[Napoleon]

Haha. Karygiannis tunnel option. Toronto Eats Gardiner?

Someone desperately needs to hire a proofreader! In addition to some tasty Gardiner...
"We are been asked"
"not even discuss"
"nto"
"opportunity to look it"
"Lets" not "Let's"
"reflec"

 

[Tuscani01]

LOL "Toronto eats Gardiner"... Is that a hint that he's supporting the removal option?

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

I'm glad to know that I'm not the only one hoping that something horrible happens to this structure (without hurting anyone, of course).

It's ugly Tiger. It ruins the view of the city from the east.

WAIT WAIT WAIT! Do these pictures mean that latte-sipping, bicycle riding paradise Amsterdam has an elevated highway running through a vibrant neighbourhood? Please explain!

yeah, there can be a balance. But still it has to go.

 

[BurlOak]

View attachment 47965

The tunnel option can only make sense if the entire Gardiner was considered. You cannot recieve enough of the benefits if you have to go over the Don River - then tunnel - then rise to meet the Gardiner at Jarvis.

I do not have the plans, but from at grade-DVP it rises 5m+ over the Don, then goes 10m below grade, then rises 20m to meet the existing Gardiner. It is a terrible alignment with a lot of the length with wasted transition zones.

 

[nfitz]

The tunnel option can only make sense if the entire Gardiner was considered.

Let's bury the rail corridor too ...

.. and a pony. I need a pony.

 

[LNahid2000]

Giving everyone in Toronto ponies will probably be cheaper than burying the Gardiner.

 

[Juan_Lennon416]

I'll pay to bury the Gardiner

 

[ssiguy2]

What about my idea of a trench a la GO corridor?

Much cheaper than a tunnel and buildings can be built over the trench which is common throughout the world. Give the developers the land of the Gardiner for free for development but with the proviso that they pay for the portion of road under their development. You would end up with an invisible Gardiner, more long term tax revenue due to development fees/taxes on the Gardiner lands, have the developers pay for it, and much cheaper long term maintenance than either the blvd or Hybrid options.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

I'll pay to bury the Gardiner

Because tunneling has gone so well in other places.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I'll pay to bury the Gardiner

Awesome. Just give me your name and address and the City of Toronto will send the bill to you.

 

[Juan_Lennon416]

Because tunneling has gone so well in other places.

Doesn't mean it will go bad here. Stop being so negative...be positive!

 

[Juan_Lennon416]

Awesome. Just give me your name and address and the City of Toronto will send the bill to you.

Thanks...please use courier service

 

[44 North]

Giving everyone in Toronto ponies will probably be cheaper than burying the Gardiner.

We don't want fancy mules tearing up the streets. People came up to me and said they want ponies. Ponies, ponies, PONIES!

 

[salsa]

Because tunneling has gone so well in other places.

Consider Boston too. There's a five part article explaining everything that went wrong with the big dig. But in the end was it really worth it? Lets see what article 2 says:

Many decades and dozens of billions of taxpayer dollars were spent on designing and constructing the Big Dig. It was supposed to open up nearly 30 acres of prime downtown real-estate, and reunite the city. But when former environmental secretary John DeVillars approved the plan, he inserted an arbitrary stipulation that 75% of the land be used for "open space." Also: as it is constructed, the tunnel underneath will not support any building taller than a few stories. As a result, nearly all proposals for the land focused on different ways to turn it into a park, or worse, a parking lot. And in the end, what have we got for all of the effort? A six lane divided highway, at-grade, with "open space" in the middle. See for yourself:

$15 billion buys you a tunnel, a new at-grade highway and a glorified median strip

"Pedestrian friendly" connection to the North End

Northernmost section - perhaps the nicest part but still very highway-like

We didn't get redevelopment of the urban fabric to replace what was demolished fifty years ago. And we didn't get much of a park either. Just a barren "open space." Or as Charlie Gardner put it: they made a desert and called it a park.

http://walkingbostonian.blogspot.ca/2011/12/big-dig-part-2.html

On the day I visited, the North End was jammed with tourists snapping photos of the streets, students standing in long lines at pizza parlors, and many residents simply going about their daily business by foot. The few on the Greenway were walking briskly either toward the North End or back the other way, and indeed, with such an extraordinary neighborhood so close by, the appeal of lying on a shade-less grass lawn between six lanes of roaring traffic loses any appeal it might have otherwise had.

http://oldurbanist.blogspot.ca/2011/04/they-made-desert-and-called-it-park.html

I've visited the area last year and fully agree with the above observations. While it looks much better without the elevated highway, you have to wonder if this outcome was really worth the $15 billion that it costed.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Consider Boston too.
...
I've visited the area last year and fully agree with the above observations. While it looks much better without the elevated highway, you have to wonder if this outcome was really worth the $15 billion that it costed.

That's where they have erred - the goal should have been to knit back the fabric of the city damaged by the expressway through development (with the odd parcel of space left as public squares, with great enclosure on all sides) - not aiming for the lowest hanging fruit of poorly designed public "space".

AoD