Interprovincial bridge crossing discussion

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by dougvdh

It absolutely will have impact. There's the inevitable traffic you note. There's noise impacts - the corridor is quite close to an elementary school, lots of residential, a hospital. There's a huge increase in air pollution (CO, NOx, and microparticles).

I'd like to see the math on that after netting out the decrease in air pollution elsewhere, and forecasted out as there are fewer and fewer ICE cars on the road.

(Yes, there's always going to be an inducement effect, but in this case, there would also be offsetting benefits.)

There's the division of school catchment areas

Any more than what already exists?

loss of recreational space.

Which ones?

It will further evidence the development potential of the Cyrville Station TOD (and high density tax base potential). It impact negatively will Monfort hospital operations.

What's the impact on the Montfort?

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by phil235

I'm really struggling to understand what you mean about the tax base being lowered. How would a bridge lower the tax base? Surely Ottawa isn't going to empty out because there is an east end bridge.

One thing that I don't understand is why the city can't just change its truck routes to make a new bridge more viable, and the downtown route less viable. I understand the political challenges of changing a truck route, but surely it is doable.

No I don't think it will cause some huge exodus but it makes development more viable for a swath of especially far eastern Gatineau and would make commutes longer thus decreasing development from points east of Aviation. It's probably a rounding error in the citywide budget but it's greater than zero.

I guess it is politics and just logic of such a large detour. I think a reduction in trucks is over-rated. 10 or 5 per hour is inconsequential. I see trucks from Montreal or points east who use the current route so they would switch but we could theoretically make them take the 50 now if we had the will.

[dougvdh]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

I'd like to see the math on that after netting out the decrease in air pollution elsewhere, and forecasted out as there are fewer and fewer ICE cars on the road.

(Yes, there's always going to be an inducement effect, but in this case, there would also be offsetting benefits.)

Over all air pollution levels will increase with more EVs. Yes, there's less CO emissions, but the bigger issue is the fine particle emissions (PM2.5 are the biggest issue for human health), primarily from tire wear. These increase as vehicle weight increases. And inducement is a massive factor. Traffic levels aren't going to drop on King Edward, that will still operate at capacity. And trips will expand to fill the new bridge in a few years. So there's going to be no netting out effect. Even if you look at the truck traffic, a very significant portion of the truck traffic downtown is downtown for a reason - it's making deliveries there. That traffic is not going to be displaced.

Any more than what already exists?

Right now you can cross the parkway at a couple points between Ogilvie and Montreal on foot, so lots of pedestrian traffic to the 3 schools that in close proximity and that have catchements that span across. And there's also Cite Collegiele access (vehicle, pedestrian, bikes) from the parkway. That's likely to be removed if the parkway becomes a highway.

Which ones?

The whole linear park along Aviation will be compromised by filling it with traffic. Plus whatever the route around the west end of the airport is will cut into the SGEC linear park and impact the shoreline. Not sure what the operational impacts on the airport will be, but I can't imagine they would be unimpacted.


What's the impact on the Montfort?

Impact on imaging equipment that's sensitive to vibration. Plus changes to access related to traffic congestion in the Montreal Road / Aviation Corridor. And the likely loss of the access from the Parkway.

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by dougvdh

Impact on imaging equipment that's sensitive to vibration. Plus changes to access related to traffic congestion in the Montreal Road / Aviation Corridor. And the likely loss of the access from the Parkway.

Are you aware that the Queensway-Carleton Hospital sits beside the 416 highway? It has an MRI machine that seems to function just fine. Ambulances even use that near-by 416 to speed their travel to the hospital.

For many years, the Civic Campus of The Ottawa Hospital has been sitting on the busy Carling Avenue. It seems to have survived. Indeed, its replacement is being built at the intersection of Carling and Prince of Wales; two busy roads.

Having a road near a hospital is not necessarily a negative.

[Richard Eade]

Traffic will increase as the cities of Ottawa and Gatineau grow. That traffic needs to be properly managed. When it is not, issues like King Edward Boulevard arise.

Compare the roadways on the north end of the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge to what is currently on the south end. If I ignore the fact that the ramps between major roads on the Quebec side resemble a confusing bowl of noodle, traffic in Gatineau can travel on freeways to go west, north, or east to/from the M-C Bridge. On the Ottawa side, all traffic is dumped onto residential and secondary streets. There are no freeways leading to/from the M-C bridge on the Ottawa side. When the bridge was designed, there was a plan to have a freeway connection, but that link was never built because of opposition from local residents.

The northern portion of King Edward became a traffic nightmare. The city’s solution is to rake in millions of dollars by reducing the speed limit to 30 kph. The outrageously slow speed limit is annoying to drivers (as are the automated speeding tickets), but with few alternatives, the traffic remains. It simply spends longer there, in stop-and-go congestion.

People, including truckers, do not necessarily drive on King Edward for the fun of it. They have few other options.

That missing connection between the Vanier Parkway and the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge should be made. This also involves changing the designation of the Vanier Parkway to allow trucks.

