TKTKTK
Senior Member
If I might suggest the most obvious woonerf: Church Street, from Carleton to Wellesley? I can't imagine anyone opposing this.
|
|
|
- Thread starter confusion
- Start date
valkoholic
Active Member
Makes sense to me. That stretch basically behaves like a woonerf today. The on-street parking and pedestrian actvity slows traffic to a crawl. It's great stretch of street for showing people that on-street parking is actually good for pedestrians.
SunriseChampion
Senior Member
Come to think of it, the side streets around where I grew up in Scarborough were pretty much woonerfs, what with the kids basically covering them, forcing vehicular traffic to a crawl. Especially when we played road hockey, footy or b-ball.
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
This rant's a bit late to the party, but St. George (the west side, at least) is practically a textbook example of how *not* to improve the pedestrian qualities of a street. Pedestrian flow is severely hampered by the design of the sidewalk, which narrows to widths barely able to accommodate two passing people at a time, let alone the tens of thousands per hour that use it. And this is in good weather, not when the sidewalk is further reduced by snow (or, as is the case for some of the 'dual' stretches of sidewalk, not shoveled at all, literally slowing you down by minutes, a completely inexcusable situation when you're trying to walk 8 blocks in 10 minutes and get to one of the select few left-handed seats in a class). Straight stretches of sidewalk exist only for a few dozen metres at a time, making for a remarkably discontinuous path. Obstacles abound, parking meters pop up randomly, ginormous concrete planters and utterly useless patches of dead grass abound, consuming even more space. Driveway cutouts mean the sidewalk slopes sideways, so in winter you're guaranteed to slip on them. They had to rebuild most of the damn thing only a few years after construction, and the 'crosswalks' they put in (the cobblestones) weren't actual crossings, so people darted across at random. The east side is more consistent, both in design and in one's ability to actually walk down the street without tripping over people and obstacles, but the sidewalk there could also be wider (even though almost every well-used building on St. George is on the west side). I guess cyclists are the only beneficiaries of St. George's "improvements," though there's suspiciously few cyclists that use it, compared to a street like Harbord, anyway.
confusion
Active Member
Agreed with all the points you made. I do believe it is an improvement over Harbord when it comes to pedestrians. The sidewalks are much to skinny here for the amount of people that walk through. With all of the bike traffic on Harbord and only 2 lanes of car traffic, it seems some streets in this city will never be right due to the conditions.
I'm not sure why so many support St. George as a woonerf though, a woonerf should be a route, not a destination.
Reading back through the comments, someone said they preferred cars on Yonge. I laughed.
I'm not sure why so many support St. George as a woonerf though, a woonerf should be a route, not a destination.
Reading back through the comments, someone said they preferred cars on Yonge. I laughed.
mgl
Active Member
The sidewalks don't seem all that wide on the side of Toronto Life Square and it was just built.
I would love wider sidewalks on Yonge between Bloor and Front. Keep it 2 way but close a lane in each direction. Wide sidewalks would be great. I currently avoid the area since I keep having to jump into the street to get around people.
bleeepbluuup
Active Member
Those cobblestones are also spaced exactly right to trap you and send you crashing if you're on inline skates. A few of my friends found this out soon after they were installed.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
drum118
Superstar
Most major street sidewalks were never design or seen for today use of them when built.
Been calling since 2006 that Bay St south of Queen be close to traffic with transit still allow to use it. There would be no sidewalk, other than one level surface with better drainage at corners and along this new road.
Been calling since 2006 that Bay St south of Queen be close to traffic with transit still allow to use it. There would be no sidewalk, other than one level surface with better drainage at corners and along this new road.
Council approves redesign of busy downtown Yonge St. for pedestrians
Jonny5
Senior Member
Agreed. It was never anticipated there could be so many self-absorbed ignorant morons for whom continuously being in everyone else's way was their single life goal.
Kraylin
Active Member
This is one of the problems with Toronto. This thread started in 2009 and in that 12 years nothing has been done. Well besides adding a few hundred thousand people to already congested sidewalks and streets.
ShonTron
Moderator
Northern Light
Superstar
Quite right to say that problems such as this can and ought to be addressed more comprehensively, more quickly.
But also worth saying that its not quite accurate that nothing has been done.
The biggest amount of sidewalk widening has occurred ad hoc through the development process.
Sidewalk on Adelaide at Yonge, prior to the Bay-Adelaide Centre:
Sidewalk today:
As you can see, the sidewalk was substantially increased in size (and prettied up)
This is far from the only example.
However, it is, as I noted, 'ad hoc', done largely through redevelopment, and as such, not benefiting those sites where no development has happened.
There have been dedicated projects to create more pedestrian space; including the area in front of Union Station; and on Market Street; but these have been relatively few.
Certainly, it would have been nice to see more assertive action.
*****
But lets note with some optimism; the City just approved this plan for Yonge; the new John Street is set to get under way; and the City is edging towards a plan to widen the sidewalks along Front in the St. Lawrence area, so action is finally beginning to ramp up.
Last edited: