Comment 113334

By StephenBarath (registered) | Posted August 07, 2015 at 08:39:53 in reply to Comment 113319

"I concede I don't like the Dundurn solution..."

I have never heard anyone besides you propose it...

I appreciate this "art of the possible" track you're trying to take. Yes, the King ramp to the 403 is very busy (you say "astronomical" volume below- do you know what the volume might actually be?). Does it warrant four north-bound Dundurn lanes? A traffic engineer might be able to tell us that. I've never heard anyone suggest it needs to be, besides you.

Below you say '"Dundurn Funnel" problem of the westwards morning commute to the 403.' Is this a problem? You say so. I've never heard of anyone else make claims about this. To me, the problem seems to continue to be the mentality that car traffic should be prioritized over all other modes, and over a liveable neighbourhood. Why should we overbuild and overdesign Dundurn around Main and King (adding lanes, or using dynamic lanes), when there's plenty of capacity and we know that traffic patterns adapt when there are constraints? Is that going to lead to a liveable neighbourhood around a thriving transit hub (this area already has a lot of transit by multiple providers)?

Comment edited by StephenBarath on 2015-08-07 08:43:54

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools