Highways in Canada

[wave46]

Originally Posted by lio45

So, a tractor-trailer leaving Toronto for Thunder Bay will always pass through Gravenhurst and North Bay, and never through Parry Sound and Sudbury? I guess that's the answer I was looking for then

Typically yes (not always though), unless they go through the US.

The terrain along the majority of highway 11 is fairly subdued, aside from the North Bay-New Liskeard and Beardmore to Nipigon stretches. It's less prone to weather off Lake Superior. There's less volume of traffic too.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lio45

You still haven't answered your own question though which one is superior, 11 or 17?

11 seems straighter, and if most of the trans-Northern-Ontario traffic volume originated from North Bay and points east, then that's probably the best choice, but 17 is shorter, and is already partially freeway on a good section, both huge pros for it.

Basically, you made me curious now...

Highway 11 is not an expressway but it is four lanes divided all the way north to North Bay. There are still two lane sections on the highway to Sudbury from Toronto.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by wave46

Typically yes (not always though), unless they go through the US.

The terrain along the majority of highway 11 is fairly subdued, aside from the North Bay-New Liskeard and Beardmore to Nipigon stretches. It's less prone to weather off Lake Superior. There's less volume of traffic too.

Actually, if we're trying to find the superior route, then that should be a pro, not a con. (Indicating it _IS_ the superior path.)

"Oh, nobody takes Highway 17 anymore, it's too crowded"

[Dengler Avenue]

Bien la 17 entre North Bay et Sault Sainte Marie peut être achalandée de temps à temps, donc il y avait déjà une planification (préliminaire) de son élargissement.

Quant à la 11 vers Cochrane, après les 3 cantons (New Liskeard, Haileybury, Temiskaming Shores), elle est effectivement peu achalandée.

Édit: On peut trouver les DJAM <débit journalier annuel moyen> des routes ontariennes jusqu'à la fin de 2016 là: http://www.raqsa.mto.gov.on.ca/techpubs/TrafficVolumes.nsf/tvweb. C'est ma source d'information.

(Peut-être mon français est excellent quand on parle des route et des autoroutes*, mais si l'on parle des autres choses, c'est une différente histoire.)

* De plus, les 2 branches de la route Transcanadienne traversent les régions bilingues en Ontario.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by lio45

Believe it or not, I had that same pun in mind too (something like: obviously 17 is the "Superior" route, 11 being the "Interior" route)

"It's hard to say"?!? But your sig says the opposite - that anyone who is familiar with both paths will immediately know that there's one that's the best one.

I don't have enough of an urge to know the answer to justify taking my car/pickup and trailer to Thunder Bay for no reason then come back (via the other route), so I'm asking someone who presumably did

As the one referred here, I will say that 17 north of SSM should not be divided. Highway 11 is a flatter route once you get north of the Tri Towns. Highway 11 should be twinned before twinning 17.

[Dengler Avenue]

I was gonna keep quiet the entire time but my signature (which was meant to be a self-reminder) caught lio45's attention.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by lio45

Actually, if we're trying to find the superior route, then that should be a pro, not a con. (Indicating it _IS_ the superior path.)

"Oh, nobody takes Highway 17 anymore, it's too crowded"

I thought I was listing it as a pro.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

As the one referred here, I will say that 17 north of SSM should not be divided. Highway 11 is a flatter route once you get north of the Tri Towns. Highway 11 should be twinned before twinning 17.

That's the rub. There's parts of both highways that might justify twinning but neither really justifies it for the full length.

If there was just one route across the country, I'd be more supportive. The closest we have to that is the section of 17 between Thunder Bay and Manitoba. Even then, there is an alternate route for most of the way.

[Dengler Avenue]

Or we can just twin 11 in NEO and 17 in NWO while pretending that the missing link between Schreiber and SSM is still missing.

I love how I’ve almost always caused these spillover conversations.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Or we can just twin 11 in NEO and 17 in NWO while pretending that the missing link between Schreiber and SSM is still missing.

Why are we twinning these highways again? I'm looking at AADT data for 11 and i'm looking at a road with a steady base of 3,000-5,000 AADT for most of its length north of North Bay (and sub 1,000 for nearly 160km around Quetico Provincial Park).

Even the 17 from Manitoba to Sudbury lacks AADT over 10,000 and floats around 1,000-3,000 for most of its length.

What's the Ontario AADT cutoff to warrant twinning? 10,000? 8,000?

[Dengler Avenue]

(1) It’s just largely a patriotic thing at this point. Also correction: it’s 17 between MB/ON and Nipigon, then 11 between Nipigon and N Bay, then 17 again.

(2) 17 near 69 actually hits 12,800 from what I remember. Also it’s busy through N Bay and around Renfrew. (Aren’t you from Ottawa? I thought you’d know. )

(3) Well, supposedly 17K but in practice nobody follows that guideline, let’s be real here.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Why are we twinning these highways again? I'm looking at AADT data for 11 and i'm looking at a road with a steady base of 3,000-5,000 AADT for most of its length north of North Bay (and sub 1,000 for nearly 160km around Quetico Provincial Park).

Even the 17 from Manitoba to Sudbury lacks AADT over 10,000 and floats around 1,000-3,000 for most of its length.

What's the Ontario AADT cutoff to warrant twinning? 10,000? 8,000?

We're not - at least the Ontario government isn't and has no plans to, aside from a small section near Renfew, Thunder Bay-Nipigon and perhaps a small section near Manitoba.

There's minimal economic justification relative to other uses of tax money, especially since we'd have to borrow it.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

(1) It’s just largely a patriotic thing at this point.

Ok.

Originally Posted by wave46

We're not - at least the Ontario government isn't and has no plans to, aside from a small section near Renfew, Thunder Bay-Nipigon and perhaps a small section near Manitoba.

That seems fine enough.

Originally Posted by wave46

There's minimal economic justification relative to other uses of tax money, especially since we'd have to borrow it.

That was my assumption. Seems like some people fetishize the twinning of highways just because they can be twinned.

[Dengler Avenue]

Really, my apologies that I’ve been giving SSP-er’s a false impression over this matter.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Seems like some people fetishize the twinning of highways just because they can be twinned.

It's a discussion board, so I don't mind some speculation on infrastructure projects of a grand scale. It is kind of neato to speculate on 'what-if' sometimes.

I just keep reality in mind when it's all said and done.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Why are we twinning these highways again? I'm looking at AADT data for 11 and i'm looking at a road with a steady base of 3,000-5,000 AADT for most of its length north of North Bay (and sub 1,000 for nearly 160km around Quetico Provincial Park).

Even the 17 from Manitoba to Sudbury lacks AADT over 10,000 and floats around 1,000-3,000 for most of its length.

What's the Ontario AADT cutoff to warrant twinning? 10,000? 8,000?

In a word: Safety

Lets for a moment ignore the amount of traffic, but instead, think of what the traffic is made of. Both 11 and 17 have a large amount of truck traffic crossing it. If your goods came from one side or the other, and didn't arrive by rail, it came on one of these highways.

Every snowstorm, an accident involving a transport truck seems to close the highway every time. While in other parts of the province, this is a minor inconvenience, in NEO, this can cause detours of over 4 hours. Most areas, there really is no alternative routes.


AADT is not the be all and end all for reasons to twin a highway.

[Dengler Avenue]

And that’s why ON-11 was twinned between Gravenhurst and North Bay when the top AADT was ~4000 (lack of EDR), while a much more heavily travelled ON-9 (AADT: 16,700) between Orangeville and Newmarket has been left as is (many EDR’s) with no plan whatsoever to make amends.

Ps: Did I mention ON-9 through Schoenberg is dangerous? There’s been a least a fatality each year.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by wave46

I thought I was listing it as a pro.

No, you clearly listed it ("traffic") as a con.

i.e. you said the pros of 11 compared to 17 were:
-subdued terrain
-less prone to lake weather effects
-less traffic

(My apologies if I misunderstood you, but that seems pretty clear to me...)

However, to be fair, traffic can be a con, it depends on context. If no one takes that road (because 11 is better) but it's jam-packed with locals near Sault Ste Marie, then yeah, that's a con.

But if there's more through traffic between NWO and Southern Ontario on the 17 than on the 11, that's a pro for 17 for someone like me who is wondering which one to take (it indicates it's the better route).

[wave46]

Originally Posted by lio45

No, you clearly listed it ("traffic") as a con.

i.e. you said the pros of 11 compared to 17 were:
-subdued terrain
-less prone to lake weather effects
-less traffic

(My apologies if I misunderstood you, but that seems pretty clear to me...)

However, to be fair, traffic can be a con, it depends on context. If no one takes that road (because 11 is better) but it's jam-packed with locals near Sault Ste Marie, then yeah, that's a con.

But if there's more through traffic between NWO and Southern Ontario on the 17 than on the 11, that's a pro for 17 for someone like me who is wondering which one to take (it indicates it's the better route).

My post was in regards to the specific question about a tractor-trailer.

Less traffic would be a pro for them. They hate being mixed in with high volumes of cars, simply because ordinary drivers (i.e. you and me) really don't take into account how much more room large vehicles need.

I may have been unclear in my reply.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by wave46

We're not - at least the Ontario government isn't and has no plans to, aside from a small section near Renfew, Thunder Bay-Nipigon and perhaps a small section near Manitoba.

There's minimal economic justification relative to other uses of tax money, especially since we'd have to borrow it.

They’re already starting on the Kenora to Manitoba section. The whole point is economic development. How do you get Torontonians who think nothing of a vacation in PEI, the Laurentians or Quebec City to visit equally close places in their own province like the Sault or Thunder Bay? How do you get businesses established up there with slow and dangerous highway connections to their Canadian markets? One reason that the numbers are low is the lack of divided highways.