Whoah, I can’t speak for ViewFromThe42, but I don’t think they meant it like that. I certainly appreciate your viewpoint too! I hadn’t thought of it that way before, and you’re right as well.
(Though we could probably split this off into the “Parking” thread...)
(12-29-2017, 12:14 PM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: [ -> ]It's a legitimate point of view to have. Few want to think that a couple minutes of cold air is why they put their neighbours out of business to shop at Zellers Sears Eatons Target Wal-Mart and The Bay, but the level of effort we're willing to put out is incredible. It's a bit of the inverse of Pascal's Wager, where we aren't willing to make the tiniest effort, even though this miniscule effort to us means the world/livelihood of so many people we know. It's a sad, sad state, but it's one we're all too happy to put ourselves in.
Well now hang on a second. There is no inherent reason why climate control has to be associated with the car-dependence and monolithic corporate ownership that one thinks of when discussing a mall.
One question that the map should raise is why the only place in the city you can walk for several blocks indoors is at a suburban, car-dependent mall. Putting people down for choosing the mall is not helpful.
Maybe if people would listen more carefully when I suggest that it’s obvious that one should be able to get between the different buildings of a development without going outside, or that part of city planning should involve considering how indoor or partially protected pedestrian connections can be provided at reasonable cost, then we could have both: an engaging, multi-owner, pedestrian-oriented downtown,
and the ability to stay out of the weather if one chooses.
Simple example that I consider a clear screw-up because it’s clear who should have made a different decision and what different decision: the buildings down the west side of King between First United and Willis Way. The first floor should have been recessed, leaving a continuous covered arcade parallel to the sidewalk. Glass roofs should have been provided to cover the pedestrian links around to the parking lot near the LCBO, between the two buildings, and around the side on Willis Way. Then one could walk that entire block under cover, or, if preferred, out on the sidewalk.
Add a sliding wall system and the arcade could be climate controlled in winter while still open to the air in summer.
And the recent construction on Willis Way could have been incorporated into the same system. It is entirely practical to have a situation where the only need to be rained on is to cross the street, and even there I don’t see why we couldn’t have attractive roof structures to shed the rain to the sides.
Full climate control is harder to achieve, essentially requiring a bridge or tunnel level, either of which gets into more complicated issues of control and responsibility for the various corridor areas, and more expense for the construction. But with the number of large towers we are putting up lately, there are areas of the city where this definitely should be considered. Anywhere that two large towers (I don’t know, maybe more than about 10-15 stories or so) sit next to each other, they should be linked. With sufficiently large buildings, the additional cost of the links is obviously trivial by comparison.
If climate were a significant factor, ripping the roof off the Shops at Don Mills would have been a failure.
I believe that this discussion originated around cars parking in the new bike lanes in uptown. There is obviously a demand there for people who want to shop in core which is great for core merchants which have a tendency to be more independently owned. Unfortunately a lot of people that drive cars, especially in the winter, want to park as close as possible to the business which they want to visit. I'm all for a vibrant core but if we do not accommodate these people they will shop the malls.
You can say all you want about whether parking should or should not be on this stretch of road, but THE DECISION WAS ALREADY MADE. When they finalized the design, we were supposed to have protected bike lanes on both sides, with certain portions of dedicated parking.
The road was built, and nearly completed, to those specifications. Unfortunately the city felt the need to bend the original design to briefly serve a perceived parking need, and now many drivers are under the mistaken impression that there is more on-street parking available here than there should be. THAT is the main issue we are struggling with.
I don't mean to tell you that you are wrong, but I do feel it is important to point out the corollary for any argument or point. Yes, some people get cold easily (even in a heated office, my circulation means that my toes and fingers are constantly like ice), and it is a personal choice whether a few extra minutes in that cold is worth it to support your neighbours' businesses. We all have tradeoffs we make, but ultimately they do have subsequent realities formed on account of those choices. I think the map is helpful for some because it can help dispel the idea that the mall is so much less walking or time outside, but indeed for some it is their choice. I am proud that I spend the overwhelming majority of my dollars at locally-owned locations, but even I make certain less desirable choices, such as renting a car on occasion to visit family, rather than taking a series of buses. And indeed I'm trying to even change my habits further, by getting myself prepared to attempt winter cycling.
(12-29-2017, 12:04 PM)creative Wrote: [ -> ]What the map also shows is that most parking at the mall is less than half a city block to the entrance into the climate controlled mall. Winter happens and people don't want to venture outside any more than is necessary. Summer is a different story but winter is 6 months long! Just sharing a different point of view. Not discrediting the opinions of others or in any way putting down those who created the map.
I think if you do the same kind of map overlay with Boardwalk, you'll find the outside walking is even longer, and yet there is no climate-controlled path between stores -- it's exactly like it would be in uptown or downtown. And yet people complain about downtown/uptown parking, and no one has an issue with it at Boardwalk. Or at Sunrise. Or at countless other such mega-strip malls being built in this country.
I was not arguing for onstreet parking on King in the uptown core. I was merely stating that if we do not accommodate those people that want to park close they will go elsewhere. As for Boardwalk and Sunrise, people will drive from store to store if necessary. In my case I am usually going to only one store so I can park reasonably close to the front door.
If you give everyone a free car, they'll take it. If you give everyone free gas, they'll take it. If you give everyone free ample parking, they'll drive to it and take it. We have to decide at what points we can change the motivators. We can't ever beat the malls for visibly apparent free parking, unless we have the ability and confidence to change the rules (around how much parking, charges, etc).
One of the few bright spots where we *can* control things is with events, and we have started to do this. You can't reasonably park close to Bluesfest or Ribfest, but events like these we can give direct bus access to. We can give the closest parking to those on bikes (and do, with the bike valet). With Canada Day, we can even control the roads downtown and by Columbia Lake to allow for buses and LRT to exit most quickly, while those who drive all the way to the site are indeed taking the less convenient option. And so where we have easier times changing the motivators, we should do so, continuing what we have done, and pioneering more.
Yeah, I don't think it is realistic to expect people to walk between stores at the Boardwalk. They drive between stores if they want to shop at more than one. Which I think is also something you can't do Uptown with parking rules that don't allow re-parking your vehicle in another free lot.
(12-29-2017, 02:26 PM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: [ -> ]I don't mean to tell you that you are wrong, but I do feel it is important to point out the corollary for any argument or point. Yes, some people get cold easily (even in a heated office, my circulation means that my toes and fingers are constantly like ice), and it is a personal choice whether a few extra minutes in that cold is worth it to support your neighbours' businesses. We all have tradeoffs we make, but ultimately they do have subsequent realities formed on account of those choices. I think the map is helpful for some because it can help dispel the idea that the mall is so much less walking or time outside, but indeed for some it is their choice. I am proud that I spend the overwhelming majority of my dollars at locally-owned locations, but even I make certain less desirable choices, such as renting a car on occasion to visit family, rather than taking a series of buses. And indeed I'm trying to even change my habits further, by getting myself prepared to attempt winter cycling.
100% agreed about the map — it shows the distances in Uptown really are not far at all. And especially for people visiting just one establishment, the total distance outside might even be less in Uptown depending on exactly where we assume they park at the mall vs. in Uptown.
I think my viewpoint comes down to the idea that thinking more about weather protection is something that can be done by designers everywhere, whether they are designing a single building or planning an entire city downtown. We shouldn’t associate weather protection with big malls in the suburbs which I agree have significant downsides, with the biggest probably being the car dependence that is usually associated with them. And we definitely shouldn’t blame the problems of malls on their roofs. Rather, it is their parking lots, and ownership structure, and overall layout, and sometimes their walls that relate to the problems. So with better design, there shouldn’t need to be as extreme a tradeoff between a nice area and an enclosed area.
(12-29-2017, 01:33 PM)DHLawrence Wrote: [ -> ]If climate were a significant factor, ripping the roof off the Shops at Don Mills would have been a failure.
I don’t think ripping the roof off was the key factor. Do I recall correctly that they tore down a failing mall and built a number of separate blocks, which are now doing reasonably well? Clearly they changed lots of things about the layout. It simply isn’t credible that the reason for the resurgence is that there isn’t a roof anymore. If that were true, why do the stores have roofs at all? What is a vestibule for? Why do cars have roofs and window glass? Why do we bother with shelter at all?
At the same time, a lack of a roof wasn't a barrier to success. There are clearly other factors at play.
(12-29-2017, 10:56 AM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: [ -> ]I'd definitely enjoy a video or visual article on how to winter bike. I fear that I'll do one part but not another, regret it, and suffer for it. It always feels in my mind like I need tires I don't have, cleaning equipment I don't have, shoes, gloves, headgear I don't have, and getting it all together feels daunting. That said, I'm doing the foolish New Year's move into a Downtown house with a backyard basement entry, so it might be the best kind of place to winter cycle from.
Don't feel bad! I'm no pro at all. The only real thing I did is add fenders to my bike, which made a huge difference to the amount of muck and snow that gets sprayed everywhere. I wear my snowboard helmet instead of a bike helmet because it's warmer (they're essentially identical, except a snowboard helmet has extra fabric for warmth), and I wear good winter gloves and a face mask. The face mask thing is probably the number one thing I'd recommend - folks here on this forum twigged me to it last year. Without it, I can only ride for a few minutes before my lungs hurt so bad! With it, I could ride for hours.
Here's a little video I put together showing what I do after each ride:
(12-29-2017, 11:22 AM)jamincan Wrote: [ -> ]My main motivation for cleaning it regularly is the noise - I can't stand it when I don't have a silent drivetrain. It drives me nuts.
Yes!! I feel so embarrassed that it wasn't until I regularly cleaned my chain (twice a week in the summer, or after every ride in the winter) that I realized that chains can actually be really, really quiet (silent). For the longest time I was determined to go out and buy a belt-driven bike because I didn't like the noise of my chain. Turns out I just needed to take care of it.