Roads/Bridges projects/issues

[harls]

Originally Posted by AylmerOptimist

I bet that by time the Queensway widening is completed, gas will be at 2$litre.

Life is full of idiots.

I think it's pretty much complete right now, the only thing they have to do is demolish the bridge at Moodie and rebuild it before they can open any of the new lanes.

[waterloowarrior]

Jockvale EA going to p&e

$39 million.... but it's a road, not a transit project, so it must not be questioned

[waterloowarrior]

I stand corrected

Jockvale plans to get rough ride: McRae
Council not keen on big road projects,councillor says

Patrick Dare
Ottawa Citizen

Thursday, October 30, 2008

OTTAWA-A proposed $39-million suburban road project could be the first casualty of a growing mood on city council away from roads and toward more public transit.

Councillor Maria McRae, chairwoman of the transportation committee, says the proposed expansion of Jockvale Road in south Nepean, from a two-lane country road into a four-lane arterial with median, lighting, bicycle lanes and sidewalks, may not win the easy approval that previous road projects have enjoyed. She says councillors are increasingly questioning the big, costly road projects that are supposed to ease congestion, but only seem to feed it.

"I don't think that's council's direction right now," said Ms. McRae. "We've come to a crossroads. Is that how we're building Ottawa?"

The proposed expansion is to be examined by the transportation committee next Wednesday. The environmental assessment is done and city staff are requesting authority to go ahead with property purchases. The project covers four kilometres of road between Bren Maur Road and Prince of Wales Drive and would involve a $6.4-million bridge at the Jock River, a large intersection at Prince of Wales and Jockvale for $10.3 million and widening for $22.3 million.

The councillor for the Gloucester-South Nepean area, Steve Desroches, says the project can be done in stages, but is needed to handle cars coming not only from suburban parts of southern Ottawa, but also rural communities. The city estimates its southern urban population could rise to 151,500 by 2031.

"We have tremendous growth. We need to have the road capacity," said Mr. Desroches.

But Ms. McRae said that even dedicated automobile drivers are questioning the wisdom of widening more roads.

She was recently surprised by the negative reaction of residents to the proposed expansion of the Airport Parkway to four lanes - a project staff is recommending.

She said that these big projects aren't just expensive; they create additional traffic load for other roads, which are then under pressure to be widened. She said many residents, young and old, believe transit to be the best solution.

The Jockvale Road debate will be part of a wider discussion of transportation and road projects to start on Nov. 10 when the city's revised Transportation Master Plan is released, then debated and voted on by councillors beginning Nov. 19.

Bay Ward Councillor Alex Cullen, chairman of the transit committee, said some road projects like Jockvale may be approved, since automobiles will still account for at least 60 per cent of travel even if the city's ambitious transit goals are reached.

But Mr. Cullen said related projects such as a huge project to widen Prince of Wales Drive are in for a fight at city council because their completion would directly undermine efforts to get people using the transit system. The proposed Prince of Wales four-lane road would stretch 10.3 kilometres from Woodroffe Avenue to Fisher Avenue.

Capital Ward Councillor Clive Doucet said he is dismayed to see the city continually bringing on new road projects when it's so clear that more roads feed urban sprawl and much of the continent's environmental, financial and social problems. He says making Prince of Wales into four lanes would effectively make it a freeway.

Mr. Doucet said Ottawa needs to look at Toronto, where officials have refused to expand the Don Valley Parkway into downtown - despite serious congestion and political pressure - and more rail transit service is being built.

© Ottawa Citizen 2008

[Richard Eade]

A quick note about the Strandherd-Armstrong Bridge. It is apparently being designed to have left turn lanes run its entire length: Thus, the deck will be at least 2 x (3.5m turning + 3.5m general + 3.5m general + 3.5m transit + 2m bike + 2m walkway) = ~40m in width. It will also need a clear span across the high water level of the Rideau, so about 80m.

So, which would you rather have?

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

Bay Ward Councillor Alex Cullen, chairman of the transit committee, said some road projects like Jockvale may be approved, since automobiles will still account for at least 60 per cent of travel even if the city's ambitious transit goals are reached.

See, I told you that the city planners could have changed to modal ratio to something else, as to avoid building more roads. Basically you put 30% transit and 60% cars, and you have, this is the network you need to build. If it would have been 40% cars and 50% transit, you surely would have seen a different scenario. Nobody's talking about this.

[Deez]

^ But at the same time you have to come up with something that councillors will not scoff at. In the world of politics, you always have to make compromises to ensure things get approved. I hate it, but that's the way our society functions.

On a side note, I think it's likely that the 30% split target (for the AM peak) will be attained before any LRT is built...shows that we could have been much more ambitious.

[AuxTown]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

A quick note about the Strandherd-Armstrong Bridge. It is apparently being designed to have left turn lanes run its entire length: Thus, the deck will be at least 2 x (3.5m turning + 3.5m general + 3.5m general + 3.5m transit + 2m bike + 2m walkway) = ~40m in width. It will also need a clear span across the high water level of the Rideau, so about 80m.

So, which would you rather have?

I would much rather have:



This is the Esplanade Riel Bridge in Winnipeg. I saw bridges of this type all over rural Holland and they look awesome! I would like to see that type of bridge for our new East end one as well....I'll keep dreaming.

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by O-Town Hockey

I would much rather have:



This is the Esplanade Riel Bridge in Winnipeg. I saw bridges of this type all over rural Holland and they look awesome! I would like to see that type of bridge for our new East end one as well....I'll keep dreaming.

The problem is that the Rideau Canal, and by extension the river, is a heritage area. The bridge must be a clear span (no in-water supports).

The width of the bridge is also a problem, being effectively almost 10 lanes wide. In order to have clearance under the cables, the tower would have to be disproportionately tall.

So given the option of a large girder shaped like an under-bridge arch; or an above bridge arch with a suspended deck; which would you like to see as the new S-A Bridge?

[eemy]

I'd go with a plain box girder design like we normally see. As far as I'm concerned, neither design is overly compelling, and unless the city is willing to spend some money for an architect to design something truly outstanding, it's not worthwhile making this sort of feeble effort. I'd much rather see energy and money spent on designing the Kettle Island bridge.

As for O-Town Hockey's suggestion, there's absolutely no reason that a cable-stayed bridge couldn't be a clear span, and i don't see why it would have to be disproportionately high for roadway clearance.

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

I'd go with a plain box girder design like we normally see. As far as I'm concerned, neither design is overly compelling, and unless the city is willing to spend some money for an architect to design something truly outstanding, it's not worthwhile making this sort of feeble effort. I'd much rather see energy and money spent on designing the Kettle Island bridge.

As for O-Town Hockey's suggestion, there's absolutely no reason that a cable-stayed bridge couldn't be a clear span, and i don't see why it would have to be disproportionately high for roadway clearance.

Well, there are some things to think about: This is the first bridge being built over what is now a heritage river: It is the first Ottawa bridge people see when coming north along the canal/river (until the new transit bridge is built 20m south of this one, circa 2030): The height on the east shore is just above the minimum height required for boat clearance (so a relatively flat deck will work here): The same architectural team has been retained as designed the Corkstown Pedestrian Bridge (and they like arches).

As for the tower height, I was taking the word of staff that it was not acceptable. I should probably do some quick checks.

The pictured bridge is a narrow, light pedestrian bridge, but I'll take it as a guide. If we work out the numbers for a deck that is roughly 100mX40m - assuming that there is a single tower situated at one corner of the deck, we have the following:

A diagonal along the deck surface is ~108m.
If we assume that the sidewalk is on the outside of the bridge, with the cycle lane between the sidewalk and the transit lanes, then there needs to be about 5m of clearance at roughly 5m from the bridge edge. Thus, approximately 10m from the low end of the deck diagonal the cable must be at least 5m above the deck.
For an over all diagonal length of 108m, that would mean a 54m tower.

And, all those cables would need to have a solid tie-back location off the bridge.

OK, that said, the girder bridge would probably be a cantilevered affair. Thus, it would need a fair amount of excavation on the east bank. The east bank is currently just about the perfect height. The west bank is lower and would not need any excavation to allow for cantilever. The bridge would need to be ramped up, also, to get the required above-water clearance.

The arch, which the NCC apparently preferred, would require no additional excavation of the east bank. There would be some filling of the west bank. If we assume a nice smooth inverted catenary arch of say 6m up for 10m across, the 100m span would tower 60m!

*** Trivia Alert *** The Eskimo, through centuries of trial and error, have settled upon an approximately 6/10 height to diameter ratio as best for igloos. And all without advanced math - or so we think ***

Hmmm. So I guess the designers just don’t want towers. They seem to want an arch. There is also some thought going on that 'Space-frame' arches might even be less expensive than concrete girders.

Personally, I would go with the cantilevered girders. Although I am a big fan of the old trestle bridges.

[eemy]

Just out of curiousity, but what stake does the NCC have in this project? Do they actually own the land? My understanding is that they only have jurisdiction over federal properties in the NCR.