I know that there will be a lot of opposition to using Vanier to access the bridge, but, in reality, it already serves that purpose. Many, many vehicles (excluding trucks) already use Vanier to get to Beechwood, and to a lesser extent, Montreal Road, to get King Edward. This is the same traffic that would continue to use Vanier to access the bridge – except, drivers would not need to jog over to King Edward. Some traffic would continue to use King Edward, but much less.

My preference would be to sink a 1.5km-long tunnel into the Rideau River bed. (Sinking the precast tunnel segments into the river bed would be done over a series of winters and late summers, when the river’s flow is minimum.) There should be two lanes per direction in the tunnel.



The route is fairly direct and would remove most of the traffic from the northern part of King Edward. There will be increased traffic on Vanier, but a good portion of the cars already travel that route. Hazardous materials would be directed to continue on Vanier (without entering the tunnel) to Beechwood, and then over to King Edward for bridge access. Thus, there would still be minimal truck traffic on King Edward, north of Beechwood.

All this does not mean that I am against a new bridge further east. I support better connections across barriers in all forms. There needs to be an eastern bridge, a western bridge, and I would like to have a Bank Street subway that continues across the river into Gatineau.

[roger1818]

Others have said this before, but if a Kettle Island bridge is built, I would like to see the following:

• Elimination of cars from the Alexandra Bridge,
• Reduction of lanes on the MC bridge from 6 to 4, and
• Restriction on the MC bridge to a maximum of 3 axles (or maybe 6 tires) including trailers.

This should resolve a significant portion of the traffic problems.

[hwy418]

We could trench the Aviation Parkway for most of the way between the 417 interchange and the SGEC Parkway and grade-separate the intersections at Beechwood, Montreal Rd, and Ogilvie. Providing ramps to/from those streets is a choice. Also, there have been great strides made in noise and vibration mitigation technologies in the past two decades. If we can have semiconductor R&D and manufacturing facility located right next to a 8-lane freeway, it is entirely plausible the Montfort Hospital will continue to provide the same level of care they currently do.

[dougvdh]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

Are you aware that the Queensway-Carleton Hospital sits beside the 416 highway? It has an MRI machine that seems to function just fine. Ambulances even use that near-by 416 to speed their travel to the hospital.

Pre-existing conditions can be designed for. I didn't say it was insurmountable ($$), but there are impacts.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by dougvdh

Pre-existing conditions can be designed for. I didn't say it was insurmountable ($$), but there are impacts.

Except the Queensway Carleton Hospital predates Hwy 416 by 23 years.

• The Queensway Carleton Hospital opened on October 5, 1976
• Ontario Highway 416 opened on September 23, 1999.

[CanadaGoose]

So,
- build link to Vanier parkway (but that would be cities land)
- can't build kettle island due to houses and mri machine at Montfort (that somehow works at Queensway and also cannot be moved?) and ambulance due to traffic.
- induced demand
- survey that suggests a percentage of around 10-20% of trucks will divert
- not being a priority for city of Ottawa.

I will now add to something that few people in Gatineau will care about:
- so many new trucks will flood the residential streets of Montee Paiement and Route 148 / Maloney.
- how will they add capacity for this induced demand
- we will have one bridge that goes from a highway to king Edward and a new one, that will go from a highway to Montee Paiement

Therefore, I say it cant be built.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by dougvdh

Impact on imaging equipment that's sensitive to vibration.

There was a similar "fear" at U of O related to the LRT; how'd that work out?

Plus changes to access related to traffic congestion in the Montreal Road / Aviation Corridor. And the likely loss of the access from the Parkway.

The most recent info I can find on either issue is from CBC whine-o-tron stories from 2008 ("vibration") and 2013 ("traffic") respectively.

Has there been any further study in the interim?

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

There was a similar "fear" at U of O related to the LRT; how'd that work out?



The most recent info I can find on either issue is from CBC whine-o-tron stories from 2008 ("vibration") and 2013 ("traffic") respectively.

Has there been any further study in the interim?

Probably not. It's an advocacy argument not an actual problem.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Probably not. It's an advocacy argument not an actual problem.

You, good sir, are clearly not thinking of the children!

[DTcrawler]

I was somehow under the impression that a Kettle Island Bridge would largely remove truck through-traffic from downtown. If it's only going to result in a small reduction in the number of hourly trucks, it's not worth building, IMO. Building it and only partially solving the downtown truck problem would be a failure because it would likely preclude any further mitigation efforts and allow politicians/planners to consider the truck file "closed".

[bartlebooth]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

Traffic will increase as the cities of Ottawa and Gatineau grow. That traffic needs to be properly managed. When it is not, issues like King Edward Boulevard arise...

...All this does not mean that I am against a new bridge further east. I support better connections across barriers in all forms. There needs to be an eastern bridge, a western bridge, and I would like to have a Bank Street subway that continues across the river into Gatineau.

I get that it can be fun to draw lines on maps but I think a plan like this would be a massive waste of money (0.5+ billion?) in relatively short order, and that's saying nothing of all the non-monetary problems it'd introduce or make worse.

