King Street (Streetcar Transit Priority)

[TheTigerMaster]

In all three proposed options? I don't doubt your claim, I just can't see this working. It's going to make the Bloor Bike Lanes look like Nirvana.

Well we won't know for sure until they announcement this evening. But Staff have consistently emphasized their awareness of the ineffectiveness of the current non-separated, rush hour streetcar lanes, and of their desire to use low-cost physical barriers to enforce separation between trams and cars. I would be shocked if Option 3 included no physical separation whatsoever - everything staff have said up to now has indicated otherwise.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Option 3 sounds like it would be incredibly annoying to drive on. I assume car drivers would be physically relegated to being in a single right lane. All cars on the road would be forced to wait each time a streetcar loads passengers, a car illegally stops to pick up/drop off passengers or whenever a car is waiting for pedestrians to turn so they can make a right turn. I don't see this option being of great benefit to car drivers, and certainly not to transit users or pedestrians.

 

[steveintoronto]

Well we won't know for sure until they announcement this evening. But Staff have consistently emphasized their awareness of the ineffectiveness of the current non-separated streetcar lanes, and of their desire to use low-cost physical barriers to enforce separation between trams and cars. I would be shocked if Option 3 included no physical separation whatsoever - everything staff have said up to now has indicated otherwise.

Thank you for your patience, it's an excellent discussion, but I've scoured searching for a reference to "bollards" (City may have used another term) and can find no reference, save for this from June of last year, in this forum: (the string may continue the reference after this)

Johnny Au said: ↑

I am thinking of a hybrid Option 3 and 4, in which it is Option 4 during the day, but Option 3 during the night. This way, it would be pedestrian and cyclist friendly during the day and speeding up streetcars during rush hours, while allowing delivery vehicles and taxis to be on King during the night. Pillars could pop along King Street during the day to discourage vehicular traffic.
I think this makes sense but wonder how much time and money will it take to add the bollards/pillars to the intersections?

I think this makes sense but wonder how much time and money will it take to add the bollards/pillars to the intersections?

I think ideally option 4 would be best for transit, but that may mean they will have to remove the bike lanes from Adelaide/Richmond as a compromise.

Option 3 may work too if they paint the streetcar lanes red or something and have bigger warning signs with better enforcement. Option 3 seems to be the better compromise for drivers.

If they want a pilot project, then no left turn and parking period will be a start.

I think we're discussing what will be a massive glitch in the proposals, and that's with the surmise of an eventual 'curb' to separate RoW from the single lane of traffic each side. And that is this: Parking, stopping or none of those allowed? And if not allowed, what is the remaining cause d'etre of having vehicle access to begin with?

There might be far less than compromise possible. All three of the now present proposals are nonsensensical in some form or another in actual usage.

Edit to Add: I see you have addressed one of those, we're seeing the same kind of glitches.

 

[Avenue]

Was the objective of this ever to only speed up streetcars?

Option 2 speeds up streetcars and improves pedestrian experience. I don't see any problem with also improving the pedestrian experience.

I don't see anything in it that effectively speeds up streetcars. It only improves the pedestrian experience, which should have absolutely no superiority over consideration given to public transit riders.

 

[innsertnamehere]

^how would banning cars from King except for one way in a single lane with bollards to protect the streetcar lanes fail to improve streetcar speeds? King would have better travel conditions than any other streetcar route in the city in that case.. No left turns for it to wait for, dedicated lanes, etc.

 

[innsertnamehere]

This is my understanding of scenario 1.. not sure why people are so upset about this, or how they think it will fail to improve streetcar operations.

 

[steveintoronto]

This is my understanding of scenario 1.. not sure why people are so upset about this, or how they think it will fail to improve streetcar operations.

That is what is *should* be, at least to me, and as *apparently* proposed in Option 1. But I still can't find City reference to bollards. Without bollards, fencing (with gaps for signalled pedestrian crossings), or at the very least, curbs, lack of enforcement of the single lane of vehicular traffic is going to be a nightmare that spills over into the streetcar RoW. There must be some form of physical separation.

Getting back to the meeting tonight, be aware that this *appears* to be what it's about:

Stakeholder Advisory Group
The mandate of the SAG is to provide a forum for feedback, guidance and advice to the Project Team at key points during the public consultation process.The SAG is composed of approximately 40 interested and affected organizations representing a balance of geographic and sectoral interests (applications from individuals are not considered). The SAG is not intended to address specific property issues or concerns and consultations with King Street area landowners and businesses will be undertaken separately by the Project Team.

Draft Terms of Reference [...]

http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=a8349ca0cc3f8510VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD

In searching for any reference by the City for bollards, I keep coming across stories like this https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...-redesign-king-street-and-quickly-keenan.html that completely confuse the difference between *pedestrian malls* and *transit malls*.

From Keesmaat:

https://twitter.com/jen_keesmaat

There's a series of tweets on the King Thing...errr...I like Jennifer, but she appears to be a bit intoxicated with a sense of grandeur that's not going to be achieved on this. Visions are wonderful, but pragmatism rules.

Case in point:

King Street bears no resemblance what-so-ever to wide, spacious pedestrian walk, non-railed roads. (Edit: And *One Way*)

 

[innsertnamehere]

I imagine bollards like used on the Richmond Adelaide and Bloor bike lanes will be used. Similar To the bloor street bike lane pilot project.

http://bikingtoronto.com/blog/2015/...es-for-cars-and-bike-traffic-is-skyrocketing/

 

[steveintoronto]

I imagine bollards like used on the Richmond Adelaide and Bloor bike lanes will be used. Similar To the bloor street bike lane pilot project.

And when they inevitably get broken off, (as happens on Roncesvalles and Bloor cycle lanes) where do they land? In the tracks directly adjacent?

I say the same as I do for Bloor cycle lanes: Do it right, or don't do it at all. A concrete curb, temporary ones for now, will be necessary, with all the complications that ensue from doing it! By fudging the implementation, it fudges the claim to whatever the study result is.

Edit: I'm getting more concerned at to Keesmaat's objectiveness on this: (A nod to Zach's post yesterday on bike lanes, albeit I can't see any practical possibility of them)

 

[Avenue]

^how would banning cars from King except for one way in a single lane with bollards to protect the streetcar lanes fail to improve streetcar speeds? King would have better travel conditions than any other streetcar route in the city in that case.. No left turns for it to wait for, dedicated lanes, etc.

You're describing option 1. Option 2 is what I'm criticizing.

 

[innsertnamehere]

I agree that it isn't as good as option 2.. but it will still make big improvements. I prefer option 1 personally.. but that one could still work. Traffic would be really low on that option since cars would not be able to make continuous trips along the street, most would be doing local access. the low traffic levels could probably be easily accommodated at the right turn lanes at intersections, too, so I don't see them block up the streetcars.

The one issue I really see with that option is taxis stopping in the streetcar lanes to let out passengers and blocking the streetcars.

 

[bobbob911]

I like to think of myself as a fairly progressive person, but IMO the first two preferred options are completely stupid. What's the point of having cars on King street when they are forced to turn every block? Its going to be a confusing disaster that will make the new Queen's Quay look as straightforward as a Dora the Explorer map in comparison.

Option 3 I can definitely get behind. Let the frustration of single lane traffic naturally redirect cars. Don't do it by making the direction of the lanes change every block.

 

[salsa]

I don't understand why anyone closely following this proposal would've expected a car-free King Street. It was never going to happen, unless we told these buildings to abandon their driveways and garages.

Because Jennifer Keesmaat and the media hyped up the idea that a car-free King St was a viable option, until now.

 

[Avenue]

Option 2 has three steps:

Step one: Narrow the road
Step two: ???
Step three: Profit

It's pretty crazy how little it does in the way of relieving streetcars from obstructions. Streetcars will be forced to share a much smaller road with the same amount of cars, and wait forever for the cars to make right turns, once all the pedestrians have finished crossing. It could turn out even worse than status quo.

 

[SaugeenJunction]

This is my understanding of scenario 1.. not sure why people are so upset about this, or how they think it will fail to improve streetcar operations.

View attachment 98795

Did you make that? Great visual