HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2007, 6:02 PM
feepa's Avatar
feepa feepa is offline
Change is good
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,758
Traffic in Calgary or Edmonton is nothing compared to Montreal or Toronto, or many other cities. Most of the time, at rush hour, Traffic still flows near speed limit. From my experiences, many freeways in Montreal come a near complete stand still at times. My experience was only limited to a few days...
Either way - 2 hours to get across Calgary is absurd, and if it was true, I'm sure it doesn't happen all the time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2007, 6:28 PM
IntotheWest's Avatar
IntotheWest IntotheWest is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okotoks (Calgary)
Posts: 2,916
How did I know that Calgary would come up in this thread

TV - I'm not sure what you ran into, but I live in the furthest point in SW Calgary (the furthest point of anywhere in Calgary period), and during rush hour, it takes me about 40 minutes to downtown...50 on the worst day, 30 minutes if moving good (about 60% of the time). The biggest hiccups on McLeod are at Southland - where you can sit for 2-3 light changes - and Glenmore (partly because of the continued construction there).

I also used to go direct to the airport during rush hour (both there and back), and it would typically take 35 minutes - which includes some slow-time on the Deerfoot. That's one corner of the city to another. The longest trip in 4 years (two trips a week) was 50 minutes...in snow, with accidents.

By C-Train, it's 27 minutes - exactly.

Toronto is by far worse - especially during rush hour. Working in North York, and staying in Markham would take me about 45 minutes during rush hour. The odd time I'd go downtown after work, it'd be closer to an 1:20 - admittedly, down Younge though

When I lived worked in Winnipeg (EK, working at 355 Portage) for 5 years, it would on average take about 25 minutes, with some slow down over Disraeli...that was 10 years ago.

In Edmonton, I could make it from my home in St Albert to Jasper/101th would take on average 30 minutes (7 years ago, I'm sure it's worse now).

In Vancouver, I had a couple routes - the first was from downtown to Burnaby (boundary/Kingsway), would take about 20 minutes but against the grain. The second would be from the depths of Richmond (just off No 3) to central Vancouver (41st), and that would take 25 minutes...likely another 15-20 minutes to downtown from there. Much, much worse if you live out in Surrey or New West, unless taking the Skytrain.

One of my wife's friends did claim to drive 1:25 minutes each way in Calgary for a commute, but she lived in the far NW (Nose Hill area), and worked in the SE industrial area.

Sorry for the long post - just sharing some "data" through lengthy and somewhat unbiased experience.
__________________
Download Google Earth 4 "Calgary Downtown" Collection of buildings here - http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2007, 6:38 PM
malek's Avatar
malek malek is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Montréal
Posts: 8,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by feepa View Post
Traffic in Calgary or Edmonton is nothing compared to Montreal or Toronto, or many other cities. Most of the time, at rush hour, Traffic still flows near speed limit. From my experiences, many freeways in Montreal come a near complete stand still at times.

isn't that what real traffic is?

I wouldn't mind driving on a packed highway at rush time well below the speed limit, i would be at work in 25 minutes. Its the stand still that get on my nerves, and most of the times because some idiot is playing with his/her phone or being a lunatic leaving too much space in front of their car.

Too many trucks create traffic too, because it takes much longer to take off and they leave a lot of space ahead of them (no choice either), put 300 trucks on a stretch and you get instant traffic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2007, 7:02 PM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
Editor
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 40,275
Quote:
Originally Posted by malek View Post
isn't that what real traffic is?
No. Edmonton, in fact, is so fabulous, that cars fly! No need for stopping!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2007, 7:18 PM
Greco Roman Greco Roman is offline
Movin' on up
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by feepa View Post
Your idea of a troll is anyone who isn't a booster of Winnipeg. Guess that makes me a troll then, and yes, it does take 2 Winnipegs to be greater than 1 feepa.
No, my idea of a troll is anyone who comes here to mock someone (such as people with disabilities) or something else with little insight to contribute to (ie no constructive criticism, just pure verbal diharrea); they don't really care what is going on in the city, but only visit to knock it down and get a good laugh in.

Comments made by you, such as these: "1 Calgary would still be better then 2 Winnipeg's combined." are an example of pure verbal diharrea.

This fits your description to a tea.

