Upload
others
View
5
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Western Light Rail Transit CorridorPlanning and Environmental
Assessment Study
1 May 2013
1
Presentation Overview
1. Where We Began• Background and Study Area
2. Understanding the Carling Options• Transportation Network Perspective• City‐Building Perspective• Transportation Performance Perspective
2
2
Presentation Overviewctd…
3. Proposed Rapid Transit Network
4. What We Heard (so far)• Community and NCC Concerns
5. Where We Are Headed
5. Summary and Next Steps
3
3
Council Direction:June 27, 2012
• The City presented details and preliminary analysis of 15 corridors
• Council was not satisfied • Identified that clear interests of the community must be considered and reflected
• Directed to align with City, NCC planning initiatives
4
Study Context(2008 TMP)
5
5
Study Area
Bayview Station Operational 2018
Tunney’s Pasture Station operational 2018
Baseline Station / Algonquin Campus
6
6
O-Train
Queensway
Corridors Considered Initially (15)7
O‐Train
Holland
Island Park
Kirkwood
Tweedsmuir/HydroBroadview
Churchill
Woodroffe
Richmond
Rochester Field
Cleary
Understanding the Carling Options
• Compromises the network and operations
• Would require continued bus service in the north, including using the Parkway for the foreseeable future
• 2 – 3 times the cost of other options
• Potentially very visually intrusive
• 7.1 km underground is impractical
8
Carling via O‐Train
Not Recommended for Further Analysis
Transportation Network Perspective: Fractured Network
O-Train (and service from the airport) terminates at Carling and requires a transfer
O-Train cannot connect to Gatineau
10
Reduced transit service to Tunney’s, Westboro, and Dominion
10
Transportation Network Perspective: Connection to Tunney’s Pasture
From East:Every 3-4 train to Tunney’s
11
From South West:Transfer at Baseline(replacing Tunney’s)ORMaintain BRT connection
11
T
T
Transportation Network Perspective: Connection to Tunney’s Pasture
From East:Every 3-4 train to Tunney’s
12
12
T
TFrom West:Transfer at Lincoln Fields(replacing Tunney’s)
T
Transportation Network Perspective: Connection to Tunney’s Pasture
13
13
T
T
T
T
From South:Transfer at Carling and LeBreton
From East:Every 3-4 train to Tunney’s
Reduced transit service to Tunney’s, Westboro, and Dominion
O-Train cannot connect to Gatineau
Transportation Network Perspective: Capacity Implications
14
30 trains/hr.(2 min. service)
6 trains/hr.(10 min. service)
10-minute service inadequatefor employment at Tunney’s
24 trains/hr.(2.5 min. service)
Inadequate for demand fromthe west and southwest
14
www.ottawa.ca/westernLRT
City‐Building Perspective
• Elevated Guideway• Lincoln Fields• Experimental Farm• Over Queensway (along the Capital Arrival Route)
• Negative impact of infrastructure on view corridors
15
15
Transportation Performance Perspective
16
16
Travel Time = Ridership
Baseline to Tunney’s Pasture
• Choosing Carling Avenue adds between 3 – 13 minutes to a passengers’ trip
Transportation Performance Perspective: “Hybrid” Primary
17
?
17
Transfer Points
Supplementary Corridor (TBD)
Primary Corridor
Tunn
ey’s
Bay
view
Lincoln FieldsCarling/O-Train
Less efficient Primary line (longer)
Supplementary line that would focus on local needs is problematic -fractured
Population and Employment:18
Tunney’s Pasture
Ottawa Hospital Civic CampusCarlingwood Mall
Proposed Rapid Transit Network19
19
Lincoln Fields‐Baseline Connection
20
• Portion south of Lincoln Fields is common to all as it generally follows the current Southwest Transitway
• BRT and LRT in corridor between Lincoln Fields and Queensway
• New BRT connection to Queensway
• Iris Station will be modified to suit LRT
21
Lincoln Fields‐Baseline ConnectionStage 1
22
Lincoln Fields‐Baseline Connection –Stage 2
Iris Station
23
Option C – Deep Trench
Option B – Shallow Trench
Option A – Cul-de-sac
What We Heard (so far)
Community Concerns
• Should protect – not ruin – Byron Linear Park
• Should connect – not physically divide – community
• Should encourage – not restrict – access to greenspace, waterfront and pathway network
• Should avoid – not make use of – the Parkway
24
24
www.ottawa.ca/westernLRT
Parkway (Magenta)Where it fell short:
• Restricts access to greenspace, waterfront and pathway network
• Relies on using the Parkway
25
25
www.ottawa.ca/westernLRT
Richmond via Churchill (Blue)Where it fell short:
• Ruins Byron Linear Park• Physically divides community• Does little to encourage/improve access to waterfront pathways and parkland
26
26
www.ottawa.ca/westernLRT
Richmond via Rochester Field (Yellow)
Where it fell short:• Ruins Byron Linear Park• Physically divides community
27
27
www.ottawa.ca/westernLRT
CPR‐Richmond (Red)Where it fell short:
• Does little to protect Byron Linear Park west of Woodroffe
• Does little to encourage/improve access to waterfront pathways and parkland
28
28
Where We Are Headed
• Challenged ourselves to find options that respond to what we heard, while:
• Maintaining the integrity of transit long range financial plan
• Meeting transit ridership goals• Allowing for continued citywide network investments
• Solutions
29
29
www.ottawa.ca/westernLRT
Richmond Underground• Protects Byron Linear Park and keeps LRT off the Ottawa River Parkway
• Maintains community connectivity• Encourages access to greenspace, waterfront and pathway network
30
30
www.ottawa.ca/westernLRT
Richmond Underground ‐ North
• Protects Byron Linear Park• Maintains community connectivity• Encourages access to greenspace, waterfront and pathway network
31
31
Estimated Costs
• Class D planning estimates• based on conceptual plans• 40 per cent contingencies• +/‐ 25 per cent• consistent with City policy
• In 2013 dollars
• Not including inflation to construction year and variable elements (fleet and maintenance facility)
32
Estimated Costs2013 +/‐ 25%
Carling via O‐Train: $2.3 B
Richmond via Churchill: $2.2 B
CPR Richmond: $1.1 B
Richmond via Rochester Field: $960 M
Richmond Underground: $900 M
Richmond Underground‐North: $880 M
Parkway: $630 M
33
Summary
• Richmond Underground is preferred option
• Responds to clear community and NCC concerns• Most cost‐effective investment• Improves community and network transit service• Promotes transit ridership and City growth • Allows for citywide network expansions further
east and south
34
34
Use of Former CPR Rail Bed ‐Skead Street (view North from Westminster)
35
Use of Former CPR Rail Bed ‐Skead Street
36
Cleary Station – open air
37
Cleary Station – view from the River
38
Cleary Station – view from the pathway network
39
Cleary Station – aerial view
40
New Orchard Station
41
Richmond Underground (cross section)
42
Richmond Byron Linear Park
New Orchard Station
43
Next Steps
• Your input needed ‐ [email protected]• Transportation Committee and Council in June 2013
• Functional Design and EA Documentation• Decision included in 2013 TMP (late June)
44
44
Questions?
45