07-28-2022, 02:33 PM
(07-28-2022, 09:21 AM)ijmorlan Wrote:(07-27-2022, 02:20 PM)dtkvictim Wrote: I can see the argument going either way though, between the diagonal jog across Charles St, and the potentially complete lack of curbs along the former bus terminal as nearly the entire length along Ontario St is technically a "driveway". I can also imagine wanting to avoid boxing in the former bus terminal on all 4 sides between the LRT, 2 bike lanes, and a pedestrian street.
But the bus terminal “driveway” is a former driveway. Any future development would be built on the assumption that there is a bike path there. While I agree that we have to be careful to allow for the possibility of a vehicle entrance somewhere around that block, even in the absence of considering the bike path in designing that block a new build would most likely have a regular driveway, not a wide one like there is now.
And until the new build, that side would be completely uninterrupted. So I don’t really understand the objection.
For that matter, a new build could have underground parking entrances on the road side of the sidewalks, like this:
https://goo.gl/maps/3VCrRqcn7ibsefXX8
Then there is no conflict at all.
It's former only in the sense that it's not actively being used, but it's still physically a driveway with curb cuts. From what I've seen, they can't or won't build bike lane curbs parallel to any existing curb cuts regardless of how actively used they are.
Not saying I wouldn't prefer the lanes on that side (I would), I just imagine this is how the city or region viewed the issue.