Calgary Roads

[Ramsayfarian]

I think a fair trade off would be 40Kph speed limits in residential areas but I get to cock/gunt punch any parent I see jaywalking with their kids. Doesn't matter where or when. If they're not using a crosswalk, Pow! Right in the baby maker.

As a non-parent, I'm appalled when I see parents doing this.

[Cage]

Regarding kids playing outside. Here are my observations as a Dad to a very active four year old.

- One factor not mentioned in the above discussion is the greater diversity of household types than was present 20-40 years ago. When I grew up the street with 80 houses had at least 30 houses with Kids. Today's neighbourhoods have higher percentage of childless houses. Consequently it harder for kids to meet other kids in the neighbourhood.
- Structured activities for some kids has taken on whole new expanded realm. Parents are moulding their progeny into little superstars at a very young age(3-5 years). For some kids activity has shifted from the playground and to dance studio, hockey rink, etc.
- Greater schooling choices have segregated our communities. When I was growing up there was basically two schooling choices, public or separate. The public had one more option, french immersion at a few select schools. Today's schooling choices have afore mentioned three plus spanish immersion, Charter schools, special needs schools, etc. With all the schooling choices, kids within the same community are sent to different schooling locations are consequently do not interact with their neighbours.
- Greater use of school bussing options has resulted in kids whose inner circle of friends are located several communities apart. If the kids want to meet outside of school, their parents must drive them due to distance involved.
- Increase housing density has reduced the opportunity for kids to play in their own backyard. When I was growing up my Dad built a ice rink in our back yard. The house lot was 60 feet wide. Today my back yard is just shy of 40 feet wide. I would be hard pressed to build an adequate rink that allowed for decent ice surface.
- An unintended consequence of housing density increase. I don't have a sidewalk on my side of the street. When I played outdoors, my Mom took comfort that kids used the sidewalks and cars used the road. Today my wife freaks out that my kid could get run over due at innocent mistake. Bluntly the sidewalk introduced buffer zone for my childhood that my daughter does not have available.
- When I grew up, everyone drove slower in our neighbourhood because nearly everyone had kids. The houses that did not have children living in the home had grandkids that would stop by constantly. I can remember 1 out of 80 houses was rented by university students and there were no DINK households. Today I have at least 5 houses rented to university aged people, and 10 more houses owned by DINKs or SINKs. Vehicles go faster when driven by individuals without connection to young children, MHO based on observation from my front yard.

WRT technology. Yes my daughter plays with iPad and watches TV, however she also gets double the recommended time of activity, a little over 2 hours active play per day. She does parks 4-5 times per week plus gymnastics and other activities. I believe the discussions of too much TV and too little activity need to be separated.

Finally the medical, fitness, and child rearing communities need to come clean with their double speak. There is too great a focus on learning game theories rather than getting kids active. For example written exams for gym class. Additionally, unstructured play is essentially forcing young kids to sort out disagreements for themselves. Yes the younger ones are going to get short end of the stick, but some day the younger ones will be the older ones and get to be leader.

[Full Mountain]

Regarding kids playing outside. Here are my observations as a Dad to a very active four year old.

- One factor not mentioned in the above discussion is the greater diversity of household types than was present 20-40 years ago. When I grew up the street with 80 houses had at least 30 houses with Kids. Today's neighbourhoods have higher percentage of childless houses. Consequently it harder for kids to meet other kids in the neighbourhood.
- Structured activities for some kids has taken on whole new expanded realm. Parents are moulding their progeny into little superstars at a very young age(3-5 years). For some kids activity has shifted from the playground and to dance studio, hockey rink, etc.

I think this has a huge affect on the usage of outdoor play, when I was growing up I didn't do organized sports as a result I had energy and time when I got home to go out and play.

- Greater schooling choices have segregated our communities. When I was growing up there was basically two schooling choices, public or separate. The public had one more option, french immersion at a few select schools. Today's schooling choices have afore mentioned three plus spanish immersion, Charter schools, special needs schools, etc. With all the schooling choices, kids within the same community are sent to different schooling locations are consequently do not interact with their neighbours.
- Greater use of school bussing options has resulted in kids whose inner circle of friends are located several communities apart. If the kids want to meet outside of school, their parents must drive them due to distance involved.
- Increase housing density has reduced the opportunity for kids to play in their own backyard. When I was growing up my Dad built a ice rink in our back yard. The house lot was 60 feet wide. Today my back yard is just shy of 40 feet wide. I would be hard pressed to build an adequate rink that allowed for decent ice surface.
- An unintended consequence of housing density increase. I don't have a sidewalk on my side of the street. When I played outdoors, my Mom took comfort that kids used the sidewalks and cars used the road. Today my wife freaks out that my kid could get run over due at innocent mistake. Bluntly the sidewalk introduced buffer zone for my childhood that my daughter does not have available.
- When I grew up, everyone drove slower in our neighbourhood because nearly everyone had kids. The houses that did not have children living in the home had grandkids that would stop by constantly. I can remember 1 out of 80 houses was rented by university students and there were no DINK households. Today I have at least 5 houses rented to university aged people, and 10 more houses owned by DINKs or SINKs. Vehicles go faster when driven by individuals without connection to young children, MHO based on observation from my front yard.

WRT technology. Yes my daughter plays with iPad and watches TV, however she also gets double the recommended time of activity, a little over 2 hours active play per day. She does parks 4-5 times per week plus gymnastics and other activities. I believe the discussions of too much TV and too little activity need to be separated.

Finally the medical, fitness, and child rearing communities need to come clean with their double speak. There is too great a focus on learning game theories rather than getting kids active. For example written exams for gym class. Additionally, unstructured play is essentially forcing young kids to sort out disagreements for themselves. Yes the younger ones are going to get short end of the stick, but some day the younger ones will be the older ones and get to be leader.

There was something mentioned in the movie "The Human Scale" regarding how our city designs have made us more isolated, we have reduced the possibilities of interacting with our neighbours. By not interacting with others we reduce our empathy for others and relegate their needs lower than our own.

[Yes I know the above is a bit of stretch, but I know for myself when I get in a rush it's easy to get focused on getting there, everyone else be damned]

[93JC]

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.


I also agree that street design plays a larger part in determining the speed that people actually travel at than a number on a sign.

[You Need A Thneed]

Do away with Playground Zones, have a blanket law that says 30kph maximum ANYWHERE in residential zone when there are kids playing within 10 metres of the street.

Obviously with some resonable exceptions. A kid playing on the other side of a fence doesn't count, etc.

[lubicon]

Regarding kids playing outside. Here are my observations as a Dad to a very active four year old.

- One factor not mentioned in the above discussion is the greater diversity of household types than was present 20-40 years ago. When I grew up the street with 80 houses had at least 30 houses with Kids. Today's neighbourhoods have higher percentage of childless houses. Consequently it harder for kids to meet other kids in the neighbourhood.
- Structured activities for some kids has taken on whole new expanded realm. Parents are moulding their progeny into little superstars at a very young age(3-5 years). For some kids activity has shifted from the playground and to dance studio, hockey rink, etc.
- Greater schooling choices have segregated our communities. When I was growing up there was basically two schooling choices, public or separate. The public had one more option, french immersion at a few select schools. Today's schooling choices have afore mentioned three plus spanish immersion, Charter schools, special needs schools, etc. With all the schooling choices, kids within the same community are sent to different schooling locations are consequently do not interact with their neighbours.
- Greater use of school bussing options has resulted in kids whose inner circle of friends are located several communities apart. If the kids want to meet outside of school, their parents must drive them due to distance involved.
- Increase housing density has reduced the opportunity for kids to play in their own backyard. When I was growing up my Dad built a ice rink in our back yard. The house lot was 60 feet wide. Today my back yard is just shy of 40 feet wide. I would be hard pressed to build an adequate rink that allowed for decent ice surface.
- An unintended consequence of housing density increase. I don't have a sidewalk on my side of the street. When I played outdoors, my Mom took comfort that kids used the sidewalks and cars used the road. Today my wife freaks out that my kid could get run over due at innocent mistake. Bluntly the sidewalk introduced buffer zone for my childhood that my daughter does not have available.
- When I grew up, everyone drove slower in our neighbourhood because nearly everyone had kids. The houses that did not have children living in the home had grandkids that would stop by constantly. I can remember 1 out of 80 houses was rented by university students and there were no DINK households. Today I have at least 5 houses rented to university aged people, and 10 more houses owned by DINKs or SINKs. Vehicles go faster when driven by individuals without connection to young children, MHO based on observation from my front yard.

WRT technology. Yes my daughter plays with iPad and watches TV, however she also gets double the recommended time of activity, a little over 2 hours active play per day. She does parks 4-5 times per week plus gymnastics and other activities. I believe the discussions of too much TV and too little activity need to be separated.

Finally the medical, fitness, and child rearing communities need to come clean with their double speak. There is too great a focus on learning game theories rather than getting kids active. For example written exams for gym class. Additionally, unstructured play is essentially forcing young kids to sort out disagreements for themselves. Yes the younger ones are going to get short end of the stick, but some day the younger ones will be the older ones and get to be leader.

yes, yes, and hell yes. Taking my street (in a new neighborhood) as an example:
1. of roughly 100 houses on the street I would put the count of homes with children school age or younger at about 20-30 tops.
2. For whatever reason parents today seem to think they need to put their kids in some kind of structured activity at all time. And the more it costs and the more time it takes the better (apparently).
3. There are exactly 8 kids on my street with kids my age (7 homes in total since two of those kids are mine). They go to 7 different schools. In other words not a single kid goes to the same school as a kid from another house. All your school friends live in different communities, never mind living on another street. My kids have school friends who live in different quadrants of the city.

[ByeByeBaby]

Interesting article on the front page of today's Metro - Calgary traffic flow: Some downtown streets less busy than in 1964 (http://metronews.ca/news/calgary/1122607/calgary-traffic-flow-some-downtown-streets-less-busy-than-in-1964/)

Drivers may fume about traffic in downtown Calgary today, but numerous core-area streets actually have lower traffic volumes in recent years than they did a half-century ago, according to data the city has compiled over decades.

Major entryways into the Beltline like 4th Street and 14th Street SW, for example, saw less traffic in 2012 than they did in 1964, when the city’s population was a quarter the size.

“It is a little bit surprising,” Ekke Kok, the city’s manager of transportation data, said of the historical vehicle counts he and his predecessors have collected since Grant MacEwan was mayor.

Traffic on many centre-city routes peaked in the late 1990s and early 2000s, with volumes tending to drop off in the latest five years of recorded data.

The stretch of Macleod Trail between 25th Avenue South and the Elbow River, for example, recorded its thickest traffic in 1998, when 63,000 vehicles were counted in a 24-hour period.

Annual counts from 2008 to 2012, by comparison, averaged at 49,800.

A couple of nice images as well, including this chart showing travel mode entering and exiting the downtown core:
http://metronewsca.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/cbd-cordon-count.jpg
Slightly fewer car occupants than in 1990; how much more office space and how many more jobs have moved downtown over the past 25 years?

[Full Mountain]

Interesting article on the front page of today's Metro - Calgary traffic flow: Some downtown streets less busy than in 1964 (http://metronews.ca/news/calgary/1122607/calgary-traffic-flow-some-downtown-streets-less-busy-than-in-1964/)



A couple of nice images as well, including this chart showing travel mode entering and exiting the downtown core:
http://metronewsca.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/cbd-cordon-count.jpg
Slightly fewer car occupants than in 1990; how much more office space and how many more jobs have moved downtown over the past 25 years?

The interesting part for me is the continual growth of transit despite the train being at capacity and the recession.

[lineman]

The interesting part for me is the continual growth of transit despite the train being at capacity and the recession.

The train is only at capacity during peak times, and wouldn't a recession steer more people to transit (driving and parking becoming cost prohibitive)?

[milomilo]

Calgary traffic really isn't that bad. I find the stress from driving is more due to poor driving skills and crappy road designs/planning.

[Rusty van Reddick]

Calgary traffic really isn't that bad. I find the stress from driving is more due to poor driving skills and crappy road designs/planning.

yeah all the douchebags tailgating you because you "drive too slow" really make life hell.

