adma
Superstar
What's a simple Roundabout for some is a Long Distance Runaround for others.
|
|
|
Roads: Six Points Interchange Reconfiguration (City of Toronto, UC)
carrefour
New Member
those who think a simple Roundabout is a Long Distance Runaround obviously haven't driven around one.
N
notyouagain
Guest
Anybody know if this is correct? I hadn't heard this before.
BTW, those of you who want to discuss the relative merits of Scarbrough and Mississauga should start a new thread.
Also BTW, the roundabout was ruled out at the very beginning of this very lengthy process. Go back to the beginning of this thread for more info.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Looking through the 2009-2018 Capital Program for Transportation Services, I found that the Six Points interchange is forecast to be spent on it: $1,449K in 2015, $1,578K in 2016, $2,000K in 2017, and $1,205K in 2018. So work on it will not start until 2015.
Four years of work is a lot of work... and a lot of money as well.
Four years of work is a lot of work... and a lot of money as well.
Last edited:
Hipster Duck
Senior Member
The more I think about this project, the more I think that it is a misdirected waste of money meant for a perceived social gain that will probably never materialize. The current interchange, as it is, works perfectly. A complex, at grade intersection will likely be a massive traffic (and bus) bottleneck while not being any less of a deterrent to pedestrians.
And, speaking about pedestrians, the fix is already in for this neighbourhood. I don't see how this will further "urbanize" the area west of Kipling because that area is already psychologically associated with low density, strip commercial development and suburban bungalow development with residents who are extremely on guard about encroaching development of any kind.
But, hey, if the city is hellbent on encouraging walkability in the area, they could build a pedestrian overpass over the current interchange for a fraction of the cost.
And, speaking about pedestrians, the fix is already in for this neighbourhood. I don't see how this will further "urbanize" the area west of Kipling because that area is already psychologically associated with low density, strip commercial development and suburban bungalow development with residents who are extremely on guard about encroaching development of any kind.
But, hey, if the city is hellbent on encouraging walkability in the area, they could build a pedestrian overpass over the current interchange for a fraction of the cost.
waterloowarrior
Senior Member
.
Last edited:
nfitz
Superstar
Clearly the poster is using M as thousand, not million; that seems pretty clear from the context. You know the old system ... X - 10, C = 100, M = 1000
jks
Continuous Lurker
^^Those are roman numerals, not the "old" system.
Kitsune
Senior Member
They should just make this one giant round about.
nfitz
Superstar
Towered
Superstar
WTF is the matter with this city? The EA for this was completed in 2007 and approved by council in January 2008. Why the hell won't work even begin for another 6 years??? All they have to do is remove the series of ramps, which are not impeded by surrounding structures and build a couple of new at grade roads. This is driving me crazy.
Railization
Active Member
Are you kidding? Bloor St. is terrible at this intersection and will benefit greatly from the redesign. It allows Bloor St. to continue as the arterial road it should be, and I think it will be great for walkability to the subway at Kipling, especially with the new east exit proposed for the station.
Hipster Duck
Senior Member
^What do you mean by "the arterial road it should be"? Bloor street is a subarterial that effectively ends at Kipling right now. It does its job. And what walkability do we aspire to? Not every corner of this city has to simulate some sort of pedestrian-friendly pre-war urban fabric. The area right now is sandwiched between a large rail corridor and some fifties bungalows with the biggest NIMBYs in the world. Do you think that that's the kind of place that we can initiate some sort of Neo-Copenhagen?
Dan416
Senior Member
I think this "interchange" is confusing even for drivers. I mean one second you're on Bloor, the next you're on Dundas in the blink of an eye. In my opinion, roads should go straight. In the case of Kipling, Dundas and Bloor all converging on one point, this was impossible. The EA determined it best to have Kipling and Bloor intersect like normal, and Dundas would curve a bit. It's much better than the ridiculous configuration there now which is autocentric but still confusing. It'll free up land and make the area more amenable to redevelopment.
catcher_of_cats
Active Member
Is anyone here surprised by this? I'm not since this is Toronto after all.