Page 1 of 15 12345 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 1443

Thread: Yellowhead Trail | Discussion

  1. #1
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,539

    Default Yellowhead Trail | Discussion

    Well I've driven on Yellowhead trail lately out to the westend for a business errand and I've noticed that the 156 st. interchange looks like it's almost done. According to the city of Edmonton website the interchange is supposed to open by sometime in October.

    Has anyone heard any plans on any further upgrades, interchanges, etc...

    The next logical project should be 149st. Although I don't know what city planners have in store, or if anything concrete is planned?

  2. #2
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    566

    Default

    From what I remember - 127 street interchange is the next highest priority, then 66 street, then 149 street. A good decade worth of road construction for sure.

  3. #3
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Capital Region
    Posts
    1,206

    Default

    Think how much fun it will be in 10 years time, only a few sets of lights to deal with (plus daily accidents involving stupid drivers and trucks of course).
    Edmonton, Capital of Alberta

  4. #4
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,532

    Default

    yellowhead west is shaping up nicely....

    they really need to hit 127st though and 66st.

    but one thing they really need to do is to repave the damn thing with steel plated iron rivited concrete. The condition of the surface is brutal.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  5. #5
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,317

    Default

    The really bad parts are at the intersections and will get replaced when the interchanges get built. All those trucks stopping and then slowly accelerating away from lights really beat up the road.

  6. #6
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,913

    Default

    CN Rail has two overpasses just east of 124 st. I don't think the eastern-most one is used anymore. I wonder what the chance of converting it to southbound fly over would be? It would at least eliminate left hand turns from the Yellowhead onto Bushpilot road at a very minimal cost. It would be interesting to see how cooperative CN would be.
    Also regarding CN and the Yellowhead, wouldn't it be nice if they planted a hedge or a row of trees along the south-side of the railyards? That would be a very economical way to beautify what has to be the ugliest stretch of road in Edmonton.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO
    yellowhead west is shaping up nicely....

    they really need to hit 127st though and 66st.

    but one thing they really need to do is to repave the damn thing with steel plated iron rivited concrete. The condition of the surface is brutal.
    The hot weather we've been having lately is accelerating the problem. We need to prepare for global warming.
    Edmonton first, everything else second.

  8. #8
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,539

    Default

    I think one quick solution they should implement on the east part of yellowhead is eliminate the traffic light for the business park section. All they have to do is improve one of the roads to one of the current overpasses and that's one less light.

    From what I've read so far too, it doesn't look like anything will be done at 149th. Although shouldn't that intersection be a priority.

    How bout too the total closure of 142 st. at the most or at least a right in, right out only westbound, right in and right out only eastbound?

  9. #9
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,740

    Default

    Someone mentioned that one of 149 St or 142 St will be a flyover.

  10. #10
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    7,241

    Default

    Given the close proximity between 156 Street and 149 Street, there is a good chance that 149 Street will be a flyover only. Otherwise, weaving lanes would have to be contructed between the two interchanges as there would not be enough room for proper merging between the on/off ramps.

  11. #11
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,539

    Default

    A Flyover could be the case because of the proximity of 156 but what about the problem of all the businesses that rely on direct access to yellowhead. Costco, Casino Yellowhead and the hotel could be hurt, especially the hotel if you couldn't get there off the freeway.

  12. #12
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    304

    Default

    Is there any room to widen the eastern sections of the Yellowhead? Seems like it starts out really wide from the west end but when you get to the east end it's cramped.

  13. #13
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Strathearn, Edmonton
    Posts
    4,004

    Default

    I like the eastern end of the Yellowhead, it shows you don't need a huge open strip of land to build a freeway. Its becomes a very compact freeway that doesn't suck up a ton of land area.

  14. #14
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,740

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmcowboy11
    A Flyover could be the case because of the proximity of 156 but what about the problem of all the businesses that rely on direct access to yellowhead. Costco, Casino Yellowhead and the hotel could be hurt, especially the hotel if you couldn't get there off the freeway.
    I think most of the businesses along there, as well as those between 97 - 89 Streets and near 66 Street, can adjust. Their continued exposure along the Yellowhead isn't going to hurt them anyway. Otherwise I say "too bad so sad" because the Y-head was always intended to be a freeway since the damn thing was first built.

  15. #15
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,539

    Default

    Well ok, that is true.

    How bout this then, a minor solution to not completely eliminate access to yellowhead. Eliminate 142 completely, either flyover or simply nothing at all. And at 149 have a flyover except have a right off-ramp from yellowhead to 149 westbound and a right on-ramp from 149 to yellowhead eastbound.

    Maybe a stupid idea it could be an option.

  16. #16
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,740

    Default

    For 142 St, it should be the same as what's going to be done at 107 St: one stop sign, no lights, no left turns.

    Another thing they can improve on are the actual lanes. Notice when driving EB into the city, the leftmost lane appears outta nowhere around 170 St? Which makes no sense from a traffic-flow POV.

    And once all traffic lights are eliminated, ban all large trucks from using the 2 left lanes. It's an annoying traffic-flow killer when there's a bigarse 18-wheeler in every lane stopped at a red light.

  17. #17
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey
    And once all traffic lights are eliminated, ban all large trucks from using the 2 left lanes. It's an annoying traffic-flow killer when there's a bigarse 18-wheeler in every lane stopped at a red light.
    I can see how keeping trucks out of the left lanes would help things right now, but once the lights are gone there would be no point to such restrictions. They might even lead to merging difficulties if the right lane was filled with trucks. I say lets immediately ban the trucks from the leftmost lane except to access a left turn lane.

  18. #18
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    304

    Default

    What's the funding look like for the Yellowhead upgrades? Is the province covering a lot of the bill?

  19. #19
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles; Athens
    Posts
    4,399

    Default

    66th is the major sore part that I think needs fixing ASAP.

    We need to get the thing entirely to freeway standards. That's what it is meant to be.

    Also, put up barricade walls or whatever to hide ugly parts from the road, especially in the eastern part. Again...freeway, not business access road.

  20. #20
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Also, put up barricade walls or whatever to hide ugly parts from the road, especially in the eastern part. Again...freeway, not business access road.
    I don't think that visible buisnesses on adjacent roadways are incompatible with freeways. It's business access lights (89th) and right in/outs without significant accel/decel lanes(67th, 68th, 14X) that don't work with freeways.

    Of course, lights in general don't work with freeways, but everyone knows that.


    In my humble opinion, it's 127th that is the most urgent after 156, but what does the city think? They Just re-paved that intersection last year, which doesn't exactly give me hope.

  21. #21
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,532

    Default

    "Also, put up barricade walls or whatever to hide ugly parts from the road, especially in the eastern part. Again...freeway, not business access road."


    thank you....


    as for 127st....this is going to be a very complex undertaking given the businesses, houses and lack of room to alter the roadway during construction.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  22. #22
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles; Athens
    Posts
    4,399

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander
    I don't think that visible buisnesses on adjacent roadways are incompatible with freeways. It's business access lights (89th) and right in/outs without significant accel/decel lanes(67th, 68th, 14X) that don't work with freeways.
    Visibile businesses are one thing...the f-ugly things that line sections of the Yellowhead are quite another.

    Also, do we need to see into things like the CN rail yards from the freeway? Put up concrete walls, plant some trees on the otherside and it seems like you're in a forest, not an industrial area.

  23. #23
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MylesC
    Visibile businesses are one thing...the f-ugly things that line sections of the Yellowhead are quite another.

    Also, do we need to see into things like the CN rail yards from the freeway? Put up concrete walls, plant some trees on the otherside and it seems like you're in a forest, not an industrial area.
    I agree, especially on the rail yards.

  24. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MylesC
    66th is the major sore part that I think needs fixing ASAP.
    66th Street will get done as soon as the Humane Society has moved into its new digs on 137th Ave. They have the land now and are supposed to start construction this year. Once that's done, they move away from 66th Street and the city is free to build an overpass.

  25. #25
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Strathearn, Edmonton
    Posts
    4,004

    Default

    Its too bad that the one section of Gainers still remains and has been recently expanded, it would have left that whole area open to really good redvelopment. Now if residential is too be introduced on all the old meat packing lands, there is going to need to be a large buffer away from the giant cooler.

  26. #26
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,252
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey
    For 142 St, it should be the same as what's going to be done at 107 St: one stop sign, no lights, no left turns.
    I thought 142 was to be closed?
    Onward and upward

  27. #27
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    142 and 124 should have access from St. Albert Trail and 127th st ramps, respectivly. No bridges, just right turns.

  28. #28
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,740

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey
    For 142 St, it should be the same as what's going to be done at 107 St: one stop sign, no lights, no left turns.
    I thought 142 was to be closed?
    Works for me too.

  29. #29
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,740

    Default

    So has anyone here driven across the new 156 St overpass?
    I gather that the Yellowhead is still under construction in that area. Hopefully this will result in lanes that make more sense (that is, eliminate left lanes that appear and disappear without notice).

  30. #30
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,252
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    It is sweet!
    Onward and upward

  31. #31
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,539

    Default

    I can't wait to check out the overpass/interchange at 156.

    Now my question is anything planned anywhere on yellowhead to start next year (2007). We can't slow down, that whole road should be light free as soon as possible.

  32. #32
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,539

    Default

    I saw and tried the 156st interchange and it's not too bad

    Probably the only confusing thing which might annoy some people is the entrance to get onto Yellowhead trail eastbound. Rather than the typical right turn onto the freeway it is a left turn to a ramp that loops round to go eastbound. Other than that the interchange looks good and looks like it will help traffic flow much better.

  33. #33
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    5,180

    Default 89 Street and other rants

    Whoops...posted next. Sorry.

  34. #34
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    5,180

    Default 89 Street and other rants

    The lights on Yellowhead and 89th street have to be the cheesiest, most pathetic example of poor planning this side of the levees in New Orleans! Noted from an earlier post that it wouldn't take much to fix this. It should be the city's #1 $1.49 priority.

    Next...get rid of the lights at 107 street. Global Planning Stupidity runner-up to 89th street.

    121 street, 124 street, 127 street. Pick one..build an overpass. Of course 127 makes the most sense. If you can use the seemingly abandoned CN flyover at 121 street cheap - then by all means use that too.

    149, 142 street ..pick one (or build in between) and construct service roads off the Yellowhead to connect the two...as well as provide entry/exit for the Yellowhead Hotel, if it's that important to save the stripper bar there (silly, of course it is!!), Casino and Costco.

    That leaves 66th street. Not sure how to over/underpass as we should really close the whole street while we grade seperate the LRT at 66th too. (Another bonus from being being cheap in the 70's.)

    That still leaves an at-grade RR crossing (buy out the businesses that use it?), and a couple of level crossings for the fire dept.

    And yes, yes, YES...let's do some creative landscaping to beautify, or at least hide the scrap yards, auto body shops, et al along the route.

    <gasp> that should do it, eh?

  35. #35
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,252
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    You basically hit the plans for the Yellowhead.

    Flyover on 149

    142 closed.

    The CN flyover is for VIA.

    124 - closed.

    127 - overpass

    107 - up in the air.

    89 - dead

    66th - up in the air due to the Fort Road interchange re-do.
    Onward and upward

  36. #36
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,539

    Default

    Well it's been about 7 months or so since I started this thread and I've again been wondering about Yellowhead freeway.

    156 st overpass has now been open for a few months and seems to be doing well. The status of the yellowhead is still of course remained the same. Yes I know you can't expect everything to happen right away, but now I'm wondering again. Does the city of Edmonton plan to start any more construction on the yellowhead this year or are we going to have to wait for a few more years before anything happens again? Please someone tell me some good news.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  37. #37
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,532

    Default

    i really wish we wall'd in that road for the most part, reduced access, and began workings on overpasses for:

    127st
    66st
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  38. #38
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    I saw a city Consulatants budget list that had a couple million budgeted for design on yellowhead trail, 149th to 127th. It would be nice if they started soon.

    Here it is, an attachement to the Feb 27 trans. Committee agenda.

