HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #2501  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2011, 8:12 PM
Jimby's Avatar
Jimby Jimby is offline
not a NIMBY
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 8,796
I have never seen a daytime checkstop on Mission Road before now. It is a good place because no one can see it until it is too late.



daytime alcohol check stop, Mission Road SW by LUMIN8, on Flickr

Last edited by Jimby; Dec 23, 2011 at 10:47 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2502  
Old Posted Dec 29, 2011, 6:50 AM
You Need A Thneed's Avatar
You Need A Thneed You Need A Thneed is offline
Construction Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Castleridge, NE Calgary
Posts: 5,892
I typed this up about a month ago regarding the Airport Trail Tunnel, and submitted it the Herald. I didn't ever see it published, and I thought it should be shared for someone to actually read, so here it is:

____________________

Re: Mayor Clashes over Tunnel (November 15), FLying High on Debt - Airport Tunnel is no Bargain - (letter, November 21), and Digging a Debt (Letter, November 18)

At the November 14th city council meeting, Alderman Lowe and some others were asking about the total costs of the Airport Trail Underpass. Mayor Nenshi claimed that they had the information, and he was correct. And of course, the numbers wouldn't look like the anti-tunnel aldermen want them to look. Let's review the numbers in detail.

What is currently approved by council is $295 million. However, according to the city's estimate, what is being built now will only cost about $284 million, and only roughly 2/3rds of that is actual construction costs. Also, the city put a 30% contingency cost into the project budget, when a standard amount is only 10%. All for a project that, despite it's size, is actually quite simple in construction methods, and relatively free of potentially delaying unknowns. It's being built on wide open land, with no existing utilities in the way, etc. in other words, the project has a good chance of being built under budget.

In phase 2, the city builds two interchanges, at Barlow Trail, and at 19th Street, and the airport authority provides $20 million of the total cost. These interchanges must be built when the city decides to connect Airport Trail to the newly opened section of Metis Trail, which will likely happen in 5-10 years. In 2011 dollars, the city's portion is approximately $60 million for phase 2.

Phase 3, which involves building extra flyover ramps to the interchanges - when traffic demands it, is likely 20-30 years away (the city's transportation department thinks that they will never be needed). The city and the airport authority have agreed to split the cost 50/50, which according to the current design, and using 2011 dollars, makes a bill to the city of approximately another $60 million dollars. Of course, in 20+ years, societal transportation requirements could totally change what is required, so no one really know what the actual dollar value may be.

If you add all the numbers together, you would get $414 million. However, that number is certain to not be the total cost of the tunnel, as the final total will obviously be affected by inflation, and possibly changes in scope. Also, this total includes more than simply the tunnel itself. It includes a significant amount of work that would be required whether the tunnel was ever built or not. Roughly $20 million of that cost is for the portion of 96th ave/Airport Trail between 36th Street and 60th street that would be needed either way. Also, even without the tunnel, future traffic volumes on Airport Trail may force the city to build those to interchanges anyway, perhaps without ANY financial help from the airport authority. Those interchanges would cost around $100 million together. So, let's call the total cost of the tunnel itself around $300 million. That includes the cost of the land, the tunnel, the road through the tunnel, and the extra costs incurred by the Airport Authority in building the new runway that are caused by this tunnel construction.

However, in order to calculate the total long term cost of the tunnel, we must consider costs that would be incurred to the city in other places, if the city would have to adapt to not having the tunnel. Country Hills Blvd, between Deerfoot and Stoney Trail NE, would have to be designed and upgraded beyond what is currently planned and allowed for. Land already approved for development would have to be purchased or expropriated. The west LRT project required the city to pay $200 million to buy up land along the route. The city would likely have to buy more land than for the WLRT just along Country Hills Blvd. By the time the traffic would become completely unbearable (and thus needed for the expansion of the road), all that land would be developed, making expropriating or purchasing the land more complicated. I imagine that the province would have to improve the Country Hills Blvd/Deerfoot Trail interchange, and the city would have to build interchanges along Country Hills Blvd as well. There are 6 or 7 planned traffic lights between Deerfoot Trail and Metis Trail along Country Hills Blvd. (See the Stonegate Landing website to see the planned intersections) Building 7 interchanges would obviously be out of the question, but there would have to be 3 to 4 at minimum, with short distances between them making complicated and expensive ramps likely.

Metis Trail would likely require conversion into a full freeway as well, whereas with the tunnel, leaving it as an expressway should suffice for many years, if not forever. That would add another 2 or 3 interchanges. Adding up the required interchanges, plus land purchases, and you will easily get to the $300 million cost of the tunnel, and likely more.

