Roads: Ontario/GTA Highways Discussion

[ShonTron]

Look at the Highway 17 near the Manitoba boarder. A decade later and still nothing. It's not first nations problem there. The only thing the liberals did so far is twinning some portions of Highway 11/17 from TB to Nipigon. Folks aren't happy that the highway remains at 90km/h as it was before. Saskatchewan and Alberta has 110km/h limits on at-grade expressways. MTO chooses 90 km/h. Northern Ontario is so large, this should build freeways and remove daytime speed limits in rural portions so people could get around faster. I doubt we'll see more than 100km of the Highway 17 twinned in out lifetime. No knows when they'll actually upgrade the TB Expressway into a freeway.

Same for North Bay. MTO already done the EA for 60km of new Hwy 17 freeway east of North Bay but highly doubt anything will happen till the mid 2030s. The Highway 69 twinning delays has push back twinning of the Sudbury bypass and possibly freeway extension east of the current eastern terminal. They say there's a plan to eventually twin Hwy 17 from Sault Ste Marie to Mattawa and from Petawawa to current 417 terminal. Eventually they could link up and the 417 would over take the 401 being the longest freeway in Ontario. The only twinning done last decade was near Sault Ste Marie which lead to the protest that old Hwy 17 should be renamed Hwy 17B and not 638. MTO should hurry up and get Highway 69 done so this can get moving and finally get rid of the Hwy 69 designation for good. It's been 15 years and MTO has old twinned half of the ~150km of Highway 69.

The 90 km/h speed limits are strange on the new twinned sections of Highway 17. There are sections of Highway 11 south of North Bay and through Muskoka with at-grade intersections, yet, it's 100 km/h.

The sections of Highway 69 twinned and/or replaced with Highway 400 have dealt with most of the worst parts of driving that road: the section south of Sudbury through Wanup and over the CN railway, the dangerous S-surve and intersection of Highway 637 to Killarney, the Nobel bypass. The only slow-ish section now is at Pointe au Baril.

As it is, it's a pleasant drive compared to 10 years ago. Apart from twinning the French River and Pickerel River bridges, and maybe a Pointe au Baril bypass, I don't think Highway 69/400 needs to be finished.

In the north, my priorities would be to improve the Highway 17/69 connection in Sudbury and twin the Sudbury bypass, compete the twinning between the Manitoba border and Kenora and between Thunder Bay and Nipigon. Highway 417 shouldn't extend beyond Petawawa.

 

[gweed123]

In the north, my priorities would be to improve the Highway 17/69 connection in Sudbury and twin the Sudbury bypass, compete the twinning between the Manitoba border and Kenora and between Thunder Bay and Nipigon. Highway 417 shouldn't extend beyond Petawawa.

I'd also add twinning 17 between Petawawa and Sudbury (through North Bay). I agree a full 400-series would be overkill, but that section should at least be twinned. The Mattawa-Petawawa section would be the hardest to do, given the geography.

 

[muller877]

I believe there are First Nations issues holding up some of those sections. And to be fair, is twinning Highway 69 really a high priority? The GTA has many more pressing needs (*cough* QEW through Mississauga).

How would you propose to expand the QEW in Mississauga? (Dixie/Cawthra area) The only way you could do so without expropriation of property is to make the service roads one-way streets on both sides of the highway (and then the homes would have this honking huge wall right outside of their front door which they would fight)

 

[innsertnamehere]

MTO has the plans somewhere. They plan to add an HOV lane through the stretch. Part of the tightest stretch already has funding through the Dixie Road interchange reconstruction.

 

[darth_freeman]

They have come to agreement with one of three... and that section still has not seen construction start. And this is the province of ontario - not the province of the GTA. Each area does have its own separate huge needs.

The issue is twinning those rural highways is very expensive as it's commonly through rocky/Canadian Shield type terrain. The cost/benefit per driver is very low, compared to GTA/urban improvements.

How would you propose to expand the QEW in Mississauga? (Dixie/Cawthra area) The only way you could do so without expropriation of property is to make the service roads one-way streets on both sides of the highway (and then the homes would have this honking huge wall right outside of their front door which they would fight)

It's already underway: http://qewdixieea.ca/
Expropriation may be a dirty word but it's being done here, as well as at the Credit River: http://www.qewcreditriver.ca/
Improvements also coming soon to QEW/403 interchange: https://www.mississauga.com/news-st...3-qew-expansion-plans-could-benefit-business/

 

[Jasmine18]

Imo highway 69 should be twinned to Subdury as that would encourage more development and open up that area to more local tourism.

 

[steveintoronto]

The issue is twinning those rural highways is very expensive as it's commonly through rocky/Canadian Shield type terrain. The cost/benefit per driver is very low, compared to GTA/urban improvements.

muller877 said: ↑

How would you propose to expand the QEW in Mississauga? (Dixie/Cawthra area) The only way you could do so without expropriation of property is to make the service roads one-way streets on both sides of the highway (and then the homes would have this honking huge wall right outside of their front door which they would fight)

It's already underway: http://qewdixieea.ca/
Expropriation may be a dirty word but it's being done here, as well as at the Credit River: http://www.qewcreditriver.ca/
Improvements also coming soon to QEW/403 interchange: https://www.mississauga.com/news-st...3-qew-expansion-plans-could-benefit-business/

Excellent video presentation. I'm of two minds watching that though. One that's in horror of the amount of expansion and cost for the almighty car, and the other of resignation that the locals have brought it on themselves by living car lives.

This kind of road expansion is alive and well in Toronto and Ontario, while it's becoming the opposite in other world class cities other than to build by-passes around urban areas, not through them. Meantime transit investment pales compared to the cost of building and re-building mega-road infrastructure.

 

[Steve X]

I'd also add twinning 17 between Petawawa and Sudbury (through North Bay). I agree a full 400-series would be overkill, but that section should at least be twinned. The Mattawa-Petawawa section would be the hardest to do, given the geography.

Some of the sections don't need to be twinned at the moment. North Bay to Mattawa will happen eventually as the EA is already done. Beyond, they could upgrade the road to a super2 with interchanges at key location and better safety features. Eventually they could increase the limit to 100km/h as other parts of the country has done so.

My feelings why the newly twinned Hwy 17 in TB district remains 90 km/h is due to the amount of traffic using the sideroads. Maybe the Liberals went cheap and didn't want to build a full freeway with local access roads.

The Liberals have pretty much given up on the urban part of the GTA. I don't expect they want to do much here as one project is done would open another door for another project.

 

[gweed123]

Some of the sections don't need to be twinned at the moment. North Bay to Mattawa will happen eventually as the EA is already done. Beyond, they could upgrade the road to a super2 with interchanges at key location and better safety features. Eventually they could increase the limit to 100km/h as other parts of the country has done so.

My feelings why the newly twinned Hwy 17 in TB district remains 90 km/h is due to the amount of traffic using the sideroads. Maybe the Liberals went cheap and didn't want to build a full freeway with local access roads.

The Liberals have pretty much given up on the urban part of the GTA. I don't expect they want to do much here as one project is done would open another door for another project.

Personally, I would prefer twinned and at-grade over a Super 2. One of the biggest killers on these highways is head-on collisions, which Super 2s wouldn't solve. I think a Highway 11 (north of Gravenhurst) type of configuration would be best: Put in interchanges at the major roads, but leave the minor roads as at-grade intersections. Once it's open, gradually add interchanges and service roads to move towards full controlled access.

 

[darth_freeman]

muller877 said: ↑

Excellent video presentation. I'm of two minds watching that though. One that's in horror of the amount of expansion and cost for the almighty car, and the other of resignation that the locals have brought it on themselves by living car lives.

This kind of road expansion is alive and well in Toronto and Ontario, while it's becoming the opposite in other world class cities other than to build by-passes around urban areas, not through them. Meantime transit investment pales compared to the cost of building and re-building mega-road infrastructure.

Hard to argue against widening the QEW in Mississauga when it's been the same 6 lanes over over 50 years now.

It's likely the strength of the Lakeshore West GO Train route which is why this section of QEW hasn't been widened until now.

 

[steveintoronto]

Hard to argue against widening the QEW in Mississauga when it's been the same 6 lanes over over 50 years now.

It's likely the strength of the Lakeshore West GO Train route which is why this section of QEW hasn't been widened until now.

As I stated, I'm of two minds on it. It is hard to argue against the need to widen *unless habits change*. And if they don't, then the folks who are eventually expropriated for expansion die by their own sword for car travel being their choice to begin with, albeit my sympathies are with those expropriated who do use transit.

But if (gist) "GO has allowed the QEW to remain the same 6 lanes over fifty years now"...then doubling GO capacity should allow it to remain 6 lanes for another fifty years, albeit the relationship won't be arithmetically linear. But you get the gist. LA has seen the light, when will we?

Increasing Highway Capacity Unlikely
to Relieve Traffic Congestion

Reducing traffic congestion is often
proposed as a solution for improving fuel
efficiency and reducing greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions. Traffic congestion has
traditionally been addressed by adding
additional roadway capacity via constructing
entirely new roadways, adding additional
lanes to existing roadways, or upgrading
existing highways to controlled-access
freeways. Numerous studies have examined
the effectiveness of this approach and
consistently show that adding capacity to
roadways fails to alleviate congestion for
long because it actually increases vehicle
miles traveled (VMT).
An increase in VMT attributable to increases
in roadway capacity where congestion
is present is called “induced travel”. The
basic economic principles of supply and
demand explain this phenomenon: adding
capacity decreases travel time, in effect
lowering the “price” of driving; and when
prices go down, the quantity of driving
goes up.
1
Induced travel counteracts the
effectiveness of capacity expansion as a
strategy for alleviating traffic congestion and
offsets in part or in whole reductions in GHG
emissions that would result from reduced
congestion.

Susan Handy
Department of Environmental Science and Policy
University of California, Davis

[...continues...]
http://www.dot.ca.gov/newtech/resea...0-12-2015-NCST_Brief_InducedTravel_CS6_v3.pdf

 

[Steve X]

Personally, I would prefer twinned and at-grade over a Super 2. One of the biggest killers on these highways is head-on collisions, which Super 2s wouldn't solve. I think a Highway 11 (north of Gravenhurst) type of configuration would be best: Put in interchanges at the major roads, but leave the minor roads as at-grade intersections. Once it's open, gradually add interchanges and service roads to move towards full controlled access.

Yes, we would all agree a divided highway (or dual carriageway in the UK) would be the best solution. The cost and environmental damage is however much higher when a second roadway is necessary. Personally I like to see a full 417 freeway from Manitoba to Quebec. I know that's not happening.

 

[Dan416]

I was heading west on Sunday afternoon around 2 pm and it took me 15 minutes just to get out of Mississauga along the 401 (coming from Mississauga Rd). 401 traffic is insane. It's incomprehensible to me that the 401 is so narrow in this stretch and that the expansion is so far off (the portion up to the Credit River is already under construction, why not accelerate the rest?)

 

[darth_freeman]

But if (gist) "GO has allowed the QEW to remain the same 6 lanes over fifty years now"...then doubling GO capacity should allow it to remain 6 lanes for another fifty years, albeit the relationship won't be arithmetically linear. But you get the gist. LA has seen the light, when will we?

Increasing Highway Capacity Unlikely
to Relieve Traffic Congestion

Widening of the QEW will only add HOV/HOT lanes, so the usual "induced demand" spiel doesn't quite apply. Improvements like making Dixie into a conventional interchange and ramp/shoulder upgrades enhance safety as well.

I was heading west on Sunday afternoon around 2 pm and it took me 15 minutes just to get out of Mississauga along the 401 (coming from Mississauga Rd). 401 traffic is insane. It's incomprehensible to me that the 401 is so narrow in this stretch and that the expansion is so far off (the portion up to the Credit River is already under construction, why not accelerate the rest?)

This is long overdue but the P3 project is already underway, currently in RFQ stage: https://news.ontario.ca/mto/en/2017/04/widening-highway-401-to-keep-people-moving.html
With any luck 401 @ Mississauga will have the collector/express system up by 2021 (and into Milton by 2023). Until then coming from Mississauga Road you can hop on the 407 for a few bucks.

 

[steveintoronto]

Widening of the QEW will only add HOV/HOT lanes, so the usual "induced demand" spiel doesn't quite apply.

OK, that wasn't mentioned in the vids. Now it makes a lot more sense.