Kanata LRT EA - Bayshore to Palladium

[1overcosc]

Another idea they could study: once the entire 416 to 174 section is 8-laned, try dividing the highway into a collector-express system with the inner 2 lanes being express and the outer two lanes being collector. The collector and express sections would be blocked off from each other, except for transfers at the eastern and western edges of downtown (say between Bronson and Rochester in the west and between Riverside and Nicholas in the east). Much of the congestion on the 417 comes from the interchanges and the lane changes required for people to use them, so doing something like this would allow downtown-bound and cross-town traffic to separate from local traffic, allowing the former group to skip all the congestion caused by the interchanges.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

No. They concluded that HOV lanes are not practical east of the 416 because exits are too closely spaced.

Seems like a silly excuse to me. Just make them combination HOV/express lanes and only permit people to enter/leave them every few exits.

I like HOV lanes as a concept but I do agree that unless they extend all the way into downtown they're rather useless. If we were going to do them, it should have HOV lanes from Kanata all the way to Kent,

Or better yet, to the 174 split (and then add them to the 174).

To do this, the new lanes between 416 and Carling would be built as HOV and the inner lanes from Carling to Kent would be converted from regular traffic to HOV.

The problem is, once a lane is assigned to general use, it can never be taken back as an HOV lane, and widening that much highway all at once is a non starter.

They should have just left the HOV lanes out of it. Instead of a 8 lane highway from the 416 to Kanata (6 regular lanes + 2 HOV) it should have been just 6 regular lanes.

You forgot the bus lanes. It is actually 10 lanes (6 regular + 2 HOV + 2 bus lanes). Having both HOV and bus lanes is redundant as buses are great users of HOV lanes.

They also should have never widened the 7 out to Carleton Place. That just encourages out-of-city sprawl.

I'm not sure I agree with you on that one. Carleton Place is far enough away that even with a wider highway 7, it isn't very attractive for those who work anywhere other than Kanata and there are better options for them. There hasn't been much development between Stittsville and Carleton Place, so I don't see that type of sprawl. However, it does make travelling west to places that are not served by any reasonable forms of transit safer.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Seems like a silly excuse to me. Just make them combination HOV/express lanes and only permit people to enter/leave them every few exits.



Or better yet, to the 174 split (and then add them to the 174).



The problem is, once a lane is assigned to general use, it can never be taken back as an HOV lane, and widening that much highway all at once is a non starter.



You forgot the bus lanes. It is actually 10 lanes (6 regular + 2 HOV + 2 bus lanes). Having both HOV and bus lanes is redundant as buses are great users of HOV lanes.



I'm not sure I agree with you on that one. Carleton Place is far enough away that even with a wider highway 7, it isn't very attractive for those who work anywhere other than Kanata and there are better options for them. There hasn't been much development between Stittsville and Carleton Place, so I don't see that type of sprawl. However, it does make travelling west to places that are not served by any reasonable forms of transit safer.

At least on weekends, it can take as long to get from the airport to the Queensway at Bronson as to get from Bronson to Carleton Place. So, Highway 7 is effective in making it easier to live in Carleton Place and commute by car. Development to the west of Stittsville to the city boundary is controlled by the City so that is why development is not moving by leaps and bounds in that direction. However, development around Stittsville is already the most distant urban area from downtown.

On the other hand, we need to make sure that roads are safe and have sufficient capacity.

Provincial highway widenings can be very political but at least something gets done, otherwise we would still be dealing with 2 lane Highway 16 to Prescott.

[HighwayStar]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

At least on weekends, it can take as long to get from the airport to the Queensway at Bronson as to get from Bronson to Carleton Place. So, Highway 7 is effective in making it easier to live in Carleton Place and commute by car. Development to the west of Stittsville to the city boundary is controlled by the City so that is why development is not moving by leaps and bounds in that direction. However, development around Stittsville is already the most distant urban area from downtown.

On the other hand, we need to make sure that roads are safe and have sufficient capacity.

Provincial highway widenings can be very political but at least something gets done, otherwise we would still be dealing with 2 lane Highway 16 to Prescott.

I'm a bit baffled by this statement.

I live in Westboro, travel frequently, and Carling/Kirkwood to Airport is 15-17 minutes.... either way... in optimal traffic.

Worst case is arriving at YOW at 4pm (done it many times) and getting to Carling/Kirkwood exit through rush hour. Takes at absolute worst case 20-25 minutes.

Bronson to Carleton Place is at very best a 1/2 hour... so I'm a little confused... especially by the weekend reference.

All that said... my earlier question(s) remains:
1) How many people change their behaviour due to HOV lanes??

It all sounds nice and green... but as all "green" initiatives, I think it's time we see hard results from all our "investment" in these endeavours.

Does anyone have any reference points as to the effectiveness of the HOV concept??

[1overcosc]

Most of the research I've read suggests that it's nebulous; they can work well (from both environmental and traffic management points of view) but it depends on implementation and the local circumstances... and that HOV-HOT lanes (the variant where single-occupant drivers can choose to use the HOV lane for payment of a toll) and congestion charges are a lot more effective.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Most of the research I've read suggests that it's nebulous; they can work well (from both environmental and traffic management points of view) but it depends on implementation and the local circumstances... and that HOV-HOT lanes (the variant where single-occupant drivers can choose to use the HOV lane for payment of a toll) and congestion charges are a lot more effective.

So putting them on the widest, least congested sections of the highest, but not on the narrowest, most congested sections doesn’t work well?

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by HighwayStar

I'm a bit baffled by this statement.

