Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[7/8]

I tend not to be a particularly literal person, but yes, Clarington has a large supply of develop-able land, of which a lot of it will be more affordable than in a lot of other areas within the GTA, so I expect the population to increase by hundreds of thousands of people in the next 30-50 years.

It's around 85,000 already, having increased by nearly 9% between 2006 and 2011. It's only going to get higher and it's mostly farmland still. I think 500,000 or higher is very realistic.

It's crazy how fast Brampton has grown in my lifetime. My family moved to Brampton around the time I was born (1995), and the population was about 270 000*. This year, the population estimate is over 600 000!

I've uploaded some photos of the 407 extension that I have taken over the past few weeks since the highway opened:

Thanks for the photos as always. It's nice to see the signage heading EB, since I've on travelled it WB so far.

About the distance signs, doesn't the GTA have a lot of visitors from the US? How come the distance signs aren't in miles? Also, the distances translate weirdly. 3.1 km is nearly two miles, but it's actually 1.92 miles. Shouldn't it be 3.2 or 3.3 km?

It would be a lot of work to put distances in both km and miles. And by this logic, since lots of Canadians, Europeans, etc visit the U.S., shouldn't all U.S. signs have km too? Canada switched over to metric in the '70's, and we don't plan on switching back

[Mapmikey]

https://goo.gl/maps/cLca2S9erSL2

That one is at least 30 years old. Look at the 1's without the serif.

Here is another right off Yonge St that is not nearly that old but this is no longer Hwy 9...

https://goo.gl/maps/HE4WaSY74C32

[cl94]

About the distance signs, doesn't the GTA have a lot of visitors from the US? How come the distance signs aren't in miles? Also, the distances translate weirdly. 3.1 km is nearly two miles, but it's actually 1.92 miles. Shouldn't it be 3.2 or 3.3 km?

It would be a lot of work to put distances in both km and miles. And by this logic, since lots of Canadians, Europeans, etc visit the U.S., shouldn't all U.S. signs have km too? Canada switched over to metric in the '70's, and we don't plan on switching back

At this point, only 2 major countries do not use metric distance. The US should have switched in the 70s, but that never happened, of course. You get used to metric distance pretty quickly and the speed limits translate pretty nicely (80 km/h = 50 mph, 100 is 60).

[noelbotevera]

About the distance signs, doesn't the GTA have a lot of visitors from the US? How come the distance signs aren't in miles? Also, the distances translate weirdly. 3.1 km is nearly two miles, but it's actually 1.92 miles. Shouldn't it be 3.2 or 3.3 km?

It would be a lot of work to put distances in both km and miles. And by this logic, since lots of Canadians, Europeans, etc visit the U.S., shouldn't all U.S. signs have km too? Canada switched over to metric in the '70's, and we don't plan on switching back

At this point, only 2 major countries do not use metric distance. The US should have switched in the 70s, but that never happened, of course. You get used to metric distance pretty quickly and the speed limits translate pretty nicely (80 km/h = 50 mph, 100 is 60).

I'll be honest, I have never been exposed to metric distance. I went to The Netherlands back in 2005, but I was just a year old and never thought about distances. My parents never taught me despite living in a country using metric (the Philippines post US territory). I've lived in the US my entire life too.

[cbeach40]

Quite a pile of things, so quickly:

1. Downloading was indeed a media/spin thing used to describe the transfer of services between the province and municipalities in the 1990s. Wasn't just highways, a number of other services changed hands as well.

2. The rationale was basically roads that served local traffic. Not necessarily routes that were bypassed by freeways, but roads on which traffic was not provincially significant.

For the most part that was accomplished well (certainly a handful of exceptions going both ways), and from a service delivery standpoint it really makes more sense for all involved.

Yes, there are a lot of old signs out there. Mostly on sections of road that were not transferred.

I have the same questions too. Ontario already has the concept of Connecting Links, where a provincially highway is signed as a highway, but is actually locally maintained. Why didn't they make more of these Connecting Links instead of mass downloading?

Because there are an awful lot of legal ramifications to Connecting Links, most of which are not good for either MTO or the municipality. It really creates a lot of headaches for both with minimal benefit. Municipalities have far more flexibility without CLs on their roads.

Victoria St in Kitchener is a good example of a well-done Connecting Link.

That's not a Connecting Link.

[7/8]

Quite a pile of things, so quickly:

1. Downloading was indeed a media/spin thing used to describe the transfer of services between the province and municipalities in the 1990s. Wasn't just highways, a number of other services changed hands as well.

2. The rationale was basically roads that served local traffic. Not necessarily routes that were bypassed by freeways, but roads on which traffic was not provincially significant.

For the most part that was accomplished well (certainly a handful of exceptions going both ways), and from a service delivery standpoint it really makes more sense for all involved.

Yes, there are a lot of old signs out there. Mostly on sections of road that were not transferred.

I have the same questions too. Ontario already has the concept of Connecting Links, where a provincially highway is signed as a highway, but is actually locally maintained. Why didn't they make more of these Connecting Links instead of mass downloading?

Because there are an awful lot of legal ramifications to Connecting Links, most of which are not good for either MTO or the municipality. It really creates a lot of headaches for both with minimal benefit. Municipalities have far more flexibility without CLs on their roads.

Fair enough, I just like think the older system with more provincial highways since I believe it made it easier for navigating. But I can understand your reasoning.

Victoria St in Kitchener is a good example of a well-done Connecting Link.

That's not a Connecting Link.

Hmmm, I thought someone on here said it was. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the concept of Connecting Links? Victoria St has Hwy 7 and RR 55 shields side by side, so I thought this would equate to a Connecting Link. I figured this means the Region maintains the road, but signs it as a provincial highway. How is that different from a Connecting Link?

[vdeane]

I'm curious now too about Connecting Links.  In NY, municipally maintained sections of touring routes don't entail any special obligation on either NYSDOT (beyond sending traffic count and pavement condition data to FHWA) or the municipality since the shield doesn't denote any legal status.  It's simply a sign for motorist navigation.  Couldn't Ontario have created a similar system so that routes wouldn't get broken up in odd ways?

[cbeach40]

Hmmm, I thought someone on here said it was. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the concept of Connecting Links? Victoria St has Hwy 7 and RR 55 shields side by side, so I thought this would equate to a Connecting Link. I figured this means the Region maintains the road, but signs it as a provincial highway. How is that different from a Connecting Link?

A Connecting Link is a legal agreement between the municipality and the Province. The road is designated as a continuation of the King's Highway, and while the municipality owns the roadway, many operations on it are subject to MTO review and approval. The upside of that is that expenses the municipality incurs along the designated CL receive provincial funding. In the case of Victoria Street, no such agreement is in place.

I'm curious now too about Connecting Links.  In NY, municipally maintained sections of touring routes don't entail any special obligation on either NYSDOT (beyond sending traffic count and pavement condition data to FHWA) or the municipality since the shield doesn't denote any legal status. It's simply a sign for motorist navigation.  Couldn't Ontario have created a similar system so that routes wouldn't get broken up in odd ways?

Was not any desire to do so, as since they are local roads (the reason why they were transferred in the first place), it made far more sense to be incorporated into the local roads network.
And as has been discussed in the same thread before, the actual impact of renumbering has been minimal, as almost all of the sections of highway either a) retained their number or b) had their numbering changed to better reflect the local context.

[cl94]

I agree with Chris. Big examples of this are Highways 3 and 7. All sections of 3 that were downloaded are CR/RR 3, while those of 7 are either numbered 7 or something with 7 at the end. Heck, parts of old Highway 7 have the road actually named "Highway 7" to this day.

[7/8]

Hmmm, I thought someone on here said it was. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the concept of Connecting Links? Victoria St has Hwy 7 and RR 55 shields side by side, so I thought this would equate to a Connecting Link. I figured this means the Region maintains the road, but signs it as a provincial highway. How is that different from a Connecting Link?

A Connecting Link is a legal agreement between the municipality and the Province. The road is designated as a continuation of the King's Highway, and while the municipality owns the roadway, many operations on it are subject to MTO review and approval. The upside of that is that expenses the municipality incurs along the designated CL receive provincial funding. In the case of Victoria Street, no such agreement is in place.

Thank you for the explanation! Wikipedia says it's not a CL either, and I believe you. But I'm still wondering who maintains Victoria St, since it has both a Hwy designation and a RR designation?

I'm curious now too about Connecting Links.  In NY, municipally maintained sections of touring routes don't entail any special obligation on either NYSDOT (beyond sending traffic count and pavement condition data to FHWA) or the municipality since the shield doesn't denote any legal status. It's simply a sign for motorist navigation.  Couldn't Ontario have created a similar system so that routes wouldn't get broken up in odd ways?

Was not any desire to do so, as since they are local roads (the reason why they were transferred in the first place), it made far more sense to be incorporated into the local roads network.
And as has been discussed in the same thread before, the actual impact of renumbering has been minimal, as almost all of the sections of highway either a) retained their number or b) had their numbering changed to better reflect the local context.

Thanks for posting this, I hadn't read that far back in this thread. I can respect the MTO's decision to download the highways, but I still personally prefer a system like NY state where they have a nice cohesive state highway network.

[SignGeek101]

About the distance signs, doesn't the GTA have a lot of visitors from the US? How come the distance signs aren't in miles? Also, the distances translate weirdly. 3.1 km is nearly two miles, but it's actually 1.92 miles. Shouldn't it be 3.2 or 3.3 km?

Just go in a time machine back to 1975. But then you wouldn't see many of the newer freeways in Toronto now, would you? 

The number of worldwide (metric) combined visitors to the US far exceeds the amount of US visitors to Canada I would think (I didn't look up the numbers). Distances are just rounded. I've seen 70 mi (speed limit signs) be converted to 110 or 115 (but usually 110 because metric speed limits are always on the ten's ex: 10,50,100 etc).

But to humour you, here's a dual metric, imperial distance sign (far away from Ontario, I've never seen one there): https://goo.gl/maps/UPnj7KJMJ7t

If you're interested about Canada's switch look here: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5659.msg123406#msg123406

shouldn't all U.S. signs have km too?

There are a few, most of them near the Canadian and Mexican borders (I-5 in San Diego, I-87 near Quebec etc).

I remember reading a blog from a German couple travelling to southern Arizona. They were so relieved when they arrived on I-19 
https://goo.gl/maps/yYRyD9FAoKU2 - This pair (along with the ones heading southbound) could be the only Clearview metric signs in the US.

[7/8]

But to humour you, here's a dual metric, imperial distance sign (far away from Ontario, I've never seen one there): https://goo.gl/maps/UPnj7KJMJ7t

Cool! I'm surprised how far away it is from the US border too. But reading the thread you posted, it sounds like Nova Scotia has the most pre-metric relics and imperial signage.

shouldn't all U.S. signs have km too?

There are a few, most of them near the Canadian and Mexican borders (I-5 in San Diego, I-87 near Quebec etc).

I remember reading a blog from a German couple travelling to southern Arizona. They were so relieved when they arrived on I-19 
https://goo.gl/maps/yYRyD9FAoKU2 - This pair (along with the ones heading southbound) could be the only Clearview metric signs in the US.

I've read about I-19, too bad they plan on replacing the signs with imperial units during various construction projects. By the time I make it to Arizona, it might be too late

[MisterSG1]

Thankfully there aren't many (if any) serious low bridge situations on the 400 series highways. But on bridges where the clearance is close, I think heights in both meters and feet/inches should be posted.

Indeed, the city of Toronto does in fact do this, you can metric ate all you want but a trailer, that is a trailer that is a full size 53' trailer that is part of a tractor trailer is 13' 6". Convert that t metric and you get 4.1148m.

So if a sign says 4.1m, will I hit that bridge....the spread of 4.05m to 4.14m covers FOUR WHOLE INCHES.

