Macleod Trail Urban Boulevard

[Spring2008]

Macleod Trail upgrade report to be further studied by city
Plan calls for wider sidewalks, cycle lanes, more trees and lower speed limit
CBC News Posted: Oct 10, 2014 9:06 PM MT Last Updated: Oct 10, 2014 9:06 PM MT

The city spent $600,000 on the Macleod Trail report discussed Friday at a standing policy committee meeting on transportation.
The city spent $600,000 on the Macleod Trail report discussed Friday at a standing policy committee meeting on transportation. (CBC)


Macleod Trail development 6:49

4 shares

Facebook

Twitter

Reddit

Google

Share

Email
External Links

Macleod Trail Corridor Study
(Note: CBC does not endorse and is not responsible for the content of external links.)

A plan to upgrade a long stretch of Macleod Trail got a rough ride Friday from city councillors.

The plan calls for wider sidewalks, cycle lanes, more trees and a lower speed limit for the busy roadway from Anderson Road to 25th Avenue.

Bike lanes, wider medians eyed for Macleod Trail update
The $120-million plan comes without a timeframe for implementation, and it's not currently in city council's 10-year plan.

Some councillors like the plan, but Coun. Peter Demong says the report seems aimed at discouraging car use — and he says that's not a realistic vision of Macleod Trail's future.

"We want to encourage business to continue to develop there, but that doesn't mean we have to make the automobile go away," he said. "So there are parts of it that we want to keep, parts of it we want to scrap and parts of it we want to adapt."

A council committee voted Friday to refer the report — which cost taxpayers $600,000 — to administration until early next year for further study.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...city-1.2795942

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by Spring2008

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...city-1.2795942

I love it when a plan to maintain 100% of the auto capacity is attacked by a councillor as "making the automobile go away". Perhaps Demong has fewer than 3 fingers, so he can't do the difficult calculations involved?

[Spring2008]

Was driving down this stretch the other day thinking this area's kind of an embarrassment and very underutilized up until Chinook heading south. You have some of the richest neighborhoods to the west, and a rail line to the east connecting two big hubs in the city.

Wondering if it might be better to not include the bike lanes(run those parallel to the tracks), while still pushing for slightly wider sidewalks with new landscaping and upzoning along the corridor. Seems like something that should be done in the short term.

[mykalberta]

With wider sidewalks and a tree/buffer between pedestrians and vehicles what would be the reason for lowering the speed limit? That might be where the comment from the Councillor comes from.

[MasterG]

Looking at the traffic counts briefly for the sections in question, Macleod Trail definitely plays a bigger roll in the collective car-culture psyche than other roads. I suspect because it used to be much heavier used in the 1980s/early 1990s is the peak flow, with stagnate counts or reductions by 2012. In the late 1980s it was one of the busiest roads by all measure. In 2012, many other roads have caught up and passed Macleod on traffic counts.

Since 1989 the city has added 400,000 people since then but traffic has not increased on this stretch as many simply assume (hence the call by some that Macleod Trail is for cars!!" when this idea was floated).

Here is some brief comparisons between various point within the plan:

• Between Anderson & Southland: 1989= 78,000 / 1996=59,000 / 2012=56,000
• North of Glenmore near Chinook Mall: 1989=55,000 / 1996=61,000 / 2012=61,000
• North of Chinook around 50th Ave: 1989=57,000 / 1996=65,000 / 2012=54,000
• Macleod near Mission Road: 1989=50,000 / 1996=53,000 / 2012=49,000

Most importantly, keep in mind the city was very different back in 1989. A similar sized traffic count was also found on such small roads as these:

• Crowchild Trail between Glenmore & 50th Ave: 1989=57,000 / 2012=96,000
• Crowchild Trail between 16th Ave NW & the Bow River: 1989=60,000 / 2012=90,000
• Memorial Drive just east of Deerfoot NE: 1989=57,000 / 2012=69,000

The last statistic is that current LRT ridership on the South Line that parallels Macleod Trail is ~100-120,000 per day, over 2x the number of cars. in 1989 that was a very different picture with likely less transit users than road users.

Macleod Trail in this stretch no longer needs to be what it is (a shitty commuter road), it can now change to reflect that the road can be adjusted because it is unlikely to see much traffic growth in it's future. At the very least focus effort on improving the pedestrian experience at all the stations in a way that reflects what they are: significantly more important than the adjacent Macleod Trail and used by many more people.



If you want to look at some road counts:
http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation...flow-maps.aspx

[floobie]

Originally Posted by MasterG

Looking at the traffic counts briefly for the sections in question, Macleod Trail definitely plays a bigger roll in the collective car-culture psyche than other roads. I suspect because it used to be much heavier used in the 1980s/early 1990s is the peak flow, with stagnate counts or reductions by 2012. In the late 1980s it was one of the busiest roads by all measure. In 2012, many other roads have caught up and passed Macleod on traffic counts.

Since 1989 the city has added 400,000 people since then but traffic has not increased on this stretch as many simply assume (hence the call by some that Macleod Trail is for cars!!" when this idea was floated).

Here is some brief comparisons between various point within the plan:

• Between Anderson & Southland: 1989= 78,000 / 1996=59,000 / 2012=56,000
• North of Glenmore near Chinook Mall: 1989=55,000 / 1996=61,000 / 2012=61,000
• North of Chinook around 50th Ave: 1989=57,000 / 1996=65,000 / 2012=54,000
• Macleod near Mission Road: 1989=50,000 / 1996=53,000 / 2012=49,000

Most importantly, keep in mind the city was very different back in 1989. A similar sized traffic count was also found on such small roads as these:

• Crowchild Trail between Glenmore & 50th Ave: 1989=57,000 / 2012=96,000
• Crowchild Trail between 16th Ave NW & the Bow River: 1989=60,000 / 2012=90,000
• Memorial Drive just east of Deerfoot NE: 1989=57,000 / 2012=69,000

The last statistic is that current LRT ridership on the South Line that parallels Macleod Trail is ~100-120,000 per day, over 2x the number of cars. in 1989 that was a very different picture with likely less transit users than road users.

Macleod Trail in this stretch no longer needs to be what it is (a shitty commuter road), it can now change to reflect that the road can be adjusted because it is unlikely to see much traffic growth in it's future. At the very least focus effort on improving the pedestrian experience at all the stations in a way that reflects what they are: significantly more important than the adjacent Macleod Trail and used by many more people.



If you want to look at some road counts:
http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation...flow-maps.aspx

Well that kind of seals my opinion. If its actual traffic usage is essentially static, it doesn't really need to be prioritized as a road where capacity should be increased. It can retain its current capacity (not really sure why the speed limit would need to be lowered... 60 really isn't that fast), have a much nicer pedestrian experience, and generally look a lot nicer than it currently does.

Though, I do find its connectivity with Chinook Centre pretty annoying. The mall single-handedly makes traversing that adjacent stretch of MacLeod a total pain in the ass on weekends, or even weekday afternoons and evenings. I have no idea what could be done to improve that situation, though.

[93JC]

I like the plan. I hope it turns that stretch of Macleod into something reminiscent of Memorial Drive b/w Crowchild and Edmonton Tr (with a couple extra lanes) rather than another 16th Ave N b/w Crowchild and Edmonton Tr (which is better than before but not great).

I read the whole report a while ago, and I don't remember anything about lowering the speed limit though...

[McMurph]

Thanks for the numbers, floobie. I'm amazed that Macleod has seen no to negative growth in car counts over decades. Although I find it hard to imagine a day when it will be anything other than what it has always been and I doubt I would ever go for a stroll along it, an "urban boulevard" as the city has framed it seems like a reasonable long term plan.

[floobie]

Originally Posted by McMurph

Thanks for the numbers, floobie. I'm amazed that Macleod has seen no to negative growth in car counts over decades. Although I find it hard to imagine a day when it will be anything other than what it has always been and I doubt I would ever go for a stroll along it, an "urban boulevard" as the city has framed it seems like a reasonable long term plan.

