Skip to content

Canadian Urbanism Uncovered

A suggested work-around for the Queen’s Quay conundrum

Read more articles by

This week, we heard that the long-standing plans for converting the southern part of Queen’s Quay Boulevard into attractive, landscaped walking and cycling paths to complete the waterfront trail are in jeopardy. The TTC wants to rebuild the tracks as soon as possible, but Waterfront Toronto only has about half of the $80 million required to do the project. The TTC is threatening to rebuild the tracks in their current location, rather than shifting them as required to accommodate the new project, unless Waterfront Toronto comes up with the money right away; Waterfront Toronto, meanwhile, says that they just need the city to reallocate some of the money it has pledged to the Waterfront. But a project to remove car lanes and spend money on pretty walk/bike facilities on the waterfront does not seem like one that would be a priority for the Ford administration.

But there could be a simple temporary solution for Waterfront Toronto. The City of Toronto created successful pedestrian zones this year on Gould Street and Willcocks Street, on the Ryerson and University of Toronto St. George campuses, with a miniscule budget.  They did it by simply using paint, planters, and other inexpensive materials. It’s a model adopted from New York, where a pedestrian plaza at Times Square was created the same way. The idea is to simply get it done, and then over time implement more permanent and high-quality infrastructure as the money becomes available.

Waterfront Toronto could do the same thing. Get the TTC to move the tracks, and simply paint in the bike lanes and add planters to create temporary cycling and walking spaces cheaply and quickly. It would probably cost less than a million. No doubt some money is needed to reconfigure infrastructure for the remaining car lanes on the north side, but that can probably be done with the money Waterfront Toronto already has laid aside for the project.

In fact, a similar solution has already been tried — when the Queen’s Quay walking and cycling reconfiguration was proposed, temporary bike and walking lanes were set up in August 2006 to give everyone a sense of what it could be like.

It wouldn’t be a long-term solution. The spaces would need to, eventually, be upgraded to the attractive, fully landscaped bike lanes and walking path that would attract visitors and create a really coherent waterfront experience. But until then, we’d be happy to at least have any kind of bike lane and walking zone linking the fragmented waterfront together.

Recommended

23 comments

  1. I”m in, but only if we have the 5 million Geraniums again.

  2. Mayors Doug and Rob would certainly classify this as a war on the car, and it just won’t fly, at least not if they have a say. I guess that’s the question – can they stop this?

  3. Don’t settle for anything less than the full design. A temporary short term fix means it will never really happen. Commit fully or it will die and we’ll never get the street we want and deserve.

  4. There are two schools of thought:

    1) If we do something temporary and get it done, people will see how well the project works, and the money will show up, to do something more permanent.
    2) If we do something temporary and get it done, people will see how well the project works, and the money will NEVER show up, because it’s working so well the way it is.

    Personally, I am surprised the project hasn’t been cancelled as it has the possibility of reducing maximum car traffic permitted on a street by even a tiny amount…..

  5. Good idea! Get the meat & potatos now, wait for the gravy later.

  6. Dylan,

    I am afraid your read of the situation is probably off a bit. You casually mentioned let TTC “move the track” as if it is the simplest part of the job. As far as I can tell, it is by far the biggest (and most expensive) part of it. Yes TTC wants to do something immediately, but I believe it just wants (and has the money) to replace the tracks in place. To move the tracks is a totally different ball game that requires Waterfront to get on board with money. That said, I’d agree that the most sensible approach is to divert some money right now and just move the track. Well, given the fearless leader we have these days, won’t hold my breathe for that.

  7. Work like this only gets done once in a lifetime. There needs to be a sound vision for Toronto, one that can see past today’s shortcomings and crate a better city for tomorrow.

  8. The street traffic will not be reduced if you read the EA.

  9. I love the idea Dylan!

    Since it looks likely that unless a temporary design is implemented that nothing will change, I think it’s an easy choice. To improve the pedestrian and cycling realm here is the key part of the plan, which Dylan’s proposal addresses well. To make it look prettier can happen down the road, but even if it doesn’t happen, people will still love this a lot better than what we got right now.

  10. Yu > as far as I can tell, track replacement requires the whole bed to be replaced, so it’s not much different whether it’s done in the same alignment or a slightly different one. I could be wrong, but in any case, Waterfront Toronto does have a pot of money that should cover additional infrastructure costs – it seems like it’s the money for the full landscaping costs for the cycle/walk project that isn’t there yet.

  11. It’s a good idea because Waterfront Toronto should be around long enough to champion the cause of fully completing the project.

  12. Dylan and Yu,
    The TTC’s concern is not so much with the logistics of the construction project itself, but with the entire proposal to operate the streetcar in a side-of-the-road alignment. Tech staff at the TTC have never been happy with this arrangement, despite what has been written in the official reports.

  13. According to Steve Munro, this option is one of the two being considered.

    If it is true completing the project just requires council to approve reshuffling some money, then they should be able to get approval for the money long before that phase of the project starts construction even if it isn’t until the fall or the spring.

    My understanding that it is supported by residents. I lived in a condo on Queen Quay when the temporary change was made and they where generally happy with it on the condo’s web forum.

  14. The residents and business along Queen’s Quay are broadly supportive of this scheme, and there have been years of detailed planning and fine-tuning to get to this point. Yes, it’s always possible to find someone who will grumble, and that’s been a Ford tactic — listen to one squeaky wheel and portray that as the voice of the people — but there’s a fighting chance we will see the whole project go through given support from many interested parties including the federal government.

  15. Baray, and by “street traffic” you mean motorized vehicles? I would bet that street traffic in the form of bikes and pedestrians will definitely increase. Still, good to know it may be one less thing to latch onto by “auto-uber-alles” Ford.

  16. What Baray means is that this project would not cause traffic jams or congestion, even if a lane or two is being removed. Queens Quay already acts like a 1-lane-per-direction street anyways, with the legally/illegally parked vehicles taking the kerb lane. With the removal of streetcars from the median of the general traffic lanes, traffic phases could be further simplified and more green time can be given to motorists.

  17. “listen to one squeaky wheel and portray that as the voice of the people”

    I don’t mean to veer off topic, but that’s been a tactic for many Smitherman suipporters too, regarding the Jarvis Bike Lanes. Phrases like “the city rose up in anger over these lanes”, “The people have spoken about these lanes”. Come on! As if all the people have a single opinion. The truth is, only some people rose up in anger, while others rose up in other emotions.

    Sorry for veering off topic. Don’t take this rant as a piece supporting Ford.

  18. I’m quite sure the bulk of the money the TTC needs is FOR the moving of the tracks.

    I’m sure the TTC couldn’t care less about the existence (or not) of bike lanes. The money they need is for track work.

  19. I hear mutterings elsewhere that the TTC engineer corps are not wild about side of the street running anyway – this would be a great chance to kill it entirely.

    The Harbourfront line was one of the last laid with TTC’s old style of construction – whether on side or centre of street the new layered approach will reduce noise and require less intrusive maintenance in the future.

    In any case, do we know how the $80m is broken out? Surely we can’t save *$40m* with paint and bollards.

  20. @Herb and Jacob: Yes, vehicular traffic/volume will largely remain the same, as well as intersection performance. In several cases, it will actually improve. Not sure if peds will increase for its pretty rammed right now, but it will certainly be more pleasant. Bikes will no doubt increase for the MGT will be far improved over the inconsistent bike lanes there now.

    @ Anoymous: TTC are rarely pleased with anything proposed by others, even if proven to work, here or anywhere else.