Chief William Commanda Bridge (former Prince of Wales Bridge)

[corynv]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

EDIT: If it comes to Portage, then the route needs to change. Trains should go up Maisonneuve and take Allumettière down to the west end. If the Alexanrdra Bridge is also used, they could join with the Portage Trains at the Maisonneuve/Allumettière intersection. Both corridors are wide enough to easily accommodate LRT, unlike Alexandre-Taché.

How/where would you connect up with the Terrasses du Chaudiere if you take that route? Since i'm sure if the STO is doing rail like that in downtown hull both most be a thing. Especially for people with disabilities taking the lrt to there, having to get off and walk over wouldn't be the best thing. And since all of the Plateau/Alymer buses would stop there wouldn't be as many buses to hop onto to go in that direction, especially in the morning rush.

Edit: Do we know if the NCC is willing to allow gatineau to expand des Allumettière in the part the goes through gatineau park? I'd assume part of the reason they chose the route they did initially is because it goes around it.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Aside from the bridge recommendation, a huge take away for me in that report is... BRT is back!

LRT only
Part LRT part BET
BRT only

Are all being considered now.

It never stopped being considered, as per the STO's description of the étude complémentaire. However, the medium-term capacity issues they've spoken about publicly mean that BRT is likely more of a baseline scenario rather than an actual option. The core section (Val-Tétreau and Hull to Ottawa) is almost certain to be LRT at this point because the demand would max out at-grade BRT by time anything was built (2028, is their aim iirc). The question is whether LRT will be extended all the way west and to the Plateau in a first phase, or whether they'll make do with buses for one or both branches.

[Aylmer]

The Portage Bridge seems like a good option to me. It would be a few minutes faster than Alexandra, and provides a good connection to the job-rich western portion of the Ottawa CBD. However, I'm still of the opinion that the Alexandra Bridge would be the better option when you throw in the context of it having to be rebuilt. This is a rare opportunity to have a new crossing downtown, purpose-built for LRT. It's not the ideal transportation connection, but it's an essential component of a transit loop, which I increasingly believe will be inevitable in the next 30-40 years.

If Gatineau does end up going for Portage, I'll still be thrilled. However, I really hope that the new Alexandra will be built for a future LRT connection. Perhaps something akin to Toronto's Prince Edward Viaduct being built with a subway deck decades before the subway.

[Radster]

The Blue LRT route from West Gatineau just begs to continue past Lyon, maybe on Sparks, then under the War Memorial towards Chateau Laurier to loop back over Alexandra bridge and back to Gatineau West using Allumettieres.

However, Tunneling under the War Memorial could be difficult, and kind of an eyesore to have a tunnel portal from Sparks, also tunneling under Maisonneuve by Laurier towards the Ottawa River might be hard, considering that intersection literally sits on top of a huge underground parking garage for the Portage complex.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by corynv

How/where would you connect up with the Terrasses du Chaudiere if you take that route? Since i'm sure if the STO is doing rail like that in downtown hull both most be a thing. Especially for people with disabilities taking the lrt to there, having to get off and walk over wouldn't be the best thing. And since all of the Plateau/Alymer buses would stop there wouldn't be as many buses to hop onto to go in that direction, especially in the morning rush.

Edit: Do we know if the NCC is willing to allow gatineau to expand des Allumettière in the part the goes through gatineau park? I'd assume part of the reason they chose the route they did initially is because it goes around it.

I would have the Trillium Line go down the Park des Portageurs along the river (as the big DMUs cannot run on the street) and terminate at Zibi Building 6, either behind or under.

As for the proposed routing of Gatineau's LRT, Alexandre Tâché is not very wide, so I'm not sure how realistic it could be. Both St-Raymond and Allumettière corridors are probably wide enough to accommodate LRT within the existing right of way.

[J.OT13]

Best case scenario for Gatineau's LRT, a crossing at Portage to Lyon and a second crossing at Alexandra to Rideau and eventually, both can be connected to complete the loop.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

As for the proposed routing of Gatineau's LRT, Alexandre Tâché is not very wide, so I'm not sure how realistic it could be. Both St-Raymond and Allumettière corridors are probably wide enough to accommodate LRT within the existing right of way.

Chemin d'Aylmer's 20-25 lateral metres is enough for surface LRT, with 1-2 meters of expropriation necessary at stations or for turning lanes in the narrower sections. But as there are very few buildings that close to the road, it isn't a huge hurdle.



