Calgary Roads

[5seconds]

The original FPS calls for a tunnel in the Anderson road interchange, 2 tunnels in the Sarcee/Glenmore/SWCRR interchange (it could be 1 tunnel, but at 280m it would introduce extra lighting and ventilation concerns, so it looks like splitting it into 2 was preferred.) and the strangest one is a 2 lane, 168m long tunnel for the Weaselhead Road that runs under the SWCRR. I assume it's a private road for Nation residents, but not sure about that.

Originally Posted by Mazrim

I know that a couple of the people who worked on that study read these forums, but I don't think they post. Maybe if you ask nice enough, they might answer some questions!

That's really good to know. Thanks!

[kw5150]

In some peoples' opinion, here is what freeways did to Detroit. It is really important that we get this road system right in Calgary!
Don't get all riled up either. It is from a documentary I watched.






By kw5150 at 2010-09-24

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by lubicon

Soon to be joined by the Airport Tunnel!

Airport Trail tunnel AND the McCall Way tunnel.

[Ramsayfarian]

Originally Posted by kw5150

In some peoples' opinion, here is what freeways did to Detroit. It is really important that we get this road system right in Calgary!
Don't get all riled up either. It is from a documentary I watched.

It's this person's opinion that those people don't know what they're talking about.

Let me guess their theory. Without freeways, whites wouldn't have fled for the burbs during the racial tensions of the late sixties

[Rusty van Reddick]

White flight started in Detroit- and I mean in a huge way- in the 1950s several years before the riots.

Every US city has "freeways." Detroit's problems are about far more than freeways.

[Ramsayfarian]

Originally Posted by Rusty van Reddick

White flight started in Detroit- and I mean in a huge way- in the 1950s several years before the riots.

Every US city has "freeways." Detroit's problems are about far more than freeways.

I don't doubt that it started as soon as the first house in the burbs was available. The riots added a whole bunch of fuel to the fire.

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

Airport Trail tunnel AND the McCall Way tunnel.

Is this tunnel going to be a public access tunnel? I thought that it was going to be for airport airside ground personnel.

[UofC.engineer]

filler...i screwed up a quote

[UofC.engineer]

Originally Posted by kw5150

In some peoples' opinion, here is what freeways did to Detroit. It is really important that we get this road system right in Calgary!
Don't get all riled up either. It is from a documentary I watched.

Whats the name of the doc?

[DizzyEdge]

That google maps shot above is what happens when a city of 1.8 million gets reduced to 700k in 60 years. You can find similar occurrences in other US cities, although Detroit got it the worst.

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by YYCguys

Is this tunnel going to be a public access tunnel? I thought that it was going to be for airport airside ground personnel.

Yup, Public access. The only way for WestJet and other cargo area employees to get to work.

There is also an airside only tunnel a little further north.

[kw5150]

Originally Posted by Ramsayfarian

It's this person's opinion that those people don't know what they're talking about.

Let me guess their theory. Without freeways, whites wouldn't have fled for the burbs during the racial tensions of the late sixties

I dunno....it was filmed from the perspective of a long term inner city resident of detroit.

[kw5150]

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

Whats the name of the doc?

I forget, but I will try to track it down.

Here are some other facts

"Detroit engineers developed a massive freeway system to transport their so called fruits of the automobile industry, in doing so Detroit destroyed many public housing units to accomidate the freeway expansion. Public housing residents were evicted and offered no plan for relocation. The city of Detroit failed to comply with the Federal Housing Act 048, which required alternative housing for dislocated renters. In effect, the city created 17,000 refugees and wide distrust for local government."

I just dont want to see this happen to kensington / hillhurst or any other area in the city.

[kw5150]

http://maps.google.ca/?ll=42.429705,...11,219.25,,0,0

Here, take a drive through Detroit!

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by kw5150

Here, take a drive through Detroit!

Interesting how the block south of that, W Golden Gate is really nice.

Hard to believe this is on the the very next block:

http://maps.google.ca/?ll=42.428901,...,,0,-4.84&z=18

[Yahoo]

Longtime listener - first time poster here.

