News   Aug 13, 2024
Daniels on Parliament Rising at Gerrard in Regent Park
 233     0 
News   Aug 13, 2024
OLT Approves Height Bump from 35 to 40 Storeys at Leaside Station
 1.1K     3 
News   Aug 13, 2024
News Roundup for August 13, 2024
 503     0 

Roads: Keep the Gardiner, fix it, or get rid of it? (2005-2014)

Status
Not open for further replies.
TOareaFan said:
Ah yes, some of us fools forget that the Gardiner only carries people who otherwise could use the Lakeshore West rail service ;)
Click to expand...
No...
...But the massive conversion of GO service into a new surface subway-feel network will remove a lot of people from Gardiner AND elsewhere. To the point where downtown can absorb the capacity of whatever cars coming in from 403. A portion of the people driving from elsewhere in GTA near all the GO RER lines will use them, outside Lakeshore, too. Eliminating enough cars from downtown to accomodate the inflow from the 403. Boom. It all balances out to a new equilibrium; no more congested than today. Boom. No economic disaster. See?

Now people driving in on the 403 has room to merge into downtown. No economic disaster. Problem solved, thanks to converting the whole GO network GTA-wide into a frequent "surface subway". And from what I hear, Metrolinx may just pull off that miracle before the Gardiner collapses. Toronto Star December 17th, 2014: Metrolinx is speeding up electricification of GOtrain network -- imagine SmartTrackizing the whole GO network into "forget-the-timetable" frequent subway convience with super-reliable electric trains. Yes. The entire shebang. It's plausible in the timescale before Gardiner teardown.

Too many cancellations have occured. Eglington subway? Poof. Sheppard extension? Poof. Indecision? Ouch. But for once, finally the Feds & Ontario & City Hall are simultaneously enthusastic about SmartTrack (the name of one of the GO RER routes). Even Harper expressed interest when he met Tory! Whatever creature we vote for in 2015 inside Parliament isn't likely to cancel GO RER. It seems like the Metrolinx Miracle may actually happen.

I'll approve Gardiner demolition, if they succeed. I'm finally sold.
 
Last edited:
Another issue is that all of the GO parking lots are packed and there is not much room for expansion. With all-day GO RER, demand for the GO trains will increase, however, many people still have to drive because there is nowhere to park at the station.

I would be curious to see if GO has plans to build multi-storey garages at their main lots. I know I have seen some in the east...not sure about the west.
 
arcum said:
Another issue is that all of the GO parking lots are packed and there is not much room for expansion. With all-day GO RER, demand for the GO trains will increase, however, many people still have to drive because there is nowhere to park at the station.
Click to expand...
Metrolinx seems to know this already, they brought it up in their meetings and I see scattered mentions of making GO more pedestrian/TTC/transit friendly. Several things will mitigate this.
(1) They are also plans for new pedestrian-friendly infill stations at many locations. Some are within 416 (e.g. new Gerrard Square GOstation serving Riverdale/Danforth/Cabbagetown/Little India), plus others outside the downtown too, like the probable new Eglington Crosstown interchange with SmartTrack/UPX.
(2) Many new hub/interchange stations. Like what they'll need to build for transfers between Subway + SmartTrack + UPX + GOtrains, and some other lesser interchanges here and there. Make them easier to transfer than the nightmarish Yonge-University interchange,
(3) Lot of suburban places will still have massive garages. They are continually building massive garages at some of them, and have provisions for more in the outer areas. This will not stop in the outlying areas.
(4) Paid parking ideas. GO expanding reserved spots, making some stations paid-parking only, adding Presto card daily parking, etc.). Even with paid, it can be cheaper to park outside downtown than in downtown -- more than enough to pay for the fare. Future Metrolinx initiatives can encourage adjacent mallowners to add a paid parking area, etc.
(5) A mesh of improved transit to the stations. If you're only a 5 to 15 minute bus hop or bike ride to a surface subway station (GO RER) with frequencies permitting painless transfer, then there are situations such as parents who will tell their highschool/college/university kids "kids, please take the train, you'll get there faster today! I put a bit on your Presto." rather than soccer-moming them over there. And "Hey, let's take the train to the Dome. They now finally run all the time and we avoid the expensive and slow stadium parking!", or you get the "I have too much work...I feel like taking the train so I can do my emails" to things like "it now seems cheaper and about as fast if I pay parking at that suburban lot to avoid the full GO lot"). Those storyboards are going to happen here and there, when all the GO lines are subway-frequency combined with 25% faster electric trains. Not everybody, but it all adds up, eventually we've eliminate, a few laneful of freeways worth of cars, if the initiative is massive enough.
(6) The neverending condo boom, for better or for worse. They tend to demand transit more than drive.

-- People who don't take the car, often linger longer near their transit endpoints, pushing an economic boom to the shops around the stations. Doesn't doesn't seem like an economic disaster.
-- Select other cities have successfully displaced a whole freewayful of cars into public transit in a generation, permitting them to shut down their ugly viaducts -- while doing far less than what Metrolinx is wanting to do!
-- True -- We'll never be a Copahagen, but we can at least turn a "9 out of 10" car culture into a "7 out of 10" car culture within 25 years, sufficient enough to demolish Gardiner.

Before a month ago, I disagreed with demolishing Gardiner. See my post I made a few days ago.
I didn't think Toronto had the balls, but I'm willing to see what the ongoing Metrolinx Miracle now brings us.
If it happens -- amazing -- I'm sold on saying goodbye to Gardiner
 
Last edited:
arcum said:
I see this posted a lot, but it's really just cherry-picking a few examples. Removing the busiest sections of the Gardiner would have a devastating effect on the city and the economy. It would put a lot of stress on sideroads and increase travel times of anyone going in/out of the city by hours. It will affect more than just commuters. Think about buses, taxis, travel from downtown to the airport, etc. There just aren't enough alternatives currently. The Lakeshore GO line is close to capacity.
Click to expand...

The two sides won't be able to convince each other.
Why doesn't the city do a real experiment: close the Gardiner for a month and see what "devastating effect" it might have.
 
mdrejhon said:
No...
...But the massive conversion of GO service into a new surface subway-feel network will remove a lot of people from Gardiner AND elsewhere. To the point where downtown can absorb the capacity of whatever cars coming in from 403. A portion of the people driving from elsewhere in GTA near all the GO RER lines will use them, outside Lakeshore, too. Eliminating enough cars from downtown to accomodate the inflow from the 403. Boom. It all balances out to a new equilibrium; no more congested than today. Boom. No economic disaster. See?
Click to expand...

Yes but that is different from what you posted....you said electrify and launch RER on the Lakeshore and then tear down the Gardiner....you/they would have my support if RER was launched on the Milton and KW lines in addition to the LSW line then we have a different discussion.
 
Just food for thought, even now parking downtown on the weekends isn't even that expensive, often can be had for $5-10. A round trip GO fare will cost more than parking, though of course there's the cost of gas as well.

But I don't think we can really even entertain the thought of demolishing the Gardiner until at least we have vastly improved transit options.
 
ksun said:
The two sides won't be able to convince each other.
Why doesn't the city do a real experiment: close the Gardiner for a month and see what "devastating effect" it might have.
Click to expand...

The city estimates that the delays caused by the congestion of closing 1 lane during this construction have cost $1 million per day.
 
ksun said:
The two sides won't be able to convince each other.
Why doesn't the city do a real experiment: close the Gardiner for a month and see what "devastating effect" it might have.
Click to expand...

Just try driving downtown on a weekend when the Gardiner is closed as it often is in the summer. Imagine it being 2 or 3 times worse if it was a weekday.
 
TOareaFan said:
Yes but that is different from what you posted....you said electrify and launch RER on the Lakeshore and then tear down the Gardiner....you/they would have my support if RER was launched on the Milton and KW lines in addition to the LSW line then we have a different discussion.
Click to expand...
Apologies. When I said RER, I forgot to mention the whole GO network since RER affects all of it.
 
TOareaFan said:
The city estimates that the delays caused by the congestion of closing 1 lane during this construction have cost $1 million per day.
Click to expand...

if you know how the government comes up with those "estimate", you won't take it seriously. It is based on numerous assumptions many of which can be highly questionable.

Plus, you have to consider the benefit of removing this monster - the added land value, retail/residential, a more accessible waterfront, and all the invisible benefits. It is not a one way street.
I am not proposing the remove the whole thing, just the part east of Spadina.
 
ksun said:
I am not proposing the remove the whole thing, just the part east of Spadina.
Click to expand...
The current proposal to end it at Jarvis isn't that different than this. The 2-lane exit for Yonge/Bay exits just east of Spadina. And then there's the one-lane at York for Javis. So persumably everthing east of Spadina comes down, and get's replaced by a 2-lane (in each direction) structure to carry the Javis/Lakeshore traffic, which would I assume drop down to surface and join Lakeshore just east of Yonge (similar to the existing Jarvis ramp) and the one lane to turn left on Jarvis would be similar to now.

I should really read the plans ... I assume this is detailed somewhere.
 
nfitz said:
The current proposal to end it at Jarvis isn't that different than this. The 2-lane exit for Yonge/Bay exits just east of Spadina. And then there's the one-lane at York for Javis. So persumably everthing east of Spadina comes down, and get's replaced by a 2-lane (in each direction) structure to carry the Javis/Lakeshore traffic, which would I assume drop down to surface and join Lakeshore just east of Yonge (similar to the existing Jarvis ramp) and the one lane to turn left on Jarvis would be similar to now.

I should really read the plans ... I assume this is detailed somewhere.
Click to expand...

I don't know how distance is perceived by drivers, but "an exit for Yonge/bay just east of Spadina" makes little sense to me. For a pedestrian, Yonge is pretty far from Spadina - 1.4km, and that essentially covers most of downtown east-west wise. For me, the expressway ending at Spadina or ending at BayYork is vastly different. My position is that there should be no elevated expressway or ramps between Spadina and Jarvis. Two lanes of expressway/ramps are still a huge obstacle and will make central waterfront a lot less accessible and attractive.

I don't think the drivers HAVE to exit at Yonge or Bay or York st, and exiting at Spadina and then going on local streets will be so much more painful/time consuming to them.

Additionally, Lake Shore shouldn't be widened either. Six lanes are more than enough and any widening attempts will defeat the purpose of removing the Gardiner.

Anyway, all the discussion is probably moot. There is little chance the Gardiner will be removed.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top