[Thanos]

Or use public transit, walk, or use a bicycle.

We are talking about DMW here. I highly doubt that will ever be an option for him.

 

[nfitz]

Or use public transit, walk, or use a bicycle.

That scramble intersection at Dundas-Yonge impedes public transit on Dundas.

Quite frankly, I think the Yonge-Dundas scramble crossing is a complete waste. Any other city I've seen scramble crossings, it's done to speed up traffic in the intersection, and simplify crossing. Typically these intersections all have left turns going on, and pedestrians ONLY cross on the scramble. At Yonge-Dundas, there's no left turns ever ... so pedestrians can always cross when the light is green.

And then for pedestrians, you have this odd situation, where you can cross ... and the pedestrian crossing goes red ... but then you have the scramble ... so you have this red phase when you can't cross ... for no reason at all.

In the end, you've reduced the time available for vehicles ... which does slow the streecars between Bay and Victoria ... and you see a majority of pedestrians still crossing at the regular crossings ... perhaps 50% only cross one street anyways ... and only 1/3 would arrive just in time for the scramble, rather than of the other 2 crossing phases. So at best ... what, 17% might make use of the scramble??

The use of the scramble crossing at Yonge-Dundas seems wasted ... and unnecessarily impedes cars, streetcars, buses, and bicycles (well it would if bicycles actually followed the law ...).

 

[Thanos]

And then for pedestrians, you have this odd situation, where you can cross ... and the pedestrian crossing goes red ... but then you have the scramble ... so you have this red phase when you can't cross ... for no reason at all.

Either your not describing the situation clearly because i use that intersection every morning and afternoon and i've never seen anything as to what you're describing.

And btw, the scramble was put in place to facilitate pedestrian flow not vehicle flow. Do you even remember how things were before. People would wait on the street and block traffic because there was not enough room on the sidewalks. Only other solution other then the scramble is too widen the sidewalks which would remove one lane of traffic.

 

[fouronesix]

Either your not describing the situation clearly because i use that intersection every morning and afternoon and i've never seen anything as to what you're describing.

And btw, the scramble was put in place to facilitate pedestrian flow not vehicle flow. Do you even remember how things were before. People would wait on the street and block traffic because there was not enough room on the sidewalks. Only other solution other then the scramble is too widen the sidewalks which would remove one lane of traffic.

I think what nfitz is saying is that on a normal through stage of the cycle (as opposed to a scramble stage) the pedestrian signal will count down until there is a red hand. There will be a red hand in all four directions and then the scramble stage will start, counting down until there is a red hand in all four directions again.

I think that having pedestrians cross only on the scramble (if it was lengthened slightly) as nfitz suggests is a reasonable compromise between pedestrian and vehicle movement through the intersection. The Dundas street car is indeed impeded in both directions approaching this intersection by too few cars making it thorugh the intersection in a single cycle.

That being said, completely eliminating the scramble is ridiculous, and I hope this downtown traffic study and any decision flowing from it is based on actual technical study and rational argument rather than the "feelings" and "perceptions" of politicians. Although I don't have high hopes.

 

[nfitz]

I think that having pedestrians cross only on the scramble (if it was lengthened slightly) as nfitz suggests is a reasonable compromise between pedestrian and vehicle movement through the intersection.

It would be if there were right-hand turns at the intersection. Returning them does seem odd.

Perhaps simply lengthening the Dundas cycle and shortening Yonge part of the cycle might be the solution ... Yonge never seems as backed up.

Though why they didn't try this at an intersection where there is right-turns I don't know.

BTW, I can't recall ever actually driving through this intersection ... but I seem to spend a lot of time standing there waiting for the 505.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Minnan-Wong says he drives on Dundas St. through the intersection regularly and feels there is "significant added congestion."

"The amount of traffic that flows through is cut in half because of the extra cycle that pedestrians receive," he told reporters Wednesday. "Especially during the p.m. rush hour you have cars queuing back all the way to Elizabeth St.

"I think we need to examine whether we are improving traffic or actually making it worse on Dundas."

