[dmuzika]

The Province of Alberta is planning on upgrading the Deerfoot Trail/Glenmore Trail interchange, the busiest interchange in the City of Calgary. Current major deficiencies include 3 core lanes being reduced to 2 core lanes on Deerfoot Trail and no direct ramp from NB Deerfoot Trail to WB Glenmore Trail (current access is via Heritage Meadows Rd and Heritage Dr that includes 2 signalized intersections), see http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/glengp.htm. THe City of Cagary website also now has a link to the project.

The project includes


new vehicle bridge adjacent to existing (east side) over Glenmore Trail
realignment and geometric improvements of loops and ramps
addition of one core lane in both directions on Deerfoot Trail over Glenmore Trail
addition of extra lanes and shoulder widening on Deerfoot Trail north and south of Glenmore Trail
addition of collector-distributor lanes on southbound Deerfoot Trail and eastbound Glenmore Trail


A map of the project is http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/glen-m5.pdf

This project is part of Stage 1 of the 2006 Deerfoot Trail/Glenmore Trail Interchange Functional Planning Study. The Ultimate Stage includes 2 flyovers and C/D lanes on Glenmore Trail between Deerfoot Trail and Blackfoot Trail.

While Stage 1 addresses the lane deficiencies on Deerfoot Trail, it does not address the NB --> WB access. If the interchange is the busiest in Calgary and connects the city's major N-S and E-S corridors, it should be full access and free flowing. While the interchange being constructed as the Ultimate Stage would be ideal, due to funding restraints it may not be realistic. As a compromise, I think at the very least the NB --> WB flyover should be constructed as part of the initial stage. The interchange would then be similar to the recently completed McKnight Blvd/Metis Trail/36 St NE interchange, http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/bu/transportation_infrastructure/ne_lrt_extension/mcknight_blvd_36_interchange/mcknight_36street_interchange_plan.pdf.

It appears Stage 1 is still being studied, I wonder if there is any chance it may be modified to add the flyover. Any thoughts?

[craner]

:previous: I agree with you. If it's the two busiest roads in Calgary it needs to be free flow - do it right from the beginning.
I'm wondering how they are going to get additional core lanes on Glenmore under the existing Deerfoot bridge with the present pier locations. :shrug:

[Skeletor]

There's plenty of room under there. They can fit at least 6 lanes in the middle section. They can remove the sloped concrete embankments and put in a retaining wall for more room for the C-D lanes if necessary. Could likely squeeze at least 12 lanes total under that bridge.

[craner]

There's plenty of room under there. They can fit at least 6 lanes in the middle section. They can remove the sloped concrete embankments and put in a retaining wall for more room for the C-D lanes if necessary. Could likely squeeze at least 12 lanes total under that bridge.

I was through there again today and my concern is the center opening - there is only room for 4 lanes (2 each direction) and a Jersey barrier. If they want to reuse the existing bridge then the Glenmore lanes (going same direction) will be separated by a pier.
(that post make any sense ?)

[craner]

***INFO***
There is an open house tonight at the Glenmore Inn on the Deerfoot / Glenmore interchange.

Hopfully we can find out about the # of Glenmore lanes going under Deerfoot.
(Remember at 14 Street SW they only left 2 EB lanes on Glenmore under that bridge :koko: :hell:)

[Skeletor]

I forgot about this thread! I drove by there since my last post, and you are absolutely right. There is only room for 4 lanes between the pillars. They could probably fit another 3 or 4 on either side to bring the total to 10-12 lanes, but then at least one of the straight through lanes would have to split off from the other two. >>>HERE<<< (http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/glen-m1.pdf) is the ultimate stage plan, and it only shows two lanes in each direction as well as two collector/diverter lanes in either direction for a total of 8. It doesn't look like they plan on rebuilding the existing bridge at all. That sucks. Lets hope they are smart enough to leave room for 6 lanes under the new one, but somehow I doubt it, and I'm not sure if that would even be possible without rebuilding the existing bridge.

I wish I would have known about that open house earlier. I probably would have dropped in, but seeing as it's over at 8, I probably won't have time. :(

[craner]

I forgot about this thread! I drove by there since my last post, and you are absolutely right. There is only room for 4 lanes between the pillars. They could probably fit another 3 or 4 on either side to bring the total to 10-12 lanes, but then at least one of the straight through lanes would have to split off from the other two. >>>HERE<<< (http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/glen-m1.pdf) is the ultimate stage plan, and it only shows two lanes in each direction as well as two collector/diverter lanes in either direction for a total of 8. It doesn't look like they plan on rebuilding the existing bridge at all. That sucks. Lets hope they are smart enough to leave room for 6 lanes under the new one, but somehow I doubt it, and I'm not sure if that would even be possible without rebuilding the existing bridge.

I wish I would have known about that open house earlier. I probably would have dropped in, but seeing as it's over at 8, I probably won't have time. :(

The new bridge will accommodate 6 core lanes for Glenmore undernieth but as you say this is irrelevant unless they replace the existing bridge. Talking to the Alberta Transportation reps at the open house they said the existing structure still has about 50years worth of life and it is the City's responsibility to relace it as it suits the needs for Deerfoot which is all the Province is responsible for. So don't hold your breath for anything soon.:(

[sheldonsgongshow]

This interchange upgrade seems to be slower than anything else. They still haven't announced what officially is happening in the first stage and when.(supposed to start this spring)

[pjcharlier]

I'm glad this expansion is going to happen, It's long over due!
But It won't Help South bound Traffic Unless they widen Deerfoot to 3 lanes over Bow bottom Trail S.E.
Traffic will still backup past the Calf Robe Bridge due to congestion from 3 lanes squeezing down to 2 lanes!
I see no mention of surveys or construction plans on any of the provincial or city sites. :brickwall:

http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k154/pjcharlier/stuff/deerfoot.gif

[Mazrim]

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

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

[polishavenger]

I dont understand why they have included such a wide fly over for NB Deerfoot to WB Glenmore and EB Glenmore to NB Deerfoot. Would it not be more cost effective and better for drivers to have a more direct flyover with a gentler curve?

Any traffic engineers out there who can weigh in on this?

[Mazrim]

A more direct flyover means they cross each other in the middle of the interchange, which costs a ton more money to do. By sweeping around, you have only a couple short bridge structures instead one very long structure.

[polishavenger]

A more direct flyover means they cross each other in the middle of the interchange, which costs a ton more money to do. By sweeping around, you have only a couple short bridge structures instead one very long structure.

How does sweeping around result in only a few short bridge structures? It looks to me like its one very long bridge. You can align the more direct bridges in such a way as to cross at relatively low points, meaning all that would happen is one or two additional support columns.

[mersar]

How does sweeping around result in only a few short bridge structures? It looks to me like its one very long bridge. You can align the more direct bridges in such a way as to cross at relatively low points, meaning all that would happen is one or two additional support columns.

In this case it is long sweeping bridges in the ultimate plan, likely for a couple reasons. First is design speed, second is to provide adequate separation between the ramps on blackfoot and deerfoot, and third probably relates to where they would need to position the piers for the bridges. Mazrim is right that it would be more costly to do a more direct offramp, but you're going to end up with a triple layer stacked interchange and its usually more cost efficient to double the length of a bridge rather then double its height.

[Mazrim]

Heh, I just looked at the ultimate stage plan on Alberta Transportation's website and those are some ridiculous bridges. The key is that there is no triple stacking, which saves money...but they made the ramp bridges so insanely long that it doesn't make sense. There are a few places where you can use earth fill and retaining walls instead of a continuous bridge, and I think that's what you'll end up seeing in the future. On both Stoney Trail and Anthony Henday Drive, long ramp bridges like that have ALWAYS been reduced into pieces and using more earth fill.

[O-tacular]

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

[Bassic Lab]

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

A proper cloverleaf would, in many ways, be a great deal worse than the current interchange. There is a reason nobody builds them anymore.

[O-tacular]

Please do tell... Clearly the current interchange cannot handle NB - WB traffic.

[frinkprof]

Please do tell... Clearly the current interchange cannot handle NB - WB traffic.Why Not Build a Cloverleaf?

