Is the Fairfax County GIS site (Virtual Fairfax) considered a good source for where state routes are? Is there perhaps a better source? I don’t find Virtual Fairfax as useful as the Loudoun County GIS site, since I don’t see a way to identify road segments.
I ask because I am working on updating the alternative names to the new VA-XXX or SR-XXX standard, and I want to verify where the routes start and end.
I had never heard of Virtual Fairfax until I saw this message (and I can’t get it to work on my computer at all). However, the old Fairfax GIS site, although probably even less convenient to use, has complete state route number information.
No offense, but this seems like a complete waste of time, since alternate names provide absolutely no information to users and aren’t used for routing except in a few odd corner cases. I mean, if you are active in an area with NO unresolved URs, MPs, or PURs, and ALL of the places in your area have complete address information and correct names and categories, and NO incorrect street names or incorrect turn arrows or unknown directions; then, by all means, have fun and update the alternate street names. But for most of us, there are more useful things we can do.
We were all over the map on ramp instructions so a standard was a good thing for that.
Yeah, changing all the alts is a waste of time unless you are trying to inflate your edit count. :?
It could also cause routing problems if done partially due to big detour prevention. (See alternate name discussion in the wiki article). Probably OK to do it from one end to the other, but definitely not from the middle then outwards and and take a break during a tile update.
Thanks to a post on the NY forum, this topic has now been re-animated like a zombie from the dead…
Since state specific shields in VA are only used on routes under 600 and the generic circle is above 600, we got it backwards. 
Apparently this is a feature request only at this point but according to SM ct13, implementation of the standard is now on hold until this gets sorted out…
Congrats to sez and richard for calling it right in the first place! 
What is the current status of this issues? I do think is does need to be swapped.
I think this is still suspended.
If you are adding or fixing a road, I would assume the US standard of SR-XXX or State Rte XXX
Is the usage of SR vs VA still being debated or is there a resolution yet?
It’s resolved. Someday we may even get shields on the map (where the route number is in the primary field – which is not many places)
Yeah!
Let’s not go crazy and “mass edit” roads though!
I use them to track our progress as I “walk” my managed and adjoining areas.
+1
no, wait…+1,000,000,000
None of the general policy guidelines should ever be seen as an encouragement towards mass editing.
Excellent, thanks! Like SeZAKxing mentioned, I do use these to track where I’ve updated in the more rural areas…