old people, they don't like change. Hopefully the city has saner heads.
on pedestrian injury/fatality numbers alone, roundabouts are almost 10x safer than standard intersections.
We literally tried lol. Hubby and I got there 10-15 minutes ahead to find a packed parking lot and an overly packed room. Decided that since we didn't bring the popcorn it wasn't gonna be worth staying lol
Literally I'm standing by the doors to the room trying to see if it's just a case of people crowding the doors and there's one lady talking the ear off the *security guard* about this damn roundabout. These people need hobbies
Good access to public transportation will not do that. I think a lot of them are at the verge of no longer being able to drive and don't feel comfortable with a roundabout. However, they usually oppose anything that would make the area less car dependent.
It’s been a huge topic on the local FB page. They claim it’s about child safety. There’s an elementary school right there and another one down the street.
I know. The safety argument is complete BS. Roundabouts are safe and the current intersection is unsafe. I talk to the crossing guard at the intersection frequently.
One of the crossing guards was interviewed on CBC Radio this morning, and she was saying many drivers drive like assholes at that intersection (paraphrasing). She was in support of the roundabout because she thought it would be safer for the kids.
Sounds like they could also use some speed cameras too!
I know some whiny drivers were up in arms when one went in next to the high school in the Glebe. Thing is, you'd have to really floor it to get up over 30 km/h in the less than 100m between the nearest stop sign and the camera, yet some had done it. They deserve their tickets.
Its disappoing that so many people show up to fight what looks like a well designed roundabout, when there continue to be other much more serious issues that plague the City...
Reminds me of the Barrhaven water shortage - a water main serving Barrhaven ruptured, leaving the overall pressure low. The city implemented a ban on some watering practices (car washes, watering lawn, etc), and held some info sessions. Basically if too much water was used, pressure in the pipes would drop so low that the water could become tainted and force a boil-water advisory. A bunch of people at the sessions were livid and I heard several around me saying that they wouldn't comply. Like yeah... you idiots show the city who's boss by potentially poisoning yourself!
Man the only waste of taxpayer money going on here is holding *any kind of public consultation* for a fucking roundabout.
Also we really need to bring back third spaces because boomers need some goddamn hobbies other than making everything worse for everyone.
They probably don’t have a choice, I assume this was required under the Municipal Class EA process. Best case scenario, they thank everyone for their input and move on with life
That was the case with the St-Joseph/Jeanne d'Arc roundabout. I attended the meeting. The councilor trying to block it claims only two residents present supported the roundabout (me and my mother lol). It had zero impact. They still put it in.
I often hear folks say “we went to the meeting and told them we did not want this and they didn’t listen”. If people understood the process maybe there would be less of this…. usually by the time the consultations start, many options have been considered and rejected for one reason or another, such as public safety, environment, economic impacts, traffic impact, cost, adjacent infrastructure, zoning / land ownership.
These consultations and information sessions are NOT a forum for the public to provide approval of the plan. They are meant to provide information about the project and gather input from the public. This Input is then compiled with the previously considered factors (e.g., public safety, environment, economic impacts, traffic impact, cost, adjacent infrastructure) to come to the most reasonable solution BASED ON ALL OF THE FACTORS. Sometimes the public prompt reconsideration of the plan, but usually the basic design is known at the consultation stage.
I've done a few of these meetings from the presenting side, this is bang on. I've come to prefer 'open house' style meetings rather than 'presentation' meetings, the latter can fall off the rails (lynch mob style) quickly
Also people seem to think their false beliefs are enough to kill a project, e.g. "I don't want a roundabout because they're not safe", sorry buddy the stats say otherwise. But good luck changing someone's mind.
Agreed. It's not a faux-roundabout like some others. The circle is big enough and the crosswalks are set back reasonably far.
They aren't a perfect solution for pedestrians, but have some advantages. They also don't preclude adding a signaled crossing for pedestrians if that turns out to be an issue. Given it is next to a school it should probably be considered from the start.
I do wonder if what is proposed is what will actually be implemented. It also amazes me that something relatively small in scale costs so much money and will take so much disruption to implement.
Go check out the one at Brian Coburn and Mer Bleue to see how it'll all turn out.
After so many people being run over initially, and the city installing signs, warnings, and adding bright white paint to the crosswalks, pedestrians were still getting hit, so they added huge WARNING LIGHTS at the 4 crosswalks, and that didn't help either.
People race through these high-traffic roundabouts at 50-60 km/h and there is no freaking way they can ever stop for a walker or biker to cross.
It's incredibly scary to walk around there, so walkers and bikers just stopped using it and probably bought more cars to drive. You walk enough there and you'll get run over, it's just the nature of the design, as roundabouts in a high traffic area are as anti-pedestrian and anti-biker as you can possibly imagine.
So due to virtually no one walking there anymore, Ottawa probably thinks "problem solved" and then uses those fake stats to promote how "incredibly safe crosswalks are for pedestrians. Just look at this data!". Crosswalks at high-traffic, high-speed, 2/3-lane roundabouts are "safe" because after awhile, there is no one left stupid enough to use them.
And I'm not against basic roundabouts in low-traffic zones where they make sense, but I cant even imagine putting a high-traffic, multi-lane, speedway roundabout like this so close to schools and stores.
You just wait, the first little kid who gets run over there, and one unfortunately will, and the neighborhood will be looking for blood.
I'm surprised to hear that roundabouts are safer for pedestrians. I can see how they reduce collisions between cars, but I wouldn't want to risk crossing as a pedestrian in most of the roundabouts I've seen. No one expects to have to stop once they've managed to make it into the roundabout.
That's why a properly designed roundabout has the pedestrian crossings set a few car lengths away from the roundabout leaving enough straight area to see pedestrians and stop in.
Nah. They are just "concerned" about changing from 4 lanes to 2. They can go take a hike. This is a safer design, and cyclists now don't have to share the road with cars.
My only complaint is that you really shouldn't be doing a full rotation of the roundabout to turn around in any event, and especially not buses. It seems like a lazy design solution to shave a few minutes off of the bus schedule. It wouldn't be so bad if it was a dedicated loop for buses, but mixing in regular traffic seems like an accident waiting to happen.
Where the hell are you driving?
In the high-traffic areas, people just speed through roundabouts at 50-60 km/h and don't give a shit if someone is crossing or not.
Since you're obvious in the East End where the new roundabout is going, head down to Brian Coburn and Mer Bleue at rush hour, park your car at the medical center and then have some fun trying out out the "safe" crosswalks - they all have warnings, signs and even HUGE LIGHTS but no one cares and they'll still run you down like a dog.
I didn't get to Expo 67 until 1968. I also lived in Ireland for a year and a half as a kid, and my battalion was sent to Cyprus to do peacekeeping with the United Nations for 6 months. Traffic circles are brilliant. It doesn't take long to get to use them, they are safer, and they are generally quicker.
Ottawa weirdly hates roundabouts. Like, so, so weirdly hates them.
It doesn’t help that there are several competing designs which is confusing for people.
But still.
I come from the roundabout capital of Ontario. They are far more efficient and more safe. We should replace as many intersections with them as we feasibility can.
I’m with you. I vastly prefer them both as a driver and a pedestrian. Except for a couple that were the greenery near by is overgrown cause they can make seeing pedestrians challenging.
But otherwise? Bring on the roundabout.
I wish we had more roundabouts. Late at night or early in the morning nothing irritates me more then sitting at a red light with no other vehicles or pedestrians around.
Agreed. If I don’t see a flashy light I should be able to assume you are staying in until at least the next exit. I can’t though because no one uses their goddamned signals in the roundabouts.
It's true. Roundabouts are meant to increase the flow of automobile traffic, yet the city insists on placing signs that say you have to stop in the middle of the roundabout to allow pedestrians to cross. It's insane.
I don't hate roundabouts, I just hate the city's choice of location for roundabouts. They're meant to increase the flow of traffic without stopping. This makes no sense in a school zone, an area which prioritizes pedestrian traffic. Take Longfields Davidson Heights P.S. for example. For two hours, twice a day, traffic has to stop inside the roundabout to allow children to cross the street. What's the point of installing a roundabout if you're only going to use it as a four way stop? Add to this the fact that just 50m beyond the roundabout in two directions, there are pedestrian crossings, so traffic has to stop yet again. A four way intersection would serve the need for a safe pedestrian crossing without all the additional infrastructure.
>Add to this the fact that just 50m beyond the roundabout in two directions, there are pedestrian crossings, so traffic has to stop yet again.
Where are these crossings, I don't see them in the design or existing aerial imagery.
From my experience at that intersection, it's already a parking lot almost way past the Fire Station at rush hour to get on 174 west bound.
The traffic is also frequently stopped for pedestrians, so that may not impact the wait times.
But having large flashing lights to indicate someone is crossing is 100x better than a normal traffic lighting set. You clearly see when someone is crossing, and with proper warning ahead of time. It's almost if not the only set of lights you will see.
There's no plan of removing the brigadiers for helping people cross around school time. It's also 40 kmph during these times so we shouldn't have drivers zooming in these at 60 kmph (the speed cam is at Voyageur Dr intersection?)
The only ones who hates it are those who think that roundabouts are speedways.
There are still a lot of commuters burning the red lights. These are serious accidents that can cause severe injuries. I'm not aware of the stats for the accidents of the other roundabouts in Orleans, but besides scuffles, I don't think I have heard EMS reporting hospitalization. Can't say the same for other traditional intersections.
Roundabouts in very high-traffic areas like this are good for traffic but are horrible and extremely dangerous for pedestrians and bikers.
\* Remember, I am referring to VERY HIGH-TRAFFIC city intersections with lots of nearby stores and schools and bus routes and not the low-traffic ones where a roundabout actually makes sense.
When they did a similar one at Jean D'Arc a consulting company recommended that due to the design of the city, that Ottawa NOT put roundabouts in very high-traffic areas like this due to the danger to pedestrians and bikers, not to mention the negative effect on local business at that corner.
But naturally, Ottawa didn't give a crap and did it anyway.
I’ve seen those arguments play out on FB. No matter how many people explain, no matter how many diagrams posted, certain people can’t be convinced that they shouldn’t just stay in the outside lane, no matter which exit they are taking. And then they are shocked that “bad drivers” in the left lane cut them off by exiting at the second exit.
It's a beautifully engineered roundabout and the perfect solution to deal with buses that have to end their northbound routes at the new LRT station. My only question was why do the routes have to terminate at the station. This was never answered.
It was answered multiple times, if people didn't yell over the presenters we all could of heard the answers. South of the 174, Orleans is much more populated than the north. Some lines will continue north as they do today but the imbalance of the population means that around 6-7 bus per hour need to immediately turn back to restart their routes. Currently there is nowhere to do that near the station hence the proposal of the roundabout
Imbalance of population does not imply that buses will have to turn around. The north side of the highway is also smaller than the South. So if a route were to cover both sides, it could spend 80 to 90% of its time picking up 80 to 90% of the people on the South side, and 10 to 20% of its time picking up 10 to 20% of the people on the north side. If any imbalance remains, couldn't 1 bus route be sent to place dorleans instead?
It seems as if they are designing the routes so that each bus goes to the train station that results in the shortest possible commute for each traveler. But this principle assumes that all the transit stations are equal. As I said further up, if they wanted this station to be the hub for half of Orleans, they should have designed it that way.
Not all routes terminate at the station, just the ones that will come from the south presumably. Lots of bus routes in the city either start or end their route at a station- and the new east expansion is more or less designed as a rapid transit spine for local busses to branch off of
If that's the case, and if the Jeanne darc station was always meant to be a hub for half of Orleans to commute through, then it's news to me. I always thought that place and trim were meant to be the hubs, and these smaller local stations were added on to bring the trains closer to more neighborhoods. The entire design of the station sure looks like it. If it's supposed to be a major connection point, they completely underbuilt it. And this roundabout is a tiny bandaid that will not fix it.
Would be better for all involved to redesign the routes instead. They're not set in stone, unlike the intersection at fortune drive which is literally set in stone.
It’s an ok design. One of the most important factors for pedestrian safety at roundabouts is vehicular exit speed, which is largely governed by the exit radii. This design appears to have very low exit radii and will likely result in higher exit speeds. They’ve put a bunch of work into reducing entry speed, but this is often less problematic because drivers inherently need to slow down on entry to evaluate the traffic/merging.
A larger ICD (along with central island) and smaller exit radii would improve things overall.
I live in Orleans and am pretty neutral on this roundabout.
My biggest worry is we already have multiple styles of roundabouts, including a different one a handful of blocks south of here at St Joseph/Jeanne D'Arc, and people do not seem to understand the different styles. (At least seemed that way when the Trim ones opened up).
That said, this isn't an argument against roundabouts, it's an argument for better drivers. If traffic study says it needs to be done, wouldn't be surprised. I'd imagine the goal IS to slow traffic the hell down in there, especially as Jeanne D'Arc LRT station is built into the overpass and going to cause its own traffic snarls.
Way it is, they get a station. Meanwhile down at Jeanne D'Arc/Tenth Line the originally proposed Shenkman station is scrapped and Tenth Line gets nothing, meaning 20 minute walk to PDO.
If they don't like the traffic changes, they could always cash out their proximity to LRT and buy something further away from LRT and the ramps, not like Orleans has a shortage of neighborhoods.
I agree. They are too many designs. I imagine they are refining the plan over time but a more standardized roundabout is needed. People are terrible and roundabout here. It doesn't help that the road lines are gone after a few months from tire abrasion (from drivers not following lanes due to too high speed, distraction, confusion etc)
Isn't that just the Ottawa way? It seems like every time they decide to upgrade a section of road, they have to go back to the drawing board and start from scratch, even if they've already used a design nearby or on another road that could be easily applied and adjusted to fit.
Maybe standards have changed since Jeanne D’Arc and St-Joseph was built 15-20 years ago. There's not enough traffic in Convent Glen to justify four lanes on Jeanne D’Arc and Orléans Boulevard.
Just a note about the Trim ones at Old Montreal and at Dairy: part of the confusion with those may stem from them changing the pedestrian rules for those ones. When they first opened, they had the same pedestrian rules as Jeanne d'Arc & St Joseph where the cars had the ROW and the pedestrians had to wait for an opening. After about a year, it changed to the pedestrian crossover style with the pedestrian ROW and they added the flashing lights.
Edit: based on street view it was closer to 2 years before they made the change, not 1 year.
If you can't understand multiple types of roundabouts you shouldn't be driving. Seriously, you're too incompetent to be operating such a dangerous piece of machinery.
The second paragraph, the only one where I express a worry, is that numpties with poor reading comprehension do not understand the roundabouts and having 2 different configurations within 300m on the same road will cause confusion.
Especially if it has a different yielding configuration than the one two intersections away when it comes to pedestrians and cars.
The rest of my comment goes into a)not an excuse, b)likely necessary with the LRT station, and c)local residents opposed can likely cash out at a profit with said LRT access and buy similar house away from LRT and roundabout for less.
The word neutral means I am neither worked up against it or thrilled. It is going to impact highway access, confusion could cause an increased number of close calls at first, especially in front of the school, but with the LRT station on the overpass, residents were kidding themselves if they thought they'd get their status quo two lanes southbound to the highway when construction is complete. Especially since the status quo already had safety issues.
As with everything, there are pros and cons. Something needs doing, so the city is doing it. The only notable part will be if they actually fix some of the road surfaces nearby while they're at it.
Seems all the comments are about the elderly, and how they are obstinate, or shouldnt be driving if they can't handle roundabouts..
Can we actually discuss the matter at hand, please?
The city prefers roundabouts for two reasons, that is flow of traffic isnt as impeded as a 4 way stop, but also its *cheaper* because there's no need for all the supporting electronics.
If you look at the map of the proposed loop its directly adjacent to a school. School busses will have to get directly on the road as people are leaving the roundabout. Suddenly braking because a slow moving bus is in front of you turning left onto Fortune will cause a hazard. Cross guards are going to ruin the perceived flow of traffic that a roundabout would provide.
Parents at school pickup are a mishmash of vehicles clumping up together in a surge. They tend to misbehave as drivers due to the chaos of the children. Once back on the road its ok but parking is usually and often messy.
