News   Nov 01, 2024
 1.9K     13 
News   Nov 01, 2024
 2.2K     3 
News   Nov 01, 2024
 704     0 

Roads: Ontario/GTA Highways Discussion

The QEW won't need to be widened through St. Catherines for a while - the province only widened it to 6 lanes maybe a decade ago. and even then, it will likely be far cheaper and better spent money to expropriate the few houses required to widen it further whenever that time comes.

The Mid-Penn is a useless highway with no real purpose. It's really not needed.
 
The QEW won't need to be widened through St. Catherines for a while - the province only widened it to 6 lanes maybe a decade ago. and even then, it will likely be far cheaper and better spent money to expropriate the few houses required to widen it further whenever that time comes.

The Mid-Penn is a useless highway with no real purpose. It's really not needed.
Aside from the rebuilding of the Garden City Skyway (which I agree with, because the existing structure is nearly the end of its life and doesn't meet currents standards), I'd much rather see improved GO service along the Niagara peninsula than a widened QEW, or a new highway.

If the Province wants to make a splash with a big infrastructure project in the area, build a new rail tunnel under the Welland Canal or a new alignment from St. Catharines to Niagara Falls that puts a station closer to the actual Falls, so it's more attractive for tourists.
 
Aside from the rebuilding of the Garden City Skyway (which I agree with, because the existing structure is nearly the end of its life and doesn't meet currents standards), I'd much rather see improved GO service along the Niagara peninsula than a widened QEW, or a new highway.

If the Province wants to make a splash with a big infrastructure project in the area, build a new rail tunnel under the Welland Canal or a new alignment from St. Catharines to Niagara Falls that puts a station closer to the actual Falls, so it's more attractive for tourists.
As with most of these cases, the rate of growth in this province means it will likely be a "Why not both" scenario here.

Right now there is definitely no need for the mid-penn however. Not only will improved GO Services help immensely (and we all know how popular the existing Niagara GO services are), the only part of the QEW that could arguably need to be widened today is between Hamilton and Grimsby, and that part can be done very cheaply as all the bridges are already designed for it.

The Mid-Penn is just absolutely not needed. A combination of improvements to the QEW and GO services should be able to handle travel demand in the corridor for decades to come.
 
As with most of these cases, the rate of growth in this province means it will likely be a "Why not both" scenario here.

Right now there is definitely no need for the mid-penn however. Not only will improved GO Services help immensely (and we all know how popular the existing Niagara GO services are), the only part of the QEW that could arguably need to be widened today is between Hamilton and Grimsby, and that part can be done very cheaply as all the bridges are already designed for it.
Agreed on the Stoney Creek section of the QEW. What's really needed on the QEW is a continuation of the HOV lanes from Brant St out to at least Fifty Rd. Convert the Burlington Skyway to a 3+1HOV in each direction, and carry that configuration through Centennial Pkwy, with the highway being widened for HOV lanes east of Centennial.

The Mid-Penn is just absolutely not needed. A combination of improvements to the QEW and GO services should be able to handle travel demand in the corridor for decades to come.
Makes you kinda wish the Province would have kept Hwy 20 as a Provincial highway. Strategic upgrades along that corridor (bypassing towns like Smithville and Fonthill) would have provided a pretty decent stop-gap alternate route at a fraction of the cost of building a new corridor.
 
As with most of these cases, the rate of growth in this province means it will likely be a "Why not both" scenario here.

Right now there is definitely no need for the mid-penn however. Not only will improved GO Services help immensely (and we all know how popular the existing Niagara GO services are), the only part of the QEW that could arguably need to be widened today is between Hamilton and Grimsby, and that part can be done very cheaply as all the bridges are already designed for it.

