King Street (Streetcar Transit Priority)

[TheKingEast]

If any of you take King or Queen during rush hour, the traffic is insane and it is in large part due to car traffic. On top of that, much of the traffic is coming from University, Jarvis, Younge where idiot drivers block the intersection.

Time to live up to that "world class" moniker and actually make big boy decisions. Enough of the suburbanite culture.

 

[BMO]

Why don't they start by enforcing the HOV rules that are already signed along King St.? Streetcars and taxis only during rush hour. Even some of the street HOV diamonds are still there.

You'd still have a bunch of issues unless you restrict left turns since technically you're allowed to enter an HOV lane to make a turn. I'm not opposed to restricting Left turns.

 

[gweed123]

http://urbantoronto.ca/news/2017/01/king-street-pilot-study-push-car-free-corridor

Analysis of the current Pilot Study.

 

[Leo_Chan]

Does having a streetcar ROW usually mean streetcars in the median and one vehicle on each side of the ROW? Is it possible to do the opposite and have cars in the centre of the roadway? Having streetcars on the sides also allows riders to be dropped off on the sidewalk, or in other words, closer to the stores, not in the danger of traffic. Is there an example of this somewhere in the world? or is this an original idea

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

I think they are going away from cobblestones or cobblestone like concrete due to difficulties with snow plow equipment on them in the winter.

 

[Megaton327]

Does having a streetcar ROW usually mean streetcars in the median and one vehicle on each side of the ROW? Is it possible to do the opposite and have cars in the centre of the roadway? Having streetcars on the sides also allows riders to be dropped off on the sidewalk, or in other words, closer to the stores, not in the danger of traffic. Is there an example of this somewhere in the world? or is this an original idea

This wouldn't be feasible for King because it would require the entire width of the roadway to be ripped up along the entire length of the project area, tracks removed, and new tracks installed in the curb lane. This would probably result in the removal of 504 King service for at least a year, possibly several years, through downtown, and the restriction of most auto traffic along large stretches of it for long periods too.

Also, that would pose a serious safety issue for right turns, in that they would realistically need to be completely prohibited. It's generally preferred to have cars in the curb lane making right turns, with left turns prohibited, as that is much safer.

 

[TrickyRicky]

I think the only way that a full transit mall would work is if there is a continuous network of parallel rear service lanes in the blocks being consider for conversion. With thousands of new residential spaces being proposed for the area I sure wouldn't want to live on or near King after a full transit mall conversion (My wife used to live at King and Bathurst for a few years so I am somewhat familiar with going there personally); however, if the City deems the commuter interest is paramount (as it may rightly be) I think it could work. I personally would prefer a Street-car right-of-way option over a full transit mall. I don't think complete elimination of vehicle traffic is prudent or even coherent with the philosophy of mixed-use neighbourhoods. Full transit mall conversion I feel are more appropriate for commercial or business districts.

 

[steveintoronto]

I think the only way that a full transit mall would work is if there is a continuous network of parallel rear service lanes in the blocks being consider for conversion. [...]

There appears to be a misunderstanding of the term "Transit Mall". Many precedents have been set around the world, and recent ones, not historical. But for the purposes of Toronto, a 'historical case' for all the wrong reasons (as in being behind the times), let's focus on North Am examples: (Not on this list is one now almost forty years old, The San Diego Trolley, which runs in a transit mall in downtown SD. After the the largest US cities' transit systems, it carries more passengers than any other US city system)(the Trolley was the 4th most-ridden light rail system in the United States, with an average of 119,800 riders per weekday.[3] )

A transit mall is a street, or set of streets, in a city or town along which automobile traffic is prohibited or greatly restricted and only public transit vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians are permitted.

