Highways in Canada

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by The Chemist

I have to agree to this. When I took the Canada Line for the first time this past summer, I was appalled at how small the stations and trains were. Sure, automatic train control reduces headways, but when each train has such a limited capacity you're still going to have capacity problems.

I've always wondered why Vancouver has such low transit ridership by Canadian city standards, especially given that they've arguably got the most regionally complete rapid transit network in the country at this time. Stuff like this maybe?

[1overcosc]

While Vancouver's geography creates problems, it also creates one huge benefit: it provides a hard, inescapable limit on urban sprawl. In Toronto, limiting urban sprawl & urban intensification has been achieved by legislation protecting rural lands around the city, which works for now but could easily be shattered if a future provincial government decided to scrap the protections--the Ontario PC party proposed to do this in the 2014 election, for example (though they also took hard right tea party-esque positions hence their collapse at the polls, so they may not be the best representative of what on Ontario politician might do in the future).

Then again, Ottawa's greenbelt has survived 50 years of new federal governments despite the fact that its value if sold off for redevelopment would be in the billions.

[SOSS]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

While Vancouver's geography creates problems, it also creates one huge benefit: it provides a hard, inescapable limit on urban sprawl. In Toronto, limiting urban sprawl & urban intensification has been achieved by legislation protecting rural lands around the city, which works for now but could easily be shattered if a future provincial government decided to scrap the protections--the Ontario PC party proposed to do this in the 2014 election, for example (though they also took hard right tea party-esque positions hence their collapse at the polls, so they may not be the best representative of what on Ontario politician might do in the future).

Then again, Ottawa's greenbelt has survived 50 years of new federal governments despite the fact that its value if sold off for redevelopment would be in the billions.

I disagree with preventing urban sprawl. It is occurring, just not in Vancouver proper. Development is moving up the mountains on the north shore and in Coquitlam. Langley, Abbotsford, Chilliwack are all becoming primarily bedroom communities too. Head north and Squamish is rapidly growing as a bedroom community since the Sea-to-Sky has made it realist for commuters.

Urban sprawl continues, just not in all directions.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by SOSS

I disagree with preventing urban sprawl. It is occurring, just not in Vancouver proper. Development is moving up the mountains on the north shore and in Coquitlam. Langley, Abbotsford, Chilliwack are all becoming primarily bedroom communities too. Head north and Squamish is rapidly growing as a bedroom community since the Sea-to-Sky has made it realist for commuters.

Urban sprawl continues, just not in all directions.

Even in those areas though the sprawl can only occur up to a point.

Interestingly, even Los Angeles - the grand-daddy of sprawl - is having the same issues and has been intensifying more. (Most of the sprawl there happened 30 to 60 years ago)

[Innsertnamehere]

Toronto is 150m with roughly 1200 passengers.

[libtard]

Originally Posted by SOSS

So you are talking about the carrot vs the stick approach. It's challenging to offer a carrot to one with out giving another group the stick. All urban centres are restricted. You can't build a bike lane into an urban core without removing a vehicle lane or vehicle parking. Can't widen sidewalks without taking away from roadways etc. the exception is grade separated transit which costs a lot. CoV is part of a larger regional transit program and can't control such mass projects. They are limited to the streets and sidewalks they have. They do need to improve their public consultation process though.

Give as many carrots to pedestrians and cyclist that is reasonable. Don't built new roads (like Boston or the freeways planned of yesteryear). Also The market determines the cost of vehicle ownership, not the city.

Can you stop shitting up this thread? We've had the "highways are bad" discussion numerous times. Take it somewhere else. This thread is to discuss highway developments, specs, and share pictures.

[Procrastinational]

Originally Posted by SOSS

I disagree with preventing urban sprawl. It is occurring, just not in Vancouver proper. Development is moving up the mountains on the north shore and in Coquitlam. Langley, Abbotsford, Chilliwack are all becoming primarily bedroom communities too. Head north and Squamish is rapidly growing as a bedroom community since the Sea-to-Sky has made it realist for commuters.

Urban sprawl continues, just not in all directions.

The bigger factor limiting sprawl in the Lower Mainland is ALR. If you look at a map, all the growth is clustered in areas that aren't designated as ALR. In some places further in the valley, there is plenty of land that is undeveloped and is not protected under ALR. In these places, low density new development is happening, but closer to Vancouver in places like Richmond, there is basically no non-ALR land left to develop, so the only way to grow is up.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

I've always wondered why Vancouver has such low transit ridership by Canadian city standards, especially given that they've arguably got the most regionally complete rapid transit network in the country at this time. Stuff like this maybe?

I think it's because:

1. Calgary and Ottawa are somewhat unusual in terms of employment. Calgary is extremely monocentric, with a lot of corporate jobs in the core and very high parking rates, and Ottawa's legions of civil servants mean that the government can position employment near the Transitway and stagger work times.

2. Toronto and Montreal have large, pre-war inner cities where public transit is sort of the default travel option, even for non-commute trips. Vancouver doesn't have a line like, say, the Bloor Danforth line or the Green line in Montreal which basically is extremely useful for inner city residents doing medium-distance travel within the inner city. The Broadway corridor would be our version of this, if we ever get it.

3. A lot of Vancouverites walk to work or bike to work.

[SOSS]

Originally Posted by libtard

Can you stop shitting up this thread? We've had the "highways are bad" discussion numerous times. Take it somewhere else. This thread is to discuss highway developments, specs, and share pictures.

I apologize. Here I thought this forum was for an intelligent conversation regarding Highways in Canada. Such a conversation includes pros and cons to highways, impact on society, impact on environment, historical highway rhetoric, current highway rhetoric, alternatives to highways, past development, current development, future development etc.

[SOSS]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

I think it's because:

1. Calgary and Ottawa are somewhat unusual in terms of employment. Calgary is extremely monocentric, with a lot of corporate jobs in the core and very high parking rates, and Ottawa's legions of civil servants mean that the government can position employment near the Transitway and stagger work times.

I lived in downtown Calgary for a time and when I explain to people how Calgary operates WRT the commute I explained it like a doughnut. Everyone lives on the outside but works in the centre (with the exception of a few). Calgary is working on increasing number of employment centres outside of the downtown and also increasing downtown residences.

I like the term monocentric a lot more. Thx

[ssiguy]

Hypothetically people will live in high rises as the land disappears which the policy-wonks in Vancouver will tell you. In reality they are "skipping over" the ARL to WR/SS. Langley and Surrey are spread out messes and within 10 year it will be one solid blob to Abbotsford.

The only thing helping densify some of the inner areas has little to do with planning {except around transit stations where the planning has been very proactive} and far more to do with the astronomical housing prices. Most people would rather have a little house and a yard in the city but in Vancouver that would require a after tax income VERY few could even dream of. SFH are the domain of the extremely wealthy and of course Chinese passport seekers.

Higher density in the suburban areas of Vancouver has a lot more to do with people not being able to afford anything else than good planning itself. Vancouver has a disastrous highway system that is bringing the city to a screeching halt, making regular roads dangerous as people try to find short cuts, transport trucks barreling down 2 lane city roads spewing out pollution and making a racket, buses stuck in traffic, and ruining the quality of life. this is made worse by the fact that not only did Vancouver not plan it's road network but also didn't plan it's city for transit. Vancouver was the very last of Canada's big 6 cities to get rapid transit but by then much of the population growth of the after war period had taken place with disjointed SFH neighbourhoods.

Highways are a fact of life that Vancouver refuses to acknowledge.

[Procrastinational]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Hypothetically people will live in high rises as the land disappears which the policy-wonks in Vancouver will tell you. In reality they are "skipping over" the ARL to WR/SS. Langley and Surrey are spread out messes and within 10 year it will be one solid blob to Abbotsford.