Since this is the case, and have no interest in what is going on in Winnipeg, unlike other out-of-province forumers that do visit here and have constructive criticism to add without the arrogance, I think you should visit somewhere else and look down on them. Clearing the air of this nonesense will help to improve the discussions around here. You have your reasons for being an Edmonton booster, so please go and boost Edmonton elsewhere, ok?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2007, 8:57 PM
feepa's Avatar
feepa feepa is offline
Change is good
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,758
^^ If you have a problem with any of my postings, please feel free to contact an admin/mod of this board. Name calling, and other stuff does not belong on this board. If you have a specific issue with me, bring it to a PM. It does not need to fill the valuable discussion on how much better Winnipeg is or isn't because it has/has not freeways. At least my post was in the context of the discussion at hand. If you can't take a little tongue'n'cheek humour, maybe you need to turn your computer off, and get laid.

and FYI: I do have a vested interest in what goes on in my former home town, and place where lots of my family lives. Sorry I dont sugar coat everything. I speak how I see it. Like it or not, I don't care.
Thanks,

feepa.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2007, 9:02 PM
feepa's Avatar
feepa feepa is offline
Change is good
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,758
Quote:
Originally Posted by malek View Post
isn't that what real traffic is?

I wouldn't mind driving on a packed highway at rush time well below the speed limit, i would be at work in 25 minutes. Its the stand still that get on my nerves, and most of the times because some idiot is playing with his/her phone or being a lunatic leaving too much space in front of their car.

Too many trucks create traffic too, because it takes much longer to take off and they leave a lot of space ahead of them (no choice either), put 300 trucks on a stretch and you get instant traffic.
I'm not sure what your question means? Real traffic? That's real traffic congestion, for sure
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2007, 9:12 PM
mbeaumont mbeaumont is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Quebec city
Posts: 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by feepa View Post
Traffic in Calgary or Edmonton is nothing compared to Montreal or Toronto, or many other cities. Most of the time, at rush hour, Traffic still flows near speed limit. From my experiences, many freeways in Montreal come a near complete stand still at times. My experience was only limited to a few days...
Either way - 2 hours to get across Calgary is absurd, and if it was true, I'm sure it doesn't happen all the time.

Considering the Montreal Metro has 3 times the population of either Calgary or Edmonton its only natural, its only a select few that are at a complete standstill during rushhours mainly Decarie and the Metropolitain, but our freeways only reach a max of 6 lanes wide which dosen't help the situation if we had more lanes Im sure our traffic wouldn't be as bad at all
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2007, 9:21 PM
Marc B.'s Avatar
Marc B. Marc B. is offline
Robot Hand is the Future
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Wolseley
Posts: 325
Quote:
Originally Posted by IntotheWest View Post
Toronto is by far worse - especially during rush hour. Working in North York, and staying in Markham would take me about 45 minutes during rush hour. The odd time I'd go downtown after work, it'd be closer to an 1:20 - admittedly, down Younge though
Watching 16 lanes of traffic crawl along the 401 while zipping out of Wilson Station on my way home from York was an after school treat in Toronto.

We barely have traffic here - for reasons not to be smug about. Getting south of Portage down Memorial after work, though, is a pain in the ass. Something about funnelling four lanes of traffic into two. I don't think a freeway would really help (building LRT to UM probably would make a difference though, or at least wouldn't hurt...a guy can dream) I am all for reducing obstructions along commercial hauling routes like Route 90, Lagemodier, and Inkster and improving flow efficiency for industry. I thought there was movement in that direction anyway, no?
__________________
your pal, Tom Mango
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2007, 9:24 PM
Greco Roman Greco Roman is offline
Movin' on up
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by feepa View Post
^^ If you have a problem with any of my postings, please feel free to contact an admin/mod of this board. Name calling, and other stuff does not belong on this board. If you have a specific issue with me, bring it to a PM. It does not need to fill the valuable discussion on how much better Winnipeg is or isn't because it has/has not freeways. At least my post was in the context of the discussion at hand. If you can't take a little tongue'n'cheek humour, maybe you need to turn your computer off, and get laid.
and FYI: I do have a vested interest in what goes on in my former home town, and place where lots of my family lives. Sorry I dont sugar coat everything. I speak how I see it. Like it or not, I don't care.
Thanks,

feepa.
Spoken like a true gentleman. Classy
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2007, 9:30 PM
feepa's Avatar
feepa feepa is offline
Change is good
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,758
Can you please take your hate for me to a private message? This doesn't need to be here... or maybe we can discuss your problems with me over beer or a beverage of your choice, on me, my treat, seeing as you seem to be here in Edmonton.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2007, 9:38 PM
h0twired's Avatar
h0twired h0twired is offline
Dynamic Positivity!
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by trueviking View Post
youre crazy...i went from NK to u of m every day for 7 years and it was half an hour.....my friend takes 2 hours minimum to get to work in calgary...he leaves at 5AM to avoid rush hour, but on the way home its 2 hours....are you actually pretending that calgary's traffic isnt horrific?....get real....for a city that size it has more traffic than anywhere....you are ridiculous to suggest anything else.

