Originally Posted by dmuzika (Post 10044014)

I would agree about the traffic signals; though with the completion of the Regina Bypass, Saskatchewan doesn't have any signals on TCH-1, but does have some uncontrolled intersections in Swift Current and Moose Jaw that need to be closed or consolidated into an interchange. Manitoba on the other hand...:help:

The challenge in the prairies is the Dominion Land Survey, where you theoretically have a rural road crossing the highway in 1-mile increments (granted not all were built). There are also some minor/secondary highway crossings that wouldn't initially require interchanges. At least Alberta has been doing some planning to address their sections, with ROW set aside for bypasses around Strathmore and Medicine Hat, as well as developing an access management strategy to convert its section to a freeway. Who knows when any of it will be funded.

But like the BC Interior, a lot the rural prairie sections don't have the traffic to warrant a full freeway/interstate conversion.

Originally Posted by craner (Post 10045626)

TCH in Alberta is basically a freeway from the BC border to the east side of Calgary (if you use the Ring Road). East of there, yes, lots of upgrading required.

Ozabald - do you have an example of a “Texas style slip ramp” ?

Originally Posted by craner (Post 10045626)

....Ozabald - do you have an example of a “Texas style slip ramp” ?

Originally Posted by Ozabald (Post 10045850)

Here's the definition of a slip ramp; "Texas style":
https://www.texashighwayman.com/glossary.shtml

Slip ramp in Texas:
I-35 NB; exit 280; Salado, TX
https://www.google.com/maps/@30.8769...8192?entry=ttu

Slip ramp - Swift Current, SK:
https://www.google.com/maps/@50.3018...8192?entry=ttu

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue (Post 10045857)

Similar to my proposal for Morris, MB? :D
https://i.imgur.com/VOO1vAxh.jpg

By the way, we can probably try similar stuff for Sorrento, Salmon Arm, Sicamous, Revelstoke and Golden. ;)

Originally Posted by dmuzika (Post 10046175)

Having recently driven through Morris, you'd destroy their central business district, there's plenty of land for a bypass. I suspect the same for Salmon Arm.

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue (Post 10045857)

Similar to my proposal for Morris, MB? :D
https://i.imgur.com/VOO1vAxh.jpg

By the way, we can probably try similar stuff for Sorrento, Salmon Arm, Sicamous, Revelstoke and Golden. ;)

Originally Posted by Metro-One (Post 10046285)

Salmon Arm is definitely going to be the most difficult town centre to upgrade the #1 through.

The other towns listed would be relatively easy.

Originally Posted by Tvisforme (Post 10046298)

I wonder what the cost comparison would be for upgrading roughly 24 kilometres of the existing Salmon Arm alignment between Tappen and Canoe versus a bypass route along Sunnybrae-Canoe Point Road that crosses the lake to Engineer's Point and rejoins the existing highway at Canoe. It would make quite a difference for through traffic.

Originally Posted by dmuzika (Post 10051538)

I wonder if access to Hwy 97B might be an issue. It seems that if Hwy 97A were to be twinned ("four-laned") from the Okanagan to Hwy 1, Hwy 97B would probably be easier to expand than Hwy 97A north of Enderby. If that scenario played out, there would still be a lot of traffic that would bypass the proposed bridge. I'm also wondering if Salmon Arm would still want people accessing the city, even if the TCH didn't continue through its city centre.

I wonder if a bypass couldn't be built to the south of Salmon Arm along the base of Mount Ida?

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue (Post 10051571)

A bypass south of Salmon Arm sounds better. That may require rebuilding the through lanes of the interchange at Salmon River Road, though. (This is to cap the maximum slope of the bypass at 5% for 4.2 km at the foot of the hill.) I wonder how much work that will be.

