reaperexpress said:
Seriously, guys?

UP-Express-train.jpeg


union-pearson-express.jpg
Click to expand...
I did consider UP, but even if it's technically Regional Rail, in my mind I classify it as something else - and I can't really explain why. Maybe because it's not long distance enough, and it kind of exists in its own weird bubble.
 
sche said:
Decisions like whether or not to tunnel should be made solely from a cost-benefit perspective. Does it provide enough benefit to justify the additional cost, how can we maximize benefit-cost ratio. Obviously some costs and benefits are not easily quantifiable, but still, weighing costs and benefits is the only valid reasoning for justifying a project. If visual impact and slightly more noise for a few dozen homes is worth a couple hundred million, then bury the Davenport Diamond. If not, don’t. Whether or not other projects wasted money or not should never be a part of that equation.
Click to expand...

Sure, but is it how projects are being done by Metrolinx though? To make that claim requires consistency - and we know this principle isn't consistently applied.

AoD
 
robmausser said:
They are building all the Leslie / Sheppard condos next to the 401 with large balconies on them. Makes no sense to me, a solarium would be much better. Can use it all year round and with triple pane windows, can actually enjoy it.

Actually I find most people don't even use balconies at all. They are more a status symbol. In my building, no one barely uses them, except my neighbour of course, who has loud parties on them until 3am.... of course.
Click to expand...
Yum, breathe in all the those nitric oxides 👌
 
sche said:
The fact that money is being wasted in one place is not an argument for wasting money in other places.
Click to expand...

If you believe parks, sky, quiet, and the public domain are a waste then you have a point. However if building a real park through the city that isn't littered with concrete columns and which isn't the primary source of noise in the community has value, then I don't see your point here.

Does building a city that you can appreciate as you walk around it, or where you can sit on a park bench and read a book matter? A purely utilitarian view of things tells us parks are a waste of money... we need to pay for their upkeep, we don't charge admission fees, it is space that could be generating revenue or fulfilling a more obviously beneficial purpose like farming or housing. To borrow the sentiment expressed by someone else in this thread: if you want trees, grass, and sky then leave the city and go to a forest and meadow.

My question is, do we really need to trade away the excellence of our city to have transportation or can we accept that we can have both transportation and livability and for a similar price to what we are paying now.
 
Last edited:
One other point is that cost benefit accounting has long been biased against the environment, and that includes both the natural environment and the livability of the urban environment. How much could the city make selling High Park to a high rise condo developer? Whatever accounting you might use to show that turning down billions of dollars to save trees, grass, and pathways in High Park if applied to Davenport Diamond might show you that same accounting tells you to put the rail corridor underground.
 
brianyyz said:
Not even that in the Netherlands, and things seem to run there fine enough
Click to expand...
The highest speed at which trains directly pass platforms in the Netherlands is 140 km/h.

VIA Rail already passes platforms at up to 160 km/h, and GO passes at up to 150 km/h.

 
reaperexpress said:
The highest speed at which trains directly pass platforms in the Netherlands is 140 km/h.

VIA Rail already passes platforms at up to 160 km/h, and GO passes at up to 150 km/h.

Click to expand...
It didn't sound like the bells were ringing on the passing train, and non of its headlights were on. Do they not sound bells when they go straight through? Feels like the headlights should be on. That whole situation looked super dangerous with a slowing train acting as a distraction for a very fast moving one.
 
First shot was exactly one year ago today, the last VIA northbound (an equipment move) before construction began.

Remaining shots are from today.

Work is definitely progressing - all the pylons are poured, both end structures are coming along nicely.

When I tried to imagine what it will look like with the bridging added, I can't say I am thrilled. The space under the guideway is not as high as the renders seemed to suggest - I think it may end up being a bit claustrophobic underneath.The airiness of the walk along Wallace Ave will definitely suffer.

I'm not impressed with the gap between the existing sound wall and the new structure south of Wallace. That kind of narrow opening just begs the wrong types of occupancy. The old wall doesn't seem to be retaining anything, so maybe it will be torn down.

It is interesting to compare the look of Campbell Park today with the renders that the community prepared way back at the beginning. Not as obtrusive as feared, perhaps, but not as bright and cheery as ML suggested either. My overall rating was meh.

- Paul



20210321 VIA P007.jpg
20220321 GO Davenport a.jpg
20220321 GO Davenport b.jpg
20220321 GO Davenport c.jpg
20220321 GO Davenport d.jpg
20220321 GO Davenport e.jpg
20220321 GO Davenport f.jpg
 
crs1026 said:
First shot was exactly one year ago today, the last VIA northbound (an equipment move) before construction began.

Remaining shots are from today.

Work is definitely progressing - all the pylons are poured, both end structures are coming along nicely.

When I tried to imagine what it will look like with the bridging added, I can't say I am thrilled. The space under the guideway is not as high as the renders seemed to suggest - I think it may end up being a bit claustrophobic underneath.The airiness of the walk along Wallace Ave will definitely suffer.

I'm not impressed with the gap between the existing sound wall and the new structure south of Wallace. That kind of narrow opening just begs the wrong types of occupancy. The old wall doesn't seem to be retaining anything, so maybe it will be torn down.

It is interesting to compare the look of Campbell Park today with the renders that the community prepared way back at the beginning. Not as obtrusive as feared, perhaps, but not as bright and cheery as ML suggested either. My overall rating was meh.

- Paul



View attachment 386896View attachment 386897View attachment 386898View attachment 386899View attachment 386900View attachment 386901View attachment 386902
Click to expand...
This is going to be so cool once complete. Can’t wait to see VIA’s Canadian fly over it.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top