Highways in Canada

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by Ozabald

BC has three crossings with Alaska; there's five border crossings in the Lower Mainland alone; six if one includes Ross Lake/Hozomeen.

Thanks, I wasn't aware of this one. Something to add to my "places to go" file once the road is repaired!

[craner]

Calgary Ring Road
http://https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/traffic-to-flow-on-one-of-final-stoney-trail-ring-road-sections-in-early-october

[cranes]

https://newhighway7.ca/

New Highway 7 – Phase 2 – Grand River Bridges – Design and Construction Report (2023)

Phase 2 – New Highway 7 Grand River Bridges

A Design and Construction Report (DCR) that documents the Detailed Design of the new Grand River Bridges and associated environmental mitigation measures is now available for 30-day public review from September 27, 2023 to October 26, 2023.

Notice is posted on the project website www.NewHighway7.ca, published in local newspapers, and sent to persons on the project mailing list. If there are no significant outstanding concerns at the end of the 30-day public review period for the DCR, the project can move towards the construction stage.

https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...b776475-35fb-5979-a479-59537b6a5ef8.html

[Dengler Avenue]

A grand bridge over Grand River

[Innsertnamehere]

Damn - an 80km/h limit on the highway is a shame. The old plan was 90km/h - which I understood given the tight corners, but 80km/h is just so insanely low for a freeway.

[haljackey]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Damn - an 80km/h limit on the highway is a shame. The old plan was 90km/h - which I understood given the tight corners, but 80km/h is just so insanely low for a freeway.

That will probably be brought up in the feedback. If you're going to do all this work and not make it 100km/h (ideally 110 or 120), that seems like a big waste.

I love how the article says they're making it 80km/h to save money, yet they're also making it 3 lanes on each bridge.... maybe a compromise is to narrow it to 2 lanes and use those savings to make it better designed so you can actually drive fast on it?

2 lanes at 120km/h is going to move just as many vehicles as 3 lanes at 80km/h given normal conditions anyway. If you need a third lane in the future, you can just cannibalize the shoulder as is done elsewhere. Not ideal sure, but so long as the structure can still support the weight of a fully loaded bridge its well within structural design.

Seeing that this project has been delayed for like 50 years, you'd think by now there should be sufficient funding to build it properly.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by haljackey

That will probably be brought up in the feedback. If you're going to do all this work and not make it 100km/h (ideally 110 or 120), that seems like a big waste.

I love how the article says they're making it 80km/h to save money, yet they're also making it 3 lanes on each bridge.... maybe a compromise is to narrow it to 2 lanes and use those savings to make it better designed so you can actually drive fast on it?

2 lanes at 120km/h is going to move just as many vehicles as 3 lanes at 80km/h given normal conditions anyway. If you need a third lane in the future, you can just cannibalize the shoulder as is done elsewhere. Not ideal sure, but so long as the structure can still support the weight of a fully loaded bridge its well within structural design.


Seeing that this project has been delayed for like 50 years, you'd think by now there should be sufficient funding to build it properly.

Getting it up to a 100km/h speed limit means much larger curves and a higher superelevation - it's not so simple. 90 (which means a 110km/h design speed) was a decent compromise, as just to the west it's connecting to 85 which is a 90km/h highway anyway, but 80 would make it only the second provincial freeway in the province with a limit that low.

Honestly, it will likely be built much better than the 406 through St. Catharines is anyway, so all it'll end up doing is becoming a massive speed trap. The 406 has 250m radius corners on the mainline highway, which is extremely tight.. It feels like the 80 limit is appropriate. this will be a 500+m radius, just with a reduced superelevation.. it's going to feel very safe to do well over 80km/h on it.

I suspect the ultimate design will have this stretch at 80km/h, and the main highway westward at 90km/h, unfortunately. The tight turn into guelph to connect to the Hanlon Parkway is also tighter than standard for a 100km/h highway and I somehow suspect they aren't going to sign the middle portion of the highway for 100 if both ends of it are having reduced limits..

[Dengler Avenue]

So Kitchener - Guelph Freeway and possibly Hanlon Parkway will only be posted at 90 km/h?

[Innsertnamehere]

MTO may sign it 100km/h in the middle between the two towns, but the curve into Guelph is almost definitely going to be 90, and now we know the approach into Kitchener is going to be 80.. so..

I'm hopeful the southern part of the Hanlon can be 100km/ at least, south of Kortright - but the part through central Guelph would probably be looking at a 90 limit after completion as well.

[Horus]

I'm no engineer, but could they not have found a way to cross the river in a single span, rather than needing a pier in the middle of the river? Despite it's name, that river isn't so Grand.

[sonysnob]

I suspect it will just be the Grand River bridges that will have a lower design speed. East of the Grand River, the highway runs through relatively flat green field design, and I'd expect it will have the design speed of a modern 400 series highway.

