Calgary Cycling Paths & Infrastructure

[UofC.engineer]

Mattamy Homes, Rotary, and the Parks Foundation have launched the Rotary Greenway project - 138 kms of cycle paths circling the city.
:cheers:

http://www.parksfdn.com/greenway.html

Does anyone know when the SE portion of the greenway will open up?

It would be nice if the pathway could be finished by next summer!

[Allan83]

Hey there skyscraper geeks, City of Calgary is asking for feedback for developing the cycle tracks in Centre City and it must be received by September 20th. Feel free to fill in the survey below:

http://fluidsurveys.com/s/calgarycentrecitycycletracknetwordsurvey1/

For more info about the Centre City cycle track check out this link:
http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TP/Pages/Cycling/Cycling-Route-Improvements/City-Centre-cycle-track-network.aspx?redirect=/cycletracknetwork

My recommendations for higher priority areas for cycle track were:
1. 10th both-ways or 11th/12th as one way cycle tracks for west/east route
2. Extension of 7 St SW cycle track from Bow River to 17 Ave for north/south route
3. 4 St SE cycle track for an eastern north/south connection

Those all look good to me, but why would 11th and 12th be only one way for bikes?

[Radley77]

Those all look good to me, but why would 11th and 12th be only one way for bikes?

These were the ones that I entered into the survey.

My preference for a one way on 11th Ave and one way on 12th Ave would be because it would help with light timing. Also, from my experience riding in places like Portland, it just seems that in inner city areas, that one ways work better in general in traffic congested areas for cars as well as bikes. I'd be apprehensive about adding more conflict points on one way streets where autos may not be aware where to look.

There are a lot less intersections on 10th Ave so could have a two way bike lane there...

[RyLucky]

Hey there skyscraper geeks, City of Calgary is asking for feedback for developing the cycle tracks in Centre City and it must be received by September 20th. Feel free to fill in the survey below:

http://fluidsurveys.com/s/calgarycentrecitycycletracknetwordsurvey1/

For more info about the Centre City cycle track check out this link:
http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TP/Pages/Cycling/Cycling-Route-Improvements/City-Centre-cycle-track-network.aspx?redirect=/cycletracknetwork

My recommendations for higher priority areas for cycle track were:
1. 10th both-ways or 11th/12th as one way cycle tracks for west/east route
2. Extension of 7 St SW cycle track from Bow River to 17 Ave for north/south route
3. 4 St SE cycle track for an eastern north/south connection

Thanks for sharing that. Good recommendations too.

[Radley77]

The following chart shows a comparison of the top 50 cycling cities in the United States (and based on a regression also places Calgary in the middle of the pack).

The US Average for bike lane density is 0.9 miles/square mile whereas Calgary is only 0.1 miles/square mile:

http://imageshack.us/scaled/landing/51/rjc0.png

One can also see that Calgary has some of the most multi-use pathways of any city in North America. I think Calgary has potential to be a truly good cycling city with the river as a natural right of way, but it's critical that bike infrastructure is increasing focused on connections to major destinations.

Calgary can look to places like Minneapolis that share a similar climate and North American urban planning for best practices.

It really is critical that places like Centre City and Beltline which have higher frequency for active mode fatalaties are focused on first.

[fusili]

The following chart shows a comparison of the top 50 cycling cities in the United States (and based on a regression also places Calgary in the middle of the pack).

The US Average for bike lane density is 0.9 miles/square mile whereas Calgary is only 0.1 miles/square mile:


I am a metric fanatic, so I have to comment on the use of bike lanes per square mile as a measurement here. Does this unfairly advantage denser cities? Isn't bike lanes per square mile really an input metric and not an outcome metric- which would be the number of people cycling? I am always hesitant about using any single metric to define whether a city is "bike friendly" or not.

[MalcolmTucker]

Especially when city boundaries are rather arbitrary.

[Radley77]

I am a metric fanatic, so I have to comment on the use of bike lanes per square mile as a measurement here. Does this unfairly advantage denser cities? Isn't bike lanes per square mile really an input metric and not an outcome metric- which would be the number of people cycling? I am always hesitant about using any single metric to define whether a city is "bike friendly" or not.

The comparison was between bicycling.com ratings ( their ratings, not mine) and independent data from APTA as wanted to compare a qualitative perception metric to a more quantitive one.

A regression against the 3 variables yielded an r2 coefficient of 0.5. And as can be seen the colour green shaded cells with higher bike density generally end up ranking higher than the red cells with lower bike infrastructure density.

I also included annual mean temperature to highlight that you can still be in a climate similar to Calgary like Minneapolis and be bike friendly.

There is more variables to bike infrastructure like bike parking and multimodal transit connectivity or bike shares that were not factored in to the regression.

In New York, which i was in a few weeks ago, an example cycling trip may be walking 400 m to a bike lane, taking a bike share, cycling 2000 metres, parking the bike, then walking 50 m. There is also some data now saying that when New York implemented bike lanes that taxi speeds INCREASED by 7%. This I think points to it making more sense to declutter the roads from cyclists and provide increasing amounts of segregation especially in high speed/ high volume environments.

[fusili]

Some good news about the success of the 7th street cycle lanes:

Usage of cyclists on 6th/7th street jumped from 740/day to 1330/day. Not a bad amount of cyclists now.

www.calgarycitynews.com/2013/09/7-street-sw-cycle-track-already-busiest.html

[UofC.engineer]

Some good news about the success of the 7th street cycle lanes:

Usage of cyclists on 6th/7th street jumped from 740/day to 1330/day. Not a bad amount of cyclists now.

www.calgarycitynews.com/2013/09/7-street-sw-cycle-track-already-busiest.html

"The number of cycling trips per day on 7 Street S.W. is more than double than what was originally forecasted (500 trips). With more than 1,000 trips counted in 24 hour periods on weekdays, in July and August, the 7 Street S.W. cycle track is already the busiest on-street bikeway in Calgary."

Thanks for posting the info Fusili, I can hardly wait until the West/East portion opens up! I also would like to see how the 2013 overall cycle count was affected by the cycle tracks.

I dream that one day Calgary will be in the same league as Portland when it comes to cycling ridership. We need more cycle tracks in core and the Beltline, also signage along bike routes wouldn't hurt either.

[Radley77]

Some good news about the success of the 7th street cycle lanes:

Usage of cyclists on 6th/7th street jumped from 740/day to 1330/day. Not a bad amount of cyclists now.

www.calgarycitynews.com/2013/09/7-street-sw-cycle-track-already-busiest.html

Interesting that there is now less cycling traffic on the offsetting streets. Seems to fit at least with some inferences that these routes declutter offsetting streets from bikes and the cyclist prefer to shoehorn into these safe routes.

Anecdotally, ive seen a lot more children and teenagers as well as women cyclists using the cycle track. In Vancouver, women cyclists have gone up by a 100% over a four year period. I think this illustrates how unsafe cycling infrastructure can marginalize people from using active mode transportation.

I would like to see more transportation engineers that are looking at rising rates of obesity and seeing that lack of active modal transportation infrastructure in new suburbs is resulting in health issues for the public.

[Fuzz]

I use the cycle track daily, and it has made my ride so much more enjoyable and safe. Outside of rush hour, I'm amazed to see the diversity of people using it. I'd call this an absolute success, and although I won't use any others regularly, I can't wait until the city puts more in.

[Spring2008]

So has the city said where the next separated cycle lanes will be built?

[outoftheice]

I know bike sharing has been talked about before in Calgary but this article caught my attention. Does anyone know if private partnership was considered when Calgary City Council last explored the idea?? I think a small scale roll out around the city centre and beltline area could prove to be very successful. Especially with the investments that have been made recently in the cycling infrastructure/river pathway system. If they can get a $3 million sponsor ship commitment from Coke in smaller Irish cities, surely we could get a bit more for advertising in Calgary which could go a long way to making the project economical. From the article:

The hugely successful Dublin bikes-for-hire scheme will be available in three other cities from next summer and could be rolled out to other towns in the near future.

Public Transport minister Alan Kelly has unveiled plans to have 700 bikes installed in Cork, Limerick and Galway by next July, but told the Irish Independent that other towns and cities could also benefit.

Sponsored by Coca Cola Ireland, the bikes will be branded 'Coke Zero bikes', with 315 for Cork, 200 in Limerick and 185 in Galway.


