HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada

About The Ads  This week the ad company used in the forum will be monitoring activity and doing some tests to identify any problems which users may be experiencing. If at any time this week you get pop-ups, redirects, etc. as a result of ads please let us know by sending an email to forum@skyscraperpage.com or post in the ads complaint thread. Thank you for your participation.


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2008, 7:47 AM
craner's Avatar
craner craner is offline
Go Tall or Go Home
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 5,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy_haak View Post
What would you propose the federal government should do? The provinces wouldn't take to kindly to having their toes stepped on, and I can assure you that the courts would probably agree with them.
I would like to see the Feds develop a "National Highway Strategy" and identify key routes (E-W & N-S) that are vital to the nation. I'm not talking a tonne of highways, just the most important ones. Then (of course) I would like the Feds to provide some substantial funding to improve these key routes and bring them up to a consistent standard. And yes I would like to see the routes with consistant numbering and signage - I'm quite happy with the green mapleleaf motif BTW.
I could go on but that is the basis of my wishes - lets catch up to the 20th century at least

Just one example of my frustration is the twinning to be completed in Banff which has been on the books for years and is a deadly stretch. There is only about 36 kms remaining to twin IIRC and they finally announced it would be done about 5 years ago. Of course they break it into 3 phases and only provide funding for 10kms. Then even this phase gets scaled back to 6kms. They have since added a little more $$ to the pot to get it up to 9kms. For God's sake bite the bullet and finish it already - IT'S ONLY 36 KMS. sorry I'm ranting again. It really isn't a large sum of money when you see the amounts they spend on much more frivolous projects and the amount they collect in gas taxes.
OK - I'm done.

Also just wanted to say thanks to "mininari for starting the thread as I'm very interested to see what is happening with the TCH accross the country.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2008, 7:48 AM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
Editor
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 40,002
I think Highway 1 would work for the whole thing. Most of the west already uses it, Ontario doesn't have a Highway 1 and highways 1 to 199 are main highways anyway.

I don't think highways should be a federal responsibility, though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2008, 9:25 AM
Architype's Avatar
Architype Architype is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy View Post
Also what is the TCH like in NFLD? There must be some 4 lane sections there, especialy in the Avalon.
Newfoundland has somewhere around 60 miles of four-lane divided freeway between Logy Bay, St. John's and Whitbourne (childhood home of Shannon Tweed) on the Avalon Peninsula. There are some shorter sections at Corner Brook and Grand Falls. Also there is the four-lane divided freeway around 20 miles (Pitts Memorial) between downtown and Conception Bay South, which will be extended this year. I don't know of any real twinning plans on the current agenda, but I think the long range plan is for twinning of the TCH to Clarenville, approximately a further 60 miles. Current highway projects are concentrating on completion of the Trans-Labrador highway, and other improvements to secondary highways.

This picture shows where the (Pitts Memorial) downtown freeway, built in the 1970's, enters the city of St. John's. This portion along the hill is divided by a median:

^my pic 2007

Also see post here for more freeway pics by Canasian:
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...7&postcount=89

I use the term "freeway" because they are all 4 lane divided and controlled access, which is what distinguishes it from the term "highway".

Last edited by Architype; Jun 7, 2008 at 10:10 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Jun 8, 2008, 7:16 AM
ssiguy ssiguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 6,871
Thanks for the info Architype.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2008, 3:14 AM
Mininari Mininari is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria (formerly Port Moody, then Winnipeg)
Posts: 2,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by craner View Post
I would like to see the Feds develop a "National Highway Strategy" and identify key routes (E-W & N-S) that are vital to the nation. I'm not talking a tonne of highways, just the most important ones. Then (of course) I would like the Feds to provide some substantial funding to improve these key routes and bring them up to a consistent standard. And yes I would like to see the routes with consistant numbering and signage - I'm quite happy with the green mapleleaf motif BTW.
I could go on but that is the basis of my wishes - lets catch up to the 20th century at least

Just one example of my frustration is the twinning to be completed in Banff which has been on the books for years and is a deadly stretch. There is only about 36 kms remaining to twin IIRC and they finally announced it would be done about 5 years ago. Of course they break it into 3 phases and only provide funding for 10kms. Then even this phase gets scaled back to 6kms. They have since added a little more $$ to the pot to get it up to 9kms. For God's sake bite the bullet and finish it already - IT'S ONLY 36 KMS. sorry I'm ranting again. It really isn't a large sum of money when you see the amounts they spend on much more frivolous projects and the amount they collect in gas taxes.
OK - I'm done.

Also just wanted to say thanks to "mininari for starting the thread as I'm very interested to see what is happening with the TCH accross the country.
Thanks! I'm glad I did because there has been some interesting things posted in here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2008, 6:53 PM
lubicon's Avatar
lubicon lubicon is offline
Suburban dweller
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Calgary - our road planners are as bad as yours Edmonton
Posts: 4,810
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post
I think Highway 1 would work for the whole thing. Most of the west already uses it, Ontario doesn't have a Highway 1 and highways 1 to 199 are main highways anyway.

I don't think highways should be a federal responsibility, though.
Actually there are 2 Trans Canada Highways in the west. The (original) TCH is #1 and runs Wpg-Regina-Calgary-Vancouver. #16 (aka Yellowhead route) has also been designated as the TCH. It runs Wpg-Saskatoon-Edmonton-Jasper, then splits and part of it continues on to Prince George/Prince Rupert and the other portion rejoins the #1 at Kamloops.
__________________
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe.

Albert Einstein
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2008, 9:47 PM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
Editor
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 40,002
That can be Highway 2 or you can do what they do with interstates and call them 1S and 1N.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2008, 10:05 PM
lubicon's Avatar
lubicon lubicon is offline
Suburban dweller
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Calgary - our road planners are as bad as yours Edmonton
Posts: 4,810
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post
That can be Highway 2 or you can do what they do with interstates and call them 1S and 1N.
We already have a #2 in Alberta. We'll stick with TCH #1 and TCH #16 I guess.
__________________
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe.

Albert Einstein
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2008, 10:40 PM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
Editor
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 40,002
Why not just call it the Trans-Canada?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2008, 11:02 PM
Aylmer's Avatar
Aylmer Aylmer is online now
Still optimistic
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montreal (C-D-N) / Ottawa (Aylmer)
Posts: 5,058
Because there is the TCH Yellowhead and the other one (I'll call him southy!).

__________________
I've always struggled with reality. And I'm pleased to say that I won.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2008, 11:19 PM
kirjtc2's Avatar
kirjtc2 kirjtc2 is offline
Nashwaaksissy
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Fredericton, NB
Posts: 1,278
Quote:
Originally Posted by craner View Post
I would like to see the Feds develop a "National Highway Strategy" and identify key routes (E-W & N-S) that are vital to the nation. I'm not talking a tonne of highways, just the most important ones. Then (of course) I would like the Feds to provide some substantial funding to improve these key routes and bring them up to a consistent standard. And yes I would like to see the routes with consistant numbering and signage - I'm quite happy with the green mapleleaf motif BTW.
I could go on but that is the basis of my wishes - lets catch up to the 20th century at least
There already is one:
http://www.comt.ca/english/nhp-e.htm

Though as far as I can tell, there's nothing about funding levels, just an acknowledgement that "these are the major highways in Canada".
__________________
Fredericton: We're #3! We're #3!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2009, 5:14 PM
Mininari Mininari is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria (formerly Port Moody, then Winnipeg)
Posts: 2,325
Lets not let this thread get too cold.
There were lots of TCH-related announcements in the federal budget:
While construction won't be starting for a little while, it would be good to monitor these for developments, dates, etc.

-Completion of the twinning of highway 185 in Quebec (the missing 4-lane link to the relatively new 4-Lane TCH in New Brunswick)
-Upgrades to the TCH near Headingley, Manitoba
-Funding of phase IIIB for twinning the TCH from Lake Louise to the BC Border
-Select upgrades to highway 17 in Ontario (this one is pretty vague).
-Upgrades to the TCH in Newfoundland (vague as well).

And Also:
-Port Mann Bridge to be 10-lane cable-stayed 'superbridge' with Collector/Express lanes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2009, 6:32 PM
Rathgrith's Avatar
Rathgrith Rathgrith is offline
I'm just joking.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 1,176
Its going to take a LONG time before all of Highway 17 is twinned in Ontario. Some parts of the highway in Northern Ontario have more bears/deer/moose using it than cars.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2009, 6:58 PM
0773|=\ 0773|=\ is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathgrith View Post
Its going to take a LONG time before all of Highway 17 is twinned in Ontario. Some parts of the highway in Northern Ontario have more bears/deer/moose using it than cars.
There isn't enough traffic volumes to warrant it. I drove from Winnipeg to Kenora this weekend, and even then, as soon as you're past the exit for Steinbach, the traffic on the TCH drops off substantially. As much as I'd love to see it as a way to promote more unity in our country (quicker to get places), I don't see it happening. Maybe we should be looking at improvements to our cross-country passenger rail instead.

I saw an interesting solution when I was in South Africa for long-distance national corridors with low traffic volumes. The highway maintains three lanes, with the middle lane alternating every 2 kms as a passing lane for each direction. This would require much less right-of-way, and as you approach larger urban areas, the road could widen to either a four-lane divided expressway, or a full freeway.

Some parts of the TCH need to be divided (and possibly with full grade-separated access) their entire way. I'd say from Calgary to Kamloops the traffic exists. Not to mention it makes trips through the Kicking Horse Canyon and Rogers' Pass a lot safer.

This would all require federal investment though. In that sense, the US did a good thing investing in its Interstate highways. It's not a great model in urban areas, but for inter-city travel, it makes places a lot closer. Our challenge will be to design these roads to complement the smaller towns that the highway passes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2009, 7:29 PM
Spocket's Avatar
Spocket Spocket is offline
Keep yo pimp hand strong
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Changchun , China
Posts: 3,010
Not exactly related to twinning but the TCH at Hwy. 16 in Manitoba is getting an upgrade. I don't know if it's under construction yet but there's an interchange in the works at least.

Since Hwy. 16 is also part of the TCH , I doubt Manitoba will ever put any extra cash into it to twin it. Alberta and Saskatchewan might but they also get a lot more use out of this highway (and as such have already upgraded much of it to a twinned route)
__________________
Giving you a reason to drink and drive since 1975.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2009, 7:34 PM
eemy's Avatar
eemy eemy is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,467
I definitely think a divided highway through Northern Ontario is warranted, not because it has high traffic, but for safety reasons. That said, I don't feel the investment that would be required to achieve it is warranted. I do like the idea of having 3 lanes with an alternating centre lane instead, and perhaps dividing the highway where traffic warrants (Highway 69 to Sudbury, and 17 to Sault Ste. Marie) or were it would significantly improve safety.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2009, 7:36 PM
0773|=\ 0773|=\ is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spocket View Post
Not exactly related to twinning but the TCH at Hwy. 16 in Manitoba is getting an upgrade. I don't know if it's under construction yet but there's an interchange in the works at least.

Since Hwy. 16 is also part of the TCH , I doubt Manitoba will ever put any extra cash into it to twin it. Alberta and Saskatchewan might but they also get a lot more use out of this highway (and as such have already upgraded much of it to a twinned route)
At this point, when I drive from Edmonton to Winnipeg, it's much faster to just drive to Saskatoon, down to Regina, and then follow the #1 to Winnipeg. Two-lane highways can really slow you down if there's ANY traffic on the road. I don't think the traffic warrants two twinned highways, especially since SK 11 from Saskatoon to Regina also runs south-east.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2009, 7:41 PM
0773|=\ 0773|=\ is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy_haak View Post
I definitely think a divided highway through Northern Ontario is warranted, not because it has high traffic, but for safety reasons. That said, I don't feel the investment that would be required to achieve it is warranted. I do like the idea of having 3 lanes with an alternating centre lane instead, and perhaps dividing the highway where traffic warrants (Highway 69 to Sudbury, and 17 to Sault Ste. Marie) or were it would significantly improve safety.
I'd say 17 could be a freeway standard from Ottawa all the way to North Bay, possibly even all the way to Sudbury. From there to Manitoba, I'd say make it a three-lane alternating centre-lane solution. If you put any interchanges along the three-lane section, make sure the overpass is built to accommodate a twinned highway in the future... See how much traffic comes first, and plan ahead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2009, 8:14 PM
blake10 blake10 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by 0773|=\ View Post
There isn't enough traffic volumes to warrant it. I drove from Winnipeg to Kenora this weekend, and even then, as soon as you're past the exit for Steinbach, the traffic on the TCH drops off substantially. As much as I'd love to see it as a way to promote more unity in our country (quicker to get places), I don't see it happening. Maybe we should be looking at improvements to our cross-country passenger rail instead.
That is true, but the Winnipeg-Kenora section gets very busy in the summer (especially on Fridays and Sundays) and there have been a number of serious accidents. I believe they announced that they were going to twin the road to Granite Lake (about halfway between the MB border and Kenora) and make "improvements" from there to Kenora. Of course, this leaves the small Manitoba section through the Whiteshell. I don't know if they have any plans to twin this part but they should: It's not that long and it will be really annoying driving out to the cabin to have a two-lane section in the middle of two divided highways.

