HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #981  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 8:38 PM
biguc's Avatar
biguc biguc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: pinkoland
Posts: 11,677
Nuance, Riverman. Since you can't see the difference between a death trap and a moderate-speed underpass for a moderate speed road, I'll just argue against you as if you're saying this underpass should be a kilometer wide with cushy pillows all over it.
__________________
no
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #982  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 8:39 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 37,483
Quote:
Originally Posted by biguc View Post
Nuance, Riverman. Since you can't see the difference between a death trap and a moderate-speed underpass for a moderate speed road, I'll just argue against you as if you're saying this underpass should be a kilometer wide with cushy pillows all over it.
But it's a lot easier to argue against your point if one pretends that you're calling for something that doesn't meet current engineering and safety standards.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #983  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 8:39 PM
biguc's Avatar
biguc biguc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: pinkoland
Posts: 11,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
Haha, they didn't build because of a rumour?
I'm sure your SPENDP buddies would have loved to build a billion dollar underpass a kilometer wide at every intersection. And you can't make roads out of pillows, dumbass.
__________________
no
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #984  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 8:41 PM
biguc's Avatar
biguc biguc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: pinkoland
Posts: 11,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
Another way to control speed would be to hang logging chains from the underpass, forcing drivers to slow down to avoid chains going through the windsheilds. But I doubt any engineer would sign off on this scheme either.

So an underpass geometry is designed to limit speed to a given rate. If those rates are exceeded, collisions, and likely some deaths occur. How many deaths are acceptable?

See the engineer's logic here? By designing the roadway for the speed limit + X%, the city removes liability.

Safety factors are used across the board in every single branch of engineering. Every engineer is trained to use established safety factors. To not do so would be considered irresponsible and would surely result in dicipline.

Where are you even going to find enough pillows to build an underpass a kilometer wide? Manitoba's pillow industry can't support your pillow in the sky schemes.
__________________
no
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #985  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 8:46 PM
biguc's Avatar
biguc biguc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: pinkoland
Posts: 11,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bdog View Post
Classic! The same people arguing for building this underpass to the bare, unsafe minimums of 100 year old underpasses are the exact same people arguing in another thread to make the Perimeter safer. "Can you believe that there is no proper median on the south Perimeter? People making left turns onto gravel roads - unfathomable in the 21st century! No proper MERGE lanes, just yield right onto the Perimeter... Wow, this was outdated the day it was built in the 1960s".

I mean, this is Waverley we're talking about. Not Osborne through the Village. Love Steveos email to the councillor lol - Taxable land?? Yeah, if only they would make those lanes a bit narrower, the City could sell that extra few feet of right-of-way to the developers lining up to build high-value, taxable development on that school yard and the car washes parking lot

What's classic is how you think the perimeter should be a gravel road for goat travel only but people should be able to drive the speed of sound through here. This is Waverley, we're talking about here, not the 401. You obviously don't care about taxable land because you want to make this a kilometer wide.
__________________
no
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #986  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 9:01 PM
steveosnyder steveosnyder is offline
North End Troublemaker
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: YWG
Posts: 1,102
Quote:
Originally Posted by bomberjet View Post
Holy Christ. Engineers have a legal obligation to design whatever it is they are designing to the laws, codes and standards as provided by the local governing agencies. The engineers who have produced said codes, etc have done so based on experience.

An engineer is not stupid. They understand exactly what they're doing and what their job is. A roadway engineer designing a highway has one goal, to move vehicles. The fact and debate whether said highway is not needed, etc, etc is completely irrelevant at that point.
I completely agree with this. But unlike Riverman, who seems to think added to the design speed is needed, I understand that designing a street to the posted limit is the actual code, if it wasn't they would change the code. Building to over the speed limit is unnecessary, more expensive, and in most cases actually less safe.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #987  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 9:06 PM
CoryB CoryB is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 5,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by biguc View Post
I couldn't disagree more, though, with people who say this should have been built 20 years ago.
I thought part of the reason for building the Kenaston underpass was to also meet the need of traffic that was taking Waverly at the time making a future underpass there unnecessary.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #988  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 9:07 PM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Fossil fuel & rubber
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ontario's feel good town
Posts: 4,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveosnyder View Post
Building to over the speed limit is unnecessary, more expensive, and in most cases actually less safe.
Trouble is, you don't have a clue what is necessary. Best to defer to the engineer who does this for a living, is properly trained and knows what he is doing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #989  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 9:11 PM
steveosnyder steveosnyder is offline
North End Troublemaker
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: YWG
Posts: 1,102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
Yes, that is exactly what you are saying. Make it barely safe enough to travel through at the speed limit. Sorry, but things are not done that way.
No. This is not the case. A design speed of 60 means it's safe to drive 60. If you build a street with a design speed of 60 you are not "barely safe enough" to drive 60, you are safe to drive 60 in normal conditions. This is the code, this is the standard, this is what should be built.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #990  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 9:14 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 37,483
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
Trouble is, you don't have a clue what is necessary. Best to defer to the engineer who does this for a living, is properly trained and knows what he is doing.
The problem is that that, as Biguc alluded, the traffic engineer does not think in terms of what makes for the best city and the best neighbourhoods. They only think in terms of traffic flow, which is generally always going to result in the maximum speeds and capacities possible. The answer to every traffic problem is more lanes.

