Functional Classification in Mississippi

Moderators: MapSir, karlcr9911

Re: Functional Classification in Mississippi

Postby bart99gt » Wed Dec 17, 2014 11:20 pm

Yep. OK, I think that clears everything up. I'll make changes to the MS wiki to reflect this conversation.
bart99gt
Country Manager
Country Manager
 
Posts: 500
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:53 pm
Location: Olive Branch, MS
Has thanked: 93 times
Been thanked: 226 times

Re: Functional Classification in Mississippi

Postby sketch » Wed Dec 17, 2014 10:59 pm

Just pick up the rural classification. By that I assume you mean pick the lower of the two alternatives.
sketch
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5852
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:13 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA
Has thanked: 1389 times
Been thanked: 1882 times

Re: Functional Classification in Mississippi

Postby bart99gt » Wed Dec 17, 2014 10:57 pm

Yep, that's it.

So following the above, say the second urban area isn't there (for instance, it is a county road that at best intersects a state or US highway 10 miles away), I have been usually just going straight to the rural classification at the end of the urban area. Would it be more appropriate to keep the urban classification going, even though said road never enters another urban area, or just pick up the rural classification as I have been doing?
bart99gt
Country Manager
Country Manager
 
Posts: 500
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:53 pm
Location: Olive Branch, MS
Has thanked: 93 times
Been thanked: 226 times

Re: Functional Classification in Mississippi

Postby sketch » Wed Dec 17, 2014 9:21 pm

Oh, I think I may have either misread or misunderstood your hypothetical.

Code: Select all
  URBAN      ]]     rural     rural       rural     [[   URBAN
--Princ Art--]]-Minor Art---{Interstate}--Maj Coll--[[-Minor Art--
    Major       Major/Minor               Minor/PS     Minor


I reread it and I think this is what you're saying – top row is urban vs. rural area; bottom row is corresponding Waze type. In this case, I would choose Major and Minor respectively for the two sections: Major to extend the urban grid to the Interstate intersection; Minor to give continuity between the two urban areas when the type in both urban areas is at least Minor Arterial. Is this making sense?
sketch
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5852
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:13 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA
Has thanked: 1389 times
Been thanked: 1882 times

Re: Functional Classification in Mississippi

Postby bart99gt » Wed Dec 17, 2014 4:54 am

Well, I proofread my prior response, and that should have said Major Collector instead of Major Arterial. But I think the same concept still applies.
bart99gt
Country Manager
Country Manager
 
Posts: 500
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:53 pm
Location: Olive Branch, MS
Has thanked: 93 times
Been thanked: 226 times

Re: Functional Classification in Mississippi

Postby sketch » Wed Dec 17, 2014 4:41 am

Only when it's a Rural Minor Arterial through that rural area, which does suggest a relatively high-traffic function, though perhaps not quite to the level of a Principal Arterial. Still, an arterial nonetheless.
sketch
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5852
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:13 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA
Has thanked: 1389 times
Been thanked: 1882 times

Re: Functional Classification in Mississippi

Postby bart99gt » Wed Dec 17, 2014 4:34 am

OK, I've gotcha.

I guess my main hang up/point of confusion is I was imagining that you could potentially convert a road to a major highway over a very long distance simply because it was a Primary Arterial through a city, when said road may not really be intended for that function by the DOT further down the road.

So let me pose one last question, if said road never became anything better than a Major Arterial after passing the interstate, never enters another urban area, and did not otherwise qualify to be a mH (ie., not a State Hwy, BR, LOOP, etc.) would you just drop the road to a PS anyway? Or maybe just carry the higher classification until its next intersection with another classified road?
bart99gt
Country Manager
Country Manager
 
Posts: 500
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:53 pm
Location: Olive Branch, MS
Has thanked: 93 times
Been thanked: 226 times

Re: Functional Classification in Mississippi

Postby sketch » Wed Dec 17, 2014 4:15 am

No, that would only be appropriate if there weren't a Major Collector portion at all. The moment it becomes Major Collector, Major Hwy is not an option (unless it's a US Highway).

