On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 11:41 PM Bradley White <theangrytom...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For example, US Hwy 101 is the main route connecting the cities (e.g. > > Eureka) and towns along the coast of northern California. Right now > > only some segments are tagged as highway=trunk. I would like to > > upgrade all of it to highway=trunk, up to Hwy 199, where most traffic > > leaves 101 and heads to I-5, at Crescent City. > > I did this a year or two ago, then changed it back following the > previous time this discussion came up last year. Someone else has > recently changed it back to trunk in its entirety as you describe (as > well as US 395, CA 70); I explained in a changeset comment that the > "major intercity highway where no motorway exists" definition (per > Highway:International_equivalence) is contentious and not commonly > used, but that I have no plans on reverting their changes. > Also language introduced by NE2 when he changed the wiki to justify his own national mass edit on the US highways. > Caltrans doesn't appear to have "divided" as a requirement for an > expressway build, or even necessarily a freeway (See:(California) > State Highway Map 2005; David Rumsey Map Collection) - these terms are > used to describe the level of access control on a given highway. US > 101 through Redwood Ntl Park is signed with "Freeway Entrance" and is > fully access controlled, but is an undivided 4-lane road. Many 2-lane, > undivided roads are considered expressways in California, for example: > - Vasco Road connecting Antioch & Livermore > - Portions of CA 4 west of Angels Camp > - CA 108 east of Sonora (fully access controlled 2-lane road) > > Once you know what to look for - reduced access to adjacent > properties, smoothed road geometry (esp. when bypassing old highways), > hard shoulders, usually 65 mph - they aren't too hard to differentiate > from conventional 2-lane highways with no access control. Where these > are obvious I generally tag them as trunk roads as opposed to primary. > Specifically in the case of CA 108, I reject that a fully access > controlled two-lane road is anything less than a trunk, if we have > decided to use 'trunk' to mean 'expressway'. California doesn't use > AASHTO definitions so I won't either. > I think that generally fits what would be tagged as a trunk as well (fully access controlled but single carriageway and AASHTO's definition). > Reno, NV has a couple urban arteries that straddle the divide between > trunk and primary (specifically: McCarran Blvd/NV 659, Pyramid Hwy/NV > 445 north of McCarran, Veterans Pkwy, foothills portion of Mt. Rose > Hwy/NV 431). These roads carry traffic at speeds higher than other > nearby arteries (45-55 mph as opposed to 40 mph). They are built to > the highest level of access control specified by Washoe RTC - > generally no direct access to properties, except for retail/commercial > areas (where access is quite frequent), or rural areas where no other > roads provide access to properties. They range from undivided w/ > center turn lane to divided with concrete jersey barriers & headlight > blinders (similar to a freeway). The majority of these roadways have > bike lanes, and many have sidewalks. They are quite similar to San > Jose's expressway system, except for a lack of grade-separated > interchanges. Are these primary, or trunk? I don't really know. They > currently sit at an awkward mix of trunk and primary depending on how > definitively myself and others think they are "expressways" or not. > I'd probably consider those as expressways. > I don't deny that "divided highway with partial control of access" is > a rigorous definition, with which it is certainly possible to tag > unambiguously with. I just question whether it is a good choice in the > US to use 'trunk' to mean 'expressway' in the same way that 'motorway' > means 'freeway', when the US has a formal freeway system, but lacks a > formal expressway system. Most other countries that also lack a formal > expressway system do not use the trunk/expressway definition (UK, > Canada, etc). In my area, sticking strictly to "divided highway with > partial control of access" means very few highways at all will see > 'trunk' tagging. Certainly, this reflects what's on the ground here if > we use this definition - but why use a definition that either has to > be used ambiguously or seldom at all? > > I support orthogonalizing expressways & trunk by using > 'expressway=yes/no' for access control (maybe > access_control=full/partial/no?), 'highway=trunk' to mean non-freeway > road with national-level importance, and using 'oneway' to denote > whether a highway is divided or not. Then let rendering decide how to > draw the road from there. Want to see formal expressways drawn > separately? 'Expressway=yes' & 'oneway=yes'. Want a more general view > of the most important US highways? 'Highway=trunk'. > Feels like conflating expressways and primaries.
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
