interesting that on the federal side, no politicians present. Just a bunch of bureaucrats.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 4:37 PM
Capital Shaun Capital Shaun is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 860
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1overcosc View Post
Apparently the NCC is claiming the two options cost the same. Not exactly sure how.

Interesting that on the federal side, no politicians present. Just a bunch of bureaucrats.
Probably because none of the local CPC MPs want their names attached to this either way. If their constituents complain about the outcome they can point to the "arm's length" NCC to assert blame.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 4:39 PM
Kitchissippi's Avatar
Kitchissippi Kitchissippi is offline
Busy Beaver
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capital Shaun View Post
Reading the tweets as they come in. Basically the NCC is telling the city to look into the Rochester field alignment which the city has previously stated would cost millions more.
This picture shows the city's routing vs the NCC's routing: https://twitter.com/mpearson78/statu...29646349447168
That has always been my preferred alignment, with a station on Richmond at Maplelawn/Denbury Ave. Dominion Station is useless in my opinion as a transit hub because you can't send buses down there. Having a station anchoring the far end of Westboro Village can establish a strong pedestrian corridor along Richmond with a spur at McRae towards Westboro Station. It may cost millions more, but in terms of city building it is a logical and smarter approach.

The city really botched up the estimates for this option, I almost think they were trying to sabotage it by putting a significantly higher cost to it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 4:44 PM
Dado's Avatar
Dado Dado is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1overcosc View Post
Apparently the NCC is claiming the two options cost the same. Not exactly sure how.
Probably because the NCC's version of the CPR routing is to sink it well into the water table, thus its costs would rise, bringing it to the same cost as a Rochester-Richmond routing.
__________________
Ottawa's quasi-official motto: "It can't be done"
Ottawa's quasi-official ethos: "We have a process to follow"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 5:05 PM
c_speed3108 c_speed3108 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1overcosc View Post
Apparently the NCC is claiming the two options cost the same. Not exactly sure how.

Interesting that on the federal side, no politicians present. Just a bunch of bureaucrats.
Basically David Reevely figured it out: They cost about the same if the route runs along the surface on Byron corridor.

I suspect some people in the neighbourhood may take issue with that idea. They like the "linear park" (aka city owned dog bathroom facility)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 5:37 PM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 11,452
Putting a surface route through the Byron would be difficult to do without level crossings. Putting in level crossings would constrain capacity & speed and is not desirable.

I still firmly believe the Richmond Underground route is ideal, and I think Watson needs to take advantage of the upcoming federal election to push for a federal cabinet override of the NCC.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 5:45 PM
Dado's Avatar
Dado Dado is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kitchissippi View Post
That has always been my preferred alignment, with a station on Richmond at Maplelawn/Denbury Ave. Dominion Station is useless in my opinion as a transit hub because you can't send buses down there. Having a station anchoring the far end of Westboro Village can establish a strong pedestrian corridor along Richmond with a spur at McRae towards Westboro Station. It may cost millions more, but in terms of city building it is a logical and smarter approach.
I'd go a couple more steps than that.

Rochester Field should be developed as a TOD around the station.

I'd move Westboro Station westwards to Churchill (east side) so that Westboro Station actually lines up with Westboro's main cross street and where the station would have gone were it not designed with an access ramp. Besides making the station more central to Westboro, it would also allow the new station to be built without interfering with the operation of the current station until very late in the conversion process.

The current Westboro Station property could then be incorporated into the redevelopment of the Health Canada property to its north, with its two bridges serving as accesses.

The extra distance between the new Westboro Station and Tunney's Pasture would now permit the addition of a station at Island Park Drive, the last major cross street in the area, and one which would better serve the condo craze in the Island Park-Richmond/Wellington area.

Quote:
The city really botched up the estimates for this option, I almost think they were trying to sabotage it by putting a significantly higher cost to it.
It does seem that way.
__________________
Ottawa's quasi-official motto: "It can't be done"
Ottawa's quasi-official ethos: "We have a process to follow"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 5:49 PM
eternallyme eternallyme is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,243
Wasn't the purpose of that "linear park" a long-identified rapid transit corridor that was never built?

It can be done without any grade crossings, but requires a few things:

1) Either a tunnel or an elevated guideway would be necessary at Rochester Field, allowing it to cross Richmond Road, over or under the Richmond/Fraser intersection, before settling to the surface.

2) To allow for a surface alignment (lowest cost), closures would be required at all of Westminster, Windermere, Wavell, Redwood, Lockhart and Ancaster Avenues (i.e. forced onto Byron - must access Richmond Road at Woodroffe or at an edge). One or two pedestrian overpasses could be built though to maintain pedestrian access across.

3) It would need to descend underneath Woodroffe Avenue, likely in a open-air depressed alignment with an overpass (perhaps incorporating a below-grade station), as that road cannot be closed off.

4) A bored tunnel would be ideal (no property acquisition required) to rejoin at Lincoln Fields, descending into the tunnel before Richardson Avenue and rejoining just before the current Transitway station. A cut-and-cover tunnel or elevated guideway would require property acquisition or major road closures, and a surface alignment would be too problematic there.

5) The linear park is, on average, 22 metres wide. That would easily allow for a bicycle/pedestrian pathway, and some greenspace, at both the Byron and Richmond ends, except perhaps in the vicinity of the stations.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 6:06 PM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,243
http://www.ncc-ccn.gc.ca/property-ma...ansit-corridor

Quote:
the Sir John A. Macdonald Parkway partially buried option, which was put forward by the City for the environmental assessment study, cannot meet the two conditions set by the NCC’s Board of Directors:

-unimpeded continuous access to the corridor lands and Ottawa River shorelines, and
-minimal visual impact on the corridor landscape quality and the user experience of this corridor.
Here's a quick map I made showing pedestrian crossings of the Parkway in the area...



edit:

Legend
Blue Crosswalk icons - protected pedestrian crossings
Blue dotted line - measures distance between New Orchard and Lanark Ave crossings
Yellow Diamond - Partial Crossings and Richmond and Carling (have to walk to an intersection to cross)
Yellow Cars - Intersection Crossing with unprotected merge lane crossing

Last edited by waterloowarrior; Nov 21, 2014 at 6:20 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 6:07 PM
Capital Shaun Capital Shaun is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 860
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kitchissippi View Post
That has always been my preferred alignment, with a station on Richmond at Maplelawn/Denbury Ave. Dominion Station is useless in my opinion as a transit hub because you can't send buses down there. Having a station anchoring the far end of Westboro Village can establish a strong pedestrian corridor along Richmond with a spur at McRae towards Westboro Station. It may cost millions more, but in terms of city building it is a logical and smarter approach.

The city really botched up the estimates for this option, I almost think they were trying to sabotage it by putting a significantly higher cost to it.
I don't remember reading anything about the station locations. I don't think the NCC brought that up.

I'm impartial on the alignment in that area but I find the NCC's reasoning hypocritical. That talk about protecting access to the shoreline when there's a 4 lane highway already impeding access is pretty rich. And converting the Byron linear park to surface LRT just removes someone else's green space. The NCC's grass is sacred though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2014, 6:10 PM
Capital Shaun Capital Shaun is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 860
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterloowarrior View Post
http://www.ncc-ccn.gc.ca/property-ma...ansit-corridor



Here's a quick map I made showing pedestrian crossings of the Parkway in the area...

Hard to believe the NCC considers an access point every kilometer (or more) as 'unimpeded continuous access'.

Last edited by Capital Shaun; Nov 21, 2014 at 6:14 PM. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:56 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.