Page 1 of 7 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 619

Thread: QE2 highway badly needs an upgrade

  1. #1
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton - Millwoods
    Posts
    47

    Default QE2 highway badly needs an upgrade

    From good old Neil at the Sun

    http://www.edmontonsun.com/Comment/C...8/4742381.html



    Fri, December 28, 2007
    QE2 highway badly needs an upgrade

    By NEIL WAUGH




    Traffic deaths are terrible under normal circumstances.

    But during the holiday season - when peace on earth is the name of the game - they are doubly tragic.

    And, once again, the Queen Elizabeth 2 Highway has claimed more victims.


    This drives me up the wall. To blame this on "Congestion" and the need for a 3rd lane is ridiculous. This, IMO, is due to the inability of drivers to obey speed limits, drive defensively, and to drive according to road/weather conditions. Yes, this highway is probably more congested than some of the country roads that Neil travels on his hunting and fishing trips, but I would not consider it to be overly congested.. I think Neil needs to travel at bit. Say, to the Lower Mainland in BC and travel Highway #1 at rush hour. That is congestion. All we need here are better drivers IMO. Plus, he is also saying that Stelmach should get on the EAA to re-open commuter service again at the muni to help with highway 2 congestion Arrgh.


    Pardon my rant.

    Pete

  2. #2
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,277
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    rant pardoned...
    Onward and upward

  3. #3
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    435

    Default

    His words regarding the City Centre Airport is just cringe-worthy at best, but hey it's a society with free speech*.

    And steelman's right... it seems that once you exit Calgary or Edmonton city limits, all driving rules go out the window. Why can't anyone drive at 110 km/h on that highway, or slow down when the road conditions aren't that great?

    And to Neil, you're just grasping at straws with that whole City Centre Airport train of thought!

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

    Default

    The QE2 is rarely if EVER bumper to bumper. Traffic I saw on the I-5 north of Seattle was bumper to bumper.

    What is needed is:

    1) Paving of certain sections that are in *very* poor conditions.

    2) Moronic Albertans who think they're invincible in trucks of SUVs need to learn how to drive and obey traffic laws. Yes, traffic on the QE2 is fast in the summer and it works. However, when there is frost and ice...grow a brain people.

    3) Did I mention grow a brain, idiots?

    And, wow, Neil...what *are* you smoking? Yeah...Airbus service from the downtown airport would relieve traffic pressures.

    Excuse me, but the audacity of that made me puke in my lung.
    LA today, Athens tomorrow. I miss E-town.

  5. #5
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,309

    Default

    I think there are a few rough spots on QEII south on the way to the International Airport. Other than that, 130 km/h seems to be the going speed.

    I'm sure that the QEII would be safer if more drivers followed the speed limit of 110 km/h. I drove home on the QEII during a snowstorm, and the "morons in trucks and SUVs" were speeding.

    And Neil, stick with the issue at hand. The airports have nothing to do with the safety of the highway. I wish you would stick with the facts, rather than generalizations.

  6. #6
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    1,041

    Default Re: QE2 highway badly needs an upgrade

    For once, I sort of agree with Neil. Now, any of us who travel this road frequently know that certain stretches of the road are busier than others. Apart from certain times of the year, I'd argue that the "congestion" is not as bad Waugh says it is.

    Maybe an upgrade needs to be applied from Edmonton to Leduc and from Airdrie to Calgary. Maybe something around Red Deer, but probably not. Anyway, steelman is right that drivers have an inability to obey speed limits and should probably drive more safely, but the reality is that unless there are massive resources earmarked towards cracking down on traffic related infractions on the QEII, this behavior will continue. Regardless, the two arguments are completely independent in my books.

  7. #7
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,026

    Default

    Why does the QE2 from Edmonton to Leduc and Calgary to Airdrie need to be expanded, there's already 3 or 4 lanes per direction in those stretches. I do agree that the stretch through Red Deer needs to be expanded, plus the Gasoline Alley entrances/exits need to be redone.

    Anyway, QE2 expansion isn't as high a priority as, say, twinning Hwy 63 to Fort Mac, twinning the Yellowhead all the way to the Jasper National Park gate (and beyond), creating a new Hwy 43 bypass around Grande Prairie, or building more interchanges on the Yellowhead.
    “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

  8. #8
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    1,041

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey
    Why does the QE2 from Edmonton to Leduc and Calgary to Airdrie need to be expanded, there's already 3 or 4 lanes per direction in those stretches. I do agree that the stretch through Red Deer needs to be expanded, plus the Gasoline Alley entrances/exits need to be redone.

    Anyway, QE2 expansion isn't as high a priority as, say, twinning Hwy 63 to Fort Mac, twinning the Yellowhead all the way to the Jasper National Park gate (and beyond), creating a new Hwy 43 bypass around Grande Prairie, or building more interchanges on the Yellowhead.
    Agreed on twinning Hwy 63.

    Just saying that the two mentioned locations (Edm to Leduc, Cgy to Airdrie) are the busiest stretches of road on the QEII so if an expansion is warranted, then these will have to be first. Apart from a few days/weekends though, I don't feel that congestion on the road is bad at all. If it is going to be a problem though, it will be a problem in these two areas. I think what many fail to realize is that departing during non-peak hours means that the "congestion" that Waugh talks about is practically non-existent.

  9. #9
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    So adding another lane on QE2 might ease occasional congestion. But collisions and failures will just turn these higher capacity roads into more massive parking lots extending for many miles with no escape routes.

    I think our taxes would be better spent on a means of bypassing these bottlenecks.

  10. #10
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    853

    Default

    You know I would be all for restoring air service from City Centre to Calgary....as long as it went to Calgary's secondary airport Springbank.

    As for the QEII driving at 130 is not a problem if that is what everyone is doing and the roads are bare and dry, different story if there is some snow or black ice - as it ihas been said get a brain people or it will splattered on the road.

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kona
    As for the QEII driving at 130 is not a problem if that is what everyone is doing and the roads are bare and dry, different story if there is some snow or black ice - as it ihas been said get a brain people or it will splattered on the road.
    It is incredibly wasteful to drive at 130km/hr fuel economy wise. People don't realize how little time they are saving. All you do is put your life in some other idiots hands as your reactions are impaired by going 20% faster. Not that I'm a saint... but it would be easier to be one if this was policed properly.

    If we are going to build, would it be possible to have some sort of heavy truck lane or similar? Just a thought, probably wouldn't work, as the trucks wouldn't stay in it. Seems to me that QEII is too economically important for our province to not expand it soon - I think another lane each way (i.e. expanding to 3 each way for whole route) is almost needed already, and will without question be needed in 10 years time, which is probably how long to get planned, financed, and built.

    PS. Agree with Sonic re Gasoline alley. We have learned from experience how to try and get back on the main road going North, not user friendly at all.

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kona
    You know I would be all for restoring air service from City Centre to Calgary....as long as it went to Calgary's secondary airport Springbank.


    Actually, if Neil is at all honest about his intentions, he would be forced to agree. Indeed it would only serve O&D patrons and thus be no threat to YEG. However it would also be of no benefit and even the tiniest amount of support for flights between YXD and Pattyburg is like saying, let's just bore a "small" hole in the dyke.


