Roads/Bridges projects/issues

[rocketphish]

One small step for Ottawa winter walkers could be one great leap for a liveable city
Ottawa will shovel the Corktown and Flora footbridges over the Rideau Canal, releasing the walkways from the annual winter “stair prison.”

Bruce Deachman, Ottawa Citizen
Published Nov 14, 2023 • Last updated 59 minutes ago • 2 minute read

Are those the snow-free footsteps of progress I hear?

On Tuesday morning, Somerset Coun. Ariel Troster and her Capital ward counterpart Shawn Menard were informed that the stairs of the Corktown and Flora footbridges over the Rideau Canal would be cleared of snow this winter.

In past winters, only the ramps leading to and from the bridges were cleared, leaving a longer, sloped detour for pedestrians. The two councillors had lobbied the city to change this policy.

According to Quentin Levesque, director of Roads & Parking Services in the city’s Public Works Department, the plan to shovel those stairs will be a pilot project this season, allowing the city to gather feedback from both the staff doing the shovelling, and constituents doing the walking.

Hopefully, these small steps will lead to greater strides by the city — and perhaps other agencies in charge of where and how we can access our outdoor public spaces (are you listening NCC and Parks Canada?) — to clear even more staircases that are typically chained off throughout our winters, as well as deal with other winter wonderland-related impediments that keep us out of parks or, in the case of sidewalk ice buildup, force us to push our strollers onto roads and trust that motorists will do the decent thing and slow down.

How could it not? When I wrote about the subject a year ago, I called the embassy of Mongolia to see how officials in their capital, Ulaanbaatar — the coldest capital city on earth — dealt with the matter. Officials there told me they clear all the public staircases. How can we not?

It appears, however, that snow-removal changes beyond the two footbridges won’t occur anytime soon, at least not at the municipal level. Levesque’s note indicates the city won’t be making any alterations or improvements to its Winter Maintenance Quality Standards this winter.

But let’s not look this snowy morsel of a gift horse in the mouth, but rather count our lucky stairs and revel in the admittedly only slight freedom we’ve gained from what Troster calls “stair prison.” Surely when the city sees all the goodwill it will accumulate at a relatively insignificant cost, other staircases will similarly be freed from winter’s icy grip. Could the city’s Ebenezer Scrooge-like miserliness be melted by the sight of children walking into parks once again? Perhaps municipal stair-shoveling could be included among the activities that count towards high school students’ required 40 hours of volunteer community service.

Could Ottawa become more a more liveable city when the groundhogs are hibernating? Tuesday’s announcement gives me hope.

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...-liveable-city

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Athens

Maybe we should actually design roads to interface with streets in a way that is friendly to everyone, not just cars. That set of intersections is a death trap from cyclists and pedestrians. Reducing the throughput of that intersection by a marginal amount won’t have an effect in the long run.

How many fatalities have there been at those intersections in recent years? One that I remember and improvements were made as a result.

Reducing the throughput of an intersection that already has significant congestion problems, will have substantial impacts for a lot of people.

I have a major problem with the attitude that only pedestrians and cyclists matter.

I went through this intersection twice today. Most users were motorists despite the existence of fully segregated cycling paths. As I indicated, there was a massive backup of traffic on Riverside westbound.

I don't want my tax money spent on projects that offer very marginal improvements to pedestrians and cyclists at most while also substantially inconveniencing the majority.

[Lakeofthewood]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

How many fatalities have there been at those intersections in recent years? One that I remember and improvements were made as a result.

Reducing the throughput of an intersection that already has significant congestion problems, will have substantial impacts for a lot of people.

I have a major problem with the attitude that only pedestrians and cyclists matter.

I went through this intersection twice today. Most users were motorists despite the existence of fully segregated cycling paths. As I indicated, there was a massive backup of traffic on Riverside westbound.

I don't want my tax money spent on projects that offer very marginal improvements to pedestrians and cyclists at most while also substantially inconveniencing the majority.

In fairness, the large amount of construction activity in the area has really slowed traffic down, both with and without lanes being closed.

[LRTeverywhere]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I have a major problem with the attitude that only pedestrians and cyclists matter.

I have a major problem with people who equate safety of pedestrian and cyclists to the comfort and speed of people in vehicles.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

How many fatalities have there been at those intersections in recent years? One that I remember and improvements were made as a result.

According to city stats, there were 9 accidents involving pedestrians and cyclists at this intersection between 2015 and 2019. It rates as a dangerous intersection by their metrics: https://maps.bikeottawa.ca/collisions/

I'm not sure what improvements to the intersection you are talking about. The recreational pathway on the river was put below grade, but there have been virtually no changes for N-S travel. That leaves the two big problems with the intersection unchanged. One, it is designed like an interchange, with slip lanes and ramps to facilitate high car speeds, which is definitely not best practice in an urban area. It is unsafe by design for anyone not in a car, so that alone would be a strong justification for changes.

Second, it takes up a lot of space right on the riverfront, and creates big dead zones in what should be a prime (if flood-prone) location. That kind of design is right out of the Robert Moses playbook, and may have looked good in the 30s, 40s and 50s, but we have evolved a lot since then in our understanding of what makes a good urban environment. A change in layout could make the area better for a much larger number of people, including the people who live and work in the area that you are forgetting.

Throughput is a consideration for sure, but you seem to be making it the only consideration.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

One small step for Ottawa winter walkers could be one great leap for a liveable city
Ottawa will shovel the Corktown and Flora footbridges over the Rideau Canal, releasing the walkways from the annual winter “stair prison.”

Bruce Deachman, Ottawa Citizen
Published Nov 14, 2023 • Last updated 59 minutes ago • 2 minute read

Are those the snow-free footsteps of progress I hear?

On Tuesday morning, Somerset Coun. Ariel Troster and her Capital ward counterpart Shawn Menard were informed that the stairs of the Corktown and Flora footbridges over the Rideau Canal would be cleared of snow this winter.

In past winters, only the ramps leading to and from the bridges were cleared, leaving a longer, sloped detour for pedestrians. The two councillors had lobbied the city to change this policy.

According to Quentin Levesque, director of Roads & Parking Services in the city’s Public Works Department, the plan to shovel those stairs will be a pilot project this season, allowing the city to gather feedback from both the staff doing the shovelling, and constituents doing the walking.

Hopefully, these small steps will lead to greater strides by the city — and perhaps other agencies in charge of where and how we can access our outdoor public spaces (are you listening NCC and Parks Canada?) — to clear even more staircases that are typically chained off throughout our winters, as well as deal with other winter wonderland-related impediments that keep us out of parks or, in the case of sidewalk ice buildup, force us to push our strollers onto roads and trust that motorists will do the decent thing and slow down.

How could it not? When I wrote about the subject a year ago, I called the embassy of Mongolia to see how officials in their capital, Ulaanbaatar — the coldest capital city on earth — dealt with the matter. Officials there told me they clear all the public staircases. How can we not?

It appears, however, that snow-removal changes beyond the two footbridges won’t occur anytime soon, at least not at the municipal level. Levesque’s note indicates the city won’t be making any alterations or improvements to its Winter Maintenance Quality Standards this winter.

But let’s not look this snowy morsel of a gift horse in the mouth, but rather count our lucky stairs and revel in the admittedly only slight freedom we’ve gained from what Troster calls “stair prison.” Surely when the city sees all the goodwill it will accumulate at a relatively insignificant cost, other staircases will similarly be freed from winter’s icy grip. Could the city’s Ebenezer Scrooge-like miserliness be melted by the sight of children walking into parks once again? Perhaps municipal stair-shoveling could be included among the activities that count towards high school students’ required 40 hours of volunteer community service.

Could Ottawa become more a more liveable city when the groundhogs are hibernating? Tuesday’s announcement gives me hope.

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...-liveable-city

I don’t understand why high traffic outdoor stairs are not heated in Ottawa.

