[Talk-us] Mass Change of Highway Classification in Larimer County Colorado

[Evin Fairchild]

I find it surprising that unpaved roads are considered part of the NHS. Do
you think you could provide some examples?

I haven't looked that closely at the Midwest and plains states but I have
taken a quick look at some of them and ISTM that most of the rural routes
that are NHS are major state routes and US routes. Highly doubt that any of
those are unpaved in 2021 but I could be wrong...

-Evin


On Tue, May 4, 2021, 3:54 PM Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:

> Oh, well, if we're going by the NHS, it's time to retag a *lot* of
> roads in the midwest that aren't even paved as trunk...  seriously the
> NHS is even more arbitrary than just mapping trunk to expressways and
> then piecing things together based on characteristics.
>
> On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 5:10 PM Evin Fairchild <evindfair at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > But the wiki clearly states that the trunk tag has to do with importance
> rather than physical characteristics. The NHS defines roads that are the
> most important. Heck, in most states the speed you can drive on a divided
> highway is the same as on most straight two lane roads.
> >
> > It's not classification creep to define the most important non-freeway
> roads as trunk. If you have an authoritative source as a basis for the
> trunk designation, you're not going to have to worry about people tagging
> roads between two small towns as trunk. You can simply explain to the
> person that that road isn't in the NHS, politely ask them to change it
> back, and move on with your life.
> >
> > -Evin
> >
> > On Tue, May 4, 2021, 2:55 PM Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 4:28 PM Evin Fairchild <evindfair at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I'd say it's pretty well connected given the terrain. In Colorado,
> there are several east-west roads across the Rockies aside from I-70. These
> roads are generally pretty straight and fast, something that can't be said
> for many roads in the Appalachians (aside from the ADHS corridors), and
> that contributes to the isolation of much of Appalachia.
> >> >
> >> > Personally, I'm in agreement with Brian that continuity is important.
> I find it kind of visually jarring when roads change back and forth between
> trunk and primary when they switch between being divided to undivided.
> >>
> >> I think it reflects the ground truth as it moves between expressway
> >> and an ordinary highway.
> >>
> >> > It seems that the trunk thing keeps coming up over and over again and
> we can never come to an agreement over what roads should be tagged as
> trunk. So I would like to propose that we tag as trunk any road that is
> part of the National Highway System, which is a network of roads that
> includes the Interstate Highway System as well as other roads that are
> "important to the nation’s economy, defense, and mobility." See link below:
> >>
> >> Against this.  I think the existing practice, where trunk is
> >> equivalent to expressways as they exist in the US: motorway-like, but
> >> not quite there.  So like a single carriageway that is limited and
> >> controlled access, or a dual carriageway that is a mix of controlled
> >> and uncontrolled access and high speed, works sufficiently well.  Plus
> >> do we really want to fall into the typical American stereotype of
> >> exaggerating what we are on something like this?  Let's avoid upward
> >> classification creep.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20210504/436da843/attachment-0001.htm>