This web forum is an opportunity for members of the Queen’s community to openly discuss questions, goals and recommendations related to
Queen's Campus Master Plan as the process moves forward over the next several months. This forum is intended to provide an opportunity for free flowing community discussion.
• All comments are the opinion of the contributor.
• Contributors are asked to include their true name and e-mail address, but are not required to do so.
• Comments will be moderated by the site administrator. Any comments that contain personal attacks, offensive language or raise concern regarding campus safety and security will not be approved.
• The
blog administrator will try to answer all questions in a conversation thread or through subsequent posts as themes emerge, but not all comments will necessarily receive a direct response.
Should you wish to send feedback anonymously, please use the
Campus Master Plan Feedback Form
qucampusplan 
The following video was recently posted on youtube. It demonstrates only too well the effect that Queen’s has had on the surrounding area and why it has been abandoned by families and non-student households. Over the years numerous task forces and committees have failed to solve the problem.
One of the current suggestions is that students move further from Campus to the Williamsville area. Why ? Won’t this lead to more of the same,the loss of more family homes and the expansion of the “ghetto”?
Hi Joan, Thanks for your comments. Your video demonstrates what can happen when too many single family homes are converted to multiple occupant dwellings in a tightly focused area. With such “wear and tear”, both the building stock and the surrounding environment suffer if building owners defer maintenance. Queen’s, our client, is very aware and concerned about these issues.
The City’s Williamsville study proposes the construction of new multi-occupant dwellings along Princess Street for not only students, but younger families and professionals. As campus and city planners, we are interested in exploring this opportunity to provide student-oriented housing in an appropriate location and form – on a busy street with many amenities.
Perhaps this strategy will reduce the pressure to convert single family homes into multiple occupant dwellings and begin to minimize the “dis-investment” your video so clearly illustrates. – Anthony
I am interested to know if the CMP team has considered the possible benefits of persuading the city to implement a pedestrian scramble crossing at the intersection of University Ave and Union Street. Located at the heart of campus, this is a very busy pedestrian crossing in both directions, and too often I have seen pedestrians come into conflict and “near misses” with the vehicle traffic. A scramble crossing would stop vehicular traffic in all directions once in each cycle, allowing pedestrians to cross in all directions, including diagonally. As the pedestrian traffic peaks during weekdays, in particular between Queen’s class times, the traffic signals could easily be programmed to only offer scramble crossings during these times.
Existing scramble crossings in other cities vary in whether they continue to allow pedestrians to cross, as they do now, at the same time as vehicles travelling in the same direction. Given the high ratio of pedestrian traffic to vehicular traffic, I would advise that pedestrians should be allowed to cross alongside vehicular traffic during the vehicles’ “green light” phases.
Cyclists, as always, would be subject to the same rules as motorized vehicles; however, unlike motorists, they would be free to dismount and walk their bikes through the intersection during the scramble phase of the traffic cycle.
Along the same lines, I believe that the intersection of Union Street and Alfred Street (and/or Frontenac Street) merits a north-south pedestrian “courtesy crossing” such as those now seen along King Street south of Leonard Field. At the very least, a painted cross-walk from Alfred Street (or Frontenac Street) to Tindall Field could increase safety by reminding motorists of the pedestrians’ presence, while encouraging pedestrians to cross in a predictable manner along a prescribed path.
The implementation of either of these proposals is dependant on the approval and co-operation of the City of Kingston, but as they are issues of community safety, I believe them to be high priorities meriting serious consideration from both the City and the Campus Master Plan team.
Thomas Douglas
M.PL. candidate, Queen’s School of Urban and Regional Planning
Correction:
Tindall Field is south of Frontenac Street, not Alfred Street. My intention was to suggest a north-south cross-walk across Union Street from Frontenac Street (roughly in line with Tindall Field), or from Alfred Street (roughly in line with the Sir John A MacDonald building).
Hi Thomas –
This intersection has certainly been identified as both an important place on campus, as well as a place with safety concerns. The CMP will be including a number of recommendations for this intersection — aligned with LAMPs vision for this intersection as a University ‘Town Square’ — addressing public realm enhancements as well as traffic calming measures. A scramble intersection hasn’t been considered as an option yet, but I will forward this comment on to the project team for consideration as we’re drafting the final plan.
Your other cross section recommendations align with many we’ve already identified. We’ll be hosting an open house in December that will contain our mobility map that identifies areas for new traffic calming measures as well as intersections. Keep an eye out on this blog for when we post the materials or please come by the open house!
Thanks so much for your comments.
– Anthony
Thomas:
Your suggestion about a “pedestrian scramble” at the intersection of University Avenue and Union Street has been incorporated into the final Campus Master plan. It can be seen on pages 106 -107 in the discussion about the proposed Library Square, with a lovely rendering from the Library and Archives Master Plan project.
It is also included in the Section 5.5.2 Street Network, on pages 122-124.