Calgary Roads

[Ferreth]

I would think that Deerfoot has more to do with it having way more traffic than any other road in the city. Not only more traffic, but also at a higher speed, which creates more heat on the road, hence it melts and clears faster.

Stoney Trail however, doesn't have near as much traffic, so I would think that if it is clear it is the result of better grading or sanding.

Nice try. I would say at 6:30 in the morning is the key time that I compare. The city's assertion that "we couldn't get out in time" or "there was too much traffic to get around" don't apply yet. I consistently see more work done on Deerfoot than major roads at that time of the day. Barlow Tr. south at that time has lots of traffic - lots of people in the industrial areas seem to get in early, yet it's worse for wear despite all the road tires pushing snow around and heating up the road. Yeah, it's not as fast, but IMO I don't think that makes enough of a difference. The sand all over Deerfoot on colder days suggests recent work too, which would've been thrown to the sides of the road once enough cars have past. I have no doubt about more ploughing on the Deerfoot - cars just don't do a good job pushing piles of snow to the side of the road :D The contrast is dramatic - I see *no* evidence of any snow clearing from the city in my morning commute, despite in some cases of several hours having been available since the snow, yet Deerfoot, while not perfect, is much better having had snow pushed aside, sand applied, or salt applied (quite obvious with the wholly wet road vs. the icy tracks on the city streets). The comments about unions rules preventing the city from getting out equipment and staff was interesting - if this is true, the City should totally be communicating this and transfer some of the flack they have been getting to the union(s).

I can only speak to the area of Deerfoot I see at the times of day I drive it - that's why I'm interested in what other people are seeing to get an overall sense of if Deerfoot is being better maintained that City maintained roads.

Interesting comments about highways. I've always thought that highways were a different beast and just expected them to be non-drivable for a few days of the year in very bad conditions. But with the populations out in the bedroom communities now, perhaps the Province needs to step things up a notch and maintain those connections to Calgary to the same "showpiece" standards as the city section of Deerfoot.

[mersar]

How far outside the city are you talking? I've heard and read a lot of people saying that Volker Stevin does a much better job than the City of Calgary on the roads around Okotoks and area.

I'd agree with them as well. Coming in on Highway 1A from Cochrane after a snowfall the lanes and usually 90% of the shoulder are usually clear of pretty much any trace of snow until you hit 12 mile coulee road where the city starts taking care of Crowchild (this change, granted it is relatively low traffic area, is always visible as the lanes are then snow packed usually at least to Stoney and only past there do they tend to start to be bare again). Part of it may also be due to the equipment being used, the city doesn't have many (if any?) trucks with front plows, most of their trucks are all the smaller plows mounted under the truck which barely move much snow.

[lubicon]

Interesting tidbit. I was talking to one of the mom's on my daughter's hockey team. Her residential street was just plowed the other day and is now in fantastic driving condition. Coincidentally she lives on the same street as Steven Harper who is back in town for the holidays.

And no, I have absolutely no problem with this.

[Nudrock]

Interesting tidbit. I was talking to one of the mom's on my daughter's hockey team. Her residential street was just plowed the other day and is now in fantastic driving condition. Coincidentally she lives on the same street as Steven Harper who is back in town for the holidays.

And no, I have absolutely no problem with this.


Probably done for security reasons.

[lubicon]

Probably done for security reasons.

Bingo.

[Bigtime]

Breaking News on Twitter

CTVCalgary: BREAKING NEWS: Agreement to pursue funding between City of Calgary and Calgary Airport Authority reached for new tunnel. #yyc

CITYBEAT - CITY OF CALGARY PRESS RELEASE
-----------------------------------------------------------------

The City of Calgary and The Calgary Airport Authority have
reached an agreement to pursue funding for the 96 Avenue
tunnel and road network connecting Airport Trail to Métis
Trail.

The agreement sees the two parties contribute $90 million
towards the tunnel’s $287 million cost as part of a multi
-partner funding proposal with the provincial and federal
governments. Mayor Dave Bronconnier will lead efforts to
secure $98.6 million each from the provincial and federal
governments by March 1, 2010.

The City will design and build the tunnel and take over
ongoing maintenance once the project is constructed.

“This agreement confirms The City’s commitment to enhance the
northeast road network for Calgarians,” said Mayor
Bronconnier.

“The extension of Airport Trail was part of our Plan It
Calgary discussions and part of our long range plan. City
Council has already committed our share of funding for this
tunnel that will support traffic movement before the airport
builds a vital new runway.”

Garth Atkinson, president and CEO of The Calgary Airport
Authority, said the Authority is pleased to support The City
of Calgary as it moves forward in its discussions with the
federal and provincial governments regarding funding for the
Airport Trail extension.

“We are on track with the parallel runway project and timing
is now critical if the Airport Trail extension is to be
constructed at the same time as the runway,” said Atkinson.
“Called by some the most important 14,000 feet in Alberta,
this new runway at YYC will keep Calgary connected to the
world and along with other airport expansion plans, ensure
that we have the capacity to support economic growth in
Alberta.”

The tunnel is intended to extend the existing portion of 96
Avenue eastward to 36 Street NE. It is the first phase of the
long-term project that includes construction of a new 14,000
-foot north-south runway and closure of Barlow Trail between
48 Avenue and Airport Road NE.

The new runway, which will be in service by 2014, is one
component of a $1.8 billion expansion of airport facilities
planned over the next six years. The schedule for the runway
project includes the closure, in April 2011, of a portion of
Barlow Trail between 48 Avenue and Airport Road NE. The
imminent closure of this section of road has initiated the
call from The City of Calgary to both levels of government to
define its ability to provide financial support for the
Airport Trail extension.

-30-

[mersar]

And just have to comment on my previous comment about snow removal and that lane on Crowchild. It still hasn't been plowed (at least as of last night) and it seemed someone finally wasn't paying attention and drove up the snowbank and I suspect rolled their car (you could see the scrape marks in the snow bank, then they just eased off but no sign that the car was pulled back or sideways out of it). I went through there last night as the last two tow trucks were just picking up their pylons after they had cleaned up the mess that was left.

[mersar]

Breaking News on Twitter

CTVCalgary: BREAKING NEWS: Agreement to pursue funding between City of Calgary and Calgary Airport Authority reached for new tunnel. #yyc

Wow... great to see this. It isn't a completely done deal since they still need to convince the upper 2 levels of government to kick in funding but its a very significant step for sure.

[You Need A Thneed]

Awesome news on the tunnel. Getting the Airport Authority's support is going to help. Before, their stance was always "We're not going to pay for it," so it seems like they've come around, which will help the case to get funding from the province and the feds.

[Bigtime]

So the CAA will pay 45 million towards this tunnel, in addition to the 500 million the runway itself will cost. I think they are doing enough in this case.

[Corndogger]

Awesome news on the tunnel. Getting the Airport Authority's support is going to help. Before, their stance was always "We're not going to pay for it," so it seems like they've come around, which will help the case to get funding from the province and the feds.

The City designing and building the tunnel is not good news. They're the last people that should have anything to do with designing such a critical piece of infrastructure.

The City also needs to be convinced to drop any plans of downgrading Metis Trail.

[korzym]

I was thinking about this the other day, Mcloed trail and lake fraser gate should get this treatment, where traffic coming from fraser onto southbound mcloed, does so by way of merging lanes, so that at least one side of mcloed maintains free flowing traffic. It`s a compromise, cost effective idea
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a53/korzym/mcloedfraser.jpg

And this can be used to remedy countless other t-intersections in the city

[You Need A Thneed]

The City designing and building the tunnel is not good news. They're the last people that should have anything to do with designing such a critical piece of infrastructure.


Why would the city do a poor job designing the tunnel? Would it be structurally deficient? It wouldn't be designed by "the city" anyway, they'd get an engineering firm to do it.

Do you have any other examples of poorly designed infrastructure that the city has done - especially for something a relatively simple to figure out as this tunnel?

[greg_a]

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=51.028656,-114.052162&spn=0.060891,0.154324&t=h&z=13&layer=t

Google Maps now has traffic data for Crowchild the Deerfoot.

[mersar]

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=51.028656,-114.052162&spn=0.060891,0.154324&t=h&z=13&layer=t

Google Maps now has traffic data for Crowchild the Deerfoot.

Also looks like part of Glenmore and 16th Ave have it showing as well.

[automan]

Why would the city do a poor job designing the tunnel? Would it be structurally deficient? It wouldn't be designed by "the city" anyway, they'd get an engineering firm to do it.

Do you have any other examples of poorly designed infrastructure that the city has done - especially for something a relatively simple to figure out as this tunnel?

The problem with this city is there is little consistency. You never know whether you need to stay in the left or right lanes when coming to interchanges. Can they mess up a tunnel, I don't know? But... they could mess up the approaches and exits of the tunnel.

[korzym]

The City designing and building the tunnel is not good news. They're the last people that should have anything to do with designing such a critical piece of infrastructure.

The City also needs to be convinced to drop any plans of downgrading Metis Trail.

Why would the city do a poor job designing the tunnel? Would it be structurally deficient? It wouldn't be designed by "the city" anyway, they'd get an engineering firm to do it.

