Roads: Gardiner Expressway

[AlvinofDiaspar]

wylie:

Don't laugh, chunks of the Gardiner had been known to land from the sky. Luckily, it hasn't killed anyone - yet.

AoD

 

[ahrvojic]

This is a decision of the people of Toronto and not the majority of surrounding commuters that are against this.

Hate to break it to you, but Toronto's urban meshwork (economic, social, cultural, infrastructural, etc.) stretches far beyond its political boundaries and those often-dismissed surrounding commuters are in fact its life blood. As I've said before, who do you think fills all those office towers on a daily basis?

I can't say I feel strongly about the Gardiner either way, but we shouldn't pretend that it exists in a vacuum.

 

[adma]

I was thinking of the Laval collapse as well. And face it; when it was finished c1970, even it might have seemed (at least to road/engineering/infrastructure geeks) the height of modernity in whatever prestressed-concrete way--no different from, say, the 427 around here...

 

[bizorky]

Hate to break it to you, but Toronto's urban meshwork (economic, social, cultural, infrastructural, etc.) stretches far beyond its political boundaries and those often-dismissed surrounding commuters are in fact its life blood. As I've said before, who do you think fills all those office towers on a daily basis?

That being said, it is hard to imagine that reducing the size of one highway would make all that much difference. There would still be a road where the Gardiner is, just a different type of road than the ugly thing there now.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

And relatively minor GO improvements could accommodate all those west-end drivers whose commutes must already be at the threshold of unbearableness.

 

[dashingdan]

I find it surprising how much support there is on here to actually take down the Gardiner. Especially since the only good reason to do so is because it's "ugly". And it'll "revitalize" the waterfront. Yeah, right.

Tearing down the Gardiner must be an idea that's in vogue right now or something. Trading one obstacle for an even bigger obstacle doesn't exactly sound like revitalizaing the waterfront to me. If you were to bury the Gardiner, maybe, but this half-baked plan to just take it down and widen the Lake Shore is just plain silly. Sure, if you want to cripple the downtown economy it might work.

OTOH, maybe improved GO service on Lakeshore West could help relieve some of the resulting congestion. But as it stands now, you're just inviting chaos and paralysis. Maybe if Toronto went through a profound shift toward a more urban lifestyle, you know, with decent commuter train service and subways out to say, Mississauga, then we wouldn't need the Gardiner.

All in all, it's a very tricky proposal. Far more expensive than the simple price tag of $1 billion to take down the Gardiner and replace it with an at grade expressway (er, sorry, University Ave.-like boulevard).

 

[SD2]

I find it surprising how much support there is on here to actually take down the Gardiner. Especially since the only good reason to do so is because it's "ugly". And it'll "revitalize" the waterfront. Yeah, right.

Tearing down the Gardiner must be an idea that's in vogue right now or something. Trading one obstacle for an even bigger obstacle doesn't exactly sound like revitalizaing the waterfront to me. If you were to bury the Gardiner, maybe, but this half-baked plan to just take it down and widen the Lake Shore is just plain silly. Sure, if you want to cripple the downtown economy it might work.

Take a look at the renderings presented in the PDF.

I still don't understand how people can't see the Gardiner as a barrier. With a multilane road you can at least have nice sidewalks with retail, etc. and some nice landscaping. The Gardiner doesn't allow for this.

Try getting to the waterfront on Bay, having to cross under the Gardiner and then try it on Windermere and Lakeshore - the latter is definitely a more pleasant experience.

OTOH, maybe improved GO service on Lakeshore West could help relieve some of the resulting congestion. But as it stands now, you're just inviting chaos and paralysis. Maybe if Toronto went through a profound shift toward a more urban lifestyle, you know, with decent commuter train service and subways out to say, Mississauga, then we wouldn't need the Gardiner.

GO already goes to Mississauga. A subway there would require cooperation from Mississauga; it would be more their responsibility than Toronto's.

 

[The Mississauga Muse]

GO already goes to Mississauga. A subway there would require cooperation from Mississauga; it would be more their responsibility than Toronto's.

Speaking of Mississauga, here's the September 29th editorial of the Mississauga News FYI:

"THE MISSISSAUGA NEWS
Gardiner must be saved

The Mississauga News
Sep 29, 2006

(Mississauga) - Yes, the Gardiner Expressway is located in Toronto, but residents of Mississauga certainly have a stake in its future.

This week, the City of Toronto released what had been previously a secret report that highlights future options for the Gardiner.

Chief among the plans is to gut it, tear it down and possibly bury it or have it operate on ground level.

We say any move to destroy the Gardiner will be a disaster, a plan that will result in traffic headaches for years, if not decades, and keep Mississauga commuters from reaching their downtown destinations.

So far, the actual reasons for taking down the Gardiner are almost non-existent with the chief concern being the expressway is ugly and that it blocks the view of the lake.

What a bunch of malarkey."

The rest can be viewed at:

MISSISSAUGA NEWS GARDINER EDITORIAL


Signed,
The Mississauga Muse

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I wonder how Mississauga would feel if there is an expressway right through Port Credit...

Hate to break it to you, but Toronto's urban meshwork (economic, social, cultural, infrastructural, etc.) stretches far beyond its political boundaries and those often-dismissed surrounding commuters are in fact its life blood.

The urban meshwork does indeed extend beyond political boundaries, and yet I don't recall any of the administration in outlying regions make decisions on the basis of what's good for the whole (one example I can raise is the differential in tax rates across different municipalities, leading to sprawl). So in this instance, why should the City of Toronto make a decision that has profound local importance on the basis of what a commuter in some far flung region think?

As I've said before, who do you think fills all those office towers on a daily basis?

Mostly people who walk and took the TTC/GO to work?

AoD

 

[El Chico905]

Take a look at the renderings presented in the PDF.

Those renderings are a joke, the people out number the cars, and it shows a 6 lane road, not a 10 lane Highway like is mentioned in the report.

I still don't understand how people can't see the Gardiner as a barrier. With a multilane road you can at least have nice sidewalks with retail, etc. and some nice landscaping. The Gardiner doesn't allow for this.

It's because it isn't a physical barrier at all, There may be nice sidewalks, but I doubt there will be much retail seeing as how the road will be fronted by the parking garages of Waterclub, Infinity, etc.

Try getting to the waterfront on Bay, having to cross under the Gardiner and then try it on Windermere and Lakeshore - the latter is definitely a more pleasant experience.

That's not because of the Gardiner, it's because there is actually something to walk to on Windermere, instead of Condos at the foot of Bay st.

 

[cacruden]

What goes up, must come down.....

If not now, in the future.... it is only a matter of time.

It is time for Mississauga to realize this and limit the impact to them by:
- pushing for the best solution (both for Toronto, and for them) -- even at a higher cost (which is street-level access into Toronto, and a tunnel bypass through toronto.
- push for increased transit to/from Toronto
- push for improved traffic flow around the north of toronto for those bypassing Toronto.

 

[Antiloop33rpm]

I have to agree with Cacruden. The Gardiner is going to come down sooner rather than later at this point. It has become an aging, concrete hulk who's lifespan and role in the city is crumbling and becoming obsolete. Should it have been torn down long ago? Maybe. But that is largely irrelevant now. Instead why not focus on the issue at hand.

And like it or not, many people all across the GTA have a vested interest in the future of the Gardiner. A person downtown may not think that an Oakville commuter has any right or say in it's future, but, they do. Commuting functions in and out and even across the city are considerations that need to be taken. And I see no reason why they shouldn't make their concerns known (for their on sake I hope they do it in a more thoughtful and intelligent way than relying on National Post 'journalist' to do their work).

What I think is probably the sadest part of this debate is the fact that allready it has turned into political rhetoric and nonsense at a stage when what should be taking place is public consultation, debate and discussion. I know this is hard to avoid but the mere suggestion of doing something about the Gardiner so quickly degrades into childish antics, it leaves an outsider thinking that not much good can come of all this.

Replacing the Gardiner is going to be a very important project for Toronto and one that has the potential to positively impact the areas surrounding it in a number of ways. Hopefully the level and quality of public and governmental discourse around the project one day improves to actually reflect the significance of the project.

 

[ahrvojic]

The urban meshwork does indeed extend beyond political boundaries, and yet I don't recall any of the administration in outlying regions make decisions on the basis of what's good for the whole ... So in this instance, why should the City of Toronto make a decision that has profound local importance on the basis of what a commuter in some far flung region think?

I don't recall that either, but then your solution is to let the completely interdependent cities of the GTA continue to uselessly struggle against each other out of spite?

I think Antiloop put it best: the Gardiner is going to have to come down sooner or later, but commuting functions in and out of the city need to be taken into consideration regardless of how far flung the commuters may be.

Tearing down the Gardiner from Spadina may not seem like much, but seemingly small changes or events can be greatly amplified when tinkering with complex networks such as a city's transportation grid and that's why it isn't (or shouldn't be) as straightforward as it may seem.

 

[SD2]

An idea suggested here - putting the road underground while using the already dug hole as an opportunity for a new subway line would probably be the best bet.

Costly, but everyone wins - the roadway remains, we remove a barrier to the waterfront and we get a needed downtown relief line to further ease traffic.

 

[cacruden]

Doing the tunnel and subway at the same time -- while reducing the surface portion from 10 lanes -- would likely be the best solution.

It would take a person with vision, political power, and the business skills to mitigate the costs, through increasing the density (land that is released by tunnelling could be redisignated hi-density) -- which could offset some of the costs -- and provide additional justification for the subway line.

There is only one problem.

That person does not seem to exist.