Calgary Roads

[craner]

Glad to see this one announced - been waiting on this for years. :cheers:

[Rollerstud98]

I wish these fucks would build our 40th ave overpass here in Airdrie. Even before this spending announcement the city had put up 50% of the cost to try and get it to go ahead. We also need a grade separation for the yankee valley rail crossing. Before that happens we need the 40th ave access though to reduce the stress that is already there and will be so much worse with reduced lanes.

[YYCguys]

I wish these fucks would build our 40th ave overpass here in Airdrie. Even before this spending announcement the city had put up 50% of the cost to try and get it to go ahead. We also need a grade separation for the yankee valley rail crossing. Before that happens we need the 40th ave access though to reduce the stress that is already there and will be so much worse with reduced lanes.

Oh I know! YVB is really horrible between 8th street and East Lake Blvd (which is almost the entire length of it) is so bad, especially during peak times! I tend to avoid it by travelling to Edmonton Trail or down 8th to Balzac to access the QE2!

[Rollerstud98]

Oh I know! YVB is really horrible between 8th street and East Lake Blvd (which is almost the entire length of it) is so bad, especially during peak times! I tend to avoid it by travelling to Edmonton Trail or down 8th to Balzac to access the QE2!

I’m east of QE2 and generally avoid the worst of it at the bad times. Very rare I cross the tracks anymore which is nice lol.

[suburb]

Oops I meant 45th avenue. Didn’t even notice my mistake till now! But I’m glad you knew what I meant! 👍

I obviously perpetuated the error, but knew exactly what you meant.

[suburb]

I wish these fucks would build our 40th ave overpass here in Airdrie. Even before this spending announcement the city had put up 50% of the cost to try and get it to go ahead. We also need a grade separation for the yankee valley rail crossing. Before that happens we need the 40th ave access though to reduce the stress that is already there and will be so much worse with reduced lanes.

Yeah - that project is obviously in the wrong place (just like this post).

[Corndogger]

Yeah - that project is obviously in the wrong place (just like this post).

Post is perfectly fine here and many Calgarians are very familiar with what's going on in places such as Airdrie.

[MalcolmTucker]

I wish these fucks would build our 40th ave overpass here in Airdrie. Even before this spending announcement the city had put up 50% of the cost to try and get it to go ahead. We also need a grade separation for the yankee valley rail crossing. Before that happens we need the 40th ave access though to reduce the stress that is already there and will be so much worse with reduced lanes.

Airdrie shouldn’t have planned to expand where the traffic demand was likely to put the interchange into failure mode, or they should have made the project contingent on developers directly footing the bill.

Airdrie is running out of water and could have planned developments in a different pattern to reach their limit without necessitating more large infrastructure investments.

[YYCguys]

Yeah - that project is obviously in the wrong place (just like this post).

Unless I’m mistaken, there there isn’t a “Calgary area communities” thread so this is the closest related thread.

[Corndogger]

Unless I’m mistaken, there there isn’t a “Calgary area communities” thread so this is the closest related thread.

One isn't needed either. It's not like the Calgary threads are so busy that we can't handle posts about Airdrie, etc. I actually like knowing what's going on in the places around Calgary as we can often learn from them.

[craner]

One isn't needed either. It's not like the Calgary threads are so busy that we can't handle posts about Airdrie, etc. I actually like knowing what's going on in the places around Calgary as we can often learn from them.
I’ll second this - no need for separate “Calgary area” threads - I want to know what is happening in these places.

[speedog]

Airdrome traffic is also greatly impacting the highway 566/Range Road 11 intersection - I believe plans are for a roundabout there in the near future. Of course, heavy congestion there pushes some to use Balzac Boulevard.

Personally, I just let Google Maps route me out of Airdrie when I'm working up there - it seems to do a decent enough job and even offers up interesting routes at times like under Stoney Trail on a gravel road along side Nose Hill Creek.

And what of SE Airdrie with all of the residential construction there, how long until YVB starts to get bogged down from all of that additional traffic?

[YYCguys]

Airdrome traffic is also greatly impacting the highway 566/Range Road 11 intersection - I believe plans are for a roundabout there in the near future. Of course, heavy congestion there pushes some to use Balzac Boulevard.

Personally, I just let Google Maps route me out of Airdrie when I'm working up there - it seems to do a decent enough job and even offers up interesting routes at times like under Stoney Trail on a gravel road along side Nose Hill Creek.

And what of SE Airdrie with all of the residential construction there, how long until YVB starts to get bogged down from all of that additional traffic?

The intersection at RR11/566 is a mess! Things flowed somewhat well before they put in the 4 way stop, but there were accidents so they had to do something about it. Well accidents have virtually disappeared but the line ups are insane! The roundabout is badly needed! And additional lanes on both roadways. But that’s wishful thinking!

YVB is already bogged down. I won’t travel east/west during peak times if I can help it, nor will I visit shops in the Sierra Springs area during those times. Traffic is so bad! They say a grade separated road over/under the CPR tracks will help, but I also think something needs to be done with the intersections at Main and also at the QE2 and Kingsview Market/McDonald’s. What I don’t know!

[Pegasus]

"50, 40 or 30? Calgary city hall set to decide on residential speed limits" https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/50-40-or-30-calgary-city-hall-set-to-decide-on-residential-speed-limits-1.5122430

Read the conflicting views of various councillors in the article. My view - why do we want to turn nearly the whole city into one giant playground zone? (Except this would apply all hours of the day or night).

And "more traffic calming measures" . . .

The city is going nuts (how about proper signage at James McKevitt/Stoney Trail if safety is so important - see my earlier post)

[davee930]

"50, 40 or 30? Calgary city hall set to decide on residential speed limits" https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/50-40-or-30-calgary-city-hall-set-to-decide-on-residential-speed-limits-1.5122430

Read the conflicting views of various councillors in the article. My view - why do we want to turn nearly the whole city into one giant playground zone? (Except this would apply all hours of the day or night).

And "more traffic calming measures" . . .

The city is going nuts (how about proper signage at James McKevitt/Stoney Trail if safety is so important - see my earlier post)

The children! What's with all the damn new kids anyway. Make us all drive like bitches because they can't keep their damn balls off the street.

[Pegasus]

The children! What's with all the damn new kids anyway. Make us all drive like bitches because they can't keep their damn balls off the street.

Agreed - they shouldn't be playing with balls on Elbow Drive at midnight!

[davee930]

Agreed - they shouldn't be playing with balls on Elbow Drive at midnight!

Yeah and car technology is getting way better. Yet we still go the other way.

Pussies in charge

[dmuzika]

The scariest spot in any residential neighbourhood? Near almost any school (especially elementary school) in the rush to drop off or pick up students (maybe lasts half an hour at most). People converge on the location, drop off/pick up junior, then try to get out of there. It's borderline chaos and in a 30 km/h zone, I'm surprised there aren't more incidents during those times.

[suburb]

The scariest spot in any residential neighbourhood? Near almost any school (especially elementary school) in the rush to drop off or pick up students (maybe lasts half an hour at most). People converge on the location, drop off/pick up junior, then try to get out of there. It's borderline chaos and in a 30 km/h zone, I'm surprised there aren't more incidents during those times.

Can't disagree on this whatsoever!

There also seems to be more people not walking to school. Even the very young kids can be walked with parents, but parents are too lazy. +10 degrees and it is too cold. Ridiculous.

[DoubleK]

"50, 40 or 30? Calgary city hall set to decide on residential speed limits" https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/50-40-or-30-calgary-city-hall-set-to-decide-on-residential-speed-limits-1.5122430

Read the conflicting views of various councillors in the article. My view - why do we want to turn nearly the whole city into one giant playground zone? (Except this would apply all hours of the day or night).

And "more traffic calming measures" . . .

The city is going nuts (how about proper signage at James McKevitt/Stoney Trail if safety is so important - see my earlier post)

The proposed changes are here. (https://www.calgary.ca/transportation/roads/traffic/traffic-safety-programs/residential-speed-limits.html)

They have it broken down ward by ward. For the streets that are actually changing I really struggle with people driving on streets of that type at 50 kph.

[Pegasus]

The proposed changes are here. (https://www.calgary.ca/transportation/roads/traffic/traffic-safety-programs/residential-speed-limits.html)

They have it broken down ward by ward. For the streets that are actually changing I really struggle with people driving on streets of that type at 50 kph.

Seeing which streets are affected I am not so concerned now - as you write on most of these streets it would be hard to do more than 40 km/h anyway. Bus routes and more significant roads remain at 50.

[accord1999]

Seeing which streets are affected I am not so concerned now - as you write on most of these streets it would be hard to do more than 40 km/h anyway. Bus routes and more significant roads remain at 50.

Push back from voters and Calgary Transit may have led to this compromise. Carra still tried to get 30 km/h residential and 40 km/h in as many collectors as possible.

https://i.imgur.com/Cihy8ck.png

CT reported that if all collectors went to 40 km/h, there would be a need for more buses and more hours of service to maintain the current service frequency.

https://i.imgur.com/28VSIT1.png

https://www.scribd.com/document/477482529/Attach-2-Technical-Analysis-Report-TT2020-1036

[Pegasus]

Push back from voters and Calgary Transit may have led to this compromise. Carra still tried to get 30 km/h residential and 40 km/h in as many collectors as possible

You can take safety too far. If some people had their way they would have someone walking in front of each car with a red flag (like in the early 1900's).

Unfortunately it looks like the north end of Elbow Drive is staying unchanged at 40 km/h.

[korzym]

Tsuut'ina Trail - Calgary SW Ring Road
FjRGGnD9V-E

[Pegasus]

Tsuut'ina Trail - Calgary SW Ring Road video

Thanks for posting :tup:

At the beginning if the video SB traffic looks backed up leaving Tsuut'ina Trail and joining 146th Ave/Fish Creek Blvd. People need to learn Anderson/Maclead Trail is the best way to rejoin Stoney rather than using Fish Creek Blvd and James McKevitt.

[Mykie]

People need to learn Anderson/Maclead Trail is the best way to rejoin Stoney rather than using Fish Creek Blvd and James McKevitt.

Well it depends on where you're trying to go, no? If Evergreen or Bridlewood, there's no way it's faster to use Anderson, especially once the timing of the lights at Fish Creek Blvd/Stoney is optimized.

[Pegasus]

Well it depends on where you're trying to go, no? If Evergreen or Bridlewood, there's no way it's faster to use Anderson, especially once the timing of the lights at Fish Creek Blvd/Stoney is optimized.

Duh . . . "Anderson/Maclead Trail is the best way to rejoin Stoney rather than using Fish Creek Blvd and James McKevitt"

[Mykie]

Duh . . . "Anderson/Maclead Trail is the best way to rejoin Stoney rather than using Fish Creek Blvd and James McKevitt"

Duh. So what I'm saying is, regardless of Anderson and Macleod being good for that purpose as a bypass, for the people backed up at Fish Creek making intracity trips who likely live in those 2 neighbourhoods it's still the best way. I'm agreeing with you... calm down. :haha:

[Pegasus]

Duh. So what I'm saying is, regardless of Anderson and Macleod being good for that purpose as a bypass, for the people backed up at Fish Creek making intracity trips who likely live in those 2 neighbourhoods it's still the best way. I'm agreeing with you... calm down. :haha:

What I am (calmly) saying is that people will (instinctively) take Tsuut'ina Trail as far as they can and then cut through Evergreen/Bridlewood to reach Stoney Trail. Due to speed limits, a playground zone and multiple lights on Fish Creek Blvd/James McKevitt, those going on to Stoney trail (i.e. not travelling to Evergreen/Bridlewood) would find Anderson/Macleod Trail to be a much better route.

[N McCity]

So on a drive the other night snooping around various parts of the city, I noticed the Airport Trail work is well under way and It left me wondering what the logic of this project is. Why build 2 interchanges on the road just to have it hit traffic lights at either end?

If I want to enter the airport from NB Deerfoot then I don't have any lights to stop at anymore. If I come from SB Deerfoot or from 96th I still have to battle the Deerfoot interchange lights.

If I exit the airport to go to Deerfoot as most cars do I first have to battle the pointless light near the Silver Lot, then I have to go though a light to enter Airport Trail, and then I end up at the Deerfoot interchange lights if I am continuing to 96th or going south.

Unless I'm missing something I really don't see the logic behind these interchanges given that one of the most heavily used traffic movements still won't be free flowing AND it takes a road that probably won't have a lot of traffic for years removes two intersections I wouldn't consider among the worst congested in the city only to have them dump out into comparatively sub standard designs that could be bottlenecks. Why bother in the first place?

[Mazrim]

Why bother in the first place?

The short answer is that it was part of the deal that allowed the Airport Trail tunnel to get built.

[N McCity]

The short answer is that it was part of the deal that allowed the Airport Trail tunnel to get built.
I guess so. I can’t remember that far back on the deal anymore but IIRC I read something about the 2 interchanged being federally funded. Still doesn’t change the question of why bother. Too bad they didn’t go to the effort of improving the access to them from both the airport to actually make it somewhat worth it.

At any rate I hope that means the speed limit can be raised.

[CrossedTheTracks]

I guess so. I can’t remember that far back on the deal anymore but IIRC I read something about the 2 interchanged being federally funded. Still doesn’t change the question of why bother. Too bad they didn’t go to the effort of improving the access to them from both the airport to actually make it somewhat worth it.

I think the reasoning was something like this: given a baseline of traffic of a few years ago... if the city extends Airport Trail to Metis & Stoney without additional interchanges, then airport-bound traffic will get overrun with general traffic. So if Airport Trail becomes free-flow, then general traffic won't overrun airport traffic, and you're back to the baseline.

(I'm not defending this argument, just trying to share my recollection of history.)

[Corndogger]

I think the reasoning was something like this: given a baseline of traffic of a few years ago... if the city extends Airport Trail to Metis & Stoney without additional interchanges, then airport-bound traffic will get overrun with general traffic. So if Airport Trail becomes free-flow, then general traffic won't overrun airport traffic, and you're back to the baseline.

(I'm not defending this argument, just trying to share my recollection of history.)

They want the free flowing of goods and people from/to the airport which makes perfect sense. Should have been ages ago.

[Corndogger]

I guess so. I can’t remember that far back on the deal anymore but IIRC I read something about the 2 interchanged being federally funded. Still doesn’t change the question of why bother. Too bad they didn’t go to the effort of improving the access to them from both the airport to actually make it somewhat worth it.

At any rate I hope that means the speed limit can be raised.

Until we get rid of most of this city council and purge administration that's unlikely. They're lowering speed limits all over the place even after making major upgrades to roads. It's beyond maddening and is going to cause accidents not prevent them.

[ImmortalHawk]

They want the free flowing of goods and people from/to the airport which makes perfect sense. Should have been ages ago.

It seems like almost every major city has a expressway-like link to the rest of the city. Think of Grant McConachie Way in Vancouver and the 400s expressways surrounding Toronto Pearson.

[N McCity]

It seems like almost every major city has a expressway-like link to the rest of the city. Think of Grant McConachie Way in Vancouver and the 400s expressways surrounding Toronto Pearson.
Between the interchange that distributes traffic north, south, and east, and the airport there are 3 traffic lights on Grant McConachie Way so it's interesting you compare that to YYZ's spaghetti bowl.

