[Electrify]

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/05/08/yonge-bay-to-go-one-way

TORONTO - Could Yonge St. and Bay St. become one-way streets?

Public Works chairman Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong wants to study the idea of turning two of the downtown’s busiest north-south streets into one-way roads.

“It would, I think, improve traffic flows and you’d have the ability to, I think, also include some sort of separated bike lanes and possibly add transit as well,†Minnan-Wong said.

“I think it would be a really interesting approach or study … I think we need to look at innovative approaches to dealing with gridlock and congestion in the downtown core.â€

Minnan-Wong said he doesn’t have a preference on which street would become only northbound traffic and which would handle only southbound traffic.

Last year, the public works committee gave the green light to a yet-to-be completed downtown transportation study to look at ways to improve the flow of traffic.

“We do have a congestion and traffic problem, I would hope that council would be looking at ways … of improving traffic in the downtown core and not making it worse,†Minnan-Wong said.

Councillor Adam Vaughan blasted the idea and warned the change, if it ever happened, would “wipe out every small business†along those streets.

“One-way streets destroy commercial activity on them,†Vaughan said.

Councillor Kristyn Wong-Tam, whose ward includes Yonge St., said there should be research and studies before Yonge and Bay Sts. are turned one-way.

“We can’t necessarily do it because of the whim of a councillor,†she said.

“We can certainly look at it and study it but I’m not sure if that’s the way that we want to go. One-way streets in some cities do not facilitate good commercial activity, we know that for a fact.â€

Wong-Tam has her own changes in mind for Yonge St. — at least temporarily.

She will ask the Toronto and East York community council next week to approve closing two of the four lanes on Yonge St. between Gerrard St. and Richmond St. from August 17 to September 16 for the Celebrate Yonge street event. The plan, endorsed by the Downtown Yonge BIA, would widen the sidewalks during the closure and allow around 12 business operators to bump out patios.

“This is not first street in Canada to go through this intervention,†Wong-Tam said.

Asked if she’d ever push for the change to be permanent, Wong-Tam said she was taking the issue “one step at a time.â€

“We have some key performance indexes that we want to meet,†she said. “One of the main objectives is we have to see a better business environment for the merchants and the retailers so we’ll also be monitoring the sales activity.â€

Minnan-Wong shrugged off Wong-Tam’s temporary street closure idea.

“She seems to come up with a lot of interesting ideas,†he said.

Minnan-Wong said the temporary closure was fine as long as it is only for one month this summer.

“That’s fine, that’s nothing new, that’s been done before,†he said.

“I think the fact that that was tried and stopped and not done again says something.â€

I have to disagree with Vaughan's assertion that one way streets kill businesses and pedestrian street activity. When I was in Montreal last summer, I stayed only a few blocks away from Rue Saint-Catherine and Boulevard de Maisonneuve, both one-way streets, and both bursting with pedestrian and business activity. Same thing could be said for the numerous one way streets in New York City.

I believe the reason why Richmond and Adelaide are less lively than Queen and King has more to do with the lack of transit along these roads and other zoning guidelines than it has to do with them being one way. Even Bay St., a two way road, sees significantly less activity along it than Yonge does.

 

[jwill]

There are a couple problems with this but the biggest one for me is the transition from the two-way Yonge in midtown to the one-way Yonge. Driving southbound from St. Clair, how do cars get over to Bay to continue traveling southbound? It would be challenging to direct all that traffic through Yorkville. Davenport Rd is really the only road that could carry that traffic, but left turns onto Bay would eat up a lot of green time on a busy street.


It might work better from a network point of view to combine Church and Bay into a pair, with Bay carrying more southbound traffic and Church carrying more northbound traffic. They could be reconfigured to have 3 lanes each in the primary direction (2 through lanes, with one for turns and parking), with a single lane for the other direction. (like Wellington between University and Spadina). I would support that as part of a plan to slim down Yonge St. to 2 or 3 lanes through the downtown.

 

[Fred.S]

I don't normally agree with Minnan-Wong (I generally dislike him). But I think this is a good idea, if done right. I think the problem in other cities is that they turn 4+ lane roads one-way, and they become 4-lane highways (sort of like Richmond and Adeleide). Zoning also has a lot to do with that.

For Yonge though, bring it down to two lanes, keeping both open during rush hour, and have parking and/or loading/unloading off-peak. Then convert the other two lanes into extra sidewalk space and separated bike lanes. This wouldn't increase the speed of Yonge traffic, but would maintain car throughput and stopping for delivery vehicles. Making Yonge a major bike path and increasing pedestrian space would be very beneficial to the street.

Do something similar for Bay.

