Correct. Us Aspen-ites lobbied to ensure that 17th Ave didn't get used as an alternative to Bow Trail, so that route just allows partial access (ie can exit off north bound RR, but can't enter onto NB RR off 17th) and is expected to be used mainly as an exit into the neighbourhood off the ring road.
Super stoked for this announcement. I am far enough east that this will be 0% impact on me noise and construction wise, but will be amazing for access!
Last edited by BigNumbers; 07-05-2018 at 10:16 AM.
I am far enough east that this will be 0% impact on me noise and construction wise, but will be amazing for access!
I'm in Oakridge, far enough removed to not hear much, but trust me, when they're hammering those pilings into the ground, you and every other person in Aspen will hear it.
What I want to know is why they built the new Peigan extension from 52 ST to Stoney as a 2 lane road, even though it widens to dual lanes at 52 ST and again at the Stoney interchange. It's results in some really stupid bottlenecks at rush hour, and there's tons of space to widen the road to 4 lanes. It seems there was zero future planning involved with that construction
Won't disagree with your question because it is true, but to be fair in this case 'we' is the City and that had nothing to do with the Ring Road.
What I want to know is why they built the new Peigan extension from 52 ST to Stoney as a 2 lane road, even though it widens to dual lanes at 52 ST and again at the Stoney interchange. It's results in some really stupid bottlenecks at rush hour, and there's tons of space to widen the road to 4 lanes. It seems there was zero future planning involved with that construction
Also the Glenmore-Stoney interchange is ridiculous, sticking northbound traffic from Glenmore into a single turn lane with a light. Why could they not follow the Peigan interchange a few miles up which flows way better?
Worst yet 61st ave is 4 lanes over stoney with no access/ramps. 52nd st would be a breeze with a middle access point. A 10 year old with a map could have designed it better.
Over a year ago I called in QR77 to ask the mayor about this and they left me on hold for 20 minutes only to tell me "sorry we're out of time" as the major was lying his ass off about how great his snow removal was.
Location: Close enough to make a beer run during a TV timeout
Exp:
I went to a lot of the SE Stoney open houses, and that question come up over and over again. Simply put- the single biggest issue with Deerfoot is that there are too many interchanges too close together. It worked in a city of 500K, but not a million. So the engineers didn't want to repeat that mistake. Keep Stoney as free flowing as possible.
Looking at Google Maps it's 1.9 km from 61st to Peigan, and 2 km to Glenmore. That is closer than the 3 km they tried to keep between most of the interchanges.
What the City of Calgary could do is build collector roads beside, but I'm not sure if there would be enough traffic to justify the cost.
The Following User Says Thank You to ken0042 For This Useful Post:
I'm in Oakridge, far enough removed to not hear much, but trust me, when they're hammering those pilings into the ground, you and every other person in Aspen will hear it.
I'm in Cedarbrae. I can hear the haulers and graders from my back deck all day every day.
Frankly, I'm not all that excited about the SW ring road since I saw the plans. Southland and 90th are not going to merge onto the ring road. Instead, they'll be funneled together through a commercial complex on the Tsuu T'ina, with intersections and stop signs. Then they'll join up with the ring road on what looks like a single-merge lane.
So I'll have much more traffic in my neighbourhood, with moderately improved access to an area of the city (the far West) that I rarely go to anyway.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
It seems there was zero future planning involved with that construction
NE was leg was built as it was because of nonsense about predicted traffic levels and the nature of P3 contracts which also involve maintenance. In fact, unlike Deerfoot, tons of future proofing went in to Stoney on the east side... it's a relatively easy process to make it 5 lanes each way that's literally just stripping topsoil and paving.
Good luck doing that to any other major road in the city.
I went to a lot of the SE Stoney open houses, and that question come up over and over again. Simply put- the single biggest issue with Deerfoot is that there are too many interchanges too close together. It worked in a city of 500K, but not a million. So the engineers didn't want to repeat that mistake. Keep Stoney as free flowing as possible.
Looking at Google Maps it's 1.9 km from 61st to Peigan, and 2 km to Glenmore. That is closer than the 3 km they tried to keep between most of the interchanges.
What the City of Calgary could do is build collector roads beside, but I'm not sure if there would be enough traffic to justify the cost.
Never understood this line of thinking, if you closed every second intersection on deerfoot the bottle necks would be twice as painful. the problems with deerfoot is it's just not big enough and it's design is horrible. And what good is a free flowing roadway if you can't get on or off it?
