Alexandra Bridge replacement | Proposed

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Again, it's an 80/20 thing. Tunnelling under the river would likely result in easier transfers to Ottawa's LRT.

Tunnelling under the river also means long approach slopes that mean the closest stations to the river shore will be well inland, making the system, yet again, as useless as possible for transit service in the core.

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Tunnelling under the river also means long approach slopes that mean the closest stations to the river shore will be well inland, making the system, yet again, as useless as possible for transit service in the core.

Tunnelling on the Portage/Lebreton side has less of a level change between either shore and the river is shallow. The geology is likely good for tunnelling, waterfalls and rapids usually happen in spots where rock is tougher for the water to erode. The reason the downtown tunnel had to dip far below the canal was there is too much built environment and sensitive structures around. It's mostly greenspace on the other side.

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Again, it's an 80/20 thing. Tunnelling under the river would likely result in easier transfers to Ottawa's LRT. A surface loop would likely result in more capacity and access to more destinations. But there's a legitimate question as to whether, say, shaving [x] number of minutes would be worth [x] hundreds of millions. The Alexandra/Plaza option scores high in terms of value: Although it's not the best transportation-wise, it provides adequate transportation at a cost which is likely much, much lower than the alternatives, considering that much of the infrastructure necessary for it is either there (ROW, station cavern) or going to be rebuilt anyways (Alexandra Bridge).

But of course, we're all talking in the abstract here. If you could save 5 minutes per trip for an extra $50M, it would be a no-brainer to go with the Portage option. If it turns out to be a 2 minute savings for $200M, perhaps less so. We just don't have the numbers here.

If you consider crossing greenspace no different from crossing water, the Alexandra bridge route is actually very long. The distance between a Plaza Bridge station to a Gatineau station would be well over a kilometre. A Lyon to Place d'Accueil link would be significantly less. I still maintain a Chateau-Rideau transfer is about 200 metres because the epicentre of Rideau Station is effectively at the vicinity of Freiman/William, a train-to-train transfer at Lyon could be done in 40 metres. There's a considerable commuting time and utility difference here.

This sort of reminds me of the old NSLRT situation where a line is being designed to give residents from a low-density suburb direct access to downtown, while the real needs of intra-core transit isn't really being addressed. This won't make it easier for Ottawans to get to a job in Gatineau, or for the bulk of people living in eastern Gatineau to go to work in Ottawa, which is either downtown or elsewhere along the LRT route, making efficient train-to-train transfers paramount.

As with the Confederation Line: Why place a cheap bet on a one-trick pony when you can double down on a versatile plow horse?

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

If you consider crossing greenspace no different from crossing water, the Alexandra bridge route is actually very long. The distance between a Plaza Bridge station to a Gatineau station would be well over a kilometre. A Lyon to Place d'Accueil link would be significantly less. I still maintain a Chateau-Rideau transfer is about 200 metres because the epicentre of Rideau Station is effectively at the vicinity of Freiman/William, a train-to-train transfer at Lyon could be done in 40 metres. There's a considerable commuting time and utility difference here.

You're arguing that the tunnel idea would result in faster trips. I've agreed before, and I'll do so again. There's no need to be defensive.
My point was never that it wasn't. It's simply that we need to evaluate to what extent it improves service, to what extent it costs more, and whether one is worth the other.

We've got to remember that, especially for a medium-sized city like Gatineau, we don't have the luxury of choosing between the good and the perfect - we choose between the good and nothing at all. If we could get the feds to pay for an interprovincial tunnel or loop, of course that's preferable - I completely agree. But if not, our options are the Alexandra/Plaza option or squat. Let's not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

[NOWINYOW]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Yes, that would do it. Since Ottawa will not have to pay for it, the "massively expensive" doesn't bother.

There's only one taxpayer. If Gatineau/Quebec are picking up the tab, you know there will be federal money as well. And Ottawa taxpayers contribute to federal as well. There are no large public projects anywhere in Canada that doesn't include taxes from citizens across the country.

[J.OT13]

This article could go in one of many threads. Since this discussion was launched by the Alexandra replacement process, I've opted to post on this page.