    "10. Inner Ring Loop and Highway Connectors (66-1480) – up to $4,000,000
    Preliminary/detailed design engineering services for upgrading Yellowhead Trail, 121 Street to 149 Street."

  39. #39
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60
    CN Rail has two overpasses just east of 124 st. I don't think the eastern-most one is used anymore. I wonder what the chance of converting it to southbound fly over would be? It would at least eliminate left hand turns from the Yellowhead onto Bushpilot road at a very minimal cost. It would be interesting to see how cooperative CN would be.
    Also regarding CN and the Yellowhead, wouldn't it be nice if they planted a hedge or a row of trees along the south-side of the railyards? That would be a very economical way to beautify what has to be the ugliest stretch of road in Edmonton.
    CN cooperate...thats funny!

  40. #40
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,740

    Default Latest news on Yellowhead Highway

    Province plays waiting game with feds on upgrades to Yellowhead
    Ottawa slow to commit funds for twinning of Jasper Park portion
    David Finlayson, The Edmonton Journal
    Published: Saturday, May 12, 2007

    EDMONTON - The province keeps hitting a roadblock trying to get the federal government to twin the Yellowhead Highway through Jasper National Park, deputy transportation minister Jay Ramotar said Friday.

    "They've got money for a national highway system and some of that should go to twinning the park. We keep pressing them but it's not an easy task."

    Once the feds commit to the project the province will twin the 19-kilometre stretch between Hinton and the park gates, Ramotar told the Yellowhead Highway Association conference.

    The last 41 kilometres between North Battleford and Lloydminster will be twinned this year, but B.C. has no long-term plans to twin any stretch of the Yellowhead, despite the development of Prince Rupert as a major container port, the conference heard.

    Truck volumes are relatively low and they consider the intermodal rail link to Prince Rupert more important, regional transportation director Dave Duncan said.

    "We also have great challenges with the unique geography and we will concentrate on other priorities."

    B.C. will spend $147 million in the next four years on their 1,400 kilometres of the Yellowhead corridor, which also includes Highway 5 between Tete Jeune and Kamloops. Most of it will be maintenance, but there will be more passing lanes built in high-volume sectors, Duncan said.

    Ramotar said the federal government has never kept up with a joint plan to upgrade the national highway system in 15 years, and it's going to take another 30 years.

    The western provinces need to "take the next step" and forge more public private partnerships to get the highway system moving, he noted.

    "If you do that you can leverage a lot of federal money. They have $7 billion for the national highway system and $1.25 billion for P3s."

    Ramotar said the province will save $180 million on the southeast section of the Anthony Henday in Edmonton by partnering with the private sector, and the lowest bid on the northeast Calgary project came in $341 million below department estimates.

    He also said the province is committed to turning the Yellowhead into a freeway by eliminating all grade crossings across the province, but it will take 20 to 30 years.

    Plans to bypass Lloydminster, Hinton and Edson are moving ahead, but they have to design them differently than in the past so there is minimal economic impact on the communities, he added.

    "Future growth depends on the ability to move goods and services, and the Yellowhead is not only a national highway, but a key east-west corridor."

    [email protected]

    © The Edmonton Journal 2007

  41. #41
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,532

    Default

    id love more 2 lane sections...doesnt have to be 100% twinned, but how about even 10 more 1km sections of passing....

    RVs in summer are killer.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  42. #42
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,740

    Default Re: Latest news on Yellowhead Highway

    He also said the province is committed to turning the Yellowhead into a freeway by eliminating all grade crossings across the province, but it will take 20 to 30 years.
    I hope this also includes Yellowhead Trail through Edmonton.

  43. #43
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,317

    Default

    Even if the Jasper park portion of the highway isn't twinned they could at least fence it to keep the animals off the road and raise the speed limit to 100 km/h. An interchange is also needed at the highway 16/93 junction.

  44. #44
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,740

    Default

    Meanwhile, a major upgrade of the highway from Vancouver to Calgary is now open:

    http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-col...ing-horse.html




    B.C.'s top construction project, a four-lane bridge that moves billions of dollars in goods a day along the Trans-Canada Highway in Kicking Horse Canyon, opens on Friday, 21 months ahead of schedule.

    Billed by B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell as a vital shipping artery linking B.C. to Canada and beyond, the new 405-metre-long Park Bridge east of Golden, B.C., is costing the federal and provincial governments $137 million.

    The investment, part of a $2.3-billion reconstruction of a 26-kilometre stretch of highway, should prove fruitful for Canadian business while also saving lives, the premier said.

    "It's the gateway from B.C. to the rest of Canada, from Canada to British Columbia and from British Columbia to the world," Campbell said during an opening ceremony Thursday for the bridge, which rises 90 metres over the Kicking Horse River.

    "It will save us hundreds of lives and it will provide for economic opportunities for people throughout the province," he added.

    'Feat of engineering'
    The bridge — "a feat of engineering" — will ease congestion as vehicles curve up and over, and also through the mountains, Kootenay-Columbia MP Jim Abbott said. The estimated 2,000 commercial trucks that travel through the canyon daily will also be able to drive along an improved six-kilometre section of the highway.

    Before the reconstruction project, the 26-kilometre stretch of road was considered one of the worst in Canada, averaging 140 accidents a year — more than two-and-a-half times the provincial average. An inquiry into a fatal bus accident in 1990 led to recommendations that it be drastically upgraded.

    Mayor of Golden James Doyle said he knows the perils of the road first-hand, having been in an accident there himself 17 years ago.

    Phase 2 completion set for January 2008
    "I've seen way too many people in my 39 years living in Golden get killed or injured badly," Doyle said.

    Park Bridge was built under Phase 2 of the Kicking Horse Canyon Project. The second phase of construction, which also includes upgrading six kilometres of highway, is slated for completion in January 2008.

    As impressive as the scale of the Park Bridge project is the speed of its construction. It has only been five years since the first blueprints went out.

    Phase 3 is expected to be the most complex endeavour, involving major improvements to 17 kilometres of the Trans-Canada Highway and the expansion to four lanes from two lanes.

    The first phase, involving three kilometres of highway, began in 2002 and was completed in spring of 2006.

    The Trans-Canada Highway route carries 9,000 vehicles per day during the summer and traffic is expected to increase by 50 per cent over the next 25 years, according to a news release from the Kicking Horse project.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  45. #45
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    412

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48
    Even if the Jasper park portion of the highway isn't twinned they could at least fence it to keep the animals off the road and raise the speed limit to 100 km/h. An interchange is also needed at the highway 16/93 junction.
    When I drive through Jasper Park I don't want everything to be seen through a 6 foot fence. Not to mention the fact that it would interfere with all kinds of travel patterns of the animals.

    Even if it was fenced making it 100 would be insanity - tourists will always stop, and increasing the speed just increases the risk for someone to get killed, injured, etc.

    I think more passing stretches could work. Those tourists that gather together in their RV's are the worst - they never leave space in between to get between and around them.

  46. #46
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,252
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey
    Meanwhile, a major upgrade of the highway from Vancouver to Calgary is now open:

    http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-col...ing-horse.html


    Yup...amazing to see, yet again, all ideas and money flow on one highway...myopia rules!!!!!
    Onward and upward

  47. #47
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,036

    Default

    Don't expect anything to happen on the yellowhead, until the transcanada is a lot nearer to completion.

  48. #48
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,252
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    ..which, given that the Yellowhead 16/5 is much much much much much much much much much easier to twin becasue God/glaciiers/North THompson/Fraser did the earthmoving for you, makes this bridge seem excessive. But then, the world flows on Highway 1.

    I am not saying that this stretch of highway did not need some help, not at all. I am saying that Canada as a whole needs to realize that there is more than Highway 1.
    Onward and upward

  49. #49
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    412

    Default

    Driving across Canada on 1 allows a person to miss A LOT of Canada as well...many things that are definetely worth seeing.

  50. #50
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey
    Meanwhile, a major upgrade of the highway from Vancouver to Calgary is now open:

    http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-col...ing-horse.html


    Yup...amazing to see, yet again, all ideas and money flow on one highway...myopia rules!!!!!
    To be fair, the congestion along the Hinton to Tete Jaune stretch of highway 16 is relatively minor in comparison to much of highway 1 in BC (or at least it has been in my experience anyways). Highway 1 is the shortest route to the coast for anyone starting south of Wetaskiwin and the shortest route from most of Alberta to the Okanagan, Shuswap and west Kootenay areas.

  51. #51
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Casa
    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48
    Even if the Jasper park portion of the highway isn't twinned they could at least fence it to keep the animals off the road and raise the speed limit to 100 km/h. An interchange is also needed at the highway 16/93 junction.
    When I drive through Jasper Park I don't want everything to be seen through a 6 foot fence. Not to mention the fact that it would interfere with all kinds of travel patterns of the animals.

    Even if it was fenced making it 100 would be insanity - tourists will always stop, and increasing the speed just increases the risk for someone to get killed, injured, etc.

    I think more passing stretches could work. Those tourists that gather together in their RV's are the worst - they never leave space in between to get between and around them.
    Co-locating our major national parks and major transportation corridors was a very bad idea, but it's too late to change it now. That leaves us with the task of trying to preserve the integrity of the parks while facilitating movement of traffic through them. Compromises will need to be made. In Banff, that has meant fencing the highway and building crossings for wildlife. The same thing will ultimately need to happen in Jasper.

  52. #52
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,252
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48
    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey
    Meanwhile, a major upgrade of the highway from Vancouver to Calgary is now open:

    http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-col...ing-horse.html


    Yup...amazing to see, yet again, all ideas and money flow on one highway...myopia rules!!!!!
    To be fair, the congestion along the Hinton to Tete Jaune stretch of highway 16 is relatively minor in comparison to much of highway 1 in BC (or at least it has been in my experience anyways). Highway 1 is the shortest route to the coast for anyone starting south of Wetaskiwin and the shortest route from most of Alberta to the Okanagan, Shuswap and west Kootenay areas.
    To be fair again to the yellowhead, the distance Canada wide to Vancouver via 16/5 is almost moot - and given the faster speeds and lower grades and a sheer lack of steep grades (16 on 1, 2 on 16/5), the economic equation is moot to favoring 16/5. Grow Rupert more, and suddenly...

    Yes the rail line can help, and I am not saying don't work on #1, but to COMPLETELY ignore the other route....
    Onward and upward

  53. #53

    Default

    December 22, 2007
    By FRANK LANDRY, CITY HALL BUREAU, EDMONTON SUN

    Yellowhead to stay a mess
    No plans to turn it into a freeway

    Motorists had better get used to the traffic snarls along Yellowhead Trail.

    Mayor Stephen Mandel said yesterday he doesn't see the heavily travelled route being turned into a free-flow thoroughfare like the Whitemud any time soon.

    "No, to be honest, not during my tenure as mayor, even if I stay four, five terms, no, I don't think so," he said yesterday in a year-end interview with Sun Media.

    "There are too many other things to do and it's incredibly expensive."

    Mandel said several overpasses would need to be built, and they'd cost $180 million to $200 million each.

    "I'm not sure if it's the best way to spend money."

    However, the mayor said there may be things done to restrict access to the road to help improve the flow of traffic.

    He said an overpass at 66 Street may be realistic in the near future.

    The Yellowhead, along with 75 Street, the Whitemud and 170 Street, are proposed to one day form Edmonton's inner ring road.

    Anthony Henday Drive would be the outer ring road.

    Mayne Root, executive director of the Alberta Motor Transport Association, said improvements are desperately needed along the Yellowhead.

    "It is a part of the national highway network, and it would be good to have it upgraded," Root said.

    Root said the Yellowhead, like major trucking thoroughfares in other cities, is not keeping up with traffic demands.

    "We would hope it would be a priority, at the soonest possible time."

    He said constant stopping and starting at traffic lights slows down truckers, and causes them to burn more fuel.

    The city has been making gradual improvements to the Yellowhead, including the recent completion of the 156 Street overpass.

    As well, the speed limit was bumped up on the western portion of the route to 90 kmh from 80 kmh.

