Scramble Crossings (City of Toronto) (Yonge/Dundas, Yonge/Bloor, Bay/Bloor)

[BobBob]

Isn't Bay/Front the busiest pedestrian intersection because of Union Station.

That would certainly be our analogue to Shibuya, in that there is a major subway and suburban rail station, with virtually all the destinations on the other side of the street, requiring massive waves of pedestrian crossings. In our case though, there is the option of "crossing" underground via PATH, dampening somewhat the hope of having a Shibuya-like spectacle in our town.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Looks like the crossing is at risk http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013/07/31/city_proposes_to_scrap_baybloor_pedestrian_scramble.html

If I could suggest one change for these crossings, it would be to have a sequence in the lights where just cars can make right turns while pedestrians have to wait. Then the scramble happens and cars have to wait. Currently, there is no chance for cars to turn right without being blocked by pedestrians crossing, thus causing congestion behind the one or two cars turning.

 

[CDL.TO]

Seeing that since no one specifically waits for the scramble phase, you only have a 1 in 3 chance of arriving at the intersection when the scramble will be the active signal phase.

And seeing that the scramble only offers a benefit to people who need to cross diagonally, only 1 in 3 of those people benefit from the phase (unless there are particularly noteworthy pedestrian attractors diagonally across the intersection).

Perhaps scrambles aren't worth it seeing that they only conceivably benefit 1 in 9 pedestrians crossing at an intersection?

 

[Admiral Beez]

Alternatively, consider having scrabble crossings only at intersections where no left or right turns are permitted for cars.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Pedestrian bridges in areas with a high volume of pedestrians would be useful. They are quite popular in other parts of the world, but for whatever reason haven't caught on here in NA.

 

[Johnny Au]

Pedestrian bridges in areas with a high volume of pedestrians would be useful. They are quite popular in other parts of the world, but for whatever reason haven't caught on here in NA.

Las Vegas has pedestrian bridges over the intersection of Tropicana Avenue and Las Vegas Boulevard: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropicana_–_Las_Vegas_Boulevard_intersection

 

[Markster]

Seeing that since no one specifically waits for the scramble phase, you only have a 1 in 3 chance of arriving at the intersection when the scramble will be the active signal phase.

And seeing that the scramble only offers a benefit to people who need to cross diagonally, only 1 in 3 people benefit from the phase (unless there are particularly noteworthy pedestrian attractors diagonally across the intersection).

One thing I've seen in other countries is that when an intersection has a scramble phase, it also means that there is no pedestrian crossing allowed at all during vehicle phases, removing right-turn conflicts with pedestrians. In these instances, it makes a lot of sense, since you only get one shot to cross to your desired corner.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Las Vegas has pedestrian bridges over the intersection of Tropicana Avenue and Las Vegas Boulevaed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropicana_–_Las_Vegas_Boulevard_intersection

Yeah. There are also quite a few here in Toronto. But its nowhere near as prevelant as in other countries. They make lots of sense in areas with high pedestrian traffic and wide streets. A great area for them would be the at grade sections of our LRT lines.

 

[W. K. Lis]

One thing I've seen in other countries is that when an intersection has a scramble phase, it also means that there is no pedestrian crossing allowed at all during vehicle phases, removing right-turn conflicts with pedestrians. In these instances, it makes a lot of sense, since you only get one shot to cross to your desired corner.

I agree. The way they implemented scrambled intersections here in Toronto does not not make a lot of sense. But apparently the politicians or bureaucrats here "know better". Must have been the same people who made a mess of splitting the 501 streetcar route, because they "know better".

 

[ShonTron]

Yeah. There are also quite a few here in Toronto. But its nowhere near as prevelant as in other countries. They make lots of sense in areas with high pedestrian traffic and wide streets. A great area for them would be the at grade sections of our LRT lines.

There aren't any pedestrian bridges over intersections that I know of in Toronto; the ones I can think of span railways, freeways and the occasional major street such as Lake Shore Blvd at the CNE. There's also the various private bridges such as the Eaton Centre/Bay, St. Mike's Hospital, etc.

I wouldn't be in favour of building Las Vegas or Asian-style forced grade separations at major intersections. That's a very auto-centric approach. They make some sense in Las Vegas where they keep gawking tourists out of harms' way and built with casino entrances integrated to better separate suckers from their money, but you don't see them in New York or London or many other western city.

 

[TFC]

The argument that I've heard against pedestrian bridges in transportation planning courses has been that human psychology dictates we take the shortest possible route to our destination. Pedestrian bridges over railways and highways are one thing, but over a city road would seldom be used.

 

[diminutive]

I wouldn't be in favour of building Las Vegas or Asian-style forced grade separations at major intersections. That's a very auto-centric approach. They make some sense in Las Vegas where they keep gawking tourists out of harms' way and built with casino entrances integrated to better separate suckers from their money, but you don't see them in New York or London or many other western city.

The one exception could be Moscow where there are hundreds of underground pedestrian crossings. Underpasses there are like little malls, with kiosks and vendors, plus provide some shelter from the elements. Moscow's intersections look ridiculous, as well, which probably has something to do with it.

Since most of what one assumes Toronto's busiest pedestrian intersections are already overlapped by PATH the need for a second, elevated, pedestrian crossing is a bit redundant.

 

[ShonTron]

The one exception could be Moscow where there are hundreds of underground pedestrian crossings. Underpasses there are like little malls, with kiosks and vendors, plus provide some shelter from the elements. Moscow's intersections look ridiculous, as well, which probably has something to do with it.

I've never been to Moscow (or Russia for that matter, but I have been to a few Chinese cities that were built with Russian/Soviet influence and they have similar extensive underground systems, such as Dalian (where the directional signs inside are in Chinese, English, Korean and Russian).

Since most of what one assumes Toronto's busiest pedestrian intersections are already overlapped by PATH the need for a second, elevated, pedestrian crossing is a bit redundant.

That's a good point. The PATH is brilliant, I can't imagine the Financial District without it. The new Union Station to York Street tunnel, is a reliever to the Front/York/University intersection, though there are no plans to close off the pedestrian crossings there.

Of course we speak of secondary routes, not forcing pedestrians underground or aboveground to get them out of the way of cars, these instances are simply means of providing alternatives and more pedestrian capacity.

 

[ShonTron]

The argument that I've heard against pedestrian bridges in transportation planning courses has been that human psychology dictates we take the shortest possible route to our destination. Pedestrian bridges over railways and highways are one thing, but over a city road would seldom be used.

Which is why you'll often find the corners fenced off and pedestrians forced onto the bridges. Here's a photo I took of such an interesection in Shenzhen in 2008:

 

[innsertnamehere]

if anyone thinks that pedestrian bridges are actually good for urbanism, they should leave right now.