Ring Road To Nowhere

[ken0042]

I think you have it wrong. The person in the right lane must always yield to the person on the inside (left) lane.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by RedMileDJ

You want to put a roundabout in, because the province screwed up the access to southbound 68th from westbound 16th? HA! The only reason the roundabout idea was being thrown around is because the province screwed up the interchange, and didn't allow the access. And in 10 to 13 years, they'll be putting in an overpass...just like what's at 52nd and 16th. It's a waste of money. They expect people to know to use the roundabout to go back south. So...turn right...so you can turn around and go south. It's so laughable.

It wouldn't be a waste of money since the roundabout would stick around even after the interchange was built for 16th/68st. It should also improve traffic flow for the street, making it a positive investment. Granted, that's if drivers operate it properly. But if they have a license, they should know since they are required to know how to.

Also, the original plan for the interchange was to have no access to and from Stoney Trail. It was/is intended to only be a partial interchange, with connections on the west side of it. So westbound 16th ave traffic along with Stoney Trail wouldn't be able to turn south period. Hopefully when they get around to building that interchange, they include full connections for those three roads.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I think you have it wrong. The person in the right lane must always yield to the person on the inside (left) lane.

My understanding, an ideal roundabout

Each road enters and exits with two lanes.

If you enter from the right lane you must exit on the right lane of the next road. No need to Yield because there is no reason for anyone to be in your lane, since anyone in your lane would be exiting before they reach you.

If you enter from the Left Lane, you must yield to anyone already in the center lane of the circle. No need to worry about anyone in the right lane because they have to exit before they get to you. Then you must enter into the center lane.

Once in the center lane you can take the left lane of any exit without yielding, since nobody should be crossing exits from the right lanes, and Anyone trying to enter the center lane must yield to you.

Assuming all directions are equally used the right lanes would take 33% of the traffic load with no yields, and the left lanes would take 66% with 1 Yield

Best picture I could find quickly.

[photon]

That's what this one is isn't it?

https://www.google.ca/maps/@51.03035...8i6656!6m1!1e1

EDIT: I guess not, but similar. If you enter in the right lane you may exit at the next road but you must exit at the road after.

EDIT2: Wait it's weird, one of the segments only has one lane. Seems weird but I never see a problem at that traffic circle so it works.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by #-3

My understanding, an ideal roundabout

Each road enters and exits with two lanes.

If you enter from the right lane you must exit on the right lane of the next road. No need to Yield because there is no reason for anyone to be in your lane, since anyone in your lane would be exiting before they reach you.

If you enter from the Left Lane, you must yield to anyone already in the center lane of the circle. No need to worry about anyone in the right lane because they have to exit before they get to you. Then you must enter into the center lane.

Once in the center lane you can take the left lane of any exit without yielding, since nobody should be crossing exits from the right lanes, and Anyone trying to enter the center lane must yield to you.

Assuming all directions are equally used the right lanes would take 33% of the traffic load with no yields, and the left lanes would take 66% with 1 Yield

Best picture I could find quickly.

I wish the "smart" folks in Calgary hadn't #######ized the traffic circles here. What you described is the proper way. If I remember correctly, the McKenzie Towne circle was initially set up that way but apparently people couldn't figure it out so the City went and screwed it up even more. I only have to deal with that thing a handful of times per year but it is messed up.

[Resolute 14]

It was initially set up with the idea that you would go one or two roads over from the right lane, but you would yield if you were going two. In practical terms though, probably close to 70% of traffic coming in from McKenzie Towne Blvd is exiting to McKenzie Towne Blvd, so anyone trying to get into Prestwick especially was just screwed.

The city's FAQ for it is awesome though: "We built it without painted lines because we assumed people could drive. When we learned that was not the case, we painted lines, for safety! But then we removed them and we won't tell you why. Oh, and here's a map that won't help you out at all."

http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation...bout-FAQs.aspx

And here's McKenzie Towne council's instruction page: http://www.mtcouncil.com/clientuploa...tions%20v2.pdf

I especially like "if you can't exit safely from the left lane, continue around the circle and try again". All I can picture is some timid driver circling forever until they run out of gas.

[burn_this_city]

Wish they'd just repave the traffic circle in McKenzie Towne, its so washboarded in the center lane.

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

I especially like "if you can't exit safely from the left lane, continue around the circle and try again". All I can picture is some timid driver circling forever until they run out of gas.

And the saddest part is, in the inside lane, they have the right of way to exit wherever they please without having to yield to anyone.

I always break down roundabouts into two simple rules:

- Cars already in the circle have the right of way over those entering (so yield going in).
- On a dual-lane roundabout, cars on the inside lane have the right of way over everyone.

And you can even make it simpler:

- The right of way is simply a hierarchy from the inside of the circle to the outside. Inner lane > outer lane > outside of circle.

That's it. Easy peasy.

[temple5]

Originally Posted by #-3

My understanding, an ideal roundabout

Each road enters and exits with two lanes.

If you enter from the right lane you must exit on the right lane of the next road. No need to Yield because there is no reason for anyone to be in your lane, since anyone in your lane would be exiting before they reach you.

If you enter from the Left Lane, you must yield to anyone already in the center lane of the circle. No need to worry about anyone in the right lane because they have to exit before they get to you. Then you must enter into the center lane.

Once in the center lane you can take the left lane of any exit without yielding, since nobody should be crossing exits from the right lanes, and Anyone trying to enter the center lane must yield to you.

Assuming all directions are equally used the right lanes would take 33% of the traffic load with no yields, and the left lanes would take 66% with 1 Yield

Best picture I could find quickly.

I may be mistaken but I seem to remember the traffic circle rules as follows (for 2 lane traffic circles). Of all intersections, traffic circles rely heavily on the proper use of signal lights.

Left (inner) lane always has ROW except it cannot take the first exit.

Right (outer) lane always must yield to inner lane but it can skip first exit and proceed to second exit but must exit on the second and cannot continue around.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by temple5

Right (outer) lane always must yield to inner lane but it can skip first exit and proceed to second exit but must exit on the second and cannot continue around.

There is nothing in the rules saying the outside lane must take the first or 2nd exit.
http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/1994.htm

Taking more than two exits is risky, and requires focus. But there is no rule against it.

[Resolute 14]

Yeah, I don't think it was ever a rule, but more of a common courtesy. If you're going well around the outside, you're a d-bag endangering people, much in the same way people riding the left lane of Deerfoot at 100 are.

[lazypucker]

So are there any announcements about the construction of the SW leg of the ring road, from COP to 22X? The Tsuu T'ina people got paid already!

[Muffins]

Originally Posted by lazypucker

So are there any announcements about the construction of the SW leg of the ring road, from COP to 22X? The Tsuu T'ina people got paid already!

The only announcement/info I've seen is that the part from highway 8 to COP is on hold. The part through the reserve will go ahead as scheduled.

In other words, the ring road still wont be a ring for quite a while.

[Madman]

Notley is in favour of finishing the entire ring road - although no details are available.

Finishing the Tsuu T’ina ring road on time seems less problematic, if only because the province faces a “massive penalty” if it doesn’t get cars on the road within seven years of the final deal being sealed.

Prentice’s plan to delay one link in the chain doesn’t make sense, Notley feels, “because there’s no point in building 95 per cent of an engine and then letting it sit there, not working.”

[Joborule]

Nvm, posted above.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by lazypucker

So are there any announcements about the construction of the SW leg of the ring road, from COP to 22X? The Tsuu T'ina people got paid already!

The city has signs showing the route posted at the off-leash park adjacent to the Tsuu T'ina land.

https://www.transportation.alberta.c...s/06_90Ave.jpg

One thing that has me scratching my head is the map shows the Southland Drive and 90th Ave connections as 'future construction.' Does that mean the road will initially only hook up at Anderson?

[getbak]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The city has signs showing the route posted at the off-leash park adjacent to the Tsuu T'ina land.

https://www.transportation.alberta.c...s/06_90Ave.jpg

One thing that has me scratching my head is the map shows the Southland Drive and 90th Ave connections as 'future construction.' Does that mean the road will initially only hook up at Anderson?

It looks like those connections will be the City's responsibility. The Province will build them to the edge of the Reserve and the City will have to connect them to the city streets. Logically, you'd hope they'd all get built at the same time, but no one ever accused the government of doing things logically.

[Calgary14]

Originally Posted by Acey

Macleod and 162 Ave will be the first diverging diamond in Canada, my holy Jesus this is going to be absolute mayhem for many months.



RIP, south Calgary.

http://metronews.ca/news/calgary/140...-on-left-side/

The biggest issue with this interchange is that the traffic will be free-flowing on Macleod but there will still be only one lane to get onto 22x. So while the traffic will flow freely while on Macleod it will come to a stop when merging off Macleod onto the one lane to go east/west on 22x.

The city confirmed during the info session that the Macleod/162nd interchange won't solve the problem, it will move the problem, until the ring road gets completed and a proper merge is built from Macleod to 22x/Stoney. Unless of course you continue going south on Macleod in which case it's a huge win

[BlackArcher101]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

It didn't help when they repainted the thing to allow McKenzie Towne Blvd traffic to use both lanes all the way through. The problem is not the circle, but the lack of giant, neon, flashing "IF YOU ARE IN THE RIGHT LANE, YIELD YOU WORTHLESS SACK OF CRAP" signs.

Witnessed a hilarious moment this morning which happens way too often. Following someone in the inner lane, there was a truck + trailer in the outer lane, who was running ahead and along side the person in the inner lane. Person in inner lane wanted to exit, but couldn't because the truck was there.

Person in the inner lane didn't signal (they rarely do), and laid on the horn because somehow the truck did the wrong thing. Truck had no chance of even knowing she wanted to exit, even if she did signal as he was ahead. So she slowed down and after the trailer passes, cuts off someone else in the outer lane who was passing the exit, all with no signal on.

The city should have damn well left the circle alone. Now with all these different integration's of lines and signs, people have different perceptions of the traffic rules within the circle and their rights.

Not to mention you have two of the five exits determined as dual lane and the remaining three single lane. However, the lines painted for the single exits imply that only the outer lane can exit to them, so you have mass confusion on who has the right of way. City says the exists aren't wide enough for two lanes, yet that's the way they were operating before.

I wouldn't have a clue how insurance would determine fault in the case of an accident in that circle. There seems to be two different laws with different interpretations of each existing.

[DoubleK]

How does that make anything any worse than it is today for traffic exiting on 22x?

People heading south of 22x get a major benefit.