Building bridges between Ottawa and Gatineau



Toon Dreessen
Architects DCA
Ottawa Business Journal
May 24, 2019

Recent flooding has forced officials to close a vital link between Ottawa and Gatineau: the Chaudiere Crossing, parts of which date back more than 100 years.

To the east, the Alexandra Bridge – another critical interprovincial connection – is slated to close for renovations and is pushing 120 years old, having been adapted for cars after the removal of railway crossings two generations ago.

The Macdonald-Cartier Bridge, constructed in 1963, is a regular traffic snarl, connecting a highway in Gatineau with a boulevard in Ottawa, forcing truck traffic through a once-vital neighbourhood.

The Portage Bridge is from 1973, but is a poor truck route, since it is not connected to any major road systems in Ottawa suitable for the more than 3,000 trucks that cross the Ottawa River each day. With the exception of the pedestrian and bicycle boardwalk on the side of the Alexandra Bridge, none of these routes accommodates pedestrians or cyclists well, despite a 30 per cent increase in commuting by bike in the last decade.

It’s telling that none of these crossings are less than 40 years old, with most far older. And it’s no wonder: Building a new interprovincial bridge is likely a $1 billion exercise, and no one wants a new bridge in their backyard.

But earlier this year, the federal government announced funding for to update studies for a sixth interprovincial bridge – a surprise move that’s set to kick off a fresh round of contentious debates.

What to do?

Several years ago, the National Capital Commission determined that a new bridge at Kettle Island would be best, but this was opposed by municipal political leaders at the time and remains a non-starter with current politicians.

A tunnel is an expensive option – likely double the cost of a bridge – and may not be able to accommodate all the material that’s shipped by truck through our region, depending Ministry of Transportation regulations. It would also send a significant number of trucks down the Vanier Parkway from Highway 417, something that would affect surrounding communities at least as much, or more, than sending them down the Aviation Parkway to Kettle Island.

Closing our eyes to the problem isn’t going to work. We can wish for a day when we don’t have heavy truck traffic, but that’s unlikely to materialize in the near future.

We need to have a public conversation about the route that makes the most sense, and achieves the best result for the most people.

A strong vision for the capital

We cannot afford to wait for another generation to make the decision while more pedestrians and cyclists are killed on our streets.

Any new connection must have a high design quality, and create a positive pedestrian and cycling link, while serving as a gateway to our city.

We need a vision for how to route truck traffic, create streets for people and connect our communities. This could include:

• Investing in the Prince of Wales and Alexandra bridges as part of a continuous loop of transit, linking Ottawa, LeBreton Flats, the ByWard Market, museums, residential and commercial hubs with frequent, free, hop on/off services to benefit tourists and residents alike;
• Using the same loop, create strong pedestrian and cyclist networks to boost multi-modal ways for residents to work, play and shop;
• Terminate the truck route off-ramp and remove the Nicholas Bypass, rebuilding King Edward Avenue and reconnecting our communities, removing this scar on the landscape as a truncated highway through our city;
• Create at least one new bridge, and plan for the replacement of existing bridges, with a focus on the best public value for trucking routes, linked to existing highways and major industry;
• Set a vision for existing needs and growth so future generations have a roadmap, and funding, for bridge construction and repair;
• Establish a long-term design vision to connect our population growth projections with design vision for high quality, public investment in the built environment. This allows gradual funding, consensus building, and sustained planned growth to support a long term vision.

Design matters

When we design a bridge, we have to think about how it will function and last for the next 50 or 100 years.

We need to imagine how we can create sustainable reinvestment in our existing infrastructure to adapt to new uses and set safety, beauty and quality on equal or better footing with shaving a few minutes off a commute. We need to plan, create, fund and reinvest in our built infrastructure to create the society we aspire to.

We need to have public conversations on the role of the built environment in society, culture, the economy and environment. This is, in large part, the role of architects and purpose of an architecture policy for Canada (#riseforarchitecture). This can’t simply be a traffic engineering exercise, nor designed to the minimum standard.

We need to galvanize attention on action, not just more studies that fan the flames of division. The time is now.

Toon Dreessen is president of Ottawa-based Architects DCA and past-president of the Ontario Association of Architects. For a sample of Architects DCA’s projects, check out the firm’s portfolio at bit.ly/DCA-portfolio. Follow @ArchitectsDCA on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and Instagram.

https://obj.ca/article/building-brid...a-and-gatineau

[danishh]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

This article could go in one of many threads. Since this discussion was launched by the Alexandra replacement process, I've opted to post on this page.



https://obj.ca/article/building-brid...a-and-gatineau

reading in between the lines, he's saying build the kettle island bridge, rebuild POW and Alexanda for Rail/Ped/Bike (only?). Streetcar down Albert/Slater and Rue Laurier in Gatineau for the continuous transit loop (should be able to share ROW with normal traffic, like GTA, but would benefit from a dedicated ROW/streetcar lane)

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by danishh

reading in between the lines, he's saying build the kettle island bridge, rebuild POW and Alexanda for Rail/Ped/Bike (only?). Streetcar down Albert/Slater and Rue Laurier in Gatineau for the continuous transit loop (should be able to share ROW with normal traffic, like GTA, but would benefit from a dedicated ROW/streetcar lane)

The streetcar loop is what I have been advocating for quite a while but using exclusive lanes whenever possible. This could then be used for an STO LRT extension and would not require awkward transfers to the Confederation Line for those destined within downtown.

[J.OT13]

I agree with most of what is proposed in the article:

1. Build a new bridge that links the A50 and 417 in the east end as a new truck route and downtown bypass;
2. Narrow the Macdonald-Cartier to 4 lanes, using the two removed for pedestrians and cyclists;
3. Drop the tunnel. It's too expensive and too much risk involved;
4. Restore King-Edward into a tree-lined urban boulevard with mid-rise zoning;
5. Rebuild the Alexandra for double track STO (Rideau terminus), peds and bikes;
6. Restore or rebuild PoW for OC Transpo (Trillium Line to Zibi), peds and bikes.

The Confederation Line can, for now, complete the transit loop. Additional investment in surface rail would not be worth the high cost and could cause further conflict between all modes of transportation. If a loop were to be built, it should be on Sparks, and use the Chaudière crossing to joint the Trillium terminus at Zibi.

[NOWINYOW]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

[*]Narrow the Macdonald-Cartier to 4 lanes, using the two removed for pedestrians and cyclists;

I don't quite get the rationale for cutting lanes off the MC bridge. I live in that area. When I walk to Gatineau, it is far more pleasurable & scenic to walk Alexandra V MC. As well, there's really nothing at either end of MC from a Pedestrian POV nor any network of bike lanes / paths. However, IF a bridge further east ever gets built - which I seriously doubt in our lifetimes - then I could see MC getting downsized, but again, at what cost and for what value?

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by NOWINYOW

I don't quite get the rationale for cutting lanes off the MC bridge. I live in that area. When I walk to Gatineau, it is far more pleasurable & scenic to walk Alexandra V MC. As well, there's really nothing at either end of MC from a Pedestrian POV nor any network of bike lanes / paths. However, IF a bridge further east ever gets built - which I seriously doubt in our lifetimes - then I could see MC getting downsized, but again, at what cost and for what value?

I agree; in my proposal, re-configuring the MC Bridge is on the condition of a new bridge in the east end. If we don't build that new A50-417 bridge, then the MC has to be maintained as is. At the moment, King Edward is not a destination, but if the truck traffic were to be removed and the street tuned back into a tree-lined boulevard, then we might see more pedestrian and bike traffic.

[c_speed3108]

Sounds like she is in rough shape.

From the Ottawa Citizen...

'Worrisome' damage forces closure of Alexandra Bridge for about three weeks
Author of the article:
Tom Spears

7 hours ago • 2 minute read




The Alexandra Bridge had to be closed without warning last Friday after inspectors found a serious and unexpected flaw, a local MP says.

It will take an estimated three weeks to repair, and the bridge will remain closed to cars and trucks during that time. The lane for cyclists and pedestrians will, however, remain open.



The weak point also emphasizes that the 120-year-old bridge is nearing the end of its life, said Liberal Steve MacKinnon, who represents Gatineau.

