valkoholic
Active Member
No, it would be building a better public realm. You're referring to the failed attempt to remove lanes and build a moving-sidewalk.
|
|
|
The Star: Jarvis St. must change with evolving environs
- Thread starter khris
- Start date
No, it would be building a better public realm. You're referring to the failed attempt to remove lanes and build a moving-sidewalk.
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
A very confusing Jarvis Street today
Click on the thumbnail to enlarge, then click again on the image for full size.
Click on the thumbnail to enlarge, then click again on the image for full size.
Junction416
New Member
Just counting people who walk to commute is a flawed approach. When you think about it measuring commuters is measuring the labour force, which is only about 60% of Toronto's population. You don't count all the seniors who walk to the drugstore or all the students to school. Plus drivers get out of there cars and drive and residents buy groceries and go to bars, walk to bus stops etc..., so improving the pedestrian realm benefits all these people. I'm positive that if you count the total number of trips made along Jarvis a huge portion of them are made by foot. Its time we stopped pandering to commuters and started reclaiming the streets for those who live on them and use them, not those who want to pass through as quickly as possible.
kettal
Banned
Tell that to valcoholic, who thinks only 1% of the population uses bikes.
DSCToronto
Superstar
Member Bio
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2008
- Messages
- 22,401
- Reaction score
- 37,090
- Location
- St Lawrence Market Area
I assume this is for the final lane painting and scraping off of old lane markings.
JARVIS STREET – TORONTO AND EAST YORK DISTRICT
MOUNT PLEASANT ROAD to QUEEN STREET EAST. Jarvis Street will be closed from Queen Street East to Gerrard Street East from 7:00
A.M. to 7:00 P.M. Jarvis Street will be closed from Gerrard Street East to Wellesley Street East from 11:00 A.M. to 3:00 P.M. Jarvis Street will
be closed from Wellesley Street East to Mount Pleasant Road from 3:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M.
START DATE: Saturday July 24th, 2010
COMPLETION DATE: Sunday July 25th, 2010
HOURS of WORK: 7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M.
TRAFFIC IMPACT: SEVERE
JARVIS STREET – TORONTO AND EAST YORK DISTRICT
MOUNT PLEASANT ROAD to QUEEN STREET EAST. Jarvis Street will be closed from Queen Street East to Gerrard Street East from 7:00
A.M. to 7:00 P.M. Jarvis Street will be closed from Gerrard Street East to Wellesley Street East from 11:00 A.M. to 3:00 P.M. Jarvis Street will
be closed from Wellesley Street East to Mount Pleasant Road from 3:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M.
START DATE: Saturday July 24th, 2010
COMPLETION DATE: Sunday July 25th, 2010
HOURS of WORK: 7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M.
TRAFFIC IMPACT: SEVERE
Tewder
Senior Member
I'm not sure I understand your logic. Are you counting the number of trips along Jarvis as a whole, i.e. road and street?. If so and you are counting trips along Jarvis to justify the 'reclaiming of streets' you'd lose your argument as most are overwhelmingly by car. If you're only considering the 'sidewalks' of Jarvis then pedestrian trips are 100% already (in theory at least) but would only remain 100% no matter how much sidewalk you add so there is no advantage, and little evidence to suggest that decreasing the road space to increase pedestrian space would draw more pedestrians: Yonge Street or Queen Street have very narrow sidewalks but far more pedestrians than Jarvis or University for example.
I'm all for reclaiming urban spaces for the pedestrian but we have to do it in ways that will accommodate commuters too. They are not the enemy. In this day and age must of us are both commuters and pedestrians, often within the same trip, and are intimately tied to both perspectives. Why would we seek to make enemies of ourselves, or any one part of ourselves? So we come back again, as is so often the case with polarized and political wedge issues, to a knee-jerk reliance on a simplistic solution that is to make an enemy of cars/commuters/roads rather than adequately assessing the needs of people to get around.
At heart though I'm with you in that the answer is not to keep building more roads but to keep expanding mass transit such that someday, and someday soon hopefully, the number of trips along Jarvis may in fact truly tip in favour of pedestrians... at which point it would make sense to rethink the street/road divide of the public realm. In the meantime punishing commuters or those who travel by car seems like a band-aid solution to make us feel better even as the open wound beneath continues to rot and spread.
Again, the car is not the enemy; our lack of commitment to transit funding is.
Junction416
New Member
I'm not arguing for the punishment commuters or that improving the street will necessarily attract more pedestrians. Rather I'm arguing that we need to stop punishing pedestrians. While improving the public realm does not necessarily attract more pedestrians it makes it a safer and more pleasant place to walk for those who already use it, therefore improving those things that are the most difficult to measure like quality of life and sense of community, perceptions of safety.
The problem with streets and improving them is the easiest indicator we have is for cars, measured in total commute time and Level of Service (LoS), yet we have no consistent comparable indicators for bikers and pedestrians or even the economic benefits to the street and neighbourhood that can be incurred. The result is that historically we have seen a degradation of the pedestrian realm and storefront businesses because we have made investing improving commute times and making room for parking the end all of our transportation policy at the expense of maintaing a quality pedestrian realm, the benefits of which are difficult to measure and point to at election time.
We need to rebalance this and I think that Jarvis Plan does this. It does not significantly increase the commute time but I believe it will significantly improve the experience of walking along the street. Why shouldn't residents of Canada's densest neighbourhood benefit from wider sidewalks a great public realm?
But I also concede that I overestimated the number of trips pedestrian makes in relation to cars. Looking at 2005 pedestrian and traffic counts, during the am rush about 16% of trips through the intersection of Jarvis and Dundas where by pedestrians (619 of 3956) and at off-peak hours about 20 percent of trips were made by pedestrians (601 out of 3072) (source: http://www.toronto.ca/involved/projects/jarvis/pdf/ea-2010-01-28/appendix_e.pdf). Not half but still significant.
Last edited:
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
The last work done on Jarvis Street was Wednesday night, nothing Thursday, Friday or today due to the rain (or forecast of same) so we're looking at a bit of a delay here. The bike lanes were marked out Wednesday night, this is how it still looks today south of Wellesley St. (photo from Thursday afternoon)
Click on the thumbnail to enlarge, then click again on the image for full size.
Tewder
Senior Member
I agree with the ends but not necessarily the means. We have to get more cars off the road. If we take away road space without giving adequate alternatives we will just create further gridlock which means further idling and emissions etc which certainly wont make for an improved public realm or a more pleasant environment in which to walk. In fact it may create further trouble for smaller side streets which are relatively more pleasant to stroll in now.
That said, I think your approach is perfect for thoroughfares that are already narrow and unfriendly to traffic such as Bloor or Yonge. The improvements along Bloor are a good template.
Well again, it's sort of chicken or the egg: a greater accommodation of parking and the car etc has come in tandem with a decline in funding and expansion of mass transit. I would expect the opposite to be true then, that ongoing investment and expansion of public transit would diminish a reliance on the car. I truly think this is the place to start, and now! It kind of comes back to a point I've made here earlier that advocating for bike lanes and wider sidewalks etc is great but distracts somewhat from the larger discourse on transit that needs to be the focus. All these groups need to coalesce to make their voice heard and make this happen if we hope to see a change of policy of this magnitude any time soon, imo.
jmacmillan
Active Member
I've cycled up and down the street several times over the past couple of days. The only congestion I noticed was due to a stalled car near the ramp to the Gardiner, which resulted in a backup south of King Street. On the whole, it's been rather uneventful.
Last edited:
GraphicMatt
Looking forward to a FRESH START for Toronto
But the removal of the reversible lane was supposed to result in mass GRIDLOCK and extra pollution and general chaos. How do we explain this?
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
With the reversible lane gone Jarvis Street has not been gridlocked at all, it's appears to be business as usual though it's probably safe to say that traffic is a little lighter than normal with people taking vacation in the summer. Disappointingly it's still a speedway, traffic hasn't been calmed to any noticeable degree.
valkoholic
Active Member
Wow. Are you always on?
Juan_Lennon416
Senior Member
I do not mind bike lanes on Jarvis Street as long as people use them! I hate when there is a bike lane along a street (i.e. Sherbourne Street) and cyclists continue to ride on the sidewalk, in the traffic lane(s) or in the middle of the street.
DSCToronto
Superstar
Member Bio
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2008
- Messages
- 22,401
- Reaction score
- 37,090
- Location
- St Lawrence Market Area
The paving on Sherbourne is ghastly and I for one seldom cycle on it for that reason. The City is planning to resurface it in 2011 and 2012 so it may then get more cycling usage.
Last edited: