King Street (Streetcar Transit Priority)

[innsertnamehere]

A reminder that a car free King is literally impossible. There are dozens of driveway access points along king that are legally required to be provided access to a public road.

 

[Avenue]

I don't think anyone is really asking for fully car-free. The original idea was protected streetcar lanes with signaling priority at intersections... Once they opened up this starting point to debate it started to get hijacked by things like giving concessions to taxis, and widening sidewalks with street patios.

 

[ADRM]

From an email sent out to stakeholder advisory groups:

The City will be officially launching the King Street Transit Pilot on Sunday, November 12, 2017 at 7 a.m. (weather permitting). The purpose of this email is to provide you with information and educational material about the pilot to distribute to your stakeholder members.

 

[innsertnamehere]

I don't think anyone is really asking for fully car-free. The original idea was protected streetcar lanes with signaling priority at intersections... Once they opened up this starting point to debate it started to get hijacked by things like giving concessions to taxis, and widening sidewalks with street patios.

It was always about giving space to the public realm as well as improving transit service. The only "hijacking" that occurred was when taxis were allowed to use it at night.

 

[MetroMan]

A reminder that a car free King is literally impossible. There are dozens of driveway access points along king that are legally required to be provided access to a public road.

Some segments of King have no driveways and have back alley access for business loading docks. Spadina to University is one of these segments. There’s no reason to keep cars on this segment other than to appease the car lobby while defeating the goal of improving King street transit.

 

[centralblue]

We have to keep our eye on the ball and not overthink this.

If the velocity of the streetcars increases across that zone, the pilot is a success. Period.

That and that alone was the goal of the pilot.

- Paul

If this is the sole criteria for success. Then the project will succeed and transit riders from king west will lose. I foresee that transit time between Bathurst and Jarvis will indeed increase. however the journey time from points outside of the zone will increase at least in the west end as the Bathurst intersection will become a huge pinch point. I am hoping to be pleasantly surprised and/or not killed by an impatient driver wanting to turn left or right at Bathurst. In the last 15 years the city has removed 4 lanes of personal and commercial motor vehicle traffic through the core. This Project will remove another 4 lanes. It will be interesting to see where that traffic ends up.

 

[innsertnamehere]

I suspect Jarvis and Bathurst will see significant no pedestrian times to clear large volumes of cars. Far longer than the existing advanced left you see today.

 

[crs1026]

If this is the sole criteria for success. Then the project will succeed and transit riders from king west will lose. I foresee that transit time between Bathurst and Jarvis will indeed increase. however the journey time from points outside of the zone will increase at least in the west end as the Bathurst intersection will become a huge pinch point.

I also suspect this is what will happen. The only solution will be to extend the car-free streetcar lane even further west. (Break my heart....)

This pilot is going to be a gamechanger for the city. While I don't advocate making the downtown an auto-banned zone (just yet..... ;-) ) , this project could well be the small change that causes many people to say, too much. Already, the sensible conclusion that the average motorist will make is that taking a car downtown is just not convenient in many (most?) situations.

No amount of transit construction is going to resolve the congestion downtown. It's a direct result of the vitality, and density, of the core. Excluding far more automobile traffic is becoming the only valid solution. The pilot is such a small step, but I hope it's a tipping point. People will scream, and say that it has to be undone.... but there really isn't any going backwards.

- Paul

 

[muller877]

I suspect Jarvis and Bathurst will see significant no pedestrian times to clear large volumes of cars. Far longer than the existing advanced left you see today.

I hope that there will be a police presence for the first week or two so that they can control the pedestrians and cyclists during this advanced light. Plus traffic/transit staff so they can figure out the right timing.

I also expect this will decrease the traffic along King St east and west of the transit zone. Especially East since Front & Adelaide/Richmond are great alternatives. To the west Queen St sucks and there is no other through street near King so it's going to be a nightmare.

 

[MetroMan]

I The pilot is such a small step, but I hope it's a tipping point. People will scream, and say that it has to be undone.... but there really isn't any going backwards.

- Paul

This is a good point.