    ---

    I agree that QE2 could be supplemented somehow though, but why don't we just try simple "low speed rail" again? It should be able to do 120 km/h which seems fast enough for the cars, and there is existing infrastructure right from downtown to downtown already in place. We'd only need a few extra overpasses, or just crossing signals with teeth.

  13. #13
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JayBee
    I agree that QE2 could be supplemented somehow though, but why don't we just try simple "low speed rail" again? It should be able to do 120 km/h which seems fast enough for the cars, and there is existing infrastructure right from downtown to downtown already in place. We'd only need a few extra overpasses, or just crossing signals with teeth.
    That may be the "best-bang-for-the-buck" option. All we need for a start is to "bring back the dayliners" and see where it goes. If the demand is there it can be used to justify a high speed service.

  14. #14

    Default

    Broken record time: We can't use existing CP or CN rails. They do not want anything but their own freight on those lines.
    Building a line in a green field, or right beside the CP/CN rails would cost nearly the same cost to build the full High speed system (at least 3/4's)

    So we are either all in, or we fold.

    Thanks,

  15. #15
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,966

    Default

    they need more 3 lane sections for passing and slow moving vehicles IMO...with 3 lanes all of the way eventually.

    but i find the biggest problems are that people stay in the left lane...move the $$#@ over
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  16. #16
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,308

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO
    they need more 3 lane sections for passing and slow moving vehicles IMO...with 3 lanes all of the way eventually.

    but i find the biggest problems are that people stay in the left lane...move the $$#@ over
    IanO, perhaps it's time to drop off the keys and take the Red Arrow etc. for a while. it will give you an opportunity to learn to relax regardless of which lane you're in while you develop an appreciation for how many years it can take to actually do some of those things that we all want done yesterday. and it doesn't really take longer here, we're just starting a little bit later.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  17. #17
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    48

    Default

    In the 10-15 year time frame, it's probaly a better idea to widen QE-II only where necessary in the urbanized areas of greater Calgary, greater Edmonton and Red Deer. Money would also be better spent getting rid of all grade-level crossings, left lane exits/entrances and upgrading pavement quality from Edmonton to Fort McLeod and points south over to to Alberta Route 4 and the US Border.

    The QE II is a very vital economic link to the rest of North America. Eventually the road will require a six-lane minimum pathway between Edmonton and Calgary, but not just yet. After seeing those 1962 maps of the Highway 2 corridor in another thread on this board, I can see how for the province has progressed in the past 45 years.

    Just my respectful $0.02 !!!

  18. #18
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    6 degrees north of you
    Posts
    784

    Default

    I think the first two things that need done on the QEII are
    getting rid of all access points unless they're overpasses with
    diamonds/cloverleafs. Highway 2A is always within a one to
    ten minute drive from the QEII anyways. The traffic accessing
    the QEII at regular intersections can go to 2A, then join the QEII
    at one of the dozens of points that they intersect, with overpasses.

    Second, is to re-do that long straight stretch of the QEII just south
    of Olds. That is about 50 miles of nothing but straight road, with
    narrow shoulders and a narrow/shallow median. It really needs
    to be brought up to freeway standard.
    Yay, summertime!

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO
    they need more 3 lane sections for passing and slow moving vehicles IMO...with 3 lanes all of the way eventually.

    but i find the biggest problems are that people stay in the left lane...move the $$#@ over
    You just proved the contradiction.

    Three lanes won't help if people can't figure out the bloody rules of the road. In fact, I find driving the three lane parts of Highway 2 worse than the two lane parts for the reason that most people have no clue where to be.
    LA today, Athens tomorrow. I miss E-town.

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards
    Broken record time: We can't use existing CP or CN rails. They do not want anything but their own freight on those lines.
    Building a line in a green field, or right beside the CP/CN rails would cost nearly the same cost to build the full High speed system (at least 3/4's)

    So we are either all in, or we fold.

    Thanks,
    Long time coming with the response, but just a quick rebuttal:

    Everything you said is correct, except about the costs of high speed rail:

    - High speed has always included electrification, which is a significant amount. (I know we could be the first to use the "JetTrain", and I think it could be feasible actually, but thus far nobody else has done high speed without wires.)

    - High speed also implies a much higher degree of grade separation than low-speed. With low speed, all they'd really need are, as mentioned, crossings with teeth. With high speed, you pretty much have to be sure that no tires come in contact with the rails. That will put the cost well higher.

    - The costs of operating the system must also be taken into account, and again, seat for seat, we're looking at probably double as a minimum (say for 200 km/h vs. 120). Operating costs must be taken into account.

    I can't believe the costs would be only 30% higher for high speed. I strongly suspect that, CP's freight trains aside for a moment, the price increment for TCO (total cost of ownership) is more like 10 times. CP aside again, the minimum costs for low speed would only be the costs of the trainsets themselves, three platforms with ticket offices, a modern signaling system (presuming CP doesn't already have one), and about 40 odd crossing gates (no, I haven't counted, but its certain something more than flashing lights is neccessary.)

    Now about CP: They might and might not "want" passenger trains interfering with their freight, but money talks, and the federal government talks, and at some threshold of carrot:stick ratio, they absolutely would cooperate. It's only a question of do the numbers of interested voters equal the threshold.

    (Via already uses CN, and has the ability to use any trackage in their system with no changes to the contract neccessary, but their Calgary line would just not be competitive for passenger service.)

    How much could it hurt to do a pilot project for 6 months? Just get 2 excess Via or Amtrak trainsets and a couple Atco trailers, and see how it goes. I would certainly prefer riding in a train to Calgary, even if it has to slow down at crossings. I personally came much closer than comfortable to an accident on the QE2, and it scared the dickens out of me. And if I'm going to fly, it just doesn't seem worth it either.

  21. #21
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    City Of Champions
    Posts
    3,854

    Default

    It's not the guy in the SUV doing 130 that makes highway 2 unsafe. It's having 25 vehicles change speeds quickly because Ernie from Ponoka thinks he has the right to drive is 78 1/2 ton Ford at 95km/h.

  22. #22
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,308

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LindseyT
    It's not the guy in the SUV doing 130 that makes highway 2 unsafe. It's having 25 vehicles change speeds quickly because Ernie from Ponoka thinks he has the right to drive is 78 1/2 ton Ford at 95km/h.
    he thinks so because he does LindseyT, just like many of those big rigs - particularly the american ones - have the "right" to be restricted to 55 mph (88 kph).
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  23. #23

    Default

    The fact that one can travel 130 km/h on QEII at its busiest times proves that it doesn’t need a third lane to relieve congestion. I would agree that QEII needs work, most of the cloverleaf interchanges (i.e. Hwy 27 @ Olds) and have very short acceleration/deceleration ramps, meaning you have to watch out for slow traffic entering the highway. Unfortunately all the engineering in the world can’t prevent Alberta winter weather or bad winter drivers.

    Someone mentioned the straightaway south of Olds as an area needing improvement. There has been efforts to widen the median (essentially shifting a set of lanes over) and widening the shoulders, and they starting working on the last stretch between Carstairs and the Crossfield Esso (just north of Hwy 72) this fall but construction is suspended for the winter. The at grade intersections around between Bowden & Carstairs got to go, and they could simply be closed.

    As for extra lanes between Airdrie & Calgary and Leduc & Edmonton, I think an alternate highway needs to be examined. Highway 2A exists between Crossfield and Leduc (with a couple short hiccups near Innisfail and Lacombe) to serve as an alternate route, but there is no decent alternate route the closer you get to either Edmonton or Calgary. With increased interprovincial and commuter traffic, there needs to be an alternate route so if there’s an accident that closes the highway, one can still reasonably get in & out the city.