The bike stations and bikes will be funded by the Department of Transport, through the National Transport Authority (NTA), at a cost of €4m to install. It will cost another €900,000 a year to operate and maintain the service.

It is understood that Coca Cola Ireland has paid €3m over five years to secure the branding rights – much of this will go on maintenance, with the balance to be made up by councils and the €250,000 expected to be generated in subscriptions.


Full article here:
Cork, Limerick and Galway to get bikes for hire next year http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/cork-limerick-and-galway-to-get-bikes-for-hire-next-year-29595062.html

[McMurph]

I use the cycle track daily, and it has made my ride so much more enjoyable and safe. Outside of rush hour, I'm amazed to see the diversity of people using it. I'd call this an absolute success, and although I won't use any others regularly, I can't wait until the city puts more in.

I've only used it a couple of times and found the timing of the lights was horrible. I think I had to stop at every single avenue, and given the length of the blocks it seemed like it would have been as fast and less annoying to have walked. As a cyclist, I have no problems navigating in and keeping up with traffic -- outside of peak traffic times I would probably rather stick to streets. Of course, I've only ridden the track a couple of times. If it usually flows better I'll have to try it some more.

On the whole, though, I think the track and the overall strategy is great. Downtown segregated tracks are particularly awesome for less confident cyclists and for kids. I only fear that drivers will start to hurl abuse at cyclists on roads without segregated lanes (something that already happens occasionally due to our extensive pathway system).

[Fuzz]

Southbound in the morning the timing is pretty much perfect. I agree going northbound at the end of the day sucks. You stop at every light. I used to take 6th, and you had to stop at every other light, so it is worse. I'd guess they can't do much about it though, since it crosses the ctrain, 6th, 5th, and 4th which are all timed with other lights. Though at rush hour, that timing doesn't matter much for cars so perhaps they could improve it. I'd doubt the traffic dept. would be very interested in doing it though.

Either way, I don't mind the stops to much mostly because coming in to work is smooth, and its so much safer.

The lights used to be timed perfectly for FAST walking pace. You can make it all the way through in a green wave. Or at least you could before the bike lanes went in. Haven't walked it since last winter.

[Allan83]

These were the ones that I entered into the survey.

My preference for a one way on 11th Ave and one way on 12th Ave would be because it would help with light timing. Also, from my experience riding in places like Portland, it just seems that in inner city areas, that one ways work better in general in traffic congested areas for cars as well as bikes. I'd be apprehensive about adding more conflict points on one way streets where autos may not be aware where to look.

There are a lot less intersections on 10th Ave so could have a two way bike lane there...
Those sound like well thought out reasons to me. Including those considerations I think I would favour putting in one two way bike lane on 10th.

[Radley77]

I know bike sharing has been talked about before in Calgary but this article caught my attention. Does anyone know if private partnership was considered when Calgary City Council last explored the idea?? I think a small scale roll out around the city centre and beltline area could prove to be very successful. Especially with the investments that have been made recently in the cycling infrastructure/river pathway system. If they can get a $3 million sponsor ship commitment from Coke in smaller Irish cities, surely we could get a bit more for advertising in Calgary which could go a long way to making the project economical. From the article:





Full article here:
Cork, Limerick and Galway to get bikes for hire next year http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/cork-limerick-and-galway-to-get-bikes-for-hire-next-year-29595062.html

I believe Tervita has a bike share for employees and Hotel Arts have bikes available for hotel guests. There are a couple rental shops around for the weekend excursions as well.

Bike share could be done, but I think its still a bigger priority to have a safe network in the Beltline first. I dont think Calgary is there yet.

Calgary is making some good improvements on bike parking and it is now having better bike facilities at several CPA lots.

I think it would also be nice if part of the scope of bike strategy would be to look at better bike parking facilities at LRT stations. At least then the optics might look better for bikeshare (though in reality the different urban fabric of the Beltline lends itself to different opportunities).

[Chealion]

So has the city said where the next separated cycle lanes will be built?

I'm guessing we find out January/February. Rumours I've read are 3rd Ave, 8th Ave (excluding Stephen Ave), and 10th (or 11th/12?) to start.


Winter 2014
Council considers recommended east-west/north-south cycle track network
Design phase 2 cycle track(s)
Spring 2014 - Begin constructing phase 2 cycle track(s)
Summer 2014 - Open Calgary’s phase 2 cycle track(s)
Fall 2014 - Continue design work on phase 3 cycle track(s)
2015 - Construct and open phase 3 cycle track(s)


http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TP/Pages/Cycling/Cycling-Route-Improvements/City-Centre-cycle-track-network.aspx

[Spring2008]

Sounds like there's potential for a east/west and a north/south route for the next phase.

[ByeByeBaby]

I know bike sharing has been talked about before in Calgary but this article caught my attention. Does anyone know if private partnership was considered when Calgary City Council last explored the idea?? I think a small scale roll out around the city centre and beltline area could prove to be very successful. Especially with the investments that have been made recently in the cycling infrastructure/river pathway system. If they can get a $3 million sponsor ship commitment from Coke in smaller Irish cities, surely we could get a bit more for advertising in Calgary which could go a long way to making the project economical. From the article:


IIRC, the report for a bike share system said around $1M was needed as a sponsorship to make the system financially viable. Although I think that the system the report had outlined was too constrained to the downtown, and ignored some of the differences between Calgary and Washington (the main source for some of the bike share ridership) -- in particular the transit access. In Calgary, the trains on 7th basically stop right on the sidewalk, run frequently and are free in the downtown. In DC, the metro is buried multiple stories below ground, runs frequently, and costs for any trip.

Were it up to me, I would have somewhat expanded the system that was proposed in Calgary -- the proposal was basically downtown/Beltline only, with two or three stations in Hillhurst/Sunnyside. I would have expanded south to 17th Ave and into Mission, east to Inglewood and Bridgeland, west into Sunalta and north more fully into Hillhurst (say 14th St / 5th Ave). The tricky thing with bike share is that a critical mass is important: with a small number of stations, it is inconvenient, nobody uses it and it loses political will -- like the first bikeshare system in DC.

The other thing that is important is having good infrastructure to support more occasional and less confident riders; if we're making big infrastructure improvements over the next couple of years, I can see that being in place before a bikeshare system is established.

[RyLucky]

A separated 2-way bike lane on the north side of 10th ave would be great because:
(1) there would be no conflicts with cars or reasons to stop for 3 blocks at a time
(2) the lane can be extended in both directions quite far, especially to the west were it leads to Sunalta station and can connect to the river pathways under Crowchild. Importantly, this is a way to connect cyclists in the Beltline to the NW and W (and vice versa) without needing an expensive CPR overpass (although, that is needed at 7th st too).
(3) the current bike lane on 10th does not work at all. It basically functions as a turning lane and/or street parking. Barrier separation is clearly needed.

The more I think about it, the more I am sold on 10th ave. I understand the rationale for putting it on 8th ave, but 8th ave doesn't go as far, is already safer to bike on, has a conflict/traffic light every block, and may lead to conflicts between cyclists and pedestrians on Stephen Ave. I think we should focus on extending 7th street to 17th ave (no jigging around) and use 10th as the primary E-W track. Maybe 5th ave, 13th Ave, and 2nd St can eventually, one day get upgraded cycle infrastructure too.

[Chealion]

RyLucky: Why a 2 way on the north side instead of a separated lane on each appropriate side? If you're going east you're on the wrong side of the road and making a right sounds like a nightmare.

Though once the plan comes out I'd love to know what the plan is in regard to construction - especially given the amount of development 10th Ave has happening. (Mark and the Mustard Seed are both pain points on biking east)

[RyLucky]

RyLucky: Why a 2 way on the north side instead of a separated lane on each appropriate side? If you're going east you're on the wrong side of the road and making a right sounds like a nightmare.

Though once the plan comes out I'd love to know what the plan is in regard to construction - especially given the amount of development 10th Ave has happening. (Mark and the Mustard Seed are both pain points on biking east)

Keeping both directions on the north side of 10th ave would avoid conflicts with intersections at Centre, 2, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19th st, which I consider to be a big plus. Of course, I am talking about a separated (curbs, planters, maybe even trees or parked cars in some places) bidirectional bike lane, not just road paint.

I'll be interested to see how bike infrastructure is coordinated with development too. It's not ideal to close a lane or sidewalk, but usually I'll tolerate short term pain for long-term gain.

[Chealion]

Keeping both directions on the north side of 10th ave would avoid conflicts with intersections at Centre, 2, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19th st, which I consider to be a big plus.

Now I get it (feeling a little slow). Thanks.

[Fuzz]

By keeping it on one side, you also don't have the loss in parking.

As for bike share, we really need a network of cycle tracks before you can do that. I was in Montreal a few weeks ago and my Wife and I rented Bixi bikes. We road on some painted lane only lanes, and several of the cycle tracks, as well as pathways (and the F1 circuit, a must do!). With Calgary's current infrastructure, it just isn't easy to get around for causal riders. I noticed over 1/2 the riders there were in casual clothes, no helmets etc. They could do that becuase of the infrastructure.


The other issue is they need to cover a big enough area to be useful. Restricting it to a small zone downtown doesn't make sense, as bikes are good for covering larger distances. We will also need some form of bike lanes north of 10th, even if they are just painted lines. Having to go to the river or 10th isn't very convenient of the place you want to get to is downtown.

In short, I don't think Calgary is ready.

[Radley77]

One of the observations I had recently was City of Calgary poured cement and installed bike racks about a block from where I live. About 50% housing stock is 3 story condos and the other 50% is single family houses. The streets are generally full of parked cars. Immediately the bike rack had four bikes parked in it.

Id think that there are lots of places where could just put in more bike racks and it would help increase accessibility.

Where I see bike share being most valuable is to those who arrive in inner city area by transit and then have to travel greater than 400m to there place of work ( like an lrt user who has to work in mission).

[fusili]

Where I see bike share being most valuable is to those who arrive in inner city area by transit and then have to travel greater than 400m to there place of work ( like an lrt user who has to work in mission).

I definitely agree. It's that medium-distance that needs to be covered. Even Inglewood could be covered with bike stations at City Hall station and in Inglewood.

Somewhat related, but I think there could be value in having Car2Go spots at LRT stations outside the home zone. Great way to provide access to spots outside the inner city via a transit-Car2Go trip.

[RyLucky]

Bike share works well in MTL and NYC where a lot of people take mass transit and many people do not own private motor vehicles. Like you said, it's perfect for that final kilometer from the train station to work.

IMO, it would be better use of resources to improve cycle infrastructure near C-train stations first, with the eventual goal of installing cycleshare stations all along bike routes. Then again, MTL got bixi first, and then improved their infrastructure. Bike sharing is something that could probably work in many areas of our city, but it must be tightly coordinated with transit. Lastly, NYC and MTL represent opposite philosophies on bikeshare funding models, and I think it's important that eventually our bikeshare system be totally private, without subsidy. Rather than subsidizing operational costs, I think the city ought to build safer, more accessible infrastructure.

[ByeByeBaby]

One of the observations I had recently was City of Calgary poured cement and installed bike racks about a block from where I live. About 50% housing stock is 3 story condos and the other 50% is single family houses. The streets are generally full of parked cars. Immediately the bike rack had four bikes parked in it.

Id think that there are lots of places where could just put in more bike racks and it would help increase accessibility.

Where I see bike share being most valuable is to those who arrive in inner city area by transit and then have to travel greater than 400m to there place of work ( like an lrt user who has to work in mission).

This is exactly correct. Bike share is in some ways really a killer app for transit access, especially over mid range distances (800-1600 m). Over shorter distances (especially under 400m), the hassle of taking a bike out and returning it, as well as walking to stations is high relative to just walking there.

The proposed plan has all of the stations essentially within that 800m of 7th Ave. The sort of trips that I think would really be attractive by bike share (in most cases, with cycling infrastructure improvements) are trips like downtown-17th Ave, Mission to Erlton or 7th Ave LRT, Inglewood to downtown or Bridgeland LRT, Kensington to downtown.

[ByeByeBaby]

The other area, now that I think about it, that could really benefit from a bikeshare setup (but desperately needs infrastructure improvements first) is the greater "NW Hub" area roughly bounded by SAIT, Foothills, Market Mall and Brentwood (or even out to Northland or Dalhousie) and also containing the U of C, North Hill Mall, McMahon and Foothills Athletic, the U of C research park, the Children's Hospital, etc. There are a lot of facilities (and also a lot of residences) that are scattered about, with more limited transit access -- even the U of C campus itself is large enough that the train station at the edge starts to be awkward to get to.

[outoftheice]

From the Construction Thread:
Next separated cycle track announced:

http://blogs.calgaryherald.com/2013/11/27/city-to-unveil-plans-for-major-new-separated-bicycle-lane-downtown/

Personally, I can see the value by adding a cycle track on what is essentially the SB portion of Macleod Trail as I think that the strength of the South LRT line will help offset any problems losing a lane of traffic out of the core will have on people's commutes. The route also nicely links the two main bike path systems in the city and eliminates the large loop around the Stampede grounds that people who do not want to fight for space with traffic are currently forced to take. That being said, I can see a couple of issues that I'm curious to get some feedback on from the bikers on the forum.

1. What is it like for cyclists to have cycle traffic that offers 2 direction travel when the road way it is situated on is a one way street? I think that this would be a little weird as the guy on the bicycle will be the only object travelling against the majority of the traffic flow.

2. Does anyone else see it as a problem that this bike lane will be built on the east side of 1st? If it's purpose is to provide a route for cyclist into the core, that requires cyclists to leave the bike lanes and head west. But in order to exit the bike lane and head west, that means that cyclists will have to cross 3 lanes of traffic to do so. The only solution I can see is that cyclists on the bike track will have to be given their own set of turn signal traffic lights and automobile traffic will have to be stopped to allow for the turn movements of cyclists. I see this as being a rather large pain for everyone on all modes of transportation.

[fusili]

I like bike lanes, but I think this one is a bad location for one. 4th Street East, 1st Street SW or 2nd Street SW are much, much, much better candidates. 1st Street SW can easily connect to the Elbow River Pathway via Rouleauville Square and the old Mission bridge. 2nd street does so already (it just needs a rail crossing). Both also connects to the 13th avenue Greenway much better. Using 1st ST SE is honestly quite dangerous, and eliminates a very busy vehicle lane.

[H.E.Pennypacker]

Yeah I'm not a fan of the location - the 1 St SE and 4 Ave already is a headache in rush hour and busy times, backing up ... taking a lane away from all those cars that want to turn southbound (and there are a lot) will cause a back up even further

[Wooster]

The thing with 1st SE from a capacity standpoint is that at its highest volumes south of the Elbow, it's 3 lanes - it's only 4 lanes North of Elbow, where this cycle track may go.

The 1st SW is much more difficult for a lot of reasons - it has more bus routes, and you'd have to completely reconfigure the streetscape between 12th and 14th avenues and eliminate curb bump-outs and onstreet parking, and it wouldn't touch the Elbow pathway.

4th SE is likely to happen in any event.

[fusili]

The thing with 1st SE from a capacity standpoint is that at its highest volumes south of the Elbow, it's 3 lanes - it's only 4 lanes North of Elbow, where this cycle track may go.

The 1st SW is much more difficult for a lot of reasons - it has more bus routes, and you'd have to completely reconfigure the streetscape between 12th and 14th avenues and eliminate curb bump-outs and onstreet parking, and it wouldn't touch the Elbow pathway.

4th SE is likely to happen in any event.

Ok fair points. But why the east side and not the west. Connects so much better to everything on the west side. That I do not understand.

[lineman]

Bus stops are on the west side.

[H.E.Pennypacker]

Ok fair points. But why the east side and not the west. Connects so much better to everything on the west side. That I do not understand.

Bus routes are the only thing I can think of

[MichaelS]

Any details available as to how this will work going under the CPR tracks?

[Wooster]

Ok fair points. But why the east side and not the west. Connects so much better to everything on the west side. That I do not understand.

There's still a lot of design an analysis to be done before it would be finalized, but I understand from a functional standpoint (driveways, bus stops, turn movements etc) it would work better on the east side.

