Calgary Roads

[Corndogger]

What advantage does moving the Northbound Crowchild-Eastbound Memorial ramp provide?

Safety!

[craner]

What advantage does moving the Northbound Crowchild-Eastbound Memorial ramp provide?
I was wondering about that too. The only thing I can think of is it gives a little more weave distance for cars entering Crowchild northbound and those exiting on to Memorial. :shrug:

Thanks for posting the info on Crowchild Corndogger. :tup:

[milomilo]

I was wondering about that too. The only thing I can think of is it gives a little more weave distance for cars entering Crowchild northbound and those exiting on to Memorial. :shrug:

Thanks for posting the info on Crowchild Corndogger. :tup:

That's the reason and it's a good one. The current merge lane distance is minuscule, and the relocated on ramps will shorten it further - so any extra space is good.

[craner]

^Agreed.
Anyone know the time frame for these Crowchild improvements ? (open in 2019?).

Also - isn't a ramp from westbound 16th Ave. to northbound Crow included ?

[Corndogger]

^Agreed.
Anyone know the time frame for these Crowchild improvements ? (open in 2019?).

Also - isn't a ramp from westbound 16th Ave. to northbound Crow included ?

I believe the signs say the project will be done in fall 2019.

I think a ramp from WB 16th Ave. to NB Crowchild is going to be built but it might be part of the BRT project. I'm not positive how it fits in but I believe it's supposed to be done in the same time period.

[milomilo]

Nothing shows how badly laid out the lanes on our roads are, and the poor driving it encourages, than when it snows. Driving around and out the city today, any time there was a right lane that was going to end some time in the next km or so, the asphalt was covered in ice, whereas the middle and left lane would be clear from people driving it. This is even more annoying, as if I want to do the correct thing and use that lane, I then have to drive in shittier conditions than the rest of the road and will probably be forced to drive in the wrong lane as well. Similarly, at the three lane hill climb section past Crossfield, there was not a single person the entire way, except for myself, using the lane they were supposed to.

I maintain that there are probably hundreds of lane kilometres of ashphalt in this province which are basically worthless, as not a single person uses them, yet this could be fixed by simply painting the lines differently.

[suburbia]

Is there any information on what the construction just south of Deerfoot and 17th SE will look like when completed? Looks like a new bridge over Deerfoot, but am unclear about the vision here.

It may already have been mentioned but I cannot find it.

[EDIT]

Sorry - I just did a quick search (which I should have done in the first place) and it is for the BRT there
http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/PublishingImages/Transit-projects/17ave-transitway/17-ave-se-brt-phase-2-map.jpg
Via City of Calgary (http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/Pages/Transit-projects/17-ave-se-brt-phase-2-28-st-se-to-9-ave-se.aspx)

http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/Pages/Transit-projects/17-ave-se-brt-phase-2-28-st-se-to-9-ave-se.aspx

There are two construction cameras:
https://app.oxblue.com/open/cityofcalgary/deerfoottrail

https://app.oxblue.com/open/cityofcalgary/bowriverbridge

[sammyd]

Is this the video you're talking about? This makes some aspects of the upgrades a lot clearer. At least clearer for me.

Wd5ObU2hJE8

That new pedestrian crossing at Kensington across Memorial will slow traffic down to a halt.

[Corndogger]

That new pedestrian crossing at Kensington across Memorial will slow traffic down to a halt.

That needs to be either taken out or turned into a pedestrian overpass. Did Druh demand that crossing be put in in exchange for her vote?

[Porfiry]

That needs to be either taken out or turned into a pedestrian overpass. Did Druh demand that crossing be put in in exchange for her vote?

Parkdale isn't a freeway, it's full of lights and pedestrian crossings already. One more will hardly change anything.

[Corndogger]

Parkdale isn't a freeway, it's full of lights and pedestrian crossings already. One more will hardly change anything.

In that location it will. Why is a pedestrian crossing needed at that location anyway?

[Porfiry]

In that location it will.

Why? If the rest of Parkdale manages just fine with pedestrian crossings and traffic lights, what makes that spot so special?

[craner]

That is a strange location for a pedestrian crossing

[milomilo]

That new pedestrian crossing at Kensington across Memorial will slow traffic down to a halt.

Uh, isn't that the entire point of a pedestrian crossing? Don't see the issue here, if anything Memorial needs a lot more lights, for the benefit of drivers and pedestrians.

[topdog]

In that location it will. Why is a pedestrian crossing needed at that location anyway?

Ummm...so people can cross the road.

[DizzyEdge]

The pedestrian crossing makes sense. It's the main road from Kensington and through Hillhurst and West Hillhurst, and then a 20 min walk later the road has only one sidewalk and you end up here:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@51.0525264,-114.1209261,3a,75y,260.07h,88.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbTGMnDBVQ5J1yNZfgs41cQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

You can see the river and the river pathway and can't actually get to it.

I'd actually like to see that spot improved even more, as a western gateway to the main route to Kensington.

[ImmortalHawk]

Glenmore Trail widening plans, and other improvements in the Crowchild Trail area

http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/Documents/Road-projects/Glenmore-Tr-widening-overall-plan-map.pdf

Finally the City is doing something about that stretch of Glenmore Tr. Once the SWCRR is done, it's gonna get really congested.

[Corndogger]

I do worry about that. Going east, there is still only 2 lanes under Crowchild. There is a study for longer term changes, but that won't happen until the ring road opens.

Wasn't there already a study done on this? I'm 99% positive that I attended some open houses about this stretch of road back in 2004. Barry Erskine was the alderman for Ward 11. People were pushing for more lanes along that stretch including under Crowchild to help relieve congestion. Erskine said the city was studying it. Maybe his idea of studying is different than an official study but this has been on the city's radar for a long time.

[craner]

Looks like Glenmore is shifting northward - wonder what the reason for that is ?

[milomilo]

The rest of Glenmore is a pretty big problem. As far as I can tell, you'd need to significantly widen the causeway, add basketweaves to the onramps onto Glenmore and rebuild the flyovers on both interchanges.

I know I railed against over building/future proofing in the other thread, but Glenmore is a great example of the opposite. I cannot understand why they built the two flyovers with only room for 4/5 lanes on either side of the causeway. It wasn't even very long ago.

[srperrycgy]

Looks like Glenmore is shifting northward - wonder what the reason for that is ?

Probably to allow for an interchange at Richard Rd. in the future.

[msmariner]

Looks like Glenmore is shifting northward - wonder what the reason for that is ?

Lots of room to north of the current alignment. This way they can straighten the road out to. Plus I think they can build the new portion with old road still in use

[The Unknown Poster]

Had the pleasure of being in Calgary for the weekend for the first time. Arrived Friday and was struck by how quickly the snow was cleared. Also immediately struck by how much better your road infrastructure was compared to Winnipeg where our main strategy is to put lighted intersections every block. It was nice to actually drive freely.

