[jsbertram]

Those youtube videos of the stoney trail road were awesome :worship:

I wish I could see an overhead picture of the area the proposed stoney trail ring road will cover

Do you mean something like this?

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=calgary,+ab&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=29.910058,56.513672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Calgary,+Division+No.+6,+Alberta,+Canada&ll=51.174393,-114.008389&spn=0.023085,0.087891&t=h&z=14

Just follow the unfinished freeway from the interchange of Stoney & Highway 2.

When you reach the end of eastside construction, continue south to Highway 22X.
On the westside, when you reach the Trans Canada Highway, Stoney will continue south to Highway 8.

[Rothwell]

Do you mean something like this?

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=calgary,+ab&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=29.910058,56.513672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Calgary,+Division+No.+6,+Alberta,+Canada&ll=51.174393,-114.008389&spn=0.023085,0.087891&t=h&z=14

Just follow the unfinished freeway from the interchange of Stoney & Highway 2.

When you reach the end of eastside construction, continue south to Highway 22X.
On the westside, when you reach the Trans Canada Highway, Stoney will continue south to Highway 8.

I heard something about a First Nations Tribe holdings up progress because of land disputes. Say it ain't so. And it it is, what part of the ring road will be compromised?

[jsbertram]

I heard something about a First Nations Tribe holdings up progress because of land disputes. Say it ain't so. And it it is, what part of the ring road will be compromised?

Just roll back to messages since June, and you'll find almost everything you want to know.

[korzym]

Stoney trail group is taking down their website today

[lubicon]

Stoney trail group is taking down their website today

No big loss, it wasn't much of a website to begin with.

[korzym]

No big loss, it wasn't much of a website to begin with.

I also found out that their not responsible for building 60th ave ne or additional lanes.

They signed a 20 year lease however, and in it if I'm not mistaken said they would be on the hook for maintenance [and upgrades?]. Must be a sweet deal if all they'll have to do is paint new lines on the road every few years for the $20m/year or w/e they'll be receiving. This is news to me that they won't build 60th ave or additional lanes, further when the time for that comes they will get bid on - makes me cringe cause I hope the NE stretch won't have one poorly designed bridge by a crappy bidder...stoney tr group raised the standard high

save the bird's eye view pics of the road onto your computer while you can!

60th ave ne can be seen at 1:25 of this vid:
6X3AhqGgpCM

[mersar]

I also found out that their not responsible for building 60th ave ne or additional lanes.

They signed a 20 year lease however, and in it if I'm not mistaken said they would be on the hook for maintenance [and upgrades?]. Must be a sweet deal if all they'll have to do is paint new lines on the road every few years for the $20m/year or w/e they'll be receiving. This is news to me that they won't build 60th ave or additional lanes, further when the time for that comes they will get bid on - makes me cringe cause I hope the NE stretch won't have one poorly designed bridge by a crappy bidder...stoney tr group raised the standard high

The maintenance involves a bit more then just painting the lines every few years. STG also is responsible for snow removal, pothole patching, repaving (which will be needed at least once in the term of the contract) etc, for the NE but also the maintenance of the NW stretch for the next 30 years. Similar to how whoever wins the SE leg will be responsible for the SE plus Deerfoot maintenance.

[korzym]

The maintenance involves a bit more then just painting the lines every few years. STG also is responsible for snow removal, pothole patching, repaving (which will be needed at least once in the term of the contract) etc, for the NE but also the maintenance of the NW stretch for the next 30 years. Similar to how whoever wins the SE leg will be responsible for the SE plus Deerfoot maintenance.
See thats why I think the website, as crappy as it is, shouldn't be taken down. It was nice that they put up traffic alerts and the like when they were building it. Obviously this is a money thing, and I doubt that site got a lot of internet traffic

[Oliver Klozov]

:previous: I travelled Canmore to Strathmore and return on Saturday. Naturally I took Stoney both ways but I did stop at Costco off Sarcee on the return trip. Is that ever convenient now.

Anyway, I noticed that snowplow/sanding trucks that were on the NW section were Carmacks. I had seen a Carmacks pickup stopped along the NE section previously. If I'm not mistaken, Carmacks also has the current maintenance contract for Deerfoot. I would expect that they will be the maintenance partner for whoever gets the SE 3P contract.

[mersar]

:previous: I travelled Canmore to Strathmore and return on Saturday. Naturally I took Stoney both ways but I did stop at Costco off Sarcee on the return trip. Is that ever convenient now.

Anyway, I noticed that snowplow/sanding trucks that were on the NW section were Carmacks. I had seen a Carmacks pickup stopped along the NE section previously. If I'm not mistaken, Carmacks also has the current maintenance contract for Deerfoot. I would expect that they will be the maintenance partner for whoever gets the SE 3P contract.

Yep, Carmacks does have the Deerfoot mainline contract, and were a partner on STG. And they are also a partner with a group consisting of two the STG partners (Flatiron, Graham) that are bidding on the SE. The part with the SE actually is only covering Deerfoot south of 22X, possibly I'd suspect the current contract only goes to that point, its possible that whoever has the contract for the highways south of the city may take care of it up to there.

[Corndogger]

See thats why I think the website, as crappy as it is, shouldn't be taken down. It was nice that they put up traffic alerts and the like when they were building it. Obviously this is a money thing, and I doubt that site got a lot of internet traffic

I'd like to know why the P3 websites for AHD in Edmonton are so much better than what STG did and had/have so many more updates. The SE leg of AHD had a ton of zoomable photos every month, video animations, etc. The last photo update from STG only had 3 photos! Even though the NW AHD website is clearly done by the same people who did the STG one, there appears to be a lot more photos and more info. Hopefully the SE leg of Stoney Trail will have a decent website with lots of information and frequent updates.

[Corndogger]

Yep, Carmacks does have the Deerfoot mainline contract, and were a partner on STG. And they are also a partner with a group consisting of two the STG partners (Flatiron, Graham) that are bidding on the SE. The part with the SE actually is only covering Deerfoot south of 22X, possibly I'd suspect the current contract only goes to that point, its possible that whoever has the contract for the highways south of the city may take care of it up to there.

I think that's Volker Stevin. At least I've seen a lot of their vehicles around Okotoks.

[Oliver Klozov]

I think that's Volker Stevin. At least I've seen a lot of their vehicles around Okotoks.

Yup. Volker-Stevin has the maximum 7 Contract Management Areas (CMA) which encompasses pretty much all of southern Alberta. The only CMA's around Calgary they don't have is the one to the north and Deerfoot Trail.

When privatization happened, Carmacks had the 4 CMAs around Calgary for the first 5 years and Volker-Stevin had the 4 further south and east, Med Hat, Lethbridge, Crowsnest, etc. In the second wave of contracts, the province raised the maximum from 4 CMAs to 7 and V-S took 3 away from Carmacks. The other went to the contractor further north.

Deerfoot maintenance came later.

[Mazrim]

I'd like to know why the P3 websites for AHD in Edmonton are so much better than what STG did and had/have so many more updates. The SE leg of AHD had a ton of zoomable photos every month, video animations, etc. The last photo update from STG only had 3 photos! Even though the NW AHD website is clearly done by the same people who did the STG one, there appears to be a lot more photos and more info. Hopefully the SE leg of Stoney Trail will have a decent website with lots of information and frequent updates.
I'd say they didn't bother because that sounds like a lot of effort for very few viewers relatively speaking. Construction updates are nice for people like us, but overall it's not worth the money, and they're busy enough building the road as it is to go and send off pictures constantly to the website publisher. STG's way of thinking is "if it's not specified in our contract to do so, we don't do it." It's how you save money.

