Recent comments

  • Redevelopment of the Wallace-Perth Church property (Union Lofts)   5 years 2 weeks ago

    The Toronto Star has an article about this re-development:

    http://www.thestar.com/life/homes/2013/03/28/praise_the_loft.html

    Praise the loft
    Windmill Developments plans to convert a red-brick, Neo-Gothic church at Perth Ave and Wallace Ave. into a condo that it has christened Union Lofts.
    Windmill Developments plans to convert the red-brick, Neo-Gothic church at the northeast corner of Perth Ave and Wallace Ave. into a condo that it has christened Union Lofts.
    By: Ryan Starr Staff Reporter., Published on Thu Mar 28 2013

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 2 weeks ago

    I would also strongly support bike lanes in this plan, especially on Edwin and Perth, mainly to allow contra-flow bike traffic. Edwin is especially important to preserve access to/from the Railpath. Perth would make an excellent route that crosses the entire neighbourhood north-south on a less busy street, connecting schools, parks, etc.

    Any street that is going one-way in this plan should easily accommodate the space for a contra-flow bike lane.

    As a bonus, slightly narrower regular lanes would work toward diminishing the concern that one-way streets create wider, faster lanes.

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 2 weeks ago

    I would be strongly supportive of more bike lanes on any or all streets, including Perth. I find Toronto a difficult city to walk and bike in. Ideally, I would prefer separated bike lanes where cars cannot park, but any marginal improvements (like paint on the road) would be helpful, in my opinion.

    Alas, I doubt there is much support from the broader community.

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 2 weeks ago

    Hello all

    I was wondering what everyone's thoughts were regarding bike lanes. I believe that the addition of bike lanes to some of the busier streets, such as Perth, would create a much safer area for the children of the community. If Perth does become a one way street, this would create enough extra space to allow bike lanes. Not only will these bike lanes create safer travel routes for children, they may also reduce the traffic created by the drop off/pick up of children at the schools. I predict that if the lanes did exist, parents would be more inclined to bike to school with their children, or allow the kids to bike to school themselves.

    From a safety standpoint, I also think bike lanes around some of the streets near the Campbell ave. park would be a good idea.

    Thoughts?

  • 26 Ernest Ave (Former Solways scrap / metal sales site): Townhouses   5 years 3 weeks ago

    Blah blah blah. There's always someone like you that has to complain about everything.

  • 26 Ernest Ave (Former Solways scrap / metal sales site): Townhouses   5 years 3 weeks ago

    I'm mainly saddened because I get around almost exclusively by bicycle, and Solway was the only shop where I could get the metal I needed to fix the things in my life that break from time to time, without having to take half a day off work to ride out to the burbs (or pay a small fortune in shipping).

    I find it a touch distressing that while people keep getting excited about crap like 3D printers enabling people to actually fix the things they own instead of replacing them, we keep having to travel farther and farther afield in order to get the parts or materials we need for those repairs.

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 3 weeks ago

    I don't have a ton to say, other than that I fully support your comments. You have made a strong case for your arguments, and I agree that we need more research in order to truly confirm that the alleged increased traffic in our community actually exits, and that it is a result of people cutting though the community, rather than from an increase in something like two car homes for example. You also make a good point that having north/south one way streets in conjunction with east/west one way streets will result in people driving in cricles. I would add that this driving in circles means that a car from the community would have to drive on more community streets to enter or leave, therefore increasing the ammount of cars that each of our streets would see.

    I would also like to add that I know this group was making proposals based on changing traffic patterns south of Dupont, but I want to reiterate that I am very concerned about any plan that wants to channel more traffic onto Dupont. I understand wanting traffic to stay on major roads, but Dupont is already a complete mess during rush hour. I know that many members of our community use Dupont to enter and leave the area, meaning that the problems that currently exist on Dupont are ones that directly, and negatively, impact our community.

    Thanks a lot

    Stewart

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 4 weeks ago

    I would like to apologize for the statement about finally having people who care in the community. I did not mean to insult those who have lived here for a long time. My intent was to say that the community is growing and it seems to me that the people moving in have an active interest in making this a better place to live. Look at the new stores, the young families. Change for the better. Every great neighbourhood goes through this. This area hasn't seen that in a long time and it is long overdue.

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 4 weeks ago

    You said:
    "I feel like for the first time in a long time, there is a group of people in this neighbourhood who actually care about it"

    There are many people both past and present who care for JT/Davenport, like myself and others. Like I said before, not everyone attends the meetings, like myself, but still contributes to the community behind the sceen. doesn't mean people don't care.. So to say that only certain people care in the community and not is not fair statement.

    The concerns and post of the residents are legit and everyone has a right to their opinion, like you said. So I encourage the posting and yes letting the councillors office know as well.

    You also said:
    "I would argue that if you make the neighbourhood a pain in the ass to cut through, the only people using the streets will be local residents who care for the community, and drive with safety as a primary concern"

    I live and use to own a home on Symington Ave for 40 yrs plus, and seen the changes regarding traffic flow. I personally don't think that these changes is really going to eliminate or effect the changes of traffic flow in the hood, as long as we have traffic on bloor and dupont drivers will always use other alternatives, like Symington and Perth. I seen this over the years. I do the same thing, if i am driving on bloor or dupont and there is traffic I will use side streets, one way and so forth to get back home.JF

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 4 weeks ago

    So I'm joining a bit late to this conversation. There's no way I could comment on all the comments that have been made. I would just like to say that I think people need to provide constructive criticism to the plans that was presented. Many people worked long hours and had many debates about the proposed changes. From what I have read, there is a little bit of radicalism going on here. Let's be honest, if this plan was put in place, it is not going to "ruin" anyone's life or be detrimental to one’s health. Would a few extra turns inconvenience someone? Sure. Should it let your stress levels go through the roof? I hope not.

    If you were moving into an area with these one way streets in place, you wouldn't think twice about it. It would just be the way it is. The goal of the plan was to increase safety in the neighbourhood. One of those concerns was the people who speed through the neighbourhood in an attempt to bypass traffic on Dupont. It is only a matter of time before we have a serious accident on our hands if and when someone gets hit by a car speeding along, not paying attention, or runs a stop sign to save a few seconds in their day.

    Are the one ways proposed an inconvenience? Yes. Will they increase traffic on some streets? Yes. That is inevitable. However, I would argue that if you make the neighbourhood a pain in the ass to cut through, the only people using the streets will be local residents who care for the community, and drive with safety as a primary concern.

    To attack an idea without understanding its purpose does little to solve the problem. It’s sort of like pissing in the wind. Ya, it provides relief, but the result is a mess with no happy party in the end. There is certain logic to the one-way streets. It creates circles that, while they may appear to be a nuisance (especially on Perth), they do create flow for locals and they do deter drivers looking to skip a bit of traffic, from cutting through. But to be so one-sided in your criticisms is not helpful. This is an open process. If you have concerns, feel free to pass them on through the councilor’s office. After reviewing the plan and reading some of the feedback, I will be proposing some changes to the Traffic Committee with some alternatives. If you really wanted to make a difference, you would do the same, and provide alternatives or solutions to some of the problems the plan has, not just filing rampant complaints, and shooting down ideas about them on this website. There is middle ground to be had here, and I implore you to not be so one-sided and to step back and see the bigger picture.

    No plan will ever be perfect, nor will it address the needs of everyone. Change is coming to our neighbourhood. Things can’t stay the way they are. It’s not safe on our roads. I feel like for the first time in a long time, there is a group of people in this neighbourhood who actually care about it. And yes, they are all entitled to their opinion. But I ask you to respect the process. File your complaints, and provide constructive criticism. The committee wants to serve the neighbourhood for the greater good. Any feedback made to the appropriate channels will be addressed.

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 4 weeks ago

    Hats off to you for speaking up. This is much your community as anyone elses. Though some residents or (small groups) form committees to make the JT/Davenport a better community, does not mean that one person or group have the last say, or feel they have more right over some other residents. There has been a trend with some groups/individuals in JT/Davenport who think they have more of a say then anyone else, having an agenda. Though they might think they mean well, this is a problem. I have seen this and been involved myself because of other residents or small groups within JT/davenport trying to make changes without proper consultation and feed back from other residence. Some is the fault of the elected officials giving into small groups, like I said I seen this in the past. I also have spoken to Ana's office. I hope before they go through with any changes, this is well thought out. JF

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 4 weeks ago

    Hi Michael;

    I read you post in full. Generally you points were that the community feels there is an issue, and that a number of new developments in the area will cause traffic to rise.

    I believe I responded fully to the first point already so I won't go through that item again.

    On the second item; traffic levels will go up, they will rise over time as the population rises on this we agree. I do not agree that the developments outside of this neighbourhood are likely to materially impact traffic volume within the neighbourhood since all of the developments you referred to are East of us and from the East traffic will arrive at Symington before Perth and therefore use that road rather than trying to turn left(South) across traffic without the aid of a traffic light. The same would be true of traffic travelling East on Bloor, turning left(North) onto Perth is a slow and at times dangerous process, if you were travelling to the East of our neighbourhood you would use the traffic lights at Symington to aid you left turn. Traffic not moving South-west from Dupont and Lansdown would have no reason to drive down Perth and any traffic travelling to Dupont and Lansdown coming from anywhere but the South-west would have no reason to arrive at Perth either. On the issue of developments within the neighbourhood I would argue that planning which is designed to prevent local residents from using local roads is based on an unacceptable motivation, we are all equals and all equally entitled to use the roads which we jointly pay for.

