Ring Road To Nowhere

[Joborule]

We haven't had those lights flashing in the late night anymore for the past couple of years I believe; at least from the areas I drive around in. Anyone know why this was changed?

[Acey]

There are a lot more exceptions that I would add to the list than that; something like Beddington Trail becomes a bloodbath if you turn off traffic lights to save a few cars 30 seconds. So many others I could think of where I'm now making a conscious effort to not go that way after 9 pm. After a year when the tangible increase in major crashes is realized, they'd bail real quick on that plan. Agree to disagree.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Acey

There are a lot more exceptions that I would add to the list than that; something like Beddington Trail becomes a bloodbath if you turn off traffic lights to save a few cars 30 seconds. So many others I could think of where I'm now making a conscious effort to not go that way after 9 pm. After a year when the tangible increase in major crashes is realized, they'd bail real quick on that plan. Agree to disagree.

Not sure who you're referencing here?

ggg said neighborhood collector. That would not include Beddington. I don't think anyone is arguing for a road that is 3 lanes each way with dual left turns to be a free for all.

It also wouldn't work at Shag and Country Hills.


But it definitely would work at dozens of smaller intersections.

[Acey]

Even at some smaller intersections there are geometry issues. I think the answer is to build roundabouts, which we are doing. How long are you waiting at these dozens of smaller intersections? Even a semi-actuated signal should have minimal wait time off-peak when timed correctly.

[kevman]

Originally Posted by GGG

Most probably should be.

Any neighbourhood collector to arterial should be flashing yellow for the arterial and red for the neighbourhood. From about 9pm - 6 am these lights serve no purpose outside of rush hours.

Downtown you could probably do the same. Make East West flashing yellow for all but the main intersections.

Something like McLeod trail likely needs lights 24hrs per day. You also probably need to leave the protected dual left and dual right turns as lights as well.

Every set of lights should turn into a stop sign for the lower traffic leg or a 4-way stop when traffic volumes drop below the threshold where lights would be required.

That makes way too much sense to ever be implemented!

The intersection of 19th St. and Northmount Dr. used to drive me nuts. I'd come home from hockey at midnight and get stuck at a red light for minutes without another car in site. Eventually I just started stopping, looking both ways and running the red. Flashing lights would have meant I didn't need to break the law to use common sense.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by Acey

Even at some smaller intersections there are geometry issues. I think the answer is to build roundabouts, which we are doing. How long are you waiting at these dozens of smaller intersections? Even a semi-actuated signal should have minimal wait time off-peak when timed correctly.

I, for one, would welcome a Richard Road @ Crowchild Trail type roundabout solution for 50 Avenue / Mount Royal Gate SW @ Crowchild Trail.

Most traffic heading west is exiting to Crowchild North or South, so they'd be out of the circle at the first exit.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by kevman

That makes way too much sense to ever be implemented!

The intersection of 19th St. and Northmount Dr. used to drive me nuts. I'd come home from hockey at midnight and get stuck at a red light for minutes without another car in site. Eventually I just started stopping, looking both ways and running the red. Flashing lights would have meant I didn't need to break the law to use common sense.

I've got an intersection near me and I basically do that every time. It's sensible in rush hour and during the day to have the lights, but at other times it's just unnecessary. I asked our alderman for a sensor to at least reduce the time you sit there, and they did nothing. So...I guess I just make sure there are no police in sight and then go.

[Bill Bumface]

I used new Stoney for a legitimate reason last night to go out to Bragg Creek. Someone please explain this to me...

I had the option to keep going straight to stay on the 201/Stoney West, or to exit and take the 201/Stoney South. Isn't this supposed to be a frigging ring road? Why not call "Stoney West" Highway 8?

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by Slava

I've got an intersection near me and I basically do that every time. It's sensible in rush hour and during the day to have the lights, but at other times it's just unnecessary. I asked our alderman for a sensor to at least reduce the time you sit there, and they did nothing. So...I guess I just make sure there are no police in sight and then go.

I do the same thing.

But sensors don't work either, half of them are ####ed once they freeze and they just revert back to timers

[vegasbound]

Originally Posted by Joborule

We haven't had those lights flashing in the late night anymore for the past couple of years I believe; at least from the areas I drive around in. Anyone know why this was changed?

I was wondering this too; my neighbourhood had flashing lights at night and then about a year or two ago they randomly changed this.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by vegasbound

I was wondering this too; my neighbourhood had flashing lights at night and then about a year or two ago they randomly changed this.

I noticed that too. Roads like along Country Hills Blvd between Coventry Hills and Harvest Hills, when the businesses are closed, there shouldn't be any reason why those lights aren't flashing yellow, and the lights turning out of the plaza flashing reds. Same with along Creekside. But they turned those off now, which is stupid IMO.

Another one of those dumb city hall decisions to change things that worked to something that doesn't for the sake of doing something?

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by vegasbound

I was wondering this too; my neighbourhood had flashing lights at night and then about a year or two ago they randomly changed this.

In my experience it would be one of three things:
- There was a serious crash that made them decide to change it
- They looked at traffic volume growth and decided it needed to change
- A politician or senior manager that lives nearby was mildly irritated by it and asked for it to change

The last one happens more often than you'd think.

