Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 04-30-2012, 01:28 PM   #41
Resolute 14
In the Sin Bin
 
Resolute 14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Exp:
Default

I dont have the link handy, but in the Globe and Mail story on the crash, they spent a couple paragraphs noting how the Wildrose Party promised to make twinning the road a priority. They then spent about one sentence noting that Redford had done the same. Thought that was interesting - pretty much a case of the PC's word being taken as meaningless since they've managed less than 20k in six years. In six years, virtually the entire length of the 43 was twinned, from Onoway to Grande Prairie (save the Sturgeon Lake Indian Reserve, which spent several years demanding far too much money).

The government was committed to twinning the 43 due to their involvement in the CANAMEX project. But how the heck did the 63 fall by the wayside despite the promises of several years ago? Definitely a question the PCs need to be answering in the Legislature.
Resolute 14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2012, 03:49 PM   #42
oilboy2
Backup Goalie
 
Join Date: May 2004
Exp:
Default

That picture says it all. On top of that the regions population is expected to explode again. The province has sadly dropped the ball on this one. For a region that fuels Alberta one would think a twinned highway would be there a long time ago.
The gas station at Mariana lakes closed years ago when "construction" was coming through. To this day only trees have been cut.

On the flip side we are paying a billion dollars because idiots can't respect the rules of a single lane road. If those people knew how to drive and looked up what the word patience means 63 would be a very safe highway.
oilboy2 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to oilboy2 For This Useful Post:
Old 04-30-2012, 07:17 PM   #43
MrMastodonFarm
Lifetime Suspension
 
MrMastodonFarm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda View Post
if i got stuck behind that, i think i would just pull over and take a nap for an hour. not worth the aggravation of driving behind that mess
And an hour later you'd wake up and catch up to it 15 minutes later.

It's a 4+ hour drive from Fort McMurray to Edmonton, and being stuck behind that, which is a constant worry when driving up to McMurray, can make you crazy.

Just get the damn road twinned already, the project should have been DONE 15 years ago.
MrMastodonFarm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2012, 07:53 PM   #44
Mean Mr. Mustard
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14 View Post
I dont have the link handy, but in the Globe and Mail story on the crash, they spent a couple paragraphs noting how the Wildrose Party promised to make twinning the road a priority. They then spent about one sentence noting that Redford had done the same. Thought that was interesting - pretty much a case of the PC's word being taken as meaningless since they've managed less than 20k in six years. In six years, virtually the entire length of the 43 was twinned, from Onoway to Grande Prairie (save the Sturgeon Lake Indian Reserve, which spent several years demanding far too much money).

The government was committed to twinning the 43 due to their involvement in the CANAMEX project. But how the heck did the 63 fall by the wayside despite the promises of several years ago? Definitely a question the PCs need to be answering in the Legislature.
While I agree it should have been done years ago at the same time it is a difficult location to build a new road due to the marshlike ground as well as the short construction season. I don't work on a road crew and I pray to god I never have to but talking to people in the industry, it is a difficult road to build regardless as to how much money is thrown at the damn thing.
Mean Mr. Mustard is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Mean Mr. Mustard For This Useful Post:
Old 04-30-2012, 11:21 PM   #45
oilboy2
Backup Goalie
 
Join Date: May 2004
Exp:
Default

And even once it's twinned I hope people realize there will still be horrific accidents. Then what will they say? All one has to do is drive between Calgary and Edmonton and count the crosses on that twinned highway. On top of that more than a few were result of head on collisions...yes on a twinned highway. Only recently did that ugly cable barrier go up to prevent more cars crossing into the other lane.
oilboy2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 09:17 AM   #46
metallicat
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Exp:
Default

Well when they say they're twinning 63, does it mean making it a divided highway? Or just adding a second lane both directions?
__________________
But living an honest life - for that you need the truth. That's the other thing I learned that day, that the truth, however shocking or uncomfortable, leads to liberation and dignity. -Ricky Gervais
metallicat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 09:21 AM   #47
MrMastodonFarm
Lifetime Suspension
 
MrMastodonFarm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oilers_fan View Post
Well when they say they're twinning 63, does it mean making it a divided highway? Or just adding a second lane both directions?
Divided, two-lanes either way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oilboy2 View Post
And even once it's twinned I hope people realize there will still be horrific accidents. Then what will they say? All one has to do is drive between Calgary and Edmonton and count the crosses on that twinned highway. On top of that more than a few were result of head on collisions...yes on a twinned highway. Only recently did that ugly cable barrier go up to prevent more cars crossing into the other lane.
I don't think anyone has ever suggested twinning 63 will eliminate all accidents.
MrMastodonFarm is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to MrMastodonFarm For This Useful Post:
Old 05-01-2012, 10:49 AM   #48
Resolute 14
In the Sin Bin
 
Resolute 14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oilboy2 View Post
And even once it's twinned I hope people realize there will still be horrific accidents. Then what will they say? All one has to do is drive between Calgary and Edmonton and count the crosses on that twinned highway. On top of that more than a few were result of head on collisions...yes on a twinned highway. Only recently did that ugly cable barrier go up to prevent more cars crossing into the other lane.
As noted, you'll never eliminate all accidents. Especially in a place where winter lasts six months.