    Coun. Kim Krushell, whose Ward 2 includes parts of the Yellowhead, said that she wants to see overpasses built on the Yellowhead at 127 Street and 149 Street.

    She also wants to look into restricting truck traffic to specific lanes. The idea has been shot down previously by city administration, she said.

    But Krushell said she believes the Henday, when completed, will also ease congestion on the Yellowhead.

    "Right now, there are a lot of trucks on the Yellowhead that have no other option," she said.

    The province recently announced the construction of the northwest stretch of the Henday by 2011.

  54. #54
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,740

    Default

    The feds should take over the funding of Yellowhead Trail, seeing that its part of the Trans-Canada Highway system. Or the province, if they see fit to maintain responsibility for Deathfoot Trail in Calgary.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  55. #55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO
    i really wish we wall'd in that road for the most part, reduced access, and began workings on overpasses for:

    127st
    66st
    Agreed - maybe 149 street as well (given how busy Costco is)? Restricting access makes sense to me. If I lose 142 st, pretty easy to travel a little further to 149 st (sorry - St Albert trail is not an option, way too slow). I'd do that for a better, faster, safer motorway, than the mess that Yellowhead is right now, and I'm sure others would too.

    Make some tough decisions, and start shuting access roads. You could shut 142 st access tommorow, even before 149 st flyover or similar, and no-one would miss the extra 2 minute commute (well - maybe McDonalds and a few businesses would be upset, but that's life...)

  56. #56
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    48

    Default

    I think everyone knows the Yellowhead will eventually be a full-fledged freeway through Edmonton. That is a given. I think Mayor Mandel is attempting to shift responsibility for funding of the upgrade to the province or federal government.

    It would have been nice to have seen him been a bit more direct and state that the Yellowhead is slated to be a full freeway with the assistance of the City, Province and Federal Government. He should have stated that Edmonton needs the same kind of assistance with Yellowhead Calgary got with the Deerfoot Trail.

    The 89 Street chokepoint is an easily fixed joke. With 66 Street/Yellowhead upgrades coming, the balance of changes could be a breeze, provided all levels of government are on board for the fixes.

    A city of Edmonton's size in the western hemisphere should have an east-west freeway running through the core of its industrial zone. It's just a matter of "when"...The "where" was determined back when the Yellowhead was made the major east-west corridor through the city. I'm certain this decision was made post-METS.

  57. #57
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Concrete Bob
    I think everyone knows the Yellowhead will eventually be a full-fledged freeway through Edmonton.
    I think you're dreaming. There are too many businesses operating between the YH and the CN tracks and too little room to offer alternate access. These businesses would all need relocating at taxpayer's expense.

    The mayor is right, we have higher priorities and alternate routes.

  58. #58
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    For a real freeway the only businesses that would suffer are those near the 89th access and right at 142. ORtherwise all we need to make a freeway is add interchanges. Virtually no businesses would need relocation. The only thing stopping us is the cost of building the interchanges, and I think that all the proposed yellowhead overpasses should be above any other interchange on the city priority list.

  59. #59
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander
    For a real freeway the only businesses that would suffer are those near the 89th access and right at 142. ORtherwise all we need to make a freeway is add interchanges. Virtually no businesses would need relocation. The only thing stopping us is the cost of building the interchanges, and I think that all the proposed yellowhead overpasses should be above any other interchange on the city priority list.
    You're apparently not aware of the many businesses that are located between 124 Street and 156 Street and between 82 Street and 50 Street.

    89 Street could be closed easily, as should 107 Street.

  60. #60

    Default

    The lights that remain along Yellowhead is just a small frame of whats wrong with the big picture city. Too often, the weak and powerless city bends over backwards to comfort the very small minority, while the rest of the city waits at the light. These business have all had what? 30 + years to move out?

    89 street has full access from 97st or 82 st. Should have been shut down years ago.

    66 St has long been promised to be the next interchange done... and really only needs to be a flyover. Access to and from the yellowhead is easily available via fort road or 50st..

    - that leaves the 142/149 + 127/124/121 ... and that 107st

    ... 142 should be the interchange and 149st should just be a fly over... 149 st as a fly over better not cost 200 million dollars...

    Once that's done, that leaves 127/124/121...and 107st...

    Why 124 st is still open... makes no sense. Access to business' north of yellowhead is all open from 127st, and the only thing that needs access on the south side is the police impound lot, and the Yellowhead Youth Center/Casa... Traffic shouldn't be able to cut down 124 st either... but lots do, it has the build of a small quiet residential street, but acts as an arterial? Force traffic on to 127st or St Albert Trail... or 121st... and CLOSE 124st.

    Really, we need to close 124 and 89 st yesterday

    Build Flyovers for 149 + 66 st and a limited interchange/flyover for 127st to keep existing travel directions open, and not open more... (keeping no left turn on to yellowhead going north on 127)

    Full interchanges for 142/121...

    I have a dream that once NLRT starts - we close muni, or at least the one run way, run the LRT up the west side of nait (east side of the airport, and same with a partial freeway past nait and kingsway into downtown

  61. #61
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards
    These business have all had what? 30 + years to move out?
    But why should they move? What incentive can the city offer? Higher taxes, lower taxes, transit access, customer proximity? These businesses are there because it makes sense for them to be there. Attempting to relocate them could easily move them to Strathcona County.

    BTW, there are businesses on the south side of YH too, but fewer.

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards
    Full interchanges for 142/121...
    These make absolutely no sense to me. Why do you think these should be left open at all, let alone be made into full interchanges?

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards
    I have a dream that once NLRT starts - we close muni, or at least the one run way, run the LRT up the west side of nait (east side of the airport, and same with a partial freeway past nait and kingsway into downtown
    That sounds like a nightmare to me.

  62. #62

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dwells
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards
    Full interchanges for 142/121...
    These make absolutely no sense to me. Why do you think these should be left open at all, let alone be made into full interchanges?
    I agree - this would be a waste of money. Perhaps fix one of 142 st and 149 st, but not both (unless some sort of cheap combo). 142 st and 149 st are very quiet roads in these areas as they go nowhere but the Yellowhead. They do not need blue chip access.

