[smallspy]

Not sure where you heard this, but you generally know everything drum. I read (from Metrolinx, early in the process of building Line 5) that the grey was chosen to match higher-order transit, specifically the Line 1 Toronto Rockets. This doesn't really hold the test of time (like everything Metrolinx does) because the Line 3 trains and the new Line 2 trains will all sport color to some degree, albeit not as much as the CLRV or SRT cars.

As I understand the situation from someone who had been involved in the project since the very early days but retired a couple of years ago, the idea behind the paint scheme of the cars was that they were purposely kept neutral so that they could have a final paint scheme applied via vehicle wraps shortly before the revenue service launch.

And while that may have been the plan 15 or 20 years ago, the amount of turnover in the various organizations involved in the project likely means that the plan from that long ago has simply been forgotten.

I would have assumed the TTC stopped painting subway cars simply because it's been cash starved for decades and could save a few bucks; not for any aesthetic reason.

The TTC stopped painting subway cars simply because it no longer had to.

The first several batches of subway cars were painted red because they were steel, and steel needs to be painted in order to keep rust at bay. Within those batches they received one batch of otherwise identical cars that were built of aluminum, and were kept unpainted because aluminum doesn't rust but instead forms an oxide layer that is virtually impervious to oxygen - and so doesn't deteriorate like steel will.

Since then, and until the Toronto Rocket cars, all cars were built with aluminum bodies. They still used steel underframes, which had to be painted and treated in order to stop rust.

Then the Toronto Rocket cars arrived, and are made of stainless steel. Much like aluminum, the type of stainless used doesn't rust through the creation of a passive oxide layer.

So why bother spending the money on paint when you don't need to?

Dan

 

[smallspy]

Taxing vehicles by weight would not imperially save lives. I'm not saying we shouldn't implement better pedestrian safety standards in vehicles - actually, I think that's a great idea.

I'm saying that taxing vehicles by weight or an all-out ban would be a very brunt tool to meet an end goal which could be better achieved through the latter item you brought up. It's like using a jackhammer to try to drive a brad nail.. Sure, it may drive the brad nail. But the bradnailer will do it much nicer with less damage..

How about applying the same rules to all of the vehicles?

"Light trucks" do not have to meet the same crashworthiness or pedestrian impact standards are cars do. Maybe its time that they do.

Dan

 

[BrenWilson]

Realistically Canada doesn't have control over crash safety regulations. We can either choose to copy American regs and import American cars, or European standards and import European cars.

But pedestrian crash safety standards doesn't prevent hitting pedestrians, just reduces the severity of the resulting injury. Limiting large vehicles with horrific visibility reduces the likelihood of certain collisions from happening at all. I would like to see regulations that encourage cab-over design styles as we transition into EV trucks and commerical vehicles.


The pickup truck tax is something I've thought about before. A vehicle registration fee based on weight class that is tax deductible for business would lessen the amount of people buying pick-ups for personal reasons but given the price of these trucks already I'm not sure how effective it would really be. Would be nice to also see additional license requirements for light duty vehicles.

 

[Natika33]

Realistically Canada doesn't have control over crash safety regulations. We can either choose to copy American regs and import American cars, or European standards and import European cars.

But pedestrian crash safety standards doesn't prevent hitting pedestrians, just reduces the severity of the resulting injury. Limiting large vehicles with horrific visibility reduces the likelihood of certain collisions from happening at all. I would like to see regulations that encourage cab-over design styles as we transition into EV trucks and commerical vehicles.


The pickup truck tax is something I've thought about before. A vehicle registration fee based on weight class that is tax deductible for business would lessen the amount of people buying pick-ups for personal reasons but given the price of these trucks already I'm not sure how effective it would really be. Would be nice to also see additional license requirements for light duty vehicles.

They have something like this in Japan. Smaller & lighter vehicles (kei cars) are taxed less, but there's also a special commercial license for those who use bigger vehicles for work (trucks, etc) that one wouldn't get if you just wanted a bigger vehicle for your personal vehicle. The license plates are different colours too, to differentiate.
Example: https://www.pref.aichi.jp/global/en/living/taxes/tax.pdf

Since we're all paying for the extra damage to the roads from larger vehicles too, couldn't we make an economic as well as a safety argument for this?

 

[jordanmkasla2009]

Swift? I was really surprised they put an LRT crossing there. It's prime usage is people avoiding Bermondsey. I'd think intersection improvements at Bermondsey (the approach from the south is terribly poorly laid out) could improve much of that.

Considering you aren't allowed to turn left or u-turn in both directions on Eglinton at this intersection anyone who hits the LRT here is at fault. Heck you aren't even allowed to drive straight through from Swift Dr to Credit Union Dr and vice versa. The only reason there even is traffic lights there is for the single allowed left turn from Credit Union to WB Eglinton. otherwise it should just be a channelized right turn in right turn out

 

[nfitz]

Considering you aren't allowed to turn left or u-turn in both directions on Eglinton at this intersection anyone who hits the LRT here is at fault. Heck you aren't even allowed to drive straight through from Swift Dr to Credit Union Dr and vice versa. The only reason there even is traffic lights there is for the single allowed left turn from Credit Union to WB Eglinton. otherwise it should just be a channelized right turn in right turn out

I hadn't realized that you couldn't turn left from Eglinton (nor have I ever needed to).

Good grief, that arrow is hard to see. Especially if you are in the left-hand lane, where the no U-turn sign is more prominent.

 

[micheal_can]

Why are police not out enforcing the laws? Even if they gave drivers warnings, it may do more than much else will. It seems most accidents do involve activities that are illegal under the HTA.

 

[trafficexplorerON]

I hadn't realized that you couldn't turn left from Eglinton (nor have I ever needed to).

Good grief, that arrow is hard to see. Especially if you are in the left-hand lane, where the no U-turn sign is more prominent.
View attachment 673524

I think combining the "no left turn" and the "no U-turn" signs would be more effective that what we have here, as it wouldn't require as much space. Unfortunately, I don't think it's allowed in Ontario.
This example is from the American MUTCD:

 

[goodcitywhenfinished]

I hadn't realized that you couldn't turn left from Eglinton (nor have I ever needed to).

Good grief, that arrow is hard to see. Especially if you are in the left-hand lane, where the no U-turn sign is more prominent.
View attachment 673524

What a horrible design

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

I think combining the "no left turn" and the "no U-turn" signs would be more effective that what we have here, as it wouldn't require as much space. Unfortunately, I don't think it's allowed in Ontario.
This example is from the American MUTCD:
View attachment 673536

Toronto does not use theses signs, it seems.

Also Toronto cannot use "red traffic arrows".

 

[nfitz]

Toronto does not use theses signs, it seems.
View attachment 673621

I didn't think anywhere in Ontario used them after the court ruling a few years ago along the transitway in Ottawa that threw out a ticket for someone who turned left at such a sign - because there was nothing to indicate it wasn't allowed.

 

[trafficexplorerON]

I didn't think anywhere in Ontario used them after the court ruling a few years ago along the transitway in Ottawa that threw out a ticket for someone who turned left at such a sign - because there was nothing to indicate it wasn't allowed.

Do you have a link for that? I'm interested to see where this took place.

Toronto does not use theses signs, it seems.
View attachment 673621

I thought I remembered seeing these green circled arrow signs on my Driving Test? I think they only had one arrow instead of two, though. Or am I remembering wrong?
The issue I have with these signs is that people might see a green circle as a "you may do this" rather than a "you must do this". After all, the green circled U-turn sign doesn't mean that everyone is required to make a U-turn.
I would personally rather that they add a "no left or U-turn sign" to the HTA.

 

[nfitz]

Do you have a link for that? I'm interested to see where this took place.

I'd have to dig through newspaper archives from the 1990s(?). Somewhere near the mess that is Nicholas Street and Stewart Street.

 

[crs1026]

There's a lot of attention to the legality of each of those signs - but very little attention to the overall cognitive flow and layout/design of all the signs in total at those intersections. In my opinion, they are all extremely cluttered signage as a whole and it is understandable if drivers miss one or more signs, especially if they are new to the intersection.

- Paul

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

While this has been mentioned before in this and other threads, for the newbies to this thread...

This is from Google Maps, April, 2025, at Eglinton & Bermondsey.

The "transit signals" look the same as the regular traffic signals. Signage clutter for the transit signal and left turn signal. Not so great if you don't read English The signs do not even include Canada's other official language, French. No "left turn red arrow". If you're a s-l-o-w reader, you can be in trouble.

Of course, MTO (and Toronto Transportation Services) refuses to follow what they do in Europe, who have to handle their 24 official and working languages.