Road Constructions in Calgary

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Probably like how on newer freeways like Stoney- they don't want weaves to be too close together. That's one of the biggest issues with Deerfoot.

That’s fine and all but the 210 ave intersection should have NB macleod to EB 210 access for those who live in Chaparral (which is my assumption of what will happen). Otherwise Stoney would be the primary access for that community from NB macleod.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by Engine09

Friend of mine just bought a place in Legacy, all those traffic circles suck, they're too small.

Sounds like they're working as intended if you think they're small. It's telling you to slow down.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

Regardless of perception or what you've seen, a DDI is still way safer overall than a Parclo. Do a conflict point analysis and review the types of collisions present at each interchange type and it becomes obvious. Canadian jurisdictions have been slow to adopt safer road design trends from elsewhere because of a reluctance to ask drivers to adapt to modern design. Even some slow-to-act US DoTs are outpacing us by a wide margin now.

We still get comments that roundabouts are "new" and "scary" from the public despite the fact that the modern roundabout design in North America is over 30 years old and there have been modern roundabouts in Calgary for nearly 20 years. Familiarity shouldn't be a higher-weight value over safety.

I'd willing to bet money that someone will comment on this engagement page that the city should build a cloverleaf interchange at 210th.

It would be interesting to see the data, but anecdotally I've never come across an accident crash at a roundabout. It also seems like crashes are almost guaranteed to be minor.

[Engine09]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

Sounds like they're working as intended if you think they're small. It's telling you to slow down.

I always thought the main intended purpose was to keep traffic flowing. They should just install speed bumps as well, residents would love that.

I drive to work everyday through a traffic circle that is great because there's enough real estate to build it at reasonable size. Nice and easy, gradual turns, not that that small, squeezed in bull#### in Legacy.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by Engine09

I always thought the main intended purpose was to keep traffic flowing. They should just install speed bumps as well, residents would love that.

I drive to work everyday through a traffic circle that is great because there's enough real estate to build it at reasonable size. Nice and easy, gradual turns, not that that small, squeezed in bull#### in Legacy.

Roundabouts do keep traffic flowing. You're far less likely to need to come to a complete stop for a long time like a traffic signal. Having to slow down more than you'd like doesn't mean it's not flowing.

If you're not slowing down to enter a roundabout, there's a chance that it's not doing what it's supposed to be doing. If you make the turns approaching a roundabout too gradual, then someone will enter the roundabout at a high speed. That might sound great to someone in a rush to get to work in the morning, but that removes one of the key safety benefits of the roundabout. A required check for all roundabout designs is called the "fastest path" and there are maximum speeds you're not supposed to exceed when checking that. Those checks help size and shape roundabouts.

Looking at the legacy roundabouts in google maps, I'm not in love with how they're laid out. Either the developers squeezed them as much as possible to get more land for residential lots, or they were originally signalized intersections and changed to roundabouts. They look like they'll still be safer than any signalized intersection would be at those spots, and it's a lot cheaper to maintain for the city in the long run.

[TorqueDog]

Man, the ones in Legacy are fine, maaaybe a tad on the small side -- the massive ones you can find scattered around Edmonton are a rare redeeming quality for an otherwise crappy city where roads are concerned -- but still. Get a better handling car so you can stay flatter through the circle without lifting. Certainly better than unnecessary three and four-way stop signs or light-controlled intersections. I like traffic circles. They're easy to navigate unless you're a drooling moron or bought a vehicle too big for your abilities behind the wheel.


Plus those ones in Legacy are waaaaaaay better than these stupid pieces of sh-t on Royal Ave SW. Just be happy they aren't those. People park too goddamn close to the entry/exit points and everyone seems to forget to yield to the person to the right of them if they arrive at the same time because somehow the absence of a stop-sign or yield makes people lose brain cells.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

the massive ones you can find scattered around Edmonton are a rare redeeming quality for an otherwise crappy city where roads are concerned

If you're referring to intersections in Edmonton like this, then those are actually old-style traffic circles (not to be confused with a roundabout). You won't see those built ever again.

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Plus those ones in Legacy are waaaaaaay better than these stupid pieces of sh-t on Royal Ave SW. Just be happy they aren't those.

Those are mini-roundabouts. They're definitely not going to have the same safety impacts as a full-sized roundabout but they work!
https://nacto.org/publication/urban-...ni-roundabout/

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

If you're referring to intersections in Edmonton like this, then those are actually old-style traffic circles (not to be confused with a roundabout). You won't see those built ever again.

Nah, not the light-controlled ones. I mean the large, proper roundabouts they have; yield to traffic in the roundabout to enter, yield to the traffic on the inside lane exiting, etc. I don't know the street layout of Shelbyville well enough to link you to one, but they have them.

