Much ado about a bridge
As we move towards more frequent service on the Georgetown, Milton and Barrie/Bradford GO lines, as well as implement an express train to the airport and increase VIA rail services, there is a need to separate trains from cars at Strachan Avenue, just west of the approach to Union Station. However, there appears to be a showdown brewing over the preferred option. Metrolinx, the regional transit authority, is recommending that Strachan Avenue be raised above the tracks, while the city of Toronto is recommending that the tracks be lowered below Strachan Avenue.I'm not going to take sides quite, but I have reproduced the planning matrix from the City of Toronto's report:
| Strachan Overpass | Railway Underpass | |
|---|---|---|
| Street Network Connectivity | VERY POOR Maintains Strachan connections Removes 3 east/west connections Impacts Quality Meats Access | VERY GOOD Maintains existing patterns and allows for improvements |
| Open Space Community | VERY GOOD Does not impact open space | VERY GOOD Maintains existing patterns and allows for improvements |
| Pedestrian/cyclist Experience | VERY POOR Unattractive ped. environment No cycling lanes Very long approaches Increased change in grade | VERY GOOD Maintains existing patterns and allows for improvements |
| Existing Development Impact | VERY POOR Disconnects 460m of existing frontage Overshadows existing development | VERY GOOD Maintains existing patterns and allows for improvements |
| Development Potential | VERY POOR High Impact on adjacent sites Restricted frontage south of crossing Restricted access to Triangle Lands | VERY GOOD Maintains existing patterns and allows for improvements |
| Cost and Feasibility | POOR Medium impact on utilities No impact on railway operations during construction Difficult construction with adjacent existing development ~ $25 million | VERY POOR High impact on utilities Cost of new trackage Impacts railway operations during construction ~ $125 million |
As we can see, lowering the railway is the optimal solution, but it costs a heck of a lot more than the sub-optimal solution. Taking a look at the broader issue,
If the objective is to separate cars from trains, do urban design considerations justify spending much more than the absolute minimum necessary to get the job done?
If so, how much more?
Is the city paying for the construction, or is the province paying through Metrolinx?
How would the recommendation change if the opposite party were the one paying for the construction?
We are at the intersection of city-building and fiscal responsibility, and the rhetoric has already started to fly. But, why does it always seem to be about bridges in this city?
Labels: politics, urban design
posted by Andrae Griffith @ 9:23 p.m.
5 Comments:
Would building a rail underpass not cancel all service of these lines during construction?
Not necessarily cancel, but it would severely impact service. There are currently four tracks and you would likely have to take two out of service at any given time.
Do you know why building an underpass for Strachan, under the tracks is not being considered?
It was considered but was not recommended for various reasons. Since I had to reproduce the table by hand I hope you can appreciate why I only copied the two options that are still in the running.
Someone once told me about the Bloor Street Viaduct, and how important it was that they built the train deck "just in case". To me, this 100 million dollar expense, while quite a chunk of change, is justified. Looking back, we will be glad we made the choice not to build the Strachan rollercoaster.
Nice comment about "why it always seems to be about bridges". The connection points in the city are at issue: are we willing to put the effort (and cash) into straight forward connections, or are we going to have to
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home