Calgary Roads

[Mazrim]

Can someone tell me what C&G is, in regards to road lanes. Also 'shy distance'?
C&G is curb and gutter. Shy distance is the offset required to prevent drivers from moving their vehicle away from objects they perceive to be too close to them.

I've run into a few intersections where me and my bike couldn't activate the induction loop. Will these new cameras be able to sense something as small as a cyclist?
I don't know the exact details of the cameras, but apparently they are better than loops for cyclists/motorbikes. Your results may vary, if the cameras are not properly positioned, though.

[Fuzz]

I've run into a few intersections where me and my bike couldn't activate the induction loop. Will these new cameras be able to sense something as small as a cyclist?

I've got one on my route, and it works pretty well. My best bet to trigger it is to weave a bit as I approach. Sometimes if I come straight in it doesn't seam to detect me. (pedal bike, not motorbike).

[5seconds]

C&G is curb and gutter. Shy distance is the offset required to prevent drivers from moving their vehicle away from objects they perceive to be too close to them.


I don't know the exact details of the cameras, but apparently they are better than loops for cyclists/motorbikes. Your results may vary, if the cameras are not properly positioned, though.

Awesome, thanks! Can you tell me where the 'lip of gutter' is measured from? Is that into the road where the edge of the concrete meets the asphalt, or at the face of the curb etc?

[MichaelS]

Awesome, thanks! Can you tell me where the 'lip of the gutter' is measured from? Is that into the road where the edge of the concrete meets the asphalt, or at the face of the curb etc?

Lip of gutter is where the concrete meets the asphalt I believe. Face of curb is referred to as FOC (for Face of Curb).

[fusili]

Lip of gutter is where the concrete meets the asphalt I believe. Face of curb is referred to as FOC (for Face of Curb).

Oooh, oooh, and BOW means "Back of Walk"

[5seconds]

Thanks!

[5seconds]

OK, another question:

The specification for Curb & Gutter on some roads is 0.25m and on others it is 0.5m. It looks like the faster roads have the wider gutters. Is this correct? and is this because slower roads don't need as much space for people to feel comfortable going the speed limit?

The standard for a collector road is 0.25m on each side. If an older collector road is reworked (but not fully repaved) and the older gutter is smaller than 0.25m, would the lane be considered to start from where the pavement meets the small gutter lip (as it states in the city guide), or would it be measured from 0.25m from the face of the curb, where a standard gutter lip *should* extend to?

Thanks!

[AB Born]

I've run into a few intersections where me and my bike couldn't activate the induction loop. Will these new cameras be able to sense something as small as a cyclist?

Roads said that the cameras are supposed to see cyclists. If it's not working call 311 to report the problem because the camera probably got misaligned due to some high winds.

[MMMBeer]

The revisions to Hwy 8 / Glenmore Tr between Sarcee Tr and 69 St SW are now in effect.

Extra EB lane and some WB improvements, and more streetlights.

Seems to be an improvement, although I don't know why they didn't just twin that stretch - was the difference in cost that much?

[You Need A Thneed]

The new 52nd Street Bridge makes driving in that area so much better. A full three lanes each way between 114th and Glenmore now.

[YYCguys]

Not sure if this has been posted yet, but the green highway signs on Deerfoot are indicating that the Airport Trail west extension is "Opening soon!". In terms of transportation, what timeline is realistic for "opening soon" of this road?

[freeweed]

In terms of transportation, what timeline is realistic for "opening soon"

I've seen as long as 18 months.

Although I suspect this one will be opened before the end of the year.

[Mazrim]

Not sure if this has been posted yet, but the green highway signs on Deerfoot are indicating that the Airport Trail west extension is "Opening soon!". In terms of transportation, what timeline is realistic for "opening soon" of this road?

If the guide signs are going up, that usually means the project is very close to opening. A few months, probably.

5seconds: I had to do a double check, since I've been using 0.5 C&G on everything lately, but that was just the nature of the jobs I've been working on. Minor roads do indeed using 0.25 instead of 0.5. AFAIK, lane widths are always measured from where the concrete meets the asphalt, so retrofitted roads with new C&G do in fact "lose" some driving width.

(As a fun side note, in places like Glenmore Trail in the SW where they repaved the road and didn't grind off enough asphalt, they basically took over the gutter pan with asphalt and "increased" the lane width! I'll be interested to see how the drainage works there now though.)

[mersar]

Not sure if this has been posted yet, but the green highway signs on Deerfoot are indicating that the Airport Trail west extension is "Opening soon!". In terms of transportation, what timeline is realistic for "opening soon" of this road?

This month I believe is the plan for this one. But freeweed is bang on, its quite variable and often not anywhere near the average persons definition of 'soon'.

[5seconds]

If the guide signs are going up, that usually means the project is very close to opening. A few months, probably.

5seconds: I had to do a double check, since I've been using 0.5 C&G on everything lately, but that was just the nature of the jobs I've been working on. Minor roads do indeed using 0.25 instead of 0.5. AFAIK, lane widths are always measured from where the concrete meets the asphalt, so retrofitted roads with new C&G do in fact "lose" some driving width.

(As a fun side note, in places like Glenmore Trail in the SW where they repaved the road and didn't grind off enough asphalt, they basically took over the gutter pan with asphalt and "increased" the lane width! I'll be interested to see how the drainage works there now though.)

As always, thanks so much!

[AB Born]

Drove down the new part of 52 St SE today, what a HUGE difference from this:
http://goo.gl/maps/zjzm8

[AB Born]

Messing around on YouTube tonight... I found this video:
hWUguIzjR4M


Was anyone here stuck in that mess?

.

[You Need A Thneed]

Isn't that the one that pretty much got everyone in the city? Everyone's commute home was something like 4x normal or more that day.

[fusili]

Messing around on YouTube tonight... I found this video:

Was anyone here stuck in that mess?

.

Well, if you are revving it on pure ice, I guess you won't go anywhere. Too many people have no idea how to drive on ice. I had no sympathy for that one car, they were just flooring it constantly. :shrug:

[DoubleK]

As I recall there were two bad ice events in a couple weeks. I was stuck on Crowchild for about 4 hours during the one in December.

[fusili]

That's what I love about walking/taking the train. My commute takes the exact same amount of time each and every day, rain, shine or horrible ice storm. :)

[Calgarian]

Well, if you are revving it on pure ice, I guess you won't go anywhere. Too many people have no idea how to drive on ice. I had no sympathy for that one car, they were just flooring it constantly. :shrug:

Pretty much. One big thing I like about driving a standard is I can just slowly let out the clutch to get moving, or I can also put it in second to get going too.

