Highways in Canada

[VANRIDERFAN]

Originally Posted by Architype

I think it's easy to see what happened. There is only a yield sign, not a stop sign, on the south section of the intersection, the bus driver was not required to stop there, and thought they could make it across but failed.

There is a stop sign. It was taken out by the collision. I’ve driven past that intersection many times and there are stop signs going north and south.

[VANRIDERFAN]

Originally Posted by drew

Bridges and elevated roadways requiring foundations

+

Foundations being comparatively more expensive in Southern Manitoba (shit soil)

=

More expensive infrastructure.

Once you get out of the Red River Gumbo the soil structure is much better for construction.

[drew]

^ it's generally worse than pretty much anywhere else in the country, especially when coupled with the climatic extremes. The "gumbo" extends more or less from Steinbach through to somewhere between Brandon and Portage.

The soils in and around Portage are hands down the worst period 80+ feet clay/silt.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by drew

^ it's generally worse than pretty much anywhere else in the country, especially when coupled with the climatic extremes. The "gumbo" extends more or less from Steinbach through to somewhere between Brandon and Portage.

The soils in and around Portage are hands down the worst period 80+ feet clay/silt.

The funny thing is that on a per-capita basis, Portage must have more interchanges and grade separations than anywhere else in Manitoba?! Three traffic interchanges and at least three railway overpasses that I can think of.

[VANRIDERFAN]

Originally Posted by drew

^ it's generally worse than pretty much anywhere else in the country, especially when coupled with the climatic extremes. The "gumbo" extends more or less from Steinbach through to somewhere between Brandon and Portage.

The soils in and around Portage are hands down the worst period 80+ feet clay/silt.

Macgregor is where the silt and clay turns to loam. The soil of the Regina Plain is the same as the Red River Valley. Bottomless and a son of a bitch to build on.

[craner]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

The cheapest configuration they could do in the Prairies is to have more "RiRo" (right in, right out) at grade intersections that don't permit traveling through the main highway. That way you don't even have to build any bridge.

Something like this:



You can even eliminate the left turn across the highway by having U-turns on either end.

No U-Turns please - those have their own dangers.

One thing I’ve noticed at these types of highway intersections in Alberta is they put a turn in the secondary highway before the intersection to force drivers to slow down.

[craner]

Originally Posted by dmuzika

I agree that the TCH through the prairies is completely substandard, but Interstate standards might be a little lofty. At the very least there should interchanges at every primary (2 digit) rural highway between Calgary and Winnipeg. My count is 5 in Alberta, 10 in Saskatchewan (assuming a couple highways were realigned to consolidate the intersection), and 11 in Manitoba; at grade intersections in urban areas should also be either closed or have grade separation. A subsequent phase would be to address secondary highways and small town/village access. One could probably get away with sparsely used rural roads remaining at grade (for now).

Originally Posted by esquire

I agree. I don't think it is realistic to expect the full freeway treatment for the Trans-Canada unless everyone is OK with the GST going up a couple of percentage points or some type of similar measure. But there is an awful lot of low hanging fruit in the form of trunk highways that meet the TCH via at-grade intersections, like the one in this case, that could be converted to interchanges. A couple dozen interchanges through MB/SK/AB (mostly diamonds, maybe a few more complicated than that) would make a huge difference in terms of overall safety.

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Full freewaying the entire TCH would be wildly expensive, but there is a big gap between it's current state and that. If you were to ask me, I would like to see each prairie province set up a program aiming to construct ~2 interchanges a year on the TCH and other major rural highways at the busiest at-grade crossings. Try to have a goal of a free-flow TCH free from signalized intersections and busier at-grade crossings. The quieter at-grade crossings with really minimal crossings aren't a big deal to leave as much.

Originally Posted by thewave46

This would be a perfect fit for a modern Trans-Canada Highway cost sharing program from the federal government; say a 80 federal/20 province split. Ontario and Quebec are getting their dollops of federal infrastructure cash, this would provide a modicum of fairness.

The construction of interchanges on the Prairies and continued freeway construction in BC are probably the best bang-for-buck safety improvements on highways in Canada today. Low-hanging fruit too, as one could keep local companies involved over a decent timespan - these aren't mega-projects that need huge companies to do work at scale.

I think the quotes above have the right idea.

The entire TCH route across the prairies is already 4 lanes/twinned save for the final few kms in Manitoba to the Ontario border (which is in the process of being addressed). As such, I think any funding could focus on removing level crossings & traffic signals and building town bi-passes to provide a consistent 110km/hr speed limit.

If the Feds provided an initial $2B in funding that would build 26 diamond interchanges (at $75M a pop). That would be a pretty good start and be good value IMO.

It’s about addressing the low hanging fruit to get the momentum going.

[Nashe]

Originally Posted by Architype

If I'm reading that correctly, those numbers seem incredibly low. For comparison, Newfoundland has about 50 interchanges along its 900 km TCH.

NB has about 70 in 500km on the TC2 (Edmunston to Sackville). I don't THINK there are any level car crossings (but a few train crossings).

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by craner

I think the quotes above have the right idea.

The entire TCH route across the prairies is already 4 lanes/twinned save for the final few kms in Manitoba to the Ontario border (which is in the process of being addressed). As such, I think any funding could focus on removing level crossings & traffic signals and building town bi-passes to provide a consistent 110km/hr speed limit.

