[Talk-ca] Proposed changes to road classification and related stuff

[Jherome Miguel]

I agree we can keep the existing trunk network based on the NHS for most
provinces, but add a few others in places like the Prairie provinces. The
trunk network based on the NHS creates a well connected network visible on
high zoom and are usually the "best" routes between cities served by those,
but let's relax that requirement this time.

For BC, trunk routes can remain largely the same, but remove BC 99 north of
Vancouver for the reasons provided previously. Next thing thing is BC 19:
should this be set to trunk (except where it's freeway) all the way from
Nanaimo to Port Hardy? Current trunk status for BC 19 ends at Campbell
River (also where the NHS core status of that highway ends)

For what is a good trunk route, let's follow the new US classification
guidelines for the ideal "best" route for a certain classification between
two places: it's  usually the fastest route but not always, especially
where the fastest route goes through a remote area with lack of motorist
services and there are better alternatives. I can see there's a good reason
not to upgrade Route 113 and 169 even if they're being the fastest and
shortest link between Val-d'Or and Saguenay; it's a northerly route through
hundreds of kilometres of boreal forest and there's a long stretch between
places with a 24-hour gas stations at least to be a viable routing.

On population centres that should be connected to the top-level network, I
can agree there should be variance between dense regions (e.g. Southern
Ontario, St. Lawrence Valley) and sparse regions (Northern Ontario, the
Prairies, BC). Maybe should we include important towns in sparser areas?

Let's go back on trunks used to indicate expressways (the proposal is to
use expressway=yes following the American proposal and the highway tag
based on the importance). There's some efforts going on for Ontario
(currently in the wiki talk page of the provincial proposal) with some
support, but still far from universal agreement, plus there's also the
issue with what "important" former provincial highway segments can get
primary (current existing example is former Highway 7 through Peel and
York, which was bypassed by 407 ETR), as well as discussions for setting
primary to some cross-town arterials in Toronto.

On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 12:39 PM Jherome Miguel <jheromemiguel at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I'll don't have to say all over and over again trunk is not the best tag
> for a road that is nearly built to controlled-access standard, or is just a
> mere dual carriageway/divided highway. We already have this expressway=yes
> tag to identify such roads, and the highway= tag should reflect the
> importance, not the build. Trunk to mean a road nearly built to
> controlled-access standard only creates a game of connect the dots from
> there. By suggesting that, it's basically a step backward from what has
> been an improvement, trunk for the most important roads that aren't freeway
> or autoroute.
>
> (Can someone mediate?)
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20220215/f2023a5d/attachment.htm>