Quote:
Originally Posted by Acey
Not oversight, it's cost-benefit. You call it barely mitigation, any modern highway design guide calls it 100% mitigation given that the weave is off the mainline. We are not Texas and have decided that, given their cost and other factors Texas does not face, we are not building four-level stacks. If the flyover is not needed for 20 years, you have to factor in 20 years of additional maintenance costs when deciding if you build it or not... you don't just build $100 million interchanges and hope for the best.
|
Around here we do. Not sure if you've ever driven that back road called Deerfoot, but not one of the interchanges are the same or predictable.
I'm really not trying to insult anyone, and I don't know why this seems to be a question that pisses you off. It's clear and obvious that they have taken the next 25 years into consideration with much of the RR, but at this one intersection, they've repeated the exact same mistake they did on Deerfoot.
Yes, they can fix it in 20 years, and yes, they will need to. And also, yes, it will be a royal PITA when they do. I'm just asking IF there is a plan (and by extension, what that plan looks like). I am sorry for ruffling feathers.