Downtown-Wide 'Transportation Study' Planned by City

[dunkalunk]

What I would like to see is the installation of 'local traffic only on King and Queen, directing through traffic to use Richmond and Adelaide. While this would not be enforceable, it would hopefully encourage people to use alternatives instead of conflicting with streetcars.

Another idea could be to run semi express buses on Richmond and Adelaide, to help move people quicker across downtown while freeing up the streetcar for local trips.

I actually really like both of these ideas.

And for the record, I really do want to see the DRL built, but the front street extension really has been a missing link for a long time.

 

[nfitz]

And for the record, I really do want to see the DRL built, but the front street extension really has been a missing link for a long time.

I'd quite happily see Front Street extended to Dufferin Street.

However Front Street Extension was a misnomer ... as planned it was esentially an off-ramp from the Gardiner ending at Bathurst/Front. Is this what anyone living in downtown wants?

It may make sense if the Gardiner was essentially moved, and terminated at Bathurst/Front - but in addition to the current arrangement?

 

[dunkalunk]

That's essentially what I've proposed. The old front street extension proposal was essentially surface highway that would cause a lot of disruption to the Liberty Neighborhood, and cut off GO access from Exhibition.

My proposal is essentially what you just said, a moving of the Gardiner except with the addition of a partial intersection at Ordnance and a slight widening of Front between Bathurst and Spadina.

Realistically though, we have a long way to go for transit expansion before the Gardiner could be simply rerouted to Front.

 

[drum118]

That's essentially what I've proposed. The old front street extension proposal was essentially surface highway that would cause a lot of disruption to the Liberty Neighborhood, and cut off GO access from Exhibition.

My proposal is essentially what you just said, a moving of the Gardiner except with the addition of a partial intersection at Ordnance and a slight widening of Front between Bathurst and Spadina.

Realistically though, we have a long way to go for transit expansion before the Gardiner could be simply rerouted to Front.

Are you aware there is a study/EA out to build a 2 lane road next to the new GO 5th track east of Dufferin St for the Liberty Neighborhood??

 

[EnviroTO]

This seems to have been lost in discussion of Kristen Wong-Tam's laudable efforts to revamp Yonge St, but Denzil Minnan-Wong says staff will present in September a "very significant transportation study of the downtown, all the major roads and thoroughfares," with a view to reducing traffic congestion.

When I read that it means a focus on cars and getting them to move more quickly. This isn't going to create bike lanes, that much is for sure. Considering tolls / congestion charges are a non-starter in a Ford administration I can only assume it means things like less on street parking, synchronized lights, maybe more one-way streets, etc. Moving more cars through an urban environment quickly typically means a less hospitable environment for pedestrians and bicycles.

 

[nfitz]

Considering tolls / congestion charges are a non-starter in a Ford administration ...

Why not? As a car driver, I honestly can't think of another way that would have any significant effect on traffic congestion. Even spending hundreds of $billions overnight would only lead to more congestion. The Ford's have millions ... they wouldn't bat an eye at paying road tolls, if it would save them half of their journey time. Neither would I.

 

[EnviroTO]

The Ford's have already ruled it out. Much like the licence registration fee they see tolls on existing streets that currently don't have them as part of a war on cars. They are only open to tolls on new roads like one a private firm builds under the Gardiner.

 

[nfitz]

Then they will fail in their attempts to reduce congestion. They might improve an intersection or pressure point here or there ... but they won't reduce average commute times.

I'm quite sure there are ways of improving the Allen-Eglinton mess ... but even the previous administration made some road infrastructure additions such as the Simcoe and Dufferin underpasses that have improved the situations for a few, but didn't have any impact on the average commute.

 

[dunkalunk]

Are you aware there is a study/EA out to build a 2 lane road next to the new GO 5th track east of Dufferin St for the Liberty Neighborhood??

I am now. But a 2 lane local street is a lot different than the old front street extension proposal.

