|
|
|
nfitz
Superstar
I don't think ANY of King is 80 feet wide. Most of it is the standard 66 feet. There are some opportunities west of Spadina where it's 75 feet - but that's only 650 metres of the pilot area! See the figure below.
In a 66-foot right of way? No chance you can do it all. Perhaps if it really WAS 80 feet wide (24.4 metres). But it isn't.
Looking at the official plan, Front has more opportunities through the core (and expanding the ROW on Bathurst north to Queen - which is where you get the most congestion!)
Attachments
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
Property Data map shows it is 80 feet row west of Bathurst, and indeed 66 feet east of Spadina.
I don't think that is a deal-breaker. Eglinton changes ROW width multiple times throughout its corridor, and the Eglinton Connects plan just adds or removes public space accordingly.
nfitz
Superstar
That mapping isn't entirely accurate - if you saw how they digitized it, you'd be horrified! It's listed at 75 feet - but there could be variations, and I haven't looked in detail. It's outside of the King Pilot area though. They key is the core.
But perhaps there is case for putting proper bike lanes on King west of Bathurst, which doesn't have the advantage of the adjacent corridors on Front, Adelaide, Richmond, and Wellington! But west of Dufferin it's back to 66 feet.
Eglinton is a minimum of 88 feet through the core. There's a small bit east of Bayview that's only 75 feet - but they've also been expropriating where necessary. Which isn't an easy an option in the core.
Obviously adding safe bike lanes on King through downtown east of Spadina is not feasible, without removing one of the two traffic lanes. The bikes whizzing past now between the streetcars and parked cars, are not that safe, and if they increased significantly in numbers, it would become untenable.
Last edited:
innsertnamehere
Superstar
the property data maps are generally fairly accurate - but even then, they are showing 23.75m, or about 78ft.
Regardless, it's semantics. There isn't space for real dedicated bike lanes on King. Richmond / Adelaide work great too because the bike lanes are super wide, allowing easy passing of other cyclists. This is especially important during peak periods in the summer when the cycling volumes can see over 50 cyclists pass through a single light cycle. Even if you could squeeze in some standard 1.8m wide cycling lanes on King somehow, the 3.5m lanes on Richmond and Adelaide would still be far better.
Regardless, it's semantics. There isn't space for real dedicated bike lanes on King. Richmond / Adelaide work great too because the bike lanes are super wide, allowing easy passing of other cyclists. This is especially important during peak periods in the summer when the cycling volumes can see over 50 cyclists pass through a single light cycle. Even if you could squeeze in some standard 1.8m wide cycling lanes on King somehow, the 3.5m lanes on Richmond and Adelaide would still be far better.
44 North
Senior Member
Yeah no for sure, Spadina-Jarvis would be $2bn if we're lucky. Where would the portals go, getting under PATH, utils, storm drains, AODA-required station infrastructure in that narrow ROW. And with our Planning dept we can barely let a mouse sneeze without fearing a nimby uproar. Would never hold my breath on it.
With the capacity though I'd assume we'd advance to 2-car LRVs, maybe with bidirectionality. Which is something I think should've been built into projects like Spadina-Waterfront LRTs.
Avenue
Active Member
I think the ridership and economic activity on King totally justifies a below ground portion from Spadina to Jarvis or hell, Bathurst to Parliament. It's the financial core of the country and extremely densely populated. Yes, even with an eventual subway underneath Queen East it's justified.
Last edited:
Rainforest
Senior Member
^ Although placing a part of King streetcar underground would be cool and would speed it up, the cost would be enormous. And the capacity of the resulting system would still be limited by the on-street, mixed-traffic sections east and west of the tunnel.
Expanding the "Pilot" east and west, staying on surface and just changing the usage priorities, is a lot cheaper and would still speed it up and make the service more reliable.
If we eventually get the "first" Relief Line completed, and then get extra funding to build another tunnel through downtown, then perhaps it should be used for the "second" Relief Line; again high-capacity / heavy rail.
Expanding the "Pilot" east and west, staying on surface and just changing the usage priorities, is a lot cheaper and would still speed it up and make the service more reliable.
If we eventually get the "first" Relief Line completed, and then get extra funding to build another tunnel through downtown, then perhaps it should be used for the "second" Relief Line; again high-capacity / heavy rail.
syn
Senior Member
There's a very sound argument for underground transit on the downtown portion of King.
Unfortunately we don't care to build underground transit where it's justified.
steveintoronto
Superstar
syn
Senior Member
Oh I agree completely.
Who's going to fund it? I have no idea. Even spending a few million on an important downtown transit corridor seems to be an issue for some politicians, while spending billions elsewhere isn't.
Personally I like the idea of removing all automobiles from King, with the exception of delivery vehicles.
steveintoronto
Superstar
And residents needing access. This can be instituted with minimum cost and in short time, well within a year. The sooner the King Transit Mall becomes that, the better. It's not like other cities haven't already done this to great success and huge amounts of documentation.
The real legal glitch remains in Queen's Park.
Steve Munro's latest installment on the King Car now up:
http://stevemunro.ca/2018/10/05/king-street-update-september-2018/
syn
Senior Member
That's a given.
Fortunately a lot of auto access points for drivers who want to access these buildings are not directly on King.
I'd also like to see investment in updated signage/wayfinding and shelters.
steveintoronto
Superstar
Shelters are well within the City's competence, but signs, other than larger ones or illuminated, aren't. It seems trivial, but this is one of a myriad of aspects that QP can trip Toronto on.
There's absolutely no doubt that better and more specific signals and signage are needed. That is up to the HTA, which has a section (Pilot Section) stating (gist)...
Best I quote this exactly:
https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90h08#BK383
Why in hell this present Council and Mayor didn't apply to the past QP regime for unique inclusion under this section God only knows. It's going to be difficult if not impossible under a 'streetcar hating' despot.
Perhaps 'uploading of the subway' might offer some favour as a trade-off, we'll see.[/quote]
Attachments
ehlow
Senior Member
It's amazing how much better this line is than a few years ago. The new trains, the pilot with new stops, POP combined together have made it so much more efficient, fast & reliable and subway-like. Of course, it could use more capacity and is sometimes packed full.
Once it's made permanent, I'd love to see more invested in the shelters at big transfer points like St Andrew station and have the curb extended out to the streetcar, with at least a roof & some walls for weather protection. With DRL so many years away and not going west of University, this will be the main way for people to get to Spadina-Bathurst to King, which is exploding as a tech hub and employment area with thousands of jobs coming. Spadina GO Station will hopefully help too but it seems years away.
https://business.financialpost.com/...n-presence-in-toronto-real-estate-development
Once it's made permanent, I'd love to see more invested in the shelters at big transfer points like St Andrew station and have the curb extended out to the streetcar, with at least a roof & some walls for weather protection. With DRL so many years away and not going west of University, this will be the main way for people to get to Spadina-Bathurst to King, which is exploding as a tech hub and employment area with thousands of jobs coming. Spadina GO Station will hopefully help too but it seems years away.
https://business.financialpost.com/...n-presence-in-toronto-real-estate-development