Highways in Canada

[Djeffery]

Well, I have no idea what a single point is, but the ramps really haven't changed there since it was changed from a full cloverleaf in the 90's. The onramp from south 25 onto 401E might be a little tighter now with the new overpass being on the west side of where the old one was. I don't know if they adjusted the north to west ramp after that construction or not, it was night time last time I went there and wasn't really paying attention.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Just wondering...

Can single-point A4 parclo interchange be a thing? Or will the loops be too tight in that case? Every now and then, when I exited 401W at Highway 25, I noticed that the off-ramp’s curved at such an angle that I thought MTO was gonna build a single-point there.

You may need to explain what that is. Even Google is not helpful.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

You may need to explain what that is. Even Google is not helpful.

For single point interchanges, see Highway 406 @ Niagara Road 77 in Saint Catherine’s, and Ottawa Airport Parkway @ Hunt Club Road. For both of these two, the entrance to the highway is on the left. Now imagine having the highway access on the right through a loop instead. That’s what I meant by single point a4 parclo.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

For single point interchanges, see Highway 406 @ Niagara Road 77 in Saint Catherine’s, and Ottawa Airport Parkway @ Hunt Club Road. For both of these two, the entrance to the highway is on the left. Now imagine having the highway access on the right through a loop instead. That’s what I meant by single point a4 parclo.

Is this what you're talking about as it pertains to Ottawa?

https://www.bing.com/maps?q=Ottawa+Airport+Parkway+%40+Hunt+Club+Road&FORM=HDRSC4

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Is this what you're talking about as it pertains to Ottawa?

https://www.bing.com/maps?q=Ottawa+Airport+Parkway+%40+Hunt+Club+Road&FORM=HDRSC4

I would prefer a google map streetview...

@swimmer_spe This is what I meant by single point interchange: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-point_urban_interchange. Just imagine accessing the highway from the right hand side via a loop instead. That’s what I meant by single point a4 parclo interchange. I’m simply wondering if this can be a thing.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I would prefer a google map streetview...

@swimmer_spe This is what I meant by single point interchange: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-point_urban_interchange. Just imagine accessing the highway from the right hand side via a loop instead. That’s what I meant by single point a4 parclo interchange. I’m simply wondering if this can be a thing.

I gave you a beautiful aerial view!

I'm having a hard time picturing what it is you're talking about. Could you draw it and post a pic? There seems to be so many interchange variations that nothing seems impossible as long as you have the space and/or money.

[Djeffery]

I think the interchanges you are talking about are like that because they don't have the space for the loops you are talking about. I think the reason the exit at 25 reminds you of this is because of the left turn from the west to south exit. Where most ramps now bring everyone to a single light with left and right turn lanes, this exit still utilizes the original west to north ramp and added that left turn spur off it when they removed the old west to south ramp over 20 years ago. I guess if there was room for the loops, there isn't any need to do what you are asking, if I'm understanding you right.

We have several old overpasses around London that are gradually being replaced and they don't have the original inner 270 degree ramp loops of the original cloverleaf anymore because the overpasses weren't wide enough for the 6 lanes of traffic as well as ramps under the bridge when the highway was being widened here 30 years ago. So now you just come off the highway and turn left or right, and when you want to enter the highway southbound to eastbound, you turn left onto the same ramp as the person coming northbound to eastbound (and likewise for westbound). Kind of a simple, low traffic rural version of what you are showing with Ottawa and St Kitts.

https://www.google.ca/maps/@42.9475917,-81.1023332,656m/data=!3m1!1e3

[Dengler Avenue]

@Djeffrey I’ll give the 401/25 interchange a bit more thought after work. At least you get what I’m saying.
@Corndogger @swimmer_spe I’ll show pictures when I have time. The only thing is that drawing these kind of things takes at least 2 hours... I once proposed a total revamp of the interchanges between TCH, SFPR, Pacific Highway and Golden Ears Way, and that took good 6 hours... You guys can still see it from the imgur link that I posted in the SFPR thread in the Vancouver subforum.
I’m impressed to see so many diamond interchanges along the 401 in Oxford and Middlesex too. The dumbbell with 19 is beautiful.

