|
So now Toronto's brilliant mayor wants to tear down the Gardiner (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| loca |
| quote: | Originally posted by smuncky
eventually, they will intergrate all the gta transit systems. they are now in the planning stages but eventually will run the whole transportation system in the gta. |
I think the idea is ridiculous. Pushing all the traffic onto University is going to be absolutely insane. I honestly shudder when I think about the time we're going to spend in traffic jams.
On the whole new transit thing deal... jesus christ. I don't know if some of you realize that not everyone lives downtown. Some of us have to commute from YRT to TTC and now you would add a third one?! It would most likely cost me more to take the public transit than to drive my car in the end :nervous: |
|
|
| smuncky |
| quote: | Originally posted by loca
I think the idea is ridiculous. Pushing all the traffic onto University is going to be absolutely insane. I honestly shudder when I think about the time we're going to spend in traffic jams.
|
???
i think you got confused somewhere.
| quote: | Originally posted by loca
On the whole new transit thing deal... jesus christ. I don't know if some of you realize that not everyone lives downtown. Some of us have to commute from YRT to TTC and now you would add a third one?! It would most likely cost me more to take the public transit than to drive my car in the end :nervous: |
there won't be a third transit operater. metrolinx will overlook all the transit operators and intergrate things like fares, schedules and planning for better efficiency. there will still be a yrt, ttc, GO, MT, etc. so instead of each agency doing their own thing and not caring what the other is doing, everything will be coordinated through metrolinx. that's basically a really watered down explaination. |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| The gardnier needs to go but I don't see a viable alternative at this time. The population of Toronto doubles during the week with the number of commuters there are. Lakeshore is currently the best alternative to taking the Gardiner however; expanding the lakeshore would completely go against developing the waterfront. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
2 minutes, LOL!!! 2 minutes is what it costs when some stoner takes 30 seconds to rev up at the advance green and I miss my turn!
Even at 4 AM, with no traffic on the roads, just going from around Dufferin to the DVP on the Gardiner saves more than 2 minutes taking Lakeshore from Bathurst or Spadina just due to the lights. That's not even counting other drivers on the roads.
The article refers to "waterfront planners" - I wonder if this includes any traffic engineers?
I think a huge part of the problem is that people are comparing the commute time on the Gardiner now compared to other roads and simply pretending (or believing with unfathomable naivete) that this will be exactly how much longer everybody's commute will be. They somehow manage to ignore that the traffic that would have been on the Gardiner still has to go somewhere, and that factor by itself is likely to double or triple the city commute time.
Even worse, when major intersections are very close together (which they are, downtown), traffic congestion can eventually reach a saturation point where the slowdown becomes more exponential than linear. If the interval between lights isn't long enough for all of the cars within that stretch to get through the intersection, you end up with a cumulative pile-up AKA total gridlock.
TWO MINUTES... haha, even the Star was cynical about that figure! Where do they find these people!? |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by smuncky
metrolinx will overlook all the transit operators and intergrate things like fares, schedules and planning for better efficiency. |
In theory. |
|
|
| loca |
| quote: | Originally posted by smuncky
???
i think you got confused somewhere.
there won't be a third transit operater. metrolinx will overlook all the transit operators and intergrate things like fares, schedules and planning for better efficiency. there will still be a yrt, ttc, GO, MT, etc. so instead of each agency doing their own thing and not caring what the other is doing, everything will be coordinated through metrolinx. that's basically a really watered down explaination.
|
No lol that first point wasn't intended as a response to what you posted :p
As for Metrolinx... I suppose in some areas it might be useful, but tbh I'd rather they didn't coordinate fares lol Unless they convinced the YRT to go back down to 2.75. Either way, this is something that leaves me unconvinced, I would really have to see proof of how they plan to make this work before I would back up a project like this.
**edit**
[this is not for you either smuncky :p]
2 minutes, my ass. |
|
|
| dEsidEL |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
2 minutes, LOL!!! 2 minutes is what it costs when some stoner takes 30 seconds to rev up at the advance green and I miss my turn!
Even at 4 AM, with no traffic on the roads, just going from around Dufferin to the DVP on the Gardiner saves more than 2 minutes taking Lakeshore from Bathurst or Spadina just due to the lights. That's not even counting other drivers on the roads.
The article refers to "waterfront planners" - I wonder if this includes any traffic engineers?
I think a huge part of the problem is that people are comparing the commute time on the Gardiner now compared to other roads and simply pretending (or believing with unfathomable naivete) that this will be exactly how much longer everybody's commute will be. They somehow manage to ignore that the traffic that would have been on the Gardiner still has to go somewhere, and that factor by itself is likely to double or triple the city commute time.
Even worse, when major intersections are very close together (which they are, downtown), traffic congestion can eventually reach a saturation point where the slowdown becomes more exponential than linear. If the interval between lights isn't long enough for all of the cars within that stretch to get through the intersection, you end up with a cumulative pile-up AKA total gridlock.
TWO MINUTES... haha, even the Star was cynical about that figure! Where do they find these people!? |
I think 2 minutes was the cherry coated topping estimate given by the initial planners. The Environmental Assessment of the area is expected to flesh that out into a more realistic figure. Too bad it's supposed to take another 5 years just to come up with.
For those who are worried about what implications the removal of the Gardiner will have without a viable alternative to re-route traffic, you needn't worry since most of us, and surely the planners of this monster probably won't be alive by the time a shovel is put into the ground.
It's no suprise some members of the public feel a general cynicism about the whole issue given that the city has been 'talking' about this now for more than 10 years with barely anything seeing the light of day. That goes for the Waterfront as well.
|
|
|
| smuncky |
btw, they just implemented a new plan. while the EA is going on, the gardiner will be restricted to bicycles only. it was started yesterday as well.
 |
|
|
| zoogla |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
if you get on at exactly the right time |
That's the difference between your 400 example and that section of the Gardiner; it always seems to be empty, regardless of time of day. Obviously, when there's an accident or something it will be packed, but then so would any road so that's a moot point. |
|
|
| malek |
faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaking hippies.
When these people will understand that containers don't take neither the bicycle, the tramway or the bus.
:whip: :whip: :whip:
We have *exactly* the same issue here in MTL, a highway project bordering the port (one of the largest container port in the north atlantic) was seriously watered down! From 8 lanes, it becomes 4 lanes, plus two reserved for buses and 2 for HOV. Speed was lowered to 60 and it will have lights during off rush hours.
Opposants suggested that it would block access to the river, an access they never had in the first place because of the port and its containers, and the port isn't planning to go anywhere for the next 50+ years.
These people were showing Toronto as example for tearing down the gardiner, which was simply false.
Its very discouraging :( |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by fayraree
That's the difference between your 400 example and that section of the Gardiner; it always seems to be empty, regardless of time of day. Obviously, when there's an accident or something it will be packed, but then so would any road so that's a moot point. |
What part of the Gardiner is always empty, even during rush hour? |
|
|
| zoogla |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
What part of the Gardiner is always empty, even during rush hour? |
DVP --> Jarvis. During morning traffic or evening. |
|
|
|
|
