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

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

Nice shot of the fly-over.

So, they went to all the trouble of separating the OR-174 lanes wide apart, but built the LRT on one side. Why?

...............

Good Day.

I'm not sure, but I thought that the final alignment here had the 174 eastbound moved back over to beside the guideway at the end of construction. KEV still needs some workspace until then. IMO.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Why would that prevent new future stations from being built?

It would prevent the building of side platform stations in the future (the otherwise easiest in-fill station design) without a full shutdown of the line to re-align the rails (and the 174) to allow space for a station.
I agree with Richard Eade to this point; This is exactly what I am concerned about for the so-called 'future' stations of Jasmine Crescent and Tenth Line Rd.
They do not seem to have allowed space for the stations without future major, and otherwise unnecessary, complications.
-----------Future-Proofing.---------------
It brings into question the commitment to these future stations.

<sigh>

[nalnal]

Pretty jealous of the GO Expansion for Toronto that was just given a go ahead.

[AuxTown]

Originally Posted by nalnal

Pretty jealous of the GO Expansion for Toronto that was just given a go ahead.

Yes, but not jealous of the traffic congestion required to justify such HUGE investments into commuter transit....

[swimmer_spe]

[QUOTE=PHrenetic;9606226
It would prevent the building of side platform stations in the future (the otherwise easiest in-fill station design) without a full shutdown of the line to re-align the rails (and the 174) to allow space for a station.
I agree with Richard Eade to this point; This is exactly what I am concerned about for the so-called 'future' stations of Jasmine Crescent and Tenth Line Rd.
They do not seem to have allowed space for the stations without future major, and otherwise unnecessary, complications.
-----------Future-Proofing.---------------
It brings into question the commitment to these future stations.

<sigh>[/QUOTE]

Is there any reason they couldn't just leave the alignment of the rails as is, reroute the 174 to fit the infill and then build the station?

Originally Posted by nalnal

Pretty jealous of the GO Expansion for Toronto that was just given a go ahead.

It's what happens when you leave rail lines in place.....

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Is there any reason they couldn't just leave the alignment of the rails as is, reroute the 174 to fit the infill and then build the station?
.................

Good Day.

Fair Question.
Take a look at post #934 this thread from J.OT13, the last photo from the east end of the flyover looking west. They have pretty much already used all the space between property and the 174 westbound and the guideway.
The lines of these three elements continues eastward below the photo. It had been a squeeze already during the ramp construction to get the westbound lanes in there with constructor space, so IMHO, no - just plain no room left.
Plenty of space to the eastbound side as Richard Eade noted, but ....... . Beats me how they would finagle a station without moving rail.

As for a Tenth Line station - we have not seen how the alignment works in and about the bridge here, so - open question, but I have my severe doubts.
The 174 / guideway RoW had to be widened under all the other bridges, and ancilliary work done, so I see no reason Tenth Line would be any different.

And FYI to my previous post #987 this thread about where I had seen a more recent east schedule bar diagram, J.OT13 post #930 this thread from 2021 Dec 17 per Kate Porter CBC twitter.

EnJoy!

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Flyover between Blair Station, the current terminus, and Montreal Station, looking east (towards Blair Station).

This one?

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

Good Day.

Fair Question.
Take a look at post #934 this thread from J.OT13, the last photo from the east end of the flyover looking west. They have pretty much already used all the space between property and the 174 westbound and the guideway.
The lines of these three elements continues eastward below the photo. It had been a squeeze already during the ramp construction to get the westbound lanes in there with constructor space, so IMHO, no - just plain no room left.
Plenty of space to the eastbound side as Richard Eade noted, but ....... . Beats me how they would finagle a station without moving rail.

As for a Tenth Line station - we have not seen how the alignment works in and about the bridge here, so - open question, but I have my severe doubts.
The 174 / guideway RoW had to be widened under all the other bridges, and ancilliary work done, so I see no reason Tenth Line would be any different.

And FYI to my previous post #987 this thread about where I had seen a more recent east schedule bar diagram, J.OT13 post #930 this thread from 2021 Dec 17 per Kate Porter CBC twitter.

EnJoy!

So, between a park and a golf course? You are saying that the city could not expropriate 100M from either side and build a station? For that matter, why not expropriate part of the Costco and stick it there? There are lots of options to put it in without touching the tracks, but they may not be ideal.

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

This one?

So, between a park and a golf course? You are saying that the city could not expropriate 100M from either side and build a station? For that matter, why not expropriate part of the Costco and stick it there? There are lots of options to put it in without touching the tracks, but they may not be ideal.

Good Day.

Yep, that's the photo..... and yes, the golf course and lots of spare room on the south side (eastbound side) is the -plenty of room- that we were referring to, even without expropriation.
Proper planning for a station would have moved the guideway south enough to leave room for platforms both sides (or a center platform station - more efficient space-wise, but the rails have to split for space).

As for the north (westbound) side, yep.... we are talking no room without moving rail UNLESS expropriation - and now we are into NIMBY big time. A park !!! private property !!! parking !!! Oh My !!!! (sorry about that, but.....)

EnJoy!

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

Good Day.

Yep, that's the photo..... and yes, the golf course and lots of spare room on the south side (eastbound side) is the -plenty of room- that we were referring to, even without expropriation.
Proper planning for a station would have moved the guideway south enough to leave room for platforms both sides (or a center platform station - more efficient space-wise, but the rails have to split for space).

As for the north (westbound) side, yep.... we are talking no room without moving rail UNLESS expropriation - and now we are into NIMBY big time. A park !!! private property !!! parking !!! Oh My !!!! (sorry about that, but.....)

EnJoy!

Better yet, they would have moved the flyover further east to allow a Jasmin station to be built without the expense of a pedestrian overpass to cross half of the 174.

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Better yet, they would have moved the flyover further east to allow a Jasmin station to be built without the expense of a pedestrian overpass to cross half of the 174.

Good Day.

We Have a BINGO

But that was the ORIGINAL long-term planning for a -future- Jasmine station FAILURE !

and was pointed out by many here at that time.

<sigh>

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

Good Day.

Yep, that's the photo..... and yes, the golf course and lots of spare room on the south side (eastbound side) is the -plenty of room- that we were referring to, even without expropriation.
Proper planning for a station would have moved the guideway south enough to leave room for platforms both sides (or a center platform station - more efficient space-wise, but the rails have to split for space).

As for the north (westbound) side, yep.... we are talking no room without moving rail UNLESS expropriation - and now we are into NIMBY big time. A park !!! private property !!! parking !!! Oh My !!!! (sorry about that, but.....)

EnJoy!

Has NIMBY worked against this line anywhere? If not, why would that change?

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Has NIMBY worked against this line anywhere? If not, why would that change?

Good Day.

There was little opportunity for NIMBY in the East line planning - that's the (IMHO) MAIN reason the guideway has gone down the center of the 174.

But that's mostly just me. and a few others. all over the place.

<sigh>

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

Good Day.

There was little opportunity for NIMBY in the East line planning - that's the (IMHO) MAIN reason the guideway has gone down the center of the 174.

But that's mostly just me. and a few others. all over the place.

<sigh>

That means that when new infill stations happen, they may end up without much of a NIMBY happening.

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Is there any reason they couldn't just leave the alignment of the rails as is, reroute the 174 to fit the infill and then build the station?

Yes, there is a ‘Hard’ limit to moving the west-bound lanes away from the LRT – the support for the LRT flyover. The off-ramp might be able to go on the other side of the pier, but not the main lanes.

My main comment was aimed at the fact that they built the LRT right up against the west-bound lanes. Since they have already moved the east-bound lanes more than 15 metres away, why didn’t they simply position the LRT into the middle of the gap? That way, they could have added side platforms to the LRT to create a future Jasmine Station.



The station could have been very simple, having a pedestrian bridge from City-owned land to the west-bound platform. The cross-over to the east-bound platform would have been a single flight of stairs down to an underpass hanging beneath the tracks. Since people don’t need 5+ metres of headroom, the underpass could be about 8 feet under the rail bridge. There is no need to make the stairs go all the way to the ground.

The NCC property appears to be further away from the current east-bound lanes of the OR-174, so I’m not sure of the reason for the City wanting to move those east-bound lanes back, tight against the LRT. (Purple areas are City owned.)

[J.OT13]

But it does seem that the flyover has a straight/level section long enough to accommodate a station. That alone gives me some hope. Sure they'll have to move the highway to accommodate the platforms. For the north end (westbound), removing the bus lane, which will no longer needed, may leave enough space.

If the station does go there, it probably is the best spot, serving the high school (where former/perspective students from Rideau High on St. Laurent now go) and apartment complexes. Having the station behind the Costco would be very close to Blair and not be as useful. Costco is not a transit generator and the car oriented office park is a mixed bag.

[OCCheetos]

In one of the last public meetings regarding the Stage 2 East extension (this one), someone asked about how a future station at Tenth Line could be added in the future without disrupting service, and the response from the Stage 2 rep was to contact the team via email to receive a more detailed response.

Perhaps someone could send in an email to ask for clarification about this station, in addition to Tenth Line and Orleans Town Centre?

I'll also just note that the project agreement specifies side platforms for all three future stations, including the other two which are where the line is right in the middle of the median.

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

In one of the last public meetings regarding the Stage 2 East extension (this one), someone asked about how a future station at Tenth Line could be added in the future without disrupting service, and the response from the Stage 2 rep was to contact the team via email to receive a more detailed response.

Perhaps someone could send in an email to ask for clarification about this station, in addition to Tenth Line and Orleans Town Centre?

I'll also just note that the project agreement specifies side platforms for all three future stations, including the other two which are where the line is right in the middle of the median.

Good Day.

I thought I remembered both those points, but was unsure to include them. Thx Muchly.

Another worry I have is the ongoing winter salt spray situation (ref: Nicholas - uOttawa station, and 417 - St.Laurent station problems) given the guideway goes down the center of the 174.
I sure hope KEV has a better designed ongoing solution to help prevent corrosion and electrical difficulties.

Silly Me !

[J.OT13]

City to mark progress of Stage 2 O-Train East Extension

Ottawa – Mayor Jim Watson will be joined by the Honourable Mona Fortier, President of the Treasury Board, on behalf of the Honourable Dominic LeBlanc, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Infrastructure and Communities, and Marie-France Lalonde, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship and Member of Parliament for Orléans, and, Councillor Allan Hubley, Chair of the Transit Commission for a milestone event in the construction of the Stage 2 O-Train East Extension.

Date: Tuesday, April 26, 2022

Time: 9 to 9:30 am

Place: OR 174 median, west of Jeanne d’Arc Station

Note: Media will be unable to access the site directly. Please meet at Ottawa City Hall where a shuttle will take media to and from the event location. The event will be taking place on an active construction site with uneven ground. Please ensure you are wearing closed toe, sturdy shoes.

[Catenary]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

Yes, there is a ‘Hard’ limit to moving the west-bound lanes away from the LRT – the support for the LRT flyover. The off-ramp might be able to go on the other side of the pier, but not the main lanes.

My main comment was aimed at the fact that they built the LRT right up against the west-bound lanes. Since they have already moved the east-bound lanes more than 15 metres away, why didn’t they simply position the LRT into the middle of the gap? That way, they could have added side platforms to the LRT to create a future Jasmine Station.



The station could have been very simple, having a pedestrian bridge from City-owned land to the west-bound platform. The cross-over to the east-bound platform would have been a single flight of stairs down to an underpass hanging beneath the tracks. Since people don’t need 5+ metres of headroom, the underpass could be about 8 feet under the rail bridge. There is no need to make the stairs go all the way to the ground.

The NCC property appears to be further away from the current east-bound lanes of the OR-174, so I’m not sure of the reason for the City wanting to move those east-bound lanes back, tight against the LRT. (Purple areas are City owned.)

The widening of the highway to the south was only built to temporary specifications to accommodate both directions of traffic while they constructed the flyover and MSE wall to ramp up to it. That isn't simply empty space that they could have moved the train into, it was an active highway while construction took place. If you wanted more space, the highway would have required further widening during construction. If a station were to be built on the MSE wall, a centre platform design with modifications to the south wall and eastbound lanes would be the most likely solution.

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

Good Day.

Another worry I have is the ongoing winter salt spray situation (ref: Nicholas - uOttawa station, and 417 - St.Laurent station problems) given the guideway goes down the center of the 174.
I sure hope KEV has a better designed ongoing solution to help prevent corrosion and electrical difficulties.

Silly Me !

While the salt was initially an issue, we haven't seen problems like that lately. Unlike Nicholas, drainage on the 174 is also away from the median, so meltwater will be directed towards the ditches and not to storm sewers along the guideway.

[Richard Eade]

With all due respect, I would have to disagree with your first observation, Catenary.

Yes, ‘temporary’ east-bound lanes were built so that the west-bound traffic could be moved onto the old east-bound lanes. This gave room to construct the support structures for the fly-over. At that point, the west-bound traffic could have been moved back to where they are currently. This would have left plenty of room in between the lanes to construct the ramp, MSE walls and all.

What I’m saying is that, if they were serious about adding a future Jasmine Station, the east-bound lanes should have been PERMANENTLY moved to where they are currently. Why go through the time and expense of building temporary lanes, then tearing them out, only to have to do a bunch of lane-moving later. It could have been done once and there would have been room for a later station.

And, as I said; there would have been plenty of room between the two directions of traffic to completely build the ramp.

As for your second point, about a central platform making the most sense; it might, if it was further east, where the train was no longer on the ramp. However, the road appears to be a bit more curved there. If there were a straight enough section, the simplicity of vertical movement could make it preferable.

Otherwise, I would suggest that the level elevated section following the flyover could have been built a bit longer, so that a pedestrian overpass to get to the station, as shown in my second image, was still high enough to clear traffic.

Since a pedestrian underpass below the tracks does not need to be very large, a few precast concrete boxes could have been embedded in the embankment to act as future passages between platforms.

And, if the highway was later able to be widened (although I have my doubts, based on the fly-over supports), lanes could even encroach under the side platforms, if the vertical circulation was kept to the inside at the platform ends. If there is no chance of adding lanes under the platforms, it might even be acceptable to use ramps on the outside edges of the platform areas for the vertical movement. If the bridge to the station were at one end, then a ramp could run the length of the station.

[J.OT13]

Watson Club wasting everyone's time by claiming today we "start" installing rail along the east segment even though it's been happening for months, which is clearly visible in the background.

Jim Watson
@JimWatsonOttawa

Important milestone this morning as we start installing rail on the Stage 2 LRT East extension! 12.5 kms of track will be laid to connect five new stations between Blair and Trim Road, which will be ready for service in 2024

https://twitter.com/JimWatsonOttawa/...C-rePRsJQqAAAA

This picture is the epitome of the classic politician.


https://twitter.com/ChrisKurys/statu...C-xbKVrpQqAAAA