That's what I love about walking/taking the train. My commute takes the exact same amount of time each and every day, rain, shine or horrible ice storm. :)

Yeah it might take a couple minutes longer as there will always be stretches of sidewalk that aren't shoveled or will be a bit slippery, but yeah, pretty consistent regardless of the weather. The walk did suck this morning, not used to the cold yet...

[You Need A Thneed]

According to the city's website, Metis Trail between 64th and 80 is now open with 2 lanes each way. This will help the traffic in the area. Getting through the 80th Ave intersection either way has been slow at times.

[rotten42]

According to the city's website, Metis Trail between 64th and 80 is now open with 2 lanes each way. This will help the traffic in the area. Getting through the 80th Ave intersection either way has been slow at times.




SHHHHHHHHH! That route is great now. I don't want people to mess it up. ;)

[DizzyEdge]

So i'm trying to compare roads in Toronto to Calgary, but all I can find from TO is kms of roads, and all I can find for Calgary is lane-kms (so a 3 lane 1 km road would be 3 lane-kms, whereas the Toronto measure would just say 1km of road).
Does anyone have a source that I can use so that I'm comparing apples to apples?

Thanks

[Mazrim]

Did anyone end up checking out the Macleod Trail Corridor open house at Chinook last night? Curious what they showed there.

[DoubleK]

Very happy to see that the City of Calgary is going to try to make Mcleod Trail free flow from 162nd Ave through Anderson for the morning rush.

From November 12, you will not be able to make a left turn onto Lake Fraser Gate betwen 6am and 8:30am.

Ever since they switched the access from EB 22x to NB Deerfoot, volumes on McLeod Trail have been nutso. Hope this helps!!

[AB Born]

Neat to see city fine Enmax $10K after what happened on Monday morning. Amazing that one intersection being closed (6Ave & McLeod) caused so much trouble.

[DizzyEdge]

Very happy to see that the City of Calgary is going to try to make Mcleod Trail free flow from 162nd Ave through Anderson for the morning rush.

From November 12, you will not be able to make a left turn onto Lake Fraser Gate betwen 6am and 8:30am.

Ever since they switched the access from EB 22x to NB Deerfoot, volumes on McLeod Trail have been nutso. Hope this helps!!

Not be able to, or you'll get a fine if a cop catches you doing it?

[DoubleK]

There is more information about the pilot on the City of Calgary website (http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/Roads/Pages/Traffic/Lake-Fraser-Gate-traffic-pilot-FAQ.aspx).

My understanding is that the signal will be set to green for McLeod Trail and won't change between those times.

[AB Born]

130 Ave SE is now open east of 52 St SE.

[eggbert]

I just received an email from the City:

Crowchild Trail Corridor Study

The City of Calgary has hired and is working with ISL Engineering and Land Services and Stantec Consulting to conduct a long-term transportation study for the section of Crowchild Trail from 17 Avenue South to 24 Avenue North. The study provides recommendations for future roadway upgrades accommodating all modes of travel while maintaining connections to adjacent communities and amenities.

Public open houses are being held to provide citizens with the opportunity to learn more about the study and proposed future concepts for Crowchild Trail. The same information will be presented at both sessions.

The open houses will be held on:

Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - 5:00-8:00pm
Olympic Volunteer Centre, University of Calgary, Red and White Club
Free parking available on the east side of the building after 5:00pm

Thursday, November 15, 2012 - 5:00-8:00pm
Marda Loop Communities Association
3130 – 16 Street SW

The long-term Crowchild Trail Corridor Study will:

Update the 1978 Crowchild Trail Transportation Plan.
Align Crowchild Trail with the Calgary Transportation Plan.
Consider walking and cycling connections, Calgary Transit routing, community access, and access to the Centre City.
Accommodate the Primary Transit Network and the Primary High Occupancy Vehicle Network with a feasibility study from Glenmore Trail S.W. to 16 Avenue N.W., connecting the Activity Centres of the University of Calgary/Foothills Medical Centre, Centre City, and Mount Royal University.
Consider vehicle movement including goods and commuters.
Consider appropriate street connections to Crowchild Trail as part of the Calgary Transportation Plan.
Allow The City to more accurately evaluate proposed changes to the corridor in the future.

Your attendance at this session and feedback regarding the proposed concepts for Crowchild Trail is appreciated. Feedback received will be considered in the final recommendations provided to the City.

For more information about the project visit www.calgary.ca/crowchild (Crowchild Trail Corridor Study

The City of Calgary has hired and is working with ISL Engineering and Land Services and Stantec Consulting to conduct a long-term transportation study for the section of Crowchild Trail from 17 Avenue South to 24 Avenue North. The study provides recommendations for future roadway upgrades accommodating all modes of travel while maintaining connections to adjacent communities and amenities.

Public open houses are being held to provide citizens with the opportunity to learn more about the study and proposed future concepts for Crowchild Trail. The same information will be presented at both sessions.

The open houses will be held on:


Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - 5:00-8:00pm
Olympic Volunteer Centre, University of Calgary, Red and White Club
Free parking available on the east side of the building after 5:00pm

Thursday, November 15, 2012 - 5:00-8:00pm
Marda Loop Communities Association
3130 – 16 Street SW

The long-term Crowchild Trail Corridor Study will:



Update the 1978 Crowchild Trail Transportation Plan.
Align Crowchild Trail with the Calgary Transportation Plan.
Consider walking and cycling connections, Calgary Transit routing, community access, and access to the Centre City.
Accommodate the Primary Transit Network and the Primary High Occupancy Vehicle Network with a feasibility study from Glenmore Trail S.W. to 16 Avenue N.W., connecting the Activity Centres of the University of Calgary/Foothills Medical Centre, Centre City, and Mount Royal University.
Consider vehicle movement including goods and commuters.
Consider appropriate street connections to Crowchild Trail as part of the Calgary Transportation Plan.
Allow The City to more accurately evaluate proposed changes to the corridor in the future.


Your attendance at this session and feedback regarding the proposed concepts for Crowchild Trail is appreciated. Feedback received will be considered in the final recommendations provided to the City.

For more information about the project visit www.calgary.ca/crowchild)

[kw5150]

Too funny.......I just predicted that they would announce something about crowchild last week....I would LOVE to be involved in this project.......but whoever is on the team is going to lose a lot of sleep. There are so many roads coming together on so many different planes, affecting so many different communities........a true coordination effort will be required....wow.

