Calgary Stoney Trail [Ring Road]

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

Future extra lanes. Wide Load corridor.

Believe me, it's not about wide loads. There's no such designation as "wide load corridor". High loads? Oversize loads? Yes. But none will ever require you to have a wide open median like that, ever.

It's a cost saving measure. Originally it was proposed as a concrete median. Paint is cheaper than concrete, though the size of that painted median is hilarious looking.

[MichaelS]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

Believe me, it's not about wide loads. There's no such designation as "wide load corridor". High loads? Oversize loads? Yes. But none will ever require you to have a wide open median like that, ever.

It's a cost saving measure. Originally it was proposed as a concrete median. Paint is cheaper than concrete, though the size of that painted median is hilarious looking.

Seems like a large dip in safety to save some $$$ to me.

[lubicon]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

Believe me, it's not about wide loads. There's no such designation as "wide load corridor". High loads? Oversize loads? Yes. But none will ever require you to have a wide open median like that, ever.

It's a cost saving measure. Originally it was proposed as a concrete median. Paint is cheaper than concrete, though the size of that painted median is hilarious looking.

Originally Posted by MichaelS

Seems like a large dip in safety to save some $$$ to me.

And at the end of the day there is no cost savings at all, just a shuffling of where the money will come from. With concrete medians you will limit (or eliminate) head on collisions and the associated fatalities/serious injuries/vehicle damage that goes with it. Without it you will have higher costs for the accidents that do occur. The difference is the money will come from health care budget rather than the transportation/infrastructure budget but at the end of the day it is still taxpayer money so this doesn't save a dime. It probably costs more in the long run.

[Mazrim]

I don't disagree at all with that. I imagine the contractor/designers went to the government and asked if they could make the change, and provided reasons it would be okay (I would guess they quoted clear zone requirements which should be fine here, since there is plenty of room for the majority of errant vehicles to correct themselves in time). Perhaps they had to file a design exception, but I wouldn't know for sure.

A raised median can help prevent head on collisions, but the chance of there being one at this particular spot is less likely than say...a 2 lane road at 100km/h. If enough concerns are raised in the future, a jersey barrier could be installed in the middle of the road .

[MalcolmTucker]

It is also not a huge deal to run a continual form M-barrier (or whatever our standard is now) down the bridge.

[Barnes]

I would like to meet these designers who are unfamiliar with snow and its tendency to cover up paint on a road. It's going to be a cluster in the winter.

[Peachycarnihan]

Originally Posted by lubicon

And at the end of the day there is no cost savings at all, just a shuffling of where the money will come from. With concrete medians you will limit (or eliminate) head on collisions and the associated fatalities/serious injuries/vehicle damage that goes with it. Without it you will have higher costs for the accidents that do occur. The difference is the money will come from health care budget rather than the transportation/infrastructure budget but at the end of the day it is still taxpayer money so this doesn't save a dime. It probably costs more in the long run.

There will be concrete median barriers on the bridge when it fully opens later this year. The current arrangement is temporary whilst there is a speed restriction and only one lane in each direction.

The original Schedule 18 drawing shows no raised median, just concrete barriers and this is what is being built. 'Stage 1' (ie. 2013) requires 2 lanes in each direction and 'Ultimate' allows for 3 lanes in each direction and a 6m median.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by Peachycarnihan

The original Schedule 18 drawing shows no raised median, just concrete barriers and this is what is being built. 'Stage 1' (ie. 2013) requires 2 lanes in each direction and 'Ultimate' allows for 3 lanes in each direction and a 6m median.

You're right! I was looking at the ultimate design. My bad.

You can PM yyc_engineer and he'll likely be able to shed some insight, he's answered all my questions about the project so far.

[craner]

Originally Posted by 5seconds

I'm thinking 1 year, but who knows!

One year would be great . . . But seems optimistic.

Home stretch now. New detour ramp for the WB-SB movement is opening at 22X/Deerfoot in the next few days. You'll go past the interchange then turn left across the EB lanes, same as the current EB-NB detour.

That will allow them to demolish the old WB-SB loop, finish up the new EB-NB flyover, and build the approach for the new SB-EB loop.

New WB-SB detour is up, so 22X/Deerfoot is temporarily functioning as a diamond with only 4 active ramps, more accurately a "parclo B3" interchange.

[ggopher]

Northbound Deerfoot is closed around the Calf Rope Bridge right now due to the emergency on the CP Rail Bridge.