It'd be interesting to know what the cost savings were for the reduction in design speed at the Grand River bridges is. I'm guessing it must be pretty substantial. I don't think they'd reduce the design speed otherwise.

[sonysnob]

Originally Posted by Horus

I'm no engineer, but could they not have found a way to cross the river in a single span, rather than needing a pier in the middle of the river? Despite it's name, that river isn't so Grand.

In water piers are generally not desirable where they could be avoided, however, even for the Grand River, they'd probably need to build something like a cable stayed bridge or something to avoid any in water piers.

The problem with in water piers is that they can be prone to scouring during high flow events. While the scouring potential can't be fully avoided while constructing an in water pier, the Grand is a pretty low and lazy river, so it's probably not that much of a concern in this case.

From the renders it looks like a pretty bridge. Hopefully that's what ends up actually being constructed. The renders of the new Credit River bridge for the QEW showed a very elegant design, but they ended up building a rather pedestrian looking launched steel girder. So we shall see.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

I suspect it will just be the Grand River bridges that will have a lower design speed. East of the Grand River, the highway runs through relatively flat green field design, and I'd expect it will have the design speed of a modern 400 series highway.

It'd be interesting to know what the cost savings were for the reduction in design speed at the Grand River bridges is. I'm guessing it must be pretty substantial. I don't think they'd reduce the design speed otherwise.

I'm not a highway engineer, but the curve to connect to the Hanlon is a 575 metre radius curve on the last set of plans which were publically presented. I don't believe that's enough to have a posted limit of 100, which from my understanding generally wants at least a 750 metre radius.

It may be just a short reduced limit though, like Highway 11 does at the curve in Gravenhurst. We'll have to see.

The rest of the highway, minus this chunk now, appears to generally be built for 100km/h speeds however, so we may see it be 80-100-90 in terms of speed limit.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

I'm not a highway engineer, but the curve to connect to the Hanlon is a 575 metre radius curve on the last set of plans which were publically presented. I don't believe that's enough to have a posted limit of 100, which from my understanding generally wants at least a 750 metre radius.

It may be just a short reduced limit though, like Highway 11 does at the curve in Gravenhurst. We'll have to see.

The rest of the highway, minus this chunk now, appears to generally be built for 100km/h speeds however, so we may see it be 80-100-90 in terms of speed limit.

Technically the turning radius (measured from the centre of the median) can be as low as 700 m: In the case of 30-m median, it just means that the turning radius for the lane closest to the centre of the circular curve is 700 m - 30 m / 2 - 3.75 m x 2 = 677.5 m. (In the case of 22-m median, that becomes 700 m - 22 m / 2 - 3.75 m x 2 = 681.5 m). The absolute minimum turning radius for 120-kph design speed is 648 m (rounded to the nearest integer).
Perhaps, if the 110-kph design speed only covers a small section, even an advisory yellow speed sign will do the job.

[jamincan]

Cynical me: this bridge is never ever going to get built anyway, so the design speed is largely just academic.

More seriously, I've seen $80 million for the bridge bandied about which seems low to me considering the renderings show the span extending over the flood plains on either side.

[JayMi]

[Dengler Avenue]

That’s like York Regional Highway 7 between Richmond Hill and Markham in Ontario.
(I’m suppressing my urge to mention an Okanagan Freeway here. )

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by jamincan

Cynical me: this bridge is never ever going to get built anyway, so the design speed is largely just academic.

Even more cynical: a small percentage of drivers will obey that speed limit anyway.

[flipper316]

Originally Posted by craner

Calgary Ring Road
http://https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/traffic-to-flow-on-one-of-final-stoney-trail-ring-road-sections-in-early-october

Man what a gorgeous freeway the ring road will be once it's finally finished. Wish we had something like that in BC.

[Innsertnamehere]

An interactive map of the proposed Highway 413 has been posted on the project's website:

https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/db76d6b5387140dab22f07c17c1ac346/



Couple of interesting notes:



- The Humber River bridge crossing is just a hair over 1km long - this would make it the largest bridge crossing in the GTA by a decent margin, excluding the Burlington Skyway. Indeed, it would be one of the largest non-international bridges in the province, behind only the two Skyways on the QEW.

- Despite only being rebuilt in 2020, the King-Vaughan Road bridge over the 400 is proposed to be replaced to accommodate the interchange with the 413

- The size of the 410/413 interchange strikes me as rather excessive

- The bridge over the Credit River is over 600m long, much larger than I anticipated.

- The design seems to be for 6 lanes across the entire alignment - this is new as far as I know. Previous studies IIRC called for 6 lanes between the 400 and 427 and south of Mayfield Road, but the central part was to originally only to be 4 lanes.

- I continue to be confused as to why they are proposing to retain the 410 connection to Highway 10, including expensive flyovers to connect it to the now extended 410, which is effectively replaced by the 413. I feel like they would be better off removing it as most traffic will likely get on the 413 anyway.