There was a history of accidents, yes, in part due to having an at grade intersection with a railway crossing close to it..... but more because of the growth in volume of traffic as central Etobicoke developed.
I would challege anyone to suggest how that intersection could have been designed in any other way. It is actually extremely functional. I walk it several times a week, and in the context of a not very appealing streetscape on Dundas, existing condos on Royal York that are deliberately disconnected from the street, and new construction around Prince Edward that was approved with little concern for or insistence on a walkable street environment, the RY-Dundas intersection is neither a llimiting nor enabling factor in improving this area.
I bristle a bit at people suggesting that these road layouts should be rebuilt just because they hark from years when the auto was king. This does sound like “war on the car” thinking with no agenda other than to stick it to motorists “ just because”. Outside of the city core, the entire GTA was built to be auto centric. We can’t simply tear it up. We need to make constructive improvements, and that will lead to suburban zones that downplay autos. But constricting auto traffic in the suburbs should not be an end in itself. There is nothing wrong with accommodating the current reliance on the automobile provided it does not prevent promotion of transit or active modes.
Six Points is a good move because the overall zone plan is worth the change, but RY/Dundas, Rexdale/Islington etc are just fine - until someone has a plan for those areas as well.
- Paul