In any case, not that I'm advocating this design, but the Almillo Bridge in Seville is a perfect example of a cable-stayed bridge with a clear span and with no potential interference of the cables with the roadway. The tower height would certainly need to be a minimum height for engineering reasons, but I expect it could be reduced by adopting certain design features.

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

Just out of curiousity, but what stake does the NCC have in this project? Do they actually own the land? My understanding is that they only have jurisdiction over federal properties in the NCR.

In any case, not that I'm advocating this design, but the Almillo Bridge in Seville is a perfect example of a cable-stayed bridge with a clear span and with no potential interference of the cables with the roadway. The tower height would certainly need to be a minimum height for engineering reasons, but I expect it could be reduced by adopting certain design features.

An interesting looking bridge! Lots of pictures here: http://photos-seville.com/the-alamillo.php

I like the idea that the tower is the cantilever weight for the deck of the bridge. No need to tie the cables back. We would probably need a heavier tower to balance the extra 3 lanes, but this might be offset by our bridge being shorter than Seville's. Maybe we could make it a Scherzer Rolling Lift Bridge and not worry about the over-water clearance.

Putting the tower and cables in the center makes sense. I notice also that they put the shared pathway in the center. I think that our designers want the pedestrians on the outsides so thay can enjoy the views.

I think the NCC is involved because the canal/river is an entryway to the region. Parks Canada is also involved since the bridge will span the heritage canal.

[Richard Eade]

I wonder if there are any restrictions of the bridge's elements's heights due to the proximity to the airport?

[eemy]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

I wonder if there are any restrictions of the bridge's elements's heights due to the proximity to the airport?

I doubt it, it doesn't seem to intefere with the flight paths from the airport. There should be some sort of overlay for the airport related to noise, height restrictions etc. that are calculated using tools from Transport Canada, and I believe those are usually incorporated into municipal zoning by-laws, but I could be wrong. Perhaps someone could check that out.

I'm quite certain that the NCC has no jurisdiction except for federally-owned properties. Regardless of the prominence of the location, unless they own the property, they shouldn't have any jurisdiction. Can anyone else clarify?

[waterloowarrior]

Small step forward for wide Jockvale Road

Patrick Dare
Ottawa Citizen

Wednesday, November 05, 2008

OTTAWA-While the City of Ottawa struggles to pay the cost of maintaining its roads, bridges and buildings, it is under intense pressure to build more in growing communities that were approved for development years ago.

One such project is Jockvale Road in south Nepean, a former country road around which subdivisions such as Stonebridge have been built. The city has a $39-million widening and reconstruction project planned for the road, which runs from the Jock River four kilometres to Prince of Wales Drive. Wednesday night, council's transportation committee decided to push ahead to the next steps on the project, including property acquisitions.

Councillors Maria McRae and Alex Cullen said this doesn't mean the road will be widened, but that it at least preserves the corridor, giving future councils the option of widening the road.

City staff say the project won't be built until some time after 2016, which means the $300,000 just spent on an environmental assessment will have to be spent once again, since environmental assessment studies are only valid for five years. Barrhaven Councillor Jan Harder says the $300,000 had to be spent to protect the corridor for when the city does have the money to build the new road.

Ms. Harder says the road project will be "a huge amount of money," but it's essential for the safety of the residents of south Nepean, who must traverse a "treacherous" Jockvale Road. She said police must be on the road during rush hours to manage the traffic that reaches 1,500 vehicles an hour; accidents are frequent, and the lack of sidewalks makes the road and the old Jock River Bridge dangerous.

The project would make the two-lane road into four lanes, with bicycle lanes, a median, sidewalks and lights.

The construction of a new bridge over the Jock River would cost $6.3 million, a new intersection at Prince of Wales and Jockvale would cost $10.3 million, and widening the road would cost $22.3 million. While a developer has given the city some of the land, the property acquisition alone for the project would cost $6 million.

Three councillors on the committee - Jacques Legendre, Georges Bédard and Clive Doucet - voted against the project.

"We can't maintain the roads we have now," said Mr. Doucet, noting that the city is having trouble finding the extra $20 million a year that is supposed to help maintain the city's existing infrastructure.

The city decided to add two per cent to its annual tax increase to maintain assets like roads, but cutting that expense is one of the options before council, which faces $35 million worth of cuts just to stick to a five-per-cent tax increase for the 2009 budget year.

The city is spending about half of what it should on maintaining roads, according to its own senior staff.

Ms. Harder was incensed that councillors would vote against the road project, saying they cannot suddenly turn against all road construction when the projects were approved years ago in transportation master plans.

