Comment 118061

By mdrejhon (registered) - website | Posted April 29, 2016 at 14:10:36 in reply to Comment 118016

Doing James 1-way would have meant ripping out those nice streetlamps, cutting down all trees, and removing all public art from James St N.

Anything 4 lanes would have been devastation to James St N. Trees gone, lights gone, artworks gone...

(Indeed, they may still have to rip some of this up during construction, but would restore everything to at least as pretty or prettier, I would presume -- given it's James St N. Or this section gets the 'careful' treatment like LRT lines through heritage areas in Europe, by doing things such as simply wiring crosswires between the existing light standards to hold up catenary...)

It's my understanding (if I am not told incorrectly) that James will remain a 2-lane street, with 1 lane per direction for BOTH LRVs/cars. So it's a 2-way street for cars and LRT. Like a TTC streetcar but only for those few blocks.

The "1 lane per direction" (which is what it is today) should not be misinterpreted as a "1 lane street", because it's status quo for James St N (preservation) but with tracks.

It's an acceptable compromise as long as A-Line stays true express LRT towards the mountain (south of King) during any future extension. That keeps mountain access to downtown very fast, as it would only go into mixed traffic north of King towards waterfront. Very short mixed-traffic streetcar section.

Which might even go dedicated again if they make Wilson-to-WestHarbour section pedestrian-only in the future, given sufficient TOD and traffic diversion over time.

Comment edited by mdrejhon on 2016-04-29 14:15:00

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools