11th Street Underpass | ?m | ?s | City of Calgary

I've always found these sorts of throughput totals overrated when it comes to future planning decisions.

People drive in areas that are designed to handle more traffic. That doesn't mean we're bound to always use that space for vehicular traffic.

Supply drives demand.
 
Woosh said:
I've always found these sorts of throughput totals overrated when it comes to future planning decisions.

People drive in areas that are designed to handle more traffic. That doesn't mean we're bound to always use that space for vehicular traffic.

Supply drives demand.
Click to expand...
Induced demand is real to a certain extent but it's not applicable across all ranges. If that was the case there would be zero traffic because demand always matches the supply available. That's why people suggest reducing the lanes, so you can reduce some of the demand but it will never be 0 just because you closed the road, it'll move to other roads and there will be traffic jams there.
 
trtcttc said:
Induced demand is real to a certain extent but it's not applicable across all ranges. If that was the case there would be zero traffic because demand always matches the supply available. That's why people suggest reducing the lanes, so you can reduce some of the demand but it will never be 0 just because you closed the road, it'll move to other roads and there will be traffic jams there.
Click to expand...
Which is often a distinction without a difference. Most traffic is competing for the same objective

It's easy to look at the CPKC tracks as a significant bottleneck in the traffic network, but I don't think that's necessarily the case. It doesn't really matter whether you're north or south of the tracks...at PM rush hour most cars are in the same rat race just trying to get to one of the external exits (Bow River, Elbow River, 17 Ave, Crowchild Tr)...for the next level of the rat race.

Everything happening within that network doesn't matter that much (though tbf there are plenty of people ending their trip within the core+beltline)...its mostly just getting in line for one of those bottlenecks.
 
trtcttc said:
Induced demand is real to a certain extent but it's not applicable across all ranges.
Click to expand...

Induced demand is always relevant. The easier you make some utility, the more likely people are to use it. It's a universally observed trend across all public services, be it roads, healthcare, public transit, electricity, etc. etc. etc.

You assume that by making the marginal road more difficult to drive, the total number of drivers will stay consistent.

Most research on the subject would not support your conclusion.

Typically, whenever you make driving on any marginal road more difficult, you can expect some portion of the effected drivers to make use of a different mode of transportation.
 
Woosh said:
Induced demand is always relevant. The easier you make some utility, the more likely people are to use it. It's a universally observed trend across all public services, be it roads, healthcare, public transit, electricity, etc. etc. etc.

You assume that by making the marginal road more difficult to drive, the total number of drivers will stay consistent.

Most research on the subject would not support your conclusion.

Typically, whenever you make driving on any marginal road more difficult, you can expect some portion of the effected drivers to make use of a different mode of transportation.
Click to expand...
If you close the 11th crossing, making getting somewhere more difficult I’m not switching to the bus because of that. I’m taking a new route and putting pressure on other streets.
 
Woosh said:
Induced demand is always relevant. The easier you make some utility, the more likely people are to use it. It's a universally observed trend across all public services, be it roads, healthcare, public transit, electricity, etc. etc. etc.

You assume that by making the marginal road more difficult to drive, the total number of drivers will stay consistent.

Most research on the subject would not support your conclusion.

Typically, whenever you make driving on any marginal road more difficult, you can expect some portion of the effected drivers to make use of a different mode of transportation.
Click to expand...
I’m not disagreeing on the idea of induced demand and that it exists. But that’s only a PORTION of the total demand. If ALL demand is induced, then there will be no traffic, because if the road is crowded, nobody should be driving. Conversely, in the evening, nobody should be walking/biking because there is no traffic, so it should be inducing a ton of demand. That’s obviously not the case. Closing down the road does not magically make All the users of that road disappear or walk/bike/transit. A portion of them will, a portion of them will simply crowd to other streets, making traffic worse. By reducing the lane, you are cutting down on a portion of the demand, the portion that hopefully would use another form of transportation, but the people that would drive regardless if it’s 1 lane, 0 lanes, or a park, can still use the 1 lane. Realistically, there’s almost no way demand would be induced/reduced based on 1 small road.

It’s the same idea with healthcare as you mentioned. If we close every hospital tomorrow except Foothills, what would happen? All the demand disappear because all the sick people are suddenly not sick? No. The people that are only slightly sick will see the multi-day wait in the Emergency and decide not to go, the people with very serious illness will simply wait because their demand was never induced by the extra hospital.
 
This might be the worst planning idea I've seen come out of the City in a long time. I'm all for creating more parks, but underneath an industrial train corridor is idiotic. The safety concerns are one thing, but how bout closing off vehicular access between the Beltline and DT for 5 full blocks. Genius!
 
I'm also thinking that if they were to close off vehicles crossing on 11th Ave, they would have to accelerate the 14 street Bow Trial interchange to include all movements of traffic to compensate.

If the math and traffic models map out to make it cheaper and more feasible than just simply doing an all modes crossing for 11th, then I could see the rational behind it. But still don't think a small, trenched park under a very active railway bridge is appealing. Especially when the Bow River and Millennium Cowboys Park is right there.
 
Joborule said:
I'm also thinking that if they were to close off vehicles crossing on 11th Ave, they would have to accelerate the 14 street Bow Trial interchange to include all movements of traffic to compensate.

If the math and traffic models map out to make it cheaper and more feasible than just simply doing an all modes crossing for 11th, then I could see the rational behind it. But still don't think a small, trenched park under a very active railway bridge is appealing. Especially when the Bow River and Millennium Cowboys Park is right there.
Click to expand...
And that section of the river front is about to be redone and become much more usable. I get we need some park space in that section of the city but it is weird to put it here versus better utilizing the spaces that do exist.
 
Urb said:
This might be the worst planning idea I've seen come out of the City in a long time. I'm all for creating more parks, but underneath an industrial train corridor is idiotic. The safety concerns are one thing, but how bout closing off vehicular access between the Beltline and DT for 5 full blocks. Genius!
Click to expand...
I don't think eliminating one CPR crossing for cars is going to be the end of the world.

In fact, 11th street doesn't even register on traffic volume maps.

1743105146852.png


I think having a pedestrian underpass a park might be an attraction within the downtown/beltline area. Something similar to the Peace Bridge on Highline Park. Plus...it's cheaper to make an underpass for pedestrians than for vehicles.
 
Was the cost for 5th street SW that expensive that the city would consider something lesser than like this? Why wouldn't 5th Street just be the standard? take that plan and apply it again. I feel like this is over complicating something that could be a standard design that still promotes multiple methods of moment.
 
Urban_Views said:
Was the cost for 5th street SW that expensive that the city would consider something lesser than like this? Why wouldn't 5th Street just be the standard? take that plan and apply it again. I feel like this is over complicating something that could be a standard design that still promotes multiple methods of moment.
Click to expand...
5th is much wider, maybe twice as wide.
 
Urban_Views said:
Was the cost for 5th street SW that expensive that the city would consider something lesser than like this? Why wouldn't 5th Street just be the standard? take that plan and apply it again. I feel like this is over complicating something that could be a standard design that still promotes multiple methods of moment.
Click to expand...
The difference is that the 5th street underpass was built in the 1950's with an upgrade that was completed in 2022. The 11th street crossing is an existing surface crossing.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top