Deerfoot Trail / Glenmore Trail Interchange

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

As for the rant about traffic and interchanges, if you had to drive the route I do every day and see the sheer stupidity and inadequacy of the current road network you'd rant too!!! Although I must take back my comment about wanting them to fix Glenmore before the SELRT. I want both to be built as soon as possible. The more we can do to lessen idling cars and general traffic congestion, the less CO2 we emit. And let me point out that my moving to the far SE does not conflict with my urban and environmental beliefs. I am reducing my trip to work from an hour, to 10 mins. Also, the area I am moving to will be a future TOD with high density and an abundant mix of retail, office, and residential.

/End overlong defence of my suburban transformation.

Haha, yeah I get all that, and it all has validity to it. Just giving you a hard time of course.

Anyway, I tend to care as little about roads as possible, but the modicum of transportation engineer in my bones has to debunk the "all/most interchanges should be cloverleafs" myth when it comes up.

[Ramsayfarian]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

Funny to see this thread was started 2 years ago and still nothing's happened. I drive Glenmore / Deerfoot every day and I literally want to round up everyone responsible and shoot them!! How the HELL can they not make it a proper cloverleaf?! NB Deerfoot - WB Glenmore is a joke! A fucking joke! Who is the genius that designed this mess? Glenmore embarrasses me as a Calgarian for anyone driving from outside the city. Especially in the SW where it becomes a 2 lane country road. As much as the SELRT is a massive priority to me, they need to fix this mess soon because it is in no way adequate for the population that uses it.

I wouldn't say nothing. Isn't the work on Grave's bridge completed and the on ramp from Glenmore WB to Deerfoot NB is also finished.

[mersar]

Originally Posted by Ramsayfarian

I wouldn't say nothing. Isn't the work on Grave's bridge completed and the on ramp from Glenmore WB to Deerfoot NB is also finished.

The new Graves bridge is built and complete, and the refurb to the original bridge is on the second half of the bridge now with a single lane on the south side of the bridge closed.

[O-tacular]

Don't even get me started on the Graves bridge!!! It's been like 2 years now of them re-surfacing the old bridge. During the winter, when absolutely no work is going on the cops constantly stake out the "construction zone". They even have an old fashioned photo radar minivan stationed there every other day. Sure the new bridge is finished, but now they're dragging their feet on the older east bound section to the point where I think it's on purpose.

Did I mention that discussing Glenmore turns me into a raging hulk?

[Mazrim]

I drive Deerfoot and Glenmore every day. A cloverleaf wouldn't solve anything there. There's a reason they removed a couple loops at the cloverleaf at Glenmore and Blackfoot.

Not directed at you in particular O-tacular, but it really grinds my gears when people tell me that we should build more cloverleafs and that Parclo interchanges are worse off. (Most don't know what they're called, but I get the idea. One guy called them "the one with only 2 loops" which is pretty good). Usually the quickest way to show examples of the old cloverleaf interchanges on Highway 1 and 2.

- They need tons of space.
- If you don't have that space, you get really short weaving distances.
- You have to get to speed while dealing with people trying to exit in the same lane and slow down.

Parclo interchanges generally hold more volume, at the loss of free flowing traffic on the cross road.

The design of the Crowchild/Bow/Memorial complex is worse off in my opinion.

[polishavenger]

I think cloverleaf interchanges can be salvaged (all free flow I mean) if the on and off loops crossed over each other. The loop coming off the above grade road would cross over the lane leading to the loop that goes onto the above grade road. To achieve this You need additional short bridge structures, the second deck bridges have to be longer, and the on ramp roads need to be seperated from the main traffic stream.

[Mazrim]

Sounds like you're suggesting a basket weave, which is usually only considered as a last resort due to the high cost it generally incurs. Plus, where do the ramps cross so they don't interfere with the interchange itself? If I'm imagining your idea correctly, you'd have to go over one ramp then dive under the cross road's bridge structure, or vice versa. You need a lot of land free to pull it off. That's a tough way to salvage a cloverleaf.

[calgarydude]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

I hate to tell you this, but every time you upgrade an interchange, the problem will always move to the next worst point. If they fix Anderson, then Deerfoot still sucks because of the terrible weave between Memorial and 17th Avenue. Then it moves up North even more if they fix that. 37th and Glenmore being fixed now moves the problem to Highway 8, but that's still better than just leaving it and doing it all at once.

