Ring Road To Nowhere

[TurdFerguson]

I've been using the Stoney to Peigan to deerfoot in the mornings to get from Mahogany to Ingelwood, so far it has been awesome. Thinking of trying this for my route home as well...anyone take peigan to stoney around 4:30? pretty smooth? I see sections of EB Peigan are still 1 lane.

[Bobblehead]

While I'm sure the snow is exacerbating things, I couldn't have imagined how much traffic there is trying to get to Stoney since the SE portion opened.

I've driven 16th EB in the afternoon to get home and it normally slowed down to a crawl for 36th to merge EB and 52nd to exit. Then after 52nd it would open up again.

Now it is a crawl from Barlow all the way past 64th (where I exit).

So I've definitely noticed an impact and I don't use the Deerfoot or the SE portion.

[Flambé]

Is there a reason there is no eastbound access onto 22X from Mckenzie or Cranston and no access into Mckenzie or Cranston from westbound 22X?

Or am I missing an important part of the deerfoot/22x overpasses...

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Flambé

Is there a reason there is no eastbound access onto 22X from Mckenzie or Cranston and no access into Mckenzie or Cranston from westbound 22X?

Or am I missing an important part of the deerfoot/22x overpasses...

No way to safely add that movement without ridiculous expense.

[Flambé]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

No way to safely add that movement without ridiculous expense.

I guess with all the open space between 22X and the existing off ramps it would have been feasible to link up some more off/on ramps.

Seems really limited in scope the way it is, considering the existing expense.

But I am certainly not an engineer, so I will be thankful for what we get.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by Flambé

I guess with all the open space between 22X and the existing off ramps it would have been feasible to link up some more off/on ramps.

I'm not sure what you mean...22X is gone and there's really nothing left from the interchange as it was before construction on Stoney Trail began.

[Acey]

I think I know what he means, like WB 22X could have linked to the SB Deerfoot exit to the McK/Cran bridge, which we know couldn't because it'd be a bad weave.

[Maccalus]

One interesting quirk is that you can't go southbound on Deerfoot coming north out of Cranston. There is room to have an exit meet up with the exit off of eastbound stoney south of the bridge that goes to northbound deerfoot to allow exiting in that direction. I assume this was not built due to the very small number of movements it would actually service.

[ken0042]

Would part of that be due to the fact you can't go from NB Deerfoot to the north part of Cranston either? I can see that becoming confusing; you can exit one way, but can't come back the same way.

[Acey]

I wouldn't think so. I imagine they analyze each access at a time and do their cost-benefit, if they can justify the cost and it meets the design standards, then they do it. Whether or not you can get to it from the other way likely doesn't matter.

[burn_this_city]

The 22x leg has been 100km/h for almost a month now. Every morning without fail there is someone driving 60km/h in the left lane. It's a highway people, get over to the right or off the freeway if you can't drive reasonably close to the limit. The speed differential between vehicles is dangerous, and I'm inclined to blame the people going way too slow vs someone doing the limit or slightly below.

[Resolute 14]

Yeah, it's ridiculous to see the danger strugglers create on that road. I see morons doing 60 from McLeod right to Deerfoot. I wonder if there is a provincial number/website we can contact like Calgary's 311 service to ask that signage be put up. I doubt a "slower traffic keep right" sign would do a lot of good, but if it gets one moron to move over...

[Flambé]

Originally Posted by Acey

I think I know what he means, like WB 22X could have linked to the SB Deerfoot exit to the McK/Cran bridge, which we know couldn't because it'd be a bad weave.

Yes. I'm not sure what a bad weave is, I was just surprised when driving it that there is not eastbound access to Stoney from Mckenzie or Cranston. Or access to Mckenzie/Cranston from westbound Stoney.

This now has me worried that southbound access to Macleod Trail from eastbound Stoney may be removed completely once that section is completely done. Which sucks, because I use it every morning. And I only mention this because we had a letter sent to the residents of Silverado stating that that access would be unavailable while work was being done, but maybe that's already completed and I don't have anything to worry about.

[Madman]

Originally Posted by Flambé

Yes. I'm not sure what a bad weave is.

Deerfoot southbound at Southland/Anderson/Bow Bottom.

[ken0042]

Examples of a bad weave is NB Deerfoot at Anderson/Southland, 17th and Memorial, 16th ave and 32nd ave, etc. Traffic trying to enter the freeway at the same place that traffic is trying to exit.

It's the same reason that from SB 52nd onto WB Stoney you have to turn left instead of having a simple ramp going to the right. That extra distance brings the weave from 1.6 km to 2.2 km. (Give or take.)

[Resolute 14]

Any discussion of bad x begins and ends with Crowchild/Memorial/10th/Bow. I'm not sure there is a worse weave in Canada than trying to get from 10th Ave to the Memorial exit in rush hour.

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Any discussion of bad x begins and ends with Crowchild/Memorial/10th/Bow. I'm not sure there is a worse weave in Canada than trying to get from 10th Ave to the Memorial exit in rush hour.

A couple guardrails/barriers to prevent that movement would fix that issue. I get that people would have to make two left hand turns but that would flow traffic a bit better in my opinion.

I think it's worth a pilot.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

A couple guardrails/barriers to prevent that movement would fix that issue. I get that people would have to make two left hand turns but that would flow traffic a bit better in my opinion.

I think it's worth a pilot.

It's not just the people making that movement that are weaving there. Everyone has to weave there, due to there only being one continuous lane in that area. Extra barriers to prevent that movement would just make a bigger disaster.

[Acey]

The specific issue with 22X at Deerfoot is that the mainline bridges over Deerfoot are only 3 lanes wide. The SB-EB and NB-WB loops dump right onto these bridge, leaving no room for an acceleration lane and it'd have to be a horrible yield situation with traffic on the loops trying to pick gaps to jump in, all while going up hill. Obviously that's a no go, so mainline has to be 2 lanes both ways approaching the bridge and the loop becomes the 3rd lane.

The ultimate plan is for the loops to have their own bridges over Deerfoot so that mainline can be 3 lanes wide on the existing bridge. This ultimate plan eliminates any chance they could have had of adding a WB exit to the McK/Cran bridge.

Bottom line is, you can look at the drawings for an hour (I've done it) and try to make more accesses work. Once you've devised some convoluted bridge that could possibly have worked, then you look at the ultimate plan, and everything goes out the window.

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Everyone has to weave there, due to there only being one continuous lane in that area..

That is not true. If the movement was prevented you wouldn't have weaving, there is no traffic streams that would have to cross.