Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 107

Thread: Traffic Circles in Edmonton

  1. #1

    Default Traffic Circles in Edmonton

    Circular History | Spacing Edmonton

    "Intersections of important highways were in the first instance controlled by large-diameter traffic rotaries at grade; but in designing these intersections, enough land was reserved at the sides to be used for grade separation when traffic volume builds up to a point which cannot be handled by a simple rotary."

    http://spacing.ca/edmonton/2013/11/2...edium=facebook
    www.decl.org

  2. #2
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,340

    Default

    From the linked article:
    A few modern roundabouts, smaller and lower-volume descendants of the 1950s-era circles, have been built in the city since 2000. They are effective and more pedestrian / bicycle friendly than their predecessors – we could use more of them!
    Smaller and lower volume - great for replacing 4-way stops on low to moderate volume city streets, but not so much for the highway intersections where they seem to be used the most. Why can't we build full size circles where highways meet? Space constraints are generally not an issue there, and the space occupied by a larger circle isn't really wasted (as per quote in first post)
    Last edited by Titanium48; 20-11-2013 at 01:39 PM. Reason: remove double quote

  3. #3
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    5,294

    Default

    "historic designation" *shudders*

    Not sure what Dant considered excessive traffic volume, but whatever it was, has long since been eclipsed.

    *Aside* Driving my fellow teens off for a night of frivolity I hit up the traffic circle at University Ave and 114 St. We couldn't agree on where to go, so I drove around, and around and around till we made up our collective minds.

    Minds, not brains, I know ...
    ... gobsmacked

  4. #4
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,340

    Default

    ^ I think the circle at 87 Av and 142 St might be a candidate for the historical designation. It is well under capacity and likely to remain so.

  5. #5
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    5,294

    Default

    Yeah, maybe. It's certainly one of the prettiest.
    ... gobsmacked

  6. #6

    Default

    I like traffic circles. Good drivers are not intimidated by them and like the free flowing nature. Nothing urks me more than waiting 2 or 3 minutes for a stupid traffic light when there are no cars crossing.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  7. #7
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,133

    Default

    And they might be cheaper to operate, all you have to do is plow, fix potholes. Any collisions have less of an impact as the are not head on or rarely even 90 degrees they tend to be a glancing blow not a direct one. You never have to change the bulbs or computer for the traffic signals as there are none. (Yah I know St. Albert Trail is some hybrid between the two).

  8. #8

    Default

    I really hate that St Albert Trail hybrid circle/intersection.

    The only traffic circle that actually scares me is that weird one on 101 St near NAIT. That thing has a confusing design and should be demolished and made into a light-controlled intersection.

  9. #9
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    5,294

    Default

    Yeah, traffic circles are all sunshine, roses and lollipops 75% of the time.

    But, get a certain volume of traffic (i.e. rush hours) and they turn into the seventh circle of hell.

    And quite contrary to the artcle, accidents may be less life threatening but occur frequently in high volume situations and make said seventh circle of hell actually begin to look quite appealing.
    ... gobsmacked

  10. #10

    Default

    I will really miss the Bonnie Doon traffic circle. I can shoot through that at full speed.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  11. #11
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    I will really miss the Bonnie Doon traffic circle. I can shoot through that at full speed.
    Except when going north on 83rd to north on 85th in the inside line. The outside lane will often think they have the right of way and cut in front of you as they go to Connors Road...

  12. #12

    Default

    No kidding. I tend to keep just ahead of them, turn on my signal and force way out and forcing them to take the turn too.

    I do yield to buses though. They have a tough enough job.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  13. #13
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Beautiful BC
    Posts
    1,657

    Default

    Roundabouts are the norm in the UK for example. But quite frankly they likely haven't caught on in places like Alberta, as they require a certain degree of concentration and driving skill, that the average driver here simply does not possess.
    "The only really positive thing one could say about Vancouver is, it’s not the rest of Canada." Oink (britishexpats.com)

  14. #14
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,233

    Default

    ^ You've only got to look at the joke of a 'driving test' here.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  15. #15
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Crawford Plains, Millwoods since 1985
    Posts
    2,687

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    I will really miss the Bonnie Doon traffic circle. I can shoot through that at full speed.
    Is it getting demolished for the LRT or something?

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    ^ I think the circle at 87 Av and 142 St might be a candidate for the historical designation. It is well under capacity and likely to remain so.
    I use this circle daily and an increasing proportion of drivers don't know how to use it ( or don't care ), On a daily basis I see some drivers go 3/4 the way around in the outside lane while others use the inside lane to go out the first right. I find I have to drive so defensively in circles now I'd prefer lights.

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tarsands View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    ^ I think the circle at 87 Av and 142 St might be a candidate for the historical designation. It is well under capacity and likely to remain so.
    I use this circle daily and an increasing proportion of drivers don't know how to use it ( or don't care ), On a daily basis I see some drivers go 3/4 the way around in the outside lane while others use the inside lane to go out the first right. I find I have to drive so defensively in circles now I'd prefer lights.
    People don't know how to use regular intersections either.


    They run yellow lights,
    they run red lights,
    they turn without stopping on red,
    they change lanes through intersections,
    they make right hand turns immediately into the centre lane...

    Moreover, what you're saying above about how people use traffic circles, I believe is technically legal, though I don't believe it should be.
    Last edited by KC; 21-11-2013 at 07:49 AM.

  18. #18
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,260

    Default

    Does traffic in the outside lane not have to yield to traffic on the inside lane?

  19. #19

    Default

    I like when they post these type of signs to teach those who barely passed their drivers test.



    If I am going through on my bike I will take the inside lane as I am supposed to.






    I like this design for busier intersections. Thinking Yellowhead.

    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 22-11-2013 at 06:41 AM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    I like when they post these type of signs to teach those who barely passed their drivers test.
    It's sad that people can't pass their driving tests here. We have some of the easiest testing procedures around. 30 mins in a car on a summers day and just about anyone can get a licence.
    My tester was more concerned with the jerk that was tallgating me than how I was actually performing on the road...

  21. #21

  22. #22
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,133

    Default

    Bah nothing, I have friends in Swindon (west of London) they have the Magic Roundabout, it works quite well but fortunately my friend drove through it not me.
    http://6000.co.za/wp-content/uploads...-swindon-5.jpg

    Alberta Transportation has built a few recently in Villeneuve, Sylvan Lake, Highway 8/22 north of Bragg Creek and planning more (Yellowhead east)...
    http://www.transportation.alberta.ca...LAN.pdf#page=2

  23. #23
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,026

    Default

    I really can't see them putting traffic circles on the Yellowhead highway, which is mostly a divided highway, quasi-freeway or whatever.

