Mon Mar 17, 2014 3:28 pm
sketch wrote:In Detroit I saw a much bigger difference (because Detroit's much bigger and has way more roads to choose from); basically where it used to make me backtrack to get on the nearest freeway entrance, it now sends me along a Principal Arterial (Major Highway) or two for a few miles to get to the next useful freeway entrance downstream. It actually saves a couple minutes.
russblau wrote:Comment: in general, I think FC is a good basis for assigning road type; I think the references to route numbering should be removed. In practice, there is a fairly high degree of correlation between route numbering and road function, but it is definitely not 100%. In those cases where a US highway serves the function of a minor highway because it travels along a narrow street with traffic lights and driveways, or where a state highway serves the function of a major highway because it has few intersections and permits high-speed through travel, the road's function should take precedence over its numbering.
dbraughlr wrote:I would like to see the rationale documented for the exception for ramps to be used for at-grade connectors.
dbraughlr wrote:I believe that primary street should be used for the main road linking two rural towns (and presumably thus the main street through the town) when no higher classification applies (which is often the case). This could well require local knowledge of the editor rather than a published document. Functionally the street is the primary route even though there isn't much traffic.
Mon Mar 17, 2014 6:18 pm
sketch wrote:I don't think I can think of any situation where a user might upgrade a road type without approval.
Mon Mar 17, 2014 6:50 pm
sketch wrote:I don't envision that champs/RCs will have too hard a time understanding why other champs/RCs have made these determinations. Perhaps oversight via posting all such determinations to a state's Wiki or forum will be sufficient.
Wed Mar 19, 2014 4:59 pm
qwaletee wrote:Never a downgrade?
Wed Mar 19, 2014 6:15 pm
Wed Mar 19, 2014 8:24 pm
sketch wrote:Perhaps a note should be added to "street" type to say that it should only be used for paved local roads.
Say something like we use the functional class with the exceptions that a road can be upgraded based on local knowledge of function to produce better routing (what happened to the idea that a city wants people to use certain roads and not cut through on residential streets even if they are faster?), or downgraded to dirt where local knowledge is that the road does not really serve its designated function because there is a paved alternative.
Thu Mar 20, 2014 2:58 pm
CBenson wrote:So in the freeway definition it is stated that there should be "no at-grade intersections." I think that US-50 in this stretch meets the requirement for no at-grade intersections and the exit and entrance roads are not at-grade connectors and are thus properly ramps. However, given the current guidance and the proposed guidance if you interpret these access points "at-grade" then the US-50 would be a major highway and the exits and entrances should not be ramps.
I would state that if you can't cross the highway without either passing over or under the highway then all exits and entrances with acceleration and deceleration lanes along that highway should be considered "grade-separated."
Sat Mar 29, 2014 4:28 am
nzahn1 wrote:It may come under exceptions to the rule, but I would never consider US-40 through Downtown Baltimore to be a Major Highway in any respect. With only 1-2 lanes getting by in some sections, and average speeds less that 20 mph, I would never expect to get routed via US-40 if I was crossing the city. I would consider it a waste of waze's routing engine's time if it considered US-40 as an option (all .05 seconds).
Mon Apr 07, 2014 2:07 pm
dbraughlr wrote:I don't see how your statement "It's not a freeway" is somehow more valid than my statement "It is not a major highway either".
Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:00 pm