I'm sure you have great driving skills like every other male person on here. All I have is 34 years of a spotless driving record, not even one speeding ticket, but I don't know how to drive because douchenozzles tell me so.

[milomilo]

yeah all the douchebags tailgating you because you "drive too slow" really make life hell.

I'm sure you have great driving skills like every other male person on here. All I have is 34 years of a spotless driving record, not even one speeding ticket, but I don't know how to drive because douchenozzles tell me so.

Did I say that? The biggest issue is poor lane discipline. I actually have some sympathy for the bad driving as it's a product of awful road design encouraging people to just stick to the middle lane as they have no idea when the lane they are in will suddenly end, or how on earth they'll have to navigate the next abortion of an interchange.

[Full Mountain]

The train is only at capacity during peak times, and wouldn't a recession steer more people to transit (driving and parking becoming cost prohibitive)?

True, and this is a very good thing for the city of Calgary and our tax rates

[milomilo]

True, and this is a very good thing for the city of Calgary and our tax rates

The graph says CT buses, which I don't think is a typo as the article is talking about downtown streets, so the train isn't being directly discussed.

I don't think the train is so full that buses would be a an alternative for the majority of passengers, especially given the nature of the system (feeders to LRT stops, few parallel routes).

[fusili]

The graph says CT buses, which I don't think is a typo as the article is talking about downtown streets, so the train isn't being directly discussed.

I don't think the train is so full that buses would be a an alternative for the majority of passengers, especially given the nature of the system (feeders to LRT stops, few parallel routes).

IIRC, buses and trains carry an equal amount of passengers into downtown. That was before West LRT (again, IIRC), so that probably has changed. That being said buses are an alternative for some people. A few express buses run into the catchments for the LRTs at peak periods that basically help handle the additional load that the train cannot. As well, there are many bus routes that are standing room only during rush hour, even with pretty low headways. The 301, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 are all very busy routes where there are times when the bus is too full to pick up more passengers (and those are just off the top of my head).

[dmuzika]

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)

I drove out to the Glenmore/Ogden area last night and was surpised to see that all the buildings at Glenmore & 31 St SE have been completely cleared out. That didn't take long.

[You Need A Thneed]

I drove out to the Glenmore/Ogden area last night and was surpised to see that all the buildings at Glenmore & 31 St SE have been completely cleared out. That didn't take long.

Those buildings have all been gone for a couple of months already.

[craner]

I noticed the City is patching/replacing the retaining wall on Crowchild at University Drive. I take this as a bad sign that they are not planning on properly fixing Crowchild (24th to 17th) any time soon.
:hell::(

[MichaelS]

I noticed the City is patching/replacing the retaining wall on Crowchild at University Drive. I take this as a bad sign that they are not planning on properly fixing Crowchild (24th to 17th) any time soon.
:hell::(

The corridor study will be starting up again this fall to look at the problems. Once completed it will be like every other project, waiting on funding.

[mersar]

I noticed the City is patching/replacing the retaining wall on Crowchild at University Drive. I take this as a bad sign that they are not planning on properly fixing Crowchild (24th to 17th) any time soon.
:hell::(

Considering the concrete was crumbling (and on the 16th Avenue bridge there was exposed rebar in the pier) its at best a band-aid solution for now.

[Cage]

Check out this winner of a plan for the folks of rocky ridge and royal oak.

Plan is to create a right in from Crowchild trail onto Eamon Road. Check out the details.

http://www.calgary.ca/councillors/ward-1/Pages/News/Proposed-New-Access-from-Crowchild-Trail.aspx

[lineman]

Please note that this proposal is just that – a suggestion put forward to residents for consideration. The City is seeking feedback from Ward 1 and Ward 2 residents as to whether or not the community wants a new access from Crowchild Trail.

At the end of the day, I really shouldn't care, as this will not affect me at all.

[lubicon]

Check out this winner of a plan for the folks of rocky ridge and royal oak.

Plan is to create a right in from Crowchild trail onto Eamon Road. Check out the details.

http://www.calgary.ca/councillors/ward-1/Pages/News/Proposed-New-Access-from-Crowchild-Trail.aspx

This is actually a pretty good plan for those residents living at the south end or RRRO.

[J-D]

This is actually a pretty good plan for those residents living at the south end or RRRO.

Would royally suck for a few of those houses right by the proposed exit though. Front yard a busy entrance into the community and backyard on Crowchild. :yuck:

[lubicon]

Would royally suck for a few of those houses right by the proposed exit though. Front yard a busy entrance into the community and backyard on Crowchild. :yuck:

Also true.

[AgentGibb]

I could be wrong, but I thought one of the design considerations for the Tuscany station P&R was that there was no direct access from Crowchild and so the parking lot could be relatively small.

This would seem to change that situation somewhat, no?

[H.E.Pennypacker]

I could be wrong, but I thought one of the design considerations for the Tuscany station P&R was that there was no direct access from Crowchild and so the parking lot could be relatively small.

This would seem to change that situation somewhat, no?

That's true, it would ... IIRC they still want to use Crowfoot as the commuter station and have Tuscany as more of a neighbourhood specific one ... They'd have to enforce parking restrictions in Rocky Ridge/Royal Oak if they want to add direct access from Crowchild

[CTrainDude]

I could be wrong, but I thought one of the design considerations for the Tuscany station P&R was that there was no direct access from Crowchild and so the parking lot could be relatively small.

This would seem to change that situation somewhat, no?

Somewhat - I think the idea to limit access from Crowchild would be to limit the 'out of towners' from Cochrane from parking there. I don't think adding this westbound exit would be quite as bad as adding a quick access into Tuscany.

[YYCguys]

Those folks with their big, albeit mostly run down, properties along Eamon Road won't be happy if this goes through. Maybe that will be the impetus for them to sell up and free up the land to be redeveloped!

[lubicon]

The Tuscany side of the station has no direct access off Crowchild. The RRRO side of the station will only have an exit off WB Crowchild and no way to get onto Crowchild if I am reading this right. The intent is to keep people from coming from outside the communities of Tuscany and RRRO to use the parking lots and they way it is set up now that should not be an issue.

