Calgary Roads

[Acey]

Between 22X and Barlow is the only place where there could possibly be enough road capacity for it to be of any value. But that isn't the busiest stretch of Deerfoot. Yeah, have fun making one lane of Deerfoot a HOV lane as it goes over Anderson or Glenmore... see how well that works.

[You Need A Thneed]

Between 22X and Barlow is the only place where there could possibly be enough road capacity for it to be of any value. But that isn't the busiest stretch of Deerfoot. Yeah, have fun making one lane of Deerfoot a HOV lane as it goes over Anderson or Glenmore... see how well that works.

I was wondering where it would possibly make sense as well. On a road like Deerfoot, I can't see it making sense until there are at least 4 lanes each way for the entirety. I don't see the point of Stoney Trail at all, and I have no idea of any reason to put such a lane on any other highway.

[MalcolmTucker]

I think the initial intent in the legislation is to be able to designate lanes to help ease congestion around the oil sands.

[freeweed]

Oh good, more nanny state social engineering. Make all the peasants get out of their cars and into buses while the MLA's are driven around in their limos.

While the first part is funny, I actually agree 100% with the second.

It seriously pisses me off to see how many politicians at every level refuse to take transit. I hear apologists for this all the time, and I don't buy it.

1. Your job is no more important than mine. I cannot be late for mine, either.

2. If transit is not reliable enough for YOU, then why would it be for ME?

It was amusing that some of the ward councillor candidates actually made it part of their platform that they'd take transit to work. As if it's so exceptional and unexpected. Personally, I'm a big fan of eating your own dogfood.

[freeweed]

I think the initial intent in the legislation is to be able to designate lanes to help ease congestion around the oil sands.

That's absolutely the plan and was part of any semi-competent news reporting on the issue.

There hasn't even been a hint of suggestion about implementing this on Deerfoot.

[fusili]

While the first part is funny, I actually agree 100% with the second.

It seriously pisses me off to see how many politicians at every level refuse to take transit. I hear apologists for this all the time, and I don't buy it.

1. Your job is no more important than mine. I cannot be late for mine, either.

2. If transit is not reliable enough for YOU, then why would it be for ME?

It was amusing that some of the ward councillor candidates actually made it part of their platform that they'd take transit to work. As if it's so exceptional and unexpected. Personally, I'm a big fan of eating your own dogfood.

We may try and organize a "take transit for a week" for City Council sometime in the next year or so, just so Councillors can understand what transit needs to succeed and how to improve it. A few, such as Mar, took transit regularly, and Keating made a lot of efforts to take transit so he could understand the need for better transit in the SE.

[s211]

It seriously pisses me off to see how many politicians at every level refuse to take transit. I hear apologists for this all the time, and I don't buy it.

And therein lies the problem. Is it truly impossible to conceive that public transit is not practical for every single being on the planet? (PS: for the record, I don't own a car.)

[You Need A Thneed]

While the first part is funny, I actually agree 100% with the second.

It seriously pisses me off to see how many politicians at every level refuse to take transit. I hear apologists for this all the time, and I don't buy it.


Councillors are mostly either working downtown, or close to home (in their ward). If transit isn't easy to get to those places, it definitely needs improving.

Sure, they might have days where they have a bumch of meetings scheduled all over the place - take cars on those days.

[freeweed]

And therein lies the problem. Is it truly impossible to conceive that public transit is not practical for every single being on the planet? (PS: for the record, I don't own a car.)

For someone working a 9-5ish job in the downtown core, in a building with a station so close to the office that it's NAMED AFTER IT, public transit is highly practical.

Yes, it's impossible to convince me that a city councillor cannot take public transit for 90% of their days. Unless they're doing a heck of a different job than I envision. Perhaps there's a ward where the regular working hours are 8pm-4am and mostly on Sundays, or the guy/gal only goes to City Hall 2 times a month, or they need to rush out at a moment's notice every other hour for unscheduled meetings to put out fires, or something like that. I won't claim omniscience here.

Do what the private sector was forced to do. Put 30 parking spaces under City Hall and make them expensive as hell, for everyone. Let's see just how "essential" a car is on most days then.

[freeweed]

We may try and organize a "take transit for a week" for City Council sometime in the next year or so, just so Councillors can understand what transit needs to succeed and how to improve it. A few, such as Mar, took transit regularly, and Keating made a lot of efforts to take transit so he could understand the need for better transit in the SE.

Nenshi supposedly takes it frequently (for certain values of "frequent"), which impresses the hell out of me.

[para transit fellow]

I was wondering where it would possibly make sense as well. On a road like Deerfoot, I can't see it making sense until there are at least 4 lanes each way for the entirety. I don't see the point of Stoney Trail at all, and I have no idea of any reason to put such a lane on any other highway.


There is the radical concept of using the shoulder as a bus/HOV lane

http://ottawa.ca/en/residents/transportation-and-parking/traffic/freeway-shoulder-bus-lanes

http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/highwayprojects/Hwy99_Bus_Lanes/


is the shoulder built to the same spec as the rest of the lanes?

[mersar]

There is the radical concept of using the shoulder as a bus/HOV lane

http://ottawa.ca/en/residents/transportation-and-parking/traffic/freeway-shoulder-bus-lanes

http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/highwayprojects/Hwy99_Bus_Lanes/


is the shoulder built to the same spec as the rest of the lanes?

Most of Deerfoot's probably isn't, its probably too narrow especially over any bridges. That said, the City did that already on Crowchild and it works decently.

[Acey]

There is the radical concept of using the shoulder as a bus/HOV lane

Will not work on Deerfoot Trail, unless there's a radical new concept of a bus capable of squeezing by on a shoulder less than a metre wide.

[Dmajackson]

Most of Deerfoot's probably isn't, its probably too narrow especially over any bridges. That said, the City did that already on Crowchild and it works decently.

It does work decently but it needs more police enforcement. I get stuck in the afternoon jam on Crowchild NB quite often and I'm still yet to see any police out to enforce the transit-only lane which is odd because it would be an easy cash cow (just as easy as enforcing the 80km/h speed limit in the NW on a Saturday morning).

I could see shoulder lanes working on Glenmore when it gets widened for the SWRR. Three public lanes and one transit-only lane. the southern half of Sarcee could do the same style as Crowchild provided the power lines can be dealt with.

[Acey]

A few weekends ago they had a good trap setup SB Deerfoot with a guy on the Southland bridge, and you can't seem him till it's too late because of the huge diagrammatic sign for Anderson/Bow Bottom. I also saw CPS nabbing people in the bus lane, NB Centre St before McKnight. Seems like they do it if they have time, but they're too busy tending to all the fender benders at rush hour because people can't drive.

[freeweed]

A few weekends ago they had a good trap setup SB Deerfoot with a guy on the Southland bridge, and you can't seem him till it's too late because of the huge diagrammatic sign for Anderson/Bow Bottom. I also saw CPS nabbing people in the bus lane, NB Centre St before McKnight. Seems like they do it if they have time, but they're too busy tending to all the fender benders at rush hour because people can't drive.

It's more that they're spending 3 hours clearing an accident site because we still don't take the concept of "free-flow" very seriously.

CPS's practices would cripple any large city. I seem to recall hearing about things being done to change that, but I'm not seeing a lot of progress yet.

[kw5150]

Thoughts............

Can we just do the preliminary road alignment and grading for the SW ring road........and......wait for this:

Fix the problem areas inside the city first????

I had the "pleasure" of driving down to auburn bay yesterday at about 4:30. It is still the same stupid areas holding up hundreds of cars.

Plus, this city has been designed to be one giant maze and roadblock. Nothing connects and has any kind of logical, rational thought. The whole city road network is one big nimby controlled clusterfuck.

Another thing that would go a VERY long way is to educate people about HOW TO MERGE. People on the freeway should NEVER, and I mean NEVER step on the brakes to let people in!! This is rule number one in the world of defensive driving on a freeway! It is up to the people merging to get up to speed and join the flow! All that the people on the freeway should do is slightly let up on the gas to open up "windows of opportunity" for the people to merge into.

Stop the madness out there on the roads!! OMG!!

You would have to be a sadist to want to drive everyday in rush hour in this clusterfuck of a city road network. Nothing functions right now at all.

Thoughts..................

[bigcanuck]

You would have to be a sadist to want to drive everyday in rush hour in this clusterfuck of a city road network. Nothing functions right now at all.

Thoughts..................

I drive downtown in rush hour every day - and I'm not a sadist. And I prefer this option over transit.

[kw5150]

Great. That does nothing to hint at a solution. Thanks for your amazing input as usual.

I drive downtown in rush hour every day - and I'm not a sadist. And I prefer this option over transit.

[MasterG]

I drive downtown in rush hour every day - and I'm not a sadist. And I prefer this option over transit.

I think rather than attempt to improve commute times overall (essentially impossible on aggregate), the focus should be placed on what I like to think is commute resiliency. The routes in this city are not designed for this.

I moved to the Beltline 2 years ago, the biggest difference is that it takes the same amount of time each day to get to work. Regardless of accidents, traffic and weather. The reason is that I can walk in a pinch, take a bus-train combo, bicycle all along a variety of routes or drive or car2go. All options are available and on any given day one may be faster than another.

The point is that I can switch to the one that reflects the amount of time I want to commute on any given day. Things like a NIMBY designed road network, 2 access points for a neighbourhood and a lack of transit options that operate on a different network that the same two roads all reduce resiliency. Accident on Deerfoot that shuts it down? too bad, I am stuck in the SE for an extra 2 hours. Any snow day? Too bad, it takes 3 hours to leave my community if I am living west of Sarcee Tr SW.

Its not about being faster, its about being predictable.

[kw5150]

Yes, and other cites have very open street networks.....Calgary is like a maze, literally. We have to stop funneling people on to giant roads. The new 22x / deerfoot interchange is almost the size of the beltline. Gross!

I think rather than attempt to improve commute times overall (essentially impossible on aggregate), the focus should be placed on what I like to think is commute resiliency. The routes in this city are not designed for this.

I moved to the Beltline 2 years ago, the biggest difference is that it takes the same amount of time each day to get to work. Regardless of accidents, traffic and weather. The reason is that I can walk in a pinch, take a bus-train combo, bicycle all along a variety of routes or drive or car2go. All options are available and on any given day one may be faster than another.

The point is that I can switch to the one that reflects the amount of time I want to commute on any given day. Things like a NIMBY designed road network, 2 access points for a neighbourhood and a lack of transit options that operate on a different network that the same two roads all reduce resiliency. Accident on Deerfoot that shuts it down? too bad, I am stuck in the SE for an extra 2 hours. Any snow day? Too bad, it takes 3 hours to leave my community if I am living west of Sarcee Tr SW.

Its not about being faster, its about being predictable.

[MasterG]

Yes, and other cites have very open street networks.....Calgary is like a maze, literally. We have to stop funneling people on to giant roads. The new 22x / deerfoot interchange is almost the size of the beltline. Gross!

How do you change it though? How do you tell Mount Royal that 8th Street will now connects all the way through as it should?

There are so many missing connections that would be needed. Many are not possible, some could be done easily. Most would have huge neighbourhood considerations as traffic would change dramatically in a lot of areas.

The entire Mount Royal / Elbow Park / Elboya / Stanley Park area should be reopened in as many connections as possible. Mitigate traffic through traffic calming, signals and stops rather than restricting access.

[freeweed]

I drive downtown in rush hour every day - and I'm not a sadist. And I prefer this option over transit.

That's because in downtown, you're on a grid system so the traffic moves way more efficiently than via arterial routes. You're not seeing the congestion that only begins once you hit the suburbs.

[kw5150]

Im just thinking.....Why is my road any different than someones road up in mount royal? Why does my avenue have free flow vehicles during rush hour but some douche up on mount royal can vote to impede vehicles on roads that we all pay taxes for?

I think the city should seriously consider re-opening a few severed connections and doing a massive defensive driving course for calgarians. I swear traffic would get better by 10-20% in only a month with better knowledge of merging. It feels like a circus out there.

And for gods sake:

-fix the crowchild clusterfuck.
-fix the Bow bottom trail / deerfoot / southland drive death trap corner
-fix The Mcleod corridor (shouldnt it all be free flow after heritage drive?
-Fix all of the NE / deerfoot interface....lol
-Re-connect centre street north to continue and connect to airport trail!!
-Why does 14th street N just end??
-fix mcknight and edmonton trail and deerfoot area
-fix Ogden / Barlow area
-fix how The 4th street flyover is so steep and curved at the end!
-Add a direct (cross town) route to downtown from 17th ave SE!!!!
-Make bow trail a two way (thru route) that connects to kensington and inglewood.
-re-align bow trail to the 5th and 6th street one ways.

What was the city thinking?

"Ok, we have to move people.......lets make it an adventure and confuse them the whole way!!"

Sure we need the ring road.....but holy shit we could use some fixes in the city as well.






How do you change it though? How do you tell Mount Royal that 8th Street will now connects all the way through as it should?

There are so many missing connections that would be needed. Many are not possible, some could be done easily. Most would have huge neighbourhood considerations as traffic would change dramatically in a lot of areas.

The entire Mount Royal / Elbow Park / Elboya / Stanley Park area should be reopened in as many connections as possible. Mitigate traffic through traffic calming, signals and stops rather than restricting access.

[suburbia]

That's because in downtown, you're on a grid system so the traffic moves way more efficiently than via arterial routes. You're not seeing the congestion that only begins once you hit the suburbs.

Oh that's not true.

Downtown is hell in rush hour.

[Acey]

And for gods sake:

[$3 billion dollars in fixes]



Yep, if only it were that easy...

[Ferreth]

$3000 tax levy to every Calgarian will cover all the roads we need. We can levy the same again next year to cover all the LRT projects we need.

Problem solved! :cheers:

[RyLucky]

Yes, and other cites have very open street networks.....Calgary is like a maze, literally. We have to stop funneling people on to giant roads. The new 22x / deerfoot interchange is almost the size of the beltline. Gross!

You say this, but then in your next post you give a list of expressways and free-flow routes you want upgraded?

I agree that some of the "solutions" in Calgary were obviously designed by traffic engineers and not psychologists. They are designed to achieve one thing: maximum throughput at minimum cost. And they work. Ever tried going from EB Bow to NB Crowchild? Exit left, turn right, turn left, go around a loop, turn right, cross oncoming traffic, merge left, merge right, and now you are on Crowchild and hopefully you don't plan on turning onto Memorial. As critical as I am of this particular example, it actually was extremely cost effective to implement and accommodates a high volume of traffic.

Little emphasis has been given to how a project affects the feel of the local environment, how much land is needed, and how it will affect nearby communities, pedestrians, and cyclists (see South Bronx Freeway). Can someone be an engineer and a sociologist? I've said it before, but the trend we will start to see as inner city land values and populations rise is more emphasis on land use and local traffic. That means more traffic lights and fewer confusing loops. 14th St & Bow Trail is likely to one day reconfigure to when West Village develops. Memorial W, 14th St NW, Parkdale Blvd, Edmonton Trail, 17th Ave E, and Macleod should eventually introduce more pedestrian crossings and lights. Inner city free flow will be be focused on Memorial E, Deerfoot, and Crowchild.

[Koolfire]

Ever tried going from EB Bow to NB Crowchild? Exit left, turn right, turn left, go around a loop, turn right, cross oncoming traffic, merge left, merge right, and now you are on Crowchild and hopefully you don't plan on turning onto Memorial. As critical as I am of this particular example, it actually was extremely cost effective to implement and accommodates a high volume of traffic.


Wouldn't a roundabout make more sense here? This solution WB is decent, but EB I've had more than enough near misses.

[MasterG]

Im just thinking.....Why is my road any different than someones road up in mount royal? Why does my avenue have free flow vehicles during rush hour but some douche up on mount royal can vote to impede vehicles on roads that we all pay taxes for?

I think the city should seriously consider re-opening a few severed connections and doing a massive defensive driving course for calgarians. I swear traffic would get better by 10-20% in only a month with better knowledge of merging. It feels like a circus out there.

And for gods sake:

-fix the crowchild clusterfuck.
-fix the Bow bottom trail / deerfoot / southland drive death trap corner
-fix The Mcleod corridor (shouldnt it all be free flow after heritage drive?
-Fix all of the NE / deerfoot interface....lol
-Re-connect centre street north to continue and connect to airport trail!!
-Why does 14th street N just end??
-fix mcknight and edmonton trail and deerfoot area
-fix Ogden / Barlow area
-fix how The 4th street flyover is so steep and curved at the end!
-Add a direct (cross town) route to downtown from 17th ave SE!!!!
-Make bow trail a two way (thru route) that connects to kensington and inglewood.
-re-align bow trail to the 5th and 6th street one ways.

What was the city thinking?

"Ok, we have to move people.......lets make it an adventure and confuse them the whole way!!"

Sure we need the ring road.....but holy shit we could use some fixes in the city as well.

Some of these are good ideas, some I don't think would be beneficial:

Bad ideas:
-fix the crowchild clusterfuck (too invasive too communities and mega-expensive; but perhaps a few smaller projects around it can mitigate the worst issues?)
-fix The Mcleod corridor (doesn't really solve anything for a lot of money, it just pushes more traffic congestion inward quicker to areas that can't and wont be upgraded to free-flow)
-fix how The 4th street flyover is so steep and curved at the end! (not a real problem, you are unhappy because you can't enter downtown at 80km/h?)
-Re-connect centre street north to continue and connect to airport trail!! (eliminates centre street transit route as an advantage, I'd rather see Centre improved with even better priority for bus traffic)

Good Ideas
-fix the Bow bottom trail / deerfoot / southland drive death trap corner
-Fix all of the NE / deerfoot interface....lol (standardization of interchanges would be very much an improvement)
-Why does 14th street N just end?? (I agree its dumb, but likely not solvable as a neighbourhood now exists)
-fix Ogden / Barlow area
-Add a direct (cross town) route to downtown from 17th ave SE!!!! (your best idea, change Bow Tr into a 2-way and connect west and east on simple, direct routes)

[freeweed]

Oh that's not true.

Downtown is hell in rush hour.

I feared that my sarcasm might have been so strong, that people missed could entirely. Take the exact opposite of what I said and see if it seems more realistic to you. ;)

[craner]

Bad ideas:
-fix the crowchild clusterfuck (too invasive too communities and mega-expensive; but perhaps a few smaller projects around it can mitigate the worst issues?)

This has to be done, and I don't mean with little piece meal smaller projects. I don't understand what would be so invasive to the communities to fix it properly. It drives me nuts the City has dragged it's feet on this for so long and now they throw their hands up and say it can't be done.:hell: It's such a small portion (lengthwise) of Crowchild overall to connect the north & south portions.
End rant.

[J-D]

This has to be done, and I don't mean with little piece meal smaller projects. I don't understand what would be so invasive to the communities to fix it properly. It drives me nuts the City has dragged it's feet on this for so long and now they throw their hands up and say it can't be done.:hell: It's such a small portion (lengthwise) of Crowchild overall to connect the north & south portions.
End rant.

As much as I hate that section of Crowchild (less so now that I'm done University... but still plenty), the billion dollar price tag affixed to fixing it is a bit prohibitive.

[Joborule]

This has to be done, and I don't mean with little piece meal smaller projects. I don't understand what would be so invasive to the communities to fix it properly. It drives me nuts the City has dragged it's feet on this for so long and now they throw their hands up and say it can't be done.:hell: It's such a small portion (lengthwise) of Crowchild overall to connect the north & south portions.
End rant.

Quite frankly Crowchild in it's current form is already getting that job done. Going through with the original updated plans doesn't really make things worse.

[RyLucky]

To upgrade Crowchild to ideal standards means a $1B and leveling a neighbourhood. Craner, check out the proposal that came out last year if you want to see why it is so invasive to fix it properly. Given that the current configuration works OK (by no means ideal) at moving 100 000 vehicles/day, the billion dollar fix is not an option, especially when a couple smaller fixes in the $10-20 million dollar range will drastically improve throughput.

Here is an alternative that would fix a lot of problems, maintain mobility in all directions, and only require minimal appropriation:

Phase 1: Fix the North Side of the River. ~$15.5-20.5M
A) Convert Crowchild&5th-Ave-NW into a Crowchild&26th-Ave-SW-style intersection. Sacrifice direct access. ($10-15M)
B) Convert Crowchild&Kensington into right-on-right-off. Sacrifice left turns and E-W travel. Add a pedestrian overpass. ($5M)
C) Introduce 2 new lights on Memorial at 19th St W and somewhere near 27th St W. This will accommodate more left turns from Hillhurst and Parkdale that will be required if they lose access to Crowchild. This may mean slower travel speeds on Memorial, but shouldn't affect traffic too badly, as Memorial's major bottlenecks are further east. Local residents may actually be happy with more crossing to the river. ($0.5 M)

Phase 2: Fix Banff Trail.~$32-42M
A) Create a Crowchild&33rd-Ave-SW-style single overpass at Crowchild&24th-Ave-NW. ($30-40M)
B) Right-on-right-off access at 23rd Ave. ($0.5M)
C) A better connection between MacMahon and 24th Ave west of Crowchild. ($1.5M)

Phase 3: Fix 10th Ave Access & Kick off West Village.~$100-160M
A) Create an onramp from WB 10th Ave > NB Crowchild > WB Memorial. This means adding a NB right hand lane on the bridge and over EB Memorial. Perhaps the inside lane on the bridge could become transit or HOV. ($50-80M)
B) With redevelopment of West Village, introduce a new road connection 17th St in Sunalta to 19th St in Hillhurst. This means a CPR underpass and a new bridge. This would obviously be in the long term. ($50-80M)

By the way, my estimates are based on the costs projections fro similar projects, but could easily vary a ton. I just wanted to paint a picture of how to improve traffic flow a lot without building a superhighway. It can be done in phases, and it respects existing communities. Thoughts?

[Yahoo]

How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time.

The billion dollar price tag to fix Crowchild is just trying to scare people who have no idea of the budgets in Calgary and Alberta. A billion isn't what it used to be (ask the LRT planners). And you don't have to spend it all at once. When they fixed the north and south sections it was a slow progression. Do the easy fixes like around McMahon and save money over time to pay for the more expensive ones. Instead of doing nothing for decades.

"Leveling a neighborhood" to fix Crowchild is a total exaggeration. What we have is vocal NIMBY's stopping an entire city from doing what's needed.

Throw in a city council that acts like a cat chasing a string for pet projects and we find our roads in their current state. Look at Bowfort & 16th - approved how many times since 1986 - yet cancelled over and over. Now the solution is some turn lanes lol.

I wish Mayor N would drive to work along my route. Since it makes front page news when he gets caught in a traffic jam. It makes me wonder where my massive property tax increases have gone. They certainly don't seem to be used to solve any transportation problems.

[davee930]

How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time.

The billion dollar price tag to fix Crowchild is just trying to scare people who have no idea of the budgets in Calgary and Alberta. A billion isn't what it used to be (ask the LRT planners). And you don't have to spend it all at once. When they fixed the north and south sections it was a slow progression. Do the easy fixes like around McMahon and save money over time to pay for the more expensive ones. Instead of doing nothing for decades.

"Leveling a neighborhood" to fix Crowchild is a total exaggeration. What we have is vocal NIMBY's stopping an entire city from doing what's needed.

Throw in a city council that acts like a cat chasing a string for pet projects and we find our roads in their current state. Look at Bowfort & 16th - approved how many times since 1986 - yet cancelled over and over. Now the solution is some turn lanes lol.

I wish Mayor N would drive to work along my route. Since it makes front page news when he gets caught in a traffic jam. It makes me wonder where my massive property tax increases have gone. They certainly don't seem to be used to solve any transportation problems.

It's such a joke that they haven't done anything there and don't plan to either

[lineman]

Converting Crowchild and Kensington to a right on/ right off would mess up the 1/101 route resulting in much less mobility to the seniors living in the area. Good luck with that.

[Mazrim]

Since it makes front page news when he gets caught in a traffic jam.
It does?

[DizzyEdge]

Not sure if this is specifically "Roads", but one thing I noticed in Toronto is the different design of sidewalk designs next to driveways, where 2/3 to 3/4 of the sidewalk does not slope, just the last 1/4-1/3 does. Like this:

http://i.imgur.com/xbtX8oe.jpg

Much of what I see in Calgary is that the entire sidewalk slopes, like this:

http://i.imgur.com/VfZchx7.jpg

I find the Calgary-style to be fairly treacherous in winter, if the sidewalk is icy at all the fact it's entirely on a slope (and sometimes more of a slope that this photo shows) makes a very careful walk necessarily, particularly in situations like this photo where there's two side by side. The Toronto style seemed way better as most of the sidewalk does not slope. Can anyone think of a disadvantage to the Toronto style? just seems silly to design a sidewalk at a driveway seemingly more to benefit a car than the pedestrians.

[MichaelS]

How high and at what slope is the Toronto one? Is there a risk of vehicles scraping their bumpers as they arrive/depart? I guess not if they use this design in Toronto.

[ByeByeBaby]

Not sure if this is specifically "Roads", but one thing I noticed in Toronto is the different design of sidewalk designs next to driveways, where 2/3 to 3/4 of the sidewalk does not slope, just the last 1/4-1/3 does. Like this:

http://i.imgur.com/xbtX8oe.jpg

Much of what I see in Calgary is that the entire sidewalk slopes, like this:

http://i.imgur.com/VfZchx7.jpg

I find the Calgary-style to be fairly treacherous in winter, if the sidewalk is icy at all the fact it's entirely on a slope (and sometimes more of a slope that this photo shows) makes a very careful walk necessarily, particularly in situations like this photo where there's two side by side. The Toronto style seemed way better as most of the sidewalk does not slope. Can anyone think of a disadvantage to the Toronto style? just seems silly to design a sidewalk at a driveway seemingly more to benefit a car than the pedestrians.

If the sidewalks are raised to the same height from the roadway, then the sloped part in Toronto is necessarily much steeper than the Calgary sidewalk. The higher the slope, the lower the effective sliding friction; an ice-covered surface that causes no sliding on a full-width slope could easily cause sliding on a steeper quarter-width slope. I'm not sure that it is necessarily more treacherous to step with both feet on a, say, 7% slope than it is to step with one foot on a flat surface and the other on a 25% slope. The steeper bump is also probably tougher for cars and wheelchairs.

[DizzyEdge]

It seemed wide enough that two people could easily walk side by side over the non-sloping part, however it may be that their sidewalks are wider. Now I'm tempted to get geeky and measure angles and widths..

[RyLucky]

Those driveways would be a pain to get over on a wheelchair. I suppose that's one advantage to alley-access parking.

[Yahoo]

Originally Posted by Yahoo
Since it makes front page news when he gets caught in a traffic jam.

It does?

Yep - didn't you read about Mayor N and his front page traffic jam story earlier this year? That's what started the push to re-time lights and look at closing some turn lanes at rush hour. They did something on 24th and Crow as a result of the mayor's frustration (he's the only one that counts I guess) but honestly I don't think it helped a bit. Not that I don't welcome the city trying stuff like that. Quite often a quick change can offer short term relief. But unfortunately short term with the city often means decades.

I'd welcome an independent group to take over roads and transportation (the province?). Someone who would look at problem areas and get them fixed. I don't support dictatorships lol, but when the political process becomes crippled to act then perhaps someone who doesn't just listen to the NIMBY's should be in charge.