I feel that we spend so much time in Calgary worrying about what other cities do and it leads us to think that they're all doing it better. They aren't. Calgary has evolved naturally and like every city needs to keep changing. But the call for greater density or messing with our roadways smacks of our planners treating the city like it's an experiment, and they want to change things for their own personal agenda.

Take Crowchild Trail for example. There is a debate about the need to upgrade it and if we should. To me that's just silly. The last time it was upgraded in the bad part I was shocked. I was just a kid and couldn't believe that they went through all the effort just to put in 2 narrow lanes with no shoulders on Crowchild in one of the busiest areas.

It needs to be upgraded to at least 3 lanes of free flowing traffic and we can forget all the debate about "traffic acting like a fluid and filling up anything we build right away" or HOV lanes. Losing houses along the main roads is unfortunate but necessary for the greater good - and is nothing like the situation in Detroit. Those topics are interesting to discuss, but are just distractions and designed to delay action on a badly needed project.

Sure, in some studies some roads do fill up and become congested as lanes are added. But that's only in specific circumstances. It's not like every road upgrade causes congestion. Crowchild is too narrow, has too many lights, not enough lanes, choke points, awful merge and exit lanes with other main roads, and only 1 lane that doesn't require traffic to change lanes to proceed down the road. But it's a great road, for a city of 250,000.

HOV is laughable at this point in time for Calgary. We need to think about it once our multi-lane freeways start becoming overcrowded. That's 100-200 years from now.

I remember driving in the San Francisco area and I couldn't figure out why traffic was flowing so smoothly during rush hour. Yes, they have their bad areas but overall it was a dream. Then I realized every road was at least 3 lanes - even the side streets. It's like the planners of old knew that 2 lane main roads - and even side roads - just lead to congestion, pollution, and a real drop in productivity (not to mention quality of life).

I just wish city council would stick to the plan and focus on making a free flowing skeletal road network. We dropped the ball on 16th - because of a restaurant, I hope we don't make the same mistake on Crowchild etc.

Sorry for the long post but there is one other topic that annoys me with roads. The tendency to build things incorrectly to "prevent" future generations from changing things. I mean will the city ever learn that putting houses right up against Country Hills Blvd for example is just wrong? That's a relatively new road yet there are no standards. Some areas leave lots of room, and then other sections have man made choke points - and you just know that someday the city will be looking at buying up the houses along the edge to add another lane (for traffic, HOV, bike lanes, bus lanes, hover cars, trains, or what have you). Calgary is lucky in that we have very few geographical barriers to doing things correctly. We have room. The situation in SW Stoney is purely man made in that past city councils never imagined the city would grow. They need to leave room beside new transportation corridors.

[fusili]

Just as a counter point. You talk about San Francisco's roads and how well they function. During the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake several major freeways in San Francisco were badly damaged, especially the Embarcadero Freeway and large parts of the Central Freeway, both multi-lane free flow freeways with off-ramps. The damage was so extensive that both were pretty much demolished outright and converted into at-grade boulevards with multiple signalized intersections.

And guess what? Traffic imrpoved. Not only that, there was considerable redevelopment where the Embarcadero used to be, around what is now Pier 39, which, as a tourist, I am sure you visited.

Just a counter point to saying that San Francisco's success is based on large roads with free flow traffic. Removing a major freeway improved traffic in the long run.

Check out a UofT study on this called "The fundamental law of road congestion". This isn't a select few cases, it is a well studied relationship.

http://www.parisschoolofeconomics.eu..._seminar3b.pdf

[5seconds]

Just to add a little to that. An interview with Vancouver urban planner and ex-councilor Gordon Price, now director of the CITY Program, a continuing education program in urban planning and sustainable community development at Simon Fraser University.

Peter Mares: But roads are popular. I mean, if we look at Brisbane at the moment for example, they're tunnelling under the city all over the place and have built more links so that everyone can drive through the city more easily. People are complaining about public transport in Melbourne and Sydney. I mean, roads are popular, people like roads.

Gordon Price: Indeed. And roads are where buses go, where bicycles are. You will, and can do roads so that they serve many different purposes. But to make them simply traffic sewers -- this is the tragedy of it. You're going to spend a lot of money and you'll be pretty much back where you started, only you've got more of what you tried to solve in the first place.

Peter Mares: You mean, more traffic?

