BC Highway Construction

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Ozabald

It's the BC way. Build/upgrade highways on the cheap and then as the years go by; maybe upgrade at a much higher cost than if the work was originally done.

Look at the Inland Island highway (BC-17). Many planned interchanges were not built and the original highway was shoehorned in to be used between Lantzville and Parksville; rather than upgrading or building a new stretch.

That’s B.C.-19 though yea the same can be said about B.C.-17 on the island and on the mainland…

[Ozabald]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

That’s B.C.-19 though yea the same can be said about B.C.-17 on the island and on the mainland…

Whoops; my mistake! It's been awhile since driving the Inland Island Highway. The stretch from Parksville to Campbell River is a well designed and built road; except for the missing interchanges with traffic lights in their place. Nothing beats seeing a fully loaded logging truck coming up behind you as you are stopping at the lights from going 110-120 km/h.

[kev_427]

There's no need for a full freeway from Kamloops to Alberta. Putting an interchange at frickin Craigellachie doesn't add any benefit. There are two reasons for upgrading a highway: traffic flow and safety. Traffic flow is not affected by a small rural access road. Safety is also not an issue at this type of intersection. What about the Manitoba bus crash? That was not just a rural access road, it was the main access to the town of Carberry. An interchange is warranted here. Same with Valleyview, Chase, Sorrento, Salmon Arm, Sicamous, Revelstoke, and Golden. But a full freeway is overkill. Don't get me wrong, there should be 4 lanes from Kamloops to Alberta yesterday. Build it up to the standard that other western provinces have. Not a freeway.

[Ozabald]

Originally Posted by kev_427

There's no need for a full freeway from Kamloops to Alberta. Putting an interchange at frickin Craigellachie doesn't add any benefit. There are two reasons for upgrading a highway: traffic flow and safety. Traffic flow is not affected by a small rural access road. Safety is also not an issue at this type of intersection. What about the Manitoba bus crash? That was not just a rural access road, it was the main access to the town of Carberry. An interchange is warranted here. Same with Valleyview, Chase, Sorrento, Salmon Arm, Sicamous, Revelstoke, and Golden. But a full freeway is overkill. Don't get me wrong, there should be 4 lanes from Kamloops to Alberta yesterday. Build it up to the standard that other western provinces have. Not a freeway.

That's the BC mindset; build a highway cheap as possible to the lowest common standard. Compare the highways of BC and the Prairies to that of the 400 series in Ontario, the Autoroutes in Quebec, NB and NS. Plus, look at BC-97 in the Okanagan. An absolute joke with there highway routed on Harvey Ave. in Kelowna, 32nd Street in Vernon, etc.

[kev_427]

Originally Posted by Ozabald

That's the BC mindset; build a highway cheap as possible to the lowest common standard. Compare the highways of BC and the Prairies to that of the 400 series in Ontario, the Autoroutes in Quebec, NB and NS. Plus, look at BC-97 in the Okanagan. An absolute joke with there highway routed on Harvey Ave. in Kelowna, 32nd Street in Vernon, etc.

I agree, 97 through the Okanagan is the most underbuilt highway in BC besides the Malahat. It should be a freeway. Highway 1 carries far less traffic. The average daily traffic on 97 ranges from 13000 to 60000. The lowest 400 series highway section is south of Parry Sound which carries just under 10000. Highway 1 west of Salmon Arm is only 5000 to 7000. The demand just isn't there. There's a reason why Highway 1 west of Calgary isn't a freeway. It has a similar aadt to BC 1. So it's not "the BC mindset", it's the modern mindset. They don't build overbuilt freeways in the middle of nowhere anymore. Start with 4 lanes, and as demand rises, add interchanges incrementally.

[Dengler Avenue]

There's a reason why Highway 1 west of Calgary isn't a freeway.

Do you mean east?

[Ozabald]

Originally Posted by kev_427

I agree, 97 through the Okanagan is the most underbuilt highway in BC besides the Malahat. It should be a freeway. Highway 1 carries far less traffic. The average daily traffic on 97 ranges from 13000 to 60000. The lowest 400 series highway section is south of Parry Sound which carries just under 10000. Highway 1 west of Salmon Arm is only 5000 to 7000. The demand just isn't there. There's a reason why Highway 1 west of Calgary isn't a freeway. It has a similar aadt to BC 1. So it's not "the BC mindset", it's the modern mindset. They don't build overbuilt freeways in the middle of nowhere anymore. Start with 4 lanes, and as demand rises, add interchanges incrementally.

Unfortunately, it's the BC mindset to build to the lowest standard and fix the mistakes afterwards. Look at BC-91. It is an urban freeway that had traffic lights; with the last set removed not that long ago; just 30+ years later. And there's the current mess with the SFPR. Even the parts of the SFPR which are a freeway, are built to such a low design standard with a narrow ROW and tight curves.

There are other criteria than AADT when upgrading a highway to a freeway. The importance of the corridor, its connectivity, promoting economic development and safety are other factors. The TCH between Kamloops and Calgary is the primary trade corridor in Western Canada. It connects to the largest port in Canada and one of the largest on the West Coast; plus connects the 3rd largest CMA to the 5th largest CMA in the country. Plus, it's an unsafe highway in many parts. Absolutely, the TCH should be a fully control-access four lane highway built to US Interstate or Ontario 400-series standards.

[flipper316]

Originally Posted by kev_427

I agree, 97 through the Okanagan is the most underbuilt highway in BC besides the Malahat. It should be a freeway. Highway 1 carries far less traffic. The average daily traffic on 97 ranges from 13000 to 60000. The lowest 400 series highway section is south of Parry Sound which carries just under 10000. Highway 1 west of Salmon Arm is only 5000 to 7000. The demand just isn't there. There's a reason why Highway 1 west of Calgary isn't a freeway. It has a similar aadt to BC 1. So it's not "the BC mindset", it's the modern mindset. They don't build overbuilt freeways in the middle of nowhere anymore. Start with 4 lanes, and as demand rises, add interchanges incrementally.

Highway 1 west of Calgary is a freeway from the city limits to the BC border.

[kev_427]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Do you mean east?

Yes.

[flipper316]

Good article.
https://fvcurrent.com/p/fraser-valle...-highway-delay

[kev_427]

Originally Posted by Ozabald

Unfortunately, it's the BC mindset to build to the lowest standard and fix the mistakes afterwards. Look at BC-91. It is an urban freeway that had traffic lights; with the last set removed not that long ago; just 30+ years later. And there's the current mess with the SFPR. Even the parts of the SFPR which are a freeway, are built to such a low design standard with a narrow ROW and tight curves.

There are other criteria than AADT when upgrading a highway to a freeway. The importance of the corridor, its connectivity, promoting economic development and safety are other factors. The TCH between Kamloops and Calgary is the primary trade corridor in Western Canada. It connects to the largest port in Canada and one of the largest on the West Coast; plus connects the 3rd largest CMA to the 5th largest CMA in the country. Plus, it's an unsafe highway in many parts. Absolutely, the TCH should be a fully control-access four lane highway built to US Interstate or Ontario 400-series standards.

My point is that a rural 4 lane highway and a rural freeway have basically the same capacity. A 4 lane highway is sufficient for economic development, safety, and connectivity, and will be for the next 50 years. You mentioned the Interstate system, which was mostly built over 50 years ago. It would not have been built to the same level today. There's no need for a full freeway through Montana/Nebraska/Wyoming/etc. 4 lanes is good enough.

[craner]

Originally Posted by Ozabald

There are other criteria than AADT when upgrading a highway to a freeway. The importance of the corridor, its connectivity, promoting economic development and safety are other factors. The TCH between Kamloops and Calgary is the primary trade corridor in Western Canada. It connects to the largest port in Canada and one of the largest on the West Coast; plus connects the 3rd largest CMA to the 5th largest CMA in the country. Plus, it's an unsafe highway in many parts. Absolutely, the TCH should be a fully control-access four lane highway built to US Interstate or Ontario 400-series standards.

Amen brother - preach it !

[nname]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

@Ozabald might have Sorrento and Salmon Arm in mind in that comment.

Well with the amount of funding they have, they probably feel more beneficial to upgrade more km of highway to 4 lanes, then to upgrade a few km to freeway and leave the rest as-is.

Just checked some trucking videos, none of the recently upgraded section have driveway access, even the Salmon Arm segment. Frontage road are built on both sides, so shouldn't be too difficult for the upgrade to freeway eventually. Not sure how they will do it for the downtown segment though.. maybe bypass starting from the 10th Ave intersection? But again that's probably not something to worry about before the entire highway is upgraded to 4 lanes first.

The exit number for the new Salmon River Road interchange seems to be 478.

PS. video for the Salmon Arm upgrade is quite hard to find...

[craner]

Extended fall Highway 1 closures east of Golden for final construction push

http://https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2023MOTI0143-001417

[dmuzika]

Originally Posted by kev_427

There's no need for a full freeway from Kamloops to Alberta. Putting an interchange at frickin Craigellachie doesn't add any benefit. There are two reasons for upgrading a highway: traffic flow and safety. Traffic flow is not affected by a small rural access road. Safety is also not an issue at this type of intersection. What about the Manitoba bus crash? That was not just a rural access road, it was the main access to the town of Carberry. An interchange is warranted here. Same with Valleyview, Chase, Sorrento, Salmon Arm, Sicamous, Revelstoke, and Golden. But a full freeway is overkill. Don't get me wrong, there should be 4 lanes from Kamloops to Alberta yesterday. Build it up to the standard that other western provinces have. Not a freeway.

Originally Posted by Ozabald

There are other criteria than AADT when upgrading a highway to a freeway. The importance of the corridor, its connectivity, promoting economic development and safety are other factors. The TCH between Kamloops and Calgary is the primary trade corridor in Western Canada. It connects to the largest port in Canada and one of the largest on the West Coast; plus connects the 3rd largest CMA to the 5th largest CMA in the country. Plus, it's an unsafe highway in many parts. Absolutely, the TCH should be a fully control-access four lane highway built to US Interstate or Ontario 400-series standards.

