Gardiner East Gardiner Expressway & Lake Shore Boulevard Reconfiguration Environmental Assessment & Urban Design Study Public Information Centre #4 – April 2015 1 John Livey Deputy City Manager City of Toronto 2 Christopher Glaisek Vice President, Planning & Design Waterfront Toronto 3 Presentation Outline • Gardiner East in Context • Public Works and Infrastructure Committee (PWIC) Direction • New Work Completed • Alternatives Evaluation • Next Steps 4 Gardiner East in Context 5 What area are we studying? • 2.4km Elevated Structure = Yonge St. from King St. to Bloor St. First Gulf Site 6 Transportation Demand Growth 2031 Study year Morning Peak Hour Inbound to Downtown 250,000 +237,900 Total Total Trips 200,000 +157,200 Total 150,000 100,000 +115,500 Total Projection Actual 50,000 Gardiner East & West 1975 1981 1985 1991 1995 2001 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 Auto (Gardiner Westbound and Eastbound) Auto (All Other Routes) TTC Transit GO Transit Walk/ Cycle Source: AM Peak Hour Inbound to Downtown: 1) Transportation City Cordon Count (1975-2011); 2) Transportation Model EMME2 Forecast (2011-2031); 3) 2006 Transportation Tomorrow Survey (TTS) for Walk/Cycle Mode and Other Data; Downtown: Defined as Bathurst to Don River and Waterfront to the rail corridor north of Bloor 7 How Commuters get Downtown (AM Peak Hour 2011) Walk Cycle 4% Dupont (5,900) (33,500) TTC Transit 49% Don River Bathurst Auto (All Other Routes) 21% Gardiner West 4% (6,100) (77,700) GO Transit 19% Gardiner East 3% (29,500) (5,200) 157,200 Total Source: AM Peak Hour Inbound to Downtown: Transportation City Cordon Count (2011) Downtown: Defined as Bathurst to Don River and Waterfront to the rail corridor north of Bloor 8 Gardiner East Role & Function Today ORIGIN / DESTINATION STUDY – DOWNTOWN VS. THROUGH TRIPS (AM Peak Hour) EASTBOUND Spadina/YorkBay-Yonge 3,000 54% Eastbound @ Dufferin 5,650 per hour 5,650 Jarvis/ Sherbourne 1,400 25% 2,600 • DVP 900 16% 22% through traffic 1,200 • Gardiner East Study Area Lake Shore 350 6% WESTBOUND Spadina/YorkBay-Yonge 2,600 35% To Dufferin /Hwy 427 5,650 21% Jarvis/ Sherbourne 500 7% 2,700 21% through traffic Richmond 1,800 24% DVP 4,500 per hour 4,500 1,500 Lake Shore 700 9% Gardiner East Study Area Lake Shore 2,900 9 Don McKinnon Consulting Team Project Manager Dillon Consulting Ltd. 10 Previous Consultation Round 1: Ideas (May/June 2013) – 1,000+ participants Stakeholder Advisory Committee meeting Public meeting Online engagement – webcast of public meeting; online tool Round 2: Alternatives/Evaluation Criteria (Oct 2013) – 1,500+ participants 2 Stakeholder Advisory Committee meetings Public Meeting Online engagement – webcast of public meeting; online tool Round 3: Presentation of Alternatives (Feb 2014) – 1,000+ participants Stakeholder Advisory Committee meeting Public meeting Online engagement – webcast of public meeting; online survey 11 Previous Alternatives Assessed Evaluation Approach Maintain Improve Replace Remove (Boulevard) Previously Recommended Alternative 12 What We’ve Heard Public feedback stressed the importance of: • Balancing modes of transportation • Enhancing waterfront connectivity • Providing new transportation infrastructure • Ensuring transit projects are prioritized and funded (concerns with assumptions that transit will be in place in future) • Enhancing the public realm On the Alternatives: • Maintain: least disruptive to traffic, keeps existing road capacity, but not a long term solution and misses opportunity to revitalize area • Improve: adding bike/pedestrian features is good but cost is high considering the limited benefits • Replace: concerns about cost and practicality of replacing just the eastern part of the expressway • Remove: cost effective, good for revitalization and redevelopment but will impact traffic and could create a barrier at grade for pedestrian crossings 13 Previously Recommended: Remove (Boulevard) • Remove 6-lane Gardiner Expressway East • New 8-lane Lake Shore Boulevard at grade • New DVP on/off ramp connection at east end and new Gardiner ramp at west end • Boulevard lined with new trees, sidewalks, retail frontage 14 2014 PWIC Direction March 4, 2014 15 PWIC Meeting and Deputations • • Deputations made by the public, industry associations, stakeholders, property owners, etc. First Gulf (Unilever site developers) provided a concept for a 'hybrid' alternative that maintains