Riverdale Rink Rat
Senior Member
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2008
- Messages
- 2,775
- Reaction score
- 273
- Location
- Back to East York... Alas!
The ramp speed wouldn't be any different than what exists if the ramp touches down close to Eastern, if anything it could be shallower with realignment.
As for the stormwater facility, that is an un-designed project at this time. I don't see how building the land-side of a storm-water facility (it's actually a sediment trap facility) under a realigned Gardiner could be less plausible than "utilize existing DVP ramps" as shown in Slide 39, when their overlay clearly shows that half of those existing ramp supports would be in the middle of the expanded river mouth (ie. would have to be rebuilt in the riverbed). The Lower Donlands Framework Plan (here) shows more detail of what they are claiming would interfere...it just doesn't sound right.
Jcam/Vegeta's solution has to go under the rail bridge, then hang a much tighter turn, or go over the rail bridge sky high and then come back down to the Gardiner. I suspect that, due to cost considerations, the team who did the survey rejected an 'over the rail bridge' solution out of hand. That might be wrong, but it's not nefarious. And, I'd say, it's not wrong.
And to say the floodway is 'undesigned' is reaching. That's all they've been doing from the start of this project, designing the floodwater protection in such a way as to allow for development.