70Challenger
Active Member
Chicago turned its waterfront airport into a park, once Toronto does the same and bridges the island to the main promenade we can get on Chicago's level.
Toronto Lower Don Lands Redevelopment | ?m | ?s | Waterfront Toronto
rdaner
Senior Member
After having spent time on both waterfronts I have come to the conclusion that they are apples and oranges. Very different with attributes for both but ours is still (rapidly) evolving.
jje1000
Senior Member
I feel like the oldest pre-WaterfrontTO sections need a refresh in order to tie them into the language the rest of the waterfront has. They are usually the most heavily trafficked sections of the waterfront, but really do feel rather basic compared to the newer sections.
The biggest problem zone right now for me is the area from Harbour Square to the Westin Harbor Castle, which I think is the source of the 'wall of condos' stereotype the waterfront gets. Harbour Square 's driveway is inappropriate facing a quay, and Harbour Square Park West is tired and needs a facelift. Likewise, I think that it would be a good idea to replace the parking space in Harbour Square Park with a pavilion with some dining options, in order to activate the space (not sure how the rest of the park is progressing since there doesn't seem to be any money for it). And let's not get into the atrocious use of space beside the Westin Harbor Castle, or its massive drop off ramp facing Queens Quay...
Personally I think Grant Park looks good on a map, but much of it is actually just visual green space and not really programmed (in comparison to sections like Millennium/Maggie Daley Park). Good back when there were Sunday drives in carriages, but vast distances to walk across.
Last edited:
rdaner
Senior Member
Good points. Also I was in Chicago once in February and the entire waterfront looked like Siberia.
prisecaru0
New Member
I have to agree with this, personally I don't lean left in terms of politics. Yet i do support the proposal to close the airport by the left politicians idea. If closed, you could connect the islands with a bridge or a tunnel and give Toronto its own waterfront park. Maybe we put a giant bean in the middle as well.
Dinamo5
New Member
It's either they close the airport or they make a new island, to not have a connection to the islands is crazy, why cant you have one channel to have tall boats/ships to come in and the other channel to not have those boats is crazy to me, 20 years down the road they are going to say wow why didn't we build this bridge earlier...lol
Last edited by a moderator:
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
I don't particularly like the airport - but the current deficiencies in the waterfront isn't really a result of, and will be solved by changes at TIA.
AoD
Last edited:
hawc
Senior Member
The island airport is an incredible asset for the city and a good source of tax and employment too.
Love how people are just like, "Meh, I don't think we should have it anymore, make it a park."
So naive to how the real world works.
Love how people are just like, "Meh, I don't think we should have it anymore, make it a park."
So naive to how the real world works.
70Challenger
Active Member
It's been demonstrated in chicago that removing horribly placed infrastructure along the waterfront won't be the death of the city. Real world... how about that real world precedent? Billy bishop stans never have any response beyond personal insults.
urbanexplorer
Active Member
This whole debate has been done to death in various threads IMO. I don't think starting with calling a group of people "stans" will yield a productive conversation anyway. Lots of people use the airport. Lots don't. Difference of opinion. I love it, personally.
tripwire
Active Member
Wasn't there thoughts of a bridge connecting Lower Donlands to the island? I would like seeing both east and west connections so that it's essentially a big connected loop. But I don't know if it's really a priority, and how easy access to the island would (negatively) affect it.
70Challenger
Active Member
It's not a priority. Toronto accepts the status quo because it's convenient. We should keep Chicago's name out our mouths until that changes.
rdaner
Senior Member
I think that there needs to be a larger conversation about the Island Airport. For example the issue for me is not its presence but the way the runway is configured. Why not fill in the south side of the Island and move everything a few hundred metres to the south? This solves the noise issue, allows expansion, brings the northern edge closer to redevelopment and a new park. I am sure that this has occurred to other stakeholders. Waterfront Toronto is a three level organization that could bring everyone together. And I don’t see getting rid of the beach on the south side as long as larger facilities are provided elsewhere. The airport is a tremendous asset.
Northern Light
Superstar
Can we please keep the Billy Bishop discussion in its dedicated thread.
urbantoronto.ca
Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport | ?m | ?s | Ports Toronto | Arup
Of course someone COULD do this though why anyone would think it was a good use of funds is really beyond me. If you can afford to fly and can't walk 200 metres to transit you can probably afford to take a taxi all the way home or even use the (free) shuttle all the way to Union. Many things...
SKULL_KRUSHER
New Member
This would be a dream come true imo. It would've been really nice if they had gone with the bridge connecting the east side of the island to the Lower Don Lands. Bridges connecting either side of the island to the mainland would be incredible for public access to green space and would lead to so much more use of the island.