Calgary Stoney Trail [Ring Road]

[MonctonGoldenFlames]

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

Did Tsuu T'ina affect the project?
If no, then they are not a stakeholder

tsuu tina did affect the project in the past. but, if the province sticks by their word and does not negotiate further with the tsuu tina, the nation is no longer a stakeholder in the project moving forward, and merely becomes a physical barrier to which the ring road must be designed around.

[kw5150]

Ok time for some new solutions.......

[GoflamesGo]

I say we build a bridge suspended 100ft in the air, over tsu tina.

[shreddog]

Originally Posted by kw5150

Ok time for some new solutions.......

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by MonctonGoldenFlames

you're thinking of lakeview being affected negatively, and i am thinking of the larger community, city of calgary, being affected positively. i guess it's a matter of perspective on how we define 'affected' and 'community'.

Like most development issues, you can sum this entire discussion up with the word NIMBY.

[kw5150]

If we fix the traffic problems in the far southwest with the ring road, doesn't traffic just get congested somewhere else down the line? They should really be working on a new LRT alignment that goes by mount royal college somehow, and has a vancouver-style elegant fly-over, over the Glenmore reservoir. Then a couple interchange upgrades to to 14th, Heritage, Southland, Anderson and voila! Problem kind of solved! At least we will have another LRT line that actually goes through some communities!

4 billion dollars later.......

Ooops, I forgot upgrading to interchage at Glenmore/ hwy 8..................and Sarcee / richmond

And upgrade hwy to four lanes for f sakes!!!! All of those richies on the western slopes can pay for it.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by freeweed

Like most development issues, you can sum this entire discussion up with the word NIMBY.

I am not so convinced. I wouldn't want the Ring Road through the Weaslehead, nor would I want it through Fish Creek, or Nose Hill or the Bird Sanctuary. My perspective personally is that we shouldn't be building massive super highways through environmentally sensitive areas, no matter where they are.

My other objection is just to our obsession with roads in general. The size and number of major roads, highways and arterials in Calgary is just ridiculous. Road construction, to some extent, is just a wicked problem. Trying to solve the problem just exacerbates the conditions that led to the problem in the first place:
More roads = More and longer trips (there is a lot of research behind trip generation and average trip length and the level of road infrastructure); more parking required, which leads to lower land use density and mix, which decreases the viability of transit.
More and longer trips; lower density and land use mix and decreased viability of transit = More need for roads.

I know this is really over-simplified, but often road construction just leads to more demand for those roads. Just watch what the ring road will do to residential development in Symons Valley. The same thing will happen with the SWRR. If we build it, it will simply spur development in the deep SW and the far West, which will increase the length and number of trips those people make.

[Wentworth]

Originally Posted by MonctonGoldenFlames

you're thinking of lakeview being affected negatively, and i am thinking of the larger community, city of calgary, being affected positively. i guess it's a matter of perspective on how we define 'affected' and 'community'.

Personally, I don't see how this necessarily constitutes a huge positive benefit for the larger community. A big plus for the deep-SW residents for sure, but at the expense of facilitating further sprawl and eventually more upstream/inner city traffic problems as this traffic unloads off of the ring road and tries to get downtown. Then there is the impact on the Glenmore Resevoire park system, probably one of the City’s nicest assets and about the only place I’ve taken out of town guests where they’ve said “wow, this is nice.”

Why not just build 16 lane highways all the way down MacLeod Trail and Bow Trail into downtown? Wouldn't that benefit the larger community?

EDIT: Hah, should have refreshed my page before replying. My sentiments echo kw and fusili's.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by Wentworth

Personally, I don't see how this necessarily constitutes a huge positive benefit for the larger community. A big plus for the deep-SW residents for sure, but at the expensive of facilitating further sprawl and eventually more upstream/inner city traffic problems as this traffic unloads off of the ring road and tries to get downtown. Then there is the impact on the Glenmore Resevoire park system, probably one of the City’s nicest assets and about the only place I’ve taken out of town guests where they’ve said “wow, this is nice.”

EDIT: Hah, should have refreshed my page before replying. My sentiments echo kw and fusili's.

About the further sprawl, the area west of Stoney would be off limits unless Tsuu T'ina Nation decides to develop a city themselves. The area east is already developed. Hence the impact would be greatly limited compared to Stoney North.

I do think that the ultimate design should only be 6 lanes there though, with the median reserved for a Southwest LRT. Any further ring roads would have to be via Highway 22, which is of little use right now.

[Wentworth]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

About the further sprawl, the area west of Stoney would be off limits unless Tsuu T'ina Nation decides to develop a city themselves. The area east is already developed. Hence the impact would be greatly limited compared to Stoney North.

I do think that the ultimate design should only be 6 lanes there though, with the median reserved for a Southwest LRT. Any further ring roads would have to be via Highway 22, which is of little use right now.

I'm thinking of Evergreen and points West and South from there. There are already huge areas that were absorbed by the City that are waiting for development. Then there's always the possibility of sprawl in bedroom communities further out.

[suburb]

Originally Posted by kw5150

If we fix the traffic problems in the far southwest with the ring road, doesn't traffic just get congested somewhere else down the line?

It is a *ring* road.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by Wentworth

I'm thinking of Evergreen and points West and South from there. There are already huge areas that were absorbed by the City that are waiting for development. Then there's always the possibility of sprawl in bedroom communities further out.

Exactly, right now sprawl in the south west is in some ways constrained by traffic congestion. The ring road will suddenly make development out to Priddis seem viable. The deep south west is already about as far away from any employment centre as you can get in the city. Will pushing it west to 85 St SW, with Highway 8 style acreage development all the way to Bragg Creek, really improve the city?

If we can build the SWRR right, which would involve the T'suu T'ina route, it can be a viable transportation route for some time. The expansion to sixteen lanes would essentially be all we would ever need. I am afraid that a half asses 37 St route will only delay the problem until it gets much worse. At that point we will not be able to do anything else. We would have wrecked Lakeview and ultimately achieved nothing for it.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by suburb

It is a *ring* road.

Houston probably thought that as well. And then they had to build 2 more "ring" roads. This road will not be around the edge of the city for long, and building it will only spur outward development further.

[fusili]

My last post points to the terrible problem that transportation engineers and planners fail to recognize (or fully recognize) all the time. And that is that road infrastructure has an incredible effect on development patterns. When planning a road you should take into account two scenarios- the development pattern (along with trip generation) without the road, and the development pattern with the road and see what the scenarios yield.

Transportation planners typically do the opposite- they assume that one development scenario will occur and then see what the impact on traffic will be with and without the road. When planning the ring road I don't imagine they said "OK, what will development in Symon's Valley be with this road, and what will it be without." In many cases, road infrastructure solves one problem, but creates another.

[Mazrim]

Can someone please tell me exactly what negative environmental effects a bridge over the weaselhead would cause? I've heard a whole lot of words said about it, but not a single specific issue yet. Is this complaining for the sake of complaining? What damage have all the Bow River crossings built in the last 15 years done? Any? Environmental mitigation has been priority number one on those crossings every time, and they have all been successful. I don't see why this couldn't either.

Originally Posted by fusili

Houston probably thought that as well. And then they had to build 2 more "ring" roads. This road will not be around the edge of the city for long, and building it will only spur outward development further.

What the heck are you talking about? The SW Ring Road (the current topic of discussion) has a good portion of it blocked to expansion due to the native reserve. That isn't going to change. The rest of the ring road, however, will go ahead regardless of what happens in the SW, and no one seems to have a problem with the development that might already be encouraging.

I really do enjoy your comment about "ignorant planners" though. I've read almost a dozen different papers on road construction and the effects on traffic, and they all mention exactly what you say. I can guarantee you planners weigh all options. Just because the road isn't the option you like doesn't mean it's the wrong one.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

What the heck are you talking about? The SW Ring Road (the current topic of discussion) has a good portion of it blocked to expansion due to the native reserve. That isn't going to change. The rest of the ring road, however, will go ahead regardless of what happens in the SW, and no one seems to have a problem with the development that might already be encouraging.

There are other areas of the City where residential development could occur other than where the T'suu Tina nation is. The whole area West of Bridlewood and the East Springbank area are both areas that will see development massively increase with this road. This development would put pressure on existing roads, especially into the downtown. Unintended consequences and all that.

I do have a problem with the rest of the ring road and the development it is encouraging, I said so several times.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by fusili

I do have a problem with the rest of the ring road and the development it is encouraging, I said so several times.

I'm well aware of your thoughts on roads, but I'm talking more in a general sense. You're not the only who is citing concerns with increased network traffic in the SW as a result of the SW ring road...which wasn't apparently a big concern in the NE or SE from my recollections. It seems backwards as the NE and SE have much more available space to expand.

It's definitely one of those cases where I have to respect your opinion though. You'd have to run a train from my house to my work to get me to use transit, so I'm definitely pro-roads. You're all for transit based solutions, so we're going to look at everything differently.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

It's definitely one of those cases where I have to respect your opinion though. You'd have to run a train from my house to my work to get me to use transit, so I'm definitely pro-roads. You're all for transit based solutions, so we're going to look at everything differently.

Exactly. I am for smart transit planning that serves the needs of its riders. I loathe people who berate others for not taking transit, when it would be extremely inconvenient to do so. Asking you to take transit is probably ridiculous. But asking you to support transit isn't.

You say you need transit to conveniently service your trip from home to work, so how does that make you pro-roads? It is not like you dislike the idea of transit, you just recognize that for your particular case, transit doesn't work. Shouldn't transit, more or less, be taking people from their homes to their work with minimal transfers? What you need to recognize, is that although you don't use it yourself, you benefit from transit, mostly because it takes vehicles off the road and the better it does this, the better your commute will be.

For example if you are driving from Westhills to the SE industrial and you are sharing Crowchild with people going from Westbrook to Rockyview Hospital, a transit solution for those people helps you, although it doesn't serve your particular trip. Just imagine our city without the C-Train. Getting downtown would be hell. Every investment in Transit helps the city as a whole. I think everyone needs to recognize that.

[craner]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

Can someone please tell me exactly what negative environmental effects a bridge over the weaselhead would cause? I've heard a whole lot of words said about it, but not a single specific issue yet. Is this complaining for the sake of complaining? What damage have all the Bow River crossings built in the last 15 years done? Any? Environmental mitigation has been priority number one on those crossings every time, and they have all been successful. I don't see why this couldn't either.

EXACTLY.
Let's build this thing - the City needs it.

[craner]

Originally Posted by fusili

Houston probably thought that as well. And then they had to build 2 more "ring" roads. This road will not be around the edge of the city for long, and building it will only spur outward development further.

I do have a problem with the rest of the ring road and the development it is encouraging, I said so several times.

You say this like it's a bad thing.