Quote:
Originally Posted by wave46
An Ontario tall-wall would basically complete the separation of lanes for that section of Highway 69.
Honestly, I'm at the point of even thinking that a full on freeway-to-freeway interchange for 69 and 17 is kind of wasteful at this point.
Then again, the MTO has really gone gung-ho for over designing things on that highway given its volume. Beautiful overbuilt interchanges for podunk side roads, massive rock cuts when narrowing the freeway would have sufficed. No expense was spared.
|
I sort of disagree with the 2nd part. I think a free-flowing interchange between freeways is simply a matter of good practice. For example, I find the interchange between 401 and Highbury Avenue in London aweful. Bref, 8 S to 401 W and 401 E to 8 N in Cambridge is even worse.
Anyway back to 17/69: At the very least, 69 north to 17 west shouldn’t be interrupted because I’m sure (lol I can be really wrong) lots of truck go to the industrial park at Fielding. As for 17 W to 69 S, at least we should allocate ROW for the free-flowing ramp.
As for the last part, I really think 110 m ROW in Canadian Shield is financially irresponsible outside of North Bay, Sudbury, SSM and Thunder Bay, where having a 6-lane freeway isn’t without basis.
@swimmer_spe, don’t you always complain that Queen’s Park shorted the North in terms of freeway extension? Tell them to stop going extravagant so they can no longer cite cost as a factor to not do it. Outside of those 4 cities, I already
struggle to make a case even for 4 lanes, so 6 lanes are pure pipe dreams.