I Love Deerfoot Trail

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by flambers

LOL, how about 22x as another example. Technically it was not over capacity during non rush hour. However a major upgrade was required and it was done.

The problem with 22X was never capacity, but rather safety.

Capacity will begin to become an issue when the ring road nears completion.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

Also, if the commute is say 50 min and widening it 1 or 2 lanes would only decrease it by 20 minutes. Its not economically feasible IMO. And its a cost of living in that area.

What percentage of drivers that use Deerfoot are on the road at rush hour? Say 50%? Perhaps conservative?

If those sections of Deerfoot have 100,000 cars per day, and half of those are on at rushhour, and therefore would benefit from the 20 minute decrease in travel time, then you are looking at 1 million minutes fewer per business day that a car is on the road. I wonder how much fuel that saves, and how much pollution it prevents?

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Maybe I am foolishly expecting engineering to make sense, but wouldn't they design something to handle its maximum load? They wouldn't build a bridge to withstand 50 tonnes if only 5% of the time 60 tonne trucks will be driving over it, for example.

The other interchanges were also designed to handle the full load at the time; without looking forward. Like Beddington Trail only able to turn south onto Deerfoot; and the bridge never being built to anticipate 2 way traffic.

Well, the bridges are different because, yes, they have to be designed for maximum weight load + factor of safety so they don't collapse.

But in terms of the roadways, there isn't really anything inherently unsafe about having a road operating at or over capacity. (it would be unsafe to have everyone actually driving the speed limit in the over-capacity conditions... but it's not physically possible for that to actually happen so for the most part the traffic flow will just slow down).

I'm probably going to butcher this explanation because it's been a number of years since university and I don't really do this type of engineering anymore, but here is my best shot:

You have to consider that rush-hour peaks handle probably 50% or more of the total traffic using the road over 24 hours (I'm guesstimating on the 50% figure). Basically the road sees a very large portion of it's traffic volume load in only a couple hours a day. When the other 21-22 hours a day you see much much less volumes. So you strike a balance between the rush hour traffic loads and the "regular" traffic loads to try and reach an optimum design... if that makes any sense.

They do use modelling to predict future volumes and population & traffic growth. Transportation planners do the future stuff. Transportation designers do the more detailed hands-on stuff like calculate sight-lines, speed limits, roadway inclines, etc.

I definitely can't claim to know how they designed the deerfoot 30+ years ago or whenever it was. They would have predicted some type of future traffic volumes and factored that in. It may be nearing the end of it's design-life. But whatever upgrades they deem are necessary, it definitely doesn't mean it's ever going to be free-flow driving at 100km/h down to McKenzie or up to the airport during rush hour.

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by SeeGeeWhy

Peanut, I'm with flambers.

What kind of basis does an honours degree in civil engineering and multiple years worth of relevant professional project experience give you to speak about transportation design?

Now hush woman, you're embarassing the family name.

Okay sorry. I'll get back to the kitchen right after this...

Originally Posted by mykalberta

I am with Peanut.

The City had to know that building to the south like mad would do this to Deerfoot. And convieniently the Province is responsibile for it so it gets all the flack. IMO its a classic Bronco tactic.

Also, if the commute is say 50 min and widening it 1 or 2 lanes would only decrease it by 20 minutes. Its not economically feasible IMO. And its a cost of living in that area.

You can also use the C Train if you dont like the Deerfoot

I totally support the free plug for C-Train and Transit!!

Your point about the extra 1-2 lanes decreasing the commute by 20 minutes is a good one. It's also interesting because in that case, then you have to start factoring in the fact that people using other roadways become aware of the new "improved" deerfoot commute, and then switch to using Deerfoot. So as a totally hypothetical example, while the 1-2 lanes "should" help the Deerfoot commute by 20 minutes, it actually would maybe only help the deerfoot commute by 10 minutes but the commute would get better on Macleod by 5 minutes, Blackfoot by 4 minutes, etc., because of people switching to the roadway they now perceive as "better". It can all turn into a huge traffic modelling and simulation exercise that planners and designers do to try and figure it out. Fun to think about for nerds like me anyways!