However, the Highway 2 comparison isn't entirely valid because policies have changed in the years since. There is no way you could get away with building a highway with such a small median between any more. The twinned 63 would be more like new highways with a very wide gap between.

It's actually interesting when driving to Grande Prairie to see how different the new road is compared to the old. The new one flattens hills as much as possible and the turns tend to be far more sweeping. The old one is like a roller coaster in places with sharper turns. They do a lot of things now to try and enhance the safety of the road that they didnt do when these highways were first built.
Resolute 14 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Resolute 14 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-01-2012, 12:52 PM   #49
jayswin
Celebrated Square Root Day
 
jayswin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

I see Calgarypucks famous "it just shouldn't happen" argument is making a small appearance in this thread.

"We need to come up with solutions so that people don't drink and drive as much."

"Wrong! Drinking and driving is brutal and people shouldn't do it!"

"The highway needs to be twinned because it's too small for the amount of traffic and it's been proven that a number of motorists will always drive unsafe down this road"

"The road's fine, people just need to drive safely down it, and plus people will get in accidents even if you make it safer."
jayswin is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to jayswin For This Useful Post:
Old 05-01-2012, 03:21 PM   #50
habernac
Franchise Player
 
habernac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: sector 7G
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm View Post
Highway 63 should have been twinned 10-15 years ago. It's taken the life of two people I know and more to come in sure.

Yes driver error probably doesn't help, but with the amount of traffic and the TYPE of traffic its insane how it's still single lane most of the way.
I grew up there as well. The highway should have been twinned 30 years ago. The economy of this province lives and breathes in Ft McMurray. It's embarassing seeing the lack of infrastructure that city has had to deal with, especially seeing how much money this province reaps from the area.
habernac is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to habernac For This Useful Post:
Old 05-01-2012, 03:28 PM   #51
Free Ben Hur!
Scoring Winger
 
Free Ben Hur!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Judea
Exp:
Default

The whole infrastructure funding formula for the Wood Buffalo region needs major reform. When GCOS (Suncor) was built in the 60's, Sun Oil (and their prime contractor Bechtel), installed the needed infrastructure in Fort McMurray BEFORE major construction of the facility itself took place. Why? Until this point in time Fort McMurray was little more than a trading post. This process was repeated, on a larger scale, when Bechtel returned to build Syncrude Canada in the 70's. This is how things are done all over the world to support megaproject construction.

Somewhere industry and government in Alberta have lost their way on when and how to fund the infrastructure requirements of the region. To me, a new funding mechanism is needed for looming infrastructure expenses that is built-in to the upfront budgeting and approval of new projects. Raising infrastructure funds from royalties and taxes paid to the Province (i.e. after construction costs have been recovered) is too late in the process.

Maybe start with a government led advisory panel of stakeholders (economists, industry, infrastructure experts, the public) to determine a funding formula and bind the formula to the project approval process, i.e. an infrastructure surcharge on the project budget. Think airport improvement fees except paid for by the leaseholder. Of course the oil companies would howl like banshees which, of course, would be the first indication that the idea would be good for taxpayers and residents. I mean, it's not like these facilities are just marginally profitable.

Turn the money over to the level of government capable of most effectively managing it (i.e. Wood Buffalo not the Provincial Government) at the time of project approval. (A caveat: transportation projects like highways and rail that exist in multiple jurisdictions would obviously need to be jointly managed.) This would allow required infrastructure to be moved along at a pace much closer to that of the major projects. Wood Buffalo will be in a perpetual state of catch-up if the status quo is maintained.
Free Ben Hur! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 03:31 PM   #52
Rathji
Franchise Player
 
Rathji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Supporting Urban Sprawl
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Northendzone View Post
Good grief, that looks like a gong show. One would think that those kinds of loads would have to be moved at night, or is the road busy 24/7?
Can't move oversized loads (of that size at least) outside the city at night.

Inside the city (at least Calgary) , you can't move them during the day.

As a pilot driver for a house mover for a year or so, it caused some interesting situations where you drive to the city limits and sleep in your truck till it is light enough to move.
__________________
"Wake up, Luigi! The only time plumbers sleep on the job is when we're working by the hour."
Rathji is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 08:44 PM   #53
oilboy2
Backup Goalie
 
Join Date: May 2004
Exp:
Default

So in the news today a 20 year old was stopped for doing 180kmh on 63 the day after this accident. This goes with the 100 other speeding tickets issued on the highway just this weekend. Clearly many simply don't care. Once it's twinned you can bet it will turn into an autobahn and innocent people will still get killed by idiots. We are dealing with a whole different population on that highway.
I say this because I drive it a lot and have yet to see it duplicated on any other highway in this province
oilboy2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 09:23 PM   #54
MrMastodonFarm
Lifetime Suspension
 
