Highway to Hell?

So it’s been a while since my first post. To prevent my blog from falling into irrelevancy, I’ve decided to rush the writing of another post. To that effect, I will address a subject to which no Torontonian is indifferent – the Gardiner.

Much talk has been made over the years about doing something with the Gardiner expressway. Yet it remains in almost its original constitution. Perhaps this fact is itself the answer to the Gardiner question for I believe that the Gardiner should stay. No alternative accomplishes what it purports to and the detrimental effects of the Gardiner are diminishing for reasons I will explain.

First, consider the ‘alternatives.’ Bury the Gardiner. Even if we ignore the costs, and the disruption caused by construction, we still find problems. The tunnel would not be safe. Boston buried its downtown expressway and pieces of the roof are falling down. Accidents, especially those involving fires can be catastrophic inside a tunnel. And even if the freeway goes underground, entry and exit ramps would be just as intrusive as they are now. And then there are the costs.

Replace the Gardiner with a ‘grand boulevard.’ Under this scheme, the highway is torn down, but Lakeshore Boulevard is expanded to 10 lanes with a median. I don’t understand why this is cited as a way to connect the city to the waterfront. There could be no greater barrier than a 10 lane road with highway traffic. Would pedestrians have to cross this boulevard or would there be pedestrian bridges? How will cyclists ride across the bridges?

In light of these alternatives, the Gardiner is not so bad. Let me further dispel two myths about the Gardiner. It is a barrier to the waterfront? In fact, you can easily walk underneath it. When people say the Gardiner is a barrier, what they mean is that the undeveloped land north of the Gardiner is a barrier. Historically, there has been little to experience by venturing south of Front Street until you reach Queen’s Quay. Discontinuity between the downtown and water’s edge has kept the waterfront aloof. Somehow, the Gardiner was unjustly maligned for this. Luckily, there is development going on just north of the Gardiner, centered around Bremner boulevard. Mixed-use developments will fill in the gap between Front Street and Queen’s Quay. When people have reason to be in this area, they will see how easy it is to walk beneath the Gardiner. None of the cars needs to stop.

The cars that do need to stop, are the ones on Lakeshore Boulevard (the one they want to expand to 10 lanes). Here, multiple stage crossing is a hindrance to pedestrians. Ideally, Lakeshore Boulevard beneath the Gardiner would be reduced or eliminated. The space could be used for cycling or markets but pedestrians would have no impediments to reaching the lake, while cars speed above them.

The other myth – the Gardiner is an eyesore. Perhaps it once was, before the area around it was built up. Now, however, the land to the south and increasingly to the north has been developed. As a result, the Gardiner is being boxed in. The sight of the roadway and the noise it generates are being blocked out by condominium towers. How those units sell is beyond me, but they benefit the visiting public. The benefit goes both ways. Driving along the Gardiner has become an exciting experience. Like a Tokyo racer, motorists get to speed through an urban mass of skyscrapers. But distraction can be unsafe. For that reason, proposals to illuminate the Gardiner with neon arches or whatever are foolhardy. The red lava lamp of a condo owner is enough competition for the brake light of another vehicle.

Given this analysis, I say the Gardiner should stay. It is the cheapest, best alternative for transportation along the waterfront. Luckily, the city's budget crisis is forcing planners to agree.