Re: [Talk-us] highway=trunk for NHS routes?

On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Mark Wagner wrote: > On Sat, 31 Dec 2016 12:22:04 -0500 > Bill Ricker wrote: > > > On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 4:21 AM, Volker Schmidt > > wrote: > > > > > You can find detailed PDF maps of all NHS

Re: [Talk-us] highway=trunk for NHS routes?

On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Richard Welty wrote: > On 12/31/16 4:19 PM, Kerry Irons wrote: > > > > Not to cloud this discussion, but be aware that at least some states > > refer to “county trunk” roads at the county level. Near as I can tell > > that simply means

Re: [Talk-us] highway=trunk for NHS routes?

On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 8:26 AM, Bill Ricker wrote: > But we do need to seriously examine if our US definition of trunk/primary > in lieu of UK M/A/B system is fit for purpose outside the compact urban > zones, and then what to do that can serve both the feeder of a cluster

Re: [Talk-us] highway=trunk for NHS routes?

On 12/31/16 4:19 PM, Kerry Irons wrote: > > Not to cloud this discussion, but be aware that at least some states > refer to “county trunk” roads at the county level. Near as I can tell > that simply means “major” vs. “minor” roads at the county level > without rigid criteria to define them.

Re: [Talk-us] highway=trunk for NHS routes?

On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 8:09 AM, Volker Schmidt wrote: > I have just come across this NHS road that I know well: [1] > This is a winding mountain road, two lanes, many parts without shoulder. > > ​And the only/best thru road through these mountains; access from LA to multiple

Re: [Talk-us] highway=trunk for NHS routes?

> > Both appear to be well maintained in the photos; the width of paving > greatly exceeds the two marked lanes. Out where "50 Miles to Next Gas" > signs still live, this is a major road. > > US160 is the most significant road for literally miles. ​ > US180 is the tourist main feeder to the Grand

Re: [Talk-us] highway=trunk for NHS routes?

populated areas are not. Kerry Irons From: Bill Ricker [mailto:bill.n1...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2016 12:22 PM To: Volker Schmidt <vosc...@gmail.com> Cc: talk-us@openstreetmap.org Openstreetmap <talk-us@openstreetmap.org> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] highway=trunk fo

Re: [Talk-us] highway=trunk for NHS routes?

On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 4:21 AM, Volker Schmidt wrote: > You can find detailed PDF maps of all NHS Routes, state-by-state at a web > page of the Federal Highway Administration > ​[...]. On these maps you will find plenty of NHS roads that are > definitively not trunk roads. >

Re: [Talk-us] highway=trunk for NHS routes?

voschix wrote: > The answer is definitely NO. > You can find detailed PDF maps of all NHS Routes, state-by-state at a > web page of the Federal Highway Administration [1]. On these maps > you will find plenty of NHS roads that are definitively not trunk roads. > Just two examples in Arizona: [2]

Re: [Talk-us] highway=trunk for NHS routes?

As a general rule, should highway=trunk be used for routes on the National > Highway System? Considering that those routes are generally more backbone > routes, more important than a lot of primary routes, it makes sense that > they should be tagged with trunk. > --Roadsguy > The answer is

Re: [Talk-us] highway=trunk for NHS routes?

On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Volker Schmidt wrote: > > As a general rule, should highway=trunk be used for routes on the National >> Highway System? Considering that those routes are generally more backbone >> routes, more important than a lot of primary routes, it makes

Re: [Talk-us] highway=trunk for NHS routes?

> As a general rule, should highway=trunk be used for routes on the National > Highway System? Considering that those routes are generally more backbone > routes, more important than a lot of primary routes, it makes sense that > they should be tagged with trunk. > --Roadsguy > The formulation on