[policyenthusiast]

Actually, this works fine. You’re right that within the roundabout, drivers in the right lane within the roundabout continuing past an exit have to yield to traffic in the left lane exiting the roundabout. However, it looks like drivers in the outer lane won’t be allowed to driver past the second exit. Hence, they only yield to inner-lane traffic when entering the roundabout (where they’d normally have to yield anyway).

Yes, but inner-lane traffic exiting cuts across the direction of outer-lane traffic going through. That's what I'm describing.

In a conventional roundabout, you yield at the entrance to the intersection then you can proceed as normal. In a "turbo roundabout" as Ian called it, the right lane has to yield when entering, then yield a second time to inner lane traffic leaving through the first exit. Many drivers don't understand that they need to. I'm not sure if it's faster or not, but it definitely seems more likely to cause accidents.

Yield points in pink.

 

[BrettB]

This looks like it operates how roundabouts were built for years in Edmonton, including 142 St and 87 Ave and so many others that have since been removed. 2 lanes in, 2 lanes out. Not sure what the issue is.

I'm more concerned with the lack of a safe way for cyclists to navigate the circle.

 

[The_Cat]

Buses travelled on the right lane, even if was a left turn. This gives other vehicles incentive to break these rules.

 

[ADob]

Roundabouts are objectively the safest form of intersection, and as soon as they try to "dumb them down" they make them far more confusing. On a related note, if they're going to chew up an intersection to make a roundabout, couldn't they make it somewhere with higher traffic? It seems like they chose this location at random.
View attachment 657449

The problem with the one on 118 ave/101 st is that it doesn't function like a proper traffic circle. I have zero problems with those; they mostly make sense and are clear. This one is a half-circle/half-intersection and 87.43% of the users have no clue how to treat it. I rarely ever see people change lanes in the middle of a traffic circle, but they do it here all the damn time. Mainly, I think, because it isn't acting like an actual traffic circle and nobody knows what to do.

 

[policyenthusiast]

The problem with the one on 118 ave/101 st is that it doesn't function like a proper traffic circle. I have zero problems with those; they mostly make sense and are clear. This one is a half-circle/half-intersection and 87.43% of the users have no clue what to do. I rarely ever see people change lanes in the middle of a traffic circle, but they do it here all the damn time. Mainly, I think, because it isn't acting like an actual traffic circle and nobody knows what to do.

Guilty as charged, they tried to dumb down the roundabout and I have no idea how it's supposed to work. This, the Groat/118th "roundabout" and the abhorrent traffic "control" across from the legislature/high level bridge (below) are all headache-inducing, even for non-tourists.

 

[northlands]

the right lane has to yield when entering, then yield a second time to inner lane traffic leaving through the first exit. Many drivers don't understand that they need to. I'm not sure if it's faster or not, but it definitely seems more likely to cause accidents.

In theory, there should never be the second yield. As long as a right lane driver going to the second exit yields to oncoming traffic like they're in the left lane, they should never have to yield a second time within the circle.

 

[yeggator]

Yes, but inner-lane traffic exiting cuts across the direction of outer-lane traffic going through. That's what I'm describing.

In a conventional roundabout, you yield at the entrance to the intersection then you can proceed as normal. In a "turbo roundabout" as Ian called it, the right lane has to yield when entering, then yield a second time to inner lane traffic leaving through the first exit. Many drivers don't understand that they need to. I'm not sure if it's faster or not, but it definitely seems more likely to cause accidents.
View attachment 657458
Yield points in pink.

Technically, you’re right. In practice, though, that second yield would be heeded at the same time as the first yield before a car enters the roundabout.

 

[dkazzed]

I just choose to be safe and only enter the roundabout when both lanes are clear, whether I'm in the inside or outside lane.

 

[JuliallThat]

The problem with the one on 118 ave/101 st is that it doesn't function like a proper traffic circle. I have zero problems with those; they mostly make sense and are clear. This one is a half-circle/half-intersection and 87.43% of the users have no clue how to treat it. I rarely ever see people change lanes in the middle of a traffic circle, but they do it here all the damn time. Mainly, I think, because it isn't acting like an actual traffic circle and nobody knows what to do.

No spot in the city feels more risky to drive through than that stupid ovalbout, and I find normal roundabouts to be very easy and work just fine, so that's not my concern.
There's too many movements that are unclear, there's all these ramps and cross streets and roads that approach and exit in a straight line so some don't slow down, ignore the yield or don't even know it's there.
Why it isn't a priority to rebuild is baffling to me. A normal roundabout would be fine.

 

[mcr]

The problem with the one on 118 ave/101 st is that it doesn't function like a proper traffic circle. I have zero problems with those; they mostly make sense and are clear. This one is a half-circle/half-intersection and 87.43% of the users have no clue how to treat it. I rarely ever see people change lanes in the middle of a traffic circle, but they do it here all the damn time. Mainly, I think, because it isn't acting like an actual traffic circle and nobody knows what to do.

Yup, it's just awful. No clear lane markings in it half the time, come from 118 Ave WB you... kinda have a lane, but not really? The whole 101 St / 118 Ave portion is a total cluster with 3 lanes all of a sudden, with a few of them becoming turning lanes once you hit 118 Ave / 97 St. I avoid it as much as possible

 

[ADob]

My husband works at NAIT and if I pick him up, we end up doing all sorts of shenanigans to avoid that ovalbout (great name, btw, @JuliallThat !), including scooting through the residential neighbourhoods. It is vile. Would 311 be a valid way to complain? Or is there a better way to let the City know?

 

[policyenthusiast]

My husband works at NAIT and if I pick him up, we end up doing all sorts of shenanigans to avoid that ovalbout (great name, btw, @JuliallThat !), including scooting through the residential neighbourhoods. It is vile. Would 311 be a valid way to complain? Or is there a better way to let the City know?

311 is a good catch-all in the absence of a specific public engagement initative from the City. They generally send all 311 tickets to the appropriate teams.

 

[The_Cat]

I don’t know if the 118/101/Princess Elizabeth traffic circle can be changed. There are residential streets going north and a strip mall on the south side. Three roads mostly merge onto 118 Avenue. It could be even more tricky with a BRT route.

 

[ADob]

Then maybe this one should get some traffic lights? The Groat one got lights but I don't really understand why, since it was never really problematic. This one, however, could only be improved with some clear signalization. Or an out of control bulldozer...

 

[JuliallThat]

I don’t know if the 118/101/Princess Elizabeth traffic circle can be changed. There are residential streets going north and a strip mall on the south side. Three roads mostly merge onto 118 Avenue. It could be even more tricky with a BRT route.

Since it's so long there's plenty of space to reduce the oval-ness of it and turn it into a more normal roundabout with rational approach angles which would be fine. Or a signalized intersection.