Highways in Canada

[GreaterMontréal]

The A-19 extension, construction has now started

https://www.newswire.ca/fr/news-releases...ont-officiellement-lances-817605628.html

[WildCake]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Only BC has a bad freeway network, and probably Manitoba. Alberta and Saskatchewan as well as the Maritimes have excellent road networks by almost any standard.

Alberta and Sask have decent urban freeways around their bigger urban centres, and does have the odd interchange in smaller towns, but their TCH is comparable to Manitoba once you're driving thru the prairies between Calgary and Winnipeg. Lots of at-grade intersections that could probably be upgraded.

TCH west of Calgary is an exception although that is essentially Canada's top tourist destination (Banff and Lake Louise) and a critical segment of the highway system with few alternate routes so the fact that it is a freeway makes sense.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN

The CAF didn't want to close that base, it was the Chretien led LPC who nailed the bases in ridings that didn't vote Liberal in the early 90's (Chilliwack, Calgary, Summerside). When it comes to Canadian Defence policy it's always about the pork and never about capability. The only two bases that are pretty safe to always remain in place are Esquimalt and Halifax.

I have heard rumors of moving the Halifax one to Cape Breton area. I have heard of the desire to move Esquimalt too. I doubt it will ever happen, but really, who knows.

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

It depends. Are you referring to urban freeways, or an interprovincial freeway network?

While Vancouver has no real urban freeway system, Toronto and Montreal certainly do, and both Edmonton and Calgary have freeway ring-roads.

If you are talking about interconnected freeway networks, there is a pretty expansive freeway system in ON, QC, NB & NS, not too far off what you would find in the USA.

Edmonton and Calgary do not have full freeway for all of it. Granted some parts are, but that isn't good enough.

[Loco101]

Highway closures in Northern Ontario now. Due to weather. But the MTO is reporting a closure near Nipigon due to a collision. Hopefully it's not one that will close the highway for awhile.

[davee930]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I have heard rumors of moving the Halifax one to Cape Breton area. I have heard of the desire to move Esquimalt too. I doubt it will ever happen, but really, who knows.



Edmonton and Calgary do not have full freeway for all of it. Granted some parts are, but that isn't good enough.

I agree. What's the point of these huge roads if there are goddamn traffic lights at the interchanges.

[craner]

^I’m confused, there are no traffic lights on AHD in Edmonton or Stoney Trail in Calgary.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Loco101

Highway closures in Northern Ontario now. Due to weather. But the MTO is reporting a closure near Nipigon due to a collision. Hopefully it's not one that will close the highway for awhile.

I'd guess no more than 8-12 hours. Such is the life in Northern ON in winter.

Originally Posted by craner

^I’m confused, there are no traffic lights on AHD in Edmonton or Stoney Trail in Calgary.

Edmonton
Highway 216, I'll admit, it is a freeway. However, explain to me the mess of the inner ring of the highways that are Highway 2, 16, 170 st NW, and 75 st NW. The streets, I can accept, but the 2 highways that go through the capital?

Calgary
201, if you catch it right, it is a freeway. What about the other highways, like the TC1? Calgary really is confusing as to what they want to make a freeway into.

AB seems to want to act like they are part of Quebec. Montreal still has parts of A20 as a city street, and it used to have the reversed direction section.

[Denscity]

Highway 3 east of Hope is closed again due to another mudslide.
Keep in mind this is close to the infamous Hope Slide. Yikes.

Edit: "Washout" not mudslide.

[swimmer_spe]

With the massive storm in BC washing away bridges and whole sections of various highways, Is it time we reexamine how we lay highways? For those that have driven these highways, you'll know that they are built right next to rivers and cliffs and high mountains. We have seen that a big enough storm makes this a recipe for disaster. Here are a few of my "back of napkin" ideas:

1) Longer, higher bridges. Instead of building bridges to the edge of rivers, we should have a flood buffer such that water shouldn't come close to the abutments of the bridge in normal year rain and runoff conditions.

2) Tunnels. TCH/BC 5 Vancouver to the BC border does not have a single tunnel. They have a few snow sheds. Maybe it is time to tunnel through the mountain to avoid problem areas.

3) More routes. Imagine if the Island of Montreal only had half their crossings (9 currently) and something happened to close them all. The fact there is more of them means a better chance of getting some open sooner. You might say "But there is a mountain in the way." I'd say: "See Number 2".

4) Proper barriers. One of the problem, especially on the Malahat was the fact that most barriers did not have proper drainage holes. That is why it became a river. If they are going to use movable barriers, they should all have large drainage holes to allow the water to quickly drain off the highway and into the ditches.

It is my hope that this event changes how highway, especially in BC, are designed.

[nname]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

1) Longer, higher bridges. Instead of building bridges to the edge of rivers, we should have a flood buffer such that water shouldn't come close to the abutments of the bridge in normal year rain and runoff conditions.

2) Tunnels. TCH/BC 5 Vancouver to the BC border does not have a single tunnel. They have a few snow sheds. Maybe it is time to tunnel through the mountain to avoid problem areas.

Not sure how would tunnel helped for this situation. If tunnel were used, those river valley where washout occurred are most likely be break between two tunnels. And by using tunnels, you're creating another issue - mudslides at tunnel entrances. Also, the terrain at that section is mostly rolling hills not steep cliff, so not sure if it's the best terrain for tunnels.

Highway 1 through Fraser Canyon have a few tunnels, yet there are still mudslides outside of the tunnel.

I sort of agree on the river part. The highway shouldn't need to cross the Coldwater river 6 times, and most of those 6 bridges are destroyed or damaged this time when the river flooded. The could definitely move the highway a bit uphill and further away from the river.

But then if you check I-70 east of Vail Colorado, you see somewhat similar design, where the highway is remarkably close to the Colorado River, and crossing it a grand total of 16 (!) times. But then the hill is much steeper there so there's not many other choices. Not sure how the highway will fare if Colorado River got flooded...

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by nname

Not sure how would tunnel helped for this situation. If tunnel were used, those river valley where washout occurred are most likely be break between two tunnels. And by using tunnels, you're creating another issue - mudslides at tunnel entrances. Also, the terrain at that section is mostly rolling hills not steep cliff, so not sure if it's the best terrain for tunnels.

Highway 1 through Fraser Canyon have a few tunnels, yet there are still mudslides outside of the tunnel.

I sort of agree on the river part. The highway shouldn't need to cross the Coldwater river 6 times, and most of those 6 bridges are destroyed or damaged this time when the river flooded. The could definitely move the highway a bit uphill and further away from the river.

But then if you check I-70 east of Vail Colorado, you see somewhat similar design, where the highway is remarkably close to the Colorado River, and crossing it a grand total of 16 (!) times. But then the hill is much steeper there so there's not many other choices. Not sure how the highway will fare if Colorado River got flooded...

If a mudslide happens just outside the opening, you did not build it long enough.

A tunnel can bypass the multiple crossings that are used to keep it at a more level angle. Draw a straight line from the start to the end of where it crosses unnecessarily. I know it isn't that easy, but there are no easy fixes to this problem.

[Dengler Avenue]

I also wonder if there will be plan to address those long and steep hills on Coquihalla Pass.

[Airboy]

As for the comment about another access to the lower mainland. I can't see another feasible route. There are 2 few valley to use. its why the railways use the same routes. There will be a major rethink about our transportation issues.

One route that should be looked at is 99. make it a better transportation corridor.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I also wonder if there will be plan to address those long and steep hills on Coquihalla Pass.

That is another example of a problem waiting to happen.

Originally Posted by Airboy

As for the comment about another access to the lower mainland. I can't see another feasible route. There are 2 few valley to use. its why the railways use the same routes. There will be a major rethink about our transportation issues.

One route that should be looked at is 99. make it a better transportation corridor.

That is why you tunnel a route.

[Airboy]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

That is another example of a problem waiting to happen.



That is why you tunnel a route.

Not just the mountains there is a lack of safe adequate routes out of the lower mainland.

I was once told that one of the reasons we do not have a lot of tunnels is how brittle the mountains are and it makes it tough for tunnels. lots of collapsing tunnels.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Airboy

Not just the mountains there is a lack of safe adequate routes out of the lower mainland.

I was once told that one of the reasons we do not have a lot of tunnels is how brittle the mountains are and it makes it tough for tunnels. lots of collapsing tunnels.

So, explain how many other places, with similar geology have tons of tunnels?

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

So, explain how many other places, with similar geology have tons of tunnels?

Like where? Europe? I don’t remember there being many tunnels through the American Rockies.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Like where? Europe? I don’t remember there being many tunnels through the American Rockies.

I would compare them to the Alps. They have similar geology, formed much the same way.

[hipster duck]

The Alps are hard to cross, but you have to traverse fewer kilometers of them and you can share the cost of construction among many more people.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

The Alps are hard to cross, but you have to traverse fewer kilometers of them and you can share the cost of construction among many more people.

That may be true, but rebuilding after each flood isn't a better solution.