    Edit: never mind, they are talking about interchanges on the Yellowhead, not the highway itself.
    Last edited by Sonic Death Monkey; 22-11-2013 at 10:01 AM.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  24. #24
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,340

    Default

    ^^ Sylvan lake works OK because it is the entrance to town and you need to slow down anyways. 8/22 is terrible - it should have been full radius like Edmonton's older circles with a westbound to northbound free flow lane and without the stupid chicane.

  25. #25

    Default

    Traffic circles in my experience only work well with low volume traffic (in which case a 4 way stop is probably better), or higher volume provided the volume of traffic is very equal from all directions (there aren't many places like that). With unequal volume, traffic circle equals traffic jam, as it can be impossible to break into the flow if vehicles are not coming through from opposite direction to 'shield' / 'provide time'. I spent way to much of my younger life trapped in traffic circle jams at rush hour to want them in Alberta.

  26. #26
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    I like when they post these type of signs to teach those who barely passed their drivers test.
    100% agree. I don't see a reason why we can't post this sign up on all traffic circles.

  27. #27
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kitlope View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    I will really miss the Bonnie Doon traffic circle. I can shoot through that at full speed.
    Is it getting demolished for the LRT or something?
    I hope not. Serves me well everyday.

  28. #28
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,133

    Default

    [QUOTE=newtocan;560764]
    Quote Originally Posted by Kitlope View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    I will really miss the Bonnie Doon traffic circle. I can shoot through that at full speed.
    Is it getting demolished for the LRT or something?
    Eventually, yup...
    http://www.edmonton.ca/transportatio...tailed_Map.pdf

    Without a bridge or tunnel to separate the LRT from the traffic circle it would create all sorts of traffic headaches. Not that thousands of cars turning from 83rd Street to Connors Road won't.
    Last edited by sundance; 25-11-2013 at 01:36 PM.

  29. #29

    Default

    ^The idea is for them to continue east onto 75st and then continue south.83rd will be reduced to a route used a lot less than it is now.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  30. #30

    Default

    As if 75th can handle the extra traffic
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  31. #31
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Beautiful BC
    Posts
    1,657

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post


    I like this design for busier intersections....
    Just a heads up.... Edmonton doesn't have "busier intersections". What you people consider busy would be laughed at pretty much anywhere else in the world.

    What you do have is a bunch of dumb, uneducated ****wits who shouldn't even be allowed behind the wheel of a Noddy car let alone an F350.
    "The only really positive thing one could say about Vancouver is, it’s not the rest of Canada." Oink (britishexpats.com)

  32. #32
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Beverly Heights in a small house with a large lot!!
    Posts
    1,921

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by expat View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post


    I like this design for busier intersections....
    Just a heads up.... Edmonton doesn't have "busier intersections". What you people consider busy would be laughed at pretty much anywhere else in the world.

    What you do have is a bunch of dumb, uneducated ****wits who shouldn't even be allowed behind the wheel of a Noddy car let alone an F350.
    Make the RIGHT choice before you take your last breath......

  33. #33
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    702

    Default

    ^ To be fair, the second "Advanced" test new drivers take as part of the GDP program (to get a full class 5) is actually a little more comprehensive. They make you do crazy stuff like merging on freeways. Go figure! But as it's not mandatory to take the second test, it's of little mass benefit. Getting a license here is still a joke though.

    I have such a love-hate relationship with traffic circles. They work so beautifully for certain intersection, but it pains me to see how many people don't understand the basic rules that make them work. I have actually seen, on two separate occasions, people going the wrong way in a traffic circle. Which is quite a feat of stupidity considering how the roads angle into them.

    And I'm sad the main reason they're often removed is that Albertans are simply not good enough drivers to use them.

  34. #34
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by halocore View Post
    I have such a love-hate relationship with traffic circles. They work so beautifully for certain intersection, but it pains me to see how many people don't understand the basic rules that make them work. I have actually seen, on two separate occasions, people going the wrong way in a traffic circle. Which is quite a feat of stupidity considering how the roads angle into them.
    Most dangerous is when people have their left turn signal on and exit the circle from inner circle. Believe me I have seen people do this.

  35. #35
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    702

    Default

    ^Ugh, yes. Although turn signal use seems to be considered optional in Alberta, so I'm not overly surprised when people don't get signal use in the circles.

  36. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by newtocan View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by halocore View Post
    I have such a love-hate relationship with traffic circles. They work so beautifully for certain intersection, but it pains me to see how many people don't understand the basic rules that make them work. I have actually seen, on two separate occasions, people going the wrong way in a traffic circle. Which is quite a feat of stupidity considering how the roads angle into them.
    Most dangerous is when people have their left turn signal on and exit the circle from inner circle. Believe me I have seen people do this.
    HUH it's perfectly legal for the inside (left lane) to exit from the left. It is the responsibility of the outside (right lane) to yield. It's actually illegal to switch lanes in the traffic circle. Further to that the Right lane is supposed to be solely for people entering and immediately exiting the circle.

    the laws can be found on this doc.

    http://mckenzietowne-connect.com/wp-...uctions-v2.pdf

    Based on your nick name I think you may be applying another countries rules here.
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 16-12-2013 at 02:50 PM.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  37. #37
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Crawford Plains, Millwoods since 1985
    Posts
    2,687

    Default

    HUH it's perfectly legal for the inside (left lane) to exit from the left. It is the responsibility of the outside (right lane) to yield. It's actually illegal to switch lanes in the traffic circle. Further to that the Right lane is supposed to be solely for people entering and immediately exiting the circle.
    How do you know to yield when in the right lane when there's no right side signal from the driver in the left lane? He was talking about the dummies that leave their left signal on from when they entered the traffic circle and now they want to exit but leave the same (wrong) signal light flashing.

    Please, re-read the post.

  38. #38

    Default

    ^ oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh

    I didn't understand.

    Although it should never be an issue as the right is supposed to always be exiting anyways.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  39. #39

    Default

    BBZZZZT wrong. The right lane doesn't not have to always exit. In fact, there is no law against going all the way around in the traffic circle in the right lane. You do however, have to yield right-of-way to any vehicle in the inside (left) lane. Even the signs at traffic circles promote the right lane going to the first, or second exit from the traffic circle.

  40. #40
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post

    Although it should never be an issue as the right is supposed to always be exiting anyways.
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post


    .

  41. #41
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,513

    Default

    Common sense and prevailing traffic patterns really come in to play as well, some circles do function a bit differently if only because of traffic patterns. A good example is the circle at 87 avenue and 142 street. Southbound on 142 street, many, many vehicles in the left lane exit immediately on to 87 avenue Westbound, so it's generally not a good idea to be in the right lane if you intend on going halfway around. Vice versa with Eastbound on 87th. Many, many vehicles in the right lane go three quarters of the way around, so it's probably not wise to attempt to go halfway round in the left lane.

    I dunno, maybe because I grew up driving through that traffic circle and the one at 107/142 a couple times a day, but traffic circles seem pretty simple to me. It never ceases to amaze me to see all sorts of ridiculous things in them. Even signalling, which should be very, very simple, is apparently extremely difficult to handle. Left if you're staying in the circle, right if you're exiting. It can't be any simpler.

  42. #42

    Default

    I would say that using turn signals in general is starting become a lost art. I can honestly say that at least a third of the drivers on the road that I come across do not use their turn signals. Maybe the other hand is texting who knows.

  43. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deedub35 View Post
    I would say that using turn signals in general is starting become a lost art. I can honestly say that at least a third of the drivers on the road that I come across do not use their turn signals.
    I think it's because people speed up when they see someone with a signal on, wanting to enter their lane.

    I wish Alberta would make it a law to have to yield to someone with a signal light on. It really helps drivers be more courteous and use their signals more in US states that do that.

  44. #44
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    702

    Default

    ^ While people do need to be yielding to those in the left-hand lane in traffic circles, I would personally strongly oppose any law forcing you yield to someone with a signal on.

    So many people use their signals like they're a magical device that gives them permission to change lanes or make turns regardless if its actually safe to do so or not. Everyone should be courteous on the road, but it's also the turning driver's responsibility to shoulder check and drive safely. Giving people a law that shifts that responsibility of safety onto the car in the other lane is grossly unfair.

    And I personally think it's your right as a driver to choose to be courteous or not. I for one never let in anyone who is clearly trying to avoid a line up caused by a lane closure and push their way in up front. It's arrogant of them to assume they don't have to wait like everyone else, so why should I extend my courtesy? My two cents at least.

  45. #45
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,133

    Default

    There is a law that states you must signal ...
    Division 3
    Signalling Driver’s Intentions When to signal
    9 With respect to starting, turning or changing the course or direction of a vehicle or stopping a vehicle on a highway, the person driving the vehicle must,
    (a) before starting, turning or changing the course or direction of the vehicle or stopping a vehicle, ascertain that there is sufficient space in which to make the movement in safety, and
    (b) following making that ascertation, cause the appropriate signal referred to in section 10 or 11 to be made.
    As well the driver of the car merging must be reasonable and prudent but the driver already on the highway must allow the vehicle in ...
    Division 11
    Merging Entering onto highway
    50 A person who is about to drive a vehicle onto an intersecting highway from another highway that is marked by a “merge” sign need not stop the vehicle before driving the vehicle onto the intersecting highway but shall take all necessary precautions and merge the vehicle safely with the traffic on the intersecting highway.
    Allow merging
    51 A person driving a vehicle on a highway where the highway is marked by a “merging traffic” sign near the intersection of another highway marked by a “merge” sign shall take all reasonable precautions to allow a merging vehicle to enter in safety onto the highway on which the merging is to take place.
    Division 9 covers traffic circles the pertinent portion is here...
    Traffic circles
    40 Unless otherwise directed by a traffic control device, a person driving a vehicle that is travelling in a traffic circle shall yield the right of way to any other vehicle that is in the circle and that is travelling to the left of that person’s vehicle.
    You can find the full text of the law here;
    http://www.canlii.org/en/ab/laws/reg...-304-2002.html

  46. #46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by halocore View Post
    And I personally think it's your right as a driver to choose to be courteous or not. I for one never let in anyone who is clearly trying to avoid a line up caused by a lane closure and push their way in up front. It's arrogant of them to assume they don't have to wait like everyone else, so why should I extend my courtesy? My two cents at least.
    It is actually more effective in reducing queuing times if everyone utilized the lane to the point where you’re forced to merge. Too often everyone avoids the soon-to-be-closed lane and create massive queues effectively reducing capacity. Going single file in stop-and-go situations makes traffic much worse than creating a merger situation.
    See this article: http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/ho...tion-1.1340869

    This is not only true for construction, but for freeways. Case in point is the whitemud particularly at the 149St eastbound ramp and the Terwillegar westbound merge area. In both cases there is almost a kilometre worth of pavement ahead, but as soon as drivers are off the ramp, they insist on signalling and force their way into traffic. The problem is when they signal, some drivers engage the brakes to let them in. The car that was following that “kind” driver who allowed the merge is now also forced to brake. The car following that car must also brake. This is in effect, a negative shockwave that propagates down the lane. This is how phantom traffic jams are created. Drivers should instead get to speed, use the entire merge area and merge when there is adequate space. This also allows traffic to space themselves to let you in without hitting their brakes.
    THERE IS NO REASON FOR ANYONE TO USE THEIR BRAKES ON A FREEWAY DURING NORMAL OPERATION CONDITIONS. Modulating the gas pedal should be more than adequate.
    Back onto Traffic Circles, the main reason for the confusion is obviously driver training and education – the lack of to be precise. Our testing system is simply too watered down. There’s no reason not to include navigating a circle onto a driver’s exam. If one doesn’t exist in an area. There should be a virtual one to navigate. There’s a lot of opposition to more stringent criteria due to cost factors. This shouldn’t matter. Pass the costs onto the user. The effects are three-fold:

    1) You get better drivers

    2)Insurance claims go down

    3)Due to costs of getting a drivers license, people are more inclined to take transit until they are absolutely forced to get a vehicle


    Marcel’s example of the 142Street and 82Ave traffic circle is prime example of lack of care from drivers. As a warning to drivers wanting to continue southbound in 142street through that circle…stay in the inside lane. A friend of a friend was in the outside lane wanting to take the 2nd exit. Was side swiped by the inside car entering the same time as him wanting to take the first exist out westbound. That friend was deemed liable.

    On a final note, back to the training/testing procedures; the instructors and examiners should take a course from traffic engineers and the people who decide on traffic laws.
    Many instructors like preaching the “stale green” and look at the pedestrian signal to decide how you approach the intersection. This is false, they are called pedestrian signals b/c they guide pedestrians not vehicles. Countdown timers are now creating a problem whereby the timer goes to 0 but the traffic light stays green. And you get cars prematurely slowing down or outright stopping when the countdown hits 0. Other things are traffic signal actuation that the general public should realize exists so they don’t stop 2 cars lengths behind the stop bar and wonder why they aren’t getting a green light…

  47. #47
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,340

    Default

    ^ Some public education about the efficiency of last minute, alternating traffic merging in lane closure situations might be in order.

    For the pedestrian countdowns, why not just have truth in traffic signalling? The countdown should accurately reflect how many seconds a pedestrian has left to cross the street, or a cyclist or driver has to get through the intersection, before the light cycle changes. No exceptions, accurate countdowns are good for everyone.

    An indication that a signal is vehicle-actuated would also be good for cyclists, as the sensors often don't respond to bicycles and cyclists need to use the pedestrian button to get the light to change.

    It is annoying when people stop well behind the stop line or more than a couple meters behind the car in front regardless of how the signals are actuated, as it causes traffic to back up more than it should and can block entry to turn lanes.

