Ring Road To Nowhere

[onetwo_threefour]

I imagine that the longer term plan is that the Cranstoneers will exit off Stoney SB at 88th and then take Seton, once 88th St. re-opens as the South extension of Stoney. The area plans I've seen for Mahogany make 88th look like an important road as they are limiting access out of Mahogany to only one exit at Seton if I remember correctly. If that is the case then I assume that the part of 88th St. south of Stoney will be an expressway, so if you're going to Cranston you would have to deal with only a relatively few lights on Seton Blvd. I don't know how long that will take, but it looks like the long term plan for accessing Cranston from Stoney. 52nd is the stop-gap.

[Acey]

Originally Posted by The Big Chill

Taking Seton wont be nearly as bad as it's being made out to be, as long as the traffic doesn't get too congested along there.

True, but it's gonna get really crappy really fast, as Mahogany grows... and there's still hardly anything besides the hospital south of Seton Blvd. This, by the way, is the "vision" they have for Seton...



If even a fraction of their vision gets built, 52 St and Seton Blvd are going to be busting at the seams... and Cranston people will have to wade through it.

The only thing that can save it now is the planned interchange on Deerfoot at 212 Ave, about halfway between Seton Blvd/Cranston Ave and the river... pg 8/9 of this document.

[Madman]

Originally Posted by psicodude

How the hell is that not annoying? There are already like 5 set of lights and a couple of stop signs on that route, and it's still mostly a barren wasteland. Once it's all developed, me and 10,000 of my closest friends will have to drive through 6 or 7 intersections, past the largest shopping centre in the area, and past a huge hospital just to get home.

I appreciate the map Acey posted and the explanation behind it, but please do not just brush this off as "no big deal" because it's a huge deal to the people that live in that area. What is going to end up happening is that people in that area won't take the ring road but just choose to stick to Deerfoot, even though we've had to endure the construction gong show for 3 years. I understand that the people in these neighbourhoods account for only a small fraction of the city and nobody else gives a ####, but how about just a tiny bit of understanding over why we are unhappy?

All of that being said, however, I will choose to suck it up because the other 99% of the project is incredible (and I would never call one of the engineers an idiot). You don't get a sense of the sheer size of Stoney until you are sitting on top of an overpass and get to look down on things. It really is impressive.

So you'd rather create a basket weave worse than the one at Deerfoot and Southland/Anderson?

Making that weave negates the entire reason to build the ring road.

For years people have screamed at the stupid designs in Deerfoot that have created critical pinch points and insane weaves in traffic that bring it to it's knees - so when the two biggest roads in town merge and the designers make the decision to not make those same 2 mistakes, people rage like they've outlawed lattes.

Does it suck for those using the ring road and wanting to exit to Cranston? Sure it does, but as many other have stated, there are other options and life will go on smoothly.

[Acey]

Originally Posted by fotze

My god, that area of Calgary is almost like they are constructing another brand new city.

To build a second downtown is pretty much their plan. The seed has been planted for Seton Blvd and 52 St to crumble; this merely days after the latter has opened.

[Maccalus]

Originally Posted by Acey

To build a second downtown is pretty much their plan. The seed has been planted for Seton Blvd and 52 St to crumble; this merely days after the latter has opened.

Don't worry, the SE train line will come to save us all......

[psicodude]

Originally Posted by Madman

So you'd rather create a basket weave worse than the one at Deerfoot and Southland/Anderson?

Making that weave negates the entire reason to build the ring road.

For years people have screamed at the stupid designs in Deerfoot that have created critical pinch points and insane weaves in traffic that bring it to it's knees - so when the two biggest roads in town merge and the designers make the decision to not make those same 2 mistakes, people rage like they've outlawed lattes.

Does it suck for those using the ring road and wanting to exit to Cranston? Sure it does, but as many other have stated, there are other options and life will go on smoothly.

Nope, I don't want another Southland/Anderson and stated that I accept the reasoning as Acey so clearly pointed out. I'm just angry because I assumed Stoney Tr. was going to solve all of life's problems for me. You know, downtown in 8 minutes, make me better looking, etc. I'm also angry that the rest of the city is just brushing it off as a bunch of latte sipping yuppies whining, when I believe we have a legitimate, albeit impossible to fix, gripe.

I need someone to blame, but aren't sure who is at fault. Is it the developer for putting the overpass so close to 22X, the province for telling them to put it there, or the city planners for not knowing how huge the Stoney/Deerfoot interchange would be?

If anyone needs me, I'll be in the angry dome.

[5seconds]

A similar issue is on the cards for the SW ring road, at least in the 2009 plans. The interchange at 130th ave only allows movements to-and-from the South. The interchange is too close to Anderson so the movements were restricted to the south. (North is to the left on this map)

[Slava]

^ What does it mean there when it says "realigned fish creek"? Are they planning on moving the creek bed with the Ring Road?

[Acey]

Originally Posted by Slava

^ What does it mean there when it says "realigned fish creek"? Are they planning on moving the creek bed with the Ring Road?

Yeah they're gonna move a bunch stuff. SW Stoney is going to be insanely expensive. It'll be... like almost twice the cost of the other three legs combined.

