[Northern Light]

The problem is that School Boards have (older) under-used schools that nobody wants to close or even reduce in size and a need for NEW schools in areas experiencing high development pressures. They cannot afford to operate both.

While I concur that there remains surplus real estate, I think we need to take a couple of steps back.

1) Toronto is increasing in population rapidly, which all other things being equal, means many more school-aged children over time. Holding on to under-used real-estate or buildings to accommodate that is considerably lower cost than
re-acquiring said real estate and building new.

2) There is a natural cycle in all neighbourhoods, when an area is comparatively lower cost, yet otherwise family-friendly also, it becomes a nexus of young families, and school populations boom.

But those same residents will one day be empty nesters, and the idea that most will downsize is demonstrably wrong. The data shows that most people will keep the home they own at age 50 when teens might be present still right through their retirement years. Sure, some will move/downsize early; and many will be 'forced' into long-term care/retirement living late in life..........but that won't be til the very end of their lives.

Meaning there will be a period of at least one generation where schools in a given area will routinely run significantly below capacity, until there is a critical mass of homeowners departing this earth entirely or departing their homes for some variation of assisted living.

Neighbourhoods simply do not hold an even-keel over time. Hence gentrification. Neighbourhoods swing from being high demand and turnover, to low demand and turnover. School populations fluctuate with this.

We need to design and operate schools with this in mind. The idea that when when a school declines to 60% enrollment relative to capacity we ought to close it and sell of the land is literally ridiculous and irresponsible.

Schools have life-cycles, just like people. Designing them so that either a portion of the space can be de-facto mothballed (sealed off, reduced heat/ac) or used for an alternative community purpose for a period of time, needs to be part of basic school architecture.

3) To the extent that we choose to bring in working-age immigrants to lower the median population age, rather than encourage already present families to consider more children is curious indeed. This exaggerates the issues I noted above.
This is not an argument against immigration, but rather one in which I ask, for what purpose are we bringing in immigrants? If the answer to substitute for a low birth rate, maybe we need to ask about what it would take to raise same?

I should add here, I'm quite content to see the population structurally decline over time, I seen no value in growth for its own sake, I simply note the way in which we are pursuing growth has a host of adverse and seemingly unintended consequences, of which temporarily surplus schools is one.

 

[crs1026]

Schools have life-cycles, just like people. Designing them so that either a portion of the space can be de-facto mothballed (sealed off, reduced heat/ac) or used for an alternative community purpose for a period of time, needs to be part of basic school architecture.

3) To the extent that we choose to bring in working-age immigrants to lower the median population age, rather than encourage already present families to consider more children is curious indeed. This exaggerates the issues I noted above.
This is not an argument against immigration, but rather one in which I ask, for what purpose are we bringing in immigrants? If the answer to substitute for a low birth rate, maybe we need to ask about what it would take to raise same?

I should add here, I'm quite content to see the population structurally decline over time, I seen no value in growth for its own sake, I simply note the way in which we are pursuing growth has a host of adverse and seemingly unintended consequences, of which temporarily surplus schools is one.

I'm treading carefully around the macro level of your comments. (Personally I think immigration/ emigration is a worldwide phenomenon that (lucky for us) Canada benefits from, but we are riding a larger tide that is unsteerable rather than us crafting a policy). It's probably enough to say we are safe to take immigration as a given in the Canadian and GTA planning context and to manage our education system with the presumption that there are many more new students coming.

We are coming out of (I hope) a generation where we have squeezed all our institutions to drive minimum cost - clearly reaching a dysfunctional level of starvation mentality. I'm not sure we have really turned the corner on that - easy to complain about, but when we are asked to pay more..... but we shall see.

There are ominous headlines about the Province wanting to override municipal school boards to reclaim.surplus educational real estate. To me this is just Greenbelt 2.0 and has no policy basis beyond a few more of DoFo's developer friends waiting in the bushes to score an easy buck. I have yet to see any hard data about the scale of the supposed surplus, but we should have a policy that is focussed on maintaining a safety margin of unused school capacity, rather than squeezing unused resources out of the system..... I agree with your thesis ie if the kids aren't there now, they will come.

