View Single Post
  #56  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2009, 9:59 PM
Smevo's Avatar
Smevo Smevo is offline
Sarcstic Caper in Exile
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Calgary
Posts: 3,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by eternallyme View Post
Looking at traffic counts, 104 should definitely be twinned up to Port Hastings before significant re-alignments on Cape Breton are necessary (the entire mainland section should be twinned ASAP - they should aggressively pursue a twinning of the entire remaining mainland section plus the Canso Causeway bypass). Once that is done, Cape Breton can begin to be conquered.

Existing 105 could even be downgraded and renumbered as Trunk 5 once 104 bypasses it from Port Hastings to the CBRM, since no part of it is a freeway and most of it is a rural arterial highway.

I do agree the existing Canso Causeway should be maintained as Trunk 4 for local traffic, since otherwise for local vehicles from Auld Cove to Port Hastings, it is a long way out to the two exits necessary.

The new 4-lane bridge/causeway could also be tolled until the cost is paid off, but in that situation, trucks would be banned from the existing causeway.
Looking at traffic counts alone, I'd have to agree with you for the most part. The only issues are that most people actually take the longer way (105) because of the condition of Tk 4, though as the upgrading along Tk 4 continues, that may change. The other issue is the hairpin on Kelly's Mountain isn't likely going anywhere anytime soon, and neither is the truck traffic there. The hairpin speed rating is 40km/h at the end of a long, steep descent, and that's why there's so many problems with it. This has prompted some truckers nervous of it to take Tk 4, which has no shoulders and a lane width that is too narrow to properly accomodate truck traffic. According to word on the street, there was a ban on trucks on Tk 4, and although I've never seen anything official to confirm this, it would be a good location for a truck ban, at least until there's a minimum of maintained gravel shoulders and wider lanes along it's entire length.

Basically, even though the traffic counts data doesn't warrant the completion of a 2-lane 104 through CB, imho the other circumstances surrounding the situation do warrant a push to be done on it. I do however agree that twinning on the mainland takes priority, but it should be done a lot faster than what's happening now, and the push through CB needs to be done immediately after the mainland twinning.

I also agree that 105 should be downgraded to Tk 5 once the 104 is done because it is far from freeway standard, and is probably the 100-series highway that's least deserving of the designation by design standards. I also think that 162 and 142 should be downgraded to Trunks as well, but that's more because of traffic counts and maintenance priorities than design standards. They served their purpose while mining was big, but now there's really not much use for them beyond local trunks or even collectors.
__________________
Just another Caper in Alberta...
Reply With Quote