Not my numbers... I just quoted MasterG's post. But, thanks

[Spring2008]

Current plan as proposed is not part of the 10 year capital budget, why not a phased/scaled down approach to get things going? This would all be brownfield development which the city seems to pushing hard for.

[artvandelay]

Other than the reduced speed limit, I like the plan. 60 is a slow enough speed limit.

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by floobie

Not my numbers... I just quoted MasterG's post. But, thanks

Just like Floobie to always be taking credit for other's work! What a jerk!

I am okay with either 50 or 60 km/h. But I hope any changes would include increasing the priority of cross-traffic over Macleod, particularly at the 39th Ave and Chinook Station. Remove the whole green-wave thing at station-crossing intersections and rotate through the light-cycle much quicker so the road starts to not be as much of a barrier to W-E traffic and pedestrians.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by artvandelay

Other than the reduced speed limit, I like the plan. 60 is a slow enough speed limit.

People are barely hitting 60 most times of the day between Chinook and 25th Avenue, especially on Cemetery Hill.

[Ramsayfarian]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

People are barely hitting 60 most times of the day between Chinook and 25th Avenue, especially on Cemetery Hill.

If that's the case why even change the speed limit then? I would leave it at 60 just to shut people up. The only time you can't do 60+ on MacLeod is during rush hour, with the exception of Chinook then it grinds to a halt.

Besides being butt ugly, the biggest problem from a drivers perspective is that the lights don't seem to be synced. I find this to be a problem throughout Calgary.

[J-D]

Originally Posted by Ramsayfarian

If that's the case why even change the speed limit then? I would leave it at 60 just to shut people up. The only time you can't do 60+ on MacLeod is during rush hour, with the exception of Chinook then it grinds to a halt.

Besides being butt ugly, the biggest problem from a drivers perspective is that the lights don't seem to be synced. I find this to be a problem throughout Calgary.

The lights on Macleod trail seem to be worse than anywhere else in the city, but I'm not a traffic engineer and I have a feeling there is a lot of math and logic behind how they are timed.

It's not even just that they're painful in rush hour (even if there's an accident on Deerfoot or Blackfoot it's faster to deal with the accident than to try Macleod as an alternate)... but even when there's little to no traffic I never seem to be able to get any semblance of clear sailing - it's red to red to red to red, speed limit or speeding.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by Ramsayfarian

If that's the case why even change the speed limit then? I would leave it at 60 just to shut people up.

The curve radii at intersections will be reduced to make pedestrian crossing lengths shorter. You're going to have to slow down more to make the corner, which means speed differentials increase and people slamming on their brakes when someone slows to turn will be more common. That's just one of many reasons I can see them lowering the speed limit.

[Spring2008]

I agree, keep it at 60.

[93JC]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

The curve radii at intersections will be reduced to make pedestrian crossing lengths shorter. You're going to have to slow down more to make the corner, which means speed differentials increase and people slamming on their brakes when someone slows to turn will be more common. That's just one of many reasons I can see them lowering the speed limit.

"Curve radii at intersections will be reduced"? Where? I don't remember seeing that in the report. In fact a lot of the radii will get bigger.

[mersar]

Originally Posted by Ramsayfarian

Besides being butt ugly, the biggest problem from a drivers perspective is that the lights don't seem to be synced. I find this to be a problem throughout Calgary.

I actually find Macleod to be one of the better sync'd roads in the city. Many times when I drive it you can often make it from Chinook to at least Mission Road if not all the way to 25th before hitting a red outside of the peak of rush hour.

[Ramsayfarian]

Originally Posted by McMurph

Thanks for the numbers, floobie. I'm amazed that Macleod has seen no to negative growth in car counts over decades. Although I find it hard to imagine a day when it will be anything other than what it has always been and I doubt I would ever go for a stroll along it, an "urban boulevard" as the city has framed it seems like a reasonable long term plan.

I'm guessing that expanding Deerfoot to Highway 2 is the reason for the huge drop in traffic.