[korzym]

I'd say they didn't bother because that sounds like a lot of effort for very few viewers relatively speaking. Construction updates are nice for people like us, but overall it's not worth the money, and they're busy enough building the road as it is to go and send off pictures constantly to the website publisher. STG's way of thinking is "if it's not specified in our contract to do so, we don't do it." It's how you save money.

who are you? haha..stg insider?..

Alberta and Calgary agree on ring road study


By Rick Donkers, Calgary HeraldDecember 1, 2009 11:03 AM
CALGARY - The province and the city of Calgary announced an agreement Monday on how to move forward with developing a new plan for the oft-delayed ring road around the southwest section of the city.

The memorandum of understanding sets out each government's role during the ring road planning study, according to a news release from the province.

Alberta transportation minister Luke Ouelette called the memorandum a significant step in the ring road process.

“The planning study will look at an effective solution to address the immediate traffic issues for Calgary residents and enhance connections to the provincial highway network.” Ouelette said.

This latest planning process will include a look at previous transportation studies and alignment options.

Oulette and other provincial officials have long held that a ring road should go around the city, pointing to a route along 37th Street SW and through the Weaselhead Environmental Area.

But the city is taking steps towards a tighter circle for the southwest portion of the ring by moving ahead with plans to build an interchange at 37th Street and Glenmore Trail. That project was on hold for years while the province and Tsuu T'ina negotiated the possibility of running the southwest ring road through First Nations land. That deal fell apart in the summer when band members voted against the proposal.
© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald
http://www.calgaryherald.com/Alberta+Calgary+agree+ring+road+study/2289949/story.html

[Corndogger]

I'd say they didn't bother because that sounds like a lot of effort for very few viewers relatively speaking. Construction updates are nice for people like us, but overall it's not worth the money, and they're busy enough building the road as it is to go and send off pictures constantly to the website publisher. STG's way of thinking is "if it's not specified in our contract to do so, we don't do it." It's how you save money.

The province should have made this a condition of the contract. Also, it's not a question of whether or not the website gets a lot of traffic but one of accountability. We're paying for these projects and we should be able to track the progress of them. I'd also say that the province itself should be given a good kick in the butt for their even worse performance in this area. Just one more reason to clean house come next election.

[Wentworth]

^^ So the city is going ahead with building an interchange at 37th and Glenmore without any decision on routing of the future ring road?

I thought they were aiming to have some sort of decision by the end of November?

[Mazrim]

who are you? haha..stg insider?..
I worked on the NE Ring Road so I've come to know how they work. It's efficient and hectic at the same time, but it's how they come in on time and on budget. (and no, I didn't work directly for STG...I doubt I'd have time to even read these forums if I did!)

[jsbertram]

^^ So the city is going ahead with building an interchange at 37th and Glenmore without any decision on routing of the future ring road?

I thought they were aiming to have some sort of decision by the end of November?

The 'decison' was a memorandum of understanding that City and Prov would work together to look at previous ideas and any new ideas for building the SW Ring Road, rather than each doing their own study & then later trying to merge their ideas together into a common plan.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Alberta+Calgary+agree+ring+road+study/2289949/story.html

Prov Transport SW Ring Road site:
http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/4043.htm

The 37th / Glenmore interchange upgrade is still going ahead, but 'with provisions for the SW Ring Road'

[You Need A Thneed]

Drove the ring road again last night, first from Country Hills Blvd E to Beddington- then Beddington back to Metis.

A couple of thoughts:

Why didn't the NE section get flat lensed streetlights? Those things that they have for the NE section are horrible for light pollution. I'm very surprised they were allowed. They should replace them all immediately.

The Metis Trail interchange just is massive for the current amount of traffic that goes over it. Three lanes going northbound over the bridge. I understand that once the area is built out, that will be necessary, but it's mostly abandoned right now. I drove North from the interchange to 144th Ave, does anyone know if 144th Ave west of Metis turns towards the north and goes past Cross Iron Mills? Also, it hadn't occured to me until yesterday that Metis Trail will have a railway crossing there at 144th Ave.

The cloverleaf ramps at some interchanges - like Country Hills Blvd E - almost seem unnecessarily large. Better than too small I suppose.

I laugh at the bridge clearance signs on the tall Deerfoot bridges - something like "10.6 M". What's the point of putting up a sign like that when the bridge right beside is obviously much lower?

[mersar]

The Metis Trail interchange just is massive for the current amount of traffic that goes over it. Three lanes going northbound over the bridge. I understand that once the area is built out, that will be necessary, but it's mostly abandoned right now. I drove North from the interchange to 144th Ave, does anyone know if 144th Ave west of Metis turns towards the north and goes past Cross Iron Mills?

It used to come out on the service road that runs parallel to the QE2, with the recent road work it may not anymore though. Once Metis is built all the way north to 566 it will be a much better option.

Also, it hadn't occured to me until yesterday that Metis Trail will have a railway crossing there at 144th Ave.

A very, very low usage track fortunately. I've only ever seen a train on it once, and it was only a half dozen cars

[Seadood]

Drove the ring road again last night, first from Country Hills Blvd E to Beddington- then Beddington back to Metis.

The Metis Trail interchange just is massive for the current amount of traffic that goes over it. Three lanes going northbound over the bridge. I understand that once the area is built out, that will be necessary, but it's mostly abandoned right now.

Would there be a possibility that this might be a LRT ROW? Since it was a P3 the city might have put their 2 cents in and requested a bridge to accommodate, since it wasn't on their dime.

[You Need A Thneed]

Would there be a possibility that this might be a LRT ROW? Since it was a P3 the ciy migth have put their 2 cents in and requested a bridge to accommodate, since it wasn't on their dime.

No, the LRT right of way was originally at the future 60th Street Interchange, but now I think its where 36th Street is (west of Metis)

I have no doubt that the Metis interchange will eventually need to be that big, it's just that, right now, it serves the people of Skyview Ranch, and the few businesses North of Stoney.

[freeweed]

Why didn't the NE section get flat lensed streetlights? Those things that they have for the NE section are horrible for light pollution. I'm very surprised they were allowed. They should replace them all immediately.

Agreed, but I don't think the province has quite the light pollution regulation that Calgary does.

I drove North from the interchange to 144th Ave, does anyone know if 144th Ave west of Metis turns towards the north and goes past Cross Iron Mills?

I think so. I drove out of CIM a few days ago and there were signs saying "alternate route to Calgary", as opposed to going up to Balzac. It's a new road that detours around a little, and you end up on this really crappy gravel road which eventually hits Metis, right by the tracks. I didn't even realize where the heck I was until getting to Metis/Stoney. Tons of new roadwork going on and I imagine this new road from CIM will connect to Metis eventually.

[Mazrim]

Why didn't the NE section get flat lensed streetlights? Those things that they have for the NE section are horrible for light pollution. I'm very surprised they were allowed. They should replace them all immediately.
It met the specs for the ring road, so there's technically nothing wrong with it though. I mentioned this earlier in the thread, but it was likely cheaper to use those lights, plus the light spread they have allows the ring road to be lit from the (wide) median.