  24. #24
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,026

    Default

    What really slows down traffic is a big 18-wheeler doing 100 kph overtaking another 18-wheeler doing 90 kph.
    “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

  25. #25
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,966

    Default

    3lanes in this fashion...


    right - trucks(limited to 10km/h less than speed limit) and slow moving vehicles also for merging.

    middle - normal traffic

    left - passing
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  26. #26
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,597

    Default

    Comment from a "seasoned" driver who runs to cowtaown with regularity:
    "We always drive at the posted speed limit in the centre lane! This accomodates other drivers leaving or entering the highway via the right lane" " Even when there are no ramps for miles?"
    "Yes, always!"

    Sheesh and Ye gads!

  27. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dmuzika
    As for extra lanes between Airdrie & Calgary and Leduc & Edmonton, I think an alternate highway needs to be examined. Highway 2A exists between Crossfield and Leduc (with a couple short hiccups near Innisfail and Lacombe) to serve as an alternate route, but there is no decent alternate route the closer you get to either Edmonton or Calgary. With increased interprovincial and commuter traffic, there needs to be an alternate route so if there’s an accident that closes the highway, one can still reasonably get in & out the city.
    I was sort of wondering about this as well. My thought being, could we upgrade 2A and expand it, such that it becomes the large truck only route, with all heavy vehicles directed down it (from a truck weigh in station, or similar)? If we removed heavy vehicles from QEII, most of the traffic issues would go away IMO.

  28. #28
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    City Of Champions
    Posts
    3,854

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor
    Quote Originally Posted by LindseyT
    It's not the guy in the SUV doing 130 that makes highway 2 unsafe. It's having 25 vehicles change speeds quickly because Ernie from Ponoka thinks he has the right to drive is 78 1/2 ton Ford at 95km/h.
    he thinks so because he does LindseyT, just like many of those big rigs - particularly the american ones - have the "right" to be restricted to 55 mph (88 kph).
    Are you sure about that? If your driving at an unsafe speed you can be ticketed, too fast or too slow. Besides, a farm pickup, some lady hauling three kids in a minivan, or some old guy in an 89 Crown Victoria is very different than a large commercial vehicle. One you can see from km's behind and assume it's slower moving, the other you can't.



    A vehicle going 15 over the limit can theoretically travel without impacting any vehicle on the road, it simply weaves in an out of traffic. The one going 15 under travels in a straight line forcing every other vehicle to make a maneuver.

  29. #29
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    6 degrees north of you
    Posts
    784

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter
    I was sort of wondering about this as well. My thought being, could we upgrade 2A and expand it, such that it becomes the large truck only route, with all heavy vehicles directed down it (from a truck weigh in station, or similar)? If we removed heavy vehicles from QEII, most of the traffic issues would go away IMO.
    That would be a good idea except for the fact that Hwy 2A goes
    straight through the middle of every town within 10 miles of the
    QEII. Suddenly residents of Millet, Wetaskiwin, Ponoka, Lacombe,
    Blackfalds, Penhold, Innisfail, Olds, Carstairs, Crossfield, and even
    Red Deer will have 10,000 Semi's a day cruising their main streets.
    Yay, summertime!

  30. #30
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    dmuzica's original idea that we need connectors from the big cities to the 2A is a good one. I like to take alternate routes on trips down south, and I find that 2 lane roads are less stressful, more enjoyable, and more scenic than QE2 will ever be, and the lost time is minimal going 110 on 21 versus 120 on the 2.

    I'm another who thinks that an additional lane would help far less than better designed interchanges and a few closed accesses. Anywhere I've travelled in Canada, a third lane(or more) makes drivers assume that there is no difference between the right, centre and left lanes.

  31. #31
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,182

    Default

    THe worst thing about the QE2 safety-wise are the at grade crossings. They should all be abandonned and feeder roads constructed to overpasses.
    Otherwise, the next best safety improvement needs to come from the people driving the road at excessive speeds and in poor conditions.

  32. #32
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 240GLT
    THe worst thing about the QE2 safety-wise are the at grade crossings. They should all be abandonned and feeder roads constructed to overpasses.
    Something about this doesn't ring true. Replace 'QE2' with 'Yellowhead' or 'Trans-Canada.' Neither has the limited access as proposed and neither has the problems associated with QE2.
    Quote Originally Posted by 240GLT
    Otherwise, the next best safety improvement needs to come from the people driving the road at excessive speeds and in poor conditions.
    What a concept! Lower speed limits and better enforcement. Just might work. It's simple and cheap too.

  33. #33
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles; Athens
    Posts
    4,399

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO
    3lanes in this fashion...


    right - trucks(limited to 10km/h less than speed limit) and slow moving vehicles also for merging.

    middle - normal traffic

    left - passing
    That would work, but if the province went ahead and did it, they would have to have an educational campaign to instruct Albertans how to drive correctly.
    LA today, Athens tomorrow. I miss E-town.

  34. #34
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    6 degrees north of you
    Posts
    784

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander
    dmuzica's original idea that we need connectors from the big cities to the 2A is a good one. I like to take alternate routes on trips down south, and I find that 2 lane roads are less stressful, more enjoyable, and more scenic than QE2 will ever be, and the lost time is minimal going 110 on 21 versus 120 on the 2.
    That's precisely why I'll usually take Hwy 22 when going to
    SW Alberta, which is at least once a year.
    Yay, summertime!

  35. #35
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,340

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter
    Quote Originally Posted by kona
    As for the QEII driving at 130 is not a problem if that is what everyone is doing and the roads are bare and dry, different story if there is some snow or black ice - as it ihas been said get a brain people or it will splattered on the road.
    It is incredibly wasteful to drive at 130km/hr fuel economy wise. People don't realize how little time they are saving. All you do is put your life in some other idiots hands as your reactions are impaired by going 20% faster. Not that I'm a saint... but it would be easier to be one if this was policed properly.

    If we are going to build, would it be possible to have some sort of heavy truck lane or similar? Just a thought, probably wouldn't work, as the trucks wouldn't stay in it. Seems to me that QEII is too economically important for our province to not expand it soon - I think another lane each way (i.e. expanding to 3 each way for whole route) is almost needed already, and will without question be needed in 10 years time, which is probably how long to get planned, financed, and built.

    PS. Agree with Sonic re Gasoline alley. We have learned from experience how to try and get back on the main road going North, not user friendly at all.

    130 km/h is the design speed for highway 2, so having all of the traffic going that fast is perfectly safe unless visibility or traction is significantly compromised by dense fog, heavy precipitation or snow or ice cover. Fuel economy does not decline as quickly with speed as it used to either.

    As for heavy truck lanes, the rest of the continent may force our hand - many jurisdictions seem to want to require 105 km/h speed governors for trucks. Imagine trucks that can't do more than 105 km/h trying to pass the RV doing 100 km/h. Traffic jams for kilometers.

    On gasoline alley, I don't go there anymore. If I need to stop in Red Deer, I go into Red Deer (why not, I'll end up there anyways).

