TCH east of Nipigon (La route transcanadienne à l'est de Nipigon) - Page 62

Dengler Avenue · #**1221** Posted **Sep 4, 2019, 4:04 PM**

If Northern Ontario has a lot of people (which in turns means a lot of votes), sure...

swimmer_spe · #**1222** Posted **Sep 4, 2019, 7:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

If Northern Ontario has a lot of people (which in turns means a lot of votes), sure...

Almost 800,000 people. That is pretty high. Besides, this has nothing to do with population, and more to do on road safety.

Dengler Avenue · #**1223** Posted **Sep 4, 2019, 9:31 PM**

I mean the political will...

vid · #**1224** Posted **Sep 5, 2019, 12:01 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

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

Too much private property and residential development along it, especially in the city. They would have to completely by-pass most of the existing right of way. And if we're doing that, why not just build a new 2-lane highway between Nipigon and Raith, nearly parallel to the TCPL corridor, with a connection to Highway 527 at its mid-point?

wave46 · #**1225** Posted **Sep 5, 2019, 12:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Almost 800,000 people. That is pretty high. Besides, this has nothing to do with population, and more to do on road safety.

In a province of 14 million. So, about 6% of the population.

Most of those 800,000 don't live in the Northwest (the highest concentration of people in Northern Ontario live in a band between North Bay and Sault Ste Marie) too. If we're just looking at the Northwest, it's less than 2%.

For a highway with a <5,000 AADT. Maybe vid can elaborate, but I don't think carnage is happening on Highway 102, inconvenient as the traffic may be.

I'm with vid. Bypass the bypass if you must and just limit development on the new highway.

We have bigger issues in the north than a divided Highway 102.

swimmer_spe · #**1226** Posted **Sep 5, 2019, 2:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wave46

In a province of 14 million. So, about 6% of the population.

Most of those 800,000 don't live in the Northwest (the highest concentration of people in Northern Ontario live in a band between North Bay and Sault Ste Marie) too. If we're just looking at the Northwest, it's less than 2%.

For a highway with a <5,000 AADT. Maybe vid can elaborate, but I don't think carnage is happening on Highway 102, inconvenient as the traffic may be.

I'm with vid. Bypass the bypass if you must and just limit development on the new highway.

We have bigger issues in the north than a divided Highway 102.

First of, it would be 17%, not 8%...

Second, I am all for highway upgrading, but lets do it right. Lets also plan it right.

All major highways, including the 102 in Northern ON should be planned to become a divided highway. This will mean that outside the cities and towns, there wont be development on the actual highway.

What should be done is simple, at least in my view:
1) All cities and towns should be bypassed with a divided highway.
2) starting at all the ends of the divided highway, chunks should be upgraded.
2) the divided highway should eventually be upgraded to full freeway design with no crossing traffic.

wave46 · #**1227** Posted **Sep 5, 2019, 2:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

First of, it would be 17%, not 8%...

Population of Northern Ontario: 780,140 (2016 census)
Population of Ontario: 13,448,494 (2016 census)

(780,140/13,448,494)*100% = 5.8%.

Northwestern Ontario: 231,691 (again, 2016)

(231,691/13,448,494)*100% = 1.7%.

swimmer_spe · #**1228** Posted **Sep 5, 2019, 5:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wave46

Population of Northern Ontario: 780,140 (2016 census)
Population of Ontario: 13,448,494 (2016 census)

(780,140/13,448,494)*100% = 5.8%.

Northwestern Ontario: 231,691 (again, 2016)

(231,691/13,448,494)*100% = 1.7%.

My bad..

Still, it has nothing to do with population. It has to do with traffic. It also has to do with the type of traffic.

wave46 · #**1229** Posted **Sep 5, 2019, 5:49 PM**

I would say that the MTO should think about reserving corridors if they're thinking about some of this stuff.

It's just such a pain to build all sorts of property accesses after the fact when designing a highway.