The only thing helping densify some of the inner areas has little to do with planning {except around transit stations where the planning has been very proactive} and far more to do with the astronomical housing prices. Most people would rather have a little house and a yard in the city but in Vancouver that would require a after tax income VERY few could even dream of. SFH are the domain of the extremely wealthy and of course Chinese passport seekers.

Higher density in the suburban areas of Vancouver has a lot more to do with people not being able to afford anything else than good planning itself. Vancouver has a disastrous highway system that is bringing the city to a screeching halt, making regular roads dangerous as people try to find short cuts, transport trucks barreling down 2 lane city roads spewing out pollution and making a racket, buses stuck in traffic, and ruining the quality of life. this is made worse by the fact that not only did Vancouver not plan it's road network but also didn't plan it's city for transit. Vancouver was the very last of Canada's big 6 cities to get rapid transit but by then much of the population growth of the after war period had taken place with disjointed SFH neighbourhoods.

Highways are a fact of life that Vancouver refuses to acknowledge.

Some good points.

I don't think it's an argument against ALR, but my guess is that if the ALR didn't exist, most of the population in the Lower Mainland wouldn't spread quite as far into the valley. The fact of the matter is people don't really choose to live way out in the valley. Most would no doubt rather live close to the core. But having ALR in areas near the city like in Richmond and Delta seems to make development leapfrog the ALR further into the valley. You could probably fit the population of Langley and much of Abbotsford into the areas of Delta and Richmond and Surrey that are covered by ALR. Hell you could probably fit much of Surrey into the ALR in Delta and Richmond.
In retrospect it may have been better to set aside less land for ALR closer to the city (under the realistic assumption that the city would need some room for expansion in the long term), and to have been more strict with land use beyond Surrey.

As another symptom of poor planning, I do believe there will come a time when the price of land becomes high enough to pressure the release of most of the land close to the city from ALR. If this happens it will be very unfortunate.

What I'd really like to see is a greenbelt along the north shore mountains from West Van to at least Coquitlam, preventing development higher along the hillsides than what is already there.


Just as you say, cars are part of the picture, and Vancouver can't just pretend they don't exist. While not ideal, we should absolutely make the most of things, and have an acceptable road network. With the use of electric cars and other forms of zero emissions vehicles increasing, most of the biggest arguments against the automobile are declining in merit. We have some of the highest gas prices in North America, and some of the cheapest electricity. We should be strongly encouraging electric car usage.

[SOSS]

I am thankful for ALR in BC. Otherwise there would just be a mass of single detached houses everywhere and likely freeways zig zagging all across the lower mainland (outside of Vancouver proper). Better up than out. Hillside developments are creeping way too high into the mountains just like in other jurisdiction (Kelowna comes to mind).

ALR was a wise move of governments past. Too bad they didn't give the ALC any teeth to do much about it. Way too many abuses of this land throughout BC.

[haljackey]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Thought I would create a fantasy map for what I would like to see for the Ontario freeway network.



- Extension of the 417 all the way to Sault Ste. Marie. This would be around 700km of new highway, and would have to be phased over a long period of time. First parts to be done would be Arnprior to Petawawa, North Bay to Nipissing, and Sudbury to Espanola, with the rest being filled in after that.
- Extension of highway 7 twinning from Carleton Place to Perth, along the south side of Mississippi lake.
- Extension of 174 in Ottawa to Clarance-Rockland
- Bradford Bypass
- complete upgrade of highway 6 in Guelph to a full freeway
- construction of the highway 6 Morriston bypass south of the 401.
- Extend the highway 6 super 2 from the Hamilton Airport to Caledonia

Widenings:
- Widen highway 6 from the 403 to the Hamilton Airport
- 401 widening between Kitchener and Toronto as planned with an 8+2 HOV setup
- widen highway 11 to 6 lanes from Barrie to Gravenhurst, upgrade to full freeway. upgrade remaining at grade crossings on the highway, rename highway 411.
- Widen 400 to Barrie with an 8+2 HOV setup.
- Widen QEW from the 403 to the 406 with a 6+2 HOV setup
- Widen 403, 6+2 HOV to highway 6 from the QEW, and 6 lanes after that to Brantford.
- Upgrade highway 35 to a full freeway
- Widen 401 from London to Windsor with a 6 lane setup
- Widen 401 from Cobourg to Kingston with a 6 lane setup
- Widen 401 through Durham extending the express-collectors system to the 407 WDL and 10 lanes between the 407 WDL and 407 EDL.

