News   Nov 12, 2024
16 Storey Tower Proposal South of Warden Station Grows to 27 Storeys
 706     1 
News   Nov 12, 2024
News Roundup for November 12, 2024
 520     1 
News   Nov 12, 2024
Financial Core Nightlights
 619     0 

Extending Hwy 400 South

hawc said:
Run it down Black Creek and Weston. The local area is pretty gross so you're not exactly cutting through Forest Hill. Then keep it going down Keel to Bloor, still a pretty nasty neighbourhood (I know I lived in it). But at Bloor, you run it underground underneath Parkside Drive which would be way too gorgeous to wreck since it's High Park. Then join up with the Gardiner. Done and Done.

If you wanted to run a highway across the city I'd run it across Dundas from end to end. Not losing anything special on that wasteland of a street.

Sorry if I offend, just calling it like it is. :)
Click to expand...
Hi there, Robert Moses.

Do you normally rise from the dead just around Hallowe'en?
 
accura407 said:
The focus should not be about eliminating freeways but rather RE-ALLOCATING THE USE OF THE FACILITY. This means, decrease single driver commuters, increase carpoolers and buses, give priority to freight so that we don't lose 6 BILLION DOLLARS A DAY in Trade because of congestion.

Whoever thinks that Today's 5 Million+ Population Toronto can operate properly with a roadway infrastructure built for 2.5 Million+ Population Toronto is insane. Do we need to build highways everywhere? No. But at the very least if you remove capacity in one location you need to allocate it to another. Replacement at the very least is vital. Take out a lane here, Add a lane there.

Last thing...I never said the allen rd lands would pay for a toll tunnel, but it would bring in a hefty amount of funds for sure...
Click to expand...

This whole project would mean new capacity, not reallocating capacity. Reallocating would mean the existing network becoming more about the needs of trucks and there's more than enough capacity for them as it is, but not for single occupancy vehicles. You just drew a line down the map without bothering to see what was there, which is repeating the Modernist planning mistakes of the past so notorious of Robert Moses and the likes of the Metro expressway planners. There are in fact great neighbourhoods there, whose density and diversity minimizes the need for such road capacity in the first place. The neighbourhoods north of High Park are denigrated by your proposal and deemed expendable for a luxury expressway, which is a grave insult. That they are not Forest Hill means that these neighbourhoods can be severed, destabilized, cut up and cleared of their most important heritage buildings? No, that isn't acceptable.
 
junctionist said:
The neighbourhoods north of High Park are denigrated by your proposal and deemed expendable for a luxury expressway, which is a grave insult. That they are not Forest Hill means that these neighbourhoods can be severed, destabilized, cut up and cleared of their most important heritage buildings? No, that isn't acceptable.
Click to expand...

it may be wrong but typically this is how things work. rich ppl are more likely to vote and they usually have additional influence by knowing the right people.
 
Except that in today's Toronto, even these "not Forest Hill" neighbourhoods have so-called rich people, or at least rich people on their behalf. And anyone who'd seriously propose an expressway down Keele/Parkside in 2011 has got to be an adolescent/pre-pubescent who's unfamiliar with the neighbourhoods or with Robert Moses vs Jane Jacobs historiography...
 
adma said:
Anyone who'd seriously propose an expressway down Keele/Parkside in 2011 isn't familiar with the neighbourhoods or with Robert Moses vs Jane Jacobs historiography.
Click to expand...

I think an expressway would actually brighten up Keele. As for Parkside, I said, bury it at that point (from Bloor to the lake). Also, many urban scholars are now re-examining Moses and you may be familiar with the arguments that there was actually 'good Moses' and 'bad Moses'. Not all bad.
 
adma said:
Except that in today's Toronto, even these "not Forest Hill" neighbourhoods have so-called rich people, or at least rich people on their behalf. And anyone who'd seriously propose an expressway down Keele/Parkside in 2011 has got to be an adolescent/pre-pubescent who's unfamiliar with the neighbourhoods or with Robert Moses vs Jane Jacobs historiography...
Click to expand...

Seriously?
 
hawc said:
I think an expressway would actually brighten up Keele. As for Parkside, I said, bury it at that point (from Bloor to the lake). Also, many urban scholars are now re-examining Moses and you may be familiar with the arguments that there was actually 'good Moses' and 'bad Moses'. Not all bad.
Click to expand...

Re-examining Moses is one thing; using it as an alibi to advocate tinpot retro-Moses solutions for circumstances like this is another. IOW, maybe you're just an insensitive jerk.

You might as well be arguing that the presence of architectural scholars and preservationists re-evaluating 60s modernism means that replacing Penn Station with MSG was "not all bad".
 
Last edited:
The cost of any new highway into the downtown will be comparable to the cost of a new subway line.

And if we have that kind of funding available, we better build DRL subway; that will help even the drivers. The capacity of a highway lane is about 2,200 pphpd (the legal driving interval is 2 s, thus 1,800 cars can pass any given spot in 1 hour; multiply it by the occupancy factor 1.2 and get 2,200). So, even if we build 3 highway lanes in each directions, we add about 6,600 pphpd to the system capacity (and then there is a problem of dumping all those extra cars onto the rather narrow downtown streets).

In contrast, a single subway "lane" can handle up to 40,000 pphpd. DRL will be >50% full most of the day. Even if half of DRL riders will be those who otherwise take Yonge / Spadina, we can expect that the other half (10,000 pphpd) will be due to car trips not taken.
 
hawc said:
Hey adma, I'm not being rude to you. Don't be rude to me.

Lay off the personal attacks and stick to arguing the points or I'll report you to a moderator.

This isn't FOX News.
Click to expand...

Well, I want to know where you get this obtuse notion of an expressway "brightening up Keele" from. Or even, what you know about the conditions that prevail here, in 2011--physically, urbanistically, sociologically, et al.

Come to think of it, for argument's sake, let's take a single node: Dundas and Keele.

keele+dundas.bmp


Kinda camoflauged by the fisheye effect there, but explain how one is to get an expressway btw/the bank building on the right and the commercial block on the left--both of which are critical historical elements within the commercial heart of West Toronto Junction. Because if you're going to advocate destroying either or both of them on behalf of an expressway, the locals are going to have your hide for that. And if you don't realize that, or feel that an expressway is more important than their, er, NIMBY self-interest, you truly are an insensitive jerk.

However, I agree that you could have gotten away with it 40-50 years ago. But realize that back then, the architecture wasn't as valued, the neighbourhoods weren't as valued, Jane Jacobs hadn't arrived in town yet, and gentrification hadn't planted itself in this soil. Thus, today, such a scheme not only wouldn't be politically tenable, it'd be a la-la land laughing stock a la the Doug Ford Portlands proposal. Scarcely anyone but the absolute Ford-ian fringe, if even that, would vote for it on Council--otherwise, the citizens would be up in arms.

Fantasies like a Keele/Parkside expressway belong to the Usenet/Libertrollian realm of planning/transport discussion where everybody's circle-jerking over achieving their highway fantasies through blithe imposition of eminent domain or whatnot.
 
Yes, let's build freeways cutting through all the poor neighbourhoods like all the US cities. Why, let's go even further and expropiate property from blacks and give it to private developers to building housing exclusively for white people. Robert Moses would be proud.
 
Wow! For the record, I am not sure we could, or should, get this highway down to the Gardiner. Even if I did, though, I am not sure I would say it for fear of being called out as an "insensitive, prepubescent, circle jerker".....really, did this (or any) debate need to get to that (or any) level of name calling?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top