19 June 2009 | Posted inBlog News & Updates
Posted by Justin
That thing in the middle
Big things happened in Toronto yesterday. A local Architect presented his idea for what he would do to with our inter-city expressway, the Gardiner Expressway. The same expressway the city has been talking about tearing down/repairing/doing nothing with, for almost a quarter of a century. It’s a great time to do it also, with the city will be going on strike come Sunday night. But never the less, I thought I would show my friends to the south as not many people from Toronto actually look at my content.
The Gardiner Expressway, built between 1955-1966. Named after Robert G. Gardiner, (our Robert Moses) was the Chair of the now defunct Metro Council. It stretches about 20 kilometers running east west, and like most intercity expressways. The elevated road could be described as being a barrier or an eyesore towards its adjacent communities. Problem with Toronto is that it also doesn’t have just an expressway to contend with. But also the main rail corridor that runs from Detroit to Montreal bisecting an adjacent area, cutting the city off from its waterfront. Many call this area the rail lands. I call it a noisemaker. While the government would call it a ‘non-priority issue.’
See Canada doesn’t have the population to really contend with the U.S. of A, so there will never be any sort of ‘Big Dig,’ like Boston. The city planners, and local government were inept to see the potential of the rail lands before all of the waterfront condos were built. So they missed on the opportunity to bury the expressway. So now the city is left with arguing. Mainly from the suburban commuters, who use the artery everyday, and the urban dwellers that live beside the highway. While the real issue of the highway is maintenance. In previous years, large swaths of concrete have been falling down on the daily commuter, because of the amount of road salt that is has been used on it over the years. Studies have shown it would cost significant more to fix the road deck, with the cheapest option to tear it down.
.
.
The story of the Gardiner Expressway really begins with a single building. The Toronto Harbour Commission (now known as Harbour Sixty Restaurant)
It began it’s life as a modest, 6 storey little retreat at the edge of the water. Welcoming all to Toronto, similar but not on the same scale, as the Statue of Liberty. (This is the Canadian version of the Statue of Liberty)
There it is sitting really quiet, (on the right) in a cute kind of way. On the waters edge.
You can see the rail corridor running east-west, just inland before the city proper begins.
And then the roaring 20′s came, and the Harbour Commission decides it’s time to expand, with the introduction of the Toronto Waterfront Development plan. Someone, somewhere probably got tired of walking across the CN Rail lines, and decided that it was time to reclaim almost 2000 acres of land, south of the train tracks.
(It’s kind of ironic that it’s taken almost 100 years since. For the city to implement any kind of strategy for it’s waterfront.)
That was their plan, this is what we got:
Image showing land being reclaimed. Road identified running east-west along harbourfront.
Image showing Rail Lands, and Gardiner Expressway. Before CN Tower is built.
Around 1972 – CN Tower is completed. First residential condos appear on waterfront. Gardiner Expressway (shown in red is built), Harbour Commision building show in blue.
Harbour Commision building today shown in blue. You can view a large photo here
The Gardiner Expressway today:
I honestly think Toronto is the most over-planned city in the world. So many studies, and various proposals have been produced, with little no action taking place. So here are a few different ‘proposals’ for the Expressway.
Tunnel
- Will cost $1-billion dollars. (Everything seems to cost a billion dollars)
- Problems with several obstacles, including: River, Street Car tunnels, sewage pipes, lake-water cooling plant, etc.
Leave it as is, and spruce up area underneath
- Will make commuter happy
- Probably won’t attract much users
- Still disconnects waterfront with city
Vision from Local Architect. Basically install 8 metres above the Expressway, a green roof and park space. (Link to Toronto Star Article)
The problem I see with this proposal is that it’s making what is a barrier, even taller. Although I can appreciate the desire to enhance the public realm with a linear park along the waterfront; I think this proposal creates more problems, then it eliminates. It’s almost as if it is trying to hard to make a statement.
Some might say it is bold. I would say it’s unfortunate it got out in the media.
Toronto Viaduct Proposal – remove portion of highway, and create a bridge-like structure above the rail corridor.
I purely put this in because it seems whenever a new proposal comes for the Gardiner Expressway, the advocates start calling on this monstrosity.
I’m not sure who the designers are, but they seem to have forgotten about a few little things, like: value of adjacent land, access on and off, safety, money, and what the neighbours in the adjacent condos would think of having a 10 storey tall vehicular tube running beside their balcony. I honestly just think it looks ridiculous.
Okay yes, there is some merit to diverting the highway over the rail corridor. But first, as I’ve mentioned before, the rail companies think they own the city, second, it doesn’t need to be a super-structure, and third, the logistics of achieving the purpose of this artery, might outweigh the benefits of creating such a mess.
Waterfront Toronto’s Plan – Remove eastern most portion of expressway. Creating an 8 lane ‘Boulevard’ at grade.
The argument for this is to remove the visual barrier, by creating a two-stage crossing with an at-grade ‘Boulevard.’
Of all the proposals, this one seems to have the greatest pedestrian realm enhancement to it. It actually suggests people will be using this space. The problem with this is scheme is that it is going to take 3 years to determine if it is a viable option. Followed by another 4-5 years to determine who will pay for it, followed by another 4-5 years for construction (I am factoring in, that there will probably be a court battle, a labour strike, and some sort of celebrations to commemorate each piece being removed.)
.
.
I really don’t think there is one solution that will keep everyone happy. There is a vast disconnect between the suburban and urban dwellers and their vision for the city. It will probably come down to which form of government (Conservatives in the Suburbs, Liberals in the city) is in power at the time. Which will determine the fate of the highway.
Having lived beside the highway, I’ve noticed several things in daily traffic patterns. The first being, the majority of users do not traverse straight across the city, they will always get off the expressway before they reach the central part of the waterfront, and secondly. There is only high traffic volume during the rush hour commute. Any other time, the traffic is moderate to low.
But if I were in charge, I would do several things, which I haven’t seen proposed.
1. I would keep the Expressway intact on the western edge of the city.
2. When the expressway gets closer to the city, and the condo towers stat to appear. I would reverse the highway with space underneath. Basically creating a covered highway, with vegetation and community space similar to the local architect without building the Expressway higher.
3. When the Expressway gets into the city with the highest densities. It would convert into a boulevard at grade. Leaving some portions of the elevated deck to allow movement above the Boulevard. Which will allow pedestrians the opportunity to avoid the long processions of crossing the street and provide a linear park for the city dwellers.
.
.
.
Justin Zawyrucha‘s other blog posts:
Page 1 - Blogs 111-81
Page 2 - Blogs 80-50
Page 3 - Blogs 49-19
Page 4 - Blogs 18-1
Post a Comment
Run for mayor (if that’s what you Northerners call your guy who is in charge). Another note . . . I don’t really like to ever hear the phrase “large swaths of concrete have been falling down on the daily commuter” . . . I’m going to assume that safety has been reviewed, but yea, that sounds no good!
Yup…Mayor David Miller
Some would call him incompetent. I actually like what he has done, although it hasn’t been the easiest ride.
You can check out his Twitter account: http://twitter.com/mayormiller
i’m going to vote for looney justin. that’s what i call a canadian mayor. it’s really great to get a big overarching perspective on such an ambitious plan. We’ve been having a heated debate about the big highway that runs through st louis for eons also, and there are no “everybody’s thrilled” options – but the discourse is half the battle…of course the money is the other half of the battle. very anxious to hear all about this in the future – keep us up to date, and keep your urban design opinions coming – very refreshing!
Wowser – I didn’t realise Toronto is so over planned. I can tell you vancouver is a mess with construction due perhaps to lack of planning years ago… now they’re ripping everything appart in a mad rush to do as much as possible before next year’s olympics… Highways, Bridges, Skytrains going underground, a big public square downtown, you name it – they’re working on it. years of procrastination is biting teh tax payers in the ass all at once. …but really the GVA is tiny compared to the GTA… Toronto needs to stop trying to look like a mini new york (i’m talking to you dundas square!) and move fwd with its own destiny.
Justin, I just stumbled upon your blog while searching for Gardiner Expressway. Whatever happens to the expressway, I hope that some elements of the structure are saved, as has been done at the eastern end. I started a series of paintings this spring in an attempt to capture the beauty of the expressway before it disappears. The expressway verges on monumental.
You’re the first person I’ve seen point out the fact that this city’s planning over the past century has been one of the greatest combined acts of stupidity in the history of urban affairs. Mistake after mistake, missed opportunity after missed opportunity. David Miller is looking for a legacy, and the TWRC is politically-motivated. All I know is traffic is not going to decrease over the next 50 years, so truncating the sole controlled-access highway through downtown is going to create even more traffic problems than exist now.
Ideally, the solution is a tunnel – but you’re right. This is Canada. We don’t think big, and when we do, there’s no money or willpower in sight.
Tunnel – never going to happen. They lost that chance when Cityplace and the ACC were built. Too costly, and you’ll never convince a majority that it’s worth it.
The problem with Toronto is that it’s trying to be on the same stage as a lot of American cities. Yes, it has 7 million people living here. But when your entire country only has about 35 million people. The wealth is going to spent elsewhere.
If you look at European cities, their land area is much smaller, where the one/two large metropolises gets more exposure and is more significant culturally.
It doesn’t matter the way you look at it. There will always be people who say the federal/provincial/municipal governments are not doing enough.
I’ve always thought David Miller has done a pretty good job. He has been in office a quite of few years. Yes, there has been some issues along the way. But how many people on personal level, do you know for longer then 5 years. That you don’t have an issue with. Not many I bet.
Same with when you mention about the TWRC being politically motivated. Yes i agree. But I think too many people get caught up on it as there only motivation. If your boss told you to do something, your probably going to do. Same with them.
Agreed – there’s many things I like about Miller but on this issue I think he’s dead wrong. Like you said, Toronto is in many ways overdeveloped, and playing with an already ludicrous traffic infrastructure situation is in my mind, crazy. As a condo resident near the rail lands I often daydream while on the balcony about burying the Gardiner under the rail lands. But like you said, it would be astronomically expensive, and nobody on any level of bureaucracy will foot the bill. It’s fun to dream though.
On an aside, I think the problem with the Gardiner isn’t the Gardiner. It’s Lake Shore being underneath it. Two high-capacity roads stacked is not friendly for anyone – developers or environmentalists.
Well I think the problem with Lakeshore Boulevard really comes down to the intersection condition.
I’m surprised no one has died at Bathurst and Lakeshore, especially with Fleet Street running parallel to Lakeshore. That intersection should be nominated for the worst intersection is the country. I would have thought with the addition of the Fort York Neighbourhood that they are building, they may have looked at elimating Fleet street, and pull the new buildings closer to Lakeshore.
The stretch from Bathurst to Spadina in my opinion is the most successful because it allows development right up against the Gardiner, but once you get to the intersection it becomes a problem. Traffic coming off the Gardiner can only turn left, and everyone on Lakeshore has to go through the intersection.
The part of Lakeshore under the Gardiner from Spadina to Bay is probably the most conducive to potential development because it will allow the elevated portion to be removed without effecting the existing Condo’s.
Once it gets to Yonge Street. Again it becomes another horrible intersection.
I agree with you that Lakeshore is a problem, and it mainly has to do with the intersections where pedestrians cross. It always seems that it’s a two or three stage crossing.
I think it’s always great to think Big. But I think the designers of the road were more focused on getting from point A to point B. Rather then thinking about the pedestrian quality and experience.
Justin Zawyrucha, is it?
Sir.
I stumbled across this blog entry while looking for something else, so I’m admittedly commenting a wee bit after the fact. But still …
Wow.
Your little mini-essay shows a disturbing lack of understanding of Toronto’s waterfront development and urban-planning history.
And this from a representative of a “global architectural firm that specializes in planning, design and delivery solutions for buildings and communities”.
Where to begin?
First, the factual errors (I’ll skip over the spelling and grammatical errors):
- You date a photo that includes the CN Tower to 1972 … four years before it was constructed.
- The Gardiner was never an “intercity expressway”.
- Toronto did indeed have a “big dig” … between 1949-1954 … when the Yonge Subway was constructed
- Toronto and Montreal are both among the top 10 cities in N America by population (in the US only NY, LA, and Chicago exceed Toronto and Houston also exceeds Montreal)
- there are others, but they’re less heinous so let’s move on.
More to the point, your characterization of the waterfront development is horribly distorted from historical fact.
The waterfront’s re-purposing as a residential, recreational and tourist zone has only occurred (with a handful of notable exceptions) in the past 4-5 decades. Since the City of Toronto was founded in 1834 until the 1970s-80s and beyond, there was virtually no desirable waterfront (as people now perceive it) to be “cut off” from downtown. After the original First Nations settlements and trade routes were replaced by military garrison and strategic transportation links which then gave way to settlement and development after about 1820, Toronto’s waterfront has focused almost exclusively on industry and commerce throughout the city’s history.
Front Street began as a broad open access route bordering on the waterfront (the 19th century equivalent to the Gardiner Expressway), separating the growing town (if you will) from the unseemly and often unsafe docks and industry on the harbour. With the advent of the railway in the 1850s, this right-of-way became the obvious route for rail, which served to further “cut off” the town. This pattern continued for 100-plus years, during which the only access most citizens had – or desired – to the waterfront was via the steamship and ferry docks, and via purpose-built destinations such as Sunnyside and (later) the ballpark at Maple Leaf Stadium.
The Toronto Harbour Commission building was never a “retreat” nor “the Canadian version of the Statue of Liberty”. It was the headquarters for port operations and for civil engineering projects that included development of the Toronto Islands (into the recreational gems they are today), the island airport (and Malton airport too!), the eastern Portlands, Ashbridge Bay, much of the CNE grounds, the Leslie Street Spit and many MANY more of Toronto’s significant initiatives.
The infill of the 1920s and subsequent decades was indeed well-planned (jointly with the City) and was mapped out as early as 1864, with objectives far more eloquent than “someone, somewhere probably got tired of walking across the CN Rail lines”.
Mr Zawyrucha, were it not for the enlightened and proactive planning (and execution) by the THC and the City of Toronto, there would not have existed any desirable harbourfront for you to become all exorcised about!
So yes, now that they have facilitated that transformation – which has produced far more successes than failures – it is indeed timely to address the next phases. One aspect of that is to review and potentially re-imagine the elevated expressway. All of which has been considered by actual planners and engineers with vastly superior grasp of the situation than you have demonstrated here.
Sir, I hope that with the passage of time since you posted this diatribe, you have matured somewhat and educated yourself about the actual history and heritage of that which you deign to criticize.
By all means contribute ideas, provocative or otherwise. But please Mr Zawyrucha, get your facts straight first.
Regards, RS