She said the city approved the establishment of Barrhaven and related communities and must now build the roads and transit service to them.

Ms. Harder said other road expansions will also be needed to serve the southern communities in Ottawa.

She said the widening of Prince of Wales Drive, a huge project stretching 10 kilometres from Woodroffe Avenue to Fisher Avenue, will be one of several essential road projects needed to keep people moving to and from the south.

One of the property owners affected by the Jockvale project showed up at Wednesday's meeting.

Patty O'Brien, who owns a home at 3470 Jockvale Rd. , said her house is unsellable because of the looming road project.

The expansion would take out part of her front yard, but she is not being bought out by the city because the house would still be habitable. If council approves going ahead with property acquisition on Nov. 12, the city might change its mind and purchase her property.

Most of the comments from the public who attended open houses on the project supported it. But Stonebridge resident Richard Rankin told the transportation committee yesterday that the widening will turn the road into a noisy highway, which won't improve safety.

He said a more modest improvement would be to add a turning lane from Jockvale onto Prince of Wales.

© Ottawa Citizen 2008

[clynnog]

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

I'm quite certain that the NCC has no jurisdiction except for federally-owned properties. Regardless of the prominence of the location, unless they own the property, they shouldn't have any jurisdiction. Can anyone else clarify?

Believe me, the NCC will claim jurisdiction and stick their noses into anything and everything if it strikes their fancy. You wouldn't believe the extent to which they are circulated on fairly standard development applications within Ottawa.

[waterloowarrior]

Backgrounder: Ottawa’s Transportation Master Plan: Road Recommendation: Minimize road investments
Ottawa - In September 2008, the City put forward recommendations for citywide road projects as part of the update to the Transportation Master Plan (TMP). The road projects originally presented were determined to be essential to accommodate growth, required to facilitate development across the city, or identified as specific road priorities by Council. Based on the results of public consultation, an affordability analysis and a continued emphasis on building transit infrastructure first, the City’s final recommendations for road projects are different from those originally put forward.

The City’s approach to limit the number of road projects was confirmed through the final round of public consultations, where residents generally supported the need to maximize transit investment at the cost of building new roads. For example, during the consultation period, residents questioned the need for specific road projects, such as the Airport Parkway.

In addition to the public consultation on potential road projects, which occurred in September, the City completed a high-level system based affordability analysis that confirmed the need to re-evaluate priority road investments. Upon these reviews, and in consideration of the transit investment priorities, some road projects have been delayed, including:

Airport Parkway, from Hunt Club Road to Riverside Drive
Highway 174, from Blair Road to St. Joseph Boulevard
Campeau Drive, from March Road Road to Kanata Avenue

Overall, the City is proposing that $666 million be invested into priority road projects in the early investment period. This will mean an approximate annual expenditure of $95 million through to 2015. These funds are largely generated through the collection of Development Charges and must be spent on the project for which the funds were levied. The final recommended package of priority road projects is $84 million less than the list of road projects originally proposed in September.

[lrt's friend]

Overall, the City is proposing that $666 million be invested into priority road projects in the early investment period. This will mean an approximate annual expenditure of $95 million through to 2015. These funds are largely generated through the collection of Development Charges and must be spent on the project for which the funds were levied. The final recommended package of priority road projects is $84 million less than the list of road projects originally proposed in September.

Lots of money going to roads before we see any advantage from LRT. Any bets that even more money will be spent after 2015 on roads? Why is there development charges for roads but not transit?

[waterloowarrior]

new draft
Phase 1: $666 million
Phase 2: $753 million
Phase 3: $693 million

Total $2,112 million
(this number includes cycling and pedestrian facilities, not sure if the second one does)

previous draft

Phase 1 (2009-2015): $ 680 million
Phase 2 (2016-2022): $ 535 million
Phase 3 (2023-2031): $ 785 million

Total $2,000 million

[waterloowarrior]

Jockvale expansion plan rolls ahead

The Ottawa Citizen

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

OTTAWA - City council laid the political groundwork for the expansion of a suburban road Wednesday when it ordered municipal staff to start acquiring the necessary land.

The city has a $39-million widening and reconstruction project planned for Jockvale Road in Nepean.

City staff say the project won't be built until some time after 2016, which means the $300,000 just spent on an environmental assessment will have to be spent once again, since environmental assessment studies are only valid for five years.

The project would make the two-lane road into four lanes, with bicycle lanes, a median, sidewalks and lights, and is deemed necessary to support subdivisions in the area.

Some on council tried to get the project cancelled because they say the city cannot continue to financially support unsustainable suburban development, but they were handily defeated.

© The Ottawa Citizen 2008