News   Nov 18, 2024
 150     0 
News   Nov 18, 2024
 743     1 
News   Nov 18, 2024
 532     0 

Roads: Ontario/GTA Highways Discussion

No, you don't get what I'm talking about, because if you carefully read post #508 where I quoted you saying streets in Toronto with a highway number had a "highwayness" in the sense that seemed to indicate people called them as such in the same sense Hurontario is called "10". They do not and never did. Yonge has never been labelled "11" in popular nomenclature.

Well, not to the same degree, (and I never implied it was to the same degree) because unlike Hurontario/10 in Mississauga, Yonge/11 in Toronto never was exactly rural--at least, not in the King's Highway era. But as long as it was the red line on the map marked "11", Yonge carried a "highwayness", anyway--and it was that beginning-of-Highway-11-ness which, of course, motivated the "Longest Street In The World" bumf. If Yonge weren't Highway 11 (and intuitively "known as such" by the public) in the first place, the tourist shills wouldn't have created that mythology.

Ultimately, it all depends where you set the "popular nomenclature" bar; just because people referred to Yonge as "Yonge" and not as "11" (at least, not south of the 401, or Steeles, or wherever God's Country as opposed to the Big City officially began at whatever moment), doesn't mean they were oblivious to its being 11. It isn't a black-or-white highway-versus street thing: there are shades of grey. And as long as commonly used road maps and city street maps existed that depicted Yonge as a red line with an "11" shield, people knew. Period. Yeah, maybe not all people were so engaged; but it's not like there isn't a whole slew of other "if you're a true Torontonian, you have to know this" things that a lot of Torontonians weren't and aren't aware of, either. Look: there's a "mediocre majority" for everything.

All you're betraying is that you either (a) weren't around, at least in an actively map-using-and-consuming form, when the most commonly used Ontario and Toronto maps showed Yonge as that red line marked "11"; or (b) have a perspective on what is or isn't a "highway" that's even more uninspiredly, ahistorically functionalistic than Coruscanti's.
 
*Snip*
All you're betraying is that you either (a) weren't around, at least in an actively map-using-and-consuming form, when the most commonly used Ontario and Toronto maps showed Yonge as that red line marked "11"; or (b) have a perspective on what is or isn't a "highway" that's even more uninspiredly, ahistorically functionalistic than Coruscanti's.

You know I'm inspired to call Istanbul Constantinople again. Wait, no, even better, Byantium is its proper name now and forever.
 
You know I'm inspired to call Istanbul Constantinople again. Wait, no, even better, Byantium is its proper name now and forever.

You'd hold more authority if your perspective on "highwayness" weren't the Nickelback to my Velvet Underground. (Irrespective of the fact that Nickelback sells more records--quantity does not equal quality.)

And besides, such a "you're an old square, man" approach is no excuse for an ahistorical perspective on the past; or viewing the past through an uninformed present-day filter.

So, in lieu of a typical street map from back in the day (which would have showed those same arteries numbered and in red), this (which practically every naturalized Ontario road traveller in the 60s would have been familiar with, even those residing within Toronto) will have to do to drive home a point.

67toronto.jpg


Once again, it didn't mean people referred to Yonge as "Hwy 11". But intuitively, they knew of its "highwayness" all the same...something that was part of a bigger network out there. Yeah, maybe it wasn't hyper-celebrated through posterity--it's only "highways", after all, it wasn't like Casa Loma or New City Hall or any of that stuff...but beneath the surface, it was "known", all the same.
 
I really, really don't know what point you're trying to make, nor why it's addressed to me. Even though you've made it about a hundred times, with all the same words in quotation marks.

Clearly I'm either not "old" enough or "sophisticated" enough to "get" it.
 
I really, really don't know what point you're trying to make, nor why it's addressed to me. Even though you've made it about a hundred times, with all the same words in quotation marks.

Clearly I'm either not "old" enough or "sophisticated" enough to "get" it.

Mind you, the core of my point was directed more at transportfan than you.
 
To change gears, here's some interesting photos of work on the new Windsor-Essex Parkway, which is essentially an extension of Highway 401.

http://www.windsorstar.com/entertai...r+parkway+surrounding+area/7136294/story.html

Definitely a much needed piece of infrastructure.

IMO, if they're going to build a new crossing, they should build the new one somewhere around Amherstburg, to become the main trucking route. Most of the trucks are either headed south or west from Detroit anyway, so that allows a bypass. Keep the Ambassador Bridge for cars, have the new bridge for trucks. Not exclusively for one or the other mind you, but it would seem to make sense for trucks to avoid having to go through Downtown Detroit and Downtown Windsor if they don't have to.
 
