[steveintoronto]

King Street has outgrown its sidewalks and downtown growth is just getting started. In the coming decade, the daytime population of downtown Toronto is going to double. Most of those people get around on foot so the King Street redesign must take pedestrians into account. The narrow sidewalks have to be expanded.

If true why are you so enthusiastic about wasting big parts of that precious space by handing it over to restaurant row for free?

I agree with MetroMan on many points, but on this one we disagree. Whether you or I think otherwise, the priority of this mall is for transit. King is the fourth most used transit route in Toronto. THAT is what the emphasis is on, not pedestrians sauntering. There's lots of pedestrian space to build *above* the sidewalks and *over* the transit RoW, just as is done in Hong Kong and other cities.

Excellent point. This talk might be better in the subway thread but what happens there is intertwined with this. The very presence of the King concept looks like it helped deflect the subway to Queen yet both projects still look like they're being managed in their own silos as if one shouldn't have anything to do with the other.

Indeed. And the Relief Line is an excellent example of many of those same folks bemoaning the lack of a 'greater integrated vision' and yet are shuttered when it comes to putting the Relief Line into the regional and greater context it demands. Just ending it at Queen and University is madness, let alone building it as yet another subway boondoggle. The most expensive transit project ever planned for Toronto, and they foresee running four car subway trains on it? WTF? To talk the King Transit Mall and the Relief Line as completely unrelated systems and movements boggles the mind of a transit planner from almost anywhere but Toronto. And all the independent ones here are sounding the same alarm.

In the event, I cannot foresee QP, no matter who gets elected, funding Toronto's Pape Avenue Entitlement with toy trains. Metrolinx, who the funding is going to be channeled through, is going to give priority to regional *run-through* RER relief on Union Station as well as the present subway. And that includes a one-seat ride from beyond the suburbs to the core of Toronto, just like *modern" world class cities. What a concept. Ironically, the Kompromized King Mall, which will flounder in it's own special Torontonese Sauce, will make that point clearer than ever: 'Why give Toronto money when they just spend it on toys'?

A couple a months ago I said the now former Chief Planner was delivering a compromised transit scheme on King and compromised subway a few blocks north. Too soon to say I told you so?

It's been clear all along. The question isn't if she was forced to buckle-under to retain her job, the question is really why quit now? Some stories have hinted at reasons, but I think something bigger is yet to reveal itself.

I like Keesmaat, a lot, but did she compromise herself? Absolutely...was that justified? Hard to say. I respect her for quitting though. How long can you live a lie?

As with all 'boulevard cafes' (which are on public property) the City charges businesses for the space (downtown ca $80 sq/m ) and these fees are likely to be increased quite substantially when the new Boulevard cafe by-law is approved later in the fall.

It's still a give-away, at least for those with 'location, location, etc'. It's a transit mall. Without that, there is no 'King Street'. If pedestrians are second in priority, then ban cars. As an avid cyclist (I just zoomed through there) I'm more than willing to give up King as a cycling thoroughfare. So should cars.

But the priority is, and will be, getting streetcars through there in a timely manner. A "Pedestrian Mall" in such a narrow street is incompatible with the prime objective.

 

[TransitBart]

As with all 'boulevard cafes' (which are on public property) the City charges businesses for the space (downtown ca $80 sq/m ) and these fees are likely to be increased quite substantially when the new Boulevard cafe by-law is approved later in the fall.

What is to 'like' about this?

 

[DSC]

What is to 'like' about this?

I was correcting the poster who said that the City did not charge for occupying the public boulevard. They do. Maybe not enough, but that's another argument. Personally I like patio cafes IN THE RIGHT LOCATIONS but I was not discussing liking or not.

 

[steveintoronto]

Personally I like patio cafes IN THE RIGHT LOCATIONS but I was not discussing liking or not.

This is a crucial point, and for the life of me, why would anyone want to sit next to stinking, loud, obnoxious traffic, pay a premium for it, and think it is somehow 'elan'?

There is irony in that if internal combustion vehicles are banned on King, the 'sidewalk real-estate' does become something much more desirable. The problem remains the highly restricted width of the street, however, but elegant platforms and walkways built above the sidewalk in sections, with entrances to the second floors of buildings and walkways to elevated sections the other side of King could and would expand on the pedestrian viability of the King Korridor, and actually increase quality retail space by making second floors pedestrian accessible. For mobility access, elevators would be necessary to make this work, not an impossible task, as second floor businesses must already provide that. The trick would be not to overbuild it to the point of blocking sunshine and light on the ground level.

Here's a larger scale example of what I can foresee for parts of King, albeit open air with only a limited walkway covered from the elements, while the open part can be used for 'patios':

https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/ele...uare-to-worldwide-house-building-33769588.jpg

 

[PinkLucy]

What is to 'like' about this?

I hit like not to like the fees, but in agreement with the points made

 

[TransitBart]

I hit like not to like the fees, but in agreement with the points made

I LOVE patio cafes. I also have a couple of acquaintances who have businesses. Be careful what you ask for. From what I know, marginal businesses will disappear given the financial burden on top of property tax.

 

[steveintoronto]

I LOVE patio cafes. I also have a couple of acquaintances who have businesses. Be careful what you ask for. From what I know, marginal businesses will disappear given the financial burden on top of property tax.

The story reported in the TorStar was alarmist. There's no indication that the rate will increase. It's up to Council. Mostly what it's about is assuring that mobility access is maintained on the remaining sidewalk, and other aspects are considered.

UT article on it here:
http://urbantoronto.ca/news/2017/06/toronto-revising-rules-and-fees-sidewalk-cafés

 

[PinkLucy]

I LOVE patio cafes. I also have a couple of acquaintances who have businesses. Be careful what you ask for. From what I know, marginal businesses will disappear given the financial burden on top of property tax.

I wasn't asking for anything. I also love patio cafes. I was simply agreeing with the other poster who referred to the possibility that fees could go up.

 

[TransitBart]

There is coming a limit to what many small businesses can bear. I hope that balance (politicians. Vs. populace) can prevail.

 

[DSC]

There is coming a limit to what many small businesses can bear. I hope that balance (politicians. Vs. populace) can prevail.

Last fall the initial proposals from Staff were to REALLY increase patio licence fees. Of course, the licencees complained and were joined by several neighbourhood associations who argued that patios add life to streets and, if properly run and not blocking pedestrians, are a 'civic good. Nobody (I think) says the fees should be $0 but it is not unreasonable to expect anyone occupying public space to pay something. Staff quickly backed down and the latest fee proposals I have seen seem pretty fair to me. There is 'final report' coming to a joint meeting of PWIC and ML&S Committees on 13 October. This Report will deal with pedestrian clearways, 'rules', fees etc etc and is (in general) expected to make very good recommendations.

 

[muller877]

Last fall the initial proposals from Staff were to REALLY increase patio licence fees. Of course, the licencees complained and were joined by several neighbourhood associations who argued that patios add life to streets and, if properly run and not blocking pedestrians, are a 'civic good. Nobody (I think) says the fees should be $0 but it is not unreasonable to expect anyone occupying public space to pay something. Staff quickly backed down and the latest fee proposals I have seen seem pretty fair to me. There is 'final report' coming to a joint meeting of PWIC and ML&S Committees on 13 October. This Report will deal with pedestrian clearways, 'rules', fees etc etc and is (in general) expected to make very good recommendations.

...and as long as the restaurants don't get too greedy. Along King St W (theater district) the restaurants take up 1/2 the sidewalk with their patio which is fine. But then they throw a menu board on the sidewalk as well. Leaving only 1/4 of the sidewalk for pedestrians. Basically so only one person can get through at a time.

And then someone locks a bike around a hydro pole which blocks it even further.

Only if everyone was practical it would work out fine. There should be no menu boards and no bike parking where there is a patio.

 

[BMO]

I saw what looks like advanced right-turn signals at King/Portland being installed. Maybe it has something to do with the pilot?

 

[torman404]

I saw what looks like advanced right-turn signals at King/Portland being installed. Maybe it has something to do with the pilot?

Saw the same at King and Jarvis today. Yes, looks like they are preparing for the pilot.

 

[CapitalSeven]

Has there been a clear statement of how the signals will work? With most vehicles forced to turn right, there does need to be signal phase not completely blocked up with pedestrians in one crosswalk or the other. Streetcars and traffic can roll at the same time.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

How soon can we expect the pilot project to launch?