Ring Road To Nowhere

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by ExiledFlamesFan

The people we should be targeting are the parasite communities. The people that use the city of Calgary's infrastructure daily yet do pay for this use. There should be tolls on all entry roads into Calgary from 5-10AM. Commercial vehicles exempt.

I understand that this is a provincial budget issue but the city of Calgary is also hurting for cash and we could use the toll revenue to help build the NCSE lrt.

Exempt all locally registered vehicles as we're already paying in our property taxes and you've sold me

[Calgary14]

Looks like the oil crash has the SW portion of the ring road in jeopardy

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-...-up-in-the-air

If it must be built in 7 years or the land goes back to the Natives, my guess is that it will go back to the Natives and we'll be right back to square one.

[polak]

Dumb.

Now is the time to build.

[Muffins]

Yeah, but think of all the blue rings they could build with the money they would save.


On a serious note, it would be completely idiotic to delay this and risk losing the land.

[Calgary14]

Originally Posted by Muffins

Yeah, but think of all the blue rings they could build with the money they would save.


On a serious note, it would be completely idiotic to delay this and risk losing the land.

Agreed. But without the required funding they'd have to let the land go. Then start the process of decades of negotiations to try and get it back.....oh what fun does that sound like!

[Slava]

Well to be fair, they have only said they're reviewing it along with all of the other projects. I don't think they're stupid enough to kill the project at this point. There is also some sentiment in the article that suggests that they might reset the clock, based on the land transfer not being complete. I have no idea whether that's possible, but that would seem far more likely than just outright killing it.

[Bunk]

I believe the 7 yr clock doesn't start ticking until Federal approval, which hasn't happened yet (as far as I know).

In any event they need to value engineer the heck out of the ridiculous current design.

[Acey]

I'm not concerned that it'll get done. Plans might be be scaled back, but only slightly. The province will do what it takes to get this done, because not only is it a couple hundred million dollars down the drain, but they're not going to get to do it again.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by polak

Isn't this Economics 101?

You build as many infrastructure projects that you can during a recession? Low material and labor costs while also creating jobs. Increase tax when times are good to make up for it...

If our government doesn't know that then we have bigger problems.

Yes, but it's not Winning Elections 101.

[ricosuave]

Originally Posted by getbak

This story gives a decent overview of the history: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/De...087/story.html

Bunk, I know there was a Deerfoot proposal report which explored 4 options from the 'through Fish Creek park' to the 'where it is now' and options in between... probably from the late 70s or early 80s.

Do you or anyone know if that report is available for viewing?

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by Bunk

In any event they need to value engineer the heck out of the ridiculous current design.

- "Deerfoot is so poorly planned! We can't fix any of the traffic issues without huge costs/disruptions!"
- "Stoney is so ridiculously designed! We'll never need it to be so built out!"

I'm not quoting you on these, but I'm pointing out that there seems to be no middle ground with some people on this. I think it would be a mistake to pretend that the City will never grow enough to need additional capacity in a bottleneck area considering there will not be a chance to expand the road right-of-way after this section is built. These constraints don't exist in the other three quadrants.

It will be value engineered, since every other portion has been, but it's not going to be less "ridiculous" in some aspects. The need for some of the larger interchanges still exist regardless of the presence of the C-D lanes, for example.

[BlackArcher101]

Why why why is the agreement to have the road completed and open in 7 years else it returns to the nation. That's just completely dumb.

What happens if we start in year 5 and by year 7 it's 80% completed. With that wording, Tssu Tina gets the land back and a nearly finished highway.

Should have just been a deadline for construction to start instead and that's it.

[Acey]

Alberta wasn't negotiating from a position of power, else we'd have had a deal 30 years ago. TTN didn't want a Big Dig style disaster and construction equipment on site for 20 years.

[Calgary14]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

Why why why is the agreement to have the road completed and open in 7 years else it returns to the nation. That's just completely dumb.

