King Street (Streetcar Transit Priority)

[reaperexpress]

Because taxis are allowed to go straight through during certain times of day. That exception needs to be squashed..I don't think the HTA allows for a right-turn sign with a designator "only taxis allowed between 10-7" or something along those lines.

A black sign with a white right turn arrow - the sign we are talking about - is a lane designation sign. It designates the right lane as right turn only. There is no time of day when taxis are allowed to proceed straight from the right turn lane.

 

[goreckm]

A black sign with a white right turn arrow - the sign we are talking about - is a lane designation sign. It designates the right lane as right turn only. There is no time of day when taxis are allowed to proceed straight from the right turn lane.

That's correct. My suggestion is to make both lanes right turn only, or force cars out of the middle lane before the intersection. That's what's impossible with the exception.

 

[goreckm]

Alternatively, if you don't want to allow two lane right turns, you can make the yellow line move to the right, forcing cars to merge into the tight turn lane.

 

[EnviroTO]

i've suggested that many times before.

obviously King would need to become a one way, but it could be paired with Queen.

Thumbs down if you mean one-way the same direction the whole route, but thumbs up if you mean they should go back to the proposal that proposed a mix of alternating . There is already Adelaide and Richmond for one-way traffic. One way streets prioritize cars moving quickly over street life and transit.

 

[Northern Light]

The King Street item before I&E passed yesterday, with this amendment:

 

[duty free]

Thumbs down if you mean one-way the same direction the whole route, but thumbs up if you mean they should go back to the proposal that proposed a mix of alternating . There is already Adelaide and Richmond for one-way traffic. One way streets prioritize cars moving quickly over street life and transit.

View attachment 560964

no that's a myth. it all depends on the design. there's countless examples where one way streets do not prioritize car movement. especially if it's just one lane. this idea some people have that it would kill the street's vibrancy is misguided at best.

personally I think ROW's would be fine. not ideal, but better than what it currently in place.

 

[allengeorge]

no that's a myth. it all depends on the design. there's countless examples where one way streets do not prioritize car movement. especially if it's just one lane. this idea some people have that it would kill the street's vibrancy is misguided at best.

Having lived on both one-way and two-way streets over the years, I have to agree - with caveats.

It all depends on what the one-way and the surroundings look like. If you’ve a narrow one-way with lots of parking and barely enough space to pass if someone double-parks, and trees, and buildings crowding in - yeah: traffic will slow down.

OTOH, if you’ve multiple one-way lanes, huge setbacks, not a lot of pedestrians, etc. - it’s gonna suck. And for some reason this typology sucks a lot more in Toronto, than say…New York.

 

[adys123]

Having lived on both one-way and two-way streets over the years, I have to agree - with caveats.

It all depends on what the one-way and the surroundings look like. If you’ve a narrow one-way with lots of parking and barely enough space to pass if someone double-parks, and trees, and buildings crowding in - yeah: traffic will slow down.

OTOH, if you’ve multiple one-way lanes, huge setbacks, not a lot of pedestrians, etc. - it’s gonna suck. And for some reason this typology sucks a lot more in Toronto, than say…New York.

Especially since, contraflow transit lanes or cycle lanes can serve to actually prioritize access by those sustainable modes. And sidewalks are always bidirectional

 

[CapitalSeven]

Has anyone else thought about reversing direction on Richmond and Adelaide, and then making one-way pairs of Queen-Richmond and Adelaide-King? Each street could have a reserved streetcar lane with platforms built out from the sidewalk. Hugely expensive and disruptive but worth it?

 

[reaperexpress]

Has anyone else thought about reversing direction on Richmond and Adelaide, and then making one-way pairs of Queen-Richmond and Adelaide-King? Each street could have a reserved streetcar lane with platforms built out from the sidewalk. Hugely expensive and disruptive but worth it?

Yes it has been proposed countless times since the 1950's and it has never made sense because it would undermine the attractiveness of streetcar service by separating the eastbound and westbound stops. It's far more effective for transit to operate on a street where traffic operations are optimised solely for transit (like King Street) rather than having the main transit and motor traffic routes on the same streets which requires the operations to be a compromise for both.

 

[duty free]

King Street current design is what happens when non creative people think they're creative.

Just ban on street parking on every 500 route. Put every the streetcar in a ROW. Have the platforms/stop clear enough so that commuters are safe from vehicle traffic. ban left turns and be done with it. delivery trucks can go on side streets. same with parking.

 

[reaperexpress]

King Street current design is what happens when non creative people think they're creative.

Just ban on street parking on every 500 route. Put every the streetcar in a ROW. Have the platforms/stop clear enough so that commuters are safe from vehicle traffic. ban left turns and be done with it. delivery trucks can go on side streets. same with parking.

This comment is what happens when someone who hasn't put any serious thought into the design thinks they're creative.

 

[duty free]

This comment is what happens when someone who hasn't put any serious thought into the design thinks they're creative.

Nah. It’s a disaster. I’ve put way too many hours of thought into it for over a decade.

Half assed execution gets half assed results. If they went full transit mall that would have been great. Had they gone with the ROW option instead that would’ve been better. It’s not well thought out or executed. Sorry if you took that personally.

Swanston street this is not. they had three options.

A. ROW
B. Poor Design
C. Transit Mall

and picked the worst option by far.

 

[reaperexpress]

Nah. It’s a disaster. I’ve put way too many hours of thought into it for over a decade.

Half assed execution gets half assed results. If they went full transit mall that would have been great. Had they gone with the ROW option instead that would’ve been better. It’s not well thought out or executed. Sorry if you took that personally.

Swanston street this is not. they had three options.

A. ROW
B. Poor Design
C. Transit Mall

and picked the worst option by far.

Draw me a cross section of what you want at a platform. Streetmix is a quick tool for drawing cross sections.

For the record, when I was on the design team I was pushing for the intermittent transit mall option, not the half-assed design we got.

 

[duty free]

Draw me a cross section of what you want at a platform. Streetmix is a quick tool for drawing cross sections.

For the record, when I was on the design team I was pushing for the intermittent transit mall option, not the half-assed design we got.

It's called... a Transit Mall.

https://streetmix.net/-/2555233