  36. #36
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,026

    Default

    I avoid Gasoline Alley like the plague because it's become such a pain in the arse to exit back onto the QE2. I'd rather fuel up the SonicDeathMobile before leaving the Edmonton or Calgary metro areas (I prefer the northbound rest stop with the Esso/Timmys near Crossfield).
    “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

  37. #37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48
    As for heavy truck lanes, the rest of the continent may force our hand - many jurisdictions seem to want to require 105 km/h speed governors for trucks. Imagine trucks that can't do more than 105 km/h trying to pass the RV doing 100 km/h. Traffic jams for kilometers.
    When I lived in Europe, I rode on a heavy truck from Scandinavia down to Spain. The Scandinavian truck (Scania - it was great) was speed governed to 90km/hr (at the time, a Scandinavian requirement, not a pan-European one). We kept to the right lane of the autobahn, no traffic issues, cars wizzing by at over 200km/hr.

    Interestingly, the truck driver had rigged up a system whereby he could disconect the entire dashboard, and was then able to bypass the speed governer / limiter. He would do this if another truck annoyed him, to get by, or similar. Problem is, the odometer is logged (also GPS), and the odometer would not accumulate while bypass was on, so just for little bursts

  38. #38
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,185

    Default

    Nothing (so far) in the works as far as anticipated construction on Highway 2.

    Here is the most recent tender schedule (13k pdf) -> AI & T Tender Schedule - Nov 07 to Jan 08

    If you are interested in tender results go to this link (440k pdf) -> AI & T Tender Results

    This pdf file is updated on a regular basis. It currently lists results from all tenders from Jan 07 to present.

  39. #39
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,133

    Default

    And to just continue making your commute into Nisku/Leduc miserable...
    http://www.onefm.ca/news/leduc-count...-been-delayed/

  40. #40

    Default

    IMO one upgrade that the QEII could do with is to change the procedure that police/rcmp/sheriffs use for conducting traffic stops so that cars are only pulled over at rest areas or off of exit ramps.

    As it is now, a car pulled over by emergency responders on the side of the QEII causes massive confusion and sudden braking in both lanes. From what I've seen a simple traffic stop seems to cause an unsafe situation for drivers and responders on our main 4 lane highway. I think changing the procedure for all non emergency traffic stops makes sense.

    What do you think C2E'ers?

  41. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by debos View Post
    IMO one upgrade that the QEII could do with is to change the procedure that police/rcmp/sheriffs use for conducting traffic stops so that cars are only pulled over at rest areas or off of exit ramps.

    As it is now, a car pulled over by emergency responders on the side of the QEII causes massive confusion and sudden braking in both lanes. From what I've seen a simple traffic stop seems to cause an unsafe situation for drivers and responders on our main 4 lane highway. I think changing the procedure for all non emergency traffic stops makes sense.

    What do you think C2E'ers?
    Not a bad idea,and there should also be an education campaign that you DON'T have to slow to 60 if you are in the far left lane when an officer pulls over a car in the far right lane , only the immediate lane beside the officer or emergency vehicle is required to slow to 60,I've seen people on the QE2 slow to 60 in the OPPOSITE direction, because its been beat into their heads that speed fines double when passing emergency workers.

    I don't think though that you could get people to pull over in rest area's or the like since they are few and far between and weve been trained to pull over as soon as the officer turns on the red blue lights.

    This gets back to education and driver training, there are so many people who have poor driving knowledge.

    Just to clarify from the Highway traffic Act

    "... (2)(t) does not apply if there are 2 or more traffic lanes for traffic moving in the same direction as the vehicle and
    there is at least one traffic lane between the driver’s vehicle and the
    stopped emergency vehicle or tow truck...."

    2(t) refers to the passing of emergency vehicles at 60km/h
    Last edited by KenL2; 21-08-2015 at 10:21 AM.
    Excellence is a continual Journey up a staircase where there is NO top step...

  42. #42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KenL2 View Post
    Not a bad idea,and there should also be an education campaign that you DON'T have to slow to 60 if you are in the far left lane when an officer pulls over a car in the far right lane , only the immediate lane beside the officer or emergency vehicle is required to slow to 60,.
    I wasn't aware of this. People will slow down though when there is an incident, it's human nature. This doesn't bug me that much on the QET, 5 minutes at 60km instead of 100, doesn't change my trip time significantly.

    As long the province keeps tripping more sections, the QET will slowly get better. The tripling is needed now, the traffic has ramped up a lot in the last five years, and I expect will be even busier 5 years from now.

  43. #43
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    YEG
    Posts
    1,499

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KenL2 View Post
    Not a bad idea,and there should also be an education campaign that you DON'T have to slow to 60 if you are in the far left lane when an officer pulls over a car in the far right lane , only the immediate lane beside the officer or emergency vehicle is required to slow to 60,.
    I wasn't aware of this. People will slow down though when there is an incident, it's human nature. This doesn't bug me that much on the QET, 5 minutes at 60km instead of 100, doesn't change my trip time significantly.

    As long the province keeps tripping more sections, the QET will slowly get better. The tripling is needed now, the traffic has ramped up a lot in the last five years, and I expect will be even busier 5 years from now.
    The problem isn't changing your trip time, it's the causing of an unsafe and unnecessary braking situation when the vehicle in the far left lane with a driver aware that he doesn't have to slow to 60 km/h suddenly has to slam on his brakes to avoid rear ending the uneducated or ignorant driver who does slow down to 60 km/h.

    Perhaps my favourite offender is the driver who not only thinks they have to slow to 60 km/h BUT also moves into the far left lane leaving the far right lane empty, thus forcing the educated drivers to slow down.

    I wish Alberta would bring in legislation to force retesting for Operators Licenses every five years.

  44. #44
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,343

    Default

    ^ This exact situation has happened a number of times to me while travelling the QE2 specifically. While I didn't have to slam on the brakes necessarily, it has caused some aggressive, and unnecessary braking, while also worrying if the vehicles behind me were paying attention, and not going to slam into the back of me.

  45. #45

    Default

    Just doing some digging int eh Rules of the Road regulations from the Alberta government and ran across this

    "...
    Slow moving vehicles
    3
    (1)
    If a person driving a vehicle is driving the vehicle on a
    highway at a speed that is less than the normal speed of the traffic
    on the highway at that time and place and under the conditions then
    existing, that person shall drive the vehicle
    (a) in the right traffic lane then available for traffic, or
    (b) as close as practicable to the right curb or edge of the
    roadway,
    except when either
    (c) overtaking and passing another vehicle travelling in the
    same direction, or
    (d) preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private
    road or driveway.
    ..."

    So that ties into what GranaryMan was saying those travelling slower must move to the right..
    Excellence is a continual Journey up a staircase where there is NO top step...

  46. #46
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,233

    Default

    It's amazing how that just doesn't register with some people.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  47. #47
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Vancouver - Edmonton
    Posts
    156

    Default

    I think this is a driver education issue. It is far too easy to get a licence here. You spend two years driving with your parent or guardian who may or may not be a good driver and they pass all the bad habits and lack of knowledge to the driver in training. The road test is also far too easy. In my opinion driver education needs to happen as a class in high school, while they are doing their two year Learners with their parents, that way the lessons and rules of the road will stick a lot better.