Extending Front to Ordnance and putting in direct ramps to Gardiner from there would not preclude the potential for a new local street in Liberty Village, nor would cut off any access that isn't already being blocked by the rail corridors. Light timing could also ensure that through traffic won't be dumped onto the street.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Would a ramp from the Gardiner to the King/Queen/Roncesvales intersection help relive some of the demand for the Gardiner in the core from the West. Coupled with a Front st. extension that connects to the Gardiner would it not function much like Richmond/Adelaide in diverting traffic off the Highway and onto municipal roads.

The biggest concern I see is the additional congestion that would be added to King/Queen and that it would be less efficient than Richmond/Adelaide since those streets are much closer to the core.

 

[nfitz]

Would a ramp from the Gardiner to the King/Queen/Roncesvales intersection help relive some of the demand for the Gardiner in the core from the West.

Isn't that pretty much what Jameson is?

Coupled with a Front st. extension that connects to the Gardiner would it not function much like Richmond/Adelaide in diverting traffic off the Highway and onto municipal roads.

Though the traffic on the west side already seems worse than the east side. Wouldn't this make it even worse?

The biggest concern I see is the additional congestion that would be added to King/Queen and that it would be less efficient than Richmond/Adelaide since those streets are much closer to the core.

Indeed. I'd think improving the ramps to York, Yonge, Spadina, and potentially adding ramps to Simcoe/Bathurst would be more effective.

Imagine if we rebuilt the Gardiner so Lakeshore followed along it somehow (layered?) from Jameson to Bathurst ... think how much nicer Exhibition place would be without a virtual expressway disconnecting it from the lake!

 

[EnviroTO]

I think the idea of trying to reduce congestion through any means other than transit is pointless. If it starts to flow people will move off of the GO into their car and cause gridlock again. Put tolls in and then you might get things to flow but you will have turned public roads into roads for the wealthy while making transit more crowded than it is now. Only transit investments will increase capacity, maintain the pedestrian environment, and serve the greater population at the same time.

 

[dunkalunk]

Woodbridge, who do you know that actually thinks ramps here are a good idea? Besides, The Queensway/Lakeshore combo pretty much act as extended ramps for the Gardiner. Nowhere in the former city of Toronto is there so much transportation capacity within a 200m wide corridor.

 

[nfitz]

Put tolls in and then you might get things to flow but you will have turned public roads into roads for the wealthy while making transit more crowded than it is now.

You might well have the wealthy ... but more importantly you'd get the roads moving for business and those that have no choice (transporting materials ... etc.). I'm not really concerned about the impacts of traffic on commuting - there's a real simple solution there for most individuals. It's all the impacts the congestion makes on business that I think is most important.

Yes, transit would become more crowded ... however the more well-used. the system is, the closer you can get to operating at a break-even point. There'd have to be a quick outlay for more vehicles, more garages, etc. GO is doing much of that right now with a massive infrastructure expansion that will increase GO usage 7-fold in the next 20 years. Short-term you can redirect tolls into some major bus purchases, and in the medium term get a couple of serious subway plans going like the DRL and getting GO to 15-minute service on key lines.

 

[dunkalunk]

I think the idea of trying to reduce congestion through any means other than transit is pointless. If it starts to flow people will move off of the GO into their car and cause gridlock again. Put tolls in and then you might get things to flow but you will have turned public roads into roads for the wealthy while making transit more crowded than it is now. Only transit investments will increase capacity, maintain the pedestrian environment, and serve the greater population at the same time.

I would actually say that increasing parking rates, and reducing requirements for new developments in addition to improving transit might be a bit more effective than just transit alone. especially if a portion of that rate increase went back into transit. By tolling a certain route, you cause people to look for alternates. By tolling the last few meters, you effectively decrease the number of people driving altogether.

At the same time, it may be useful to create a Short-Term Parking registry and dedicated spaces for delivery vehicles so we don't see as many illegally parked. A lot of a city's congestion is really caused by people just circling to find a place to park.