Author Topic: MT: SR201 upgrade to primary?  (Read 3329 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline vespertine

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 87
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:October 27, 2024, 12:27:00 pm
MT: SR201 upgrade to primary?
« on: July 07, 2022, 06:51:20 pm »
Traveled briefly in Fairview on MT200, and noticed junction signs for 201 used the square primary route shields. Didn't know if it was a goof or not, and traveled about 3 miles down the road to see if there were any reassurance shields, which there were not. Did a little research on the MDT website, and found on their Highway Systems Map that the section of 201 between MT16 and MT200 is red/a primary route. So it looks like the shields I saw were meant to be there.

Of course, the one thing I don't know is if the section of 201 west of MT16 is also signed with primary shields, or if they Tennessee'd it and kept it secondary.

v.

Offline the_spui_ninja

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 803
  • Last Login:Today at 08:49:08 am
  • THE Western SD Highway Nut
Re: MT: SR201 upgrade to primary?
« Reply #1 on: July 08, 2022, 05:39:32 pm »
So something like this came up with 323 in Ekalaka; I noticed the junction signs on US 212 were primary rectangles, and the road's marked as a primary highway on that map, so we upgraded the whole thing to primary. If you look at StreetView, this was a change after 2015, because it shows the secondary shields in Fairview. I'm up for splitting 201 into a "primary" and "secondary" portion based on the MDT map following the 323 precedent, but if anyone's determinedly opposed or has conflicting information please let me know!
An adventure is only an inconvenience rightly considered. An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered. - G.K. Chesterton

Offline Duke87

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1018
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 11:12:21 pm
Re: MT: SR201 upgrade to primary?
« Reply #2 on: July 08, 2022, 07:31:13 pm »
I'm up for splitting 201 into a "primary" and "secondary" portion based on the MDT map following the 323 precedent

I support doing this.

Offline oscar

  • TM Collaborator
  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1584
  • Last Login:Today at 09:06:47 am
    • Hot Springs and Highways pages
Re: MT: SR201 upgrade to primary?
« Reply #3 on: July 08, 2022, 09:46:16 pm »
This photo I took on October 31, 2019, from northbound MT 16 (on my way north into Saskatchewan, for a field check of the newly-opened Regina Bypass), indicates a route 201 signage split at MT 16, with the route to the west remaining secondary, and to the east becoming primary.

The 2021 official state map shows 201 as a red principal highway east of MT 16 (but still with a secondary route marker), and a black "other highway" west of MT 16 (also with secondary markers, with some unpaved segments between MT 13 and MT 16).

The secondary marker shown on the official map notwithstanding, I would split route 201 at MT 16, as proposed.

 

Offline the_spui_ninja

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 803
  • Last Login:Today at 08:49:08 am
  • THE Western SD Highway Nut
Re: MT: SR201 upgrade to primary?
« Reply #4 on: July 10, 2022, 08:40:28 pm »
This photo I took on October 31, 2019, from northbound MT 16 (on my way north into Saskatchewan, for a field check of the newly-opened Regina Bypass), indicates a route 201 signage split at MT 16, with the route to the west remaining secondary, and to the east becoming primary.

That's exactly what I was looking for! Looks like MDT is following that map as far as how routes are signed. I'll get this shifted over the next time I do a route update with the other ND and CO stuff.
An adventure is only an inconvenience rightly considered. An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered. - G.K. Chesterton

Offline the_spui_ninja

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 803
  • Last Login:Today at 08:49:08 am
  • THE Western SD Highway Nut
Re: MT: SR201 upgrade to primary?
« Reply #5 on: July 13, 2022, 07:35:50 am »
Okay, it should be good at the next update. Vespertine, you'll have to update your .list file because the system didn't like it when I tried to leave the routes linked.
An adventure is only an inconvenience rightly considered. An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered. - G.K. Chesterton