A new survey is out for the Masterplan.

Link here: https://s.cotsurvey.chkmkt.com/?e=237188&h=B22D91A9D99E66E&l=en

1628102739371.png
 
Dinamo5 said:
Toronto should just build a bridge by the airport for people to access the islands period. That is the shortest distance to cross and if there are any ships larger, then they have go to the other side to enter, that is where the ship channel is anyways. Wether we want light rail on there or not that is another discussion for sure. And yes you would have to probably expand the airport site to accomodate pedestrian traffic and vehicles but lets push for it. If i am downtown and want to get over to the islands for like a 1/2hr I should not have to take a water taxi or ferry and pay $10 to go for a bike ride or walk, its silly. And who cares what 600 residential residents have to say there is 7 million other people in the GTA who think otherwise.
Click to expand...
(sorry, late to the thread).

The eastern gap is the commercial ship channel (for the ones and twos that still enter), but there is a significant amount of smaller commercial and recreational traffic that use the western gap. Any bridge eastern or western would have to be either moveable or be high enough for clearances, creating design problems for the approaches. Adding in allowable grades for anything on rails only complicates that problem.
 
lenaitch said:
(sorry, late to the thread).

The eastern gap is the commercial ship channel (for the ones and twos that still enter), but there is a significant amount of smaller commercial and recreational traffic that use the western gap. Any bridge eastern or western would have to be either moveable or be high enough for clearances, creating design problems for the approaches. Adding in allowable grades for anything on rails only complicates that problem.
Click to expand...
I know its a long shot at best but I think there are some creative designs of bridges in Europe and Asia that have solved similar issues. Traffic entrances into bays have been directed in certain ways the eastern gap with the larger ships that probably does not seem possible but the western one maybe over to hanlons point beach, something like a curved bridge even if its only for walking better than nothing. I guess I can only dream. Gauranteed the island residents are the ones continually fighting these discussions.
1628171378323.png
 
Dinamo5 said:
I know its a long shot at best but I think there are some creative designs of bridges in Europe and Asia that have solved similar issues. Traffic entrances into bays have been directed in certain ways the eastern gap with the larger ships that probably does not seem possible but the western one maybe over to hanlons point beach, something like a curved bridge even if its only for walking better than nothing. I guess I can only dream. Gauranteed the island residents are the ones continually fighting these discussions.
View attachment 339507
Click to expand...
Certainly easier if only for pedestrians (although that image doesn't look that it would be fully accessible-compliant). I don't know if there are any minimal clearance rules in place. The example image - and I realize it is only an example - certainly wouldn't allow passage of many sailboats and perhaps not even the fireboat.
 
Dinamo5 said:
I know its a long shot at best but I think there are some creative designs of bridges in Europe and Asia that have solved similar issues. Traffic entrances into bays have been directed in certain ways the eastern gap with the larger ships that probably does not seem possible but the western one maybe over to hanlons point beach, something like a curved bridge even if its only for walking better than nothing. I guess I can only dream. Gauranteed the island residents are the ones continually fighting these discussions.
View attachment 339507
Click to expand...
Or even a swing bridge! A pedestrian one would be relatively light too
 
calimehtar said:
keeping the islands just a bit inaccessible was good and that's why there shouldn't be a bridge.
Click to expand...
I wholly support this. By forcing visitors to pay to visit, the Toronto Islands are a final bastion of what used to pass for normalcy in 1970s and 80s Toronto. The islands have no litter, no graffiti, well manicured lawns and maintained paths and public spaces, no public defacation, no addicts shooting up in plain sight, no beggars, no encampments, it‘s like the polar opposite of my visits to Alan Gardens. That moat around the islands is the park’s natural defence against our otherwise often crazy and unpleasant experiences of Toronto’s public spaces. So, no bridge, thank you.
 
Admiral Beez said:
I wholly support this. By forcing visitors to pay to visit, the Toronto Islands are a final bastion of what used to pass for normalcy in 1970s and 80s Toronto. The islands have no litter, no graffiti, well manicured lawns and maintained paths and public spaces, no public defacation, no addicts shooting up in plain sight, no beggars, no encampments, it‘s like the polar opposite of my visits to Alan Gardens. That moat around the islands is the park’s natural defence against our otherwise often crazy and unpleasant experiences of Toronto’s public spaces. So, no bridge, thank you.
Click to expand...
Or we could actually address those problems, but nah let's just ban poor people from using the Islands 🙄 .
 
TossYourJacket said:
Or we could actually address those problems, but nah let's just ban poor people from using the Islands 🙄 .
Click to expand...
Easy to say, but can you think of any city in North America that‘s addressed those problems that we can look to?

And besides, why do you assume that only poor people do the things I mentioned? Beggars and encampments certainly, but public drug use and defecation, littering and vandalism… that’s all sh#tty people, not poor people business. If having a clean park missing these elements above requires me to pay a few bucks and enjoy a ferry ride, I’m good.
 
Last edited:
Admiral Beez said:
I wholly support this. By forcing visitors to pay to visit, the Toronto Islands are a final bastion of what used to pass for normalcy in 1970s and 80s Toronto. The islands have no litter, no graffiti, well manicured lawns and maintained paths and public spaces, no public defacation, no addicts shooting up in plain sight, no beggars, no encampments, it‘s like the polar opposite of my visits to Alan Gardens. That moat around the islands is the park’s natural defence against our otherwise often crazy and unpleasant experiences of Toronto’s public spaces. So, no bridge, thank you.
Click to expand...
#DowntownProblems lol
 
Admiral Beez said:
I wholly support this. By forcing visitors to pay to visit, the Toronto Islands are a final bastion of what used to pass for normalcy in 1970s and 80s Toronto. The islands have no litter, no graffiti, well manicured lawns and maintained paths and public spaces, no public defacation, no addicts shooting up in plain sight, no beggars, no encampments, it‘s like the polar opposite of my visits to Alan Gardens. That moat around the islands is the park’s natural defence against our otherwise often crazy and unpleasant experiences of Toronto’s public spaces. So, no bridge, thank you.
Click to expand...

How about a pedestrian bridge AND a small entrance fee?
 
Irishmonk said:
How about a pedestrian bridge AND a small entrance fee?
Click to expand...
What exactly is the problem we’re trying to fix? I go the the islands on my bicycle a few times each summer, I’ve never had a problem getting there, and the ferry is fun.

Ferries, like streetcars are part of the Toronto experience and identity. My vote is no bridge. Besides, the bridge would take you into the airport, not centre island, meaning people will demand some sort of shuttle (I do love narrow gauge railways, like in Centreville). I just don’t see the need to change what we have now.
 
Admiral Beez said:
I wholly support this. By forcing visitors to pay to visit, the Toronto Islands are a final bastion of what used to pass for normalcy in 1970s and 80s Toronto. The islands have no litter, no graffiti, well manicured lawns and maintained paths and public spaces, no public defacation, no addicts shooting up in plain sight, no beggars, no encampments, it‘s like the polar opposite of my visits to Alan Gardens. That moat around the islands is the park’s natural defence against our otherwise often crazy and unpleasant experiences of Toronto’s public spaces. So, no bridge, thank you.
Click to expand...

LOL

Maybe you should visit the Allan Gardens instead. ;)
 
Last edited:
syn said:
LOL

Maybe you should visit the Allan Gardens instead. ;)
Click to expand...
I get you. Allan Gardens. I used to be a pedantic dick too, waiting for that gotcha moment to desperately show how smart I think I am. But as you age past your 20s one grows tired of the needless peacocking and you just want to enjoy the conversation.
 
Last edited:
TossYourJacket said:
Or we could actually address those problems, but nah let's just ban poor people from using the Islands 🙄 .
Click to expand...

What's you solution? No city in North America has been able to figure it out, and the ones that are more sympathetic to the problem just end up having an even bigger mess.

This is not just about poor people. I know plenty of poor people that work their asses off and aren't taggers, addicts and thieves.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top