[5seconds]

Width of the corridor:

For reference, between the two dashed lines is a 1/2 mile, 804.67 meters.

Thanks MalcomTucker!

My rough and maybe-not-too-accurate measurement puts that allowance at about 32 metres. If lanes are pegged out at 4m, wouldn't that give them enough land for a 4 lane road with shoulders and narrow median? That would be enough for Redford's idea of a city bypass. (Whether it's a good idea is another matter entirely)

[para transit fellow]

But would the residents of Bragg Creek tolerate a 4 lane highway on the edge of their community.

(Especially with no room to make any sort of interchange)

[You Need A Thneed]

Thanks MalcomTucker!

My rough and maybe-not-too-accurate measurement puts that allowance at about 32 metres. If lanes are pegged out at 4m, wouldn't that give them enough land for a 4 lane road with shoulders and narrow median? That would be enough for Redford's idea of a city bypass. (Whether it's a good idea is another matter entirely)

There isn't the proper width for even the 2 lanes and ditches now. Four lanes with a median would be way too wide.

Plus, if traffic demands required 4 lanes on that road, there would be four lanes already. No more traffic is going to use that road even if it's marked as the ring road. The traffic that is going to use that road is already using it.

[5seconds]

There isn't the proper width for even the 2 lanes and ditches now. Four lanes with a median would be way too wide.

Plus, if traffic demands required 4 lanes on that road, there would be four lanes already. No more traffic is going to use that road even if it's marked as the ring road. The traffic that is going to use that road is already using it.

Yea, I'm pretty sure it's not a great idea, just curious about the practicalities as Redford has already stated this as an alternative. Do you know the actual allowance for Highway 22?

[Oliver Klozov]

Yea, I'm pretty sure it's not a great idea, just curious about the practicalities as Redford has already stated this as an alternative. Do you know the actual allowance for Highway 22?

It is not a real alternative at all just blowing smoke up your ass.

I don't know what the exact r-o-w width is through the reserve but I do know it is well below today's standard for a 2-lane primary highway. That's why when it was rebuilt only a few years back (10+?), they could not even put in proper ditches. With 3 entrances to Redwood Meadows and 1 or 2 to the rodeo grounds, there is no way it could function as a ring road.

[5seconds]

"A veteran on the municipal file, Ray Danyluk said it's his "top priority" as Alberta's new transport minister to finalize a long-elusive deal to finish Stoney Trail through native reserve land."

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Griffiths+Danyluk+take+municipal+affairs+transport/5543322/story.html

[craner]

"A veteran on the municipal file, Ray Danyluk said it's his "top priority" as Alberta's new transport minister to finalize a long-elusive deal to finish Stoney Trail through native reserve land."

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Griffiths+Danyluk+take+municipal+affairs+transport/5543322/story.html

round, round we go . . .:brickwall:

[5seconds]

round, round we go . . .:brickwall:

I'm not sure we are going round and round. When I bought my house, they had a price advertised (1). We made an offer (2), they had a counter offer (3), we had a counter-counter offer (4), they proposed a counter-counter-counter offer (5) which we rejected, and we went back to our counter-counter offer (4), which was finally accepted.

So far in the entire history of the ring road, only 1 offer was presented. I'm not sure why so many people think that there could only ever be one offer, and that it would be a 'take it or leave it' deal.

[craner]

^ I agree the route through the reserve is the best option for the road - it's just frustrating to see it drag on for years (decades) with nothing geting built.
I really hope they can hammer out an agreement - but I'm skeptical. I hope I'm pleasantly surprised - and soon.

[Oliver Klozov]

I'm not sure we are going round and round. When I bought my house, they had a price advertised (1). We made an offer (2), they had a counter offer (3), we had a counter-counter offer (4), they proposed a counter-counter-counter offer (5) which we rejected, and we went back to our counter-counter offer (4), which was finally accepted.

So far in the entire history of the ring road, only 1 offer was presented. I'm not sure why so many people think that there could only ever be one offer, and that it would be a 'take it or leave it' deal.

That's not a very good analogy. Something more along the lines of .......

and we went back to our counter-counter offer (4), which was finally accepted. Then we took it to family for a vote and my 3 kids voted NO and the deal was dead.

;)

[5seconds]

That's not a very good analogy. Something more along the lines of .......

and we went back to our counter-counter offer (4), which was finally accepted. Then we took it to family for a vote and my 3 kids voted NO and the deal was dead.

;)

(The people we bought from actually did take our offer to their kids! But they said yes)

It wasn't meant to be an analogy, rather just an example of how a negotiation can work normally, with a land deal that cost less than 0.05% of the value of the ring road

But it's really more like...

...and we went back to our counter-counter offer (4), which was finally accepted. It was then subtly changed (4a) by the purchasing party before it was presented to our family for a vote, and 2 of my 3 kids voted NO...

Either way, the deal was only dead because one party, the Province, walked away after only the first deal. I have never heard of negotiation like that, especially with all the time and money invested in it.

[DoubleK]

Either way, the deal was only dead because one party, the Province, walked away after only the first deal. I have never heard of negotiation like that, especially with all the time and money invested in it.

What makes you think that there wasn't extensive negotiations (which there was) before it was put to a vote by the Nation?

[MalcolmTucker]

The deal was rejected because it didn't include something the province couldn't give. There was no reason to keep talking.

[5seconds]

What makes you think that there wasn't extensive negotiations (which there was) before it was put to a vote by the Nation?

I don't think that. When preparing the offer, there was a lot of back-and-forth going on. But that is all it was, an offer. One that was ultimately rejected (In part due to last minute wording alterations, according to the Nation).

Like I said, I can't imagine why a negotiation like this would falter at the rejection of the first offer, especially when the communicated reasons for rejection are largely within the power of the Province to address.

I think that if a new offer is rejected, then it's probably time to leave it alone. And if the Province was genuinely not that interested in making a deal, then I understand walking away the first time, but that just isn't the case.

The deal was rejected because it didn't include something the province couldn't give. There was no reason to keep talking.

Do you mean the guaranteed land, or the guaranteed access?

[MalcolmTucker]

Do you mean the guaranteed land, or the guaranteed access?

They could guarantee land, , but they couldn't guarantee that the federal government would allow the land to be incorporated into the reserve. The federal government would be naturally cautious about this, lest reserves start trying to expand nation wide and extend treaty rights to the new lands.

[5seconds]

They could guarantee land, , but they couldn't guarantee that the federal government would allow the land to be incorporated into the reserve. The federal government would be naturally cautious about this, lest reserves start trying to expand nation wide and extend treaty rights to the new lands.

While they certainly are relying on that, that has never been a publicly stated problem with the deal, to my knowledge. (the media brings it up, but i haven't heard that issue from the band). There were three conditions for coming back to the negotiation, and that wasn't one.

I wonder if there will still be an escape clause in the deal, with construction only going ahead once the new lands are incorporated into the reserve? That's about the only assurance the province is in a position to offer.

EDIT: I should say that while we know the thoughts of the Leadership, we can't say much for the actual voters. If a guarantee of federal approval was of prime importance to the average voter, then a deal could maybe never be done. My gut says this isn't the case, but it could very well be.

[mersar]

The new WB lanes of 22X between 52nd and roughly where the old 72th street was are now paved. West of 52nd towards Deerfoot is also getting near the point they'll be paving. Range Road 290 (the new north-south access from 22X to 146th ave) is also ready for paving.

[craner]

Attended the MacLeod Tr/22X interchange open house on Wednesday.
Three lanes E-W on 22X and a full cloverleaf interchange with extended weave lanes (separated on MacLeod). The rep. from the Province said flyover ramps for left turns will likely be added in about 15 years when the existing 22X bridge needs replacing. The existing bridge will act as the eastbound lanes for 22X.
One dissapointment was the ability to exit the Shaunessy shopping area at the south end and go east on 22X will be lost.

[lubicon]

Attended the MacLeod Tr/22X interchange open house on Wednesday.
Three lanes E-W on 22X and a full cloverleaf interchange with extended weave lanes (separated on MacLeod). The rep. from the Province said flyover ramps for left turns will likely be added in about 15 years when the existing 22X bridge needs replacing. The existing bridge will act as the eastbound lanes for 22X.
One dissapointment was the ability to exit the Shaunessy shopping area at the south end and go east on 22X will be lost.

