Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable roads

[nhanway]

I can't find the legend/key for the WSDOT FC Map, do they different types between Urban and Rural areas? In 2009 US DOT removed the urban/rural split and simplified things. The only thing that didn't line up was there was only one type of "Urban Collector" and there were "Rural Major Collector" & "Rural Minor Collector". "Urban Collector" & "Rural Major Collector" became "Major Collector".

In Connecticut, the most likely change at an Urban/Rural border was a "Principal Arterial - Other" changing to a "Minor Arterial". In our first version of the translation, we actually traced the route back to urban areas on both ends & if it changed back we kept it the same. The version that was proposed last year, changed the default type of "Minor Arterial", but we haven't implemented it yet because we are waiting for feedback from Ehud.

I was able to find this in the WSDOT FC guildlines PDF

While the original 1989 guidance document recommended “changing the functional classification when rural routes cross an urban boundary”, a follow-up addendum in 1991 said, “Instead of automatically upgrading the functional classification of a rural route that crosses an urban boundary, the rural classification may be continued inside the urban boundary until there is a more logical and acceptable place for a change at a point inside the urban boundary.” This 2012 guidance document reinforces the assertion of the 2008 memorandum which states that, “the practice of automatically upgrading the functional classification of a rural route that crosses an urban boundary should be phased out and eliminated. Upgrading the functional classification due to an actual change in function should be the operative criteria, rather than the location of the urban/rural boundary.”


So maybe these roads will slowly update in WSDOTS FC map. Some of the roads might have been mapped based on outdated guidelines.

[nnote]

The GIS map we are using for FC in AZ is from ADOT itself. We were provided with it after contacting ADOT and were very fortunate they provided it to us. While at first we were very sceptical about the states FC, we studied and debated it a lot before implementing it (we also had a variety of not such nice thoughts about the map and the persons responsible for it). As we studied it we found it to be very good and especially as we implemented it we found it to be actually very logical. It took a few to get used to something new... but me personally I see the sense in what it is. As far as rural and urban areas go, another AZ editor did a complete study an write up on this for us, Fredo-p will post his details on this in the thread soon.

[nnote]

I have to give a shout out to my AZ team, after much debating the official state gov FC GIS, on April 30th we decided to go for it. Almost two weeks later of non stop editing, ------- AZ FC is completed! ----------

[nnote]

In a style mentioned here a few posts back, in AZ we wanted to complete the FC before contemplating any changes, in order to have it fully completed and to be able to visually see that it's completed.
Now that we know it's completed we can now discuss changes that need to be made, and us folk in AZ have had some discussion on it. Instead of re -typing it, I'll copy and paste a post I made on our AZ G+ page....

"I've seen alot of places where it is dirt road, or not much of a road, but in FC it is a primary road. Looking at the wider picture (or zooming out...) I see reasonably that yes it may be a dirt road, or may be middle of no where, but for this geographical area... well, it most certainly is the primary road in and out of the area compared to the roads around it. Also I see some spots that leave you wondering why isn't a specific road a primary road... Again looking at the area I see that there are plenty of roads around it, and even if it is a larger road in the area, is it the only road in and out of the area, and is it the most direct route in and out of an area?"

Also along those lines regarding State Routes that have been downgraded to Primary road, I would say that those State Routes are a Primary road --through the middle of basically no man's land AZ, or Reservation area-- if that makes any sense. Also, one feeling I have on some SR's being primary, is that I highly doubt waze is going to divert you 40 miles to stay on higher classified roads, if that specific primary road cuts 40 miles off your trip.

One example I can give for a US Highway being downgraded from major to primary is
https://www.waze.com/editor/?lon=-109.3 ... 85&env=usa
Highway 191...
To travel this length of highway is actually a 6 hour drive, with no gas or stops available between towns... Most of the SR's that got downgraded exist in eastern AZ, and looking at them, there are little to no services available, very hilly and curvy or nothing but 2 lanes through the middle of nowhere desert or reservation territory. The issue about reservation roads have been brought up before, and part of the feeling about those also includes that all though they are open to public (mostly), it's not the the desire of literally those independent "nations" to have the public traversing their land as the public would over regular more major roads. The AZ FC that we got from the State government tends to show this also.
I myself am not against changing or modifying the State's FC, but with the sense I see in it, I will need a more the 'Just because' reason to do so.
As far as keeping things the same crossing state lines, we do need to look at this issue, but before time is spent debating it, if everyone looks they may find that their states FC does agree with the neighboring states FC where highways cross state lines. We can argue wiki etc etc, but if the FC's actually happen to agree, then what is the argument about?
I'm all for coming to a common classification for where roads cross state lines, but lets get the official data first, without making up our own. And where there's differences, lets discuss those.

[nzahn1]

Sorry, for chiming in late. I've been quietly following this thread for days, and this was the paragraph that I had to respond to:

Lightly-signed US highways are still US highways, even if it's kinda hard to follow them just using roadside signs. There's an interest in having them labeled consistently, especially since they'll be Major Highways on either side of the metropolitan area. Downgrading a road as it travels through an urbanized area is one of the things we want to avoid.

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).

ps. Please don't look at anything in baltimore, its a mess.

[nzahn1]

I think I once counted that it changes direction 100 times in ~12 miles ... or something like that.

Looks like a fun road to drive.

[nzahn1]

Second.

Its going to mean a lot of education on the behalf of champs/mentors though. Be sure to decimate the information in a clear and thoughtful manner to us AMs and junior editors.

[nzahn1]

Before we implement anything, can we make sure that the links to the functional classification maps for each state are available somewhere besides my Google spreadsheet? The proposed page says that we should check our state's Mapping Resources page, but not all states have one. Would it make more sense to have these links on a centralized page on the wiki rather than spread out on separate state pages--perhaps on the National Resources page? State wiki pages could have a functional classification section and then link to the central page, but it would seem to solve the problem of how to find the maps for the 20+ states without a resource page.

After I saw we were going live with this, I've spent a few hours on ARCGis making maps for Maryland. The state agency puts out a shape file, but I hoping to publish either an interactive or PDF map for our editors.

Lets just say it will take some time.

[nzahn1]

Hey all, can you all take a look at the Google Earth .kml file on this page and see if you would find it useful:

https://sites.google.com/site/nzahn1waze/resources

Our state doesn't provide (useful) interactive or static FC maps, and only some of the counties do. Therefore, I figured I could take their data and do a better job.

Feedback?

[nzahn1]

3) This last one I am not sure deserves to be on this page or not but users can download the actual GIS data available for a gis viewer (aka shapefiles). I do not mind leaving this option only on the NC wiki (I am not too sure how many folks would actually download the data). But does anyone see any benefit of listing it on this general FC page?

I would make sure at least one of the links is to the State's generic FC page not the GIS file itself (hopefully that has GIs data downloads). This way we wouldn't have to update the links every time the states update their GIS data.