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

[vid]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

He is talking about the design speed of a road.

Yes, basically. They don't design the roads to a high enough standard for higher speed limits under the current provincial laws because there isn't the volume for it and clearing the rocks and swamps to build that way costs more.

But still, I am pretty sure the reason the upgrades on 11/17 east of Thunder Bay are still 90km/h is because they're split into a couple segments, and those segments can't be more than 90km/h. Regardless, most traffic is going over 110 on them anyway and police don't seem to eager to ticket them until they're going above that. When you're doing 100 and the cops are passing you because you're going to slow for them, that itself indicates their position on the speed limits along 11/17!

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by wave46

I drive highway 17 between North Bay and Sudbury frequently.

Re: the 80km/h limit near North Bay and Sturgeon Falls - it's really a non-issue.

I've (anecdotally) observed that people from Cache Bay don't really have the concept of 'merging' in their minds - more like figuring out that, yes, there is traffic moving at highway speeds and that, yes, they may have to join this flow smoothly when the merge lane runs out. They then proceed to panic and stop in the merge lane until traffic clears.

On the outskirts of North Bay, there's multiple businesses and roads that are in the area, so I could see the issue. I think there's been some collisions there in the past few years, so I could see the justification.

Re: life in Northern Ontario. Relative to the northern rural regions in other provinces, we have it pretty good. You're not finding 4-lane highways up to Prince George, BC or Thompson, MB.

We get all sorts of nice goodies too:
Northern Energy Credit
Northern Travel Grant for healthcare
Half-price vehicle registration,
The 400 to Sudbury *(soonish!) and 11 to North Bay
The dozens of uncrowded small hospitals (excluding the zoos that are Health Sciences North and Thunder Bay Regional Health Centre)
Affordable home prices
Living in one of the lowest-taxed jurisdictions in Canada (Ontario)

Sure, if you live in the backwoods of the Northwest, you can be isolated and have a set of problems that the Province doesn't address well - I understand and empathize with that. It is funny to hear the complaining of the residents of North Bay or wherever acting as if they're spurned by the province, while they get perks the residents of Windsor (farther away from Toronto!) would love to have. Maybe I'm a glass-half full guy, but we have it good up here - we'd do well to appreciate what we have.

Toronto to Windsor is: 368km.
Toronto to Sudbury is: 400km.
Toronto to Windsor is: 356km

So, North Bay is 12 km closer, but Sudbury is 32km further.

I do not disagree that we don't have it good, because we in some aspects do. However, those that we really don't have it good in, seem to be those that matter.

Fun fact. Sudbury had 3 hospitals. When they closed the other 2 and expanded the current one, they did not keep the same number of beds in the city. The number is lower now. This is just one of the many things that the government does that does not make sense that pisses a lot of people off. It is easier to see here because we have so little and they seem to make things worse.

Originally Posted by vid

Yes, basically. They don't design the roads to a high enough standard for higher speed limits under the current provincial laws because there isn't the volume for it and clearing the rocks and swamps to build that way costs more.

But still, I am pretty sure the reason the upgrades on 11/17 east of Thunder Bay are still 90km/h is because they're split into a couple segments, and those segments can't be more than 90km/h. Regardless, most traffic is going over 110 on them anyway and police don't seem to eager to ticket them until they're going above that. When you're doing 100 and the cops are passing you because you're going to slow for them, that itself indicates their position on the speed limits along 11/17!

110 vs 120+ I know, it is 10 less/more km per hour, but it still is silly.

Realize, we live in a world where places like AB have speed limits on their rural dirt roads of 100km/hr.
We also live in a world where BC has highways at 120km/hr.
And a wonderful world where in Germany, they have no speed limits on some 4 lane highways.
Ontario is "testing" a speed limit off 110 km/hr where most other provinces have them on their 4 lane divided highways.

So, lowering a speed limit is a lazy way to have less enforcement. If it is a bad area, start ticketing for 5 over. Word will get around that you do the speed limit or it'll cost you.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Toronto to Windsor is: 368km.
Toronto to Sudbury is: 400km.
Toronto to Windsor is: 356km

So, North Bay is 12 km closer, but Sudbury is 32km further.

I do not disagree that we don't have it good, because we in some aspects do. However, those that we really don't have it good in, seem to be those that matter.

Fun fact. Sudbury had 3 hospitals. When they closed the other 2 and expanded the current one, they did not keep the same number of beds in the city. The number is lower now. This is just one of the many things that the government does that does not make sense that pisses a lot of people off. It is easier to see here because we have so little and they seem to make things worse.

Yes, I lived in Sudbury when they amalgamated the hospitals, hence my comment of "excluding". Ottawa had some pretty major amalgamating as well.

That's a problem province-wide - large metropolitan hospitals don't have the capacity required, while little hospitals have lots of capacity to spare. So, places like Hearst run at half-capacity, while Health Sciences North is at 115% capacity.

So, if you're outside of Sudbury or Thunder Bay in northern Ontario, there's rooms to spare, which was my point. Hospitals in Toronto and Ottawa are overloaded too - the ER wait times in those cities are often >12 hrs.

That's not a north vs. south issue, it's a rural vs. metro one. Dozens of small hospitals are hugely inefficient. In the north, there's 2 major metro hospitals (HSN and Thunder Bay), 3 large regional ones (North Bay, SSM and Timmins) and probably 20+ small ones. All for a population of less than Mississauga.

This is why I oppose a big 4-lane project. Spend the billions of dollars on upgrading hospitals in the big cities (who really need it!) before building an underused freeway across the boonies.

Anyway, I digress - this is a thread about the Trans-Canada.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by wave46

Yes, I lived in Sudbury when they amalgamated the hospitals, hence my comment of "excluding". Ottawa had some pretty major amalgamating as well.

That's a problem province-wide - large metropolitan hospitals don't have the capacity required, while little hospitals have lots of capacity to spare. So, places like Hearst run at half-capacity, while Health Sciences North is at 115% capacity.

So, if you're outside of Sudbury or Thunder Bay in northern Ontario, there's rooms to spare, which was my point. Hospitals in Toronto and Ottawa are overloaded too - the ER wait times in those cities are often >12 hrs.

That's not a north vs. south issue, it's a rural vs. metro one. Dozens of small hospitals are hugely inefficient. In the north, there's 2 major metro hospitals (HSN and Thunder Bay), 3 large regional ones (North Bay, SSM and Timmins) and probably 20+ small ones. All for a population of less than Mississauga.

This is why I oppose a big 4-lane project. Spend the billions of dollars on upgrading hospitals in the big cities (who really need it!) before building an underused freeway across the boonies.

Anyway, I digress - this is a thread about the Trans-Canada.

This is a thread about a highway that in our province, it is the one with the largest gap between freeways. Once you hit the MB border, you are on a freeway to BC. Conversely, there is only about 100-200 km of a total gap on the mainland going east. All of the gap in Ontario are in lower density areas that are mainly in Northern Ontario. It is one of the many ways our provincial government neglects us.
Lowering a speed limit, is neglecting us.
Not raising the speed limit when the road has been upgraded is neglecting us.
Building a bridge that cannot take our winters and subsequently is closed, cutting off cross Canada traffic is neglecting us.

So, arguing what we have good is irrelevant. When a snowfall can close 11, 144, and 17 at the same time, cutting off traffic flow for close to 24 hours, who cares that my house is cheap, or that I don't pay for parking, or my sticker is half price, when I cannot safely travel where I live.

An ice storm is forecast for today. Guaranteed 11, 144 and 17 will close, possibly for upwards of 24 hours or more. When was the last time all roads leading to Toronto, or Ottawa were closed? By not properly plowing our highways, we are being neglected. It is the North. We get snow, and lots of it. The roads should be plowed so frequently that people get pissed off always being stuck behind a plow. But they would rather spend the money where more voters live.

[sonysnob]

^ But that's a selective argument too.

First of all, Ontario is the only province in Canada where the major east-west population axis doesn't follow the Trans-Canada. It follows Highway 2 and the 401.

There are also few places west of Manitoba that are as remote as parts of northern Ontario. Yes, I wouldn't call the near north between Sudbury and North Bay remote, but, it's not irrelevant that almost nobody lives in the 700km between Sault Ste. Marie and Thunder Bay. And again, almost nobody lives on Hwy 17 between Thunder Bay and Dryden. It's not outrageous that the province has generally spent the money where people actually live.

Four laning northern highways isn't going to protect them from weather either. Sure, there may be less closures due to collisions and such, but the overwhelming reason that highways get closed is because of snow. It still snows on a 400-series highway. It's not rare for the 402 east of Sarnia to be closed for incliment weather. Those people get stranded to. It's just that those people don't live in northern Ontario, so you either don't know that they are stranded, or because they had to pay full price for their renewal sticker, you simply don't care.

The least busy four-lane highways are consistently in the north. There are no sections of four-lane provincial highway in southern Ontario that carry less traffic than either Hwy 69 or Hwy 11. I get that you want more four-lane highways (and I actually would prioritize some segments of 17 east and west of Sudbury), but ignoring the above facts in order to justify highway twinning is cherry picking your argument.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

This is a thread about a highway that in our province, it is the one with the largest gap between freeways. Once you hit the MB border, you are on a freeway to BC. Conversely, there is only about 100-200 km of a total gap on the mainland going east. All of the gap in Ontario are in lower density areas that are mainly in Northern Ontario. It is one of the many ways our provincial government neglects us.
Lowering a speed limit, is neglecting us.
Not raising the speed limit when the road has been upgraded is neglecting us.
Building a bridge that cannot take our winters and subsequently is closed, cutting off cross Canada traffic is neglecting us.

So, arguing what we have good is irrelevant. When a snowfall can close 11, 144, and 17 at the same time, cutting off traffic flow for close to 24 hours, who cares that my house is cheap, or that I don't pay for parking, or my sticker is half price, when I cannot safely travel where I live.

An ice storm is forecast for today. Guaranteed 11, 144 and 17 will close, possibly for upwards of 24 hours or more. When was the last time all roads leading to Toronto, or Ottawa were closed? By not properly plowing our highways, we are being neglected. It is the North. We get snow, and lots of it. The roads should be plowed so frequently that people get pissed off always being stuck behind a plow. But they would rather spend the money where more voters live.

I think we'll have to disagree then.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

^ But that's a selective argument too.

First of all, Ontario is the only province in Canada where the major east-west population axis doesn't follow the Trans-Canada. It follows Highway 2 and the 401.

There are also few places west of Manitoba that are as remote as parts of northern Ontario. Yes, I wouldn't call the near north between Sudbury and North Bay remote, but, it's not irrelevant that almost nobody lives in the 700km between Sault Ste. Marie and Thunder Bay. And again, almost nobody lives on Hwy 17 between Thunder Bay and Dryden. It's not outrageous that the province has generally spent the money where people actually live.

This is not about where we live. This is about the goods we ship throughout our country. The fact that a bridge failed causing all east/west truck traffic to come to a halt while a solution was figured out shows that the government does not have the forethought to do things right.

There is a bridge across the Spanish River on highway 17 that I drive across to get to/from work. If that bridge ever collapsed or was otherwise unusable for any period of time, the detour from either side to the other would be over 8 hours! This is not as uncommon as you might think. So, an area that isn't remote could soon become very remote.

Originally Posted by sonysnob

Four laning northern highways isn't going to protect them from weather either. Sure, there may be less closures due to collisions and such, but the overwhelming reason that highways get closed is because of snow. It still snows on a 400-series highway. It's not rare for the 402 east of Sarnia to be closed for incliment weather. Those people get stranded to. It's just that those people don't live in northern Ontario, so you either don't know that they are stranded, or because they had to pay full price for their renewal sticker, you simply don't care.

One of the biggest reason for crashes are head on collisions. Whether it be due to fog, snow, rain, etc, a divided highway would prevent those crashes. That is what I am trying to prevent. When I have to go to work, as calling in sick is really not a good thing, want to know someone isn't crossing the line. I want to know I can see, even at a slower speed that I won't cross that line.

As far as sticker price - have one price, regardless of where you live, if that means that Northern Ontario won't be an after thought.

Originally Posted by sonysnob

The least busy four-lane highways are consistently in the north. There are no sections of four-lane provincial highway in southern Ontario that carry less traffic than either Hwy 69 or Hwy 11. I get that you want more four-lane highways (and I actually would prioritize some segments of 17 east and west of Sudbury), but ignoring the above facts in order to justify highway twinning is cherry picking your argument.

There are more reasons for dividing a highway than just traffic volumes. If you can ignore those, than I can ignore traffic volumes too.

[Dengler Avenue]

I sort of understand swimmer_spe’s view. Commuting between Denlou and Espanola, if the stretch of 17 between McKerrow and Nairn Centre is closed for any reason, he has to forego the shift. In fact, I’ve always wondered if you people who live in Northern Ontario risk getting fired for not showing up at work because of road closure.
(Edit: Micheal you beat me to it. )

For that part, I’m happy that most of us agree that twinning should happen around Sudbury. I’m guessing from turnoff to Espanola to Warren-Markstay?
I’ll also add to the list east and west of North Bay, from Sturgeon Falls to Corbeil (commuter traffic) then in and out of T Bay, from Shabaqua Corners to Nipigon (commuter traffic and redundancy of routes). For K town, hmm, this is a good one. I suggest extending Longbow Lake Road to Highway 71 to improve redundancy on the east end. On the west side, I propose linking up as many cottage roads as possible for EDR.

I also think that fixing healthcare and making it more efficient is a fair precondition for mega highway projects, in addition to FN consultations, though.

For the record, I think Northern Ontario is really where twinning takes into account more than just AADT though. In GTA, we have a few highways with AADT > 17K but MTO doesn’t care. As for the 407 Extension, swimmer_spe you should sit through 401 rush hour traffic every now and then to see why it’s useful. Like I said, even 412 is useless because 401’s still bad east of that. Obviously, with Oshawa voting NDP most of the time, of course the provincial government ain’t removing the tolls any time soon.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I sort of understand swimmer_spe’s view. Commuting between Denlou and Espanola, if the stretch of 17 between McKerrow and Nairn Centre is closed for any reason, he has to forego the shift. In fact, I’ve always wondered if you people who live in Northern Ontario risk getting fired for not showing up at work because of road closure.
For that part, I’m happy that most of us agree that twinning should happen around Sudbury. I’m guessing from turnoff to Espanola to Warren-Markstay?
I’ll also add to the list east and west of North Bay, from Sturgeon Falls to Corbeil (commuter traffic) then in and out of T Bay, from Shabaqua Corners to Nipigon (commuter traffic and redundancy of routes). For K town, hmm, this is a good one. I suggest extending Longbow Lake Road to Highway 71 to improve redundancy on the east end. On the west side, I propose linking up as many cottage roads as possible for EDR.

I also think that fixing healthcare and making it more efficient is a fair precondition for mega highway projects, in addition to FN consultations, though.

I talked to my supervisor what I am supposed to do if the highway is closed. Call and wait, or call, and tell them you are not coming in.They will call others in as needed.

I think that what they should o is start now, and add 20km sections on all existing 4 lane sections. Kinda like what is being done on 69, sort of. If all ends of 4 laning had sections under construction, eventually things would be better.

I do think that between SSM and North Bay should be done as soon as possible. And, with my way,, it could be done faster. I would even suggest bypasses of Sturgeon Falls, Verner, Hagar, and Blind River be built at the same time. Then, it is just filling in the gaps.

