Or all around
officedweller said:
How about under the line 😳
Click to expand...

Or all around the station? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Liziba station - Wikipedia
1607606305977.png

Photo by David290
 
nfitz said:
How is expropriating and demolishing houses "the tiny corner of a park"?

Extreme statements on either side don't help.
Click to expand...

For better or for worse, land taking is very common for major transit projects, it happens a lot quicker in countries where they build for less money and hence are building a lot more. Theres a very reasonable argument to be made around the needs of the many vs. the needs of the few. Compensating someone to relocate so that massive amounts of time can be saved, emissions can be reduced, connectivity can be improved, other properties can be redeveloped is a seemingly very good tradeoff, especially in the central orbit of a massive city.
 
I guess there are different views on whether someone can have sentimental attachment to property that overrides the greater good. I think it is more than fair to buy at perhaps a small premium to market prices--premium to compensate for having to move when one does not otherwise plan to, which is a burden.
 
afransen said:
I guess there are different views on whether someone can have sentimental attachment to property that overrides the greater good. I think it is more than fair to buy at perhaps a small premium to market prices--premium to compensate for having to move when one does not otherwise plan to, which is a burden.
Click to expand...

I think thats generally how expropriation works
 
I'd argue it's not just sentimental attachment, but a difference in values. For a lot of people, even an above market payout is not worth the damage to the community (and the loss of their home).

Especially in a case like this where it really isn't necessary.
 
jelbana said:
If Eglinton West and the Scarborough subway weren't being proposed to be built almost completely underground, and the same value engineering was used everywhere, then it would've made it harder to argue for burying the line for reasons like the above. Right now, there is absolutely no credibility in the arguments being put forth for the Ontario Line, even if it is hypothetically the right technical design.
Click to expand...

There's that - and a nearly ready-to-go-plan (the DRL South) the province scrapped for no good reason.
 
40m is a bit oddball. Here for the SRL there'll likely be 4 car trains (so at a guess 80-100m) and the two new Sydney Metro lines proposed are at least 4, some maybe 6 car.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top