  48. #48
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    YEG
    Posts
    1,499

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by realkevbo View Post
    I think this is a driver education issue. It is far too easy to get a licence here. You spend two years driving with your parent or guardian who may or may not be a good driver and they pass all the bad habits and lack of knowledge to the driver in training. The road test is also far too easy. In my opinion driver education needs to happen as a class in high school, while they are doing their two year Learners with their parents, that way the lessons and rules of the road will stick a lot better.
    Not necessarily a class in high school but instead similar to how Germany issues a Drivers License (Operators License in Alberta).

    Further to that point, having Police/Sheriffs/Peace Officers enforce even the simplest driving infractions such as not signalling while changing lanes, or blocking the left lane of a two lane road rather than merging into the right lane to allow people to pass would remind people of proper driving habits.

    I still support the retesting every five years in order to maintain your Operators License however.

  49. #49
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Do you really thing it's safe to be going 120km/hr in the left lane when the right lane is going 60km/hr? That huge discrepancy is speed is bound to cause issues. Slow down in both lanes I say.

  50. #50
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    120 to 60 is the same as 60 to 0, so if passing in the adjacent lane at 60 is OK then the far lane at the speed limit should be fine.

    It's not like we don't have 60km/hr streets in the city with unprotected sidewalks, which is a whole lot more dangerous. We should be able to trust that the trained officer who is out of his vehicle on the side of the highway won't take a step too close to traffic so 60 is reasonable in the adjacent lane. It's a far bigger problem when we expect the same standards of predictability from kids walking down the sidewalk.

  51. #51
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Do you expect, and should you expect, the guy going 60 in the right lane not to move to the left lane? If we're talking defensive driving?
    Last edited by Channing; 21-08-2015 at 02:49 PM.

  52. #52
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,513

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander
    120 to 60 is the same as 60 to 0, so if passing in the adjacent lane at 60 is OK then the far lane at the speed limit should be fine.
    No, it's not. The relative difference in speed is the same, but the difference in kinetic energy is absolutely not the same. Energy rises at the square of velocity/speed.

    I'm not saying that the left lane should slam on the brakes to slow to 60 as well, nor should they keep trucking along at 110-130. But if the right hand lane has slowed down to 60-70, the left lane should probably ease off to 90-100 so that the speed differentials aren't so massive between the two.

  53. #53
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    ^Yeah I'm with you. I'm also not suggesting the left lane needs to be at 60 all the time, but should consider slowing down, especially if there is other traffic nearby.

    If you are all alone, full speed on the left lane sure.

  54. #54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GranaryMan View Post
    The problem isn't changing your trip time, it's the causing of an unsafe and unnecessary braking situation when the vehicle in the far left lane with a driver aware that he doesn't have to slow to 60 km/h suddenly has to slam on his brakes to avoid rear ending the uneducated or ignorant driver who does slow down to 60 km/h.
    When you are driving behind someone, you should always expect they may stop in an instance. I have zero sympathy for someone who tail gates / follows so close, they can't Manage when the car in front slams on the brakes. I do have sympathy for the person who gets hit from behind by that ***** following to close, it's the person behind, not the one in front, who is to blame, regardless of the reason the front person slows down or stops. Keep a proper following distance, will get there just as fast. Having to slow down once in a while for an emergency vehicle, IMO, is a good thing, even if it isn't technically required.
    Last edited by moahunter; 21-08-2015 at 11:19 PM.

  55. #55
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by debos View Post
    IMO one upgrade that the QEII could do with is to change the procedure that police/rcmp/sheriffs use for conducting traffic stops so that cars are only pulled over at rest areas or off of exit ramps.

    As it is now, a car pulled over by emergency responders on the side of the QEII causes massive confusion and sudden braking in both lanes. From what I've seen a simple traffic stop seems to cause an unsafe situation for drivers and responders on our main 4 lane highway. I think changing the procedure for all non emergency traffic stops makes sense.

    What do you think C2E'ers?
    In theory it might work well but probably not in practice. They could easily only conduct "blitzes" (sp?) in rest stop areas / off ramps but what if an officer is driving back to the station and comes across an unsafe driver, speeder, or impaired? Are you suggesting they shouldn't be allowed to pull those people over because they aren't anywhere near a rest stop / off ramp?

  56. #56

    Default

    That's why I said "non emergency stops". I think it would be safer for everyone...


    Quote Originally Posted by Mla View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by debos View Post
    IMO one upgrade that the QEII could do with is to change the procedure that police/rcmp/sheriffs use for conducting traffic stops so that cars are only pulled over at rest areas or off of exit ramps.

    As it is now, a car pulled over by emergency responders on the side of the QEII causes massive confusion and sudden braking in both lanes. From what I've seen a simple traffic stop seems to cause an unsafe situation for drivers and responders on our main 4 lane highway. I think changing the procedure for all non emergency traffic stops makes sense.

    What do you think C2E'ers?
    In theory it might work well but probably not in practice. They could easily only conduct "blitzes" (sp?) in rest stop areas / off ramps but what if an officer is driving back to the station and comes across an unsafe driver, speeder, or impaired? Are you suggesting they shouldn't be allowed to pull those people over because they aren't anywhere near a rest stop / off ramp?

  57. #57
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Beaumont, ab
    Posts
    575

    Default

    I hate the QE2 so much that last week into Calgary I took the 56 thru Drum...longer - yes, but much more scenic and leisureyly....

  58. #58
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    5,822

    Default

    Hwy 21 from Sherwood Park to Strathmore is one I use quite a bit with pit stops at Bashaw and Three Hills
    Last edited by Drumbones; 22-08-2015 at 09:17 PM.

  59. #59
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,026

    Default

    I don't mind the QE2 at all.

    It does need improvements though:
    - More passing lanes so that 100 km/hr 18-wheelers can pass Grandpa Irvin's 90 km/hr motorhome without holding up traffic
    - needs extra lanes going by Red Deer
    - also needs extra lanes between Crossfield and Airdrie
    - close all at-grade crossings
    - crash barriers for the entire stretch. After a recent crash south of Leduc that closed the entire highway, it was reported that the past Progressive Calgary governments saw fit to only build crash barriers from south of Airdrie to the 11A interchange
    - with Gasoline Alley having devolved into one of the most inconvenient, crowded, inhospitable and poorly-developed rest stops on God's green Earth, it would be nice if more services opened up along the highway, such as fully developed rest areas with washrooms (such as the one south of the Wetaskiwin exit) and a couple more roadside gas stations.
    - on that note they really need to redo the Gaetz Ave interchange
    “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

  60. #60

    Default

    The speed limit needs to be raised to 120 km/h.
    Edmonton first, everything else second.

  61. #61
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Beaumont, ab
    Posts
    575

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    I don't mind the QE2 at all.

    It does need improvements though:
    - More passing lanes so that 100 km/hr 18-wheelers can pass Grandpa Irvin's 90 km/hr motorhome without holding up traffic
    - needs extra lanes going by Red Deer
    - also needs extra lanes between Crossfield and Airdrie
    - close all at-grade crossings
    - crash barriers for the entire stretch. After a recent crash south of Leduc that closed the entire highway, it was reported that the past Progressive Calgary governments saw fit to only build crash barriers from south of Airdrie to the 11A interchange
    - with Gasoline Alley having devolved into one of the most inconvenient, crowded, inhospitable and poorly-developed rest stops on God's green Earth, it would be nice if more services opened up along the highway, such as fully developed rest areas with washrooms (such as the one south of the Wetaskiwin exit) and a couple more roadside gas stations.
    - on that note they really need to redo the Gaetz Ave interchange
    Well if it wasn't for the **** poor mgmt of the Bear Hills rest stop near Hobbema....

