[AKS]

I don't know about the other parts but few years ago when I went downtown by the DVP, I could see smog shroud the downtown core. Also I see photos posted in newspapers too. Maybe the other areas didn't get coverage?

http://www.livinggreentoronto.com/2008/06/07/ontarios-smog-kills-9500-a-year/

The areas with the highest numbers of projected smog-related deaths in Ontario are Toronto, with 2,130, Peel Region with 700 and York Region with 590.

The park lane condos are in etobicoke. I'm not too familar with the area though since I've never been there.

 

[nfitz]

You guys are looking too micro. Driving towards Toronto from the east, you often see a line of smog in the sky ... somewhere near Trenton ... and from there it lasts until Windsor!

 

[jaycola]

Robert Fung suggested tearing it down to make the waterfront more inviting. However I have yet to see a plan to integrate the gardiner, that would beautify it with all the ramps and all. If someone has a good plan to make it look nice and fit well with the waterfront, then by all means keep the gardiner. The only other solution I've heard about is to bury the gardiner like the other cities buried their highway. If the other cities thought they could make it look nice, they wouldn't have needed to resort to burying it. Hence I don't believe Toronto can come up with a spectacular idea that no one has thought of before to make it look nice and integrate well.

There have been a number of proposals for humanising the gap between downtown and the lake but the anti auto lobby will refuse to consider it at once or without hesitation.

I think with we are better off making what we have work better. It has been done in other cities and while it is not the ideal situation it is by far less costly and will create little disruption for the city.

There have been, over the years, a number of exciting proposals for the improvement of the underpasses and elevated sections but they get rejected out of hand.

Maybe some of them need to be revisited.

http://www.toviaduct.com/skyPATH.htm

See what other cities have done
http://spacing.ca/wire/?p=2161

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-22575755_ITM

http://www.metropolismag.com/story/20030601/the-anti-big-dig

“We spent a lot of time walking the corridor underneath the Gardiner and asking, ‘If it is actually a barrier, how is it acting as a barrier?’” Brook explains. “We found that it wasn’t so much a physical barrier as there was a stigma associated with it.”

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

^^^ I guess it's that time again...

For the Gardiner viaduct proposal to rear it's head.

Personally I think we should bury the thing from just west of the EX and throught downtown. However I'm not against trying to beautifying it either. I like the climbing plants shown in the Metropolis link (ivy?) we'd have to find plants that would be able to withstand brackish conditions due to the salt used in the winter, but I know of people that keep brackish (salty) aquariums and grow plants just fine so it's just a matter of finding the right species. The Spacing link showed how the underside of the Gardiner could be built up into small shops as well. This could be usefull in the core where there will be many people milling about and who could use more shops and services.

 

[GraphicMatt]

The Viaduct is such a ridiculous science-fiction concept. Billions of dollars to make an elevated highway more elevated. But now it will be higher and have cabling! And people will LIVE in the support pillars! And the robot butlers will make all our dreams come true.

The problem with beautifying the underside of the Gardiner, as I see it, is that we already HAVE something under the Gardiner - directly under in some places-: a wide road called Lake Shore. That severely limits our options. And neon lights seem are not a magical cure-all.

 

[jaycola]

In an ideal world, a quick removal of the Gardiner and transforming an efficient Lakeshore would be our best option, but this is not nearly an ideal world.

They peg the cost of removing the Eastern Gardiner at $300M. We know from other major projects that the cost will likely double before completion and it does not take into account losses to the Toronto economy during the construction period.

The environmental assessment will take 5 years and demolition and construction could take another 8 years. Will we wait 13 more years to start construction of East Bayfront, west and lower donlands?

I agree the viaduct is over the top science fiction but there may be elements of the plan (or others that have been done)worth looking at. It is time to get moving on the projects that will move Toronto forward.

Put the $300m into projects that can start right away. Clean up the dirty brownfields and start issuing permits, improve transit links and services, make the city an exciting place to visit.

Once you have the city working better, then look at dismantling the mistakes we have made.

 

[GraphicMatt]

There's not really a viable 'do nothing' argument with the Gardiner, because it's approaching fifty years old and it will need to be refurbished in time. The cost of this will approach the cost of tearing it down/replacing it.

It's important to at least consider whether we really need the least-used section between Jarvis and the DVP. This section is not really used by commuters and, like the section further east that was taken down, I doubt in time anyone would really notice it was gone.

 

[TKTKTK]

I haven't been to etobicoke, but here's quote from 3Dementia regarding proximity to the gardiner.

Buildings will get built close to the Gardiner, I don't have a problem with that - I like it actually! On the other hand, I don't want to see highways built through people's balcony's - but that's not at all what we're talking about here.

There's also the issue of pollution. In the summer, downtown always seems to be engulfed with smog. It's not like it's anywhere else in the GTA. Just the downtown area. I don't know if even those green roofs will help off set it with the amount of traffic that goes through downtown.

Pollution is a major problem. But low-emissions and zero-emissions vehicles are becoming more and more wide-spread. I think if we want to focus on lowering pollution downtown, there are many effective ways to do it.

I also forgot to mention another issue. I think Kristopher said while lining up at ACC to get in. The gardiner would splash water on the people waiting in line during rainy days. I think if the gardiner is kept, this is also another issue to address.

Wet streets splash people when vehicles drive by. Buses seem to do this the most

 

[TKTKTK]

It's important to at least consider whether we really need the least-used section between Jarvis and the DVP. This section is not really used by commuters and, like the section further east that was taken down, I doubt in time anyone would really notice it was gone.

Oh, I think you'll notice the section gone when you get to the end of the DVP and meet a giant line-up of cars stopping to make left and right turns onto Lake Shore, or crawing up the single-lane off-ramp for Richmond (and then ramming that bulk of the DVP-to-Gardiner's traffic right into the middle of historic Corktown) You probably won't notice a difference, but someone who actually lives in this neighbourhood and uses these roads will.

 

[GraphicMatt]

Oh, I think you'll notice the section gone when you get to the end of the DVP and meet a giant line-up of cars stopping to make left and right turns onto Lake Shore, or crawing up the single-lane off-ramp for Richmond (and then ramming that bulk of the DVP-to-Gardiner's traffic right into the middle of historic Corktown) You probably won't notice a difference, but someone who actually lives in this neighbourhood and uses these roads will.

I get on and off the Gardiner at Jarvis several times a week to go into Burlington for work. I'll often take the Gardiner to the end on my way home to make stops at Canadian Tire or Price Chopper at Lake Shore & Leslie. I'm not far removed from this section of the highway at all. Don't paint me with that brush.

This is all anecdotal, but I don't feel like many people take the DVP down to the Gardiner, then get off at Yonge/York/Bay. The traffic studies will tell us more.

They've acknowledged that the Richmond & Adelaide street ramps need to be improved/widened as part of this process. Fair trade.

 

[TKTKTK]

I get on and off the Gardiner at Jarvis several times a week to go into Burlington for work. I'll often take the Gardiner to the end on my way home to make stops at Canadian Tire or Price Chopper at Lake Shore & Leslie. I'm not far removed from this section of the highway at all. Don't paint me with that brush.

So the bulk of your travel is Core to West, starting at Jarvis (which is outside of the area recommended for removal). You use the eastern section only occasionally for errands, no wonder you think of it as optional. Given that this is ACTUALLY my backyard, I feel like I have more experience with what we're talking about here.

This is all anecdotal, but I don't feel like many people take the DVP down to the Gardiner, then get off at Yonge/York/Bay. The traffic studies will tell us more.

What's the magic number? It's certainly many, as the road is generally always busy (though never seems to get grid-locked). The traffic studies that have been released so far have felt that there was going to be enough traffic transferred from the Gardiner to the Lake Shore that it required the widening and complete re-working of the road to accommodate it - and even then with delays.

They've acknowledged that the Richmond & Adelaide street ramps need to be improved/widened as part of this process. Fair trade.

Fair trade for who? For the West Donlands that haven't been built yet? For the East Bayfront that hasn't even been planned yet? Or for people who live in Corktown who get the highway moved over their homes?

What the hell kind of planning rationale is that? Who are these VIP future West Donlands and East Bayfront residents that we need to clear the area for?

 

[dunkalunk]

Speaking of access points, whatever happened to the front street extension? Is it officially dead?

[edit] and why are there not directional ramps from the Gardiner eastbound to the Queensway Eastbound and vice-versa (besides the rail corridor and massive opposition to those in queen west of course)?

Surely if these connections were in place, there would be less effects felt along the Exhibition-DVP section of Lake Shore Blvd if the Gardiner were torn down.

 

[catcher_of_cats]

Speaking of access points, whatever happened to the front street extension? Is it officially dead?

The Front Street Extension was removed from the city's Official Plan last week. Now planning can begin on the new Front Street Extension that will be a local road from at least Strachan to Dufferin, potentially with the Western Waterfront LRT.

 

[GraphicMatt]

So the bulk of your travel is Core to West, starting at Jarvis (which is outside of the area recommended for removal). You use the eastern section only occasionally for errands, no wonder you think of it as optional. Given that this is ACTUALLY my backyard, I feel like I have more experience with what we're talking about here.

Your backyard is the Gardiner? Actually?

There are no ramps between the start of the Gardiner and Jarvis. Being from Corktown (right?), where do you get on the highway? And what do you use the Eastern section for?

Anecdotals aren't worth much, sure, but I'd sure like to hear some arguments from people who rely on that Eastern section.

What's the magic number? It's certainly many, as the road is generally always busy (though never seems to get grid-locked). The traffic studies that have been released so far have felt that there was going to be enough traffic transferred from the Gardiner to the Lake Shore that it required the widening and complete re-working of the road to accommodate it - and even then with delays.

The widening and re-working of the Lake Shore would be for aesthetic reasons, as well. When this plan was intro'ed, they talked about losing two minutes in traffic time along the eastern section. That's more than acceptable. Five minutes would be acceptable.

Fair trade for who? For the West Donlands that haven't been built yet? For the East Bayfront that hasn't even been planned yet? Or for people who live in Corktown who get the highway moved over their homes?

What the hell kind of planning rationale is that? Who are these VIP future West Donlands and East Bayfront residents that we need to clear the area for?

Are you exaggerating? Why would they need to build a "highway over people's homes" to rework the Richmond & Adelaide ramps? If the plan is contingent on that, then I'd find it hard to support.

Most of the DVP traffic terminates at Bloor or Richmond already.

 

[TKTKTK]

Your backyard is the Gardiner? Actually?

There are no ramps between the start of the Gardiner and Jarvis. Being from Corktown (right?), where do you get on the highway? And what do you use the Eastern section for?

Anecdotals aren't worth much, sure, but I'd sure like to hear some arguments from people who rely on that Eastern section.

Errands in the morning often take me into the core before I head back east and then north (I work at Eg/Warden), and on the way home I stay on the DVP to the Gardiner to get to the gym (Adelaide Club).

I also appreciate that it takes all the traffic that would otherwise be running 30 feet away from me on the Richmond and Adelaide overpasses - something you think residents ought to accept on behalf of non-existent residents of other neighbs.

The widening and re-working of the Lake Shore would be for aesthetic reasons, as well. When this plan was intro'ed, they talked about losing two minutes in traffic time along the eastern section. That's more than acceptable. Five minutes would be acceptable.

The widening and reworking is for capacity reasons, but they'll also (in theory, though we know how it works in practice) beautify the roadway as well. The Aesthetic statement here is taking the Gardiner down, not replacing it with a super-designed road. If you're curious about what we're going to end up with, check out the Eastern section of the Lake Shore at Carlaw. Beautiuous.

Even 5 Minutes is a pipe-dream. The light cycles as they exist now add more than 5 minutes to your travel time versus taking the Gardiner. Each intersection can be 3-4 minutes on its own. Add more traffic to that mix, but only an extra lane, and I don't see how you're going to keep the flow you have even now.

Are you exaggerating? Why would they need to build a "highway over people's homes" to rework the Richmond & Adelaide ramps? If the plan is contingent on that, then I'd find it hard to support.

The Richmond ramp is a single lane. More traffic flows past it than takes it. If you end the highway there, all traffic will now take it. Good luck with that single lane.

So, you'll need to widen Richmond, right? Richmond threads between people's homes, closer even than the Gardiner gets to things. How are you going to add capacity to that? How can you justify adding extra traffic volume like that to an existing neighbourhood when the sole purpose behind it is to favour neighbourhoods that don't even exist? It boggles the mind.

Most of the DVP traffic terminates at Bloor or Richmond already.

No it doesn't. If you drove on the DVP in these sections you would very clearly see that.