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

[DonValleyRainbow]

"Looking East at Campbell Avenue Park - After (with Overpass)"

That image is probably a direct shot back at Options for Davenport and their rendering.

 

[salsa]

The pro-tunnel group has argued before that the trees in Erwin Krickhahn Park would be endangered by the bridge, in part because the pillars would interfere with the roots. Well guess what, is a cut-and-cover trench gonna protect them?

 

[salsa]

Two more images:

Campbell Avenue Park looking under

Wallace Square looking south

 

[crs1026]

The new renderings appear to have taken some inspiration from the "deficiencies" that the residents' earlier renderings alluded to - that's useful. The surface finishes are different and the point has been taken that existing vegetation needs to be conserved.

The trench approach certainly points to an awful lot of pile driving next to residential areas. If I had a spare moment I'd compare the distance trenched to the West Toronto Diamond project. This one has to be at least as much pile driving. And we know how much fun *that* was for the community.

- Paul

 

[Adjei]

Metrolinx says that the greener features, including more pathways, more park space and greenery growing up the sides of the structure, will raise the cost of the project from about $140 million to about $200 million. The agency’s Anne Marie Aikins said it is committed to picking up the tab for public realm improvements.

It is also still considering two new stations on the Barrie GO line near Bloor St. and St. Clair Ave., that could offer more transit to that community.


http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/tra...ightens-design-for-davenport-rail-bridge.html

 

[SaugeenJunction]

Interestingly, it looks like Metrolinx dropped the capacity for a 3rd track on the bridge (unless my information is incorrect). According to this anti-bridge picture, the bridge would accommodate 3 tracks:

Whereas in this new Metrolinx rendering, there are only catenaries for 2 tracks, and the separated bridge decks for the rails only look wide enough for 1 train each:

 

[W. K. Lis]

Wonder if those who still want the tunnel or nothing, will not no increases in taxes to pay for a tunnel? If you want lower taxes, we'll have to go with a bridge.

 

[vic]

Though the OfD rendering of Campbell Park may be a bit extreme, you'd have to be delusional to think that whatever Metrolinx builds here will look anything like these renderings.

 

[crs1026]

I very much doubt that ML will waive the option of adding a third bridge at some later date. That detail was probably not mentioned in the interests of prettier artwork.

The ML rendering of Campbell Ave Park, which looks as spacious as Center Island, is quite misleading. The east side of the tracks is zoned employment/industrial. There won't be a two-sided greenspace in that location. ML hasn't said what it will do to the current underpass at Dupont, either.

This version is better than the last version, and ML has done some listening. At the end of the day, it still comes down to a choice between an intrusive bridge or a doubly expensive and still quite intrusive trench that takes twice as long and is twice as painful to build. Personally, I'd say the residents are better off with a bridge, two new GO stations, and a bunch of money spent on parks and greenery, but it's a painful proposition.

- Paul

 

[dowlingm]

So the bridge now costs 40pc more and has 33pc less track. But don't worry, Metrolinx will "assume" the extra cost from their store of magic beans...

 

[crs1026]

So the bridge now costs 40pc more and has 33pc less track. But don't worry, Metrolinx will "assume" the extra cost from their store of magic beans...

We haven't exactly seen a comprehensive project plan and budget for Barrie RER in the first place, so we can't exactly weigh how much this latest change impacts the project's viability or prudence. Magic beans is exactly how ML works. Your point?

I would say both sides of this argument are likely true. The residents may be extracting some questionable goodies from this exercise, but ML's initial proposal may have been unrealistically cheap and lacking in regard for impacts on the surrounding area. The right solution is probably somewhere in between.

- Paul

 

[M II A II R II K]

With the shorter elevated section they'll still have to double track the remaining sections on the ground. Wonder how long they would have to shut down the Barrie line for that.

 

[mdrejhon]

Metrolinx says that the greener features, including more pathways, more park space and greenery growing up the sides of the structure, will raise the cost of the project from about $140 million to about $200 million.

I'll take it over a tunnel costing way over half a billion dollars.

Doing a 50 percent overspend to greatly prettify an ugly bridge, still keeps it cheap compared to a tunnel.

It is a bittersweet compromise, but sensible for any Barrie RER plan.

And....maybe a small bit of extra budget could also go into signalling upgrades, With resignalling for three minute head ways, you can do a lot out of just two tracks. The French and Japanese manage to move more trains faster over a two track corridor than Omtario can with a three track!!

 

[BurlOak]

More berm and less bridge than in previous renderings.

That should mean lower cost.

 

[vic]

That should mean lower cost.

Yes. But their whole selling feature of this bridge is all the land that it unlocks underneath. Now it's just a stub between Wallace and Dupont. But it will sparkle, I guess.