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

[Dengler Avenue]

K I know that this is a big if, given the provincial government’s commitment, but for now let’s suppose that transcanada highway will be twinned.
I wanna know which route to twin between Nipigon and North Bay because I can’t choose between 11 and 17.
Correct me if I’m wrong.
If we barge onto 11:
Generally, the terrain is easy for a long distance so twinning shouldn’t cost much. Also, currently it’s more reliable than the 17 in the winter. In addition, it’s shorter than 17 by 30 km.
However, there aren’t that many towns along the highway.
If we stay on 17 (I will start from North Bay and go west):
Between North Bay and Espanola, the freeway is badly needed.
Between east of Espanola and east of SSM, the terrain is forgiving, so twinning shouldn’t cost much. Also, there are quite a few sizable towns along the way (i.e. Blind River, Thessalon, Bruce Mine).
Between SSM and Nipigon, though, it’s a different story.
First, we will need to bypass Rankin Location 15D on the north east because the First Nations there won’t let the highway in. If the freeway is to follow Trunk Road and Black Road, we are talking about massive expropriations and relocations here.
Then, we need to make a brand-new freeway section with smoother grades between Hayden and Wawa so that trucks can go on safely. This will be the most expensive piece.
Between Marathon and Nipigon, how can we even fix the 17…
I’m sorry that I haven’t given much detail about 11 because I have only been on the 17 (twice). (The part along Lake Superior can get dangerous…)
What do you guys think? Please tell me which route and why. It’s for a project. Thank you.

Je sais qu’il est possible que la route transcanadienne en Nord-Ontario ne sera jamais élargie à quatre (4) voies, basée sur l’engagement du gouvernement provincial, mais pour les objectifs de cette discussion, on peut présumer qu’elle sera élargie (ou qu’elles seront élargies).
Je veux savoir quelle route doit être élargie entre Nipigon et North Bay (que j’appelle « Baie du nord » parfois pour une traduction littérale) car je ne peux pas choisir entre l’11 et la 17.
Veuillez me corriger si je fais tort. (Aussi, mon français n’est pas bon. Excusez-moi pour la mauvaise grammaire.)
Si l’on continue plutôt l’élargissement sur l’11 :
En général, la terre est facile (ou pardonnante) pour une longue distance, alors les travaux d’élargissement ne seront pas trop coûteux. Elle est aussi plus fiable que la 17 en hiver, et présente une distance plus courte par 30 km.
Le problème? Il n’y a pas beaucoup de villes sur cette route.
Si l’on continue sur la 17 (Je discuterai les tronçons de North Bay « la Baie du nord » à Nipigon, de l’est à l’ouest):
Entre North Bay et Espanola (Espagnole), il faut convertir immédiatement la route courante à une autoroute.
Entre Espanola et l’est de SSM, la terre est pardonnante (facile), alors les travaux d’élargissement ne seront pas trop coûteux. Aussi, il y a beaucoup de villes moyennes sur cette route, par exemple, Blind River (Rivière-Aveugle, haha), Thessalon, Bruce Mines (les mines de Bruce), etc.
Mais entre l’est de SSM et Nipigon, les travaux deviendront beaucoup plus difficiles.
D’abord, on doit contourner le territoire des autochtones à Rankin 15D au nord-est, car ils n’y voudront pas d’autoroute. Si l’autoroute suivra Chemin Trunk et Chemin Black (Noir), il faut exproprier beaucoup de propriétés et les déménager.
Alors, voici la partie des travaux qui sera la plus coûteuse : une nouvelle autoroute (évidemment, à 4 voies avec des chaussées séparées) entre Hayden et Wawa. Il faut réduire les pentes afin de créer un roulant sauf pour des camions.
Entre Marathon et Nipigon, est la 17 améliorable ???
Je suis désolé que je n’ai pas donné beaucoup de détails pour l’11, car j’ai seulement roulé sur la 17 (pour deux fois). (Le tronçon le long du Lac Supérieur peut être dangereux…)
À quoi pensez-vous? Veuillez me dire quelle route et pourquoi. C’est pour un projet. Merci.

[Dengler Avenue]

I'm aware that there have been previous threads on this topic, but I just wanna start a new one to gauge people's opinion. It's the reason that I'm after.

[Loco101]

Highway 11 is the route that almost all transports take so that's why I prefer it be twinned first. But I do feel that Hwy 17 needs to be twinned between Sault Ste. Marie and Mattawa. The Lake Superior section of Hwy 17 wouldn't be as scenic and fun if it were twinned which would be extremely expensive.

Hwy 11 is much flatter and has many straight sections. I've always felt that a 4 lane divided highway would be in Canada's best economic interests. Yes it would be costly at first but long-term economic benefits make doing it worth it.

[wave46]

I've driven both highways.

The crux of the problem is that they both simultaneously need it in sections, but not at all in others. So, if choosing one eliminates the other, I can't really choose either.

The length and terrain involved in each makes it prohibitive as well. Whereas Highway 11 generally has better terrain, the most challenging sections of the highway (between North Bay/New Liskeard and Geraldton/Nipigon) tend to have low AADT. Really low, in the latter's case.

Highway 17 has higher AADT, but more consistently worse terrain.

In lieu of making a choice, here's how I'd apportion the dollars:

Highway 11:
North Bay to New Liskeard: 2+1 highway
New Liskeard to 101 West to Timmins: 4 lanes
101 West to Hearst: 2+1 highway
Hearst to Nipigon: As-is

Highway 17:
Mattawa to North Bay: 2+1 highway
North Bay to Sault Ste. Marie: 4 lanes
Sault to Nipigon: As-is.

If we had only one major highway through the region (like in NW Ont.) I'd be much more supportive of 4 lanes through the entire route.

[Dengler Avenue]

Yea for the 11, I totally agree with twinning along 101 west of Matheson towards Timmins, then barging up on 655. Sadly Cochrane and places will be completely left out. Also, in that case, I would also twin 101 from west of 144 and build a freeway bypass on the north. Later on though, I would also twin 11 and pass Polly Lake on the north and join the current alignment west of Nipigon (1 bridge) to eliminate that bottleneck.
Yea it just sucks that things are spread over the 2 routes...

[swimmer_spe]

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1gi...e4&usp=sharing

I did this up a few weeks ago. I renumbered things to make it flow.

Highway 17 east of SSM makes sense. It should go from the International Bridge, all the way to where the 417 is now. There are lots of communities along that part of the highway.

Highway 17 West of Thunder Bay makes sense as well. It connects to the rest of Canada.

Highway 11 south of Hearst makes sense. There are lots of communities. Also, the terrain is easy to build on once you get north of New Liskard.

But what about Between Nipigon and SSM/Hearst?

As a motorcyclist, the thought of taming 17 north of SSM is utter madness. It is a beautiful highway with curves and hills that just ask to be ridden. Those same curves make it prohibitively expensive to build highways.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontari...way_17#The_Gap
"The Gap

Following the war, construction on the missing segment of Highway 17 between Schreiber and Sault Ste. Marie proceeded slowly; the completion of Highway 11 between Nipigon and Hearst already provided a road between the east and west. However, in 1949 the federal government signed the Trans Canada Highway Act, which provided up to a 90% subsidy to provinces to complete their portion of the highway to the required standards. Two portions of Ontario's route were eligible for this subsidy: Highway 69 between Parry Sound and Sudbury, and Highway 17 along the north shore of Lake Superior.[22]

Amongst some of the most difficult terrain encountered in Canada, engineers blasted 2,087,234 cubic metres (2,730,000 cubic yards) of rock, removed 5,982,641 cubic metres (7,825,000 cubic yards) of earth, and cleared 6.97 square kilometres (1,720 acres) of forest in order to bridge the 266 kilometres (165 mi) of wilderness known as "the Gap".[22] The Gap was completed and opened to traffic on September 17, 1960, uniting the two segments and completing the route of Highway 17 from the Manitoba border to the Quebec border."

"Before the outbreak of World War II in 1939, a new bridge spanning the Nipigon River was completed alongside a 91.6 km (56.9 mi) highway eastward to Schreiber. Both were opened together ceremoniously on September 24, 1937.[20] When the war began, construction on Highway 17 halted,[8] with effort instead focused on the simpler northern route via Geraldton and Hearst."

Highway 11 is a simpler route to work with. You might argue of less traffic, but if it were made into a 4 lane highway, the number would quickly climb as it would be the easier, and faster route for truckers. This would likely remove trucks from 17 Between SSM and Nipigon for those not going specifically between there.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1gi...e4&usp=sharing

I did this up a few weeks ago. I renumbered things to make it flow.

Highway 17 east of SSM makes sense. It should go from the International Bridge, all the way to where the 417 is now. There are lots of communities along that part of the highway.

Highway 17 West of Thunder Bay makes sense as well. It connects to the rest of Canada.

Highway 11 south of Hearst makes sense. There are lots of communities. Also, the terrain is easy to build on once you get north of New Liskard.

But what about Between Nipigon and SSM/Hearst?

As a motorcyclist, the thought of taming 17 north of SSM is utter madness. It is a beautiful highway with curves and hills that just ask to be ridden. Those same curves make it prohibitively expensive to build highways.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontari...way_17#The_Gap
"The Gap

Following the war, construction on the missing segment of Highway 17 between Schreiber and Sault Ste. Marie proceeded slowly; the completion of Highway 11 between Nipigon and Hearst already provided a road between the east and west. However, in 1949 the federal government signed the Trans Canada Highway Act, which provided up to a 90% subsidy to provinces to complete their portion of the highway to the required standards. Two portions of Ontario's route were eligible for this subsidy: Highway 69 between Parry Sound and Sudbury, and Highway 17 along the north shore of Lake Superior.[22]

Amongst some of the most difficult terrain encountered in Canada, engineers blasted 2,087,234 cubic metres (2,730,000 cubic yards) of rock, removed 5,982,641 cubic metres (7,825,000 cubic yards) of earth, and cleared 6.97 square kilometres (1,720 acres) of forest in order to bridge the 266 kilometres (165 mi) of wilderness known as "the Gap".[22] The Gap was completed and opened to traffic on September 17, 1960, uniting the two segments and completing the route of Highway 17 from the Manitoba border to the Quebec border."

"Before the outbreak of World War II in 1939, a new bridge spanning the Nipigon River was completed alongside a 91.6 km (56.9 mi) highway eastward to Schreiber. Both were opened together ceremoniously on September 24, 1937.[20] When the war began, construction on Highway 17 halted,[8] with effort instead focused on the simpler northern route via Geraldton and Hearst."

Highway 11 is a simpler route to work with. You might argue of less traffic, but if it were made into a 4 lane highway, the number would quickly climb as it would be the easier, and faster route for truckers. This would likely remove trucks from 17 Between SSM and Nipigon for those not going specifically between there.

Does that mean twinning 11 between Nipigon and North Bay then?
Also what did you mean by taming 17 (as a motorcyclist)?

Ps: I used to have this idea - Twin 11 between Nipigon and North Bay (with a branch off to Timmins) because the future all-season road to James Bay will start at either Hearst or Smooth Rock Falls. (Speaking of that, will Ring of Fire intersect 11 anyhow?) As for the 17 corridor between SSM and North Bay, revive the northland passenger trains! Costs will be a joke though...

Ps: For twinning 17 along the north shore of Lake Superior (to which, it seems, everybody is opposed), I was gonna say "Learn from BC" as they're trying to twin Highway 1 among mountains and passes. Then I realized there's a difference between doing that for 100 km at most and doing that for nearly 600 km...

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Does that mean twinning 11 between Nipigon and North Bay then?
Also what did you mean by taming 17 (as a motorcyclist)?

Ps: I used to have this idea - Twin 11 between Nipigon and North Bay (with a branch off to Timmins) because the future all-season road to James Bay will start at either Hearst or Smooth Rock Falls. (Speaking of that, will Ring of Fire intersect 11 anyhow?) As for the 17 corridor between SSM and North Bay, revive the northland passenger trains! Costs will be a joke though...

Yes, twin Highway 11 between Nipigon and North Bay.

Highway 17 between SSM and Wawa is one of the nicest rides on a motorcycle. It has nice pavement, great vistas, and the curves and hills are made for riding. Ultimately, if it were twinned, many of these sections would straightened and made flatter. That is a horrible idea.

It sounds like the RofF will connect somewhere around Geralton.

Now, don't get me started on The Northlander or other passenger rail. I will go off on such a tangent that 20 pages later, you will not remember what this thread was supposed to be about.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Yes, twin Highway 11 between Nipigon and North Bay.

Highway 17 between SSM and Wawa is one of the nicest rides on a motorcycle. It has nice pavement, great vistas, and the curves and hills are made for riding. Ultimately, if it were twinned, many of these sections would straightened and made flatter. That is a horrible idea.

It sounds like the RofF will connect somewhere around Geralton.

Now, don't get me started on The Northlander or other passenger rail. I will go off on such a tangent that 20 pages later, you will not remember what this thread was supposed to be about.

at the last part
I do wish, though, that the north were as populated as the south because if that were the case, we wouldn't even be concerned with these 2 topics right now.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

at the last part
I do wish, though, that the north were as populated as the south because if that were the case, we wouldn't even be concerned with these 2 topics right now.

