Northern Ontario developments!

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

17 north of SSM doessn't really make sense for many reasons. Highway 11 would be a better one to do.

And that was what I wanted to discuss in this post: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=229872...

I was surprised that nobody cared.

IMO though, once 17 is four-laned from Manitoba border to Nipigon, and from SSM to outside of Arnprior, the only logical next move is to twin the remaining section along Lake Superior, (assuming that Canada needs/wants a transcontinental freeway) unless you guys have better ideas. I would like to hear them in that case.

In addition, AADT on 11 between Nipigon and Hearst is very low, so IMO (JK I took the idea from Loco101), it should only be twinned between Timmins (aka barging onto 101 west of Matheson) and intersection with 11B (to Cobalt).

I'm sorry that I've sounded biased against the 11. It's just that, with a transcanada freeway in mind, I start saying weird things.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

And that was what I wanted to discuss in this post: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=229872...

I was surprised that nobody cared.

IMO though, once 17 is four-laned from Manitoba border to Nipigon, and from SSM to outside of Arnprior, the only logical next move is to twin the remaining section along Lake Superior, (assuming that Canada needs/wants a transcontinental freeway) unless you guys have better ideas. I would like to hear them in that case.

In addition, AADT on 11 between Nipigon and Hearst is very low, so IMO (JK I took the idea from Loco101), it should only be twinned between Timmins (aka barging onto 101 west of Matheson) and intersection with 11B (to Cobalt).

I'm sorry that I've sounded biased against the 11. It's just that, with a transcanada freeway in mind, I start saying weird things.

I will put my comments on the other thread. I didn't know it existed.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I will put my comments on the other thread. I didn't know it existed.

Yea so much for me writing it in both English and French in the hope of getting franco-ontarians to comment too... -_-

[vid]

Not many franco-ontariens on here who use French as their primary language, but the Quebec forum has quite a few monolingual Francophones.

[Loco101]

The initiative to have a freeway or 4 lane divided highway across Northern Ontario would have to come from the federal government. The Ontario government is in no hurry nor does it have any targets.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Loco101

The initiative to have a freeway or 4 lane divided highway across Northern Ontario would have to come from the federal government. The Ontario government is in no hurry nor does it have any targets.

Are you saying that the federal government would have to foot in 95% (if not 100%) of the bill to have it done then...

Also, will it be a feasible idea to move some job opportunities from Toronto up north to, say, Sudbury and North Bay? Northern development right?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Loco101

The initiative to have a freeway or 4 lane divided highway across Northern Ontario would have to come from the federal government. The Ontario government is in no hurry nor does it have any targets.

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Are you saying that the federal government would have to foot in 95% (if not 100%) of the bill to have it done then...

Also, will it be a feasible idea to move some job opportunities from Toronto up north to, say, Sudbury and North Bay? Northern development right?

Until highway 69 reaches Sudbury, I expect nothing to be done along Highway 17/11 North of the French/Mattawa Rivers.

North Bay, Sudbury and SSM all have major Federal and Provincial offices.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Until highway 69 reaches Sudbury, I expect nothing to be done along Highway 17/11 North of the French/Mattawa Rivers.

North Bay, Sudbury and SSM all have major Federal and Provincial offices.

Then 2 years ago, the provincial liberal said that nothing will be done about 69 between Sudbury and Estaire until Sudbury Bypass is twinned. What a nice catch-22...

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Are you saying that the federal government would have to foot in 95% (if not 100%) of the bill to have it done then...

Also, will it be a feasible idea to move some job opportunities from Toronto up north to, say, Sudbury and North Bay? Northern development right?

I would say that the federal government would have to fund at least 75% of the total cost if it were to go ahead.

The Ontario government already has big offices and headquarters in all Northern Ontario cities except Timmins. The interesting thing is that many of those offices have lower operating costs in the North, at least compared to the GTA and other larger Southern cities.

[Dengler Avenue]

Then, funny enough, the Headquarter of Natural Resource is located at Wawa near where 101 meets 17. I wonder if that has to do with the fact that Lake Superior and Michipicoten PP are nearby.

My question though: What does having big government offices in certain places imply? That the government cares about them?

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Then 2 years ago, the provincial liberal said that nothing will be done about 69 between Sudbury and Estaire until Sudbury Bypass is twinned. What a nice catch-22...

The stretch between Sudbury and Estaire is already a 4 lane divided highway, with the exception of a small 5km(?) section up to highway 17, which is 4 lanes, but without a median.

I think it was the first stretch to open.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Then, funny enough, the Headquarter of Natural Resource is located at Wawa near where 101 meets 17. I wonder if that has to do with the fact that Lake Superior and Michipicoten PP are nearby.

My question though: What does having big government offices in certain places imply? That the government cares about them?

Yes, basically. The construction of satellite offices of several ministries is often dictated by economic development concerns. For instance, look at where Revenue Canada's major processing facilities are located.

On the plus side for the employer, it limits employee turnover and they tend to have a lower operating cost than in major cities. Keeping low-end civil servants in Ottawa from job hopping is much harder than keeping people in Sudbury.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Yea so much for me writing it in both English and French in the hope of getting franco-ontarians to comment too... -_-

Nice of you to try though.

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Then, funny enough, the Headquarter of Natural Resource is located at Wawa near where 101 meets 17. I wonder if that has to do with the fact that Lake Superior and Michipicoten PP are nearby.

