Trans Canada Highway Twinning: Segments U/C

[wave46]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

It would be nice to have a twinned hwy from coast to coast. That's one of the great things in the U.S. I know we have a small population and a massive expanse but if we were able to build a railroad that was the longest in the world 133 years ago we should be able as a nation to do this with ease now.

We could do it, but the value for money would be quite poor relative to other infrastructure needs.

I live on the edge of where the freeway ends going across the country from east to west. The roads north and west of here are so minimally travelled (I've been up to Thunder Bay multiple times) that a massive freeway project would be hugely underutilized.

The route splits the traffic across the nation on two different axes - Highway 17 follows the Superior shoreline, while Highway 11 goes inland. The former gets the bulk of tourist/single vehicle traffic, while the latter gets a lot of the freight. If there was only one path across the country, I might be more supportive of the spending.

I'd suggest improvements to the existing highways.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by wave46

We could do it, but the value for money would be quite poor relative to other infrastructure needs.

I live on the edge of where the freeway ends going across the country from east to west. The roads north and west of here are so minimally travelled (I've been up to Thunder Bay multiple times) that a massive freeway project would be hugely underutilized.

The route splits the traffic across the nation on two different axes - Highway 17 follows the Superior shoreline, while Highway 11 goes inland. The former gets the bulk of tourist/single vehicle traffic, while the latter gets a lot of the freight. If there was only one path across the country, I might be more supportive of the spending.

I'd suggest improvements to the existing highways.

I think the biggest issue is the sparse population in Northern Ontario.
BC and the Prairies have both 1 and 16, and yet in 2 of the provinces, both routes are twinned.

Politics-wise, Queens Park really needs to learn how to not hurt Northern Ontario but make it great again (for lack of a better way of wording it).

[JHikka]

I think people are putting too much emphasis on a highway being twinned or not.

Canada has a highway that connects East-West (TCH). Whether or not it's twinned is up to local and regional needs.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I think the biggest issue is the sparse population in Northern Ontario.
BC and the Prairies have both 1 and 16, and yet in 2 of the provinces, both routes are twinned.

Politics-wise, Queens Park really needs to learn how to not hurt Northern Ontario but make it great again (for lack of a better way of wording it).

The sparse (and declining) population of Northern Ontario doesn't help. The terrain is terrible in certain sections too.

The twinned routes are in the flattest provinces. Funny how that works, huh?

I'd say improvements to Highway 1 between the BC border and Highway 5 in BC would be the greatest bang for the buck, along with grade-separating the high-volume intersections of Highway 1 in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba.

[Dengler Avenue]

In that case, what about Antigonish (and possibly Port Hawkesbury, Port Hastings and even Sydney) that warrants the twinning of 104 then?

Sorry I was referring to JHikka’s post.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

In that case, what about Antigonish (and possibly Port Hawkesbury, Port Hastings and even Sydney) that warrants the twinning of 104 then?

Sorry I was referring to JHikka’s post.

Nothing really warrants it other than to make the declining population in Cape Breton happy, I suppose. Perhaps there is sufficient truck traffic coming from NFLD to warrant it through Antigonish-New Glasgow but it's not exactly as if NFLD is setting the world on fire right now, either. I haven't gone through Nova Scotia's AADT data in a while.

Infrastructure funding in and around Halifax would be a wiser choice than twinning the 104 any further than Antigonish.

[Andy6]

Maybe one thing that would reverse population declines in northern Ontario and Cape Breton would be better highway access for tourism and industry.

[sonysnob]

^ There is always that argument, but at least for the case of North Bay, the four lane highway hasn't exactly lead to an economic boom. North Bay is only a 3 hour drive from Toronto. Even if Timmins got a four lane highway from it south to Toronto, it's still going to be a 7 hour drive. That's a long way for either tourism or industry regardless of how many lanes the highway has.

A four lane highway to a place like Lindsay, or Owen Sound might offer more direct economic benefit because these places already aren't that far to a major market.

[Dengler Avenue]

Ottawa is 4 hours from GTA, but people travel between both by car anyway.

Obviously there’s a lot more to do in Ottawa, especially because it’s the national capital (capitale fédérale).

Aside from that, is there anything that Sudbury and North Bay can learn from Ottawa? Both cities are gateway to the north.

At this point, from the viewpoint/perspective of GTA, I must concede that SSM on the 17 and Cochrane on the 11 are too far and are only for cross-country trips.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

^ There is always that argument, but at least for the case of North Bay, the four lane highway hasn't exactly lead to an economic boom. North Bay is only a 3 hour drive from Toronto. Even if Timmins got a four lane highway from it south to Toronto, it's still going to be a 7 hour drive. That's a long way for either tourism or industry regardless of how many lanes the highway has.

The same can be said for Saint Stephen and Charlotte County in NB. The area hasn't exactly prospered or grown any more with a twinned Route 1 running right through it. My argument against twinning Route 11 north of Bouctouche was always that it was a road to nowhere surrounded by a declining population. Twinning the 104 in NS to Antigonish makes sense, I suppose, if you're looking to get that population nearer to other population centres in the province. Twinning beyond it doesn't make much sense, at least IMO.

Originally Posted by sonysnob

A four lane highway to a place like Lindsay, or Owen Sound might offer more direct economic benefit because these places already aren't that far to a major market.

