innsertnamehere
Superstar
Also the Riverdale Park pedestrian bridge.
|
|
|
- Thread starter MetroMan
- Start date
Admiral Beez
Superstar
It's ridiculous that the redevelopment of Regent Park did not require separated bike lanes from River St. to Parliament. That was a once in a lifetime opportunity, since you're tearing up the sidewalks and roads anyway. Gerrard northside is perhaps too tight between streetcar and houses, but Dundas could have easily accommodated separated lanes no problem.
There was no excuse for not putting separated bike lanes on Dundas between River and Parliament. If this city can't include them in such obvious, low-hanging fruit situations such as the total rebuild of a neighbourhood, what chance does the rest of the city have?
ADRM
Senior Member
It's ridiculous that the redevelopment of Regent Park did not require separated bike lanes from River St. to Parliament. That was a once in a lifetime opportunity, since you're tearing up the sidewalks and roads anyway. Gerrard northside is perhaps too tight between streetcar and houses, but Dundas could have easily accommodated separated lanes no problem.
There was no excuse for not putting separated bike lanes on Dundas between River and Parliament. If this city can't include them in such obvious, low-hanging fruit situations such as the total rebuild of a neighbourhood, what chance does the rest of the city have?
I agree with you on the other streets, though worth noting that Shuter is slated to get cycle tracks sometime in 2020 as part of the planned resurfacing.
Northern Light
Superstar
Artists Render of proposed Shuter St. Cycle Tracks:
Proposed Configurations:
Taken from presentation:
I'm mostly fine w/this, but again, some streetscaping efforts would be nice.
Proposed Configurations:
Taken from presentation:
I'm mostly fine w/this, but again, some streetscaping efforts would be nice.
TossYourJacket
Senior Member
Ooof, that first illustration has a pretty solid dooring gauntlet going on where the parking is. Hopefully most of it ends up closer to the diagram where there's a buffer between the parking and the bike lane.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Question...
Will the Bloor West Bikeway going under the two railway underpasses be level with the roadway or the sidewalk?
From link.
From link.
Personally, would like to see the bikeway being level with the sidewalk at the underpasses. Going downhill would be fine, but going uphill depends if the rider builds up enough speed to continue uphill.
All underpasses like this should have the bikeway level with the sidewalk. Will be ignored by the designers who don't ride bicycles.
Will the Bloor West Bikeway going under the two railway underpasses be level with the roadway or the sidewalk?
From link.
From link.
Personally, would like to see the bikeway being level with the sidewalk at the underpasses. Going downhill would be fine, but going uphill depends if the rider builds up enough speed to continue uphill.
All underpasses like this should have the bikeway level with the sidewalk. Will be ignored by the designers who don't ride bicycles.
TossYourJacket
Senior Member
Keeping it level with the sidewalk would also be safer for cyclists, so we really should do it, since you know, we're supposed to be a Vision Zero city (which like, lol). But that will cost more so it won't happen.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
Where‘s the crackheads and unintelligible mutterers? Did the artist of the above piece spend anytime on Shuter?
rbt
Senior Member
That's space doesn't have the primary purpose of a bike lane. It's a place for wet weather (snow/heavy rain) to accumulate outside of the driving lane.
Bike lanes should be level with the sidewalk but spending ~$50M widening the underpass to make that happen is well outside the bike lane budget at this time.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
If they are going to rebuild the underpasses, they would likely be able to get rid of those girders in the middle of the roadway and the girders between the sidewalk and roadway.. Enough room for snow windrows. Hopefully there would be no sewer grates along the bikeway.
From link.
From link.
From link.
salsa
Senior Member
None of that is relevant to the design of the bike lane for which the rendering exists to visualize, but you just can't help yourself but to spew vitriol toward the have-nots and the least fortunate at every opportunity.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
It is relevant. Riding up the Sherbourne lane I've had crazies jump in front of me, junkies with needles in their arms wander Into my path, stopped to give a TPS witness statement after a woman tossed a bottle of "liquid" into a TTC operator's face as I cycled past, and seen too much crazy sh#t on that bike route south of Gerrard that I'd rather risk it elsewhere. I don’t usually consider the Sun and especially SAL worth anything but dunny roll, but only they seem to call out this street for what it is.
LEVY: Dundas and Sherbourne circus carries on
At the corner of Parliament and Carlton Sts. people were swinging to the sounds of a big band group playing at the Cabbagetown Festival Saturday.
torontosun.com
My point? Put any new separated east/west bike lanes south of Bloor where the crazies don't congregate, like Gerrard, Dundas and Queen. If that makes me a vitrol spewer, I'm perfectly fine with that. I may not use today's progressive vocabulary , but I still want supporting housing, shelters and harm reduction for our least fortunate. But that doesn't mean I can't advocate for putting bike lanes in places where there is the least disruption to folks who just want to cycle the city in safety.
Last edited:
smably
Senior Member
There's not using "progressive vocabulary" and then there's dehumanizing people living with poverty and mental illness as "crackheads", "crazies", "junkies", and "unintelligible mutterers" in every thread, at every opportunity. It's gross and you should stop that.
Northern Light
Superstar
Here's the problem. You're not fine w/that.
For the simple reason, you have a pov, which you would like to see delivered on; that requires persuading others in most cases. If your language causes people to tune out your arguments, to invalidate them simply because you made them, then you lose; you're POV goes nowhere.
You often have really good points; but you can't seem to resist the desire to express them in the harshest possible way.
Believe others are 'snowflakes' if you wish; but understand those 'snowflakes' are key to getting what you want.
Not offending them, serves your purpose.
Frankly, like many here, I honestly feel you could take a more empathetic attitude towards some of societies more marginalized members.
That said, I've had enough discussions w/you to believe that you don't actually lack that empathy in the right circumstances. When talking about someone you know, or your kids know, you can find words of empathy or soften a stand
from recrimination to disappointment.
You need to be able to express that for strangers, most of whom are no worse inherently that many people you know. They are products of their circumstances. I'm not letting them off the hook for any bad choices along the way; but they deserve an attitude that expresses a desire to help them out of their mess; not insult them for being in it.
TrickyRicky
Senior Member
There is this perception on this thread that street parking is only useful to visitors to a neighbourhood and therefore it’s expendable. That’s fine but I’ve been stressing that parking is also important to building and business servicing.
Building servicing is not a secondary use of the road space, it is arguably the primary purpose of the road in the first place. Some of the glaring deficiencies of the existing Bloor bike lanes are in areas where building servicing was never considered at all as a function, let alone a primary function of the road.
Building servicing includes where deliveries or input or outputs can’t be brought into reasonable or convenient proximity to buildings. Garbage collection is an obvious example where we have seen the dubious compromise on this thread. Consider others like where say a restaurant needs regular grease-trap pumping which takes place from a truck that parks where if the building has no rear lane of appropriate width and is fronted by a bike lane?
Building servicing is not a secondary use of the road space, it is arguably the primary purpose of the road in the first place. Some of the glaring deficiencies of the existing Bloor bike lanes are in areas where building servicing was never considered at all as a function, let alone a primary function of the road.
Building servicing includes where deliveries or input or outputs can’t be brought into reasonable or convenient proximity to buildings. Garbage collection is an obvious example where we have seen the dubious compromise on this thread. Consider others like where say a restaurant needs regular grease-trap pumping which takes place from a truck that parks where if the building has no rear lane of appropriate width and is fronted by a bike lane?