06-28-2019, 06:05 PM
(06-28-2019, 05:38 PM)tomh009 Wrote:(06-28-2019, 04:01 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: All too typical. For an illustration of a proposed development, I think they have a responsibility to actually make the drawing match up with what could actually be built. I don’t expect them to measure exactly where every overhead support pole is, but taking note of which roads and rails actually surround the site is well within reasonable expectations.
Are they really proposing to eliminate Charles St. in favour of an LRT-only route? That’s what is depicted in the pictures, with large buildings on the site of GRR.
As ac3r says, these are actually conceptual ideas from the city's PARTS plan, not renders from Auburn.
And, yes, the city's expectation is that in the long run the GRR property will be developed, whether that be 10, 20 or 30 years from now. Obviously the city cannot force any development to happen there, but the property is 20% climbing gym and 80% surface parking: the goal is much greater intensity near the LRT stations.
Thanks, that does make more sense. However, my question about Charles St. stands: the illustration shows the tracks crossing something blue that looks like a water feature near the station. Charles St. itself is nowhere to be seen. Although on looking again I see there is a greyed-out car outline apparently driving on the blue. So who knows what is going on. They wouldn’t just put a big blue area to look more inviting even though there is no intention at all of removing the road, would they?