I think making many major downtown streets one-way would facilitate seperated transit and bike lanes while minimally impacting car traffic.

 

[Silence&Motion]

“I think Yonge is a wonderful street that’s under-used by cars. If people could get onto the street they would use it.” - Denzil Minnan-Wong (quoted in today's Star)

I almost spit my coffee out when I read this quote this morning. Is he really suggesting that putting more cars on Yonge street should be a policy priority for Toronto? Why not pave over the sidewalks, knock down the buildings, add a few more lanes on each side. Maybe some cloverleafs to replace those pesky stoplights. Then cars would really be able to utilize Yonge. They could speed up and down it all the time without ever having to stop and interact with the city.

 

[Fred.S]

There are a couple problems with this but the biggest one for me is the transition from the two-way Yonge in midtown to the one-way Yonge. Driving southbound from St. Clair, how do cars get over to Bay to continue traveling southbound? It would be challenging to direct all that traffic through Yorkville. Davenport Rd is really the only road that could carry that traffic, but left turns onto Bay would eat up a lot of green time on a busy street.


It might work better from a network point of view to combine Church and Bay into a pair, with Bay carrying more southbound traffic and Church carrying more northbound traffic. They could be reconfigured to have 3 lanes each in the primary direction (2 through lanes, with one for turns and parking), with a single lane for the other direction. (like Wellington between University and Spadina). I would support that as part of a plan to slim down Yonge St. to 2 or 3 lanes through the downtown.

A valid concern, which would require some creativity in the Bay/Davenport/Yonge area, but I don't think it's the biggest challenge. Although maybe Yonge and Church would be a better pair since they both meet up north of Bloor to make a good splitting point. The south end at Front might have issues though.

 

[ShonTron]

Some issues:
1. Already raised was the fact that there's no logical connection between Bay and Yonge to merge the traffic directions, though Davenport would make the most sense. This would require some serious road work to properly do this.

2. Between Dundas and College, Bay is used to divert and short-turn streetcars in both directions (using McCaul in the opposite direction). Alternative routes would have to be found to lay track or build new turns and switches at Church and Dundas and Church and Carlton.

3. The plans are already underway to rationalize the York/Bay/Yonge ramp from the Gardiner. How would this work with the new traffic scheme?

Though I've thought about this idea in my head. One way streets do not necessarily result in killing streetscapes. Yes, Ste- Catharine is one way but very vibrant. Same with St-Laurent and St-Denis, or if you prefer, 5th Avenue in Manhattan. Where one-way streets have hurt are in smaller centres, such as Hamilton (treated as throughways, combined with other short-sighted urban interventions, and local economics).

I'm not completely opposed to the idea, though, and think that 2+1 lane configurations (through lanes and parking/left turn lane) could provide decent levels of service to all users, pedestrians, cyclists, motorists.

One idea I've thought about, but wouldn't push, is permanently narrowing Yonge with one lane each way, with permanent street parking and (unseparated) bike lanes, with the parking giving way to left turn lanes where they make sense. Church and Bay become one way pairs, ensuring that, especially in the Village, sidewalks are improved and widened. Two through lanes each way plus left turn lanes on Bay and Church could provide decent car throughput while improving pedestrian realm on three streets, plus provide parking and a new north-south bike lane route. Front would be forced to take some northbound auto traffic over to Church from Yonge, and streetcar non-revenue trackage rebuilt.

 

[car4041]

One disadvantage of this would be messing up the route of the Bay bus. Of course it's possible for it to operate on Bay southbound and Yonge northbound, but splitting a route in that way is hardly an optimal thing to do (see e.g. the discussion in the comments on this blog post).

It might work better from a network point of view to combine Church and Bay into a pair, with Bay carrying more southbound traffic and Church carrying more northbound traffic. They could be reconfigured to have 3 lanes each in the primary direction (2 through lanes, with one for turns and parking), with a single lane for the other direction.

What about the streetcar tracks, though?

 

[nfitz]

Minnan-Wong might be onto something, by removing a direction of traffic on Yonge and Bay.

But perhaps he hasn't taken it enough; maybe it would be better to remove both directions of traffic - at least on Yonge!

 

[gweed123]

A valid concern, which would require some creativity in the Bay/Davenport/Yonge area, but I don't think it's the biggest challenge. Although maybe Yonge and Church would be a better pair since they both meet up north of Bloor to make a good splitting point. The south end at Front might have issues though.

That's exactly what I was thinking. You could reconfigure the Church and Yonge intersection to be a 'split'. Also, both Yonge and Church right now don't carry any real significant bus traffic (Yonge carries 1 supplementary route, big deal). Church doesn't have anything.

