Print

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

[dvferyance]

Seems to me this would makes sense since it's freeway. Who would follow the old route anyways? My proposal is BC-5 becomes the Trans Canada Hwy from Kamloops to Hope. The part between Kamloops and Cache Creek solely becomes BC-97. The old route south of there to Lytton gets a new number. From Lytton to Hope becomes and extension of BC-12 and BC-5A becomes BC-5.

[7/8]

My guess is because the Coquihalla was tolled until 2008. I agree though that it seems silly not to route the TCH along it now.

[SignGeek101]

You're not the only one who would love to see this happen. 

[oscar]

Seems to me this would makes sense since it's freeway. Who would follow the old route anyways?

It's definitely slower and more work than BC 5. But it does have some scenic stretches, including in the Fraser Canyon where the highway and two major rail lines share the gorge with the river.

[vdeane]

I'd move TCH 1 onto the Coquihalla Highway now that the tolls are gone.  It is the through route, after all, and it is the TCH mainline we're talking about.

[Mapmikey]

Who would follow the old route anyways?

Me, for one.  I drove the Coquihalla (SB) when I drove to Vancouver in 2014.  It was a little rainy and this road is fairly harrowing with the volume of trucks and the steepness of the hills combined with a 120 km/h speed limit.  On my next drive out there in a couple years I will be following TCH through that part.

As for why TCH hasn't been moved to it yet, are they able to keep the Coquihalla open through all the wintry weather when compared to the Fraser Valley routing of TCH?

[oscar]

Who would follow the old route anyways?

Me, for one.  I drove the Coquihalla (SB) when I drove to Vancouver in 2014.  It was a little rainy and this road is fairly harrowing with the volume of trucks and the steepness of the hills combined with a 120 km/h speed limit.  On my next drive out there in a couple years I will be following TCH through that part.

I've driven both (the TCH through Fraser Canyon in 2012, the Coquihalla this June). I preferred the faster freeway, though my Prius couldn't take full advantage of the 120 km/h limit due to all the inclines (also beware the Mounties in the median, waiting for you to speed up after the inclines). But the choice between the two is not a no-brainer, at least from the tourist/scenic standpoint.

[dmuzika]

I would guess it's petty politics.  Without any evidence, I suspect that the communities through the Fraser Canyon lobbied to have the TCH continue to go through their communities - even though most people will choose the freeway regardless of what it is signed.  Considering that the roadway and exit numbers are continuous from Horseshoe Bay to Kamloops via TCH 1 & BC 5, it would make the most sense to reroute the Trans-Canada via the Coquihalla.  Maybe a compromise would be to renumber the Fraser Canyon (Kamloops-Hope) section to Highway 1A and keep the Trans-Canada Highway designation; either the regular green or create a TCH Historical route (similar to historical US routes).

If the Coquihalla was to be renumbered, a larger renumbering should be considered to deal with the multiple suffixes of Highway 97 that exist in the region.  Here's my thought, without this being redirected to Fictional Highways:

TCH 1 - Hwy 5 (Coquihalla Hwy)
TCH 1A (TCH Historical Route) - TCH 1 (Kamloops-Hope)
Hwy 1B - Hwy 5A (Kamloops-Merritt)
Hwy 5 (Yellowhead Hwy) - terminates in Kamloops
Hwy 8 - Hwy 97C (Merritt-Kelowna)
Hwy 25 - Hwy 5A (Princeton-Merritt), Hwy 97C (Merritt-Ashcroft)
Hwy 25A - Hwy 97D near Logan Lake

As a side note, I've also wondered why the Trans-Canada Highway in southern Ontario hasn't been rerouted from Highways 12 and 7 to Highways 400 and 401 to connect with Toronto.

[Transportfan]

My guess is because the Coquihalla was tolled until 2008. I agree though that it seems silly not to route the TCH along it now.

Even with tolls it should have been the TCH. NS made a new toll route and rerouted the TCH along it.

[Transportfan]

As a side note, I've also wondered why the Trans-Canada Highway in southern Ontario hasn't been rerouted from Highways 12 and 7 to Highways 400 and 401 to connect with Toronto.

Because when it comes to assigning highway designations, we Canadians aren't the sharpest tools in the toolbox.

[cbeach40]

As a side note, I've also wondered why the Trans-Canada Highway in southern Ontario hasn't been rerouted from Highways 12 and 7 to Highways 400 and 401 to connect with Toronto.

Because when it comes to assigning highway designations, we Canadians aren't the sharpest tools in the toolbox.

Because in Ontario no one cares about the TCH. Even in the north people just call them by 11, 17, etc.

[dmuzika]

Because when it comes to assigning highway designations, we Canadians aren't the sharpest tools in the toolbox.

I did read in A Road for Canada that when the original Trans-Canada Hwy route was being established, the province preferred a southern route that connected with the major population centres while the federal government preferred a northern route that was more direct to Manitoba.  The compromise was a route in the middle - hence Hwys 7, 12, and 69 (later 400) - which east of Coldwater (Hwy 12/400 Jct) doesn't really serve anybody in terms of inter-provincial travel.  Fast-forward to today and we have multiple northern routes which are more direct (Hwys 11 & 17) and the 401 trumps the TCH, with a provincial capital and the largest metropolitan area in Canada being bypassed.  Even if the TCH is not as prominant in Ontario, would there ever be consideration in rerouting the TCH off of Hwys 7 & 12 (maybe another TCH Historical Route) and use Hwys 400 & 401?  Unlike BC, highways wouldn't have to be renumbered.

Back to the OP, I remember when the Coquihalla Highway first opened, Highway 5 was signed as Yellowhead 5 north of Kamloops and BC 5, with the regular provincial shield, south of Kamloops.  Sometime in the mid/late 1990's, before the tolls were lifted, the Yellowhead 5 shield was added to the Coquihalla Highway - that would have been the time to reroute TCH 1.

[7/8]

Maybe a compromise would be to renumber the Fraser Canyon (Kamloops-Hope) section to Highway 1A and keep the Trans-Canada Highway designation; either the regular green or create a TCH Historical route (similar to historical US routes).

I think this would be a great idea. But I could image some people complaining about possible confusion with switching the Hwy 1 designation from the current location to the Coquihalla (but then again, you can't please everyone).

If the Coquihalla was to be renumbered, a larger renumbering should be considered to deal with the multiple suffixes of Highway 97 that exist in the region.  Here's my thought, without this being redirected to Fictional Highways:

TCH 1 - Hwy 5 (Coquihalla Hwy)
TCH 1A (TCH Historical Route) - TCH 1 (Kamloops-Hope)
Hwy 1B - Hwy 5A (Kamloops-Merritt)
Hwy 5 (Yellowhead Hwy) - terminates in Kamloops
Hwy 8 - Hwy 97C (Merritt-Kelowna)
Hwy 25 - Hwy 5A (Princeton-Merritt), Hwy 97C (Merritt-Ashcroft)
Hwy 25A - Hwy 97D near Logan Lake

Does anyone know why there are so many suffixed Hwy 97's? It's not like BC ran out of 2-digit numbers to use.

As a side note, I've also wondered why the Trans-Canada Highway in southern Ontario hasn't been rerouted from Highways 12 and 7 to Highways 400 and 401 to connect with Toronto.

Because when it comes to assigning highway designations, we Canadians aren't the sharpest tools in the toolbox.

Because in Ontario no one cares about the TCH. Even in the north people just call them by 11, 17, etc.

I was going to say the same thing.

[cbeach40]

Even if the TCH is not as prominant in Ontario, would there ever be consideration in rerouting the TCH off of Hwys 7 & 12 (maybe another TCH Historical Route) and use Hwys 400 & 401?  Unlike BC, highways wouldn't have to be renumbered.

