Confederation Line (Stage 1) | In Service 1.0 - Page 126

Kitchissippi · #**2501** Posted **Nov 13, 2015, 5:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by HighwayStar

Try as I might, I can't quite grasp where that water filled Y is... would some kind soul please enlighten me

It's by the intersection of Tremblay and Belfast. I went out there on my bike a few weeks ago and it is amazing how much earth they moved for this. It's too bad that this was built just for access to the maintenance area and the tunnels seem narrower and single track. This would have made a nice possible future option for a split towards the General Hospital, via the Train Yards and down the Alta Vista corridor

HighwayStar · #**2502** Posted **Nov 13, 2015, 5:50 PM**

Ahh... so it's the split from the mainline (each direction) into the storage area...

thanks..

rocketphish · #**2503** Posted **Nov 13, 2015, 6:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

I'm hoping that they plan to add drainage for the north 'Y' of the Connector. From the picture, it looks like a bit of a water collector.

If they do, they could call it the "Connector Collector"

ortelius · #**2504** Posted **Nov 14, 2015, 6:17 AM**

So exciting to see those tracks!
According to the website: 92.4% of Lyon Station cavern completed as of November 6

Kitchissippi · #**2505** Posted **Nov 14, 2015, 1:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ortelius

So exciting to see those tracks!
According to the website: 92.4% of Lyon Station cavern completed as of November 6

They seem to be going at a rate of 1.5% to 2.5% per week in mining out the stations, which means they should be done digging Lyon out before Christmas. Parliament could be dug out by April, Rideau by June. Jawbreaker will probably go on to digging the running tunnel, which IIRC progressed at roughly 9 metres a day, so it is capable of doing the remaining 1 km by May.

eemy · #**2506** Posted **Nov 14, 2015, 4:52 PM**

It seemed like the tunnel went a lot faster than the stations. That's understandable due to the greater volume to remove in the stations, but I'm still surprised how much slower the progress is with them.

MaxHeadroom · #**2507** Posted **Nov 16, 2015, 2:44 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

It seemed like the tunnel went a lot faster than the stations. That's understandable due to the greater volume to remove in the stations, but I'm still surprised how much slower the progress is with them.

There is a lot of time consuming steps and processes with both Parliament and Lyon stations, because they are being dug in close proximity to existing high structures, particularly parking garages that don't have a lot of lateral support for the potentially pivoting load above.

Admiral Nelson · #**2508** Posted **Nov 16, 2015, 2:59 AM**

Are the large earth mounds near LeBreton the result of the tunnel dig?

Catenary · #**2509** Posted **Nov 16, 2015, 3:54 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Admiral Nelson

Are the large earth mounds near LeBreton the result of the tunnel dig?

It depends on what you're referring to. There is a large pile of excavated rock at the corner of Albert and Empress is from the tunnel. Other piles in the area are building up to the new bridge at Pimisi (Lebreton) Station.

rocketphish · #**2510** Posted **Nov 16, 2015, 4:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catenary

It depends on what you're referring to. There is a large pile of excavated rock at the corner of Albert and Empress is from the tunnel. Other piles in the area are building up to the new bridge at Pimisi (Lebreton) Station.

And then there are the large berms of soil near the intersection of Booth and the Parkway, which are part of the landscaping project that is underway.

lrt's friend · #**2511** Posted **Nov 16, 2015, 3:18 PM**

Fancy that, Stockholm interlines their subways. Clearly, they don't know what they are doing.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=219318

Radster · #**2512** Posted **Nov 16, 2015, 6:50 PM**

In Stockholm they also built many of the lines to areas slated for development, with little to no people living there initially. And it proved to be a good strategy. Yet here this is called building transit to nowhere. Narrow minded if you ask me.

MalcolmTucker · #**2513** Posted **Nov 16, 2015, 6:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radster

In Stockholm they also built many of the lines to areas slated for development, with little to no people living there initially. And it proved to be a good strategy. Yet here this is called building transit to nowhere. Narrow minded if you ask me.

Gotta zone for it, and stop zoning where there is no transit. Copenhagen did it in 1947 with the Fingerplan. They had the advantage of the post war building boom, and a lot of radial rail lines already in place to enable.

Code:

Figure 2: The "Fingerplan"for Greater Copenhagen 1947. The hand represents the idea (length of hand is 25 km). Diagrammes illustrate traffic structure, employment location, and residential areas (in shading). After Bredsdorff(l949).

Source: https://tidsskrift.dk/index.php/geografisktidsskrift/article/view/2556/4549

lrt's friend · #**2514** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 1:12 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radster

In Stockholm they also built many of the lines to areas slated for development, with little to no people living there initially. And it proved to be a good strategy. Yet here this is called building transit to nowhere. Narrow minded if you ask me.

We tried that. We heard all the complaining.

Of course, green field transit building is very cheap and you can tailor development with transit in mind from day one.

When you wait, you have to deal with NIMBYs who drive up the cost. You also tend to have wedge transit in also at great cost and in less than ideal locations like next to expressways. You have already built to auto standards, which will always limit the success of transit. You then have to encourage intensification, which means you are effectively bulldozing the area.

EdFromOttawa · #**2515** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 1:53 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

We tried that. We heard all the complaining.

Of course, green field transit building is very cheap and you can tailor development with transit in mind from day one.

When you wait, you have to deal with NIMBYs who drive up the cost. You also tend to have wedge transit in also at great cost and in less than ideal locations like next to expressways. You have already built to auto standards, which will always limit the success of transit. You then have to encourage intensification, which means you are effectively bulldozing the area.

Yahhhhhh damn our lack of North American foresight and love for the auto.

Can you imagine where we would be if we had focused Ottawa as a transit-first city back in the 50s???

acottawa · #**2516** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 2:17 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Gotta zone for it, and stop zoning where there is no transit. Copenhagen did it in 1947 with the Fingerplan. They had the advantage of the post war building boom, and a lot of radial rail lines already in place to enable.

Code:

Figure 2: The "Fingerplan"for Greater Copenhagen 1947. The hand represents the idea (length of hand is 25 km). Diagrammes illustrate traffic structure, employment location, and residential areas (in shading). After Bredsdorff(l949).

Source: https://tidsskrift.dk/index.php/geografisktidsskrift/article/view/2556/4549

Copenhagen didn't open its first metro line until 2002. That's a long wait for all of that transit oriented development.

eemy · #**2517** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 3:47 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by acottawa

Copenhagen didn't open its first metro line until 2002. That's a long wait for all of that transit oriented development.

The S-Train, however, has been around since 1934.

FFX-ME · #**2518** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 5:19 PM**

Given what the city looks like now it would be very very very easy to use that Copenhagen model. All you need to do is allow development to occur in thin segments along where the LRT lines are planned within the greenbelt. For some stupid reason I don't know people oppose this development and instead support suburban sprawling. It's inevitable, it has to happen at some point.

We otherwise will have many km of track with no people in sight.

swimmer_spe · #**2519** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 9:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

Given what the city looks like now it would be very very very easy to use that Copenhagen model. All you need to do is allow development to occur in thin segments along where the LRT lines are planned within the greenbelt. For some stupid reason I don't know people oppose this development and instead support suburban sprawling. It's inevitable, it has to happen at some point.

We otherwise will have many km of track with no people in sight.

Are you talking about the lack of development in the green belt?

FFX-ME · #**2520** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 9:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Are you talking about the lack of development in the green belt?

Yes. We should allow development in those segments of the greenbelt which will be near the LRT lines and create a transit-oriented community.