In conversation with a local, he did say that while I saw all the ways Winnipeg could be better if they followed Calgary's lead, he said living in Calgary you see all the ways Calgary could be better. Perspective.

Anyway, very quick trip but beautiful city, super friendly people. Only visited one restaurant and that was Broken City (the gf is a vegan and found it on an app she uses) and it the food and service was excellent.

Looking forward to coming back when we can spend more time exploring more than just Calgary Tower!

[lubicon]

Lots of room to north of the current alignment. This way they can straighten the road out to. Plus I think they can build the new portion with old road still in use

Bingo

[craner]

So I noticed the pillars for the 17th Ave. BRT bridge over Deerfoot are in place .... also noticed they didn't leave any room to expand Deerfoot by even one lane in each direction ... :shrug::koko::hell:

[Mazrim]

Adding more lanes there doesn't actually solve any problems anyways. What they need is a better way to get traffic on and off Deerfoot at 17th Avenue and Memorial.

[suburbia]

So I noticed the pillars for the 17th Ave. BRT bridge over Deerfoot are in place .... also noticed they didn't leave any room to expand Deerfoot by even one lane in each direction ... :shrug::koko::hell:

I actually agree with the strategy of pushing resources to transit, so am okay with not leaving space for more lanes there (noting there are other bottlenecks that would preclude adding lanes even if they kept more room there).

A full green line is a major priority, starting with the first phase, but seamlessly continuing to additional stages, the immediate next piece being heading north. At the end of the day, that hedges new demand to get to the core over the coming years.

[milomilo]

Is it actually really not wide enough? I'll have a look when I drive through tomorrow but that would be silly if it's the case. I agree lane numbers isn't the big issue, but if all the other new bridges are built with room then it was all for nothing if this one wasn't.

[Corndogger]

I actually agree with the strategy of pushing resources to transit, so am okay with not leaving space for more lanes there (noting there are other bottlenecks that would preclude adding lanes even if they kept more room there).

A full green line is a major priority, starting with the first phase, but seamlessly continuing to additional stages, the immediate next piece being heading north. At the end of the day, that hedges new demand to get to the core over the coming years.

That's some great logic on your part. We've fucked up other locations so why not this one?

[milomilo]

He's correct that there isn't much point putting much more road capacity onto Deerfoot. Those cars are mostly going to be headed downtown and we don't want more doing that at at peak hours. If we add more capacity to the core, it has to be other modes of transport at this point otherwise we will just make traffic worse.

The most important thing would be to clean up the interchanges so that the through traffic can get through better.

[Mazrim]

I agree lane numbers isn't the big issue, but if all the other new bridges are built with room then it was all for nothing if this one wasn't.
How many new bridges ones are actually built with extra room, though? Thinking of some interchanges I drive by regularly, you can tell that the new interchanges at Macleod Trail and 162 Avenue/Sun Valley Boulevard isn't built for expansion, and neither is the one at Crowchild Trail and Flanders Avenue.

I've only been through the new 16th Avenue and Bowfort Road interchange once or twice but I think that one does have room, which is probably related to being in close proximity to the ring road. I believe Glenmore over Ogden Road also has room which is probably so it can properly connect to the Barlow Trail interchange they have planned.

On Deerfoot, it doesn't look like the 17th Avenue or Memorial Drive bridges were built with expansion beyond 6 core lanes in mind.

[milomilo]

How many new bridges ones are actually built with extra room, though? Thinking of some interchanges I drive by regularly, you can tell that the new interchanges at Macleod Trail and 162 Avenue/Sun Valley Boulevard isn't built for expansion, and neither is the one at Crowchild Trail and Flanders Avenue.

I've only been through the new 16th Avenue and Bowfort Road interchange once or twice but I think that one does have room, which is probably related to being in close proximity to the ring road. I believe Glenmore over Ogden Road also has room which is probably so it can properly connect to the Barlow Trail interchange they have planned.

On Deerfoot, it doesn't look like the 17th Avenue or Memorial Drive bridges were built with expansion beyond 6 core lanes in mind.

Yeah it's mostly just the very far out ones that seem to have extra room, especially in the south where they already have 8 through lanes - which as I've said before is stupid as everyone knows the right lane will end, then end again as the road goes from 4 to 3 to 2 lanes, meaning nobody uses the rightmost lane.

One of the girders went up on the BRT bridge last night. It looks like you might just be able to fit in 8 lanes - it would leave very little shoulder, but no one cares about that here anyway. But really it looks like the intention is for it to remain 6 lanes.

[speedog]

Speaking of roads, I was doing some surfing yesterday and discovered an interesting little tidbit about the CoC with respect to the John Laurie/McKnight Boulevards realignment proposal - it is purported that the CoC already owns the 26 or so properties it figures will have to make way for this realignment to occur and that the CoC has owned these properties for over a dozen years already. If this indeed true, how long before the CoC moves forward with this project or are there other constraints/priorities that are taking precidence?

Kind of like the McKnight Boulevard expansion between Edmonton Trail and 4th Street NW - another project that has been quietly shelved but the CoC is still acquiring properties in that corridor to probably ease any future expansion.

[Mazrim]

Every single bridge structure on Stoney and Henday? :runaway:

I referring more to Calgary than Alberta government projects, but you're definitely right about that!

[milomilo]

I referring more to Calgary than Alberta government projects, but you're definitely right about that!

How big are they buiilt? I noticed a few plans for provincial overpasses that were built with ultimate capacity of 10 lanes, although to me it looks like you could fit in even more with just a centre barrier rather than the grass median.

[Cage]

Speaking of roads, I was doing some surfing yesterday and discovered an interesting little tidbit about the CoC with respect to the John Laurie/McKnight Boulevards realignment proposal - it is purported that the CoC already owns the 26 or so properties it figures will have to make way for this realignment to occur and that the CoC has owned these properties for over a dozen years already. If this indeed true, how long before the CoC moves forward with this project or are there other constraints/priorities that are taking precidence?

Kind of like the McKnight Boulevard expansion between Edmonton Trail and 4th Street NW - another project that has been quietly shelved but the CoC is still acquiring properties in that corridor to probably ease any future expansion.


The City of Calgary has a "slush fund" of money to purchase properties in defined areas for the purpose of future infrastructure projects. I believe the account is called "Program 565" or "Program 645", anyway its got a really funny name. This Program is a legacy of the Glenmore 5th Street and causeway improvements. The left over money was reinvested into future projects.

This mystery program allows city administration to buy properties when they come available on the market rather than use expropriation or other means. When the project proceeds, the properties all ready purchased are sold to the project and the funds available for reinvestment. The fund is completely self sustaining.

Every few months you will see weird property purchases and sales listed as incamera or closed session items on the agenda. This is part of the reason why CoC has so many incamera sessions.

Former Councillor Andre Chabot and Mayor Nenshi werte about the most knowledgeable persons on council regarding the program.

