News   Mar 28, 2024
 1.1K     2 
News   Mar 28, 2024
 575     2 
News   Mar 28, 2024
 877     0 

Star: City Hall eyes traffic circles

Queen and Richmond? But Queen and Richmond are parallel to each other.

I think the writer meant to invoke the Vimy Circle plan for University & Richmond from way back when...

I want a Magic Roundabout shirt!

If we both order from them at the same time, maybe we could bring the shipping cost down? I want one too!

- we would have to start calling to make sure we're not both wearing it to the same function -

42

(coincidentally, this is the Norman Invasion post)
 
I think the writer meant to invoke the Vimy Circle plan for University & Richmond from way back when...

Okay. I figured there was a cross street in there somewhere. :)
 
Edmonton has had traffic circles since the 1960s and was used extensively through the city. In fact, to get your drivers license, a traffic circle is part of the road test.

Over the past twenty or so years though, they've pretty much all been replaced with standard intersections, since the delays ended up being worse than if there were lights, leading to impatience, then you guessed it, more accidents. Traffic circles are great for mid-capacity intersections, but once you hit a certain point, they're useless. They work really well for the remaining intersections though, so much faster than waiting at a light, and definitely safer, once you know how to use it.
 
It has already been said a number of times on this thread, but here's goes again:

Yesterday's traffic circles are not today's roundabouts. They have been re-engineered to work well with higher capacity roads, and they are sprouting up everywhere. Go visit roundabouts.ca to read up on them: click on Introduction to get the full explanation as to why the old ones did not work as well as the new ones do.

42
 
Traffic circles are great for mid-capacity intersections, but once you hit a certain point, they're useless.

Well, that's kind of an issue. What was a "mid-capacity" intersection if 1975 could be a show-stopper these days. At what point do logistics dictate you rip the roundabout out and put back in the intersection?

And I'm not convinced you've got a winning argument with patience. At least at a light, you KNOW sooner or later you've got a guaranteed turn. But when you're sitting there at the mercy of oncoming traffic from the left, with nothing to depend on but your own luck and judgement, the urge to take chances of your own volition has GOT to be a lot higher. Imagine the chances you'd take turning right on a red once you realized it was never, EVER, going to turn green?
 
Luckily they're not building traffic circles anymore, they're building roundabouts.

There's lot's of info about them in Quebec (in French) at this website. Click on the links at left to the various regions (Outaouais is a particularly good one) to see lots of flash animations of various roundaboute or carrefours giratoires.

42
 
Click on the links at left to the various regions (Outaouais is a particularly good one) to see lots of flash animations of various roundaboute or carrefours giratoires.

I don't mean to be boring here, but I personally am less interested in what they look like as in some stats as to how they work out practically. I have my opinions, but they're just opinions. I'd like to see some solid examples of how they've improved traffic flow... or not. Like, X number of accidents in 1990 before roundabout vs. Y number in 2005 after roundabout (and adjusted for change in volume of traffic); average duration of wait from from arrival at junction to completed transit through... things like that. Does that exist, and can you give us a link?
 
Well, actually, I thought, why not look it up? So I did. I found this site, and while they don't really back up their figures (locations, years of study, actually numbers in volumes, etc.) they do seem to suggest an overall lowering of incidents, and a significant one.

There are a couple of issues that urge consideration. One is the issue of pedestrians, who can be assured of a crossing at lights, but have to depend on being seen at roundabouts. I suppose this could be addressed with underpasses or something (bridges wouldn't accommodate wheelchairs, it occurs to me). The other, though, is bikes. In my experience, cyclists are famous for making up their own rules on the fly as it is. At roundabouts, where there are no signals and the typical cyclists swapping of "vehicle mode" rights for "pedestrian mode" convenience and absolution from responsibility willy-nilly, this could be a huge risk. I'm wondering how to address that.
 
Some of the animations in the Quebec Carrefour Giratoire links I mentioned earlier show how bikes and pedestrians are meant to use the roundabouts.

42
 
Some of the animations in the Quebec Carrefour Giratoire links I mentioned earlier show how bikes and pedestrians are meant to use the roundabouts.

I saw them. They did, in fact, spark that concern before I read the other piece. There seems to be nothing that guarantees a pedestrian access but the keen sight and goodwill of motorists.
 
Buffalo is another city that has a number of traffic circles. They were put in as part of Frederick Law Olmsted's parks and parkway system for the city.

fig2.jpg


symphonycolor.jpg

Symphony Circle

ferrycolor.jpg

Ferry Circle
 
Post

Link to article

Traffic Circles Proposed
Replace Lights; 'Goofy' idea to be studied for busy intersections

Kelly Grant
National Post

Thursday, November 01, 2007

Council's public works committee approved a new study yesterday on installing traffic circles at some of the busiest intersections in Toronto, although the chairman admitted the idea is an odd one.

"I know that perhaps it is a goofy new initiative," Glenn De Baeremaeker, the councillor for Ward 38 Scarborough-Centre, conceded. "But many of us propose goofy new initiatives. Some of us are experts at goofy new initiatives. This is why we send [our ideas] to staff first before we actually try to do anything, to make sure there's some sober second thought."

The traffic circle study was the brainchild of Case Ootes, a veteran councillor.

Mr. Ootes said roundabouts, which are popular in Europe, should be studied to see whether they cut down on idling and reduce T-bone crashes.

He said the city has an obligation to at least consider them, especially in locations where new intersections are about to be installed.

"It's just a knee-jerk reaction to put in a light every time we put in a new intersection," Mr. Ootes said.

Toronto already has 11 small traffic circles.

As part of the study, staff is being asked to recommend other intersections that could be suitable for roundabouts.

Mr. Ootes sugges ted Eglinton Road East and Don Mills Road -- the third busiest intersection in the city -- along with Eglinton Road East and Victoria Park Road and St. Clair Avenue East and O'Connor Drive.

Some 49,930 vehicles flow through Eglinton and Don Mills during the busiest eight hours of the day. Nearly 40,000 use the Eglinton and Victoria Park intersection during the same period, while 22,400 drive through St. Clair and O'Connor, according to Mike Brady, the city's manager of traffic safety.

Councillor Shelley Carroll, the budget chief, tried to kill the traffic circle proposal at the works meeting.

She was the first member of the committee to tag the idea as a "goofy new initiative" that would needlessly absorb staff time.

"It really discredits this council that we just sort of, you know, wander the globe and think up goofy new initiatives and move them willy-nilly," she complained.

She also accused Mr. Ootes of requesting the study at the behest of the Canadian Automobile Association because a sustainable transportation plan council adopted last month focuses on getting Torontonians out of their cars.

"Basically this is here on behalf of Councillor Ootes because we didn't bring forward an initiative that specifically meets all of the goals of the CAA. That's why it's here."

Mr. Ootes, who was not at yesterday's meeting, scoffed at the accusation.

"Shelley Carroll has a problem thinking outside the box," he said in an interview. "That's just a dumb reaction. It's an ignorant comment."

The works committee voted 4-2 to go ahead with the study. Staff is to report in January.
 
Councillor Shelley Carroll, the budget chief, tried to kill the traffic circle proposal at the works meeting.

She was the first member of the committee to tag the idea as a "goofy new initiative" that would needlessly absorb staff time.

wow... just wow. And people like her are running the city?
 
Anyone who's ever studied how things work outside this continent would never dismiss roundabouts as "goofy". The general public can be forgiven for their ignorance of how they work, but members of the works committee should be educated in things like this. Calling roundabouts goofy makes about as much sense as calling stop signs goofy.

I wish the papers would stop calling them traffic circles. Traffic circles aren't roundabouts.

Oh btw, for people who suggest roundabouts are only good for moderate traffic flows, that's just not true. They can handle large traffic flows just like signals. Much better than old traffic circles could. Roundabouts aren't appropriate everywhere, but they should definitely be considered along with signals, stop signs, etc when an intersection is designed.
 

Back
Top