xy3 said:
Unfortunately , parks abutting major arterials or forming the medians of major arterials will just encourage roadkill or accidents involving peoples pets. This is part of why I prefer couryard parks, or enhancements to existing parks/ravines rather than poorly thought out new parks or expansions of parks.
Click to expand...
The death of any animal in traffic, be they wild or domestic, is always unfortunate, but I don't think that should ever be a leading argument for precluding the greening of our urban environment, wherever that might be. As for our pets, they should always be leashed(except in designated off-leash areas of course).
 
Last edited:
Part of "University Park" includes the reduction of traffic lanes from 3 to 2 lanes in each direction, the addition of cycling lanes (should be dual-direction so that emergency vehicles could use the cycling lanes to get to the hospitals), and "delivery" zones for stores and hospitals.

 
Doppleganger said:
The death of any animal in traffic, be they wild or domestic, is always unfortunate, but I don't think that should ever be a leading argument for precluding the greening of our urban environment, wherever that might be. As for our pets, they should always be leashed(except in designated off-leash areas of course).
Click to expand...
It's one of the many arguments as to why I don't find parks on roaring dangerous arterials or busy intersections with 4 lane+ traffic to be appealing places to relax. I find hidden courtyard, pocket parks, and enhancements to existing parks to be a better use of funds.
 
xy3 said:
It's one of the many arguments as to why I don't find parks on roaring dangerous arterials or busy intersections with 4 lane+ traffic to be appealing places to relax. I find hidden courtyard, pocket parks, and enhancements to existing parks to be a better use of funds.
Click to expand...
High Park?

Bloor Street West on the north had some narrowing with bike lanes.

Parkside Drive on the east definitely needs improvement.
Parkside%2B-%2BProposed.png
From link.
A proposed layout for Parkside including a multi-use trail and a wider sidewalk
See Parkside Drive Study Phase One Consultation Report at this PDF link.

The Queensway on the south has a worse story. 18 acres (7.3 ha) of High Park was given to Metro Transportation when The Queensway was built in the early 1950s. This was in contravention of stipulations by original High Park owner John Howard that the lands be used for parkland only. Metro officials searched for descendants of Howard to obtain their consent.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
I don't like this design.
Click to expand...
Because it would upset the single-occupant motorists?

The dual-direction cycling lanes can be used by ambulances heading for St. Joseph's Health Care Centre, or other emergency vehicles. Yes, the separation should be more robust than paint or flexiposts.

 
Last edited:
W. K. Lis said:
Because it would upset the single-occupant motorists?

The dual-direction cycling lanes can be used by ambulances heading for St. Joseph's Health Care Centre, or other emergency vehicles. Yes, the separation should be more robust than paint or flexiposts.

Click to expand...
I think the station on the outside should be left as is. Don't see why we need a grand entrance here.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Is there a really good reason as to why they can't use the opera house side of Queen? I faintly recall there was at least talk of accommodations for a future subway connection there.

AoD
Click to expand...
There is a connection into the Opera House already… although it could use an upgrade: no escalators. Anything there would eat into its little forecourt too though, and that's quite busy on show nights.

The best answer here would be to get University Avenue rebuilt with the centre islands moved to the east side, and plunk the new entrance into the wider area that would become available there. That would take a sorely lacking will at City Hall to make a big decision though!

42
 
picking a fight with the ontario appeals court is something I dont think metrolinx has a capacity to fight.

Wonder if it's too late to change to that center-median plan?
 
generalcanada said:
picking a fight with the ontario appeals court is something I dont think metrolinx has a capacity to fight.

Wonder if it's too late to change to that center-median plan?
Click to expand...
As Metrolinx are currently in the public consultation phase and their plans have been roundly condemned, I am sure they will adjust them. Of course they will, they're Metrolinx! :->
 
interchange42 said:
There is a connection into the Opera House already… although it could use an upgrade: no escalators. Anything there would eat into its little forecourt too though, and that's quite busy on show nights.

The best answer here would be to get University Avenue rebuilt with the centre islands moved to the east side, and plunk the new entrance into the wider area that would become available there. That would take a sorely lacking will at City Hall to make a big decision though!

42
Click to expand...
That still means the pavilion will be built "on or around the premises of Osgoode Hall". Bascially, the NE corner is a no-go to them.
 
I don't expect the city to go to the barricades on this. The Ontario Line is a Provincial Priority. PuppetMayor now does whatever Thug Frod tells him because that's the deal they made on the way to getting re-elected this year. Will and decisions reside at Queen's Park, not City Hall. 😟
 
CapitalSeven said:
I don't expect the city to go to the barricades on this. The Ontario Line is a Provincial Priority. PuppetMayor now does whatever Thug Frod tells him because that's the deal they made on the way to getting re-elected this year. Will and decisions reside at Queen's Park, not City Hall. 😟
Click to expand...

Nice photo of Toronto's City Hall...
queen-s-park.jpg

From link.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top