Please no raised freeways!


I just received an email from the City:

Crowchild Trail Corridor Study

The City of Calgary has hired and is working with ISL Engineering and Land Services and Stantec Consulting to conduct a long-term transportation study for the section of Crowchild Trail from 17 Avenue South to 24 Avenue North. The study provides recommendations for future roadway upgrades accommodating all modes of travel while maintaining connections to adjacent communities and amenities.

Public open houses are being held to provide citizens with the opportunity to learn more about the study and proposed future concepts for Crowchild Trail. The same information will be presented at both sessions.

The open houses will be held on:

Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - 5:00-8:00pm
Olympic Volunteer Centre, University of Calgary, Red and White Club
Free parking available on the east side of the building after 5:00pm

Thursday, November 15, 2012 - 5:00-8:00pm
Marda Loop Communities Association
3130 – 16 Street SW

The long-term Crowchild Trail Corridor Study will:

Update the 1978 Crowchild Trail Transportation Plan.
Align Crowchild Trail with the Calgary Transportation Plan.
Consider walking and cycling connections, Calgary Transit routing, community access, and access to the Centre City.
Accommodate the Primary Transit Network and the Primary High Occupancy Vehicle Network with a feasibility study from Glenmore Trail S.W. to 16 Avenue N.W., connecting the Activity Centres of the University of Calgary/Foothills Medical Centre, Centre City, and Mount Royal University.
Consider vehicle movement including goods and commuters.
Consider appropriate street connections to Crowchild Trail as part of the Calgary Transportation Plan.
Allow The City to more accurately evaluate proposed changes to the corridor in the future.

Your attendance at this session and feedback regarding the proposed concepts for Crowchild Trail is appreciated. Feedback received will be considered in the final recommendations provided to the City.

For more information about the project visit www.calgary.ca/crowchild (Crowchild Trail Corridor Study

The City of Calgary has hired and is working with ISL Engineering and Land Services and Stantec Consulting to conduct a long-term transportation study for the section of Crowchild Trail from 17 Avenue South to 24 Avenue North. The study provides recommendations for future roadway upgrades accommodating all modes of travel while maintaining connections to adjacent communities and amenities.

Public open houses are being held to provide citizens with the opportunity to learn more about the study and proposed future concepts for Crowchild Trail. The same information will be presented at both sessions.

The open houses will be held on:


Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - 5:00-8:00pm
Olympic Volunteer Centre, University of Calgary, Red and White Club
Free parking available on the east side of the building after 5:00pm

Thursday, November 15, 2012 - 5:00-8:00pm
Marda Loop Communities Association
3130 – 16 Street SW

The long-term Crowchild Trail Corridor Study will:



Update the 1978 Crowchild Trail Transportation Plan.
Align Crowchild Trail with the Calgary Transportation Plan.
Consider walking and cycling connections, Calgary Transit routing, community access, and access to the Centre City.
Accommodate the Primary Transit Network and the Primary High Occupancy Vehicle Network with a feasibility study from Glenmore Trail S.W. to 16 Avenue N.W., connecting the Activity Centres of the University of Calgary/Foothills Medical Centre, Centre City, and Mount Royal University.
Consider vehicle movement including goods and commuters.
Consider appropriate street connections to Crowchild Trail as part of the Calgary Transportation Plan.
Allow The City to more accurately evaluate proposed changes to the corridor in the future.


Your attendance at this session and feedback regarding the proposed concepts for Crowchild Trail is appreciated. Feedback received will be considered in the final recommendations provided to the City.

For more information about the project visit www.calgary.ca/crowchild)

[Mazrim]

Glad to see most people had the same written comments that I did. Pretty sure one of them is almost exactly how I wrote it too!

I would LOVE to be involved in this project.......but whoever is on the team is going to lose a lot of sleep.
I don't see it as too different than the GE5 and Glenmore Causeway projects, and the only reason people would lose sleep is if they agree to an unreasonable time frame to finish the study.

Also, while this study will encompass all of the corridor mentioned, I'm certain they will focus on pieces of the area to upgrade the road.

[kw5150]

This will be one of the most involved road projects in the inner city and all kinds of departments will come out of the woodwork to be a part of this. There is so much going to be so much coordination to keep everything free-flowing. There is nothing simple about this project at all and they will have to consider all aspects including:

-11th and 12 ave tie in.
-Kensington Road
-Possible new ramps so you can go any direction from all roads
-Not turning the area running through kensington into a freeway and dividing the community.
-Eliminating the criss crossing
-Refereshing the vibrancy of the waterfront area.
-keeping the area "free flowing" as much as they can during construction.

I think this is much different than Glenmore...no? Glenmore was at right angles and the space crunch wasnt as bad.


Glad to see most people had the same written comments that I did. Pretty sure one of them is almost exactly how I wrote it too!


I don't see it as too different than the GE5 and Glenmore Causeway projects, and the only reason people would lose sleep is if they agree to an unreasonable time frame to finish the study.

Also, while this study will encompass all of the corridor mentioned, I'm certain they will focus on pieces of the area to upgrade the road.

[Yahoo]

I just received an email from the City:

Crowchild Trail Corridor Study

[/URL]

I received the same email. (Unfortunately I'll be out of town). I think updating the 1978 plan shows that this will still be a long time off. If the 88 Olympics didn't trigger upgrades 10 years after the plan was in place I don't see how they'd suddenly have the money to proceed given the road budget is mostly going to the airport.

You do see things for example like exposed rebar and missing concrete on the 16th Ave bridge over Crow so it can't wait forever. It seems to me like they could do these upgrades in small steps in a lot of areas. Road widening in sections and a new interchange here and there every couple years like they did on the southern and northern sections may be the best way to go since money is always tight. 24th for example doesn't really have to be part of a large project that I can tell since it's isolated somewhat. As is the section by 16th.

Even closing certain roadways might make sense given the difficulty in dealing with some sections. Do we really need so many entrances to McMahon parking? (Like for example - the Province could have just forgotten about the Nose Hill - Stoney interchange had Nose Hill drive not been diverted west by the city in a rather odd decision. I'll make a lot of use of the new interchange - but given there are a lot of alternate routes I'd sooner have seen the money spent elsewhere). Perhaps given the impact on certain areas along Crowchild it might make sense to rework the surrounding roads and cut out some intersections completely. If done with a lot of art, cool landscaping, and easy access it might make some of the affected areas more attractive.