- Paul

 

[Northern Light]

I'm treading carefully around the macro level of your comments. (Personally I think immigration/ emigration is a worldwide phenomenon that (lucky for us) Canada benefits from, but we are riding a larger tide that is unsteerable rather than us crafting a policy). It's probably enough to say we are safe to take immigration as a given in the Canadian and GTA planning context and to manage our education system with the presumption that there are many more new students coming.

As previously noted, I take no issue w/immigration per se. I value people's personal freedom to relocate for opportunity, or love or to flee persecution as the case may be

My issues are with immigration policy as currently enacted in Canada, which have very little to do with our points-based immigrants who were less than 40% of our immigration total last year, or with refugees; but rather
with diploma-mills students and temporary foreign workers, both groups which we as a country are merciless in exploiting to benefit low-wage employers; causing the dual-harm of rising housing prices and wage suppression in many entry-level jobs.

***

Now as this is really running off topic from the thread mission I won't go much further down that road here, we have other threads for that.....suffice to say, this does tie back in to the thread is so far as we plan infrastructure and for that matter program policy in a very siloed, and reactionary manner in this country. We need housing, education, transportation, healthcare and other programs and infrastructure not merely to react to growth but to be in place in advance of reasonably foreseeable growth.

We also need when discussing the value of any policy or investment to look at the externalities and costs of 'growth'; something around we wish we seem to suffer a measure of willfull blindness.

 

[W. K. Lis]

I'm sure there are empty nesters who would want to rent out a room or basement out, but don't want to end up with a "tenant from hell" and having to go through years of no rent to get rid of them.

Some Ukrainians, Poles, and other former East European empty nesters are doing just that for some Ukrainian refugees... for now. Same with other former migrates.

 

[W. K. Lis]

OP-ED: “Vision One” – killing pedestrians one at a time​

From link.

Gillian Kranias recounts how pedestrian safety concerns in her Vaughan Road neighbourhood were ignored and even made worse in the lead up to a tragic death.​

On the Friday of the Civic Holiday weekend, a woman was struck and killed crossing Vaughan Road at Atlas Ave, just up the street from me. It was bound to happen – another ‘one’ pedestrian death. But this one was closer to home, closer to the local travel hazards my neighbours and I know too well.

Vaughan Road is known by many Toronto drivers. Its curvy travelling route dates to pre-colonial times. For those who don’t know the road, think of the jogs on the TTC Subway route between the St Clair West and Eglinton West stations (it follows a buried creek and natural ravine). On street level, with the same curves, just to the South, is Vaughan Road.

Atlas Ave starts at St Clair West and runs one-way Northbound to Vaughan before switching direction as part of the traffic mazes in the residential blocks south of the Allen Expressway. Atlas is a favorite through street for anyone driving from West downtown/midtown to the Allen. At the intersection of Atlas and Vaughan, most cars turn left. There is no stop sign, no pedestrian crossover, and no traffic light. Some of us who live in the neighbourhood drive through this or similar intersections along Vaughan. More of us navigate them as pedestrians, as people with mobility devices, and/or as cyclists. We are 8 to 80 years old, and beyond.

I am filled with grief for my 84-year-old neighbour’s loss of life. Grief turns to anger when I recall late nights of email writing and collective efforts on meetings with councillors that bore so little fruit. Changes we residents asked for remain a distant, neglected hope.

I worked to prevent this​

I became concerned about pedestrian safety in my Oakwood Village neighbourhood eight years ago, while walking with my kids to our local school. Crossing Vaughan at Winona (one street West of Atlas), where there are traffic lights, I noticed someone had ripped down the sign about “No Right Turn on Red”. After I called the City, they reinstated it. But a month later it was gone again. That was when I started emailing my local councillor’s office. Meanwhile, my kids and I got used to crossing on our green light while rushing cars made right hand turns, on their red, in front of us. And behind the scenes of our daily pedestrian lives, in 2017, the City rescinded this one small pedestrian protection at this key neighbourhood intersection.

