PDA

You are viewing a trimmed-down version of the SkyscraperPage.com discussion forum.  For the full version follow the link below.

View Full Version : Calgary Roads



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45

Ferreth
Mar 14, 2011, 11:55 PM
I used to live in Bridgeland and the 4 way stops drove me bonkers there. People not signaling a left turn in one of those almost cost me my front bumper on several occasions. With a traffic circle, no signal means I assume you are coming past me, until I see the car is leaving, then I try to quickly squeeze in if there is time before the next non-signaling car gets to me. I'm still pissed we didn't get a traffic circle in Mayland Heights (19th St, 14th Ave)- the traffic light is a slight improvement; a traffic circle would've been better IMO.

frinkprof
Mar 15, 2011, 12:16 AM
Speaking of roundabouts, the McCall Way/Barlow Trail realignment looks to be open in time for the Barlow Trail closure on April 3rd. Barlow Trail will start getting ripped up almost immediately after the closure.

mwalker_mw
Mar 15, 2011, 12:36 AM
Roundabouts are a whole lot easier to navigate when you can see the lines on the road. A bit of a problem around here about 7 months of the year....

Ramsayfarian
Mar 15, 2011, 1:37 AM
Speaking of Roundabouts
LUiijJLMnDc

I hate to date myself, but I was at that very concert.

shreddog
Mar 15, 2011, 3:12 AM
Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't really think you're getting this. This isn't a case where someone built a traffic circle, and decided to call it a roundabout. They are two similar, but different things.

This isn't just a case of different names for the same thing. They're fundamentally different in how they operate.
...
We do seem to have this same debate yearly don't we ... well actually it was 13 months ago (http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/3644.htm)just before the orbital interchange at Dartmouth opened. At that time we had an interesting debate about nomenclature, whith some forumers actually discovering that there was a difference - in theory - between roundabouts and traffic circles ...
No wonder people get confused. This is literally the first time in my life that I've ever heard the terms "roundabout" and "traffic circle" not being used interchangeably.

I, like everyone else I've ever talked to, have always thought of them as being the same thing, just different terms on different sides of the pond.

Now that I glance at the Wikipedia articles, I can see the distinction, but colour me ignorant on this one. ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_circle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundabout
We soon discovered after that, that while the rest of the world differentiates between the two, in Alberta - at least as defined in our traffic laws - a roundabout and a traffic circle are the same with regards to the yeild pattern, and differ only on scale ...

From the provincial transportation website (http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/3644.htm):Modern roundabouts are different from traffic circles, such as those built in Edmonton. The centre island of the modern roundabout is smaller and has been designed with a tighter curvature that encourages lower speeds, resulting in a safer intersection that can accommodate more vehicles per hour.

Now according to traffic law in Alberta for ROUND ABOUTS (http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/3644.htm) the yield pattern is:3.Yield to traffic inside the circular lane, and wait for an appropriate gap.

Whereas according to traffic law in Alberta for TRAFFIC CIRCLES (http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/2013.htm) the yield pattern is:In a traffic circle, the vehicle on the right must yield to the vehicle on the left. The driver on the left must activate the right signal and use caution when leaving the circle and crossing through the outside lane.

So - at least in Alberta - when one comes to an orbital interchange, one must yield to traffic on the left, that is traffic in the circle, before proceeding. Personally, I don't care if they had called them chuzzwazzers, I think yielding to another car to avoid being hit is always a good idea! Too bad more people don't share that opinion.

bookermorgan
Mar 15, 2011, 1:28 PM
Speaking of roundabouts, the McCall Way/Barlow Trail realignment looks to be open in time for the Barlow Trail closure on April 3rd. Barlow Trail will start getting ripped up almost immediately after the closure.

I saw a "Airport Detour" Sign on McKnight Blvd. approaching 19th this morning. It is grouped with the McCall Way / Hangars signs but in a construction orange design.

You Need A Thneed
Mar 15, 2011, 2:24 PM
I saw a "Airport Detour" Sign on McKnight Blvd. approaching 19th this morning. It is grouped with the McCall Way / Hangars signs but in a construction orange design.

Was it just a orange diamond construction sign with a picture of an airplane on it? There's one like that on 64th Ave between Metis and 36th Street.

bookermorgan
Mar 15, 2011, 3:23 PM
Orange Rectangle Sign Airport Symbol on the left Airport Detour on the right

Replaces "Air Terminal" Sign here (http://maps.google.ca/?ie=UTF8&ll=51.092715,-114.016585&spn=0,0.066047&z=15&layer=c&cbll=51.09271,-114.016275&panoid=o_FQyP80C0zkR_0WAt9L6A&cbp=12,100.71,,0,5.76)

You Need A Thneed
Mar 15, 2011, 3:31 PM
The city should just remove all of the Terminal direction signs off of McKnight. COming from that direction, people should be taking Deerfoot to the terminal. If the terminal signs have to stay up, it should tell you to take a U-turn, and go back to Deerfoot. In a few years, when the tunnel is complete, than terminal directional signage can go back up, but even then it probably doesn't need it.

You Need A Thneed
Mar 15, 2011, 3:32 PM
Speaking of roundabouts, the McCall Way/Barlow Trail realignment looks to be open in time for the Barlow Trail closure on April 3rd. Barlow Trail will start getting ripped up almost immediately after the closure.

Barlow Trail will likely start getting ripped out the same day.