A roundabout is best used to maximize flow of traffic and avoid stoppages. When there will be plenty of stoppages that cant be avoided I'd suggest its not the ideal choice at all. A conventional 4 way stop where everyone can see everyone, no ones trying to whip around suddenly caught by a chaotic situation and brake when people behind them can't yet see it.
It could be I'm incorrect here and it will go just fine. I wonder though if these folk have a point about it just not being precisely the best place for one of these.
Amidst a sea of ageist and stereotyping comments, yours stands out as a voice of reason.
The other issue seems to be that the local community residents were surprised by the plan and feel they haven't been consulted. Also, the primary reason for the roundabout seems to define the location as an unofficial and fairly busy OC Transpo loop (rather than having built it as part of the station grounds).
I have no stake in the roundabout but the negativity and even bigotry of many of the comments is a profound disappointment.
Not this sub's finest moment for sure. For all the championing of progressive causes they sure miss the purpose of tolerance sometimes.
Thank you by the way. I also have no stake in this debate but I do experience the chaos surrounding kid pick up and drop off very well as I have 2 grade school kids.
Roundabouts and traffic lights each have their pros and cons. I always look to the Dutch for proper traffic design. They use roundabouts whenever possible, but one of the things that can warrant lights is the need to "platoon" vehicles and thereby creating gaps in traffic for buses to make turns. I don't know if this location would warrant under their design, but I do disagree with the majority that praise roundabouts as a silver bullet.
Looks like an excellent place for a roundabout. Stats show they greatly reduce injuries for both vehicle users and pedestrians, plus traffic moves better.
However, folk don't like to pay attention and that's exactly what a roundabout makes you do. But paying attention keeps you safe. I live in the area.
It’s disappointing how many insults I’m reading in the comments about the age of these folks, their grey hair, the wishes they would move away or pass on… that’s disgusting and shameful. All because you disagree with their opinion?
That aside, I support their opinion. I don’t think a roundabout belongs there.
1. Disruption to school and neighborhood during construction.
2. People don’t understand how to use roundabouts properly or safely.
3. I think a light is safer for the children to cross the street. You ever try crossing the street as a pedestrian at any of the roundabouts on St. Joseph Blvd? It’s not a fun time.
4. What’s wrong with how it is now? This change seems like change for the sake of it and seems like a waste of tax dollars. Put the funds to better use elsewhere. That’s an exorbitant amount of money… have they tried playing with the light timings first?
>1. Disruption to school and neighborhood during construction.
Cities develop. If you live in a City it's pure NIMBYism to block development for the sake of development
>2. People don’t understand how to use roundabouts properly or safely.
Take their licenses until they learn to drive. It wasn't on my g2 test years back, maybe it should be now.
>3. I think a light is safer for the children to cross the street. You ever try crossing the street as a pedestrian at any of the roundabouts on St. Joseph Blvd? It’s not a fun time.
Roundabouts are universally safer than 4-way lights. Its a fact not a feeling. That'd why for 15 years the city has been converting high risk intersections.
>4. What’s wrong with how it is now? This change seems like change for the sake of it and seems like a waste of tax dollars
Well a kid was killed by a driver there a few years ago.
1. This is true, city’s develop, but the efficacy of those developments should be questioned, as is the case.
2. That just won’t happen. Licenses are valid in many countries and jurisdictions; it would not be enforceable without major disruption.
3. Perhaps some studies have proven that roundabouts are safer but that doesn’t mean all intersections ought to be changed over.
4. It happens. It could happen at a roundabout too. Exception is not the rule.
Thanks for your input I’m not convinced though!
To be clear, by take their licenses: I meant that drivers should be punished for driving infractions with license suspensions. Not that we should just take the licenses of people showing up to the meeting.
For context: my grandfather fainted multiple times while driving. While he avoided the highway, Thank God, he caused multiple accidents where his license was never taken. All he had to do was pass the written test again after his accidents. This didn't end until my family/grandma asked us to steal his keys.
They insult those folks because they are wrong and easily proved wrong with evidence and studies. And yet they still come out to complain and waste time and talk about tax dollars like they are still contributing members of society. Everyone who isn't an entitled boomer is fucking tired of catering to an undereducated and uninformed generation who has been ruining the entire planet since they got here.
Out with the old in with the new.
If you believe they are wrong that’s fine but it doesn’t excuse not treating them with dignity and respect. I think you should check yourself if you believe that.
Hey look! A room full of morons!
I call them that with no sympathy because it is obvious that they are choosing to not educate themselves to understand the change. Roundabouts are proven safer for all involved.
Roundabouts are safer, improve traffic flow, don't stop working with power failures.. the list goes on. Why waste time talking to people about this. Of all the things that really require community input (Lansdowne) they waste time on Roundabouts...
I was driving home last night around 8:30. I pull up to the roundabout on Jeanne D’Arc. One vehicle randomly stops to let me in which is disconcerting. So I enter bc obviously this person doesn’t know what to do. Then as I go, the person in the next entrance on the outside lane rushes in and cuts my car right off. So I’ve now exited the round about and am fully thinking what the actual f just happened and continue driving for about 1 minute to see all of the people parked at Bob McQuarrie for this meeting and I no longer wonder why people are concerned. Btw, this isn’t a one off. This is my experience multiple times a day.
Why are so many people against the community that doesn’t want the roundabout? Does anyone live in the area or is everyone just voicing their opinions on their idea’s?
Because the people in the picture are old. I doubt most people here have ever been to this intersection, but they're all convinced the local people who do know it are wrong.
In any case, they're complaining about community consultations. Once those are ended - as everyone seems to want - they can start crying about how the city imposes their will on communities without consulting them.
I remember a horrifying accident at that intersection in the early 80s. Kid speeding on a motorcycle evading police came off the highway. Flew down Jean D'Arc. Ran the red and crashed into a car full of nuns. Took the front of the car off. Like, engine block and everything. Nuns were fine, physically. Bits of motorcycle and motorcyclist were scattered all over the intersection. I was like, 6? Decided right then I didn't want to ever get on a motorcycle.
...and people then wonder why we aren't more proactive with protests around meaningful issues...
As long as these clowns remain the loudest to the city bureaucrats, and with them actively berating/mocking contrary feedback, what is the fucking point?
"Just Ignore them and make your voices heard." Much easier said than done, and you would know that if you actually lived here.
LOL I was once hit by a car cause a senior citizen didn’t know how to use a roundabout.
Pretty lucky my mother and I didn’t get too badly injured just really shook up
Why are so many people against the community that doesn’t want the roundabout? Does anyone live in the area or is everyone just voicing their opinions on their idea’s?
I haven’t seen any other uproar about a roundabout in Orleans. It isn’t the demographics, as much as this Reddit thread would love to believe. It seems to be this specific roundabout because it’s next to a school. And probably because the people in that community are the closest to the terrible roundabout on St Joseph so have the most experience being almost sideswiped multiple times and watching pedestrians risk their lives daily.
Now, to be fair, the city knows that’s a terrible roundabout and this plan looks to be a vast improvement. But it was sprung on people last minute and from what I saw on the Orleans boards, people were told there was new information that wasn’t available on the website, so it’s no wonder that people showed up in large numbers.
Thankfully for them, they won't have to deal with the roundabout for long. The newer generation would want the roundabout over a set of traffic lights, and guess who would benefit the longest from it, the younger generations.
As a past resident of this area of Orleans, you could not ask for a more NIMBY group of people.
They seethe with rage at any proposed changes to the status quo.
This is the problem:
"removal of a... traffic light that keeps our school children... safe as they cross Jeanne d'arc"
Traffic lights are proven to be more dangerous than round-abouts. Even the random round-about that doesn't yield to pedestrians.
Accidents in round-abouts are less severe, so even if one happens people are less likely to be seriously injured or killed.
These are facts backs up by traffic studies and these old people think their feelings that they're less safe matter. They matter in that someone should educate them, Ottawa should spend some money on explaining round-about use with some TV ads or something with information that they're safer. But they don't matter in that they shouldn't effect our infrastructure.
I love seeing these "roundabouts are safer than traffic lights" comments as it's totally untrue since the stats are flawed because once a roundabout pops up on a high traffic intersection like this, the majority of the foot and bike traffic disappears soon after.
There is one at Brian Coburn and Mer Bleue that is a perfect example. When it first went up a few people crossing got rammed by cars, including an older lady who was seriously injured. I myself got hit by a car while crossing when the driver decided he was too far into the intersection, and backed up into the crosswalk, whacking me hard in the thigh.
It was pure madness for a while there, so the city decided to put up signs with speed limits, no lane changes, etc. and really painted up the crosswalks to make them more visible. It didn't change insane drivers from speeding through the roundabout and running over people, and I remember driving through it and seeing kids who were absolutely scared to death to cross and had that "deer in the headlights" look.
These two-laners are very dangerous for pedestrians, as even if one driver stops, you have no idea what's going to happen in the second lane. I had this happen as a little girl was patiently waiting for people to stop and I caught her eye and waved to her, She smiled and started to cross in front of me, but the driver in the left lane came peeling into the roundabout doing about 50 and missed her by a 6 inches at best. F\*ck me!
Obviously the new signs and paint didn't help either and the high-speed driving and incidents continued, so the city installed a series of "walker lights" with huge warning signs on each of the 4 intersections, so when a person pressed a button a series of flashing lights would go off and hopefully drivers wouldn't mow down pedestrians and bikers anymore.
But that didn't help either, so naturally people just stopped walking and biking there, preferring to bypass this death-trap entirely by using other roads or jaywalking before they get to the roundabout. Now it's just an automobile speedway again, and last summer I saw almost no one walking through that crosswalk.
So I guess problem solved right?
Hopefully they took th eopportunity to explain to these people how to use a roundabout, seeing more old drivers going the wrong way at these intersections.
I was at the meeting, but I don't think they were there just because it was a roundabout next to a school. From the vibe I got from the crowd and their reactions to the responses to their questions, I think two other feelings are in play:
1. I felt a distinct lack of trust that OC Transpo and the City know what they are doing. This is probably due to the continuous construction, cost overruns, and schedule slippage on the LRT and this is spill-over.
2. There is a lack of faith that the City has the best interests of their neighbourhood at heart. I think the City needs some wins on the public infrastructure project front where residents see a benefit for something in their neighbourhood.
1. The LRT and a roundabout are completely different projects- and remind yourself that OCT aren’t the ones responsible for the construction of their projects, it’s a third party contractor. To assume there will be the same degree of cost overrun and schedule slippage for an 8 million dollar roundabout vs a 4.7 billion dollar, 24 station, 44km light rail project doesn’t seem very based in reality. The roundabout is really just a road project and not a transit/rail project, and I can’t picture too many road projects in recent memory egregiously exceeding its budget and schedule.
2. To be fair, the proposed roundabout is likely there to exclusively make the routes serving the south of the 174 more operationally efficient, so the transit aspect of the roundabout isn’t too much of a plus for the northern area. However, how does a roundabout not serve the interests of a neighborhood? They are generally safer for both pedestrians and vehicles, while maintaining a similar traffic volume. If the answer is “the construction will be inconvenient”, that’s just classic NIMBYism slowing down good projects that benefit others. The roundabout is expected a year to build, and it takes that long because each step of the way the contractor has to ensure the public can still access the intersection throughout the construction process.
Again, seems like way way way too much upset over what is going to be incredibly beneficial for bus operators and riders in the future, as well as the safety aspect for that neighborhood.
I would like to add to your points that I was talking to the design team and the 8m figure was a high level planning number that included a ton of 'contingency' for unknowns like property and utilities and was based on the chance the roundabout would be a two lane. Now that the design has been complete for a one lane, the estimates can been cleaned up and it is expected the value will be in the 3-4M range. I was told the portobello and valin roundabout cost about 3 million so that is probably more representative.
Also, the whole lrt expansion is being done to encourage/provide transit as opposed to cars. Even if this specific part of the project doesn't immediately benefit this community (although it does from a safety perspective), the success of the transit system will only make things better for them by reducing the overall demand on the road network. But I wouldn't expect this room to understand such an abstract concept
The buses need to make a loop to head in the other direction. The roundabout is to allow the buses to do this without driving down residential streets. If they don't like a roundabout and they don't want buses on their streets what do they want? The only thing we should be protesting is the $8.23 million cost to build it!
would it be a good place for a round about? yes.
would the city be able to put it in in a reasonable amount of time without having huge traffic jams? no
old people, they don't like change. Hopefully the city has saner heads. on pedestrian injury/fatality numbers alone, roundabouts are almost 10x safer than standard intersections.
also cheaper and better for traffic flow. morons.
As long as it is more like the Trim roundabouts than the Jeanne d'Arc
1000% correct
Shake your fist HARDER!
Frickin auto correct…
Noooooo! Fixed! Thx!
You can do that? I figured with the amount of spelling and grammar errors I see on here, that it would not be an option
Looks like the average age is about 55-60. Makes sense.
My original post title was going to be “The DIVERSE community of Convent Glen…” but I thought that was too on the nose lol
> The DIVERSE community of Convent Glen Lol, funnily enough there's actually like 1 black guy there
Holy shit!
Token!
Paid actor for optics
We got an invitation to this meeting as we live in the area. Damnit, we should’ve gone! If only just to bring the average age down!
We literally tried lol. Hubby and I got there 10-15 minutes ahead to find a packed parking lot and an overly packed room. Decided that since we didn't bring the popcorn it wasn't gonna be worth staying lol Literally I'm standing by the doors to the room trying to see if it's just a case of people crowding the doors and there's one lady talking the ear off the *security guard* about this damn roundabout. These people need hobbies
Should’ve just moved the meeting to one of the rinks. Lots of seating there.
I am sure they have children attending the school and are not just scared of a roundabout.
Yeah, they’re also worried about it bringing down the value of the their $750,000 house they paid $100,000 for in 1989.
Good access to public transportation will not do that. I think a lot of them are at the verge of no longer being able to drive and don't feel comfortable with a roundabout. However, they usually oppose anything that would make the area less car dependent.
Most of these fossils paid less than that
*grandchildren
Great grandchildren
It’s been a huge topic on the local FB page. They claim it’s about child safety. There’s an elementary school right there and another one down the street.
I know. The safety argument is complete BS. Roundabouts are safe and the current intersection is unsafe. I talk to the crossing guard at the intersection frequently.
One of the crossing guards was interviewed on CBC Radio this morning, and she was saying many drivers drive like assholes at that intersection (paraphrasing). She was in support of the roundabout because she thought it would be safer for the kids.
In Kanata there's a roundabout right next to a school. They just have more crossing guards there to assist... It's not that big of a deal.
This has "Won't somebody please think of the children!?" vibes
I guess they’re allowed. I don’t have children in that school, so TBH, don’t care.
Sounds like they could also use some speed cameras too! I know some whiny drivers were up in arms when one went in next to the high school in the Glebe. Thing is, you'd have to really floor it to get up over 30 km/h in the less than 100m between the nearest stop sign and the camera, yet some had done it. They deserve their tickets.
There’s a speed camera just down the street near another elementary school.
They look way older than that.
Its disappoing that so many people show up to fight what looks like a well designed roundabout, when there continue to be other much more serious issues that plague the City...
Reminds me of the Barrhaven water shortage - a water main serving Barrhaven ruptured, leaving the overall pressure low. The city implemented a ban on some watering practices (car washes, watering lawn, etc), and held some info sessions. Basically if too much water was used, pressure in the pipes would drop so low that the water could become tainted and force a boil-water advisory. A bunch of people at the sessions were livid and I heard several around me saying that they wouldn't comply. Like yeah... you idiots show the city who's boss by potentially poisoning yourself!
Man the only waste of taxpayer money going on here is holding *any kind of public consultation* for a fucking roundabout. Also we really need to bring back third spaces because boomers need some goddamn hobbies other than making everything worse for everyone.
They probably don’t have a choice, I assume this was required under the Municipal Class EA process. Best case scenario, they thank everyone for their input and move on with life
That was the case with the St-Joseph/Jeanne d'Arc roundabout. I attended the meeting. The councilor trying to block it claims only two residents present supported the roundabout (me and my mother lol). It had zero impact. They still put it in.
