Calgary Roads

[North_Regina_Boy]

Why not tunnel? haha I know you in Calgary LOVE tunnels.

[craner]

Lots of good comments. For me, in the broadest sense, it can basically be summarized by these two by milomilo & Joborule:

What's being suggested here isn't an outrageous increase in capacity, it's removing a massive bottleneck so that capacity is similar from Stoney down to Glenmore, and reconfiguring what is probably the worst interchange I've ever seen anywhere.

and

We don't mind that it's up to appropriate freeway standards north of 24th avenue NW, and south of 17th avenue SW; so why is that such a taboo idea in the middle? Just because it's right by downtown doesn't mean it's function has to be different, because it can't be, nor should it.

[sim]

Originally Posted by lineman

How is a trenched freeway any less walkable than what currently exists now? Could it be possible that with a trench, west hillhurst and parkdale could be better connected with at-grade ped overpasses?

And who in their right mind would walk down a freeway anyway?

It wouldn't be. It really isn't now either, but first we need to frame/ have an understanding of what walkable actually means, which is accessibility and not whether something can be walked across or over, etc., because that's not it.

[sim]

Originally Posted by craner

Well played.

[milomilo]

Thinking about this, I don't think it needs to be this complex and an extra bridge across the bow can be avoided. Simply put signals on Bow trail and underneath Crowchild, and have onramps parallel going on to Crowchild. The LRT will get in the way a little but there are lots of similar situations across the city. The northbound Crowchild bridge over Bow will probably have to move west but I think that would be the biggest construction needed.

This would massively simplify the whole thing, removing all the silly tight loops and should allow 3 lanes each way until north of the river. Of course this only fixes that interchange and there is more work on the other side of the Bow.


Something similar to Crowchild/33rd:
https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Cal...6d3bb1b652b63a

[Ferreth]

Email I got from the City of interest to you roads people:

The City of Calgary recently completed a functional planning study to identify the configuration of a future interchange at the intersection of 16 Avenue and 19 Street N.E. The study also considered what changes might be required at Deerfoot Trail and Barlow Trail when an interchange is constructed at 19 Street N.E. because they are so close together.

The City implemented a thorough engagement program and used input to develop and refine options for the corridor. In November 2014, The City presented the 16 Avenue / 19 Street N.E. Interchange Functional Planning Study recommendations to Council, which include changes to the Deerfoot Trail and Barlow Trail. Council has asked City staff to hold additional public engagement sessions to ensure Calgarians are aware of the proposed changes to the other intersections. The project name has been changed to 16 Avenue N.E. Functional Planning Study – Deerfoot Trail to Barlow Trail to better reflect the scope of the study.

The public is invited to attend one of three open houses to learn more about the project and the recommendations.

Pineridge
Thursday, Feb. 19, 2015, 5 p.m. - 8 p.m.
Village Square Leisure Centre (2623 56 St N.E.)

Rundle
Wednesday, Feb. 25, 2015, 5 p.m. - 8 p.m.
St. Rupert School (111 Rundlehill Dr N.E.)

Mayland Heights/Vista Heights
Tuesday, Mar. 10, 2015, 5 p.m. - 8 p.m.
Crossroads Community Association (1803 14 Ave N.E.)

Please feel free to forward this information to others that might be interested.

[Mazrim]

There is an Open House tonight (5-8) and Saturday morning (10-1) for the Macleod Trail / 162 Avenue interchange. It's being held at Bishop O'Byrne. They'll be showing further information based on feedback from the first open houses and narrowed down options for the interchange.

http://www.calgary.ca/engage/Pages/M...terchange.aspx

[You Need A Thneed]

McKnight Blvd is being twinned between Stoney Trail and 100 street E.

[speedog]

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

McKnight Blvd is being twinned between Stoney Trail and 100 street E.

I'm surprised this twinning project isn't going all the way out to Conrich what with all the vastly increased amount of truck traffic that the CNR yard out there is generating. This just means the pinch point will be moved further east to 100th Street.

[Ramsayfarian]

Not sure what amused me more, the article or the comments.

http://calgaryherald.com/opinion/col...t-of-motorists

[Fuzz]

Gah! Each sentence is more painful to read than the previous one. She's denser than a neutron star. Just when you think she can't say anything stupider, you read the next line, and there it is. Perhaps I'm fortunate all my ad blocking ad-ons render facebook comments invisible. I'm not sure I could handle it.

[shogged]

But guys, she's a soccer mom.

[UofC.engineer]

Another pro car article in my opinion:

http://calgaryherald.com/opinion/col...ion-in-calgary

Thoughts?

[Ferreth]

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

Another pro car article in my opinion:

http://calgaryherald.com/opinion/col...ion-in-calgary

Thoughts?

The harder I think about it, the more my head hurts.

Although I lol'd at the line:

Questionable practices, such as sending staff to street corners to count bikes with a clipboard, have needlessly set businesses and cyclists against each other

Really? Were city staff beating up cyclists and/or businesses with their clipboards?

This is more of an anti-city hall rant IMO, Manning Foundation style.

[lineman]

i have no problems with traffic. Of course, choosing to live, work and play within a decent proximity works wonders with spending less time behind the wheel. I wish people took more personal responsibility with the choices they make rather than dump blame on our road system.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

Another pro car article in my opinion:

http://calgaryherald.com/opinion/col...ion-in-calgary

Thoughts?

http://www.ceosforcities.org/research/driven-apart/

If anyone ever quotes the TomTom, TTI or other such study, link them to this webpage and study. Worst congestion metric ever.

Let's look at Kansas, Phoenix and Indianapolis which Farkas applauds as "leading the way." According to a similar report (the TTI), they all "waste" 15, 44 and 39 hours per year in traffic. Yet, their average annual travel times during rush hour are 229, 191 and 225 hours respectively. This gives them a time travel index of 1.06, 1.12 and 1.05 (non-congested hours divided by congested hours)

Compare this to "congested" cities such as New York, Chicago or San Francisco, who "waste" 41, 44, and 55 hours each year respectively. Yet, their total time spent commuting each year is 163, 136 and 186 hours. These cities are much larger, their drivers spend less time in traffic, yet they are generally seen as more "congested"? (Their time travel indices are 1.45, 1.23 and 1.31- much "worse than Kansas, Phoenix and Indianapolis).

It is a completely backward metric.

[CalgaryAlex]

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

Another pro car article in my opinion:

http://calgaryherald.com/opinion/col...ion-in-calgary

Thoughts?

Lol, Manning Foundation.

I like this:

Nor is it to give large but well-intentioned transit projects a free pass.

Farkas doesn't supply any justification for this absurd statement, and the numbers indicate that this isn't the case. I don't even know what he means by "free pass"! Does he mean that we just flood Calgary Transit with funding without any thought put into it? If so, where did he even get that from?

Not a single one of these pro-car advocates understands that there will always be congestion. With capacity comes congestion. Increase the former and you get an increase in the latter.

Nor do they acknowledge that it's not about one mode of transportation versus another. It's all about balance and options between all modes.

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by fusili

http://www.ceosforcities.org/research/driven-apart/

If anyone ever quotes the TomTom, TTI or other such study, link them to this webpage and study. Worst congestion metric ever.

Let's look at Kansas, Phoenix and Indianapolis which Farkas applauds as "leading the way." According to a similar report (the TTI), they all "waste" 15, 44 and 39 hours per year in traffic. Yet, their average annual travel times during rush hour are 229, 191 and 225 hours respectively. This gives them a time travel index of 1.06, 1.12 and 1.05 (non-congested hours divided by congested hours)

Compare this to "congested" cities such as New York, Chicago or San Francisco, who "waste" 41, 44, and 55 hours each year respectively. Yet, their total time spent commuting each year is 163, 136 and 186 hours. These cities are much larger, their drivers spend less time in traffic, yet they are generally seen as more "congested"? (Their time travel indices are 1.45, 1.23 and 1.31- much "worse than Kansas, Phoenix and Indianapolis).

It is a completely backward metric.

This exactly.

My commute takes either 5 minutes or 8 minutes, depending on if a car is in the way so I can't make a key intersection light. This metric gives my 8 commute a congestion rating of 1.6, more congested than all major cities in North America.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by MasterG

This exactly.

My commute takes either 5 minutes or 8 minutes, depending on if a car is in the way so I can't make a key intersection light. This metric gives my 8 commute a congestion rating of 1.6, more congested than all major cities in North America.

The other thing the TTI and TomTom miss completely- walkers, cyclists and transit riders. If we were to implement a priority signalling program in Calgary that hypothetically improved 10K transit riders commutes by 10 minutes each, but slowed down 25K drivers commutes by 3 minutes each, it would be a positive net benefit of 25K minutes per day in terms of overall commute times. But to TomTom it would only look like 75K minutes of wasted time every day.

[Fuzz]

I've got an aprox 15 minute bike commute. Almost 4 minutes of that is spent on the cycle track to get through 4 lights due to what looks like hostile light timing. I hope they fix it soon, last year was way better.