Will you still be able to access the south end of the shopping area with that exit off MacLeod? I mean the one that loops off the ramp and comes in behind Home Depot. It's very convenient when I need to get to the Rec Centre for hockey. Otherwise it will be a cluster.

[DoubleK]

One dissapointment was the ability to exit the Shaunessy shopping area at the south end and go east on 22X will be lost. That was the ONLY benefit to a horrible highway configuration

Will you still be able to access the south end of the shopping area with that exit off MacLeod? I mean the one that loops off the ramp and comes in behind Home Depot. It's very convenient when I need to get to the Rec Centre for hockey. Otherwise it will be a cluster. Based on the maps I saw, yes this will be preserved.

I am wondering how the SWRR is going to accommodate this interchange. I thought I saw a system interchange at this location on some Functional Planning Study Maps.

[5seconds]

I am wondering how the SWRR is going to accommodate this interchange. I thought I saw a system interchange at this location on some Functional Planning Study Maps.

This is the 2008 map showing the basics of the ring road leading into the SW Portion.

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a400/jessesalus/SRR_2008.jpg

It probably doesn't help, but there you go!

Does anyone know if there are there any more updated maps of this area?

[tmjr]

Chief says Calgary’s S.W. ring road ‘on the back burner’ (http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/calgary/Chief+says+Calgary+ring+road+back+burner/5625708/story.html)(Calgary Herald)

Tsuu T’ina Chief Sandford Big Plume says southwest ring road discussions are on the tribe’s “back burner” as he’s prepared to let Alberta’s premier and other ministers settle into their new roles before resuming negotiations.

“There are a lot of other issues that we’re dealing with right now. So it’s just on the back burner. You’ve just got a new premier in there. Let them get settled, let them get ready and we’ll meet them when the time’s right.”

“We’re very happy that there’s been discussions they brought up pertaining to access, but mostly it’s us asking access to our nation to guarantee that access will always be there,” the chief said. “Things are moving along very well. I’m pretty sure we’re close to inking some long term arrangements.”

A city official confirmed the two sides are close to a solution.

Brings to mind some of the skepticism people have expressed that negotiations with the Tsuu T'ina will only drag on and on. I'm also a little surprised that negotiations with the nation over road access to the city seem to be separated from negotiations for the ring road ROW.

It seems to me that, with Premier Redford already expressing disapproval to the alternate proposals, the perceived urgency of getting a deal done, and something significant that the nation wants already being largely agreed to separately, the nation's negotiating position is far stronger than it was a couple of months ago...

[5seconds]

I'm also a little surprised that negotiations with the nation over road access to the city seem to be separated from negotiations for the ring road ROW.

The ROW and access are (strangely) 2 somewhat separate issues. The Province has already agreed to several interchanges to access Nation land, but I believe that the corridor will be within of the City of Calgary, so while the interchanges would certainly be built, the 2009 agreement did not state that they had to remain open. Once built, the City of Calgary could barricade the interchanges (on City land), and restrict access to the Nation if they wanted.

I think that the Province could not make the promise that access would be uninterrupted indefinitely, but they didn't pursue the City to make a legal agreement before the last deal. This time there is separate negotiations with the City that will have to be hashed out before the next deal can be re-presented, so that it can form a legally binding part of the next deal (or it will be a separate deal that the Nation can rely on even if it's not technically part of the new deal). I'm not sure if that agreement would have to go to Council, but if it does, it would be a milestone to watch out for before the next deal gets presented.

The Nation wants to cross all the Ts and dot all the Is; they don't want access to be at the whim of the current Mayor. Given the level of discourse on this very topic in Calgary ("Let's block all access to their Casino, the greedy jerks!") it seems a wise decision on their part.

[5seconds]

Another new article about the SWRR. Nothing really new in there.

“The change in leadership did not stop the process. But we need to look at whether we take different steps to advance that. Whether that means I sit down with anyone or not, I don’t think we’re that far along yet,” Redford said Saturday.

Danyluk has said it’s his “priority” as Alberta’s new transportation minister to finalize a long-elusive deal, and that a meeting between the province and the band could happen within a couple of weeks.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Redford+says+Calgary+ring+road+still+radar/5628824/story.html

[Seadood]

Took a drive down Glenmore yesterday and could see the new lanes for Stoney. Glenmore detours onto the off ramp then curves into the on ramp to avoid the interchange construction. As you do that, you get a view of the Stoney lanes just north on the approach to the interchange. What I saw was they paved the Stoney lanes. I assume that it was done to prevent erosion of the road bed. Comments?

[mersar]

Took a drive down Glenmore yesterday and could see the new lanes for Stoney. Glenmore detours onto the off ramp then curves into the on ramp to avoid the interchange construction. As you do that, you get a view of the Stoney lanes just north on the approach to the interchange. What I saw was they paved the Stoney lanes. I assume that it was done to prevent erosion of the road bed. Comments?

Well that and to just have it done. A project this large can't be all paved in one single run, so they might as well start paving the parts that are ready when they are ready.

[tmjr]

Driving through the Stoney - Crowchild interchange, everything SEEMS to be done. However, the speed limit is left at 60 kph through the area.

Do they leave the speed limit low for a period after finishing an interchange just to let people get used to the new traffic flow patterns? Or is there more to be done at Crow/Stoney that requires the low speed limit?

[mersar]

Still doing some cleanup work. I did notice they've got the guides in place for pouring most of the barriers east of the Stoney bridge now, so on Crowchild there is definately still some work going on.

[Mazrim]

I'm pretty sure the speed limit will be 60 on Crowchild until the LRT station is finished.

[patm]

Anyone know what they plan on doing for the 22x bridge over Macleod? Something tells me that it will be total chaos... They've got that, then they need to build an over/under pass for the Silverado access road and then the James Mckevitt access...

I gotta move.

[tmjr]

Still doing some cleanup work. I did notice they've got the guides in place for pouring most of the barriers east of the Stoney bridge now, so on Crowchild there is definately still some work going on.

Didn't notice those until today; they were pouring/forming the barriers on the EB Crow side when I drove by.

I guess I was more thinking about Stoney trail itself - its still 60 kph under the bridge...

[Barnes]

Question regarding the southeast leg. According to the schedule here (http://www.sestproject.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/SEST-Presentation-Board-06-2011.pdf), all of the work is scheduled to be completed except 22x and Deerfoot (2013) is scheduled to be complete by Nov 2012. Will they open the stretch between 17 ave se and 22x once it's done?

[freeweed]

Say what we will about the Ring Road, but they sure designed it well. The huge shoulders saved my car (and possibly my body) today. The Beamer (surprise, surprise) behind me just didn't want to let me lane change after a merge and ended up almost wiping me off the road at nearly 80km/h. Only the very wide shoulder gave him enough room to move around me.

Of course, this was all predicated by the idiot in front of us doing 60 as he merged onto a 100 route. I REALLY wish we had signs on ramps saying something like "you're about to merge into traffic doing 100, you may want to consider actually approaching that speed before merging".

[lubicon]

Driving through the Stoney - Crowchild interchange, everything SEEMS to be done. However, the speed limit is left at 60 kph through the area.

Do they leave the speed limit low for a period after finishing an interchange just to let people get used to the new traffic flow patterns? Or is there more to be done at Crow/Stoney that requires the low speed limit?

Still lot's of clean up type work to be done (landscaping in the medians etc.) so I suspect the speed limit will stay until that is done. In addition the pedestrian bridge just south of the interchange is still under construction so the speed limit will probably stay at 60 at least in that vicinity for awhile.

[Mazrim]

Anyone know what they plan on doing for the 22x bridge over Macleod? Something tells me that it will be total chaos... They've got that, then they need to build an over/under pass for the Silverado access road and then the James Mckevitt access...

I gotta move.
Hey, if they can build the Glenmore/5th/Elbow interchange area without massively disrupting traffic (in some areas it was actually improved) then they can definitely build that interchange without any major problems. ;)

I REALLY wish we had signs on ramps saying something like "you're about to merge into traffic doing 100, you may want to consider actually approaching that speed before merging".
Anthony Henday SW used "100 Ahead" (you know, the same ones to warn when the speed limit slows down) on the ramp entrances to the mainline and people didn't change their habits at all, unfortunately. That's why you don't see them anywhere else.

[Cage]

Say what we will about the Ring Road, but they sure designed it well. The huge shoulders saved my car (and possibly my body) today. The Beamer (surprise, surprise) behind me just didn't want to let me lane change after a merge and ended up almost wiping me off the road at nearly 80km/h. Only the very wide shoulder gave him enough room to move around me.

Of course, this was all predicated by the idiot in front of us doing 60 as he merged onto a 100 route. I REALLY wish we had signs on ramps saying something like "you're about to merge into traffic doing 100, you may want to consider actually approaching that speed before merging".


I feel you pain. Although never having to use the median, I have made a few surprise moves in that area.

I think the permanent fix to add a third lane on WB Stoney between CHB and Crowchild such that RO RR traffic would stay in this third lane when commuting over to Crowchild. Finally this third lane would not be a extension of the right hand lane going up the hill from the bottom of Nose Hill Creek to Citadel, this traffic should continue to be merged into the center lane.

[freeweed]

It's an interesting idea, certainly something I've thought about before. There's plenty of room to prevent it from becoming a "weave" lane too.

[lubicon]

I think the permanent fix to add a third lane on WB Stoney between CHB and Crowchild such that RO RR traffic would stay in this third lane when commuting over to Crowchild. Finally this third lane would not be a extension of the right hand lane going up the hill from the bottom of Nose Hill Creek to Citadel, this traffic should continue to be merged into the center lane.

This is exactly what they have done south of the Crowchild interchange and it works great. Exiting off Crowchild onto SB Stoney you do not have to merge at all. You get you own lane that continues all the way to the Tuscany exit. Anyone going to Tuscany never has to merge or change lanes, and if you are heading further south you have about 1.5km to make your lane change. The only merge there is comes from EB Crowchild>SB Stoney traffic which merges into the 3rd lane.

[suburb]

This interview with Tsuu T'ina chief speaks to the ring road quite a bit. It also speaks to the relation with the City of Calgary. Looks like this is another place where Mayor Nenshi is going a fantastic job!

http://tinyurl.com/c5cty7u

[eggbert]

Time to push ahead on S.W. ring road deal, Redford says
‘This will not be a never-ending process,’ premier vows
By Clara Ho, Calgary Herald November 13, 2011 8:16 AM

CALGARY — Premier Alison Redford made it clear she wants to see a resolution to the drawn-out southwest ring road debate, a project that politicians and Tsuu T’ina leaders have been working for decades to complete.

A new expressway loop around the city would put an end to traffic snarls that have long plagued commuters — and after more than 40 years of discussions on both sides to hammer out a deal, Redford said it’s time to push ahead.

“We need to move on,” Redford told the Calgary Herald editorial board earlier this week. “This will not be a never-ending process,” she said.

An agreement was tantalizingly close in 2009 but collapsed after it was rejected by band members in a referendum.

Negotiations resumed this summer, reigniting hopes the project would finally be completed. But an end of September deadline for a Tsuu T’ina vote slipped by with no resolution.

Redford said she hopes a deal can be reached to satisfy the provincial government, the City of Calgary and the Tsuu T’ina Nation.

“The former premier was very optimistic he could get it done before (he stepped down Oct. 1). I just don’t know quite where Tsuu T’ina is right now,” she said.

During the Tory leadership race, Redford suggested the best option for the southwest portion of the ring road around Calgary was through Tsuu T’ina land.

But she noted that the second best option was expanding Highways 22 and 22X to Highway 1, along with Highway 8, to move traffic around the city.

She also indicated she did not support the five alternative routes put forth by Alberta Transportation, which would have the southwest portion of the road run through the city.

Redford did not divulge whether she had a time frame in mind before strongly considering her second-best option, adding that she plans to sit with Transportation Minister Ray Danyluk and get his assessment first.

The cost to undertake her top two ring road options “are not that dissimilar,” she said.

Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/Time+push+ahead+ring+road+deal+Redford+says/5702723/story.html#ixzz1dbOfFmbw

[YYCguys]

Premier Ed Stelmach had anticipated a deal by Oct. 1. A spokesman for the premier said that goal likely won’t be met, as talks are still ongoing.

Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/Time+push+ahead+ring+road+deal+Redford+says/5702723/story.html#ixzz1dcK1jc80


Let's see, the article was written today, Nov 13th, and the author of the article states that the goal of October 1st likely won't be met??!? HA! Now there's some good writing for you!

Tsuu T’ina Chief Sandford Big Plume was unavailable for comment, but a source with the band confirmed negotiations are ongoing.

Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/Time+push+ahead+ring+road+deal+Redford+says/5702723/story.html#ixzz1dcKntHLu


Negotiations have been ongoing for 40 bloody years! We'd better see a resolution before the next road construction season begins! This is getting ridonkulous!!!

[5seconds]

Negotiations have been ongoing for 40 bloody years! We'd better see a resolution before the next road construction season begins! This is getting ridonkulous!!!

Not sure where everyone is getting this '40 years' number from. Talks only started in 1984. Even then, those talks were at a time when the land-use was in a state of transition. Most of the land in question was not returned to the Reserve until 1992, and even then, it was in title only; the physical land wasn't returned until later, when the military vacated and cleared the land. The military's lease on the open-range portion that the road was planned to go over wasn't set to expire until 2005, with an option to renew until 2010.

(In fact, the barracks portion, the 320 acres directly west of 37th street, had a lease that did not expire until 2050!)

With the value of the land in flux, I doubt any real negotiations were even undertaken while the military were still on site. If the military had decided to stay for as long as it could, any negotiations that happened in 1992 (for instance) would be so out of date by 2010 that it would hardly be worth doing.

Negotiations over this route for a provincial ring road has only been ongoing since 2003.

(Sorry, I wasn't having a go at you, YYCGuys. I have just seen that figure in the newspaper about 4 times in the last week alone!)

[jsbertram]

I think this '40 years' mis-quote is because everyone has known since the 1970's when Cedarbrae, Woodbine, Oakridge and Midnapore were being developed that something like Deerfoot Trail would be needed on the west side of the city.

There may not have been any negotiations for use of the reserve lands until the last decade or so, but the need for what we now know as SW Stoney Trail has been apparent to anyone living south of the reservoir ever since those communities, and others further south, were built.

[5seconds]

I think this '40 years' mis-quote is because everyone has known since the 1970's when Cedarbrae, Woodbine, Oakridge and Midnapore were being developed that something like Deerfoot Trail would be needed on the west side of the city.

There may not have been any negotiations for use of the reserve lands until the last decade or so, but the need for what we now know as SW Stoney Trail has been apparent to anyone living south of the reservoir ever since those communities, and others further south, were built.

That makes a lot of sense.

I have just been doing a little research, and this is the timeline of events as I can piece them together:

A connector road here was first identified in 1959; It was proposed as a potential Expressway, and in 1963 reclassified as a Parkway. In 1968 it was further re-classified as a Freeway. The alignment was within the City of Calgary limits at the time, though today it would include Nation land (The purchase of 980 acres of land on the north east corner of the reserve by the military predates the first conception of the road by 7 years). It was proposed to run south from Sarcee Trail, skirting the west-edge of the Weaselhead and connecting to the 37th street alignment south of the reservoir.

It wasn't until 1977 that the formal possibility of running the road through the Tsuu T'ina land emerged when the Reid & Crowther report showed 2 of the 3 routing options through the Tsuu T'ina lands.

Until 1984, the Nation publicly stated that they were not interested in a road through their reserve, although in 1982 they allowed and co-funded a routing study on Nation land.

Apart from the Southwest Calgary Transportation Study in 1987, there doesn't seem to be any appreciable progress on planning of the road until the province took over the project in 2003, with the 'current' iteration of the route seemingly set in 2005.

I don't know if this is as interesting to others as it is to me (I hope it is!). There has been so much misinformation relating to this road that I wanted to get the facts for myself, and thought I would share it if anyone else was interested.

[jsbertram]

I'm wondering if your timeline should include that the NE corner of the reserve lands north of the Weaselhead and west of 37th St were for decades DND lands that were leased from the reserve, but this was found to be in error so the courts ordered that lands had to be cleaned up and returned to the reserve.

That might be why the plans in the 1960s and 70s assumed the NE reserve land would be transferred from the DND to the City so the Sarcee Trail could continue south of Glenmore Trail and across the Weaselhead to get to 37th St south of the reservoir.

[Calgarian]

Is highway 22x (Marquis or Lorne trail) going to be re named Stoney Trail once the ring road is connected in the SE?

[Mazrim]

Is highway 22x (Marquis or Lorne trail) going to be re named Stoney Trail once the ring road is connected in the SE?
Yes. For the first phase I believe Spruce Meadows Trail will survive until they extend into the SW. They did toy with the idea of a dual 201/22X classification for a while though.

[jsbertram]

Is highway 22x (Marquis or Lorne trail) going to be re named Stoney Trail once the ring road is connected in the SE?


I don't remember Highway 22x east of MacLeod Tr being renamed "Deerfoot Trail" when 22x and Deerfoot were finally connected, but the Deerfoot extension further south to DeWinton existed only on paper.

Plans are a bit sketchy, but what I've seen is SW Stoney Trail has a major intersection with Highway 22x (aka Marquis de Lorne Trail; aka Spruce Meadows Trail) with provisions to continue Stoney Trail south to Black Diamond and Okotoks.

In the 50+ year plans I've seen, there will be an outer ring road built between Okotoks, Chestermere, Airdrie and Cochrane. The inner express lanes of the SW Stoney Trail would be added at that time to make the connection between Cochrane and Okotoks since the ROW through the reserve is already there -- assuming the SW Stoney Trail is built on reserve land. If the SW Stoney Trail turns out to be a 37th St alignment completely within the city boundaries, then the west side of the outer ring road would somehow get past the reserve west of Bragg Creek and skirt the foothills back to Turner Valley.

That's far enough in the future to be a problem by our grand-kids' grand-kids to solve if we're still using personal transportation devices like cars.

[DizzyEdge]

Yes. For the first phase I believe Spruce Meadows Trail will survive until they extend into the SW. They did toy with the idea of a dual 201/22X classification for a while though.

You know that's not a bad idea.
That way someone who is coming from the east or west of the city on 22x won't wonder why they're suddenly on a different highway.. have dual signage, then at some point signage indicating they need to exit to continue on 22x.

Although I suppose if there's signage once they come onto the 201 indicating a distant exit to continue on 22x that would do the job also.

[Seadood]

You know that's not a bad idea.
That way someone who is coming from the east or west of the city on 22x won't wonder why they're suddenly on a different highway.. have dual signage, then at some point signage indicating they need to exit to continue on 22x.

Although I suppose if there's signage once they come onto the 201 indicating a distant exit to continue on 22x that would do the job also.

In a perfect world. But the people in charge of signage aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer. Before the Deefoot Extension opened and #2 duplexed with 22x, I seem to recall there was NO signage indicating what happend to #2 when you exited. Sort of left you hanging. Back then they experimented with stupidly huge signage with those massive directional arrows and oh-so-informative decals for city centre, airport, etc.
If anyone comes into the city from the south, have a look at the signage just prior of the Okotoks interchange. The sign clearly states that 2 south needs to exit, to get to Okotoks and Dewinton. Of course, should say 2a.
Signage for duplexed highways in this province is sorely lacking.
Sask. does a far superior job in that aspect.

[Bassic Lab]

You know that's not a bad idea.
That way someone who is coming from the east or west of the city on 22x won't wonder why they're suddenly on a different highway.. have dual signage, then at some point signage indicating they need to exit to continue on 22x.

Although I suppose if there's signage once they come onto the 201 indicating a distant exit to continue on 22x that would do the job also.

I'm not entirely sure why Stoney was used for the name of the East Freeway. I think it made more sense when Stoney was the name of the road between Glenmore and the (unnamed) Future East Freeway, Glenmore stayed Glenmore, the portion between Glenmore and 22X was Sarcee, and so on. It could all have been signed as the 201 but, to me at least, these are all separate roads, many of which continue on. It really isn't like the Edmonton Ring Road which is a single road; it is five distinct roads, portions of which form a ring.

[Barnes]

Question regarding the southeast leg. According to the schedule here (http://www.sestproject.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/SEST-Presentation-Board-06-2011.pdf), all of the work is scheduled to be completed except 22x and Deerfoot (2013) is scheduled to be complete by Nov 2012. Will they open the stretch between 17 ave se and 22x once it's done?

Anyone?

[Cage]

Anyone?

It does not look like any portion of the road will be openned early.

http://www.sestproject.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/SEST-Corridor-Update-July-2011.pdf

The Alberta Government signed a 33-year agreement with Chinook Roads Partnership to design, build, operate and partially finance the southeast leg of the Stoney Trail ring road from its junction at 17 Avenue SE, south along the City of Calgary’s eastern limit, then west along Highway 22X to east of the Macleod Trail interchange. This new road will be opened to traffic by the Alberta Government in the fall of 2013.

Further within the update are numerous references to interchanges openning in fall 2013.

This is similar to te NE portion of Stoney, the road was substantially completed the fall and spring before the November start date. There was even time to host bike race on the road in August.

[MalcolmTucker]

It does not look like any portion of the road will be openned early.

http://www.sestproject.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/SEST-Corridor-Update-July-2011.pdf



Further within the update are numerous references to interchanges openning in fall 2013.

This is similar to te NE portion of Stoney, the road was substantially completed the fall and spring before the November start date. There was even time to host bike race on the road in August.

The agreement likely has a partial early open bonus that incents even not fully complete operation earlier than the posted date. Pretty standard in P3s. Unless the province made the same mistake twice, I doubt it won't be open a day more than necessary.

[Mazrim]

You know that's not a bad idea.
That way someone who is coming from the east or west of the city on 22x won't wonder why they're suddenly on a different highway.. have dual signage, then at some point signage indicating they need to exit to continue on 22x.

Although I suppose if there's signage once they come onto the 201 indicating a distant exit to continue on 22x that would do the job also.
I have to think there will be something guiding people at either end of the Stoney stretch where 22X is now. Common sense is good too. Hey, I'm still traveling East/West, so all is good! Anyway, I believe the intention would be to phase out the 22X moniker eventually (Highway 1 bypass!) so it wouldn't be good to put it on Ring Road signage.

In a perfect world. But the people in charge of signage aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer. Before the Deefoot Extension opened and #2 duplexed with 22x, I seem to recall there was NO signage indicating what happend to #2 when you exited. Sort of left you hanging. Back then they experimented with stupidly huge signage with those massive directional arrows and oh-so-informative decals for city centre, airport, etc.
If anyone comes into the city from the south, have a look at the signage just prior of the Okotoks interchange. The sign clearly states that 2 south needs to exit, to get to Okotoks and Dewinton. Of course, should say 2a.
Signage for duplexed highways in this province is sorely lacking.
Sask. does a far superior job in that aspect.
When I moved to Calgary in 2003, I had no problems following the directional signs from SB Deerfoot to EB 22X to SB Highway 2. It was there, trust me. I had no idea about the South end of Calgary when I moved here so it came in handy.

I suppose if you're not looking enough, you might miss it. I see people diving across Deerfoot all the time because they somehow miss the big overhead green signs. These were small ground mounted trail blazers saying "To Highway 2" with an arrow though.

I followed your instructions to look at the Okotoks interchange and I think you meant heading south out of the City, not into the City from the south. The NB signs are ground mounted ones that say 2A Okotoks Next exit. The SB signs look fine too. Check it out.

http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/5017/huhp.png

Are you talking about somewhere else?

I'm not entirely sure why Stoney was used for the name of the East Freeway. I think it made more sense when Stoney was the name of the road between Glenmore and the (unnamed) Future East Freeway, Glenmore stayed Glenmore, the portion between Glenmore and 22X was Sarcee, and so on. It could all have been signed as the 201 but, to me at least, these are all separate roads, many of which continue on. It really isn't like the Edmonton Ring Road which is a single road; it is five distinct roads, portions of which form a ring.

Just like Edmonton's Anthony Henday Drive, the Ring Road is being built in multiple pieces but it's all part of the same road. I don't get why you think they're so separate when they're exactly the same as Edmonton. The only portion of any road in the City of Calgary named Stoney Trail before the ring road construction started was the portion from Highway 1 in the NW to Country Hills Blvd. That's because it's part of the eventual ring road. We're not getting existing roads expanded on all sides of the city to make this either. 22X is the only portion like that. Naming them differently is actually more confusing to travelers from outside the city than anything else.

[Bassic Lab]

I have to think there will be something guiding people at either end of the Stoney stretch where 22X is now. Common sense is good too. Hey, I'm still traveling East/West, so all is good! Anyway, I believe the intention would be to phase out the 22X moniker eventually (Highway 1 bypass!) so it wouldn't be good to put it on Ring Road signage.