[DoubleK]

^^^

I think it's important to note that there is nothing untoward about handling those land purchases in that fashion. If anyone catches wind that the city is thinking about buying a particular parcels, a land speculator would swoop in and buy it hoping to make quick buck.

[Porfiry]

If anyone catches wind that the city is thinking about buying a particular parcels, a land speculator would swoop in and buy it hoping to make quick buck.

Isn't expropriation done at "market value"? I don't think a speculator would have much upside, unless they got the property at a meaningful discount.

[DoubleK]

Isn't expropriation done at "market value"? I don't think a speculator would have much upside, unless they got the property at a meaningful discount.

Expropriation is a forced sale, they would use appraisals to determine the value but it's not an exact science. It is almost always is at a premium to the "market value".

[milomilo]

Depends on location; Stoney and Henday range from 6 to 12 lane ultimate stages, with almost all widening done median-side. Some places are already at ultimate, like Stoney under 61 Ave, SB Stoney at 22X, etc.

Mainline Henday NE will require widening of bridges at a couple places for a 10 lane ultimate, but it will be akin to the Stoney widening over West Nose Creek and done with relatively little difficulty.

It looks to me that you could easily add another lane, maybe 2, at 61 ave and keep full size shoulders?

[milomilo]

Stoney/Henday are built to a much higher spec than what would we be considered permissible in a Deerfoot type situation. Spec for Stoney SE mainline dictates a minimum 23.2 meter median which is what currently exists at 61 Ave. Anywhere that wasn't initially built to ultimate but will have widening median-side has more than 23.2 now, such that 23.2 will exist post-widening. It's a rural freeway type spec from the AB Trans Design Guide that calls for no barriers of any type in the median and mostly the reason they basically rebuilt all of NE Henday when they closed the loop up there.

It just seems excessive because we're used to the shitty spec to which everything else in Calgary was built. Anybody who has driven Stoney SE will agree that 8 mainline lines at 61 Ave is sufficient for the ultimate stage... where shit falls apart is the weave between Peigan and 17th and the crunch down to 2 lanes.

So by Alberta's new (stringent) book, Stoney at 61 Ave is at minimums.

Fair enough. I disagree though that a centre concrete barrier is a shitty standard. It's a standard which exists on far more roads in both in cities and everywhere in places like Europe, the prairies are the exception when it comes to building roads like that. The 23.2m median you describe is definitely 'better' from a safety standpoint and is useful with the weather we get, but I don't think it would be the end of the world if it got reduced at certain points if we absolutely needed more lanes.

[Design-mind]

Thought I would post a few in the roads section. 17th Ave BRT expansion.

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4667/40443552892_e883ef8c3a_b.jpg

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4671/26615414468_1ba6f5bb73_b.jpg

[s211]

Thought I would post a few in the roads section. 17th Ave BRT expansion.

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4667/40443552892_e883ef8c3a_b.jpg


Go Eskimos!!! :D :runaway:

[Corndogger]

2017 provincial traffic numbers are out.

Deerfoot traffic growth has slowed slightly. It officially hit 170,000 vehicles per day in 2017 between 16 Ave and Memorial representing a 0.82% increase over 2016, down from a 2.14% increase from 2015 to 2016.

Stoney NW growth is basically the same, busiest point at Beddington is up 1.92% to 75,380 in 2017.

Since opening in late 2013, Stoney SE is up 30%. It's not to the extent of Henday but I'm assuming the province has underestimated volume on the NE, because Since 2011, volume is up 164% at McKnight to 58,250; no doubt they're trying to find money to widen it. Henday SW needs money far sooner, with volume at over 83,000 on two lanes each way... but growth has significantly slowed. Henday's busiest point is near West Edmonton Mall at over 101k per day due to significant development outside the ring.

But the main thing is that traffic volumes are still growing. Are transit ridership numbers still declining? These numbers are important in planning our future transportation network. It would be ill advised to favor transit over roads as much as we have in the past. We should be correcting that imbalance now to adjust to the new economic reality.

[CrossedTheTracks]

But the main thing is that traffic volumes are still growing. Are transit ridership numbers still declining? These numbers are important in planning our future transportation network. It would be ill advised to favor transit over roads as much as we have in the past. We should be correcting that imbalance now to adjust to the new economic reality.

I eagerly await the facts & arguments you use to prove your assertion that we have been "favoring transit over roads". Particularly when many recent transit projects have brought road improvements along for the ride.

2017 transit ridership is down from 2015 (101.9 million trips from 110 million trips), but I can't seem to find any 2016 statistics; so it's not clear what changes may have happened in 2016 vs 2017.

[Corndogger]

I eagerly await the facts & arguments you use to prove your assertion that we have been "favoring transit over roads". Particularly when many recent transit projects have brought road improvements along for the ride.

2017 transit ridership is down from 2015 (101.9 million trips from 110 million trips), but I can't seem to find any 2016 statistics; so it's not clear what changes may have happened in 2016 vs 2017.

We've gone through this exercise before. Go look at the city's capital budgets for the last decade and what they have planned for the future. What road improvements did the West LRT bring other than an interchange at Sarcee Trail/17th Ave.? That was about $45 million IIRC compared to an overall budget of at least $1.5 billion. How is the Green Line helping roads? There's another $4.5 billion for transit. The allocation allotment is completely out of whack. If you think it isn't make your case. The city's own figures make mine.

[msmariner]

We've gone through this exercise before. Go look at the city's capital budgets for the last decade and what they have planned for the future. What road improvements did the West LRT bring other than an interchange at Sarcee Trail/17th Ave.? That was about $45 million IIRC compared to an overall budget of at least $1.5 billion. How is the Green Line helping roads? There's another $4.5 billion for transit. The allocation allotment is completely out of whack. If you think it isn't make your case. The city's own figures make mine.
Besides the interchange at Sarcee/17. Bow trail was completely rebuilt from Crowchild to 37st and 17Th ave was rebuilt from 33rd to 69Th. That’s a pretty good chunk of road upgrades that may not have been done without the LRT

[accord1999]

But the main thing is that traffic volumes are still growing. Are transit ridership numbers still declining? These numbers are important in planning our future transportation network. It would be ill advised to favor transit over roads as much as we have in the past. We should be correcting that imbalance now to adjust to the new economic reality.
The APTA's ridership report has numbers up to Q3 2017 for Calgary Transit. Based on Q3, transit ridership may have bottomed out, though for the first 3 quarters, bus ridership is down 16% from the peak in 2014 and hasn't been this low for more than a decade. LRT is only down a few percent by comparison.

http://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Pages/RidershipArchives.aspx

[You Need A Thneed]

We've gone through this exercise before. Go look at the city's capital budgets for the last decade and what they have planned for the future. What road improvements did the West LRT bring other than an interchange at Sarcee Trail/17th Ave.? That was about $45 million IIRC compared to an overall budget of at least $1.5 billion. How is the Green Line helping roads? There's another $4.5 billion for transit. The allocation allotment is completely out of whack. If you think it isn't make your case. The city's own figures make mine.

You also have to consider the road upgrades that are nit required or at the very least delayed because of transit investment.

For example the SE green line will take some pressure off of Deerfoot. The west LRT took some pressure off of Bow. The N green line will take some pressure off of centre street/ Edmonton trail/ 4th street and also Deerfoot trail.

[craner]

You also have to consider the road upgrades that are nit required or at the very least delayed because of transit investment.

For example the SE green line will take some pressure off of Deerfoot. The west LRT took some pressure off of Bow. The N green line will take some pressure off of centre street/ Edmonton trail/ 4th street and also Deerfoot trail.
Not by reducing Centre St. to one lane each direction.

[CrossedTheTracks]

We've gone through this exercise before. Go look at the city's capital budgets for the last decade and what they have planned for the future. What road improvements did the West LRT bring other than an interchange at Sarcee Trail/17th Ave.? That was about $45 million IIRC compared to an overall budget of at least $1.5 billion. How is the Green Line helping roads? There's another $4.5 billion for transit. The allocation allotment is completely out of whack. If you think it isn't make your case. The city's own figures make mine.

If you don't like the specific allocation to transit and want fewer dollars, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. But stating that transit is "favored", that's what I'm taking issue with.

Compare totals over some period of time, and include provincial funding (for both roads and transit) if you care to convince me. How many billions for the ring road in total? (I'm not arguing against the ring road, just holding it up as the biggest example, of "yes, we are paying for roads".)

Yeah, West LRT didn't bring multiple interchanges to the roads. But in the NW, every interchange on Crowchild (other than 16th) arrived with LRT expansions. Over in the NE, McKnight & Metis interchange.

[Corndogger]

Besides the interchange at Sarcee/17. Bow trail was completely rebuilt from Crowchild to 37st and 17Th ave was rebuilt from 33rd to 69Th. That’s a pretty good chunk of road upgrades that may not have been done without the LRT

The Bow Trail "rebuild" in the stretch you reference was done long before the West LRT. No connection. 17th Ave. wasn't rebuilt. It was shifted in places b/c of the LRT work. What benefit did that bring?

[Corndogger]

You also have to consider the road upgrades that are nit required or at the very least delayed because of transit investment.

For example the SE green line will take some pressure off of Deerfoot. The west LRT took some pressure off of Bow. The N green line will take some pressure off of centre street/ Edmonton trail/ 4th street and also Deerfoot trail.

I doubt the Green Line will have any impact on Deerfoot. I'd love to see number s for Bow Trail. I drive on a stretch of that road just about every day of the week and am always surprised at how empty the trains are outside of rush hour. I see cars with just a few people on them all of the time. When I'm driving to the N.E. I see cars with lots of people in them no matter what time of day or day of week I go by. Has the city made the stations on the N.E. leg capable of handling four-car trains yet? If they haven't they should.

[Corndogger]

I'd wager that's somewhat irrelevant since I only cited numbers and prospective improvement for provincial roads, but y'all can carry on with this discussion about transit which I don't give a shit about. :haha:

But those are two of the most used roads in the city and I'd be really surprised if volumes on Glenmore and Crowchild have dropped.

[Corndogger]

If you don't like the specific allocation to transit and want fewer dollars, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. But stating that transit is "favored", that's what I'm taking issue with.

Compare totals over some period of time, and include provincial funding (for both roads and transit) if you care to convince me. How many billions for the ring road in total? (I'm not arguing against the ring road, just holding it up as the biggest example, of "yes, we are paying for roads".)

Yeah, West LRT didn't bring multiple interchanges to the roads. But in the NW, every interchange on Crowchild (other than 16th) arrived with LRT expansions. Over in the NE, McKnight & Metis interchange.

I'm not surprised you fell back on the tired ÿou have to include the ring road" argument. The N.W. leg of the LRT is 30 years ago. They had no choice but to build interchanges unless they wanted to have a total clusterfuck. I liked that mix even if some of the interchange designs are total disasters. N.E. LRT is even older.

You need to look at what the city has done and is doing. Stoney Trail is totally provincial and never would have been built by the city. Even if you include it the entire thing will cost less than just the Green Line's first phase. People can argue all they want that transit has been screwed in terms of funding but the facts say otherwise. Transit has been screwed because of poor planning but so has the road network.

[Corndogger]

If you don't like the specific allocation to transit and want fewer dollars, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. But stating that transit is "favored", that's what I'm taking issue with.

Compare totals over some period of time, and include provincial funding (for both roads and transit) if you care to convince me. How many billions for the ring road in total? (I'm not arguing against the ring road, just holding it up as the biggest example, of "yes, we are paying for roads".)

Yeah, West LRT didn't bring multiple interchanges to the roads. But in the NW, every interchange on Crowchild (other than 16th) arrived with LRT expansions. Over in the NE, McKnight & Metis interchange.

Just to be clear, I'm not advocating for fewer dollars for transit. I'm allocating for more road funding. I would like to see the city shift some of it's transit priorities. I know it won't happen but I would prefer most of the Green Line to be delayed and the money used to put everything underground downtown and extend the LRT to the airport. BRT--scrap it all!!!

[ClaytonA]

Just to be clear, I'm not advocating for fewer dollars for transit. I'm allocating for more road funding. I would like to see the city shift some of it's transit priorities. I know it won't happen but I would prefer most of the Green Line to be delayed and the money used to put everything underground downtown and extend the LRT to the airport. BRT--scrap it all!!!

This is not specific to dogger.

And this is the muddled UCP party line somethings wrong with the project, let's delay it and re-plan it. But wait there's only one taxpayer, right? So where's that new road funding to come from if we even are funding capital spending (cut my taxes first & etc.)? Lets take from one transportation pot and put it in the other. I mean nobody the elites know uses transit, (elite projection) they run around empty all the time (especially rush hour when most people use transit). Sezn Chu feels deep in his gut that bicycling counts are wrong. It doesn't matter that all modes are counted at the same time with the same method for cordon counts. Doesn't fit his world view or if you want beliefs. Do facts change beliefs?

Meanwhile all those communities like Cranston/Mahogany/Ranchlands/etc in the SE and Keystone/Sage Hills/etc in the NW out 30km from downtown etc continue building out with much less employment than residents. $2.2 billion SWRR isn't likely to help those commuters despite it being built like a commuter highway (continuous interchanges like Deerfoot Trail) instead of a true bypass. $1.6 billion for Crowchild's Bow River Bridge project will. Stoney, Deerfot, and Glenmore as Acey points out are already busy. There's already a Deerfoot study underway.

People won't have options, so they invest in vehicles leading to the Los Angeles spiral of induced road demand, lower transit/walking/cycling etc demand, ever higher societal transportation cost, legendary traffic jams, and less economic competitiveness than Europe and Asia. Massive infrastructure spending in Europe and Asia to remain and get more competitive. i.e. wages better stay higher than those places because the cost of living won't be falling. Maybe oil will come back or our version of Silcon Valley/high tech will offset it. Whatever, you say autonomous electrifed cars, hyperloop ...

[craner]

^Wow. Need a breath ? ;)

Having read all that I'd still like to see more invested in roads. Crowchild 24th - 17th and the west ring road to complete the loop would be my top two priorities (just my opinion though).

[Corndogger]

This is not specific to dogger.

And this is the muddled UCP party line somethings wrong with the project, let's delay it and re-plan it. But wait there's only one taxpayer, right? So where's that new road funding to come from if we even are funding capital spending (cut my taxes first & etc.)? Lets take from one transportation pot and put it in the other. I mean nobody the elites know uses transit, (elite projection) they run around empty all the time (especially rush hour when most people use transit). Sezn Chu feels deep in his gut that bicycling counts are wrong. It doesn't matter that all modes are counted at the same time with the same method for cordon counts. Doesn't fit his world view or if you want beliefs. Do facts change beliefs?

Meanwhile all those communities like Cranston/Mahogany/Ranchlands/etc in the SE and Keystone/Sage Hills/etc in the NW out 30km from downtown etc continue building out with much less employment than residents. $2.2 billion SWRR isn't likely to help those commuters despite it being built like a commuter highway (continuous interchanges like Deerfoot Trail) instead of a true bypass. $1.6 billion for Crowchild's Bow River Bridge project will. Stoney, Deerfot, and Glenmore as Acey points out are already busy. There's already a Deerfoot study underway.

People won't have options, so they invest in vehicles leading to the Los Angeles spiral of induced road demand, lower transit/walking/cycling etc demand, ever higher societal transportation cost, legendary traffic jams, and less economic competitiveness than Europe and Asia. Massive infrastructure spending in Europe and Asia to remain and get more competitive. i.e. wages better stay higher than those places because the cost of living won't be falling. Maybe oil will come back or our version of Silcon Valley/high tech will offset it. Whatever, you say autonomous electrifed cars, hyperloop ...

Speaking of facts where are you getting yours from? $1.6 billion for the Crowchild Trail/Bow Trail bridge widening and ramp movement project? You should drive by that project or look it up on the City's website. The cost is $87 million which is about 5% of the figure you used and actually includes other work.

As for the Green Line no one is saying it should be delayed and I'm definitely not saying it should be downgraded in quality. It needs to be rethought in places because the plans presented make no sense. I can guarantee you that the vast majority of people are not in favor of spending billions of dollars for a frickin' tram that's going to run at surface. This is why people pushed for it to go underground downtown and want it stay underground going north for as far as possible. Low floor trains also make no sense. Others here have already presented the case for why so I'm not going to restate their points.

Why are you against addressing these issues?

[Corndogger]

^Wow. Need a breath ? ;)

Having read all that I'd still like to see more invested in roads. Crowchild 24th - 17th and the west ring road to complete the loop would be my top two priorities (just my opinion though).

Glenmore also needs to be fully freewayized. How many more interchanges are needed on the east side before that's done? It couldn't be that many.

[msmariner]

The Bow Trail "rebuild" in the stretch you reference was done long before the West LRT. No connection. 17th Ave. wasn't rebuilt. It was shifted in places b/c of the LRT work. What benefit did that bring?

No it wasn’t. Bow trail was rebuilt at the same time to allow for the tracks to be put in the middle. The road was widened to three lanes each way on that stretch. Work was started around 2010 and finished 2014. I’m quite familiar with the timelines of it since I worked on all fazes of the construction.
17th ave was widened and turn bays installed from 33rd to Sarcee. The section from Sarcee to 69Th was realigned & expanded. Most of the old road there was where the tracks are now.

[msmariner]

Glenmore also needs to be fully freewayized. How many more interchanges are needed on the east side before that's done? It couldn't be that many.

Barlow, 52nd St, 68Th ( if it ever gets built as planned) and the interchange at Stoney would need to be built to Ultimate to handle more traffic. The EB/NB left turn is already a complete failure

[milomilo]

Last year in Calgary a few interchanges opened:

TCH/Bowfort Road - $71.7 million
MacLeod/162nd $78 million
Glenmore/Ogden - $90 million

Plus a load of smaller ones. Maybe that was just a big dollar year, but the argument that Calgary isn't spending money on roads is complete horse shit.

[You Need A Thneed]

http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/Documents/Road-projects/SWBRT/McKnight-Blvd-52St-intersection-upgrades-Feb2018.pdf

McKnight 52nd Street intersection upgrades as part of the north crosstown BRT.

Lanes going north or south goes from 5 to 8 through the intersection.

[ClaytonA]

Speaking of facts where are you getting yours from? $1.6 billion for the Crowchild Trail/Bow Trail bridge widening and ramp movement project? You should drive by that project or look it up on the City's website. The cost is $87 million which is about 5% of the figure you used and actually includes other work.

...

http://majorprojects.alberta.ca/#list/ I'm not as up on Calgary road projects. The Bow River Bridge is the main bottle neck if that's phase 1.

Fully agree with you the Green Line LRT should be grade separated to north of McKnight where the right-of-way gets wider (if that's far enough). Heck the city should be going for automated trains like the REM and Skytrain. The frequency at all hours possible when you don't have to pay for drivers is worth the extra capital expense over the infrastructure's lifetime. Others in the community want a streetcar/tram feel. Same as Vancouver.

Dont let the perfect be the enemy of the good - keep supporting the project.

[milomilo]

http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/Documents/Road-projects/SWBRT/McKnight-Blvd-52St-intersection-upgrades-Feb2018.pdf

McKnight 52nd Street intersection upgrades as part of the north crosstown BRT.

Lanes going north or south goes from 5 to 8 through the intersection.

What a waste of money. If they're rebuilding the intersection why are they just putting in queue jump lanes? They should at least be provisioning for proper bus lanes on 52nd if not a full interchange.

It's funny how the NIMBYs in the SW get a proper BRT line with dedicated lanes and overpasses yet bitch and moan about it, but in the NE where they would actually be grateful for a line like that, they only get a half assed line with a few fancy shelters and queue jumps.

[Mazrim]

What a waste of money. If they're rebuilding the intersection why are they just putting in queue jump lanes? They should at least be provisioning for proper bus lanes on 52nd if not a full interchange.

It's funny how the NIMBYs in the SW get a proper BRT line with dedicated lanes and overpasses yet bitch and moan about it, but in the NE where they would actually be grateful for a line like that, they only get a half assed line with a few fancy shelters and queue jumps.

Why don't you ask them? I'm sure the city looked at it as an option.

My guess? It has to do with how the queues on 52nd differ from the queues on Glenmore and 14th Street.

[msmariner]

Why don't you ask them? I'm sure the city looked at it as an option.

My guess? It has to do with how the queues on 52nd differ from the queues on Glenmore and 14th Street.