Upgrading Glenmore will make a noticeable difference, guaranteed. The Anderson/Bow Bottom/Deerfoot interchange is an even bigger challenge to upgrade, but the volumes definitely dictate that Glenmore is in more need of upgrades at this pont.

I understand what you are saying about bottlenecks, but at the same time if you get rid of the first one, the second one isn't quite as bad (otherwise it would be the original bottleneck). If they fix Anderson going south, then traffic improves signifcantly IMO. of course how they do that exactly is difficult, with southland drive right there as well. past Anderson its better. if they fixed that area and had it 3 lanes over the bridge where is the next bottleneck going south?
before Anderson its glenmore, but that would only improve (I think) if Anderson/southland was fixed.
going north, yep glenmore again is a bottleneck, and it could be just as bad with more traffic flowing to it.
So I agree going northbound it may not fix things as much as people hope, but I think going south it would.

of course I don't know what they could do aside from cutting off southland access or having a dedicated lane off of southland that flows into Anderson (for those that aren't going blackfoot->southland->deerfoot south

[polishavenger]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

Sounds like you're suggesting a basket weave, which is usually only considered as a last resort due to the high cost it generally incurs. Plus, where do the ramps cross so they don't interfere with the interchange itself? If I'm imagining your idea correctly, you'd have to go over one ramp then dive under the cross road's bridge structure, or vice versa. You need a lot of land free to pull it off. That's a tough way to salvage a cloverleaf.

The simplest way to explain without diagraming it is to simply imagine the off ramp loop going over the on ramp access road before meeting the main road. I dont think it would take too much extra space, and cost difference would be small since most of the raised elements could be made out of dirt with only a two lane wide bridge segment.

[dmuzika]

I know I'm bumping an old thread, but the city has closed Heritage Drive under the Graves Bridge due to flooding for the 2nd (or more?) time this year. Heritage Drive also serves as the access ramp from northbound Deerfoot Trail to westbound Glenmore Trail as traffic is to use Heritage Meadows Way & Heritage Drive. In addition, the clearance of Heritage Drive under the Graves Bridge might be an issue for trucks.

The province has plans to twin the overpass over Glenmore Trail to increase the number of lanes on Deerfoot Trail (http://www.transportation.alberta.ca...GDI-Stage1.pdf), however the basic interchange configeration will remain the same. There are ulitmatle plans for mulitple flyovers for the Glenmore/Deerfoot interchange and a series of collector/distributor lanes on Glenmore between Deerfoot and Blackfoot Trails (see http://www.transportation.alberta.ca...on/glen-m1.pdf and http://www.transportation.alberta.ca...on/glen-m2.pdf).

Even if the entire "utimate design" is not implimented immediatly, I wonder if the city & province should strongly consider addiding the NB Deerfoot --> WB Glenmore flyover to the initial stage to avoid having to use Heritage Drive as the access route?

[Tropics]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

The design of the Crowchild/Bow/Memorial complex is worse off in my opinion.

Gah, this area is freaking pitiful. Atm to get from Bow Trail EB to Memorial EB you need to drive down a exit past the new LRT, turn onto 10th ave, do a quick uturn to be on 10th WB, drive up to Crowchild, yield twice to end up in the far left lane and now you have about 1/2 a block to change lanes twice to the far right lane to exit onto Memorial, which in traffic is a freaking gong show.

That whole little section there needs a MASSIVE overhaul. Crowchild is a critical and major road these days and it is going to become far more so in the future of this city and it needs a major expansion and overhaul so that access onto and off of Crowchild becomes easy and the lights on the road are all removed and over and underpasses take their place. They have fixed the Northern section of it fairly well once you get to the University and beyond, but the area between the river and McMahon Stadium needs a massive overhaul and redesign including an extra lane on each side.

[Doug]

Plus the Crow-Bow-Memorial interchange is horribly inefficient in terms of footprint.