The Mid-Penn is just absolutely not needed. A combination of improvements to the QEW and GO services should be able to handle travel demand in the corridor for decades to come.
I agree completely. I think I would go full 'Seldom Seen Smith' if this projects ever got underway. Not needed for all the reasons stated. Improvements to the existing QEW - yes. And the 403 reaching into Hamilton and up the Mountain - yes. And part of that is already being studied - the rebuilding of the Freeman interchange, which is badly needed 7 days a week. Another major key (as mentioned above) is continuing improvements to GO services into the Niagara Peninsula (which would then include Hamilton), and I would add Brantford to that (rail) and Waterdown (Rail would be kind of cool along the CP line connecting from Hamilton, through Waterdown, and joining the GO service at Guelph Junction into Toronto, but perhaps not. A lively GO BRT along Dundas and express bus connections to Aldershot would be needed) (And yes, I realize that most if not all are being studied and possibly in various degrees of implementation - but keep the focus!). And lastly - ending Doug Ford Urban sprawl. Keep urban units more compact, keep densities trending upwards. And protect and enhance farmland in Southern Ontario - once paved it is lost for ever. (People in general should be paying more attention to the Global Food Supply as the effects of the Russian Invasion of the Ukraine continue and as an example of how vulnerable our food supply could become in certain circumstances). We should be land banking (a very general term) for farming purposes (not rural estate lot 'farming') certain classes of farmland now.
 
The weaving from the westbound 401 to the collector lanes for 410 & Dixie is bad. I wish a ramp from 401 express to the mini-express on the northbound 410 was part of that work, but alas.
This is also where I exit for Mavis because the one that is actually signed for Mavis makes you switch over multiple lanes in a kilometre.
 
Navigation apps. Not sure why but they (can't say all of them however) want you in the collectors here even if you are driving all the way through Toronto past Pickering or vice versa. Blindly following what the computer says is one source of the overuse of the collectors vs the express.

Good point. Some navigation software (or their settings) can send you or some weird routes. I'm not a big user of them but a couple of folks in our bike group do and after getting to someplace via what seemed like the longest, most complicated route possible, you wonder why.
 
I never understood why more drivers coming in from Mississauga/Milton on the 401 don't stay in the express lanes. From what I see, almost always the collectors jams up where 410 merges and the express is moving quickly until the usual slow down approaching 427.
Commuting to and from this general area, the 401 WB collectors is unavoidable when entering 401 from Mavis, Hurontario, or 410 SB. Perhaps they could add a transfer to the express in between Hurontario and Mavis, but that's doubtful.
 
Agreed on the Stoney Creek section of the QEW. What's really needed on the QEW is a continuation of the HOV lanes from Brant St out to at least Fifty Rd. Convert the Burlington Skyway to a 3+1HOV in each direction, and carry that configuration through Centennial Pkwy, with the highway being widened for HOV lanes east of Centennial.


Makes you kinda wish the Province would have kept Hwy 20 as a Provincial highway. Strategic upgrades along that corridor (bypassing towns like Smithville and Fonthill) would have provided a pretty decent stop-gap alternate route at a fraction of the cost of building a new corridor.

Maybe the QEW can get 8-10 lanes through Stoney Creek and Grimsby, then keep the current 6 lanes between Ontario St and 406, and then widened from Glendale to McLeod Rd. On top of improved GO service that's probably enough for this entire segment to handle demand.

Highway 20 could've gotten twinned and designed like Hwy 6 through Hamilton and it would be a nice alternative to the QEW as well.
 
As with most of these cases, the rate of growth in this province means it will likely be a "Why not both" scenario here.

Right now there is definitely no need for the mid-penn however. Not only will improved GO Services help immensely (and we all know how popular the existing Niagara GO services are), the only part of the QEW that could arguably need to be widened today is between Hamilton and Grimsby, and that part can be done very cheaply as all the bridges are already designed for it.

The Mid-Penn is just absolutely not needed. A combination of improvements to the QEW and GO services should be able to handle travel demand in the corridor for decades to come.
Unless you have a GO train every 10-15 minute 7 days a week, you will see no decease in traffic on the QEW to Hamilton, let alone Toronto. Even widening will not do much for traffic.

You can get 8 lanes in between Confederation and 406 with a possibly 10 by shifting the service roads and it will require new overpasses for the 10 lane. A few bridges will have to be widened for 8/10 lanes.

Time to drop this need for HOV to the point you make it an transports only lane since they are moving goods costing more than that 2 - 4 person car.