I believe it is going to be a BRT route. PCL has been installing proper bus stops up 52st for the past year. It’s not dedicated lanes as per 14st/SW but still a BRT

[Mazrim]

I believe it is going to be a BRT route. PCL has been installing proper bus stops up 52st for the past year. It’s not dedicated lanes as per 14st/SW but still a BRT

I'm not talking about whether or not it's a BRT route. I'm referring to the question about why the SW gets dedicated bus lanes but not here on 52nd street. Obviously BRTs can run fine in most cases on the roads with little helpers like queue jumps, but I'm guessing they did the math and figured out dedicated bus lanes weren't required here.

[milomilo]

I'm not talking about whether or not it's a BRT route. I'm referring to the question about why the SW gets dedicated bus lanes but not here on 52nd street. Obviously BRTs can run fine in most cases on the roads with little helpers like queue jumps, but I'm guessing they did the math and figured out dedicated bus lanes weren't required here.

Firstly, this is BRT in name only. The only thing that will come close to BRT in this city is the SW portion of the SWBRT. What we will have on the North Crosstown is just a slightly fancier express bus that will still be painfully slow, as any bus in mixed traffic inevitably is.

I would cynically say you are placing too much faith in the city basing the put in proper infrastructure in the SW and not the NE purely on data rather than some political reason. I find it very hard to believe that Mercedes man in the SW is more likely to take transit than the typically lower income person in the NE.

[Rollerstud98]

Firstly, this is BRT in name only. The only thing that will come close to BRT in this city is the SW portion of the SWBRT. What we will have on the North Crosstown is just a slightly fancier express bus that will still be painfully slow, as any bus in mixed traffic inevitably is.

I would cynically say you are placing too much faith in the city basing the put in proper infrastructure in the SW and not the NE purely on data rather than some political reason. I find it very hard to believe that Mercedes man in the SW is more likely to take transit than the typically lower income person in the NE.

What about 17th ave SE?

[milomilo]

What about 17th ave SE?

Yes, fair enough I would say that would qualify, although just as with the SWBRT, it's still only partial as the rest of the journey has to be made in mixed traffic. It's a good start though and I hope they can figure out a way to get it into downtown properly.

17th Ave offers another great comparison to the SWBRT - it's been a gongshow of construction for almost a year now yet you barely hear a peep from the locals in complaint, probably because they have better things to do and appreciate the investment. Compare that to the SW, where construction hasn't even started yet and you have ready2engage and all the other NIMBYs.

IMO, we should scrap the SWBRT and any other infrastructure in the far SW for the next 20 years until the local baby boomer NIMBYs die off, and spend that money on the rest of the city. Anyone SW of 14th and Glenmore does not deserve any taxpayer money after their actions over the last few years.

[DoubleK]

I drive 17th Ave SE everyday.

My view for the lack of communication and is they have done a fantastic job of doing the construction while limiting the disruption. Yes, some businesses have undoubtedly been impacted but they have had very helpful signage for access and parking. The biggest impact has been the loss of the center turning lane.

[You Need A Thneed]

There are a couple places where providing dedicated lanes along 52nd street would have required property acquisition to demolish the houses.

And there are a number of key queue jump lanes and lane extensions that are being built, which will be a huge improvement on how fast these busses can get through traffic. The intersection improvements at McKnight/52nd include queue jumps, but also have long lane extensions that will allow busses to bypass the traffic backups that happen there. The dual left turn lanes in all directions that are being added will do quite a bit towards reducing the traffic jams there too. Just north of this, southbound Falconridge Blvd is getting a queue jump at Castleridge Blvd, where with the previously mentioned work, there will be a third lane to get the busses through all the way through Mcknight.

Southbound 52nd got a lane extension just before 32nd age, where the BRT turns.

Where the BRT turns off of eastbound 16th ave onto northbound 36th street, they are building a queue jump there that will allow the BRT to get through the light before having to merge into traffic. There may be others that they haven't started yet too, but the ones mentioned will go a long way towards getting busses through almost as fast as if they had dedicated lanes.

The work at mcknight/52nd was badly needed even if they weren't doing work for the BRT. I do wonder how much this costs, and whether that shouldn't go towards an interchange there (obviously that would be significant additional cost on top), as one might be necessary in 10 years anyway.

[You Need A Thneed]

Yes, fair enough I would say that would qualify, although just as with the SWBRT, it's still only partial as the rest of the journey has to be made in mixed traffic. It's a good start though and I hope they can figure out a way to get it into downtown properly.

17th ave SE BRT won't have dedicated lanes all the way downtown, but will have dedicated lanes right into the inner city.

It also should do a lot for redevelopment in the area, which the dedicated lanes along 14th can't do in the SW.

[technomad]

Last year in Calgary a few interchanges opened:

TCH/Bowfort Road - $71.7 million
MacLeod/162nd $78 million
Glenmore/Ogden - $90 million

Plus a load of smaller ones. Maybe that was just a big dollar year, but the argument that Calgary isn't spending money on roads is complete horse shit.

was going to say... Calgary always seems to have a few interchange projects on the go. Want to see road neglect? go 3 hrs north where a new interchange is a once a decade event, and the incredibly expensive transit projects add massive interference with vehicle traffic wherever possible :tup:

Calgary's pick-away approach to building the freeways is doing fine.. in the next decade we should see Stoney complete, possibly Glenmore and Airport trail too.

Beyond that, Crowchild and Deerfoot rebuilds are going to eat resources for a long long time.. enough that there will probably be screaming demand for a 4th LRT line by the time they're done :haha:

[technomad]

that south section of Barlow is still tagged as a freeway grade road on the city's planning maps, same as Deerfoot and Glenmore..

building that out to freeway spec would make a great bypass route for the overhaul of Deerfoot from Anderson to Peigan

[milomilo]

Increasingly I'm starting to think you can fix north Deerfoot for ~$400m. A couple reversible median HOV, basketweaves, other relatively minor fixes. That doesn't include fixing the embarrassment of a diamond at 16 Ave, but you don't need to fix that to fix mainline. At some point the objective becomes making Deerfoot less unsafe, as opposed to reaching an A level of service.

The south is beyond trashed, however. Have fun rebuilding the Anderson/Bow Bottom complex. Glen, Calf Robe, Ivor Strong, like it's just such a level of fuckery down there I don't know where you even start. Phase 1 at Glen with the new mainline bridge, maybe. Relatively unintrusive.

I use that diamond every day and it isn't bad really. The only issue is the (lack of) distance between it and Memorial.

[technomad]

Objectively it is beyond the point of failure, but less so than other points on Deerfoot so it seems less bad. The bigger issue (https://goo.gl/U2t6ZF) is...



...it's a collision trap. Goes back to the point about simply making Deerfoot and its interchanges more safe, as opposed to fixing capacity.

wow, didn't realize the accident count was so high there

so what’s the fix? systems interchanges at 16 and memorial, basket-weaves in between?

[milomilo]

Yes. But we can't afford that... so the idea is just to mitigate the damage with some lesser solution.

