News   Apr 15, 2021
 170     0 
News   Apr 15, 2021
 494     0 
News   Apr 14, 2021
 412     0 

Roads: Redway Road Extension / "Leaside bypass"

W. K. Lis

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
18,923
Reaction score
7,874
Location
Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way
We shouldn't do that either. Though surely placing blame on those grieving is particularly despicable. The same is true of blaming the driver, until we know what happened.

Bull. Studies show otherwise. Simply reducing the speed of impact reduces injuries and shortens braking distances.

If the drivers actually slow down. If the roadway is built for higher speeds, the drivers will.
 

Silence&Motion

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Messages
1,810
Reaction score
1,926
Location
Marda Loop
Instead of paving over parkland to build more roads, perhaps the yuppies in Leaside could try leaving their SUVs in the driveway and taking the bus for a change.
 

salsa

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 27, 2013
Messages
8,752
Reaction score
9,398
Location
North York
Instead of paving over parkland to build more roads, perhaps the yuppies in Leaside could try leaving their SUVs in the driveway and taking the bus for a change.

+1

In a few years those yuppies will be getting underground transit in their hood. I wish I was that lucky.
 

the lemur

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 1, 2012
Messages
4,069
Reaction score
632
...to Leslie of course (but running along the edge of Sunnybrook Park)!

I think that'd be difficult to say the least. You've got the edge of the Holland Bloorview complex there (I don't they'd be happy with the increased traffic), the change in elevation and the existing trail between Sunnybrook Park and Serena Gundy Park (unless you're planning an elevated link ...) and even then, once you connect with Leslie you're basically spit out into already heavy traffic.
 

DarnDirtyApe

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
690
Reaction score
10
FYI Millwood has posted speed limit of 40km/h. Of course everyone knows that you can drive 10-20 above the limit and still not get a ticket. It's possible that the girl ran into the road and the guy was driving 50 (but said in the police report that he was doing 40) which is still fast enough to kill someone, but he's technically not at fault.

I personally think that speed limits need to be more strictly enforced, BUT some roads need to have them increased. Residential streets should be dropped to 30.
 

the lemur

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 1, 2012
Messages
4,069
Reaction score
632
FYI Millwood has posted speed limit of 40km/h. Of course everyone knows that you can drive 10-20 above the limit and still not get a ticket. It's possible that the girl ran into the road and the guy was driving 50 (but said in the police report that he was doing 40) which is still fast enough to kill someone, but he's technically not at fault.

I personally think that speed limits need to be more strictly enforced, BUT some roads need to have them increased. Residential streets should be dropped to 30.

There's been a police report already?

The 10-20 km/h leeway and the lack of enforcement are both part of the problem. But the source of it is the fact that drivers looking for a shortcut through the Bayview/Laird/Eglinton quadrant (for lack of a better word) will take the relatively direct, continuous streets such as Millwood, Mcrae, Sutherland, Hanna, etc. and their sense of urgency and safety will lead them to overlook their own transgressions. Instead of just lowering the speed limit and increasing enforcement, we should be looking at ways of making it physically more difficult to maintain high speeds on stretches: pinch points, chicanes, tabletops, etc. - just enough not to inconvenience local residents using their neighbourhood streets. Faster traffic belongs on the roads that are designed for it: Bayview, Eglinton and Laid.
 

DarnDirtyApe

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
690
Reaction score
10
I just said it's possible, although I know that at least in a vehicle on vehicle accident a police report is completed at the scene of the accident. Among other things, the police ask the driver(s) how fast they were going, but obviously have no way to verify the answers unless there were witnesses. Given that the police still haven't laid any charges against the driver at this point, it seems pretty clear that none will be forthcoming. Presumably the driver didn't actually break the law, but we'll probably never know what exactly happened.

It would cost a fortune to install physical restrictions given how many streets there are like this one throughout the city - designed for speeds that are unsafe for pedestrians. Also, those main roads you speak of can't handle more (or faster) traffic anyway - Eglinton is residential through Leaside and the other two are predominantly "main street retail" which should have similar speed limits to residential streets given the amount of foot traffic. Forcing traffic onto other streets only shifts the problem, it does not solve it.
 
Last edited:

the lemur

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 1, 2012
Messages
4,069
Reaction score
632
Physical restrictions are the only thing that works to reduce speed, as opposed to lower speed limits (which drivers will (eventually) ignore anyway) and enforcement (which only works when it's being applied). Drivers are using Millwood, etc., at the speed they would be doing on the main roads if there were no impediments (lane closures, poorly timed signals, etc.).
 

ehlow

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
3,496
Reaction score
144
Location
Yonge & Eglinton
Physical restrictions are the only thing that works to reduce speed, as opposed to lower speed limits (which drivers will (eventually) ignore anyway) and enforcement (which only works when it's being applied). Drivers are using Millwood, etc., at the speed they would be doing on the main roads if there were no impediments (lane closures, poorly timed signals, etc.).

Yes. Things like speed bumps work. Speed limits don't work because no one obeys them.
 

W. K. Lis

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
18,923
Reaction score
7,874
Location
Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way
I just said it's possible, although I know that at least in a vehicle on vehicle accident a police report is completed at the scene of the accident. Among other things, the police ask the driver(s) how fast they were going, but obviously have no way to verify the answers unless there were witnesses. Given that the police still haven't laid any charges against the driver at this point, it seems pretty clear that none will be forthcoming. Presumably the driver didn't actually break the law, but we'll probably never know what exactly happened.

It would cost a fortune to install physical restrictions given how many streets there are like this one throughout the city - designed for speeds that are unsafe for pedestrians. Also, those main roads you speak of can't handle more (or faster) traffic anyway - Eglinton is residential through Leaside and the other two are predominantly "main street retail" which should have similar speed limits to residential streets given the amount of foot traffic. Forcing traffic onto other streets only shifts the problem, it does not solve it.

From this link:

Police start using ‘black boxes’ in car crash investigations

Nearly every car being manufactured right now comes with a little added bonus by way of a tiny recording device nestled under the center console. And if you’re looking to keep your driving habits under wraps, you might want to start worrying.

As many as 96 percent of the cars mass-produced in 2013 include event data recorders, or EDRs, yet the existence of these small “black box†surveillance devices are rarely known among the automobile drivers whose data is being collected with every quick turn of the steering wheel.

Depending upon the vehicle, the police maybe trying to see if there is a little black box that will tell them the facts, and not guessing.

And that's not all. See this link:

Automotive Black Box Mandatory by September 1, 2014

You’ve probably heard about the forthcoming automotive black boxes. These “automotive data recorders†are able to let government and insurance personnel determine the conditions leading up to an accident. Whether you like this idea or not, pretty soon, it’s going to be mandatory in all cars. As of September 1, 2014, 100 percent of new cars and trucks will be required to be equipped with this feature.
 
Last edited:

WislaHD

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 21, 2013
Messages
9,314
Reaction score
7,642
Location
Midtown Toronto
According to this, the new councilor of Leaside, Jon Burnside, also supports a Redway extension.

Burnside said he’ll back John Tory in the new mayor’s efforts to attack gridlock and build SmartTrack, a surface rail line which the new councillor said will free up space on the future Eglinton Crosstown light-rail transit line.

The Don Valley West councillor said he’ll speak with the city and the provincial transit agency Metrolinx about ways to stop infiltration into Leaside neighbourhoods, a problem that could worsen along with local LRT construction along Eglinton Avenue, as commuters try to “jump the queue†by heading through Leaside.

Burnside will set up committees in both north and south Leaside to look at ideas - including an extension of Redway Road, which he supports - to deal with traffic, though he warns anything done to reduce motorists’ movements will inconvenience some residents.
 

44 North

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 8, 2010
Messages
3,496
Reaction score
1,895
Location
Ward 28
I fully support the Redway Road extension. It seems like a no-brainer. However, I do have my reservations about using such an important corridor; and to what effect a 4-lane arterial would have on the future use of that section for, say, a rapid transit or GO line.
 

Rainforest

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
4,501
Reaction score
2,126
I fully support the Redway Road extension. It seems like a no-brainer. However, I do have my reservations about using such an important corridor; and to what effect a 4-lane arterial would have on the future use of that section for, say, a rapid transit or GO line.

If it can take up space otherwise available for GO, or even DRL; then why would we want to build that extension?

I am not even sure how it could help the auto traffic. It will connect to the Bayview extension, which is essentially a mini-highway into downtown. But, most of the cars will have to use Laird Drive to get to Redway Road; is that even desirable?
 

BurlOak

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
6,063
Reaction score
1,643
If it can take up space otherwise available for GO, or even DRL; then why would we want to build that extension?

I am not even sure how it could help the auto traffic. It will connect to the Bayview extension, which is essentially a mini-highway into downtown. But, most of the cars will have to use Laird Drive to get to Redway Road; is that even desirable?

Maybe it would take people off Southvale Dr. and Moore Ave. https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.6985428,-79.3636785,16z

I found this with a quick google search.

City of Toronto Council and Committees

Redway Road and Brentcliffe Road Extensions - Feasibility Study


The purpose of this study is to determine the need and feasibility of extending Redway Road westerly from its current terminus to Bayview Avenue

. . . . . . .

The study is to be initiated by October 4, 1999, and be completed in approximately 2.5 months, January 1, 2000

I have no idea if this has actually been studied, or what the results were.
 

Top