Alexandre-Taché (where it falls back to 3 lanes, or 15-ish metres) is a tougher cookie. But the STO's 1B variant overcomes that by shifting the ROW onto the old railway along Lucerne between Zibi and Val-Tétreau, completely bypassing the problematically narrow section of Taché.

[danishh]

Originally Posted by Radster

The Blue LRT route from West Gatineau just begs to continue past Lyon, maybe on Sparks, then under the War Memorial towards Chateau Laurier to loop back over Alexandra bridge and back to Gatineau West using Allumettieres.

However, Tunneling under the War Memorial could be difficult, and kind of an eyesore to have a tunnel portal from Sparks, also tunneling under Maisonneuve by Laurier towards the Ottawa River might be hard, considering that intersection literally sits on top of a huge underground parking garage for the Portage complex.

It's impossible to tunnel under maisonneuve the way the parking garage is built.

the only option is surface rail down the current maisonneuve and portage bus lanes. This would severely degrade the carrying capacity for cars.
champlain would have to go 2 lanes northbound for morning rush hour, 2 lanes southbound for afternoon, to compensate for the loss in capacity. Or another bridge would have to be built west of the Portage.

If the city of Gatineau sticks with the results of this study, they are pretty much guaranteeing no intraprovincial light rail for the foreseeable future. If they want intraprovincial light rail, the options are PoW and Alexandra. That's it. This study guarantees STO buses for intraprovincial routes.

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by danishh

It's impossible to tunnel under maisonneuve the way the parking garage is built.

the only option is surface rail down the current maisonneuve and portage bus lanes. This would severely degrade the carrying capacity for cars.
champlain would have to go 2 lanes northbound for morning rush hour, 2 lanes southbound for afternoon, to compensate for the loss in capacity. Or another bridge would have to be built west of the Portage.

If the city of Gatineau sticks with the results of this study, they are pretty much guaranteeing no intraprovincial light rail for the foreseeable future. If they want intraprovincial light rail, the options are PoW and Alexandra. That's it. This study guarantees STO buses for intraprovincial routes.

Good Day.

I don't know about -impossible-. Lots worse have been converted or built through......it is, after all, just a garage.
A HUGE garage, with so many entrances and exits that it could well be split. Loose some parking?.....so be it.

That leaves the question of surface .vs. tunnel open to costs and negotiation,
esp. if OC-T co-ordinated planning a T-Line extension past Zibi/Chaudiere through/under/to the north end of Portage Br., a natural intersect/station.

And if the Gat line runs the Portage Br., it could drive through or dive under the interchange to the SJAM intersection, or dive just to the south to head for Sparks and Lyon/Parl.
(Surface to Lyon/Parl will not be tolerated, and the additional cost will have to be ponied up by the Feds, as neither Prov will consider it, reasonably.)

So if Ott and Gat negotiate a STO to Lyon/Parl,
in conjunction with a T-Line to Chaudiere/Portage,
and if the Feds rebuild Alexandra to include LRT/MUP, allowing STO to Rideau at the Chateau,
(or deeper to allow a turn to join the STO at Lyon/Parl, but that's a really big IF, and again, surface just ain't gonna pass)......

Oh the Dreams of actual co-operation and planning.....!!!!

EnJoy!

[Acajack]

Mathieu Fleury is pissed at STO/Gatineau apparently. I'll try to find a link.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Mathieu Fleury is pissed at STO/Gatineau apparently. I'll try to find a link.

There's a piece in Le Droit.

[PHrenetic]

Good Day.

"Mathieu Fleury vilifies Gatineau and is snubbed by Watson" (translated)

https://www.ledroit.com/actualites/g...f79218d830efd8

It seems he's walking (talking) a nest of conflicting roles and interests, without being on the inside of the discussions between Gat and Ott. Nothing new about that.

EnJoy!

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Chemin d'Aylmer's 20-25 lateral metres is enough for surface LRT, with 1-2 meters of expropriation necessary at stations or for turning lanes in the narrower sections. But as there are very few buildings that close to the road, it isn't a huge hurdle.



Alexandre-Taché (where it falls back to 3 lanes, or 15-ish metres) is a tougher cookie. But the STO's 1B variant overcomes that by shifting the ROW onto the old railway along Lucerne between Zibi and Val-Tétreau, completely bypassing the problematically narrow section of Taché.

I hope you do you do realize they have other options that they are considering.

http://www.sto.ca/fileadmin/user_upl...rio-H1_imp.pdf

That scenario comes close to what Kitchissppi suggested and this is one im willing to support.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

Good Day.

"Mathieu Fleury vilifies Gatineau and is snubbed by Watson" (translated)

https://www.ledroit.com/actualites/g...f79218d830efd8

It seems he's walking (talking) a nest of conflicting roles and interests, without being on the inside of the discussions between Gat and Ott. Nothing new about that.

EnJoy!

Article updated to add Jim Watson saying that Mathieu Fleury is out to lunch.

[J.OT13]

Watson has always talked about crossing the Trillium Line over the PoW. He never mentioned using it to cross the STO towards Ottawa. So this is no surprise.

[Multi-modal]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

I hope you do you do realize they have other options that they are considering.

http://www.sto.ca/fileadmin/user_upl...rio-H1_imp.pdf

That scenario comes close to what Kitchissppi suggested and this is one im willing to support.

Scenario H1 and H2 really cover a lot more of Hull. I either prefer H1 or T1 I think. Not sure yet, lots of information to parse (and my french is very poor).

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Multi-modal

Scenario H1 and H2 really cover a lot more of Hull. I either prefer H1 or T1 I think. Not sure yet, lots of information to parse (and my french is very poor).

I agree with H1 or H2 for the far superior coverage. It might also end up cheaper than the T option which is what the City had proposed. I really hope they end up finishing the downtown loop by crossing a second time at Alexandra.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Multi-modal

Scenario H1 and H2 really cover a lot more of Hull. I either prefer H1 or T1 I think. Not sure yet, lots of information to parse (and my french is very poor).

I've mentioned before that the variants that only use the Alexandre-Taché route at some point (by taking the northern Plateau routing southwards down St-Raymond) are borderline unacceptable as they leave the vast majority of Hull's population in the lurch with no rapid transit likely to be provided to them for decades. (Rapibus in its current - definitive - configuration only serves a small part of Hull.)

[le calmar]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I've mentioned before that the variants that only use the Alexandre-Taché route at some point (by taking the northern Plateau routing southwards down St-Raymond) are borderline unacceptable as they leave the vast majority of Hull's population in the lurch with no rapid transit likely to be provided to them for decades. (Rapibus in its current - definitive - configuration only serves a small part of Hull.)

This reminds me of the dense and mature central neighbourhoods in Ottawa that will end up with no access to rapid transit for decades while all the distant suburbs will be serviced. The Alexandre-Taché and St-Raymond corridor lacks the density imo, there is a lot of single family homes with large parcels there whereas a LRT running along Allumettières could help rejuvenate the area similarly to what happned to Maisonneuve.

[Aylmer]

One thing which I think is under-appreciated (and 'under-measured') is that a rapid transit project is more than only a question of commercial speed and coverage. The placement of infrastructure will determine where and how development will happen, and where it won't. So it's of particular importance as to where and how we want development to happen.

I think that this is an aspect of the Confederation Line which was somewhat neglected, and Ottawa will find itself trying to develop around stations in almost undevelopable areas between onramps beside the convenient-to-build Queensway sections, while by-passing or barely grazing those corridors which could've used the growth.

Essentially, let's build transit for the city we want, not build the city around the convenience of construction.

For Gatineau, I believe this means that existing nodes need to be served (Vieux-Aylmer, UQO/Val-Tétreau, Plateau Smart Centre), and that their corridors (Chemin d'Aylmer/Principale, Boul. Plateau, Taché) should be prioritized for transit and development in order to further strengthen them. These should be corridors which can, over time, become dense, pedestrian-oriented main streets.

I am deeply skeptical of routings on Allumettières and Maisonneuve because these are car corridors whose purpose is incompatible with the kind of dense development and slow speeds which transit-oriented development requires. The best you could end up with is a sort of unhappy middle which is too auto-oriented to be pleasant, but too dense to be convenient for cars. Worse still, the competition with the existing nodes would do no favours to them. The result is middling new nodes and degrading old nodes, a shit-to-drive-on Chemin d'Aylmer and a shit-to-drive-on Allumettières, and 'just-okay' transit service down both. Like lukewarm beer or a half-dried grape, sometimes going down the middle makes no one happy. I think it's preferable for us to have excellent transit/ped-oriented corridors building on existing nodes, and to leave Maisonneuve and Allumettières for quick car access.

Coverage, speed, and other infrastructure metrics are important. However, we shouldn't lose track of the fact that LRT is a city-building project, not just an infrastructure project. And I strongly believe that the B1/T1 routing accomplishes that, regardless of the technology.

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

I hope you do you do realize they have other options that they are considering.

I don't know what tone this is supposed to convey.