nfitz
Superstar
Obviously they are not going to be fencing the streetcar corridor on King!
|
|
|
steveintoronto
Superstar
How so? It is fenced in many other jurisdictions. Do you not see the conflict of pedestrians wandering onto the tracks? Melbourne's Bourke Mall has a speed limit of 5kmh and the trams must flash lights and ring bells as they progress along it...and *still* people get hit by trams.
So let's get this straight: Is this a "transit mall" or a "pedestrian mall"? Seems to me the cause d'etre of the entire project was to speed the flow of streetcars along King.
Of course, at stops, there would be a gap in the fencing.
nfitz
Superstar
Because it's clearly an utterly absurd suggestion. There's no restrictions on crossing the road mid-block now, and people do it all the time, with 4 lanes of traffic. And you think it's going to be a problem once there's less lanes and less traffic?
On major downtown streets? I've never seen it.
Do you not have any perspective? I cross King now with streetcars all the time, where there are no traffic lights. Where do you currently cross?
You claim that 5 km/hr is the speed limit. I have no evidence that this is true. I've seen different numbers. And for what distance is this?
Looking at the literature, there seem to be less pedestrian collisions on Bourke, than adjacent streets that don't have this.
In fact, the study notes that it's been suggested that:
where possible, streets with trams should be more fully “pedestrianised”, as with the Bourke Street Mall and Swanston Street, to create a safe and pleasant environment for pedestrians
I really don't know what your concern is, or where you are pulling your information out from - but putting a fence along is quite obviously not going to happen!
Attachments
44 North
Senior Member
Do you think it wouldn't happen because it provides no net benefit to transit service, or because it runs too far afoul of attempts at pedestrianization? Because I think there's a lot of potential benefit, say between Jarvis and University, or Church and Bay. This wouldn't be some monstrous chainlink thing. It'd be an attractive and artistically-designed piece, waist height, and designed to keep service steady and reliable during the most peak of times (like events). And I guess safer for wayward peds.
nfitz
Superstar
Wayward peds? It's patently absurd. It's carrying this misbelief that people can only cross the road at signals to whole new and ridiculous levels.
If you don't need a fence to stop people crossing King Street now, I can't fathom why you'd need one then! It's beyond ludicrous. And I have to think that those that would suggest it, are not crossing it on a daily basis, at all hours of the day and night (very few of which it has enough traffic to even be bothersome).
Personally, I'd prefer waist-high bushes instead of fences. Accomplishes pretty much the same thing, but looks a lot nicer. And without cars on the street, you wouldn't have to worry about the salt spray in the winter killing them.
I do agree though that if it is eventually converted into a full transit/pedestrian mall, then some type of physical separation between ped traffic and transit traffic will be needed. Different coloured pavement won't do it.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Better than
But maybe benches as barriers?
Or a suburban car-oriented version:
But maybe benches as barriers?
Or a suburban car-oriented version:
nfitz
Superstar
There's a difference between a bit of low fencing around an intersection which does have crossing somewhere, to mid-block, or places where you have to cross during a break in traffic, like Victoria Street (at King).
steveintoronto
Superstar
I've posted the speed limits and conditions Yarra Trams have to run by previously. I'll find the pics and post them again. And they have to continually clang their bells and flash their lights going through the core of Bourke Street Mall. Was discussing this with an Aussie just a few hours ago, will have a Melbourne friend post on it. It's an issue that's going to rankle quite a few people like yourself, but a choice has to be made. Is this *Transit Mall* for through-traffic, or a destination in itself, like Bourke Mall is?
Meantime, to address "wayward peds":
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...etcar-torontos-deadliest-for-pedestrians.html
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...es-showing-woman-struck-by-ttc-streetcar.html
http://www.torontosun.com/2017/04/14/ttc-streetcar-kills-pedestrian-in-chinatown
Now mix streetcars moving "faster than walking speed" (the complaint now with King streetcars) and un-barriered pedestrians? What could possibly go wrong? Thoroughly agreed with Gweed's "green bushes' which is how many European cities *given the space* do it. King Street, unfortunately, lacks that space.
So the question remains, how to separate unaware pedestrians from moving streetcars at speed?
https://www.thestar.com/content/dam...ight-of-way.jpg.size.custom.crop.1086x722.jpg
Last edited:
44 North
Senior Member
Absurd, ludicrous, ridiculous? I don't see the need to be extreme. It's not like anyone's saying it needs to be some great wall topped with barb wire. And yeah I totally agree that midblock crossing is important, and would only expect there to be intermittent gaps in any fencing.
Bushes or shrubbery could be alright, I'm always in favour of greening and landscaping the streets. I don't think it'd work all that well though. I think it would require proper planters to hold them, and there isn't enough space for that. Also shrubbery can be finicky, and could easily be trampled and walked through. And if it does grow well, perhaps it could be dangerous by shielding the crossing ped from the driver, and the ped's sightline of oncoming streetcars. Still though, I think sidewalk greening and trees should be a huge part of this project.
steveintoronto
Superstar
@Gweed came up with some excellent drawings and measurments some months back for a proposal for cycle lanes down the middle and the tracks adjacent to the present sidewalks. It could probably have worked, albeit the costs to move the tracks and re-do the junctions would have been prohibitive, at least at this point in time. But the parameters have moved on since then, and cyclists like drivers are going to have to sacrifice through running for one lane of access for the sake of the *Transit* Mall and greater pedestrian space. With that sacrifice, there just might be room for some sort of green living curtain. Perhaps a fence material that supports hardy vines, preferably flowering ones. The softness will have a huge psychological effect on the local businesses and users. San Diego does it this way, albeit vines grow more readily there.
Lets see what kind of allowance Gweed can come up with for a suggestion on it. My major concern will be vehicle exhaust fumes being toxic, but research must have been done on this elsewhere. San Diego has the luxury, like a lot of European cities, of being avenues rather than tight streets. University Avenue might even have an answer!
amnesiajune
Senior Member
Why is this needed? The next roads over to the north have a bike lane already. King should be a road that's used as little as possible by cars and bikes.
steveintoronto
Superstar
Reread what's written.
What do you think the term "sacrifice" might mean for cyclists? (Of which I'm an avid one, and quite willing to state that the only cyclist access should be sharing the one lane with motorists, unless they walk their bike as a pedestrian on the sidewalk). So read again if you missed that the all the times it's been written.
Last edited:
nfitz
Superstar
You don't. You imply there's something wrong with people crossing the street. And I"m not sure what your photo is supposed to show - this is at an intersection, and the pedestrians are clearly crossing on a green light. That's a much bigger road than King.
pman
Senior Member
I'm not sure why the spectre of clueless pedestrians throwing themselves in front of streetcars in the absence of a protective stream of cars has become such an issue on this thread. Lots of cities have streets that are closed to automobiles and have streetcar lines running beside sidewalks, and the death toll appears to be acceptable. Perhaps in the spirit of trying something revolutionary for Toronto we could - for once - look at the rest of the world's experience rather than rolling out our usual default of hypothesizing without data? Because this is starting to sound like The War On The Streetcar, folks.