Calgary Roads - Page 36

Ferreth · #**701** Posted **Dec 21, 2009, 5:17 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SubwayRev

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

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 · #**702** Posted **Dec 21, 2009, 8:28 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corndogger

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 · #**703** Posted **Dec 21, 2009, 6:21 PM**

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 · #**704** Posted **Dec 22, 2009, 9:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

Probably done for security reasons.

lubicon · #**705** Posted **Dec 22, 2009, 10:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nudrock

Probably done for security reasons.

Bingo.

Bigtime · #**706** Posted **Dec 22, 2009, 10:07 PM**

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 · #**707** Posted **Dec 22, 2009, 10:11 PM**

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 · #**708** Posted **Dec 22, 2009, 10:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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

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 · #**709** Posted **Dec 22, 2009, 10:48 PM**

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 · #**710** Posted **Dec 22, 2009, 10:49 PM**

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 · #**711** Posted **Dec 23, 2009, 1:48 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

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 · #**712** Posted **Dec 26, 2009, 9:21 AM**

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

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

You Need A Thneed · #**713** Posted **Dec 26, 2009, 4:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corndogger

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 · #**714** Posted **Dec 26, 2009, 7:14 PM**

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=5...h&z=13&layer=t

Google Maps now has traffic data for Crowchild the Deerfoot.

mersar · #**715** Posted **Dec 26, 2009, 7:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by greg_a

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=5...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 · #**716** Posted **Dec 26, 2009, 7:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

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 · #**717** Posted **Dec 26, 2009, 8:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corndogger

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

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 · #**718** Posted **Dec 26, 2009, 9:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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

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:

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 · #**719** Posted **Dec 26, 2009, 9:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by korzym

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 · #**720** Posted **Dec 26, 2009, 10:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

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.