News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.4K     0 

44 North said:
Was about to post about how sweet that would be to have an elevated boardwalk trail, with similarities to what exists at Brickworks. And that there's ample space to weave it through. But looking at a property map...dang. How is it people can own right up to the water's edge outside a rural area? People even owns parts of the islets! Would've thought TRCA would've rescinded this by decree half a century ago.

View attachment 217594
Click to expand...

Conservation authorities are not municipal parks departments. The post-Hazel floodplain controls that prompted the creation of the watershed-based authorities in the first place was about structures - primarily residences - not land ownership. The goal was to protect them from future human incursion, and therefore risk to life. The various authorities have bought up lands in the intervening years but primarily for their own purposes. I would imagine available public money back in the '50s and '60s was no easier to come by than today.
 
innsertnamehere said:
Mineola and Indian Rd should be connected with a bridge, along with the Queensway.

I don't see as much a need for service road connections across the river. The two bridges above should remove most local traffic off the QEW.
Click to expand...

A definite yes to the Queensway connection.

Agree that Mineola/Indian Rd looks like a logical connection spot; but the way the road does not serve as a proper grid road to the east strikes me as problematic. Fixable; but not cheap, I'd like to see a smooth connection to Atwater as part of any project, but that's me.

Not directly related here, but Mississauga also desparately needs a N-S Grid Road between Erin Mills and Hurontario that crosses both the QEW and the Valley.

There don't appear to be a lot of good choices. Mavis/Stavebank ends up quite close to Hurontario and doesn't really address the gap at Lakeshore.

I'd be inclined to try to unify Creditview/Erindale Stn/Glengarry, but there' no obvious connection on the other side to get you all the way south. Not cheap, lots of things to consider spending lots of dollars, always a need to prioritize.

Queensway makes the most obvious sense of any project and should end up on a near-term capital plan.
 
crs1026 said:
........that is the primary issue to ring bells at TCRA.
Click to expand...
Couple of notes here: One, this is not TRCA jurisdiction but CVCA (Credit Valley Conservation Authority)

crs1026 said:
It speaks to the relative slope of the river bed. Those houses are high enough that there is little or no prospect of flooding
- Paul
Click to expand...

Note Two..........the prospects of many of these homes flooding are in fact not immaterial; here is the regulatory floodplain map for this section.

1575044047188.png
 
innsertnamehere said:
Mineola and Indian Rd should be connected with a bridge, along with the Queensway.

I don't see as much a need for service road connections across the river. The two bridges above should remove most local traffic off the QEW.
Click to expand...
I guess you haven't seen or try to drive between Hurontario and Erin Mills/Southdown Rd when something happens on the QEW in this area?? Even with those 2 bridges in place, traffic will still be backup close to what takes place today.

More important is how far can you take Mineola west and what impact will it have on the people on those streets????

Hazel has stated a number of times that not building the Queensway over the river was one of her great mistake as mayor.

The biggest issue for Mississauga for over 30 years is the lack of true continues n-s/e-w roads.

The late Ward 1 councilor was going to push the Queensway extension all the way over to 403 with an interchange there this term, regardless if it went through the backyard of the mayor.

The service road would allow the local folks a faster trip to/from home and leaving the QEW to drivers who are passing Mississauga in the first place. I have called for these service roads the last 2 decades and was told it would upset the NIMBY folks who live in the area, especially the south side ones.

Like I have said far too long, 60% of Mississauga needs to be bulldoze and rebuild correctly, other than real old parts of the city. Getting across the Credit river has been an issues since I started to live in the city.

Don't support keeping the bridges and rarely I dive over them.
 
If the bridge were to be slated for demolition, it could be relocated, perhaps for Mineola/Indian Road?
 
Exactly; and re London Bridge, it was really a kind of "bridge facadism"--which you can't do with monolithic concrete like this.

Unfortunately, the nature of reinforced concrete is such that even the most graceful landmark bridges can be especially vulnerable to wear and tear and the elements--this (demolished 1991) being a case in point.

Bridge Hunter

bridgehunter.com bridgehunter.com

In the QEW's case, it's more a matter of whether it's *that* far gone--and given this government, I could just as well see them citing "heritage doesn't pay" blog posts along the lines of Greg Rickford's preferred sources on debunking climate change.

Incidentally, there's one more presently-endangered 1930s QEW arch bridge, and it's probably the most "expendable" because it isn't high-level as well as being buried btw/ flanking structures w/the QEW's expansion--that across Etobicoke Creek. (Though it's paradoxically more *visible* at first hand, thanks to a trail running underneath)

 
Last edited:
adma said:
Incidentally, there's one more presently-endangered 1930s QEW arch bridge, and it's probably the most "expendable" because it isn't high-level as well as being buried btw/ flanking structures w/the QEW's expansion--that across Etobicoke Creek. (Though it's paradoxically more *visible* at first hand, thanks to a trail running underneath)

Click to expand...