I know some of you might doubt that such an expansion of Country Hills Blvd would be required. For those people, I recommend going to drive that section of Country Hills Blvd during rush hour, and then realizing that the area up there is only 10% developed. There is a huge area of land waiting to be developed, which will add a huge amount of traffic. Considering that a significant portion of that development is industrial and commercial (everything west of Metis Trail, plus pockets along 60th Street), there will be significant heavy truck traffic. There will likely be some industrial businesses that will want to be close to both the airport, and to the new CN rail yard being built out by Conrich. Country Hills Blvd even as a 6-8 lane road seems totally inadequate to handle that amount of traffic.

So, what is the long-term-total cost of the Airport Trail Tunnel? We don't know exactly, but in all likelihood, the number is around ZERO dollars, give or take $50 million or so. Even if we say that building the tunnel would cost $50 million more than not building it, it is still a good deal to build the structure that will create the best overall transportation network, and will allow Country Hills Blvd to remain the urban boulevard that the city has planned it to be. Most likely, the tunnel saves the city money in the long term.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2503  
Old Posted Dec 30, 2011, 5:53 PM
Cage Cage is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: YYC
Posts: 2,742
YNAT great analysis I agree with most of the points provided howerver there are some sticking points to consider WRT upgrade CHB in the event tunnel is not built.

In point form:
1) The above analysis and the City's analysis of tunnel alternatives both hinge on comparing the present value cost of tunnel versus the future cost of CHB upgrade. A better analysis would have been to compare build the tunnel now versus immediate buildout of CHB.
2) Analysis of interchanges on the CHB option does not take into account interchanges that have to be built regardless of tunnel or no tunnel. An immediate example is CHB and Metis Trail. IMHO the costs of this interchange are irrellevant to the Tunnel discussion as the interchange is required. Same goes for Metis Trail and 96th Ave NE, the interchange is required in both options as Metis Trail is planned to be an expressway with grade separated interchanges.
3) Land value costs for upgrade CHB assume the city does nothing for the next 20 plus years. A better option would have been to cost out immediate expropriation for the land required to upgrade CHB versus build the tunnel.
4) Any analysis I have reviewed has always hinged on either full build out of CHB from Deerfoot to Stoney or full build out Airport Trail and Tunnel. However for comparison purposes I submit that any option needs to remove costs associated with activities east of Metis trail.

Here is the analysis I would like to see.
1) Tunnel cost analysis puts the base price for tunnelportion at $200 million (no additional interchanges just a 4 vehicle lane plus LRT tunnel.
2) Cost of upgrades to CHB between deerfoot an Metis. Exclude costs that are required by way of other development plans (e.g. the CHB/Metis interchange cost is covered under Metis Trail plan). Include additional costs associated with no tunnel option (while a grade separate interchange is required at CHB/Metis under all options, there are additional costs under no Tunnel due to additional traffic volumes).

My traffic routing vision for a no tunnel option would be Stoney -> 96th Ave -> Metis tr -> CHB -> Barlow/Stonegate -> Airport.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2504  
Old Posted Dec 30, 2011, 6:18 PM
You Need A Thneed's Avatar
You Need A Thneed You Need A Thneed is offline
Construction Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Castleridge, NE Calgary
Posts: 5,892
Expropriating now would save some of the cost of that, but then you would have to finance that cost, and the cost would even out. It would still be expensive. I've tried to leave interchanges required either way out of my comparision. But, we must also keep in mind that having the tunnel will delay the need for some of the interchanges. Metis/CHB and Metis/96th won't be required nearly as soon with the tunnel in place. As well, the CHB one likely can become a simpler interchange with the tunnel.

The point is, there is significant cost involved with not building the tunnel now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2505  
Old Posted Dec 30, 2011, 9:20 PM
Cage Cage is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: YYC
Posts: 2,742
Expropriate undeveloped land right now would be a signficant cost savings to expropriating developed land later on. WLRT was expensive to expropriate due to the level of development and the need to compensate for reconstruction of houses and offices. Immediate expropriation of CHB land does not result in any building demolition and only minimal costs for Stonegate to adjust their development plans.

My best guestimate for expropriation of CHB land would be $20-30 million. This is based on similar undeveloped land values in the immediate vicinity of CHB. At this cashflow, no civic financing would be required.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2506  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2012, 5:11 PM
DoubleK DoubleK is offline
Near Generational
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,447
4 snowflakes and everyone forgets how to drive...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2507  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2012, 6:28 PM
Innersoul1's Avatar
Innersoul1 Innersoul1 is offline
City of Blinding Lights
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 3,676
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleK View Post
4 snowflakes and everyone forgets how to drive...
Yes, it was pretty bad this morning! But much of the congestion this morning entering into the downtown core from the west was caused by the 8th Ave. closure around Western Canadian Place (Husky). Lot's of cars turn into the the northern central part of downtown via 6th St., which was closed. As a result the next point to turn left after 6th st. is 2nd St. That accounted for much of the traffic/volume/ congestion on 9th Ave, Bowtrail
__________________
Sweet dreams are made of cheese. Who am I to diss a brie?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2508  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2012, 9:18 PM
bulliver's Avatar
bulliver bulliver is offline
So very tired...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Penticton
Posts: 3,757
So I was in Calgary yesterday, just burned down the Deerfoot on my way to Lethbridge. Gotta say, the lack of consistency of the lanes on Deerfoot is quite irritating. Now its 3 lanes, now 4, now 2, now back to 3...

