Travel Mapping

Highway Data Discussion => In-progress Highway Systems & Work => Topic started by: rickmastfan67 on January 19, 2016, 11:40:23 pm

Title: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: rickmastfan67 on January 19, 2016, 11:40:23 pm
I wish we could activate the 'Select Named Canadian Highways' system.  Ontario has a ton of thise that qualify and are already on GitHub.  This would also help fix the duplication of the Gardiner and DVP being in the wrong system and active on the site.

Edited after splitting thread to change subject from "Re: Finishing Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways" to "cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways". -Eric/yakra
Title: Re: Re: Finishing Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways
Post by: yakra on January 20, 2016, 12:36:59 am
I wish we could activate the 'Select Named Canadian Highways' system.  Ontario has a ton of thise that qualify and are already on GitHub.  This would also help fix the duplication of the Gardiner and DVP being in the wrong system and active on the site.
Not saying "I am for this", but...
I am not against this. :)

Edit: At the very least, I'm in favor of it being in the HB as an in-devel system. I may make a cannf_con.csv. Or maybe someone else will beat me to it. Gotta check whether there are Route/Root conflicts between cannf and canonf, mumble mumble...
Title: Re: Re: Finishing Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways
Post by: yakra on January 20, 2016, 11:43:23 am
• I would want to delete a lot of the Alberta routes that aren't actual freeways.
• Queen Elizabeth Way isn't in cannf. What system should it be part of?
• SK CirDr is out-of-date; the road is now a complete loop.
Title: Re: Re: Finishing Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways
Post by: Bickendan on January 20, 2016, 05:52:42 pm
Most of the AB routes that aren't actually freeways would ultimately fall into the main canab system, right?
Title: Re: Re: Finishing Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways
Post by: yakra on January 21, 2016, 11:15:04 am
Most of the AB routes that aren't actually freeways would ultimately fall into the main canab system, right?
In cannf (http://cmap.m-plex.com/hb/selecthwys.php?sys=cannf&rg=can.ab&gr=p#r) in AB, there's only CroTrl (http://cmap.m-plex.com/hb/hwymap.php?sys=cannf&rg=can.ab&gr=p&r=ab.crotrl&showint=0&dl=0), which partially overlaps with AB1ACoc (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=ab.ab001acoc).
As the file stands now, there's a small and incomplete overlap between the two, which wouldn't be picked up by multiplex detection (waypoints at different streets). It looks like the Crowchild Trail designation extends as far northwest as AB AB1ACoc 12MileRd.
Title: Re: Re: Finishing Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways
Post by: Jim on January 21, 2016, 07:04:36 pm
I wish we could activate the 'Select Named Canadian Highways' system.  Ontario has a ton of thise that qualify and are already on GitHub.  This would also help fix the duplication of the Gardiner and DVP being in the wrong system and active on the site.

Let's at least get that system up as a devel system.  If some basic fixes are made, I'm sure we can quickly take it to preview, and perhaps soon after, active.
Title: Re: Re: Finishing Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways
Post by: yakra on January 21, 2016, 07:44:42 pm
I wish we could activate the 'Select Named Canadian Highways' system.  Ontario has a ton of thise that qualify and are already on GitHub.  This would also help fix the duplication of the Gardiner and DVP being in the wrong system and active on the site.

Let's at least get that system up as a devel system.  If some basic fixes are made, I'm sure we can quickly take it to preview, and perhaps soon after, active.
There are no Route/Root conflicts between cannf and canonf. Once this system goes live, the old canonf route names can become AltRouteNames, e.g. ONDVP for DonValPkwy.
How about I bang together a cannf_con.csv?
Title: Re: Re: Finishing Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways
Post by: Jim on January 21, 2016, 07:58:56 pm
How about I bang together a cannf_con.csv?

Go for it!  I expect to be able to run a site update in a bit.
Title: Re: Re: Finishing Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways
Post by: yakra on January 21, 2016, 08:10:51 pm
Pull request will be in in the next few minutes.
Edit: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/368
Title: Re: Re: Finishing Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways
Post by: rickmastfan67 on January 22, 2016, 12:17:29 am
• Queen Elizabeth Way isn't in cannf. What system should it be part of?

I think it should stay where it is.  It is officially part of the 400 series in Ontario unlike the other 2 routes that are currently in that network.
Title: Re: Re: Finishing Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways
Post by: yakra on January 22, 2016, 01:00:50 am
• Queen Elizabeth Way isn't in cannf. What system should it be part of?
(Why did I ask the question if I think I have an answer? :P)

I think it should stay where it is.  It is officially part of the 400 series in Ontario unlike the other 2 routes that are currently in that network.
I got the opposite impression on reading your "this would be the best place" comment on GitHub. :) But anyway...
I'm not convinced. By this logic, CANNST should contain both the Bedford Bypass and Cabot Trail. It's a signed vs. unsigned thing -- It's not *signed as* an ON4xx route.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: rickmastfan67 on January 22, 2016, 01:17:56 am
Well, for the QEW to stay where it is, it has this going for it unlike your other examples:
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: yakra on January 22, 2016, 10:55:32 am
Not as unlike my examples as you might think:
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: si404 on February 11, 2016, 10:20:38 am
Looking through the routes currently in cannf (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?sys=cannf)

AB BedTrl (Beddington Trail) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=ab.bedtrl) - no reason to be in the system
AB CroTrl (Crowchild Trail) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=ab.crotrl) - goes a lot further NW (12 Mile Coulee Rd) though this is the unnumbered bit, all but the middle bit (Kensington Rd - 24th Ave) is actually freeway
AB GroRd (Groat Road) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=ab.grord) - no reason to be in the system
AB SheParkFwy (Sherwood Park Freeway) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=ab.sheparkfwy) - a reasonable inclusion (though is also AB100), though bit east of AB216 doesn't have the name.
AB TerDr (Terwillinger Drive) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=ab.terdr) - it would be worthy of inclusion if the mainline was build, but it isn't. Ditch it.
AB WayGreDr (Wayne Gretzky Drive) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=ab.waygredr) - partially freeway (101Ave - 118Ave) but that's only two junctions at the river crossing. Maybe
BC GolEarsWay (Golden Ears Way) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=bc.golearsway) - middle section (192St to BC7) is freeway, but rest isn't. Maybe
BC KniSt (Knight Street) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=bc.knist) - section in browser is freeway, but Knight Street is surface streets for a good long while further north. Maybe
NS BedByp (Bedford Bypass) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=ns.bedbyp) - Keep
ON AllRd (Allen Road) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=on.allrd) - Allen Rd goes a mile further north as surface street. Keep?
ON DonValPkwy (Don Valley Parkway) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=on.donvalpkwy) - Keep
ON ECRowExpy (EC Row Expressway) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=on.ecrowexpy) - Keep (needs a tweak or two?)
ON GarExpy (Gardiner Expressway) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=on.garexpy) - Keep
ON LinAlePkwy (Lincoln M. Alexander Parkway) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=on.linalepkwy) - Keep
ON RedHillPkwy (Red Hill Valley Parkway) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=on.redhillpkwy) - Keep
ON RR174 (Queensway) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=on.rr174) - Queensway goes further into Carlington (as 417 Freeway), RR174 goes further east as surface. Needs sorting, but general idea is a keeper
SK CirDr (Circle Drive) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=sk.cirdr) - needs extending, but keep.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: rickmastfan67 on February 11, 2016, 02:59:54 pm
ON ECRowExpy (EC Row Expressway) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=on.ecrowexpy) - Keep (needs a tweak or two?)

Nope, it's the full route in the HB already.  Maybe need to recenter the eastern end, but that's about it for it.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: yakra on February 11, 2016, 03:29:21 pm
AB BedTrl (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=ab.bedtrl) - no reason to be in the system
AB GroRd (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=ab.grord) - no reason to be in the system
Agreed.

AB TerDr (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=ab.terdr) - it would be worthy of inclusion if the mainline was build, but it isn't. Ditch it.
Yes, ditch it.

AB WayGreDr (Wayne Gretzky Drive) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=ab.waygredr) - partially freeway (101Ave - 118Ave) but that's only two junctions at the river crossing. Maybe
If BedTrl is out, then let's ditch this one too.

