News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.4K     0 

I don't think diverging diamond is inherently bad. The problem is the speed of vehicles and lack of buffer space. Most on-ramps in Ontario don't have signalized crossings for on-ramps. You are expected to dash across the ramp and hope you can clear it before a car already going 90 kph dives down the ramp. That (admittedly bad) design from Springfield at least has signalized crossings!
 
Getting a diverging diamond interchange here would be pretty awesome, actually. It's much better than just building more flyover ramps, and it's not like the pedestrian experience here can get much worse.
 
salsa said:
I hope that improved cycling infrastructure will be included in this interchange redesign. There was a really nice proposal a few years ago that would be great to see implemented.


Click to expand...

Let's all pitch in and send a few emails to the relevant city and provincial decision makers to get some pedestrian and cycling goodies bundled with this project. Heck, I'll volunteer as tribute - I email the city incessantly until they fix potholes on my street...
 
To piggy back on my previous post, I am struggling to understand the city's logic WRT road repair. I contacted 311 to request some small road repairs - sunken sewer grates and short (100 metres) patches of particularly bumpy road. They responded that repairs will be done sometime in the next four years. How does it take that long to perform what seem like very minor repairs? Perhaps they're bundling it with major road reconstructions which I understand have their own schedules. But it makes no sense leaving all repairs until a major rebuild. How is the road supposed to be maintained in passable condition until then?
 
the new zenway overpass looks a little bit off (when viewed from Highway 7). i dont know if that's just me?
 
salsa said:
I hope that improved cycling infrastructure will be included in this interchange redesign. There was a really nice proposal a few years ago that would be great to see implemented.


Click to expand...

Putting a bridge/bikeway/walkway under the 401 between Yonge Street and Yonge Blvd. would not be that expensive, but because it would displease their automobile gods, the politicians and bureaucrats will find ANY excuse NOT to build it.
 
W. K. Lis said:
Putting a bridge/bikeway/walkway under the 401 between Yonge Street and Yonge Blvd. would not be that expensive, but because it would displease their automobile gods, the politicians and bureaucrats will find ANY excuse NOT to build it.
Click to expand...
Similar thing happened on Credit River Bridge over QEW. The concept that won out was a separated sidewalk on the QEW for pedestrians and Active Transportation. https://qewcreditriver.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Appendix-E-Reference-Design.pdf (although I could see it changing to below).

I thought a better solution was a pedestrian bridge under the deck - either between the arches (where the current work platform is) or between the 2 boxes of the new Segmental Bridge or under the overhang.
1603555107026.png
 
Transportfan said:
Why would they even accommodate cyclists and pedestrians on a freeway crossing anyways?
Click to expand...
At the Credit River Bridge, the idea is to provide an additional connection across the Credit River. Between Dundas and Lakeshore, the only crossing is the QEW Bridge. And for someone on Mississauga Road, Dundas can only be accessed by back-tracking very far westward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: max
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top