HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #6881  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2017, 2:01 AM
GreaterMontréal's Avatar
GreaterMontréal GreaterMontréal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,580
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollerstud98 View Post
QE2 can get congested at peak times in Airdrie but that is it and with the future overpasses which need to be built pretty much right now a lot of that stress will be removed.
all the traffic from Edmonton will use the bypass and you may end up with the same problem in the future. even people in Airdrie would use it. considering the rapid growth. the Blue would have problems as well if you want to access HW2, no ? or HW1 , the bypass a toll HW maybe ?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6882  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2017, 2:11 AM
MalcolmTucker MalcolmTucker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11,437
[del]

Last edited by MalcolmTucker; Aug 29, 2017 at 4:47 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6883  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2017, 2:37 AM
YYCguys YYCguys is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,521
Everyday during the afternoon rush time, posted highway speeds northbound QE2 between the weigh scale and Yankee Valley Blvd can't be maintained in the curb lane and even sometimes in the middle lane, accessing the interchange. Because I live in the centre of the west side, it's even better for me sometimes to stay in the innermost lane at posted or greater speeds and access Veterans Blvd instead! Maybe a bypass as you have drawn would be a good idea for those accessing points north or east of Airdrie!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6884  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2017, 3:26 AM
Rollerstud98 Rollerstud98 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by YYCguys View Post
Everyday during the afternoon rush time, posted highway speeds northbound QE2 between the weigh scale and Yankee Valley Blvd can't be maintained in the curb lane and even sometimes in the middle lane, accessing the interchange. Because I live in the centre of the west side, it's even better for me sometimes to stay in the innermost lane at posted or greater speeds and access Veterans Blvd instead! Maybe a bypass as you have drawn would be a good idea for those accessing points north or east of Airdrie!
Once 40th ave is done a lot of traffic getting off at Yankee will now get off at 40th ave. I'm over in Woodside so I get off at 567(veterans) all the time. We're looking at years though and it will be getting worse before better for sure.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6885  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2017, 1:45 PM
googspecial googspecial is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: YYC
Posts: 233
Plans could have & probably have changed since building the East Freeway - these "Ultimate Stage" plans from AB Transportation show the East Freeway continuing North past the Stoney Curve. I recall hearing about an Airdrie Bypass long time ago, but haven't seen any actual plans beyond this and some mentions in development plans around the Balzac/Cross Iron Mills area. Maybe 5seconds knows more about it...

http://www.transportation.alberta.ca...ion/ef-m6u.pdf

Given the amount of logistics and distribution centres and manufacturing in the SE industrial - It kinda makes sense to have this bypass as it would take some of that large truck traffic off the QEII through Airdrie and Northern half of Deerfoot.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6886  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2017, 5:39 PM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
Hopefully it's not a high priority, there are about a thousand road projects which should be ahead of the line than an Airdrie bypass.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6887  
Old Posted Aug 2, 2017, 2:33 PM
DoubleK DoubleK is offline
Near Generational
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,447
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleK View Post
I see that some of them have been marked, does that mean a repair is coming soon?
The repairs have been completed and they did a really nice job. It's much smoother now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6888  
Old Posted Aug 2, 2017, 3:25 PM
MalcolmTucker MalcolmTucker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11,437
[del]

Last edited by MalcolmTucker; Aug 29, 2017 at 4:49 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6889  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2017, 4:05 AM
holhm22 holhm22 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 315
Awesome! Thanks for the updates as usual, 5seconds!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6890  
Old Posted Aug 5, 2017, 3:59 AM
craner's Avatar
craner craner is offline
Go Tall or Go Home
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 6,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker View Post
This is the closest thing to a public plan for long term transportation initiatives in southern Alberta:



The projects listed around Calgary are:
Hwy 22. Access Management and Twinning Study (Hwy. 567 - Hwy. 8)
Hwy. 566 Access Management and Twinning Study (Hwy. 772 - Hwy. 9)
Hwy. 791 Access Management and Twinning Study (Hwy. 564 - Hwy. 22X)
Thanks MT - I've seen his before but it's nice to know where to find it.
Also thanks 5 secs for your great info as usual.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6891  
Old Posted Aug 8, 2017, 4:03 PM
MalcolmTucker MalcolmTucker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11,437
[del]

Last edited by MalcolmTucker; Aug 29, 2017 at 4:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6892  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2017, 2:59 AM
sammyd sammyd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 103
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6893  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2017, 10:36 PM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
So that confirms what I said and thought all along. Building a ROW for 16 lanes was a massive waste of land and money, and now leaves us with an eyesore of a road that is much wider than it needs to be. Even if we somehow stumble into a future where we absolutely have to have a full outer ring road, there is no reason why it couldn't run through a regular 6,8 or 10 lane divided freeway concurrently with the inner ring road in that section.

Anyone have any creative ideas to use a 200m wide strip of useless highway median now?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6894  
Old Posted Aug 14, 2017, 3:02 AM
Doug's Avatar
Doug Doug is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 10,047
Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo View Post
So that confirms what I said and thought all along. Building a ROW for 16 lanes was a massive waste of land and money, and now leaves us with an eyesore of a road that is much wider than it needs to be. Even if we somehow stumble into a future where we absolutely have to have a full outer ring road, there is no reason why it couldn't run through a regular 6,8 or 10 lane divided freeway concurrently with the inner ring road in that section.

Anyone have any creative ideas to use a 200m wide strip of useless highway median now?
Radial light rail line from Seton to Westhills to Foothills.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6895  
Old Posted Aug 14, 2017, 11:20 PM
sammyd sammyd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 103
http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-...xpected-friday

$100 000 per day delayed. Awesome system we have.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6896  
Old Posted Aug 14, 2017, 11:56 PM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug View Post
Radial light rail line from Seton to Westhills to Foothills.
Apologies, I exagerated a little bit. If the ROW is anything like the similar section of Highway 2 leading into Edmonton, then the wasted median is about 100m:



Still, you use 10m of that on a railway or something, hard to think of much use for the other 90m of wasted land we have for effective perpetuity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acey View Post
The reason, obviously, is that AB Trans had previously run analysis that showed a regular divided freeway would have been unable to properly perform that duty.

It confirms what you thought all along because AB Trans has now changed their position such that they deem an upgraded Highway 22 to be a sufficient component of an upgraded outer road network. Given the aforementioned plans for twinning of outer highways, and Highways 60/21/19 around YEG where significant twinning is already done and continues in the case of Highway 19, it's clear that AB Trans is not moving away from the automobile by any stretch of the imagination. It seems unlikely that they will tomorrow release a presser saying they are abandoning the vision for a ultimately divided highway between Saskatoon and Calgary, or that they are no longer are interested in Highway 22... unlikely given that they're upgrading it as we speak. By upgrading these facilities to controlled-access divided highways, you begin to form what is objectively an outer ring roadbut is not classed as such.

Prior to this, there was clearly a long-term vision for high capacity greenfield outer ring roads, so wisely it was decided to construct SWRR with contingency such that incorporating such a vision into the existing road would not be prohibitively expensive. The ministry has now decided that the possibility is zero, so they are considering removing the contingency. All I ever argued was that if they considered the possibility to be something greater than zero, then the contingency should be included. From my perspective, Mason has made a distinction here to state that plans for the grander concept of a high capacity outer ring are those that have been determined to be overkill, which in turn allows SWRR's contingency to be scaled back. The implication is that they still believe the collector-distributor system would have had valid function in a high capacity outer system.
AB Trans don't have a universe simulator, there is no way they could build an accurate model/simulation to justify the collector/distributor road they had 'planned'. There simply isn't the data, considering there is no road there now and the Province and City are the ones deciding where future growth goes. Also, a non zero chance of something happening is a terrible business case for spending tens or hundreds of millions to future proof for a plan that we have no proof ever existed, especially when the negative effects of not future proofing are completely benign.

-----------

But anyway, we are where we are now (due to decades of incompetence and bad decisions). I imagine it's too late now to build a normal freeway without oversized useless overpasses and unnecessarily gigantic, so are we forever lumbered with all that wasted land?

How could they not have come to realise that "future network planning will not include outer ring roads" a couple of years ago, when they were designing this road? Perhaps we would be closer to building the whole thing, with a proper bridge over the Elbow if they had?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6897  
Old Posted Aug 15, 2017, 2:28 AM
MalcolmTucker MalcolmTucker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11,437
[del]

Last edited by MalcolmTucker; Aug 29, 2017 at 4:56 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6898  
Old Posted Aug 15, 2017, 5:17 AM
technomad technomad is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alberia
Posts: 858
Agree that a greenfield outer ring road probably isn't needed, but SW Stoney may still end up being the hwy1 route someday, so no issues with having expansion space, even if it does seem excessive now

WRT to the Elbow crossing, could the 1% public art component for the project go towards a better looking, less intrusive bridge?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6899  
Old Posted Aug 15, 2017, 11:46 AM
Fuzz's Avatar
Fuzz Fuzz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,421
Quote:
Originally Posted by technomad View Post
Agree that a greenfield outer ring road probably isn't needed, but SW Stoney may still end up being the hwy1 route someday, so no issues with having expansion space, even if it does seem excessive now

WRT to the Elbow crossing, could the 1% public art component for the project go towards a better looking, less intrusive bridge?
The public art 1% is a city rule, not provincial.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6900  
Old Posted Aug 15, 2017, 10:13 PM
Rollerstud98 Rollerstud98 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acey View Post
The extent of which is the mountain rendering on MSE walls, wild rose emblems on wing walls, and cream/rose coloured sealers on concrete bridges.

No blue rings or random girders supporting a piece of rock.
So much better, even the fish on glenmore kick the shit out of the blue ring and the bowfort towers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:53 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.