Traffic on the parkway is already a challenge throughout the week (including weekends). We continue to see increases in residential density to neighbourhoods along the corridor, particularly at major intersections like McCarthur, Montreal, and Beechwood. The city continues to invest in safer crossings for pedestrians and cyclists (e.g. Montreal road, upcoming Donald at parkway improvements, etc). All these factors plus adding thousands of trucks would further clog up the corridor. Makes no sense if your goal is improving efficiency for truck/auto mobility.

The parkway is slowly being decommissioned as an expressway as density increases and mobility patterns become more varied in the area. It won't be quick but it's already happening and I couldn't be happier. Time to put to bed the idea of the parkway as a viable north-south expressway through this part of town.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by bartlebooth

I get that it can be fun to draw lines on maps but I think a plan like this would be a massive waste of money (0.5+ billion?) in relatively short order, and that's saying nothing of all the non-monetary problems it'd introduce or make worse.

Traffic on the parkway is already a challenge throughout the week (including weekends). We continue to see increases in residential density to neighbourhoods along the corridor, particularly at major intersections like McCarthur, Montreal, and Beechwood. The city continues to invest in safer crossings for pedestrians and cyclists (e.g. Montreal road, upcoming Donald at parkway improvements, etc). All these factors plus adding thousands of trucks would further clog up the corridor. Makes no sense if your goal is improving efficiency for truck/auto mobility.

The parkway is slowly being decommissioned as an expressway as density increases and mobility patterns become more varied in the area. It won't be quick but it's already happening and I couldn't be happier. Time to put to bed the idea of the parkway as a viable north-south expressway through this part of town.

Agreed it will be much busier and more clogged up as you say but most of this will be moving traffic rather than creating more though it's interesting a lot of the anti car voices warning of induced demand are in favor of this.

How is the parkway being decommissioned? As you point out some intersections are busy but they try to make it as useless as possible as the thoroughfare. You can't exit on Beechwood headed north for example. Are there more plans like that?

[bartlebooth]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Agreed it will be much busier and more clogged up as you say but most of this will be moving traffic rather than creating more though it's interesting a lot of the anti car voices warning of induced demand are in favor of this.

How is the parkway being decommissioned? As you point out some intersections are busy but they try to make it as useless as possible as the thoroughfare. You can't exit on Beechwood headed north for example. Are there more plans like that?

We've added thousands of new apartments and homes within close proximity to the parkway in the last few years and there's more development coming. I think this added density will just mean more traffic of all types but that means more cars and trucks (residents driving, delivery, etc). Not sure how well you can move traffic when you're increasing the density plus new truck traffic to an area we both agree is already busy and clogged.

When I say decommissioned, I mean we're seeing a slow (albeit very slow) change from an expressway to more of a corridor that needs to accommodate an increasing variety of people travelling in different ways. It will (and is) becoming less of an expressway as more density is added. Example, since the footbridge was built over the Rideau in Strathcona park at Somerset, there's been an increase in foot and cycling traffic across the parkway at Donald. The city will soon be investing more than 1 million to make this intersection safer for peds and bikes.

And you can exit on Beechwood when heading north on the parkway, you just can't turn right when the light is red. I know because I'm in a car at this intersection all the time.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

You, good sir, are clearly not thinking of the children!

Pfft! Let the children get their own bridge.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by DTcrawler

I was somehow under the impression that a Kettle Island Bridge would largely remove truck through-traffic from downtown. If it's only going to result in a small reduction in the number of hourly trucks, it's not worth building, IMO. Building it and only partially solving the downtown truck problem would be a failure because it would likely preclude any further mitigation efforts and allow politicians/planners to consider the truck file "closed".

The amount of traffic will depend entirely on the use of the following sign on the other bridges.



Also, a key consideration is what kind of trucks it is diverting. Estimates of low diversion tend to count smaller delivery/amazon/postal trucks, even though it is clearly the large 18 wheelers that is causing the most problems downtown.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Others have said this before, but if a Kettle Island bridge is built, I would like to see the following:

• Elimination of cars from the Alexandra Bridge,
• Reduction of lanes on the MC bridge from 6 to 4, and
• Restriction on the MC bridge to a maximum of 3 axles (or maybe 6 tires) including trailers.

This should resolve a significant portion of the traffic problems.

In addition, King Edward could be narrowed back to the tree lined boulevard it used to be. It would help clean up downtown and reduce noise and pollution levels.

Kettle would also create new cycling and transit links between Ottawa and Gatineau, providing better access to Slush Puppie Arena, Montfort, La Cité and employment nodes on both sides of the river. Kettle Island bridge would be transformational for the region by providing more options for all modes of transportation while maintaining the same amount of car lanes across the river.

Originally Posted by hwy418

We could trench the Aviation Parkway for most of the way between the 417 interchange and the SGEC Parkway and grade-separate the intersections at Beechwood, Montreal Rd, and Ogilvie. Providing ramps to/from those streets is a choice. Also, there have been great strides made in noise and vibration mitigation technologies in the past two decades. If we can have semiconductor R&D and manufacturing facility located right next to a 8-lane freeway, it is entirely plausible the Montfort Hospital will continue to provide the same level of care they currently do.