Talk:South Dakota/Highway Classification

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Black Hills Trunk Classification

For the most part, I feel like SD's trunk roads represent the standards set well. The one area I think needs work is south of Rapid City; I don't think there needs to be both the SD 79 corridor and the US 385/16 corridor. In my opinion, the US 385/16 corridor should be the one downgraded to primary as it is not the most efficient for through traffic, only access to the park and Custer. Thoughts? --Stretch Longfellow (talk) 20:32, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

So as someone who's lived in this state for 25 years, the trunk system as it is now is pretty good, with some additions necessary (some long-haul routes that are missing, to align with ND, WY, NE, MN, IA etc). I'll get to adding the proposals on the main page here now that my life is starting to settle down (made the page, did initial table work, then my grad school project intensified and I had a kid). For the Hills, the problem is that "the most important non-motorway roads that provide principal, long-haul connections between population centers of regional importance" are really only spurs into the Hills from I-90, and don't continue out the other side. For instance, US 16 from Rapid to Custer is a concrete wide-shouldered high-travelled road but the other roads heading out of Custer (16A, 385 S, 16 W, 89) are lower-travelled roads that don't link Custer with the surrounding area. I know the general idea now is to avoid trunk spurs, but an idea that would align with how most people travel in the Hills would be to have US 16 from Rapid City to Custer (using the 16/385 truck route in Hill City), US 85 from Exit 17 to Deadwood, and US 14A from Lead to Exit 30 as the trunk routes. Does that make sense? --SD Mapman (talk) 21:15, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Hopping into this conversation too. I personally interpret the idea of having no trunk spurs as more of a guidance than a hard and fast rule. It's something to generally avoid, but if a rule prevents you from improving the map, then ignore it. And I agree with you that I think a trunk spur along US 16 from Rapid City to Custer is one of those situations where introducing a trunk spur is the only logical choice to make.
One other change that I'd make in the Black Hills if I had my way is downgrading US 16A to secondary: I can't consider consider it anything more than a scenic route that doesn't serve anything beyond just being a pretty drive. I'd think it would make sense to instead continue the primary classification along SD 244 out of Keystone, a higher-quality route with more traffic. Oregonian3 (talk) 17:32, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
That makes sense, Iron Mountain Road is really a tourist trap with no actual destination. SD Mapman (talk) 21:02, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Also had a kid, hence why I'm just now responding. ;) I'm still not totally sold on Custer being a significant enough destination to merit trunk status, but I am willing to concede. One I missed earlier is US 14A and US 85 by Deadwood; why are these trunk? --Stretch Longfellow (talk) 17:57, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Deadwood is a gambling destination, with more billboards than Las Vegas (due to SD's lax billboard laws lol). I extended the spur to Lead as it's the 7th largest city West River. Custer is the 10th largest city West River, and is a hub for tourist activity in the Southern Hills.