O-Train Line 1/3 [Stage 2 | West Extension | Tunney's to Baseline/Moodie] | U/C

[Stacmon]

Originally Posted by SidetrackedSue

Have you driven past all the buildings by the Barrhaven Town Centre? Several towers, many, many, walk-up MUR buildings, and all clustered around a transit station as well as retail and entertainment.

I'm still surprised that Barrhaven now has a skyline that can be seen as we approach from the south or coming across from Riverside South.

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.2731681,...7p2AIHROEhjTkxnMXF2NA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

At the Costco end of Strandherd, there are multi-story buildings with residential over retail/office. It feels like things we are arguing for in Westboro are happening in other places as well.

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.2681752,...5UxOQ4vnciaMTCk757d5Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Having been a 'refugee from Barrhaven' when I moved to Kars, I'm struck by the height being achieved in Barrhaven.

The first picture in particular was really helpful to see how high parts of Barrhaven have grown in just the last few years. We are seeing it everywhere now, there, Kanata and Orleans (e.g., Petrie's Landing and later near St Joseph and train stations)!

[J.OT13]

For sure, there are some decent density clusters in all of the big three suburbs. Some more successful (with retail proximity) than others.

That said, not all proposals near current and future transit stations in the suburbs have followed the City's objectives of density and 15 minute communities. Still seeing a lot of low density and car oriented hellscapes.

[Stacmon]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

That said, not all proposals near current and future transit stations in the suburbs have followed the City's objectives of density and 15 minute communities. Still seeing a lot of low density and car oriented hellscapes.

Your comment makes me wonder how a Sutcliffe administration will see community planning. I think many of us would agree McKenney was likely more partial to the 15 minute community/local perspective, but now that we know we won't have them as mayor, does Sutcliffe and his allies on council advocate building communities for all types of people (including those that love getting into their cars and driving far from their residential only communities), like he advocated for all types of transportation or is this more of a generational paradigm shift that prioritizes "complete communities" all across the political spectrum?

[lrt's friend]

At the Costco end of Strandherd, there are multi-story buildings with residential over retail/office. It feels like things we are arguing for in Westboro are happening in other places as well.

Despite the fact, that we offer next to no transit to that area.

For sure, there are some decent density clusters in all of the big three suburbs. Some more successful (with retail proximity) than others.

That said, not all proposals near current and future transit stations in the suburbs have followed the City's objectives of density and 15 minute communities. Still seeing a lot of low density and car oriented hellscapes.

There is little hope of 15 minute communities as long as everybody is fixated on Costco, Walmart Supercentres, Loblaws Superstores, Lowe's and Home Depot. We even want multiplex arenas these days. Everything is bigger than ever before and cannot possibly fit within a normal 15 minute model, even with good densities.

[J.OT13]

• Video Link

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

That said, not all proposals near current and future transit stations in the suburbs have followed the City's objectives of density and 15 minute communities. Still seeing a lot of low density and car oriented hellscapes.

Yeah, taller buildings that have poor street orientation, suburban setbacks, pointlessly long or complicated walking distances, and are unnecessarily far from neighbours and other land uses, are just... taller sprawl.

[SidetrackedSue]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

pointlessly long or complicated walking distances,

When downsizing from a rural village 'estate' lot to an apartment, we had our sights set on Riviera Condos. My sister (from Toronto) scoffed, "condo in a park".

We lucked out that nothing was available to rent when the time came for the move and we ended up in Westboro. At the time, everything seemed so much handier compared to the rural village, that we didn't understand it would be a poor choice.

That said, the complexes at Barrhaven Centre include a senior living building and for those downsizing in Barrhaven but wanting to stay close to friends, and possibly family, it isn't a bad choice. Aside from the box stores, there are restaurants, theatre, and a bus stop at the door and a short walk to more frequent service if needed.

Had I chosen to live in Barrhaven until our downsizing time, that would have caught my interest.

[J.OT13]

• Video Link

[J.OT13]

• Video Link

[Hybrid247]

I'm no engineer, but looking at the alignment of the track flyover in relation to the pedestrian bridge south of Lincoln Fields in that video makes me think there's no way they will be able to fit all four tracks under pedestrian bridge the way they show it on GeoOttawa. It appears there would be no space to accommodate the easternmost track (inbound track from Algonquin) under the bridge.

