Both Boston and Seattle are bad examples because while they tore down the highway, they moved it underground at great expense.Yeah, this isn't the place for a Gardiner discussion, really, but all the points raised there are refuted by experience. Induced demand has been well observed everywhere. They tore down a freeway in Boston and they're doing it in Seattle and many other places and it's been shown to work. The teardown plan , talking about the east end, isn't to remove it and to do nothing, but to transform Lakeshore Boulevard and distribute the traffic - which studies show is far less than most people think, into the system that way.
At the end of the day, the question isn't entirely about THE GARDINER on its own terms but how the City's finite money is best spent. IF you have $1B, what are the pros/cons of putting it towards RD Park vs. keeping that highway up?
Yeah, it's called Lake Shore Boulevard and a Waterfront LRT.Both Boston and Seattle are bad examples because while they tore down the highway, they moved it underground at great expense.
People here are talking about just tearing down a highway and not providing an alternative.
Forgot about the GO Train improvements coming...Yeah, it's called Lake Shore Boulevard and a Waterfront LRT.
Year after year, train by train, bus by bus, Metrolinx has steadily increased GO Transit service. And now, that work is taking on a whole new energy. We’re building transit service that will change life in this region through the GO Expansion program. More than a rush hour commuter service, GO will offer more service with faster trains, more stations and seamless connections to a regional rapid transit network.
GO Expansion will make the network better, faster and the region easier to travel in.
Today, we run 1,500 weekly trips on the GO Transit system. Each year we’re adding more, and when we’re done building, we’ll be running over 6,000 weekly trips.
Using a new train technology on the Barrie, Lakeshore, Stouffville and Kitchener lines will allow faster trains to transport you and will offer all-day trips, going two ways, as quickly as every 15 minutes. Milton and Richmond Hill lines will also offer you up to 30% more service.
EDIT.People here are talking about just tearing down a highway and not providing an alternative.
How is that not true?That is not true.
It has been mentioned again and again: instead of pouring $1 billion down the drain in repairs to just keep up that disruptive Expressway, the city could use that $1 billion to invest in mass rapid transit.
That was the reason why I brought up the Gardiner.To again try to rope things back on thread, the relevant discussion is here is the City's finite resources and whether the cost savings of not leaving the Gardiner up could be used to build more transit or - more to the point - something like Rail Deck Park. The City does not spend $1B on a lot of things because it rarely has $1B to spend. Whether spending all that on the Gardiner is the best use of tax $ remains a fair question, particularly in our evolving urban context.
I agree with your first point. If the City is serious about building a park here, they have many tools available to them to make it happen. The City owns a lot of surplus land and I'm sure a workable trade could be made if the City was prepared to move forward with Rail Deck Park.I feel like there are a few ways the city could pursue a compromise solution, if they felt it necessary.
The first way would be to conduct a land swap, using some large property to hand off elsewhere in the city in exchange for air rights. Somewhere around the Six Points? Honeydale Mall, perhaps? Is any of that land not spoken for?
Alternatively, the city could say "okay you can build some 30-storey towers here, but first you need to fund the construction of all of the mass transit that's needed in this part of town, and much of the infrastructure works, before anything starts getting built". Worst case scenario, the bluff is called but millions of public sector dollars are saved.