H
Hydrogen
Guest
Rant all you want (and you do it here all too often), but you are not getting your six lane arterial road to service your needs any time soon.
You find similarity between Walmarts and highways. Good for you.
|
|
|
Rant all you want (and you do it here all too often), but you are not getting your six lane arterial road to service your needs any time soon.
You find similarity between Walmarts and highways. Good for you.
adma
Superstar
I dunno, it seems like UT's become a parking spot lately for those who might have gotten epiphanies from coffee-shop copies of Our Toronto Free Press in the 1990s...
TKTKTK
Senior Member
Don't worry, there's still room for you and your high-horse (they're parking exempt, right?)
ProjectEnd
Superstar
Right, and have it flood every basement in the core with disgusting lakewater? Just kidding. Actually London has a similar network for their (now) mothballed MailRail system.
Dichotomy,
Don't you ever get sick of taking your pollutant-spewing car everywhere? While you laude other cities for their comprehensive road networks (London, etc.), most of those cities have equally expansive transit systems. Each time you list a road or a trip between two destinations, there is often a transit link close by. Furthermore, you capitalize the fact that you live downtown yet you shamelessly advocate further automobile usage, begging the question: what do you think makes a healthy neighborhood?
urbanfan89
Active Member
Part of me thinks they should just wire some explosives onto the pillars and then detonate on a Monday morning at 5 am.
adma
Superstar
Yeah, now that's taking Mayor Daley's Meigs Massacre technique to the next stage...
Dichotomy
Banned
Right, and have it flood every basement in the core with disgusting lakewater? Just kidding. Actually London has a similar network for their (now) mothballed MailRail system.
Dichotomy,
Don't you ever get sick of taking your pollutant-spewing car everywhere? While you laude other cities for their comprehensive road networks (London, etc.), most of those cities have equally expansive transit systems. Each time you list a road or a trip between two destinations, there is often a transit link close by. Furthermore, you capitalize the fact that you live downtown yet you shamelessly advocate further automobile usage, begging the question: what do you think makes a healthy neighborhood?
If the TTC offered a pay card like Chicago does, then I might use the TTC more, but even if I drive down to the ferry docks, it is $10 to park (most times) versus $5.50 for return fare on the subway. With my dog, it's just far more convenient to drive.
Less than 20% of the 'pollutants' come from the private automobile. Since my car is less than a year old, it's tailpipe emissions are as clean as current technology allows.
We do walk to the bars, clubs, shows, etc. in this neighborhood, but if I am already in my car (commuting to work, for example), it only makes sense to make quick detours to do errands along the way.
Who out there can possibly claim the TTC is faster or more convenient than driving? It takes me 45 minutes by walking and subway to get to work. In the worst traffic I can drive it in 30 - I average 22 minutes.
What makes a good neighborhood? That's a little tougher because the meaning can change as one gets older and life changes. It's odd that the current argument seems to be that living downtown should be about walking or cycling because of the density, but really isn't that what small town living should be? To take advantage of everything Toronto has to offer, with its various shopping districts, etc., the TTC simply wouldn't be convenient. We have visited Yorkdale, Ikea and Sherway Gardens in the same afternoon. How could you possibly do that on the TTC?
How many people on this board can really lay claim to knowing their neighbors? Sure, maybe you say hello to them in the elevator or as you sweep your front drive, but do we really know our neighbors anymore? I'm talking like the Ricardos and the Mertz's!
Is a neighborhood like the Annex where neighbors curse at each other because there is no parking and they have to park a block away with their groceries? Is it more like Victoria Village where octogenarians resent the young families invading their neighborhood where they've lived for 45 years? There are plenty of positive examples, too, I am sure, but if you want to know your friendly grocer, pinch the cheeks of the neighbor's kid while visiting the butcher, you really need to move to Stayner, or Clinton.
How about Islington/Albion where my parents grew up, with shootings in the schools and nary an English sign in sight?
A neighborhood is many things to many people.
Chuck
Senior Member
If the TTC offered a pay card like Chicago does, then I might use the TTC more, but even if I drive down to the ferry docks, it is $10 to park (most times) versus $5.50 for return fare on the subway. With my dog, it's just far more convenient to drive.
Less than 20% of the 'pollutants' come from the private automobile. Since my car is less than a year old, it's tailpipe emissions are as clean as current technology allows.
We do walk to the bars, clubs, shows, etc. in this neighborhood, but if I am already in my car (commuting to work, for example), it only makes sense to make quick detours to do errands along the way.
Who out there can possibly claim the TTC is faster or more convenient than driving? It takes me 45 minutes by walking and subway to get to work. In the worst traffic I can drive it in 30 - I average 22 minutes.
What makes a good neighborhood? That's a little tougher because the meaning can change as one gets older and life changes. It's odd that the current argument seems to be that living downtown should be about walking or cycling because of the density, but really isn't that what small town living should be? To take advantage of everything Toronto has to offer, with its various shopping districts, etc., the TTC simply wouldn't be convenient. We have visited Yorkdale, Ikea and Sherway Gardens in the same afternoon. How could you possibly do that on the TTC?
How many people on this board can really lay claim to knowing their neighbors? Sure, maybe you say hello to them in the elevator or as you sweep your front drive, but do we really know our neighbors anymore? I'm talking like the Ricardos and the Mertz's!
Is a neighborhood like the Annex where neighbors curse at each other because there is no parking and they have to park a block away with their groceries? Is it more like Victoria Village where octogenarians resent the young families invading their neighborhood where they've lived for 45 years? There are plenty of positive examples, too, I am sure, but if you want to know your friendly grocer, pinch the cheeks of the neighbor's kid while visiting the butcher, you really need to move to Stayner, or Clinton.
How about Islington/Albion where my parents grew up, with shootings in the schools and nary an English sign in sight?
A neighborhood is many things to many people.
I can completely relate to you. A year ago, I was in your shoes defending my anti-TTC view point, and rationalizing the fact that I often drive between two subway stations because the TTC's fare policy punishes short trips within the urban area, and rewards 30 km trips from the suburbs. I used to complain of a complete lack of higher speed roads throughout the city, and was dead set against user fees that target drivers only.
I think that both sides of this argument need to come to an agreement. I am almost shocked to say this, but I just sold my car and am now living car free in the city, purely by choice. I too used to boast the fact that I could travel across the entire city in one day, but can you honestly say that is the only possible way to do your chores? I have changed the stores that I shop at so that I can get almost everything done at locations along the subway. Yes, there still are car dependent trips, they now account for a fraction of the total, and can be lumped together for a $50 zipcar rental. It's absolutely true that cars are faster - in 15 minutes, I can barely get from St. Clair to Dundas, but by car I'd already be in North York. But if you plan your trips so that you only ever go as far as Dundas anyway, you're still only 15 minutes away from everything.
And my advice to those be all end all urbanists: get off your high horse! I didn't meet a single new neighbour just by switching to transit, and did not get to know my neighbourhood any better. Even if everyone who could switch to transit did, there would still be hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, of trips in the GTA made by car. The lack of roads is stifling the GTA, and maybe the creation of 4 lane one way streets throughout the city wouldn't be a bad thing! Furthermore, it's the recent availability of things like big chain grocery stores and big box electronic and hardware stores on the subway line that pushed me to give up my car - NOT the availability of mom and pop stores. If it's the average GTA resident that you're trying to switch to transit, you have to provide services desirable to them in the central city.
Just_Chris
Active Member
I don't own a car or drive myself anymore, but the lack of arterial streets in Toronto is odd. I've traveled to many major cities in North America, and almost all of them have a network of arterial streets 6+ lanes wide. Not just in the "outer areas" 6+ km from downtown, but in the inner city as well. Vancouver is lauded for having no freeways, but they have a pretty dense grid of wide arterials that run through the city (and don't dead-end). A number of them lead into their downtown. The only such streets we have leading to our downtown I can think of is the freeway, Lakeshore, and Avenue Road. I guess it's just the way our city was laid out.
Dichotomy
Banned
Exactly. Also, Vancouver's grid isn't festered with one way steets (out of the core) or traffic calming measures. They don't have useless cross-walks mid-block (they have traffic lights that a pedestrian can push the button for and the light will change red for traffic when in cycle with traffic flow - not a big inconvenience for a mother with her kid and grocery buggy in tow.) When I was stuck on traffic on (6 lane) Kingsway, I was amazed that I could turn right onto one of the sidestreets and drive (almost in a straight line) for several blocks - no 4 way stops, no speed bumps. What an astounding concept. Vancouver can function without major highways because it was better planned in the '30s.
Toronto doesn't have that luxury and now wants to destroy what feeble highways that were built in the '50s to rectify the problem.
nfitz
Superstar
Vancouver doesn't have a lot of 6+ lane arteries; most are 4 lanes.
On the east side of downtown (Woodbine/Gerrard) I notice a difference between here and the west end. There are quite a few good east-west routes here, with perhaps the exception of Queen East, once you get east of Woodbine - though it's all local traffic.
With Lakeshore, Eastern/Richmond/Adelaide, Queen, Dundas, Gerrard, and Danforth you have 6 good roads (well 5, I avoid Danforth, but it seems to keep a lot of cars off the good routes) into downtown. Getting downtown - at least as far as Church, in rush-hour is surprisingly easy (not that there's much point, normally if I'm doing this, I'm avoiding an accident on the Gardiner/Lakeshore heading to southwestern Ontario).
But on the west-side everything seems to break down. Seems a simple fix would be a bit better roads on the west side. Dare I say it, Front Street Extension - though perhaps NOT connecting it to the Gardiner would help traffic in the West End - perhaps connect it to the Queensway instead along with the waterfront west LRT? If traffic flowed a bit better in this area the King and Queen cars would be a lot happier.
Towered
Senior Member
Well the Liberty Village development plans seem to include an extension of Front street as a local road (with no connection to the Gardiner).
nfitz
Superstar
Presumably though it would dead end on Dufferin. Small improvement, but with Adelaide and Richmond also dead ending rather than going through, you still have issues.
singularc
New Member
save the Gardiner! - narrow the Lakeshore!
I am very concerned about the potential removal of part of the Gardiner Expressway.
I travel a lot with business, and do business in Toronto and around the world in the film and television production sector. My travel and work in other cities has allowed me to see how many other world class cities cope with issues such as transportation, and I have seen many creative solutions to problems that we have here in Toronto.
Keeping cross-town car and truck traffic away from pedestrian traffic makes a lot of sense. My crews and I are on the road in-town quite a lot, picking up and delivering supplies and building sets all over the city. The Gardiner expressway helps our efficiency and economic productivity in many ways, and helps to reduce pollution by minimizing idling at traffic lights and keeps those nasty traffic fumes above the pedestrian grade. It is MUCH faster than the lakeshore at most times of the day. Removal of the Gardiner would be a severe economic blow to our productivity and our ability to effectively do business here. The traffic problems here are already difficult to deal with. The gridlock caused by removal of this section would certainly convince me and likely others to take film and television productions to other cities. I'm sure that my industry is not the only one with these concerns - one must take into account that commuting into and out of the city is not the only way that the Gardiner is used.
The Gardiner has been called a barrier to the waterfront, but I firmly believe that an 8-lane road filled with idling cars and trucks is a much more significant barrier to the waterfront. Moving the "only" 120,000 vehicles per day that use that section of the Gardiner down to a grade-level street will be a huge step backwards for the environmental, cycling and pedestrian friendly movements in Toronto. The Waterfront Toronto study is obviously biased, and I would argue totally deluded. It argues that the new plan would add 2 additional minutes on the trip from Jarvis to Carlaw, which is ridiculous. You hit one red light and it's more than that.
What we need to do is start developing the land under the Gardiner to be more appealing. Many cities around the world have developed their under-expressway spaces to be cafes and retail spaces, making a "useless" and "ugly" space into a useful and welcoming space for pedestrians. Put art on the concrete posts, as has been done further west. Work on improving the space that exists. The Gardiner is ugly under that section because the property owners, the City of Toronto, Waterfront Toronto, and property developers are not doing anything to try to make the existing space nicer and more liveable - in fact it seems as if they are trying to keep it as ugly as possible until they successfully lobby council for the removal of that part of the Gardiner - "paving" the way for more valuable (for them) condominium development.
I would like to see the Gardiner remain, and that we develop the untapped potential of the under-expressway space by removing 2 lanes of the Lakeshore and putting in more ground-level retail and a pedestrian walkway under the Gardiner. Galleries, shops, cafe's, gardens ... a pedestrian friendly ground level experience. And generating more economic benefit for more people than a much wider road and condos.
Let's start looking at the potential for improvement of our existing infrastructure, and split that $300 million between fixing the Gardiner and improving public transit. We are a city full of creative ideas, let's start using them. How about elevated trains to Etobicoke and Scarborough? Trains and bikes for commuters and vehicles for work.
Let's fight to make this a livable city for its residents, not just for the property developers and other commuters. Leave the grade level near the waterfront for pedestrians and cyclists, we don't need another University Avenue down by the lake. I think we need a pedestrian market under the overpass.
Sounds not bad, don't you think?
I am very concerned about the potential removal of part of the Gardiner Expressway.
I travel a lot with business, and do business in Toronto and around the world in the film and television production sector. My travel and work in other cities has allowed me to see how many other world class cities cope with issues such as transportation, and I have seen many creative solutions to problems that we have here in Toronto.
Keeping cross-town car and truck traffic away from pedestrian traffic makes a lot of sense. My crews and I are on the road in-town quite a lot, picking up and delivering supplies and building sets all over the city. The Gardiner expressway helps our efficiency and economic productivity in many ways, and helps to reduce pollution by minimizing idling at traffic lights and keeps those nasty traffic fumes above the pedestrian grade. It is MUCH faster than the lakeshore at most times of the day. Removal of the Gardiner would be a severe economic blow to our productivity and our ability to effectively do business here. The traffic problems here are already difficult to deal with. The gridlock caused by removal of this section would certainly convince me and likely others to take film and television productions to other cities. I'm sure that my industry is not the only one with these concerns - one must take into account that commuting into and out of the city is not the only way that the Gardiner is used.
The Gardiner has been called a barrier to the waterfront, but I firmly believe that an 8-lane road filled with idling cars and trucks is a much more significant barrier to the waterfront. Moving the "only" 120,000 vehicles per day that use that section of the Gardiner down to a grade-level street will be a huge step backwards for the environmental, cycling and pedestrian friendly movements in Toronto. The Waterfront Toronto study is obviously biased, and I would argue totally deluded. It argues that the new plan would add 2 additional minutes on the trip from Jarvis to Carlaw, which is ridiculous. You hit one red light and it's more than that.
What we need to do is start developing the land under the Gardiner to be more appealing. Many cities around the world have developed their under-expressway spaces to be cafes and retail spaces, making a "useless" and "ugly" space into a useful and welcoming space for pedestrians. Put art on the concrete posts, as has been done further west. Work on improving the space that exists. The Gardiner is ugly under that section because the property owners, the City of Toronto, Waterfront Toronto, and property developers are not doing anything to try to make the existing space nicer and more liveable - in fact it seems as if they are trying to keep it as ugly as possible until they successfully lobby council for the removal of that part of the Gardiner - "paving" the way for more valuable (for them) condominium development.
I would like to see the Gardiner remain, and that we develop the untapped potential of the under-expressway space by removing 2 lanes of the Lakeshore and putting in more ground-level retail and a pedestrian walkway under the Gardiner. Galleries, shops, cafe's, gardens ... a pedestrian friendly ground level experience. And generating more economic benefit for more people than a much wider road and condos.
Let's start looking at the potential for improvement of our existing infrastructure, and split that $300 million between fixing the Gardiner and improving public transit. We are a city full of creative ideas, let's start using them. How about elevated trains to Etobicoke and Scarborough? Trains and bikes for commuters and vehicles for work.
Let's fight to make this a livable city for its residents, not just for the property developers and other commuters. Leave the grade level near the waterfront for pedestrians and cyclists, we don't need another University Avenue down by the lake. I think we need a pedestrian market under the overpass.
Sounds not bad, don't you think?
Dichotomy
Banned
Check again. In the 'old' city, many of the streets have been turned into 1-way, which allows 2 lanes of traffic to move at once and 4 during rush hour. Once you cross false creek into the 'newer' city proper (long before Burnaby) Hastings, Refrew, Kingsway and many others are 6-lanes.
In many ways, Kingsway is Vancouver's Eglinton. Think of how much better this city would move if Eglinton was 6 lanes wide!
Vancouver's Achilles heal are it's bridges/tunnels. The anti-car lobby prevented the Lion's Gate refurbishment from adding a 4th lane to the deck - but bicycle lanes were okay! When sight-seeing at the top of Grouse Mtn, we could see through binoculars the mess that southbound (one lane) across the bridge was in the late afternoon, so we opted to stay longer and eat on the mountain, rather than drive back into the city and dine there.