Calgary Stoney Trail [Ring Road]

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by 5seconds

'It seems outrageous': Engineer says province grossly overbuilding southwest ring road

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-...thwest-section

I've been outraged since reading that self-serving article yesterday. Time for the government to push ahead at top speed and get this leg and the west one done.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by 5seconds

'It seems outrageous': Engineer says province grossly overbuilding southwest ring road

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-...thwest-section

Glad someone agrees with what I have been saying. Those inner lanes are a pointless waste of money that will only ever be useful if we deliberately build a bad city that requires them. An 8-10 lane road with no express lanes would be more than sufficient for any future we can plan for.

[milomilo]

I did email the minister a while back, but it didn't really shed much light:

Originally Posted by Minister's assistant

Thank you for your August 16, 2017 email regarding the Southwest Calgary Ring Road and the Government of Alberta’s approach to outer ring roads. As the Ministerial Assistant to Honourable Brian Mason, Minister of Transportation, I am able to provide the following information.



Conceptual planning for outer ring roads around Edmonton and Calgary occurred in the early 2000s and was halted in 2012.



The area southwest of Calgary is mostly developed within the city limits; therefore, land was required from the Tsuut’ina Nation for the initial build of Southwest Calgary Ring Road, and any other capacity improvements that may be required in the future. At this time, the long-term configuration of the transportation corridor through this area is not yet determined, but the lanes currently being constructed allow for the future addition of transportation options, including transit and active transportation.



In comparing freeway construction costs, the increased cost of a collector/distributor freeway is generally due to building longer bridges than initially needed, in order to accommodate future expansion. Constructing longer bridges involves higher initial costs, but is a cost-effective strategy when future expansion is anticipated, as these bridges do not need to be lengthened when the freeway is expanded. This approach also minimizes future traffic disruptions during any expansion work.



If you have any further questions, please contact Michal Pylko, Director of Highway and Roadside Planning. Mr. Pylko can be reached toll-free at 310-0000, then 780‑984‑2916, or at michal.pylko@gov.ab.ca.



Thank you for taking the time to write. I hope this information is helpful.



Sincerely,



Jennifer D. Burgess

Ministerial Assistant

[Mazrim]

I like how they conveniently sneak in that this engineer lives in Discovery Ridge partway through the article. Very objective look at things, I'm sure.

God forbid we ever do any future proofing of anything. By the way, what happened to all those flying cars we were supposed to be using that they predicted in the 60s?

EDIT: I was wondering - did they try and future proof Highway 2 between Leduc and Edmonton because of property issues as well? Obviously it hasn't yet seen any use but I would be curious to know the thought process there.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

I like how they conveniently sneak in that this engineer lives in Discovery Ridge partway through the article. Very objective look at things, I'm sure.

God forbid we ever do any future proofing of anything. By the way, what happened to all those flying cars we were supposed to be using that they predicted in the 60s?

EDIT: I was wondering - did they try and future proof Highway 2 between Leduc and Edmonton because of property issues as well? Obviously it hasn't yet seen any use but I would be curious to know the thought process there.

I'd like to know why this engineer never said anything during the planning process for this leg? It's not like the province didn't send out a ton of info and hold numerous open houses on the project. The timing of his intervention makes me wonder if he isn't being paid by YYC Cares to advocate against the project.

IIRC the article said he was a structural engineer. Do structural engineers normally have anything to do with road network planning?

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

I like how they conveniently sneak in that this engineer lives in Discovery Ridge partway through the article. Very objective look at things, I'm sure.

God forbid we ever do any future proofing of anything. By the way, what happened to all those flying cars we were supposed to be using that they predicted in the 60s?

EDIT: I was wondering - did they try and future proof Highway 2 between Leduc and Edmonton because of property issues as well? Obviously it hasn't yet seen any use but I would be curious to know the thought process there.

Originally Posted by Corndogger

I'd like to know why this engineer never said anything during the planning process for this leg? It's not like the province didn't send out a ton of info and hold numerous open houses on the project. The timing of his intervention makes me wonder if he isn't being paid by YYC Cares to advocate against the project.

IIRC the article said he was a structural engineer. Do structural engineers normally have anything to do with road network planning?

I'm no fan of the NIMBYs in the SW, but are you aware of what he is specifically talking about? This is planning for a whole extra ring road inside of the one currently being built. It's not future proofing, it's needless waste. No projections would ever require the volumes that would justify a 16 lane collector express freeway in that area.

[craner]

^ That's sooo awesome - Do it Now !

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by milomilo

I'm no fan of the NIMBYs in the SW, but are you aware of what he is specifically talking about? This is planning for a whole extra ring road inside of the one currently being built. It's not future proofing, it's needless waste. No projections would ever require the volumes that would justify a 16 lane collector express freeway in that area.

Anyone who's actually been paying attention to this project has known about these plans for a long time. You would also know why the road has to be that big in that area. Since you and others against this projects don't know the history and reasoning behind the scope of the project why would you expect anyone to believe that you know the area will NEVER require the capacity they are proposing? There are plenty of examples in Calgary where we were told roads would be able to handle the volumes they were designed for well into the future only to find out a few short years later they were already reaching capacity levels that allowed for relatively free movement of vehicles. The SWRR will likely have 100K/day shortly after the west leg is done. The 30 year forecast is a joke.

One other point. A lot more roads in Calgary need a CD system for safety and efficiency. It's time we start building big city roads and stop catering to special interest groups.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by craner

^ That's sooo awesome - Do it Now !

Build the west leg first and expand the NE leg and then build the rest of the SW part. For good measure throw in a five level stack so we can say we're the first in the nation to have one.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Anyone who's actually been paying attention to this project has known about these plans for a long time. You would also know why the road has to be that big in that area. Since you and others against this projects don't know the history and reasoning behind the scope of the project why would you expect anyone to believe that you know the area will NEVER require the capacity they are proposing? There are plenty of examples in Calgary where we were told roads would be able to handle the volumes they were designed for well into the future only to find out a few short years later they were already reaching capacity levels that allowed for relatively free movement of vehicles. The SWRR will likely have 100K/day shortly after the west leg is done. The 30 year forecast is a joke.

One other point. A lot more roads in Calgary need a CD system for safety and efficiency. It's time we start building big city roads and stop catering to special interest groups.

My posts have never said anything to indicate I am against the SWRR, I have always been supportive of it and am glad it's getting built, and hopefully the remaining section is built shortly after. What I am opposed to is needless government waste, a position supported by most Calgarians but somehow lacking when it comes to arenas and pointless overbuilding.

The government have stated they have no plans to build an outer ring road, they knew this in 2012 yet they still built the SWRR with provision to include it. They also project relatively light usage of the road out until 2050, less than half of what Deerfoot will carry on a much smaller and worse designed road. If you don't believe them, fine, but it's the only trustworthy data we have and the only data they will be using to decide how big of a road to build. That said, I think we can all be pretty confident the SW will remain the least used section of the ringroad, so why would we choose to give that section a C/D system and not the rest of the ringroad which will be more heavily used?

As you pointed out though, this is all water under the bridge. The time to be opposed to this was years ago as to change it now would be an even bigger waste. I need to start being more vocal on this as it's not the first time I've seen a huge mistake which is largely unnoticed, but I don't have the direct line to the media that the busybody NIMBYs in the SW do.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by 5seconds

I think securing the land was a good idea, but I can see why building the interchange bridges to accommodate 16 lanes might be a questionable move. By the time it's needed, I cant help but think that the infrastructure would be in need of rehabilitation or replacement anyway, and could be rebuilt at that time to accommodate either new lanes or new modes using that corridor.

I agree. In the highly unlikely event that we absolutely, no other option, need to build a 16 lane C/D there, then rebuilding the overpasses is still possible. Someone posted on here once that the 'time value' of money that is assumed when building infrastructure is something like 5% per year. So spending $100M today costs $1 billion+ 50 years from now. Whatever additional money we are spending to 'future proof' this road would have been much better spent on infrastructure we need today.

Still though, I think the idea that we must plan for a road that big in the future is absurd. We have the power to build the city we want, and the only way a road of that size would be required is if we built two more Calgary sized cities on either end of it. We would have failed spectacularly if we end up in a situation we have built this road for.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by 5seconds

I disagree with this. It is directly adjacent to communities containing thousands of drivers, most of whom are desperate for an alternate route to cross the Elbow river. Throw in Nation developments, and I think it will fill the needs of the pent-up demand that's already there, and then generate a good deal more just by being open.

It will be interesting to see how things change once that area is opened up with much more accessibility. But as I see it, along with intracity traffic, the NW and NE sections are heavily used as they serve as a bypass for regional/national east-west traffic, and similarly the NE and SE sections serve as a bypass for north-south traffic. The amount of traffic coming from the south headed west is not as significant as the other flows I mentioned, at least for now, so I can't see it being as heavily trafficked.

I could be wrong though and perhaps if the TCH was re-routed to a more south alignment things would change.

[craner]

Originally Posted by 5seconds

I think securing the land was a good idea, but I can see why building the interchange bridges to accommodate 16 lanes might be a questionable move. By the time it's needed, I cant help but think that the infrastructure would be in need of rehabilitation or replacement anyway, and could be rebuilt at that time to accommodate either new lanes or new modes using that corridor.

This I completley agree with (without my tougue in cheek).

[speedog]

Originally Posted by milomilo

It will be interesting to see how things change once that area is opened up with much more accessibility. But as I see it, along with intracity traffic, the NW and NE sections are heavily used as they serve as a bypass for regional/national east-west traffic, and similarly the NE and SE sections serve as a bypass for north-south traffic. The amount of traffic coming from the south headed west is not as significant as the other flows I mentioned, at least for now, so I can't see it being as heavily trafficked.

I could be wrong though and perhaps if the TCH was re-routed to a more south alignment things would change.

Something to ponder...



From http://calgaryringroad.wordpress.com

[lubicon]

Originally Posted by speedog

Something to ponder...



From http://calgaryringroad.wordpress.com

Not sure this is necessary as drawn, but for sure the one thing they need to do is bypass Strathmore completely. The town keeps growing and adding traffic lights along the TCH.

[craner]

^ I like this - any indication what the time frame for this is - 50+ years ?

[DoubleK]

Wow. When will this stop? Whose interests do they think they are representing?

[dmuzika]

Originally Posted by lubicon

Not sure this is necessary as drawn, but for sure the one thing they need to do is bypass Strathmore completely. The town keeps growing and adding traffic lights along the TCH.

In later stages of the study, including the Executive Summary, the province scaled the scope back to a simple bypass for Strathmore (similar to those around Vegreville and Portage La Prairie). The corners between Strathmore and Gliechen remain, but realistically they should have been dealt with when TCH 1 was twinned in the 1980s.

If there was a connection that tied in the Strathmore Bypass to Hwy 560, then TCH 1 could follow Glenmore Trail through Calgary, an upgrade from 16 Ave.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by 5seconds

So it looks like the people behind YYCcares are now attacking the ring road plan from another angle. This time on the Glenmore-37th street side. Stay tuned.

[Socguy]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

Wow. When will this stop? Whose interests do they think they are representing?

In this case, what they are doing makes a perverse amount of sense. This project is on the clock. If they can succeed in stalling it long enough it's over. Don't engage in the design and consultation process to start the clock and then tie it up in the courts to run out the clock. I fully expect a non-stop barrage of issues and complaints to be raised till the project is done.

One would hope the courts are smart enough to ask these folks why they didn't raise these issues during the consultation process.