TCH east of Nipigon (La route transcanadienne à l'est de Nipigon)

[Dengler Avenue]

A month? You sure live like a nomad.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

A month? You sure live like a nomad.

Maybe tomorrow, I'll wanna settle down....

[Dengler Avenue]

You will know by winter, when TCH is closed semi-regularly. In the meantime, (from all the reports I've been able to pull), watch out for that bad spot on 17 between McKerrow and Lorne west of the bridge that leads into Nairn Centre. A lot of nasty accidents happened there.

[Dengler Avenue]

Curious question: Does anyone know how wide the ROW of Highway 17 is through CFB Petawawa? I wanna see if it’s possible to fit both a four-lane freeway and its service road through there. I still can’t believe that there’s no alternative roads between Petawawa and Chalk River.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Curious question: Does anyone know how wide the ROW of Highway 17 is through CFB Petawawa? I wanna see if it’s possible to fit both a four-lane freeway and its service road through there. I still can’t believe that there’s no alternative roads between Petawawa and Chalk River.

https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.9411503,-77.350073,2115m/data=!3m1!1e3

I'd say not much. Having said that of all the property owners to deal with, DND likely isn't that bad.

[Dengler Avenue]

That’s surprising. I’d think that, if anything, these guys will be pickier. As for the ROW, IMO, as long as it’s 27.6 - 30 meters wide, it’s possible to fit both a 4-lane freeway and a service road in.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

That’s surprising. I’d think that, if anything, these guys will be pickier. As for the ROW, IMO, as long as it’s 27.6 - 30 meters wide, it’s possible to fit both a 4-lane freeway and a service road in.

They could just reroute it to the outside of the base.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

They could just reroute it to the outside of the base.

I checked. The terrain will be very rough and the route very circuitous.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I checked. The terrain will be very rough and the route very circuitous.

You know what you do with the rock you are blasting through? Use it to build the road bed.....

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

You know what you do with the rock you are blasting through? Use it to build the road bed.....

So that’s a thing, after all. In that case, there’s definitely basis for twinning 17 even along Lake Superior Shore. In fact, we can even use those rocks to eliminate every slope greater than 5%.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

So that’s a thing, after all. In that case, there’s definitely basis for twinning 17 even along Lake Superior Shore. In fact, we can even use those rocks to eliminate every slope greater than 5%.

Actually, yes you couldd, however, please make a new section as the section between SSM and Wawa is a beautiful drive.

Oh, and, here is something wonderful:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/h...qutommZHTphyvM2DlFQ6i8Tu2HcIXBgc6FRkqAvg

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Actually, yes you couldd, however, please make a new section as the section between SSM and Wawa is a beautiful drive.

Oh, and, here is something wonderful:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/h...qutommZHTphyvM2DlFQ6i8Tu2HcIXBgc6FRkqAvg

(1) No need to worry. The three crazy curves through Lake Superior Park (Montreal River Harbour, Agawa Bay, ~ 20 km south of Michicoten) will be retained as service roads (Read: EDR).

(2) I shared that link in your thread too~~

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Curious question: Does anyone know how wide the ROW of Highway 17 is through CFB Petawawa? I wanna see if it’s possible to fit both a four-lane freeway and its service road through there. I still can’t believe that there’s no alternative roads between Petawawa and Chalk River.

I had read something quite a long time ago about the highway being widened through the CFB Petawawa section. I can't remember if it was an MTO article or a media article interviewing the MTO. I think it was back in the 1990s and was a look at 4-laning (or extending the 417) to just West of Deep River.

I remember it saying that the section of Hwy 17 from the Pembroke by-pass to where it crosses the Chalk River would not be a difficult part for expansion because there is little private property and the ROW is available. There was something about the the base not being a big issue either and that federal dollars could be sought to build highway overpasses over the military road crossings.

I've driven that section many times and there are fences on each side of the highway with warning signs on them. They are not that close to the road and there is clearly lots of room to build within. There also used to be a railroad track on that section that no longer exists which means that expansion could happen on either side.

[Dengler Avenue]

I’ve read an article about TCH Chalk River Bypass too but I can’t find it anymore...

[sonysnob]

The MTO has at least conceptualized widening Hwy 17/417 as far west as Rolphton. I don't think the province owns any right of way west of Petawawa, however, it's not impossible a right of way has been designated as a controlled access highway but not owned.

For example, the MTO has designated, but does not own the land for a bypass of Aylmer in Southwestern Ontario for Highway 3. Imagine, despite the fact that the province doesn't in fact own the land, the province has the authority to dictate what uses the existing land owner can undertake on their land. The province has some crazy legal powers under the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act.

[Dengler Avenue]

So North Bay Bypass is like that too, eh?

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

So North Bay Bypass is like that too, eh?

The last I've heard is that the MTO is still very slowly buying up properties but isn't in a rush to move the highway.

The provincial government can force any property (except the federal government owned property I think) to be expropriated for the purposes of road expansion. I don't know the laws but I've read that there are timelines that have to be followed and property owners are supposed to be properly compensated at a fair market value.

[Dengler Avenue]

Cobden though... The most obvious route for a bypass should be to the west of the current alignment but it’s slated to be on the other side of the lake. If acquisition weren’t an issue, why wasn’t the most obvious route chosen?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Loco101

The last I've heard is that the MTO is still very slowly buying up properties but isn't in a rush to move the highway.

The provincial government can force any property (except the federal government owned property I think) to be expropriated for the purposes of road expansion. I don't know the laws but I've read that there are timelines that have to be followed and property owners are supposed to be properly compensated at a fair market value.

A family friend in North Bay lives in a house on the path of the new Bypass. They have been told that if they sell, the MTO will be buying it for x amount.

[Dengler Avenue]

It's been almost 2 years. Are they still holding out? If yes, is it because MTO refuses to buy it at a higher price??