innsertnamehere
Superstar
I believe northbound cyclists are actually supposed to cross over the ped crossing and queue in the green "southbound" queuing area. You really struggle to see the bike signal from the southern portion as well.
|
|
|
- Thread starter MetroMan
- Start date
ADRM
Senior Member
Holy shit, looking again at the pavement markings, you're right, that's absolutely what they're indicating. That's pretty dumb and runs counter to what I witnessed 99% of the cyclists doing naturally.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
London’s Protected Bike Lanes Move People 5 Times More Efficiently Than Car Lanes
From Streetblog USA, at this link:
A 2014 artist's rendering of Blackfriars Junction, immediately west of Upper Thames Street, after protected bike lane installation.
From Streetblog USA, at this link:
Leave it to a Brit to deliver a mathematical smackdown this courteously.
History may never record which anonymous bureaucrat was assigned to field the following question about London’s protected bike lane network (known there as “cycle superhighways”) submitted to the public agency Transport for London:
That’s when the Transport for London bureaucrat also dropped this mind bomb into the conversation:
And the happy news from this project seems to be that because “traffic” means people, not cars, London’s new protected bike lane network has made Upper Thames Street much, much more efficient — because it gave more Londoners a way to comfortably move through their city in a way that requires less public space.
History may never record which anonymous bureaucrat was assigned to field the following question about London’s protected bike lane network (known there as “cycle superhighways”) submitted to the public agency Transport for London:
Prior to the introduction of cycle superhighway, certain claims were made by TfL on the impact on traffic on Upper Thames St. Congestion now seems to be worse than predicted. Please supply any data or reports on the prediction v. reality. If no analysis has been done, please let me know if it will be and if not, why not. Thank you.
The bureaucrat found while looking up the data for this question that some auto speeds (especially the eastbound evening rush hour) were indeed slower than first modeled, while others (the westbound morning rush hour — so, in most cases the same commuters) came out faster than first modeled:
That’s when the Transport for London bureaucrat also dropped this mind bomb into the conversation:
Recent monitoring data shows that central London segregated cycle lanes are moving five times more people per square metre than the main carriageway, with East West Cycle Superhighway seeing a more than 50 per cent increase the total mileage cycled.
Because the person who asked the question, after all, didn’t ask about auto congestion. They asked about traffic congestion.
And the happy news from this project seems to be that because “traffic” means people, not cars, London’s new protected bike lane network has made Upper Thames Street much, much more efficient — because it gave more Londoners a way to comfortably move through their city in a way that requires less public space.
A 2014 artist's rendering of Blackfriars Junction, immediately west of Upper Thames Street, after protected bike lane installation.
Last edited:
steveintoronto
Superstar
You can clearly see how slippery it is from this pic:
That City staff are so oblivious to the obvious comes as no great surprise. Note the concrete plinth to the left of the green paint. That's there to mount a barrier. Why the need for a barrier? Take a close look at how those cyclists are positioned for their turn. Observers may not have seen what can happen yet, but it will happen, for the same reason you queue *any* vehicles save for when lined up for races at an intersection, which needless to say, should be prevented. The turning and then crossing process will not proceed rationally from that point as presently set-up. The northerly flow channel is fine in that regard, the southerly flow one (green) is just bizarre.
Most of you will disagree. I'm on record as stating "I told you so". Other cities don't do it this way for good reason. The Danes and Dutch especially would be aghast at this.
If a pipe railing barrier was installed on the plinth, the green paint would be unnecessary and the whole project much safer, but I digress. A partial barrier to prevent "through-running" of the two streams of cycle direction is also necessary. (Where the two opposing flows meet) It's a matter of time (And I watched this happen even before the official opening) where cyclists would be drawn southbound on Bathurst to enter the green bay and continue the wrong way down the northbound channel.
Bingo. As presently configured, there's a number of serious ambiguities and conflicts. I think the queuing in the channel is the better option, by far, pedestrians being blocked besides. There should be a duplicate cyclists signal, perhaps even a staggered phase one, at the intersection of the channel and the green bay space, so that one stream of cyclists goes before the other to stop directional conflict when turning east across Bathurst. That will be a problem for time allocation for stopped vehicular traffic, but so be it. Is this to be a safe crossing or not? Pedestrians need at least twice the time to cross Bathurst anyway, so a staggered flow for cyclists would be tight but sufficient.
If the two merging flows are staggered, then a separate light should face each flow so the cue to proceed is clearly visible to each. That light position, since it isn't under the HTA on the cycle track, can be on the western side of the intersection facing as close to the two cues as possible. The HTA does require the cyclist light to remain on the eastern side as well.
And then there's the lack of foresight for pedestrian right of way to cross the channel, unless that's been addressed somehow in the last few weeks since I was there.
Attachments
Last edited:
steveintoronto
Superstar
Notice the careful attention to the *FLOW* of traffic, including the all important cycle traffic and pedestrian crossing. This is light years ahead of anything in Toronto, but alas...
Here's what the Adelaide/Bathurst opposing bike lane flow (where the northbound channel meets the southbound green bay) needs, albeit a physical barrier/flow directer is needed, but for now, this painted indicator would help:
Also note the complete absence of Green Overload. It just isn't necessary in *well designed traffic infrastructure*. It will always be needed in some situations, fair enough, but 'crying wolf' is rampant painting it everywhere. Not to mention the incredible loss of traction on most green *painted* surfaces. If it is green asphalt, of the type used in Europe with the special tractive compound added (European is usually red, not green) it would be a huge plus.
Even excessive white line markings are slippery as fug, especially when wet.
And then we have the yellow tactile strips being installed length-wise along King, all the while the City inviting cyclists to use the space. Streetcars and tracks parallel one side, very slippery yellow strip the other and the icing on the cake, the slippery white line markings down the center of the tightrope cyclists must use...
What could possibly go wrong?
Attachments
Last edited:
steveintoronto
Superstar
I visited the 'green bay' yesterday on foot, with thin sole shoes on (akin to real running shoes, not the consumer ones) to check out the adhesive/traction properties of the green section.
It's odd, like no other patch in TO (or elsewhere, save for painting disasters) that I've come across. Perhaps it's an attempt to correct the obvious slippery strips in it (still present), but my impression is that the paint used had no traction grit in it, it was added onto wet paint, and then painted over again, such that a *very* uneven application of grit is now present. Right next to the curb, it is very prominent, something to be avoided as it causes other problems according to guidelines. And then in strips, as mentioned, there is none. That's going to be a nasty situation. One of the problems that presents is someone slipping on the non-gritted streaks, and then falling on the heavily gritted part. It will tear cloth and the skin under it. It will also harbour water, and freeze.
And the turn arrow indicating eastward to the north of the marked cycle lane is in conflict with HTA guidelines for "two abreast" cycling flow.
See:
Cycling and the Law
Single File Cycling vs Two Abreast Cycling
https://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=af6e0995bbbc1410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD
A marshalling rail has to go up on the plinth provided to correct that before it turns to grief.
Last edited:
steveintoronto
Superstar
Well, well. I got banned from UT for two weeks for repeatedly pointing out the obvious on this, but it's clearly beyond the scope of all but a few cyclists (I wasn't the only one calling 'foul' on this) as to what constitutes safe cycling infrastructure or not. The three monkeys writ large...
There's quite a few green boxes just as compromised or more than this, not that Toronto cyclists would notice (save a choice few, of whom most of us have been serious cyclists for generations, and in other nations):
It's more than just the missing railing (for which a plinth has been provided), there's several glaring errors in the design. But then again, it's Toronto. The average cyclist wouldn't know the difference. Most don't observe protocol let alone safe cycling.
And btw: The Church has no claim on that property. Even if they did, the City has clear right of expropriation. But of course, this is about the "dead"...not the living. It's clear where priorities lie with this Council. The "plinth" is clearly visible in the photo. If a curb or railing was installed on it, there would be no reason to need the farcical green mess that would make even an amateur painter blush...green.
And there's also the legal technicality now of the HTA applying to the area painted green, since it is a parking space, part of the street, not the sidewalk.
I wonder what Cnclr Layton has to say on that? It's obviously not compliant to HTA regs.
There's quite a few green boxes just as compromised or more than this, not that Toronto cyclists would notice (save a choice few, of whom most of us have been serious cyclists for generations, and in other nations):
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2017/12/07/bike-lane-design-allows-for-hearse-parking.htmlBike lane design allows for hearse parking
Revamped area in front of St. Mary’s Church at Bathurst and Adelaide Sts. Is a compromise, but some cyclists say it shows a lack of commitment of the city’s Vision Zero road safety goals.
This green area outside St. Mary's Church at Bathurst and Adelaide Sts. is supposed to offer both hearse parking and protection for cyclists. (Eduardo Lima / Metro News)
By Sarah-Joyce Battersby
Thu., Dec. 7, 2017
A new turning lane and traffic light dedicated to bikes shows cycling is alive and well in Toronto. But a lack of curb to keep cars out has some critics questioning the design.
The driving force? Hearses.
The $550,000 project at Bathurst and Adelaide Sts. sits directly in front of St. Mary’s Church, which has hosted funerals for more than a century.
Consultations with the church and the cycling community led to the concession, in part to allow hearses to park out front.
“It’s a pretty understandable consideration that we’re making, given that it’s a church and it holds funerals,” Coun. Mike Layton told Metro, adding the compromise upholds the site’s existing use while providing “significant” protection for bikes.
The open design also accommodates the large volume of bikes that can collect at the intersection, he said. (More than 500 riders clock through the spot during morning rush hour.)
Though the church has other entrances and a parking lot, Layton said other buildings and additions constructed over the years don’t allow for a direct route to the sanctuary.
“It really wasn’t feasible or realistic to think that people would walk out the front door with a casket and walk it around the building,” he said.
Cyclist Hanno Rein told Metro in an email that the decision pits the safety of some over the convenience of others and shows a lack of commitment to the city’s Vision Zero road safety goals. It’s a conflict he sees repeated in other areas, such as reducing speed limits, narrowing lanes and installing more pedestrian crossings.
“If the politicians of this city continue to run on platforms that focus on speeding up cars that move through our city, we’ll need a lot more hearses in the future,” he said.
Parked cars, including limos and hearses, have been spotted in the lane since it opened, prompting calls on Twitter to review the design.
“Classic Toronto: almost good, but not quite,” wrote @robmclarty.
“This is too common and why infrastructure can’t depend on the goodwill of drivers or 9-5 enforcement,” wrote @awkwartunity.
Hearses have been spotted in bike lanes elsewhere in the city. Just last week Twitter user @matthewdvm sent out a photo of such a scene in the Sherbourne bike lanes.
Toronto police generally use their discretion when it comes to ticketing funeral vehicles, according to a traffic services officer.
St. Mary’s declined to comment when reached by phone, but the church website published a brief statement ahead of the lane’s opening that read, in part: “Our hope is that cyclists have a safer commute by utilizing the new lanes and respecting the parish property.”
Calling the change a “major improvement,” Layton said the compromise helps preserve the city’s heritage.
“(The church) has been there longer than all of us,” he said. “It will be there longer than all of us.”
It's more than just the missing railing (for which a plinth has been provided), there's several glaring errors in the design. But then again, it's Toronto. The average cyclist wouldn't know the difference. Most don't observe protocol let alone safe cycling.
And btw: The Church has no claim on that property. Even if they did, the City has clear right of expropriation. But of course, this is about the "dead"...not the living. It's clear where priorities lie with this Council. The "plinth" is clearly visible in the photo. If a curb or railing was installed on it, there would be no reason to need the farcical green mess that would make even an amateur painter blush...green.
And there's also the legal technicality now of the HTA applying to the area painted green, since it is a parking space, part of the street, not the sidewalk.
I wonder what Cnclr Layton has to say on that? It's obviously not compliant to HTA regs.
Last edited:
salsa
Senior Member
Attachments
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
source?
jaybe
Active Member
Nice increase in utilization by cyclists. That translates to 267 cyclists per hour or 4.5 bikes per minute. I wonder how the cyclists' use of the track compares with the number of cars using the remaining lanes?
I ask because you can be sure Councillors like Mammolitti will try to block progress made by cyclists. Do these stats support cyclists and the movement of people through the core or can they be co-opted by those proposing there is a war on the car?
I ask because you can be sure Councillors like Mammolitti will try to block progress made by cyclists. Do these stats support cyclists and the movement of people through the core or can they be co-opted by those proposing there is a war on the car?
ADRM
Senior Member
Also worth nothing that more recent counts have shown dramatically higher cyclist traffic on Adelaide.
steveintoronto
Superstar
The source is almost three years old though. The success for all major downtown routes is far beyond that now.
Recently I've been trying to find the source for the claim (gist) "More people cycle into the downtown than drive down the Don Valley Parkway". (On a working day)
Either I've got the wrong tag, or the wrong information. If anyone can supply a link to that info, I'd be very grateful. It makes an exquisite point.
Attachments
innsertnamehere
Superstar
yup June 2016 numbers are likely way below what we will see in June 2018 - I've been a near daily user of the Richmond Adelaide lanes since they were installed in 2014, and every year cyclist traffic has noticably increased. It's to the point where the morning peak direction can feel very dutch with the ridiculous summer traffic levels. I expect this year to be even busier, winter traffic has certainly been far higher than last winter.