    The overall point in my post was that no measurable evidence or professional opinions have been added to this discussion, your post did not address either or those requests.

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 4 weeks ago

    I'm sorry you feel that way Scott. No where did I suggest, state or make any accusations of dishonesty. I have however said that the process to date has not been transparent.

    I believe I fully understand the process which has led us here, but please correct me if I've missed anything. Approximately 1 year ago a meeting on traffic issues was held in the community, that meeting resulted in a committee being struck, that committee worked for a year and have now presented a plan. Any feedback that I have seen to date which is not represented a minor alteration to the proposal and which upholds the intend of the proposal has been met with defensiveness.

    As someone who makes a living managing change I can tell you that had the committee met with the community regularly throughout the process, asked for ongoing feedback and showed how that feedback was being integrated into the plan, the the resulting proposal would have enjoyed much broader support.

    I would welcome additional meetings, these should be held on several different days of the week and at different times so that the entire community can participate. Only through thorough community consultation in a open goals (not positions) based approach can result in a successful solution.

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 4 weeks ago

    Hello,

    This response ignores the points made in my post yesterday. Surely you understand that within 5 years the traffic situation in our neighbourhood is going to change dramatically as a result of the many important developments either underway, planned or currently under examination pending approval. These changes are intended to retain the residential character of the area, protect the increasing numbers of young children, and generally ensure that the Junction Triangle does not become a thoroughfare for people commuting to and from the downtown core.

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 4 weeks ago

    You seem to not understand the process that has been under way. Councillor Bailao received many complaints about traffic and decided to form a committee. A public call went out and locals showed up. This group spent a fair amount of time discussing different issues and how they might be resolved. It took a while because people are donating their time and have busy lives and there was a lot of thought that went into this. This plan is like version 10. This is not my plan, it is a plan that a committee of locals came up with in conjunction with the councillors office and the Traffic Department. As part of that process we looked at traffic counts and other data to inform what we saw with our eyes. This plan is to create conversation and seek input. And now this plan has been presented once in public and put online for feedback and there will be more meetings and more input. Nothing is set in stone. Nothing has been decided by anybody.

    It is clear to me that you just dont like this plan and that is ok. But I would add that your suggestion that this process, which is still underway, is somehow dishonest, says more about you than about the people who have donated their time to make their community better. I have tried to answer your points to the best of my ability but since you are crossing the line into questioning the honesty of fellow residents I am not going to follow up with you any more. Thanks for your input.

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 4 weeks ago

    Hi Scott;

    I think many people including myself are looking for real justification for the changes that are being proposed and which you are clearly in favour of. From all of the posts I've read it seems that the defence of this plan is based on several elements, let me speak to them.

    *Most other downtown area's are one-way, everyone else cannot be crazy therefore we should stop missing out on the benefits. - This is false evidence for a number of reasons; we don't know what problem those residents were trying to resolve, we don't know if the problems they were trying to resolve were in fact resolved and we don't know if there was a reduction or an increase in traffic volume. The road layouts in other area’s are entirely different from our own, therefore even if we did have aforementioned facts, without significant modelling we cannot reasonably assume that the impacts those neighbourhoods see, would be the same impacts we would see. In addition we are not downtown, we should instead be comparing our neighbourhood to other mid-town areas; the Danforth, High Park/Swansea, Yonge/Eglinton are all better comparisons and unlike this plan, in those area’s greater than 50% of their roads are bi-directional.

    *Much of the traffic in the community is non-local and will disappear with these plans. - On this front I have seen two arguments the first is that residents believe this to be the case, and the second is that video's have been taken showing this cut through traffic. - This again is false evidence; the only way to identify cut through traffic is to show it entering and leaving the area, and showing that the person in the car had no other reason to be in the area, this cannot be accomplished without simultaneous recording all entry and exit points and cross identifying the traffic. A study like this would be large and expensive, did this occur? On the issue of complaints from residents, these are valid but only a starting point, they are a reason to conduct a study not evidence of a problem.

    *It’s what the people want – I think from the evidence of both this forum and Ana Bailao’s Facebook page opinion is very clearly divided, not only on the solution but also on whether or not a problem really exists in the first place. The act which allows for implementation of Councillor driven traffic calming provides for a vote by affected residents, it calls for a minimum 50% plus 1 participation in the vote by affected residents and a 60% support by voting residents, from where I sit now I find it hard to believe you have the votes needed to make this change.

    I agree that change is difficult, many will oppose change simply because they prefer the devil they know to the one they don't, but the way gain supported is to communicate openly and honestly and to offer evidence that the change will improve the lives of the affected people. This has not happened here; the committee worked for far too long a period in a silo and without the ongoing feedback of the affected residents, the consequence is a plan which reflects the views of far too few people and which is more likely to fail than succeed. The proponents of this plan are far too tied to their solution, rather than to finding a solution the community can live with.

    Finally; since it appears you've previously ignored my proposals I will repeat them here; I hope this time you will view them with a more open mind.

    First; I am fine with making Edwin and Franklin one-way per the plan. All of the East west streets should be left bidirectional, making them one way will simply cause people to drive in circles and result in a greater traffic volume as a result, moreover it does nothing to prevent cut through traffic, since that is only affected by roads which join up with the surrounding arterial roads. The current solution for Perth is utterly unacceptable; Perth should be divided into no more than two one-way sections. If there is consensus that Perth should be one-way then it should run South from Dupont to Wallace and North from Bloor to Wallace. A better solution might be to place no-entry (either 7a-10a/3p-6p or 7a-6p) signs at both the North and South ends, where Perth meets Bloor and Dupont, and then leave Perth bi-directional.

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 4 weeks ago

    Hello,

    I just read through your objections to the proposed traffic circulation problems and am quite puzzled by them. The overall thrust of your comments is that "things are fine as they are", which even a cursory knowledge of our neighbourhood traffic belies. One of the main concerns behind these proposals is that the current state of traffic is going to become much more intense over the next few years due to:

    • the new townhouse development at Wallace and the Railpath;
    • the church conversion at Wallace and Perth;
    • the condo tower proposed for Campbell and Dupont;
    • the ongoing developments at Lansdowne and Dupont.

    Together, these developments will significantly increase the traffic in our neighbourhood. What is now quite regular "cutting through" our neighbourhood will undoubtedly become heavier traffic. You appear to be unaware of these developments or, in the case of the Wallace townhouses, unaware that they will significantly increase pressures. The solution proposed by the traffic committee is to emulate Toronto neighbourhoods like the Annex, where traffic is channelled on one-way streets, thereby reducing speeds and the "short-cut" attractiveness of residential streets. I live on Hugo Ave. north of Dupont and can certainly testify to the disruptive and dangerous practices of driver who decide to take a short cut. The proposed changes are intended to either reduce or end such practices.

    These changes will not so much ruin our lives, as you seem to think, as cause a minor inconvenience as older habits are exchanged for new ones. I often find myself in the Annex for work reasons and must say that I do not find it difficult to navigate after familiarizing oneself with the neighbourhood.

    My more serious concern about your letter is the lack of remedies therein. Indeed, the only remedy contained in your letter, a new road from Lappin to Antler, is obviously impractical into today's fiscal and political climate. It turns a series of minor traffic changes into a major public works project. This proposal has no wings.

    I would welcome some concrete and realistic proposals from you. Alternatively, you need to convince the community that increased population can be accommodated and the quiet residential character of our streets can be preserved without change. I hope you will examine these issues more closely.

    Sincerely,

    Michael Dartnell

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 4 weeks ago

    I think I have gone over all your questions in other posts.

    I never said that one way streets will create more street parking. I said this plan will create more street parking and you can see it on the map.

    More traffic on Dupont. Thats the idea. Keeping traffic on arterial roads. Read the posts about roundabouts and light timing.

    Here is part of what was read at the public meeting.

    "The amount and speed of traffic in the Junction Triangle has increased over the past 10 years.

    A large percentage of this is traffic looking for shortcuts on residential side streets instead of staying on major arterial roads such as Bloor, Symington, and Dupont. Volume, speeding, and noise not only effects safety but also the quality of life in a community. There has not been any comprehensive traffic management planning of our area in living memory.

    The Junction Triangle is the only area of Ward 18 that does not have any traffic flow control. In fact, Junction Triangle is one of the few areas downtown that has no traffic flow controls. The time has come to explore traffic management control so that our community has the same advantages that other communities do.

    Over the past year a group of residents representing different parts of the area met frequently with the Councillor’s staff and with City Traffic Staff to look at the numbers and suggest solutions that will help our community.

    The goal of the committee was to improve the quality of life in the Junction Triangle by slowing down and discouraging non-local traffic. We recognize that when changes like this are made it takes a while to adjust. We all live in this community and these changes will affect us too. But if you ask people in other communities how they feel about traffic management they will tell you that they get used to it and grow to appreciate the benefits to the community."

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 4 weeks ago

    Hi Scott.

    Thanks for your input, but I would like to point out to you, that this is a forum to encourage community discussion. I don’t appreciate your comment about me “just criticizing” while others offer “tweaks” to the plan, nor do I appreciate the harsh way in which you demean the comments/proposals of other posters on this board. I, and others, do offer alternatives and suggest solutions to our critiques. In the end however, I don’t see much point in offering “tweaks” to, what I see as, a broken plan. I feel that the current situation is far superior to the proposed plan.

    I see the validity of some of your responses to my post, but I still stand by my critique of the plan. After reading your post, I didn’t come away with any sense of how you think the proposed changes will help the community. Do you think you could clarify this for me? I stated in my post that the plan will increase the volume of traffic on Dupont, and I am interested to hear your perspective on how the proposed plan will reduce this volume. You also stated that the traffic situation around the current school drop off is a “mess”. As a Ruskin resident, I directly deal with the student drop off, every day, and I don’t find it an inconvenience. Could you explain to me how/why you think the current situation is a mess, and how the proposed plan will fix this mess? I am also confused by your claim that one way streets will increase street parking. Can you clarify this? Finally, You also claim that every neighborhood in the city has one way streets and that they must know something that we don’t. Can you specifically tell me how these one way streets will improve our daily lives?

    As to your comment about my neighbor on Ruskin, I am sure that there are a number of people in the community who love the plan, and a number who hate it. I personally, don’t see how the plan is going to make our traffic situation any better. In my opinion it will make it a lot worse for some of the community members. That is why I am concerned about it. I can not see many positives to this plan, and I would be interested to hear your take on what makes this plan so positive.

    Thanks for your response.

    Stewart

  • General Electric / Hitachi Uranium Processing Plant on Dupont St.   5 years 4 weeks ago

    I had always been aware of this plant but I wanted to make a note that in some research I have been doing on another topic I was reading the July 1984 Issue of Toronto Life and in a story about the JT they talk about residents becoming more aware of the industry in the area due to air conditions and spills starting in the mid 1970's and people become aware of the fuel processing plant. So at that time probably until 1990-91 when the area started to turn over it was on peoples minds and people were aware. It always amazes me how quickly though the history or details of an area fade.

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 4 weeks ago

    The proposed plan looks good, it would certainly decrease traffic.
    Regardless of what the final plan turns out to be, we can't stand pat with the current system, something has to be done to divert the ever increased traffic. Keep up the good work.

  • General Electric / Hitachi Uranium Processing Plant on Dupont St.   5 years 5 weeks ago

    Hey Greg,
    Do you have an email address??? Cheers J

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 5 weeks ago

    This is not exactly what I was talking about but similar. Instead of Strachan think Wallace. Would there be enough ditch to put a pedestrian bridge over north of Wallace? Posible but the rail line has to get back to grade by Dupont to head into the Davenport Diamond.

    http://www.blogto.com/city/2013/03/by_the_numbers_the_strachan_overpass_...

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 5 weeks ago

    Roundabouts are starting to appear all over and the neat thing is that each one can be totally different than the other.

    For interests sake two of the smallest in Toronto are the corners of Broadway and Rowley and Broadway and Banff Avenue 3 blocks away from each other.

    As you say they can have speed control or hard stop/go control. The best thing is to tell our councillors to keep up the pressure and get these EA's and studies done. Although the Dufferin jog was on time and under budget it took decades to get a shovel in the ground. I was in high school living in Parkdale when I first heard about the jog and it took 30 years! Lets not let that happen here.

  • Junction Triangle Traffic Management Plan   5 years 5 weeks ago

    When I drove around Iceland, I encountered some roundabouts that had speed bumps as you entered and exited the loop. I'm not a huge fan of speed bumps in general but they would slow down the ever-moving traffic as it moves through the roundabout.

    I always like driving through the roundabout on Windemere in Swansea. Other than the one on Claxton Blvd in Forrest Hill, they're the only roundabouts I know of in the city. Luckily, they're not totally unheard of here. Building one at Dundas/Annette/Dupont would be a challenge as it would require more lanes than the other two, and it would see a lot more traffic.

    It's really the perfect intersection for a roundabout... what's sad is that we view this as such a challenge.

    There's a National Post article from less than a year ago about this subject: http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/07/21/roundabouts-are-one-of-the-best-...