Travel Mapping
Highway Data Discussion => In-progress Highway Systems & Work => Completed Highway Systems Threads => Topic started by: yakra on January 26, 2016, 11:46:26 am
-
This system is almost ready to activate.
Prior discussion on AARoads (http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16779.0)
AB216She:
Updated GMSV shows exit numbers for a couple of the interchanges, which match those shown on OSM:
• AB16 -> 54
• 101Ave -> 58
In light of that, I'm almost inclined to also proactively change:
• SheParkFwy -> 61
• AB14/628 -> 64
(ACAICT, MerSt is or will be unnumbered.)
Is there anything else that needs attention?
-
HB has been updated to include all four conversions to exit number style labeling listed above.
Hit me with your Peer Review!
-
If you dig through this document you will find a guide sign plan for Northeast AB216 showing the exit numbers (exit numbers you listed are correct and it will also give you a heads up on the exit numbers for the new section).
http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/content/doctype353/production/AHDNESch18.PDF
Also... MerSt will be removed by project completion this fall.
-
A few more items from my notes:
1. Re. AB11ASyl (now AB11ARed): I looked into it further and the portion out to the west town boundary is indeed included as a "provincial highway connector" (which is probably why it shows up in the GeoBase shapefile). This is strange given that Sylvan Lake is a Town not a City. Even so, the "connector" status is almost certainly meaningless now since AB11A west of Sylvan Lake was de-designated (given to Red Deer County) about 15 years ago. Keep the HB as is.
2. AB2TrkCar. Not sure why this is included. It is not part of the formal provincial highway system nor is it signed with the usual route shield.
3. AB1ACoc. The south end should connect to TC1 via Banff Trail. I remember when the signage was very clear about this but seems to have fallen off... (AB1A used to be routed continuously across Calgary connecting downtown via 14th Street and 9th Ave SW to the now defunct Chestermere side.) At any rate the connection between Crowchild Trail and TC1 is not a full movement interchange so the Banff Trail portion is still necessary.
-
If you dig through this document you will find a guide sign plan for Northeast AB216 showing the exit numbers (exit numbers you listed are correct and it will also give you a heads up on the exit numbers for the new section).
http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/content/doctype353/production/AHDNESch18.PDF
Yikes, that's a lot of pages to wade thru. :D I don't think I ever made it to any sign plans (with Pretty Pictures); it's good to know the exit numbers are right and will most likely be signed. OSM shows exit numbers for the U/C segment: 49 and 52. Are those correct?
Also... MerSt will be removed by project completion this fall.
I'll have another look at this, and either delete this point, or mark it as closed.
2. AB2TrkCar. Not sure why this is included. It is not part of the formal provincial highway system nor is it signed with the usual route shield.
This is shown in the shapefiles as AB501. IIRC, I was GMSVing around the area when first cleaning up AB2 and trying to find out how exactly it interacts with AB501. It's not signed as AB501, but has these BGSes (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.1692426,-113.2864317,3a,34.8y,17.7h,85.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sL7W8XcA823hlh1x5JiN_RQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) instead, so in it went.
I wanted to say there are some other examples around of other truck routes in the HB signed just with a BGS and not the usual route shield, but I can't actually come up with anything. (The one I thought there was is in fact signed with a more traditional shield.)
I'm not married to the idea of keeping it in the system, and am open to deleting it. (If so, what to relabel the AB AB2 AB2Trk_S point?)
Keep it? Ditch it? Discuss.
3. AB1ACoc. The south end should connect to TC1 via Banff Trail. I remember when the signage was very clear about this but seems to have fallen off... (AB1A used to be routed continuously across Calgary connecting downtown via 14th Street and 9th Ave SW to the now defunct Chestermere side.) At any rate the connection between Crowchild Trail and TC1 is not a full movement interchange so the Banff Trail portion is still necessary.
I was never 100% confident in my placement of AB1A here. The original file on CHM (http://cmap.m-plex.com/hb/hwymap.php?r=ab.ab001acct) did use this routing, and Google & Mapnik both show AB1A on Banff. The shapefiles (erroneously?) showed AB1A on Crowchild down to AB1, so on "1 point per interchange" grounds, I put the end there, writing off Banff as a glorified ramp, similar to University Dr's use for some other movements. I was helped along in this decision by the lack of signage in GMSV, and Banff being one-way N of 23rd. I guess though that SB travel would use 23rd.
I can accept this, and move AB1ACoc back onto Banff.
Small caveat: Would the NB routing continue on Banff all the way to Crowchild, or take 23rd in parallel with the (assumed) SB routing?
-
Forgot to mention in my last post...
julmac, what are your sources of info, re what's part of the provincial highway system, what's a provincial highway connector, and the like? I'd love to have access to the same info you do.
-
One other thing on AB216She: there seems to be a new exit 52 open north of AB16, per OSM and Google Maps.
I noticed that while fixing an error in my list file. I'm too busy sidewinding my way up and down California (and finding stuff to add to my usaca to-do list) to do more checking in AB right now.
-
One other thing on AB216She: there seems to be a new exit 52 open north of AB16, per OSM and Google Maps.
Wow. Didn't reading that just send me down a rabbit hole! :D
At first glance, OSM & Google looked a bit screwy, but it appears they reflect the temporary routes in place due to construction (http://www.northeastanthonyhenday.com/documents/13010_NEAHD_2015_Winter_Shutdown_Roadways_1-20k_000.pdf).
I Googled around for a bit in search of news of the Aurum Road interchange opening, and came up empty-handed. But wait! Look at Google Satellite view and you'll plainly see the existing segment of roadway in service before reconstruction began. Indeed, it was included in the original draft of AB216 on CHM (http://cmap.m-plex.com/hb/hwymap.php?r=ab.ab216). I cut that segment out because it wasn't shown in the shapefiles as AB216.
So there's something, A road there, that's been open, and probably still is, in whatever transient state of reconstruction... It's (still) open, right? Is it signed for AB216 already? Is Exit 52 signed as such? The temporary (temporarily two-way?) connection seems to be at the ramp terminus (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.587054&lon=-113.343319), vice the center of the future interchange here (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.587321&lon=-113.345320), but that's far from a big deal. Edit: there's a BGS (https://www.google.com/maps/@53.5839577,-113.3458553,3a,16.6y,120.3h,99.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7m9cWF_SdW32AburkHKs6A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) up and uncovered for southbound traffic, though that doesn't necessarily mean much.
Things are in flux enough that I'd just as soon wait a little bit till some more of the dust settles. I'm not in a rush to activate CANAB, and meanwhile AB216 northeast is scheduled to open October 1st...
-
AB1ACoc moved onto Banff Trail.
AB216She extended northward to Exit 52.
I haven't done anything about removing MerSt from AB216She, or deleting AB2TrkCar.
-
2. AB2TrkCar. Not sure why this is included. It is not part of the formal provincial highway system nor is it signed with the usual route shield.
This is shown in the shapefiles as AB501. IIRC, I was GMSVing around the area when first cleaning up AB2 and trying to find out how exactly it interacts with AB501. It's not signed as AB501, but has these BGSes (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.1692426,-113.2864317,3a,34.8y,17.7h,85.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sL7W8XcA823hlh1x5JiN_RQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) instead, so in it went.
I wanted to say there are some other examples around of other truck routes in the HB signed just with a BGS and not the usual route shield, but I can't actually come up with anything. (The one I thought there was is in fact signed with a more traditional shield.)
I'm not married to the idea of keeping it in the system, and am open to deleting it. (If so, what to relabel the AB AB2 AB2Trk_S point?)
Keep it? Ditch it? Discuss.
I doubled checked, and you are right it is part of the designated system, as Highway 501, although it is unsigned. So it definitely doesn't belong in the canab "primary" system, and, as unsigned route, shouldn't be included in the "secondary" system either.
-
Forgot to mention in my last post...
julmac, what are your sources of info, re what's part of the provincial highway system, what's a provincial highway connector, and the like? I'd love to have access to the same info you do.
I work for the Government of Alberta so I am lucky to have access to the GIS system and records of highway designations.
-
A few notes from my recent travels in southern Alberta:
AB 1A -- Many maps show another segment of the route east of downtown Calgary, where I saw 1A signage along 17th Ave. SE. However, at its junction with AB 201, and in both directions on AB 201, there is only greenout where you'd see a 1A shield. I'd write off the remaining 1A shields as remnant signage, and ignore the (former) 1A segment.
AB 8 -- I didn't see any AB 8 signage along the Glenmore Trail east of Sarcee Trail. And at the Sarcee Tr. junction, there's only "To AB 8" markings for Glenmore Trail heading west.
AB 5 -- There is AB 5 signage on the multiplex with AB 6 east of the main Waterton Lakes park entrance. But none south of AB 6 to Waterton Park village past the fee collection booths, so I couldn't tell where the south end of the route is. The south end now in the HB (TwpRd13A, better known as Akamina Parkway, which is what Alberta 511 calls it -- I'd change that label to AkaPkwy) is certainly a major road, which regrettably I couldn't travel because it was closed for reconstructiion. But might AB 5 extend one intersection south to Mountain View Rd., which is the entrance to Waterton Park village?
Also, RgeRd300A -> RedRockPkwy.
BTW, both AB 5 and AB 6 are well-signed within national park boundaries, even if there is no AB 5 signage in the main part of the park south of AB 6.
AB 6 -- Waypoint WatLakeNP is oddly named. It's only a minor park road, with no fee booths, going only to the Bison Paddock part of the national park. I'd rename to BisPadRd.
-
The last segment of AB 216 around Edmonton is now open to traffic. Thanks to a VMS hack, one of the initial announcements was rather rude:
http://globalnews.ca/news/2976809/in-photos-final-leg-of-anthony-henday-drive-opens-this-weekend/
http://globalnews.ca/news/2978212/social-media-lights-up-over-crude-sign-on-new-leg-of-edmonton-ring-road/
(h/t to SignGeek101 on the AARoads forum)
-
AW YISS!
-
AB 1A -- Many maps show another segment of the route east of downtown Calgary, where I saw 1A signage along 17th Ave. SE. However, at its junction with AB 201, and in both directions on AB 201, there is only greenout where you'd see a 1A shield. I'd write off the remaining 1A shields as remnant signage, and ignore the (former) 1A segment.
This is the former AB1AChe, which julmac discussed on AARoads. Looks like even more signage has disappeared since he posted there.
AB 8 -- I didn't see any AB 8 signage along the Glenmore Trail east of Sarcee Trail. And at the Sarcee Tr. junction, there's only "To AB 8" markings for Glenmore Trail heading west.
Assuming this is a "Highway Connector" route, as julmac described on AARoads (http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16779.msg2115865#msg2115865), with its resulting spotty signage. GIS shows this as being the extent of the route.
AB 5 -- There is AB 5 signage on the multiplex with AB 6 east of the main Waterton Lakes park entrance. But none south of AB 6 to Waterton Park village past the fee collection booths, so I couldn't tell where the south end of the route is. The south end now in the HB (TwpRd13A, better known as Akamina Parkway, which is what Alberta 511 calls it -- I'd change that label to AkaPkwy) is certainly a major road, which regrettably I couldn't travel because it was closed for reconstructiion. But might AB 5 extend one intersection south to Mountain View Rd., which is the entrance to Waterton Park village?
Also, RgeRd300A -> RedRockPkwy.
I've made the suggested relabelings.
AkaPkwy is what the shapefiles have for the west end.