[DoubleK]

Open Houses (http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/Pages/Road-projects/Macleod-Trail-162-Avenue-S-Interchange.aspx) for McLeod Trail/162nd Ave Interchange are tonight and Saturday.

[Doug]

Given that suburban expansion past Tuscany and Rocky Ridge is constrained by existing acreage development, will there ever be demand to extend the NW line? I could maybe envision a station at 12 Mile Coulee that could service out of town commuters and future development up by Spy Hill.

[PPAR]

I think the transit next stage in that direction will be a regional rail service from Cochrane along the existing CP right of way.

[Bri-Guy]

Open Houses (http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/Pages/Road-projects/Macleod-Trail-162-Avenue-S-Interchange.aspx) for McLeod Trail/162nd Ave Interchange are tonight and Saturday.



I thought the proposed Diverging Diamond (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/10/Diverging_diamond_redone.svg/640px-Diverging_diamond_redone.svg.png) interchange design was novel. Would also serve peds and cyclists well - better than any design with loops involved. Would have to be signed well to control traffic properly as it is such a foreign design to avoid collisions as it could be a bit unnerving driving on the "wrong" side of the bridge if you weren't expecting it as you approach from E/W (thinking night or stormy conditions...)

I hadn't seen this design before and it appears that it could handle traffic fairly well in all directions - though I can't see any time where the flow won't be primarily to/from the north.

It would be really neat to see the city use this design here.

[Full Mountain]

I thought the proposed Diverging Diamond (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/10/Diverging_diamond_redone.svg/640px-Diverging_diamond_redone.svg.png) interchange design was novel. Would also serve peds and cyclists well - better than any design with loops involved. Would have to be signed well to control traffic properly as it is such a foreign design to avoid collisions as it could be a bit unnerving driving on the "wrong" side of the bridge if you weren't expecting it as you approach from E/W (thinking night or stormy conditions...)

I hadn't seen this design before and it appears that it could handle traffic fairly well in all directions - though I can't see any time where the flow won't be primarily to/from the north.

It would be really neat to see the city use this design here.

Can you expand on this? From what I can tell I'm not sure this would be any better for peds & cyclists than your typical interchange.

[Doug]

I've seen several diverging diamond interchanges in Utah. They improve traffic flow and traffic safety. The impact to pedestrian is neutral.

[You Need A Thneed]

Speaking of "different" intersection designs, the city has drawn up a Continuous Flow intersection proposal for the Barlow/McKnight intersection.

You can see the plans on the city's website (McKnight Open House Boards)

[mersar]

I believe there was another open house this week for the Flanders Avenue/Crowchild redesign. Anyone go to it?

[Bri-Guy]

Can you expand on this? From what I can tell I'm not sure this would be any better for peds & cyclists than your typical interchange.

The diamond would allow peds to cross roadways at grade - any interchanges with loops coming up from/going down to MacLeod I would assume that pedestrians would be restricted from that side of the road entirely. I am not aware of an area where they would be alowed to cross a section of road such as this, which would be dangerous as traffic would be somewhat high speed - and probably not expecting these to be crossing (esp as they are exiting MacLeod coming from a higher speed). I am making the assumption that rather than build some additional elevated pedway above this traffic, the peds/cyclists would be restricted on this side, and directed across to the other side (north) of the bridge (without the any loops).
Less direct travel, and more more hassles for these type of travellers.

Those are my thoughts.

[Full Mountain]

The diamond would allow peds to cross roadways at grade - any interchanges with loops coming up from/going down to MacLeod I would assume that pedestrians would be restricted from that side of the road entirely. I am not aware of an area where they would be alowed to cross a section of road such as this, which would be dangerous as traffic would be somewhat high speed - and probably not expecting these to be crossing (esp as they are exiting MacLeod coming from a higher speed). I am making the assumption that rather than build some additional elevated pedway above this traffic, the peds/cyclists would be restricted on this side, and directed across to the other side (north) of the bridge (without the any loops).
Less direct travel, and more more hassles for these type of travellers.

Those are my thoughts.

I see, that makes sense. Be interesting what they put in.

[J-D]

Open Houses (http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/Pages/Road-projects/Macleod-Trail-162-Avenue-S-Interchange.aspx) for McLeod Trail/162nd Ave Interchange are tonight and Saturday.

This almost seems a little weird to me:



162 Avenue is a primary access point for pedestrians across Macleod Trail. Review of aerial photography shows no fewer than 10 demand lines worn into the grass from adjacent development sites to the intersection. This suggests that a significant pedestrian demand is currently unaddressed.
162 Avenue is part of the City’s Primary Cycling Network, providing a cross-town connection between southwest residential communities and the Fish Creek / Bow River pathway networks. High quality cycling access needs to be provided across Macleod Trail, which is safe and comfortable for users of all abilities.
​


It's as if for pedestrians the attitude is to wait for significant pedestrian demand to build infrastructure, but for cycle infrastructure it's very much an "if we build it, they will come" attitude.

[craner]

Open Houses (http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/Pages/Road-projects/Macleod-Trail-162-Avenue-S-Interchange.aspx) for McLeod Trail/162nd Ave Interchange are tonight and Saturday.

Did anybody attend one of the 162 /MacLeod open hoses and can report ?

[Mazrim]

Did anybody attend one of the 162 /MacLeod open hoses and can report ?

I was there on Friday and it was well attended. I can't comment much on the content as I was involved in making the boards, but there was a constant group of people around the Stoney Trail board as it seemed to be a bigger concern than the interchange itself.

As a regular user of the area, I put a comment form in saying the Diverging Diamond should be used because it's awesome. :cool: The overall reaction of the general public to the Diverging Diamond was mixed. Some said it was too out there for Calgary, and some said it looked great!

The open house boards can be downloaded from the City's website now:
http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/Pages/Road-projects/Macleod-Trail-162-Avenue-S-Interchange.aspx

[Innersoul1]

I noticed over the past 3 weeks that on the main streets in Montgomery they have installed the historic black and white street signs. how many other neighbourhoods are like this?