The Metis Trail interchange just is massive for the current amount of traffic that goes over it. Three lanes going northbound over the bridge. I understand that once the area is built out, that will be necessary, but it's mostly abandoned right now. I drove North from the interchange to 144th Ave, does anyone know if 144th Ave west of Metis turns towards the north and goes past Cross Iron Mills? Also, it hadn't occured to me until yesterday that Metis Trail will have a railway crossing there at 144th Ave.
It was built to ultimate right away because of the proposed industrial/commerical development in the area directly to the South. It was a huge development, but I bet much of it being held off with teh economy the way it is.


The cloverleaf ramps at some interchanges - like Country Hills Blvd E - almost seem unnecessarily large. Better than too small I suppose.
This may sound funny, but this is to normal design standards...almost all the time you find them building ramps to sub design standards with really slow ramp speeds. We're so used to tight loops that it's like a miracle. There's a reason the TUC juts out so far at the interchanges!


I laugh at the bridge clearance signs on the tall Deerfoot bridges - something like "10.6 M". What's the point of putting up a sign like that when the bridge right beside is obviously much lower?
No one's really sure about this one haha. We all laugh at it. I think they took the "bridges need clearance signs" comment too literally. That being said it was put on the bridges when the girders were fabricated so it's not like they went out of their way to do it.

[para transit fellow]

It used to come out on the service road that runs parallel to the QE2, with the recent road work it may not anymore though. Once Metis is built all the way north to 566 it will be a much better option.

144th Ave still goes westward to the old service road (range road 295?). I was out that way a week ago and saw that the deck for the railroad crossing was poured and awaiting lights and bells. Just north of the crossing, range road 293 was paved to Crossiron Drive (township rd 261) and thought i saw lines marked...

I think it was still short of a toplift layer (maybe this spring?)

A very, very low usage track fortunately. I've only ever seen a train on it once, and it was only a half dozen cars

The track is solely for the sulpher facility at the gas plant. Biggest potential problem is that trains will block the crossing as they shunt cars (remember 50th ave and ogden road?)

[Oliver Klozov]

The track is solely for the sulpher facility at the gas plant. Biggest potential problem is that trains will block the crossing as they shunt cars (remember 50th ave and ogden road?)

Sulphur unit trains are normally 112-114 cars. That is far too long (~7000') to be assembled on the spur. I'm not sure but I would bet that the 6-axle locomotives that are used for road freights are not allowed on the spur (too heavy). That leaves the 4-axle GP-38s to pull shorter cuts of cars out of the plant and then assemble a unit train at a place called Petro which is a siding near where the spur joins the Red Deer subdivision.

[para transit fellow]

Sulphur unit trains are normally 112-114 cars. That is far too long (~7000') to be assembled on the spur. I'm not sure but I would bet that the 6-axle locomotives that are used for road freights are not allowed on the spur (too heavy). That leaves the 4-axle GP-38s to pull shorter cuts of cars out of the plant and then assemble a unit train at a place called Petro which is a siding near where the spur joins the Red Deer subdivision.


update: I was at the County offices today. Apparently the road is functional to Crossiron drive. The only thing holding up the road is the new railroad crossing which lacks power for the power to the crossing signal lights.

So a new Malzac/ metis trail route is waiting on Fortis Alberta's ability to string some wire.

[eggbert]

I was driving up past the new ped bridge this morning by Royal Oak, the sign changed again saying delays up to Dec 15th now. I think that's like the 5th time change I've seen now since the original October 20th date. On the bright side there was progress, the handrail is up for the southbound lanes now.

[Corndogger]

The province has been saying that the cost of the NW leg of Stoney Trail is $460 million. This figure has been used since about Day 1 if I remember correctly and clearly doesn't include the new and expanded interchanges. Is there a place where they list the costs of these other projects? I've looked on the AB Transportation site but had no luck.

[YYCguys]

How is it possible for the recently announced Harvest Hills/Centre Street interchange to be started in the spring and finished in the fall of next year, or am I totally missing something here?

[mersar]

How is it possible for the recently announced Harvest Hills/Centre Street interchange to be started in the spring and finished in the fall of next year, or am I totally missing something here?

The earth work is all done, the detour is already in use and its only 2 fairly simple bridges. Essentially they just need to dig a few holes for the footings and start pouring concrete. The tuscany/scenic acres interchange took about as long to do once you take out the earth work for it

[freeweed]

How is it possible for the recently announced Harvest Hills/Centre Street interchange to be started in the spring and finished in the fall of next year, or am I totally missing something here?

Crowchild/Sarcee started in April and finished in November, so it's certainly possible. It's only in the past couple of years that road construction is taking 3x as long as necessary. And, as mersar mentions, earthworks are mostly done.

[mooky]

I also remember 18th Street and Glenmore a few years back being done in record time, like one construction season, so it can be done, just some recent construction projects seem to be in a time-freeze be they NW ring road or down town LRT platforms....

[You Need A Thneed]

Earthworks is mostly done, the detour road is done, construction can start right away on the actual structure, that's how it can be done in one season.

[mersar]

Crowchild interchange has 2 of the abutments for the east ramp bridges poured and the forms removed already, the other 2 have forms in place. They've also got forms laying on the ground beside the pier for the ramp bridge on the west side of the interchange. Both abutments for that bridge have the footings finished now, so won't be long until they setup the forms and pour them either.

[Oliver Klozov]

Most of the construction delays in the past couple of years are attributable to material supply shortages, especially steel.

[Corndogger]

Crowchild interchange has 2 of the abutments for the east ramp bridges poured and the forms removed already, the other 2 have forms in place. They've also got forms laying on the ground beside the pier for the ramp bridge on the west side of the interchange. Both abutments for that bridge have the footings finished now, so won't be long until they setup the forms and pour them either.

Sounds like your saying there's no reason why most of this interchange couldn't open by next summer.

[freeweed]

For all my kvetching about the long-delayed pedestrian bridge, this morning they have the lane detours changed, implying they're going to continue working on it today.

Some damn brave souls willing to be up there in these temperatures.

[Mazrim]

It actually doesn't feel too bad when the sun is shining. I wouldn't want to be out there if it wasn't sunny though!

[Misterspiffy]

I have a question that maybe someone can answer here; on Hwy 22X at Deerfoot, 16 Avenue at Deerfoot, and at one point along Deerfoot the signage for northbound Deerfoot include 'Red Deer'. But Stoney Trail at Deerfoot, the northbound Deerfoot exits are signed with 'Edmonton'. I have also noticed they have made the same change on Hwy 2 exits on Yankee Valley Road in Airdrie; it is signed Edmonton now and not Red Deer. Why the inconsistency?

[Corndogger]

I have a question that maybe someone can answer here; on Hwy 22X at Deerfoot, 16 Avenue at Deerfoot, and at one point along Deerfoot the signage for northbound Deerfoot include 'Red Deer'. But Stoney Trail at Deerfoot, the northbound Deerfoot exits are signed with 'Edmonton'. I have also noticed they have made the same change on Hwy 2 exits on Yankee Valley Road in Airdrie; it is signed Edmonton now and not Red Deer. Why the inconsistency?

I can't answer your question but I can provide a link to the manual the Province claims they use for highway guides and information signs. Jump to p. 73 of the PDF file and start looking from there--lots of diagrams. If you look at point 1 on that page (top of column 2) you'll see the following statement.

1. Destinations ‐ these are the major traffic generators, terminal points or nodes along a particular route. They are typically centres which are of
importance or interest to the majority of motorists and usually are separated
by a considerable distance.

