[talk-ph] Cebu road classification

Rally de Leon ralleon at gmail.com
Thu Mar 19 04:38:22 UTC 2015


Dear Totor,

I only discovered your message in my spam folder yesterday. I was the one
who edited and put all those ref by DPWH on primary roads (doing some
tests, checking for patterns all over PH)

The reason for the delay in reply is that I need to type an extensive
guidelines on trunk-editing (for osm learners) which is confusing to many.
I am fact-checking existing examples in OSM PH, where I myself broke the
recommended road classifications of DPWH many times.

It's better to explain by-example (and reason why), so that other mappers
reading this can benefit from discussion (links: to follow later)

My edits in Cebu Proper:
Route 8 (camino real) which is classified as primary by DPWH (equivalent to
trunk road) in OSM. I initially followed faithfully the DPWH's route -
which in "many times" proven as outdated. Is the current trunk route shape
still valid? Reroute if necessary, but leave the DPWH ref value intact.

Route 840 coastal road (by-pass or diversion road), which also appeared as
trunk on OSM. I initially decided to downgrade this to primary route -
prior to testing and consultations with local mappers (see my personal
guidelines below - second rule)

As for the 2 bridges that goes to the airport (they also run in parallel) -
having the same function (applying my second rule). I did not touch Marcelo
Fernan route (check edit history) :-) I just saw the original route on
DPWH's database, the Marcelo Fernan isn't even on DPWH (probably a city or
provincial road - national road?) - didn't noticed coz I was in a hurry
that time (forgot to open a discussion for consultation). If you feel
Marcelo Fernan qualifies more as a trunk than the other bridge (considering
the guidelines below), then by all means, tag it correctly as you see it on
the ground.

Anyways, better this way... "somebody breaks something" (as I always break
something, hehe), we have more people interested in reading and learning,
how we will solve this :-)

Please see my personal notes below.

Cheers,
Rally



============================================================

I use the following guidelines (rules) in my head in editing primary and
arterial roads.
This is not yet an extensive list and I wish we can get more ideas from
others.

*First Rule*: Don't follow DPWH recommended routes, they are just guide.
They're outdated in so many areas (I will show many examples in various
areas that doesn't make sense).


*Second Rule*: No two (or more) trunk should run in parallel routes (having
same regional function).

The typical case of (old) Camino Real vs. (new) Diversion/By-Pass Road --
choosing which one will be the designated provincial or regional trunk road
in OSM map? (forget DPWH). But  you should only have one trunk crossing a
town or typical city, by looking at it in the regional or provincial
perspective.


*Clue: look at the intention of DPWH (regional planning). Have they widened
the old primary routes (to maintain primary status)? But if the Diversion
Road is being redesigned with more capacity: twice as wide, twice as fast
as the old route, and is actually used by regional motorists, then the
answer is obvious. *

This is tricky in example Lubao By-Pass Road (Pampanga). Maybe because said
By-pass road is not a National Road? same case with Marcelo Fernan Bridge
(not on DPWH)

If we notice, DPWH uses the same concept: they rarely have two 'primary'
running in parallel.
eg. In the case of NCR, even if Alabang-Zapote is far from Sucat Road, they
tag Sucat Road as primary, Alabang-Zapote as secondary (even if the latter
is allegedly part of the old Daang Maharlika). My theory is that DPWH treat
these two road serving the same function (in the future): linking SLEX (E2)
to CAVITEX (E3/E4). But I tend to disagree and will recommend
Alabang-Zapote be tagged as Trunk, because I believe Daang Hari will become
trunk someday, then it will violate my *Third Rule.*


*Third Rule:*Trunk should not terminate in the middle of somewhere. It
should typically terminate on:
(1) another trunk road
(2) expressway
(3) major port/gateway: international airport or seaport, or a major ro-ro
terminal (SRNH)
(4) self-contained major city, eg. provincial capital
(5) circumferential provincial roads that ends on itself (in some islands)

examples:
- trunk road stopping at Tabuk, Kalinga (because it's the capital)
- decision to extend Quezon Ave (N170) from Mabuhay Rotonda to the nearest
trunk, which is AH26 (N120 Roxas Blvd) via N150(Padre Burgos) instead of
via N170 (Taft Ave back to EDSA); because routing to Taft Ave will break
the Second Rule (running parallel trunks with N120(Roxas Blvd) and
N145(South Super) which are also both located in Manila, all going in the
same direction to EDSA.


*Fourth Rule:* Test if it is really "THE" trunk road.

This is a tricky balancing act, considering its function, the original govt
design and how ALL (INCLUSIVE) motorists actual use them. (I had
contradicted/reverted my own edits so many times, after the questions like:)

(a) If I close down one of the two: (old) Camino Real route, or the new
Diversion Route, which will have more negative economic impact
(regionally). Which will create more regional traffic chaos (in an all
inclusive consideration)?

(b) Am I aware of the bigger picture (future 'regional role' of a
particular road section - eg. being groomed as gateway, happening in 2
years)?

Is there an exception: should I break the *First Rule* here? Is it located
on a mega-city that can support 2 or more parallel trunks: One trunk for
the LGU (serving its own numerous internal primary routes); another trunk
(a non-expressway) acting as regional by-pass road.

(c) Did I check my personal biases for trunk?
- Is it because it's my favorite, or the faster route?
- "I want our road to be more visible." (tagging for the renderer - common
with newbie mappers)
- exclusive consideration: private-vehicles' perspective (car carries
lesser people per trip)
- am I mapping for the leisure travelers (tourist map)?

(d) Inclusive Mobility test: Did I consider that Provincial Public
Transport perspective (carrying more "road-user commuters" per vehicle)?
Should they all be assigned to Primary road instead of Trunk Road for
private car users.

This is different for local buses (for local users) which in IMHO should be
rerouted away from regional trunk roads.

(e) Did I consider the regional trucker's route (delivering goods and
services that fuels regional economy)? Aren't they entitled to the overall
traffic-count that dictates which are considered trunk roads? (or should I
assume they don't exist)

A huge truck having large road-footprint may (just) represent any:
- Driver & "pahenante" (professional perspective)
- Business perspective (logistics company or private entity)
- Or the bulk of Goods, Products and Services these trucks represent

note: IMHO and personal bias, Public Transport (d) have a higher weight for
decision as trunk. BUT it must be supported by data/figures. Should we
consult the DPWH or the DOTC or the DTI on this, or we just trust the
government powerpoint presentations future plans and programs?


*Fifth Rule:* Every province should have it's own (map-visible) provincial
road
- It is a set of serially-connected ways (LGU's main arterial roads),
passable (no missing bridges), and actually paved (not just on drawing
board of DPWH) that may qualify as a trunk (in terms of road design); and
especially if this road passes "provincial boundary" linking to National
Highway Network (NHN).
- AND this need not follow "volume-kilometerage" qualification by DPWH to
be primary class
- WHY? remote places with substantial population have long been neglected,
and need visible roads (a little nudge from from map makers) that connects
US to THEM
- ...fully aware that we "should not be tagging for the renderer", but I'm
"tagging trunk or primary for social justice and equality" IF said road
qualifies the minimum road quality & pass-ability. Yes, it's a personal
bias; my digital activism ;-)

eg. Had I not made a stupid mistake of prioritizing Marikina-Infanta road
as trunk, over the more favored Infanta-bound route N601 (via Manila  East
Road), then only the adventurous would have seen Sitio Camagong / Little
Baguio (a nice little cold sitio) or eat at Jariel's peak, pass a protected
forest in Sierra Madre. To this day, Marikina-Infannta road is still a
tertiary road, (virtually invisible as far as DPWH is concerned),
considering the shelved plan to put a major seaport in Infanta (which
automatically makes it a trunk). This puts to waste (all the concrete and)
tax-payers money if nobody think this road exist (thus now, will remain
tagged as primary in OSM).
eg. Saranggani province may not have a trunk road if I don't have a
(break-the-rule) fifth rule :-) since it's main arterial road remains
"secondary class" per DPWH

So what is not (a trunk)? if there already a trunk road in the province,
then that lone primary road that leads to a remote town (with no major
port), then it's just a primary road.
eg. Calatagan, Batangas


*Sixth Rule: *Is the *First Rule* still valid? We need to keep that in
check always. As we move towards data transparency, DPWH will soon find
itself catching up, and volunteer mappers will also adjust to approximate
government plan (comparing with DOTC-LTFRB routes). At some point we will
close the GAP.


The reason we should be rushing things on DPWH routes (first phase),
because on the second phase, we will put all DOTC/LTFRB public transport
and truckers route in OSM's relation, and compare these public_transport
route data with DPWH, as well as opinion of private road users. This will
truly help us visualize the road that support the bulk of road users (which
is the correct trunk road).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/attachments/20150319/68b2cb19/attachment.html>


More information about the talk-ph mailing list