Northern Ontario developments!

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

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).

Ah, but SSM/Thunder Bay isn't close or part of the coveted "cottage country".

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Ah, but SSM/Thunder Bay isn't close or part of the coveted "cottage country".

Ah, I see how it is.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Ah, I see how it is.

There is already talk of bypassing the current 90 km/hr 4 lane section between Orrillia and Gravenhurst.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

There is already talk of bypassing the current 90 km/hr 4 lane section between Orrillia and Gravenhurst.

Seriously though what a waste of the current RIRO freeway...
I would rather MTO move all properties along the 11 a few hundred meters back to make that proper 6-laned freeways with shoulders left and right.
Ps: How I wish MTO applies the same logic with the 69 as well. There are quite a few cottages along that route too, especially between Sudbury and Estaire.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Seriously though what a waste of the current RIRO freeway...
I would rather MTO move all properties along the 11 a few hundred meters back to make that proper 6-laned freeways with shoulders left and right.
Ps: How I wish MTO applies the same logic with the 69 as well. There are quite a few cottages along that route too, especially between Sudbury and Estaire.

This was poor planning back then that is why the RIRO is being bypassed. Not only that, but, give it 20 years and it will be 6 lanes south of Parry Sound/Gravenhurst.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

This was poor planning back then that is why the RIRO is being bypassed. Not only that, but, give it 20 years and it will be 6 lanes south of Parry Sound/Gravenhurst.

On the 400?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

On the 400?

They have been working south of Barrie to widen it to 6+ lanes. It looks like they could add a lane on the bridges to Highway 12.

The summer cottage rush is bad enough that they could widen south of Barrie to 10 lanes and it still would be plugged.

Too bad there were no rail lines that connect the city of Toronto to Cottage Country... oh wait, there is....

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

They have been working south of Barrie to widen it to 6+ lanes. It looks like they could add a lane on the bridges to Highway 12.

The summer cottage rush is bad enough that they could widen south of Barrie to 10 lanes and it still would be plugged.

Too bad there were no rail lines that connect the city of Toronto to Cottage Country... oh wait, there is....

As a "rule of thumb" though, more lanes = more severe congestion. 401's a very good example of that. ._.

Cottage traffic though, what can ya do...
At this rate, we might actually need a 426 to replace part of 26...

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

As a "rule of thumb" though, more lanes = more severe congestion. 401's a very good example of that. ._.

Cottage traffic though, what can ya do...
At this rate, we might actually need a 426 to replace part of 26...

And the 404 to go north to the 412.

By the airport, Highway 401 has the most lanes in all of North America. 18!!! And every rush hour, it is congested.

Now, if they brought back the Northlander, and timed it right, they could pull people off the 400.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

And the 404 to go north to the 412.

By the airport, Highway 401 has the most lanes in all of North America. 18!!! And every rush hour, it is congested.

Now, if they brought back the Northlander, and timed it right, they could pull people off the 400.

Ya know what? Since this thread's about Northern Development, let us hear your 20 pages of off-tangent about the Northlander.

Ps: Don't you just wish that GTHA weren't too urban-sprawled so that resources could have been (more) evenly distributed... Otherwise the province wouldn't even have suspended Northlander right...

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Ya know what? Since this thread's about Northern Development, let us hear your 20 pages of off-tangent about the Northlander.

Ps: Don't you just wish that GTHA weren't too urban-sprawled so that resources could have been (more) evenly distributed... Otherwise the province wouldn't even have suspended Northlander right...

The problem really is that we have put all of our industry as close to Toronto as possible. If they could have put the saw mills and smelters within the GTA, they would have.

I am happy that housing is skyrocketing within the GTA. That means more people, and more businesses will look elsewhere. That makes the 5 major cities in Northern Ontario appealing to them.

As far as rail, It annoys me that TBay and SSM have not been served by passenger rail service.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

The problem really is that we have put all of our industry as close to Toronto as possible. If they could have put the saw mills and smelters within the GTA, they would have.

I am happy that housing is skyrocketing within the GTA. That means more people, and more businesses will look elsewhere. That makes the 5 major cities in Northern Ontario appealing to them.

As far as rail, It annoys me that TBay and SSM have not been served by passenger rail service.

For the first part, what are some examples? Industrial park in Etobicoke?

For the second part, wow I'm just glad that I'm not the only one who thinks that way. Let's do some calculation here:
Suppose that the housing bubble continues. Then, both municipal and provincial governments will benefit from the sales tax.
Meanwhile, some companies will move to North Bay (assuming that housing in the north is consistently cheaper than in the south, such that London, Waterloo, and Kingston are out of question) and/or Sudbury. In that case, lol, the province will have no choice but to upgrade 17 and, in the latter case, 69 as well.

On an unrealistic note, though, it will be nice if some move to Kenora as well. This way, MB government, ON government, and the federal, will have to be involved in upgrading TCH around there.
K perhaps let me be slightly more realistic: Say that some move to Thunder Bay. Then, the twinning of TCH from Shabaqua Corners to Nipigon will be pushed forward.

