Trans Canada Highway Twinning: Segments U/C

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by vid

Twinning will be between Nipigon and Thunder Bay, not Nipigon and Shabaqua.

The eventual plan is to extend the 4 lane section to Shabaqua....just not soon. I read it in one of the government releases...though I've read so many, I don't remember which one. When I said that work was beginning this year, I guess I should have been more clear....engineering work is beginning (actually, it began in the fall). It's nothing you will see yet, but at least it's progressing.

[vid]

The highway to Shabaqua was the project that was supposed to 4-lane and twin the Trans Canada from Intercity to Shabaqua but was scaled back to a two lane road from the edge of town to the MTO's weigh scales in Rosslyn. If they decide to upgrade that highway and the old 11/17 to Shabaqua then that is going to be a separate project.

There is also a vision of a highway from Nipigon to Upsala, completely by-passing the Lakehead.

[adriancanada]

Originally Posted by jmt18325

Ontario actually has some other twinning planned. They have plans to extend the 417 to Renfew and they are supposed to start designing a route to Petewawa. The Sudbury bypass is going to be made into a freeway (work has already begun) and there is talk of extending the freeway west to Espanola.

The 417 extension to Petawawa via Pembroke and Renfrew is a good and achievable idea. They seem to be working on that section for quite a while- the next step should be construction/completion until as far as Renfrew. Reaching Pembroke and Petawawa will probably take another 10 years. Beyond that point, I don't think the traffic warrants twinning, as there are no significant towns until North Bay, which is quite far away.

Another 'less known' branch of the Trans-Canada is through central Ontario, along Highway 7. In my opinion, the stretch between Perth-Carleton Place-Highway 417 should be a candidate for twinning. I know there is currently work ongoing on a smallish section between the 417 interchange and Carleton Place. Along with better connecting those communities with Ottawa, it could also serve as a second viable connection between the GTA and Ottawa, as the 35/115 + highway 7 route is actually about 50 kms shorter than the 401 + 416.

As for the Sudbury region, I don't understand why they don't look at extending the freeway EAST, to north bay, instead of west. I would imagine there's quite a bit of traffic between 2 of Northern Ontario's largest cities, especially considering they're relatively close. I think connecting the via twinning 2 should be a priority over the extension westwards towards Espanola.

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by adriancanada

As for the Sudbury region, I don't understand why they don't look at extending the freeway EAST, to north bay, instead of west. I would imagine there's quite a bit of traffic between 2 of Northern Ontario's largest cities, especially considering they're relatively close. I think connecting the via twinning 2 should be a priority over the extension westwards towards Espanola.

I think that very well may be what happens. The westward twinning is just an idea, but I wouldn't be surprised to see North Bay and Sudbury connected first. The first step seems to be the extension of the freeway around Sudbury that they are working on.

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by vid

The highway to Shabaqua was the project that was supposed to 4-lane and twin the Trans Canada from Intercity to Shabaqua but was scaled back to a two lane road from the edge of town to the MTO's weigh scales in Rosslyn. If they decide to upgrade that highway and the old 11/17 to Shabaqua then that is going to be a separate project.

There is also a vision of a highway from Nipigon to Upsala, completely by-passing the Lakehead.

Thanks for the correction.

[lubicon]

Alberta - both Trans Canada Highways (#1 and #16) are twinned from the Sask border in the East to the Jasper and Banff National Park in the west. That is all that the province is responsible for, the section of the highways in the national parks falls under federal jurisdiction. Hwy #1 in Banff Park is twinned to Casle Junction (about 1-2 between Banff and Lake Louise) and is scheduled to be twinned the rest of the way to the BC border. There is no twinning of #16 in Jasper Park.

Saskatchewan - as others have indicated, Hwy #1 is twinned the entire lenght in Sask. However, Hwy #16 is also designated as the Trans Canada and it is only twinned from the Alberta border to Saskatoon. East of Saskatoon towards Manitoba is is pretty much all 2 lane.

[0773|=\]

^ A couple corrections... TCH 16 loses its 4-lane status just west of Hinton, so there is roughly 10 kms of 2-lane highway outside of Jasper N.P. (supposedly going to be twinned soon but not done yet). While I haven't driven TCH 16 from Edmonton to Saskatoon in a few years, I was sure there were a few 2-lane gaps that remained in the section between Lloydminster and North Battleford.

TCH 1 is 4-lanes across Saskatchewan except for the run through Moosomin, though I think that is supposed to be bypassed eventually. In any event, the recent twinning of the eastern sections shaves almost a full hour off the drive-time from Regina to Winnipeg.

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by 0773|=\

While I haven't driven TCH 16 from Edmonton to Saskatoon in a few years, I was sure there were a few 2-lane gaps that remained in the section between Lloydminster and North Battleford.

TCH 1 is 4-lanes across Saskatchewan except for the run through Moosomin, though I think that is supposed to be bypassed eventually. In any event, the recent twinning of the eastern sections shaves almost a full hour off the drive-time from Regina to Winnipeg.

All of those gaps have been filled now.

[mersar]

Originally Posted by 0773|=\

TCH 1 is 4-lanes across Saskatchewan except for the run through Moosomin, though I think that is supposed to be bypassed eventually. In any event, the recent twinning of the eastern sections shaves almost a full hour off the drive-time from Regina to Winnipeg.

I was through there in August and the bypass was mostly constructed, and it opened in November from my understanding.

[VANRIDERFAN]

TCH is now four lanes from just west of MB ON border to just east of the BC AB border. 16 is four lanes from Hinton AB to just east of Saskatoon. I don't think that there are any plans to twin 16 through MB at all. I saw an announcement that there would be a cloverleaf built at the intersection of 16 and the TCH west of Portage MB. But when I drove by there last week there was no sign of any survey work being done there let alone construction.

[0773|=\]

Yeah, TCH 16 east of Saskatoon provides, at best, a marginal distance reduction to Portage. With all the twinning that's happened, most traffic driving between Winnipeg and Saskatoon/Edmonton tends to travel to Regina and then take SK 11 (completely twinned except for a brief section through Chamberlain--which has had numerous issues pop-up preventing a bypass from being built).

Speaking of interchanges that Manitoba says it's supposed to build and doesn't build, how about the interchange at the Perimeter Highway (101) and Lagimodiere Blvd (59)?

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by 0773|=\

Speaking of interchanges that Manitoba says it's supposed to build and doesn't build, how about the interchange at the Perimeter Highway (101) and Lagimodiere Blvd (59)?

They will both be built. Projects have been pushed up and moved back as needed. The perimeter interchange construction starts this year with the rehabilitation of the current structure.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by adriancanada

As for the Sudbury region, I don't understand why they don't look at extending the freeway EAST, to north bay, instead of west. I would imagine there's quite a bit of traffic between 2 of Northern Ontario's largest cities, especially considering they're relatively close. I think connecting the via twinning 2 should be a priority over the extension westwards towards Espanola.

Well, because Hwy 17 west takes traffic from southern Ontario to western Canada. Also, North Bay already (almost) has 4-lane highway access from Toronto, while the Sault has been waiting for 40 years since it was first promised. The reality is that if you don't have transportation links you can't get business up there and you can't get tourists. This has to get built soon. As I noted above somewhere, it took over 30 years just to get the 15 miles of Highway 17 from the Sault city limits to Echo Bay replaced with semi-freeway despite the fact that the highway had bumper to bumper traffic on weekends and (in its old alignment) served as the main street for the Garden River Reserve, replete with little kids riding their bikes and other dangerous things. This needs to get done, hopefully to be followed by the stretch from Kenora to the Manitoba border, which is also totally inadequate as a 2-lane road.

[craner]

Originally Posted by bulliver

Strawman. No one is arguing these reasons to fourlane the highway. You've clearly never been stuck for hours behind a convoy of semis that can only do 30-40kph on the steep grades in Yoho NP and Roger's pass.

Vid mentioned commerce. If goods can be shipped quicker, cheaper and more efficiently then we all win, whether consumers or suppliers.

Plus there is the issue of national image. TCH in its current form is a joke. We should ask for, and achieve better.

EXACTLY ! Great post.

The TCH is an embarrassment.
While driving with some friends from Seattle to Banff and on to Calgary they asked if I was taking the "back road" because it was more scenic. I had to tell them "no - this is our main national highway."

Metro-One The stretch between Kamloops and Salmon Arm for sure should be twinned with interchanges. I believe they are starting some twinning on that section this year. I would love to be able to drive all the way to Calgary on a twinned/4 lane road with no traffic lights or stop signs. Currently as far as one can go from Vancouver doing so is to Kamloops.

Yeah - hard to believe the two largest centers in western Canada are not connected by a modern road in 2009. What the hell have we been doing for the last 40 years ?

[craner]

jmt18325 - you are an incredible source of info - keep it coming please.

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by craner

jmt18325 - you are an incredible source of info - keep it coming please.

Thanks...I really keep on top of it because like you, I really look forward to the upgrades. I'm always positive though, and I'm very happy about the progress that is being made in BC....it takes time to build through one of the most harsh terrains the world has to offer. I too wish they had started sooner...but then, what would I have to look forward too?

Note: It also helps that I have absolutely no life and a very good recall memory...and infrastructure development (and progress in general) is quite exciting to me

[jmt18325]

Oh, but I must note that I am wrong at times and so I welcome any corrections.

[craner]

Originally Posted by jmt18325

Thanks...I really keep on top of it because like you, I really look forward to the upgrades. I'm always positive though, and I'm very happy about the progress that is being made in BC....it takes time to build through one of the most harsh terrains the world has to offer. I too wish they had started sooner...but then, what would I have to look forward too?

Yes, the upgrades now occuring are exciting - and at least they will be new instead of reaching the end of their lifecycle.
I just hope I see it completed in my lifetime.

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by jmt18325

They will both be built. Projects have been pushed up and moved back as needed. The perimeter interchange construction starts this year with the rehabilitation of the current structure.

That reminds me :
I'm under the impression that this will be the most complex interchange configuration in the province and , to be honest , I can't figure out why a simple cloverleaf won't do the trick. Is there anywhere I can see a schematic and even if not , any idea when this thing is supposed to be completed ?

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by Spocket

That reminds me :
I'm under the impression that this will be the most complex interchange configuration in the province and , to be honest , I can't figure out why a simple cloverleaf won't do the trick. Is there anywhere I can see a schematic and even if not , any idea when this thing is supposed to be completed ?

I wasn't aware of that. I assumed they would simply build another bridge beside the current one and make it into a cloverleaf....interesting.