it can take 2 hours just to get out of downtown in calgary....i have several times been caught in freeway traffic in calgary that took hours to get through....i've sat at lights for 6 cycles numerous times...you can cross winnipeg in 1/2 an hour any time of day...you never...ever sit at a light for more than a single cycle....i go through portage and main every morning at 8:30....i'm usually the third or fourth car at the light....i go the full length of downtown...5 minutes in the morning....10 in the evening.
You are delusional. Do you really believe that everyone spends 2 hours getting home in Calgary? Traffic isn't great but it flows much better and more directly than almost anywhere in Winnipeg.

Never sit for more than one light? Now I know you have lost it completely. I can name 3 locations where you will have multiple light stops in Winnipeg just on route 90 alone.

- RTE 90 and McGillvery
- RTE 90 and Grant
- RTE 90 and Notre Dame

Not to mention turning left from Norte Dame to go north on Keewatin. That beast is sometimes backed up past St James. Speaking of St James. How fun is that stretch when it is a single lane due to all of the people making left turns onto Ellice, Sargent and St Matthews?

I personally can't think of ANY route from point A to point B in Calgary that takes 2 hours in rush hour. If you can think of one let me know. I will happily drive the route and tell you how long it took me.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2007, 9:42 PM
Wooster's Avatar
Wooster Wooster is offline
Round Head
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 12,696
Calgary's traffic is bad at rush hour in certain parts of the city, particularly downtown. For the very reason our trains are packed too. Everyone converges from every part of the city into only a few square blocks of the CBD. That has nothing to do with freeway, and everything to do with concentration. The worst part of the Calgary commute by far is getting the fuck out of downtown (which of course is a grid). Calgary neighbourhoods around downtown fought against freeways (downtown penetrator, and the one that was meant to plow over 11th Avenue).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2007, 9:42 PM
Greco Roman Greco Roman is offline
Movin' on up
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,449
My opinion of the matter is that if the expressway systems are built to handle the amount of traffic using them, then they work great. Calgary's Deerfoot is an odd example of what can go wrong with an expressway. The highway was constructed to allow for freeflowing traffic in a north-south direction across the city. For the most part, it does it's job accordingly. However, during peak rushour times, in the morning and afternoon, things get really jammed up. And the reason for that is simple; the highway was not constructed to allow for the amount of traffic using the highway at peak times. Shit, some sections at major interchanges only have two lanes for traffic to go through, creating mass bottlenecks backing up traffic for kilometers. Now obviously shit happens of course, like accidents and such, that only compound the situation. That's life.

There have been many upgrades along the Deerfoot, and I wonder that if the city (or whoever is in charge of maintaining the Deerfoot) has any plans to expand the lanes to accomodate for increasing volumes of traffic. It would seem like a costly project and I'm not sure if this would be a priority for Calgary or not.

As for being stuck in traffic, once it did take me 1.75 hours to get home from work. I did sit on the Deerfoot for nearly an hour and a quarter, steaming mad and cursing the city and it's traffic. This didn't happen often, however I was usually stranded on the Deerfoot parking lot for near 40 minutes in the afternoon, going at a snails pace. Morning traffic was never an issue for me, as I was usually at work prior to the morning rush.

I took the Deerfoot because it was indeed the most direct route from my office to my house. The other routes (Centre St., Macleod Tr. Edmonton Tr.) were just as crazy for traffic on the roads at peak times, so I was either going to sit on those roads or on the Deerfoot.

Edmonton and Winnipeg, in regards to traffic, are a dream compared to Cowtown. If Winnipeg were to create such a means of freeflowing traffic, they must be able to incorporate for future expansion of the roadway, or you will surely experience what Calgary is going through, something that I do not miss
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2007, 9:49 PM
Calgarian's Avatar
Calgarian Calgarian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 23,472
A lot of Calgary's traffic is due the insane amount of construction (both road and building) happening in every part of the city.

Deerfoot is supposed to be expanding to 8 lanes for the entire legnth of the road, but work will not start until new overpasses are built to allow for the increased volume. At least that's what I heard anyway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2007, 9:59 PM
IntotheWest's Avatar
IntotheWest IntotheWest is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okotoks (Calgary)
Posts: 2,916
Greco - it sounds like you come from the North, and sitting on Deerfoot - even in rush hour - for 40 minutes on average, I'm guessing you're starting your trek at Country Hills, and going pretty far south. Going to the airport on Monday morning, I do recall seeing slow moving traffic at the Airport Tr turn-off (I was heading north) that I'm sure starts at Airdrie, and just builds by Country Hills.

