Toronto Harbor Infill.

[Whoaccio]

I doubt this would ever happen, but would anybody ever consider infilling the Toronto harbor?

http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=43.628035~-79.360728&style=r&lvl=15&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=28311653&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&cid=A043444D726AA4E8!261&encType=1

Think about it, we would have soo much more space to interact with water (25km in that case). It could be really nice if it were done right (not bloody likely). It's not like we haven't infilled before, why stop now?

Those particular shapes are just to show the gist, not hard and fast plans. Plus, it would give us a place to dump our trash, screw you Michigan!

 

[jn_12]

I've often wondered why we couldn't just do that and create a waterfront from scratch instead of trying to develop it around some poorly planned areas. Ya my first instinct says the price would probably be steep, but do we have any totals for how much it cost the city to do the first time? It's not like we need anything Dubai-ish, but even an extra 100-200 feet added could do wonders.

Does anyone have any info on the infill process that created what we have now?

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

There had been many plans for additional lakefill - some as recent as the last few years ago (the Central Waterfront proposal by TWBTA under Waterfront Toronto - losing scheme to West 8/DTAH). I think the general consensus is that gross lakefilling is to be avoided due to the negative environmental impact.

AoD

 

[Whoaccio]

There had been many plans for additional lakefill - some as recent as the last few years ago (the Central Waterfront proposal by TWBTA under Waterfront Toronto - losing scheme to West 8/DTAH). I think the general consensus is that gross lakefilling is to be avoided due to the negative environmental impact.

AoD

With all due respect to the denizens of Toronto Harbor, I am skeptical about the environmental stamina of the area. We aren't talking about the Great Barrier Reef here, it is a disused industrial harbor. Lord knows if there is much of an environment to destroy.

 

[Edward Skira]

The harbour is one of the great things about the city. Why fill it in? There's a big lake on the other side of the islands that has all the room in the world to fill in. Just keep expanding the spit.

 

[DSC]

There was a plan a few years ago, which may well still be 'active' to do some landfill behind the Westin Harbour Castle Hotel and "push" the Island Ferry Docks a bit further out into the harbour which would allow the waterfront trail to be continued between the Harbour Castle and the Docks.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Warning! The best intentions can be turned around and could end up as something you had not wanted.
Example:

The lake shore at sunnyside was filled in to produce a park for people with beaches, swimming pool, and an amusement park. It ended up as an expressway and busy roadway.

 

[jn_12]

That's like saying democracy leads to nazism. Just because it's happened before, doesn't mean it will again. Fact is, we learn from our past mistakes and there is no reason to think we would build another highway just because we did that before.

I think that if Waterfront Toronto actually gets it right, then we'll be fine, but if its botched, we should think about other options for the future.

 

[adma]

Now, that's an interesting picture--I remember that Seaway Motor Hotel directional sign (it survived well into the 70s); but that seems to read, *Sunnyside* Motor Hotel...

 

[Whoaccio]

The harbour is one of the great things about the city. Why fill it in? There's a big lake on the other side of the islands that has all the room in the world to fill in. Just keep expanding the spit.

Well, not that I have thought this through or anything, but if I had carte blanche the idea would be to infill the harbor, such that the south side of the Islands would be our final shoreline between the lake. At the same time, expand the Tommy Thompson spit Westwards to create a new harbor on the south side of the islands.

Warning! The best intentions can be turned around and could end up as something you had not wanted.
Example:

I don't know how fair that is. Earlier lake infills were intended from the ground up to be industrial grounds, not a wonderfully urbanistic utopia. The Gardiner et al is hardly a looker, but it did do the job it was meant to do. Tthe intentions got confused, just that they were bad intentions.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Whoaccio:

I don't know how fair that is. Earlier lake infills were intended from the ground up to be industrial grounds, not a wonderfully urbanistic utopia. The Gardiner et al is hardly a looker, but it did do the job it was meant to do. Tthe intentions got confused, just that they were bad intentions.

Not necessarily true - historically there is always the intent to have some green space along the waterfront, but somehow when push gets to shove, that's the component that always seems to be neglected.

AoD

 

[wyliepoon]

Hong Kong is currently carrying out a massive infill project on its central waterfront between Central and Wanchai in Victoria Harbour. The main purpose of this infill is to create an underground expressway, the Central-Wanchai Bypass (Hong Kong's version to our burying of the Gardiner Expressway). Secondary to this is to create space for future MTR subway lines such as the North Island Line and the Shatin-Central Link (a waterfront branch line for Hongkong Tramways is also under consideration). The new waterfront will be made up of parkland and "groundscrapers" as opposed to the skyscrapers HK is so famous for.

The big opposition to this project is that in terms of heritage preservation. Some groups are opposed to further infill of Victoria Harbour, saying it would turn the harbour into an ugly "river". Most people are opposed to the plan because it took away famous waterfront landmarks such as the Central Star Ferry pier (now replaced by a Disneyfied version nearby) and the Queen's pier; both times riots nearly broke out when the government demolished them. There is also opposition because an expressway-like boulevard (the "P2 Road") will run right through the infilled land, creating a Gardiner-like barrier to the waterfront.

I see the question of heritage preservation here in Toronto if we ever decide on infilling Toronto Harbour. Would the average Torontonian approve having a Harbourfront Centre that would be a few hundred metres away from the waterfront? How about Queen's Quay Terminal? Redpath? Waterfront infill might help solve our transportation problems (an infill based on Hong Kong's project could provide space for an underground replacement to the Gardiner and the Downtown Relief Line), but would any level of government be willing to fork over the money for such a massive project?

Plans and renderings:

http://www.cedd.gov.hk/eng/about/achievements/regional/images/central_a.jpg

http://www.pland.gov.hk/p_study/prog_s/UDS/eng_v1/images_eng/OI18.jpg

http://www.pland.gov.hk/p_study/prog_s/UDS/eng_v1/images_eng/OI19.jpg

 

[Dichotomy]

There was a plan a few years ago, which may well still be 'active' to do some landfill behind the Westin Harbour Castle Hotel and "push" the Island Ferry Docks a bit further out into the harbour which would allow the waterfront trail to be continued between the Harbour Castle and the Docks.

Or how about burying a 10 lane Expressway at the foot of the harbour, and then creating a huge strip of public park/biking trails on top? There was a proposal floated a few years back to do just that but the idea never went very far. I wonder why not. Seems to me everybody would benefit.

 

[Whoaccio]

Or how about burying a 10 lane Expressway at the foot of the harbour, and then creating a huge strip of public park/biking trails on top? There was a proposal floated a few years back to do just that but the idea never went very far. I wonder why not. Seems to me everybody would benefit.

I believe that was a toll road. Of course, toll roads turn the biggest advocates of cars (the CAA, Rob Ford Types) into their biggest opponents.I'm always surprised at the light speed reversal in policy. Something which is beneficial, but free, is great. Something that is equally beneficial, but costs 4-7$ per use, is abhorrent and to be avoided at all costs. Can you even bury a 10 lane expressway? The costs of burying road tunnels after two lanes in either direction tend to go ballistic.

 

[fiendishlibrarian]

That section of the Gardiner was one of the two infamous "ramps" that allowed those so inclined to bring out their inner Evel Knievel before it was rebuilt about a decade ago. Also remember those angled light standards going all the way to the DVP and York Mills up until the early-mid 80s.

Also wondering how many people in Toronto c. 196(0-3) had Citroen station wagons.