My question though: What does having big government offices in certain places imply? That the government cares about them?

The headquarters for the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) is not in Wawa. Wawa has a district office. MNRF districts are smaller than the geographical districts found in Northern Ontario.

There are three MNRF regions with regional offices:

Northwest: Thunder Bay

Northeast: Timmins (Porcupine)

South: Peterborough

The actual MNRF headquarters is located in Peterborough.

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by wave46

The stretch between Sudbury and Estaire is already a 4 lane divided highway, with the exception of a small 5km(?) section up to highway 17, which is 4 lanes, but without a median.

I think it was the first stretch to open.

That 4 lane undivided stretch has been that was for quite awhile. But there are plans being drawn up to have it built to freeway standards with service roads.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Loco101

That 4 lane undivided stretch has been that was for quite awhile. But there are plans being drawn up to have it built to freeway standards with service roads.

The design for a new 17/69 (although I prefer to think of it as 417/400) interchange was so cool that I took a screenshot of it.

Link to the video is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eEQqz2xynU

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by wave46

The stretch between Sudbury and Estaire is already a 4 lane divided highway, with the exception of a small 5km(?) section up to highway 17, which is 4 lanes, but without a median.

I think it was the first stretch to open.

They mean the 2 lane section of Highway 17. Realistically, that 4 lane section of 69 is not too bad.... for now.

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

The design for a new 17/69 (although I prefer to think of it as 417/400) interchange was so cool that I took a screenshot of it.

Link to the video is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eEQqz2xynU

They finally got rid of the roundabouts?????

For every connection to each of the highways they had roundabouts. That one singular roundabout is fine, but it had 3 or 4, last I remember.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

They mean the 2 lane section of Highway 17. Realistically, that 4 lane section of 69 is not too bad.... for now.



They finally got rid of the roundabouts?????

For every connection to each of the highways they had roundabouts. That one singular roundabout is fine, but it had 3 or 4, last I remember.

What do you mean??

I would say the roundabout's needed there in the future to keep traffic flowing. At the very least (on a somewhat unrelated note), traffic flowing between 417 and 400 (JK I mean 17 and 69) should be uninterrupted.

Now a digression, just because it's bugged me for a while:
For 11 between Gravenhurst and North Bay, why is the speed limit 100 kph even with all the at-grade intersections (23 of them, I counted)? This is very rare in Ontario. (The other place is 17 & Greater Sudbury Road 55 just NE of Denlou.) Technically there are some on the 400 as well but they are de facto RIRO.
Then, there's Thunder Bay Expressway, where all at-grade intersections will stay as is and where, said Del Duca, the speed limit will stay at 90 kph. "It's not like the 400-series Highways" He said. So my question is, what's with the inconsistency?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

What do you mean??

I would say the roundabout's needed there in the future to keep traffic flowing. At the very least (on a somewhat unrelated note), traffic flowing between 417 and 400 (JK I mean 17 and 69) should be uninterrupted.

Now a digression, just because it's bugged me for a while:
For 11 between Gravenhurst and North Bay, why is the speed limit 100 kph even with all the at-grade intersections (23 of them, I counted)? This is very rare in Ontario. (The other place is 17 & Greater Sudbury Road 55 just NE of Denlou.) Technically there are some on the 400 as well but they are de facto RIRO.
Then, there's Thunder Bay Expressway, where all at-grade intersections will stay as is and where, said Del Duca, the speed limit will stay at 90 kph. "It's not like the 400-series Highways" He said. So my question is, what's with the inconsistency?

Lets put a roundabout at the junction of 11 and 400. Or 400 and 401... Sounds silly doesn't it. So, why should 17(417) and 69(400)

The inconsistency is with the timing of the construction. Thunder Bay and SSM area are relatively new compared to 11 and 17 near Sudbury.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Lets put a roundabout at the junction of 11 and 400. Or 400 and 401... Sounds silly doesn't it. So, why should 17(417) and 69(400)

The inconsistency is with the timing of the construction. Thunder Bay and SSM area are relatively new compared to 11 and 17 near Sudbury.

For 11/400, there isn't a roundabout because it's only a 3-way intersection (or interchange). It does need to be converted to a trumpet configuration though in case we need a 426 to replace 26 (all the way to the west end of Wasaga Bypass, that is).

For 400/401, the freeway technically still exists for a short distance (known as Black Creek Drive) even south of the 401 so we need flyovers. (By the way, traffic merging from 400 onto 401 is a gong show even during midday. Lineup can start as far as 3 to 5 km from the interchange.)

For 17(417)/69(400), however...
For one, the future freeway will end immediately at 17(417), so a more appropriate comparison will be Conestoga Parkway/8 in Kitchener. (By the way, the lineup on 8 during rush hour is horrifying.)
More importantly, it does not help that there are residences within 500 m of the intersection. As much as I would like to draw flyovers for that interchange, regardless I'm always gonna end up with 8 lanes for Regent Street through that residential intersection. It's just a horrible idea. (I'm sure you know that, even if the speed limit on Regent Street is 60 kph, near where it will turn into 400, people will blow through that intersection at 109 kph anyway.)

As for the inconsistency in the speed limit, I thought the twinning of 17 bypassing Garden River and of 11 all the way to North Bay were completed around the same time though (the former in 2010 and the latter in 2012).