Sandy Hill Truck Tunnel

[Uhuniau]

Rather a steep price to keep the Manor Park NIMBY cell happy.

How about building the bridge, extending the O-Train over the PoW bridge, and building some proper transit on the Rideau-Montreal corridor with that money instead?

[acottawa]

This makes no sense whatsoever. Hopefully with new provincial and federal representation the bridge will be back on the table.

[passwordisnt123]

This whole Sandy Hill truck tunnel thing has been one huge distraction from way more important issues. I've been scratching my head from day one as to how so many people (including some very smart people I often agree with on other issues in this forum) bought into the notion that this was a good use of a year's worth of time and nearly a million dollars in research.

City Hall also explored this option under Larry O'Brien, if memory serves, and it was concluded then too just as it was re-confirmed today that a Boston-style "Big Dig" truck tunnel is simply not economically feasible.

I'm all for increasing connectivity between Gatineau and Ottawa. I'm also all for getting trucks off our city streets downtown as much as possible. But, for what it's worth, we should consider that for $2 billion dollars, we could have built an uneconomical truck tunnel through Sandy Hill to accomplish this task and the end result would have been a bottle neck on the MacDonald-Cartier bridge. OR, for $1.6 billion, we could have built the Kettle Island Bridge AND also paid for all the infrastructure on both sides of the river AND that cost would have been divided amongst two cities and the feds AND we would have ended up with a whole new crossing of the Ottawa river over and above all of that.

Oh, edit: ... AND the Kettle Island bridge would have been a crossing that vehicles carrying hazardous materials could have actually used unlike the Sandy Hill truck tunnel because regulations prohibit those trucks from using tunnels.

[Acajack]

Still scratching my head at the eastern end of that routing.

Why force traffic off the 417 to the Vanier Pkwy for 200 m and create a huge bottleneck at the westward extension of Coventry Rd?

If they are going to stick to this general routing, why not just builld a new exit and interchange just west of the RCMP and cross the Rideau River there?

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by passwordisnt123

This whole Sandy Hill truck tunnel thing has been one huge distraction from way more important issues. I've been scratching my head from day one as to how so many people (including some very smart people I often agree with on other issues in this forum) bought into the notion that this was a good use of a year's worth of time and nearly a million dollars in research.

City Hall also explored this option under Larry O'Brien, if memory serves, and it was concluded then too just as it was re-confirmed today that a Boston-style "Big Dig" truck tunnel is simply not economically feasible.

I'm all for increasing connectivity between Gatineau and Ottawa. I'm also all for getting trucks off our city streets downtown as much as possible. But, for what it's worth, we should consider that for $2 billion dollars, we could have built an uneconomical truck tunnel through Sandy Hill to accomplish this task and the end result would have been a bottle neck on the MacDonald-Cartier bridge. OR, for $1.6 billion, we could have built the Kettle Island Bridge AND also paid for all the infrastructure on both sides of the river AND that cost would have been divided amongst two cities and the feds AND we would have ended up with a whole new crossing of the Ottawa river over and above all of that.

Oh, edit: ... AND the Kettle Island bridge would have been a crossing that vehicles carrying hazardous materials could have actually used unlike the Sandy Hill truck tunnel because regulations prohibit those trucks from using tunnels.

A few points:

-I think this exercise has been worth it, although the routing is certainly different than I would have expected and the cost a bit higher (I would have thought the routing would have been via Nicholas with a portal near Laurier).

-The link you posted indicated the cost of the Kettle Island crossing is 1.2B, not 1.6B as you mentioned. So the cost difference is 500-800M.

-As I recall, the Kettle Island bridge was not expected to divert a significant number of trucks from King Edward because it is too far east. Downtown truck traffic is the main problem we are trying to solve, so we need to consider how effective each solution is at addressing it.

[YOWflier]

What a tragedy if this thing gets built and doesn't integrate directly with the 417.

[Horus]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Still scratching my head at the eastern end of that routing.

Why force traffic off the 417 to the Vanier Pkwy for 200 m and create a huge bottleneck at the westward extension of Coventry Rd?

If they are going to stick to this general routing, why not just builld a new exit and interchange just west of the RCMP and cross the Rideau River there?

Or at least if they could align the entrance to the 417 w/b offramp at Vanier, then trucks and traffic would only need to clear a single traffic light to access that route.

As suggested by a friend, I think we should refer to the project as the Sandy Hill Interprovincial Truck Tunnel, or SHITT for short.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

A few points:



-As I recall, the Kettle Island bridge was not expected to divert a significant number of trucks from King Edward because it is too far east. Downtown truck traffic is the main problem we are trying to solve, so we need to consider how effective each solution is at addressing it.

That can be solved pretty easily by putting a no trucks sign on some or all of the downtown bridges.

The study says truck traffic is 65% through and 35% local, although I suspect a lot of that "local" traffic is not local to downtown but to industrial and warehouse areas in the suburbs (which would be better served by a bridge).

[waterloowarrior]

Councillor Tobi Nassbaum's reaction (concerns re: 417 connection and that many trucks would still be downtown)
http://www.tobinussbaum.ca/news-even...rse-correction

[Aylmer]

I think that we could do a lot for a lot less than 2 billion dollars. The way I see it, the problem with Lowertown is much less a problem of heavy traffic flow or volume (it's just as congested there as it is anywhere else), but rather a problem of design; Rideau, Waller and King Edward are urban arteries with highway designs which frustrate drivers, kill the occasional pedestrian and constitute a nuisance for nearby residents. With the tunnel, the situation would be the same, minus fewer than 2 trucks per minute at peak. King Edward will still be a hellhole, Rideau will still be perilous and no one in their right mind will spend more time than they need to on Waller.

If the tunnel were a few hundred million, then sure, why not. But for $2B, it had better make Lowertown into Shangri-La, and I don't see anything to indicate that it would. At 65% of trucks and 25k vehicles per day, it seems more like a very expensive yet only mildly effective 'solution' to Lowertown's traffic problems. The way I think about it, $2B is 8 km of underground LRT, enough for the Bank St. Line (4km to Billings) and Rideau St. Line (4km to St-Laurent) combined, both of which would transport MUCH more than 25k people per day and improve traffic conditions for countless neighbourhoods, including Lowertown.


Instead, I think that some of the following measures would achieve much of the same without such a heavy waste of public funds:

- Apply a truck charge to the interprovincial bridges to incentivize off-peak use of certain truck sizes.

- Reduce the design speed of the arteries in Lowertown to about 40 km/h. This not only makes the streets safer for all users, but that is also the speed at which you can attain the highest peak flow, allowing for more people to move steadily along instead of just rushing from red light to red light.

- Redesign King Edward to reduce the number of allowed turns and the number of lanes to help traffic flow and make the street less of an eyesore. Just with its current width, we could turn it into a much nicer street with comparable flow.

- Consider digging a short, shallow truck tunnel from King Edward to Waller (from about George to Daly or about 400m) to bypass the sharp intersections on Rideau which large trucks can't easily take.


I think that these measures would be much more efficient at mitigating the effects of traffic for much, MUCH less than $2B. In the real world, we've got to make choices which get the biggest bang for the least buck. But the way things are looking now, the SHITT is looking like the biggest bucks for very little bang.

[passwordisnt123]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

A few points:

-I think this exercise has been worth it, although the routing is certainly different than I would have expected and the cost a bit higher (I would have thought the routing would have been via Nicholas with a portal near Laurier).

-The link you posted indicated the cost of the Kettle Island crossing is 1.2B, not 1.6B as you mentioned. So the cost difference is 500-800M.

-As I recall, the Kettle Island bridge was not expected to divert a significant number of trucks from King Edward because it is too far east. Downtown truck traffic is the main problem we are trying to solve, so we need to consider how effective each solution is at addressing it.

You're right, it is $1.2 billion for the Kettle Island Bridge in the source I linked to, not $1.6 billion as I'd written. Good catch, thanks. This does make my point even stronger though. Also, not only would it be cheaper in absolute terms but the Kettle Island Bridge cost would be shared with other levels of government so that would make it even cheaper still for Ottawa residents.

