It is already difficult to find parking on this side street. Where are the cars supposed to disappear to when most of these homes have no parking of their own? Paying $100 for 6 months is not cheap. If we're paying for this "privilege" which means we don't have to move cars around rush hours, we expect to receive proper parking spaces. Bikes always can and always will go wherever they need to. It's rare to see any bike on this street at all.
N
Nichole Jankowski
9 years ago
This seems like an unnecessary use of city funds. Dowling is a quiet, residential, one-way street.
A
Adam Harrison
9 years ago
Bike lanes are certainly essential to promote safe and active transport, however they may be best served on streets where safe sharing of the road is less attainable (Bloor would be an excellent example). Dowling is already a one way, people cycle down the street both ways safely already, it is not a high traffic street, vehicles already move at a reasonable slow pace. The usefulness of the cycle lane here is questionable especially at the expense of the removal of a number of necessary vehicle parking spaces without a determined compensation. There are no laneways or garages for the majority of residential buildings on Dowling, thus no parking, delivery, moving-in and out options are available to residents in absence of street parking. Jameson, Roncesvalles, Dufferin, and King may be more appropriate cycle lane connections to the waterfront.
M
Mark nielsen
9 years ago
Reasonable parking must be maintained. Bike lane access is important but not at the total disrespect and expense of existing infrastructure.
K
Kevin Thornton
9 years ago
We pay for parking on the street. You are able to ride on Jameson and roncesvalle road. This is an inconvenience for all of us.
K
kevin thornton
9 years ago
We pay for parking on the street. You are able to ride on Jameson and roncesvalle road. This is an inconvenience for all of us.
A
Anonymous
9 years ago
We need MORE parking spots. Not less. Bicycle can go on Roncesvelle and to the beach.
D
Dan O'Connor
9 years ago
We need parking on Dowling! Parking is sparse as it is!
S
Scott Wood
9 years ago
Featured
We own a property located at 122 Dowling Avenue and have heard from numerous tenants that the proposed Dowling bike lane will cause significant hardship for the residents of the street. We see minimal benefit in removing the current parking along the street (specifically between King and Queen), and as such, wish to voice our strong opposition to the plan in its proposed form. Thank you for your consideration.
J
jeff cross
9 years ago
no bike lanes needed parking we need
P
Pauline Cross
9 years ago
I live on Dowling and would like to see a solution that allows for bicycle lanes AND the established parking on the street
D
Dave Huband
9 years ago
As a Beaty Ave resident and bike commuter I too cannot see the feasibility of this proposal. How can they really suggest there are 20 alternate spots that can be created and if those do exist why aren't they in use now? If the 20 are south of King what are residents closer to Queen supposed to do? It's a ridiculous compromise. To lose 32 spots will greatly impact an already difficult situation throughout the neighbourhood.
A
Anonymous
9 years ago
Featured
While I am a cyclist, I also have 1 car that I share with my husband. I'm very concerned that removing 32 parking spots would be a significant disruption. As it is, our neighbourhood (Dowling/Leopold/Maynard/Laxton) has very limited parking and I often have to circle several times to find a spot. Where would we park? What do we do when we have groceries? Heavy items? Are with children, older adults, or people with disabilities? I'm a fan of bike lanes, but don't see how this is feasible in this area.
J
Joshua Grover
9 years ago
I also wanted to mention that during the consultation one of the reps for the planning committee admitted that Dowling south of King was wide enough to accommodate two travel lanes and parking on both sides of the street. Why not allow us to park there now then? They said this would add 20 parking spots, which I cannot believe, but if so, why not let us park there now!?
J
Joshua Grover
9 years ago
I attended the city's information session and gave a detailed response there, I also took the email address of the person responsible for collecting the necessary information from that session [email protected] you should send this submission to her as well and we should also include our councillor Gord Perks [email protected]
The main points are, too many spots will be eliminated. It is an inopportune use of the infrastructure. The cycle path planning committee should use this as a opportunity to install a Bicycle Actuated Signal for southbound bike traffic at King, a light they can activate will signal a light at the bend in King street to stop traffic coming eastbound, and allow them to cross King to get to dowling south of King to reach the bridge. Right now it is very difficult to introduce a light to allow for a left-hand turn northbound form Dowling to cross Queen, so it would be ideal to make Beatty two way bike traffic, contraflow lane there would not disrupt parking as the street is wide enough to accommodate Sharrows southbound and contraflow separate lane northbound as it is 7.5 m wide which is above the minimum spec 7.3 m for this design, while Dowling is only 6.15m wide.
I am a cyclist, and use bike lanes to commute to work daily, but I also own a car and park on Dowling. I have wrote a long response to the public consultation, but essentially it says, don't use the plan that is cleanest from a cartographic point of view (the straightest line) if it is not the best use of the current infrastructure.
V
Veronica Sepehr
9 years ago
Featured
I have a 1-year old daughter and I currently park my car on the street. Imagine dragging your daughter from a further distance during the winter. I would also like to know the criteria to choose Dowling Avenue versus other streets.
J
Jess H
9 years ago
Featured
There are many residents on King Street that have no other alternative but to park on Dowling Ave. and Beaty Ave. To replace the parking on Dowling Ave. with a bike lane would render it impossible to park a vehicle for many Parkdale residents. I rode a bike for years and never needed a bike lane on Dowling Ave. Jameson Ave. and Beaty Ave. are perfectly good alternate routes to cycle southbound to King Street. Please don't make it any more difficult than it already is to find parking after a long day of work!!
P
Patricia Anderson
9 years ago
Featured
There is a reasonable alternative. Use the street directly west of Dowling as the route south from Queen--it is closer to Sororen and already one way going south. It has speed bumps. Cyclists can make a left at King to get to Dowling, or walk their bikes east on King to cross at the light at Dowling to continue south to the foot bridge over the highway. People must walk a short distance west at The Lakeshore to cross Lakeshore with the traffic light so this is nothing new. People can take Dowling north on their return journey to Sororen. This is the logical route;rhe cheapest option; and the least disruptive plan. It is absolutely ridiculous to remove parking for those who live in this neighbourhood when there is a clearly better way to achieve the goal.
It is already difficult to find parking on this side street. Where are the cars supposed to disappear to when most of these homes have no parking of their own? Paying $100 for 6 months is not cheap. If we're paying for this "privilege" which means we don't have to move cars around rush hours, we expect to receive proper parking spaces. Bikes always can and always will go wherever they need to. It's rare to see any bike on this street at all.
This seems like an unnecessary use of city funds. Dowling is a quiet, residential, one-way street.
Bike lanes are certainly essential to promote safe and active transport, however they may be best served on streets where safe sharing of the road is less attainable (Bloor would be an excellent example). Dowling is already a one way, people cycle down the street both ways safely already, it is not a high traffic street, vehicles already move at a reasonable slow pace. The usefulness of the cycle lane here is questionable especially at the expense of the removal of a number of necessary vehicle parking spaces without a determined compensation. There are no laneways or garages for the majority of residential buildings on Dowling, thus no parking, delivery, moving-in and out options are available to residents in absence of street parking. Jameson, Roncesvalles, Dufferin, and King may be more appropriate cycle lane connections to the waterfront.
Reasonable parking must be maintained. Bike lane access is important but not at the total disrespect and expense of existing infrastructure.
We pay for parking on the street. You are able to ride on Jameson and roncesvalle road. This is an inconvenience for all of us.
We pay for parking on the street. You are able to ride on Jameson and roncesvalle road. This is an inconvenience for all of us.
We need MORE parking spots. Not less. Bicycle can go on Roncesvelle and to the beach.
We need parking on Dowling! Parking is sparse as it is!
We own a property located at 122 Dowling Avenue and have heard from numerous tenants that the proposed Dowling bike lane will cause significant hardship for the residents of the street. We see minimal benefit in removing the current parking along the street (specifically between King and Queen), and as such, wish to voice our strong opposition to the plan in its proposed form. Thank you for your consideration.
no bike lanes needed parking we need
I live on Dowling and would like to see a solution that allows for bicycle lanes AND the established parking on the street
As a Beaty Ave resident and bike commuter I too cannot see the feasibility of this proposal. How can they really suggest there are 20 alternate spots that can be created and if those do exist why aren't they in use now? If the 20 are south of King what are residents closer to Queen supposed to do? It's a ridiculous compromise. To lose 32 spots will greatly impact an already difficult situation throughout the neighbourhood.
While I am a cyclist, I also have 1 car that I share with my husband. I'm very concerned that removing 32 parking spots would be a significant disruption. As it is, our neighbourhood (Dowling/Leopold/Maynard/Laxton) has very limited parking and I often have to circle several times to find a spot. Where would we park? What do we do when we have groceries? Heavy items? Are with children, older adults, or people with disabilities? I'm a fan of bike lanes, but don't see how this is feasible in this area.
I also wanted to mention that during the consultation one of the reps for the planning committee admitted that Dowling south of King was wide enough to accommodate two travel lanes and parking on both sides of the street. Why not allow us to park there now then? They said this would add 20 parking spots, which I cannot believe, but if so, why not let us park there now!?
I attended the city's information session and gave a detailed response there, I also took the email address of the person responsible for collecting the necessary information from that session [email protected] you should send this submission to her as well and we should also include our councillor Gord Perks [email protected] The main points are, too many spots will be eliminated. It is an inopportune use of the infrastructure. The cycle path planning committee should use this as a opportunity to install a Bicycle Actuated Signal for southbound bike traffic at King, a light they can activate will signal a light at the bend in King street to stop traffic coming eastbound, and allow them to cross King to get to dowling south of King to reach the bridge. Right now it is very difficult to introduce a light to allow for a left-hand turn northbound form Dowling to cross Queen, so it would be ideal to make Beatty two way bike traffic, contraflow lane there would not disrupt parking as the street is wide enough to accommodate Sharrows southbound and contraflow separate lane northbound as it is 7.5 m wide which is above the minimum spec 7.3 m for this design, while Dowling is only 6.15m wide. I am a cyclist, and use bike lanes to commute to work daily, but I also own a car and park on Dowling. I have wrote a long response to the public consultation, but essentially it says, don't use the plan that is cleanest from a cartographic point of view (the straightest line) if it is not the best use of the current infrastructure.
I have a 1-year old daughter and I currently park my car on the street. Imagine dragging your daughter from a further distance during the winter. I would also like to know the criteria to choose Dowling Avenue versus other streets.
There are many residents on King Street that have no other alternative but to park on Dowling Ave. and Beaty Ave. To replace the parking on Dowling Ave. with a bike lane would render it impossible to park a vehicle for many Parkdale residents. I rode a bike for years and never needed a bike lane on Dowling Ave. Jameson Ave. and Beaty Ave. are perfectly good alternate routes to cycle southbound to King Street. Please don't make it any more difficult than it already is to find parking after a long day of work!!
There is a reasonable alternative. Use the street directly west of Dowling as the route south from Queen--it is closer to Sororen and already one way going south. It has speed bumps. Cyclists can make a left at King to get to Dowling, or walk their bikes east on King to cross at the light at Dowling to continue south to the foot bridge over the highway. People must walk a short distance west at The Lakeshore to cross Lakeshore with the traffic light so this is nothing new. People can take Dowling north on their return journey to Sororen. This is the logical route;rhe cheapest option; and the least disruptive plan. It is absolutely ridiculous to remove parking for those who live in this neighbourhood when there is a clearly better way to achieve the goal.
Please preserve the parking spots on Dowling Ave.
I agree with this petition.