[Megaton327]

Has there been a clear statement of how the signals will work? With most vehicles forced to turn right, there does need to be signal phase not completely blocked up with pedestrians in one crosswalk or the other. Streetcars and traffic can roll at the same time.

Unfortunately I don't think I've ever once been at a major intersection in downtown Toronto, as a driver or streetcar rider or cyclist or pedestrian, and seen an advanced green where several pedestrians didn't freely walk into the road and block vehicles from making their turns. People just don't care.*

Enforcement is the key, which means this pilot is doomed insofar as cars being able to make right turns.

 

[muller877]

Unfortunately I don't think I've ever once been at a major intersection in downtown Toronto, as a driver or streetcar rider or cyclist or pedestrian, and seen an advanced green where several pedestrians didn't freely walk into the road and block vehicles from making their turns. People just don't car.

Enforcement is the key, which means this pilot is doomed insofar as cars being able to make right turns.

Freudian slip Megaton. care, not car

But yes, without proper enforcement of the advanced turning the project will fail. The other question I have is cyclists. If the right lane is right turn only how many cyclists will be in the far right of the street going straight through? Cyclists should be staying to the left of the right turning cars.

 

[crs1026]

This may actually be less of an issue on King than it is everywhere else.

As I think about this, I wonder why the right turn light is being treated as an "advance" green. It's more of a case of a regular green light, that has an arrow instead of a full lens, to remind the driver that the right turn is their only option... in case they miss the no left/no through sign. The right arrow green is not granting right of way over opposing traffic in the same way that an advance left turn arrow does. Nor does it restrain pedestrians any more than a regular green light. (At a regular green light the HTA requirement for making a right turn is to yield to pedestrians who are legally crossing in the direction of the green....which I agree is frustrating when there's a steady stream of them!....but it's normal). This is no different.

If the HTA says that a right green arrow gives priority to the turning car over pedestrians, then maybe we shouldn't have used them in the design.

If you assume that the only cars on King will have been making local stops within that block of the mall, the right turn to exit King will feel much more like exiting a parking lot than making a turn in traffic. Yes, it will take longer, as there will have to be a gap in pedestrian movement, but so what? There will not be a line of cars piled up behind blowing their horns impatiently.... the mall will be inherently calming. Just turn when it is safe to do so.

- Paul

 

[BMO]

I'm interested in finding out how they plan to address the Bathurst/King intersection. Right now it's already a shitshow between streetcars stopping nearside on the eastbound approach combined with the left-turning vehicles. Are westbound vehicles going to be forced to turn right or will they be allowed to drive through? in an ideal world the Streetcar stop would be shifted far side so that vehicles behind the streetcar could do their turns and create a clearing for streetcars further back upstream.

 

[BMO]

This may actually be less of an issue on King than it is everywhere else.

As I think about this, I wonder why the right turn light is being treated as an "advance" green. It's more of a case of a regular green light, that has an arrow instead of a full lens, to remind the driver that the right turn is their only option... in case they miss the no left/no through sign. The right arrow green is not granting right of way over opposing traffic in the same way that an advance left turn arrow does. Nor does it restrain pedestrians any more than a regular green light. (At a regular green light the HTA requirement for making a right turn is to yield to pedestrians who are legally crossing in the direction of the green....which I agree is frustrating when there's a steady stream of them!....but it's normal). This is no different.

If the HTA says that a right green arrow gives priority to the turning car over pedestrians, then maybe we shouldn't have used them in the design.

If you assume that the only cars on King will have been making local stops within that block of the mall, the right turn to exit King will feel much more like exiting a parking lot than making a turn in traffic. Yes, it will take longer, as there will have to be a gap in pedestrian movement, but so what? There will not be a line of cars piled up behind blowing their horns impatiently.... the mall will be inherently calming. Just turn when it is safe to do so.

- Paul

I believe that based on the HTA advanced turning arrows are only meant for movements where the vehicle has the right of way and should theoretically be unimpeded. For emphasizing right-turn only you would use signs with a simple green light (no arrows). Thus I'm inclined to believe they will be adding advanced right-turn movements.

 

[ShonTron]

I believe that based on the HTA advanced turning arrows are only meant for movements where the vehicle has the right of way and should theoretically be unimpeded. For emphasizing right-turn only you would use signs with a simple green light (no arrows). Thus I'm inclined to believe they will be adding advanced right-turn movements.

