Roads: Traffic Signals

[H4F33Z]

^^That's gonna be super controversial to do. But you know what else was controversial 5 years ago, The Bloor Bike lanes. Times changed. I think it's time for Toronto to take the plunge. It can start as a pilot.

 

[JasonParis]

What else do Montréal and New York City have in common? Both are on islands! Except for the Bronx when it comes to New York City.
Toronto can have a canal running along its city limits so that Toronto can become an island.

I sometimes view the Yonge spine as Manhattan, surrounded by the development-limiting yellow belts which act as our East, Hudson and Harlem Rivers.

 

[gabe]

I also noticed when driving in Europe that there are many yield signs but few stop signs. Here it's the opposite.

People here have no idea how to use a yield sign. The city replaced the yield sign on my street with a stop sign a few years ago because there was too many accidents.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

People here have no idea how to use a yield sign. The city replaced the yield sign on my street with a stop sign a few years ago because there was too many accidents.

They should do what they do in Europe. Raised crosswalks and intersections.

 

[DSCToronto]

This was adopted by Council in June 2020>

IE13.8

ACTION​

Adopted on Consent​

​

Ward: All​

Accelerate Implementation and Installation of the New Traffic Control Devices Including New Traffic Signals, Mid-block Pedestrian Signals, Pedestrian Crossovers, and Flashing Beacons​

City Council Decision​

City Council on June 29 and 30, 2020, adopted the following: 1. City Council direct the General Manager, Transportation Services to develop an action plan to accelerate the implementation of new traffic control devices including new traffic signals, mid-block pedestrian signals, pedestrian crossovers, and flashing beacons from 18 months down to 8 months or less from the time that they are approved by Council.​

Background Information (Committee)​

(June 10, 2020) Letter from Councillor Mike Colle on Accelerate Implementation and Installation of the New Traffic Control Devices Including New Traffic Signals, Mid-block Pedestrian Signals, Pedestrian Crossovers, and Flashing Beacons (http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/ie/bgrd/backgroundfile-147815.pdf)​

 

[lenaitch]

The cities of Montréal and New York City are the only jurisdictions that prohibit right turns on red lights. Unless otherwise signed. Maybe it's time for Toronto (and the GTHA) to join them?

The entire GTHA might be a bit much. There's a difference between a downtown intersection and the intersection of two arterials in the boonies.

 

[afransen]

Since moving to the Netherlands, I have been examining how Dutch traffic signals manage to be so much more flexible and safe than Canadian ones, and I think a key factor is the widespread use of multi-stage crossings. And unlike the examples you might know in the GTA (University Ave, Highway 7, etc), the multi-stage crossings in the Netherlands still allow pedestrians to cross the street in one go.

I made a video to illustrate my thoughts:

I checked out your channel. Some great content! Astonishing that you don't have more subs. Keep up the good work! Maybe you should collab with Not Just Bikes.

 

[reaperexpress]

I checked out your channel. Some great content! Astonishing that you don't have more subs. Keep up the good work! Maybe you should collab with Not Just Bikes.

Wow, thanks! That's really flattering.

I'm actually satisfied with the number of subscribers as it is, given my target audience. Whereas Not Just Bikes is accessible to the general public, my videos tend to be more technically oriented, aimed specifically at transportation professionals and enthusiasts.

While the number itself is low compared to channels like Reece Martin's or Not Just Bikes, the impact is surprisingly high since so many of the viewers are actually planners, engineers, professors or transportation advocates.

To increase the subscriber count I'd also need to make far more videos, which I don't feel like doing because YouTube is purely a hobby and I have no intention to monetize the channel like the above mentioned ones. (I've also heard that non-monetized channels don't get recommended as much by the Algorithm since they don't make money for Google). I have other full-time work that's also related to transportation, and after a full day I often just want to do something completely unrelated in my free time.

 

[Towered]

More new traffic lights coming:

Bay and Grenville
Dovercourt and Northumberland

 

[DSCToronto]

Those among us who like Roundabouts my like https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-53947440

 

[afransen]

Those among us who like Roundabouts my like https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-53947440

Thanks for sharing. It's quite melodramatic to say they closed the intersection after a hit and run. Someone hit a bollard and the crossing was closed until it was replaced. I notice that they don't use any sharks teeth to show drivers that they should yield. Maybe not used in the UK? I have seen them here in Canada, such as in right turn slip lanes for pedestrian crossings. It also looks like the geometry might be designed for vehicular speeds too high for pedestrians and cyclists to have priority. In the NL, there are higher speed roundabout where cyclists and pedestrians have to yield for cars, but the crossings are much further from the roundabout so there is time for cars to clear the roundabout and people to see the cars oncoming.

I am amused by the guy quoted saying it just so confusing that he can't just whip through the roundabout and he has to look around. Try slowing down you numpty!

Mark Lawrence-Jones's heartbeat rises as he approaches the roundabout in his car.
First there is pedestrian crossing to negotiate. "You've got to look right for the cyclist, then you're on to the roundabout, then you're looking right for the cars," he said.
"Then, when you leave the roundabout, you've got to be looking over your left shoulder for any cyclists, and then you've got to quickly whirl around to your right to see if anybody is going to come across the pedestrian crossing.
"As I exit the roundabout I feel dizzy because I've been moving my head hard to the left and hard to the right to look out for people. It's very difficult at the same time to actually look where you're going."

How fast is this guy driving through the roundabout?

 

[Towered]

New traffic light coming mid-block on Bloor between Islington and Aberfoyle.

 

[reaperexpress]

Thanks for sharing. It's quite melodramatic to say they closed the intersection after a hit and run. Someone hit a bollard and the crossing was closed until it was replaced. I notice that they don't use any sharks teeth to show drivers that they should yield. Maybe not used in the UK? I have seen them here in Canada, such as in right turn slip lanes for pedestrian crossings. It also looks like the geometry might be designed for vehicular speeds too high for pedestrians and cyclists to have priority. In the NL, there are higher speed roundabout where cyclists and pedestrians have to yield for cars, but the crossings are much further from the roundabout so there is time for cars to clear the roundabout and people to see the cars oncoming.

I am amused by the guy quoted saying it just so confusing that he can't just whip through the roundabout and he has to look around. Try slowing down you numpty!

How fast is this guy driving through the roundabout?

I was somewhat shocked about the level of hate that that roundabout has been getting from Brits. I think the issue is that historically pedestrians and cyclists have never had priority at roundabouts, they've always just needed to run for their lives and motorists never had to think about them. I've always been shocked by the lack of priority that pedestrians get on British roads - they often need to yield to turning traffic at side streets too, even though they're walking along the road with priority.

Thankfully the pedestrian priority in Ontario is (theoretically) pretty much the same as in the Netherlands. Drivers need to yield to pedestrians when entering and exiting roundabouts in urban areas (but typically not in rural areas). And pedestrians always have right-of-way when walking along a street that itself has right-of-way.

To bring some relevance to the thread topic (there is also a roundabout thread btw), I think that part of the reason that Dutch traffic signals are so much more advanced than Ontarian ones is that they simply have fewer of them, and a lot more thought can go into designing each individual signal. The GTA has the same number of traffic signals as the entire country of the Netherlands (about 5000), with less than half the population, so it makes sense that our engineers just use a cookie-cutter approach.

Instead of placing a traffic signal as a knee-jerk reaction every time a pedestrian gets hit crossing the street, they actually consider the various options for improving the intersection, including roundabouts, pedestrian refuge medians, zebra crossing, curve radii, sightlines etc. And they pick the best one based on overall safety, rather than just picking the easiest way to avoid the particular collision that happened. Toronto's Vision Zero program seems to be using the whack-a-mole approach, where they only resolve the type of collision that has been occuring, without considering that their changes may increase another type of collision such that the overall safety hasn't improved and all that's changed is that the road system has become less efficient (a.k.a traffic lights and stop signs everywhere).

 

[Northern Light]

I was somewhat shocked about the level of hate that that roundabout has been getting from Brits. I think the issue is that historically pedestrians and cyclists have never had priority at roundabouts, they've always just needed to run for their lives and motorists never had to think about them. I've always been shocked by the lack of priority that pedestrians get on British roads - they often need to yield to turning traffic at side streets too, even though they're walking along the road with priority.

Thankfully the pedestrian priority in Ontario is (theoretically) pretty much the same as in the Netherlands. Drivers need to yield to pedestrians when entering and exiting roundabouts in urban areas (but typically not in rural areas). And pedestrians always have right-of-way when walking along a street that itself has right-of-way.

To bring some relevance to the thread topic (there is also a roundabout thread btw), I think that part of the reason that Dutch traffic signals are so much more advanced than Ontarian ones is that they simply have fewer of them, and a lot more thought can go into designing each individual signal. The GTA has the same number of traffic signals as the entire country of the Netherlands (about 5000), with less than half the population, so it makes sense that our engineers just use a cookie-cutter approach.

Instead of placing a traffic signal as a knee-jerk reaction every time a pedestrian gets hit crossing the street, they actually consider the various options for improving the intersection, including roundabouts, pedestrian refuge medians, zebra crossing, curve radii, sightlines etc. And they pick the best one based on overall safety, rather than just picking the easiest way to avoid the particular collision that happened. Toronto's Vision Zero program seems to be using the whack-a-mole approach, where they only resolve the type of collision that has been occuring, without considering that their changes may increase another type of collision such that the overall safety hasn't improved and all that's changed is that the road system has become less efficient (a.k.a traffic lights and stop signs everywhere).

Narrowing the road is always the key vs more traffic lights.

Specifically in the form of reducing the number of travel lanes.

Its simply about how many things both drivers and pedestrians (or cyclists) can keep an eye on at once.

One lane each way, mid-block, is roughly 2 things to keep an eye on; add in cyclists or any on-street parking and it may be a bit more complex, but is really quite manageable.

That same street intersecting like, now means a minimum of 4 things to keep any eye on at once. (more if you add turn lanes, parking, cyclists etc.)

Now once you get to 4-lane roads meeting 4-lane roads, things get complicated.

Six-lane roads more so. Wider roads, in addition to movement complexity, increase crossing time curb to curb, and often induce higher vehicle speed and variable vehicle speed vs narrower roads.

We could eliminate many traffic lights, first, by eliminating lanes.

This (lane reduction) is likely to occur in the core as bike lanes roll out.

Whether the City is willing to remove previous traffic lights that are no longer necessary will be interesting to watch.

Apart from that; there is also a need to use median barriers to prevent some left-hand turns at uncontrolled intersections off major roads.

Doing so would smooth traffic, reduce accidents and simplify movements for pedestrians to safely navigate a crossing.

 

[reaperexpress]

Narrowing the road is always the key vs more traffic lights.

Specifically in the form of reducing the number of travel lanes.

Its simply about how many things both drivers and pedestrians (or cyclists) can keep an eye on at once.

One lane each way, mid-block, is roughly 2 things to keep an eye on; add in cyclists or any on-street parking and it may be a bit more complex, but is really quite manageable.

That same street intersecting like, now means a minimum of 4 things to keep any eye on at once. (more if you add turn lanes, parking, cyclists etc.)

Now once you get to 4-lane roads meeting 4-lane roads, things get complicated.

Six-lane roads more so. Wider roads, in addition to movement complexity, increase crossing time curb to curb, and often induce higher vehicle speed and variable vehicle speed vs narrower roads.

We could eliminate many traffic lights, first, by eliminating lanes.

This (lane reduction) is likely to occur in the core as bike lanes roll out.

Whether the City is willing to remove previous traffic lights that are no longer necessary will be interesting to watch.

Apart from that; there is also a need to use median barriers to prevent some left-hand turns at uncontrolled intersections off major roads.

Doing so would smooth traffic, reduce accidents and simplify movements for pedestrians to safely navigate a crossing.

Absolutely. And lane reduction is not something that is "likely to happen" it is something that has already been happening for several years. Just this year for example Scarlett Road was rearranged from 4 lanes to 2 lanes + bike lanes + left turn lanes + parking lanes, and this is an extremely common update which has happened to countless other streets already (Harbord, Wellesley, Dundas East, Gerrard, Shuter, River, Annette, Davenport, Rogers, Cosburn, etc).

Traffic already flows more smoothly regardless of removing signals because the notion of 2 lanes per direction was purely theoretical to begin with given how often one or the other would be obstructed by parked cars, turning cars, stopped buses, cyclists, streetcars, etc. Now there can at least be one efficient traffic lane per direction, with dedicated space elsewhere for people parking, cycling or turning.

Unfortunately I'm not aware of any of these road diets being leveraged to eliminate traffic signals (or stop signs). The only win I've seen so far was that as part of the Shaw Street reconstruction this year (which included banning cars for one block in order to prevent cut-through traffic) they removed the all-way stop signs at Essex Street to give priority to Shaw. But the rest of the superfluous stop signs are still there, making Shaw an inefficient cycling route if you obey the law. Which undermines the route's potential to divert cyclists off of Ossington.

I suppose the upside though is that we don't need to focus on bringing about lane reductions, we can simply look at the lane reductions which are already occuring and see what opportunities there are to eliminate traffic signals and stop signs.