What's the point of adding a lane at Sarcee & Richmond Rd and then shrink it back down just a km later? It will create giant cluster####s with cars trying to merge and cutting off each other...
If the city wants to add extra lanes, extend them all the way to the Bow Trail intersection...
It moves more traffic through the intersection for a given green time. There is tangible benefit. Better money spent than extending it to 17 Ave where there is already an interchange would be further improvements to the Sarcee/Bow intersection.
The Following User Says Thank You to Acey For This Useful Post:
How long until some NIMBY complains that the name “Priddis Slough Drive” (which I assume is a working name, but would be great for the real name) is going to decrease their property value in Silverado/Chaparall/Walden or Priddis?
How long until some NIMBY complains that the name “Priddis Slough Drive” (which I assume is a working name, but would be great for the real name) is going to decrease their property value in Silverado/Chaparall/Walden or Priddis?
That's the name of the park that's already there, so for sure the real name.
The 194th/Macleod interchange video above is dated May/18. Is that when the video was made or when they thought that interchange would open? It's currently not an overpass and for some reason I could see it staying that way for years before they make it an overpass
Yeah nothing is planned at Bow Trail. Sarcee is going to suck for a year, then suck really bad next October when Stoney opens up all the way down to 22X. For Signal Hill, Glamorgan, and Glenbrook, all they get is a huge bump in Sarcee traffic, with no other benefit. The city has done preliminary work designing a Richmond Rd/Sarcee interchange but has no money.
Through October we'll see for sure but you can definitely say that Crowchild and 14 Street are winners, and Sarcee is a loser. Big time. There's still a chance the ring is done in 2023, depends how quickly the province can sort out their issue with an Enmax powerline and set a firm date for completion.
I wonder if they could at least kill the left turns from Richmond Road onto Sarcee. Would mitigate the Sarcee time on red and make it easier to sequence the RR green lights for max efficiency (would probably open up another through-lane or two both ways, too).
WB Richmond to SB Sarcee - have to go straight through, first right go past Petro Canada and take the loop onto SB Sarcee
Make getting onto NB Sarcee only possible via the new Westhills Way and/or Tsuut'ina Parkway...essentially you take SB Sarcee to one of those interchanges where you get turned around to the north.
Westbound on southbound Sarcee could maybe work like that but I don't know what you'd do with eastbound. That's a lot of left turning traffic and dumping any of it onto Richmond Road east of Sarcee would not be good.
I think at this point you just tough it out for 3 years with the 3 through lanes after this upgrade is done, and don't bother with bandaid fixes. Then you see what happens with volume after the west leg is open and set a rough timeline for the interchange, or more than likely decide you probably don't need it.
Recently drove by the new south west Costco. There is no southbound ramp at Costco, you have to enter the shopping area about a km earlier. If you miss that turn, it is a very long drive before you can turn around. There is a bridge from the neighbourhood directly into Costco, curious why they wouldn't include the ramps.
Recently drove by the new south west Costco. There is no southbound ramp at Costco, you have to enter the shopping area about a km earlier. If you miss that turn, it is a very long drive before you can turn around. There is a bridge from the neighbourhood directly into Costco, curious why they wouldn't include the ramps.
It isn't a full interchange because it's too close to Anderson Road. Not enough room.
The Following User Says Thank You to Mazrim For This Useful Post:
Yeah they would have had to build a "braided ramp" on both sides like what you see along Crowchild Trail northbound between Brisebois and Northland, or northbound Deerfoot at Auburn Bay. So it was completely possible just not worth it at all, given the hard limit on development that will occur west of Stoney. The new 16 Ave NW/Stoney interchange will have 3 of these which is part of why it looks like they're building a small city down there. This highway has one on both sides:
Also this diagram is outdated, as the interchange they've actually built at Anderson includes an eastbound-northbound loop ramp making the interchange totally free-flow, and mainline also passes over Anderson and not under it... likely quite a bit cheaper.
Final build:
This redesign is part of why Woodbine people are mad, as the added loop ramp pushed the NB-EB exit ramp closer to them... and raised the mainline lanes maybe 6-10 meters higher going through there.
This redesign is part of why Woodbine people are mad, as the added loop ramp pushed the NB-EB exit ramp closer to them... and raised the mainline lanes maybe 6-10 meters higher going through there.
The mainline is at existing grade, and they lowered Anderson Road. From the pathway you can barely see the road. Next time I go by there, I'll take a picture of it and the pedestrian bridge (since the scaffolding is off).
EDIT: Also, it's easier to find Schedule 18 on the Alberta website than the new design! Sorry for posting the old one.
The mainline is at existing grade, and they lowered Anderson Road. From the pathway you can barely see the road. Next time I go by there, I'll take a picture of it and the pedestrian bridge (since the scaffolding is off).
EDIT: Also, it's easier to find Schedule 18 on the Alberta website than the new design! Sorry for posting the old one.
I meant that mainline is raised vs the original drawings, not that they physically raised it. I wonder if the savings from swapping the bridges were enough to lower the cost and that's why they were able to build that extra loop. Maybe they did new estimations of the volume there and thought it would be higher but there's still some practical limit to how high it will ever be.
Sure hope the current configuration at 69th St and Glenmore doesn't last long. I thought it was bad a couple of days ago when it took me 4 lights to get through the new intersection; today backed up well past Sarcee.
Hmm, just noticed that WB Stoney (aka HWY8/Glenmore) to NB 69 St will require a left turn (after going under the 69 st bridge and looping back). Seems unfortunate considering there will probably be 20 cars going NB on 69 St for every 1 that now free flows SB into Discovery. Lame.
Yeah, considering how liberal the construction has been with temporary roads and ramps, it doesn't seem like a big ask to have a temporary WB Glenmore to NB 69th ramp built...
