ADRM
Senior Member
huge if true.
|
|
|
- Thread starter salsa
- Start date
huge if true.
amnesiajune
Senior Member
That's not what "boogeymen" means, but I agree with this.
And apparently one under Sheppard as well.
ticky
Active Member
Got his piece of trash in the mail today. Figured I would post it here should anyone else want to let them know that a/ their spelling and grammar are atrocious, and b/ how completely wrong their beliefs are.
lead82
Senior Member
This is pure propaganda calling the city's plan to urbanize NYCC 'activism'. This will dramatically improve NYCC and make it a destination which will improve business. Most businesses do not rely on the street parking immediately in front of their store fronts. If they did they'd all go under. The senior's comment is hilarious. Most seniors I know NEVER parallel park and would certainly not care about the lost spaces. Grocery stores in the area all have large underground parking lots for convenience (Loblaws, Whole Foods).
It just amazes me that people think that removing 2 lanes of traffic at rush hour will make the commute longer. If anyone has seen Yonge during rush hour, the curb lane is not fully utilized as there is always someone there or used for turns. If anything reducing traffic lanes is an improvement because it will reduce the traffic volume. It is high time that Yonge be made into the main street in the area and not the local highway through a dense neighbourhood.
This group reminds me of SOS on St. Clair back in the day. Many of those folks are still convinced the new St. Clair is a disaster when it's now a highly successful and more beautiful avenue. The car lobby is still strong in the suburbs but Filion is very popular and has strong support as he's a fantastic councillor that cares deeply about the area.
It just amazes me that people think that removing 2 lanes of traffic at rush hour will make the commute longer. If anyone has seen Yonge during rush hour, the curb lane is not fully utilized as there is always someone there or used for turns. If anything reducing traffic lanes is an improvement because it will reduce the traffic volume. It is high time that Yonge be made into the main street in the area and not the local highway through a dense neighbourhood.
This group reminds me of SOS on St. Clair back in the day. Many of those folks are still convinced the new St. Clair is a disaster when it's now a highly successful and more beautiful avenue. The car lobby is still strong in the suburbs but Filion is very popular and has strong support as he's a fantastic councillor that cares deeply about the area.
amnesiajune
Senior Member
What I do get about these complaints though... The reason is isn't utilized is that it's full of GO buses that are stopping. But the plans don't have any bus bays, so with this change we're essentially going to have one lane in each direction during rush hour.
lead82
Senior Member
Silliest argument in that message. Sure there are Go buses there but they don't run that often to be a major concern. Everyone ignores the fact that the area needs a huge boost in the public realm which is atrocious. It's something I don't understand in the Toronto mentality. It's not about the war on the car it's about making life better for the pedestrian. NYCC should be a destination and it should support the exiting dense population to get around on foot and by transit. A greatly improved project realm will do that, keeping the road as 6 lanes will not.
amnesiajune
Senior Member
Someone read John Filion's latest newsletter, eh? (For people who don't live here, it went out this week and that was his exact quote)
NYCC's public space is fine, and NYCC is already as much of "a destination" as it ever will be. North of Empress the area is a bit dull but no changes to Yonge Street will address that. The dullness there is a result of having nothing except condo buildings and Korean/Japanese/Chinese restaurants.
pman
Senior Member
Since so many of the councillors who peddle this WOTC idiocy come from North York, where they won elections, it seems a lot of people up there want to keep their degraded and car-centric public realm.
MisterF
Senior Member
NYCC's public spaces are fine? The sidewalk in some places is largely made of patchy asphalt, the centre median has dead stumps where there were once trees, wooden hydro poles and wires clutter up the streetscape and narrow the sidewalk, the grass in Mel Lastman Square is trampled and dead, and opportunities to cross Yonge and the bypass roads are few and far between. If that's fine then I've got to say, your standards aren't too high. Parts of the streetscape are pretty good but as a whole it needs work to put it mildly.
amnesiajune
Senior Member
"As fine as or finer than anywhere else in Toronto". Happy now?
I support this project for the most part, but hearing John Filion (who's obviously doing this in large part to cement his legacy before he retires) and downtown-based urban planners talk about Yonge Street like it's some suburban wasteland makes me want to oppose it. CityPlace and Humber Bay are out there if we need an actual lifeless alley of condos to complain about.
I support this project for the most part, but hearing John Filion (who's obviously doing this in large part to cement his legacy before he retires) and downtown-based urban planners talk about Yonge Street like it's some suburban wasteland makes me want to oppose it. CityPlace and Humber Bay are out there if we need an actual lifeless alley of condos to complain about.
sunnyraytoronto
Senior Member
Lead82, I hope you do realize the proposed Yonge Street Cycle Tracks at the reduction in rush-hour traffic/parking lanes will actually make it more difficult for the existing "dense population to get around on foot and by transit" since it actually result in narrower "walkable" pedestrian sidewalk space!
11th
Senior Member
Though one might say those are part of what makes NYCC a "destination" to people in the northern 416 and southern York Region.
lead82
Senior Member
If you look at the designs the preferred one removes street parking and keeps the green median and removes 2 lanes of traffic to widen the side walks and add the cycle tracks. Sitting here in Vancouver on vacation as I write this and it's clear where Toronto fails. The public realm in NYCC and most of the city is awful. For the most part street trees are half dead or stumps instead of lush and big. We barely have any dedicated cycle tracks which is the main reason most don't cycle - it's too dangerous. Vancouver does this very well and we could learn a lot from them.
When I said NYCC should be destination I meant that it should attract more pull from York Region and Toronto. It's one of the few successful mini downtowns. The large problems are the traffic is horrendous there because it's mostly used as a through route from 401 to York Region. The aim of the project is to make the area nicer for the local residents and more pleasant a place to walk, bike. Mel Lastman Square is well used but it's a hoge poge of a square. The space is very segmented and doesn't flow together at all.
Amnesiajune, I have read Filions letter and also the opposing community website. I agree with Filion. It amazes me that people have come to accept such crappy standards for public realm in Toronto but at the same time I hear many complain about how ugly Toronto is or how all the money goes to improve downtown parks or the waterfront. Here we have a project that will significantly improve a non downtown urban centre and some locals are making a big fuss over 2 lost car lanes and street parking. NYCC has lots of car lanes and street parking. Traffic will use the Beecroft and Doris alternatives (which are rarely that busy) and there are plenty of underground and street parking lots available in the area.
sunnyraytoronto
Senior Member
I'm very familiar with the "preferred" design, thanks,....
Eliminating traffic/parking lanes which are generally 3.0-3.5m wide for 2.5m wide cycle tracks, create left over space,.... but to convert that space into wider pedestrian sidewalk requires expensive shifting of curb, street furnitures and utility work especially light post.
Thus, the "preferred" design actually changes the entire cross-section of street! Look closer at the original July 2016 "preferred" design VS the latest Sept 2016 "preferred" design,... you'll notice tree lined centre median (currently 3.2m) went from 3.0m (which maximized pedestrian sidewalk width) to 4.5m (still 3.0m south of Sheppard) and now proposed sidewalk width decrease by 0.75m on each side of Yonge Street (from 4.05m down to 3.3m) and we actually lose net "walkable" pedestrian sidewalk width VS current sidewalk!!!! Why? (hint: re-read the previous and next paragraph)
original July 2016 "preferred" design:
https://www.slideshare.net/knelisch...treet-mcea-study-pic-2-display-panels-low-res
latest Sept 2016 "preferred" design:
https://www.slideshare.net/knelischer/reimagining-yongestreetpic3displaypanels
Even with cycle tracks on Yonge Street, it would still be too dangerous (too many high volume vehicle-cyclist conflict points) and thus, most won't cycle on them. It's like putting lipstick on a pig. City staff & consultant knows this, that's why they changed the original July 2016 "preferred" design to the latest Sept 2016 "preferred" design with super wide tree line centre median at the cost of the promised wider pedestrian sidewalk width!,.... easier and about $25 million cheaper to convert the failed cycle tracks back to traffic/parking lane!
Attachments
Last edited: