sixrings
Senior Member
I go but I am 36 and white.... I think the bigger issue of the age and race is that it is probably the least likely group to be taking transit in Toronto and so they may have ulterior motives in their suggestions.
|
|
|
Palma
Senior Member
yet when residents in Weston complain about the gas plant being located in their ward, Metrolinx does nothing although they did say if there is a lot of opposition and no one wants it there, it can be moved. They are just paying lip service I think. Guess if this happened in the east say Leslie a decision would have already been made to remove it by Metrolinx
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
No, I don't think we should be making major policy decisions based on community meetings. Exactly because the people who need this infrastructure the most are the same people who have the least ability to take three hours out of their day to come to these public meetings. This includes people who are at work, people with multiple jobs, watching kids, lower income people, etc...,
If people want to complain about small details at community meetings, that's fine. But broad policy should never be set solely because of feedback at the meetings. That should be done via elected representatives.
crs1026
Superstar
You aren't giving sufficient credit to the dynamics of public meetings. There is theatre in many directions eg the (sometimes contrived) aplause. However - One noisy public meeting may have more impact on elected reps' thinking than a hundred insightful, well-composed emails. I'm actually impressed with how the elected representatives that I see in public meetings process that much conflicting input. (did I just say something nice about politicians? sheesh.) If they can't find a way through it all, they don't get reelected.
There is a difference between 'input' and 'analysis'. I agree that public meetings are a poor forum to talk on a technical level. When I chatted with the ML people who were staffing the display boards, I had no illusion that I could make some point that would make them say 'That's a good idea - I'm going to make that change.' then and there. But - when six people in a row complained (to applause) that some part of the study was 'crap', I knew that the elected reps were going to be asking followup questions, and that meant that staff were going to be rethinking their sums. Even if the speakers had no substance to their comments at the time, the elected rep wants something better to take back next time. It's an interesting way to challenge and dissect a plan, but it produces some interesting forward progress.
- Paul
k10ery
Senior Member
I can't believe that even Toronto would fail to set up transit priority at a dedicated U-turn signal!
Looking at your map above, the indirect left turns look pretty well planned out to me. Left turn phases at suburban arterials drive me crazy in general - it's so inefficient! Much of the time, I bet the proposed arrangements will be faster for all drivers than the current arrangements.
As a downtown resident, I wish we had the option to eliminate left turns so easily. Left turns slow traffic, especially mixed traffic streetcars. And they kill quite a few pedestrians. Good for the planners on this one, in my view.
k10ery
Senior Member
crs1026
Superstar
My fear is that it will be set up, Toronto style. We don't do transit priority well yet. Do we expect different here?
Transit priority is good for extending green lights, and for curtailing opposing greens, when transit vehicles are approaching. The risk here is different. You have a significant volume of left turn traffic, which means there will still have to be significant minimum timing for the cross-traffic over the tracks. Otherwise, the U-turning vehicles will back up waiting for a permissive signal (and we may not have width for long waiting lanes for the U-turn light, thanks to the 45-meter thing). If an LRT approaches during the minimum period for the U-turn green, the minimum duration will take precedence over the transit priority function. And the LRT will come to a stop. The more U-turn crossings there are, the more of this will occur.
U-turn lanes for right turns require the vehicle to come out of the U, merge into the left traffic lane, and then make a lane change to the right lane in order to turn. Can you say "fender-bender"? That's a lot of perturbation in traffic flow. You can signal the far side of the U-turn lane, which slows the through traffic.
Bottom line - left turn traffic is going to be problemmatic either way.
Three duckunders - Islington, Kipling, and Martin Grove - are not going to break the City's piggy bank. Everyone wins.
- Paul
darth_freeman
Active Member
I think the U-Turns will all occur while opposing traffic is stopped, hence the traffic signals. So the weaving from left to right shouldn't be a huge issue.
But I agree that Islington, Kipling, Martin Grove, (and possibly Royal York) should look at partial underground options.
darth_freeman
Active Member
Tripling or quintupling the number of traffic signals per intersection generally does not lead to increased efficiency.
k10ery
Senior Member
The proposal eliminates signal phases.
DKsan
Active Member
Technically, they still could make a side alignment happen.
Instead of build the LRT guideway in the middle of Eglinton, build on top or bottom and just shift the roadway.
Instead of build the LRT guideway in the middle of Eglinton, build on top or bottom and just shift the roadway.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Well Metrolinx is examining varying degrees of grade separation, and City staff have also confirmed that they are looking at side of road alignments, so we'll know soon enough. I suspect side of road might be possible in some locations, and in other locations it'll have to switch to the centre (which isn't unprecedented at all). I expect that it won't work, but we'll see. You never know until it's investigated
Palma
Senior Member
Then Metrolinx should not be giving false hope to residents out there
Palma
Senior Member
Just so I have this straight, the LRT will be underground at Keele but as it approaches Black Creek will come above surface. Now, does it go back below surface after Black Creek to Weston Rd or does it continue above surface from Black Creek to Weston Rd?
BMO
Senior Member
Probably below-grade to Weston due to having to cross the rail.