Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong lives in nice, quiet inner suburb of Toronto (not unlike the one pictured above). Note the lack of sidewalks. Note the lack of pedestrians. If you lived there you would likely drive to every place you needed to go. If you drove downtown you'd probably also see a stark difference between your quiet neighbourhood and the hustle and bustle of downtown. On downtown Toronto streets such as Jarvis and Dundas it's not as easy to drive what with all the pedestrians and cyclists. Compare that quiet suburb with the busyness of the pedestrian scramble at Yonge and Dundas:
If you lived in a quiet suburban house where everything was only reachable by car, perhaps you too would assume that all streets are built for cars and then reach the conclusion that downtown streets must also be changed to ensure that pedestrians and cyclists stay out of the way of your private automobile as much as possible. So perhaps it's not entirely surprising that Minnan-Wong sees pedestrian scrambles as a "problem" to be solved, or that cyclists need to be funneled onto certain streets so that other streets can be kept clear for drivers:
“Traffic along here is a real challenge. I’m not saying the scramble intersection is the complete problem,” Minnan-Wong says as he walked along Dundas St. on Thursday “Just a moment ago there was Pepsi truck making a drop off, when that happens, you turn a two-lane road into a one-lane. Then you double the time to clear the intersection and it really starts to add up.”
Minnan-Wong, in his role as Chair of the Public Works and Infrastructure Committee, has declared battle against congestion. He's directed City staff to do a "comprehensive" study of downtown traffic, the Downtown Transportation Operations Study
, to come up with quick ways to reduce congestion within the scope of the current road network. The study, which was born out of the Bikeway Network 2011 update which called for a pilot separated bike lane on Richmond, has since then suffered some scope creep. Not only has it expanded beyond its original northern boundary of Queen to include the pedestrian scramble at Yonge and Dundas, but it has also meant to come up with an inventory of quick ideas of reducing congestion in the whole downtown south of Queen. The pedestrian scramble, installed only a few years ago had already been recently studied and compared to the pedestrian scrambles in Calgary. That study was clear that there was a trade off between improving movement and safety for pedestrians with improving movement for drivers. Yes, a pedestrian scramble will make drivers slower but is that such a bad thing?
Funnily in the terms of reference of the Downtown Transportation Operations Study, City Staff has put all road users on equal footing, quite unlike what Minnan-Wong's comments are suggesting:
The primary focus is to identify opportunities that will initially improve traffic operations in downtown Toronto as quickly and as efficiently as possible. Initiatives that are low-cost, can be readily implemented, do not require extensive planning or design, do not require acquisition of private property, and can be supported by all road users will be given the highest priority. In addition, the study will also identify and review broader-scale changes that are likely to influence downtown traffic operations within the next ten-year period and identify opportunities for other medium and long term priorities.
The study terms sound reasonable, balancing the needs of all road users - pedestrians, public transit users, cyclists and drivers, noting that the Official Plan "clearly emphasizes a multi-modal approach with emphasis on transit and active modes and establishes the practical limitations of providing any substantive new road infrastructure capacity into the core".
My colleagues in the active transportation network aren't optimistic that the results of the study will be promising. First, it's unclear if making some quick tweaks will actually reduce car congestion; second, some of these tweaks may mean that cars are able to go faster - but faster cars result in greater danger for pedestrians and cyclists; third, road pricing seems to be off the table even though it has the greatest promise; and finally the politicians in power will likely cherry pick recommendations from the study to suit their focus on prioritizing car drivers.
It's pretty common knowledge that the city is full of cars; that there really isn't any room for more roads; and that new roads inevitably get congested rather than relieving it. The Mayor and his executive committee, however, seem not to understand the idea of induced demand, in that the easier we make it for private automobiles the more that extra space is just taken up with latent demand - people who otherwise would have avoided a trip because of the difficulty of traveling. There isn't money to build any new freeways into downtown nor money or space to build all the parking required. That won't stop some politicians from thinking that ideas like "synchronizing lights" as if the seconds saved will make a big difference for drivers. The worry is that the safety and convenience of people will get sacrificed again for the greediest transportation mode. And for nothing, since nothing short of making it harder for cars to drive on streets has ever "solved" the problem of car congestion without killing the patient in the process.
So does Minnan-Wong want a lively, safe city where cyclists and pedestrians feel comfortable? Or does he want to recreate his own quiet, tired neighbourhood across the city?
Comments
W. K. Lis
The suburban road layout is a
Wed, 09/21/2011 - 13:22The suburban road layout is a maze. One may have to go first in the opposite direction away from the intended direction and travel in a half circle. It maybe advertised as "pedestrian friendly", but one cannot use it as a pedestrian.
Clay the Suburban (not verified)
You don't plan cities by
Thu, 09/22/2011 - 14:08You don't plan cities by watching car commercials. Minnan-Wong etc. always overlook that car traffic congestion is worse in the suburbs than downtown . There are more car crashes here in the suburbs. The DVP congestion is worse at the north end, There are more pedestian injuries and fatalities at suburban intersections. And yes. it sucks riding a bike or taking transit up here too. Percapita bike crashes are worse too. The suburbs only offers lessons in how not to handle all forms of traffic. Minnan-Wong trouble is he just wrong, urban or suburban. Car commercials are only the place car traffic works well.
fabien (not verified)
A car-only house such as the
Sat, 09/24/2011 - 16:01A car-only house such as the one pictured should have to pay an environmental tax. The proceeds of this tax would be used to develop bike, pedestrian and public transportation infrastructure. There is no need to chastize people for living in far-away suburbs, just make them pay. That goes for the councillor too.
Silvio (not verified)
Far away suburbs? really?
Sat, 09/24/2011 - 22:32Far away suburbs? really? That is an idiotic idea. We are are taxed up the wazzoo and don't need any new taxes just because I make enough to live north of Bloor. I already pay enough enviro taxes that only go towards Mcguinty's pension and perqs . I pay 100 times the property tax of any dreadlocked bike courier who lives in a downtown flophouse so how about a bike license fee of $100 per year to pay for the services used by bike whiners? Asphalt ain't free .
fabien (not verified)
Silvio, well this is
Sun, 09/25/2011 - 09:48Silvio, well this is akward..have a look at what a house goes for in Cabbagetown or Riverdale and see how downtown residents get around and you will probably come to the humbling conclusion that a good number of riders are considerably wealthier than you! Equating cyclists with people unable to afford better transportation is ignorant at best. So rhe whole tax discussion is moot. The fact is these suburbs have costly infrastructure and low density and the other taxpayers are footing the bill. Quite simply silvio, you are NOT paying your fair share of the tax burden. You chose to live far and offload the cost of that decision to other tax payers. I will continue to ride and live downtown and you should pay more for choosing an infrastructure-taxing lifestyle This is not personal, simple economics and a matter of equitable taxation.
A.R. (not verified)
It's clear that some people
Mon, 09/26/2011 - 15:20It's clear that some people like Silvio don't even know their own city, and just assume it's like some dumpy American city where bikes and downtown is for poor people. How pathetic. People who don't know their own city should learn about it before they engage in discussions.
Not much learning can happen in the driver's seat of a car when you have to devote your concentratration to not damaging the vehicles or landscape around you with your several-thousand pound hunk of metal, rubber, and glass. A driver might also not think about the wear his vehicle causes to the roads versus a thirty pound human-powered vehicle while on the road and later assume that both vehicles should pay similar fees in spite of their completely different impact. They can say "asphalt isn't free" but require roads to be built upwards of 10 x wider to accomodate cars. It's rhetoric that tries to trap cyclists into an image of freeloaders or some irresponsible group, but it's not going to work.
Downtown is fantastic once you forget about cars, and infrastructure like scramble crossings can make getting around a pleasure. We need to get these reactionaries who don't want any improvements in favour of getting around in ways other than driving out of office; they're not going to do the historic city of Toronto any good.
Gerry Visits (not verified)
The suburbs of Toronto are
Wed, 09/28/2011 - 08:57The suburbs of Toronto are horrible. They are designed only for cars and nothing else. Every year I come to one to visit family and I cannot wait to leave.
These suburbs became the fashion from the Fifties on when everybody began worshipping cars as if they were religious icons. The first people to move into them are now frail and old (often before their time) and not even able to drive a car anymore, but they have nowhere to walk safely with their Zimmer frames or their electric scooters, so they have to move.
The suburbs continue to be sold to people as the North American dream. To me, it has always been a nightmare. The homeowners only grow lawns and trees, and rarely when you walk in these places is there a single garden worth stopping to look at. Never have I seen anybody using their garden to grow vegetables.
Of course, the people who are newest to come to North America think the suburbs are wonderful. The honeymoon soon fades, and all they care about are their property values. Because of the Property Bubble in Canada, they are in no hurry to leave the suburbs even if they don't like them.
Riding a bicycle in Toronto's suburban areas is dangerous because of the busy grid roads. As a cyclist visiting from Europe, I fhink overall this city is backward in cycling provision. I know because of the annual snowfall, that year round cycling is not an option for most people, but for the rest of the year, why are they all fouling the air and clogging up the roads in their air-conditioned killing-machines except because Toronto's PLANNERS have over the years made it so?
If Toronto is the best of North America, then I really don't know why the rest of the world have thrown away their cultural histories to try to become like this.
Luke (not verified)
Here's what so maddening
Wed, 09/28/2011 - 21:50Here's what so maddening about Ford's acolytes' views on transportation: any other traffic aside from automotive is excluded from their definition of a solution. It's so utterly self defeating. They reject alternatives for more of the same which only begets more of the same: more congestion, gridlock and smog.
When I encounter phrases such as "streets…kept clear for drivers", albeit from Herb but accurately summing up our Mayor's current philosophy of efficient traffic, I wonder that more don't apprehend its contradiction. That is, it's the motorways that exclude all but cars that are regularly clogged by the worst traffic jams. Think Gardiner, DVP, 401 and half the arterials in Vaughn.
That comes of subsidizing a mode of travel that's inherently inefficient. And what else? Opinions such as commenter Silvio who simply hasn't a clue about who is a freeloader and who isn't.
Silvio educate yourself as to the economics of roads, parking and automobility's externalities; it certainly will help others to take your posts seriously.
Random cyclist (not verified)
Maybe Ford should reinstate
Thu, 09/29/2011 - 00:31Maybe Ford should reinstate the $60 a year Vehicle Registgration Tax Grab that Miller started. And this time it should apply to anyone DRIVING into Toronoto from Mississaauga or etc outside the city.
After all, bicycles don't make potholes or cracks in the pavement, do they?!?
Luke (not verified)
To my mind the fairest and
Thu, 09/29/2011 - 03:25To my mind the fairest and most transparent policy is a core congestion surcharge and/or road tolls. While the registration fee hits all drivers equally, no matter how much they drive, the others are usage based and assign the greater expense to those availing themselves most of a public resource. The revenue derived should definitely be directed toward transport initiatives rather than the usual political slush funds.
There must be a clear path between behavior and its costs and consequences; that's what's lacking now. Drivers don't seem to fathom that insurance premiums, registration charges, gas taxes, indeed all the car related overhead, essentially contribute nothing toward the funding of Toronto's local streets. And that's the ones where you'll find cyclists--you know, all those dreadlocked freeloaders.
But to answer Herb's original question: it seems the kind of city Councillor Minnan-Wong and his ilk want is one where drivers can speed through with the least possible delay, and where the cost of achieving such is borne by the wider community.
Sounds like he wants Buffalo.
W. K. Lis
Too bad the Toronto Parking
Mon, 10/03/2011 - 17:38Too bad the Toronto Parking Authority wasn't put on the auction block. Whatever buyer might have raised the parking rates to get back the purchase price. In turn, force people to look at alternatives.
Maybe the TPA will increase the rates in the meantime. Help with Ford's supposed deficit. If fact, why is there still free parking in shopping centres, offices, or visitor parking at condos and apartments. The city should tax the parking spaces, again help the supposed deficit. If there was no more free parking in the suburbs, maybe we will turn our attention to walking, bicycles, and public transit more.
Tax the parking spaces to get revenue for Toronto, and the 905 as well.
Random cyclist (not verified)
This area isn't really all
Tue, 10/11/2011 - 18:16This area isn't really all that bad by Toronto standards. Lack of sidewalks isn't really an issue on minor roads in the suburbs, and in my view cycling is often safer in the suburbs as long as you stick to minor roads and avoid cycling on arterials. Biking in downtown Toronto can be ridiculously dangerous due to heavy traffic and poorly designed bike lanes. Also this house is near bus routes 24, 54 and 91 and is within reasonable walking distance of a shopping plaza and No Frills grocery store.
Random cyclist (not verified)
I really like your this plan
Thu, 10/13/2011 - 20:34I really like your this plan and I think people should take your advice. Many countries are suffering from this problem. I must say that we should improve in it and we have to do something for this problem. You have really very nice plan and you should do the work on this plan.