Highways in Canada

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by ericmacm

Cost is absolutely a huge factor, unfortunately. The construction of brand new interchanges these days seems to be coming in at around $150-200M (in ideal conditions like open prairie, areas with challenging terrain would likely cost even more) and the costs of overpasses are highly variable.

Just doing some ballpark estimating, using the TCH in Manitoba as an example, if you were to build a new interchange every 10 km or so (using average interchange spacing on 401 in SW Ontario as an example), you would be building around 14 on the segment of the TCH between Winnipeg and the Ontario border, which would cost around $2.1-2.8B just for the interchanges, not counting overpass grade separations, bypasses, or access removals. The number would grow closer to around $9.2B to include interchanges on the remainder of the TCH in Manitoba if you continued with an approximately 10km spacing.

While something like this is not out of the realm of impossibility, it is a lot of money for what is realistically not a lot of return outside of safety improvements. Interchanges will improve safety and will reduce accidents, especially on a TCH system that sees an ever-increasing amount of truck traffic, but a $9.2B+ spend is a very hard figure to justify by any government.

Despite the costs, however, I do believe that we need to seriously pick up the pace when it comes to work on both twinning and upgrading the TCH network, specifically in its most underdeveloped sections through BC and ON. It is very clear that not having a robust national highway network like the US is a major point of vulnerability.

Calgary to Winnipeg is about 1,300 km. So, that would need about 130 interchanges spaced 10km apart. Lets say that is $200m per. That would be $26 billion. You are seeing the real world effects of building a divided highway cheaply. Time to dig deep and make them limited access.

[Metro-One]

200 million per interchange?

That’s a really high estimate for simple diamonds on flat land, which most of these interchanges would be.

Also, why does it seem that Canada had its thumb up its ass when the US was building the interstate system when things were cheap?

[Architype]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Calgary to Winnipeg is about 1,300 km. So, that would need about 130 interchanges spaced 10km apart. Lets say that is $200m per. That would be $26 billion. You are seeing the real world effects of building a divided highway cheaply. Time to dig deep and make them limited access.

Highway overpasses should not cost that much, perhaps more like $5 million each. In this case, some of the necessary interchange seems to be present already. These don't need to be fancy or complicated interchanges, but an overpass is necessary, unless you have traffic signals. The flat terrain in Saskatchewan makes it even cheaper than in most of Canada.

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Bus and a truck collides.
Maybe there is an issue with highways in the Prairies. This is not the first.

A lot of the bad accidents in the Prairies happen at intersections along the 4 lane divided highways with at-grade crossings. In Ontario there would most likely be a freeway interchange at ones that busy even though it's not fully freeway. An example is Highway 11 between Huntsville and North Bay.

I witnessed a bad accident a few years ago at an at-grade crossing on Hwy 1 in Saskatchewan with the intersection to the town of Whitewood. The intersection is busy enough to warrant a freeway interchange but nothing has been done yet. The emergency response was also a joke compared to what you would see in Ontario.

All that seems to be done at those dangerous intersections is that the speed limit may get reduced by it really doesn't slow down many vehicles. Also, many crossing the highway will do it dangerously in front of traffic approaching at a high speed.

[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).

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Calgary to Winnipeg is about 1,300 km. So, that would need about 130 interchanges spaced 10km apart. Lets say that is $200m per. That would be $26 billion. You are seeing the real world effects of building a divided highway cheaply. Time to dig deep and make them limited access.

$26 Billion is a mere fraction of what went out the federal government’s door during Covid. It’s not a prohibitive number.

[Architype]

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).

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

[esquire]

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. The collision must have happened in the far right (south) lane of the intersection, the bus was spun and continued to the final resting place, most of the victims must have died from the fire. This is one of the most dangerous types of highway intersections, the undivided ones with two way traffic are perhaps even worse. Route 5 looks like a major enough highway to warrant a simple overpass. I think both drivers survived.

I don't think the pictures tell the whole story, like why did the bus driver not see the truck coming and judge its speed accurately, was he distracted? Why could the truck driver not avoid or at least mitigate the collision? Even driving a semi, if you are going the posted speed limit (80)(edit: 100 - apparently it was raised some time ago?) you should have enough time to slow down or use evasive manouevres. How did the bus get hit in such a way that caused it to end up so far from the intersection and burn?

In this case the drivers have reportedly survived, so we should be able to get some answers.

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).

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.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by ericmacm

Cost is absolutely a huge factor, unfortunately. The construction of brand new interchanges these days seems to be coming in at around $150-200M (in ideal conditions like open prairie, areas with challenging terrain would likely cost even more) and the costs of overpasses are highly variable.

Just doing some ballpark estimating, using the TCH in Manitoba as an example, if you were to build a new interchange every 10 km or so (using average interchange spacing on 401 in SW Ontario as an example), you would be building around 14 on the segment of the TCH between Winnipeg and the Ontario border, which would cost around $2.1-2.8B just for the interchanges, not counting overpass grade separations, bypasses, or access removals. The number would grow closer to around $9.2B to include interchanges on the remainder of the TCH in Manitoba if you continued with an approximately 10km spacing.

While something like this is not out of the realm of impossibility, it is a lot of money for what is realistically not a lot of return outside of safety improvements. Interchanges will improve safety and will reduce accidents, especially on a TCH system that sees an ever-increasing amount of truck traffic, but a $9.2B+ spend is a very hard figure to justify by any government.

Despite the costs, however, I do believe that we need to seriously pick up the pace when it comes to work on both twinning and upgrading the TCH network, specifically in its most underdeveloped sections through BC and ON. It is very clear that not having a robust national highway network like the US is a major point of vulnerability.

It's nowhere near $150-200 million per interchange. MTO is building a new, greenfield interchange on Highway 6 south of Guelph, including a second road-over highway crossing (without interchange), for $62 million:

https://www.raqs.merx.com/public/bulletin/contractView.jsf?id=411422304

In Northern Ontario, MTO is building new construction greenfield freeways with full access control for about $12 million per kilometre:

https://www.raqs.merx.com/public/bulletin/contractView.jsf?id=33018951

For interchanges to approach $150-200 million, it needs to be a large complex full freeway interchange or have extremely complex staging requirements. The Dixie Rd interchange in Mississauga is $165 million for example, but that is an extremely complex interchange project with a major highway reconstruction and widening, new service roads, huge utility infrastructure works, etc.

Simple diamond interchanges to eliminate grade crossings in rural locations in the prairies could probably be delivered for $30 million a pop or so at most if they were cost conscious in their design. Something like this.

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.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by esquire

I don't think the pictures tell the whole story, like why did the bus driver not see the truck coming and judge its speed accurately, was he distracted? Why could the truck driver not avoid or at least mitigate the collision? Even driving a semi, if you are going the posted speed limit (80) you should have enough time to slow down or use evasive manouevres. How did the bus get hit in such a way that caused it to end up so far from the intersection and burn?

In this case the drivers have reportedly survived, so we should be able to get some answers.



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.

Or, in the interim, we can do it the Eastern European style: RIRO (right-in, right-out), then a U-turn spot +/- 1.5 KM from the RIRO with left-hand exit and merge lanes (like the ones in B.C.).

At least this isn’t Ontario where MTO explicitly bans civilian U-turn spots on the freeway in its geometric design guideline.

[ericmacm]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

200 million per interchange?

That’s a really high estimate for simple diamonds on flat land, which most of these interchanges would be.

Also, why does it seem that Canada had its thumb up its ass when the US was building the interstate system when things were cheap?

I’m using more recent new build (not an upgrade or reconstruction) interchange projects in Manitoba and Alberta as examples, and going on the high end as a more conservative estimate.

[esquire]

New interchanges in Manitoba have been absurdly expensive in recent years. It seems like there is always some complicating factor driving prices up. Take for instance the new PTH 100 @ St. Mary's Road that is currently under construction. A diverging diamond on flatland prairie with some associated roadworks (a few realignments, etc.). Estimated cost? Not sure where it landed exactly, but the range was between $150-200 million.

[drew]

Bridges and elevated roadways requiring foundations

+

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

=

More expensive infrastructure.

[thewave46]

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.

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.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Loco101

A lot of the bad accidents in the Prairies happen at intersections along the 4 lane divided highways with at-grade crossings. In Ontario there would most likely be a freeway interchange at ones that busy even though it's not fully freeway. An example is Highway 11 between Huntsville and North Bay.

I witnessed a bad accident a few years ago at an at-grade crossing on Hwy 1 in Saskatchewan with the intersection to the town of Whitewood. The intersection is busy enough to warrant a freeway interchange but nothing has been done yet. The emergency response was also a joke compared to what you would see in Ontario.

All that seems to be done at those dangerous intersections is that the speed limit may get reduced by it really doesn't slow down many vehicles. Also, many crossing the highway will do it dangerously in front of traffic approaching at a high speed.

All intersecting highways should have interchanges if it is a divided highway on either of them.

[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.

[Dengler Avenue]

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.

That was exactly what I suggested.

[harls]

My brother and his GF were almost killed in this exact same scenario back in the late 90's. He was travelling WB on highway 1 when a senior pulled out into his lane coming from the south on #13, a very similar intersection to hwy 5. Luckily he only got t-boned on the back end of his car and everyone survived.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

That was exactly what I suggested.

Sorry, didn't see your post

The current configuration really is a terrible design. It's hard to gauge if the median is large enough for a car traveling across the highway to hide in before proceeding again, but I wouldn't risk it. I certainly wouldn't do it with a bus. Some intersections seem to be even worse. You'd have to be sure that there was no oncoming traffic coming at you at 120 km/h in both directions before proceeding, and it's hard to gauge with all the obstacles from behind the stop line.

One direction should swing out a bit to allow for a bigger median and, if you're already doing that, might as well reconfigure it for a RiRo.

[thewave46]

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.

Maybe making the podunk accesses a RIRO-style affair might work, but the podunk accesses aren't generally the problem. Their low volume of traffic doesn't generally affect highway operations. Having their access limited to RIRO-style onto the Trans-Canada wherever possible or forcing them to use side-roads until the next major intersection does seem an easy win. It would moderately improve safety, but would cost relatively little.

The problem here was the junction of two reasonably busy provincial highways, one with lots of heavy truck traffic. Making traffic detour much out of the way would be a non-starter, especially since the village to the south (Carberry, MB) probably wants equal access to both Brandon-bound and Winnipeg-bound sections of the Trans-Canada. A funky RIRO-style median turnaround would be a short-term kludge solution. Better than nothing I suppose, but short-term kludges tend to become long-term solutions.

I think there's a point where we ask for a higher standard. The Trans-Canada through the Prairies is deserving.