Calgary Roads

[CorporateWhore]

The bus ride out was a bit of a pain, but otherwise fun was had by all.

Frinkprof you should've said hello...I don't think we've met before? We're pretty used to having a child hanging off our arm by now.

Might as well add my photos to thread.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3706/14238755776_2e18aa5d71_b.jpg
(https://flic.kr/p/nGem2f)Ferrari Dino 308 GT4 (https://flic.kr/p/nGem2f) by Thomasaurus (https://www.flickr.com/people/85051342@N06/), on Flickr

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5037/14075304147_082b9b2865_b.jpg
(https://flic.kr/p/nrMBxH)Alfa Romeo Spider Veloce (https://flic.kr/p/nrMBxH) by Thomasaurus (https://www.flickr.com/people/85051342@N06/), on Flickr

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5485/14075196689_52f451b4f4_b.jpg
(https://flic.kr/p/nrM4AZ)Porsche 928S (https://flic.kr/p/nrM4AZ) by Thomasaurus (https://www.flickr.com/people/85051342@N06/), on Flickr

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3813/14075235550_f3436f2803_b.jpg
(https://flic.kr/p/nrMga1)Hmm, this guy looks familiar (https://flic.kr/p/nrMga1) by Thomasaurus (https://www.flickr.com/people/85051342@N06/), on Flickr

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3782/14238742496_bc041b1d4c_b.jpg
(https://flic.kr/p/nGeh5h)Tunnel-16 (https://flic.kr/p/nGeh5h) by Thomasaurus (https://www.flickr.com/people/85051342@N06/), on Flickr

https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2922/14075245520_69e6416fcd_b.jpg
(https://flic.kr/p/nrMj7U)T-Bird (https://flic.kr/p/nrMj7U) by Thomasaurus (https://www.flickr.com/people/85051342@N06/), on Flickr

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5536/14261878085_0c6bcf5fd1_b.jpg
(https://flic.kr/p/nJgRtK)Porsche 550 Spyder (https://flic.kr/p/nJgRtK) by Thomasaurus (https://www.flickr.com/people/85051342@N06/), on Flickr

[lineman]

I wish I hadn't pulled a thirteen hour shift that ended at 1:00pm, because I would have gone to this. Cool to see that many exotic and unique cars there.

Would've made for a good afternoon. Sure beats spending the day discussing American hookers online in a Calgary Urban/Suburban debate thread. :haha:

[milomilo]

http://conf.tac-atc.ca/english/annualconference/tac2013/session7/azita.pdf

This document shows 2 narrower lanes plus LRT. It looks like you could just about squeeze in three lanes if you abandoned most of the shoulder, but that probably wouldn't be a good idea in a tunnel.

[The Chemist]

Is it just me or is that tunnel really tall? I don't seem to recall Shanghai's river tunnels having that much clearance, but it's been quite a while since I've gone through one so I may be wrong.

[CorporateWhore]

It didn't seem overly tall to me. Either way, they probably wanted to make sure it was able to handle a large cross section of vehicle types. They had a digger displayed on top of a trailer, and the space above it wasn't ridiculously high or anything.

If anything, the lanes were a little narrowed than I thought they'd be, but you have a bit of a different perspective as a pedestrian as opposed to when you drive.

[lineman]

Is it just me or is that tunnel really tall? I don't seem to recall Shanghai's river tunnels having that much clearance, but it's been quite a while since I've gone through one so I may be wrong.

Possibly to fit LRT cars if that pipe dream ever comes to fruition.

[You Need A Thneed]

Possibly to fit LRT cars if that pipe dream ever comes to fruition.

LRT cars don't need as much clearance as trucks.

The tunnel is posted with a 5.3 metre clearance.

Above that are the fans, lane control, etc. it's around 7 metres to the ceiling.

[Full Mountain]

No, we wouldn't be "more glad". To start with, the tunnel money is only a drop in the bucket compared to the Green Line LRT. 20 years from now - hell, 20 hours from now - once the runway is operating, the price of a tunnel goes up at least an order of magnitude. So we could have the airport tunnel, and once we come up with $3 billion build the Green Line, or we could have some preliminary earthworks done for the Green Line, and only need $2.8 billion more for it, plus $3 billion for the airport tunnel.

I'm a transit advocate, but the airport tunnel is a total no-brainer. I'm just glad that a long-term perspective was used for once.

The bit that bugs me out the tunnel is that it should have been built 20 years ago when the airport put out the original plan for the second runway and closure of Barlow. Instead we wait till the 11th hour and have to pull money from other projects, when that money could have been put aside years ago.

[Bigtime]

Surprised not to see Bigtime there.

We were kid free on Saturday, took full advantage of it.

I did drive through it yesterday morning though, pretty cool.

[MalcolmTucker]

The bit that bugs me out the tunnel is that it should have been built 20 years ago when the airport put out the original plan for the second runway and closure of Barlow. Instead we wait till the 11th hour and have to pull money from other projects, when that money could have been put aside years ago.
Money wasn't pulled from current other projects, only from the post 2017 provincial funding envelope. The money was borrowed.

[Full Mountain]

Money wasn't pulled from current other projects, only from the post 2017 provincial funding envelope. The money was borrowed.

So it was pulled from projects that would have been funded by the post 2017 funding, whatever they may be. My point is that the delays in planning, caused a shuffling of priorities, something that should have been done 20 years ago.

[MalcolmTucker]

^ then we would have had to pull money from projects that are already done today! It makes little difference in the end.

[RyLucky]

The bit that bugs me out the tunnel is that it should have been built 20 years ago when the airport put out the original plan for the second runway and closure of Barlow. Instead we wait till the 11th hour and have to pull money from other projects, when that money could have been put aside years ago.

What we should have done is kept the airport terminal building where it was 50 years ago at the south side of the airport lands, and save everyone 4 km/trip over the past half century.

[Bigtime]

What we should have done is kept the airport terminal building where it was 50 years ago at the south side of the airport lands, and save everyone 4 km/trip over the past half century.

I do believe even when the new terminal was planned they knew there would someday be the parallel runway, thus moving the terminal north to make operations easier when that day came.

[You Need A Thneed]

What we should have done is kept the airport terminal building where it was 50 years ago at the south side of the airport lands, and save everyone 4 km/trip over the past half century.

and, now, with the runway opening, a south end terminal would be a lousy place (in terms of taxiing distance) to have it.

[freeweed]

and, now, with the runway opening, a south end terminal would be a lousy place (in terms of taxiing distance) to have it.

Absolutely. You see this poor planning at a lot of airports, where you spend 15-20 minutes taxiing everytime. I'm extremely happy YYC made the right choice.

[lineman]

I'm for one glad there was enough foresight to move the terminal north to allow for growth. Imagine how much more of a clusterfuck that Deerfoot/McKnight/12th area would be if it had stayed.

[Innersoul1]

I am wondering if anyone has thoughts on the "fancy" crosswalk painting that the city is undertaking in parts of the city. They are painted in a terracotta and sandstone colour and feature a design that looks like stamped concrete. I can't seem to find a picture of one in Calgary but the image I have posted below is closest to it.

They look great, but I can only imagine the cost associated with them. They have been actively used on the crosswalks around the West LRT. My biggest issue is that they didn't weather the winter very well. In many locations it's all but gone. Additionally, i watch a crew go about putting in one of these crosswalks. It's a multi-step process that takes the better part of a day to complete half of a crosswalk.

I am all for beautifying our urban spaces but this doesn't really do so efficiently. Additionally, the impact on the safety of pedestrians, in terms of visibility is marginal at best.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Ag8s4e8ZchU/T_7xFCudp7I/AAAAAAAABgs/e1HYVzGGa90/s1600/741.JPG
Credit: Urban Spaces and Place Blog

[Ramsayfarian]

Not sure if it has been mentioned here yet, but I noticed that with the road construction being done on 14st SW, one can see the old streetcar rail ties.

[CTrainDude]

Not sure if it has been mentioned here yet, but I noticed that with the road construction being done on 14st SW, one can see the old streetcar rail ties.

Awesome - any chance someone has some photos?

[Trans Canada]

Awesome - any chance someone has some photos?

http://i.imgur.com/sztj359l.jpg
from http://imgur.com/a/mXGNY; http://www.reddit.com/r/Calgary/comments/26emhq/14th_street_sw_streetcar_history/

[PVG-YYC]

With all these residential/rental tower going up in DT Core, I can see a lot of traffic issues in the near future. Does City of Calgary have any plan to improve the transportation or city infrastructure to accommodate the population growth?

[Full Mountain]

I am wondering if anyone has thoughts on the "fancy" crosswalk painting that the city is undertaking in parts of the city. They are painted in a terracotta and sandstone colour and feature a design that looks like stamped concrete. I can't seem to find a picture of one in Calgary but the image I have posted below is closest to it.

They look great, but I can only imagine the cost associated with them. They have been actively used on the crosswalks around the West LRT. My biggest issue is that they didn't weather the winter very well. In many locations it's all but gone. Additionally, i watch a crew go about putting in one of these crosswalks. It's a multi-step process that takes the better part of a day to complete half of a crosswalk.

I am all for beautifying our urban spaces but this doesn't really do so efficiently. Additionally, the impact on the safety of pedestrians, in terms of visibility is marginal at best.

Credit: Urban Spaces and Place Blog

The visual impact for drivers is a greater benefit than the beautification IMO

[Full Mountain]

With all these residential/rental tower going up in DT Core, I can see a lot of traffic issues in the near future. Does City of Calgary have any plan to improve the transportation or city infrastructure to accommodate the population growth?

Check out http://www.routeahead.ca/ for the transit plan, also plans for pedestrian and other active mode improvements throughout Centre City.

[fusili]

With all these residential/rental tower going up in DT Core, I can see a lot of traffic issues in the near future. Does City of Calgary have any plan to improve the transportation or city infrastructure to accommodate the population growth?

Playing devil's advocate here: why do they need to (apart from general planning for growth)? If 1000 people move to this city and move into condo towers in Beltline, there is very little impact from a transportation perspective, as most will walk, take transit or drive in a reverse direction from peak traffic. If those 1000 people move to the far out burbs, they will drive along many kms of city roads to get to work, including the roads that those downtown dwellers use.

From a transportation perspective, residential development in the downtown has the least amount of impact, such to the point that it should almost be considered nil.

[lubicon]

I am wondering if anyone has thoughts on the "fancy" crosswalk painting that the city is undertaking in parts of the city. They are painted in a terracotta and sandstone colour and feature a design that looks like stamped concrete. I can't seem to find a picture of one in Calgary but the image I have posted below is closest to it.

They look great, but I can only imagine the cost associated with them. They have been actively used on the crosswalks around the West LRT. My biggest issue is that they didn't weather the winter very well. In many locations it's all but gone. Additionally, i watch a crew go about putting in one of these crosswalks. It's a multi-step process that takes the better part of a day to complete half of a crosswalk.

I am all for beautifying our urban spaces but this doesn't really do so efficiently. Additionally, the impact on the safety of pedestrians, in terms of visibility is marginal at best.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Ag8s4e8ZchU/T_7xFCudp7I/AAAAAAAABgs/e1HYVzGGa90/s1600/741.JPG
Credit: Urban Spaces and Place Blog

Wonder if this is the same thing that was done to 53 Street NW a few years ago between Crowchild and Market Mall. If so my observations are:

1. it made the crosswalks and intersections much more visible to drivers
2. it looked great
3. it didn't weather very well at all and was worn down fairly quickly.

[mersar]

Wonder if this is the same thing that was done to 53 Street NW a few years ago between Crowchild and Market Mall. If so my observations are:

1. it made the crosswalks and intersections much more visible to drivers
2. it looked great
3. it didn't weather very well at all and was worn down fairly quickly.

Similar on the WLRT route but different. The 53rd Street project was using a coloured rubber tile material inset into the pavement, whereas the WLRT is just painted brick material from what I know.

[MalcolmTucker]

Similar on the WLRT route but different. The 53rd Street project was using a coloured rubber tile material inset into the pavement, whereas the WLRT is just painted brick material from what I know.
The WLRT is painted asphalt. They vibrated down a metal grid to leave impressions like it is brick work, then painted it.

[Mazrim]

(It's my first post in about 2 months, so I wanted to share. I don't mean to spam my blog on this site, so if people would rather I didn't, I can take it down)

Please, keep posting links here every time you make a post! Another great one, by the way. It's always interesting to see the changes made over the years.

[PPAR]

Thanks THR that article is really interesting. Two questions. First, when was the Glenmore reservoir constructed? Secondly, it appears from your maps that the current NE corner of the Reserve is not classified as part of the reserve lands in the early models of the ring road. This seems to make it more straight forward for the 1950's planners to plan a route without acquiring reserve land.
I know the NE corner was leased out to the military at that time. Had the city conveniently forgot that the land was native controlled?

[andasen]

We have a schematic for the Ogden-Glenmore Intersection!

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


High Quality PDF version (http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/Documents/Road-projects/glenmore-ogden/glenmore-ogden-plan.pdf)

[fusili]

We have a schematic for the Ogden-Glenmore Intersection!


This is good. Will help a lot of Quarry Park traffic get onto Glenmore easier instead of taking 18th Street, and will probably speed up the 302 BRT over this section. Most importantly, it will get rid of the bottleneck as Glenmore crosses the CP tracks by the irrigation canal and will make Glenmore free flow from Barlow to Deerfoot (I think they planned to have it free flow to Stoney in the medium term).

[milomilo]

Massive improvement. Now just two more intersections and Glenmore is almost a real road.

[YYCguys]

Perhaps this will spur on a residential extension of Riverbend into that wasteland that currently exists between Riverbend and the 24th street alignment south of Glenmore.

[outoftheice]

Is there a reason why eastbound Glenmore goes from 3 lanes to two as it hits the Ogden Road bridge structure?? Aren't we currently dealing with all kinds of headaches right now and searching for a solution because of Deerfoot dropping a lane as it approaches Glenmore? Seems kind of short sighted to be repeating the same thing here. I would think that most of the traffic volumes that are on Glenmore eastbound at the point would be exiting onto Barlow Trail so to me it makes the most sense to keep the road 6 lanes until after passing through Barlow...

[freeweed]

Perhaps this will spur on a residential extension of Riverbend into that wasteland that currently exists between Riverbend and the 24th street alignment south of Glenmore.

Oh, it's certainly going to induce some sprawl all right. Both commercial and residential.

About time Glenmore gets fixed up though.

[andasen]

Oh, it's certainly going to induce some sprawl all right. Both commercial and residential.

About time Glenmore gets fixed up though.

...Sprawl...

What definition are you using. Any development resulting from 24th being linked to Ogden Road with a Glenmore overpass would be infill development and brownfield redevelopment. As a bonus it could be TOD grade density at that.

[You Need A Thneed]

That looks like the design from a year or two that I saw. Might be revised now

[fusili]

Perhaps this will spur on a residential extension of Riverbend into that wasteland that currently exists between Riverbend and the 24th street alignment south of Glenmore.

Can't. Landfill setbacks. To the east is the abandoned Ogden landfill. To the south of that is the Ecco Landfill. To the east of that is the old WestCo Fertilizer Plant. No residential, hospitals, food services of any kind or schools in any of those areas.

[Doug]

What happens to Shepherd Road?

[Nudrock]

Shepard road will get a better connection with 86 ave (hopefully) and on to that traffic circle.

[andasen]

What happens to Shepherd Road?

Shepard road will get a better connection with 86 ave (hopefully) and on to that traffic circle.

Looking like this

http://i.imgur.com/4ThX94b.gif?1

Source (http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/Roads/Documents/Development-and-projects/long-range-plan-24-st-86-ave.pdf)

[Full Mountain]

Looking like this

http://i.imgur.com/4ThX94b.gif?1

Source (http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/Roads/Documents/Development-and-projects/long-range-plan-24-st-86-ave.pdf)

Why wouldn't they have a right out on the Shepard/86th curve rather than turning Shepard into a cul-de-sac?

