|
|
|
Roads: Highway 401 Widening - Highway 8 to Highway 410 (MTO, U/C, Planned)
- Thread starter salmonz
- Start date
drum118
Superstar
The times I have been east of it to 416, 3 lanes would been nice to have a few times. Port Hope area can be slow going. Other than that, can't really speak on traffic for that section, but need to plan for it now. I would say off hand, been east of 35 about 2 dozen times. Going west of Toronto, a hundreds of trips. 8 so far this year, with 4-6 more to come.
nfitz
Superstar
Three lanes might certainly be warranted as far as Kingston - or even somewhat beyond (they've just announced that they are now widening from Montreal Street to Highway 15). But I can't see it happening much further east of that for many years, and I can't forsee it east of Highway 16.
Not sure the relevance of Port Hope. It is 3 lanes through there - and I haven't seen any traffic problems through there in the years since it was widened.
mtomo
New Member
who was the contractor that demolished the second line overpass on the 401? was it priestly demolition?
Toffy
Active Member
It was Priestly Demolition, they're behind most bridge demolitions on MTO projects. Northern Machinery Service used to be the big name in bridge demolition until they were bought up by Priestly a few years ago. There's a few machines in the Priestly fleet with the Northern name on them still.
Jasmine18
Senior Member
The 401 should be 6 lanes from Winsdor to Kingston in the long term.
Anything above that is overkill really.
Anything above that is overkill really.
Haljackey
Active Member
I'd say this is the minimum*
Ideally I'd think it would function best as:
-6 lanes from new bridge in Windsor to Highway 402. Heavy truck traffic on this stretch, new 3rd lane would provide car-only passing lane.
-8 lanes from Highway 402 to Highway 403. The 401 essentially acts as 'two' highways merged on this stretch, and has the highest truck volumes outside of Greater Toronto.
-6 lanes from Highway 403 to Highway 8. Functions perfectly fine here, although those missing ramps from 401 EB to 8 NB and 8 SB to 401 EB would help a lot in the Kitchener area.
-8+2 HOV from Highway 8 to Highway 6. Entering the commute zone of Greater Toronto
-10+2 HOV between the Highway 6 interchanges, again as the 401 essentially acts as 'two' highways here.
-8+2 HOV from Highway 6 to Highway 407 ETR. I don't think the proposed collector-express system from Milton to 407 is really needed, but maybe! Could maybe widen to 10+2 HOV for this stretch instead.
-12+2 HOV from Highway 407 ETR to Highways 403 & 410. Collector-express system begins.
-18+2 HOV from Highways 403 & 410 to Highway 427.
-14+4 HOV from Highway 427 to Highway 400. Would need extensive rebuild of Highway 427 interchange. Dedicated HOV ramps for 400 interchange would be amazing.
-12+4 HOV from Highway 400 to Highway 404. Would be tight.
-14+2 HOV from Highway 404 to Highway 412. Collector-Express system ends.
-10+2 HOV from Highway 412 to Highway 418. Expropriation in Oshawa area required.
-8+2 HOV from Highway 418 to Highways 35 & 115.
-8 lanes from Highways 35 & 115 to Cobourg or Belleville.
-6 lanes Cobourg or Belleville to Highway 416.
-Eventually 6 lanes from Highway 416 to Quebec border, dependent on truck volumes.
*Also bump speeds to 120km/h outside of Greater Toronto. Could be as high as 130 on the HOV lanes as they are separated from regular traffic and are the leftmost lane. Gives incentive to carpool too!
*Lightly used HOVs could be HOTs. Heavily used HOVs could be 3+ or even 4+ instead of 2+.
*Assumes no new parallel highways are built (407 East and Highway 7 freeway are the exception)
*20-30 year build period. HOVs only go in when complete road rebuilds are needed.
Last edited:
crs1026
Superstar
What a marvellous cost-beneft base for an enhanced GORER system and HxR to London and beyond. And for the integrated toll system that we need to fund it.
I agree, it would be full the day it was completed. There's the rub.
- Paul
nfitz
Superstar
I don't frequently drive this, but I've never seen congestion on this section. What time of day does it happen?
Eventually being the year 2150? Have you ever seen a traffic jam here, other than for construction or an accident? I frequently drive this section, and it's amazingly quiet in comparison to the rest of the route. Given the lack of population growth, and even depopulation at times, in this area, I can't see anything changing for a long time.
Haljackey
Active Member
The stretch between the 402 and 403 has quite a lot of JIT (just in time) transport truck traffic on it. It can be particularly busy in the Ingersoll area where CAMI is when the plant and other operators are running. Typically trucks occupy both the right and middle lanes, leaving the leftmost lane the only 'open' lane for cars. Overpasses on this stretch are slowly being replaced to allow 8 lanes eventually, which may be needed in 20-30 years.
