UPDATE: There will be another opportunity for the public to comment and view the presentation materials tomorrow, Saturday, March 28 from 10:00 AM to 1:00 PM at an Open House held at the Harbourfront Centre (Lakeside Terrace). The public will will have the opportunity for one-on-one discussions with planners and officials.
The presentation from the Wednesday, March 25 meeting is now up on Waterfront Toronto’s website. (PDF, 18 MB)
Waterfront Toronto presented their recommendations tonight at the Westin Harbour Castle Hotel on how Queens Quay will be turned into a grand lakefront boulevard by placing streetcar lanes in the centre, traffic only on the north side and a pedestrian focused space on the south side. The study, which is for the section between Bathurst and Parliament Streets, is expected to be completed in the Fall of this year, and detailed design work to be complete in Spring 2010.
Highlights:
• There are two recommendations going forward. Both will restrict Queen’s Quay to two traffic lanes, on the north side of the streetcar tracks; one will see westbound one-way traffic, the other will have bi-directional traffic. The current centre streetcar reservation and bike lanes will be maintained west of Spadina Avenue.
• A four-metre wide Martin Goodman Trail, separated from the streetcar right-of-way with a row of trees, and will complete the missing link in this important recreational and commuter route.
• A six-metre wide sidewalk along most of the south side, with additional tree plantings and the potential room for street stalls.
• Wider, fully accessible streetcar platforms. Stop locations will be realigned in places, but stop spacing will remain about the same, approximately 350 metres apart.
• The first phase of the Waterfront East Streetcar will run through the existing Bay Street Tunnel, to Queen’s Quay and emerge onto Queen’s Quay East between Yonge and Freeland Streets. The potential for a decorative portal entrance by the West 8/du Toit Allsopp Hillier design team has been identified. In the short term, a loop at Parliament and Queen’s Quay will be the eastern terminus of this new transit line, until connections are made with the planned Cherry Street streetcar route from King Street.
• A two-way traffic pattern on Queen’s Quay may allow for a grass-covered transit right of way.
• There will be additional spots for bus loading and unloadings, as well as management of commercial deliveries to mitigate access and congestion issues for autos. There will also be limited on-street parking available. It is anticipated that the “level of service” for auto traffic on Queen’s Quay will be about the same, even with the obvious pedestrian, cyclist and transit priority measures.
More details and images can be found at the Waterfront Toronto website here.
The written press release is below. Let the discussion begin!
Waterfront Toronto will officially present the technically recommended alternative and two options for the traffic lanes, one which would have two-way traffic and the other one-way traffic, for public discussion and input tonight. While Waterfront Toronto has a slight preference for the two-way option at this time, further analysis and public input are required before a final option is presented to City Council.
“Today we are one step closer to our goal of revitalizing Toronto’s central waterfront area,†said John Campbell, President and CEO of Waterfront Toronto. “From east to west, Queens Quay is the backbone of our waterfront and it will soon become a revered destination not only for Torontonians but the world.â€
Transforming Queens Quay by creating a beautiful linear park on the south side of the street that would include a generous new pedestrian promenade and an expanded Martin Goodman Trail was part of the winning design for revitalizing the central waterfront selected by Waterfront Toronto in 2006 after an international design competition.
Prior to making any changes to Queens Quay, Waterfront Toronto and the City of Toronto began a Class Environmental Assessment (EA) process to study the feasibility, impact, and alternatives to the idea. In fact, Queens Quay has been subject to two EAs, one on the revitalization itself and another, done in conjunction with Toronto Transit Committee and the City of Toronto, focusing on planning transit services for the new waterfront development underway in East Bayfront and future communities in the West Don Lands and Port Lands.
The EA process, which has been ongoing for the past two years, has included the examination of several alternative planning solutions for Queens Quay. Each alternative presents a different configuration for a revitalized Queens Quay that has been analyzed and rated against a series of city planning and environmental criteria. The EA process also includes a thorough and continuing public consultation component and extensive in-depth technical analysis.
Furthermore, rigorous traffic and transit modeling were undertaken to test the feasibility of all of the alternative design solutions.
