TCH Route Through Calgary - Page 5

craner · #81 Posted **Dec 4, 2009, 7:51 PM**

Quote:

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.

That sounds like a good plan (just like Oliver Klozov's post above), except Calgary wouldn't get a E-W expressway for the northern half of the city out of it.

lubicon · #82 Posted **Dec 4, 2009, 10:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

Looks like a great idea on paper, but there are a couple of flies in that ointment (as always).

1. The route would somehow have to reconnect with #1 west of Calgary, meaning using the SW ring road. Unless they figure out some miracle on how to make that portion of the ring road a true free flow, high speed roadway I'm not sure I see the poin tin doing this.

2. 901 runs right through the Siksika nation, and they could have a similar problem in building a major highway through here that they did with the Tsu Tiina land.

Oliver Klozov · #83 Posted **Dec 4, 2009, 10:49 PM**

What a bunch of NIMBY dolts! The alignment would almost assuredly be a simple twinning of 22X not running through the middle of a farmer's field. At the east end it would not likely be on the alignment of 901; most of that is on the reserve and we know how much grief attaining that land would be. Besides, 901 goes right through a reserve housing area. More likely, the alignment would follow the northern boundary of the reserve and the village of Gleichen. Any farm land required would at the field's edge not through the middle.

dmuzika · #84 Posted **Dec 6, 2009, 7:14 PM**

Here is a link to East of Calgary TCH study by the province, http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/4046.htm. It shows a potential bypass of Strathmore and the possibilty of linking to Hwy 22X.

mersar · #85 Posted **Dec 6, 2009, 7:32 PM**

Very interesting to see whats being studied.

YYCguys · #86 Posted **Dec 6, 2009, 11:43 PM**

Indeed it was. A good friend of the family was killed while attempting to cross the TCH near Strathmore in her vehicle some years ago. I can't remember the cross road off the top of my head. When she died, I remember hearing that hers was but one of the many accidents that have occured in that area. To eliminate all but local traffic on that stretch of the highway would be a good thing! Bring on the realignment sooner rather than later!

Corndogger · #87 Posted **Dec 7, 2009, 12:06 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by dmuzika

Here is a link to East of Calgary TCH study by the province, http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/4046.htm. It shows a potential bypass of Strathmore and the possibilty of linking to Hwy 22X.

After looking at the PowerPoint presentation it looks to me like there is no plan to get rid of 16th Ave. as the TCH through Calgary. Hwy 22X will be an upgraded route into the city. The freeway plans are very interesting and are consistent with what the province said a few years ago. Too bad this wasn't being done tomorrow. The Strathmore bypass should definitely be done right away to improve safety and traffic flow. A well-placed interchange or two should serve them well. The indirect route to connect 22X with Hwy 1 (Slide 21) is no doubt to avoid Indian land. Looks like the province has learned their lesson and will probably never consider land deals with the natives again.

mersar · #88 Posted **Dec 7, 2009, 12:20 AM**

Yeah, it appears its more to give alternate access then to replace access. The one thing I could see that proposal would do is make it more attractive to truckers to use the south part of the ring road to bypass the city rather then using 16th or even the north part of Stoney. And I agree on the need for the bypass at Strathmore, its long over due

Koolfire · #89 Posted **Dec 7, 2009, 12:49 AM**

Seeing we don't know what the SW ring road is going to look like, I'm not in favour of this plan. To me it makes more sense to bypass Strathmore to the north and link up with the north part of the ring road just north of Country Hills NE/Stoney trail interchange.

Corndogger · #90 Posted **Dec 7, 2009, 12:58 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koolfire

Seeing we don't know what the SW ring road is going to look like, I'm not in favour of this plan. To me it makes more sense to bypass Strathmore to the north and link up with the north part of the ring road just north of Country Hills NE/Stoney trail interchange.

If you look at the PowerPoint presentation there's a slide which shows the annual growth rates of traffic into Calgary from the east via the various highways in the area. Hwy 22X is growing the fastest by far. Given the layout of Calgary, this route is probably a lot more convenient for many people than Hwy 1 and would definitely be better than going even farther north.

Koolfire · #91 Posted **Dec 7, 2009, 1:11 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corndogger

If you look at the PowerPoint presentation there's a slide which shows the annual growth rates of traffic into Calgary from the east via the various highways in the area. Hwy 22X is growing the fastest by far. Given the layout of Calgary, this route is probably a lot more convenient for many people than Hwy 1 and would definitely be better than going even farther north.

Yes, but I wonder how much of that traffic heads to Deerfoot/Glenmore/Hwy 8. If the traffic is headed to foothills industrial area then then it's fine

but if the traffic increase is because it's quicker way across Calgary then

Corndogger · #92 Posted **Dec 7, 2009, 2:26 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koolfire

Yes, but I wonder how much of that traffic heads to Deerfoot/Glenmore/Hwy 8. If the traffic is headed to foothills industrial area then then it's fine

but if the traffic increase is because it's quicker way across Calgary then

But the province isn't planning on taking options away from people, just making them better. There's probably more than enough people and commerce to justify improving all of the routes and we do need to consider the biggest market is the intercity traffic which is only going to keep on growing.

As far as I'm concerned, the best option to solve a few huge issues we have would be to turn Hwy 8 (Glenmore Trail) into a true freeway and have it link up with Hwy 1. Hwy 22X could still be done as well and it shouldn't cost too much as I can't see the need for many interchanges outside of the city until it meets up with Hwy 1. If development pushes further out in the deep SE then developers should pay for the interchanges they want. If we were to follow CalTrans recommended rules of spacing interchanges at least 3 km apart that would allow for a lot of development before extra interchanges would be needed.

lubicon · #93 Posted **Dec 7, 2009, 7:06 PM**

Simply by-passing Strathmore would go a long ways to solving many of the problems. Why the town was ever allowed to place even more traffic lights on the highway is a mystery to me, it goea against everything Alberta Transportation seems to be trying to achieve. A simple bypass of the town would be a relatively cheap option to implement. Stoney Trail will serve to route traffic to the SE portions of Calgary so there is no real benefit to building an entirely new 4 lane highway to link up to 22X . Given the cost of doing that I don't see the point. If any of you are familiear with #16 (the other TCH

, a similar bypass was built around Vegreville, east of Edmonton. It works very well.

craner · #94 Posted **Dec 7, 2009, 7:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by dmuzika

Here is a link to East of Calgary TCH study by the province, http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/4046.htm. It shows a potential bypass of Strathmore and the possibilty of linking to Hwy 22X.

Interesting indeed - I will be following the progress of this - thanks dmuzika

I'll say it again: It still doesn't address an express route through the city on the north side (not that this is really the province's responsibility).

Oliver Klozov · #95 Posted **Dec 7, 2009, 8:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lubicon

......A simple bypass of the town would be a relatively cheap option to implement. Stoney Trail will serve to route traffic to the SE portions of Calgary so there is no real benefit to building an entirely new 4 lane highway to link up to 22X . Given the cost of doing that I don't see the point.......

Any simple bypass of Strathmore would definitely fragment farmland, exactly what the county folks claim they don't want.

As for SE Calgary destinations being served by Stoney from the TCH, 901 and 22X are being used for that now including an ever-increasing number of trucks. I started using that much quicker route even back when it was still gravel and you had to dip south to 24 and go past Carseland.

Moving the TCH to the 901/22X alignment makes the most sense. Once arriving in the SE corner of the city, traffic from the east can take Stoney north or continue on Stoney west. It also eliminates all that useless mileage of going north just to go south again

Also, 901/22X would put off the need for a Strathmore bypass for decades.

dmuzika · #96 Posted **Dec 7, 2009, 9:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by craner

Interesting indeed - I will be following the progress of this - thanks dmuzika

I'll say it again: It still doesn't address an express route through the city on the north side (not that this is really the province's responsibility).

I agree, the city does need an express route on the north side. However I think that route will run independently of the Trans Canada Hwy, McKnight Blvd & John Laurie Blvd would probably be the best bet.

craner · #97 Posted **Dec 8, 2009, 4:23 AM**

Totally agree.

Daguy · #98 Posted **May 16, 2010, 7:30 PM**

I've wondered for awhile about a probably crazy idea, but I was just curious to see what anyone else would think about it.

Given full access control of 16th from Sarcee Trail to Crowchild, could a 6 lane tunnel be constructed under 16th to Deerfoot? I understand the obvious problems with this idea, as it would almost certainly require expensive tunnel boring, but it would create a very fast through route for the TCH. Any thoughts?

dmuzika · #99 Posted **May 17, 2010, 1:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daguy

I've wondered for awhile about a probably crazy idea, but I was just curious to see what anyone else would think about it.

Given full access control of 16th from Sarcee Trail to Crowchild, could a 6 lane tunnel be constructed under 16th to Glenmore? I understand the obvious problems with this idea, as it would almost certainly require expensive tunnel boring, but it would create a very fast through route for the TCH. Any thoughts?

A tunnel could not borred to connect 16 Avenue to Glenmore Trail inside city limits. To do that it would have to be N-S orrientated and there are already some major routes that serve that purpose; Deerfoot Trail, Crowchild Trail, Sarcee Trail, and the future Stoney Trail on both the east and west perimeter of the city. Maybe an alternative would be to construct a NE/SW orientated connector somewhere between Calgary and Strathmore that could connect the Trans Canada with Glenmore Trail.

I've thought about an E-W tunnel between Crowchild and Deerfoot Trails under 16 Ave, but other than cost I don't know how practical it would be for inner city usage.

Joborule · #**100** Posted **May 17, 2010, 5:25 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by dmuzika

I've thought about an E-W tunnel between Crowchild and Deerfoot Trails under 16 Ave, but other than cost I don't know how practical it would be for inner city usage.

That's something that I've been musing about for a while. It would allow the ability to make the TCH a full (and directly E-W) freeway in the city, while preserving the 16th avenue urban corridor. Wonder if it would be anything realistically done in the long term future. Because it seems a bit off to have freeways on the east side of Deerfoot, and west of Sarcee Trail, but make it a major road right jab in the middle.