|
|
|
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.
crs1026
Superstar
The Mount Dennis alignment was proposed after the initial EA, because the Mount Dennis mobility hub was a new feature that didn't exist until the McGuinty government pared the line back to end there.
http://www.metrolinx.com/en/projectsandprograms/mobilityhubs/Mount_Dennis_Mobility_Hub_Study_EN.pdf
In this version, the LRT station is under the railway overpass and on the north side of Eglinton Avenue - yes, a side of road alignment..
There is no suggestion of how the line might proceed westwards, but the grades involved certainly suggest that a tunnel would be most practical.
EDIT: The drawings at
http://www.thecrosstown.ca/sites/de.../h-comparativetrafficassessmentmemorandum.pdf
show the line moving to the centerline of Eglinton under and west of the Weston Road intersection.
- Paul
http://www.metrolinx.com/en/projectsandprograms/mobilityhubs/Mount_Dennis_Mobility_Hub_Study_EN.pdf
In this version, the LRT station is under the railway overpass and on the north side of Eglinton Avenue - yes, a side of road alignment..
There is no suggestion of how the line might proceed westwards, but the grades involved certainly suggest that a tunnel would be most practical.
EDIT: The drawings at
http://www.thecrosstown.ca/sites/de.../h-comparativetrafficassessmentmemorandum.pdf
show the line moving to the centerline of Eglinton under and west of the Weston Road intersection.
- Paul
Last edited:
jcam
Active Member
My bet is the only place they're contemplating side alignments for Crosstown West is from Mimico Creek (where Eglinton splits from the highway ramsp) westward to Renforth Gateway.
Palma
Senior Member
how is possible to go from side and then eventually centre. This would also make residents there unhappy. If its going underground after Black Creek it might as well stay underground until after Scarlett where it comes up. That section approaching Royal York is quite wide. At least it should make them happy except for the people that live pass Scarlett Rd to Kipling Ave I suppose
nfitz
Superstar
The same was as the 509 at Queens Quay and Spadina, I'd assume. Not sure why possibility would be an issue.
Monarch Butterfly
Superstar
Going west. Eglinton Avenue will shift to the south at the old York Municipal Building, over the LRT portal. From the portal the tracks will be going OVER Black Creek Drive on the north side of Eglinton Avenue. After Black Creek Drive the tracks incline into the hill for the Mt. Dennis Station. Under the railway tracks, the tracks (and tail track) will be under Weston Road and continue under Eglington to a portal in the hill leading to Jane Street.
The inclines will be able to be handled by light rail. They would be still steep for heavy rail.
The inclines will be able to be handled by light rail. They would be still steep for heavy rail.
