Confederation Line (Stage 1) | In Service 1.0 - Page 29

lrt's friend · #**561** Posted **Oct 15, 2013, 4:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

North of Hunt Club.

South, it's a lesser arterial.

no, north of Lester Road, it is a residential street. That has been in the official plan for decades and reflects the nature of the neighbourhood.

Capital Shaun · #**562** Posted **Oct 15, 2013, 4:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by McC

this isn't the first mention of this concern.

It's the first I read about it. If it is such a big issue they sure didn't make much noise about it.

eternallyme · #**563** Posted **Oct 15, 2013, 5:13 PM**

As for that research station - why not move it to Vars or Russell or something if it cannot accept an urban pattern nearby?

Dado · #**564** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 12:16 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Well, this is called an 'affordable' plan. Extending LRT from Bayshore to Kanata will cost at least an additional $1B and to CTC will be $1B++++.

I do often wonder from where you come up with your numbers.

Once the line gets to Bayshore, there's not a lot left to complicate construction going west: there's crossing Moodie (already budgeted for the Transitway extension), the Beachburg Sub, and March. With those three grade separations, plus the one that already exists at Kanata Ave, and the one being built at Terry Fox for Earl Grey Drive/Didsbury plus a bridge over the Carp River, you can get a line all the way to the north side of the Queensway opposite the Palladium.

We'd be looking at 2.3 km to Moodie (partly budgeted already), 6.4 km to March, 8.6 km to Kanata Centrum, 11 km to the Palladium. Even at an astounding $100/km - that's above the cost of burying 1 km of the Western LRT along the Parkway - we'd be looking at $1.1B.

Compare that to the complications of going to Place d'Orléans:

-cross OR 174 east if Blair, probably over but possibly under
-cross over St. Joseph interchange, plus build an elevated station
-cross over Greens Creek and its ravine
-cross under Rockcliffe Pwy
-cross under Jeanne d'Arc interchange
-cross under Orléans Blvd
-cross under Place d'Orléans Drive into an underground Place d'Orléans Station

That distance is about 9 km from Blair, just a little more than to Kanata Centrum from Bayshore. Given all the complications, there's no way on Earth that going to Place d'Orléans would be less expensive than going to Kanata Centrum.

Now given the respective ridership numbers, Orléans is definitely the correct choice, but let's not go nuts claiming that going to Kanata is going to be a fortune, either. Once we get to Pinecrest, it's pretty close to clear sailing all the way to the north side of the Palladium. Moreover, if you take the line north after Moodie and head along the rail corridors, we can probably save more money still.

Buggys · #**565** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 2:16 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by eternallyme

As for that research station - why not move it to Vars or Russell or something if it cannot accept an urban pattern nearby?

The vast bog that is Mer Blue, is the very reason that station is where it is at now. There is nothing urban on the Mer Blue bog, at all. No one in their right mind would have their house built on a bog.

Uhuniau · #**566** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 2:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dado

Once we get to Pinecrest, it's pretty close to clear sailing all the way to the north side of the Palladium. Moreover, if you take the line north after Moodie and head along the rail corridors, we can probably save more money still.

Clear sailing, minus whatever 🞵🞵🞵🞵 we'd have to put up with from the NCC for using up a few hundred linear meters of their precious stupid 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 Greenbelt.

Uhuniau · #**567** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 2:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buggys

The vast bog that is Mer Blue, is the very reason that station is where it is at now. There is nothing urban on the Mer Blue bog, at all. No one in their right mind would have their house built on a bog.

That, sir or madam, is an insult to Bog People!

I really wish Mer Bleue was slightly more accessible, especially this time of year. A wonderful taste of the boreal, right in Ottawa.

GoTrans · #**568** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 5:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Clear sailing, minus whatever 🞵🞵🞵🞵 we'd have to put up with from the NCC for using up a few hundred linear meters of their precious stupid 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 Greenbelt.

Before you go blaming the NCC for everything wrong with City transit planning just remember the following;
if not for the NCC, the route would follow the curving Ottawa River Parkway causing more squeal, more maintenance to rail and LRT's and possibly slower speeds;
lower ridership since the stations and hence higher long term operating costs, as the route would be further from built up areas;
the LRT would be totally suburban centred with little benefit to those living inside the Greenbelt;
the City has known for years that their use of the parkway was for a limited time only and should have known the KCC's response to giving up control of the land. The last time I checked the City did not offer to buy the land from the NCC;
the NCC has no money unless the Federal Govt. gives them some so maybe the blame needs to be re-directed to the government itself.

Dado · #**569** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 5:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Clear sailing, minus whatever 🞵🞵🞵🞵 we'd have to put up with from the NCC for using up a few hundred linear meters of their precious stupid 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 Greenbelt.

Actually, the obstructing upper-level agency is more likely to be the MoTO than the NCC.

A rapid transit corridor could be built all the way from Bayshore to the Palladium without using a square metre of NCC Greenbelt - but only if the MoTO agrees to stop insisting on preserving its interchanges in their exact current form.

Unfortunately, as we've seen with the Bayshore-Moodie EA, the MoTO and/or our consultants (who also frequently work for the MoTO) won't consider redesigning the Moodie interchange to simplify the passage of a rapid transit corridor, instead preferring to take some NCC Greenbelt - and pushing Corkstown Rd even further out of its way.

J.OT13 · #**570** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 5:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoTrans

Before you go blaming the NCC for everything wrong with City transit planning just remember the following;
if not for the NCC, the route would follow the curving Ottawa River Parkway causing more squeal, more maintenance to rail and LRT's and possibly slower speeds;
lower ridership since the stations and hence higher long term operating costs, as the route would be further from built up areas;
the LRT would be totally suburban centred with little benefit to those living inside the Greenbelt;
the City has known for years that their use of the parkway was for a limited time only and should have known the KCC's response to giving up control of the land. The last time I checked the City did not offer to buy the land from the NCC;
the NCC has no money unless the Federal Govt. gives them some so maybe the blame needs to be re-directed to the government itself.

One of the few things the NCC have done right. I think the City should offer to buy up the strip of land they need for the Richmond underground, along with Rochester Field, and sell the air rights for nearly waterfront development (3-4 floors along the parkway and 15-20 on Rochester field along with an event plaza).

hwy418 · #**571** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 7:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dado

Actually, the obstructing upper-level agency is more likely to be the MoTO than the NCC.

A rapid transit corridor could be built all the way from Bayshore to the Palladium without using a square metre of NCC Greenbelt - but only if the MoTO agrees to stop insisting on preserving its interchanges in their exact current form.

Unfortunately, as we've seen with the Bayshore-Moodie EA, the MoTO and/or our consultants (who also frequently work for the MoTO) won't consider redesigning the Moodie interchange to simplify the passage of a rapid transit corridor, instead preferring to take some NCC Greenbelt - and pushing Corkstown Rd even further out of its way.

What is the basis for your comment? The approved plan for the West Transitway Extension from Bayshore to Moodie is to minimize the encroachment into the greenspace by staying mostly within the MTO right of way. The north half of the Moodie interchange will be rebuilt to accomodate the grade separation of the Transitway there so that NCC lands west of Moodie Drive would not be touched.

All this may change now that LRT is planned for Bayshore Station and the pending move of DND to the Carling Campus seems to be going nowhere. Sure the busway can be build between Holly Acres and Moodie, but the grade separations may not be required after all.

TransitZilla · #**572** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 7:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by hwy418

What is the basis for your comment? The approved plan for the West Transitway Extension from Bayshore to Moodie is to minimize the encroachment into the greenspace by staying mostly within the MTO right of way. The north half of the Moodie interchange will be rebuilt to accomodate the grade separation of the Transitway there so that NCC lands west of Moodie Drive would not be touched.

All this may change now that LRT is planned for Bayshore Station and the pending move of DND to the Carling Campus seems to be going nowhere. Sure the busway can be build between Holly Acres and Moodie, but the grade separations may not be required after all.

He's got a point.

As I recall, the plan for the full West Transitway extension past Moodie requires 4 underpasses:
-the 417West-Moodie offramp;
-the Moodie north-417 West onramp;
-Moodie itself
-the Moodie south-417 west onramp.

If the MTO were agreeable to reconfiguring the interchange as a diamond, only one underpass (under Moodie itself) would be required. But MTO is weirdly obsessed with the partial cloverleaf...

Richard Eade · #**573** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 9:24 PM**

Yes, a ½ diamond could simplify things:

A drawback, though, is that one of the north-bound lanes across the bridge will become a storage lane for west-bound traffic (which is currently a fairly low volume).

However, as Dado pointed out, there is great resistance to losing the Parclo configuration. Besides, Staff now has a Council Approved plan and they will not be happy to change from that (regardless if there are better ideas) unless there is a very compelling reason.

The approved plan, as presented:

Or, to make it a bit clearer and point out some of the ‘features’, I have indicated the planned lanes:

Notes: (1) I have simplified things by 'straightening' some lanes. For example, I have not included the 'bend' in the Transitway / Rail line which pushes Corkstown Road north into the NCC's playing field.
(2) The plan calls for 3 lanes per direction across the bridge. This is done by minimizing (or removing) the sidewalks.

