Roads: Traffic Signals

[drum118]

The whole point of this discussion is to allow white transit signals to be also used in situations where they cannot currently be used. For example on King Street to indicate a through movement for streetcars throughout the entire east-west green, avoiding the need to have confusing redudant signal heads.

Having white bars for transit is long over due and stop the confusion with traffic signals that are the same as transit totday. Then a lot of today drivers don't understand traffic signals in the first place.

 

[BrenWilson]

The whole point of this discussion is to allow white transit signals to be also used in situations where they cannot currently be used. For example on King Street to indicate a through movement for streetcars throughout the entire east-west green, avoiding the need to have confusing redudant signal heads.

There's nothing stopping this currently. But why would you need to signal through streetcars separate from a regular green? Aren't left turns banned in these intersections already?

- A white bar transit phase on the TTC network does not give vehicles permission to travel straight. Under the HTA they could potentially change the meaning to permit straight-through movements, but first they would need to change all the existing transit bars to something else (e.g. a diagonal bar).
- Per the existing TTC and HTA definitions, the transit signal gives the driver permission to turn left or right with priority. So it cannot occur at the same time as the east-west crosswalks along King. Forcing the signals to serve separate phases for westbound streetcars, eastbound streetcars and east-west pedestrians would massively increase delay for streetcars and pedestrians.

They are currently used in Hamilton for at least one through movement that I can think of. There is no reg that they are only for turns.

 

[reaperexpress]

There's nothing stopping this currently.

What's stopping this currently is that the transit bar does not indicate a through movement on the TTC. If you show a white bar, it means the streetcar can turn left or right but cannot go straight.

But why would you need to signal through streetcars separate from a regular green?

Because we don't want to provide a regular green. It encourages drivers to illegally travel straight.

Aren't left turns banned in these intersections already?

Irrelevant. A streetcar priority phase would also conflict with pedestrian phases on both sides.

 

[BrenWilson]

What's stopping this currently is that the transit bar does not indicate a through movement on the TTC. If you show a white bar, it means the streetcar can turn left or right but cannot go straight.

That's a TTC problem, the HTA doesn't care.

Because we don't want to provide a regular green. It encourages drivers to illegally travel straight.

I'm not sure the transit priority signal really does much here, but this speaks to larger issues with the king street priority corridor. If the goal is to have the light forever red, but have the white bar cycle on when needed for streetcars - again you can do this, its up to the TTC to allow it.

Irrelevant. A streetcar priority phase would also conflict with pedestrian phases on both sides.

I'm not following you here.

 

[trafficexplorerON]

I'm not following you here.

Let's say for example you show a white bar for Eastbound traffic.
Transit vehicles turning left would conflict with pedestrians on the North crosswalk, and transit vehicles turning right would conflict with pedestrians on the South crosswalk. It's therefore not possible to give those crosswalks the walk signal at the same time as the white bar.

I'm also not crazy about the idea of vertical white bars having multiple different meanings depending on the intersection. Especially if more signs is what we need to explain the meanings.
Oh, and the taxi exception further complicates things.

 

[reaperexpress]

That's a TTC problem, the HTA doesn't care.

How do you expect the TTC to solve the problem when they have no alternative way of showing a left turn arrow for transit vehicles only?

I'm not following you here.

Transit bar = fully protected left turn and right turn.
Pedestrians conflict with left turn and right turn.

 

[BrenWilson]

I'm also not crazy about the idea of vertical white bars having multiple different meanings depending on the intersection. Especially if more signs is what we need to explain the meanings.
Oh, and the taxi exception further complicates things.

This is already the case! The symbol is currently just a blanket transit priority in our regs. The taxi exception would not work with this, no transit signal would - if you have anything that isn't a transit vehicle going through the intersection you need a regular traffic light, that's not really negotiable. The problem with King is that it is a half baked pilot that no one seems to want to pick up and actually complete from the ground up - you can't solve it by tweaking signals and signage alone.

Let's say for example you show a white bar for Eastbound traffic.
Transit vehicles turning left would conflict with pedestrians on the North crosswalk, and transit vehicles turning right would conflict with pedestrians on the South crosswalk. It's therefore not possible to give those crosswalks the walk signal at the same time as the white bar.

Transit bar = fully protected left turn and right turn.
Pedestrians conflict with left turn and right turn.

The current regs require the transit priority to be the only movement during the phase anyways, you wouldn't have concurrent pedestrian movement and the phase only lasts as long as the vehicle needs to clear the intersection which is shorter than any pedestrian phase would require. If you wanted to allow for transit through movements with pedestrians, you would require a dedicated 3 light transit signal (under current regs).

How do you expect the TTC to solve the problem when they have no alternative way of showing a left turn arrow for transit vehicles only?

