W. K. Lis
Superstar
Maybe don't call it an elevated GO Train, but call it a "subway". They'll still complain.
Visually the electrification supports on that overpass are going to be a much bigger issue than the overpass itself, and that only from viewpoints that are far enough to see over the overpass edge.
A GO/RER station at Lansdowne would be net good news for the city I'd say.
- The vacation streetcar yard ~250m north might just get a bit more enticing for a buyer.
- With a good design/favourable site plan of a combined structure you might get an accessible second exit/transfer for Lansdowne Subway.
- For UofT commuters from York region a few stops on the BD line might work better than backtracking from Union or using the Spadina line from Downsview Park.
- Might kick off another gentrification row of course
- Some light industrial/employment land would likely be lost unless those roofing businesses were relocated to the aforementioned streetcar yard. A bigger project than a few strips of concrete, for sure.
The structure Metrolinx has proposed is unprecedented in North America.
Can you point to the houses, schools, and coffee shops adjacent to that structure?
Not exactly related, but in keeping with the issue of grade-separating GO lines. What's the criteria for a road/rail grade-separation? Will all our RER lines have to be grade-separated? Is it only if the line is under 15mins, 7.5mins, or if a road sees x amount of many cars/hr?
Re impact on Davenport community - as previously stated, the added visual impact of electrification should be part of the debate from the start. Don't flash pictures of the Bloor Subway or the UPX Airport Spur as models of how innocuous the elevated line is, without adding graphics to demonstrate what a bilevel-capable, overhead-catenary line looks like. The single-level 'no-wires' look is as hyperbolic and misleading as the residents' efforts in the opposite direction. Leaving this unstated is exactly what creates mistrust about ML's proposal.
As a *goal*, the entire network should be totally grade separated. As a matter of *priority*, we should be working inwards to outwards, with the two criteria being a) tackle the most serious car-vs-train exposues first, b) create the longest no-slow-track stretches (crossings often have speed restrictions applied). There should be a continuing capital budget for this, which should be longstanding and outside any specific project envelope for a particular RER upgrade proposal.
Yeah, I agree the residents group is being hyperbolic but it's disingenuous to suggest that the UPX is the same thing. There are real concerns that should be addressed related to building a rail bridge through an existing neighbourhood and responding to their hyperbole with hyperbole is a bit hypocritical.