[speedog]

It's as if for pedestrians the attitude is to wait for significant pedestrian demand to build infrastructure, but for cycle infrastructure it's very much an "if we build it, they will come" attitude.

Interesting, I didn't come to the same conclusion from what you quoted.

[Bri-Guy]

Did anybody attend one of the 162 /MacLeod open hoses and can report ?

As a regular user of the area, I put a comment form in saying the Diverging Diamond should be used because it's awesome. :cool: The overall reaction of the general public to the Diverging Diamond was mixed. Some said it was too out there for Calgary, and some said it looked great!

The open house boards can be downloaded from the City's website now:
http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/Pages/Road-projects/Macleod-Trail-162-Avenue-S-Interchange.aspx

I thought that it was interesting how many options they supplied, though really it will come down to probably 2 or 3 that will be truly considered. The Parclo AB was the previously preferred, and could potentially be implemented, though I thought that the fact that the diverging diamond treats traffic in an unbiased manner (rather than only favouring traffic heading to or from the North)- which might be wise to consider for the potential for additional developments that would be destinations to the south - or to Seton to some degree.

With the 6th Street access from 22X being removed as well as the Right out access to MacLeod from the Superstore/theatre parking lot - this intersection will definitely be seeing a lot more traffic flowing through it in the future - not really a good thing for the network in the Shawnessy shopping area, that is already poor often times.

[CalgaryLankan]

The Stoney Trail, right-in and right-out exit/entry to 14th Street NW will be open to traffic this weekend. This will ease traffic issue for many people in Evanston.

[tmjr]

Plan to redesign Barlow Trail, 16th Avenue interchange passes vote (CBC News - 5Nov2014) (http://http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/plan-to-redesign-barlow-trail-16th-avenue-interchange-passes-vote-1.2824917)

A council committee has approved a long-term plan to reconfigure the often congested cloverleaf on 16th Avenue at Barlow Trail in the city’s northeast.

The project, which also includes a new interchange at 19th Street and a third bridge over Deerfoot Trail, is pegged to cost $200 million.

[J-D]

Plan to redesign Barlow Trail, 16th Avenue interchange passes vote (CBC News - 5Nov2014) (http://http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/plan-to-redesign-barlow-trail-16th-avenue-interchange-passes-vote-1.2824917)

I'm pretty sure I could think of a better use for $200 million, but I'd always be biased towards infrastructure that I use on a daily basis. :shrug:

[suburbia]

The Stoney Trail, right-in and right-out exit/entry to 14th Street NW will be open to traffic this weekend. This will ease traffic issue for many people in Evanston.

So by this I'm assuming you mean the north side of Stoney. I hadn't noticed them working on it, but will try to take a peak. When will they put the bridge in?

[fusili]

Plan to redesign Barlow Trail, 16th Avenue interchange passes vote (CBC News - 5Nov2014) (http://http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/plan-to-redesign-barlow-trail-16th-avenue-interchange-passes-vote-1.2824917)

Another complete neglect of the Route Ahead plan. They have a BRT going along 16th avenue here. Not saying they need to build transit lanes now, but shouldn't they at least show space for future dedicated transit lanes.

[Ferreth]

I'm pretty sure I could think of a better use for $200 million, but I'd always be biased towards infrastructure that I use on a daily basis. :shrug:

I do use Barlow/16th/19th St, and I question why this should be built in the next 10 years; I could see in the next 20, but to build it in the next 10 years means bumping something else down the list. OTOH, if the Deerfoot improvements and 16th/68th all are getting built in the same time frame, perhaps this is more justified as 16th will serve as a shunting point between the Ring Road and Deerfoot.

[You Need A Thneed]

I think it's hilarious that the article talks about "congested Barlow/16th", and presents 19th Street and Deerfoot Trail as secondary.

redoing Barlow/16th is ONLY necessary in the scenario because of the 19th Street interchange. Right now, Barlow/16th is pretty much never a problem.

[craner]

^Yes you're right about that YNAT

Well I for one and happy about this.
In my dreamland I would love to see a signature bridge taking 16th Ave over the Deerfoot valley - bank to bank. Something really spectacular when viewed from Deerfoot.

[CalgaryLankan]

So by this I'm assuming you mean the north side of Stoney. I hadn't noticed them working on it, but will try to take a peak. When will they put the bridge in?

Yes - correct, it is north side of Stoney with access to Evanston. The bridge may come in few years later. At least this will ease some traffic issues on Symons Vally Rd during morning rush hour.

[DizzyEdge]

This is probably a question for Malcolm Tucker, since he tends to have these sorts of stats:

Can anyone provide the stats as far as 1) gasoline tax collected in AB 2) amount returned to the province and cities earmarked for road work 3) the amount returned to the province and cities earmarked for non-road work 4) the cost of roadwork in AB.

Asking due to the often heard refrain that gas taxes should be more than paying for all road building and maintenance.

Thanks

[93JC]

This is probably a question for Malcolm Tucker, since he tends to have these sorts of stats:

Can anyone provide the stats as far as 1) gasoline tax collected in AB 2) amount returned to the province and cities earmarked for road work 3) the amount returned to the province and cities earmarked for non-road work 4) the cost of roadwork in AB.

Asking due to the often heard refrain that gas taxes should be more than paying for all road building and maintenance.

Thanks


I can't give you all the answers you're looking for but I give you a head start.

2013-2016 capital plan: http://www.finance.alberta.ca/publications/budget/budget2013/fiscal-plan-capital-plan.pdf
See page 67 (p. 9 of the PDF).

"About $3.4 billion over three years will be provided for the provincial highway network and other provincial transportation infrastructure."

$3.4 billion / 3 years = $1.133 billion per year

2014-15 first quarter fiscal update: http://finance.alberta.ca/publications/budget/quarterly/2014/2014-15-1st-Quarter-Fiscal-Update.pdf
Refer to page 6 of the PDF.

Fuel tax for 2014-15 is forecast to bring in $965 million in revenue. (Actual 2013-14 revenue was $925 million.)



