Highways In Canada II

[craner]

MPs want Guilbeault to explain road funding remarks. Will it happen?

http://https://apple.news/A0B-Z_pSbTTSU6IjqYOdu2A

The 4th video link in this story focuses somewhat on the potential impact to BC highway infrastructure projects.

[ScreamingViking]

The thing about the 401 through Toronto is that it WAS supposed to be a bypass of the city. And it was, for a short time. The King's Highway website has a great history: https://www.thekingshighway.ca/Highway401.htm

Transportation planners of the day probably didn't see that suburbanization was coming (nor that the Toronto metropolitan area would become as populated as it is). And "regional planning" wasn't a thing yet, so as the suburbs grew there was no opportunity to coordinate to build another bypass or network of freeways. And in the older/central urban area of the city there was a big battle against planned freeways that would have torn up the heart of Toronto (hence the truncated Allen Road)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel...ays_in_Toronto

The 407 and other highways and infrastructure such as hydro lines were built in what was called the Parkway Belt, but that wasn't put in place until the late 1970s and was more of a reaction to the suburban growth. Neptis has a nice map and explanation of it all:

https://neptis.org/publications/chap...ning-endeavour

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by craner

MPs want Guilbeault to explain road funding remarks. Will it happen?

http://https://apple.news/A0B-Z_pSbTTSU6IjqYOdu2A

The 4th video link in this story focuses somewhat on the potential impact to BC highway infrastructure projects.

It focusses too much on Vancouver and misses the most important point, the inter city highway network, especially the #1

What will happen to the plan to twin the #1 through the national parks under this clown??

[Nouvellecosse]

In this video it seems like he just has a big mouth. It doesn't seem like the policy position is actually wrong in that they're just focused on not funding urban road "capacity" increases like the QC tunnel proposal that would be better addressed with transit. Which is the right choice for both the environment and infrastructure costs. But he made vague statements revealing governments intentions that they didn't plan to actually announce and he wasn't specific about what those intentions entailed which raised widespread alarm.

The government probably didn't even need to make an announcement and could simply have released their decisions on individual funding requests as they made them providing rationale for why funding for particular projects was denied. Perhaps he needs media training or something. Or he just wanted to feel important.

• Video Link

[craner]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

It focusses too much on Vancouver and misses the most important point, the inter city highway network, especially the #1

What will happen to the plan to twin the #1 through the national parks under this clown??

Exactly what I would call him - a clown.

[Metro-One]

Yes, the highway network in Quebec City and Montreal isn’t in need of big expansions, but there is a lot more to the country than Windsor to Quebec City.

And even then, aging structures will still need to be replaced and upgraded with modern standards, so it’s still a dumb comment.

Where does the new tunnel (should have continued with the bridge project) for the George Massey Tunnel fall on this decision? Or the long awaited much needed upgrade to the #1 from Langley to Abbotsford / Chilliwack?

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Yes, the highway network in Quebec City and Montreal isn’t in need of big expansions, but there is a lot more to the country than Windsor to Quebec City.

And even then, aging structures will still need to be replaced and upgraded with modern standards, so it’s still a dumb comment.

Where does the new tunnel (should have continued with the bridge project) for the George Massey Tunnel fall on this decision? Or the long awaited much needed upgrade to the #1 from Langley to Abbotsford / Chilliwack?

As implied, it’ll be on a case-by-case basis. Email Steve Guilbeault.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Yes, the highway network in Quebec City and Montreal isn’t in need of big expansions, but there is a lot more to the country than Windsor to Quebec City.

And even then, aging structures will still need to be replaced and upgraded with modern standards, so it’s still a dumb comment.

Where does the new tunnel (should have continued with the bridge project) for the George Massey Tunnel fall on this decision? Or the long awaited much needed upgrade to the #1 from Langley to Abbotsford / Chilliwack?

I believe he did mention that they would help with maintenance project still.

He also kept referencing the Quebec Tunnel - which is fair enough. That project was pretty uniquely terrible of an investment though.

I imagine the Liberals under this so-called-policy would not fund projects like the George Massey Tunnel replacement or Trans Canada widening to Abbotsford as they would be "urban" capacity expansions. Twinning the Trans-Canada may still be on the table though, but even then I'm doubtful given how long the feds have sat on the Yoho National Park twinning.

[Metro-One]

Oh, how gracious of them to help with maintenance… now this is something the truckers should protest on.

Ideology has overtaken practicality and reality.

Where is this clown’s alternative proposal in a massive building of high speed rail and regional rail projects nationwide as an alternative? Oh wait, that would actually take effort and balls.

The Liberals are beyond done for me now. That was the final straw.

[Nouvellecosse]

Well they haven't actually announced a decision on Massey funding have they? And he did say they were planning to invest more in mass transportation. We can try to imagine what their decisions would be but they haven't actually announced them at this point. His carelessness with his statements is definitely a problem, but the actual substance behind their decision making is what really matters. So we'll have to see how those decisions pan out. Let's hope there is some actual progress on regional and intercity rail soon.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Oh, how gracious of them to help with maintenance… now this is something the truckers should protest on.

Ideology has overtaken practicality and reality.

Where is this clown’s alternative proposal in a massive building of high speed rail and regional rail projects nationwide as an alternative? Oh wait, that would actually take effort and balls.

The Liberals are beyond done for me now. That was the final straw.

Well, if we had a similar system of expressways that Japan has, we could probably complete twinning Highway 1 sooner than the 'many decades' that the Ministry currently expects it will take (with funding coming from general taxation).

However, no political party that could control a government in Canada has so far made any moves towards tolling the system.

If I have the numbers right, a car trip from Burnaby to Winnipeg on a tolled Highway 1 (2,287 km) in Japan would pay a toll of 56,000 yen, or $500 CA. Is that right? - I can only find old toll prices on English language websites, but I don't think they've increased since the early 2000s.

[thewave46]

The disappointing bit is that there's significant low-hanging improvements in connecting our cities in the West. It probably is one of the glaring weaknesses in our national infrastructure.

Interchanges replacing high-risk at-grade intersections on the Trans-Canada, a divided highway from Calgary to Vancouver. These are tangible improvements that could benefit places long neglected by the federal government, especially in light of the large investments made by the federal government for industry and infrastructure in the east.

The benefit from huge investment in highways in the eastern portion of the country is much lower now as much of the lowest hanging fruit has been mostly harvested already.

It's one thing if we're doing high-speed rail with Europe-like investment and making this sort of statement with respect to highways, but we're kind of doing neither.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by thewave46

The disappointing bit is that there's significant low-hanging improvements in connecting our cities in the West. It probably is one of the glaring weaknesses in our national infrastructure.

Interchanges replacing high-risk at-grade intersections on the Trans-Canada, a divided highway from Calgary to Vancouver. These are tangible improvements that could benefit places long neglected by the federal government, especially in light of the large investments made by the federal government for industry and infrastructure in the east.

The benefit from huge investment in highways in the eastern portion of the country is much lower now as much of the lowest hanging fruit has been mostly harvested already.

It's one thing if we're doing high-speed rail with Europe-like investment and making this sort of statement with respect to highways, but we're kind of doing neither.

The Rockies will make sure that connecting Vancouver with Calgary will never be a low hanging fruit. Ask the geotechnical engineers that have worked on KHC Phase 4.
I tried drawing an interchange between 4 lanes of TCH and Field, and that was when I understood why Parks Canada went with traffic lights instead.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

The Rockies will make sure that connecting Vancouver with Calgary will never be a low hanging fruit. Ask the geotechnical engineers that have worked on KHC Phase 4.
I tried drawing an interchange between 4 lanes of TCH and Field, and that was when I understood why Parks Canada went with traffic lights instead.

Fair enough.

Maybe 'low-hanging fruit' was the wrong phrase.

Obvious place for improvement that benefits large numbers of people might be the phrase I'm looking for.

Even a RIRO-style 'freeway' in rural sections would likely be a marked improvement.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Well, if we had a similar system of expressways that Japan has, we could probably complete twinning Highway 1 sooner than the 'many decades' that the Ministry currently expects it will take (with funding coming from general taxation).

However, no political party that could control a government in Canada has so far made any moves towards tolling the system.

If I have the numbers right, a car trip from Burnaby to Winnipeg on a tolled Highway 1 (2,287 km) in Japan would pay a toll of 56,000 yen, or $500 CA. Is that right? - I can only find old toll prices on English language websites, but I don't think they've increased since the early 2000s.

The price system for tolls has remained stable since I have moved to Japan 11 years ago (man time goes by fast!).

General rule of thumb is it is about 20 bucks per 100km traveled.

Now, that price is reduced if you have a transponder, and weekends and holidays are cheaper for everyone.

With that though you get amazing highways.

I frequently drive from my place in Kagawa to Kochi city for work, it is one of the more remote cities in Japan. The route crosses the Shikoku mountain range (Shikoku is essentially a smaller Taiwan if that helps) and there is no winding around the mountains following valleys, it’s a nearly straight line THROUGH the mountains. About 70% of the route is tunnels, the majority of the remaining 30% is akin to the new section of the Kicking Horse, all viaducts. And all highways in Japan are like this.

Now, if you don’t want to pay the toll you can use the free alternative which is akin to the current state of our #1 in BC.

And there are highway buses linking all these towns (and the towns in between) and of course there is also the railway!

From my home (which is akin to Nanaimo) I also often work in Takamatsu (which is akin to Victoria. Very similar corridor in population, population density, physical geography and distance) I can take the freeway (very fast, tunnels and viaducts) or I can take the secondary free route (4 lanes, mix of interchanges and lights, still uses tunnels) or the tertiary route (currently being expanded to 4 lanes, uses tunnels). There is also a fourth route that winds through the mountains, which is hilariously akin to the Malahat (#1) linking Victoria and Nanaimo.

Yes, obviously Japan and Canada are different, but I think we could do a little better than having our primary (and only) corridor to the status of a fourth tier route in a similar corridor in Japan.

Oh, and of course there is also the train linking the cities, which of course even under the very “green” provincial NDP and Federal Liberals is still a no go for Vancouver Island.