[Pegasus]

"CALGARY -- The city has delayed the announcement of its long-term recommendations to improve Deerfoot Trail due to unforeseen circumstances".

https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/city-postpones-announcement-of-long-term-deerfoot-trail-recommendations-1.5144616

[Porfiry]

Between the interchange that distributes traffic north, south, and east, and the airport there are 3 traffic lights on Grant McConachie Way so it's interesting you compare that to YYZ's spaghetti bowl.

Yah, Airport Trail pre-upgrades is in better shape than Grant McConachie. I don't know why it'd even be mentioned, it's not an expressway at all. Getting to YVR by car is a nightmare.

[N McCity]

They want the free flowing of goods and people from/to the airport which makes perfect sense. Should have been ages ago.
But the problem with calling it free flowing is two intersections are free flowing; the rest of it still is not free flowing. The only free flowing route is to the airport from NB Deerfoot and that will be thanks to the construction of one of the two interchanges. Seems like a very small return for spending the money to attempt to make something free flowing. It's an improvement sure but a small one and definitely one that isn't really free flowing.

What should be done is free flowing access from all directions of Deerfoot to the terminal and call it a day and leave it alone. It would require a change at the airport where Barlow Tr terminates, but this would actually probably be really easy to do. It would also require free flowing access to WB Airport Tr which is something this project won't provide. This also would require rethinking the Deerfoot interchange which probably couldn't even be done anymore anyway so probably forget everything I said...

[N McCity]

Yah, Airport Trail pre-upgrades is in better shape than Grant McConachie. I don't know why it'd even be mentioned, it's not an expressway at all. Getting to YVR by car is a nightmare.

Grant McConachie itself isn't really any worse than Airport Trail other than that it serves twice the airport, and the actual terminal access portion makes more sense when it's not under construction . The real problem is morning rush hour that uses Russ Baker to get into Vancouver from Richmond. The interchange is designed to handle the airport traffic, not that.

[N McCity]

"CALGARY -- The city has delayed the announcement of its long-term recommendations to improve Deerfoot Trail due to unforeseen circumstances".

https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/city-postpones-announcement-of-long-term-deerfoot-trail-recommendations-1.5144616
Too bad I was nervously awaiting what we'd find out and now I have to get even more nervous. I'm afraid of how this city will handle such a project.

[craner]

^Haha - Can you be more specific on what you’re nervous about ?

[DoubleK]

"CALGARY -- The city has delayed the announcement of its long-term recommendations to improve Deerfoot Trail due to unforeseen circumstances".

https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/city-postpones-announcement-of-long-term-deerfoot-trail-recommendations-1.5144616

What in the literal F?

This kind of conceptual work shouldn't take 5 years to complete.

At least do the basketweave at Southland/Anderson while you navel gaze about what to do north of 16th.

[Corndogger]

What in the literal F?

This kind of conceptual work shouldn't take 5 years to complete.

At least do the basketweave at Southland/Anderson while you navel gaze about what to do north of 16th.

Alberta Transportation should have kept complete control of this project. My gut is telling me that the results are saying citizens want massive investment in this road and people like Druh are freaking out over spending big $$$$$ on a freeway. Wouldn't surprise me in the least if she and her like-minded councilors convinced upper administration to put a delay on this project. I predict we hear nothing more about this until the election.

[Corndogger]

But the problem with calling it free flowing is two intersections are free flowing; the rest of it still is not free flowing. The only free flowing route is to the airport from NB Deerfoot and that will be thanks to the construction of one of the two interchanges. Seems like a very small return for spending the money to attempt to make something free flowing. It's an improvement sure but a small one and definitely one that isn't really free flowing.

What should be done is free flowing access from all directions of Deerfoot to the terminal and call it a day and leave it alone. It would require a change at the airport where Barlow Tr terminates, but this would actually probably be really easy to do. It would also require free flowing access to WB Airport Tr which is something this project won't provide. This also would require rethinking the Deerfoot interchange which probably couldn't even be done anymore anyway so probably forget everything I said...

There's more to come on this project. The goal is to have Airport Trail free flowing from Deerfoot east to 201 so there's quick easy access to/from the distribution centers, etc. in the N.E. Given what a clusterfuck the Green Line is I'd love to take a chunk of that money and finish this project and complete turning Glenmore into a freewayish road across the entire city. Benefits would be a lot bigger and a lot more people would be happy. Might not be what Druh wants but it would save NC Calgary from having to live with a transit catastrophe for decades.

[MalcolmTucker]

Alberta Transportation should have kept complete control of this project. My gut is telling me that the results are saying citizens want massive investment in this road and people like Druh are freaking out over spending big $$$$$ on a freeway. Wouldn't surprise me in the least if she and her like-minded councilors convinced upper administration to put a delay on this project. I predict we hear nothing more about this until the election.
The goal of Alberta Transportation was to hand Deerfoot back to the city. The city stopped that by convincing decision makers that the city would only accept a complete project. The province countered that to set a definitive standard of what the city would accept, the city should do the study.



and we are where we are today.

[milomilo]

When it comes to Deerfoot trail upgrades, one does have to ask; do we have any fucking money? Our roads function, no not perfectly but literally no city ever has perfectly functioning roads and ours are better than most. It's not like the state of Deerfoot is holding back the economy, and with muted growth to be expected for the medium term until the population sees the writing on the wall, spending huge amounts on road upgrades is probably just pissing money away, unless we can get the feds to fund the majority of it.

[Corndogger]

The goal of Alberta Transportation was to hand Deerfoot back to the city. The city stopped that by convincing decision makers that the city would only accept a complete project. The province countered that to set a definitive standard of what the city would accept, the city should do the study.



and we are where we are today.

I'm well aware of the stupid move that the province wants to make. What I'm saying is the Alberta Transportation should kept control over this remake/upgrade project(s). The City is incompetent when it comes designing and building freeways. Just look at the complete mess Deerfoot is in the sections that the City built. Province needs to give it's head a shake for even considering giving back control of that road.

[craner]

The Province wants to divest itself of the costs of Deerfoot. They argue that once the ring road is done 201 provides the provincial highway routing and #2 within becomes the city’s problem.
Not saying I agree with it but I think that is the province’s view.

[milomilo]

Call me a pessimist, but does anyone actually see the economy being any better than it was in 2014 any time soon? If we don't have much greater activity than we had back then, then we objectively do not need road upgrades since the city was doing great without them at that point. The city budget is fucked, the provincial budget is fucked, both partially deliberately, what actual monetary benefit do we gain from road upgrades?

[Corndogger]

The Province wants to divest itself of the costs of Deerfoot. They argue that once the ring road is done 201 provides the provincial highway routing and #2 within becomes the city’s problem.
Not saying I agree with it but I think that is the province’s view.

That's exactly their view and it's stupid. Highway 2 is still a provincial highway--makes no sense that it would be in one location and not another. It's also still going to be a major economic corridor for the province. It's such a shortsighted move especially given how badly the City has fucked this road up in the past. The province should be taking control over every major road in Calgary to prevent the city and region from grinding to a complete halt.

[milomilo]

to prevent the city and region from grinding to a complete halt.

Nonsensical hyperbole.

[Corndogger]

Nonsensical hyperbole.

Is it? Damn near every road has curb extensions at every intersection, there's speed bumps, etc. littering every residential neighborhood, they want to lower the speed limit down to school zone speed nearly everywhere, and they're lowering speed limits on major roads. The City is doing all it can to make driving so unpleasant that people give up and use a different mode of transportation. The province never should have given the City the power to control speed limits. If the UCP wants to score some easy political points they should rip up the City Charters given to Edmonton and Calgary and put both cities back on three-year election cycles if not two. In the big scheme of things elections are dirt cheap.

