Toronto GO Transit: Davenport Diamond Grade Separation | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

vic said:
It will be especially toasty for Darth-Vader-On-A-Segway who again appears in two of the renderings.
Click to expand...
Our favorite GO RER Easter Egg here, maybe a bit belated for Easter 2017.

Already pre-pinch-zoomed for your viewing pleasure:

IMG_2760.JPG


IMG_2759.JPG
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2759.JPG
    IMG_2759.JPG
    204.8 KB · Views: 503
  • IMG_2760.JPG
    IMG_2760.JPG
    245.1 KB · Views: 634
dowlingm said:
Here's my take on Dupont
  • get rid of the old bridge
  • install a replacement pedestrian overpass not requiring a central support, preferably a thinner deck so as to ease the current height restriction*. Ideally, this new overpass would permit ramp and stairs access from the overpass level to the sidewalk level as well.
  • delete the middle lane exclusion now that there is nothing to dodge, move the lanes closer together, widen slightly.
  • raise the cycle lane to the footpath level - possibly raise the level of the combined path a touch. Move the railings from the property lines to the outside edge of the cycle path with a small wall/suitable drainage arrangements to contain snow cleared from cycle lane - if the overpass deck could not span the full width of Dupont then this could be where a support pillar either side could go.
  • bury the hydro wires
Apart from drivers wanting to illegally park in the cycle lanes, everyone's a winner. Yes, it's more money, and the City should pay it. Given all the changes Metrolinx has made on their end, it's a valid contribution and a noticeable difference in the perception of the area.

* Question: would demolition and replacement require a minimum clearance where the current 4.2m is grandfathered?
Click to expand...

If you're going to remove the old bridge and replace it, why not replace it with something meeting the current standards? No reason why a replacement can't have a bit of a hump if it's not carrying a railway...

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
smallspy said:
If you're going to remove the old bridge and replace it, why not replace it with something meeting the current standards? No reason why a replacement can't have a bit of a hump if it's not carrying a railway...
Click to expand...
oh, sure, just didn't know how high a hump it might require!
 
Saw this on Facebook and thought I would share it here:
REQUEST FOR ARTIST QUALIFICATIONS - METROLINX PUBLIC ART OPPORTUNITIES
Closing Date: May 29, 2017 9am EST

The first opportunity is the Davenport Diamond Grade Separation in Toronto. This 1.4km elevated guideway and green corridor in an urban setting will increase community connectivity and create new public spaces including a multi-use trail. The total integrated art budget for this project is $4 million CAD all-inclusive, and will incorporate up to four artwork sites.
Click to expand...

Source.
 
mdrejhon said:
Our favorite GO RER Easter Egg here, maybe a bit belated for Easter 2017.

Already pre-pinch-zoomed for your viewing pleasure:
Click to expand...

Haha, oh man. I've seen celebrities used before but this takes the cake. I'm going to have to start taking a magnifying glass to renders from now on.
 
Allandale25 said:
Saw this on Facebook and thought I would share it here:
REQUEST FOR ARTIST QUALIFICATIONS - METROLINX PUBLIC ART OPPORTUNITIES
Closing Date: May 29, 2017 9am EST

The first opportunity is the Davenport Diamond Grade Separation in Toronto. This 1.4km elevated guideway and green corridor in an urban setting will increase community connectivity and create new public spaces including a multi-use trail. The total integrated art budget for this project is $4 million CAD all-inclusive, and will incorporate up to four artwork sites.

Source.
Click to expand...

OK, who want to type up a proposal for a life-size sculpture of Darth Vader riding a Segway.
 
Options 4 Davenport has released this video (which includes the local City Councillor) with people speaking out with their concerns on the overpass proposal.
 
Allandale25 said:
Options 4 Davenport has released this video (which includes the local City Councillor) with people speaking out with their concerns on the overpass proposal.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry but I have no respect for these people. First they decided to live next to a busy rail corridor and then they complain about the noise and vibration? Shame on them
 
For those who haven't seen it, the group also posted this flyover animation (originally created by Metrolinx).

 
raptor said:
I'm sorry but I have no respect for these people. First they decided to live next to a busy rail corridor and then they complain about the noise and vibration? Shame on them
Click to expand...

A lot of people bought houses along local rail corridors when there were just a handful of trains per day. It's like buying a house on a quiet street vs. a busy road, and one day having the city tell you they're going to expand the road to accommodate multiple times as much traffic as when you bought the home.

Where else could they buy a house? For these people, it might have been a choice between these houses and houses out in the car-dependent communities of the 905. After all, local house prices were historically comparable to recent suburban subdivision homes. It's better to minimize the impact of infrastructure on local communities than to encourage people to live elsewhere. More sprawl merely exasperates existing transportation problems.
 
junctionist said:
Where else could they buy a house? For these people, it might have been a choice between these houses and houses out in the car-dependent communities of the 905. After all, local house prices were historically comparable to recent suburban subdivision homes. It's better to minimize the impact of infrastructure on local communities than to encourage people to live elsewhere. More sprawl merely exasperates existing transportation problems.
Click to expand...

That's a false choice - is there any evidence the mere presence of an elevated railway line as suggested will push people to move elsewhere with no replacements? I found that exceedingly hard to believe in an area of the city where housing is at a premium.

AoD
 
junctionist said:
For these people, it might have been a choice between these houses and houses out in the car-dependent communities of the 905.
Click to expand...
This overpass - and the all-day bidirectional RER service that it makes possible - is exactly the kind of project that is required to reduce car-dependence. But of course you wouldn't know that from watching the video. The makers give no context at all and even include footage of freight trains to illustrate noise complaints.

By all means, people should advocate for electrification and for design improvements like the inclusion of a new rail path, but this video disingenuously blurs the line between improving the proposal and rejecting it altogether. And at the end, with the invocation of the oh-so-evil premier and the MPP, it comes across as nothing but a political attack ad. Does Ana Bailao have ambitions for higher office?
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
That's a false choice - is there any evidence the mere presence of an elevated railway line as suggested will push people to move elsewhere with no replacements? I found that exceedingly hard to believe in an area of the city where housing is at a premium.

AoD
Click to expand...

It's a real choice that people made. 15 years ago, $400,000 could buy you a house in the neighbourhood or a new house in a nice subdivision in Brampton far from any railway line or factory. A lot of people chose to live in the city because they liked the older neighbourhoods and wanted to be less car dependent. There were neighbourhoods further from railway lines, but they weren't as affordable. There weren't that many trains using this railway line back then.

If people move to the suburbs, it's not like the street will empty out given the city's issues with housing. People will rent the houses out as rooming houses or divide them into apartments. You won't have as many middle class owners invested in the neighbourhood, and it could decline. Neighbourhoods declined throughout North America when cities built expressways through the urban fabric in the 1960s. I don't have anything against low income people, but most low income neighbourhoods end up undesirable places to live.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top