A months-long traffic study beginning this week will help determine whether a previously approved plan to permanently remove the traffic signals at Wallace Terrace and Goulais Avenue should proceed.
The study will include temporarily removing the traffic signals at the intersection and installing a pedestrian crosswalk and two stop signs on Goulais. That work is expected to be completed by Thursday.
City council has already approved the permanent removal of the traffic signal, along with a plan to narrow Wallace Terrace from three lanes to two — a measure commonly referred to as a ‘road diet’ aimed at calming traffic.
Ward 5 Coun. Matthew Scott was one of two members who opposed the road diet plan, which includes removing the signal at Wallace Terrace and Goulais Avenue.
Scott said the city's traffic department tends to follow the Ontario Traffic Manual very tightly.
"When they notice things are outside of the norm for the OTM, the traffic department brings forward ideas to council, and this was one of them," he said, adding that he grew up in the Bayview neighbourhood.
"I know these lights, I know this corner. It's busy when there's people going in and out of the plant and it's busy when people are headed home at four o'clock or headed to work at eight o'clock. It's one of two ways into the west end, along with Second Line — which we know has a problem with traffic," Scott said.
Local residents rely on those lights to safely cross Wallace Terrace en route to nearby parks, Manzo Pool, and Bayview’s new splash pad, he said. They also use the signals to attend local businesses at that corner, like Millie's Mini Mart and Deluca's Pizza.
"We continue to try and build out the west end and add infrastructure, but we're taking away things that are made for safety because of an Ontario Traffic Manual, which to me is short sighted," Scott said.
Due to council procedural rules, Scott cannot introduce a motion reversing his earlier vote against removing the lights or implementing the road diet.
Instead, Scott proposed conducting a temporary traffic study as an alternative approach before any permanent changes are made.
He acknowledged some confusion among residents who mistakenly believe his support for studying impacts means he supports removing the lights.
"Some people just know the most recent history, so they get a little bit angry at me and say, 'why do you want the lights gone?' I don't."
Scott is hoping there will not be any major collisions at the intersection during the traffic study.
"I just want people to see it's not right," he said.
Any council motion to reverse the decision will have to come from a councillor other than Scott or Stephan Kinach, since they both voted against the original motion. Scott suggested anyone not in favour of the removal of the traffic signals at that intersection should contact the mayor and members of council.
Maggie McAuley, the city's manager of design and transportation, said public feedback will be a part of the study.
"Community members will be invited to provide feedback online. Results of the study will be presented to council for further consideration," she said.