Wyoming Avenue might be better tagged at tertiary here as it carries a higher amount of through traffic since it connects Palm Street all the way to Nellis Blvd in a straight line. It also has lane markings unlike the other residential roads, which is often an indicator of a street being a collector road/through street.

Regarding Ely as a trunk destination—it is by no means as large as other distant smallish rural cities like Elko or Fallon, let alone a major metro like Vegas or Reno, but it is certainly a significant hub relative to its region. It has a population just shy of 4,000, which is a big deal in a largely remote area of Nevada like this, where the next largest community, McGill, is just a satellite town of Ely with about 1k people. Its also a major hub logistically with its industrial activity, its airport, and its position on the crossroads of three U.S. Routes.

But regarding your second point in your previous comment—the issue is we've never really had an official complete classification document, at least not as of this year or even the last, or an active ongoing discussion. As I recall it, most of the trunk highway classifications made in Nevada have simply been made by either you or me with no prior discussion on our own justifications. I think going straight to reverting a change like this—only citing the lack of community consensus as a reason for reversion—is counterintuitive to avoiding the "switching road classifications back and forth ad nauseum", too.

I'm just curious—what's would be the objection to Route 50 being trunk here aside from the lack of a wider community consensus/documentation? I think it's a little unfair to cite the NV highway classification page on the OSM Wiki since it's still supposedly a draft, and has only been contributed to by two users and is essentially abandoned with no discussions on its talk page and no further work since Feb 2023.

I disagree with the assessment of classifying it as trunk based on its greater cross-country route due to the implications that other relatively minor sections of any lengthy US Route should be trunk. However, considering it's the only major E-W route through central NV (aside from Route 6, which actually has about half the AADT and is less connective than 50), it seems like a pretty strong case for trunk here.

The boundaries not being snapped to the roads should be fine. It makes editing the roads and boundaries on their own far easier without having to worry about moving other attached ways around or accidentally breaking them.

If you looked at the history of the ways, you would see that's not my doing. horse=no for example was added by the user who had changed these roads to cycleways. This way (way/216965446/history) for example was given horse=no tags in this changeset (changeset/155534292). I didn't touch any of the access tags, just the way classification. Those access tag edits were made nearly a year before I made mine, like by accident on that editor's part.

They don't connect to any other tertiary roads at their ends, but they are still important collector roads that are wider, busier, and higher-speed compared to other nearby residential/unclassified roads, and are the main or only major roads that lead into these particular areas. Here's a relevant explanation for this that I left on another changeset: changeset/169266279

The residential areas that are surrounded by but legally not part of Las Vegas are areas of unincorporated Clark County that were inhabited prior to the city's annexation of what is currently northwestern region. This allows for different zoning laws, like ones you'd find in a rural area, all within in an area just outside of the city proper. This allows agricultural activity, like the ranches and orchards you can find around the Tule Springs area, or for larger, more rural-like estate houses that are sparsely placed around the Lone Mountain area. Pre-existing residents also won't have to be annexed into the city and thus forced to follow its laws that may differ from those that apply to Clark County. Most of Las Vegas is land that was undeveloped before being annexed by the city.

They shouldn't be tagged as cycleways just because they can be used by cyclists as well—regular paths and pedestrian streets are more all-encompassing tags and reflect that they are used by other non-motor traffic like pedestrians and horse carriages in addition to cyclists.

Most of the northwestern borders, especially around the Kyle Canyon/Lone Mountain/Centennial Hills areas. A user had attempted to supposedly simplify the borders, incorrectly realigning the outermost borders to the Red Rock Canyon NCA boundary, engulfing the Paiute Res. boundaries, and deleting official enclaves of unincorporated Clark County located inside of Las Vegas and arbitrarily integrating them into the city.

Tule Springs could be downgraded to unclassified since right now it is technically a dead-end road, though considering it is actively being expanded—the rest of it under construction right now—I wouldn't overthink it. Summerlin West currently has a lot of roads in this situation right now as well.

Theme Road on the other hand is a rare case of an un-extendable tertiary stub. It's a lengthy, busy collector road, but it has no outlet. Stubs of any classification can exist in rare cases if the road is significant enough, and usually they're caused by geographical restrictions (like the road is within an island, peninsula, or valley) or because the development has ended and thus so has the major section of the route (see southern Pahrump, Sandy Valley, and Mt Charleston for examples of tertiary/secondary stubs). The Sparks/Spanish Springs area has a few tertiary, secondary, and primary stubs as well.

Thank you for fixing the Las Vegas city boundaries! These had been very incorrect for a long time until now.

Hello, the source you provided doesn't seem to explicitly show these roads as official proposals. Even if they were proposed at some point, and thus now outdated, there wouldn't be a point in mapping them as recent ESRI imagery shows that road right-of-ways have been graded over in these construction areas, and they do not align with the ways you traced. It would also be unlikely for Evelyn Brook Street to connect directly with a freeway ramp or for 5th Street to be routed straight through a federally-protected land.

Here's the project: https://www.clarkcountynv.gov/news/news-detail-t28-r1033

The project has started, but the bridge isn't under construction yet. Currently, they're working on the first phase, which is mostly just improvements along Wiesner Way, including realigning it towards the wash, building the roundabout at the Silver Bowl, and currently they're widening the rest of the road and working on the Galleria intersection. The second phase is in 2026, which will be the beginning of the bridge construction.

US 6 should most likely remain primary in Nevada for its lower connectivity and usage by traffic, except for the section between 318 and Ely, and the segments concurrent with US 95 west of Tonopah and 50/93 east of Ely.

I'd also say the same for the US 93 section upgraded to trunk between Crystal Springs and Majors Place junctions—it's a very comparatively low-traffic route only linking smaller towns, and most traffic travelling between Las Vegas and Ely will use 318 over the less-direct route via Caliente, Panaca, and Pioche.

If the spur you're referring to is 93 Business—motorway spurs are perfectly fine as it's a physical construction-based classification rather than an importance-based one. There are many examples of this throughout the country, like I 8 in San Diego, Northern Parkway in Phoenix, Earhart Expressway in New Orleans, and quite a handful around Providence, RI. Regarding solely its length—considering it is a direct spur off of another motorway and isn't disconnected, it being a motorway should be fine.

As for signage, considering not all freeways have "Freeway ends" signs by their terminus it's usually standard practice to end the motorway at where there's a physical characteristic change like an at-grade intersection or when the road narrows, or at the last interchange of a bypass or where it transitions into another road.

While US 50 being trunk is a little more justifiable, granted that its much busier these days than its reign as the "Loneliest Road in America", and links some regionally significant places like Fallon, Ely, and Delta, UT (with even more major highways and cities located west/east of this stretch), I would probably leave US 6 at primary, since it sees even much less traffic than 50 and connects even less population centers and major highways directly. It is a cross country route, but is very rarely used for such. In fact, it is notoriously a relatively pointless US highway for much of its route (aside from places like New England or between I 15 and I 70 in Utah) given that most of the parts that do directly connect major population centers have been successfully bypassed by Interstates, and segments that aren't bypassed usually only link smaller communities and are very lightly traveled, such as the case with it in Nevada. For example, US 6 barely sees about 200-300 vehicles along a stretch like the route between Tonopah and Route 318 because of its isolation and connections only with Ely and Tonopah, the latter of which is an even smaller community.

Thank you for this road class change! This is one I have been planning to make myself for your exact reasons but never got around to doing.

Hello. I think this changeset and a couple others around this area overcomplicate/confuse some road classification criteria. Usually, it is fine for motorways to meet pedestrian crossings when they terminate at an at-grade intersection, especially when that intersection is a major one that indicates the end of the freeway. The only cases in which it is better to terminate the motorway at the interchange instead of the intersection is when the interchange is what indicates the end of the freeway, such as if the highway transitions into another highway or road that is not intended to be a freeway, like the Airport Connector or after passing through the terminals becomes Paradise Road or how the interchange east of the Hoover Dam marks the end of the bypass to become the original alignment of US 93, and there are no signs or signalized intersections which would better indicate that the freeway has ended. Additionally, regarding median breaks—these authorized access-only crossovers are essentially on every single divided highway, to allow emergency and maintenance vehicles to make safe immediate U-turns or for traffic to be switched over if urgently needed. It's very common for motorways to have intersections with various track and service roads that only authorized vehicles can use, and even sometimes even very minor publicly-accessible roads, usually unpaved ones.

As for Route 173, and the implication it should be trunk to eliminate a dangling spur, that is the reason I had downgraded it from trunk to primary in the past, as the freeway section of the 93 Business loop is only tagged at a motorway for its physical characteristic rather than its importance, and would be a primary road itself if it weren't built up to freeway standards between I 11 and VM Drive. In reality, 173 is only used to connect traffic between US 95 and I 11 into Boulder City, and is more of a local access road than a major long-haul highway like 95 or I 11.

Now regarding the Railroad Pass Casino Road—despite its freeway connection, it isn't necessarily used for getting between the two motorways (which is what 173 does further east) and doesn't serve any other secondary (or higher) tagged roads, but is rather only used for accessing one other tertiary road (Dawson Ave) and the commercial/industrial development right here at the interchange. In more rural areas like this, it will be more common and expected to have roads that connect to Interstates be tagged as tertiary and even unclassified/residential roads.

It's may sound trivial, but I tagged it to as primary to match the rest of the road since this is the last ramp to intersect Lake Mead Parkway before it merges with the Beltway. This is the same logic used for the other side of the road but in reverse (where Lake Mead Parkway meets the I 11 N to 564 E ramp). Technically, traffic going from west 564 to I 11 south isn't entering a short freeway before turning onto a completely different highway, but traffic that goes straight does, as that's a mainline highway segment (of Lake Mead Parkway/564) that directly merges with another freeway with no actual ramps.

Bit of a false alarm. I apologize for jumping to conclusions here—I put two and two together since you were the last one to edit the relation and I definitely recalled there being a node at some point prior to that, and you had additionally re-created the node, which lacked the original GNIS import data and is often an indication of delete-and-remap. I just did some investigating with OSMCha and found out that the label was actually merged with the Goodsprings boundary by another user back in April, and this change didn't modify the relation like your edits (or anyone else's beforehand) so it wasn't easily traceable because it only modified the old node and the current boundary. Luckily, I was able to restore the old one without having to do a complicated revert or interfering with your changes. Sorry for the mix up.