GraphicMatt
Looking forward to a FRESH START for Toronto
That's true. And also the time I spend drawing up tactics to win the War on Cars that grips our city.
|
|
|
The Star: Jarvis St. must change with evolving environs
- Thread starter khris
- Start date
TKTKTK
Senior Member
Oh, that war doesn't need tactics. Cars will win
This is Toronto. The death of the car would require: a) efficient public transit all over the city b) the widespread adoption of cycling c) some sort of cataclysm that returns us to being a small agrarian village.a) & b) will never happen (the former because, well, it just won't, and the latter because of a combination of weather and scale) and with c) we'll be too busy trying to grow crops and survive the winter that we won't have much time to think about what we're missing (well, other than the bulk of our friends and loved ones).
Archivist
Senior Member
I wish I'd known, I would have made an effort to go by with my "Turn Jarvis into a Pedestrian Street" t-shirt.
confusion
Active Member
I biked through the winter for the first time this past year and it wasn't that bad at all.
Even Toronto in one of its wettest winters the streets were dry more than they are now in the spring. Toronto hardly gets any snow compared to the rest of Ontario so this city is ideal. I armed myself with a warm waterproof jacket and I found most days I got warm enough to unzip my coat to prevent getting hot, even when it was -15 outside. Once you are prepared for riding in the winter it is no different than the nicer months. The only thing I don't like about winter cycling here is the seasonal hours of sunlight. I get very nervous riding in full lanes in the dark squished between badly plowed snowbanks and cars driving too fast.
But... I think it's more of a psychological barrier not biking in the winter in Toronto.
GraphicMatt
Looking forward to a FRESH START for Toronto
Oh, that war doesn't need tactics. Cars will win
a) & b) will never happen (the former because, well, it just won't, and the latter because of a combination of weather and scale) and with c) we'll be too busy trying to grow crops and survive the winter that we won't have much time to think about what we're missing (well, other than the bulk of our friends and loved ones).
I don't think there really IS a "war on cars" - we will always need some cars and some roads. But certainly it's a worthy goal to reduce the number of cars on the roads, promote public transit use (use needs to come before expansion, unfortunately) and emphasize walking as a good way to get around the downtown core.
Most every municipality in the world, large to small, is trying to increase their modal split. It's about balance.
These protestors are ridiculous because a) It's not like Rosedale to Downtown is a particularly difficult trip to make via transit, and b) There's an uncomfortable class-war subtext to it.
TKTKTK
Senior Member
I dunno, I just don't see buses being that popular in those neighbourhoods.
It's not just Rosedale, there's a slew of neighbourhoods north of Bloor along that corridor
Fighting to make Jarvis a pedestrian street is silly (surprise!) why not fight to make Church a pedestrian street? That'd be awesome and realistic!
Last edited:
TKTKTK
Senior Member
I've done it before. I used to bike to work in the winter when I was a teenager. I used to take buses then too. I refuse to ever do it again. It sucks. The only enjoyment I ever got from it was a smug sense of self-satisfaction for braving all that suck, and not actually dying.
Never again!
adma
Superstar
I dunno, I just don't see buses being that popular in those neighbourhoods.
Though the Rosedale bus is actually quite frequent and dependable--and not just for commuting nannies, either. (I've seen the likes of Allan Gottlieb using it.)
Chuck
Senior Member
This is a classic case of Toronto mediocrity. Yonge and Church are already heavily used pedestrian and bike corridors just itching to be enhanced. Narrow those to two car lanes each, and a thriving street scape could be created. Instead, those streets will continue to be neglected, while at the same time one of the few transportation corridors that actually can move a large volume of cars will no longer be able to do so, and probably won't become an important pedestrian or bike corridor anyway.
Our first goal should be to improve the street scape on streets that are currently heavily used by pedestrians and cyclists. This would create an instant success and benefit many more people. For the time being, Jarvis' sidewalks are already quite generous compared to many other downtown streets, and the priority there should be cleaning up the neighbourhood. Quite frankly, cars are the least of Jarvis' concerns today.
Our first goal should be to improve the street scape on streets that are currently heavily used by pedestrians and cyclists. This would create an instant success and benefit many more people. For the time being, Jarvis' sidewalks are already quite generous compared to many other downtown streets, and the priority there should be cleaning up the neighbourhood. Quite frankly, cars are the least of Jarvis' concerns today.
urbanboom
Active Member
No, the classic case of Toronto mediocrity is actually the fact that people feel the need to pedestrianize only one road. Do them both!
Archivist
Senior Member
Jarvis is, architecturally, one of the best streets in the city. The only "mediocrity" here is that the issue has become so contentious - cleaning up a heavily populated corridor and making it pleasant for pedestrians and cyclists is the right thing to do.
I remain suspicious of pedestrian streets. I actually prefer streets that have cars, just cars moving in an environment that seems safe and reasonable within the city. Church Street is lively, and if it has problems it is more to do with the physical constriction of the commercial core of the street, which limits its growth and makes rents too high. I have no desire to have Church as a pedestrian street, the cars there move in the way that cars should move in a densely populated city - slowly and carefully.
Jarvis is a traffic funnel.
But we're arguing for nothing - no one will convince TKTKTK, who will be still be driving presumably when gas is $5 a litre. And my own eyes and considerable experience crossing and walking Jarvis tells me that the fifth lane is bad for the city, bad for business, bad for everyone.
I remain suspicious of pedestrian streets. I actually prefer streets that have cars, just cars moving in an environment that seems safe and reasonable within the city. Church Street is lively, and if it has problems it is more to do with the physical constriction of the commercial core of the street, which limits its growth and makes rents too high. I have no desire to have Church as a pedestrian street, the cars there move in the way that cars should move in a densely populated city - slowly and carefully.
Jarvis is a traffic funnel.
But we're arguing for nothing - no one will convince TKTKTK, who will be still be driving presumably when gas is $5 a litre. And my own eyes and considerable experience crossing and walking Jarvis tells me that the fifth lane is bad for the city, bad for business, bad for everyone.
TKTKTK
Senior Member
No, it really isn't. It's a street that has architectural merit (in spots, like all streets) but it really isn't one of the best.
Front, King, Queen, etc. etc. clobber it. I suppose that's easily forgotten.
We only really brought up pedestrianizing Church because you suggested pedestrianizing Jarvis:
Since you don't mean pedestrianize in the same way (it sounds like you just want pedestrians to be considered) you should change your slogan?
Gas? I'll still be driving when its all Hydrogen or Electric or whatever it ends up, far, faaaaarrrr into the future with everyone else.
Last edited:
Archivist
Senior Member
Gee, if you were writing circa 1965, you'd be certain you'd be flying to work in your little podcar, too! Yay!
rdaner
Senior Member
Manipulation
The drawings in the Globe today are misleading in the before and after sketches; the after sketch looks like there are only 2 lanes being proposed which is the impression many people who don't bother to read the text will come to.
The drawings in the Globe today are misleading in the before and after sketches; the after sketch looks like there are only 2 lanes being proposed which is the impression many people who don't bother to read the text will come to.