Highways in Canada

[Taeolas]

Originally Posted by Franco401

NB always uses super wide medians whenever possible, but the old Trans-Canada bypass of Fredericton (the oldest freeway in the province, built 1959) is a disaster for crash protection. Even with guardrails near signs, you basically just have a narrow strip of flat grass separating traffic flows, even when the road curves and traffic doing 110 on a road designed for 90 has to swerve just to stay in lane. You then get to go down a VERY steep hill where it narrows to one lane for no reason, adds another, goes down to a four-lane undivided road, loses the right lane at a ramp with a laughable indicated speed of 30 and makes another dangerous turn onto a narrow bridge.

This is the area in question, all leading down to the Princess Margaret Bridge; the old TCH bridge across the Saint John.

Thankfully, now that the TCH is routed elsewhere, traffic levels are a lot lower, but that stretch of highway needs a LOT of work. It is still one of the 2 river crossings within City limits. On top of being a narrow bridge at the end, the highway at the north end of the bridge is a mess. By the roads, the traffic priority heads to the north east, away from the city since that is the original TCH routing.

But traffic volume is now distinctly north-west oriented, heading back into the city and heading to the Route 8 highway to the northern part of the province (not a divided highway but a nice modern route for the most part). Northbound traffic ends up doing a 270 degree turn, looping under the old highway and merging with traffic from the east. Then you can either merge onto the new Route 8, or you can get stuck at a traffic light to continue on into the city.

Southbound traffic is even worse. People coming from the west on the old highway hit a traffic light right at the end of the bridge, so traffic coming out of the city can come up the ramp and onto the bridge.

The Route 8 highway was finished about 4 years or so ago. And for whatever reason instead of having it link up directly with the Princess Margaret Bridge, they gave it a curve and had it link up with Union street 3/4 of a kilometer away, something that still boggles us. At least now, the city and province are considering fixing that interchange up and probably putting a 2-lane roundabout in that intersection. But they're only starting to do the studies and plans for it, so we're years away from seeing any significant changes there.

*Edit* Looking at Streetview, the traffic light is a fairly recent addition; it wasn't there in 2013, but it's been there since 2016 onward; I think it may have been put in 2014 or 15.

[swimmer_spe]

The cost of building to full freeway standards is expensive. The interchanges with the bridges make each exit much more expensive. Having turning lanes,, while not the best answer is a better one than leaving it a 2 lane.

[Franco401]

Originally Posted by Taeolas

The Route 8 highway was finished about 4 years or so ago. And for whatever reason instead of having it link up directly with the Princess Margaret Bridge, they gave it a curve and had it link up with Union street 3/4 of a kilometer away, something that still boggles us. At least now, the city and province are considering fixing that interchange up and probably putting a 2-lane roundabout in that intersection. But they're only starting to do the studies and plans for it, so we're years away from seeing any significant changes there.

*Edit* Looking at Streetview, the traffic light is a fairly recent addition; it wasn't there in 2013, but it's been there since 2016 onward; I think it may have been put in 2014 or 15.

The traffic light on the end of the bridge was put there in 2015 to deal with the massive increase in traffic due to the repairs on the Westmorland, and left there because it was so much safer.

Even though the long section Route 8 was completed in 2014, the section from the end of the bridge to Marysville is over 30 years old. The routing made sense when Route 2 still had to go downriver, and the city is only a few years away from building a roundabout or interchange at that junction to straighten the flow.



The southside interchange will continue to be a problem, however.

https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.9397745,-66.6342878,457a,35y,21.71h/data=!3m1!1e3

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

The cost of building to full freeway standards is expensive. The interchanges with the bridges make each exit much more expensive. Having turning lanes,, while not the best answer is a better one than leaving it a 2 lane.

But it can (and should) be done. NB is a small and poor province, yet we have over 800 km of divided highway built to full freeway standard. The only exception is three level railway crossings around Moncton (all little used spur lines that only see 1-3 shuttle trains of no more than six cars per week).

[ssiguy]

You guys don't realize how good you have it in the highways departments. Let me put this into perspective for you so you can visualize how bad the highway system is in BC...……….Essex County Ontario with 400,000 varying from 330 to 400 km from Toronto has more 6 lane freeway than ALL of BC.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

But it can (and should) be done. NB is a small and poor province, yet we have over 800 km of divided highway built to full freeway standard. The only exception is three level railway crossings around Moncton (all little used spur lines that only see 1-3 shuttle trains of no more than six cars per week).

To build a freeway through Northern Ontario would cost well over 10 Billion. if they left out most o the lower use exits and had them as level, we could probably half that cost.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

To build a freeway through Northern Ontario would cost well over 10 Billion. if they left out most o the lower use exits and had them as level, we could probably half that cost.

When they freewayize a road they always close down most exits. That's why they're classified as limited access roads. Not only would it be super expensive to build interchanges at every turn off it would be super unsafe to have people exiting and entering the freeway if the exits were too close together.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

When they freewayize a road they always close down most exits.

Someone tell that to AB roads (and SK, MB and BC...).

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

When they freewayize a road they always close down most exits. That's why they're classified as limited access roads. Not only would it be super expensive to build interchanges at every turn off it would be super unsafe to have people exiting and entering the freeway if the exits were too close together.

Originally Posted by milomilo

Someone tell that to AB roads (and SK, MB and BC...).

And NB and NS, and possibly QC too.....

[wave46]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

To build a freeway through Northern Ontario would cost well over 10 Billion. if they left out most o the lower use exits and had them as level, we could probably half that cost.

Considering $2 billion cost for Highway 69 from Parry Sound to Sudbury (145km), I would expect a full freeway to cost in the $20-30 billion range, presuming ~1800 km to be twinned from Arnprior, ON to Manitoba border, excluding 4-lane sections near Sudbury, Sault Ste. Marie and Thunder Bay.

Unforgiving terrain, lots of service roads required for property access.

I suggest 4-lane undivided with geometry improvements - prevents foolish overtaking maneuvers, allows more forgiveness during winter storm conditions (effectively becomes 2 lanes) at minimal cost due to access to province already owning right-of-way. Perhaps a center median on long stretches where no property access required.

Bypasses of built up areas can be factored in too.

There's a middle ground here with respect to roads.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by wave46

Considering $2 billion cost for Highway 69 from Parry Sound to Sudbury (145km), I would expect a full freeway to cost in the $20-30 billion range, presuming ~1800 km to be twinned from Arnprior, ON to Manitoba border, excluding 4-lane sections near Sudbury, Sault Ste. Marie and Thunder Bay.

Unforgiving terrain, lots of service roads required for property access.

I suggest 4-lane undivided with geometry improvements - prevents foolish overtaking maneuvers, allows more forgiveness during winter storm conditions (effectively becomes 2 lanes) at minimal cost due to access to province already owning right-of-way. Perhaps a center median on long stretches where no property access required.

Bypasses of built up areas can be factored in too.

There's a middle ground here with respect to roads.

4 lanes undivided would be a good start. Centre medians would also be good too. The reality is, Northern Ontario, and much of Canada does not need 401 style freeways.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Someone tell that to AB roads (and SK, MB and BC...).

Where has AB not done that?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Where has AB not done that?

Highway 1 between Calgary and the SK border.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

4 lanes undivided would be a good start. Centre medians would also be good too. The reality is, Northern Ontario, and much of Canada does not need 401 style freeways.

You can't have sections of your main highway network being below standard if you want to maximize the economic potential of the nation. If places like ND and MT can have Interstate highways then there's no reason why Canada can't do the same. And it's not like the U.S. doesn't have crazy terrain to deal with either. You'd think that after approximately 60 years we could at least have two limited access controlled freeways that stretch from one end of the country to the other. With today's "we don't deserve better" mentality in this nation we likely wouldn't even have railroads that go across the country.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

And NB and NS, and possibly QC too.....

There are no non-limited access point on NB 1 & 2, and the freeway portions of 11, 15 & 7. There are also no non-limited access points on the freeway portions of the 100 series highways in NS. I don't know what you're getting at.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Where has AB not done that?

Literally every road that isn't the 201 or 216, and Highway 1 west of Calgary. The QE2 is closest to being up to spec, but has multiple uncontrolled intersections, and that stupid interchange at Red Deer (being fixed). Plus cloverleafs.

All the other roads aren't proper freeways, just divided rural roads with dangerous uncontrolled left turns. Drive east on highway 1 and it's like that until Ontario. Every single bloody range road has kept its access to the highway, the very opposite of what a controlled access road should be. Similarly highway 43 up to GP, highway 16, highway 2 south to the border... all of them.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Literally every road that isn't the 201 or 216, and Highway 1 west of Calgary. The QE2 is closest to being up to spec, but has multiple uncontrolled intersections, and that stupid interchange at Red Deer (being fixed). Plus cloverleafs.

All the other roads aren't proper freeways, just divided rural roads with dangerous uncontrolled left turns. Drive east on highway 1 and it's like that until Ontario. Every single bloody range road has kept its access to the highway, the very opposite of what a controlled access road should be. Similarly highway 43 up to GP, highway 16, highway 2 south to the border... all of them.

The province doesn't consider any of those roads to be freeways--there is a difference between a freeway and a highway. They do have plans to turn big stretches of Highway 2 into a controlled access freeway but they can't do it all at once. They also have to fight with the people who think it's their God given right to have direct access off the road into their property and/or business. If it was up to AB Transportation that shit would be gone tomorrow.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

The province doesn't consider any of those roads to be freeways--there is a difference between a freeway and a highway. They do have plans to turn big stretches of Highway 2 into a controlled access freeway but they can't do it all at once. They also have to fight with the people who think it's their God given right to have direct access off the road into their property and/or business. If it was up to AB Transportation that shit would be gone tomorrow.

That's kind of what I mean - AB don't really care about any distinction between a freeway and any other road, they just upgrade everything piecemeal. Technically a 'highway' is pretty much any road that is open to the public, although I think conventionally the range roads and township roads in the prairies aren't classed as highways. So there is no actual difference between one of our 'freeways' and a two lane rural road. One is just a bigger version of the other.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Highway 1 between Calgary and the SK border.

For TCH between Arnprior and south of Lake Superior Shore, I suppose it’s okay to twin it and have at most 1 interchange per community and at most 4 per city.

For the rest (except around communities and cities), we copy US Route 1 in Rhode Island from E Beach Road (Charlestown) to Pond Street (Wakefield):

First, leave a wide median (0.5 ~ 1 km) between the 2 directions;
Then, RIRO at ALL little used intersections; note that if they’re too close, we need to combine access;
Now comes the tricky part: U-turn spots 1.5 ~ 2 km, with exit and merge lanes (hence the need for wide median), after the last RIRO in each direction for the next 10 km.

Let me know whether my suggestion makes sense.

In Canadian Shield, this might be the way to grade-separate intersections. Alternatively, we can always use the terrain to build interchanges (like ON 400 around Parry Sound).

In all seriousness, if US can have multiple interstates through the Rockies where population isn’t even that dense, I don’t see why not for Canada. Also, building through Canadian Shield still looks cheaper than through Interior BC.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

For TCH between Arnprior and south of Lake Superior Shore, I suppose it’s okay to twin it and have at most 1 interchange per community and at most 4 per city.

For the rest (except around communities and cities), we copy US Route 1 in Rhode Island from E Beach Road (Charlestown) to Pond Street (Wakefield):

First, leave a wide median (0.5 ~ 1 km) between the 2 directions;
Then, RIRO at ALL little used intersections; note that if they’re too close, we need to combine access;
Now comes the tricky part: U-turn spots 1.5 ~ 2 km, with exit and merge lanes (hence the need for wide median), after the last RIRO in each direction for the next 10 km.

Let me know whether my suggestion makes sense.

In Canadian Shield, this might be the way to grade-separate intersections. Alternatively, we can always use the terrain to build interchanges (like ON 400 around Parry Sound).

In all seriousness, if US can have multiple interstates through the Rockies where population isn’t even that dense, I don’t see why not for Canada. Also, building through Canadian Shield still looks cheaper than through Interior BC.

Money is the problem. We as a country are broke. We as a province are broke.

We simply cannot afford to upgrade 11 and 17 to full freeway.

Also, most of those interstates were built using war as a pretext.