For the stretch east of the 416, yes by eventually I mean 'some day'. The government has been quoted in the past they want to widen the entire 401 to a minimum of 6 lanes which seems odd because as you mentioned, this stretch sees light usage.
Getting HOVs/HOT lanes on the 401 throughout the Greater Golden Horseshoe would enable the highway to carry more people through it. I know the government doesn't like to replace a general purpose lane with it, but I am warm to the idea of converting the leftmost express lanes to HOV between Highway 409 and Brock Road. All you'd need in the short term is some buckets of white paint and signs. No room for a buffer zone, but that's not really that necessary.
For the stretch east of the 416, yes by eventually I mean 'some day'. The government has been quoted in the past they want to widen the entire 401 to a minimum of 6 lanes which seems odd because as you mentioned, this stretch sees light usage.
Getting HOVs/HOT lanes on the 401 throughout the Greater Golden Horseshoe would enable the highway to carry more people through it. I know the government doesn't like to replace a general purpose lane with it, but I am warm to the idea of converting the leftmost express lanes to HOV between Highway 409 and Brock Road. All you'd need in the short term is some buckets of white paint and signs. No room for a buffer zone, but that's not really that necessary.
BurlOak
Senior Member
I'm not sure about this. What is the use of these lanes - I though I have seen a number like 800 vehicles per hour.
Say the average occupancy in a car is 1.25 in a general lane where HOV does not exist, but 1.10 when an HOV exists (a few multi-passenger vehicles stay in right lanes due to impending exit), and the occupancy in a HOV lane is 2.5.
We could have 4 lanes x 2000 vehicles per hour x 1.25 people = 10,000 people.
Instead we have 3 lanes x 2000 vehicles per hour x 1.10 people = 6,600,
Plus 1 lane x 1000 vehicles per hour x 2.50 people = 2,500.
Total people = 9,100 people.
HOV capacity 10% less than all lanes as general purpose lanes.
timio
Active Member
If the OPP were to enforce "keep right except to pass" the transport-induced congestion might be a bit less along here.
As the main thoroughfare through this part of the province, I find it quite busy. Even a few years ago on Christmas Day it was fairly steady with traffic.
TransitBart
Senior Member
HOV is a sop to voters concerned about the climate. (I believe that is a real concern btw.) But all the HOV and HOT in the world won't change a thing unless there are cost effective and convenient alternatives. Arguing otherwise is fantasy land.
For most of us, as problematic as a carbon economy might be, setting aside our desire/need to travel is not on the table.
And although there are 100s of threads here they regularly twist together in a common theme because the issue is "getting around" and in North America that has meant car rather than train. Changing that is proving to be a long-term challenge.
Don't anyone here be offended by what I said. If you are single and own a car, you don't have anyone to load in the passenger seat always. All the HOV lanes in the world in spite your desire to help won't change a thing.
For most of us, as problematic as a carbon economy might be, setting aside our desire/need to travel is not on the table.
And although there are 100s of threads here they regularly twist together in a common theme because the issue is "getting around" and in North America that has meant car rather than train. Changing that is proving to be a long-term challenge.
Don't anyone here be offended by what I said. If you are single and own a car, you don't have anyone to load in the passenger seat always. All the HOV lanes in the world in spite your desire to help won't change a thing.
nfitz
Superstar
Fair enough, I don't drive that way particularly often.
I've seen no indication the government has actually said this - though perhaps a particularly poor Transport Minister might have made the comment once, but it doesn't appear to be in any government documents, or widely reported - I've always figured she was likely misquoted or misinterpreted.
crs1026
Superstar
The problem is the amount of 102-kmph trucks wanting to pass 97-kmph trucks. They are legitimately using the middle lane to pass. They in turn block the 108-kmph motorists who pull into the left lane (again, legally passing) and block the 120 kmph cars in that lane. Dedicated truck lanes are one potential solution, but at heavy truck volume there would have to be other measures, as merging into the truck stream to get to and from exits and auto lanes could be dicey.
An OPP friend of mine tells me that on the 400 highways, they really do think twice before pulling over anybody who is making a technical violation, unless it's blatantly unsafe or unwise, or otherwise crosses a threshold of risk or suspicion. The issue being that pulling a car onto the shoulder (with an eventual need to pull back into traffic) has some inherent risk, and for the officer, the risk has to be worth the concern. In other words, don't look for enforcement to deal adequately with HOV abuse or drive-left behaviour that is merely unprincipled or inconvenient. Deterrence is important but patience may be the only true solution. And, better higher order transportation options to reduce the need for auto trips.
- Paul