It's nice to hear that they're still thinking about Crowchild. My fear is that if they do it as 1 massive project it'll never get approved.

[Knoots]

I don't see it as too different than the GE5 and Glenmore Causeway projects, and the only reason people would lose sleep is if they agree to an unreasonable time frame to finish the study.



I agree with kw on this one. If the city wants this project to meet the future growth and transportation needs of Calgary, they've got to do this right. That means a lot of $$ and some creative engineering based on ROW limitations. The interaction of Memorial and Bow trail/11th/12th to Crowchild alone seems rather overwhelming ie ensuring free flow to/from each major artery (currently you can't hit Crow southbound from Bow eastbound, and you have weave across Crow to hit memorial coming from downtown). On top of that, throw in continuous 6 lane Crow from 17th ave South to 24th ave north (and the implications to 16th ave N, McMahon) plus HOV lanes, all while maintaining some resemblance of flow and normalcy during construction and, my friend, you've got yourself an engineering gong show. Oy, I wouldn't want to touch this project with a 10 foot pole.....with that said, you can be sure I'll be at the open house. Very exciting.

[5seconds]

Remember that the GE5/Glenmore project was only a fraction of the total corridor study completed in 2002. A couple of issues, especially regarding the ring road/37th street/14th street issue, meant that only the GE5 portion could go through at the time.

Wonder if anything like that would happen with Crowchild... I suppose widening in constricted corridors would be the biggest community concern?

[tmjr]

5Seconds, iirc, you live in Lakeview - I'm curious what your perspective is on the bikelanes mentioned in this story in the Calgary Herald (http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/energy-resources/Lakeview+residents+want+confusing+bike+lanes+removed/7496901/story.html)

Both the Lakeview Community Association and the North Glenmore Park Community Association are asking city hall to immediately restore a section of Crowchild that was recently converted to bike lanes. The 500-metre stretch of roadway, between 66th Avenue S.W. and the entrance to North Glenmore Park, had four driving lanes until two of those were turned into cycling lanes this summer.


I come down to Lakeview once in a while but never via Crowchild, so I'm not sure what the issue is...

[5seconds]

5Seconds, iirc, you live in Lakeview - I'm curious what your perspective is on the bikelanes mentioned in this story in the Calgary Herald (http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/energy-resources/Lakeview+residents+want+confusing+bike+lanes+removed/7496901/story.html)

I come down to Lakeview once in a while but never via Crowchild, so I'm not sure what the issue is...

Oh boy. It's been an interesting issue. I think that the general idea of taking capacity from the road and dedicating it to cycle usage is a great idea. I think the problem is the way it was done. Essentially the biggest problem that people seem to have with it is that it's ugly (looks like a temporary construction diversion) and that the resulting road it kind of narrow. (There are also complaints about the intersection with 66th, and while there are issues there, I think those could be dealt with separately to the lane issue)

I personally don't have as big of a problem with it as some people in the community, but I do think it's ugly for the main entrance to such a great park, and it would have been much better if they designed it properly, instead of shoe-horning it onto the existing roadway layout (I know, I know: everything would be better with a bigger budget!). It was paid for out of the water department budget because it was tacked onto a sewer line upgrade, and it was done cheaply.

I think a 6.7 meter-wide cycle track is odd; If they had been able to move the median and make a ~3m cycle track in addition to 2 good sized lanes and maybe a parking lane, I think it would have been a great idea.

[Radley77]

Oh boy. It's been an interesting issue. I think that the general idea of taking capacity from the road and dedicating it to cycle usage is a great idea. I think the problem is the way it was done. Essentially the biggest problem that people seem to have with it is that it's ugly (looks like a temporary construction diversion) and that the resulting road it kind of narrow. (There are also complaints about the intersection with 66th, and while there are issues there, I think those could be dealt with separately to the lane issue)

I personally don't have as big of a problem with it as some people in the community, but I do think it's ugly for the main entrance to such a great park, and it would have been much better if they designed it properly, instead of shoe-horning it onto the existing roadway layout (I know, I know: everything would be better with a bigger budget!). It was paid for out of the water department budget because it was tacked onto a sewer line upgrade, and it was done cheaply.

I think a 6.7 meter-wide cycle track is odd; If they had been able to move the median and make a ~3m cycle track in addition to 2 good sized lanes and maybe a parking lane, I think it would have been a great idea.

I think that was the original proposal from Lakeview, i.e: turn the northbound east lane into a dual lane cycle track (and have 3 lanes for autos). I've drove on that road twice a week during rush hour and haven't had an issue with congestion. My best sense on this issue from reading the Lakeview newsletters is that there is confusion and aesthetics. The Glenmore park is I think the cities prettiest park, and this isn't the first time I've heard of someone describing the new cycling lane as ugly. City of Calgary needs to do a better job of consulting on projects like this that engages cyclists as well as local residents. In my experience with participating in a traffic study in Renfrew, the ideas were backed by the community association, the cycling community, and residents were able to vote on certain major elements of traffic changes. Once things like petitions start circulating about then you've really lost any sense of having a fair engagement process. My hope is that with some of the additions made in the last year including new cycling coordinator and plans to hire an engineer for bike infrastructure and cycling educator that will start to build some more competency in execution.

[5seconds]

Yea, the road sees 2000-3000 cars a day, and does not need a 4-lane divided road IMO. Re-jigging the lanes would have been a great solution if the cost of moving the median could be covered. (Or even pouring a new curb on the east side to divide the bikes from the cars.) Using yellow pylons and concrete blocks seems odd in the location.

The independent petition group in Lakeview (not the community association) has engaged the U of C, and they are working on alternatives as a 4th year engineering student project, with results in April.

As well, the community has said it will look into funding options so that if there is genuinely no financial way to make it better, there might be a way of doing it that won't cost the city a penny (sort of like that berm in the park beside Crowchild near 17th avenue SW, it was paid for by corporate sponsors).

I agree that North Glenmore is the nicest park. And since there are lots of buses during events and races in the park, and canoe trailers going to the canoe club, it would be nice to have it look nicer and to have wider lanes than are there now.

It will be interesting to see what happens.

[para transit fellow]

I know I read this somewhere but I'm having trouble finding it again.
(maybe i didn't read it)


Is there a known timeline on the glenmore trail/ shepard rd/ cpr tracks?

[Cage]

Perhaps someone on the forum could nanswer this question. ALternately perhaps the answer is well known to everyone but me.

How does CTV Calgary calculate their road volume? Example is this link: http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/traffic

Also how does CTV News get their average speed on the morning commute telecasts?

Thanks in advance. :cheers:

[MalcolmTucker]

I think both TomTom and Google use opt in data services where to get traffic data, you have to share your travel time for route segments. All in the background of course.

[Radley77]

Perhaps someone on the forum could nanswer this question. ALternately perhaps the answer is well known to everyone but me.

How does CTV Calgary calculate their road volume? Example is this link: http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/traffic

Also how does CTV News get their average speed on the morning commute telecasts?

Thanks in advance. :cheers:

At least for the map, that info is from Google Maps (though not sure how the data is collected). You can go to this website and scroll through the data by day of the week and time to visualize how traffic patterns change throughout the day and see how it compares against current traffic conditions:

https://maps.google.ca/

[tmjr]

Crowchild streamlining would cost up to $1 billion and swallow up homes (http://www.calgaryherald.com/Crowchild+streamlining+would+cost+billion+swallow+homes/7537253/story.html#ixzz2C5KO8rDb) (Calgary Herald article)

I wonder if it will ever get done, given the kinds of costs involved...

[tmjr]

Oh boy. It's been an interesting issue. I think that the general idea of taking capacity from the road and dedicating it to cycle usage is a great idea. I think the problem is the way it was done. Essentially the biggest problem that people seem to have with it is that it's ugly (looks like a temporary construction diversion) and that the resulting road it kind of narrow. (There are also complaints about the intersection with 66th, and while there are issues there, I think those could be dealt with separately to the lane issue)

I personally don't have as big of a problem with it as some people in the community, but I do think it's ugly for the main entrance to such a great park, and it would have been much better if they designed it properly, instead of shoe-horning it onto the existing roadway layout (I know, I know: everything would be better with a bigger budget!). It was paid for out of the water department budget because it was tacked onto a sewer line upgrade, and it was done cheaply.

I think a 6.7 meter-wide cycle track is odd; If they had been able to move the median and make a ~3m cycle track in addition to 2 good sized lanes and maybe a parking lane, I think it would have been a great idea.


Thanks for your perspective! Would you rather keep it as is, or rip it out as per the Lakeview Community Association president, assuming the city refuses to make fixes?

[lineman]

Crowchild streamlining would cost up to $1 billion and swallow up homes (http://www.calgaryherald.com/Crowchild+streamlining+would+cost+billion+swallow+homes/7537253/story.html#ixzz2C5KO8rDb) (Calgary Herald article)

I wonder if it will ever get done, given the kinds of costs involved...

I don't get how people buy or build million dollar homes next to a bottlenecked major artery. When I was looking for a home, my realtor had a couple homes on his list next to crowchild. I quickly crossed them out.

It's called foresight, people. Something will eventually be done. Many expropriated people will not be happy, and the rest of Calgary will give them the stink-eye.

[Acey]

I like how the picture in the article is of a section of Crowchild that has already been fixed. Still gridlocked. Surprised it's only $1B, obviously that's going to increase the longer they take to get it done.

[Bigtime]

I'm not surprised at all by the giant price tag to fix that stretch of Crowchild. It is going to be a massive project.

Now what kind of public art can that budget buy us? ;)

[RyLucky]

for a closer look at designs: http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TP/Pages/Projects/Current-Planning-Projects/Crowchild-Trail-Corridor-Study.aspx?redirect=/crowchild

[Jimby]

Spending billions on improving roads for the benefit of people who choose to live a car-centric lifestyle on the fringes of the city does nothing for the people who live in the inner city. Why should their houses be torn down to make it easier for vehicle traffic to get around?
I would rather see scarce resources go towards expanding and improving the CTrain network rather than more freeways.
Yes Crowchild is a bottleneck, but if it is improved so it becomes free flowing, then it will just shift the bottleneck elsewhere, and then the vehicle drivers/voters/taxpayers will be demanding more inner city houses to be torn down with more road lanes added for their benefit.
We should learn from bigger older cities rather than blindly repeating their mistakes, for example the Spadina expressway in Toronto that Jane Jacobs and neighbours stopped. If it had been built, traffic would still be just as bad in Toronto.

[RyLucky]

My first impression is that a $1Billion of LRT would do more to reduce overall congestion in the city.

[RyLucky]

I think $1B could just about buy LRT from UofC to Foothills to Westbrook.

[Jimby]

I like the gondola idea across the Bow Valley between Westbrook and Foothills/ACH/U of C.

[5seconds]

Thanks for your perspective! Would you rather keep it as is, or rip it out as per the Lakeview Community Association president, assuming the city refuses to make fixes?

While I would have been OK with leaving it while alternatives were explored (but honestly, not permanently), Pincott released a statement yesterday stating that the road would be put back to the original '4-lanes for cars' design. Since they were clear that there was no money to try again, I think it will be left this way until/if private fund-raising can be done.

The UofC engineering program is running a project to look at alternatives, so it will be interesting to see what they come up with, and how realistic it would be to implement without City help.

[Full Mountain]

Re: Crowchild

Is it not redundant to have both Memorial access and Kensington road access? If one was closed off and the other an over/underpass (memorial, kensington respectively), this would dramatically reduce the number of houses that need to be taken out and overall community impact.

[Knoots]

Very interesting to see the concept designs. As someone who lives in the Marda Loop area, I use this stretch quite a bit so I would be very happy to see it free flow. I very infrequently use Stoney Trail, so would really appreciate tax dollars being spent on inner city infrastructure. :) But at the expense of inner city homes?.... that's a tough one.

If they're gonna spend $1B, they've gotta do it right. I don't see connections to Bow trail WB from Crow NB, nor Crow SB from Bow EB. Calgary is infamous for "you can't get there from here", I think it's 'bout time to shake that reputation. :shrug:

[DizzyEdge]

What about have an interchange at kensington rd and crowchild, sink crowchild at 5th ave so that 5th ave can cross, but there's no access to or from crowchild and then make 23rd street or 25th street more free-flow for local users to access 5th ave from the 24th/crowchild interchange?

[artvandelay]

Interesting concepts, but I don't think it's necessary to have it free flow. Traffic would be fine on Crow if they just made it six lanes the entire way through. The bottlenecks where it goes down to 4 lanes at Bow and at 16th are what cause most of the problems. The lights at 24th, 5th and Kensington aren't that bad in my opinion. And this is coming from someone who drove this stretch daily while I attended U of C.