Results of the EA show that the technically recommended alternative provides the greatest opportunity for creating a world-class waterfront street. Traffic analysis confirms that reducing traffic to two lanes on the north side of Queens Quay is not only feasible in the short term but can also accommodate future traffic demands.
The Class Environmental Assessment process is ongoing and public input is still being sought. The recommended plan incorporating the Preferred Alternative will be identified after we have taken into account public and stakeholder input. It will go to City Council for approval in July.
The revitalization of Queens Quay is budgeted at approximately $192 million which includes all new services and public realm improvements and $150 million for new transit along Queens Quay in the new East Bayfront area.
The first phase of construction from York to Spadina is expected to begin about one year after the completion of the EA. Waterfront Toronto’s goal is to finish construction along Queens Quay by 2012.
photo by Kevin Steele
64 comments
I am interested (read: curious) to know how the plans for this project will be affected by the city’s plans to tear down the gardiner, considering the plan is to redirect most of the traffic ONTO lakeshore…
A|Layton: Queens Quay is not Lakeshore, so the effects will probably be minimial. Queens Quay even as it stands now doesn’t really act as an arterial anyways, it’s more like a local road for the condos that line both sides of it.
Even if they tear down the Gardiner (or not), you wouldn’t take Queens Quay as an alternate to Lakeshore.
I guess that is one way to stop people in SUVs from driving over the streetcar tracks to get to their condos. Sheesh.
Currently, Queens Quay can act as a bit of a Lakeshore overflow for downtown traffic. You couldn’t do this in isolation – traffic in the whole area would have to be rethought. You’d also have to police no stopping zones (which would be a bit of a first in Toronto). It would be a mess whenever there is a game on at any of the stadiums.
Having said all that I like the idea much better than the “tear-down-the-Gardiner” campaign. The bleak condos along Queens Quay and lack of destinations south of the Gardiner gives me little reason to go down to the area.
I am fully supportive of this project…..
With one caveat…
Must we take 3 years to build it? After a 2 year-long EA? This is classic Toronto. I love my City, but we have a serious problem with procrastination and delay in this town.
Why do in six months what can take 5 years?
I think the construction schedule is setting up to be another St. Clair.
Merchants, residents and tourists like will be much happier if they (to borrow a commercial slogan) “JUST DO IT”.
“The bleak condos along Queens Quay and lack of destinations south of the Gardiner gives me little reason to go down to the area.”
There’s the ferry Docks, Sugar Beach, Harbourfront, the Guvernment, and the existing parks along Queen’s Quay which are attractions. What kind of destinations did you have in mind? Also, some of the condos can attract, like Arthur Erickson’s “King’s Landing” midrise with its setbacks.
Went to the meeting and it was very interesting.
On the Gardiner, they are only beginning an EA on that project so it may not even be three years until that plan comes out. By then, this Queens Quay project should be already started if it gets green light this fall.
They have rethought the traffic and although the citizens groups and BIAs at the meeting were skeptical, it looks like they’ve done serious homework on traffic volume, patterns at peak times. They say that even with reduced lanes, if they cut down on lineups for parking lots, and illegallyparked cars and buses, they can make the traffic move faster.
We live on Queens Quay so we’re very worried about construction shutting down traffic. They intend to only shut down the north side first while they make the south side go both ways, then when the north side is ready, they ‘ll tear up the south side.
They shed a lot of light about the TTC expansion out east. See our post here.
A.R.: You find the Ferry Docks to be an attraction? How many people do you see going down to watch the ferries? The Government should be sent out to Mississauga. Waterfront has been brought back from its CBC days, peddling “community” via finger-paint and antiques, but for the most part, people want to hang by the water. The condos won’t offer much, and their retail space is filled with services for people that live there. King’s Landing is probably the first building down there, and is showing its age. It’s not an attraction, no more than any condo is an attraction.
Yes, James M, why does it take so bloody long to get anything done in this town? My guess is that people in city Council are not from Toronto and are so overwhelmed by the big city lights. Embarrassing.