[Calgarian]

I still can't believe they aren't connecting Riverbend to 24th street as was originally planned 20 some years ago. I think the people on Riverstone Rd somehow managed to have that blocked despite being in the original plans when they bought those houses.

Glad to see a plan on this though, this is a clusterfuck of an interchange currently.

[You Need A Thneed]

Not technically City of Calgary, but it appears that Peigan Trail is close to being ready to open between 84th St SE, and 100th Street SE.

When Peigan extends all the way to Chestermere, I can understand the point. But I don't understand the point of extending Peigan only to 100th. Frontier Road is a couple hundred meters south, and already extend between 84th and 100th, and has very little traffic.

[DizzyEdge]

Are there any plans for an interchange at Barlow and Glenmore?

[You Need A Thneed]

I don't think I've seen it mentioned here - Glenmore under Blackfoot has had it's construction one removed - finally.

[srperrycgy]

I don't think I've seen it mentioned here - Glenmore under Blackfoot has had it's construction one removed - finally.

That project took far too long to complete. Glenmore was a pain with the reduced speed that almost everyone ignored and Blackfoot was bad for the abrupt lane shifts.

[googspecial]

I've recently started driving Stoney NE, and am curious if anyone here knows where a connection at the top right corner would head to?

This is all I can seem to find on the net during my lunch break:
http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/ef-m6u.pdf

To me, a Hwy 9 extension to Drumheller makes sense... Is there any actual future road planned here?


EDIT: With the TUC outline from that map, it looks as if there would be a connection North as well as East.

[googspecial]

Originally there was a plan to connect to Highway 9 by going east, and an extension of the East Freeway (NE and SE side of the ring road) to the north. The extension east to Highway 9 was dropped from the ring road plans (any future extension to Highway 9 would be provided by Country Hills Blvd), while a future extension north to connect with Highway 2 north of Airdrie was part of the planning when the ring road was designed.

The TUC in that area was protected years ago so the land accommodating an east extension is likely a remnant from earlier plans, though in the early 2000s there were alternative routes under consideration, and it's possible that the land will be held on to just in case there is a future need to head east from that location.

Interesting. Yeah I can see how if Country Hills is going to be used, then there is no need to go East on that corner.
At first I thought it was kind of silly to go North there, but the more I think about it, it would be be good to by-pass Deerfoot/Airdrie when driving into the city. (If heading to the East side of the city)

Is there any time-frame for this? 50 years? Plans would likely change anyways...

[You Need A Thneed]

New Plan on the city's website for the Bowfort Road / 16th Ave interchange:

http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TP/Documents/Projects/Completed-Planning-Projects/TCH-Bowfort/bowfort_tch_recommended_plan_2014.pdf

[CTrainDude]

New Plan on the city's website for the Bowfort Road / 16th Ave interchange:

http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TP/Documents/Projects/Completed-Planning-Projects/TCH-Bowfort/bowfort_tch_recommended_plan_2014.pdf

Who knew they'd ever replicate Glenmore and Macleod? Interesting.

[speedog]

Who knew they'd ever replicate Glenmore and Macleod? Interesting.

John Laurie and 14th Street NW is also similar.

[googspecial]

New Plan on the city's website for the Bowfort Road / 16th Ave interchange:

http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TP/Documents/Projects/Completed-Planning-Projects/TCH-Bowfort/bowfort_tch_recommended_plan_2014.pdf

I dig the SPUI

[ByeByeBaby]

Who knew they'd ever replicate Glenmore and Macleod? Interesting.

It's a pretty standard interchange design. Makes a lot of sense here, particularly given the lower volumes on Bowfort Road, especially if there's a special event signal timing for the WB-SB movement.

[Ramsayfarian]

Here's a fun little time waster. Not sure how accurate it is, but I found that max speed and Max acceleration really helps to get traffic flowing. I'm going to tweet the mayor with my findings.

Traffic Simulator (http://www.mtreiber.de/MicroApplet_html5)

[lubicon]

Here's a fun little time waster. Not sure how accurate it is, but I found that max speed and Max acceleration really helps to get traffic flowing. I'm going to tweet the mayor with my findings.

Traffic Simulator (http://www.mtreiber.de/MicroApplet_html5)

Don't we already know that? It's just the other drivers on the road that don't.

[artvandelay]

This might me the stupidest thing I've heard all week, what is the point of having a school zone in effect 5 hours after school is out?

Slowing down for kids is now a 13½-hour daily duty, as council standardized playground and school zone times citywide from 7:30 a.m. to 9 p.m.

No longer will drivers have to estimate when it’s one hour past sunset, which is currently the standard in 30 km/h playground zones. School zones will also no longer end at 5 p.m.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/calgary/Calgary+standardizes+playground+school+zone+times+from/10053151/story.html

[Full Mountain]

This might me the stupidest thing I've heard all week, what is the point of having a school zone in effect 5 hours after school is out?



http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/calgary/Calgary+standardizes+playground+school+zone+times+from/10053151/story.html

Probably because 90+% of drivers are incapable of remembering that playground and school zones have different times and applicable days. IMO every playground and school zone should be 24/7 that way everyone gets in the habit of slowing down around these areas.

Eventually I'd like to see most local roads move from a 50km/h design to a 30km/h design, this would make people feel that they are going faster thereby slowing traffic.

[Cage]

This might me the stupidest thing I've heard all week, what is the point of having a school zone in effect 5 hours after school is out?

There is a lot of overlap between playground zones and school zones. Example in Arbour Lake there is a playground zone sign, then 10 meters later its a school zone sign. Doesn't really matter where one zone leaves and the other zone starts.

