I'm just wondering whether having access at a particular location is a right though? Is there legal precedent of this? What if the city wanted to make changes on their own land....are they precluded to do so? I would suggest that having a road in a specific place is a fairly tenuous definition of a right, but I could definitely be wrong about that.
Thanks!
Aboriginal Rights are not listed anywhere, and were meant to be defined on a Nation by Nation, case by case basis. It is hard to know if access at that location would be considered a right, but with a road in constant use in that location for over 130 years that we know about, I think a good case could be made that the access road was something that was used before european contact, and that the Province or City would have no right to extinguish that unilaterally. I think access in general is a right, but it would be interesting to see if that particular access point would be protected.
My understanding is that if the City wanted to make changes to their own roads that could potentially impact the access there, they are obliged to consult with the Nation (above and beyond any other public engagement) and that the needs (and rights) of the Nation would have to be accommodated. What that means would be different in each case.
For an example of a road built beside a reserve that was quashed by the Supreme Court, the Misikew Cree case deals with this, though that was in regards to a treaty right, not an aboriginal right.
There are enough potential grey areas that this is not a simple issue legally, but on balance, I think it the access would have to be accommodated to some degree. At the end of the day, it would likely take a court case to definitively answer that question if it ever really came to that.
Southeast commuters are upset about a portion of the newly-opened ring road, saying a barricade is leading to traffic jams.
While the southeast ring road is still not fully open, the off-ramp from westbound Stoney Trail onto southbound Deerfoot Trail is. However, there is no access to Seton, Cranston and the South Health Campus, because the lane steers drivers right past the exit.
“There’s a lot of land space there, and it just doesn’t seem right,” complains Michelle Kinghorn, who lives in Cranston. “There’s got to be a better way.”
Drivers are now being forced to cut through other neighbourhoods to get to the hospital or Cranston, which is causing traffic backups.
Alberta’s transportation minister says the permanent barricade between the lanes was designed for safety.
“We want safe turn movements, and if they’re going to be at freeway speeds it requires certain distances and curvatures, which can’t be achieved with the spacing between the entrances to those communities and Deerfoot Trail,” says Ric McIver.
It appears Cranston residents are only now becoming aware they can't get in from WB Stoney. The same silly woman claiming there to be "lots of land space" is probably the same woman who, along with others, would have to have her house bulldozed to make room for a SB basketweave. Despite SE plans being out for 3 years, know-it-all Facebook commenters are still leaving these gems.
Quote:
Safety or not it is a huge inconvenience...
Where are we hiring these civil engineers from? It is a disgrace and an embarrassment. Just travel south of the 49th to see how a road system works....
God forbid they build a road properly... these are the same people who probably rag on Deerfoot when people die at Calf Robe or under the 17 Ave curve.
Location: Close enough to make a beer run during a TV timeout
Exp:
To be fair, I would consider myself a bit of an armchair Stoney Trail geek. I went to every open house, and have PDFs hanging in my garage that were printed over 5 years ago. And I missed that in that spaghetti that is Deerfoot/22X that there would not be access to Cranston and McKenzie Lake. I even have friends in Cranston and thought I had the new route traced out.
I think people have a right to be upset. As a community that borders the new roadway they get the extra traffic but not the access. And as psicodude said earlier, even not having direct access to the hospital is mind blowing. Yes, I took 52nd to Seton yesterday and right now it isn't bad. But before shovels go into the ground for the SW portion that route will have traffic lights and cross traffic.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ken0042 For This Useful Post:
True to an extent, but Mazrim just said it perfectly on SSP... these people are attacking the engineers and calling them stupid. Thousands of hours of review went into this design, and it was (rightfully) determined that the needs of many outweigh the few. The engineers built the road this way to save YOUR stupid ass from the inevitable accidents weaves create. People saying crap like, "oh my cat could have designed a better interchange?" Seriously? You and your cat will be backed up to exit 236 on Deerfoot everyday after it slows to a crawl, as people negotiate the stupid weave you so badly want.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Acey For This Useful Post:
Location: Close enough to make a beer run during a TV timeout
Exp:
I don't blame the engineers either. They were obviously given a budget to work with, and certain things got scrapped. What I don't get is why WB 22X to SB DF has to come down and merge from the left. Add another $20M bridge and you could have it come down to the right, and all traffic still going left. The $20M bridge would be for SB DF onto Seton Blvd.
I don't blame the engineers either. They were obviously given a budget to work with, and certain things got scrapped. What I don't get is why WB 22X to SB DF has to come down and merge from the left. Add another $20M bridge and you could have it come down to the right, and all traffic still going left. The $20M bridge would be for SB DF onto Seton Blvd.
Edit- much like what you suggested on SSP.
That would mean no access to Cranston from Deerfoot SB, instead of Stoney WB.
That's probably worse.
Either way, there are alternative routes that will work ok.
Here's a post of mine from SSP, I thought I may have posted something similar on here, but apparently not. Anyway, this is from April 9, 2010 - 3.5 years ago:
Quote:
Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed
Yup it is using HWY 22x, and builds the interchanges along HWY 22x (everything east of McLeod).