Do you have any other examples of poorly designed infrastructure that the city has done - especially for something a relatively simple to figure out as this tunnel?

Well for one, the airport's deal is with the federal government.

And second, if the feds design it, it means they pay for it.

[korzym]

I was thinking about this the other day, Mcloed trail and lake fraser gate should get this treatment, where traffic coming from fraser onto southbound mcloed, does so by way of merging lanes, so that at least one side of mcloed maintains free flowing traffic. It`s a compromise, cost effective idea
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a53/korzym/mcloedfraser.jpg

And this can be used to remedy countless other t-intersections in the city

Ah..found this patent, so here's another way of doing it:

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20050008432-0-large.jpg

note: this is something that actually is in the budget. but its not listed as getting an overpass, just "improvements". The second example I provided features a small bridge, but still you can get away with lights...and thats the direction the budget seems to be going in. The budget provides no details of the design, but I hope it incorporates some of the ideas I presented..southbound mcloed should absolutely be freeflow, no exceptions.

[Corndogger]

note: this is something that actually is in the budget. but its not listed as getting an overpass, just "improvements". The second example I provided features a small bridge, but still you can get away with lights...and thats the direction the budget seems to be going in. The budget provides no details of the design, but I hope it incorporates some of the ideas I presented..southbound mcloed should absolutely be freeflow, no exceptions.

The City needs to get out of this anti-road mindset they're stuck in and fix that area properly. MacLeod Trail needs to be freeflowing in both directions in this area and it wouldn't cost that much to do so.

[Corndogger]

Why would the city do a poor job designing the tunnel? Would it be structurally deficient? It wouldn't be designed by "the city" anyway, they'd get an engineering firm to do it.

Do you have any other examples of poorly designed infrastructure that the city has done - especially for something a relatively simple to figure out as this tunnel?

Are you sure all such projects are contracted? What the projects will entail definitely isn't and that is where the problem lies. The City constantly picks the option that was needed 20 years ago instead of what will be required to handle traffic for the next 30 years or so. I find it hard to believe any outside engineering firm that has been involved in designing roads as part of P3 projects for example, would advocate for merge and exit lanes that are much too short (don't meet standards; Shawnessy/MacLeod Trail interchange area had to be modified a year after it was built because they refused to listen to people), involve 5 (4?) sets of lights in five blocks (Glenmore/Elbow interchange area), a changing number of lanes on a major road (Deerfoot, which I'm sure was designed in house), etc.

Another recent example of a major structural screw-up which was done in house involved the Crowchild/50 Ave. interchange. One of the loop ramps had it's "slope" going the wrong direction (backward as if it was designed as part of a UK interchange) and it had to be redone at the last second before the interchange could open.

If there's a way to screw-up this tunnel the City will find a way to do it.

[Corndogger]

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=51.028656,-114.052162&spn=0.060891,0.154324&t=h&z=13&layer=t

Google Maps now has traffic data for Crowchild the Deerfoot.

Interesting that the section of Crowchild that has lights has no traffic data. Seems that way for other roads as well.

[Full Mountain]

Finally a reasonable article on the snow debate


The answer to city's snow job (http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion/answer+city+snow/2388143/story.html)
December 29, 2009

With the weather outside no longer frightful, city officials might be tempted to put the issue of snow-clearing on hold, until the next storm. They'd be wrong. This is exactly the breathing room needed to research ways of doing a better job.

The Herald editorial board decided to help. We phoned Carmacks Enterprises, the company contracted to clear Deerfoot Trail and Stoney Trail, both under provincial jurisdiction. Carmacks knows what it is doing, as evidenced by the fact its two roads were the only ones operating smoothly after the first storm in December.

Carmacks dispatches a heavy-duty, $250,000 plow for every 38 lane-kilometres. That adds up to 14 plows dedicated to the Deerfoot and 10 for the ring road. Carmacks enforces a bare and wet pavement standard -- a crucial distinction. Calgary plows, but doesn't remove snow until it piles up past a certain height or impedes traffic.

Carmacks, to keep roads at bare pavement, has trucks drive repeatedly over the territory, plowing, salting and sanding from the first snowflake until six hours or so after it stops snowing.

"After the snow event is over, you still have to watch it," says Phonse Morgan, the Carmacks project manager responsible for snow clearing on the Deerfoot and Stoney Trail. "If you have bare pavement and it's wet, and you're at -8 C or -9 C, you're going to have icy conditions if you let it go. You have to put salt or a sand-salt mixture."

The city's snow clearing response? At best, it takes five hours to clear a busy road once. The policy states: "our goal is to fully service each of our Priority One snow and ice control routes (i. e. roads with more than 20,000 vehicles per day) once every five hours."

That's FIVE hours of treachery, traffic and accidents.

Carmacks says the specification changes depending on the conditions, with wind, temperature and other factors determining what the response should be to keep the roads safe. The company's state-of-the-art trucks are computerized to determine the appropriate response, changing automatically according to conditions. Anyone can drive the vehicles with just a few hours training, says Morgan.

It's not that complicated. Yet, the more aldermen put their heads together, the more they fail to grasp the root of the problem is in the policy itself. Aldermen are throwing Band-Aid solutions at the issue, looking at smaller contractors to clear problem residential streets, and generally asking all the wrong questions.

For example, administration was asked if it could clear residential streets with another $14 million in the snow-clearing budget, roughly a 1.5 per cent tax increase. Transportation said it could plow residential roads a total of five times a year with that money; however, it wouldn't have enough left over to truck away the snow, rendering the plowing useless. The cost to plow and remove snow from residential roads, only twice a year, would jump to $88 million.

That's ridiculous. The city should be asking a company like Carmacks what it could do with that kind of money.

"Fourteen million dollars, I think would go a long ways," says Morgan. Depending on the winter, it could clear all Priority 1 routes to the pavement for a year.

"If we only end up with four or five snow events throughout the year, $14 million would probably be pretty accurate."

Morgan said an investment of 80 trucks would be needed for the 3,500 lane-kilometres in the Priority 1 routes. (The city has 100 trucks, but only 20 graders). He said his company would pay for the drivers and the trucks, but would charge the city a rate of between $120 and $130 an hour. The longer the contract with the city, the better the deal, he said.

If that's the case, contract out the city's snow clearing. Carmacks could do the major thoroughfares, while the city could do everything else, on its $24 million budget.

In typical Calgary fashion, city administration gave council an all-or-nothing choice last fall, when aldermen examined implementing a bare-roads policy. Council voted no after being told it would cost $100 million a year to keep all roads bare of snow all winter.

So, here's another choice. Clear only Priority 1 roads to the pavement, and plow and sweep the rest. Put the contract out to tender, giving companies like Carmacks the chance to make sure the job gets done properly. We've seen the best the city can do and it comes up short. Now it's time to try something innovative, and give private enterprise a turn.
© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald

[para transit fellow]

It seems to me that we have already had more than 5 snow events/snowdays.

[Aegis]

The City needs to get out of this anti-road mindset they're stuck in and fix that area properly. MacLeod Trail needs to be freeflowing in both directions in this area and it wouldn't cost that much to do so.

Actually, compared with 10 years ago, the City has vastly improved our road network. All of the new interchanges on crowchild, the GE5 project, the ring road, and deerfoot extension have dramatically reduced traffic congestion.

McLeod Trail will never be free-flowing because it's been designed as a commercial corridor with business access directly off the road. It's not in the City's plans, in any event.

Roads in Calgary are fine ; the infrastructure deficiency now is transit.

[mersar]

They've started on the intersection improvements on 12 Mile Coulee at Rockyvalley Drive NW, crews were out setting up the ground thawing heaters last night and you could smell it all over the area this afternoon (even just as you drove on Crowchild past 12 mile)

[Corndogger]

Actually, compared with 10 years ago, the City has vastly improved our road network. All of the new interchanges on crowchild, the GE5 project, the ring road, and deerfoot extension have dramatically reduced traffic congestion.

McLeod Trail will never be free-flowing because it's been designed as a commercial corridor with business access directly off the road. It's not in the City's plans, in any event.

Roads in Calgary are fine ; the infrastructure deficiency now is transit.

The work done in the last 10 years was an attempt to catch up for decades of doing very little, especially during the 1990s. Deerfoot and Stoney Trail work were done by the province and never would have been done by the City.

I realize all of MacLeod Trail will never be freeflowing but the section in question was designed to be so. The entire section up to Glenmore Trail should be made freeflow.

The roads in Calgary are anything but fine. The infrastructure deficiency is still in roads. We've spent way too much on transit in the past decade. Get rid of the anti-car policies in the core and you cut the transit budget by 70% and it would be fine. I could name several road projects that need to be done now and that would have a much bigger bang for our tax dollar than spending more on transit.

[mooky]

The roads in Calgary are anything but fine. The infrastructure deficiency is still in roads. We've spent way too much on transit in the past decade. Get rid of the anti-car policies in the core and you cut the transit budget by 70% and it would be fine. I could name several road projects that need to be done now and that would have a much bigger bang for our tax dollar than spending more on transit.