    Back to traffic circles, most of the conflicts go away when you use a single lane circle on a lower volume road. All of the 4-way stops on neighborhood roads could be replaced by short-radius, single lane traffic circles (or "roundabouts" as many prefer to call the smaller radius designs).

  48. #48
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    702

    Default

    I've seen a few neighbourhoods that use the small roundabouts in place of 4 way stops. They're a good solution, although (again) it seems like many people are unsure of how to use them.

    And B.ike, while the "zipper" merge described in that article does makes sense, it's a very idealized situation where traffic is at the perfect speed to allow for exact amount of traffic to merge smoothly. Realistically, the open lane in a construction situation often comes to a standstill beyond your control or there is simply too much traffic volume for one lane. Regardless, the point I was arguing is that it should be your choice as a driver whether to let someone in or not. Maybe I just don't want to spoil my view by looking at the back end of an ugly truck, haha. It may not be rational or efficient, but when is human choice ever those things? Situations where you should yield to someone with a turn signal (traffic circles and merge lanes) are already covered in existing laws. There's no need for a blanket "yield to signal" law like exists in some places.
    Last edited by halocore; 18-12-2013 at 05:45 PM.

  49. #49
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Beverly Heights in a small house with a large lot!!
    Posts
    1,921

    Default The lowly traffic circles

    Once again, the have the distinction of the most dangerous piece of roadways in the city.Are they? Or, are drivers woefully untrained in how to use them. The city is planning to remove the 142 circle. If anything, it ought be improved in some manner as they are far more efficent at keeping people moving. If St Albert Trail is any example, lights are the last thing the city should install.
    Make the RIGHT choice before you take your last breath......

  50. #50

    Default

    Traffic circles only are good in low to medium traffic. They start failing horribly in high traffic.

    There are two traffic circles on 142st, I assume the one they are removing is the one at 107th avenue? This one gets backed up pretty badly in the opposite directions of rush hour simply because you can't break through the flow.

  51. #51

    Default

    I wonder how many accidents are from the side road alley that enters/exits onto 107 Ave just West of the 142 St traffic circle (it's between the church and the strip mall)

    I've seen a few cars rear-ended on the West part of the circle because they had to stop fast there after exiting the circle because of another car on that side road (it's not very obvious that it's there).

  52. #52
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,567

    Default

    We have two traffic circles very close to our house and use them on a daily basis. 98 ave/85st and 90ave/83st (bonnie doon). I think they work well, most drivers know how to use them. Some don't know, but realize they don't know. It's the rare ones that think they know how to use them, but don't.

    I notice that ETS busses tend to use them illegally, driving to the 2nd, 3rd or 4th exit in the outside lane, not yielding to inside traffic.

  53. #53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nobleea View Post
    I notice that ETS busses tend to use them illegally, driving to the 2nd, 3rd or 4th exit in the outside lane, not yielding to inside traffic.
    I remember back in drivers ed once upon a time learning that buses are the only vehicles allowed to do that.

  54. #54
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,133

    Default

    We needed YET ANOTHER THREAD about traffic circles? These should be merged with (pick one)

    Traffic Circles in Edmonton

    http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/forum...ad.php?t=34449

    More "roundabouts", fewer intersections
    http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/forum...ead.php?t=9672

    A rant against closure of traffic circles

    http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/forum...ead.php?t=7222

  55. #55
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    5,294

    Default

    That and the fact these arguments just go 'round in circles anyway ...
    ... gobsmacked

  56. #56
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,309

    Default

    The Bonnie Doon circle is notoriously bad, which will be removed with the construction of the LRT.

    I think the smaller traffic circles (like the one by the Sherwood Park Golf Course) work well.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  57. #57
    Forum Administrator *
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,481
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    I will merge this thread with one of the others.

    New thread merged at post #49 (as of Feb 5, 2014). This thread was the latest and newest one on traffic circles.
    Last edited by Admin; 05-02-2014 at 04:43 PM. Reason: clarification after the thread merger was completed
    Ow

  58. #58

    Default

    Traffic circles are my favorite type of intersection as they are designed for efficent traffic flow in all directions. People who do not like them are either not taught how to use them, are too timid as drivers or are too busy texting while driving.

    On accidents, when is the last time to have seen a major t-bone collision or a person do a dangerous left turn with oncoming traffic. My guess, never.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  59. #59
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by nobleea View Post
    I notice that ETS busses tend to use them illegally, driving to the 2nd, 3rd or 4th exit in the outside lane, not yielding to inside traffic.
    I remember back in drivers ed once upon a time learning that buses are the only vehicles allowed to do that.
    They often have stops right after the exit, so they have to be in the outside lane.

    But I've also seen them yield, and they watch carefully the traffic to the left of them.

  60. #60
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    3,581

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Cat View Post
    The Bonnie Doon circle is notoriously bad, which will be removed with the construction of the LRT.

    I think the smaller traffic circles (like the one by the Sherwood Park Golf Course) work well.



    Yeah during morning and afternoon rush hours the one at the Doon is a total cluster since a ton of ETS routes run through it.

    And to boot there's the pedestrian crossings on it that only serve to compound the $hyt show.

    Back in the 80s and 90s Top_Dawg and his crew used to drive it pyssed three or four times a day, every day, making beer runs to the old ABA cold beer store and partying at the Rex, Cap, Highwayman, Regency and wherever else.

    Now, even sober, Top_Dawg avoids it.

  61. #61
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,513

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    On accidents, when is the last time to have seen a major t-bone collision or a person do a dangerous left turn with oncoming traffic. My guess, never.
    Yeah, I really dislike the fact that they called the highest collision locations "THE MOST DANGEROUS INTERSECTIONS", because that's not the case at all. Despite the high number of collisions at 107ave/142st I'd be willing to bet that almost none of them had significant personal injury or property damage given the nature of the collisions (mostly rear-enders or sideswipes).

    That said, something does need to be done about that particular intersection. It does not perform well under heavy traffic loads, and it's going to get REALLY ugly when 102 avenue closes for a couple years to replace the bridge over Groat.

  62. #62
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,182

    Default

    I love the traffic circles... I think they work very well.

    I would point to "operator error" to explain 99% of the issues that occur in those circles
    Parkdale

  63. #63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    On accidents, when is the last time to have seen a major t-bone collision or a person do a dangerous left turn with oncoming traffic. My guess, never.
    Yeah, I really dislike the fact that they called the highest collision locations "THE MOST DANGEROUS INTERSECTIONS", because that's not the case at all. Despite the high number of collisions at 107ave/142st I'd be willing to bet that almost none of them had significant personal injury or property damage given the nature of the collisions (mostly rear-enders or sideswipes).