AB 6 -- Waypoint WatLakeNP is oddly named. It's only a minor park road, with no fee booths, going only to the Bison Paddock part of the national park. I'd rename to BisPadRd.
Relabeled to BisPad, in keeping with the convention I've used for similarly signed park destinations.
-
The highway 12 bypass of Bentley and Gull Lake has opened.
http://www.lacombeexpress.com/news/395276481.html?mobile=true
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/913
-
AFAIK, the only thing standing between canab and activation is the issue of whether to keep or ditch AB2TrkCar (http://tm.teresco.org/hb/?u=&r=ab.ab002trkcar). It's designated as (Edit: part of) AB501 but not signed as such.
It's another case of the longstanding God Damn Truck Routes.
Signage is here (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.1692841,-113.2865032,3a,34.8y,17.7h,85.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sL7W8XcA823hlh1x5JiN_RQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) and here (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.203751,-113.3012305,3a,56.5y,223.54h,92.97t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1st4BeiuYDorSwDCCB2Si0XQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i39). And here's what we have to guide travelers around (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2003631,-113.2864612,3a,75y,8.29h,86.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s30Pg-RVpLCPsTKFhk_dXAg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) the corner (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2021295,-113.2879797,3a,17.9y,139.45h,87.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smsyw9WZzH5EzRmE_NmLdXw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).
At the moment, I'm leaning ever so slightly toward ditching it.
Longtime watchers of the CHM/TM forums, care to comment?
-
If that's all the signage there is and it isn't in any provincial logs, I'd do up a dummy AB 501 file, don't include it, and activate the rest.
Sorry, I meant to edit my own post instead of yours. :P Reverted. -yakra
-
No need to worry about even a dummy AB501 file; AB500+ are a separate system.
I do have a file, around... somewhere. On a hard disk that may or may not be toast.
Anyone else?
-
Why is AB500+ a different system?
-
Personally I would not count that as a signed truck route. I thought that the condition for determining whether or not it's signed is a shield of some sort.
-
Why is AB500+ a different system?
AB's routes higher than 216 use a different shield.
-
Why is AB500+ a different system?
AB's routes higher than 216 use a different shield.
Alberta Provincial Highways 1-216 are tier 4.
Alberta Provincial Highways 500-986 are tier 5.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Alberta_provincial_highways
-
Ok, got it. Thanks :)
-
AFAIK, the only thing standing between canab and activation is the issue of whether to keep or ditch AB2TrkCar (http://tm.teresco.org/hb/?u=&r=ab.ab002trkcar). It's designated as (Edit: part of) AB501 but not signed as such.
It's another case of the longstanding God Damn Truck Routes.
Signage is here (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.1692841,-113.2865032,3a,34.8y,17.7h,85.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sL7W8XcA823hlh1x5JiN_RQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) and here (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.203751,-113.3012305,3a,56.5y,223.54h,92.97t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1st4BeiuYDorSwDCCB2Si0XQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i39). And here's what we have to guide travelers around (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2003631,-113.2864612,3a,75y,8.29h,86.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s30Pg-RVpLCPsTKFhk_dXAg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) the corner (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2021295,-113.2879797,3a,17.9y,139.45h,87.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smsyw9WZzH5EzRmE_NmLdXw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).
At the moment, I'm leaning ever so slightly toward ditching it.
Longtime watchers of the CHM/TM forums, care to comment?
If you have excluded "Sherwood Park Freeway" (which is part of the designated "primary" [1-216] network), then AB2TrkCar definitely does not belong.
-
AB 8 -- I didn't see any AB 8 signage along the Glenmore Trail east of Sarcee Trail. And at the Sarcee Tr. junction, there's only "To AB 8" markings for Glenmore Trail heading west.
Assuming this is a "Highway Connector" route, as julmac described on AARoads (http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16779.msg2115865#msg2115865), with its resulting spotty signage. GIS shows this as being the extent of the route.
Yes, officially a "connector route" from the City boundary at 101 Street, but it has never been signed east of Sarcee Trail. When the next section of AB 201 opens in a few years, it will supersede the signed portion of AB 8 out to 101 Street. See the guide sign plan here: http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/documents/SWCRR-Schedule18-AppE.pdf
-
It's another case of the longstanding God Damn Truck Routes.
...
Longtime watchers of the CHM/TM forums, care to comment?
Guh. And I didn't even finish my sentence. :P 'Swhat I get for posting at 1am.
..The longstanding God Damn Truck Routes conundrum/debate that has been plaguing CHM/TM for years. What to include, what not to include, how to decide... yecch. It's a bit of a mess. Those who've been around the forums for a long time have witnessed this headache before.
If you have excluded "Sherwood Park Freeway" (which is part of the designated "primary" [1-216] network), then AB2TrkCar definitely does not belong.
I neglected to mention on AARoads, that although SheParkFwy (http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?u=yakra&r=ab.sheparkfwy) isn't included as part of canab, it *is* included as part of the cannf "Canada Select Named Freeways" system.
So, I don't view this as a total 1:1 comparison. SheParkFwy isn't signed with its route number; AB2TrkCar *is*, even if just as text on a BGS. As you noted upthread, it's "no[t] signed with the usual route shield."
So it comes down to a matter of the God Damn Truck Route debate...
I thought that the condition for determining whether or not it's signed is a shield of some sort.
I was thinking about -- I had wondered a bit whether that had ever -- formally or informally or what -- been made the case for determining what makes the cut as a truck route. I couldn't even remember if there'd really been any discussion about that. I just don't have the stomach to go find & read thru all our previous truck route threads, here or on the CHM forums or wherever... So hey. I'll just call it good. I was leaning that way to start with, and have gotten enough votes in favour, so....
I'll give AB2TrkCar the axe, and relabel the corresponding point on AB2 as 8St.
-----
Yes, officially a "connector route" from the City boundary at 101 Street, but it has never been signed east of Sarcee Trail. When the next section of AB 201 opens in a few years, it will supersede the signed portion of AB 8 out to 101 Street. See the guide sign plan here: http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/documents/SWCRR-Schedule18-AppE.pdf
Interesting stuff. Luckily, I won't have to worry about it for a few years. 8)
So, AB8 & AB201 will end at one another at 101 St, with neither continuing beyond that point. At least, until the next segment of AB201, northwards along the 101 St corridor to close the gap to TCH 1, opens.
Will AB8 be formally truncated when this all happens? Will the Connector Route cease to exist?
julmac, where would you argue that I should end AB8? Sarcee Trail?
-
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/938
AB63: add AB686 interchange
AB2: AB2Trk_S -> 8St
canab.csv: delete AB2TrkCar
canab_con.csv: delete AB2TrkCar
AB CroTrl: AB8 -> GleTrl
AB8 truncated from AB2 to SarTrl
I've left the vestigial ab.ab002trkcar.wpt in as an unprocessedwpt dummy file.
If there are no more comments after a week, I'll activate canab.
-
AB58: Mac/Woo was so named because the end of AB58 in the shapefiles coincided with the L_PLACENAM attribute changing from "Mackenzie County" to ""I.D. No. 24 Wood Buffalo". I think I'm going to change it to WoodBufNP instead. Any objections?
-
AB58: Mac/Woo was so named because the end of AB58 in the shapefiles coincided with the L_PLACENAM attribute changing from "Mackenzie County" to ""I.D. No. 24 Wood Buffalo". I think I'm going to change it to WoodBufNP instead. Any objections?
Makes sense to me to refer to the national park in the point label, rather than the obscure "improvement district" that is coextensive with the park.
I have no other comments. I had thought there would be some highways in northern Alberta that would be short on waypoints, where the Milepost route logs could help. But it looks like the shapefiles picked up all the available points.
-
I'll put in a pull request to change the label and activate canab around midnight.
-
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/964