Eglinton/Allen Road Westbound North Turning Lanes

[dunkalunk]

I had no idea this was going to be condos, has the land already been sold, or is it just a zoning provision at this point?

And just a reminder, not saying that it should be done, just saying that it's possible

 

[sixrings]

i think in the local paper the two parking lots were on high priority for the ttc to sell and make cash off. condos would then make sense. joe m was in the paper being interviewed if i remember.

i have seen this proposal before and am skeptical how well a large roundabout will work. everytime im remotely close to square one i use their roundabout. my wife thinks im a geek but i just want to experience how the traffic flows. the roundabout is amazzzzzing with little traffic. with a lot of traffic it grinds to a hault. i assume your roundabout has room for two lanes of cars. but that still might be chaos. that being said id be willing to try it out depending in the price.

 

[Chuck]

It is essential for the flow of traffic on Eglinton that entry from the Allen be limited by the traffic light. If cars could get onto Eglinton on a non stop basis, Eglinton would become completely overwhelmed and the gridlock you currently see on the offramp would simply transfer to Eglinton itself. Nothing gained.

Building a roundabout would accomplish nothing, unless a third eastbound lane was added to Eglinton.The intersection modifications recently completed represent the only feasible improvement to the area, as northbound Allen is presently operating well below capacity.

 

[reaperexpress]

I actually think this is a very good design. I especially like the separated bike lanes that remove the need for cyclists to cross the two turn lanes. They could use this design in other places, such as the Spadina to Lakeshore/Gardiner on-ramp.

I want to see what this looks like, but I haven't had time to get down there to look at it. If anyone could take/find a picture of it, that would be awesome.

i have seen this proposal before and am skeptical how well a large roundabout will work. everytime im remotely close to square one i use their roundabout. my wife thinks im a geek but i just want to experience how the traffic flows. the roundabout is amazzzzzing with little traffic. with a lot of traffic it grinds to a hault. i assume your roundabout has room for two lanes of cars. but that still might be chaos. that being said id be willing to try it out depending in the price.

If they built it as a turbo-roundabout it would probably have plenty of capacity. The issue is that Eglinton itself doesn't have capacity and it wouldn't be wise to add any either.

 

[Fred.S]

I want to see what this looks like, but I haven't had time to get down there to look at it. If anyone could take/find a picture of it, that would be awesome.

Took a few photos of the intersection. They also just put up bike signals, though they're not in use yet. On a bit of a separate tangent... Anyone else think Toronto's redundancy with signals and signs clutter things up? I don't see why you need two side-by-side bike traffic lights with a big "bike signal" sign. Other countries have one traffic light with the lights shaped as bicycles. The same criticism goes for dedicated turn signals and transit signals which could be much simplified and even less confusing to out-of-town motorists.

 

[reaperexpress]

Took a few photos of the intersection. They also just put up bike signals, though they're not in use yet. On a bit of a separate tangent... Anyone else think Toronto's redundancy with signals and signs clutter things up? I don't see why you need two side-by-side bike traffic lights with a big "bike signal" sign. Other countries have one traffic light with the lights shaped as bicycles. The same criticism goes for dedicated turn signals and transit signals which could be much simplified and even less confusing to out-of-town motorists.

Awesome, thanks for the pictures! It's nice to see an infrastructure change where cyclists are not completely ignored. The city is inching it's way toward decent cycling infrastructure.

And I totally agree about the redundant redundancy in redundant traffic light signals. It's ugly and wasteful. There's also a safety issue when it comes to these signals, because as it is, different types of signals easily mistaken for one another unless you read the sign. For example, on Spadina, that could mean a car turns left in front of a streetcar, or here it could mean a car would turn right into a bike.

 

[sixrings]

i wonder if with the lrt construction underway if we will soon see the proposal for the tunnel turning lane from eglinton west onto north bound allen.

 

[Fred.S]

i wonder if with the lrt construction underway if we will soon see the proposal for the tunnel turning lane from eglinton west onto north bound allen.

That just made me realize this improvement might all be ripped up in the next few years...

 

[Fred.S]

Awesome, thanks for the pictures! It's nice to see an infrastructure change where cyclists are not completely ignored. The city is inching it's way toward decent cycling infrastructure.

And I totally agree about the redundant redundancy in redundant traffic light signals. It's ugly and wasteful. There's also a safety issue when it comes to these signals, because as it is, different types of signals easily mistaken for one another unless you read the sign. For example, on Spadina, that could mean a car turns left in front of a streetcar, or here it could mean a car would turn right into a bike.

I wish Toronto would move to using specialized streetcar/LRT signals, as most other countries do, that don't make sense to most car users, and therefore wouldn't be mistaken for left-turn signals etc. They could also be used for special bus movements, such as at Eglinton and Allen, to give buses priority when entering/exiting the station.

Example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Public_transportation_traffic_lights_in_NL_and_BE.svg

 

[TransitPolicyChanger]

I wish Toronto would move to using specialized streetcar/LRT signals, as most other countries do, that don't make sense to most car users, and therefore wouldn't be mistaken for left-turn signals etc. They could also be used for special bus movements, such as at Eglinton and Allen, to give buses priority when entering/exiting the station.

Example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Public_transportation_traffic_lights_in_NL_and_BE.svg

There are a couple of examples that I know of where this is the case. The one that comes to mind right away is Queen East and Broadview, where above the red light there is another signal that will show a white bar when there is a streetcar waiting to turn at the start of the green cycle. Left turns are prohibited at rush hour, so I guess they wanted this instead of a green arrow to prevent non-ttc vehicles from believing they can make the left.

(check out a google street view looking east at Broadview and Queen).

As for the general redundancy of lights, I would think a lot of it has to do with safety. At Eglinton and Allen Road there is a lot of turning traffic, a median in the middle, etc., so there is a good chance a driver could have their view of a traffic signal blocked and likely why there are extra signals. With respect to having two turning signals (or in general two signals as a minimum), I believe the main reason is to have two red lights at all times in case a bulb burns out. Last thing you want is someone not having a red light and turning into traffic. I've seen another arrangement (in Calgary I believe) where the turn signal will have 4 bulbs, 2 reds, amber and green arrows.

 

[ShonTron]

I don't have a problem with redundancy for traffic signals. I think you should have two sets of signals for each phase in case of a light burning out or blocked sight line. It's a matter of overkill with all the explanatory signage, the size of the light fixtures and such. There's a couple of things I'd like to see but are not permitted under the MTO/OMUTCD specs.

I'd like to see red and amber arrows as well as green (eliminate the accompanying signage and make it more clear what the signals mean).

I certainly would advocate the full use of white bar transit aspects. Currently, the white bar is only allowed for transit exclusive phases, which is why Spadina and St. Clair don't have them except for turning streetcars, and only in the vertical permissive phase. Also, bicycle-shaped LED aspects for bicycle signals. New York City, amongst other has these and no other signs are necessary.

I'd also go and change the traffic lights themselves as I find our yellow signal casing with yellow backplates at 12-12-12 or 12-8-8 somewhat ugly in urban settings, and black being better anyway, but that's besides the point.

 

[TransitPolicyChanger]

I'd also go and change the traffic lights themselves as I find our yellow signal casing with yellow backplates at 12-12-12 or 12-8-8 somewhat ugly in urban settings, and black being better anyway, but that's besides the point.

I agree that Toronto uses the 12-12-12 way too much. Especially at major intersections with the 12-12-12-12. Mississauga uses the 12-8-8-12 more often, which I prefer; however, Mississauga does tend to have 3 signals at most of their intersections (granted most places the roads are at least 6 lanes wide).

 

[Palma]

I say I hope those rumours about completely getting rid of the Allen from Eglinton to Lawrence are true. Then it could be gotton rid of from Lawrence to where ever it stops which i think is Sheppard. That whole area could be developed into residential streets with houses but not 50' lots, more like 25-40 ft lots to increase density (not condos as there are already too many under construction right now).

 

[Neil]

+1

It would seem like a good place to put the spoil from the Eglinton TBMs.

 

[sixrings]

I wish theyd keep the south bound allen and get rid of the north bound... But if its keeping it all or losing it all Id have it GONE!....