[talk-ph] Fwd: Your final say on the proposed road classification scheme

[Jherome Miguel]

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Jherome Miguel <jheromemiguel at gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: [talk-ph] Your final say on the proposed road classification
scheme
To: Timeo Gut <timeo.gut at hotmail.com>


Those aren’t route references, but an abbreviation of the Arroyo-era name
Strong Republic Nautical Highway (which is signed to some degree), which is
today simply called the Nautical Highway or RORO system. I’ll suggest
adding the West, Central or East Nautical Highway as an alternative name
and a prefix for ferry routes forming the system (which I’ve done with
Batangas-Calapan, Dumaguete-Dapitan and Cataingan-Polambato)

I can follow up the restoration of trunk status to the Route 502 and 503
routings (including reroutings to bypass Kalibo and Makato town proper,
which will remain primary, Kalibo being a provincial capital). Route 5 to
Roxas will remain trunk, by the way, ending at the city plaza and rotonda
(major routes ending at roundabouts are completely fine as an exception to
the connectivity guideline).

For the lone trunk route within Masbate, it doesn’t have enough traffic to
satisfy trunk status, primarily serves medium-sizes towns and a small city,
and is also isolated from other trunk roads. This example reminds me of a
previous attempt to use trunk classification for any metaphorical “trunk”
road of every province or region, which I have been critical of for various
reasons, not only for creating bad connectivity of the national road
network but also ignoring other factors that affect classification like
traffic usage (that is generally dependent on the size of major
destinations served) and official designation, is optimized for truck and
bus routing (but not all other road users), and is not aligned with the
international usage of the trunk tag as the most important roads of a
country that is not controlled access.

On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 10:53 PM Timeo Gut <timeo.gut at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Due to the low traffic volume served by Batangas-Roxas RoRo I would
> rather view this as a complementary shortcut than an integral part of
> the core road network. I would find it preferable to follow the
> alignment of the Western Nautical Highway i.e. shift trunk from Route
> 505 to Route 503/502. This would also complete the north-south backbone
> of Panay.
>
> For the same reason I'd be in favor of downgrading Masbate leg of
> Central Nautical Highway to primary. Given the infrequent ferry service
> it seems that there's just not enough traffic using this section as a
> thoroughfare to justify trunk classification. This would also be more
> consistent relative to the Bohol-Camiguin-Balingoan section.
>
> Talking about Nautical Highways, does anyone know if there actually are
> SRNH ref markers anywhere along these routes? If not maybe we could
> shift this denotation from ref tags to alt_name or short_name.
>
>
> On 2021-06-12 02:42, Jherome Miguel wrote:
> > A route would be marked trunk if it serves two large cities (see list
> > on proposal page) or metro areas. Some trunk routings with ferry
> > segments under the proposal follow Nautical Highway routes. I have
> > marked Route 505 (Arnaldo Boulevard and Baybay in Roxas City) as trunk
> > in the present and future schemes, but if you're suggesting trunk
> > routings with a ferry segment should have multiple scheduled trips
> > every day or the ferry leaving full, which is not the case here due to
> > long trip length (Batangas-Roxas direct being ~17 hours long), then I
> > can drop that in favor of the Mindoro and Caticlan routing. Would also
> > like to note this with the Central Nautical Highway routing
> > (Legazpi-Pilar-Aroroy-Masbate City-Cataingan-Bogo-Cebu
> > City-Tubigon-Jagna-Camiguin-Balingoan). While the Cebu-Legazpi legs of
> > this route, currently tagged trunk, provides a shortcut to the usual
> > routing between the two cities via Eastern Visayas, the Cataingan-Bogo
> > leg has infrequent ferry service, and the Masbate segments downgraded
> > to primary (the Cebu-Bogo legs would remain trunk as it connects with
> > the Bogo-Palompon ferry that forms the Cebu-Ormoc trunk routing); same
> > goes with the Cebu-Bohol-Camiguin-Balingoan legs, which have been long
> > tagged primary.
> > _______________________________________________
> > talk-ph mailing list
> > talk-ph at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk-ph mailing list
> talk-ph at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/attachments/20210701/edeb965b/attachment.htm>