[archited]

Several posters on this site have wondered why Jasper Avenue couldn't have sequenced lights that enable motorists/cyclists to travel at a constance speed and thereby not have to stop at red lights. It is a mathematical impossibility to have two-way traffic sequenced to achieve that outcome. The best that could occur is having sequenced lights in one direction for portions of the cross-town distance at certain times of the day to benefit traffic moving in one direction, say westbound in the evening when people are leaving downtown from about 101street (eastbound traffic from 101 would have the opposite lanes sequenced then); and the opposite in the morning "rush-hour" traffic. Even then, the City blocks are not equal in length and unpredictable traffic snarls can throw sand in the gears of any attempt at a smooth always green ride.

 

[kcantor]

^
While actual free flow - particularly in both directions - is likely not achievable except perhaps for short stretches, weather and road conditions and accidents etc. are ongoing variables that also make it harder to achieve. What can likely be done however is to plan for “half cycle” delays and to use much shorter cycles than Edmonton currently imposes. It’s one thing to wait 20 seconds for a light to change, it’s quite another to wait 90 seconds and that’s even worse for pedestrians who have much shorter “walk times” vs wait times as they need to wait through the full cross street cycle as well as their own “don’t walk” cycle.

https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop08024/chapter6.htm

 

[IanO]

 

[David A]

Several posters on this site have wondered why Jasper Avenue couldn't have sequenced lights that enable motorists/cyclists to travel at a constance speed and thereby not have to stop at red lights. It is a mathematical impossibility to have two-way traffic sequenced to achieve that outcome. The best that could occur is having sequenced lights in one direction for portions of the cross-town distance at certain times of the day to benefit traffic moving in one direction, say westbound in the evening when people are leaving downtown from about 101street (eastbound traffic from 101 would have the opposite lanes sequenced then); and the opposite in the morning "rush-hour" traffic. Even then, the City blocks are not equal in length and unpredictable traffic snarls can throw sand in the gears of any attempt at a smooth always green ride.

Pedestrians have also wondered why they can't have sequenced lights here, but when it comes to priority I suspect the order is as given, motorists first, cyclists second and pedestrians after that.

I realize the inherent conflicts given the different speeds everyone travels at. We don't have a very pedestrian friendly downtown because they at best an after thought or more often just ignored.

 

[TAS]

Pedestrians have also wondered why they can't have sequenced lights here, but when it comes to priority I suspect the order is as given, motorists first, cyclists second and pedestrians after that.

I realize the inherent conflicts given the different speeds everyone travels at. We don't have a very pedestrian friendly downtown because they at best an after thought or more often just ignored.

I wouldn't even include cyclists in your priority list. The city does not want cyclists on Jasper Ave. There is infrastructure for pedestrians and cars, not for bikes on Jasper Ave as the safer option is a block off with protected lanes. Not many cyclists dare to use Jasper so having any consideration for light sequencing for bikes doesn't make sense.

 

[kcantor]

Pedestrians have also wondered why they can't have sequenced lights here, but when it comes to priority I suspect the order is as given, motorists first, cyclists second and pedestrians after that.

I realize the inherent conflicts given the different speeds everyone travels at. We don't have a very pedestrian friendly downtown because they at best an after thought or more often just ignored.

It may not be possible to sequence the lights - particularly in both directions - for either pedestrians or cars BUT shortening the timing of lights (particularly at those stupid scramble intersections) so that cars and pedestrians aren’t sitting or standing for interminable lengths of time before being able to proceed would make the street a better experience for all.

 

[David A]

I wouldn't even include cyclists in your priority list. The city does not want cyclists on Jasper Ave. There is infrastructure for pedestrians and cars, not for bikes on Jasper Ave as the safer option is a block off with protected lanes. Not many cyclists dare to use Jasper so having any consideration for light sequencing for bikes doesn't make sense.

Yes, it is true the bike lanes are north and south of Jasper Avenue. I have seen cyclists from time to time on Jasper Avenue (even have done it myself years ago), but it is not common now.

However, regardless the discussion here and with the city in general seems to revolve around cyclists more than pedestrians downtown.

 

[TAS]

It may not be possible to sequence the lights - particularly in both directions - for either pedestrians or cars BUT shortening the timing of lights (particularly at those stupid scramble intersections) so that cars and pedestrians aren’t sitting or standing for interminable lengths of time before being able to proceed would make the street a better experience for all.

Yes. I'd like to see the length of light cycles addressed better.

 

[The_Cat]

One thing that seems to clog traffic on Jasper Avenue westbound is the parked cars by 100 A Street.

 

[kcantor]

One thing that seems to clog traffic on Jasper Avenue westbound is the parked cars by 100 A Street.

And eastbound between 102 and 101 (along with the ETS timing stop between 98 and 97).

 

[Edmontonmanía]

Has anyone photos of how it looks now the renovated part? For those of us who don't live in Edmonton, please.

 

[Gronk!]

It's been over 2 weeks since they reopened Jasper Ave, but they still haven't bothered replacing the old lights/traffic signals with the new lights/traffic signals. Have they suddenly decided to hibernate for the winter?

View attachment 699909

View attachment 699910


I also noticed that the new lights between 114 St - 117 St are not the same as the new lights that were installed in the 109 St - 114 St section a couple of years ago.

View attachment 699911

View attachment 699912

Someone please tell me they'll fix the outstanding issues from 114 St-117 St this spring?

 

[Tropical]

Has anyone photos of how it looks now the renovated part? For those of us who don't live in Edmonton, please.

I have good news for you. Google Streetview is updated and shows the renovations.

Explore west from here: https://www.google.com/maps/place/1...try=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI2MDMxMC4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw==

 

[constance_chlore]

These arrived in mailboxes a few days ago

 

[archited]

The City has to figure out a way to do more in this regard. They can absolutely leave businesses stranded for very long periods of time leading to failures that might otherwise have succeeded. They should have a temporary "partnership" with businesses affected by the area closures working on incentives to keep the public interest at a high level. The City Administration is/has been very poor at this.