People flying downhill to at-grade intersections, it's hilarious to call Deerfoot/16th anything less than a massively unsafe embarrassment of a junction at the two most important highways in the province. Memorial west of Deerfoot carries ~100k a day, so the Memorial interchange is equally embarrassing and inadequate; it's a recurring theme on Deerfoot to the extent that any one junction ends up not looking as bad, relative to others.

You're being overly dramatic - 16th Ave may technically be the TCH but it's a city road at that point and hardly one of the Province's two most important roads. Yes, it's a crappy interchange but there are far worse examples elsewhere and it would be quite low down on my list of priorities.

That article states it's the 'most dangerous intersection', but then states that most of the accidents are rear enders, which could be classed as less bad than other accidents - I'd like to see their numbers. As I said, I use the interchange on my commute and there's rarely much of a wait, and very rarely any accidents. The interchange itself does not 'need' fixing, but basketweaves or collector roads or something between 16th and Barlow on Deerfoot.

[milomilo]

What officially makes something count as an 'objective' failure? I suspect in every city there are countless sections of road, from small to large that could class as objectively failing on some level, but it's a losing battle anyway. You fix one interchange and a few years later it will be back to failing, or you move the problem somewhere else. It's literally an impossible problem to solve, which is why I'm not too upset that an interchange that does not cause much of a visible problem is not currently being rebuilt.

I would focus on the problem areas that disproportionately affect a road. If 16th was a flat intersection, it would fit that description, but currently 16th being a less than perfect interchange has little negative impact, as it only means that you will be slightly delayed getting onto another congested road. The things that do have a disproportionate impact are things like traffic heading onto Blackfoot backing up and blocking mainline Deerfoot.

I'd be interested in seeing the numbers you are using for 16th/Deerfoot though.

[craner]

Looks like relief might be less than 10 years away :)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/barlow-trail-16th-avenue-interchange-redesign-vote-passes-1.2824917

http://http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/barlow-trail-16th-avenue-interchange-redesign-vote-passes-1.2824917

[milomilo]

I agree 100%, which is why I stated and clearly need to reaffirm that I wouldn't start fixes there given that funds are limited. However, it doesn't make the aforementioned movements any less of a failure.

Level of service for signalized intersections is a somewhat complex function of traffic, effective green time, and other metrics. Several movements are at an F LOS. I'll see if someone from AT can confirm this for you.

In the meantime, consider the high capacity two-lane flyovers on the ring roads that opened in recent years, handling ~11k turning vehicles per day. AT thought it'd be smart to not have a turning movement at a systems interchange open in a state of failure, so high capacity semi-directional flyovers were built.

The most glaring example is the WL movement at SPF and Henday, which is not a systems interchange... but AT built a semi-directional flyover to handle 7,360 AADT in 2017. AT was split between 2 options for that flyover as I recall, and ended up going with the cheaper one at about $30 million. So worried they were about the inadequacy of the existing loop ramp to handle this peak volume, they built a semi-directional.

To sum up, AT thought a loop was inadequate for ~7k at SPF and Henday. At 16 Ave/Deerfoot (http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/mapping/2017/TM/10000006.pdf), EL is at 11,180 and NL is at 10,700 in 2017, serviced by a split diamond where traffic descends down steep hills.

OK fair enough. Just for fun, if we did decide to 'fix' the interchange in a realistic way - what would you propose? Would it resemble any of the city's plans?

[craner]

I would love to see the City build a "signature" bridge for 16th over Deerfoot - bank to bank.
Highly unlikely I know due to the added cost ... but I like to dream.

[craner]

I like the recommended option (http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TP/PublishingImages/16ave-recommended-option.png) seen here, in terms of the 16/Deerfoot component. New bridges taking mainline 16 over top of the whole complex creating 3 levels. Definitely expensive. The layout, proximity of the creek and train tracks make pretty much any large scale fix really expensive.

Not sure what's best for 16/Barlow.

Seems strange that 16th drops to only 2 lanes each direction just east of Deerfoot in the recommended option. :shrug:

[milomilo]

Yeah I mean...



Those are the collisions that hurt you. The sideswipes from the weaves at Barlow/16th or any other clover are less dangerous, even if more numerous. Despite this and the evidence above, I'm fine to continue with the notion that 16/Deerfoot is "not that bad", since it's apparently over dramatic to call it an embarrassment.

I totally get that what I experience does not equal data, and if the statistics show that 16th/Deerfoot has the most collisions I'm not going to argue with that. But still... in my time in Calgary I don't think I've ever experienced a collision or incident on that interchange that has held me up significantly. Compare that to some other trouble spots, for instance the worst of all - Crowchild/Glenmore where I have been stuck in gridlock countless times because of 'something' - that's why I think it isn't that bad. Yes, it's relative, but things could always be better in the same way they could always be worse, and I've lived in cities with much worse roads than Calgary.

[milomilo]

Seems strange that 16th drops to only 2 lanes each direction just east of Deerfoot in the recommended option. :shrug:

Well it wouldn't be a road designed in Calgary if it didn't nonsensically add and drop lanes! Does anyone still wonder why no one uses the right lane?

[craner]

Well it wouldn't be a road designed in Calgary if it didn't nonsensically add and drop lanes! Does anyone still wonder why no one uses the right lane?

:haha: So true.

[milomilo]

You see it differently than AT engineers.

Definitely.

The fourth lane on Stoney is not a through lane. It's just a really long on-ramp and really long off-ramp. You see 8 lanes under 61 Ave. AT sees 6 lanes, and an auxiliary lane for traffic to/from Peigan and Glen.

I admit that the posted interchange at 16th, the lane drops won't really matter. And I am fine with the situation you describe on Stoney - as long as the number of through lanes stays consistent for long periods, which it often doesn't.

However, what I would like to see is that auxiliary lane marked differently (and this be consistent across the province). Have the lane markings look something like this:
_______________

- - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
---------------------
_______________

This sometimes is applied here but the differentiation is poor and only for the last hundred meters or so. On the UK's motorways (sorry, I do like them), any time lanes are splitting off, which is rare, it will be signed well in advance and the lines progressively get more and more solid, which nudges people into getting into lane in a reasonable time, rather than either driving in the wrong lane for miles or changing lanes at the last second. They also sometimes have a delightfully un-Canadian 'GET IN LANE' sign to inform people that things are changing.

At the very least, it would make me less irritated about myself driving in the 'wrong' lane, as I'm often forced to do.

[milomilo]

Something screwy went on with my post there, should be showing correctly now.

[milomilo]

The whole laning thing annoys me more than it probably should, but I feel it's justified. One of the biggest WTFs is this section of HWY2/2A:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@52.5351386,-113.6629906,5775m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en

Firstly, it's completely pointless having three lanes, but my main beef is I feel silly whichever lane I choose. If I drive in the middle, I feel like a typical middle lane idiot. But if I move to the right, it achieves nothing (other than perhaps undertaking a few other middle lane idiots), and I have to move back over in a km anyway. It's sections like this (and I know it was probably built a while ago) that give me little faith that the designers care about lane discipline.

Thanks for that link though, very interesting. That Y is a nice bit of road and feels like I'm driving on a proper piece of infrastructure. Until you hit the lights on Macleod or the uncontrolled left turns further south...

[ggopher]

Another classic example of idiotic lane placement is Stoney Trail SE.

Eastbound Stoney Trail after 52nd Street SE, traffic squeezes down to 2 lanes on the curve turning Northbound. This allows 2 dedicated traffic lanes for traffic merging from Westbound 22x turning to Northbound. After the curve there is 4 lanes, but no one ever uses the far 2 right lanes for the entire stretch of SE Stoney.

How much traffic could they possible imagine coming from Westbound 22x heading North? For Eastbound traffic (the majority of volume), why would they squeeze traffic down to 2 lanes on a curve?

[DoubleK]

. In that scenario, the ER and NL movements become critical to the entire AB road network.

I'm not familiar with these acronyms?!

[craner]

^ I'm not sure either but I'm thinking:
ER = Eastbound turning Right.
NL = Northbound turning Left.

...maybe ??

[Corndogger]

^ I'm not sure either but I'm thinking:
ER = Eastbound turning Right.
NL = Northbound turning Left.

...maybe ??

I'm sure that's what he means but I've never seen those acronyms used. For system interchanges it's very confusing. It would be much better to use EB to SB and NB to WB. I looked at a ton of sites with traffic engineering acronyms and none of them used ER and NL. At least in the U.S. ER means Emergency Response.

[milomilo]

How one determines that this is the configuration ahead of time... you're right. It's not good.

Exactly. We all like to complain about people driving in the middle lane, but in reality this often a sensible decision as often have you have no way of knowing whether the right lanes are true through lanes, auxiliary lanes or are otherwise just going to end randomly.

I'm sure the designers at AT have done a fine job of calculating the theoretical capacity of a road and put in what they believe is an appropriate number of lanes. The problem is in reality these lanes are pointless, as when you drive those sections, like the section of Stoney you mentioned, the right lanes are empty as everyone uses the left two lanes which they know will continue on. We can blame this on the drivers if you like, but I believe as much blame lies on the way roads are designed.

[Corndogger]

Exactly. We all like to complain about people driving in the middle lane, but in reality this often a sensible decision as often have you have no way of knowing whether the right lanes are true through lanes, auxiliary lanes or are otherwise just going to end randomly.

I'm sure the designers at AT have done a fine job of calculating the theoretical capacity of a road and put in what they believe is an appropriate number of lanes. The problem is in reality these lanes are pointless, as when you drive those sections, like the section of Stoney you mentioned, the right lanes are empty as everyone uses the left two lanes which they know will continue on. We can blame this on the drivers if you like, but I believe as much blame lies on the way roads are designed.

The problem is lanes serving dual purposes so politicians can look good by delivering roads at the cheapest cost possible with the odd exception. Lanes should be core or auxiliary not both. It's a huge safety issue and causes congestion when there's no need for it. The city is way worse than the province in this regard.

[ClaytonA]

Looks like relief might be less than 10 years away :)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/barlow-trail-16th-avenue-interchange-redesign-vote-passes-1.2824917

http://http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/barlow-trail-16th-avenue-interchange-redesign-vote-passes-1.2824917

It'd be great to see the City setting aside an alignment for BRT or LRT along 16 Ave through this section. Save the city money by planning ahead.

Would it make more sense to elminate 19 St NE access from 16 Ave with just an underpass and just force all traffic to use Barlow coupled with connecting Maunsell Rd to the existing 7 Ave NE intersection. It's not much additional distance and would greatly simplify the interchange designs versus maintaining each and every access point to the detriment of the many. 19 St NE is just too close to the other major arterials and looks like a collector.

[ClaytonA]

Acey, I appreciate your contributions here. I'm interested in your response to the add/drop criticism of forcing more lanes changes. Aren't motorists more likely to have collisions in merges/diverges movements? i.e. such as forced lane changes instead of being able to maintain movement in one lane with only incoming traffic merging. The result of a forced lane changes is similar to adding another intersection just before the actual one as motorists are forced into an additional merging movement. Tradeoff between money and safety.

Just look at how AB Transpo (likely) cheaped out on Crowchild by the Bow River Bridge where there are multiple lane add/drops both north and southbound. Glenmore at 14 St SW where vehicles are forced over two lane changes to continue east/west on Glenmore past 14 St SW is another. Easy to see AB Transpo designing hard to navigate and more collision prone highways than other provinces with these beliefs and values. A lot of under-used asphalt and land. People get the public goods/services for which they pay.

Also as you imply having to wait an average more than one light cycle (80s) during the rush hours is hardly onerous at 16 Ave and Deerfoot for two movements of 12 (definition of LOS F from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_service). It's the rush hours. We're wasting limited societal resources if we pay for and design everything for free flow LOS A at the peak hours. Doesn't the engineer's code of conduct/ethics, etc. have something regarding efficient use public funds?

Engineers hide behind jargon like this much too often. A grade of F sounds and feels much more serious than just using the 80s time delay. Audience and all that. Context more easily communicated by the time delay might be someone waiting 80s for a bus to show up at rush hour. From the link, we probably both agree:

... While it may be tempting to aim for an LOS A, this is unrealistic in urban areas. Urban areas more typically adopt standards varying between C and E, depending on the area's size and characteristics, while F is sometimes allowed in areas with improved pedestrian, bicycle, or transit alternatives. ... Emphasis added.

This intersection is interesting as to the east it is being freeway-ified while to the west some want to turn it into an urban boulevard (whatever that is). The NE land use is much younger than the north central. Different community and transportation feel. Has the Crowhild freeway-ification inflamed NIMBYism in the NW with it's conversion? North of Glenmore and south of Stoney east-west commutes have issues in Calgary. Really long term more balanced east-west land use is the best solution with more employment in the NW.

Deerfoot with the ring road is turning into more an internal Calgary major aterial and less a provincial highway. Deerfoot has a lot of issues. When is the province offloading it to the City of Calgary? Wasn't that the plan once the ring roads were complete as already happened in Edmonton? ;) Maybe it'll happen with an austerity provincial government...$10 billion per year is a lot to cut/save.

[YYCguys]

It'd be great to see the City setting aside an alignment for BRT or LRT along 16 Ave through this section. Save the city money by planning ahead.

Would it make more sense to elminate 19 St NE access from 16 Ave with just an underpass and just force all traffic to use Barlow coupled with connecting Maunsell Rd to the existing 7 Ave NE intersection. It's not much additional distance and would greatly simplify the interchange designs versus maintaining each and every access point to the detriment of the many. 19 St NE is just too close to the other major arterials and looks like a collector.

Hi! So you’re suggesting expropriating and bulldozing a number of residential properties along Maunsell Close in order to accomplish this goal? Is it worth it?