Build the damn thing and build it now, community be damned.

As an Ontario taxpayer I would not be happy if $400M+ were wasted on a completely unnecessary tunnel just to satisfy a few hundred wealthy NIMBYs.

We can't let these NIMBYs hold progress hostage.
 
Today, all bridges must have enclosed bottoms to stop material falling below especially over rivers, creeks, water from an environment position and safety points over roads.

The elevated section will also have enclosed bottoms from a safety point.

Its a mistake to delay TRAP. Having the MPP calling for it shows they are listening to their voters so they can be reelected in 2018 is a political game.

There been talk for years that there would be a station at St Clair and there should be one. Depending if its a fully size station with car drop off or a small walk-in with short platforms for smaller trains, you are looking at $15m to $30m for the station.

The old station that was there was 2 track with a platform on the bridge and curve on the east side. If Metrolinx wants to do the same thing, then the bridge will have to be widen. It most likely will have to be widen if there is to be a 3 track platform for the station.
 
drum118 said:
Its a mistake to delay TRAP. Having the MPP calling for it shows they are listening to their voters so they can be reelected in 2018 is a political game.
Click to expand...
tumblr_inline_nzfevykxev1rg0x34_500.jpg
 
Isn't it this week that the TPAP is supposed to "start". I've seen some concern in the community that they are worried once it starts it can't be stopped. I think in theory the Minister(s) could stop it at any time if they really wanted to, just like they recently did with the GTA West.
 
Allandale25 said:
Isn't it this week that the TPAP is supposed to "start". I've seen some concern in the community that they are worried once it starts it can't be stopped. I think in theory the Minister(s) could stop it at any time if they really wanted to, just like they recently did with the GTA West.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Lots of EA's get completed but the work never commences. In this case, I find it hard to believe that the finding will be "no environmental impact". This one will be about what can be done to mitigate the impact and is that sufficient. So it's a discussion to have, not one to avoid.

I walked under the TTC overpass at Old Mill yesterday. It's the closest thing I can find to compare the proposed bridge to. My reaction was - "Hey, this isn't so bad". It's not the Gardiner. Indian Road-Bloor is pretty similar. If ML can improve on that, they can likely provide a defensible option for TPAP. That's not ramming this down anyone's throat.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
I walked under the TTC overpass at Old Mill yesterday. It's the closest thing I can find to compare the proposed bridge to. My reaction was - "Hey, this isn't so bad". It's not the Gardiner. Indian Road-Bloor is pretty similar. If ML can improve on that, they can likely provide a defensible option for TPAP. That's not ramming this down anyone's throat.

- Paul
Click to expand...

Good suggestion for a comparison regarding Old Mill. Looked it up on Google Maps.

old-mill.png
 
1overcosc said:
Build the damn thing and build it now, community be damned.

As an Ontario taxpayer I would not be happy if $400M+ were wasted on a completely unnecessary tunnel just to satisfy a few hundred wealthy NIMBYs.

We can't let these NIMBYs hold progress hostage.
Click to expand...

Add the St. Clair Stop and Build the damn thing and build it now.
 
drum118 said:
Today, all bridges must have enclosed bottoms to stop material falling below especially over rivers, creeks, water from an environment position and safety points over roads.
Click to expand...

So are you suggesting that all of the open-decked bridges that CN and CP have built over the past 5 years are against the law? All of the bridges that have been rehabbed in that time as well?

There is nothing wrong or illegal about building an open-decked bridge, and even some benefits for it in certain situations. But there are a lot of drawbacks to them as well.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
smallspy said:
So are you suggesting that all of the open-decked bridges that CN and CP have built over the past 5 years are against the law? All of the bridges that have been rehabbed in that time as well?

There is nothing wrong or illegal about building an open-decked bridge, and even some benefits for it in certain situations. But there are a lot of drawbacks to them as well.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
Click to expand...

Will the proposed 2 separate bridge solution allow for an interconnection of the separate bridges at a later date? I think this is an important consideration. Won't the piles have to be connected at the bottom to esure there is not lateral movement of one but not the other?

I hope they are considering this when they are doing the engineering.
 
Sounds like we could hear tomorrow if MPP Martins was successful at getting the Minister(s) to delay/suspend the TPAP for the grade separation. This was posted by the community group who is against the bridge:

""I [MPP Martins] got this update from Cristina Martins' office today, in response to my question about whether she had gotten a response from Glen Murray about delaying the TPAP. If you haven't written your letter yet, tonight's the night!

"I am told that we can expect a response by the latest tomorrow (27th). You and Sam will be the first to hear to from us, I can assure you of that.
I would definitely encourage Options and those concerned to continue the email/letter writing campaign. Alternatively, if you could provide us with the latest petition numbers we can use it in a last push today and tomorrow.""
 
MPP Christina Martin posted this on Facebook:


RE: Davenport Diamond Rail Crossing – TPAP

Dear Neighbours,

On January 18th, 2016 Metrolinx hosted it’s most recent public meeting regarding their proposal to remove the Davenport Diamond rail crossing by building an 1.4km elevated guideway through the existing GO rail corridor.

At this meeting we heard the community’s concerns regarding safety, noise, vibration, ridership, and the need for a full assessment of all of the options. As a result, I wrote to the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change, the Hon. Glen Murray on the community’s behalf, requesting that the Transit Project Assessment Process (TPAP) be delayed until these concerns were properly addressed.

This afternoon Minister Murray responded to my letter stating that the Transit Project Assessment Process is a “proponent-led, self-assessment process,” meaning that the Minister does not have the authority to delay the submission of the Notice of Commencement set to begin on January 28th, 2016. Subsequently, Metrolinx will have 120 days to receive feedback from the public, which must be both addressed and documented. At the end of this period a final Environmental Project Report is submitted by Metrolinx to the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change. If outstanding concerns remain at the end of TPAP, residents can submit objections to the Ministry for consideration. Once TPAP is completed and objections are received, the Minister can either give the proponent a notice allowing the project to proceed; a notice requiring further consideration, or a notice allowing them to proceed subject to conditions set out in the notice.

I remain committed to holding Metrolinx accountable to a project that engages our residents and includes the types of world class legacy pieces that bring real benefits to our community. This means continuing to advocate for a new GO Station along this rail corridor so residents can utilize Regional Express Rail as an efficient, alternative and electrified mode of transit as well as ensuring that we connect communities within Davenport.

As your MPP, I will continue to take any concerns you may have directly to Metrolinx and the Minister of Transportation. As we move into the Transit Project Assessment Process for the removal of the Davenport Diamond, I want to encourage you to remain engaged and I look forward to hearing from all of you.

Sincerely,
Cristina
 
Cristina Martins said:
This afternoon Minister Murray responded to my letter stating that the Transit Project Assessment Process is a “proponent-led, self-assessment process,” meaning that the Minister does not have the authority to delay the submission of the Notice of Commencement set to begin on January 28th, 2016.
Click to expand...

Translation: My strongly worded last-minute letter was ignored because I wrote it to the wrong person.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top