|
|
|
Ward8
Active Member
I do. I think it's an absurdity. But how else will they perpetually expand it in the future when traffic isn't alleviated? Sorry to be glib, but I just find this whole process to be depressingly regressive.
sche
Active Member
Attachments
whydidimakethis
Active Member
While this is true, these widths include wide medians and tons of empty space on either side (there does need to be some space for a clear zone but those are literally half the ROW in some of your examples). Also don't forget the transitway is an extra 60m on top of what you are showing.
A smaller highway footprint would not only be better for the areas the highway goes through by causing less damage and less "dead zones" when areas around it are developed, and it would also surely be more cost effective.
If 12 lanes can fit in 90m, then 6 lanes + transitway definitely does not need 170m:
For reference on how big 170m is, here's the widest freeway in NA with 18 lanes and 4 carriageways:
And compared to a rural section of the 407:
Attachments
Last edited:
innsertnamehere
Superstar
The transitway protection is what requires such a crazy ROW. You can see from the drawing that MTO would only need a 110m ROW for the freeway.
MTO's standard freeway design is to allow them to be widened to 10 lanes ultimately typically. So it's not just a 6-lane freeway with a 2-lane Transitway.
The transitway protection is almost overkill on this corridor if you ask me, I mean look at the 407, 30 years later there still aren't concrete plans to actually built the transitway through a dense area, and if anything the transitway may get scrapped in favour of a new GO Line according to regional transit planning documents.
407E, 427 extension, etc. all have transitway provisions as well.
The transitway portion of the ROW will sit more or less naturalized until it is needed at least, and will be mostly undisturbed by construction. Often times MTO leases the right of way to adjacent farmers as well in the interim from what I remember. They just simply ensure the land is actually owned by them.
MTO's standard freeway design is to allow them to be widened to 10 lanes ultimately typically. So it's not just a 6-lane freeway with a 2-lane Transitway.
The transitway protection is almost overkill on this corridor if you ask me, I mean look at the 407, 30 years later there still aren't concrete plans to actually built the transitway through a dense area, and if anything the transitway may get scrapped in favour of a new GO Line according to regional transit planning documents.
407E, 427 extension, etc. all have transitway provisions as well.
The transitway portion of the ROW will sit more or less naturalized until it is needed at least, and will be mostly undisturbed by construction. Often times MTO leases the right of way to adjacent farmers as well in the interim from what I remember. They just simply ensure the land is actually owned by them.
Last edited:
kamira51
Active Member
I'd rather have a GO line instead of a bus way.
imerk
Active Member
For comparison, the Brampton Heritage Heights plan was approximately 105 metres right of way, although that includes BRT lanes. Still would be a nightmare crossing a 105 metre wide intersection in an "urban area" as they propose.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
Heritage heights is just a hilarious plan as it fails at creating an urban area and fails at creating an effective transportation system. It's comically bad.
robmausser
Senior Member
Where exactly? along the 413 route?
innsertnamehere
Superstar
I meant the 407 transitway.
afransen
Senior Member
Do you mean Brampton's urban boulevard idea? It was batsh!t crazy.
Transportfan
Senior Member
What's the point of a transitway through this corridor?
Sunnyside
Active Member
Probably better to have it and not need it than to need it someday and not have it.
kamira51
Active Member
People here are also forgetting about the transmission corridor that's proposed to run along side the highway.
cd concept
Senior Member
If this highway is such a hot topic of not being built here. Why are they widening it more for a transitway and transmission lines etc?