Gardiner west of Cherry and replaces it east of Cherry with a new Gardiner-DVP connection Summary of Deputations and Letters • • • • • • • • • • Relying too heavily on assumption that transit will be in place Lack of focus on movement of goods in EA Impacts on access to goods, services and businesses Increase in travel time is too high in Remove option Removing the Gardiner will limit access to downtown core Removing the Gardiner will increase pollution (from congestion) Capacity must be maintained during construction The kinds of buildings that abut the expressway west of Yonge are not compatible with the East Bay Front Precinct We believe that removal of this small section of the expressway will enable more desirable development in our part of the city 16 Reduce the financial burden that the expressway puts on the whole City of Toronto PWIC Referral Decision PWIC Referral Decision: 1. 2. Work with WT and community stakeholders to review the recommended option [Remove] under the EA process to mitigate congestion concerns; Prepare an additional option that combines the maintain and replace components to preserve expressway linkage and functionality between the GE and the DVP, and evaluate it against the EA criteria and the following: • • • • • • • Transportation functionality; Impacts on key economic sectors; Cost benefit; Future land use considerations; Public transit components; Environmental Impacts; and Neighbourhood growth and compatibility 3. Report back in 2015 17 Hybrid & Remove (Boulevard) • The evaluation is now focused on Hybrid & Remove (Boulevard): – The other alternatives were not recommended previously – PWIC directed the team to investigate Hybrid and Remove (Boulevard) – Maintain remains the base case • The evaluation is considering: – Input received from public, stakeholders, & PWIC deputations – New employment lands development opportunity (e.g. First Gulf) – Goods Movement and Economic Competitiveness Studies – EA Terms of Reference 18 New Work Undertaken (in response to PWIC) 19 New Work Undertaken What did we do? 1. Optimized the Remove (Boulevard) alternative to improve auto travel times 2. Developed a Hybrid alternative 3. Studied Goods Movement & City Economic Competitiveness impacts 4. Assessed and compared the Hybrid against the previously recommend Remove (Boulevard) alternative 20 Optimized Remove (Boulevard) 21 Remove Description • Removes 1.7 km of elevated expressway and replace with at-grade 8-lane tree lined Lake Shore Blvd • Removal of about 750 m (EB lanes) and 850 m (WB lanes) of the existing Logan on/off ramps • Removal of all road infrastructure along Keating Channel • New DVP ramp connection • New ramps at Jarvis Street 22 Remove (Boulevard) 23 Remove (Boulevard) 24 Remove (Boulevard) 25 Remove (Boulevard) 26 Remove (Boulevard) 27 Remove (Boulevard) 28 Remove (Boulevard) 29 Reducing Travel Time for the Remove Alternative • Optimization involved: – Adjustments to traffic signal operations/phasing – Modifications to Lake Shore Boulevard intersection configurations (e.g. Jarvis SB lane under rail pass becomes a right turn lane and LSB WB right turn lane added) • The optimized Remove alternative reduces the additional travel time to 3-5 minutes from the previously presented 5-10 minutes (AM peak hour) 30 Hybrid Development 31 Proposed First Gulf Development • Proposed large-scale office and retail development • Development area includes land under control of First Gulf (29 acres), as well as City works yards (20 acres) and private land parcels • Potential employment centre and economic catalyst • Strategic location close to rail, roads, future LRT and trails • Opportunity to connect site to Port Lands and South of Eastern 32 First Gulf Hybrid Proposal (2014) City Owned Property First Gulf (Unilever) site City Works Yard Gardiner East EA – Scope Workshop 33 Study Area Considerations City Stormwater Quality Management Facility Rail Corridor/ Yards Rail Corridor Bridge Potential Queens Quay extension Planned public realm space along Keating Channel First Gulf (Unilever) Site Planned Don River Sediment Control Basin Freeway functionality/ connection 34 Hybrid Evolution • A new DVP to Gardiner ramp alignment close to rail tracks is not feasible due to: – Safe ramp design speed – City Stormwater facility • It was determined that the current alignment of the Gardiner/DVP ramps best satisfies the above • No real benefit to removing and rebuilding a new ramp in the same location, so use existing ramps 35 Hybrid Description • Re-decks existing Gardiner structure and retains DVP ramps. • Removes about 750 m (EB lanes) and 850 m (WB lanes) of the existing Logan on/off ramps. • Adds 2 new ramps (2 lanes each) in the Keating precinct: – about 470 m new WB on-ramp and – about 425 m new EB off-ramp • Includes new multi-use pathway & some intersection improvements. 36 Hybrid Boulevard 37 Hybrid Boulevard 38 Hybrid Boulevard 39 Hybrid Boulevard 40 Hybrid Boulevard 41 Hybrid Boulevard 42 Alternatives Evaluation 43 EA Terms of Reference Evaluation Approach Environment Urban Design Economics Transportation + Infrastructure • 4 Study Lenses • 16 Criteria Groups • 60 Measures 45 Hybrid and Remove Existing Hybrid Remove 45 Transportation &Infrastructure Transportation Modeling - Transit Assumptions • All alternatives require new transit to support planned development in study area • Transportation modeling assumes same new transit for all alternatives • SmartTrack, currently under study, would provide transit benefit Waterfront LRT Extension Relief Line Broadview LRT Extension GO Service Improvements 475 Transportation &Infrastructure Auto Travel Times A Projected Inbound Travel Times AM Peak Hour Average Victoria Park/Finch 2031 2031 2031 Base Case Hybrid Remove A to D 52 min +0 min +3 min B to D 30 min +0 min +3 min C to D 23 min +3 min +5 min Victoria Park/Kingston E to D 27 min +0 min +3 min C B Don Mills/Eglinton D Union Station Kipling/Lake Shore E • 2031 Base case travel times are approximately five minutes higher than current travel times due to growth in background traffic volumes. 47 Transportation &Infrastructure Safety Hybrid Remove (Boulevard) • Free turn remains at Jarvis and Gardiner overhead structure continues to impact sight-lines in LSB corridor • Includes some intersection improvements (e.g. Sherbourne St. NB ramp channel removed) • Gardiner sub-standard shoulder configuration remains • All free turns removed and all sight-line obstructions eliminated. • Improves all intersections 48 Transportation &Infrastructure Goods Movement Study Concerns of Industrial and Manufacturing, Retail, Courier and Logistics Companies: • Road Capacity & Travel Time – Increased travel times will result in greater impacts and operating and maintenance costs for trucks • Reliability – Concern that greater travel time “buffer” will be required • Alternate Routes – More vehicles on other City roads will impact deliveries • Impact of Construction – Concerns of significant congestion during construction • Safety – More trucks on our City streets could lead to more accidents Study Summary: • • • • The Port Lands generate high number of trucks in the City Peak AM period is a heavy truck travel time – approx. 500 trucks/hr. on the Gardiner (approximately half of what Hwy 401 carries) 80% of truck trips on East Gardiner either begin or end in the local area The nature and extent of impact ultimately depends on the type of goods shipped 49 Transportation &Infrastructure Construction Carlaw DVP Cherry Parliament Sherbourne Jarvis Yonge Hybrid Remove (Boulevard) • Close two Gardiner travel lanes at a time • Pre-build on/off ramps and re-align for re-decking activities Lake Shore (Cherry and DVP) • Closures of Lake Shore at times during • Close and demolish eastbound then re-decking activities. westbound Gardiner travel lanes in • Build new Keating on/off ramps and retwo stages, detour traffic, demolish align Lake Shore DVP ramps and Logan ramps • Demolish Logan ramps and detour traffic • Six years of construction, including • Six years of construction, including approximately three to four years of approximately one and a half years of road detours road detours (Logan Ramps) 50 Urban Design Public Realm Hybrid Remove (Boulevard) • East of Don River, a new open Boulevard • The entire corridor is opened up is created with new public realm creating a new attractive streetscape • West of Cherry St. minimal with new public realm improvements to the attractiveness of • Additional public realm space created the corridor • Visual barriers largely removed • For additional cost, aesthetic enhancements could be made under the structures of the elevated expressway Lake Shore Blvd E @ Parliament St University Ave @ Richmond St W 51 Urban Design Pedestrian Experience- Existing (Maintain) Boulevard Hybrid Lake Shore Blvd E/Gardiner Expressway @ Jarvis Street 52 Urban Design Pedestrian Experience - Hybrid Lake Shore Blvd E/Gardiner Expressway @ Jarvis Street 53 Urban Design Pedestrian Experience - Remove Boulevard Hybrid Lake Shore Blvd @ Jarvis Street 54 Urban Design Planning – Built Form • Both alternatives reduce highway ramps over the mouth of the Don River • The Hybrid alternative requires two two-lane highway ramps east of Cherry Street and a new access road along the Keating Channel, which will reduce development area and may limit public use of the water’s edge in the Keating Precinct • The Hybrid alternative will require a review of the Keating Precinct Plan • Both alternatives equally provide the necessary flexibility for achieving a Broadview road and transit connection • Both alternatives provide additional connections and better built form interface between the Port Lands and Unilever precinct • Both alternatives support development plans in the South of Eastern and Port Lands areas (including First Gulf Site) 55 Urban Design Planning – Built Form Remove (Boulevard) Hybrid 56 Urban Design Planning – Don River View Looking North Don River & Keating Channel (Don Mouth Naturalization) Hybrid Remove (Boulevard) 57 Urban Design Planning – Keating Channel Hybrid Hybrid Existing 58 58 Urban Design Planning – Keating Channel Remove (Boulevard) Existing 59 Costs1 (100 Year Lifecycle) Economics $1,000 $919M $864M (+/- 20%) (+/- 10%) Millions of $’s $750 $505 $461M $522 (+/- 20%) $500 $135 $250 $414 $326 $342 $0 Hybrid Remove (Boulevard) Maintain 2013$’s (un-inflated) Capital Estimate Operations & Maintenance Estimate 1 All costs are high level order of magnitude prepared for comparative purposes only. 61 Costs1 (100 Year Lifecycle) Economics $1,000 Millions of $’s $750 $500 $336M $250 (+/- 20%) $240M $76 (+/- 20%) $19 $415 $260 $291M (+/- 10%) $84 $221 $207 Remove (Boulevard) Maintain $0 Hybrid Net Present Value Capital Estimate Operations & Maintenance Estimate 1 All costs are high level order of magnitude prepared for comparative purposes only. 62 Economics Public Land Value Creation • Remove would provide 12 additional acres of new development land west of the Don River than Hybrid provides – which could generate a potential for $100M to $150M of additional public land sales revenue ($2013) • East of Don River, both alternatives unlock First Gulf Site development including City-owned parcels (20 acres) 62 Economics Economic Competitiveness - Consultation • Concerns of Think Tanks, Employers, Building Owners/Managers: • Regional transit service is critical • There is an increasing reliance of downtown employees using transit, cycling and walking • There is frustration with travel time and reliability when traveling places within Downtown and the region • The length and nature of road construction disruption is a major concern • Potential for impact on Downtown competitiveness given the highway accessibility of other GTHA submarkets and their increasing amenities • Increased travel times of the Remove alternative might decrease the regional attractiveness of Downtown 63 Economics Economic Competitiveness - Results Study Findings: 1. Global Competitiveness: • Toronto is ranked as one of the world’s most competitive cities; a standing that is unlikely to be affected by either alternative. • There are several criteria considered by third party competitiveness studies – accessibility is an important criterion, particularly access by public transit 2. Regional Economics: • To remain competitive, Toronto needs to have a strong transportation network that links the city, including the downtown core, with neighbouring regions. • The increase in vehicle travel time with the Remove alternative may impact regional competitiveness. • Removal of expressways in some other downtowns appears not to have harmed their economic performance. 64 Economics Economic Competitiveness - Results Study Findings…/2: 3. Local Economics: • Both alternatives complement development plans for Port Lands and South of Eastern developments • Increased development opportunities in the Remove alternative along the Lake Shore Blvd corridor represent a positive economic impact • Removing the expressway connection could affect attractiveness of the Port Lands for certain industries Regarding construction: • Construction period for both options is up to six years – this will likely impact commerce • The Remove alternative will have three to four years of road detours and the Hybrid alternative will have one and a half years of road detours. 