The way I read that "rule" is that not only Red Deer should be included but Airdrie as well on the signs that are in Calgary. I'm sure Airdrie qualifies based on the above. Maybe they are working on new rules that haven't been published but to not mention places that have about 40K and 100K people, respectively, doesn't make much sense to me.

http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType233/Production/Guide_info.pdf

[You Need A Thneed]

The construction tender for the Harvest Hills Blvd bridge over Stoney closes on Dec 17 (unless it's extended).

It's for the eastern of the two eventual bridges only. So, in the future, another bridge will have to be built, and then either at the same time or later than that, a bridge for the LRT will have to be built in between them.

[Mazrim]

I have a question that maybe someone can answer here; on Hwy 22X at Deerfoot, 16 Avenue at Deerfoot, and at one point along Deerfoot the signage for northbound Deerfoot include 'Red Deer'. But Stoney Trail at Deerfoot, the northbound Deerfoot exits are signed with 'Edmonton'. I have also noticed they have made the same change on Hwy 2 exits on Yankee Valley Road in Airdrie; it is signed Edmonton now and not Red Deer. Why the inconsistency?

It's a standard set by the government basically only for Highway 2 to be honest. Edmonton does the same thing.

ie. Street View of Anthony Henday EB at Gateway Blvd. (http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=edmonton&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Edmonton,+Division+No.+11,+Alberta&ll=53.435668,-113.502867&spn=0,359.980795&z=16&layer=c&cbll=53.435595,-113.503373&panoid=O7GZwZD8x49HFZsCDOFQlg&cbp=12,80.13,,0,13.75)

Most of the time you will get cities like Red Deer or Airdrie in other situations. 22X and Deerfoot after the ring road goes through there will reference Fort Macleod only because there's really nothing else south of Calgary in terms of big cities.

[srperrycgy]

Most of the time you will get cities like Red Deer or Airdrie in other situations. 22X and Deerfoot after the ring road goes through there will reference Fort Macleod only because there's really nothing else south of Calgary in terms of big cities.

Hmmm....I seem to remember a reasonably big city south of Calgary that I went to university in....what was it called again? oh yeah....Lethbridge. :rolleyes:

[bookermorgan]

:previous: South...then east on another highway

[mersar]

Hmmm....I seem to remember a reasonably big city south of Calgary that I went to university in....what was it called again? oh yeah....Lethbridge. :rolleyes:

Yeah, though there are a few signs that do mention it once you are south of High River.

[srperrycgy]

Yeah, though there are a few signs that do mention it once you are south of High River.

Yep. But it's time for signage to be overhauled and made consistent (control cities, clarity, etc.) province-wide.

[Mazrim]

Hmmm....I seem to remember a reasonably big city south of Calgary that I went to university in....what was it called again? oh yeah....Lethbridge. :rolleyes:

I would agree with you on this except that Lethbridge isn't on Highway 2.

Also, in the last two years Alberta did overhaul it's signage standard to be very clear and easy to use, so all new signage will be more consistent. That started with Anthony Henday Drive.

[eternallyme]

I do agree that Lethbridge - and not Fort Macleod - should be the control city on Highway 2 south of Calgary, since it is a destination city for far more people heading south.

The control city order on the CANAMEX corridor (regardless of highway designation):

Dawson Creek (BC) <--> Grande Prairie <--> Edmonton <--> Red Deer <--> Calgary <--> Lethbridge <--> Great Falls (MT)

[dmuzika]

I do agree that Lethbridge - and not Fort Macleod - should be the control city on Highway 2 south of Calgary, since it is a destination city for far more people heading south.

The control city order on the CANAMEX corridor (regardless of highway designation):

Dawson Creek (BC) <--> Grande Prairie <--> Edmonton <--> Red Deer <--> Calgary <--> Lethbridge <--> Great Falls (MT)

I 100% agree and would take it one step further, I think the CANAMEX Corridor should be redesignated as Highway 2. The Trans Canada and Yellowhead Highways have constant numbers through Alberta (actually, all of Western Canada) and I think the CANAMEX should as well. The non-CANAMEX sections of Hwy 2 could be redesignated as follows:

- Hwy 2 south of Fort Macleod could become Hwy 4
- Hwy 2 between Edmonton and Falher (Hwy 49) could be come Hwy 34 (unused number)
- Hwy 2 between Falher and Hwy 35 near Grimshaw, along with Hwy 49 between Valleyview & Hwy 2, could be come Hwy 35
- Hwy 2 between Hwy 35 and Grande Prairie could become Hwy 40

Could take it one step further and try to convince BC to renumber the Alaska Hwy (Hwy 97) as Hwy 2.

[AB Born]

I've often wondered why the overhead signage doesn't have lights on it. A number of Canadian cities are like this, but a lot of American cities have lit overhead signage.

[Mazrim]

I've often wondered why the overhead signage doesn't have lights on it. A number of Canadian cities are like this, but a lot of American cities have lit overhead signage.

It's not necessary as it has Retro-Reflective sheeting. Your headlights do all the work the lighting installed on old signage does. Old signs on Deerfoot for example still have lights because they have no Retro-Reflective sheeting installed on them. 16th Avenue's signage have button copy installed on the lettering to help make them more visible, but that's it.


Could take it one step further and try to convince BC to renumber the Alaska Hwy (Hwy 97) as Hwy 2.
I would be really sad if that ever happened. Highway 97 is a big part of my childhood! It wouldn't be the same if they made it a lousy 2. :(

[eternallyme]

I 100% agree and would take it one step further, I think the CANAMEX Corridor should be redesignated as Highway 2. The Trans Canada and Yellowhead Highways have constant numbers through Alberta (actually, all of Western Canada) and I think the CANAMEX should as well. The non-CANAMEX sections of Hwy 2 could be redesignated as follows:

- Hwy 2 south of Fort Macleod could become Hwy 4
- Hwy 2 between Edmonton and Falher (Hwy 49) could be come Hwy 34 (unused number)
- Hwy 2 between Falher and Hwy 35 near Grimshaw, along with Hwy 49 between Valleyview & Hwy 2, could be come Hwy 35
- Hwy 2 between Hwy 35 and Grande Prairie could become Hwy 40

Could take it one step further and try to convince BC to renumber the Alaska Hwy (Hwy 97) as Hwy 2.

I was thinking Highway 15, with other changes:

Highway 2 south of Fort Macleod would become Highway 4 (designation switch)
Highway 2 from Edmonton to High Prairie would remain Highway 2, as would Highway 2A west of High Prairie
Highway 2 from High Prairie to Falher would become Highway 49
Highway 2 from Falher to Grimshaw and Highway 49 south of Falher would become Highway 35
Highway 2 from Grimshaw to Grande Prairie would become Highway 40 (and 2A near Grimshaw would become 40X)
Highway 15 (existing) from Fort Saskatchewan eastward would become Highway 37
Highway 15 into Edmonton from Fort Saskatchewan would become Highway 37X
Highways 3, 16 and 216 would be co-signed with 15, while 43 and existing 4 would be replaced

[You Need A Thneed]

It's not necessary as it has Retro-Reflective sheeting. Your headlights do all the work the lighting installed on old signage does. Old signs on Deerfoot for example still have lights because they have no Retro-Reflective sheeting installed on them. 16th Avenue's signage have button copy installed on the lettering to help make them more visible, but that's it.


Exactly, there's no need for lighting on the signs that have the retroreflective sheeting, they are brighter from just headlights that any old of older signs are with the lighting.

I wonder when the province/city is going to replace all of the older signage to meet the new signage standards. It wouldn't cost a lot to do Deerfoot and the main roads that way.

[Mazrim]

I wonder when the province/city is going to replace all of the older signage to meet the new signage standards. It wouldn't cost a lot to do Deerfoot and the main roads that way.

Probably not for a while. They'd probably have to replace most of the old structures for the overhead signs as well as installing new overhead structures for currently ground mounted signage. You can see them already replacing a couple structures on 16th Avenue at Barlow and 52nd interchanges. The old ones are old standard design loads and the new panels are much bigger usually (if they're following Alberta Transportation's new standard).

Deerfoot really needs a sweeping review of it's existing signage and a big update, because too many people get easily lost on there and miss exits or make dangerous lane changes right at the exit due to poor advance signage.

[Beltliner]

I 100% agree and would take it one step further, I think the CANAMEX Corridor should be redesignated as Highway 2. The Trans Canada and Yellowhead Highways have constant numbers through Alberta (actually, all of Western Canada) and I think the CANAMEX should as well. The non-CANAMEX sections of Hwy 2 could be redesignated as follows:

- Hwy 2 south of Fort Macleod could become Hwy 4
- Hwy 2 between Edmonton and Falher (Hwy 49) could be come Hwy 34 (unused number)
- Hwy 2 between Falher and Hwy 35 near Grimshaw, along with Hwy 49 between Valleyview & Hwy 2, could be come Hwy 35
- Hwy 2 between Hwy 35 and Grande Prairie could become Hwy 40

Could take it one step further and try to convince BC to renumber the Alaska Hwy (Hwy 97) as Hwy 2.

Highway 2 south out of Fort Macleod could just as easily be re-gazetted as AB-89. The number's open, and the road is pretty much a northward extension of US-89 from Montana in any event. It just means the exit numbers of a re-gazetted AB-2 to Lethbridge and Coutts would have to be calibrated in miles, is all.

[Oliver Klozov]

I was thinking Highway 15, with other changes:

Highway 2 south of Fort Macleod would become Highway 4 (designation switch)

I like the idea of Highway 15 to match with I-15 in Montana but it likely would never fly; there's just too much history with "Highway 2".

Hwy 2 south of Fort MacLeod should become Hwy 89
- matches up with US 89 in Montana
- old Hwy 4 is too near to re-use for this stretch of Hwy 2


Highway 2 from Edmonton to High Prairie would remain Highway 2, as would Highway 2A west of High Prairie
Highway 2 from High Prairie to Falher would become Highway 49
Highway 2 from Falher to Grimshaw and Highway 49 south of Falher would become Highway 35

Falher isn't on Hwy 2 but I think I know what you mean - Donnelly Corner. One problem with extending Hwy 35 beyond Grimshaw is they make a big deal of Grimshaw being Mile '0'.

The stretch of 49 from Valleyview to to its junction with 2A used to be Hwy 34 not that long ago along with Valleyview to Grande Prairie. That could be used for Valleyview thru Peace River to Grimshaw.

While we're in the area, why not change 49 to Hwy 55 like the eastern part of the Woods and Water route. 55 could then be the only designation for the old Hwy 2 from Donnelly to Athabaska where the existing 55 ends/starts.

Hwy 2 from Athabaska into Edmonton could become any unused number.

Highway 2 from Grimshaw to Grande Prairie would become Highway 40 (and 2A near Grimshaw would become 40X)

Yup


Highway 15 (existing) from Fort Saskatchewan eastward would become Highway 37
Highway 15 into Edmonton from Fort Saskatchewan would become Highway 37X
Highways 3, 16 and 216 would be co-signed with 15, while 43 and existing 4 would be replaced

I would prefer re-designating Hwy 28A (Gibbons to Hwy 15) to Hwy 63 and then continue using 63 into Edmonton. Hwy 28 north from Gibbons would have co-designation with 63 until they split again. This (all of 63) would actually be a good major route to re-use the Hwy 4 designation - Edmonton to Fort Mackay and eventually beyond.

The short stretch of 15 from 28A to 37 could be 37X.

[dmuzika]

Falher isn't on Hwy 2 but I think I know what you mean - Donnelly Corner. One problem with extending Hwy 35 beyond Grimshaw is they make a big deal of Grimshaw being Mile '0'.

The stretch of 49 from Valleyview to to its junction with 2A used to be Hwy 34 not that long ago along with Valleyview to Grande Prairie. That could be used for Valleyview thru Peace River to Grimshaw.

While we're in the area, why not change 49 to Hwy 55 like the eastern part of the Woods and Water route. 55 could then be the only designation for the old Hwy 2 from Donnelly to Athabaska where the existing 55 ends/starts.

Hwy 2 from Athabaska into Edmonton could become any unused number.

Highways 49, 2, and 35 from Valleyview to NWT are regarded as part of the National Highway System and probably should be numbered as one constant number. Even if Hwy 35 extends further south, Grimshaw could still retain its status as being Mile 0 of the MacKenzie Hwy, much like how Dawson Creek is Mile 0 of the Alaska Hwy even though its located on the middle of Hwy 97. Hwy 2A near Grimshaw could be renumbered as Hwy 35A.

I origionally though Hwy 55 could stretch from SK to BC across Hwys 2 & 49, however the current Hwy 2 from Donnelly to Athabasca does serve as a major alternate route between the Peace Country and Edmonton.

[Oliver Klozov]

Highways 49, 2, and 35 from Valleyview to NWT are regarded as part of the National Highway System and probably should be numbered as one constant number. Even if Hwy 35 extends further south, Grimshaw could still retain its status as being Mile 0 of the MacKenzie Hwy, much like how Dawson Creek is Mile 0 of the Alaska Hwy even though its located on the middle of Hwy 97. Hwy 2A near Grimshaw could be renumbered as Hwy 35A.


Okay.

I origionally though Hwy 55 could stretch from SK to BC across Hwys 2 & 49, however the current Hwy 2 from Donnelly to Athabasca does serve as a major alternate route between the Peace Country and Edmonton.

Donnelly to Hondo maybe. From Hondo south to Edmonton that "alternate route" is Hwy 44 down to Hwy 16 and then east to Edmonton. Other than local traffic, Hwy 2 from Hondo to Athabaska would mostly be traffic continuing east on Hwy 55 and vice versa.

[mersar]

Noticed this morning that Stoney is finally back open with 2 lanes each direction north of Crowchild. Crews seem to be taking this week off on the interchange, the one crane they have there was lowered and all the equipment hasn't moved since last week (typically they've left the crane boom raised over the weekends)

[Oliver Klozov]

I headed out Boxing Day morning for a trip from Canmore to Edmonton. By my side was the new Garmin GPS I got for my wife for Christmas. (Had to figure out how it worked before I could teach her ;) ). After entering an Edmonton address, it wanted me to take the old way to bypass Calgary and take Morley Road from the TCH over to 1A and then 22 and 567 over to Airdrie. I noted the estimated time of arrival in Edmonton as I ignored the GPS and passed the Morley Road exit. After recalculating, the estimated TOA went up 3 minutes. I was a bit surprised that the unit did not want me to exit at the Jumping Pound Petrocan and take 22 north. It wanted me to take 201 Stoney Trail!! :tup:

My hopes were soon dashed that the unit had the new portions of Stoney Trail in it. It then wanted me to exit Stoney at Nose Hill, Nose Hill to Country Hills and then over to Deerfoot.