Don't buses use roads, aren't the two issues linked? At least in my small brain they are.

That said, get rid of the anti-transit policies into the core and cut funding to road projects by 70% and put it into transit and it would be fine. My anecdotal evidence trumps yours. All I'm saying here is, your simplifying the issue JUST a little bit.

[Aegis]

The work done in the last 10 years was an attempt to catch up for decades of doing very little, especially during the 1990s. Deerfoot and Stoney Trail work were done by the province and never would have been done by the City.

I realize all of MacLeod Trail will never be freeflowing but the section in question was designed to be so. The entire section up to Glenmore Trail should be made freeflow.

The roads in Calgary are anything but fine. The infrastructure deficiency is still in roads. We've spent way too much on transit in the past decade. Get rid of the anti-car policies in the core and you cut the transit budget by 70% and it would be fine. I could name several road projects that need to be done now and that would have a much bigger bang for our tax dollar than spending more on transit.

I don't agree with anti-car policies for the simple reason that the city depends on private vehicles. However, the deficiency is in transit. Most of the city is unserved by LRT, and bus service isn't close to convenient.

Most of the major road projects are complete now - I listed them off. A commuter has several free-flowing road options to go anywhere in the city - that is the definition of a decent road network.

I think you're just trying to rile up the greenwashed crowd.

[Stang]

They've started on the intersection improvements on 12 Mile Coulee at Rockyvalley Drive NW, crews were out setting up the ground thawing heaters last night and you could smell it all over the area this afternoon (even just as you drove on Crowchild past 12 mile)

Call me crazy, but I love that smell.

[craner]

I don't agree with anti-car policies for the simple reason that the city depends on private vehicles. However, the deficiency is in transit. Most of the city is unserved by LRT, and bus service isn't close to convenient.

Most of the major road projects are complete now - I listed them off. A commuter has several free-flowing road options to go anywhere in the city - that is the definition of a decent road network.

I think you're just trying to rile up the greenwashed crowd.

Where ?:shrug:

Deerfoot is the only one I can think of and it still needs work in spots (i.e Glenmore and Southland-Anderson where 4 lanes become 2:koko: ). The NE portion of Stoney is the only other significant stretch of road that is "free flow".
I do agree that the City and Province have done a lot of work to improve the situation in the last decade (which isn't over until the end of 2010 BTW but that is another issue) with the work on Deerfoot, Crowchild, Glenmore, & Stoney). But I also agree that much of this was catch-up from the 1990's.
I still think Crowchild and Glenmore need to become fully freeflow sooner rather than later, and a freeflow route be established accross the north part of the city (JLB-McKnight). I certainly don't want to see the transit budget slashed 70% as I would like the LRT to be expanded as well. I like the approch taken with the NW and West LRT lines where the major roads (Crowchild & Bow Trail) are improved at the same time as the LRT is expanded.

That's my $0.02 anyway.

Happy New Year to all ! :cheers:

[Aegis]

Where ?:shrug:

Deerfoot is the only one I can think of and it still needs work in spots (i.e Glenmore and Southland-Anderson where 4 lanes become 2:koko: ). The NE portion of Stoney is the only other significant stretch of road that is "free flow".
I do agree that the City and Province have done a lot of work to improve the situation in the last decade (which isn't over until the end of 2010 BTW but that is another issue) with the work on Deerfoot, Crowchild, Glenmore, & Stoney). But I also agree that much of this was catch-up from the 1990's.
I still think Crowchild and Glenmore need to become fully freeflow sooner rather than later, and a freeflow route be established accross the north part of the city (JLB-McKnight). I certainly don't want to see the transit budget slashed 70% as I would like the LRT to be expanded as well. I like the approch taken with the NW and West LRT lines where the major roads (Crowchild & Bow Trail) are improved at the same time as the LRT is expanded.

That's my $0.02 anyway.

Happy New Year to all ! :cheers:


OK - I didn't mean literally 100% freeflow. But, for example.. as someone who lives near the city's core, I can now drive to Deerfoot Meadows via Crowchild-Glenmore-Deerfoot much easier than before. Deerfoot handles North-South freeflow, The Ringroad allows a drive to go east-west with minimal disruption. In general, if you take the right route - you can traverse the city's boundaries without much time/effort. This was completely impossible 10 years ago.

[Corndogger]

Don't buses use roads, aren't the two issues linked? At least in my small brain they are.

That said, get rid of the anti-transit policies into the core and cut funding to road projects by 70% and put it into transit and it would be fine. My anecdotal evidence trumps yours. All I'm saying here is, your simplifying the issue JUST a little bit.

No, I'm not simplifying the issue at all. Yes, buses use roads but the City doesn't seem to know that as they are obsessed with LRT extensions and serving only one market (downtown). I hope you aren't being serious about the City having anti-transit policies into the core. It's the exact opposite and there's nothing anecdotal about it. Just look at the City's policies. At most there are 120,000 people that work downtown and about 750,000 in total. So in other words about 16% of Calgarians work downtown yet the City has to allocate over half of their transit budget to serve this area because they won't allow developers to build as many parking stalls as they want. Let people decide what they want. Of course the City knows that people will choose to drive so they have to enforce their social engineering policies to get what they want.

Hopefully after the next election will be left with a City Council that is a lot more in tune with what the majority of citizens want and a lot less concerned with pleasing special interest groups who are being discredited on a daily basis lately.

[frinkprof]

Nevermind.

[Corndogger]

I don't agree with anti-car policies for the simple reason that the city depends on private vehicles. However, the deficiency is in transit. Most of the city is unserved by LRT, and bus service isn't close to convenient.

Most of the major road projects are complete now - I listed them off. A commuter has several free-flowing road options to go anywhere in the city - that is the definition of a decent road network.

I think you're just trying to rile up the greenwashed crowd.

In the last year I've noticed that there are a lot more buses on city streets. I've also noticed that most of them have very few people on them and I'm not talking about weird times either. To make matters worse a number of these buses are the articulated type. It would be much better to use large vans in most of these cases.

What purpose will be served by building more LRT legs when they now cost well over a billion dollars each? Most of the ridership will come from people who use buses now and buses do have the advantage that they can go anywhere there is a road. The downtown core isn't going to get much larger in terms of the number of people that work there for a number of reasons so why invest billions more to serve this one location? Expanding our major roads to include HOT/HOV lanes and HOV only ramps which would speed up transit on major roads would make transit much more viable for people working in other areas of the city than spending a fortune on LRT expansions.

As for most road expansion projects being completed, I disagree. The Crowchild/Bow Trail mess needs to be redone immediately. Anyone who drives on Crowchild over the river knows that area is congested most hours of the day. On most days from about 3 to 7 PM in the afternoon you are guaranteed to come to a complete stop because the road isn't large enough to handle the traffic volumes and the way the ramps are designed has made the road very dangerous. Glenmore Trail needs more work to add lanes and interchanges on the east and west ends, MacLeod Trail needs interchanges added at Lake Frasier and Heritage Drive and I would say a major interchange needs to be build at Glenmore to properly handle all of the traffic in the area. There are other roads that need work as well but they can wait a bit until we get either new people running our transportation department or the entire roads department is contracted out to the private sector. Transit should be privatized as well. Seriously, how could either department be any worse?

[Corndogger]

OK - I didn't mean literally 100% freeflow. But, for example.. as someone who lives near the city's core, I can now drive to Deerfoot Meadows via Crowchild-Glenmore-Deerfoot much easier than before. Deerfoot handles North-South freeflow, The Ringroad allows a drive to go east-west with minimal disruption. In general, if you take the right route - you can traverse the city's boundaries without much time/effort. This was completely impossible 10 years ago.

Certain areas are much better such as the one who mentioned. But we really do need an E/W freeway in the city as relying on Stoney Trail is not realistic unless you live in the general area. Making Glenmore a true freeway makes the most sense and it wouldn't really take too much to achieve it.

[Corndogger]

Where ?:shrug:

Deerfoot is the only one I can think of and it still needs work in spots (i.e Glenmore and Southland-Anderson where 4 lanes become 2:koko: ). The NE portion of Stoney is the only other significant stretch of road that is "free flow".
I do agree that the City and Province have done a lot of work to improve the situation in the last decade (which isn't over until the end of 2010 BTW but that is another issue) with the work on Deerfoot, Crowchild, Glenmore, & Stoney). But I also agree that much of this was catch-up from the 1990's.
I still think Crowchild and Glenmore need to become fully freeflow sooner rather than later, and a freeflow route be established accross the north part of the city (JLB-McKnight). I certainly don't want to see the transit budget slashed 70% as I would like the LRT to be expanded as well. I like the approch taken with the NW and West LRT lines where the major roads (Crowchild & Bow Trail) are improved at the same time as the LRT is expanded.

That's my $0.02 anyway.

Happy New Year to all ! :cheers:

Is Crowchild going to be improved when they do the West LRT? I thought it wasn't. I really wish they would redo the Crowchild/Bow Trail interchange complex at the same time as that it actually a much more important project. The LRT is not going to reduce traffic in that area at all.

If every LRT project was like the NW expansion where major road work was done at the same time I'd be more in favor of them. But I'm sensing the City has gone so anti-car that they want to minimize road work as much as possible. Not even their beloved Europeans have such crazy policies and people in China and India are buying cars like crazy. The City is making a huge mistake in forgetting how much all people value freedom of mobility.This is true in all societies not just in the West.

[Corndogger]

Transit networks require transfer points and hubs. Downtown is the most intuitive place to have the largest hub, which is a big part of why many transit routes terminate or pass through downtown.

Anyway, continue the roads talk.

I know the point you are trying to make but I'm not convinced the FedEx model works best for transit. Having some hubs located near where major roads intersect makes a lot of sense as far as I'm concerned. A hub near Glenmore/Crowchild, for example, could quickly take people to places such as the University, Foothills Hospital, industrial areas to the east, etc. Building a system of HOT/HOV lanes and ramps would greatly speed up such trips and provide a lot of flexibility.

[MalcolmTucker]

No, I'm not simplifying the issue at all. Yes, buses use roads but the City doesn't seem to know that as they are obsessed with LRT extensions and serving only one market (downtown). I hope you aren't being serious about the City having anti-transit policies into the core. It's the exact opposite and there's nothing anecdotal about it. Just look at the City's policies. At most there are 120,000 people that work downtown and about 750,000 in total. So in other words about 16% of Calgarians work downtown yet the City has to allocate over half of their transit budget to serve this area because they won't allow developers to build as many parking stalls as they want. Let people decide what they want. Of course the City knows that people will choose to drive so they have to enforce their social engineering policies to get what they want.

Hopefully after the next election will be left with a City Council that is a lot more in tune with what the majority of citizens want and a lot less concerned with pleasing special interest groups who are being discredited on a daily basis lately.

You have to think about the marginal cost to provide an extra lane into downtown and the excess road capacity during peak (if any) within the downtown road network. By allowing unlimited parking you are committing the city to provide a road network to support that parking, or day long traffic jams.

The marginal cost of the WLRT per rider is $17,500 (based on 40,000 people and $700 million dollar cost).

Given an optimal lane capacity of around 2200 vehicles per hour (ignoring that additional lanes above 2 have diminishing returns to scale), and that all new lanes into downtown either require a bridge or tunnel, plus roads radiating out or the capacity will be unused (Bow Trail connector and the East side Downtown Penetrator being the two most likely, both themselves requiring expansions of Deerfoot and Crowchild at minimum).

For above $300 million we can add another through lane between the river the 32nd on Crowchild while removing all the intersections. For $300 million, even before adding any capacity to get people downtown, considering a generous 3 hour peak you have added 6600 vehicle movements, or $45k per vehicle.

Not that I am arguing against doing the Crowchild project, I am arguing against doing the cavalcade of projects needed to stretch that one extra lane all the way into downtown. It is ridiculously expensive. It is cheaper to funnel more and more people onto the LRT, even if that requires tunnels down the road.

[freeweed]

So in other words about 16% of Calgarians work downtown yet the City has to allocate over half of their transit budget to serve this area because they won't allow developers to build as many parking stalls as they want.

Developers aren't going to pay for the 19 new lanes of bridge needed to funnel those extra 16% of Calgarians into downtown each and every business day. Nor the extra ramps/elevated roadways/demolished buildings needed to handle that kind of traffic in the core. Downtown becomes a virtual gridlock during rush hour every time it snows; I couldn't possibly imagine how bad it would be with tens of thousands more cars.

On my semi-annual roadtrip through the US right now, and wow - life without transit? No thanks. Freeways are awesome when you only drive around at 1pm or 3 in the morning, but jebus. I think I'd kill myself if I had to drive in this kind of rush hour traffic twice every working day.

Calgary is rapidly approaching the perfect balance of transit (and the subsequent decent rush hour average speed) and roads (and the subsequent near-freeflow everywhere). Driving through cities with 12-lane freeways, where you can literally take 5 minutes to exit because of how long lights take to cycle (because every single person is driving, everywhere, all the time)... it's ludicrous to the point of shared insanity. I will give anything to be able to live in a city where we never have to experience this.

[korzym]

here's a new years present:
http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=$GASO&p=D&yr=0&mn=8&dy=0&id=p89439544545

use that chart to time your gas purchases better

I believe that reflects the actual price of gas, of all people I can't believe I didn't look into this before...admittedly I've been ignorant towards commodities, never thought unleaded gas had contracts traded on the exchanges..

[Wooster]

Just back from my Christmas Trip to Calgary. I must say that Calgary must be one of the easiest cities (over 1 million) to drive a car around in. Generally, the condition of the roads are the best I've ever seen. Besides freeways, I think it's really the secondary network of limited access arterials (such as Sarcee, Shagannappi, Country Hills, John Laurie etc) that make it so fast to move around. That said, as Calgary grows, it's clear that the share of people commuting by transit/walking/cycling will need to increase as the capacity of roads going in and out of the core is finite and already beyond capacity during peak hours.

[freeweed]

use that chart to time your gas purchases better

I must drive a lot more than you; I need a fill every week or so. Months-long commodities pricing doesn't help much in that regard.

Guess I just fill 'er up when it gets close to empty.

[Landmass]

We have the room lets take out that grass section in the middle.Put up Jersey Barriers we could add up to 2 lanes going in each direction !!!

[Ferreth]

We have the room lets take out that grass section in the middle.Put up Jersey Barriers we could add up to 2 lanes going in each direction !!!
There would be enough room north of 17 Ave S. I've often wondered why the Province hasn't pushed this as the bridges all have enough room as well, so it's as cheap as a lane addition is ever going to get on the Deerfoot.

[You Need A Thneed]

Lanes are currently being added between Beddington and Mcknight on southbound Deerfoot.

[WeavedWeb]

Hello all, I haven’t posted in ages, but I just wanted to add my two cents on the Roads v. Transit issue being discussed in this thread lately.

It seems to me that some people aren’t seeing the whole picture when talking about which is a better investment, roads or transit. What is being missed is that while roads and transit must compete for funding and priority, they are designed to work in unison to provide the city with an integrated transportation system. We shouldn’t pour all of our money into one mode of transport rather than the other—rather, we need to strategically invest to create the most effective system.

Below are the Calgary LRT network plan and Skeletal Road Network plan (which was established in 1995 but is no longer current city policy). The Skeletal Road Network, with the exception of 16th Ave. N, was to be free-flowing without any traffic lights.

http://img686.imageshack.us/img686/382/lrtnetworkplan.pnghttp://img32.imageshack.us/img32/2396/fig3map.gif

Everyone is familiar with the LRT network; the Skeletal Road Network (the image above first developed in 1995) was designed to include four major N-S and four major E-W corridors:

N-S:
-East Freeway
-Deerfoot Trail
-Crowchild Trail-Glenmore-14 St.-Anderson-Macleod
-Stoney Trail-Glenmore-Sarcee Trail (SWRR portion)

E-W:
-Stoney Trail N.
-16 Ave N.
-Glenmore Trail
-Highway 22x

In addition, a secondary support network of expressways was planned, some of which were to be at least partially free-flowing:

NE Calgary:
-McKnight Blvd
-Metis Trail
-Airport Trail
-Barlow Trail (Memorial-Airport Trail)
-Memorial Drive (Deerfoot-4th Ave)

NW Calgary:
-Sarcee Trail (Stoney-Country Hills Blvd)
-Shaganappi Trail
-Country Hills Blvd (Beddington-Shaganappi)
-Beddington Trail (Deerfoot-Country Hills Blvd)
-John Laurie Blvd (Sarcee-McKnight)

SE Calgary:
-Peigan Trail
-Barlow Trail
-Anderson Road
-Blackfoot Trail

SW Calgary:
-Sarcee Trail (Glenmore-16 Ave N)
-Bow Trail

This can in part be seen here, where freeways and expressways are identified in red:

http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/8997/fig5map.gif

Up until now, all of the major infrastructure projects the city has undertaken have brought the city closer to the goal of a Skeletal Road Network w/expressway network, and a Primary radial LRT network expanding from downtown to the suburbs.

The networks were designed to work together, with the LRT strongest in providing service from the suburbs to downtown and the Skeletal Road Network best for cross-town and inter-suburban routes (and commercial traffic). Certain corridors with very high loads of traffic (i.e., Crowchild Trail NW and Macleod Trail S) combine major roads with LRT lines to increase capacity more efficiently, while in other areas of the city (West, NE) the LRT traverses corridors without major free-flowing routes to provide more direct service to downtown.

Currently, however, the system is incomplete. “Skeletal” roads such as Glenmore, Crowchild, and Macleod Trail (south of Anderson) are only partially free-flowing. Vast improvements have been made in the past decade (i.e., Crowchild Trail west of 32 Ave. and the GE5 project), but huge gaps remain: Crowchild between 32 Ave NW and 17 Ave SW, both ends of Glenmore, and the lack of a free-flow link between Glenmore and Anderson in the SW.

The supporting network of expressways fare no better: most were designed to be upgraded as traffic warranted, but for the most part this has not occurred. Anderson Road has been in need of widening and upgrading for years west of Macleod Trail, however, the only work done so far coincided with the new 37th St. bridge over Fish Creek (completed in 2003, Anderson was widened from a pathetic one lane per direction to two lanes per direction west of 24th St.). McKnight Blvd, on the other hand, has been upgraded at and around 36 St. to coincide with LRT expansion, but is in serious disrepair from 36th St. west to Deerfoot.

The LRT network is arguably just as inadequate. Major improvements have occurred, such as the extensions of all three legs, and serious work will soon get under way to add the West leg to the system. Stations are also being upgraded, starting downtown, to expand the system to four-car trains. However, the SE line is nowhere near close to being realized, the 8th Ave subway is unfunded, and the North Central line isn’t even talked about by officials. These three crucial pieces of infrastructure will no doubt be required in the medium-term and without them the transportation system will be severely handicapped.

Going Forward

When the most recent Transportation Infrastructure Investment Plan (TIIP: 2009-2018) was created, much talk surrounded the flip of the 60-40 ratio of roads capital investment to transit: for the first time in history, more capital would be spent on transit than on roads. Pro-transit individuals applauded this as a step in the right direction. Pro-roads individuals showed it as proof of an out-of-touch city council. Quite frankly, however, neither matters: Regardless of the split in funding, there is still an enormous infrastructure deficit on both sides of the system.

In addition, other than the TIIP, there is no document going forward that proposes a means to further develop Calgary’s existing transportation system. This is no joke. The city has no medium- or long-term plan to prioritize, stage, fund, or correlate with the province future transportation projects to improve the integrated transit-roads system. The city only has policies to guide future decisions about transportation planning and investment.

The current document is the Calgary Transportation Plan 2009 (integrated within PlanIt). In fact, the transportation “plan” isn’t really a plan at all, but a set of policies to guide Calgary into an alternate mode-friendly city, with emphasis on denser communities, complete streets, etc. The centerpiece of the plan is a new transportation “hierarchy” to guide all future transportation and land-use decisions:

http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/7158/transpohierarchya.jpg

The hierarchy is based on the degree of sustainability of each mode of transportation over the others. Not surprisingly, single occupancy vehicles are at the bottom of the hierarchy. The car is an unsustainable means of transportation, and therefore, while the needs of the car will be “considered…the needs of the car should not be met at the expense of other transportation options.”

It is now city policy to consider public transit a superior mode of transportation and support it accordingly. This will diminish future roads investment significantly, as we have already seen with the reversed 60/40 split in funding.

In my opinion, we are headed in the wrong direction. I don’t think it should be up to the municipal government to decide for its citizens which form of transportation is best for them, but rather to service the needs of the population with a balanced approach considering demand and means. Obviously, the main transportation demand in Calgary is for personal and commercial vehicle mobility. Secondary demand is for affordable, efficient, and direct public transit service where practical. Best of all, these needs are not contradictory! An integrated system allows us to serve both interests to most of the population while creating a more efficient transportation system (rather than a sole focus on roads, or a sole focus on transit).

I believe Calgary’s optimal transportation system includes a completed Skeletal Road Network, a supporting expressway/arterial network, and a completed Primary LRT network. However to have a truly balanced and functional system, three gaps must be closed:

1) The Primary LRT Network must be expanded to include SE and NC legs, as well as to include an 8th Avenue Subway to increase system capacity
2) The Skeletal Road Network, as previously envisioned, must be completed as a free-flowing system. This requires major work on Crowchild, Glenmore, Macleod, Deerfoot (in congested areas), the remaining portions of the ring road, and 16 Ave N.
3) The secondary expressway network must be upgraded in many places to meet capacity. Two core lanes on certain major expressways are not sufficient (i.e., Anderson, McKnight, Sarcee Trail S. of 16 Ave.) to meet current and future demand. Interchanges are also needed in some locations to alleviate major intersections.

It is not a solution to solely focus on transit and alternate modes of transportation to improve our transportation system. However, we apparently can’t invest in both networks simultaneously (except in the cases where LRT expansion requires road expansion). I’m not sure what the solution is, but if we neglect one system for too long, the consequences will be costly and unpleasant—just think of the situation of both networks at the start of this decade.

The city needs to continue to invest in roads and transit and going forward we have a huge fiscal gap to cover to be able to do both. (Am I crazy or do we need a new source of funding?)


P.S. I was arriving back in Calgary from the States on December 4, when that huge snowstorm hit. My flight was delayed and I didn’t actually arrive until 3:00am on December 5th. Anyways, the drive home from the airport to Evergreen provided a glimpse into early morning plowing activities. Most of Deerfoot had not been plowed and was partially covered in snow drifts and packed snow. Police blocked exits in some spots where ramps where impassable. However, Carmacks crews were out in force clearing certain sections of the roadway. They were attacking certain corridors first (when I drove by, Glenmore – Memorial) with five or more sanders clearing all lanes simultaneously (with police help in controlling traffic). The cleared sections were near-perfect and scraped to the pavement. After getting off of Deerfoot, I took Anderson to Macleod, and Macleod to James McKevitt. I didn’t see any sanders on city-managed roads and the roads obviously hadn’t been cleared for hours, as they were covered in packed snow with snow drifts under bridges, etc. I’d imagine that by sunrise Deerfoot was probably nearly completely plowed while most city roads were just getting started. Anyways, just thought some might find that interesting as it was the talk on this thread a few weeks back.

[mersar]

P.S. I was arriving back in Calgary from the States on December 4, when that huge snowstorm hit. My flight was delayed and I didn’t actually arrive until 3:00am on December 5th. Anyways, the drive home from the airport to Evergreen provided a glimpse into early morning plowing activities. Most of Deerfoot had not been plowed and was partially covered in snow drifts and packed snow. Police blocked exits in some spots where ramps where impassable. However, Carmacks crews were out in force clearing certain sections of the roadway. They were attacking certain corridors first (when I drove by, Glenmore – Memorial) with five or more sanders clearing all lanes simultaneously (with police help in controlling traffic). The cleared sections were near-perfect and scraped to the pavement. After getting off of Deerfoot, I took Anderson to Macleod, and Macleod to James McKevitt. I didn’t see any sanders on city-managed roads and the roads obviously hadn’t been cleared for hours, as they were covered in packed snow with snow drifts under bridges, etc. I’d imagine that by sunrise Deerfoot was probably nearly completely plowed while most city roads were just getting started. Anyways, just thought some might find that interesting as it was the talk on this thread a few weeks back.

Yep, that is one of the main differences I've seen as well between how Carmacks and Volker Stevin deal with highways versus how the city deals with any roadway for the most part. Its not uncommon to see two or three plows running together even on 1A. The closest I've ever seen the city come to this is running two graders up Macleod Trail, and all the second seemed to be there for was to push the snow that fell back off the bank down the median from the first grader back up

[kap384]

Hello all, I haven’t posted in ages, but I just wanted to add my two cents on the Roads v. Transit issue being discussed in this thread lately.........................

I’d imagine that by sunrise Deerfoot was probably nearly completely plowed while most city roads were just getting started. Anyways, just thought some might find that interesting as it was the talk on this thread a few weeks back.

Excellent, informed and balanced post. Not blindingly pro-Transit or pro-Roads, but pro-ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE. Great way to kick off this thread for 2010!

[eternallyme]

There are two on that list that should be downgraded to arterials as they really aren't expressways since they have direct accesses:

Bow Trail from 26th Street to Sarcee Trail (numerous commercial entrances, also posted at 60 km/h)

Blackfoot Trail north of 58th Avenue (several industrial entrances)

[lubicon]

No, I'm not simplifying the issue at all. Yes, buses use roads but the City doesn't seem to know that as they are obsessed with LRT extensions and serving only one market (downtown). I hope you aren't being serious about the City having anti-transit policies into the core. It's the exact opposite and there's nothing anecdotal about it. Just look at the City's policies. At most there are 120,000 people that work downtown and about 750,000 in total. So in other words about 16% of Calgarians work downtown yet the City has to allocate over half of their transit budget to serve this area because they won't allow developers to build as many parking stalls as they want. Let people decide what they want. Of course the City knows that people will choose to drive so they have to enforce their social engineering policies to get what they want.

Hopefully after the next election will be left with a City Council that is a lot more in tune with what the majority of citizens want and a lot less concerned with pleasing special interest groups who are being discredited on a daily basis lately.

Let's say it is 120 000 people working DT, which is probably pretty close. Like you say, that leaves 780 000 other people in the City, but probably only 1/2 of them work at most. The rest are children, seniors, non working adults etc. So really the percentage of working Calgarians who work DT is pretty close to 50%, one of the highest numbers in North America.

[Corndogger]

Let's say it is 120 000 people working DT, which is probably pretty close. Like you say, that leaves 780 000 other people in the City, but probably only 1/2 of them work at most. The rest are children, seniors, non working adults etc. So really the percentage of working Calgarians who work DT is pretty close to 50%, one of the highest numbers in North America.

No, my numbers are correct. There are about 120,000 people who work downtown (probably a little less after last year) and about 750,000 employed people in total. Remember the population is close to 1.1 million not 900,000. The 16% figure I quoted is about right and the above figures are the latest from the various federal agencies. The 120K figure is from the City. If any number is wrong it would be that one. The planning in this city might make it seem like 50% of the people work downtown but that's not reality. It's also why I'm so frustrated with the transportation planning in this city. The City keeps saying they are a business so I'd like to know how many businesses in the real world essentially tell 80%+ of their customers that they don't matter? My guess is very few, if any.

[waterloowarrior]

According to the 06 census, Calgary CMA's employed labour force (15+) is 632,020.. take away people who work at home or work out of the province and the total is ± 580,000... does the 750,000 include people who are in the labour force but not employed?

[frinkprof]

Nevermind.

[Wooster]

Which is why there are secondary transit hubs/corridors for some (but admittedly not all) of the other major employment centres. This of course includes the U of C/Research Park, SAIT, 36th Street NE retail corridor and the McLeod Trail commercial/retail corridor. The bolded part is a bit of an exaggeration in my mind.

Not to mention the Beltline, which accounts for 27% of "suburban" office space in the city is not counted in the downtown figure. There's probably at least another 20,000 working in the Beltline everyday only 3-4 blocks from 7th ave. Further to Frink's point, about 25% of rush hour volume on the c-train is reverse flow, much of which is to major employment hubs on the lrt like the U of C. The 'worker' number doesn't also account for student commuters, of which there are many.

[korzym]

noteworthy news, roads thread style:

This is a great site that outlines how we're being scammed, I don't know how due process works in Canada, hopefully its similar and not some retarded british-inherited law. Point #4 outlines this.
http://www.arizonacitizensagainstphotoradar.com/

http://camerafraud.wordpress.com/

I doubt Canadians will do anything about this issue.

[MalcolmTucker]

noteworthy news, roads thread style:

This is a great site that outlines how we're being scammed, I don't know how due process works in Canada, hopefully its similar and not some retarded british-inherited law. Point #4 outlines this.
http://www.arizonacitizensagainstphotoradar.com/

http://camerafraud.wordpress.com/

I doubt Canadians will do anything about this issue.

#4 would be different state by state. In Alberta when they brought in multinova I am sure they made process serving by mail legal. Plus, it is done by police forces here, not outsourced like it sounds like in the US of A.

To my knowledge Alberta is the only province with unmanned photo radar - speed on green cameras. The provision of having even a supply officer or technician in the vehicle at least provides a deterrent to putting them everywhere. Speed on green should be rolled back, and the safety efficacy of red light camera's should be continually studied.

Just be thankful they are not allowed to use 'two camera' multinova and red light cameras to assign demerits (takes a picture of your face) due to an weird bit of case law from a couple years back.

[Mazrim]

To my knowledge Alberta is the only province with unmanned photo radar - speed on green cameras.
Pretty sure I got flashed by one in Winnipeg not too long ago.... :(

[freeweed]

Pretty sure I got flashed by one in Winnipeg not too long ago.... :(

Not sure if they turned on speed-on-green. If you got flashed in Winnipeg, it means you ran a red light (unless things have changed recently).

[kw5150]

Not sure if they turned on speed-on-green. If you got flashed in Winnipeg, it means you ran a red light (unless things have changed recently).

Winnipeg has been doing speed on green sice 2003 for sure. I should know. I got one going north on route 90....... and then another going south on my way home...... haha. Im so glad that I dont speed anymore!

[korzym]

#4 would be different state by state. In Alberta when they brought in multinova I am sure they made process serving by mail legal. Plus, it is done by police forces here, not outsourced like it sounds like in the US of A.

To my knowledge Alberta is the only province with unmanned photo radar - speed on green cameras. The provision of having even a supply officer or technician in the vehicle at least provides a deterrent to putting them everywhere. Speed on green should be rolled back, and the safety efficacy of red light camera's should be continually studied.

Just be thankful they are not allowed to use 'two camera' multinova and red light cameras to assign demerits (takes a picture of your face) due to an weird bit of case law from a couple years back.

Thats not good enough for me, I`m going to research this as much as I can. I`ll be calling the non-emergency police line and doing some internet searches. The whole issue at hand now is that people initially thought it was ok and passively went along with it. I heard a story about a judge getting one of these tickets and he had the ticket thrown out and even sued.

[MalcolmTucker]

^ Canada's government with fused legislature and executive usually ensures that the left hand knows what the right hand is doing, at least in the legislative sense.

It is covered in the

Traffic Safety Act (http://www.qp.alberta.ca/574.cfm?page=T06.cfm&leg_type=Acts&isbncln=9780779738533)

In any proceedings in respect of a charge that a person has failed to comply with this Act,
(a) the evidence of any person involved in the manufacture, installation or operation of, or analysis or interpretation of data collected, reported or transmitted by, a recording device located in a motor vehicle may be given by affidavit [this is traditional photo radar];
(b) an affidavit referred to in clause (a) is proof, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, of the facts stated in the affidavit;
(c) a copy of an affidavit referred to in clause (a) must be served on the defendant by ordinary mail at that person’s latest address, as indicated on the records of the Registrar, at least 14 days before the day of the hearing; [this allows serving by mail]
(d) the defendant may, with leave of the court, require the attendance of any person giving evidence by affidavit pursuant to clause (a) for the purpose of cross‑examination.

[freeweed]

Winnipeg has been doing speed on green sice 2003 for sure. I should know. I got one going north on route 90....... and then another going south on my way home...... haha. Im so glad that I dont speed anymore!

Huh. Guess I've been away too long. Fortunately I never manage to get to the speed limit with the traffic there, so speeding tickets aren't much of a concern when I visit. :haha:

[korzym]

snow removal...jajaja McIver is no good for some bs reason: some fool will say something against his ideas, which are perfectly good..jajajaja.... Of course bronconnier is a no show on the issue
http://calgary.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20100107/CGY_alderman_mciver_snow_100107/20100107/?hub=CalgaryHome

[MalcolmTucker]

One would involve policy changes so Calgarians with snow plowing equipment could help on a volunteer basis. Will never happen, will cause road damage - and who is liable for the traffic hazard of snow - bare pavement - snow, which will turn into snow - ice - snow during a mild chinook.

Another is to make City vehicles available to help in snow clearing during major snow storms.

What does this even mean, putting plows on fire trucks?

Alderman McIver wants the City to re-define things like what makes a road passable.

As long as he is willing to raise taxes to pay for the additional clearing, I see no problem with this.

As for Bronco's silence, every time he responds to an Alderman in a story he 'elevates' the Alderman to his level. Until the campaign starts, there likely will be little comment on things like this from Bronco. Plus, it is possible Bronco is on vacation, or the reporter didn't even ask as there was no 'we attempted to comment x and there was no response'.

[korzym]

your full of shit kid

[Bigtime]

your full of shit kid

That's a real constructive rebuttal you got there. At least try to have a mature debate on the subject you brought up.

[frinkprof]

Nevermind.

[freeweed]

Will never happen, will cause road damage - and who is liable for the traffic hazard of snow - bare pavement - snow, which will turn into snow - ice - snow during a mild chinook.

Um, drivers?

Seriously? You're going to claim that snow clearing is now hazardous because it *could* cause icy conditions depending on later weather? It's better to just leave the snow there?

Man, our litigious society will be the death of me. Literally.

[MichaelS]

Will never happen, will cause road damage - and who is liable for the traffic hazard of snow - bare pavement - snow, which will turn into snow - ice - snow during a mild chinook.


I think the bigger question of liability is if one of these volunteer snow plows hits a parked car. Who pays for that parked car? I would certainly hope not the city. But then, how do we ensure all volunteer plows have the proper insurance to cover them in case an incident like this happens?

[korzym]

That's a real constructive rebuttal you got there. At least try to have a mature debate on the subject you brought up.

this shit he wrote is pure fallacy, how can you begin to take it seriously?

Its about time blades get put onto more city trucks. Sir.Humphrey.Appleby of course will bring up bogus examples, he would interpret "putting blades on city vehicles" as putting blades on aircraft if he could. When McIver said putting blades on more city vehicles, personally I interpreted that as saying he wants blades on the city's water rescue boats and hovercraft.

A lot of you are bringing up idiotic arguments whenever McIver makes a comment. Their either blatantly idiotic comments or so narrow minded, of course their not narrow minded if its for your own personal agenda

[Bigtime]

this shit he wrote is pure fallacy, how can you begin to take it seriously?

It is still his opinion to have, you should at least respect it as such.

I have an existing opinion of McIver, but I haven't waded into this debate because I didn't catch all the details yet. However it appears that Sir Appleby has, and has offered his opinion on the ideas put forth.

[lubicon]

I think the bigger question of liability is if one of these volunteer snow plows hits a parked car. Who pays for that parked car? I would certainly hope not the city. But then, how do we ensure all volunteer plows have the proper insurance to cover them in case an incident like this happens?

Not just hitting vehicles, but other items as well - fire hydrants, curbs, speed bumps etc. Not that I'm against this idea but I don't see how they could get around the liability issues.

On this note, there was a guy on my street who plowed our road after the big blizzard in early December. Worked out pretty well except for the fact that he filled my driveway with snow just after I had spent considerable effort shovelling it. Not a big deal, I spent a few more minutes moving the snow back onto the street.

[You Need A Thneed]

this shit he wrote is pure fallacy, how can you begin to take it seriously?

Its about time blades get put onto more city trucks. Sir.Humphrey.Appleby of course will bring up bogus examples, he would interpret "putting blades on city vehicles" as putting blades on aircraft if he could. When McIver said putting blades on more city vehicles, personally I interpreted that as saying he wants blades on the city's water rescue boats and hovercraft.


What's wrong with what he said? McIvor was talking about allowing volunteers with plowing equipment to help out during big storms. His point was that liabilty issues would make that impossible - and he's certainly correct on that point. People that have equipment and have insurance to cover themselves aren't going to be volunteering their time - especially when there are plenty of malls and shopping areas that are willing to pay them for their time.

McIvor also said that "city vehicles be made available" during a storm, and like Sir Appleby Said, that makes no sense either. Every vehicle that the city owns that's capable of being a help has already got a plow on it - unless you want to put plows on Fire trucks. He said nothing about putting plows on the patrol boats and aircraft. The city owns lots of light trucks that maybe could be helpful for light snow, but that's not the point. The point was to help out when there's lots of snow - and a half ton truck with a plow on the front simply isn't very helpful. The large sanding trucks with plows underneath weren't really even heavy enough for some of the snow we've had this winter.

[mersar]

McIvor also said that "city vehicles be made available" during a storm, and like Sir Appleby Said, that makes no sense either. Every vehicle that the city owns that's capable of being a help has already got a plow on it - unless you want to put plows on Fire trucks. He said nothing about putting in plows on the patrol boats and aircraft. The city owns lots of light trucks that maybe could be helpful for light snow, but that's not the point. The point was to help out when there's lots of snow - and a half ton truck with a plow on the front simply isn't very helpful. The large sanding trucks with plows underneath weren't really even heavy enough for some of the snow we've had this winter.

Yep. The one example that they mentioned on the radio last night when they were discussing it was garbage trucks and buses (yeah, I can totally see the union letting CT install snow plows on the front of a bus </sarcasm>)

[Stang]

I honestly don't find "snow removal" to be a top priority. I could care less if my side street is covered in snow. It is winter, in Canada.

An area that could use some work would be how well the city prepares for and handles storms. There's an important distinction there, and it seems that many don't distinguish. I still believe that sometime mother nature hands us a real challenge and it is completely unrealistic to expect your commute times to remain the same in the middle of a freezing blizzard.

That being said, I think that there could be a bit more attention spent to preparing for storms. The city has said in the past that they prep the roads with a mixture prior to a snowfall, but there's something about that system that hasn't seemed to work on a few occasions this year. I don't see any harm in looking at ways to improve this. Of course, this isn't what Ric is on about. He's just appealing to those that have unrealistic expectations that their far-flung sidestreet will be plowed to the pavement within hours of a storm. Of course, everyone's tone will change when they realize that there will be a cost attached.

There's nothing wrong with looking at improving the way the city handles snow, however. But I don't want to be paying more taxes so that everyone's cul-de-sac is pristinely groomed.

[freeweed]

Not just hitting vehicles, but other items as well - fire hydrants, curbs, speed bumps etc. Not that I'm against this idea but I don't see how they could get around the liability issues.

Who pays for this if a city vehicle hits them? That's right, the city.

Let the city pick up the tab as part of allowing private citizens to do it. I don't know why people have such a hard time with this.

Unless we're going to claim that city employees are such skilled experts and private citizens are such clods that suddenly fire hydrants all over the place are going to be taken out if we dare let private citizens on the roads... :rolleyes:

Sorry folks, but a couple of dented cars is a fair price to pay for reducing serious accidents (and actually allowing people to get out of their homes - did you guys see the drifts on that one street in the NE? these people were trapped for a week!).

[lubicon]

Who pays for this if a city vehicle hits them? That's right, the city.

Let the city pick up the tab as part of allowing private citizens to do it. I don't know why people have such a hard time with this.

Unless we're going to claim that city employees are such skilled experts and private citizens are such clods that suddenly fire hydrants all over the place are going to be taken out if we dare let private citizens on the roads... :rolleyes:

Sorry folks, but a couple of dented cars is a fair price to pay for reducing serious accidents (and actually allowing people to get out of their homes - did you guys see the drifts on that one street in the NE? these people were trapped for a week!).

All valid points Freeweed. I won't argue over any of them.

Interesting that yuo bring up the street in NE Calgary. I think I know the one that you mean. Yes it's a shame that these people were drifted in for such a long period of time, BUT come on, does no one on that street own a shovel? I know it would be a hell of a job but if everyone pitched in and got to work I'll bet they could have dug themselves out to the point that the street was somewhat accessible. That's one of the many problems in this country. We all sit around and wait for the government to 'do something' about every problem that comes along instead of taking the initiative ourselves. Sitting on your ass for a week waiting for the City to rescue you seems a little over the top to me.

[MichaelS]

Who pays for this if a city vehicle hits them? That's right, the city.

Let the city pick up the tab as part of allowing private citizens to do it. I don't know why people have such a hard time with this.

Unless we're going to claim that city employees are such skilled experts and private citizens are such clods that suddenly fire hydrants all over the place are going to be taken out if we dare let private citizens on the roads... :rolleyes:

Sorry folks, but a couple of dented cars is a fair price to pay for reducing serious accidents (and actually allowing people to get out of their homes - did you guys see the drifts on that one street in the NE? these people were trapped for a week!).

Valid points, but all it takes is one very serious incident (like hitting and killing a pedestrian) to cost the City (and hence tax payers) a lot of money. Yes, snow filled streets clogging traffic cost the economy a lot as well, but if the City were to come out and say they would cover the cost of all damage caused by these volunteers, it would be such a huge financial liability. What would prevent people from sticking a sheet of plywood on to the front of their station wagon to clear their block (extreme case)? If you made it so you didn't have to worry about the consequences, I think you would just be opening it up to disaster.

I think it would be great if we could utilize a volunteer force to help clear residential streets. You would just need to ensure that each person willing to volunteer had the proper equipment and training, and the insurance to cover any damages they may cause. But that is a very large expense to get yourself to that point, and those that have won't volunteer out their services.

[korzym]

What's wrong with what he said? McIvor was talking about allowing volunteers with plowing equipment to help out during big storms. His point was that liabilty issues would make that impossible - and he's certainly correct on that point. People that have equipment and have insurance to cover themselves aren't going to be volunteering their time - especially when there are plenty of malls and shopping areas that are willing to pay them for their time.

McIvor also said that "city vehicles be made available" during a storm, and like Sir Appleby Said, that makes no sense either. Every vehicle that the city owns that's capable of being a help has already got a plow on it - unless you want to put plows on Fire trucks. He said nothing about putting plows on the patrol boats and aircraft. The city owns lots of light trucks that maybe could be helpful for light snow, but that's not the point. The point was to help out when there's lots of snow - and a half ton truck with a plow on the front simply isn't very helpful. The large sanding trucks with plows underneath weren't really even heavy enough for some of the snow we've had this winter.

Theres plenty of international trucks in the fleet that can be outfitted with blades and what not. If you want to put some on fire trucks...well firemen are known to have lots of down-time, so why not let them get to work. Plus as McIver pointed out, in these snow storms the equipment cant even get out because they are trapped or limited as well

[frinkprof]

Nevermind.

[freeweed]

All valid points Freeweed. I won't argue over any of them.

Interesting that yuo bring up the street in NE Calgary. I think I know the one that you mean. Yes it's a shame that these people were drifted in for such a long period of time, BUT come on, does no one on that street own a shovel? I know it would be a hell of a job but if everyone pitched in and got to work I'll bet they could have dug themselves out to the point that the street was somewhat accessible. That's one of the many problems in this country. We all sit around and wait for the government to 'do something' about every problem that comes along instead of taking the initiative ourselves. Sitting on your ass for a week waiting for the City to rescue you seems a little over the top to me.

Agreed. When the big storm hit, I was perfectly prepared to NOT wait for the government. I had several people on my street with cash in hand, ready to pay a neighbour to use his Bobcat to clear our street. We weren't as bad as in the NE but even still, smaller cars couldn't move. In my mind it was a lot safer (and quicker) to use this whole technology thing and do it by machine instead of by hand.

Neighbour informs me he couldn't do it, because the city would fine him.

We tried to do things on our own and the government told us we couldn't. I'm sorry, but hand shovelling 4 feet of snow on tens of thousands of sq ft of street is just not reasonable.

[bigcanuck]

Theres plenty of international trucks in the fleet that can be outfitted with blades and what not. If you want to put some on fire trucks...well firemen are known to have lots of down-time, so why not let them get to work. Plus as McIver pointed out, in these snow storms the equipment cant even get out because they are trapped or limited as well

I would hate it for my house to be the one on fire when the alarm comes in and all the trucks are out clearing snow 5 kms away...

[freeweed]

Funny addendum to my story:

So when we realized we couldn't feasibly shovel the street, I asked around to see if anyone owned a snowblower. Yes, in the olden days this is how we used to clear our streets in Winnipeg as the city often took days to clear residential streets. Of course in Calgary no one owns one...

Anyway, several of the guys hopped in their big 4X4s and drove back and forth all morning, packing it down. It sorta worked and at least made the street passable. Not sure how that's any "safer" than just running a 'cat, but *shrug*. It's still an icy, rutted mess and anyone with a low clearance car scrapes the hell out of it, but at least it works.

Thankfully this next week should help a LOT.

[korzym]

As mersar pointed out, the union would never allow this, so it's a non-starter.

another case of narrow-mindedness, this can be worked around. they could negociate with the unions, hire non-unionized workers to drive the equipment, or whatever. If other cities in north america can do it, theres no reason we can't. Actually, the reason "it can't be done" is because it doesn't align with your agendas. Your anti-road so we could sit here all day and you'll come up with every excuse in the book to be against this

[korzym]

I would hate it for my house to be the one on fire when the alarm comes in and all the trucks are out clearing snow 5 kms away...

Then I guess you'd like it even more that those same trucks couldn't get there in the first place. What this statement is telling me is that "oh hell, we're snowed in, we better give up and accept it"

[jeffwhit]

another case of narrow-mindedness, this can be worked around. they could negociate with the unions, hire non-unionized workers to drive the equipment, or whatever. If other cities in north america can do it, theres no reason we can't. Actually, the reason "it can't be done" is because it doesn't align with your agendas. Your anti-road so we could sit here all day and you'll come up with every excuse in the book to be against this
Maybe you should move to New Hampshire, it seems like you'd be a lot happier there.

[MichaelS]

Anyway, several of the guys hopped in their big 4X4s and drove back and forth all morning, packing it down. It sorta worked and at least made the street passable. Not sure how that's any "safer" than just running a 'cat, but *shrug*. It's still an icy, rutted mess and anyone with a low clearance car scrapes the hell out of it, but at least it works.

Thankfully this next week should help a LOT.

Maybe wasn't any "safer" but those guys had insurance for their 4x4's, and if they were to hit something, they would be covered. Did your neighbour with the bob cat have that kind of coverage?

[You Need A Thneed]

Theres plenty of international trucks in the fleet that can be outfitted with blades and what not.

Every single one of them gets blades in the winter.

Buses would make lousy plows, they aren't nearly heavy enough, plus they are too bulky to do the job well (Wheelbase too long). Fire trucks would be heavy enough, but there's no way anyone in their right mind is going to subject all those pumps and equipment to the extra vibration and abuse that a plow takes. Plus, do you have the whole fire crew riding around on the fire engine, or do you have one guy driving, and if a fire happens, the driver has to go pick up the rest of the crew back at the fire station before heading out to the fire? Never mind that fire trucks are really too bulky too - way too long.

Also, the trucks they use double as sanding trucks, and none of these other vehicles would be capable of carrying or distributing sand.

For the times that extra plowing capacity is needed, you need BIG plows, not more small ones. Like I said, the big snowfalls we had earlier this winter were enough to make the truck plows mostly useless. Graders and other heavy equipment are what is needed when there is a large snow event.

The city should not purchase more heavy equipment just for snow removal that will only get used twice a year, on average. Contract the work out to contractors who already have equipment, fine.

[korzym]

Maybe you should move to New Hampshire, it seems like you'd be a lot happier there.
Maybe you should take your own advice and liberal ideas and leave Alberta yourself.

On the same token..

[frinkprof]

Nevermind.

[Slug]

Not every resident with a blade on their truck knows how to clear residential streets. Last year, a neighbor tried and failed to make our road more passable and eventually the city had to fix it ... probably due to complaints from other people thinking it was the city messed it up.

[Ferreth]

Agreed. When the big storm hit, I was perfectly prepared to NOT wait for the government. I had several people on my street with cash in hand, ready to pay a neighbour to use his Bobcat to clear our street. We weren't as bad as in the NE but even still, smaller cars couldn't move. In my mind it was a lot safer (and quicker) to use this whole technology thing and do it by machine instead of by hand.

Neighbour informs me he couldn't do it, because the city would fine him.

We tried to do things on our own and the government told us we couldn't. I'm sorry, but hand shovelling 4 feet of snow on tens of thousands of sq ft of street is just not reasonable.

Two comments here:

First, on neighbor Joe's bobcat, the city has to catch you to fine you. A friend of mine witnessed equipment that had been being used for a city road job nearby being used to shovel out a few driveways and a bit of street clearing. I'm sure if the city employees/contractors had gotten caught, there would have been hell to pay, but considering the cops couldn't get in there either, it was unlikely anyone who would care to report it was going to find out. It's sometimes better to beg forgiveness rather than ask permission as far as a little discrete snow clearing goes.

As far as hand-shoveling goes, you'd be surprised how much you can do by hand. I used to clear a 75ft. driveway by myself - no more than three hours after the worst snow. If I did that much on the street, and every 2nd neighbor did the same, there would be a one lane passable road at least. People are too afraid of manual labor, yet they run to the gym to stay fit. Go figure.

[devonb]

:previous:

agreed

[outoftheice]

Forgive me if this has been mentioned... but is there an actual example of plows being added to city vehicles that would not normally have them?? The idea makes for a great talking point, but on my travels I can't think of a single time I've seen a city bus whip by with a plow stuck on its front... If it hasn't been tried elsewhere, why not? There are plenty of other cities in North America who receive a lot more snow than Calgary. If none of them are using this idea, I'm guessing there's a good reason for it....

[Wentworth]

I honestly don't find "snow removal" to be a top priority. I could care less if my side street is covered in snow. It is winter, in Canada.

An area that could use some work would be how well the city prepares for and handles storms. There's an important distinction there, and it seems that many don't distinguish. I still believe that sometime mother nature hands us a real challenge and it is completely unrealistic to expect your commute times to remain the same in the middle of a freezing blizzard.

That being said, I think that there could be a bit more attention spent to preparing for storms. The city has said in the past that they prep the roads with a mixture prior to a snowfall, but there's something about that system that hasn't seemed to work on a few occasions this year. I don't see any harm in looking at ways to improve this. Of course, this isn't what Ric is on about. He's just appealing to those that have unrealistic expectations that their far-flung sidestreet will be plowed to the pavement within hours of a storm. Of course, everyone's tone will change when they realize that there will be a cost attached.

There's nothing wrong with looking at improving the way the city handles snow, however. But I don't want to be paying more taxes so that everyone's cul-de-sac is pristinely groomed.

I think you make some great points here. I also don't think snow removal is a big priority. I think getting the sanders out sooner on the major routes is a higher priority. The problem seems to be that the sanding trucks themselves are getting stuck in gridlock. There has got to be something we can look at, like having the equipment more distributed throughout the city, and possibly look at using smaller less expensive equipment to accomplish this, if necessary. I've also heard some chatter that bureaucracy and union work rules are preventing equipment from getting out in a timely manner. I'm not really big on privatization, but if this is true, then we need to look at putting the work out to tender.

But volunteer snow removal (outside of clearing the area in front of your own house) is a generally bad idea, and I still don't believe that anyone is seriously suggesting that we put blades on buses or firetrucks. And, as an aside, the CTU was on the radio a month back complaining that they need snow tires for their buses. Ironic.

[korzym]

Forgive me if this has been mentioned... but is there an actual example of plows being added to city vehicles that would not normally have them?? The idea makes for a great talking point, but on my travels I can't think of a single time I've seen a city bus whip by with a plow stuck on its front... If it hasn't been tried elsewhere, why not? There are plenty of other cities in North America who receive a lot more snow than Calgary. If none of them are using this idea, I'm guessing there's a good reason for it....

Denver

[outoftheice]

Denver

Thanks for the reply. Can you provide a link to some information regarding their program in Denver? I tried searching but this is the only thing I found....

http://www.denversnowplan.com/resources.htm#fleet

Snow Removal Fleet

68 plows heavy plows
Seven motor graders
Four loaders
The motor graders and loaders are deployed to areas where snow tends to drift on the road, creating tall drifts that plows can’t remove; they address streets where ice is packed and needs to be broken up; they can be used to clear on-street parking after the roads are addressed. Motor graders do the heavy work and the loaders remove the snow or ice from the road.
An additional four loaders at camps to load materials into the plows

It makes no mention of plows being temporarily attached to buses, emergency vehicles etc...

[Ferreth]

I did a quick search on Flickr for the possibility of a "Denver Bus Plow" and found only the standard complaints of 'the bus got stuck because the road wasn't plowed' ... just like we'd get here in Calgary.

Pics or it didn't happen Korzym! :D

[You Need A Thneed]

Drove up to Mallzac this eve all the way up Metis Trail (and whatever roads it turns onto on the way. So it is now open.

The signs in the mall showing the alternate route call the portion of Metis Trail north of Stoney "Dwight Mclellan Trail". I don't know who Dwight Mclellan is.

[frinkprof]

Nevermind.