Originally Posted by Mazrim

Those are mini-roundabouts. They're definitely not going to have the same safety impacts as a full-sized roundabout but they work!
https://nacto.org/publication/urban-...ni-roundabout/

They're f-cking horrible, people suck at them, and mini-roundabouts the way they've been implemented there deserve to die a painful death.

[Shazam]

https://www.alberta.ca/roundabouts#:...ial%20vehicles.

Kids had to learn this for the leaner's license.

The traffic circles in Edmonton originally didn't have lights. That's how much Edmonton sucks.

[powderjunkie]

Edmonton has a bunch of asymmetrical roundabouts that don't really feel like roundabouts when you drive them (probably because traffic patterns mean its usually just a right turn yield and you rarely actually use the circle part)

https://maps.app.goo.gl/E4u1FiWH2PHMKpfU6.

[Shazam]

Hey I've driven on that thing.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Edmonton has a bunch of asymmetrical roundabouts that don't really feel like roundabouts when you drive them (probably because traffic patterns mean its usually just a right turn yield and you rarely actually use the circle part)

https://maps.app.goo.gl/E4u1FiWH2PHMKpfU6.

Traffic in the "circle" has to stop for traffic instead of the other way around, so it's a traffic circle and not a roundabout. Edmonton is no good.

[Brendone]

Originally Posted by Engine09

Friend of mine just bought a place in Legacy, all those traffic circles suck, they're too small.

Also, can the mods edit the thread title, f'ing annoying.

I’d change it to “Roads Constructionses” to see if I could push you over the edge.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

Traffic in the "circle" has to stop for traffic instead of the other way around, so it's a traffic circle and not a roundabout. Edmonton is no good.

Ahh yes, I couldn't remember the intricacies of it. It's been a decade since I lived there, but i think it worked pretty well - certainly better than a 5-way stop light

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

Traffic in the "circle" has to stop for traffic instead of the other way around, so it's a traffic circle and not a roundabout. Edmonton is no good.

I don’t believe this is true. From a yielding point of view a traffic circle and aroundabout are the same thing. See the link above form Alberta or the link below from AMA

https://ama.ab.ca/articles/traffic-c...les-in-alberta

Q. Who has the right of way in a traffic circle?
A. Drivers in the innermost lane always have the right of way in a circular intersection.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by GGG

I don’t believe this is true. From a yielding point of view a traffic circle and aroundabout are the same thing. See the link above form Alberta or the link below from AMA

https://ama.ab.ca/articles/traffic-c...les-in-alberta

You need to look at the specific traffic circle linked (https://maps.app.goo.gl/E4u1FiWH2PHMKpfU6). The 'circle' portion literally has stop signs as it comes to intersecting roadways.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

You need to look at the specific traffic circle linked (https://maps.app.goo.gl/E4u1FiWH2PHMKpfU6). The 'circle' portion literally has stop signs as it comes to intersecting roadways.

Yeah but that isn’t the difference between a traffic circle and roundabout. In a normal traffic circle the people in the circle have the right of way.

That Edmonton creation is some kind of poorly signed mess that just creates confusion by breaking the first principle. Yield to the circle.

It’s more of a spilt intersection with curved cross roads.

[Acey]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

Regardless of perception or what you've seen, a DDI is still way safer overall than a Parclo. Do a conflict point analysis and review the types of collisions present at each interchange type and it becomes obvious. Canadian jurisdictions have been slow to adopt safer road design trends from elsewhere because of a reluctance to ask drivers to adapt to modern design. Even some slow-to-act US DoTs are outpacing us by a wide margin now.

Then build it and don't ask the public who don't know anything about how interchanges work. I didn't say a DDI wasn't safer, but merely that it'd be anomolous for Calgary to not build a parclo when they have ROW to build a parclo.

Given the way traffic would move at Macleod/210 I question whether a DDI is even higher capacity than a 6-ramp parclo but capacity seems to not be a factor.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by GGG

Yeah but that isn’t the difference between a traffic circle and roundabout. In a normal traffic circle the people in the circle have the right of way.

That Edmonton creation is some kind of poorly signed mess that just creates confusion by breaking the first principle. Yield to the circle.

It’s more of a spilt intersection with curved cross roads.

ALBERTA REGULATION 304/2002
Traffic Safety Act
USE OF HIGHWAY AND RULES OF THE ROAD REGULATION

Division 9

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.

https://kings-printer.alberta.ca/126...4&display=html

There is no differentiation between 'roundabout' and 'traffic circle' in the TSA anyway, roundabout doesn't even show up in the thing.

... which brings us back to 'Edmonton is no good'.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

There is no differentiation between 'roundabout' and 'traffic circle' in the TSA anyway, roundabout doesn't even show up in the thing.

... which brings us back to 'Edmonton is no good'.

Yeah that was the point I was making. On the Alberta new drivers website there is a discussion about design speeds but that is about it