King Street (Streetcar Transit Priority)

[nfitz]

Here's the concept approved:
View attachment 113087

Those green spaces next to the tracks? What do you think they are? And this is the first implementation, there's two more to come. Details aren't finalized for this implementation yet, and won't be until late Summer. Final approval isn't until late July.

The green spaces? Why I hadn't noticed. They are clearly zones reserved for lemmings to stand quietly drinking their flasks of Iceberg Vodka, packed in by the hundreds, only to jump in front of the occasional passing streetcar, to the rallying scream of 'subways', 'subways', 'subways'.

What was I thinking ...

 

[steveintoronto]

The green spaces? Why I hadn't noticed. They are clearly zones reserved for lemmings to stand quietly drinking their flasks of Iceberg Vodka, packed in by the hundreds, only to jump in front of the occasional passing streetcar, to the rallying scream of 'subways', 'subways', 'subways'.

What was I thinking ...

Obviously you weren't thinking, as here again is what you wrote:
nfitz said: ↑

And why compare this to Queens Quay. It's not comparable. At Queens Quay, the pedestrians are frequently right next to the tracks. This isn't true at King, where the tracks are in the centre of the street, not the edge.

This is the lesser of the three proposals studied. The other two, one of which might yet be approved, have even more "pedestrian realm" planned directly adjacent to the tracks.

 

[nfitz]

Obviously you weren't thinking, as here again is what you wrote:
nfitz said: ↑

I'm not sure why you think these two posts are saying different things. In the first one I'm making fun of you, for thinking a patch of grass between parking spots and a turn lane, is going to be filled with pedestrians falling off the curb. In the second, I'm pointing out the main pedestrians zones are well separated from the tracks - just like they are like now. There aren't even any bump outs at pedestrian crossing, to move where the majority of pedestrians crowd, closer to the tracks.

This is the lesser of the three proposals studied. The other two, one of which might yet be approved, have even more "pedestrian realm" planned directly adjacent to the tracks.

More, but still trees, parking/loading spots, etc. The prime movement area is still removed from the tracks. Nor do any of them have much change to the crossing width at intersections. There's no way this is going to be more dangerous than the current situtation, where pedestrians are expected to cross 4 lanes between intersections.

Furthermore, if you want to go into that study, then recall the neighbourhood goals. These would not be achieved by a lot of fencing.

 

[steveintoronto]

I'm not sure why you think these two posts are saying different things.

Because you completely contradict yourself.

More, but still trees, parking/loading spots, etc. The prime movement area is still removed from the tracks.

[...]

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2017/ex/bgrd/backgroundfile-104940.pdf

The green spaces? Why I hadn't noticed. They are clearly zones reserved for lemmings to stand quietly drinking their flasks of Iceberg Vodka, packed in by the hundreds, only to jump in front of the occasional passing streetcar, to the rallying scream of 'subways', 'subways', 'subways'.

What was I thinking ...

God only knows...

I have asked you how often and where you cross King Street. That's something you could choose to answer easily.

I cycle King every other day, I used to live on King, I cross it often. Do your socks match?

And why compare this to Queens Quay. It's not comparable. At Queens Quay, the pedestrians are frequently right next to the tracks. This isn't true at King, where the tracks are in the centre of the street, not the edge.

Best you inform the City to get their proposal right. Final approval is later next month.

 

[nfitz]

Because you completely contradict yourself.

Clearly I should have taken Mark Twain's advice, as it does appear to be difficult to tell the difference.

Best you inform the City to get their proposal right. Final approval is later next month.

Proposal is right. Shows tracks in centre.

There's not going to be a fence.

 

[steveintoronto]

Just reviewing the City's existing Bylaws, whether this section must be modified or not is a good question:
(being a pilot project might lend itself to an exception written elsewhere in the Bylaw or the City of Toronto Act)(This section is 85 pages long)

[...continues at length...]
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/municode/1184_743.pdf

Are the patios privately owned in public space or publicly owned in public space?

Is answered in this section under the term "permit".

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

It's a very valid question, but I surmise it would be leased, just as sidewalk patios are:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/sidewalk-patio-1.3973262

Needless to say, the City will be charging a good penny or two for leasing that space, and again, if alcohol is served, all the more reason to ensure pedestrians don't share a drink with a streetcar. It might be their last one.

Let's not pretend that somehow this represent a new danger - it isn't like vehicles with the ability to kill don't used to operate in that space. To drag out every bit of rules just to make transit improvement difficult even as a pilot project is counterproductive.

AoD

 

[steveintoronto]

Let's not pretend that somehow this represent a new danger - it isn't like vehicles with the ability to kill don't used to operate in that space. To drag out every bit of rules just to make transit improvement difficult even as a pilot project is counterproductive.

AoD

I think you took that the wrong way. See my last post. I'm very much in favour of this, in fact disappointed that Council took the weakest option. That may change sooner rather than later. But let's also not be giving away that space too cheaply. The rates are set out in the Bylaw I just posted, and they're up for review at this time. Rather than see too much of the "Public Realm" go to entrepreneurship, I'd rather it be for general public use. As it is, King Street's sidewalks are cluttered with patios that leave very little space on the sidewalk, and I was just thinking about that "2.1 metres minimum" in the Code. I suspect that's been violated in a couple of spots already. Just packing a metric tape measure in my backpack to cycle along there now, weather permitting.

The essential point of needing some sort of separation, fence or barrier where pedestrians are adjacent to streetcars hopefully going at speed continues to need addressing. This is a projected "transit mall" (or "corridor") not a "pedestrian mall".

Edit to Add:

An existing area of pedestrian constriction, although they may have had to already move their railing back, but note the lettering on the sidewalk: "TTC RAMP". This is from May last year, and the markings from the team surveying for the study:

 

[aquateam]

I'm not sure you are paying attention. It's been made very clear, that they are not going to be fencing or gating King Street!

I'm not sure why this is off the table. They use fencing in Montreal, even downtown (e.g. Rene-Levesque) to minimize conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles. It should definitely be considered for sections of King street.

See here, next to Metro Cote Vertu, for instance.

Obviously not everywhere, preferably tastefully done, but it isn't a Berlin wall dividing King street like it seems to be made out to be.

This whole discussion is pointless. People aren't idiots. They're capable of walking next to a streetcar without getting hurt.

When there's actually an accident on Queen's Quay or the King pilot then we can talk. Until then we're just blowing a hypothetical problem way out of proportion.

Streetcar accidents do occur, more often than you think. One of my classmates had a long and painful rehabilitation after being hit by one... he doesn't remember all the details because of the head injury but he was rollerblading at the time, and likely one train had cleared and he didn't realize there was another one coming in the other direction. See these articles:
http://www.torontosun.com/2017/04/14/ttc-streetcar-kills-pedestrian-in-chinatown
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...es-showing-woman-struck-by-ttc-streetcar.html
http://toronto.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=455317
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/streetcar-tracks-cyclists-1.3696234

The vision zero philosophy is that no life should be an acceptable cost of transportation, and that streets should be engineered so that a split-second error in judgement doesn't lead to death. While this was meant primarily for cars, the same philosophy should extend to our transit system. King street is in the entertainment district, full of drunk people from out of town, relying on people's judgement is a poor substitute for safer design. It shouldn't be necessary to wait for people to die to take reasonable precautions for predictable scenarios.

Development potential on Dundas is extremely limited since the corridor is designated as a "neighbourhood", which basically means no non-ground level housing allowed except directly on Dundas. Almost the entire area between Queen, Dufferin and the Oakville/Bala sub railways is designated as mixed-use, employment or regeneration areas.

Maybe a billion dollar tunnel, combined with the ongoing housing crisis, might cause us to revisit this ridiculous and arbitrary law that makes it illegal to build tall buildings in that section of downtown.

 

[W. K. Lis]

They use fencing as a median between tram/streetcar tracks.

From link:

 

[steveintoronto]

They use fencing as a median between tram/streetcar tracks.

Pedestrian safety improves at major CBD tram stop
29 October, 2013

Public Transport Victoria, Yarra Trams, Victoria Police and Melbourne City Council have acted to improve the safety of passengers and road users at and around the accessible tram stop on Flinders Street at Swanston Street.

The stop has been identified as a high risk area for pedestrian accidents with 14 near misses in the last six months. Victoria Police has previously issued penalty notices to pedestrians for illegally crossing the tracks.

A trial earlier in 2013 with some fencing temporarily installed saw 82 people unsafely cross the tram tracks, compared to 364 when the fencing was not in place.

Hundreds of pedestrians leaving or entering the platform stop do not use the designated crossing, which puts them at risk of being hit by trams or cars.

Yarra Trams is extending the existing safety fencing on the south side of the stop on behalf of PTV to prevent this dangerous behaviour.

At the same time, Melbourne City Council is installing a safety fence on the footpath on Flinders Street opposite the tram stop.

The recent trial by PTV and Yarra Trams saw the installation of temporary fencing to discourage pedestrians from illegally crossing tram tracks.

The study showed an average 80 per cent reduction during peak hours in the number of pedestrians crossing tram tracks.

The success of this trial prompted PTV and Yarra Trams to make this fencing a permanent solution as part of its commitment to passenger and community safety.

Existing safety fencing will remain in place and tram operation is unaffected.

http://www.yarratrams.com.au/media-...trian-safety-improves-at-major-cbd-tram-stop/

 

[nfitz]

I'm not sure why this is off the table. They use fencing in Montreal, even downtown (e.g. Rene-Levesque) to minimize conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles. It should definitely be considered for sections of King street.

I haven't seen much in Montreal - and offhand, I don't recall any on R-L, or Dorchester - though it's not impossible they've added a few feet here and there. Though there's lots of flower boxes in a few spots. R-L however is a 6-lane arterial, with a median. It's more akin to University than King. St. Catherines would be a better comparison to King, and I recall no fencing there.

See here, next to Metro Cote Vertu, for instance.

