ARG1
Senior Member
The safest answer is probably the City, or more specific local Councillors. Otherwise, why do Hurontario and Finch West have TSP?
|
|
|
felix123
Active Member
Pressure needs to be increased on councillors in wards along Eglinton East to demand full TSP favouring the LRT. If not, the new line will just serve as a revenue-generator for more BlogTO articles, decrying Line 5's crappiness.
(I would, but my councillor is Joe Cressy, and even if he cared about line 5, he doesn't read or respond to communications from his constituents as far as I'm aware.)
(I would, but my councillor is Joe Cressy, and even if he cared about line 5, he doesn't read or respond to communications from his constituents as far as I'm aware.)
mistersg1
Active Member
No one ever answered my question, do the VIVA Rapidways currently use transit signal priority?
TSP as it’s being referred to here is this nice catch all term, but how exactly is it supposed to work? Am I to believe it’s supposed to allow the vehicle in the right of way to never face a red light?
TSP as it’s being referred to here is this nice catch all term, but how exactly is it supposed to work? Am I to believe it’s supposed to allow the vehicle in the right of way to never face a red light?
smallspy
Senior Member
Toronto Transportation Services has long held that they don't want "transit priority" in the way that a lot of people here envision it, but have and will allow other forms of it where it makes sense to.
That said, there are detection loops placed in advance of almost all of the signalized intersections on Eglinton (some are placed well in advance), so it looks like there will be some level of pre-emptive priority in place on Eglinton.
The simple answer is "sometimes".
There is a pre-emptive and green-hold mode on the VIVA Rapidways, but it only gets engaged if a bus approaches that intersection more than 3 minutes late. If the bus is early or less than 3 minutes late, the priority is disabled.
Dan
innsertnamehere
Superstar
That's how the TTC's TSP largely works too - only engaged if vehicles are late to increase reliability.
Metrolinx has indicated that the Crosstown will behave like this as well, if the trains are on time, they will not have priority, but will have priority if running behind schedule. It will mean longer travel times, but also should mean that the trains should run relatively on schedule. I.e. if they get held up at a light or two early on the surface run and are taking longer than they should be to get across the surface section, the last few lights will be prioritized to make sure they make the run in the planned time period.
I'm sympathetic to not having total light priority which would throw pedestrian and vehicular travel times way off, but think there should probably be some amount of normal priority for on-time vehicles. Something in between transit vehicles literally never seeing a red and having 0 priority absolutely whatsoever. Perhaps if vehicles are within 10-15 seconds of a light, the light gets extended.. reducing red-times, but not eliminating them.. My understanding is that this is largely how Kitchener's LRT operates - no total priority, but the LRVs are prioritized.
Metrolinx has indicated that the Crosstown will behave like this as well, if the trains are on time, they will not have priority, but will have priority if running behind schedule. It will mean longer travel times, but also should mean that the trains should run relatively on schedule. I.e. if they get held up at a light or two early on the surface run and are taking longer than they should be to get across the surface section, the last few lights will be prioritized to make sure they make the run in the planned time period.
I'm sympathetic to not having total light priority which would throw pedestrian and vehicular travel times way off, but think there should probably be some amount of normal priority for on-time vehicles. Something in between transit vehicles literally never seeing a red and having 0 priority absolutely whatsoever. Perhaps if vehicles are within 10-15 seconds of a light, the light gets extended.. reducing red-times, but not eliminating them.. My understanding is that this is largely how Kitchener's LRT operates - no total priority, but the LRVs are prioritized.
ssiguy2
Senior Member
Let U-turns have been used very successfully and especially when they are employed not only on the street the train is running down but also the streets they are crossing. They have also proven themselves to be very safe and especially for pedestrians as they get rid of all pedestrian/car interaction. They also REDUCE traffic congestion and backups as they give left-hand turns longer times to turn then just regular advanced green lights. Controlled and uncontrolled U-turn routes are fairly common in BC along commercial roads that are separated by concrete infill between the opposing traffic.
Eglinton is the world's most expensive streetcar and will never have the capacity, reliablity, or frequency of a grade separated system. Infact it will never even have the same attributes compared to other LRT systems like CTrain or LA LRT. IT will have to be divided into 2 completely different lines or the system will simply not have the capacity needed for the grade separated sections.
Will Eglinton be a failure.............of course not. It will be a well used corridor but the City has gotten incredibly little bang for it's buck.