[lubicon]

[QUOTE=dmuzika;5746287]I know I'm bumping an old thread, but the city has closed Heritage Drive under the Graves Bridge due to flooding for the 2nd (or more?) time this year. Heritage Drive also serves as the access ramp from northbound Deerfoot Trail to westbound Glenmore Trail as traffic is to use Heritage Meadows Way & Heritage Drive. In addition, the clearance of Heritage Drive under the Graves Bridge might be an issue for trucks.

The province has plans to twin the overpass over Glenmore Trail to increase the number of lanes on Deerfoot Trail (http://www.transportation.alberta.ca...Stage1.pdf</b>), however the basic interchange configeration will remain the same. There are ulitmatle plans for mulitple flyovers for the Glenmore/Deerfoot interchange and a series of collector/distributor lanes on Glenmore between Deerfoot and Blackfoot Trails (see http://www.transportation.alberta.ca...on/glen-m1.pdf and http://www.transportation.alberta.ca...on/glen-m2.pdf).

Even if the entire "utimate design" is not implimented immediatly, I wonder if the city & province should strongly consider addiding the NB Deerfoot --> WB Glenmore flyover to the initial stage to avoid having to use Heritage Drive as the access route?[/QUOTE]

Makes total sense. But my gut feeling is the Province is dragging their feet and stalling until Stoney Trail is finished. Then they will give control of Deerfoot back to the City and tell the City the whole project is not their problem anymore and it's up to Calgary to carry it out.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by lubicon

Makes total sense. But my gut feeling is the Province is dragging their feet and stalling until Stoney Trail is finished. Then they will give control of Deerfoot back to the City and tell the City the whole project is not their problem anymore and it's up to Calgary to carry it out.

That's pretty much the general feeling everyone has about it. It's unfortunate because while Stoney Trail will definitely take some of the load off Deerfoot (trucks mainly), especially in peak hours, there's simply too much traffic that won't bother to go well out of their way and will continue to use Deerfoot.

Let's not forget though that the Alberta government could not simply just force Deerfoot upon the City. There will have to be negotiations, and I imagine that some kind of guarantee of funding for upgrades will be part of it. (This is all speculation, but I imagine it would be the case)

[North_Regina_Boy]

I hope the Province / City can get started on making the Glenmore a full through-city freeway with making it limited access from Stoney Trail East (With the full build-out soon) to Stoney Trail West. Now that the province has settled the land ownership rights with the Natives I believe that atleast the section of Stoney Tail from Sarcee Trail to Highway 1 will be started within a year or a little more. Then just work on the Deerfoot / Glenmore interchange. As well as the last few interchanges on the east side and it will make trucking through Calgary a much better experience.

Here's hoping all this all gets done before 2020!

This will make going from NB Deerfoot to WB Trans-Canada without stopping possible, without having to take Stoney Trail all the way around the North end of the city. Even without the SW Stoney Trail complete.

[dmuzika]

Originally Posted by North_Regina_Boy

I hope the Province / City can get started on making the Glenmore a full through-city freeway with making it limited access from Stoney Trail East (With the full build-out soon) to Stoney Trail West. Now that the province has settled the land ownership rights with the Natives I believe that atleast the section of Stoney Tail from Sarcee Trail to Highway 1 will be started within a year or a little more. Then just work on the Deerfoot / Glenmore interchange. As well as the last few interchanges on the east side and it will make trucking through Calgary a much better experience.

Here's hoping all this all gets done before 2020!

This will make going from NB Deerfoot to WB Trans-Canada without stopping possible, without having to take Stoney Trail all the way around the North end of the city. Even without the SW Stoney Trail complete.

Maybe even reroute that Trans Canada Hwy to follow Glenmore Trail as the free-flow "city route".

[North_Regina_Boy]

Originally Posted by dmuzika

Maybe even reroute that Trans Canada Hwy to follow Glenmore Trail as the free-flow "city route".

I would say that is possible, however even if Glenmore become totally "free-flow" the industrial area to the east of Stoney trail might limit that route. However the trucks could go north to the existing TCH and the province could build interchanges / fly-overs between the east edge of Calgary and Chestermere.

OR

The TCH could have a bypass called 1A and go south from Glenmore to 22X and upgrade 22X to a limited access highway east through to connect to the existing TCH at Gleichen.