[YYCguys]

Ya’ll are talking like the sole reason to improve Deerfoot Trail (and other major roadways in the city) is economic benefit. But I think the safety benefit is (or should be) right up there. I live in Airdrie now and rarely drive on Deerfoot because I am nervous to be on that highway. I hear about so many accidents and traffic back ups that I don’t want to potentially be part of that.q

[speedog]

Ya’ll are talking like the sole reason to improve Deerfoot Trail (and other major roadways in the city) is economic benefit. But I think the safety benefit is (or should be) right up there. I live in Airdrie now and rarely drive on Deerfoot because I am nervous to be on that highway. I hear about so many accidents and traffic back ups that I don’t want to potentially be part of that.q

If you're nervous about being on Deerfoot/QE2 then you should be nervous about driving anywhere. I'm on Deerfoot pretty much several times a day and have never been in an accident on Deerfoot, haven't seen any bad ones either, mostly minor fender benders.

Now that's not to say that there aren't bad accidents on Deerfoot but it's really not as terrifying as you believe it is. Some people do dumb shit, some people are busy being distracted, some are driving unsafely but in the end I would say that Deerfoot isn't really any less safe than any othe expressway in the city.

[YYCguys]

If you're nervous about being on Deerfoot/QE2 then you should be nervous about driving anywhere. I'm on Deerfoot pretty much several times a day and have never been in an accident on Deerfoot, haven't seen any bad ones either, mostly minor fender benders.

Now that's not to say that there aren't bad accidents on Deerfoot but it's really not as terrifying as you believe it is. Some people do dumb shit, some people are busy being distracted, some are driving unsafely but in the end I would say that Deerfoot isn't really any less safe than any othe expressway in the city.

I’m fine on Sarcee, Shag, etc. and on the less busy sections of the QE2. I’m not a senior citizen. I’m not even close. But with people doing well over the speed limit on Deerfoot, especially on the narrower or curved sections makes me skiddish. I do about 105 on the Deerfoot. But most people treat it like the QE2 aka The Alberta-baun at 110 or higher. And I don’t feel comfortable in the construction zones when posted speed limits are lower (like at Stoney/TCH west) and people completely ignore them.

[N McCity]

I’m fine on Sarcee, Shag, etc. and on the less busy sections of the QE2. I’m not a senior citizen. I’m not even close. But with people doing well over the speed limit on Deerfoot, especially on the narrower or curved sections makes me skiddish. I do about 105 on the Deerfoot. But most people treat it like the QE2 aka The Alberta-baun at 110 or higher. And I don’t feel comfortable in the construction zones when posted speed limits are lower (like at Stoney/TCH west) and people completely ignore them.
I actually go as fast as 120 sometimes if it's not too congested and others are doing nearly that because I'm in the left lane. What is more scary than that is people that are now going 80-90 as they're not only an obstacle but will give the city bad ideas.

People start ignoring the construction limits because either they are too low given where the work is (well out of the danger of traffic), they signs are up but there is no workers in sight anywhere and there is no added danger to drivers, or if it appears to not be being enforced. Yet they can have a crew come and do some short one day work ON a road right in the middle of it and they probably won't lower the speed limit because i guess they don't matter as much.

[N McCity]

people like Druh
For anyone that was wondering this is what I meant by me being nervous.

Whether or not congested, the road is usually full to the point where if you are in the wrong lane good luck getting into the one you need. It may not often be so badly over designed capacity that it jams to a halt, but it is over capacity to the point where the road design is incredibly dangerous all things considered.

[N McCity]

Call me a pessimist, but does anyone actually see the economy being any better than it was in 2014 any time soon? If we don't have much greater activity than we had back then, then we objectively do not need road upgrades since the city was doing great without them at that point. The city budget is fucked, the provincial budget is fucked, both partially deliberately, what actual monetary benefit do we gain from road upgrades?

Unpopular idea in Alberta: Spend the money when times are tough rather than save it until times are good. What is good enough today will be an obstacle for tomorrow's (whenever that may be) recovered economy.

Remember that this work would largely start 2-3 years from now and take a good 2-3 years. that would be 2025-2026. I expect things for this province will either be better by then or so bad we will have all left...

[Mazrim]

Damn near every road has curb extensions at every intersection, there's speed bumps, etc. littering every residential neighborhood,
You say this like those are bad things? God forbid they do something to make streets a little nicer in residential areas. They aren't freeways.

they want to lower the speed limit down to school zone speed nearly everywhere, and they're lowering speed limits on major roads.
Baseless hyperbole. They have maps showing where the speeds limits would change and it's all in low volume residential streets. The major roads to get you in and out of a community are unchanged.

The City is doing all it can to make driving so unpleasant that people give up and use a different mode of transportation.
Even with all these changes, driving is still the most efficient way to get around the City, because all the major thoroughfares are still there to get you around quickly. If they wanted driving to be unpleasant, they wouldn't have spent the last 5 years building a ton of interchanges on major roads, or widened a bunch of roads to connect to the ring road, or upgraded old roads.

If you want to see a concerted effort to discourage driving, go look at the Metro Vancouver area. Calgary is the complete opposite of that.

[Porfiry]

Is it? Damn near every road has curb extensions at every intersection, there's speed bumps, etc. littering every residential neighborhood, they want to lower the speed limit down to school zone speed nearly everywhere, and they're lowering speed limits on major roads. The City is doing all it can to make driving so unpleasant that people give up and use a different mode of transportation.

LOL. Having lived in Vancouver, this comment is so ridiculous. Calgary is an absolute nirvana for car drivers. You have no idea how good you have it, but you still need to complain about things that are so trivial.

[MalcolmTucker]

Calgary does have 'pain points', but for the overall network, it is the best in the country.

[Bri-Guy]

Provincial news release just posted:
Province announcing new 40th Avenue interchange for Airdrie today
Preliminary work, including acquiring rights-of-way, is now underway. Construction on the interchange is expected to begin in 2021-22 and be complete by 2024.

news conference is here (https://youtu.be/BwJp764I5fk)

• Traffic volumes on QEII in the area of 40th Avenue in Airdrie is about 85,000 vehicles per day, including 7,000 commercial vehicles.
• Traffic has increased by about 30 per cent since 2014.
• The QEII and 40th Avenue interchange project will include:
o Construction of a 40th Avenue bridge over the QEII
o Construction of ramps to and from 40th Avenue to QEII
• The project is estimated to cost up to $83 million. Alberta Transportation will contribute up to $21.1 million and the City of Airdrie is allocating about $62 million.

[YYCguys]

Provincial news release just posted:
Province announcing new 40th Avenue interchange for Airdrie today
Preliminary work, including acquiring rights-of-way, is now underway. Construction on the interchange is expected to begin in 2021-22 and be complete by 2024.

news conference is here (https://youtu.be/BwJp764I5fk)

• Traffic volumes on QEII in the area of 40th Avenue in Airdrie is about 85,000 vehicles per day, including 7,000 commercial vehicles.
• Traffic has increased by about 30 per cent since 2014.
• The QEII and 40th Avenue interchange project will include:
o Construction of a 40th Avenue bridge over the QEII
o Construction of ramps to and from 40th Avenue to QEII
• The project is estimated to cost up to $83 million. Alberta Transportation will contribute up to $21.1 million and the City of Airdrie is allocating about $62 million.

I hope that it won’t be already inadequate by the time it’s opened. When the “rathole” (QE2/Yankee Valley Blvd) was reconstructed and improved, it almost immediately became inadequate to handle the traffic as the city continue to grow between the announcement and the completion.

Note that the 40th avenue interchange is only a partial one. A full interchange is in the plans to be built a little further south at some point.

[Rollerstud98]

I kinda miss the ole rat hole. Not from a traffic standpoint but it was need with the cliffs on both sides of it and the southbound on ramp dug in to the cliffs. 40th ave will be busyvfrom the start as a lot of coopers, wind song, prairie springs and hillside or whatever that hood is callled, plus south pointe will probably jump to that now. Maybe even a good chunk of luxstone, bayside as well. 8th street should improve at that time but hopefully with the circle going in it will be better already.

[Corndogger]

I actually go as fast as 120 sometimes if it's not too congested and others are doing nearly that because I'm in the left lane. What is more scary than that is people that are now going 80-90 as they're not only an obstacle but will give the city bad ideas.

People start ignoring the construction limits because either they are too low given where the work is (well out of the danger of traffic), they signs are up but there is no workers in sight anywhere and there is no added danger to drivers, or if it appears to not be being enforced. Yet they can have a crew come and do some short one day work ON a road right in the middle of it and they probably won't lower the speed limit because i guess they don't matter as much.

People driving <90 should be ticketed for impeding the flow of traffic if conditions warrant driving near the speed limit. Sadly, the City doesn't believe in science when it comes to speed limits and physics.

[Corndogger]

For anyone that was wondering this is what I meant by me being nervous.

Whether or not congested, the road is usually full to the point where if you are in the wrong lane good luck getting into the one you need. It may not often be so badly over designed capacity that it jams to a halt, but it is over capacity to the point where the road design is incredibly dangerous all things considered.

Deerfoot is grossly overcapacity--no one denies that other than road-hating people such as Druh. The design of the road is horrible and often confusing for drivers not familiar with it. If this were the U.S. the entire stretch of Highway 2 through Calgary would be 5+1 lanes and damn near every interchange would have been rebuilt years ago.

[Corndogger]

Unpopular idea in Alberta: Spend the money when times are tough rather than save it until times are good. What is good enough today will be an obstacle for tomorrow's (whenever that may be) recovered economy.

Remember that this work would largely start 2-3 years from now and take a good 2-3 years. that would be 2025-2026. I expect things for this province will either be better by then or so bad we will have all left...

A lot of people support that idea but some think that major infrastructure projects need to be treated as if they were household purchases. If Milo had been around here 15 years ago or so he would be supporting building now as well. Back during the last major economic downturn that lasted awhile we built next to no infrastructure. Then when boom times returned we spent like triple the amount to get about half the infrastructure which was beyond stupid. We need to be building when costs are low so we can get more bang for our bucks. Good infrastructure also attracts businesses, etc. so it needs to be in place for when the economy starts to improve.

[Corndogger]

You say this like those are bad things? God forbid they do something to make streets a little nicer in residential areas. They aren't freeways.

Speed bumps, etc. make streets nicer? No they don't. Where do you live that residential streets are freeways? Where I live the streets are very narrow--it's just about impossible for two cars to pass each other. No one is going to speed down such streets.


Baseless hyperbole. They have maps showing where the speeds limits would change and it's all in low volume residential streets. The major roads to get you in and out of a community are unchanged.

No, it's the truth. Drive around and you can't help but notice it.

Even with all these changes, driving is still the most efficient way to get around the City, because all the major thoroughfares are still there to get you around quickly. If they wanted driving to be unpleasant, they wouldn't have spent the last 5 years building a ton of interchanges on major roads, or widened a bunch of roads to connect to the ring road, or upgraded old roads.

If you want to see a concerted effort to discourage driving, go look at the Metro Vancouver area. Calgary is the complete opposite of that.

Now that the City has control over speed limits that's quickly changing. Yeah, the City has done some building over the last five years but a number of those projects were driven by other parties. The province forced the City to build the connectors into the S.W. portion of 201. I distinctly remember the City making a big stink about that at first until their hand was forced. Druh and her gang were vehemently opposed to spending a single cent on connecting to an evil freeway.

If you want some good examples of speed limits being dropped on major roads take a drive on Crowchild. The area down by Glenmore is down to 70 even though they just improved the road. If you're driving southbound on Crowchild the speed limit has been dropped to 70 BEFORE you hit 24 Ave. NW. That always used to happen AFTER you had crossed 24 Ave. If that's not bad enough there's a sort of hidden speed camera before you go through 24 Ave. Complete dick move. But the best of all is the newly completed stretch over the Bow River. We finally get extra lanes and much safer entrances and exits onto and off of the road and they lower the speed limit to 60! The speed should be 80 and that's what 90% of drivers are doing. I contacted the City about this and was told that because they added a lane the speed has to stay at 60. How can you defend such nonsense or deny that the City is going out of their way to make driving unpleasant? Just because they haven't reached Vancouver levels yet doesn't mean that's not what they're aiming for.

[Corndogger]

LOL. Having lived in Vancouver, this comment is so ridiculous. Calgary is an absolute nirvana for car drivers. You have no idea how good you have it, but you still need to complain about things that are so trivial.

No, my comment is not ridiculous. The time to stop Calgary from becoming as bad as Vancouver is now not when it's too late to do anything about it. We might have it good compared to Vancouver but that doesn't mean that it's actually good.

[Corndogger]

Calgary does have 'pain points', but for the overall network, it is the best in the country.

Our goal should be to remove those "pain points" not compare ourselves to Vancouver and become complacent.

[Corndogger]

I hope that it won’t be already inadequate by the time it’s opened. When the “rathole” (QE2/Yankee Valley Blvd) was reconstructed and improved, it almost immediately became inadequate to handle the traffic as the city continue to grow between the announcement and the completion.

Note that the 40th avenue interchange is only a partial one. A full interchange is in the plans to be built a little further south at some point.

Where are you seeing that this is only going to be a partial interchange? I know about a year ago that's what the province was proposing to do but the cost was much lower. Is $83 million not enough to build the complete interchange?

As a bit of a side note, anyone else find it strange that Airdrie is being asked to fund over 75% of this project? If it's that far down the province's priority list what is higher? What about the Cochrane interchange project? Will we see an announcement soon so that project can proceed next year?

[Rollerstud98]

Where are you seeing that this is only going to be a partial interchange? I know about a year ago that's what the province was proposing to do but the cost was much lower. Is $83 million not enough to build the complete interchange?

As a bit of a side note, anyone else find it strange that Airdrie is being asked to fund over 75% of this project? If it's that far down the province's priority list what is higher? What about the Cochrane interchange project? Will we see an announcement soon so that project can proceed next year?

I think it is too close to the Yankee valley Blvd interchange to have a full interchange. Don’t want it to end up like McKnight/64th. But you are right, last time I heard about it the city was willing to fork over 50% at $30,000,000.00. So cost has increased by quite a bit. This now defunds the yankee valley/cpr underpass as they were taking money from that to help expedite the 40th ave over pass.

[milomilo]

Is it? Damn near every road has curb extensions at every intersection, there's speed bumps, etc. littering every residential neighborhood, they want to lower the speed limit down to school zone speed nearly everywhere, and they're lowering speed limits on major roads. The City is doing all it can to make driving so unpleasant that people give up and use a different mode of transportation. The province never should have given the City the power to control speed limits. If the UCP wants to score some easy political points they should rip up the City Charters given to Edmonton and Calgary and put both cities back on three-year election cycles if not two. In the big scheme of things elections are dirt cheap.

Yes, this post just amplified the intensity of hyperbole, it's completely disconnected from reality.