AB CroTrl (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=ab.crotrl) - goes a lot further NW (12 Mile Coulee Rd) though this is the unnumbered bit, all but the middle bit (Kensington Rd - 24th Ave) is actually freeway
The only one I'm really iffy about at all. At this moment I'm leaning toward keeping it. Extend NW, concurrent with AB1ACoc to 12MileRd.

AB SheParkFwy (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=ab.sheparkfwy) - a reasonable inclusion (though is also AB100), though bit east of AB216 doesn't have the name.
Definitely include. Truncate E end to AB216. W end needs sorting.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: yakra on February 11, 2016, 04:58:45 pm
SheParkFwy W end:

75 St:
The current end in the HB. I see no other evidence that Sherwood Park Freeway should end here. Truncate...

73 St & 82 Ave:
FWIW, this is where the shapefiles make the cutoff between L_STNAME_C = "Sherwood Park Freeway North-west" & L_STNAME_C = "82 Avenue North-west", just east of 73 St. The cutoff for the WB roadway is at the gore of the merge with 82 Ave.
GMSV at 73 St shows "82 (WHYTE) AV". (https://www.google.com/maps/@53.5181103,-113.4395149,3a,39.8y,342.4h,83.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQMD-Ok8v1xNbvY7HYzmVug!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) I interpret that as meaning that Sherwood Park Freeway has just ended, merging into 82 Ave by that point.

71 St:
The last at-grade intersection before the freeway-freeway. GMSV reveals that between June (https://www.google.com/maps/@53.5175722,-113.4364905,3a,37.5y,205.35h,90.49t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sGic-50azrpUCWxwQddl0Zg!2e0!5s20140601T000000!7i13312!8i6656) and July (https://www.google.com/maps/@53.5175554,-113.4365014,3a,37.5y,213.04h,89.77t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sVJUSzEnEmjEfDyyXoEnTAg!2e0!5s20140701T000000!7i13312!8i6656) of 2014, signage was changed from a post-mounted "Sherwood Park Freeway" with an arrow pointing east to an overhead "Sherwood Park Freeway" with no arrows.

ArgRd:
The last interchange before the at-grade bits. Wiki[citation needed]pedia lists the end as here (their 0.9 km figure would put their end at where I'd put the waypoint (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/53.5160038,-113.4314655/53.5142558,-113.41843/@53.5151559,-113.4403848,15z/data=!4m2!4m1!3e0)); I don't really see any other sources to corroborate that. Though I did find this (https://www.google.com/maps/@53.5146737,-113.4237022,3a,61.6y,296.7h,87.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2NJWieBVw8QQLIVi-qXpXw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) signage (https://www.google.com/maps/@53.5160289,-113.4296012,3a,44.9y,283.47h,86.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6TqHPwDh7Rkv__qBuISeWw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), it doesn't convince me of anything. I look at it as being control "cities" using road names; eventual destinations.

Right now I'm leaning toward the merge with 82 Ave.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: si404 on February 11, 2016, 08:13:32 pm
Nope, it's the full route in the HB already.  Maybe need to recenter the eastern end, but that's about it for it.
I hadn't zoomed in enough to see that the wierd eastern end is mapped correctly.
AB SheParkFwy (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=ab.sheparkfwy) - a reasonable inclusion (though is also AB100), though bit east of AB216 doesn't have the name.
Definitely include. Truncate E end to AB216. W end needs sorting.
My only doubt is that it is another route (AB100). If you consider this named freeway, then you ought to consider named freeways that are, likewise, also entirely covered by provincial highway networks. eg Anthony Henday Drive, which is AB216. I don't have a problem with that, but there is this can o'worms waiting to be opened.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: yakra on February 12, 2016, 02:35:16 pm
My only doubt is that it is another route (AB100).
I don't see any problems here. While this is, internally, AB100, it is not signed as such, and is thus left out of CANAB. So CANSF would be an appropriate place to keep it.

If you consider this named freeway, then you ought to consider named freeways that are, likewise, also entirely covered by provincial highway networks. eg Anthony Henday Drive, which is AB216. I don't have a problem with that, but there is this can o'worms waiting to be opened.
I don't draw that same line of causality. CANSF is for Canadian Select Named Freeways, and makes no pretense of trying to include all the named freeways. As Anthony Henday Drive is already covered on TM as AB216, there's no reason to include it in this Select set.
(Well... I guess I did just consider it, didn't I? :) )
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: si404 on February 12, 2016, 03:19:18 pm
I don't see any problems here.
Nor do I, other than the can of worms of having a route in two systems, but not others that would also be candidates. I didn't realise, however, that AB100 is unsigned.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: yakra on February 14, 2016, 12:58:00 pm
Updates to get AB & NS ready for Preview are now in the HB.

Breakdown of status by province:
AB   Ready
BC   Ping Oscar
NS   Ready
ON   Ping James
SK   Needs work

Ping Oscar:
• What's your take on BC GolEarsWay & KniSt? My inclination would be to ditch them; that's just my 2 cents.
• If you'd like, I could bash together an update for Circle Drive and submit it for your approval.

Ping James:
• I looked over the ON routes along with all the others when this thread got started, and everything looked good & mostly ready to go. Right?
• However, Si does bring up a good point (http://tm.teresco.org/forum/index.php?topic=30.msg384#msg384) about RR174 (Queensway) needing sorting.
• From a stylistic perspective, I don't like the mismatch between Route/Root (RR174) and City (Queensway), used for these named systems to provide the full highway name. I'd prefer they be more consistent, with what's signed. However, there is the existing precedent of NV CR215. Thoughts? (My dislike is not a violent dislike, to be clear...)
• Despite me saying "Shield style ... convincing argument" upthread (http://tm.teresco.org/forum/index.php?topic=30.msg139#msg139), I still think that CANNF is the best place for Queen Elizabeth Way. Going back to Tim's third bullet point from this post (http://clinched.s2.bizhat.com/viewtopic.php?p=2223&mforum=clinched#2223) when the state/provincial systems' scope was first defined...
Quote
- In general, most states should have a well defined system of numbered state highways, with their own designation type and highway shield, which are often called something like "trunk" or "touring" or "traffic" routes. ... The scope of the system is not the same as "all state-maintained highways". Each state defines their highway system differently.....
(Italics as in original)
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: yakra on February 14, 2016, 02:01:41 pm
Oscar, since I can't leave well enough alone, here's a working draft of SK CirDr I've put together:
Code: [Select]
SK11/16_A http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.089454&lon=-106.604635
TaySt http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.104766&lon=-106.604462
8thSt http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.114623&lon=-106.604462
14thSt http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.121817&lon=-106.604075
SK5 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.129352&lon=-106.607723
108thSt http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.136596&lon=-106.612058
AttDr http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.150133&lon=-106.613259
PreAve_N http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.152477&lon=-106.624031
+X01 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.154478&lon=-106.637936
+X02 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.157690&lon=-106.641111
WarRd http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.158032&lon=-106.646733
SK11/16_B http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.157901&lon=-106.670079
AirDr http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.154346&lon=-106.681795
33rdSt http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.143813&lon=-106.702223
SK7/14 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.129326&lon=-106.719818
11thSt http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.114685&lon=-106.715237
ValRd http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.104548&lon=-106.713370
SK219 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.092665&lon=-106.670423
SK11_N http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.092504&lon=-106.662473
ClaAve http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.089896&lon=-106.646562
PreAve_S http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.089633&lon=-106.622615
SK11/16_C http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.089454&lon=-106.604635

