Travel Mapping
Highway Data Discussion => Updates to Highway Data => Solved Highway data updates => Topic started by: the_spui_ninja on May 11, 2021, 11:43:45 pm
-
So I noticed that the SRT was not in the HB; is this because TX 121 is continuously on the frontage roads (as opposed to the George Bush tollway where TX 190 only is the frontage road in sections)?
-
Right. SRT doesn't fill in any gaps in the overall network.
-
Of course, soemone who drove the road, and not the frontage roads, wouldn't be able to mark anything given the precedent set on (most of) the rest of the site. Has there been a change in the policy that routes where one is a frontage road to another aren't concurrent? Between this and US 31 in Birmingham, it seems there might have been.
-
Of course, soemone who drove the road, and not the frontage roads, wouldn't be able to mark anything given the precedent set on (most of) the rest of the site.
Maybe so, though I wouldn't begrudge anyone for Androscoggin River Bicycle & Pedestrian Path (https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=4190.msg23027#msg23027)ing it.
Has there been a change in the policy that routes where one is a frontage road to another aren't concurrent? Between this and US 31 in Birmingham, it seems there might have been.
No policy per se, though there's often a "break the concurrency if you choose to break the concurrency approach. So, no change.
Here, it should be noted that the SRT isn't even in the system, so there's no concurrency to break. ;)
WRT US31, I read thru that topic a while back & gave it some thought, but never weighed in out loud. Got to be too much for my attention span; closed the browser tab. If it were me, I'd do things a bit differently there, but how exactly, wellll...
Seems from froggie's last post in that thread that he's open to further suggestions on how to handle that area.