Author Topic: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread  (Read 4290 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline michih

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 873
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Today at 02:31:00 am
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #60 on: September 14, 2017, 03:47:20 pm »

Online yakra

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1049
  • Last Login:Today at 03:02:37 am
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #61 on: September 17, 2017, 02:49:57 pm »
Perhaps a more relevant question might be: are the "Winnipeg City Routes" (Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada) (canmbw) actually maintained by the province, or by the city? I don't know, but perhaps someone on the forum does, and the answer could be relevant here.
Maintained by the city I believe.
The Winnipeg Routes are a unique case, a one-off; they're the only such numbered/signed city system in Manitoba; it's highly unlikely that there will ever be another in the future. As such, there won't be any confusion with any other potential city systems, or a need the differentiate multiple such systems within Manitoba.
Some quotes from the canbmw thread:
Jim: "These seem to be an unusual case where they are well-signed and seem to take the place, within the Perimeter Highway, of what might normally be expected to be part of the provincial system."
mapcat: "I agree that they're a special case, and not analogous to USA county routes, or other smaller district systems we don't include."
I agree with this assessment. (Of course, having drafted the system. :) ) I'll note that not only are many of them extensions of canmb/canmbs routes from outside the Perimeter Highway, but many are themselves former Provincial highway alignments.
The canmbw thread blew up a bit too fast, and I've just left it alone for a while, but some day I'd like to revisit it, hash out a few of the topics therein as needed (maybe even with a topic split), and move canmbw toward activation again. But it's a low priority right now.

Offline oscar

  • TM Collaborator
  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 370
  • Last Login:Today at 12:03:00 am
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #62 on: Yesterday at 06:26:51 am »
With usaak nearing activation, and usaca also well along, I'd like to lay claim to cansk.

This would cover the primary routes 1-399. There are four levels within that group (1-99  most major highways; 100s major northern highways; 200s spurs to parks; 300 assorted other spurs). But all have similar signage, unlike the distinctive signage for secondary routes (600-799) and northern secondary routes (900s).