Dengler Avenue · #**1230** Posted **Sep 10, 2019, 12:50 AM**

What's going on with twinning 17 west of Kenora? All talk no action?

Dengler Avenue · #**1231** Posted **Oct 10, 2019, 5:09 PM**

I'm looking at Highway 17 Sudbury SW Bypass between Road 55 (Lively) and Road 80. Why can't the highway go straight? Is the terrain too rugged for such an alignment? (It doesn't seem too bad when I looked at it from Google Terrain View.) IIRC, the plan to twin the bypass is to follow the current alignment between the two interchanges.

wave46 · #**1232** Posted **Oct 10, 2019, 8:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I'm looking at Highway 17 Sudbury SW Bypass between Road 55 (Lively) and Road 80. Why can't the highway go straight? Is the terrain too rugged for such an alignment? (It doesn't seem too bad when I looked at it from Google Terrain View.) IIRC, the plan to twin the bypass is to follow the current alignment between the two interchanges.

It's rock.

Which means you have to blast it to get a decent road base and proper grading.

It's just easier to follow an alignment that's relatively flat.

Loco101 · #**1233** Posted **Oct 10, 2019, 9:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I'm looking at Highway 17 Sudbury SW Bypass between Road 55 (Lively) and Road 80. Why can't the highway go straight? Is the terrain too rugged for such an alignment? (It doesn't seem too bad when I looked at it from Google Terrain View.) IIRC, the plan to twin the bypass is to follow the current alignment between the two interchanges.

Mainly due to a number of small lakes and to a lesser extent private property.

Loco101 · #**1234** Posted **Oct 10, 2019, 9:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

What's going on with twinning 17 west of Kenora? All talk no action?

Who knows. I'm sure that the funding will eventually come through. I am surprised that the federal government hasn't come through with anything clear.

swimmer_spe · #**1235** Posted **Oct 11, 2019, 12:34 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I'm looking at Highway 17 Sudbury SW Bypass between Road 55 (Lively) and Road 80. Why can't the highway go straight? Is the terrain too rugged for such an alignment? (It doesn't seem too bad when I looked at it from Google Terrain View.) IIRC, the plan to twin the bypass is to follow the current alignment between the two interchanges.

Well.... you have rock. You also have small lakes. And then there are the swamps. It is why Northern Ontario roads are rarely straight.

Dengler Avenue · #**1236** Posted **Oct 13, 2019, 2:01 AM**

I drove by Rivière Veuve twice. I didn’t know until now that veuve is French for widow. So Widow River... Now that sounds a lot more depressing...

swimmer_spe · #**1237** Posted **Oct 13, 2019, 2:50 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I drove by Rivière Veuve twice. I didn’t know until now that veuve is French for widow. So Widow River... Now that sounds a lot more depressing...

Every name has a story.
Ask me how North Bay got it's name. You would think because it was located on the north bay of a lake, right?

Dengler Avenue · #**1238** Posted **Oct 13, 2019, 2:54 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Every name has a story.
Ask me how North Bay got it's name. You would think because it was located on the north bay of a lake, right?

That’s true. It’s actually on the northeast side of Lake Nipissing. Maybe it’s got that name because it’s squished right between Nipissing and Trout and because that used to be the portage area for fur traders?

swimmer_spe · #**1239** Posted **Oct 13, 2019, 3:03 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

That’s true. It’s actually on the northeast side of Lake Nipissing. Maybe it’s got that name because it’s squished right between Nipissing and Trout and because that used to be the portage area for fur traders?

But wouldn't it then have Portage in it's name?

It does have to do with fur trading and with a box of nails.

Dengler Avenue · #**1240** Posted **Oct 25, 2019, 9:51 PM**

I’ve been looking hard for the route options of the realigned Highway 11/17 from Harbour Expressway to Shabaqua Corners, but I can’t find any pictures. The original link, highway11-17kakabeka.ca, expired long ago.

Does anyone have any idea?

Also I just found this: http://www.valueanalysis.ca/upload/c...Situations.pdf. Check out slide 6!