Gosh, that's ugly. But how is this comparable? It's a 7-lane artery, out in the suburbs, adjacent to a large bus terminal at the terminus of a subway line. The fence runs for all of 70 metres, along the south side of the terminus. I suspect the problem you get here, is that a lot of students for nearby Vanier Cegep, and Cegep de St-Laurent arrive on bus, and then make a beeline across the road. This is similar to the 65 metres of fencing we see in Toronto on Bay Street from Front to the train tracks, outside the GO bus terminal.

Vanier is my Alma Mater, though before they build that Metro station. Dawson too in pre-motherhouse days. However, it's no secret I'm playing without a full DEC.

Obviously not everywhere, preferably tastefully done, but it isn't a Berlin wall dividing King street like it seems to be made out to be.

I said earlier, that a short piece of fence near an intersection wasn't a big issue. Nor have I complained about the Bay fence (though I think there should be a pedestrian crossing of some kind at the south end of that), similar to the new one on Yonge) - perhaps there's be a chance to do that with the end comping to the GO terminal.

Though I honestly don't know which spot on King actually needs that, being a much narrower road. Perhaps near St. Andrew - though University is a more likely candidate really. It's much wider, and doesn't have the small stores on each side; it's much more like Dorchester.

Streetcar accidents do occur, more often than you think.

Often it's sheer stupidity that has lead to them - and a surprising number hit by the streetcar they just got off. Many are at intersections, where the fence wouldn't apply.

Pedestrian safety improves at major CBD tram stop

That's just a a stop though. I wasn't precluding ANY barrier. In particular I was objecting to mid-block barriers and at intersections that had no signals (like Victoria/King). You don't have stops at those locations.

 

[steveintoronto]

You don't. You imply there's something wrong with people crossing the street. And I"m not sure what your photo is supposed to show - this is at an intersection, and the pedestrians are clearly crossing on a green light. That's a much bigger road than King.

The bigger danger are the cars. It's pretty hard not to see a streetcar. On King, there'll be at most one lane to cross, before getting to a refuge.

steveintoronto said: ↑
So the question remains, how to separate unaware pedestrians from moving streetcars at speed?

Why do you think pedestrians are impeding streetcars on King? They only do that when there are pedestrian-controlled crossings. Do you suggest those get removed?

I'm not sure you are paying attention. It's been made very clear, that they are not going to be fencing or gating King Street!

I wasn't precluding ANY barrier.

And so it goes...

 

[aquateam]

I haven't seen much in Montreal - and offhand, I don't recall any on R-L, or Dorchester - though it's not impossible they've added a few feet here and there. Though there's lots of flower boxes in a few spots. R-L however is a 6-lane arterial, with a median. It's more akin to University than King. St. Catherines would be a better comparison to King, and I recall no fencing there.

Gosh, that's ugly. But how is this comparable? It's a 7-lane artery, out in the suburbs, adjacent to a large bus terminal at the terminus of a subway line. The fence runs for all of 70 metres, along the south side of the terminus. I suspect the problem you get here, is that a lot of students for nearby Vanier Cegep, and Cegep de St-Laurent arrive on bus, and then make a beeline across the road. This is similar to the 65 metres of fencing we see in Toronto on Bay Street from Front to the train tracks, outside the GO bus terminal.

Vanier is my Alma Mater, though before they build that Metro station. Dawson too in pre-motherhouse days. However, it's no secret I'm playing without a full DEC.

I said earlier, that a short piece of fence near an intersection wasn't a big issue. Nor have I complained about the Bay fence (though I think there should be a pedestrian crossing of some kind at the south end of that), similar to the new one on Yonge) - perhaps there's be a chance to do that with the end comping to the GO terminal.

Though I honestly don't know which spot on King actually needs that, being a much narrower road. Perhaps near St. Andrew - though University is a more likely candidate really. It's much wider, and doesn't have the small stores on each side; it's much more like Dorchester.

Often it's sheer stupidity that has lead to them - and a surprising number hit by the streetcar they just got off. Many are at intersections, where the fence wouldn't apply.
That's just a a stop though. I wasn't precluding ANY barrier. In particular I was objecting to mid-block barriers and at intersections that had no signals (like Victoria/King). You don't have stops at those locations.

A long section of Cote Vertu actually has fencing, between Bertrand and Decarie, but I think the city is installing more. I would have posted a streetview of R-L but the fencing is recent (within the last 3 years), so you can see the construction on streetview but not the full fence.

St. Catherine is one-way, though, so it's inherently safer for pedestrians. And there isn't a major transit route that needs to be sped up.

St. Catherine street doesn't have fences but it has bollards! It would be nice to see this treatment, with the sidewalk flush to the street, bollards, and granite pavers given to sections of King, especially for TIFF. Bollards would be a good substitute for fencing, something to put a psychological barrier marking the boundary between where the streetcar lanes are and the rest of the street. Of course a dark granite strip marking the boundary of the streetcar lane would be a nice touch.

Sherbrooke is getting a makeover too, why can't Toronto streets get a similar treatment/facelift?

 

[W. K. Lis]

Even in Ottawa, they're designing the stations to have fencing as a safety feature. We should consider fencing on the surface streetcar (and future light rail) stations and stops.

See link.