HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2011, 1:46 AM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,243
http://ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/cit...sition6eng.htm
2. OTTAWA ROAD 174 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CUMBERLAND (19)

WHEREAS Ottawa Road 174 is a fundamental transportation link and critical to future growth in Orléans and continuing east; and

WHEREAS to accommodate growth west of Trim Road along OR 174, the City of Ottawa will be completing an Environmental Assessment on the widening of OR 174 from the Highway 417/174 split to Jeanne D’Arc, as identified as a Phase 1 and Phase 2 project in the Transportation Master plan; and

WHEREAS the planned Ministry of Transportation widening of Highway 417 from Nicholas Street to the 417/174 split is anticipated to be completed prior to 2016; and

WHEREAS the City of Ottawa’s Official Plan and Transportation Master Plan does not currently identify the need to widen OR 174 east of Jeanne D’Arc; and

WHEREAS in 2008 the Province of Ontario offered the City of Ottawa $5M to fund an Environmental Assessment for the widening of OR 174 / Prescott Russell Road 17; and

WHEREAS the Provincial offer of $5M is still available;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Provincial offer of $5M to complete an Environmental Assessment of the widening of OR 174/Prescott Russell Road 17 be utilized under the following conditions:

a) That the widening of Highway 417 to fix the split westerly to Nicholas Street is fully funded with a commitment to implement by 2015;
b) All costs related to the City of Ottawa’s planned Environmental Assessment from 417/174 split easterly to Jeanne D’Arc be drawn from the Provincial offer of $5M;
c) The remaining funds be used to complete the Environmental Assessment of OR 174 / Prescott-Russell Road 17 from Jeanne D’Arc easterly and that the study be borne by the Province or the United Counties of Prescott and Russell with the City providing input on the scope of the study prior to the call for proposals;
d) That the Environmental Assessment from Jeanne D’Arc easterly look at the downstream effect on the City’s infrastructure, and that the study include a cost benefit analysis and a full exploration of all alternatives; and,
e) That the Environmental Assessment from Jeanne D’Arc easterly requires final approval by City of Ottawa Council.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the results of the Environmental Study for the widening of OR 174 from Jeanne D’Arc easterly be considered and incorporated into the City’s updated Transportation Master Plan.

CARRIED
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2011, 2:28 AM
adam-machiavelli adam-machiavelli is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,244
Ex-urban sprawl brought to you by councillor Blais.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2011, 10:39 PM
Requin Requin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by DubberDom View Post
Although I believe that the expansion of the 174 between Trim and 417 is warranted, the city should opposed any expansion of the 174 east of Trim. The sole purpose of this expansion will be to service growth in Rockland and other communities east of Ottawa, while bringing no benefit to the city of Ottawa except more traffic, at the expense of further destroying the watershed along the river where the highway will expand.
Completely agree with this as well. If the expansion east of Trim goes ahead, Rockland should pay for it. There are only negative implications for Ottawa. It's quite infuriating, actually.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Apr 9, 2011, 2:47 AM
OttSenators OttSenators is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Requin View Post
Completely agree with this as well. If the expansion east of Trim goes ahead, Rockland should pay for it. There are only negative implications for Ottawa. It's quite infuriating, actually.

I Disagree.

One main reason for the expansion out there is safety. There have been 260 of accidents over the past 5 years, and widening the highway out there would help to stop them. 6 people have died.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Apr 9, 2011, 4:05 AM
ThePlanner ThePlanner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 12
There's other better ways to make a road safer than just by widening it. In fact, you could argue that widening the road makes it even less safer by encouraging more traffic and more polluting emissions. Better ways to make the road safer include lowering the speed limit, eliminating dangerous turns, and increasing mass transit access along the route.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Apr 9, 2011, 4:24 AM
Deez's Avatar
Deez Deez is offline
you know my steez
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Toronto/Ottawa
Posts: 1,397
Quote:
Originally Posted by OttSenators View Post
I Disagree.

One main reason for the expansion out there is safety. There have been 260 of accidents over the past 5 years, and widening the highway out there would help to stop them. 6 people have died.
If someone were to run the numbers on this I would wager that this section of highway is no less dangerous per veh-km traveled than any other 2 lane highway in the province. But who am I kidding, no one will.