Species status: extinct. At least I'm fairly certain it was one of the first things they did when construction there ramped up in the last couple months.
 
44 North said:
Species status: extinct. At least I'm fairly certain it was one of the first things they did when construction there ramped up in the last couple months.
Click to expand...
When I first saw the previous post from @adma , I thought it was referring to the nearby Bowstring Arch - although it's 1909.
  • Technically, I think the Etobicoke Creek Bridge is still there.
  • The first phase (where we are now) is to demolish a bit from the north (11m worth of girders built in the late 1960's) and widen to the north (net addition about 9m).
  • Next phase is to demolish the north arches - likely happening next year. (There are 3 sets of arches, with the inner ones built in the early 1930's and 2 arches added to each side in the 1950's). When this stage is going on, there will be an "island" work zone separating the EBL and WBL.
  • The third phase is to demolish the south arches and the south girder segment (again 1960's vintage).
  • Although you could walk under it, the 1960's widening took away from the heritage value of this bridge, and I don't believe there were any real complaints about this demolition.
 
BurlOak said:
When I first saw the previous post from @adma , I thought it was referring to the nearby Bowstring Arch - although it's 1909.
  • Technically, I think the Etobicoke Creek Bridge is still there.
  • The first phase (where we are now) is to demolish a bit from the north (11m worth of girders built in the late 1960's) and widen to the north (net addition about 9m).
  • Next phase is to demolish the north arches - likely happening next year. (There are 3 sets of arches, with the inner ones built in the early 1930's and 2 arches added to each side in the 1950's). When this stage is going on, there will be an "island" work zone separating the EBL and WBL.
  • The third phase is to demolish the south arches and the south girder segment (again 1960's vintage).
  • Although you could walk under it, the 1960's widening took away from the heritage value of this bridge, and I don't believe there were any real complaints about this demolition.
Click to expand...

Yes you and adma are correct, the bridge is still there. I picked a bouquet of oopsie daisies
 
Northern Light said:
I'd be inclined to try to unify Creditview/Erindale Stn/Glengarry, but there' no obvious connection on the other side to get you all the way south. Not cheap, lots of things to consider spending lots of dollars, always a need to prioritize.
Click to expand...

Creditview Rd. is actually the same concession as Clarkson Rd. after it angles to run north-south, as well as Bexhill Rd. south of Lakeshore. Not really possible to link them up now though.
 
Last edited:
Ford government backs down again.

News Release
Ontario Preserving Historic Bridge in Mississauga
December 18, 2019
Province will rehabilitate the QEW bridge over Credit River
Ontario's government is moving forward with rehabilitating the bridge on the Queen Elizabeth Way (QEW) over the Credit River in Mississauga.
Earlier this year, the province committed to funding the rehabilitation of the bridge on the QEW over the Credit River in Mississauga and to ensure value for money by inviting Infrastructure Ontario to review options for the project.
In November, the government published options for the project and invited feedback from the public. Based on the feedback received, the government made the decision to preserve the original heritage structure of the bridge.
In addition to rehabilitating the existing bridge, the project will also include a new north bridge structure and accommodate the City of Mississauga's active transportation plan and improvements to the QEW/Mississauga Road interchange.
"Our government has listened to the people of Mississauga and we will only seek bids that involve the preservation and rehabilitation of the existing Credit River bridge on the QEW," said Kinga Surma, Associate Minister of Transportation. "We will be moving forward with rehabilitation of the bridge as announced in April."
"This is a government that listens to local communities and values their input on important projects like this," said Rudy Cuzzetto, MPP for Mississauga-Lakeshore. "At over 80 years old, this bridge needs major rehabilitation now, to ensure it remains safe for the public. However, we recognize it is both a provincially significant heritage bridge, and a symbol of the Credit River Valley, and I'm very proud of our commitment to preserve it."
"Building this critical infrastructure project is crucial to ensure we can move people and goods across our region," said Kaleed Rasheed, MPP for Mississauga East-Cooksville. "I am glad to hear that the project will go ahead while maintaining the Credit River bridge."
"We heard from local community groups that rehabilitating the QEW Credit River bridge was important," said Natalia Kusendova, MPP for Mississauga Centre. "Now, we can move forward with a plan that preserves this heritage structure, while improving our provincial highway system."
QUICK FACTS
  • The QEW Credit River bridge was built in 1934 and has been designated by the province as a heritage property under the Ontario Heritage Act.
  • On April 25, 2019, Ontario announced funding to rehabilitate the bridge over Credit River on the QEW.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top