[DirectionNorth]

Once all of 69 is widened, will it be renamed to 400?

I would imagine that the whole thing will be the 400 - the sections south of Parry Sound was once the 69, and they renumbered it as the twinning extended north. As I understand it, the twinned section between Sudbury and French River isn't signed because the MTO doesn't want to sign two discontinuous segments of road as a 400-series.

I can see the 69 designation being retained for the spur between the Estaire interchange and the Southeast Bypass, as I don't believe the MTO has plans to fully upgrade that section. Highway 2 is still signed for 1 km east of Ganonoque.

 

[Deadpool X]

In today's world where people navigate with Google Maps, how does renumbering of highways benefit?

 

[kamira51]

In today's world where people navigate with Google Maps, how does renumbering of highways benefit?

I think it's more about simplicity.

 

[Kitsune]

Once all of 69 is widened, will it be renamed to 400?

Yes - the entire thing is going to be renamed 400. We only 67km left of two lane .highway left .. I would not be shocked if it gets renamed in the near future as a paper victory for Ford.

 

[Northern Light]

Latest twinning project on 11/17 the subject of a gov't presser today:

Ontario Newsroom

news.ontario.ca

Key tidbits: (from the above)

***

 

[lenaitch]

That would work too. Certainly some continuity between 407 and 7 would be welcome. The only issue I potentially see with that is that most people associate 407 with tolled, so having a free section of the 407 connecting to a tolled section may be confusing for people, as they may incorrectly assume the current 115 would be a toll highway as well, and avoid it. I know there are plenty of interstates in the US that have tolled and non-tolled sections, but that's somewhat of a rarity in Canada.


Autoroutes are numbered based on the US Interstate numbering system (autoroutes ending in either 0 or 5 are major trans-provincial routes, other 2-digit routes are primary routes, 3-digit routes are auxiliary routes). For non-autoroute highways, 100-series are major trans-provincial routes, 200-series are more local routes (akin to County highways in Ontario) south of the St. Lawrence, and 300-series are local routes north of the St. Lawrence.

All routes have their lowest numbers in the south and west (Autoroute 5 for example is the major N-S route in the Gatineau area, which is paralleled by Route 105), and highest numbers in the north and east (Route 299 in Gaspe cuts north-south across the peninsula).

The only US Interstate system I was aware of, outside of spurs, urban alternates, etc. is the odd/even - n/s and e/w groupings. I suppose Ontario has a somewhat similar system with its primary-secondary-tertiary groupings. I wasn't aware of the southwest to northeast progression. It seems to sort of fall apart for routes like 132 and 138 that run pretty much all the way west to east across the province. Regardless, similar to Ontario and probably most other jurisdiction, I imagine their numbering system is pretty much lost on the travelling public and of interest to transportation nerds.

 

[lenaitch]

I would imagine that the whole thing will be the 400 - the sections south of Parry Sound was once the 69, and they renumbered it as the twinning extended north. As I understand it, the twinned section between Sudbury and French River isn't signed because the MTO doesn't want to sign two discontinuous segments of road as a 400-series.

I can see the 69 designation being retained for the spur between the Estaire interchange and the Southeast Bypass, as I don't believe the MTO has plans to fully upgrade that section. Highway 2 is still signed for 1 km east of Ganonoque.

Assuming it stays under provincial jurisdiction (I haven't looked at the plans), it would be unusual for them to number a route in the 400 series if it isn't up to that design standard. Some of the former Hwy 69 alignments remain under provincial jurisdiction although they have a 'local name'. Lake Joseph Rd. in Parry Sound District has a 4-digit provincial highway number assigned to it.

 

[ericmacm]

Here's a neat tool that some of you may find interesting - the MTO Permit Controls Map database.

I had brought it up a couple of pages ago but I figured it might be useful to link it for seeing which major provincial highways could emerge in the future. If you filter by the "Grading or Landscaping" category, you can see the roads that MTO maintains landscaping permits for, at varying sizes for major (planned and existing 400-series or expressway) and minor (planned and existing four-lane non-grade separated) highways. There are a large number of minor highways that hold freeway and interchange-sized grading permit controls. It's worth noting that many of these highways will almost certainly never happen due to population densities in the areas they run through, but it's interesting to see which corridors could eventually host a major highway in the future as our province grows. There are also former controlled areas that haven't been removed from the map yet, like the cancelled St. Thomas-Aylmer expressway alignment. Additionally, the entire area of northwestern Ontario doesn't seem to have any data, so the map is certainly not up to date or maintained on a regular basis.

Some interesting new (or old but stagnant) alignments I found on there include the HWY 115 Northeast Bypass around Peterborough to just south of Lakefield, HWY 417 Northwest Extension from Renfrew to just south of Pembroke, HWY 3 between the Grand River and Port Colborne, and HWY 17 both east of Sudbury and east of North Bay. There are others on there like the Bradford Bypass, new Kitchener-Guelph HWY 7, Morriston Bypass, and HWY 404 Northeast Extension that we already know about.

 

[afransen]

Here's a neat tool that some of you may find interesting - the MTO Permit Controls Map database.

I had brought it up a couple of pages ago but I figured it might be useful to link it for seeing which major provincial highways could emerge in the future. If you filter by the "Grading or Landscaping" category, you can see the roads that MTO maintains landscaping permits for, at varying sizes for major (planned and existing 400-series or expressway) and minor (planned and existing four-lane non-grade separated) highways. There are a large number of minor highways that hold freeway and interchange-sized grading permit controls. It's worth noting that many of these highways will almost certainly never happen due to population densities in the areas they run through, but it's interesting to see which corridors could eventually host a major highway in the future as our province grows. There are also former controlled areas that haven't been removed from the map yet, like the cancelled St. Thomas-Aylmer expressway alignment. Additionally, the entire area of northwestern Ontario doesn't seem to have any data, so the map is certainly not up to date or maintained on a regular basis.

Some interesting new (or old but stagnant) alignments I found on there include the HWY 115 Northeast Bypass around Peterborough to just south of Lakefield, HWY 417 Northwest Extension from Renfrew to just south of Pembroke, HWY 3 between the Grand River and Port Colborne, and HWY 17 both east of Sudbury and east of North Bay. There are others on there like the Bradford Bypass, new Kitchener-Guelph HWY 7, Morriston Bypass, and HWY 404 Northeast Extension that we already know about.

One wonders why we can't exercise this kind of forethought when it comes to reserving future rail ROWs for regional rail. A colossal failure.

 

[ericmacm]

One wonders why we can't exercise this kind of forethought when it comes to reserving future rail ROWs for regional rail. A colossal failure.

They should absolutely be doing it, but since the privatization of CN in 1995 and the fact that CP has always been a private company (that gave up their passenger rail division a long time ago), there is no incentive since the governments don't control what happens to those networks. I hope one day we will see Metrolinx start to go beyond just purchasing existing sections of rail corridor and actually plan major new rail ROWs and spurs throughout the province, instead of just within the GTA.

 

[afransen]

They should absolutely be doing it, but since the privatization of CN in 1995 and the fact that CP has always been a private company (that gave up their passenger rail division a long time ago), there is no incentive since the governments don't control what happens to those networks. I hope one day we will see Metrolinx start to go beyond just purchasing existing sections of rail corridor and actually plan major new rail ROWs and spurs throughout the province, instead of just within the GTA.

Seems like it's already essentially too late for the GTA.

 

[Steve X]

They should absolutely be doing it, but since the privatization of CN in 1995 and the fact that CP has always been a private company (that gave up their passenger rail division a long time ago), there is no incentive since the governments don't control what happens to those networks. I hope one day we will see Metrolinx start to go beyond just purchasing existing sections of rail corridor and actually plan major new rail ROWs and spurs throughout the province, instead of just within the GTA.

Owning is one thing. Maintenance and policing is another. Until it is close to breaking even, I don't see it happening.

 

[ShonTron]

Here's a neat tool that some of you may find interesting - the MTO Permit Controls Map database.

I had brought it up a couple of pages ago but I figured it might be useful to link it for seeing which major provincial highways could emerge in the future. If you filter by the "Grading or Landscaping" category, you can see the roads that MTO maintains landscaping permits for, at varying sizes for major (planned and existing 400-series or expressway) and minor (planned and existing four-lane non-grade separated) highways. There are a large number of minor highways that hold freeway and interchange-sized grading permit controls. It's worth noting that many of these highways will almost certainly never happen due to population densities in the areas they run through, but it's interesting to see which corridors could eventually host a major highway in the future as our province grows. There are also former controlled areas that haven't been removed from the map yet, like the cancelled St. Thomas-Aylmer expressway alignment. Additionally, the entire area of northwestern Ontario doesn't seem to have any data, so the map is certainly not up to date or maintained on a regular basis.

Some interesting new (or old but stagnant) alignments I found on there include the HWY 115 Northeast Bypass around Peterborough to just south of Lakefield, HWY 417 Northwest Extension from Renfrew to just south of Pembroke, HWY 3 between the Grand River and Port Colborne, and HWY 17 both east of Sudbury and east of North Bay. There are others on there like the Bradford Bypass, new Kitchener-Guelph HWY 7, Morriston Bypass, and HWY 404 Northeast Extension that we already know about.

Fascinating find!

 

[ericmacm]

Owning is one thing. Maintenance and policing is another. Until it is close to breaking even, I don't see it happening.

I don't want to derail the thread too much - Metrolinx is still a relatively new agency so it's definitely not something they would do in the short term. However, I could see Metrolinx becoming closer to being profitable over the decade as many of these massive expansion projects finish up and lands around the stations get beefed up by TOD. We are still at a point where many GTA transit stations are super suburban, but the scales of planned intensification are crazy, and it will almost certainly result in a profitable Metrolinx that can throw a lot more expansionary money around.

It's a bit of an optimistic take, but that's where I feel the trend is slowly heading given our national obsession for TOD and mixed-use intensification, one day ending up with a profitable provincial transit agency that can afford to build and reserve new rail corridors.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Do we have a thread for the Bradford Bypass? Should we not make one? We typically have individual threads for large highway projects like that, particularly as construction seems to be ramping up and that the project has support from both the Liberals and PCs, and is quite likely to actually happen..

Anyway, in the interim, I just received a notice in my inbox that they are now considering interchanges at 10th Line and 2nd Concession.: