Rethinking the Queensway

[JM1]

I was thinking that if you were to somehow manage a cut and cover operation for the 417 between, say Preston and the Rideau River, would the building space above it and the development rights justify the cost?

My guess is that the answer is yes. You could improve N-S road connections, and possibly even make way for an additional E-W LRT while simultaneously burying a noisy roadway. Between the sale of rights to the land, developmetn fees, and city taxes, it probably would not be too costly to pay the whole operation off (especially since it is not a tunnel, but a cut and cover operation).

Any views?

MOD EDIT: Changed the thread title from "417 Land Value" to "Tearing Down the Queensway" to reflect the discussion
-WW

[c_speed3108]

I can't really see it being feasible on only a dollars and cents stand-point.

Even if you took just a limited stretch - say the Canal to Bronson or so.

You would gain about 10 city blocks of space, give or take, as you would still need space for ramps and whatnot.

Even if you could build the tunnel for for say 500 million, that would mean you would need to raise an average of 50 million per city block. I can't see the land going for that much.

[McC]

the accounting could include land sale, development charges and property taxes over the debt repayment period for the tunnel, but I still don't know if it would have a positive net present value.

[Harley613]

i wonder how it worked when montreal built the ville-marie tunnel....i don't think there was an existing expressway on that route, i think they built it under existing real estate. the opposite of what we are talking about here, yet similar in design.

[Kitchissippi]

The fact that you can still get a detached house in Centretown north of the Queensway for less than $500K, means that land isn't that valuable in that area.

For an inner city freeway, the Queensway is not that bad, it does not seen as visually divisive as an elevated highway like Toronto's Gardiner or Montreal's Metropolitain. The fact that it's built on a mound makes bridge replacement easy, as we've been witnessing in the Carling area. If anything, the sidewalks that pass underneath could just use better lighting and some aesthetic treatment to tie it to either side better.

[Aylmer]

I think it would be very interesting to do something with the Queensway. The way I see it, there are two options:

- Sink it: out of sight, out of mind, out of pocket.
- 'Embarcadero' it: along with adequate transit and an attractive (and cross-able) design, it could be a very interesting option

If my descriptions aren't enough of a hint, I'd be more favourable of making it into a boulevard. I'd imagine that most of the traffic from both sides of the Queensway turns north towards Downtown, I wouldn't think that traffic would be any worse than it is now. Plus, you could easily have rapid transit along the route (maybe it would integrate into our Bank st. subway!).

Who knows?

[Harley613]

it's already woefully inadequate capacity wise, i don't think boulevarding it would be a good idea! since a ring road isn't in the cards anymore i think it needs to be expanded, which might actually make sinking it plausible!

[Dado]

Even if the Queensway was sunk (my guess would be between Rochester and the Lees/Mann area since there's a transitway trench at Lees*), I doubt the land would be redeveloped - at least not most of it.

Between the need for interchanges and some way to continue the collector/ramp functions of Raymond, Catherine, Orangeville, Chamberlain and Isabella, my guess is that it would end up being a boulevard between Bronson and the Canal.


*Plus in light of the discussions elsewhere on a downtown tunnel/trench to Gatineau, there is a need to keep lower level interchange options open.

[Zach6668]

Originally Posted by Harley613

it's already woefully inadequate capacity wise, i don't think boulevarding it would be a good idea! since a ring road isn't in the cards anymore i think it needs to be expanded, which might actually make sinking it plausible!

Meh, it's really only at or over capacity for a few hours per day. I'd rather not give more people disincentive to take public transit

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by Harley613

it's already woefully inadequate capacity wise, i don't think boulevarding it would be a good idea! since a ring road isn't in the cards anymore i think it needs to be expanded, which might actually make sinking it plausible!

That would be very difficult as it is the only east-west freeway and it carries over 180,000 vehicles every weekday, it would require at least 12-16 lanes if it was an urban boulevard, which would be even worse trying to cross and the land impact would be enormous.

A ring road would not draw significant traffic to relieve congestion to any great degree since the vast majority of traffic on the 417 is headed to, from or within Ottawa.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by Zach6668

Meh, it's really only at or over capacity for a few hours per day. I'd rather not give more people disincentive to take public transit

Reduce the capacity and it would be over capacity 14 to 16 hours a day on weekdays, plus it would strain parallel arterials like Carling Avenue.

I don't see any significant changes in terms of design and capacity on the central section of the 417. There is no room to expand it, and traffic has been growing at a minimal rate, as opposed to the suburban sections.

Improved lighting and sidewalks on streets under the 417 I think would help, along with perhaps more greenery (i.e. more/taller trees).

[Zach6668]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

Reduce the capacity and it would be over capacity 14 to 16 hours a day on weekdays, plus it would strain parallel arterials like Carling Avenue.

I don't see any significant changes in terms of design and capacity on the central section of the 417. There is no room to expand it, and traffic has been growing at a minimal rate, as opposed to the suburban sections.

Improved lighting and sidewalks on streets under the 417 I think would help, along with perhaps more greenery (i.e. more/taller trees).