“We have announced a life extension program that would sporadically, periodically get executed that would buy us basically six to 10 more years for that bridge,” said MacKinnon.

“That work involves obviously a large number of inspections. An inspection was done at the end of last week whereupon they strongly recommended to the department (Public Services and Procurement Canada) that the bridge be closed because they found a deformed piece of latticework in the structural part of the bridge. So, a very worrisome development.


“So the department decided to close the bridge for at least three weeks while that particular problem gets repaired.”

The latticework is a set of load-bearing beams that are arranged in a criss-cross pattern, and one of them has become deformed.

“This bridge needs to be replaced in that six-to-10-year window,” MacKinnon said. “It will need to be dismantled and replaced.”

“The government has booked the money to replace the bridge” but there is no design yet, he said.

“This (bridge) is being constantly inspected and there is constant reinforcement work going on,” he said.

“That work is usually foreseeable and planned and you’re able to do it by closing at night or closing one lane from time to time. In this case, no.” He said the deformity was “disquieting” and required a full closing.


Public Services and Procurement sent this message late Tuesday:

“A recent structural evaluation of the bridge (completed in March) revealed that due to the deterioration of several bridge members, load restrictions were required.

“A recent inspection revealed that certain of those bridge members required urgent temporary repair, resulting in the sequencing of some work activities being revised.

“To minimize disruptions, Public Services and Procurement Canada determined that the most effective way to complete this work was to close the bridge and begin work immediately.

“The bridge remains safe and accessible for pedestrians and cyclists but a full closure of the traffic lanes is required to complete this work.” This should be finished by May 24.

MacKinnon said the latest development also emphasizes the need to approve a sixth crossing of the Ottawa River, which would take truck traffic away from downtown instead of channeling it along King Edward Avenue.

tspears@postmedia.com

twitter.com//TomSpears1

[OTownandDown]

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

Sounds like she is in rough shape.

From the Ottawa Citizen...

A couple weeks ago I took advantage of the lack of traffic and walked out onto the cantilevering traffic lane on the east side. Quite a hair-raising experience, as the deck has far less material than you think when you're driving a car!

Anyways, vertigo aside, I was amazed at how much corrosion is happening to the steel below the deck. Didn't they just paint the thing a couple years ago?

[Aylmer]

If you have the chance, go and walk on the bridge. It's actually lovely to be able to walk and bike around without the noise from the cars. The centre deck feels completely different with the steel casing overhead.

I'll say it: I hope they keep it car-free. That bridge has such potential as a destination, and such marginal usefulness as a two-lane road. Imagine a reconstructed bridge where the entire deck was basically an extension of Jacques Cartier and Majors Hill parks? Not just space to walk and bike across, but lookouts to stop and sit. Weather protection under the truss. A "tavern-on-the-bridge" for people to grab a drink and a bite overlooking Parliament. It would be such an asset and a draw.

Even more practically, bridges without car lanes are magnitudes less expensive. Portland's Tilikum Crossing - of a similar size as the Alexandra Bridge - cost a paltry $180M CAD. And that included rails for streetcars, light rail, buses, emergency vehicles, and a stunning design with all sorts of bells and whistles. Compare that with the $1200M estimate for an unremarkable Kettle Island Bridge.

We've got a once-in-a-generation opportunity to build a crossing a stone's throw from Parliament. Let's not waste on two expensive and poorly-placed lanes when we could have an icon of a bridge for less.

[J.OT13]

Consultation on the Alexandra Bridge replacement, including a survey.

https://ncc-ccn.gc.ca/projects/alexa..._medium=social

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Consultation on the Alexandra Bridge replacement, including a survey.

https://ncc-ccn.gc.ca/projects/alexa..._medium=social

Alexandra Bridge Replacement

Background

The Alexandra Bridge is one of five interprovincial bridges in Canada’s Capital Region that link the cities of Ottawa, Ontario, and Gatineau, Quebec. The bridge spans the Ottawa River from Nepean Point, just west of Ottawa’s ByWard Market to the Canadian Museum of History in the Hull district of Gatineau. Its usage represents approximately 9 percent of the average daily interprovincial vehicle traffic in the Capital Region. The bridge is used by about 33 percent of all active mobility users (i.e. pedestrians, cyclists, users with mobility aids and so on) crossing the Ottawa River.

The bridge is a major national landmark. It is recognized for its iconic beauty and world-class workmanship. When completed in 1901, the bridge represented a momentous achievement in engineering. It was an early example of the use of poured concrete piers and the exclusive use of steel in bridge construction. It was, at the time, the fourth-longest bridge of its type in the world, and the largest structure entirely constructed of steel in North America. Canadian engineers and designers conceived and executed its design. In 1995, the bridge was designated a National Historic Civil Engineering Site by the Canadian Society for Civil Engineering. The bridge has had a long service life, which attests to the excellent quality of the craftsmanship and materials used in its construction.

The bridge is now reaching the end of its service life and is due for replacement. It is currently undergoing repairs, and will undergo more in 2022–2023 that will allow it to remain in service until it is replaced. Studies have found that it is no longer economical to maintain the 120-year-old structure. The Government of Canada announced in Budget 2019 that the bridge would be replaced within the next 10 years.

PSPC will be working in collaboration with the NCC on the design of the replacement bridge. The design and construction process will take place over an approximately 10-year period, and is part of a broader effort to improve interprovincial transportation in Canada’s Capital Region. Site work is scheduled to begin in 2028, and construction of the new bridge is expected to be completed by 2032.

Phase 1 consultation objectives

In the present phase of public consultation, we want to give you an opportunity to

• learn about the Alexandra Bridge replacement project
• share your thoughts and concerns about how you feel you may be affected by the project
• propose ideas to minimize any adverse effects and enhance any benefits that the project may have
• share your thoughts on design guidelines for the replacement of the Alexandra Bridge
• propose ideas as to how you think the history and built heritage of the Alexandra Bridge should be celebrated after its replacement

Description of the project and project stages

The replacement of the Alexandra Bridge will take place in the following three stages:

Pre-planning (2020–2021)

• Develop vision and design guidelines
• Public consultation 1: design guidelines, potential impacts and mitigation

Planning (2021–2025)

• Development of design options
• Public consultation 2: conceptual design options and evaluation
• Public consultation 3: preliminary design
• Public consultation 4: final design

Procurement and implementation (2025–2032)

• Procurement process to award design and construction contract
• Public consultation 5: final design and construction plan
• Final design and construction plan submitted to NCC board of directors
• Demolition and construction

The basic requirements for the bridge are the following:

1. Two lanes for vehicle traffic (one in each direction) that could — in the future — be adapted for public transit via a tram or light rail system.
   
2. One lane for active mobility (i.e. pedestrians, cyclists, users with mobility aids and so on) on the upstream (west) side of the bridge. The active mobility lane will be bidirectional, with separation of pedestrians and cyclists. The active mobility lane should include seating and viewing locations that provide rest points without compromising safety or obstructing users.
   
3. The traffic lanes and the active mobility lane will have a solid surface that will protect the bridge from the elements, de-icing products and dirt. This will allow for a longer-lasting structure.

The replacement of the Alexandra Bridge also presents a unique opportunity to reimagine this vital connection between Ottawa and Gatineau. Located at the heart of the Capital Region on the traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe, and offering one of the area’s most breathtaking views of Parliament, the new bridge will occupy a space rich in symbolism and history. In short, the bridge will have a functional purpose, but it will also represent something greater than the sum of its parts.

From the materials employed to build it, to its uses as a public space and its appearance, it will — like its predecessor — make a statement about the values and priorities of the times in which it was built. An important part of this stage of the project is therefore to provide a response to the following question: What does the Alexandra Bridge mean to us as residents of Canada’s Capital Region and as Canadians?

Vision and design guidelines

The vision for the new bridge is to create a bridge as a unique civic place, reflective of Canadian values and identity, and respectful of the integrity of the national capital’s cultural landscapes.

This vision is supported by the following draft design guidelines. You can click on any of the cards to learn more about the details of each category.