If the Feds provided an initial $2B in funding that would build 26 diamond interchanges (at $75M a pop). That would be a pretty good start and be good value IMO.

It’s about addressing the low hanging fruit to get the momentum going.

Honestly even 25 interchanges across the corridor and a couple of bypasses would make a massive difference in how the corridor operates.

The biggest problems in terms of low-speed zones are around Winnipeg, Brandon, and Strathmore. Address those areas, get some of the other busier rural highway intersections done, and perhaps bypass a few smaller towns, and the Trans-Canada would already be in far better shape than it is today.

[Architype]

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN

There is a stop sign. It was taken out by the collision. I’ve driven past that intersection many times and there are stop signs going north and south.

There are both, a stop sign, then a yield sign. Two stop signs would be safer, but the median gap would have to be made wider to accommodate them at both points. I checked some of the area on Google; and they are lacking in interchanges; even Brandon, a city of 50K, has level crossings. In this case, I would put the cause of the accident down to driver error at a dangerous substandard intersection, unless there were mechanical problems.

[Nashe]

So if you want to turn left from the 5, you have to cross the first set of lanes, stop in the median, then merge left into the other side? That's a bit ... iffy to say the least.

[VANRIDERFAN]

Originally Posted by Architype

There are both, a stop sign, then a yield sign. Two stop signs would be safer, but the median gap would have to be made wider to accommodate them at both points. I checked some of the area on Google; and they are lacking in interchanges; even Brandon, a city of 50K, has level crossings. In this case, I would put the cause of the accident down to driver error at a dangerous substandard intersection, unless there were mechanical problems.

You'll have zero argument from me that all the PTH's that cross the TCH need to have an interchange. If the MB gov had started in the 80's when most of the TCH in the province was twinned with an interchange every 5 to 7 years this would not be an issue.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

The cheapest configuration they could do in the Prairies is to have more "RiRo" (right in, right out) at grade intersections that don't permit traveling through the main highway. That way you don't even have to build any bridge.

Something like this:



You can even eliminate the left turn across the highway by having U-turns on either end.

With how much space is there, this could work well.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_left

Originally Posted by craner

No U-Turns please - those have their own dangers.

One thing I’ve noticed at these types of highway intersections in Alberta is they put a turn in the secondary highway before the intersection to force drivers to slow down.

It isn't really a U turn. Technically, it is a bunch of left turns.

[dmuzika]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

The cheapest configuration they could do in the Prairies is to have more "RiRo" (right in, right out) at grade intersections that don't permit traveling through the main highway. That way you don't even have to build any bridge.

Something like this:



You can even eliminate the left turn across the highway by having U-turns on either end.

Maybe for rural roads, but other highways should be grade separated. Otherwise it's another version of the TCH 1/16 roundabout.

Originally Posted by craner

No U-Turns please - those have their own dangers.

One thing I’ve noticed at these types of highway intersections in Alberta is they put a turn in the secondary highway before the intersection to force drivers to slow down.

I think that might have to do with the TCH having at NW <--> SE alignment for significant sections east of Calgary. It probably has the curve to allow for a perpendicular crossing.

[NewIreland]

Originally Posted by Nashe

NB has about 70 in 500km on the TC2 (Edmunston to Sackville). I don't THINK there are any level car crossings (but a few train crossings).

Where are these train crossings?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by NewIreland

Where are these train crossings?

One of them is near Moncton.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

One of them is near Moncton.

Two actually. Three if you include the level crossing on the divided Highway 15 by the airport, but that’s not the TCH.

All of these crossings are little used spurs servicing industrial parks. They are all well marked with overhead signs and flashing signals. I have lived in Moncton 34 years, and I have personally witnessed trains using these crossings only 5-6 times. The trains approach the crossings very slowly and are quite visible.

It is no doubt a surprise to unwary drivers to see a train crossing an expressway carrying road traffic averaging 120 km/hr, but alert drivers should have no trouble stopping in time.

There is no reason to try and beat the train at the crossings. These are shunt trains usually no more than 6-8 cars in length.

Should these level crossing exist? Absolutely not. But, they are an unfortunate legacy of a previous time with questionable standards. Is it worth it to spend $100M to fix the problem? This is debatable.

[acottawa]

As an Ontarian that hasn’t been to the prairies since childhood, I am shocked at how this highway is designed. A divided highway with a stop sign is a ridiculous indifference to health and safety.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by acottawa

As an Ontarian that hasn’t been to the prairies since childhood, I am shocked at how this highway is designed. A divided highway with a stop sign is a ridiculous indifference to health and safety.

No no, not on the main thoroughfare TCH. Think of ON-11 between Gravenhurst and North Bay, ON-17 coming east out of SSM, and pockets ON-17 between Thunder Bay and Nipigon, for example.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

No no, not on the main thoroughfare TCH. Think of ON-11 between Gravenhurst and North Bay, ON-17 coming east out of SSM, and pockets ON-17 between Thunder Bay and Nipigon, for example.

Highway 11 between Gravenhurst and North Bay is either grade separated or RIRO, nobody is able to cross it. (Maybe there is some obscure side road with a level crossing).