News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.5K     0 

duffo said:
I've mentioned this before - but a new signalized crossing would increase LRT cycle time above the maximum contractual requirement and CrossLinx would be financially penalized. This is made worse by the grade on this segment of road. The Project Agreement would need to be re-opened to allow for this new crossing, if it is to be at-grade, which it seems like no one is interested in doing. Drawback of P3s..
Click to expand...
duffo said:
They must have sorted out the issue then, at least what I mentioned was the case several years back
Click to expand...

Update: It is still the intent of the City to proceed with this..............but Metrolinx and TTC are indeed objecting to the additional traffic light.

This is causing delays.

For the life of me, this idea has has been around for years.........as has the Crosstown project, how this wasn't settled early on, or at least years ago is beyond me.
 
Could this be a nascent cycle track staked out along Overlea Blvd?

IMG_5220.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: max
  • Like
Reactions: max
Allandale25 said:
thelocal.to

The Battle Over a 475-Metre Bike Lane on Marlee Avenue | The Local

In Toronto, even the most modest bike lane proposal is met with outsized anger and fear.
thelocal.to thelocal.to
Click to expand...

Its a good piece, outlining the largely irrational, over-wrought opposition to a cycle track here, and pointing out erroneous assumptions/assertions by opponents.

****

At the same time, there are a couple of implicit things that are worth noting......

One is that scope of change in this particular area; with a sea of new towers coming (which we're covering here at UT), and the Crosstown (well, eventually, maybe, one day)..... and the cycling facilities too, among other things.

That is a lot of change. People are often resistant to change of any kind, good, bad or middling. The world can't stand still due to nostalgia, obstinance or stubbornness..... that said, this is a lot of change for anyone to take in; and I have some sympathy for those whose heads are spinning at the pace and scale of same.

Though I have no sympathy for their getting basic facts wrong, or for making some truly peculiar statements that imply that cyclists are a greater threat to young children crossing the road than aggressive drivers......... (their parents likely among them)

Also of note is the need to bring areas along by growing cycling from its areas of strength (downtown, near college/uni campuses etc.) to help change the conversation in the community ahead of cycle track additions.

To be clear, I think this one is perfectly supportable, I'm simply saying its easier to get infra through when you have 6% or more of the community already biking (for commuting) vs when its notably less than that.

But part of the timing of these investments is to take advantage of road resurfacing/reconstruction programs that may come along only once in a generation or even a lifetime, and that is an important consideration.
 
Northern Light said:
Its a good piece, outlining the largely irrational, over-wrought opposition to a cycle track here, and pointing out erroneous assumptions/assertions by opponents.

****

At the same time, there are a couple of implicit things that are worth noting......

One is that scope of change in this particular area; with a sea of new towers coming (which we're covering here at UT), and the Crosstown (well, eventually, maybe, one day)..... and the cycling facilities too, among other things.

That is a lot of change. People are often resistant to change of any kind, good, bad or middling. The world can't stand still due to nostalgia, obstinance or stubbornness..... that said, this is a lot of change for anyone to take in; and I have some sympathy for those whose heads are spinning at the pace and scale of same.

Though I have no sympathy for their getting basic facts wrong, or for making some truly peculiar statements that imply that cyclists are a greater threat to young children crossing the road than aggressive drivers......... (their parents likely among them)

Also of note is the need to bring areas along by growing cycling from its areas of strength (downtown, near college/uni campuses etc.) to help change the conversation in the community ahead of cycle track additions.

To be clear, I think this one is perfectly supportable, I'm simply saying its easier to get infra through when you have 6% or more of the community already biking (for commuting) vs when its notably less than that.

But part of the timing of these investments is to take advantage of road resurfacing/reconstruction programs that may come along only once in a generation or even a lifetime, and that is an important consideration.
Click to expand...
I agree change can be hard to deal with but I don't think in this case it's so drastic along Marlee. Marlee has already had bike lanes for most of its length for many years, rapid transit is not new to the area as Line 1 has been there for decades, and there are already many towers in the area (there is a large cluster on east side of Marlee extending north and south from Ridelle). None of the cycling infrastructure proposed is going where there was no cycling infrastructure before either, it's all extensions for the Marlee & Roselawn bike lanes and the Belt Line trail.
 
Last edited:
bearcat said:
I agree change can be hard to deal with but I don't think in this case it's so drastic along Marlee. Marlee has already had bike lanes for most of its length for many years,
Click to expand...

I agree on this entirely.

.... and there are already many towers in the area (there is a large cluster on east side of Marlee extending north and south from Ridelle).
Click to expand...

Well now........we'll differ here slightly, excluding the new midrises, there are a dozen towers publicly proposed just on the west side of the Allen, on Marlee or Lawrence or Eglinton within a block or so........

And...I can tell you now, more are coming. That is a radical alteration of the area.

That's not an argument against said change; just noting the scale/speed is quite substantial.
 
Northern Light said:
I agree on this entirely.



Well now........we'll differ here slightly, excluding the new midrises, there are a dozen towers publicly proposed just on the west side of the Allen, on Marlee or Lawrence or Eglinton within a block or so........

And...I can tell you now, more are coming. That is a radical alteration of the area.

That's not an argument against said change; just noting the scale/speed is quite substantial.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, I guess I am biased on how I view the area. I lived in one of the towers there (the tallest one I think 🤣) for many years when I was younger, and many of my friends from school lived in adjacent towers. Glencairn station was a 5 minute walk away (before the Bell building blocked access through its property). It felt very much not suburban to me back then already, at least west of the Allen. Maybe the people living in the single family homes a few blocks over felt and currently feel differently.
 
As someone who lives on Marlee (in a house with a driveway) and bike regularly on both northern and southern sections of Marlee, I am in the compromise camp: unidirectional bike lanes on each side of Marlee as a continuation of the northern section, which already has such an arrangement.

Right now, I am often forced to bike on the sidewalks if I don’t want to be roadkill!
 
Johnny Au said:
As someone who lives on Marlee (in a house with a driveway) and bike regularly on both northern and southern sections of Marlee, I am in the compromise camp: unidirectional bike lanes on each side of Marlee as a continuation of the northern section, which already has such an arrangement.

Right now, I am often forced to bike on the sidewalks if I don’t want to be roadkill!
Click to expand...
I think one of the reasons for the bidirectional cycle track is to make the connection to the York Belt Line trail easier. The project is called "Beltline Gap Connection" after all. The priority I think was to make the Belt Line trail which is bidirectional continuous. In that context I think it makes sense.


There is also fewer driveways on the west side of Marlee where there bidirectional cycle track will be going, most driveways on that stretch are on the east side so with a bidirectional cycle track they won't be an issue at all.
 
Last edited:
I think there was a political element with the bidirectional choice. With fewer houses on the west side (not just driveways), fewer people will have parts of "their" yards taken away from them (read: the city using more of the right of way). So, less opposition, theoretically.

In a way at this point the design doesn't matter. The value with having a bike lane, any bike lane, connecting this stretch is going to vastly outweigh in terms of safety and convenience for cyclists and pedestrians the status quo of a relatively narrow street and aggressive drivers.

If there's one element that I think would truly benefit from more consideration it's the connection between Marlee and Winona. It's an awful intersection to turn from and while I think moving the lights back further east will help a lot it still feels like it will be really clunky to be on the new bike lanes heading northbound.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top