A few caveats:
• SK TCHYel SK11_S & SK SK11 SK16_S have different coords. Recommend replacing the coords in the SK11 file with the coords from the TCHYel file. I've used the TCHYel coords above.
• I've left in +X01 & +X02 to avoid breaking the multiplex with (active) TCHYel, but I recommend deleting them from both files.
• On the new segment, I've broken the multiplex with (in-dev) SK11: I removed +x37, and recentered SK11_N (labeled ToSK219 in the SK11 file).
• Signage for SK11 and TCH16 are a bit... odd. I'm not 100% certain the routes still follow what's in the HB, but for now I've left the labels as if they do. This will take some investigation, GMSVing around and such. It looks at first glance like a case of spotty (https://www.google.com/maps/@52.0849217,-106.6045005,3a,65.1y,0.05h,90.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smQYWvNd0QsngCecjZskNUw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) signage (https://www.google.com/maps/@52.0895334,-106.5972561,3a,52y,270.58h,90.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUWfIod8WcfwAhfZwuhPUZw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), missing TOs, and the like... Maybe.
Edit: TCH16 is confusingly signed along both the NE and SW legs of Circle Drive. Signage for SK11 seems to be a bit more indicative of following the western leg; thru travelers attempting to follow signage for the route are going to have a hell of a time. (Well -- NB is confusing but still doable. SB, traffic is directed to exit Idlewyld at the Circle Drive interchange, where there's no signage at the ramp terminus, so good luck.)
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: julmac on February 15, 2016, 12:00:43 pm
Ever since the southwest leg of Circle Drive opened, the routing of SK11 and TC16 has been ambiguous. It appears that SK11 and TC16 are intended to be routed both ways around the circle, with SK11 removed from Idylwyld Drive. I suggest that to minimize changes in the HB, TC16 be kept along the east leg of Circle Drive and SK11 be route along the west leg. Idylwyld Drive (the freeway portion) should be added to CANSF.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: yakra on February 16, 2016, 12:00:39 am
Ever since the southwest leg of Circle Drive opened, the routing of SK11 and TC16 has been ambiguous. It appears that SK11 and TC16 are intended to be routed both ways around the circle, with SK11 removed from Idylwyld Drive. I suggest that to minimize changes in the HB, TC16 be kept along the east leg of Circle Drive and SK11 be route along the west leg. Idylwyld Drive (the freeway portion) should be added to CANSF.
This is also what I was thinking to do, TCH16 on the east and SK11 on the west.
Oscar, what's your opinion on adding Idylwyld Drive to CANSF?

Edit: Might be worthwhile to email SK MoT for clarity...
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: oscar on February 16, 2016, 08:37:24 am
Just a few cents from the road (julmac, does that cliche still exist up there, with the removal of the penny from circulation in Canada?). I'm going to be really busy the next few days, mainly helping my sister in southern California move.

On Circle Drive and Idylwild Drive:

I think the signage for the TCH around the northeast quadrant of Circle Drive is clear enough for TCH travelers to follow, and any TCH signage on other parts of Circle Drive is probably just missing "TO" banners.

As for SK 11, there is probably still a fair amount of remnant SK 11 (and even TCH) signage on Idylwild Dr. to really confuse things on GMSV. A look at the online official highway map (which I don't have time for right now) would be more definitive.

On the BC unnumbered routes:

I have zero familiarity with those routes, and never bothered to travel them on multiple visits to Vancouver, which should tell you something about their (un)importance.

On Queen Elizabeth Way in Ontario:

Leaving aside the metaphysics of which system it belongs in, the most important thing is that it remain in an active system. It's too important and well-traveled a route to move from an active to an inactive system. That means leaving it alone until CANNF is activated. I don't feel as strongly about the unnumbered Don Valley and Gardiner routes, which I have traveled and are in my list file.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: yakra on February 16, 2016, 11:08:49 am
I think the signage for the TCH around the northeast quadrant of Circle Drive is clear enough for TCH travelers to follow, and any TCH signage on other parts of Circle Drive is probably just missing "TO" banners.
Agreed.

As for SK 11, there is probably still a fair amount of remnant SK 11 (and even TCH) signage on Idylwild Dr. to really confuse things on GMSV.
I haven't seen any TCH without TO plates. SK11, yes, there's still plenty of that. (First random former-11 interchange I plopped Pegman down at.) (https://www.google.com/maps/@52.1146367,-106.6700889,3a,75y,289.94h,90.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWFs5xswqC0F9XrsmGbx7dQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) Including at the northern Idlewyld/Circle interchange, and the aforementioned ramp terminus, which still signs the old route (https://www.google.com/maps/@52.1579534,-106.6705733,3a,38.2y,268.28h,89.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suaCgANFEUPmZ49BdYbBodA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).

A look at the online official highway map (which I don't have time for right now) would be more definitive.
All I found was this stuff (http://www.highways.gov.sk.ca/sask-maps/). Nothing with any good "zoomed-in" detail, and nothing with enough info to find a definitive route.

On the BC unnumbered routes:

I have zero familiarity with those routes, and never bothered to travel them on multiple visits to Vancouver, which should tell you something about their (un)importance.
Si says "Maybe"; I'm leaning toward "Ditch'em" -- do you have a strong opinion?

On Queen Elizabeth Way in Ontario:

Leaving aside the metaphysics of which system it belongs in, the most important thing is that it remain in an active system. It's too important and well-traveled a route to move from an active to an inactive system. That means leaving it alone until CANNF is activated. I don't feel as strongly about the unnumbered Don Valley and Gardiner routes, which I have traveled and are in my list file.
Agree 100% -- let's leave this active in CANONF until CANNF is activated. Same for the others.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: oscar on February 17, 2016, 01:23:34 am
A look at the online official highway map (which I don't have time for right now) would be more definitive.
All I found was this stuff (http://www.highways.gov.sk.ca/sask-maps/). Nothing with any good "zoomed-in" detail, and nothing with enough info to find a definitive route.

What I had in mind was from Tourism Saskatchewan. As it turns out, its online map (.pdf of only one side of a paper map) both predates the completion of Circle Drive, and has zero detail about anything within the Saskatoon city limits. But I recall that the most recent paper version has a Saskatoon insert on the back side. I'm three time zones away from my copy for a few weeks, but maybe julmac can help here since IIRC he's from Saskatchewan.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: rickmastfan67 on February 17, 2016, 06:29:19 pm
Ping James:
• I looked over the ON routes along with all the others when this thread got started, and everything looked good & mostly ready to go. Right?
Pretty much.

• However, Si does bring up a good point (http://tm.teresco.org/forum/index.php?topic=30.msg384#msg384) about RR174 (Queensway) needing sorting.
ON RR174 (Queensway) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=on.rr174) - Queensway goes further into Carlington (as 417 Freeway), RR174 goes further east as surface. Needs sorting, but general idea is a keeper
If Ontario wouldn't have gone on their download binge in 1997, this would have still been part of ON-17 (the RR-174 part at least) and this wouldn't have been a problem.  Anyways, I'd just keep it to the expressway part of RR-174.  Sure, a little bit to the east it changes to RR-17 because of a district change, but I'd just leave it as is.

ON AllRd (Allen Road) (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?r=on.allrd) - Allen Rd goes a mile further north as surface street. Keep?
I'd have no problems even shortening the northern end down to the Transit Road point and leave just the expressway part.  Probably could even take out the 'WilHeiBlvd' point.  Plus, I would need to update the labels to the current standards by taking out the 'W'/'E' at the end of some of them.
Anyways, Allen Road (Spadina Expressway) was suppose to be part of a big Toronto Expressway system, however, only this part got constructed as well as the DVP and Gardiner.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_Road
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: yakra on February 18, 2016, 01:03:03 am
If Ontario wouldn't have gone on their download binge in 1997, this would have still been part of ON-17 (the RR-174 part at least) and this wouldn't have been a problem.  Anyways, I'd just keep it to the expressway part of RR-174.  Sure, a little bit to the east it changes to RR-17 because of a district change, but I'd just leave it as is.
Yes, just keep the expressway part of RR-174. Though how about this -- extend it west, concurrent with ON417, to include all of the highway that bears the "Queensway" name? Precedent: NJ NJTpk got extended to include all of the NJ Turnpike, even the I-95 bits, sometime before CHM went inactive. I recently did the same with AB CroTrl, extending it along the Crowchild Trail portion of AB1ACoc. Doing this could sort out the Queensway/RR174 City/Route/Root mismatch -- it wouldn't be all RR174, but it would be all Queensway, thus ON Que.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: rickmastfan67 on February 19, 2016, 06:59:52 pm
If Ontario wouldn't have gone on their download binge in 1997, this would have still been part of ON-17 (the RR-174 part at least) and this wouldn't have been a problem.  Anyways, I'd just keep it to the expressway part of RR-174.  Sure, a little bit to the east it changes to RR-17 because of a district change, but I'd just leave it as is.
Yes, just keep the expressway part of RR-174. Though how about this -- extend it west, concurrent with ON417, to include all of the highway that bears the "Queensway" name? Precedent: NJ NJTpk got extended to include all of the NJ Turnpike, even the I-95 bits, sometime before CHM went inactive. I recently did the same with AB CroTrl, extending it along the Crowchild Trail portion of AB1ACoc. Doing this could sort out the Queensway/RR174 City/Route/Root mismatch -- it wouldn't be all RR174, but it would be all Queensway, thus ON Que.

