Changes to the Peace Park Road Junction

Thursday, 19 April 2012 12:50 Written by Village of Cumberland

The Village has sent us this note about the upcoming changes to the juncton of Cumberland Road and 3rd Street - it'll become a proper T-Junction pretty soon....see the attached PDF. We guess that'll take care of a few of the most obvious potholes too.

Attachments:
roadworkApr12.pdf	[ ]	123 Kb

< Prev		Next >

Comments

+1 # Adam Robinson 2012-04-27 13:22

I wonder if a traffic circle (round-about) wouldn't be more appropriate and would assist in slowing traffic down, while also keeping it flowing from all directions. I can think of a few places where this would be a benefit, i.e. the 4-way at the park, 4th and Dunsmuir, for example. Many people fail to stop at these intersections.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

0 # Brett Ferdinandi 2012-04-29 13:38

Although the current design is poor this design is only partially better in my opinion.
Traffic bound towards Dunsmuir Ave. along Cumberland Rd should be afforded a right hand turn lane onto third. Without the inclusion of a right hand turn lane or an allowance to phase/improve this design/construction at a later time, traffic will back up many times a day along Cumberland Rd. as Coal Valley Estates and Trilogy continue to develop. Entrance into Cumberland is already conjested but as the population increases this will be exponentially more frustating an experience. It seems there are many excuses as to why past designs here in Cumberland were very short-sighted but in this case the space afforded by the existing road leaves current road crews half the space required for the lane/turn off, which seems to be half the battle.
Thank-you for your ear on this. Have a good day.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

0 # Debra Lefebvre 2012-04-29 23:15

In the planning process, was the Peace Park considered? It is a very well used park in the neighbourhood. Are parks expendable? Will the proposed and happening changes improve the traffic flow at the cost of the park, or just be a change in traffic flow that does nothing to improve the situation, just a change for changes sake. Hmm?

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

Refresh comments list
RSS feed for comments to this post

Add comment

Comments are not reviewed to speed up the discussion. Please be respectful and constructive, otherwise we will have to consider introducing review or removing the comment functionality altogether.

JComments

News - News