As I was driving a big truck and pulling 65 feet worth of trailer, I was trying to be considerate and keep right, but the constant appearance and disappearance of the rightmost lane(s) forced me to travel in the second from the left lane, as it was at least constant.
__________________
Support the mob or mysteriously disappear...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2509  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2012, 10:39 PM
You Need A Thneed's Avatar
You Need A Thneed You Need A Thneed is offline
Construction Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Castleridge, NE Calgary
Posts: 5,892
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2510  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2012, 2:17 AM
DizzyEdge's Avatar
DizzyEdge DizzyEdge is offline
My Spoon Is Too Big
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 9,191
nevermind
__________________
Concerned about protecting Calgary's built heritage?
www.CalgaryHeritage.org
News - Heritage Watch - Forums

Last edited by DizzyEdge; Jan 16, 2012 at 3:27 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2511  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2012, 5:31 AM
You Need A Thneed's Avatar
You Need A Thneed You Need A Thneed is offline
Construction Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Castleridge, NE Calgary
Posts: 5,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulliver View Post
So I was in Calgary yesterday, just burned down the Deerfoot on my way to Lethbridge. Gotta say, the lack of consistency of the lanes on Deerfoot is quite irritating. Now its 3 lanes, now 4, now 2, now back to 3...

As I was driving a big truck and pulling 65 feet worth of trailer, I was trying to be considerate and keep right, but the constant appearance and disappearance of the rightmost lane(s) forced me to travel in the second from the left lane, as it was at least constant.
Yup, we all can't wait for that to be fixed. The short stretches of two lane are the worst. The fourth lanes, for the most part are just short stretches between interchanges, and there is no real reason for slower vehicles to move over in those lanes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2512  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 5:16 PM
suburb suburb is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 945
A couple days ago I needed to take 14th st NW in to DT when Deerfoot was a parking lot because of accidents (we don't normally drive, but there were reasons to drive, so don't go there). Anyway, 14 st was really backed up also while the opposing lanes were deserted. Got me thinking, anyone considered lane reversal for a longer stretch on a road like 14 st NW?

I'm guessing it is not so easy and likely many reasons not to do this, but just putting it out there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2513  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 5:38 PM
DizzyEdge's Avatar
DizzyEdge DizzyEdge is offline
My Spoon Is Too Big
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 9,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by suburb View Post
A couple days ago I needed to take 14th st NW in to DT when Deerfoot was a parking lot because of accidents (we don't normally drive, but there were reasons to drive, so don't go there). Anyway, 14 st was really backed up also while the opposing lanes were deserted. Got me thinking, anyone considered lane reversal for a longer stretch on a road like 14 st NW?

I'm guessing it is not so easy and likely many reasons not to do this, but just putting it out there.
Although 14th street doesn't head down town per se, the fact it skirts it seems like it might be appropriate. Really all streets that approach downtown should have lane reversal unless there's a reason not to (Edmonton Trail south of 2nd ave, and Macleod wouldn't be appropriate. Unsure about 9th ave in Inglewood)
__________________
Concerned about protecting Calgary's built heritage?
www.CalgaryHeritage.org
News - Heritage Watch - Forums
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2514  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 6:47 PM
freeweed's Avatar
freeweed freeweed is offline
Home of Hyperchange
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Dynamic City, Alberta
Posts: 17,566
Quote:
Originally Posted by DizzyEdge View Post
Although 14th street doesn't head down town per se, the fact it skirts it seems like it might be appropriate. Really all streets that approach downtown should have lane reversal unless there's a reason not to (Edmonton Trail south of 2nd ave, and Macleod wouldn't be appropriate. Unsure about 9th ave in Inglewood)
Really this logic applies to any route that experiences regular, dramatic volume/direction issues. Downtown should have little to do with the analysis in my opinion (it correlates strongly, sure).

