Glenmore Trail East Study – Stoney Trail to Rainbow Road
Project update - February 2017
In 2015, The City of Calgary, Rocky View County and Alberta Transportation initiated a study for a half interchange at Glenmore Trail / Highway 560 and 100 Street S.E. The study focused on providing access to and from the west to accommodate the highest demand movements.
Based on several factors, including public input throughout the study, planned development in the area and the shifting role and function of the interchanges within this part of the corridor, the study area grew from its initial focus on Glenmore Trail and 100 Street S.E. to include the intersections at 116 Street S.E. and Rainbow Road.
Final study recommendations have been developed and are ready to be presented to Calgary City Council and Rocky View Council.
The City of Calgary, Alberta Transportation and Rocky View County worked together to make joint recommendations for future interchange plans on Glenmore Trail at 100 Street S.E., 116 Street S.E. and Rainbow Road. This purpose of the study was to identify the interchange layouts, the land required to build the interchanges and how access will be provided to the bordering lands. The future interchanges are not anticipated to be constructed for 20 - 30 years.
Study background and purpose
The study area involves three governing bodies:
- Glenmore Trail (called Highway 560 east of Stoney Trail) is a Provincial road managed by Alberta Transportation
- Lands south of Glenmore Trail and west of 116 Street S.E. are within City of Calgary
- Lands north of Glenmore Trail and east of 84 Street S.E. are within Rocky View County
100 Street S.E. is also known as Garden Road or Range Road 285. 116 Street S.E. is also known as Conrich Road or Range Road 284. Glenmore Trail/Highway 560 is a designated high load corridor for trucks, so any future interchange must provide a bypass for trucks with high loads to get around the bridge. The intersection of Glenmore Trail and 100 Street S.E. was identified for closure in a February 2007 Functional Planning Study.
The currently approved plan shows 116 Street S.E. shifted west of the existing intersection. In the years since this plan was approved, the East Regional Context Study, Shepard Industrial Area Structure Plan (ASP) and Janet ASP have been approved and confirm this will be a major business / industrial area in the future. As a result, The City of Calgary and Rocky View County need to provide access to the lands around Glenmore Trail at 100 Street S.E., 116 Street S.E. and Rainbow Road.
Alberta Transportation agreed to explore interchange layouts that provide the best access while meeting the highway requirements.
The Glenmore Trail East Study was undertaken to include the following outcomes:
- Determine long-term needs for capacity, lane configurations and land (right-of-way) requirements
- Identify the impacts to properties in the study area, if any, and prepare an access management plan to establish access to bordering properties when the interchanges are constructed
- Identify the interchange plans and profiles that accommodate and consider:
- High load trucks on Glenmore Trail, 100 Street S.E. and 116 Street S.E.
- Tie-ins to other interchanges and the surrounding road network
- Transit priority
- Pedestrian and cyclist mobility
The study recommendations are also intended to improve safety while minimizing impacts to road users, land owners and the environment.
The City of Calgary, Alberta Transportation and Rocky View County recognize that decisions are improved when stakeholders and citizen input is included throughout the study process. The project team developed a three-phased engagement program for the project, with opportunities for stakeholders and citizens to provide feedback during each phase of the study.
Phase 1 - Issues Scoping
An information session was held on June 15, 2015 to introduce the project team, provide information about the study and discuss any issues or concerns about the proposed interchange. More than 60 people attended and 18 comment forms were submitted. The feedback form was available on this web page from June 16 - 22, and an additional 46 comment forms were submitted online.
Respondents were most concerned about maintaining access from the east and existing traffic congestion. Several respondents indicated that construction of the interchange in 20 - 30 years is too long and short-term improvements are needed. For detailed information about the information session, please view the display boards, comment summary and the verbatim comments from the feedback forms.
Representatives from The City of Calgary, Rocky View County, Alberta Transportation and power transmission utilities (AltaLink, Alberta Electric System Operator and ENMAX) were invited to attend an Issues Scoping Workshop June 25, 2015. The purpose of the workshop was for technical experts to identify issues, concerns and constraints prior to developing concepts for the future half interchange.
Some of the topics discussed included high loads ramps and high load traffic requirements, preserving or managing the surrounding wetlands, accommodating wildlife movement, the existing power lines, residential access and the local road network. The input received was used to develop and review options for the future interchange.
The project team met with key stakeholders and all adjacent landowners - seven groups in total - to review preliminary interchange options. Landowners were most interested in minimizing right-of-way requirements, providing a full interchange at 100 Street S.E., and keeping 116 Street S.E. on the current alignment.
Phase 2 - Develop Options
Fifty two people attended the open house and five of them submitted their feedback forms at the event. There were 58 feedback forms completed online.
- The majority of the respondents (48 respondents, 83%) felt the proposed short-term improvements at 100 Street S.E. would improve traffic flow.
- Responses varied for which interchange configuration (diamond interchange or diverging diamond interchange) was best suited for 100 Street S.E. or 116 Street S.E.
- Wetlands and environmentally sensitive areas were the environmental factors that received the most responses as an important environmental consideration.
- The social factor that received the most responses for being an important consideration was local connectivity.
- The two economic factors that received the most responses for being an important consideration were road safety and travel time / operations. For detailed information about the information session, please view the display boards and What We Heard Report.
Sixty-one people attended the Information Session and nine comment forms were submitted at the event. Thirty people submitted feedback online following the event. Participants were provided an overview of the project, engagement process as well as study recommendations, and were asked to share their feedback about the engagement process.
Generally, participants were satisfied with the engagement process for the Glenmore Trail East Study. Over 80% of participants felt their input was used to develop the study recommendations and that they were provided enough information and opportunity to share their feedback throughout the project.
Participants indicated that opportunities for improving engagement on future projects include better promotion of events and providing an opportunity to share feedback on the final recommendations.
- Project Team to present to Calgary City Council - Summer 2018
- Project Team to present to Rocky View County Council - TBD
- June 15, 2015 information session display boards
- June 15, 2015 information session verbatim comments
- June 15, 2015 information session comment summary
- November 16, 2016 information session display boards
- November 16, 2016 Information Session What We Heard Report
- May 14, 2018 Information session display boards
- May 14, 2018 Phase 3 What We Heard Report
- May 14, 2018 Phase 3 Functional Planning Study Report
- Appendix A - Design Check Exhibits
- Appendix B - Engagement Summary Reports
- Appendix C - Environmental Screening Assessment
- Appendix D - Geotechnical Input
- Appendix E - Traffic Analysis and Future Conditions
- Appendix F.1 - Functional Design Drawings
- Appendix F.2 - Functional Design Drawings
- Appendix F.3 - Functional Design Drawings
- Appendix F.4 - Functional Design Drawings
- Appendix F.5 - Functional Design Drawings
- Appendix F.6 - Functional Design Drawings
- Appendix F.7 - Functional Design Drawings
- Appendix F.8 - Functional Design Drawings
- Appendix F.9 - Functional Design Drawings
- Appendix F.10 - Functional Design Drawings
- Appendix F.11 - Functional Design Drawings
- Appendix G - Stormwater Drainage Plan
- Appendix H.1 - Road Safety Audit Report
- Appendix H.2 - Road Safety Audit Report
- Appendix H.3 - Road Safety Audit Report
- Appendix H.4 - Road Safety Audit Report
- Appendix I - Construction Cost Estimates
- Appendix J - Short Term Option Recommendation
- Appendix K - Option Evaluation
- Appendix L - Recommended Plan Traffic Analysis Results
- Appendix M - AT Correspondence
- Appendix N - Glenmore Business Park Access Memo
- Appendix O - Property Acquisition Comparison Plan