The_Cat
Senior Member
Even if the interchange was roughed in, finishing it would not be as difficult.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Daveography
- Start date
husky
Active Member
Not sure you could rough it in though, you'd have to import a ton of fill for the approaches.
They'd be better off just making it right in/right out similar to 149 Street and putting a pedestrian overpass there. It's not a long detour for cars but for pedestrians it's a fair jaunt.
Foolworm
Active Member
No point -- for westbound Yellowhead there's already one at 125 Ave, and eastbound there's no space at 66 St for an offbound turnout anyway.
The latter problem persists in the interchange design and presents an access issue for Montrose -- traffic exits at Fort Road and either has to head south to 118 Ave, or north to 125 Ave where there's an at-grade crossing with the LRT.
As for a pedestrian overpass, both sides are industrial so again, no point.
The latter problem persists in the interchange design and presents an access issue for Montrose -- traffic exits at Fort Road and either has to head south to 118 Ave, or north to 125 Ave where there's an at-grade crossing with the LRT.
As for a pedestrian overpass, both sides are industrial so again, no point.
Last edited:
fromtraintotower
New Member
Is that why they did an overhaul of Fort Road and 125 Avenue?Looks like the 66 St intersection will be removed but there's likely no interchange to replace it.
View attachment 652158
View attachment 652159
66 Street Intersection Removal | City of Edmonton
As part of the Yellowhead Trail Freeway Conversion, changes will include widening the road to 6 lanes from 50 Street, east towards the river.www.edmonton.ca
dkazzed
Active Member
66 St was planned as an overpass with one interchange movement (onramp to YHT EB) but "Interim solution is being developed based on the final plan" leads me to believe that they are going after the low hanging value engineering fruit of just removing the overpass for the time being.
I would have agreed, except that 66 St was integral to that continuous cycling route from 142 St to 50 St, as the path is largely on the south side of Yellowhead but crosses north between Fort Road and 66 St. They could maintain the existing sidewalk on the north side of Yellowhead Trail between Fort Road and 66 Street as a shared use path and introduce a pedestrian crossing across Fort Road in the interim. It likely won't be used frequently enough to disrupt vehicular traffic flow, and Fort Road traffic isn't high enough to justify how long of a light signal it has at the moment, especially with 3 through lanes in each direction. Actually the left turn movement from Fort Road/Wayne Gretzky north onto YHT WB is the one movement that deserves more time.
I would have agreed, except that 66 St was integral to that continuous cycling route from 142 St to 50 St, as the path is largely on the south side of Yellowhead but crosses north between Fort Road and 66 St. They could maintain the existing sidewalk on the north side of Yellowhead Trail between Fort Road and 66 Street as a shared use path and introduce a pedestrian crossing across Fort Road in the interim. It likely won't be used frequently enough to disrupt vehicular traffic flow, and Fort Road traffic isn't high enough to justify how long of a light signal it has at the moment, especially with 3 through lanes in each direction. Actually the left turn movement from Fort Road/Wayne Gretzky north onto YHT WB is the one movement that deserves more time.
CplKlinger
Senior Member
It's out to tender for design and construction, and they're asking for a right in right out solution that allows for a future partial overpass per the concept design. It also asks the proponent to "identify and plan the new Shared Use Path requirements between Wayne Gretzky Drive and 66 Street."
Foolworm
Active Member
Disappointing, but the project is over budget, after all. In all likelihood they'll go back to Option 1: https://www.edmonton.ca/sites/defau...ets/Yellowhead_Trail_WWH_Report_Ph2_Final.pdf
This after all those properties had been bought and demo'd too.
This after all those properties had been bought and demo'd too.
The_Cat
Senior Member
I’m thinking 66 Street is much like 149 Street. The north section connects with Fort Road and 125 Avenue. At least residents south of the Yellowhead can reach the Yellowhead from 50 Street or Gretzky Drive.
bodsbods9090
Senior Member
Just do it right the first time (the designed overpass for which they had a video done up for it). The way expenses balloon for projects over time will just make this an even more expensive fix in the future.
The_Cat
Senior Member
yeggator
Active Member
Satellite imagery from Google Earth Pro taken last month. You can see where they're doing the grading to realign the freeway, the piles for the overpass and the grading/drainage work for the surrounding interchange.
fromtraintotower
New Member
I do wonder if/how having to clean the soil would affect the time to build this. I say this because apparently, one of the reasons why Blatchford is taking so long is because they need to clean the soil from radioactive materials being a former airport.
The_Cat
Senior Member
I'm sure the soil has to be remediated, but I think it's more from air fuel and other possible chemicals.
yeggator
Active Member
Curious, why would an airfield be radioactive?
husky
Active Member
Remediation is generally being conducted as buildings are torn down and/or the areas being prepared for development (e.g. site grading). I haven't heard of it being a significant road block to date.
And as far as I am aware, none of the remediation is due to radioactive materials.