There are many technical elements for a transportation designer to consider when designing an interchange. Some key factors that often negate the use of a full cloverleaf include:

Weaving and traffic volumes
Safety
Land availability

In urban areas, left turning volumes are often very high at major intersections. On a full cloverleaf design, all left turning movements use the loop ramps and generate weaving maneuvers. The problem arises in the area of the weave between two loop ramps. If the volume entering the loop is high, coupled with a high volume of exiting traffic from an adjacent loop, then the weave required to get from one loop to the next cannot be made in a smooth transition. Eventually, vehicles begin stopping in the weave area which contributes to serious accidents, particularly on major high-speed thoroughfares and when there is only a short distance available for weaving.

As a result, The City of Calgary has removed loops in two cloverleaf interchanges at Blackfoot Trail/Glenmore Trail and at Sarcee Trail/Trans Canada Highway. Similarly, The City of Toronto has removed all of its cloverleaf interchanges.

Another factor influencing the choice of interchange design is the amount of land a full cloverleaf requires. To build a cloverleaf safely and in accordance with accepted design standards, it requires a large area (please refer to the diagram available for download on the right of your screen).

The use of a full cloverleaf for interchanges on major roadways is not recommended for many city situations due to high traffic volumes. Cloverleafs are most appropriate for applications in rural areas with low turning movements and low traffic volumes.http://www.calgary.ca/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_0_104_0_0_35/http;/content.calgary.ca/CCA/City+Hall/Business+Units/Transportation+Infrastructure/Construction+Projects/Interchanges/Interchanges.htm

Also, your transformation is almost complete O-tacular. First the move to the suburbs, next a verbose rant about inadequate road/interchange infrastructure. You just need to verbally oppose anything new being built near your residence, yell at some kids to get off your lawn and brag about the nearby school site (that won't be built upon until your kids are too old to attend it).

[O-tacular]

[QUOTE=frinkprof;5114962


Also, your transformation is almost complete O-tacular. First the move to the suburbs, next a verbose rant about inadequate road/interchange infrastructure. You just need to verbally oppose anything new being built near your residence, yell at some kids to get off your lawn and brag about the nearby school site (that won't be built upon until your kids are too old to attend it).

Ahaha!:haha: So true Frinkprof. I feel so strange being on this end of the spectrum. Next is a minivan, 1.5 kids and a golden retriever. But I still hold no illusions for a school being built in time for my future kids to attend. As for opposing development near my future home, I say bring it!!! The sooner they can build the SELRT and develop Seton the better!!! Density all the way!!! Give me some credit, It's not like I'm living in a single family home or driving an SUV.

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

/End overlong defence of my suburban transformation.;)

[frinkprof]

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

/End overlong defence of my suburban transformation.;)Haha, yeah I get all that, and it all has validity to it. Just giving you a hard time of course.

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

[Ramsayfarian]

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


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

[mersar]

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

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

[O-tacular]

:previous:

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

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

[Mazrim]

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

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

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

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

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

[polishavenger]

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

[Mazrim]

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

[calgarydude]

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

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

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

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

[polishavenger]

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

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

[dmuzika]

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

The province has plans to twin the overpass over Glenmore Trail to increase the number of lanes on Deerfoot Trail (http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/OH1-GDI-Stage1.pdf), however the basic interchange configeration will remain the same. There are ulitmatle plans for mulitple flyovers for the Glenmore/Deerfoot interchange and a series of collector/distributor lanes on Glenmore between Deerfoot and Blackfoot Trails (see http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/glen-m1.pdf and http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/glen-m2.pdf).

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

[Tropics]

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

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

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

[Doug]

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

[lubicon]

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

The province has plans to twin the overpass over Glenmore Trail to increase the number of lanes on Deerfoot Trail (http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/OH1-GDI-Stage1.pdf), however the basic interchange configeration will remain the same. There are ulitmatle plans for mulitple flyovers for the Glenmore/Deerfoot interchange and a series of collector/distributor lanes on Glenmore between Deerfoot and Blackfoot Trails (see http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/glen-m1.pdf and http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/glen-m2.pdf).

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

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

[Mazrim]

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

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

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