[kora]

Yeah I'm not a fan of the location - the 1 St SE and 4 Ave already is a headache in rush hour and busy times, backing up ... taking a lane away from all those cars that want to turn southbound (and there are a lot) will cause a back up even further

1 Street SE is no longer the important traffic artery it once was.

If we look at average daily weekday 24hr traffic figures (vehicles / day) for 1 St SE, just south of 6 Av, using random intervals (south of 4 Av isn't universally available across these time periods):

2011: 20,000
2006: 25,000
2001: 34,000
1996: 22,000
1991: 22,000
1987: 23,000
1973: 18,800

Traffic volume flow maps, Transportation Planning, City of Calgary
http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TP/Pages/Planning/Transportation-Data/Traffic-volume-flow-maps.aspx

[MasterG]

1 Street SE is no longer the important traffic artery it once was.

If we look at average daily weekday 24hr traffic figures (vehicles / day) for 1 St SE, just south of 6 Av, using random intervals (south of 4 Av isn't universally available across these time periods):

2011: 20,000
2006: 25,000
2001: 34,000
1996: 22,000
1991: 22,000
1987: 23,000
1973: 18,800

Traffic volume flow maps, Transportation Planning, City of Calgary
http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TP/Pages/Planning/Transportation-Data/Traffic-volume-flow-maps.aspx

This is interesting, what's with the bump in 2001? Any other major roads closed during that year or something?

[Boris2k7]

From what I can see from those maps, 1SE still has 3-5x as much vehicular traffic as 1SW, and 2x as much as 4SW or 5SW. Sure, traffic has been reduced, but saying it's not an important traffic artery doesn't bear with reality.

[H.E.Pennypacker]

From what I can see from those maps, 1SE still has 3-5x as much vehicular traffic as 1SW, and 2x as much as 4SW or 5SW. Sure, traffic has been reduced, but saying it's not an important traffic artery doesn't bear with reality.

Exactly.. Those are some interesting stats but my point is that despite the reduced traffic flow, that section of 4th is a snail crawl mess in peak times .. Taking a lane away for bikes will slow it down even more

If they could divert more traffic flow to 6th Ave via 3rd St SE, that would help mitigate the addition of a bike lane so the E-W traffic isn't affected a lot

[Wooster]

This is interesting, what's with the bump in 2001? Any other major roads closed during that year or something?

Transit strike likely.

[davee930]

Imagine a 2 way bike path going E-W over top of the train tracks with ramps on either side connecting the perpendicular cycle tracks. They could build it the same way they built the animal crossing bridges on the transcanada highway. Cover it with excavated dirt plant some trees and it creates a really long park as well!

[Fuzz]

1. What is it like for cyclists to have cycle traffic that offers 2 direction travel when the road way it is situated on is a one way street? I think that this would be a little weird as the guy on the bicycle will be the only object travelling against the majority of the traffic flow.

Not an issue at all on 7th st. Going southbound, you have traffic moving with you, and bike traffic coming toward you. The northbound bikes aren't looking to turn across your path for most of the route. The only issue is the stop sign on 3rd, as you have 4 way car traffic, 4 way pedestrian and 2 way bike traffic. It can be a little tough to get your turn when it is busy. Lots of stuff to watch for.

[RyLucky]

Bump.
www.calgaryherald.com/touch/story.html?id=9469441

5-6 new cycle tracks to be unveiled at hotel arts Thirsday.

[Spring2008]

Looking forward. Reminds me again, where's Radley at these days??

[Chealion]

Metro just posted a PDF of the brochure:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/204894426/Cycle-Track-Brochures-Print

http://metronews.ca/news/calgary/932262/downtown-calgary-cycling-network...

Also clarifies no cycle track on Stephen Ave but will open Stephen Ave to be used by bicycles with the exception of 1100-1400 (which I actually quite like as a general improvement)

[Spring2008]

Any mention of timeline? What tracks will they be working on this year?

[Chealion]

My 0.02 on the new draft:

It's awfully conservative and leaves a fair amount undefined. (eg. What defines a supporting bikeway? Painted lane? Sharrows? Wishful thinking?)

I do like that they put on the first page "People arriving by car decreased from 60% of traffic to 39%" for all those who insist that the majority drive.

I actually like the compromise on 8th Ave. But the lack of a track on 4/5/6 is a bigger deal.

I'm hoping that there are more specific details released, and my dream of having a cycle track outside my window are now dashed.

Any mention of timeline? What tracks will they be working on this year?

EDIT: http://bikecalgary.org/cycletracknetwork -> Says 5 year implementation schedule. 2014's focus is 1st St. SE

[outoftheice]

I like the majority of the plan but I must say that the inclusion of the Stephen Ave Walk is a weak point. Stephen Ave is one of the few examples of a high grade European High Street in North America.... this should not be messed with by introducing high speed bike traffic onto the street!

[lineman]

Oh boy. I'm sure Bell, Platt and their flocks of sheep are having a giant circle jerk over this.

[UofC.engineer]

I like the majority of the plan but I must say that the inclusion of the Stephen Ave Walk is a weak point. Stephen Ave is one of the few examples of a high grade European High Street in North America.... this should not be messed with by introducing high speed bike traffic onto the street!

I totally agree, I also don't know why 12th ave was chosen instead of 10th ave to have a cycle track. Isn't the 13th ave greenway just one block away? Am I even allowed to ride a bike on the 13th ave greenway?

[MichaelS]

I totally agree, I also don't know why 12th ave was chosen instead of 10th ave to have a cycle track. Isn't the 13th ave greenway just one block away? Am I even allowed to ride a bike on the 13th ave greenway?

It is purposely built to have a separate cycle track I thought. I agree with your thoughts, why build another one 1 block away? 10th seems like the much more logical choice, as it is a further distance, and also a lighter traffic road.

[Spring2008]

I like the majority of the plan but I must say that the inclusion of the Stephen Ave Walk is a weak point. Stephen Ave is one of the few examples of a high grade European High Street in North America.... this should not be messed with by introducing high speed bike traffic onto the street!

This could get dangerous! Would a cycle track along the alley between Stephen and 7th av be possible?

[MichaelS]

This could get dangerous! Would a cycle track along the alley between Stephen and 7th av be possible?

I don't think that alley exists for many blocks (Hyatt, Hudson's Bay, etc...).

[MasterG]

This could get dangerous! Would a cycle track along the alley between Stephen and 7th av be possible?

They purposely left Stephen Ave is a unique cycle-track (if you could call it that). East of 4th Street, a separated cycle route like 7th is just fine. But the reality is that they would never do that on the pedestrian portion. I expect a limited hours where riding is possible. (exclude 11am to 2pm) followed by a low-speed Woonerf? zone. There will be no proposal for a high-speed route despite any push for such by the cycling community.

I suspect for this section the most you would see is a 9A street approach: shared lane westbound, cycle lane east-bound, with speed limitations (like the ones that currently exist). Stephen Ave can easily handle that without disrupting the pedestrian experience. At least no more than the cars that are currently allowed in the evenings.

[mrcccondor]

They purposely left Stephen Ave is a unique cycle-track (if you could call it that). East of 4th Street, a separated cycle route like 7th is just fine. But the reality is that they would never do that on the pedestrian portion. I expect a limited hours where riding is possible. (exclude 11am to 2pm) followed by a low-speed Woonerf? zone. There will be no proposal for a high-speed route despite any push for such by the cycling community.

I suspect for this section the most you would see is a 9A street approach: shared lane westbound, cycle lane east-bound, with speed limitations (like the ones that currently exist). Stephen Ave can easily handle that without disrupting the pedestrian experience. At least no more than the cars that are currently allowed in the evenings.

Look at the number of bike racks on Stephen ave currently - I don't think the proposal is a drastic change from current conditions.

I agree with 10th Ave over 12th Ave, but the Greenway isn't an effective cycle corridor. No clear delineation between peds and cyclist. Stop sign at every intersection. I just don't like 12th cause it'll mess with other potential initiatives - turning 11th and 12th to 2 way streets, rumours of lrt going through beltline...

[Wooster]

13th is envisioned more as a recreational route connecting parks and heritage. If you ride it, it's not particularly functional as a commuter type route. 12th vs 10th - On 10th a cycle track would have bigger impact on travel lanes and parking as a narrower two way street. Loading and driveways are also more challenging. 12th is wider and it's easy to do a two way cycle track on a one way corridor. The curb lanes are very underutilized, so traffic flow is virtually unaffected. It's also the densest and most central route for Beltline.

[Wooster]

My 0.02 on the new draft:

It's awfully conservative and leaves a fair amount undefined. (eg. What defines a supporting bikeway? Painted lane? Sharrows? Wishful thinking?)

I do like that they put on the first page "People arriving by car decreased from 60% of traffic to 39%" for all those who insist that the majority drive.

I actually like the compromise on 8th Ave. But the lack of a track on 4/5/6 is a bigger deal.

I'm hoping that there are more specific details released, and my dream of having a cycle track outside my window are now dashed.



EDIT: http://bikecalgary.org/cycletracknetwork -> Says 5 year implementation schedule. 2014's focus is 1st St. SE

Even the most ardent bike supporting Councillors like Farrell and Woolley aren't able to support 4th, 5th, 6th yet. The backlash would (almost certainly) be so severe it puts the whole program at risk. Let's not forget that 5th and 6th in particular are crucial transit routes and transit is looking for some transit priority measures here. Cycling is not the only mode desperate for space.

Despite this - in my view, this is NOT a conservative plan.

Supporting infrastructure will primarily be painted lanes - for instance 3rd ave, south of 17th on 5th st where we don't have as much space to work with.

[fusili]

My thought about 8th Avenue for the cycle track is that it is a lesser of several evils kind of thing. Definitely not using 7th and (as Wooster also pointed out), 9th, 6th, 5th and 4th are all heavily used traffic roads, and are politically a non-starter. Also, because they are all one-ways, they are very poor to use as cycle lanes.

Now, 5th/6th with bus-only lanes......

[MasterG]

I totally agree, I also don't know why 12th ave was chosen instead of 10th ave to have a cycle track. Isn't the 13th ave greenway just one block away? Am I even allowed to ride a bike on the 13th ave greenway?

12th is a better connection for where the main density of beltline residents live: south of 12th avenue. If I am living at 14th or 15th ave closer to 14th street, and I would like to head east (17th Ave destinations, Stampede park, lindsay park etc.) It would not be a great benefit for me to divert North 5 blocks, then over 5 or 10, then south 5 or 10 blocks again.

13th Greenway is not really a cyclist-friendly route. While quiet for car traffic, it does not have controlled intersections / priority over cross street traffic (i.e. stop signs). Crossing 2nd Street, 1st Street is difficult without a light when you are on a bicycle when traffic is tough. Keeping on 12th ave the fast-moving cycle traffic is a much better idea, especially due to 12th having excess capacity and lane-space available as it is.

Overall a strong plan, I am afraid we won't see much of this come to fruition though. The Calgary Sun crowd will come out swinging. Hopefully Woolley, the Beltline Community Assoc and the pedestrain/cycle groups can hold them off and at least get a few key routes.

[UofC.engineer]

Overall a strong plan, I am afraid we won't see much of this come to fruition though. The Calgary Sun crowd will come out swinging. Hopefully Woolley, the Beltline Community Assoc and the pedestrain/cycle groups can hold them off and at least get a few key routes.

There is no need to worry, the Sun readers are only a small vocal minority, the arguments they make are weak and only made to slander Nenshi. The cycling strategy was approved in 2011 and it called for 30km of cycle tracks. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the $25-30 million for the cycling strategy has already been secured.

[woychukb]

13th Greenway is not really a cyclist-friendly route. While quiet for car traffic, it does not have controlled intersections / priority over cross street traffic (i.e. stop signs). Crossing 2nd Street, 1st Street is difficult without a light when you are on a bicycle when traffic is tough. Keeping on 12th ave the fast-moving cycle traffic is a much better idea, especially due to 12th having excess capacity and lane-space available as it is.

As a pedestrian I feel the 13th Ave Greenway fails for exactly the same reason - if you think it's bad crossing those streets as a cyclist, try it as a pedestrian. I haven't figured out exactly who the project was meant to benefit since none of vehicles, cyclists or pedestrians seems to gain any advantage.

Personally I'd prefer to put the cycle track on 10th so that drivers maintain a clear east-bound route (12th) and a clear west-bound route (11th) which should also help keep traffic off of 10th.

[MasterG]

As a pedestrian I feel the 13th Ave Greenway fails for exactly the same reason - if you think it's bad crossing those streets as a cyclist, try it as a pedestrian. I haven't figured out exactly who the project was meant to benefit since none of vehicles, cyclists or pedestrians seems to gain any advantage.

Personally I'd prefer to put the cycle track on 10th so that drivers maintain a clear east-bound route (12th) and a clear west-bound route (11th) which should also help keep traffic off of 10th.

Agreed completely. I would be happy to have controlled intersections, not necessarily stop lights, but at least signs on a far larger portion of Beltline roads. 1st street , 8th street, 4th street should have a light at practically every intersection that cycles frequently.

I do find myself naturally taking 13th when I go east or west as a pedestrian, the qualtiy and friendliness of the improvements really stand out, namely because other routes are so ugly. I have been socially engineered to use it! The horror!

[MasterG]

There is no need to worry, the Sun readers are only a small vocal minority, the arguments they make are weak and only made to slander Nenshi. The cycling strategy was approved in 2011 and it called for 30km of cycle tracks. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the $25-30 million for the cycling strategy has already been secured.

Yes that is true, they do have it within scope of their current budget. The cycling and inner city communities are fired up to support this, so hopefully that will pay off.

[RyLucky]

Everyone has already made most of the points I was going to make, but I just wanted to add one suggestion. A major weak point in the network is the lack of connection to the river from Sunalta. This could be a major route connecting the SW, W, NW Suburbs, UofC, Foothills to the Beltline, and currently it feels unsafe and circuitous. My hunch is that the plan was mainly developed by 25-35 yo males who live in the Beltline. A better Sunalta connection would better serve bike commuters from the bridge-and-tunnel crowd as well as students.

There are a few other tweaks I would prefer, but I'll see how implementation of 1st st SE goes before considering items more difficult items.

Although I assume Nenshi's role is limited in this network, I think historians of the future will look back at the network as one of his crowning achievements. This could really change the look and feel of our inner city.

[Full Mountain]

My concern with the plan is that the 5th street lane stops that 15th, this leaves a troublesome couple of blocks to 17th and then a significant section south of 17th to the river with minimal supporting infrastructure. As part of this I think that 5th St south of 11/12th should be converted to 2 way similar to 4th street, this would provide a more pleasant cycling experience if we aren't going to put a separated lane in.

[RyLucky]

My concern with the plan is that the 5th street lane stops that 15th, this leaves a troublesome couple of blocks to 17th and then a significant section south of 17th to the river with minimal supporting infrastructure. As part of this I think that 5th St south of 11/12th should be converted to 2 way similar to 4th street, this would provide a more pleasant cycling experience if we aren't going to put a separated lane in.

That actually sounds like a pretty good idea to me. I think it would give the converted area more of a neighbourhood feel too.

[Spring2008]

I do find myself naturally taking 13th when I go east or west as a pedestrian, the qualtiy and friendliness of the improvements really stand out, namely because other routes are so ugly. I have been socially engineered to use it! The horror!

I'll use the greenway if it ever reaches 8th street.

[UofC.engineer]

My concern with the plan is that the 5th street lane stops that 15th, this leaves a troublesome couple of blocks to 17th and then a significant section south of 17th to the river with minimal supporting infrastructure. As part of this I think that 5th St south of 11/12th should be converted to 2 way similar to 4th street, this would provide a more pleasant cycling experience if we aren't going to put a separated lane in.

I agree, I think they should extend the cycle track down to the elbow river pathway. If that is considered "over kill" they should at least put in bike lanes to the river so it can connect to the pathway system.

[RyLucky]

5th St needs wider sidewalks. Everywhere. From the Bow to the Elbow. There are tons of spots where you pretty much have to walk single-file.

[MasterG]

I agree, I think they should extend the cycle track down to the elbow river pathway. If that is considered "over kill" they should at least put in bike lanes to the river so it can connect to the pathway system.

Absolutely. 5th street south of 17th ave is a key bike route now, except with terrible sight lines, a narrow ROW and heavy auto traffic. I suspect that the amount of conflict south of 17th ave would be a big battle. Even the residential along there has street parking, which would largely have to be removed to do much of anything.

The sidewalks are also amongst the narrowest in the area on 5th street in Cliff Bungalow, so any changes should address them as well. All in all, its not one of the "lets be a bit more efficient and squeeze in a bike lane so everyone wins" it will be a "lots of losers now, and lots more to come."

My preference is pedestrian and bike space improvements, but that would require losing all parking for the majority of the route which will be a tough sell for local who want it both ways, even if the majority walk as it is.

[Cage]

Overall a strong plan, I am afraid we won't see much of this come to fruition though. The Calgary Sun crowd will come out swinging. Hopefully Woolley, the Beltline Community Assoc and the pedestrain/cycle groups can hold them off and at least get a few key routes.

Probably see about 75% of the initial plan come to fruition. At least one major component will likely have to be reworked, my guess is either 1 Street SE or 12 Avenue will get repositioned due to overall city pushback.

Don't worry about the Calgary Sun crowd, the bigger problem with implementation of the Cycle Track strategy is that there are no benefits to the citizens in the majority of the wards where has there is potential for huge negatives to these citizens. Negatives are to both motorists and pedestrians. In the Pedestrian instance there is Stephen Ave; I sometimes walk at ground level between the Core (TD Tower) and Bankers Hall and in cold weather like today it is a brisk walk. I would be forced to take the Plus 15 overhead walkway if the number of high speed bikes posed a threat to safety. On the motorist front, its hard not to get angry at cycle pathway when you are stuck in traffic and staring at open unused cycling lane.

To put things into perspective, I live in Ward 2, drive and walk downtown but would never take my bike downtown (distance from home being the primary reason for not biking downtown). What's in it for me? Would the negative aspects result in significant (or perceived significant) inconvenience to the point where I would raise a concern with my Councilor up to organizing opposition to the Cycle Track Plan.

[frinkprof]

I totally agree, I also don't know why 12th ave was chosen instead of 10th ave to have a cycle track.

12th vs 10th - On 10th a cycle track would have bigger impact on travel lanes and parking as a narrower two way street. Loading and driveways are also more challenging. 12th is wider and it's easy to do a two way cycle track on a one way corridor. The curb lanes are very underutilized, so traffic flow is virtually unaffected. It's also the densest and most central route for Beltline.The solution for the 10th/11th/12th corridor (2 way cycle track on 12th) is the only one that Beltline Transportation Committee is taking issue with.

The problem is that putting in a 2 way cycle track along 12th Avenue right now basically precludes possible reversion to 2 way operation of 11th and 12th Avenues. BTC wants a revisit of 11th and 12th 2 way operation with a study and discussion before a decision is made on cycle tracks in this corridor and also possible long-term transit solutions in this corridor as well.

10th is preferred as an alternative, and if 2 way operation comes to pass, you could have a 1-way cycle track on any one of 10th, 11th or 12th and the other direction on one of the adjacent avenues. For example, you could have an westbound cycle track on one side of 10th and a eastbound cycle track on one side of 11th.

Everything else is supported and will be lobbied for.

[MasterG]

The solution for the 10th/11th/12th corridor (2 way cycle track on 12th) is the only one that Beltline Transportation Committee is taking issue with.

The problem is that putting in a 2 way cycle track along 12th Avenue right now basically precludes possible reversion to 2 way operation of 11th and 12th Avenues. BTC wants a revisit of 11th and 12th 2 way operation with a study and discussion before a decision is made on cycle tracks in this corridor and also possible long-term transit solutions in this corridor as well.

10th is preferred as an alternative, and if 2 way operation comes to pass, you could have a 1-way cycle track on any one of 10th, 11th or 12th and the other direction on one of the adjacent avenues. For example, you could have an westbound cycle track on one side of 10th and a eastbound cycle track on one side of 11th.

Everything else is supported and will be lobbied for.

That is a tough proposition for me. I would much prefer to see 12th ave as the East-west bicycle connector as it is much more accessible to large swaths of the Beltline's population. but I would also like 2 way reversion.

What about 10th Ave cycletrack + inclusion of 15th ave bicycle boulevard and traffic calming?

[frinkprof]

That is a tough proposition for me. I would much prefer to see 12th ave as the East-west bicycle connector as it is much more accessible to large swaths of the Beltline's population. but I would also like 2 way reversion.

What about 10th Ave cycletrack + inclusion of 15th ave bicycle boulevard and traffic calming?Yeah the 15th Avenue bike boulevard idea was actually generated by Beltline Transportation Committee. Certainly for that and it's just a matter of working out which measures you implement to make it happen.

BTC had always envisioned having one east-west bike route in the south half of the community, and one in the north half.

[MasterG]

Yeah the 15th Avenue bike boulevard idea was actually generated by Beltline Transportation Committee. Certainly for that and it's just a matter of working out which measures you implement to make it happen.

BTC had always envisioned having one east-west bike route in the south half of the community, and one in the north half.

Yes I would agree, you certainly want one in the southern half. I suppose the challenge would be to give 15th ave the correct amount of priority: no lights/intersection controls at 8th, 5th, 4th or 1st making travel East-West difficult without improvements.

It would be a good candidate for the Vancouver style "green until crossing demanded by pedestrian or cyclist" buttons.

[Allan83]

I’m not in favour of making 11th and 12th into two way streets. I’d want to see the traffic studies before committing to one side or the other, of course, but just from my personal experience on those roads I think they need to be one-way with synchronized lights to handle the volume of traffic they have at certain times of the day. On a related topic, one fringe benefit of the 7th street cycleway I’ve noticed is that it seems to make that street a lot nicer for pedestrians as well. Walking beside cyclists, who are always very diverse, wearing all kinds of different clothes, and riding different kinds of bikes, is a lot more interesting, and seems a lot more social somehow, than walking beside a stream of anonymous cars. And I think adding a cycleway to 10th, 11th, or 12th would do the same thing. Adding a cycleway may be the way to create the intimacy and street friendliness people are looking for rather than changing 11th and 12th to two way streets. Just my 2 cents.

[DizzyEdge]

Is there a time of day when both 11th and 12th are fully utilized? It seems in the morning rush hour 12th would be full and 11th not so much, and in the evening rush hour the opposite. If that is the case, what about doing something like making 10th ave a lane reversal street, 3 lanes east in the morning, 3 lanes west in the evening, with 11th and 12th back to two way full time.

[Chealion]

I totally agree, I also don't know why 12th ave was chosen instead of 10th ave to have a cycle track. Isn't the 13th ave greenway just one block away? Am I even allowed to ride a bike on the 13th ave greenway?

The 13th Ave Greenway actually has both a sidewalk and a "MUP" - on the ground they look the same however. It was said earlier, it's a terrible route because of the difficulty crossing the larger streets, but also there are no curb cuts. (Something to do with provincial traffic law - what exactly I'm not sure)

Even the most ardent bike supporting Councillors like Farrell and Woolley aren't able to support 4th, 5th, 6th yet. The backlash would (almost certainly) be so severe it puts the whole program at risk. Let's not forget that 5th and 6th in particular are crucial transit routes and transit is looking for some transit priority measures here. Cycling is not the only mode desperate for space.

Despite this - in my view, this is NOT a conservative plan.

Supporting infrastructure will primarily be painted lanes - for instance 3rd ave, south of 17th on 5th st where we don't have as much space to work with.

I understand why not to do 4/5/6 completely - the limitation of not changing the road and only using existing space is a poor fit for those roads. At minimum I would think you'd need bus islands (and please transit only lanes) so the cycle track reduces conflict with transit. The lack of a EW track north of the tracks that connects all the way from 1st St to 7th (or 11th) is unideal.

I do take back the awfully part of my awfully conservative sentence, I still think it's conservative but an excellent and practical compromise.

Thanks for the info on the supporting infrastructure. Painted lanes a lot more suitable than sharrows.

[MalcolmTucker]

Can't go from Calgary to Copenhagen in a single step. As my policy prof once told me, a policy that gets the government unelected is automatically the worst policy. Even Vancouver has a weird revolt over a bike lane on a sideish street right now!

[MasterG]

Can't go from Calgary to Copenhagen in a single step. As my policy prof once told me, a policy that gets the government unelected is automatically the worst policy. Even Vancouver has a weird revolt over a bike lane on a sideish street right now!

I bet you'll see most of these built. The reality is that all the roads can handle the perceived hit to vehicular capacity. Especially 12th ave, 5th street and 8th. Stephen will be interesting, but I doubt you will see a cycle-track in the definition of 7th Street, definitely one more low-key: allows cyclists but not necessarily a fast route or dedicated space.

[H.E.Pennypacker]

For Stephen Ave, just had signs indicating for bikers to go slowly .. Otherwise they can be given 'speeding ticket's :rolleyes:

[Spring2008]

Connecting this to our very large river path system will be a key to success. I can see cycling really take off here once the right infrastructure is in place with a central workforce of ~200,000 and growing. Very important to continue maximizing all forms of transportation to reduce congestion.

Graham: Cycle track deserves to get some traction


BY BRUCE GRAHAM, CALGARY HERALD FEBRUARY 7, 2014

Calgary’s proposed cycle track network has been creating quite a buzz around town lately and we wanted to weigh in on this issue. You may wonder why we, as Calgary’s leading economic development organization, care about a cycle track network for Calgary. Well, as the promotional agency tasked with attracting and retaining the best talent, as well as promoting our business and lifestyle advantages around the world, a cycle track network will help us do just that.

It may be less obvious than an increase in healthy lifestyle or taking tailpipes off the roads, but an inner city cycle track network can boost business. In Colorado, cycling brought more than $1 billion to the state’s local economy, and in New York, after the installation of a protected bike lane, retail sales increased by as much as 49 per cent compared to a three per cent increase in sales citywide during the same period.

When San Francisco optimized Valencia Street for cyclists and pedestrians, nearly 40 per cent of merchants reported increased sales and 60 per cent reported more area residents shopping locally due to reduced travel time and convenience. Travelling by bike encourages more frequent stops than travelling by car; a study of Toronto merchants revealed that patrons arriving by foot and bicycle visited the most often and spent the most money per month.

It goes without saying that parking the car and jumping on your Trek is good for your health, but it’s also good for the health of the community. Business owners would be interested in a study done by the Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research, which found that cycling reduced employee absenteeism — specifically, the employees who cycled to work regularly missed less work, on average more than one day per year less than colleagues who didn’t. And a Minnesota company that encouraged its employees to bike to work saved $170,000 in health care over three years and $301,000 through increased employee productivity every year.

And then there’s the social reputation factor: The “I didn’t know the city built on energy invested in commuter bike lanes.” And make no mistake, it is an investment. This is a prime example of the kind of selling feature we use when telling Calgary’s story around the world. People want to live in a city that invests in making the lives of its citizens better. Sixty-two per cent of recent transplants to Portland, Ore., said that the city’s bike friendliness was a factor in their decision to move there. By 2018, Calgary’s population is expected to grow by more than 150,000 people. We’d love to add the cycle track network to our people-attraction tool kit before we see tens of thousands of new cars added to our morning commute.

The major benefit of dedicated bike lanes is they help pedestrians, motorists, transit users and cyclists coexist safely. Even in Calgary’s harshest weather, you’ll see many diehard cyclists making their way to work, and these numbers would increase if we made their commute safer. After New York City installed their first protected bike lane (the first in the U.S.), they saw a reduction in injuries to all street users by 58 per cent. Calgary drivers will be the first to say that the unpredictability of cyclists sharing the narrow downtown roadways makes them nervous for the safety of the cyclists and themselves. A cycle track network in Calgary gives commuters a reliable alternative to driving, while ensuring the well-being of both cyclists and motorists.

Calgary is already well suited to adopting a cycle track network and here’s why. With the most expensive parking in Canada, our citizens have already shown us they would happily utilize this healthy and fun mode of transportation.

The first leg of the cycle track network runs on 7th Street S.W., and over the course of a year (2012-2013), the number of bikes quadrupled per day. Pedestrians were happier too, as the number of cyclists riding on the sidewalk went down by 25 per cent. At 700 kilometres, Calgary has the longest paved urban pathway system on the continent. With the addition of a downtown cycle track (and Calgary Transit’s recent announcement that all new buses will have bike racks), commuters can safely and efficiently travel from their homes in any quadrant of the city into the core. Calgarians may be surprised (and hopefully delighted) to learn that over the past five years, a multitude of downtown building owners have added up to 2,000 bike parking stalls in their buildings, telling their tenants and their employees they support their desire to embrace diverse transportation options.

We realize adoption will take time and people want to be involved in the process to understand where the proposed network will go and how it impacts them. We encourage Calgarians looking for more information on the cycle track network, to stop by the CORE Shopping Centre, Plus-15 level, by Holt Renfrew, this Monday to Friday from 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. to talk to the cycle track network team.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion/op-ed/Graham+Cycle+track+deserves+some+traction/9482985/story.html

[Spring2008]

Now that the Macleod Trail cycle track got turned down, now what? Would 1st sw work?

[ByeByeBaby]

Now that the Macleod Trail cycle track got turned down, now what? Would 1st sw work?

The decision (odd to my eyes, but someone must have a reason) to push the 1st St E corridor ahead of the strategy has been stopped. The whole circus will kick off again in two months when the entire cycletrack strategy gets brought forward; this is the more extensive network, and IMHO is the real battle.

The 1st St E corridor always struck me as an odd corridor to push forward; not only is it on the busiest roadway, but it has the least stand-alone merit. The 2006 downtown commuter cyclist survey (http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TP/Pages/Cycling/Cycling-Route-Improvements/Downtown-Commuter-cyclist-survey.aspx) had an open-ended question (Q9) over which north/south route in the downtown/Beltline needed improvement, and 1st St E didn't make the top 10, which is notable given that there are only 15 N/S roads in the Beltline longer than 2 blocks.

Here's the routes cyclists take:
http://i.imgur.com/5iWr0kt.png

Commuters heading into the central city from the south take the Elbow river pathways the most, with a second much smaller group coming in on 14th and 20th St from Altadore/Bankview. (West of Crowchild and east of the Stampede, most head over to the river.) Nobody's coming from the cemetery, or the industrial districts. The main destination for commuters is going to be the middle of downtown; east of Centre, there's the Bow, and City Hall and not a whole lot else as compared with the huge amount of office space in the centre of the core.

The cycle track plan identified 5th as a route, which seems ideal; it goes right into the heart of the core, it's not nearly as busy a road south of downtown, it serves a lot more destinations in the Beltline/Mission area, it connects to the Elbow pathways more directly than 1st St E (which has the detour around Lindsay Park), and the bulk of existing N/S traffic is on the 2nd/4th/5th corridor already. Going from, say, Banker's Hall to the Elbow River Pathway past 5th St is 2.1 km on 5th and 3.8 km on 1st E; that 1.7 extra km is not something people would be excited to ride.

But I'm sure there were reasons for separating it out; maybe the additional tourist destinations on 1st E, or maybe because it's shorter, there's less expense. Who knows; we love to build orphan cycling facilities and change our minds before we get a network down. Once, it was 2nd St W; then it was 10th Ave S; then the 7th St W cycle track. The 13th Ave greenway managed to get dropped from consideration as a key cycle facility before it was even done construction, which must be some sort of record.

[Spring2008]

wow look at 2nd street sw! Too bad it ends at the tracks.

[fusili]

Agreed, 2nd street should be proposed bike lane. I see the difficulty with connecting it to Downtown though.

What I don't understand is the push to put bike paths on the the busiest vehicle roads rather than secondary streets. I think 7th Street is great as a cycle track, because it doesn't have a huge volume of vehicle traffic, which means less conflicting turns. Secondary roads, IMO, make the best bike routes, because they are direct, have less conflicting turn movements, and also usually have no lights, so less waiting for bikes. 2nd Street NW would be a perfect example of this if it had a bike lane.

I understand some of the arguments for 1st SE, but I really don't get it. It just seems to be an attempt to achieve a victory over roads.

[Wooster]

The fundamental problem is getting people under the tracks.

[Spring2008]

http://blogs.calgaryherald.com/2014/02/21/why-big-downtown-developers-are-betting-on-cyclists/

[ByeByeBaby]

wow look at 2nd street sw! Too bad it ends at the tracks.

2nd St SW has the best bike conditions because there's already a bike lane on it from the Elbow to the tracks. If you can see it under the gravel, that is. I think this is a measure of cyclists using the less direct route with better conditions; no matter where a cycle track is built in the beltline, I would expect substantial use from those on nearby roads.

