Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: F-Rated Intersections

  1. #1
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,672

    Default F-Rated Intersections

    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  2. #2

    Default

    4 of the top 20 along the SLRT route.

    I wonder how many will show up in future versions of this report on the new LRT lines.

  3. #3
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,085

    Default

    But zero of them on the Metro line.

  4. #4

    Default

    but zero on the original part of the Capital line... hrmmmm

  5. #5

    Default

    Much better maps accompanying the article here & from a copy of the report here, along with an actual explanation as to what a "F rating" signifies (80 seconds of delay or more).
    Last edited by noodle; 04-04-2018 at 07:56 AM. Reason: Changed link for report from Scribd to CoE's own repository
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  6. #6
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,074

    Default

    “...

    ”Officials could investigate each of those [intersections] further to see if there’s anything to be done, but they’re not planning to do that unless Council gives specific direction, said Ohm.

    ””We’ve got enough to do,” he said.

    ...”

    soooo... apparently we’re too busy planning to do any more planning so just suck it up people?
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  7. #7

    Default

    111/23 ave is past the end of the SLRT, so that's not a major factor, although buses and P&Riders making left turns to access the station might be.

    That23 ave ranks higher on the list than 51ave or university ave suggests to me that maybe LRT isn't the only thing going on at the other ones either.



    That 112 ave and 50th street is included on the list - and that the city was actually looking at widening there makes this look like a joke. It needs to be narrower, not wider, but with more priority on the EB-NB left turn. If this city can't make get 11000 cars per day through the T intersection of a 4-lane road with another 4-lane then there's no hope.
    There can only be one.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    “...

    ”Officials could investigate each of those [intersections] further to see if there’s anything to be done, but they’re not planning to do that unless Council gives specific direction, said Ohm.

    ””We’ve got enough to do,” he said.

    ...”

    soooo... apparently we’re too busy planning to do any more planning so just suck it up people?
    I stopped being surprised at the level of incompetence in the CoE's planning when they used the fact that they've screwed the pooch on other intersections along the 109 St corridor to justify their running of the streetcar through an intersection that's currently rated C/D. Never thought I'd see a City department use its own incompetence as an excuse to avoid improvement out of said incompetence.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    “...

    ”Officials could investigate each of those [intersections] further to see if there’s anything to be done, but they’re not planning to do that unless Council gives specific direction, said Ohm.

    ””We’ve got enough to do,” he said.

    ...”

    soooo... apparently we’re too busy planning to do any more planning so just suck it up people?
    Not saying that whatever they're doing is more important, but 80s is one light cycle in most locations.

    That's really the bare minimum definition of congestion; if the intersection clears every cycle then it's working just fine.
    There can only be one.

  10. #10

    Default

    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  11. #11

    Default

    you dont say that running an LRT at grade through a busy intersection will make it congested!

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    “...

    ”Officials could investigate each of those [intersections] further to see if there’s anything to be done, but they’re not planning to do that unless Council gives specific direction, said Ohm.

    ””We’ve got enough to do,” he said.

    ...”

    soooo... apparently we’re too busy planning to do any more planning so just suck it up people?
    Peter Ohm.

    The guy who planned the Fort Road TOD so so well. Last time I heard it was at least 10 times over budget and 10 years behind.

    The guy who I had to point out that they had not budgeted all the sewer and electrical infrastructure. Also that CN would not let them plan condos within 30 feet of their tracks. The guy who did not anticipate CN required an unbudgeted $6M retaining/sound barrier wall.

    How these egghead keep their job is a mystery to me. Oh yeah, this is the COE.
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 04-04-2018 at 08:30 AM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by trick91 View Post
    you dont say that running an LRT at grade through a busy intersection will make it congested!
    Thank goodness they're "maintaining the urban feel" of that corner, so that everyone can marvel at the Harvey's & Denny's parkings lot & institutional architecture of MacEwan while you sit in traffic
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    “...

    ”Officials could investigate each of those [intersections] further to see if there’s anything to be done, but they’re not planning to do that unless Council gives specific direction, said Ohm.

    ””We’ve got enough to do,” he said.

    ...”

    soooo... apparently we’re too busy planning to do any more planning so just suck it up people?
    Not saying that whatever they're doing is more important, but 80s is one light cycle in most locations.

    That's really the bare minimum definition of congestion; if the intersection clears every cycle then it's working just fine.
    the f rating means 80 seconds, or longer. (The longer part reaching towards infinity)

  15. #15

    Default Calculated Level of Service

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post

    Not saying that whatever they're doing is more important, but 80s is one light cycle in most locations.

    That's really the bare minimum definition of congestion; if the intersection clears every cycle then it's working just fine.
    The way the data is presented makes you think that the wait times at the intersections were actually measured. Not so, it is some sort of calculation.

    From the report:
    "Level of Service is calculated as a flow volume to capacity ratio, or the volume of trafficdivided by the design capacity (in volume) of an intersection based on a number offactors. Level of Service at intersections is translated into a standardized rating of Athrough F, with A representing nearly free flow traffic at or above the speed limit, and Frepresenting delays of more than 80 seconds to traffic flow."

    Note that design capacity is also a calculation and all these calculations (like statistics) can be manipulated to suit the required outcome.

    Run a LRT across an intersection that reduces the actual capacity and increases wait time? Just recalculate the design capacity to a lower value.

  16. #16
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,594

    Default

    Slightly amusing that an 81 second driving delay warrants this type of response/reporting, but standing at a crosswalk for 3+ minutes is just the norm in a lot of places even with pedestrian controlled lights.

    Was there any mention of the pedestrians crossing those F-rated intersections? Any timings? Anything?

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Channing View Post
    But zero of them on the Metro line.
    No, not on the current Metro Line. That'll change when (if ever) Metro goes through 127 St/153 Ave. I have zero hope for any grade separation there, despite the ideas for trenched sections on the extension that were floated couple months ago. There won't be money for it.

  18. #18

    Default

    Wow, that is a horrible definition. How can you possibly convert a ratio into a time delay?

    I would like to see these intersections actually measured, I'm pretty sure you would get completely different results.
    There can only be one.

  19. #19

    Default

    It's not like this one calculated measure is considered in a vacuum.

    https://www.edmonton.ca/transportati...tion-data.aspx

    Some data is measured, other is derived/calculated.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cumberland View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Channing View Post
    But zero of them on the Metro line.
    No, not on the current Metro Line. That'll change when (if ever) Metro goes through 127 St/153 Ave. I have zero hope for any grade separation there, despite the ideas for trenched sections on the extension that were floated couple months ago. There won't be money for it.
    Maybe they're discounting the time that the light is actually red? if you're only counting the time to clear once it's green then metro line intersections don't look that bad.
    There can only be one.

  21. #21

    Default

    Keep in mind the following:

    Intersection signal operations to support the Level of Service Assessment summary are analyzed ona rotating four year cycle for different sectors of the city.
    Some of the data is 4 years old, depending on the schedule.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  22. #22
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,447

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    Maybe they're discounting the time that the light is actually red? if you're only counting the time to clear once it's green then metro line intersections don't look that bad.
    That's it! We'll just ignore the fact that our terrible signal programming has the intersection completely unused by any vehicles, pedestrians or LRT trains for up to a minute, and focus on the fact that most traffic does eventually get through, most of the time.

  23. #23
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,672

    Default

    I think any intersection that's an F-rated intersection should have video cameras installed so the lights can be varied.

    Also, when I worked at the University, the right turn off of Whyte (westbound) onto 112 Street was slowed significantly when a loading truck was parked there.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •