digi
Active Member
They work well in other countries, perhaps a little driver education is needed.
|
|
|
They work well in other countries, perhaps a little driver education is needed.
spider
Senior Member
Traffic light timing
Traffic lights have been wired to a computer for years, 35 years in some cases. I don't know how many of them are controlled by a computer but I have driven down Bayview or Victoria Park through 6 or 8 intersections in a row on green lights simply by driving the speed limit in light traffic.
The question was asked how could a computer controlled string of intersection/signals be beneficial to west bound traffic and not to east bound traffic at any given time, the answer lies in the distances/driving times between signals. If the intersections in a given section of road were evenly spaced there would be no problem but that is obviously rarely the case.
The computer is programmed to give priority to traffic in one direction in the morning rush and the opposite in the evening. Mix in intersections that have to serve traffic on both East/West and North/South streets at the same time and the model makes compromises that are less than ideal for both routes.
Traffic lights have been wired to a computer for years, 35 years in some cases. I don't know how many of them are controlled by a computer but I have driven down Bayview or Victoria Park through 6 or 8 intersections in a row on green lights simply by driving the speed limit in light traffic.
The question was asked how could a computer controlled string of intersection/signals be beneficial to west bound traffic and not to east bound traffic at any given time, the answer lies in the distances/driving times between signals. If the intersections in a given section of road were evenly spaced there would be no problem but that is obviously rarely the case.
The computer is programmed to give priority to traffic in one direction in the morning rush and the opposite in the evening. Mix in intersections that have to serve traffic on both East/West and North/South streets at the same time and the model makes compromises that are less than ideal for both routes.
Chuck
Senior Member
In my opinion, demolishing the Gardiner is a step sideways rather than a step forward. What will it actually accomplish in terms of improving the urban environment or enhancing the transportation system? It's not that I'm against demolishing it, but honestly there are much more important projects that could be undertaken on the east side of downtown. Way to go Miller, yet another useless "legacy" project.
nfitz
Superstar
Or you could use the same technique that the other countries used. They simply built a lot of them, and people figured it out. Even England had very few roundabouts until the 1960s.
Waterloo seems to be using this technique - must be about a dozen there now built in the last 3-4 years.
toraerach
Active Member
Maybe a couple of roundabouts would help move the traffic better.Just dont know if Torontonians are ready.
Excellent - replace one barrier to pedestrians with another that could prove to be more dangerous.
MisterF
Senior Member
Roundabouts might not be appropriate here, but they're not more dangerous for pedestrians than signalized intersections.
toraerach
Active Member
I suppose if you put something really attractive in the centre of the roundabout it would make it more attractive to pedestrians. A nice big monument or another piece of art can make it an attraction in itself. It works for the Arc de Triumph afterall, although obviously a bit more toned down. Crossing University doesn't seem as daunting because halfway through you have that very well done median with something to look at. I've always thought that compared to other cities we don't have that many visible monuments.
If you can distract the pedestrians from the busy road it won't seem like such a barrier.
dowlingm
Senior Member
roundabouts have limits though - more than four exits or more than an inner and outer lane and things get VERY dicey. One five exit three lane roundabout near Cork Airport in Ireland was referred to as the "magic roundabout" because drivers seemed to fall under the spell of the conflicting lane markings to exit in different directions. Thankfully part of it is now a flyover so traffic has eased but give it another few years and it will be back to its crazy self.
singularc
New Member
pedestian friendly streets
Another reason why cars should stay above the pedestrian grade, is that even if the speed limit is only 50km/hr, someone in a hurry will be going 80 or more. It's slow and frustrating for the driver and dangerous for the pedestrian and cyclist. So let's keep the highway elevated, where you can go 90 to 100 km across downtown safely! You don't have to worry about hitting red lights, and I don't have to worry as much about being hit by a car while I'm trying to walk across the street to the waterfront.
The lights have to cascade red to green at the right interval to keep traffic flowing, but it can only work for one direction. Computers and cameras are supposed to keep that synchronized, according to time of day and traffic flow.
However, both Sherbourne and Parliament are deliberately synchronized to maximize red lights in BOTH directions, as I've tested those routes repeatedly and always get 70-80% red, no matter what direction I travel, no matter the time of day. Although the system can be tricked if you do, like, 80 km/hr between the lights, traffic allowing!
Another reason why cars should stay above the pedestrian grade, is that even if the speed limit is only 50km/hr, someone in a hurry will be going 80 or more. It's slow and frustrating for the driver and dangerous for the pedestrian and cyclist. So let's keep the highway elevated, where you can go 90 to 100 km across downtown safely! You don't have to worry about hitting red lights, and I don't have to worry as much about being hit by a car while I'm trying to walk across the street to the waterfront.
singularc
New Member
if you're not with us ... it will be torn down
I don't mean to be confrontational with you because you are certainly right, but we must act - you can sit by as your government spends $300 to $400 million dollars (likely more) demolishing a very useful piece of infrastructure, or you can be vocal about the alternatives you'd like to see in place. Split the money between fixing and improving the Gardiner (maybe another access ramp for industrial access into the Portlands at Cherry St?) and improving the rail links with the outlying areas. There's a lot more useful ways we could be spending this money. We all have to fight this crazy idea, there is a lot of political will and money supporting it. To arms, brothers and sisters, to arms! Be against demolishing it! Save the Gardiner!
I don't mean to be confrontational with you because you are certainly right, but we must act - you can sit by as your government spends $300 to $400 million dollars (likely more) demolishing a very useful piece of infrastructure, or you can be vocal about the alternatives you'd like to see in place. Split the money between fixing and improving the Gardiner (maybe another access ramp for industrial access into the Portlands at Cherry St?) and improving the rail links with the outlying areas. There's a lot more useful ways we could be spending this money. We all have to fight this crazy idea, there is a lot of political will and money supporting it. To arms, brothers and sisters, to arms! Be against demolishing it! Save the Gardiner!
RedRocket191
Senior Member
I didn't know we wanted to promote heady industry in the Portlands... I thought we had some really nice plans to remove the industry and replace it with parkland and new communities...
Dichotomy
Banned
Because, of course, more condos and townhouses are important, whereas jobs are not....
RedRocket191
Senior Member
Because, of course, more condos and townhouses are important, whereas jobs are not....
Jobs are great, but what kind of jobs? Manufacturing isn't really our strength in Ontario anymore.
smuncky
Senior Member
Because, of course, more condos and townhouses are important, whereas jobs are not....
from what i read and understand, it will be a live/work community. there will be jobs there, along with housing.
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
There's more to jobs than just manufacturing. Part-time jobs at stores and restaurants are needed too, unless 16 year old girls are expected to work full-time in a steel mill or a car plant ("better" jobs). Besides, maybe heavier jobs should over time be sent packing to peripheral spots on the highway...who wants a deafening and odorific printing plant in their backyard?
Will there be a new elementary school? There's jobs. New LRT line into the portlands? More jobs. There's bound to be multiple Starbucks, Second Cups, Subways, Rabbas, and dry cleaners...more work for postmen, for internet repairmen, for home stagers (all those flippable condos)...new lawyers will be needed to help new residents fight The Docks, the power plant, the treatment plant ("how dare they exist in my neighbourhood!")......any population increase means more local jobs.
Will there be a new elementary school? There's jobs. New LRT line into the portlands? More jobs. There's bound to be multiple Starbucks, Second Cups, Subways, Rabbas, and dry cleaners...more work for postmen, for internet repairmen, for home stagers (all those flippable condos)...new lawyers will be needed to help new residents fight The Docks, the power plant, the treatment plant ("how dare they exist in my neighbourhood!")......any population increase means more local jobs.