Roads: Traffic Signals

[reaperexpress]

Is there really any way to adapt the Dutch model here though?

Yes of course.

Obviously a 100% separation of cycle/pedestrian routes from through traffic routes is pretty difficult to achieve anywhere other than greenfield developments like Houten or Almere, but the principles of separating destination streets (retail, residential etc.) from movement roads (highways, arterials) is applicable in all planning contexts. After all, it's not like all Dutch cities were built since the late 70's when the current planning principles were introduced. Pre-1970's areas of the Netherlands didn't historically separate movement functions from place functions any more than their counterparts in Toronto. But in the subsequent years Dutch cities have systematically been diverting motor traffic away from areas with higher pedestrian activity towards areas with lower pedestrian activity, ideally to grade-separated motor traffic infrastructure such as the N201 arterial road bypassing Alsmeer and Uithorn (opened 2014), the A2 motorway through Maastricht (opened 2016), the Victory Boogie Woogie Tunnel in Den Haag (opened in 2021), and the A-16 motorway northern extension in Rotterdam (under construction).

For example in the downtown core of Toronto, one would try to identify routes where motor traffic has a relatively low per-vehicle impact on the surrounding urban area (University Ave, Richmond, Adelaide etc) and areas where they have a particularly high conflict with urban life (King, Queen, Yonge), and try to divert traffic from the latter to the former. The King Pilot is an example of a project which aligns well with Dutch Sustainable Safety principles, since King Street is a hotspot of pedestrian activity.

An example of a City project which goes totally against the principle of separating movement from place is the Allen District development plan, which envisions turning Allen Road into an 'urban boulevard', adding sidewalks and buildings fronting directly onto it, thereby creating new pedestrian-vehicle conflicts where few/none currently exist. According to Sustainable Safety principles, Allen Road should instead remain as a limited-access road, and those developments should be centered around the new internal collector streets within the development. The two sides of the development would be linked across Allen Road using pedestrian/cycling underpasses.

 

[Dan416]

Yes of course.

Obviously a 100% separation of cycle/pedestrian routes from through traffic routes is pretty difficult to achieve anywhere other than greenfield developments like Houten or Almere, but the principles of separating destination streets (retail etc.) from movement roads (highways, arterials) is applicable in all planning contexts. After all, it's not like all Dutch cities were built since the late 70's when the current planning principles were introduced. Pre-1970's areas of the Netherlands do include arterial roads with frontage like you find in Toronto, but they still take efforts to downgrade their motor traffic function whenever possible. Meanwhile new motor traffic infrastructure fully separate from urban activity maintain/improve the function of the motor traffic network. There are tons of new grade-separated motor traffic infrastructure projects within existing cities, like the Victory Boogie Woogie Tunnel in Den Haag opened in 2021, the A-13 northern extension under construction (the north portion of ring road around Rotterdam)

For example in the downtown core, one would try to identify routes where motor traffic has a relatively low per-vehicle impact on the surrounding urban area (University Ave, Richmond, Adelaide etc) and areas where they have a particularly high conflict with urban life (King, Queen, Yonge), and try to divert traffic from the latter to the former. The King Pilot is an example of a project which aligns well with Dutch Sustainable Safety principles, since King Street is a hotspot of pedestrian activity.

An example of a City project which goes totally against the principle of separating movement from place is the Allen District development plan, which envisions turning Allen Road into an 'urban boulevard', adding sidewalks and buildings fronting directly onto it, thereby creating new pedestrian-vehicle conflicts where few/none currently exist. According to Sustainable Safety principles, Allen Road should instead remain as a limited-access road, and those developments should be centered around the new internal collector streets within the development. The two sides of the development would be linked across Allen Road using pedestrian/cycling underpasses.

Thanks for explaining.

Do any other countries utilize the Dutch model? Is it well regarded in urban planning circles or is it an outlier? And if it’s well-regarded, why aren’t we learning from it and implementing their learnings? Do other cities in Canada or the US follow the Dutch model?

Sorry, that’s a lot of questions.

 

[reaperexpress]

Thanks for explaining.

Do any other countries utilize the Dutch model? Is it well regarded in urban planning circles or is it an outlier? And if it’s well-regarded, why aren’t we learning from it and implementing their learnings? Do other cities in Canada or the US follow the Dutch model?

Sorry, that’s a lot of questions.

New South Wales (Australia) has adopted the same principles, though they have a lot of work to do before their networks are unravelled to any significant degree.
https://www.movementandplace.nsw.gov.au/about

I just happened across NSW's guidelines, but I'm sure there are plenty of other places which also follow the same principles. I would assume that Sweden does as well given their good track record for road safety but I haven't actually looked into it.

 

[reaperexpress]

Jackson Bourret has just posted this video documenting the shocking number of intersections where the City installed Leading Pedestrian Intervals even though vehicles are not allowed to turn across the path of pedestrians. So transit riders and drivers are held at a red light for 5 seconds for absolutely no reason.

From the description of the video, here is his list of LPIs which are completely pointless.

- Harbord St at Robert St (east/west)
- Harbord St at Brunswick Ave (east/west)
- Harbord St at Palmerston Blvd (east/west)
- Bloor St at Palmerston Blvd (east/west)
- Bathurst St at Richmond St W (north/south)
- Kennedy Rd at Highway 401 eastbound off ramp (north/south)
- Lawerence Ave W at Rosewell Ave (east/west)
- Keele St at Highway 401 eastbound off ramp (north/south)
- Ellesmere Rd at Borough Approach E (east/west)
- Weston Rd at Highway 401 westbound off ramp (north/south)
- Weston Rd at Walsh Ave (northbound)
- W- Islington Ave at Allenby Ave (north/south)
- Islington Ave at Highway 401 eastbound off ramp (westbound split phase)
- The East Mall at Highway 427 northbound off ramp (north/south)
- Yonge St at Harbour St (north/south)
- Davenport Rd at Avenue Rd (east/west
- Bathurst St at Wells St (north/south)
- Bathurst St at Warwick Ave (north/south)
- Bathurst St at Ava Rd (north/south)
- Bathurst St at Neptune Dr (north/south)
- Dufferin St at Auburn Ave (north/south)
- Rogers Rd at Glenholme Ave (east/west)
- Weston Rd at Dennis Ave (north/south)
- Spadina Ave at Richmond St W (north/south)
-Dupont St at Cream Top Ln/Hammond Pl (eastbound LPI with leading left turn phase)
- Kingston Rd at Eglinton Ave E (northeast/southwest)
- Kingston Rd at Midland Ave (northeast/southwest)
- Church St at Gloucester St (north/south LPI after exclusive pedestrian phase)
- Lakeshore Blvd at Windermere Blvd (southbound LPI south half stage only)King St at Brant St (east/west)
- Queen St at Woodfield Rd (east/west)
- Yonge St at Richmond St (north/south)
- University Ave at Front St W (north/south)
- Avenue Rd at Yorkville Rd (north/south)

He has also generally been documenting two other issues with the City's LPI implementaions:

They often install LPIs in locations with leading left turn phases, which results in left turning drivers cutting in front of oncoming traffic and through the crosswalk just as oncoming traffic is released.

They often fail to also give bicycles a leading interval where a bicycle signal is present.

 

[PL1]

Jackson Bourret has just posted this video documenting the shocking number of intersections where the City installed Leading Pedestrian Intervals even though vehicles are not allowed to turn across the path of pedestrians. So transit riders and drivers are held at a red light for 5 seconds for absolutely no reason.

From the description of the video, here is his list of LPIs which are completely pointless.


He has also generally been documenting two other issues with the City's LPI implementaions:

They often install LPIs in locations with leading left turn phases, which results in left turning drivers cutting in front of oncoming traffic and through the crosswalk just as oncoming traffic is released.

They often fail to also give bicycles a leading interval where a bicycle signal is present.

There are intersections with LPI at a T intersection so there is no need for said LPI (see Danforth at Woodington; I have not had time to watch yet, so I apologize if this issue was raised).