[haljackey]

Sorry... is it this interchange that is being discussed?
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5266451,-79.906247,908m/data=!3m1!1e3

Halton Regional Road 25 / 401? When I google 'Ontario Highway 25' I get redirected to a highway in New York lol

This interchange was expanded to accommodate the widening of the 401 below. That's why the loop ramps look kinda odd right now. Once the widening is complete, the geometry of the loops will be realigned to meet the highway at a different angle.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by haljackey

Sorry... is it this interchange that is being discussed?
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5266451,-79.906247,908m/data=!3m1!1e3

Halton Regional Road 25 / 401? When I google 'Ontario Highway 25' I get redirected to a highway in New York lol

This interchange was expanded to accommodate the widening of the 401 below. That's why the loop ramps look kinda odd right now. Once the widening is complete, the geometry of the loops will be realigned to meet the highway at a different angle.

Yea I meant Halton Regional Road 25 (Highway 401 Exit 320). I see. Thanks.

[swimmer_spe]

I am a fan of high speed ramps. I should not have to slow down when going from one to the other. It is interesting that an older road in Sudbury, the Lasalle extension when it meets old 144/Elm going west to north, for passenger vehicles, the ramp can be taken at speed. The ramp speed is 70km/hr and the speed of both roads is 80 km/hr.

Much of the old ramps of the 400 series highways were full cloverleafs. While that gets everyone where they are needing to go, it adds weaving and short acceleration/deceleration to the mess. Newer interchanges have lights. Some have roundabouts.

It is interesting how we have many intersecting 400 series highways, yet so few are built to stay at the highway speed. The 4 stacks are cool and should be put where 2 highways intersect.

The ramps should be built at the speed that is at the end of it.

[Dengler Avenue]

I agree to some extent. For example, I really hate that loop from 404 South to 401 East. Ditto for 407 East to 404 North. If anything, other than with 403 and 410, 407 should meet every other major freeways (427, 400, 404 and possibly a northerly extension of 412) with stack interchanges.

For 69/17 in the future, while I understand the geographical constraint (rocks everywhere), I think a loop from 69 North to 17 West is a mistake: It should be a flyover instead due to the sheer number of trucks.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I agree to some extent. For example, I really hate that loop from 404 South to 401 East. Ditto for 407 East to 404 North. If anything, other than with 403 and 410, 407 should meet every other major freeways (427, 400, 404 and possibly a northerly extension of 412) with stack interchanges.

For 69/17 in the future, while I understand the geographical constraint (rocks everywhere), I think a loop from 69 North to 17 West is a mistake: It should be a flyover instead due to the sheer number of trucks.

69/17 is going to be a mess no matter what they do. You have a steep hill to contend with. I have thought that if they put the divided 400 on the east side of Richard Lake that it might make a new interchange better there.

[MatthewD]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I agree to some extent. For example, I really hate that loop from 404 South to 401 East. Ditto for 407 East to 404 North. If anything, other than with 403 and 410, 407 should meet every other major freeways (427, 400, 404 and possibly a northerly extension of 412) with stack interchanges.

For 69/17 in the future, while I understand the geographical constraint (rocks everywhere), I think a loop from 69 North to 17 West is a mistake: It should be a flyover instead due to the sheer number of trucks.

A potential Hwy 412 and Hwy 418 Extension with stacks would be beneficial up to cottage country as well as a potential 407 extension to Hwy 416 outside of Ottawa or twinning Highway 7 between Hwy 115 and Hwy. 15 in Carleton Place and increasing the speed to 100 and maybe renaming the 115 between 407 and 7 as a non tolled version of Highway 407. And putting ramps to exits along that route.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by MatthewD

A potential Hwy 412 and Hwy 418 Extension with stacks would be beneficial up to cottage country as well as a potential 407 extension to Hwy 416 outside of Ottawa or twinning Highway 7 between Hwy 115 and Hwy. 15 in Carleton Place and increasing the speed to 100 and maybe renaming the 115 between 407 and 7 as a non tolled version of Highway 407. And putting ramps to exits along that route.

LoL I love how we’ve always ended up hijacking the highway thread to talk about Ontario ones.

For the renumbering of Highway 115 in the event that we convert the RIRO to proper freeway and twin Highway 7 all the way, I’ve been thinking for a while. Maybe Highway 402 if we end up bringing it all the way from London through KWG, Orangeville, GTA North, Lindsay and Peterborough? Very unlikely that we’ll even do this.

407? I always have reservations about using that number. Let’s be real here: People don’t read signs. They see 407 and start using country roads instead.

415? As much as twinning Highway 15 is highly unlikely, I would rather reserve that number for 15 in any event. Plus it will get very confusing at Carleton Place. People be using 415 thinking that it will take them to Kingston when... lol... “WELCOME TO GTA EAST!”

115? It’s up to 400-series standard and, at this length, it really should get a 400 designation. Highway 69 didn’t stay as Highway 69. (Ha, did anyone notice that they’re both multiples of 23? )

428? Highway 28 goes a very different route east of Peterborough.

That said, I’ve been thinking about 443 actually. Old 43 goes between Town of Perth (Not the county!! Funny that Highway 7 passes through both the town and the county that bear the same name, huh?) and Winchester and meets Old 34 there. Going down the proposed freeway then 417 all the way, then getting out at Old 34 does basically the same thing. That said, it will function similarly as the Old 43. That’s why I think 443 might make sense.

[Djeffery]

402? LMAO. I know you have this fixation on the idea there will ever be a highway built across the north of London to the east, I have no idea why.

Why not 415? 402 has no relation to highway 2 other than an interchange. 403 isn't even remotely near 3, and 404 is even further from 4. No need to reserve 415 for something related to 15 that god knows would happen either.

[Franco401]

People depend on their GPS more than ever, there's no way a kinda-similar highway number will cause problems.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Djeffery

402? LMAO. I know you have this fixation on the idea there will ever be a highway built across the north of London to the east, I have no idea why.

It depends on how serious MTO is about widening 7-8 from New Hamburg to Stratford and the Guelph-Kitchener freeway link. Granted it’s still long distance from Stratford to London and that we might revive HSR (or HFR) for SWO, but we will see. Sure we can treat the freeway suggestion past Guelph as pure fantasy as this point (unless MTO really wanna build GTA West and extend it to Guelph, which we will see).

Originally Posted by Djeffery

Why not 415? 402 has no relation to highway 2 other than an interchange. 403 isn't even remotely near 3, and 404 is even further from 4. No need to reserve 415 for something related to 15 that god knows would happen either.

For 409 and below, we can say that. Once you start with 410 though, every 400-series really serve to replace the original highway (except 418 - IMO it really should have been numbered 457 because of Durham Regional Road 57 nearby).
Then again, those are in the minority so 415 sure why not?

Originally Posted by Franco401

People depend on their GPS more than ever, there's no way a kinda-similar highway number will cause problems.

That’s a fair point. I’m in the minority for this one.

[le calmar]

Originally Posted by Franco401

People depend on their GPS more than ever, there's no way a kinda-similar highway number will cause problems.

You would have to be pretty clueless to not realize you've been driving on the wrong highway for 2 hours. But I must admit, quite a few people I know have a bad sense of orientation and don't know much about geography. I would not be surprised if they made that mistake without a GPS.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

It depends on how serious MTO is about widening 7-8 from New Hamburg to Stratford and the Guelph-Kitchener freeway link. Granted it’s still long distance from Stratford to London and that we might revive HSR (or HFR) for SWO, but we will see. Sure we can treat the freeway suggestion past Guelph as pure fantasy as this point (unless MTO really wanna build GTA West and extend it to Guelph, which we will see).

For 409 and below, we can say that. Once you start with 410 though, every 400-series really serve to replace the original highway (except 418 - IMO it really should have been numbered 457 because of Durham Regional Road 57 nearby).
Then again, those are in the minority so 415 sure why not?

That’s a fair point. I’m in the minority for this one.

The lowest 400 series number not used is 408, but that should be left for the highway 8 corridor.

As far as 407 or 415 or 435.... yes. In this day and age we drive by GPS, not map. So, having a number that doesn't make sense on a map is fine if the GPS sorts it out.

Highways 97 and 5 in BC show how it may make no sense, but it does. They are concurrent, but one is south and the other is north.

Only us purists know that the 400 series highways were labeled based on the nearest regular highway. However, if that is the case, we need to relabel 400 to either 411 or 469. If you want to argue against it, then your argument about what the extension of the 407 to Ottawa becomes is moot.