[AlvinofDiaspar]

TKTKTK:

I think the Gardiner provides a different urban environment. "Superior" is relative.

That's like saying that being beside an abattoir (or insert your favorite landuse here) provides a "different" urban environment, and by extension "superior" is relative.

Removing the Gardiner will not improve the life of cyclists or pedestrians; especially if its replaced by a higher-volume, larger road way (like Lake Shore East of the DVP).

Or it could, if done University Ave. style. The possiblity is there. I thought you're not into removing options?

Yes, and you pointed out that there's a development freeze on it, even though proposals have been previously made. Obviously the issue with that parcel is above and beyond the Gardiner (whose presense elsewhere hasn't seemed to impact new construction).

That doesn't mean the design aspects of the proposal hasn't been negatively impacted by the Gardiner - as had been demonstrated by existing buildings along the Gardiner.

Removing the Gardiner isn't going to make a development-frozen, flood-endangered site more desirable. Unfreezing it, and flood protecting it might though.

You are conflating desirability of a site to legal requirements for actual construction to occur.

AoD

 

[Dichotomy]

Actually, the plan is to have buildings against both the space the Gardiner is occupying right now and the cement factory. I guess either they're both on the waterfront or they both aren't eh?

AoD

Not sure who's going to want to live down by the stink of the Don River, but I guess that's just me.
Ever hang out at the foot of Coxwell (where all those lovely 600k townhomes are?) when the wind is blowing the wrong way?

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Dicotomy:

Just so you know, public policy of a punative nature is congruent with democracy. Throwing that word around to justify your particular brand of ideology cheapens it.

AoD

 

[Dichotomy]

Come now - that's because the area has just been rezoned for non-industrial purposes, plus being located in a flood zone (and actually, there is a freeze on development on the site - that's in spite of the fact that I can recall at least two proposals from the private sector).

If you want a more interesting indicator of effect of the Expressway - you should take a look at whether the majority of structures along the Gardiner actually actively uses that side of the building.

AoD

Well, a friend of mine lives in a Penthouse along Queen's Quay and half his two storey living room hangs about 20 feet over the Gardiner. You can't even hear it. Of course, his two balconies face the west and south, which is where the lake is anyway.

The Don River isn't going away, and lofty plans to turn it into a lovely marsh area (lest we forget that the reason the marshes were destroyed is because of the outbreaks of disease from the mosquitos therein 150 years ago) aren't going to help the stench.

 

[Dichotomy]

You can thank the government kowtowing to the car lobby and building miles of suburban freeways back in the 1960s for that.

Well, I don't know of any 16 year olds that turn to their mother and say, "I can't wait until I get my first MetroPass."

Most people want personal transportation. Whether that is a SmartCar or a Hummer, it's their CHOICE. In nearly all cases, public transit is a default choice because of economic conditions.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Well, a friend of mine lives in a Penthouse along Queen's Quay and half his two storey living room hangs about 20 feet over the Gardiner. You can't even hear it. Of course, his two balconies face the west and south, which is where the lake is anyway.

In other words, the design of the building (and the built environment) is being compromised by the presence of the Gardiner. And that's not even speaking of the ground level.

The Don River isn't going away, and lofty plans to turn it into a lovely marsh area (lest we forget that the reason the marshes were destroyed is because of the outbreaks of disease from the mosquitos therein 150 years ago) aren't going to help the stench.

Funnily enough, there is marsh at the foot of Spadina and it hasn't turned into West Nile central.

AoD

 

[Whoaccio]

Ideally (and let me stress "ideally") we would have an integrated transport plan combining expressways, heavy rail and such throughout the GTA. If I were to dream out loud, we would get something like:

http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=43.690069~-79.799194&style=h&lvl=9&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=28299670&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&cid=A043444D726AA4E8!230&encType=1

Toronto, or whoever, should just bite the bullet and buy up the rail corridors in the GTA. Make multi-modal corridors. To finance it, you could just put a 5$ toll on all GTA highways. Of course, the biggest opponent of road tolls are Rob Ford types. So, I don't know how you wanna deal with that.

 

[urbanboom]

Well, that's your version of social engineering. This is a DEMOCRACY. By the Toronto's Star's own figures, 76% of the people in this city DRIVE to work and 16% take the TTC.

Yet you don't hear me wanting to 'punish' the poor slobs on the TTC, do you?

You're right, this is a democracy. So if people really don't want this plan to happen, then an other person will run and defeat Miller. This could become a major debate in the next election... democracy will take its course, and the people in the end will decide.

As for me wanting to "punish" car drivers, I say this: I have very little sympathy for the person who lives in Uxbridge and works in downtown Toronto. Either you shouldn't live in Uxbridge, or you shouldn't be working in downtown Toronto. If you're going to us a highway that my tax dollars fund and pollute air that I breath, you better damn well pay for it, because I sure as hell won't for you.

 

[TKTKTK]

TKTKTK:



That's like saying that being beside an abattoir (or insert your favorite landuse here) provides a "different" urban environment, and by extension "superior" is relative.

Well, basically yes. And just like the Gardiner, the abattoir (though less than superior) hasn't prevented new development from springing up around it.

There are plenty of areas left in the city were people can choose not to live by the Gardiner, or by the abattoir.

Or it could, if done University Ave. style. The possiblity is there. I thought you're not into removing options?

Well, given they've already presented figures that suggest a University Ave. style boulevard would be under capacity by about 400 cars/hour, I'd say you're being optimistic, but disingenuous

Also, moving the 120,000 cars that use that stretch of the Gardiner each day onto the surface (even if only a percentage of that big number) will not better the lives of cyclists or pedestrians; they'll need to navigate through even MORE traffic.