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by phil235

According to city stats, there were 9 accidents involving pedestrians and cyclists at this intersection between 2015 and 2019. It rates as a dangerous intersection by their metrics: https://maps.bikeottawa.ca/collisions/

I'm not sure what improvements to the intersection you are talking about. The recreational pathway on the river was put below grade, but there have been virtually no changes for N-S travel. That leaves the two big problems with the intersection unchanged. One, it is designed like an interchange, with slip lanes and ramps to facilitate high car speeds, which is definitely not best practice in an urban area. It is unsafe by design for anyone not in a car, so that alone would be a strong justification for changes.

Second, it takes up a lot of space right on the riverfront, and creates big dead zones in what should be a prime (if flood-prone) location. That kind of design is right out of the Robert Moses playbook, and may have looked good in the 30s, 40s and 50s, but we have evolved a lot since then in our understanding of what makes a good urban environment. A change in layout could make the area better for a much larger number of people, including the people who live and work in the area that you are forgetting.

Throughput is a consideration for sure, but you seem to be making it the only consideration.

OK, I’ll play the Devil’s advocate for a bit:

Let’s say that a lane is removed from Bank Street in each direction and segregated bike lanes are installed. That creates a street with less than half of the current capacity for vehicles. Where will the current traffic divert to? Remember, all of those vehicles are going somewhere, for some purpose.

Perhaps your solution is; ‘There won’t be as many cars – reverse Induced Traffic. OK, what do you say to the merchants that are no longer getting as many customers? Look at the desperate situation for the downtown merchants without the same number of workers. Look at the problems with Lansdowne, because it doesn’t attract enough business. All those people going somewhere and doing something are important.

Maybe you simply decide that all of those folks should be taking transit; but that is not a reasonable option for many. Firstly, there are only buses running along Bank Street, and those buses are already caught up in traffic. If the vehicle capacity of the road is drastically reduced, transit will become MUCH worse. (Remember, my assumption is that you are talking about removing vehicle capacity – including for buses – to give bikes a safe route along a major throughway.)

Then there is the issue of the overall transit capacity, even if many were willing to choose a longer, slower transportation option. OC Transpo does not have the capacity to carry a lot more people. It already has a driver shortage, leading to many cancelled runs. It already has issues with traffic congestion, which leads to cancelled runs.

In round numbers, vehicles account for about 80% of the travel in the city; transit about 15%; walking and biking about 5% (in good weather), I believe. There needs to be good, high-capacity vehicle routes to get from one area of the city to another. Ottawa already lacks many of the routes that it should have. Bank Street may not be the best route for vehicles, but it is one of the few available.

How about this idea: The city buys a sliver of address 1335 so that it has room to create a bidirectional bike path along the east side of Bank Street, from Lamira Street to Riverdale Avenue. This would involve moving the roadway to the western edge of the city’s right-of-way. Also, a new MUP bridge would be built east of the current Billings Bridge. Also, there would be NO RIGHT TURN from west-bound Riverside to north-bound Bank (from Riverside to cross the bridge). Instead, drivers would take the western loop and then turn left from east-bound Riverside onto north-bound Bank. The north-bound to east-bound ramp from Bank to Riverside will still be an interaction point.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

OK, I’ll play the Devil’s advocate for a bit:

Let’s say that a lane is removed from Bank Street in each direction and segregated bike lanes are installed. That creates a street with less than half of the current capacity for vehicles. Where will the current traffic divert to? Remember, all of those vehicles are going somewhere, for some purpose.

Perhaps your solution is; ‘There won’t be as many cars – reverse Induced Traffic. OK, what do you say to the merchants that are no longer getting as many customers? Look at the desperate situation for the downtown merchants without the same number of workers. Look at the problems with Lansdowne, because it doesn’t attract enough business. All those people going somewhere and doing something are important.

Maybe you simply decide that all of those folks should be taking transit; but that is not a reasonable option for many. Firstly, there are only buses running along Bank Street, and those buses are already caught up in traffic. If the vehicle capacity of the road is drastically reduced, transit will become MUCH worse. (Remember, my assumption is that you are talking about removing vehicle capacity – including for buses – to give bikes a safe route along a major throughway.)