Fuel tax revenue: $965 million
Roads costs: $1,133 million
Cost shortfall = $168 million

That's the total fuel tax revenues compared to just the cost of provincial roadwork; that doesn't include the money granted to municipalities for roadwork. :cheers:

[DizzyEdge]

Isn't a portion of the fuel tax earmarked for transit and other types of projects? For some reason I thought that was the case.

[North_Regina_Boy]

I am liking the updated Glenmore Ogden Rd plans. It shows the future (hopefully soon future) of building the overpass at Barlow Trail, and getting Glenmore to a complete E-W limited access freeway.

Just two more hurtles past Barlow Trail. 52nd and the flyovers at Stoney Trail SE, as I expect 68th won't have access to Glenmore when that happens.

[93JC]

Isn't a portion of the fuel tax earmarked for transit and other types of projects? For some reason I thought that was the case.

A portion of fuel tax revenue is earmarked for transit and other types of transportation infrastructure projects insofar as the government of the day decides "We're bringing in about $X from fuel taxes, so let's spend Y% of $X on transit and other stuff."

Fuel tax revenue doesn't get put into a special fund or anything like that (whereas, for example, revenue from VLTs goes into the Alberta Lottery Fund), it's just general revenue. It's not different than income taxes in that respect.

Ultimately it doesn't really matter because no one revenue stream covers any one operating expense in its entirety. We spend more on roadworks than we make from fuel taxes. We spend more on public transit than we make from fares. Everything in this province is subsidized with money from income taxes and O&G royalties. Everything.

[MMMBeer]

With recent talk of huge road projects and urban highways (plus the LRT tunnelling options) I thought I would share this article. It's about Seattle's project to tunnel highway under the downtown to replace the existing Alaskan Way Viaduct and revitalise the waterfront. Also, how it's not going exactly to plan.

http://grist.org/politics/seattles-unbelievable-transportation-megaproject-fustercluck/

I know it's not Calgary specific, but I thought some of the themes were relevant here.

Wow great article. Scary stuff. Sounds like the City of Seattle is getting bent over royally. You would think after Boston's experience with its Big Dig no-one would want to touch large urban tunneling projects for a long time.

Walking to the waterfront under that highway has got to be one of my sketchier Seattle experiences. Otherwise I love visiting there.

Hopefully Calgary doesn't enter into dumb developments like this.

[Trans Canada]

With recent talk of huge road projects and urban highways (plus the LRT tunnelling options) I thought I would share this article. It's about Seattle's project to tunnel highway under the downtown to replace the existing Alaskan Way Viaduct and revitalise the waterfront. Also, how it's not going exactly to plan.

http://grist.org/politics/seattles-unbelievable-transportation-megaproject-fustercluck/

I know it's not Calgary specific, but I thought some of the themes were relevant here.This could be very relevant to West Village. Bow Trail will likely be realigned and I bet there will be a fight between those who want to keep it as a freeway and those who want to slow it down and integrate into the neighbourhood.

[craner]

Thanks for posting that article 5seconds - very one sided but still a very interesting read.

[UofC.engineer]

Wow great article. Scary stuff. Sounds like the City of Seattle is getting bent over royally. You would think after Boston's experience with its Big Dig no-one would want to touch large urban tunneling projects for a long time.

Walking to the waterfront under that highway has got to be one of my sketchier Seattle experiences. Otherwise I love visiting there.

Hopefully Calgary doesn't enter into dumb developments like this.


Thanks for posting this! A very interesting read. I have always wondered what the effects would be of removing Deerfoot trail and redeveloping the riverfront land.


Obviously this would never happen in Calgary, besides giving Rick Bell 5 years worth of writing material I'm sure there would be lawsuits from industrial and commercial businesses along Deerfoot and a suburban Coup d'etat on City Hall.

[fusili]

Thanks for posting this! A very interesting read. I have always wondered what the effects would be of removing Deerfoot trail and redeveloping the riverfront land.


Obviously this would never happen in Calgary, besides giving Rick Bell 5 years worth of writing material I'm sure there would be lawsuits from industrial and commercial businesses along Deerfoot and a suburban Coup d'etat on City Hall.

I am a huge urbanist, but I see absolutely no reason to ever bury Deerfoot. It isn't adjacent to anything useful or developed. The area of Deerfoot adjacent to the river is entirely isolated or next to industrial land.

We don't have a comparable project in Calgary, because we don't have any freeways through our downtown.

[DizzyEdge]

The only comparable thing I can think of in Calgary is Memorial east of Edmonton Trail.

[UofC.engineer]

I am a huge urbanist, but I see absolutely no reason to ever bury Deerfoot. It isn't adjacent to anything useful or developed. The area of Deerfoot adjacent to the river is entirely isolated or next to industrial land.

We don't have a comparable project in Calgary, because we don't have any freeways through our downtown.

Sorry if I misled you, I wondered what it would be like if deerfoot was removed, not buried.

[fusili]

Sorry if I misled you, I wondered what it would be like if deerfoot was removed, not buried.

That would also be a terrible idea. It is not a freeway through a downtown, or bisecting a neighbourhood. It isn't located on prime real estate and is flanked by industrial for most of it's length. It is a north/south freeway in a city whose major axis and freight traffic is north/south. What would be the point, other than some symbolic victory over the car?

[You Need A Thneed]

That would also be a terrible idea. It is not a freeway through a downtown, or bisecting a neighbourhood. It isn't located on prime real estate and is flanked by industrial for most of it's length. It is a north/south freeway in a city whose major axis and freight traffic is north/south. What would be the point, other than some symbolic victory over the car?

And, for most of Deerfoot's length, there already is a physical barrier preventing ease of access from side to side.

It's same reason why the Nose Creek alignment made no sense for the NC LRT, it's not worth building anything in that area.

[PPAR]

The only comparable thing I can think of in Calgary is Memorial east of Edmonton Trail.

Memorial North of downtown is more reminiscent of what Seattle wants to have after replacement of the freeway.