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue (Post 10051841)

Is that in Google Earth Pro, or Global view of Google earth? It even shows the shape of the mountains. :runaway:

Originally Posted by Tvisforme (Post 10051804)

I think the northern route works better for a 97B upgrade. The existing Highway 1 to the east of Salmon Arm is a straight line through flat, low-density land and it could easily become part of 97B; connecting with Highway 1 near Canoe. The distance going north is the same or shorter than skirting the south end of Salmon Arm and you'd still have easy access to Salmon Arm via the old Highway 1 roads from both the west and the east.

https://i.imgur.com/26xXICDh.jpg

Originally Posted by Tvisforme (Post 10051804)

I think the northern route works better for a 97B upgrade. The existing Highway 1 to the east of Salmon Arm is a straight line through flat, low-density land and it could easily become part of 97B; connecting with Highway 1 near Canoe. The distance going north is the same or shorter than skirting the south end of Salmon Arm and you'd still have easy access to Salmon Arm via the old Highway 1 roads from both the west and the east.

https://i.imgur.com/26xXICDh.jpg

Originally Posted by Metro-One (Post 10049148)

Some very, very disappointing results in that study, but not surprising.

Short story, we are not going to see a limited access highway 97 between Peachland and Vernon in our life times, if ever.

Instead we will get short segments of freeways interrupted by urban cores.

In West Kelowna there is a plan to be grade separated between Daimer Drive (interchange) to the current Westside Interchange. Between Grizzly Road and Gosset Rd. doesn't seem to be directly addressed.

Now here is the joke, long term plan for downtown Westbank is to keep the highway at grade along Dobbin Road! Yes, you read that right, an arterial road sandwiched between two expressway sections. All alternate route scenerios have been dropped and wont be studied further...

Oh, and no mention of a tunnel option.

No joke, this is only plan being considered:

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...c3fe3536_h.jpgjoke1 by Ian, on Flickr

Next is Peachland, and yep, only minor improvements. No alternate route, no four lane expansion for at least 20 years...

After that, through Kelowna, expect no new expressway route, no new second crossing, just a sixth lane added to the existing bridge.... or even cheaper... a counter flow system! Oh god... oh, and unlike before where they said they may make express lanes along the existing corridor in the absence of not continuing the new expressway and bridge option, well, that's also been dropped. Enjoy your traffic nightmare forever!

From there, from the University to the Jammery we will get grade separated free flow again, but done in stages, so don't worry, time wasting money wasting traffic lights will be added first, before full interchanges that we know will likely never happen (seeing how all the expressway plans on paper for decades have now disappeared).

Through Winfield itself north of Commonwealth to Oceola Road is another spot lacking in any real information / plan.

From there, it looks like the 97 could become grade separated standards to Vernon... maybe, apparently doing so would be bad for inclusivity....... now we know who is doing these studies...

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...cf731516_c.jpgwhatagain by Ian, on Flickr

Somehow adding interchanges and frontage roads in this largely rural stretch along a mountains side is "bad" for affordability, livability and "inclusivity" ... like, how? How is that any worse than a four lane expressway with at grade traffic lights? I would think having local frontage roads would be better for those living in the areas? No????? And not needing to cross a dangerous four lane divided (by median barrier) expressway with people traveling over 100km/h for every trip???

So, there it is, a bizarre hodgepodge of grade separated expressway, two lane arterial, and everything in between!

This is funny though, for some reason some interchanges get double green checkmarks for "inclusivity," livability and affordability, and others in very similar built environments of light industrial get a big old red X??????

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...5d99c5d9_c.jpgWhat. by Ian, on Flickr

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...af0c7eb2_b.jpgJoke2 by Ian, on Flickr


In the end, what a joke.

But I guess bus que jumping lanes and some bike lanes will solve all of the 97's traffic problems! Enjoy your traffic nightmare forever! All eggs in one terribly designed basket!

It's equally funny that at the same time the current study for Kamloops' transportation improvements are almost entirely freeway / interchange upgrade considerations for the #1 and #5.

But, whatever, at this point the people of the Okanagan will only have themselves to blame for having hodgepodge highway and transit infrastructure that will be hindering each other forever sharing a single congested corridor with no real cohesive plan. The current Kelowna city council themselves are against a second crossing and are the ones who nixed the Clement expressway plan (which woulld have freed up Harvey to be majorly downgraded to a more local road with a real robust transit backbone).

Originally Posted by craner (Post 10056901)

I can feel your frustration in that post Metro.
It really is unbelievably non-sensical.
How can a project improve transportation in the region and yet hurt affordability ?
How can it improve connectivity yet hurt inclusivity (what does that even mean) ?
How does it hurt livability ? Is crawling through traffic on Harvey more “livable” than being able to take an alternate freeway route and downgrade Harvey as you describe ?

So stupid - who is making these boneheaded decisions ?

(Sorry for all the rhetorical questions).

Originally Posted by VantageHD (Post 10057249)

Such a joke! They can't even upgrade the #1 from Hope to Port mann bridge, let alone through Kelowna. That stretch should have been a 4 lane highway years ago but all the government does is limp through projects throughout a persons entire life. They need to actually build things instead of talk and run studies. All it does is waste time and money - what government excels at.

Originally Posted by Metro-One (Post 10056155)

Yeah, it’s a complete joke and a real slap in the face to the Okanagan.

I posted this in the Kelowna thread, but it didn’t get a single response from anyone there, so at this time judging from the complete lack of engagement I now feel people get what they deserve…



I always want to add, I was recently looking at Nanaimo’s 20 year plan, and while also underwhelming in timeline, the current plan is still to upgrade the parkway to essentially freeway standards, along with other potential interchange upgrades along the 19, and in Victoria the official plan is still eventually to have the 17 full freeway (one interchange at a time…).

So when it comes to being shortchanged for highway improvements, Kelowna is the bottom of the bottom (Kamloops likely to have the best roads, followed by Nanaimo, Victoria and then Kelowna / Okanagan relative to populations.)

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue (Post 10059138)

Meanwhile my attempt at freeway through Revelstoke:

Originally Posted by Mazrim (Post 10061245)

Dare to dream - why not bypass the worst parts of Eagle Pass and Three Valley Gap with a new route? You can tell they're gonna drag their feet on widening the highway there, especially along the cliffs at Three Valley Gap.

https://i.imgur.com/xSIvpAS.png

Originally Posted by dmuzika (Post 10059601)

This wouldn't have anything to do with results of the 2020 provincial election and the comparative lack of NDP seats in the Okanagan; or the last Liberal premier being from Kelowna? :runaway:

Maybe that's the inclusion factor. :P

At least the next election is in October 2024.

EDIT: Never mind, I looked at the poll numbers and barring a major development, the NDP will be sticking around for a while.

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue (Post 10061581)

I wonder if that’s just because it’s B.C. though. In Newfoundland, TCH goes through Terra Nova N.P. If that ever gets twinned, I’ll be curious to see if Parks Canada has the gut to propose a light there. (Apparently TCH in Newfoundland has 0 traffic lights even for those through-the-town stretches.)

Originally Posted by Metro-One (Post 10062529)

This is one I don't blame on the province, despite the sluggish pace, all the highway 1 upgrades have been decent free flow projects. The federal parks are 100% federal jurisdiction and they do what they want to do.

The lack of any funding for the project is also 100% on the feds.

One good thing the province has done has been focusing on the most challenging sections first, such as the Yoho Canyon, and replacing major bridges.

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue (Post 10061262)

I’ve come across your proposal before. Does it require tunnelling through the mountains?
I don’t know the geology of the Rockies well enough to dream like that. :(

Originally Posted by MIPS (Post 10063965)

Vicars Road around 4pm is torture. It took me seven minutes to get off the frontage and onto the highway Eastbound because the frontage intersection constantly clogs. Not 24 hours earlier I waited to turn eastbound but there was four or five cars already lined up between the highway lights and the frontage intersection with everyone waiting in the other three directions to turn onto the highway as well. Light goes green, they all turn left, light goes yellow and before I can cross and exit Eastbound I'm dicked for another three minutes by an F350 and a 50 foot horse trailer blocking the intersection AND taking all the spots at the light so they can turn left.
Likewise the lights at the same time can back up traffic nearly a kilometer long heading Eastbound as far back as Ashley's Furniture, causing people to exit off the highway to the frontage by the Burger King, only to get jammed at Vicars or get stuck trying to turn left onto Valleyview Drive which at this point is heavily loaded with people exiting downtown that you get a lineup as far back as the Shell station.

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue (Post 10061262)

I’ve come across your proposal before. Does it require tunnelling through the mountains?
I don’t know the geology of the Rockies well enough to dream like that. :(