Pedestrian Bridges

[ryan1]

Originally Posted by On Edge

This thing means the parkway will never, ever be widened and the main route to the airport in our nation's capital will remain an overcongested 2-lane cowpath.

Who knows when it will happen, but it seems the pedestrian bridge has been designed so that the Airport Parkway can be "easily" widened...

Originally Posted by bradnixon

Yes. The dashed lines in the plan below indicate the future widening of the Parkway. The EA required the bridge to not have any centre piers so as to avoid any possible future conflict.



(Picture from http://johnsankey.ca/pathplan.html, which has a great chronicle of the entire bridge saga.)

[On Edge]

Originally Posted by ryan1

Who knows when it will happen, but it seems the pedestrian bridge has been designed so that the Airport Parkway can be "easily" widened...

But if you drive past there it is really obvious that there is absolutely no way 2 extra road lanes will fit under the ped. bridge.

[1overcosc]

^ Are you sure about that? You'd be surprised how many times I've found, from experience, 'there's no way they can fit more lanes there' and they do.

In any case the Parkway can't really be widened until some sort of redirect away from Bronson happens. As it stands you can't funnel that much Airport traffic onto a traditional mainstreet. I think we've debated numerous solutions to this--everything from a tunnel underneath Dows Lake to hook Bronson up to Booth/Rochester/Carling to connecting it to Riverside instead--but some sort of solution has to be found if the Parkway is to be widened.

[Catenary]

Originally Posted by On Edge

But if you drive past there it is really obvious that there is absolutely no way 2 extra road lanes will fit under the ped. bridge.

There are almost 4 lanes through there right now, with the way the NB on ramp is split around the temporary central pillar. It's SB lane, NB Lane, Pillar, NB Ramp under the bridge now with room to spare.

[NOWINYOW]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

In any case the Parkway can't really be widened until some sort of redirect away from Bronson happens.

True enough insofar as North bound from the airport. However, to alleviate the "parking lot" syndrome in the evenings, plus help move traffic to the airport quicker, I'd suggest 2 south bound lanes. Where the lanes converge into a single direction lane now, a partially separated right lane for those exiting at Hunt Club. Once past Hunt Club the lanes could remain as they are now.

[1overcosc]

^ That's actually a very good idea.

[ryan1]

Originally Posted by NOWINYOW

True enough insofar as North bound from the airport. However, to alleviate the "parking lot" syndrome in the evenings, plus help move traffic to the airport quicker, I'd suggest 2 south bound lanes. Where the lanes converge into a single direction lane now, a partially separated right lane for those exiting at Hunt Club. Once past Hunt Club the lanes could remain as they are now.

Excellent idea. That should solve the issue of getting people to the airport faster during rush hour at a minimal cost compared to alternatives. It's very frustrating sitting on a major north-south thoroughfare in traffic when you are trying to catch a flight. Especially because a majority of the back-up is due to the Hunt Club exit.

Nevertheless, as a major north-south thoroughfare, the Airport Parkway should have 2 lanes in each direction throughout.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

^ They put a construction sign in the water?

That way it'll be harder for the ducks to sue.

[On Edge]

Originally Posted by Catenary

There are almost 4 lanes through there right now, with the way the NB on ramp is split around the temporary central pillar. It's SB lane, NB Lane, Pillar, NB Ramp under the bridge now with room to spare.

I swear the bridge is too low over the road on the sides where added lanes might be placed. Nothing taller than a roadster would fit under there. Plus there would be no room on the sides for breakdown lanes or anything else.

[1overcosc]

I heard something interesting at work today. Apparently, the Rideau River at the site of Donald-Somerset bridge is so shallow that its possible to wade across it. I knew the Rideau River in that area was shallow but I had no idea it was THAT shallow. I think that explains why a construction sign was put in the water, there may already be people wading across it who the city feels necessary to warn about the building activity.

[1overcosc]

The Airport Parkway ped bridge is somewhat reminiscent of the Bridge of Strings in Jerusalem:


Credit: User 'Little Savage' on Wikimedia Commons (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...s_Bridge_5.JPG)

I wonder if the Bridge of Strings actually inspired any of the engineers working on this one. Both aim to enhance non-auto mobility (Ottawa's is a pedestrian/cyclist bridge, Jerusalem's is a tram/pedestrian bridge), and both are intended to serve as gateway landmarks.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

I heard something interesting at work today. Apparently, the Rideau River at the site of Donald-Somerset bridge is so shallow that its possible to wade across it. I knew the Rideau River in that area was shallow but I had no idea it was THAT shallow. I think that explains why a construction sign was put in the water, there may already be people wading across it who the city feels necessary to warn about the building activity.

That is why there was a seasonal walking bridge there (maintained and installed each spring by the Rideau Lawn Tennis Club) from the 1910s until it was washed away in 1952. The bridge was easy to install in the very shallow water.

[rocketphish]

Aerial of the Somerset-Donald bridge site:



From: southfacing

[DEWLine]

Well, with construction over an active waterway, what would you do?

[TransitZilla]

Airport Parkway bridge looking much closer to completion now:

From http://www.johnsankey.ca/path2014.html


I think this picture shows how there is lots of room under the bridge for future Airport Parkway widening. The orange tower in the middle is temporary and should be removed shortly.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

I heard something interesting at work today. Apparently, the Rideau River at the site of Donald-Somerset bridge is so shallow that its possible to wade across it. I knew the Rideau River in that area was shallow but I had no idea it was THAT shallow. I think that explains why a construction sign was put in the water, there may already be people wading across it who the city feels necessary to warn about the building activity.

I've done it!

[On Edge]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

Airport Parkway bridge looking much closer to completion now:

From http://www.johnsankey.ca/path2014.html


I think this picture shows how there is lots of room under the bridge for future Airport Parkway widening. The orange tower in the middle is temporary and should be removed shortly.

I don't see any room. Certainly not inside the pylons, and outside is too low for traffic to pass under.

[HighwayStar]

Originally Posted by On Edge

I don't see any room. Certainly not inside the pylons, and outside is too low for traffic to pass under.

???

There are already 2 full lanes and shoulders on the left. They take up less than half the space. Add another 2 lanes on the right... and shouldn't be a problem to push the Hunt Club on-ramp back a bit if necessary..... but it looks like it would fit anyway...

[1overcosc]

Even with retaining the Hunt Club ramp where it currently is, two additional lanes would fit between the ramp and that O tower. The only way I can possibly see it not fitting is if you insist on having a big grass median between the two directions like on some rural freeway.

[Mulder]

Originally Posted by On Edge

I don't see any room. Certainly not inside the pylons, and outside is too low for traffic to pass under.

Originally Posted by HighwayStar

???

There are already 2 full lanes and shoulders on the left. They take up less than half the space. Add another 2 lanes on the right... and shouldn't be a problem to push the Hunt Club on-ramp back a bit if necessary..... but it looks like it would fit anyway...

~34 metres from the abutment/retaining wall on the west side to the footing of the tower structure

The standard lane width on that road with that design speed would be 3.75m MAX.

Lets go 2m on either side of that for shoulder & separation to reduce it to 35m. Might as well subtract medium barrier & shoulder Inside should @ 1m barrier system at .63m. That still gives me 32m to play with lanes.

Which, we could fit 7 lanes under the bridge at 3.75m width. Very easily. We are talking about 5 lanes max.

As for clearance, if they have already planned for widening in the design (which they have) they would have already accounted for the height clearance.

Baring that, you do realize that heavy trucks are also not permitted to use Airport parkway.