Barrhaven Light Rail Transit and Rail Grade

Barrhaven Light Rail Transit and Rail Grade

Barrhaven Light Rail Transit (Baseline Station to Barrhaven Town Centre) and Rail Grade- Separations Planning & Environmental Assessment Study Public Consultation Group Meeting #3 08 September 2020 Confidential 1 Agenda • Introductions • Study Objectives • Preliminary Recommended Plan – Baseline Station to Nepean Sportsplex – Nepean Sportsplex to Barrhaven Centre • Next Steps • Discussion Confidential 2 Study Objectives • Study commenced September 2018 • Develop Recommended Plan for: – LRT alignment and stations – SW Transitway, Woodroffe, Fallowfield rail grade- separations – Train Storage and Servicing Facility (TSSF) – Supporting Facilities • Environmental Assessment following Ontario’s Transit Project Assessment Process (TPAP) Confidential 3 Study in 2 Parts • Baseline Station to Nepean Sportsplex: – Identify preferred LRT alignment • Nepean Sportsplex to Barrhaven Centre: – Convert existing at-grade BRT Transitway to LRT – New rail grade-separations at VIA Rail crossings Confidential 4 Baseline Station to Nepean Sportsplex Confidential 5 Overview • 2.4 km long corridor • 2 km protected corridor west of Woodroffe ROW • 3 new stations Confidential 6 Three Key Design Considerations • Grade-separation and associated clearance requirements • Geotechnical conditions of concern • Limited available right-of-way in the “pinch point” Confidential 7 Grade Separation • Extension of the City’s O-Train Line: – Fully grade-separated facility designed to the same operational and safety requirements • Close spacing between street crossings and need to go over or under CN Rail line – Allowable slope and required clearance dictate vertical alignment choice needs to be consistent for entire 2.4 km segment (no mix and match) Confidential 8 Geotechnical Conditions of Concern • Recent investigations – Woodroffe and Fallowfield Grade Separations (2002, 2003) – SW Transitway Extension – Baseline to Norice (2008, 2009) – Woodroffe Watermain replacement (2014) – This EA Study (2018) • Ground conditions: – Topsoil over Sensitive Marine Clays – Up to 13 m thick, over – Sands, Silts and Glacial Till – Up to 17 m thick, over – Bedrock – depth varies from 10 to 25 m over Study Area Confidential 9 Geotechnical Conditions of Concern • These ground conditions common in the Ottawa area • Well understood by geotechnical specialists to be very challenging to address – Groundwater levels would be several meters above any the base of any below-grade alternative – All below-grade alternatives extend into permeable sands below the sensitive marine clay level – Below-grade alternatives need to be designed to prevent any lowering of groundwater as this would lead to dewatering of the clay – Dewatering of clay is likely to cause settlement of the clay and the homes and structures it is supporting – This could extend several hundred metres either side of the LRT alignment Confidential 10 Extent of Geotechnical Risks with Trench Option • Number of buildings within potential impact zone (250 m from LRT alignment): – Commercial - 18 – Institutional - 13 – Office - 10 – Residential - 647 • Roads • Underground Utilities Confidential 1111 Right-of-Way in Pinch Point • 1997 EA Plan located Transitway extension through pinch point in a cut-and-cover tunnel underneath SB lanes of Woodroffe Avenue • ROW limited to less than 40 m Confidential 12 Right-of-Way in “Pinch Point” • Approved 1997 EA plan through the “Pinch Point” to be re- evaluated • Both below-grade and elevated alternatives would be considered • Results of this focused evaluation would determine the preferred alternative for the entire Baseline Station to Nepean Sportsplex section Woodroffe Avenue facing South at Pinch Point Confidential 13 Alternatives Considered • Six alternatives between Knoxdale and West Hunt Club evaluated – Bored tunnel options screened out due to geotechnical considerations and cost – East side options screened out due to geometric design challenges, construction disruption and utility conflicts Confidential 14 Alternatives 1 and 2: Below-grade in Woodroffe Avenue ROW • Cut-and-cover tunnel or open trench Confidential 15 Alternatives 3 and 4: Elevated in Woodroffe Avenue ROW • Elevated to reduce construction challenges • Median and west-side alternatives • Median option has potential to provide a new station at Nepean Sportsplex on the east side of Woodroffe Confidential 16 Alternatives 5 and 6: West of Woodroffe Avenue ROW • Open trench and elevated alternatives • Continuous straight track geometry • Impacts some residential properties Confidential 17 Evaluation Criteria • A comprehensive list of criteria that respond to all aspects of the environment was used to evaluate the six (6) alternatives. Criteria groups included: – Transportation System Sustainability – NCC Greenbelt Sustainability – Ecological and Physical Sustainability – Land Use and Community Sustainability – Economic Sustainability Confidential 18 Findings – Elevated vs. Below-grade • Below-grade alternatives: – expose the City to more risk and liability associated with geotechnical conditions – are more expensive and challenging to construct – have reduced noise, privacy and view impacts but creates barrier – generally supported by the community (tunnel preferred) • Elevated alternatives: – reduce risk and liability associated with geotechnical conditions – are more cost-effective and easier to construct – have the potential for use of the at-grade space below the guideway for mobility or community uses Confidential 19 Preferred Alternative: Elevated West of Woodroffe Avenue Confidential 20 Evaluation Rationale (Elevated versus Trench) Geotechnical Risks • Trench options must be within continuous permanently water-tight structure to prevent leaks • Leaks could lead to lowering of water table resulting in settlement of surrounding structures and underground utilities • Leaks very difficult to repair or correct – potentially require ongoing pumping/ recharge to prevent settlement • Legal liability for possible damages Confidential 21 Below-grade Construction Methodology 2.4 Km of Continuous Watertight Wall 1 2 34 Confidential 22 Elevated Construction Methodology O/H Structure Supported on Piers every 30 – 40 m 1 2 34 Confidential 23 Evaluation Rationale (Elevated versus Trench) Minimizing Underground Utility Conflicts Confidential 24 Evaluation Rationale (Elevated versus Trench) Underground Utility Conflicts • Elevated alignment avoids conflicts with existing underground utilities that cross the corridor, thus do not require complicated solutions to maintain existing or provide new crossings. • Major impacted utilities* include: – 2100mm dia. Tallwood Storm Collector Sewer – 2250mm dia. Lynwood Sanitary Collector Sewer – 1800mm dia. Sovereign Storm Collector Sewer – 1350mm & 1200mm dia. West Hunt Club Storm Collector Sewers – Proposed Enbridge Gas Distribution Main & others • Geotechnical conditions add challenges to utility relocations and connections due to depth of watertight cut-off wall *Note: only sewers > 1000mm dia. listed, there are many more utilities that cross the corridor Confidential 25 Preferred Alternative Why Elevated? • Avoids geotechnical risks • Minimizes underground utility conflicts • Simpler and faster to build • Lower cost • Completely covering trench not a viable option Ottawa, Hurdman Station Confidential 26 Preferred Alternative Why Elevated? • Does not create community barrier that limits pedestrians and cyclist movement across corridor • Trench option requires additional crossing structures • Open space below guideway can be programmed for community benefit • Provides opportunity for new N- S MUP within corridor Confidential 27 Preferred Alternative Why West of Woodroffe Avenue? • Avoids impact to Woodroffe Avenue during and post construction • Straight alignment reduces noise, maintenance costs and provides best ride quality • Allows optimization of station locations and potential for integrated development opportunities • Best enables continuous MUP connection from Baseline Station to south of Hunt Club Road Confidential 28 Impacts to Existing Residential Properties • Three properties 1 between Knoxdale and West Hunt Club affected • 120 of 205 existing 1 dwellings directly impacted 2 • Majority of the buildings 2 constructed prior to 3 1965 (55+ year old) 3 Confidential 29 Redevelopment Potential (Concept) Confidential 30 Tallwood Station Looking Southwest Confidential 31 Knoxdale Station Looking Southeast Confidential 32 Nepean Sportsplex Station Looking Southwest Confidential 33 Public Feedback – What We Heard • Support advancing LRT and rail overpasses sooner • Elevated facility: – Noise and visual concerns – How would snow be managed? – What would space underneath be used for? • Avoid traffic impacts to Woodroffe Avenue during and post-construction • Groundwater quality impacts Confidential 34 Responses / Mitigation • Noise and vibration: no source mitigation needed • Views/Privacy: – alignment not close to existing dwellings – new developments designed to mitigate impacts • Seasonal Maintenance: snow management design guidelines such as wider guideway; MUP location • Corridor landscaping and space programming opportunities being developed • West of Woodroffe ROW avoids traffic impacts • No impact to groundwater anticipated Confidential 35 Nepean Sportsplex to Barrhaven Centre Confidential 36 Overview • Convert 7.6 km existing Transitway to twin-track electric Light Rail Transit • Includes modifying Fallowfield, Longfields, Strandherd Stations • New LRT/BRT transfer terminal station

View Full Text

Details

  • File Type
    pdf
  • Upload Time
    -
  • Content Languages
    English
  • Upload User
    Anonymous/Not logged-in
  • File Pages
    65 Page
  • File Size
    -

Download

Channel Download Status
Express Download Enable

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

  • Not to be reproduced or distributed without explicit permission.
  • Not used for commercial purposes outside of approved use cases.
  • Not used to infringe on the rights of the original creators.
  • If you believe any content infringes your copyright, please contact us immediately.

Support

For help with questions, suggestions, or problems, please contact us