However, don't get too worked up about the bylaw changes. It is not likely that enforcement will have a sustained increase during the new hours for playground and school zones. Not much to get worked up about unless you frequent one for the oddity areas for playground and school zones.

Oddity areas are instances where the zone does not match the road or driver expectations. Example is Elbow Drive with the large number of playground zones without actual playground nearby. Another example is the School Zone on Richard Road. Four lane collector roads should not have school zones. Also the school zone starts around the corner and closer to the Catholic high School. The school zone situation on Richard Road is very confusing and a bug revenue trap for CPS/City.

[tomthumb2]

I had the "pleasure" of going DT on Bow Trail last evening. What a complete disaster. If they are going to shut it down to one lane for the summer for paving why not just expand it. Its a classic case of a 1960s road not designed to handle any volume whatsoever. It seems like the WLRT has had zero effect?

[artvandelay]

The amount of playground zones in the city is ridiculous to begin with. They are used as a traffic deterrent rather than a safety measure. Calgary is one of the few jurisdictions in North America that even has playground zones to begin with. Most places only have school zones, which are often only in effect at times when there are children present outside the school.

Also, there is a reason that 50km/h is the default speed in residential areas worldwide - it's because it's been determined over the years to be the most reasonable and safe speed for these types of roads. There's no use in re-inventing the wheel.

[Calgarian]

I think playground zones are a total waste of time, can't think of the last time I even saw kids playing in a playground, they are all inside watching TV or playing Xbox.

[Full Mountain]

I think playground zones are a total waste of time, can't think of the last time I even saw kids playing in a playground, they are all inside watching TV or playing Xbox.

Maybe if we stop designing for the car and started designing for humans they would be outside.

[suburbia]

Am generally quite pleased about the decision of council to standardize school and playground zones. Good move in support of people who choose to enjoy the fields around schools and the playgrounds in their areas. It may aggravate those who are anti-public space and drive everywhere, but I think it is important to support / encourage / enable play and physical fitness in general.

I think playground zones are a total waste of time, can't think of the last time I even saw kids playing in a playground, they are all inside watching TV or playing Xbox.

It is probably due to the areas you hang out in.

[rotten42]

Maybe if we stop designing for the car and started designing for humans they would be outside.



ya...because that's the reason :rolleyes:

[Mazrim]

Eventually I'd like to see most local roads move from a 50km/h design to a 30km/h design, this would make people feel that they are going faster thereby slowing traffic.

That isn't how things work. Drivers already for the most part will drive whatever feels comfortable to them. Lowering the speed limit will not have a distinct effect on their interpretation of the road in front of them. Traffic calming is a better solution as it changes a driver's expectations and forces them to feel uncomfortable, which then slows them down.

[MalcolmTucker]

I would rather my neighbourhood get rid of of the different zones and go to limits of 40 kph instead everywhere. Easier to enforce, less confusing.

[Full Mountain]

That isn't how things work. Drivers already for the most part will drive whatever feels comfortable to them. Lowering the speed limit will not have a distinct effect on their interpretation of the road in front of them. Traffic calming is a better solution as it changes a driver's expectations and forces them to feel uncomfortable, which then slows them down.

That's what I'm getting at, design for 30km/h not 50km/h. A great example of what not to do is 16th Ave N, the road is designed for 60-70 km/h traffic but is signed at 50km/h, people then feel safe driving over the speed limit because of the way the road is designed.

[fusili]

Somewhat related, but I recommend anyone read "Traffic" by Tom Vanderbilt. It is a well-researched book on how people drive, the psycholgy behind it and why drivers behave the way they do. It really demonstrates how dangerous driving is, why people on average drive so poorly, what causes traffic jams, etc. Definitely a good read.

[Ferreth]

I'd like to see all roads without a dividing line (basically side streets) be 40km/hr. 50 is just too fast on those narrow roads. I'd also get rid of school zones and playground zones and replace them with speed limit signs with the times valid underneath.

Oh, and I would get rid of about 1/2 of the current zones out there - too many zones for too little reason right now.

None of this is going to happen, but I bitch about it at any rate :)

[freeweed]

This might me the stupidest thing I've heard all week, what is the point of having a school zone in effect 5 hours after school is out?

I've never understood why school zones AREN'T in effect long after school is out, if this really is about safety. As a kid, we played in the local schoolyard after hours all the time. Most schools seem to have playgrounds of one sort or another in them, or at least big open fields which attract children for a pickup game of soccer or tag or something.

Of course I hate the entire thing to begin with. Apparently children are being mowed down in record numbers in cities across North America, and only in Calgary are they safe. And Calgary has raised a culture of mindless pedestrians who pretty much from birth are taught to never look out for cars, which is the only reason these idiotic 30km/h zones are required in the first place. I was fortunate enough to grow up in an era when children actually played at playgrounds all the time, and somehow we managed to avoid the inevitable death trap that 50km/h residential streets are.

CPS sure is gonna like this though. Another hour every morning, and several more hours every winter. Plus, even more people slamming on the brakes on slippery roads for no reason. Yay!

[Boris2k7]

I've never understood why school zones AREN'T in effect long after school is out, if this really is about safety. As a kid, we played in the local schoolyard after hours all the time. Most schools seem to have playgrounds of one sort or another in them, or at least big open fields which attract children for a pickup game of soccer or tag or something.

