The city is officially pushing the “remove” option for the Gardiner Expressway
We knew this was coming, but it’s a big deal all the same: city staff are officially recommending that councillors vote to get rid the elevated portion of the Gardiner Expressway east of Jarvis Street. The move would save the city money, free up development space, and clear the way for some ground-level beautification—but vehicle travel times would increase. The idea will go before the city’s public works and infrastructure committee on March 4th, after which city council will have to give its approval.
It’s not clear whether the project would proceed immediately, even if councillors were to give it the green light. Rob Ford opposes demolishing the Gardiner. Karen Stintz, who formally announced her mayoral candidacy on Monday, is pushing a “hybrid” solution that involves leaving the highway up for the time being. If the expressway becomes an election issue, anything can happen.
3 thoughts on “The city is officially pushing the “remove” option for the Gardiner Expressway”
Tear it down. I’d heard the additional travel time would amount to 7 minutes. If that’s too long to wait people need to find something else to do with their lives.
Keep the Gardiner for ~3-5 years
Build a tunnel south of the Gardiner, perhaps with 2 -3 levels (eastbound and westbound
traffic and connector’s level) pending on possible real estate. Work could be
done whilst fully using the Gardiner. Dirt and material could be transported
with barges, minimizing the impact on the local traffic. Conveyors and concrete
pumping from the Lake Ontario could practically eliminate transport on streets
Once ompleted, the Gardiner to be demolished and developed. Developers probably would e interested to finance the possibly AFP project.
Possible outing: Perhaps from Lake Shore Blvd E (~Leslie) through Queens Quay E and W, then ake Shore Blvd W, perhaps close to Jameson.
The offset onstruction could be much cheaper and faster, with uninterrupted traffic.
Locating it arther from the train tracks could be a priceless benefit if the subterranean
set of approach tracks is implemented (See among others the WEB postings “US & USRC Track Capacity Study, Train apacity Analysis, AECOM, November 2011: There is the possibility of a ubterranean set of approach tracks below the USRC corridor”)
(BTW building second level of tracks above the current US probably is much more practical n the view of work already done for the Dig Down).
First of all, that’s *not* a trivial amt of time to add to a 1 way commute. Secondly, is that 7 mins an average time or a rush hour time? Third, how much confidence do they have in this 7 min estimate?
My point is, its easy to flip off an answer like “just do it”, but I’d like to see a lot more numbers from multiple sets of unbiased analysts before doing anything rash.
Comments are closed.