Traffic engineers know their stuff when it comes to roads, but they aren't city planners. I wouldn't entrust city planning decisions to them any more than I would leave it to an electrician, a mailman or a big-box retail developer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #991  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 9:15 PM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Fossil fuel & rubber
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ontario's feel good town
Posts: 4,023
See my post just above.

There is a city planning department. Are you suggesting they have not seen this plan?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #992  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 9:17 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 13,708
Bingo, Esquire. City planners say we need this road or we don't, just like for neighbourhoods, parks, whatever. They tell the transportation engineer to fix the issue with the road, they fix the issue.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #993  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 9:22 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 37,483
The problem in this city is that city planner recommendations typically get shelved in favour of politically expedient approaches. We see this every time Plan Winnipeg and now its successor OurWinnipeg gets amended by council to include something that no city planner in their right mind would recommend.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #994  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 9:26 PM
Bdog's Avatar
Bdog Bdog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
The problem is that that, as Biguc alluded, the traffic engineer does not think in terms of what makes for the best city and the best neighbourhoods. They only think in terms of traffic flow, which is generally always going to result in the maximum speeds and capacities possible. The answer to every traffic problem is more lanes.

Traffic engineers know their stuff when it comes to roads, but they aren't city planners. I wouldn't entrust city planning decisions to them any more than I would leave it to an electrician, a mailman or a big-box retail developer.
What I think Riverman and others are alluding to here is the Steveo has no idea what the 10 km per hour difference in design speed is, or what it means for land use in the area, or land requirements. What does that 10 km/hour difference mean in terms of lane width? In terms of slope? In terms of grade? Does Steveo have any idea? No, he doesn't.

Is that 10 km/hour less of design speed going to make the "pedestrian realm" in this area better? If it's designed to 60 vs. 70, is it going to be safer for walkers in front of the car wash? Is there going to be a lot more taxable land because the grade is 0.01% (or whatever it is) steeper with a lower design speed?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #995  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 9:28 PM
steveosnyder steveosnyder is offline
North End Troublemaker
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: YWG
Posts: 1,102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
Trouble is, you don't have a clue what is necessary. Best to defer to the engineer who does this for a living, is properly trained and knows what he is doing.
Directly from TAC:

"A recent study showed that both faster and slower drivers are more likely to be involved in collisions. In an analysis of speed variance, the study found that the major contributing factor was the difference between design speed and posted speed limits."

"The speed of vehicles on a roadway has a significant bearing on safety, particularly in terms of the severity of collisions. However, the relationship of speed to the probability of a collision is not as evident, since collisions are complex events that can seldom be attributed to a single factor. It is now widely believed that collision rate is more directly affected by speed variations than by speed per se, given that intuitively, the probability of conflicts would be lower if all vehicles were travelling at the same speed (this has lead to the introduction of minimum speed limits for some applications)."

From another study, done by engineers (link):

"Placing a sign that shows the speed limit does not automatically imply that drivers also choose the indicated speed. Speed violations are the most common traffic violations. Brogt (1978) states that this is the consequence of the fact that the design speed of a particular road is not in accordance with the posted speed limit. This means that the indicated speed limit is not in accordance with the speed limit the road was originally designed for."

It's not like it's a big stretch -- induced demand and induced speeding are things, and many many engineers have already studied it.

Last edited by steveosnyder; Dec 11, 2014 at 9:42 PM. Reason: Added another quote from TAC... Who seem to agree with me.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #996  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 9:40 PM
biguc's Avatar
biguc biguc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: pinkoland
Posts: 11,677
Since there are still some grown ups here, let's look at some pictures.

Here's is an underpass from a very suburban area near Liverpool. You may recall that Liverpool is the hometown of Riverman's engineer friend who provided the non-anecdote he's basing his entire argument on.

Anyway, as you can see, it's not that different from Waverley. The posted speed limit is 40 stones per hour. That's about the speed limit of Waverley near Taylor and the speed limit we're asking the underpass be designed to.




Here's a view from the ground:



"THAT'S SO BLOODY UNSAFE IT'S JUST NOT RIGHT," says Riverman's Liverpudlian friend. "Classic!," says Bdog, "part of it looks like it's 100 years old!"


Here's what Riverman thinks is the bare necessity for this underpass, lest we all perish in motorcar accidents.





Here's a link to a list of traffic fatalities by country: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ted_death_rate

Per 100 000 vehicles, Canada has 9.3
The States, where they love to overbuild road infrastructure for safety, has 13.6
The UK, where they've built this clearly dangerous and inadequate underpass that people on a 60km/h road should only drive through at 60km/h clocks in with a lowly 6.2 road deaths per 100 000 vehicles.


Moldova has 77.5 deaths per 100 000, since rskylar was bound to ask.
__________________
no
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #997  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 9:42 PM
Simplicity Simplicity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,774
I'm just going to leave two things here:

1) Let's not kid ourselves about the costs of expropriating a couple feet of 'taxable' land because a) most of that land is already a ditch in the city's right of way, and b) it's almost completely valueless as it is. So this part of the discussion is getting a little far-fetched.

2) There's no doubt that traffic heading down Waverley and Kenaston during rush hour(s) is getting out of control. Kenaston especially. So I understand the logic of trying to keep east/west traffic off of Taylor and ease congestion on Kenaston because people are disinterested in turning left at Waverley and/or being stuck at a train. But there's also Ridegwood South on the way. And as of right now, there's no plan to widen Wilkes past Shaftesbury where they've already done their expropriations, so it's not reasonable to say quite yet that the Waverley underpass eventually services Sterling Lyon as a quasi-freeway onto both Kenaston and onward into Charleswood/Ridgewood South. But if that's the plan - which would make sense - then Waverley between Sterling Lyon/Hurst and Taylor is at least going to become relatively high speed moving south.

Anyway, just a couple thoughts...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #998  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 9:45 PM
Simplicity Simplicity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,774
Quote:
Originally Posted by biguc View Post
Since there are still some grown ups here, let's look at some pictures.

Here's is an underpass from a very suburban area near Liverpool. You may recall that Liverpool is the hometown of Riverman's engineer friend who provided the non-anecdote he's basing his entire argument on.

Anyway, as you can see, it's not that different from Waverley. The posted speed limit is 40 stones per hour. That's about the speed limit of Waverley near Taylor and the speed limit we're asking the underpass be designed to.




Here's a view from the ground:



"THAT'S SO BLOODY UNSAFE IT'S JUST NOT RIGHT," says Riverman's Liverpudlian friend. "Classic!," says Bdog, "part of it looks like it's 100 years old!"


Here's what Riverman thinks is the bare necessity for this underpass, lest we all perish in motorcar accidents.





Here's a link to a list of traffic fatalities by country: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ted_death_rate

Per 100 000 vehicles, Canada has 9.3
The States, where they love to overbuild road infrastructure for safety, has 13.6
The UK, where they've built this clearly dangerous and inadequate underpass that people on a 60km/h road should only drive through at 60km/h clocks in with a lowly 6.2 road deaths per 100 000 vehicles.


Moldova has 77.5 deaths per 100 000, since rskylar was bound to ask.
There's my laugh for the day. Thanks for that...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #999  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 9:52 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 13,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveosnyder View Post
Directly from TAC:
From another study, done by engineers (link):

"Placing a sign that shows the speed limit does not automatically imply that drivers also choose the indicated speed. Speed violations are the most common traffic violations. Brogt (1978) states that this is the consequence of the fact that the design speed of a particular road is not in accordance with the posted speed limit. This means that the indicated speed limit is not in accordance with the speed limit the road was originally designed for."

It's not like it's a big stretch -- induced demand and induced speeding are things, and many many engineers have already studied it.
The bold statement is not quite correct, IMO. The road is not originally designed for a higher speed, then the speed limit lowered. The road is designed to 10 km/h higher than the posted speed limit is/will be, to allow for driver error. In both speed and direction.

Say for railway design, design speed is track speed. There is very little human involvement in controlling train direction. Ie: they are stuck on the track. Train speed is monitored and controlled much easier than a passenger vehicle. So for that application design and posted speed are the same due to the reduction of allowable error.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1000  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 9:54 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 13,708
Also just to add, the City is currently in the midst a study to provide a new roadway south of Wilkes. A Sterling Lyon west extension if you will. It's part of the William Clement Parkway extension preliminary design.
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 > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:08 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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