Johnny Au
Senior Member
They should be signed as Interprovincial.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Haljackey
- Start date
ARG1
Senior Member
Its a bit more complicated than that. The National Highway System is a program in which the federal government offers funds to provincial (and in Ontario's case, provincial and regional) roads to bolster a properly maintained road network across the country. Unlike the US however, I don't really see a reason why we should have an "Interstate" type system. In the US, interstates make sense especially in the east coast where states are incredibly small, and highways constantly changing numbers is a serious issue. In Rhode Island, the section of the i95 in Rhode Island is a measly 70km, that is the distance of Highway 400 from Black Creek Drive to Mapleview Drive (the first exit in Barrie). It is shorter than the distance many people commute here in Toronto, let alone the distance people drive just to reach their cottages during the weekend. Having unified numbers in the eastern United States is kind of important.
This really doesn't apply to Canada. Outside of satisfying some internal OCD, the only location that would benefit from having more consistent signage and numbering is, what, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia?
Provinces like Ontario are extremely large, large to the point that what a highway is called in relation to another province is pretty much insignificant, and for those who live on the borders that would be impacted by it, they probably already know the highways by heart. There really isn't a pressing need to have a unified highway system, and I think that's okay.
One of the things I found very interesting reading through back in the day is how the highway numbering system works in each of the provinces, and its fascinating how much each province's numbering system speaks about the province as a whole. Quebec and Ontario (and also Nova Scotia I guess) are the only ones that have explicitly defined highway numbers for their major arterials, and shows how massive they are as provinces where that's something they have to explicitly declare, and even the way they handle it is quite unique. Quebec is extremely structured with a purpose and meaning to their numbers, meanwhile Ontario's 400 series highways are numbered by complete random without any form of logic or consistency to back it up. However, this system also shows how stringent both provinces are about standards. In Quebec, many of their autoroutes are actually 2 lane country roads where the only thing separating them from regular country roads are the fact that all intersections are grade separated (but even then there are some at grade railroad crossings), and the opposite is true such as the A20 which has traffic signals on Ile-Perrot. Meanwhile all of the 400 series highways have to follow a specific design standard of separated carriageways for each direction and fully grade separate crossings. The designation of "400-series highway" actually means something in Ontario, and we choose to follow strict standards with our highways, and it shows with how we have one of the most elaborate and highest quality standards when it comes to road construction and maintenance on the continent.
BC wanted to have a system that separated its major freeways from its regular highways, but it was removed after many of its highway plans were cancelled, which is quite indicative of that province, and more specifically the Greater Vancouver Area. Nova Scotia has a special demarcation for its major trunk arterials, but the standards for those are even lower than Quebec where at grade crossings in 2 lane arterial sections are permitted, and are still marked as "exits", which really signifies NS desperately trying to be seen as a cool kid on the provincial scene. Other provinces are more modest. Saskatchewan numbers their routes based off where they go. 200 series highways go to recreational areas, 300 series highways go to minor villages, 100 series highways are northern highways that are usually low quality feeders to the core highways that are 1-99. Ontario is the only province with a regional road system, which puts in full display how much autonomy we give to our municipalities, and our regions/counties.
This type of uniqueness is one of the things I personally find extremely charming about Canada, especially when you consider that its ultimately a federalized state where each province has its own history, background, and culture, and something as simple as their highway systems speaks a lot about them in their own special ways, and I don't think that should ever go away.
whydidimakethis
Active Member
One thing that desperatley needs to be fixed is for there to be a better guide signage standard that is consistant across counties and even inside counties themselves.
When driving on a provincial highway, you always know to expect those green signs (most of the time) to tell you where you are going. Once you get off the provincial network, it is downright embarrasing how bad it is. Each county has radically different methods of guide signs. Some counties do it really well and consistantly (York Region for example) where almost every road has the same way of telling you what each crossroad is, and some counties are just awful like Simcoe County where you drive on one county road and see 5 different types of guide signs in a couple kilometres, not to mention they are often oversised, undersised, missing critical information such as the destinantion, or completely useless altogether.
Here is an example of good signage from Durham:
This is good because it closely resembles the ones already on provincial highways. It is clear, it tells you which road is coming up and where it will take you.
Here is a bad example from Perth County:
Those are the ONLY signs telling you what to do and where to go. JCT sign only tells you that there is a junction with CR56, and thats it. There is no destination guide sign until you are already stopped at the intersection, and even then it's a tiny little sign.
Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
If you drew a straight line from Halifax to Vancouver it would pass well North of significant population centers in Canada (mainly because it bypasses the Quebec City-Ottawa-Windsor corridor which contains a significant percentage of Canada's population, if not nearly half). Even if the line were tweaked to at least pass through the nation's capital, you still wind up missing the GTA by quite a bit, and trying to swing down to hit Toronto would add significant length to the route.
