Non-Road Boards > Travel Mapping

California State Highways (in development)

(1/8) > >>

oscar:
I'm starting this topic, to steer any new comments to one place.

The draft system's routes can now be viewed in TM's draft highway browser, with an index for all California routes in the HB (including Interstate and U.S. routes) at http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?rg=ca. Additional business routes are being added as I find them. I also need to draft or find real route files to replace obvious "placeholders" for a few routes like CA 18 Business Big Bear or CA 44 (the maps for those routes are copies of one of Si's recent Russia updates, because nothing screams "placeholder" quite like a map full of Cyrillic characters). So this system still needs some work even to get it ready for review, and I would encourage people to hold off on comments other than on basic matters such as routes (especially business routes) to add or delete.

One major issue that needs to be resolved, pre-review, is how to deal with all the relinquishments of state route segments to local governments that have been happening lately. I think the prevailing sentiment is to find a way to overlook mid-route relinquishments that otherwise would chop routes into little pieces. The draft route files ignore such relinquishments for now. However, I did remove one short route, CA 225 in Santa Barbara, that was relinquished in its entirety. For relinquishments at one end of a route, we might or might not want to treat them as truncations. Once I have a handle on all the relinquishments out there, I'll post here a better-developed proposal on how to deal with relinquishments.
:

vdeane:
Good to know that anyone wanting to clinch CA's state highways needs a Russian visa. ;)

Regarding the relinquishments, how is signage around them?  I can see three cases:
1. Route remains signed, either due to a desire to sign some form of continuity or because nobody can be bothered to remove the signs
2. Route signage just disappears at the start of the relinquishment and reappears at the end of it
3. Route is signed as beginning/ending at the borders of the relinquishment

Cases 1 and 2 seem to pop up all over other systems without issue (though some states seem to be allergic to signing routes over portions they don't maintain even when it would make for a better system; it probably depends on whether a state views route numbers as an inventory system that happens to help travelers or a system to help travelers that happens to handle inventory).  3 is obviously no longer part of the system.

rschen7754:
CA 195 was removed at the end of 2014 - http://www.cahighways.org/193-200.html#195 and http://enwp.org/California_State_Route_195 explain what happened.

oscar:

--- Quote from: rschen7754 on November 02, 2015, 09:48:03 PM ---CA 195 was removed at the end of 2014 - http://www.cahighways.org/193-200.html#195 and http://enwp.org/California_State_Route_195 explain what happened.

--- End quote ---

Already removed from TM's draft Highway Browser, as was CA 86S (which I still need to fold into CA 86), CA 225 (relinquished to death), and CA 275 (mostly decommissioned. with the short remnant unsigned). CA 51 (unsigned, concurrent with I-80BL Sacramento) will be removed next time I edit the .csv (route index) files to add missing business routes.

english si:
The bit of CA1 south of I-10 is signed as To CA1 in Santa Monica. The [To] plates become [South] ones on entering Venice.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page