Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang
Aesthetics are one thing, but that's only part of it. I don't think that overhead does any favours to the street below - shadowing, traffic, the "pedestrian realm".
The +15 and +30 bridges, and the height needed to clear the CPR tracks, would mean that the platforms will be far above the street. Or if the bridges are demo'd, that obviously impacts the indoor walkability of downtown.
So sure, I said "ugly baby", but I believe that the elevated option is subpar for more than just that.
And I think that most of all, this is just another way that the province is trying to save the city from itself. The province is exerting more power over municipalities and the their ability to make decisions. And the sad irony of it all is that the inaction and delays by the successive UCP governments is a key reason why we're at this point, and then they offer a half-baked solution as a "take it or leave it" to the city. After seemingly being OK with, and guaranteeing the funding for, the underground alignment.
So aside from being cheaper (probably), elevated doesn't really win in any other categories for me.
At this point I think that the city chose the only option available to them, otherwise the federal funding goes down the toilet. So get started on the Shepard to "Grand Central" bit because that has to be done anyway. It won't serve the majority of commuters until it gets into downtown proper, but... here we are.
|
Elevated actually wins for me before even considering costs. It's a better user experience. And IMO it is actually less harmful to the public realm where it really matters. (And then of course it's cheaper with cheaper OPEX)
A big thing overlooked in the city's plan is that
grade-change transitions have the most detrimental impact to the public realm and create dead zones. There is a chicken/egg thing where a lot of these dead zones don't seem so bad, because they are tucked up against a car-sewer-stroad like Macleod or 16th or Bow Tr or Memorial...but those were mostly self-fulfilled prophecies.
Transition to underground is arguably better than to elevated (red line along Macleod Tr, or Hounsfield Hts to go under 16th), but fewer transition zones is best of all. (lots of examples of elevated transition zones: Bow River crossings, Blue line @ Millenium Park, red line up the hill to SAIT, etc)
Some sort of transition is inevitable near Olympic Way. Elevated is mitigated by being right beside the heavy rail tracks (a hostile barrier in themselves), but the tunnel would have seen it on 11 Ave (unclear exactly where since they changed 4 St station to surface level).
But then in Eau Claire we would have had a double whammy going from underground to elevated, whereas a continuous elevated option is actually a lot less disruptive. Going to surface along Centre St would also likely mean transition zones near 16th.
So on the whole I'm not convinced the tunnelled alignment is significantly less disruptive to the public realm - especially where it should matter to us the most. But none of it is the end of the world either way. We just need better ways to move people.