Eglinton is the world's most expensive streetcar and will never have the capacity, reliablity, or frequency of a grade separated system. Infact it will never even have the same attributes compared to other LRT systems like CTrain or LA LRT. IT will have to be divided into 2 completely different lines or the system will simply not have the capacity needed for the grade separated sections.
Will Eglinton be a failure.............of course not. It will be a well used corridor but the City has gotten incredibly little bang for it's buck.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
The bad news is that Toronto's Transportation Department is doing their
Last edited:
mistersg1
Active Member
Yeah, that’s how I thought it worked. What you describe as a pre-emptive green would be the transit signal getting a green before the lead fully protected left turn I presume.
This should be a further question of why a lag fully protected left turn movement can’t instead occur. Because of total efficiency, it doesn’t seem particularly efficient for having three phases on one street. That is, you’d have a phase only for the transit vehicle to proceed (making turns from a ROW would need this phase no matter what, like you see at Lake Shore and Bathurst), the second phase would be the leading fully protected left turn, and the third phase would be the regular green (which the transit vehicle could move). Obviously if you used a lagging fully protected turn movement, you could eliminate the need for the transit only phase, as both the regular green and transit vehicle could move together.
Furthermore, a transit phase could still exist in lagging fully protected left turn, but would occur after the lagging turn movement and before the cross street starts its signal. Think of it like an extended green for the transit vehicle.
mistersg1
Active Member
I’d argue they are doing both simultaneously in a strange way.
A lousy non grade separated system and a street forever altered by restricted turn movements and longer signals. Eglinton for example had little to know fully protected left turn movements, before they were protected-permissive at most intersections.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
For lagging left turns, we'll need police or "crossing guards" for a little while (a week, a month, a year, or forever) to "wake" up the left turners. For any case, the police or "cross guards" will still be needed when the light rail vehicles go on simulated runs, without passengers, before the "official" opening and after, to make sure motorists can see the traffic signals AND the light rail vehicles crossing intersections.
MrGoose
Active Member
The best solution is to close the line east of Laird and spend however much it will take to elevate the eastern section and start saving money for the Lawrence Crosstown.
I cannot believe we went through the trouble of building a 20 billion dollar subway and then gimped it by making it lower capacity and giving it less priority than an suv trying to make a left.
For those of you who say “oh but 15K pphd is enough”, if we had used high capacity subway trains, then we could've made the station boxes smaller by using less cars per train and saved a couple billion dollars. If we're going to go through the trouble of digging subway sized tunnels through midtown Toronto, we might as well have used subway sized trains.
No matter how you slice it, making this an LRT and not a proper subway was a real mistake.
Either the capacity is enough, in which case we could have saved alot of money by using high-floor trains and making the station boxes smaller, or the capacity is not enough in which case we'll have to spend way more money building another line.
Not to mention the colossal f-up that the eastern section is.
I cannot believe we went through the trouble of building a 20 billion dollar subway and then gimped it by making it lower capacity and giving it less priority than an suv trying to make a left.
For those of you who say “oh but 15K pphd is enough”, if we had used high capacity subway trains, then we could've made the station boxes smaller by using less cars per train and saved a couple billion dollars. If we're going to go through the trouble of digging subway sized tunnels through midtown Toronto, we might as well have used subway sized trains.
No matter how you slice it, making this an LRT and not a proper subway was a real mistake.
Either the capacity is enough, in which case we could have saved alot of money by using high-floor trains and making the station boxes smaller, or the capacity is not enough in which case we'll have to spend way more money building another line.
Not to mention the colossal f-up that the eastern section is.
Amare
Senior Member
I figured this was the case all along, just Toronto was trying to spin it in a way where Metrolinx was at fault for the stupid decision that the city themselves made.
Allandale25
Senior Member
Out of curiosity, what's the purpose of misquoting the cost when the real cost can easily be found? Do you believe the tactic helps make your point stronger? I think misquoting the cost to make your point is unnecessary.
44 North
Senior Member
I think TSP will work ok. Seems like all the surface vehicles in the city have a green-hold system. Can't force a red, but want to make the green while people are boarding is doable as is evident.
What nobody brings up in all this is the likelihood of future midblock traffic lights. As blocks get developed new intersections will be added, new traffic signals will be added. This will definitely affect end-to-end run times.
What nobody brings up in all this is the likelihood of future midblock traffic lights. As blocks get developed new intersections will be added, new traffic signals will be added. This will definitely affect end-to-end run times.
superelevation
Active Member
Part of the problem Toronto has a problem writing good schedules. If the schedule is super slow you'll never be late!