Then there is the issue of the overall transit capacity, even if many were willing to choose a longer, slower transportation option. OC Transpo does not have the capacity to carry a lot more people. It already has a driver shortage, leading to many cancelled runs. It already has issues with traffic congestion, which leads to cancelled runs.

In round numbers, vehicles account for about 80% of the travel in the city; transit about 15%; walking and biking about 5% (in good weather), I believe. There needs to be good, high-capacity vehicle routes to get from one area of the city to another. Ottawa already lacks many of the routes that it should have. Bank Street may not be the best route for vehicles, but it is one of the few available.

How about this idea: The city buys a sliver of address 1335 so that it has room to create a bidirectional bike path along the east side of Bank Street, from Lamira Street to Riverdale Avenue. This would involve moving the roadway to the western edge of the city’s right-of-way. Also, a new MUP bridge would be built east of the current Billings Bridge. Also, there would be NO RIGHT TURN from west-bound Riverside to north-bound Bank (from Riverside to cross the bridge). Instead, drivers would take the western loop and then turn left from east-bound Riverside onto north-bound Bank. The north-bound to east-bound ramp from Bank to Riverside will still be an interaction point.

A few responses - the suggestion above doesn't involve the removal of a lane on Bank. It really just consolidates the lanes on Riverside, and transforms them from a highway configuration to a city street configuration to make it safer and free up space.

In terms of your figures, if a lane on Bank was to be removed, that doesn't actually represent a 50% reduction in capacity, for a couple of reasons. As a single lane with turn lanes etc. provides more than 50% of a 4-lane configuration. Also, you would be removing one of four lanes for bikes, not two, so you still have 75% of the road space. And really, all you are talking about is changing the spot where road capacity decreases. Right now commuters can drive on four lanes a bit further north on Bank, but they still have to deal with a narrowing road at that point. How much of a difference does that really make? But more fundamentally, while 80% of travel may be by vehicle now, that is not sustainable as the city grows, no matter how many lanes we might maintain.

Not speaking of you specifically, but I almost feel that many of the people complaining about how hard it is getting to drive downtown have never lived anywhere else. Anyone who has spent any time at all trying to drive downtown Toronto or Montreal would understand that downtown Ottawa is not at all hard to drive to, and that trying to maintain easy car access as car volumes increase is a fool's game. In a growing city, we have no choice but to change our modal share, and transit, walking and cycling improvements are what we need to invest in.

[Lakeofthewood]

Originally Posted by phil235

Not speaking of you specifically, but I almost feel that many of the people complaining about how hard it is getting to drive downtown have never lived anywhere else. Anyone who has spent any time at all trying to drive downtown Toronto or Montreal would understand that downtown Ottawa is not at all hard to drive to, and that trying to maintain easy car access as car volumes increase is a fool's game. In a growing city, we have no choice but to change our modal share, and transit, walking and cycling improvements are what we need to invest in.

There's a reason when people go visit Toronto and Montreal they usually just park their cars for the weekend, but in Ottawa they drive everywhere. The latter is not a good thing. It's indicative of how unattractive our city is to non-auto modes.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by phil235

According to city stats, there were 9 accidents involving pedestrians and cyclists at this intersection between 2015 and 2019. It rates as a dangerous intersection by their metrics: https://maps.bikeottawa.ca/collisions/

I'm not sure what improvements to the intersection you are talking about. The recreational pathway on the river was put below grade, but there have been virtually no changes for N-S travel. That leaves the two big problems with the intersection unchanged. One, it is designed like an interchange, with slip lanes and ramps to facilitate high car speeds, which is definitely not best practice in an urban area. It is unsafe by design for anyone not in a car, so that alone would be a strong justification for changes.

Second, it takes up a lot of space right on the riverfront, and creates big dead zones in what should be a prime (if flood-prone) location. That kind of design is right out of the Robert Moses playbook, and may have looked good in the 30s, 40s and 50s, but we have evolved a lot since then in our understanding of what makes a good urban environment. A change in layout could make the area better for a much larger number of people, including the people who live and work in the area that you are forgetting.

Throughput is a consideration for sure, but you seem to be making it the only consideration.