Oh yeah, I'm indifferent to trenching or not, but wouldn't really want it expanded at all anywhere near downtown.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by Zach6668

Oh yeah, I'm indifferent to trenching or not, but wouldn't really want it expanded at all anywhere near downtown.

Trenching would not change the capacity, but it would be expensive and disruptive.

There is almost no chance of any expansion of the 417 in the downtown area. No room to do so.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

That would be very difficult as it is the only east-west freeway and it carries over 180,000 vehicles every weekday, it would require at least 12-16 lanes if it was an urban boulevard, which would be even worse trying to cross and the land impact would be enormous.

A ring road would not draw significant traffic to relieve congestion to any great degree since the vast majority of traffic on the 417 is headed to, from or within Ottawa.

However, since there's relatively little through-traffic, most of the cars are already having to wait at lights to get onto the N-S streets. I think you could do 8-10 lanes with a medians separating the different directions as well as two lanes of left/right turning traffic, so you only ever have to cross 3 lanes a a time. And along with a rapid transit line, you could easily surpass the Queensway's current capacity.

So, in order or appearance, looking east

Two lanes of right-turning traffic, median two lanes of traffic plus a left-turning lane, median, light rail, median, two lanes of left-turning traffic, median, two lanes of right-turning/through traffic.

[DubberDom]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

However, since there's relatively little through-traffic,

Are you insane? The Through traffic is the main problem, that's why westbound traffic backs up all the way to the 417/174 split at nights, and EB typically backs up between Carling and Parkdale.

The Gatineau-bound traffic is another problem, the Kettle Island option would end up encouraging more through traffic from Ottawa West to 417/174/Aviation parkway split. Best option is not only to plan an eastern bridge (like Kettle), but also a Western bridge option with direct 417 access (eg at 416).

Public transit usage is at it maximum in Ottawa, there is no way to get more people using public transit, light rail or not. I know where I work, it is impossible for us to get to work without a car, unless we spend 1.5 hours on the bus each way with 3 transfers. There are multipple employment areas in Ottawa without transit access. Downtown office workers already use transit.

Blame the Feds, why are they building/moving to facilities not directly serviced by transit? Cases in point: RCMP in Barrhaven at JDS building, Agriculture Canada at old Nortel buildings on Baseline, DND moving to Nortel etc...

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

However, since there's relatively little through-traffic, most of the cars are already having to wait at lights to get onto the N-S streets. I think you could do 8-10 lanes with a medians separating the different directions as well as two lanes of left/right turning traffic, so you only ever have to cross 3 lanes a a time. And along with a rapid transit line, you could easily surpass the Queensway's current capacity.

So, in order or appearance, looking east

Two lanes of right-turning traffic, median two lanes of traffic plus a left-turning lane, median, light rail, median, two lanes of left-turning traffic, median, two lanes of right-turning/through traffic.

That's still a much larger barrier to cross than the current elevated freeway and also requires significant expropriation. The lights would create gridlock for sure...I don't know of a single non-freeway road in Canada that carries 180,000 cars each day.

[eemy]

If the ring expressway that the MTO was planning at one time ever goes forward, it might allow the Queensway to be turned into a urban boulevard in the central area by diverting most of the cross-town traffic. I'm not ever sure it's a worthwhile endeavour at this point. There are lots of other parts of the city that could use rejuvenation.

[McC]

http://twitpic.com/bgq4kr
rakerman put up this pic a while back comparing/contrasting* overhead views of the Greber Plan and the actual 417 in the Lees-Nicholas-Mann clusterfudge. Anyway, I think these shots show the one area where the Queensway, as it currently exists, wastes a lot of potentially-high-value development land. (although I recognize that it's not just the Queensway that's wasting space in this area)

* he was comparing, I think they are contrasting, FTR.
(When I look at the Greber boulevards I see all of those bridges and how much better integrated they are to the neighbourhoods, and how they connect the neighbourhoods together, where the Queensway divides them)

[Dado]

I think Gréber gets a lot of undeserved bad press because of things like the Queensway being turned into a freeway.

Even ideas like the Vanier Parkway/Expressway have to be considered from the perspective of a time in which most goods were still moved by rail.


Anyway, with hindsight, building the Queensway as a freeway rather than an urban boulevard was probably not a good move. I would have put our freeway further south, like roughly along the Baseline-Heron-Walkley axis or along the Beachburg Sub (the east-west railway through Nepean).

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by Dado

I think Gréber gets a lot of undeserved bad press because of things like the Queensway being turned into a freeway.

Even ideas like the Vanier Parkway/Expressway have to be considered from the perspective of a time in which most goods were still moved by rail.


Anyway, with hindsight, building the Queensway as a freeway rather than an urban boulevard was probably not a good move. I would have put our freeway further south, like roughly along the Baseline-Heron-Walkley axis or along the Beachburg Sub (the east-west railway through Nepean).

The latter plan might have actually been a good one (along the railway axis) as it would send all the trucks down there near the industrial areas, and would reduce the need to improve the Hunt Club Road corridor. There are no communities divided by the railway at all.

As for the Baseline-Heron-Walkley axis, maybe if that was done before those areas were developed. But by the 1960s it would have divided communities such as Heron Park, Herongate, Bel Air/City View and Pinecrest Park.