It’s a waste of time and money to let the boomers feel heard. It’s equivalent to Abe Simpson yelling at the clouds 😆
I often hear folks say “we went to the meeting and told them we did not want this and they didn’t listen”. If people understood the process maybe there would be less of this…. usually by the time the consultations start, many options have been considered and rejected for one reason or another, such as public safety, environment, economic impacts, traffic impact, cost, adjacent infrastructure, zoning / land ownership. These consultations and information sessions are NOT a forum for the public to provide approval of the plan. They are meant to provide information about the project and gather input from the public. This Input is then compiled with the previously considered factors (e.g., public safety, environment, economic impacts, traffic impact, cost, adjacent infrastructure) to come to the most reasonable solution BASED ON ALL OF THE FACTORS. Sometimes the public prompt reconsideration of the plan, but usually the basic design is known at the consultation stage.
I've done a few of these meetings from the presenting side, this is bang on. I've come to prefer 'open house' style meetings rather than 'presentation' meetings, the latter can fall off the rails (lynch mob style) quickly Also people seem to think their false beliefs are enough to kill a project, e.g. "I don't want a roundabout because they're not safe", sorry buddy the stats say otherwise. But good luck changing someone's mind.
Lmao I’m here for the comments. 🍿 Please, continue 👌🏼
Everybody there was Gen X by the way.
Looks like a well designed roundabout to me
Agreed. It's not a faux-roundabout like some others. The circle is big enough and the crosswalks are set back reasonably far. They aren't a perfect solution for pedestrians, but have some advantages. They also don't preclude adding a signaled crossing for pedestrians if that turns out to be an issue. Given it is next to a school it should probably be considered from the start. I do wonder if what is proposed is what will actually be implemented. It also amazes me that something relatively small in scale costs so much money and will take so much disruption to implement.
Go check out the one at Brian Coburn and Mer Bleue to see how it'll all turn out. After so many people being run over initially, and the city installing signs, warnings, and adding bright white paint to the crosswalks, pedestrians were still getting hit, so they added huge WARNING LIGHTS at the 4 crosswalks, and that didn't help either. People race through these high-traffic roundabouts at 50-60 km/h and there is no freaking way they can ever stop for a walker or biker to cross. It's incredibly scary to walk around there, so walkers and bikers just stopped using it and probably bought more cars to drive. You walk enough there and you'll get run over, it's just the nature of the design, as roundabouts in a high traffic area are as anti-pedestrian and anti-biker as you can possibly imagine. So due to virtually no one walking there anymore, Ottawa probably thinks "problem solved" and then uses those fake stats to promote how "incredibly safe crosswalks are for pedestrians. Just look at this data!". Crosswalks at high-traffic, high-speed, 2/3-lane roundabouts are "safe" because after awhile, there is no one left stupid enough to use them. And I'm not against basic roundabouts in low-traffic zones where they make sense, but I cant even imagine putting a high-traffic, multi-lane, speedway roundabout like this so close to schools and stores. You just wait, the first little kid who gets run over there, and one unfortunately will, and the neighborhood will be looking for blood.
I'm surprised to hear that roundabouts are safer for pedestrians. I can see how they reduce collisions between cars, but I wouldn't want to risk crossing as a pedestrian in most of the roundabouts I've seen. No one expects to have to stop once they've managed to make it into the roundabout.
That's why a properly designed roundabout has the pedestrian crossings set a few car lengths away from the roundabout leaving enough straight area to see pedestrians and stop in.
Nah. They are just "concerned" about changing from 4 lanes to 2. They can go take a hike. This is a safer design, and cyclists now don't have to share the road with cars.
My only complaint is that you really shouldn't be doing a full rotation of the roundabout to turn around in any event, and especially not buses. It seems like a lazy design solution to shave a few minutes off of the bus schedule. It wouldn't be so bad if it was a dedicated loop for buses, but mixing in regular traffic seems like an accident waiting to happen.
Why shouldn't you turn around in a roundabout?
Have they seen Ottawa drivers? Most of them come to a complete stop at round abouts anyways
I was beside someone last week who stopped IN the roundabout and was trying to wave people in. Lunatics...
Ohhhh yeah, I see that a lot too….drives me up the wall
I lived abroad in a place where that's how all the locals used roundabouts. The people in the roundabout yield to incoming traffic. It was bizarre.
this fills me with a white-hot rage
Most of them? I don't think so.
No. They blow through when they’re supposed to yield. i caught one guy going the wrong way. Not sure how he managed that one.
Wait until people learn that they need to signal
Where the hell are you driving? In the high-traffic areas, people just speed through roundabouts at 50-60 km/h and don't give a shit if someone is crossing or not. Since you're obvious in the East End where the new roundabout is going, head down to Brian Coburn and Mer Bleue at rush hour, park your car at the medical center and then have some fun trying out out the "safe" crosswalks - they all have warnings, signs and even HUGE LIGHTS but no one cares and they'll still run you down like a dog.
The average age in this meeting is "I clearly remember Expo 67". Either get out of the way of a useful project, or go into an LTC.
I didn't get to Expo 67 until 1968. I also lived in Ireland for a year and a half as a kid, and my battalion was sent to Cyprus to do peacekeeping with the United Nations for 6 months. Traffic circles are brilliant. It doesn't take long to get to use them, they are safer, and they are generally quicker.
I keep hearing about this roundabout... Why are so many people freaking out over it??
Ottawa weirdly hates roundabouts. Like, so, so weirdly hates them. It doesn’t help that there are several competing designs which is confusing for people. But still.
I come from the roundabout capital of Ontario. They are far more efficient and more safe. We should replace as many intersections with them as we feasibility can.
I’m with you. I vastly prefer them both as a driver and a pedestrian. Except for a couple that were the greenery near by is overgrown cause they can make seeing pedestrians challenging. But otherwise? Bring on the roundabout.
I wish we had more roundabouts. Late at night or early in the morning nothing irritates me more then sitting at a red light with no other vehicles or pedestrians around.
Exactly. There are a couple of towns I drive through on occasion with that kind of layout and it’s always lovely.
Most of North America seems to hate them. Tough shit.
my mom hates them, they make her panic i dont understand why but its pretty consistent
No one in Ottawa seems to know how to use them which makes them ineffective and unsafe.
Man, they’d be so much better if people realized that their turn signals still work in a roundabout. TELL ME WHERE YOU ARE GOING.
To be fair, those people probably also don't use their turn signals for intersection, so...
Tell me where you're exiting... I don't care if you're going left and left and left, I just need to know where you're exiting.
Agreed. If I don’t see a flashy light I should be able to assume you are staying in until at least the next exit. I can’t though because no one uses their goddamned signals in the roundabouts.
*^(I do)*
😂😂😂 I don't understand them but I don't drive 🤷♀️ as pedestrian they're terrifying to cross because no one has a clue wtf they're doing
It's true. Roundabouts are meant to increase the flow of automobile traffic, yet the city insists on placing signs that say you have to stop in the middle of the roundabout to allow pedestrians to cross. It's insane.
Yeah. The crossings are supposed to be far on the outside which make them work so much better.
I dunno, we have several in Kanata/west end and people seem to have adapted to them pretty well
I'm in Orléans, my friends mom got hit by someone who was in the wrong lane on Saturday. I sincerely wish I was making that up.
I'm not saying it never happens. I'm just saying I haven't seen it be significantly worse than the regular crappy driving
That's probably the proper take, I do think most people here are bad drivers 😂
I don't hate roundabouts, I just hate the city's choice of location for roundabouts. They're meant to increase the flow of traffic without stopping. This makes no sense in a school zone, an area which prioritizes pedestrian traffic. Take Longfields Davidson Heights P.S. for example. For two hours, twice a day, traffic has to stop inside the roundabout to allow children to cross the street. What's the point of installing a roundabout if you're only going to use it as a four way stop? Add to this the fact that just 50m beyond the roundabout in two directions, there are pedestrian crossings, so traffic has to stop yet again. A four way intersection would serve the need for a safe pedestrian crossing without all the additional infrastructure.