Gordon Price: Of course. I simply ask people show me the example where this has worked. All I want is for a working example of a city that has built its way out of congestion simply by building more roads and then is that the place you want to be? I don't get an answer to A or B.

Peter Mares: You mean, there's never been a city that's managed to fix congestion by building more freeways or more roads.

Gordon Price: You might argue that Houston, Texas has. They throw about $1-billion a year into it, they do keep the traffic moving. Do people want to be like Houston? Can you be like Houston? Are you prepared to spend that amount of money and is that really the kind of city that you want in the end? And they have to run as fast as they can just to keep where they are. And they're looking at transit too. It's never going to be either/or. The car doesn't go away, people will always be complaining about public transit. You want both, you have to have some kind of balance.

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/...utions/3400396

[kw5150]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

Interesting how the block south of that, W Golden Gate is really nice.

Hard to believe this is on the the very next block:

http://maps.google.ca/?ll=42.428901,...,,0,-4.84&z=18

I know! but drive down to the end and it fades fast into rundown-ness.

[kw5150]

Originally Posted by Yahoo

Longtime listener - first time poster here.

I feel that we spend so much time in Calgary worrying about what other cities do and it leads us to think that they're all doing it better. They aren't. Calgary has evolved naturally and like every city needs to keep changing. But the call for greater density or messing with our roadways smacks of our planners treating the city like it's an experiment, and they want to change things for their own personal agenda.

Take Crowchild Trail for example. There is a debate about the need to upgrade it and if we should. To me that's just silly. The last time it was upgraded in the bad part I was shocked. I was just a kid and couldn't believe that they went through all the effort just to put in 2 narrow lanes with no shoulders on Crowchild in one of the busiest areas.

It needs to be upgraded to at least 3 lanes of free flowing traffic and we can forget all the debate about "traffic acting like a fluid and filling up anything we build right away" or HOV lanes. Losing houses along the main roads is unfortunate but necessary for the greater good - and is nothing like the situation in Detroit. Those topics are interesting to discuss, but are just distractions and designed to delay action on a badly needed project.

Sure, in some studies some roads do fill up and become congested as lanes are added. But that's only in specific circumstances. It's not like every road upgrade causes congestion. Crowchild is too narrow, has too many lights, not enough lanes, choke points, awful merge and exit lanes with other main roads, and only 1 lane that doesn't require traffic to change lanes to proceed down the road. But it's a great road, for a city of 250,000.

HOV is laughable at this point in time for Calgary. We need to think about it once our multi-lane freeways start becoming overcrowded. That's 100-200 years from now.

I remember driving in the San Francisco area and I couldn't figure out why traffic was flowing so smoothly during rush hour. Yes, they have their bad areas but overall it was a dream. Then I realized every road was at least 3 lanes - even the side streets. It's like the planners of old knew that 2 lane main roads - and even side roads - just lead to congestion, pollution, and a real drop in productivity (not to mention quality of life).

I just wish city council would stick to the plan and focus on making a free flowing skeletal road network. We dropped the ball on 16th - because of a restaurant, I hope we don't make the same mistake on Crowchild etc.

Sorry for the long post but there is one other topic that annoys me with roads. The tendency to build things incorrectly to "prevent" future generations from changing things. I mean will the city ever learn that putting houses right up against Country Hills Blvd for example is just wrong? That's a relatively new road yet there are no standards. Some areas leave lots of room, and then other sections have man made choke points - and you just know that someday the city will be looking at buying up the houses along the edge to add another lane (for traffic, HOV, bike lanes, bus lanes, hover cars, trains, or what have you). Calgary is lucky in that we have very few geographical barriers to doing things correctly. We have room. The situation in SW Stoney is purely man made in that past city councils never imagined the city would grow. They need to leave room beside new transportation corridors.

You also have to look at the fact that: If you upgrade Crowchild, sure it goes faster....but to where? It will just bring people into downtown faster and then.....guess what? More congestion. The answer is getting people out of their cars in the long run. The planner aren't involved in some secret war on cars, they are trying to solve the problems that ONLY relying on cars has created. Lets not make an enemy out of planners.....they have done some VERY excellent things to our inner city in the last couple of years.