Rainforest
Senior Member
Now I get your frustration. Indeed, why didn't they accept those proposals that would cost virtually nothing to implement ..
|
|
|
TOareaFan
Superstar
I would go even further.....when the tour buses show up and people are either pouring out of them or climbing back into them.....the north sidewalk becomes completely blocked and pedestrians have to re-route onto King and around the buses/crowds.
Similar happens about 1/2 hour before and after each show just with crowds milling around and blocking the thru path.
Added to the already large volume of foot traffic, the situation becomes dangerous.
That said (and I am not disagreeing with you) I often wonder why the flow of people hasn’t adjusted to the ample south sidewalk........on Simcoe (south of King) similar blockages happen on the west side due to RTH.....but most local pedestrian traffic avoids it by walking on the east side.
Just interests me that a similar “adjustment” has not happened on King.
pman
Senior Member
But on the plus side, the fact that Toronto would widen any sidewalk, even temporarily, is some kind of miracle.
TOareaFan
Superstar
It’s a miracle that has been happening though
drum118
Superstar
Avenue
Active Member
I personally am not happy because I don't think the proposal prioritizes transit enough. I worry that the improvement for travel times will be so little that the failure of the project will impede such efforts city wide.
MetroMan
Senior Member
I understand why they’re doing it like this. A sudden completely car free King st would not fly with this Council.
Once the pilot is complete and shows an improvement in transit times — and it will improve, though not to all of its potential — then when they build the permanent infrastructure, they can install retractable bollards at each block and close selected blocks off during certain times and eventually make those closures permanent.
For example, there are no laneways or parking garage entrances on King between Peter and University. They can close this stretch entirely to cars or perhaps pave the road in cobblestone so that it becomes a woonerf with bollards that is closed to cars most of the time.
But none of this would be done if they had proposed excluding cars entirely and council just rejected the pilot. This will be a gradual shift.
Last edited:
nfitz
Superstar
That's the number of population divided by the number of cars.
For AM/PM peak commuting, 1.1 is more typical.
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
Honestly, I have completely lost hope for the success of this project.
It is neither a street mall or a transit prioritization. I am certain you could pull any pedestrian or streetcar user on King aside and ask them how they would improve the street, and they would do a better job than City Planning has here.
It is neither a street mall or a transit prioritization. I am certain you could pull any pedestrian or streetcar user on King aside and ask them how they would improve the street, and they would do a better job than City Planning has here.
steveintoronto
Superstar
I understand your sentiment completely. It's been undermined and diluted from the original premise so much...but there's one thing that does give me hope: The Bloor Bike Lanes. Also incredibly compromised and much of the design contrary to best practice, and somehow it survived in spite of that.
Fingers crossed, because at this point, there's not much else but hope to see this work the way it should.
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
Yes. In 5 years time, Tory's successor may actually look at actually prioritizing transit on King, building on this "progress".
Sometimes we do have to take an incrementalist approach to city building. I recognize that. I worry still that this project has been undermined and diluted so much that it appeases nobody and sucks the air out of the room for future progress.
syn
Senior Member
Is that due to the views of of this particular group, or is it simply because there's a urban/suburban divide?
steveintoronto
Superstar
That's not as simple a question as it first seems. I was shocked, as per Wisla's post above, as to how *even those downtown cnclrs claiming to be so 'pro-transit-mall'* so readily voted for compromises that knocked the trolley poles out from under the originally proposed concept from Planning.
We can't put all the blame onto the burbs for that. The downtown councillor compromises were just as fifth column.
crs1026
Superstar
We have to keep our eye on the ball and not overthink this.
If the velocity of the streetcars increases across that zone, the pilot is a success. Period.
That and that alone was the goal of the pilot. It is not a complete transformation of the street nor is it intended to achieve a 'perfect' template of a downtown streetscape model for the future.
We may not have it all right, and we still have much to learn.
I hope it inspires walkable and bikeable streets and I hope it makes that area more attractive and enjoyable. But if all it does is make the streetcars work better, it's a successs. There are suburban councillors who don't want to see even that part happen Let's not get so down on what the project isn't doing that we aid and abet their opposition. I
- Paul
If the velocity of the streetcars increases across that zone, the pilot is a success. Period.
That and that alone was the goal of the pilot. It is not a complete transformation of the street nor is it intended to achieve a 'perfect' template of a downtown streetscape model for the future.
We may not have it all right, and we still have much to learn.
I hope it inspires walkable and bikeable streets and I hope it makes that area more attractive and enjoyable. But if all it does is make the streetcars work better, it's a successs. There are suburban councillors who don't want to see even that part happen Let's not get so down on what the project isn't doing that we aid and abet their opposition. I
- Paul