Toronto councillors’ views mixed on Gardiner teardown
Toronto councillors predict the fate of the 2.4-kilometre eastern end of the Gardiner Expressway will be a major item for debate in the lead-up to this fall’s municipal elections.
The findings of a report released Wednesday present city politicians with a tradeoff between saving money and longer commutes, said Councillor John Parker, a member of the public works committee.
The committee’s chair, Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong, said he doesn’t like the removal option because it could add 10 minutes to his commute from Don Mills and increase vehicle emissions.
“When I sit in traffic, that extra 10 minutes getting home to my family, that’s a lot of time,” Minnan-Wong said, adding the study didn’t consider the economic costs of longer commute times.
RELATED:
A brief history of Toronto’s ‘superhighway’
Gardiner Expressway report favours removing the eastern portion
Photos: A look back at the Gardiner
Mayor Rob Ford made it clear he wants to keep the Gardiner’s eastern leg in place.
“The Gardiner is very useful,” Ford said. “If we tear it down it will be traffic chaos for five to six years, and I don’t want to see that.”
“Is there some problems? Is there some crumbling? Absolutely. It’s an old bridge that needs to have some infrastructure work put into it. But people are willing to patch it up. We can beautify it.”
Ford agreed “it’s going to be a big election issue.”
Councillor Paula Fletcher, whose waterfront ward includes part of the eastern Gardiner, said the study shows that “removal is a very good option,” but cautioned that members of the public still have to weigh in.
“I don’t make decisions without hearing from the public, but it’s very clear to me that … the option that’s coming up as best for the city overall is remove. It’s not so great if you’re somebody who is driving down the DVP every morning.”
Parker said he was struck by the fact that removal wins out on several criteria, including urban planning, compatibility with surrounding neighbourhoods, construction time and accommodation of cyclists and pedestrians.
“My inclination is to look at the preponderance of benefits in removal rather than retention, but we’re here to learn,” Parker said after a city hall presentation Wednesday.
The analysis goes to a public meeting Thursday night. A city staff report will be presented March 4 to council’s public works and infrastructure committee, and to council in April.
“It’s not the first time I’ve heard that recommendation (to remove it),” Parker added. “It’s something we have to take a serious look at.”
“A quick look says if your main goal is to maintain traffic, then doing everything you can to keep the expressway up is the best choice. But on practically every other criterion that might be important to us, that is the least satisfactory option.”
Councillor Mike Layton, another member of the public works committee, said he hasn’t made up his mind but removal seems like an attractive way to go.
“The thing doesn’t make our city terribly attractive. It’s falling apart. If staff think it serves the public good for us to remove a section of it, then that’s a very valid conclusion.”
“It would probably increase the value of real estate around that section and you’d no longer have this rather significant blight on our waterfront.”
Yesterday’s city hall presentation outlined the pros and cons of maintaining, improving, replacing or removing the elevated expressway between Jarvis and Leslie Sts.
Michelle Berardinetti, an east-end councillor and committee member, said more analysis needs to be done.
“I think that’s what the intention of committee is to do,” she said.
Councillor Doug Ford told reporters that he would be interested in burying the eastern section and developing on top.
“I would look at going to the market and seeing how much we could get if we were to build on top of the Gardiner,” Ford said. “There’s a tremendous amount of real estate we could develop, get them to pay for the Gardiner underneath and put transit underneath as well.”
