[Northern Light]

Outstanding Change

This is exactly the kind or proposal we need to see more of this City!

I think it strikes a very nice balance in creating much more pedestrian friendly streets, augmenting the beauty of the city, for both residents and tourists while not actually making it impossible to get around by car for those who need to do so.

I love the look of the John St. proposal and some of the new public squares/parks.

Beyond that I am very much in favour of the propose 2-way conversion of Adelaide and Richmond, west of University.

All this complaining from some, about something that will not materially, adversely affect traffic, but will allow for a much more humane environment.

As for the larger 1-way issue.........

Yes, of course there are 1-way streets in the world that aren't dead; though there are many that are....

No, their one-wayness is not the be all/end all of success or failure...

However, high-wayness is almost always a detriment to a street being a successful place for pedestrians or cyclists.

AND

Most (not all) major streets which are made 1-way are done so with the intend of speeding traffic operating express through a community, not to the community.

Which, in general, has the effect of diminishing the opportunity for retail success and patio culture and also reduces the likelihood of many pedestrians or cyclist.

I for one do not want to walk along side cars doing 70km/ph or gridlocked and spewing pollutants everywhere, doesn't strike me as conditions I'd want to bike in either.....

It is true, of course, that you could keep both these roads 1-way and address most of those concerns, however, if you narrow Richmond and Adelaide by 1 lane each way for wider sidewalks/bike lanes, and you program longer pedestrian cycles at traffic lights...etc etc.....

Then you also defeat the whole purpose of having made the road 1-way in the first place.

Which in turn begs the question, why not convert back to 2-way which is just easier to navigate, even as a driver?

 

[unimaginative2]

I just don't understand the idea that Richmond or Adelaide are highways. Sure, they're slightly easier to drive on than King or Queen, but I've never hit 70kmh, and there are traffic lights every two blocks.

 

[Whoaccio]

They boobed with that photo. It's not Toronto. It's Helmut Jahn's scheme for the Hudson Yards redevelopment project in Manhattan.

Toronto doesn't have an Empire State Building.

Didn't you get the memo? After we finish creating 'small town' feel areas throughout the City, we will eventually move on to creating Art Deco inspired neighborhoods to maintain that Metropolis feel. By 2080, we should be ready for our second go around with modernism. Engineers are already on plans to convert the CN Tower's Sky Pod to a zeppelin dock and adding sunburst motifs to Scotia.

 

[Whoaccio]

Well you could do a lot worse than Peterborough. It's usually the other way around - trendy main streets in small town and cities are often compared to Queen West. In Huntsville there's a store called "Queen Street North". Kind of clever in a Be Sharps kind of way.

Fair enough, but trying to have a main retail strip in a large 21st century city retain a 'small town feel' just seems bizarre to me. Its not like there isn't a long list of vibrant and unabashedly 'big city' streets the world over that we could use as a model.

 

[Hipster Duck]

Okay, here's my prediction:

1. Adam Vaughan succeeds in converting the streets to two-way.

2. The streetcar track replacement of Adelaide goes ahead, as planned.

3. With the streetcar tracks being replaced, Vaughan et al. see an opportunity to introduce regular streetcar service to Adelaide.

4. The Adelaide streetcar becomes one of the slowest surface transit routes in the city, averaging 6 km/h at rush hour. Travel along both streets becomes frustratingly slow for transit riders and car drivers alike.

5. The city turns to its next project: making Wellington a two-way through the core.

 

[nfitz]

Streetcar tracks are being replaced on Adelaide this year. Are they going to do both directions or just one? Even if Bathurst to University is two ways, it doesn't help for westbound detours as there are no access points to Adelaide west of at least York (I don't think there's any working way to access York from Queen or King anymore, just Wellington)

I'd think it would have to just be the one-way on Adelaide. If they put the second track in, there would be no way to get to it! It's probably not on anyone's radar ... the track replacement has been in the works for years, before this new scheme came about.

 

[MisterF]

Fair enough, but trying to have a main retail strip in a large 21st century city retain a 'small town feel' just seems bizarre to me. Its not like there isn't a long list of vibrant and unabashedly 'big city' streets the world over that we could use as a model.

While a lot of small towns and cities have trendy main streets that somewhat resemble Queen, they're not on the same level. Queen Street feels much more like a big city than those streets. Low rise doesn't mean small town, and preserving a low rise built form on Queen has nothing to do with keeping a supposed "small town feel".

 

[wyliepoon]

Nobody will actually stop to think, "Hey, Richmond and Adelaide probably won't become lively shopping streets unless they're completely rebuilt with buildings that actually have retail at the base." Unfortunately, the only uses enlivening the streets--nightclubs--will have all been chased out by then.

That, I think is the main reason for the lack of street life on Richmond and Adelaide, and much of the Entertainment District. Since the area used to be an industrial/warehouse district, many buildings don't have any units at street level. Street level entrances of buildings lead either upstairs or downstairs to the basement (or both).

I think we are picking the wrong battle here. We should be thinking about whether the existing buildings should be renovated to include more street-level units, not whether Richmond and/or Adelaide should be one-way or two-way.

 

[Whoaccio]

While a lot of small towns and cities have trendy main streets that somewhat resemble Queen, they're not on the same level. Queen Street feels much more like a big city than those streets. Low rise doesn't mean small town, and preserving a low rise built form on Queen has nothing to do with keeping a supposed "small town feel".

According to the article:

The north end's brick-and-beam buildings would be protected to form a Warehouse Precinct, while historic thoroughfares like Queen West would remain low-rise in order to protect their “main street charm,†the plan states.

"Small town feel" and "main street charm" are about as synonymous as one gets.

 

[junctionist]

I don't know why our Victorian main streets are conceptualized as small towns. It's like every neighbourhood has to have "village" tacked on its name.

 

[golodhendil]

Beyond that I am very much in favour of the propose 2-way conversion of Adelaide and Richmond, west of University.

All this complaining from some, about something that will not materially, adversely affect traffic, but will allow for a much more humane environment.

As for the larger 1-way issue.........

Yes, of course there are 1-way streets in the world that aren't dead; though there are many that are....

No, their one-wayness is not the be all/end all of success or failure...

However, high-wayness is almost always a detriment to a street being a successful place for pedestrians or cyclists.

AND

Most (not all) major streets which are made 1-way are done so with the intend of speeding traffic operating express through a community, not to the community.

Which, in general, has the effect of diminishing the opportunity for retail success and patio culture and also reduces the likelihood of many pedestrians or cyclist.

I for one do not want to walk along side cars doing 70km/ph or gridlocked and spewing pollutants everywhere, doesn't strike me as conditions I'd want to bike in either.....

It is true, of course, that you could keep both these roads 1-way and address most of those concerns, however, if you narrow Richmond and Adelaide by 1 lane each way for wider sidewalks/bike lanes, and you program longer pedestrian cycles at traffic lights...etc etc.....

Then you also defeat the whole purpose of having made the road 1-way in the first place.

Which in turn begs the question, why not convert back to 2-way which is just easier to navigate, even as a driver?

Mind showing the data for the "many" one-way streets that have an "inhumane" environment, compared to the, I presume, "few" two-way streets that are pedestrian-unfriendly and dead?

Whether a street is dead or alive with pedestrian activity depends only on whether the streetscape and storefronts are interesting. If there are stores and restaurants that attract people, you will have a bustling one-way street teeming with pedestrian life whether it is a two-lane street (like Newbury Street in Boston) or a five-lane superroad (like 5th Ave in Manhattan). If the retail or streetscape is unattractive, you will get dead streets even if it's a narrow, cozy two-way street. To believe that making a one-way street two-way will miraculously bring pedestrian activity to life is as absurd as believing that making a street one-way will turn it into a highway.

 

[TKTKTK]

I think the point is that one-way traffic really tends to kill pedestrian or cycling traffic. It acts simply as a highway to get to another part of the city. They can help improve street life by making both streets two way. I believe the plan calls for both streets to be 3 lanes, with one lane for parking / sidewalk bumpouts.

They could help improve street life by making sure there's something ON Adelaide or Richmond. In fact, what I said is nearly a lie, in the few spots where there are storefronts, restaurants, whatever, there IS pedestrian traffic — both during the day and during the night. Also, you've got to ask yourself, why walk along Adelaide or Richmond when you can walk along much nicer Queen or King?

 

[MisterF]

"Small town feel" and "main street charm" are about as synonymous as one gets.

Why? Toronto has dozens of low rise neighbourhoods that have what could be described as "main street charm". So do bigger cities like Chicago and London. There's nothing small town about it.

 

[Archivist]

I agree with TK - there's just not enough on Richmond or Adelaide to merit changes there, and making them two way will do nothing to magically make them better streets. They are sandwiched between King and Queen anyways, which do and should predominate.

The changes on John are far more important - it would be great to have more linkages between the existing busy activity on Queen and King, and the John Street improvements are a natural way to help that process. John is already quite promising, and doing a little will likely yield a lot.

 

[TrickyRicky]

The mentioned successful one way streets are not unsuccessful because of the direction of their flow. But I don't believe that you can discount the idea that traffic flow direction is irrelevent because such streets exist.

Once a street becomes heavily used and congested creating a network of one-way streets enhances traffic throughput. However, an argument can be made that were you to attempt to engineer street vitality one-way streets would be detrimental to this process. My point being that you can't look at a snap shot of cities now and draw any conclusions about street-direction without looking at how those streets evolved over time.