Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph

[Viewfromthe42]

Always a chance they make it 90kph in order to fit with 85 ;-)

[Chicopee]

I suspect that the speed limit will be 90 k. It seems that 100 k limits are for "4" series highways only in Ontario.

[The85]

I am a new member and hope to find answers to a number of questions. We live just off Victoria and Lackner so will be affected by the construction. Very curious as to what is going to happen, when and exactly what is going to be built. Unless I have missed things in my reading, there are lot of questions unanswered or not published by the Ministry. So here they are:

Construction Phases:
... Work underway - connection of Wellington to Bingemans Centre Drive - when to be opened?
... Extension of Bruce through to the rebuilt interchange at Wellington - is there a published timeline for completion?
... Is the closing and rebuild of Victoria Street bridge over #85 going to happen and if so when?
... What is the contract situation and is there a published timeline for the new 18 km roadway and interchanges between #85 & Wellington in the west to the north end of the Hanlon in Guelph?

Welcome to the forum Brad. The MTO's Southern Highways Program (2016-2020) provides some specific timelines for aspects of the project:
http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/highway...pdf#page=5

Specifically:

• New Victoria Street Bridge: utility relocations in 2017, new bridge in 2018
  
• Shirley Ave realignment: 2017
  
• New Highway itself: "beyond 2020"
  

[SammyOES2]

I would hope its 100 for the majority, although I could certainly understand lower in both KW/Guelph. I think the interchanges are generally far enough apart that I don't really see any reason not to make it 100?

[Markster]

I suspect that the speed limit will be 90 k. It seems that 100 k limits are for "4" series highways only in Ontario.

"Highway 7" from Kanata to Carleton Place (west of Ottawa), built in the last 10 years, is 100km/h.

[Chicopee]

I would like to see 100 as well, but if the new highway can have the higher limit, why isn't the expressway 100 between Elmira and "The Burg"? What would the difference be?

[danbrotherston]

I don't think there's been any statement, but I would imagine 100km/h.  The MTO doesn't build freeways with anything less than a 130km/h design speed these days.

Design speed 130 km/h, speed limit 100 km/h. Can't explain that.

[Markster]

Design speed 130 km/h, speed limit 100 km/h.  Can't explain that.

The biggest expense of our new highway 7 is the interchange with 85. If they didn't require 100km/h flyovers, it could have been much cheaper.

[Canard]

8 is 100 km/h between Fairway and the 401.

I'm curious now about the "much cheaper" comment - I would have thought the cost would have been due to the layering, not the radii. I can't imagine the larger radii would make that much of a cost difference?

That interchange is going to be a masterpiece of engineering, and I can't wait to see it come together!

[Chicopee]

True, 8 past Fairway is 100... I'd still like to understand why the expressway is 90. Especially the 7/8 portion from Ottawa to say Trussler.

[ijmorlan]

I don't think there's been any statement, but I would imagine 100km/h.  The MTO doesn't build freeways with anything less than a 130km/h design speed these days.

Design speed 130 km/h, speed limit 100 km/h.  Can't explain that.

De facto speed limit 120km/h

But regardless, there needs to be some difference between the design specification and the actual for safety factor. You don’t want routine usage to be running right at the limit.

Of course I don’t expect the interchange ramps to support 100km/h, although I suppose some of them could.

[Chris]

True, 8 past Fairway is 100... I'd still like to understand why the expressway is 90. Especially the 7/8 portion from Ottawa to say Trussler.

Many fatal accidents and cars crossing the median in the early 90's so they decided to lower it 10 kms.

[danbrotherston]

De facto speed limit 120km/h

But regardless, there needs to be some difference between the design specification and the actual for safety factor. You don’t want routine usage to be running right at the limit.

Of course I don’t expect the interchange ramps to support 100km/h, although I suppose some of them could.

That kind of logic makes sense if you treat traffic engineering like bridge engineering, which quite frankly is exactly what traffic engineers do.

The problem with that is the load is not a physical mass, it's a group of people operating vehicles.

So yes, the road should be forgiving to a higher speed than the speed limit, bUUUUUT that's a far more subtle thing than the "design speed". Specifically, the "apparent" design speed should be the speed limit, if you want people to travel at the speed limit.

The same applies here as applies to residential areas. The only real difference is the "innocent people" put at risk by drivers who drive too fast on the highway is almost exclusively people in other cars, as opposed to pedestrians, cyclists, and after this morning, building occupants.

I do suspect that highways are far harder to make the apparent design for a given speed, and speed limits and enforcement become more important.

[SammyOES2]

I understand the concept of what you're saying about lowering "the design speed" (even 'the apparent' design speed) in order to actually enforce a lower speed limit.  But is there any data that actually backs it up as a good design principle?  Particularly for a high speed highway (I think its much more likely to be true when talking about city streets / intersections), I would imagine that causing people to drive at the 'design speed' of a highway means that below average drivers are more likely to get hurt in a high speed situation.

[ijmorlan]

De facto speed limit 120km/h

But regardless, there needs to be some difference between the design specification and the actual for safety factor. You don’t want routine usage to be running right at the limit.

Of course I don’t expect the interchange ramps to support 100km/h, although I suppose some of them could.

That kind of logic makes sense if you treat traffic engineering like bridge engineering, which quite frankly is exactly what traffic engineers do.

The problem with that is the load is not a physical mass, it's a group of people operating vehicles.

So yes, the road should be forgiving to a higher speed than the speed limit, bUUUUUT that's a far more subtle thing than the "design speed".  Specifically, the "apparent" design speed should be the speed limit, if you want people to travel at the speed limit.  

The same applies here as applies to residential areas.  The only real difference is the "innocent people" put at risk by drivers who drive too fast on the highway is almost exclusively people in other cars, as opposed to pedestrians, cyclists, and after this morning, building occupants.

I do suspect that highways are far harder to make the apparent design for a given speed, and speed limits and enforcement become more important.

Yes, excellent point, and I would agree that a big problem with our cities is that we allow traffic engineers, in effect, to design many aspects of the city. Whereas instead the road design and drivers should have to live with what is good for the city as a whole. Example that occurs to me: on the highway I understand signs are designed to break off in the event of a collision, and this is good design. Whereas in the centre of the city, I think it would be preferable if poles would stop a car dead before it hits a pedestrian. If that’s a problem for its occupants, they shouldn’t have been driving that fast.