Roads: Gardiner Expressway

[ADRM]

It's so patently silly to compare the Crosstown LRT to the Gardiner East.

Here is a true statement using conclusions drawn from the expert report that councillors were supposed to base their decision on: The current plan to pursue the hybrid option will save the people who use it a few minutes off their rush hour commute, and in order to save those few minutes, there is a premium of $500M over the alternative option being considered that all taxpayers will be forced to pay on behalf of the people who use that piece of infrastructure. How could anyone read that statement and rationally support that option?

Also, nothing is ever done until shovels are in the ground, and this thing isn't even funded, now that the tolling option is off the table. Tory has to find a way to pay for this thing. My money's still on the hybrid option somehow getting built, but it's also not accurate to deem it a fait accompli.

 

[44 North]

One is a freeway, the other is a transit line. Don't compare the two. You can't use a freeway if you don't own a car. You can't use a transit line at certain times or for odd trips. Eglinton is underserved, with the LRT it'll get adequate service. The Gardiner East is overbuilt (because it was built with a second feeder freeway in mind), with the hybrid option it'll be adequately built to keep traffic flowing smoothly with minimal disruption to the nearby land.

Lots of people use a freeway if they don't own a car. Buses (GO, Greyhound, casino, etc), work vehicles, cabs, etc. Insertname even included the average vehicle occupancy (a number greater than one). This was one of the things that seemed to have gotten lost in the Gardiner debate: that we saw a lot of vehicle counts used, but not volumes of people. And I don't see how one 'can't use a transit line for odd trips'.

 

[Palma]

The city released a report that said travel times across the stretch would increase by 10 minutes with the boulevard option. On a stretch that normally takes maybe 2 minutes today. That sounds pretty bad to me.

wow a whole 10 minutes (8 minutes more). Boy that justifies spending $500M on the Gardiner

 

[innsertnamehere]

It's so patently silly to compare the Crosstown LRT to the Gardiner East.

Here is a true statement using conclusions drawn from the expert report that councillors were supposed to base their decision on: The current plan to pursue the hybrid option will save the people who use it a few minutes off their rush hour commute, and in order to save those few minutes, there is a premium of $500M over the alternative option being considered that all taxpayers will be forced to pay on behalf of the people who use that piece of infrastructure. How could anyone read that statement and rationally support that option?

Also, nothing is ever done until shovels are in the ground, and this thing isn't even funded, now that the tolling option is off the table. Tory has to find a way to pay for this thing. My money's still on the hybrid option somehow getting built, but it's also not accurate to deem it a fait accompli.

As AoD noted, playing it off as "saving a few minutes" is not a fair comparison. The better way to put it is that by saving $400,000,000, you get to add 5 minutes to 144,000 people a day's commute. This is a renewal project, not an expansion. You are saving $36,000 a day over 30 years for that, or a whopping $0.25 for each trip. At that rate you are valuing those peoples time at $3 an hour. That is an easy win to me to be worth the cash.

Also, I fully support Eglinton, the comparison was not meant to "bring down" Eglinton, but rather to show the absurdity of not spending the money to actually maintain the Gardiner. And as I mentioned, even at the proposed solution, it isn't really maintaining the asset, it is still downgrading it. Spending $5 billion to improve 150,000 peoples commutes is a no brainer. I just struggle to see why so many on this board are vehemently opposed to spending $400 million to keep 150,000 peoples commutes the same.

 

[innsertnamehere]

wow a whole 10 minutes (8 minutes more). Boy that justifies spending $500M on the Gardiner

yea, it does. At $30 an hour (the amount Metrolinx typically uses in its BCAs to value a commuters time), the project pays for itself in a mere 2 years. For 8 minutes.

If I were a betting man, the average time value for people on the Gardiner is also significantly higher than that given the amount of commercial vehicles that use it. A commercial vehicle often bills clients north of $200 an hour for service. So for that vehicle to sit in traffic for an additional 8 minutes, you are looking at $27 in lost productivity.

 

[ADRM]

As AoD noted, playing it off as "saving a few minutes" is not a fair comparison. The better way to put it is that by saving $400,000,000, you get to add 5 minutes to 144,000 people a day's commute. This is a renewal project, not an expansion. You are saving $36,000 a day over 30 years for that, or a whopping $0.25 for each trip. At that rate you are valuing those peoples time at $3 an hour. That is an easy win to me to be worth the cash.

Also, I fully support Eglinton, the comparison was not meant to "bring down" Eglinton, but rather to show the absurdity of not spending the money to actually maintain the Gardiner. And as I mentioned, even at the proposed solution, it isn't really maintaining the asset, it is still downgrading it. Spending $5 billion to improve 150,000 peoples commutes is a no brainer. I just struggle to see why so many on this board are vehemently opposed to spending $400 million to keep 150,000 peoples commutes the same.

But both transit planning and budgeting are closed loop systems -- the opportunity cost in the case of the hybrid option over the boulevard is $500M that could be spent on other projects (Waterfront LRT, anyone?) that would also alleviate folks' commute times (or create entirely new commutes where cars are currently the only practical option). The goal of transit planning across the GTA should be to find any way possible to move people out of cars and into more efficient modes of transportation. This decision runs counter to that goal.

 

[Euphoria]

If nothing else, the decision not to allow tolls should reopen the debate about whether to go ahead with the Gardiner Hybrid, an expensive, anti-urban piece of infrastructure that maintains a barrier to the waterfront. Most drivers who use the Gardiner to get in and out of the core rather than as a bypass will barely feel a difference in their commute times if we go with the boulevard option. Spend the $500,000.00 in savings on transit. Believe me, I have much more elaborate ideas for the Gardiner, but given budget constraints and the high cost of living, this is the sensible choice.

 

[steveintoronto]

There was a blocked lane at Dundas today on the DVP and my entire trip from Eglinton took 10 minutes more than usual.

OMG! That's just awful....Never happens on any other form of transport...

 

[Leo_Chan]

Does a 10 lane (4+1+1+4) Lakeshore Boulevard that has 8 lanes of traffic and 2 lanes ROW for streetcars/LRT make sense? IMO, there is a massive lack of transit in that area, east of Union.

 

[salsa]

Spending $5 billion to improve 150,000 peoples commutes is a no brainer. I just struggle to see why so many on this board are vehemently opposed to spending $400 million to keep 150,000 peoples commutes the same.

I don't mind spending more money to reduce commute times. But I have a problem with the notion that a driver's time is somehow more valuable than anyone else's. The mayor made a lot of noise about how anything that reduces traffic lanes (like Eglinton Connects) is "a non-starter", how any delay for drivers is bad for business and the economy. Yet he has nothing to say about the impact of the thousands of transit riders who are delayed every single day by subway problems, overcrowded buses and poor service. Where are all the cries about lost productivity whenever the subway breaks down?

He spends hundreds of $millions to speed up Gardiner repairs so that the lanes can be reopened sooner, while the TTC is asked to cut back on maintenance, reliability and bus service which was responsible for many delays last year.

He fought against the chief planner and told lies to justify the Gardiner hybrid, while a little bike lane on Bloor Street is held to unbelievably high scrutiny for how much it will be used year-round.

The idea of removing cars from King street is considered a radical and controversial idea by suburban councillors, when it should be a no brainer given that transit riders vastly outnumber drivers.

The mayor would rather pay police officers to harass pedestrians who cross the street during the countdown, than to spend more money on vision zero.

The mayor pulls a photo op for a Green P parking app, but can't be bothered to show up for this.

His original vision zero plan only called for a 20% reduction in pedestrian deaths over ten years. This was so tone deaf and insulting to those who are affected that he was forced to change the goal to zero deaths, which he previously dismissed as too ambitious. But he did not increase the budget accordingly.


So to reiterate, I'm ok with spending more money to ensure that drivers spend less time stuck in traffic, as long as it's consistent with good planning. But I'm fed up being treated as less important than them just because I'm a transit user and a cyclist. I'm fed up with how cars have dominated city planning for so many decades, yet any attempt to rebalance our priorities is a 'war on cars', or will cause 'traffic chaos'. Whether we're debating bike lanes, street parking, LRT vs subways, the gardiner, or closing a street for an event, the overwhelming reaction I always hear is "what about the drivers". If that weren't the case, then maybe I would be more sympathetic to the Gardiner which I never use.

 

[Rainforest]

Bad news. It is particularly disturbing that two main opposition parties, i.e. Tories and NDP, are even less likely to allow tolls on DVP and Gardiner.

It would be great if we had a Toronto-only based party at the provincial level. Such party would never win the majority and form the government, but it would have a lot of leverage in dealing with any other party that wins the plurality and needs some extra votes to form the government.

If the Toronto-only based party won just 12 or 15 out of the 23 city's ridings, then a majority government would be rarely possible. Whether the Liberals or Tories win the plurality, they would be forced to seek accord with the Toronto-based party in order to vote their government in.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Maybe the city can help get us affordable housing by building them on gasoline stations in Toronto?

Bye bye downtown Vancouver stations. It was nice gassing up at you

From link.

Gas stations in downtown Vancouver are quickly going the way of the dodo bird, driven out by the city's astronomical real estate values.

Chevron announced last year it was considering selling off one of the last two remaining downtown stations on West Georgia Street near Bidwell.

That would leave the Esso at Davie Street and Burrard Street as the last downtown gas station standing, although word is a "for sale" sign may soon go up at that location as well.

"My understanding is that station is also being marketed so we're likely to have zero in the near future," said Mehdi Shokri of Avison Young Real Estate.

"We've has such a bull market here on the residential land side ... the numbers are getting so incredibly high that gas stations can't make sense of their business model any more," he said.

The land value of the West Georgia Chevron was pegged at $32.8-million by B.C. Assessment earlier this month, more than triple the value of its 2016 assessment of $10.2-million.

New tax, same story

Mehdi says the drag that was expected on real estate prices when the 15 per cent foreign buyers tax was introduced this past summer hasn't materialized in the Coal Harbour neighbourhood where the Chevron station is located.

"A block away [developer] Bosa went to market with their Cardero project just after the 15 per cent tax so everyone was looking at that project as a sign of where land and condos could be going," said Mehdi. "They basically sold out that project averaging $1,800 a square foot.

"You're still seeing presales at historic levels."

Mehdi says downtown grocery stores and banks are also changing the way they evaluate their businesses as the value of the land they occupy soars.

"Some of the traditional stores like Safeway are sitting on sizable properties ... and they realize there's a lot of value there. So you're finding a lot of pension funds and development partners giving them an understanding of how they can realize more value by not only selling it, but by becoming part of the development."

Gone for good?

While online banking is making brick and mortar banks less relevant, and grocery stores are moving into ground floors of new high rises, Mohdi believes the downtown Vancouver gas station may truly be on the verge of extinction.

"There's been a trend here with a lot of the downtown condos that parking isn't being used any more. Most of the people who chose to live here do so because of the amenities and, frankly, they don't want to be in a car — they want to walk or ride their bike," he said.

"I really don't think there will be much of an impact from not having a gas station downtown, particularly for local residents.

That might be one way to rid the downtown streets of the single-occupant motor vehicles. No gasoline stations for them to fill up in.

 

[11th]

Bad news. It is particularly disturbing that two main opposition parties, i.e. Tories and NDP, are even less likely to allow tolls on DVP and Gardiner.

It would be great if we had a Toronto-only based party at the provincial level. Such party would never win the majority and form the government, but it would have a lot of leverage in dealing with any other party that wins the plurality and needs some extra votes to form the government.

If the Toronto-only based party won just 12 or 15 out of the 23 city's ridings, then a majority government would be rarely possible. Whether the Liberals or Tories win the plurality, they would be forced to seek accord with the Toronto-based party in order to vote their government in.

It's easier said than done. Look at the past mayoral election and you will see how difficult it will be for a Toronto-only based party to draft up their policies/visions.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

It's easier said than done. Look at the past mayoral election and you will see how difficult it will be for a Toronto-only based party to draft up their policies/visions.

Having said that, the goal of such a party shouldn't be to gain power per se (because you won't ever) but to deny them a chunk of the votes they need.

AoD

 

[pstogios]

Maybe the city can help get us affordable housing by building them on gasoline stations in Toronto?

Bye bye downtown Vancouver stations. It was nice gassing up at you

From link.



That might be one way to rid the downtown streets of the single-occupant motor vehicles. No gasoline stations for them to fill up in.

This is actually totally irrelevant to the topic of this thread which is the Gardiner Expressway.

This kind of discussion is better suited to the New Transit Funding Sources thread.
http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/new-transit-funding-sources.18434/unread