  62. #62
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,026

    Default

    The Bear Hills rest stop was operated by the Louis Bull Tribe. They once had plans to open a casino at the rest stop, but that must have fallen through.
    http://www.wetaskiwintimes.com/2010/...uis-bull-tribe
    “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

  63. #63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by realkevbo View Post
    I think this is a driver education issue. It is far too easy to get a licence here. You spend two years driving with your parent or guardian who may or may not be a good driver and they pass all the bad habits and lack of knowledge to the driver in training. The road test is also far too easy. In my opinion driver education needs to happen as a class in high school, while they are doing their two year Learners with their parents, that way the lessons and rules of the road will stick a lot better.
    I took driver's education in high school here in the early '80s. Half a year, 2 credits toward my diploma.

  64. #64
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,026

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    I don't mind the QE2 at all.

    It does need improvements though:
    - More passing lanes so that 100 km/hr 18-wheelers can pass Grandpa Irvin's 90 km/hr motorhome without holding up traffic
    - needs extra lanes going by Red Deer
    - also needs extra lanes between Crossfield and Airdrie
    - close all at-grade crossings
    - crash barriers for the entire stretch. After a recent crash south of Leduc that closed the entire highway, it was reported that the past Progressive Calgary governments saw fit to only build crash barriers from south of Airdrie to the 11A interchange
    - with Gasoline Alley having devolved into one of the most inconvenient, crowded, inhospitable and poorly-developed rest stops on God's green Earth, it would be nice if more services opened up along the highway, such as fully developed rest areas with washrooms (such as the one south of the Wetaskiwin exit) and a couple more roadside gas stations.
    - on that note they really need to redo the Gaetz Ave interchange
    Looking at the AB Transportation website, there are indeed plans to replace the Gaetz Ave interchange and to add lanes between Crossfield and Airdrie.
    “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

  65. #65
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,026

    Default

    http://www.transportation.alberta.ca...s/central.aspx

    Highway 2

    The Hwy 2 and Taylor Dr/Gaetz Ave Interchange will be reconstructed; including the removal of three bridge structures, construction of five new bridge structures, reconfiguration of ramps and intersections, realignment and six laning of Hwy 2 and the construction of collector-distribution roads.
    Two roadside turnouts along Hwy 2 will be removed. The turnouts are located southbound opposite the Sports Hall of Fame and northbound approximately 3.5 km south of the McKenzie Road interchange.
    Alberta Transportation has identified the need to plan for widening of Highway 2 to a six lane divided freeway standard, with provision for an ultimate eight lane widening upgrade between Highway 42 to Highway 597.

    Highway 2A

    A planning study has been completed to develop functional plans for the twinning of Hwy 2A between Hwy 42 at Penhold and Hwy 2 south of Red Deer.
    The intersection of Hwy 2A and Hwy 597 will be upgraded to a modern roundabout. The works will include; detour construction, median construction, realignment of C & E Trail, relocation of C & E trail intersection and Illumination.
    A twinning planning study has been completed through the Town of Ponoka .
    A twinning planning study has been completed between Blackfalds and Lacombe
    “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

  66. #66
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,026

    Default

    http://www.transportation.alberta.ca...s/calgary.aspx

    Highway 2

    Alberta Transportation conducted a functional planning study of the future Highway 2 at Highway 23 interchange. This was a long-term planning study and will identify the ultimate interchange requirements and the future alignment of Highway 23 around Frank Lake.
    Long term planning study was undertaken to identify the ultimate requirements for the Balzac (Hwy 566) interchange.
    Alberta Transportation conducted a functional planning study of the future Highway 2 at Township Road 265 interchange. This was a long-term planning study and will identify the ultimate interchange requirements.
    Widening the QEII Highway from a four lane divided freeway to a six lane divided freeway north of Junction 2A/72 (Crossfield) to south of Highway 581 (Carstairs)
    Widening the QEII Highway from a four lane divided freeway to a six lane divided freeway, including upgrading the existing Highway 72 interchange to accommodate the widening. Junction 567(Airdrie) to north of Junction 2A/72 (Crossfield)
    “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
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    5,822

    Default

    I noticed on that one map that it has a wide purple line from 41ave sw to hwy 19 at nisku. I had heard that they were planning to move the highway west a bit back from the tracks but I didn't know it was so soon. Interesting. Another interchange is planned around the Trinidad rd, twp. rd 510. I wonder if they will be beginning work on that as well.
    Last edited by Drumbones; 24-08-2015 at 02:58 PM.

  68. #68
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,026

    Default

    Province looks at expanding Highway 2 between Calgary and Edmonton
    https://www.metronews.ca/news/calgar...nd-edmont.html

    The provincial government is seeking a group to study widening the Queen Elizabeth Highway to six lanes between Edmonton and Calgary, and as the congestion mounts, some motorists say it's beyond time to do so.
    “Given forecast growth in traffic volumes, the study will look at if the QEII should be expanded to six lanes all the way between Edmonton and Calgary and if so, what that would cost,” said Bob McManus, a spokesperson for Alberta's transportation department.

    McManus said the study is meant to look at all options, including if public transit or other measures could help ease the congestion between the two cities.

    “There’s been no final decision, nor will there be until we have all the facts,” he said.

    In the tender documents, the province states between 28,000 and 35,000 vehicles use the highway every day in rural areas.

    That number climbs to 50,000 around Red Deer, 83,000 south of Airdrie and about 90,000 north of Leduc.

    Highways typically get an expansion to between six or eight lanes when volumes reach between 30,000 and 50,000 cars per day, the document states.
    Three companies have been shortlisted for the project and the winning bidder will have until late 2017 to submit their report.
    “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

    I drove the 401 highway on Tuesday between Montreal and Toronto. Long sections in between the cities are still 2 lanes in each direction with 35,000-40,000 vehicles per day. At 9pm Tuesday, I counted semi trucks going the opposite direction and counted 116 in 10km which equates to 1,160 TRUCKS PER HOUR! (total traffic in both directions.) Many times there were more trucks than cars on the road.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  70. #70
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,340

    Default

    An extra lane won't help much if people don't use it properly. Most drivers follow the slower traffic keep right rule in the 2 lane sections, but once you pass Leduc northbound people seem to pick lanes randomly. Adopting BC's giant "keep right except to pass" signs might help a little.
    Last edited by Titanium48; 01-10-2015 at 11:22 PM.

  71. #71
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,233

    Default

    ^ Part of that problem stems, I think, from five busy on-ramps. Two from the airport and another two coming out from Nisku, plus a further merge ex-Nisku just north of the Flaman yard - not all day long, though. Many drivers move out into the centre lane to leave room for adjoining traffic from those ramps.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  72. #72
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    2,591

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    An extra lane won't help much if people don't use it properly. Most drivers follow the slower traffic keep right rule in the 2 lane sections, but once you pass Leduc northbound people seem to pick lanes randomly. Adopting BC's giant "keep right except to pass" signs might help a little.

    Many states in the USA have laws that require trucks to stay in the right lane, except in special areas with an extra passing lane. They are never allowed in the left lane for any reason, and they have a lower speed limit than the rest of traffic.

    If we adopted this, it would free up a lot of movement on the QEII.

