innsertnamehere
Superstar
It won't be faster, especially mid day. Mid day, my bus zooms into the GO bus terminal from the DVP, while it would otherwise be forced through several stoplights instead. I support improvement, but without a loss of lanes.
|
|
|
DarnDirtyApe
Active Member
It's induced demand in the sense that if you make certain travel patterns impractical, then yes people will adjust by not making those trips. By that logic you should rip up half the roads in the city, creating total gridlock so that everyone just stays home.
Generally those cities who have successfully torn down freeways had excess capacity elsewhere, or at least some sort of alternative route for remaining traffic. Toronto has a grand total of one highway (DVP/Gardiner is essentially one route) in and out of downtown, and the TTC and GO are already struggling to keep up with growing ridership.
When you factor in the fact that Toronto's high housing prices and land transfer taxes make relocation an expensive proposition, I don't think it's reasonable to just assume that people will adapt to a major reduction in auto capacity through downtown.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
You also have to remember that the highways have already done their damage to the downtown core in terms of surface parking (which has finally been mostly transferred to underground garages) and that the highways go mostly unfelt in the city. much like NY, I feel it is key to have at least a singular access highway to the downtown core, which is what the Gardiner and DVP are. without them most DVP traffic would be shoved onto Adelaide and Richmond, along with Bayview-bloor, and would make already bad traffic on Gerrard, Richmond, and Adelaide even worse. never mind the fact that an 8-10 lane lakeshore would become an even bigger barrier (IMO) than the gardiner + 6 lane lakeshore is today.
middeljohn
New Member
It's true that other cities in North America have removed freeways with some success, however the only one that's relevant is San Francisco, because it's the only city around the size of Toronto that did it. And yes, it's true that there were positive side effects due to that removal, so based on that alone without any further research one may feel inclined to automatically assume that removing the Gardiner would be a positive.
However, take a look at SF on Google Maps. They STILL have a freeway serving their downtown (I-80), because they realize that an important economic area needs goods to easily get into the downtown without disrupting local traffic, and the best way to do that is with a freeway.
Toronto needs a freeway serving downtown. One city block is only so long that two or three trucks could fill up the entire section between sets of traffic lights. Without the Gardiner helping limit how much distance they'd have to drive through city streets to do their deliveries DT, that is exactly what would happen. Instead of 10-15 vehicles taking up a lane it could be as little as 2-3. How does that solve congestion?
It's unfortunate that the Gardiner was built where it was - north of downtown would've made a lot more sense - but it is far too late to change the location now. If the city really wants to improve the transition from a pedestrian's perspective and have it not hurt travel times too significantly along that corridor, you could remove a section of it between Strachan and Parliament (around there) and convert that section into an upgraded Lakeshore Blvd with 8 lanes.
salsa
Senior Member
If it was built north of downtown, many established neighbourhoods would have been demolished, just like with the spadina expressway. Ramming a highway through Rosedale or the Annex would have been deeply regrettable. Meanwhile, the Gardner's existing location was once an industrial wasteland so it was easier to build it there, and the industry needed a highway to serve it.
WislaHD
Superstar
If Toronto is a world-class city that thinks big, then replacing the Gardiner with a new elevated expressway would be my personal choice.
I can only see that happening with massive provincial and federal support though, and the Gardiner can't wait forever for a solution...
I can only see that happening with massive provincial and federal support though, and the Gardiner can't wait forever for a solution...
BurlOak
Senior Member
It would be great if the Province would upload the entire Gardiner (not just the part west of the Humber) and DVP so that there would be enough funds to maintain it. It would also allow for larger, bolder initiatives to be considered. After all, these freeways benefit the entire Region, not just Toronto.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
Thats the 1 thing, and the only thing, that Hudak has right. The Gardiner, DVP, Allen, Lincoln Alexander, and Red Hill Expressway should all be uploaded. (as well as any other municipal expressways that I am forgetting about)
BurlOak
Senior Member
There are a number of questionable municipal expressways that maybe do not serve a huge Regional purpose.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ontario_expressways
I would say Allen is one of them (unless it gets extended down to the Gardiner). I do not know the entire list, but maybe Burlington Street (Hamilton), Highbury (London), short segments of Highway 27 (Toronto), Kingston Road (Toronto) and maybe the Windsor would make sense to leave with their respective cities.
middeljohn
New Member
I meant in an ideal world if nothing existed and you could plan a city from scratch.
bgobgo
Active Member
I'm reposting an article that hihihi put in the One York construction thread as this article also talks about the York/Bay/Yonge off ramp being dismantled...
http://life.nationalpost.com/2014/01...-of-southcore/
Ramp construction will likely begin in 2016, [Stephen Schijns, manager of infrastructure planning at the City’s Transportation Services division] says.
http://life.nationalpost.com/2014/01...-of-southcore/
Ramp construction will likely begin in 2016, [Stephen Schijns, manager of infrastructure planning at the City’s Transportation Services division] says.
ksun
Senior Member
Today's Star suggests Gardiner east of York should be dismantled completely without much complications to traffic. Makes perfect sense to me. All the "what about the traffic without the Gardiner" worry is really unnecessary, especially when the pros obviously outweighs the cons by a factor of 10.
I like this part "Shanghai put its waterfront expressway underground and built 12 new subway lines, feats that would take us 400 years of environmental assessments and community consultations, never mind construction. The Chinese say matter-of-factly that these “are obviously good things to do.” Why can’t we see that?". - an underground expressway and 12 subway lines will indeed take us 400 years.
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/comm...the_gardiner_expressway_a_costly_mistake.html
I like this part "Shanghai put its waterfront expressway underground and built 12 new subway lines, feats that would take us 400 years of environmental assessments and community consultations, never mind construction. The Chinese say matter-of-factly that these “are obviously good things to do.” Why can’t we see that?". - an underground expressway and 12 subway lines will indeed take us 400 years.
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/comm...the_gardiner_expressway_a_costly_mistake.html
BMO
Senior Member
Why do I get the feeling that the people proposing to tear down the gardiner east are looking at historical traffic data without taking into account the thousands upon thousands of residents that are slated to move into the area without any transit (or at least no concrete funding for transit). Does anybody know if the traffic impact studies take into account projected growth in the area?
ksun
Senior Member
to be honest it is irrelevant.
Most residents to be living by the Gardiner will NOT drive on a daily basis. 50% of them may have a car, but chances are that 95% of those people won't have to drive on the expressway to work everyday.
The primary purpose of the Gardiner is for suburbanites to get in/out of downtown. Downtowners couldn't care less about it. So how much growth there will be doesn't seem that important.
salsa
Senior Member
It's true that downtowners don't drive much, however the suburbs are not getting any smaller. Most people who move here settle in the GTA, and many of them will drive.