Resolute - it's an interesting point about the pollution and fuel savings. I imagine someone is probably looking at it somewhere and factoring it in, but I never personally have been involved with anything like that.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by 4X4

I just called 266-1234 and asked the cop whether it's illegal to turn over the double solid. Her answer: "Absolutely illegal."
And just to make sure I was clearly understanding her, I gave her my example of going down 14th street and turning left over the double solid into a gas station... Her answer: "Absolutely illegal."

I feel vindicated. I will continue to lean on my horn whenever some ###### does that in front of me...

Here's the actual law that states this. point 15(3).

You can turn left over a double yellow line if you are not in an urban area.

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

What percentage of drivers that use Deerfoot are on the road at rush hour? Say 50%? Perhaps conservative?

If those sections of Deerfoot have 100,000 cars per day, and half of those are on at rushhour, and therefore would benefit from the 20 minute decrease in travel time, then you are looking at 1 million minutes fewer per business day that a car is on the road. I wonder how much fuel that saves, and how much pollution it prevents?

Correct, but its not cost effective for the province. Someone wasting his or her time, say 40 minutes a day has no dollar value as the summation of that time over a year isnt a valid way to cost it except to the persons quality of life which was known when the person moved to that location.

And the fuel saving, agian doesnt benefit the province but the user. Also the pollutions created should be a cost to the user, not the province. Its like a 5+ billion dollar project to upgrade Deerfoot to 4-5 lanes. And that doesnt include the upgrades that would be required to handle the extra traffic on the off QE2.

As a tax payer who made the choice to spend more on a location closer to where I work, than a "cookie cutter" farther away. If all you are saving is 40 minutes a day of total commute time when there are other options available (CTrain) doesnt make a lot of sense IMO. I dont want Calgary to turn into Houston North.

[urban1]

Bring on the toll roads. Forget taxpayer money.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The problem with 22X was never capacity, but rather safety.

Capacity will begin to become an issue when the ring road nears completion.

Okay, Safety is not a problem on Deerfoot?

[flambers]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

I am with Peanut.

The City had to know that building to the south like mad would do this to Deerfoot. And convieniently the Province is responsibile for it so it gets all the flack. IMO its a classic Bronco tactic.

Also, if the commute is say 50 min and widening it 1 or 2 lanes would only decrease it by 20 minutes. Its not economically feasible IMO. And its a cost of living in that area.

You can also use the C Train if you dont like the Deerfoot

Problem is Deerfoot is just as bad for the folks driving from the North End of the City going South Bound. This is not a South end of the City problem its the whole City problem.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by flambers

Okay, Safety is not a problem on Deerfoot?

The lack of capacity is causing the safety issue on Deerfoot.

22X was never over capacity, but it was a dangerous and poorly designed road even before it went from being a county road to a feeder route.

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by flambers

Problem is Deerfoot is just as bad for the folks driving from the North End of the City going South Bound. This is not a South end of the City problem its the whole City problem.

If you live in the North and work in the South, then IMO tough luck. Again its a quality of life cost. Living near the core you get fire sirens and police sirens and traffic noise but you walk to work. If you live in the burbs you dont get that but you get a long commute time.

I will never feel sorry when people complain about it. And people sholdnt feel sorry for me if I ever complain about inter city living. I made a choice, I have to live with the positives and negatives.

[You Need a Thneed]

Deerfoot needs a few bottlenecks fixed up, such as the places where it is two lanes, and places where the on and off ramps are too close together. But other than that, it doesn't need to be 4-5 lanes the whole way through town. That would be way overkill.

[CrusaderPi]

Originally Posted by urban1

Bring on the toll roads. Forget taxpayer money.

Hey ya, put one between Calgary and Aidrie, Calgary and Okotoks, Calgary and Cochrane. #%^& freeloaders. Also, people with dogs in their cars get charged more.

[Resolute 14]

No, put one between Anderson and Douglasdale.

If you inner city freaks want to go through our communities to get out of town, you pay the toll.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

What percentage of drivers that use Deerfoot are on the road at rush hour? Say 50%? Perhaps conservative?

If those sections of Deerfoot have 100,000 cars per day, and half of those are on at rushhour, and therefore would benefit from the 20 minute decrease in travel time, then you are looking at 1 million minutes fewer per business day that a car is on the road. I wonder how much fuel that saves, and how much pollution it prevents?

Induced demand is a big problem. You add 2 more lanes to Deerfoot, and suddenly more people will find the deep south more attractive because the commute isn't that bad from there, and houses are cheaper. Boom, your road is over capacity again. Back to square one.

You leave it 3 lanes (fix that Glenmore mess...) and people will be inclined to live closer to work, or to take rail transit (when and if it exists). The amount of money spent per person on infrastructure for rail commuters is way lower than road commuters. And your pollution problem is addressed.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

Induced demand is a big problem. You add 2 more lanes to Deerfoot, and suddenly more people will find the deep south more attractive because the commute isn't that bad from there, and houses are cheaper. Boom, your road is over capacity again. Back to square one.

You leave it 3 lanes (fix that Glenmore mess...) and people will be inclined to live closer to work, or to take rail transit (when and if it exists). The amount of money spent per person on infrastructure for rail commuters is way lower than road commuters. And your pollution problem is addressed.

Correct. It really should be three lanes each direction and then a decent length merge lane before and after interchanges.

[Resolute 14]

^ Without weave zones.

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The lack of capacity is causing the safety issue on Deerfoot.

22X was never over capacity, but it was a dangerous and poorly designed road even before it went from being a county road to a feeder route.

I don't really even know if the lack of capacity is causing the safety issues on Deerfoot. I don't have any stats really, but I would imagine that most of the worst accidents are happening when people are driving at full speeds (i.e. not during rush hour and the road isn't operating at capacity). Accidents that happen during rush hour but they are "usually" more of a fender-bender type (rear-end, side-swipe due to bad merge, etc), but there is always exceptions of course.

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

Induced demand is a big problem. You add 2 more lanes to Deerfoot, and suddenly more people will find the deep south more attractive because the commute isn't that bad from there, and houses are cheaper. Boom, your road is over capacity again. Back to square one.

Exactly. Same goes for the North end of town and say... Airdrie becoming more popular. Or whatever communities are way up in the North end there.

[EVERLAST]

Originally Posted by MaxPower

This bothers me. 120kph is too fast for a "large truck". Current speed limits are ridiculous for modern cars and light trucks, but it doesn't make sense for a heavy vehicle with brutal brakes to be going that fast. Keep that crap in the middle lane and drive reasonably.

While I'm certain these stories are exaggerations, to elicit multiple responses like these you probably drive like some renegade d-bag.

now I know where my location will be on my sig

oh and by the way that's a f'ing renegade ###### bag......I even spelled it out for you.

I drive a large decal truck with the phone number on all sides. When I drive the deerfoot or anywhere in Calgary for that matter IF I drive the speed limit I get numerous driving complaints.

GUys call the number which is coincidentally my cell and I politely ask where in the city this complaint is originating and ask for the licence # and unit #. MOst if not all of the lovely people swear at me not realising its me they are talking to. I ask them because I can see them if they are still driving while making the call to which teh response is always YES.

I have a handsfree unit built into my stereo....they dont.
They are always swerving and still trying to pass me and are always trying to go 125-135. If I am doing 105 I get cut off and they slam on their brakes just to make matters worse.

I have been driving around Calgary since 1983 in this truck or style of truck and driving has gotten worse.

I have never been in an accident in my work vehicle
and have my class 1 and 3.

AS FOR Keep that crap in the middle lane and drive reasonably......ITS 2 years old and cost 140k.

so its not crap and watch who you call a ###### there knuckle child.

THANKS FOR COMING OUT ....HOPE YOU LIKED THE SHOW.