Of course I hate the entire thing to begin with. Apparently children are being mowed down in record numbers in cities across North America, and only in Calgary are they safe. And Calgary has raised a culture of mindless pedestrians who pretty much from birth are taught to never look out for cars, which is the only reason these idiotic 30km/h zones are required in the first place. I was fortunate enough to grow up in an era when children actually played at playgrounds all the time, and somehow we managed to avoid the inevitable death trap that 50km/h residential streets are.

CPS sure is gonna like this though. Another hour every morning, and several more hours every winter. Plus, even more people slamming on the brakes on slippery roads for no reason. Yay!

:yeahthat:

Sick and tired of this bullshit...

[sim]

Don't we already know that? It's just the other drivers on the road that don't.

Who's we? Who are these other drivers? I wonder if the other drivers think the same thing?

Well it doesn't really matter because what we supposedly know isn't true anyway and that is not how traffic works.

[Jimby]

LED streetlights being installed in Altadore.
http://www.660news.com/2014/07/23/calgary-set-to-flip-switch-and-install-led-streetlights/#.U9AB5KgaSdI.twitter

[DoubleK]

I would rather my neighbourhood get rid of of the different zones and go to limits of 40 kph instead everywhere. Easier to enforce, less confusing.

This.

Save for the main entrance/exit to my community, I rarely do 40 kph. It's not worth the risk of running a kid over.

[Full Mountain]

I've never understood why school zones AREN'T in effect long after school is out, if this really is about safety. As a kid, we played in the local schoolyard after hours all the time. Most schools seem to have playgrounds of one sort or another in them, or at least big open fields which attract children for a pickup game of soccer or tag or something.

Of course I hate the entire thing to begin with. Apparently children are being mowed down in record numbers in cities across North America, and only in Calgary are they safe. And Calgary has raised a culture of mindless pedestrians who pretty much from birth are taught to never look out for cars, which is the only reason these idiotic 30km/h zones are required in the first place. I was fortunate enough to grow up in an era when children actually played at playgrounds all the time, and somehow we managed to avoid the inevitable death trap that 50km/h residential streets are.

CPS sure is gonna like this though. Another hour every morning, and several more hours every winter. Plus, even more people slamming on the brakes on slippery roads for no reason. Yay!

And mindless drivers, amazing how many times I've been nearly clipped when I have the right of way. IMO when you drive a vehicle you are responsible for any interaction between you and more vulnerable road users. Do I think pedestrians, etc. should be given complete prevalence? No but if a car is crossing a crosswalk the pedestrian in the crosswalk has the right of way, time to start making people understand that. I think we need to start raising crosswalks to the height of the sidewalks, to better delineate who has the right of way.

[freeweed]

And mindless drivers, amazing how many times I've been nearly clipped when I have the right of way. IMO when you drive a vehicle you are responsible for any interaction between you and more vulnerable road users. Do I think pedestrians, etc. should be given complete prevalence? No but if a car is crossing a crosswalk the pedestrian in the crosswalk has the right of way, time to start making people understand that. I think we need to start raising crosswalks to the height of the sidewalks, to better delineate who has the right of way.

People understand it full well, but there will always be shitty drivers on the road. As a mostly pedestrian, it's up to me to protect my life - no amount of enforcement is going to make my broken spine better, after the fact.

I suppose we could start shooting motorists who make a mistake though. Seems to be a common enough sentiment whenever a pedestrian is hit. I'd love to see this standard applied to LRT drivers too, when they kill someone. Clearly the driver is always at fault after all.

[Calgarian]

Maybe if we stop designing for the car and started designing for humans they would be outside.

I think you are missing the point. Kids don't play outside anymore and it has very little to do with the built form of the area they are in and everything to do with TV, video games and neurotic parents. When I was a kid I pretty much lived outdoors, my parents had to force me to come inside, now it seems to be the opposite, and the built form is the same now as it was then.

[MalcolmTucker]

I think you are missing the point. Kids don't play outside anymore and it has very little to do with the built form of the area they are in and everything to do with TV, video games and neurotic parents. When I was a kid I pretty much lived outdoors, my parents had to force me to come inside, now it seems to be the opposite, and the built form is the same now as it was then.
Might have something to do with there being more room inside homes due to increased floor space and decreased family size, not solely technology. I imagine in the 60s to be alone the best option was to go outside.

[Calgarian]

Might have something to do with there being more room inside homes due to increased floor space and decreased family size, not solely technology. I imagine in the 60s to be alone the best option was to go outside.

I'd say it has more to do with having multiple TVs, ipads, computers and a million other distractions that weren't around 20 years ago.

[bigcanuck]

I think you are missing the point. Kids don't play outside anymore and it has very little to do with the built form of the area they are in and everything to do with TV, video games and neurotic parents. When I was a kid I pretty much lived outdoors, my parents had to force me to come inside, now it seems to be the opposite, and the built form is the same now as it was then.

As someone who has kids, the above is incorrect.

[sync]

As someone who has kids, the above is incorrect.

well you are not in the majority.

my brother and sister (3 kids each) don't let them (the kids) cross the (suburban) street.

meanwhile the crime rate keeps dropping.

perception versus reality.

[bigcanuck]

well you are not in the majority.

my brother and sister (3 kids each) don't let them (the kids) cross the (suburban) street.

meanwhile the crime rate keeps dropping.

perception versus reality.

I'm not in the majority because I have kids? Or because the kids in our neighbourhood play outside still? Because your brother and sister don't let their kids cross the street, does that make them the majority?

Careful about including crime rates - increased/decreased crime rates doesn't affect the safety of a child playing at a playground or crossing the street.