The way you've been doing it is good. In your example, I would carry the MH through to the Interstate, then continue as mH after that, even if it weren't a state highway – the higher of the two types available for a Major Collector, because the road is Major Highway on both ends, and Minor Highway is the higher type available for Major Collectors.

I think I'm having a hard time explaining this clearly but I'm kinda pressed for time at the moment. Basically, if it would result in continuity – whether perfect or not – choose the higher option. By "imperfect continuity" I mean that, if it's what's available to you, having the road switch from MH to mH to, later, MH again makes more sense than MH to PS to MH.

Anyway, continuing it to the Interstate is a very good practice, and an important exercise in grid continuity, which is a concept I've been wanting to speak on for a while but which I haven't had much time for yet.
sketch
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5852
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:13 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA
Has thanked: 1389 times
Been thanked: 1882 times

Re: Functional Classification in Mississippi

Postby bart99gt » Wed Dec 17, 2014 1:44 am

I understand wanting to keep consistency between two closely spaced urban areas.

However, and I may be a little foggy on this, does this mean we should keep the urban classification between two urban areas that are say, 40-50 miles apart?

I only say this because it isn't uncommon for some roads to be a Primary Arterial in an urban area, drop to a Minor Arterial on the rural map, then at some point drop down to a Major Collector.

For example, you have State Hwy 1 that is the main route through the middle of town A and is 4 lanes. Once it hits the city limits, it goes down to 2 lanes, and the rural map says it is now a Minor Arterial. A mile or so outside of town, the road has an interchange with an adjacent interstate, and on the other side of the interstate, State Hwy 1 becomes a Major Collector on the rural map. 30 miles down the road, it enters another urban area (town B), in another county, and becomes a Minor Arterial.

Now, the way I have been doing things is I would take the urban classification all the way to the interchange with the interstate, then beyond there, I would demote the road only down to a mH because it is a state highway. But you're saying that it should be carried all the way to the other urban area as a MH?
bart99gt
Country Manager
Country Manager
 
Posts: 500
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:53 pm
Location: Olive Branch, MS
Has thanked: 93 times
Been thanked: 226 times

Re: Functional Classification in Mississippi

Postby sketch » Tue Dec 16, 2014 7:51 pm

bart99gt wrote:I made an edit to one of the footnotes on the FC chart to clear things up a bit. I've seen a few sections of road that were improperly classified and I think it may be due to some confusion about how to interpret the chart.

Basically, as per the discussion above, if there is more than one choice in the chart, default to the LOWER of the two.

My personal preference is to carry the urban classification (if it is higher than the surrounding rural one) out far enough to provide a transition from the urban to rural environment (if someone needs examples, just ask), and to keep a road from changing classification(s) back and forth because it skips in and out of an urban area.

Remember, the chart is a MINIMUM classification. If you feel, that in your judgement, that a road should be classified higher, then do so. These maps only get updated every few years, so roads may have been widened, reconfigured, etc...

This seems more or less consistent with what I meant. The point is that a road shouldn't drop down in type between two urban areas, it should remain consistent through its rural stretch.

So if a road is Minor Hwy in one urban area, then goes thru rural where it could be Minor Hwy or PS, then gets to another urban area where it's Minor Hwy, then Minor Hwy should be chosen. In other words, this is the situation that overcomes the default lower choice.

Otherwise, the lower of the two is fine, for example if the road is PS in one urban area, PS or Minor between, and Minor in the next urban area, then PS is fine.

That may be what you're saying anyway, I just wasn't clear. The "far enough to provide a transition" language is what threw me off.
sketch
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5852
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:13 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA
Has thanked: 1389 times
Been thanked: 1882 times

Next

Return to Mississippi

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron