[just east of the creek]

I think disallowing through traffic would do a lot to mitigate any concerns about making the street one way.

One ways being about moving traffic more quickly is not necessarily bad for pedestrians. You could easily enforce a low average speed of 30-40 kph with signal timing (assuming through traffic is permitted) which tends to achieve higher average speeds than bidirectional streets with higher speed limits. So a 30 kph max speed one way is quite feasible, without being inconsistent with walkability.

I agree with a lot of what Northern Light had to say, and having worked and entertained in the area am pretty familiar with the multiple neighborhoods to each side of the Financial District. In general one way streets have not been kind to neighborhoods and often become versions of Cayuga Speedway or maybe the Bristol Dragway. I've watched the changes in miniature in Oakville and removing one way streets has been beneficial to the streets in question.

But in this specific case, using the existing streetcar tracks to physically separate vehicles from cyclists and pedestrians, plus traffic calming measures at intersections, plus measures you have alluded to, could, with some work. lead to an enhanced environment for the street - wider pedestrian walkways, enhanced outdoor patios, separated and dedicated bike lanes, separated and dedicated streetcar tracks.

Unfortunately this may provide more benefits to one side of King then the other, but until you nix cars completely from these sections of King, or rework the streetcar tracks, then that may be a tough nut to crack. Oh, and the 'Car is King' crowd, another crowd more vocal in general opposition then found in the general neighborhood. However the King streetcar (as Queen, Dundas and College also) has far greater abilities to move larger volumes of people then my SUV, and those capabilities will only increase in importance. The TTC should be laser focused on upping reliability, frequency and average speed on these routes.

 

[reaperexpress]

Bike lanes on King are absolutely essential for efficient streetcar operation. The current 1 m gap between the trackbed and the street furniture is not quite wide enough for a streetcar to safely overtake a cyclist. So we have streetcars crawling along at 15 km/h along a so-called streetcar priority corridor because they're stuck behind a bike. It would only have taken an additional 50 centimetres to make room for an actual bike lane, and it's not like 50 cm actually makes a meaningful difference to the pedestrian realm on a now 7-metre sidewalk.

Furthermore, a >1.5m buffer between the streetcar tracks and the pedestrian realm is necessary in order for streetcars to safely operate at a decent speed (e.g. 40 km/h), because operators have advance notice of pedestrians crossing the tracks.

Based on what we've seen so far on other streets such as Spadina where crossing pedestrians have stepped in front of moving streetcars midblock, building the pedestrian realm out to the streetcar tracks will result in TTC Operations implementing a painfully low (20 km/h?) speed restriction across King Street.

Plenty of European cities have trams travelling through pedestrian areas or immediately next to pedestrian areas, but unless there is a fence along the tracks, trams are generally restricted to very low speeds in those areas. Just eliminating car traffic is not necessarily enough to ensure that streetcars can move quickly along the street.

 

[DSC]

Bike lanes on King are absolutely essential for efficient streetcar operation. The current 1 m gap between the trackbed and the street furniture is not quite wide enough for a streetcar to safely overtake a cyclist. So we have streetcars crawling along at 15 km/h along a so-called streetcar priority corridor because they're stuck behind a bike. It would only have taken an additional 50 centimetres to make room for an actual bike lane, and it's not like 50 cm actually makes a meaningful difference to the pedestrian realm on a now 7-metre sidewalk.

Furthermore, a >1.5m buffer between the streetcar tracks and the pedestrian realm is necessary in order for streetcars to safely operate at a decent speed (e.g. 40 km/h), because operators have advance notice of pedestrians crossing the tracks.

Based on what we've seen so far on other streets such as Spadina where crossing pedestrians have stepped in front of moving streetcars midblock, building the pedestrian realm out to the streetcar tracks will result in TTC Operations implementing a painfully low (20 km/h?) speed restriction across King Street.

Plenty of European cities have trams travelling through pedestrian areas or immediately next to pedestrian areas, but unless there is a fence along the tracks, trams are generally restricted to very low speeds in those areas. Just eliminating car traffic is not necessarily enough to ensure that streetcars can move quickly along the street.

Moving the TTC tracks on King would be quite costly as they are installed in the 'new way' with a 'permanent' concrete base layer and the 'temporary' tracks laid on top of it encased in another layer of concrete. The TTC and the City are not planning to do more than lay new tracks i.e. they are not planning to move the 'permanent' base layer. As a regular cyclist I might like a bike track on King but, really, the tracks on Adelaide & Richmond are not far away - particularly if one is on a bike..

 

[reaperexpress]

Moving the TTC tracks on King would be quite costly as they are installed in the 'new way' with a 'permanent' concrete base layer and the 'temporary' tracks laid on top of it encased in another layer of concrete. The TTC and the City are not planning to do more than lay new tracks i.e. they are not planning to move the 'permanent' base layer. As a regular cyclist I might like a bike track on King but, really, the tracks on Adelaide & Richmond are not far away - particularly if one is on a bike..

Nothing I suggested involves shifting the streetcar tracks.

I also never said that cycle tracks are necessary, I asked for the bare minimum cycling provision which is a 1.5m strip of asphalt between the tracks and the sidewalk. Regardless of whether it's a main cycling route or not, there will be bikes on King Street because that's where a ton of destinations are, and because some people are continuing west of Bathurst or east of Parliament where Richmond/Adelaide is not a reasonable option.

The only question is whether you want streetcars to be stuck behind those bikes or not.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Nothing I suggested involves shifting the streetcar tracks.

I also never said that cycle tracks are necessary, I asked for the bare minimum cycling provision which is a 1.5m strip of asphalt between the tracks and the sidewalk. Regardless of whether it's a main cycling route or not, there will be bikes on King Street because that's where a ton of destinations are, and because some people are continuing west of Bathurst or east of Parliament where Richmond/Adelaide is not a reasonable option.

The only question is whether you want streetcars to be stuck behind those bikes or not.

Pretty hard to argue against that.

Separated bike lanes are better for pedestrians, they’re better streetcars and they’re better for cyclists. The only thing standing in the way is our attachment to car-centric infrastructure.

This option really needs to be pushed hard as RapidTO infrastructure begins planning. This is a generational opportunity to get this right.

Our downtown streets need to be centred around pedestrians, cyclists and streetcars. Cars can be accommodated where they fit.

This is our only option if we’re serious about Vision Zero, meeting our climate targets, and building effective transport infrastructure

 

[blacksquirrels]

Can i ask why? I grant you that currently Richmond and Adelaide look pretty substandard. But the vision here is a bit different. Bike lanes would be physically separated from cars by the streetcar tracks, themselves physically separated from cars as well. Excluding intersections, the street sections should be much calmer for cyclist's. The streetcar tracks would confine cars to one side of King with expanded pedestrian and cycling to the other.

One way King & Queen streets, if properly executed it could work. It depends on how it's designed ultimately.

assuming banning cars completely is a no go and keeping streetcar tracks in the two middle lanes is necessary due to the turn radius I think I'd design a one way King and or Queen Street like this...

Lane 1: Bumped out streetcar platform & dedicated bike lane.
Lane 2: Streetcar local service with dedicated tracks (frequent stops just like the current 504)
Lane 3: Streetcar express service with dedicated tracks (only stops at major intersections like Spadina, Bathurst, Dufferin etc...)
Lane 4: Local traffic only (for taxi/uber drop offs, forced to turn left at the end of every block.)

+ priority transit signalling & no street parking.

 

[reaperexpress]

Pretty hard to argue against that.

Separated bike lanes are better for pedestrians, they’re better streetcars and they’re better for cyclists. The only thing standing in the way is our attachment to car-centric infrastructure.

This option really needs to be pushed hard as RapidTO infrastructure begins planning. This is a generational opportunity to get this right.

Our downtown streets need to be centred around pedestrians, cyclists and streetcars. Cars can be accommodated where they fit.

This is our only option if we’re serious about Vision Zero, meeting our climate targets, and building effective transport infrastructure

The decisions on King Street have nothing to do with car-centric infrastructure. King Street is already nearly car-free as it is. The main tradeoffs are between transit, cycling and walking. Don't let people like Not Just Bikes mislead you into thinking that planning decisions in the City are still car-oriented. They are not. Toronto's City Planners are perfectly happy to turn car/parking lanes into sidewalks and bike lanes, and councillors are perfectly happy to install unwarranted traffic signals and stop signs in the (misguided) name of pedestrian safety, even when Transportation Services warns them that it will royally screw up traffic.

In the case of cycle tracks, the tradeoff is between cycling and walking. The raised curb between the streetcar tracks adds space, because you need a buffer between the streetcar and the curb, and then another buffer between the cycle track and that same curb. In this case, I think I'd choose a wider pedestrian realm given that King is a primary destination (i.e. pedestrian space), and is not a primary cycling route (due to Richmond/Adelaide).

 

[just east of the creek]

One way King & Queen streets, if properly executed it could work. It depends on how it's designed ultimately.

assuming banning cars completely is a no go and keeping streetcar tracks in the two middle lanes is necessary due to the turn radius I think I'd design a one way King and or Queen Street like this...

Lane 1: Bumped out streetcar platform & dedicated bike lane.
Lane 2: Streetcar local service with dedicated tracks (frequent stops just like the current 504)
Lane 3: Streetcar express service with dedicated tracks (only stops at major intersections like Spadina, Bathurst, Dufferin etc...)
Lane 4: Local traffic only (for taxi/uber drop offs, forced to turn left at the end of every block.)

+ priority transit signalling & no street parking.

This sounds very interesting. And would really ramp up the level of transit activity that could be accommodated.

 

[DSC]

One way King & Queen streets, if properly executed it could work. It depends on how it's designed ultimately.

assuming banning cars completely is a no go and keeping streetcar tracks in the two middle lanes is necessary due to the turn radius I think I'd design a one way King and or Queen Street like this...

Lane 1: Bumped out streetcar platform & dedicated bike lane.
Lane 2: Streetcar local service with dedicated tracks (frequent stops just like the current 504)
Lane 3: Streetcar express service with dedicated tracks (only stops at major intersections like Spadina, Bathurst, Dufferin etc...)
Lane 4: Local traffic only (for taxi/uber drop offs, forced to turn left at the end of every block.)

+ priority transit signalling & no street parking.

UT has a transit fantasy thread, adding express streetcar tracks may be better posted there!

 

[afransen]

King only needs to work for cycling access, not as a cycling through route. Mixing with pedestrians should work. You would also need to discourage bikes from using the streetcar tracks (maybe some green patches or just a rough/bumpy surface under the tracks).

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Pretty hard to argue against that.

Separated bike lanes are better for pedestrians, they’re better streetcars and they’re better for cyclists. The only thing standing in the way is our attachment to car-centric infrastructure.

This option really needs to be pushed hard as RapidTO infrastructure begins planning. This is a generational opportunity to get this right.

Our downtown streets need to be centred around pedestrians, cyclists and streetcars. Cars can be accommodated where they fit.

This is our only option if we’re serious about Vision Zero, meeting our climate targets, and building effective transport infrastructure

The decisions on King Street have nothing to do with car-centric infrastructure

When I wrote that comment, I had streets like College in mind. Streets where we dedicate valuable road space to parking, rather than cycling/active transport.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Regarding King, we shouldn’t be too pessimistic about the lack of explicit cycle lanes. I’m sure the redesigned King will be far safer for all road users, including cyclists.

 

[reaperexpress]

Regarding King, we shouldn’t be too pessimistic about the lack of explicit cycle lanes. I’m sure the redesigned King will be far safer for all road users, including cyclists.

Safer, sure. But not necessarily better for transit operations.

The Public Realm group will not give up those 50 cm of sidewalk width unless they are absolutely forced to. Speaking from my experience trying and failing to get them to give up those 50 cm during the design of the original pilot. I and others predicted that streetcars would commonly get stuck behind bikes if they only provided a metre of space beside the tracks, and sure enough that's exactly what happened.

King only needs to work for cycling access, not as a cycling through route. Mixing with pedestrians should work. You would also need to discourage bikes from using the streetcar tracks (maybe some green patches or just a rough/bumpy surface under the tracks).

Mixing with pedestrians? On King? The pedestrian traffic is often so dense that you can barely mix with pedestrians on foot, let alone on a bike.

 

[blacksquirrels]

UT has a transit fantasy thread, adding express streetcar tracks may be better posted there!

the King street pilot still doesn't change the fact that the 504 stops too frequently, moves people too slowly and is often overcapacity during rush hour. it would probably be best to upgrade the service beyond streetcars at some point.

 

[innsertnamehere]

the King street pilot still doesn't change the fact that the 504 stops too frequently, moves people too slowly and is often overcapacity during rush hour. it would probably be best to upgrade the service beyond streetcars at some point.

good thing a new downtown subway roughly following the route of the 504 is under construction as we speak!