I feel like I'm banging my head against a brick wall. The HTA allows any transit movement during the white bar priority phase. If the TTC doesn't allow this, that's their own rule. There's nothing to change in the HTA (unless we just go to full 3 light white bar transit signals, which the MTO seems reluctant to do). It would be up to the transportation engineers designing the intersection to ensure that there are no conflicts, which is possible because transit routes are planned and drivers are professional. The scenario where you have a conflict in transit movements, where one is going straight and one in the opposing direction is turning left and they both show up at the same time, you would know if that possibility exists because of route planning. You can handle this one of two ways, use the same phase and let the two drivers sort out right of way (straight movements first), or phase each direction.

Regardless you would not be able to use a transit priority signal on King for any real benefit if the carve out for taxis remains. Taxis would still require a green signal, which cannot run at the same time as a transit priority. King also allows bikes, so if you removed the standard green you would need a bike signal (I don't remember off the top of my head if the HTA allows for bike on ped signal movements, but that would be an additional sign).

 

[trafficexplorerON]

If you wanted to allow for transit through movements with pedestrians, you would require a dedicated 3 light transit signal (under current regs).

As a matter of fact, that is exactly what is trying to be done. Do you really expect them to show a red light for the transit vehicles every time the ped phases come on? Because that's what's gonna happen if you only let streetcars proceed on a "priority" phase. Why don't you draw some diagrams or something to illustrate what your alternative phasing solution is.

This is already the case! The symbol is currently just a blanket transit priority in our regs.

So your solution would be that a white bar means protected turns only at a bunch of other intersections, but thru+permissive turns (yielding) at this specific corridor?

The HTA allows any transit movement during the white bar priority phase. If the TTC doesn't allow this, that's their own rule.

White bar priority means turning vehicles do not have to yield, and other intersections operate based on this. My first point addresses this. And why would the TTC be more willing to change their rules than the MTO?

 

[nfitz]

This is already the case! The symbol is currently just a blanket transit priority in our regs. The taxi exception would not work with this, no transit signal would - if you have anything that isn't a transit vehicle going through the intersection you need a regular traffic light, that's not really negotiable.

The taxi exception isn't most of the day. Could easily have no greens ever during the day, and revert to them later.

Better yet - get rid of the taxi exception. At the times of day it's in place, Richmond and Adelaide were always faster!

 

[afransen]

The taxi exemption was always a malicious insertion by opponents to sabotage the transit priority corridor execution. Given that the transit priority has proven itself, the exception should be removed so that the signs and signaling can be made clearer.

 

[BrenWilson]

So your solution would be that a white bar means protected turns only at a bunch of other intersections, but thru+permissive turns (yielding) at this specific corridor?

The priority light currently means whatever you need it to based on the specific intersection. This is already how it works.

White bar priority means turning vehicles do not have to yield, and other intersections operate based on this

They don't need to yield to any other non-transit vehicles because everyone else has a red. I'm not sure anyone does use multiple priority signals at once, because for those cirsumstances everyone just use dedicated transit signals (however problematic those are). My point is that if you wanted to, the regulations don't specifically stop you, you'd just need to sort out the specific transit conflicts accordingly.

 

[adys123]

The priority light currently means whatever you need it to based on the specific intersection. This is already how it works.


They don't need to yield to any other non-transit vehicles because everyone else has a red. I'm not sure anyone does use multiple priority signals at once, because for those cirsumstances everyone just use dedicated transit signals (however problematic those are). My point is that if you wanted to, the regulations don't specifically stop you, you'd just need to sort out the specific transit conflicts accordingly.

Because the white bar transit signal allows for absolutely all-direction movement for transit vehicles, it cannot be used on King Street as is - because you cannot have any conflicting movements for the transit vehicles either.

 

[trafficexplorerON]

The priority light currently means whatever you need it to based on the specific intersection. This is already how it works.

Examples??

They don't need to yield to any other non-transit vehicles because everyone else has a red. I'm not sure anyone does use multiple priority signals at once, because for those cirsumstances everyone just use dedicated transit signals (however problematic those are). My point is that if you wanted to, the regulations don't specifically stop you, you'd just need to sort out the specific transit conflicts accordingly.

The whole point of reworking the HTA rules about this stuff is that dedicated transit signals don't need to have green lights, eliminating the possibility that motorists get them confused.

How about this: you draw up some diagrams explanining what you would do instead.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

Examples??


The whole point of reworking the HTA rules about this stuff is that dedicated transit signals don't need to have green lights, eliminating the possibility that motorists get them confused.

How about this: you draw up some diagrams explanining what you would do instead.

How Toronto uses "transit priority signals"...

 

[trafficexplorerON]

How Toronto uses "transit priority signals"...

That doesn't prove that Toronto already "means whatever you need it to based on the specific intersection".
This is just another white bar for turn priority, which is how they basically always use white bars.