[junctionist]

That concern about firetrucks seemed alarmist. It'll be fine. There will be enough space for cars to pullover. The sidewalks and bike lanes will be busy. The Crosstown will also reduce congestion on Eglinton by getting more people on transit and walking. A lot of the people in the walkable neighbourhoods around Eglinton--whether working class or upper class--drive everywhere and live a somewhat suburban lifestyle. That can change.

With that said, we've seen a general trend towards larger firetrucks that need wider lanes, and hence, wider streets. You see it in greenfield development in suburban areas across North America like the 905--all streets are wider than in pre-WWII neighbourhoods--whether it's a 2 lane side street or a 6 lane arterial. That's not good for our cities because we have to build larger roads that are harder for people to cross. Studies show that fire response in older neighbourhoods with narrower streets is just as good as in the suburbs with wider streets and larger trucks. We shouldn't accommodate the trend of fire departments upsizing trucks with wider streets.

 

[ehlow]

Anybody who knows this section of road knows that it's already often a 1 lane road in each direction due to road repair or delivery trucks and that it's no exaggeration to say that there is often more road space taken up by buses than cars.

Also there are often so many pedestrians that the sidewalks are overflowing & crowded. It will be even more busy pedestrian area with all the condos opening & starting construction.

 

[salsa]

Here's a link to John Tory's position against Eglinton Connects:
http://www.johntory.ca/fighting_gridlock_initiative

Great. Yet another fake "progressive" conservative. The crop of candidates in this election are becoming almost as bad as last time.

 

[Palma]

First question is who are "we"?

The second question is was the consensus that reducing 4 lanes of vehicular traffic to 2 lanes in order to provide protected bike lanes, wider sidewalks and more trees a great idea? Really?

It is mid winter, an alarm sounds in a fire hall on Eglinton Avenue, the fire crews scramble, board their vehicles and start to respond to the emergency but are brought to a halt at the end of their driveway because the one lane of traffic in both directions is plugged solid with traffic all day long. There is no one on the bike lanes or sidewalk but they are not available to mortals.

It is mid summer, a cyclist has a massive heart attack and an ambulance is dispatched. They never reach the poor cyclist in time because the roads are jammed. Traffic is supposed to pull over for emergency vehicles you say. In this configuration there is no over into which to pull.

Well there are plenty of streets in toronto with one lane for cars. On Davenport cars are parked even during rush hours in the morning and there is a bike lane so one lane for cars. On St Clair, other than during AM and PM rush hours, cars are also parked in one lane and there is only one lane in each direction. Although if need be, the ambulance can use the streetcar tracks. But what if there is already 1 streetcar or 2 on the tracks then what?. You also have parts of Dufferin where cars are allowed to park (non rush hours) and then there is only 1 lane for cars and buses at times.

 

[calimehtar]

The fire truck thing has come up in other projects before and I think it's ridiculous. It doesn't make sense to design the city around fire trucks, we should design fire trucks to suit the city.

 

[spider]

Well there are plenty of streets in toronto with one lane for cars. On Davenport cars are parked even during rush hours in the morning and there is a bike lane so one lane for cars. On St Clair, other than during AM and PM rush hours, cars are also parked in one lane and there is only one lane in each direction. Although if need be, the ambulance can use the streetcar tracks. But what if there is already 1 streetcar or 2 on the tracks then what?. You also have parts of Dufferin where cars are allowed to park (non rush hours) and then there is only 1 lane for cars and buses at times

Identifying current problems doesn't excuse repeating them, aren't we supposed to learn from our mistakes? At least the examples cited had parking.

I still don't know who "we" is.

 

[W. K. Lis]

The fire truck thing has come up in other projects before and I think it's ridiculous. It doesn't make sense to design the city around fire trucks, we should design fire trucks to suit the city.

So true. Link to this article on
Mobile Fire Apparatus: United States vs. Europe

The Star had an article, back in 2008 (see link), on
Super-sized fire trucks a poor fit for city streets

Who would have thought that fire trucks would turn out to be such a burning issue, especially among firefighters?

The fact is some worry they won't be able to do their job properly because their vehicles are too large to negotiate many city streets.

"I've been a Toronto firefighter for almost 20 years," says one professional, who asked that his name not be used. "I've responded to fires in the past where we had to leave the truck down the street and run to the fire by foot because we couldn't make the turn."

Former Toronto fire chief (1993-98) Peter Ferguson was so concerned about the situation he commissioned a Canadian manufacturer to make two smaller, European-style fire trucks more than a decade ago. Though he retired before they were delivered, he makes it clear one of the main opponents to downsizing was the union.

"They said the cab wasn't big enough," he recalls. He also says the union worried that smaller trucks meant smaller crews. That was not the case, Ferguson insists.

"The big issue was the union's position but that wasn't the only one. The majority of calls to the fire department today are medical. My idea was to put a paramedic on every truck. But that didn't go anywhere. To them I was a radical."

Yet to most of us, smaller trucks and paramedics sound like excellent ideas. When you look at how other fire departments around the globe work, both seem essential.

"Smaller trucks do exist!" argues the anonymous firefighter. "Toronto failed 10 years ago when they tried to make their own `European-style' pumpers. They weren't designed right and were very dangerous to drive and operate. They were sold cheap to some Caribbean fire department and were never put into service here in Toronto.

"The Toronto Fire Department continues to purchase trucks for the downtown that make driving very difficult. National Fire Protection Association standards do tend to make the trucks large, however, if you can't make it to the fire what good is following the standard? It's about time we start looking at how fire services operate in Europe and Asia instead of looking south all the time."

Who could disagree? But in their own way, Toronto's monster fire trucks are the product of an official culture that would suburbanize the city. Think of the ludicrously oversized garbage bins that appeared recently. In their own bloated way, they may be even more inappropriate and obnoxious. Talk about sending the wrong message and cluttering up the city.

At a time when we are being told to consume less, save more, you'd think governments and civic institutions would do the same. Now that people are returning to the city in droves, you'd also think that the urban virtues of compactness, connectedness and closeness would acquire new urgency.

And how ironic that the push is on throughout suburbia to remake its spacious precincts in the image of a city. It's happening in Mississauga, Markham and places in between. That means narrower streets, shorter blocks, mixed use, the very things people like most about the city.

We all know this has to happen; we have no choice. In the meantime, few of the cities we love most would meet modern safety standards. That's why we put smoke detectors in our homes.

That's also why less is more than ever. The cult of bigness would have it otherwise, but in half a century, all it has given us is a planet that's burning up.

In this case, where there's smoke, there's fire.

 

[spider]

The fire truck thing has come up in other projects before and I think it's ridiculous. It doesn't make sense to design the city around fire trucks, we should design fire trucks to suit the city.

Well, if we can't have both fire trucks and bike lanes whatever should we do?

Fire trucks we count on to save our lives and property 12 months of the year.
Bicycles, being discretionary rather than existential are of no value to anyone but the rider who almost invariably hangs up his helmet for more than half the year leaving a lot of precious road space deserted.
I wouldn't be surprised if cars outnumber bikes at least a thousand to one or more for half the year on Eglinton Avenue. A half dozen people will pop up and vow that they ride their bike all year round, good for them, but not good enough to justify year round closure of a lane of traffic on a main street anywhere in Toronto.

We all know what my choice would be.

 

[LNahid2000]

I hate when people use the "half a year" argument against bikes. Our winters really aren't that bad, and there are colder places where bikes have a high modal share year round.

 

[junctionist]

Give me the bicycle over the firetruck. It'll get me from point A to point B like to my job. You want a firetruck, go ahead and get one. I won't have the city rebuilt to accommodate it and produce inferior infrastructure for people's daily lives, so you better buy one that fits the streets.

 

[TOareaFan]

I hate when people use the "half a year" argument against bikes. Our winters really aren't that bad, and there are colder places where bikes have a high modal share year round.

I don't think spider was suggesting otherwise....this past winter aside, our winters aren't that bad....it does not change, however, the observable fact that the vast majority of cyclists who currently cycle to work don't do it between November and April (guestimate).

Finding ways to accommodate (encourage?) active transit like cycling is a very important part of an integrated transportation plan .....but it does not do anyone any good in that endeavour to pretend that, for the majority of people who will participate, it will be a seasonal component. Even in cities with far more developed cycling infrastructure on the roads (like Montreal) the amount of cyclists varies dramatically with the weather.

 

[ehlow]

Eg connects is more than just bike lanes. It's also about an improved pedestrian realm like big trees and wider sidewalks

 

[junctionist]

I don't think spider was suggesting otherwise....this past winter aside, our winters aren't that bad....it does not change, however, the observable fact that the vast majority of cyclists who currently cycle to work don't do it between November and April (guestimate).

Finding ways to accommodate (encourage?) active transit like cycling is a very important part of an integrated transportation plan .....but it does not do anyone any good in that endeavour to pretend that, for the majority of people who will participate, it will be a seasonal component. Even in cities with far more developed cycling infrastructure on the roads (like Montreal) the amount of cyclists varies dramatically with the weather.

There are cities like Copenhagen with cold and snowy winters that have a large number of people cycling because of proper infrastructure and winter maintenance. Leaving snowbanks in bike lanes is improper road maintenance that shuts down cycling in the winter. The city's plowing standards are all created with driver safety in mind. Cycling requires faster snow clearance on local roads than the 8 cm standard. If the city's expressways weren't cleared of snow after 2.5 cm (say until 8 cm accumulated), would anyone risk driving on them? You could shut down driving in the winter if you didn't maintain streets with driver safety in mind--the bus stops would be crowded with people no matter how inconvenient transit is in many parts of Scarborough. Do you think it even matters, though? If 60% of road users in the summer are on bikes and 5% in January, the bike lanes are still solid infrastructure that helps a lot of people get around safely on an annual basis.

 

[ehlow]

I still don't know who "we" is.

The original "we" probably referred to the people who went to the Eg Connects public meetings or did the survey on the website. I went to one and they were very well attended.

 

[junctionist]

The people who cared enough about Eglinton's future to go to the Eglinton Connects meetings were in fact overwhelmingly supportive of all of the improvements. Everyone also agreed that the city should go further and bury the overhead wires along the street. One part of the consultations had members of the public gather at tables in groups and decide how the street should be configured, with cards that read "trees" "car lane" "bike lane" and "sidewalk", that participants lined up on a paper in whatever way they wanted the street to be configured. Sidewalk widths and number of car lanes differed, but I was pleasantly surprised at how almost every table decided to include bike lanes in their ideal configuration--the majority of the people were local residents who weren't apparently dedicated cyclists.