Toronto CIBC SQUARE | 241.39m | 50s | Hines | WilkinsonEyre

[Traynor]

If anything stood out on one of those renders... it was the damn railway tracks take up too much space and split the core!

All that talk years ago about burying the Gardiner Expressway was wasted on the wrong eyesore... (I like the way the Gardiner snakes between the condos. Very future-like, with high speed expressways flowing through and around tall towers.)

What should be buried is all the railway tracks. Toronto should do what New York City did a hundred years ago... Bury all the train tracks under the city and build skyscrapers over them. From the Don River in the east, to West of the Exhibition grounds, all the tracks should be in a tunnel.

Think of all the prime land that would become available for future development!!! I leave it to your imaginations of what our skyline would look like if it could truly be "filled in" as so many forumers talk about.

 

[maestro]

You don't need to actually bury them to bury them though. Many cities lie on multiple planes. Also, if you at Cityplace and Liberty Village the once surface rail lines now run in an open cut (somewhat) without any shifting of tracks.

 

[philofra]

If you are referring to the railway track under Park Avenue in New York City, they weren't buried, they were built over. Park Avenue is literally a platform built over the tracks.

Back in the 1960s, in Toronto, there were suggested plans to straddle the rail tracks with developments. Obviously nothing became of it.

 

[Automation Gallery]

Back in the 1960s, in Toronto, there were suggested plans to straddle the rail tracks with developments. Obviously nothing became of it.

There was also talk of electrified Bullet trains, 40 years later look at what we still have.

 

[wyliepoon]

OK... taking another shot at the rendering. The model is now rescaled to 800ft (Mongo's estimate on Page 10).

Ferry view

Toronto Islands view

Portlands view

Island Airport

Aerials:

Even at 800ft, the building still sticks out on the skyline just by being such a tall tower so close to the waterfront.

 

[Traynor]

If you are referring to the railway track under Park Avenue in New York City, they weren't buried, they were built over. Park Avenue is literally a platform built over the tracks...

No, I was not referring to that. New York City has Hundreds of rail tracks running underneath city streets. Grand Central Station on 42nd has 67 tracks on two levels serving not just subways but commuter trains all over the region.

Penn Station between 7th and 8th, 31st and 33rd is the busiest passenger transportation facility in the United States and by far the busiest train station in North America. All of it is under Manhattan!

Like Boston's "Big Dig" Toronto should have buried the rail tracks a long LONG time ago. How can we revive this idea?

There was also talk of electrified Bullet trains, 40 years later look at what we still have.

True... I'm a child of the early 60's... I'm still waiting for the moving sidewalks, flying cars and jet packs we were all promised for the 21st Century! LOL

 

[Automation Gallery]

True... I'm a child of the early 60's... I'm still waiting for the moving sidewalks, flying cars and jet packs we were all promised for the 21st Century! LOL

We would of had a better chance in Japan...

 

[Mo-tage]

You don't need to actually bury them to bury them though. Many cities lie on multiple planes. Also, if you at Cityplace and Liberty Village the once surface rail lines now run in an open cut (somewhat) without any shifting of tracks.

From union, west to Bathurst you could easily build on top of the tracks. That entire stretch is down in a pretty deep trench now. Hopefully some common sense will arise in the city and people will start to realize that the Gardner is not the barrier to the waterfront the tracks are. Maybe that will happen once Miller the car hater is out of office.

From my view in Montage I have a clear view down the huge gap in the city left by the rail corridor and it really is the ugliest part of downtown. I've often thought even just covering the tracks not with buildings but with a roof that becomes a huge downtown park. Think about how impressive a park would be that streched from union to bathurst covering the tracks. That would truly be a park to rival the likes of central park in NY. And while they're at it do something with that god awful eye sore of a roof on union station.

 

[Automation Gallery]

From union, west to Bathurst you could easily build on top of the tracks. That entire stretch is down in a pretty deep trench now. Hopefully some common sense will arise in the city and people will start to realize that the Gardner is not the barrier to the waterfront the tracks are. Maybe that will happen once Miller the car hater is out of office.

Think about how impressive a park would be that streched from union to bathurst covering the tracks. That would truly be a park to rival the likes of central park in NY. And while they're at it do something with that god awful eye sore of a roof on union station.

True.. it has been brought up many times, it has been done in Australia and other parts of the world, but then again most of their rail system is electrified. I may be wrong but i think most of our rail corridors are owned by the different levels of government, it would have been a different story if the private sector ran it.

 

[Traynor]

From union, west to Bathurst you could easily build on top of the tracks. That entire stretch is down in a pretty deep trench now. Hopefully some common sense will arise in the city and people will start to realize that the Gardner is not the barrier to the waterfront the tracks are. Maybe that will happen once Miller the car hater is out of office.

From my view in Montage I have a clear view down the huge gap in the city left by the rail corridor and it really is the ugliest part of downtown. I've often thought even just covering the tracks not with buildings but with a roof that becomes a huge downtown park. Think about how impressive a park would be that streched from union to bathurst covering the tracks. That would truly be a park to rival the likes of central park in NY. And while they're at it do something with that god awful eye sore of a roof on union station.

All very valid points!

"a roof that becomes a huge downtown park"

I love this idea! Grass, trees, a rowing pond, fountains, graceful pedestrian bridges, small concessions selling balloons and popcorn... Ladies with parasols strolling with gentleman in straw boater hats.... OK I am a hopeless romantic and I got carried away.

But this would be a less expensive alternative to the tunnel I proposed AAAANNNND once developers got an eyeful of all that open space and grass they would be salivating and they'd certainly "Pave paradise and put up a...." and we'd eventually get all those skyscrapers in that corridor after all.

 

[grey]

Like Boston's "Big Dig" Toronto should have buried the rail tracks a long LONG time ago. How can we revive this idea?

The idea was sound, but the Big Dig went disasterously over budget and the corner-cutting led to falling concrete fatalities. It's not hard to imagine Toronto experiencing the exact same problems. It's an enormous undertaking and the city is practically broke to begin with. As unpleasant as the expressway may be, I really question the practicality of such a project. I think improving transit to the outer suburbs is a far more important priority that will have much farther reaching benefits for many more people.

 

[Mo-tage]

Actually even a parking lot over the tracks would be ok. Cover the tracks between Church and Simcoe, turn it into parking and give those lots direct access to Lakeshore or Bremner. If people could park in lots close to the core, but not have to drive north of the tracks it would remove the huge bottle neck that the tracks create during rush hour. It would keep a large number of cars out of the core of the city during the day.

 

[milanista]

Actually even a parking lot over the tracks would be ok. Cover the tracks between Church and Simcoe, turn it into parking and give those lots direct access to Lakeshore or Bremner. If people could park in lots close to the core, but not have to drive north of the tracks it would remove the huge bottle neck that the tracks create during rush hour. It would keep a large number of cars out of the core of the city during the day.

Sorry I'm going to have to disagree with that.
The vast majority of people on this site, and probably within Toronto for that matter literally stand up and cheer whenever an existing surface parking lot becomes a condo, office tower, or anything other than a parking lot for that matter and you're proposing the biggest one in recent history right in the downtown core?

Some of the other ideas mentioned in this thread may be far fetched and extravagantly expensive, but at least the end result is something that would most likely look good.

A massive new parking lot downtown, I'm afraid you're living in the wrong decade my friend.

 

[Mo-tage]

Sorry I'm going to have to disagree with that.
The vast majority of people on this site, and probably within Toronto for that matter literally stand up and cheer whenever an existing surface parking lot becomes a condo, office tower, or anything other than a parking lot for that matter and you're proposing the biggest one in recent history right in the downtown core?

Some of the other ideas mentioned in this thread may be far fetched and extravagantly expensive, but at least the end result is something that would most likely look good.

A massive new parking lot downtown, I'm afraid you're living in the wrong decade my friend.

So you're saying it's preferable to leave the tracks the way they are, rather than use the land for some benefit? I really don't find the tracks anymore attractive than a parking lot.

I'd much rather see parks or development over the tracks, but if the only choice were parking I'd accept that. Particulariy a lot that would have the effect of reducing traffic in the core of the city and help alleviate the bottle neck the tracks create during rush hour. Right now this is valuable land running through the heart of the city, we need to find a better use for it.

Besides I bet a bunch of new well placeed parking would make surface lots in the city a less attractive use of the land. Might encourage some of those land owners to sell to developers more quickly.

 

[milanista]

So you're saying it's preferable to leave the tracks the way they are, rather than use the land for some benefit? I really don't find the tracks anymore attractive than a parking lot.

I'd much rather see parks or development over the tracks, but if the only choice were parking I'd accept that. Particulariy a lot that would have the effect of reducing traffic in the core of the city and help alleviate the bottle neck the tracks create during rush hour. Right now this is valuable land running through the heart of the city, we need to find a better use for it.

Besides I bet a bunch of new well placeed parking would make surface lots in the city a less attractive use of the land. Might encourage some of those land owners to sell to developers more quickly.

While I do understand your point, it's land that isn't really doing much so let's put it to work, I just think that any surface parking lot is simply out of date. Although both are eyesores I think I'd rather have the tracks there instead of a parking lot, even if it were a "temporary" lot. A surface parking lot of that size in a location like that just smacks of downtown Detroit or Buffalo, everything I'm happy that Toronto isn't. And a massive lot right off the Gardiner like that only further damages what highways into downtown cores already do, and that's allow people to avoid as much of the city as possible. Get in, park, get out. Don't spend any money, don't partake in any culture, just get in and get out. We can't cater to that kind of mentality anymore because that's what kills a downtown core.

I do realize that we are simply speculating here and I am making quite a leap from one parking lot to a dead downtown core, but it's a slippery slope and this is just what I tend to think when I hear the terms parking lot & downtown in the same sentence.