News   Jul 12, 2024
199 Church Showcases Heritage Facade and Artwork at Street Level
 906     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Six Points Plaza Redevelopment Advances With 36-Storey First Phase
 811     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Trading Spaces: Can Real Estate Conversion Help Boost Housing Supply?
 334     0 

Roads: Gardiner Expressway

pman said:
I agree it's not surprising the WT board endorses the "remove" option. After all, they're a bunch of left-wing downtown elites waging war on the car, who based their recommendation on nothing more than an exhaustive survey of four different options that were put in place all around the world, actual data on traffic volumes and commuting patterns, rigorous economic and environmental analysis of the various options, input from some of the world's best planners, and adult thought about the way Toronto's infrastructure and public realm contribute to or detract from our competitive advantage. What a bunch of losers...
Click to expand...

I've noticed that during council meetings, when staff makes recommendations that go with Rob Ford's beliefs or wants, he proudly praises them for backing him. When staff don't, he ignores them and says his "phone calls" are the most important backings.
 
Need a mayoral candidate to get behind the removal option, but I bet Tory will be afraid to. Hopefully Chow won't. (Assuming here that both of them run.)

Looking out on this section of the Gardiner from my office window now. 5:25pm. Westbound doesn't back up till Yonge ramp, eastbound is clear sailing. This is just not a very busy section of highway, and with property values it is entirely possible that removing it is a net profit to the City while vastly improving the area.
 
Grimace said:
Need a mayoral candidate to get behind the removal option, but I bet Tory will be afraid to. Hopefully Chow won't. (Assuming here that both of them run.)
Click to expand...

Nobody will be behind the remove option because it will throw support to Ford. Any candidate who supports the removal will just stay non commital and then support removal later.
Why would any politician tell the truth when they can decieve instead.
 
RippedLikeStinson said:
Why is Jarvis the western extent of this proposal? Why not go further west, well past the downtown core?
Click to expand...

If they studied the entire Gardiner, the replace would have been a viable option. By limiting the scope, they eliminated one option to make removal look better.
 
BurlOak said:
If they studied the entire Gardiner, the replace would have been a viable option. By limiting the scope, they eliminated one option to make removal look better.
Click to expand...

How would this have made replace a viable option? Replace is always way more expensive than maintain, and at the end of the day you've got an elevated expressway.

If anything, the study has gone out of its way to minimize how much better the remove option is. The 10 minute traffic increase is a complete exaggeration. I said earlier in this thread that I wanted to see the real traffic data because the 10 minute increase made no sense to me. And today WT says that only 1% of all trips would see more than 7 minutes added to their trip.

Removal is the only sensible option, but the politics is tricky. It's not about throwing support to Ford, who is not going to be a factor, but to another candidate.
 
Grimace said:
How would this have made replace a viable option? Replace is always way more expensive than maintain, and at the end of the day you've got an elevated expressway.

If anything, the study has gone out of its way to minimize how much better the remove option is. The 10 minute traffic increase is a complete exaggeration. I said earlier in this thread that I wanted to see the real traffic data because the 10 minute increase made no sense to me. And today WT says that only 1% of all trips would see more than 7 minutes added to their trip.
Click to expand...

I wish they'd release the complete data. If only 1% of trips will have 7 minutes added, how many will have 10 minutes?
 
FNTS said:
I hope City Council agrees with them and we'll finally see this thing go. Hopefully the western section will come next!
Click to expand...

Don't count on it.

Most drivers, and people in general, view the East Gardiner as more of just a connector between where the Gardiner REALLY starts and the DVP. Convincing some to tear the eastern section may be difficult but the western section would probably be impossible. The western section is a far, far more important downtown access freeway than is the eastern.

It's good that Waterfront Toronto finally came out with it's recommendations but it's the councillors that matter. When will this be put to a vote? It can't be put off indefinitely because the damn thing is ready to fall down.
 
Grimace said:
How would this have made replace a viable option? Replace is always way more expensive than maintain, and at the end of the day you've got an elevated expressway.

If anything, the study has gone out of its way to minimize how much better the remove option is. The 10 minute traffic increase is a complete exaggeration. I said earlier in this thread that I wanted to see the real traffic data because the 10 minute increase made no sense to me. And today WT says that only 1% of all trips would see more than 7 minutes added to their trip.

Removal is the only sensible option, but the politics is tricky. It's not about throwing support to Ford, who is not going to be a factor, but to another candidate.
Click to expand...

I agree, it needs to be removed. If only 1% of trips are on the East Gardiner, what's the big deal? People in Toronto are just too afraid of change.
 
TOareaFan said:
how far west would you go? I think the issue is that it is much more used/congested westbound and finding solutions to the traffic needs is much harder.
Click to expand...

There's also no room for an 8 lane road due to all the condos.


Grimace said:
Need a mayoral candidate to get behind the removal option, but I bet Tory will be afraid to. Hopefully Chow won't. (Assuming here that both of them run.)
Click to expand...

I thought that the current council will make the decision.
 
Grimace said:
How would this have made replace a viable option? Replace is always way more expensive than maintain, and at the end of the day you've got an elevated expressway.
Click to expand...

With East Gardiner studied, how can you bury the East and then climb to 20m above ground by Jarvis. The grades needed would be very steep.
 
BurlOak said:
With East Gardiner studied, how can you bury the East and then climb to 20m above ground by Jarvis. The grades needed would be very steep.
Click to expand...

I don't understand. I didn't say anything about burying, and burying wasn't an option in the study. Burying eastern only doesn't make sense, not enough traffic to justify.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top