I work for Mayor Nenshi, ask me anything!

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by Rathji

Do you honestly think there is a separate system of traffic lights that the bikes use?

No, he's saying there is a lot of issue with light timing and synchronization for automobile traffic, worry about fixing that first.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

No kidding. Start with rush hour on 4th, 5th, and 6th ave. Those roads flow well during dead times, but it takes 30 mins to traverse 10 blocks on those roads at peak time.

If only there were some other mode of transportation, other than cars, that the city could somehow encourage in order to take some of those excess cars off of those roads during peak times. If only...

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

No kidding. Start with rush hour on 4th, 5th, and 6th ave. Those roads flow well during dead times, but it takes 30 mins to traverse 10 blocks on those roads at peak time.

Those roads already have signal optimization. You simply can't have signal optimization that makes roads in all directions flow without stopping.

[bomber317]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Those roads already have signal optimization. You simply can't have signal optimization that makes roads in all directions flow without stopping.

That's silly talk, it should always be optimized for the person traveling on that path. Especially CP drivers!

But seriously, have you guys actually tried and tackle signal light optimization? Even just a simple scenario of say the downtown core.

We all saw the effects of the system not working during the flood.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by bomber317

We all saw the effects of the system not working during the flood.

IIRC, the flood shut down the traffic optimization computers downtown. Then, even with significantly less traffic downtown, it was much worse to get around.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by fotze

Is there a map that shows where signals have optimization?

No maps, but all of the downtown is included.


Calgary,ca link 1
link 2

[Madman]

Originally Posted by Rathji

Do you honestly think there is a separate system of traffic lights that the bikes use?

Don't be silly - bikes are exempt from all rules of the road and don't bother with stupid traffic lights.

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by HockeyIlliterate

How about working on optimizing and properly synchronizing the traffic lights in the city for the automobile traffic first?

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

No, he's saying there is a lot of issue with light timing and synchronization for automobile traffic, worry about fixing that first.

From the Calgary Transportation Plan, which goes on to say that prioritization of work should reflect this.

http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation...f?noredirect=1

[Addick]

Before people take a look at the prioritization pyramid and lose their mind, it is important to realize that it does not represent a war on cars. To the contrary, it is based on the realization that your transportation system cannot almost entirely rely on the private automobile and it is unfair to ask the car to play a role it cannot realistically perform.

Calgary is in a difficult position because it realizes that continually adding road space won't solve its transportation issues and it must invest in other modes of transport but, unfortunately, they were so under-funded they cannot pick up the slack in the mean time. It has to wait until the other modes can play their role and take a larger modal-share before it can spend the money necessary to modify the road network and enable it to plays its still important but smaller role.

In the mean time, it can only afford small fixes that help with the pain. However, these fixes (e.g. light synchronization) cannot work against measures that attempt to improve the efficiency, effectiveness and viability of other modes that are in desperate need of attention.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

No, he's saying there is a lot of issue with light timing and synchronization for automobile traffic, worry about fixing that first.

I must be missing the point. Are you saying that automobile traffic traffic light sync that won't apply to bikes? or vise versa?

You change one to make it better, wouldn't it make the other better? Its not like there is another set of lights.

[HockeyIlliterate]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Those roads already have signal optimization. You simply can't have signal optimization that makes roads in all directions flow without stopping.

In the Downtown core area on weekends, which is when I usually drive my car, I often cannot travel more than a block at a time when going North-South (or vice versa). Which is to say, when the traffic light turns green, I can usually go no farther than to the next block (even if I am the first car at the light) because the traffic light at the next block is red. Even when there is no traffic on the crossing roads.

When going East-West (or vice versa), if I get a green light at one particular intersection, I tend to get green lights at all of them, but if I don't, then I'm often stuck going two or three blocks at a time.

Does that strike you as proper signal optimization?

Originally Posted by Makarov

If only there were some other mode of transportation, other than cars, that the city could somehow encourage in order to take some of those excess cars off of those roads during peak times. If only...

I seem to recall a recent post in the Gear Grinder thread about how even the trains were logjammed because of poor light syncronization. Perhaps I was seeing things though, because I suppose that trains and other forms of transportation aren't subject to traffic lights....

Originally Posted by frinkprof

From the Calgary Transportation Plan, which goes on to say that prioritization of work should reflect this.

http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation...f?noredirect=1

Nice pyramid, which seems to ignore people's needs.

Walking, cycling, and public transit may be sustainable, but they aren't particularly realistic options when it comes to transporting large volumes of goods.

Twice a month grocery shopping? Good luck strapping all of your produce and canned goods on your back, or on your bike, or carrying it on a bus or train.

Holiday shopping spree? Hope you can get all of your gifts home without getting mugged when you have a bundle of goods under each of your outstretched arm.

Some DIY items that you picked up at Home Depot to improve your house? It might be tough carrying those 2x4's and table saws around, but I'm sure that you can manage doing so without a car.

Of course, all of this commentary and little picture show seems to ignore one significant realization: traffic light sychronization helps with the flow of automobile traffic just as much as it helps with the flow of pedestrian and bicycle traffic. So if you improve the light timing for cars, others can benefit as well.

