Today Sat Sun
It is forcast to be Chance of Rain at 11:00 PM EDT on May 24, 2013
Chance of Rain
11°/5°
It is forcast to be Clear at 11:00 PM EDT on May 25, 2013
Clear
13°/5°
It is forcast to be Clear at 11:00 PM EDT on May 26, 2013
Clear
14°/6°

23 Comments

news

Roncy Redesign Review

20090324ronceystreetshot1.jpg
Photo by Metrix X from the Torontoist Flickr Pool.


If you’re ever having one of those blah days, the kind where your life seems decidedly lacking in excitement and you find yourself in need of an emotional jolt, might we suggest that you attend a community meeting as an antidote? Perhaps one devoted to an ambitious redesign of your neighbourhood? The depth and breadth of passion, indignation, frustration, hope, and fear on display will perk you right up.
On Monday night more than a hundred Roncesvalles area residents met in the gym of Howard Public School, to be updated on plans for the renewal of their main drag. The reaction to the city’s design proposal, as explained by Councillor Gord Perks, Scott Mitchell of Transportation Services, and various other city staffers was—how do we put this?—fractious. There were questions and challenges and qualms galore, and more than a few nasty accusations were bandied about as well. We, ever eager to catch a riveting bit of community political theatre, and ever interested in our changing streetscapes, were there to catch the latest installment of this ongoing saga.


This week’s meeting was held as part of the environmental assessment of the Roncesvalles renewal project, and as such was focused on the major infrastructure developments that are planned. Fine-grained details (the choice and placement of tree planters, lamppost design, etc.), though big factors in how the avenue will ultimately look and feel, weren’t up for discussion. The plan which city staffers are recommending includes two major changes for Roncesvalles: curb bump-outs and transit-loading platforms. They also considered recommending the introduction of cycling lanes but decided that this would require removing too many parking spaces, and have therefore called for a wider main travelling lane (4.3 metres) instead, one that can more easily accommodate cyclists.

20090324roncydesign.jpg
A sketch of the design proposal, courtesy of the City of Toronto.


So what are these new bits of infrastructure? Bump-outs are widened portions of the sidewalk, ones which jut out into what would otherwise be part of the roadway. On Roncesvalles these are planned for many corners, and will both increase the space available to pedestrians and shorten the distance from curb to curb as you cross the street. The transit-loading platforms are a new kind of infrastructure entirely, modelled on similar ones in Stockholm and Dresden but not widely used (yet) in North America. Located at TTC stops, they are extensions of the sidewalk out into the street for the full width of the parking lane, and thus will allow a streetcar to pull up right alongside: transit riders would no longer go out into the street to board the cars but step directly from the transit platforms onto the streetcars. Crucially, they will bring the affected portion of the streetcar route into compliance with provincial accessibility legislation, as those with mobility devices (wheelchairs, walkers, etc.) will be able to board transit vehicles easily.

20090324perks.jpg
Scott Mitchell (Transportation Services) and Gord Perks (Ward 14 councillor) explaining the design plan. Photo by Hamutal Dotan/Torontoist.

Residents at the meeting, though many expressed appreciation for the work that went into these plans, were for the most part singularly unimpressed. They were unhappy about the elimination of parking spaces (about twenty will be lost); concerned that the new transit-loading platforms are confusing (they will be shared by cyclists, who will ride over them with the help of sloped sides); worried about the flow of traffic (curb bump-outs mean you can’t pull over into the right/parking lane in advance of making a right turn); and displeased with the absence of three-dimensional models that would have made the design’s details clearer. Underlying all of these specific complaints was a more diffuse sense of resentment, one which could be attributable either to a resistance to change or to a sense that the plan was being imposed by the city against the neighhourhood’s will. (Which of these applies depends, of course, on whom you ask.)
We chatted with a group of residents after the meeting, all of whom agreed that Roncesvalles wasn’t actually in need of a redesign at all. This was a case, they said, of the city interfering to “Disnify” something which ought to be left alone. One called the design plan a “monstrous concoction that Gord has brewed up” and another described it as “an experiment for the TTC and an ego thing for Gord Perks.” (Both declined to give their names.) Perks, however, said that the band of naysayers was small, and pointed out that it was the local BIA which urged the renewal in the first place.
Whether this plan goes forward is now up to Council. The finalized design recommendation, incorporating feedback from the community, will be presented to the Public Works and Infrastructure Committee on May 5, and if approved will go to a meeting of the full council a few weeks later.

Comments

  • http://wesshepherdphotographers.com wesshepherd

    What a waste of resources! Roncesvalles works fine just as it is. When are the politicians and public servants (who seem to have forgotten the definition of “servant”) going to do what the people want, instead of telling the people what is best for them?

  • http://null Green Sulfur

    It sound like some people were involved while others have an axe to grind. It’s kind of obvious that there’s political motives at play when a person makes a personal attack on a politician but refuses to give their name. If I were writing this article, I would have just left out the attacks because anyone who won’t give their name can’t be credible in this context.

  • http://null Vincent Clement

    What exactly is wrong with Roncesvalles that requires such upheaval?

  • http://undefined Hamutal Dotan

    It’s an entirely reasonable worry that you’re raising. I included the comments not because I was particularly interested in the specific individuals making them (who may or may not have axes to grind: one’s owned commercial property on Roncesvalles for seven years, the other has been a homeowner in the neighbourhood for fifteen years) but because they struck me as representative of the sentiments in the room at large. Of the residents who came up to the mike to speak to the proposal, four out of five were moderately to severely critical of the design plan, and many challenged the city staffers and Perks directly with failing to listen to the community.

  • http://null Careygrrl

    Have you been down the washboard patchwork of asphalt that is Roncesvalles on a bike lately, or tried to get a stroller up onto the streetcar from the road, or come this close to being swiped by an impatient driver ignoring the stop signs as you’re stepping off the streetcar? These are pretty minor changes, or I should say improvements, which, as the article points out, are standard in other places. It’s not “upheaval” – it’s maintenance. Roncesvalles is a great area and this is going to make it better for everybody. People get so upset about change. Get over it.

  • http://null AR

    Roncesvalles, like virtually so many streets in Toronto, needs its overhead wires buried.

  • http://null dowlingm

    @AR – that can’t happen unless the new streetcars get in-ground power like Alstom APS or Bombardier PRIMOVE.
    The bumpouts will NOT allow people in mobility devices to fully access the current streetcar fleet – only new streetcars with low floor boarding would do that. The combo of bumpouts and low floor cars will mean no-barrier boarding like the subway.
    I have wondered about the feasibility of earlier compliance by adding a middle low floor section to the existing artic streetcars – with all-door boarding people with mobility issues could use the middle doors and fare checking would be done by inspectors. Unfortunately since that would not be a “100% low floor solution” Admiral Giambrone would never go for it, and it would only cover 50 cars anyway.

  • http://www.bikingtoronto.com bikingtoronto

    The local BIA, Roncesvalles Renewed (click for a nice rendering of how the “bump-outs” will look), is a driving force behind this, because they want a street more focused on the pedestrian and less focused on the autombile.
    The lack of bikelanes is fine… a street that makes things safer for pedestrians will benefit cyclists too.
    More about the Roncy plans regarding cycling.

  • http://undefined Hamutal Dotan

    Yes – the transit platforms are designed to work in tandem with new streetcars which the city will be getting, ones which have low floors and no stairs. (The design of those streetcars is still being finalized, so I can’t link to any specs as of yet.)

