Welcome, Guest

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

1. •  
     CommentAuthorStBPegger
   • CommentTimeMay 20th 2008

    
   I'm all for roundabouts. They make traffic more efficient, are natural areas for slowing down traffic (you gotta to go round a curve) and use less gas idling. The more in the city the better, although I fear the learning curve of some folk.
   
   I was driving back from the symphony and was behind an old person, who proceeded to go the wrong way into the city's only legit roundabout (which is weak by european standards). Now if you've seen this roundabout, this is a very hard thing to do because you have to do a crazy turn to get around the curb. Further, you have two signs to show you which way to go: a one-way sign inside the circle, and a "go on the right side" sign entering the circle. When the guy left the traffic circle he proceeded to drive on the wrong side of the road, as that is where the circle spit him out. Abosolutely dangerous. Mind you, this guy then proceeded to drive like an idiot, barely making a turn left onto the bridge.
   
   And this guy isn't the first I've seen go the wrong-way on said roundabout.
   The answer is to have more of them so that people get used to them, and a whack of education.
   
   I also completely agree that we're a stop-sign-obsessed society, which also has waaay too many traffic lights. Hmm...maybe if we didn't have as many we would haven't to worry about them being so old that it would be too much to sync them.
2. • CommentAuthorSam
   • CommentTimeMay 20th 2008

    
   I seem to recall reading somewhere about a traffic signal computer for the city that either doesn't exist; is obsolete; or only a handful of signals downtown are connected to it. Anyone have any info on this?
   Maybe if the city joined the 21st century with some updated equipment traffic would move a lot smoother.
3. •  
     CommentAuthorStBPegger
   • CommentTimeMay 20th 2008

    
   I just remember hearing/reading that the reason our lights aren't synced is because they're really old and have to be done manually. I certainly hope this is the case, otherwise there has to be some explaining as to why the lights are so bloody ill timed.
4. • CommentAuthorDeanK
   • CommentTimeMay 20th 2008

    
   "I certainly hope this is the case"
   
   Even if that were the case... setting the lights to do off at a certain time is not rocket science.. nor is figuring out what that certain time is based on acceleration factor, speed and distance from one light to the next.
5. •  
     CommentAuthorStBPegger
   • CommentTimeMay 20th 2008

    
   I think part of the problem is when there's a power failure, that they have to be reset. Bloody ridiculous. That's why the fewer lighted intersections, the less we would have to maintain.
6. • CommentAuthorDeanK
   • CommentTimeMay 20th 2008

    
   "I think part of the problem is when there's a power failure, that they have to be reset. "
   
   from what I know the timing is hard set... not electronically set.
7. •  
     CommentAuthorGrumpy_Old_Guy
   • CommentTimeMay 20th 2008

    
   Nothing to sync or reset at a roundabout!

   Thankful People: StBPegger
8. •  
     CommentAuthorcancelbot
   • CommentTimeMay 21st 2008

    
   Moderator

   Posted By: StBPeggerI just remember hearing/reading that the reason our lights aren't synced is because they're really old and have to be done manually. I certainly hope this is the case, otherwise there has to be some explaining as to why the lights are so bloody ill timed.

   
   
   I spent the long weekend in the Twin Cities, and while I can't say I am a fan of their freeways, I was quite envious of their apparent mastery of traffic light syncing. You could go up and down a major street and more often than not, you would hit a green light. In fact, other than major intersections, it was rare to hit a red.
   
   Contrast that with Winnipeg, where driving in on Pembina you are assured of hitting a red 2 out of 3 times, even at piddling local intersections. One thing I notice they do differently in the Twin Cities is that the major street has much longer green lights than the side street, unlike Winnipeg where major streets will get frequent reds even when there is no one waiting to turn off of the side street. The greens on major routes here are quite often too short, too.

   Thankful People: Zwikster
9. •  
     CommentAuthorStBPegger
   • CommentTimeMay 21st 2008

    
   And wtf happened to route 90/kenaston - wasn't it supposed to be timed? I drove down there yesterday and almost every light was a red. So much for parting the sea shammy :P
10. •  
      CommentAuthorcancelbot
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2008

     
    Moderator
    LET MY PEOPLE GO (a steady 50 kmh down Kenaston)!!!!

    Thankful People: Zwikster
11. • CommentAuthorDeanK
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2008

     
    Kenaston rocked as a way out of the city before they put in all those lights... They never, EVER should have allowed all that development on that road.
12. •  
      CommentAuthorcancelbot
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2008

     
    Moderator
    Meh. I don't mind it the way it is (but then I'm one of those anti-freeway nuts), but I just wish the lights would sync.
    
    However, I do have fond memories circa 1997 of blasting down Kenaston en route to morning classes at UM...ah, the days before red light cameras, photo radar and Kenaston development :)
13. • CommentAuthorDeanK
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2008

     
    Oh I like all the stores together in one bunch like that.. makes for a nice place to go shoppping without running all over the place...
    
    But to basically shut down Kenaston like that? ugg...why bother putting in the underpass by the railyard when you are just going to stop traffic anyway?
14. •  
      CommentAuthorcherenkov
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2008

     
    Service roads are an under-used concept in Winnipeg. You could have one intersection and service roads feeding everything off it.
15. •  
      CommentAuthorgrumpy old man
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2008

     
    Because Winnipeg does not spend the money required to efficiently manage traffic flow we'll be stuck with poorly designed and operated traffic signals.
    
    If we use Kenaston as an example, new technology exists to synch the north/south flow of traffic. It also exists to manage east/west flow. The point here being the north/south lights don't change because they were timed but they would change because they were demanded (sensors under the road bed).
    
    They also should be engineered for maximum flow through at intersections like Corydon and Grant. It seems that too frequent cycling ensures long delays.
    
    Ahhh, I could rant on this for hours...
16. •  
      CommentAuthorGrumpy_Old_Guy
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2008

     
    We don't spend they money on efficient traffic flow, instead we spend extra on gasoline and brake pads negotiating stop and go traffic.
    
    Corydon and Grant: Roundabout ! (Ahhh, I could rant on this for hours...)
17. •  
      CommentAuthorZwikster
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2008

     
    I think this was the sport bar we would go to for pre drinking.
    Pints were only $1 and another night it was only $4 for a large pitcher..place was dead, so it was easy for a few early cheap beers.
    
    Brothers
    430 1st Ave N # 35
    Minneapolis, MN 55401, United States
18. • CommentAuthorWinklovic
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2008

     
    Here's a great site with a good explanation of roundabout design:
    http://www.roundaboutsusa.com/design.html
    
    How about a roundabout at Confusion Corner? Confusion Circle? :)
19. • CommentAuthorMonominto
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2008

     
    The advantage of the roundabout is that there is not really a limit as to how many roads can lead into it: example, 3 in equals 3 out or up to 8 in = 8 out, just takes up more room the more roads there are.
    
    The largest one I've seen is around the Arc du Triumph in Paris, I have NO idea why more vehicles aren't smashed beyond recognition on that one, but they manage to get in, around and out without killing each other! AND, no one stops, ever!
20. •  
      CommentAuthorSputnik
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2008

     

    Posted By: WinklovicHow about a roundabout at Confusion Corner? Confusion Circle? :)

    
    
    Confusion corner would be a prime spot for a traffic circle if it wasn't for the lights on Osborne and Gertrude(?).
    
    If traffic was able to flow freely for at least 500 meters after the traffic circle it would work just fine. Otherwise it will just get terribly backed up and cause even more congestion.