  73. #73
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,026

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howie View Post
    ^ Part of that problem stems, I think, from five busy on-ramps. Two from the airport and another two coming out from Nisku, plus a further merge ex-Nisku just north of the Flaman yard - not all day long, though. Many drivers move out into the centre lane to leave room for adjoining traffic from those ramps.
    To add to that, there's also the split between AHD westbound and Gateway Blvd. Slower traffic wanting to go on AHD WB have to drive in a middle lane.
    “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

  74. #74
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,513

    Default

    I don't know if it needs to be six lanes the entire way, but certainly the areas with the highest volumes near Edmonton, Calgary, Red Deer and so on are getting pretty congested at all times of the day. I realize that a lot of these areas are already 6 or even 8 lanes presently, but those areas likely could be expanded further (not more lanes, but further distance wise). There's definitely been a noticeable increase in congestion the past few years.

    If it does go to six lanes, I completely agree that transport trucks should be completely banned from the left hand lane. They can travel in the right lane, pass slower trucks in the middle, but they should stay out of the left hand lanes. On a few of the big upslopes you frequently see numerous trucks changing lanes to try to beat other trucks up the hill because of differences in loads. Driving to Banff last week at least twice I had semis make Crazy Ivans in to the left hand lane causing me to have to slam on my brakes to avoid rear ending them or being side swiped, and then had to travel at 90km/h because the truck in the left lane didn't want to follow his buddy at 85km/h.
    Last edited by Marcel Petrin; 02-10-2015 at 09:49 AM.

  75. #75
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,340

    Default

    ^^ The stupid left hand exit for AHD is well inside the city limits, and most of my experience with highway 2 is on weekends when only the airport ramp has a significant amount of traffic. People still pick lanes randomly starting at the Leduc overpass.

  76. #76
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,383

    Default

    A comprehensive study of widening the QE2 and bringing it up to a full freeway standard, rather than the current piecemeal improvements, is definitely the way to go.

    For instance, there are still a number of at grade crossings mostly in the section between Red Deer and Carstairs that need to be removed. A section between Carstairs and Crossfield was recently widened to six lanes and then reverts to four lanes between Crossfield to just north of Airdrie. Then there are the Gasoline Alley, Leduc roller coaster, Nisku interchange, and Cross Iron Mills chokepoints.

    There is so little margin for error on the existing QE2. The shutdown of even one of the lanes of traffic (whether due to construction or an accident) causes traffic to come to a standstill and quickly back up for tens of kilometres.

  77. #77

    Default

    ^I've been stuck in quite a few of those accident back ups. For this reason alone, three lanes makes the most sense. Its a big project though.

  78. #78
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,133

    Default

    Certainly needs it today, at least to the south side of Leduc, around Red Deer and from the existing 3 lane section around Carstairs to Airdrie.

    Nisku / Leduc probably needs ramp metering too, but the 41st Avenue SW interchange might solve some of the Nisku / Leduc problems.

  79. #79
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,309

    Default

    One of the challenges with the QE II north of Red Deer is the number of bridges crossing rivers, creeks, highways and railroad tracks. I can think of the RR tracks north of Red Deer, Blindman River, Battle River, the creek south of the Millet/616 overpass, the interchanges at Highway 53, 12 and 39 and the RR tracks at Leduc.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  80. #80
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,026

    Default

    They will need to redo the Gaetz Ave interchange south of Red Deer before any more lanes are added
    “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

  81. #81

    Default

    Along with the study of putting in more lanes on the QE2 they should also run a parallel study on the cost of a rail link. It may be more advantageous to add a rail link that carries freight and passengers than building extra lanes. Plus, the link could go to the airport.
    Last edited by Gemini; 02-10-2015 at 11:43 PM.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  82. #82
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    5,822

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Cat View Post
    One of the challenges with the QE II north of Red Deer is the number of bridges crossing rivers, creeks, highways and railroad tracks. I can think of the RR tracks north of Red Deer, Blindman River, Battle River, the creek south of the Millet/616 overpass, the interchanges at Highway 53, 12 and 39 and the RR tracks at Leduc.
    And more bridges over creeks you don't even notice. It's a huge job, no doubt, but with the growing cities one that will need to be done. I've noticed in the US they just build another new freeway. It's not uncommon to have 2 major roadways running parallel, even crisscrossing each other between cities, but they have a lot more taxpayers than we do.
    Last edited by Drumbones; 03-10-2015 at 04:00 AM.

  83. #83
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    311

    Default

    Slightly related question, how come we could afford to build all of this infrastructure in the past but nowadays it seems impossible.
    Are we pricing ourselves out of our own lifestyle ? Or have we come to expect too much from the government ( social programs, healthcare etc)

  84. #84
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    32

    Default

    I think the province should build a whole new 4 lane divided highway a few KM east or west of the current one. It could separate the traffic and provide an alternative if there is an accident or construction.
    Greatest City in the world.

  85. #85

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rupikhalon001 View Post
    Slightly related question, how come we could afford to build all of this infrastructure in the past but nowadays it seems impossible.
    Are we pricing ourselves out of our own lifestyle ? Or have we come to expect too much from the government ( social programs, healthcare etc)
    Labour used to be relatively cheap and materials like steel was expensive. Now labour, especially construction labour is very expensive. Also all the expropriation costs and land acquisition is extremely costly.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  86. #86
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rupikhalon001 View Post
    Slightly related question, how come we could afford to build all of this infrastructure in the past but nowadays it seems impossible.
    Are we pricing ourselves out of our own lifestyle ? Or have we come to expect too much from the government ( social programs, healthcare etc)
    Labour used to be relatively cheap and materials like steel was expensive. Now labour, especially construction labour is very expensive. Also all the expropriation costs and land acquisition is extremely costly.
    ok, thanks. I am sure there is a whole set of economics out there that explains what happens to costs as a countries become more advanced

  87. #87
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,026

    Default

    I find it hilarious that some of you are suggesting that they build a new highway parallel to the current QE2 when that is exactly what they did 50 years ago (hence why there's a Hwy 2 and a Hwy 2A). So now you guys want 3 parallel highways???
    “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

  88. #88

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rupikhalon001 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rupikhalon001 View Post
    Slightly related question, how come we could afford to build all of this infrastructure in the past but nowadays it seems impossible.
    Are we pricing ourselves out of our own lifestyle ? Or have we come to expect too much from the government ( social programs, healthcare etc)
    Labour used to be relatively cheap and materials like steel was expensive. Now labour, especially construction labour is very expensive. Also all the expropriation costs and land acquisition is extremely costly.
    ok, thanks. I am sure there is a whole set of economics out there that explains what happens to costs as a countries become more advanced
    Here is a micro example.

    Back in the late 60's my dad bought a Craftsman wrench set that cost him $300 which was more than a week's wages. Today the same wrench set from Craftsman is still about $300 but if you want a plumber or a guy to service your furnace, two hours later your bill is $300.

    The point is that consumer inflation is rising on certain things but products manufacturing has been moved offshore and is often cheaper now than ever before. BUT construction and service labour has continued to rise 4 times that of inflation and is increasingly unaffordable.