[lubicon]

Interesting concepts, but I don't think it's necessary to have it free flow. Traffic would be fine on Crow if they just made it six lanes the entire way through. The bottlenecks where it goes down to 4 lanes at Bow and at 16th are what cause most of the problems. The lights at 24th, 5th and Kensington aren't that bad in my opinion. And this is coming from someone who drove this stretch daily while I attended U of C.

Another HUGE factor is having to repeatedly change lanes just to continue driving STRAIGHT ahead. This makee no sense whatsoever.

[suburbia]

Spending billions on improving roads for the benefit of people who choose to live a car-centric lifestyle on the fringes of the city does nothing for the people who live in the inner city.

Without having looked at all of this in detail, I would want to point out that inherent in this is access to and from the university and the largest hospital in the province.

There are inherent issues with crowchild currently, and while I'm two minded about making things wide-open, I think it doesn't actually service the city at a reasonably basic level as it sits.

Thinking forward, which is what planning is all about, keep in mind that major development is being looked at over the next 25+ years for the West Village. The density to the south is increasing, and while some commercial will move that way, there are limited opportunities for this to happen in a big way. Additionally, major central projects will require more space, be they sports facilities, convention facilities, hotel/tourism infrastructure, etc. Personally, I'd like the city to make a bid for a major international event to be hosted in the West Village before all is developed (but I'm off on a tangent now).

Those who want a small town feel should move to Reston, Manitoba where land is cheap and they're not expanding the roads.

[DizzyEdge]

Arguably the "Small town feel" is centered on Kensington, and not near crowchild where 90% of whatever small town feel there is has already been removed by the very existance of crowchild. Adding an interchange won't really change that in my opinion. I will agree that having to change lanes to keep going straight is way more of an issue than some lights.

[Jimby]

I want to live in an urban city with efficient land use and an effective rapid transit system. I don't want to live in sprawlville where the roads get bigger and bigger so we can all drive to our vinyl beige castles which don't even have mail delivery.
Why our we emulating Houston or Atlanta and broken models from the past?

[DizzyEdge]

I want to live in an urban city with efficient land use and an effective rapid transit system. I don't want to live in sprawlville where the roads get bigger and bigger so we can all drive to our vinyl beige castles which don't even have mail delivery.
Why our we emulating Houston or Atlanta and broken models from the past?

Are we though? or are we just fixing a part of an existing road which wasn't built right?

[5seconds]

John Mar is not a fan of the Crowchild Proposals

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/calgary/Alderman+calls+billion+Crowchild+Trail+expansion+cruel+joke/7541565/story.html

My own thoughts: I think the weave from bow trail across 3 lanes to get to Memorial is a mess, and the fact that there is only one through northbound lane is a problem. I think the narrowing of the road before the stadium is a bottleneck that could be addressed.

I would love to see these issues taken care of in a way that has the least impact to the existing communities (read: no houses needed). Can that be done?

[Me&You]

Are we though? or are we just fixing a part of an existing road which wasn't built right?

Exactly. I'm all for more efficient uses of land, which is exactly why Crowchild needs to be fixed. In it's current state, it doesn't do anyone, any good. Not only is it inefficient in moving commuters, but also any goods by choking truck traffic.

Fix it. Fix it right. Fix it now.

[RicoLance21]

Are we though? or are we just fixing a part of an existing road which wasn't built right?

From a Vancouverite's perspective, the free flow parts of Crowchild are the parts of an existing road which wasn't built right.

[DizzyEdge]

Also, and trust me, I'm pro-transit, but there is already an LRT running along crowchild (north of the river anyway), at some point with 4 car trains there will be no more capacity, then what? I'm not saying we then need to go back to roads, but I am curious what the 'then what' solution might be.

[MalcolmTucker]

I think there should be a period of testing throughput without a permitted turn from 10th Ave to Memorial east bound. Also, can look at debottlenecking - how much extra throughput is needed really before you create new bottlenecks north of Charleswood Drive?

[RicoLance21]

Also, and trust me, I'm pro-transit, but there is already an LRT running along crowchild (north of the river anyway), at some point with 4 car trains there will be no more capacity, then what? I'm not saying we then need to go back to roads, but I am curious what the 'then what' solution might be.

Bury downtown portion of NW/S LRT line and then increase frequency.

[artvandelay]

John Mar is not a fan of the Crowchild Proposals

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/calgary/Alderman+calls+billion+Crowchild+Trail+expansion+cruel+joke/7541565/story.html

My own thoughts: I think the weave from bow trail across 3 lanes to get to Memorial is a mess, and the fact that there is only one through northbound lane is a problem. I think the narrowing of the road before the stadium is a bottleneck that could be addressed.

I would love to see these issues taken care of in a way that has the least impact to the existing communities (read: no houses needed). Can that be done?

Mar is such a drama queen. :haha: It's also a shame that he seems to be more concerned about the destruction of a couple houses (where the owners will receive fair compensations) than the loss of a public park.

I pretty much agree with you. I think the major issue that must be addressed is the elimination of the convoluted weaving patterns and make sure that through traffic is able to move efficiently. The new parallel bridge is a great way to address this by separating the traffic bound for Memorial from the main Crowchild lanes.

I'm as much of a supporter of urbanism as anyone, but I believe this is a project that must be done eventually - just not at the expense of a new LRT line.

[McMurph]

Whoa... if I'm looking at this right there is no provision in any option for access to Memorial or Bow for people entering NB Crowchild at 17th. Isn't that going to be a major problem for folks in Bankview / Knobhill / Richmond / Killarney?

Although if the SELRT is prioritized ahead of this we'll probably have a good 20 to 30 years before we have to deal with it. 50 years if we get the NCLRT too.

[lineman]

I want to live in an urban city with efficient land use and an effective rapid transit system. I don't want to live in sprawlville where the roads get bigger and bigger so we can all drive to our vinyl beige castles which don't even have mail delivery.
Why our we emulating Houston or Atlanta and broken models from the past?

The plans outlined would improve transit through this corridor. Also it looks like pedestrian and bicycle access would improve too. Right now, there's a lot of wasted space and potential opportunity around Crowchild and Memorial. It doesn't all have to be implemented as conceptualized, but something needs to be done.

Ah yes "sprawlville", where driving to hospitals on the city's edge are okay. They make for interesting photo subjects.

[lineman]

I pretty much agree with you. I think the major issue that must be addressed is the elimination of the convoluted weaving patterns and make sure that through traffic is able to move efficiently. The new parallel bridge is a great way to address this by separating the traffic bound for Memorial from the main Crowchild

The 10 ave bridge to Memorial is brilliant. My favourite part of the plan. If only one thing were to be built, I would hope that this would be it.

[Acey]

Looking a the detailed plans... I'm amazed that Calgary has figured out the concept of a frontage road.

[Calgarian]

I'm all for improvements to Crowchild, that road is f'd! Im an urbanist and will stay in the inner city as long as I can, but I realize that there are people in the suburbs, and I also realize Crowchild is part of a provincial highway, so improving flow through there is necessary. The current plan may not be the ideal one, but I'm glad they're looking at it.

I agree with Dizzy in that there is already an LRT line there, so investment in the LRT isn't going to fix the commute to the NW.

[kw5150]

It is ridiculous that the current roads cant handle the volume. The only problem is the crazy composition of of the roads......so many criss-crossing lanes and badly timed lights. Give this road design problem to the faculty of environmental design for and make it a co-operative project that involves the faculty of engineering for a thesis project. This needs more thought than just a road engineer figuring out the best way to move some cars.

I am going to draw this area and see what I can come up with. I have tried a few times, but everytime I just get pissed of and quit....lol. Too many roads coming together with too many problems...

This can be done without deferring to design ideas from the 70's and 80's.

[Calgarian]

I was talking to a friend from Vancouver who figures Calgary's traffic problems come from the fact that most of our major roads son't connect the whole way through the city, they start and stop at other major roads (Crowchild, MacLeod, Blackfoot, John Laurie, 14st, Barlow (is in 3 damn sections now), Centre St, Edmonton TR... the list goes on). I think this is a very good point, thoughts?

[Acey]

Add Sarcee to that list. Imagine an access restricted Bow Trail, and Sarcee connecting to the north. Would take a good bite out of the Crow mess.

Doesn't help that the only road built to a decent standard in the entire city is Stoney Trail. Really horrible roads we've got here. Sad, really.

[DizzyEdge]

I'm being a bit unfair here but compare:

https://maps.google.com/?ll=51.076675,-114.142628&spn=0.089624,0.222988&t=h&z=13

with

https://maps.google.com/?ll=49.244388,-123.077087&spn=0.093127,0.222988&t=h&z=13

[Acey]

We've got land as far as the eye can see. You'd think our city was crammed onto on island with a gross inadequacy in our roads budget.

[andasen]

Well something needs to be done, right now everything is being caught at the bridge over the bow. In looking at how to proceed IMO they need their very first consideration needs to be how to improve the transit crossing the bow there (rt 20, 72/73) Nothing can be done with the current number of lanes. Wonder if it would be possible to fix this issue without significantly improving the access to Downtown from Crowchild. Ya I'm all for a war on cars entering DT.

[kw5150]

Im telling you. Its all about fixing some of these severed connections and interruptions to free flow in just a few key areas. We would be good for years by fixing these areas, especially because our transit is improving so much at the same time.

Why does centre street just end at Beddington??
Why does edmonton trail just end at mknight? This city is constantly funneling people onto a few major roads and blocking access to the others.....it is traffic hell.

This freeway hybrid model where we block access to so many streets it turning out to be really shit for the city. There are some areas that we should be opening up new access points in the inner city, not closing them. We need some fresh eyes on our traffic problems........we have the road capacity, but something is not adding up. There should not be this many problems when we have almost 100 interchanges.

[fusili]

Crowchild. Wow. Just wow.

There seems to be a short list of problems that need to be solve:
- horrible access from Bow Trail westbound/10th avenue to Memorial eastbound (crossing 3 lanes in a short distance)
- Lack of through lanes (far right lane on crowchild northbound is forced onto Memorial, necessitating lane changes)

And the solution is to add multiple bridges and ramps, demolish parts of historic schools, tear down multiple homes, add lanes everywhere. Transportation Engineering in this province has no understanding of limitations or constraints.

[Calgarian]

Why does centre street just end at Beddington??


This one makes me scratch my head.

[suburbia]

I'm being a bit unfair here but compare:

https://maps.google.com/?ll=51.076675,-114.142628&spn=0.089624,0.222988&t=h&z=13

with

https://maps.google.com/?ll=49.244388,-123.077087&spn=0.093127,0.222988&t=h&z=13

A stark difference no doubt, till you realize it completely an unfair comparison. Try areas with similar proportions of protected land and have your zoom set at the same level. Not saying Calgary is stellar, but when you try to finagle spin it doesn't actually help your cause.

Consider:
https://maps.google.com/?ll=49.242147,-122.971601&spn=0.039449,0.102911&t=h&z=14

The other thing with the Calgary link is that it includes areas literally at the edge of the city to the West.

Back to a discussion about roads ...

[Ramsayfarian]

Platt's column is about Mar's opposition to the Crowchild plan. I agree with most of what Mar has to say. Can't help but laugh at Mar's picture. He's looking pretty menancing for someone barely 5' tall. The photographer must have lied on his belly to take the shot.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2012/11/14/calgary-alderman-scoffs-at-billion-dollar-plan-to-expand-crowchild-tr-down-the-line

[kw5150]

There is a much more elegant solution to all of this.

[Bigtime]

Hovercars?

[kw5150]

Im thinking a hybrid of what exists on the east side of the city with the 4th ave flyover and local roads below with a set of lights.

In this scenario, there would be local access into West Hillhurst by making 9th ave sw a two and connecting it into west hillhurst using pumphouse ave, crossing the river and joining to 23rd st nw. 23rt st nw (in west hillhurst) would become a high street with new condo development and establish a new inner city link.

Where this hypothetical road (pumphouse ave to 23rd ave) crosses the river it would meet memorial at a set of lights with large advanced left turn lanes. The memorial at the current crowchild / kensington road could be reocated to this new set of lights and incorporate a park along the river and some new condo development.

Crowchild could remain as it currently stands but instead of ducking under memorial (really stupid....) it would fly over a slightly sunken memorial drive.

Kensington road would be closed and directed to memorial drive and have a beautiful landmark at the end. All new interchanges and intersections would have full access to all directions.

Bow trail would then be directly linked to 4th and 5th ave sw (into downtown) instead of 9th ave sw. access to 9th ave sw would be maintained from bow trail and crowchild. In this scenario, because of some of the roads being de-freeway-ized, the west village could probably be realized. The majority of the new interchange would be over top of the old creosote area. There would also be a new section of river promenade.....blah blah blah.

[Full Mountain]

Crowchild. Wow. Just wow.