Transit malls are instituted by communities who feel that it is desirable to have areas not dominated by the automobile, or as a way to speed travel time through an area—usually the city center—for transit vehicles and as a transport hub for interchanges, making them more efficient and thereby more attractive as an alternative to car use. Converting a street or an area to a transit mall can be a form of pedestrianization, allowing pedestrians and cyclists as well as transit vehicles to move more freely, unimpeded by private motor traffic, if autos are banned completely. However, some transit malls are not auto-free, but rather restrict cars and other private traffic to only short segments or only one lane, with other lanes being limited to buses or trams (streetcars).
[...]
North America
In North America, the creation of pedestrian-friendly urban environments is still in its infancy, but transit malls have existed in a few cities for more than 40 years, starting with the Nicollet Mall[1] in Minneapolis, Minnesota in 1968, followed by the Granville Mall in Vancouver, British Columbia, in 1974 and the Portland Mall in 1977. In North America, transit malls usually take the form of single streets in which automobiles are mostly prohibited but transit vehicles are allowed. They are rarely completely free of motor vehicles. Often, all of the cross streets are open to motorized traffic, and in some cases taxis are allowed and truck deliveries are made by night.

Examples include:

• Nicollet Mall in Minneapolis, Minnesota
• Granville Mall in Vancouver, British Columbia
• Portland Transit Mall in Portland, Oregon
• 7th Avenue in Calgary, Alberta
• 10th Street NW, Federal Triangle, Washington, DC, de facto
• 16th Street Mall in Denver, Colorado
• Fulton Mall in Brooklyn, New York
• Graham Avenue Transit Mall in Winnipeg, Manitoba
• Long Beach Transit Mall in Los Angeles County
• Main Street Mall in Memphis, Tennessee
• Santa Rosa Transit Mall in Santa Rosa, California
• State Street in Madison, Wisconsin
• Transit Plaza in Champaign, Illinois
• [...]

• 
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transit_mall

 

[Tuck]

The creation of one single transit mall is not going to be an apocalyptic event for downtown traffic. Lots of cities have transit malls, and use them to high levels of success. They do have their challenges, but other cities have overcome that, so why can't we?

Does having a streetcar ROW usually mean streetcars in the median and one vehicle on each side of the ROW? Is it possible to do the opposite and have cars in the centre of the roadway? Having streetcars on the sides also allows riders to be dropped off on the sidewalk, or in other words, closer to the stores, not in the danger of traffic. Is there an example of this somewhere in the world? or is this an original idea

I think the new NYC streetcar plans to run along the curb, rather than the centre.

 

[crs1026]

Transit malls do not have to be built in a way that excludes *all* vehicles *all* the time. Vehicles can still be allowed access for deliveries within that block and/or curfewed to particular times of day. Size of vehicle can be restricted so you don't have 18-wheelers where you don't want them. There really isn't a conflict with pedestrian traffic in this, as speed can be limited to a crawl and pedestrians will mostly encounter parked vehicles, not moving vehicles. Access points don't have to be continuous, so someone wanting to cheat would not encounter a continuous available path.

As for snow removal and cobblestones, there are time-proven solutions for that. Bring back the cobblestones!

- Paul

 

[steveintoronto]

[...] Bring back the cobblestones!

You're torturing me with nostalgia! The Queen-Roncy barns I remember clearly with those first gen work vehicles, and the cobblestone.

But your picture of the UK has me tormented! Trying to place that town centre (if indeed it is one). The statue in the background is telling, but I'd guess a market town in the south, but that segues to a very important point on cobblestones. I initially had horrendous thoughts on your previous post for cobblestones on a transit mall shared with bikes, until realizing it would be just the streetcar RoW. Where necessary for bike crossings, it could be paved sparingly, just enough for safety.

In the Somerset county seat of Taunton, where I spent time on and off revisiting the family (settled back in the UK, ex-London, swore they'd never return there) and work sojourns over the decades (I retain an EU passport) I couldn't help but wonder why the city centre not only had cobblestones for the limited vehicle traffic, but also had it for the cycleway! Took me a while to realize: to slow down cyclists too! There's a cohort of especially fit cyclists in the UK, and many more who use it as their prime form of transportation (that's not due to limited finances, it's due to re-establishing historical patterns, and the cycling infrastructure that supports it) and given the chance, many do speed through city centres.

Whether I agree with doing same on a King Transit mall is an open question, the point is that the string on 'cobblestones or not' is an excellent one. I definitely agree with cobblestones for the track RoW though. It will *deter* other use without blocking crossing it.

And btw: Where is that a pic of that you posted?

 

[crs1026]

Picture is High Street, Elgin, Scotland. Taken en route to our "CPR Tour" of the Moray - Forres (Home of Donald Smith), Dufftown (Home of George Stephen) and of course the town of Craigellachie. Excellent tastings en route and a great area to cycle.

There are solutions to the bike vs cobblestone issue - this shot from Trondheim Norway. I will digress long enough to point out that Norway has a solution to bikes and hills, too.

- Paul

 

[steveintoronto]

There are solutions to the bike vs cobblestone issue - this shot from Trondheim Norway. I will digress long enough to point out that Norway has a solution to bikes and hills, too.

Many thanks! We are digressing from the string premise, suffice to link Norwegian ingenuity:
http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/04/bike-elevator-take-you-steep-hills/8774/
http://www.citymetric.com/transport/norway-contains-worlds-only-bike-escalator-and-it-excellent-555

And Youtube vids:

On the 'smooth' bike paths over cobblestone, that's all that's needed to satisfy all *practical* needs for cyclists, and since pedestrians will be sharing space adjacent, it keeps cyclists in a predictable lane. The only observation for now to add that the surface be 'gritty' like they use in the UK for added traction.

http://www.sustrans.org.uk/sites/de...-pdfs/Technical Note 8 - Path surfaces(1).pdf

 

[gweed123]

Here's my alternative configuration for a transit mall along King St. This drawing is configured for a 20m ROW, but it can be expanded to a 23m ROW by increasing the amount of sidewalk space on either side.

The main advantage to this configuration is that the pedestrian and cyclist traffic is physically separated. In most transit mall configurations I've seen, the bike lane is right next to the sidewalk, which greatly increases the potential for cyclist-pedestrian collisions. It also means that whenever a streetcar lets passengers off, the cyclists have to stop and wait. With the bike lanes in the middle of the road, that isn't an issue. Cyclists can access the sidewalk at any cross street, just as a pedestrian would if they wanted to get from one side of the road to the other. Also, the centre bike lanes are wide enough together to be the width of a general traffic lane, allowing the middle to be used for emergency vehicles without disrupting transit operations.

With this configuration, the streetcars pull right up to the edge of the sidewalk, which makes it easier for wheelchair/stroller access. The bike racks on the edge of the sidewalk serve a dual purpose. They have their intended use as a bike rack, but also double as a visual and semi-physical barrier between the sidewalk and the street. They effectively become a fence if placed at the appropriate intervals.

I realize that this configuration wouldn't be appropriate for the pilot project, since it involves removing and replacing the streetcar tracks. I do however think that if King St is permanently turned into a transit mall, that this configuration should be examined.

Thoughts?

 

[crs1026]

Interesting idea. I'm not opposed to curb placement for streetcars. It's novel for Toronto, although quite common lots of other places. The little things I spotted are

• Not ideal for parking emergency vehicles - for police and ambulance matters, it leaves the vehicle further from the sidewalk, which might impede their work. Fire trucks take up the whole street anyways, so a fire call means a total blockage. But it's desirable to have transit able to get past stopped emergency vehicles when possible.
• Those poles for the trolley wires are potential collision obstacles for cyclists....is that a raised curb that they sit on? I would sacrifice the pretty streetlights for a combination light/trolley wire pole mounted on the sidewalk, as that's a safer place for the poles - especially if the bike racks create a natural divider.
• Trees will have to be pruned more to keep them from contacting the trolley wires....less of an issue if the tracks are in the center.

I wonder how comfortable cyclists would feel out there. Through riders would probably be happy, but it would be a challenge to discourage stopping riders from cutting across the tracks mid-block if that's their end destination.

- Paul