Calgary Stoney Trail [Ring Road]

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by lubicon

FromAlberta Transportation's website today.


November 25, 2009

Lights go out at Harvest Hills Boulevard in Calgary

Interchange to replace signalized ring-road intersection
Calgary... Calgary’s ring road is one step closer to becoming free-flow with plans underway for an interchange to replace the signalized intersection at Stoney Trail and Harvest Hills Boulevard NW.

“The Harvest Hills Boulevard NW interchange is part of the Alberta government’s plan to make the Stoney Trail ring road free-flowing with no level-grade intersections by 2013,” said Luke Ouellette, Minister of Transportation. “This project represents our commitment to providing the infrastructure needed to support the province’s economic growth and prosperity.”

Construction will start in early 2010 and the interchange will open to traffic by fall 2010.

“It’s great to see this important project move forward,” said Teresa Woo-Paw, MLA for Calgary-Mackay. “The new interchange will improve access to the ring road for northwest Calgary residents and enhance safety for all users of Stoney Trail.”

Plans for the new interchange reflect high standards of engineering, design, and construction. Interchanges are considered the safest and most efficient way to enter or exit a highway. On average, interchanges reduce collisions by 45 per cent and eliminate t-bone and head-on collisions that frequently result in serious injuries or fatalities.

Visit www.transportation.alberta.ca/804.htm for more details on the Calgary ring road.

The Government of Alberta has a clear plan for a strong economic recovery. The Way Forward will bring Alberta back into a surplus position in three years by trimming government spending; using cash reserves to protect key programs; continuing to invest in public infrastructure; and ensuring that our province's industries are competitive and continue to attract investment to provide jobs and prosperity.

http://alberta.ca/acn/200911/273882BF1F288-E491-F499-ECE7C586CF0E0AC1.html

This also sounds promising for the Nose Hill Drive intersection.

This is good news and now we know the equipment that was sitting there right after the opening of the road (probaby still there) was for this interchange. I'm not surprised at all they plan on having it open by next fall. Hopefully the Nosehill interchange does not get delayed until after the Crowchild work is completed. They need to put that project out for tender now and start on it in the summer if that is possible. Has the province said anything about building new bridges over the river as part of this project or will that come later? I can't seem to find any plans on their website that specifically deal with this interchange, only for a section of the corridor.

[mersar]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Has the province said anything about building new bridges over the river as part of this project or will that come later? I can't seem to find any plans on their website that specifically deal with this interchange, only for a section of the corridor.

My understanding of it from talking with people from AB Transportation in the past is that the Nosehill interchange doesn't force the need for the new river bridge, and that the new river bridge only is required to be done before the second phase of the 16th ave interchange, which won't start until the SW is decided on. The big factor is the single bridge over the river is a quarter billion dollar project, so they won't build it until they need to.

[jsbertram]

Here's the page for the "2009 Southwest Calgary Ring Road (Highway 201) Functional Planning Study" using the Tsuu T'ina lands.

Alberta Transportation has made it difficult to find from their main "Calgary Ring Roads" website.

http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/swringgp.htm

[korzym]

I'm going to have to update my annotations on the videos for harvest hills. I added an annotation for 60th ave recently

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by mersar

My understanding of it from talking with people from AB Transportation in the past is that the Nosehill interchange doesn't force the need for the new river bridge, and that the new river bridge only is required to be done before the second phase of the 16th ave interchange, which won't start until the SW is decided on. The big factor is the single bridge over the river is a quarter billion dollar project, so they won't build it until they need to.

Yeah, it's a 4 lane road - the current bridges have the capacity. Stoney NB likely won't be 3 lanes until after the river, anyway.

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

Here's the page for the "2009 Southwest Calgary Ring Road (Highway 201) Functional Planning Study" using the Tsuu T'ina lands.

Alberta Transportation has made it difficult to find from their main "Calgary Ring Roads" website.

http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/swringgp.htm

Doesn't really need to be easy to access from the website, it's all outdated now. It used to be easy to access.

[jsbertram]

Just looking at those PDFs reminded me that the Ultimate build-out of the SW Ring Road would have had 4 Express lanes and 3 or 4 local lanes running in each direction (Northbound and Southbound) between 22X and the Trans Canada Highway.

Good luck squeezing all that in the 37th St ROW from Glenmore to Fish Creek and the Glenmore ROW from Sarcee to 37th unless you build several 4-lane tunnels stacked under the ROWs.

To steal a phrase "Gentlemen, we can build them — we have the technology."

[mersar]

Was just taking a closer look at the area on google earth, even if they needed to twin the bridge over the railway yard just to get the road alignments needed for Nosehill itself, there looks to be essentially no median from what they graded years ago for the future twinning so it wouldn't be hard to just bring all the lanes back together on that piece of ground between the two bridges

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

Just looking at those PDFs reminded me that the Ultimate build-out of the SW Ring Road would have had 4 Express lanes and 3 or 4 local lanes running North-South between 22X and the Trans Canada Highway.

Good luck squeezing all that in the 37th St ROW from Glenmore to Fish Creek and the Glenmore ROW from Sarcee to 37th unless you build several 4-lane tunnels stacked under the ROWs.

To steal a phrase "Gentlemen, we can build them — we have the technology."

The express lanes were/are very very far off. They were only to be built when the outer ring road was built, in the post 2040 time horizon.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

Doesn't really need to be easy to access from the website, it's all outdated now. It used to be easy to access.

But it still reminded me what could have been built by having a ROW without constraints of existing housing developments.

It'll be interesting to see what happens if "Plan B" involves expropriating a large strip of houses in Lakeview, Oakridge, Cedarbrae and Woodbine to widen the 37th St ROW to accommodate a 6- or 8-lane freeway.

Perhaps then, tunneling from Glenmore to Southland or Anderson under the current 37th St ROW will start to look look like a better "Plan B". It won't be cheap to build, but I suspect the extra cost of tunneling will still be cheaper than the extra cost of expropriating homes for a surface route & Weaselhead bridge.

And you know everyone in these neighborhoods will fight this until their grandchildren have grandchildren.

[freeweed]

Man, the pedestrian bridge just keeps looking better and better. They've finished the bridge decking on the east side (I think there's a final concrete pour to be done but not sure) and you can get a good sense of what the final product will look like. This may be the nicest pedestrian bridge I've ever seen, that's not a "designer" bridge, or otherwise something trying to make a statement.

This is just a plain, McIver-would-be-proud bridge, and it's pretty nice considering.

I do like how they keep extending the "lanes closed" sign by a day here, 2 days there. Even though you can clearly tell from the progress so far that there's virtually no chance they'll be done before December. Especially if there's another layer of concrete to cover the deck - surely they can't pour that with traffic running underneath?

[Stang]

Originally Posted by freeweed

Man, the pedestrian bridge just keeps looking better and better. They've finished the bridge decking on the east side (I think there's a final concrete pour to be done but not sure) and you can get a good sense of what the final product will look like. This may be the nicest pedestrian bridge I've ever seen, that's not a "designer" bridge, or otherwise something trying to make a statement.

I was actually at the shopping area in Tuscany yesterday, and I was surprised that I could clearly see the two arches of the bridge from there. They stand out quite nicely.

[eternallyme]

Any outer ring road in the southwest will likely have to go all the way out to Highway 22 at Bragg Creek beyond the reserve (bypassing the short section within the reserve).

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

Any outer ring road in the southwest will likely have to go all the way out to Highway 22 at Bragg Creek beyond the reserve (bypassing the short section within the reserve).

Well, now yes. But that was not the original plan. I don't think there will be an outer ring road in the SW without it passing through the reserve, it is just too far out.

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

But it still reminded me what could have been built by having a ROW without constraints of existing housing developments.

It'll be interesting to see what happens if "Plan B" involves expropriating a large strip of houses in Lakeview, Oakridge, Cedarbrae and Woodbine to widen the 37th St ROW to accommodate a 6- or 8-lane freeway.

Perhaps then, tunneling from Glenmore to Southland or Anderson under the current 37th St ROW will start to look look like a better "Plan B". It won't be cheap to build, but I suspect the extra cost of tunneling will still be cheaper than the extra cost of expropriating homes for a surface route & Weaselhead bridge.

And you know everyone in these neighborhoods will fight this until their grandchildren have grandchildren.

I really hope all our engineer friends on this site, and residents of these neighborhoods who are on this site, will contact their government reps to tell them that this would be the best plan overall!

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by Sir.Humphrey.Appleby

Well, now yes. But that was not the original plan. I don't think there will be an outer ring road in the SW without it passing through the reserve, it is just too far out.

At one time Scarboro was "far outside the city", as was CFCN, and Lincoln Park (now MRU). Bowness, Forest Lawn and Montgomery used to be separate towns. The city grew up to them, absorbed them, and kept on growing.

I don't see why the city won't continue to grow west to Bragg Creek and beyond, and end up surrounding the reserve lands. It's unlikely the reserve would be absorbed into the city itself.

[mersar]

The city won't grow that far west, especially in that direction. The difference between the past growth and absorbtion and now is distance. Bragg Creek is 20+ kilometers as the crow flies from the city limits, theres enough land in between to put the entire city again. When places like Bowness were annexed they were only a kilometer or two out at most, usually the city was already pressing on their doorstep. Future growth will be a lot more constrained, and while there will be growth in that direction, I'd expect to see it further north, mostly along the TCH and north towards Cochrane.

[MalcolmTucker]

^ That is a long long way off, especially since it is 30 km from 37th St to the west boundary of the reserve, 23 km from Stoney/ 101st St. Calgary at its widest (east-west) is about 24 km, from Valley Ridge to the NE ring road.

[eternallyme]

That hypothetical route may not seem so far-fetched, since isn't that corridor being suggested as a future TCH alignment through Calgary? (hence the designation of 901 in the eastern part, as a future 1)

All that would be needed is to upgrade Highway 8/Glenmore Trail.

[lubicon]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

But it still reminded me what could have been built by having a ROW without constraints of existing housing developments.

It'll be interesting to see what happens if "Plan B" involves expropriating a large strip of houses in Lakeview, Oakridge, Cedarbrae and Woodbine to widen the 37th St ROW to accommodate a 6- or 8-lane freeway.

Perhaps then, tunneling from Glenmore to Southland or Anderson under the current 37th St ROW will start to look look like a better "Plan B". It won't be cheap to build, but I suspect the extra cost of tunneling will still be cheaper than the extra cost of expropriating homes for a surface route & Weaselhead bridge.

And you know everyone in these neighborhoods will fight this until their grandchildren have grandchildren.

Originally Posted by YYCguys

I really hope all our engineer friends on this site, and residents of these neighborhoods who are on this site, will contact their government reps to tell them that this would be the best plan overall!

Tunnelling may not be a bad idea, but if you are going to do it, then just tunnell under the original route (that the Tsu Tiina rejected). We may nopt be able to build on their land, but perhaps we could go under it.