RC8
Senior Member
I cross the rail corridor every day and it's a breeze. Crossing the highway on the other hand is a nightmare.
|
|
|
- Status
junior43
Active Member
So what's going to change if it's taken down? A couple trees and a bike path?
If it's gone, the south side will be filled with condos, so depending where you are, you'll still be in shade.
Also, all those cars that once were on the Gardiner will be in your face now. If the report's right and it will only add 3-10 minutes to commutes, that won't be enough to get people out of their cars. Their commutes can vary by that much now. So, instead of these cars whizzing by with no stops (since this portion is under utilized supposedly) these cars will be stuck in stop and go traffic in front of you. Adding even more pollution to the environment since flying by with no stops they emit less pollution. Now you will have them adding even more pollution at ground level while they're stuck in traffic.
I find it odd your against Billy Bishop expansion because of added pollution, yet here your volunteering to have more tailpipes emitting fumes virtually in your face.
Crossing the highway will be the same nightmare if it's gone - but there'll be trees now. You can leave the Gardiner and improve the underneath environment and everyone wins. There's only going to be more cars in the future if we do grow as they predict by 50%.
BurlOak
Senior Member
By studying only the Eastern Gardiner, they made it impossible to realistically recommend replacement. How can you build the east above the railway and then connect to the existing Gardiner still East of Yonge. How can you build an underground highway in the east and then rise to the elevation of the existing Gardiner before Yonge.
You are correct that a highway stacked on top of the railway is the best solution, but the study limits made sure that that would not be recommended. Let's upload the Gardiner to the Province and see if they will be smart enough to come up with a proper solution.
I doubt that you cross the Gardiner. I imagine that you are crossing a six lane Lakeshore Blvd - and that will turn into an 8 lane road - maybe 10 or 12 lanes at intersections depending on how many dedicated turn lanes are added.
junior43
Active Member
It was a study done by waterfront Toronto, the conclusion was determined before the report began. It's similar to the Con's F35 procurement, they set it up to come to only one conclusion. If the Toronto Board of Trade did the study they would have concluded to repair or replace.
This will be a very divisive issue for the next few election cycles if they tear it down. They should maintain at minimum and let transit in the suburbs improve prior to tearing it down. Between improving that transit and population growth you will have people voluntarily switching to public transit. Forcing this through will only frustrate them more - leading to more Ford-like candidates.
It will be tough enough selling tolls on the DVP and Gardiner (which I 100% support) as it is now. But it will be a lot easier to justify them in the context of repairing/improving the Gardiner. It will be virtually impossible to sell it to them when they now have to pay and they're also losing parts of the highway.
Silence&Motion
Senior Member
If I was a city councillor, I'd be willing to offer the possibility of tolls as a bargaining chip for supporting the improve/replace option. Getting the public to accept tolls on the DVP/Gardiner would be a huge asset to transit planning in the city.
Crossing (under) the highway doesn't have to be a nightmare. Look at the Gardiner at Strachan, Fort York, and Bathurst. It's really all of the ramps and the terrible layout of Lake Shore Blvd. that makes it so bad. Getting rid of the ramps at York and Harbour Street will be a huge improvement for the central area.
On the eastern end, I think a huge improvement would be cutting the Lake Shore down to 2-3 lanes under the westbound section of the Gardiner, and turning the area under the eastbound section into a pedestrian and cycling path (http://goo.gl/maps/frWss). Unfortunately, this is not what they're proposing.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Are you suggesting that the data presented in the study are inaccurate? And if so, what are the inaccuracies?
Last edited:
gabe
Senior Member
GO is terrible, a city the size of Toronto should have commuter rail running all day 7 days a week like most cities it's size.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
it does on 2 lines, and GO is fast moving towards implementing all day on other lines. Stouffville is half way through its EA right now for it.
kEiThZ
Superstar
1) Scarborough doesn't start till Vic Park. That "East of Yonge" doesn't sway anyone in Scarborough.
2) Scarborough is not Mississauga. Ratepayers here pay taxes to the City of Toronto. And vote here as well. This comparison is particularly annoying. And as a former Scarberian, one I will always found offensive. Nothing works better to rile up Scarborough residents than to insist they aren't actually part of they city they pay taxes too. I've even seen some politicians use it.
And people wonder why Scarborough tilted towards Ford....
kEiThZ
Superstar
I would say that all-day service on the Stouffville and Richmond Hill lines should be the prerequisite before tearing down Gardiner East. It's what the report assumes to begin with. TTC-GO Fare integration would be nice too for Scarberians and North Yorkers.
Without showing some serious transit improvements, this one is going to be political hot potato in the East. Not just Scarborough. Markham and Durham residents will probably be more unhappy about this. Though, they can't take out on their municipal politicans like Scarborough residents can.
Last edited:
Dandy Horse
Active Member
Actually, no, there are more Go train stations in Scarborough than any other borough in Toronto. The lakeshore line has the best frequency of any of the lines, But also the Stouffville line has Kennedy, Agincourt and Miliken stations, and Old Cummer and Oriole are very close to Scarborough in North York. Im really sick of the "poor scarborough" mentality. Try living in the rest of the GTA, Scarborough gets way more than its fair share, while constantly crying poor me, and the ignorance of some people out there is pulling regular Toronto back into the dark ages.
kEiThZ
Superstar
1) Do you realize how big Scarborough is geographically? There's a reason there are so many stations. It's also 630 000 residents. That's more than all of Durham Region. That's well over half of York Region. And about half of Peel Region.
2) Despite you being "sick of the "poor Scarborough" mentality", it won't change realities on the ground: most Scarberians take longer to get to work taking the TTC than any GO commuter from the 905, who get to enjoy fare integration between their agency and GO. All while they pay taxes to the City of Toronto.
Last edited:
Dandy Horse
Active Member
I assume by their agency you mean their car? The rest of the gta doesn't have anything close to the Ttc bus service in even deepest scarb
Dandy Horse
Active Member
Honestly, maybe if they don't want to be taking the bus forever, they should stop voting for people that cancel every transit improvement that comes up. Which has been a lot, lot, lot more times than anything has ever been cancelled in the rest of the GTA. nobody can help them if they are too stupid to help themselves. Im talking about the original streetcar plans in the 50s, all the way up to transit city. their isolation is a choice.
Rainforest
Senior Member
Stupid or not, they are a large voting block in every elections in Toronto. In the situation when transit funding is a hard sell generally, antagonizing Scarborough virtually guarantees that no major city-wide transit initiative will succeed. Regardless of the technical merits, its supporters will be simply out-voted.
- Status