A general overarching thought here:
Parkways in New York, generally, are signed with some sort of special shield. In Long Island it's the lighthouse shield. In Rockland and Orange counties it's the stylized circles. In Westchester county and upstate, it's the state highway shield shape but green. And in the 5 boroughs it's a mishmosh of inconsistent standards but there *are* shields.
I'm inclined to give less weight to shields & shield styles for a system such as this.
• Some existing systems have multiple shield styles, E.G. usavt, usatn,
(more debatably, cannb before its split into cannba/cannbc/cannbl), and the toll roads in usapa, usafl, & usatx* systems.
• More importantly, I view this as more of a system of named routes, akin to
usasf. Think of that system's "Text on a BGS" style of display in the HB, in either TM or CHM. Some-but-not-all of these routes will bear shields.
It occurs to me that every road I am having the "wait that's not a parkway, why are we including it?" reaction about has something crucial in common: a lack of shield-based signage. So this would not only provide an objective cutoff for excluding them,
Aah, but did you have that reaction about the Jackie Robinson Parkway? That one could throw a wrench in the works. As mariethefoxy noted, it doesn't seem to have any shields.
it would also be arguably consistent with our general policy on excluding unsigned routes.
Excluding unsigned numbered routes, we do, yes. But for a system of
named routes? These by their nature play by somewhat different rules. Something can be signed by text on a BGS, on a glorified blade sign, on a vanilla blade sign...
When starting development of this system, I foresaw a lot of difficulty in defining
"Just what IS a Parkway?"This gets into the murky philosophical definition of...
What is the Sunken Meadow State Parkway? Is it the route that bears a certain reference number (908K)? Or is it all the roadway that is just named "Sunken Meadow State Parkway"?After some consideration, I decided to go by what's included in NYS reference routes. It just seems to be the most even, objective cutoff I can make. This allows us to decisively pin down routes' ends, include obvious additions like BetStaPkwy, JacRobPkwy, KorWarPkwy, and allow for a little bit of the expected "This was added, why not this? It's a Parkway, innit?", while keeping it sensible & providing a clear cutoff to keep us from getting carried away & going too far down that rabbit hole.
- Also, I would argue that the eastern endpoint of Pelham Parkway should be at the point where the ramp from Bruckner Blvd merges in (right about where the divided highway ends), not at I-95 itself. A "one point per interchange" argument could be made to the contrary, but I would counterargue by saying that "ramp" isn't really a ramp - it's part of Shore Rd, and it predates the construction of both Pelham Parkway and I-95 (it used to be two way).
My take is that Shore Rd used to be there, but moved. TDV & GIS list the northern path, to the cloverleaf, as Shore Rd itself, and the ramp as a ramp.
TDR, TDV & GIS all three clearly show PelPkwy ending at the I-95 underpass. Thus PelPkwy gets its end here, a step before
1PPI even comes into play.
Pelham Parkway ends at Shore Rd where the two meet.
I agree with this statement, because I consider Shore Rd to end at at a different
point.
- Mosholu Parkway unambiguously ends at a T intersection with Southern Blvd, and always has. Reference Route 908F does turn up Southern Blvd to end at Bronx River Parkway exit 8, but this section of road is not in any way part of Mosholu Parkway and therefore should not be plotted as part of the route
I'm not sold on this. TLDR, Mosholu Parkway is clearly signed @ BRP Exit 8, in both directions.
vdeane, what's your take here?