[freeweed]

I'm not in the majority because I have kids? Or because the kids in our neighbourhood play outside still? Because your brother and sister don't let their kids cross the street, does that make them the majority?

Personally I use my eyes. 30 years ago, playgrounds were full of kids from sunup to sundown. Today, I can walk by 3 or 4 in an evening walk, and I'm lucky if I see one occupied. And it's either by kids with their parents, or teenagers. I'm just plain gobsmacked at how many people don't think a child of 10 is capable of going across the street to play in the playground, on their own or with friends.

What you as an individual do has got nothing to do with "majority" (although I'm pretty sure the implication was that if you let your kids play outside, you're not in the majority). I just look at how few children are outside playing, in a city with the largest baby boom in Canadian history since the 1950s. And I'm not just being a grumpy anecdote - I'm indirectly doing part of the Calgary Corporate Challenge this summer. We've been out walking pretty much every single night since May. You'd think I lived in a senior's complex, with how few kids you see in a given hour.

Careful about including crime rates - increased/decreased crime rates doesn't affect the safety of a child playing at a playground or crossing the street.

According to most parents I talk to, they do not let their kids play outside unsupervised because of fear of abduction, assault, or other violent crimes. Very few bring up traffic safety. And those that do acknowledge that our streets are probably safer than in the past, what with all the miracle 30km/h zones and such. They just don't "feel safe". Also, our playgrounds are light-years safer than they used to be, what with padding everywhere, that recycled rubber "sand", and just better overall safety standards.

So as a parent, I'd be curious what other kind of "safety" issue would prevent you from letting your kids play outside (if you were the type to do so).

[sync]

I'm not in the majority because I have kids? Or because the kids in our neighbourhood play outside still? Because your brother and sister don't let their kids cross the street, does that make them the majority?

Careful about including crime rates - increased/decreased crime rates doesn't affect the safety of a child playing at a playground or crossing the street.

look, you said kids do play outside and i countered with well, no, not all of them do.

as for majority we'd need a poll to be sure i guess.

and i stand by my statement that a lot of parents have a perception of the dangers of modern society that does not jive with the reality of the statistics they are presented with.

at least the parents i know do.

[Calgarian]

There is a fantastic documentary on this called "scared of my shadow", puts everything into perspective fairly well.

[sync]

There is a fantastic documentary on this called "scared of my shadow", puts everything into perspective fairly well.

netflix?

[suburbia]

go to limits of 40 kph instead everywhere. Easier to enforce, less confusing.

If you're confused by consolidated school and playground zones, you shouldn't be driving.

[freeweed]

If you're confused by consolidated school and playground zones, you shouldn't be driving.

If your children are confused by looking both ways before crossing the street, you shouldn't be breeding.

[suburbia]

I'm not in the majority because I have kids? Or because the kids in our neighbourhood play outside still? Because your brother and sister don't let their kids cross the street, does that make them the majority?

I'm with bigcanuck. Unfortunately there is a huge over representation on this forum of monkey whackers without families of their own (or at best, married but with no kids).

We have plenty of kids playing outside in the parks in our area also.

[Calgarian]

netflix?

I think I saw it on the documentary channel (part of CBC), not sure if it's on netflix or not.

[freeweed]

I think I saw it on the documentary channel (part of CBC), not sure if it's on netflix or not.

It was probably made by childless people. Their opinion is basically worthless anyway. They'll never understand what it's like.

[Calgarian]

It was probably made by childless people. Their opinion is basically worthless anyway. They'll never understand what it's like.

x81M3g3zjXc

[simster3]

Question about paving. Is there anyway to see the future paving schedule, maybe even next years. My road and all the roads in Killarney (and probably all of the southern innercity) are in terrible shape due to all the infill action and I am wondering if I can find out when they plan to pave in an area. I found a schedule for this year but I'm not sure if they include side street or non-artery roads on that site. Anyone have some insight?

[fusili]

Freeweed, I imagine you might be in a "declining" neighbourhood. Perhaps all the kids have grown up?

[Calgarian]

Freeweed, I imagine you might be in a "declining" neighbourhood. Perhaps all the kids have grown up?

While I'm sure neighbourhoods can be a factor (the CBC article touches on this), this is actually a very well documented phenomenon all across the country.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/why-the-kids-dont-play-any-more/article15446614/
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/lack-of-outdoor-play-said-to-hurt-children-s-development-1.2497526

[93JC]

And mindless drivers, amazing how many times I've been nearly clipped when I have the right of way. IMO when you drive a vehicle you are responsible for any interaction between you and more vulnerable road users. Do I think pedestrians, etc. should be given complete prevalence? No but if a car is crossing a crosswalk the pedestrian in the crosswalk has the right of way, time to start making people understand that. I think we need to start raising crosswalks to the height of the sidewalks, to better delineate who has the right of way.

When you are driving a vehicle you are responsible for your interaction between you and the other users of the road, true, but it's also true for pedestrians. That's what freeweed was speaking to when he spoke of "mindless pedestrians".

For example, I was driving Monday and I cut off a pair of pedestrians in a crosswalk. Did they have the right of way? Yes, technically. So what was I doing in the crosswalk?

I was making a right turn at a red light, and the two pedestrians were standing at the corner to my right. Neither one was looking at me, and neither one was looking in the direction they were (eventually) crossing. I stopped behind the stop line, I watched them, I saw a break in vehicular traffic, and being that neither pedestrian looked like they were going to cross the street I decided to go. They turned and stepped off the curb when I was already halfway through the crosswalk. I wasn't going very fast so I stopped very quickly. No harm done. Still, they didn't even know I was there until I'd already come to a stop. Nothing about their body language suggested they were going to cross. Neither signalled their intent. Neither was watching me. They blindly stepped off the curb and presumed I would stopped. Should I have waited longer? Maybe. It was still stupid behaviour on their part.

Pedestrians have a responsibility to watch where they're going and to observe vehicular traffic just as much as a car has the responsibility to watch for pedestrians. It's a two-way street (no pun intended). If you're being nearly clipped at intersections maybe you should re-evaluate your own behaviour as a pedestrian.

If anything I have found drivers are TOO courteous to pedestrians and will stop to let people jaywalk. Marda Loop is terrible for it.

I have been nearly hit a couple times, ever. Both times were drivers who passed illegally on the right after the car in front of them had stopped for me. Is that bad? Yes. Do we need to have enormous speed humps for crosswalks? No, that's just ridiculous. :haha:


As for playground and school zones, I'm all for the times being synchronized. I'm glad the subjective "1 hr after sunset" malarkey is over with. 7 am to 9 pm seems excessive though. While we're going to the trouble of changing the times we should re-evaluate where the zones are placed too. Some are blatant excuses to "calm traffic", at the behest of helicopter parents who bemoan "Won't somebody please think of the children??" I'm sure, where traffic does not need to be 'calmed'.

[Full Mountain]

When you are driving a vehicle you are responsible for your interaction between you and the other users of the road, true, but it's also true for pedestrians. That's what freeweed was speaking to when he spoke of "mindless pedestrians".

For example, I was driving Monday and I cut off a pair of pedestrians in a crosswalk. Did they have the right of way? Yes, technically. So what was I doing in the crosswalk?

I was making a right turn at a red light, and the two pedestrians were standing at the corner to my right. Neither one was looking at me, and neither one was looking in the direction they were (eventually) crossing. I stopped behind the stop line, I watched them, I saw a break in vehicular traffic, and being that neither pedestrian looked like they were going to cross the street I decided to go. They turned and stepped off the curb when I was already halfway through the crosswalk. I wasn't going very fast so I stopped very quickly. No harm done. Still, they didn't even know I was there until I'd already come to a stop. Nothing about their body language suggested they were going to cross. Neither signalled their intent. Neither was watching me. They blindly stepped off the curb and presumed I would stopped. Should I have waited longer? Maybe. It was still stupid behaviour on their part.

Pedestrians have a responsibility to watch where they're going and to observe vehicular traffic just as much as a car has the responsibility to watch for pedestrians. It's a two-way street (no pun intended). If you're being nearly clipped at intersections maybe you should re-evaluate your own behaviour as a pedestrian.

If anything I have found drivers are TOO courteous to pedestrians and will stop to let people jaywalk. Marda Loop is terrible for it.

I have been nearly hit a couple times, ever. Both times were drivers who passed illegally on the right after the car in front of them had stopped for me. Is that bad? Yes. Do we need to have enormous speed humps for crosswalks? No, that's just ridiculous. :haha:

As for playground and school zones, I'm all for the times being synchronized. I'm glad the subjective "1 hr after sunset" malarkey is over with. 7 am to 9 pm seems excessive though. While we're going to the trouble of changing the times we should re-evaluate where the zones are placed too. Some are blatant excuses to "calm traffic", at the behest of helicopter parents who bemoan "Won't somebody please think of the children??" I'm sure, where traffic does not need to be 'calmed'.

I don't disagree that pedestrians need to pay more attention

[Devils Advocate]

Is your 30 seconds is worth a life to you? Here's the issue, you (as a general term) use my community has a place to pass through twice a day, your car detracts from my community, you do not interact with my community you simply drive through. Why is it that I have to sacrifice my safety (a 50km/h car is fatal for the pedestrian nearly 50% of the time) and my enjoyment of my community because you need to save 30 seconds on your drive? This (http://www.reddit.com/r/Calgary/comments/2ampd6/shit_ton_of_emergency_vehicles_headed_west_on/) happened less than a block from my house on a narrow 50 km/h road, if there is enough energy in that collision to flip a car, don't you think it's more than enough to kill someone (adult or child)?

[/Devils Advocate]

I don't believe a speed limit change will do anything for either side of the debate, it's unlikely to dramatically affect anyones travel time and it's even less likely to decrease the risk to other users of the roadway. IMO this is where street design plays a much larger factor than a number on a sign.

Further, I find it frustrating that when drivers cause incidents (there are no accidents, everything has a root cause or causes) they get little more than a ticket, do we really think that we are going to change behaviour patterns by a few dollars? One only needs to consider the parking ticket as an example, due to the low value of it, it has little deterrent value for most people, same with the distracted driving tickets. We need to reframe how people see risk, we need to understand how small our area of focus is, try this some time place two business cards beside each other (or any items of similar size with writing on them) focus on one and attempt to determine what is on the other. Then consider what happens when you are driving and focus on one thing on the road at 50km/h and consider what could happen outside your area of focus, then consider the same thing at 100km/h.

[Ramsayfarian]

Personally I use my eyes. 30 years ago, playgrounds were full of kids from sunup to sundown. Today, I can walk by 3 or 4 in an evening walk, and I'm lucky if I see one occupied.

Maybe it's because there's been reports of some creepy guy in Tevas and white socks hanging around the playgrounds on a nightly basis. :)