Ring Road To Nowhere

[Slava]

Originally Posted by WilsonFourTwo

Ya, self-sufficient wasn't really the right word to describe what I meant.

I'm just trying to show the difference between a community like Lakeview and communities such as (not picking on anyone here....) Coventry Hills or Panorama or McKenzie Towne (etc).

In Lakeview, I do my groceries there, use the barber, buy my gas, service my vehicle, buy the local pizza, get my beer, use the convenience store, use the tailor, enjoy the parks/recreation, etc, etc, etc. The vast majority of my day-to-day life is accomplished within a few square blocks. That's how communities ought to be built (imo).

I know, and I'm just giving you a hard time really.

Aside from the walking distance (which I wonder how many Lakeview residents would consider the amenities walking distance this week anyway) communities like Somerset, Bridlewood,etc. in the deep south are all the same. You can do all of what you listed there and take the C-train to the downtown office.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

I don't know if there are any realtors/serious real estate players on here, but what do you think this means for property values in communities like Woodbine, Shawnessy, Cedabrae, Braeside, etc?

Nothing in the short term.

Lakeview will be the only community that gets disadvantaged by the new proposed alignment. Lakeview house values may see some negative impact for a few years while the road gets built and everyone gets used to its presence.

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Originally Posted by WilsonFourTwo

And one question for you......why would I be expected to surrender my home (not that I would have to) in order to put in a road for an pushing little prick like you?

Because there's roughly one hundred thousand vehicles with me that are more important than you each and every day.

[bomber317]

Originally Posted by WilsonFourTwo

I'm just trying to show the difference between a community like Lakeview and communities such as (not picking on anyone here....) Coventry Hills or Panorama or McKenzie Towne (etc).

In Lakeview, I do my groceries there, use the barber, buy my gas, service my vehicle, buy the local pizza, get my beer, use the convenience store, use the tailor, enjoy the parks/recreation, etc, etc, etc. The vast majority of my day-to-day life is accomplished within a few square blocks. That's how communities ought to be built (imo).

I don't see how Panorama is much different. As somebody who is buying a home there, they have schools/groceries/convenience stores/restaurants/pubs/even a bubble tea place/car service/movie theater/rec center/walking paths/parks/etc, etc ,etc.

Yes the community is larger and you can't "walk" to everything but there aren't many newer communities that do.

[You Need a Thneed]

I really don't like calling lake view NIMBY's in this case, less face it, this isn't a basement suite going in next door that they are concerned about. This is hundreds of homes being levelled. Of course people in Lakeview are going to be concerned about that. That could be a thousand people forced to move from a house and a community that they love.

Not wanting a freeway to go right beside your community = NIMBY

Not wanting a freeway to level a 3rd of your community = not NIMBY.

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

not NIMBY

Double negative?

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

I really don't like calling lake view NIMBY's in this case, less face it, this isn't a basement suite going in next door that they are concerned about. This is hundreds of homes being levelled. Of course people in Lakeview are going to be concerned about that. That could be a thousand people forced to move from a house and a community that they love.

Not wanting a freeway to go right beside your community = NIMBY

Not wanting a freeway to level a 3rd of your community = not NIMBY.

I agree with this sentiment, but I thought I should point out that, technically speaking, the reverse is true.

The reserved right of way or the nearby golf course, or the community church, or the local strip mall is NOT your backyard. Seeing as how NIMBY stands for "Not in My Backyard," it is not technically true that complaining about the redevelopment of a nearby motel or shopping center is suggesting that it not happen in your backyard.

Your actual backyard (that, for the residents, the freeway would end up occupying) is possible to be a NIMBY about.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Not wanting a freeway to level a 3rd of your community = not NIMBY.

I disagree. I still see it as being NIMBY; it's just a larger scale of project. I can also understand some of their concerns.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by Handsome B. Wonderful

Because there's roughly one hundred thousand vehicles with me that are more important than you each and every day.

Stay classy there, HBW. I actually looked up all 55 of your posts and TBQH, your mouth should be way too full of crow for you to be beaking off.

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

I really don't like calling lake view NIMBY's in this case, less face it, this isn't a basement suite going in next door that they are concerned about. This is hundreds of homes being levelled. Of course people in Lakeview are going to be concerned about that. That could be a thousand people forced to move from a house and a community that they love.

Not wanting a freeway to go right beside your community = NIMBY

Not wanting a freeway to level a 3rd of your community = not NIMBY.

Fair enough. I would imagine that there would still be fairly vocal opposition if there was a way to avoid any property losses (impossible, I know) but still border the community with the road.

Honest question: Would it really be 1/3 of the community? Obviously, there would need to be a fairly good radius on the curve to get around the corner of the reserve, but 1/3 seems very high.

And now a bit of a tangent: I wonder to what extent could freeway standards be adjusted to minimize the impact on the community? Could there be a short stretch with reduced shoulders/median to allow for a tighter radius? How about a reduced speed limit to allow for a tighter curve? Elevate one direction over top of the other for the curve (probably way too expensive!)? I know that everyone wants a 110 km/h freeway, but in this particular place, maybe there's some wiggle room?

Also - perhaps some of the curve could be directed north of the existing Glenmore Trail/37th intersection? Maybe share some of the bulldozing between some of the properties on 3 of the 4 quadrants of that area instead of assuming that Lakeview should bear the brunt of it?

Just some random musings...

[CaptainYooh]

These concerns are greatly exaggerated. I remember the uproar in Woodbine when the RR portion of 37th Street from Anderson to 146th Str. got built. Everyone was up in arms screaming bloody murder and predicting the end of Woodbine. Nothing really happened. The houses on the edge got buffered from the road with a noise abatement slope and their value did not get affected negatively at all after all except for during the time of construction, which is the case for any area, really. Same will happen in Lakeview, I am sure, if they actually do get to build the darn thing finally.

[You Need a Thneed]

Yeah, I was just pointing out that it's alright for Lakeview residents to voice concern in this case, as it would be a project that could affect them significantly.

Call it NIMBY, or not, it shouldn't be frowned upon in this case.

Unfortunately, unless the Tsuu Tina come back to the negotiating table, it's really the only option we as a city are left with. Any other option would require levelling just as many homes in Lakeview (just different ones), and more elsewhere; would cost more money, and not provide as good of a road network.

I've said it before, the city should get working on BRTs and other solutions for the area, because there's still a good chance in my mind that the SWRR never goes ahead.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

These concerns are greatly exaggerated. I remember the uproar in Woodbine when the RR portion of 37th Street from Anderson to 146th Str. got built. Everyone was up in arms screaming bloody murder and predicting the end of Woodbine. Nothing really happened. The houses on the edge got buffered from the road with a noise abatement slope and their value did not get affected negatively at all after all except for during the time of construction, which is the case for any area, really. Same will happen in Lakeview, I am sure, if they actually do get to build the darn thing finally.

Totally different situations. Woodbine et al had a wide swath set aside for the ring road, no homes had to be removed.

There is literally not enough room between the yards in lakeview and the property line of the reserve to put in the ring road. Houses will have to be demolished, perhaps as many as 500.

[CaptainYooh]

The City will buy out the houses that get affected and pay people well for it. Same thing happened with the very expensive homes in Mayfair along Glenmore Tr. Yes, a lot of frustration for the homeowners during the process but at the end of the day, they all got better financially.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

Honest question: Would it really be 1/3 of the community? Obviously, there would need to be a fairly good radius on the curve to get around the corner of the reserve, but 1/3 seems very high.

My guess for the final alignment will to be to cut to the east of 37th Ave in to Lakeview so that the alignment can join up with existing Glenmore east of 37th, joining where Glenmore is already heading as much north as west. That would keep to a minimum the number of houses required in Glamorgan that would need to be removed. That easily looks like it could end up being a third of the community.

I'm sure the province will already be doing everything they can to keep the required ROW as narrow as possible, i.e. having a concrete barrier median, etc. I wonder if a cut and cover tunnel might not end up as the best option, as it might allow most of the community to be rebuilt in a similar way after construction is complete. There would be no need for large setback distances. This could help mitigate some of the extra cost of putting in the tunnel in the first place.

Whatever is done, the construction period is going to be messy and disruptive for many people around there.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Houses will have to be demolished, perhaps as many as 500.

I just went on Google Maps and counted 76 houses along 37th street. Are they saying that 6 rows of houses would have to go? That's over 200 metres wide.

Or were they counting the apartment complex right by Glenmore?

I think this is where some of the rest of us get off accusing people of being NIMBYs. We hear of 500 houses getting demolished, and kids being trotted out with signs saying "where will I play?" All designed to get people mad at the process.

Meanwhile we may be talking about under 100 houses; and by the time the project is done those kids will be more concerned about being able to afford a house that is close enough to commute home before their own kids have to go to bed.

I'm also a little jadded that in my own Copperfield I had to deal with our own NIMBYs for the SE leg; and said people didn't look at the plans before they bought their houses.

[Ashartus]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

Honest question: Would it really be 1/3 of the community? Obviously, there would need to be a fairly good radius on the curve to get around the corner of the reserve, but 1/3 seems very high.

And now a bit of a tangent: I wonder to what extent could freeway standards be adjusted to minimize the impact on the community? Could there be a short stretch with reduced shoulders/median to allow for a tighter radius? How about a reduced speed limit to allow for a tighter curve? Elevate one direction over top of the other for the curve (probably way too expensive!)? I know that everyone wants a 110 km/h freeway, but in this particular place, maybe there's some wiggle room?

I think that's where there is some room for change if the provincial government is willing to be open-minded. Right now the plan is for it to be an 8-lane freeway with future expansion to 16-lane (which seems a bit excessive to me), all with no traffic lights and 100 km/h or higher speed limit. The land required for that is huge. If they scale it back a bit, maybe a 6-lane highway with 80 km/h speed limit like Glenmore Trail, it would take up a lot less land and still solve the major traffic problems for the foreseeable future (and in particular provide an alternate route past the reservoir for people going between the south and west parts of the city). That combined with an upgrade of Highway 22 west of the city down to 22X so traffic coming from the west has a route for bypassing the city altogether would, in my opinion, probably more-or-less accomplish the objectives of the ring road while being a lot less disruptive to existing communities.

[calgaryrocks]

Originally Posted by Ashartus

Right now the plan is for it to be an 8-lane freeway with future expansion to 16-lane (which seems a bit excessive to me),

yea 16 is crazy when you consider there won't be development to the west of that section because of the reserve

[troutman]

Originally Posted by chemgear

double negative?

imby

[Madman]

If Highway 22 didn't backtrack and run straight through Redwood and Bragg Creek, it would be used much more by people and truckers looking to bypass the City.

Time to bulldoze some Wintergreen houses.