Where is the ‘Navy Pier’. Only in Toronto would we expect people to travel from around the world to marvel at our ground floor retail, decks, grass and bike lanes.
“A.R.: You find the Ferry Docks to be an attraction? How many people do you see going down to watch the ferries?”
The islands are the attraction, and so the ferry docks are the gateway.
“Waterfront has been brought back from its CBC days, peddling “community†via finger-paint and antiques, but for the most part, people want to hang by the water.”
There’s theatre and galleries, which tend to attract people. There’s also a skating rink in the winter among its features.
“The condos won’t offer much, and their retail space is filled with services for people that live there. King’s Landing is probably the first building down there, and is showing its age. It’s not an attraction, no more than any condo is an attraction.”
It makes for a nicer streetscape, and that quality to an environment is more attractive than blank concrete fortresses. If that didn’t matter, than the European streetscapes of old residences wouldn’t attract anyone either.
@A.R. – I understand your reaction, but hear me out. The various boat docks aren’t of interest unless you are going on them. The retail in the area is very limited and there aren’t even many restaurants.
Harbourfront should take some blame as a government institution. The programming at Harbourfront pretty banal and I think it should improve itself (example: Went to the “dim sum” festival to wasn’t much Chinese food. I was told by Harbourfront staff member that “it is not about the food”.) The artist spaces are of interest but it doesn’t have the critical mass of other areas of Toronto.
And yes, The Guvernment is one destination but it doesn’t really participate in the life of the area as it isn’t open during the day.
A valid question is what is missing to create a real neighbourhood out of those ugly glass condo towers. More public space is probably the correct answer.
When I lived on Queen Quay and York the area was packed with crowds of people on summer weekends. I think it is pretty successful as an attraction.
Given that Chicago is roaring ahead with its own constant waterside improvements, the Queens Quay scheme is badly needed, if only to avoid falling further behind.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-riverwalk-city-zonemar12,0,764986.story
This plan sounds a lot like what I thought Harbourfront could be like after seeing Aker brygge in Oslo, Norway: http://lrt.daxack.ca/Oslo/hires076.jpg
Oh please! The Gardiner won’t be torn down for some time. IT will likely be municipal election fodder, and nothing will be decided until after, then the project itself will take almost a decade.
People should drive more slowly on QQ anyway, there are all kinds of children’s programs at the harbourfront centre and those lakeshore overflow drivers are always speeding. It’s a danger and a disgrace. I believe the plan will mitigate gridlock in the area because it will become obvious to those drivers that this is no longer a ‘short cut’! That combined with the added enforcement will make it a much more beautiful and liveable neighbourhood.
The area is in desperate need of an overhaul and could become a major destination for local citizens and tourists alike. I’m so happy to finally see that change coming! I agreed we should JUST DO IT already! It’s a brilliant and thoughtful plan. I can’t wait to see it come to fruition!
Glen> Navy Pier? You want a Navy Pier in Toronto? It’s the worst atrocity in Chicago.
I think Eric Kuhne summed it up best when he looked at the plans and said “It’s 12 km and there’s not a single interesting thing to do”
Another waste of money.
@glen “Where is the Navy Pier?” It’s in Chicago.
@glen “Only in Toronto would we expect people to travel from around the world to marvel at our ground level retail, decks, grass and bike lanes”. In Chicago, they expect people to marvel at a giant Ferris Wheel set beside a convention centre/outdoor shopping mall. Is that your preference?
@James “The various boat docks aren’t of interest unless you are going on them”. I like boats whether I’m going on them or not. Who are you to tell me they aren’t of interest? I particularly enjoy when there’s a ship unloading at Redpath, or when HMCS Toronto comes to town.
@James “The Guvernment is one destination but it doesn’t really participate in the life of the area as it isn’t open during the day”.
Is life a 9 to 5? Things that happen at night aren’t life? Personally, I prefer night life to anything that happens during the day. Am I not valid?
@uSkyscraper “Given that Chicago is roaring ahead with its own constant waterside improvements, the Queens Quay scheme is badly needed, if only to avoid falling further behind”.
Again with Chicago! Are we in some kind of waterfront-race with Chicago? They’re roaring ahead with building what amounts to West Edmonton Mall on Navy Pier; is that the vision we should be scrambling to match, lest we fall behind? Most of what makes Chicago’s waterfront appealing results from their century-old master plan, not anything happening today.
Not an interesting thing to do in 12kms? That, I think, is called “lying”.
If Navy Pier is your benchmark for “interesting things to do” you need to stop complaining and run for office and see if anybody buys that vision of Toronto. I don’t think they will.
When in Chicago I went for long runs north and south of the Loop. Mostly paths along parkland, separated from the city by the expressway that is Lakeshore Drive. Nice paths. There is that Navy Pier, a bit south Soldiers Field and then way south the Science and Tech Museum in Hyde Park. Nice paths yes…interesting very interesting. Is this what Eric Kuhne thinks of as interesting?
I am not entirely convinced of the widespread, enduring, and ‘monumental’ appeal of this project or its vision or of its ability to attract persons who want to really ‘enjoy a space’. At the very least, we can say that it is better than what is currently east of Lower Jarvis. But need we be so conservative, traditional, so pedantic in our view of what an ‘epic’ public space should be? Are we so utterly unaware of what a real successful urban space actually is – has no-one been paying attention?
When I view the site plans, the 3d visuals, and listing of ‘attractions’, if they can be called that, it makes me think of: European tourism traps, 50+ retired people promenading; underemployed 20-30somethings wiling away their daytime hours; fitness freaks who somehow have found a two-hour lunchtime window to bike, jog, and blade; carless residents with no specific ambition towards enjoying a space; etc., (don’t get me wrong – this is not a hate-off – i fall into 2 or more of these categories).
One would think that the idea-people behind this thought that Lakeshore West pedestrian/ bike/ park strip west of strachan was successful. Nonsense. Several dozen or hundreds of users on a typical day in a km stretch is not successful. It is underutilized, passionless, and wasted. Who pik-niks these days? Is grass the best we can do? What percentage of park space is actually stepped on in a given day (
(resubmitted – original cut-off)
I am not entirely convinced of the widespread appeal of this project or its vision nor of its ability to attract persons who want to really ‘enjoy a space’. At the very least, we can say that it is better than what is currently east of Lower Jarvis. But need we be so conservative, traditional, so pedantic in our view of what an ‘epic’ public space should be?
When I view the site plans, the 3d visuals, and listing of ‘attractions’, if they can be called that, it makes me think of: European tourism traps, 50+ retired people promenading; underemployed 20-30somethings wiling away their daytime hours; fitness freaks who somehow have found a two-hour lunchtime window to bike, jog, and blade; carless residents with no specific ambition towards enjoying a space; etc., (don’t get me wrong – this is not a hate-off – i fall into 2 or more of these categories).
One would think that the idea-people behind this thought that Lakeshore West pedestrian/ bike/ park strip was successful. Nonsense. Several dozen or hundreds of users on a typical day in a km stretch is not successful. It is underutilized, passionless, and wasted. Who pik-niks these days? What percentage of park space is actually stepped on in a given day (1%)????? Need to be alone, have quiet, or be thoughtful – stay at home!
We need dynamic, busy, compressed excitement! We need mardi-gras made solid and urban year-round (interesting design problem), we need taste-of-danforth crowds; we need loud, bright, and obnoxious; we need fixed, mobile, and fluid attractions that create a ‘character’ of exuberance not repose. No matter how reclusive or crowd-hating an individual is, they will want to be nearby or overlooking at least. Places like this attract the best eating, dancing, walking, cafeing, sporting, screaming, buying. Late night, 7-day, all-year round activity zone. Will some spaces need to be enclosed – probably. We need Santa Monica meets Mediterranean meets the French Quarter meets Copenhagen waterfront.
Gone must be the days of park just being ‘open space’ of little character, a mere assemblage of loners and lunch-eaters, the space between oversized trees and park bench rivalries. People think that they want a nice walk with a pleasant view – people should know better.