  • http://null Greensleeves

    There is no doubt that some modest beautification and maintenance is in order on Ronces. I would happily support that. The area has charm that might easily be even more inviting and interesting. But I see no substantive advantage to this move to add ‘bumpers’ to the road way.
    It’s easy to understand resistance to what looks like an ambitious-to-be-noticed politician’s vanity project which will have an identifiable negative impact on the people who live in the area and run businesses on Roncesvalles. It’s easy to see why normally passive, non vocal folks are ready to make noise. We are frustrated.
    While I appreciate the need to accommodate differently abled folk, these curb extensions will seriously ‘cripple’ the smooth function of the area and STILL not manage to improve access to the street car, since steps are still in the vehicle itself.
    Presumably we want a healthy local, walkable, accessible, commercial area, an added destination for those who are enjoying the boardwalk or High Park in summer, or our community driven success story, the recovery of The Revue Theatre (seriously bereft of parking availability as it is). There are wonderful restaurants that are blossoming and a trend to higher end boutique shops which are happily, an antidote to the dreaded ‘mall blight’. Do we want to drive away these businesses which add to the areas property values with their added quality of services? Surely it makes no sense to impair a large group to accommodate a small group, however righteous the cause. BOTH groups and their needs must be addressed.
    As a resident, I rarely use my car as Roncey is easy walking distance, but many do and I know that parking is an issue even now. When I do use my car it is generally to pick up larger items from our fabulous Pollocks hardware store or perhaps to pick up a DVD from the Film Buff or sushi from Vincent’s on the way home. It’s manageable at the moment without forcing me to park on the side streets. But that will change with the loss of parking on Roncey. Living in the first block from Roncey will become as busy as Saturdays every day. Residents, who have *paid* for street parking permits, already compete for spaces within their block without this added pressure. The issue will in turn affect property values for these residents.
    The loss of parking will discourage locals from using local business and trade as part of a ‘chore run’ en route to or from home. Roncesvalles will become a place to avoid if you are in a car.
    It’s already happened to St. Clair Ave. Lakeshore Av in the west end, New Toronto is struggling with the same issue confronting St. Clair. This is how you kill a healthy neighbourhood and shopping area… you drive them to the malls and end up swamped in trashy local stores with low overhead, just when we were starting to attract really more interesting vendors to the area.
    There is so much to be done in this city’s infrastructure: streets are distressed from poor and patchy repairs that leave perennial pot holes in spring. Parkside caved into a hole big enough to swallow a car a few years ago from water damage. We were lucky someone was not seriously injured. The long encrusted city water service pipes allow poorer water pressure than existed in 1910. (Dare I ask; are they still lead based pipes?) One of those antique pipes burst and gushed for the better part of 24 hours on south Indian Rd. creating a 4 ft deep flood that destroyed several cars and damaged residential property not long ago. Pipe bursts can also contribute to black outs (which have become more frequent lately). And yet we are paying more for water service. City trees, which have an enormous mitigating effect on both air pollution and temperature of houses in summer (reducing the need for energy for air conditioners) are dying from pollution and spotty arbor care, re-planting is bogged down in bureaucratic delay. Street lights remain dark for months without repair which become s a security concern. Break and enters are common and dark streets an easy target. Services for garbage now need an instruction manual and have become costly. Services decline and what services remain seem to now have an added price tag everywhere we turn. Through it all, the threats of more property tax hikes loom and the controversy about the fairness of the MPAC assessments is heating up to boot. Check with Cheri DiNovo.
    Residents, home owners, law abiding, civil and co-operative neighbours, people who love this area and this city are beginning to feel that we are in a hostile environment and under siege and worse, that we are not HEARD by City Hall.
    We are all under pressure from the recent financial debacle and WE have no one on whom to down load our added burden and there’s no more notches on the belt.
    Mr. Perks, if you are going to spend OUR tax money…you need to be very smart about it and listen to the local users!

  • http://null Ben

    Deal with it.

  • http://null Green Sulfur

    What a big, long crock. When you redo a street, you don’t plan for tomorrow, you plan for the next 10 or 20 years, at least. And in that neighbourhood, that means planning for low floor streetcars and the fact that only more people are going to be living in and around the Roncy neighbourhood. The fact is, keeping the existing parking won’t do it. You need to plan knowing that there frankly won’t be room for everyone in the neighbourhood to drive a car. And in recognition of that, there needs to be better access to public transit and a more welcoming streetscape for pedestrians.
    Now your claim about St. Clair is way off. This is comparing apples to oranges in every way. Plus, if St. Clair hadn’t been screwed up by the NIMBYs at Corso Italia BIA, the inconvenience of construction would long be over.
    It actually surprises me that the BIA is the one pushing for visionary local renewal while it’s a group of residents (albeit a small group) that can’t see the trees for the forest.
    My last point will be that so many times the NIMBYs are so caught up in opposing for the sake of opposing that they miss the good that is coming to their neighbourhood. Just look at the Wychwood Barns to see what good can come of putting NIMBYs in their place.

