POLL: What to do with the Gardiner?

15 comments

1. I wouldn’t recommend getting rid of Lakeshore, as it represents a section of Highway 2, an incredibly vital part of our history.

2. How is it vital? Does it resemble its historical form in any way? Could the Gardiner be renamed to Highway 2 for the purposes of honouring history with a moniker?

3. I ticked “get rid of Lakeshore,” because I think it’s the bigger obstacle. Really, I think that we need more and better ways of getting across it — a series of pedestrian bridges that go over Lakeshore but under the expressway, say.

4. Replace both routes (Lakeshore & the Gardiner)with a mass transit route,preferably an LRT, running from Highway 427 in the West to the base of the DVP, with a plan to continue the Eastern route along Kingston Rd. to Pickering.

   This route can be below grade in the core, eliminating interference with automotive and pedestrian traffic, and above grade elsewhere, reducing costs.

5. Considering how Hwy 2’s identity’s already been diminished through de-designation, I’m not sure whether removing Lakeshore’ll make a difference. If anything, I’d rather reinstate the QEW name to the “western Gardiner”.

   Strange how deadlocked the poll’s turned out, though…

6. The train tracks ought to be buried. They are just as much of a barrier between the waterfront and the downtown core as the Gardiner Expressway. Getting rid of only one of the two barriers won’t do much good.

7. I think what we should desperately want to avoid is a massive public works project intended on replacing the Gardiner. It will be staggeringly expensive, fraught with disaster and delay (Big Dig anyone?)and will rob money from projects that the people on this forum find most valuable, like Transit City.

   I can’t wait to hear points and counter-points tonight.

8. Isn’t the car traffic the true barrier? vs. the Gardiner/railtracks?

9. Is it cynical to think that if the rail tracks were buried they would only be replaced by tall buildings, rather than palatial gardens?

10. While the rail tracks run on diesel burying them entirely is not really an option Andrew. Even after electrification of the Lakeshore line there will be all the other GO lines, freight trains and VIA running on diesel.

    I would favour decking over them where they are in cuttings to the maximum length allowed by law, creating new parks and sports facilities and maybe a building or two… and most of the remaining open subway between Eglinton and Bloor with only Davisville remaining open to the elements at least while the yard exists.

    @Josh Hind – Eb Zeidler proposed just that for the Allen Expressway. That is also proposed for the railyards on the New York west side, and was the plan for the Vancouver Whitecaps stadium before there was a loss of nerve. However, the developers who built over the subway near Old Mill seemed to have a lot more grief than they bargained for.

    @Hamish – every little helps, right?

11. I find Lakeshore/Habour under the Gardiner to be much less pleasant than the Gardiner itself. At least the Gardiner has buildings being built around it to complement it.

12. Where’s the option to double-deck it? Charge a toll for the upper level based on volume.

13. I recommend getting rid of (or calming) Lakeshore instead, because that’s the barrier to the waterfront, not the Gardiner. Getting rid of the Gardiner will just make traffic on Lakeshore worse.

    Sydney, Australia has a waterfront expressway much like the Gardiner, but walking to Circular Quay from the business district is a lot more pleasant than walking to Queen’s Quay.

14. I picked “build stores/amenities into it”, but if multiple answers were possible I’d have added something about a transit corridor and about Lakeshore, too:

    – something needs to be done about Lakeshore and the train corridor. Mark Dowling’s idea about decking over is an intriguing one.

    – in general, I think all major highways need to have transit corridors, much like is sort of being grown on the 407 for rapid bus transit. The Gardiner should be no exception.

15. Boston’s “Big Dig” became so expensive because of greed on the part of the contractors involved. It became too easy to tear the city apart, then demand triple the original estimate to put it back together again. (A tactic viewers of Holmes on Homes know all too well.)

    If it’s too expensive to bury the Gardiner, then trench it for a fraction of the cost, a la Decarie Expressway in Montreal. Then lease or sell the real estate *above* it, with the stipulation that the developer roof over their section appropriately before building on it.