Cycling infrastructure (Separated bike lanes)

[rbt]

5 lane roads? Everyone run for the hills!!! And by hills I really mean any number of the word's great cities.

Jarvis needs retail, and it needs to shed its bad reputation. The width of pavement has nothing to do with either, and certainly hasn't made people any less likely to avoid the street. Decreasing the absurd density of crack addicts, shelters, and prostitutes will accomplish far more for corridor than painting on bike lanes.

You will notice there are either very wide sidewalks or parking on both of those. Your Paris example has a ton of crosswalks. In fact, your Paris example is far less hostile to pedestrians than the Charles/Jarvis/Mount Pleasant intersection.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

That's fine, but I made none of those claims in my post. In fact, I didn't even know Ford had said something like that. So, nice strawman. All I said was that 4 minute delay would be quite painful, on top of its already slow speeds.

I was expanding on the "four minutes longer than the eight to 10 minutes forecast by the city" part. The study never forecast those times, it was in the 2-4 minute range during peak travel periods (AM & PM).

Jarvis has never been a "speedway" in recent times. It was just not as slow as it is now, but that didn't make it a speedway. In fact, before the bike lanes people complained about how slow it was. They complained more when the bike lanes went in.

In contrast, I don't think I've EVER heard anyone complain about driving speeds on Sherbourne… and there are bike lanes there. This makes sense of course, since Sherbourne isn't a small arterial road for the City of Toronto.

Speeds on Jarvis Street, especially upper Jarvis, border on 'road rage' speeds with some idiots weaving in and out of traffic. Another problem is with the aggressive speeds come fast and dangerous turns onto east-west streets often at fast turn rates and sometimes at the peril of pedestrians who may be crossing. The four lane reduction has helped slow speeds to an extent but it's still a fast and dangerous street.

 

[reaperexpress]

Jarvis needs retail, and it needs to shed its bad reputation. The width of pavement has nothing to do with either, and certainly hasn't made people any less likely to avoid the street. Decreasing the absurd density of crack addicts, shelters, and prostitutes will accomplish far more for corridor than painting on bike lanes.

The bike lanes on Jarvis are just bike lanes. They aren't part of a street revitalization or complete streets project, so don't expect them to cure Jarvis. But they still make cycling alot faster, safer, more pleasant and more popular.

 

[k10ery]

The bike lanes on Jarvis are just bike lanes. They aren't part of a street revitalization or complete streets project, so don't expect them to cure Jarvis. But they still make cycling alot faster, safer, more pleasant and more popular.

I think this is sort of backwards.

The whole point of Jarvis from the beginning was traffic calming and streetscape revitalization. It was only when they realized an EA would delay things too long did they switch to bike lanes for traffic calming instead of wide sidewalks. The bike union hadn't even asked for this one.

The trouble is the Jarvis decision contributed directly to Rossi's mayoral candidacy and Ford's ultimate election. How well's that working out for you, Complete Streets people?

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

Now the Jarvis Streetscape project appears dead in the water.

 

[GraphicMatt]

The trouble is the Jarvis decision contributed directly to Rossi's mayoral candidacy and Ford's ultimate election. How well's that working out for you, Complete Streets people?

Rossi never gained much support and Ford actually said numerous times that he wouldn't remove the lanes if elected so... I dunno. It's not going great, but it could be worse.

Re: Jarvis as a whole. Painting the street as a crack-infested whoremporium strikes me as thinking from ten years ago. It certainly has a ways to go, but there have been numerous developments along the northern stretch of Jarvis -- the southern part, up until just before Queen, has always been nice --, with more to come. There's a ton of potential there.

Wide streets don't have to kill urban living, but Toronto has never done them well. Jarvis absolutely did (and still does at points) have a speedway feel to it, that was really unbecoming considering it's a street with residential developments, a ballet school, a high school, etc. The reversible lane was also ugly as hell.

 

[junctionist]

Wide streets don't have to kill urban living, but Toronto has never done them well. Jarvis absolutely did (and still does at points) have a speedway feel to it, that was really unbecoming considering it's a street with residential developments, a ballet school, a high school, etc. The reversible lane was also ugly as hell.

Spadina and St. Clair Avenue West, on the other hand, are vibrant, diverse, and attractive and thus great wide streets in my opinion.

 

[GraphicMatt]

Spadina and St. Clair are examples of where Toronto has done wide-ish streets pretty well, yep. The streetcars sure help. University is a medicore wide street. Richmond & Adelaide have decent stretches but have a ways to go. (Separated bike lanes on either would make a world of difference.) Jarvis is bad but salvageable. Lake Shore is terrible.

 

[Chuck]

The numerous streetcar routes that intersect Jarvis offer transit access that is actually almost as good as Spadina or St. Clair West. Jarvis also likely has a higher population density than either of these streets, maybe even combined. The difference is retail - there's hardly any of it along the street, meaning that as someone who doesn't live there, I couldn't even find an excuse to walk along Jarvis (north of Queen).

I suspect that the main obstacle to quality retail and restaurant establishments opening up is the lack of willingness on the part of most people to even consider heading down to the street - sorry, but it's true.

 

[GraphicMatt]

But it's not true? Lots of people live on Jarvis. Allen Gardens is always pretty busy. People are around. If Jarvis is lightly-traveled these days I don't believe it's because people are afraid of its reputation but rather because it can be rather boring.

Either way, Jarvis didn't develop a sketchy reputation just by chance -- the changes made in the last century to facilitate automobile traffic played a major role in the street's decline. Yes, wide urban streets can work, but in Jarvis' case they made a ton of mistakes.

 

[nfitz]

In my experience, where wide urban streets do work, they are accompanies by wide sidewalks.

On Jarvis, you feel like your walking down the side of an expressway. Woodbine between Danforth (or at least Kingston Road) and Lakeshore has a similar problem.

 

[gweed123]

As someone who lived on Jarvis for a year (literally, my rez room was on the 3rd floor fronting directly onto Jarvis), I can say with confidence that many people used it as a mini-expressway, especially on the shoulders of the peaks, when the traffic was able to flow freely. Even late at night, people would use Jarvis as a racing strip.

I think it's also fair to say that the semi-expressway nature of Jarvis definitely contributed to its decline. It's a very loud street at all times of the day/night, and it's not very visually appealing. It's definitely a contrast living on Jarvis vs living on a street like Sherbourne (same demographics, same type of housing, basically the same everything except for the design of the street itself). I much prefer Sherbourne.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

The problems for Jarvis Street go back decades. My mom & dad (and eventually, I as a kid) used to go to the Town & Country buffet on lower Jarvis in the 60's & 70's though I barely have any memory of it. My mom asked a few visits ago if hookers still work the street and if hobos are still a problem.

Jarvis is a street that is slowly improving in sections, it's very walkable from Carlton to Bloor, not so great from Carlton down to Queen, messy but good from Queen down, with a few exceptions. The added bike lanes and removal of the reversible lane has helped considerably to slow traffic (mostly) and add more of a human element to the street, the lanes should be extended from Queens Quay right up to Bloor. It's a downright shame that the Jarvis Streetscape plan died, it certainly would have given the shot in the arm it needs so badly and likely attracted faster development to some of Jarvis Street's needier areas.

And don't be fooled, Jarvis has a lot of great buildings to admire if one takes the time to follow it up, though some not-so-great buildings can be found along here too.

 

[CDL.TO]

Riding down Jarvis Street this morning (which I never usually do), those vehicle-counting tubes were set up in the bike lane just north of Dundas.

 

[Jarrek]

This is a cross post from the bicycle trails thread, but we're dealing with a very fragmented bicycle infrastructure in Toronto. If you want to see the big picture, see the article below:

http://www.theurbancountry.com/2011/06/torontos-fragmented-bicycle-network.html