Roads: Gardiner Expressway

[GraphicMatt]

Let's fight to make this a livable city for its residents, not just for the property developers and other commuters. Leave the grade level near the waterfront for pedestrians and cyclists, we don't need another University Avenue down by the lake. I think we need a pedestrian market under the overpass.

Sounds not bad, don't you think?

There's a lot of talk of 'beautifying' the underside of the Gardiner in this thread, which admittedly is probably a better tact than doing nothing at all. But it all still feels really disingenuous. Call me cynical, but I think the people proposing 'pedestrian markets', 'art installations' and 'cafés' underneath are exactly the same kind of person who would NEVER visit any of those, were they to be built. Essentially, you're just proposing something you hope will be cheap that will placate those who want the thing torn down, so you can keep driving on it.

I've yet to see a really nice example of a 'beautified' expressway overpass. Certainly some look nicer than the Gardiner, but that's an easy feat, roughly akin to beating John Goodman in a swimsuit contest.

Also: Demonizing University Avenue doesn't ring true at all. People cross it daily. No one thinks twice about walking from City Hall to the MuchMusic building because they'll have to cross big-scary University avenue. Hell, I saw somebody getting wedding photos taken on the median a few weeks ago. I sincerely doubt anyone has ever taken wedding photos under the Gardiner.


I was walking near Lakeshore/Leslie on the weekend where the eastern end of the Gardiner used to be. While I can't say like I felt like they did a GOOD job with the space (development around the intersection feels very suburban), the area was PACKED with cyclists, rollerbladers and pedestrians. It was really nice to see.

 

[vicente]

Most people here complain that highways are bad, and that tearing down highways will lead to a healthier, more urban city because people will be taking public transit and/or walking.

The problem here is that THIS IS NOT EUROPE. Well, not until we build 5 more subway lines and have streetcars on every major street from Steeles to downtown, from Kipling to Morningside.

If we get rid of our urban freeways, we have no alternative. Well I guess you do, if sitting on a bus when it's 30 degrees C stopping at every intersection needing to transfer 3 times is your idea of an alternative.

It's often pointed out that traffic spontaneously increases when new freeways are built. However, when freeways are torn down, subway lines and other forms of rapid transit don't magically appear. Instead, you get stuck with lines of cars stopping and going, waiting to turn left at every intersection where there used to be a highway exit.

As someone said, the Gardiner completes our only freeway ring road, tearing down a section of it will only lead to people idling at red lights waiting to get from one freeway to the other.

So unless 5 subway lines (including the Queen subway) and dozens of new streetcar lines get built, the Gardiner has to stay.

 

[Dichotomy]

There's a lot of talk of 'beautifying' the underside of the Gardiner in this thread, which admittedly is probably a better tact than doing nothing at all. But it all still feels really disingenuous. Call me cynical, but I think the people proposing 'pedestrian markets', 'art installations' and 'cafés' underneath are exactly the same kind of person who would NEVER visit any of those, were they to be built. Essentially, you're just proposing something you hope will be cheap that will placate those who want the thing torn down, so you can keep driving on it.

I've yet to see a really nice example of a 'beautified' expressway overpass. Certainly some look nicer than the Gardiner, but that's an easy feat, roughly akin to beating John Goodman in a swimsuit contest.

Also: Demonizing University Avenue doesn't ring true at all. People cross it daily. No one thinks twice about walking from City Hall to the MuchMusic building because they'll have to cross big-scary University avenue. Hell, I saw somebody getting wedding photos taken on the median a few weeks ago. I sincerely doubt anyone has ever taken wedding photos under the Gardiner.


I was walking near Lakeshore/Leslie on the weekend where the eastern end of the Gardiner used to be. While I can't say like I felt like they did a GOOD job with the space (development around the intersection feels very suburban), the area was PACKED with cyclists, rollerbladers and pedestrians. It was really nice to see.

Let's hear your comments again on Feb. 5 when you walk around there. I know because I use Cherry Beach 12 months of the year with my dog and the Martin Goodman Trail is EMPTY. In fact, you don't have to go down there in February: try a weekend in October or November, unless it happens to be one of those rare 'Indian summer' (are we allowed to say that anymore?) days.
Your point about beautifying under the Gardiner is well taken: the noise and dust alone would make any commercial venture under there dubious at best. Besides, where would the panhandlers go? The water and spray that shoots off the Gardiner isn't great either, especially in the winter. Just ask the previous owners of Somerset, the GM dealer that closed by the foot of Sherbourne.
They certainly could do something to the underbelly (like those upside down trees that have been recently painted - they're quite nice), but I doubt business would be clamoring to open up. Maybe parking spaces would be feasible. They could at least clean the place once in a while.

 

[urbanfan89]

Most people here complain that highways are bad, and that tearing down highways will lead to a healthier, more urban city because people will be taking public transit and/or walking.

The problem here is that THIS IS NOT EUROPE. Well, not until we build 5 more subway lines and have streetcars on every major street from Steeles to downtown, from Kipling to Morningside.

Which is what MoveOntario 2020 is.

If we get rid of our urban freeways, we have no alternative. Well I guess you do, if sitting on a bus when it's 30 degrees C stopping at every intersection needing to transfer 3 times is your idea of an alternative.

It's often pointed out that traffic spontaneously increases when new freeways are built. However, when freeways are torn down, subway lines and other forms of rapid transit don't magically appear. Instead, you get stuck with lines of cars stopping and going, waiting to turn left at every intersection where there used to be a highway exit.

Currently with the Gardiner, traffic gets backed up at every offramp. There are a total of three ramps between the CNE and DVP. There are 10 streets (after Simcoe is opened) that lead from Lakeshore to north of the railway tracks (which must be improved). In theory, at least, an at-grade intersection will allow more choices to get on/off the road. Just add half-decent signal synchronization.

As someone said, the Gardiner completes our only freeway ring road, tearing down a section of it will only lead to people idling at red lights waiting to get from one freeway to the other.

The fact that the Gardiner completes a ring road doesn't justify not considering alternatives to it, especially since those who drive through it without going/coming from downtown are a small minority. Besides, if we had a ring road it's the 407.

So unless 5 subway lines (including the Queen subway) and dozens of new streetcar lines get built, the Gardiner has to stay.

Why not do both?

 

[CDL.TO]

Whoever thinks that Europe doesn't have many expressways should head over to Google Maps. Paris has 3 ring road expressways (4 if you count the massive Grand contournement). The big difference, as I see it, is how they integrate their expressways into the urban fabric. There's a heavy use of tunnels and interchanges are usually small. But they still have plenty of expressways, and it's not a stretch to believe that if Toronto were in Europe, not only would we have a larger subway system, but also a Spadina expressway.

A lot of people are complaining that those who support the removal of the Gardiner are anti-car, but I just can't see there being much opposition by those Gardiner removal supporters to a plan to replace it with a tunnel. This debate is really one of 'urban fabric' vs 'better mobility'. It's easy to feel victimized if you believe that there's an irrational group out there who hope to punish you for your car-driving ways. In reality, they just see urban fabric as having greater value to their lives and the lives of those around them than high-speed mobility.

I think there's a big problem that both sides of this issue is seeing it as being symbolic of the larger debate of "people vs cars" and as such is causing some needlessly heated emotions. I just can't bring myself to believe that the loss of a 1.5km section of the Gardiner and the addition of 3 traffic lights will have any real effect on downtown traffic and travel times when you look at the big picture, but I also can't believe building a busy 8 or 10 lane surface road right alongside a railway viaduct will improve the urbanity of the area.

 

[Dichotomy]

I think everyone would be happy if the Gardiner were buried. Whatever happened to that proposal floated a few years back for a 8 0r 10 lane tunnel under Humber Bay? As I recall, some consortium approached the city with the idea and they were going to foot the entire bill. In exchange, they wanted the land rights under the Gardiner. That sounded like a plan worth looking at.

Let's forget the nonsense of two minutes being added to anyone's drive time from Jarvis to the foot of DVP. The lights at Jarvis, Sherbourne, Parliament and Donway are three-way. Each light is a minimum 1- 1/2 minutes - and that's assuming they are properly synchronized, which is impossible for two way traffic anyway.

Why is everyone ignoring the train tracks and the rusting bridges that support them? Those bridges are disgusting, and far more daunting to a cyclist or pedestrian than the Gardiner!

I just don't see how Adelaide/Richmond could ever pick up the extra traffic. A lot of traffic in the core has to divert along the Gardiner/Lakeshore because there is no alternate route.

And don't give me the nonsense about losing 3 lanes on the Gardiner and gaining one on Lakeshore is going to compensate! One of the worse traffic bottlenecks in the city is the 401/Allen interchange because some brilliant engineer decided that 6 lanes can merge into 3 all in short order!

 

[urbanfan89]

I think everyone would be happy if the Gardiner were buried. Whatever happened to that proposal floated a few years back for a 8 0r 10 lane tunnel under Humber Bay? As I recall, some consortium approached the city with the idea and they were going to foot the entire bill. In exchange, they wanted the land rights under the Gardiner. That sounded like a plan worth looking at.

Land value in downtown Toronto must be as expensive as in Tokyo in 1989 or Hong Kong in 1996.

Let's forget the nonsense of two minutes being added to anyone's drive time from Jarvis to the foot of DVP. The lights at Jarvis, Sherbourne, Parliament and Donway are three-way. Each light is a minimum 1- 1/2 minutes - and that's assuming they are properly synchronized, which is impossible for two way traffic anyway.

Impossible for two-way traffic? What rock are you living under?

Why is everyone ignoring the train tracks and the rusting bridges that support them? Those bridges are disgusting, and far more daunting to a cyclist or pedestrian than the Gardiner!

I dunno, how about they fix that problem at the same time?

I just don't see how Adelaide/Richmond could ever pick up the extra traffic. A lot of traffic in the core has to divert along the Gardiner/Lakeshore because there is no alternate route.

And then ramp up GO Rail service at the same time?

And don't give me the nonsense about losing 3 lanes on the Gardiner and gaining one on Lakeshore is going to compensate! One of the worse traffic bottlenecks in the city is the 401/Allen interchange because some brilliant engineer decided that 6 lanes can merge into 3 all in short order!

No one planned for the Allen to abruptly halt at Eglinton.

 

[CDL.TO]

Let's forget the nonsense of two minutes being added to anyone's drive time from Jarvis to the foot of DVP. The lights at Jarvis, Sherbourne, Parliament and Donway are three-way. Each light is a minimum 1- 1/2 minutes - and that's assuming they are properly synchronized, which is impossible for two way traffic anyway.

I know I've already read that the Gardiner will likely end/start east of Jarvis, so that's not relevant. And the ramps to the DVP are west of Don Roadway (I assume you mean Don Roadway) so that's not really relevant either. That said, you forgot Cherry St.

And how does a green traffic light add 1.5 minutes to a trip?

And don't give me the nonsense about losing 3 lanes on the Gardiner and gaining one on Lakeshore is going to compensate! One of the worse traffic bottlenecks in the city is the 401/Allen interchange because some brilliant engineer decided that 6 lanes can merge into 3 all in short order!

Who are you talking to?

 

[Automation Gallery]

Maybe a couple of roundabouts would help move the traffic better.Just dont know if Torontonians are ready.

 

[Whoaccio]

Maybe a couple of roundabouts would help move the traffic better.Just dont know if Torontonians are ready.

I don't know... from an engineering point of view I understand the benefits of traffic circles, but after returning from Edmonton I am none to impressed. Most hypothetical time savings are wiped out by drivers who don't understand the intricacies of roundabouts and pedestrians. Pedestrians do not work well with roundabouts. They are BIG too, a well engineered round about really is hideous.

Land value in downtown Toronto must be as expensive as in Tokyo in 1989 or Hong Kong in 1996.

I hope that is sarcasm...

Whoever thinks that Europe doesn't have many expressways should head over to Google Maps. Paris has 3 ring road expressways (4 if you count the massive Grand contournement). The big difference, as I see it, is how they integrate their expressways into the urban fabric. There's a heavy use of tunnels and interchanges are usually small. But they still have plenty of expressways, and it's not a stretch to believe that if Toronto were in Europe, not only would we have a larger subway system, but also a Spadina expressway.

I can buy that. I don't even really think that a full tunnel is necessary, I would be content with trenching and some half decent design. I really like the concepts they were throwing out a few months ago for the HWY 401 extension in Windsor. Trenches with decked over parks in important areas.

 

[syn]

Whoever thinks that Europe doesn't have many expressways should head over to Google Maps. Paris has 3 ring road expressways (4 if you count the massive Grand contournement). The big difference, as I see it, is how they integrate their expressways into the urban fabric. There's a heavy use of tunnels and interchanges are usually small. But they still have plenty of expressways, and it's not a stretch to believe that if Toronto were in Europe, not only would we have a larger subway system, but also a Spadina expressway.

A lot of people are complaining that those who support the removal of the Gardiner are anti-car, but I just can't see there being much opposition by those Gardiner removal supporters to a plan to replace it with a tunnel. This debate is really one of 'urban fabric' vs 'better mobility'. It's easy to feel victimized if you believe that there's an irrational group out there who hope to punish you for your car-driving ways. In reality, they just see urban fabric as having greater value to their lives and the lives of those around them than high-speed mobility.

I think there's a big problem that both sides of this issue is seeing it as being symbolic of the larger debate of "people vs cars" and as such is causing some needlessly heated emotions. I just can't bring myself to believe that the loss of a 1.5km section of the Gardiner and the addition of 3 traffic lights will have any real effect on downtown traffic and travel times when you look at the big picture, but I also can't believe building a busy 8 or 10 lane surface road right alongside a railway viaduct will improve the urbanity of the area.

Well said.

I don't really see myself as anti-car, but pro-transit. Unfortunately a lot of people who do rely on their cars see that as anti-car.

 

[Dichotomy]

Land value in downtown Toronto must be as expensive as in Tokyo in 1989 or Hong Kong in 1996.

Not sure what you are getting at here. The land in and around the Gardiner must be worth a small fortune. If a consortium wants to spend a few billion building a tunnel under Humber Bay, I am sure the city can work out some arrangement where a balance of condos/parks would replace the Gardiner. This plan would also allow for the least amount of disruption downtown while the tunnel under the Bay was being built.

Impossible for two-way traffic? What rock are you living under? :rolleyes:

By definition, if the lights are synchronized for eastbound, then westbound is going to get a lot of red lights, and vice versa. I've driven Jarvis and Eglinton east for many years and see the results myself. Add in the fact that the streets along Lakeshore are 3-way signals and you have a recipe for disaster.


I dunno, how about they fix that problem at the same time? :rolleyes:

Is that in the budget? I can't imagine the traffic mayhem as those bridges are replaced at the same time or even after the Gardiner is stumped. I endured the DVP bridge repairs and it took them 4 years of reduced lanes and snarled traffic.


And then ramp up GO Rail service at the same time?

We're talking about commuters again, aren't we? I guess the undeground garages that are full in all these downtown condos must be a mirage.

No one planned for the Allen to abruptly halt at Eglinton.[/QUOTE]

Very, very true. And look at the mess Eglinton has become. Most of that traffic would have continued down to St. Clair and eventually the Gardiner. Is this going to be the future of the West Donlands as downtown traffic has nowhere to go westbound?

 

[egotrippin]

I'm sure it's been said, probably be me already, but I'd love to see the Gardiner torn down and replaced by a tunnel that runs the stretch where it was elevated. Although if we're talking fantasy land here, I'd love to see the DVP/Gardiner torn out and replaced with express bullet trains. Create a true transit city, park your car at the perimeter of the city and be shuttled in high speed and comfort to stops at main thoroughfares. Every major street would have rail transit, with automobile traffic being limited to local traffic. Highspeed rail links would also come from a west-end route, as well as north and south connections. It's essentially all fantasy, and needs refinement, but I've been dreaming up plans for a largely car free city.

 

[Whoaccio]

Impossible for two-way traffic? What rock are you living under? :rolleyes:

By definition, if the lights are synchronized for eastbound, then westbound is going to get a lot of red lights, and vice versa. I've driven Jarvis and Eglinton east for many years and see the results myself. Add in the fact that the streets along Lakeshore are 3-way signals and you have a recipe for disaster.

Wait, if lights are synchronized for eastbound traffic, the corollary is that they should be synchronized for westbound traffic as well. I don't understand how traffic signals synchronized for Eastbound traffic can hinder Westbound traffic. Hinder N/S traffic, sure, but E/W?

 

[Dichotomy]

Wait, if lights are synchronized for eastbound traffic, the corollary is that they should be synchronized for westbound traffic as well. I don't understand how traffic signals synchronized for Eastbound traffic can hinder Westbound traffic. Hinder N/S traffic, sure, but E/W?

The lights have to cascade red to green at the right interval to keep traffic flowing, but it can only work for one direction. Computers and cameras are supposed to keep that synchronized, according to time of day and traffic flow.
However, both Sherbourne and Parliament are deliberately synchronized to maximize red lights in BOTH directions, as I've tested those routes repeatedly and always get 70-80% red, no matter what direction I travel, no matter the time of day. Although the system can be tricked if you do, like, 80 km/hr between the lights, traffic allowing!