If I could maybe figure out for sure what the Western end is, maybe.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: oscar on April 07, 2016, 03:48:25 pm
A look at the online official highway map (which I don't have time for right now) would be more definitive.
All I found was this stuff (http://www.highways.gov.sk.ca/sask-maps/). Nothing with any good "zoomed-in" detail, and nothing with enough info to find a definitive route.

What I had in mind was from Tourism Saskatchewan. As it turns out, its online map (.pdf of only one side of a paper map) both predates the completion of Circle Drive, and has zero detail about anything within the Saskatoon city limits. But I recall that the most recent paper version has a Saskatoon insert on the back side. I'm three time zones away from my copy for a few weeks, but maybe julmac can help here since IIRC he's from Saskatchewan.

Followup, now that I'm reunited with my latest (2014-15) Tourism Saskatchewan provincial road map. Its back side does indeed have a fairly detailed city inset for Saskatoon. However, it sheds no light at all on the routing of TCH 16 and SK 11 through the city, or the route designations (if any) for Circle Drive. It does show route markers for TCH 16, SK 11, and other highways, but only in the outskirts of the city. Grrrr.

I plan to drive through Saskatchewan again this summer. I'll probably steer far clear of Saskatoon, but will try to pick up the latest tourist map, and check on whether the new edition says anything meaningful about route designations through Saskatoon. You can also order your own free copy from Tourism Saskatchewan, as I've done ahead of previous visits.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: oscar on May 26, 2016, 06:58:25 pm
I did pick up the latest Tourism Saskatchewan map, earlier this month. As unhelpful, on Circle Drive or other route designations within Saskatoon, as previous editions.

But driving down SK 11 from Prince Albert, I noticed overhead signs directing SK 11 and TCH 16 traffic to Circle Drive. The overhead for the through lanes showed no route number for Idylwild Dr., which continues beyond the interchange. That indicates that SK 11 follows Circle Dr., and no longer follows Idylwild Dr. Whether clockwise or counter-clockwise on Circle Dr. was unclear, as I saw no signage at the end of that off-ramp saying which way to turn to stay on SK 11. But I saw no SK 11 (or TCH) signage on the northwest quadrant of Circle Dr., from the Idylwild Dr. interchange to the SK 7/14 interchange west of downtown, at which point I left Circle Dr. on SK 7 heading southwest.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: oscar on June 27, 2016, 01:38:50 pm
I forgot to mention that I took another pass at Saskatoon later that trip. Circle Dr., in both directions at the Idylwild Dr. interchange, has signs indicating SK 11 goes south on Idylwild Dr. The northeast quadrant of Circle Dr., heading clockwise, has some overhead signs indicating that it's either SK 11 south, and others with "To SK 11". Most perplexing, SK 11 northbound approaching the Circle Dr./TCH 16 junction has overhead signs directing northbound SK 11 traffic to either turn left onto Circle Dr. west, or go straight ahead on Circle Dr. north (take your pick). 

Whoever takes on SK provincial routes (which might be me, once I've finished usaak, considering how much driving I've been doing there lately) should call the transportation ministry, to find out where exactly SK 11 officially goes through Saskatoon, and what route numbers if any are officially assigned to each of Circle Dr.'s quadrants. Also, to urge that it fix the total clusterfork that is route signage in Saskatoon.

I also saw some of that in Regina on that trip, with conflicting signage on its Ring Rd. around, and SK 6 around or through, that city. I'll be back in Regina for a few days -- but this time not Saskatoon -- next month, so I can try to clarify the situation there. EDIT: No real issue with route signage in Regina. SK 11 continues on Ring Rd. down ro the southern junction of SK 6 and TCH 1, in a rather useless multiplex with SK 6, but the signage is reasonably clear. I'll later fix this in cansph.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: julmac on July 16, 2016, 12:23:53 pm
Whoever takes on SK provincial routes (which might be me, once I've finished usaak, considering how much driving I've been doing there lately) should call the transportation ministry, to find out where exactly SK 11 officially goes through Saskatoon, and what route numbers if any are officially assigned to each of Circle Dr.'s quadrants. Also, to urge that it fix the total clusterfork that is route signage in Saskatoon.

The Ministry of Highways doesn't own Circle Drive; it's controlled by the City (which no doubt is contributing to the issue).
I'm hoping that route signage is handled better when the Regina Bypass opens in a few years time, although no indications yet on what the highway routings will be (at least this time, the province has full control over the roadway).
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: mapcat on December 01, 2016, 10:23:42 pm
Bumping...what's still up for debate? From what I can tell, AB, BC, NS, and ON (with the possible exception of the western end of Queensway) appear settled, leaving SK still in limbo. There aren't any potential additions in other provinces, are there? Think we can move this up to preview by the end of the year?

On a related note, since cansph will never be added as a system, what's the logic in displaying it as a "devel" system in the HB? Anything in the list is late-CHM-vintage at best, and therefore likely to be completely revamped when its provincial system is properly drafted.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: oscar on December 02, 2016, 07:56:08 pm
In AB, should the Glenmore Trail in Calgary be added (back)? The plan had been to include it in the AB 8 route file, but before canab was activated, AB 8 was truncated (at my suggestion) to remove a big freeway chunk of the Trail with no posted route numbers.

Are there other freeways that should be added, in other provinces? BC and ON have been kept up to date, nut I'm unsure of the others. SK probably has no candidates for additions, with Regina's Ring Rd. removed long ago since most of it is now part of SK 11. The Manitoba St. Expressway in Moose Jaw is a "probably not" as not long enough, but I want to noodle a little on that. In MB, does Winnipeg have freeway-level "city routes" worthy of addition (I don't recall any)? I'm drawing a blank right now on QC, I doubt NL has anything unnumbered.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: Bickendan on December 03, 2016, 12:47:01 am
There were a couple in metro Vancouver that Tim nixed... Knight St and Golden Ears Way.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: yakra on December 03, 2016, 03:47:33 am
Bumping...what's still up for debate? From what I can tell, AB, BC, NS, and ON (with the possible exception of the western end of Queensway) appear settled
I wanna say BC could still be sorted. I didn't take Oscar's response WRT GolEarsWay & KniSt upthread as very definitive -- even if he did suggest they were unimportant.

There were a couple in metro Vancouver that Tim nixed... Knight St and Golden Ears Way.
Did Tim nix those? If so, they've remained in the HB to this day. Maybe you're thinking Si & me -- Si gave them both a "maybe", and I pooh-poohed them upthread. But looking back at the routes in the HB again, I don't see why I was thinking "ditch it" for KniSt. It's all freeway (the part plotted, at least). Connects to a numbered route too. Seems pretty cromulent. I'd still wanna ditch GolEars Way though...

In any case, I think some consistency with routes that are only partially freeway would be good. GolEarsWay is plotted in its entirety, even the non-freeway bits. KniSt has only the freeway bits plotted.

leaving SK still in limbo. There aren't any potential additions in other provinces, are there? Think we can move this up to preview by the end of the year?
SK is the sticking point, IMO. It looks like nothing but a headache. I'd hesitate to put that workload on Oscar unless he's ready & willing to assume it.

In AB, should the Glenmore Trail in Calgary be added (back)? The plan had been to include it in the AB 8 route file, but before canab was activated, AB 8 was truncated (at my suggestion) to remove a big freeway chunk of the Trail with no posted route numbers.
Well, it was actually julmac's info that really got me fully convinced. :) I'm definitely willing to entertain the idea of adding it. The question of "how much to include?" gets to be a rabbit hole pretty quickly, and is best saved for another post.

In MB, does Winnipeg have freeway-level "city routes" worthy of addition (I don't recall any)?
I haven't really looked into how freeway-level things get there, in detail. Probably not much. I've been thinking that the Winnipeg City Routes could be their own Tier 5 system.

I doubt NL has anything unnumbered.
I believe there's nothing unnumbered. Back in the day, Tim proposed NL3A, until I realized it had a number, so it went into cansph instead.