When I moved to Calgary in 2003, I had no problems following the directional signs from SB Deerfoot to EB 22X to SB Highway 2. It was there, trust me. I had no idea about the South end of Calgary when I moved here so it came in handy.

I suppose if you're not looking enough, you might miss it. I see people diving across Deerfoot all the time because they somehow miss the big overhead green signs. These were small ground mounted trail blazers saying "To Highway 2" with an arrow though.

I followed your instructions to look at the Okotoks interchange and I think you meant heading south out of the City, not into the City from the south. The NB signs are ground mounted ones that say 2A Okotoks Next exit. The SB signs look fine too. Check it out.

http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/5017/huhp.png

Are you talking about somewhere else?



Just like Edmonton's Anthony Henday Drive, the Ring Road is being built in multiple pieces but it's all part of the same road. I don't get why you think they're so separate when they're exactly the same as Edmonton. The only portion of any road in the City of Calgary named Stoney Trail before the ring road construction started was the portion from Highway 1 in the NW to Country Hills Blvd. That's because it's part of the eventual ring road. We're not getting existing roads expanded on all sides of the city to make this either. 22X is the only portion like that. Naming them differently is actually more confusing to travelers from outside the city than anything else.

It really isn't like Anthony Henday. The Edmonton Ring Road is a single road that gently curves as it passes around the city. The portion of the Calgary Ring Road that was always listed as Stoney Trail does something similar between between Glenmore and what used to be listed as "Future East Freeway" but the other portions are all straight roads that are quite distinct. 22X definitely isn't the only part of the Ring Road that is an expansion of an existing road; the portion between Glenmore and 22X is an extension of Sarcee and used to be listed as such; the Glenmore portion obviously is an expanded existing road.

[Seadood]

When I moved to Calgary in 2003, I had no problems following the directional signs from SB Deerfoot to EB 22X to SB Highway 2. It was there, trust me. I had no idea about the South end of Calgary when I moved here so it came in handy.


I followed your instructions to look at the Okotoks interchange and I think you meant heading south out of the City, not into the City from the south. The NB signs are ground mounted ones that say 2A Okotoks Next exit. The SB signs look fine too. Check it out.

anything else.


Perhaps I'm dating myself, but I am referring mid eighties to mid nineties, before there was an extension of Deerfoot. Back then, there was a stop sign at 22X and routes shields indicating 22x east and west. #2 fell off the table, there was no way you knew you had to go west to Macleod.

Did you purposely go out to the Okotoks interchange to check this out? Seems like a long way to go to review.

RE: Okotoks exit:
Yes, referring to northbound PRIOR to interchange.
Look at the actual exit sign, it says 2 south- Okotoks and Dewinton.
Also, isn't Dewinton on a secondary highway? Wouldn't acknowledging that highway be in order?

[Seadood]

I could be wrong on the Dewinton secondary highway.
Google map does not show a route marker.
I seem to recall one a few years ago. Could have changed.

[Seadood]

The signage on the ring road is superlative IMHO. And it appears that there is a standarization of fonts on Alberta highway signs. Is this an application of North American standards?

[Oliver Klozov]

Perhaps I'm dating myself, but I am referring mid eighties to mid nineties, before there was an extension of Deerfoot. Back then, there was a stop sign at 22X and routes shields indicating 22x east and west. #2 fell off the table, there was no way you knew you had to go west to Macleod.

...

That's because that part of Deerfoot was not Hwy 2. Hwy 2 back then was Deerfoot to Anderson to MacLeod. It wasn't until much later when the upgrades to Deerfoot were being done that they switched it over.

[Seadood]

That's because that part of Deerfoot was not Hwy 2. Hwy 2 back then was Deerfoot to Anderson to MacLeod. It wasn't until much later when the upgrades to Deerfoot were being done that they switched it over.

Yes I remember now.
Thanks for the memory jog.
Anderson was a smooth faster route than trundling down Blackfoot/Southland.
Hard to believe that was ever a provincial highway designation.

Here's another routing problem: 1A west into Calgary from Chestermere.
No signage to indicate what happens to 1A. Does it "end" or duplex north on #2 back to #1?
Aren't "A" highways to always return to their "parent", sorry I can't think of a better term.
I believe that 1A used to originally go thru DT on 6th and turn onto 14th St to terminate at North Hill. Some of the old signage still exists, thinking of 14th ave direction boards showing 14st as 1A.

[Mazrim]

It really isn't like Anthony Henday. The Edmonton Ring Road is a single road that gently curves as it passes around the city. The portion of the Calgary Ring Road that was always listed as Stoney Trail does something similar between between Glenmore and what used to be listed as "Future East Freeway" but the other portions are all straight roads that are quite distinct. 22X definitely isn't the only part of the Ring Road that is an expansion of an existing road; the portion between Glenmore and 22X is an extension of Sarcee and used to be listed as such; the Glenmore portion obviously is an expanded existing road.
I'll be completely honest with you: I have no idea what you're talking about. Right now there is no ring road connecting to Glenmore. If you're talking about ancient plans for the ring road planning, then maybe they took the liberty of listing it as Sarcee, but when they started doing the actual design and construction of the road, it's treated exactly like Anthony Henday.

If you mean the shape of the road differs...well, blame geography, not the planners for the "gentle curving" nature of Anthony Henday (which honestly has very long straight stretches too). The West side of Calgary obviously has some actual terrain to deal with, hence the NW and SW portions curving lots, while the NE and SE are flat bald-ass prairie, so it's really simple to draw a straight line and go with it. Development of the two cities follows the same idea.


Did you purposely go out to the Okotoks interchange to check this out? Seems like a long way to go to review.

RE: Okotoks exit:
Yes, referring to northbound PRIOR to interchange.
Look at the actual exit sign, it says 2 south- Okotoks and Dewinton.
Also, isn't Dewinton on a secondary highway? Wouldn't acknowledging that highway be in order?
I'm using Google Street View take get the pictures of these signs.

Like you said, it doesn't look like Dewinton has a highway number attached to the road going through it. Here's how the NB signs look anyway. It says 2A South, not 2 South.

http://img830.imageshack.us/img830/2418/huh2p.png

The signage on the ring road is superlative IMHO. And it appears that there is a standarization of fonts on Alberta highway signs. Is this an application of North American standards?
Alberta always has it's own little brand of standards that differs from the rest, but they're following the lead of pretty much everyone else by moving to the Clearview font (I think back in 2006?). The ring roads were the first major projects to use them, and basically all signs being replaced now use Clearview. Unfortunately it ends up being quite messy on retrofits where they try to jam what is a larger font into a small sign. (see pretty much all the Deerfoot retrofit signage they've done in the last year. Terrible.)

[Cage]

Driving through the Stoney - Crowchild interchange, everything SEEMS to be done. However, the speed limit is left at 60 kph through the area.

Do they leave the speed limit low for a period after finishing an interchange just to let people get used to the new traffic flow patterns? Or is there more to be done at Crow/Stoney that requires the low speed limit?

Still doing some cleanup work. I did notice they've got the guides in place for pouring most of the barriers east of the Stoney bridge now, so on Crowchild there is definately still some work going on.

Didn't notice those until today; they were pouring/forming the barriers on the EB Crow side when I drove by.

I guess I was more thinking about Stoney trail itself - its still 60 kph under the bridge...

Speed limit on Stoney is now 100km/h under Crowchild. That said a lot of people were still doing 80 on the drive home lastnight, but a few enterprising individuals were doing 100 in the left lane.

100kph does make the merge from WB Crow and the CHB turnoff a little interesting. Will be more interesting today when the off ramp gets iced up. The issue is a lot of RR/RO residents don't want to speed up to 100kph for the 30 seconds they are on Stoney. However the traffic comming from under the bridge is at 95-110kph and overtaking ver quickly resulting in high speed weaving issues.

[Mazrim]

The issue is a lot of RR/RO residents don't want to speed up to 100kph for the 30 seconds they are on Stoney. However the traffic comming from under the bridge is at 95-110kph and overtaking ver quickly resulting in high speed weaving issues.

This is standard operating procedure on all major routes in the City, unfortunately. Deerfoot of course is the worst offender for this. How many times have you been going off 16th Avenue onto NB Deerfoot only for one jackass to go 60-70 all the way down the insanely long ramp only to finally start accelerating once he's actually on Deerfoot? Drives me insane.