Likely no, freeway signage is grossly expensive, and then you have the cost of removing it from the old route. Add to it the fact that it's signed as an afterthought and therefore has next to zero navigational value and it's a pile of money with no benefit. Plus, for the few people who actually want to "follow" the TCH routing, Hwy 17 is the mainline route anyway, even if a southern loop via Toronto were established.

The Georgian Bay-Central Ontario Routes of the TCH exist as historical remnants more than any actual functional concern. The designation could be pulled from it and it wouldn't really make any difference.

[vdeane]

Though it's not as if Ontario puts the TCH on guide signs... just on reassurance markers and nowhere else from what I've seen.

[Transportfan]

The TCH is actually a joke. It should have been a consistent highway in it's own right.

Even some roadgeeks don't see it: The Wikipedia articles for the TCH-1 through the western provinces title the articles "X-Provincial Highway 1."

They even basically deny the US Federal Highway System exists! Scroll down to the bottom of the page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:National_Highway_System_(Canada)

[dmuzika]

Does anyone know why there are so many suffixed Hwy 97's? It's not like BC ran out of 2-digit numbers to use.

I remember emailed BCMoT asking why it was 97C a number of years ago, IIRC their response was that it had something to do with tourism since Hwy 97 is a well-known route.  Considering that Hwy 97C is a four lane freeway, they could have numbered it just about anything and it still would have been used.  I do recall being in an Okanagan gift store a few years ago and they had an older map of the area, the Okanagan Connector was shown as proposed Highway 8.

[Scott5114]

They even basically deny the US Federal Highway System exists! Scroll down to the bottom of the page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:National_Highway_System_(Canada)

Well, yeah. Interstates/US routes aren't federally maintained.

[Transportfan]

But there certainly is a comprehensive US federal highway system.

[vdeane]

Outside of the national parks and military bases, the federal government does not own or maintain a single inch of pavement.  That is for the states.  The interstates are US routes ("federal route" is reserved for Viatologists) are simply a common numbering system; in fact, some US routes aren't even NHS routes!  The "national highway system" (NHS routes) is a funding eligibility system, nothing more.  Canada, in contrast, has a federal bridge corporation that maintains EVERY bridge that crosses provincial lines, as well as the Seaway International Bridge (so, yes, there is pavement in the US that is owned/maintained by Canada), and some crossings over the St. Lawrence in Montréal.  The Wikipedia talk page is accurate.

[brucester4]

Outside of the national parks and military bases, the federal government does not own or maintain a single inch of pavement.  That is for the states.  The interstates are US routes ("federal route" is reserved for Viatologists) are simply a common numbering system; in fact, some US routes aren't even NHS routes!  The "national highway system" (NHS routes) is a funding eligibility system, nothing more.  Canada, in contrast, has a federal bridge corporation that maintains EVERY bridge that crosses provincial lines, as well as the Seaway International Bridge (so, yes, there is pavement in the US that is owned/maintained by Canada), and some crossings over the St. Lawrence in Montréal.  The Wikipedia talk page is accurate.

I believe the bridges on the TCH between Nova Scotia and New Brunswick are maintained by the provinces.  I think the westbound bridge may have been built by New Brunswick and the eastbound bridge by Nova Scotia.  The westbound bridge has a date of 1991 in the style used by New Brunswick, the eastbound bridge has no viable date which is common in Nova Scotia.  Both bridge are numbered in the New Brunswick style M524 and M525.

https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.8565085,-64.2633083,3a,75y,231.03h,84.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOZ2fKlM5m3jIjbTtVo6AlQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en

[Rothman]

Outside of the national parks and military bases, the federal government does not own or maintain a single inch of pavement.  That is for the states.  The interstates are US routes ("federal route" is reserved for Viatologists) are simply a common numbering system; in fact, some US routes aren't even NHS routes!  The "national highway system" (NHS routes) is a funding eligibility system, nothing more. 

You and I appear to be tilting at windmills to get this point across again and again and again and again...

[JasonOfORoads]

("federal route" is reserved for Viatologists)

Wasn't expecting that flashback. Well played.