ssiguy2
Senior Member
Until you write and/or talk to your local councillor you will never know for sure.
Building underneath is already happening with the Loblaws development, but long swaths of the Gardiner are above Lakeshore Rd.
My councillor whom never even had a website until 2015, and in one of his newsletters talked about the option he voted for regarding the Gardiner (same option as Tory) and explained his reasons. He never asked me or had a community meeting to see what people wanted. Sure does not have annual community meetings. I have only been to 1 in 5 yearsUntil you write and/or talk to your local councillor you will never know for sure.
Does the hybrid option allow for transition to grand boulevard later?
But won't the section between the DVP and Cherry still be elevated?
That's still a pretty big gap of urban blight. There is no reason why it couldn't go another block and then rise to the DVP.
I also don't like the blvd of Lakeshore. 6 lanes with 2 bike lanes is to wide and will become a mini-freeway. If the city is intent on spending this amount on the Gardiner then Lakeshore should be much thinner with wider sidewalks, no bike trails , and a maximum of 4 lanes with a nice tree lined median.
Sort of -- the Gardiner will have to be ramped down to the street level, but the main issue is the elevated stretch between Jarvis and Parliament in any case, and not the section between Parliament and DVP covered. Hybrid really should be called - let's keep the Gardiner elevated and change the connection with the DVP.
AoD