Mazrim
Mar 15, 2011, 3:42 PM
You're going to start seeing a lot of signs to "try" (key word is try) to help drivers remember that...well, Barlow won't be around soon. I get the feeling that no matter how many signs are out there though, you're probably going to still see people attempt to get to the airport from the old routes.

You Need A Thneed
Mar 15, 2011, 3:47 PM
There's probably going to be a few people that end up in the Cargo /WestJet building area for the first time in their life, wondering where to road that continues to the terminal is.

Also, likely some who are driving North on Barlow, notices that it will still be possible to go north past McKnight, and will just assume that the road didn't get closed.

Mazrim
Mar 15, 2011, 4:01 PM
There's going to be piles of VMS boards on Deerfoot/McKnight/Country Hills/etc. to try to alleviate the initial pain, plus some permanent signs on McCall to help remind the occasional driver who still goes up there in error. You gotta hope at some point they read ONE of them!

You Need A Thneed
Mar 15, 2011, 4:12 PM
There's going to be piles of VMS boards on Deerfoot/McKnight/Country Hills/etc. to try to alleviate the initial pain, plus some permanent signs on McCall to help remind the occasional driver who still goes up there in error. You gotta hope at some point they read ONE of them!

For people like myself, who have driven those routes thousands of times, I hardly even notice of any of those signs any more. I suppose big display boards would get my attention.

I do wonder how its going to look to people visiting Calgary that some of the signage taking them to the airport will lead them down an overcrowded country road and WAY around. Oh well, most of that will be aided when Metis Trail opens.

bookermorgan
Mar 15, 2011, 5:07 PM
also...the dreaded GPS drivers will be totally lost....

"but my GPS says I can go that way..."

Mazrim
Mar 15, 2011, 5:27 PM
GPS still can't get people on Stoney Trail properly, so I imagine that will be fun for a while. :)

You Need A Thneed
Mar 15, 2011, 5:29 PM
GPS still can't get people on Stoney Trail properly, so I imagine that will be fun for a while. :)

I know my dad's older GPS didn't even really know about 36th Street, it would never give a route that took you on that road. I wonder if some newer GPS still do the same thing?

frinkprof
Mar 16, 2011, 12:40 AM
I know my dad's older GPS didn't even really know about 36th Street, it would never give a route that took you on that road. I wonder if some newer GPS still do the same thing?There's only one GPS.

frinkprof
Mar 16, 2011, 12:45 AM
Barlow Trail will likely start getting ripped out the same day.It's more than likely, it's a certainty.

The tie-ins points for the McCall Way/Barlow re-alignments just need a grading touchup, and then they are ready for paving. There was already some paving done yesterday. Wouldn't be surprised if there's already been some more done since then.

Ramsayfarian
Mar 16, 2011, 3:54 AM
There's only one GPS.

But many maps.

frinkprof
Mar 16, 2011, 3:56 AM
But many maps.Also many GPS receivers.

Ramsayfarian
Mar 16, 2011, 4:01 AM
But only one GPS.

frinkprof
Mar 16, 2011, 4:03 AM
There can be only one.

Ramsayfarian
Mar 16, 2011, 4:18 AM
Nicely played. If you didn't say that I was going to.

So we're not completely off topic. I posted this link in the transit section a couple of days ago, but it quickly got buried.

Interesting article on Slugging. (http://www.miller-mccune.com/culture-society/slugging-the-peoples-transit-28068/)

Koolfire
Mar 16, 2011, 4:55 AM
But only one GPS.

I think there is 3 GPSs today and maybe a 4th to come. Americans were the original, the Russians have GLONASS, Europe has Galileo and the Chinese are working on COMPASS.

frinkprof
Mar 16, 2011, 4:59 AM
I think there is 3 GPSs today and maybe a 4th to come. Americans were the original, the Russians have GLONASS, Europe has Galileo and the Chinese are working on COMPASS.Those are all GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite Systems).

freeweed
Mar 16, 2011, 7:05 AM
There's only one GPS.

And still plenty of people too stupid to learn how to drive without it.

Bigtime
Mar 16, 2011, 1:24 PM
Never forget LORAN C.

fusili
Mar 16, 2011, 4:56 PM
I think there is 3 GPSs today and maybe a 4th to come. Americans were the original, the Russians have GLONASS, Europe has Galileo and the Chinese are working on COMPASS.

Those are all GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite Systems).

I am going to take the surveyors word on this one.

Bigtime
Mar 16, 2011, 8:04 PM
Yeah, I think we are splitting hairs here. GPS is one of 4 GNSS's that are either active or being planned/set-up.

I still rock a sextant (no I don't)

freeweed
Mar 17, 2011, 12:06 AM
The term "GPS" has been genericized plenty. Regardless of what the US military would like us to believe.

Are any of these other GPS(-type) systems even fully operational yet? Can you buy receivers for them?

Bigtime
Mar 17, 2011, 1:40 AM
I think the Russian system is mainly used by the government and military, but they apparently are making strides into the commercial market.

frinkprof
Mar 17, 2011, 7:16 AM
The term "GPS" has been genericized plenty. Regardless of what the US military would like us to believe.Oh yeah. I'm mostly the one splitting hairs here due to it being a pet topic.

Are any of these other GPS(-type) systems even fully operational yet? Can you buy receivers for them?You can not rely on GLONASS 24 hours a day, but you can sometimes get a solution using solely GLONASS satellites.

The advantage can come in combining the systems. A lot of receivers used in commercial applications make use of GLONASS satellites. Picking up a couple Soviets can be a lifesaver when you wouldn't have a hope for getting a good phase-fixed solution otherwise.

freeweed
Mar 17, 2011, 4:27 PM
Neat. I've been waiting for the day when all 3 "GPS" systems would be available in a consumer handheld. Accuracy is pretty good right now, but there are still occasional problems and more sats can only help.

Mazrim
Mar 17, 2011, 4:31 PM
Neat. I've been waiting for the day when all 3 "GPS" systems would be available in a consumer handheld. Accuracy is pretty good right now, but there are still occasional problems and more sats can only help.

What do you mean by occasional problems? Loss of signal outside the mountains? Being off by hundreds of meters? I don't own a GPS unit and the only time I used one extensively was for RWIS, but I never had accuracy or signal issues once in most of Alberta and that was in 2005.

Jack Doe
Mar 17, 2011, 4:50 PM
GLONASS has 23 out of 24 satellites up in its constellation. The 24th should go up this summer. They suffered a setback in December when a rocket carrying three satellites plunged into the Pacific.

Galileo isn't even close to being finished. Only two experimental satellites have been launched. The first four operational satellites are due to be launched this year and partial operational capability of the system is planned for 2013 or 2014 (probably the latter).

The Chinese Compass system has launched seven experimental satellites and looks like it will be operational before Galileo with whom they are fighting for bandwidth frequency.

As well, India is developing a regional system that probably won't have any use in North America.

freeweed
Mar 17, 2011, 5:33 PM
What do you mean by occasional problems? Loss of signal outside the mountains? Being off by hundreds of meters? I don't own a GPS unit and the only time I used one extensively was for RWIS, but I never had accuracy or signal issues once in most of Alberta and that was in 2005.

Loss of signal, and the fact that accuracy isn't perfect. Sure, 10m may be enough for most uses but the more accurate the better - especially when using GPS tracks on something like Google Earth. The resolution there is high enough that a slightly off GPS track is clearly visible. And yeah, sometimes it's WAY out. In the mountains you get really weird effects sometimes - although I will say that I'm still astounded at how well it works period. Feels a bit like magic to someone who grew up with compass and sketched maps.

I use a GPS on a regular basis so I'm just more exposed to its flaws than most people. Ironically considering the title of this thread, I almost never use it on roads. :haha:

tmjr
Mar 18, 2011, 4:08 PM
The airport tunnel project may be doomed if the Calgary Airport Authority doesn’t significantly ease its demands, the Herald has learned.

After more than a month of intense negotiations between the authority and city over the proposed tunnel under a yet-to-be built runway, airport brass hasn’t moved from its opening position.

It’s a stance that has skeptical alderman gasping about major risks the city could face, including liabilities and costs beyond what city hall can possibly afford.

Ald. Brian Pincott said the airport authority’s position could push the project tab to $500 million, not the $295 million council agreed to in a 8-7 vote last month, while a colleague worried about the sticky position the city is wading into.


http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Calgary+airport+demands+doom+tunnel+project/4460665/story.html

You Need A Thneed
Mar 18, 2011, 5:27 PM
It appears to me that the opponents to the tunnel are just trying to sway popular opinion their way. Pincott's phrase "It’s not inconceivable that this is a $500-million project, We literally scraped the bottom of the barrel to get the $295 million.” is one example.

Again, he's totally blowing the numbers out of porportion. The city was not scraping the bottom of the barrel to get to $295 million. From what I've heard, the actual construction would be somewhat less than the $160 million approved. Remember, the city had something like a 30% contingency on the construction portion. Saving money on the construction will also save money on the financing. Even with somewhat higher land aquisition costs, it should still easily come in under $295 million. The interchanges, even if the Airport gets its way would be a ways down the road, and likely when the city would be thinking of building them anyway.

freeweed
Mar 18, 2011, 5:55 PM
We literally scraped the bottom of the barrel to get the $295 million.

I literally want to kill people who misuse this term. I didn't realize City Hall budgeting was accomplished through money stored in barrels, let alone sticky money that requires actual scraping to remove it from within said container.

Mazrim
Mar 18, 2011, 6:43 PM
I literally want to kill people who misuse this term. I didn't realize City Hall budgeting was accomplished through money stored in barrels, let alone sticky money that requires actual scraping to remove it from within said container.

Static Electricity is a bitch!

Ferreth
Mar 19, 2011, 3:00 AM
:previous:Crap, I forgot to ask about those barrels when I filled out my "City Budget Process" Survey!

MalcolmTucker
Mar 19, 2011, 3:10 AM
I will have to ask Oscar Feck about the money barrels - we have evidence in print from Councillors!

Ramsayfarian
Mar 19, 2011, 3:17 AM
It appears to me that the opponents to the tunnel are just trying to sway popular opinion their way. Pincott's phrase "It’s not inconceivable that this is a $500-million project, We literally scraped the bottom of the barrel to get the $295 million.” is one example.

Again, he's totally blowing the numbers out of porportion. The city was not scraping the bottom of the barrel to get to $295 million. From what I've heard, the actual construction would be somewhat less than the $160 million approved. Remember, the city had something like a 30% contingency on the construction portion. Saving money on the construction will also save money on the financing. Even with somewhat higher land aquisition costs, it should still easily come in under $295 million. The interchanges, even if the Airport gets its way would be a ways down the road, and likely when the city would be thinking of building them anyway.


The built in contingency is mentioned in the article. I can see why The City is balking at some of the Airport's demands.

FTFA:
"The terms range from the fairly obvious — that the city be on the hook for cost overruns — to the city guaranteeing to cover any airport costs, losses or third-party claims related to the tunnel construction or operations, or even failures to stick to the project schedule.

What’s more, airport officials want the right to halt tunnel construction entirely and make the city pay for cleanup if the city can’t meet the design and construction schedule.



Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Calgary+airport+demands+doom+tunnel+project/4460665/story.html#ixzz1H0mFWyHe

freeweed
Mar 19, 2011, 3:35 AM
Odd, the city is running street sweepers today. I've never seen them before May in previous years.

It's not a bad idea, there's more gravel than normal. Just unexpected.

MalcolmTucker
Mar 19, 2011, 3:39 AM
Up on the hill, always saw them early. Just a function of certain routes perhaps?

mersar
Mar 19, 2011, 1:36 PM
Odd, the city is running street sweepers today. I've never seen them before May in previous years.

It's not a bad idea, there's more gravel than normal. Just unexpected.

I've seen them out and about for the last week. They did a half dozen passes down 17th avenue one evening this past week.

Ferreth
Mar 19, 2011, 4:51 PM
Street sweepers were down my local feeder road last week. First time I've seen them out dodging around leftover snow piles, although that is a function of the larger than normal amount of snow - they are out around this time of year every year from what I can remember.

I much appreciate the "pre-cleaning" from a cycling perspective.

Mazrim
Mar 19, 2011, 4:57 PM
Should have waited for the snow storm to pass this weekend before sweeping!

Ferreth
Mar 19, 2011, 5:52 PM
Should have waited for the snow storm to pass this weekend before sweeping!

There was a lot of gravel in my area before the cleaners came through. What gravel might be laid down from the upcoming storm (drat!) will still leave the road cleaner than before.

AB Born
Mar 21, 2011, 12:09 AM
What are the tall street light poles popping up in various spots of the city? Looks like they have a big "power" box attached to them at the base... what is this for?

mersar
Mar 21, 2011, 12:27 AM
What are the tall street light poles popping up in various spots of the city? Looks like they have a big "power" box attached to them at the base... what is this for?

Those are likely some of the new mini cell towers that some cell companies are rolling out.

AB Born
Mar 21, 2011, 12:34 AM
Those are likely some of the new mini cell towers that some cell companies are rolling out.

Really? Is the city getting some money from this? It seems like a great idea.

DizzyEdge
Mar 21, 2011, 4:08 PM
Perhaps something like.. this?

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/8715/cal0227bleaderautophoto.jpg

Mazrim
Mar 21, 2011, 5:29 PM
Not quite. It's a standard light pole with an extension on the top, as well as a large control box mounted to the side of the pole. I've seen one on Canyon Meadows Drive just up the hill from Bow Bottom Trail and on Airport Trail between Barlow and 19th Street.

I'll see if I can get a picture of it today.

YYCguys
Mar 22, 2011, 12:45 PM
We were talking a few pages back about roundabouts/traffic circles. The way people drive in this city makes me believe that if they can't understand simple speed limit signs (eg: Airport Trail westbound is 90 from the Park n XXX to Deerfoot, yet almost EVERYONE goes 60!) then they surely wouldn't understand how to navigate a roundabout/traffic circle!

freeweed
Mar 22, 2011, 3:37 PM
We were talking a few pages back about roundabouts/traffic circles. The way people drive in this city makes me believe that if they can't understand simple speed limit signs (eg: Airport Trail westbound is 90 from the Park n XXX to Deerfoot, yet almost EVERYONE goes 60!) then they surely wouldn't understand how to navigate a roundabout/traffic circle!

If there's one thing I've learned in my years driving, it's that there are two types of drivers: those that think everyone else is going way too slow, and those that think everyone is going way too fast.

And if there's something I've learned in my years driving in Calgary, it's that this is actually often true here. People seem to either be 20-30 under, or 20-30 over. No one seems to drive the speed limit.

On Airport Trail, I notice 2 reasons people drive slow: 1) it's a road by an airport, ie: tourists, and 2) relentless speed enforcement. I've seen people pulled over hundreds of times now on the way east. So of course on the way home, people drive a lot slower in response.

Bigtime
Mar 22, 2011, 3:56 PM
On Airport Trail, I notice 2 reasons people drive slow: 1) it's a road by an airport, ie: tourists, and 2) relentless speed enforcement. I've seen people pulled over hundreds of times now on the way east. So of course on the way home, people drive a lot slower in response.

Eastbound Airport Trail where it drops from 90 to 50/60 is a notorious speed trap. I slow down every time and don't even risk it. But there are always plenty of stupid people that just go ripping past still doing 90, they'll get theirs.

You Need A Thneed
Mar 22, 2011, 4:30 PM
The tender is out for the bridge on 52nd Street SE over the irrigation canal and the train tracks.

Mazrim
Mar 22, 2011, 4:33 PM
I'd say the worst place in the City for people having trouble even getting close to fast enough for the speed limit is Glenmore after Crowchild and up Sarcee until Bow Trail.

I don't know why people are so afraid of that section of road but it's almost impossible to go 80 there. I am so glad I don't live out there anymore...I was certain I was going to road rage if I had to deal with that too much longer.

Koolfire
Mar 23, 2011, 1:59 AM
I'd say the worst place in the City for people having trouble even getting close to fast enough for the speed limit is Glenmore after Crowchild and up Sarcee until Bow Trail.

I don't know why people are so afraid of that section of road but it's almost impossible to go 80 there. I am so glad I don't live out there anymore...I was certain I was going to road rage if I had to deal with that too much longer.

I thought Sarcee was only 70 km/h. I haven't driven the SW in a long time. But what annoying about the city is the inconsistent speed limits. Why is it going up the hill northbound on Shaganappi it's 80km/h but on the way down 70 km/h and then drop to 60 past Country Hills.

Did I miss the notice that had Country Hills from Beddington to Shaganappi dropped from 80 to 60? I thought 60 was a temp construction speed but last time I drove it 2 weeks ago it looked permanent.

Beddington north of Country hills feels like it should be 70 km/h like John Laurie. I think the lights are timed that way too. Always seem to catch the red at 60 km/h

Why is Sarcee North 70 km/h and the south 80 km/h?...

Oliver Klozov
Mar 23, 2011, 3:22 PM
Why is Sarcee North 70 km/h and the south 80 km/h?...

Here's another -

The TCH (16 Ave) westbound is 80 km/h from just west of the DQ at 49 St NW, past Bowfort Rd, past Stoney Trail, past Valley Ridge Blvd and goes to 110 km/h near the top of the hill.

Eastbound it drops from 110 to 90 km/h at that same location and continues to be 90 until just before Bowfort Rd.

So it's 80 westbound and 90 eastbound for 2 or 3 kilometers. :(

kap384
Mar 23, 2011, 6:21 PM
One more:

16th Ave NW east of Deerfoot, specifically just before the exit to southbound Barlow. The speeding limit is freakin 90 people!!! Way too many people putter along at 60 or barely better all the way to 36th ST!!!!:hell::hell::hell::hell:

lubicon
Mar 23, 2011, 6:47 PM
Here's another -

The TCH (16 Ave) westbound is 80 km/h from just west of the DQ at 49 St NW, past Bowfort Rd, past Stoney Trail, past Valley Ridge Blvd and goes to 110 km/h near the top of the hill.

Eastbound it drops from 110 to 90 km/h at that same location and continues to be 90 until just before Bowfort Rd.

So it's 80 westbound and 90 eastbound for 2 or 3 kilometers. :(

This one really pisses me off. There's absolutely no reason it can't be rasied to 90 WB after Bowfort Road. There's no traffic lights anymore after that point and nobody drives 80 on it anyhow. Going EB, the drop from 90 to 80 is a nuisance and to top it off the City has put a red light/speed camera at this location to nab unsuspecting drivers. Dirty pool if you ask me.

CPS also has a couple of favorite spots for speed traps on the TCH west of COP. Westbound they like to sit right at the Stoney Trail intersection and nab people who dare go faster than the riduculous 80 speed limit. Eastbound there often is a photo radar van sitting just over the crest of the hill about 10 feet after the speed limit drops from 110 to 90.

tmjr
Mar 25, 2011, 5:41 PM
From the airport thread...

You can build road surfaces to deal much better with frost heave, but it's way more expensive. I'd think runways are built to a much higher standard than your average road.

I wonder how much it costs to do repairs to the road system every year to deal with frost heaving, and whether or not some more expense in building the road would be offset by not having to do as extensive repairs year after year? I imagine that tradeoff has already been considered though...

freeweed
Mar 25, 2011, 6:25 PM
I wonder how much it costs to do repairs to the road system every year to deal with frost heaving, and whether or not some more expense in building the road would be offset by not having to do as extensive repairs year after year? I imagine that tradeoff has already been considered though...

I'd hope so, but you never know with civic planning.

In cities that get a lot more frost heave, generally they build the roads to a higher standard. Calgary doesn't (normally) see as much so our roads really start falling apart in a bad winter like this. I've driven on < 5 year old pavement this month that will likely crumble to dust once the melt starts in earnest.

The question really comes down to how many bad winters you expect. If Calgary gets 2-3 like this in a row... ouch.

Ramsayfarian
Mar 25, 2011, 8:58 PM
This isn't frost heave, but check out this stretch of road that was repaired in only 6 days.

http://jalopnik.com/#!5785281/japan-fixed-this-quake+damaged-road-in-just-six-days

tmjr
Mar 25, 2011, 10:12 PM
The question really comes down to how many bad winters you expect. If Calgary gets 2-3 like this in a row... ouch.

Fair enough, though it seems to me we always have SOME damage from the winter, and then during the spring there are crews going about remediating or doing preventative maintenance. Perhaps on major roads like Crowchild where major repairs would cause lots of disruptions, it would be worth the extra expense. Again, hopefully the tradeoff has been considered!

I recall reading about new types of payment mixes incorporating rubber and other materials that made the pavement more resilient. Has that sort of thing been tried? I imagine if the pavement was more resistant to cracking, potholes would be less of an issue (I say that NOT being a civil engineer, though I play one on TV... :P)

freeweed
Mar 27, 2011, 6:47 PM
We don't have a weather thread for Calgary, so as I noticed this on the road I'll post it here.

You can very clearly see where this latest weather system stops. West of Bear Hill, there was virtually no fog yesterday. Almost no snow. No frost at all. Coming back towards the city, as soon as you top that hill the frost starts and continues all the way to Calgary.

Our mission is clear - we have to level that hill and let the nicer weather in! It was partially blue sky and +3 on the other side yesterday, -5 on the Calgary side and completely socked in. :hell:

Cage
Mar 27, 2011, 8:11 PM
Question regarding frost heave on the roads - Crowchild in particular.

What is going to happen along the Crowchild corridor between Brentwood and Sarcee?

As reported in the media this area is a mess for road traffic. But not reported in the media is the effect of ground heaving on the C-Train line. In two spots eastbound and one spot Westbound each C-train must slow to a crawl in order to go over an area of bad rail allignment.

Does the ground heaving subside with the warmer weather?

What are the repairs required for the C-Train line?

The above posts mention the road affects and repair requirements, so I'm not focusing on this aspect of Crowchild corridor.

frinkprof
Mar 27, 2011, 9:00 PM
We don't have a weather thread for CalgaryYes we do. In fact, you created it.

freeweed
Mar 28, 2011, 5:32 AM
Yes we do. In fact, you created it.

Correction: that anyone pays attention to. ;)

freeweed
Mar 28, 2011, 5:36 AM
As reported in the media this area is a mess for road traffic. But not reported in the media is the effect of ground heaving on the C-Train line. In two spots eastbound and one spot Westbound each C-train must slow to a crawl in order to go over an area of bad rail allignment.

Huh, I've been wondering about this. Figured it was just the usual traffic delays (too many trains during the rush now, so you're always sitting at some point). Makes sense though. The road is as bad as I've ever seen it here, and the train shares the same bed.

Does the ground heaving subside with the warmer weather?

Technically yes, although not always the way you expect/want it. I have a hard time seeing rails just realign themselves perfectly.

This brings up a larger question in my mind but I'm sure train geeks can answer it - how do CN/CP deal with frost heave? Is the C-Train on a very shallow bed because it's *L*RT? I'd have to think freight traffic runs on rails that are very resistant to frost heave, considering that half the country suffers from a large amount of it.

Re: road frost heave - all I know is, I'm laughing at all the idiots in this city who drive pickups as daily vehicles. Because I've been down that stretch of Crowchild in a few vehicles, and a pickup. The pickup sounded like it was going to fall apart. Serves 'em right. :haha:

Oliver Klozov
Mar 28, 2011, 4:25 PM
This brings up a larger question in my mind but I'm sure train geeks can answer it - how do CN/CP deal with frost heave? Is the C-Train on a very shallow bed because it's *L*RT? I'd have to think freight traffic runs on rails that are very resistant to frost heave, considering that half the country suffers from a large amount of it.


Initially the railroads deal with it in the same way - speed restrictions. A bad frost heave on the railroad could see a speed restriction of maximum 10 mph!
Not only can frost heaves create a bump in the track, they can also create a significant cross level variation which when you watch a train go over one you see the train rock from side to side.

Once a frost heave subsides, the track will not always return to it's original level. Then they have to bring out the ballast regulators and tampers, lift the track, shake and tamp the ballast to return the track to its proper geometry.

The "L"in LRT of course stands for "Light". The only real difference between that and the freight railroad's rail is the weight. Rail in North America is measured in pounds per yard. The heavier the rail the heavier the train that can over it. There is little or no difference, however, in their susceptibility to frost heaving.

YouTube of a ballast tamper in action:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lz4aZg_IkDc

Notice how the tamper lifts the rail and shakes the ballast. The piece way out in front relays info back to the tamper which instructs it as to how much ballast to shake under the tie or which side to shake more.

freeweed
Mar 28, 2011, 5:38 PM
Huh, thanks for the info. It seems like a monumental task, monitoring and repairing thousands of km of track - EVERY SPRING. :shrug:

Bigtime
Mar 28, 2011, 6:47 PM
There was a truck on the CP rail lines downtown yesterday by my place, it looked like a daylighting truck and it appeared to be blowing air or something onto the tracks. Any idea what they were doing? It was incredibly noisy.

fusili
Mar 28, 2011, 7:02 PM
There was a truck on the CP rail lines downtown yesterday by my place, it looked like a daylighting truck and it appeared to be blowing air or something onto the tracks. Any idea what they were doing? It was incredibly noisy.

Badger Daylighting? There was one by our office the other day as well (the Macleod Trail Underpass). Wonder what they are doing.

Bigtime
Mar 28, 2011, 7:14 PM
Badger Daylighting? There was one by our office the other day as well (the Macleod Trail Underpass). Wonder what they are doing.

It looked like one of those trucks, but it was on the rail lines (it had the rail wheels) and blowing onto the track.

Oliver Klozov
Mar 28, 2011, 7:28 PM
It looked like one of those trucks, but it was on the rail lines (it had the rail wheels) and blowing onto the track.

It was quite likely one of these -

AF1 Cold Air Blower

This unique vehicle is offered in two versions: one on rails for railways and one on wheels for airports runways. The AF1 blast away the toughest snow and ice with its 700 km/h (435 mph) air nozzle. For the wheel version, the carrier is powered by a 187 kW (250 hp) engine and can reach speeds of 0-80 km/h (0-50 mph). The blower is powered by a 373 kW (500 hp) turbocharged Diesel engine and the air flow is created by a two stage centrifugal fan. The air nozzle is hydraulically controlled.

http://www.grouperpmtech.com/images/AF1-neige.jpg

Bigtime
Mar 28, 2011, 7:37 PM
That is exactly what I saw, so it was removing ice and snow.

Ramsayfarian
Mar 28, 2011, 7:40 PM
That is exactly what I saw, so it was removing ice and snow.

Probably in conjunction with the repairing the damage with the lastest derailment.

Radley77
Mar 29, 2011, 7:36 PM
City weighs lane reversal options

Roughly one year after automated lane reversals were unveiled on Memorial Drive and the 5th Avenue connector, the city is looking at similar options for other congested traffic arteries.

The two reversals service up to half a million motorists every year each and similar measures exist on Centre Street and 10th Street.

Troy McLeod, city roads manager, says analysis has been done on adding lane reversals elsewhere — namely where Centre Street and McKnight Boulevard cross paths, on the Langevin Bridge and possibly even on the 4th Street underpass slated to open in late 2012.

“They’re very effective for making use of existing infrastructure and ideally located where the peak flow (of traffic) is unbalanced,” McLeod said.

But not everyone is sold on the idea.

Calgary motorist Aaron Chatha, who frequently travels against traffic flow on Memorial Drive when only lane is available, said more traffic frequency monitoring needs to be done.

“If there’s an accident or something I could be stuck there for 30-40 minutes,” he said. “I think, with Memorial, it was a great idea at first but it doesn’t work any more.”


Metro News Article - Jeremy Nolais - City Weighs Lane Reversal Options (http://www.metronews.ca/calgary/local/article/816719--city-weighs-lane-reversal-options)

I definitely think Langevin Bridge could use a lane reversal during off peak hours. You can see in Google Maps, how light traffic can be and that you could add more mobility options via lane reversals:

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=edmonton+trail,+calgary&aq=&sll=49.891235,-97.15369&sspn=43.009758,78.662109&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Edmonton+Trail+NE,+Calgary,+Alberta&ll=51.049664,-114.052548&spn=0,0.019205&z=16&layer=c&cbll=51.049936,-114.052306&panoid=cHdazUuN9iph419cYGWs-Q&cbp=12,206.4,,0,0.4

kw5150
Mar 29, 2011, 10:02 PM
Did I hear a rumour that The city of Calgary wants to make 9th ave SW a 2-way road? That would be amazing. It would also be good if the made 4th st sw a two way all the way as well. I always never liked how 4th st goes 1-way under the rail line.

mersar
Mar 29, 2011, 10:44 PM
Did I hear a rumour that The city of Calgary wants to make 9th ave SW a 2-way road? That would be amazing. It would also be good if the made 4th st sw a two way all the way as well. I always never liked how 4th st goes 1-way under the rail line.

Never heard anything about 9th ave, but its widely known that the city has looked into (and still wants to) eventually turn 11th and 12th avenues both back to two way traffic. A lot of the changes needed to make that happen will occur once the WLRT is opened (including the one necessary part of ading the intersection at 10th and 14th street)

kw5150
Mar 29, 2011, 10:53 PM
Never heard anything about 9th ave, but its widely known that the city has looked into (and still wants to) eventually turn 11th and 12th avenues both back to two way traffic. A lot of the changes needed to make that happen will occur once the WLRT is opened (including the one necessary part of ading the intersection at 10th and 14th street)

They have already converted 2 sections of 9th ave SE back to 2-way. I hope the trend continues. I have had SO many times that I really wished I could head east on 9th ave SW. There is REALLY something wrong with the vehicular circulation downtown. It seems like you have to drive 6 blocks to get back to where you were because of all the one ways and stephen ave and the C train line. Having 9th ave as a 2 way would also lessen the feeling of a big freeway headed into downtown. Look how many vancouver streets are 2-way........it seems to work just fine. The bow trail / 9th ave corridor needs a serious re-visit. So much opportunity down there with the west village and riverfront.

DizzyEdge
Mar 29, 2011, 11:42 PM
Never heard anything about 9th ave, but its widely known that the city has looked into (and still wants to) eventually turn 11th and 12th avenues both back to two way traffic. A lot of the changes needed to make that happen will occur once the WLRT is opened (including the one necessary part of ading the intersection at 10th and 14th street)

I wonder how useful swapping 11th and 12th for 10th and 11th would be.
Or since 9th is one way east, making 10th one way west, straight to crowchild?

frinkprof
Mar 29, 2011, 11:46 PM
I wonder how useful swapping 11th and 12th for 10th and 11th would be.
Or since 9th is one way east, making 10th one way west, straight to crowchild?Remember to account for a streetcar on some combination of 10th, 11th, and 12th as well.

fusili
Mar 30, 2011, 2:16 PM
Remember to account for a streetcar on some combination of 10th, 11th, and 12th as well.

Agree. It would be sweet.

Mazrim
Mar 30, 2011, 7:15 PM
Just wanted to say...after driving through Saskatchewan and Manitoba the last week, the roads here in Calgary are pretty damn nice in comparison. Everyone is getting hit hard by potholes and frost heaves it seems this year, and the Trans Canada in and around Regina was absolutely the worst I've seen.

freeweed
Mar 30, 2011, 7:58 PM
Just wanted to say...after driving through Saskatchewan and Manitoba the last week, the roads here in Calgary are pretty damn nice in comparison. Everyone is getting hit hard by potholes and frost heaves it seems this year, and the Trans Canada in and around Regina was absolutely the worst I've seen.

Hopefully without starting a flamewar...

What you say is true pretty much every year. I do the drive at least once a year and the highways are noticeably worse (although to be fair, SK highways are in damned good shape the past couple of years) and the city streets are like night and day. So when I hear people in Calgary complaining about the roads, I chuckle a bit. Hell, I've been here long enough that I catch MYSELF complaining - and then I go for a road trip, and remember what bad roads are really like. The clay soils in Manitoba are absolute hell on just about any roadbed.

I may be driving east very soon, so I just wanted to say thanks for the heads up. Fortunately I'll be taking a vehicle with high clearance and excellent suspension, but at 125 or so no vehicle is immune to bad roads.

Mazrim
Mar 30, 2011, 9:33 PM
I may be driving east very soon, so I just wanted to say thanks for the heads up. Fortunately I'll be taking a vehicle with high clearance and excellent suspension, but at 125 or so no vehicle is immune to bad roads.

Pay close attention to those little signs with the red triangle. Slow to 60km/h, seriously. Many of those marked frost heaves have scrape marks from vehicles traveling too fast over them. At least in Manitoba they clearly warn you to slow down for them. Even if you have the clearance, you probably don't want to hit the "bumps" too hard.

There has been a ton of paving done in Manitoba lately (I assume last summer), so I would say overall Saskatchewan was the worst.

The newer 4 lane stretches of the Trans Canada around the Sask/Man border are lovely though. Wish I had gotten some picture of those gigantic wind generators out at Moosomin.

Ferreth
Mar 31, 2011, 1:09 AM
Just wanted to say...after driving through Saskatchewan and Manitoba the last week, the roads here in Calgary are pretty damn nice in comparison. Everyone is getting hit hard by potholes and frost heaves it seems this year, and the Trans Canada in and around Regina was absolutely the worst I've seen.

Over many years, I have driven Calgary, Edmonton, Saskatoon and Winnipeg, plus highways around there. I agree that Alberta, and Calgary specifically has the best overall quality roads. My Dad always complains how bad Calgary roads are. He phones 311 and the city comes and fix the hole within a week usually. Still not good enough for him - the city should be proactively looking for the holes and fixing them according to him. I always tell him that I don't feel like paying that much taxes - usually shuts him up on the subject :rolleyes:

Jack Doe
Mar 31, 2011, 2:28 AM
My Dad always complains how bad Calgary roads are. He phones 311 and the city comes and fix the hole within a week usually. Still not good enough for him - the city should be proactively looking for the holes and fixing them according to him. I always tell him that I don't feel like paying that much taxes - usually shuts him up on the subject :rolleyes:

Complaining about stuff that will never get fixed, one of the benefits of growing old I suppose. When I grow up, I too want to be an old codger. In the meantime, get off my lawn you damn kids.

Old fart in training,
Jack

Mazrim
Mar 31, 2011, 6:41 PM
As expected, the Northbound Calf Robe bridge is being repaired this year, similar to how they did the Southbound bridge last year. Traffic nightmares ahoy!

halifaxboyns
Mar 31, 2011, 8:05 PM
This is probably off topic - but I'm trying to do some research on MacLeod Trail. A friend mentioned to me that some years ago MacLeod Trail was voted the 'Ugliest road' in Calgary in some article?

Does anyone remember what article that was and where I could find it?

Mazrim
Apr 4, 2011, 4:32 PM
I think 17th Avenue SE is probably uglier than Macleod, personally. Thankfully they have a plan in place to pretty it up.

Cage
Apr 5, 2011, 4:36 PM
http://www.calgary.ca/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_0_395_203_0_47/http%3B/content.calgary.ca/CCA/City+Hall/Business+Units/Animal+and+Bylaw+Services/Bylaw+Services/Excessive+vehicle+noise/April+6+and+7+Open+Houses.htm

On March 16, 2011, Animal & Bylaw Services presented a deferral report to SPC on Land Use, Planning and Transportation. Animal & Bylaw Services requested additional time to conduct more public engagement.

There will be two additional open houses on Excessive Vehicle Noise:

Date: Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Time: 5:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.
Location: Scenic Acres School main gymnasium
Address: 50 Scurfield Way NW, Calgary

Date: Thursday, April 7, 2011
Time: 5:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.
Location: Wildwood School main gymnasium
Address: 120-45 Street SW, Calgary

At the April open houses, there will be opportunities for Calgarians to:
1. Complete an in-depth survey on the impact of excessive vehicle noise on their quality of life. This survey will not be available online.
2. Listen to sound calibrated to various decibel levels.
3. Watch a video about new technology available to monitor excessive vehicle noise.

Mazrim
Apr 5, 2011, 4:49 PM
http://www.calgary.ca/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_0_395_203_0_47/http%3B/content.calgary.ca/CCA/City+Hall/Business+Units/Animal+and+Bylaw+Services/Bylaw+Services/Excessive+vehicle+noise/April+6+and+7+Open+Houses.htm

lol...

Did you know?

The closer you are to the sound source, the louder the sound.
Valuable info!!! :koko:

bookermorgan
Apr 7, 2011, 8:37 PM
Orange Rectangle Sign Airport Symbol on the left Airport Detour on the right

Replaces "Air Terminal" Sign here (http://maps.google.ca/?ie=UTF8&ll=51.092715,-114.016585&spn=0,0.066047&z=15&layer=c&cbll=51.09271,-114.016275&panoid=o_FQyP80C0zkR_0WAt9L6A&cbp=12,100.71,,0,5.76)

http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitpic/photos/large/272174588.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJF3XCCKACR3QDMOA&Expires=1302209605&Signature=qmFf1VYfrV0oGuXGa6EChRZHrqc%3D (http://twitpic.com/4i1n98)

freeweed
Apr 7, 2011, 8:54 PM
It's not a detour if it's permanent (not sure if this has been pointed out here or not yet).