    That said, something does need to be done about that particular intersection. It does not perform well under heavy traffic loads, and it's going to get REALLY ugly when 102 avenue closes for a couple years to replace the bridge over Groat.
    We should upgrade the BD traffic circle by adding a third lane. LOL

    http://heathpie.blogspot.com/2011_06_01_archive.html
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  64. #64

    Default

    I find it ironic that the people saying the driving tests are too easy, then posting factually INCORRECT information about when each lane can/can't exit.

    http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/1993.htm

    Summary:

    You're legally allowed to exit on the first exit from the left lane and vehicles in the right lane are allowed to circuit the traffic circle for as long as they like. The only rules are:

    You must yield to pedestrians prior to entering the traffic circle
    You must yield to vehicles current in the circuit
    Drivers in the outside lane must yield to drivers in the inside lane
    Use your left signal lights until you pass the last exit before the exit you plan on... exiting, then use your right signal and exit
    Stay in and exit in the same lane as you came in on
    Buses will usually take the outside lane and likely won't yield to you if you're on the inside lane, be vigilant
    118 Avenue and St. Albert Trail is not a traffic circle, it's clearly controlled by lights, you drunken psychopath.
    Last edited by thisiswilson; 06-02-2014 at 01:36 PM. Reason: clarified need to switch to right signal

  65. #65
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    5,294

    Default

    ^^ Funny photo PRT - but only somewhat of an exaggeration of what 114 Street and University Ave or 114 Street and Belgravia Road used to look like!

    Which is why we got rid of those circles. They are great up to a certain voliume of traffic, after which they rapidly decline in utility.
    ... gobsmacked

  66. #66

    Default

    I'd guess that in 20 years, with self driving cars, everyone will want traffic circles / roundabouts as minor speed adjustments would allow near continuous, non-stop driving from point A to B.

    In the meantime, they are still safer...

    Ourston Roundabout Engineering | When should roundabouts replace traffic signals?
    Excerpt:
    "In addition to their benefits at high-flow sites, roundabouts also give great safety benefits at high-speed sites, especially where a signalized cross intersection would be the alternative. In general, signalized cross intersections are more dangerous than roundabouts everywhere, but the safety advantage of roundabouts over signalized intersections is greatest at high-speed crossings. Roundabouts replacing signalized high-speed intersections can reduce fatalities by 90 to 100 percent."

    http://www.ourston.com/resources/rou...re/policy.html


    Five Case studies...
    http://www.ourston.com/resources/studies.html

    Excerpt from one:
    "In the three years prior to the opening of the roundabout, nine crashes were reported at the intersection; four resulted in injuries and hospitalization was required in three instances. Damages associated with the collisions totaled $300,000, says Garder.
    In 2008–2009, three crashes were reported on the roundabout, none of which resulted in injuries. Damages associated with the accidents totaled $8,800, he says.
    With regard to traffic flow, drivers may be able to sail straight through roundabouts, just as they may an intersection with a signal light. With routine traffic on a roundabout, though, drivers generally proceed through more quickly than if they have to stop for a red light, he says.
    The researchers computed that a driver who travels straight through 10 similar roundabouts daily versus 10 signalized intersections would annually save 14 gallons of gas. If every licensed driver in the country did the same, Garder says 2.7 billion gallons of gas would be saved annually."
    http://www.ourston.com/resources/stu...about-way.html
    Last edited by KC; 06-02-2014 at 08:49 PM.

  67. #67

    Default

    A roundabout way of easing congestion, and scaring seniors - Opinion - Macleans.ca
    Excerpt:
    "
    http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/10/05/a...caring-seniors
    "There are plenty of good reasons behind this faddishness. By eliminating the need to come to a complete stop at an intersection, roundabouts can significantly improve traffic flow and reduce congestion, particularly during rush hour. This saves both time and fuel. The design also works to reduce the frequency and severity of accidents. Because cars merge into a roundabout at an angle, the possibility of head-on or T-bone crashes is almost completely eliminated. American research on the conversion of intersections from stoplights or stop signs to roundabouts suggests a 40 per cent reduction in accidents, and 80 per cent fewer injuries."
    /

  68. #68

  69. #69

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by McBoo View Post
    ^^ Funny photo PRT - but only somewhat of an exaggeration of what 114 Street and University Ave or 114 Street and Belgravia Road used to look like!

    Which is why we got rid of those circles. They are great up to a certain voliume of traffic, after which they rapidly decline in utility.
    If you look at the photo again, it is not a funny picture. The buses on the outside of the circle are the problem as they do not yield for exiting buses and cars creating a blockage that gridlocks the entire intersection. Look at the nearly empty outflows with a wall of buses blocking the gaps. In that example, strict police intervention would reduce the severity of the gridlock and make the traffic circle more efficient.

    Here is an example of the same issue at a regular intersection.
    www.trafficquagmire.com

    Traffic circles work but when is the last time you saw any police monitoring or catching traffic violations within them?

    I like traffic circles and 4 way stops because 90% of the time they are free flowing with almost no hesitation. Traffic lights irritate me as you wait for a mindless light to change when there is little or no crossing traffic at all. Sometimes through multiple sequences as traffic backs up in one direction.
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 07-02-2014 at 07:35 AM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  70. #70
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,340

    Default

    ^ 4-way stops are never free-flowing - you are always required to stop even if there is no conflicting traffic. 4-way stops are a generally a bad idea. Nearly all 4-way stop intersections would be better served by either a regular 2-way stop or yield, traffic lights or a traffic circle.

    Traffic lights can be inefficient at low traffic volumes, but roundabouts breakdown at high traffic volumes. The delays caused by the latter are a bigger problem. Traffic lights are sometimes used in flash mode (mimicking a stop sign) during low volume periods, so perhaps the flashing reds could be also be used with the normal cycle during medium volume periods. That way it would be legal to proceed through the intersection after stopping and verifying that there is no conflicting traffic instead of waiting for the light to change while the intersection is empty.

  71. #71

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    ^ 4-way stops are never free-flowing - you are always required to stop even if there is no conflicting traffic. 4-way stops are a generally a bad idea. Nearly all 4-way stop intersections would be better served by either a regular 2-way stop or yield, traffic lights or a traffic circle.

    Traffic lights can be inefficient at low traffic volumes, but roundabouts breakdown at high traffic volumes. The delays caused by the latter are a bigger problem. Traffic lights are sometimes used in flash mode (mimicking a stop sign) during low volume periods, so perhaps the flashing reds could be also be used with the normal cycle during medium volume periods. That way it would be legal to proceed through the intersection after stopping and verifying that there is no conflicting traffic instead of waiting for the light to change while the intersection is empty.
    Put some traffic lights around but a bit back from circles for use during rush hours only.

