Highways in Canada

[b31den]

There is a sign at a major intersection in Grande Prairie which has a sign for "west" to Alaska and "north" to Edmonton.

Alaska is over 2000km away and there are numerous other more relevant destinations before getting there.

Edmonton is obviously south, but for strange reasons you must drive north from the city for a bit before getting to the main 4-lane highway to go east and South.

There are signs on BC 97 for Whitehorse that show over 1500km

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

Neither does the 416

Of course.

[osirisboy]

That's like highway 40 in Quebec. It has a sign for Gatineau (or hull I can't remember) not Ottawa, and it doesn't even go there

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

That's like highway 40 in Quebec. It has a sign for Gatineau (or hull I can't remember) not Ottawa, and it doesn't even go there

It's actually signed "Ottawa-Gatineau" westbound in the Montreal area.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

Just as an aside, highway signage is more of a contentious issue then one might realize. I am quite good friends with a few people who work for the MTO in Ontario (I went to college for civil engineering), and I've had some good discussions about signage with them over the years.

I am quite good friends with the engineer who put up the sign for "Cochrane, Thunder Bay, and Rainy River" on Highway 11 just north of Barrie. The erection of that sign caused quite a stir, and even garnered a television news story from CTV News in Barrie. Do you have any idea how many letters the MTO got because of that sign? It's actually kind of crazy to think about...

The same engineer wanted to clean up the control cities at two Highway 12 interchanges along the 400. Orillia is still signed via Simcoe Road 16 (the downloaded alignment of Highway 12) for example. He received blowback from MTO's management when he went to make changes to the highway signage because apparently municipalities get upset when the MTO changes highway signs directing to them (even apparently if it is to improve the signage).

Where is that sign?

[sonysnob]

It's just north of Barrie:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@44.4379004,-...rFmZ_mh7TI3CrkOc8SDzQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

[Mister F]

The 416/7/417 signage is silly. The 416-401 combo is clearly the major route from Ottawa to Toronto and it's the way most drivers between the two cities go. Connecting Ottawa to Toronto and the rest of southern Ontario is the entire purpose of the 416. The 416 exit should refer to Toronto, the 7 exit should refer to Peterborough and the 417 at that interchange should refer to North Bay. None of this Arnprior nonsense.

I always thought Ontario's habit of using small towns as control cities was ridiculous. Forget Cornwall, Kingston, Pembroke, and Carleton Place. Stick to major destinations. East of Toronto the only control city should be Montreal and arguably Ottawa. It would make the system much easier to navigate.

[sonysnob]

^ Arguments over control cities are silly. There is no hard and fast way to sign any road, anywhere, not just Ontario. You know that, you just wrote that post above because you and I have argued in the past and you chose to be a dink.

You could ask ten people's opinions about which is the most appropriate control city, and get 11 different opinions.

The ascertain that there is something wrong with the way things are currently done is stupid. Sure there are lots of other possible ways to sign any highway, but there really is no way that is going to satisfy everyone's opinion, because the best way to sign a highway and a highway network is highly subjective.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

^ Arguments over control cities are silly. There is no hard and fast way to sign any road, anywhere, not just Ontario. You know that, you just wrote that post above because you and I have argued in the past and you chose to be a dink.

You could ask ten people's opinions about which is the most appropriate control city, and get 11 different opinions.

The ascertain that there is something wrong with the way things are currently done is stupid. Sure there are lots of other possible ways to sign any highway, but there really is no way that is going to satisfy everyone's opinion, because the best way to sign a highway and a highway network is highly subjective.

Perhaps the best thing that the ministry of transportation can do is to tell people to bring the newest map books with them whenever they travel afar.

[sonysnob]

Road signs are a navigational aid. One of many navigational aids. Other such aids include maps and GPSs and other guide books.

Any signage system that any jurisdiction creates is going to be biased a certain way, and is going to be filled with it's own idiosyncrasies. Any system. Rightly or wrongly, Ontario's system on the 401, as an example, is biased to communities that are spaced about 200km apart. For those who say that it's stupid that the 401 doesn't use Montreal as a control city east of Toronto, it's a pretty easy counter-argument to point out that exceedingly few vehicles leaving Toronto heading east are actually going to Montreal. It's hard to know exactly, but the number of motorists actually bound for (or stopping in) Kingston is probably comparable to that that is destined to Montreal.

If someone thinks that there is a highway system where the signs aren't biased some way or that doesn't have idiosyncrasies, it's probably just because that person doesn't actually know the system well enough to have observed those traits.

If there was a suitable control city that made sense that was in Quebec along Autoroute 20 leaving Montreal, the MTQ could have just as easily picked that instead of Toronto. But there isn't really a suitable control city west of Montreal in Quebec off A-20. Similarly there isn't really a suitable control city west of Phoenix in Arizona, and it's probably not by accident that the 400 and 69 in Ontario always use Toronto heading southerly despite using Barrie, Parry Sound and then Sudbury heading north.

Everyone who is arguing against me does some degree or research whey they travel in an unfamiliar area, and it's not unreasonable to expect those people who are unfamiliar with Ontario's highway network (or any other highway network) to have to do some degree of research to. The people who are arguing against me are probably more interested in proving me wrong than really considering the validity of their actual arguments.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Perhaps the best thing that the ministry of transportation can do is to tell people to bring the newest map books with them whenever they travel afar.

Or learn some basic facts about the geography of Canada before leaving the house.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Andy6

Or learn some basic facts about the geography of Canada before leaving the house.

I should have done that before I headed to Chicago. The offline google map failed me...

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Andy6

Or learn some basic facts about the geography of Canada before leaving the house.

Don't underestimate the stupidity of the travelling public.

They recently opened a new diverging interchange at Shediac for Highways 11 & 15. The signage isn't bad, and there is signage (twice) indicating that you should deviate right for Rte 15 to PEI. The signage just before the roads split however is more local, and indicates you should go right for Scoudouc and left for Shediac. This seems to cause great confusion for PEIslanders, and there are many stories of disoriented Islanders heading north on the 11 to Miramichi rather than 15 east to PEI as a result.

It's not even geographically ignorant Americans we're talking about here! You would think that your typical PEIslander should be able to find their way back home from Moncton........

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

The people who are arguing against me are probably more interested in proving me wrong than really considering the validity of their actual arguments.

Not at all in my case. I've pointed out the idiocy of the signage at the 417-416 junction many times before on here.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

If there was a suitable control city that made sense that was in Quebec along Autoroute 20 leaving Montreal, the MTQ could have just as easily picked that instead of Toronto. But there isn't really a suitable control city west of Montreal in Quebec off A-20. .

When I was a kid the westbound control city on A-20 coming out of Montreal was Dorion.

The westbound control city on A-40 out of Montreal was Vaudreuil.

It was illogical then and it would still be illogical now.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

^ Arguments over control cities are silly. There is no hard and fast way to sign any road, anywhere, not just Ontario. You know that, you just wrote that post above because you and I have argued in the past and you chose to be a dink.

You could ask ten people's opinions about which is the most appropriate control city, and get 11 different opinions.

The ascertain that there is something wrong with the way things are currently done is stupid. Sure there are lots of other possible ways to sign any highway, but there really is no way that is going to satisfy everyone's opinion, because the best way to sign a highway and a highway network is highly subjective.

There is no universe where, from the Bayshore area of Ottawa, Highway 7 is a better routing to Toronto than 416-417. It's not really a matter of opinion in this case, at least based on the needs of the vast majority of drivers which are to get from point A to point B as quickly and safely as possible.

Montreal-Quebec City, which can be driven either via A-20 (south shore) or A-40 (north shore), is a case where it's a matter of opinion as to which is the preferable routing.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

diction creates is going to be biased a certain way, and is going to be filled with it's own idiosyncrasies. Any system. Rightly or wrongly, Ontario's system on the 401, as an example, is biased to communities that are spaced about 200km apart. For those who say that it's stupid that the 401 doesn't use Montreal as a control city east of Toronto, it's a pretty easy counter-argument to point out that exceedingly few vehicles leaving Toronto heading east are actually going to Montreal. It's hard to know exactly, but the number of motorists actually bound for (or stopping in) Kingston is probably comparable to that that is destined to Montreal.
.

Those signs aren't primarily for locals or map geeks, they're for people who have little to no idea where they are going. Those people do exist. Out of all the people on the 401 who are going to be driving eastbound out of Toronto but are shaky on geography or even road geek culture, the largest share will be bound for either Montreal or Ottawa.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Acajack

There is no universe where, from the Bayshore area of Ottawa, Highway 7 is a better routing to Toronto than 416-417. It's not really a matter of opinion in this case, at least based on the needs of the vast majority of drivers which are to get from point A to point B as quickly and safely as possible.

Montreal-Quebec City, which can be driven either via A-20 (south shore) or A-40 (north shore), is a case where it's a matter of opinion as to which is the preferable routing.

(1) If Highway 7 gets twinned and grade-separated between Peterborough and Madoc (Centre Hastings) and between Tay (slightly west of Perth) and Carleton Place, though, it might be a different story. It’s not exactly a pipe-dream there.

(2) If A30 gets extended to Bécancour, there’s now a 3rd option. This one may be more of a pipe-dream though.

[sonysnob]

Just one more thing about signage. I think people forget when they argue on the internet that a highway sign has to convey information to motorists that are blowing by the sign at 120 km/h. There is a very finite amount of information that can be conveyed to a motorist who is traveling at that speed. Highway designers have to be really cognizant about what information they actually give to drivers. It's really really easy to put far too much information on a sign, and overload .

For example, this is a terrible sign assembly:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@36.1680177,-...CBA!2e0!5s20150301T000000!7i13312!8i6656
There is way too much information conveyed on that sign for a driver to read all of it and still pay attention to the road in front of them.

Just as another example, it's common in Quebec for lane assignment signage (signs with downward pointing arrows over lanes) to be split up across several different overhead gantries. Long street and community names are common in Quebec, so for example, on A-20 approaching the A-25 interchange, the MTQ has chosen not to try to sign all of the lanes at once. You can see what I mean below:

Sign 1, left two lanes and right lane:


Sign 2, two right lanes:


Sign 3, left three lanes:


Sign 4, two right lanes:


Sign 5, two right lanes:


There's a sixth sign as well, but I don't have a photo of it handy, but you get my drift. That's a solution to information overload, but it's flawed in of itself, it would probably be more clear to try and sign at least four lanes at least once, but I'm not sure it was practical in this application.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

If Highway 7 gets twinned and grade-separated between Peterborough and Madoc (Centre Hastings) and between Tay (slightly west of Perth) and Carleton Place, though, it might be a different story. It’s not exactly a pipe-dream there.

Twinning Highway 7 as the main route from Ottawa to Toronto wouldn't have been a bad idea. Though obviously the 416 was chosen due to being the lowest hanging fruit, taking advantage of a shorter route (fewer $$$) via the 401 that it already there. Even if not as direct.