Highways in Canada

[Wharn]

Originally Posted by The_Architect

I'm not just saying "Look at Detroit!" in saying that's why it's failing, I point to Detroit when I try to show the difference between a downtown cut apart by freeways and one that has freeways around the outside but an full, intact downtown area. North-South routes are needed, and the Don/427 help with that, but the answer can't be one like the planned Spadina Expressway. The Allen is a good start to that, but it ends rather abruptly and would work much better if it directly connected to Bathurst.. without tearing up neighbourhoods like the Annex.

Again, we are avoiding the fact that Detroit's downtown ended up in its current state due to factors other than freeways. Even before the 1967 riots the city had a toxic environment and racism ran deep on both sides. The freeways merely allowed the white middle class to run away from their problems (instead of reconciling with the disenfranchised black community) and still commute to their jobs in downtown Detroit.

Also, on the topic of the Allen, Bathurst street is a disaster as it is. Having an expressway prematurely terminating at it would make the narrow 4-lane corridor downright nightmarish. At least we agree that the Allen (formerly Spadina) needed to be re-routed, although IMO it would still be best if the terminus was downtown.

Originally Posted by The_Architect

Not geographic isolation, if there are ways of providing transportation without razing some of the best parts of the Toronto waterfront, then by all means do it. Besides, if the city makes it's transit better to serve the area well, why would they all have to drive into downtown anyways? Toronto is already too car-centric, might as well not make it more so.

Statistically speaking, what is considered "too car-centric"? Toronto already has the third-highest transit ridership on the continent. We beat out supposedly "transit-centric" cities like Vancouver, Portland and San Francisco.

It may have also occurred to planners that some people prefer driving, and for them the opportunity cost of using transit in terms of inconvenience (due to the nature of the job) or lost time is simply too high. Planners ought to maintain a balance between transit and the automobile instead of favouring one over the other; many European cities seem to use this balanced approach with good results (Stuttgart comes to mind). But I suppose it is a futile argument, because Toronto has always enjoyed screwing over poor Scarborough, so either way no real useful development (except maybe the Sheppard subway) will occur.

Originally Posted by The_Architect

Besides, the area is more than a "few dozen cottages". It's one of the nicer neighbourhoods of Scarborough, and the Bluffs and Beaches are 2 highly well known areas of the Toronto waterfront.

The revised plans called for the highway to run between Gerrard and Danforth. I commute through that neighbourhood sometimes, it's definitely not anything special (even by Scarberia standards) and you couldn't even call it a "waterfront" neighbourhood.

Originally Posted by The_Architect

The Bluffs themselves are viewed as a geological wonder, and a unique feature in North America. It would be like building an expressway right along the cliffs of Dover IMO.

As you can see in the image above, the proposed expressway is nowhere near the bluffs. Ignoring the "natural wonder" aspect for a moment, it's a bad idea to build a major transport corridor on top of them because they are geologically unstable and have poor access to other arterials.

[niwell]

Originally Posted by Wharn

The revised plans called for the highway to run between Gerrard and Danforth. I commute through that neighbourhood sometimes, it's definitely not anything special (even by Scarberia standards) and you couldn't even call it a "waterfront" neighbourhood.

As a resident of Riverdale I kinda take offense to that. The housing stock in the neighbourhood is one of the best and most desired in the central city. Far better materially than my preferred west end locales. Gerrard st itself isn't great but try looking at the residential streets.

As I posted before, I'm not sure how an expressway ROW following the Lakeshore west line would have worked out. It's not very wide and a LOT of amenites along Gerrard and Dundas simply would not exist if the expressway was constructed. For instance the lofts and arts complexes in former factories at Dundas and Carlaw. There are hundreds (seriously) of independent businesses in those buildings.

[flar]

Originally Posted by Wharn

Again, we are avoiding the fact that Detroit's downtown ended up in its current state due to factors other than freeways. Even before the 1967 riots the city had a toxic environment and racism ran deep on both sides. The freeways merely allowed the white middle class to run away from their problems (instead of reconciling with the disenfranchised black community) and still commute to their jobs in downtown Detroit.