Notice that the 417 ramps are as close to the current configuration as possible. This leads to a number of awkward (or dangerous) issues for pedestrians, cyclists and drivers. In order to compensate for this, the consultants suggested that only two through lanes were actually needed in the south-bound direction so the outside lane could (theoretically) be converted to a Multi-Use Pathway (MUP). However, you will notice that the west-bound MUP (yellow line) has to climb a hill to get up to the intersection at Moodie, but, then the person must wait for the light to cross the off-ramp, then wait for the light to cross Moodie.

The following suggestion was submitted to staff, but had no influence on the final plan:

This image shows the MUP on the south-bound lane, but the main difference was that Corkstown Road was grouped with the tracks, passing under the 417’s off-ramp. The off-ramp was moved to the northern intersection since most of the traffic taking that ramp will continue north to the ex-Nortel Complex (when-ever it gets populated). Also, in the staff’s plan, buses from the 417 enter the Moodie Station from Corkstown Road; by moving the Corkstown Road intersection closer to the 417 bus service could be faster.

Buggys · #**574** Posted **Oct 17, 2013, 1:48 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

That, sir or madam, is an insult to Bog People!

I really wish Mer Bleue was slightly more accessible, especially this time of year. A wonderful taste of the boreal, right in Ottawa.

Lol. Bog People don't live in the same kind of housing regular people do : - P.

rocketphish · #**575** Posted **Oct 17, 2013, 2:43 AM**

Another view of the roadheader that will be excavating the tunnel starting at the western portal:

Click on the image for a much larger version.

from: http://www.ottawalightrail.ca/

rocketphish · #**576** Posted **Oct 17, 2013, 5:26 PM**

Developers map out light-rail possibilities

Mark Brownlee, Published on October 17, 2013

Which came first: the developer or the light-rail train system?

It may not be as old as the chicken-egg question, but as Ottawa marches closer to the unveiling of the first leg of its new rapid transit system, it’s going to be increasingly on the minds of those hoping to build around the city’s transit hubs.

While the city’s home and office builders are generally excited about the potential spike in demand for residential and commercial space around the new 12.5-kilometre, $2.1-billion system, they also realize they won’t know for sure how the system will be used until people are actually riding it.

“It’s not just as simple as ‘build it and they’re going to use it,’ ” said Neil Malhotra, vice-president of Claridge Homes, which is one of the biggest residential developers in central Ottawa, where the first part of the LRT system will be built.

“It depends what happens at the different spots along the train stations, what drives people to use it.”

Developers received a little bit of clarity last week, when Mayor Jim Watson announced plans to spend $2.5 billion to build out the city’s rail system by 2023. However there are still uncertainties about how riders are going to respond.

Is it just going to be a tool for getting people to work? Are people just going to use it to get to and from suburbs in Kanata and Orleans, once the next phases of the system are built out? Will it be used in off-peak hours by those going to restaurants, shopping malls and other recreational amenities?

These are the questions Mr. Malhotra is asking himself as he tries to determine the best way to take advantage of this unprecedented investment in Ottawa’s transit system.

But while he’s still optimistic that building around transit stations will be a fruitful investment, a lot is riding on convincing developers like Claridge that LRT will eventually become a major part of the daily lives of residents.

The city will need to guarantee plenty of residential, retail and office space exists around the transit hubs to make sure they are using it in the first place, said Peter Hume, the councillor who chairs the city’s planning committee.

“To the extent that we get no development along there, that will be a significant failure for light rail,” he said.

To alleviate that risk, the city is creating “transit-oriented development” plans that allow greater density on properties within approximately 800 metres of future LRT stations.

Mr. Hume is so intent on bringing in new buildings to the areas around the transit stations that he’d like to move beyond builders such as Claridge to others such as Tridel Condominiums, which is based in Toronto.

Which begs the question: if developers need riders to make planning decisions about where to build around LRT stations but the city needs developers to make the system a success, how do you get one without the other?

Claridge is planning projects that would be successful even if Ottawa residents decide against using the new system en masse, said Mr. Malhotra, since people are still generally intent on moving into the downtown core even as it stands now.

Others want to make sure they get in on the ground floor of a system they’re positive is going to be successful.

Morguard’s Bernie Myers, who manages the largest portfolio of office real estate in Ottawa, is trying to make sure the downtown buildings for which he is responsible have direct connections with the light-rail line.

“It’s proven in pretty much every city that if you can go straight from your office and get on a train or subway without going outside, that’s advantageous,” he said.

Mr. Malhotra, meanwhile, is eagerly waiting for the city to announce how it plans to build the system beyond the line that is currently under construction.

“The real value of the train is 20 years away still,” he said. “Until it’s running to every arm of the city and you can get back and forth to places, we’re not sure what the impact is.”

http://www.obj.ca/Real-Estate/2013-10-17...opers-map-out-light-rail-possibilities/1