News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.6K     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
 5.4K     0 

Northern Light said:
Unhelpful post that contributes nothing to the discussion of transit in this corridor; Check!
Click to expand...

Oh really? First, do you take transit along this corridor, cause I do? Do you live in this area, cause I do? If you do lets have a healthy debate.

I strongly feel this is a complete sham that contributes very little to no enhancements for public transit users, cyclists and car drivers in the area I live and travel.

This is standard City of Toronto planning for Scarborough. Cut important corners in the design to 'save money', cater to ideological special interest groups, and create an acceptable environment for outsiders where it seems acceptable to silence the majority people who live here. This paint is a sham and likely wont end well, again.
 
Last edited:
OneCity said:
City of Toronto planning for East Scarborough

Cool red paint - check

Fake cycling lane - check

Fake rapid bus transit - check

Loss of vehicle lane with no improvements- check

Fight next Mayor who trys to fix the mess - TBD
Click to expand...
Sheesh, what do you have against BRT's and LRT's?
 
Coolstar said:
Sheesh, what do you have against BRT's and LRT's?
Click to expand...

Sheesh, what does this current coat of red paint even have anything to do with BRT's and LRTs? Absolutely nothing

When did I ever say I had anything against BRT or LRT? Never

I hope use are just mistaken in your post and not trying to falsely frame to attack the opinion which. It is common on UT

If anything my issue is exactly the opposite of what you just accused me of in that this plan is neither BRT or LRT. Even then if it was it should be grade separated, with separated cycle lanes and only removing a vehicle lane if providing true rapid transit that will see real benefits for the community

The red paint will look cool, but its truly unhelpful and may cost us more politically in the long run
 
Last edited:
OneCity said:
Oh really? First, do you take transit along this corridor, cause I do? Do you live in this area, cause I do? If you do lets have a healthy debate.

I strongly feel this is a complete sham that contributes very little to no enhancements for public transit users, cyclists and car drivers in the area I live and travel.

This is standard City of Toronto planning for Scarborough, cut important corners in the design to 'save money', cater to ideological special interest groups, and create an acceptable environment where it seems acceptable to silence the majority people who live here. This paint is a sham and likely wont end well, again.
Click to expand...

A legitimate discussion begins by dropping all pretense of rage and bitterness.

Portions of the lanes are likely to see some physical separation.

I would prefer more, rather than less; but that will depending on the number of driveways and turning movements required across the lane.

Lets wait and see how much protection is installed, what degree of enforcement occurs, and what benefit that brings before pre-judging an entire project on a small section of paint.

There is also a rationalization of transit stops due to occur as part of this project.

That should help achieve some savings in travel time.

The utility or lack thereof in this project will be in how much time it saves a commuter in this corridor.

If it is none or 1-2M from UTSC to Kennedy; I will agree it was a failure.

If it can produce savings of 5M each way or 10M round trip (or better); and that is reinvested in additional frequency, then I think it will have been a success.

No one is arguing this is the ideal long-term vision.

Its an alternative to the status quo.
 
Northern Light said:
A legitimate discussion begins by dropping all pretense of rage and bitterness.

Portions of the lanes are likely to see some physical separation.

I would prefer more, rather than less; but that will depending on the number of driveways and turning movements required across the lane.

Lets wait and see how much protection is installed, what degree of enforcement occurs, and what benefit that brings before pre-judging an entire project on a small paint project.

There is also a rationalization of transit stops due to occur as part of this project.

That should help achieve some savings in travel time.

The utility or lack thereof in this project will be in how much time it saves a commuter in this corridor.

If it is none or 1-2M from UTSC to Kennedy; I will agree it was a failure.

If it can produce savings of 5M each way or 10M round trip (or better); and that is reinvested in additional frequency, then I think it will have been a success.

No one is arguing this is the ideal long-term vision.

Its an alternative to the status quo.
Click to expand...

I'll gladly own my bitterness when seeing decades of corner-cutting planning from the City of Toronto specifically as it relates to to Scarborough. Seeing over and over an accepted toxic culture of bullying and push back from other areas of the City, while at the same time planning far superior better transit designs elsewhere in the GTA/City. Also my bitter opinion was towards the project itself, yours was moreless towards me.

The frequency issues are currently due to stop lights and the bottle necks are at Kennedy station with the construction. The right lane was never problematic east of Kennedy for our buses. I actually take the bulk of thus corridor weekly so I have very damn good understanding exactly what the impacts are and moreso what they are not with this painted mirage.

Cyclists will see a minimal upgrade, tho they still need to contend with the fast buses, and buses will now need to navigate cyclists in between stop lights.

But what are we gaining here? Not much aside from a red coat of paint.

Seems more like an empty political gesture becasue the City may not proceed with the EELRT. Which in itself was not grade separated but atleast provided separate cycle lanes and tunnel Morningside crossing. EELRT and Crosstown East should have been grade separated, but this red paint charade is new low planing from the City.
 
Last edited:
turini2 said:
usway and the LRT. I came up with "Mississauga Gateway" as a name that implies a connection to the neighbouring city, while still givi
Click to expand...
I think that works better. "Centennial Park" is a bit too far west. Maybe "Western Gateway" or "Airport Corporate Centre"? Still, I think the Mississauga Gateway is best.
 
sche said:
Does anyone know why the bike lane got painted? Also, what does striped red paint mean vs solid red paint?
Click to expand...

Dashed lines are usually in areas where modes conflict, with car, buses and cyclist

Likely a warning for cyclists to be on extra alert in that area if cars are merging in that area
 
afransen said:
Is mixing buses and bikes in the same lane really wise? Buses generally need the whole lane and can't 'squeeze' past a cyclist in a standard lane like cars can.
Click to expand...

I'll be fair and say it helps cyclists along this corridor in the sense they only have to contend with aggressive bus drivers and not both car and buses.

Aside from that, its still not all that safe, moreso when cars are turning from a lane over onto side streets. Not a worthwhile upgrade by any means and scary for all involved.

And certainly buses and cyclists will conflict at times impeding travel time, but wont matter much as the stop light frequency and construction impedance determines the frequency here as always.
 
Last edited:
It's because if they didn't allow cyclists in the bus lane. Cyclists would have to ride in the car lanes which would make cyclists squeeze between buses and cars, or ride on the sidewalk (which is illegal). I think eventually, there will be cycle tracks, but this will still be a fair solution for now.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top