You're right about collector lanes, every high traffic roadway should have them from the beginning
Location: Close enough to make a beer run during a TV timeout
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus
Never understood this line of thinking, if you closed every second intersection on deerfoot the bottle necks would be twice as painful.
I guess they have done their homework on this from other cities. If you notice, the bottlenecks are where there is weaving. Take Southland and Anderson. If you could get the people exiting onto Southland to exit before the people at Anderson exit, you would have two sets of "off" exits followed by one "on" entrance. Even though Deerfoot narrows to two lanes there, it would flow much better.
Also look at larger cities where they have metered onramps. The point being to limit the number of cars going on, to make the overall merging easier.
Another point, NB Deerfoot gets better right after 64th in the afternoons. You could make the argument that most people have exited by then, but 64th isn't a very busy interchange and the number of cars exiting is less than the previous exits. The point that works is there isn't another onramp until Airport Trail; which is 3.6 km away. Beddinton doesn't count as there isn't an onramp NB.
I guess they have done their homework on this from other cities. If you notice, the bottlenecks are where there is weaving. Take Southland and Anderson. If you could get the people exiting onto Southland to exit before the people at Anderson exit, you would have two sets of "off" exits followed by one "on" entrance. Even though Deerfoot narrows to two lanes there, it would flow much better.
Also look at larger cities where they have metered onramps. The point being to limit the number of cars going on, to make the overall merging easier.
Another point, NB Deerfoot gets better right after 64th in the afternoons. You could make the argument that most people have exited by then, but 64th isn't a very busy interchange and the number of cars exiting is less than the previous exits. The point that works is there isn't another onramp until Airport Trail; which is 3.6 km away. Beddinton doesn't count as there isn't an onramp NB.
Sticking with the 64th example, there's a large volume of vehciles entering NB Deerfoot from McKnight, and they don't have enough room to merge onto the heavy amount of traffic on Deerfoot at the posted speed limit. This creates a bottleneck.
I think one of the short term solutions to this is to make the on ramp turn into a new lane altogether, that turns off onto 64th ave exit.
Frankly, I'm not all that excited about the SW ring road since I saw the plans. Southland and 90th are not going to merge onto the ring road. Instead, they'll be funneled together through a commercial complex on the Tsuu T'ina, with intersections and stop signs. Then they'll join up with the ring road on what looks like a single-merge lane.
I have heard there will be a commercial complex in the 90th/Southland area, but I don't think there will be impediment to traffic because of that. There's one stoplight where Southland will intersect with 90th, but 90th looks pretty free flowing.
To each their own, you may not use it all that often but I still there will be a noticeable benefit on 14th and most likely Glenmore/Crowchild as well.
I have heard there will be a commercial complex in the 90th/Southland area, but I don't think there will be impediment to traffic because of that. There's one stoplight where Southland will intersect with 90th, but 90th looks pretty free flowing.
Here's the Tsuut'ina Crossing development planned for Southland and 90th. Doesn't exactly scream 'free-flowing traffic' to me. Certainly not the Southland stretch, and Southland will be the main feeder onto the ringroad for that part of the city. So all those cars from Oakridge, Palliser, Pump Hill, Braeside, and Cedarbrae heading to the ring road will be funneled through a business and commercial park, then make a left turn at lights, then merge onto the ringroad. It's going to be an absolute ####-show at rush hour.
There are two more commercial districts being planned for where Anderson and Glenmore connect with the ring road. The whole design is meant to maximize business opportunities for the Tsuut'ina, at the expense of free flowing traffic. This could have all been avoided if the NIMBYs in Lakeview didn't put the kybosh on a road on city land directly over the Weaselhead.
Spoiler!
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
Last edited by CliffFletcher; 07-05-2018 at 06:12 PM.
Here's the Tsuut'ina Crossing development planned for Southland and 90th. Doesn't exactly scream 'free-flowing traffic' to me. Certainly not the Southland stretch, and Southland will be the main feeder onto the ringroad for that part of the city. So all those cars from Oakridge, Palliser, Pump Hill, Braeside, and Cedarbrae heading to the ring road will be funneled through a business and commercial park, then make a left turn at lights, then merge onto the ringroad. It's going to be an absolute ####-show at rush hour.
Spoiler!
Is that expected to be years off in the future though? Like at this point it could be a straight shot to those lights at 90th, quick left and onto the ring road?
I assume most of the people in Braeside and Cedarbrae will use the interchange at Anderson to get onto the Ring Road, not the 90th/Southland one. I grew up in Braeside and that's definitely what I would have done if the Ring Road had existed at the time.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