Concerned parents launched a safety subcommittee at the school and wrote regularly to the councillor of Ward 21, later including Ward 15 as well. We walked the neighbourhood, identifying “what hinders our safety?” and “what could improve things?” We even stood at the Vaughan and Winona intersection during rush hour, counting how many cars turned right on a red as well as when and why traffic backups happened. We proposed that the City add a few seconds to each East-West green light, to alleviate rush hour backup frustrations along Vaughan, and re-install the “No Right Turn on Red”, to protect pedestrians. With one traffic lane on Vaughan, cars weren’t gaining much from their right on red privilege anyhow.

My councillor’s staff told us that transportation planners were preparing intersection improvements. That sounded hopeful. We had shared our observations and proposals, and we wanted to connect directly. But no transportation staff reached out to our community school council, even though that school district spans the Vaughan and Winona intersection. Eventually, the City spent significant money on new traffic lights without a single public meeting, replacing automatic light rotations with a pedestrian-triggered button for North-South crossings. We almost always walk up to a red light now, versus what felt like a 50-50 chance before. With four high-rise apartments nearby, hundreds of pedestrians, including Vaughan Road bus users, face longer ‘commutes’ across Vaughan at Winona each day.

Changing from an automated to a pedestrian-triggered light rotation brought further ripple effects along Vaughan. Navigating Vaughan at Atlas – one block East of Winona, where Friday’s tragedy occurred – became a lot harder for pedestrians and drivers alike. I know this because there used to be a bus stop at Atlas on the North side. Most passengers hopping off the bus during rush hour could cross Vaughan easily, because each red light rotation generated cyclical breaks in the flow of Eastbound cars from Winona and had a natural traffic calming effect on Westbound cars heading towards it. I also know this from the occasional times I drive up Atlas and need to turn left onto Vaughan. It takes a lot longer to get a decent break in traffic flow, and I can feel my impatience and anxiety spiking as my heads flips left-right, left-right, left-right, and ahead at Southbound Atlas traffic headed onto Vaughan. The curved river-tracing angle of Vaughan Road doesn’t help, for pedestrians and car drivers alike.

Police reported that it did not appear the 84-year old was “in a crosswalk” when struck by the pickup truck. Indeed, there are no protections for crossing Vaughan at Atlas, but residents know that the intersection remains a common foot crossing. With worsening car speeds and traffic loads, one resident advocated for a formal pedestrian crossing numerous times over the years, but no changes came. Another resident suggested four way stop signs along the busy road. The only change we Atlas dwellers noticed was how TTC removed our bus stop, quietly, two years ago.

No one crosses Vaughan at Atlas from the bus anymore. But someone got killed anyhow.

Enough is enough​

Mayor Chow says, “we want to work with you” to make Toronto safer, more inclusive. That will happen when staff and councillors make more time to connect with residents. This means visiting us at neighbourhood group meetings (e.g., the Oakwood-Vaughan Community Organization) and school council meetings, on street corners, and at local bus stops. By walking neighbourhoods and talking with diverse residents often, planners can improve transportation, spend wisely, and save lives.

Toronto’s Vision Zero commitment is about changing infrastructure to reduce traffic fatalities to zero. Meanwhile, staff regularly bypass meaningful resident engagement on changes, reproducing what I call ‘vision one’ – risking one precious life at a time.

I send condolences to family and community of the woman killed by a pickup truck driver while walking on the summer evening of Friday August 4. I regret the need to leverage a tragedy to reach our City with a message about the missing data in Transportation Services staff’s ‘Reports for Action’: Each neighbourhood and intersection is unique. Resident voices echo across Toronto. We want City staff to write to us, meet with us, and walk the streets with us. We need you to listen.

 

[lenaitch]

formerly known as Scarlett Heights Collegiate Institute

Rumour has it that the originally proposed name was to be Scarlett Heights Institute of Technology until somebody did some doodling.

 

[lenaitch]

There are ominous headlines about the Province wanting to override municipal school boards to reclaim.surplus educational real estate.

Quite frankly, I'm surprised school boards have survived this government.

 

[crs1026]

OP-ED: “Vision One” – killing pedestrians one at a time​

I spent a little time with Google Maps and Streetview trying to understand what was happening here.

I'm not familiar with the intricacies of the Vaughan-Atlas intersection, but I had a hard time relating the details in the article to what might have been a causal factor in the fatality or what might be a recurring hazard for pedestrians.

I have a lot of empathy for the writer's grief, but I'm just not sure that the writer is offering solutions.. Possibly the speed limit on Vaughan should be reviewed, as the road is curvy and drivers (who can't see around a corner) need more time to react. Possibly the geometry of the intersection - which is angular, not perpendicular - ought to be changed. The lights at Winona may need review by themselves, but I'm not convinced they are the root cause. At the end of the day it's an intersection of a sidestreet with a major road, and we won't be enabling pedestrian crossing at every such intersection. Having a signalled crossing a block away is likely an appropriate achievable standard - with an added impact on the mobility challenged, I'm afraid.

As to the non-responsiveness of City departments to local issues, that is how city departments work, initially. The whole point is for them to take problems away and apply independent professional skills and data collection and analysis. The danger is when staff report back and their findings differ from what the community thinks it needs. That's why we have local Councillors, to act as a sympathetic mediator and communicator. There has to be an informed dialogue. Community meetings and consultations are essential but they are contentious - that's what Councillors earn their money doing. So I put the real monkey here on the Councillor's desktop. The community needs to have its say, and possibly they have insights and suggestions that will indeed help. But, I suspect the intersection won't change much, or perhaps not in the way the residents expect.

So, as much as the comments articulate the passion of Vision Zero well, I'm not seeing lessons learned here - other than, we can do better at demonstrating we are listening and take this topic seriously.

- Paul

 

[afransen]

You can facilitate safer crossing on such streets without signalized intersections using centre pedestrian refuges where people can wait for gaps in traffic.

They can be pretty small, to fit narrow ROWs.

from NACTO:

Median Refuge Island | National Association of City Transportation Officials

Median refuge islands are protected spaces placed in the center of the street to facilitate bicycle and pedestrian crossings. On two-way streets, crossings are facilitated by splitting movements into…

nacto.org

 

[W. K. Lis]

Yeah, more signs will help pedestrian safety. Not!

 

[Northern Light]

I spent a little time with Google Maps and Streetview trying to understand what was happening here.

I'm not familiar with the intricacies of the Vaughan-Atlas intersection, but I had a hard time relating the details in the article to what might have been a causal factor in the fatality or what might be a recurring hazard for pedestrians.

I have a lot of empathy for the writer's grief, but I'm just not sure that the writer is offering solutions.. Possibly the speed limit on Vaughan should be reviewed, as the road is curvy and drivers (who can't see around a corner) need more time to react. Possibly the geometry of the intersection - which is angular, not perpendicular - ought to be changed. The lights at Winona may need review by themselves, but I'm not convinced they are the root cause. At the end of the day it's an intersection of a sidestreet with a major road, and we won't be enabling pedestrian crossing at every such intersection. Having a signalled crossing a block away is likely an appropriate achievable standard - with an added impact on the mobility challenged, I'm afraid.

As to the non-responsiveness of City departments to local issues, that is how city departments work, initially. The whole point is for them to take problems away and apply independent professional skills and data collection and analysis. The danger is when staff report back and their findings differ from what the community thinks it needs. That's why we have local Councillors, to act as a sympathetic mediator and communicator. There has to be an informed dialogue. Community meetings and consultations are essential but they are contentious - that's what Councillors earn their money doing. So I put the real monkey here on the Councillor's desktop. The community needs to have its say, and possibly they have insights and suggestions that will indeed help. But, I suspect the intersection won't change much, or perhaps not in the way the residents expect.

