[grey]

I just don't know what is wrong with having two one way streets running parallel like they do. In the end we have the same number of lanes they are just grouped differently and that allows traffic to flow much smoother. I use Adelaide eastbound just about every morning and it is a very smooth feeder for the dowtown core from the west end.

If we agree (and I think we do) that not every street has to be a Queen/Yonge/Bloor then what is wrong with an Adelaide that has a pretty eclectic (if old) collection of businesses, some retail, a wee bit of hospitablity and some office while, at the same time, being a bit of a congestion reliever.

Sure, the original purpose of the twin one-way streets seems a bit "daft" now....but the end result is a pretty functional pair of roads.

I wouldn't call it ideal by any means in its current state. Especially on Adelaide, where the majority of storefronts are abandoned and for lease. I've seen struggling businesses close (Alteriors) and I really see no prospects for any of the former restaurants and bars next to Burrito Boys, Smoke's, and Ravisoups (excellent, go try it asap). It has the potential to be so much more. There are some amazing spaces there. And there will be a very large number of condo units lining these streets within the next few years.

 

[TOareaFan]

Everyone fears that the cars will go crazy because they won't be able to get into the city quickly," Mr. Vaughan (Trinity Spadina) said yesterday. "The reality is, if you go down there at rush hour, there are no cars on Adelaide whatsoever, so you've got this massive wide street in the downtown that nobody is using. And then when you go to Richmond Street, there are flocks of 20 cars at a time every five minutes but in between ... you can't see a car for 30 or 40 blocks in either direction."

Adam can see for 30 or 40 blocks? Wow.

Not very well.....as I mentioned elsewhere, I am on Adelaide pretty much every day during rush hour from Bathurst to Uni.......it is a smooth route in. I imagine it is the combination of single direction, good light co-ordination and few driveways directly onto to it. But i can confirm to Mr. Vaughan that I am never alone on the road on the way to work.

 

[ElCentro]

The whole "one way streets kill life" argument is a misunderstood reading of Jane Jacobs' Death and Life of Great American Cities where she argued that the conversion of major Manhattan thoroughfares to one way operation hampered bus service, because residents had to migrate over to the next block over to catch a bus in the other direction. Beyond that, she never implied that one way streets were somehow bad for pedestrian vitality, particularly in cases like Richmond and Adelaide which never had any significant surface transit routes to begin with.

Jane Jacobs explicitly discussed the negative impacts of one way streets and limited access expressways in Dark Age Ahead (see pages 77-79) http://books.google.ca/books?id=xIg...0CDwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=one way street&f=true

 

[TOareaFan]

I wouldn't call it ideal by any means in its current state. Especially on Adelaide, where the majority of storefronts are abandoned and for lease. I've seen struggling businesses close (Alteriors) and I really see no prospects for any of the former restaurants and bars next to Burrito Boys, Smoke's, and Ravisoups (excellent, go try it asap). It has the potential to be so much more. There are some amazing spaces there. And there will be a very large number of condo units lining these streets within the next few years.

So isn't it reasonable to expect the residents of those condos to support the businesses/restaurants/bars? Why does it matter that traffic only flows in one direction?

As someone else pointed out, though, not every street can/should/will be a thriving, vibrant retail scene.

 

[grey]

These vibrant New York neighbourhoods are exclusively one way streets, many of which are even wider than Adelaide or Richmond...

Yes, but there are other even more significant differences than traffic direction. A major one being that those neighbourhoods have about ten thousand times the volume of pedestrian traffic, which has a massive positive impact on businesses.

So isn't it reasonable to expect the residents of those condos to support the businesses/restaurants/bars? Why does it matter that traffic only flows in one direction?

To avoid filling up this thread, here's some lengthy debate and discussion from a blog regarding one way streets and how (if at all) they are a detriment to pedestrians. Suffice to say, it looks like reasonable arguments can be made for both sides. I wouldn't be surprised if it had wide-ranging differences on a case by case basis.

As someone else pointed out, though, not every street can/should/will be a thriving, vibrant retail scene.

I pointed it out as well, but I also pointed out that these are not "every street" -- maybe I'm seeing potential here because I draw strong comparisons between this area and King West, where businesses are thriving in beautifully restored buildings just like the ones here with similar ground level spaces and offices above.

 

[lead82]

Well, bringing pedestrian traffic to this neighbourhood is exactly what Adam Vaughan wants to do. Where I disagree is the point of turning Adelaide/Richmond into two ways west of University. I say leave them as is but remove one lane from each, widen the sidewalk, make room for huge patios and encourage more restaurants, bar and cafes. This area would be a fantastic patio area is more room was devoted to the public instead of private road use. As stated by the traffic counts, the roads west of University are not really used that much except during weekend evenings. That is the time when the pedestrian traffic is highest in the area.

Another thing that can be done differently here is that this can become a pedestrian friendly district with not just a main street, but a whole area of streets, small alleyways. There is a lot of innovative stuff that can be done here but it may require re-jigging the road system in favour of alternative uses instead of the automobile --> ie more bike lanes, wider pedestrian sidewalks and a generally improved pedestrian realm.

 

[grey]

^^^ yes, basically this. I'm not entirely sold on two-way streets either, having researched it a bit. I'm just not satisfied with seeing this neighbourhood squandered and mostly derelict and I'm bewildered that others accept the status-quo. I travel along Adelaide and Richmond to work daily and it feels like Hamilton.

 

[egotrippin]

While the general traffic speed is definitely one factor, I don't see why one-way streets are so negative to the pedestrian realm otherwise. I think it's largely some psychological holdover from the days when Richmond and Adelaide were converted for use as mini highways/evacuation routes, and since then development on them has been weary at best. For starters, we could keep their one-way status while reclaiming one lane to add to the sidewalks, and possibly include a bike lane (with its own curb separation). On top of all of this, I love crossing either Richmond or Adelaide between stoplights because as a pedestrian, I only have to worry about traffic coming from one direction.

Essentially, I don't think the friendly pro-pedestrian development has been hampered as a direct result of their one-way status, but rather as a result of those in charge of their overall development instilling imaginary barriers to their development. Those are my thoughts anyway, because I personally enjoy taking Adelaide or Richmond for my east-west walks through the city. Also, as I've seen it tossed around as a comparison: Montreal? They seem to be doing okay.

 

[gristle]

Two directions west of University is a fantastic idea. Those streets cut through the potentially beautiful King/Spadina district full of heritage buildings, which is absolutely begging to become Nolita/Soho-fifteen-years-ago (Entertainment District between Queen and King and Simcoe and a bit west of Spadina).

True, not every street needs to be a shopping destination, but that's not the goal here. Also, I don't know why we're so focused on single retail streets here (I guess some people are limited in experience to this city -- Yonge, Queen, and Bloor). What I'd prefer to see (and I think what Adam is aiming for) is a mix of live/work spaces and studios.

You are absolutely right.

Adelaide between Bathurst and University is a total diamond in the rough - and would benefit from two-way traffic.

Overall, King/Spadina is still coming to life. It has the potential to be one of the great places in this city.

 

[Chuck]

Adelaide between Bathurst and University is a total diamond in the rough - and would benefit from two-way traffic.

But why?

 

[Catapult]

took me 45 mins to drive from Adelaide / John to Adelaide / York today. Adelaide is ALWAYS gridlocked at rush hour between east of University!

We should be making all of our downbtown core streets one way. right now after 9 am it's slow going with parked cars taking up two lanes and street cars on the only lanes that move. One way streets would allow one lane to park. one lane street car dedicated lane and two lanes for cars and a small lane for bikes.

 

[junctionist]

I wouldn't mind Adelaide becoming an important and vibrant retail street in the west end with a view terminus as grand as this:



It's the view terminus most road users will never see, since traffic moves eastbound which is just too bad. View termini like St. Mary's at Portugal Square aren't exactly common here.

 

[js97]

I think you have a ridiculous impression of Vaughan and you really need to catch him speaking in person or on the Rogers channel. The anti-Vaughan clubber types are hilariously out of touch and he is honestly way smarter than any of them and could destroy any argument they could possibly come up in a totally educated and rational manner. I think he has a far better head on his shoulders than any of the mayoral candidates, but I wouldn't wish that job upon him.

Oh, I think he's very intelligent and well spoken, I would say probably one of the top councillors in terms of public speaking and debates. I just think it's gotten to his head, especially when you throw rhetoric about it being empty for 30-40 blocks.. when we are only talking about a 3 block section?

Take a look at Manhattan and their 6 lane avenues. They are littered with shops and retail. From Soho, all the way to the park.

It's wasted infrastructure money and a make work project that I don't think will benefit the city that much.

The guy doesn't even live in the ward!

 

[kettal]

took me 45 mins to drive from Adelaide / John to Adelaide / York today. Adelaide is ALWAYS gridlocked at rush hour between east of University!

wow, you could have walked there in 5 minutes

 

[wyliepoon]

I think the biggest obstacle preventing Richmond/Adelaide (and even sections of King Street in the Entertainment/Fashion District) from being pedestrian friendly is not the fact that they are one-way streets, but because they are mostly lined with historic industrial loft buildings that were not built with pedestrian-friendliness in mind in the first place. Those buildings have no retail spaces at street level, only a main entrance consisting of stairs leading to a half-basement or a main floor that is slightly above street level, or maybe just a couple of loading docks facing the street, in the case of 401 Richmond.

Richmond between Peter and Spadina is one example of what I'm talking about.