If you can propose an underground toll rout for the 400 that incorporates the DRL, presumably using Black Creek Dr., I'm listening. We need to relieve congestion and find ways of paying for subways. These are valuable discussions.
I am, reluctantly, going to show you just how open minded I am. I expect, in exchange, you to meet the standard for being taken seriously when you make proposals outside of a 'fantasy' thread.
Your theoretical aim, as I understand it, is to dissipate congestion, both by more efficiently routing, and accommodating great car traffic, while also facilitating increased transit, particularly in the form of a massive DRL west, well beyond the wildest visions of any current transit advocates or planners.
Great.
So, for this to be a 'realistic' proposal, you'll be happy to know you don't have to have the detailed design done, or the architectural drawings.
(see, people can be fair)
But you do need to have at least crude estimates of the traffic volume your new creation will hold, and some vaguely intelligent argument as to why it would flow the way you imagine it.
You also need to show that you have some vague (lets say +/- 25% ) idea of the cost.
To do that, you're going to have to tell us how you envision organizing the corridor. Do you imagine the subway running under the underground highway, over it, or along side it?
This will indicate the corridor size as well as issues w/water table, location of bedrock and required grades.
It would be nice if you put all that info in your idea, but some of us have a pretty good sense of what you're likely to encounter, so a more detailed design idea should suffice)
You have to account for whether your proposal is likely to result in a net gain of traffic.
And
If it does, where you would put said traffic when it arrives at its destination?
If that capacity (in traffic lanes) does not now exist, where do your propose to put it, and at what cost?
And once that traffic arrives at its precise location (as oppose to general) how much net new parking is required? And where will that be located and at what cost?
****
Asking these questions makes no one here, close minded.
It makes us realists.
It does not mean we won't support bold gestures.
It means there's a finite amount of money (more than most politicians routinely admit), but nonetheless, a finite amount; so taking into account the cost and financing of what's already underway matters.
***
Worth noting you mentioned that your proposal requires the Front St. Extension in order to function............putting aside the long political fight to remove such an idea from consideration, and that said notion was ultimately approved, portions of that corridor have now been encroached on, and no longer permit the extension as previously envisioned.
You suggest that extra traffic capacity could be achieved on Richmond and Adelaide..........sure, we could all live on the moon, it is, actually, possible. BUT.......
How? and at what cost? There are heritage buildings lining many portions of those roads which would have to be removed to allow additional lane capacity.
You want to go under them? That's a substantial additional costs and involves going below sewers, the PATH, various foundations and 2 subways lines amongst other obstacles.
Oh, and that's w/o factoring in where on/off ramps might go.
***
Speaking for myself, (though I believe many UT'ers would agree)....
We are not all sticks-in-the-mud trying to ruin your fun or stifle innovative thought.
Rather, we want to debate the do-able, evaluate what is already seriously proposed, for the most part.
I'm totally ok w/fantasies and wild ideas, just put them in the correct threads, or start one........rather that taking over an existing, serious topic with an idea not sufficiently thought out in either the practical or political sense to be taken seriously, YET.