However option 1 is MUCH cheaper. I am however proud that the Prov of Alberta made it possible for trucks to get around Calgary without having to slow down to more than 70km/h in ideal conditions. Same with Edmonton

[Joborule]

Hwy 1 East Calgary 797 to 842 Recommended Plan (2011)

Presentation

According to the study (that should almost be complete) of the Highway network between 797 to 842, the plan is to have current Highway 1, and 22X be the main entries into the city from the east. Although in the current plan overview map in the first link, it shows 22X as incomplete before Highway 24; but in the open house previously, it showed 22X linking up with a realigned Highway 1 east of HWY 24, that splits off like Highway 2 and 2A south of the city does.

That's why I have the belife that if there's going to be any road that has potential to turn into the Trans Canada bypass route, it would be 22X. Now the SW Stoney is gonna go forward, I wonder if the province will make this the case.

[dmuzika]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Hwy 1 East Calgary 797 to 842 Recommended Plan (2011)

Presentation

According to the study (that should almost be complete) of the Highway network between 797 to 842, the plan is to have current Highway 1, and 22X be the main entries into the city from the east. Although in the current plan overview map in the first link, it shows 22X as incomplete before Highway 24; but in the open house previously, it showed 22X linking up with a realigned Highway 1 east of HWY 24, that splits off like Highway 2 and 2A south of the city does.

That's why I have the belife that if there's going to be any road that has potential to turn into the Trans Canada bypass route, it would be 22X. Now the SW Stoney is gonna go forward, I wonder if the province will make this the case.

The province has been pushing the Hwy 901/Hwy 22X alignment for a number of years. The problem I see for that is that for Calgary-bound traffic, there are few options for getting around the city from Hwy 1 East (Stoney Trail, Deerfoot Trail, and Macleod Trail) and the major east-west highway would have a north-south orientation through Calgary.

What I find interesting is that the province also has a document for twinning Hwy 560 between Calgary and Langdon, and it shows it as a four lane freeway. Combine that with Calgary's plans to eventually build interchanges along Glenmore Trail and the ROW for the Glenmore Trail/Stoney Trail interchange to be expanded, and you could end up with an east-west freeway from Langdon to Stoney Trail SW that doesn't follow the perimeter of the city. The missing link would be a Langdon-Hwy 1 East connection, but that could probably be done fairly easily.

Traffic counts are the lowest east of Calgary in terms of traffic entering Calgary from out of town, so three freeways heading east would probably be a bit of overkill. If the Hwy 560/Glenmore Trail twinning happend, I wonder if the 22X expansion wouldn't be necessary, and a small link from Langdon to Hwy 1 west of Strathmore would probably be cheaper than a new freeway along Hwy 22X/901 between Calgary and Gliechen.

You can see all the documents for highways in the Calgary area at http://www.transportation.alberta.ca...s/calgary.aspx.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by dmuzika

The province has been pushing the Hwy 901/Hwy 22X alignment for a number of years. The problem I see for that is that for Calgary-bound traffic, there are few options for getting around the city from Hwy 1 East (Stoney Trail, Deerfoot Trail, and Macleod Trail) and the major east-west highway would have a north-south orientation through Calgary.

What I find interesting is that the province also has a document for twinning Hwy 560 between Calgary and Langdon, and it shows it as a four lane freeway. Combine that with Calgary's plans to eventually build interchanges along Glenmore Trail and the ROW for the Glenmore Trail/Stoney Trail interchange to be expanded, and you could end up with an east-west freeway from Langdon to Stoney Trail SW that doesn't follow the perimeter of the city. The missing link would be a Langdon-Hwy 1 East connection, but that could probably be done fairly easily.

Traffic counts are the lowest east of Calgary in terms of traffic entering Calgary from out of town, so three freeways heading east would probably be a bit of overkill. If the Hwy 560/Glenmore Trail twinning happend, I wonder if the 22X expansion wouldn't be necessary, and a small link from Langdon to Hwy 1 west of Strathmore would probably be cheaper than a new freeway along Hwy 22X/901 between Calgary and Gliechen.

You can see all the documents for highways in the Calgary area at http://www.transportation.alberta.ca...s/calgary.aspx.

It's possible that they may replace the idea of having 22X be the main entrance for the south with 560/Glenmore instead. As you said, it would probably be cheaper, and satisfy the purpose of a southern freeway for the region.