[Talk-us] Trunk

[Evin Fairchild]

I think primary ought to be used for major state routes and minor US
routes, secondary for minor state routes, and tertiary for collector
arterials.

On Oct 14, 2017 9:23 PM, "Nathan Mills" <nathan at nwacg.net> wrote:

> I guess my question is why primary isn't good enough for the primary route
> between places that don't have higher grade roads connecting them? These
> important mostly two lane roads are perfectly fine as primary.
>
> In many cases primary routes happen to be divided, but in many cases they
> aren't. Having a simple distinction between the two by using trunk to mean
> non-motorway divided (or similar) preserves long-standing practice and
> generally seems like a good thing to me.
>
> -Nathan
>
> On October 14, 2017 11:18:43 PM EDT, Evin Fairchild <evindfair at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> I'm amazed that NE2's definition hasn't been removed after 7 years. It
>> must not have been that controversial or else someone would have removed
>> it. Seems like you just don't agree with his opinion and just really have
>> some personal problems with that guy. I know he engaged in some really dumb
>> stuff like unilaterally changing all the US highways to trunk and he
>> ultimately got banned for a turn restriction dispute with you over a parclo
>> interchange in Florida, but he's not the only one who believes that many US
>> highways are deserving of trunk status given the amount of traffic they
>> receive and their importance in a region's highway network.
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 9:43 PM, Evin Fairchild <evindfair at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 14, 2017 5:41 PM, "Paul Johnson" <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 7:28 PM, Evin Fairchild <evindfair at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 14, 2017 4:25 PM, "Paul Johnson" <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 6:08 PM, Evin Fairchild <evindfair at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Oct 14, 2017 2:04 PM, "Wolfgang Zenker" <wolfgang at lyxys.ka.sub.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> it looks to me that this discussion is going in circles, not forward
>>>>>> at the moment. IMHO it does not make a lot of sense to argue what
>>>>>> might
>>>>>> be the true meaning of "trunk". Instead, we should concentrate on what
>>>>>> it should mean, document this meaning if we can agree on one and don't
>>>>>> worry to much about what other maps or different parts of the world
>>>>>> think a "trunk" is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah, the whole reason why this discussion hasn't resulted in a
>>>>>> consensus for 7+ years is because people have dug in their heels so much
>>>>>> and said "trunk roads can only be divided highways, no its, ands, or buts."
>>>>>> I support what is written on the wiki that says that it is the second most
>>>>>> important road after motorway. I haven't seen a single compelling reason to
>>>>>> believe that trunk should only apply to divided highways. You can still
>>>>>> tell whether a trunk is divided at low zooms based on how thick the line is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm OK with single carriageway trunks, if they're controlled access,
>>>>> like, say, the Chickasaw Turnpike, and similarly constructed roads.  The
>>>>> single carriageway parts of US 395 or US 97 in eastern Oregon, US 400 in
>>>>> Kansas or US 75 in Oklahoma, though?  They're all solid primaries.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You actually think that US 97, the main artery thru Central Oregon
>>>>> that passes thru the Bend area which has a 75K population and a metro
>>>>> population of 100K shouldn't be connected to the outside world with a trunk
>>>>> road?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes.  Because for the majority of that length that isn't between US 20
>>>> and County Road 40 is, for all practical purposes, the same generic two
>>>> lane, shoulderless ribbon of pavement that pretty much any two lane Texas
>>>> FM or RM road, or pretty much any other similar road in the American west.
>>>> Primary is more than ample for such a road.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's not accurate to compare a US highway to some podunk FM/RM road
>>>> out in the middle of nowhere in Texas. US 97 has way more traffic and very
>>>> deserving of its trunk road designation. Most US highways are, except in
>>>> places where they parallel an interstate or other freeway. BTW, this is
>>>> what is written on the wiki.
>>>>
>>>
>>>  Which was updated by NE2 to skew towards his view of the situation.
>>> Any edits by him have negative value at this point.  Disconnect his reality
>>> from actual reality.
>>>
>>
>>
> --
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20171014/f9ccbd9c/attachment-0001.html>