[freeweed]

I sure wish there were highway patrols out at the Deerfoot/Stoney construction zone where the speed limit is 80 but most drivers choose to make up their own speed limit, mostly faster. Does this speed limit apply to after dark when the workers are probably not working anyways?

As far as I know, yup.

What's more infuriating is that most of the drivers who blast along doing 100 or so through that zone, don't speed up a single bit once the speed goes back up to 110.

Making up speed limits is a Calgary tradition.

[KrisYYC]

You know what kind of irritates me? I might get flamed for this but why does Calgary insist on giving tribal names to our major roads? Calgary is trying be a world class city but we name our streets like we're some little town in the middle of nowhere. The worst has to be Shaganappi trail (which if you're british sounds like slang for "have sex with a diaper trail"). And why call a huge multi lane freeway "trail"? When I have friends and family from overseas visiting they laugh at it.

Glenmore causeway, the GE5, Macleod, John Laurie sound like proper big city major roads.

What's next? The West LRT going to be called "The Buffalo Run"?

/rant

[frinkprof]

^I kind of like the native names. Lots of Canadian town and city names are named after tribes or are native words, which isn't the same as streets/thoroughfares, but still highly visible. The "trail" thing though, I kind of agree on. I think the only one that should be called a trail is MacLeod, since it actually was a trail, and referred to as such on maps, at one time.

Some of the names might sound funny (Shaganappi, Sarcee, lots of towns in eastern Canada). However, if you ask me, names like Wolverhampton, Borehamwood, and Gloucester sound strange, and that's just England (yes those are place names, and not streets). What's worse than names for thoroughfares sometimes is community names. Tuscany, Royal Oak, Mahogany, Sundance, Discovery Ridge. All rather arbitrary, other than they combine words that are pleasing to the ear, or in Tuscany's case, named after a well-known region of Italy, but still for no other reason. And just so I'm not picking on newer communities, Sunridge, Tuxedo, Oak Ridge, Eagle Ridge, and Dover are all seemingly arbitrary too.

I guess the question I'm asking is, what's in a name?

[Wooster]

Good god these interchanges take up a lot of space.

[mersar]

I sure wish there were highway patrols out at the Deerfoot/Stoney construction zone where the speed limit is 80 but most drivers choose to make up their own speed limit, mostly faster. Does this speed limit apply to after dark when the workers are probably not working anyways?

Speed limits are still in effective when no workers are present, what changes is that the doubled speed fines drop back to normal speed fines.

[freeweed]

Calgary is trying be a world class city but we name our streets like we're some little town in the middle of nowhere. The worst has to be Shaganappi trail (which if you're british sounds like slang for "have sex with a diaper trail"). And why call a huge multi lane freeway "trail"? When I have friends and family from overseas visiting they laugh at it.

Seriously? I mean, seriously? People come over from Europe, which has some of the most goofy and arbitrarily-named roads imaginable, some so ancient that the point of the name has been forgotten for centuries, and they laugh at us trying to incorporate a bit of our country's history into our cities?

I admit I've had a juvenille laugh or 2 at Shaganappi, but come on - do you giggle when you go to Phuc's Chinese restaurant? Do you laugh when British people use the expression "knock you up in the morning", and assume they're all rural hicks for using such terms?

Is this a tolerance for other places thing, or is it specific to our Native peoples? I'll give you that I'm surprised we don't have more John Lauries and whatnot, but Calgary isn't chock full of famous people at this early stage in its life. Should we be only pulling white folk names out of it?

Little towns in the middle of nowhere, from what I've seen, usually have street names like Elm or Oak Street, or (more commonly) numbered streets because they have all of 5.

And many places in Europe have seemingly strange names for their "streets" - motorways, gardens, ways, bays, all sorts of things that were picked somewhat arbitrarily. "Trail" has an historical connection to the area - it's how everyone got around at one point. I suppose we could have used "railway" but that would conflict with existing railways.

Calgary's street naming is a bit quaint and lends a bit of interesting flavour to the city - but laughing at it? Being upset that we've chosen Native names for *some* of our streets?

Seriously?

[Skeletor]

do you giggle when you go to Phuc's Chinese restaurant?
Yes!! There's this one called Phuc Duc, I think, and I nearly get in a car accident everytime I pass it!

Do you laugh when British people use the expression "knock you up in the morning", and assume they're all rural hicks for using such terms?

Hell yeah. Never heard that one, but I nearly fell out of my chair just now. And I only assume that some of them are hicks. It depends on the teeth.

Seriously?

A little bit.

[Skeletor]

Good god these interchanges take up a lot of space.

It's so you can go 100 km/h around the bends. Good thing space is something we have no shortage of, especially on the edge of the city!

[lubicon]

As far as I know, yup.

What's more infuriating is that most of the drivers who blast along doing 100 or so through that zone, don't speed up a single bit once the speed goes back up to 110.

Making up speed limits is a Calgary tradition.

Most Calgarians believe speed limits are merely suggestions and they only apply to other drivers anyhow. Same with no parking zones, handicapped parking spots, and parking stall line markings.

[shogged]

Most Calgarians believe speed limits are merely suggestions and they only apply to other drivers anyhow. Same with no parking zones, handicapped parking spots, and parking stall line markings.

biggest problem with Calgary roads is the combination of drivers from all over Canada. Take the driving styles of people from Ontario, bc, the maratimes, and then of course native calgarians... You get a giant clusterfuck of people who don't know how to merge, treat the passing lane like their own personal fast lane, and the list goes on!

[craner]

The "trail" thing though, I kind of agree on. I think the only one that should be called a trail is MacLeod, since it actually was a trail, and referred to as such on maps, at one time.

:previous: I agree. I don't mind the native names but the "trail" thing is hick.

[reflexzero]

biggest problem with Calgary roads is the combination of drivers from all over Canada.

Heh, very true, although there are a lot of drivers on the road who come from lands without snow, ice, stop signs, shoulder checking, lane designations... etc.. or at least it seems that way.

[korzym]

Good god these interchanges take up a lot of space.
its not like this is japan or the Netherlands. get real

[sauril]

biggest problem with Calgary roads is the combination of drivers from all over Canada. Take the driving styles of people from Ontario, bc, the maratimes, and then of course native calgarians... You get a giant clusterfuck of people who don't know how to merge, treat the passing lane like their own personal fast lane, and the list goes on!

Exactly. I'd also add to your list the ruralites who move to the big city, who take 3 lanes to make a left hand turn. There seem to be fewer of them these days though.

Merging is the worst though. Why do people not understand that when you want to enter a freeway from an onramp, you should probably be going somewhat near the speed limit.

[Oliver Klozov]

... The "trail" thing though, I kind of agree on. I think the only one that should be called a trail is MacLeod, since it actually was a trail, and referred to as such on maps, at one time....

What about Bow Trail? Banff Trail? Edmonton Trail?

Edmonton Trail is the southern end of what was the Calgary & Edmonton Trail, the original Hwy 2. Parts of the original trail are stilled signed C&E Trail from Ponoka to Innisfail.

[Doug]

Ring road deal inches forward
Updated: Mon Mar. 23 2009 11:53:25

ctvcalgary.ca

After decades of planning and negotiation, the southwest west ring road is another step closer to reality.

There are reports that a tentative deal has been struck between the provincial government and the Tsuu T'ina Nation.

No details are being released but it is believed that the two sides now have a deal on the table which will go to members of the First Nation for ratification.

Earlier this month, Transportation Minister Luke Ouellette said a draft agreement was in place but there were still some outstanding legal issues.

The northeast and northwest sections of the ring road are scheduled to open to drivers in November.

Construction on the southeast portion of the road will begin in the spring of 2010.

The province says it remains confident that the entire ring road will be open to traffic by 2015.

[Wooster]

its not like this is japan or the Netherlands. get real

All I'm saying is that just because you have land doesn't mean you have to use it wastefully. Surely there's a way to make these interchanges more compact and still function effectively. Look at the ramp going East-bound Transcanada turning onto Stoney Trail North in the NW - I swear you drive an extra KM just making the turn around that enormous ramp. It's ridiculous!

[Wooster]

Ring road deal inches forward
Updated: Mon Mar. 23 2009 11:53:25

ctvcalgary.ca

After decades of planning and negotiation, the southwest west ring road is another step closer to reality.

There are reports that a tentative deal has been struck between the provincial government and the Tsuu T'ina Nation.

No details are being released but it is believed that the two sides now have a deal on the table which will go to members of the First Nation for ratification.

Earlier this month, Transportation Minister Luke Ouellette said a draft agreement was in place but there were still some outstanding legal issues.

The northeast and northwest sections of the ring road are scheduled to open to drivers in November.

Construction on the southeast portion of the road will begin in the spring of 2010.

The province says it remains confident that the entire ring road will be open to traffic by 2015.

If I had a buck for every time we heard there was a 'tentative deal' or a deal is 'close'...

[BFHeadstone]

Exactly. I'd also add to your list the ruralites who move to the big city, who take 3 lanes to make a left hand turn. There seem to be fewer of them these days though.

Merging is the worst though. Why do people not understand that when you want to enter a freeway from an onramp, you should probably be going somewhat near the speed limit.

Or people that try to merge/change lanes and SLOW DOWN

I had someone do that to me again...

[You Need A Thneed]

Look at the ramp going East-bound Transcanada turning onto Stoney Trail North in the NW - I swear you drive an extra KM just making the turn around that enormous ramp. It's ridiculous!

It'll be needed when the full intechange is built.

[frinkprof]

What about Bow Trail? Banff Trail? Edmonton Trail?

Edmonton Trail is the southern end of what was the Calgary & Edmonton Trail, the original Hwy 2. Parts of the original trail are stilled signed C&E Trail from Ponoka to Innisfail.
Fair enough. I made that post in haste. I'd extend the use of "trail" to where the existing street evolved from something that was once an actual major historic trail.

[outoftheice]

Well we're another step closer to seeing the SW portion of the ring road... any bets on when we'll see the first shovels go into the ground? My guess is 5 years....

Calgary's SW ring road clears major hurdle

Tsuu T'ina council OK's draft deal

By Kim Guttormson, Calgary HeraldMarch 24, 2009 8:02

The long-awaited south-west ring road has cleared a significant hurdle with the chief and council of the Tsuu T'ina Nation approving a deal with the province to build the freeway across band land.

Band members, who have been informed of the council's decision, will have their chance to vote on the agreement June 30.

Alberta Transportation spokesman Jerry Bellikka said the province has also been notified that the council has approved a draft of the final agreement.

While there are still other hurdles -- including ratification by the band members and approval from the federal government--Bellikka called the council's vote"a very significant step."

"There are still some more steps to go through,"he added, "but this is a very, very positive step," Bellikka said.

Tsuu T'ina spokesman Morten Paulsen said Chief Sandford Big Plume will hold a news conference this afternoon, but would provide no other details.

The mythic southwest ring road has been in the works, off and on, for decades.

Negotiations have ramped up over the past few years, raising hopes that a deal would be reached--especially with the province heralding imminent deals a number of times during that period.

The preferred path of the 20-kilometre road is to run it through the Tsuu T'ina reserve --but that requires about two square kilometres of land be transferred to the province.

Price has been a sticking point, as have some other details.

Dave Fryett, transportation director for the South of Fish Creek community association, said the band council's approval makes him hopeful the ring road is closer.

But he's cautious with his optimism, citing previous announcements that have fizzled.

"I did go to a news conference in 2004 and they said there was a deal, with deadlines and mileposts," he said.

What there is no doubt about, Fryett said, is the need for a southwest connector.

"We need it, we need a southwest ring road. Everything now is reliant on the Glenmore causeway,"he added of commuters trying to travel north-south along 14th Street S. W. or Macleod Trail.

With a draft deal finally going to a vote, if the band members accept it, the province can move ahead with the established route.

But Fryett sees the vote itself as a step forward. Even if the members reject it, he points out, the city and province can then move forward with an alternative route.

"Everybody needs to make a decision," Fryett said.

Ald. Brian Pincott, whose ward abuts the Tsuu T'ina reserve, said he's long been a proponent of not waiting for the band to make a decision about the ring road.

"I've been a proponent of let's move forward and find a solution for Calgary," he said, pointing to the need for an interchange at 37th Street and Glenmore Trail as an example. "I'm still a proponent of that."

If Tsuu T'ina residents approve the deal in June, the federal government still needs to pass an order-in-council to transfer the property to the province. That's been estimated to take anywhere from six months to a year.

Construction on the southwest leg of the ring road--which could eventually expand to 16 lanes but is likely to start with four, with at least five interchanges, including 37th and Glenmore -- is expected to take be-tween three and four years once it begins.

Fryett argues this is the perfect time to start such a major project, with construction companies looking for jobs for the first time in years.

Earlier this month, the province unveiled plans for the southeast leg of the ring road, with 25 kilometres of free-flowing, six-lane roadway built from 17th Avenue S.E. to the Macleod Trail interchange at Marquis of Lorne Trail.

[mersar]

Yeah, lets hope this is a real start and not another false start. Depending on what the agreement reads I actually wouldn't be too surprised to see this one start possibly at the same time as the SE or shortly afterwards (providing the band members approve it, which I find to be quite likely based off their approval of the last vote on the SWRR)

[WeavedWeb]

All I'm saying is that just because you have land doesn't mean you have to use it wastefully. Surely there's a way to make these interchanges more compact and still function effectively. Look at the ramp going East-bound Transcanada turning onto Stoney Trail North in the NW - I swear you drive an extra KM just making the turn around that enormous ramp. It's ridiculous!

Setting aside any debate about freeways v. transit, the fact of the matter is that if you are going to build a freeway to handle the long-term capacity that the Ring Road is projected to be carrying, these large interchange designs are necessary for both safety and efficiency. Deerfoot Trail was built with a very short-sighted design so that the freeway now handles more than three times the traffic it was designed for. The result is more accidents, more injuries, more delays (which results in more idling, etc) and more cost to the government in maintenance, healthcare, emergency responders, etc. etc. The large interchanges that are being built for Stoney Trail will allow a large amount of traffic to flow safely at a high rate of speed. In turn, this should reduce accidents and travel time for commuters using the freeway.

Anyways, the point is, Deerfoot Trail has similar intersections (i.e., Glenmore/Deerfoot, Deerfoot/16th, Deerfoot/Memorial, Deerfoot/Blackfoot) with high traffic loads comparable to what some of these interchanges are being designed for (except the Deerfoot interchanges are much smaller and more compact) and the results are more accidents, more delays, and unsafe driving.

[lubicon]

Well we're another step closer to seeing the SW portion of the ring road... any bets on when we'll see the first shovels go into the ground? My guess is 5 years....

I'd say 5 years at the earliest. Construction hasn't even started yet on the SE portion, and next up will likely be the NE section of AHD in Edmonton which will complete their ring road. After that the SW Stoney portion will be the final project to complete the 2 ring roads. 5 years would be nice, but I'm not holding my breath.

[craner]

I would be happy if the province can reach their goal of having it done by the end of 2015 which I think is attainable.
We'll see how the Band votes in June and then how long the Feds take to approve if it is radified.
There have been lots of false starts on these negotiations over the last 50 years but I don't think this SW portion has ever proceded this far down the "trail" so I commend them for that. I think both sides stand to benefit from this agreement

[Beltliner]

CHQR has an early report from the Tsuu T'ina presser this afternoon (http://www.am770chqr.com/News/Local/Story.aspx?ID=1075156):

Tsuu T'ina talks about Ring Road deal
CHQR Newsroom
3/24/2009

The Tsuu T'ina First Nation has announced they have struck a land deal with the province and the city for the southwest leg of Calgary's ring road.

Chief Sanford Big Plume says the deal still has a major hurdle to clear.

It will be put to a referendum vote on June 30th, but he says he is confident it will pass.

He says he can not get into specifics, but the deal does involve new land for the Tsuu T'ina.

He says if the deal is defeated in the referendum vote, it will die.

[KrisYYC]

The problem with Canadian drivers is our joke of a drivers education program across all provinces. They get you to put around a quiet residential neighbourhood and teach you to panic and slam on the brakes everytime anything gets within 50 feet of the vehicle.

Another problem is people equate paranoid driving with good driving. The most infuriating are people who brake while trying to merge as if it's a yield. Or the douchebags who think "speed kills!!" and sit in the left lane doing exactly 100km/h picturing themselve a civic hero for single handedly enforcing the speed limit much to the chagrin of those "dangerous" drivers who want to do 120km/h.

Having driven in the US, Taiwan and much of Europe I'd say Canadians on average are pretty pathetic drivers.

[mersar]

They had a piece on the news last night about the SE Ring road, and the business group who is fighting against it for fear of it causing an additional $20M/year in costs as a couple interchanges were removed from the plan down around the Shepard industrial area.

[devonb]

The problem with Canadian drivers is our joke of a drivers education program across all provinces. They get you to put around a quiet residential neighbourhood and teach you to panic and slam on the brakes everytime anything gets within 50 feet of the vehicle.

Another problem is people equate paranoid driving with good driving. The most infuriating are people who brake while trying to merge as if it's a yield. Or the douchebags who think "speed kills!!" and sit in the left lane doing exactly 100km/h picturing themselve a civic hero for single handedly enforcing the speed limit much to the chagrin of those "dangerous" drivers who want to do 120km/h.

Having driven in the US, Taiwan and much of Europe I'd say Canadians on average are pretty pathetic drivers.


Fully agree. Having recently moved from Vancouver where there is a higher percentage of paranoid drivers, I find Calgarians falter with being over confident in their driving abilities. I've never been in a city where so many driving laws are optional. I had a friend who was surprised to learn that signalling was the law - she thought it was a courtesy. :whip: Kind of explains why so few signal when changing lanes, or even taking turns. Being a motorcyclist, I've had a lot of close calls here from people not bothering to shoulder check or give the 'courtesy' of signalling. Overall though, I prefer the drivers here to Vancouver by a large margin.

[clooless]

More details, in case anyone was curious.

Southeast business owners upset with ring road
CHQR Newsroom
3/25/2009

Business owners along 84th Street are concerned a change in plans to the southeast ring road will cost them tens of millions of dollars every year. Many of the roughly 100 businesses in the Shepard Industrial Park moved there because they were told the ring road would include interchanges at 61st and 106th Avenue. Those interchanges have since been removed from the plans. Richard Warnock is the president of a trucking company in the industrial park. He says his employees are owner/operators, and traveling an extra five kilometers every time they load and unload will have a huge impact on their bottom lines. Group Spokesman Trevor Fridfinnson says the interchanges would cost about 25-million dollars each, but not putting them in will cost businesses between 16 and 20 million every year.

Source: CHQR

Personally I think the complaint is absurd. The Glenmore Trail interchange will be a stone's throw from the industrial park on 61st.

[MalcolmTucker]

If they truely believe it will cost them 20 million each year, perhaps they should just issue a one time levy on these businesses (if these interchanges would be safely spaced) to pay for the interchange. By their math they should be happy to!

[lubicon]

The time they save by using the new ring road, even if they have to drive a few 'extra' km's will probably more than offset the time and fuel they are currently burning using the goat trail of a road system that is currently in place. I'll bet at the end of the day they will still be money ahead when the new road opens.

[mersar]

If they truely believe it will cost them 20 million each year, perhaps they should just issue a one time levy on these businesses (if these interchanges would be safely spaced) to pay for the interchange. By their math they should be happy to!

Agreed. I'd fault the businesses if they claim the main reason they moved there was a line on a paper that was subject to change, so let them pay if they really think it would cost them so much otherwise

Looking at the maps I can see why the interchanges were dropped (though the ROW for them is still there, so they could potentially be built in the future), theres absolutely nothing out there (theres pretty much just open field between 84th and 52nd at 61st, and at 106th theres really no connection to anywhere west as 106th (which doesn't even exist that far east) would run into the CN yard and theres nothing east either past 84th all the way out to range road 283. So all those two interchanges would do is let the handful of businesses have access to the ring road, and little else.

[You Need A Thneed]

Agreed. I'd fault the businesses if they claim the main reason they moved there was a line on a paper that was subject to change, so let them pay if they really think it would cost them so much otherwise

Looking at the maps I can see why the interchanges were dropped (though the ROW for them is still there, so they could potentially be built in the future), theres absolutely nothing out there (theres pretty much just open field between 84th and 52nd at 61st, and at 106th theres really no connection to anywhere west as 106th (which doesn't even exist that far east) would run into the CN yard and theres nothing east either past 84th all the way out to range road 283. So all those two interchanges would do is let the handful of businesses have access to the ring road, and little else.
Also, for safety reasons, they don't want an interchange every mile.

[srperrycgy]

I was in Houston for the past two weeks and was impressed by parts of the freeways, especially this sucker:

http://members.shaw.ca/steve.perry/Houston 056-1.jpg

NB I-45 at the Sam Houston Tollway with reversible HOV lane in the centre. I have an appreciation for tolls now. The lack of transit was sad, but not surprising.

[mersar]

Graham Construction has moved a trailer up to the Crowchild and Stoney interchange, along with a portapotty. I'm assuming they must have won the contract for building the remaining bridges for that interchange.

[craner]

Graham Construction has moved a trailer up to the Crowchild and Stoney interchange, along with a portapotty. I'm assuming they must have won the contract for building the remaining bridges for that interchange.

Seems to me Graham has got most of the work along Crowchild.
Spring is on the way - lets start building.:banana:

[mersar]

Graham hasn't had much recently, though they are becoming a pretty major player on Stoney overall as they are also a major part of the NE P3 as well as doing the Scenic Acres/Tuscany interchange.

Enmax has also been on the bridge a few times in the past few weeks with a crew when I've gone past

[lubicon]

I didn't realize the trailers had been removed from Crowchild/Stoney in the first place. Shows how observant I am, and how often I use that intersection I guess.

There has been a pretty sizeable gang of workers on the Tuscany/Scenic Acres interchange lately as well. Looks like that project is moving along nicely.

[freeweed]

Crowchild/Stoney is definitely about the new bridges. Work to commence at some point between April and June, and major work should be completed within maybe 12 months. I imagine we'll still have the usual month or three of ramp work, etc after that, to make a fall 2010 opening.

[mersar]

I didn't realize the trailers had been removed from Crowchild/Stoney in the first place. Shows how observant I am, and how often I use that intersection I guess.

Yeah, different contractor for this next phase. AECON built the main bridges, but obviously Graham got the contract for the ramp related bridges

[craner]

It's my understanding the P3 announced for the SE portion of the ring road will not include a new interchange at MacLeod Tr. - is that correct ?
Also, what is the completion target for the SE portion ?
Thanks :)

[mersar]

Fall 2013 completion, and no, it won't include the interchange at Macleod (which needs to be done, especially since the bridge over is only 2 lanes)

[craner]

Fall 2013 completion, and no, it won't include the interchange at Macleod (which needs to be done, especially since the bridge over is only 2 lanes)

Thanks - agreed. Doesn't make sense to take it that far and not do the interchange at Macleod.:shrug:

[mersar]

I wouldn't be too surprised to see them announce at least upgrading the existing portions of the SW ring road by around that time, possibly as a separate project from the part that runs through the Tsuu Tina lands

[Stang]

On my way home from Toronto on Monday evening we flew over the Stoney/Deerfoot interchange.

Apologies for the poor quality, cell phone photo. But I know that some of you wouldn't mind a peek from this angle:

http://www.jcsphoto.ca/posts/stoney.jpg

[mersar]

Thanks for taking that shot. Definately gives a different perspective that gives an idea as to how far along things are. I still think having that curve in the main Stoney Trail to pass under Deerfoot when heading east looks a bit odd, but should work nicely.

[craner]

I wouldn't be too surprised to see them announce at least upgrading the existing portions of the SW ring road by around that time, possibly as a separate project from the part that runs through the Tsuu Tina lands

I thinking the same thing.

Cool photo Stang. :tup:

[korzym]

Thanks for taking that shot. Definately gives a different perspective that gives an idea as to how far along things are. I still think having that curve in the main Stoney Trail to pass under Deerfoot when heading east looks a bit odd, but should work nicely.
If bend ever sees high traffic volumes, count on people to nearly slam on the breaks. Think of the major bends on deerfoot during rush hour, after you clear them traffic picks up again for no good reason

[You Need A Thneed]

If bend ever sees high traffic volumes, count on people to nearly slam on the breaks. Think of the major bends on deerfoot during rush hour, after you clear them traffic picks up again for no good reason

There is no bend on the new ring road that's anything even remotely as sharp as the curves on Deerfoot.

[korzym]

True, you have to admit that people over-react to any high speed turn in this jurisdiction...most of the NE section is straight, I anticipate drivers to become confused heading eastbound towards deerfoot haha

[mersar]

If bend ever sees high traffic volumes, count on people to nearly slam on the breaks. Think of the major bends on deerfoot during rush hour, after you clear them traffic picks up again for no good reason

Theres merge lanes and exit ramps around there as well, so people slamming on breaks is an automatic assumption on my part.

[mersar]

They've started working on the street lights around the Crowchild interchange, a truck dropped off several loads of PVC and there are a number of concrete pieces for various junctions sitting along the roadway, and a backhoe was starting to trench along the WB to NB off ramp. The contractor has also moved a site office trailer in along with their storage box thats been there for a few weeks now.

[freeweed]

Does that mean we will be seeing a temporary configuration, with lights? I kinda assumed the intersection would just stay as is until all the rampwork was done.

[lubicon]

Does that mean we will be seeing a temporary configuration, with lights? I kinda assumed the intersection would just stay as is until all the rampwork was done.

I'm assuming Mersar meant street lights, not traffic lights.

And Mersar, where are the construction trailers that you mention. I don't use that intersection very often, but have not seen any new trailers recently. As a matter of fact the old ones (W of Stoney, S of Crowchild) are gone. Just wondering where they have located the new ones?

[freeweed]

I'm assuming Mersar meant street lights, not traffic lights.

D'oh. He even said that, but I read traffic.

I guess I've been so used to the non-existent street lighting in this city for so long that the possibility of actual street lights in what I consider a perpetual construction zone is so mind-blowing that my brain wouldn't process it.

Or something.

[mersar]

I'm assuming Mersar meant street lights, not traffic lights.

And Mersar, where are the construction trailers that you mention. I don't use that intersection very often, but have not seen any new trailers recently. As a matter of fact the old ones (W of Stoney, S of Crowchild) are gone. Just wondering where they have located the new ones?

Yep, street lights. The backhoe looked to have trenched a good length of the offramp when I went past this morning, so they are moving pretty fast on it.

As for the trailers, they are sitting right on the west side of the bridge on the old/real Crowchild alignment. One small ATCO style office trailer and an orange sea-can with a port-a-potty and as of this morning a small trailer mounted generator.

[mersar]

One approach to Stoney Trail that we rarely ever see: 14th Street NW

http://compscience.info/public/images/2009/stoney14-apr16-1.jpg

[craner]

Calgary business owners hope to meet to discuss ring road accessibility


By Kim Guttormson, Calgary HeraldApril 17, 2009 6:01 PMComments (4)
StoryPhotos ( 1 )

Construction work continues on the massive ring road interchange with 16th avenue April 7, 2009.Photograph by: Gavin Young, Calgary HeraldA group of businesses concerned about access to their sites once the southeast ring road is built are hoping a meeting next week will lead to a solution.

The province has already committed to building a flyover at 61st Avenue, so that the street doesn’t end at the ring road.

But it won’t pay for two ramps connecting the overpass to 61st Avenue at Stoney Trail, so the 84th Street S.E. Access Association wants the city of Calgary or the MD of Rocky View to fund the connections.

“Neither entity in recent history has provided any structural road repairs in the area at all,” Dave Gilkes, president of the association, said. “People in the area have paid, transportation levies and everything else, and got nothing back.”

While local businesses would be willing to chip in for some of the ramps’ cost, Gilkes said, but do believe it’s the responsibility of the municipalities.

His group will meet with the MD and the city on Tuesday.

Original plans for the southeast ring road didn’t include the flyover at 61st Avenue. Transportation Minister Luke Ouellette has said he’s wiling to consider including the overpass, with two ramps, as long as safety standards aren’t compromised. The ramps would allow access from north-bound Stoney Trail and onto south-bound Stoney Trail.

[lineman]

If bend ever sees high traffic volumes, count on people to nearly slam on the breaks. Think of the major bends on deerfoot during rush hour, after you clear them traffic picks up again for no good reason

I think the slowdown is more due to the weave area between interchanges and poor planning by drivers (i.e. last minute changes from far left lane to right before exiting.)

[mersar]

Theres now 2 site trailers and 2 drill rigs sitting at Crowchild and Stoney

[Wentworth]

Edit:

[mersar]

Between Highway 1 and Highway 8 is still 2035 last I checked, by 2015 is the SE part only. AB transportation had mused about having the entire thing done by 2015, but never officially said it would be, and this part was designed for a further out timeline. This may get changed later this year when the final study for that part is completed. Personally I wouldn't expect to see this part until 2020 at the absolute earliest, and a lot of the timing for this part will depend on the timing for the part through the Tsuu T'ina reserve.

As for noise, most people have always way over estimating the noise levels before projects are built, especially those who aren't immediately adjacent to the right of way. If you want to get an idea of volume levels, figure out the distance then go and find a spot in Valley Ridge thats a similar distance from the Transcanada and see what its like there.

There will likely be a huge amount of earth moving, so where the road level ends up exactly won't be known for a bit, but the general idea is usually to level out things where possible and practical and this in itself may allow them to do some noise abatement through the design (this came up with the Crowchild interchange, their reasoning for building the one off ramp closest to Tuscany thats elevated up was in part as the lower volume offramp itself now acts as a barrier to the noise from the main flow of traffic).

[freeweed]

I've been in Valley Ridge pretty much right next to the TCH and it's barely noticeable.

Unless you insist on absolute silence all around you, the city and province here do a pretty fine job of noise abatement - I remember seeing the plan for the Crowchild/Stoney interchange, and the plan there was for 60db max for the residential area. That's pretty much the sound level of a distant road, about what you'd expect.

Personally I'd almost welcome the constant low level drone - some white noise might help to drown out the idiot motorcycles that seem to blatt down my street all summer long. A major road is nothing compared to what a "quiet" suburban street already experiences.

[Wentworth]

I've been in Valley Ridge pretty much right next to the TCH and it's barely noticeable.

Unless you insist on absolute silence all around you, the city and province here do a pretty fine job of noise abatement - I remember seeing the plan for the Crowchild/Stoney interchange, and the plan there was for 60db max for the residential area. That's pretty much the sound level of a distant road, about what you'd expect.

Personally I'd almost welcome the constant low level drone - some white noise might help to drown out the idiot motorcycles that seem to blatt down my street all summer long. A major road is nothing compared to what a "quiet" suburban street already experiences.

Good point about the drone level. We get the motorcycles too (racing down 101 St in Rockyview.) We also have large packs of howling coyotes now that wake us up. Won't have to worry about that anymore.

You guys have helped calm some of my fears. I was less worried about it until this week when someone started telling me about how awful it was going to be and how they were planning on selling and moving and buying an acreage etc.. (And actually, they had bought the property for the acreage last year and I'm guessing they are just trying to rationalize the decision now that it is not looking like such a great financial move.)

[freeweed]

I was less worried about it until this week when someone started telling me about how awful it was going to be and how they were planning on selling and moving and buying an acreage etc.. (And actually, they had bought the property for the acreage last year and I'm guessing they are just trying to rationalize the decision now that it is not looking like such a great financial move.)

What you're hearing is the textbook definition of NIMBYism. Everyone wants freeways and other infrastructure, but OMG NOT IN MY BACK YARD!!!!!

I've never seen much difference in property values between people right next to major roads in Calgary vs otherwise. We do a good job here of making it a non-issue.

[Stang]

Good point about the drone level. We get the motorcycles too (racing down 101 St in Rockyview.) We also have large packs of howling coyotes now that wake us up. Won't have to worry about that anymore.

I live about 500 metres from Crowchild trail (I actually thought it was further until I just mapped it out) and I can rarely hear anything from the roadway. Maybe on a summer night I might hear a distant hum, but honestly, it is barely noticeable. Even when riding my bike even closer to the road, it really is a non-issue for me.

An in-law recently moved from Tuscany to Sherwood (near Shaganappi, north of Stoney trail) and actually used Stoney Trail in their justification for moving. "Too busy, too noisy, going to get worse, etc." Ironically, their new house is even CLOSER to Stoney Trail - that leg just hasn't opened yet. Whatever makes them feel good, I guess. :)

NIMBY-ism takes on many forms, as freeweed mentioned. "What about the children?!" will surely be next!

[Wentworth]

What you're hearing is the textbook definition of NIMBYism. Everyone wants freeways and other infrastructure, but OMG NOT IN MY BACK YARD!!!!!

I've never seen much difference in property values between people right next to major roads in Calgary vs otherwise. We do a good job here of making it a non-issue.


I'm not sure I'd quite call this NIMBY'ism. That would be if someone was actually trying to stop the roadway. Can't say I've really heard much in the way of public opposition to the road. People are within their rights to move if they don't like it...

[frinkprof]

^I think Freeweed was referring to the sentiment, rather than the action taken.

[freeweed]

I'm not sure I'd quite call this NIMBY'ism. That would be if someone was actually trying to stop the roadway. Can't say I've really heard much in the way of public opposition to the road. People are within their rights to move if they don't like it...

People are also within their rights to protest a new road expansion. It's still NIMBYism by definition - well, unless they're the types who honestly and truly do not ever want any development anywhere. Those are then called BANANAs.

Remember, it's Not In MY Back Yard. Regardless of whether or not they protest it, or just change back yards, it's still exactly the same concept. NIMBYism is what drives housing prices down in areas that see a lot of it (ie: much of the US).

At least BANANAs are honest and consistent. NIMBYs are the worst kind of selfish though - they want it all, but they want someone ELSE to deal with any possible negative consequences of something.

[lubicon]

I live about 500 metres from Crowchild trail (I actually thought it was further until I just mapped it out) and I can rarely hear anything from the roadway. Maybe on a summer night I might hear a distant hum, but honestly, it is barely noticeable. Even when riding my bike even closer to the road, it really is a non-issue for me.

An in-law recently moved from Tuscany to Sherwood (near Shaganappi, north of Stoney trail) and actually used Stoney Trail in their justification for moving. "Too busy, too noisy, going to get worse, etc." Ironically, their new house is even CLOSER to Stoney Trail - that leg just hasn't opened yet. Whatever makes them feel good, I guess. :)

NIMBY-ism takes on many forms, as freeweed mentioned. "What about the children?!" will surely be next!

Haha, jokes on them when they find out Shaganappi won't be connected to Stoney with a full interchange. Acess in and out of Sherwood is going to suck.

[lubicon]

Hi,

I just wanted to pick anyone with a willing brain about the proposed Stoney Trail extension between Hwy 1 and Bow Trail.

I live in West Springs and though my house doesn't back directly onto the TUC, I am less than a block in from there. After viewing the proposed route (below) and going out to view the actual site near my house, it looks like this road is going to be pretty darn close. So the question I'm asking myself is, should I sell and move?

Here's the city's plan:
http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/TCHBOWTRAIL.pdf

Here's what's weighing on my mind:

1. When we bought we were aware of the TUC and researched it, but the road expansion at that time is listed on a 2035 time horizon. Now they're saying they want to have it completed by 2015 on the FAQ section of their web site. So, do you think it will actually go through by 2015 or do I have more time than that?

2. The current site is at a slightly elevated grade from my house. Do you think the roadway will be built on the existing grade or above/below it? This may make some difference to how visible (and loud) it will be from my property.

3. Any guess on how loud it is going to be? (This is going to be a major truck route.) I actually attended one of the open houses and asked about noise abatement, and they said it would only be provided if the noise levels ended up exceeding provincial standards, and that there likely would not be any sound walls or barriers. I've researched these standards (which are more or less NA standards) and from what I've read, the allowable standard is actually quite loud. I've already resigned myself to the fact that we'll have to buy a central A/C unit as opening the windows in the summer would likely no longer be an option.

Thanks for any opinions.

A lot depends on how much of the road is going to be free flow (hopefully all of it). Traffic lights or anythign else that slows down traffic means vehicles will be gearing up and down through intersections which generates a lot of the noise. Having a free flow road would make it much quieter.

If you are really curious, do some reaearch on the SW portion of Anthony Henday Drive in Edmonton which is the equivalent of Stoney Trail. That portion was built with traffic lights instead of interchanges and a lot of people living along the road are up in arms over the noise. While I'm not defending them (they also knew the road was coming when they bought), the province is saying noise levels are fine because the AVERAGE noise level (in decibels) falls within acceptable standards. However during peak hours the noise level is probably above those standards, but when you average it out over time (ie all day and night) it is OK.

[Stang]

Haha, jokes on them when they find out Shaganappi won't be connected to Stoney with a full interchange. Acess in and out of Sherwood is going to suck.

All of the noise, pollution, etc. (which I don't buy anyway), but without the benefit of good access. Hmmmm...

I think that their decision was motivated mostly by the lure of a bigger house and a crazy mortgage, not so much by transportation (Tuscany is only a few years away from getting LRT), green space (Tuscany is pretty awesome for green space), etc.

To each their own, I guess. And I'm speaking only of their specific situation - not generalizing for everyone.

Edit: Just looked at the plans again. Interesting. So Sherwood residents can come FROM the east, go TO the west on Stoney. And, obviously, both directions on Shaganappi. And, of course, the "ultimate" configuration is years and years away.

[YYCguys]

A lot depends on how much of the road is going to be free flow (hopefully all of it). Traffic lights or anythign else that slows down traffic means vehicles will be gearing up and down through intersections which generates a lot of the noise. Having a free flow road would make it much quieter.

If you are really curious, do some reaearch on the SW portion of Anthony Henday Drive in Edmonton which is the equivalent of Stoney Trail. That portion was built with traffic lights instead of interchanges and a lot of people living along the road are up in arms over the noise. While I'm not defending them (they also knew the road was coming when they bought), the province is saying noise levels are fine because the AVERAGE noise level (in decibels) falls within acceptable standards. However during peak hours the noise level is probably above those standards, but when you average it out over time (ie all day and night) it is OK.

They probably knew that that the road was coming but did they know there were going to be lights instead of interchanges? One assumes that a ring road that is higher speed and higher traffic means INTERCHANGES and not the cheapass way out with lights instead.

