Skip to content

Spacing

Canadian Urbanism Uncovered

13 comments

  1. Once again an excellent column by Mr. Hume…

  2. Repeat after me: pedestrians do not walk across the Gardiner, they walk across Lake Shore – Lake Shore is the obstacle. The only reason to remove the Gardiner is to improve condo sightlines and make developers richer… oh.

  3. jamesmallon: It’s not so much a question of the Gardiner being a physical obstacle, but an aesthetic and spatial one. Simply put, walking under or in the vicinity of the Gardiner is an abrasive, unenjoyable experience. It acts a deterrent for pedestrian access to the lake. It’s ugly and has no place in 21st century Toronto. These are the reasons why it should be torn down.

  5. Aesthetics matter… less than getting hit crossing Lake Shore. Besides, even this non-car-owner has to say that the view FROM the Gardiner is aesthetically pleasing.

  6. The author makes a good point though. Everyone seems to think that these people who use the Gardiner are going to be in a state of mass confusion if they tore it down.

    Essentially what they should do is vastly improve GO service along the lakeshore just before tearing the gardiner down, because there will be an influx of brand new riders as a result.

    If we’re prepared for that, then this can really make for a better Toronto.

  7. The “but” left unsaid in Hume’s article is that when they took down San Francisco’s Gardiners they did do a road expansions and improvements. The Hayes Valley portion of the Central Freeway was replaced by the Octavia Blvd upgrade which used the freeways right of way. The Embarcadero Freeway right of way was used for the Embarcadero in it’s current form.

    The Lakeshore already uses most of the Gardners right of way.

  8. The Gardiner “acts like” a barrier even though it isn’t, while the Lakeshore *is* a barrier.

    Which must be addressed first?

    (Other non-imaginary barriers that need to be addressed include the rail yards and the wall of condo towers screening us from the lake.
    )

  9. Best solution to please everyone, apart from auto-heads, is take down the Gardiner, but most importantly throw wide pedestrian/cyclist boulevards over Lake Shore not more than 500m apart.

    I don’t feel hell freezing over yet.

  10. Yup, Hume conveniently leaves out some of the important details regarding the “successful” cities/examples he cites, and ignores the physical realities of the local situation.

    Simply removing the Gardiner will have zero effect on accessing the waterfront east of Jarvis. If you doubt me, then you really ought to go down there yourself and check it out. As above posters have argued, crossing Lakeshore is the real problem. If you thought that crossing Lakeshore west of Jarvis was difficult, then give Cherry St. a try. I dare you.

    The worst thing about that intersection is that it actually leads to a nice public beach–a piece of waterfront that people might actually WANT to access. Sure, the waterfront redevelopment will create a shiny new waterfront wonderland that far off in the future people will need to get to and from, but what I find really shameful is that there are opportunities here–doable opportunities–to make meaningful and IMMEDIATE improvements to waterfront accessibility that are being completely ignored because of all this “tear down the Gardiner” hoopla. Gardiner hoopla is no excuse for not making the many little changes to the intersections at Lakeshore that would make a world of difference.

  11. I believe taking down the Gardiner will make a difference. When they took down the far eastern portion, and created some open space with bike lanes, it definitely made a difference. I’m an example of the difference. I had tried biking to work years ago, and found it terrifying. When they put in the bike lane, it offered me a safe way to get downtown on my bike. Just take a look at the number of people biking their on weekends, and tell me it didn’t make a difference

  12. Yup, the logic behind the Gardiner teardown is a bit flawed – it’s not the roads that are the true barrier it’s the cars on the road, especially the moving ones. So the best way to start to open up all of this area is to manage the travel demand, which is way heavier in the west end. The way to manage travel demand is best done through improved transit. I’ve been thinking a Front St. transitway instead of a road project has been the way to do that (along with GO) for the last 6 years and then start to toll the Gardiner, and make busways and bikelanes on it – to be “roadical”. I don’t like how the FSE money is being redirected to the proposed Gardiner teardown; it should be invested in transit and the WWLRT is not effective enough for its $650M – its own EA says so.

  13. Freaking fire depts… the same people to blame for huge suburban roads in low-density developments with chopped back corners for better turning. Times have changed, and FDs need to change with them.