News   Jul 22, 2024
 745     0 
News   Jul 22, 2024
 504     0 
News   Jul 22, 2024
 539     0 

Gardiner Report for Council eyes only

Re: Gardiner Report for Coucil eyes only

A representative for the CAA warned demolishing the expressway would also force traffic on to residential streets.

What residental streets? We're only talking about a short section of the freeway. Stick to offering maps, travel tips and roadside assistance.
 
Re: Gardiner Report for Coucil eyes only

"It would be dangerous for pedestrians, and traffic would just move too slowly," she said. "For the money it would take to create that wide Lake Shore, the money would be much better spent on public transit across the entire city."

So transparent...
 
Re: Gardiner Report for Coucil eyes only

I still think burying the downtown portion of the Gardiner, and Lakeshore and the rail lines, and adding in a transit corridor for future subway construction -- could be offset by high-density construction over the newly covered traffic.
 
Re: Gardiner Report for Coucil eyes only

Stick to offering maps, travel tips and roadside assistance.

From its inception in 1913, CAA has been an advocate for the rights of motorists and travelers in Canada. Today, CAA is comprised of 9 clubs with a collective membership of about 4.7 million Canadians and continue to campaign to ensure safer drivers on safer roads in safer vehicles.
 
Re: Gardiner Report for Coucil eyes only

If they truly are advocates for safer driving, they should look into a much more restrictive licensing system that would see driving instilled as a priviledge and not a right - let's face it, a good chunk of drivers on the road right now have no business being there.

AoD
 
Re: Gardiner Report for Coucil eyes only

They could have driving school be a real school (like it is in Japan), but the cost is around $3,000 for schooling for automatic transmission car (more for standard I think).
 
Re: Gardiner Report for Coucil eyes only

As much as I think that certain drivers should be taken off the roads, I don't think making the process of obtaining permission to drive should be made outlandishly expensive or overly restrictive. Those are merely economic limitations and do nothing to form good driving habits.
 
Re: Gardiner Report for Coucil eyes only

bizorky:

Well actually not entirely true - cost of driving school yes, but a licensing system based on driving skills is another matter entirely.

AoD
 
Re: Gardiner Report for Coucil eyes only

^The licensing system is already based on skill.
 
Report or no report referendum or no referendum the silence on this subject concludes that we have already made our decision, the Gardiner stays for the next few decades. It is inevitable at some point that it will come down but we will do it when scarcity of land drives costs higher at which point the project itself will be more costly and difficult logistically. Think Big Dig in 30 years. Downtown Toronto is, for all the construction going on now, still in posession of vast amounts of underdeveloped land that will lasts decades into the future.
 
Re: Gardiner Report for Coucil eyes only

I'm quite convinced that a tunnel will ultimately be built, only because it is the most sensible solution. Boston will soon have the most advanced downtown freeway system in the world- err..at the cost of US14 billion mind you. Nevertheless a Toronto tunnel would be small potatoes in comparison.

Your teling me that Toronto can't afford a 500-1000 meter tunnel? OK- forget a legitimate tunnel like boston- how about a covered ditch? The only question is whether it will be dealt with now or whether huge sums will ultimately be sunk 20 years from now.
 
"Let Hazel decide fate of Gardiner"

For Torontians.... in today's Torstar

Let Hazel decide fate of Gardiner
Nov. 6, 2006. 05:29 AM
LINWOOD BARCLAY
Maybe this whole debate about the Gardiner Expressway and whether to tear it down or leave it alone could be settled once and for all if the decision were left to those who are most directly affected by it.

You know. The people of Mississauga.

Okay, maybe that's not fair. Not just Mississauga. The citizens of Oakville and Burlington and Hamilton and Milton and Brampton and Bramalea and a whole bunch of other places west of Toronto.

Why should Torontonians have any say in what happens to the Gardiner? How many of them actually use it?

Well, maybe some folks coming in from Etobicoke use it. They are, technically speaking, part of Toronto, although no one in the downtown core may be aware of this. But I bet Etobicokans (Etobians? Etobicokians? Etobivores?) don't feel much differently about the Gardiner than all those other folks from outside Toronto.

It's my sense that they're okay with it.

Sure, they hate the Gardiner. They loathe the drive in, they hate how the Gardiner bunches up on the crest of that hill just west of the Humber, where they can't tell how backed up things are, and they must choose whether to stick with it or take Lake Shore. This is when thousands of drivers, on a daily basis, do impressions of Sandra Bullock from Speed: "Stay on or get off? Stay on or get off?"

If they choose to stay on, they inch their way over the Humber, creep their way past Jameson, crawl farther along as the Gardiner rises on stilts as it approaches Spadina and the Yonge-Bay exits.

They sit in their cars and think, This is what Hell must be like. Sitting on the Gardiner for all eternity. No, Hell could not be like this. Hell is the Ritz-Carlton compared to this.

And yet, as horrendous as this daily commute may be, these same drivers know, in their hearts, that it'd be even worse if the Gardiner were gone.

They have seen the artists' renderings of a Gardiner-less downtown. The wide avenue. Lots of trees. People walking about. A vision of loveliness that includes traffic lights and crosswalks.

Yeah, that'll move things along.

And even if commuters could be convinced scrapping the Gardiner would ultimately lead to a more attractive — even efficient — roadway, they'd think: "And it'll only take 15 years to build it. Maybe I'll use up some vacation and go back to work when it's done."

Now, I can guess what you're going to say if you live downtown. You're going to say, "Huh?"

But the thing is, if you live downtown, you probably never use the Gardiner, at least not that big part of it west of Yonge. The only reason you might would be to go to the suburbs, and really, why would you want to do that? What's out there except for thousands of empty houses through the day, and thousands more people sleeping at night before they come back downtown in the morning? You could go out on the weekend, but all you'll find is a bunch of guys comparing the size of their weed whackers (and that's only in the summer).

But, you say, what gives people in Mississauga and beyond the right to tell us what to do with something — the Gardiner — in our own backyard?

Which brings us to London, Ont.

If Toronto can ship its garbage hundreds of kilometres to be someone else's problem, is it so much to ask the city to put up with a bit of an eyesore by the lake if it makes some suburbanites' lives a little less stressful?

The next time there's a task force to figure out what to do with the Gardiner (and there should be another one along in about half an hour), I suggest they put Hazel McCallion in charge. She'll know what to do.


273368595_f7568b1293_o.jpg



Signed,
The Mississauga Muse
 
Re: "Let Hazel decide fate of Gardiner"

If Toronto can ship its garbage hundreds of kilometres to be someone else's problem, is it so much to ask the city to put up with a bit of an eyesore by the lake if it makes some suburbanites' lives a little less stressful?

Except that: Toronto bought the garbage dump, Mississauga didn't pay a dime for the Gardiner.

AoD
 
Re: "Let Hazel decide fate of Gardiner"

And it's not as if they're planning to completely eliminite it, they're only talking about the part east of Spadina. A couple extra traffic lights... whoop-di-doo.
 

Back
Top