On a related note, since cansph will never be added as a system, what's the logic in displaying it as a "devel" system in the HB?
I think, just in order to have it as a reference and be able to look at it, really. It seems I ginned up the _con.csv file (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/commits/master/hwy_data/_systems/cansph_con.csv) concurrent with the initial canab upload, before this forum existed. ISTR some discussion about this, but I'm not finding anything, either in GitHub issues or on AARoads...
A quick search led to nothing in the GitHub issues; seems then, there was discussion about that on AARoads...

Anything in the list is late-CHM-vintage at best, and therefore likely to be completely revamped when its provincial system is properly drafted.
I actually updated NL2 (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/commit/071c2ba360009a4d1a0ca05142d0e022e1a27ad9) when it was extended west last year, and have been passively keeping an eye on the NL3A extension under construction.
As far as revamping goes, I think keeping the data around still makes for a good starting point. So why not have it visible; the HB makes for a handy reference & viewer.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: yakra on December 03, 2016, 04:46:42 am
"How much of each route to include?"
can lead down a rabbit hole in some cases...

Two sub-questions to try to answer:
1.) How much do we include if a route bearing a given name is only partially freeway, especially with significant at-grade portions beyond the freeway's end? Development?
2.) How much do we include if the route is partially numbered?

It was mostly Glenmore Trail that got me thinking about this, but the answers to these questions could have wider ramifications for other routes in the system.
Of the 13 routes in the HB now (and GleTrl, which isn't), the only ones I'd be 100% confident to green-light without asking any questions would be ns.bedbyp & on.donvalpkwy.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: oscar on December 03, 2016, 07:37:29 am
leaving SK still in limbo. There aren't any potential additions in other provinces, are there? Think we can move this up to preview by the end of the year?
SK is the sticking point, IMO. It looks like nothing but a headache. I'd hesitate to put that workload on Oscar unless he's ready & willing to assume it.

SK's Circle Drive is a manageable headache, especially if we deep-six the idea of getting cannf ready for preview by the end of the month, given the holiday season already in full swing. With all the system-wide issues yakra flagged, that looks unrealistic anyway.

Circle Drive has a few issues of its own, none necessarily showstoppers, aside from the easy task of filling in the newly-completed southwest quadrant:

-- much of the eastern half is numbered, at least the part concurrent with active TCH 16, and perhaps also another part concurrent with in-dev SK 11 (as noted above, signage is really confusing on SK 11's routing within Saskatoon, including which parts of Circle Dr. are part of SK 11)

-- much of the northern half is non-freeway, including both part of the TCH segment  and another to the west
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: oscar on December 03, 2016, 08:03:48 pm
Anything in the list is late-CHM-vintage at best, and therefore likely to be completely revamped when its provincial system is properly drafted.
I actually updated NL2 (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/commit/071c2ba360009a4d1a0ca05142d0e022e1a27ad9) when it was extended west last year, and have been passively keeping an eye on the NL3A extension under construction.
As far as revamping goes, I think keeping the data around still makes for a good starting point. So why not have it visible; the HB makes for a handy reference & viewer.

Some of the cansph route files have been updated here and there. For example, I made some major changes to SK 2 and SK 11, based on what I found on one of my recent visits to that province.

While it isn't critical to keep cansph online, that helps make sure that whoever starts developing the remaining provincial systems (cansk, canqc, cannl) will know where to find the route files on hand to use as a starting point.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: Bickendan on December 04, 2016, 02:58:19 am
There were a couple in metro Vancouver that Tim nixed... Knight St and Golden Ears Way.
Did Tim nix those? If so, they've remained in the HB to this day. Maybe you're thinking Si & me -- Si gave them both a "maybe", and I pooh-poohed them upthread. But looking back at the routes in the HB again, I don't see why I was thinking "ditch it" for KniSt. It's all freeway (the part plotted, at least). Connects to a numbered route too. Seems pretty cromulent. I'd still wanna ditch GolEars Way though...

In any case, I think some consistency with routes that are only partially freeway would be good. GolEarsWay is plotted in its entirety, even the non-freeway bits. KniSt has only the freeway bits plotted.

It was a while back when I drafted Knight St and Golden Ears Way. I'd want Knight St to stay, but I'm not as beholden to Golden Ears. However, if it does stay, it'll provide an incentive for me to clinch it the next time I'm able to get up to Vancouver :)
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: yakra on December 08, 2016, 02:17:33 pm
"How much of each route to include?"
can lead down a rabbit hole in some cases...

Two sub-questions to try to answer:
1.) How much do we include if a route bearing a given name is only partially freeway, especially with significant at-grade portions beyond the freeway's end? Development?
2.) How much do we include if the route is partially numbered?
on.donvalpkwy.
A Question 1A: Should the ends be at the final interchange of the freeway segments? The first at-grade intersection beyond that? Something else in special cases?
And for all these questions, should we try to make hard & fast rules out of the answers, or allow things to be more wibbly-wobbly and do what seems to Make Sense and look nice in individual cases?

Comments, route-by-route
...and thinking things thru and crap.

ab.crotrl (http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?u=&r=ab.crotrl)
Q1 and Q2 apply. There is a short at-grade segment between two freeway segments.

ab.sheparkfwy (http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?u=&r=ab.sheparkfwy)
The answer to Q1 could mean a minor adjustment to the western terminus (http://tm.teresco.org/forum/index.php?topic=30.msg392#msg392).

bc.golearsway (http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?u=&r=bc.golearsway)
Q1 applies; significant at-grade portions at both ends.

bc.knist (http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?u=&r=bc.knist)
Q1 applies; Knight St continues north with residential development and tons of at-grades. I would not want to extend it; Q1A raises the idea of lopping off the short northernmost segment.

ns.bedbyp (http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?u=&r=ns.bedbyp)
Looks good.

on.allrd (http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?u=&r=on.allrd)
Q1/1A, a few at-grades at the north end. Extraneous directional suffixes on point labels. WilHeiBlvd should be removed per 1PPI.

on.donvalpkwy (http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?u=&r=on.donvalpkwy)
Looks good.

on.ecrowexpy (http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?u=&r=on.ecrowexpy)
Looks good? (Why did I not flag it as looking good upthread?)

on.garexpy (http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?u=&r=on.garexpy)
The easternmost segment, beyond DonValPkwy, looks a bit off to me. Are we sure the route ends here, and that this shouldn't be considered a ramp?

on.linalepkwy (http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?u=&r=on.linalepkwy)
Point label RHillVPkwy mismatches route name RedHillPkwy. (I prefer RedHillPkwy.)

on.redhillpkwy (http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?u=&r=on.redhillpkwy)
Point label LinMAPkwy mismatches route name LinAlePkwy. (I prefer LinAlePkwy.)
Extraneous directional suffixes on point labels.

on.rr174 (http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?u=&r=on.rr174)
Upthread, I was batting around these ideas about renaming it on.que / ON Que instead, which would create some Q2 problems about "DO we extend it west along ON417 Queensway, and if so haw far?" Rethinking that some more, I think it's fine as is. Having the route be RR174 sidesteps the "how far to extend it" issue. Sure, it "goes further east as surface" as Si noted, but I don't see a problem here. There's been plenty of precedent for including just the freeway segments of longer routes, such as in USANSF. Keeping this as is is nice & tidy.
Yes. Looks good.

sk.cirdr (http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?u=&r=sk.cirdr)
I'd be in favor of including the whole route, not just the unnumbered portions. This is on "It's Sensible and Looks Nice" grounds, but it also gets rid of the "what to include" Q2 problem if not including numbered portions. Not knowing for certain where exactly SK16 & SK11 go, this just leaves point labeling as the one remaining hiccup. Which, looking at it some more, isn't so bad. The points where SK16 (and SK11 with it) join & leave the whole mess are pretty clearly defined; labeling is simple enough here. The only sticking point left would be what to label the point where the Idlewyld Freeway leaves Circle Dr.
Related: If SK11 is deemed to not follow Idlewyld, then include Idlewyld Fwy in cannf?

ab.gletrl (Glenmore Trail: theoretical, not yet in HB)
Possibly the biggest PitA WRT Q2.
The west end overlaps with AB8, which has a wibbly-wobbly end, due to this city "connector route" monkey business, and its poor/incomplete signage. My inclination is to include everything that is "Glenmore Trail", out to the City boundary at 101 St. As it was in the original CHM draft (http://cmap.m-plex.com/hb/hwymap.php?r=ab.ab008glt).
Mercifully, at least including everything from Sarcee Trail to AB2 is pretty cut & dry.
AB560 picks up east of AB2 -- unsigned AB560, that is. So Q2 would be wibble-wobbled by another "indeterminus" over on this end. Again, it'd make sense to toss out Q2 and just go with what's "Glenmore Trail". The freeway continues east a bit to Ogden Rd / 24 St, as CHM originally had it. Looking at Google Satellite and OSM reveals construction underway to extend the freeway east inna Texas frontage road stylee to Barlow Trail.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: yakra on December 08, 2016, 03:08:55 pm
Right. After thinking all that through, I'm starting to arrive at some answers to my questions above.

Q1: Include just the freeway portion & leave out surface road beyond, with a bit of wiggle room for short sensible exceptions. Short segments with at-grades can be allowable between two freeway segments. Controlled access & development at a minimum, ideally.
Q1A: Let it be wibbly-wobbly on a case-by-case basis, based on what Looks Nice & Makes Sense. Allow some reasonable special cases.

CroTrl can squeak by as-is here, with a short at-grade segment in the middle. It arguably may not meet my "ideal" case above, with a few parking lot & business entrances, but hey. So it's not ideal.

SheParkFwy is the "special case" I have in mind, with one very short segment west of the at-grade 71 St intersection.

GolEarsWay: If keeping it, cut off the N end at BC7. The interchange itself has an at-grade intersection anyway. If wibbly, cut off the S end @ 200St. If wobbly, cut off the S end @ 192St.

KniSt is perhaps the best argument for only including the freeway bits. I like the idea of ending it at MarDr, in the name of cleanliness. Has a bit of a 1PPI ring to it too.

AllRd:
I'd have no problems even shortening the northern end down to the Transit Road point and leave just the expressway part.  Probably could even take out the 'WilHeiBlvd' point.  Plus, I would need to update the labels to the current standards by taking out the 'W'/'E' at the end of some of them.
Concur.

RR174: Keep as-is...

CirDr: A short non-freeway segment on the north side. Sensible Exception?

GleTrl: E end would be at Ogden Rd. Extend to Barlow Trail when construction is complete in late 2017.

Q2: Include the whole thing, whether numbered or not.
It seems the most sensible thing to do for CirDr.
Ending CroTrl at AB1A would be, well... just kinda ugly. :)
RR174 neatly sidesteps Q2, if we just consider the freeway (slash Queensway) segment of numbered route RR174. Yeah man. I'm really starting to like the "leave it as RR174" solution now.
GleTrl would be an ugly rabbit hole if leaving off numbered bits, with a poorly-signed or unsigned "indeterminus" on each end. Yeah, no. Whole thing, please!
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: oscar on December 08, 2016, 09:19:53 pm
The Manitoba St. Expressway in Moose Jaw is a "probably not" as not long enough, but I want to noodle a little on that.

Uh, never mind. Less than 2.5 miles long, only one interchange besides the one at the TCH 1 junction, more at-grade intersections.,
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: rickmastfan67 on December 12, 2016, 12:32:01 am
on.garexpy (http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?u=&r=on.garexpy)
The easternmost segment, beyond DonValPkwy, looks a bit off to me. Are we sure the route ends here, and that this shouldn't be considered a ramp?

As far as I understand, it's still considered as part of the Gardiner, especially since the route used to go all the way Leslie Street prior to 2001.

However, with the recent addition of exit numbers along the route (continuing the QEW numbering), this 'ramp' got #157, not the DVP side.  However, I haven't seen pictures yet to confirm that's exactly what happened with the numbering right there.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: julmac on February 10, 2017, 01:32:04 am
Would not changing the name of the system to "Canada Select Named Freeways and Connectors" remove these tricky conundrums? This system would be most useful if it (in addition to covering all remaining freeways) filled in some key gaps between other systems. (Gaps that in many cases would be part of the state or equivalent highway systems in other regions).

Assuming it stays as a freeway system....

CroTrl - Is a planned future freeway - good as drafted, could be truncated to AB201 or AB1A_E (Banff Trail) to avoid duplication.

SheParkFrwy - Good as drafted although WB signage for "Sherwood Park Freeway" stops at Argyll road.

Glenmore Trail - Include the entire roadway within Calgary from 101 Street W (formal begin of AB8) to 84 Street E (formal begin of AB560). Is a future freeway from end to end. Should be truncated to Sarcee Trail upon opening of AB 201 SW in 2021

Macleod Trail - Include from AB201/22X to past Canyon Meadows Drive (5km). Interchange under construction at 162 Ave S.

Idyllwild Drive - Include if we are satisfied that SK11 is no longer routed along there (I am). Extend all the way to Circle Drive north if you like my "and Connectors" suggestion. This route will likely act as a de facto SK11 business route for many years due to remnant and implied "TO" signage.

CirDr - Not needed if SK11 is rerouted and activated. Otherwise, including only the SK11 portion would eliminate the north side non-freeway irritant.

GolEarsWay - south end is good with connection to BC15. North end should be truncated to BC7 (not an important connector/not a freeway north of there).

KniSt- agreed would be cleaner if truncated to BC91 and Marine Drive.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: 7/8 on June 08, 2017, 05:08:36 pm
What's the status on this system?

Also, should the freeway portion of Highbury Avenue in London, ON, and Nikola Tesla Blvd in Hamilton, ON be added to this?
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: rickmastfan67 on June 10, 2017, 12:32:19 pm
Also, should the freeway portion of Highbury Avenue in London, ON, and Nikola Tesla Blvd in Hamilton, ON be added to this?

Hit me up with some links and I'll take a look at them since I maintain ON (and yes, I know I have some other stuff to fix still on the main routes in the future).
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: 7/8 on June 10, 2017, 05:08:15 pm
Here's the Wikipedia page for Highbury Avenue (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highbury_Avenue). The freeway portion heads north from the 401, then has interchanges with Bradley Avenue and Commissioners Road before ending at Hamilton Road.

Here's a screenshot from Google Maps:
(http://i.imgur.com/8ayyWBX.png)

And here's the Wikipedia page for Burlington Street/Nikola Tesla Boulevard (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burlington_Street_(Hamilton,_Ontario)). The freeway portion of Burlington Street was recently renamed as Nikola Tesla Blvd, and it heads west from the QEW, with interchanges at Woodward Avenue, Parkdale Avenue, and Strathearne Avenue before ending at Ottawa Street.

Here's another screenshot from Google Maps:
(http://i.imgur.com/S4wbqdr.png)
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: JJBers on June 11, 2017, 12:10:28 am
Here's the Wikipedia page for Highbury Avenue (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highbury_Avenue). The freeway portion heads north from the 401, then has interchanges with Bradley Avenue and Commissioners Road before ending at Hamilton Road.

Here's a screenshot from Google Maps:
(http://i.imgur.com/8ayyWBX.png)

And here's the Wikipedia page for Burlington Street/Nikola Tesla Boulevard (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burlington_Street_(Hamilton,_Ontario)). The freeway portion of Burlington Street was recently renamed as Nikola Tesla Blvd, and it heads west from the QEW, with interchanges at Woodward Avenue, Parkdale Avenue, and Strathearne Avenue before ending at Ottawa Street.

Here's another screenshot from Google Maps:
(http://i.imgur.com/S4wbqdr.png)
I think it should be added
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: mapcat on August 17, 2018, 09:41:13 pm
After recently driving Golden Ears Way, Knight St, and Glenmore Tr, I agree with julmac's suggestion for keeping these in/adding these to the system.

I also drove Whoop-Up Dr in Lethbridge, which needs to be added to the system, obviously. It's not especially long, nor does it connect to anything, but it's a freeway, and the name.



Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: oscar on August 18, 2018, 12:20:46 am
I also drove Whoop-Up Dr in Lethbridge, which needs to be added to the system, obviously. It's not especially long, nor does it connect to anything, but it's a freeway, and the name.

Darn, I was in Lethbridge this Thursday evening. If you'd mentioned this sooner, I could've checked this out on my way out of town this morning (Friday).

I did notice the signs for Fort Whoop-Up, but didn't notice the associated road.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: mapcat on August 18, 2018, 05:49:51 pm
I also drove Whoop-Up Dr in Lethbridge, which needs to be added to the system, obviously. It's not especially long, nor does it connect to anything, but it's a freeway, and the name.

Darn, I was in Lethbridge this Thursday evening. If you'd mentioned this sooner, I could've checked this out on my way out of town this morning (Friday).

I did notice the signs for Fort Whoop-Up, but didn't notice the associated road.

Did you notice the sign for Head Smashed In Buffalo Jump? What the hell is that all about?
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: oscar on August 19, 2018, 12:43:09 am
Did you notice the sign for Head Smashed In Buffalo Jump? What the hell is that all about?

I went there a few years ago. That was one of many "buffalo jumps", naturally configured so that buffalo could be herded and driven off the side of a cliff, and the buffalo wouldn't realize it until it was too late. That was a good way for the local native tribes to stock up on meat for the winter.

"Head-Smashed-In" refers to what happened to a stupid young brave who wanted to see the buffalo herd landing at the bottom of the cliff, only he got too close to the action.

I was going to send out postcards from there, but at the visitor centre noticed ads for Vulcan, "Star Trek Capital of Canada", north of Lethbridge. So I went there next. Postcards from HSI would've required some explanation; no such issue with the cards from Vulcan, especially the ones showing the giant replica Vulcan starship along highway 23. My guess, looking at your travels on that highway and AB 534, is that you missed that attraction.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: mapcat on August 19, 2018, 09:13:51 am

I went there a few years ago. That was one of many "buffalo jumps", naturally configured so that buffalo could be herded and driven off the side of a cliff, and the buffalo wouldn't realize it until it was too late. That was a good way for the local native tribes to stock up on meat for the winter.

"Head-Smashed-In" refers to what happened to a stupid young brave who wanted to see the buffalo herd landing at the bottom of the cliff, only he got too close to the action.
Your descriptive explanation of this far exceeds anything I could have imagined. Thank you. Now I must return.

Quote
My guess, looking at your travels on that highway and AB 534, is that you missed that attraction.
Nah, I’m not into science fiction. When I’m traveling alone, I rarely stop for most attractions. If one of my kids is with me, we have a weakness for outsider art, but alone I’m satisfied with racking up miles. And donuts (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6369049,-98.3025813,1z/data=!4m3!11m2!2s165bAaygA4R5sztFXw7treQVTCFI!3e3?hl=en-us).

Obligatory on-topic comment: might we take a moment to re-examine this system and move at least some of the proposed routes to Preview?
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: oscar on August 20, 2018, 08:21:39 pm
Obligatory on-topic comment: might we take a moment to re-examine this system and move at least some of the proposed routes to Preview?

I don't see much point in a partial switch. Nudge people into getting all the routes in their jurisdictions preview-ready, then put it all in preview.

I can't speak for BC, not being familiar with its draft routes. But the one route in SK is preview-ready, and indeed got helpful comments from julmac in connection with his ongoing peer review of cansk. Other candidates are short (Ring Rd. and the incomplete Regina Bypass, which might get one or more route numbers when it's done next year).
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: mapcat on August 20, 2018, 09:26:20 pm
I don't see much point in a partial switch. Nudge people into getting all the routes in their jurisdictions preview-ready, then put it all in preview.
I meant let's move the system to preview soon, even if it means deleting some of the iffy ones.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: julmac on August 24, 2018, 11:43:53 pm
Anyone else in favour of renaming the system to "Canada Select Freeways and Connectors"?

Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: vdeane on August 25, 2018, 03:33:47 pm
Seems like a bunch more routes would have to be included if it is renamed.  I don't see the need; most of the routes are all freeways anyways (at least the included portions).
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: mapcat on August 25, 2018, 08:04:37 pm
Anyone else in favour of renaming the system to "Canada Select Freeways and Connectors"?

I can't really answer without knowing what sorts of roads "connectors" would include that "freeways" would not.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: julmac on August 27, 2018, 11:03:31 pm
Anyone else in favour of renaming the system to "Canada Select Freeways and Connectors"?

I can't really answer without knowing what sorts of roads "connectors" would include that "freeways" would not.

Routes that provide continuity to numbered systems (routes that might otherwise be included in the numbered systems of other jurisdictions). Could be
- Freeways with non-freeway gaps such as Crowchild Trail, Glenmore Trail, or extensions to freeways such as Whitemud Drive (west side), Idylwyld Drive
- Unofficial numbered routes such as Albert Street and Victoria Avenue in Regina (implied business routes for SK6 and TC1) or Manitoba Expressway in Moose Jaw ("TO SK2")
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: mapcat on August 28, 2018, 12:55:42 pm
Routes that provide continuity to numbered systems (routes that might otherwise be included in the numbered systems of other jurisdictions). Could be
- Freeways with non-freeway gaps such as Crowchild Trail, Glenmore Trail, or extensions to freeways such as Whitemud Drive (west side), Idylwyld Drive
- Unofficial numbered routes such as Albert Street and Victoria Avenue in Regina (implied business routes for SK6 and TC1) or Manitoba Expressway in Moose Jaw ("TO SK2")
I'm ok with the former but not ok with the latter.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: oscar on August 28, 2018, 10:41:23 pm
Routes that provide continuity to numbered systems (routes that might otherwise be included in the numbered systems of other jurisdictions). Could be
- Freeways with non-freeway gaps such as Crowchild Trail, Glenmore Trail, or extensions to freeways such as Whitemud Drive (west side), Idylwyld Drive
- Unofficial numbered routes such as Albert Street and Victoria Avenue in Regina (implied business routes for SK6 and TC1) or Manitoba Expressway in Moose Jaw ("TO SK2")
I'm ok with the former but not ok with the latter.

I basically agree with mapcat. In the first category, Idylwild Drive is currently in the HB as part of SK 11. That will need to be revisited before we activate cansk. As I've oft-complained, numbered routes in Saskatoon and their signage are a total clusterfork.

On the second category, if the Ministry of Infrastructure thought the former Regina routes should be treated as business routes, they could've been assigned 1A and 6A, like the Ministry did in Estevan when SK 39 was moved to a new bypass and the old route became 39A. The Manitoba St. Expy. I'm meh about, but it is pretty short.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: yakra on September 03, 2018, 03:38:24 pm
I'm with Mapcat & Oscar. I'd like to keep the criteria for inclusion as tight as we can. A loose/vague definition such as "Unofficial numbered routes" could open the floodgates to "Why is X included, but not Y?", and routes of questionable relevance.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: oscar on February 11, 2019, 11:54:24 pm
I'd like to dust this off, to pose the question of whether cannf should be promoted to preview, from its current devel status where the routes are in the HB but aren't displayed on user maps.

I think the parts of the system in the jurisdictions I manage are reasonably complete. I took a look at the two BC routes, and just cleaned them up and synched them with numbered canbc routes. I think both are borderline for inclusion (each route has about four miles of freeway, and Golden Ears Way includes a fair amount of non-freeway mileage), but I'd leave them in for now, subject to peer review.

For SK, the Regina Bypass under construction is a candidate for addition when it's completed this year or next, if its western leg ends up unnumbered (the rest, including a short already-opened segment, seems likely to become a new TCH 1 alignment). Saskatoon's Idylwild Freeway is currently in the HB as part of SK 11, but if we end up removing that from SK 11 before cansk activation, it would be a logical candidate for cannf. In any case, I would omit the Manitoba St. Expressway in Moose Jaw as too short, with less than a mile of freeway.

EDIT: Forgot the ~1 mi. unnumbered stub of Ring Rd. on the north side of Regina, west of SK 6/11. I would omit that as too short. It will not tie in, as a freeway, to the western Regina Bypass leg, which will have its own interchange with SK 11 north of Ring Rd.

I don't think anything in QC is cannf-worthy -- mapcat, your thoughts?

For AB, mapcat suggested addition of Whoop-Up Dr. in Lethbridge -- yakra, your thoughts? It's about two miles long. Also, anything we've missed in Calgary or Edmonton?

ON has quite a few cannf routes. Are they ready for preview, and is there anything else worth adding?

NS has one cannf route. Anything to add from that province, or in NL, NB, PE, MB (I don't think so)? The Arctic territories don't have any freeways.

Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: mapcat on February 12, 2019, 12:04:16 am
I don't recall seeing anything in Quebec that seemed worthy of discussion; if I had I likely would have brought it up to you at the time I was drafting canqc.

Let's put this in preview and let users weigh in after they've noticed the routes.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: froggie on February 12, 2019, 08:35:06 am
^^ PEI lacks freeways period at the present, although plans are in the works for a freeway bypass of Cornwall for TCH 1.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: yakra on February 12, 2019, 03:37:33 pm
I took a look at the two BC routes, and just cleaned them up and synched them with numbered canbc routes. I think both are borderline for inclusion (each route has about four miles of freeway, and Golden Ears Way includes a fair amount of non-freeway mileage), but I'd leave them in for now, subject to peer review.
Personally, I'm not so hot on these.

For AB, mapcat suggested addition of Whoop-Up Dr. in Lethbridge -- yakra, your thoughts? It's about two miles long.
Not so hot on this either. It's short and doesn't connect to anything else in the system. A glorified bridge that happens to have an interchange at each end.
For comparison purposes, there's the Veterans Memorial Bridge in Lewiston-Auburn, Maine. It's shorter, but does connect to a mapped route at each end. This is not included in usasf.

Also, anything we've missed in Calgary or Edmonton?
NS has one cannf route.
The Bedford Bypass. The shaping point is a bit ugly & could use a rework, but that's nothing to hold us back from promotion to preview. :)

Anything to add from that province,
The MacKay Bridge is comparable to...
on the one hand, the Betsy Ross Bridge,
and OTOH, the aforementioned Veterans Memorial Bridge.
Thoughts?

or in NL, NB, PE, MB (I don't think so)?
Nothing to add.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: michih on February 12, 2019, 03:46:34 pm
What's about Memorial Drive NE in Calgary?
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: yakra on February 12, 2019, 04:00:26 pm
What's about Memorial Drive NE in Calgary?
Not so wild about it. Short, doesn't go much of anywhere, strikes me as a bit of a glorified boulevard. The interchange with AB2 has traffic signals.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: Duke87 on February 12, 2019, 07:49:14 pm
What's about Memorial Drive NE in Calgary?
Not so wild about it. Short, doesn't go much of anywhere, strikes me as a bit of a glorified boulevard. The interchange with AB2 has traffic signals.

I would not want to arbitrarily map some of Memorial Drive without mapping the entire length of the roadway that carries that name.

I also lean towards not wanting to include it on the ground of subjective appearance of significance... but the way I see this, if someone is willing to put in the effort to map it, whatever, throw it in.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: julmac on March 24, 2019, 12:52:12 am
May need to throw in the existing portions of TC 1 and SK 11 that will be bypassed with the Regina Bypass. According to the guide sign plan (available here: https://tinyurl.com/y47dwnbn (https://tinyurl.com/y47dwnbn) ) the west leg of the bypass will be SK11 and the south leg will be TC 1, leaving the existing "bypassed" sections unnumbered, at least in the "inbound" directions. Presumably, no changes will be made to the "outbound" directions (existing signs for TC 1 and SK 11 will remain), which will be odd... two Highway 11s ?.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: neroute2 on March 24, 2019, 10:52:21 am
May need to throw in the existing portions of TC 1 and SK 11 that will be bypassed with the Regina Bypass. According to the guide sign plan (available here: https://tinyurl.com/y47dwnbn (https://tinyurl.com/y47dwnbn) ) the west leg of the bypass will be SK11 and the south leg will be TC 1, leaving the existing "bypassed" sections unnumbered, at least in the "inbound" directions.
Agreed. Old 1 west of downtown will be signed as Ring Road, and (non-freeway) old 1 east of downtown is Victoria Avenue. But old 11 has no name on these plans.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: oscar on March 24, 2019, 12:47:12 pm
May need to throw in the existing portions of TC 1 and SK 11 that will be bypassed with the Regina Bypass. According to the guide sign plan (available here: https://tinyurl.com/y47dwnbn (https://tinyurl.com/y47dwnbn) ) the west leg of the bypass will be SK11 and the south leg will be TC 1, leaving the existing "bypassed" sections unnumbered, at least in the "inbound" directions.
Agreed. Old 1 west of downtown will be signed as Ring Road, and (non-freeway) old 1 east of downtown is Victoria Avenue. But old 11 has no name on these plans.

If by "old 11" you mean the freeway between the west leg of the Regina Bypass and the interchange with SK 6, yes that's unaccounted for in the guide sign plan. But that plan doesn't indicate what signage will be on southbound SK 11 approaching the west leg, since that's not part of the Bypass project.

The bypassed part of old TCH 1, between the west leg interchange and SK 6, will be at least part of Ring Rd. Ring Rd. could include not only that segment, but also the part of Ring Rd. concurrent with SK 6, and the short stub of Ring Rd. north of downtown Regina and west of SK 6 (which I've left out of cannf for being too short, but would definitely be long enough if combined with the rest of Ring Rd. that is currently numbered).

Note, however, that the guide plans are from 2015. More recent drone footage (https://youtu.be/6poCn_4Evvc) (around 7:05) indicates that a guide sign already erected seems to show the bypassed part of old TCH 1 as part of a numbered provincial route, probably SK 11. So the plans might've changed since then. We'll know more later this year when the Bypass is completed, or when the project team sends out another drone (hope this time they send it counter-clockwise around Regina, to catch as-built signage on the western bypass leg approaching the TCH 1 junction), or maybe sooner if julmac can do some field-checking next time he's in Regina.
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: julmac on March 26, 2019, 01:22:50 am
Note, however, that the guide plans are from 2015. More recent drone footage (https://youtu.be/6poCn_4Evvc) (around 7:05) indicates that a guide sign already erected seems to show the bypassed part of old TCH 1 as part of a numbered provincial route, probably SK 11. So the plans might've changed since then. We'll know more later this year when the Bypass is completed, or when the project team sends out another drone (hope this time they send it counter-clockwise around Regina, to catch as-built signage on the western bypass leg approaching the TCH 1 junction), or maybe sooner if julmac can do some field-checking next time he's in Regina.

The sign at 7:05 is on the west leg. Rotary Ave is the Transportation Hub access south of Dewdney Ave (SK730).
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: yakra on September 19, 2019, 03:10:19 am
ON RedHillPkwy: LinMAPkwy -> LinAlePkwy
ON LinAlePkwy: RHillVPkwy -> RedHillPkwy
Title: Re: cannf: Canada Select Named Freeways
Post by: rickmastfan67 on September 23, 2019, 05:25:50 am
ON RedHillPkwy: LinMAPkwy -> LinAlePkwy
ON LinAlePkwy: RHillVPkwy -> RedHillPkwy

Fixed. https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3178

Also seems the Don Valley Parkway has gained exit numbers too.  Noticed them on OSM, and confirmed them 1-by-1 in StreetView.  However, one exit (that has an off-ramp) didn't gain a number, which was the ON-401/404 interchange (404 counterpart does have a #, but only from the HOV lanes).  So, 'both' copies of the DVP will get an update.

I've also finally pushed a cleaned up Allen Road file for the site based on previous discussion.

on.garexpy (http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?u=&r=on.garexpy)
The easternmost segment, beyond DonValPkwy, looks a bit off to me. Are we sure the route ends here, and that this shouldn't be considered a ramp?

As far as I understand, it's still considered as part of the Gardiner, especially since the route used to go all the way Leslie Street prior to 2001.

However, with the recent addition of exit numbers along the route (continuing the QEW numbering), this 'ramp' got #157, not the DVP side.  However, I haven't seen pictures yet to confirm that's exactly what happened with the numbering right there.

Getting back to this thing about the Gardiner, there is this "End Expressway (https://goo.gl/maps/5m2qCbrrtjgPjAQV9)" sign beyond they Don Valley Parkway, which kinda backs me up on keeping it, but the signage at the gore point does indicate it's Exit #157 (https://goo.gl/maps/b4SFTvR9T4oQz9jv7) (fun that it mentions ON-2, which doesn't exist there anymore).

So, I honestly could go either way at this point.