It was my 'only' consideration simply because I was looking at the traffic side of the equation. Of course, we should be looking at pedestrian and cycling side as well. My point related to merging the north and south side of Riverside, which I believe is not part of the actual plan and does not significantly improve the pedestrian and cycling situation anyways. It does make the traffic situation worse, and worse traffic also can make the pedestrian and cycling worse as well.

We seem to want to make certain improvements, even though Riverside was designed as a highway since the 1960s. It was a rural road before that. It was never an urban road. It is hard to undo this. An additional problem is that both east and west of Bank, the Riverside corridor is parkland (federally owned I believe) and will not be urbanized significantly.

I agree that the North-South (Bank Street) environment for cycling is terrible but I am not sure how this is improved given how it has been a stroad since the 1960s and a provincial highway before that. This is a major challenge. It is easy to overturn the apple cart without balanced decisions.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

It was my 'only' consideration simply because I was looking at the traffic side of the equation. Of course, we should be looking at pedestrian and cycling side as well. My point related to merging the north and south side of Riverside, which I believe is not part of the actual plan and does not significantly improve the pedestrian and cycling situation anyways. It does make the traffic situation worse, and worse traffic also can make the pedestrian and cycling worse as well.

We seem to want to make certain improvements, even though Riverside was designed as a highway since the 1960s. It was a rural road before that. It was never an urban road. It is hard to undo this. An additional problem is that both east and west of Bank, the Riverside corridor is parkland (federally owned I believe) and will not be urbanized significantly.

I agree that the North-South (Bank Street) environment for cycling is terrible but I am not sure how this is improved given how it has been a stroad since the 1960s and a provincial highway before that. This is a major challenge. It is easy to overturn the apple cart without balanced decisions.

The change that is being suggested would improve safety for cycling and pedestrians in a couple of ways. It would reduce traffic speeds which reduces the chance of death or injury in a crash. It would also remove the slip lanes and ramps that are completely to hostile to anyone not in a car. Those are clear benefit.

When I said this is an urban road, I just meant that it runs through the middle of the city where lots of cyclists and pedestrians are found. It’s design should take that into account. And I really don’t really understand why it would be hard to redesign it like a regular road? There is very little on it, so it would seem to be easier there than in most cases.

You did specifically say that you didn’t want your tax dollars to support improvements that would help the minority of people who don’t travel by car. That lends support to a conclusion that you are considering impacts on car speeds and put safety concerns for non-drivers much lower.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by phil235

The change that is being suggested would improve safety for cycling and pedestrians in a couple of ways. It would reduce traffic speeds which reduces the chance of death or injury in a crash. It would also remove the slip lanes and ramps that are completely to hostile to anyone not in a car. Those are clear benefit.

When I said this is an urban road, I just meant that it runs through the middle of the city where lots of cyclists and pedestrians are found. It’s design should take that into account. And I really don’t really understand why it would be hard to redesign it like a regular road? There is very little on it, so it would seem to be easier there than in most cases.

You did specifically say that you didn’t want your tax dollars to support improvements that would help the minority of people who don’t travel by car. That lends support to a conclusion that you are considering impacts on car speeds and put safety concerns for non-drivers much lower.

I don't want to invest in changes that don't produce significant improvements. Now, there may be improvements in intersection design that help. I was not commenting on those details. I was talking about this regarding the suggested fundamental change of rerouting the intersection. A road change that results in more left turns across traffic will likely result in more accidents (and increase congestion as I also mentioned). When we look at accidents, while it is good to look at reducing pedestrian and cycling accidents, it is also important to look at accidents overall as well. We should be reducing vehicle accidents as well.

I think it will be challenging to improve Bank Street for safe cycling. At least south of the bridge, I would like to see a connection of the Sawmill Creek pathway to the Billings Bridge area. It will soon run all the way to Riverside South, but presently terminates at Brookfield Road requiring a substantial detour over to Hogs Back.

