[TOareaFan]

May I ask why we need a Yonge/York ramp? That creates a lot of gridlock. I mean, having a ramp at Spadina and Jarvis is not convenient enough for drivers? I think the entire Yonge/York ramp should be removed completely. Why would we allow cars to downtown on Yonge st, and then what, run directly on downtown Yonge st?

I think the theory is (or would have been) if you are going to bring traffic into the downtown on a freeway the least disruptive way to have them meet city roads is in a dispersed manner. If you bring volumes of cars into the core and force them onto two streets irrespective of where they are actually headed, then you just jam/clog those streets with traffic that was never intended to be there. The York/Yonge/Bay ramp takes cars off the Gardiner and funnels them up those three streets (actually 4 as York fairly quickly splits between York and University at Front Street).

If, as you suggest, you shut down that ramp I don't think you would attain your goal of no cars on Yonge....you would just further clog Spadina at the south end until the cars could get over to Yonge since, for a portion of those cars, their destination is over at/near Yonge. Not only would Spadina take on more traffic than it wants/needs it would further clog the east west routes between Spadina and York/Uni/Bay/Yonge.

 

[nfitz]

Am I misreading something....the chart you show in support of that shows the A-D commute time is 15 minutes longer comparing remove to the base (2012) time. B-D also 15 minutes longer....C-D 10 minutes longer and E-D 5 minutes longer.

A-D is forecast to be 50 minutes in 2031 if they keep the way it is, 55 minutes if they replace it, and 60 minutes if they remove it.

You can't compare to 2012.

What I want to see is travel times from B to E and C to E.

 

[TOareaFan]

A-D is forecast to be 50 minutes in 2031 if they keep the way it is, 55 minutes if they replace it, and 60 minutes if they remove it.

You can't compare to 2012.

Thanks.....but still more than......

What studies? I don't recall anything like that. We're talking 5 minute difference at best.

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

This is what I was going off of:

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/02/05/gardiner_report_favours_removal_in_the_east.html

The one drawback for removal would be added commute time for drivers. They could experience an increased travel time of 10 minutes each way, and more if transit options such as the TTC’s relief subway line don’t come to fruition.

The numbers are presented in an extremely confusing fashion.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Really? I don't see how the report could have made it any more clear.

 

[Grimace]

We had an exchange on this stuff over a year ago. At one point they were saying that only 1% of trips would see travel times increase more than 7 minutes. The travel time increases with the removal option struck me as exaggerated. I look out on the Eastern Gardiner from my office and the bottlenecks during busy times are at other places.

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

My sympathies, but if your life revolves around Mississauga to that extent, you should move to Mississauga. There must be something about the east end that keeps you there, right? Maybe your family can adjust to you, rather than the other way around. Or maybe your wife's job is portable? If the Unilever site does get developed out quickly, there should be 10,000 jobs looking for candidates!

Why not live in Mississauga? Do I even need to answer that? Our neighbourhood is wonderful except for the small problem of my wife's job, which very specialized and not at all portable. We have other friends and family nearby on the east side, it's just her parents who are in the west end. In turn, they have to care for elderly relatives in Oakville...

My point is that people live and work throughout the GTA for myriad reasons and rely on being able to use a multi-faceted transportation network. I think that the eastbound Gardiner is a sufficiently important part of that network that we should maintain it.

BTW, I didn't live in the area when the stub came down, but I can understaned that the traffic volumes didn't justify an expressway.I do know that Lakeshore can get really backed up during rush hour - that light at Carlaw takes forever - and the area seems poised to remain industrial forever. On balance the teardown there probably made sense, but it was a stub...

 

[salsa]

Am I misreading something....the chart you show in support of that shows the A-D commute time is 15 minutes longer comparing remove to the base (2012) time. B-D also 15 minutes longer....C-D 10 minutes longer and E-D 5 minutes longer.

I'd point out that the chart actually indicates 10 minutes over Maintain, but as the G&M article says, that's going to be even less with the further analysis.

$660 million, for less than 10 minutes, for a minority of drivers, some of the time. Given all of the other benefits, what other legs does Gardiner East have left to stand on?

Guys, I am comparing the difference between the remove and replace option which we are currently debating as to which one is the better solution. The difference amounts to only 5 minutes, contrary to the 15 that DarnDirtyApe was claiming. I brightly doubt council will choose to maintain the expressway as it exists today, so that's off the table. It's either gonna be removed or replaced.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Why not live in Mississauga? Do I even need to answer that? Our neighbourhood is wonderful except for the small problem of my wife's job, which very specialized and not at all portable. We have other friends and family nearby on the east side, it's just her parents who are in the west end. In turn, they have to care for elderly relatives in Oakville...

My point is that people live and work throughout the GTA for myriad reasons and rely on being able to use a multi-faceted transportation network. I think that the eastbound Gardiner is a sufficiently important part of that network that we should maintain it.

BTW, I didn't live in the area when the stub came down, but I can understaned that the traffic volumes didn't justify an expressway.I do know that Lakeshore can get really backed up during rush hour - that light at Carlaw takes forever - and the area seems poised to remain industrial forever. On balance the teardown there probably made sense, but it was a stub...

Your sob story is nice and all, but we don't build infrastructure for individuals. If you have to move, well too bad.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

We had an exchange on this stuff over a year ago. At one point they were saying that only 1% of trips would see travel times increase more than 7 minutes. The travel time increases with the removal option struck me as exaggerated. I look out on the Eastern Gardiner from my office and the bottlenecks during busy times are at other places.

I recall that too. Hopefully they break it down in the EA.nI couldn't care less if 15 people have their commutes increased by 15 minutes or whatever.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Guys, I am comparing the difference between the remove and replace option which we are currently debating as to which one is the better solution. The difference amounts to only 5 minutes, contrary to the 15 that DarnDirtyApe was claiming. I brightly doubt council will choose to maintain the expressway as it exists today, so that's off the table. It's either gonna be removed or replaced.

Why do your doubt that they will vote to maintain? That's the most likely outcome, in my opinion. It's relatively cheap, and they won't upset any drivers.

 

[salsa]

So I'm looking at the traffic conditions on google maps in the height of rush hour as I wait for my bus to come. Highways all over the GTA are a complete cluster f right now (as always) except for the east part of the Gardiner expressway. U know what, just tear it down already. Carmageddon did not materialize when dozens of other cities around the world demolished their urban highways, and it's not gonna happen here either.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Does the City keep records of how many cars use our avenues at peak hour? I'd like to compare that to the Gardiner East.

 

[nfitz]

Thanks.....but still more than......

That 5 minutes was in a response to trips from the East End. Point C. None of the 2031 trips for improve, replace, or remove are more than 5 minutes worse than for Maintain.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Woah. $900 Million? Scrap that plan.

I never expected it to be so expensive.

That $900,000,000 will have to be done all over again (with inflation increasing those numbers) in another 25 to 50 years. And that's just for that section east of Jarvis.