Calgary Roads

[CalgaryAlex]

Originally Posted by milomilo

We are in agreement then

I have to say though, any solution worth doing will be enormously expensive I think. It'll be a tough sell and there may well be projects more deserving of the money. But once it's done it would be fair to call the road network there 'complete' and wouldn't need to receive any major new road infrastructure ever again.

Very, very true. Hopefully when they make decisions, they make the right ones that won't cost us huge down the line.

[andasen]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Should we just reduce every road to one lane then? If increasing capacity can only increase congestion, the opposite has to be true also?

Apologies for the strawman - but there has to be a middle ground. Solving this problem isn't so much about vastly increasing capacity, but more efficiently using the infrastructure we've got. What's there now is two highly used roads funneling through a neighbourhood street network and then possibly the most stupidly designed interchange on the planet. What we have isn't good for anyone right now, and either doing nothing or decreasing capacity even further will do nothing to make the area friendlier to pedestrians or make the streetscape less hostile.



What do you mean by that? That's what you have to do to make that movement, there's no other option. In fact, all traffic from the south heading north has to filter briefly into one lane, it's idiotic and not the fault of the drivers.

The congestion on Crowchild broadly has its source by the constrained capacity of Downtown roads. The only effective solution that can be provided is to enable the N-S traffic to bypass the congestion associated with downtown.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by andasen

The congestion on Crowchild broadly has its source by the constrained capacity of Downtown roads. The only effective solution that can be provided is to enable the N-S traffic to bypass the congestion associated with downtown.

That would be effectively be achieved by restructuring Bow/Crow to follow the generally accepted best practise of having exiting and entering only from the right of the highway, and having three continuous through lanes. Currently the congestion northbound is mostly caused by having all three lanes having to merge into the left most lane (which then is joined by merging traffic from Bow heading for Memorial) - this is not how roads should be built!

I don't actually think the south of river section would require as large an engineering solution as might be expected - just put lights on Bow trail with at grade crossings over the LRT and parallel slip roads on to Crowchild. It would still require a huge amount of work, but no where near as much as if we wanted to keep Bow Trail free flow (which is unnecessary).

[MMMBeer]

What we should be bringing in is road pricing.

That would cut way down on the increased congestion from improving Crowchild. And it does need improving - what a cluster.

One thing that has always impressed me since I moved here is how limited downtown parking is (by design). That "pricing" of parking has already cut down on demand.

Pie in the sky as it would never fly politically, but the obvious thing to do for a scarce resource (i.e. rush hour road room) is to allocate a price to it. Also brings people's attention to the fact building and maintaining roads is not free.

[CalgaryAlex]

Originally Posted by 5seconds

Ironically, Crowchild Trail was conceived of as a downtown bypass road (part of the intermediate ring road), so those in the NW could get to the SE industrial areas without having to go downtown.

One day I really need to look into why the bridge was designed the way it was with only that single through lane northbound.

New blog opportunity??

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by 5seconds

One day I really need to look into why the bridge was designed the way it was with only that single through lane northbound.

I'd be interested in this. It really does look like someone just started drawing ramps and loops with no consideration whatsoever for how it would function in reality, and also completely forgot about EB-NB traffic.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by 5seconds

Good lord, that's all I need! But maybe next time I'm in the archives I can pull the old Crowchild files and take a look.

Probably the 1981 Bow Trail Connector Study would point you at the earlier decisions and their names for the Crowchild crossing.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by MMMBeer

What we should be bringing in is road pricing.

That would cut way down on the increased congestion from improving Crowchild. And it does need improving - what a cluster.

One thing that has always impressed me since I moved here is how limited downtown parking is (by design). That "pricing" of parking has already cut down on demand.

Pie in the sky as it would never fly politically, but the obvious thing to do for a scarce resource (i.e. rush hour road room) is to allocate a price to it. Also brings people's attention to the fact building and maintaining roads is not free.

If there is ever the political will to do this, this will be the best thing to have ever happened. With the current technology I see little reason why this couldn't happen with dynamic pricing on each road depending on congestion.

[DizzyEdge]

I wonder if it would be useful to determine what the cost would be, capital (incl expropriation) and operating (maintenance + loss of property tax revenue), to double the capacity of all roads leading to downtown, and then have an annual report that shows how close we are for that needing to happen, and what we're doing (transit, bike lanes, lane reversals, etc) to keep us from hitting that red zone.
I meet so many people angry at the limited downtown parking, who never seem to think that double the existing parking would likely mean double the # of cars heading there every morning, ie double the time of your commute.

What's funny as after typing that last sentence, it occurs to me I've never heard that message from the city ever, which is another big issue, city explanation/justification for policies never seems to be broadcast.

[sim]

For anyone that wants some empirical evidence, and because this lovely place came up in the construction thread as well:

Houston - freeways beget freeways

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by sim

For anyone that wants some empirical evidence, and because this lovely place came up in the construction thread as well:

Houston - freeways beget freeways

One would hope an LRT line would also rapidly increase in usage over the years and fill to capacity - that doesn't mean there were no benefits from it's construction. I definitely don't support a massive increase in freeway construction in the city, but I definitely do think there are numerous small improvements that could make some areas a lot better without moving congestion somewhere else. Mainly improvements to Glenmore and Crowchild.

Originally Posted by Article

I’m very disappointed and disheartened that my friend, Mr. Poe, would stand up and offer this amendment and call the Katy Freeway a concrete monstrosity. It’s my pride and joy. I got the Katy Freeway built without an earmark. Got it built from five year, three months. Went from eight lanes to 23 lanes. The economics has boomed because of the Katy Freeway. It’s moving more cars in less time, more savings to taxpayers than any other transportation project in the history of Houston.

This quote is moronic though and does indicate the Katy Freeway was road building for the sake of road building - measuring success by number of lanes added and cars moved.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by milomilo

One would hope an LRT line would also rapidly increase in usage over the years and fill to capacity - that doesn't mean there were no benefits from it's construction. I definitely don't support a massive increase in freeway construction in the city, but I definitely do think there are numerous small improvements that could make some areas a lot better without moving congestion somewhere else. Mainly improvements to Glenmore and Crowchild.

This quote is moronic though and does indicate the Katy Freeway was road building for the sake of road building - measuring success by number of lanes added and cars moved.

Roads and transit essentially operate in reverse. For roads, each incremental vehicle on a road decreases the travel time for everyone else, especially near the tipping point of "congestion", where an incremental vehicle will have a significant impact to the flow of traffic.

Transit, on the other hand, works somewhat in reverse. For each additional passenger, there is a incremental increase in frequency (which happens in leaps and bounds because you can only add a whole transit vehicle to a route at a time, not portions thereof). Of course, there is a point where transit too gets congested, but overall, the more people who ride transit in the city, the better it is for transit riders. The more people who drive in a city, the worse it is for drivers.

[CalgaryAlex]

Originally Posted by sim

For anyone that wants some empirical evidence, and because this lovely place came up in the construction thread as well:

Houston - freeways beget freeways

Originally Posted by Article

TXDOT plans to provide additional SOV capacity on I-45 North, I-59 South, 288 South, and 290

Lol, one over-budget project complete and studies show it has been a failure. Let's do it again four more times.

[Bri-Guy]

Next set of project information sessions by the City coming up Thurs, Jun 18 5 - 8pm and Sat, Jun 21 10am - 1pm.
Looking forward to seeing if we will be getting our first Diverging Diamond interchange.

This area needs a solution badly. But also looking to see what else they have devised to resolve the issues @ 162nd Ave and Shawville Blvd (separate, but related project)

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by Bri-Guy

But also looking to see what else they have devised to resolve the issues @ 162nd Ave and Shawville Blvd (separate, but related project)

The Shawville Blvd intersection is very much a part of this project. Spoiler alert: You'll be happy with the direction this project is going.

[lubicon]

So had my first experience with the new afternoon lane reversal on 5th Avenue. As expected I was less than impressed and my commute ended up being longer than I generally expect. Now I understand that one sample does not necessarily tell the whole tale but I just don't see this thing working. 4th Avenue was slower than previously and there is no flow anymore after 10 Street as traffic grinds to a halt due to the newly installed lights. Based on a single test I am giving this project a big fail for the moment.

[youngregina]

Originally Posted by lubicon

So had my first experience with the new afternoon lane reversal on 5th Avenue. As expected I was less than impressed and my commute ended up being longer than I generally expect. Now I understand that one sample does not necessarily tell the whole tale but I just don't see this thing working. 4th Avenue was slower than previously and there is no flow anymore after 10 Street as traffic grinds to a halt due to the newly installed lights. Based on a single test I am giving this project a big fail for the moment.

I had quite the opposite experience. I was able to fly down 4th to 7th street in the left hand lane after passing 5th street, and then turn right onto 5th avenue. The flow was mediocre at best, but I know that I was able to pass through the remainder of downtown more easily than sitting in stop and go on 4th, trying to get through the ctrain and 10th street. What really bothers me though, is that all of that traffic exiting downtown on 4th and 5th now has to be funnelled through 1 lane. So you are only ever going to go as fast as your slowest driver. Plus the immense amount of weaving that takes place once the single lane meets up with the rest of bow trail after 14th street.

[lubicon]

Originally Posted by youngregina

I had quite the opposite experience. I was able to fly down 4th to 7th street in the left hand lane after passing 5th street, and then turn right onto 5th avenue. The flow was mediocre at best, but I know that I was able to pass through the remainder of downtown more easily than sitting in stop and go on 4th, trying to get through the ctrain and 10th street. What really bothers me though, is that all of that traffic exiting downtown on 4th and 5th now has to be funnelled through 1 lane. So you are only ever going to go as fast as your slowest driver. Plus the immense amount of weaving that takes place once the single lane meets up with the rest of bow trail after 14th street.

That is the weak link in the entire plan. Essentially 4 lanes of traffic (2 from each of 4th and 5th Ave) are getting squeezed into one lane.

[Bigtime]

Massive rebuild coming for 17th avenue, including long overdue pedestrian improvements east of 4th street. The one glaring oversight (at least in my opinion) is the absence of adding any bike lanes to 17th and the city rep saying that 17th is still a "car focused roadway".

http://www.calgarysun.com/2015/06/10...e-aka-red-mile

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Massive rebuild coming for 17th avenue, including long overdue pedestrian improvements east of 4th street. The one glaring oversight (at least in my opinion) is the absence of adding any bike lanes to 17th and the city rep saying that 17th is still a "car focused roadway".

http://www.calgarysun.com/2015/06/10...e-aka-red-mile

Anyone who thinks that 17th Ave is a car-focused road-way is out to lunch. Any city's primary patio and pedestrian retail area should not have those words anywhere near it. Not that cars should be removed entirely, the city should at least recognize its a pedestrian-focused place, not a car-focused one, at the very least in the main sections.

I will withhold judgment until we see the designs but not making any "visible" pedestrian improvements or wider sidewalks on the already key corridor of 4th Street to 8th Street would be a big misstep.