There seems to be a short list of problems that need to be solve:
- horrible access from Bow Trail westbound/10th avenue to Memorial eastbound (crossing 3 lanes in a short distance)
- Lack of through lanes (far right lane on crowchild northbound is forced onto Memorial, necessitating lane changes)

And the solution is to add multiple bridges and ramps, demolish parts of historic schools, tear down multiple homes, add lanes everywhere. Transportation Engineering in this province has no understanding of limitations or constraints.

I'm with Fusili on this one, there is no reason why taking out houses and/or parts of schools should even be allowed within the parameters of the study, if the transportation department doesn't get that this gets people riled up maybe it's time for a wholesale change in that department.

[mrcccondor]

I'm with Fusili on this one, there is no reason why taking out houses and/or parts of schools should even be allowed within the parameters of the study, if the transportation department doesn't get that this gets people riled up maybe it's time for a wholesale change in that department.

But you've got to make sure cars can take the off ramps at 80km/hr!! Ignore the fact that traffic is moving 5km/hr in congested periods!

[RyLucky]

IF Crowchild improvements have any chance of coming to fruition, it will be in a scaled-back form focusing on safety and priority to thru-traffic, with minimal land acquisition:

Crowchild & Kensington Rd NW: take out lights. right turns only. (Kind of like Memorial & 19th)
Crowchild & 5th Ave NW: Over-pass, no access. (See Crowchild&26th Ave SW)
Crowchild & 23rd, 24th Ave NW: Here there is room for Crow&33rd Ave SW style access, and consider a steep retaining wall to save room.
10th Ave SW: Restore lights under Bow Trail, add NB onramp lane on right (instead of left) NB lane of Crowchild over bridge, that become the forced exit WB Memorial lane.
Changes to Memorial There will be a need for better access (ie a ramp) from WE Memorial to SB Crowchild. It would also be nice to have 3 NB lanes under Memorial, but major interchange work here is less important than the above priorities, especially given the cost of changes here. New lights at Kensington Rd, and at 19th Street. Possibly a future pedestrian bridge at 19th Street to West Village. Future changes to Bow Trail in WV should also be considered before implementing changes to Crowchild.

With the plan described above, people in Parkdale & Hillhurst will sometimes be forced to use Memorial to access Crowchild by car, but will have far better transit options on Crowchild and on 5th Ave. Best of all, 5th Ave will reconnect a community that is currently divided by a highway.

[fusili]

I'm with Fusili on this one, there is no reason why taking out houses and/or parts of schools should even be allowed within the parameters of the study, if the transportation department doesn't get that this gets people riled up maybe it's time for a wholesale change in that department.

Simple solutions can address many of the concerns. It just seems like $1B is a lot to solve the issue of having to cross three lanes to get from Bow/10th to Memorial eastbound. How about adding a eastbound ramp to memorial from 14th street, which all traffic on 10th/Bow Trail will cross anyways?

[Full Mountain]

Im thinking a hybrid of what exists on the east side of the city with the 4th ave flyover and local roads below with a set of lights.

In this scenario, there would be local access into West Hillhurst by making 9th ave sw a two and connecting it into west hillhurst using pumphouse ave, crossing the river and joining to 23rd st nw. 23rt st nw (in west hillhurst) would become a high street with new condo development and establish a new inner city link.

Where this hypothetical road (pumphouse ave to 23rd ave) crosses the river it would meet memorial at a set of lights with large advanced left turn lanes. The memorial at the current crowchild / kensington road could be reocated to this new set of lights and incorporate a park along the river and some new condo development.

Crowchild could remain as it currently stands but instead of ducking under memorial (really stupid....) it would fly over a slightly sunken memorial drive.

Kensington road would be closed and directed to memorial drive and have a beautiful landmark at the end. All new interchanges and intersections would have full access to all directions.

Bow trail would then be directly linked to 4th and 5th ave sw (into downtown) instead of 9th ave sw. access to 9th ave sw would be maintained from bow trail and crowchild. In this scenario, because of some of the roads being de-freeway-ized, the west village could probably be realized. The majority of the new interchange would be over top of the old creosote area. There would also be a new section of river promenade.....blah blah blah.

If someone was to really do this right they should be able to provide specific numbers of cars per hour on each ramp and where they go, this should be easily accomplished using cameras set up throughout the corridor.

I would think a mitigation strategy would be to end the lane from 10th/bow around the WB Memorial exit and instead of the right lane exiting to WB Memorial the WB Memorial exit would become an exit like EB Memorial. Additionally the lane from WB Memorial to NB Crowchild would exit onto 5th and add a lane on the left for the University Drive exit. This allows two lanes throughout this stretch and all it would need is a few thousand in line paint and new signs.

Here's a rough sketch (mostly proportional, excuse the errors) (click for larger)
http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/7453/crowchildreroute.jpg (http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/7453/crowchildreroute.jpg)
Image: Me

[Mazrim]

Simple solutions can address many of the concerns. It just seems like $1B is a lot to solve the issue of having to cross three lanes to get from Bow/10th to Memorial eastbound. How about adding a eastbound ramp to memorial from 14th street, which all traffic on 10th/Bow Trail will cross anyways?

$1B is to connect the free-flowing section of Crowchild South of 17th Avenue to the free-flowing section North of 24th Avenue. $150-200M of that would be for the Bow River crossing, if I'm reading that site correctly.

It looks like it's possible that the 16th Avenue area will cost more than the Bow River crossing.

It's not worth getting too riled up over a preliminary study design yet. Lots of work still to come before designs are finalized.

[kw5150]

If someone was to really do this right they should be able to provide specific numbers of cars per hour on each ramp and where they go, this should be easily accomplished using cameras set up throughout the corridor.

I would think a mitigation strategy would be to end the lane from 10th/bow around the WB Memorial exit and instead of the right lane exiting to WB Memorial the WB Memorial exit would become an exit like EB Memorial. Additionally the lane from WB Memorial to NB Crowchild would exit onto 5th and add a lane on the left for the University Drive exit. This allows two lanes throughout this stretch and all it would need is a few thousand in line paint and new signs.

Here's a rough sketch (mostly proportional, excuse the errors) (click for larger)
http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/7453/crowchildreroute.jpg (http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/7453/crowchildreroute.jpg)
Image: Me

But why would you keep that disaster of a memorial drive interchange?

[fusili]

"Where are the dedicated bus lanes on 16th and Kensington Road?" asks the guy who feels that RouteAhead should have led to at least some better integration of Transit planning with road upgrades.