The Broward | 19m | 6s | Truman | MoDA

1762281595338.png
 
whatchyyc said:
View attachment 693245
Click to expand...
The 5th Street and 15th Avenue intersection version of this is mostly complete and is pretty wild. I really don't get why they couldn't keep the cycling facility at street level instead of raising it up to a weird, tiny mixing zone. 5th and 12th Avenue SW have had the level crossing for a decade with few real issues, why reinvent the wheel here?
 
I dont understand what they are doing with that corner. The bike lane goes up a ramp, over a depression for pedestrians to get to asphalt level and over a curb wall to run into another curb wall, if you ride in a straight line. Someone needs to explain how this is better than the temporary bike infrastructure for a cyclist going down 2 St SW, as I dont get it. Just seems so counter to best practices i have seen anywhere else, seems to create more delays for cyclists and more confusing interactions for peds v. cyclists.
 
I would encourage people with concerns about this ridiculous intersection design to reach out to the project team to voice them. I agree that how they have designed these intersections just invites pedestrian/cyclist conflicts and creates the potential for injuries. A "slow down mixing zone" was apparently the goal here where signage and paint will make the intentions all clear. In my view, signage is typically only ever needed to make up for poor design. Maybe if enough people call them out on the bad design, they'll actually rethink it... or at least not replicate it elsewhere.

Project team contact: 1415ave@calgary.ca
 
I'd think the reason for the design is that cyclists will have to slow down as they approach the intersection. What I don't understand is by moving the people waiting to cross into the path of the bike lane seems like a big mistake.
 
trtcttc said:
I'd think the reason for the design is that cyclists will have to slow down as they approach the intersection.
Click to expand...
That's the only thing I can think of as the rationale for such a bizarre design, but this one really got away from them. A mixing zone makes sense on the river pathway where there's subtle cues that cyclists and pedestrians should expect some mixing, but these are controlled intersections in a grid pattern.

If the cyclist has the green they will be aiming to proceed at-speed through the intersection, just like a car or pedestrian will be doing. The route of travel deviation is wild, forcing cyclists to go both up to curb height, but also over, and also in narrower shared space overall. Adding to the mess is a bunch of unmarked buffer space and the ever-ubiquitous, Calgary-special - an oversized traffic control signal pole with a ginormously huge gravity base, and a whole bunch of new signal boxes and the tactile strips all over.

That's a lot of effort to achieve .... what exactly? Why is this superior to the 12th and 5th intersection that's worked successfully for 15 years?

It's almost like they wanted to build a raised intersection, but only could do it for 2 of the 3 modes, leaving cars are regular height. It would almost have made sense if the cars were also asked to come up to curb level, creating a table that's consistent and signaling to all users that there's a lot of mixing going on here. But obviously, cars would never be forced to drive through such a non-standardized thing of varying heights and unpredictable dimensions.

Truly a bizarre one!
 
CBBarnett said:
It's almost like they wanted to build a raised intersection, but only could do it for 2 of the 3 modes, leaving cars are regular height. It would almost have made sense if the cars were also asked to come up to curb level, creating a table that's consistent and signaling to all users that there's a lot of mixing going on here. But obviously, cars would never be forced to drive through such a non-standardized thing of varying heights and unpredictable dimensions.
Click to expand...
They are doing a raised intersection at 19th st NW and 2nd Ave, it's an odd intersection with 2nd Ave not being contiguous, and obviously lower traffic volumes than the Beltline. But they could do raised intersection which would make more sense than these weird platforms.

1762380628031.png
 
I only just looked at the Plan Views for these. What in the world were they doing with all of the intersection designs?
14 Ave is re-designed as a 2-way street with 1 lane for vehicle travel and a parking lane on each side. At every intersection they could have chosen to shorten the pedestrian crossing distance using curb extensions like so (approx. curb line in red):
1762383034684.png

15 Ave on the south side has a continuous parking lane. Could have consistently used curb extensions to reduce pedestrian crossing distances throughout as well. Corner radii are selected almost at random like at 12 St and 15 Ave. Any reason that the curb extensions couldn't have been consistently added to reduce crossing distances and to improve pedestrian visibility?
1762383622942.png

1762383643150.png

I'm guessing that the reason the mobility engineers didn't do curb extensions was so that vehicles can use the parking lane at corners to slip out of the drive lane and right turn at red lights and stop signs easier.
Vancouver has actual streetscape guidelines and a catalogue for different types of bike lane and intersection designs that balance all modes for safer travel and so implementation can be similar, cohesive and comprehensive as you travel around the City.

Calgary on the other hand makes everything a 'special study' for the mobility engineers to create ad hoc designs. For a project landing page that professes to make safer environments for pedestrians and cyclists and to improve accessibility, it sure seems to introduce new conflicts between different mobility types and does not consistently improve safety for pedestrians in a meaningful way. Seems to somehow benefit motorists with occasional 3.5m wide drive lanes and corners to slip around at the expense of pedestrians.
1762384487314.png

Maybe we should be developing a comprehensive guide for safe intersection designs that correctly balance different mobility users safety, that can be consistent and coherent throughout the City (particularly the inner city) and not have these bizarre ad hoc outcomes. Looks like corner radii to allow cars to move easily remains the driving factor in decision making. Where are all the curb extensions they have said they have added, aside from the redesigned ramp intersections that create conflicts between cyclists and pedestrians competing for limited space?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top