tstormers
Senior Member
Bridge piers going in!!
- Thread starter JasonParis
- Start date
drum118
Superstar
Timeframe is about right to take the line north to Hwy 7 and it will help the Yonge line once it opens. Going west is questionably to RC, let alone to the airport,. A lot of us will be gone by then especially when the next phase opens.to worry about as a lot of things can change between now for the next phase, let alone going west.
JBoogie
New Member
Some nice renderings for the Don Valley bridge!
reinventingthewheel
Active Member
T3G
Senior Member
Man, it's too bad we as a society have accepted value engineering the aesthetics right out of our public works.
Imagine, instead of a non descript concrete bridge of zero consequence, an elegant stone viaduct spanning the valley.
en.wikipedia.org
Imagine, instead of a non descript concrete bridge of zero consequence, an elegant stone viaduct spanning the valley.
Settle–Carlisle line - Wikipedia
asey20
New Member
That wouldn't be feasible but technically possible. Look at how much closer the piers are in comparison to the Ontario line renders. You'd have to somehow span across the DVP with those piers being much closer together. That would result in a pier placed between every few lanes (not sure how many exactly) of the DVP which would be a major disruption and reconfiguration of that section of the DVP. Also considerably more expensive.Man, it's too bad we as a society have accepted value engineering the aesthetics right out of our public works.
Imagine, instead of a non descript concrete bridge of zero consequence, an elegant stone viaduct spanning the valley.
Settle–Carlisle line - Wikipedia
Voltz
Senior Member
I know there have been plans in the past to build the DRL out farther. The switch to the OL line with its smaller stations and surface sections allowed it to be built out farther, some kind of backroom lobbying and interests must have been behind the switch. There is also the issue of the private sector financing, operations and maintenance, someone is making money off that.
T3G
Senior Member
I know why they did it the way they did, I just regret that we as a society are OK with accepting uglier designs to save money.
We'd never build a station like the IRT City Hall ever again:
asey20
New Member
81-717
Active Member
I thought the same about line 4 (taking it to STC vs going straight to McC/ShE).
I for one like the OL render way more. That stone viaduct just gives off 1600s vibes.
reinventingthewheel
Active Member
Your point stands about value engineering. However the criteria for this Don Valley bridge valued an unobtrusive design with low visual impact more than a cheap design. Consider that the lower Don Valley bridge for this same project has a much more stand out design, because the setting is more appropriate.
I will say that they’ve done a disservice by not shading this render better.
chrisw
Active Member
How feasible is a branched line with 90s headways?
adys123
Active Member
It would limit the branches to each a headway double that (i.e., 180 s), as 90 second headways are the maximum at this point.
christiesplits
Senior Member
That's the most Toronto-a** bridge ever. Hell, they'll find a way to value-engineer it further.
goodcitywhenfinished
Active Member
Until we can build metro systems on par with French construction costs, I really don't see the point in complaining about the aesthetics of bridges