Quote:
Originally Posted by Acey
It does reduce to 2 just before joining mainline, to be fair. AT doesn't like 3+3 merges. There are mega long-term plans to twin 8 all the way out to 22, and for 22 to be a freeway - which would make that westbound through movement more important.
Not the answer anyone wants to hear, but a decision was made to simply not make any fundamental changes from the design drafted many many years ago for the SW leg, which saved a ton of time and expedited the project. New modeling for the traffic flow would have been done for other things like noise, and those models very well could be spot on.
I'm not saying this is "acceptable", but rather that there's not a bunch of engineers shocked and in awe losing sleep over the shocking revelation that WB Glenmore to SB Stoney isn't flowing great.
|
This makes sense considering the entirety of the interchange is on Tsuut'ina land (though really most of the SWRR is until Fish Creek Blvd). The nation rightly used time constraints as a negotiation chip, so we literally would have had to 'buy' more time to make any changes (in addition to the cost of the changes themselves).
I'd argue that is in fact completely acceptable (though not ideal) to have moderate backups at peak hour, even on a brand new project. 11/12 movements being excellent is good enough in my book. Of course the big issue here is backups happening down the middle lane which is obviously no buono. Even if they didn't anticipate this much volume for whatever reason in the original design it sucks that they failed to weigh the impact this kind of failure could have