Sadly - even though the city is looking at lights it seems like they purposely are re-timing some lights to get people to use transit. The light into downtown at 11ST & 6 Ave SW was re-timed so there is a big lineup in the morning while traffic leaves downtown. The only problem is that traffic doesn't leave downtown in the morning - so people sit at long red waiting for nobody. Then at Bow and Sarcee they shortened the light cycles so traffic backs up several streets. You know, the usual parking lot where people sit at green lights but can't go through because of a red light a mile away. They should fix the light timing, but 311 doesn't respond to light timing issues unless you bug the mayor or aldermen for help. Frustrating. The real solution is an interchange like was planned - but Mayor N has shown no interest in building interchanges except at the traffic choked airport (sarcasm).

[Rusty van Reddick]

Yep - didn't you read about Mayor N and his front page traffic jam story earlier this year? That's what started the push to re-time lights and look at closing some turn lanes at rush hour.

I read the Herald every day and have never seen a front page story like you're describing. Searching "Nenshi traffic jam" only uncovered this, from over a year ago: http://www.660news.com/2012/11/02/enmax-fined-for-causing-monday-morning-traffic-delays/

[fusili]

Yep - didn't you read about Mayor N and his front page traffic jam story earlier this year? That's what started the push to re-time lights and look at closing some turn lanes at rush hour. They did something on 24th and Crow as a result of the mayor's frustration (he's the only one that counts I guess) but honestly I don't think it helped a bit. Not that I don't welcome the city trying stuff like that. Quite often a quick change can offer short term relief. But unfortunately short term with the city often means decades.

I'd welcome an independent group to take over roads and transportation (the province?). Someone who would look at problem areas and get them fixed. I don't support dictatorships lol, but when the political process becomes crippled to act then perhaps someone who doesn't just listen to the NIMBY's should be in charge.

Sadly - even though the city is looking at lights it seems like they purposely are re-timing some lights to get people to use transit. The light into downtown at 11ST & 6 Ave SW was re-timed so there is a big lineup in the morning while traffic leaves downtown. The only problem is that traffic doesn't leave downtown in the morning - so people sit at long red waiting for nobody. Then at Bow and Sarcee they shortened the light cycles so traffic backs up several streets. You know, the usual parking lot where people sit at green lights but can't go through because of a red light a mile away. They should fix the light timing, but 311 doesn't respond to light timing issues unless you bug the mayor or aldermen for help. Frustrating. The real solution is an interchange like was planned - but Mayor N has shown no interest in building interchanges except at the traffic choked airport (sarcasm).

Take off your tinfoil hat. It's uncomfortable and kinda weird looking.

[Mazrim]

Yep - didn't you read about Mayor N and his front page traffic jam story earlier this year? That's what started the push to re-time lights and look at closing some turn lanes at rush hour. They did something on 24th and Crow as a result of the mayor's frustration (he's the only one that counts I guess) but honestly I don't think it helped a bit.
If you can find an article about this I'd love to see it. I have never heard anything about this before.

I'd welcome an independent group to take over roads and transportation (the province?). Someone who would look at problem areas and get them fixed. I don't support dictatorships lol, but when the political process becomes crippled to act then perhaps someone who doesn't just listen to the NIMBY's should be in charge.
An independent group would look after their own pocketbook before any citizen's concerns. There are plenty of examples of what happens when things shift from public to private ownership. A simple "we are meeting the required traffic operations stated in our contract" would answer pretty much any complaint. Also, there is no reason for the government to assume liability for all of Calgary's roads too, hence why they would love to give Deerfoot back to the City once SE Stoney opens.

Sadly - even though the city is looking at lights it seems like they purposely are re-timing some lights to get people to use transit. The light into downtown at 11ST & 6 Ave SW was re-timed so there is a big lineup in the morning while traffic leaves downtown.
An interesting crackpot theory to say the least! Sounds like something they always say about Vancouver.

I'll never understand all the hatred over the Airport Tunnel, whether your comment was sarcasm or not. God forbid this city be proactive for once. It's such an apples and oranges comparison to other areas of the City, unless Crowchild will have some new restrictions in the coming years I've never heard of that will prevent upgrades????

[freeweed]

I'll never understand all the hatred over the Airport Tunnel

Me either. It's funny to see the usual crowd of "social engineering! stop wasting money on transit!" get so upset about a major road improvement.

I guess Nenshi did it, therefore it's bad. Fuck logic and a consistent opinion.

[fusili]

Yeah, the airport tunnel to me is such a good case of building something now instead of later. For other projects, you could argue that the headache of construction to upgrade is annoying, but worth the savings. With the airport tunnel, it was either we build it now, or we never, ever build it. Who is going to build a tunnel under an operating runway?

[ByeByeBaby]

Yep - didn't you read about Mayor N and his front page traffic jam story earlier this year? That's what started the push to re-time lights and look at closing some turn lanes at rush hour. They did something on 24th and Crow as a result of the mayor's frustration (he's the only one that counts I guess) but honestly I don't think it helped a bit. Not that I don't welcome the city trying stuff like that. Quite often a quick change can offer short term relief. But unfortunately short term with the city often means decades.

I'd welcome an independent group to take over roads and transportation (the province?). Someone who would look at problem areas and get them fixed. I don't support dictatorships lol, but when the political process becomes crippled to act then perhaps someone who doesn't just listen to the NIMBY's should be in charge.

Sadly - even though the city is looking at lights it seems like they purposely are re-timing some lights to get people to use transit. The light into downtown at 11ST & 6 Ave SW was re-timed so there is a big lineup in the morning while traffic leaves downtown. The only problem is that traffic doesn't leave downtown in the morning - so people sit at long red waiting for nobody. Then at Bow and Sarcee they shortened the light cycles so traffic backs up several streets. You know, the usual parking lot where people sit at green lights but can't go through because of a red light a mile away. They should fix the light timing, but 311 doesn't respond to light timing issues unless you bug the mayor or aldermen for help. Frustrating. The real solution is an interchange like was planned - but Mayor N has shown no interest in building interchanges except at the traffic choked airport (sarcasm).

:haha: You had me going there for a minute. Pretty hilarious stuff.

... wait, you don't actually believe your paranoid Robert Moses fantasies, do you?

[fusili]

Probably best to post this here:

Vancouver the ‘most congested city in North America’; Calgary ranks 23rd


THE PROVINCE AND THE CALGARY HERALD NOVEMBER 6, 2013 2:36 PM

Calgary ranks 23rd in a list of the most congested cities in North America, according to a new ranking by a European navigation and traffic management company.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Vancouver+tops+most+congested+city+North+America+Survey/9133439/story.html


This is a classic case of using a completely backward metric. Vancouver is perhaps one of the few cities in North America to have reduced average commute times across the region in the last decade or so. But by this metric, it is the "most congested city" in North America.

I could go on and on about how terrible this metric is, and how it actually rates those with horribly, horribly long commutes as somehow better than short ones in traffic. Worst, worst metric I can think of in the entire world.

[AB Born]

I made a 311 request asking when the intersection of 16th Ave & Bowfort Rd will have it's upgrades done... the City website suggests that the upgrades will be done in 2013, but someone from Roads emailed me back saying there aren't any plans to do the intersection upgrades until money is "found".

.

I also made a 311 request asking about the timeline for the 52 St SE & Peigan Trail intersection.... and was told that they were having trouble with one of the utilities being relocated, that whoever owned said utility was giving the city trouble in having it moved.
I doubt that the intersection will be complete before spring.

.

[woychukb]

Probably best to post this here:

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Vancouver+tops+most+congested+city+North+America+Survey/9133439/story.html

This is a classic case of using a completely backward metric. Vancouver is perhaps one of the few cities in North America to have reduced average commute times across the region in the last decade or so. But by this metric, it is the "most congested city" in North America.

I could go on and on about how terrible this metric is, and how it actually rates those with horribly, horribly long commutes as somehow better than short ones in traffic. Worst, worst metric I can think of in the entire world.

For those that don't want to dig through the article and links from it the methodology referred to is basically: take the off-peak travel time and the peak period travel time and express as a percentage. In other words if your commute goes from 2 minutes to 3 that's worse than going from 60 minutes to 80 minutes. And yes, it is a very silly metric.

[mersar]

From what I recall, the closing of lanes originated out of the Traffic Congestion Reduction Pilot program, which originated with Lake Fraser Gate and Macleod down in the SW and is being tried at 24th now. Pretty much easy and cheap projects with substantial benefits compared to their cost.

The mayor supports it, but I can't recall any other 'front page stories' about him being stuck in traffic that lead to it.

[You Need A Thneed]

Speaking of airport tunnel, here's what it looks like from 36th St: (iPhone doesn't take very good pictures with the light levels so different at night):
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y116/g_major7/null_zpsc40eb66f.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y116/g_major7/null_zps3851a571.jpg

[RyLucky]

Probably best to post this here:



http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Vancouver+tops+most+congested+city+North+America+Survey/9133439/story.html


This is a classic case of using a completely backward metric. Vancouver is perhaps one of the few cities in North America to have reduced average commute times across the region in the last decade or so. But by this metric, it is the "most congested city" in North America.

I could go on and on about how terrible this metric is, and how it actually rates those with horribly, horribly long commutes as somehow better than short ones in traffic. Worst, worst metric I can think of in the entire world.

I partly agree and partly disagree. Let's not get into it too much, but I just wanted to say that "hours cost" (or whatever they call it) is but one metric that ought to be taken in balance with others, and congestion is a tricky thing to define and quantify, and all those cities are definitely congested. By "congestion" I mean transit and roads are crowded, productivity and quality of life suffers for this, and folks tolerate varying levels of congestion based on what they are accustomed to.

[freeweed]

For those that don't want to dig through the article and links from it the methodology referred to is basically: take the off-peak travel time and the peak period travel time and express as a percentage. In other words if your commute goes from 2 minutes to 3 that's worse than going from 60 minutes to 80 minutes. And yes, it is a very silly metric.

I disagree that it's a silly metric. It depends on what you're trying to quantify.

And I'm also stunned that Vancouver would see this sort of pattern. Do they truly have no cars on the road during off-peak times, but everyone drives during rush hour? Or is their street design when at capacity just that poor? Which of course isn't necessarily a bad thing. Engineering roads solely for rush hour is completely retarded.

Regardless, I see this is a valuable measure. If all else is equal, ie: the distance you live from your destination, you can get a good idea how bad congestion can get. And as a tourist, it helps me to know which cities to completely avoid during rush hour. LA, San Fran, San Jose, and Seattle being in the top don't surprise me in the least. Toronto and DC, yup. NYC - well traffic is never "good" there so that kinda surprises me. Although I did spend an hour on the GWB once. :haha:

I must just have never driven in Vancouver during the rush. While I don't remember it as being a particularly traffic-friendly city, it certainly struck me as easier and faster than almost everywhere else in the top 10.

This sort of thing helps me to know if avoiding rush hour is a big deal or not. It's practically required in places like LA or Seattle. If you don't get moving before 3, then just stay where you are unless someone's heart is about to explode. And for those of us that rarely deal with actual rush hour traffic in our home city - it's nice to know how bad it can get, if we choose to go for a drive on a day off or something.

[suburbia]

I partly agree and partly disagree. Let's not get into it too much, but I just wanted to say that "hours cost" (or whatever they call it) is but one metric that ought to be taken in balance with others, and congestion is a tricky thing to define and quantify, and all those cities are definitely congested. By "congestion" I mean transit and roads are crowded, productivity and quality of life suffers for this, and folks tolerate varying levels of congestion based on what they are accustomed to.

While Calgary is far, far from it, I've suggested in the past that there is likely a sweet-spot for density, at which point we minimize commutes, maximize efficiency of utilities and services, etcetera, but after that point, higher density becomes more challenging. We tend to always say more density - period, but at some point, the anthill starts to rot.

[RyLucky]

While Calgary is far, far from it, I've suggested in the past that there is likely a sweet-spot for density, at which point we minimize commutes, maximize efficiency of utilities and services, etcetera, but after that point, higher density becomes more challenging. We tend to always say more density - period, but at some point, the anthill starts to rot.

Congestion is more complex than just to do with density. In Calgary, I think the biggest contributing factors are probably distance traveled (think of it as a result of low density if you like) and mode of travel (also feel free to associate car travel with the fact that low-density developments are harder to service effectively with other modes).

Building high density suburbs doesn't really make sense unless (A) there is also a high density of employment, (B) the density is centred around transit nodes, and/or (C) the alternative is building more residential dwellings down the road, creating car traffic that would have to share the same roads anyway. Stadium Plaza, for example, is ideal for new high-density residential developments.

At really high densities, yes road congestion becomes a problem, but more people are able to utilize the virtually unlimited pedestrian capacity of our sidewalks. NB: Even sidewalks can reach max capacity, but a making them a few feet wider can greatly increase capacity - something that cannot be said of roads or transit. Fortunately, downtown has 7th Ave for emergency vehicle access.

I agree with you that super-high density is not always desirable, although in Calgary we have so many great public spaces that I've never really felt the claustrophobia that I've felt in other cities. We just need to make sure to keep improving our public spaces as we increase density. Also, we have to keep it affordable to live in the inner city, especially for those who wish to live a modest family lifestyle.

[Yahoo]

To clarify, there were radio reports of the mayor getting stuck in traffic that lead to things like Macleod Trail and Lake Fraser Gate light timing changes. Which is a good thing! This plan wasn't put up due to brainstorming - it was as a result of important people getting stuck in traffic.

I just wish common people or city workers would report and complain more. Not to be jerks - I mean complain to get obvious solutions or obvious problems looked at. Too often people just whine to themselves (or in comment or discussion forums) without talking to the people who can get things done. And people are niave if they think a complaint by the mayor isn't given priority over say a typical 311 call. (which according to some sources at city hall (I know an IT person that works for the city) are ignored unless 10 people make the same complaint)

Has anyone here ever noticed something silly, unsafe, or crazy with a light timing or roadway design but never reported it? (rhetorical question - we all know the answer). From what I read a lot of people do notice things.

[Yahoo]

Re: the airport tunnel. I don't think another debate is necessary because it's already been discussed a lot, but to answer some people's questions who seem baffled why people are still upset...

I actually supported it originally. It would cost more to do later, would be easier to do now, it would provide alternate access to the airport etc. All true.

But then some things changed my mind. And it's not just me after all. Like people note - a lot of people are still upset.

- excessive cost
- there is no access now and has it hurt anything?
- I was flying a lot at the time and noticed that lots of big cities only have 1 access to their airports. Often due to things like lakes or oceans, but sometimes mountains or just houses prevented more access
- I looked at maps to discover the routes to the airport if the tunnel wasn't built. They seemed reasonable.
- I feel it would be money better spent to upgrade the access roads we have now rather than spend more on another access point. Upgrades to Deerfoot and surrounding roads have more benefits than just airport access.
- Potential LRT access to the airport is 1 benefit, but it's not like there aren't other ways to do this. In any case it's not something that will happen soon anyway.
- Excessive ongoing insurance costs are required since a problem with the tunnel could be disastrous to the airport.
- I don't really think it's a big concern (or even a valid concern) but some have mentioned the security risk as a terrorist target if Calgary was ever in the spot light. (G8 meeting, Olympics etc)
- I checked into congestion around the airport - there wasn't any - especially compared to the rest of our main roads. There is no evidence it will be needed anytime within the next hundred years.

But my biggest issue is that it used up pretty much the entire road budget for Calgary. If you're going to prevent other projects then you better be sure it's the best use of your money. Mayor Dave mentioned something like 40 unfunded interchanges were needed in Calgary (ideally of course). I don't think 1 of them has been built under Mayor N. Mayor N ran away from Crowchild (although I think he would like it fixed if we had the money), stopped Bowfort and 16th yet again, and due to economic reasons (which I support) quit a lot of the road resurfacing projects - but that resulted in a lot more than usual wavy bumpy roads.

I don't hate the idea of the tunnel and can think of several reasons to support it. But in the end it just isn't worth the cost/benefit. How many people go to the airport every day compared to use Crowchild or McLeod for example?

[Yahoo]

To call me a crackpot because the light timing was changed at Bow and Sarcee right when the new LRT line came on line is a bit stunning to me. Drive that way home now and you'll be parked at green lights sometimes backing up to westbrook mall due to the light change. Similar changes occurred into downtown. Anyone who drives 11th St and 6th Ave SW knows this to be a fact. Before you think I'm wearing a tinfoil hat wander down and look for yourselves at rush hour. The walk cycle at that light was changed to a mere 8 "seconds" and traffic sits at an unnecessary red every rush hour. (I complained to 311 and after 3 updates explaining why they couldn't change it they sent someone to look and actually did change it because of my complaint. But not by much). Maybe it wasn't a conspiracy. But why didn't they put up "new" signs? Why did they lower the speed leaving downtown westward AFTER the LRT construction was finished? (again - with no "new" sign). I think it's naive to think that cities don't try to manipulate light timing. It's often for the greater good. But if you do it then it should be done in the open don't you think? Perhaps the people involved didn't think it was a big deal, but if you had to sit parked at a green light every evening then perhaps you'd be a little ticked off too. Man, I can't believe Calgary transit doesn't complain since it's a bus route too.

Anyway, even though I like to discuss and debate things I'm really regretting the decision to create an account here and post my opinions. (lol - as I'm sure many of you agree). Although it's awfully boring if everyone agrees about everything - which seems to be what many old timers here want.

[fusili]

To clarify, there were radio reports of the mayor getting stuck in traffic that lead to things like Macleod Trail and Lake Fraser Gate light timing changes. Which is a good thing! This plan wasn't put up due to brainstorming - it was as a result of important people getting stuck in traffic.

I just wish common people or city workers would report and complain more. Not to be jerks - I mean complain to get obvious solutions or obvious problems looked at. Too often people just whine to themselves (or in comment or discussion forums) without talking to the people who can get things done. And people are niave if they think a complaint by the mayor isn't given priority over say a typical 311 call. (which according to some sources at city hall (I know an IT person that works for the city) are ignored unless 10 people make the same complaint)

Has anyone here ever noticed something silly, unsafe, or crazy with a light timing or roadway design but never reported it? (rhetorical question - we all know the answer). From what I read a lot of people do notice things.

No, no it wasn't. This was an initiative that directed transportation to find cost-effective changes to congestion called the Traffic Congestion Reduction Strategy, which included pilots at other intersections.

And yes, we should ignore complaints that are reported by less than 10 people. Because in a City of 1 million people, trying to solve every single complaint to 311 would create a horrendous logjam of work that the city would never, ever get out of.

Stop getting your information from radio talk shows, online comment boards and the like. If you want to pretend to understand what you are talking about, actually follow Council and Committee hearings and see what is actually going on. Or just search the City of Calgary website to see what is happening and why. Otherwise this is just tinfoil hat, batshit crazy, sun newspaper commenting nonsense.

[freeweed]

The airport tunnel used up Calgary's entire road budget?

[fusili]

The airport tunnel used up Calgary's entire road budget?

Yup. As long as your information is from newspaper comment boards, talk radio and other sources, the airport tunnel was the City's entire roads budget for 5 years. Plus, gravy train!!!

[Barnes]

The airport tunnel used up Calgary's entire road budget?

No. It did use up the entire tunnel budget though.

[MasterG]

Yup. As long as your information is from newspaper comment boards, talk radio and other sources, the airport tunnel was the City's entire roads budget for 5 years. Plus, gravy train!!!

Yeah the barely had enough money to repave 11th and 12th (and all other major roads in DT and the beltline) every second year for the past 6 Years! how dare they threaten the bi-annual downtown paving schedule by building a tunnel!

[You Need A Thneed]

Re: the airport tunnel. I don't think another debate is necessary because it's already been discussed a lot, but to answer some people's questions who seem baffled why people are still upset...

I actually supported it originally. It would cost more to do later, would be easier to do now, it would provide alternate access to the airport etc. All true.

But then some things changed my mind. And it's not just me after all. Like people note - a lot of people are still upset.

- excessive cost It's expensive, but excessive? Probably not. Either way, city has already shown that building the tunnel is the least expensive alternative.
- there is no access now and has it hurt anything? Access to what? The Airport? That's not what the project is about, though it is a side benefit. Metis and CHB are very congested now.
- I was flying a lot at the time and noticed that lots of big cities only have 1 access to their airports. Often due to things like lakes or oceans, but sometimes mountains or just houses prevented more access Airport Access is not the main reason for the tunnel. But that's not to say that access from multiple directions isn't a good thing.
- I looked at maps to discover the routes to the airport if the tunnel wasn't built. They seemed reasonable. They certainly wouldn't be reasonable when the area is built out. That's the point. It would cost more than the cost of the tunnel to give high enough capacity access to Deerfoot along CHB/Metis in the future.
- I feel it would be money better spent to upgrade the access roads we have now rather than spend more on another access point. Upgrades to Deerfoot and surrounding roads have more benefits than just airport access. City has already shown that upgrading access roads to a high enough capacity would be more expensive than the tunnel. Downgrading of Metis Trail, which is complete, and made possible by the construction of the tunnel, already has saved the city over $200 million itself in future road building costs.
- Potential LRT access to the airport is 1 benefit, but it's not like there aren't other ways to do this. In any case it's not something that will happen soon anyway. Distance from future NC line and from current NE line is about the same, however, NE line is already there, rail transit doesn't have to wait for NC line to be done.
- Excessive ongoing insurance costs are required since a problem with the tunnel could be disastrous to the airport. Valid concern, but tunnel is built with all that in mind. Insurance costs shouldn't be terrible.
- I don't really think it's a big concern (or even a valid concern) but some have mentioned the security risk as a terrorist target if Calgary was ever in the spot light. (G8 meeting, Olympics etc) There are probably easier targets that would cause more problems.
- I checked into congestion around the airport - there wasn't any - especially compared to the rest of our main roads. There is no evidence it will be needed anytime within the next hundred years. Is the congestion as bad as some other roads? no. Is there some congestion on CHB and Metis now? Absolutely. Also, note that these are roads driving through empty fields on either side for the most part. Those fields aren't going to be empty in 5-10 years. Stonegate Landing, Jacksonport, Cityscape, Skyview Ranch, Redstone, Saddleridge - all of these are going to be filling up 5 -10 years from now. Without the Airport Tunnel, CHB may have had the worst congestion in the city 5-10 years from now, hence the reason why rebuilding it to handle all the traffic would cost more than the tunnel costs. All those developments listed, that doesn't even fill up the entire NE area INSIDE the ring road. And the densest portions of the developments that are already there haven't even started yet. The corner of CHB/60th St is zoned for high density, up to 80 metre (~20 story) tall buildings, I think. Plus 6-8 story buildings surrounding that. The whole area is roughly 10% developed, and the existing roads are struggling.

But my biggest issue is that it used up pretty much the entire road budget for Calgary. If you're going to prevent other projects then you better be sure it's the best use of your money. Mayor Dave mentioned something like 40 unfunded interchanges were needed in Calgary (ideally of course). I don't think 1 of them has been built under Mayor N. Mayor N ran away from Crowchild (although I think he would like it fixed if we had the money), stopped Bowfort and 16th yet again, and due to economic reasons (which I support) quit a lot of the road resurfacing projects - but that resulted in a lot more than usual wavy bumpy roads. The money saved by building the tunnel now will help the city catch up in infrastructure needs in the future. It didn't use up any portion of the roads budget. It was built with capital money. When the city signs the city charter that is coming, it will have the source for the capital funding that it wants.

I don't hate the idea of the tunnel and can think of several reasons to support it. But in the end it just isn't worth the cost/benefit. How many people go to the airport every day compared to use Crowchild or McLeod for example? Again, tunnel was not built solely for airport access, it was not even the main reason. It is a good reason, though, as the Airport lands are one of the biggest employment areas in the city. Also, comparing cost benefit between it and other projects isn't really the issue here. The cost benefit calculation was done between the tunnel option and what it would have cost to solve the same problem in a different way. The tunnel was shown to be both cheaper and the best option - really making it a no brainer.

Answers in red above.

[Ferreth]

I just wish common people or city workers would report and complain more. Not to be jerks - I mean complain to get obvious solutions or obvious problems looked at. Too often people just whine to themselves (or in comment or discussion forums) without talking to the people who can get things done. And people are niave if they think a complaint by the mayor isn't given priority over say a typical 311 call. (which according to some sources at city hall (I know an IT person that works for the city) are ignored unless 10 people make the same complaint)

For what it's worth, I've complained to 311 about some specific road issues and have gotten action, sometimes. It seems if the complaint is reasonable, and obviously fixable without much cost/effort, it gets done. Remember, the city encourages you to report potholes so they don't have to go looking all over for them. My last complain about a pot hole, the city went above and beyond my original complaint and fixed all the cracks up and down the street while they were there.

[Acey]

City has already shown that upgrading access roads to a high enough capacity would be more expensive than the tunnel. Downgrading of Metis Trail, which is complete, and made possible by the construction of the tunnel, already has saved the city over $200 million itself in future road building costs.

Yeah... I'm not ever going to understand this. I realize we've saved a ton of money, at the expense of Metis sucking and it will continue to suck and eventually become Macleod-bad, and the tunnel will dump more traffic onto it so I don't get that argument either.

[RyLucky]

Building the tunnel was the right thing to do.

[sportsdude]

15 Million Dollars to be spent on Deerfoot Trail Improvements
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/calgary/Province+tackle+Deerfoot+Trail+bottleneck/9140395/story.html

Any bets this will accomodate maybe 1 years growth for the super S.E? Also that this project is getting fast tracked because our minister of transportation lives in the area?
However any improvements the province is willing to take the whole bill before they hand it back to Calgary is much appreciated.

[Acey]

Building the tunnel was the right thing to do.

Agree 100%. Nuking plans to build an interchange at Airport Trail/Metis... that's what I don't get. You're negating the effectiveness of the tunnel if the infrastructure is not there on either side to support it.

It's as if nobody realizes how fucking terrible McKnight is and that you need a decent thoroughfare for the NE. Airport Trail is their only shot at it.

Any bets this will accomodate maybe 1 years growth for the super S.E?.

It's better than nothing and I like the plan, but I'm sure by any official measure the improvement will accommodate zero years of growth, as Deerfoot would still be over-capacity going through there. Not really anything to write home about until the they fix the Glenmore squeeze as well. Instead of NB slowing to a crawl around Barlow in the morning rush, it'll start maybe a few hundred metres further north. Meh.

[You Need A Thneed]

Agree 100%. Nuking plans to build an interchange at Airport Trail/Metis... that's what I don't get. You're negating the effectiveness of the tunnel if the infrastructure is not there on either side to support it.

There is still plans for an interchange at Metis Trail/Airport Trail. Airport Trail will eventually be freeway from Stoney to Deerfoot. The Metis/64th Ave interchange wasn't axed either.

[ggopher]

15 Million Dollars to be spent on Deerfoot Trail Improvements
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/calgary/Province+tackle+Deerfoot+Trail+bottleneck/9140395/story.html

Any bets this will accomodate maybe 1 years growth for the super S.E? Also that this project is getting fast tracked because our minister of transportation lives in the area?
However any improvements the province is willing to take the whole bill before they hand it back to Calgary is much appreciated.

I attended the open house for this on Wednesday night. These upgrades seem like a great idea, for relatively low cost. However it only moves the problem on NB Deerfoot to Glenmore where it also reduces to 2 lanes. But at least they are working on it. And it makes sense to wait for the SE ring road to open first, at least give people an alternative before you cause chaos.

http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/drftom-gp.htm

However, it also does nothing to fix SB Deerfoot at Anderson. Talking to AB Transportation, the long term plan is to add another bridge at Anderson south of the existing structure. But that would be very expensive. They looked at creating a basket weave for the SB merging traffic from Southland, but they feel there is not enough room to make it work.

At least they are trying....

[Mazrim]

There's no sense in making sub-standard fixes to temporarily improve conditions on Deerfoot. They need to significantly rework the Glenmore and Anderson/Bow Bottom interchanges to improve traffic flow in the long term, so those will definitely have to sit and wait longer. The changes they are proposing may be smaller, but they will make a difference and fit within the current restrictions without appearing to do anything sub-standard.

[fusili]

There's no sense in making sub-standard fixes to temporarily improve conditions on Deerfoot. They need to significantly rework the Glenmore and Anderson/Bow Bottom interchanges to improve traffic flow in the long term, so those will definitely have to sit and wait longer. The changes they are proposing may be smaller, but they will make a difference and fit within the current restrictions without appearing to do anything sub-standard.

Hey it's me, anti-roads guy, and I agree with this message. The Glenmore/Deerfoot interchange is such a clusterfu%$k. I don't know how many times I blew by Glenmore just because I forgot to turn off 2 KM BEFORE THE DAMN INTERCHANGE!!

And Anderson/Deerfoot, that's just dangerous.

[You Need A Thneed]

Hey it's me, anti-roads guy, and I agree with this message. The Glenmore/Deerfoot interchange is such a clusterfu%$k. I don't know how many times I blew by Glenmore just because I forgot to turn off 2 KM BEFORE THE DAMN INTERCHANGE!!

And Anderson/Deerfoot, that's just dangerous.

In Deerfoot and Glenmore, you essentially have the biggest N/S road and the biggest E/W road in the city intersecting, and one of the turn movements doesn't even have a ramp. You have to drive through a couple of lights, make a right turn, and then merge onto Glenmore. The other turn movements have their own ramps, but aren't much better - tight radius ramps that have yield sings at the end of them, and are so small that you added a lane to get rid of the yield signs, you'd still have FAR too short weave zones.

The whole thing needs to be blown up and started from scratch.

[H.E.Pennypacker]

^ Agreed ... With the SWRR deal in place and appears that fiasco is over with, the next major road expenses should be incurred on revamping Glenmore/Deerfoot and Deerfoot/Anderson

It would be a painful few years of construction traffic for commuters but it's not going to get any better - short term pain for long term gain .. Brings the debate of spending money on the SELRT or on a complete overhaul of Deerfoot at Glenmore/Anderson

[dmuzika]

In Deerfoot and Glenmore, you essentially have the biggest N/S road and the biggest E/W road in the city intersecting, and one of the turn movements doesn't even have a ramp. You have to drive through a couple of lights, make a right turn, and then merge onto Glenmore. The other turn movements have their own ramps, but aren't much better - tight radius ramps that have yield sings at the end of them, and are so small that you added a lane to get rid of the yield signs, you'd still have FAR too short weave zones.

The whole thing needs to be blown up and started from scratch.

The problem with the province's proposed improvements (http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/OH1-GDI-Stage1.pdf) is the NB-->WB movement still isn't addressed. The Ulitmate Stage shows two flyovers for Glenmore/Deerfoot (http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/glen-m2.pdf) (EB-->NB and NB-->WB) and C/D lanes on Glenmore (http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/glen-m1.pdf) between Blackfoot Trail and Glendeer Circle. The problem is I wonder how long (if ever) it will take for the ulitmate stage would be constructed?

At the very least, when they add the new northbound bridge they should build the NB-->WB flyover so it's freeflow in all directions. However maybe the province should consider buidling it to the ulitmate stage right away. Is the Glenmore/Deerfoot interchange handle more traffic than some of the major ring road interchanges (i.e. Deerfoot/Stoney north, Deerfoot/Stoney south (22X) or even QE2/Anthony Henday Dr)?

[mersar]

At the very least, when they add the new northbound bridge they should build the NB-->WB flyover so it's freeflow in all directions. However maybe the province should consider buidling it to the ulitmate stage right away. Is the Glenmore/Deerfoot interchange handle more traffic than some of the major ring road interchanges (i.e. Deerfoot/Stoney north, Deerfoot/Stoney south (22X) or even QE2/Anthony Henday Dr)?

Traffic levels on Deerfoot south of Glenmore are 100,000 AADT and north of Glenmore was 127,000 in 2012. The City's latest data for 2011 shows Glenmore is 137,000 AAWT west of Deerfoot and 66,000 AAWT east of Deerfoot. Numbers aren't quite an exact comparison as the city data only counts weekdays, but its close (the city map shows 114k north of Glenmore for 2011, but province's data is 120k)

So yes, way more than any single part of the ring road currently in either Calgary or Edmonton.

Stoney @ Deerfoot North is about 78k on Deerfoot, 40k on Stoney
Stoney @ Deerfoot South is about 35k on Stoney (22X), 73k on Deerfoot
QE2/Anthony Henday is about 87k on QE2, 61k on AHD

(roughly... taking the higher number from both sides of each interchange as reported by AB Transportation as thats the only data I have)

[ggopher]

The problem with the province's proposed improvements (http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/OH1-GDI-Stage1.pdf) is the NB-->WB movement still isn't addressed.

At the very least, when they add the new northbound bridge they should build the NB-->WB flyover so it's freeflow in all directions. However maybe the province should consider buidling it to the ulitmate stage right away. Is the Glenmore/Deerfoot interchange handle more traffic than some of the major ring road interchanges (i.e. Deerfoot/Stoney north, Deerfoot/Stoney south (22X) or even QE2/Anthony Henday Dr)?

At the open house for the Southland interchange, I asked specifically about the missing ramp from NB Deerfoot to WB Glenmore in the proposed Glenmore interchange. However they feel that the existing solution is adequate and have no plans to include that in the first round of improvements. It is a bit of a maze through Heritage, but there is only set of traffic lights and then a right hand turn at the lights (which now turns into a dedicated lane on Heritage Drive when the city fixed that area after the flood). I don't agree, but at least if this is 2 lanes, it will be a small improvement.

[dmuzika]

At the open house for the Southland interchange, I asked specifically about the missing ramp from NB Deerfoot to WB Glenmore in the proposed Glenmore interchange. However they feel that the existing solution is adequate and have no plans to include that in the first round of improvements. It is a bit of a maze through Heritage, but there is only set of traffic lights and then a right hand turn at the lights (which now turns into a dedicated lane on Heritage Drive when the city fixed that area after the flood). I don't agree, but at least if this is 2 lanes, it will be a small improvement.

It's disappointing that arguably the busiest interchange in Alberta doesn't allow for movement in all directions, although it would interesting to see how much traffic actually goes from NB Deerfoot to WB Glenmore. In a perfect world, it would be great if you could replicate the McKnight Blvd/36 St NE/Metis Trail interchange at Deerfoot/Glenmore (at least in the short term), but like anything, costs are an issue.

Is there enough room to to add a NB-->WB loop in the cloverleaf, or is Burnco too close to the interchange?

[mersar]

Is there enough room to to add a NB-->WB loop in the cloverleaf, or is Burnco too close to the interchange?

Its doable, but definitely would require some land purchasing. You'd have to move the WB->NB ramp quite a ways out and even then, making it the exact same size as the SB->EB ramp it would stretch over where 13th Street is now. The buildings are far enough to the east to not be impacted, just storage yard really for Lafarge's pipe plant.

http://i41.tinypic.com/10f0qo9.jpg

[dmuzika]

Its doable, but definitely would require some land purchasing. You'd have to move the WB->NB ramp quite a ways out and even then, making it the exact same size as the SB->EB ramp it would stretch over where 13th Street is now. The buildings are far enough to the east to not be impacted, just storage yard really for Lafarge's pipe plant.

Nice! I'm wondering if a short/medium solution would be integrate something like this:

http://i725.photobucket.com/albums/ww255/dmuzika/Road%20Signs/Deerfoot_Glenmore/Stage1_zpsc90ca4ef.png
http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/OH1-GDI-Stage1.pdf

With something like this:

http://i725.photobucket.com/albums/ww255/dmuzika/Road%20Signs/Deerfoot_Glenmore/Interchange_zps3d04ee5d.png
Original Image, http://www.northeastanthonyhenday.com/images/SITE%2029.jpg (Anthony Henday Dr/Sherwood Park Fwy interchange), modified by me.

More land from Burnco would be needed, but it probably could be squeezed in there.

[Acey]

Is there enough room to to add a NB-->WB loop in the cloverleaf, or is Burnco too close to the interchange?

That'd be the least of the concerns; it'd introduce a horrible merge that they couldn't possibly justify, even as an interim solution. Cutting corners is the only way we can fix Deerfoot at this point, but this is a corner I'd rather not see them cut.

[Ferreth]

16th Ave/19th St. NE functional planning options presented to stakeholders. Note that the plans consider 16th and Deerfoot, 19th and Barlow all at the same time.
Link to pdf:
http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TP/Documents/studies/16ave/16Ave-phase2-stakeholder-input.pdf

You'll note that the city is considering a diverging diamond interchange for Deerfoot in several options. I'd say it isn't going to work well here due to the extra bridges required over the railroad tracks and the limited weave distance to get from from Deerfoot SB to 19th St SB. Might as well just build a third level bridge for 16th Ave across Deerfoot like option D. Personally, I'd like to see option A w. a 3rd level on Deerfoot like option D.

