01-29-2017, 05:52 PM
(01-29-2017, 05:49 PM)Markster Wrote: To cross post my comments from another forum...
While I 'm glad they're working on putting in a crossing, it's probably the least useful location that isn't actively stupid (like if they had put it behind the middle of the strip mall).
The higher density housing is all to the west of the proposed crossing, and the more useful destinations (the grocery, the fast food) are also to the west of the crossing. That apartment tower you see to the right of the photo doesn't even have access to the hydro corridor (it's a massive retaining wall), anyone who lives there has to walk around to Wilson Ave anyway.
For a lot of people, this is not going to improve their trip to the grocery store.
I can see the city's reason for this location though.
1) It's encroaching on a large strip mall that will likely be more amenable to the taking of a small sliver of its property (on a % basis).
2) It's closer to the only "official" entrypoint to the Hydro corridor trail, from Balfour Cres. Any further west, and the city would be compelled to create a public access right of way directly from Traynor, negotiating with one of the apartment complexes.
3) It connects with one of the signalized intersections on Fairway.
My preference would be for it to be lined up with the traffic light to the west. Behind PartSource. That would put it in the centre of the general distribution of retail on Fairway, instead of on the eastern edge.
On the bright side, the proposal would reduce the Trip of Maximum Inconvenience:
As current
241 Traynor Ave to 560 Fairway (Swiss Chalet): 1.2km (80m before LRT)
As proposed
Reyburn Ave @ Traynor to 666 fairway (McDonald's): 700m (80m before LRT)
Great analysis. I'm not too familiar with the area or the movement patterns, but it sounds like it's worth pushing for a better location. Is it possibly worth pushing on the property owners on both sides to stand up and volunteer to have the pathway (for reasonable compensation of course).