As far as near Nipigon, extend 585 over the river to Highway 11. That would mean there would be an all Canadian alternate detour to 11/17.

[Dengler Avenue]

What does “call and wait” mean? Waiting for the highway to be reopened?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

For the record, I think Northern Ontario is really where twinning takes into account more than just AADT though. In GTA, we have a few highways with AADT > 17K but MTO doesn’t care. As for the 407 Extension, swimmer_spe you should sit through 401 rush hour traffic every now and then to see why it’s useful. Like I said, even 412 is useless because 401’s still bad east of that. Obviously, with Oshawa voting NDP most of the time, of course the provincial government ain’t removing the tolls any time soon.

Fun fact... the 401 has the most thru lanes in Canada at 18 lanes. In fact, for a few years, it was the widest in the world, and then China beat us. Then the USA beat us with 26 lanes.

Building more lanes down south is not a solution either. I am not suggesting up here have more than 4-6 lanes.

Removing tolls will not ease congestion, quite the opposite.

[sonysnob]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

This is not about where we live. This is about the goods we ship throughout our country. The fact that a bridge failed causing all east/west truck traffic to come to a halt while a solution was figured out shows that the government does not have the forethought to do things right.

There is a bridge across the Spanish River on highway 17 that I drive across to get to/from work. If that bridge ever collapsed or was otherwise unusable for any period of time, the detour from either side to the other would be over 8 hours! This is not as uncommon as you might think. So, an area that isn't remote could soon become very remote.

The Nipigon River bridge was closed for 17 hours. That's it. All that media coverage for a 17 hour bridge closure due to an improperly designed bridge abutment. I'm sure it was pretty embarasing for the bridge designers and constructors, but it really turned out to be not that big of a deal.

At the same time as the Nipigon River bridge closure, a long stretch of Highway 11 was closed through northeastern region for a much longer duration just due to inclement weather with no media attention at all.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

One of the biggest reason for crashes are head on collisions. Whether it be due to fog, snow, rain, etc, a divided highway would prevent those crashes. That is what I am trying to prevent. When I have to go to work, as calling in sick is really not a good thing, want to know someone isn't crossing the line. I want to know I can see, even at a slower speed that I won't cross that line.

As far as sticker price - have one price, regardless of where you live, if that means that Northern Ontario won't be an after thought.

Welcome to life. I live in southern Ontario, and drive 80km to work one way, 60km of which is on two lane highway. Believe it or not, but south of the French River there is still fog, snow, rain etc, and a divided highway would certainly make my drive safer too.

For some reason northerners think their somehow special and every trunck road should be safer than the equivalent highway in southern Ontario. Highway 12 is constantly busier than any highway in northern Ontario and nobody is talking about making that a divided highway.

Christ, I just about hit a buck deer on Highway 48 north of Stouffville back in November. In all likelihood that would have ended my life. By your logic surely that must mean that all of Highway 48 must be divided too right? It wasn't even rainy, foggy, or snowy.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

There are more reasons for dividing a highway than just traffic volumes. If you can ignore those, than I can ignore traffic volumes too.

But traffic volumes are the most important factor. Sure, there are a variety of factors that a government considers before deciding to improve a highway, but the most important of those factors are the number of motorists who are going to use the highway.

SwimmerSpe, you just argue from a fantasy perspective. At some point the reality has got to hit that the government has more problems to solve than there is money to solve the problems. And that's just life. You arguments always ignore that reality. You aren't ever going to have all the things that you want. To argue otherwise is both childish and annoying.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

The Nipigon River bridge was closed for 17 hours. That's it. All that media coverage for a 17 hour bridge closure due to an improperly designed bridge abutment. I'm sure it was pretty embarasing for the bridge designers and constructors, but it really turned out to be not that big of a deal.

At the same time as the Nipigon River bridge closure, a long stretch of Highway 11 was closed through northeastern region for a much longer duration just due to inclement weather with no media attention at all.

Close the 401 for 17 hours...
It has been done - - > https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hundreds-evacuated-after-propane-fire-1.477793

I'll bet trucks kept rolling, just onto different routes. School buses could get your children home, and you could get to/from work. Must be nice to have an alternate route that is not over 500km, or that must go through another country. Do you carry your passport just in case the highway closes?

Originally Posted by sonysnob

Welcome to life. I live in southern Ontario, and drive 80km to work one way, 60km of which is on two lane highway. Believe it or not, but south of the French River there is still fog, snow, rain etc, and a divided highway would certainly make my drive safer too.

For some reason northerners think their somehow special and every trunk road should be safer than the equivalent highway in southern Ontario. Highway 12 is constantly busier than any highway in northern Ontario and nobody is talking about making that a divided highway.

Christ, I just about hit a buck deer on Highway 48 north of Stouffville back in November. In all likelihood that would have ended my life. By your logic surely that must mean that all of Highway 48 must be divided too right? It wasn't even rainy, foggy, or snowy.

Highway 48 is not a trunk route. Neither is 2, 3, 4, 6, 7,, 10, etc. In Southern Ontario, the trunk routes all have a 4 in front of their number, and are 3 digits long, except for the labeled ones, like DVP, Gardiner, etc.

In Northern Ontario, our trunks routes are 11, 17, 69, and parts of 101. Those serve most, if on all of our population.

Highway 48 within a few km of highway 404, a trunk route. Highways 2, 3, and 7 all parallel highway 401, a trunk route. What alternative routes parallel 11, 17, 69 or 144 that are within a few km of it? In winter it is worse, because at least in the summer, there are some dirt roads I can use to bypass most of it. Still can't bypass the Spanish River bridge without an 8 hour drive.

Originally Posted by sonysnob

But traffic volumes are the most important factor. Sure, there are a variety of factors that a government considers before deciding to improve a highway, but the most important of those factors are the number of motorists who are going to use the highway.

SwimmerSpe, you just argue from a fantasy perspective. At some point the reality has got to hit that the government has more problems to solve than there is money to solve the problems. And that's just life. You arguments always ignore that reality. You aren't ever going to have all the things that you want. To argue otherwise is both childish and annoying.

That is the real truth. And let's be fair, the prefer to bolster those ridings they won or the ones they need to win. Highway construction, just like new schools, hospitals, and everything else has more to do with politics. Hamilton is learning what happens when you don't vote PC Highway 11 was 4 laned partly due to the fact that the ridings of Nipissing, Parry Sound and Muskoka tend to be easy wins for the PCs, and they were done under their reign.

So, I will continue to argue for 4 lanes across our province along the TCH routes till the last part is done.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

What does “call and wait” mean? Waiting for the highway to be reopened?

Call them and then sit in traffic waiting for the highway to open.

[sonysnob]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Close the 401 for 17 hours...
It has been done - - > https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hundreds-evacuated-after-propane-fire-1.477793

I'll bet trucks kept rolling, just onto different routes. School buses could get your children home, and you could get to/from work. Must be nice to have an alternate route that is not over 500km, or that must go through another country. Do you carry your passport just in case the highway closes?

[/quote]

And you know who owns and maintains those alternative routes? The local municipalities. People who pay much higher property taxes than the folks who live in the north. So you want the same level or service in a more remote area? Pony up and pay up. If everyone put all of the other half of their licence renewal fee into a big pot think of all of the alternative roads you could build.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Highway 48 is not a trunk route. Neither is 2, 3, 4, 6, 7,, 10, etc. In Southern Ontario, the trunk routes all have a 4 in front of their number, and are 3 digits long, except for the labeled ones, like DVP, Gardiner, etc.

Highway 48 is absolutely a truck route.

I don't have numbers, but I can pretty much guarantee that Highway 48 takes both more trucks in terms of sheer volume and in terms of percentage of overall traffic than virtually any highway in northern Ontario.

In your last post you were trying to justify twinning for the improvement of safety? Does the safety of the motorists on Highway 48 not matter? Or do they just matter less because when one of them has a head on-collision the delayed motorists can just move one concession to the east.[/quote]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

In Northern Ontario, our trunks routes are 11, 17, 69, and parts of 101. Those serve most, if on all of our population.

Highway 48 within a few km of highway 404, a trunk route. Highways 2, 3, and 7 all parallel highway 401, a trunk route. What alternative routes parallel 11, 17, 69 or 144 that are within a few km of it? In winter it is worse, because at least in the summer, there are some dirt roads I can use to bypass most of it. Still can't bypass the Spanish River bridge without an 8 hour drive.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

That is the real truth. And let's be fair, the prefer to bolster those ridings they won or the ones they need to win. Highway construction, just like new schools, hospitals, and everything else has more to do with politics. Hamilton is learning what happens when you don't vote PC Highway 11 was 4 laned partly due to the fact that the ridings of Nipissing, Parry Sound and Muskoka tend to be easy wins for the PCs, and they were done under their reign.

So, I will continue to argue for 4 lanes across our province along the TCH routes till the last part is done.

There is always a political bent when it comes to government spending. Why do you think the Liberals kicked in funding for Maley Drive? The liberals want to keep Sudbury red. The Harris/Eves conservatives started doing advance work to four-lane Highway 12 near Beaverton, a project that was quietly shelved when the McGuinty Liberals took power in 2003. The Highway 26 project through Wasaga was likewise delayed and ended up being scaled back with the Libs in power.

Highway 17 twinning up the Ottawa Valley wasn't funded by the Libs, which has now been prioritized again by the PCs, so it's hard to say exactly what's fair. Highway 17 up the Ottawa Valley is hands down the busiest section of Highway 17 in the province, so it was probably pretty insulting to those people who live in Renfrew County that the Liberals prioritized a relatively lightly traveled segment east of Thunder Bay in favour of their road.

The point that get's missed in all of this is that everybody thinks that they are so hard done by. I go to Chatham and hear from people that they think "Ontario ends in London". Which totally ignores the billion dollars that was spent to extend the 401 through Windsor of course.

[swimmer_spe]

And you know who owns and maintains those alternative routes? The local municipalities. People who pay much higher property taxes than the folks who live in the north. So you want the same level or service in a more remote area? Pony up and pay up. If everyone put all of the other half of their licence renewal fee into a big pot think of all of the alternative roads you could build.[/QUOTE]


A Fun fact, on a percentage basis, my taxes in Greater Sudbury is higher than Toronto. So, based on $100,000 property, I would pay more taxes than Toronto. And Timmins is double than here. So, please tell me how your property taxes are higher. You home values are higher, and that means that you pay a higher total, but not higher percentage.


Highway 48 is absolutely a truck route.

I don't have numbers, but I can pretty much guarantee that Highway 48 takes both more trucks in terms of sheer volume and in terms of percentage of overall traffic than virtually any highway in northern Ontario.

In your last post you were trying to justify twinning for the improvement of safety? Does the safety of the motorists on Highway 48 not matter? Or do they just matter less because when one of them has a head on-collision the delayed motorists can just move one concession to the east.[/QUOTE]

You don't have the numbers, but you state it anecdotally. I have been able to show facts. Please show me facts. I bet if you compare the numbers, the 404 has more trucks on it than the 48.

The busiest highways in a given area should be divided. So, if 48 had more traffic than the 404, then yes, divide it. My point is more that if you have an accident on 48, you have an alternative to it. If you have an accident on the 404, you have an alternative to it. If you have an accident on 11, 17, 69 or 144, your alternatives are not reasonable.


There is always a political bent when it comes to government spending. Why do you think the Liberals kicked in funding for Maley Drive? The liberals want to keep Sudbury red. The Harris/Eves conservatives started doing advance work to four-lane Highway 12 near Beaverton, a project that was quietly shelved when the McGuinty Liberals took power in 2003. The Highway 26 project through Wasaga was likewise delayed and ended up being scaled back with the Libs in power.

Highway 17 twinning up the Ottawa Valley wasn't funded by the Libs, which has now been prioritized again by the PCs, so it's hard to say exactly what's fair. Highway 17 up the Ottawa Valley is hands down the busiest section of Highway 17 in the province, so it was probably pretty insulting to those people who live in Renfrew County that the Liberals prioritized a relatively lightly traveled segment east of Thunder Bay in favour of their road.

The point that get's missed in all of this is that everybody thinks that they are so hard done by. I go to Chatham and hear from people that they think "Ontario ends in London". Which totally ignores the billion dollars that was spent to extend the 401 through Windsor of course.[/QUOTE]

What is unfair is that most of the money made by the province in our area from the mining and forestry sector is not spent in our area. If there was a law that the money collected from an area must be spent in that area, We would have better services and roads in the North.

You don't get it as you live in the south where you have all we give you. We just want some of the pie too; not just the crumbs.

[sonysnob]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

A Fun fact, on a percentage basis, my taxes in Greater Sudbury is higher than Toronto. So, based on $100,000 property, I would pay more taxes than Toronto. And Timmins is double than here. So, please tell me how your property taxes are higher. You home values are higher, and that means that you pay a higher total, but not higher percentage.

Fun fact: I pay more -- so I get an alternate route. Want an alternate route? I guess you're going to need to pay more.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

You don't have the numbers, but you state it anecdotally. I have been able to show facts. Please show me facts. I bet if you compare the numbers, the 404 has more trucks on it than the 48.

Not one of your posts above have contained any hard facts.

Maybe there is something to the lack of services in the north. If you think you have been sharing facts, there is definitely something to be said about the northern educational system.

I'll have my friend at the MTO pull some numbers for me when I am back to work in the new year.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

The busiest highways in a given area should be divided. So, if 48 had more traffic than the 404, then yes, divide it. My point is more that if you have an accident on 48, you have an alternative to it. If you have an accident on the 404, you have an alternative to it. If you have an accident on 11, 17, 69 or 144, your alternatives are not reasonable.

11, 17, 69 and 144 run through hundreds of kilomtres of wildland. Neither the physical geography nor the social geography is the same. It would cost hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars to provide network redundancy for some of those roads. And down south, that redundancy is paid for at the local level. So once again, you want better roads, pony up.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

What is unfair is that most of the money made by the province in our area from the mining and forestry sector is not spent in our area. If there was a law that the money collected from an area must be spent in that area, We would have better services and roads in the North.

You don't get it as you live in the south where you have all we give you. We just want some of the pie too; not just the crumbs.

What was the line you used on me?

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Fun Fact

?

No that wasn't it...

Oh yeah...

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

You don't have the numbers, but you state it anecdotally.

Don't give me some bullshit northern Ontario party propaganda about how funding from mining and forestry is allocated in the province. I want numbers that back up that supposition.

[Dengler Avenue]

I'll have my friend at the MTO pull some numbers for me when I am back to work in the new year.

I’d greatly appreciate that. The most recent AADT numbers were left off at 2016. I even emailed MTO for 2017 and 2018 AADT numbers once but never heard back. That’s 3 years of data to update...

[sonysnob]

The 2018 numbers probably aren't categorized yet. The MTO doesn't have the internal resources to update traffic data quickly.

But, the 2017, 18, and 19 data will be pretty much the same. In southern Ontario traffic on most highway corridors grows somewhere around 1-2% per year. In northern Ontario traffic is generally more stable, because most communities don't have significant population growth. (Though that's true in some areas of the south. Traffic is pretty stable on the 401 through Chatham-Kent for example).

What I was referencing in my post is a breakdown of commercial traffic. But I'm going to ask for a few specific segments only.

[Dengler Avenue]

Yea breakdown of truck aadt will be nice. I wanna see it too for some of my fantasy proposals.

Meanwhile I’d also like to hear from others like Loco101, vid and F. Lionel.