I hope nobody from the South has to go to the airport today. This is the reason why Calgary needs a ring road AND the airport tunnel. There has to be a backup route to the airport.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by Acey

Only in the middle of the night or on a holiday would 16 Ave be faster. Between ~3-6 pm on a weekday Stoney would be like 50% faster, or more. I still seen a ton of trucks on 16th though, and they can't all be intra-city.

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

It occurred to me that although google maps says both are 25 mins (16th ave vs Stoney Trail), it might actually be faster for big trucks to use Stoney as google maps times wouldn't account for the slow acceleration after a stoplight on 16th.

WRT Stoney Trail over 16th Avenue for cross town trips, I think yesterday was the tipping point.

I live in Citadel and work in Manchester Industrial. Usual commute is four opptions including Deerfoot-Stoney, Glenmore-Crowchild, Glenmore-Sarcee, MacLeod-Downtown-Crowchild. With the flooding situation on Monday and Tuesday I used Stoney,17th Ave SE - 52nd Street - Peigan - Deerfoot. By Wednesday morning the city woke up to the Stoney road option and traffic for 17th Ave SE backed up to Hwy 1 overpass. Today it was reported backed up to McKnight.

I predict fgor truck traffic, they will not return to 16th Ave crosstown option. Their fears about the big beacon hill will subside and they will notice the advantages of Stoney for crosstown trips.

[Socguy]

Originally Posted by ggopher

...I hope nobody from the South has to go to the airport today. This is the reason why Calgary needs a ring road AND the airport tunnel. There has to be a backup route to the airport.

I get Stoney, but I don't think the Airport tunnel is strictly necessary as a backup to the airport with County Hills just above it.

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by Socguy

I get Stoney, but I don't think the Airport tunnel is strictly necessary as a backup to the airport with County Hills just above it.

Other than Country Hills Blvd being an urban Main Street in the future, and Airport Trail being a freeway. The CHB you don't think would be necessary would be more than 3 km further, have a much lower speed limit, and have about 10 more traffic lights.

[Socguy]

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

Other than Country Hills Blvd being an urban Main Street in the future, and Airport Trail being a freeway. The CHB you don't think would be necessary would be more than 3 km further, have a much lower speed limit, and have about 10 more traffic lights.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Country hills is now only going to be a 'future urban main street' because they went ahead and built the tunnel. Originally it was slated to be the major connection to the Airport... besides I thought we were just talking about an alternate route to the Airport which Country hills accomplishes, traffic lights or not. If the justification for building out Airport trail was to create an alternate FREEWAY route to the airport, that falls into the category of: nice-to-have-but-money-better-spent-elsewhere.

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by Socguy

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Country hills is now only going to be a 'future urban main street' because they went ahead and built the tunnel. Originally it was slated to be the major connection to the Airport... besides I thought we were just talking about an alternate route to the Airport which Country hills accomplishes, traffic lights or not. If the justification for building out Airport trail was to create an alternate FREEWAY route to the airport, that falls into the category of: nice-to-have-but-money-better-spent-elsewhere.

No, CHB was planned to be an urban main street long before the tunnel was approved. It was never intended to be a main connection to the airport.

The justification with building the tunnel really has very little to do with the airport at all. It connects the airport, yes. But mostly it's to connect the developing area East of the Airport in the NE to Deerfoot Trail - to create the road network that is required to service the area, for the lowest price.

Considering that the Tunnel make the best working network, and is also the cheapest, its a no brainer. Making a great alternative connection to the Airport is just gravy, as is a potential future LRT connection there.

[Socguy]

That's news to me, I was under the impression that Country hills was suppose to take over as the main connection to the airport instead of airport trail, once it was shut down and before the decision to build the tunnel was taken.

[Blader]

Originally Posted by Socguy

That's news to me, I was under the impression that Country hills was suppose to take over as the main connection to the airport instead of airport trail, once it was shut down and before the decision to build the tunnel was taken.

I have a copy of 'The Northeast Regional Policy Plan (draft) dated January 18 2006, a 49 page pdf. It was released long before the 2nd runway was announced by the airport authority.

8.6.2
Policies
(1) Location of the core centre
(a) The majority of the commercial development should be located within the southwest quadrant of the area, on the southwest corner of Country Hills Boulevard NE and 60th Street NE, and
(I) A traditional main street commercial area, with medium and smaller format commercial uses as deemed complementary and appropriate, and

Obviously, this draft must have been updated. Nonetheless, the plan long ago, was for a community oriented roadway along Country Hills Boulevard.