I'd sooner see the money spent on making Queen's Quay (which is the present, logical, boulevard route through this part of the city) more pedestrian and cyclist friendly, even restricting car access to it further.

That doesn't mean the design aspects of the proposal hasn't been negatively impacted by the Gardiner - as had been demonstrated by existing buildings along the Gardiner.

I'm not sure it's the Gardiner that's negatively impacting the architecture of the area - as mediocre proposals seems to be a problem all over the city.

I happen to think there are some more than acceptable buildings along the Gardiner. None are my favourite, but they don't have to be.

You are conflating desirability of a site to legal requirements for actual construction to occur.

Nope. I'm pointing out that the desire is there (you said you knew of two previous proposals for the land), but the land is physically prevented from being developed right now.

 

[Glen]

The value and shape of developmental land is affected quite a bit by the presence of an ugly, loud, elevated highway right next door. It's not like you're all of the sudden going to see extra room for all sorts of new projects, but the land that's there WILL suddenly look a whole lot more interesting to developers. Which is the aim.

What is interesting about that is there a condo on Fleet west of Bathurst. It is beside both the Gardiner and a cement yard. If the presence of such decreases desirability, it will be reflected in value. Are those condos considerably less expense than others?

Furthermore, if land values for residential are depressed by the presence of the Gardiner, that gives an opportunity for lower cost housing to be developed. Conversely if the goal is to increase the desirability and hence value of the area let those whom will profit foot the bill. Tax increment financing would allow the cost to be borne by those whom benefit.

 

[TKTKTK]

or you shouldn't be working in downtown Toronto. If you're going to us a highway that my tax dollars fund and pollute air that I breath, you better damn well pay for it, because I sure as hell won't for you.

If they're working in Toronto, their employer is currently contributing taxes on their behalf

If my understanding is correct, businesses still shoulder the bulk of our city's tax base (though that's slowly being changed).

 

[Dichotomy]

When did I say you're stupid? I certainly understand why you're arguing, I was just poking fun at the tendency for most threads on this forum to explode into 30 or 40 page debates about things you're never going to change by yelling at each other. It's clear that both sides of this argument have their minds made up. At this point, it's like going up to a sixty year old Catholic priest who has been a Catholic his whole life and trying to convince him God doesn't exist. I never said stop arguing, just that you could probably do well with a detente of sorts because you're just wasting energy right now.

But hey, if you want to be all SERIOUS BUSINESS and prove my point that you all have to chill out a little, go ahead.

The major problem is not the vociferous shouting from one camp to another; rather it is that many have given up even being heard. We are losing the very value of dialogue - especially respectful communication - in the name of the sheer force of naked power.
It is this disrespecting of those with whom one disagrees, rather than building on the common ground from which we can all learn that is drowing out true dialogue in a background white noise of 'me-me-me.'
The polarization of issues facing us today is going to be the downfall of democracy.

 

[Dichotomy]

??????????????????????????????

What the f*? Are you on acid or something? If by cities you mean Cleveland and Pittsburgh, perhaps.

But in the major cities I've spent time in the last few years, all seem to have had much more serious traffic issues than Toronto. Manhattan, London, Paris, Seoul - and then there is Bangkok - there's nothing like Bangkok in rush hour.

Clean out your bong!

Pittsburgh and Cleveland have more in common with the Toronto (in terms of size, demography, population, geography) than Manhattan, London or Paris. Or Seoul or Bangkok.
Pity that you would compare our traffic to Manhattan, which has St. Jamestown's density up and down its length. I'd rather compare our traffic to more 'modern cities,' thanks. London and Paris' issues have everything to do with their age (1,000+ years) and their doubled size.

 

[Dichotomy]

You're right, this is a democracy. So if people really don't want this plan to happen, then an other person will run and defeat Miller. This could become a major debate in the next election... democracy will take its course, and the people in the end will decide.

As for me wanting to "punish" car drivers, I say this: I have very little sympathy for the person who lives in Uxbridge and works in downtown Toronto. Either you shouldn't live in Uxbridge, or you shouldn't be working in downtown Toronto. If you're going to us a highway that my tax dollars fund and pollute air that I breath, you better damn well pay for it, because I sure as hell won't for you.

I can certainly sympathise with your feelings here. I have to admit, when I get in a 'bad' mood I curse out the 'tourists' who clearly don't know where they're going and holding back traffic. The two accidents I've had in the past 10 years have both been by (incidentally) women; one from Markham who didn't know the middle lane of Jarvis (with the green arrow) is shared, and the other from Aurora who made a left turn on Avenue Rd., just south of St. Clair from the middlelane, not realizing it had widened to 6 lanes there.
However, this rapidly degenerates into an 'us' versus 'them' argument. If that's your thinking, then the Dome should have been built on Sheppard, as was originally proposed. If we insist on putting all the 'cultural' venues downtown, then we're going to have to tolerate the riff-raff from Uxbridge coming to them.

 

[urbanboom]

The major problem is not the vociferous shouting from one camp to another; rather it is that many have given up even being heard. We are losing the very value of dialogue - especially respectful communication - in the name of the sheer force of naked power.
It is this disrespecting of those with whom one disagrees, rather than building on the common ground from which we can all learn that is drowing out true dialogue in a background white noise of 'me-me-me.'
The polarization of issues facing us today is going to be the downfall of democracy.

I don't really things are a polarizing as you might think... Barely more than half of Ontario voted in the last election. I think the opposite of polarization is happening: people are just not caring at all.