JaayJR
New Member
Disagree. SB YH traffic is arguably heavier in comparison. Especially with Costco being on that corner. Id still consider 149st open. Especially if you can turn sb from wb YH and vice versa.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Daveography
- Start date
dkazzed
Active Member
I think there's room to turn St. Albert Trail into a DDI if you put the multiuse path between the two directions. The main problem is they want the collector distributor lanes going straight through. I haven't seen any DDIs design with straight through movements for the ramps yet. There is an easy remedy -- the way the ramps from the C/D lanes and from 127 St are already proposed, those who want to travel between 127 St and the C/D lanes west of St Albert Trail can use the main Yellowhead Trail lanes. There are four lanes in each direction under St Albert Trail so it shouldn't be a problem.
The_Cat
Senior Member
A couple of pics of Fort Road:
MacLac
Senior Member
I just saw these pics. So PCL built 2 new train overpasses to the same spec of the '50's overpass that was there before? Just one shitty, narrow lane in each direction? Or is this a temp thing?
yeggator
Active Member
Those are for the temporary tracks to allow CN trains to run while they add an addition bridge span to the mainline under which a second set of lanes will go.
Last edited:
EdmTrekker
Senior Member
No more lanes than were there before - so what ws the gain?
The_Cat
Senior Member
It will be easier to dismantle the bridges once the new bridge is up.
jason403
Active Member
It used to be 4 lanes, upon completion next fall it will be 6 lanes. Net gain of 2 lanes, one additional in each direction.
northlands
Senior Member
Nice to see PCL at the helm of this stretch.
CplKlinger
Senior Member
yeggator
Active Member
(Probably) unpopular opinion: when the Yellowhead becomes a full freeway, the right-most lanes on YHT at the existing Fort Road interchange should become egress lanes and the ingress ramps should become free-flow onto YHT instead of merging. That would leave two through-lanes per direction on YHT under the Fort Road overpass.
As it stands, the current merging setup is RIDICULOUSLY dangerous, and going from Fort Road to "merge" onto eastbound YHT, you have to yield to 70 km/h traffic. It's gonna be catastrophic to have almost a hundred thousand vehicles per day travelling at 80+ km/h with the current merging setup. Even exiting the highway feels dangerous with how short the ramps are, but I'm mainly worried about the merge. I bet my life savings we'll see so many accidents there, or really bad traffic jams from slow merges and sudden braking.
As it stands, the current merging setup is RIDICULOUSLY dangerous, and going from Fort Road to "merge" onto eastbound YHT, you have to yield to 70 km/h traffic. It's gonna be catastrophic to have almost a hundred thousand vehicles per day travelling at 80+ km/h with the current merging setup. Even exiting the highway feels dangerous with how short the ramps are, but I'm mainly worried about the merge. I bet my life savings we'll see so many accidents there, or really bad traffic jams from slow merges and sudden braking.
Gronk!
Senior Member
Just need more yield signage on the Fort Road merge onto Yellowhead EB since they are practically invisible.
cliffapotamus
Active Member
I'm hearing that the section from 107st to 127 is going to be elevated on a berm, with cross-streets passing below at grade. trying to avoid sinking too low into the ground and exacerbating drainage infra costs. 300M long, very tall, wall-esque freeway structure instead of the at-grade intersections and freeway shown in renders.
yeggator
Active Member
I'd be very curious to know where you learned that. It would be shocking to see such a design change now, right as they're about to start construction on that segment.
The_Cat
Senior Member
I can understand, especially if water floods at the Whitemud.