In terms of your second point about diverting traffic, it's true, there were some discussions about how much traffic would be naturally diverted by the Kettle Island Bridge when that issue was being discussed. I frankly think this point is a bit silly as well because cities already have tools at their disposal to force trucks to divert from the path of least resistance when they want to force them to take a different route. One of these tools cities have at their disposal usually looks like this:

[passwordisnt123]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Instead, I think that some of the following measures would achieve much of the same without such a heavy waste of public funds:

- Apply a truck charge to the interprovincial bridges to incentivize off-peak use of certain truck sizes.

- Reduce the design speed of the arteries in Lowertown to about 40 km/h. This not only makes the streets safer for all users, but that is also the speed at which you can attain the highest peak flow, allowing for more people to move steadily along instead of just rushing from red light to red light.

- Redesign King Edward to reduce the number of allowed turns and the number of lanes to help traffic flow and make the street less of an eyesore. Just with its current width, we could turn it into a much nicer street with comparable flow.

I'm all for reducing the speeds as you suggest but I suspect there is no way in hell the City of Ottawa is going to allow a redesign of King Edward right after they just finished redesigning it. The paint is practically still wet.

- Consider digging a short, shallow truck tunnel from King Edward to Waller (from about George to Daly or about 400m) to bypass the sharp intersections on Rideau which large trucks can't easily take.

That alignment has already been explored and found lacking. It fell within the area of this very study.



Also, for what it's worth, a shallow tunnel in the instance of that specific alignment likely wouldn't work as it would slam into the Confederation Line. Gotta think three-dimensionally with this stuff because that z-axis will get you every time. I suspect that may be the reason why that alignment wasn't found to be feasible.

[Mikeed]

I would really like to love this project- so that's my bias. But it is a hard sell. The Pro's I'd like to contribute is:

The existing infrastructure of the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge is under utilized due to limitations in the road design. It was built from '63-65 after design work started in the mid-50's. It was suppose to across the Rideau river and link up with the Vanier Parkway and the 417, but this was canceled when it would have destroyed most of New Edinburgh Park - you can still see the half constructed bridge spans in the water and can clearly imagine the routing in Google Earth. I would like to see the existing assets we have utilized to their full potential.

This is primarily in my mind dealing with interprovincial traffic (with significant truck traffic) through the downtown core of Ottawa and fixing a missing link that has turned what should be the 'Young and Dundas' Sq. of Ottawa into a horrible traffic sewer that continues to hold back the a vital area of the future of Ottawa - the King Edward / Rideau / Market / Sandy Hill axis.

Building a bridge in the East, I do not believe will do anything to improve the issues that are facing this axis, which when looking at the long term/big picture, is vital to the future evolution towards a more dense, more livable city.

The legacies of the King Edward Expressway and the essentially interprovincial freeway the Vanier Parkway are what holds this area back.

Focusing on a Rideau subway to do this is not realistic in my opinion. The bridge in the East wouldn't do that.

Spending 2B and more to probably fix these issues 50 year old issues, would be worth it- if it is the first step in returning this core axis into a walkable urban community. This in of itself going to be 25-50 year process.

My stipulations are:
- the tunnel needs to be an interprovincial link between the two East/West highways for all kinds of traffic,
- tolling must be on the table,
- the Feds, Provinces, NCC and City all need to be working together.

I can also imagine possibly the South portal being squeezed into the ROW of the Vanier Parkway after the first intersection.



If It was 50 years ago, maybe I would have just punched a full expressway through New Edinburgh Park and down the Vanier Parkway- but wouldn't that be making the mistake of the canceled King Edward Expressway, or the Spadina?

All I know is the Feds are lining up to make it rain infrastructure money.

Also think about how this project could work with initiatives to turn Lees into a true TOD that isn't a eyeshore and disaster, how King Edward south is an important TOD opportunity and should be a walkable street linking the southern campus of uOttawa.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by acottawa

This makes no sense whatsoever. Hopefully with new provincial and federal representation the bridge will be back on the table.

Heck, with Madeleine Meilleur gone the provincial government is a lot more neutral on this issue.

I don't think the federal government really cares about it all.

At this point, it would be the City government, which has firmly rejected any plans for a bridge, that would be the main bottleneck with going back.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by MaxHeadroom

Sad that they were not able to incorporate a direct connection to the 417. Therefore, in my opinion this whole project is pointless.

The 417 connection is easy enough; there's a roundabout at the new intersection with Vanier Parkway so traffic will flow well to exit 117.

A fully free flowing interchange to the 417 is probably not possible anywhere in the area.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by passwordisnt123

I'm all for reducing the speeds as you suggest but I suspect there is no way in hell the City of Ottawa is going to allow a redesign of King Edward right after they just finished redesigning it. The paint is practically still wet.

Normally, I'd agree with you. However, $2B can make anyone reconsider just about anything.

That alignment has already been explored and found lacking. It fell within the area of this very study.

I'm not certain if it has, tbh. All the possibilities I have seen have portals further down and further up and are meant as underground highways, not as a low-speed underground bypass. Then again, I may be mistaken.

Also, for what it's worth, a shallow tunnel in the instance of that specific alignment likely wouldn't work as it would slam into the Confederation Line. Gotta think three-dimensionally with this stuff because that z-axis will get you every time. I suspect that may be the reason why that alignment wasn't found to be feasible.

I hadn't thought about LRT. Now that I do, however I still think it works since LRT is both much deeper on the Z axis (at Daly/Waller, it's still about 30m below) and only tangencial on the X-Y axis (LRT curves east from Waller from about Daly). I don't think you have to go deep at all; essentially just cut and cover under George or Rideau with a depth of 5 meters or so, 10 at most. It would be more of an underground street than underground highway: A two-lane tunnel with a low speed limit and turns which are less sharp than the streets above, but not highway curves for high speeds. But it allows for large trucks to avoid the dangerous turns onto/off of Rideau.

[zzptichka]

With both Meilleur and Belanger gone it will be interesting to see what stance new MP and MPP will take.
This will definitely be one of the major by-election issues.

[rocketphish]

Oh geez... let's just move the problem and create a new bottleneck somewhere else. A truck traffic roundabout (with signalized pedestrian crossings?) is an excellent way to just block up the roads in a different neighbourhood.




I agree with those of you who believe that if this tunnel doesn't directly link to Hwy 417, it's a waste of time and a huge waste of money.

The northern end of the proposed alignment looks fine, but why not change the orientation of the southern end and link it directly into the Queensway via Robinson Field? Funny that they didn't even consider this option in the Feasibility Study:

[passwordisnt123]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

I'm not certain if it has, tbh. All the possibilities I have seen have portals further down and further up and are meant as underground highways, not as a low-speed underground bypass. Then again, I may be mistaken.

It has. You can read the report and all the problems with that alignment here starting at around page 9 and again around page 27.

https://documents.ottawa.ca/sites/do...ibility_en.pdf

And Waller is the exit point of the Confederation Line tunnel so it's not at full depth there, it's actually rising out which is one of the many reasons the Waller and Nicholas alignments won't work as easily as people think they will.

I'd also reiterate that this isn't the first time this has been studied and found to be uneconomical. I hope that this study finally puts any notion of this absurd truck tunnel to bed once and for all. Yes, it seems tempting in theory but $1 million dollars worth of research re-confirms that it just isn't worth it.

[passwordisnt123]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

Oh geez... let's just move the problem and create a new bottleneck somewhere else. A truck traffic roundabout (with signalized pedestrian crossings?) is an excellent way to just block up the roads in a different neighbourhood.




I agree with those of you who believe that if this tunnel doesn't directly link to Hwy 417, it's a waste of time and a huge waste of money.

The northern end of the proposed alignment looks fine, but why not change the orientation of the southern end and link it directly into the Queensway via Robinson Field? Funny that they didn't even consider this option in the Feasibility Study:

I think we should probably exercise little bit of humility here. I'd imagine the team of experts who looked at the subject were probably pretty thorough and looked pretty exhaustively.

The study took 1 year and cost almost $1 million and was conducted by an entire engineering team looking at the geological and infrastructure impediments but we honestly think that in 30 minutes we can come up with an elegant solution that eluded a full-time team of experts on the subject?