Jumping into an older conversation.

I would agree that while TC-1 needs to be upgraded to a 4-lane expressway, it doesn't need to be a full freeway between Kamloops and Alberta border. Interchanges should be required in all urban areas, as already listed, as well as the general requirement that no traffic signals would be permitted - if it needs signals, build an interchange. Going against the current gov't philosophy that "highways connect communities, not bypass them", TC-1 should bypass built up areas where you can't construct interchanges, but maintaining an expressway standard in rural areas. With other corridors also needing long-overdue upgrades and limited funding, the reality is that BC freeway investments could be better spent elsewhere.

Saying that, BC should also be required to also have a long-term access management strategy for TC-1 along the entire route. Even if rural access interchanges wouldn't be initially needed/constructed, locations should be identified and ROW established, so they could be more easily added at a later time. Even if that Craigellachie or Donald interchange isn't needed today, provisions should be included so it could be built 50+ years from now.

[kev_427]

Originally Posted by dmuzika

Jumping into an older conversation.

I would agree that while TC-1 needs to be upgraded to a 4-lane expressway, it doesn't need to be a full freeway between Kamloops and Alberta border. Interchanges should be required in all urban areas, as already listed, as well as the general requirement that no traffic signals would be permitted - if it needs signals, build an interchange. Going against the current gov't philosophy that "highways connect communities, not bypass them", TC-1 should bypass built up areas where you can't construct interchanges, but maintaining an expressway standard in rural areas. With other corridors also needing long-overdue upgrades and limited funding, the reality is that BC freeway investments could be better spent elsewhere.

Saying that, BC should also be required to also have a long-term access management strategy for TC-1 along the entire route. Even if rural access interchanges wouldn't be initially needed/constructed, locations should be identified and ROW established, so they could be more easily added at a later time. Even if that Craigellachie or Donald interchange isn't needed today, provisions should be included so it could be built 50+ years from now.

Well said. In addition to what was said before, people are always piling on the BC government for not turning Hwy 1 into a freeway, meanwhile Alberta and Saskatchewan's sections of Hwy 1 have similar traffic flows and yet I don't see people on here complaining that their governments aren't upgrading Hwy to a freeway. It functions just fine as an expressway, so why can't BC have the same? Why would we need a freeway when everyone else has an expressway? BC is currently below the standard, and needs to only be raised to the standard. Not above it.

[Ozabald]

Originally Posted by kev_427

Well said. In addition to what was said before, people are always piling on the BC government for not turning Hwy 1 into a freeway, meanwhile Alberta and Saskatchewan's sections of Hwy 1 have similar traffic flows and yet I don't see people on here complaining that their governments aren't upgrading Hwy to a freeway. It functions just fine as an expressway, so why can't BC have the same? Why would we need a freeway when everyone else has an expressway? BC is currently below the standard, and needs to only be raised to the standard. Not above it.

Actually, the TCH through the Prairies should be built to a freeway standard; a la Ontario 400-series highways or the TCH in New Brunswick and the 4-lane NS 100-series highways. The number of traffic lights on the TCH in AB and SK is a joke.

This is not acceptable for the TCH:
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.0377...8192?entry=ttu

or this:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Me...NzBs?entry=ttu

Low volume intersections should be closed or if they have to be maintained, a culvert underpass can be used. Newfoundland uses them for very low volume interchanges on the four-lane sections of their TCH. Much more cost efficient than a diamond interchange. Here's an example for the entrance to Butterpot Provincial Park; west of St. John's.
https://www.google.com/maps/@47.3818...6656?entry=ttu

[Dengler Avenue]

A good example to learn from will be MTO twinning TCH between Thunder Bay and Nipigon. Interchanges are all future-proofed.

[Ozabald]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

A good example to learn from will be MTO twinning TCH between Thunder Bay and Nipigon. Interchanges are all future-proofed.

Yes, MTO is good for future proofing their 4-laning for interchanges. BC is the opposite. It seems to be an afterthought and when it's decided to replace an intersection with an interchange, it becomes a complex and expensive project.

[dmuzika]

Originally Posted by Ozabald

Actually, the TCH through the Prairies should be built to a freeway standard; a la Ontario 400-series highways or the TCH in New Brunswick and the 4-lane NS 100-series highways. The number of traffic lights on the TCH in AB and SK is a joke.

This is not acceptable for the TCH:
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.0377...8192?entry=ttu

or this:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Me...NzBs?entry=ttu

Low volume intersections should be closed or if they have to be maintained, a culvert underpass can be used. Newfoundland uses them for very low volume interchanges on the four-lane sections of their TCH. Much more cost efficient than a diamond interchange. Here's an example for the entrance to Butterpot Provincial Park; west of St. John's.
https://www.google.com/maps/@47.3818...6656?entry=ttu

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...

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.