Kraus Development (525-565 Conestogo Road) | 3-35 fl | Proposed

[danbrotherston]

First of all, you could use a bit more respect than calling it a "ridiculous idea".

Second of all, could you provide some citations showing that it would cost 2-3 times as much? Bridges over the freeway cost a fortune, and the causeway would also be an expensive project.

As for a "significant ramp"...the reason the overpass must be so high is because the highway carries large vehicles. A tunnel does not need to be nearly so large. Which aside from making it cheaper, also makes the access ramps shorter.  And if we wanted to spend 2-3 times as much, we could probably regrade the highway (which is already slightly above ground level because of super-elevation) and make the tunnel level.

As for social safety issues, they can be a problem for tunnels, but if the tunnels are well designed, it significantly mitigates that issue. It is also the case that there are social safety issues for a near 300 meter long bridge and causeway.  I know tunnels can be done well, because I have seen tunnels done well...not here of course, but in other places.

I thought people would be happy a piece of pedestrian infrastructure like this is included in a potential proposal. Instead we went straight to a tunnel is better. 

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that a tunnel costs more than a bridge.  but here you go. https://wps.pearsoned.ca/ca_ab_faigley_p...index.html or https://www.pedbikeinfo.org/cms/download...ov2013.pdf or https://www.algonquin.org/egov/docs/1271...343597.pdf 

Not a civil engineer, so I don't know but I would assume a tunnel would need be a couple meters below the level of traffic, I guess they could construct a vehicle bridge over the pedestrian path. looking at google earth it does appear that the hwy is built up a bit so that would reduce the ramps down for a tunnel and increase the size of the ramp for a bridge. 

Still, I think we need to be realistic about what we should expect to be achieved. I am sure the developer and the city have come up with three potential options. Build a bridge, build a tunnel or do nothing. personally I see them doing nothing over building a tunnel.

Fair enough, I am glad there is something proposed, and ultimately, I don't think we're looking at any kind of final design...probably closer to a simcities level design.

As for cost, I'm not saying that a bridge is more expensive than an identical tunnel, I'm saying that the context of the design would make a tunnel cheaper because it is a much smaller structure. The specific context drives prices far more than the type of structure.