That's not to say, most areas with height clearances ran by the private sector, think drive thrus or private parking garages in most cases will show the feet/inches measurement as the predominant measurement. Some Canadian corporations like Scotiabank have drive thru ATMs where the height clearance is shown in feet/inches ONLY. It's the public sector where we see most of the metric height clearances.

I could go on and on about how Canada isn't a metric country, and even I'm not a fan of the system despite being taught in school in metric only. Incidentally, the Ontario curriculum as of 2006 has reintroduced imperial measurements to be taught alongside metric units.

Even so, just because the rest of the world does something is a very poor argument on why something should be done. Somewhat road related, every other country uses a different speed limit sign than those seen in the US and Canada, should we switch and spend boatloads of money because the rest of the world does something.

[noelbotevera]

Some interesting oddities I found in the GTA:

For some reason Allen Road is a freeway near the 401. Why is this?

How come the two local-express sections in Mississauga and Toronto don't connect? Are there plans to connect these sections in the future? The websites I've checked don't mention reasons why these sections don't connect.

[7/8]

Some interesting oddities I found in the GTA:

For some reason Allen Road is a freeway near the 401. Why is this?

How come the two local-express sections in Mississauga and Toronto don't connect? Are there plans to connect these sections in the future? The websites I've checked don't mention reasons why these sections don't connect.

I don't know much about Allen Road, though I've always thought that was strange too

But I believe the collectors-express sections aren't connected because there isn't any room to expand within the given space of the complex 401/427 interchange. I guess it wasn't designed with enough room from the get-go? It's certainly a bad spot for traffic!

[haljackey]

Gardiner East draft report/appendix

Lots of reading material and neat pics/diagrams/stats

http://www.gardinereast.ca/participate-online

For some reason Allen Road is a freeway near the 401. Why is this?

Allen Road was the only built part of the Spadina Expressway. More info here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_Road#Spadina_Expressway

[MisterSG1]

Some interesting oddities I found in the GTA:

For some reason Allen Road is a freeway near the 401. Why is this?

How come the two local-express sections in Mississauga and Toronto don't connect? Are there plans to connect these sections in the future? The websites I've checked don't mention reasons why these sections don't connect.

I don't know much about Allen Road, though I've always thought that was strange too

But I believe the collectors-express sections aren't connected because there isn't any room to expand within the given space of the complex 401/427 interchange. I guess it wasn't designed with enough room from the get-go? It's certainly a bad spot for traffic!

You don't? In a nut shell, the short answer is that the Allen was supposed to be a freeway that went to Spadina/Bloor, this was to be called the Spadina Expressway. Protests got it stopped beyond Eglinton. The subway line that was planned with the freeway was built the whole way, hence why this "leg" of the subway line was called the "Spadina Line".

[7/8]

Some interesting oddities I found in the GTA:

For some reason Allen Road is a freeway near the 401. Why is this?

How come the two local-express sections in Mississauga and Toronto don't connect? Are there plans to connect these sections in the future? The websites I've checked don't mention reasons why these sections don't connect.

I don't know much about Allen Road, though I've always thought that was strange too

But I believe the collectors-express sections aren't connected because there isn't any room to expand within the given space of the complex 401/427 interchange. I guess it wasn't designed with enough room from the get-go? It's certainly a bad spot for traffic!

You don't? In a nut shell, the short answer is that the Allen was supposed to be a freeway that went to Spadina/Bloor, this was to be called the Spadina Expressway. Protests got it stopped beyond Eglinton. The subway line that was planned with the freeway was built the whole way, hence why this "leg" of the subway line was called the "Spadina Line".

Oh yeah, I've heard of the Spadina Expressway but it's been I while since I've read up on it. I guess I should have made that connection

I find it funny that they call the freeway portion Allen Road. I know it's continuous with the surface-road called Allen Road, but it's still a misleading name

It reminds of Highbury Avenue in London (Ontario, not England ). That one surprised me the first time I went on it!

[noelbotevera]

Another oddball I found is the 400 south of the 401. I read that 400 was meant to extend south to the QEW, now the Gardiner Expy., but was later cancelled due to opposition. Was the stub south of the 401 a remnant of that project?

EDIT: I found something that suspiciously looks like another remnant: this wide median not far from the end of Highway 400.

So I'm thinking the plan was to route it down Black Creek Drive, as if you pan to the left it looks as if it was prepared for a freeway.

[SignGeek101]

Another oddball I found is the 400 south of the 401. I read that 400 was meant to extend south to the QEW, now the Gardiner Expy., but was later cancelled due to opposition. Was the stub south of the 401 a remnant of that project?

EDIT: I found something that suspiciously looks like another remnant: this wide median not far from the end of Highway 400.

So I'm thinking the plan was to route it down Black Creek Drive, as if you pan to the left it looks as if it was prepared for a freeway.

To answer your question: There were plans to extend the 400 to the DVP (Don Valley Pkwy) or the Gardiner to the south. It, of course, never got built.



There was quite a bit (still a lot) of NIMBYism in the 60's and 70's that prevented further freeway building. If it were me, I would have done the extension of the Gardiner east to the 401 as an alternate way across the city.

There is a whole page about cancelled Toronto highways on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancelled_expressways_in_Toronto

[noelbotevera]

Another oddball I found is the 400 south of the 401. I read that 400 was meant to extend south to the QEW, now the Gardiner Expy., but was later cancelled due to opposition. Was the stub south of the 401 a remnant of that project?

EDIT: I found something that suspiciously looks like another remnant: this wide median not far from the end of Highway 400.

So I'm thinking the plan was to route it down Black Creek Drive, as if you pan to the left it looks as if it was prepared for a freeway.

To answer your question: There were plans to extend the 400 to the DVP (Don Valley Pkwy) or the Gardiner to the south. It, of course, never got built.



There was quite a bit (still a lot) of NIMBYism in the 60's and 70's that prevented further freeway building. If it were me, I would have done the extension of the Gardiner east to the 401 as an alternate way across the city.

There is a whole page about cancelled Toronto highways on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancelled_expressways_in_Toronto

Interesting. Do stubs of these plans exist? I'm planning to roadgeek around the GTA and see if I can't find remnants of said projects (this is next summer's roadtrip, if you can't tell from sporadic activity from me in this thread (wow I think I'm smarter than the previous kid who was on here, and he's older than me! sorry)).

There's some interesting expressways too. Not sure if Highway 2A still exists, but it seems to be interesting.

[SignGeek101]

Not sure (remember, this was all stuff that was decided before any of us commenting on this thread were born). I did find this though:

http://www.gettorontomoving.ca/scarborough-expressway.html

https://goo.gl/maps/6etjx6Shbv12 - The old demolished part of the Gardiner. Pillars were left up in some places to remind people of what was once here.

[SignGeek101]

If anyone was wondering: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/69-highway-construction-1.3681683

A new section of twinned (and freeway) ON 69 (future ON 400) should be open by 1 August.  https://goo.gl/maps/PmoBYWTesYD2

Now it will only be about 80 km from freeway end to the current ON 400 northern terminus. I really doubt they'll have that done by 2021, but we shall see. 

[MisterSG1]

Interesting. Do stubs of these plans exist? I'm planning to roadgeek around the GTA and see if I can't find remnants of said projects (this is next summer's roadtrip, if you can't tell from sporadic activity from me in this thread (wow I think I'm smarter than the previous kid who was on here, and he's older than me! sorry)).

There's some interesting expressways too. Not sure if Highway 2A still exists, but it seems to be interesting.

Yes, there are bits and pieces of the shelved Toronto expressways that were indeed built.

Allen Road (Spadina Expressway)

Obviously this one was the most controversial one that saw any construction. Although I have never found any of the original plans, something tells me that if the Allen was built all the way south to Bloor, that the subway line which exists would have been at grade in the median for the entire length.

I may have gotten ahead of myself, but the Allen has the Spadina subway line running in the center median.

The Allen ends SB at Eglinton, and there is always a nasty backup at the end no matter what time of day it is. Indeed I will usually never ever take the Allen SB for any reason unless if I'm going to use the 401. Both the Lawrence and Eglinton exits face nasty backups by a poorly timed traffic signal.

Black Creek Drive (Highway 400 Extension)

I'm not exactly sure how the 400 looked south of the 401 prior to 1982 (when Black Creek Drive was opened) but I believe that the 400 had a forced exit at Jane Street. Black Creek Drive is an expressway with traffic lights, and yes it is that stupid. Incidentally, the entire Black Creek Drive could be converted to freeway if they wanted to, but I wouldn't count on that happening ever.

I have on occasion taken Black Creek Drive NB in PM Rush while doing Uber, and those intersections on Black Creek Drive are particularly nasty in how traffic backs up on Black Creek Drive.

Highway 2A (Scarborough Expressway)

Highway 2A is indeed known as Kingston Road in this stretch. This was indeed supposed to be part of the cancelled Scarborough Expressway.

Crosstown Expressway

While nothing really was built of this freeway. Look at the Bayview/Bloor exit on the DVP, that's a trumpet interchange, this long exit ramp is a connector road that has an interchange with Bayview before meeting Bloor at a T-intersection. Although I can not find any solid plans, it's generally believed that this connector road would have been part of the Crosstown Expressway if it were built.

Richview Expressway

Again while nothing substantial was built with this one. There are ramps from 427SB and 401EB that were obviously designed with the Eglinton exit on either road intended to be a freeway. Indeed, there is a BGS on this Eglinton Avenue "ramp" that reads (Martin Grove Road 1km)

Until very recently, maybe around 2014 or so. The land immediately north of Eglinton Avenue between Martin Grove and Royal York was nothing. This empty space was land bought for the highway. Around 2014 this land was finally sold off.




The only portion of freeway that was eliminated in Toronto was the Gardiner east of the DVP which originally ran to Leslie Street. I can't remember this actual portion of roadway existing, it was knocked down in 1999. I was a suburban kid, and I rarely went downtown in my younger days.

I don't really want to talk about the politics of all these expressway, because it will make my blood boil. Indeed, Toronto and the GTA face a massive transportation crisis in the future if growing trends with immigration continue. I can start a new topic on here if you'd like to discuss it. Not just expressways, but look at how much rapid transit was built since the cancellation of Spadina (1971). You'll find it's a game of political football full of nasty egos.

[haljackey]

The Toronto area has some of the worst commute times in North America, and since it is planned to continue growing, things will just get worse without massive expansions or new projects.

This is why I want Toronto to host the Olympics one day. It may give Toronto the infrastructure it needs to support this growth through projects that wouldn't otherwise be greeenlit.

The current provincial government seems to be very transit-focused to try and relieve this congestion. Some projects are underway, others are in the planning stages.
-Roadwise, there really isn't much going on within the developed area, and much of Toronto's growth is occurring within already developed areas.

I can only see a small handful of road projects being completed in a pipe dream. They are:
-Convert Black Creek Drive to a freeway. Extend it parallel to the rail line as a tolled/HOT only highway that cold be just 2-4 lanes wide. It would mimic a narrow Japanese expressway design.
-Build a freeway through the Gatineau Power corridor between the DVP and 401.
-When it comes time to rehabilitate or replace the structures at 401/427, squeeze some room to allow a couple collector lanes to go through the interchange and reconfigure the stretch of 401 between 427 and 409 to link the systems together.
-Build more auxiliary lanes between interchanges. Should help keep short distance traffic going only 1 exit down from messing with highway flow.
-Convert the leftmost lane of 401 to HOV/HOT throughout the entire Toronto area. This will probably not do much to relive congestion, but it will help move more people per hour on the highway.
-Convert leftmost lane on Gardiner/DVP to HOV/HOT only as well.
-Buy back 407 ETR, take out tolls. (Yeah right!)

Another alternative is to direct the growth Toronto receives to other cities in the province. Ontario had a program in the past to help convince new immigrants to look at cities other than Toronto and small towns, but funding has been cut due to budgetary issues. Cities like Windsor, London, Kingston, Sudbury, etc outside of the Greater Golden Horseshoe are better suited to growth and some even require it to keep populations stable (cities like Chatham and Windsor are declining in population).