Hopefully that isn't a big subway viaduct-bridge blocking the great view from Riverdale Park.
Riverdale East and West is a park I know and love. I wouldn’t have presented this idea if it detracted from the park in any way. One of the reasons I’m so confident in the feasibility is that I know the park and valley very well. The viaduct would be low, out of the way, and wouldn’t interfere with the park’s eastern or western sightlines. I’ve been debating whether I should tackle sketching out a rendering to show how it would look from a human or ground-level POV. But this Streetview from Humber Valley gives a rough idea:
There’s no denying that bridges are pretty cool, and that they can incorporate neat designs that provide a local benefit. This point from the study of Yonge North extension’s crossing of the East Don is similar to my line of thinking:
While a bridge alternative is highly visual and provides an opportunity to create a gateway structure / feature for the community, it also increases the potential for a change in character of the heritage district. One way to mitigate the visual effects of the bridge alternative is to incorporate heritage features in the design of the bridge.
The alignment needs to intersect with the high density/lower income areas at Cosburn/Pave and Thorncliffe Village. Not servicing those areas to save money would be irresponsible, IMO.
Yeah, well. This is just an idea. This isn’t supposed to be an insult to East York. I respect the area and have watched it improve over the years. And Pape Village is an excellent example of older, “human scale” high-density development. Not to mention that it proves that modern day Jane Jacobs-esque urban theories aren’t anything new. To be quite honest, I find those low, mid, and highrise buildings around Cosburn to be a helluva lot more “human scale” and pedestrian-friendly than the majority of condos going up downtown.
As well, for a partial component of this alternative DRL I’ve been mulling the idea of mapping out an extension of the streetcar system in this area. Basically it would be a branch of the 504 and 505 northward from Broadview, using one or two E/W streets to reach Coxwell and loop around. Or travel across the Leaside Bridge into Thorncliffe.
In a previous post I mentioned how the DRL downtown can allow for the shuttering of one E/W downtown streetcar line. Well, alternately this could also allow for ongoing extensions of the system into the inner suburbs. Not as some Transit City-lite, but rather a gradual expansion of the local-service legacy streetcar system. Many neighbourhoods would be receptive to this investment.
***
What I find interesting about transit lines and infrastructure investment is the psychology at play. There are lot of parallels between posters’ reaction to this altered DRL and realworld examples like Sheppard. People want it one way, and can’t comprehend anything different. If Metrolinx ends up using the abandoned Don Branch as a psuedo-DRL (which I wouldn’t rule out as a possibility), there are going to be some mighty angry people. Just like Save Our Sheppard, protestors can form a group like Save Our Pape and elect a crazy guy who promises to ‘git r done’