Allegra Escorts Collective

Toronto traffic is now the worst in North-America

escortsxxx

Well-known member
Jul 15, 2004
3,422
918
113
Tdot
@Anbarandy knows what he is talking about. I mentioned the massive stormwater surge tunnels and tanks already in service and under contruction in this (and/or other) threads and yet the fucking know-nothing, know-it-allls keep spewing about how the city isn't doing anything etc. When it IS!

As is the Don Valley flooding issue. I also posted YouTube videos on the new wetlands being created and the river mouth, Keating Channel etc being engineered in a massive civil works project that actually seems to be well run.

Same with the talk of glorious greenspace where the very well planned, designed and efficiently built Cityplace neighbourhood sits today. Bullshit. It was railway yards, delapidated buildings on contaminated soil. DENSE impermeable 'soil' that is actually the clay and rock excavation spoils from the subway, high rise basements etc etc.

No sense in even engaging with wilfully ignorant politically-lizard-brained Karens who really don't know fuck all about what they are complaining about.
You have an ahistorical point of view. I will grant the reestablishment and expansion say of the swamp in the Don Valley, AFTER the bridges where washed out, from lesser rainfalls than we have had in the past. Sure, there are steps foward, but also major step backwards.

There was a whole region that had condos built on it even though engineers (some obviously like the Science Centre issue) said that the sewage system was too old to even keep up with current population levels. No plans to expand or repair them (and thus the new backwash from sewer problem) and MORE important no cost to the condos to fund the minimum improvements for the new infrastructure. Converting empty grass fields, putting fake gardens on top of buildings to replace ground floor greenspace and many other factors as whole have contributed to this issue.
The conversion of Downs-view park from park to habitat is an example of useful green space that could be converted to better flood prevention but is going the wrong way. Instead parts of Toronto are becoming insurable.

The DVP could have been a major step forward with the park roof, the cheapest option long term in so many ways, but it was rejected.
 

eddie kerr

Well-known member
Jan 16, 2004
1,839
1,157
113
Saw an article on BBC News 2 weeks ago commenting on traffic congestion in the world, #1 is London England, #2 is Dublin Ireland, which surprised me and #3 is TORONTO. As a previous owner of a courier company in this city and surrounding areas I have to say that it has worsened in the last 10 years or so where the traffic is totally pathetic. The reason? Too many people and cars, no new roads and too many reductions on through lanes in favour of bicycle lanes. Danforth Ave, from Broadview to Markham road is now a single lane so when vehicles are making a left turn which is very common, cars can't go around them and must wait to continue. Many other streets such as Kingston Rd. and Midland Rd. have made the right lane as buses onl The city planners should all be fired as most of them don't drive. WAKE UP TORONTO.
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,934
3,501
113
I realize I jumped to the conclusion you where trolling so assuming your not


I've noticed that you're asking for proof, but not accepting the evidence I've provided so far. To better understand what would change your mind, could you please specify what you consider adequate proof or what specific aspects of the topic you're unsure about? This will help me provide more targeted information and address your concerns effectively."
Some possible rewordings to choose from:

  • "Can you clarify what kind of evidence would be convincing for you?"
  • "What specific concerns or doubts do you have that I can address?"
  • "Could you outline what you consider a credible source or convincing argument?"
  • "What would it take for you to reconsider your current stance?"
  • "Can you provide more context or details about what's driving your skepticism?"



Harsh version (for Trolls)


Read the data, read the reports, you can not read what before your eyes. Prove a counter case. This is ridiculous your just someone who refuses to look at data and insist on others doing your homework and holding your hand. .


I can suggest some ways for you to find the information you're looking for:

  • Check online maps and databases, such as the City of Toronto's official website or the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) website, for information on flood plains and green spaces in Toronto.
  • Look for reports and studies on urbanization and development in Toronto, which may identify areas where flood plains and green spaces have been converted to condos.
  • Consult with local environmental groups, community organizations, or urban planning experts who may have knowledge about specific areas in Toronto where flood plains and green spaces have been developed.

Some areas in Toronto that have seen significant development and urbanization in recent years include:

  • The Waterfront area, where former industrial lands have been redeveloped into condos and mixed-use buildings.
  • The West Don Lands, a former industrial area that has been redeveloped into a mixed-use neighborhood with condos, parks, and community facilities.
  • The Port Lands, a large area of former industrial and natural habitats that is being redeveloped into a mixed-use neighborhood with condos, parks, and community facilities.

Please note that these are just examples, and I would recommend further research to get a more accurate and up-to-date picture of the specific areas you're interested in.


Question why do you doubt this fact? Are you a flat earth advorcate or 6000 year no dino person or something? Ever green space helps mitigate flooding. Less green spaces equal more chance of flooding, simple rule.

PS related



Meanwhile, new Toronto lakefront condominium developments are proceeding in the Quayside and Portlands neighbourhoods, near the Islands, on flood plains historically contaminated by heavy metals, oil and coal. “Workforce housing” is a required part of the plan.


Will Flessig, former Waterfront Toronto CEO, says that middle-income professionals are expected to settle in the waterfront condominiums so that they can be closer to where they work.


But no one in Toronto is talking about the flood plains, since elected officials apparently consider the issue resolved. Based on a plan developed in 2007, the federal and provincial governments are investing $1.185 billion to reconstruct the mouth of the Don River so that the water safely flows into Lake Ontario.


However, the waterfront area still remains a flood plain, and is still affected by storm surges associated with climate change.


Building on flood plains has serious consequences, including future uninsurable buildings as insurance companies anticipate they won’t be able to afford the payouts. A single major flood causes a great deal of damage and requires insurance companies to pay all at once. With a higher frequency of catastrophic floods and the corresponding required payouts, the pool of insurance premiums collected to cover the losses dries up, and insurance companies face bankruptcy.


Before that happens and buildings are left derelict, people and property are endangered. We recently saw life-threatening flooding of buildings in Toronto, and there are limited rescue personnel to address all of the issues at the same time when mass floods happen.


Simultaneously, damage to personal property can be overwhelming — for example, to cars and contents within condominium lockers in underground parking garages. In Toronto, we have also seen streetcars submerged in water recently with people trapped inside.


Fixing the damage therefore adds costs to public transit. Water quality and disease concerns are also heightened as storm sewage systems cannot handle increasing rainfall volumes. Over the longer term, repeated flooding also weakens building foundations.

Hard to manage water levels

On a broader scale in the Great Lakes region, the ability to adapt to changing conditions is reduced. That’s because the ability of water officials to manage water levels is much more difficult when condominiums and other housing is built on flood plains.


For example, water flows are somewhat controlled in the Lake Ontario and St. Lawrence River watersheds through an international agreement called Plan 2014. If buildings are in the path of water flow, this complicates and limits the range of adjustment options.


We know now what we’re confronting. Let’s learn from past mistakes. In the best interests of homeowners, the public and climate adaptation, what’s left of Toronto’s waterfront should be public parks, not condominiums billed as “workforce housing.”


Meanwhile, new Toronto lakefront condominium developments are proceeding in the Quayside and Portlands neighbourhoods, near the Islands, on flood plains historically contaminated by heavy metals, oil and coal. “Workforce housing” is a required part of the plan.


Will Flessig, former Waterfront Toronto CEO, says that middle-income professionals are expected to settle in the waterfront condominiums so that they can be closer to where they work.


But no one in Toronto is talking about the flood plains, since elected officials apparently consider the issue resolved. Based on a plan developed in 2007, the federal and provincial governments are investing $1.185 billion to reconstruct the mouth of the Don River so that the water safely flows into Lake Ontario.


However, the waterfront area still remains a flood plain, and is still affected by storm surges associated with climate change.


Building on flood plains has serious consequences, including future uninsurable buildings as insurance companies anticipate they won’t be able to afford the payouts. A single major flood causes a great deal of damage and requires insurance companies to pay all at once. With a higher frequency of catastrophic floods and the corresponding required payouts, the pool of insurance premiums collected to cover the losses dries up, and insurance companies face bankruptcy.


Before that happens and buildings are left derelict, people and property are endangered. We recently saw life-threatening flooding of buildings in Toronto, and there are limited rescue personnel to address all of the issues at the same time when mass floods happen.


Simultaneously, damage to personal property can be overwhelming — for example, to cars and contents within condominium lockers in underground parking garages. In Toronto, we have also seen streetcars submerged in water recently with people trapped inside.


Fixing the damage therefore adds costs to public transit. Water quality and disease concerns are also heightened as storm sewage systems cannot handle increasing rainfall volumes. Over the longer term, repeated flooding also weakens building foundations.

Hard to manage water levels

On a broader scale in the Great Lakes region, the ability to adapt to changing conditions is reduced. That’s because the ability of water officials to manage water levels is much more difficult when condominiums and other housing is built on flood plains.


For example, water flows are somewhat controlled in the Lake Ontario and St. Lawrence River watersheds through an international agreement called Plan 2014. If buildings are in the path of water flow, this complicates and limits the range of adjustment options.


We know now what we’re confronting. Let’s learn from past mistakes. In the best interests of homeowners, the public and climate adaptation, what’s left of Toronto’s waterfront should be public parks, not condominiums billed as “workforce housing.”


Meanwhile, new Toronto lakefront condominium developments are proceeding in the Quayside and Portlands neighbourhoods, near the Islands, on flood plains historically contaminated by heavy metals, oil and coal. “Workforce housing” is a required part of the plan.


Will Flessig, former Waterfront Toronto CEO, says that middle-income professionals are expected to settle in the waterfront condominiums so that they can be closer to where they work.


But no one in Toronto is talking about the flood plains, since elected officials apparently consider the issue resolved. Based on a plan developed in 2007, the federal and provincial governments are investing $1.185 billion to reconstruct the mouth of the Don River so that the water safely flows into Lake Ontario.


However, the waterfront area still remains a flood plain, and is still affected by storm surges associated with climate change.


Building on flood plains has serious consequences, including future uninsurable buildings as insurance companies anticipate they won’t be able to afford the payouts. A single major flood causes a great deal of damage and requires insurance companies to pay all at once. With a higher frequency of catastrophic floods and the corresponding required payouts, the pool of insurance premiums collected to cover the losses dries up, and insurance companies face bankruptcy.


Before that happens and buildings are left derelict, people and property are endangered. We recently saw life-threatening flooding of buildings in Toronto, and there are limited rescue personnel to address all of the issues at the same time when mass floods happen.


Simultaneously, damage to personal property can be overwhelming — for example, to cars and contents within condominium lockers in underground parking garages. In Toronto, we have also seen streetcars submerged in water recently with people trapped inside.


Fixing the damage therefore adds costs to public transit. Water quality and disease concerns are also heightened as storm sewage systems cannot handle increasing rainfall volumes. Over the longer term, repeated flooding also weakens building foundations.

Hard to manage water levels

On a broader scale in the Great Lakes region, the ability to adapt to changing conditions is reduced. That’s because the ability of water officials to manage water levels is much more difficult when condominiums and other housing is built on flood plains.


For example, water flows are somewhat controlled in the Lake Ontario and St. Lawrence River watersheds through an international agreement called Plan 2014. If buildings are in the path of water flow, this complicates and limits the range of adjustment options.


We know now what we’re confronting. Let’s learn from past mistakes. In the best interests of homeowners, the public and climate adaptation, what’s left of Toronto’s waterfront should be public parks, not condominiums billed as “workforce housing.”

Meanwhile, new Toronto lakefront condominium developments are proceeding in the Quayside and Portlands neighbourhoods, near the Islands, on flood plains historically contaminated by heavy metals, oil and coal. “Workforce housing” is a required part of the plan.


Will Flessig, former Waterfront Toronto CEO, says that middle-income professionals are expected to settle in the waterfront condominiums so that they can be closer to where they work.


But no one in Toronto is talking about the flood plains, since elected officials apparently consider the issue resolved. Based on a plan developed in 2007, the federal and provincial governments are investing $1.185 billion to reconstruct the mouth of the Don River so that the water safely flows into Lake Ontario.


However, the waterfront area still remains a flood plain, and is still affected by storm surges associated with climate change.


Building on flood plains has serious consequences, including future uninsurable buildings as insurance companies anticipate they won’t be able to afford the payouts. A single major flood causes a great deal of damage and requires insurance companies to pay all at once. With a higher frequency of catastrophic floods and the corresponding required payouts, the pool of insurance premiums collected to cover the losses dries up, and insurance companies face bankruptcy.


Before that happens and buildings are left derelict, people and property are endangered. We recently saw life-threatening flooding of buildings in Toronto, and there are limited rescue personnel to address all of the issues at the same time when mass floods happen.


Simultaneously, damage to personal property can be overwhelming — for example, to cars and contents within condominium lockers in underground parking garages. In Toronto, we have also seen streetcars submerged in water recently with people trapped inside.


Fixing the damage therefore adds costs to public transit. Water quality and disease concerns are also heightened as storm sewage systems cannot handle increasing rainfall volumes. Over the longer term, repeated flooding also weakens building foundations.

Hard to manage water levels

On a broader scale in the Great Lakes region, the ability to adapt to changing conditions is reduced. That’s because the ability of water officials to manage water levels is much more difficult when condominiums and other housing is built on flood plains.


For example, water flows are somewhat controlled in the Lake Ontario and St. Lawrence River watersheds through an international agreement called Plan 2014. If buildings are in the path of water flow, this complicates and limits the range of adjustment options.


We know now what we’re confronting. Let’s learn from past mistakes. In the best interests of homeowners, the public and climate adaptation, what’s left of Toronto’s waterfront should be public parks, not condominiums billed as “workforce housing.”
FFS, again with the massive copy and paste attempt to cover your sad and sorry, biased comments that "flood plains and green space were converted to condos" after Hurricane Hazel, willy fuckin nilly without fuck all thought given to flood mitigation and protection. That was the basis of your contention.

I asked you to detail which flood plains and greens spaces were converted to condos willy-nilly, with no thought to flood mitigation and protection and BAM BLAM, another ink-stained copy and paste spam that regurgitates known information, strategies and plans. Strategies, plans and projects that the City of Toronto, tri-partite agencies and the TRCA have and are implementing.

Now you did cite 3 examples of flood plains and what you laughably believe to be lush, sub-tropical green spaces that were converted to condos:
  • The Waterfront area, where former industrial lands have been redeveloped into condos and mixed-use buildings.
  • The West Don Lands, a former industrial area that has been redeveloped into a mixed-use neighborhood with condos, parks, and community facilities.
  • The Port Lands, a large area of former industrial and natural habitats that is being redeveloped into a mixed-use neighborhood with condos, parks, and community facilities.

1) None of the lands were green spaces post Hurricane Hazel and haven't been "green spaces" since mid-19th century. They were industrial and employment lands.

2) Flood mitigation and flood protection projects were, have and are continuing to be utilized in conjunction with the development of these lands you have listed.

3) OMFG! The West Don Lands redevelopment which was former industrial lands for over a frickin century, not lush Garden of Eden green spaces, would not have been possible would not have been given the green light for redevelopment, would not have granted building permits and every other frickin permit and 'okay' to proceed building condos and such if the lands were not protected from flooding.

4) A very unique park, Corktown Common, was constructed between the lower Don Valley and the West Donlands redevelopment zone that provides flood protection not only for the West Donlands but for lands west spreading out westward from Corktown Common all the way along to the downtown area.

5) This unique park, Corktown Common was built up as a giant berm from the Don Valley to provide flood protection for all those lands listed in 4).

6) All those condos, George Brown buildings, Corus building, all those in the process of construction and those in planning and development, on the north and south sides of Queens Quay would not have been possible, nor would have been built without the Corktown Common berm/park.

7) That park, that berm, that flood protection project was basically the solution for flood protection west of the Don Valley right through to the downtown core.

8)The Port Lands? WTF do you think they are doing there? Schlong has pointed out in this thread and in others what is and must happen before redevelopment occurs. A massive and monumental project to flood protect the Port Lands BEFORE any condos fuckin go up.

9) In addition, the Port Lands Flood Protection project will also provide flood protection for portions of Leslieville and south Riverdale.

In conclusion, post Hurricane Hazel, this myth that you have bought into and fervently believe in, that " condos are sprouting like weeds in lush, mythical, Garden of Eden green spaces and floodplains" willy-nilly with no thought for flood protection is shattered.

Don't bother ink staining another one of your cut and paste replies that just reinforces that you haven't got much of a clue what you are talking about.
 
Last edited:

Bucktee

Well-known member
Jan 26, 2024
786
1,079
93
Too many cars, not enough road.

This could be offset by good public transit infrastructure, like in NYC, but Toronto is 100 years behind in developing the required subway systems.

Lack of public transit options and importing millions of new drivers within a couple years is why we're here.

It won't get any better in the foreseeable future... maybe not in your lifetime.
 
Last edited:

opieshuffle

Active member
Oct 30, 2004
372
197
43
Too many cars, not enough road.

This could be offset by good public transit infrastructure, like in NYC, but Toronto is 100 years behind in developing the required subway systems needed.

Lack of public transit options and importing millions of new drivers within a couple years is why we're here.

It won't get any better in the foreseeable future... maybe not in your lifetime.
As someone who's worked driving this city for service calls and delivery for a long time, I'll add to the above:
  • Car companies solving non-problems like shutting off the car and and turning it on again. This has created a generation of drivers who pause, then accelerate. Not a big deal in one car. But multiply that by a million and traffic slows. Make those same people the ones at the front of the line on an advanced green left turn, more delays.
  • Beurocrats with zero knowledge of city traffic, lowering all speeds limits throughout the city. WTF does Leslie street need to be at 50? Or Lawrence ave? For sure lower and add cameras by schools etc, but not on major arteries. Again, on its own, not a big deal. But counter that with people who hate driving (the majority) going 49 in a 50 with those trying to do a job and it's fucking mayhem.
  • WE DON'T TAKE DRIVING SERIOUSLY. From learning to enforcement. No-one actually knows how to "drive" and think. They want to get in and point the car. Multiply by a million again.
  • TEXTING. Weaving. "Random acts of braking" (electric cars brake lights AUTOMATICALLY come on when you release the accelerator quickly). Texting at the front of that fucking left turn advanced green holding everyone up. Again... multiply by a million cars in a million intersections.
  • UBER / Lyft / Food / Amazon delivery people with ZERO sense of the city, with zero sense of driving, following what the television screen in their faces tells them to do. This includes stopping ANYWHERE and blocking lanes.
It's not one thing... it's death by a thousand cuts.
</rant?
 

eddie kerr

Well-known member
Jan 16, 2004
1,839
1,157
113
As someone who's worked driving this city for service calls and delivery for a long time, I'll add to the above:
  • Car companies solving non-problems like shutting off the car and and turning it on again. This has created a generation of drivers who pause, then accelerate. Not a big deal in one car. But multiply that by a million and traffic slows. Make those same people the ones at the front of the line on an advanced green left turn, more delays.
  • Beurocrats with zero knowledge of city traffic, lowering all speeds limits throughout the city. WTF does Leslie street need to be at 50? Or Lawrence ave? For sure lower and add cameras by schools etc, but not on major arteries. Again, on its own, not a big deal. But counter that with people who hate driving (the majority) going 49 in a 50 with those trying to do a job and it's fucking mayhem.
  • WE DON'T TAKE DRIVING SERIOUSLY. From learning to enforcement. No-one actually knows how to "drive" and think. They want to get in and point the car. Multiply by a million again.
  • TEXTING. Weaving. "Random acts of braking" (electric cars brake lights AUTOMATICALLY come on when you release the accelerator quickly). Texting at the front of that fucking left turn advanced green holding everyone up. Again... multiply by a million cars in a million intersections.
  • UBER / Lyft / Food / Amazon delivery people with ZERO sense of the city, with zero sense of driving, following what the television screen in their faces tells them to do. This includes stopping ANYWHERE and blocking lanes.
It's not one thing... it's death by a thousand cuts.
</rant?
Re speed limits, I use Leslie from Eglinton to 401 often and always just keep up with the traffic flow. No one drives 50kph and usually do 60 or more. I was following a few cars northbound just north of Eg. Got a speeding ticket via hidden camera showing I was doing 64 and had to pay $93. fine. I presume all the cars I was following also got nailed. Also, O'CONNOR DR. has speed limit at 40kph.
 

eddie kerr

Well-known member
Jan 16, 2004
1,839
1,157
113
FFS, again with the massive copy and paste attempt to cover your sad and sorry, biased comments that "flood plains and green space were converted to condos" after Hurricane Hazel, willy fuckin nilly without fuck all thought given to flood mitigation and protection. That was the basis of your contention.

I asked you to detail which flood plains and greens spaces were converted to condos willy-nilly, with no thought to flood mitigation and protection and BAM BLAM, another ink-stained copy and paste spam that regurgitates known information, strategies and plans. Strategies, plans and projects that the City of Toronto, tri-partite agencies and the TRCA have and are implementing.

Now you did cite 3 examples of flood plains and what you laughably believe to be lush, sub-tropical green spaces that were converted to condos:
  • The Waterfront area, where former industrial lands have been redeveloped into condos and mixed-use buildings.
  • The West Don Lands, a former industrial area that has been redeveloped into a mixed-use neighborhood with condos, parks, and community facilities.
  • The Port Lands, a large area of former industrial and natural habitats that is being redeveloped into a mixed-use neighborhood with condos, parks, and community facilities.

1) None of the lands were green spaces post Hurricane Hazel and haven't been "green spaces" since mid-19th century. They were industrial and employment lands.

2) Flood mitigation and flood protection projects were, have and are continuing to be utilized in conjunction with the development of these lands you have listed.

3) OMFG! The West Don Lands redevelopment which was former industrial lands for over a frickin century, not lush Garden of Eden green spaces, would not have been possible would not have been given the green light for redevelopment, would not have granted building permits and every other frickin permit and 'okay' to proceed building condos and such if the lands were not protected from flooding.

4) A very unique park, Corktown Common, was constructed between the lower Don Valley and the West Donlands redevelopment zone that provides flood protection not only for the West Donlands but for lands west spreading out westward from Corktown Common all the way along to the downtown area.

5) This unique park, Corktown Common was built up as a giant berm from the Don Valley to provide flood protection for all those lands listed in 4).

6) All those condos, George Brown buildings, Corus building, all those in the process of construction and those in planning and development, on the north and south sides of Queens Quay would not have been possible, nor would have been built without the Corktown Common berm/park.

7) That park, that berm, that flood protection project was basically the solution for flood protection west of the Don Valley right through to the downtown core.

8)The Port Lands? WTF do you think they are doing there? Schlong has pointed out in this thread and in others what is and must happen before redevelopment occurs. A massive and monumental project to flood protect the Port Lands BEFORE any condos fuckin go up.

9) In addition, the Port Lands Flood Protection project will also provide flood protection for portions of Leslieville and south Riverdale.

In conclusion, post Hurricane Hazel, this myth that you have bought into and fervently believe in, that " condos are sprouting like weeds in lush, mythical, Garden of Eden green spaces and floodplains" willy-nilly with no thought for flood protection is shattered.

Don't bother ink staining another one of your cut and paste replies that just reinforces that you haven't got much of a clue what you are talking about.
I have read about new condos built in the GTA that began sinking due to underground streams which are very common in many areas in this city.
 

Smith_86

Active member
Jun 19, 2024
161
223
43
Why?

Why drive?

Why drive down there?

Why drive down there, to get to what.

Why drive down there, to get to what, on what day?

Why drive down there, to get to what, on what day and time of day?

Why is it, whenever I am two-wheeling it around in the Toronto core and environs are there so many, many, many cars with just 1 or if lucky 2 people inside causing traffic congestion, gridlock and mayhem?

Why do so many fuckers have to drive right to within a fuckin millimeter of their ultimate destination?
Because public transit sucks
 

lomotil

Well-known member
Mar 14, 2004
6,532
1,403
113
Oblivion
more bike lanes especially on major thoroughfares should help
If Toronto City Council had their way, the DVP and the 401 stretch through Toronto would be narrowed for bike lanes but they cannot do anything since these major arteries are under provincial and federal jurisdictions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JuanGoodman

eddie kerr

Well-known member
Jan 16, 2004
1,839
1,157
113
more bike lanes especially on major thoroughfares should help
Only if a through lane is not deleted for a bicycle lane. If you drive on Danforth Ave. from Broadview to Markham Road which is always very busy, it is now a single lane and vehicles following cars waiting to make a left turn can't go around them and must wait until they make their turn which causes much longer waiting times at every intersection. Totally insane.
 

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
26,949
5,069
113
Only if a through lane is not deleted for a bicycle lane. If you drive on Danforth Ave. from Broadview to Markham Road which is always very busy, it is now a single lane and vehicles following cars waiting to make a left turn can't go around them and must wait until they make their turn which causes much longer waiting times at every intersection. Totally insane
It's almost like there's a war on the car going on
 

lomotil

Well-known member
Mar 14, 2004
6,532
1,403
113
Oblivion
It's almost like there's a war on the car going on
There is a “war on the car” waging now obviously and no more quiet revolution. Toronto has a winter climate and the bike lanes with their concrete barriers which have virtually no cyclists for half the year have cost hundreds millions of dollars to construct.
These same bike lanes which constrict the road arteries meant for cars, trucks and buses unintentionally result in major gridlock, engine idling with more gas consumption and ironically a greater carbon footprint !
 

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
26,949
5,069
113
These same bike lanes which constrict the road arteries meant for cars, trucks and buses unintentionally result in major gridlock, engine idling with more gas consumption and ironically a greater carbon footprint !
I didnt even think about that, but yeah you're right :D
 

kbiii2

Member
Jan 25, 2012
151
12
18
I didnt even think about that, but yeah you're right :D
Being a visitor, one problem is lack of identifiable taxis. Uber is find for rural areas, but in the city safely picking out your uber from all the other traffic is difficult. Plus, if you are out late you don't want to be standing around. You want to be able to step out of the bar, club, etc. and jump in a waiting taxi or quickly flag one down. I would take the Go train from Burlington if taxis came back. Now I drive in and around the city for convenience and safety.
 
Toronto Escorts