Here are two related articles (from last summer):


<<OTTAWA - The Ontario government is looking at twinning the Trans Canada Highway between Kenora and the Manitoba border with money from its new infrastructure agreement with Ottawa.
The section of highway 17 - about 55 kilometres - is one of the most accident-prone stretches of road in the country. Highway 17 through northern Ontario is also one of the last remaining legs of the Trans Canada which is not a twinned and divided highway.

Regular twists and turns through Canadian shield rock give the highway poor sitelines and many accidents are caused by traffic passing on the single-lane road.

In the summer months it is also one of the busiest highways in the country with thousands of cottagers and tourists visiting the region for its vast lakes, fishing and recreational spots.

Ontario and Ottawa today signed a $6.2 billion infrastructure agreement under the Building Canada Fund and the Ontario government listed Highway 17 as one of its four priority projects for the money.

Earlier in the day, Winnipeg MP Steven Fletcher told the Free Press he has been working on the issue for about a year now and said “it is rather gratifying” to see it finally happening.

“This is obviously very important to a lot of people who use that section,” said Fletcher.

Since August 2006, at least eight people have died in fatal crashes on the highway and many others have been injured.>>


http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/historic/32952244.html




<<OTTAWA -- Some of the most dangerous stretches of the Trans-Canada Highway in northwestern Ontario will be twinned under a new deal the province inked with the federal government Thursday.
The $6.2-billion Building Canada Fund agreement between Ottawa and Ontario listed upgrades to Highway 17 in northwestern Ontario as one of the four priority spending areas for the money, which lasts through to 2014.

Among the plans for Highway 17 -- listed in 2007 by the Canadian Automobile Association as one of the worst stretches of road in Ontario -- are engineering studies to look at how to twin all or part of the highway between Kenora and the Manitoba border.

Improvements will also be made to Highway 17 between Kenora and Thunder Bay. Since August 2006, at least eight people have died in fatal crashes on that section of highway.

Thousands of Manitobans travel the highway each summer to take advantage of the recreational opportunities in northwestern Ontario.

Manitoba senior minister Vic Toews said Ontario has gone beyond its initial pledge to just do a feasibility study on twinning the highway and is commissioning engineers to figure out how to make it happen.

"This is the first time the highways in northwestern Ontario have been mentioned as a priority (for Ontario)," Toews said.

In the summer months, as many Manitobans use the highway as Ontarians.

"I'm looking around the parking lot here and more than half the licence plates are from Manitoba," Toews said.

Residents and politicians in the region have been lobbying Queen's Park to twin the 550-km stretch of highway between Kenora and Thunder Bay for years.

According to a 2006 petition led by Ontario MPP David Orazietti, there are an average of 488 accidents on Highway 17 each year, resulting in 839 injuries and 31 deaths.

The highway is part of the Trans-Canada system but is among the only parts of the nationwide highway that is not a four-lane divided road. In Manitoba, the only remaining section of the Trans-Canada that isn't four lanes wide is the 20 or so kilometres between Falcon Lake and the Ontario border.>>


http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/historic/32971209.html


Quote:
Originally Posted by 0773|=\ View Post
I'd say 17 could be a freeway standard from Ottawa all the way to North Bay, possibly even all the way to Sudbury. From there to Manitoba, I'd say make it a three-lane alternating centre-lane solution. If you put any interchanges along the three-lane section, make sure the overpass is built to accommodate a twinned highway in the future... See how much traffic comes first, and plan ahead.

The problem with a center lane is that it can become a "suicide lane" even if only one direction is supposed to be using it at any one time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2009, 8:32 PM
1ajs's Avatar
1ajs 1ajs is offline
ʇɥƃıuʞ -*ʞpʇ*-
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: lynn lake
Posts: 24,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathgrith View Post
Its going to take a LONG time before all of Highway 17 is twinned in Ontario. Some parts of the highway in Northern Ontario have more bears/deer/moose using it than cars.
thats cause everyone goes through the states....
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:35 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.