Napoleon
Active Member
Well, when I was on it yesterday there were some long-ish stretches without bollards in the middle. I'm hoping they put them up.
|
|
|
- Thread starter MetroMan
- Start date
UserNameToronto
Active Member
Adelaide lanes are painted all the way to Parliament St, though there are no bollards yet. There is a section in the middle (Bay to Victoria) that is still pending due to construction, a smaller portion of which (west of Yonge) that will have a special accommodation for a cargo truck zone.
I think Richmond might have all the bollards it's going to get. I estimate 50% of the Richmond lane has bollards between Parliament and Bay. There are a number of turning zones and bus stop zones that can't be bollard-ed. It isn't perfect, but I can't complain.
I think we have to remember this is a pilot project - perhaps if the trial is successful, the permanent lanes will be separated more clearly (perhaps like the Sherbourne cycle path). It's much easier to add/remove bollards then to change the concrete pour on a permanent lane.
Last edited:
Filip
Senior Member
It's a shame they didn't have those lanes curve out at intersections to allow right turning cars their own lane. I've seen way too many close calls.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
ultimately I find that relatively unsafe, I prefer it where cars can merge into the bike lane to make their right turns.. Of course most bikes still try and cut to the right of the car, which is completely dangerous. There is a full right turn lane at Bathurst and Richmond, and Its a pain to make sure you can merge safely over and that a car isn't going to drive straight into you while flying into the right turn lane. I would hate to have to do that at every intersection, forcing cyclists into mixed traffic should be minimized whenever possible.
Napoleon
Active Member
Yeah, I agree with this one. I would rather merge most of the time than have one of these transitions. Thankfully, the one at Bathurst and Richmond is rather well-painted and signed, so it's moderately obvious what's going on. There are a few of these in bike lanes around the city (happens on Spadina heading northbound around King or Adelaide) where the signage is minimal. The danger of these lane crossing is that cars are traveling at much higher speeds at the point the crossing occurs, as opposed to merging in the bike line just prior to turning.
Of course, I would prefer Montreal style signal phasing: protected peds/bikes, straight only for cars, end of bike/ped phase and general green for cars. So much safer.
ShonTron
Moderator
The Montreal "straight only" phase that starts a green cycle at busy urban intersections, and a blanket prohibition on right turns on red are great, simple, effective ways to improve cyclists' and pedestrians' safety.
smably
Senior Member
Yup, I'd be OK with either option presented above (bike lane crossing turn lane, or merging of bike lane with turn lane). Unfortunately, the way these cycle tracks have been built, the bollards go right to the stop line at the intersection. Right turning cars, instead of merging with bike traffic, just turn right into the cycle track, often without checking for cyclists. I almost got pinned under a truck that turned right at Richmond and University without signalling a few months ago. It's incredibly dangerous. An extra signal phase for right turning traffic would certainly improve this situation, though I wouldn't trust cars to respect the turning restriction on other phases, so it might lull cyclists into a false sense of security.
Dutch-style intersections with bump-outs, tight radii, and perpendicular crossings would be the ideal long-term solution.
TOareaFan
Superstar
In the areas where I drive (ie. not all over the city) the intersection at Simcoe and Front seems to work best.....drivers and cyclists both know that right turning vehicles have to cross over the bike lane to get into the right hand turn position.....I, and other drivers I have observed, know that it is like any other lane change and the person coming along in that lane (in this case cyclists) have the right of way and I have never seen it develop into an "incident"..
All the other intersections that right hand turns are allowed with cycle lanes create this "split attention" issue with the drivers....they are trying to turn right.....paying attention to the light cycle...paying attention to crossing pedestrians and paying attention to cyclists approaching from the rear on their right......it seems that having the car merge/cross over the cycle path in advance of the intersection is a more graceful method....that way the car/cycle interaction is dealt with as a separate transaction and the driver turning right is left at the intersection dealing with a more "normal" situation where they are only dealing with the light and the pedestrians.
Seems better for all involved.
All the other intersections that right hand turns are allowed with cycle lanes create this "split attention" issue with the drivers....they are trying to turn right.....paying attention to the light cycle...paying attention to crossing pedestrians and paying attention to cyclists approaching from the rear on their right......it seems that having the car merge/cross over the cycle path in advance of the intersection is a more graceful method....that way the car/cycle interaction is dealt with as a separate transaction and the driver turning right is left at the intersection dealing with a more "normal" situation where they are only dealing with the light and the pedestrians.
Seems better for all involved.
Towered
Superstar
So now that these lovely lanes have been installed, what's the next cycling infrastructure project? It should be expanding consistently with no gaps.
the lemur
Senior Member
The problem sometimes with the crossover solution is that drivers are eager to get into position to turn right, so they speed up, or cyclists are looking to move left with the bike lane, but drivers are starting to drift to the right. Like you, however, I haven't seen any conflicts.
I think the ideal solution to the problem of divided driver attention is to separate the bike lanes near intersections and put in dedicated signals.
Attachments
Napoleon
Active Member
Pilot lanes on Bloor from Shaw to Avenue!
You can read about the rest here: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2015/pw/bgrd/backgroundfile-83532.pdf
but that is by far the most exciting.
Towered
Superstar
Only from Shaw to Avenue? Sigh...we really are incapable of implementing bold civic vision in this city. They should go from Kipling to Kennedy and beyond...
rbt
Senior Member
Large projects get killed really easily. It only takes a semi-legitimate court case by some business out near Kipling to stall the central component until a new mayor comes to town who has different priorities.
Phasing these things is the way to go. Of course, there is no reason why work on Phase 2 couldn't start the second Phase 1 is funded and approved.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
It's another"pilot" that will see the lanes expanded in another year or two to a much longer length.
Towered
Superstar
I guess you guys are right. Given the scatterbrained and bi-polar nature of our municipal politics, especially in recent years, it does make sense to do potentially controversial projects piecemeal. These "pilots" are the perfect trojan horses to nullify the overwhelming destructive force of NIMBY's...