But I see no reason to fiddle with traffic light timing and turning options for bicycles at the expense of automobiles, particularly when (i) there are far more automobiles than there are bicycles on the roads; (ii) traffic light timing for automobiles is abysmal; and (iii) optomizing the light timing for cars would likely reduce overall traffic congestion for everyone.

[prarieboy]

When are the street lights on Bow Trail under crowchild going to on during the morning commute?

[MarchHare]

Walking, cycling, and public transit may be sustainable, but they aren't particularly realistic options when it comes to transporting large volumes of goods.

Twice a month grocery shopping? Good luck strapping all of your produce and canned goods on your back, or on your bike, or carrying it on a bus or train.

Holiday shopping spree? Hope you can get all of your gifts home without getting mugged when you have a bundle of goods under each of your outstretched arm.

I did not own a vehicle for the first five years I lived in Calgary. Shockingly, I was somehow able to buy groceries, Christmas presents, and everything else I purchased just fine by either walking or using public transit.

[Bunk]

The Pyramid is a pretty blunt look at mode prioritization.

I think a more useful tool is this diagram, which lives in the Calgary Transportation Plan as well as the Complete Streets Guide (which sets out right-of-way standards for all our various street types.



What I like about this is it show that different types of streets play different roles in our transportation network for different modes. Whereby Freeway type streets play no role for peds and cycling, on the opposite end of the spectrum, it's reasonable that vehicles should expect congestion or at least not expect or high rates of speed where pedestrian movement is more important (for example 17th Ave SW). Other types of streets transit needs are very important due to the number of people it's moving.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

I did not own a vehicle for the first five years I lived in Calgary. Shockingly, I was somehow able to buy groceries, Christmas presents, and everything else I purchased just fine by either walking or using public transit.

Yes, but how long did it take you to become accustomed to the regular muggings!?!

[Cabbage]

Originally Posted by HockeyIlliterate

Nice pyramid, which seems to ignore people's needs.

Walking, cycling, and public transit may be sustainable, but they aren't particularly realistic options when it comes to transporting large volumes of goods.

Twice a month grocery shopping? Good luck strapping all of your produce and canned goods on your back, or on your bike, or carrying it on a bus or train.

Holiday shopping spree? Hope you can get all of your gifts home without getting mugged when you have a bundle of goods under each of your outstretched arm.

Some DIY items that you picked up at Home Depot to improve your house? It might be tough carrying those 2x4's and table saws around, but I'm sure that you can manage doing so without a car..

I don't live downtown and own a vehicle but I have a Safeway across the street and I actually prefer to go shopping by walking there. It forces me to only buy the things I need and in turn saves me money.

For larger items, you can always get them delivered.

Chris

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Bunk

It's being looked at as part of the centre city cycling network planning. It would be 1st SE between the Bow and Elbow Rivers only - but subject to more detailed analysis of traffic data.

1st SE carries 6000 fewer vehicles per day than it used to 10-15 years ago. Also, the downtown segment carries 4 lanes at its lowest volume points, whereas just south of the Elbow as traffic accumulates southbound, it has 3. Currently the trip from Bow to Elbow takes about 4.5 minutes during PM peak and early analysis shows with a cycle track and mitigation measures like some advanced turning and signal optimization that trip would increase by about 30 seconds.

I think 4th Street SW, would be a much better fit. It's traditionally a slower commute, and 1/2 of the length of the west lane (south bound), is full of parked vehicles as it is. Much of 4th Street SW, is the Mission/Belt-line area, and it's more conducive to bike culture. As well 4th street, dissipates bicyle traffic easily to the Elbow River bike path system.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Cabbage

I don't live downtown and own a vehicle but I have a Safeway across the street and I actually prefer to go shopping by walking there. It forces me to only buy the things I need and in turn saves me money.

For larger items, you can always get them delivered.

Chris

I started walking to Safeway to buy my groceries as an exercise plan (it's about a 10 minute walk each way). I could only carry so much at a time, so I had to go more often. It didn't seem to be working out that well, and I realized it was because I bought a snack every time I went, which was now 5-7 snacks (candy bar or chips) per week instead of 1 per week.

/coolstorybro

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by HockeyIlliterate

But I see no reason to fiddle with traffic light timing and turning options for bicycles at the expense of automobiles, particularly when (i) there are far more automobiles than there are bicycles on the roads; (ii) traffic light timing for automobiles is abysmal; and (iii) optomizing the light timing for cars would likely reduce overall traffic congestion for everyone.

What's happening with projects like the 7th street cycle track is that through the work of re-engineering the road things like turn advances and signal timing are being tweaked - not at the expense of traffic, just the opposite, they're to off-set or mitigate traffic impacts as a result of the cycle track.

On that particular project, traffic movement was sped up - if anything it was at the slight expense of the convenience of pedestrians as they may have to wait slightly longer at lights while an advance left-turn green is going for instance. On the other hand, pedestrians benefit from not having cyclists on the sidewalk. Seemed like a win-win for everyone.

[Arsenal14]

Speaking of signal synchronization and pedestrian priority - is there any way to get the signals at 10th, 11th, 12th Avenues timed so it's possible to walk at a somewhat normal pace and not have to stop at every intersection? Right now those three are timed pretty well for vehicles, but are terrible for pedestrians.