[korzym]

Hi,

I just wanted to pick anyone with a willing brain about the proposed Stoney Trail extension between Hwy 1 and Bow Trail.

I live in West Springs and though my house doesn't back directly onto the TUC, I am less than a block in from there. After viewing the proposed route (below) and going out to view the actual site near my house, it looks like this road is going to be pretty darn close. So the question I'm asking myself is, should I sell and move?

Here's the city's plan:
http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/TCHBOWTRAIL.pdf

Here's what's weighing on my mind:

2. The current site is at a slightly elevated grade from my house. Do you think the roadway will be built on the existing grade or above/below it? This may make some difference to how visible (and loud) it will be from my property.

Thanks for any opinions.

Wentworth,

Your concerns about the altitude of the road are spot on. And what I mean by that is if you visit the NE ring road between 16th ave ne and mcknight blvd. NE, you will see that a massive wall of dirt has been erected between the houses, and the actual road is substantially below where the land originally was. I refer to it as GE5-like, in that the road trenched is down and has this massive mound of dirt next to it. On this stretch of road that I refer to, motorists will not be able to see the houses its trenched down so much. I estimate that the dirt wall is around 4 stories high minimum.

You can view it by going to Del Ray Crescent NE in Monterey Park. There's a pathway access to nowhere between two houses. Go there and you can walk up to the edge of the project, without worry about being hassled by project staff. And you'll get a great first hand look at what their doing. Frankly the houses that back onto the ring road cannot get a visual of the road that is parrallel to their houses, only the tops of the overpasses to the south. All those houses can see looking directly east from their backyards is the large mound of dirt and sky, no longer can they see the country horizon. Perhaps an issue on the west side that owner's might lose their view of the mountains if they do the same thing over there.

[MichaelS]

I believe it is city policy that any development next to the TUC has to have visual screening of the roadway. Essentially, if you are standing on your patio in your back yard, you should not be able to see a semi that is driving by on the ring road.

[mersar]

Trenching like that will probably occur on the west leg as well, especially around some of the interchanges as unlike the NE/SE and most of hte NW, the west side is anything but flat and trenching may actually make things work better. For instance having Stoney cross under Old Banff Coach Road or Bow Trail and leaving those at grade (same style as Crowchild really) rather then build up huge mounds of earth to build the bridges between. At 17th this may be a pretty signficant factor, since if I'm correct at that spot Stoney will essentially be running on the side of the hill about 1/3 the way up.

[mersar]

It looks like I may have been wrong on what project the drill rig and other crews that are at Stoney and Crowchild are for, both rigs were down on the level of where Stoney will be between the two bridges, so I'm thinking that they may actually be doing the initial work on the LRT bridge instead.

[craner]

Is anybody aware of a plan on how the Stoney Trail / TCH interchange will work with the proposed Bowfort Road / TCH interchange at C.O.P. ? I think the Bowfort interchange is on the City's radar in the relative short term.
It seems the two interchanges will be fairly close together so I'm curious how they are handling weave distances etc.
Any insights would be interesting.
:cheers:

[lubicon]

They've really picked up the pace on the Tuscany / Scenic Acres interchange lately. It looks like they are pouring the bridge decks if I am interpreting what I see correctly, plus there is heavy equipment back on site doing earthworks type stuff north of the bridge. Yesterday I counted 13 private vehicles plus 3 company vehicles on site meaning the work crew numbers at least 15 or 16. That is a lot more than even a week ago.

[mersar]

Is anybody aware of a plan on how the Stoney Trail / TCH interchange will work with the proposed Bowfort Road / TCH interchange at C.O.P. ? I think the Bowfort interchange is on the City's radar in the relative short term.
It seems the two interchanges will be fairly close together so I'm curious how they are handling weave distances etc.
Any insights would be interesting.
:cheers:
The plan was done with that interchange in mind. There will be a ramp that starts prior to the offramp from SB Stoney, goes up over a bridge above the offramp from Stoney then back down where an exit lane from the Stoney offramp connects onto it. On the other side the WB ramp will merge back in before the Stoney ramp starts, though it does appear the ramp may actually continue straight and turn into the outer lane on the ramp to Stoney. Distance wise they are far enough apart to work pretty well, plus the ramps from Bowfort Road will likely be pretty low traffic anyways.

You can see the map of the recommended plan here (http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/bu/trans_planning/studies/bowfort_transcan/bowfort_tch_recommended_plan.pdf).

[craner]

The plan was done with that interchange in mind. There will be a ramp that starts prior to the offramp from SB Stoney, goes up over a bridge above the offramp from Stoney then back down where an exit lane from the Stoney offramp connects onto it. On the other side the WB ramp will merge back in before the Stoney ramp starts, though it does appear the ramp may actually continue straight and turn into the outer lane on the ramp to Stoney. Distance wise they are far enough apart to work pretty well, plus the ramps from Bowfort Road will likely be pretty low traffic anyways.

You can see the map of the recommended plan here (http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/bu/trans_planning/studies/bowfort_transcan/bowfort_tch_recommended_plan.pdf).

Thanks mersar - you come through as usual.
Interesting to see the future Sarcee / TCH interchange dashed in on that plan.:)

[mersar]

They were talking with the transportation minister on QR tonight about the progress on the ring road and other projects, what was said:
NW to open staged through fall
NE to open mid fall (heard from other source first week of Nov) all at once.
design work is underway on the interchanges for the 2 signalized intersections, transport minister said he hopes to be able to announce a timeline for construction next year
the extra lane on deerfoot from Beddington to 64th is still on for this summer
Airdrie overpass of QE2 at Yankee Valley Rd finished by next year

[clooless]

design work is underway on the interchanges for the 2 signalized intersections, transport minister said he hopes to be able to announce a timeline for construction next year


Niiiiiiiice. I really hated that an interchange wasn't planned for Nose Hill Drive.

Would someone please refresh my memory -- the other signalized intersection is Harvest Hills Boulevard, correct?

[clooless]

design work is underway on the interchanges for the 2 signalized intersections, transport minister said he hopes to be able to announce a timeline for construction next year


Niiiiiiiice. I really hated that an interchange wasn't planned for Nose Hill Drive.

The other signalized intersection is Harvest Hills Boulevard, is that right?

[freeweed]

I think the biggest opening will be Deerfoot @ Stoney. Is that part of the NW or NE work, officially?

Getting the NW segment up to Beddington will at least be an accomplishment, but I want my freeway to the Balzac Balzarium, godsdamnit!

[You Need A Thneed]

the extra lane on deerfoot from Beddington to 64th is still on for this summer


Beddington all the way to McKnight. I know so becasue the stormwater tunnel under deerfoot by Laycock park is being extended, to make room for more lanes.

[You Need A Thneed]

I think the biggest opening will be Deerfoot @ Stoney. Is that part of the NW or NE work, officially?

Getting the NW segment up to Beddington will at least be an accomplishment, but I want my freeway to the Balzac Balzarium, godsdamnit!

Deerfoot/Stoney has ramps that are part of each leg. The ones that are needed for the NW leg will be open with the NW part, and the ones needed for the NE leg will open with that.

[kap384]

Large signs are are almost all assembled, ready for install @ Stoney/Country Hills (North & Southbound Stoney, East & Westbound Country Hills) Assuming they have distances to other major ring road intersections.

[mersar]

Stoney @ Tuscany/Scenic Acres:
http://compscience.info/public/images/2009/stoneytuscany-apr27-1.jpg
Looking west

http://compscience.info/public/images/2009/stoneytuscany-apr27-2.jpg
Looking south at the new alignment of Tuscany Blvd.

Stoney @ Crowchild - LRT Bridge
http://compscience.info/public/images/2009/xrt-apr27-1.jpg

[craner]

They were talking with the transportation minister on QR tonight about the progress on the ring road and other projects, what was said:
NW to open staged through fall
NE to open mid fall (heard from other source first week of Nov) all at once.
design work is underway on the interchanges for the 2 signalized intersections, transport minister said he hopes to be able to announce a timeline for construction next year
the extra lane on deerfoot from Beddington to 64th is still on for this summer
Airdrie overpass of QE2 at Yankee Valley Rd finished by next year

Awesome! - that's a nice surprize - no trucks grinding down from 100 km/hr to a stop at Nose Hill for that rediculous light at the bottom of a hill.
:banana:

I'll re-ask Coolness' question:
Where is the other set of lights on Stoney ?

[The_Bachelor]

At Harvest Hill Blvd unfortunately.

[kap384]

Large signs are are almost all assembled, ready for install @ Stoney/Country Hills (North & Southbound Stoney, East & Westbound Country Hills) Assuming they have distances to other major ring road intersections.

Eastbound Country Hills going up right now. (Not huge news, I know, but at least something getting finished on the ring road.)

[You Need A Thneed]

At Harvest Hill Blvd unfortunately.

Probobly not for long, and it'll be a relatively low traffic intersection.

[korzym]

Ring road construction forces closure of major intersection
CHQR Newsroom
4/28/2009

The province has announced plans to permenantly close a major intersection in northeast Calgary to make way for construction of the ring road.
84th street at 16th Avenue will close to traffic on May 3rd, at noon.
The province says the closure will ensure the safe operation of the new Stoney Trail interchange.
Getting to 84th Street NE means drivers will have to continue east to the next intersection, which is 100th Street (Range Road 285) and go back around, either north or south.
The province adds 100th Street between Country Hills Boulevard and 17th Avenue SE with be fully paved before the intersection is closed.
http://www.am770chqr.com/News/Local/Story.aspx?ID=1087171


Calgary ring road’s northern legs head into homestretch
Submitted by Government of Alberta on Sunday, 26 April 2009No Comment

The 2009 highway construction season will complete the northern legs of Calgary’s ring road.ringroad

“This year’s construction season will be a very productive one for Calgary and area,” said Luke Ouellette, Minister of Transportation. “We will complete approximately 45 per cent of Calgary’s ring road this year and take on a number of other important projects.”Highlights of provincial highway construction work in Calgary and area include the following.

* Completion of the $425-million Stoney Trail NW ring road from Sarcee Trail NW to Deerfoot Trail (Highway 2). Construction started in 2005 and all sections of the road will open to traffic by the end of November 2009. The road may open in phases throughout the year as construction progress allows.

* Completion of the Stoney Trail NE ring road from Deerfoot Trail to 17 Avenue SE. Construction started in 2007 and the road will open to traffic on or before Nov. 1. The project is a public-private partnership with the Stoney Trail Group and worth $650 million in 2007 dollars.

* One-lane addition to southbound Deerfoot Trail between Beddington Trail and 64 Avenue North. This $9 million road-widening project will give motorists more room between the Beddington Trail and 64 Avenue North interchanges and reduce weaving problems. Construction starts in 2009 and will be completed in 2010.

* Continuation of major upgrades to the Queen Elizabeth II Highway-Yankee Valley Boulevard interchange in Airdrie. Construction on this $42-million project started in 2008 and will be completed by the fall of 2010. The project includes new bridges, ramps, lighting improvements, and expansion of Yankee Valley Boulevard from two to six lanes.

As noted in the Budget 2009 speech, every $1 billion spent on public infrastructure supports 11,600 jobs that directly benefit Albertans and Alberta communities. The overall highway infrastructure investment of $1.8 billion in 2009 will support more than 20,000 jobs throughout the province.
http://albertatalks.ca/2009/04/26/calgary-ring-roads-northern-legs-head-into-homestretch/

some articles

[Oliver Klozov]

The lights at Harvest Hills/Centre St will be replaced by a new interchange which will be tendered in the near future. The lights and the adjacent interchange construction will of course require reduced speed limits on Stoney.

What of the 2 adjacent proposed interchanges - 1 to the west (14 St NW) and 1 to the east (11 St NE). There will be no signalized intersections in the short term but once development starts north of Stoney, will there be demand to connect these roads to Stoney with signalized intersections and then sometime later do the interchanges? :koko:

We may have reduced speed limits on Stoney for many years to come. :yuck:

[freeweed]

NW: Construction started in 2005 and all sections of the road will open to traffic by the end of November 2009. The road may open in phases throughout the year as construction progress allows.

NE: Construction started in 2007 and the road will open to traffic on or before Nov. 1.

One of these things is not like the other.

[You Need A Thneed]

One of these things is not like the other.

Exactly what I was just thinking. Even if it's just a few weeks, the project that started two years later will open first.

That being said, with all the rain in 2005, that year may have been a total write off in terms of getting work done.

[Oliver Klozov]

Exactly what I was just thinking. Even if it's just a few weeks, the project that started two years later will open first.

That being said, with all the rain in 2005, that year may have been a total write off in terms of getting work done.


Apples and oranges.

The NE as a P3 is just one big project. The NW is not one project (contract) but a series of projects. What started in 2005? The whole thing? Hardly.

Why 2005 anyway? In my view the NW actually started when they started building the Bow River bridge