The King St. Pilot is the "Greater Good"

Lately there’s been a lot of hyperbola about the King St. pilot being bad for local business.

The problem with this statement and its negative positioning of the trial is that there has been no real context associated with the “badness”. In order for something to be bad does it not have to be compared to some sort of initial baseline.

So back to the pilot specifically, if the change in street access is reducing traffic at a couple small restaurants or shops on the section of King St associated with the pilot, does this mean that the change is holistically bad for the city of Toronto?

What about all the social and psychological goodness for the people using the streetcars on a daily basis. What about the positive impact on the environment by the potential of having less emissions as a result of lower vehicle usage? What about the shift in parking patterns outside of the city centre to shared, distributed spots on the edge of the city, like those provided by Rover Parking.

These sort of changes to “mobility” need to be evaluated at the 10,000 ft level where its all about the greater good for the city of Toronto and it’s overall populous.

People are starting to look at different ways to get in and out of the city core. And its this change in thinking alone that is the big win for the city of Toronto. Old behavior needs to change, plain and simple. The bottom line is that this pilot is doing just that.

The point of the pilot should be to evaluate the greater good for the city of Toronto, not to steer away from change based feedback from a only a select few.

Subscribe to Rover Parking

Get the latest posts delivered right to your inbox

Rover Parking

Subscribe to Rover Parking

Stay up to date! Get all the latest & greatest posts delivered straight to your inbox