So, as much as the comments articulate the passion of Vision Zero well, I'm not seeing lessons learned here - other than, we can do better at demonstrating we are listening and take this topic seriously.

- Paul

You can facilitate safer crossing on such streets without signalized intersections using centre pedestrian refuges where people can wait for gaps in traffic.

They can be pretty small, to fit narrow ROWs.

from NACTO:

Median Refuge Island | National Association of City Transportation Officials

Median refuge islands are protected spaces placed in the center of the street to facilitate bicycle and pedestrian crossings. On two-way streets, crossings are facilitated by splitting movements into…

nacto.org

To better discuss this location, let's first look at an aerial pic:

As one can see Atlas is an offset intersection here, where the two parts of Atlas do not neatly align.

This is an important feature to consider, as drivers on Vaughan itself can obstruct the view of drivers on Atlas on the other side, and drivers on Atlas may be aiming to make competing turning movements within the same space. A s/w facing driver on Atlas also blocks the view of the sidewalk to the north, for any driver approaching from the south, and vice versa for the driver going n/w.

Lets additionally note the small channelization feature when approaching Vaughan from the n/e.

This isn't quite the same concept as a 'slip lane' in that Vaughan peculiar angle here makes sightlines difficult, as I noted and affects turning radii as well.

However, by placing the channelized island there, you do offer the possibility of having 3 cars on the n/e section of Atlas at Vaughan. A South/West Bound Atlas to Vaughan NB, a South-West facing Atlas to SB Vaughan, and a North-East Bound turning off Vaughan.

That is a lot of movement complexity.

Streeview image from the south side of the intersection, on Vaughan, from July '23:

Here's a look at the overhead view with a bit of mark-up by me:

Ignore the blue line above. Note that the black lines would not provide terribly convenient crossing points if one wanted to go from Atlas, to Atlas, particularly from the north.

That's because you can't have the crossing in the middle of the intersection, but respecting the offset makes for a less than ideal set-up.

*****

With the preface that I am not a Transportation Planner/Engineer, here's what I think I might be inclined to do:

Vaughan has a bus route, I'm not sure if the TTC would go for reducing lane width below 3.3M.

If that were the case, you might be looking at an island of only 0.7M (about 2ft); that's pretty damned narrow.

If you could shave the lanes to 3M then you can get at least a 1.3M island. But there's no way that would meet an accessibility standard if you smacked railings on it, which is par for the course here.

I think I will summon @reaperexpress to this thread as I think he might be able to offer greater insight and provide a useful accuracy check on my own suppositions.

 

[mrgrieves]

Crossing guards at signalized intersections. We are paying an expensive, possibly unionized city worker to help people cross because the intersection is not designed safely? Am I missing something here? And what does it say about the off peak hours where there is no crossing guard?

 

[Northern Light]

Crossing guards at signalized intersections. We are paying an expensive, possibly unionized city worker to help people cross because the intersection is not designed safely? Am I missing something here? And what does it say about the off peak hours where there is no crossing guard?

To what exactly are you 'replying'?

 

[crs1026]

Crossing guards at signalized intersections. We are paying an expensive, possibly unionized city worker to help people cross because the intersection is not designed safely? Am I missing something here? And what does it say about the off peak hours where there is no crossing guard?

In Highway Traffic Act space, a school crossing guard is simply a removable STOP sign which adds a requirement to a driver to stop and not proceed until all persons have cleared the roadway. In the absence of a crossing guard, at a signalised intersection displaying red, the driver is basically required to do similar anyways - although they may resume their motion before the pedestrians have cleared the roadway so long as the pedestrians were given the right of way.
To my mind, the human presence and oversight and the more rigourous requirement of not proceeding until clear adds a margin of safety, especially where there are school children crossing the roadway. Well worth the cost, and I have yet to see an intersection where the crossing guard was inert or superfluous. They are not that expensive, and most that I have encountered are very diligent and engaged. The one outside our local public school is a downright control freak - as an adult pedestrian I wouldn’t defy her notwithstanding that I’m twice her age.
Money well spent, IMHO

- Paul

 

[afransen]