  72. #72

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Here is an example of the same issue at a regular intersection
    Not really, most countries don't have four way stops, typically one road has precedence. The downside of a four way stop is you do have to stop a lot, but the up side is that no matter which direction you come from and which direction you go to, you can get through the intersection at all traffic volumes. It is the same with lights, which are a bit more free flow. But with a roundabout, if volumes are high from one direction, eg west going east, and you come from the south going north, it will be impossible to get through (unless there is volume north south, but it rarely comes from all directions at rush hour). This causes massive traffic block ups, traffic circles only work at low volumes or at certain locations. Often when people travel they will see a traffic circle not at rush hour, and think, this is great. But if you live with lots of them day to day it's a nightmare no matter how great the drivers are with them. I have too many childhood memories stuck in massive round about traffic jams that don't move at all, to want more of them. When you add in the higher accident rate than a four way stop, and the higher cost to convert them to lights when volumes increase, there is no reason for them, aside from odd locations (eg 87 ave and 142 where two main roads at 90 degrees, and two minor roads),
    Last edited by moahunter; 09-02-2014 at 08:06 AM.

  73. #73

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Here is an example of the same issue at a regular intersection
    Not really, most countries don't have four way stops, typically one road has precedence. The downside of a four way stop is you do have to stop a lot, but the up side is that no matter which direction you come from and which direction you go to, you can get through the intersection at all traffic volumes. It is the same with lights, which are a bit more free flow. But with a roundabout, if volumes are high from one direction, eg west going east, and you come from the south going north, it will be impossible to get through (unless there is volume north south, but it rarely comes from all directions at rush hour). This causes massive traffic block ups, traffic circles only work at low volumes or at certain locations. Often when people travel they will see a traffic circle not at rush hour, and think, this is great. But if you live with lots of them day to day it's a nightmare no matter how great the drivers are with them. I have too many childhood memories stuck in massive round about traffic jams, to want more of them. When you add in the higher accident rate than a four way stop, and the higher cost to convert them to lights when volumes increase, there is no reason for them.
    Again, why not add rush hour only lights to those grid-lock affected circles/roundabouts.
    The accident rate in our circles should be a lot lower but we're stuck with too many untrained drivers. (Might as well replace all on ramps and use lights on them too due to the rear enders.)

    Also, the accident rate may be higher but the severity rate is much much lower. I'd guess the full costs of intersection collisions are higher in both human and financial terms.

  74. #74

    Default

    ^lights on a traffic circle are useless, regular lights are much cheaper and work the same. As to accidents, it's not training, it's human nature. People anticipate the car In front moving into the circle as they should, then rear end them when they don't. A four way stop that happens less often. I wish we had four way stops in the country I grew up in, IMO they work better than traffic circles in more situations. I think safer for pedestrians as well in communities (low volumes where circles work best), why do we want cars going faster through neighbourhoods? I don't.

  75. #75

    Default

    Moahunter, just where do you get your information?

    To increase the capacity of a traffic cicle, you just need to increase the diameter. Most traffic circles built in Edmonton were designed small at a time when the city was only a quarter of today's size.
    The Bonnie Doon traffic circle is larger and has 5 points. Is there another more heavily used 5 point intersection in Edmonton? Nope. It handles nearly 40,000 cars a day. It can be slow at peak periods but no worse than many other intersections like those on 75th street. Adding lights to traffic circles can be done and is usually used to limit car entering from a low volume direction to allow the heaver used direction to free flow into the traffic circle. What the City did with the StAT/118th ave traffic circle with lights IMHO is a complete disaster as it destroyed the effectiveness of the circle principle. The problem with StAT/118th was that the traffic circle is way too small for the traffic volume. The 101st/118th traffic circle also is a 5 point traffic circle and works well but is often jammed because traffic backs up from the 118th/97th st lights.

    Here is an efficient traffic circle in Croatia with three lanes that has a tram line going underneath. As you can see, cars making only a right turn can just free flow on the right hand lane.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rotor_Zagreb-crop.jpg
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  76. #76
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    5,294

    Default

    Being generous, I count all of 20 vehicles in that monstrosity.

    The third free-flow lane for quarter turns is interesting though, I'll give you that.
    ... gobsmacked

  77. #77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Here is an efficient traffic circle in Croatia with three lanes that has a tram line going underneath. As you can see, cars making only a right turn can just free flow on the right hand lane.
    Aside from the enormous cost to make that (for what appears to be very few cars), are you certain it doesn't jam up? Again, if you had large volume traffic going west east, anyone going south north will be in a static jam unless there is north south traffic. My information is from my experience growing up in a city chock full of traffic circles, and chock full of traffic jams because of them. What's yours?
    Last edited by moahunter; 10-02-2014 at 12:31 PM.

  78. #78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^lights on a traffic circle are useless, regular lights are much cheaper and work the same. As to accidents, it's not training, it's human nature. People anticipate the car In front moving into the circle as they should, then rear end them when they don't. A four way stop that happens less often. I wish we had four way stops in the country I grew up in, IMO they work better than traffic circles in more situations. I think safer for pedestrians as well in communities (low volumes where circles work best), why do we want cars going faster through neighbourhoods? I don't.
    Lights before the circles, to break the dominant flow(s). ...and only when needed.

    It's training. Leave more space and look ahead when you move ahead. I've never had a rear ender at a yield or a traffic circle. I have been hit twice in standard intersections. (By drunks both times I believe.)
    Last edited by KC; 10-02-2014 at 02:53 PM.

  79. #79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Here is an efficient traffic circle in Croatia with three lanes that has a tram line going underneath. As you can see, cars making only a right turn can just free flow on the right hand lane.
    Aside from the enormous cost to make that (for what appears to be very few cars), are you certain it doesn't jam up? Again, if you had large volume traffic going west east, anyone going south north will be in a static jam unless there is north south traffic. My information is from my experience growing up in a city chock full of traffic circles, and chock full of traffic jams because of them. What's yours?
    Boy, you sure are reaching looking at a picture at a singular moment of time. I guess you don't believe that it is worth while since only a single trams uses it either because you see only one in the picture?

    Maybe you did not notice that the reason there are not more cars is because they already have left a fast and efficient intersection. Free flowing you know?

    What city are you referring to that had all the traffic problems? Did they have traffic circles or roundabouts?

    It is one example only with an elevated roadway because the tram runs underneath. The BD traffic circle can easily have some right turn only lanes added and the LRT can be a flyover at less cost, less interference and higher speed with no noisy crossings and safer for the student at the nearby school, library and mall.
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 11-02-2014 at 05:49 AM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  80. #80
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Red Deer
    Posts
    146

    Default

    Bumping.

    I'm not too familiar with Edmonton road history but I have been told for years and years that Edmonton got rid of a huge amount of 'traffic circles' because people didn't know how to use them.

    Since Red Deer started embracing roundabouts, the critics always use Edmonton as an example and say something like "Edmonton got rid of them! Don't build them here!"