In a perfect world (i.e. with no budget restraints), 2nd and 7th streets get cycle/pedestrian underpasses (2nd is on the books for the Green Line LRT tunnel, but that's not exactly imminent) and they are the core north/south connectors. I've seen generic estimates of cycle/ped underpass costs at $2-3 million apiece, although that would depend on the structural needs and if there are any belowground utilities that conflict. (The 4th St E underpass was $70M, but it is more than twice as deep and many times wider than a ped underpass would need to be, and the structural requirements are based largely on the distance spanned.) If the costs are in that magnitude, that seems the easiest, given the costs associated with other pedestrian/bike infrastructure.

Agreed, 2nd street should be proposed bike lane. I see the difficulty with connecting it to Downtown though.

What I don't understand is the push to put bike paths on the the busiest vehicle roads rather than secondary streets. I think 7th Street is great as a cycle track, because it doesn't have a huge volume of vehicle traffic, which means less conflicting turns. Secondary roads, IMO, make the best bike routes, because they are direct, have less conflicting turn movements, and also usually have no lights, so less waiting for bikes. 2nd Street NW would be a perfect example of this if it had a bike lane.

I understand some of the arguments for 1st SE, but I really don't get it. It just seems to be an attempt to achieve a victory over roads.

I couldn't agree with you more.

[UofC.engineer]

2nd St SW has the best bike conditions because there's already a bike lane on it from the Elbow to the tracks.

2nd st has sharrows, not bike lanes. I prefer sharrows anyways because bike lanes are usually full of gravel and seem to have a three year life span since they get faded so quickly.

When I ride into downtown I almost always take 2nd Street, I think a two way cycle track on the east side of 2nd St. would be a great addition.:)

[MasterG]

2nd St SW has the best bike conditions because there's already a bike lane on it from the Elbow to the tracks. If you can see it under the gravel, that is. I think this is a measure of cyclists using the less direct route with better conditions; no matter where a cycle track is built in the beltline, I would expect substantial use from those on nearby roads.

In a perfect world (i.e. with no budget restraints), 2nd and 7th streets get cycle/pedestrian underpasses (2nd is on the books for the Green Line LRT tunnel, but that's not exactly imminent) and they are the core north/south connectors. I've seen estimates of cycle/ped underpass costs at $2-3 million apiece, although that would depend on the structural needs and if there are any belowground utilities that conflict. (The 4th St E underpass was $70M, but it is more than twice as deep and many times wider than a ped underpass would need to be, and the structural requirements are based largely on the distance spanned.) If the costs are in that magnitude, that seems the easiest, given the costs associated with other pedestrian/bike infrastructure.


I couldn't agree with you more.

If you could do an underpass for that cheap then yes let's do it. But I doubt it, too many costly ROW conflicts (city has to buy the connection).

Fundamentally MacLeod Tr. is a fine location moving from 8 lanes to 7, when the extra lane only exists for the downtown portion.

It is the best connection from River to River, passes the most amount of density along the way. Not to mention all the additional projects in the area in the next few years. There could be an additional 3 - 5,000 people within a block or two of this cycletrack in 5 years. Largely they will not be driving walking, cycling if possible etc.

I find this obsession with Rush hour commuting a strange one, as the 1 - 2 hour afternoon rush being the only time that auto traffic will be negatively effected (estimated at 30seconds to a minute). Anyone who lives in the area or Beltline benefits / indifferent from this at all hours; anyone who is inconvenienced is only inconvenienced for 1 / 24 hours a day. For 30 seconds.

Ideally cycling and walking would have independent infrastructure. But that is not the case. Sacrifices must be made by auto traffic as they are the only group with slack to give, not to mention in the minority of mode share for the area. The underpass is crucial, as that is the main barrier for cyclists // pedestrians.

The choice is really should we give people a chance to be mobile in the core by building an alternative that raises the ultimate capacity of the road? or should we do nothing until Macleod Trail is gridlock anyways? Remember the second choice also negatively impacts the living environment of the area.

[uptown]

I wonder if 2nd street could go across the tracks instead of under? We already have level crossings in several places for bikes and pedestrians.

[MasterG]

I wonder if 2nd street could go across the tracks instead of under? We already have level crossings in several places for bikes and pedestrians.

Going up runs into grade issues which are not appealing to pedestrians and cyclists. The equivalent of building the spiral ramps of the tower parkade but for people. Expensive, not attractive / accessible to people unable or unwilling to do a few hundred metres of switch backs to get over the tracks. They would likely continue to crowd into the underpasses.

We have only one 1 level crossing for bicycles a painted bike lane on 11th street. Potentially 4th SE would count as well, although no cycling facilities exist on either side of the underpass. Note that those are 15 blocks apart or 2.5km. A car wouldn't divert that far out of the way, neither would a cyclist. And they have to pedal to get there, so their threshold for detours in much lower.

The mode share reflects that cycling and pedestrians should be getting more in the inner city. It might not be now, but the reality is that cars cannot have more space and their share has been declining already (Only 35% of downtown commuters are by car, down from 55% in 2001). There is no more room for them and adding lanes is politically unpalatable. The only reason cars are being asked for space is that they are disproportionately allocated space in the current setup. Maybe 20 years ago they deserved the space they have, but the decline in mode share and shift to alternatives demand a response. Walking, transit and cycling all require more space and no one can give any except cars unfortunately.

Bicycles will happen eventually, Calgary might as well start investing in this now before we fall further behind other North American cities.

It is too bad that the Uni-City model bites us in issues like this. The larger, older suburbs are dictating terms to the inner city, to the inner city's detriment. Public support for cycling is also drastically split along age and location lines (over 40 or in the burbs: "I hate cyclists!") vs (under 40 or inner city: "sure why not?")

[Cage]

I find this obsession with Rush hour commuting a strange one, as the 1 - 2 hour afternoon rush being the only time that auto traffic will be negatively effected (estimated at 30seconds to a minute). Anyone who lives in the area or Beltline benefits / indifferent from this at all hours; anyone who is inconvenienced is only inconvenienced for 1 / 24 hours a day. For 30 seconds.

Allow me for a few seconds to wade into the debate with the car commuter perspectives.

For starters I don't believe the 30 second delay statistic for car travelers. More specifically, I do believe there is a mathematical calculation that gets some magical average commuter delay to be 30 seconds, however I wonder what the standard deviation for the delay looks like. I imagine that if a car misses 2 lights due to increased congestion the delay is going to be order of magnitude greater than 30 seconds. I would be interested to see what the computer modeling came up with under realistic scenarios (e.g. morning peak, afternoon peak, before/after major event at Stampede, during and after a major snow storm, etc.).

The SE cycletrack proponents seem to talk as if 1 Street SE was singular piece of road however having lived at Rocky Mountain Court and driven this road extensively, I would say this is not the case. There is significant higher peak period for the Northern half of the road, 4th Avenue until 12 Avenue. This section of road has significant more grid lock peak period use (morning rush, lunch hour peak, afternoon rush, plus before and after any Stampede grounds event). 12th Avenue to 25th Avenue has only an afternoon peak.

Cycletrack proponents tend to talk about peak cycle use, which also occurs when vehicle commuter use is at it lowest. However the solution proposed by the cycletrack system is permanent. I don't mind giving up a lane of road during the summer, but during the winter, its a non starter. I would hate to see gridlock on three lanes of 1 Street SE with the cycle track not being used for long periods of time.

On the mayors temporary trial 1 street SE cycle track, I fear the time frame will be during the August time period or another time period when cycling is at its peak and road traffic is at a low point. I could agree to trial the temporary solution September to December to see how the cycle track operates in all types of conditions, including gauging public perception during the peak crush times of snow fall during the morning and afternoon rush.

[RyLucky]

Ideal routes would be 7th st and 2nd st, but they are nothing without a way past CPR and green wave light timing. Anything else will be second rate, but honestly, the situation is desperate enough that I'll settle for second rate.

This is kind of reminding me of the airport tunnel and Nenshi's argument for "the hat" (he argued it was cheaper to build the tunnel than to build all the roads up to standard in order to provide the same E-W access without a tunnel). I'm in favour of spending the money to get a direct route unless it's like $50 million or something.