[amnesiajune]

I'm really surprised that GO has not started paid parking. Either via a transponder or via a swipe of Presto when you leave the parking lot. It would even out the traffic outside the parking lot and encourage more people to take transit. Maybe a $2 reduction in fares across the board and a $3 parking fee

I'm not surprised at all. People take Go Transit because it's convenient for the typical commuter. Transit is great for the average teenager or unmarried 20-something on this forum but when you have a family and need to get to several places between work and home, the transit system is garbage - even in Toronto it's garbage.

If Go Transit started charging for parking, the message to the vast majority of its customers would be "we don't want you to drive to our stations". Even if they dropped the fares by an equivalent amount, it would still send that message and some people would choose to drive to work instead of taking the train. Nobody wins in that scenario - Go Transit loses revenue and the GTA's roads become more congested.

 

[Burnt creek]

Typical and classic car-centric ignorance, starting with the assumptions that A) People bike just for leisure rather than for commuting or other general movement; and B) People don't ride in poor weather. Quite simply and objectively, neither are true. "Bikes are nice and fun"; ugh.

Also, to continue the theme, we have here the similarly incorrect assumptions that removing lanes of traffic or parking automatically increases congestion and that changing infrastructure typologies never leads to a change in mode share.

And, finally, for the trifecta, we're presented with the assertion that "there are other roads that can be used very adequately and efficiently by cyclists", which is plainly untrue, even setting aside the intimation that cyclists should be treated as second class citizens when compared against auto users.

This is why we can't have nice things in our city.

Although that preferred board looks great - hopefully they move forward with that or something similar. It's interesting to me to observe how protected cycle infrastructure in the city doesn't always track perfectly along the funding and construction plans set out in the city's broader cycling plan (i.e. the new, 10-year plan and its predecessor).

In the end, we can now state that the city council agreed with exactly the same points i made in the first three pages of this thread. Thankfully. The points that Shiner made were exactly the same: 1) the plan to reduce car lanes in each direction from 3 lanes to 2 lane would further clog up traffic. 2). That this would hurt the businesses in the area 3) that this area is of road north of the 401 is like a freeway in volume and is already over congested because its used to access the 401 for commuters. And, is used by people in the GTA to access employment areas occupied by office towers.

 

[pipolchap]

It brings back the question, does the street serve locals or the region. Neither side is wrong. The real benefit of Re-imagine Yonge to the locals will be the improved pedestrian realm. I doubt many locals are regular cyclists. The demographics here is different from Bloor West. If they live along Yonge in NYCC, they don't need a bike..
Yes I know many on UT who are from the area are/may be regular cyclists, but this is UT we are talking about.

But improvement of the pedestrian realm includes separating pedestrians from cyclists, who use the sidewalks instead of the street. As a resident taxpayer of this area, I resent that Yonge is being used as a highway. If Shiner cares about York region residents so much, he should vote to increase Bayview's capacity to 4 lanes in both directions!

I'm not surprised at all. People take Go Transit because it's convenient for the typical commuter. Transit is great for the average teenager or unmarried 20-something on this forum but when you have a family and need to get to several places between work and home, the transit system is garbage - even in Toronto it's garbage.

Family guy here and frankly, this is not true. I'm car-less and use transit all the time to take my kids to activities in Toronto (thank you free children's fare). I can see problems with someone doing the same with GO Transit, but with the TTC it's doable.

 

[amnesiajune]

Family guy here and frankly, this is not true. I'm car-less and use transit all the time to take my kids to activities in Toronto (thank you free children's fare).

You live in a walkable neighbourhood and right beside a subway station. The vast majority of people in this city don't have that privilege, and more than half don't have the privilege of living near any reliable public transit. Having kids in Toronto generally means having a car, and parking at the Go Train station means that on your way back from work you can pick up your kid, drop off dry cleaning, drop off your kid at some activity, go buy groceries for the week, pick up your kid again and go home - something that even most Toronto residents wouldn't be able to do with transit.

 

[11th]

But improvement of the pedestrian realm includes separating pedestrians from cyclists, who use the sidewalks instead of the street. As a resident taxpayer of this area, I resent that Yonge is being used as a highway. If Shiner cares about York region residents so much, he should vote to increase Bayview's capacity to 4 lanes in both directions!

I think you are aware the traffic situation on adjacent arterials (specifically Bayview) can't be fix by just adding lanes; and if Shiner really cares about businesses losing customers who don't live on/near Yonge, adding lanes on Bayview would solve nothing either.

The compromise solution here should be putting bicycle, pedestrian and local traffic on Yonge, and diverting through traffic onto ring roads - but that will mean turning the ring roads (currently serving a residential street's role) into arterials, which I am sure is a no-no for the local councillor and residents.

 

[Palma]

I'm not surprised at all. People take Go Transit because it's convenient for the typical commuter. Transit is great for the average teenager or unmarried 20-something on this forum but when you have a family and need to get to several places between work and home, the transit system is garbage - even in Toronto it's garbage.

If Go Transit started charging for parking, the message to the vast majority of its customers would be "we don't want you to drive to our stations". Even if they dropped the fares by an equivalent amount, it would still send that message and some people would choose to drive to work instead of taking the train. Nobody wins in that scenario - Go Transit loses revenue and the GTA's roads become more congested.

They have the money to pay for gas to take the car to work and then the money to park (if working in Toronto and majority do) yet they won't pay to park at GO stations! You know why? Cause it has always been free thats why. TTC parking lot at Yorkdale use to be free if you has a metropass, Then that changed and you needed to pay to park. Did cars abandon the lot and drive to work when fees implemented? I think not

 

[Palma]

You live in a walkable neighbourhood and right beside a subway station. The vast majority of people in this city don't have that privilege, and more than half don't have the privilege of living near any reliable public transit. Having kids in Toronto generally means having a car, and parking at the Go Train station means that on your way back from work you can pick up your kid, drop off dry cleaning, drop off your kid at some activity, go buy groceries for the week, pick up your kid again and go home - something that even most Toronto residents wouldn't be able to do with transit.

Your crazy if you think that is done in one night after work. People leave work at 5pm, get to to Union to hop on and then get off wherever, jump in their cars and they have time to do all that?. What time are the kids picked up from school then or daycare? I believe 6pm is the latest for daycare. They have time now in-between to do grocery shopping and everything else? Majority of families do grocery shopping on the weekend or Fri night as well as those other errands. What time are they eating dinner then - 8pm during the week due to running those errands? Are they then doing those errands every night Mon - Fri? Boy with all that disposable income to be able to afford dropping off dry cleaning every night and doing grocery shopping every night I think they can afford to pay to park at GO stations

 

[Burnt creek]

Your crazy if you think that is done in one night after work. People leave work at 5pm, get to to Union to hop on and then get off wherever, jump in their cars and they have time to do all that?. What time are the kids picked up from school then or daycare? I believe 6pm is the latest for daycare. They have time now in-between to do grocery shopping and everything else? Majority of families do grocery shopping on the weekend or Fri night as well as those other errands. What time are they eating dinner then - 8pm during the week due to running those errands? Are they then doing those errands every night Mon - Fri? Boy with all that disposable income to be able to afford dropping off dry cleaning every night and doing grocery shopping every night I think they can afford to pay to park at GO stations

Your cherry picking at examples instead of adressing or listening to the main point (which should be obvious to anyone) that he is trying to make. And that is: that in a vast majority of the areas in the GTA, living without a car is extreemly inconvenient. "Oh no you cant pickup the kids at daycare, pick up some groceries and run miscelaneus errands in that short a time after getting off the GO train". Thats not the point. Ok what about just picking up kids or groceries after getting off the GO trains.

I had the same experience earlier in this thead when in mentioning how removing lanes road to put bike lanes hurts a business. I gave real life examples of the Best buy in the area and how the purchase of large merchandise world be inconvenient and hence hurt business. Some one replied "but havent you heard of free delivery". I just rolled my eyes and gave up. I saw no point in continuing the discussion. Same thing happened, someone cherry picked at examples instead of addressing the obvious main point.

Getting back to the topic. In this neighborhood, many (including myself) own a bike. But you dont see anyone using it day to day. Thats what should be retained. We need to respect people's needs to get around. And the way to get around (save for a tiny minority) for 365 days a year is not the bike. In a majority of other parts of the GTA, such as the scenario amnesiacjune is describing, you wont wont live there unless you own a vehicle. So why try forcing bikes and bike lanes down their throats?

 

[Burnt creek]

I agree, and I don't typically like to use these kinds of arguments. My comment was in response to some utterly ignorant posts by burnt creek, which thankfully have been thoroughly demolished by several members. He still hasn't replied yet but hopefully we won't be hearing from him anymore in this thread.

Excuse me. But i live in this area. Do you?

 

[salsa]

Excuse me. But i live in this area. Do you?

You live there? Because you seem to be unaware that that Best Buy you keep ranting about already contains a large underground parking garage. So frankly I don't see how a few on street parking spots are somehow critical to its survival, when it already has plenty of parking. This is why some members have little patience for your flawed argument. I understand that there may be legitimate concerns about the proposed plan, but did you even attend the consultations? Did you talk to staff at all?

As for myself, I live a short distance away and am in the area often, several times a week. I access the 401 from Yonge St when I drive or take the GO bus, so I'm well aware that traffic there is a problem. Which is why I've called for solutions such as completing the ring road system. I'm amazed that this still hasn't been done yet.

By the way, the majority of people consulted who also live or work on Yonge supported the plan that reduces traffic lanes and street parking. So \_(ツ)_/¯

 

[amnesiajune]

By the way, the majority of people consulted who also live or work on Yonge supported the plan that reduces traffic lanes and street parking.

That's not terribly surprising since most people who live or work on this stretch of Yonge primarily use public transit. This development was sparked by two subway stations and Go Transit to anywhere & everywhere. Around 40% of people living on Yonge between the 401 and Finch drive to work, compared to 60% for the rest of the area (the Willowdale electoral district).

 

[salsa]

That's not terribly surprising since most people who live or work on this stretch of Yonge primarily use public transit. This development was sparked by two subway stations and Go Transit to anywhere & everywhere. Around 40% of people living on Yonge between the 401 and Finch drive to work, compared to 60% for the rest of the area (the Willowdale electoral district).

That is correct. But since Burnt Creek decided to trot out the "I live in the area therefore listen to what I say" argument, I thought I'd point out that his views (among other local residents) are actually in the minority.

 

[pipolchap]

I had the same experience earlier in this thead when in mentioning how removing lanes road to put bike lanes hurts a business. I gave real life examples of the Best buy in the area and how the purchase of large merchandise world be inconvenient and hence hurt business. Some one replied "but havent you heard of free delivery". I just rolled my eyes and gave up. I saw no point in continuing the discussion. Same thing happened, someone cherry picked at examples instead of addressing the obvious main point.

Carshare/Zipcar can easily handle that. Ikea and grocery trips as well, if needed.

Getting back to the topic. In this neighborhood, many (including myself) own a bike. But you dont see anyone using it day to day. Thats what should be retained. We need to respect people's needs to get around. And the way to get around (save for a tiny minority) for 365 days a year is not the bike. In a majority of other parts of the GTA, such as the scenario amnesiacjune is describing, you wont wont live there unless you own a vehicle. So why try forcing bikes and bike lanes down their throats?

I cycle all year and I WITNESS others doing the same since I'm on a fairly routine schedule. I couldn't a few days because of the snow, but most people couldn't drive properly on those days either. Damn, I wish I know everybody's commuting habits like you!

We live in a society and the new design is intended to serve ALL, including drivers. The space along Yonge disproportionately serves the car, and not pedestrians and cyclist.

Excuse me. But i live in this area. Do you?

Yes I do. I also pay a heck of alot of taxes as well!

 

[pipolchap]

The compromise solution here should be putting bicycle, pedestrian and local traffic on Yonge, and diverting through traffic onto ring roads - but that will mean turning the ring roads (currently serving a residential street's role) into arterials, which I am sure is a no-no for the local councillor and residents.

I believe what you said is the intent of the ring road design. They do not easily allow traffic into low-density residential streets.

 

[constructo]

Latest article on the issue.

North York bike lane proposal absurd: Councillor | LEVY | Toronto & GTA | News |