They were planning on doing that a few years back. I forget why they stopped.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Toronto-Age |OT2|
- Thread starter EvilMario
- Start date
They were planning on doing that a few years back. I forget why they stopped.
I like the way you think.
BladeWorker
Member
Because eventually, the Gardiner will just bury itself.
I remember that talk too. Ha, here's a CBC article from 06 on that issue.
Can't believe that's six years ago now. Gah, this city.
The cost of burying the Gardiner along with crippling the city's road network would be a complete disaster. Better ideas involving enhancing or replacing the Gardiner to make it more of a floating highway. I did a project on this topic a couple years ago for a planning class.
http://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/explore_projects2/the_wider_waterfront/the_gardiner_expressway
An example of a possible enhancement would be to make it a double level structure, bottom level roadway and top level green park.
A sweet-ass park for deaf people.
added_time
Member
I think when Boston buried their highway, it took something like 10 extra years and came in 8 billion dollars over budget. So now most other cities are afraid to try something similar.
added_time said:
A lot of the problems were related to tunnelling under rivers, under train tracks, and near subway tunnels.
Brinbe said:
That could be a big problem. But there were a lot of high-rises along the path of the big dig too. The other problem with the big dig was that the tunnel went through a lot of landfill. I'm not sure, but I think that would be a problem with Toronto too. Not sure where the water table is, but the Gardiner might be close enough to Lake Ontario for it to be a problem. Still, it seems like this project would be smaller and easier than Boston's in many ways.
Spl1nter said:
In Boston they built the tunnel underneath the highway first. They then opened the tunnels before they began demolishing the highway. Toronto could do that.
No doubt it'd be very expensive and a long time running.
An aside, we almost had a Boston situation with the Spadina crosstown expressway.
added_time
Member
Almost the entire modern Toronto waterfront is landfill as well.
This is from the Toronto waterfront wikipedia:
"The shore of Lake Ontario (at least within present-day Toronto Harbour) is mostly landfill, extending a kilometre or more from the natural shoreline."
BladeWorker
Member
How else would Lakeshore Boulevard have got its name?
added_time
Member
Why are you asking me? I was the one saying it is landfill.
lunarworks
Member
Toronto's old shoreline overlaid on its modern shoreline.
It's a shame the downtown waterfront seems so cut off from the city, but it is pretty nice in the summer for those that take a walk along Queens Quay. Decent beaches on both ends of the city too (a bit cleaner in the Beaches than Sunnyside though).
Buffalo would die to have our waterfront. They've been trying to build one for 50 years.
Buffalo would die to have our waterfront. They've been trying to build one for 50 years.
firehawk12
Subete no aware
Remember when there was a ferry service from Toronto to Rochester and how that would make the waterfront somewhat busy because of tourists passing through? Good times.
Is there any sort of support for destroying the Gardiner Expressway and for not replacing it with anything? Not having a highway to downtown has worked very well for Vancouver. I recognize of course Vancouver never had a highway and Toronto would be going from having one to not and that's a very different situation.
lunarworks
Member
Ya, the railway already cut off the waterfront from the city to an extent, but the Gardiner just finished the job.
Imagine if the Spadina Expressway had gone through, connecting to the Gardiner. It would have driven a stake right through the heart of Downtown and we'd have NO city.
There's been talk of everything, including just removing it all together. But nothing will ever come of it, because no one will want to front the cost and wrath of the 'tax payers' enduring a decade, or more of non-stop construction.
Of course, the Gardiner is doing a good job of bringing itself down and eventually someone's hand might be forced if it cost as must to repair it as it does to bring it down.
Yeah eventually you'll have the situation they are having in Montreal where the infrastructure is literally crumbling. It's sad to say that folks will only act when someone gets injured.
I'm a pretty strong proponent of simply removing these highway systems because of positive experience Vancouver had during the 2010 olympics when they severely limited road traffic. The city completely closed off major traffic arteries for security concerns, including the viaducts, the one highwaylike portion of road in Vancouver, constructed as part of an abandoned highway plan, and which is the major eastern artery into the city. The city recognized they would need to compensate and so they temporarily increased bus service in certain areas. In the end, despite all the major roads being either closed or having lanes closed off, no one noticed any difference.
Vancouver is now considering demolishing the viaducts.
I'd definitely be in favor of it, but it'd be a monstrous undertaking and I'd be curious as to where it leaves the DVP.
Not in favor of losing the viaducts / bridges in Toronto. Seems like a really NIMBY mindset saying 'stay on your side of the river'. I'm sure people in Vancouver have their own reasons, but not in Toronto, thanks.
I like to actually be able to get places and Toronto's viaducts are used mostly for inner-city travel and not bringing more traffic into the city like Vancouver.BladeWorker
Member
I agree with you, but instead of continuing the x-way, they stopped the Allen at Eglinton and made a mess of midtown traffic there. I can't wait until the LRT dig goes through that stretch.
BigJonsson
Member
Bistro 422 is a fucking disaster, weak drinks and just a horrible atmosphere, ugh
Its a dive bar, but not a fun dive bar
BladeWorker
Member
Agreed, but it served its purpose when I was an undergrad living off of KD and old textbooks.
added_time
Member
Let's all celebrate the horrible Gardiner (night time should hide the flaws)...
Here is the Toronto photo of the day:
Here is the Toronto photo of the day:
added_time
Member
Toronto photo of the day:
added_time
Member
I doubt their brains have the capacity to remember what happened 10 minutes ago so these comments are probably long forgotten.
It IS funny though. Hehe.
Talking about the Gardiner? Well the idea with the Gardiner is to replace it with something that doesn't create a huge barrier for pedestrians. Seriously there are a whole lot of interesting things in the area (stadium, CN tower, the ferry to the islands, the beachfront) but to get from some of them to the other you have to cross under this huge concrete monstrosity. A tunnel is seen as the best solution but horrendously expensive and would take a huge amount of time to build.
Well it seems like a lot of people who just disliked him before hate him now. The people who loved him before still love him now. The article doesn't show what's up with the remaining 38 though.
Oh no, concrete!
Maybe I can agree that it doesn't exactly *look* nice, but it does function. There is already enough insane traffic downtown and removing yet another artery would worsen it quite a bit.
If someone wants to tear it down in favour of a replacement (such as a tunnel) they should have the forward thinking to build now. Doing a switchover would be the smart way to approach that, not tear one down and replace it 20 years later.
Sure that is the best way to approach it but it's expensive and would require either the province or the feds to spend some money on Toronto or for Toronto to start adding charges like tolls and increasing taxes to pay for it themselves.
The biggest problem with this region is that for some reason it's become 'common sense' that investing in it is a bad idea and it's better to just let situations decay.
added_time
Member
This is the best way to approach it. People that cause traffic and tear up the roads in the city (but choose not to live here) should be penalized for it. That way, we could use the money raised to pay for new transit infrastructure.
If the people out of town don't like it then they have a few choices:
A) not come to Toronto (which eases traffic)
or
B) take Go Train etc
or
C) move to Toronto (which helps our tax revenues)
People coming in from outside the city though are mostly going to stick with the car. Yes, plenty of people do drive to stations like Kipling and what not, but there's no way to 'fix' the subway from Kipling if people are not taking it already and GO matters are outside of the city's control. It's a mindset change more than an actual change.
Subruban BRT or LRT connection to Kipling would help a lot and would cause the areas it passes through to get denser as well. The Go train is only for weekday rush hour.
Have you guys seen how absolutely huge the major arteries are in Mississauga? There's plenty of space for two lanes down the middle for some form or right of way transit.
Start with BRT, switch later on to LRT and then 50 or 60 years later if population continues to grow the place is ready for subway.
Hazel has converted to the transit religion (just as the last of the farmlands were paved over with townhomes oddly enough) it's too bad that the GLOBAL ECONOMIC CRISIS has sapped Ontario of any money to spend. I'm pretty sure McGuinty wouldn't mind throwing transit cash at Mississauga.
Sure, but that's not a Toronto issue mostly (as has already been discussed, areas around Kipling and Islington don't have the density right now, and money is tight on LRT as it is). Mississauga has to actually move on their LRT ambitions eventually and I could see Toronto stepping up to help connect an LRT to a Hurontario rail.
Well this is something that has nothing to do with the TTC. It does have a lot to do with congestion in Toronto though
. The whole point of Metrolinx was to coordinate investment to reduce congestion on a region wide basis. It's been a complete failure so far though.I'd imagine BRTs are pretty simple to put down though in these areas. All these areas aren't dense enough for even light rail right now and I'm assuming a bus right of way is a perfect fit.
I don't mind LRT down Hurontario. I don't think it's a bad thing for Mississauga to try to get an area of its own with the density of Yonge in Toronto. The denser and more urban the suburbs get the more attention gets paid to urban issues.
McGuinty has his hands full. He's about to cut 3 billion in health care. Fuck that noise. As someone who's grandmother has recently spent time in the hospital, they are already stretched beyond what they're meant to be.
It's not just about visiting the city, either. The Gardiner does serve as an artery to other places. Remove it, and you have a massive traffic nightmare moreso than it already is.
The north side of the region needs a lot more transit in the worst way possible though. If you're heading downtown then at least you have options. My wife used to work near Dixie and Eglinton in Mississauga and there is no good way at all to get to that place from the middle of North York even though the distance is pretty small.
Ah I guess so. The Go bus completely bypasses that area doesn't it?
The money raised would pay to fix the roads, why should it pay for something those coming into the city won't use...? Technically those in the city should pay for better transit since they'll be using it 90% of the time... no?
added_time
Member
No because the people living outside of the city are avoiding paying taxes to the City of Toronto by living slightly outside the border but use the infrastructure every single day. They absolutely should be penalized for doing so.
This road toll shouldn't benefit them, it should benefit the people in the city.
(but yes it should still go to fixing the roads as well but not for the reason you said)
I'm curious to see how taxes are broken down in regards to federal, municipal and provincial, and what they pay for.