  • http://undefined AR

    “While I appreciate the need to accommodate differently abled folk, these curb extensions will seriously ‘cripple’ the smooth function of the area and STILL not manage to improve access to the street car, since steps are still in the vehicle itself.”
    Did you not hear that the new streetcars will not have steps? How would this cripple the area?
    “Presumably we want a healthy local, walkable, accessible, commercial area, an added destination for those who are enjoying the boardwalk or High Park in summer, or our community driven success story, the recovery of The Revue Theatre (seriously bereft of parking availability as it is). Do we want to drive away these businesses which add to the areas property values with their added quality of services? Surely it makes no sense to impair a large group to accommodate a small group, however righteous the cause. BOTH groups and their needs must be addressed.”
    Really? The Roncesvalles strip already has a huge number of people living within walking distance and in the apartments over the stores. Streetcars are frequent. With these two factors, why is parking such a big factor? Who is really the large group? The streetcar brings moves more people into the area and wastes no space on parking. This isn’t some suburban mall where everyone drives in.
    “As a resident, I rarely use my car as Roncey is easy walking distance, but many do and I know that parking is an issue even now. When I do use my car it is generally to pick up larger items from our fabulous Pollocks hardware store or perhaps to pick up a DVD from the Film Buff or sushi from Vincent’s on the way home.”
    You drive to pickup DVDs?! I thought you wanted a walkable community, yet it sounds like you don’t actually walk for most of your trips.
    On another note, regarding my comment on burying wires. So the streetcar wires will stay…it’ll still look better when the others on the side of the road are gone. The orange lighting, wooden poles and ugly street lights are the things which should be eliminated.

  • http://null mister j

    Obviously, you have given this a lot of thought. I don’t agree with much of what you say and I think many here have already countered your concerns. However, it seems to me you have a valid point about parking – not that I really like cars (don’t own one) but, quite simply, that people do drive. I understand you saying there won’t be anywhere to park when if you want to stop at a shop on the way home from work (not that you drive a block to pick up a DVD). I live in Forest Hill Village (I’m not rich!) and there’s a little parking lot on Spadina at Thelma Ave that works to solve the problem you identify. There are similar parking lots in all the other ‘walkable’ areas too, like Queen West, College/Grace, Kensington, etc.
    I also wanted to raise an objection to ‘NIMBYism.’ It is much better that people who actually live in an area and make use of it have a say in developments than those ‘big ideas’ that are ‘helicoptered’ in. It’s unfortunate that anyone who raises objections to developments where they live are dismissed as some ideological wingnut: a ‘NIMBY.’ There ought to be a pejorative acronym for those who have no interest in an area yet, from afar, insert simple one-liners that do nothing to invite dialogue.