[YYCguys]

Once you have passed through the last set of lights and are on the long ramp is there a speed limit sign before you get to Deerfoot itself? I've never paid attention! On most ramps there is a speed limit sign of some ridiculously low amount like 50 or 60! ������

[freeweed]

100kph does make the merge from WB Crow and the CHB turnoff a little interesting. Will be more interesting today when the off ramp gets iced up. The issue is a lot of RR/RO residents don't want to speed up to 100kph for the 30 seconds they are on Stoney. However the traffic comming from under the bridge is at 95-110kph and overtaking ver quickly resulting in high speed weaving issues.

This is caused directly by one thing - those fucking "60 km/h" signs on the ramping at the intersection. Legally the speed limit is down to 60 until you've basically merged. Not a recommended speed, but a white signed 60. It's absolutely ridiculous. Those of us that actually know how to merge onto freeways are getting frustrated and will likely end up getting tickets as a result (I'm sure speed traps will be set up here the first chance they get once the roads are bare).

Slow the speed down for the curve, sure. But after that it's 100% completely straight towards the merge. SIGN IT AT 100 THERE. :hell:

Now that being said, this isn't a standard "merge". Technically the traffic coming off WB Crowchild has its own lane onto CHB, and NB Stoney traffic also has a separate lane they can turn with. So I can see the argument that it's not really a weave zone. Except of course in reality it is, as people know which lane they want to be in and weave accordingly. The only thing saving it right now is the winter conditions, and the fact that most Calgarians seem incapable of ever maintaining speed going uphill, so you don't often see 100km/h traffic on NB Stoney in that location.

[freeweed]

Once you have passed through the last set of lights and are on the long ramp is there a speed limit sign before you get to Deerfoot itself? I've never paid attention! On most ramps there is a speed limit sign of some ridiculously low amount like 50 or 60! ��

A sign that basically says "hey shithead, speed up cuz it's 100 pretty soon"? I have never, ever seen this in Canada. So anyone who either:

a) doesn't know the speed they're about to merge into

b) doesn't understand the concept of speeding up to meet merging traffic

c) is paranoid about getting a ticket because the last speed sign they saw was 60 or 7 or 80

just trundles along.

[Seadood]

Mazrim:


http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/690/1000331ii.jpg

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/707/1000332kg.jpg

Source: Seadood (photographer); uploaded to imageshack.us

[You Need A Thneed]

As of Thursday, 17th ave SE is on its detour alignment.

[5seconds]

Edited: Nevermind

[craner]

Talks only started in 1984.

I had to laugh when I read this . . . sorry 5secs. :haha:

[5seconds]

I had to laugh when I read this . . . sorry 5secs. :haha:

It's true.

The first ever plan that had the SW Connector running through Tsuu T'ina land was from a 1977 study, and as soon as that study came out, the Chief at the time stated that there was no way the City was going to build a road through the reserve, at all. (The first time a SW connector was proposed in 1959, and the 2 subsequent revisions in 1963 and 1968, the road was planned as running ONLY through City of Calgary land, from Sarcee Trail north of the reservoir to a 37th street alignment south of the reservoir)

It wasn't until a 1984 study was concluded (A study inititated and co-funded by the Province, the City and the Nation in 1982) that the Nation agreed in principle to the idea of a road through Nation land. That was the first time negotiations were held in earnest.

EDIT: unless you know otherwise. I'm trying to be as accurate as possible in my research, and while I have references to all of the points I made, if you can point me in the direction of other info, I would love to see it.

[Bassic Lab]

I'll be completely honest with you: I have no idea what you're talking about. Right now there is no ring road connecting to Glenmore. If you're talking about ancient plans for the ring road planning, then maybe they took the liberty of listing it as Sarcee, but when they started doing the actual design and construction of the road, it's treated exactly like Anthony Henday.

If you mean the shape of the road differs...well, blame geography, not the planners for the "gentle curving" nature of Anthony Henday (which honestly has very long straight stretches too). The West side of Calgary obviously has some actual terrain to deal with, hence the NW and SW portions curving lots, while the NE and SE are flat bald-ass prairie, so it's really simple to draw a straight line and go with it. Development of the two cities follows the same idea.



I'm not really talking about a geographic issue. My point is that, upon completion, Edmonton's Ring Road will be one road that forms a ring; Calgary's will be portions of, what amounts to, five different roads. If I recall correctly, prior to the province taking the project over, all five of those segments were planned by the city and each had a separate name. The province, upon completing each segment, has simply called it Stoney Trail. I preferred the city's naming method; it seemed to match reality better.

[craner]

It's true.

The first ever plan that had the SW Connector running through Tsuu T'ina land was from a 1977 study, and as soon as that study came out, the Chief at the time stated that there was no way the City was going to build a road through the reserve, at all. (The first time a SW connector was proposed in 1959, and the 2 subsequent revisions in 1963 and 1968, the road was planned as running ONLY through City of Calgary land, from Sarcee Trail north of the reservoir to a 37th street alignment south of the reservoir)

It wasn't until a 1984 study was concluded (A study inititated and co-funded by the Province, the City and the Nation in 1982) that the Nation agreed in principle to the idea of a road through Nation land. That was the first time negotiations were held in earnest.

EDIT: unless you know otherwise. I'm trying to be as accurate as possible in my research, and while I have references to all of the points I made, if you can point me in the direction of other info, I would love to see it.

I'm not questioning your research - I just found it funny to read: "talks only started in 1982", as if we shouldnt expect any progress after just 30 years.

[5seconds]

I'm not questioning your research - I just found it funny to read: "talks only started in 1982", as if we shouldnt expect any progress after just 30 years.

I got you. I think that the 'only' came in reaction to all of the claims that there have been negotiations for either '40 years' or since 1947.

Still, without the powers of expropriation, how long would the WestLRT (for instance) have taken to get done? :eek:

[Seadood]

OK:
Lets try this again:
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/193/exitsign2.png
Source: Seadood (11/19/2011) uploaded to imageshack.us

[Seadood]

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/210/exitz.png/
Source: Seadood, uploaded to http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/210/exitz.png/

[bookermorgan]

Saw that sign this weekend....

I was all "WTF" but then I was like, "it's 3am, maybe I'm seeing things" :)

[DizzyEdge]

http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/1543/exitz.png
Source: Seadood, uploaded to http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/210/exitz.png/

fixed.



.......

[Seadood]

fixed.



.......

Not sure I want to know how you fixed it :)
Thank you.

[Mazrim]

Seadood, you're definitely right. My apologies. Looks like a very new sign, which is sad because that is quite literally the most poorly done sign I have ever seen. I say that as I've reviewed plenty of signs for Alberta Transportation.

Whatever company built that sign should be ashamed for quality control that poor.

I'm not really talking about a geographic issue. My point is that, upon completion, Edmonton's Ring Road will be one road that forms a ring; Calgary's will be portions of, what amounts to, five different roads. If I recall correctly, prior to the province taking the project over, all five of those segments were planned by the city and each had a separate name. The province, upon completing each segment, has simply called it Stoney Trail. I preferred the city's naming method; it seemed to match reality better.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it was the provincial government that did the land acquisition for the TUC back in the 70s for both Calgary and Edmonton, both of which was for the purpose of providing a ring road corridor as well as a place for major utilities. Therefore they are both one road which forms a ring.

[DizzyEdge]

Not sure I want to know how you fixed it :)
Thank you.

When you upload to imageshack and it takes you to the 'upload successful' page with all the links, click on the image, and then you're taken to a page with just the image showing, then right click on the image and choose "copy image url" or whatever the specific option is on your browser, and then past that URL into the message.

[5seconds]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it was the provincial government that did the land acquisition for the TUC back in the 70s for both Calgary and Edmonton, both of which was for the purpose of providing a ring road corridor as well as a place for major utilities. Therefore they are both one road which forms a ring.

Yup. Here is an article on this from 1976:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=fIxkAAAAIBAJ&sjid=AoANAAAAIBAJ&dq=sykes%20slams%20dictatorial%20move%20calgary&pg=2754%2C4169508

[5seconds]

So I have compiled my research and thought it would be interesting to create a timeline of the major events that have occured in the history of the SW Ring Road. I hope it's not too long and/or boring.

I have references for most of this, so if anyone wants a reference to anything, just let me know. Also, if anyone sees a mistake, let me know too, I am trying to be as accurate as possible.

1877 - 1958: Pre-Road History

1877 - Treaty 7 signed by the Tsuu Tʼina (Sarcee) and were allotted a reservation to share with the Blood and the Blackfoot at Blackfoot Crossing (Currently the Siksika reservation, approximately 100 km east of Calgary)

1883 - A new treaty was made and the Tsuu Tʼina were formally granted their current reservation, approximately 8 km southwest of Fort Calgary.

1909 - The Military offered to purchase the NE corner of the reservation for a training range. This was rejected.

1910 - The Tsuu Tʼina reservation was used by the Military for the first time; 3 days of summer training manoeuvres.

1911- The City of Calgary formally sought to purchase the NE corner of the reservation to be used as parkland. This was rejected.

1911- Offers by the Military to a long-term lease of the NE corner of the reservation was rejected by the band. Despite this, the Nation agreed to 4 days (May 20-23) of training on the reservation.

1913 - The Sarcee Band surrendered 1650 acres northeast of the Elbow river and an additional 5000 acres north and west of the Elbow in exchange for proceeds of the landʼs eventual sale. The land was subdivided to be sold ʻat fair market valueʼ, but remained unsold for almost 40 years, remaining in the control of the Department of Indian Affairs. Year-to-year agreements kept the Military training on this newly surrendered land, from 1913 to 1921.

1915 - A rifle range and other infrastructure was built without permission on the surrendered lands by the Military. Retroactive permission was later received for that year only.

1917 - While deciding not to purchase the surrendered lands, the Military asked for the land to not be sold to anyone else, so they could continue to rent it.

1921 - The Department of Indian Affairs agreed to a Military proposal for a series of 10 year leases on the surrendered lands. Over the next few years, the Military would also formalise agreements for artillery use on additional 11,000 acres of Sarcee reserve lands.

1931 - The Weaselhead, 593.5 acres of the surrendered lands, was sold by the Department of Indian Affairs and Tsuu T'ina to the City of Calgary to protect the headwaters of the proposed reservoir. Total cost: $29,675.

1952 - The Military purchased the remaining 960+ acres of the surrendered lands north of the Elbow River from the Department of Indian Affairs, for their Sarcee Camp (later Sarcee Barracks and then Harvey Barracks). Total cost: $200,000.

1956 - The Harvey Barracks land and north section of the Weaselhead is annexed by the City of Calgary.

1959 - 1983: Early Road Planning

1959 - The Calgary Metropolitan Area Transportation Study first identified a SW Connector road in the area of the Sarcee Barracks. It was classed as an Expressway, and itʼs corridor extended from 53rd street SW (Sarcee Trail) south of Highway 8, through the Sarcee Barracks, skirting the west edge of the Weaselhead and joining along a 37th street Right-of-way south of the reservoir. The route did not require any Tsuu Tʼina land.

1963 - The first revision of the transportation master plan reclassifies the SW Connector Road as a Parkway. No corridor change.

1968 - A second revision to the transportation master plan reclassifies the SW Connector Road as a Freeway. No corridor change.

1974 - A Provincial report prepared by Deleuw Cather Consulting Engineers and Planners outlined a provincial Ring Road that included a portion which followed the corridor previously outlined for the SW Connector Road. This plan called for the road to be a 4 lane, uninterupted, limited access road with a 350 foot right-of-way.

1976 - Tsuu Tʼina begin negotiations with Ottawa for the return of the Sarcee Barracks, arguing that the sale was unjust.

1977 - The “Sarcee Trail South Route Location Study (CALTS 47)” by the Engineering firm of Reid, Crowther and Partners identified 3 potential routes for the SW Connector, one (Route ʻAʼ) retaining the earlier corridor within the City of Calgary limits, and a further 2 routes (Routes ʻSʼ and ʻKʼ) that would require land south of the Elbow river in the Tsuu Tʼina reservation. All 3 routes still originate at Sarcee Trail. Route ʻKʼ would later form the basis of the 2009 ring road proposal.

1978 - Chief Clifford Big Plume of the Tsuu Tʼina publicly states that the Nation will not let the City of Calgary build a road through their reservation.

1978 - Transportation Minister Hugh Horner states that a Sarcee Trail extension through the Weaselhead should not become a major southwest Calgary bypass.

1980 - The City of Calgary purchases the 37th street Right-of-way in Oakridge on the condition that the Sarcee Trail extension does not go through the Weaselhead.

1981 - Negotiations on renewing the lease on the 11,000 acre artillery range on the Tsuu Tʼina reservation break down. The Tsuu Tʼina demand to re-buy the Sarcee Barracks lands, which the Military rejects, resulting in no renewal for the lease.

1981 - The Sarcee Barracks are renamed the Harvey Barracks.

1982 - The City of Calgary Parks Department releases itʼs master plan for the Glenmore Reservoir area. It emphasises that 37th street should not extend through the Weaselhead.

1982 - The City of Calgary, the Province of Alberta and the Tsuu Tʼina agree to co-fund a study to determine the best route for a 6 lane expressway extension of Sarcee Trail. The Nation states that they have not agreed to anything at this point, but say that they want to explore the financial benefits a road might offer them.

1982 - The Tsuu Tʼina sue the Federal Government for the return of the Harvey Barracks.

1984 - 2002: Later Calgary Road Planning

1984 - The Tsuu Tʼina agree in principle to the sale of lands for the Sarcee Trail extension after the 1982 study is completed. For the first time, negotiations over the SW Connector Road with the Tsuu Tʼina begin.

1989 - The south part of the Weaselhead is annexed by the City of Calgary.

1992 - In an out-of-court settlement, the Military returns the ownership to the Harvey Barracks to the Tsuu Tʼina. This includes an agreement for the Military to lease the ʻopen rangeʼ section until 2005 (option until 2010) and to lease the barracks section until 2050, if desired.

1993 - Harvey Barracks land de-annexed by City of Calgary.

1995 - The City of Calgaryʼs GO Plan states that the preferred route for the Sarcee Trail extension location is route ʻKʼ from the 1977 study, which avoids the Weaselhead and goes through Tsuu Tʼina land.

1996 - Harvey Barracks closes.

2000 - The City of Calgary releases a draft of a Memorandum of Understanding on the Sarcee Trail extension. This iteration of the agreement has the City and Province paying to build the road; the land would still be owned by the Tsuu Tʼina but leased to the City and Province for road use. Chief Roy Whitney states that a toll road is the only acceptable option for the road. The City of Calgaryʼs documents state that the road is not required yet.

2003 - Present: Provincial Road Planning

2003 - City of Calgary unanimously approves motion directing Mayor Bronconier to work with Tsuu Tʼina Chief Sandford Big Plume and Premier Klein to find solutions to a SW Connector Road.

2004 - Chief Sandford Big Plume of the Tsuu Tʼina and Premier Ralph Klein sign an Agreement in Principle to build the SW portion of the ring road through Tsuu Tʼina lands, with the province retaining control of the right-of-way. Negotiations over compensation and specific alignment begin.

2005 - Final framework for infrastructure agreement signed

2006 - After 15 years of ordnance clearing on the Harvey Barracks by the Federal Government, the land is formally returned to the Tsuu Tʼina.

2006 - Functional Planning Study of the ring road is completed, including a largely finished alignment.

2007 - Independent appraisal for Tsuu Tʼina lands completed.

2008 - SWRR Alignment finalised

2009 - Draft Ring Road agreement reached between Province and Tsuu T'ina Leadership.

2009 - Agreement put to vote by members of the Tsuu Tʼina and is rejected by about 60% against. The agreement called for $275 million dollars and almost 2000 acres of land to be exchanged for the 400 acres needed for the road. After the rejection, the Nation states that they are open to continuing the discussions and to tweak the deal based on 1 or 2 points of concern in the original agreement. The Province decides to walk away from all negotiations, declaring the process ʻdeadʼ.

2009 - The Province and City sign a Memorandum of Understanding to develop a transportation corridor along 37th street.

2010 - The scope of Memorandum of Understanding is widened. The aim is to study multiple corridors in the SW, not just 37th street.

2011 - The Province releases its Functional Planning Study of the 5 potential corridors for the SW Ring Road.

2011 - The Tsuu Tʼina takes a poll of itʼs members, and with 68% in favour, the Nation agrees to re-open talks with the Province.

2011 - Transportation Minister Luc Ouelette states that the province will re-enter negotiations with the Tsuu Tʼina. The Province agrees to re-word the portions of the 2009 deal that the Tsuu Tʼina took issue with, including a guarantee of a land swap. The compensation and alignment would be unchanged from the 2009 agreement. Results of the 2011 Functional Planning Study are postponed.

2011 - October deadline for an agreement missed. New Premier Elected and Transportation Minister appointed.

[AB Born]

2011 - The Tsuu Tʼina takes a poll of itʼs members, and with 68% in favour, the Nation agrees to re-open talks with the Province.


I didn't know about that... that's great news!

[5seconds]

I didn't know about that... that's great news!

Yes, I think that was in June. The Province and the Nation are officially in talks again, though it sounds like slow-going. Then again, it's all behind closed doors, so who knows how it's really progressing.

[Mazrim]

Thanks for doing all that research, 5seconds! Very interesting read.

[craner]

Yes indeed - great job 5Seconds!
Man I hope this gets worked out soon.

[freeweed]

Yes, I think that was in June. The Province and the Nation are officially in talks again, though it sounds like slow-going. Then again, it's all behind closed doors, so who knows how it's really progressing.

Pray they re-use some (and by some I mean most) of the previous work. I see at least 5 years of discussion last time, possibly more depending on what we call "discussion". From "hey let's build this road" to "nah, deal not good enough" it took 5 freaking years.

Empires have risen and fallen in less time.

[5seconds]

Thanks Mazrim and Craner. I just figured that I had all of this information, and it would be a good idea to put it together, and hopefully be interesting to others!

What really got me thinking about all of this, was the random dates being thrown around about when the negotiations for this road began. I have heard in lots of places (Sun, Herald, CTV etc. Even Nenshi mentioned it once) that the first negotiations began in 1947, but I have this image of the Westhills area in 1949 that shows that it is nothing more than farmland. I just couldn't believe that the City had begun real negotiations for a road that connected 2 farming areas that wouldn't be annexed by the city until 1954/1956, (Not to mention through a Military camp and a First Nations reserve). Planning that far in advance, maybe, but not negotiations.

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a400/jessesalus/Westhills1949-1.jpg
(1 is the numbers on Signal Hill, 2 is the intersection of Richmond Road and 53rd Street (Sarcee Trail), 3 is the intersection of 53rd street (Sarcee Trail) and 50th avenue (Glenmore Trail)

Pray they re-use some (and by some I mean most) of the previous work. I see at least 5 years of discussion last time, possibly more depending on what we call "discussion". From "hey let's build this road" to "nah, deal not good enough" it took 5 freaking years.

Empires have risen and fallen in less time.

I couldn't agree more. My understanding is that the last agreement will form almost all of the next one. Apart from the 3 identified areas of concern (Guaranteed land, guaranteed access, reversion of title if the road is no longer needed) there will be very little changed.

[freeweed]

OT, but the numbers on Signal Hill are one of my absolute favourite parts of Calgary.

[AB Born]

I had to do a fair amount of driving today so I snapped these on the way to my appointments:

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7175/6403460185_8f22b1127a_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanw-ca/6403460185/)
Stoney Trail & GlenmoreTrail (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanw-ca/6403460185/) by JordanW.ca (http://www.flickr.com/people/jordanw-ca/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7165/6403460707_d7aab71c93_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanw-ca/6403460707/)
Stoney Trail & GlenmoreTrail (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanw-ca/6403460707/) by JordanW.ca (http://www.flickr.com/people/jordanw-ca/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7146/6403464541_e53a4a9b9a_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanw-ca/6403464541/)
Stoney Trail (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanw-ca/6403464541/) by JordanW.ca (http://www.flickr.com/people/jordanw-ca/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7152/6403465115_7a44c0d8be_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanw-ca/6403465115/)
Stoney Trail (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanw-ca/6403465115/) by JordanW.ca (http://www.flickr.com/people/jordanw-ca/), on Flickr

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6239/6403466165_2442eeae99_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanw-ca/6403466165/)
Stoney Trail & 17 Ave (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanw-ca/6403466165/) by JordanW.ca (http://www.flickr.com/people/jordanw-ca/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7158/6403470325_ef62b74c8f_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanw-ca/6403470325/)
Stoney Trail & 17 Ave (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanw-ca/6403470325/) by JordanW.ca (http://www.flickr.com/people/jordanw-ca/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7035/6403474213_e1458ff61f_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanw-ca/6403474213/)
Stoney Trail & 96 Ave (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanw-ca/6403474213/) by JordanW.ca (http://www.flickr.com/people/jordanw-ca/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7166/6403478187_76c9dca611_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanw-ca/6403478187/)
Stoney Trail & 96 Ave (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanw-ca/6403478187/) by JordanW.ca (http://www.flickr.com/people/jordanw-ca/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7030/6403521097_b554fe416a_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanw-ca/6403521097/)
Tuscany - Scenic Acres Pedestrian Bridge (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanw-ca/6403521097/) by JordanW.ca (http://www.flickr.com/people/jordanw-ca/), on Flickr

[mersar]

Was down in the SE on the weekend, and lots happening and visible with Stoney since we've had nice weather up until this week. Centre pier is poured at Glenmore, about half the piers and abutments are poured at 22X/Stoney/88th, one of the temporary detour ramps at Deerfoot is open, earthworks for the future 130th ave interchange are taking shape and initial work on the piers/abutments for the CPR flyover are also starting. The bridge over the canal looks pretty complete, deck appears to be mostly done from what I can see from a distance. 104th Street is paved and almost ready for when 88th Street gets closed down at 22X this spring, minus turn lanes on 22X itself and a better barrier across where 104th Street ends (one car already missed the fact its a T intersection and went through the barrier into the canal before Christmas).

[eggbert]

I was on Stoney this morning and there's lots of activity going on directly to the southwest of the Stoney/Nose Hill Drive intersection and further towards the train tracks. I saw excavators moving dirt around and a large mobile crane. They were also surveying over top of the train tracks where the new bridge will be and had it all staked out. I assume this is part of the Nose Hill/Stoney interchange?

[You Need A Thneed]

I was on Stoney this morning and there's lots of activity going on directly to the southwest of the Stoney/Nose Hill Drive intersection and further towards the train tracks. I saw excavators moving dirt around and a large mobile crane. They were also surveying over top of the train tracks where the new bridge will be and had it all staked out. I assume this is part of the Nose Hill/Stoney interchange?

Yup, sounds like it.

The Stoney/Nose Hill Contract includes a bridge on Nose Hill over Stoney, and Bridge on Stoney over the CPR tracks (twinning the current bridge), widening the existing bridge over the CPR tracks, a pedestrian bridge over the CPR Tracks, and some pedestrian underpass structures under various roadways.

[5seconds]

I just got an answer from Alberta Transportation about the ROW width of Highway 22 through the west-end of the Tsuu T'ina reserve. It's 30.18 meters wide.

[Mazrim]

I just got an answer from Alberta Transportation about the ROW width of Highway 22 through the west-end of the Tsuu T'ina reserve. It's 30.18 meters wide.

If you squeezed in a minimum standard 4-lane section in there, you'd basically be at the ROW boundaries with maybe a couple meters on either side of the paved shoulders. Ouch.

[Yahoo]

I was on Stoney this morning and there's lots of activity going on directly to the southwest of the Stoney/Nose Hill Drive intersection and further towards the train tracks. I saw excavators moving dirt around and a large mobile crane. They were also surveying over top of the train tracks where the new bridge will be and had it all staked out. I assume this is part of the Nose Hill/Stoney interchange?

Really, I walked my dog along the Tuscany Hill and didn't see anything. There is a pile of dirt, but that has been there for months. From what I can tell they were supposed to start prelim work on the interchange in December.

I hope they stay on schedule. It's a real shame they didn't build an interchange from the get go. There have been at least 2 deaths at the dangerous set of lights. It's like the province is punishing Calgary for pushing ahead with construction of Stoney. I can see no other explanation why the interchange at the base of a hill on the busiest section of Stoney is the last to get an interchange. (Other than money, but the province was swimming in it at the time - Ralph didn't even know what to do with it except pass out $400)

[MalcolmTucker]

Important to remember that due to Stelmach we are years ahead of plan on the whole ring road enterprise.

[Mazrim]

I can see no other explanation why the interchange at the base of a hill on the busiest section of Stoney is the last to get an interchange. (Other than money, but the province was swimming in it at the time - Ralph didn't even know what to do with it except pass out $400)
It's one of the more complicated and expensive interchanges, due to the interaction with the close-by Tuscany/Scenic Acres interchange as well as the Rail Bridge and Bow River Bridge. I imagine that all factored into its timing.