    Another option would be to close 142 st and 149 st access, and instead, significantly enhance St Albert Trail and its Yellowhead interchange (given how incredibly busy that one is).

    Limited access to a "free flow" Yellowhead would be enough IMO. We can then try to fix 170 st in a similar way - make a little inner ring road reality, not with gold plated inter-changes for everyone (which will take 50 years plus at current rate), but rather, limiting access so that traffic moves fast and safer once on.

  63. #63

    Default

    You need one of 142 or 149.

    I choose 142 as the full interchange, because 149 st is likely too close to 156, and there is likely not enough room for weave lanes...

    149st should still be a fly over (read: no interchange/access to-from yellowhead)... as its an important N-S connector.

  64. #64
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter
    Quote Originally Posted by dwells
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards
    Full interchanges for 142/121...
    These make absolutely no sense to me. Why do you think these should be left open at all, let alone be made into full interchanges?
    I agree - this would be a waste of money. Perhaps fix one of 142 st and 149 st, but not both (unless some sort of cheap combo). 142 st and 149 st are very quiet roads in these areas as they go nowhere but the Yellowhead. They do not need blue chip access.

    Another option would be to close 142 st and 149 st access, and instead, significantly enhance St Albert Trail and its Yellowhead interchange (given how incredibly busy that one is).

    Limited access to a "free flow" Yellowhead would be enough IMO. We can then try to fix 170 st in a similar way - make a little inner ring road reality, not with gold plated inter-changes for everyone (which will take 50 years plus at current rate), but rather, limiting access so that traffic moves fast and safer once on.
    I think that the solution for 142 would be to close it and have 142 access to a much longer St. Albert Trail ramp, Right-in/right out only, and 142NB-YHEB traffic would pass through the St. Albert trail interchange. The same solution would work for 124 as an auxilliary of 127, although if the cop car hard were to move then 124 could have no access at all.

    149 and 66th should be flyovers with access only if there is room ( both real estate and weave zones) or could tie into the adjacent interchanges.

    I think that 107 and 121 will fester in some form until the muni closes. At that point I would build a two way accessroad/arterial about a block south of the yellowhead, in between the two, and each would have a partial interchange with the yellowhead.

  65. #65
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,179

    Default

    I think the top priority, given the NW Extension of AHD, should be to add interchanges to 66 Street, and get rid of accesses at 62 Street and 89 Street. Perhaps the way to deal with the closure at 89 Street would be to add an access at 82 Street, if truck access is needed. Doing all of this would mean a non-stop route to 97 Street.

  66. #66
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,740

    Default

    If it was entirely up to me:

    (4) 149 St - flyover (156 St is close by)
    (1) 142 St - no access (St. Albert Tr is close by)
    (2) 127 St - interchange
    (1) 124 St - no access
    (5) 121 St - underpass for exiting onto WB and entering from WB.
    (1) 89 St - no access
    (3) 66 St - flyover (Fort Rd exit is close by)
    (1) 62 St - no access

    The numbers in front are priorities.

    The "no access" changes are the highest priority because the city can do it right now or 20 years ago.
    The 127 St interchange is the highest priority interchange because it's a major corridor between downtown and the NW neighborhoods.
    66 Street is next so that the east end doesn't feel too neglected, and this may happen sooner because the Humane Society is finally moving out of there.
    Then 149 St because of west-end traffic volume and to expedite free-flowing Yellowhead traffic all through the west end.
    Then finally, 121 St, since this may take more planning because of the CN yard, VIA station and the Grand Prix.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  67. #67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey
    If it was entirely up to me:

    (4) 149 St - flyover (156 St is close by)
    (1) 142 St - no access (St. Albert Tr is close by)
    (2) 127 St - interchange
    (1) 124 St - no access
    (5) 121 St - underpass for exiting onto WB and entering from WB.
    (1) 89 St - no access
    (3) 66 St - flyover (Fort Rd exit is close by)
    (1) 62 St - no access
    ^^ what about 107st?

    This is basically what I envision too

  68. #68
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,740

    Default

    107 St is already fixed as far as I'm concerned, if it's just right turns only. If it still has traffic lights then they must be removed. If the LRT runs along it then an underpass under Yellowhead and the CN tracks would be nice.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  69. #69

    Default

    you can still turn left onto the yellowhead from 107st, which makes it another light. The only thing is you can't turn left off of the yellowhead on to 107st, which was an improvement... the dual turning left lanes with one of the lanes actually serving as the third lane on the yellowhead

    Remove all left turns, and you can eliminate the light


  70. #70
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Ozerna, North Edmonton
    Posts
    8,845

    Default

    ^ I totally agree. Do people really need to get off at 107th going westbound on YHD? They can get off at 97th. This also goes for 66th street, a few blocks up is the Fort Road overpass or get off at the 50th st overpass when going WB. You could do that for 142 st with St. Albert Trail/149th streets being so close.
    These roads should be used to exit off of YHD or exit onto YHD but not to cross it. Some of these lights hold up traffic flow on YHD with minimal cars using crossing YHD with close interchanges nearby if needed.

    Regards

  71. #71
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,532

    Default

    normally im against fences, but in the yellowheads case i would like to see sound barries (read as "ugly blockers" along most of the eastern and middle sections.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  72. #72
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,179

    Default

    What gets me about Yellowhead Trail is why some businesses are are still directly next to the Trail. The Humane Society (yes, I know it's moving), along with some businesses near 66 Street, and others between 142 and 149 Street have to go. The city has had about 25 years to correct this. The needs of commuters should come ahead of these businesses.

    We've made a few improvements with overpasses at 184 Street, 156 Street, 82 Street, Fort Road, 50 Street, which is a new overpass every five years. I'd like to see a new one at least every two years, so this road can be completed in 10 instead of 25 years.

