07-16-2018, 11:06 AM
(07-16-2018, 10:17 AM)welltoldtales Wrote: Just to add to the debate of the last pages, I inquired about the new Lancaster Street Reconstruction and was thrice rebuffed because they only do community consultations after engineering. So What I believe are the critical things to consider in the reconstruction won't even be considered until we have spent millions on designing the system (More than likely without community needs).
Then politicians and engineers will not want to go back and adjust designs once it is presented as there will be a large amount of sunk cost.
I know that community consultations can be frustrating and annoying trying to balance so many "needs". I have seen that many times first hand were members don't know what is critical to their own actual objectives. I do feel like if someone had told the Traynor neighbourhood in 2007 when the system was designed that they wouldn't be able to cross someone would have raised this concern. I also feel like it probably would have been ignored because the very underlying goals of the system didn't align.
This is similar to the affordable housing debate around LRT stations. It makes so much sense to plan for affordable housing around LRT because urban poor populations tend to use transit more. But our stated goal was actually to get more development charges and grow the economy.
This is a key point. They also don't do any consultation on detailed design. Many of the issues I raise at consultations are "detailed design issues" and I'm told they aren't looking at them right now.
But those details matter a lot. Especially for marginal infrastructure. A 1.25 meter bike lane next to a half meter gutter with curb side profile storm drains is vastly different than a 1.25 meter bike lane immediately next to a barrier curb with flat profile storm drains.