TrickyRicky
Senior Member
^Speaking of Amsterdam didn't I read somewhere that those mixed access trams make little financial or transit sense and the city was going to eliminate them but kept them for their tourism ambience?
|
|
|
- Thread starter Admiral Beez
- Start date
doady
Senior Member
Montreal and Quebec City have tons of one-way streets, yet their downtowns are not dead. In fact, Montreal's busiest and most vibrant street is Ste-Catherine, a one-way street! Compare that to nearby Rene Levesque, a two-way boulevard.
Remember, I am not proposing that the streets be completely one way anyways, since all the streetcar routes will still travel in both directions, which is important.
And just because streetcars in mixed traffic can work is some places doesn't mean that putting streetcars in their own ROW is not a huge improvement. Obviously a streetcar that does not get stuck in traffic will be much faster and more reliable.
King would have to be eastbound, since it is south of Queen and they converge. Not a big deal, just get on King, take a road to Queen, and turn on Queen to go westbound.
Remember, I am not proposing that the streets be completely one way anyways, since all the streetcar routes will still travel in both directions, which is important.
And just because streetcars in mixed traffic can work is some places doesn't mean that putting streetcars in their own ROW is not a huge improvement. Obviously a streetcar that does not get stuck in traffic will be much faster and more reliable.
King would have to be eastbound, since it is south of Queen and they converge. Not a big deal, just get on King, take a road to Queen, and turn on Queen to go westbound.
CDL.TO
Moderator
I don't know what you read and I'm not sure what you mean by "mixed access", but if you're referring to the trams without POP that I mentioned, they're very new and only entered service between 2002 and 2004.
CDL.TO
Moderator
It wouldn't HAVE to be eastbound. Having it westbound would make sense when you factor in Richmond and Adelaide. People would just have to turn left where King and Queen meet.
vancouverguy_76
Active Member
You're thinking about North America, only...there are many European Cities I've been to that have AMAZING pedestrianized streets, some with 'transit only'. Central Vienna is a prime example. The Zeil in Frankfurt is another. Central Strasbourg is very lovely... I could go on
Granville is a dive, but I think that's the nature of Granville Street. I don't think adding cars would change it's dive-ness. Yonge Street has cars, and reminds me of Granville Street (except Yonge is more interesting imo). Did I mention I dislike Granville Street? (Having just walked down it about an hour ago).
I'm really, REALLY liking the one-way idea with dedicated streetcar space. It's time to petition the city, me thinks...or at least start a Facebook page dedicated to the idea
W. K. Lis
Superstar
When the tall office towers were built in the 1960's on, I always wondered why they didn't widened King Street at the time. They could have put in a 3rd lane as a taxi stand or put in a reserved lane for the streetcars, but didn't at the time.
adma
Superstar
Probably because there were constantly existing (and substantial) buildings in the way of such a widening. It comes easier when you're dealing with nondescript residential or retail strips...
Chuck
Senior Member
Like I always say, it's land use along a street and not the flow of traffic that will dictate how much pedestrian activity is present.
I think that for starters, the north-south streets which tend not to have streetcars should be converted to one way streets in the core. Start off with Bay, Yonge, Church, Jarvis, Sherbourne, and Parliament. Then add Bloor, Wellesley, and Harbord. The logistics of having a two way streetcar route on a one way road may eliminate any streets south of and including College.
dowlingm
Senior Member
My prescription - vicious enforcement of traffic regulations such as ticketing cabs waiting in no-stopping/standing zones in the financial districts. Tickets for idiots that ignore the no-right at King to Bay at PM peak. Then, get the sidewalk cuts done and get the cabs parking in them and not the outside lanes.
From watching King while waiting for the 504, I suspect that would be a huge help. Once that's done, revisit every single stop and force them to be justified. I'd start with asking why there are three stops in 300m on the 504 (Carroll/Queen-Broadview/Thompson)
From watching King while waiting for the 504, I suspect that would be a huge help. Once that's done, revisit every single stop and force them to be justified. I'd start with asking why there are three stops in 300m on the 504 (Carroll/Queen-Broadview/Thompson)
unimaginative2
Senior Member
I completely agree with your idea doady. I even proposed a similar plan on here a few times. My idea is to take two of the four lanes on both King and Queen on one side of the street and dedicate them to the streetcar. Then, convert the remaining two lanes into a one-way street. Off peak, one of those lanes could be used for parking. That way, the streets are still useable for cars and deliveries, and they still have on-street parking for visitors to local shops, while also providing a private right-of-way for the streetcars. I guarantee it would be a much easier sell that the plan to reduce King to a one-lane street that alternates one way directions every block.