  73. #73
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,532

    Default

    ^amen, but that costs a lot of money to expropriate. However i do agree this needs to start happening now so that we can indeed do an interchange/improvement every 2 yrs for 10 to get this road where it needs to be.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  74. #74
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,740

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards
    you can still turn left onto the yellowhead from 107st, which makes it another light. The only thing is you can't turn left off of the yellowhead on to 107st, which was an improvement... the dual turning left lanes with one of the lanes actually serving as the third lane on the yellowhead

    Remove all left turns, and you can eliminate the light
    Ah, my bad. The fix they made to the 107 St intersection a while back was removing the left turn lights on Yellowhead WB.

    This is a hard one because 107 St is the major access route to NAIT from the north end. So maybe it should be a "burrow under" (as opposed to flyover) under Yellowhead and CN yard with right turns only, and people leaving NAIT can turn onto 127 Ave instead, or use Princess Elizabeth and Kingsway. This 107 St tunnel can also accommodate LRT.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  75. #75
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Cat
    What gets me about Yellowhead Trail is why some businesses are are still directly next to the Trail.
    ...
    some businesses near 66 Street, and others between 142 and 149 Street have to go.
    Why can't these businesses operate off a service road like those near 50 Street? If a service road paralleled each side of YH between SAT and 156 Street there would be no need for any intersections and only a small amount of "deconstruction" would be required since most of that stretch is parking lots and existing service roads. The 149 Street intersection should have no direct access to YH and should be:
    A) closed except for right turning traffic entering and leaving the service road
    B) as described in A) with the addition of a flyover

    142 Street should have no direct access to YH and should be as described in A)

    The service road can merge with the exit lane near SAT and 156 Street similar to the merge on Whitemud between 106 Street and Calgary Trail.

    The short stretch between 66Street and Fort Road should simply have any access to YH closed, limiting all access to these areas to 66 Street.

  76. #76
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey
    Ah, my bad. The fix they made to the 107 St intersection a while back was removing the left turn lights on Yellowhead WB.

    This is a hard one because 107 St is the major access route to NAIT from the north end.
    Why can't they go east to 97Street and change direction there or go south to Princess? Is accommodating westbound traffic from NAIT really that critical?

  77. #77
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,740

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dwells
    Is accommodating westbound traffic from NAIT really that critical?
    Considering that NAIT is a major educational institute with lots of students and staff and keeps growing and expanding, I'd say yes, access would be critical. Ever seen the traffic on 107 St at rush hour?

    Perhaps if they shut down the bloody city-killing Muni then maybe a better transportation solution that accommodates both LRT and a road with a Yellowhead interchange can be found.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  78. #78
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,696

    Default

    nevermind!

  79. #79
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by raz0469
    It's completely infeasible to close both 142/149, even if you "beef up" St. Albert Trail. How would all the commercial/industrial traffic based around 118th avenue get to the Yellowhead? It would be either 156th street or St. Albert Trail.
    The problem is that 156/149/142/SAT/127 are too close together and do not allow adequate weave space. This is exacerbated by traffic slowing down and stopping to access businesses. Providing a totally separate service road should increase safety as well as improve traffic flow.

    Quote Originally Posted by raz0469
    As it stands, those are both already very busy, and St. Albert Trail from 118th to the Yellowhead is already gridlock during rushhour, or nearly so.
    Much of the traffic problem on SAT may be due to the traffic lights on the YH in both directions and even to the railway crossing 149 Street north of YH.

  80. #80
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,696

    Default

    haha, I ninja edited out my post after you replied, I guess! I hadn't read the rest of this page prior to posting, unfortunately, and after reading it decided my post was somewhat redundant.

  81. #81
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey
    Quote Originally Posted by dwells
    Is accommodating westbound traffic from NAIT really that critical?
    Considering that NAIT is a major educational institute with lots of students and staff and keeps growing and expanding, I'd say yes, access would be critical.
    In view of what this intersection is doing to the YH, I think that the cost to the many outweighs the benefit to the few. There are alternate routes available.

    I feel that keeping this intersection open is no more valid than keeping 89 Street.

  82. #82
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by raz0469
    haha, I ninja edited out my post after you replied, I guess! I hadn't read the rest of this page prior to posting, unfortunately, and after reading it decided my post was somewhat redundant.
    Your comment is no more redundant than this entire thread. It covers the same ground as a number of older, discontinued threads, But because it is of interest to many readers, it keeps resurfacing.

    If we keep tossing the ideas around, maybe something will trigger a response that will illuminate some luminary and get the shovels moving.

  83. #83
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,539

    Default

    As much as I want to see more work done throughout the YH, if they were to even work on the far east end of it at 66 st. Build a bridge there and that will help traffic flow alot. Even if they did one road at a time for the next few years I could handle that. Also a quick solution, close some of the accesses and reroute the business traffic to major entrances rather than their own personal entrance onto YH.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  84. #84
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,532

    Default

    ^agreed...66st is the worst of the issues on the YH IMO. Then 127st next after some more expropriation.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  85. #85

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmcowboy11
    As much as I want to see more work done throughout the YH, if they were to even work on the far east end of it at 66 st. Build a bridge there and that will help traffic flow alot. Even if they did one road at a time for the next few years I could handle that. Also a quick solution, close some of the accesses and reroute the business traffic to major entrances rather than their own personal entrance onto YH.
    so pretty much what everyone else has said...

  86. #86
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards
    so pretty much what everyone else has said...
    Agreement doesn't hurt.

  87. #87
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    566

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards
    you can still turn left onto the yellowhead from 107st, which makes it another light. The only thing is you can't turn left off of the yellowhead on to 107st, which was an improvement... the dual turning left lanes with one of the lanes actually serving as the third lane on the yellowhead

    Remove all left turns, and you can eliminate the light
    Ah, my bad. The fix they made to the 107 St intersection a while back was removing the left turn lights on Yellowhead WB.

    This is a hard one because 107 St is the major access route to NAIT from the north end. So maybe it should be a "burrow under" (as opposed to flyover) under Yellowhead and CN yard with right turns only, and people leaving NAIT can turn onto 127 Ave instead, or use Princess Elizabeth and Kingsway. This 107 St tunnel can also accommodate LRT.
    I seem to remember the mayor talking about a flyover from 107 street to an upgraded 113 street near the off-leash area along 127th avenue. It would be nice if that idea was revived.