Not really sure what's going on there. I wonder if they somehow plan to have the inbound tracks from Moodie and Algonquin converge prior to passing under the bridge, but space looks quite constrained for that.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

I'm no engineer, but looking at the alignment of the track flyover in relation to the pedestrian bridge south of Lincoln Fields in that video makes me think there's no way they will be able to fit all four tracks under pedestrian bridge the way they show it on GeoOttawa. It appears there would be no space to accommodate the easternmost track (inbound track from Algonquin) under the bridge.

Not really sure what's going on there. I wonder if they somehow plan to have the inbound tracks from Moodie and Algonquin converge prior to passing under the bridge, but space looks quite constrained for that.

Actually, that bridge was demolished and they are building a replacement.

• Video Link

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Actually, that bridge was demolished and they are building a replacement.

• Video Link

For whatever reason, I thought the new 2021 aerial imagery in GeoOttawa was showing the new bridge. My mistake!

I still thought the space looked a little constrained in the video, particularly where the flyover reaches grade and where the tracks would merge, but I think now that it must just be the distorted depth from the camera angle. Moving on...

Thanks for sharing the videos btw!

[OTSkyline]

Flyover showed "Queensview Station" which is an old transitway station on 417. That won't be an LRT station... There will be a Queensview station further west through across from the Citizen building next to Goodlife & Leon's furniture.

I wonder if there was a way to densify around Lincoln Fields station once it's done. Sure, it's a huge construction area today but even once all is fixed and the LRT station opens, the station is sort of in the middle of a desert island, with grass fields & winding roads/off or on ramps on either side. Would be great to see residential towers attached to (or nearby) or more retail (and better pedestrian experience) along Carling.

But probably not... Because cars are king in Ottawa and god forbit we were to develop open space nearby (*my snowshowing trails* )

[hwy418]

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

I wonder if there was a way to densify around Lincoln Fields station once it's done. Sure, it's a huge construction area today but even once all is fixed and the LRT station opens, the station is sort of in the middle of a desert island, with grass fields & winding roads/off or on ramps on either side. Would be great to see residential towers attached to (or nearby) or more retail (and better pedestrian experience) along Carling.

Not likely since the NCC owns most of the land and they want to protect the sensitive grasses in the area.

[Multi-modal]

Originally Posted by hwy418

Not likely since the NCC owns most of the land and they want to protect the sensitive grasses in the area.

I'm sure the City will be looking at the area with the NCC as part of the Lincoln Fields Station Secondary Plan.

https://ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/public-engagement/projects/lincoln-fields-station-secondary-plan

Its in both the City's and the NCC's interest to reduce the footprint of the SJAM/Carling interchange/ramps.

[RideauRat]

Originally Posted by hwy418

Not likely since the NCC owns most of the land and they want to protect the sensitive grasses in the area.

Honest Question: what makes that grass sensitive...? like why protect a patch of grass surrounded by concrete? I hope that's just bad NCC humor as I wouldn't even consider this greenspace, it's so desolate other than the gray vegetation near, if residence want greenspace just walk the extra 50-100 (obv for those who are capable) or so meters to the bike path and you get your green space.

I almost feel like if I painted the concrete green they'd call it greenspace and bring up arms to protect it only in spite of perfectly ripe areas for density.

[J.OT13]

NCC seems more open to redeveloped certain green spaces, for example Rochester Fields has been identified for redevelopment near Sherbourne Station. I could see them re-configure the LF/ORP ramps in a post-Transitway world and sell off the strips of land along Carling.

Too bad for the massive bus loop though. Maybe we should look at Toronto for inspiration on how to build on top of it.

[OTSkyline]

And to maximize the benefit of developing such patches of grass, why not have this land transferred or set aside for low-income, supportive or transitional housing. That way it's not seen as the NCC selling land to greedy profit-driven developers. And these types of residents likely rely more heavily on transit.

Two birds with one stone.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

And to maximize the benefit of developing such patches of grass, why not have this land transferred or set aside for low-income, supportive or transitional housing. That way it's not seen as the NCC selling land to greedy profit-driven developers. And these types of residents likely rely more heavily on transit.

Two birds with one stone.

Affordable housing with easy access to transit. Seems too logical.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

And to maximize the benefit of developing such patches of grass, why not have this land transferred or set aside for low-income, supportive or transitional housing. That way it's not seen as the NCC selling land to greedy profit-driven developers. And these types of residents likely rely more heavily on transit.

Two birds with one stone.

Something like what was done with Dream at LeBreton is a good model, providing a good mix of social classes within the same buildings.