Travel Mapping
Highway Data Discussion => Updates to Highway Data => Solved Highway data updates => Topic started by: the_spui_ninja on June 30, 2018, 10:14:28 pm
-
So I swung up to SE Montana today, and happened to notice that all the S-323 shields in Alzada had been replaced with Montana 323 shields, both on US 212 and on 323 itself. Is upgrading routes from secondary to primary a thing? Or is this just a sign error?
-
another photo; I only got EB US 212 photos, but the signs were also on WB 212 and 323 itself.
-
This is a strange case of what is internally designated P-323 but apparently supposed to have S-323 shields: http://www.mdt.mt.gov/travinfo/docs/hwymap_system.pdf
But maybe they changed their stance and decided P-323 signs made sense.
-
That would make sense, as that's one of the more prominent secondaries (I think MT 7 should just be extended down, but what do I know).
-
This is a strange case of what is internally designated P-323 but apparently supposed to have S-323 shields
AFAICS, the functional classification has naff all to do with what shape shields the road gets, or even the number. Parts of US12 are P-14, part of MT3 is N-53 (ie national 53), parts of MT2 are 'off-system' (ie below secondary).
What we do have is, AFAICS:
1) signs in the field show it as MT323, rather than SR323 - and not just a mistake or two, but a lot of them suggesting purposefully doing this.
2) a policy of caring more about field signage of state highways than paper designations or 'what is supposed to be', so even if the signs are wrong, we'd have to view it as MT323 rather than SR323.
Therefore, I'm going to move what is currently SR323 in usamts to be MT323 in usamt. This shouldn't affect anyone other than me doing some housekeeping to enact this.
-
AFAICS, the functional classification has naff all to do with what shape shields the road gets, or even the number. Parts of US12 are P-14, part of MT3 is N-53 (ie national 53), parts of MT2 are 'off-system' (ie below secondary).
And then there are the "Principle" and "Other" highways shown in red and black respectively on the official state highway map. I've always been curious as to why these don't correspond with the signed "primary" and "secondary" number shields. What's more, the map refers to these shields as "state" and "other", seemingly implying that the "secondary" numbered routes are not state highways at all, when in fact the "off-system" routes on the highway system map seem to be all "primary" numbered routes. Anyone else confused?
Have also always been curious abut the decision to extend US 191 north from Malta to SK 4 a number of years ago, but not to extend US 87 north along MT 232 to AB 41, or at least marked as a red route.