In Saturday’s Globe and Mail, John Lorinc reports that there is a proposal afoot for a pedestrian bridge designed by architect Will Aslop (of OCAD fame) over the CN rail line to link new developments in the Liberty Village area to those just north along King Street [edit – I believe I was wrong about the location. There SHOULD be a bridge at Liberty, but I now understand this Aslop bridge is meant for a location further west, north of King and south of Queen, where Aslop has also designed a proposed building. On stilts, again, apparently. It’s part of a problematic development, which reduces my enthusiasm for the project]. The cost would be paid by the developer of these new areas, to join two of their developments together.
I walked in this area recently, and the need for a good pedestrian connection from the new Liberty Village developments to the rest of the city was very obvious. Furthermore, Lorinc points out the potential of a well-designed pedestrian bridge to become a destination in itself, noting examples such as the Millenium Bridge in London, and recent projects in Chicago. His article raises many interesting issues:
- – Will CN even allow the bridge to be built over its tracks?
- – Developer versus city financing of public infrastructure
- – Will this bridge be truly public?
- – Making public infrastructure well-designed as well as functional
- – Seeing “active transport” infrastructure — walking and cycling — as equally important to building roads for cars.
It’s worth reading while it is still public on the Globe site.
12 comments
“The cost would be paid by the developer of these new areas, to join two of their developments together.” are these the same infamous developers that Active 18 is dealing with?
Yes, as noted in the article. The proposed bridge would be about six stories up, and would meet the bottom of the Southerly Alsop tower, which would itself be on stilts.
It looks neat, but I’m intrigued by the whole “land bridge” thing east of Strachan.
Lornic is incorrect about the bridge over the rail line at Dundas West. This bridge, saved by residents a few years ago is in fact a heritage site that probably will become one of the few remaining tributes to the industrial past of the Junction. It is not as spiffy as the Humber bridge, but is something truly unique. sd
I was just in the Liberty Village area this weekend looking at condos, and noted that there was very little connection over the tracks. The need for connections is definately there.
I was walking back towards downtown through the old military cemetary and parking lot to Fort York, and was amazed that the only connection from the parking lot down to Fort York Blvd was via Garrison Road. I decided to hope the small and rusty chain link fence rather than double-back to Garrison road.
There really needs to be more thought put to how pedestrians will move around the whole Liberty Village area.
Greg
What does it mean for public space when there’s a massive bright yellow showpiece of fortified and exclusive condo-dweller “public space” hovering 6 storeys above parkdale – you don’t think that’s an uncomfortable omen for the future of the area and the idea of what it means to defend public space when such an obviously proprietory and controlled space is being backed up on the basis that it’s a “pedestrian connection”.
Do you think this place would have any welcome at all for people in the neighborhood that some security guard might not like the look of? How do you get six storeys up in two tower properties by the same developer and call it public space?
cris> I’m not sure I understand what you’re getting at. The condo is not being built on public space. Most of Parkdale is private residential space already (people have to live somewhere), so i’m not sure how this condo changes that. The debate in this area is over height and size. People have to live somewhere, and I assume wherever you live is not open public space.
—
Greg, I believe that the railway would not allow a pedestrian bridge to be built in Liberty Village, around where that terrible suburban Dominion & parking lot is.
When the Fort is open, you can pass through it and pop out the little bridge on Bathurst.
I was a member of the Niagara Neighbourhood Association Board during the early Liberty Village development days. The LV developers repeatedly assured residents and the board that Pedestrian and Cycling issues would be dealt with in a fair and equitable manner. Right. A pedestrian bridge is vital and bike lanes are in the works eventaully. They are, however, as per usual, mere after-thoughts. A bridge is possible but would be have to adhere to the height requirements of CN Rail.
Shawn: The point and the debate over height and size is something else entirely. What I am saying is that people who are thinking that this bridge being is offered as an public asset are taking part in wishful thinking. It’ll be an off limits space so that the people buying in will be able to avoid the poor. And that is where the public space issue is.
cris> I understand, but not sure where you said that in your post, seemed more of an anti-condo rant.
You’re making a lot of assumptions on this yet-built bridge, and about people being “able to avoid the poor”. Where are you getting this from?
If the bridge is said to be six stories up, how do you physically get up that high to be able to cross it if it is a public amenity?
The condos, like all condos right now, are probably a done deal. If they’re going to reshape the geography of the area to make priviledged connections between upper-income zones rather than operate with street level, that’s another matter, isn’t it?
As for making assumptions before it’s built – are we supposed to wait until it’s already there and not going away before bringing it up?
Keeping out the poor is a good thing. Or rather the ability to mandate appropriate behaviour in public, no sleeping, masturbating, drug taking, etc. Hence why everyone loves the path and shuns the streets downtown. Your pathetic socialism is what has actually destroyed the city and created the problems that you hate. As is typical.
The bridge is great, if too arty, and Active 18 is nothing but a front for another developer trying to protect its interest (hello Margie Z.). So let’s stop this silliness of pretending that Active 18 has anything valuable to say and isn’t a bourgeois self interested NIMBY org.
cris and Hey have demonstrated ideologically driven city views from opposite sides of spectrum. Everyone else will carry on as normal in the rational, reality-based in-between, while they try to fit everything into those ideologies.