What happens if we start in year 5 and by year 7 it's 80% completed. With that wording, Tssu Tina gets the land back and a nearly finished highway.

Should have just been a deadline for construction to start instead and that's it.

The deal is pretty one sided in that respect. They knew the odds of the government finishing on time would be slim. Once it is incomplete after 7 years the provincial government will have to negotiate again which will likely involve another cash payment

[Acey]

Clock hasn't started yet. Oil could be $100 when it does. We don't know near enough about what's going to happen to call the odds of getting it done "slim"... and I'm damn sure we're not leaving a $4B freeway on the table.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Acey

Alberta wasn't negotiating from a position of power, else we'd have had a deal 30 years ago. TTN didn't want a Big Dig style disaster and construction equipment on site for 20 years.

Yes, because the other three sections of the ring road, and the four sections of Anthony Henday all took 20 years and were "big dig style disasters".

[4X4]

Hey Acey (or anyone else in the know), can you please tell me why they didn't bother to connect WB Stoney to McKenzie and Cranston, when the easy and obvious solution is a single lane underpass beneath the SB Deerfoot to WB Stoney exit? There's tons of space, and it's not like it's a difficult addition. Southcenter has one off McLeod, FFS.

The two alternatives are either going north on Deerfoot and flipping a U-ey to go south, or else continuing WB, and flipping around at Sundance/Chapparel.

[Acey]

Originally Posted by 4X4

Hey Acey (or anyone else in the know), can you please tell me why they didn't bother to connect WB Stoney to McKenzie and Cranston, when the easy and obvious solution is a single lane underpass beneath the SB Deerfoot to WB Stoney exit?

It looks like it would fit, but actually doesn't meet the new standards in the Highway Design Guide for merge distances, which are what ruined Deerfoot Trail. Possible solutions would have involved bulldozing houses in Cranston or an additional bridge structure.

Keeping in mind that access to communities are actually the secondary function of the road (#1 being the CANAMEX corridor / north-south Deerfoot bypass) then it becomes clearer why Cranston/McKenzie failed the cost-benefit analysis.

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Yes, because the other three sections of the ring road, and the four sections of Anthony Henday all took 20 years and were "big dig style disasters".

My bad for not making it clear... but I agree with you. I'm trying to present it from the side of TTN, who probably used precedence in the arguments against long term equipment being on site long term. Like I said the province, was not in a position of power in the negotiation so they had to cave in.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by Acey

It looks like it would fit, but actually doesn't meet the new standards in the Highway Design Guide for merge distances, which are what ruined Deerfoot Trail. Possible solutions would have involved bulldozing houses in Cranston or an additional bridge structure.

I do not agree. I have driven past it about 300 times in the last year, and there is so much space to do what I'm talking about. I think it has a lot more to do with saving a few bucks, and sticking with the mantra below...

Originally Posted by Acey

Keeping in mind that access to communities are actually the secondary function of the road (#1 being the CANAMEX corridor / north-south Deerfoot bypass) then it becomes clearer why Cranston/McKenzie failed the cost-benefit analysis.

Community access being secondary is fine. I actually agree with it. But this one is easy, and it would be a pretty big benefit to two pretty large communities. But even that aside, since I don't live in either one, or spend much time there (this isn't personal), I can't help but notice that they crapped the bed big time with the one at 52nd and Stoney. What a clusterfata. Not only is the interchange fully ######ed, the distance between 52nd and Deerfoot is pretty slim, and there's a big crossover that's already bad, and one day will make Southland/Anderson/Deerfoot seem like a shortcut.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Acey

My bad for not making it clear... but I agree with you. I'm trying to present it from the side of TTN, who probably used precedence in the arguments against long term equipment being on site long term. Like I said the province, was not in a position of power in the negotiation so they had to cave in.

I wasn't really trying to be snarky in your direction. Mostly just saying that if that was TTN's argument, it was BS and they certainly knew it.

Personally, I do think they put it in hoping for delays so they get a mostly finished road a for free. But not that they expect or fear it.