Edmonton Roads

[feepa]

this is rabbit hill road going east on to henday

about 500 meters before: 80km/h sign in yellow

https://www.google.ca/maps/@53.42871...7i13312!8i6656
a bit further along another sign - 100 km/h with plently of room before the actual merge point.

https://www.google.ca/maps/@53.42900...7i13312!8i6656

However, I'm constantly amazed at the amount of people attempting to merge at 75-80 despite traffic doing 95-110 km/h

[craner]

Originally Posted by Hallsy's Toupee

Yellowhead Trail freeway conversion will be taking the first steps in a multi-year project.

Good to hear this is starting to take it's first steps already.
Thanks. 👍

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Acey

Hundreds of new signs have gone up Highway 2, the "KEEP RIGHT AND LET OTHERS PASS" signs which is in addition to the existing "slower traffic keep right" signs.

All that said, the only thing that will actually make a difference is enforcement blitzes.

Our road designs and laws will need to change before the police can do that. I don't think the police can enforce things that aren't illegal, and there's nothing in the Alberta driving guidelines that state which lane you have to drive in. Those signs are just decoration.

Remember, we have no true freeways in Alberta, just big roads. The rules of the road are no different on a rural 2 lane road or an 8 lane 'freeway'. You can drive any vehicle, in any lane, at any speed you like. As far as I know, the only exception is Deerfoot which has a city bylaw banning bicycles and slow moving vehicles.

The other thing of course is that the roads are designed to encourage driving in the wrong lanes - there are left turns off freeways and the number of lanes constantly changes, with the right lane randomly appearing and disappearing. So it's no wonder people just stick in the left lanes.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by feepa

they have these. Doesn't make a difference. Idiots still try to merge 20km/h slower than the speed limit

When I learned to drive, not in Canada, I was taught that it is the responsibility of the merging traffic to get up to highway speed and find a gap in the traffic, and if you screw up it's not the problem of the people on the highway. However in Canada, our annoying 'politeness' means the law is in fact that merging is a 'shared responsibility', which means people have the expectation that the cars on the highway will slow down for them.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Our road designs and laws will need to change before the police can do that. I don't think the police can enforce things that aren't illegal, and there's nothing in the Alberta driving guidelines that state which lane you have to drive in. Those signs are just decoration.

Remember, we have no true freeways in Alberta, just big roads. The rules of the road are no different on a rural 2 lane road or an 8 lane 'freeway'. You can drive any vehicle, in any lane, at any speed you like. As far as I know, the only exception is Deerfoot which has a city bylaw banning bicycles and slow moving vehicles.

The other thing of course is that the roads are designed to encourage driving in the wrong lanes - there are left turns off freeways and the number of lanes constantly changes, with the right lane randomly appearing and disappearing. So it's no wonder people just stick in the left lanes.

Actually, I tell a lie, there is the following paragraph in the handbook:

Passing on a multi-lane
highway

On a multi-lane highway, slower traffic
should use the travel lane furthest to the
right (unless needing the left lane to turn
left). This leaves the left lane available for
drivers of other vehicles for passing.

That's it on multi lane highways though, and this rule is so often flouted and impossible to follow given road design that it would be impossible to enforce.

[the.tru.albertan]

Originally Posted by Acey

The sections where there are 3 lanes on QE2, the slower moving trucks tend to move to the right lane. Yeah they take long to pass, but they follow the rules and aren't really the problem from my perspective.

Actually, the 3 lane portions of QEII now have regulatory signage posting "KEEP RIGHT EXCEPT TO PASS" meaning all traffic is required to keep right unless passing another driver.

Here is a good example. Go to the timeline and view previous years. You will see the sign go from "SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT" to "KEEP RIGHT EXCEPT TO PASS"
https://www.google.ca/maps/@52.35681...2!8i6656?hl=en

To clear up the confusion, there are three KEEP RIGHT signs in use on QEII.
"KEEP RIGHT LET OTHERS PASS" is the newest and was implemented to help educate drivers to move over and let faster traffic use the left lane. A catalyst for this was when that BMW driver split lanes on QEII a couple years ago but was caught on dashcam doing it. AB Transportation started putting those signs up after public reaction.

"SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT" is the green starburst sign that has long been on QEII. There isn't much law behind making someone move to the right tho because it allows traffic at or near the speed limit to remain in the left lane. So technically, it's a useless law because it's irrelevant at or near the limit. You can be in which ever lane you desire. The govs desired outcome was that it would reduce faster traffic from weaving into the left and right lanes while overtaking... not sure if they had that outcome tho.

"KEEP RIGHT EXCEPT TO PASS" are signs that have been around in AB for a while but have recently been installed on 3 lane sections of QEII. They are usually found where there are passing or climbing lanes. You are required to keep right unless passing someone.

[the.tru.albertan]

Originally Posted by milomilo

When I learned to drive, not in Canada, I was taught that it is the responsibility of the merging traffic to get up to highway speed and find a gap in the traffic, and if you screw up it's not the problem of the people on the highway. However in Canada, our annoying 'politeness' means the law is in fact that merging is a 'shared responsibility', which means people have the expectation that the cars on the highway will slow down for them.

It is a shared responsibility yes, but more so on the drivers already on the highway. The story below is about a collision that happened on QEII NB at the Red Deer 32nd Street on ramp in March. The story doesn't go into much detail of what happened but I'm familiar with what happened. A driver was coming down the on-ramp onto QEII NB and other highway traffic remained in the right lane and blocked him from merging. Caused a three vehicle collision. Highway driver was charged.

“Let people merge,” he says. “Let people onto the highway that are there. You don’t have to get in front of them. You can slow down and let them in.” - those words are from the RCMP officer.

https://rdnewsnow.com/2019/03/08/qei...harges-laid-2/

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by the.tru.albertan

It is a shared responsibility yes, but more so on the drivers already on the highway. The story below is about a collision that happened on QEII NB at the Red Deer 32nd Street on ramp in March. The story doesn't go into much detail of what happened but I'm familiar with what happened. A driver was coming down the on-ramp onto QEII NB and other highway traffic remained in the right lane and blocked him from merging. Caused a three vehicle collision. Highway driver was charged.

“Let people merge,” he says. “Let people onto the highway that are there. You don’t have to get in front of them. You can slow down and let them in.” - those words are from the RCMP officer.

https://rdnewsnow.com/2019/03/08/qei...harges-laid-2/

I know what the law is (and obey it), I just don't agree with it.

My opinion on this is that the vehicles on the highway have the responsibility to maintain a safe separation with the vehicles ahead of them - at least 2 seconds. That gives enough room that any car should easily be able to merge in without much impact on the highway traffic. Semis are a different matter, of course, and they have an excuse as to why they might not have reached speed yet.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by the.tru.albertan

Actually, the 3 lane portions of QEII now have regulatory signage posting "KEEP RIGHT EXCEPT TO PASS" meaning all traffic is required to keep right unless passing another driver.

Here is a good example. Go to the timeline and view previous years. You will see the sign go from "SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT" to "KEEP RIGHT EXCEPT TO PASS"
https://www.google.ca/maps/@52.35681...2!8i6656?hl=en

To clear up the confusion, there are three KEEP RIGHT signs in use on QEII.
"KEEP RIGHT LET OTHERS PASS" is the newest and was implemented to help educate drivers to move over and let faster traffic use the left lane. A catalyst for this was when that BMW driver split lanes on QEII a couple years ago but was caught on dashcam doing it. AB Transportation started putting those signs up after public reaction.

"SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT" is the green starburst sign that has long been on QEII. There isn't much law behind making someone move to the right tho because it allows traffic at or near the speed limit to remain in the left lane. So technically, it's a useless law because it's irrelevant at or near the limit. You can be in which ever lane you desire. The govs desired outcome was that it would reduce faster traffic from weaving into the left and right lanes while overtaking... not sure if they had that outcome tho.

"KEEP RIGHT EXCEPT TO PASS" are signs that have been around in AB for a while but have recently been installed on 3 lane sections of QEII. They are usually found where there are passing or climbing lanes. You are required to keep right unless passing someone.

I'm glad they changed this, as you say the old signs used poor terminology.

[Hallsy's Toupee]

Speaking of the QE2, there are no overhead signs for the Hwy 19 and 41 Ave SW interchanges, just exit signs on the right. If I was a new tourist or business traveler coming from the airport to Edmonton, I'd find the lack of overhead signs to be bush league.

