evandyk said:
Is there any appetite/plans to spend big bucks on the river north of Corktown? Or do anything at all to it?
Click to expand...

Right now? No.

The Mayor's Office has been clear to City departments that it's important to catch up on SOGR, to complete outstanding projects and to deliver some of the good, bold'ish ideas already in the works; so please do not add new mega-projects to the wish list.

The last time the ideas raised above got a once over of any consequence was after the big flood of the Bala sub and the stranded GO train, with the examination driven by the issue of resilience of the rail infra.

To the best of my knowledge, that very cursory look only considered options north of Gerrard, not south.

Cost quickly de-railed (pun intended) any serious examination of the options.

Evergreen raised some of these ideas a few years back as well, but they really didn't gain huge traction.

There is some sympathy for these ideas among staff........but the project scale would be daunting, and there is no political push to pursue it at this time.
 
A colleague of mine was on that train. My recollection of any discussions back then were mostly "good idea, but not planning on doing anything" much like fixing the DVP/Bayview intersection/ramps. Hence we got the big flood gates on Bayview that don't work when it rains heavily.
 
Northern Light said:
Regrettably, that won't happen, at least in the foreseeable future. It would require elevating all of the road bridges over the Don (Gerrard, Dundas, Queen, Eastern, and that in turn would require altering the approaches to same.

The most realistic changes to expand natural space in 'The Narrows' are:

1) Remove Bayview south of Gerrard to just south to just south of Eastern. That would create several acres of potential wetland/forest habitat.

2) You could optionally push the rail corridor slightly west if Bayview were removed, but only north of King/Queen, below which it would be constrained to the existing alignment.

3) Re-align the track to the east side of the River, next to the DVP, at the same height at the current DVP (it would still flood), but this option, in conjunction with option 1 above, would allow the actual re-alignment of the river, giving it some natural curves back and providing for habitat expansion.

****

Option one above requires the acquisition of the car dealership that fronts Bayview or at least eliminating its access from Bayview, but likely full acquisition to have space for re-aligning the river.

The cost is in the range of 250-750M, depending on what properties are purchased, and whether the utilities now under Bayview have to be relocated.

add

Option 3, (moving the railway to the east side, south of Gerrard) also requires enlarging the railway where it currently exists on the East side, to allow for the Don Branch to be joined by the Bala as a 2-sub corridor, to the 1/2 mile bridge, and then keep the Bala locked to the DVP until just north of Pottery Road, before returning to the current alignment.

Estimated cost, without moving the river - 2B-5B

Moving the River - adding 400M-2B depending how how big of a set of moves you make, and the quality of the habitat enhancement.

***

* the large estimate ranges should be vaguely accurate, bit and pieces of the above have been given cursory consideration in the past. However, none of have been seriously pursued due to cost and complexity, there has been no EA, and no detailed design, which is why there is such a wide range in the number
Click to expand...

Northern Light said:
Regrettably, that won't happen, at least in the foreseeable future. It would require elevating all of the road bridges over the Don (Gerrard, Dundas, Queen, Eastern, and that in turn would require altering the approaches to same.

The most realistic changes to expand natural space in 'The Narrows' are:

1) Remove Bayview south of Gerrard to just south to just south of Eastern. That would create several acres of potential wetland/forest habitat.

2) You could optionally push the rail corridor slightly west if Bayview were removed, but only north of King/Queen, below which it would be constrained to the existing alignment.

3) Re-align the track to the east side of the River, next to the DVP, at the same height at the current DVP (it would still flood), but this option, in conjunction with option 1 above, would allow the actual re-alignment of the river, giving it some natural curves back and providing for habitat expansion.

****

Option one above requires the acquisition of the car dealership that fronts Bayview or at least eliminating its access from Bayview, but likely full acquisition to have space for re-aligning the river.

The cost is in the range of 250-750M, depending on what properties are purchased, and whether the utilities now under Bayview have to be relocated.

add

Option 3, (moving the railway to the east side, south of Gerrard) also requires enlarging the railway where it currently exists on the East side, to allow for the Don Branch to be joined by the Bala as a 2-sub corridor, to the 1/2 mile bridge, and then keep the Bala locked to the DVP until just north of Pottery Road, before returning to the current alignment.

Estimated cost, without moving the river - 2B-5B

Moving the River - adding 400M-2B depending how how big of a set of moves you make, and the quality of the habitat enhancement.

***

* the large estimate ranges should be vaguely accurate, bit and pieces of the above have been given cursory consideration in the past. However, none of have been seriously pursued due to cost and complexity, there has been no EA, and no detailed design, which is why there is such a wide range in the numbers.
Click to expand...
thanks for the detailed response.
yes, bayview can definitely be removed south of river street.
but i still like the idea of elevating the tracks between the rail yard to just south of the adelaide street bridge. the water's edge extending in to corktown common would be incredible. imagine a small beach there!
once the rail line touches grade again, to achieve vertical clearance under the adelaide street bridge, it would be great if it is aligned further west as you mention.
 
AMOR said:
I daydream about the rail line being elevated here (red line) so the west river bank can be naturalized below it - think junction triangle track separation.

this would add more flood water resiliency to the rail line. and it would give us more access to the water's edge from corktown common or from the intersection of king/queen/river. it would be awesome!


View attachment 607881
Click to expand...
*Imagines GO trains going threw a glassed underwater observation tunnel all the way up the Don River...like the one they have Ripley's Aquarium*
 
tripwire said:
Huh! You could be right. I've taken that stretch of road for many years now, but maybe it's only "new" to me because I'm going westbound on it; and previously the westbound lanes were not as bumpy? Or I could just be old and senile!
Click to expand...
The west bound lanes were always 'up and down' along the westbound Lake Shore. Especially adjacent to the (removed now) old pillars of the Gardiner access ramp. Someone here mentioned that alongside the current eastbound Lake Shore the road is 'up and down' adjacent to the Gardiner pillars. If I was a passenger in our car I could not do anything on my phone because it bounce around so much. If one was speeding it could easily be very dangerous.
 
Taken 31 October.

I believe that this site has been graded since my last tour and a fence has been erected.

IMG_0958.jpeg

IMG_0959.jpeg
IMG_0960.jpeg
IMG_0961.jpeg
IMG_0962.jpeg
IMG_0963.jpeg
IMG_0964.jpeg
IMG_0965.jpeg
IMG_0966.jpeg


The intersection of Cherry and Polson is being worked on and will form the southern edge of the South Park.
IMG_0967.jpeg
IMG_0968.jpeg
IMG_0970.jpeg
IMG_0972.jpeg
IMG_0973.jpeg
 
Last edited:
DSC said:
I hear you and agree that a name is a name as far as its 'public exposure' is concerned and I certainly find many condo names are 'annoying' and misleading but I doubt most people would think we have a 'right' to select names of private things while most would think that 'the public' DOES have a right to select the name of a public building/place.
Click to expand...
I guess. I just think some people are being a bit dramatic with the reaction to this name. It’s not some sort of hardship the citizens of Toronto will have to bear. It really is just a simple name.
 
Northern Light said:
1730855359790.png


1730855440422.png
Click to expand...
I don’t like the schematic design for the north landing. The staircase and winding ramp looks like a notable pinch point.

I can’t imagine the arguments against an extended, sloped landing on the promenade or on a separate, adjacent abutment – aside from cost (and, as stated in the slides, value engineering studies have yet to come 😵‍💫)
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top