65 Various Other Evaluation Considerations • Other criteria groups under consideration but not presented include: • Transit – both alternatives facilitate new transit • Pedestrians – most improvements to pedestrian environment with the Remove • Cycling – both include new east-west cycling facility • Built Form – preference for Remove • Natural Environment – both facilitate/improve Don Mouth revitalization • Cultural Resources – minor preference for Hybrid with expected less impact on archaeological resources • Social and Health – initial results suggest that noise and air effects would be similar for both alternatives 66 Summary of Key Differences Study Lens Hybrid • Transportation • & Infrastructure • • Urban Design Economics • • • Longer auto/Goods Movement travel time in peak hour No DVP/Gardiner direct expressway connection Greater construction impact on traffic (approximately 3-4 years of detours) Complements development plans for Port Lands & South of Eastern developments (First Gulf) – requires review of Keating Precinct Plan Less public realm space created and less quality of place along Lake Shore Blvd. corridor West of Cherry Street, active street frontage along the corridor is unlikely • • Complements Don Mouth naturalization • Complements Don Mouth naturalization • No impacts on City global or regional economic competiveness Less opportunity for economic development in corridor $336 M (NPV) $919 M ($2013) • No impact on City global economic competiveness but could result in regional impacts More opportunity for economic development in corridor. $240 M (NPV) $461M ($2013) • • Environment Shorter auto/Goods Movement travel time in peak hour Maintains DVP/Gardiner direct expressway connection Less construction impact on traffic (approximately 1.5 years of detours) Remove (Boulevard) • • • • • • • Complements Port Lands & South of Eastern developments (First Gulf) More public realm space created and more quality of place along Lake Shore Blvd. corridor More opportunity for new development in corridor – more development in Keating Allows for the creation of more active street frontage along the corridor. 67 Evaluating the Alternatives Both alternatives facilitate: • Revitalization of the Don River Mouth and Flood Protection project • Development of the First Gulf site • Development of new public transit proposals However, there are differences in the benefits between the two alternatives, including: • Hybrid maintains an expressway connection between the Gardiner and Don Valley Parkway, has lower auto travel and goods movement times, and less construction disruption • Remove has a lower cost, higher revenue from public land redevelopment, creates an animated Lake Shore Boulevard and facilitates better connections to the waterfront 68 Next Steps 69 Making a Decision • • • • Consultant’s EA Evaluation Report City Staff Report May 13 PWIC and June 10 City Council Design options for preferred alternative: • • • Public Realm and functional aspects Detailed construction implementation Mitigation opportunities for preferred alternative: • • • • Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Corridor design improvements Off-site improvements Opportunities to accelerate construction and reduce user impacts • Submit EA report to Ministry of Environment 70 Project Schedule Approved EA Terms of Reference Public Ideas Design Ideas Your Ideas 2009 Public Meeting Jun 2013 Consult on Alternative Solutions Public Meeting Oct 2013 Evaluate & Consult on Four Alternative Solutions Public Meeting Feb 2014 Evaluate & Consult on Refined Solutions Committee and City Council Approval Develop & Consult on Alternative Designs Submission to MOE MOE Review & Decision You are here Spring 2015 Fall 2015 Winter 2016 2016 Onwards Please Provide Your Feedback • Public Works and Infrastructure Committee and Toronto City Council will soon consider what to do with the Gardiner East. • Thinking about the results of the additional work and updated evaluation... – What are the most important considerations in making this decision? – What other advice do you have on making a decision that involves finding a balance among priorities? 72 Get Involved • Participate Online GardinerEast.ca • Phone 416-479-0662 • Email [email protected] • Send us a letter 73 Thank you 74
© Copyright 2024