But I also think light timing should be adjusted dynamically based on actual traffic use, not just a best-guess from last year's rush hour patterns. So I'm a bit of an idealist when it comes to traffic management.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2515  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 8:27 PM
MichaelS's Avatar
MichaelS MichaelS is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 2,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by DizzyEdge View Post
Although 14th street doesn't head down town per se, the fact it skirts it seems like it might be appropriate. Really all streets that approach downtown should have lane reversal unless there's a reason not to (Edmonton Trail south of 2nd ave, and Macleod wouldn't be appropriate. Unsure about 9th ave in Inglewood)
Edmonton Trail south of 2nd Ave is one way, so I imagine it would not be very appropriate for lane reversal
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2516  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 8:36 PM
DizzyEdge's Avatar
DizzyEdge DizzyEdge is offline
My Spoon Is Too Big
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 9,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelS View Post
Edmonton Trail south of 2nd Ave is one way, so I imagine it would not be very appropriate for lane reversal
That's why I included it in the 'wouldn't be appropriate', due to the NB and SB lanes being separated by a block. Same with MacLeod trail, being separated by a median and then eventually a block, just seems like it would be too confusing.

I don't see any reason to not lane reverse 9th ave east of 6th st SE, since west bound can cut through the east village up 6th street to 6th ave (before west bound turning north behind city hall was a bit of a jam with 9th ave narrowing down to a single lane before the turn)
__________________
Concerned about protecting Calgary's built heritage?
www.CalgaryHeritage.org
News - Heritage Watch - Forums
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2517  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 9:17 PM
Bassic Lab Bassic Lab is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,934
Quote:
Originally Posted by DizzyEdge View Post
Although 14th street doesn't head down town per se, the fact it skirts it seems like it might be appropriate. Really all streets that approach downtown should have lane reversal unless there's a reason not to (Edmonton Trail south of 2nd ave, and Macleod wouldn't be appropriate. Unsure about 9th ave in Inglewood)
Would extra capacity on 14 St actually help or would traffic still back up from 9th and 12th Avenues which are already overburdened with cars from Bow and Crowchild Trails? Basically, is the choke point in the traffic funnel the routes into the core or is it the core its self?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2518  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2012, 6:04 PM
You Need A Thneed's Avatar
You Need A Thneed You Need A Thneed is offline
Construction Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Castleridge, NE Calgary
Posts: 5,892
I not going to link to Rick Bell's latest column, but it's about the lowest I've seen even him go. It also got a headline on the front page of the Sun, that's about as misleading as a headline can be.

"Tunnel Tab hits $528 Million" is the headline. Which of course, he has to include the entire cost of Airport Trail from Harvest Hills Blvd to Stoney Trail to get that number, including interchanges required decades in the future that would be required either way.

Essentially, the report sas nothing we didn't already know, except that phase 2 and 3 both will cost the city LESS than we were originally thinking. Of course, the media reports the extra costs in the future for the Airport Trail corridor (which really have nothing to do with the tunnel) as part of the tunnel cost.

Airport Trail/96th Ave is going to be built between 36th Street and 60th St no matter what. An interchange at Metis/Airport Trail is going to be required no matter what. With a tunnel, an interchagne is required in the future at Airport Trail/60th St, whereas without the tunnel, it's required in the future at Metis/64th Ave. Interchanges for Airport Terminal Access would likely be required at some point no matter whether the tunnel went ahead or not. Amittedly, those interchanges will be required sooner with the tunnel in place, but because of the tunnel, other interchanges may not be required as soon, or may not be required to be as large. The section of Airport Trail between Harvest Hills Blvd and Deerfoot was approved long before the tunnel was, and serves a completely different part of town.

I'll paraphrase one of Nenshi's tweets from yesterday evening:

The $500 million cost is the cost of the corridor over 40 years, but that includes the cost of building roads and interchanges that would have been required anyway, and it ignores the costs elsewhere that are avoided because the tunnel will be in place.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2519  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2012, 7:29 PM
freeweed's Avatar
freeweed freeweed is offline
Home of Hyperchange
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Dynamic City, Alberta
Posts: 17,566
Does Rick Bell hate that we have an airport within city limits, is that his beef?

It's getting to the point where I'm at a loss to even begin to understand the complaints here. Plop a major international airport in the midst of a large (and growing) city, and you have to spend millions on infrastructure to support it, and to deal with its presence (traffic around/through it). What am I missing?

Perhaps we should build the airport at Crossfield instead?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2520  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2012, 10:57 PM
mersar's Avatar
mersar mersar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 10,083
The city has signs up all along Crowchild between Glenmore and the UofC advertising they are taking public input into what people think about Crowchild, this input will be used as a base for updating the 1979 Crowchild Functional Study. There are two components to the new Crowchild Planning Study, one being the 17th Ave SW to 24th Ave NW corridor study, and a HOV study for between 16th ave NW and Glenmore.

You can submit online feedback by going to the survey site at calgary.ca/crowchild
__________________

Live or work in the Beltline? Check out the Official Beltline web site here
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:34 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.