    That is why we could build the original LRT line with 5 stations, a long tunnel and the miles of track for only $65 million. Now we cannot build an outhouse for under a million.
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 03-10-2015 at 12:46 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  89. #89
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    I find it hilarious that some of you are suggesting that they build a new highway parallel to the current QE2 when that is exactly what they did 50 years ago (hence why there's a Hwy 2 and a Hwy 2A). So now you guys want 3 parallel highways???
    Hwy 2A is a connector highway for all the little towns along it. No one takes hwy 2A from Edmonton to Calgary. I mean another new highway that is a real freeway the whole way, divided and 4 lanes, non-stop the whole way.

    Kind of like Ontario has more then one 400 series highway.
    Greatest City in the world.

  90. #90

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by etownff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    I find it hilarious that some of you are suggesting that they build a new highway parallel to the current QE2 when that is exactly what they did 50 years ago (hence why there's a Hwy 2 and a Hwy 2A). So now you guys want 3 parallel highways???
    Hwy 2A is a connector highway for all the little towns along it. No one takes hwy 2A from Edmonton to Calgary. I mean another new highway that is a real freeway the whole way, divided and 4 lanes, non-stop the whole way.

    Kind of like Ontario has more then one 400 series highway.
    Wrong. Between Montréal and Toronto there is only one highway, the 401 and like I already stated, it is far busier than the QEII and for long stretches is only a 4 lane highway. The same goes for the highway to Windsor.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  91. #91
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    2,591

    Default

    Ontario built some of those fantastic 8 and 10 lane divided roads by using tolls.

    We could build 8 lane divided straight from Edmonton to Calgary and break ground this year if we got over our absurd aversion to paying for the things we use.

  92. #92

    Default

    Lets get the facts straight.

    Ontario did not build the 407, it was built and operated by a private company.
    The 407 toll highway is completely within the Metro Toronto borders and serves the population of 5.5 million because the 401 through Toronto was the busiest in North America. The 407 was built out of necessity and had been in planning since the 1950's. The 407 is not an intercity toll route.

    The comparison between the low traffic volumes on the QEII and the busy 401 are laughable. There is no need for another highway to Calgary or a high speed train either. There is simply no demand to support either idea and the cost benefit ratio is negative IMHO. If you need to increase capacity, simply add a lane.
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 05-10-2015 at 07:29 AM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  93. #93
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    2,591

    Default

    ^ Add two lanes in either direction and turn the whole thing into a toll road.

    Ideally hand over the rights to build, operate, and maintain it to a private company as well. Easy solution, costs the taxpayer nothing. We would have a better maintained road and the average taxpayer would pay less every year. Only the people who use it would pay for it. Such a simple fix to this problem.

  94. #94

    Default

    ^ have that done by Friday.

    That idea would go over like a lead balloon. All the commuters from Leduc and Millet, Airdrie and farmers in Lacombe and Ponoka would be a little more than upset to be charged tolls.

    27,000 cars and trucks per day past Morningside. Say at $10 each, is $270,000 a day, less expenses of maintaining the tolls @50% =$135,000/day x 365 is $50 million/year. $5 Billion to construct requires 100 years of tolls not including financing charges.

    Not financially viable IMHO
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  95. #95
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,133

    Default

    AB Transportation has published plans for improving QE2 around Red Deer, not sure how much will ever get implemented though

    Red Deer and North
    http://www.transportation.alberta.ca...aningPlans.pdf

    South of Red Deer, Gasoline Alley
    http://www.transportation.alberta.ca...rge%20file.pdf

  96. #96

    Default

    Here is a good resource for traffic stats on the QE2. Stats for the Edmonton Calgary corridor are on pages 8-10.

    http://www.transportation.alberta.ca...y2005-2014.pdf

    By comparison, here are traffic stats on the 401 for 2010. They only go to the ON / QC border, but that is enough for our purposes. Pages 35-37 show stats for the border to Toronto corridor.

    http://www.raqsb.mto.gov.on.ca/techp...ADT%20Only.pdf

    According to google maps, the route from Toronto to Montreal is 541 km. The route from Edmonton to Calgary is only 299.

    Looking at the first entry for the 401 on page 35, traffic volumes near the ON / QC border in 2010 were only 18,500 vehicles.

    Looking at the entry at the top of page 10 for the QE2 stats, 2010 traffic volumes near Ponoka were 22,750. As of 2014, that number is up to 26,620.

    The 401 also has good VIA rail service between Toronto and Montreal which takes a large number of vehicles off that road. The QE2 has no such luxury.
    Last edited by lat; 05-10-2015 at 09:35 AM.

  97. #97

    Default

    The amount of traffic is diminished at the Quebec border but if you go to Brockville or Kingston or even Napenee where the highway are still 2 lanes in each direction with traffic counts of 35,000-40,000 vehicles per day.


    I drove the 401 highway on Tuesday between Montreal and Toronto. Long sections in between the cities are still 2 lanes in each direction with 35,000-40,000 vehicles per day. At 9pm Tuesday, I counted semi trucks going the opposite direction and counted 116 in 10km which equates to 1,160 TRUCKS PER HOUR! (total traffic in both directions.) Many times there were more trucks than cars on the road.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  98. #98
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Lets get the facts straight.

    Ontario did not build the 407, it was built and operated by a private company.
    The 407 toll highway is completely within the Metro Toronto borders and serves the population of 5.5 million because the 401 through Toronto was the busiest in North America. The 407 was built out of necessity and had been in planning since the 1950's. The 407 is not an intercity toll route.

    The comparison between the low traffic volumes on the QEII and the busy 401 are laughable. There is no need for another highway to Calgary or a high speed train either. There is simply no demand to support either idea and the cost benefit ratio is negative IMHO. If you need to increase capacity, simply add a lane.
    No, the 407 was originally built by the government as a tolled alternative to the 401 but was sold (actually long term lease, if I recall correctly) after it was complete by the next provincial government in their mad scramble to balance that year's budget, in this case at the expense of future revenue.

    I agree that there's no need for another highway, but when we're determining whether an additional lane is needed it would be a good idea to start looking at tolls to
    pay for the upgrades.

  99. #99

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    The amount of traffic is diminished at the Quebec border but if you go to Brockville or Kingston or even Napenee where the highway are still 2 lanes in each direction with traffic counts of 35,000-40,000 vehicles per day.


    I drove the 401 highway on Tuesday between Montreal and Toronto. Long sections in between the cities are still 2 lanes in each direction with 35,000-40,000 vehicles per day. At 9pm Tuesday, I counted semi trucks going the opposite direction and counted 116 in 10km which equates to 1,160 TRUCKS PER HOUR! (total traffic in both directions.) Many times there were more trucks than cars on the road.
    Sorry, anecdotal evidence is meaningless... and Montreal is just on the other side of the border, so traffic should be picking up, if that corridor is a valid comparison to the QE2... or maybe we are comparing apples to oranges...

  100. #100
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    2,591

    Default

    Keep in mind guys that modern tolls can charge based on distance as well. The farmer commuting 5 minutes may be charged 1 cent. The long haul truck going across the province may be charged 5 dollars.

    You can also have mandatory weigh in motion for trucks, which cause the majority of the damage. Very easy to do. Also easy to combine with another common sense idea used in the rest of the world: making trucks stay in the right lane, and having a higher speed limit for non-trucks.

    Even if it is a 50-75 year repayment (including maintenance), that is far better than straight out of public coffers for construction, and straight out of public coffers for maintenance. We pay for it either way, but this way only the people who use it pay.

Page 1 of 7 12345 ... 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
  •