• Enhancing views and heritage
• Blend with the urban and mobility fabric
• Public spaces and civic experiences
• Structure, height and proportions
• Materials and sustainability
• Additional equipment

It is anticipated that the crossing will be closed to traffic, including active mobility, for approximately three to four years between 2028 and 2032. Careful consideration will be given to the impact that construction will have on all groups, including general traffic, traffic management operations in communities on either side of the river, public and private transit operators, emergency services, police departments, cyclists, pedestrians, and other institutional and commercial operators in the vicinity of the bridge.

Removal of the Alexandra Bridge and construction of the new bridge will be planned in a manner that optimizes health and safety, environmental protection, the principles of sustainable development, and waste management. It will also minimize the adverse effects of construction (e.g. noise, vibration, dust and so on) on nearby communities.

The project will be subject to the impact assessment process, overseen by the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC).

A separate Indigenous engagement approach will be conducted by the NCC and PSPC with the support of Innovation 7, an Indigenous-owned consulting firm.

[FutureWickedCity]

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo

There can be little doubt from that release that the new bridge will not be built as a replica of the old one. This is a tragedy of epic proportions, far worse in my opinion than the Chateau Laurier addition. I am inconsolable

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Consultation on the Alexandra Bridge replacement, including a survey.

https://ncc-ccn.gc.ca/projects/alexa..._medium=social

Thanks. I completed the survey. In case anyone is interested, here are the answers I used for the written answers:

Q. Please indicate which other impacts you are concerned about in the box below.
Ensuring that the new bridge includes dedicated transit lanes (bus or train) that aren't shared with automobiles.

Q. If you wish, please provide us with more details on why you are concerned about the issues you selected.
The long-term effects are far more important than the short term inconveniences, as the bridge will last much longer than the construction.

Q. What kind of measures would you like to see put in place to minimize any adverse effects the project might have?
A year round free shuttle (with bike racks), using bus lanes on the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge, to allow pedestrians and cyclists to travel between the two ends of the bridge during construction.

Q. What do you like most about the existing bridge?
The way the bridge emphasizes the strength and beauty of the triangle. It is arguably one of the most beautiful truss bridges and the new bridge should honour the original bridge’s design.

Q. What would you most want to see improved with the new bridge?
Better pedestrian, cycling and transit access.

Q. What, in your view, is the most important thing that the design of the new bridge should seek to highlight or reflect? Examples might include the surrounding landscape, the history of the Ottawa River, sustainability and so on.
Its interaction with Parliament Hill. The original bridge was built within 25 years of the completion of the structures on Parliament Hill and the two have lived beside each other for generations with the Alexandra bridge being included in many of the famous vantages of Parliament Hill include the bridge.

Q. How would you like to see the history and built heritage of the Alexandra Bridge commemorated after it is replaced?
A new bridge that properly honours the current design would be the best way. I would also support a publication that records its history for perpetuity, though it would be best as a free, online publication to make it accessible to everyone. The publication could include a Virtual Reality representation of the bridge and its surroundings.

Q. Having considered the different aspects of the project, what kind of benefits do you think that the replacement of the Alexandra Bridge will have?
If designed well, the new bridge should provide better connectivity between Central Ottawa and Hull by foot, bike and transit.

Q. Please share your thoughts with us in the box below.
Strong consideration should be given to removing cars entirely from the new Alexandra bridge. If cars are permitted, the focus should be on connectivity between Central Ottawa and Hull, not between Ontario and Quebec.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by FutureWickedCity

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo

There can be little doubt from that release that the new bridge will not be built as a replica of the old one. This is a tragedy of epic proportions, far worse in my opinion than the Chateau Laurier addition. I am inconsolable

I don't think it needs to be a replica, but I do think it should strongly honour the history and design of the original bridge. That is something the Chateau Laurier addition does not do.

[J.OT13]

Personally, I prefer a modern replacement to a historic bridge.

Hard to imagine what the new bridge could look like. A design similar to the Vedder Bridge in Chilliwack could be interesting.


https://www.bclocalnews.com/news/ved...or-chilliwack/

I'm hoping for something distinctive that doesn't take away from, or compete with other historic structures. Maybe a design that's more low-key than the current Alexandra while still adding visual interest.

I would prefer some sort of steel structure (arch, cantilever, truss) as opposed to a cable stayed to better tie in with the history of the crossing.