03-15-2016, 02:19 PM
(03-15-2016, 01:23 PM)timc Wrote:(03-15-2016, 01:16 PM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: A lot of "let's save costs by avoiding these areas" (Hespeler/Eagle) followed by "let's add in many other stops, including some egregiously expensive ones." (Preston)
I didn't see "let's save costs" in there. It was more like "nobody lives on Hespeler, so why should the LRT go there?" and "keep the BRT on Hespeler and run the LRT through Preston".
I wonder what percentage of the respondents were from Preston.
"Minimize conflicts with CP and grade separation" speaks to going to the Hespeler/Eagle intersection. You have to cross rail twice just to hit that intersection, very costly.
The discussion I heard when attending, regarding Preston, was the desire for a stop right before the line heads East on Eagle. Putting a stop there, with the grade and curve and waterway issues, would be the most expensive stop on the entire line, even beyond the grade separation at King and Victoria, according to the professionals in attendance. Those same residents were also very unmoved by being able to walk to alternate stops, proposed or possible, in relatively similar timelines, with the goal of not having an egregiously expensive stop, and equally against seeing European-style development by following King down through to the Delta.
It's because we have no one living on Hespeler that we can dream about turning a completely auto-dominated landscape of massive scale into a place oriented away from its main current purpose. I advocated for keeping LRT in as straight an alignment as possible down King/Coronation, and turning the aBRT into full on BRT with at least its own paint if not physically separated lanes on Hespeler, giving an east Cambridge option which would go north to the future development at Speedsville and Maple Grove, hooking west to sportsworld.