My experience has been from the south - and as messy as it is, it's no where near as bad as the north-centre/north-west communities.

There was talk of expanding Deerfoot an extra lane - not sure if that will happen...and Deerfoot is provincial anyway, not Calgary.

Also - I should quickly add to my comments about commute times, that when I say I travel "downtown" I actually stop in the beltline at 11th Ave. As Josh mentioned above, I do remember sometimes driving from about 3rd Ave - and it could take 20 minutes to get out of the downtown area (6-7 years ago).

I didn't find Winnipeg all that quick either though (partly because the lights are so ill-timed...I don't get it), and I wasn't that far out. But the only real congestion in downtown (if you can call it that) was Portage and Main.

As for being proud as a city without freeways (Disraeli excluded ), I do find Vancouver more impressive - likely just because of its size. It still has plenty of bottlenecks to slow things down, but that seems to be more because of the waterways and bridges.
__________________
Download Google Earth 4 "Calgary Downtown" Collection of buildings here - http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2007, 10:01 PM
IntotheWest's Avatar
IntotheWest IntotheWest is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okotoks (Calgary)
Posts: 2,916
Quote:
Originally Posted by trueviking View Post
yup....compared to most cities, winnipeg has practically no traffic issues...booster or not, thats the truth...its why there is a general perception that we dont need rapid transit...if we had traffic, there would be more support for it.

it doesnt really matter, but my experience (and my friend's) of calgary traffic is vastly different than what is being claimed here....i agree that outside of rush hour is fine, but i have had many, many experiences where i crawled across the city during rush hour....practically every time i am there actually.
BTW - TV, wouldn't you want to sit in traffic for a couple hours...I seem to recall you could get a pretty good tan in your car
__________________
Download Google Earth 4 "Calgary Downtown" Collection of buildings here - http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2007, 10:06 PM
feepa's Avatar
feepa feepa is offline
Change is good
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,758
I don't get this discussion - how is Winnipeg proud because it doesn't have a freeway system?
Using examples sited already - the deerfoot, could you imagine what Calgary would be like for traffic if it didnt have the deerfoot. Yes, traffic snarls up at the first accident - but could you imagine if at every major crossing there was instead a set of lights? Traffic would back up for miles.
Call me a troll - if you will - but I dont see whats wrong with the efficient movement of goods and people with in a city. Stopping and going every 3 blocks or so with heavy truck traffic takes it toll on the road, adding to more costly repairs of the road.

Lets look at a road I'm very familar with - the Yellowhead trail in Edmonton. The few lights that remain, you can see the damage being done by heavy trucks having to brake to come to a stop at everyligh. the force being pushed down on the road when stopping, and then starting up again is tremendous. Where theres interchanges, its smooth flowing, and the road is smooth too. Edmonton has a series of freeways, and near freeways. Its needed here - how is it not in Winnipeg? I'm not saying Winnipeg needs to have freeways dividing old established neighbourhoods, but why not upgrade the the perimeter to full free flow status? and i'm not saying it needs to rip up through downtown...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2007, 12:20 AM
TSN's Avatar
TSN TSN is offline
Tiger
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 70
Thumbs down

As usual, a discussion that starts off on Winnipeg issue, in which the city then proceeds to get tarred and feathered by certain 'my city is the best and don't you dare criticize it' Calgarians. Never fails, it always seem like you enter the city and its like joining a cult where you're brainwashed to think other cities sucks and mine is perfect so don't dare criticize it.

There is nothing wrong with an absence or lack of freeways, check Ottawa/Vancouver, if you do a good job developing a mass transit system integrated with land use planning, and ensure you don't botch your arterial roads with lousy access management, etc. Calgary deserves credit for being visionary back in the 70's in planning for LRT, same with Ottawa for the transitway. Winnipeg sat on the fence.

Neighborhoods may not have been cut up but there is no denying that building these high capacity expressways/freeways puts pressure on sprawl, it's been proven over and over. You also have to remember that this infrastructure has to be maintained (see Minneapolis). At some point, you'll have to pay the piper for rehabbing all those roads. You need some kind of balanced efficient system but building alot of multi-lane freeways/expressways that will fill up quickly and require massive long term maintenance isn't the answer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2007, 12:50 AM
feepa's Avatar
feepa feepa is offline
Change is good
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,758
Since when doesn't Ottawa or Vancouver have freeways? or a lack there of?
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:28 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.