Also, Church between College and Bloor has a lot of pedestrian activity, probably just as much as Yonge from Dundas to College does.

Turn both of these 4 lane roads into 3 lane one-way roads (2 + a parking lane in off-peak), with bike lanes and wider sidewalks. Maybe even do the bike lanes as segregated bike lanes.

It would also give the opportunity to put in turning lanes at intersections, so that traffic doesn't get stuck behind 1 guy turning left.

 

[fiendishlibrarian]

Good idea, but during my Hausmann-esque moods I've long thought University/Avenue Road and Jarvis should be the uni-directional feeders into the downtown. Both streets have connections at various points that can make this happen: Avenue Road either at Queen's Park or further north at Oxton/Chaplin, and Jarvis at the Mount Pleasant/Charles/Bloor split off. Of course, with University, the median would have to be put to the side, but that would have the added bonus of creating a true, linear park from Osgoode all the way up to Queen's Park. Yonge and Bay strike me as small potatoes in that sense, as Jarvis and University already *feel* like Manhattan-esque one-way Avenues, whereas Bay and Yonge play a role more akin to 34th street, say, useful two-way streets, but not the traffic tributaries of the Avenues. Added bonus: true implementation of "rolling green" lights.

Edit: And Adam Vaughan is *really* offbase in his deluded, parochial comments.

 

[car4041]

That's exactly what I was thinking. You could reconfigure the Church and Yonge intersection to be a 'split'. Also, both Yonge and Church right now don't carry any real significant bus traffic (Yonge carries 1 supplementary route, big deal). Church doesn't have anything.

Turn both of these 4 lane roads into 3 lane one-way roads (2 + a parking lane in off-peak), with bike lanes and wider sidewalks. Maybe even do the bike lanes as segregated bike lanes.

I agree that Church seems like a better option than Bay in some ways (and that disrupting the Yonge bus is no big deal) -- but what would you do with the streetcar tracks?

 

[TrickyRicky]

No, no ,no, no, no. I disagree with Vaughn on many issues but not on this one. One-way streets are traffic sewers. They just are. Any street that succeeds as a one-way does so inspite of the one-way. And P.S. one-way DOES kill activity on streets in Montreal and New York. However, in New York, as in many Asian cities killing street activity actually makes the streets more liveable as they would otherwise be overwhelmingly congested. In Montreal you get an alternating effect where some streets are very vibrant and others are VERY dead. Having just come back from Montreal I must say that the vibrancy of the central city is much exaggerated on this forum. That is not a knock on the city, as I quite enjoy and am interested in various aspects of it.

So basically, if you feel that Yonge or Bay are overwhelmingly congested by people and business than one-way could be a good way to get people off the streets and kill street vibrancy. If you don't feel that they have achieved this level of vibrancy then you are basically trading off a cut in business and pedestrian activity for an increase in traffic volume. Traffic by the way is in my opinion enhanced by a one-way grid.

 

[gweed123]

I agree that Church seems like a better option than Bay in some ways (and that disrupting the Yonge bus is no big deal) -- but what would you do with the streetcar tracks?

Leave them. They don't seem to be too big of a deal on Richmond or Adelaide.

But depending on how the road is reconfigured, that may not be possible. If 3 lanes are used, presumably the lanes will need to be shifted slightly. Unless they only widen the sidewalks on 1 side of the street, and put the bike lanes on the same side.

So basically, if you feel that Yonge or Bay are overwhelmingly congested by people and business than one-way could be a good way to get people off the streets and kill street vibrancy. If you don't feel that they have achieved this level of vibrancy then you are basically trading off a cut in business and pedestrian activity for an increase in traffic volume. Traffic by the way is in my opinion enhanced by a one-way grid.

But if there is a net decrease in the number of traffic lanes in each direction (from 4 to 3), and a widening of the sidewalks and addition of bike lanes, how is that going to kill street life? If anything, I think it would enhance it. More pedestrians is what drives street life, not more cars. Give them more space, and you'll get more vibrancy.

 

[allabootmatt]

Those tracks seem to be a pretty important link for diverting between accidents, etc. Where else between Spadina and Parliament can streetcars move between College and Dundas?

I guess I'd rather not know Minnan-Wong's preferres solution for the Bay tracks, and those on other downtown streets.

 

[car4041]

Leave them. They don't seem to be too big of a deal on Richmond or Adelaide.

But depending on how the road is reconfigured, that may not be possible. If 3 lanes are used, presumably the lanes will need to be shifted slightly. Unless they only widen the sidewalks on 1 side of the street, and put the bike lanes on the same side.

?? The tracks on Church get regular use and were recently rebuilt. You think they should just be abandoned?