Living abroad can really open your eyes to how pathetic Canadian infrastructure can be.

Now here come the “we can’t do it” excuses… great Canadian attitude!

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

The Rockies will make sure that connecting Vancouver with Calgary will never be a low hanging fruit. Ask the geotechnical engineers that have worked on KHC Phase 4.
I tried drawing an interchange between 4 lanes of TCH and Field, and that was when I understood why Parks Canada went with traffic lights instead.

All call BS on this. Check out the new interchange being built in Chase, no reason a similar interchange can’t be built in Field.

[Acajack]

I get that we are a huge sparsely populated country and that this entails higher infrastructure costs to some degree, but the excuse only goes so far. We don't even build infrastructure in the 90% of the country that isn't populated.

Originally Posted by Metro-One

The price system for tolls has remained stable since I have moved to Japan 11 years ago (man time goes by fast!).

General rule of thumb is it is about 20 bucks per 100km traveled.

Now, that price is reduced if you have a transponder, and weekends and holidays are cheaper for everyone.

With that though you get amazing highways.

I frequently drive from my place in Kagawa to Kochi city for work, it is one of the more remote cities in Japan. The route crosses the Shikoku mountain range (Shikoku is essentially a smaller Taiwan if that helps) and there is no winding around the mountains following valleys, it’s a nearly straight line THROUGH the mountains. About 70% of the route is tunnels, the majority of the remaining 30% is akin to the new section of the Kicking Horse, all viaducts. And all highways in Japan are like this.

Now, if you don’t want to pay the toll you can use the free alternative which is akin to the current state of our #1 in BC.

And there are highway buses linking all these towns (and the towns in between) and of course there is also the railway!

From my home (which is akin to Nanaimo) I also often work in Takamatsu (which is akin to Victoria. Very similar corridor in population, population density, physical geography and distance) I can take the freeway (very fast, tunnels and viaducts) or I can take the secondary free route (4 lanes, mix of interchanges and lights, still uses tunnels) or the tertiary route (currently being expanded to 4 lanes, uses tunnels). There is also a fourth route that winds through the mountains, which is hilariously akin to the Malahat (#1) linking Victoria and Nanaimo.

Yes, obviously Japan and Canada are different, but I think we could do a little better than having our primary (and only) corridor to the status of a fourth tier route in a similar corridor in Japan.

Oh, and of course there is also the train linking the cities, which of course even under the very “green” provincial NDP and Federal Liberals is still a no go for Vancouver Island.

Living abroad can really open your eyes to how pathetic Canadian infrastructure can be.

Now here come the “we can’t do it” excuses… great Canadian attitude!

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

All call BS on this. Check out the new interchange being built in Chase, no reason a similar interchange can’t be built in Field.

Field area has shales that further complicate construction of any kind, aside from the high mountains. (Sorry I forgot to mention that in my earlier post.)
I wonder if Chase has similar complicating factors.

Geology absolutely matters. This is also why grade-separating TCH through Manitoba will be costly business (due to poor drainage), especially within Red River Valley (which includes Winnipeg). I suspect that twinning TCH in the shieldy part of eastern Manitoba will come out cheaper than grade-separating Winnipeg Perimeter Highway.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m all for an interstate standard TCH across the country, but sometimes stuff costs more than it seems to cost prima facie.

That said, it bugs me that, when MTQ was building A-50, even where deep rock cuts were needed, it only built 2 lanes instead of all 4.
The additional cost incurred from additional blasting shouldn’t be that much. Maybe it would have cost more labour trying to conceive the cut for 4 lanes instead of 2? (MTQ’s big on getting the cut slope right for rock cuts.)

[Nouvellecosse]

I'm a bit proponent of road pricing to both manage demand and fund construction and upkeep. So I definitely believe we could benefit from the Japan model by applying the user fees to fund impeccable maintenance and ambitious new construction.

But... I also think it would become immediate fodder for the PP types who would scream "axe the tax" 10x louder. Rather than being pleased at the world class infrastructure being delivered, they'd claim we were living in a dystopian nightmare because not everyone could afford unlimited use of the new routes and therefore we live under tyranny. Not that they should get a veto over effective policy options. But that depends on people not voting for them.

[ConundrumNL]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

I'm a bit proponent of road pricing to both manage demand and fund construction and upkeep. So I definitely believe we could benefit from the Japan model by applying the user fees to fund impeccable maintenance and ambitious new construction.

But... I also think it would become immediate fodder for the PP types who would scream "axe the tax" 10x louder. Rather than being pleased at the world class infrastructure being delivered, they'd claim we were living in a dystopian nightmare because not everyone could afford unlimited use of the new routes and therefore we live under tyranny. Not that they should get a veto over effective policy options. But that depends on people not voting for them.

I think your going to see road pricing become a thing out of pure necessity. As EV adoption increases, revenues from gas taxes are going to drop. A lot of that money goes into road maintenance, so the shortfall has to made up somewhere.

They 'might' be able to implement some sort of EV electric use tax at public chargers, but that would be much harder for home charging.

I've heard some US states are looking into moving to cost per mile model.