Highways in Canada

[Dengler Avenue]

Now it’s Newfoundland’s turn…

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Now it’s Newfoundland’s turn…

To do what?


Edit - Oh, there's been a washout in Port aux Basques. I see.

[libtard]

BC has always had Canada’s worst designed highways but we’ve really hit a new low. And now it’s on display for the rest of the country. I’m tired of hearing the excuse of how the “challenging” terrain is the reason for our primitive infrastructure. I’m sorry but Ontario and Quebec have just as challenging terrain and manage to design modern, 4 lane divided highways through solid rock in the Canadian Shield areas. Look at how pitiful highway 8 was, literally washed away. Its pretty sad how we have NO elevated viaducts. Note to BC design engineers, build bridges that cross rivers with elevated viaducts very far back from where the river banks are, don’t build the bridge connection ON the river bank. Just embarrassing

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by libtard

BC has always had Canada’s worst designed highways but we’ve really hit a new low. And now it’s on display for the rest of the country. I’m tired of hearing the excuse of how the “challenging” terrain is the reason for our primitive infrastructure. I’m sorry but Ontario and Quebec have just as challenging terrain and manage to design modern, 4 lane divided highways through solid rock in the Canadian Shield areas. Look at how pitiful highway 8 was, literally washed away. Its pretty sad how we have NO elevated viaducts. Note to BC design engineers, build bridges that cross rivers with elevated viaducts very far back from where the river banks are, don’t build the bridge connection ON the river bank. Just embarrassing

BC is definitely an expensive place to build highway and especially so for 4 lane divided ones. I can't really blame BC that much at all because it doesn't have a huge population and tax base and better and more expensive projects would required many more federal dollars. But I do agree that many BC highways are behind when it comes to certain standards and the way they are built.

Building highway on the Canadian Shield through Northern Ontario and Quebec isn't easy either but there are way fewer issues of erosion and avalanches aren't an issue. There is actually very little in the way of 4 lane divided highway on the Canadian Shield. Most of the projects are very slow to get done. A good example is Hwy 69 South of Sudbury or Hwy 17/11 East of Thunder Bay. The new parts of very well built but it is taking much longer to get sections done than what many had promised.

[Innsertnamehere]

BCs bad highways are more than just challenging terrain though, even in flat areas they build terrible substandard roads. Just look at the SFPR, or the complete lack of planning for a freeway through the Okanogan valley, particularly through / around Kelowna.

The only place they seem to like spending money is bridges, and there they can go completely overkill.

[Dengler Avenue]

Okay I’d cut them some slack regarding SFPR other than the crap that there are traffic lights on it. Building along Fraser River isn’t easy either.
@Loco101 Blasting granites probably takes time. Also, just curious, is there any spot in Canadian Shield that’s notorious for rock slides? I’d love to see a list of such places.

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Okay I’d cut them some slack regarding SFPR other than the crap that there are traffic lights on it. Building along Fraser River isn’t easy either.
@Loco101 Blasting granites probably takes time. Also, just curious, is there any spot in Canadian Shield that’s notorious for rock slides? I’d love to see a list of such places.

There are a few places on Hwy 17 along Lake Superior but they usually don't have a lot of rock falling at once. I tried searching online:


There was one near Kenora on the Hwy 17A bypass but it was related to construction and rock removal. Not because of erosion. https://winnipeg.ctvnews.ca/how-crews-cl...-blocked-a-highway-near-kenora-1.5335936

Here's one on Hwy 537 near Sudbury: https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=613034

One near Dryden:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-b...yden-re-opens-after-rock-slide-1.2693037

That's what I could find after doing a quick search. All of them had pretty quick cleanups and it was just rock not mud, trees, etc..

[libtard]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

BCs bad highways are more than just challenging terrain though, even in flat areas they build terrible substandard roads. Just look at the SFPR, or the complete lack of planning for a freeway through the Okanogan valley, particularly through / around Kelowna.

The only place they seem to like spending money is bridges, and there they can go completely overkill.

How do you explain all the bridges that collapsed along the coquihala? Even our bridges are value engineered.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by libtard

How do you explain all the bridges that collapsed along the coquihala? Even our bridges are value engineered.

Quite simply the bridges were built 35 years ago at the time they were engineered to handle a certain water and debris flow. This past storm had a higher water and debris flow and thus the bridges and roads were washed out.

There is nothing stopping the government from upgrading the minimum design spec for all mountain highways. Which I feel is something that will happen.

Clearly the climate has changed and we must now build our infrastructure to handle the new climate.

[ssiguy]

The VAST majority of roads in BC are in relatively flat valleys as that is where nearly the entire population lives.

The entire province's highways are substandard, over capacity, slow, and often unsafe. Now it is coming back to haunt them. It will cost the province at least $10 billion to bring the highways up to standard of what it should have. Unfortunately, the province has no intention of doing anything substantive with them.

Even the rail corridors are poorly designed and over capacity in the LM with few overpasses despite being Vancouver being the busiest port in the country.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by cabotp

Quite simply the bridges were built 35 years ago at the time they were engineered to handle a certain water and debris flow. This past storm had a higher water and debris flow and thus the bridges and roads were washed out.

There is nothing stopping the government from upgrading the minimum design spec for all mountain highways. Which I feel is something that will happen.