After ignoring that, it wanted Crowchild to Nose Hill, etc. :koko:

After ignoring that, it finally wanted Country Hills. And that's where Stoney ended. So after driving through the fields :D , "recalculating, drive to highlighted route", "recalculating, drive to highlighted route", etc., I finally reached the traffic jam trying to enter Hwy 2! :hell:

The lineup to enter Crossiron Mills was backed up to the south of the onramp from Stoney. :hell: :hell:

After finally getting to merge into that lineup and waiting for a chance to change into the centre lane, the unit's estimated TOA is now 6 minutes less than it was when I passed Morley Road. Considering that I had to stop at all 3 red lights at Nose Hill, Crowchild and HH, and the 7-8 minutes to get on Hwy 2, Stoney will deliver significant time savings.

[korzym]

yeah someone put up a link to googe maps [not earth], showing the traffic patterns and at the time the #2 was showing up as red for northbound traffic when I checked. Assumed it was the mall and you confirmed it..

So now you need to get a data phone with internet and then you'll be set ;)

[dmuzika]

I headed out Boxing Day morning for a trip from Canmore to Edmonton. By my side was the new Garmin GPS I got for my wife for Christmas. (Had to figure out how it worked before I could teach her ;) ). After entering an Edmonton address, it wanted me to take the old way to bypass Calgary and take Morley Road from the TCH over to 1A and then 22 and 567 over to Airdrie. I noted the estimated time of arrival in Edmonton as I ignored the GPS and passed the Morley Road exit. After recalculating, the estimated TOA went up 3 minutes. I was a bit surprised that the unit did not want me to exit at the Jumping Pound Petrocan and take 22 north. It wanted me to take 201 Stoney Trail!! :tup:

My hopes were soon dashed that the unit had the new portions of Stoney Trail in it. It then wanted me to exit Stoney at Nose Hill, Nose Hill to Country Hills and then over to Deerfoot.

After ignoring that, it wanted Crowchild to Nose Hill, etc. :koko:

After ignoring that, it finally wanted Country Hills. And that's where Stoney ended. So after driving through the fields :D , "recalculating, drive to highlighted route", "recalculating, drive to highlighted route", etc., I finally reached the traffic jam trying to enter Hwy 2! :hell:

The lineup to enter Crossiron Mills was backed up to the south of the onramp from Stoney. :hell: :hell:

After finally getting to merge into that lineup and waiting for a chance to change into the centre lane, the unit's estimated TOA is now 6 minutes less than it was when I passed Morley Road. Considering that I had to stop at all 3 red lights at Nose Hill, Crowchild and HH, and the 7-8 minutes to get on Hwy 2, Stoney will deliver significant time savings.

Unfortunatly I can't say I'm surprised. I was talking to a friend who works at Future Shop and sells GPS units and he was saying it takes up to 3 years for GPS companies to update their maps and include some the roads (i.e. Stoney Trail or some of the new subdivisions).

[freeweed]

People who rely on GPS to drive very simple routes deserve the hell that is continually reported to me by GPS users.

Call me old fashioned, but maps aren't that hard, and knowing at least the major routes in the city you live in should be second-nature to anyone who claims they're qualified to drive a vehicle. It frightens me how many people get completely lost when the GPS-offered route has the slightest problem. They literally cannot navigate a block over for a detour.

[yeeg]

People who rely on GPS to drive very simple routes deserve the hell that is continually reported to me by GPS users.

Call me old fashioned, but maps aren't that hard, and knowing at least the major routes in the city you live in should be second-nature to anyone who claims they're qualified to drive a vehicle. It frightens me how many people get completely lost when the GPS-offered route has the slightest problem. They literally cannot navigate a block over for a detour.

Yo hit the nail on the head. I own a pizza shop and always get people who want driving jobs and say they have GPS. Fact is the people who use maps are faster than those who rely on technology and I rarely hire those drivers who use GPS. IF you cant read a map, then how are you going to be efficient??

[Stang]

^^^ I find GPS units to be a good tool, but as other have mentioned, you need to be able to think for yourself a bit. And a backup map will never let you down. I would say that my GPS was damn near indispensable in the UK when I had to worry about the simple things like staying on the correct side of the road. And not having my wife/navigator getting annoyed at having to provide directions was worth every penny.

Stoney Trail goes up to Sarcee on the latest Navteq (Garmin's map provider) update. It'll probably be another year until we see the rest of it show up.

I believe that Garmin gives you one free map update within 60 days of purchasing the unit (or more correctly, when it first acquires a satellite signal). So Oliver Klozov, you may want to wait until that's nearly up before updating, just in case they get Stoney on there. Navteq.com shows you the most current map on their web site.

I subscribed to the unlimited map updates as I could write it off as a business expense. Updating the maps is nice, but you're essentially at the mercy of when Navteq decides to update roads like Stoney on their maps.

[bestnickever]

They literally cannot navigate a block over for a detour.

A couple years ago my father in law drove out here from BC. He stayed with us for a week or so and was going on and on about his GPS...how fantastic it was etc. He's also one to boast about his driving abilities, sense of direction, etc., etc. (he's 75, full of bullshit, and a terrible driver to boot). Anyway, one day he was off to visit an old friend in Douglasdale. We're in Queensland. He entered the address in the GPS and it led him out of Queensland to Bow Bottom, via the bus shortcut. Yes, the very same shortcut that is distinctly marked CITY TRANSIT BUS ONLY!! He said he was just doing what the GPS told him...all the while following a bus!! It led him right into the trap despite the warnings! The friggin thing could have led him over a washed out bridge, and he woulda just kept chuggin' along I guess!! I guess being from out of town it's somewhat understandable, after all locals attempt it regularly.....but... very scary knowing someone like that is on the road. He was kind of humbled for a day or so. It cost him a couple hun with a fine and a tow and we didn't hear much more about that damn GPS for the rest of the time he was here.!

[Stang]

Classic story, Bestnickever!! I wondered how people end up in those things. ;)
Another reason why GPS units can't be taken as the gospel!

[Misterspiffy]

I just checked Google Maps by asking for directions similar to Bestnickever's post, and yes, it does lead you through the vehicle trap. Although GPS systems do tell you to pay attention to all signage and obey all traffic laws, it would be nice for them to make a correction on these situations.

[tmjr]

Hi all,

Does anyone know the timeframe for adding proper access to Stoney trail from Shaganappi? It seems to me if they were to just add the EB-SB and NB-EB ramps, it would make Stoney a lot more acccessible and useful for people in the 'middle' northwest. For example, I could use Stoney to take my parents who live in Varsity to the airport...

Hey! I know: traffic circles on either side of the Shaganappi overpass :D

Thanks,
T.

[freeweed]

Does anyone know the timeframe for adding proper access to Stoney trail from Shaganappi? It seems to me if they were to just add the EB-SB and NB-EB ramps, it would make Stoney a lot more acccessible and useful for people in the 'middle' northwest. For example, I could use Stoney to take my parents who live in Varsity to the airport...

I hear ya; from what I've heard it's potentially years away.

To be honest, if you're coming from Varsity anyway, just take Crowchild west for a couple of km and take Sarcee to Stoney. Might add a few km but is MUCH faster than any other route through the city. Really, anyone who would use Shag very much could easily duck over to Sarcee or Beddington - might be a few extra minutes but still way better than before Stoney.

[You Need A Thneed]

I think whatever happens with the rest of Shaganappi is going to wait until the city figures out what becomes of Shaganappi North of Stoney. Is it going to be a major road? Will it even exist at all? That'll determine whether it'll get the full treatment as originally proposed, or just get a signallized interchange similar to Sarcee.

[Corndogger]

The province has finally put up an update about the Stoney Trail/Crowchild Trail interchange!

The project is apparently 60% complete (Fall 2011).

Full update at http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/stcrow-u13.pdf

[korzym]

The province has finally put up an update about the Stoney Trail/Crowchild Trail interchange!

The project is apparently 60% complete (Fall 2011).

Full update at http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/stcrow-u13.pdf
vids now updated. I added a new song for the main vid:

5fRy2RxPu4s

6X3AhqGgpCM

[crooked rain]

//deleted my comment - my gripe about the merge lane from Stoney to NB QE2 was answered in the Calgary roads thread//

[mersar]

They've finally got all 4 abutments for the offramp bridge at Crowchild poured, as well as they've been working on the rebar for the piers for the SB to EB ramp as well. No sign of work on the LRT bridge on the east side, the main LRT bridge looks to be getting quite far along though. And only 2 months left until Rocky Ridge Road is closed off and hopefully we'll see some signs of things really picking up.

[SmokWawelski]

I wrote to Stantec about dual turning lanes from South bound Stoney Trail onto east bound Crowchild Trail. Their response was that they are making arrangements for dual turn.......yeah :):):):):):)

[freeweed]

I noticed someone walking their dog on the pedestrian bridge between Arbour Lake and Royal Oak the other day. Not sure if that means it's "officially" open or if he just wandered through. The place still looks like a construction site with equipment and materials everywhere, but there hasn't been much activity lately so who knows.

Only 5 months late...

[mersar]

I wrote to Stantec about dual turning lanes from South bound Stoney Trail onto east bound Crowchild Trail. Their response was that they are making arrangements for dual turn.......yeah :):):):):):)

Unfortunately the bridge they appear to be building doesn't look to be wide enough for dual lanes unless there is zero shoulder, which usually isn't the case. At least it wouldn't be too hard to connect onto Crowchild if it actually is possible, since they add a third lane just before the merge, just change it so the merge joins on and becomes that third lane instead and thats set.

[SmokWawelski]

Mersar I think you got me wrong. I'm just happy that they will have a temporary dual left lane turn at the current intersection, until the whole thing is built.

[para transit fellow]

Looks like Shagganappi and stoney trail is going to become a full interchange this year:

http://www.gov.ab.ca/acn/201002/27829D789531A-B06E-5174-BDBE8490A1A58073.html

Major projects in Calgary and area include:

- Stoney Trail SE - Starting the extension of Stoney Trail from 17 Avenue SE to east of Macleod Trail. The project will be done as a P3 and open to traffic by fall 2013. The successful bidder will be announced this spring.
- Stoney Trail NW - Continuing construction of the $42-million Crowchild Trail interchange, which opens to traffic by fall 2011.
- Stoney Trail NW - Starting construction of the $14-million Harvest Hills Boulevard interchange, which opens to traffic by fall 2010.
- Stoney Trail NW - Modifying the ramps of the Shaganappi Trail interchange to provide all-direction access. This $6.6-million project will open to traffic by fall 2010.
- Deerfoot Trail - Continuing the $10-million addition of a lane to southbound Deerfoot Trail between Beddington Trail and 64 Avenue N, which will open to traffic by fall 2010.
- Deerfoot Trail - Re-paving Deerfoot Trail from the Ivor Strong Bridge to south of 17 Avenue SE and re-paving the southbound lanes between McKnight Boulevard and the north city limits at a cost of $18 million.
- QE II-Yankee Valley Boulevard Interchange - Continuing major upgrades to the $48-million interchange in Airdrie, which will be completed by fall 2010.

[korzym]

Looks like Shagganappi and stoney trail is going to become a full interchange this year:

http://www.gov.ab.ca/acn/201002/27829D789531A-B06E-5174-BDBE8490A1A58073.html

Major projects in Calgary and area include:

- Stoney Trail SE - Starting the extension of Stoney Trail from 17 Avenue SE to east of Macleod Trail. The project will be done as a P3 and open to traffic by fall 2013. The successful bidder will be announced this spring.
- Stoney Trail NW - Continuing construction of the $42-million Crowchild Trail interchange, which opens to traffic by fall 2011.
- Stoney Trail NW - Starting construction of the $14-million Harvest Hills Boulevard interchange, which opens to traffic by fall 2010.
- Stoney Trail NW - Modifying the ramps of the Shaganappi Trail interchange to provide all-direction access. This $6.6-million project will open to traffic by fall 2010.
- Deerfoot Trail - Continuing the $10-million addition of a lane to southbound Deerfoot Trail between Beddington Trail and 64 Avenue N, which will open to traffic by fall 2010.
- Deerfoot Trail - Re-paving Deerfoot Trail from the Ivor Strong Bridge to south of 17 Avenue SE and re-paving the southbound lanes between McKnight Boulevard and the north city limits at a cost of $18 million.
- QE II-Yankee Valley Boulevard Interchange - Continuing major upgrades to the $48-million interchange in Airdrie, which will be completed by fall 2010.

I suppose thats great news for residents and businesses in beacon hill and symons valley, I liked how there was space between the intersections...it kept merging issues to a minimum..

Other than that all that construction...they opened it half-***, teased you, and now you get slowed down again. Thankfully I don't deal with that area too much. Between country hills and 16th ave nw stoney should at the bare minimum be 3 lanes each direction, currently crowchild is making that area crazy..the NE stretch looked abandoned compared to that area yesterday

[Koolfire]

Looks like Shagganappi and stoney trail is going to become a full interchange this year:


Interesting, but with only 6.6 million to be spent it looks like it's only going to be a diamond interchange not the freeflowing verison in the ultimate buildout plan. Harvest Hills is 14 million and is a lot simpler to build then stacked interchange.

[lubicon]

Interesting, but with only 6.6 million to be spent it looks like it's only going to be a diamond interchange not the freeflowing verison in the ultimate buildout plan. Harvest Hills is 14 million and is a lot simpler to build then stacked interchange.

With the downgrade of Shag they don't need the full buildout plan anymore. No bridges required, just reworking some dirt to configure the ramps, and put in a couple of lights on Shag.

[You Need A Thneed]

Looks like Shagganappi and stoney trail is going to become a full interchange this year:

http://www.gov.ab.ca/acn/201002/27829D789531A-B06E-5174-BDBE8490A1A58073.html

Major projects in Calgary and area include:

- Stoney Trail SE - Starting the extension of Stoney Trail from 17 Avenue SE to east of Macleod Trail. The project will be done as a P3 and open to traffic by fall 2013. The successful bidder will be announced this spring.
- Stoney Trail NW - Continuing construction of the $42-million Crowchild Trail interchange, which opens to traffic by fall 2011.
- Stoney Trail NW - Starting construction of the $14-million Harvest Hills Boulevard interchange, which opens to traffic by fall 2010.
- Stoney Trail NW - Modifying the ramps of the Shaganappi Trail interchange to provide all-direction access. This $6.6-million project will open to traffic by fall 2010.
- Deerfoot Trail - Continuing the $10-million addition of a lane to southbound Deerfoot Trail between Beddington Trail and 64 Avenue N, which will open to traffic by fall 2010.
- Deerfoot Trail - Re-paving Deerfoot Trail from the Ivor Strong Bridge to south of 17 Avenue SE and re-paving the southbound lanes between McKnight Boulevard and the north city limits at a cost of $18 million.
- QE II-Yankee Valley Boulevard Interchange - Continuing major upgrades to the $48-million interchange in Airdrie, which will be completed by fall 2010.

I know who the successful bidder is, but since I heard the news from an insider, I can't share it. I imagine design work might already be underway by the successful bidder.

[korzym]

I know who the successful bidder is, but since I heard the news from an insider, I can't share it. I imagine design work might already be underway by the successful bidder.
Based on your posts I'm going to guess you work for the city. You award contracts, I could probably guess your name, it starts with a J..

;)

I'm being serious, posts that go way back..based on the info you disclosed

[MichaelS]

Based on your posts I'm going to guess you work for the city. You award contracts, I could probably guess your name, it starts with a J..

;)

I'm being serious, posts that go way back..based on the info you disclosed

Problem with that logic is the Ring Road is a provincial project, and not a contract awarded by the City. He might work for the province though...

[You Need A Thneed]

Based on your posts I'm going to guess you work for the city

;)

I'm being serious, posts that go way back..based on the info you disclosed

Nope, I don't work for the city. I do work in the construction industry, though our company is small compared to the size of the contractors that do these types of projects. Almost all of what I know is publicly available. I don't divulge non-public information that I do know, other than broad generalities.

[Mazrim]

It's not like it's a well hidden secret. The news spread quickly the morning the preferred proponent was notified (two weeks ago).

[freeweed]

Based on your posts I'm going to guess you work for the city. You award contracts, I could probably guess your name, it starts with a J..

;)

I'm being serious, posts that go way back..based on the info you disclosed

Internet stalker! :haha:

[para transit fellow]

Interesting, but with only 6.6 million to be spent it looks like it's only going to be a diamond interchange not the freeflowing verison in the ultimate buildout plan. Harvest Hills is 14 million and is a lot simpler to build then stacked interchange.

Maybe the big price difference is that the span is already in place at Shaggappi so it's money to be spent on the approaches/ramps. Harvest hills s more expensive because it needs approaches AND a bridge span.

[Nudrock]

- Deerfoot Trail - Re-paving Deerfoot Trail from the Ivor Strong Bridge to south of 17 Avenue SE

The road surface of this portion is currently made of concrete - correct?
So does this mean that this portion will now be pavement?
Will they rip out the concrete and replace with pavement or will they pave on top of the concrete?

[Corndogger]

It's not like it's a well hidden secret. The news spread quickly the morning the preferred proponent was notified (two weeks ago).

Why are they waiting to spring to announce the winner? The NE leg was announced in February so they get working by spring. I hope the Province does pull the typical City stunt of agreeing to road projects too late for contractors to make use of that season's construction project.

[Corndogger]

Looks like Shagganappi and stoney trail is going to become a full interchange this year:

http://www.gov.ab.ca/acn/201002/27829D789531A-B06E-5174-BDBE8490A1A58073.html

Major projects in Calgary and area include:

- Stoney Trail SE - Starting the extension of Stoney Trail from 17 Avenue SE to east of Macleod Trail. The project will be done as a P3 and open to traffic by fall 2013. The successful bidder will be announced this spring.
- Stoney Trail NW - Continuing construction of the $42-million Crowchild Trail interchange, which opens to traffic by fall 2011.
- Stoney Trail NW - Starting construction of the $14-million Harvest Hills Boulevard interchange, which opens to traffic by fall 2010.
- Stoney Trail NW - Modifying the ramps of the Shaganappi Trail interchange to provide all-direction access. This $6.6-million project will open to traffic by fall 2010.
- Deerfoot Trail - Continuing the $10-million addition of a lane to southbound Deerfoot Trail between Beddington Trail and 64 Avenue N, which will open to traffic by fall 2010.
- Deerfoot Trail - Re-paving Deerfoot Trail from the Ivor Strong Bridge to south of 17 Avenue SE and re-paving the southbound lanes between McKnight Boulevard and the north city limits at a cost of $18 million.
- QE II-Yankee Valley Boulevard Interchange - Continuing major upgrades to the $48-million interchange in Airdrie, which will be completed by fall 2010.

I always find it interesting that the Province can manage to do interchange projects much cheaper and better than the City. The Crowchild/Stoney interchange is $42 million and it's a system interchange. The City is saying that it will cost about $60 million to build the interchange at Glenmore and 37 St. SW and it will probably be just your basic, badly designed City interchange. Is the Province that much better at dealing making or is there something funny going on between the City and contractors? I realize the Glenmore interchange has some land issues attached to it but there are plenty of other examples of where what the City paid to build an interchange is completely out of whack with what the Province pays for similar projects.

[Corndogger]

The road surface of this portion is currently made of concrete - correct?
So does this mean that this portion will now be pavement?
Will they rip out the concrete and replace with pavement or will they pave on top of the concrete?

Yeah, it is concrete. If they rip it all out and replace it with pavement I can't see that only costing $18 million. Plus, that would be major chaos for commuters.

[MalcolmTucker]

I always find it interesting that the Province can manage to do interchange projects much cheaper and better than the City. The Crowchild/Stoney interchange is $42 million and it's a system interchange. The City is saying that it will cost about $60 million to build the interchange at Glenmore and 37 St. SW and it will probably be just your basic, badly designed City interchange. Is the Province that much better at dealing making or is there something funny going on between the City and contractors? I realize the Glenmore interchange has some land issues attached to it but there are plenty of other examples of where what the City paid to build an interchange is completely out of whack with what the Province pays for similar projects.

I would guess the $42 million is for the final phase of the interchange - money would already be out the door for everything that is already done (ie - an earlier contract that was marked up and paid out as complete by the treasury board), it wouldn't be reflected in this years budget. So $42 million for the upgrade to 'systems' which seems to be in line with costs that have been bandied about for Deerfoot/Glenmore by the province.

[Mazrim]

Why are they waiting to spring to announce the winner? The NE leg was announced in February so they get working by spring. I hope the Province does pull the typical City stunt of agreeing to road projects too late for contractors to make use of that season's construction project.
They have to wait to get the financial stuff in line. They use this period to finalize that and make sure the paperwork is all set. The winning bidder has already started final design and probably some initial drilling for bridge piers, if the NE portion can be used as a good indication of timelines.

Yeah, it is concrete. If they rip it all out and replace it with pavement I can't see that only costing $18 million. Plus, that would be major chaos for commuters.
If you use the paving job done last summer on SB Deerfoot from the WID canal to the Peigan/Barlow exit as an example, they will grind off a small amount of concrete to create a level surface, then repave. Works great and is much cheaper than a full replacement.

[Corndogger]

I would guess the $42 million is for the final phase of the interchange - money would already be out the door for everything that is already done (ie - an earlier contract that was marked up and paid out as complete by the treasury board), it wouldn't be reflected in this years budget. So $42 million for the upgrade to 'systems' which seems to be in line with costs that have been bandied about for Deerfoot/Glenmore by the province.

That isn't how the release reads. The entire project is $42 million which I believe is correct.

[korzym]

Nope, I don't work for the city. I do work in the construction industry, though our company is small compared to the size of the contractors that do these types of projects. Almost all of what I know is publicly available. I don't divulge non-public information that I do know, other than broad generalities.

ahh ook..if you say so ;)
I swear some things you said, the timing of it vs. inquiries I personally made to the city and then you coming out here and giving the answer...that had me thinking haha