There are signs at the Dundas & Yonge intersection that prohibit left turns AND right turns. However, there are still idiot drivers who think those signs do not apply them and attempt to do a turn and just end up causing traffic congestion that Densil Minnan-Wong nicely forgets about. Want to stop the congestion, enforce the no turn policy at that, and other, intersections. Maybe redesign the corners with more right angle concrete sidewalks instead of a curving sidewalk.

 

[nfitz]

There are signs at the Dundas & Yonge intersection that prohibit left turns AND right turns. However, there are still idiot drivers who think those signs do not apply them and attempt to do a turn and just end up causing traffic congestion that Densil Minnan-Wong nicely forgets about.

I've never seen anyone try a left-turn ... I'm sure it happens, but not that frequently. I do see the occasional right-turn, and a bit of honking behind it. But only once every few cycles ... seems more common when there are less pedestrians, and then it doesn't create any congestion.

Want to stop the congestion, enforce the no turn policy at that, and other, intersections.

Except it isn't enough to create congestion.

 

[ShonTron]

If Denzil is looking to tweak the timings, I'm not too worried. I think that Dundas could use a slightly longer green phase. Yonge hardly backs up like Dundas does in the PM rush, and even as a pedestrian advocate, I'll admit that the backups are a problem.

But the bigger problem is the lack of courtesy to the ward councillor and the use, yet again, of sneaky 'other items' motions that are likely left off public agenda. It reeks.

 

[Marcanadian]

If Denzil is looking to tweak the timings, I'm not too worried. I think that Dundas could use a slightly longer green phase. Yonge hardly backs up like Dundas does in the PM rush, and even as a pedestrian advocate, I'll admit that the backups are a problem.

But the bigger problem is the lack of courtesy to the ward councillor and the use, yet again, of sneaky 'other items' motions that are likely left off public agenda. It reeks.

“I’m not asking for any type of decision to be made today in terms of removing them, but I think it’s a reasonable thing to do to say: ‘Hey, are these things working?’”

Told of Wong-Tam’s complaint about his tactics, Minnan-Wong was mockingly dismissive. “A-gain?” he said with a smile. “Poor Kristyn.”

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1050762--ford-ally-asks-for-review-of-yonge-dundas-scramble?bn=1

 

[ibhattac]

"Told of Wong-Tam’s complaint about his tactics, Minnan-Wong was mockingly dismissive. 'A-gain?' he said with a smile. 'Poor Kristyn.'"

Ugh. I guess at least we can rest easy knowing that he would probably be as petty if it were a straight male Councillor representing Kristyn's ward. That's gotta count for something, right?

What is this nonsense. Have the common political courtesy to not muck about in someone else's ward.

Perhaps it is time for 'downtown' Councillors to start proposing things for other wards.

 

[jje1000]

"Told of Wong-Tam’s complaint about his tactics, Minnan-Wong was mockingly dismissive. 'A-gain?' he said with a smile. 'Poor Kristyn.'"

Ugh. I guess at least we can rest easy knowing that he would probably be as petty if it were a straight male Councillor representing Kristyn's ward. That's gotta count for something, right?

What is this nonsense. Have the common political courtesy to not muck about in someone else's ward.

Perhaps it is time for 'downtown' Councillors to start proposing things for other wards.

James: This city’s councillors cannot be trusted
By Royson James City Columnist

When city councillors gather to debate and count votes, if you listen long enough you may just catch the meaning behind the rhetoric.

It took a while Tuesday when Toronto’s executive committee met to debate the future of the Port Lands, a key segment of the lakefront now under revitalization.

Mayor Rob Ford started out by claiming he can’t wait 25 years for waterfront revitalization; he wants it now — “now†being in 10 years — and the way to speed up things is to take the land from Waterfront Toronto and give it to the Toronto Port Lands Company (TPLC).

Waterfront Toronto was created by the city, the province and the federal government a decade ago to plan, organize and deliver waterfront revitalization from Mimico in Etobicoke to Port Union Rd. in Scarborough.

Two years ago, the city told its own agency, TPLC, to cede control of 170 hectares of city-owned portlands west of Leslie St. to Waterfront Toronto. TPLC was to limit its activity to soil remediation and managing the leasing of the lands. Waterfront Toronto was to take the lead.

So citizens waiting to speak to the committee Tuesday could barely hide their contempt for the sudden change in direction. For one, Ford has never shown the slightest interest in waterfront redevelopment in a decade on council. Whenever he spoke of it, disdain dripped from his mouth. This Damascus-road conversion was stunning for the mayor who, as a candidate for mayor, called Waterfront Toronto a “boondoggle.â€

Secondly, Waterfront Toronto surprised everyone by being a great facilitator. It consulted widely. It earned the respect of citizens, urban planners and the development industry. It attracted $1.5 billion in investments, is about to enter into a $1 billion deal for the Pan Am Games site, and has spent nearly a billion dollars on soil remediation, infrastructure and planning and design and environmental assessments.

The executive committee, comprised of the mayor’s hand-picked lieutenants, ignored all that. Taking their cue from the emperor, the proxies claimed that the task of developing the waterfront is too great for Waterfront Toronto, an agency representing the three levels of government.

They disparaged Waterfront Toronto as laggards, its 25-year development plans powered by snails rather than horses. They argued the agency had no money to pay for essential flood protection, costing $634 million.

And when Waterfront Toronto told them they in fact have a financing plan in place — one that council asked for and one that Waterfront Toronto’s board would receive a day later — one of the mayor’s lieutenants chastised the agency for hurrying the plan to prove the committee wrong.

What could be the motivation? Enter the plain-talking budget chief Mike Del Grande.

The truth, he said, is he needs revenues from the sale of the Port Lands to fix holes in his budget. In essence, a money grab. But there’s more.

The administration already has developers in mind, has trumpeted ideas and proposals for development and is prepared to cannibalize current plans just to grab the cash.

“I know when I’m being taken for a ride,†said citizen Anthony Castaneda. The developers’ plans, presented Tuesday, “is a fantasy based on a backroom land grab.â€

The executive swallowed it whole.

You sit through a day of debate over the future of Toronto’s waterfront and leave — again — with this impression: Our citizens can be so insightful and wise; our politicians can be so shallow and dumb.

Conclusion? Do not leave the future of our city to our city council. Too many of the councillors too often don’t know the details of an issue, fail to understand the core principles governing many policies, and are like a political weathervane that spins in the direction of the prevailing political power source.

Sadly, they cannot be trusted.

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1050754#article

 

[CanadianNational]

It's good to see that James has some backbone and a viable stance on the Portlands issue.

As for the 'scramble' - the mental disconnect between operations of this council is enough to make your head blow up.
Cancelling Transit City - cancelling the Fort York Bridge - Grousing over a single scramble intersection downtown after cancelling councillor's lunches - Threatening the library system against the background mirage of the promised Sheppard Subway - Disruptive fantasies of building the entire Portlands out within 6-10 years - "Respect for Taxpayers" with backroom deals seeking to cancel taxpayer-funded council-approved contracts, and a threatened %30 tax hike...Fantasies about tunnelling under the Gardiner, or a monorail along it. Island brothels and fundamentalist support. "No service cuts, guaranteed" and fictional tankers of gravy, yet going hat in hand to the province after a hatchet KPMG review - Dissolving bike lanes on Jarvis while promising to re-instate solidly curbed ones on Sherbourne. A showy late-night citizen's marathon after getting rid of free citizen's advisory committees. Stalling waterfront transit and eyeing the corporate branding of public transit. Turning away public health nurses from the province for STI's and accepting them later for bedbugs, Removing the vehicle registration tax and debating over the retailer's 5 cent right to charge for a bag that is not a tax (takes a deep breath).....Pinkos and kooks, No Pride, but Caribana....unquestioned raises for the police union then suddenly announced necessary police cuts.

This isn't politics. This is some rich kid who got thrown the keys to the most expensive ride in the country, and doesn't care if he crashes it into a ditch at the end.
This is all rather crazy-making.

 

[Paleo]

It's good to see that James has some backbone and a viable stance on the Portlands issue.

As for the 'scramble' - the mental disconnect between operations of this council is enough to make your head blow up.
Cancelling Transit City - cancelling the Fort York Bridge - Grousing over a single scramble intersection downtown after cancelling councillor's lunches - Threatening the library system against the background mirage of the promised Sheppard Subway - Disruptive fantasies of building the entire Portlands out within 6-10 years - "Respect for Taxpayers" with backroom deals seeking to cancel taxpayer-funded council-approved contracts, and a threatened %30 tax hike...Fantasies about tunnelling under the Gardiner, or a monorail along it. Island brothels and fundamentalist support. "No service cuts, guaranteed" and fictional tankers of gravy, yet going hat in hand to the province after a hatchet KPMG review - Dissolving bike lanes on Jarvis while promising to re-instate solidly curbed ones on Sherbourne. A showy late-night citizen's marathon after getting rid of free citizen's advisory committees. Stalling waterfront transit and eyeing the corporate branding of public transit. Turning away public health nurses from the province for STI's and accepting them later for bedbugs, Removing the vehicle registration tax and debating over the retailer's 5 cent right to charge for a bag that is not a tax (takes a deep breath).....Pinkos and kooks, No Pride, but Caribana....unquestioned raises for the police union then suddenly announced necessary police cuts.

This isn't politics. This is some rich kid who got thrown the keys to the most expensive ride in the country, and doesn't care if he crashes it into a ditch at the end.
This is all rather crazy-making.

Rob Ford spent over a decade being marginalized on council by both the right and the left. Perhaps now that he is the mayor, he feels it is his time to get back at all of those that wouldn't play with him in his sandbox during those years. Payback.

There are too many spineless councilors out there that are just rubber stamping his plans despite those same councilors voting for the exact opposite thing last year.

 

[GraphicMatt]

Rob Ford spent over a decade being marginalized on council by both the right and the left. Perhaps now that he is the mayor, he feels it is his time to get back at all of those that wouldn't play with him in his sandbox during those years. Payback.

There are too many spineless councilors out there that are just rubber stamping his plans despite those same councilors voting for the exact opposite thing last year.

I don't think a lot of these ideas are coming from Rob Ford, who is primarily focused on avoiding tax increases. (Which explains the Port Lands thing.) The Executive Committee, particularly Denzil Minnan-Wong, has become very adept at pushing issues that they know they can get Ford's support on.

Ford is not a particularly shrewd player of the political game, but Minnan-Wong is, and he's very spiteful about perceived slights toward him by the previous council.

 

[Torontovibe]

It's good to see that James has some backbone and a viable stance on the Portlands issue.

As for the 'scramble' - the mental disconnect between operations of this council is enough to make your head blow up.
Cancelling Transit City - cancelling the Fort York Bridge - Grousing over a single scramble intersection downtown after cancelling councillor's lunches - Threatening the library system against the background mirage of the promised Sheppard Subway - Disruptive fantasies of building the entire Portlands out within 6-10 years - "Respect for Taxpayers" with backroom deals seeking to cancel taxpayer-funded council-approved contracts, and a threatened %30 tax hike...Fantasies about tunnelling under the Gardiner, or a monorail along it. Island brothels and fundamentalist support. "No service cuts, guaranteed" and fictional tankers of gravy, yet going hat in hand to the province after a hatchet KPMG review - Dissolving bike lanes on Jarvis while promising to re-instate solidly curbed ones on Sherbourne. A showy late-night citizen's marathon after getting rid of free citizen's advisory committees. Stalling waterfront transit and eyeing the corporate branding of public transit. Turning away public health nurses from the province for STI's and accepting them later for bedbugs, Removing the vehicle registration tax and debating over the retailer's 5 cent right to charge for a bag that is not a tax (takes a deep breath).....Pinkos and kooks, No Pride, but Caribana....unquestioned raises for the police union then suddenly announced necessary police cuts.

This isn't politics. This is some rich kid who got thrown the keys to the most expensive ride in the country, and doesn't care if he crashes it into a ditch at the end.
This is all rather crazy-making.

There is no doubt, Ford will go down as the worst mayor in Toronto's history. I am sure of that. He seems to be completely in over his head and his big brother is no better. I just hope these guys are so incompetent, that they unable to damage the city beyond repair. I agree, this is all about punishing Miller and his friends, as well as giving the finger to Toronto and everything it stood for.