The new crossing's alignment has been decided a long time ago, it will cross from the Brighton Beach area of Windsor (near where the EC Row meets Ojibway Parkway/Sandwich Street/Highway 18) to the Delray area of Detroit, just to the north/upriver of Zug Island.
 
the extension of the 404 looks almost finished. drove by the current end of the 404 (green lane) yesterday, and the carpooling parking lot was paved with curbs, so I'm guessing the highway is nearly finished.
 
From the MTO website (http://www.raqsb.mto.gov.on.ca/techpubs/TrafficVolumes.nsf/fa027808647879788525708a004b5df8/f51986ea499a13b08525745f006dd30b/$FILE/Provincial%20Highways%20traffic%20Volumes%202008%20AADT%20Only.pdf), I looked at a few Average Annual Daily Traffic (2008 AADT) values.

AADT.jpg


I would say it shows:

East
1. Highway 417 need not be extended much beyond Arnprior.
2. Highway 7 freeway need not be extended beyond Carlton Place.
3. Highway 35/115 down to 401 may need improvement or widening when 407 reaches it.

West
1. The Highway 6 by-pass of Morriston is a very high priority.
2. The new freeway from Kitchener to Guelph is also a high priority since it has high volumes for a 2 lane road

North
1. The 404 extension was probably a lower priority than the 427 or 410 extension (no data on the upper part of 410).
2. Highway 11 from Barrie to Orillia will need some attention soon.
3. The freeway from Burks Falls to North Bay and Nobel (Parry Sound) to Sudbury were not a high priority.
 

Attachments

  • AADT.jpg
    AADT.jpg
    84.8 KB · Views: 568
From the MTO website (http://www.raqsb.mto.gov.on.ca/techpubs/TrafficVolumes.nsf/fa027808647879788525708a004b5df8/f51986ea499a13b08525745f006dd30b/$FILE/Provincial%20Highways%20traffic%20Volumes%202008%20AADT%20Only.pdf), I looked at a few Average Annual Daily Traffic (2008 AADT) values.

View attachment 9223

I would say it shows:

East
1. Highway 417 need not be extended much beyond Arnprior.
2. Highway 7 freeway need not be extended beyond Carlton Place.
3. Highway 35/115 down to 401 may need improvement or widening when 407 reaches it.

West
1. The Highway 6 by-pass of Morriston is a very high priority.
2. The new freeway from Kitchener to Guelph is also a high priority since it has high volumes for a 2 lane road

North
1. The 404 extension was probably a lower priority than the 427 or 410 extension (no data on the upper part of 410).
2. Highway 11 from Barrie to Orillia will need some attention soon.
3. The freeway from Burks Falls to North Bay and Nobel (Parry Sound) to Sudbury were not a high priority.

Thanks.

Those numbers just confirm what any of us who drive the 410 with any regularity already knew....it is woefully inadequate to serve the population it serves. When I drive to work, it is the (easily, and by far) the slowest part of a journey which takes in 410/401/427/Gardiner-Lakeshore. A typical day (in both directions) sees more than 50% of my commute on the 410.
 
Thanks.

Those numbers just confirm what any of us who drive the 410 with any regularity already knew....it is woefully inadequate to serve the population it serves. When I drive to work, it is the (easily, and by far) the slowest part of a journey which takes in 410/401/427/Gardiner-Lakeshore. A typical day (in both directions) sees more than 50% of my commute on the 410.

I have been putting together a map of potential freeways in Southern Ontario. It includes a link to a study, when possible, for reference. I did not include freeway widenings.

https://maps.google.ca/maps/ms?msid=218064167374283111253.0004c7c8fb5920a13ce63&msa=0

If you know any others, along with a link to a study, I could try to add them.
 
I have been putting together a map of potential freeways in Southern Ontario. It includes a link to a study, when possible, for reference. I did not include freeway widenings.

https://maps.google.ca/maps/ms?msid=218064167374283111253.0004c7c8fb5920a13ce63&msa=0

If you know any others, along with a link to a study, I could try to add them.

It was probably by accident, but I find it kinda strange that you would post that link as a reply to someone talking (complaining) about how overly congested the 410 is.....there is not one of those projects that would ease the 410's issues and there are a couple that would just make them worse.
 
It was probably by accident, but I find it kinda strange that you would post that link as a reply to someone talking (complaining) about how overly congested the 410 is.....there is not one of those projects that would ease the 410's issues and there are a couple that would just make them worse.

I forgot to add: "there is nothing there to help 410."
 

Back
Top