City
Gardiner Falling - But at What Cost?
So the council report on the Gardiner has finally been made public. Amid much rejoicing from those who care about the waterfront, the report recommends tearing it down - or at least tearing down the Spadina to DVP section.
This is very good news, assuming council acts on it. Unfortunately, with the good comes a whole steaming heap of bad.
Along with the recommendation to tear down the Gardiner come two other recommendations, designed to ensure that the precious holy automobile driver won't be overly inconvenienced by the liberation of the waterfront. Firstly, it recommends that the Front St extension be built - a project that has been in the works for longer even than has the destruction of the Gardiner. Local residents fear that this will be costly and that itwill divert heavy traffic into their neighbourhoods.
Scary enough, but even worse is the proposal to build up Lakeshore Ave. Not content with having a giant blight in the air seperating the city from the waterfront, the report suggests moving that blight to ground-level. Lakeshore is to become, in the view of the report, a 10-lane behemoth across much of the city. In its worst-case scenario, this will create a virtual urban-freeway nearly impassable to pedestrians, and hazardous to cyclists.
I fully support tearing down the Gardiner Expressway. But if it is to be done, some compromises have to be made about Lakeshore. If the city insists on making it a 10-lane monster, there need to be rules about it: the centre lanes need to be streetcar ROWs; the outermost lanes must be made exclusively for cyclists; two of the remaining six lanes should be designated as HOV/motorcycle lanes; and there must be frequent cross-walks and wide pedestrian areas.
These cannot be negotiable - if they want 10 lanes, they need to make the lanes usable by everybody. Without those restrictions, Lakeshore will become a nightmare for anybody not in an SUV. With those suggestions, Lakeshore has a hope of truly becoming the 'grand avenue' that the report suggests, friendly to pedestrians, cyclists, and even cars.
Photo from TheStar.com
Discussion
25 Comments
Sort By Oldest First / Newest First
Subscribe
<p>The stretch they would potentially take down is one of the most visually appealing stretches of urban highway I've ever driven (in reference to the view north from the Gardiner of the downtown core). I only wish that view wasn't so short.
<p>Even with a torn down Gardiner, the waterfront will be segregated because of all the condos. Why not focus on the actual waterfront instead of a section of road 2-3 blocks north of Queens Quay.
<p>There's a great amount of actual waterfront land that is yet to be developed and won't be magically improved upon the removal of a raised highway several blocks north.
<p>And most importantly, the highways and subways in the GTA are already underdeveloped. With no other major East-West roadway south of the 401, its just going to clog the lakeshore area.
<p>Its easy for someone who lives a 30 min walk or less away from their work and easy access to stores to complain about traffic and pollution, but unless you're someone who actually uses or relies on the major roadways of the GTA, I don't think you can make a relevant opinion.
<p>The "option" of public transit is not always so easy. When you already spend 12 hours of your day at or commuting to work, the "option" of spending another 2 hours a day to spurt out less pollution from my already fuel-efficient economy car is hardly an appealing one.
<p>Not everyone has the option of living in a loft apartment 20 ft from a grocer, around the corner from a subway line, and 10 min from their work. For those who criticize the Gardiner, try living in the suburb sans car, while working in Toronto, and see how much you'll whine about a roadway not fitting in with their Eden.
1. there's already a bike/pedestrian path on queens quay
2. It's not like it's easy to cross the lakeshore anywhere from scarborough to etobikicoke
3. see #1 (already a street car lane)
I know it's trendy to hate on the car, but give it a try...it's not all that bad!
1. there's already a bike/pedestrian path on queens quay
2. It's not like it's easy to cross the lakeshore anywhere from Scarborough to Etobikicoke
3. see #1 (already a street car lane)
I know it's trendy to hate on the car, but some people don't have a choice...and it's already hard enough to get east-west in this city without ripping down a major highway and handing it over to a handful of people who for one reason or another associate the car with rich, lazy ignorant people.
For the record too the Front Street Extension will be Canada's most expensive stretch of highway and as of a couple years ago the money was coming mostly from the Waterfront Revitalization budget.
Keep in mind too that what's worse than polluting cars driving through our city are polluting cars idling in our city because they can't get anywhere.
I like the gardiner (on my motorcycle) but it's riding under it, on Lakeshore, that freaks me out.
It's been a very long time since I've been accused of being a leftist. Thanks for that; now I have something to point to when everybody else is arguing that I'm a right wing nutcase.
Serotonin:
You complain that unless somebody lives in the suburbs and has to rely on the Gardiner (because they've chosen to live in a big house in sprawl instead of near their work) they can't make 'a relevant opinion'. I'd posit that the same thing can be said in reverse - unless you live in an actually community downtown and have to deal with out-of-towners causing traffic congestion and smog, you really can't make a relevant opinion about the necessities of downtown life.
I really don't see what's so 'utopian' about making a roadway useable by everybody - it strikes me more as simply good planning. That there is already a pedestrian path and streetcar lane on Queen's Quay just doesn't strike me as particularly relevant - I wouldn't argue for removing the streetcar and sidewalks from Dundas just because both Queen and College already have them; why should Lakeshore be any diffrent?
Also, while it is true that much of Lakeshore is impassible outside of the downtown core as well, this doesn't mean that we should make it so everywhere - far better to try to make it traversable everywhere than simply equally bad across the city.
Sookie:
It is expensive (though that price includes the Front St extension and everything else) but according to The Star, it's only about $20 million more than the option of doing nothing and just mainaining it. The value is there if we look for it.
Back to the Gardiner - I still don't get the point of taking it down when it's obvious the infrastructure is still required and funds are just going to be pumped into beefing up another roadway. I'm not being facetious, I would just like to hear some more pro-removal arguments and supporting theory.
Tearing it down will only accomplish one thing - gridlock, because there isn't enough political will or money to build a replacement. So my 15 minutes commute becomes an hour through city streets (no east-west highway anymore, and that traffic needs to go somewhere!).
Isn't that great for the environment?
I live at Pape and Gerrard so you can't accuse me of being your generically labelled "suburbanite" and write me off. Serotonin was essentially right.
HOV lanes are a waste of time - all they do is make traffic worse because now there's one less lane of traffic than there was before, they don't compel anyone to carpool. Look at the stupid one on the 404 - virtually empty all the time.
I am all for improvement - but there's no viable alternative offered that actually improves anything.
Where are you getting your numbers from? The study (funded by the city) found that the average commuting time would be increased by only 5 minutes - hardly the 45 minutes that you're suggesting it would add; maybe you know more than the city planners who researched this, but somehow I doubt it.
The fact of the matter is that building roads is what creates gridlock. By creating freeways into the urban core, you're giving workers and others an excuse to move further away, thus creating more traffic. The flow on the Gardiner hasn't really increased much since it was built - I've no doubt that traffic will find another way around.
Sookie:
The financial logic is similar, but given the numbers, it would be more akin to comparing a $110 dollar bag to the $100 one - that's how (relatively) close the pricetags are.
Also, despite what many people believe, the Gardiner infrastructure isn't required. The funds are going to have to be pumped in regardless; why not pump them in a manner that beautifies the city?
There's already a gridlock problem in this city. And even though people love to blame urban sprawl and those "suburbanites" a lot of it is due to people doing actual business in this city.
I think there's a way that you can rip that bad boy down and still appease both drivers and pedestrians. But let's not lose sight that the Gardiner and Lakeshore are important ways for people in this city to get from one place to another easily. Anyone try to drive downtown this weekend with that Marathon going on? Total Nightmare!
BTW...the Lakeshore and queens quay are a stones throw from each other. Dundas-Queen, it take a lot of alcohol for me to want walk that one on a cold night.
As someone who owns two condos and soon a house in the downtown core, I wait with glee at the prospect of the Gardiner vanishing from the face of the earth and more of downtown becoming high end residential space.
What downtown Toronto needs is to grow up and drive up the density downtown so that building up the transit system becomes the ONLY option. Admittedly the transition will be difficult, but if you look at the history of really great cities like Paris, London, New York etc they all drove up the density of the core which forced mass transit to be built... not by bulding highways in the centre of the city.
I agree the roadways under the Gardiner certainly inhibit access to the lake, but the elevated highway itself? Never saw a problem.
On a serious note - until there's money earmarked for a new subway we need some viable alternatives to the Gardiner falling. I bike, scooter, drive, TTC and walk all around this city, but if I need to see my sister in the beaches (from High Park) I'm not going to spend more than an hour on the subway trying to get out there when the drive is 15min. If you think that's the point - forcing people to commute it's not. We live in the 21st century. Access is integral to a strong economy. If you want to be more European don't take down roads, charge people $50,000 tax on a $50,000 Audi A4 (source: Denmark/my Dad) and tax gas, or better yet put some pressure on the gov't to put some spending toward energy alternatives.
Burying the Gardner.
That would satisfy both camps much more than tearing it down without a replacement.
1. For "leftists" (aka people who care about the city) there wouldn't be a monstrous 10-lane road and quite possibly the space could be used to create parklands, etc a la Chicago's Waterfront.
2. For drivers who love the East/West highway, having it buried underground would appease their cries of longer commuting times.
I think a bold move such as that, despite the significantly higher costs, is the step that needs to be taken in order to build a truly great waterfront.
Burying the gardener is a great idea, except for three little words: Boston's Big Dig. If you think that tearing down the Gardiner is expensive and time consuming, you ain't seen nothing yet.
Also, commute times will only increase by 5 minutes.
Sookie:
It's a chicken and egg situation. Gov't arn't going to get serious about transit until everybody recognises it as a necessity
Lathamb:
The Gardiner is a *terrible* way to get from one part of the city to another part. It only has three downtown exits, and it used more or less exclusively for commuting in/out of the city, not across it.
The office then moved up to the airport and I started to drive. It took me 15 to 20 minutes if I travelled during non-rush hour times.
I'm all for getting rid of the Gardiner (the east end is much improved with few traffice problems) because of the Gardiner removal.
BUT unless accompanying money is spent on transit and other traffic control issues, then tearing down the Gardiner would be a disaster.
Also, often I would drive downtown from the east end because I was on a tight budget. The cost of gas for the seven minute drive was nothing and I could usually find free parking, plus go could home at any hour of the morning, easily. If I transited it would cost me almost $5 (if I'd forgotten to buy tokens), take me at least 30 minutes to get downtown and often over an hour to get home.
The solution to Toronto's car problems isn't in the roads (elevated or buried). It's in investment in better cheaper faster transit.
And for all you urban dwellers in those condo's, pitch a tent north of the city.
And for all you urban dwellers in those condo's, pitch a tent north of the city.
And for all you urban dwellers in those condo's, pitch a tent north of the city.