MrMastodonFarm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oilboy2 View Post
So in the news today a 20 year old was stopped for doing 180kmh on 63 the day after this accident. This goes with the 100 other speeding tickets issued on the highway just this weekend. Clearly many simply don't care. Once it's twinned you can bet it will turn into an autobahn and innocent people will still get killed by idiots. We are dealing with a whole different population on that highway.
I say this because I drive it a lot and have yet to see it duplicated on any other highway in this province
I wish you'd stop posting like people who want the highway twinned think it will end world hunger.
MrMastodonFarm is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to MrMastodonFarm For This Useful Post:
Old 05-01-2012, 09:45 PM   #55
oilboy2
Backup Goalie
 
Join Date: May 2004
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm View Post
I wish you'd stop posting like people who want the highway twinned think it will end world hunger.
Then what would you like from a twinned highway if it's not going to stop innocent people getting killed? Please fill me in
oilboy2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 10:08 PM   #56
Joborule
Franchise Player
 
Joborule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oilboy2 View Post
Then what would you like from a twinned highway if it's not going to stop innocent people getting killed? Please fill me in
Should it not be twined?

I think it's obvious it would reduce head on collisions greatly, which is a greater risk than necessary currently.
Joborule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 10:09 PM   #57
DuffMan
Franchise Player
 
DuffMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 127.0.0.1
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oilboy2 View Post
Then what would you like from a twinned highway if it's not going to stop innocent people getting killed? Please fill me in
why wouldn't it stop some of it. How many head ons due to an idiot passing dangerously, uphill or around corners etc. would not happen due to twinning.

If I see someone behind me doing 30 kph more than I am doing I make sure I am in the right lane. I dont' have those choices if they are heading right at me in my one and only lane, with a split second to do something.
__________________
Pass the bacon.

Last edited by DuffMan; 05-01-2012 at 10:13 PM.
DuffMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 10:15 PM   #58
MrMastodonFarm
Lifetime Suspension
 
MrMastodonFarm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oilboy2 View Post
Then what would you like from a twinned highway if it's not going to stop innocent people getting killed? Please fill me in
Putting aside the safety issue, a road that has as much traffic and the TYPE of traffic 63 had, it desperately needs to be twinned.

No need to be stuck behind a house or oil equipment for 5 hours.

These things have been said in this very thread but for some bizarre reason you've ignored them.

Back to safety... Jesus christ almighty.... I never said it will STOP all deaths, but it will make a busy road much safer.
MrMastodonFarm is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to MrMastodonFarm For This Useful Post:
Old 05-02-2012, 04:38 AM   #59
T@T
Lifetime Suspension
 
T@T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm View Post

Back to safety... Jesus christ almighty.... I never said it will STOP all deaths, but it will make a busy road much safer.
Yipe, Even the almighty Jesus Christ would tell you speed doesn't kill nearly as much as the sudden stop. And Jesus himself probably never went faster than 10 mph in his short life.

Enough of the lame 20 year excuses by the Aberta Government about expense because the land is mostly muskeg and rivers. If you can build one road you can build another beside it.
T@T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 08:56 AM   #60
schteve_d
First Line Centre
 
schteve_d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Fort McMurray, AB
Exp:
Default

I was very surprised to read this:


Quote:
The highway is often referred to as the deadliest in the province, but an Alberta Transportation spokeswoman, Health Kaszuba, said Monday the collision rate is lower than average.
She said the five-year collision rate on Highway 63 is 82 collisions per 100 million vehicle kilometres. The average for similar two lane highways in the province is significantly higher at 107 collisions per 100 million vehicle kilometres.
Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Pr...#ixzz1tisTXxMt



This topic resonates the attitude of a lot of Albertans and especially Northern Albertans. All these people signing petitions and protesting the government to just "Git 'er Done" without even having a clue about the challenges at hand. Just throw money at it.

It really isn't that easy. As the article states, building roads over muskeg and through boreal forests just isn't as easy as it sounds! The roads up here are horrible throughout the city. Last year four apartment buildings were condemned because they were sinking/shifting in the soft ground. There are buildings all over town where you can look in the corners and the walls/ceilings don't line up right any more!

When the new heavy truck rest area was built south of town they rushed and got the road paved. That following spring the new road had heaved so much it was impassable at highway speeds - it literaly was like the whoop-de-doos on a dirtbike track! It had to be ripped up and paved all over again!

We had a concrete pad poured around our entire shop a couple of years ago. The first winter after it was done it had heaved so much (about six inches) that we couldn't open the doors on the north side of our building all winter. In the spring it was fine again!

Wherever and whatever you build up here is built on the equivalent of a great big swamp and is just not as easy as it is elsewhere!

Albertans - throwing money at it won't fix it! It has to be done properly and properly is going to take time! Do taxpayers really want to fund a billion dollar road project that is slapped together and requires another billion dollars of taxpayer money in a few years to fix it? Some of these people are like children holding their breath.........."BUT I WAAAAAAANT IT"". We all want the highway twinned. They're working on it.

In the meantime don't drive like idiots and don't run around calling it the world's deadliest highway.
schteve_d is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to schteve_d For This Useful Post:
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:47 PM.

Calgary Flames
2023-24




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021