Confederation Line East LRT Extension (Stage 2) [Blair to Trim] | U/C

[J.OT13]

All 21 girders along the 174 flyover have all been installed over 4 nights.




https://twitter.com/AllanHubley_23/s...08492196696066

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Wouldn’t this dramatically reduce its capacity at peak hours and needlessly slow traffic at medium and off hours?

Actually no. Speed has little to no effect on a road's capacity. Spacing between cars is time based, not distance based. The faster the cars, the more space is needed between them. Assuming no stop signs or stop lights, a road with a speed limit of 50 km/h has nearly the same capacity as a road with a 100 km/h speed limit.

Also seems a bit dangerous.

If all they did was change the speed limit but not change the road design, it would likely create a dangerous situation. If you change the design of the road to make traveling fast feel uncomfortable, people will naturally want to slow down.

I remember once driving on the Coquihalla Highway in BC (which has a speed limit of 110 km/h) once, and driving 110 on it felt much less comfortable than driving 120 (or faster) on the Queensway or over 140 on the Autobahn.

I have driven on highways that turn into 70 zones and then back to 120 but that is usually because of cross traffic or lights so unavoidable. It also is usually a source of gridlock.

It is the traffic lights that are causing the gridlock, not the speed reduction. Having cars stopped, waiting for the light to turn green significantly reduces capacity.

[RogueNacho]

Would it not have been better to have the tracks go underground instead of over? By going down and under the highway and the on/off ramps at Blair, the track could have been kept much straighter, thus improving speed and reducing wear/tear going around the awkward curves.

[Har13]

Originally Posted by RogueNacho

Would it not have been better to have the tracks go underground instead of over? By going down and under the highway and the on/off ramps at Blair, the track could have been kept much straighter, thus improving speed and reducing wear/tear going around the awkward curves.

Short tunnels are not cost effective. But I do agree with your point.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by RogueNacho

Would it not have been better to have the tracks go underground instead of over? By going down and under the highway and the on/off ramps at Blair, the track could have been kept much straighter, thus improving speed and reducing wear/tear going around the awkward curves.

They could have done a lot of things to make that route more efficient, but you know, cost cutting.

Had the trains crossed to the median at Jasmine Park, it would have been a more natural/smooth transition than Gloucester high school.

Then there's this value-engineering nightmare that will place significant strain on trains for decades to come:


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...tawa-1.3506075

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by RogueNacho

Would it not have been better to have the tracks go underground instead of over? By going down and under the highway and the on/off ramps at Blair, the track could have been kept much straighter, thus improving speed and reducing wear/tear going around the awkward curves.

Better? Yes, but at what cost? I think this is cheaper than a tunnel or even a really long angled bridge for the highway.

[passwordisnt123]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

All 21 girders along the 174 flyover have all been installed over 4 nights.




https://twitter.com/AllanHubley_23/s...08492196696066

These are great pics. But every time I see this flyover I'm reminded of just how much the city went out of its way to spite the poor people who live in the Jasmine Cres. area. I get that the city didn't want to build a stop at Jasmine Cres. but putting the flyover where they did is like deliberately salting the earth so nothing can ever grow there. They've basically all but guaranteed no stop will be built for those people. Orleans people won't ever need to worry about Jasmine Cres. people getting on their train.

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by passwordisnt123

These are great pics. But every time I see this flyover I'm reminded of just how much the city went out of its way to spite the poor people who live in the Jasmine Cres. area. I get that the city didn't want to build a stop at Jasmine Cres. but putting the flyover where they did is like deliberately salting the earth so nothing can ever grow there. They've basically all but guaranteed no stop will be built for those people. Orleans people won't ever need to worry about Jasmine Cres. people getting on their train.

Good Day.
Quite correct. The approx. 3 km. between Blair Rd. and Montreal Rd. stations should have allowed for a Jasmine Cr. station, and it would have if the original concept of tunnels under Blair Rd. and its ramps with the 174 had been used, along with a bus-over-rail Blair station and the transition much closer to Montreal station (, -or -, could have used a rail-under-174 to median transition where they are at(half-sunken rail cut-and-tunnel, half-raised westbound 174 bump-and-bridge)), and permitted a well-distanced Jasmine station between Blair and Montreal. And cut down the wear-and-tear and wheel-grind noise with a straighter alignment. But, as noted above, the cost was evaluated as much, much more.

Now.... the best that could have been considered would have been a station to the east of the flyover, and after the curve, at the area of the triangle of 174/Laporte/EastAcres. This is approx. 2 km. east of Blair, and 1 km. west of Montreal station - doable, but questionable by the powers-that-be for "reasons" of placement/practicality/engineering/operations/yadda/yadda/yadda.
(And my opinion for those who would have a station to the east side of Blair Rd. and station, west of the flyover - no way. It would be too too close to Blair, and they are not going to loose an operational element of that pocket short turnback track.)

Conclusion - no Jasmine station - ever.

[Harley613]

174 Flyover Today
Photo_6553848_DJI_248_jpg_4198178_0_202154133520_photo_original by harley613, on Flickr

[waterloowarrior]

Great shot Harley... some classic Gloucester architecture in the background ...

[TransitZilla]

From the Montreal-Blair Transit Corridor presentation- the city is evaluating locations for a bus loop at Montreal Rd. station.



(From slide 13 of this deck: https://documents.ottawa.ca/sites/do..._boards_en.pdf [PDF])

Online consultation on the Blair-Montreal project is now open until June 11.
https://ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/publi...c-consultation

[J.OT13]

Site 1 seems to be the pretty clear winner. Site 3 is way out of the way. Site 2 would require expropriation, and it's on the small side. Site 1 is already being used as a Stage 2 site office. Seems like a no brainer.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Site 1 seems to be the pretty clear winner. Site 3 is way out of the way. Site 2 would require expropriation, and it's on the small side. Site 1 is already being used as a Stage 2 site office. Seems like a no brainer.

Agree.

Site 3 looks like it was just included so they can say they considered alternatives. Appears very random.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Site 1 seems to be the pretty clear winner. Site 3 is way out of the way. Site 2 would require expropriation, and it's on the small side. Site 1 is already being used as a Stage 2 site office. Seems like a no brainer.

The question is how much area do they need for layup bays for 3-5 buses and an operator facility with washrooms? I wish they could use the wasted space inside one of the two cloverleafs. Even better, it is too bad they didn't reconfigure the Montreal Rd exchange as a diverging diamond interchange to avoid those cloverleafs altogether and have a centre platform for the buses.

Originally Posted by bradnixon

Site 3 looks like it was just included so they can say they considered alternatives. Appears very random.

Agreed!

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by roger1818

The question is how much area do they need for layup bays for 3-5 buses and an operator facility with washrooms? I wish they could use the wasted space inside one of the two cloverleafs. Even better, it is too bad they didn't reconfigure the Montreal Rd exchange as a diverging diamond interchange to avoid those cloverleafs altogether and have a centre platform for the buses.

Agreed!

Probably not much space for now but all things considered just take the extra space for now.

As for location id suggest the south west side of the highway where the bus ramp was.... Though I'd also have put a small transfer station there and connected the LRT station to it instead of under the highway platforms

As for divergent diamond, how well would that work with where the platforms are and his doors?

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

As for divergent diamond, how well would that work with where the platforms are and his doors?

With a diverging diamond interchange, the vehicles end up driving on the left side of the road on the overpass/underpass, so the regular bus doors would be towards the median. They also need a large median anyway, so might as well use that as a shared platform. The other advantage is the buses at the stop will be kept away from the merging traffic.


Image curtesy of the Wisconsin DOT

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by roger1818

With a diverging diamond interchange, the vehicles end up driving on the left side of the road on the overpass/underpass, so the regular bus doors would be towards the median. They also need a large median anyway, so might as well use that as a shared platform.


Image curtesy of the Wisconsin DOT

So a elevator column and stairs in the middle of the LRT platforms.... Which would significantly widen them.

And users would be stuck in that island waiting for lights so that they can leave the station to say the industrial park.

Doable but maybe not the best idea.

[J.OT13]

Even basic on/off ramps would have been a huge improvement. I can't for the life of me understand why we would still need a massive clover interchange at this location post-Stage 2.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

So a elevator column and stairs in the middle of the LRT platforms.... Which would significantly widen them.

And users would be stuck in that island waiting for lights so that they can leave the station to say the industrial park.

Doable but maybe not the best idea.

First of all I suspect Montreal Rd will be more of a transfer station than a local access station. For the few that will be walking to/from the station, have a look at the existing diagram a few posts back and you will see that you will have to cross both an on ramp and an off ramp using uncontrolled crosswalks. For the latter, many of the drivers will not be watching where they are going as the are looking over their shoulder as they merge onto the road. At least with the traffic light you will have the right of way with no turning vehicles to worry about.

Stations in the middle of a highway interchange are never optimal.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by roger1818

TEven better, it is too bad they didn't reconfigure the Montreal Rd exchange as a diverging diamond interchange to avoid those cloverleafs altogether and have a centre platform for the buses.

I can understand the appeal of the DDI seeming like an elegant solution with a centre bus platform, but DDIs are not exactly known for being pedestrian friendly. I'm OK with a more standard configuration in this spot.

• Video Link

EDIT: This example of a bus stop in the centre of a DDI also doesn't seem particularly welcoming or a pleasant place to wait for a bus: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9571...7i16384!8i8192