Author Topic: usams (Mississippi State Highways)  (Read 1928 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline froggie

  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 464
  • Last Login:Today at 09:53:14 am
usams (Mississippi State Highways)
« on: October 23, 2016, 10:23:43 am »
I have (slowly) begun work on adding Mississippi state highways, starting with their 1/2-digit routes (1 to 76).  The two primary sources for determining route designation are MDOT's 2014 Selected Statistics book (most recent year), which includes a route log, and their State Designated/State Maintained map, most recently updated two months ago (August, 2016).  Both sources are available online under the Planning Division part of MDOT's website.

Directional routing should be pretty straightforward.  All even routes are signed east-west and all odd-routes are signed north-south, even if they geographically have a different direction (such as MS 315).

Three-digit routes will be added in a future phase, at least through the 600s.  One issue that will have to be considered down the road are the 7xx, 8xx, and 9xx routes.  Historically, these were hidden routes.  However, some of them (such as MS 792 south of Columbus and MS 854 near NAS Meridian) have been signed in recent years.  I have three ideas how to address this:

- Not include any of the 7xx-9xx routes
- Include only those routes that are signed.  This would require a significant research effort to locate and attempt to find signage...impossible for me to do in the field now.
- Include all 7xx-9xx routes

Suggests/comments are welcome.

I have a similar issue with "locally maintained" routes.  These are state-designated routes or route segments, but are not maintained by MDOT.  For the most part (based on my past experience, since I was stationed in Mississippi twice for a total of 7 years), they're unsigned.  However, there are a number of these locally maintained route segments (including MS 50, MS 430, and MS 537) that are in between MDOT-maintained segments.  My inkling is to include these locally maintained segments if they'e directly connected to a state-maintained segment, even if the locally-maintained leg is unsigned (as is also the case with at least one part of US 11 within Mississippi).  Looking for suggestions on how to address this.

Offline mapcat

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 853
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 10:13:33 pm
Re: usams (Mississippi State Highways)
« Reply #1 on: October 23, 2016, 02:27:45 pm »
Great to know that you're working on these!

Since the general guidelines seem to be to include signed routes and ignore unsigned routes, to me it would make sense to include the signed 600, 700, and 800 series. As for researching whether or not they're signed, I can't see how using GMSV would be improper for this. If any lack imagery, leave them out until someone can field-check.

For the non-state-maintained routes, I agree with you that only those connected to a signed state-maintained segment deserve to be included. In the off chance that one of these is signed (formerly state-maintained, perhaps?) I'd be inclined to include it.
Clinched:

Offline froggie

  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 464
  • Last Login:Today at 09:53:14 am
Re: usams (Mississippi State Highways)
« Reply #2 on: October 24, 2016, 07:15:47 am »
Quote
As for researching whether or not they're signed, I can't see how using GMSV would be improper for this.

Because Mississippi has some big GMSV holes as far as recent coverage.  Much of the state's coverage still dates back to 2008-09.  GMSV also has a tendency to not go down some of these lesser roadways...the type these 7xx-9xx route numbers are most likely to be on.

Quote
For the non-state-maintained routes, I agree with you that only those connected to a signed state-maintained segment deserve to be included. In the off chance that one of these is signed (formerly state-maintained, perhaps?) I'd be inclined to include it.

Here, it gets murky, because Mississippi is by far not the only state that has such state-designated but locally-maintained routes.  This was before your time, but it was a big sticking point for getting Vermont activated on the old CHM.  A number of NYS routes are also locally-maintained.

Offline michih

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1637
  • Last Login:Today at 02:54:55 am
Re: usams (Mississippi State Highways)
« Reply #3 on: October 24, 2016, 07:30:47 am »
- Include only those routes that are signed.  This would require a significant research effort to locate and attempt to find signage...impossible for me to do in the field now.

I have a general question. What's the reason why unsigned roads are not drafted?

If there's official data (e.g. map of the road authority) and it's "signed" on maps and GPS, I see no reason why to exclude these routes.
Quite the contrary, I've seen signs on (European) roads which are not dedicated like the signs show! For instance, road numbers on signs at roads which just head to the indicated road...

Offline yakra

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2074
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 12:42:58 am
Re: usams (Mississippi State Highways)
« Reply #4 on: October 24, 2016, 12:50:26 pm »
Here, it gets murky, because Mississippi is by far not the only state that has such state-designated but locally-maintained routes.  This was before your time, but it was a big sticking point for getting Vermont activated on the old CHM.  A number of NYS routes are also locally-maintained.
The real kicker here for Tim on CHM was how a different style of route marker usually appeared on the town-maintained sections. (He was also conflating this with the concept of VT's Town Highways, something that I don't think we were ever able to straighten him out on before just kinda giving up...) Contrast that against NYS, or even ME & NH having the same style route marker on locally maintained sections.

I have a general question. What's the reason why unsigned roads are not drafted?

If there's official data (e.g. map of the road authority) and it's "signed" on maps and GPS, I see no reason why to exclude these routes.
The idea was to have a system that matches, as close as we can get it, what's actually posted out there in the field. Something accessible that Joe Traveler can understand and follow signs for, and not esoteric obscurity that only makes sense to hardcore roadgeeks.

Offline michih

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1637
  • Last Login:Today at 02:54:55 am
Re: usams (Mississippi State Highways)
« Reply #5 on: October 24, 2016, 01:15:01 pm »
The idea was to have a system that matches, as close as we can get it, what's actually posted out there in the field.

I think most of the drafting work must be spent to fulfill this requirement.

Something accessible that Joe Traveler can understand and follow signs for, and not esoteric obscurity that only makes sense to hardcore roadgeeks.

I don't think that he can remember all road signs. I think today's Joe Traveler is just useing GPS which usually have these "esoteric data".

Why to spend a lot of effort on it? Just because a rule was set in stone?
Why not updating rules to today's occurrences?

Well, froggie asked and I think we could discuss it. If mayority is refusing, I'll accept the decision.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2016, 01:17:28 pm by michih »

Offline bejacob

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 131
  • Last Login:August 14, 2019, 03:48:37 pm
Re: usams (Mississippi State Highways)
« Reply #6 on: October 24, 2016, 04:29:13 pm »
I won't swear to it, but aren't there already some unsigned routes in the system? I don't recall seeing any signage for ID US95SprPay. Seems that the same was true in OK on US69BusDur/US75BusDur. Lots of "To US69" and "To US75" signs along the way, but nothing indicating the bannered routes.

These would be cases that the only way anyone would know to try to clinch these routes would be to research it here first. I think it's safe to say these route are official. It's just that there is no signage along the route. Perhaps business and spur routes might be different than unsigned primary routes. Just my two cents.

Offline oscar

  • TM Collaborator
  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 773
  • Last Login:Today at 10:11:26 am
    • Hot Springs and Highways pages
Re: usams (Mississippi State Highways)
« Reply #7 on: October 24, 2016, 05:29:04 pm »
I won't swear to it, but aren't there already some unsigned routes in the system? I don't recall seeing any signage for ID US95SprPay. Seems that the same was true in OK on US69BusDur/US75BusDur. Lots of "To US69" and "To US75" signs along the way, but nothing indicating the bannered routes.

These would be cases that the only way anyone would know to try to clinch these routes would be to research it here first. I think it's safe to say these route are official. It's just that there is no signage along the route. Perhaps business and spur routes might be different than unsigned primary routes. Just my two cents.

In Idaho, I flagged some unsigned spur routes I noticed while clinching them. They were promptly removed from what was then CHM's database.

There are some exceptions we've made to the rule, most notably for unsigned Interstates like I-595 in MD and I-444 in OK. I think there may be other exceptions for non-U.S. systems.

Offline Bickendan

  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 288
  • Last Login:Today at 08:08:20 am
Re: usams (Mississippi State Highways)
« Reply #8 on: October 25, 2016, 03:58:50 am »
Also, Oregon's actually pretty bad about unsigned routes. The 2002 decision to sign them was what prompted the whole system to be included, but as I've noticed during my travels across the state, it's spotty and inconsistent at best. I really, really need to finish cleaning up the Routes set to bring them up to our standards, and this will include 'removing' the unsigned Routes -- quotes used, because since they're intended to be signed but aren't, I'll be moving them into a new Highways set.

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 936
  • Last Login:Today at 12:17:56 pm
Re: usams (Mississippi State Highways)
« Reply #9 on: October 25, 2016, 05:00:58 am »
One issue that will have to be considered down the road are the 7xx, 8xx, and 9xx routes.  Historically, these were hidden routes.  However, some of them (such as MS 792 south of Columbus and MS 854 near NAS Meridian) have been signed in recent years.  I have three ideas how to address this:

- Not include any of the 7xx-9xx routes
- Include only those routes that are signed.  This would require a significant research effort to locate and attempt to find signage...impossible for me to do in the field now.
- Include all 7xx-9xx routes
Include routes you know to be signed, and not do much research on the others, waiting for people to say "this route is signed" before including it?

Offline Jim

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1510
  • Last Login:Today at 10:08:03 am
Re: usams (Mississippi State Highways)
« Reply #10 on: October 25, 2016, 08:36:56 am »
Every state has its quirks.  When drafting usany, I was fortunate that documentation and signage (almost) always match.  The "touring routes" are signed and part of usany, and the "reference route" are not, and are not included (even the erroneously signed 990V).  I have vague interest in adding reference routes as a separate system some day for completeness but primarily for better connectivity in my academic project's graph data.  The big exception are the truck routes that we included based only on signage and don't really know if we have them all.  Adding and removing them based on field reports and painful GMSV research isn't a great way to run things.

Then in drafting usama, we broke up the "A" routes even though I recall that officially they're concurrent with the parent route between segments.  We also included the signed 2A in Shelburne Falls, even though it's not an official state route.

Seems to me a good approach for usams might be to put the signed sections of the 7xx-9xx routes into a separate system that might never get activated.  They'd be there for those who want to see and clinch them but would remain preview until we could somehow be confident we had an accurate collection.

Offline mapmikey

  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 415
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 06:09:44 pm
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: usams (Mississippi State Highways)
« Reply #11 on: October 25, 2016, 08:59:22 pm »


Because Mississippi has some big GMSV holes as far as recent coverage.  Much of the state's coverage still dates back to 2008-09.  GMSV also has a tendency to not go down some of these lesser roadways...the type these 7xx-9xx route numbers are most likely to be on.


Here, it gets murky, because Mississippi is by far not the only state that has such state-designated but locally-maintained routes.  This was before your time, but it was a big sticking point for getting Vermont activated on the old CHM.  A number of NYS routes are also locally-maintained.

It turns out a majority (40 of 67) of the 7xx routes are signed:

701 Potts Camp - unsigned (2014 GMSV)
702 Michigan City - signed (2016 GMSV)
703 Byhalia - unsigned (2014 GMSV)
704 LAmar - signed (2009 GMSV) - https://goo.gl/maps/YKcjkzGzero
705 Hicory Flat - unsigned (2014 GMSV)
706 Sidon - signed on both ends (2009-2016 GMSV) https://goo.gl/maps/mx85RQTv6EN2
713 Robinsonville - signed only at MS 304 and I69 (2015 GMSV) https://goo.gl/maps/y3BtPXHg69M2
714 Sledge - signed on both ends (2014 GMSV) https://goo.gl/maps/PrK6ykCXNwG2
716 - unsigned (2014 GMSV)
718 Courtland - signed on both ends (2014 GMSV) https://goo.gl/maps/iQUEPYfRc9E2
720 near Courtland - signed from US 51 but not I-55 (2014 GMSV) https://goo.gl/maps/1QtreVuARuu
722 Pope - signed on both ends (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/wfqk2JhJ5or
723 near Bruce - signed as Pentagon 233 (GMSV 2014)
724 Enid - signed only at US 51 (end maint sign does exist though) (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/BqauH2rxEXK2
725 Batesville - signed at both ends (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/311UD8zrejw
726 Tutwiler - signed at both ends (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/PpqBwRbWEbr
727 Oakland - signed at both ends (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/SBJqxo7iZmt
728 Sumner - signed at both ends (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/dNcTYXuLnhk
729 Grenada - signed as MS 7 from US 51; there may be 1 MS 729 shield on I55 SB ramp (no GMSV from the front side)
731 Kosciusko - signed at both ends (GMSV 2016) https://goo.gl/maps/fDdbzX1DKtp
732 near Charleston - signed at MS 35 (GMSV 2014) no view at other end https://goo.gl/maps/VDYMmtEy1As
733 Taylor - signed at MS 328 only (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/XazCJrvYwyt
734 Glendora - signed at US 49E only (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/TtWjDrHh6AK2
735 Kosciusko - two piece route signed on both ends of both pieces (break is on Jefferson St btw Wells and Huntington)
736 Williamsville - signed on both ends (GMSV 2016) https://goo.gl/maps/98J5t4TVWak
738 E Oxford - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
739 Ethel - signed on both ends (GMSV 2016) https://goo.gl/maps/faYMTJdyg2C2
740 Senatobia - signed on both ends (GMSV 2013) https://goo.gl/maps/Gx9s6tNtJ4C2
741 s of Kosciusko - signed at MS 35 (GMSV 2016) and not at other end (GMSV 2009) https://goo.gl/maps/FSqtL53qvdr
743 Greenwood - signed on both ends (GMSV 2013) https://goo.gl/maps/QSpMVJXzyP82
744 Greenwood - signed at both ends (despite its short length) (GMSV 2013) https://goo.gl/maps/unctosWkbVA2
745 Kilmichael - signed on both ends (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/DZRfmdTUSYk
747 southaven - not signed (GMSV 2016)
758 Louisville - not signed (GMSV 2016)
759 Ackerman - not signed (GMSV)
760 Golden - signed as MS 366 (GMSV 2016) https://goo.gl/maps/sxjKqESTTm12
761 Myrtle - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
762 Ingomar - signed only at MS 15 (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/mCivgbJ5TUx
763 Maben - signed on both ends (GMSV 2013) https://goo.gl/maps/v5BSNWB6DFx
764 Blue Springs - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
765 Cumberland - signed from MS 50 (GMSV 2014); from the Trace it is signed as MS 50 https://goo.gl/maps/6D9RrFweEDr
766 Saltillo - signed from MS 145 (GMSV 2013) https://goo.gl/maps/vYHt8Phb6ap
767 s of Golden - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
768 s of Ackerman - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
769 Tupelo - unsigned (GMSV 2016)
770 Pontotoc - signed as MS 9 WB, TO 15-41 EB (GMSV 2014)
772 Algoma - signed on both ends (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/tVhGUQJGTaA2
773 Ripley - signed on both ends (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/MeMCDoM315M2
774 Nettleton - signed EB as MS 6, TO 145 WB (GMSV 2013)
775 Starkville - unsigned (GMSV 2016)
776 near Bigbee - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
777 Walnut - unsigned (GMSV 2013)
778 Blue Spring - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
779 Glen - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
780 Sherman - unsigned (GMSV 2016)
781 Cedar Bluff - not signed (GMSV 2013)
782 Mantee - signed on both ends (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/TZyTXA335kF2
784 Walthall - signed on both ends (GMSV 2016) https://goo.gl/maps/Y9vVoewKRoy
785 Corinth - signed only at US 72 (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/NL85E2YNH3q
786 Columbus AFB - signed only at US 45 (GMSV 2016) https://goo.gl/maps/BWK5sWGDmWJ2
788 Artesia - signed only at US 45 ALT (GMSV 2016) https://goo.gl/maps/EmXVMMBfi9K2
789 Columbus - signed at US 45 and at a turn 2/3 of its distance away but not at MS 791 (GMSV 2016) https://goo.gl/maps/8Hv9cpxAa9F2
790 n of Ackerman - signed on both ends (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/hSkUYm4sYdD2
791 Columbus - signed on both ends (GMSV 2013) https://goo.gl/maps/NohDneCuFfA2
792 Crawford - signed on both ends (GMSV 2009/2016) https://goo.gl/maps/DVubvhLNJmQ2
793 Paden unsigned (GMSV 2016)
795 Columbus - unsigned (GMSV 2013)

Offline mapmikey

  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 415
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 06:09:44 pm
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: usams (Mississippi State Highways)
« Reply #12 on: October 26, 2016, 09:14:01 pm »
Signage much more sparse in the 800s (19 of 44) and nearly non-existent in the 900s (just 3 of 23).  Note for all 700-900 series sometimes the unsigned ones did have begin/end maintenance signs.:

801 Crystal Springs - unsigned (GMSV 2013)
802 Alligator - signed on both ends (GMSV 2014)
804 Gunnison - signed on both ends (GMSV 2014)
806 Isola - unsigned (GMSV 2013)
808 Port Gibson - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
810 Sunflower - unsigned (GMSV 2013)
812 Ruleville - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
814 Greenville - unsigned (GMSV 2013)
816 Inverness - signed on both ends (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/EhyXB7m2ph92
817 Pace - signed on both ends (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/5W5i6pt1QnC2
818 Cruger - unsigned at US 49E (GMSV 2013); no GMSV at other end
819 Hermanville - unsigned (GMSV 2009)
820 Drew - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
822 Vicksburg - posted only at MS 27? (GMSV 2016)
824 Anguilla - signed on both ends (GMSV 2014)
826 Rolling Fork - signed on both ends (GMSV 2014)
830 Bentonia - appears to be in 2 pieces, signed at 3 of the 4 endpoints?  (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/2zGccuBUECF2
832 Doddsville - unsigned (GMSV 2013)
834 Vicksburg - unsigned (GMSV 2013)
835 Tchula - signed on both ends (GMSV 2016) https://goo.gl/maps/qQrcLVYK2pt
836 Lexington - signed on both ends (GMSV 2016) https://goo.gl/maps/axpqp3cz47S2
844 Crystal Springs - signed on both ends (GMSV 2013) https://goo.gl/maps/tjETBsQP7g82
848 Beauregard - signed only in town and not at US 51 (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/RhNmhqwyhZv
850 Wesson signed at both ends (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/bWBbhVMHW132
852 Brooksville - unsigned (GMSV 2016)
853 e of Philadelphia - unsigned (GMSV 2016)
854 Lizelia - signed at both ends (GMSV 2016) https://goo.gl/maps/KuSNe5kNeNP2
855 Bolton - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
857 Canton - unsigned (GMSV 2013)
859 Madison - unsigned (GMSV 2016)
860 Madison - unsigned (GMSV 2016)
878 Walnut Grove - signed on both ends (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/Zr1wLCgu45v
881 Newton - unsigned (GMSV 2016)
882 Harperville - signed from MS 35 (GMSV 2014); no GMSV at other end https://goo.gl/maps/jDa7DSpGvJu
883 Newton - signed on both ends (GMSV 2016) https://goo.gl/maps/8Aa7Sgj3Lwr
884 Meridian - unsigned, stray US 45 Business on it (GMSV 2016)
885 Philadelphia - unsigned (GMSV 2016)
886 Ridgeland - unsigned (GMSV 2016)
888 Morton - signed at MS 13 (GMSV 2014); no GMSV at other end https://goo.gl/maps/rYAdWFr1GN92
890 Bolton - unsigned
892 Homewood - signed at both ends (GMSV 2009) https://goo.gl/maps/QWm9QWDLiKS2
894 Philadelphia - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
895 Toomsuba - unsigned (GMSV 2016)
897 Toomsuba - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
902 Burns - signed on both ends (GMSV 2009-16) https://goo.gl/maps/CkwZ7eeyQak
903 Monticello - unsigned at US 84 (GMSV 2016); no GMSV at other end
904 Wanila - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
905 McComb - unsigned (GMSV 2013)
906 Summit - unsigned (GMSV 2013)
908 Summit - unsigned (GMSV 2013)
911 Gloster - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
913 Gloster - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
915 New Hebron - unsigned (GMSV 2016)
917 Sylvarena - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
923 Osyka - signed on both ends (GMSV 2014) https://goo.gl/maps/Xi6di6SXwQ22
925 Natchez - unsigned (GMSV 2015)
927 Summit - unsigned (GMSV 2009)
928 Natchez - unsigned (GMSV 2016)
930 Natchez - unsigned (GMSV 2016)
932 Natchez - unsigned (GMSV 2016)
937 Prentis - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
938 McComb - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
946 Centreville - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
952 Enterprise - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
967 Hattiesburg - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
969 Hattiesburg - unsigned (GMSV 2014)
992 Picayune - unsigned (GMSV 2013)

Offline Quidditch33

  • Milwaukeye
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 116
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:March 31, 2019, 04:05:30 pm
  • I want to be the first one to collect them all!
    • Travel Mapping User Page
Re: usams (Mississippi State Highways)
« Reply #13 on: November 17, 2016, 11:09:29 pm »
Just a little off-topic, has there been any progress made towards the usaal(Alabama State Routes)?

Thanks,
-The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step... on the gas.