  • http://null andrew

    Hey Greensleeves
    “It’s easy to understand resistance to what looks like an ambitious-to-be-noticed politician’s vanity project which will have an identifiable negative impact on the people who live in the area and run businesses on Roncesvalles.”
    Looking at the Roncesvalles BIA “Roncesvalles Renewed” page, it seems very clear that this initiative was begun at least as far back as 2003. The Councillor at the time was Sylvia Watson.
    The Roncesvalles Renewed website quite clearly attributes the initiative to the BIA, and ownership of this whole shebang to a broad coalition of partners. I doubt that they would appreciate all their effort and time being referred to as a ‘vanity project’.
    “Do we want to drive away these businesses which add to the areas property values with their added quality of services?”
    Given that the BIA is a driver in this initiative, I’d say it was probably assessed by BIA committee members at multiple times as to whether it would drive away business. Having had the opportunity to speak with the Chair of the BIA on several occasions about BIAs, streetscaping, and planning issues, I cannot imagine Tony Cauch ever putting his stamp on something he thought would potentially threaten business along Roncesvalles.
    “The loss of parking will discourage locals from using local business and trade as part of a ‘chore run’ en route to or from home.”
    From the Roncesvalles Renewed website:
    “While the BIA will seek to preserve parking where possible, the plain fact is that Roncesvalles will never be able to compete with other shopping areas on parking availability. But Roncesvalles can offer something that a mall never can: a pleasant and distinct experience for shoppers who walk, cycle or ride the streetcar.”
    Back to your points:
    “City trees, which have an enormous mitigating effect on both air pollution and temperature of houses in summer (reducing the need for energy for air conditioners) are dying from pollution and spotty arbor care, re-planting is bogged down in bureaucratic delay.”
    Item #1 on the Roncesvalles Renewed page is “A Living Sidewalk with Healthy Trees”, a plan to actually increase the longevity of trees along the boulevard, address stormwater/raw sewage overflows, and make it all prettier. Please review this and amend your comments.
    “Residents, home owners, law abiding, civil and co-operative neighbours, people who love this area and this city are beginning to feel that we are in a hostile environment and under siege and worse, that we are not HEARD by City Hall.”
    Excuse me, but this project is a combined project of the BIA, and three local residents groups [RMRA, HPRA, Sunnyside Community Association]. I think you’re ignoring a rather sizable selection of representatives from your community who have been working on this project. You have had ample opportunity to become involved in this project so as to address your concerns, and if you have been heard and aren’t getting your way and are upset about it, too bad.
    Lastly,
    “Surely it makes no sense to impair a large group to accommodate a small group, however righteous the cause. BOTH groups and their needs must be addressed.”
    Please look into StatsCan demographic projections for the aging of the population. Older people frequently need devices to assist with walking [especially if they are shopping], and have difficulty getting on and off streetcars. I won’t bother to address how mean-spirited your comment makes you sound.

  • http://undefined mikeyteeth

    The bumpouts look great. Definitely a plus for Ronceys.

  • http://null phlegmatic

    This is a very welcome addition. There is no need to drive down Roncesvalles. I live at howard park and roncesvalles and drive down parkside. To ride my bike down roncesvalles currently is a nightmare. The asphalt is mangled and it’s very dangerous with the narrow space beside parked cars and streetcars.
    Roncesvalles is a pedestrian community, I think this is a move to enhance that community, and I personally support it.

  • http://null Dudley Horscroft

    Canada has passed various Acts which require public transport to be “accessible”. This means that Toronto streetcars will either have to remain high floor, and have high level platforms in the streets, or become low floor, as the existing cars are replaced, with low level platforms in the streets. Whether the existing system works well or not, it MUST change, unless you can get the Disability Acts repealed.
    The “Easy Access Stop” as suggested for Roncevalles is cheapest and best of the alternatives. Melbourne has met the same problem, but is dealing with it. I recommend you read the following: http://www.patrec.org/atrf/papers/2005/Currie%20&%20Smith%20(2005).pdf, which discusses the problem and has photos of the alternatives of a “Super Stop”, “Kerb Bumpout” stop and an “Easy Access Stop”. Some photos of the new stops in Melbourne would have been useful for those attending the meeting.
    Re the use of the current streetcars, the articulated cars could have a low floor centre section added – this has been done elsewhere – the rigid cars could be lengthened by effectively hanging on a low floor section on the back of the existing car. Quite plausible, fairly cheap (cheaper than buying new), and would enable the 204 new cars to be bought to be used for the major extensions Toronto needs.

  • http://undefined Vincent Clement

    Except what they are proposing is much more than maintenance. It is more than replacing concrete sidewalk panels or repaving the road. It is, among other things, replacing tree planters with tree beds (and that means having to dig down deep enough to ensure there is enough soil for trees to grow and to ensure that tree beds are interconnected). But hey, it’s just “maintenance” right?

  • http://undefined Vincent Clement

    No need to drive down Roncesvalles? Then how would I get to Granowska’s when I come in from out of town? You do realize that plenty of people from outside of the neighbourhood have been coming Roncesvalles for decades to go to church, to go to St. Stanislaus – St. Casimir’s Polish Credit Union, to the deli’s and so on well before Roncesvalles became a trendy area?