[Acey]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

I noticed that too. Roads like along Country Hills Blvd between Coventry Hills and Harvest Hills, when the businesses are closed, there shouldn't be any reason why those lights aren't flashing yellow, and the lights turning out of the plaza flashing reds. Same with along Creekside. But they turned those off now, which is stupid IMO.

Probably because a) the geometry of those intersections and b) the fact that people rip down CHB at 90. I give it a month before a Subaru comes tearing down the hill and smokes the Esso truck trying to turn left on the flashing red off Country Village Way onto CHB.

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

I used new Stoney for a legitimate reason last night to go out to Bragg Creek. Someone please explain this to me...

I had the option to keep going straight to stay on the 201/Stoney West, or to exit and take the 201/Stoney South. Isn't this supposed to be a frigging ring road? Why not call "Stoney West" Highway 8?

It doesn't make sense right now because the final leg isn't open yet (planned 2024). Pretty sure you're talking about Glenmore westbound approaching Sarcee, and if you think about the fact that they're building the final leg of the ring right now to connect Highway 1 to Highway 8, it makes perfect sense. The east end of Highway 8 is now at the western Calgary city limit (west of Discovery Ridge) and not at Sarcee Trail.

What you're suggesting does make sense, but then you have to replace a ton of huge overhead signs in 3-4 years for no reason and they're not cheap.

[Madman]

It's quite clear to me that the signage guys on the new RR had no idea where and where not to place the "Exit Only" signs on the big overheads. If I'm in a lane that can continue without exiting, there shouldn't be a arrow pointing down that says it's an "Exit Only" lane.

[Acey]

Originally Posted by Madman

It's quite clear to me that the signage guys on the new RR had no idea where and where not to place the "Exit Only" signs on the big overheads. If I'm in a lane that can continue without exiting, there shouldn't be a arrow pointing down that says it's an "Exit Only" lane.

I'll need a specific instance of this occurring because I don't think I've seen it in the multiple times I've driven it. All Stoney/Henday signage is all designed by Alberta Transportation.

There is a bit of a quirk in how "exit only" lanes are sometimes signed, but that is (in my opinion) a fundamental flaw in the Alberta Highway Design Guide that cause that quirk to exists elsewhere in the province.

tl;dr: it's the same as everywhere else on Stoney/Henday

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by Acey

All Stoney/Henday signage is all designed by Alberta Transportation.

The signs were designed by a consultant working for the province, and then designed again based on those original signs by the P3 consultant who won the project. It goes through a few reviews before going up, though sometimes errors pop up when a manufacturer doesn't built the signs to spec.

Originally Posted by Acey

There is a bit of a quirk in how "exit only" lanes are sometimes signed, but that is (in my opinion) a fundamental flaw in the Alberta Highway Design Guide that cause that quirk to exists elsewhere in the province

I'd like to know what this quirk is!

[browna]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

In my experience it would be one of three things:
- There was a serious crash that made them decide to change it
- They looked at traffic volume growth and decided it needed to change
- A politician or senior manager that lives nearby was mildly irritated by it and asked for it to change

The last one happens more often than you'd think.

Some sort of technological advancements as well, maybe?

I can’t imagine the switches from the early 80s are still being used to control the lights and the pads underneath the asphalt (maybe they are)?

Possibly the older switches needed to be shut off nightly for preserving longevity, and given the handful of cars in an hour after 11pm through those intersections until 6am, didn’t need it running/be connected all night?

[Acey]

Originally Posted by browna

Some sort of technological advancements as well, maybe?

I can’t imagine the switches from the early 80s are still being used to control the lights and the pads underneath the asphalt (maybe they are)?

They are, but the cool new thing is cameras whose sole purpose is to detect the presence of vehicles, they can't record video or anything. You can see the cameras way up high here at Beddington Trail/Blvd for every movement except through traffic on Beddington Trail. This is a semi-actuated intersection, meaning it sits in green for the main movement until a vehicle/pedestrian for a minor movement is detected.

An example of tech advancing in the realm of traffic lights would be smarter signals that can flex green time for a given movement within a set of parameters, well outside of a time period when that volume of traffic would be expected... or even change the configuration of the cycle. Like an influx of traffic at 10 pm after a hockey game, for example. Like if the default behaviour of a set of signals was to at 10 pm revert from a permissive/protected left turn (green arrow followed by yield on green ball) to a permissive only at 10 pm, and now a hockey game is over and that movement is backed up 2 blocks, smart signals without any user input could reinstate the leading protected turn movement to help clear the queue, monitoring the opposing through movement from which green time is being stolen to ensure that it's still fine.

Originally Posted by Mazrim

I'd like to know what this quirk is!

It has always bothered me in this lane configuration:



that the inside exit lane is marked as exit only.

[DoubleK]

Is there a sign south of that sign?

[Acey]

Gonna use the sign prior from a different approach because NB Deerfoot before Stoney NE has a weird lane drop that ruins the sign. But this same interchange from a different direction, they do this on the approach, as they do everywhere else now:



Which is fine and logical. But I want this same sign at the gore point, where the inner lane is not marked as exit only... because it isn't. I dunno. Because by their logic, any standard single lane exit, like:



Should be marked as exit only.