HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #441  
Old Posted Oct 5, 2009, 9:46 PM
Mininari Mininari is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria (formerly Port Moody, then Winnipeg)
Posts: 2,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by eternallyme View Post
Perhaps a toll bridge across Shuswap Lake would be the best way to do it? It would be quite an impressive high-level bridge for sure though!

I agree! Why not have a tolled FAST route, with the option of using the newly redesignated old Highway 1A (old highway 1) Through Salmon Arm as the untolled, free alternative. Salmon Arm is such a vacation destination now, I don't think it will suffer if it loses some through traffic.

And on this note, I found this somewhat obscure Hwy 1 Project website on the BC MoTH website:

http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/highwayprojects/Hwy1/index.htm

So, there does seem to be some meat to those "4-laning the whole tomalie" signs, but there is not a designated website like Gateway or the Okanagan Valley Corridor... etc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #442  
Old Posted Oct 5, 2009, 10:40 PM
0773|=\ 0773|=\ is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,256
Salmon Arm isn't the worst place to stop for travellers driving between Vancouver and Calgary. Build the new bypass, but make the two-lane TCH a 'Business Route' like they have along various US Interstates.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #443  
Old Posted Oct 5, 2009, 10:52 PM
Stingray2004's Avatar
Stingray2004 Stingray2004 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: White Rock, BC (Metro Vancouver)
Posts: 3,145
Regarding a crossing of Shuswap Lake to by-pass Salmon Arm:

An original summary from 14 years ago:

Quote:
SHUSWAP LAKE CROSSING STUDY [ DRAFT 1995 ]
MAK Engineering, Walter Dilger Consulting Engineers Ltd, Colder Associates Ltd.


The objective of this study was to investigate the technical and economic viability of a bridge crossing of the Salmon Arm of Shuswap Lake, as an alternative alignment for Trans-Canada Highway improvement. The study included a video camera survey of highway traffic, directed at a review of several key assumptions related to traffic data.

The present route of the Trans-Canada Highway makes an approximately 29 kilometre loop around the Salmon Ann of Shuswap Lake, passing directly through the urban area of the District of Salmon Arm [population 12,000]. Highway improvement options have for many years considered an upgrade of the existing alignment, and a proposed southerly bypass of the District of Salmon Arm. This study investigated a northerly bypass of the District of Salmon Ann, utilizing a 2 kilometre bridge across Shuswap Lake between Sunnybrae [Tappen] and Engineers Point [Canoe], and compared such an option with improvement through the urban area along the existing TCH comdor or around the community via a southerly bypass.

The concept of a bridge across Shuswap Lake had been considered previously, but rejected because of perceived problems associated with lake depth and engineering. Recent data indicating a much shallower lake bottom suggested that the northerly bypass concept should be revisited.

The study investigated the concept of a combined highway and railway bridge, reasoning that there was significant benefit to relocation of both transportation facilities out of the urbanized area and away from the waterfront.

The work included preliminary structural investigation of bridge options, and a preliminary geotechnical assessment of abutment and lake bed conditions.
http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/kickinghorse..._mgmt_plan.pdf

And from another engineering study completed years later by Earth Tech:

Quote:
• Two lane 100 km/h
bypass around Salmon Arm.
• Interchanges constructed at each
end to connect existing TCH.
• 1.7 km long crossing of Shuswap
Lake, two lanes with 2.0 m
shoulders and sidewalk on one side.

Conclusions:
1. The bypass is the preferred long term option as it
significantly reduces travel time and would reduce
truck traffic through Salmon Arm. However, the need
for a bypass is beyond the planning horizon for the
TCH corridor.
http://web.archive.org/web/200306201.../MikeBaker.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #444  
Old Posted Oct 6, 2009, 12:19 AM
eternallyme eternallyme is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,243
Another issue is between Chase and Tappen - would it be better to go inland through Turtle Valley, or stick to the current alignment?

I'd change any design to require 4 lanes of traffic, with a design speed of 120 km/h in the rural sections as opposed to 100 km/h, except in the most mountainous areas and the national parks. Given the design through Sicamous, an urban-style freeway with a 90 km/h design speed (similar to in Golden) makes most sense, to avoid a second large bridge. That should also be the design in Revelstoke.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #445  
Old Posted Oct 6, 2009, 3:28 AM
0773|=\ 0773|=\ is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by eternallyme View Post
Another issue is between Chase and Tappen - would it be better to go inland through Turtle Valley, or stick to the current alignment?

I'd change any design to require 4 lanes of traffic, with a design speed of 120 km/h in the rural sections as opposed to 100 km/h, except in the most mountainous areas and the national parks. Given the design through Sicamous, an urban-style freeway with a 90 km/h design speed (similar to in Golden) makes most sense, to avoid a second large bridge. That should also be the design in Revelstoke.
Remember, design speed and posted speed are two different things. The Golden section is actually a 100 km/hr design speed, even though the speed limit has been posted lower.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #446  
Old Posted Oct 6, 2009, 4:23 AM
craner's Avatar
craner craner is offline
Go Tall or Go Home
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 6,239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mininari View Post
I agree! Why not have a tolled FAST route, with the option of using the newly redesignated old Highway 1A (old highway 1) Through Salmon Arm as the untolled, free alternative. Salmon Arm is such a vacation destination now, I don't think it will suffer if it loses some through traffic.

And on this note, I found this somewhat obscure Hwy 1 Project website on the BC MoTH website:

http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/highwayprojects/Hwy1/index.htm

So, there does seem to be some meat to those "4-laning the whole tomalie" signs, but there is not a designated website like Gateway or the Okanagan Valley Corridor... etc.
nice find
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #447  
Old Posted Oct 6, 2009, 1:37 PM
eternallyme eternallyme is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,243
The section through Glacier National Park (and Revelstoke National Park? although that is short) is federal responsibility though...will they get involved as well?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #448  
Old Posted Oct 6, 2009, 6:51 PM
Mininari Mininari is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria (formerly Port Moody, then Winnipeg)
Posts: 2,432

They have to, don't they? I thought that roadways in national parks were solely under federal jurisdiction.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #449  
Old Posted Oct 6, 2009, 11:05 PM
srperrycgy's Avatar
srperrycgy srperrycgy is offline
I'm the bear on the right
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Calgary (Killarney)
Posts: 1,659
The Feds do have the responsibility, but it's not a priority, yet. It's taken more than 25 years to get the TCH twinned in Banff NP. So don't expect miracles from them.
__________________
Stevinder.
* * * * * *
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #450  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2009, 2:43 AM
Dado's Avatar
Dado Dado is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by eternallyme View Post
Good start, but need a lot more work done in the Ottawa Valley. There is at least 100 km more to be twinned as soon as possible...
Bah... the less money we waste on this now the less surplus highway we'll have in the future to maintain.

They should definitely can this freewayifying business. Just make them twinned highways with at-grade crossings - fewer crumbling bridges to worry about when we won't have the resources to maintain all this distant rural infrastructure.

Anyway, let's see if the morons at the MTO can get the bicycle/pedestrian diversion right this time. So far they've managed to forget to put the restriction signs up at the entrance to the freeway each and every time it's been extended westwards. It'd be really nice if they actually told the trans-Canada cyclists where they should go, but that would be a real change of focus for the Ministry of Cars and Trucks and Occasionally Buses but Only Because We Have To.
__________________
Ottawa's quasi-official motto: "It can't be done"
Ottawa's quasi-official ethos: "We have a process to follow"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #451  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2009, 8:01 AM
craner's Avatar
craner craner is offline
Go Tall or Go Home
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 6,239
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #452  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2009, 2:08 PM
eternallyme eternallyme is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,243
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
Bah... the less money we waste on this now the less surplus highway we'll have in the future to maintain.

They should definitely can this freewayifying business. Just make them twinned highways with at-grade crossings - fewer crumbling bridges to worry about when we won't have the resources to maintain all this distant rural infrastructure.

Anyway, let's see if the morons at the MTO can get the bicycle/pedestrian diversion right this time. So far they've managed to forget to put the restriction signs up at the entrance to the freeway each and every time it's been extended westwards. It'd be really nice if they actually told the trans-Canada cyclists where they should go, but that would be a real change of focus for the Ministry of Cars and Trucks and Occasionally Buses but Only Because We Have To.
Have you ever travelled that highway? It is not an empty 2-lane highway as you believe, but currently operating at or over capacity. Also, at each traffic light, waits can be up to 30 minutes and it is sometimes even backed up for miles. Keeping them at-grade will not solve that issue.

As for bicycle restrictions, due to the lack of alternate routes once you get farther west, eventually they will have to be permitted on the highway shoulder, which would need to be widened.

As for alternate travel modes, they would barely make a dent in traffic counts up there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #453  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2009, 3:53 PM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,186
How about building 2+1 Roads for some of the northern Ontario routes, like they've been doing in Scandinavian countries.. they've been quite successful in improving safety (to motorway levels), allow for frequent passing lanes (and could allow RIRO property access), and are cheaper than full motorways.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2%2B1_road



http://www.nra.ie/Publications/Downl...le,3509,en.PDF

edit: a couple of wikipedia thumbnails




Last edited by waterloowarrior; Oct 7, 2009 at 8:05 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #454  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2009, 4:35 PM
Mininari Mininari is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria (formerly Port Moody, then Winnipeg)
Posts: 2,432
Email Reply from the MoTH regarding the "4-laning signage." Nearly 40km of 4-laning underway, or about to start! Not too bad... apparently more on the way.


