On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 8:28 PM OSM Volunteer stevea <
stevea...@softworkers.com> wrote:
> In Santa Cruz, there is about 50 meters of highway=trunk between Highway
> 17 (freeway, motorway) and where 17 ends at signalized Ocean Street
> (highway=primary). At first I was nonplussed about this
Eric Ladner wrote
> That may be more of a note to motorists that "hey.. this freeway is coming to
> an end" rather than an absolute marker of "this freeway ends here at this
> sign". San Diego's own GIS system has it marked as I-8 all the way up to
> where it splits into motorway links at
That may be more of a note to motorists that "hey.. this freeway is coming
to an end" rather than an absolute marker of "this freeway ends here at
this sign".
San Diego's own GIS system has it marked as I-8 all the way up to where it
splits into motorway links at Nimitz/Sunset Cliffs.
Arguing
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018, 00:17 Albert Pundt or if the road becomes single-carriageway and isn't a super-2 (a
> controlled-access freeway in which only one carriageway is constructed with
> accommodation for the second later).
>
A controlled access single carriageway would also be a trunk, not a
Even at the end, that's still an intersection, though. In the real world,
there's a transition to be mafe from freeway to that less than freeway
situation at the traffic light.
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018, 23:02 Evin Fairchild What?! I haven't contradicted myself at all. I already said in my initial
>
I always tag based on the actual access control. At the end of a clear
freeway, continue the motorway tagging to the first intersection or
driveway, or if the road becomes single-carriageway and isn't a super-2 (a
controlled-access freeway in which only one carriageway is constructed with
I think this is a good general rule. In the instant case, the tagging should
change at the point where the grass median ends northbound, IMO. That marks a
definite change in the physical character of the road. I believe it was tagged
like that when the carriageways were first split after the
What?! I haven't contradicted myself at all. I already said in my initial
response (the one that I sent to only you by mistake) that in cases where
there's an at grade intersection sandwiched in between two interchanges,
the road should be marked as trunk in between. Other than that case, a road
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 10:02 PM Evin Fairchild wrote:
> Nobody is saying that we should tag as motorways a road with a surface
> intersection. I don't understand what it is that we're saying that's
> causing you to come to that conclusion. We are simply saying that the
> first surface
On 11/28/2018 10:36 PM, Nathan Mills wrote:
Adding the intersection did not change the character of the road south
of the Gilcrease extension or the rights of adjacent landowners, so I
don't see any particular reason to reclassify that segment.
If we're looking for a generalized rule,
In California some roads have signs that say “End Freeway”, about 1/2 mile
before the first intersection, eg I-8 in San Diego.
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 1:04 PM Evin Fairchild wrote:
> Nobody is saying that we should tag as motorways a road with a surface
> intersection. I don't understand what it
Nobody is saying that we should tag as motorways a road with a surface
intersection. I don't understand what it is that we're saying that's
causing you to come to that conclusion. We are simply saying that the first
surface intersection that a road comes across is where the motorway should
change
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 9:36 PM Nathan Mills wrote:
> Unless there have been significant changes since I moved away, it should
> be tagged motorway between the IDL and the light at Apache/Gilcrease
> Extension. Before the Gilcrease was extended west of US-75, the Tisdale
> should have been
Unless there have been significant changes since I moved away, it should be
tagged motorway between the IDL and the light at Apache/Gilcrease Extension.
Before the Gilcrease was extended west of US-75, the Tisdale should have been
tagged entirely as motorway. Adding the intersection did not
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 9:00 PM Evin Fairchild wrote:
> I think you're misrepresenting the discussion. People are simply saying
> that the motorway destination should extend all the way to the first at
> grade intersection, rather than the interchange prior to the at grade
> intersection.
-- Forwarded message -
From: Evin Fairchild
Date: Wed, Nov 28, 2018, 6:42 PM
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway
To: Paul Johnson
I think you're misrepresenting the discussion. People are simply saying
that the motorway destination should extend all the way to the
16 matches
Mail list logo
