Design and Safety of City of Toronto Highways

[TheTigerMaster]

I'm making this thread because I've noticed a few consistently unsafe design decisions on City of Toronto owned highways. Although it is ultimately the responsibility of the driver to maintain safe operation of their vehicle, I feel that the City could trivially improve the safety of these roads with some simple signage and better design decisions.

Lane Ending Ahead Signs

This is very basic safety signage, that notifies drivers that their lane is ending ahead. On MTO maintained highways, all lane endings are marked with at least one of these signs. On roads that are more heavily travelled, it's not uncommon for lane endings to be marked with three or more these signs, that also indicate the distance until the lane ends.

On City of Toronto highways, these signs are rarely used. The driver isn't notified their lane is ending until they visually see the end of the lane. This can take the driver by surprise, since the lane ends can be obstructed by vehicles ahead, or by changes in grade. Most dangerously, the acceleration lane on City of Toronto highways never use these signs. So while drivers are focused on accelerating and finding a gap to merge, they are surprised by the lane ending without warning.

Anecdotally, last time I entered the Don Valley Parkway North from Eglinton Avenue, I immeidately noticed that there were no signs indicating that the lane was ending. Accordingly, I treated the lane as a through lane, and didn't prepare to merge into traffic. It wasn't until a little bit down the road that I noticed the lane actually did end, and I had to very quickly change into the left lane. Although I was able to handle this unsafe situation fine, it could have been totally avoided with basic signage.

Small or Non-Existent Acceleration Lanes
The acceleration lanes are to be used by drivers to get up to highway speed, before merging into through lanes of traffic. From the Ministry of Transportation:

As you leave the ramp you enter the acceleration lane. In the acceleration lane, drivers increase their speed to the speed of traffic on the freeway before they merge with it.
​

Failing to accelerate to the speed of traffic before merging puts drivers at a significant risk of being rear ended. In fact, failing to do this during a driving test results in automatic failure.

On City of Toronto highways, these acceleration lanes are typically extremely short - far too short for slower accelerating vehicles, such as trucks, to have any hope of getting up to highway speed. And of course, because the City can't be bothered to tell drivers when lanes end, drivers are often surprised by the short length of these acceleration lanes.

These short lanes are also problematic, because they don't give drivers enough time to find a gap in traffic to merge into. This can force drivers to need to come to almost complete stop in the acceleration lane. When they find a gap in traffic to merge into, they then need to accelerate from a near stop to highway speed while merging into the through lane of traffic. This is an extremely unsafe maneuver.

A particularly problematic example of this is the acceleration lane from eastbound Lake Short Blvd. to eastbound Gardiner. This acceleration lane is extremely short, and nothing warns drivers beforehand about how short this lane is. On numerous occasions I've witnessed cars accelerating to highway speed on this ramp, and then suddenly braking when they realize that they've been provided with no room to safely accelerate and merge. If the City isn't going to build a proper acceleration lane, they should at the very least put up signage to alert drivers to the shortness of the lane.

No posted ramp speeds

Ramp speed signs provide drivers with information about how quickly they can travel on an upcoming ramp. Dark conditions, or obstructions such as trees can often make it difficult or impossible to know exactly how sharp a ramp is prior to entering it, so these ramp speed signs provide drivers with critical information.

The City of Toronto uses these signs very inconsistently. They should be installed on all ramps that can't be travelled at highway speed.

 

[Kitsune]

Toronto highways were designed in the 50's, when cloverleafs were a great thing and acceleration lanes did not need to be as long as modern day. I also wonder if some missing signage is due to people stealing the signs (which reminds me of the time somebody stole a Traffic light in Sudbury. Never caught the person eithier)

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

No amount of signage will prevent motorists from using a merge lane (or a closing lane) as their own personal queue jump lane

 

[darth_freeman]

Yes, the Gardiner and DVP have some embarrassing signage.

The spring cleaning is coming up and this would be an excellent time to install some signage and pavement markings, etc.

All the on-ramps should have pavement markings indicating you aren't supposed to move onto the ramp line like at 401 EB @ Martin Grove.

Hopefully someone from the city reads this!

 

[MisterF]

Anecdotally, last time I entered the Don Valley Parkway North from Eglinton Avenue, I immeidately noticed that there were no signs indicating that the lane was ending. Accordingly, I treated the lane as a through lane, and didn't prepare to merge into traffic. It wasn't until a little bit down the road that I noticed the lane actually did end, and I had to very quickly change into the left lane. Although I was able to handle this unsafe situation fine, it could have been totally avoided with basic signage.

To be fair, that speed change lane doesn't end; it exits. A lane ending sign isn't appropriate in that situation. A more appropriate sign might be a right pointing arrow. The Eglinton exit does have a sign showing that the lane exits, and the short dashed lane division line is a visual cue that the lane will exit or end soon. The design of the interchange itself is more problematic than the signs. Having the same lane for entering and exiting traffic isn't really done anymore unless the distance between them is much greater.

MTO maintained highways have the same thing in some areas. The most egregious example I can think of is the Highway 62 interchange in Belleville. It's very similar to the DVP/Eglinton interchange and dates from a similar era.

The city could definitely be doing more to improve its highway signage. It doesn't follow MTO standards and it relies too much on words instead of graphics. But the city owned highways are simply built to a lower standard that most provincial highways. There's nothing wrong with that as Ontario's highways are built to some of the highest standards I've seen anywhere. Traffic does tend to move more slowly on city highways even when there's no congestion. And even small economy cars are capable of getting up to highway speed on even short speed change lanes. It's just that most drivers accelerate too slowly and merge too soon.

 

[BurlOak]

To be fair, that speed change lane doesn't end; it exits. A lane ending sign isn't appropriate in that situation. A more appropriate sign might be a right pointing arrow. The Eglinton exit does have a sign showing that the lane exits, and the short dashed lane division line is a visual cue that the lane will exit or end soon. The design of the interchange itself is more problematic than the signs. Having the same lane for entering and exiting traffic isn't really done anymore unless the distance between them is much greater.

MTO maintained highways have the same thing in some areas. The most egregious example I can think of is the Highway 62 interchange in Belleville. It's very similar to the DVP/Eglinton interchange and dates from a similar era.

The city could definitely be doing more to improve its highway signage. It doesn't follow MTO standards and it relies too much on words instead of graphics. But the city owned highways are simply built to a lower standard that most provincial highways. There's nothing wrong with that as Ontario's highways are built to some of the highest standards I've seen anywhere. Traffic does tend to move more slowly on city highways even when there's no congestion. And even small economy cars are capable of getting up to highway speed on even short speed change lanes. It's just that most drivers accelerate too slowly and merge too soon.

Would this sign help?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

To be fair, that speed change lane doesn't end; it exits. A lane ending sign isn't appropriate in that situation. A more appropriate sign might be a right pointing arrow. The Eglinton exit does have a sign showing that the lane exits, and the short dashed lane division line is a visual cue that the lane will exit or end soon. The design of the interchange itself is more problematic than the signs. Having the same lane for entering and exiting traffic isn't really done anymore unless the distance between them is much greater.

I think you've got the location confused. On the northbound DVP, just north of Eglinton, the merging lane does end. You can see the streetview here.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Would this sign help?

Ahh yes, you remind me of another pet peeve of mine.

The connection between Islington Avenue and the Gardiner Expressway is a combo onramp/offramp. The length of the area you have to merge here is stupidly small - just 100 metres. In my experience, if you have someone already in the onramp/offramp trying to get into the through traffic lanes, you're going to have a very difficult time merging into the offramp.

I'm embarrassed to admit that the first time [attempted] to use this offramp, I missed it because it was so short. I was leaving room for the car already in the offramp to safely merge into my lane, and by time they did that, the merging area had ended. I hadn't realized there was so little room to merge, so I assumed I had plenty of space remaining.

The signage in your post, with something indicating that the merging area is only 100 metres, would help prevent situations like this.

Toronto highways were designed in the 50's, when cloverleafs were a great thing and acceleration lanes did not need to be as long as modern day. I also wonder if some missing signage is due to people stealing the signs (which reminds me of the time somebody stole a Traffic light in Sudbury. Never caught the person eithier)

Can you elaborate on why acceleration lanes didn't need to be as long as they are today? The highway speed limits back then were as high or higher than they are in modern times.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Ahh yes, you remind me of another pet peeve of mine.

The connection between Islington Avenue and the Gardiner Expressway is a combo onramp/offramp. The length of the area you have to merge here is stupidly small - just 100 metres. In my experience, if you have someone already in the onramp/offramp trying to get into the through traffic lanes, you're going to have a very difficult time merging into the offramp.

I'm embarrassed to admit that the first time [attempted] to use this offramp, I missed it because it was so short. I was leaving room for the car already in the offramp to safely merge into my lane, and by time they did that, the merging area had ended. I hadn't realized there was so little room to merge, so I assumed I had plenty of space remaining.

The signage in your post, with something indicating that the merging area is only 100 metres, would help prevent situations like this.

View attachment 138393



Can you elaborate on why acceleration lanes didn't need to be as long as they are today? The highway speed limits back then were as high or higher than they are in modern times.

Vehicles accelerate much faster today than they did in the 50s. One reason for shorter acceleration lanes...

Re the islington/Gardiner mess... i thought the entire area was subject to a rebuild/reconfiguration

 

[MisterF]

I think you've got the location confused. On the northbound DVP, just north of Eglinton, the merging lane does end. You can see the streetview here.

View attachment 138392

Oh I see. That interchange has two ramps to the northbound DVP; one from the westbound lanes of Eglinton and one from the eastbound lanes. I thought you were talking about the other one. What you're describing is actually pretty standard on provincial highways. There's often no sign signifying that the lane is ending at the end of an acceleration lane; the short, wide lane dividing lines are enough to tell drivers the lane is going to end. Here for example. That said, it does seem like a sign is typically added in the GTA but not in rural areas. Or maybe it's a new standard that was adopted in the last decade or so. Which means Toronto will adopt it sometime around 2060.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

There's often no sign signifying that the lane is ending at the end of an acceleration lane; the short, wide lane dividing lines are enough to tell drivers the lane is going to end. Here for example. That said, it does seem like a sign is typically added in the GTA but not in rural areas. Or maybe it's a new standard that was adopted in the last decade or so. Which means Toronto will adopt it sometime around 2060.

That’s interesting. I only drive in the GTA, so I wouldn’t be aware.

Well this begs the question, why wouldn’t they always install a sign at the ending of lanes? The cost to do so is pretty damn close to zero. The cost of sending a clean up crew to the location of the inevitable accident is surely more.

 

[44 North]

Toronto's ultra-short ramps and merge lanes are pretty interesting, and I guess unique. Part of me likes them just because they make one not take driving for granted. Which is pretty easy to do when taking the massively arcing ramps of the 400 system...they can be tackled half asleep with one eye open one hand on the wheel and the other texting. Merging onto the Gardiner from LSE in that streetview, not so much. But what can be done? Is there a standard sign they can use to let it be known? Or perhaps a phrase like "Keep Focused, Limited Merge Length"? I'm not aware of any.

 

[Isotack]

That’s interesting. I only drive in the GTA, so I wouldn’t be aware.

Well this begs the question, why wouldn’t they always install a sign at the ending of lanes? The cost to do so is pretty damn close to zero. The cost of sending a clean up crew to the location of the inevitable accident is surely more.

If it is a surprise to someone that an on-ramp lane will eventually end, then that person has no business accessing the limited access highway in the first place. Rarely, does an on-ramp merge lane continue on as an additional lane n the highway. Common sense alone should tell someone that. I can only think of one off the top of my head. 401 at Hwy #25 eastbound. Even that one ends eventually if I remember right. If a merge lane did not end, then what? Continuous adding to the width of the highway or, since most highways maintain their lane allocation for some distance...dropping of lanes from the left? Again common sense.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

If it is a surprise to someone that an on-ramp lane will eventually end, then that person has no business accessing the limited access highway in the first place. Rarely, does an on-ramp merge lane continue on as an additional lane n the highway.... I can only think of one off the top of my head. 401 at Hwy #25 eastbound.

That is definitely not the case. On the 401 between Port Union and Yonge the highway interchanges with 12 roads, at eight of these interchanges there is at least one on-ramp lane that does not immediately terminate (Port Union, Morningside, Neilson, Markham, Warden, Victoria Park, DVP and Leslie). At these locations, the on-ramp lane usually continues until it tuns into an off-ramp at the next exit. Additionally, nearly all of the onramps to express lanes continue on as through lanes.

 

[innsertnamehere]

The biggest pet peeve of mine for Toronto highways is the westbound Gardiner on ramp at Jameson. The merging distance is so small that it closes at rush hours as it causes all kinds of problems in rush hours. When it is closed, drivers are forced to continue on lakeshore all the way to park lawn. This creates a massive gap of on ramps from Spadina to Park Lawn where there is no way to get on the Gardiner Expressway.. This adds over 10 minutes to the drive time compared to if vehicles could enter the highway at Jameson. The worst part is that it can all be fixed by extending the damn merge lane by 100m or so..

This used to be a difficult task as the massive bridge piers for the Dowling Avenue bridge were in the way. But the Dowling Avenue bridge has been demolished for several years now, and the city is not planning to replace it beyond a pedestrian bridge. The city desperately needs to demolish the pier and extend the on ramp to allow the ramp to remain open in rush hour.