Roads: Gardiner Expressway

[TKTKTK]

So you're saying the Gardiner was a fine idea in theory, it's just that we cheap and slovenly Torontonians let down the side by not spending the hundreds of millions of dollars that was required to make it pretty.

Basically. It's of a time, and it shouldn't be repeated, but it's not a mistake that needs drastic correction.

 

[CapitalSeven]

Yes, it is certainly a mistake requiring drastic correction. Whether they relocate the Gardiner lanes to the rail berm, or expand the boulevard to 10 lanes, either result will be better than spending any amount of money on this section of the Gardiner for anything but demolition.

Crossing 10- and even 12- lane boulevards is no big deal. We often do it several times a day here in Beijing, even at places where two of them intersect, and this in a culture where no driver or cyclist would dream of respecting pedestrians. The psychological repulsion of overhead expressways and flyovers is more of a barrier than an a wider but attractive street. The tunnels under the berm can be improved aesthetically, which would be money well spent since removing that obstacle really is beyond the realm of current fiscal, logistical, and political possibility.

 

[rudeboie]

I foresee traffic chaos into the downtown core from the east and northeast as the cars funnelling down from the DVP will end up hitting a logjam of vehicles stuck behind traffic lights on the new Lakeshore Blvd. It will also bring more traffic onto Richmond.

Same with the commute going the other direction. More traffic and gridlock on Lakeshore/Adelaide/Queen/Dundas, etc ...

You can argue that it will force ppl to use public transit. But public transit is not a realistic option for most who commute by car. This will NOT take that many vehicles off the road. And tourists coming in from the east and northeast? What better way to deter them from enjoying our fair city than by having them sit for hours on the DVP because the most freeflowing section of the Gardiner was removed.

Dismantling the Gardiner = Severe traffic congestion = More idling cars = higher CO2 levels .... SUPER IDEA!

 

[Hydrogen]

And tourists coming in from the east and northeast? What better way to deter them from enjoying our fair city than by having them sit for hours on the DVP because the most freeflowing section of the Gardiner was removed.

Yes, for the sake of tourism, we must expand the Gardiner. After all, if you build it, they will come.

 

[urbanfan89]

Heaven forbid we look at cities that have already demolished elevated highways!

I mean, what did the city councils of New York, Seoul, San Francisco, Paris, and Boston (not a good example, but whatever) think when they demolished big highways through their cities?

All hail the automobile!

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

i hope they do a better job than the last one.

 

[carrefour]

Let us all face it. Toronto has no vision.

I would like to think that the "landscaped boulevard" would have all the trappings of a Champs-Elysee or a Washington Mall or even or very own University Avenue. But since we lack vision, it will be done cheap and on the fly.
I think this because there have been plenty of opportunities with the Gardiner:

1 - why was an elevated highway built over open land to create itself a barrier when it could have been built over the existing barrier that is the rail lands. It was certainly built high enough. the rail lands are equally a barrier.

2 - why, after building the highway, was a cracked, rotten, grey street by the name of Lakeshore "Boulevard" built underneath it. as many have said, this is the real barrier.

3 - why has no one done anything regarding landscaping underneath - and I mean not just plants ... in France, under their elevated highway there is a veritable light show of blue and purple, in Japan, there is shopping and entertainment, in Germany, there are art pieces and exhibitions. the desolate-ness is the real barrier.

So I expect nothing.

And I am saddened by my cynicism.

 

[isittimetomoveyet]

I foresee traffic chaos into the downtown core from the east and northeast as the cars funnelling down from the DVP will end up hitting a logjam of vehicles stuck behind traffic lights on the new Lakeshore Blvd. It will also bring more traffic onto Richmond.

Same with the commute going the other direction. More traffic and gridlock on Lakeshore/Adelaide/Queen/Dundas, etc ...

You can argue that it will force ppl to use public transit. But public transit is not a realistic option for most who commute by car. This will NOT take that many vehicles off the road. And tourists coming in from the east and northeast? What better way to deter them from enjoying our fair city than by having them sit for hours on the DVP because the most freeflowing section of the Gardiner was removed.

Dismantling the Gardiner = Severe traffic congestion = More idling cars = higher CO2 levels .... SUPER IDEA!

One can only hope that this, in conjunction with some sort of road pricing, would be enough to push more people out of their cars and onto transit. Hopefully.

 

[billonlogan]

Here is another shot looking west. Removing the Gardiner opens up alot of land for redevelopment.

 

[billonlogan]

I foresee traffic chaos into the downtown core from the east and northeast as the cars funnelling down from the DVP will end up hitting a logjam of vehicles stuck behind traffic lights on the new Lakeshore Blvd. It will also bring more traffic onto Richmond.

Same with the commute going the other direction. More traffic and gridlock on Lakeshore/Adelaide/Queen/Dundas, etc ...

That's why I would like to see a 4 lane express route from Jarvis to the DVP along the rail corridor. This would funnel traffic off Lakeshore Bl for drivers who want to get to the DVP. This way instead of an 8 lane Lakeshore Bl it could be reduced to 6 lanes or even 4 lanes. Again, this can only be determined once we see the traffic volumes and patterns.

 

[smuncky]

here is that picture posted by billonlogan.

 

[jn_12]

Not sure if they've been posted (this thread grew too fast to keep up), but does anyone know the number of cars that use the section between Jarvis and the DVP on a daily basis?

In all honesty as well, what's the difference between 8, 10 or 12 lanes? a few extra steps? As long as there's only a centre median and not 3 or 4 different ones as we see today (re:lakeshore/Rees) there's no reason why it can't be crossed both safely and in a way that seems nonchalant. Staged crossings aren't a big deal either and most big cities (London, Paris, etc) have them, so I'm not concerned whatsoever.

 

[smuncky]

Not sure if they've been posted (this thread grew too fast to keep up), but does anyone know the number of cars that use the section between Jarvis and the DVP on a daily basis?

In all honesty as well, what's the difference between 8, 10 or 12 lanes? a few extra steps? As long as there's only a centre median and not 3 or 4 different ones as we see today (re:lakeshore/Rees) there's no reason why it can't be crossed both safely and in a way that seems nonchalant. Staged crossings aren't a big deal either and most big cities (London, Paris, etc) have them, so I'm not concerned whatsoever.

FACT SHEET
F.G. GARDINER EXPRESSWAY
• The F.G. Gardiner Expressway (Gardiner) was named after the first chair of the former Metro Council, Frederick G. Gardiner who was a strong advocate for the project.
• Construction on the Gardiner began in 1956. It was built in segments and completed in 1965 at a cost of approximately $103 million.
• The Gardiner runs for about 20 kilometres from the foot of Highway 427 and the Queen Elizabeth Way in the west to the Don Valley Parkway in the east.
• The east end of the Gardiner, from Jarvis Street to the Don Valley Parkway, is the least congested stretch of the expressway.
• The Gardiner carries approximately 200,000 vehicles per day west of the downtown core, and approximately 120,000 vehicles per day east of Jarvis Street.
• It costs the City $6-10 million annually for repairs to the Gardiner.
• The estimated cost to remove the Gardiner from the Don Valley Parkway to Spadina Avenue, including the Front Street Extension, is approximately $1.2 billion.
• The estimated cost to remove the Gardiner from Jarvis Street to the Don Valley Parkway, including new ramps and the creation of a Waterfront Boulevard is approximately $200-300 million and does not require the Front Street Extension. This figure will be refined during the Environmental Assessment.
• It has been estimated that it will take approximately 4-5 years to complete the Environmental Assessment and a total of 7-8 years to complete the entire project.

http://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/dbdocs//48404e175c33f.pdf

 

[jn_12]

Thanks!

 

[TKTKTK]

Spending $200-300 million to reduce the annual Gardiner repair bill to $5-6 million/year, to rebuild the current stretch of Lake Shore into what we have on the east side of the DVP (nice!), and reintroduce 120,000 cars/day onto the surface!

When can we start!?