[vid]

The solution to congestion isn't more lanes on the same road, it's alternative roads. Two four lane roads can handle more traffic than one eight lane road. Thunder Bay doesn't have any roads wider than 4 lanes, and we don't need them. With a centre turning lane on built-up streets and double turning lanes on the suburban high capacity arterial roads (which is basically what the expressway is) traffic in this city actually flows quite well compared to most other cities. The only real issues occur when you have multiple left turn movements near intersections, like at Memorial and Harbour and the Arthur and Red River intersections on the expressway. Balmoral and Harbour has the most vehicles travel through it out of all intersections in the city but it flows much more smoothly than Memorial and Harbour, which has 30% less traffic.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by vid

The solution to congestion isn't more lanes on the same road, it's alternative roads. Two four lane roads can handle more traffic than one eight lane road. Thunder Bay doesn't have any roads wider than 4 lanes, and we don't need them. With a centre turning lane on built-up streets and double turning lanes on the suburban high capacity arterial roads (which is basically what the expressway is) traffic in this city actually flows quite well compared to most other cities. The only real issues occur when you have multiple left turn movements near intersections, like at Memorial and Harbour and the Arthur and Red River intersections on the expressway. Balmoral and Harbour has the most vehicles travel through it out of all intersections in the city but it flows much more smoothly than Memorial and Harbour, which has 30% less traffic.

I just took a look at google street views. Do you mean, like, one car wanting to turn left into one of the stores during rush hours, holding everybody up? IMO in that case, no left turns should be allowed during rush hours except at major intersections. If people wanna access those shops on the left, they will have to make a U-turn during that time. You guys shouldn't need to worry about trucks taking a U-turn now that they're banned on city streets (except to make local deliveries).

I always have a feeling that, if the baby boomers were less stubborn, and if there were more people, Thunder Bay would have been as transit-oriented as Vancouver.

[megadude]

I've started to read some of your conversations here about the north as I am pretty fascinated by geography, history and culture. I have only gone as far as Sudbury when I was a kid and only remember the nickel. And 12 years ago I went to Nip U to go party with a friend and happened to talk to a young Strombo who was at the campus pub for an event and was blazed out of his mind complete with blood shot eyes. Though that's all I remember of North Bay because back then I didn't care about anything.

Other than those two trips, I haven't been north of Go Home Lake, which I fished last year.

Regarding the Northlander, I used to see it at Union Station all the time when going to work. Always thought it was an interesting looking train and was curious about where it came from. Then I read about and said cool, like a mini version of the Orient Express.

Then I read the news one day about how it was being discontinued. I thought that was shocking. Even if it was losing money, it seemed totally unfair. Train is way more comfortable than long distance bus rides.

I'm sure lots of things in Ontario and Canada are subsidized. I've since wondered why this can't be as well?

And interesting thought about it being used to serve as transportation for cottagers. That would be cool if they could arrange the timing and frequency like that to serve those towns.

Would have to be cheap enough to make sense for those riders since they'd still need to find their way to the cottage. Either by cab or be picked up by friends or family.

If they could figure that out one day, I'm sure it would make at least a minor but noticeable impact on congestion as not many people like sitting in gridlock traffic. Even if the train/taxi took longer, it would be more comfortable.

The service may not be for the cottage owners so much as they have to lug so much crap with them, but would work for visitors.

Would really work out well for people who could go straight from work to Union Station and take the train up instead of taking the TTC or GO to wherever they live and then jump in their car and then go clog up the roads even more.


I need to get up there soon. Have explored the coastal towns of all the Great Lakes except Superior. Damn near went with a friend a couple of years ago to Cochrane to hop aboard the Polar Bear Express to Moosonee just to say I've been to Ontario's ocean coast.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by megadude

I've started to read some of your conversations here about the north as I am pretty fascinated by geography, history and culture. I have only gone as far as Sudbury when I was a kid and only remember the nickel. And 12 years ago I went to Nip U to go party with a friend and happened to talk to a young Strombo who was at the campus pub for an event and was blazed out of his mind complete with blood shot eyes. Though that's all I remember of North Bay because back then I didn't care about anything.

Other than those two trips, I haven't been north of Go Home Lake, which I fished last year.

Regarding the Northlander, I used to see it at Union Station all the time when going to work. Always thought it was an interesting looking train and was curious about where it came from. Then I read about and said cool, like a mini version of the Orient Express.

Then I read the news one day about how it was being discontinued. I thought that was shocking. Even if it was losing money, it seemed totally unfair. Train is way more comfortable than long distance bus rides.

I'm sure lots of things in Ontario and Canada are subsidized. I've since wondered why this can't be as well?

And interesting thought about it being used to serve as transportation for cottagers. That would be cool if they could arrange the timing and frequency like that to serve those towns.

Would have to be cheap enough to make sense for those riders since they'd still need to find their way to the cottage. Either by cab or be picked up by friends or family.

If they could figure that out one day, I'm sure it would make at least a minor but noticeable impact on congestion as not many people like sitting in gridlock traffic. Even if the train/taxi took longer, it would be more comfortable.

The service may not be for the cottage owners so much as they have to lug so much crap with them, but would work for visitors.

Would really work out well for people who could go straight from work to Union Station and take the train up instead of taking the TTC or GO to wherever they live and then jump in their car and then go clog up the roads even more.


I need to get up there soon. Have explored the coastal towns of all the Great Lakes except Superior. Damn near went with a friend a couple of years ago to Cochrane to hop aboard the Polar Bear Express to Moosonee just to say I've been to Ontario's ocean coast.

For that, I (and many others) really recommend the drive between SSM and Thunder Bay. I went (towards Ottawa) in late April and boy, were the mountaintops still covered in snow and most lakes still frozen. It was some of the most serene views I've seen in my life (besides BC). I just wished that my dashcam (which has gone dysfunct now) had more memory, though, so I could have saved them onto my laptop when I hit Ottawa.

Here's the catch though: West of Wawa, there were certain curves where even doing 90 kph is difficult. I don't recommend driving at night because the stake is too high.

Ps: I'll let y'all in on a secret. While driving through Lake Superior Provincial Park on TCH, I was, as usual, doing 20% over the speed limit (108 kph). A cop was driving in the opposite direction and he didn't even look at me. xD

[megadude]

I just looked at the route. Could go up the TCH like you said and take in the scenery and explore the stops along the way. And also take out my inflatable with trolling motor and fish any of the hundred lakes along the way. I might actually be overwhelmed with so many options.

Then on the way back go through MN, WI and MI doing the same thing.

I've driven to FLA four times. Two years ago I drove to CO, UT, AZ and NM, which actually provided almost zero opportunities for boat fishing as you might have imagined.

Four years ago I drove to Philly, NJ, NYC and back up through Upstate and Western NY. I fished six lakes and one river along the way.

Three years ago it was MI, Chicago, Milwaukee and Madison and tried six different spots.

Basically none of these areas have clear water with nice weed beds and less than 10 feet deep. Give me a lake like that I'm in fishing Heaven.

Every time I drive up the 400 and pass over a multitude of clear water rivers, bays and lakes I just want to pull over and jump in with a Kayak. I don't know how I would control myself going up along the TCH.

My friend moved from Hamilton to SK and took that route. Can't remember where he pulled off, but it was somewhere way up there, and he whipped out his rod (fishing rod) and casted from shore and pulled in a monster walleye in the double digits range.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by megadude

I just looked at the route. Could go up the TCH like you said and take in the scenery and explore the stops along the way. And also take out my inflatable with trolling motor and fish any of the hundred lakes along the way. I might actually be overwhelmed with so many options.

Then on the way back go through MN, WI and MI doing the same thing.

I've driven to FLA four times. Two years ago I drove to CO, UT, AZ and NM, which actually provided almost zero opportunities for boat fishing as you might have imagined.

Four years ago I drove to Philly, NJ, NYC and back up through Upstate and Western NY. I fished six lakes and one river along the way.

Three years ago it was MI, Chicago, Milwaukee and Madison and tried six different spots.

Basically none of these areas have clear water with nice weed beds and less than 10 feet deep. Give me a lake like that I'm in fishing Heaven.

Every time I drive up the 400 and pass over a multitude of clear water rivers, bays and lakes I just want to pull over and jump in with a Kayak. I don't know how I would handle myself going up along the TCH.

My friend moved from Hamilton to SK and took that route. Can't remember where he pulled off, but it was somewhere way up there, and he whipped out his rod (fishing rod) and casted from shore and pulled in a monster walleye in the double digits range.

I wonder if that's what we can call Canadian pride there.

Yes, environmental assessment may make infrastructural work more expensive and time-consuming, but if you compare it to the States, I will say that it's worth the money and time.

[megadude]

I definitely take pride in this land being more pure. Canada is not only a fishing destination for the fish, but also for the environment in which those fish are found.

Like I mentioned before, so much of the US is turbid water. And they lack big lakes. If you look at google maps, for every Lake Okeechobee or Lake Champlain, Canada has a thousand of those that size. And they're surrounded by beautiful landscapes of trees and bedrock.

Ontario alone has 250,000 lakes.

[greyraven8]

Originally Posted by vid

The solution to congestion isn't more lanes on the same road, it's alternative roads. Two four lane roads can handle more traffic than one eight lane road. Thunder Bay doesn't have any roads wider than 4 lanes, and we don't need them. With a centre turning lane on built-up streets and double turning lanes on the suburban high capacity arterial roads (which is basically what the expressway is) traffic in this city actually flows quite well compared to most other cities. The only real issues occur when you have multiple left turn movements near intersections, like at Memorial and Harbour and the Arthur and Red River intersections on the expressway. Balmoral and Harbour has the most vehicles travel through it out of all intersections in the city but it flows much more smoothly than Memorial and Harbour, which has 30% less traffic.

Another issue that contributes somewhat to traffic flow issues in Thunder Bay is the lack of synchronization when it comes to the traffic lights. There are areas and certain major streets where you seems to be stuck in stop-and-go traffic largely because of the sea of continual red lights.