TCH Route Through Calgary

[mersar]

Originally Posted by craner

This sounds like a reasonable option - just have to deal with the "Hazardous Goods" issue accross the reservoir.

Yeah, that is a fairly big thing that would need to be dealt with. Its also a provincial issue, since its the province that sets the rules on protection of drinking water sources.

[freeweed]

At least I'm not the only one who notices the abysmal transportation options E-W in the north part of the city. All I can say is GO STONEY! There's something to be said about picking where you choose to live based on access to both transit AND freeways.

[dmuzika]

Originally Posted by Boris2k7

See, now that was a more reasonable rebuttal.

Now I question you, just for the sake of argumentation what standards you would bring those roads up to. McKnightmare doesn't sound like it would be too much of a problem, but what about John Laurie? And would this route be suitable for a BRT or HOV, if it was expanded (or even if it wasn't?). I ask this because I feel that road expansions are the absolute last resort, unless there is a situation involving a bottleneck due to previous expansions. I would go so far as to ask what could be done with this "corridor" and if it has the potential for densification if a higher-speed route was constructed.

I think that on the TCH at least, the point of this thread, you and I are seeing eye to eye, which I of course find quite aggreable.

Well we might disagree a little here. I would expand John Laurie Blvd to 6 lanes between Shaganappi Trail, much like what happened to Beddington Trail this past summer. I would also do something with the Shaganappi/John Laurie interesection, whether it would be building an interchange or expanding the number turning lanes. Shaganappi would serve as connector to Crowchild (though another possiblity is Sarcee Trail), where "express" traffic would go if they wanted to go further west, as it's already a freeway, so there is no need to build a parellel freeway. As it stands now, John Laurie prohibits truck traffic west of Shaganappi and downgrades from an expressway to an arterial street west of Sarcee, so I would be inclined leave it as is. Eventually I would maybe construct an interchange at Charleswood Drive and possibly Brisebois Dr (avoid adding more signals) and either close or convert the other intersections between Shaganappi and 14 St into RIRO.

As for BRT? I would be curious to see how successful it would be in Calgary and I'm not sure of if the John Laurie/McKnight corridor would be the best place for the first experiment. I say allow for it down the road (no pun intended). A possiblity for HOV could be to designate certain lanes as HOV during peak periods only.

Originally Posted by craner

This sounds like a reasonable option - just have to deal with the "Hazardous Goods" issue accross the reservoir.

If I'm not mistaken, I believe that certain not-so-Hazardous Goods are permitted to use the causeway. As for the others? I'm not sure the real hazardous goods should be taking 16 Ave either, so that's where Stoney Trail comes in.

[lubicon]

Originally Posted by dmuzika

If I'm not mistaken, I believe that certain not-so-Hazardous Goods are permitted to use the causeway. As for the others? I'm not sure the real hazardous goods should be taking 16 Ave either, so that's where Stoney Trail comes in.

Only Class 6 dangerous goods are prohibited on the Glenmore Causeway (the part that crosses over the water reservoir). Class 6 substances are toxic and infectious substances (poisons, biohazards, etc). For obvious reasons (the Glenmore reservoir supplies about 1/2 Calgary's water) these substances would have a very negative effect if they spilled into the reservoir.

[twsnagel]

Well, I'm personally opposed to any further development, because I own a house backing onto JLB between 14 St. and the McKnight corner.

NIMBY ALERT!

Anyways, in all honesty, the corner where JLB turns into McKnight is a disaster.

I see frequent accidents there.

Not only does the traffic have to slow to ~30km/h around that corner, there is also a very strange left-lane stop-sign/merge from eastbound 48th Ave traffic joining eastbound McKnight.

The situation could be greatly solved with a single-lane underpass for eastbound 48th, an easement of the curve into surrounding parkland, and a pedestrian over/under pass.

The rest of McKnight to Deerfoot could be solved with a fairly cheap 16th-Ave type project, with only about 10 house buy-outs.

There were community meetings about the McKnight / JLB corner about 3 years ago, but still no project.

Does anyone know the current status of this corner?

[mersar]

The McKnight/JLB corner is on the radar, but as project to be done when the opportunity arises (in other words they aren't planning on expropriating, for now they'll just buy up properties as they come up for sale). The latest the city has on their site is from 2004.

The preferred option for that corner involves buying 16 houses, and is pretty much what you describe.

[twsnagel]

Cool links. I'm fascinated by the McKnight plans - how do you go northbound on 19th St NE from eastbound McKnight?

See here

Strange...

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by twsnagel

Cool links. I'm fascinated by the McKnight plans - how do you go northbound on 19th St NE from eastbound McKnight?

See here

Strange...

If you mean 12th St instead of 19th (I'm assuming you do), you turn south onto 14th Street, west onto 46th Ave, then North on 12th. With the signage that will go up once the interchange is done, it'll be well marked.

[twsnagel]

Yeah, 12th, my bad.

Hahaha, you sound like I have no faith.

[Koolfire]

Originally Posted by twsnagel

Cool links. I'm fascinated by the McKnight plans - how do you go northbound on 19th St NE from eastbound McKnight?

See here

Strange...

What I don't get is why do we need that new road that connects to Goodard Ave near 4th St NE?

[YYCguys]

.

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by twsnagel

Cool links. I'm fascinated by the McKnight plans - how do you go northbound on 19th St NE from eastbound McKnight?

See here

Strange...

I will be moving to the NW in the fall and until Stoney Trail is completed all the way to Deerfoot, I will be forced to use JLB and McKnight to get to Westjet, so I'm curious to know what these plans are. Do you have another way to access the link (it's broken)?

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by YYCguys

I will be moving to the NW in the fall and until Stoney Trail is completed all the way to Deerfoot, I will be forced to use JLB and McKnight to get to Westjet, so I'm curious to know what these plans are. Do you have another way to access the link (it's broken)?

This fall Stoney will be complete at least to Beddington. Stoney->Beddington->Deerfoot will be completely freeflow. Much better than JLB etc. Stoney to Deerfoot will be done by 2010 at the latest.

Besides, any plans for McKnight are so far in the future as to be academic. For one thing, the city needs to buy and demolish several dozen homes from the last I saw of the plans - and that hasn't even started. It will be 10 years minimum before JLB/McKnight improves, and that's not even worrying about all the lights on west JLB.

Trust me, the Ring Road is the way to go.

[mersar]

Stoney from Sarcee to Deerfoot to 17th Ave SE should all be open by this October actually. Deerfoot to 17th Ave will be for sure as thats what the P3 agreement stated and the part from Sarcee to Deerfoot really only needs the last stretch from the CPR bridge (14th Street NE) to Deerfoot to be paved which hopefully won't take that long.

[Oliver Klozov]

Interesting discussion. I'd like to toss in another idea that was perhaps contemplated by the province at one time.

Hwy 901:
Some of you may remember that when the province first designated secondary highways with the number scheme of 500/600s for E-W and 700/800s for N-S, they also created some 900s. The 9xx designation was used for roads which would become Hwy xx once they were brought up to Primary highway standard. Most have been done, some changed (eg. 940 Forestry Trunk Road is now 734) and at least one still remains, Hwy 901.

Hwy 901 connects to the TCH just east of Gleichen/Siksika just before the TCH takes that ridiculous N-S jog. From there it heads west and becomes Hwy 22X after crossing Hwy 24 near Carseland. Hwy 22X will be part of the SE to SW ring road.

It would seem to me that the best routing of the TCH if it is to change would be to build a new interchange with Hwy 1 Just N of Gleichen and proceed west on a new alignment along the northern edge of the Siksika reserve until it reaches the current 901 alignment. It would then continue west on the current 901/22X routing and the future SW ring road until it reaches 16 Ave.

I realize this does nothing for those that want an improved E-W route through the northern part of the city but for through traffic this makes the most sense to me. It would certainly be more economical for trucks versus using the NE/NW ring road to bypass 16 Ave.

[AirGuitarChampion]

Originally Posted by Oliver Klozov

Interesting discussion. I'd like to toss in another idea that was perhaps contemplated by the province at one time.

Hwy 901:
Some of you may remember that when the province first designated secondary highways with the number scheme of 500/600s for E-W and 700/800s for N-S, they also created some 900s. The 9xx designation was used for roads which would become Hwy xx once they were brought up to Primary highway standard. Most have been done, some changed (eg. 940 Forestry Trunk Road is now 734) and at least one still remains, Hwy 901.

Hwy 901 connects to the TCH just east of Gleichen/Siksika just before the TCH takes that ridiculous N-S jog. From there it heads west and becomes Hwy 22X after crossing Hwy 24 near Carseland. Hwy 22X will be part of the SE to SW ring road.

It would seem to me that the best routing of the TCH if it is to change would be to build a new interchange with Hwy 1 Just N of Gleichen and proceed west on a new alignment along the northern edge of the Siksika reserve until it reaches the current 901 alignment. It would then continue west on the current 901/22X routing and the future SW ring road until it reaches 16 Ave.

I realize this does nothing for those that want an improved E-W route through the northern part of the city but for through traffic this makes the most sense to me. It would certainly be more economical for trucks versus using the NE/NW ring road to bypass 16 Ave.

That is an interesting idea, and really distance wise might turn out to be the same, as instead of jogging north by Gleichen you just do it on Calgary's west side (when that section of the ring is completed). Lots of truckers might end up doing that route anyway...

Wondering though if they'll still impose the class 6 dangerous goods exclusion on the west ring road / Weaselhead, as it basically is at the west end of Glenmore. On the same line, anyone know what is done about class 6 on Stoney as it goes over the bow river? As far as I know the intake for bearspaw water treatment plant is that little light concrete structure downstream of the bridge.

[lubicon]

Originally Posted by AirGuitarChampion

That is an interesting idea, and really distance wise might turn out to be the same, as instead of jogging north by Gleichen you just do it on Calgary's west side (when that section of the ring is completed). Lots of truckers might end up doing that route anyway...

Wondering though if they'll still impose the class 6 dangerous goods exclusion on the west ring road / Weaselhead, as it basically is at the west end of Glenmore. On the same line, anyone know what is done about class 6 on Stoney as it goes over the bow river? As far as I know the intake for bearspaw water treatment plant is that little light concrete structure downstream of the bridge.

Good question. Currently there are no signs posted that prohibit Class 6 DG's, but I don't know if that is because they are allowed, or because the road is not fully open yet (as a provincial highway) and thus would not be allowed.

[mersar]

Originally Posted by lubicon

Good question. Currently there are no signs posted that prohibit Class 6 DG's, but I don't know if that is because they are allowed, or because the road is not fully open yet (as a provincial highway) and thus would not be allowed.

The city has their truck route map available online, it only shows restrictions on the causeway, and the no trucks restriction on 85th Street. It shows Stoney as a truck route, though the future extensions (Country Hills NW looping all the way to 22X on the east side, and 16th Ave to Highway 8 on the west side) are all labeled as future dangerous goods routes. I believe the only reason the restriction is on the causeway is due to the fact its upstream from the intakes for the water treatment plant, whereas Stoney trail in the NW crosses downstream of the intakes for the bearspaw plant. Theres numerous other river crossings (16th Ave in the NW, Deerfoot, Blackfoot, Glenmore that are all dangerous goods routes without restrictions)

[lubicon]

Good find Mersar. Looks to me that right now Stoney is NOT designated as a DG route but will be in the future once the road actually becomes functional. I guess it remains to be seen as to whether they allow Class 6 goods on it but my guess would be 'yes' based on your observations about other routes that cross the river.

[dmuzika]

Interesting development, it appears that province might be considering realigning the TCH east of Calgary to follow Highways 22X and 901, http://www.strathmorestandard.com/Ar...aspx?e=2203446. Although not mentioned in the article, the TCH would likely follow the SW Ring Road to link with TCH 1 west of the city.