The other day Peter Kuitenbrouwer wrote an interesting article in the National Post about an idea to make a steel roof over the Gardiner Expressway here in Toronto, covered by cement and soil to form a 7 kilometer linear park. For those who have never been to Toronto, the Gardiner is a problematic chunk of roadway. It divides our downtown from the lake, but at the same time provides automobile access to the centre of the city.
There are those who think we ought to simply destroy the Gardiner and replace it with nothing. The piece at the east end of the roadway has in fact already been removed, and I don’t see a huge difference in terms of traffic issues. By that I mean traffic was bad at rush hour before it was removed and is still bad at rush hour. At other times, it seems just fine. Still, I suspect trashing the highway completely would cause chaos.
Kuitenbrouwer’s article speaks to a plan that keeps the Gardiner in place, but covers it over, making for a parkland roof. Why is it I suspect that the park would never happen if there were any development opportunities. Condos over the Gardiner? Given that our politicians have allowed developers to build condos along the prime stretch of our waterfront with abandon, I have have no faith in their ability to protect any parkland at all.
Building a roof over the Gardiner would be expensive:
$508M Estimate by Michael Barker of Altus Helyar, a quantity surveying company, of the cost of building a green roof over the Gardiner. He did not include HST, and said soft costs would add 20% to the price tag.
As we have seen time after time, nothing ever comes in at the estimated cost. Add in the HST and the so-called soft costs, and take into account materials shortages, labour disputes, weather, technical challenges and so on, and figure on double the price.
We had a little idea a while back, when Anchovy World Headquarters was located in its previous location on Blackthorn Ave., to do a renovation that included an extended basement. Our idea was to extend the basement out under the patio, and basically cover it over. This would have given us an additional basement room without eating up more garden space. When we priced it out though, this proved to be a prohibitively expensive part of the reno plan. All the contractors we talked to suggested that they could give us a much better price if we would drop this part of the plan. This was just a small area. Imagine covering over 7 kilometers of expressway. The technical and cost challenges must be astronomical. Imagine also what the construction will do to the city. Just building a few kilometers of Light Rail Transit lines has thrown the St. Clair area into chaos – for years now.
Still, I think this is healthy debate. I’m sure there will be some who will be quick to post a comment suggesting we simply all stop driving tomorrow, but it is going to be quite some time before that happens. (One look in the suburbs around Toronto bears this out. The burbs are designed to driving. Shopping is in malls and complexes of box stores. Restaurants are chains located among the box stores). Leaving the Gardiner as is may not be a good plan either. I wonder if the candidates for the mayor gig in 2010 will come up with some suggestions?
27th Street 
As someone who has not only lived right by the removed section of the Gardner and will probably live there again…the benefits of it’s removal are endless. The area is a joy to bike and walk with a massive opening feeling to the parkland vibe and immediate sense of the water and lake.
Spending money to roof the remaining Gardner is an embarrassment. What a waste of money. Instead adding more subways lines would be a much more practical use of the money. Trains rule!
I have to admit that I always liked the Gardiner. I’ll never forget the view when I drove into the city for the first time and saw the city from that raised level. I thought it was so unique.
Once I lived there, I liked the Gardiner because it raised some of the traffic up away from where I was walking or biking.
I think Toronto should embrace the Gardiner (i know that’s probably not going to happen).
They won’t build anything that doesn’t make them a fat profit. They being the politicians. Everyone can debate all they like but if the politicians ain’t making a fast buck it ain’t happening.
Seven kms is a long stretch for a covered roadway. Aside from the prohibitive costs which you already mentioned, there is the problems that are inherent with tunnels. And the creepiness factor. Even the short stretches of avalanche tunnels through the rockies freak me out. Of course the rockies in general freak me out, so.