Originally Posted by haljackey

Very cool map!

I added a few fantasy ideas for Ontario. Only one I'm not sure about is the Mid-pen highway as its route could go 2 ways and it might only be warranted if Ontario's manufacturing sector grows stronger with exports to the US.



Some routes:
-Highway 3 freeway from Windsor to Leamington
-EC Row to 401
-Highway 440 if Sarina and Chatham grow considerably
-Highway 7 freeway from Kitchener to 402, bypassing Stratford
-VMP upgrades and extension from St. Thomas to Highway 7 freeway
-Highway 424
-Highway 6 freeway from Guelph to Hamilton, continued extension to Hamilton Airport if in more demand.
-420 extended west to 406
-400 as a 4-lane HOV only / mega toll highway into downtown Toronto
-Highway 448 (DVP to 401)
-Highway 7 east to hook up with Bradford Bypass
-410 up to Collingwood
-Red Hill south to Highway 6
-426 from Collingwood to 400
-404 to Orillia
-407 to Ottawa. 115 would be renamed to 407
-Ottawa bypass

On top of this, convert the leftmost express lane on the 401 to HOV throughout Greater Toronto. So what if there's no buffer? It will carry more ppl.

On drugs

[FrAnKs]

Do you smoke crack ?

[Franco401]

I'll try my hand at this. NBers can do drugs too.



Includes:
-Legitimate features
Route 8 Super 2
Route 11 Super 2
Maine East-West Route (Interstate 92)
-My personal favorites
Route 3 Super 2
Route 10 twinned Young's Cove-Sussex, extended to Moncton
Route 1 Riverview Bypass, extended to Confederation Bridge
Fundy, Miramichi Causeways
11 Extended South
Freeway from Sackville to Nowhere
Route 17 Super 2
New Route from Richibucto to Springfield, NS
Bridge from Bathurst to Quebec and back
95 Extended to Fredericton
Miscou Island Waterslide (Wheee!)
Confederation Bridge Closed, Replaced with Teleporter
Not on map, but demolish village of Minto with explosives (may as well take the rest of Queens County too)

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by haljackey

On drugs

yea, crack alright.

That map did get me thinking about eliminating the highway 6 ferry though. I wonder what the cost of bridging the Georgian Bay entrance would cost? it would need roughly 17km of bridges, though the longest one would be 9km long.. Probably well over a Billion. Would be neat to see though.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

yea, crack alright.

That map did get me thinking about eliminating the highway 6 ferry though. I wonder what the cost of bridging the Georgian Bay entrance would cost? it would need roughly 17km of bridges, though the longest one would be 9km long.. Probably well over a Billion. Would be neat to see though.

Traffic in that section is VERY low though and Highway 6 really should be Highway 68 again in the northern section since they function really as two separate highways. The ferry doesn't even run in the winter months.

Manitoulin Island is much closer connected to Northeastern Ontario (i.e. Sudbury). Replacing (for cars) the swing bridge on the north end with a 2-lane high level or draw bridge would be more useful IMO...

[Innsertnamehere]

I presume traffic on the roadway would increase with a permanent link, people coming from Kitchener and London would use it to avoid Toronto & highway 400 traffic when going to Espanola or Sault Ste Marie. Mind you the 400 extension needs as much traffic as it can get due to its low traffic numbers...

replacing the Little Current bridge would better, and a lot cheaper though, yes.

[FrAnKs]

What peoples outside of Québec ( Ontarian, NBers and others ) think of Quebec's Autoroutes in general ? I would like to hear you about that from personal experiences.