I agree. I always argue that a place has to logically be on the way to somewhere else in order for there to be potential in its growth and to warrant for a twinned/larger highway. Also potentially if it's nearby enough that initial construction costs aren't exorbitant.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Ottawa is 4 hours from GTA, but people travel between both by car anyway.

Obviously there’s a lot more to do in Ottawa, especially because it’s the national capital (capitale fédérale).

Aside from that, is there anything that Sudbury and North Bay can learn from Ottawa? Both cities are gateway to the north.

Things Sudbury and North Bay could learn from Ottawa: Be a government town?

North Bay is to an extent - the major employers in the area are the hospital, Canadian Forces Base, Ontario provincial government and Ontario Northland.

Sudbury is still anchored by the mining industry, but the prevalence of the federal government is increasing - Revenue Canada is expanding their operations. Sudbury is also the hub for northeastern Ontario with respect to healthcare and retail.

They're gateways to the north, yes. The problem is that the north has always been a resource-based hinterland beyond those points. Unless a particular resource is booming, there's no other reason to settle up there. It is too cold to farm reliably and outside of the Claybelt there's just muskeg. It is far from population centres and manufacturing supply chains, so manufacturing's a no-go. Tech? Unless you have a critical mass of people with the talent to make it work (hard to find outside of big cities) startups are set at a severe disadvantage.

If Ottawa hadn't been chosen as the site of the federal government, I suspect it would be just a minor city anchoring the Ottawa Valley today, like Kingston or London for their respective areas.

[Acajack]

Many places in the U.S. that didn't seem to have much going for them do seem to have derived some economic benefits from being located along Interstate highways.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Many places in the U.S. that didn't seem to have much going for them do seem to have derived some economic benefits from being located along Interstate highways.

I'm curious to what examples you are thinking of.

I could see natural stopover points (say, every 2-4 hours) deriving a benefit, but at the cost of the towns that are bypassed. The recent 4-lane section of Highway 400 in Ontario bypassing Nobel markedly decreased the people stopping there. It did help the travel plaza about 25km south on the highway though.

I'm of the opinion that unless a current route is overburdened with traffic, passes through a built-up area or has safety concerns, a freeway offers little benefit.

A freeway to small northern Ontario towns won't induce much growth, aside from the construction phase.

[CityTech]

Originally Posted by wave46

If Ottawa hadn't been chosen as the site of the federal government, I suspect it would be just a minor city anchoring the Ottawa Valley today, like Kingston or London for their respective areas.

Depends where the capital was instead. If Kingston remained as capital I expect it would have grown into a very major city; bigger than Ottawa is today, as it's location is arguably more favourable than Ottawa's. When Kingston was capital in the 1840s it actually wasn't that much smaller than Toronto. Ottawa would quite possibly be Peterborough-sized in this scenario. But if Toronto or Montreal was capital, I expect Ottawa would be closer to London-sized.

[Dengler Avenue]

So distance-wise, Kenora (or even Dryden) might have some hope because they’re not that far from Winnipeg. The respective distances are 243 km and 381 km. Not to be overlooked is the fact that there is either no alternative route at all, or a very ugly one. (Closure of 17 immediately east of Vermillion Bay requires detouring through Fort Frances.) I’m gonna ask in the Ontario subforum.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...87#post8381887 #3456

[ghYHZ]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Nothing really warrants it other than to make the declining population in Cape Breton happy, I suppose. Perhaps there is sufficient truck traffic coming from NFLD to warrant it through Antigonish-New Glasgow but it's not exactly as if NFLD is setting the world on fire right now, either. I haven't gone through Nova Scotia's AADT data in a while......

AADT between New Glasgow and Antigonish is just over 8000 and a lot of this is trucks. There is just no other way to move goods to Cape Breton and Newfoundland now with the railway is embargoed east of Port Hawkesbury.

There is some container shipping to St. John’s but most goods to western and central Newfoundland and the Avalon go by truck. Marine Atlantic even has a dedicated truck ferry on the Port-aux-Basque run.

[Dengler Avenue]

So, it’s quite likely that one encounters a truck every minute; that happens when truck AADT hits 2880. With the overall AADT at 8K, that seems likely to me.

Obviously people that use that stretch of 104 all the time will know better.

All said, I can see why Nova Scotia intends to expand/extend the 4 lane freeway to Sydney via NS 4. NS 105 is too hard and too environmentally sensitive for expansion.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by ghYHZ

Marine Atlantic even has a dedicated truck ferry on the Port-aux-Basque run.

Should be on the Argentia run to bypass the Codroy Valley and the Wreckhouse winds..........

[ghYHZ]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

So, it’s quite likely that one encounters a truck every minute; that happens when truck AADT hits 2880. With the overall AADT at 8K, that seems likely to me.

Obviously people that use that stretch of 104 all the time will know better.

I know only too well! See my post over at Atlantic Highways.....

Originally Posted by ghYHZ

Driving between New Glasgow and Antigonish now and especially on summer weekends I usually take old # 4 instead of the 104. I do have to get back on 104 for the short section through Marshy Hope…..but that will all hook up eventually with the new TCH alignment bypassing Marshy Hope and Trunk 4 will once again be continuous between New Glasgow and Antigonish.

[J81]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Should be on the Argentia run to bypass the Codroy Valley and the Wreckhouse winds..........

Theres a reason why trucks dont use the argentia run. Its too expensive and takes longer.