[5seconds]

Originally Posted by Slava

^ What does it mean there when it says "realigned fish creek"? Are they planning on moving the creek bed with the Ring Road?

In the 2009 deal, yes. In the map above you can kind of see the dark line of the original Fish Creek to the left of the two black arrows pointing to the realignment.

[Northendzone]

fyp

Originally Posted by Maccalus

Don't worry, personal space travel will come to save us all......

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Slava

^ What does it mean there when it says "realigned fish creek"? Are they planning on moving the creek bed with the Ring Road?

Smaller creeks get realigned all the time for new bridges. I'm quite sure East Nose Creek was realigned under NW Stoney Trail, for example.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by 5seconds

A similar issue is on the cards for the SW ring road, at least in the 2009 plans. The interchange at 130th ave only allows movements to-and-from the South. The interchange is too close to Anderson so the movements were restricted to the south. (North is to the left on this map)

The future 130th Ave interchange on the SE leg also will not have full access, it will look similar to that one for the SW leg.

When the future 16th Ave/68th Street NE interchange gets built, it won't have full access either (The current intersection doesn't allow Stoney Trail in either direction - 16th Ave to 68th St SB). The future interchange is unlikely to allow access between 68th St and Stoney in any combination. Depending on how much money they want to spend, it may not have access to EB HWY 1, or from WB hwy 1, either. I do think that connection is necessary, though.

Concept plans for 16th Ave/68th Street NE. Shows the three options I just described. Note that the first page with only the intersection as "stage one", is actually less built that what is actually there.

[5seconds]

Yea, I think when you set the standards for a road like this, you have to balance access convenience with driving safety/bottleneck potential. I think enough people recognize that the weaves on Deerfoot were, in hindsight with current traffic levels, not the best idea. I think the Province is making the right call generally on how they are implementing this balance.

In the original plans for the SW ring road (1950s-1980s) there were access points at 90th, Southland and Anderson, whereas the 2009 plans have Southland and 90th joining first before connecting to the ring road at a single access point. The interchanges would have been too close to each other to accommodate all 3.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by psicodude

How the hell is that not annoying? There are already like 5 set of lights and a couple of stop signs on that route, and it's still mostly a barren wasteland. Once it's all developed, me and 10,000 of my closest friends will have to drive through 6 or 7 intersections, past the largest shopping centre in the area, and past a huge hospital just to get home.

Let me rephrase, it won't be the massive gong show it would have been, before 52nd and Seton were joined.

Won't there be access from 22x to the north end of Cranston as well? Its not like they are making this the only entrance to the community forever.

[cavalera403]

Like psicodude I am also in the angry dome. And it is not just because of the Seaton/ Cranston overpass not being accessible. I do understand and agree that a weave lane in this location would be a dangerous location due to people trying to change 7 lanes.

IF it was just this I would be ok
IF it was just no east bound access off to the Cranston/ Makenzie overpass I would be ok.
IF it was just no access off of stony WB at the Cranston/ Makenzie overpass I would be ok.

BUT it is all of these things.

So the only way that you can get into Cranston from east of Deerfoot is through Seaton. Which as stated is great now but once Auburn Bay/ Mahogany/Seaton/Cranston are built out is a terrible option. 5 lights already exist there.

It is not like Cranston just appeared. This is not the oldest community in calgary but it was existing/ in planing during the planning of Stony trail.

The real problem that I have is not that Cranston/Seaton is not accesable from west bound stony but that Cranston/ Makenzie is not accessable. Over Under weave that was used at NB deerfoot/ Seaton should have been used to give that access that had always existed off of 22X.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Rathji

Let me rephrase, it won't be the massive gong show it would have been, before 52nd and Seton were joined.

Won't there be access from 22x to the north end of Cranston as well? Its not like they are making this the only entrance to the community forever.

There is no access to the north end of Cranston from WB 22x/Stoney either.

[cavalera403]

Originally Posted by Rathji

Let me rephrase, it won't be the massive gong show it would have been, before 52nd and Seton were joined.

Won't there be access from 22x to the north end of Cranston as well? Its not like they are making this the only entrance to the community forever.

The options to get into Cranston are


South bound Deerfoot :
-Via Seaton/Cranston overpass
- Through the community of Makenzie Lake
West bound Stony Trail
- 52nd through Seaton
East bound Stony Trail
- Cranston/ Makenzie Lake
-Over the Cranston/ Makenzie Lake overpass to re join SB deerfoot and off at Seaton/ Cranston
North bound Deerfoot
-Seaton/ Cranston

Getting out is another story.

[Acey]

For Cranston, I'd say getting out is the easy part, getting in is what sucks. As you cannot from WB Stoney.

cavalera403, a basketweave WB Stoney to get onto the bridge there would clash with the ultimate design of the NB-WB loop at DF/22X.

[cavalera403]

Originally Posted by Acey

For Cranston, I'd say getting out is the easy part, getting in is what sucks. As you cannot from WB Stoney.

cavalera403, a basketweave WB Stoney to get onto the bridge there would clash with the ultimate design of the NB-WB loop at DF/22X.

It was an idea. But something could have been done there with less impact than the SB Deerfoot/Stoney location.

Having ZERO access is the problem....
Maybe we should get some Treaty 7 representatives to lobby this problem of lost access.