Making the changes you say the city is doing would not cause gridlock, it would do the opposite, it would reduce congestion. This should be obvious if you consider the upstream and downstream effects. On the other hand, increasing the capacity of Deerfoot would increase congestion city wide.
Unless I live in a different Calgary to you, your complaint about every road having curb extensions etc is not even close to true. They've done this in a relatively small number of places, and where they have done it I don't see how improving the safety of pedestrians is a bad thing
As a driver, I'm not a huge fan of the proposed speed decreases and find the reasoning quite illogical often, and think it will have little effect. School zones in particular are moronic policy. But this hardly represents a war on cars, and the intended effect of increased safety is hardly a bad thing (most people, myself included, would actually consider fewer accidents a good thing)
The province taking control of all roads would completely go against the UCP, and population's principles of government being in the hands of the local population. If people don't like the decisions council is making, they can vote them out.

[milomilo]

No, my comment is not ridiculous. The time to stop Calgary from becoming as bad as Vancouver is now not when it's too late to do anything about it. We might have it good compared to Vancouver but that doesn't mean that it's actually good.

Our goal should be to remove those "pain points" not compare ourselves to Vancouver and become complacent.

Have you ever left this city? Driving in Calgary is a breeze, it would not surprise me at all if the average speeds compare very favourably to most similar sized cities in North America, and definitely across the world.

[milomilo]

Ya’ll are talking like the sole reason to improve Deerfoot Trail (and other major roadways in the city) is economic benefit. But I think the safety benefit is (or should be) right up there. I live in Airdrie now and rarely drive on Deerfoot because I am nervous to be on that highway. I hear about so many accidents and traffic back ups that I don’t want to potentially be part of that.q

Any safety benefit is an economic benefit that can be accounted for. But that's a red herring, as the safety of Deerfoot is fine. Any increase in capacity will just mean more cars on the road and more accidents, more pollution, and worse public health.

So the question would remain; would the cost of upgrading Deerfoot + the negative externalities be less than the economic benefit of building it? Seeing as I don't remember any company saying they would have moved to Calgary were it not for the congestion (lol), and no-one is expecting the number of people commuting by car to downtown to rise above pre-2014 levels any time soon, that seems doubtful.

[Corndogger]

Any safety benefit is an economic benefit that can be accounted for. But that's a red herring, as the safety of Deerfoot is fine. Any increase in capacity will just mean more cars on the road and more accidents, more pollution, and worse public health.

So the question would remain; would the cost of upgrading Deerfoot + the negative externalities be less than the economic benefit of building it? Seeing as I don't remember any company saying they would have moved to Calgary were it not for the congestion (lol), and no-one is expecting the number of people commuting by car to downtown to rise above pre-2014 levels any time soon, that seems doubtful.

Adding capacity to a road that's already more than double over capacity is not going to necessarily result in more cars, accidents, etc. It will make the road safer because traffic will be able to flow more freely and with upgraded interchanges exiting and entering the freeway will be much safer. It's why such projects are done.

Some companies definitely factor in congestion. Congestion costs a lot of money and impacts competitiveness.

[YYCguys]

Where are you seeing that this is only going to be a partial interchange? I know about a year ago that's what the province was proposing to do but the cost was much lower. Is $83 million not enough to build the complete interchange?

As a bit of a side note, anyone else find it strange that Airdrie is being asked to fund over 75% of this project? If it's that far down the province's priority list what is higher? What about the Cochrane interchange project?

Not sure if this will be viewable, but this is from the City of Airdrie website:

https://www.airdrie.ca/getDocument.cfm?ID=7023

Or this from Airdrie CityView newspaper today:

https://www.airdrietoday.com/local-news/kenney-pledges-211-million-toward-40th-ave-interchange-2796021

[milomilo]

Adding capacity to a road that's already more than double over capacity is not going to necessarily result in more cars, accidents, etc. It will make the road safer because traffic will be able to flow more freely and with upgraded interchanges exiting and entering the freeway will be much safer. It's why such projects are done.

Some companies definitely factor in congestion. Congestion costs a lot of money and impacts competitiveness.

Capacity is a fairly meaningless term with roads. Deerfoot handles a certain amount of cars every day, it's not like they are turned away. Therefore it has at least as much capacity as the number of cars it carries.

Regardless, the effects of public health of road building can be estimated and added to the economic case. Unfortunately for your argument tbough, the net health benefit of road building will likely be negative. If we care about public health, it's probably better spent on hospitals than roads.

[Corndogger]

Not sure if this will be viewable, but this is from the City of Airdrie website:

https://www.airdrie.ca/getDocument.cfm?ID=7023

Or this from Airdrie CityView newspaper today:

https://www.airdrietoday.com/local-news/kenney-pledges-211-million-toward-40th-ave-interchange-2796021

I see what you mean by partial interchange but now I'm really confused why this would cost $83 million even including $10 million for land acquisition. Looks like a basic bridge to me with two simple ramps.

[MalcolmTucker]

Because it is a wide and long (will need to span at least ten lanes) bridge over an active corridor.

Plus two more bridges for crossing the cpr and Main Street. The costs don’t seem out of line to me.

[Rollerstud98]

Because it is a wide and long (will need to span at least ten lanes) bridge over an active corridor.

Plus two more bridges for crossing the cpr and Main Street. The costs don’t seem out of line to me.

It is already built over the tracks. That portion has been open for a few years now.

[Corndogger]

It is already built over the tracks. That portion has been open for a few years now.

I watched the entire announcement ceremony on YouTube last evening. If I heard correctly, the mayor said that the engineering studies for the interchange were done back in 2014. Do you know if the $83 million cost is based on 2014 figures or 2020 figures? I had another look at the diagrams floating around for this project and just can't see why this should cost so much given how basic it looks. Is there something else being done in conjunction with this project such as upgrading some local roads leading into it?

[Pegasus]

I watched the entire announcement ceremony on YouTube last evening. If I heard correctly, the mayor said that the engineering studies for the interchange were done back in 2014. Do you know if the $83 million cost is based on 2014 figures or 2020 figures? I had another look at the diagrams floating around for this project and just can't see why this should cost so much given how basic it looks. Is there something else being done in conjunction with this project such as upgrading some local roads leading into it?

$83 million does look a bit steep. The 162 Ave SW Macleod Trail interchange cost $78 million (completed in 2017) but it is a converging diamond which entails 2 bridges (8 lanes) over 6 lanes of traffic and a slip road. It was a complex design and also involved 4 new ramps to/from Macleod trail and extensive changes to the 162 Ave/Sun Valley Blvd approach roads. I don't know if the basket weave bridge to Shawville Blvd was also included in this cost.

According to the CBC article 4 interchanges were opened in 2017 at a combined cost of $255 million - or an average of $64 million each!

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/diverging-diamond-interchange-opens-calgary-1.4245773

[YYCguys]

I watched the entire announcement ceremony on YouTube last evening. If I heard correctly, the mayor said that the engineering studies for the interchange were done back in 2014. Do you know if the $83 million cost is based on 2014 figures or 2020 figures? I had another look at the diagrams floating around for this project and just can't see why this should cost so much given how basic it looks. Is there something else being done in conjunction with this project such as upgrading some local roads leading into it?

A new storm pond and realignment of Nose Creek. There doesn’t appear to be much else being done, but what do I know! I’m just a regular Joe Q. Public.

[Corndogger]

A new storm pond and realignment of Nose Creek. There doesn’t appear to be much else being done, but what do I know! I’m just a regular Joe Q. Public.

$10 million of the cost is for land acquisition but I'm pretty sure land costs, etc. are always included in these projects.

[N McCity]

Speed bumps, etc. make streets nicer? No they don't. Where do you live that residential streets are freeways? Where I live the streets are very narrow--it's just about impossible for two cars to pass each other. No one is going to speed down such streets.



No, it's the truth. Drive around and you can't help but notice it.



Now that the City has control over speed limits that's quickly changing. Yeah, the City has done some building over the last five years but a number of those projects were driven by other parties. The province forced the City to build the connectors into the S.W. portion of 201. I distinctly remember the City making a big stink about that at first until their hand was forced. Druh and her gang were vehemently opposed to spending a single cent on connecting to an evil freeway.

If you want some good examples of speed limits being dropped on major roads take a drive on Crowchild. The area down by Glenmore is down to 70 even though they just improved the road. If you're driving southbound on Crowchild the speed limit has been dropped to 70 BEFORE you hit 24 Ave. NW. That always used to happen AFTER you had crossed 24 Ave. If that's not bad enough there's a sort of hidden speed camera before you go through 24 Ave. Complete dick move. But the best of all is the newly completed stretch over the Bow River. We finally get extra lanes and much safer entrances and exits onto and off of the road and they lower the speed limit to 60! The speed should be 80 and that's what 90% of drivers are doing. I contacted the City about this and was told that because they added a lane the speed has to stay at 60. How can you defend such nonsense or deny that the City is going out of their way to make driving unpleasant? Just because they haven't reached Vancouver levels yet doesn't mean that's not what they're aiming for.

It’s not the lowing of speed limits on residential streets but how much the usual suspects wanted to lower them. I live in a community with speed cushions, yeah they don’t do anything but destroy our cars faster and I think that’s the point. What else does a couple rows of bumps on a long street do where people either don’t slow down for them or slow down for them but immediately accelerate for the rest of the road?

I’m glad you mentioned Crowchild. I freaked out the first day I went on there and saw 70 at the south end. And then 60 over Bow like WTF Calgary. And you can bet they’ll see that we’re all still doing 80-90 (save for your usual 10 under slowpoke corollas) and set up some photo radar bugger to basically tax us for trying to get somewhere in a decent amount of time. If the 70 portion is because of the bus and that in/out, get rid of the in/out and spend the $$$ to make a proper way for the bus to drive on there.

The difference between here and Vancouver is if they make driving that bad here there is no alternative. We have trains that slow down every time they cross a street, busses that don’t go where you need them to, a few bike paths for the half of the year it’s too cold to use them and then snow storm after snow storm where it takes days for anything to be done with their fake snowplow trucks (a real plow has its plowing blade mounted on the front rather than underneath which gives about the same effect a butter knife does when it spreads butter). Slow 10 under driving seems to be more of an issue here too. I like to call it the Corolla Virus which is just a great thing to have when they lower a speed limit and some resist and others go 10 under. Yikes!

While on the topic of Crowchild, anyone know when the city is gonna come back and make the Glenmore a double turn like it was supposed to be by the time 201 connected to it? I’m using that now and it would be nice it they would come and convert it to one.

[N McCity]

Any safety benefit is an economic benefit that can be accounted for. But that's a red herring, as the safety of Deerfoot is fine. Any increase in capacity will just mean more cars on the road and more accidents, more pollution, and worse public health.

So the question would remain; would the cost of upgrading Deerfoot + the negative externalities be less than the economic benefit of building it? Seeing as I don't remember any company saying they would have moved to Calgary were it not for the congestion (lol), and no-one is expecting the number of people commuting by car to downtown to rise above pre-2014 levels any time soon, that seems doubtful.

This is an understandable but simplistic approach.

More cars on a road does not mean more accidents if the margin for error is increased or the likelihood of error is decreased. This is like saying more planes in the sky means more crashes per year which over the last many decades has not been the case, again, because the designing of them was improved to reduce risk more than the increase of risk due to numbers. Many crashes on Deerfoot honestly aren’t due to number of lanes as much as really bad and dangerous designs. Where lanes is the problem is as it stands right now even off peak every day it is hard to maintain the proper spacing between cars at highway speeds and allow for people to move lanes. Any portion that is 8 lanes and isn’t one of the known bad weave points flows much better. Another factor is that people naturally seem to slow down when there is a lot of cars beside and in front of them even when they don’t need to.

The adding of lanes is not directly proportional to the adding of traffic; if this were the case, Crowchild, most of Glenmore, and any other 6 lane freeway would have comparable numbers but they don’t. Everybody that uses Deerfoot now will be the ones still using it if it was fixed because, as you say, it doesn’t turn people away... unless it has a traffic jam. Is it going to attract more traffic because of widening? I don’t see that as it will still serve the same areas and nowhere else. Anyone who uses it now uses it as the best route to get where they are going. Anyone who doesn’t use it now doesn’t use it because it is out of the way.

Economic benefit is a funny thing. What is the economic benefit of building anything if the industries that this city exists for are dead in the water. And yet we continue to build; we build for the future (in an ideal world because yeah half done jobs are a thing). You have to spend the money now when things are bad to create an attractive place to industries either revive themselves or more realistically at this point attract new ones. If we are talking about pre2014, the Green Line as conceived in that timeframe, since that, it’s economic benefit has declined as with the economy itself, and the costs have risen at the same time. Does that mean that whole project is just not worth it as well?

The problem is that many don’t want to be seen spending money in a tough time because most of the population only understands economics on a household level and the others don’t want to be caught cutting back when times are good like they are supposed to because again that is contrary to what we are used to.

I’m not saying make this place into Houston. All I want to see is Deerfoot get fixed, Glenmore have maybe no traffic lights and be fixed just before and after the causeway, Crowchild be completed with a consistent 80 speed limit, and MacLeod section by Lake Fraser Gate be fixed. That’s all this city needs for big roads. Just consistency in what’s already there. If we can’t get our act together and build good, fast trains, what else are we to do?

[Pegasus]

Unfortunately traffic calming measures are being used as (expensive) long term solutions for short term problems. Examples:

Evergreen/Shawnee - traffic calming was installed on a number of roads when Macleod trail was being widened over Fish Creek and many people were taking a short cut through the communities

Midnapore - Midlake Blvd was busy while the 162 Ave overpass was being built. Now the overpass is complete and the Stoney Trail/Macleod Trail intersection (almost) complete why would anyone short cut along a road that has one of the city's longest playground zones.

[milomilo]

This is an understandable but simplistic approach.

More cars on a road does not mean more accidents if the margin for error is increased or the likelihood of error is decreased. This is like saying more planes in the sky means more crashes per year which over the last many decades has not been the case, again, because the designing of them was improved to reduce risk more than the increase of risk due to numbers. Many crashes on Deerfoot honestly aren’t due to number of lanes as much as really bad and dangerous designs. Where lanes is the problem is as it stands right now even off peak every day it is hard to maintain the proper spacing between cars at highway speeds and allow for people to move lanes. Any portion that is 8 lanes and isn’t one of the known bad weave points flows much better. Another factor is that people naturally seem to slow down when there is a lot of cars beside and in front of them even when they don’t need to.

The adding of lanes is not directly proportional to the adding of traffic; if this were the case, Crowchild, most of Glenmore, and any other 6 lane freeway would have comparable numbers but they don’t. Everybody that uses Deerfoot now will be the ones still using it if it was fixed because, as you say, it doesn’t turn people away... unless it has a traffic jam. Is it going to attract more traffic because of widening? I don’t see that as it will still serve the same areas and nowhere else. Anyone who uses it now uses it as the best route to get where they are going. Anyone who doesn’t use it now doesn’t use it because it is out of the way.

Economic benefit is a funny thing. What is the economic benefit of building anything if the industries that this city exists for are dead in the water. And yet we continue to build; we build for the future (in an ideal world because yeah half done jobs are a thing). You have to spend the money now when things are bad to create an attractive place to industries either revive themselves or more realistically at this point attract new ones. If we are talking about pre2014, the Green Line as conceived in that timeframe, since that, it’s economic benefit has declined as with the economy itself, and the costs have risen at the same time. Does that mean that whole project is just not worth it as well?

The problem is that many don’t want to be seen spending money in a tough time because most of the population only understands economics on a household level and the others don’t want to be caught cutting back when times are good like they are supposed to because again that is contrary to what we are used to.

I’m not saying make this place into Houston. All I want to see is Deerfoot get fixed, Glenmore have maybe no traffic lights and be fixed just before and after the causeway, Crowchild be completed with a consistent 80 speed limit, and MacLeod section by Lake Fraser Gate be fixed. That’s all this city needs for big roads. Just consistency in what’s already there. If we can’t get our act together and build good, fast trains, what else are we to do?

Increasing capacity (which is what even claimed safety improvements will do) not only increases cars on that road, it increases them city wide. Unless there is some particularly dangerous intersection - which we should have statistics for - then it isn't unlikely that all the other negative health effects of putting more cars on the road would be greater than health benefit of that increase in capacity. My point is, if you are going to use the safety argument, then it probably does not come up in favour of upgrading roads.

I'm someone that drives 40,000km a year and virtually never takes transit. I'd be happy if some roads got upgraded. But money is a thing and budgets are screwed right now, and these road upgrades are expensive and only end up needing more money down the line as they increase the number of cars on the road. Unless we can get federal dollars, then any dollar spent on roads is a dollar that cannot be spent productively by a Calgarian or an Albertan. So the economic case must be made that the road upgrade would give enough boost to the economy that it would outweigh the productivity that the private sector would have generated had the money not been taken from them. And given that Calgary is probably the easiest city to drive in in Canada, or the world, then it doesn't seem to me that road upgrades would give us much of an economic boost.

I wouldn't support stopping all road upgrades, it's best to keep the skills in the economy going otherwise when we do need them it will be more expensive, causing a boom and bust sort of situation. But, short of significant federal funds, I don't think it wise to start any megaprojects. There is no urgent need, Calgary will still function just as fine as today in 5 years time if no road upgrades are done.

[craner]

That is some bizarre logic there milo, particularly this:

“then any dollar spent on roads is a dollar that cannot be spent productively by a Calgarian or an Albertan. So the economic case must be made that the road upgrade would give enough boost to the economy that it would outweigh the productivity that the private sector would have generated had the money not been taken from them.“

[milomilo]

It's 100% accurate and is the question that should be applied to any public spending. If you think that is bizarre logic then I don't think we can ever agree on anything.

[craner]

It's 100% accurate and is the question that should be applied to any public spending. If you think that is bizarre logic then I don't think we can ever agree on anything.

Well I wouldn't say we can never agree on anything - I agree with many of your posts and I would say I’m completely aligned with your views on the Green Line LRT.

For the topic at hand, what I’m not clear on is how investing in road infrastructure equates to taking money away from private citizens and/or the private sector. Are you saying taxes could be reduced ?

[Mazrim]

I’m glad you mentioned Crowchild. I freaked out the first day I went on there and saw 70 at the south end. And then 60 over Bow like WTF Calgary. And you can bet they’ll see that we’re all still doing 80-90 (save for your usual 10 under slowpoke corollas) and set up some photo radar bugger to basically tax us for trying to get somewhere in a decent amount of time. If the 70 portion is because of the bus and that in/out, get rid of the in/out and spend the $$$ to make a proper way for the bus to drive on there.

Here's my thoughts on what seems to have happened on Crowchild:
- Adding more lanes in a tight space
- Minimal shoulders
- Tighter curves
- Lots of barriers, so probably some sight distance issues
- Lots of entrances and exits

By today's design standards, these are all probably why the speed limit is what it is now. When you change a road, you're required to make sure it matches modern standards, even in a retrofit situation. There are always exceptions, but I'm guessing there were too many here to keep things as they were.

Don't like it? Stop suing the city every time you get in an accident.

[milomilo]

Here's my thoughts on what seems to have happened on Crowchild:
- Adding more lanes in a tight space
- Minimal shoulders
- Tighter curves
- Lots of barriers, so probably some sight distance issues
- Lots of entrances and exits

By today's design standards, these are all probably why the speed limit is what it is now. When you change a road, you're required to make sure it matches modern standards, even in a retrofit situation. There are always exceptions, but I'm guessing there were too many here to keep things as they were.

Don't like it? Stop suing the city every time you get in an accident.

The new speed limits are not a big deal to me. Yes it would be nice if it were 80 or 100 all the way through, but short of rebuilding the bridge completely that isn't feasible, it definitely is not up to new build 100km/h freeway standards despite being a vast improvement. As for the new limit at the south end, who cares? It's like a few 100 meters before or after you were going slow anyway.

[milomilo]

Well I wouldn't say we can never agree on anything - I agree with many of your posts and I would say I’m completely aligned with your views on the Green Line LRT.

For the topic at hand, what I’m not clear on is how investing in road infrastructure equates to taking money away from private citizens and/or the private sector. Are you saying taxes could be reduced ?

Well yes, any money the provincial or city government spends is money it takes from taxes or borrowing. Say you spend a billion on Deerfoot, split 50:50 between province and city, that's about $120 per Albertan and $333 per Calgarian's city contribution, so $453 per Calgarian total. That's money they could have spent in the economy that they are prevented from by upgrading Deerfoot.

Of course, spending the money does go back into the economy when you are paying construction workers and buying materials etc. But unless the project actually makes the economy work significantly better then it's unlikely that the government spending money will add more to the economy than the private sector spending it.

This is why I was so pissed off at the Green Line proponents using a CBR of 0.8 to say the Green Line was worth building. Using the government's own numbers, the Green Line makes us 20c poorer for every dollar we spend. So the most fiscally prudent thing to do would be to not build it at all, assuming the numbers were correct, which they weren't as the cost benefit analysis was incomplete.

[MalcolmTucker]

Waiting until congestion is bad enough to make business cases positive isn't a good way to go either.



Also, I doubt those business cases used the current debt financing yield curve for NPV instead of an arbitrarily assigned number or a forecast (which have been historically off in one direction, higher, for the past 10 years at least).



And finally: not everything needs a positive business case, because we cannot accurately assess all benefits of infrastructure, and we cannot accurately assess all costs of not building infrastructure.

[milomilo]

Waiting until congestion is bad enough to make business cases positive isn't a good way to go either.



Also, I doubt those business cases used the current debt financing yield curve for NPV instead of an arbitrarily assigned number or a forecast (which have been historically off in one direction, higher, for the past 10 years at least).



And finally: not everything needs a positive business case, because we cannot accurately assess all benefits of infrastructure, and we cannot accurately assess all costs of not building infrastructure.

That's all true and fair, but if we are talking about road infrastructure in Calgary for the next few years specifically, is the case overwhelming? It does not appear so to me, particularly given the state of both the City and Province's finances. For Deerfoot specifically, we are also building the Green Line, and the business case for either will be lessened with the construction of the other.

[MalcolmTucker]

For me for roads it falls down to:

deerfoot debottlenecking: yes, probably good

deerfoot 4 laning for the entire length: probably not worth it


A consideration also for me is that roads are mostly a user pay system, bound by a quasi social contract between road users and the government. Sure the funds are fungible, readily transferable to other uses. But until we want to break down that tight relationship, we should tread lightly.



I also don't think the province's finances are in such a bad shape that we need to start thinking like the province needs to adopt structural adjustment type austerity. Our government spending as a percentage of GDP is under control, and lower than every other province.