After a year of this pilot, transit riders are going to have gotten used to a much faster 504 and 514 ride. Drivers will complain but how do you go back to allowing King street transit to slow down to the crawling mess that it is today? The only alternative is the downtown relief line across town but in 15 to 20 years, when that’s finally built (if at all), a car reduced or car free King Street will have become cemented.

There’s no going back.

 

[Rainforest]

If this is the sole criteria for success. Then the project will succeed and transit riders from king west will lose. I foresee that transit time between Bathurst and Jarvis will indeed increase. however the journey time from points outside of the zone will increase at least in the west end as the Bathurst intersection will become a huge pinch point. I am hoping to be pleasantly surprised and/or not killed by an impatient driver wanting to turn left or right at Bathurst. In the last 15 years the city has removed 4 lanes of personal and commercial motor vehicle traffic through the core. This Project will remove another 4 lanes. It will be interesting to see where that traffic ends up.

This is a valid concern. I guess the logical way to address it is to lengthen the transit priority zone. If we can get Dufferin to Cherrie, then #514 will operate in a priority zone virtually for the whole length.

If we can get Ronces to Dufferin as well, that will create a possibility to reconfigure the Lakeshore West / Long Branch service and run it via King to downtown.

Are there any features precluding the transit mall all the way from Bathurst to Roncesvalles? I believe some sections of that route already have a "soft" transit priority during the peak hours. General traffic is supposed to avoid central lanes (= streetcar lanes) unless there is a blockage in the curb lane.

 

[nfitz]

I suspect Jarvis and Bathurst will see significant no pedestrian times to clear large volumes of cars. Far longer than the existing advanced left you see today.

I doubt it, there's not that much traffic on King now - many will take advantage of streets like Frederick, George, Princess, etc. to head south.

If it a big problem, you just remove the left turn option at Jarvis.

 

[crs1026]

Are there any features precluding the transit mall all the way from Bathurst to Roncesvalles? I believe some sections of that route already have a "soft" transit priority during the peak hours. General traffic is supposed to avoid central lanes (= streetcar lanes) unless there is a blockage in the curb lane.

Getting rid of all the left turn lanes is the only solution. Effectively King meeds to cease to exist as a through street. Leave even one left turn point, and cars will block streetcars significantly at that spot. The impact will be lots of make three-rights-to-turn-left routings down sidestreets, which will be painful.

Personally, I'm OK with a transit mall along King end to end. It moves closer to a fairer sharing of the road network between cars and transit, and it builds a truer express corridor for streetcars. But - that's a lot of cars moved onto our other roads, and personally I doubt the road network can handle that. Certainly it will turn the 501 into an even slower ride. That's why I believe this pilot will lead to the more general conclusion that there are just too many cars going into downtown, period. Some jurassic Councillors from the burbs just won't get that, but more than 51% may. There must be a tipping point in there somewhere.

- Paul

 

[TransitBart]

So if the city turns King Street into a transit mall... so far so good. Can the city in good conscience allow that idiotic closure of King for TIFF?

I hope not, but I believe so.

For that matter, if you close King to cars, do the stars, god bless their stardom, get to take the 504 to the Bell TIFF Lightbox?

I think TIFF is a great thing for the city. (not a film buff here) But I sure hope that the VIPS get to ride the 504 while the rest of the hoi polloi are biking and walking through the downtown.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Getting rid of all the left turn lanes is the only solution. Effectively King meeds to cease to exist as a through street. Leave even one left turn point, and cars will block streetcars significantly at that spot. The impact will be lots of make three-rights-to-turn-left routings down sidestreets, which will be painful.

Personally, I'm OK with a transit mall along King end to end. It moves closer to a fairer sharing of the road network between cars and transit, and it builds a truer express corridor for streetcars. But - that's a lot of cars moved onto our other roads, and personally I doubt the road network can handle that. Certainly it will turn the 501 into an even slower ride. That's why I believe this pilot will lead to the more general conclusion that there are just too many cars going into downtown, period. Some jurassic Councillors from the burbs just won't get that, but more than 51% may. There must be a tipping point in there somewhere.

- Paul

London-style congestion charges would be a welcome addition if we ever get the DRL built