Quote:
Originally Posted by polak
Yeah, just cause you can provide links that Stony is designed for 110 based on Alberta standards does not mean the road would be limited to 110 in normal jurisdictions where people know how to drive and feel comfortable behind the wheel.
|
Incorrect. Nobody has urban freeways at the same speed as their rural interstates. Texas has higher limits than anybody, but in Houston the ring roads (i.e. Stoney Trail) are at 105 and 100. I-10 (equivalent to Deerfoot) is at 100. I-20 through DFW is at 110 or lower. Utah's got 130 out in the middle of nowhere, but I-15 through Salt Lake (equivalent to Deerfoot) is at 110. Rinse and repeat. Among equivalent roads in North America, Stoney Trail would be an anomaly if signed above 110, its design speed.
You seem to be under the impression that the Alberta standards are comparatively low. Highway 1, sections of 2, 43, 63, etc. and all upcoming designs for rural twinned highway are a design speed of 130, which puts us in the upper tier of States with rural limits of 80 mph. It is therefore not a fault of the engineers and our standards, but just a matter of actually convincing the gov't to relinquish ticket revenue and sign the roads at their design speed.
In fact, our standards are
lower than the others as those Interstates signed at 120+ are controlled access with no intersections while our twinned highways obviously are not. A twinned highway in Texas equivalent in safety to QE2 is signed at 65 mph (105).