Michigan (and probably some other states) has some interesting signals. There are part-time protected left turns; otherwise the left turn signal has a flashing amber or a flashing red arrow. Flashing amber simply means turn left with caution (giving right of way to opposing traffic and pedestrians in the crosswalk) while the flashing red means stop and proceed when safe.

These aren't recognized in the Ontario version of the MTCUD, but I think they can be useful in some instances. (A flashing amber right signal to emphasize that that's the only permitted movement, but still give way to pedestrians legally crossing.)

 

[muller877]

If you assume that the only cars on King will have been making local stops within that block of the mall, the right turn to exit King will feel much more like exiting a parking lot than making a turn in traffic. Yes, it will take longer, as there will have to be a gap in pedestrian movement, but so what? There will not be a line of cars piled up behind blowing their horns impatiently.... the mall will be inherently calming. Just turn when it is safe to do so.

- Paul

You are probably right other than at Bathurst and Jarvis. The sheer number of cars that will be turning to avoid the transit mall will cause a backup unless there is some priority signal. And will impede the streetcar from progressing.

 

[pstogios]

I'm interested in finding out how they plan to address the Bathurst/King intersection. Right now it's already a shitshow between streetcars stopping nearside on the eastbound approach combined with the left-turning vehicles. Are westbound vehicles going to be forced to turn right or will they be allowed to drive through? in an ideal world the Streetcar stop would be shifted far side so that vehicles behind the streetcar could do their turns and create a clearing for streetcars further back upstream.

Another shitshow is Spadina/King at any time after 8 pm on Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays. I’m eager to see how the pilot affects the ridiculous backlog on King west of Spadina at these times.

 

[drum118]

How soon can we expect the pilot project to launch?

Until you have traffic lights setup, you have to set and wait.

Then, how much manpower is needed to set barriers up at all corners to stop through traffic? Then having police on site to force fools drivers to either turn right or straight through the intersection in place of left hand turns. Also, you got to relocate TTC stops to the far side compare where they are now.

Is there any plans have shelters for these relocated stop??

I would say off hand, by Dec we should see the changes.

What is plan for TIFF next year for these changes??

Traffic will be a mess for the first months until the daily drivers get use to the change. It will be the out of towner's and weekend drivers that will mess things up.

 

[pstogios]

Then, how much manpower is needed to set barriers up at all corners to stop through traffic?

What barriers?

 

[drum118]

What barriers?

You got to have something up to stop car going to the next block illegally. As to what, no idea.

 

[centralblue]

Received this today from the local BIA with notification that it will be implemented Between November 1-12 and run for the year. So the madness will begin soon. The Failure of the project will start with intersections at Bathurst and at Jarvis where the priority mall begin. The problem is the pedestrian interaction. Only being able to travel left or right will create conflict with pedestrian crossing with the light. Too my knowledge no such through restrictions apply to pedestrians. when the light turns green pedestrian go, cars will be force to waiting. This will cause the traffic to back up, thus causing delay in transit from getting through the intersection. Currently it is an advanced green for left turn onto bathurst from East bound King, This helps to keep through traffic flowing. It will be very interesting to watch this one. I live one block west of the pilot area on king and am fortunate enough to walk to work. I have been observing the traffic for the past 6 years on my journey to the core, this will be a huge change on how things flow (or not) through the city. I know I am going to need to find a new way to get to Leslie and Lakeshore after work

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Over time I expect autos demand on King at Bathurst and at Parliament to evaporate, and for the delays to become less significant. My concern is that it does take a long time (at least several month) for traffic patterns to reorient themselves. Hopefully this can happen within the 12 months of the pilot.

 

[BurlOak]

I wonder if Bloor and King/Queen are related.

If you want King/Queen to be more transit - get the cars to use Bloor.
If you add a bike lane to Bloor, then can't turn King/Queen into transit only.

 

[BMO]

I wonder if Bloor and King/Queen are related.

If you want King/Queen to be more transit - get the cars to use Bloor.
If you add a bike lane to Bloor, then can't turn King/Queen into transit only.

I'd say King is too far away. The traffic dispersed would likely be taken up by closer E-W roads like Harbord/Welelsley or Dupont/Davenport