    Did Edmonton get rid of traffic circles or roundabouts? What is the history here?

  81. #81

    Default

    Personally I prefer traffic lights at major intersections rather than traffic circles. I think the reason Edmonton got traffic lights is apparently they had a few Brits in the planning department at one time and they figured every driver had to suffer. I cant think of any traffic circles that have been removed lately and the ones that are left can't get removed soon enough. Red Deer is better off without them.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  82. #82

    Default

    They are being used in some neighbourhoods to replace 4-way stops. Crestwood has had a small one for years, Hazeldean got one last year or the year before.

    But there's been no large-scale removal of the big ones. The one by Bonnie Doon will be removed eventually though.
    I feel in no way entitled to your opinion...

  83. #83

    Default

    I like traffic circles, because they're safer:

    Studies have shown that roundabouts are safer than traditional stop sign or signal-controlled intersections.

    Roundabouts reduced injury crashes by 75 percent at intersections where stop signs or signals were previously used for traffic control, according to a study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). Studies by the IIHS and Federal Highway Administration have shown that roundabouts typically achieve:

    • A 37 percent reduction in overall collisions
    • A 75 percent reduction in injury collisions
    • A 90 percent reduction in fatality collisions
    • A 40 percent reduction in pedestrian collisions
    And they're faster:

    Contrary to many peoples' perceptions, roundabouts actually move traffic through an intersection more quickly, and with less congestion on approaching roads. Roundabouts promote a continuous flow of traffic. Unlike intersections with traffic signals, drivers don’t have to wait for a green light at a roundabout to get through the intersection. Traffic is not required to stop – only yield – so the intersection can handle more traffic in the same amount of time.
    Studies by Kansas State University http://www.ksu.edu/roundabouts/ measured traffic flow at intersections before and after conversion to roundabouts. In each case, installing a roundabout led to a 20 percent reduction in delays. Additional studies by the IIHS of intersections in three states, including Washington, found that roundabouts contributed to an 89 percent reduction in delays and 56 percent reduction in vehicle stops.
    And they're cheaper:

    The cost difference between building a roundabout and a traffic signal is comparable. Where long-term costs are considered, roundabouts eliminate hardware, maintenance and electrical costs associated with traffic signals, which can cost between $5,000 and $10,000 per year.

    Roundabouts are also more effective during power outages. Unlike traditional signalized intersections, which must be treated as a four-way stop or require police to direct traffic, roundabouts continue to work like normal.
    They do require having a bit of a clue & some basic situational awareness though, which may be a challenge for some.

    Source
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  84. #84

    Default

    The U.K. have traffic circles all over the place. They seem to go over better there as the roads (even major ones) are much narrower and there is way more traffic congestion because of the same problem (roads very narrow). Even some of their major highways go right through towns/cities/villages so they have to keep the traffic moving. By British standards Canadian roads are extremely wide. Circles are not necessary here, we can manage fine without them. Look at that circle in Westmount. It's got stop signs and traffic lights on it. What a joke.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  85. #85

    Default

    ^Not sure the reason UK has so many, even on highways, but my guess is cost. Overpasses/interchanges are more expensive and use up a lot of land.
    www.decl.org

  86. #86
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Red Deer
    Posts
    146

    Default

    Yah... but did the CoE rip out traffic circles or roundabouts at some point? There's a difference between the two. If not, why is it common knowledge that they did?

  87. #87
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by the.tru.albertan View Post
    Yah... but did the CoE rip out traffic circles or roundabouts at some point? There's a difference between the two. If not, why is it common knowledge that they did?
    http://spacing.ca/edmonton/2013/11/20/circular-history/?utm_source=buffer&utm_campaign=Buffer&utm_content =buffer60915&utm_medium=facebook

    P.S., that link is from the top of this page.

  88. #88
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,026

    Default

    If they want to get rid of traffic circles, don't halfass it by putting traffic signals on a traffic circle like they did with St. Albert Trail/118 Ave. Either replace the traffic circle completely or don't replace it at all.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  89. #89

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    If they want to get rid of traffic circles, don't halfass it by putting traffic signals on a traffic circle like they did with St. Albert Trail/118 Ave. Either replace the traffic circle completely or don't replace it at all.
    That was changed in the 1990s at least (I videotaped it for people in China) and if it was a problem we'd have known it by now, so it's been a good idea.

    BTW, the link just above has an extra space.
    I feel in no way entitled to your opinion...

  90. #90
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Channing View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by the.tru.albertan View Post
    Yah... but did the CoE rip out traffic circles or roundabouts at some point? There's a difference between the two. If not, why is it common knowledge that they did?
    http://spacing.ca/edmonton/2013/11/20/circular-history/?utm_source=buffer&utm_campaign=Buffer&utm_content =buffer60915&utm_medium=facebook

    P.S., that link is from the top of this page.
    Also, I don't believe Edmonton has ripped out any of the variety they're proposing for Red Deer, after watching the video you posted on Reddit.

  91. #91

    Default

    I grew up in the west end and later drove through those traffic circles to get to work. Never had a problem with them. Why people like to stop at red lights when there's no one else on the road us beyond me.

  92. #92
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,340

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    If they want to get rid of traffic circles, don't halfass it by putting traffic signals on a traffic circle like they did with St. Albert Trail/118 Ave. Either replace the traffic circle completely or don't replace it at all.
    As KC mentioned above, the lights should have been placed ahead of the circle, not in it. At off-peak hours the lights could be deactivated completely and the intersection would be a normal traffic circle. During rush hour the lights would be on a rapid cycle to control entry into the circle to prevent a single direction of traffic from monopolizing it. Once past the lights, you would still treat the intersection like a normal traffic circle. The idea is the same as the ramp metering lights used to prevent traffic jams on freeways at heavily used on-ramps.

  93. #93
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Red Deer
    Posts
    146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Channing View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Channing View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by the.tru.albertan View Post
    Yah... but did the CoE rip out traffic circles or roundabouts at some point? There's a difference between the two. If not, why is it common knowledge that they did?
    http://spacing.ca/edmonton/2013/11/20/circular-history/?utm_source=buffer&utm_campaign=Buffer&utm_content =buffer60915&utm_medium=facebook

    P.S., that link is from the top of this page.
    Also, I don't believe Edmonton has ripped out any of the variety they're proposing for Red Deer, after watching the video you posted on Reddit.
    Yah, well the new Gas Alley roundabouts that I posted there were also shared by the local facebook news group, and people immediately started screaming about how Edmonton removed theirs. In that link you posted here, it says that modern roundabouts have been used in Edmonton since 2000.

    Thanks for the info. Appreciated.

  94. #94

    Default

    I love traffic circles and find them to be a blast. I can fly through the Bonnie Doon T/C at 60 kph and not slow down. I think that many people are scared of them because they don't understand them. They need more signage like some have.

    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  95. #95
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,562

    Default

    Personally I like traffic circles except for the fact that very few seem to know the rules of the circle. Especially rush hour, the circle slows down considerably because everyone decides they have to come to complete stops everywhere. If you did that in the U.K. or anywhere else in Europe you would get run over.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  96. #96

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    I love traffic circles and find them to be a blast. I can fly through the Bonnie Doon T/C at 60 kph and not slow down. I think that many people are scared of them because they don't understand them. They need more signage like some have.

    Excellent sign! That's how I was taught to drive them. Simple.

    I was astounded to learn that the right lane could go 3/4 of the was around and the left lane a 1/4. The circle at the zoo attracts the former all the time. It's just such a bad practice I don't know why people do it. And I've seen people do the latter a couple times too.

    Then people use bad signalling, often signalling their intention way too late for it to be useful to other drivers entering the circle.

    Simple common sense but people just aren't taught that a turn signal - is a signal.

    eg On straight roads, people often signal after they start their lane change and continue well into to other lane, as if that does anything.
    Last edited by KC; 02-12-2016 at 09:47 AM.

  97. #97
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,233

    Default

    ^ Nailed it, KC.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  98. #98

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    I like traffic circles, because they're safer:

    Studies have shown that roundabouts are safer than traditional stop sign or signal-controlled intersections.

    Roundabouts reduced injury crashes by 75 percent at intersections where stop signs or signals were previously used for traffic control, according to a study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). Studies by the IIHS and Federal Highway Administration have shown that roundabouts typically achieve:

    • A 37 percent reduction in overall collisions
    • A 75 percent reduction in injury collisions
    • A 90 percent reduction in fatality collisions
    • A 40 percent reduction in pedestrian collisions
    And they're faster:

    Contrary to many peoples' perceptions, roundabouts actually move traffic through an intersection more quickly, and with less congestion on approaching roads. Roundabouts promote a continuous flow of traffic. Unlike intersections with traffic signals, drivers don’t have to wait for a green light at a roundabout to get through the intersection. Traffic is not required to stop – only yield – so the intersection can handle more traffic in the same amount of time.
    Studies by Kansas State University http://www.ksu.edu/roundabouts/ measured traffic flow at intersections before and after conversion to roundabouts. In each case, installing a roundabout led to a 20 percent reduction in delays. Additional studies by the IIHS of intersections in three states, including Washington, found that roundabouts contributed to an 89 percent reduction in delays and 56 percent reduction in vehicle stops.
    And they're cheaper:

    The cost difference between building a roundabout and a traffic signal is comparable. Where long-term costs are considered, roundabouts eliminate hardware, maintenance and electrical costs associated with traffic signals, which can cost between $5,000 and $10,000 per year.

    Roundabouts are also more effective during power outages. Unlike traditional signalized intersections, which must be treated as a four-way stop or require police to direct traffic, roundabouts continue to work like normal.
    They do require having a bit of a clue & some basic situational awareness though, which may be a challenge for some.

    Source
    I think the stats are very case specific - in Edmonton for example, the 142 107 ave traffic circle has some of the worst accident rates in the city. As to the faster, it all depends. In low volume locations that don't get rush hours they are fine (although in those situations a four way stop can work as well, and takes up less room and is easier for pedestrians to navigate). But when you have a rush hour you get jams from the priority that results for one street. Traffic circles are over-rated, sure they are fun to whiz through at high speed when they aren't rush hour jamed, but why is the goal to make traffic faster in neighbourhoods?

    Have a look what has happened in Waterloo:

    http://www.therecord.com/news-story/...terloo-region/

    But their safety record is mixed.

    A collision analysis by The Record confirms that traffic signals see far more deaths — nine killed at traffic lights between 2009 and 2013, no one killed at a roundabout. At roundabouts, vehicles are moving slowly, in the same direction, and at friendlier angles.

    But the rate of fender-benders in roundabouts is startlingly high. It's getting worse — doubling in five years. Non-fatal injuries in roundabouts have also doubled in five years.
    Or look at this one, mixed benefits at best:

    - You are 2.6 times more likely to collide at a roundabout than at a traffic signal
    - The number of injury-causing collisions is roughly the same for roundabouts and traffic signals, at just under one per intersection per year.
    - You are three times more likely to be injured or killed at a traffic signal than at a roundabout

    http://www.therecord.com/news-story/...raffic-lights/

    Aside from being trapped on 107 Ave a number of times at rush hour, and stuck in traffic jams in them in my childhood, this is why I hate them:



    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...th-nowhere-to/
    Last edited by moahunter; 02-12-2016 at 01:27 PM.

  99. #99

    Default

    One pic of a traffic jam in an outrageously huge traffic circle/ roundabout. (Yes there are others. But line ups at standard intersections are so ubiquitous that people don't even bother to take photos of the backed up traffic.)

    I've spend hours of my precious life waiting for people to advance through intersections when they pass on reasonable chances. Now we have all those that sit when the light changes because they are texting. People don't go when they have the chance, people run yellows, block intersections, etc.

    Then in the winter they spin their wheels and screw up the traction for everyone to come.

  100. #100

    Default

    Roundabouts are green, they look it and are it. Plus the emissions savings shown below translate into time and fuel savings.



    https://pix-media.s3.amazonaws.com/b...t1.30.44AM.png

    This article mentions a before and after study so as close as you can get to an apples to apples comparison:

    The Case for More Traffic Roundabouts

    Elsewhere, roundabouts are more revered : Australia has more than 10,000. France features 32,000. The UK not only boasts 25,000 (the most in the world, as a proportion of total road space), but maintains the “British Roundabout Appreciation Society,” a collective of grateful denizens who tout the roundabout as “an oasis on a sea of tarmac.”

    Discover agrees : “The roundabout,” wrote the magazine in 2001, “is the single most important device ever created to help control traffic safely and smoothly.”

    Here’s why: Using simple principles of physics, roundabouts dramatically reduce crash rates, as well as injuries and deaths. They diminish vehicle emissions. They are a more effective use of road space, and cost less to maintain than traditional four-way intersections.


    ...
    A 2001 report in the American Journal of Public Health selected 24 intersections that were converted into roundabouts in 8 different states, and analyzed the before and after crash data. In most cases, the time period (in months) was the same in the before and after periods; where it was not, the Bayes method was used for normalization. Researchers found that, overall, roundabouts reduce all crashes by 38% and reduce injuries by a whopping 76%. ...

    In addition to these reductions, researchers have found that roundabouts reduce fatal collisions by as much as 90%, and pedestrian/cyclist incidents by 40%, when gauged with traditional intersections.
    ...

    ...

    https://priceonomics.com/the-case-fo...c-roundabouts/
    And think of how much they can save us on car insurance claims and premiums and lower health care costs!!!
    Last edited by KC; 02-12-2016 at 04:58 PM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •