HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #6261  
Old Posted May 14, 2015, 5:13 AM
sim sim is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 862
Quote:
Originally Posted by craner View Post
So traffic analysis/estimates should not be used to plan the road?
You could probably make a pretty strong case that many places would have done better without it. Most of this analysis currently promotes only the supply-side, and often only for one mode.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6262  
Old Posted May 14, 2015, 4:46 PM
Socguy Socguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 473
Quote:
Originally Posted by sim View Post

For an interesting collection of models missing the mark (significantly), see almost every recent toll road project - where the modelling is supposedly rigorous considering they are somewhat used for the underlying financing and operating structure. We need only go as far as the Port Mann bridge.
The Port Mann bridge would do a lot better if there wasn't a free bridge just a short hop away. Toll them all or don't bother... epic fail

Still, I take your point. The Provence failed to account for the fact that traffic volumes were falling even before they built the bridge.

OTOH, it's a heck of a nice bridge
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6263  
Old Posted May 14, 2015, 6:45 PM
Mazrim's Avatar
Mazrim Mazrim is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 1,179
Quote:
Originally Posted by sim View Post
I'd be interested in the documentation for this if you happen to know where it might be / if it's public.

I don't think it's worth getting into details of classical 4 step modelling in this thread (I'm assuming the forecasting was done with this, as they usually are), but there are a lot of assumptions that can be made in them, to the point where you can get the answer you're looking for. Not to mention that they can be [are], largely self-fulfilling, their aggregate nature can be rather erroneous and their forecasting is based on past conditions that are assumed will hold, etc. etc.

I'd also speculate that essentially any route assignment method used is probably quite divorced from what will happen in reality. Going way around the entire SW portion of the ring road, it might be objectively faster in the model, but that amount of distance will seem subjectively longer to a lot of people (I'm assuming a NW to SE industrial area pattern).

In short, I don't buy the modelling if it somehow predicts that we'd need about 3 Deerfoots over there to meet "demand". Not until I see really extensive documentation and all assumptions.

For an interesting collection of models missing the mark (significantly), see almost every recent toll road project - where the modelling is supposedly rigorous considering they are somewhat used for the underlying financing and operating structure. We need only go as far as the Port Mann bridge.
It's normally the responsibility of the owner to follow up with volume recording post-construction. Considering consultants use data from local and provincial government forecasting to generate their simulations, it should come as no surprise that they get forecast data from the City of Calgary and Alberta Transportation to generate their models.

As far as I know, this is the extent of the public volume data available:
http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation...g-Toolbox.aspx
http://transportation.alberta.ca/3459.htm

In this very thread we discussed the early numbers that were coming out on NE and NW Stoney (I believe it was 6-8 months post-NE opening) and the O-D pair results. Didn't search this thread for it now but it should be around.

I believe SW Stoney was done with microsimulation tools, and to refer to the analogy made earlier, there's no way they designed it like a restaurant where the brunch never had a lineup. They don't design roads with the intent of it never slowing down in a peak period. Lower speeds and congestion are acceptable, what you're trying to avoid is the road failing. They don't alter the volumes so they get the results they want, if that's what you were implying. They change queue lengths at intersections, lane counts on ramps, change interchanges from Parclo A to B, things like that.

I have no problem with not relying on LOS in urban situations where the ability to expand is minimal, but that doesn't apply as well to SW Stoney, a greenfield development in a corridor devoted to utilities and high speed roadways.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6264  
Old Posted May 14, 2015, 6:47 PM
Full Mountain's Avatar
Full Mountain Full Mountain is offline
YIMBY
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,940
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazrim View Post
This is an interesting post since pretty extensive traffic modeling was done to arrive at the laning requirements for the road. You're implying they added completely incorrect volumes to their model (the City's and the Province's numbers were both used to generate it) so they could justify some mega highway you feel is never going to be needed? Personally, having seen the forecasting done for other projects and how they end up after the road is built, I would imagine they're closer than you'd like.
If it's done, make it public. Until that point it's all guess work and trust in a government that proved itself unreliable.

Council spent weeks looking at criteria for a bike lane pilot, why isn't the same rigour placed on roadways (transit does comparisons)?
__________________
Incremental Photo - @PhotogX_1

Disclaimer: All opinions expressed are my own not those of any affiliated organizations.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6265  
Old Posted May 14, 2015, 7:18 PM
sim sim is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 862
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazrim View Post
It's normally the responsibility of the owner to follow up with volume recording post-construction. Considering consultants use data from local and provincial government forecasting to generate their simulations, it should come as no surprise that they get forecast data from the City of Calgary and Alberta Transportation to generate their models.

As far as I know, this is the extent of the public volume data available:
http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation...g-Toolbox.aspx
http://transportation.alberta.ca/3459.htm

In this very thread we discussed the early numbers that were coming out on NE and NW Stoney (I believe it was 6-8 months post-NE opening) and the O-D pair results. Didn't search this thread for it now but it should be around.

I believe SW Stoney was done with microsimulation tools, and to refer to the analogy made earlier, there's no way they designed it like a restaurant where the brunch never had a lineup. They don't design roads with the intent of it never slowing down in a peak period. Lower speeds and congestion are acceptable, what you're trying to avoid is the road failing. They don't alter the volumes so they get the results they want, if that's what you were implying. They change queue lengths at intersections, lane counts on ramps, change interchanges from Parclo A to B, things like that.

I have no problem with not relying on LOS in urban situations where the ability to expand is minimal, but that doesn't apply as well to SW Stoney, a greenfield development in a corridor devoted to utilities and high speed roadways.
I'm familiar with the links, but thanks anyway. They do not have the underlying land use, attraction rates, utility functions, parameters, etc. that I was hoping to come across.

Micro-simulation, at least in the typical traffic world isn't used to model trip generation. At most, it might be used for route assignment. I highly doubt that they agent-based the entire southern half of the province. Given that, we are talking about two different levels of modelling. I'm saying that the assumptions made can highly influence the volumes output in the forecasting models. Once the volumes have been "forecast", then you'd get into the level of microsimulation that supports your laneage, configurations, etc. It's taken for granted that the volumes forecast are actually accurate (and that they can't or shouldn't be influenced by other TDM measures).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6266  
Old Posted May 14, 2015, 7:27 PM
ByeByeBaby's Avatar
ByeByeBaby ByeByeBaby is offline
Crunchin' the numbers.
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: T2R, YYC, 403, CA-AB.
Posts: 791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazrim View Post
I believe SW Stoney was done with microsimulation tools, and to refer to the analogy made earlier, there's no way they designed it like a restaurant where the brunch never had a lineup. They don't design roads with the intent of it never slowing down in a peak period. Lower speeds and congestion are acceptable, what you're trying to avoid is the road failing. They don't alter the volumes so they get the results they want, if that's what you were implying. They change queue lengths at intersections, lane counts on ramps, change interchanges from Parclo A to B, things like that.

I have no problem with not relying on LOS in urban situations where the ability to expand is minimal, but that doesn't apply as well to SW Stoney, a greenfield development in a corridor devoted to utilities and high speed roadways.
"They". To some - probably most - agencies operating roads in an urban area, lower speeds and congestion during peak periods are acceptable. That is not universal. I have heard tales of at least one urban high speed roadway project designed to the point that any congestion (LOS D and above) during peak periods was considered unacceptable by the authority operating it. I think this is a relevant point to make in this specific thread.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6267  
Old Posted May 14, 2015, 7:33 PM
suburbia suburbia is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 4,611
Quote:
Originally Posted by shreddog View Post
While I support that statement in theory, I couldn't even begin to imagine how Toronto would function without the 18 lane wide 401 ... even with good PT somethings still need to go by road and it may be better to have a few really big roads as opposed to many smaller ones. While the future will be different, it's never hurts to plan for the worst case.

18 lane 401:
Agree with you, but a major part of Toronto's challenge is strictly geography. When you're central hub is against a body of water, all movement needs to happen from a semi-circle, instead of a Calgary type situation where people move from all 360 degrees.

To your point though, yeah, categorical statements are dumb - so it is possible to see situations where things needed are beyond the capability of narrow imagination or perspective.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6268  
Old Posted May 14, 2015, 8:09 PM
WaitWhat?'s Avatar
WaitWhat? WaitWhat? is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 127
I have no models or specific data but as someone who has lived in the SW for 20 years and spent countless hours sitting on 14th street and Glenmore, my wild guess is 80,000 vehicles per day on the SWRR at Elbow River. In my view, enough to justify 6 lanes.
__________________
Wait...what?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6269  
Old Posted May 14, 2015, 9:17 PM
Mazrim's Avatar
Mazrim Mazrim is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 1,179
Quote:
Originally Posted by Full Mountain View Post
If it's done, make it public. Until that point it's all guess work and trust in a government that proved itself unreliable.