[Lakeofthewood]

Well the Bank Street Renewal project is going to be built next year, so that will be a vast improvement on Bank Street all the way into Old Ottawa South

https://ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/publi...ledbury-avenue

As for Sawmill Creek Pathway, isn't part of the Trillium Scope going to bring it up to Heron Road? So it will at least connect to the separated facilities there.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by Lakeofthewood

Well the Bank Street Renewal project is going to be built next year, so that will be a vast improvement on Bank Street all the way into Old Ottawa South

https://ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/publi...ledbury-avenue

As for Sawmill Creek Pathway, isn't part of the Trillium Scope going to bring it up to Heron Road? So it will at least connect to the separated facilities there.

Thanks, you beat me to it. I don't think there has been any consideration of changing the configuration of Riverside, so it's unlikely to occur in the near future.

[DarthVader_1961]

Originally Posted by Lakeofthewood

Well the Bank Street Renewal project is going to be built next year, so that will be a vast improvement on Bank Street all the way into Old Ottawa South

https://ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/publi...ledbury-avenue

As for Sawmill Creek Pathway, isn't part of the Trillium Scope going to bring it up to Heron Road? So it will at least connect to the separated facilities there.

Still not going to bury utility lines.. disappointing

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I don’t understand why high traffic outdoor stairs are not heated in Ottawa.

Would be nice even for a bunch of low-traffic ones.

[SidetrackedSue]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I don’t understand why high traffic outdoor stairs are not heated in Ottawa.

Would it work? As I recall the platforms for the LRT which are relatively sheltered and in an area with unlimited power capability, are not working well. Not sure if the stairs are heated in the stations or not. I don't use the LRT in 'weather' so don't know.

I agree, it would be wonderful because it would make shorter pedestrian routes available year round without the labour costs of clearing. Short pedestrian routes mean people are more willing to walk and therefore won't bitch about buses not at their door as much.

I will say in my Westboro Beach neighbourhood there has been an incredible improvement in the clearing of sidewalks. The first couple of years we were here I found I started driving more to do shopping because of the sidewalks. They have now improved to the point that it makes more sense to walk to shopping, and there are very few days when the state of the sidewalks is a legit excuse to not get out for at least a short walk. (I use poles and grippers because things aren't perfect but they are waaayyy better than 10 years ago.)

[Catenary]

Originally Posted by SidetrackedSue

Would it work? As I recall the platforms for the LRT which are relatively sheltered and in an area with unlimited power capability, are not working well. Not sure if the stairs are heated in the stations or not. I don't use the LRT in 'weather' so don't know.

I agree, it would be wonderful because it would make shorter pedestrian routes available year round without the labour costs of clearing. Short pedestrian routes mean people are more willing to walk and therefore won't bitch about buses not at their door as much.

I will say in my Westboro Beach neighbourhood there has been an incredible improvement in the clearing of sidewalks. The first couple of years we were here I found I started driving more to do shopping because of the sidewalks. They have now improved to the point that it makes more sense to walk to shopping, and there are very few days when the state of the sidewalks is a legit excuse to not get out for at least a short walk. (I use poles and grippers because things aren't perfect but they are waaayyy better than 10 years ago.)

The Line 1 stations use an electric grid laid out, with concrete poured over. When it fails, good luck fixing it without a jackhammer. On the other hand, the stairs at Carling on Line 2 have been heated forever, and seem pretty reliable, but I think those treads are precast with the heat trace in them so they're less susceptible to failure.

Heated glycol pumped through tubes is the other option, it's more reliable but you can have other issues with it. None of this is new tech though, many parking garages in Ottawa have heated ramps.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Catenary

The Line 1 stations use an electric grid laid out, with concrete poured over. When ti fails, good luck fixing it without a jackhammer. On the other hand, the stairs at Carling on Line 2 have been heated forever, and seem pretty reliable, but I think those treads are precast with the heat trace in them so they're less susceptible to failure.

Heated glycol pumped through tubes is the other option, it's more reliable but you can have other issues with it. None of this is new tech though, many parking garages in Ottawa have heated ramps.

If done right, it can be very reliable. The key is getting it right the first time.

[SidetrackedSue]

Originally Posted by roger1818

If done right, it can be very reliable. The key is getting it right the first time.

Which isn't a strength with the design or construction of the LRT!