Talk:Limited-access road

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] history

The history section deals with a specific definition; is there any proof that there were no city streets to which the maintaining authority limited driveway access before then?

On the other hand, there is stuff that can be said about history - both about that type (if such info can be found) and about major highways. This article would specifically cover issues relating to the limitation of access. Often such limitation was illegal in the early days, leading to problems with early highways. For instance I believe the QEW was initially built with full access, while Texas has used frontage roads on most freeways until recently. I'm pretty sure there's a bit about this in a USDOT book I have - I'll get to it at some point. --SPUI (T - C) 10:23, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

There is no reason or expectation of proving a negative. If you find an earlier verifiable example of a limited-access city street for horse-drawn vehicles, please add the reference to the history section.
--William Allen Simpson 16:16, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Comments on necessity for citation tags in the History section:

  • concept ... started with the parkway system of New York -- This definitely needs a citation from a reliable source. How can we be sure that the concept did not exist previously? Also, when did the term "limited access road" begin to be used legally?
  • typically divided by a ... median -- not absolutely necessary if there is an article regarding the New York Parkway System with its own sources.
  • concept evolved into uninterrupted arterial roads -- It's not clear what the difference is between a "limited access road" and an "uninterrupted arterial road". The difference should be explained in the article.
  • commonly known as expressways... -- maybe this should be reworded into "sometimes known as..." so we can remove the need for a citation here.

--Polaron | Talk 17:48, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted Vegaswikian's use of [1] as a source for "The concept of limited-access roadways started with the parkway system in the state of New York". In addition to not being a reliable source (I'm willing to accept it for a clear fact like the 1907 date, but nothing more controversial), it says nothing of the sort. The closest thing is "When it was completed in 1925, the Bronx River Parkway was the first modern, multi-lane limited-access parkway in North America." Not all limited-access roads are modern, multi-lane, parkways, or in North America. --SPUI (T - C) 13:03, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] inclusion of merged articles

Several terms used in this page were the result of earlier merges, specifically Limited-access highway (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) and Controlled-access highway (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs). It is not "misleading" to combine the terms on this single page, where the commonalities and differences are discussed. I've reverted SPUI's repeated deletion of merged material.

There is no good reason to have 4 to 6 stubs, all talking about mere terminology differences between countries.

--William Allen Simpson 16:07, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Those articles were incorrect. For instance "A controlled-access highway is usually a step up from a limited-access highway." This a definition that is not in wide use, and directly contradicts the intro. There was also some original research - "The bypass is a freeway in terms of signage although it has traffic lights at the junctions." --SPUI (T - C) 16:26, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

This is such nonsense. Who cares what you wrote in the intro, the Wikipedia:Lead section is a summary of the contents. If the contents change, the lead section changes.
Factual observations of actual roads are not original research.
--William Allen Simpson 13:22, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
What is a "freeway in terms of signage"? --SPUI (T - C) 15:37, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
What, you need pictures? Try driving a UP road, as I have. I know exactly what the original author meant. If you can find some term of art that expresses the thought better, that might be an improvement to the article.
--William Allen Simpson 07:40, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
I ask again - what is a "freeway in terms of signage"? --SPUI (T - C) 21:33, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
I know what he is trying to say, but it is a unimportant example, the Escanaba bypass is an expressway, not a freeway; Michigan has a small number of them. Some have Interstate-standard signage such as the new M-53 bypass around Romeo. Some, like M-5 Haggerty Connector in Novi & Walled Lake, have signage like a Divided Highway. And just to throw off the mix there is the 10 mile long expressway half of Metro Parkway which isn't even an MDOT road. The sentence should be deleted, IMO. -- KelleyCook 16:15, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

This edit removed citations and re-introduced RIRO Expressway, a neologism. --SPUI (T - C) 16:01, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] authoritative definition

While it appears that the precise definition of "limited-access" or "controlled-access" varies greatly in terms of legal definitions, does anyone know if there is a more universal civil engineering definition for these? Or are the engineering definitions also fuzzy?

Another question: does the limitation of access refer to the places where vehicles can enter/exit the road? I have seen a definition where it means there is no public right of way to the road in general except as specified legally, e.g. only motor vehicles of certain types may use the road. It might be useful to get a variety of authoritative definitions and see what the extent of variation is. --Polaron | Talk 16:14, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

According to [2] (not a reliable source but possibly helpful in finding them), some states (and AASHTO) use "controlled access" for a freeway and "limited access" for a non-freeway, while others use the reverse (for instance Florida - [3][4]).
The only real defining characteristic common to all is that access from adjacent properties is somehow limited. Some freeways allow bicycles (non-motorized vehicle access on freeways), so that is not a defining characteristic across-the-board, but some states do ban them from all freeways (Florida again - I actually have a good photo for the one exception given there - Image:Acosta Bridge northbound end.jpg). --SPUI (T - C) 16:52, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] variants

Comments on the need for citations in the Variants section:

  • controlled access highway is usually a step up from a limited access highway -- This does not appear to be generally true. I believe both Connecticut and New York, for example, do not distinguish between the two terms. The statement should be made more specific (e.g. "According to the definitions used by MUTCD,...") and referenced.
  • usually features ... interchanges and frontage roads ... -- Probably not necessary. If the previous reference is made clear, then this should probably follow as well.
  • expressway in terms of signage -- what does this mean? That the roadway has Exit signs? Would the West Side Highway be one? This definitely needs a citation, assuming the term "expressway in terms of signage" is not made up.

--Polaron | Talk 18:07, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NYSPS and the intro

I redid the into to use the NYSPS and the Long Island Motor Parkway as the begining of this concept. There are several souces that support this and unless someone finds something earlier this should be the best information at this time. The rest of the article still needs a major cleanup. Discussing how this concept developed over time and spread to other types of access control techniques is needed. Vegaswikian 19:43, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

There are no sources - and certainly no reliable sources - that back this up. I have reverted. --SPUI (T - C) 20:34, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
So you agree that there are sources that may not be reliable. If so, in an attempt to reach consensus on cleaning up the mess that this article is, just add a cite or fact tag. I think what is there now reads better and does not have anywhere near the number of issues that the previous text had and at the same time covers basically everything from the old text. Vegaswikian 20:50, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
That "fact" about New York's parkways being first has been marked with {{fact}} for a while, and no one has come up with even an unreliable source that says that. --SPUI (T - C) 20:53, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Would you please undo your revert and allow some other editors to comment on these changes. We can not get consensus on fixing this article if every reasonable attempt to fix the article is reverted. The suggested change is no less supported by fact then the mess that curently exists. Vegaswikian 20:58, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Adding unsourced information is not reasonable. --SPUI (T - C) 21:17, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Note how many different matches there are in [5]. Any one of them could be claimed as the first limited access road. Also note in [6]: "there was an older road in Rio de Janeiro". There are two related issues here:

  1. There is rarely agreement on a "first" of this nature. See for instance first railroads in North America - you'll find many sources claiming the Granite Railway was the first, when there were many before it!
  2. The concept of limited access applies to not only these automobile highways but also older roadways that were de facto limited access by nature of being built through parks. There are also strange cases like this one, described in State Route 110 (California):
    A nine-mile (14 km), dedicated cycleway was built in 1897 by a private business to connect Pasadena to Los Angeles. Its right of way followed the stream bed of the Arroyo Seco and required 1,250,000 board feet (2,950 m³) of pine wood to construct.
    At the time, road improvements such as paving were mainly for bicycles. So this was a limited access road.

--SPUI (T - C) 21:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Then there is a simple fix to change the wording to be among the first or one of the first or the first in the US or to even list the roads claiming this position in the article. That is not possible when the changes are reverted out. Any of those changes would be a lot better then reveerting an attempt to improve the article and would make it even more encylopedic. Vegaswikian 21:48, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Then start such a list - and don't put any in the intro. --SPUI (T - C) 21:53, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
      • That would require a revert of the existing intro, since it has some of the information, followed by a rewrite and the 3RR rule comes into play now. Vegaswikian 22:34, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
        • Maybe you should have thought of that before you started to edit war to include uncited material. --SPUI (T - C) 22:34, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
          • I did not start an edit war. I was in the middle of finishing the changes by adding more material when the previous change was reverted. It takes time to look through other articles to find what you need to do a rewrite to something that might get consensus. Vegaswikian 22:43, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The concept and various names

I added this section following the introduction to address many of the concerns raised by other editors. I believe that the simple article about the concept and the different names it goes under today may be enough for the article. I would hope that before someone goes revert happy that this be allowed to stay as is with some comments here. The article as it was with some many disputes and upto 5 references for a single sentenance was not of much use and not very encylopedic. I'd like to hear some feedback from other editors on this change. Vegaswikian 20:46, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../l/i/m/Talk%7ELimited-access_road_7f63.html"