The QEW from Toronto to Hurontario St is max 6 unless you remove the service road. Hurontario St to 403, it can be 8/10 lanes. Have to recheck, but you may get 10 lanes from 403 to the Skyway bridges. From St Catherine to Fort Erie, you can get 8 lanes in there. Will have to rebuilt the NF interchange for the extra lane(s).
 
Unless you have a GO train every 10-15 minute 7 days a week, you will see no decease in traffic on the QEW to Hamilton, let alone Toronto. Even widening will not do much for traffic.

You can get 8 lanes in between Confederation and 406 with a possibly 10 by shifting the service roads and it will require new overpasses for the 10 lane. A few bridges will have to be widened for 8/10 lanes.

Time to drop this need for HOV to the point you make it an transports only lane since they are moving goods costing more than that 2 - 4 person car.

The QEW from Toronto to Hurontario St is max 6 unless you remove the service road. Hurontario St to 403, it can be 8/10 lanes. Have to recheck, but you may get 10 lanes from 403 to the Skyway bridges. From St Catherine to Fort Erie, you can get 8 lanes in there. Will have to rebuilt the NF interchange for the extra lane(s).
Drum. Some interesting points. GO 15 minute service is a must, and a key, with more and faster service into the Niagara Region. HOV lanes vs TLO (Tranports Lane Only). Brilliant thought and why has it not occurred to the rest of the car centric world? Or maybe just myself. You would need a TLO from the 403/QEW split in Oakville to the 405. And then from K/W to past Oshawa on the 401 (or use the 407).

As for expansion. I get this to a point. Yesterday the QEW was a drag from the 403/QEW split, all they way through to the Freeman and then around to Red Hill. And it often is, and either direction, and any day of the week. And then into Hamilton and up the mountain on the 403, past the Linc, towards Brantford. So yes, more lanes should add capacity, but for how long? And at what cost?

The longer term keys are still better regional transport, and better built, better planned density and the ‘evil social upheaval’ of the 15 minute city, town, village…More frequent, fast, comfortable, connected GO rail and bus services, featuring rail lines, bus ways, light rail, separated bike lanes and trails, and changes in attitude about cars and big cars, and how we use them. And communities that are less reliant on cars for so many family activities.

it wail be really interesting to see the effects of the light rails lines in construction now in Toronto and Mississauga once fully functional. (as in when ever Crosstown opens? Followed by Finch and then the Hazel line) Could be quite transformative and maybe add impetus to more separation of existing streetcar trackage. One can hope.

Great post Drum; may have to go have another cappuccino while doodling on this one.
 
Unless you have a GO train every 10-15 minute 7 days a week, you will see no decease in traffic on the QEW to Hamilton, let alone Toronto. Even widening will not do much for traffic.

You can get 8 lanes in between Confederation and 406 with a possibly 10 by shifting the service roads and it will require new overpasses for the 10 lane. A few bridges will have to be widened for 8/10 lanes.

Time to drop this need for HOV to the point you make it an transports only lane since they are moving goods costing more than that 2 - 4 person car.

The QEW from Toronto to Hurontario St is max 6 unless you remove the service road. Hurontario St to 403, it can be 8/10 lanes. Have to recheck, but you may get 10 lanes from 403 to the Skyway bridges. From St Catherine to Fort Erie, you can get 8 lanes in there. Will have to rebuilt the NF interchange for the extra lane(s).
The only widening I would support from the Freeman interchange all the way east to the 427 would be the addition of an HOV lane on the section east of Trafalgar. Anything else is a waste of money that would be better spent on further increase Lakeshore GO service.