[srperrycgy]

A group of LED Streetlights has been installed on 37th St SW between Richmond Rd and 26th Ave SW. Very, very bright. Haven't seen white light on a road since I was a kid in the 80s. :tup:

[yyc_engineer]

A group of LED Streetlights has been installed on 37th St SW between Richmond Rd and 26th Ave SW. Very, very bright. Haven't seen white light on a road since I was a kid in the 80s. :tup:

LED's on Glenmore installed also, at least from ~ Sarcee to ~Richard Road. Didn't get a good feel for them as the sun had started to rise and it wasn't dark dark.

[Cyric]

I was listening to the CBC this morning and they had Evan Woolley on talking about upgrading the underpasses from the Beltline to Downtown, it sounds like the 1st. SW underpass is now funded (~3.5M I think but I was half asleep) so hopefully the renovations will start this Spring/Summer.

Edit: I guess I should have looked at the city's webpage first, there is already a bunch of info on it.
http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/Pages/Pedestrian-bridges/1-Street-SW-Underpass-Enhancement.aspx

[Spring2008]

The 1st underpass should be finished by Stampede. Hopefully 8 st sw isn't far behind as these will be significant public realm upgrades that are needed.

[flipstah]

I was listening to the CBC this morning and they had Evan Woolley on talking about upgrading the underpasses from the Beltline to Downtown, it sounds like the 1st. SW underpass is now funded (~3.5M I think but I was half asleep) so hopefully the renovations will start this Spring/Summer.

Edit: I guess I should have looked at the city's webpage first, there is already a bunch of info on it.
http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/Pages/Pedestrian-bridges/1-Street-SW-Underpass-Enhancement.aspx

If one of the objectives is to make it 'urine-free', I'm all for it. :yes:

[DoubleK]

The City is holding an Open House for the McLeod Trail/194th Ave Connection on Thursday.

Details here. (http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/Pages/Road-projects/Macleod-Trail-194-Avenue-S.W.-Connection.aspx)

[craner]

^Sure hope this study results in something the City can move forward on.
I don't really know why the previous study was terminated ?

[MalcolmTucker]

^Sure hope this study results in something the City can move forward on.
I don't really know why the previous study was terminated ?

The study was guided by preconditions that led to a truly ludcrous expense as a result. Easier to start again with fewer assumptions and more initial options.

[craner]

Ahh I see - thanks

[North_Regina_Boy]

Does anyone know where the previous recommendations are?

[YYCguys]

I was looking at the options for the McKnight Blvd (Deerfoot to 19th Street NE) improvements and it looks like the main focus will be on the Deerfoot/12th Street NE intersection with lane expansion east of there. Since Barlow Trail and 19th Street NE intersections are not being dealt with any longer, how about the City turns its attentions to the clusterf@#$ between Deerfoot and John Laurie Blvd?

I have a couple of ideas on how they could deal with it, though I'm not an engineer so not sure if it would even work:

1) Round about at McKnight/JLB intersection (bonus will also improve access into North Haven).

2) Local traffic between Deerfoot and JLB at ground level and free flowing traffic between Deerfoot and JLB or 14 th Street at elevated level above (I saw this in Honolulu).

[speedog]

McKnight from Deerfoot to John Laurie including the JLB/McKnight intersection had an initial planning document/whatever that used to be on the city's web site that has quietly disappeared. The JLB/McKnight intersection would've been free flowing including 48th Avenue ingress/egress - the rest to the east (4 St. NW, Centre, Edmonton Trail) would've still been a mess with the intent to expand to 6 lanes to the south which resulted in plenty of NIMBYism and community anger.

Since the project has disappeared, the CBE school on McKnight was decommissioned and now is just a rented facility, multiple homes in Highwood, Thorncliff and Highland Park have been quietly been bought and bulldozed as they've come on the market, the 7-Eleven on Centre owns 1 or 2 lots to the north of them. Time will see that more and more of the affected land required for any 6 lane expansion will become vacant and I believe at the city's hand - easier to push through such a project 15-20 years down the road if you own most of the required properties, no?

Myself, I'd like to see no intersection at 4th Street NW, push 4th over top and make it just a community road between Highwood and Thorncliff. Edmonton Trail and Centre are not so easy to solve though - jug handle intersections and other things have been proposed but all of them are messy and something we've never seen in Calgary.

[93JC]

Does anyone know where the previous recommendations are?

They've been expunged from the City's website.

This is what the new crossing over the Bow would look like:

http://i.imgur.com/APtzMZ1.png

It was so colossally overboard that it garnered little support.

[Fuzz]

Myself, I'd like to see no intersection at 4th Street NW, push 4th over top and make it just a community road between Highwood and Thorncliff. Edmonton Trail and Centre are not so easy to solve though - jug handle intersections and other things have been proposed but all of them are messy and something we've never seen in Calgary.

EEK! Don't do that! Closing off the left and right turns from 4th would force everyone onto centre (probably via 40thave) to get to JLB. That left turn Northbound on 4th is very busy. The only alternative is to go all the way over to 14th. There is already a "community road" between Highwood and Thorncliff, its Northmount drive.

Could they build a bridge with Mcknight over top, and for turns off of 4th st, have a light? Sure, 4th wouldn't be free flow but with only needing a light for left turns, it would be a vast improvement.

[Fuzz]

They've been expunged from the City's website.

This is what the new crossing over the Bow would look like:

http://i.imgur.com/APtzMZ1.png

It was so colossally overboard that it garnered little support.
Hopefully the new plan takes into account possible realignment of Bow trail to the east.

[speedog]

EEK! Don't do that! Closing off the left and right turns from 4th would force everyone onto centre (probably via 40thave) to get to JLB. That left turn Northbound on 4th is very busy. The only alternative is to go all the way over to 14th. There is already a "community road" between Highwood and Thorncliff, its Northmount drive.
If people want McKnight to flow better, than getting rid of level intersections is the way to do it - I suspect the NB left turners at McKnight are for the most part people coming out of the downtown core at rush hour, locals will adapt quite easily. Maybe the best solution is to still allow right in and out's there in all directions but have 4th still go over top - doesn't help the NB left turners but maybe a round-about just to the north would solve that and provide the EMS people all directions access at that current location.

[93JC]

Hopefully the new plan takes into account possible realignment of Bow trail to the east.

Hopefully the new plan doesn't blow away huge swaths of the existing communities and doesn't have a big frickin' loop in it either. :haha:

[UofC.engineer]

Hopefully the new plan doesn't blow away huge swaths of the existing communities and doesn't have a big frickin' loop in it either. :haha:

No-way man! We need 14 lanes from 17th ave SE to 24th ave NW, no provisions for biking or transit. Take away 18 blocks of houses on either side of Crowchild. How much would it cost? who cares!? Get the provincial government to write a blank cheque.

On a side note, I read an article in the Sun this morning about cycle tracks in downtown...9 million dollars!!! This is outrageous!!!


But in all seriousness, I am actually very interested to see what the city can come up. Ideally a low cost solution that improves traffic flow. This study should be done in conjunction with the NW mobility hub study since they are looking at a transit connection between Westbrook and UofC. Maybe if enough people took some sort of transit between Brentwood station and Westbrook station only minimal improvements could be made to Crowchild trail.

[speedog]

I'm just trying to figure out what is meant by possible realignment of Bow Trail to the east seeing as Bow Trail runs E-W - possibly this is moving the WB lanes further north?

[speedog]

No-way man! We need 14 lanes from 17th ave SE to 24th ave NW, no provisions for biking or transit. Take away 18 blocks of houses on either side of Crowchild. How much would it cost? who cares!? Get the provincial government to write a blank cheque.

On a side note, I read an article in the Sun this morning about cycle tracks in downtown...9 million dollars!!! This is outrageous!!!

How many homes were raized to bring forth the expansion of Crowchild between 17th Avenue SW and 50th Avenue SW? Not saying it's right but it's been done before and is quietly being done up along McKnight Boulevard.

The traffic will always be there in that corridor and a better way needs to found to handle it - eliminate the level intersection at 5th Ave NW would be one partial solution. The 16th-24th Ave section and the Kensington to Bow Trail is way more complex - eliminating a level intersection at Kensington should be looked at as well.

[Mazrim]

Edmonton Trail and Centre are not so easy to solve though - jug handle intersections and other things have been proposed but all of them are messy and something we've never seen in Calgary.

Jug handles aren't too unusual, and they've been done in Calgary before. They used it on 22X at Cranston/McKenzie before Stoney Trail was built through there.

http://i.imgur.com/WZjiqNg.png

[You Need A Thneed]

I'm just trying to figure out what is meant by possible realignment of Bow Trail to the east seeing as Bow Trail runs E-W - possibly this is moving the WB lanes further north?

More likely moving both sets of lanes as far south as possibile for as much distance as possible.

[speedog]

Jug handles aren't too unusual, and they've been done in Calgary before. They used it on 22X at Cranston/McKenzie before Stoney Trail was built through there.

http://i.imgur.com/WZjiqNg.png
What's been proposed for McKnioght was quite invasive on the surrounding communities and thus the opposition and probably why the project details quietly disappeared from the CoC's web site. This study (link (http://conf.tac-atc.ca/english/resourcecentre/readingroom/conference/conf2003/pdfs/furtado.pdf)) speak to the proposals a little bit.

And a rough sketch I made of what I can remember for the original plan for JLB/McKnight...

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/5040260/pics/m-jl.jpg

[Fuzz]

If people want McKnight to flow better, than getting rid of level intersections is the way to do it - I suspect the NB left turners at McKnight are for the most part people coming out of the downtown core at rush hour, locals will adapt quite easily. Maybe the best solution is to still allow right in and out's there in all directions but have 4th still go over top - doesn't help the NB left turners but maybe a round-about just to the north would solve that and provide the EMS people all directions access at that current location.
As a Highwood local, I disagree with that. JLB/Mcknight is a great road to head west on. The alternative is taking 40th to Northmount, then back north on 14th then to JLB. 4 sets of lights, or 40th to Centre to Mcknight. Neither are very pleasant with lots of traffic. I'm not sure local communities should have their access neutered. I'd expect quite a bit of blowback if that was proposed.

[speedog]

As a Highwood local, I disagree with that. JLB/Mcknight is a great road to head west on. The alternative is taking 40th to Northmount, then back north on 14th then to JLB. 4 sets of lights, or 40th to Centre to Mcknight. Neither are very pleasant with lots of traffic. I'm not sure local communities should have their access neutered. I'd expect quite a bit of blowback if that was proposed.

So go north over my proposed 4th Street NW overpass, through a roundabout to get going SB on 4th and make a RH turn onto John Laurie - probably quicker then the current scenario.

Could also go north on Northmount, swing east through Thorncliff and take a RH onto John Laurie from 4th (my proposal that spoke of overpass with RH's in/out only).

[Fuzz]

That might work...Would probably need one on the south side too. Is their precedent for that kind of intersection elsewhere(no left turn on a bridge, but traffic circles on either side?

[speedog]

That might work...Would probably need one on the south side too. Is their precedent for that kind of intersection elsewhere(no left turn on a bridge, but traffic circles on either side?
I suppose a bridge similar to 14th Street NW/JLB could be put in as well - would not restrict any E-W movements at all while providing all currents movements. Had my blinders on.

[Trans Canada]

I'm just trying to figure out what is meant by possible realignment of Bow Trail to the east seeing as Bow Trail runs E-W - possibly this is moving the WB lanes further north?
Bow Trail realignment would be part of West Village redevelopment, Ideally Bow Trail and 14th and everything in between will be nuked and rebuilt from scratch.

[craner]

But in all seriousness, I am actually very interested to see what the city can come up. Ideally a low cost solution that improves traffic flow. This study should be done in conjunction with the NW mobility hub study since they are looking at a transit connection between Westbrook and UofC. Maybe if enough people took some sort of transit between Brentwood station and Westbrook station only minimal improvements could be made to Crowchild trail.

Except Crowchild requires major improvements for the 24th NW to 17th SW stretch, and that's not likely to come cheap.

[milomilo]

They've been expunged from the City's website.

This is what the new crossing over the Bow would look like:

[img]http://i.imgur.com/APtzMZ1.png[/mg]

It was so colossally overboard that it garnered little support.

Colossal maybe but if we want to sort it out properly then that is what it's going to take.