Toronto Strachan Avenue Overpass | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

Automation Gallery said:
There is no reason to be scared but you are right Scrappy, here a couple of things that folks have to be aware of, the cars smoke you out, there is water always dripping from up above and through the side walls, the sidewalks are usually muddy and wet, when the train passes overhead it sounds and feels like its going cave in, watch for pigeons up above shitting on you, yes it is quite an experience walking or biking through this outdated underpass. Living in the neighbourhood i have also noticed that every so often tall trucks are caught wedged under the bridge, Ohh yes another thing when there is a rain storm bring your swimwear in case there is a flash flood. :eek:
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say I'm scared at all... it's just that the overall dungy-ness of the underpass is a turn-off. I wish I could hold my breath the entire way through for fear of inhaling all of the pigeon poop dust... it's pretty nasty. My main concern is the overall form of such an underpass is a unfriendly environment to pedestrians and urban development.
 
interchange42 said:
You guys know that the plan shows 10x vertical exaggeration, right?

42
Click to expand...
I could tell there is a vertical exaggeration but didn't know by what factor. I attended the Metrolinx open house last night and was able to view the presentation boards at full size. I noted that the height of the proposed bridge (the road level I think) is just slightly lower than the height of the existing train signals there. I will try to get a photo soon.
 
Unfortunately those mockups cannot be trusted to be completely accurate, but they may help force something more accurate to be created by Metrolinx just to show that it's not as bad as that.

An example of why the mockups cannot be trusted: compare the height of the bridge in the photo looking west along Wellington in regards to where (vertically) the bridge will pass beside the townhomes with the height of the bridge in the photos looking east along Duoro and in regards to where (vertically) is is shown passing by those same townhomes. It appears much higher on the photo looking west along Wellington. The actual thickness of the bridge is exaggerated for effect in all of the mockups, and of course the colour red has been used to intensify the sore-thumbedness of it all. Those who are opposed to the bridge only shoot themselves in the foot (in the eyes of others) by creating unrealistic 3D doomsday scenarios. Still, like I said, this may force Metrolinx to spend a little more money showing what this bridge would really look like, so that's a positive.

Finally I should reiterate that I am not against having the tracks lowered as far as subsequent safe and efficient operation of them will allow.

42
 
Too bad it won't look like that. It seems that what most people want here is to get the bridge as far out of view as possible and while that is one option, how about pursuing another. Instead of hiding the bridge, emphasize it. The plasticky, bright-red frame of the bridge in the suggested renderings would look amazing in real life. Make the bridge a piece of urban 'furnature' which can be interacted with and enjoyed by everyone.

We need to get out of the British tradition that mediocre is alright and into the continental European notion that infrastructure and public works should be worth looking at. A similar bridge in, say, Holland might actually look like the one in those renders while one outside Bedfordshire would surely embrace the idioms of the highway overpass.
 
I know who made the mock-ups and they're simply intended to help people who have a difficult time interpreting plans and descriptions. The mock-ups are pretty good considering they're just mock-ups. I think the height of the bridge looks accurate when you compare the bridge height to the existing signal height as also described in the Metrolinx plan drawing, but you're right - it's exaggerated in the mock-up with the west-facing view. Red was used for emphasis only; again as a visual aid. I would assume there would be some thickness of the structure for guardrails, etc. Lowered neighbouring streets are also not shown. Overall, these photos do help people visualize how/where the structure will be placed; that's all they're intended for. And at the end of the day, if we do have to settle for a bridge instead of a lowered rail corridor, of course it would be awesome for it to be a showpiece instead of another banal piece of highway infrastructure. But ideally the rail corridor will be lowered and this bridge will be a non-issue.
 
Last edited:
ProjectEnd said:
Too bad it won't look like that. It seems that what most people want here is to get the bridge as far out of view as possible and while that is one option, how about pursuing another. Instead of hiding the bridge, emphasize it. The plasticky, bright-red frame of the bridge in the suggested renderings would look amazing in real life. Make the bridge a piece of urban 'furnature' which can be interacted with and enjoyed by everyone.
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing. It would look great in winter - anything that brings a splash of colour to the city I would support 100%.

EDIT: Maybe this discussion on the bridge should be moved to T&I?
 
Errm, what?? I thought they recommended a railway underpass, so Strachan's elevation will change very little, if at all.
 
jks said:
Errm, what?? I thought they recommended a railway underpass, so Strachan's elevation will change very little, if at all.
Click to expand...

City council did recommend the railway underpass, yet despite the extensive study and community consultations that resulted in that reco, Metrolinx decided to proceed with the bridge overpass in their plans instead. This is part of the reason for the community outcry.
 
why not just move the road under the bridge???


Sure the road have some really steep slopes then but I think its best.
 
sorry i mean put the road under the railway tracks.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top