Roads: Gardiner Expressway

[AlvinofDiaspar]

There's no evidence of either side, really. You're trusting a modeling report you've never seen.

Err, there are a zillion traffic modelling reports done on zillon permutations of having the Gardiner removed - some of which I have already posted in other threads pertaining the Gardiner. Where are the modelling reports that shows delays of the gloom and doom category?

I think I will put more "trust" on them than unsubstantiated fears, if you don't mind.

There is heavy traffic though. On the Gardiner alone there are 120,000 vehicles a day. There's another road of similar capacity underneath it. I generally see the same number of cars (well, actually more) on the Lake Shore as I do on the Gardiner. So, let's say, all told...200,000 vehicles a day?

You are guessing. Where are the counts to back it all up?

The waterfront has been, and will continue to be, developed with the Gardiner extant. You're arguing that the only way forward is to tear down the Gardiner. That's flatly wrong.

Which is one reason why the waterfront area had been rather sucky, to say the least, and stretches of it will continue to be sucky as development move forward.

The current scheme proposed doesn't benefit anyone! Pedestrians and Cyclists will have to contend with even MORE traffic, and the city will lose the only cross-town route that bypasses inner city traffic.

Interesting, perhaps you should ask cyclist and pedestrians what they would prefer?

But whatever, around and around we go. You would much rather cross a surface highway, I'd much rather cross underneath an aerial one (and out the area under it to productive use).

Actually, yes I would. I have absolutely no qualms about crossing a high speed arterial route like University Avenue (and guess which one most people prefer to either cross or walk along?), and there is NO reason why traffic speed cannot be managed depending on the time of the day. Failure to consider these alternatives and positing "either-or" scenarios is the real lack of imagination which you so often deplore.

AoD

 

[MisterF]

London, a city twice the size of Toronto and with a denser central city, doesn't have any freeways going to its centre. Toronto has two. I think it'll survive just fine without a link between them. The portion proposed to be removed is the most lightly travelled part of the DVP/Gardiner, IIRC, since most of the traffic is going to downtown rather than through it. Its importance as a crosstown route is being overstated by some in this thread.

The DRL and GO improvements (electrification, more frequent trains) are needed as well.

 

[catcher_of_cats]

People who live far (north of 401) from this soon to be developed neighbourhood should be given NO say in how it develops, especially when it comes to the mistake by the lake. If an extra 2-3 minutes sitting in traffic is a make it or break it for someone, then they are already living too distant from their place of employment...

either move or change jobs!

 

[Glen]

"Tremendous" loss of time and inconvenience? By what standard, when the modeling done so far suggest nothing in the realm of tremendous. And arent' we a little self-important? Perhaps you should blame your follow road users for wanting to travel during rush hour at the same time and insisting on engaging in single-occupancy vehicular use. Spin, you say?

Interesting that you chose such a selective act of emancipation...then again, I suppose those who benefits from Gardiner's removal aren't exactly worthy to be empowered given the importance of your highness needs.




AoD

Shame on Trekker for having a job which will inconvieniece future residents in the area.

 

[Archivist]

Interesting, perhaps you should ask cyclist and pedestrians what they would prefer? As a member of both categories (as well as being a driver) I can say that I prefer the Gardiner gone. More traffic on less space with fewer onramps = slower traffic = more safety for me and for everyone. Thanks for asking, Alvin.

I would prefer if TIKTIKTIKBOOM not speak for me on this matter. He has an alarming tendency to "believe" or "not believe" to suit his prejudices.

 

[Urban Shocker]

I don't drive, I've been a pedestrian ever since I learned to walk, I Metropass it everywhere, and I live east of the DVP - and I'm delighted to learn that another section of this monstrosity will bite the dust.

 

[Dilla]

I'm delighted to learn that another section of this monstrosity will bite the dust.

Oh, wait now. Rumors of the Gardiner's death are greatly exaggerated. It's still standing, and this is just a proposal.
A lot of TKTKTKs and Trekkers are out there, there's no guarantees that this proposal will go through.

 

[Chuck]

You'll find that I'm probably one of the most pro-car people on this forum, but even I think that this part of the Gardiner could be torn down with very few negative side effects. As long as the new road is 6 lanes wide with well timed traffic lights like in downtown Hamilton, go for it!

I would actually propose separating the two directions of traffic by about 500 metres so that the new surface road would function as two separate one way streets rather than one mega street. Doing this would allow seamless traffic light sequencing in both directions, while reducing the width of each street by 50%.

Next on my highway to do list is extending the 400 down to the Gardiner, but I'll leave that for another thread.

 

[smartconservative]

You'll find that I'm probably one of the most pro-car people on this forum, but even I think that this part of the Gardiner could be torn down with very few negative side effects. As long as the new road is 6 lanes wide with well timed traffic lights like in downtown Hamilton, go for it!