The Deerfoot Stoney interchange is pretty massive. I love how it has TWO separate ramps that provide the Northbound to Eastbound movement.
The one quirk with the Deerfoot/stoney interchange (unless something has changed), is that you cannot get into the community of Cranston coming from the east on HWY 22x. I'm not exactly sure how they are planning to let the people make that turn. You can only get from Cranston onto HWY 22x eastbound from 196th Ave, and that's only because of the second ramp that I referred to above.
The Following User Says Thank You to You Need a Thneed For This Useful Post:
^^ I don't know about that, as I was exiting on to EB Stoney from SB Deerfoot on my way home tonight I was looking at the flyover that takes you from WB Stoney to SB Deerfoot and noticed that the the support for the northern part of the fly over is about twice as wide as the current roadbed that sits on it, almost looks like they could have built a split flyover with some lanes exiting on the LH side on to Deerfoot and a second part that would cross over and connect on the RH side of Deerfoot to give access to Cranston. The SB Deerfoot traffic would come through the middle and those exiting into Cranston would just have to merge right with the traffic coming off the RH flyover which would probably all be going to Cranston any way, since the SB Deerfoot traffic would come down on the LH side as it does now. I don't know if this is only another '$20M bridge' but it certainly seems doable and safe.
__________________
onetwo and threefour... Together no more. The end of an era. Let's rebuild...
Last edited by onetwo_threefour; 10-15-2013 at 07:51 PM.
Reason: Referring to two posts above rather than immediate preceding post.
There's a little piece of Cranston that kinda sticks out:
It's notable because there's a very boring 522 page document for the project called schedule 18, and it states that the WB-SB flyover from 22X to Deerfoot must have a design speed of 110 kph... which means it must have some extremely large radius I don't care to look up. So the designers hands are tied; for the flyover to cross both the NB and SB lanes and meet up with southbound Deerfoot from the right side (which would allow Cranston Ave/Seton Blvd access) means you're bulldozing that chunk of Cranston I've circled in order to maintain the required radius for the flyover. Either that, or get the province to cave and allow a lower design speed for the flyover, which would come back to haunt them down the road.
Then you think about it, and you end up in a similar situation because now SB Deerfoot traffic has to crossover to get into Seton, or go over a basketweave like on the Auburn Bay side, but there isn't room on the Cranston side for a basketweave unless you bulldoze, or cheat with design speeds. Again, hands tied. Then you start thinking about something like this:
Well we've figured it out. But that first bridge is gonna be like 8 metres high because of how high that flyover had to get to make it over EB mainline, and it has to cross 7 lanes of Deerfoot. then you have to build ANOTHER bridge after that. Then to top it all off, in addition to Copperfield and Auburn Bay people complaining about noise, you've got some Cranston people (the same people who want this movement) complaining about a flyover in their backyards. $25M to $30M all said and done? I haven't a clue, I just like doodling on drawings. Some guy probably crunched the numbers for the cost of this versus the predicted traffic volume for the movement, and didn't even bother to present his sketch of the flyover.
Easier to send Cranston people down to 52 St, methinks. Only in Calgary can we beg for much needed Deerfoot relief, finally get it done, and then hate on it.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Acey For This Useful Post:
As much as that might seem like a possible solution, it seems like that ramp is coming about 20m from houses. Is there is some rules about how close it can be to houses?
It really doesn't matter, it's done, and people will complain about anything. When 52 st joins with Seton, it really won't be annoying at all.
__________________
"Wake up, Luigi! The only time plumbers sleep on the job is when we're working by the hour."
As much as that might seem like a possible solution, it seems like that ramp is coming about 20m from houses. Is there is some rules about how close it can be to houses?
It really doesn't matter, it's done, and people will complain about anything. When 52 st joins with Seton, it really won't be annoying at all.
The ramp on the other side is even closer. You can see into Auburn Bay bedrooms, if you so desire.
As much as that might seem like a possible solution, it seems like that ramp is coming about 20m from houses. Is there is some rules about how close it can be to houses?
It really doesn't matter, it's done, and people will complain about anything. When 52 st joins with Seton, it really won't be annoying at all.
52nd st is open all the way to Seton.
The Following User Says Thank You to You Need a Thneed For This Useful Post:
So what will the best option for getting into Cranston be? Will it be exiting on 52nd and going along Seton past the hospital?
I'm likely moving from McKenzie Town to Cranston soon and our household will be using the ring road a lot.
That's correct. There's another option that involves exiting NB Deerfoot and u-turning at exit 236 (McK Lake/Towne) to come back south. Might be faster depending on where you are in Cranston.
The Following User Says Thank You to Acey For This Useful Post:
That's correct. There's another option that involves exiting NB Deerfoot and u-turning at exit 236 (McK Lake/Towne) to come back south. Might be faster depending on where you are in Cranston.
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. It's probably just as fast as the current option of waiting to make a left hand turn across 22x.
It really doesn't matter, it's done, and people will complain about anything. When 52 st joins with Seton, it really won't be annoying at all.
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.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to psicodude For This Useful Post:
