[Talk-us] directions of ways in MassGIS data
ezekielf at gmail.com
Tue Feb 3 00:13:49 GMT 2009
After looking at the satellite imagery of Mass Route 2, I definitely agree
that it should be a trunk road for most of the way with sections of
Motorway. I think it's physical characteristics by themselves fit these
classifications. Thats a good point about Motorways being completely
unsuitable, if not illegal, for bike/pedestrian/equestrian traffic. Do you
think Trunk roads should be considered suitable, if not ideal, for this type
I like your line of thinking about Trunk being used for roads that are most
appropriate for long haul traffic. In areas where Motorways are few and far
between, sometimes a two lane road is the main long distance route. Maybe
roads like these should be classified as Trunk even though they aren't quite
up to Trunk standards?
Take western Vermont as an example again:
US Highway 7 is the main north/south route connecting the major towns of
Burlington, Rutland, and Bennington because no motorway exists on that side
of the state. For most of it's length US 7 is a two lane road, but it has
sections with 3 or 4 lanes, and sections with limited access. Currently
it's tagged as Primary for most of the way with sections of Trunk, but maybe
it should be tagged as Trunk since it's the only main route in the area.
What do you think?
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Chris Lawrence <lordsutch at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Zeke Farwell <ezekielf at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Two examples of where I have used Trunk are US 4 and US 7 near Rutland,
> > http://openstreetmap.com/?lat=43.538&lon=-73.084&zoom=11&layers=B000FFF
> > Route 7 south of Rutland is sometimes divided, sometimes not. It has
> > interchanges, but they are all same grade. It also has regular
> > intersections. It has characteristics of Primary and Motorway, so I
> > classified it as Trunk.
> > Route 4 west of Rutland is completely divided, two lanes each way, it has
> > limited access, and all of it's interchanges are grade separated. It
> > the description of a Motorway, but on either end it degrades to a Primary
> > road, and it doesn't connect to any other Motorways. Because it doesn't
> > connect to the greater Motorway network, I classified it as Trunk.
> I think an important thing to consider when choosing the
> classification is that motorway implies that the road is completely
> unsuitable for pedestrian, equestrian, and bicycle traffic (often that
> traffic would be illegal). If there is a significant stretch (more
> than 2 consecutive interchanges) of continuous full control of access,
> or an official source (e.g. the state DOT map) shows it as a freeway,
> I'd tag those parts with motorway even if this leads to something
> disconnected from the broader "network."
> The trunk/primary distinction on the other hand is more a subjective
> call based on the importance of the route and how appropriate it is
> for through traffic over the "long haul" - e.g. a route that is the
> next best thing to a continuous freeway/motorway. Route 2 is clearly
> a major through route in Mass. so the parts that aren't up to freeway
> standards probably should be tagged as trunk. And the significant
> parts that are should be motorway.
> IMHO of course ;-)
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-us