I wish we were our own province. Then we would not have to put up with the BS that is Queen's Park.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I wish we were our own province. Then we would not have to put up with the BS that is Queen's Park.

As much as I feel that the south doesn't care about the north (or really, anywhere that's not part of GTA, just saying it straight), I have a question: Where are you guys gonna get the money to turn 11 or 17 into a freeway then?
I'm actually serious. :/

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

As much as I feel that the south doesn't care about the north (or really, anywhere that's not part of GTA, just saying it straight), I have a question: Where are you guys gonna get the money to turn 11 or 17 into a freeway then?
I'm actually serious. :/

Are you wanting me to go into the politics of where our mining dollars go?

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Are you wanting me to go into the politics of where our mining dollars go?

Darn that's sad to hear...
Even then, that's not a long term measure though. Minerals are gonna run out one day right?
Darn I was hoping the entire time that the provincial parks along the Superior shore will attract enough tourists to generate the revenue.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Darn that's sad to hear...
Even then, that's not a long term measure though. Minerals are gonna run out one day right?
Darn I was hoping the entire time that the provincial parks along the Superior shore will attract enough tourists to generate the revenue.

I was talking to someone at Lake Superior PP and they said that they could easily expand the park, but the government doesn't want to expand the campgrounds.

[Dengler Avenue]

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/...ns/topics/3025
This was from 14 years ago.
What do you guys think?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/...ns/topics/3025
This was from 14 years ago.
What do you guys think?

The challenges haven't changed. The solutions haven't changed.

[Dengler Avenue]

Thus, if status quo is to be kept, in 24 (?) more years, Canada will become one of the developed nations (if not the only developed nation) who will have had its national highways in "primitive" conditions for a century. (I'm referring to the 11.)

That aside though, here's the better question:
Assuming that the province has some cash and wanna twin some parts of TCH, where would the strongest opposition come from? GTHA?

"What's the province doing with our money?! Doing all these useless stuff. "

Boy was it a lost cause trying to convince GTA kids that twinning TCH is necessary.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Thus, if status quo is to be kept, in 24 (?) more years, Canada will become one of the developed nations (if not the only developed nation) who will have had its national highways in "primitive" conditions for a century. (I'm referring to the 11.)

That aside though, here's the better question:
Assuming that the province has some cash and wanna twin some parts of TCH, where would the strongest opposition come from? GTHA?

"What's the province doing with our money?! Doing all these useless stuff. "

Boy was it a lost cause trying to convince GTA kids that twinning TCH is necessary.

Lets look at The TCH outside of Ontario.

MB is complete
SK is complete
AB is complete
NB is complete

BC, QC, PEI, NS and NL are all not fully 4 lane highways.

Ontario may have the greatest chunk, but NL is not far behind. BC has the issue with building on the mountains.

QC will be fully completed within a few years.

PEI will likely never be twinned.

NS, will likely take several decades.

Name me another country in the world with a 4 lane divided highway that stretches more than 7500 km long, and has a population density of less than 4 people per square km.

The fact is, the upgrading is based on city AADT. It is not based on actual need.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Lets look at The TCH outside of Ontario.

MB is complete
SK is complete
AB is complete
NB is complete

BC, QC, PEI, NS and NL are all not fully 4 lane highways.

Ontario may have the greatest chunk, but NL is not far behind. BC has the issue with building on the mountains.

QC will be fully completed within a few years.

PEI will likely never be twinned.

NS, will likely take several decades.

Name me another country in the world with a 4 lane divided highway that stretches more than 7500 km long, and has a population density of less than 4 people per square km.

The fact is, the upgrading is based on city AADT. It is not based on actual need.

Uh for MB, don't forget that the segment from west of Falcon Lake to provincial boundary is 2-laned. The main reason is that Canadian Shield has kicked in.

For BC, at least they're committed to twinning Highway 1, and it seems that AADT isn't the main reason. (I could have got that wrong though.) I have always thought that, if BC ends up finishing it, it will set a (very) good example for Ontario and Manitoba too.

For the last part, I was so gonna name the States, just to realize that their population density is higher. (In that case, I wonder if western China will be an appropriate example.) A 4-laned freeway that's 7.5k km long though, that did give me some perspective. :O

[Loco101]

The Interstate network in the U.S. was initially built for defence purposes. Maybe our federal government should kick in money to have a freeway across the country and alternate routes in places where there is only one highway linking regions. (for example Hwy 17 at ON/MB border.