News   Apr 03, 2020
 8.2K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 9.4K     0 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 3.1K     0 

High Level Bridge

That 'last spike' photo in the video is going to fvck up people's perception of the past in the future.
 
FMahjlXUcAUF6FD


 
Am I reading this right, based on the article they are only really exploring option B2?

I have to say I love the high level bridge a lot but if they are saying, as the article states, the bridge will not be fit to handle the load of a train why would they be considering anything but the C options for a new bridge? Is it possible they would build a second bridge just for the train?
 
Am I reading this right, based on the article they are only really exploring option B2?

I have to say I love the high level bridge a lot but if they are saying, as the article states, the bridge will not be fit to handle the load of a train why would they be considering anything but the C options for a new bridge? Is it possible they would build a second bridge just for the train?
I think that's the right answer. It's a historic structure, and one of our most famous assets. So they definitely wouldn't want to demolish it. And it might be cheaper in the long run to keep using the bridge for its original purposes, and construct a purpose-built bridge for the trains down the road if that ever actually happens. Plus, if a rail line is in the works, the city could probably get the province, feds, or whatever private company is involved to chip in.
 
As much as I value the HLB as a historic resource, I think time is limited for practical use, and Options A and B mean kicking the can down the road.
Option C could still involve the HLB streetcar line, so long as the original bridge isn't demolished. I just think it makes more sense to hold on a replacement until the city has some leverage to try and get help with funding it (EG a specific high speed rail proposal).
 
Requirements for upgraded/new High Level Bridge:
• 2 lanes of traffic both ways (4 total). Additional lane added to Walterdale Bridge (4 total) and converted to two-way traffic.
• Radial railway tracks, bike path and sidewalk installed on upgraded/new High Level Bridge.

Any option that does not satisfy the requirements above should not be considered.
 
Well my vote is to fix all deficiencies on the current bridge, widen the top deck to allow the radial railway and multi-year trail, completely improve/change the north approach to allow free flow access to the top deck from the ledge grounds and Ezio Fatone park.

Also (and I know this is probably not possible, but who knows with new technology) re-install a new great divide waterfall off of the bridge.
 
Demolishing the High Level shouldn't even be on the table unless its condition deteriorates to that point (but it won't with maintenance).

They'll prob end up going with the high level line and then build a new bridge down the line for road traffic and trains.
 
Demolishing the High Level shouldn't even be on the table unless its condition deteriorates to that point (but it won't with maintenance).

They'll prob end up going with the high level line and then build a new bridge down the line for road traffic and trains.
It's a Municipal Historic Resource so Council would have to vote to remove it from the Register first before demolition is even considered.
 
They'll prob end up going with the high level line and then build a new bridge down the line for road traffic and trains.
I'm glad that the city acknowledges it needs to talk with both the high level line and the streetcar folks; given the narrow space they have to work with, it's important that the two modes are integrated safely. It makes sense to look at them both at the same time during this project, rather than trying to fit the shared use paths in later on down the road.
 

Back
Top