IMO the 401 (and the 400/69) corridor should probably be signed as a alternate route for the Trans Canada highway given Toronto's importance to the country
IMO the 401 (and the 400/69) corridor should probably be signed as a alternate route for the Trans Canada highway given Toronto's importance to the country
innsertnamehere
Superstar
It's almost like a country the size of Canada needs more than 1 road..
lenaitch
Senior Member
[/QUOTE]
Great post but my only quibble is this statement, which I don't think is completely accurate. While it is true that some provinces have a more extensive network of 'secondary provincial highways than would seem to mimic our county and regional roads, I'm not sure I would call our situation a "network". Every province has municipalities with municipal roads, but Ontario, either by dint of population, history or politics, has many more upper-lower tier municipal combinations. Out west, they are primarily single tier and, rurally, very large. How the common theme of publicly numbering upper tier roads in Ontario came to pass, I don't know. Perhaps some agreement between mayors and wardens. Their might be an MTO guideline but I doubt it is much more than that. Many of these roads, but not all are also formally named. Obviously, lower tier roads are identified as 'concession', etc. based upon the way the southern part of the province was surveyed. Even at that, with municipal amalgamation, many had to be named to avoid confusion.
The single tier municipality of Greater Sudbury, for example, has numbered routes for it more arterial roads. I assume that is a carry-over from its days as a multi-tier region and they just stuck with it to avoid massive disruption.
Should the province jump in and ensure more consistency across municipal roads, including no repeated numbers? Dunno. It would be massively disruptive and come with significant cost which, of course, they would be expected to cover. I'm not sure what the overall benefit would be.
Johnny Au
Senior Member
There's only one (now two) road bridge linking Eastern and Western Canada:
ShonTron
Moderator
Same with Chatham-Kent, Ottawa, and Kawartha Lakes. Hamilton, on the other hand, has phased out most of its former regional road designations - generally, they are now limited to former provincial highways within the city - 2, 5, 8, 20, 52, 56, and 99 (but not 53, which followed Garner and Rymal Roads).
The flowerpot shields are not consistently used on MTO signs in Peel Region - such as Mayfield Road (RR 14) and Bovaird Drive (RR 107/RR 10) on the 410. Peel, where two of the three municipalities are almost entirely urbanized and where regional roads are based on a old county road system developed for a mostly rural place, the regional designations are increasingly meaningless, especially when Highways 5 and 10 were entirely downloaded to the cities, but Highways 7, 24, and 50 downloaded to the region.
In Brampton, roads maintained by the city generally don't feature right turn slip lanes, but those by the region do. And where ever a regional and city road meet, the region has responsibility.
whydidimakethis
Active Member
The mass downloading in the 90s really screwed up everything. Now theres weird patches of downloaded highway all over the place which should have never been downloaded in the first place. It doesn't make any sense why there is just a random gap in highway 9, or why the highway 7 designation randomly stops at the Peel boundary instead of at least continuing to the 410 which would be logical. IMO it's time for the province to upload sections of highway that were never meant to be downloaded in the first place. Every other province keeps their provincial highways next to their freeways, why can't Ontario too?
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Former Highway 7 is sometimes not called "7" in some regions.
Location of Highway 7 in Southern Ontario.
RED Current route GREEN Former route
lenaitch
Senior Member
There was supposedly an analysis of which provincial highway portions served more of a local traffic need rather than provincial, but I am convinced there was an element of balancing out the dollars between what was uploaded and downloaded. I agree some make little sense. Near Coldwater, a ~6km section of Hwy 12 was turned over to the County, with that piece of the highway co-signed with Hwy 400. I don't know if it is the signage or the fact that the two routes closely parallel each other but it really messes people up (and possibly their GPS). I've seen vehicles stopped in the middle of the intersection apparently trying to figure it out.
" Every other province keeps their provincial highways next to their freeways, why can't Ontario too?" Care to enlighten - I don't know what that means.
whydidimakethis
Active Member
When a freeway is built next to an existing highway (ex: Former Hwy 2 and 401) Ontario usually downloads the provincial highway that runs parallel to the freeway. Virtually in every other province and even in the states, the provincial/state highway is usually kept as an alternate route if it's important enough even though it was bypassed by a freeway. Notice how the US Highway system is still mostly intact even after most of the network was paralled with Interstates? Even the ones that got completely replaced like US-66 are still signed as historic US highways.
In Ontario, even though CR-2 next to the 401 is downloaded, it should at least be signed as a historic highway. Same thing can be done for Highways 7, 10, 11, 24 which all had significant sections downloaded.
I'm also suprised that Hwy 7 between Markham and Brooklin wasn't downloaded when the 407 was extended.
afransen
Senior Member
I think there was an issue with this bridge wasn't there... like an expansion joint causing a severe bump in the road? You'd think it would be unacceptable to have a single point of failure in our east/west transportation route. From a strategic standpoint that is pretty foolish.
whydidimakethis
Active Member
I doubt they will ever build a new second bridge further upstream, but maybe a possible secondary route could be made around Lake Nipigon or around Nipigon itself which would allow motorists to bypass the bridge altogether.
Green= New possible route around the lake (it looks small because Ontario is massive, but this route would actually be almost 300 km long), Red= Current Nipigon Bridge, Yellow= Possible Nipigon By-pass?
Last edited:
Transportfan
Senior Member
US "federal highways" are actually under state jurisdiction. The numbers are just forcefully coordinated for continuity.