W. K. Lis
Superstar
Cars do not shop or go to restaurants. People shop and go to restaurants. Count the people, not the cars, to see if the transit mall is a success.
|
|
|
Leo_Chan
Senior Member
Are bicyclist considered people?
TheKingEast
Senior Member
torontoboy, obviously there's an issue since we're having the pilot project in the first place. Do you ride the streetcar during rush hour? Are you trying to argue that north/south traffic jams are not causing a slowdown on King and even Queen St?
I have taken this route twice a day for the last 7 years.
Your post makes 0 sense.
steveintoronto
Superstar
It's an odd thing, I cycle everywhere in this province, haven't had a driver's licence here for generations, still have my UK and California ones though, although neither is recognized after a year in Ontario. Ontario charges you money to renew the driver's licence. The others don't, but they retest you if they do have to. Ontario should do same. How did I lose my licence here, even being a truck, cab, and motorcyclist? I failed to send them money one year. That's it! Ontariariario. Zero demerits lost from a decade of commercial driving.
As a cyclist, *even when I have to walk the bike a few blocks*!!! I still shop. Why is that so difficult for so many other cyclists? What if a store is on a one-way street? And you're facing the wrong way? Does that mean you don't walk for a block to get where you want to go?
MetroMan
Senior Member
The real test is going to be Friday and Saturday night. Since the clubs moved in, it's been a real shit show. Given how much police presence is already down here on weekends, I'm curious how well the street will work with fewer cars but so many pedestrians. They would do well to install crowd barriers to widen the sidewalks into the curb lanes.
For the record, I'm not optimistic it's going to go well despite the police presence. There are always cars pulling over or parking illegally even with swarms of cops around. And if streetcars are suck behind an endless stream of taxis, it'll be a failure. Some blocks just need to be shut down to traffic and given fully to streetcars and pedestrians.
For the record, I'm not optimistic it's going to go well despite the police presence. There are always cars pulling over or parking illegally even with swarms of cops around. And if streetcars are suck behind an endless stream of taxis, it'll be a failure. Some blocks just need to be shut down to traffic and given fully to streetcars and pedestrians.
Last edited:
steveintoronto
Superstar
I had also favoured this initially, but as Paul had pointed out, and it's slowly dawning on me, many of the drivers are so irate that best the ticketing officer, if a Highway Traffic Act offence, be armed. That means being a full-fledged cop. City Hall is completely asleep on this. Where's the budget to do it? I raised that point a few posts back. No enforcement, the thing collapses. How can anyone be surprised by this? Council had best pass an emergency motion and fast to budget the TSP to enforce this long-term.
I'm not sue that many posters get that, let alone City Hall. *As it stands*..."heavy handed enforcement" is the only option to allowing other options to work.
It's certainly far too intuitive for most Torontonians.
Kinda reminds me of liquor laws in this Province. Ontarians, given looser liquor laws, (and God help us, dope laws, and believe me, I'm no prude, spent years in the music biz in three nations) will just get drunk en masse and act-up.
The same mentality happens on the roads, unless enforced.
Last edited:
steveintoronto
Superstar
I used to have a studio a decade back above one of stores on south side of Queen, just east of Spadina. Backed onto "This Is London".
Ummm...where to start, besides the shootings, barfing, pissing, shidding, basic rampant azzhole behaviour in the lane and public square (now sold to private and high rise going up).
And there were lots of cops. Paid duty. Some on the take. Won't get into that, but the 52 shakeup had a lot to do with it.
Cops on paid duty don't give an F except doing the job they're getting paid for at the time. All of those clubs have hired duty cops, it's part of the licensing agreement with many. The point is, they're not going to be enforcing King Street.
Council has to pass an emergency motion to fund the TPS to police King after the two weeks is up.
Why would TPS need a budget for this? Seems like it would be a cash cow for them. Just a few tickets an hour would more than offset the cost of the officer, I would think.
steveintoronto
Superstar
Cops don't get the money, the courts don't even get it, it's the City and Province. Head of the TPS Board was pleading exactly this case months back, and Council was warned.
I've posted it in this string from a couple of months back, I'm not adept at searching this string, I'm spoiled by far more intuitive search engines, but I'll see if I can find it with Google.
The City was warned...City gets parking tickets, Province gets HTA infraction conviction fines.
Cops won't hand out parking tickets unless specifically on that duty and paid by the City to do Bylaw enforcement.
Remember, this project, just like cycling infrastructure, is a mish-mash of overlapping legal jurisdictions. City Bylaw officers should be out en-masse ticketing and towing parking scofflaws, and cops should be enforcing the HTA.
Last edited:
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Would alternating one ways be any better, when cars could ignore the DO NOT ENTER sign and drive on the steetcar tracks?
MetroMan
Senior Member
They would have nowhere to go:
In this example from the Alternating Loops option, a car would arrive at the intersection and see their route blocked by a sidewalk. There's no Eastbound lane. To be sure, we'd have to block off the streetcar lane to all vehicles but streetcars. Flexible bollards leading up to intersections and deep cuts in the road would keep out all but the most determined rule breaker and they'd have nowhere to go since there'd be no curb lane, leaving them vulnerable for an entire block, a sitting duck for police. People that try to get away with breaking the rules look around for cops but they wouldn't try that if they knew that they can get caught down the road where they can't see. It's the same reason people don't intentionally drive the wrong way down one way streets. For a finished road after the pilot, that streetcar lane could be a raised curb at intersections.
If drivers don't understand signage (how the F*ck did they get a license anyway?), then they will understand hard infrastructure. A dead end, is a dead end.
Attachments
dende
New Member
For the pilot they should really have had signals like the following with three phases:
1. Red car signal, transit signal green, separate bicycle signal green, pedestrian walk
2. Red car signal with green right arrow, transit signal green, bicycle signal green, pedestrian don't walk
3. Red car signal, transit signal red, bicycle signal red, pedestrian don't walk, opposing road is green
The transit signal could be the white vertical bar.
After 10pm, phase 2 would need to be a regular solid green to handle the taxi exemption. Ideally the late night taxi exemption wouldn't exist, or the signal could just not have a solid green spot so drivers would realize going straight wasn't possible.
While drivers could claim ignorance of any signs, it's harder to do so for red lights whether they are new or not. Cars going through reds I assume are much less common than ignoring turn restrictions. My understanding is that photos cannot be used to enforce those not following signs, but red light cameras can be used, avoiding the need for manual enforcement here as the signal is never not red for cars.
1. Red car signal, transit signal green, separate bicycle signal green, pedestrian walk
2. Red car signal with green right arrow, transit signal green, bicycle signal green, pedestrian don't walk
3. Red car signal, transit signal red, bicycle signal red, pedestrian don't walk, opposing road is green
The transit signal could be the white vertical bar.
After 10pm, phase 2 would need to be a regular solid green to handle the taxi exemption. Ideally the late night taxi exemption wouldn't exist, or the signal could just not have a solid green spot so drivers would realize going straight wasn't possible.
While drivers could claim ignorance of any signs, it's harder to do so for red lights whether they are new or not. Cars going through reds I assume are much less common than ignoring turn restrictions. My understanding is that photos cannot be used to enforce those not following signs, but red light cameras can be used, avoiding the need for manual enforcement here as the signal is never not red for cars.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
The transit signal cannot be the white vertical bar. That signal means (in Toronto) that you can turn left or right, but not go straight (see King & Sumach for example). In order to change that meaning, you'd first need to change every existing transit signal in the City - which is also difficult given that Ontario only permits that one type of bar and not the diagonal bars used elsewhere for turns.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
The person(s) on the bicycle are people, just like the person (usually the only person) in an automobile, or pedestrian walking. (And like the 70+ people in a streetcar.)
Leo_Chan
Senior Member
Thanks for taking my question at face value; it might have been better to use the word bicycles instead of bicyclists.