The freeways were a major factor in Detroit's decline. For one, as you mentioned yourself, they enabled white flight. Detroit is the poster child for suburbanization at the expense of the inner city. Not only that, but those freeways absolutely destroyed neighbourhoods. Businesses failed and social networks were disrupted as people were cut off from one another. This primarily affected the black community, exacerbating the race problems. As you might imagine black businesses and neighbourhoods were the ones that were disproportionately expropriated.

[MolsonExport]

^indeed. As was the case with the South Bronx, destroyed by Robert Moses's cross-Bronx expressway.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Bronx


On the subject of South Bronx, here is one of the most fascinating videos on Youtube:
• Video Link

[Pimpmasterdac]

To be fair Toronto doesn't have the same type of racial problems that Detroit or the Bronx had/has. Downtown Toronto is an established it place to be, where there's plenty of culture, commerce and community. Extending the 400 South or Gatineau hydo highway isn't going to require mass expropriation or destroy communities.

Toronto unfortunately has poor public transit & expressway system. To this day there persists an adversarial relationship between public transit & expressways, when rather they can work in tandem with each other. Someone from Vaughn or Oshawa will have to drive into Toronto proper, giving them a more direct route than the clogged DVP or 427. Giving more options both for public transit and private automobile will help alleviate the demand on both strained methods!

[haljackey]

Originally Posted by Pimpmasterdac

Extending the 400 South or Gatineau hydo highway isn't going to require mass expropriation or destroy communities.

I agree that the 400 can be extended to the Gardiner if a logical design can be agreed upon.

Building a new highway through that power field would pour even more traffic onto the Don Valley Parking Lot and in theory should directly connect with the Gardiner/DVP interchange. I doubt any of this highway would ever get built.


As for the Gardiner itself... Repair it? Replace it? Remove it? Tunnel it?

[Pimpmasterdac]

Gatineau hydro highway is definitely needed, where the 404 turns into the DVP is the worst bottleneck in all of Ontario. The 404 South goes from 5 to 3 lanes, as well it has to contend with merging traffic from 401 West, 401 East Collectors and 401 East Express. Literally 6 lanes are forced to merge into 3 in a distance of 200 metres.

While it's arguable that traffic jams would be moved from here to Eglinton where the corridor intersects it, Eglinton to 401 is where the DVP becomes a parking lot. Allowing eastern bound traffic a more direct route will help the rest of the DVP North and 401.

Elevated Gardiner will have to be replaced sooner than later. No one has the political balls to come up with a practical solution though, as they'll be extremely pricey. I don't see another elevated concrete Gardiner II being built, tunnelling it would make the Eglinton LRT seem cheap and tearing it down isn't practical. There's a viaduct solution which would make it 8 to 10 lanes, but would also be expensive.

Toronto needs to get a real comprehensive transportation plan going ASAP!

[Wharn]

Originally Posted by niwell

As a resident of Riverdale I kinda take offense to that. The housing stock in the neighbourhood is one of the best and most desired in the central city. Far better materially than my preferred west end locales. Gerrard st itself isn't great but try looking at the residential streets.

Don't take offense, my parents' Toronto neighbourhood (where I grew up) is nothing special either. It's just a nondescript North York subdivision. Same goes for South Riverdale; it's standard, mass-produced 1920s and 1930s housing stock, just like the Leslie and Cummer area is standard, mass-produced 1960s and 1970s housing stock. Sorry if you're offended by that but it's just the reality of these neighbourhoods. It would not be a tragedy to lose either one.

Originally Posted by flar

The freeways were a major factor in Detroit's decline. For one, as you mentioned yourself, they enabled white flight. Detroit is the poster child for suburbanization at the expense of the inner city.

They only allowed White Flight to take place in the Detroit Metro Area. I'm sure all the white folk would have eventually moved away from the city completely if there was no way of them getting downtown from their distant suburban homes. It would be like what happened with the anglos in Montreal, but on a much larger scale (and for different reasons).

Originally Posted by haljackey

Building a new highway through that power field would pour even more traffic onto the Don Valley Parking Lot and in theory should directly connect with the Gardiner/DVP interchange. I doubt any of this highway would ever get built.

I agree, the highway through the power field would only work with a separate route into the downtown. Either that or you would need some sort of insane double-decker expressway along the current DVP route. Maybe if the city of Toronto hadn't sold off so much of the ROW to make way for shitty Scarberia housing stock, we could have at least built part of it.

Originally Posted by haljackey

As for the Gardiner itself... Repair it? Replace it? Remove it? Tunnel it?

The Gardiner has to stay in some form, personally I prefer the elevated highway. Burying it would be a waste of money since you would still have a 15-foot rail embankment and a slew of ugly condos cutting people off from the lake. May as well throw in the unpretty but efficient concrete slab.

[haljackey]

Yeah I still think elevated is the best option, and should be considered when the existing structure needs to be torn down. It can be easily redesigned to me much more friendly to it's new surroundings.

...Remember, when the elevated Gardiner was built, most of it was in industrial lands and rail yards... going over everything made sense. Today, most of the land is residential/mixed use/recreational, and the expressway should be redesigned to reflect that.

[The_Architect]

Took a funny picture of the Gardiner from Fort York last Saturday at Doors Open Toronto, I felt it'd be quite appropriate here:



Why pay for demolition when a cannon can do the job??

[feepa]

This topic of unbuilt and near built freeways in Toronto reminded me of this ultimate freeway plan for downtown Edmonton back in the 60s...

Check it out: http://albertaroads.homestead.com/edmonton/plans/index.html

I'd post the jpgs here, but they are rather large. Well worth the visit (Also a link to unbuilt Calgary freeways there too)

[go_leafs_go02]

Well, I can say you guys in Ontario have it lucky about how your freeways are built. Vancouver/BC is still struggling to get out of the 1960s in terms of how they design it.

There isn't a freeway wider than 6 lanes in any point in Metro Vancouver, and all bridges (unless tolled) are complete bottlenecks.

And yet the mistakes still occur. Rather than build for example a nice HOV/Bus lane in the media, the Ministry decides to do some half-assed bus shoulder lane - Highway 99 up through Surrey, Delta, Richmond...

[Metro-One]

well you can sleep easy knowing that the government is currently building a 3 billion dollar freeway project, involving a 20 km or so stretch of 8 lanes with a 3 km stretch of 10 lanes over the new Port Mann, involving all very modern designed interchanges

[go_leafs_go02]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

well you can sleep easy knowing that the government is currently building a 3 billion dollar freeway project, involving a 20 km or so stretch of 8 lanes with a 3 km stretch of 10 lanes over the new Port Mann, involving all very modern designed interchanges

Which I would argue is at least 15-20 years overdue. Yes, I'm looking forward to it, but I've also heard that after Gateway - that's it for highway expansion/upgrades in Metro Vancouver.

Massey Tunnel desperately needs upgrading - the 72 Ave / Hwy 91 signal won't be going away anytime soon - because somehow a municipality has control over what the Ministry does.

I'm all for HOV lanes, but they need to be done properly. Those half-assed bus lanes on Highway 99 between King George up to 91, as well as north of the tunnel is just a waste of money for how they were built.

I'm also hoping for HOV lanes to be constructed on Highway 91 on the east-west connector (although I'm not quite sure how the alex fraser bridge could be handled)

As well, I don't know why on the Surrey side of the Gateway Programme, the 232 Street interchange wasn't included. 176, 200 st have little no problems in terms of freeway traffic, but 232 bogs down significantly most days eastbound due to heavy amounts of traffic merging. Gateway should have included 232 Street in my plans, and ideally, I would like to see at least 6 lanes to Abbotsford (preferably 8 however with 2 of those lanes being HOV/Rapid Bus)

[Mininari]

Originally Posted by go_leafs_go02

Which I would argue is at least 15-20 years overdue. Yes, I'm looking forward to it, but I've also heard that after Gateway - that's it for highway expansion/upgrades in Metro Vancouver.

Massey Tunnel desperately needs upgrading - the 72 Ave / Hwy 91 signal won't be going away anytime soon - because somehow a municipality has control over what the Ministry does.

I'm all for HOV lanes, but they need to be done properly. Those half-assed bus lanes on Highway 99 between King George up to 91, as well as north of the tunnel is just a waste of money for how they were built.

I'm also hoping for HOV lanes to be constructed on Highway 91 on the east-west connector (although I'm not quite sure how the alex fraser bridge could be handled)

As well, I don't know why on the Surrey side of the Gateway Programme, the 232 Street interchange wasn't included. 176, 200 st have little no problems in terms of freeway traffic, but 232 bogs down significantly most days eastbound due to heavy amounts of traffic merging. Gateway should have included 232 Street in my plans, and ideally, I would like to see at least 6 lanes to Abbotsford (preferably 8 however with 2 of those lanes being HOV/Rapid Bus)

1) Massey Tunnel: H99 Project vision. timeline... 2020+?
2) 72nd/91 lights; you're BANG ON. What a ridiculous situation.
3) 91 HOV could just merge back in like the HOV did for the Port Mann prior to its 5-laning... gives the HOV priority access to the bridge.
4) The need out-to-Abbotsford 6-laning will become ever more deseperately needed... maybe we'll see it along with modernization of 232 / glover / 264th interchanges... $300M project?

[go_leafs_go02]

Originally Posted by Mininari

1) Massey Tunnel: H99 Project vision. timeline... 2020+?
2) 72nd/91 lights; you're BANG ON. What a ridiculous situation.
3) 91 HOV could just merge back in like the HOV did for the Port Mann prior to its 5-laning... gives the HOV priority access to the bridge.
4) The need out-to-Abbotsford 6-laning will become ever more deseperately needed... maybe we'll see it along with modernization of 232 / glover / 264th interchanges... $300M project?

I really only drive HIghway 1 east through Abbotsford, so that's where my issues are.

The MOT redid the Fraser Highway/Mt. Lehman interchange 5-6 years ago, their upgrading the Clearbrook and McCallum interchanges this year, while 232 Street causes more problems than Clearbrook or McCallum ever did to traffic flow from what I seen.

Why 232 Street was NOT included in Gateway is beyond me - I've recently emailed the MOT asking why and whether or not any short-term upgrades are planned. Heck, all they need to do is ramp metering to temporarily relieve EB merging traffic in the PM peak. Once that interchange is redone properly, hopefully 264 Street is soon after (even though it functions reasonably well).

Highway 1 DOES work alright right now as 2+2 laning right now from Langley to Abbotsford. However, I see that changing drastically in the next few years.

Either provide proper rapid transit (by rail - rather large proponent of Rail for the Valley) or widen the Highway.

I think what would work best is an 8 lane wide section of roadway east to Abbotsford, 3 general lanes in each way, and 1 HOV/Rapid Bus on the left. 6 lanes to Chilliwack should be done within the next 10 years - however, it likely will be closer to 25-30 years knowing how things are - if ever.

Oh and here's something for fore-sight - the McCallum Road and Clearbook interchanges in Abbotsford were designed to accommodate 6 lanes total....Yikes....crazy how today it should already be 6 lanes, and a possible 8 would probably be warranted in less than 10 years.

[Wharn]

Originally Posted by go_leafs_go02

Well, I can say you guys in Ontario have it lucky about how your freeways are built. Vancouver/BC is still struggling to get out of the 1960s in terms of how they design it.

There isn't a freeway wider than 6 lanes in any point in Metro Vancouver, and all bridges (unless tolled) are complete bottlenecks.

Trust me, The City of London is still struggling to get out of the 19th century when it comes to road planning. Anything other than an at-grade intersection seems to be completely foreign to our politicians. You guys got a few perimeter freeways? You're not doing too bad!

[ssiguy]

Ya, London truly is in a league of it's own.
Not only does London not have freeways but it doesn't even have one 6 lane roadway so Wellington, Oxford, Wonderland etc crawl.
Also London is plagued by rail tracks, the lovely Thames, and a totally disjointed road network. There few roads that cross London and none thru the inner city except Oxford which is about 1km north of the core.
I have been across this country from one end to the other and no other city of less than a million is harder to get around than London, at least Winnipeg has the Perimeter and lots of 6 lane roads.
London is hell for traffic all the time and will only get worse. I know that all cities like to bitch about their road system but London is beyond reason and beyond hope.

[go_leafs_go02]

Originally Posted by Wharn

Trust me, The City of London is still struggling to get out of the 19th century when it comes to road planning. Anything other than an at-grade intersection seems to be completely foreign to our politicians. You guys got a few perimeter freeways? You're not doing too bad!

I was talking more or less at provincial levels. BC Minstry is horrible compared to Ontario's ministry.

I grew up in London actually - and certainly there are certain points that lack. Either way, it definitely needs work - although I didn't have too many problems growing up there and driving in the City.

Would love to see the Ring Road constructed - but we'll see how it goes. Rather see work into rapid transit (light rail) be done than major roadway expansion in London.

Oh, and for comparision, in BC, they had plans for an expressway (south fraser perimeter road), then realized it got too expensive, so they converted half of the interchanges into signalized intersections...because (they would be able to handle being a signal the day they were built)

In comparison, they did this with the Alex Fraser Bridge too (signals along the main roadway) That plan lasted less than a year before they had to convert over to interchanges. Build it right the first time.

[Wharn]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Ya, London truly is in a league of it's own.
Not only does London not have freeways but it doesn't even have one 6 lane roadway so Wellington, Oxford, Wonderland etc crawl.
Also London is plagued by rail tracks, the lovely Thames, and a totally disjointed road network. There few roads that cross London and none thru the inner city except Oxford which is about 1km north of the core.

London has a lot of road disjointments, although I think this is fairly common in Canadian cities. Toronto has some pretty significant arterial holes as well (why does Lawrence break at Bayview? Why is Leslie not a through street? Why does Pharmacy not go over the 401? Why does Pape break at Gerrard?) That being said, the presence of a mistake elsewhere is no excuse to neglect it.

Originally Posted by ssiguy

London is hell for traffic all the time and will only get worse. I know that all cities like to bitch about their road system but London is beyond reason and beyond hope.

People bitch about the traffic in London, and though it's bad for a small city, I would say that it is far from beyond hope. Driving in London's rush hour is a dream compared to what I have to face in the Imperial Capital. All we need are a few arterial connections (Huron would be nice as a continuous street, and linking Windermere to Gainsborough would also be a good idea) some widenings (HYDE. PARK. ROAD.) and that goddamn ring, with that in place all else (including rapid transit) will follow. Toronto, on the other hand, needs a complete infrastructural overhaul.

Originally Posted by go_leafs_go02

I was talking more or less at provincial levels. BC Minstry is horrible compared to Ontario's ministry.

To be fair, it's way harder to build roads of any kind in BC than it is in Ontario. Their inane cost-cutting measures on interchanges are likely a response to the high costs of laying road beds elsewhere.

Originally Posted by go_leafs_go02

In comparison, they did this with the Alex Fraser Bridge too (signals along the main roadway) That plan lasted less than a year before they had to convert over to interchanges. Build it right the first time.

Sounds like what they're planning to do with the VMP at Highway 401: ditch the trumpet and replace it with a parclo, and then replace it with a full freeway interchange later. Eerily similar to Highbury Avenue