I love Navy Pier if for no other reason than the incredible views of the Chicago skyline. Its ferris wheel, which offers more amazing perspectives, is probably a nod to the original from the 1893(?) World’s Fair.
Of course the islands are in the way here. But there is supposed to be a temporary structure built out from the east bank of the Humber to prevent runoff pollution from closing the western beaches. It might be nice if that could be made into a long pier instead.
This QQ redo sounds reasonable enough for what it is.
Shawn and Mike,
8 million people a year disagree with you.
The point is, there is nothing compelling to draw people to Toronto’s lakefront. Nice, maybe, but compelling, no.
If that’s the case, there is nothing compelling about Toronto.
Shawn, you should get out more.
BTW did you travel to Chicago to go running?
No, went to Chicago to explore. When in other places, I like to go for a long early evening run in between a long days exploring and to reset before a long deep night of exploring. Runs take me to places I might not walk to or visit otherwise. Psychogeographic running.
And on those runs, there I found there is a lot “more” on Toronto’s waterfront than Chicago — notwithstanding Navy Pier — which is mostly just nice grass and nice pathway.
Great plan! Anything to get more bike and pedestrian lanes in there. Screw cars.
And with streetcars running east along Queens Quay towards Cherry St., that’s about time! That whole eastern harbour area will be like a mini-city in a few years time, with all the new developments going up there.
Luckily, they’re not condo-monstrousities like the ones near the ACC.
Good to see some attention being paid to bikes/trams/vegetation and pedestrians finally. I was worrying for a sec. our waterfront would turn into “sterile concrete/glass central”.
“Are we in some kind of waterfront-race with Chicago?”
Well, yes, of course we are, along with New York, San Francisco, Vancouver and every other big city that is competing to attract tourists, provide a high-quality of life for its citizens and keep business and investment from bolting to somewhere else. Cities cannot stand still – we learned that during our fall from 1980s civic supremacy. The plan for QQ is a most welcome step — more please.
I’m no fan of Navy Pier; my own Chicago reference was to something quite different, the rapid creation of a riverside walking path that allows pedestrians to navigate at the water’s edge. We need more of that kind of action in Toronto. Imagine filling in all the broken links in the Martin Goodman trail in Scarborough by just sticking a walkway into Lake Ontario…
By the way, anyone who reads Spacing who has not been to Chicago really should spend some time there if the chance ever comes up. The streetscapes, the civic infrastructure, Millennium Park — most impressive. Sure, much of the city has huge problems that you would never trade our undeveloped waterfront for, but their central public spaces are fabulous.
@glen “…there is nothing compelling to draw people to Toronto’s lakefront”.
The compelling aspect of the lakefront is the Lake.
Having just read most peoples posts here.. here’s some added thoughts.
1) The Gardiner i don’t mind. It’s much more effective to walk “underneath it” to Queens Quay than to walk across a flat-wide Boulevard. If people think it “looks” bad, paint or plant over it! Besides, cars won’t go away for many years so we’ll still need an artery to cut across the downtown to the DVP.
2) A Navy Pier wouldn’t be a bad idea(*Ferries Wheels are always cool) but NOT downtown. The Island already does this job. Besides, Chicago’s pier probably has some historical naval significance. Do “we” have that history?(*other than Fort York) I believe all our harbours have been torn down to build condos.
And last, i won’t go again into how much i’d love to see Chicago, but recent plans of building a “multi-purpose Park” near Fort York(*between Bathurst & Spadina) give me hope that some “green” will finally arrive near the waterfront. I really hope those plans materialize.
*Looking forward to “ThinkToronto” tonight!
Oops.. and sorry MikeW. The “lake” alone is not an answer to attracting people to the waterfront.
*You need somewhere for people to “stand” and do fun things around dont you?
These plans are defenitely a step forward to moving people more free-ly into the area(*without auto congestion) Mega-Attractions will come because of this.
I second the comments about length of construction time: the way things operate here, it’ll be complete in 2020. It is amazing how long St Clair Avenue has been torn up and much of it a vast wasteland.
Why not speed up the EA and super-speed up the construction so that the jobs will be helpful during this Big Recession?
I think this plan is a great idea. Reading the West8 proposal, which I think this plan is largely based on, the idea is to create a new sense of place in the area. As for those people who are concerned with nothing to do, maybe ‘if you build it they will come’ can apply here in that the improved area will naturally breed a more positive environment of businesses. The government can’t force interesting stores to open on QQ, they are the doing the best thing they can. Most of all I agree with the common sentiment they need to get in gear on this. If noticeable improvement doesn’t come soon, what little faith is left in the waterfront could be lost.
“notwithstanding Navy Pier  which is mostly just nice grass and nice pathway.”
Must’ve been some other Navy Pier. There’s not really any grass on the pier itself, lots of buildings and restaurants though.
http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en&q=navy+pier&gbv=2
Sorry Boris — I meant notwithstanding Navy Pier, Chicago’s waterfront is mostly grass and paths.
I like the picture with this post. I think I see a tree, but the lake?
Do tourist like walls of ugly buildings where, there is little sense of community?
Don’t build it for them build it for us. Soonish.
@Boris: Islands in the way?!? If you want a view of the Toronto skyline the islands are exactly where you go to get it. The best views are from around the Ward’s Island ferry dock (though I won’t tell you exactly where).
Also all this rubbish with comparisons to Chicago aside, does anyone know if the depiction of vegetation on the streetcar right-of-way has any basis in reality? I mean I’ve seen documents floating around the Roncesvalles EA indicating that we’ve figured out how to support sidewalk trees growing much closer to maturity, so I’m just about willing to believe that someone’s figured out how to grow/maintain ground cover on a streetcar right-of-way.
Islands in the way of putting anything like a Navy Pier on our waterfront, Kris (as some seem to want), not in the way in a bad way – the islands are tops in my book. Which is why my suggestion was to maybe make a pier to the west, near the Humber outlet, instead of the planned temporary structure meant to keep the western beaches clean from runoff e.coli. Make it out of construction landfill, like Leslie Spit.
@parkdalian “Oops.. and sorry MikeW. The “lake†alone is not an answer to attracting people to the waterfront. *You need somewhere for people to “stand†and do fun things around dont you?”
My point is, the Lake is the reason anything else down there matters. There are lots of places to stand and do fun things in Toronto; the argument here is whether any of those things are near the Lake. The only reason anyone cares about the waterfront is because we understand the human complusion to be near water. Hence, my comment that that the compelling thing about the lakefront is the Lake.
This just might be the most boring set of comments for a City-transfroming project I’ve read on Spacing.
If you really want to know more, Waterfront Toronto is having a drop-in presentation at Harbourfront Centre (York Quay Centre at Simcoe) Saturday March 28 from 10 to 1. The project team will be there–West 8, DTAH, ARUP, MRC, and BA along with City, TTC and Waterfront Toronto–so you can ask them the silly questions noted above and see how much traction they have.
Yeesh.
Why is it necessary to spend 5 years planning and consulting on a reduction in the traffic capacity of a couple of kilometres of a relatively minor (at least from a transportation perspective) road? Madrid would have designed, built and opened an entire subway line in the time from start to finish on this project, that is if it ever does get finished. When it comes to infrastructure, all we ever seem to do in Toronto is announce projects, plan, consult, consult some more, litigate, reannounce projects… But nothing ever actually gets built.
What provisions have been made for parking?
Glen, about the parking… forecasts call for 95¢ per litre this summer, and $1.10 by end of 2010. The price of gasoline is going up, but slower than last year, 2008. We should be aiming for transit-oriented-development, and away from the automobile. Unfortunately, some of the current buildings at the waterfront cater to the automobile crowd, turning their backs to pedestrians and transit, I hope that will change.
If there will be parking, it should be for disabled and families of more than 2.
Kris asked:
“…does anyone know if the depiction of vegetation on the streetcar right-of-way has any basis in reality?”
Kevin’s answer:
I do. And it does. Take a look at this photo of a grassed streetcar ROW in New Orleans at:
http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/7773760.jpg
Glen asked:
“What provisions have been made for parking?”
Kevin’s answer:
There are plans to install over 400 of Toronto’s iconic “post and ring” parking stands as part of the project.
I jog on the waterfront weekly and have been watching the wavey deck things take shape and I think these new details are exciting. You’ll be able to sit on the decks and watch the people go by … it ain’t ‘epic’, but don’t underestimate the appeal.
As for Navy Pier … we already have a Navy Pier. It’s called Ontario Place. It has waterslides instead of a Ferris wheel. Both are “visit once” event destinations and don’t offer much to draw you there on a regular basis.
Chicago is worth the trip. I love working there because its like a bonus, work, and a great city to boot. Most locals I hang with avoid Navy Pier. They think of it as a tourist destination.
A ferris wheel would be fun, since it’s on the waterfront why not make it dip into the lake on every rotation?
Just enough to get your feet wet!
@ BARBY – Too funny…too true..
Went to the public drop in this morning. It looks great. Overheard a lot of ridiculous ‘suggestions’ or ‘criticisms’ from people there. It is so Toronto for people to try to throw a wrench in a plan like this with extremely minor points. All I could think was “OK, go!”
Also found out that the grass under the streetcars will likely not happen because it will be destroyed by the heaps and heaps of salt that get poured on the road in the winter, while in summer it would have to be irrigated, mowed and inevitably repaired throughout the summer.
Any chance that Spadina Ave, Jarvis St, Bay St, Bathurst St will be made more pedestrain and cyclist friendly for people to get to Queens Quay ?
There is a slow-growing grass that is resistant to drought, http://www.purewest.ca/ecograss.htm . As for the salt, if the grass on your boulevard grows back each year, should be fine.
@Shawn: “Chicago’s waterfront is mostly grass and paths.”
You’re ignoring the aquarium, planetarium, museum of natural history, a mile of sandy beach within walking distance of downtown, and close proximity to the excellent Millennium Park and Art Institute of Chicago.
Navy Pier. What’s in a name. I wasn’t around for the naming of this one that I remember but believe it was meant to recall the very brief time in the immediate wake of the War of 1812 and before Rush-Bagot when Upper Canada maintained a naval presence on the lake. For one or two years we even had the Provincial Yacht “Toronto” until it broke up in 1817 and was never replaced. To put our special meaning into Navy Pier I suggest on very simple gathering in of some of the anchors and metalwork that has been or will get pulled from the lake in that area where it can be seen by those in passing. A storyboard-plaque will complete what is needed to save confusion in the present.
If a honeycomb cell product was used to house the grass, it should be possible for emergency vehicles to use the right of way. Contrast with the Queensway ROW where this would not be the case. I think if TTC wants to green the QQuay ROW, they should prove how they would do it on a stretch of the Queensway ROW.
Alternatively, if we’re only concerned with the look but want to avoid watering etc., there’s always FieldTurf – they could take BMO Field’s and lay badly needed real grass there.
While the recommendation of the Southside options by Waterfront Toronto is definiately a step forward the decision on a continuous Martin Goodman Trail along the entire length of Queens Quay has not been made yet. There are two options still on the table. Option 4 which does not have a continuous trail (between YoYo Ma Lane and Bathurst there are on-street bike lanes) and Option 5 which has an off street trail the entire length. The comment from the presenter at the public consultation meeting last Wednesday was that they were leaning to Option 4. I have posted an article on biketoronto.ca with more information on this issue and some other comments on these two designs.
http://biketoronto.ca/topic/show/686.htm
It is important to show support for a truly continuous Martin Goodman Trail through the waterfront during the public comment period before April 17th.
First, I think this project looks pretty good. Anything to reduce the automobile traffic in the downtown and promote transit and bicycles.
Second– Shawn, last I checked, this city ranked as the second most multi-cultural city on the planet. We have one of the world’s great research museums (ROM), two universities, a host of educational museums on everything from science and technology to shoes, and one of the top public library systems anywhere. This city has a more exuberant diversity of commercial enterprises than any I have seen in North America. Geography has given this city two great ravines, with hundreds of kilometres of parkland stretching into the heart of the city. Do you really want to claim that this city would have nothing compelling about it without the lake-front? Don’t get me wrong; I love to ride the long western lake-front, going from park to park and taking in creeks, the quiet pretty neighbourhoods of Mimico, and the wonderful Humber Bridge span. But I don’t delude myself that Toronto has nothing else compelling to offer.
John, I agree with all that — I was being somewhat sarcastic to the suggestion that there is “nothing compelling on the waterfront” right now. If one believes that, I was suggesting one might have to believe the rest of the city is not compelling.
The heart of Toronto’s design should be making the city live-able for locals first, then everybody else can come. And will come.
An interesting point somebody brought up above regarding the Navy Pier-esque ideas — we do have one called Ontario Place. Funny how quickly we forget about that kind of place, it leaves our radar — just as Navy Pier does for most Chicago folk I suspect. Visit once, as mentioned, and forget.
This plan seems much more “visit a lot — live some of your life there”.
“We should be aiming for transit-oriented-development, and away from the automobile.”
Yes we should. But since we still have to live in the real world and not the utopia of $3.00/L gas, and in that real world there are plenty of people who like their cars and some of those people are tourists who will come to Toronto and want to visit tourist attractions, I too am curious what provisions have been made for parking.
To those whom discount the importance of parking, do you think Kensington Market should rid itself of the large amount of parking within and around it?
I like the ‘idea’ of what the City is trying to do with this plan… but I think some things really need to be thought through a bit better.
1) I like the idea of grass on the transit right of ways — but see potential for accidents will result from people mistaking the grass surface as a place to stroll;
2) Water will certainly be a feature to draw people to the place — but by itself water is just water, and not really much of a draw;
3) To some extent, the area has long been pushed as a In an area that to a significant extent is being pushed as a tourist draw, and there are still vestiges of that thinking in the rationale for this plan. If that’s the case, access for taxis and tour buses (and parking – pace Glen) is not unimportant. Taxis and tour buses clog up the Queen’s Quay now that it is a 4 lane route — how will the area work when it’s a 2 lane route?
Final point has to do with how these proposed mega-projects (Queen’s Quay, east-Gardiner teardown) all seem to have public consultations underway, with very little suggestion from those staging these consultations that these projects should thought throw in context with other proposed changes. Either SLOW down some projects so that proposed projects can be better assessed in light of recent changes OR look at them in conjunction. Looking at everything in isolation sounds foolish when one major change is likely to unfold fast on the heels of the other.
There isn’t really on-street parking on Queens Quay now and access to existing parking lots will be maintained, so these plans won’t have a big impact, positive or negative, on parking in the area.
Darwin,
Regarding ‘parking’ concerns (and by the way, I take transit to that area), whether’s there’s on-street parking or not right now isn’t the sole issue … taxis and tour buses might not be ‘parked’ technically — but they are ‘stopped’. In any case, they do need to stop and pick up or drop off people… same thing with vehicles making deliveries, dropping off food carts, etc. Not sure how this activity will be accommodated in the new plan.
Getting to the area by bike still needs a lot of doing and improving, though the Simcoe St. tunnel will make a huge difference soon (let’s hope).
Also, sometime our EAs should analyze just how much concrete gets used and abused in these projects. We ignore the emissions from the embodied energy at our peril – delusion is not a solution.
This is a great plan and I look forward to it going ahead. I personally find that Harbourfront has improved enormously in the past few years. I find it strange that no one has mentioned the Power Plant gallery, even those who are more positive. Fabulous space.
After looking at that photo, how many tourists are going to want to visit that insanely ugly strip of concrete condofront?
It’s going to take a lot more than a strip of astroturf and a few spindly trees to make that boring stretch of urban blight attractive.
May as well go all out and turn it into the highest concentation of ugly condos in the world. At least that plan has a chance of succeeding.