Council spent weeks looking at criteria for a bike lane pilot, why isn't the same rigour placed on roadways (transit does comparisons)?
The numbers don't matter to council, and anything new and scary (see: Lanes, Bicycle and Suites, Secondary) make them froth at the mouth. The TI department pores over all the numbers and approves them anyway.

I believe all 5seconds had to do for his SWRR research was ask the right people for the reports and they gave them to him. I'm sure you could do the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sim View Post
I'm saying that the assumptions made can highly influence the volumes output in the forecasting models. It's taken for granted that the volumes forecast are actually accurate (and that they can't or shouldn't be influenced by other TDM measures).
I see no problem with this. We use assumptions for financial institutions, large companies profits, and more. Why is this suddenly a burden when it comes to road design?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby View Post
I have heard tales of at least one urban high speed roadway project designed to the point that any congestion (LOS D and above) during peak periods was considered unacceptable by the authority operating it. I think this is a relevant point to make in this specific thread.
As recently as 5 years ago I had seen the same, but it's always been specific to a particular project or project manager and the politics behind it. The general line of thinking is not that way though, even high volume high speed roadways.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WaitWhat? View Post
I have no models or specific data but as someone who has lived in the SW for 20 years and spent countless hours sitting on 14th street and Glenmore, my wild guess is 80,000 vehicles per day on the SWRR at Elbow River. In my view, enough to justify 6 lanes.
As a regular user of 14th Street/Glenmore/Sarcee/Crowchild for the last 10 years (former daily commuter, now 2-3 times weekly), I definitely can't track how many appointments I missed or how many hours I just sat in traffic either. It's absurd that there's no good alternate way across the reservoir aside from going all the way up to basically 17th Avenue if that area is bad.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6270  
Old Posted May 14, 2015, 10:40 PM
5seconds's Avatar
5seconds 5seconds is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,549
The land transfer has been approved. The Province now controls the corridor it needs to build the SW Ring Road

https://calgaryringroad.wordpress.co...art-the-clock/

EDIT: It's not totally clear yet if the transfer has actually taken place yet. The transfer has been approved, but the deal may not yet be done.
__________________
My Southwest Calgary Ring Road Blog: calgaryringroad.wordpress.com

Last edited by 5seconds; May 15, 2015 at 4:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6271  
Old Posted May 14, 2015, 11:29 PM
holhm22 holhm22 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 307
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5seconds View Post
The land transfer has been approved. The Province now controls the corridor it needs to build the SW Ring Road

https://calgaryringroad.wordpress.co...art-the-clock/
Great! Hope construction will start ASAP then!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6272  
Old Posted May 14, 2015, 11:52 PM
Socguy Socguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 473
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5seconds View Post
The land transfer has been approved. The Province now controls the corridor it needs to build the SW Ring Road

https://calgaryringroad.wordpress.co...art-the-clock/
-redundant

Last edited by Socguy; May 14, 2015 at 11:52 PM. Reason: Redundant post
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6273  
Old Posted May 15, 2015, 2:12 AM
5seconds's Avatar
5seconds 5seconds is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,549
It appears that the additional land (former Alberta Crown Land) has officially been integrated into the reserve, and the Federal Government has approved the land transfer of the ring road corridor, but I am not sure if the Province has paid the $275,000,000 or if the title of the corridor has been transferred officially to the Province yet. Approvals have been granted, but the transfer may not yet be complete.

I should get confirmation early next week, but either way the 7 year deadline has now been triggered, and by May 1 2022 the SW Ring Road needs to be open or the Province faces the loss of the corridor.

__________________
My Southwest Calgary Ring Road Blog: calgaryringroad.wordpress.com

Last edited by 5seconds; May 15, 2015 at 2:25 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6274  
Old Posted May 15, 2015, 3:05 AM
5seconds's Avatar
5seconds 5seconds is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,549
It offers no real data, but some interesting images from the SWRR traffic simulations from about 2007ish. Simulations were done and projections were made, but I haven't seen the specifics apart from projected peak hour numbers.

Video Link


I was also told by someone on the project that projections get stale after a few months. I'm not sure when the last set of projections were done.
__________________
My Southwest Calgary Ring Road Blog: calgaryringroad.wordpress.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6275  
Old Posted May 15, 2015, 3:30 AM
YYCguys YYCguys is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,803
For the first time since Stoney Trail opened, I, today, experienced a traffic jam on Northbound Stoney at 16th Avenue NE. There was a car accident between McKnight and 96th Avenue which had traffic to a crawl all the way south of 16th Avenue up to 96th Avenue. Going the other way earlier in the day was a dream, as there was hardly any traffic at all!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6276  
Old Posted May 15, 2015, 3:43 AM
RyLucky's Avatar
RyLucky RyLucky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,497
Quote:
Originally Posted by YYCguys View Post
For the first time since Stoney Trail opened, I, today, experienced a traffic jam on Northbound Stoney at 16th Avenue NE. There was a car accident between McKnight and 96th Avenue which had traffic to a crawl all the way south of 16th Avenue up to 96th Avenue. Going the other way earlier in the day was a dream, as there was hardly any traffic at all!
In 20 years, I think it will be the same as Deerfoot is now, especially at choke points with Sarcee, Glenmore, Deerfoot, 16th, and Crowchild.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6277  
Old Posted May 15, 2015, 6:41 AM
sim sim is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 862
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazrim View Post
I see no problem with this. We use assumptions for financial institutions, large companies profits, and more. Why is this suddenly a burden when it comes to road design?
In a sense, fair. In another sense, this is the very problem. Many of the people behind the decisions and dare I say, the technical work, exhibit a complete lack of erudition in a subject that has such a profound and lasting affect on people's lives. It has little to do with road design in and of itself. It's perplexing as to why it still isn't understood that the transportation system design has a marked affect on communities. Road design is a very boxed in problem.

To keep this short and simplified, in the case of a private for profit company, the direct risk posed by assumptions is borne by the owners and shareholders (ideally), and not the public. [That is not to say that the public doesn't also pay in those cases, but we are keeping this simplified and on topic, relatively.]
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6278  
Old Posted May 15, 2015, 5:25 PM
izend izend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 9
5seconds:

Are there any plans to add a 3rd lane going Eastbound Glenmore @ 14 street SW? During morning rush hours it can backup all the way to Sarcee which would causes traffic jams on the Future Ring Road.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6279  
Old Posted May 15, 2015, 6:50 PM
craner's Avatar
craner craner is offline
Go Tall or Go Home
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 4,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5seconds View Post
It appears that the additional land (former Alberta Crown Land) has officially been integrated into the reserve, and the Federal Government has approved the land transfer of the ring road corridor, but I am not sure if the Province has paid the $275,000,000 or if the title of the corridor has been transferred officially to the Province yet. Approvals have been granted, but the transfer may not yet be complete.

I should get confirmation early next week, but either way the 7 year deadline has now been triggered, and by May 1 2022 the SW Ring Road needs to be open or the Province faces the loss of the corridor.
Yes - another hurdle cleared. !!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6280  
Old Posted May 15, 2015, 8:18 PM
joe498 joe498 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 251
From Twitter:

Quote:
Scott Dippel @CBCScott · 13 minutes ago

Federal govt has approved changing boundaries of the Tsuu T'ina Nation, clearing way for ring road construction. #yyc #cbc
Quote:
Scott Dippel @CBCScott · 13 minutes ago

Tsuu T'ina transfers 400+ hectares of land to the province; the province transfers 2,000 hectares of Crown land to Tsuu T'ina. #yyc #cbc
Quote:
Scott Dippel @CBCScott · 13m
The Alta govt also transfers $275 million to Ottawa which in turn will give it to the Tsuu T'ina Nation. #yyc #cbc
Quote:
Scott Dippel @CBCScott · 12 minutes ago

Reserve boundary changes also starts the 7 yr clock on constructing the ring road. If not completed in 7yrs, Tsuu T'ina gets land back. #cbc
Quote:
Scott Dippel @CBCScott · 5 minutes ago

Transportation minister Wayne Drysdale confirms title/money transfer; says construction timetable in hands of in-coming NDP govt. #yyc #cbc
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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:18 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.