TCH east of Nipigon (La route transcanadienne à l'est de Nipigon)

[Dengler Avenue]

It’s always been a wonder to me that the total length of TCH (17-417) in Ontario is longer than that across the Prairies.

[vid]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

Does the Dawson Road really attest to that? The final western 18km of Hwy 102 only carries 2500 vehicles per day.

Yes, at least half of that 2,500 a day is trans-Canada transport traffic. They're not stopping at anything in Thunder Bay, and there is no origin or destination other than Thunder Bay, so they're trans-Canada. Unless something in Kenora is being serviced from Sudbury or something in Sault Ste. Marie is being services from Winnipeg but even then, that's trans-Canada, essentially. They're crossing a fifth of the country.

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I wonder why there isn't that much interaction between Western Canada (i.e. Prairies) and Eastern Canada (i.e. Ontario and points east). I assume that, if the two aren't well connected, it's because there isn't that much interaction between them after all.

Most of it goes through the US. What is going through the north on road is probably things that can't go through the US, or they're companies that don't have the correct licensing to enter the US.

[sonysnob]

Originally Posted by vid

Yes, at least half of that 2,500 a day is trans-Canada transport traffic. They're not stopping at anything in Thunder Bay, and there is no origin or destination other than Thunder Bay, so they're trans-Canada. Unless something in Kenora is being serviced from Sudbury or something in Sault Ste. Marie is being services from Winnipeg but even then, that's trans-Canada, essentially. They're crossing a fifth of the country.

If half of that is Trans-Canada Traffic, that's only 1200 vehicles per day. If that traffic is dispersed evenly over 12 daylight hours, that's only 100 vehicles per hour. That's very little traffic, even for a two lane highway.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

If half of that is Trans-Canada Traffic, that's only 1200 vehicles per day. If that traffic is dispersed evenly over 12 daylight hours, that's only 100 vehicles per hour. That's very little traffic, even for a two lane highway.

That is almost 1 every 30 seconds...

That is quite a lot.

[Dengler Avenue]

for 2-lane roadways I suppose

[vid]

The street I live on has an AADT of over 15,000 but it still has quiet periods, even during rush hour.

The 401 has an AADT of around 500,000.

[sonysnob]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

That is almost 1 every 30 seconds...

That is quite a lot.

That’s not a lot. The capacity of a two lane highway lane is somewhere around 2000 vehicles per hour per direction. Less depending on driveways/left turns what have you. Highway 102 has a ton of residual capacity.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

That’s not a lot. The capacity of a two lane highway lane is somewhere around 2000 vehicles per hour per direction. Less depending on driveways/left turns what have you. Highway 102 has a ton of residual capacity.

I know in the government's world, it isn't a lot. Try making a left turn with that traffic.

[vid]

No problem making left turns on Dawson Road. The problem is that a lot of people buy 200 foot frontage estate lots and stick their driveways in the blind spots.

[sonysnob]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

That’s not a lot. The capacity of a two lane highway lane is somewhere around 2000 vehicles per hour per direction. Less depending on driveways/left turns what have you. Highway 102 has a ton of residual capacity.

swimer_spe, you're nuts.

Between my job and my personal life, I drive something like 80,000km per year. Hwy 102 isn't busy. At all. If you can't make a left turn onto a road that carries 2500 vehicles per day, you aren't qualified to drive, and shouldn't have a licence.

And the MTO regulates driveway access on all sections of provincial highway, so any driveway that is constructed on a provincial highway needs to meet minimum stopping site distance requirements or the province won't grant a permit.

[vid]

Highway 102 east of Dog Lake Road isn't a provincial highway, though. That's the problem.

Personally, I don't think any of highway 102 should be a provincial highway.

[F. Lionel]

Twinning of 11/17 between Thunder Bay and Nipigon is back in the news

I guess this answers my question about what is happening with the project around Dorion. The Feds are confirming the funding but putting the progress of the project squarely on the Province of Ontario (really Doug Ford's Conservatives).

To their credit at least Ontario said there would be an upcoming announcement. Of course - anything announced in the next decade is technically an upcoming announcement.

The announcement is nothing but a political play - the federal Liberals appear with the popular local provincial Liberal and basically call out the provincial Conservatives (and imply that the federal Conservatives will be more of the same).

[Dengler Avenue]

It was $83M in 2017 and now the feds announced $37M, so $120M in total (not accounting for inflation)?

[F. Lionel]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

It was $83M in 2017 and now the feds announced $37M, so $120M in total (not accounting for inflation)?

In theory...

I'm afraid all of it has gone by the wayside, however, after the last election. But no one can say for certain what's going on as of late - there's been no "Official" confirmation about how anything is proceeding.

The article above is the first real mention of anything related to these twinning projects since the provincial election.

So far as anyone was aware it had all been shelved, once again.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by vid

Highway 102 east of Dog Lake Road isn't a provincial highway, though. That's the problem.

Personally, I don't think any of highway 102 should be a provincial highway.

Why? It should be divided and be signed as TCH.

[vid]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Why? It should be divided and be signed as TCH.

That ship sailed in the 1960s* when they decided to make the Trans-Canada Highway travel along Arthur Street instead of Dawson Road, and then it made a brief return before sailing off again in 1990 as the Shabaqua Extension.

Not doable. Not worth the waste of time. Just download it, throttle its speeds, and we'll move on.


*They made the TCH travel all the way down to Arthur Street so that Fort William wouldn't be left out. A few years later, the two cities would amalgamate and it wouldn't fucking matter.

[sonysnob]

The Dawson Road was a pretty terrible highway until the 1970s. The new bridge over the Kam River, and the three (now two) railways wasn't completed until the mid-1970s. Before that 102 was pretty much a goat path.

Highway 11/17 was comparably a much higher standard road when the Trans-Canada Highway designation was applied to it.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by vid

That ship sailed in the 1960s* when they decided to make the Trans-Canada Highway travel along Arthur Street instead of Dawson Road, and then it made a brief return before sailing off again in 1990 as the Shabaqua Extension.

Not doable. Not worth the waste of time. Just download it, throttle its speeds, and we'll move on.


*They made the TCH travel all the way down to Arthur Street so that Fort William wouldn't be left out. A few years later, the two cities would amalgamate and it wouldn't fucking matter.

So, why would it not be possible to twin the highway? it is a shorter route than the current 17.

[Dengler Avenue]

I’ve looked at it before. We will first need a bypass route 1.5 km SW of the Hoddler Avenue interchange. Then we will only be able to widen the current roadway to 4 lanes with a median barrier and with service roads on both sides of the highway to serve the abutting properties. If you can convince their owners, sure.

It seems convenient to me to make use of the 2+1 configuration of 11-17 from Kakabeka Falls to a bit south of Sistonens Corners though.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I’ve looked at it before. We will first need a bypass route 1.5 km SW of the Hoddler Avenue interchange. Then we will only be able to widen the current roadway to 4 lanes with a median barrier and with service roads on both sides of the highway to serve the abutting properties. If you can convince their owners, sure.

It seems convenient to me to make use of the 2+1 configuration of 11-17 from Kakabeka Falls to a bit south of Sistonens Corners though.

Lets build the Bradford Bypass a 2 + 1 configuration.

I am tired of the nonsense. Either we do it right, or don't do it.