    I don't think we really need to have Yellowhead access at 107th street even with the main NAIT campus nearby. But we could desperatly use another northside access road between 97 and 127 streets. This flyover (or tunnel) could do wonders for traffic flow on the north side.

  88. #88
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cured
    But we could desperatly use another northside access road between 97 and 127 streets.
    Why? I think that better access from downtown to 82 Street, to 97 Street, to 127 Street and to SAT would serve us well enough.

  89. #89
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    566

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dwells
    Quote Originally Posted by Cured
    But we could desperatly use another northside access road between 97 and 127 streets.
    Why? I think that better access from downtown to 82 Street, to 97 Street, to 127 Street and to SAT would serve us well enough.
    That would be nice too, but not as necessary if we can get better mileage out of 107th street. 107 street is already there and i think we could get better use out of it by extending it past the CN tracks to join up with the growing north side neighbourhoods. 97th and 127th streets combined are just not adequate. I think it is the only spot in the city that has a 30 block gap between major arteries. Typically the gaps are 14 or 15 blocks.

  90. #90

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cured
    Quote Originally Posted by dwells
    Quote Originally Posted by Cured
    But we could desperatly use another northside access road between 97 and 127 streets.
    Why? I think that better access from downtown to 82 Street, to 97 Street, to 127 Street and to SAT would serve us well enough.
    That would be nice too, but not as necessary if we can get better mileage out of 107th street. 107 street is already there and i think we could get better use out of it by extending it past the CN tracks to join up with the growing north side neighbourhoods. 97th and 127th streets combined are just not adequate. I think it is the only spot in the city that has a 30 block gap between major arteries. Typically the gaps are 14 or 15 blocks.
    113th is not a major road though south of 137ave. Why turn it into one, and cut a neighbourhood in half? This area has enough trouble as it is...

  91. #91
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    566

    Default

    113 street is a major road(4 lanes) in the physical sense up to 132 avenue and it is being used heavily by traffic all the way up to 127 avenue. The cars that are unable to funnel through between 132 ave and 127 ave are already cutting through the residential side streets to get to either 97 or 127 street.

    The traffic is already there virtually splitting the neibourhood in two. So why note create a way to manage it more efficiently and prevent short cutting.

  92. #92
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cured
    The cars that are unable to funnel through between 132 ave and 127 ave are already cutting through the residential side streets to get to either 97 or 127 street.
    Please explain what you mean.

  93. #93
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    566

    Default

    I'll try.

    113 street becomes a two lane road south of 132 avenue so inevitiably there is a backlog of traffic at this point. Also at 127th avenue there is a signalized T intersection with 113th street which also contributes a bit to the backflow. As a result there is a percentage of traffic that bleeds into the side roads(between 132 avenue and 127 avenue) to shortcut back to the main arteries. This behavior is perfectly legal, but perhaps not desirable.

  94. #94

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cured
    113 street is a major road(4 lanes) in the physical sense up to 132 avenue and it is being used heavily by traffic all the way up to 127 avenue. The cars that are unable to funnel through between 132 ave and 127 ave are already cutting through the residential side streets to get to either 97 or 127 street.

    The traffic is already there virtually splitting the neibourhood in two. So why note create a way to manage it more efficiently and prevent short cutting.
    If we do this, we better do it right. This should be a project combined with the Northern Leg of the LRT.

    Red line = NLRT... Remember where the old base is as a partially protected ROW from 137ave North.. very possible. Wipe out the airport and do 113ast properly... of course, 107st wouldn't be on the yellowhead anymore, and 109st juts over to 113st... fill in the white areas with what ever you want... Worlds Fair 2007 anyone? Condos? Retail... Arena (as suggested before...)

    I bet those businesses that want the airport to remain wouldn't mind redevelopment if they truly thought about it.



    My next question would be how easy is it to tunnel under a rail yard like that, and how costly would that be?

  95. #95

    Default

    Expensive. I know that EPCOR has been putting a new power line in under the rail yards to link the north side to downtown, and that the segment under the rails was a headache and quite costly and time consuming as the constant use of the rail yards makes everything a little more unstable during digging. I know there's an order of magnitude size difference but it's still being bored, just like a LRT tunnel would be.

  96. #96

    Default

    ^^would it be possible to go over the railyard then

  97. #97
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards
    ^^would it be possible to go over the railyard then
    Are we seriously considering spending billions to cross the railyards because we are unable to persuade traffic to move 6 blocks to the east? I would sooner see 113 Street blocked south of 137 Avenue.

  98. #98

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dwells
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards
    ^^would it be possible to go over the railyard then
    Are we seriously considering spending billions to cross the railyards because we are unable to persuade traffic to move 6 blocks to the east? I would sooner see 113 Street blocked south of 137 Avenue.
    I'm not, just trying to play out the options for everyone else to slowly realize this isn't an option at all, and that 97/127st are fine without needing more. Seems you have already got to this conclusion, as I have many years ago.

  99. #99
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    566

    Default

    Speak for yourselves. I believe i am still entitled to an opinion, right? The forum is for sharing ideas, not forcing your will on people.

    As a long time northside resident, i can attest to the reality that 127th street and 97th street are not really adequate to handle the growing north side communities.
    Upgrading either of these arteries or forcing LRT to share one of these arteries would require significant capital investment to somehow expand the current underpasses.

    IMO a 113/107 fly over is an option, and it wouldn't cost in the billions. At the same time i am a realist and i do understand that this will not be a huge priority for the city in the foreseeable future. A new river crossing downtown is vitally more important - even for me.

  100. #100
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cured
    As a long time northside resident, i can attest to the reality that 127th street and 97th street are not really adequate to handle the growing north side communities.
    Upgrading either of these arteries or forcing LRT to share one of these arteries would require significant capital investment to somehow expand the current underpasses.
    Upgrading both of these arteries is necessary before any crossing to 113 Street should be considered. Once they are fully improved it may indeed be necessary to consider 113 Street but I do not see that need in the foreseeable future.

    In the meantime, I think that YH would be better served with the median at 107 Street fully closed and the lights removed.

Page 1 of 15 1234511 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •