tunnel tech memo march 2013

8/13/2019 Tunnel Tech Memo March 2013

1/8

1

Technical

Memorandum

The Interprovincial Crossings Environmental Assessment Study's Terms of Reference recommended thatimprovements to the existing five vehicular bridges should be limited to provisions such as Transportation DemandManagement (TDM) and that no significant additional lane capacity on the bridges or approaches would beappropriate. However, during Phase 1 Public Consultation Session (PCS) No. 1, members of the public inquiredabout two possible tunnel options:

1. Provide a tunnel from the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge southerly to connect with the Vanier Parkway, whichthen connects to Highway 417 at the Vanier Parkway interchange; or

2. Provide a tunnel from the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge under Lowertown and the Market to connect withNicholas Street, which then connects to Highway 417 at the Nicholas Street interchange.

The purpose of this memorandum is to document conclusions on the feasibility of these connections as a solution tothe problem statement of the Interprovincial Crossings EA study. Two previous technical studies have reviewedthe feasibility of a tunnel connection, including the King Edward Avenue Renewal EA and the OMB Hearingswhich approved the removal of the Vanier Parkway link from the Ottawa Official Plan. These studies are describedbelow.

King Edward Avenue Renewal EA Study

The City of Ottawa completed the King Edward Avenue Renewal Planning and Environmental Study Report inSeptember 2002. As part of this study, several different options were examined to determine if a tunnel betweenthe southern approach of the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge and Highway 417 would be a suitable method to provide

the necessary transportation capacity in this downtown corridor. Six different downtown tunnel options wereconsidered in this study:

1. From Macdonald-Cartier Bridge to Mann Avenue beneath King Edward Avenue2. From Macdonald-Cartier Bridge to Waller Street beneath King Edward Avenue and Waller Street3. From Macdonald-Cartier Bridge to Waller Street beneath Dalhousie Street4. From St. Patrick Street to Waller Street beneath King Edward Avenue5. From Macdonald-Cartier Bridge to the Vanier Parkway beneath the Rideau River6. From Macdonald-Cartier Bridge to St. Patrick Street/Beausoleil Drive beneath the Bordeleau Park

To: Gabrielle Simonyi, Project Manager, NCC

From: Andr Leduc, P.Eng, M. Eng, JV Project Manager

CC: Raynald Ledoux, P.Eng, JV Project Director

Date: August, 27 2008 (Phase 1), Updated March 25th, 2013 (Phase 2B)

Project: Environmental Assessment Study of Future Interprovincial Crossings in the NCR

JV Project No.: 111-18339 / 63066.001

Client Project No.: NG012

Re: Macdonald Cartier Tunnel Connection Coarse Screening

2611 Queensview DriveOttawa, Ontario K2B 8K2

Telephone(613) 829-2800

Fax (613) 829-8299www.genivar.com


2/8

2

Figure 1, extracted from Delcan's study, illustrates these alternatives.

From the 6 alternatives considered, Alternatives 2, 3 and 5 most closely resemble the alternatives suggested by thepublic at Phase 1 PCS No. 1. The following summarizes the conclusions made in the King Edward AvenueRenewal study for all alternatives:

Alternatives 1 to 4:

These alternatives would provide a direct connection between the Macdonald Cartier Bridge and Highway417 via the existing interchanges at either Mann Avenue or Nicholas Street..

Even though Delcans study finds that these tunnel options would address the objective of significantly reducingtraffic on King Edward (by approximately 30% and 34% (approximately 700 vehicles) in the peak direction for themorning and afternoon peak hours, respectively, these alternatives were not recommended on the following basis:

The tunnel portals should be located north of either the Laurier/Nicholas or the King Edward/Mannintersections. However, neither intersection could accommodate the combined tunnel and non-tunneltraffic at an acceptable level of service because both intersections are currently operating at or beyond their

capacity1

; The tunnel portals completely disrupt the existing traffic operations on adjacent streets. The space needed

to cut open the portal between the tunnel bulkhead and the surface level extremity interrupts side streetscontinuity. System gridlock would likely occur;

Only three northbound lanes can be accommodated on the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge. This creates anunsolvable lane balance issue due to the tunnel alternatives resulting in five approach lanes;

Pedestrian and cycling mobility in the east-west direction across Nicholas and Mann Avenue would becompromised;

The visual impact of tunnel portals at key gateway locations could be significant and unacceptable to many;and

The costs of construction (from $110 Million to $250 million for Alternatives 1 to 4, respectively (2002figures), or from $159 Million to $319 Million (adjusted to 20122figures). These cost are considered

relatively high when considering they do not resolve the main issue of screenline bridges capacity overtime.

A variation of Alternatives 2 and 3 was proposed by the public (see Figure 2). Although the variation proposed bythe public maintains the suggested portal locations just south of the Sussex Drive structure as per the originalversion from the Delcan/City of Ottawas study, it also includes loop ramps to accommodate movement to/fromKing Edward. These ramps would impact the Saudi Arabia Embassy and surrounding neighbourhood. As such,this alternative is not recommended to be carried forward on the basis that it does not provide significantadvantages over the disadvantage of impacting the recently built embassy building and surrounding neighbourhood.

Alternatives 5 and 6:

These alternatives would provide a greater level of service for existing traffic demand and reduce delaysalong Kind Edward Avenue.

These alternatives were not recommended on the following basis:

1For example, the study shows that these tunnel option alternatives generate over 700 additional vehicles per hour into the Nicholas/Laurier intersection foralternative 1 and 800 additional vehicles per hour into the King Edward/Mann intersection. These intersections currently operate at capacity 2According to an indexation rate of 2,45 % per year (global 27,5% from 2002 to 2012) based on Qubec and Ontario fixedcapital on public infrastructures.


3/8

3

Significant modifications would be required at the Vanier Parkway/St. Patrick/Beechwood intersection,where Crichton would be closed. Local traffic would be forced to travel on local streets to alreadycongested intersections along Beechwood;

The interchange at Macdonald-Cartier Bridge/King Edward/Sussex would result in the need for 5westbound lanes (2 from King Edward, 1 from Sussex and 2 from the tunnel). A lane imbalance would becreated as the bridge can only accommodate 3 lanes;

The southern terminus of the tunnel would significantly alter the visual environment and displace parkspace;

Trucks are currently not permitted on the Vanier Parkway; The costs of these alternatives (not considering any additional costs for bridge modifications) were

estimated at $140 million for Alternative 5 and $85 million for Alternative 6 (2002 figures) or $179 Millionand $108 Million (adjusted to 20123figures). These cost are considered relatively high when consideringthey do not resolve the main issue of screenline bridges capacity over time.

Vanier Parkway OMB Hearing

The potential to link the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge with the Vanier Parkway was considered by the OMB in 1999,to assess whether this link should be removed from the City of Ottawas Official Plan. The expert testimonypresented at this hearing identified that a tunnel (or at-grade) connection to the Vanier Parkway could use the

available capacity of the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge but would not accommodate future forecast demand in theOfficial Plans 20 year planning horizon (2021) even if transit mode share targets were met. The conclusion wasthat a new crossing of the Ottawa River is required as the available capacity on existing bridges is not sufficient tomeet future travel demand.

Furthermore, recent data collected in the process of the Transportation Study of the Interprovincial CrossingEnvironmental Assessment shows that the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge is currently operating at its capacity withnearly 40,000 vehicles per day (over 4,500 vehicles during the peak hour) recorded in the southbound direction in2011. Traffic projections for the year 2031 using the TRANS regional model show that the demand on the bridgewould remain over 4,500 vehicles during the peak hour in the southbound direction but that other bridges(including the new bridge) would also reach their capacity. It is expected that in 2031, the peak period (withcongestion) would extend over a 2-hour period. Therefore, recent studies confirm that the capacity on the

Macdonald-Cartier Bridge is not sufficient to meet travel demand and that a new crossing is required and that thetunnel option connecting the MacDonald-Cartier Bridge to Highway 417 does not address future traffic congestionproblems by itself.

Since the release of Delcans report, the City of Ottawa's Confederation Line (the east-west light rail transit line)has introduced the construction of a tunnel going through the downtown. This tunnel would run underground (fromeast to west) from Queen/Wellington Streets running under Queen Street towards Elgin, Rideau and Waller Streetsand finally back up to ground level at the junction of Nicholas Street. This LRT tunnel would therefore conflictwith Alternatives 2, 3 and 4 of the KERWN tunnel options.

Conclusions

Roche-GENIVAR agrees with the conclusions derived in the King Edward Avenue Renewal Planning andEnvironmental Study Report and previous OMB decisions.

While these options ability of avoiding a new crossing is appealing at first glance, the transportation supplyprovided by this tunnel as a downtown link only would not address the future demand across the Ottawa Riverscreenline and generate negative impacts at either end of the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge and on adjacent localstreets along the KERWN corridor.

3According to an indexation rate of 2,45 % per year (global 27,5% from 2002 to 2012) based on Qubec and Ontario fixedcapital on public infrastructures.


4/8

4

Although a central trucking link may be attractive to reduce effects on surface streets in the downtown core (oneadvantage of a downtown tunnel), it continues to rely on all truck traffic being funnelled downtown rather thandistributing this traffic to all authorized crossing locations, with related traffic congestion impacts remaining.

Furthermore, the tunnel option only partially solves the problem of truck traffic on surface streets along theKERWN corridor as trucks carrying dangerous materials would not be authorized in the tunnel.

Therefore, although a downtown tunnel could complement a new truck crossing alternative, it cannot replace it. The

solution must deal with the lack of capacity across the Ottawa River and the Project must focus on addressing anddeveloping a new crossing location.

As such, we recommend that downtown tunnel alternatives be removed from further consideration from theInterprovincial EA Crossing Study.


5/8

5

Figure 1a

Tunnel Alternatives 1 and 2


6/8

6

Figure 1b



7/8

7

Figure 1c



8/8

8

Figure 2

Tunnel Option at Sussex Drive

tunnel tech memo march 2013

Documents