I suppose everyone's definition of gridlock is different. During my five years of commuting from Yong & Eglinton to Warden & Hwy 7 I was never able to find a consistantly satisfactory route through or around the 401/404 area, and believe me: I tried every possible combination of sideroads, highways and cowpaths you can imagine. Some days were better than others, but all it took was a fender bender or a bit of rain or a single lane closed for construction and my commute was suddenly doubled or tripled in length. Not to mention that I also found it stressful, that constant merging and battling with other angry and frustrated motorists. Some people are not bothered by it, but it wore me down after a few years. That's what I think of when I hear the phrase "gridlock".
Today as a pedestrian I still see daily jams along all the north-south routes downtown, particularly on streets like Sherbourne, Jarvis, and Yonge as motorists all try to crush southward to the Gardiner, getting stuck in intersections in a honking mass that is bad enough to obstruct crosswalks and endanger pedestrians. The Esplanade, which as the name suggests is generally a pretty nice street to walk along, is not so relaxing during rush hour as many commuters use it as an East-West alternative to Front St, gunning their engines after every speed bump and barely tapping their brakes at the stop signs. I see that as overflow that shows the main roads can't handle the traffic at peak times.
At any rate, "Toronto's gridlock is not as bad as XXXX city's gridlock yet" is hardly an argument not to plan ahead. You can debate the meaning of gridlock but Toronto's traffic is bad enough to be frustrating, and it will only get worse; now is the time to plan for the future and make sensible changes. That said, I'm also not convinced that a downtown toll system like London UK is the right solution for Toronto. But neither is doing nothing.