This, and the rest of the highway widening plans slated for Ottawa, will completely eliminate the already slim chance of hitting the city's 30% peak hour transit mode share mark. Barring any extreme cost shifts, how can you possibly expect to increase transit patronage while reducing auto travel times and not improving transit travel time?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Apr 9, 2011, 2:00 PM
reidjr reidjr is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePlanner View Post
There's other better ways to make a road safer than just by widening it. In fact, you could argue that widening the road makes it even less safer by encouraging more traffic and more polluting emissions. Better ways to make the road safer include lowering the speed limit, eliminating dangerous turns, and increasing mass transit access along the route.
Its not a matter of encouraging traffic the thing is the traffic is there it would not really be new traffic widening would just improve the current system which is needed.As for lowering the speed limit that would just add to the issue some would say it would make it far worse and cause many other issues.As for mass transit that is what maybe 30 years away something needs to be done now to make this raod better and easier for people to use.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Apr 9, 2011, 2:14 PM
Richard Eade Richard Eade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nepean
Posts: 1,946
Maybe there is an incentive to use public transit, but it is being built by the MTO for the City; the Cyrville Bridge. As I mentioned before (and I have seen nothing about it being changed), the new bridge is being re-built to only have TWO west-bound lanes of the OR174 pass under it.



From north to south, under the new Cyrville Bridge we will have; traffic destined for St. Laurent will take the new (separated) ramp, which is an extension of the 417-south/east ramp; there will be two west-bound OR174 lanes; then the two west-bound 417 lanes. The gore area of the merging OR174 and 417 lanes extends to west of the bridge so under the bridge, the lanes remain separate as 2+2 lanes. Heading east, the MTO is moving the south abutment so there will be two OR174 lanes and two PLUS a new third 417 lane (2+3 lanes total).

At least east-bound, the MTO has added room for an additional 417 lane, but there will still only be room under the bridge for TWO OR174 lanes per direction. As I said before, the City can widen the OR174 to ten lanes per direction, but for the next 65-70 years, there will be only two lanes per direction going under that bridge.

This bottle-neck will also affect the bus traffic during the conversion to rail since buses will be expected to run on the OR174/417. The MTO is adding new lanes to the 417 from Nicholas to the west side of the Cyrville Bridge (to the east of Cyrville Bridge in the east/south-bound direction), but there will still be just two lanes in each direction under the bridge for the OR174. Buses leaving Blair along the OR174 will have to merge with the congestion to get under this bridge.

As far as the MTO is concerned, this makes sense since the section of 417 between Nicholas and 'the split' will be increased to four lanes basic through lanes. There will be fifth lanes in places between St. Laurent and Nicholas, but these are considered auxiliary lanes and are to function primarily as speed-change lanes for ramps. So, as far as the MTO is concerned, two OR174 + two 417 lanes ensures the smoothest traffic flow.

Basically, the Cyrville Bridge is being used to throttle the west-bound OR174 traffic so that it does not over-load the 417.

It seems to me to be a shame. The St. Laurent overpass is being widened by the MTO so that there are four lanes across it. The City should be asking for a design that allows the City to add an additional lane in the future to bring the bridge up to five lanes per direction. For this minimal cost, there would then be five full lanes between the split and the Vanier Parkway/Riverside interchange. The only thing standing in the way of such a plan is the limit imposed by the new Cyrville Bridge.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Apr 9, 2011, 3:41 PM
eternallyme eternallyme is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,243
Really, I don't know why 174/old 17 is not a provincial highway. That was one of the dumbest decommissionings in all of Ontario.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Apr 9, 2011, 4:42 PM
Mille Sabords's Avatar
Mille Sabords Mille Sabords is offline
Elle est déjà vide!
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Big Bad Ottawa
Posts: 2,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by OttSenators View Post
I Disagree.

One main reason for the expansion out there is safety. There have been 260 of accidents over the past 5 years, and widening the highway out there would help to stop them. 6 people have died.
Well, if you don't wanna die, don't go live so far or don't drive so fast.

Sorry, this highway widening for "safety reasons" has to be the most morally dishonest argument for sprawl under the sun. It's amazing they still even use it. People drive like nutbars on the highways because they live far and because they want to get home faster and because there's always traffic and because they'll catch any hole in that traffic to gain 10 seconds or pass that one SUV that is blocking their view, etc, etc.

Society shouldn't have to pay for wider freeways because the people of Rockland want to get home sooner.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Apr 9, 2011, 7:26 PM
eternallyme eternallyme is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,243
It's all because of economics. Housing is considerably cheaper in Clarence-Rockland than it is in Ottawa, and that makes thousands of people want to live there and commute to Ottawa every day. And those people DO contribute to the commercial and industrial tax base of Ottawa.

Starting a war between municipalities is what caused numerous American cities to hit the dumpsters. Detroit and its suburbs, for example, have been in a constant war with terrible relations for decades.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Apr 10, 2011, 9:17 PM
Requin Requin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by eternallyme View Post
It's all because of economics. Housing is considerably cheaper in Clarence-Rockland than it is in Ottawa, and that makes thousands of people want to live there and commute to Ottawa every day. And those people DO contribute to the commercial and industrial tax base of Ottawa.
Completely agree that cheaper housing is a large incentive here. As to the contribution to Ottawa's tax base, it is marginal at best. This small contribution is likely decreasing as well. With the growth Rockland has seen in the past several years, it's no longer necessary to drive to Ottawa for shopping, dining, leisure/recreation, entertainment, etc. It's mostly all available within the Clarence-Rockland community now. So while they clog up the 174 and take up space at the Park and Ride that Ottawa residents pay for, who cares that they also bought a coffee and a sandwich while at work that day?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2011, 2:41 PM
DubberDom DubberDom is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 201
emails from Stephen Blais on the issue of Speed limit review on 174, his lack of knowledge on the status of the 174 is really disturbing, calling it a "provincial highway"... it is not, it is a Regional Arterial Road as defined by the city of Ottawa, and speed limits for such roads are supposed to be 80km/hr, not 90.

Quote:
Thank you for providing additional comments regarding the potential expansion of Highway 174.



At this time, I do not support lowering the speed limit of Highway 174 to 60km/h through the Cumberland Village corridor. In your email you mentioned the near fatal collision this morning when a minivan attempted to pass a 5-ton truck. I must highlight that traffic studies have proven that when speed limits are lowered to levels that are not appropriate for the road type (in this case a provincial highway), more cars will attempt to pass other vehicles raising the opportunities for accidents and negating any safety gains made by lowering the speed limit.



I continue to believe that an EA study is required to look at the feasibility of expanding Highway 174 to improve traffic flow.



Once again, thank you for taking the time to write.



Yours very truly,



Stephen Blais

City Councillor

Cumberland
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2011, 2:46 PM
DubberDom DubberDom is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 201
Here is another email... not sure where to start on this one.....

Quote:
Thank you for your email regarding the expansion of Highway 174 through Cumberland Village; your feedback is important to me.



While I appreciate the concerns you have raised, I have to disagree with some of the conclusions you have made in your assessment of the road widening.



Environmental impact:

Adding two more lanes along the highway corridor to speed up existing traffic flow, in my opinion, will not lead to significant environmental problems (if any). However instead of providing our opinions absent of data, it is important that the City of Ottawa conduct a proper environmental assessment study so that residents, planners, and all other stakeholders can discuss this proposal in an intelligent and informed manner.



Economic development:

The Cumberland Village Community Association has been involved in a visioning exercise with the City’s planning department. During this process, concerns have been raised by the community about the lack of economic development within the village.



The two main barriers to furthering economic development within the village are; water supply and transit. Businesses are generally not interested in locating in areas where there are aesthetic problems with the local drinking water supply. Additionally, businesses are not interested in locating within communities where consumers cannot easily travel to purchase their product.



With the widening of Highway174 through the Cumberland Village corridor to Rockland, the City would be able to expand water and sewer infrastructure to the edge of the village boundary. This would allow residents and businesses to hook into a modern water/sewer system at minimal cost. The widening of the highway will also provide quick and easy access to businesses within Cumberland Village and encourage future growth.



As of this moment, residents in Rockland are leaving home as early as 5:30am and are getting home as late as 7pm due to congestion issues. I’m sure you would agree that residents who are spending up to 4 hours a day in traffic are not interested in extending their commute by stopping in the village for their family needs. Nor would medium sized businesses want to limit their potential financial gains by restricting themselves to a large customer base due the fact that their business is not conveniently located or accessible by car.



Social impact:

I believe the social impacts of low job growth within the village, which thereby lead to a steady exodus of young village residents to Orléans and elsewhere in Ottawa, are far greater than the extra few feet of asphalt that will separate the few residents who live on the north side of Highway 174. During the municipal election, I met dozens of young couples who grew up within Cumberland village but have since decided to move to Avalon or more western communities due to traffic congestion issues and lack of employment opportunities within the village. This to me was disappointing; young families were willing and ready to remain within the village to raise their children and yet, due to circumstances within the City’s control, decided to move elsewhere.



Ring road:

The East end needs solutions to traffic congestion NOW. A ring road for the East end, while an interesting concept, is not a practical solution at this time. A ring road would require countless years of study, far more money to build than expanding Highway 174, and would move traffic congestion issues from a provincial highway to a suburban collector road (Innes).



It is important to note that plans were put in place by the former Township of Cumberland to eventually widen Highway 174. The former township established these plans knowing full well what the effects would be to the community. Nearly 30 years have passed since that time; traffic congestion has worsened, and economic development has remained neutral. The time has come to act.



During the municipal election, I spent nearly a year canvassing tens of thousands of residents across the ward, including Cumberland village. The feedback I received from the vast majority of residents was supportive to the idea of widening Highway 174. I campaigned on a pledge to have the City of Ottawa undertake an Environmental Assessment study on this proposal. I intend to see that study completed.



Once again thank you for taking the time to make your views known. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future.



Yours very truly,



Stephen Blais

City Councillor

Cumberland
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2011, 4:44 PM
DarkArconio DarkArconio is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 182
It's worth noting that OR 174 past trim is the former provincial highway 17, and I believe that it was built and initially owned by the federal government. Regardless, it was built as part of the trans canada highway network, and thus the design standards are at 90 km/h, much like the 17 past arnprior or the 7 past carleton place. The councillor may have just called it a provincial level highway in terms of standards, not a provincially owned highway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2011, 5:20 PM
DubberDom DubberDom is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 201
"HIGHWAY 16" AND "HIGHWAY 31" within the current city limits were also provincial highways at one point, but now known as Prince of Wales (RR44) and Bank Street, and no longer fall under provincial jurisdiction (same as 17/174).

Regional Route 174 is not only an arterial route, it is also a residential street as well as a quite a few unsignaled level crossing for many small feeder streets.

Highway 7 after Carlton Place has a posted speed limit of 80km/hr, and 60 through most villages. The 174 has a posted speed of 90 and 80 through the village of Cumberland.

There is no other 2-lane road within the city's jurisdiction with a 90km/hr posted limit, and under provincial jurisdiction, there are also very few 2-lane portions except in Northern Ontario with 90 sped limit

Take 138 to Cornwall as an example, the road is straight as an arrow with wide shoulders... speed limit? 80
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2011, 6:03 PM
Luker Luker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 362
negative, southern ontario is filled with dozns of two lane highways that are set at 90km/h, however some are 80km/h....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2011, 6:37 PM
DarkArconio DarkArconio is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 182
The entire length of the 17 is posted at 90 as part of the trans canada highway, with the possible exception of parts that pass through villages and towns. The point is that OR 174, the former trans canada highway, was posted at 90 before being downloaded to the city.

This isn't to say that the speed shouldn't be decreased, particularly through cumberland, but rather that the posted speed isn't some sort of aberration.

It's not really a residential street either, but rather a major regional rural highway that like many others has all sorts of development on it and intersections with traffic flow in largely one direction not warranting full lights.

Also, the comparison to urban roads like bank, or even prince of wales which is practically saturated with residential development, is not really valid. There's a reason the 416 was built to replace prince of wales as the provincial highway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2011, 7:19 PM
DubberDom DubberDom is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luker View Post
negative, southern ontario is filled with dozns of two lane highways that are set at 90km/h, however some are 80km/h....
Quote:
The posted speed limit on most rural Ontario King's Highways is 80 km/h (50 mph). Those portions of the King's Highways that have been upgraded to expressways or freeways generally have a posted speed limit of 90 km/h or 100 km/h. A handful of major highways in Northern Ontario have a posted speed limit of 90 km/h (56 mph). The posted speed limit on most rural portions of Hwy 11, Hwy 17, Hwy 17A, Hwy 61, Hwy 66, Hwy 69, and Hwy 102 is 90 km/h. The rural sections of Hwy 101 from Wawa to the Hwy 647 junction, and from Timmins to Matheson are posted at 90 km/h. The Sudbury Bypass portion of Hwy 144 has a 90 km/h limit. Also, a limited portion of Hwy 71 from Nestor Falls southerly to Emo is posted at 90 km/h. All urbanized and built-up areas along these highways will have lower speed limits imposed. Watch carefully for signs indicating a change in speed limit!
source:
http://www.thekingshighway.ca/intro.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2011, 7:22 PM
DubberDom DubberDom is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkArconio View Post
Also, the comparison to urban roads like bank, or even prince of wales which is practically saturated with residential development, is not really valid. There's a reason the 416 was built to replace prince of wales as the provincial highway.
The same reason why the current 2-lane section of the 174 should not be widened to 4 lanes. Just as they did with the 416, a re-alignment of an eastern corridor beyond Orleans is the only option
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 1:16 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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