I would actually propose separating the two directions of traffic by about 500 metres so that the new surface road would function as two separate one way streets rather than one mega street. Doing this would allow seamless traffic light sequencing in both directions, while reducing the width of each street by 50%.

Next on my highway to do list is extending the 400 down to the Gardiner, but I'll leave that for another thread.

Yikes, don't suggest that, you'll get all the pinko bike riding socialist up in arms.

 

[MetroMan]

Oh, wait now. Rumors of the Gardiner's death are greatly exaggerated. It's still standing, and this is just a proposal.
A lot of TKTKTKs and Trekkers are out there, there's no guarantees that this proposal will go through.

That's true.... but I've never seen both sides of council ever so united on such a contentious issue. There seems to be support from both Miller's side and those who often oppose anything he puts on the table.

Waterfront Toronto has spelled out clearly that this is necessary to proceed with plans for the West Donlands and East Bayfront. Leaving the Gardiner will greatly impact those projects negatively.

I think it'll pass quite easily.

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

The Saturday morning run(tm) -- jog-by opinion-making

I jogged down Logan and across the Lakeshore bikepath to Cherry, then up & around. Some thoughts:

1. TKTKTK -- the new ramp and elevated highway from Carlaw onto the Gardiner are actually inoffensive and see-through in the way you describe, but only because they're new and the paint's just dry. As soon as you get to Don Roadway, the underpinnings become a foul mess. No redeeming value. Put it out of its misery!

2. Part of the problem is the crap that has gathered at street level. Empty lots with rusted cars, cruddy two story buildings, etc. Where there are mature trees protecting the Cherry St. bikepath, it's quite beautiful... because you don't see the Gardiner, natch.

3. Cherry Street is unbelievably crappy right now, but the development possibilities are unbelievable. DD is getting two new towers and WDL will be great, but there are also nothing but empty lots from Front Street to Mill Street on the west side of Cherry. Another set of condos with retail or some mid-height office/retail complexes would continue the rebirth of Cherry. Assuming the street upgrade with the LRT line is done with some taste, this will be an absolutely premier address.

And Chuck -- you're being ironic, right? Joking? You've heard about the Spadina Expressway? Good, good... I thought you might be serious...

 

[Chuck]

I actually am being serious. I think that connecting the 400 to the Gardiner Expressway would be a fantastic link because as it is, it can often take 45 minutes or more to drive the not even 15 or so kilometres between downtown and that part of the city.

I am an advocate of filling in missing links in the highway system, while removing those that are useless. Should the east half of the Gardiner be removed? Absolutely. Should sprawl promoting highway extensions to the 404 and 427 be scrapped? Absolutely. But given that there is no practical connection between downtown and the west part of the 401, that's something that I think should be addressed - in addition to conversion of all GO lines to frequent all day service, construction of an Eglinton and DRL subway line, and addition of express tracks to the Yonge subway.

I'm both a metropass holder and an occasional driver, so I get to experience just about every possible mode of travel that exists. In my opinion, linking the 401 to the Gardiner is just about the only highway widening or expansion project that is currently needed. Most other congested areas are only so due to a lack of transit. This area is bad because not only is there no transit option, but there's not even a highway option. That makes this area one of the most neglected in the GTA in terms of high order transportation. By all means, beef up service on the GO line first and build an Eglinton subway first, but ultimately I'd like to see a highway built as well.

 

[Chuck]

Here's a quick map that I drew with all high order transportation lines highlighted. Highways in blue, existing and almost certain subway lines in red, and the Lakeshore GO line in Green. The yellow boxes encircle areas that were somehow left out of the picture during Toronto's only major transportation boom in the mid 50s to the mid 70s. If you live within one of them, how are you supposed to get anywhere?

At least the Eglinton subway line will clearly solve many problems in the "York" box even if the 400 is not extended, but you're basically SOL if you live in northeast Scarborough and northwest Etobicoke. Streetcar lines that operate at the whim of traffic lights are not high order, so they don't count.

 

[CDL.TO]

I am an advocate of filling in missing links in the highway system, while removing those that are useless. Should the east half of the Gardiner be removed? Absolutely. Should sprawl promoting highway extensions to the 404 and 427 be scrapped? Absolutely. But given that there is no practical connection between downtown and the west part of the 401, that's something that I think should be addressed - in addition to conversion of all GO lines to frequent all day service, construction of an Eglinton and DRL subway line, and addition of express tracks to the Yonge subway.

Hey Chuck,

I get what you're saying as that corridor is a missing link in the road system. But what about the feasibility? Where would you build it and, more importantly, where would such a highway connect to the Gardiner? And, even ignoring those points, how could the Gardiner deal with the new traffic that would be routed on to it?

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

a 400 extension to the gardiner would cause a mess of traffic and cut a swath of destruction with ramps and all.

i agree with filling in the missing links but not the highway links. improvements like the dufferin jog elimination will remove bottlenecks and fill in the blanks. i think there's lots of improvements to be made still with the street grid and signal system. improvements in the TTC and GO transit will also free up the roads.