174 Widening and Extension | Proposed

[MoreTrains]

If they dont like it, how about we build a wall just east of the Trim/174 intersection. Then we wouldnt need any widening.

[DubberDom]

I was at the meeting in Cumberland, Stephen Blais looked a an idiot and a bully in some of his exchanges, this plan makes no sense for the City of Ottawa, why should the city encourage sprawl outside its borders?

[1overcosc]

This sounds like another Hunt Club--some semi-expressway, some arterial. Hopefully they can ban further driveways along the route--starting now.

It's the opposite of what we expected all this time, which is a 400-series standards freeway. But if you think about it, if Barrhaven can survive without a freeway link at 100,000 people, surely Rockland can deal with a semi-expressway.

Interesting that the $40M each from the province & feds still stands. I didn't realize that money continued to be earmarked after the last widening plan was cancelled. Perhaps after the EA is done, that $80M from the upper governments can be spent on some key elements like that Cameron roundabout & a proper interchange at Trim, while city funding is waited for the whole thing.

[waterloowarrior]

Kind of hard to tell what is going on in this map
http://documents.ottawa.ca/sites/doc..._oh1_10_en.pdf

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by DubberDom

I was at the meeting in Cumberland, Stephen Blais looked a an idiot and a bully in some of his exchanges, this plan makes no sense for the City of Ottawa, why should the city encourage sprawl outside its borders?

This EA is being done jointly by the City and Prescott-Russell County, with the province paying the cost. Prescott-Russell County is actually the project lead.

Despite being outside the city's borders Rockland is a lot closer to downtown than people realize. Rockland is about the same distance to downtown as the western half of Kanata.

[Capital Shaun]

Originally Posted by MoreTrains

If they dont like it, how about we build a wall just east of the Trim/174 intersection. Then we wouldnt need any widening.

The widening is more for the benefit of Rockland commuters than those in Cumberland. I can understand why residents in Cumberland (who are officially part of Ottawa) would object with a highway cutting through their neighbourhood.

Not that I have much sympathy for those who have long commutes from Cumberland or Rockland.

[DubberDom]

23.5km from Centrum , 40 km from Rockland

also, while P-R are the lead on the EA, technically, it's the province who is paying the entire $5M amount. The city of Ottawa has the power & right to say "no"

[DubberDom]

Originally Posted by Capital Shaun

Not that I have much sympathy for those who have long commutes from Cumberland or Rockland.

Cumberland is 27.5km from Downtown, for reference, Stittsville is over 30km
You would be surprised how few downtown commuters actually live in the rural parts of Ottawa

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by DubberDom

Cumberland is 27.5km from Downtown, for reference, Stittsville is over 30km
You would be surprised how few downtown commuters actually live in the rural parts of Ottawa

I get the impression that the rural east (both inside and outside city limits) has a much higher number of downtown commuters than the rural west or rural south, judging by the fact that transit routes to Cumberland Ward, Rockland, and Russell have been successful, whereas the ones to Osgoode Ward, Kemptville, Carleton Place, and Arnprior are largely failed experiments.

[1overcosc]

Using Google Directions, distances from the Rideau Centre:

-Arnprior: 67.7km
-Carleton Place: 54.6km
-Kemptville: 60.0km
-Casselman: 56.1km
-Rockland: 37.1km

Compared to:
-Stittsville: 33.5km
-Barrhaven TC: 30.1km

Rockland is a only a bit farther out than the existing suburbs, and MUCH closer than any of the other exurban towns with freeway links. I'd rather see Rockland sprawl than Carleton Place sprawl. From an environmental perspective, Rockland is the most ecologically friendly of these sites for growth due to its relatively poor quality soil (as opposed to say, Russell, which is surrounded on all sides by prime-quality farmland), and it being right on the river making for a less energy intensive water supply.

If Rockland grows LRT service there is conceivable. Not with any of the other towns outside city limits.

Plus, I prefer the idea of distant sprawl to be concentrated along linear corridors to allow more efficient transit. If all future southward growth in Orleans was cancelled and instead all that growth was channelled into a linear corridor in Cumberland & Rockland, it would allow for more efficient rapid transit links out there.

To solve these jurisdictional issues, Clarence-Rockland (or at least, the northern part containing Rockland proper) should be annexed by Ottawa.

[MoreTrains]

This is all too much. The City should refuse LRT expansion beyond Trim and prevent anymore sprawl in the outer wards. The bulk of expansion should be within the Greenbelt providing greater density. Currently (according to Wiki) Urban Ottawa is sitting at 1,860.1/km2, we should be aiming for something similar to Montreal, which is at 2,205.4/km2. That would increase the tax base without increase useless infrastructure.

But then again... Intensification prevents sprawl and we cant have that because there is so many more square miles of undeveloped Ottawa outside the Greenbelt! All this to say, the 174 should not be widened in any capacity and the LRT should be the reason for no widening as it should pickup the difference in car users vs transit users. It is a waste of money and is detremental to sustainability and cutting GHG emissions.

[silvergate]

Originally Posted by MoreTrains

This is all too much. The City should refuse LRT expansion beyond Trim and prevent anymore sprawl in the outer wards. The bulk of expansion should be within the Greenbelt providing greater density. Currently (according to Wiki) Urban Ottawa is sitting at 1,860.1/km2, we should be aiming for something similar to Montreal, which is at 2,205.4/km2. That would increase the tax base without increase useless infrastructure.

But then again... Intensification prevents sprawl and we cant have that because there is so many more square miles of undeveloped Ottawa outside the Greenbelt! All this to say, the 174 should not be widened in any capacity and the LRT should be the reason for no widening as it should pickup the difference in car users vs transit users. It is a waste of money and is detremental to sustainability and cutting GHG emissions.

The province of Ontario made a good start at cutting emissions. But how can we expect a government which bails out automakers, and (correct me if this is outdated) holds stock in those same automakers.
There is no reason for Ontario to stop catering to cars at this point in time.

[1overcosc]

I believe Ontario has sold off its remaining auto shares.

I don't think Ontario's auto industry and its commitment to transit & urbanization are necessarily connected. I mean, the province is reportedly about to roll out a cap-and-trade mechanism and/or a carbon tax in the spring budget.

[Buggys]

Originally Posted by MoreTrains

This is all too much. The City should refuse LRT expansion beyond Trim and prevent anymore sprawl in the outer wards. The bulk of expansion should be within the Greenbelt providing greater density. Currently (according to Wiki) Urban Ottawa is sitting at 1,860.1/km2, we should be aiming for something similar to Montreal, which is at 2,205.4/km2. That would increase the tax base without increase useless infrastructure.

But then again... Intensification prevents sprawl and we cant have that because there is so many more square miles of undeveloped Ottawa outside the Greenbelt! All this to say, the 174 should not be widened in any capacity and the LRT should be the reason for no widening as it should pickup the difference in car users vs transit users. It is a waste of money and is detremental to sustainability and cutting GHG emissions.

[JCL]

Originally Posted by DubberDom

I was at the meeting in Cumberland, Stephen Blais looked a an idiot and a bully in some of his exchanges, this plan makes no sense for the City of Ottawa, why should the city encourage sprawl outside its borders?

Tell me more on what you observed of him.

As for me, when I was the LRT open house in Orleans, I suggested that the LRT should be on the south-side of the Highway because in my opinion it would an easier access for transferring passengers between LRT/local buses, and that the median option required a lot of stairs to climb (the Highwas dips below the pedestrian overpass and Champlain Street). He said, "we people could use the excercise... ".

I also remember listening to the audiocast in September 2011, right after Route Optimization changes took into effect, saying that the routes changes were fantastic. He then added that City can't go back to a "tax and spend" way of doing this. (https://app06.ottawa.ca/city_hall/we...t-20110921.flv start at 46:28)

[1overcosc]

Did anybody bring up the Jasmine station issue at the open houses?

[JCL]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Did anybody bring up the Jasmine station issue at the open houses?

At the open house in Orleans, no. But I have made a written submission suggesting that they should.

I would position the station around the Sutton Place/Aarowsmith Drive area, http://goo.gl/maps/O9FJx

[waterloowarrior]

http://ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/public...21-and-23-2015

Open Houses - April 20, 21 and 23, 2015
Monday, April 20, 2015
Community Pentecostal Church
1825 St. Joseph Boulevard, Orléans

Tuesday, April 21, 2015
R. J. Kennedy Community Centre
Hall A & B, 1115 Dunning Road, Cumberland

Thursday, April 23, 2015
Clarence Creek Community Hall
418 Lemay Street, Clarence Creek

6 to 9 p.m., presentation at 7 p.m.

You are invited to the final Open Houses to review and provide feedback on the recommendations for these two environmental assessment (EA) studies. The Confederation Line East LRT Extension study is following the Transit Projects Assessment Process and the OR174 and Prescott-Russell County Road 17 (CR17) corridor is under the Municipal Class EA process for a Schedule 'C' project.

Open House presentation and displays will include:

• Functional design of the preferred integrated LRT and OR174 widening west of Trim Road
• Functional design of the widening of OR 174 and CR 17 east of Trim Road
• Summary of comments and responses from the February 2015 consultation
• Next steps

[waterloowarrior]

April 2015 display boards
http://ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/public...21-and-23-2015

[waterloowarrior]

Final EA recommendations
http://app05.ottawa.ca/sirepub/agdoc...&itemid=344028

The highway widening design consists of a four-lane, divided arterial roadway requiring
approximately 32 metres right of way (ROW) in Cumberland Village to as much as 47
metres ROW elsewhere. The existing ROW varies from 30 to 45 metres. To
accommodate this design, property acquisition by way of generally frontage will be
required. General key design elements are noted below and a typical rural
cross-section is illustrated in Figure 1.
 In each direction, 3.5-metre lane on the right and 3.75-metre median lane with a
1.2-metre buffer (0.6-metre buffer in Cumberland Village) between the lanes to
protect for an HOV lane.
 1.5 to 5-metre wide medians including provisions for left turn lanes at
intersections. Median barriers in rural areas will enhance safety and raised
medians at intersections will improve sight distance.
 Signalization at intersections to facilitate turning movements, including u-turns.
 2.5-metre enhanced paved shoulders with rumble strips for pedestrians and
cyclists.
 Limited multi-use pathways in specific areas along the road corridor.
 Curbs and underground storm drain system within the urban area, ditches in the
rural area.
 Two new service roads to consolidate driveways and local roads.
 Continuous pedestrian and cycling pathway network (on and off-road) from Trim
Road to Canaan Road.
 Posted speeds varying from 60 (Cumberland Village) to 80 kilometres per hour.