I live in Westboro, travel frequently, and Carling/Kirkwood to Airport is 15-17 minutes.... either way... in optimal traffic.

Worst case is arriving at YOW at 4pm (done it many times) and getting to Carling/Kirkwood exit through rush hour. Takes at absolute worst case 20-25 minutes.

Bronson to Carleton Place is at very best a 1/2 hour... so I'm a little confused... especially by the weekend reference.

All that said... my earlier question(s) remains:
1) How many people change their behaviour due to HOV lanes??

It all sounds nice and green... but as all "green" initiatives, I think it's time we see hard results from all our "investment" in these endeavours.

Does anyone have any reference points as to the effectiveness of the HOV concept??

Even on weekends, traffic on Bronson can be brutal. The last time on April 7th required several light cycles to make the left turn to get on the Queensway ramp. The previous time was just awful traffic on my entire trip from my starting point near the airport to reach the Queensway. Using Hunt Club is even worse.

[McC]

so when was the last time someone posted anything even remotely on topic here?

[HighwayStar]

So hows the Kanata LRT EA going?

[roger1818]

A link to the report can be found here:

http://app05.ottawa.ca/sirepub/mtgvi...&itemid=372869

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by roger1818

A link to the report can be found here:

http://app05.ottawa.ca/sirepub/mtgvi...doctype=AGENDA (Item 3)

Under the title "KAKANATA LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STUDY (MOODIE DRIVE TO HAZELDEAN ROAD) – RECOMMENDATIONS", making "Kakanata" my new favourite typo ever.

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by rocketphish
Kanata LRT priority phasing and cost estimates

1. Moodie station to Terry Fox station, $710 million
2. Terry Fox station to Palladium station, $640 million
3. Palladium station to Hazeldean station, $500 million

I find the costs to be higher than I expected. For the, roughly, 6 km between Moodie to Terry Fox, I would have estimated the following (based on the City’s estimates made during the Confederation Line and other construction):

$50M/km for track, OCS, etc. X 6km = $300M
$30M/station X 3 (Moodie, March, Terry Fox) = $90M
$40M/km rock cut through ridge X 1km = $40M
$40M elevated overpass of rail line = $40M
$120M March/417 interchange reconfig. = $120M
$20M Pedestrian overpass = $20M

That gives a total of $610M. I wonder what I am missing to get up to the City’s $710M estimate. Maybe $100M contingency?

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

That gives a total of $610M. I wonder what I am missing to get up to the City’s $710M estimate. Maybe $100M contingency?

Or converted to 2031 dollars?

The thing I don't get is why all of the proposed routes go to the CTC? Here are the options considered:


LRT Corridor Options for North Kanata


LRT Corridor Options for Kanata Central and South

[lrt's friend]

Do the estimates include the additional trains themselves?

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Or converted to 2031 dollars?

The thing I don't get is why all of the proposed routes go to the CTC?

Presumably it will be repurposed, or redeveloped and the Tanger outlet mall is adjacent as well. Corridors tend to get protected decades in advance and it is very difficult to change that.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Presumably it will be repurposed, or redeveloped and the Tanger outlet mall is adjacent as well. Corridors tend to get protected decades in advance and it is very difficult to change that.

Presumably yes, but until we know what the new purpose is, we won't know what the transit demand will be.

Despite being surprisingly pedestrian friendly, I don't see the Tanger outlet mall being a huge draw for transit users. The plan doesn't have a station for it anyway. The closest is Campeau.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Do the estimates include the additional trains themselves?

According to the report:

Cost for design, construction, property, public art, and contingencies in 2017 dollars

[Multi-modal]

Originally Posted by roger1818

A link to the report can be found here:

http://app05.ottawa.ca/sirepub/mtgvi...&itemid=372869

Hmm, lots to digest in here. One detail that stands out to me is why Terry Fox Station is south of the bus loop with "overhead walkways to facilitate transfers".



Why not put the station on top of the middle of Terry Fox bus loop (in the middle) so no overhead walkways are required. Maybe slightly more expensive to elevate the rail over the bus loop, but way more user friendly. You can see in the alignment they had to put in a rather harsh curve (east of the station) to put the rail south of the existing bus loop.

In any case, this EA is more about routing, etc... The station design will change multiple times as it gets closer to construction. Still, its unfortunate they've already gone with a less user-friendly option for the Terry Fox Station.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Multi-modal

Why not put the station on top of the middle of Terry Fox bus loop (in the middle) so no overhead walkways are required. Maybe slightly more expensive to elevate the rail over the bus loop, but way more user friendly. You can see in the alignment they had to put in a rather harsh curve (east of the station) to put the rail south of the existing bus loop.

It could be about elevation since they need to go under Kanata Ave (using the existing, unused underpass). It is possible that the gradient needed to get from being below grade to above the loop in 240 m is too steep. Not sure but I am guessing it would be about 2.5% and according to this document, the maximum grade through a station is 1.5%. They could avoid that by having the LRT under the bus loop, but that would add to the cost significantly.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by roger1818

If you consider it is about 6.4 km from Moodie to Terry Fox and about 3 km from Terry Fox station to Palladium and 1.9 km from Palladium to Hazeldean, we end up with the cost per km as follows:

1. Moodie station to Terry Fox station: $110.94 million / km
2. Terry Fox station to Palladium station: $213.33 million / km
3. Palladium station to Hazeldean station: $263.16 million / km

From that, we should only do Moodie station to Terry Fox station.

Price for Terry Fox to Hazeldean seems nuts. We could argue that Terry Fox to Palladium is still a good investment since the corridor is ripe for intensification, but the stretch to Hazeldean is already surrounded by low-density housing.