Roads: Bathurst Street Bridge

[innsertnamehere]

My understanding with the ROW for Bathurst is that the renovation of the bridge would additionally include a complete reconstruction of Bathurst from Lake Shore to Front Street, and the entire stretch would have its own streetcar ROW. That would create around 500m of ROW, which is probably worth it.

You can see how the city plans to change the grade of Bathurst when you see the condos recently completed to the south of it and you see those awkward balconies out front of the retail units - those are supposed to be temporary until the street gets rebuilt.

 

[Megaton327]

^^^ This

There needs to be bike lanes. It's brutal riding across the bridge, and a lot of people have taken to riding on the sidewalk, which isn't so great for the pedestrians.

I have to disagree. The Puente de Luz pedestrian/cyclist bridge is just 222 metres east at Portland St/Dan Leckie Way, and the Fort York-Ordnance Triangle-Stanley Park pedestrian/cyclist bridge is being built soon a few hundred metres to the west. As a former resident in Fort York who cycled much of the time, I would almost certainly not have used the Bathurst bridge with bike lanes with the dedicated bridges adjacent to it.

 

[Red October]

I have to disagree. The Puente de Luz pedestrian/cyclist bridge is just 222 metres east at Portland St/Dan Leckie Way, and the Fort York-Ordnance Triangle-Stanley Park pedestrian/cyclist bridge is being built soon a few hundred metres to the west. As a former resident in Fort York who cycled much of the time, I would almost certainly not have used the Bathurst bridge with bike lanes with the dedicated bridges adjacent to it.

The Puente de Luz bridge is bad if you're trying to go directly somewhere because it makes you backtrack on both sides. If you live west of Bathurst south of the tracks there's no point in riding further just to ride up and across and come back. Bathurst is the most direct route (especially for getting to Adelaide), and should have bike lanes.

 

[mrxbombastic]

With respect to biking over the Bathurst street bridge, it can be dangerous and narrow if you try to stay to the side. sooooooo.... just take the lane. I do it all the time when biking over that bridge and couldn't give less of a damn if some driver is unhappy because I'm in "their" lane. Your allowed to and encouraged to take the lane if its unsafe not to. The bridge will almost certainly not be getting any extra bike infrastructure apart from painted sharrows, which i find to be a bit of a hindrance rather than help at times as they can encourage unsafe side running bike travel in narrow lanes and cars zipping by. But that is another discussion for another forum.

 

[Tuck]

The bridge is super ugly, I hope they tear it down and build a nicer one.

 

[CapitalSeven]

Well, as it's apparently on the Toronto and Ontario heritage lists, probably they won't tear it down. Heritage isn't just what (a) is pretty and (b) random individuals like.

 

[W. K. Lis]

The bridge is super ugly, I hope they tear it down and build a nicer one.

Some people said the very same thing to this:

But guess there are some who still want to tear this down:

 

[Tuck]

...Are you seriously comparing some small, lousy bridge to the Eiffel Tower?

Really?

 

[DSC]

...Are you seriously comparing some small, lousy bridge to the Eiffel Tower?

Really?

Of course he wasn't. What he was saying was that heritage is not only things that look "nice" and, more importantly, what is considered 'nice' changes with time and different people like different things.

 

[Tuck]

Of course he wasn't. What he was saying was that heritage is not only things that look "nice" and, more importantly, what is considered 'nice' changes with time and different people like different things.

Does the bridge have any historical significance behind it? Anything unique about its design (Both aesthetically and its engineering)? Anything that makes it stand out from any other truss bridge other than the fact that its old?

The only thing I can see is that the bridge was once moved.

Something isn't heritage just because its old. We tear down old things all the time.

(That said, I'll freely admit that the only reason I particularly care is because I find truss bridges to be exceptionally ugly).

 

[junctionist]

The truss design is interesting. The bridge gives the area character. I'd prefer to see it painted with some additional enhancements like lighting and art, similar to the Queen East bridge over the Don River.

 

[dowlingm]

It was moved once. Maybe it could be plunked somewhere else...

 

[junctionist]

It was moved once. Maybe it could be plunked somewhere else...

There would have to be a better use for it. If not, I'd widen the sidewalk parts of the deck by at least 100% on both sides for safer cycling with bike lanes.

 

[smallspy]

It was moved once. Maybe it could be plunked somewhere else...

It's been moved twice, actually. The first was from the Humber River to where it is now, more-or-less. The second was in 1931, when they pivoted and swung the bridge 30-some-odd degrees to the east.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[W. K. Lis]

It's been moved twice, actually. The first was from the Humber River to where it is now, more-or-less. The second was in 1931, when they pivoted and swung the bridge 30-some-odd degrees to the east.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

Before the bridge was pivoted, it was also narrower. No streetcar tracks. When it was pivoted in 1931, it was widened and streetcar tracks added.

And no asphalt. That "luxury" item was added to the roadway after.