Clearly the climate has changed and we must now build our infrastructure to handle the new climate.

Aren't most bridges designed for "100 year floods"?

[davee930]

Of course if we had an interstate system like the US. This catastophe would have been minimized. Bigger roads, more roads, bigger bridges. What am I missing here?

[zahav]

The federal government needs to provide way more infrastructure dollars to BC to improve roads and rail, we are a vital link with the port to the rest of the country, both for imports and especially for Canadian exports that originate from all over the country. We shouldn't have to shoulder that burden alone.

[davee930]

Originally Posted by zahav

The federal government needs to provide way more infrastructure dollars to BC to improve roads and rail, we are a vital link with the port to the rest of the country, both for imports and especially for Canadian exports that originate from all over the country. We shouldn't have to shoulder that burden alone.

Of course!

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by davee930

Of course if we had an interstate system like the US. This catastophe would have been minimized. Bigger roads, more roads, bigger bridges. What am I missing here?

The Coq is built similar to interstates. Isn't it still closed?

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by zahav

The federal government needs to provide way more infrastructure dollars to BC to improve roads and rail, we are a vital link with the port to the rest of the country, both for imports and especially for Canadian exports that originate from all over the country. We shouldn't have to shoulder that burden alone.

The problem is not with Ottawa but BC.

When expanding HWY#15 from the border to HWY#1 which is Vancouver's only north/south trucking route, BC just wanted a regular 4 lane road which is now has with 13 lights going thru 2 school zones and a major urban area, with much a 50km/hr speed limit. This was part of the Border Infrastructure Program and Ottawa was willing to contribute more to create a much faster and reliable route but it was BC that declined the money because they would have to match it and BC doesn't like spending money on roads no matter how essential.

Now HWY#15 is painfully slow and terminally backed-up, is used by agriculture tractors, lights at the bottom of 3 major hills bringing transport traffic to a painful stop, and even has a sign telling drivers to "slow to 50km/hr when children playing on the highway"...........you couldn't make this stuff up.

[sonysnob]

The fact that Hwy 1 is still only four lanes through basically all of the Lower Mainland is kind of a joke too.

I would think that Hwy 1 should be six lanes at least as far as Abbotsford.

And I don't think it's appropriate to just be adding a 24-hour HOV lane to the highway where they have widened it. I get not wanting to induce sprawl, but Hwy 1 is the only road east from Canada's third largest city. It should be designed as such.

[jamincan]

Originally Posted by Loco101

There are a few places on Hwy 17 along Lake Superior but they usually don't have a lot of rock falling at once. I tried searching online:


There was one near Kenora on the Hwy 17A bypass but it was related to construction and rock removal. Not because of erosion. https://winnipeg.ctvnews.ca/how-crews-cl...-blocked-a-highway-near-kenora-1.5335936

Here's one on Hwy 537 near Sudbury: https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=613034

One near Dryden:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-b...yden-re-opens-after-rock-slide-1.2693037

That's what I could find after doing a quick search. All of them had pretty quick cleanups and it was just rock not mud, trees, etc..

I believe the area just west of Sault Ste. Marie around Batchewana Bay and Lake Superior Provincial Park has some issues. Two years ago my family had a hiking trip up at Pukaskwa Park and had to detour through Chapleau because Hwy 17 was washed out west of Batchewana Bay. Then just a few weeks ago we were grabbing breakfast at the A&W in Blind River, and a heavy-equipment operator was in there heading to that same area as one lane was closed due to some rockfall. In both instances, though, I think the highway was reopened in relatively short order. Certainly nothing comparable to what BC or Nfld have seen just now.

I would be curious if it's even possible for Ontario to experience rainfall like they have seen. The Great Lakes are big, but I don't know if they are big enough for weather systems to pick up that amount of moisture. The most significant flooding event I'm aware of is Hurricane Hazel, which was a highly anomalous event, and damage from that was primarily due to irresponsible land-use planning practices of the time. If it were happen today, damage would likely be far more limited.

[sonysnob]

^ There were some major washouts near Wawa on Hwy 17 maybe 4 or 5 years ago as well. I think the highway was only closed for a few days though. It's generally not too troublesome to replace a washed out culvert. All the materials are generally pre-cast products that are ordered basically out of a catalogue.

BC's problems are far more serious since they involved full bridge washouts. I'd be willing to bet that the mountains of BC don't have comprehensive floodline mapping. Even in fairly built up areas in places like southern Ontario, the floodline mapping is constantly being updated and refined, and despite how engineered everything there is, flooding still poses a small risk to some properties and structures.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Aren't most bridges designed for "100 year floods"?

They were, but what used to be a "100-year flood" or "100-year storm" is both more frequent and more severe.

Other factors will also have to be considered: changes in freeze-thaw cycles, increased summer vs. winter temperature extremes, changes in the predominant types of precipitation by season (more or less snow, rain, ice).

Design standards have to be updated to reflect all this, and they'll vary by region of the country. But that just means new infrastructure will be built to withstand expected future weather events, climate norms, and environmental risks. Upgrading the older stuff will either happen when it's due for replacement, or if it's deemed important enough and at a high enough risk that it needs to be done before its useful lifespan is up.