  • http://undefined Missy

    My sentiments exactly. Thank you for your eloquent accurate summation of the Roncesvalles nightmare.
    And you are so right about Gord Perks.
    I did not know that he was Anti Car and Pro Cyclists until today. Seems to me, that he tried to grab everyone as voters so that he would win the elections and now he has to please everyone. I got on the phone with him today as I was livid over my experience on Ronces today with the bumped out sidewalks.
    Needless to say, I lost it with him while he was trying to sugar coat his plans like I was some sort of an idiot that never drove on our already grid locked streets.
    The day he door knocked to ask me to vote for him, he lied to me. I asked him who he supported for mayor. Seeing that I had a Rob Ford sign on my lawn and my strong positive opinion of him, Perks replied that he did not have anyone in mind at this time to support for mayor. After the elections, I read his site, (darn, I should have done it before) and there it was in plain site that Mr. Perks strongly supports Slitherman.
    Unless a person is a car driver, they will not understand the nasty grid lock that these platforms. bumped out sidewalks and streetcars will make. Going south on Ronces to make a right turn onto the Queensway will be a total nightmare. The traffic will be seriously backed up, as not only bcos of the streetcars, but also that is the same lane cars will use to make left turns. So now, there will be a traffic jam bcos of the damn bump outs. How stupid is that.
    I would like to see a report that someone got killed or run over while getting off a streetcar on Ronces. THERE IS NONE!
    I love the buses that they are using during construction. They are quick, they pull over and cars can pass.
    Going North on Ronces will also create grid locks. Not only bcos of cars lining up behind the streetcars, but the delivery truck that have no place to pull over until traffic passes & then back up to a parking space, IF they are lucky to find one now. Heck this whole thing is a mess that will revel itself when the streetcars are back on the road.
    Nostalgia has no business on our roads, it’s time to finally get rid of this outdated mode of transportation that is no longer suited to our over crowded roads.
    Gosh, I hope Rob Ford has the power to finally stop these politicians that take it upon themselves to spend our tax monies in such stupid ways for their own hidden agenda.
    And then raise our taxes to cover their mistakes.
    Mark my words……the store keepers will suffer. We may even loose them over the long run.
    I will never ever vote for this self serving ego maniac, with no business savvy again.
    And also bcos he lied to me over a simple question…..which makes me wonder what other major things he is lying about. And he lied to me again stating that the shop owners agreed to this mess. NO THEY DID NOT, ASK THEM AND THEY WILL TELL YOU THAT THIS WAS FORCED UPON THEM!
    Not only loss of 30 parking spaces (he told me today) but then there is that God-awful parking between the bump outs. I hate Bloor West Village bcos of that and now it is being jammed down our throats by men that do not do any shopping on Ronces.
    I want to see their wives being forced to do their shopping on Ronces via TTC or bikes and see how they fair.
    They will go screaming into the night ripping their hair out as they flea. lololol
    Yet we are being forced to live this this unlivable condition.
    Heck, all Perks wanted to do was go on about the trees and how pretty it will all look.
    The man is in lala land. Or, they is something more sinister going on in the back room dealing.
    I told him that I will present all my favourite shop owners with a farewell card and inform them that I will be shopping at car friendly strip malls from here on in. Now he got upset and told me that I should not do that bcos it’s my responsibility to support my local merchants. And that I WILL like the street once it’s finished.
    I lost it and blew up at him with, I don’t like it now. I ate all these years of parking tickets & long distant parking to support my merchants, but no one will force me to eat that frustration and expense any more. I will not shop on Ronces any more thanks to your Anti Car design. And I will make sure everyone knows it. Needless to say, he lost it in the end and I terminated the call.
    I am so livid that I just cannot contain myself. I have seen a lot of political blunders in my day, but this one is the straw that finally broke me.
    Gord Perks took away my rights to enjoy shopping with the convience of my car on Ronces.
    He is forcing me to shop elsewhere and I will never ever forgive him for that. Period!
    Sorry for venting. I am to upset to proof read, so forgive any grammar or spelling mistakes and the continuity of the story line.

  • http://undefined Missy

    Good for you, tell these new comers the real facts. They need a reality check as well.

  • http://piorkowski.ca/ qviri

    Raaaage 18 months after the fact!