Thank you for your enquiry of Oct 5th, 2009 regarding the signage for the TransCanada 4-laning from Kamloops to the Alberta border.

These signs have been placed along the TransCanada Corridor to highlight that the government is focussing efforts along this corridor.

Since 2001 the Ministry has invested over $325 million on upgrading the TransCanada Highway between Kamloops and the Alberta border.

An additional $350 million has been announced in new projects along this corridor. These projects are being cost shared with the Federal Government.

Projects include:

· 8.8 km of 4-laning from 10 Mile Hill to the Yoho National Park Boundary

· 3.8 km o f 4-laning from the Golden Hill to the West Portal, east of Golden

· 3.5 km of 4-laning by Donald Bridge including a new structure over the Columbia River, approx. 26 km west of Golden.

· 2.2 km of 4-laning by Clanwilliam Bridge, approximately 11 km west of Revelstoke

· 4.3 km of 4-laning between Hilltop and Balmoral, approx. 7 km east of Sorrento

· 6.1 km of 4-laning between Pritchard and Hoffman's Bluff, approx. 42 km east of Kamloops

· 10.5 km of 4-laning between Monte Creek and Pritchard, approx. 30 km east of Kamloops

We have been actively working on the engineering, environmental approvals, and property acquisition for these projects. The 10 Mile Hill to Yoho National Park Boundary and the Golden Hill east projects are currently under construction. Construction for Hilltop to Balmoral project will begin later this year while construction for the other projects will begin to be rolled out in 2010.

Further information on projects can be found on our web site at http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/projects.htm

Please feel free to contact myself should you require any additional information.

Last edited by Mininari; Oct 7, 2009 at 4:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #455  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2009, 5:43 PM
AirGuitarChampion's Avatar
AirGuitarChampion AirGuitarChampion is offline
Chuggernaught
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterloowarrior View Post
How about building 2+1 Roads for some of the northern Ontario routes, like they've been doing in Scandinavian countries.. they've been quite successful in improving safety (to motorway levels), allow for frequent passing lanes (and could allow RIRO property access), and are cheaper than full motorways.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2%2B1_road



http://www.nra.ie/Publications/Downl...le,3509,en.PDF
These aren't too bad actually. Donald to Roger's Pass is like this and I think it works well. There are a few sections like this from the Roger's Pass to Revelstoke, and a few sections around Kenora I believe starting to get built.

The biggest drawback is when you get a long line built up behind a motorhome / minivan with trailer (the worst offenders of highway traffic clogs) and finally get to the double lane section, everyone guns it to pass (significant speeding be damned) and there's a huge rush to edge the slowpoke out just before it goes back to one lane. Then you have people jamming on the brakes who don't think they can make it, holding up and compacting the rest of the passers, or you have people passing well into the single lane. Or you have one motorhome going 2km/hr faster than the other and wasting the whole passing lane.
__________________
Plan B
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #456  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2009, 6:01 PM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by AirGuitarChampion View Post
These aren't too bad actually. Donald to Roger's Pass is like this and I think it works well. There are a few sections like this from the Roger's Pass to Revelstoke, and a few sections around Kenora I believe starting to get built.

The biggest drawback is when you get a long line built up behind a motorhome / minivan with trailer (the worst offenders of highway traffic clogs) and finally get to the double lane section, everyone guns it to pass (significant speeding be damned) and there's a huge rush to edge the slowpoke out just before it goes back to one lane. Then you have people jamming on the brakes who don't think they can make it, holding up and compacting the rest of the passers, or you have people passing well into the single lane. Or you have one motorhome going 2km/hr faster than the other and wasting the whole passing lane.
Apparently this is much less of a problem in Sweden
http://international.fhwa.dot.gov/hu...hapter_two.cfm
Quote:
One of the team's most impressive observations involved watching Swedish drivers approaching the end of a passing lane. During a 20-minute observation interval, no driver speeded up to pass a slower vehicle before the passing lane ended. Passing slower vehicles in advance of lane drops is common driver behavior in the United States. The expectations induced by the 2+1 design reassured drivers through the use of effective signing that another passing opportunity would occur shortly. Hence, drivers did not feel a need to pass immediately and so did not incur risk by trying to pass just before the passing lane ended.
It sounds like the passing lanes are pretty frequent over there as well, the extra lane switches every 1.25 KM for Sweden and 2 KM for the Ireland example.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #457  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2009, 6:57 PM
blake10 blake10 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterloowarrior View Post
Apparently this is much less of a problem in Sweden
http://international.fhwa.dot.gov/hu...hapter_two.cfm
It sounds like the passing lanes are pretty frequent over there as well, the extra lane switches every 1.25 KM for Sweden and 2 KM for the Ireland example.
Sweden is not Canada. I drive the route from Winnipeg to Kenora all the time and some of the stuff I see amazes me. As you pass into Manitoba and approach the divided highway section from the East, despite being signposted, I've often seen drivers who can't wait the extra 2 minutes and must find a way to pass other vehicles 1 or 2 kms before the divided highway begins. These are cars with Manitoba plates so it's not as if they're unfamiliar with the highway. The road needs to be finished properly (twined).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #458  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2009, 7:20 PM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake10 View Post
Sweden is not Canada. I drive the route from Winnipeg to Kenora all the time and some of the stuff I see amazes me. As you pass into Manitoba and approach the divided highway section from the East, despite being signposted, I've often seen drivers who can't wait the extra 2 minutes and must find a way to pass other vehicles 1 or 2 kms before the divided highway begins. These are cars with Manitoba plates so it's not as if they're unfamiliar with the highway. The road needs to be finished properly (twined).
Well I guess if they used this 2+1 style the passing lanes would be quite frequent over a long distance. You are right though, Canadian drivers can be quite stupid on these long distance non-freeway routes (taking huge risks to save 2 minutes).

I think this would be great for the Highway 7 TCH between Peterborough and Carleton Place. Once you get west of Perth (AADT's only 3000-5000) the passing lanes are quite infrequent so you get that dangerous rush to pass situation, and the road is curvy so it's hard for cars to pass on the 2 lane parts. When you do have the passing lanes there's no barrier between you and oncoming traffic (which can also use that lane for passing if they yield..). To me these seem much better than "Super-2's" which still have the risk of head-on collisions

Last edited by waterloowarrior; Oct 7, 2009 at 8:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #459  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2009, 7:30 PM
AirGuitarChampion's Avatar
AirGuitarChampion AirGuitarChampion is offline
Chuggernaught
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake10 View Post
Sweden is not Canada. I drive the route from Winnipeg to Kenora all the time and some of the stuff I see amazes me. As you pass into Manitoba and approach the divided highway section from the East, despite being signposted, I've often seen drivers who can't wait the extra 2 minutes and must find a way to pass other vehicles 1 or 2 kms before the divided highway begins. These are cars with Manitoba plates so it's not as if they're unfamiliar with the highway. The road needs to be finished properly (twined).
Hmmm having a very brief look at their fines no wonder no one speeds up in Sweden too much!

http://www.roadmc.com/default.asp?pubid=15

I mean 1-10km/hr over and you're already at $250 Cdn equivalent!

Shorter regular intervals like 1.25km mentioned earlier might help curb the rush. Alot of our passing lanes have 2km warnings, but nothing when just coming out of a passing lane saying when the next passing lane is if it's more than 2km, then everyone's chomping at the bit to blow by.

2 minutes is a lot if you're driving an 8hr day. I mean say you do 99km/hr in a 90 zone (assuming no other factors like construction around), you'd be reasonably guaranteed not to be pulled over and shorten a Calgary to Vancouver trip for example by something like an hour!

I do get what you're saying, there are freaks who drive moronically fast then you lumber by them as they fill up for gas or get stuck behind a camper just 3km up the road - their risk has earned them nothing. But a good 10% over everything and not stopping for anything seems the fastest overall.
__________________
Plan B

Last edited by AirGuitarChampion; Oct 7, 2009 at 7:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #460  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2009, 8:31 PM
0773|=\ 0773|=\ is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterloowarrior View Post
How about building 2+1 Roads for some of the northern Ontario routes, like they've been doing in Scandinavian countries.. they've been quite successful in improving safety (to motorway levels), allow for frequent passing lanes (and could allow RIRO property access), and are cheaper than full motorways.
I agree. I've driven on similar highways down in South Africa, and often they have access control (grade-seperations) along much of the route, with overpasses that could accommodate an additional carriageway when traffic levels ever warranted it in the future. They're national routes, but they don't need the overbuild like certain Interstates in sparsely populated areas.

Just take the third lane and alternate it every 5 kms or so, and it would do wonders to cut down on drive time.

Maybe if they reserved some ROW along the route for a future HSR it would gain more public support...?
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:52 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.