YRT/Viva Construction Thread (Rapidways, Terminals)

[cplchanb]

YRT no longer has fare zones.

Don't know if this a a YRT, GO, or both problem, but GO buses don't have ETA at YRT terminals.

GO runs their own ops at finch terminal so yrt is no obligated to put signs for them. as for fare zones, it has been a mixed result at best.
but it does pave the way for future consideration on the subway lines

 

[cplchanb]

Yonge and hwy7 aren't exactly sparsely populated. Sure, they gotta run empty buses to Sutton. But that is no excuse for BRT infrastructure to be running on 30 minute frequencies like is the case in downtown markham.

imo it all comes down to operating budget....can they afford to keep a huge chunk of their fleet unused during non rush and only take them out for the am/pm surge?
its a balancing act and unfortunately it appears that they just simply dont have the money like ttc

 

[Leo_Chan]

GO runs their own ops at finch terminal so yrt is no obligated to put signs for them. as for fare zones, it has been a mixed result at best.
but it does pave the way for future consideration on the subway lines

I was talking about Richmond Hill Centre Terminal. The signs exist with the platform number and route number, but the screen is always off.

 

[applepill]

I was talking about Richmond Hill Centre Terminal. The signs exist with the platform number and route number, but the screen is always off.

If you look closely, you’ll realize that there’s actually no sign installed, it’s just a black printout.

In other news, GO finally activated their next bus display (separate centralized display) at Richmond Hill Centre after a year’s delay and after they installed a non waterproof screen outside not realizing that it rains in York Region

 

[Leo_Chan]

If you look closely, you’ll realize that there’s actually no sign installed, it’s just a black printout.

In other news, GO finally activated their next bus display (separate centralized display) at Richmond Hill Centre after a year’s delay and after they installed a non waterproof screen outside not realizing that it rains in York Region

I feel dumb now.

 

[Neutrino]

They just have one Achilles heel: frequency. If that could increase, it would be a great system.

yeah, I was going to mention that. The highway 7 frequency seems pretty bad, completely sabotaging the elaborate stations. Also that route doesn't seem to have true signal priority because buses still wait at the lights, on the rare occasions that they arrive.

 

[Neutrino]

Yonge and hwy7 aren't exactly sparsely populated. Sure, they gotta run empty buses to Sutton. But that is no excuse for BRT infrastructure to be running on 30 minute frequencies like is the case in downtown markham.

And those areas are getting more and more dense, with many more condos coming in the foreseeable future.

 

[strookie]

yeah, I was going to mention that. The highway 7 frequency seems pretty bad, completely sabotaging the elaborate stations. Also that route doesn't seem to have true signal priority because buses still wait at the lights, on the rare occasions that they arrive.

I'm not a Viva rider but as a frequent driver on Hwy 7 I'll have to say, too, that I've never seen any evidence of signal priority anywhere along the actual BRT. That includes the short single lane under the 404, where signal lights control just the bus traffic. If the lane is clear for the approaching bus, why does it still have to stop at the red light?

Also, at the intersections that have full BRT, I notice that a bus proceeds only if it have the transit signal (vertical white bar). It will not proceed on green because green includes regular traffic left hand turns, at least at minor intersections. I'd have to check again, but IIRC for Jane and 7 as one example, regular east and west traffic has a separate left turn signal. That means that the buses on the BRT can proceed on green, but they don't. It would be a very simple matter to include a white bar during the east-west green cycle, but the problem is that the vertical white bar actually means that buses can turn right or left as well as straight ahead, so having the white bar on the green would be illegal.

What this means is that there are at best only two brief periods during a full traffic signal cycle that a bus on the BRT will get a transit proceed signal. When you consider the Jane/7 intersection, that full cycle is at least 4 minutes long.

What transit priority signaling should do is exactly the same as what fire truck priority does, it cuts the green period short. And I've never seen that with BRT buses waiting at the intersections.

 

[adrianaliu]

I'm not a Viva rider but as a frequent driver on Hwy 7 I'll have to say, too, that I've never seen any evidence of signal priority anywhere along the actual BRT. That includes the short single lane under the 404, where signal lights control just the bus traffic. If the lane is clear for the approaching bus, why does it still have to stop at the red light?

Also, at the intersections that have full BRT, I notice that a bus proceeds only if it have the transit signal (vertical white bar). It will not proceed on green because green includes regular traffic left hand turns, at least at minor intersections. I'd have to check again, but IIRC for Jane and 7 as one example, regular east and west traffic has a separate left turn signal. That means that the buses on the BRT can proceed on green, but they don't. It would be a very simple matter to include a white bar during the east-west green cycle, but the problem is that the vertical white bar actually means that buses can turn right or left as well as straight ahead, so having the white bar on the green would be illegal.

What this means is that there are at best only two brief periods during a full traffic signal cycle that a bus on the BRT will get a transit proceed signal. When you consider the Jane/7 intersection, that full cycle is at least 4 minutes long.

What transit priority signaling should do is exactly the same as what fire truck priority does, it cuts the green period short. And I've never seen that with BRT buses waiting at the intersections.

part of the problem with viva is they made these rapidways trying to piss drivers off as little as possible, that means little to no signal priority for busses and a wide street thats hostile to pedestrians cyclists and transit users. also the stops are way too close. the result is beautiful transit infrastructure being wasted with slow and infrequent service. viva would be much more pleasant if the roads were 2 lanes per direction+cycle lane+rapidway, and if the adjacent high density development were less car oriented

 

[BMO]

Signal priority would probably have little impact on general traffic if they maintain the 15 minute headway. Only thing I can think of is that reliability is already so good with the ROW that the extra few minutes they'd save wouldn't justify the extra cost of implementing it, and there'd likely be very few riders added because of the few minutes savings unfortunately.

 

[smallspy]

I'm not a Viva rider but as a frequent driver on Hwy 7 I'll have to say, too, that I've never seen any evidence of signal priority anywhere along the actual BRT.

All VIVA vehicles are equipped with equipment to trigger the signals to hold a green for longer, or to advance it. And the signals are all equipped with the receiving equipment as well.

The problem is that it only actually operates when the vehicle is 3 minutes late or later according to the schedule.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[amnesiajune]

Also, at the intersections that have full BRT, I notice that a bus proceeds only if it have the transit signal (vertical white bar). It will not proceed on green because green includes regular traffic left hand turns, at least at minor intersections. I'd have to check again, but IIRC for Jane and 7 as one example, regular east and west traffic has a separate left turn signal. That means that the buses on the BRT can proceed on green, but they don't. It would be a very simple matter to include a white bar during the east-west green cycle, but the problem is that the vertical white bar actually means that buses can turn right or left as well as straight ahead, so having the white bar on the green would be illegal.

I'm not sure what you're talking about here... buses have a green light at the same time as cars. They can't turn left or right when cars have a green light (for obvious reasons) but they can (and do) go straight through.

The white bars are only used when buses need to merge with regular traffic. When buses need to turn they have an arrow turn signal. That's how the white bars are supposed to be used (Toronto uses them incorrectly).

 

[strookie]

Signal priority would probably have little impact on general traffic if they maintain the 15 minute headway. Only thing I can think of is that reliability is already so good with the ROW that the extra few minutes they'd save wouldn't justify the extra cost of implementing it, and there'd likely be very few riders added because of the few minutes savings unfortunately.

But for years already YRT has been actively promoting priority signalling as something that already exists. I believe they have directed the drivers not to activate the priority unless they're falling behind schedule. What that really means that YRT needs to push a more aggressive schedule. And, yes, station frequency is too high.

 

[amnesiajune]

And, yes, station frequency is too high.

500-600 meter station frequency is pretty much optimal for a surface BRT or LRT. It's exactly the same as what's being used on Finch West and the above-ground parts of Eglinton.

 

[Leo_Chan]

500-600 meter station frequency is pretty much optimal for a surface BRT or LRT. It's exactly the same as what's being used on Finch West and the above-ground parts of Eglinton.

Yeah, I don't feel the stop spacing to too little. If the signal priority was more aggressive, then the stop spacing is fine. However, with the current passive priority, losing a few stations wouldn't make any difference as they would still have to stop for the lights.

Another flaw is the after intersection stations rather than before the intersection. If signal priority allowed the buses to go past the intersection to stop at the station, then it would be good. However, if signal priority isn't activated all the time, then having near stops may be better.

It all comes down to Frequency, Signal Priority, and Speed.

On another note, I feel like a Rodick Station might be warranted as there is a new church and lots of medium rise units around that area. I don't know if that would make stop spacing too close, but it is a gap compared to the rest of the stations on the route.