Toronto Lower Simcoe Ramp | ?m | ?s | City of Toronto

[ADRM]

They retained the old piers where they took down the Gardiner east of the DVP. They are hardly Greek bloody columns to be worth retaining. "Hey, let's retain additional monuments to the fact that decades ago people were dumb enough to ram a highway through downtown"

Yeah, I actually kinda hate the idea. I've driven/biked past the retained bents out east with multiple different groups of people who have said something to the effect of "why did they leave part of an ugly old bridge there?" as we've gone by.

They're not a monument to anything good or particularly relevant to our city's history and they just decrease the overall usable park space in what's not a huge plot of land.

Maybe I could get on board with their retention if they, say, commissioned a bunch of OCAD students to gussy them up in some substantial way and turn them into legit pieces of public art, but as beige-ish slabs of crumbling concrete, they don't do anything pour moi.

 

[Tuscani01]

I disagree. I love the fact that they plan on incorporating some of the old piers into the design. I've had the complete opposite experience with the piers near Leslie, where people I have been with thought it was a nice touch and spoke to the history of the area quite well. Some ideas I think would look great:

- Let some ivy grow on them and they can easily become an integral part of the green space.
- Use them to display art
- Light them up
- Paint them with murals
- Add stairs to one and use it as a viewing platform

The idea that they become a monument to stupid decisions made decades ago doesn't make them less worthy of being saved. We need those reminders, and the Gardiner will always be a storied part of Toronto's history, whether you support it or not. The space that opens up once the Gardiner comes down in the future should be able to tell that story, and saving a few of the piers and reinterpreting them isn't such a bad way to do so.

"They're not a monument to anything good or particularly relevant to our city's history"

Picking and choosing what parts of our city's history to preserve based on feelings isn't rational at all. The city has a lot of bad, and those stories deserve to be told too. If we wanted to ignore bad things, we wouldn't have a memorial to all those who died in the city during the Irish famine, and we would have torn down the Don Jail because of the way prisoners were treated.

The Gardiner is highly relevant to the city's history, as it has shaped a lot of the development in our downtown, and continues to influence how the city develops.

 

[jje1000]

Add me to the list of those liking some pillars to remain.

They're a disrupting presence and there's more than enough room to design around them.

They're curios in a mostly anti-septic pre-planned neighbourhood, and can act as a point of reference in redesigning the park down the road (what if you redecked and greened up the pillars in the park so that you get a ramp leading to a viewpoint?).

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I'd rather them spend the money and effort on decent landscape architecture than trying to save the columns - if one wanted history, the bulk of the Gardiner is still right next door.

AoD

 

[wmedia]

I agree with AoD. While the rest of the Gardiner is still standing, the saved pillars aren't telling much of a story.

 

[CapitalSeven]

I'd rather them spend the money and effort on decent landscape architecture than trying to save the columns - if one wanted history, the bulk of the Gardiner is still right next door.

AoD

But leaving some of them costs less, not more, so money is freed up to spend on creativity and landscape. They do have to be treated thoughtfully. Design or public art competition.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

But leaving some of them costs less, not more, so money is freed up to spend on creativity and landscape. They do have to be treated thoughtfully. Design or public art competition.

Not in the long run - you'd have to maintain it (and it isn't that hot as is either). And public art competition by committee is an invitation to mediocrity (plus it's already been done at the Lakeshore East leg, so not original either).

AoD

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

I'm on the fence. I like them on Lake Shore, it marked a change in direction from freeway-building, environment-dominating attitudes of the 50's, to the waterfront renewal and environmentalist tones of the 90's. It was a major shift for Toronto.

That said, why would you need to duplicate that, especially there at the Simcoe offramp? It waters down the significance of the bents in the east, and it's a cruel joke with the rest of the Gardiner standing right there. Maybe we can save some near the Ex when the rest of it is torn down someday, but not at Simcoe, not now.

 

[44 North]

I'm on the fence. I like them on Lake Shore, it marked a change in direction from freeway-building, environment-dominating attitudes of the 50's, to the waterfront renewal and environmentalist tones of the 90's. It was a major shift for Toronto.

That said, why would you need to duplicate that, especially there at the Simcoe offramp? It waters down the significance of the bents in the east, and it's a cruel joke with the rest of the Gardiner standing right there. Maybe we can save some near the Ex when the rest of it is torn down someday, but not at Simcoe, not now.

This is pretty much my view. The concept of retaining them is great, and I've grown to appreciate concrete in an ever-growing glassy downtown. But the lure of retaining something like this, whether as an artistic form of irony or whatnot, is pretty much lost considering it's right next to identical columns that are in use.

Maybe it's best to imitate the columns and replace them with slabs of granite from the Shield? Like the amazing rock humps at Sugar Beach and Yorkville, we can truck in some solid rock columns to put in the park. It may cost a lot, but they would look nice and provide an interesting contrast.

 

[ADRM]

From Joe Cressy's latest newsletter:

Residents in neighbourhoods east and west of this area will see changes to the traffic flows from the Gardiner Expressway and Lake Shore Boulevard when the old ramp is closed in April as drivers seek new routes into downtown from the west. Signage will be posted in advance so drivers can make alternative arrangements. A gate will be opened at the Spadina Avenue off ramp to permit drivers to access Lake Shore Boulevard eastbound at this point, which is not normally possible. Transportation Services staff will be monitoring traffic impacts closely and adjustments will be made to traffic signal timings as needed.

The City is also hosting a drop-in event for community members to learn more about the upcoming construction and speak individually to project staff. The event will be on February 28 at the Westin Harbour Castle Conference Centre (11 Bay Street), Marine Room. Drop in anytime between 3-5pm or 6:30-8:30pm.

 

[Tuscani01]

A gate will be opened at the Spadina Avenue off ramp to permit drivers to access Lake Shore Boulevard eastbound at this point, which is not normally possible.

I've never understood why this wasn't normally possible. The Spadina ramp always backs up because Spadina is bumper to bumper north bound. This gate should have been opened years ago to avoid having Spadina become a de-facto off-ramp.

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

I've never understood why this wasn't normally possible. The Spadina ramp always backs up because Spadina is bumper to bumper north bound. This gate should have been opened years ago to avoid having Spadina become a de-facto off-ramp.

I think it would lead to risks of unsafe merges and weaving, but in this case, the city may have determined it would be an appropriate risk given the Simcoe offramp closure.

 

[Tuscani01]

I think it would lead to risks of unsafe merges and weaving, but in this case, the city may have determined it would be an appropriate risk given the Simcoe offramp closure.

Instead of making people use the gate, they can simply use the same setup at Jarvis where traffic coming off the Jarvis ramp to continue East on Lakeshore gets it's own green light. It would mean a bit more waiting for Lakeshore Traffic, but at least it would be safer. I have (illegally) done this a few times to avoid Spadina, and see many other do this quite often.

 

[Panontario]

Instead of making people use the gate, they can simply use the same setup at Jarvis where traffic coming off the Jarvis ramp to continue East on Lakeshore gets it's own green light. It would mean a bit more waiting for Lakeshore Traffic, but at least it would be safer. I have (illegally) done this a few times to avoid Spadina, and see many other do this quite often.

Alternatively, close of left lane on Lakeshore just before the Spadina exit. This would greatly reduce danger, and help with the traffic flow off the ramp. This is not a perfect solution, but would greatly improve the overall traffic flow...

 

[TOareaFan]

Alternatively, close of left lane on Lakeshore just before the Spadina exit. This would greatly reduce danger, and help with the traffic flow off the ramp. This is not a perfect solution, but would greatly improve the overall traffic flow...

As a temporary measure during the transition this is an excellent idea.....it will, initially, anger people (the thought of losing a lane) but they will quickly see that facilitating a smoother merge actually improves things.....we saw it on the WB gardiner during the construction where the rightmost lane was closed nearing the Jameson/Lakeshore onramp to facilitate a smoother/easier merge there and prevent those people from having to shift over to the left immediately....it was a much smoother traffic flow in general.