Unfortunately, the drawings are so crappy I can't really evaluate the direction ramp options for Deerfoot (H and J), although done right I'd consider those too.

Open house on Dec 4th at Vista Heights School (2411 Vermillion St. N.E.) from 5 to 8 p.m. I will be there as this is my hood and I'm most impacted by whatever they decide to do with this area.

[Acey]

http://i.imgur.com/FzJF7iP.png
http://i.imgur.com/kqlGi.gif

That's gonna be expensive as hell but I don't care. In a city of over 1 million people you can't have a damn diamond interchange at the junction of your primary N-S and E-W routes. Calgary is trippin'.

Upon further review... this is one of the more ballsy functional planning studies I've seen for a Calgary interchange. Fourth level flyover? Diverging diamond?!

[You Need A Thneed]

I don't mind any of those Deerfoot options. Not sure if I like any of the Barlow options. Really, you can't think of an option that keeps Barlow as it is?

[Acey]

I'm sure they're itching to remove the last remaining full clover in the city. They really don't like em. But for roads with lower speed limits like these two, it's the lesser of 2 evils, IMO...

[davee930]

http://i.imgur.com/FzJF7iP.png
http://i.imgur.com/kqlGi.gif

That's gonna be expensive as hell but I don't care. In a city of over 1 million people you can't have a damn diamond interchange at the junction of your primary N-S and E-W routes. Calgary is trippin'.

Upon further review... this is one of the more ballsy functional planning studies I've seen for a Calgary interchange. Fourth level flyover? Diverging diamond?!

I wish!! I don't know if it's just me but I've always wanted a stacked interchange in Calgary. Every big city has them and they're cool as shit.

[fusili]

Where are the bus only lanes? Oh wait, they forgot to talk to Calgary Transit (again) and realize that 16th avenue is a BRT corridor. No worries though, we can redo the whole thing again in the future. We never have the money to build it right, but we always have the money to build it twice.

[You Need A Thneed]

I'm sure they're itching to remove the last remaining full clover in the city. They really don't like em. But for roads with lower speed limits like these two, it's the lesser of 2 evils, IMO...

I'm not sure if the full cloverleaf there has ever been a problem. Maybe it's because it takes up nearly a quarter section of land.

It could be left there as a reminder of why they aren't built - Full cloverleafs only work when they are absolutely gigantic AND the left turning traffic numbers aren't very big.

Seriously though, 16th Ave/Barlow has never been a problem, despite being a full cloverleaf.

[MasterG]

We never have the money to build it right, but we always have the money to build it twice.

This is amazingly accurate. +1

[Joborule]

http://i.imgur.com/FzJF7iP.png
http://i.imgur.com/kqlGi.gif

That's gonna be expensive as hell but I don't care. In a city of over 1 million people you can't have a damn diamond interchange at the junction of your primary N-S and E-W routes. Calgary is trippin'.

Upon further review... this is one of the more ballsy functional planning studies I've seen for a Calgary interchange. Fourth level flyover? Diverging diamond?!

I wish!! I don't know if it's just me but I've always wanted a stacked interchange in Calgary. Every big city has them and they're cool as shit.

I really, really like option A, followed by option H. 'A' would be sick for being a progressive interchange, and 'H' would be boss just because who doesn't like flyovers? Ultimately, both get the job done in making WB-SB and SB-EB freeflow, which is most needed for that interchange.

D is alright, but you're still making traffic stop for lights, which feels off when you're coming from free flow, onto free flow. The whole transition should be seamless. The only thing it improves is free flow traffic continuing west/east on 16th, which I don't think is that needed.

In the end, I think A is the best bet since it'll be cheaper, and gets the job done.
I don't mind any of those Deerfoot options. Not sure if I like any of the Barlow options. Really, you can't think of an option that keeps Barlow as it is?

I'm not sure if the full cloverleaf there has ever been a problem. Maybe it's because it takes up nearly a quarter section of land.

It could be left there as a reminder of why they aren't built - Full cloverleafs only work when they are absolutely gigantic AND the left turning traffic numbers aren't very big.

Seriously though, 16th Ave/Barlow has never been a problem, despite being a full cloverleaf.

I think due to EB trafic merging from 16th ave that the current interchange would cause too much of a muck up with 16th ave being freeflow from Deerfoot on, going 100km/h. It would interfere with traffic wanting to go SB Barlow.

Also as you said, it takes up a huge chunk of land, which isn't justified for the amount of traffic it takes. The free space gained could be used for development.

Where are the bus only lanes? Oh wait, they forgot to talk to Calgary Transit (again) and realize that 16th avenue is a BRT corridor. No worries though, we can redo the whole thing again in the future. We never have the money to build it right, but we always have the money to build it twice.
Since the route ahead plan considers it, I'm sure the road layout would accommodate it. At least I hope.

[dmuzika]

I really, really like option A, followed by option H. 'A' would be sick for being a progressive interchange, and 'H' would be boss just because who doesn't like flyovers? Ultimately, both get the job done in making WB-SB and SB-EB freeflow, which is most needed for that interchange.

D is alright, but you're still making traffic stop for lights, which feels off when you're coming from free flow, onto free flow. The whole transition should be seamless. The only thing it improves is free flow traffic continuing west/east on 16th, which I don't think is that needed.

In the end, I think A is the best bet since it'll be cheaper, and gets the job done.


I've never driven through a diverging diamond, does anyone know accommodating it is for through traffic (in this case 16 Ave)? The through traffic has to cross over, so it would appear that there would be 2 sets of lights at the interchange where the EB and WB lanes cross over, with one direction always having to be stopped. During peak periods could that cause more backups? Or does that still allow for better east-west movement than its current setup?

I added Option A but added traffic lights to highlight the two new intersections on 16 Ave.

http://i725.photobucket.com/albums/ww255/dmuzika/Road%20Signs/Deerfoot_Glenmore/OptionA_zps2e098da3.png (http://s725.photobucket.com/user/dmuzika/media/Road%20Signs/Deerfoot_Glenmore/OptionA_zps2e098da3.png.html)

Is it possible the two crossovers could be grade separated, like a basketweave?

[Acey]

Is it possible the two crossovers could be grade separated, like a basketweave?

Yep, but at that point there's better ways to do it. The whole point of a diverging diamond is to eliminate the cost associated with bridges.

Calgary drivers cannot navigate 4-ways stops, traffic circles, or differentiate between yield and merge signs. A diverging diamond would be a disaster.

L-8z7v1VEc

[MasterG]

Calgary drivers cannot navigate 4-ways stops, traffic circles, or differentiate between yield and merge signs. A diverging diamond would be a disaster.



Could not agree more to this. Our city has grown so fast but our driving culture is very confused and stressed about that. Some drivers think its downtown Montreal and others think its a rural Saskatchewan town. We certainly haven't found equilibrium in our driving culture yet. Aggressive, timid, blatantly illegal driving are all widespread and common.

The amount of people driving opposite ways down 1-ways is outstanding. My personal favourite is the weird out of place U-turns and turns into parking lots:

Southbound 5th street at 17th ave at 5pm in the rush hour. 1st car gets green, proceeds straight south then signals to turn into Shell station's enterance 15 feet south of intersection. To accomplish this he needs an open route which is blocked by heavy 3-block lineup of cars heading northbound, including the left turn-lane queue that cannot proceed because the intersection is blocked by the queue waiting for the genius to turn into the Shell station. Gridlock in its most pure form.

hopefully we will get better as people grow more accustom to big-city life

[fusili]

Could not agree more to this. Our city has grown so fast but our driving culture is very confused and stressed about that. Some drivers think its downtown Montreal and others think its a rural Saskatchewan town. We certainly haven't found equilibrium in our driving culture yet. Aggressive, timid, blatantly illegal driving are all widespread and common.

The amount of people driving opposite ways down 1-ways is outstanding. My personal favourite is the weird out of place U-turns and turns into parking lots:

Southbound 5th street at 17th ave at 5pm in the rush hour. 1st car gets green, proceeds straight south then signals to turn into Shell station's enterance 15 feet south of intersection. To accomplish this he needs an open route which is blocked by heavy 3-block lineup of cars heading northbound, including the left turn-lane queue that cannot proceed because the intersection is blocked by the queue waiting for the genius to turn into the Shell station. Gridlock in its most pure form.

hopefully we will get better as people grow more accustom to big-city life

Ha ha. I love these. See them all the time, two opposing lanes of traffic, both backed up because people want to turn left.

Part of the reason I don't drive is because it makes me want to kill all the people. People who drive dangerously. People who drive like 4 year old children and always go 10-15km below the speed limit. People who don't signal. People who don't know they're signalling. Idiots who can't merge. Idiots who don't let people merge. People who run reds. People who honk at other cars waiting for pedestrians to cross. Jerks on cell phones. People who stop for jaywalkers. People who speed up to threaten jaywalkers. People who after sitting at a light for 30 minutes waiting to get through, get to the front of the queue and accelerate at the slowest rate possible when the light turns green. People who follow too close. People who make ridiculous maneuvers that endanger everyone on the road to save a few seconds. Idiots who go through an intersection when there isn't enough space ahead and end up blocking the entire intersection for an entire light cycle.

If I drove everyday of my life, I would eventually be in jail, the hospital or the psych ward.

When I walk, nothing anybody does really upsets me. Sometimes people walk slower than me, but that is not really frustrating.