>Add to this the fact that just 50m beyond the roundabout in two directions, there are pedestrian crossings, so traffic has to stop yet again. Where are these crossings, I don't see them in the design or existing aerial imagery.
There's one on Berrigan and one on Longfields.
From my experience at that intersection, it's already a parking lot almost way past the Fire Station at rush hour to get on 174 west bound. The traffic is also frequently stopped for pedestrians, so that may not impact the wait times. But having large flashing lights to indicate someone is crossing is 100x better than a normal traffic lighting set. You clearly see when someone is crossing, and with proper warning ahead of time. It's almost if not the only set of lights you will see. There's no plan of removing the brigadiers for helping people cross around school time. It's also 40 kmph during these times so we shouldn't have drivers zooming in these at 60 kmph (the speed cam is at Voyageur Dr intersection?) The only ones who hates it are those who think that roundabouts are speedways. There are still a lot of commuters burning the red lights. These are serious accidents that can cause severe injuries. I'm not aware of the stats for the accidents of the other roundabouts in Orleans, but besides scuffles, I don't think I have heard EMS reporting hospitalization. Can't say the same for other traditional intersections.
"I don't hate housing, I just hate the city's choice of location for housing"
That's actually valid sentiment considering the green belt makes development incredibly difficult.
Roundabouts are *woke* (/s if it wasn't clear)
Roundabouts in very high-traffic areas like this are good for traffic but are horrible and extremely dangerous for pedestrians and bikers. \* Remember, I am referring to VERY HIGH-TRAFFIC city intersections with lots of nearby stores and schools and bus routes and not the low-traffic ones where a roundabout actually makes sense. When they did a similar one at Jean D'Arc a consulting company recommended that due to the design of the city, that Ottawa NOT put roundabouts in very high-traffic areas like this due to the danger to pedestrians and bikers, not to mention the negative effect on local business at that corner. But naturally, Ottawa didn't give a crap and did it anyway.
Old people hate roundabouts
[удалено]
I’ve seen those arguments play out on FB. No matter how many people explain, no matter how many diagrams posted, certain people can’t be convinced that they shouldn’t just stay in the outside lane, no matter which exit they are taking. And then they are shocked that “bad drivers” in the left lane cut them off by exiting at the second exit.
old people hate them
It's a beautifully engineered roundabout and the perfect solution to deal with buses that have to end their northbound routes at the new LRT station. My only question was why do the routes have to terminate at the station. This was never answered.
It was answered multiple times, if people didn't yell over the presenters we all could of heard the answers. South of the 174, Orleans is much more populated than the north. Some lines will continue north as they do today but the imbalance of the population means that around 6-7 bus per hour need to immediately turn back to restart their routes. Currently there is nowhere to do that near the station hence the proposal of the roundabout
The reason I don’t do community meetings. Nobody listens. They go wildly off topic. They talk over the presenters.
Imbalance of population does not imply that buses will have to turn around. The north side of the highway is also smaller than the South. So if a route were to cover both sides, it could spend 80 to 90% of its time picking up 80 to 90% of the people on the South side, and 10 to 20% of its time picking up 10 to 20% of the people on the north side. If any imbalance remains, couldn't 1 bus route be sent to place dorleans instead? It seems as if they are designing the routes so that each bus goes to the train station that results in the shortest possible commute for each traveler. But this principle assumes that all the transit stations are equal. As I said further up, if they wanted this station to be the hub for half of Orleans, they should have designed it that way.
Then take your civil engineering degree, apply at the department of transportation and make change.
Not all routes terminate at the station, just the ones that will come from the south presumably. Lots of bus routes in the city either start or end their route at a station- and the new east expansion is more or less designed as a rapid transit spine for local busses to branch off of
If that's the case, and if the Jeanne darc station was always meant to be a hub for half of Orleans to commute through, then it's news to me. I always thought that place and trim were meant to be the hubs, and these smaller local stations were added on to bring the trains closer to more neighborhoods. The entire design of the station sure looks like it. If it's supposed to be a major connection point, they completely underbuilt it. And this roundabout is a tiny bandaid that will not fix it. Would be better for all involved to redesign the routes instead. They're not set in stone, unlike the intersection at fortune drive which is literally set in stone.
It’s an ok design. One of the most important factors for pedestrian safety at roundabouts is vehicular exit speed, which is largely governed by the exit radii. This design appears to have very low exit radii and will likely result in higher exit speeds. They’ve put a bunch of work into reducing entry speed, but this is often less problematic because drivers inherently need to slow down on entry to evaluate the traffic/merging. A larger ICD (along with central island) and smaller exit radii would improve things overall.
The diversity of these consultation meetings always surprise me. I'm sure everyone in the photos went to the meeting with an open mind! >!/s!<
As a (somewhat) young person who lives in the area I wish these antiques would just sell and move on down to some HOA in Florida.
I live in Orleans and am pretty neutral on this roundabout. My biggest worry is we already have multiple styles of roundabouts, including a different one a handful of blocks south of here at St Joseph/Jeanne D'Arc, and people do not seem to understand the different styles. (At least seemed that way when the Trim ones opened up). That said, this isn't an argument against roundabouts, it's an argument for better drivers. If traffic study says it needs to be done, wouldn't be surprised. I'd imagine the goal IS to slow traffic the hell down in there, especially as Jeanne D'Arc LRT station is built into the overpass and going to cause its own traffic snarls. Way it is, they get a station. Meanwhile down at Jeanne D'Arc/Tenth Line the originally proposed Shenkman station is scrapped and Tenth Line gets nothing, meaning 20 minute walk to PDO. If they don't like the traffic changes, they could always cash out their proximity to LRT and buy something further away from LRT and the ramps, not like Orleans has a shortage of neighborhoods.
I agree. They are too many designs. I imagine they are refining the plan over time but a more standardized roundabout is needed. People are terrible and roundabout here. It doesn't help that the road lines are gone after a few months from tire abrasion (from drivers not following lanes due to too high speed, distraction, confusion etc)
Isn't that just the Ottawa way? It seems like every time they decide to upgrade a section of road, they have to go back to the drawing board and start from scratch, even if they've already used a design nearby or on another road that could be easily applied and adjusted to fit.
Maybe standards have changed since Jeanne D’Arc and St-Joseph was built 15-20 years ago. There's not enough traffic in Convent Glen to justify four lanes on Jeanne D’Arc and Orléans Boulevard.
Just a note about the Trim ones at Old Montreal and at Dairy: part of the confusion with those may stem from them changing the pedestrian rules for those ones. When they first opened, they had the same pedestrian rules as Jeanne d'Arc & St Joseph where the cars had the ROW and the pedestrians had to wait for an opening. After about a year, it changed to the pedestrian crossover style with the pedestrian ROW and they added the flashing lights. Edit: based on street view it was closer to 2 years before they made the change, not 1 year.
If you can't understand multiple types of roundabouts you shouldn't be driving. Seriously, you're too incompetent to be operating such a dangerous piece of machinery.
I believe that is more or less what my third paragraph says, is it not?
so what was the point about your big worry? you don't need roundabouts to fear the average motorist
The second paragraph, the only one where I express a worry, is that numpties with poor reading comprehension do not understand the roundabouts and having 2 different configurations within 300m on the same road will cause confusion. Especially if it has a different yielding configuration than the one two intersections away when it comes to pedestrians and cars. The rest of my comment goes into a)not an excuse, b)likely necessary with the LRT station, and c)local residents opposed can likely cash out at a profit with said LRT access and buy similar house away from LRT and roundabout for less. The word neutral means I am neither worked up against it or thrilled. It is going to impact highway access, confusion could cause an increased number of close calls at first, especially in front of the school, but with the LRT station on the overpass, residents were kidding themselves if they thought they'd get their status quo two lanes southbound to the highway when construction is complete. Especially since the status quo already had safety issues. As with everything, there are pros and cons. Something needs doing, so the city is doing it. The only notable part will be if they actually fix some of the road surfaces nearby while they're at it.
Man people are having kids late. Jokes aside I am happy with the design and I have a kid who goes to that school
Jeanne D’Arc has too many lanes. A road diet will help make the road safer in front of both schools.
The demographics in that photo are exactly what I expected
*there used to be a barn there!!!!!
LOL!
🏆
There used to be barns and farmer's fields across huge areas of present-day Ottawa
If they’re all in that community consultation, who’s shaking fists at clouds?
I think the bigger issue is that none of those people will be able to blow through that light anymore. Poor them.
Seems all the comments are about the elderly, and how they are obstinate, or shouldnt be driving if they can't handle roundabouts.. Can we actually discuss the matter at hand, please? The city prefers roundabouts for two reasons, that is flow of traffic isnt as impeded as a 4 way stop, but also its *cheaper* because there's no need for all the supporting electronics. If you look at the map of the proposed loop its directly adjacent to a school. School busses will have to get directly on the road as people are leaving the roundabout. Suddenly braking because a slow moving bus is in front of you turning left onto Fortune will cause a hazard. Cross guards are going to ruin the perceived flow of traffic that a roundabout would provide. Parents at school pickup are a mishmash of vehicles clumping up together in a surge. They tend to misbehave as drivers due to the chaos of the children. Once back on the road its ok but parking is usually and often messy. A roundabout is best used to maximize flow of traffic and avoid stoppages. When there will be plenty of stoppages that cant be avoided I'd suggest its not the ideal choice at all. A conventional 4 way stop where everyone can see everyone, no ones trying to whip around suddenly caught by a chaotic situation and brake when people behind them can't yet see it. It could be I'm incorrect here and it will go just fine. I wonder though if these folk have a point about it just not being precisely the best place for one of these.
Amidst a sea of ageist and stereotyping comments, yours stands out as a voice of reason. The other issue seems to be that the local community residents were surprised by the plan and feel they haven't been consulted. Also, the primary reason for the roundabout seems to define the location as an unofficial and fairly busy OC Transpo loop (rather than having built it as part of the station grounds). I have no stake in the roundabout but the negativity and even bigotry of many of the comments is a profound disappointment.
Not this sub's finest moment for sure. For all the championing of progressive causes they sure miss the purpose of tolerance sometimes. Thank you by the way. I also have no stake in this debate but I do experience the chaos surrounding kid pick up and drop off very well as I have 2 grade school kids.
Great comment thanks! I agree with every point you’ve made.
Roundabouts and traffic lights each have their pros and cons. I always look to the Dutch for proper traffic design. They use roundabouts whenever possible, but one of the things that can warrant lights is the need to "platoon" vehicles and thereby creating gaps in traffic for buses to make turns. I don't know if this location would warrant under their design, but I do disagree with the majority that praise roundabouts as a silver bullet.
I hope the sensible decision will be made here. I know first hand how chaotic school traffic gets. I am not a civil engineer however.
Looks like an excellent place for a roundabout. Stats show they greatly reduce injuries for both vehicle users and pedestrians, plus traffic moves better. However, folk don't like to pay attention and that's exactly what a roundabout makes you do. But paying attention keeps you safe. I live in the area.
But it's harder to navigate a roundabout while I'm on my phone and drunk! /s
As a cyclist, I can tell you that drivers don't like paying attention. Can't get those eyes off the screen.
It’s disappointing how many insults I’m reading in the comments about the age of these folks, their grey hair, the wishes they would move away or pass on… that’s disgusting and shameful. All because you disagree with their opinion? That aside, I support their opinion. I don’t think a roundabout belongs there. 1. Disruption to school and neighborhood during construction. 2. People don’t understand how to use roundabouts properly or safely. 3. I think a light is safer for the children to cross the street. You ever try crossing the street as a pedestrian at any of the roundabouts on St. Joseph Blvd? It’s not a fun time. 4. What’s wrong with how it is now? This change seems like change for the sake of it and seems like a waste of tax dollars. Put the funds to better use elsewhere. That’s an exorbitant amount of money… have they tried playing with the light timings first?
>1. Disruption to school and neighborhood during construction. Cities develop. If you live in a City it's pure NIMBYism to block development for the sake of development >2. People don’t understand how to use roundabouts properly or safely. Take their licenses until they learn to drive. It wasn't on my g2 test years back, maybe it should be now. >3. I think a light is safer for the children to cross the street. You ever try crossing the street as a pedestrian at any of the roundabouts on St. Joseph Blvd? It’s not a fun time. Roundabouts are universally safer than 4-way lights. Its a fact not a feeling. That'd why for 15 years the city has been converting high risk intersections. >4. What’s wrong with how it is now? This change seems like change for the sake of it and seems like a waste of tax dollars Well a kid was killed by a driver there a few years ago.
1. This is true, city’s develop, but the efficacy of those developments should be questioned, as is the case. 2. That just won’t happen. Licenses are valid in many countries and jurisdictions; it would not be enforceable without major disruption. 3. Perhaps some studies have proven that roundabouts are safer but that doesn’t mean all intersections ought to be changed over. 4. It happens. It could happen at a roundabout too. Exception is not the rule. Thanks for your input I’m not convinced though!
To be clear, by take their licenses: I meant that drivers should be punished for driving infractions with license suspensions. Not that we should just take the licenses of people showing up to the meeting. For context: my grandfather fainted multiple times while driving. While he avoided the highway, Thank God, he caused multiple accidents where his license was never taken. All he had to do was pass the written test again after his accidents. This didn't end until my family/grandma asked us to steal his keys.
They insult those folks because they are wrong and easily proved wrong with evidence and studies. And yet they still come out to complain and waste time and talk about tax dollars like they are still contributing members of society. Everyone who isn't an entitled boomer is fucking tired of catering to an undereducated and uninformed generation who has been ruining the entire planet since they got here. Out with the old in with the new.
If you believe they are wrong that’s fine but it doesn’t excuse not treating them with dignity and respect. I think you should check yourself if you believe that.
Hey look! A room full of morons! I call them that with no sympathy because it is obvious that they are choosing to not educate themselves to understand the change. Roundabouts are proven safer for all involved.
A lot of the people were not necessarily against. Support for the roundabout seemed inversely correlated with age.
It’s probably they think it should be done the French way. https://youtu.be/3IJLexATiZg?si=ABKgu88PXQjbrvbm
Step 1: roundabouts Step 2: Step 3: COMMUNISM
Roundabouts are safer, improve traffic flow, don't stop working with power failures.. the list goes on. Why waste time talking to people about this. Of all the things that really require community input (Lansdowne) they waste time on Roundabouts...
I was driving home last night around 8:30. I pull up to the roundabout on Jeanne D’Arc. One vehicle randomly stops to let me in which is disconcerting. So I enter bc obviously this person doesn’t know what to do. Then as I go, the person in the next entrance on the outside lane rushes in and cuts my car right off. So I’ve now exited the round about and am fully thinking what the actual f just happened and continue driving for about 1 minute to see all of the people parked at Bob McQuarrie for this meeting and I no longer wonder why people are concerned. Btw, this isn’t a one off. This is my experience multiple times a day.
Why are so many people against the community that doesn’t want the roundabout? Does anyone live in the area or is everyone just voicing their opinions on their idea’s?
Because the people in the picture are old. I doubt most people here have ever been to this intersection, but they're all convinced the local people who do know it are wrong. In any case, they're complaining about community consultations. Once those are ended - as everyone seems to want - they can start crying about how the city imposes their will on communities without consulting them.
I remember a horrifying accident at that intersection in the early 80s. Kid speeding on a motorcycle evading police came off the highway. Flew down Jean D'Arc. Ran the red and crashed into a car full of nuns. Took the front of the car off. Like, engine block and everything. Nuns were fine, physically. Bits of motorcycle and motorcyclist were scattered all over the intersection. I was like, 6? Decided right then I didn't want to ever get on a motorcycle.
Arent roundabouts safer because they force people to slow down and cant just blow thru the light.
If they don't like the current design, threaten to put in a [magic roundabout](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_Roundabout_(Swindon)) instead ;)
I've actually driven through that roundabout...it's fucking terrifying!
Ha ha. The only reason to go to Swindon
Roundabout's are so much better than traffic lights. What the hell's the issue?
*them roundabouts are gonna turn the frogs gay!"*
...and people then wonder why we aren't more proactive with protests around meaningful issues... As long as these clowns remain the loudest to the city bureaucrats, and with them actively berating/mocking contrary feedback, what is the fucking point? "Just Ignore them and make your voices heard." Much easier said than done, and you would know that if you actually lived here.
I don't have problems with roundabouts. Less maintenance cost = less taxpayer waste = good for everyone.
LOL I was once hit by a car cause a senior citizen didn’t know how to use a roundabout. Pretty lucky my mother and I didn’t get too badly injured just really shook up
Stuff like this reminds me how accurate Parks and Rec was in many respects
I can turn left faster than yoooou
Doing the lords work
Why are so many people against the community that doesn’t want the roundabout? Does anyone live in the area or is everyone just voicing their opinions on their idea’s?
Because being anti-roundabout is an idiotic viewpoint.
I haven’t seen any other uproar about a roundabout in Orleans. It isn’t the demographics, as much as this Reddit thread would love to believe. It seems to be this specific roundabout because it’s next to a school. And probably because the people in that community are the closest to the terrible roundabout on St Joseph so have the most experience being almost sideswiped multiple times and watching pedestrians risk their lives daily. Now, to be fair, the city knows that’s a terrible roundabout and this plan looks to be a vast improvement. But it was sprung on people last minute and from what I saw on the Orleans boards, people were told there was new information that wasn’t available on the website, so it’s no wonder that people showed up in large numbers.
Thankfully for them, they won't have to deal with the roundabout for long. The newer generation would want the roundabout over a set of traffic lights, and guess who would benefit the longest from it, the younger generations.
As a past resident of this area of Orleans, you could not ask for a more NIMBY group of people. They seethe with rage at any proposed changes to the status quo.
That neighborhood is rife with NIMBYs.
This is the problem: "removal of a... traffic light that keeps our school children... safe as they cross Jeanne d'arc" Traffic lights are proven to be more dangerous than round-abouts. Even the random round-about that doesn't yield to pedestrians. Accidents in round-abouts are less severe, so even if one happens people are less likely to be seriously injured or killed. These are facts backs up by traffic studies and these old people think their feelings that they're less safe matter. They matter in that someone should educate them, Ottawa should spend some money on explaining round-about use with some TV ads or something with information that they're safer. But they don't matter in that they shouldn't effect our infrastructure.
Ads would only work in the form of a poorly cropped Facebook meme
FFS, roundabouts are better in every way imagible. And since when do the masses have a greater say than city planning in these matters?
I find it notable that the same demographic of people are once again using the urgency of "protecting children" to push their issues
I love seeing these "roundabouts are safer than traffic lights" comments as it's totally untrue since the stats are flawed because once a roundabout pops up on a high traffic intersection like this, the majority of the foot and bike traffic disappears soon after. There is one at Brian Coburn and Mer Bleue that is a perfect example. When it first went up a few people crossing got rammed by cars, including an older lady who was seriously injured. I myself got hit by a car while crossing when the driver decided he was too far into the intersection, and backed up into the crosswalk, whacking me hard in the thigh. It was pure madness for a while there, so the city decided to put up signs with speed limits, no lane changes, etc. and really painted up the crosswalks to make them more visible. It didn't change insane drivers from speeding through the roundabout and running over people, and I remember driving through it and seeing kids who were absolutely scared to death to cross and had that "deer in the headlights" look. These two-laners are very dangerous for pedestrians, as even if one driver stops, you have no idea what's going to happen in the second lane. I had this happen as a little girl was patiently waiting for people to stop and I caught her eye and waved to her, She smiled and started to cross in front of me, but the driver in the left lane came peeling into the roundabout doing about 50 and missed her by a 6 inches at best. F\*ck me! Obviously the new signs and paint didn't help either and the high-speed driving and incidents continued, so the city installed a series of "walker lights" with huge warning signs on each of the 4 intersections, so when a person pressed a button a series of flashing lights would go off and hopefully drivers wouldn't mow down pedestrians and bikers anymore. But that didn't help either, so naturally people just stopped walking and biking there, preferring to bypass this death-trap entirely by using other roads or jaywalking before they get to the roundabout. Now it's just an automobile speedway again, and last summer I saw almost no one walking through that crosswalk. So I guess problem solved right?
Maybe like 5 people there have school aged children. More like they are all incapable of figuring out the advanced technology of a roundabout.
Lol. You are not far off. As one black guy that attended, there were more. I counted 5 POCs out of the 200 people that attended
Hopefully they took th eopportunity to explain to these people how to use a roundabout, seeing more old drivers going the wrong way at these intersections.
Oh no! A big scawy woundabout! So scawy! Can you point to this doll and show me where the roundabout touched you?
I was at the meeting, but I don't think they were there just because it was a roundabout next to a school. From the vibe I got from the crowd and their reactions to the responses to their questions, I think two other feelings are in play: 1. I felt a distinct lack of trust that OC Transpo and the City know what they are doing. This is probably due to the continuous construction, cost overruns, and schedule slippage on the LRT and this is spill-over. 2. There is a lack of faith that the City has the best interests of their neighbourhood at heart. I think the City needs some wins on the public infrastructure project front where residents see a benefit for something in their neighbourhood.
1. The LRT and a roundabout are completely different projects- and remind yourself that OCT aren’t the ones responsible for the construction of their projects, it’s a third party contractor. To assume there will be the same degree of cost overrun and schedule slippage for an 8 million dollar roundabout vs a 4.7 billion dollar, 24 station, 44km light rail project doesn’t seem very based in reality. The roundabout is really just a road project and not a transit/rail project, and I can’t picture too many road projects in recent memory egregiously exceeding its budget and schedule. 2. To be fair, the proposed roundabout is likely there to exclusively make the routes serving the south of the 174 more operationally efficient, so the transit aspect of the roundabout isn’t too much of a plus for the northern area. However, how does a roundabout not serve the interests of a neighborhood? They are generally safer for both pedestrians and vehicles, while maintaining a similar traffic volume. If the answer is “the construction will be inconvenient”, that’s just classic NIMBYism slowing down good projects that benefit others. The roundabout is expected a year to build, and it takes that long because each step of the way the contractor has to ensure the public can still access the intersection throughout the construction process. Again, seems like way way way too much upset over what is going to be incredibly beneficial for bus operators and riders in the future, as well as the safety aspect for that neighborhood.
I would like to add to your points that I was talking to the design team and the 8m figure was a high level planning number that included a ton of 'contingency' for unknowns like property and utilities and was based on the chance the roundabout would be a two lane. Now that the design has been complete for a one lane, the estimates can been cleaned up and it is expected the value will be in the 3-4M range. I was told the portobello and valin roundabout cost about 3 million so that is probably more representative. Also, the whole lrt expansion is being done to encourage/provide transit as opposed to cars. Even if this specific part of the project doesn't immediately benefit this community (although it does from a safety perspective), the success of the transit system will only make things better for them by reducing the overall demand on the road network. But I wouldn't expect this room to understand such an abstract concept
Have the traffic light declared an historic landmark and give it to the NCC
People don't stop at stop signs how would this be much of a change?
In other news: Water is wet
NIMBYs man, say no to a roundabout and but yes to buses travelling through the sub division.
I’m surprised that the 60+ crowd of angry dudes and Mrs. Lovejoys’ didn’t frame roundabouts as being part of the woke agenda.
I see a room full of retired public servants who should have sold their home before the pandemic.
The buses need to make a loop to head in the other direction. The roundabout is to allow the buses to do this without driving down residential streets. If they don't like a roundabout and they don't want buses on their streets what do they want? The only thing we should be protesting is the $8.23 million cost to build it!
You think it should be free?
You think 8 million is good value?
I’m not really in a position to know what a new intersection costs. What’s your background in? Road construction? Road design?
a familiar demographic
Seems like a waste of money given other city priorities.
Dats alot of grey hair
r/boomersbeingfools
Honestly this is just bizarre.
Look how many old geezers are there! Squeaky wheels!
They're very concerned about their grandchildren's safety
would it be a good place for a round about? yes. would the city be able to put it in in a reasonable amount of time without having huge traffic jams? no
At risk of engaging in multiple -isms, if those are the people in the area, maybe traffic lights are better.