Strategically, here's what I think the QEW should look like:
  • Peace Bridge to 420: 2 lanes per direction, current configuration
  • 420 to 405: 2+1HOV in each direction
  • 405 to Bunting Rd (north side of Garden City Skyway): 4+1HOV
  • Bunting Rd to Casablanca Bl: 3+1HOV (4th lane drops just north of Bunting Rd when they exit onto the service roads)
  • Casablanca Bl to Eastport Dr (south of Burlington Skyway): 4+1HOV
  • Eastport Dr to North Shore Blvd/Easport (north of Skyway): 3+1HOV (Skyway is limited to 4 lanes per direction)
  • North Shore Blvd/Eastport to Freeman Interchange: 4+1HOV
  • At Freeman Interchange:
    • EB: 3+1HOV continue onto QEW/403, 1+1HOV onto 403 West, 2 continue onto 407
    • WB: 3+1HOV onto QEW, 2+1HOV onto 403, dedicated HOV flyover from 403 West to QEW/403
  • Freeman Interchange to Guelph Line: 5+2HOV (merged 403 and QEW HOV lanes)
  • Guelph Line to Walkers Line: 4+1HOV (lane drops at Guelph Line and Walkers Line)
  • Walkers Line to Trafalgar: 3+1HOV, with 4th lane between interchanges (connected acceleration and deceleration lanes)
  • Trafalgar to Royal Windsor: 4+1HOV
  • Royal Windsor to 403: 5+2HOV
  • At 403/Ford Interchange: 3+1HOV continues along QEW, 2+1HOV continues along 403
  • 403 Interchange to Dixie: 3+1HOV
  • Dixie to 427 Interchange: 4+1HOV (or 5 general if HOV isn't carried onto Gardiner or 427)
 
believe it or not MTO has background plans to allow for the widening of the Burlington Skyway - it's not an immovable object, especially since they are doing the Garden City Skyway already.. Not sure why you are proposing a 10-lane cross section across the Garden City Skyway but only an 8-lane cross-section on the Burlington Skyway. It would be expensive, but given the traffic over it I could see it happening at some point.

From MTO's Niagara-to-GTA study about a decade ago:


Skyway Widening.png


The preliminary plan would be to widen the 1980's structure and construct a new, third structure to the north.

Personally I find the 16-lane configuration to be a bit... overkill, but that's what MTO drew up. A 12-lane cross-section on the same size structure would probably be more appropriate with actual modern shoulders, unlike the above drawing without significant shoulders on the structure.

You could also probably just widen the 1980's structure and add an HOV lane in both directions pretty easily by routing the northbound HOV onto the southbound structure and seperating it with a barrier. Might be a good interim step.
 
The only widening I would support from the Freeman interchange all the way east to the 427 would be the addition of an HOV lane on the section east of Trafalgar. Anything else is a waste of money that would be better spent on further increase Lakeshore GO service.

Strategically, here's what I think the QEW should look like:
  • Peace Bridge to 420: 2 lanes per direction, current configuration
  • 420 to 405: 2+1HOV in each direction
  • 405 to Bunting Rd (north side of Garden City Skyway): 4+1HOV
  • Bunting Rd to Casablanca Bl: 3+1HOV (4th lane drops just north of Bunting Rd when they exit onto the service roads)
  • Casablanca Bl to Eastport Dr (south of Burlington Skyway): 4+1HOV
  • Eastport Dr to North Shore Blvd/Easport (north of Skyway): 3+1HOV (Skyway is limited to 4 lanes per direction)
  • North Shore Blvd/Eastport to Freeman Interchange: 4+1HOV
  • At Freeman Interchange:
    • EB: 3+1HOV continue onto QEW/403, 1+1HOV onto 403 West, 2 continue onto 407
    • WB: 3+1HOV onto QEW, 2+1HOV onto 403, dedicated HOV flyover from 403 West to QEW/403
  • Freeman Interchange to Guelph Line: 5+2HOV (merged 403 and QEW HOV lanes)
  • Guelph Line to Walkers Line: 4+1HOV (lane drops at Guelph Line and Walkers Line)
  • Walkers Line to Trafalgar: 3+1HOV, with 4th lane between interchanges (connected acceleration and deceleration lanes)
  • Trafalgar to Royal Windsor: 4+1HOV
  • Royal Windsor to 403: 5+2HOV
  • At 403/Ford Interchange: 3+1HOV continues along QEW, 2+1HOV continues along 403
  • 403 Interchange to Dixie: 3+1HOV
  • Dixie to 427 Interchange: 4+1HOV (or 5 general if HOV isn't carried onto Gardiner or 427)
Any thoughts on the 403 through Hamilton and up the mountain? I am not sure if GO has ever looked at regional rail to Brantford, but given commuting numbers…..
 

Back
Top