News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 4.9K     0 

There are several bridges that should never be replaced in Toronto. The General Brock Bridge (the official name for the Bathurst Street Bridge), the Queen Street Bridge over the Don River, the Prince Edward Viaduct, the Humber Bay bridge, the Wallace Avenue footbridge, and the suspension bridge in Rouge Park.
 
Tuscani01 said:
Ummm... no. This is one of the best bridges we have crossing the rail corridor. There are plenty others I'd rather see gone and replaced with something better before this one, and plenty of other areas where a bridge would be nice and where something suitably spectacular can be built.

(Not to mention the bridge itself has quite a history having been moved here from the Humber)

All it needs is some paint and some lighting to accent the trusses and it will be 'spectacular'.
Click to expand...

No doubt there is heritage value - but it's a short truss bridge - there is nothing ever particularly spectacular about it.

I think we are at risk of falling into the same pitfall as the Bush shed debate.

AoD
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
there is nothing ever particularly spectacular about it.

AoD
Click to expand...

That's your opinion, and I think your opinion is a minority in the case of this bridge. It's charming, one of 3 that remain in the city (one of which isn't even publicly accessible), and it adds quite a bit of character to an area that needs it.
 
Tuscani01 said:
That's your opinion, and I think your opinion is a minority in the case of this bridge. It's charming, one of 3 that remain in the city (one of which isn't even publicly accessible), and it adds quite a bit of character to an area that needs it.
Click to expand...

Yup, I am quite aware that my take on it is probably in the minority, but it is for the record anyways, and sometimes as a city we do have some rather odd sentimentalities.

AoD
 
The plans include one that has the bridge being widen to include a streetcar right-of-way, two traffic lanes in each direction, and sidewalks. Likely will not include passenger platforms.
 
W. K. Lis said:
The plans include one that has the bridge being widen to include a streetcar right-of-way, two traffic lanes in each direction, and sidewalks. Likely will not include passenger platforms.
Click to expand...

Interesting, I didn't know that. Hope they go that route--3 lanes each way (mixed traffic for now, allowance for future segregation of streetcar tracks) and wider sidewalks. I don't see any realistic need for bike lanes with the Puente de Luz (Portland St-Dan Leckie Way pedestrian/cyclist-only bridge) a few hundred metres east as well as the planned Fort York-Ordnance Triangle-King pedestrian/cyclist bridge coming soon. On the passenger platforms, that's fair enough, as there's not really any point to put passenger platforms on the bridge with the newly-built island platform at Niagara and the stops at Fort York Blvd.
 
W. K. Lis said:
The plans include one that has the bridge being widen to include a streetcar right-of-way, two traffic lanes in each direction, and sidewalks. Likely will not include passenger platforms.
Click to expand...
I see little point in having a streetcar right of way on the bridge - if that means an exclusive one. The TTC is very hung up on ROWs as they always blame other traffic for delays but having an exclusive ROW for 100 meters on the bridge is really not going to be of any help and the rest of Bathurst is really not wide enough for one. (In fact, as Steve Munro has shown in many of his extensive route analyses, the main problem with the TTC is not other traffic it's their amazingly poor route management.)
 
DSC said:
I see little point in having a streetcar right of way on the bridge - if that means an exclusive one. The TTC is very hung up on ROWs as they always blame other traffic for delays but having an exclusive ROW for 100 meters on the bridge is really not going to be of any help and the rest of Bathurst is really not wide enough for one. (In fact, as Steve Munro has shown in many of his extensive route analyses, the main problem with the TTC is not other traffic it's their amazingly poor route management.)
Click to expand...
Personally, I've found 511 a times, quite slow both north and south at the bottom of Bathurst, particularly south of Front.

If you look at the city mapping, the width of Bathurst is the usual 20 metres (66 feet or one chain) north of Queen. BUT from Queen to Lake Shore it's 30 metres (99 feet - or 1.5 chains).

You can clearly see this change in width if you stand on Bathurst just south of Queen. This is also the reason there is space for all those islands on Bathurst south of Queen for streetcars (and why there is one at Queen northbound but not southbound).

There's no reason they can't run a streetcar ROW all the way from Queen to Lake Shore. And in my experience, once you are north of Queen, the road flows better anyway.
 
nfitz said:
Personally, I've found 511 a times, quite slow both north and south at the bottom of Bathurst, particularly south of Front.

If you look at the city mapping, the width of Bathurst is the usual 20 metres (66 feet or one chain) north of Queen. BUT from Queen to Lake Shore it's 30 metres (99 feet - or 1.5 chains).

You can clearly see this change in width if you stand on Bathurst just south of Queen. This is also the reason there is space for all those islands on Bathurst south of Queen for streetcars (and why there is one at Queen northbound but not southbound).

There's no reason they can't run a streetcar ROW all the way from Queen to Lake Shore. And in my experience, once you are north of Queen, the road flows better anyway.
Click to expand...

That future ROW may come in handy if the DRL is ever extended west, since Bathurst will surely have a stop. That would likely become the primary TTC connection to the Ex (DRL -> Bathurst streetcar ROW + Ex streetcar ROW).
 
Red October said:
As much as I like the truss the bridge definitely is too narrow for Bathurst.

Hey, it's been moved once, move it again. Move it over to Strachan or something.
Click to expand...
No it not and no need to make Bathurst any wider than it is now.

What need to be replace and was supposed to years ago is the ramp area south of the bridge on a slope that allow a lower intersection at Fort York.

Where would you move this bridge too other than Strachan??

There nothing there other than TLC from keeping that bridge for another 100 years there.
 
drum118 said:
No it not and no need to make Bathurst any wider than it is now.

What need to be replace and was supposed to years ago is the ramp area south of the bridge on a slope that allow a lower intersection at Fort York.

Where would you move this bridge too other than Strachan??

There nothing there other than TLC from keeping that bridge for another 100 years there.
Click to expand...

Have you ever tried biking on Bathurst across that bridge? Suicide. It's much too narrow.
 
^^^ This

There needs to be bike lanes. It's brutal riding across the bridge, and a lot of people have taken to riding on the sidewalk, which isn't so great for the pedestrians.
 
They could twin the bridge. Like how they twinned the Burlington Skyway bridge.

4583138.jpg


Add a two traffic lane and bicycle path bridge to the east. Have the two southbound traffic lanes on the west side of the old bridge and both streetcar tracks on the east side of the old bridge, with the two northbound traffic lanes and bicycle path on the new bridge. Sidewalks would remain on the west side of the old bridge and new sidewalks on the east side of the new bridge.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top