[DKaz]

The freeways around Edmonton are amateur hour in a lot of ways, including the Henday and upgraded highways leading up to it. Calgary is a little better but I’m used to the newer Vancouver area freeways which have an American like high design standard to them.

I prefer BC’s new arrow up signage as well.



And BC’s one overhead light per through lane of traffic standard, centred on the lane. You’d think Alberta would adopt it to make it easier to figure out where the lanes are supposed to be.



Maybe because Vancouver and Victoria is so close to Washington State, the people who wrote the road design standards were heavily influenced by the American way of doing things.

[Landlocked]

Originally Posted by feepa

they have these. Doesn't make a difference. Idiots still try to merge 20km/h slower than the speed limit

I guess to be fair, less than half of the drivers on the road seem to know how to use a free flow turn lane, so expecting them to know how to merge on a freeway is expecting too much.

[Hardhatdan]

Originally Posted by DKaz

The freeways around Edmonton are amateur hour in a lot of ways, including the Henday and upgraded highways leading up to it. Calgary is a little better but I’m used to the newer Vancouver area freeways which have an American like high design standard to them.

I prefer BC’s new arrow up signage as well.



And BC’s one overhead light per through lane of traffic standard, centred on the lane. You’d think Alberta would adopt it to make it easier to figure out where the lanes are supposed to be.



Maybe because Vancouver and Victoria is so close to Washington State, the people who wrote the road design standards were heavily influenced by the American way of doing things.

The last thing needed these days is more signs.


I like it in South America or Africa where it's a free for all at most intersections

[240glt]

The freeways around Edmonton are amateur hour in a lot of ways, including the Henday and upgraded highways leading up to it. Calgary is a little better but I’m used to the newer Vancouver area freeways which have an American like high design standard to them.

I can't believe that in Alberta we still have major divided highways like the QE2 and Yellowhead that have at grade intersections where you can left turn right onto the highway or drive straight across it. Now that is bush league. I can't think of a single place in BC that has such poor road infrastructure as that.

[itom 987]

Two lane shit highways still cover most of BC.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by 240glt

I can't believe that in Alberta we still have major divided highways like the QE2 and Yellowhead that have at grade intersections where you can left turn right onto the highway or drive straight across it. Now that is bush league. I can't think of a single place in BC that has such poor road infrastructure as that.

I do agree those divided highways are garbage, but it doesn't seem any worse than BC's version of shitty 4 lane highways:

https://www.google.com/maps/@55.5112...7i13312!8i6656

[the.tru.albertan]

Originally Posted by 240glt

I can't believe that in Alberta we still have major divided highways like the QE2 and Yellowhead that have at grade intersections where you can left turn right onto the highway or drive straight across it. Now that is bush league. I can't think of a single place in BC that has such poor road infrastructure as that.

AB Trans has(had?) a 25 year plan to make QEII at true freeway with no at grade intersections at all. I have almost zero faith that it will ever happen in my lifetime as they are way behind even simple projects like widening in certain areas.

That's what we get with AB Trans.

Now, if you privatized it and tolled users, you'd probably see it become a true freeway in 5 years. Along with widening to 6 and 8 lanes and proper overpasses. It would basically be the 'age of enlightenment' for highway infrastructure in Alberta.

[milomilo]

Yes, if we paid more for the infrastructure we could afford to pay for more infrastructure. Nothing to do with privatization.

[the.tru.albertan]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Yes, if we paid more for the infrastructure we could afford to pay for more infrastructure. Nothing to do with privatization.

Absolutely. But look at the budget... about 75% is taken up by Healthcare and Education. The rest is divided up into a multitude of government programs, one of them being transportation/infrastructure. If you want more money going into the highways, the two big vacuums of money need to stop sucking up so much.

That's the problem with the public approach.

[Hardhatdan]

Originally Posted by the.tru.albertan

Absolutely. But look at the budget... about 75% is taken up by Healthcare and Education. The rest is divided up into a multitude of government programs, one of them being transportation/infrastructure. If you want more money going into the highways, the two big vacuums of money need to stop sucking up so much.

That's the problem with the public approach.

It's not a problem with the public approach it is a demographic issue. We have a young and old population with a gap in the middle due to big boom and bust cycles.
Older people need more medical services, younger people need more schools.
How the money pays for those ultimately comes from the people that live here, either direct to the institution or via taxation. It's only a question of efficieny and desires outcomes.