[nfitz]

The plan is to build two new ramps east of Cherry street connecting to a new street that runs parallel to Keating Channel and merges with Lakeshore just west of the Don.

From what I can see hybrid, that' the new street doesn't merge with the Lakeshore. There's a new street on what appears to be a near-90-degree angle from Lakeshore, but you have to (if heading westbound) turn left on that new street - I'm not seeing a merge. And then presumably you'd have to turn right on that street onto the other new street that has the merge with the Gardiner.

Oh hang on ... looking at the fuzzy graphic closely. So there's a street under the ramps crossing Lakeshore. And it will have an odd 3-way intersection. So you could follow either the orange or purple (badly drawn) paths below.

Oh my ... what a horrid looking intersection.

Now why is there no sign of this interesection just west of the Don on the 3-D view in the same presentation materials? And why not use a roundabout?

 

[Edward Skira]

Sure burns the C3 (Cityzen/Castlepoint) people in favour of Great Gulf if the hybrid solution goes through.

 

[vic]

 

[nfitz]

What does "4WD Section" mean along that strip of grass?

 

[muller877]

So it looks like more people support tearing down this section of road than support rebuilding it (45% vs 33%, across all demographic lines and city locations). I hope council will have some courage come next week.

Hardly a fair poll. If you look at the script it first says tearing down is cheaper ($450M more for some responders) and will result in a better waterfront. Versus commuting times.

They then asked about which one you favour.

Add in the cost of LRT to make sure commuting times are not insane (as per the development plan). Also add the cost of running the LRT for 99 years to make it comparable. Is it really cheaper?

Alternatively you should include the real change in commuting time without this LRT line that has not been funded (and including the 99 year operations would cost > $1 billion)

Oh...wait. That would result in a fair comparison. We wouldn't want that.

 

[Toffy]

What does "4WD Section" mean along that strip of grass?

The eastbound paved roadway disappears to become a grassed 4-wheel drive portion of Lakeshore. Relax though, you'll only need 4WD when it's raining.

 

[dowlingm]

The Harbour Lead rail line disappears in some renders too.

 

[dowlingm]

Hardly a fair poll. If you look at the script it first says tearing down is cheaper ($450M more for some responders) and will result in a better waterfront. Versus commuting times.

They then asked about which one you favour.

Add in the cost of LRT to make sure commuting times are not insane (as per the development plan). Also add the cost of running the LRT for 99 years to make it comparable. Is it really cheaper?

Alternatively you should include the real change in commuting time without this LRT line that has not been funded (and including the 99 year operations would cost > $1 billion)

Oh...wait. That would result in a fair comparison. We wouldn't want that.

LRT was not supposed to be conditional on Gardiner East. It was supposed to be conditional on Queens Quay East development. The City and WT couldn't get their funding act together plus the requirement to tunnel further from Bay drove up project cost and it got pushed back. There is some opportunism in pushing for LRT funding to come from GE savings, but what is offside about using an opportunity for the City to deal with an unfunded commitment?

 

[nfitz]

The eastbound paved roadway disappears to become a grassed 4-wheel drive portion of Lakeshore. Relax though, you'll only need 4WD when it's raining.

LOL. Okay, I get it now ... though one of the two figures appears to be erroneous. Not sure which.

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

Hardly a fair poll. If you look at the script it first says tearing down is cheaper ($450M more for some responders) and will result in a better waterfront. Versus commuting times.

That's awesome... so, it's an unfair poll because it tells the truth???

I do have to admit, though, that I am becoming more and more hostile to the Modified Maintain (which you might know as Hybrid) option. I was OK with it a couple of weeks ago, although I preferred the Boulevard, but the more people whinge about the 'adding 2mn to my commute' thing, the more I get annoyed by the process. Although, I'm sure the 'defenders of 2 minutes' must feel the same as I disparage something that is so important to them as to spend a $1bn dollars on...

 

[dowlingm]

If City Staff believed in "hybrid" not only would Keesmaat be supportive or neutral but Buckley would be trotted out to bat for it. Instead Tory is relying solely on political staff and proxies to make this happen. And he's within touching distance of winning!

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Has Keesmatt come out against the hybrid? I haven't been paying too much attention recently

 

[andrewpmk]

It sounds like the poll is using a biased question and Toronto's population (the vast majority of which is clueless about municipal politics) is falling for this.

Replacing Gardiner (4 lanes) and Lake Shore (3 lanes) with only Lake Shore (widened to 4 lanes) would be a 43% reduction in capacity, which would almost certainly cause close to 24/7 traffic jams. "Induced demand" is nonsense because only a small fraction of people would avoid the area, most people will keep driving but many of them will take Richmond/Adelaide, 401, etc. causing more traffic jams on those roads. Toronto traffic is bad enough and intentionally making it worse for cars, trucks and GO buses is unacceptable. Just like closing the Gardiner and DVP at the same time for the "ride for heart" causes traffic chaos and Tory needs to convince council to put an end to endlessly closing roads every single weekend most of the year causing traffic chaos.

 

[dowlingm]

Has Keesmatt come out against the hybrid? I haven't been paying too much attention recently

https://twitter.com/jen_keesmaat/status/602233227428896768
https://twitter.com/jen_keesmaat/status/605152057562165248
https://twitter.com/jen_keesmaat/status/605337273777967104

 

[vic]

It sounds like the poll is using a biased question and Toronto's population (the vast majority of which is clueless about municipal politics) is falling for this.

Replacing Gardiner (4 lanes) and Lake Shore (3 lanes) with only Lake Shore (widened to 4 lanes) would be a 43% reduction in capacity, which would almost certainly cause close to 24/7 traffic jams. "Induced demand" is nonsense because only a small fraction of people would avoid the area, most people will keep driving but many of them will take Richmond/Adelaide, 401, etc. causing more traffic jams on those roads. Toronto traffic is bad enough and intentionally making it worse for cars, trucks and GO buses is unacceptable. Just like closing the Gardiner and DVP at the same time for the "ride for heart" causes traffic chaos and Tory needs to convince council to put an end to endlessly closing roads every single weekend most of the year causing traffic chaos.

Merging a short section of the Gardiner and Lake Shore into a wider boulevard is nothing like completely closing a much longer section of the Gardiner and most of the DVP for Ride For Heart.