I have an alignment but the "proposed" roadway work limits do not encompass the entirety of the start and stop work limits. There will be a shared use path that extends beyond the roadway work, so if I still want to use the roadway alignment to be the centerline for my shared use path cross section views the CL grade elevations will be taken from the existing elevation(since there is no proposed profile here). My question is, do I need to create a new alignment profile where the existing terrain is set to be the active profile for the alignment? Or is there an easier way to work around this?
You should be able to create a separate profile from existing ground for the shared use path portion. You can then create a separate corridor for the shared use path and select your alignment then instead of right-clicking for the active profile, just select your existing ground profile from the drop down.
You can use point controls to make a template follow a different alignment. Since your main alignment improvements will have ended, all you need is a template of your shared use path and its alignment and use a point control to make the template follow the path alignment.
Charles (Chuck) Rheault CADD Manager
MDOT State Highway Administration Maryland DOT - State Highway Administration User Communities Page
Thank you for the reply. If I am understanding this correctly, you are advising to have the alignment of the shared use path follow the roadway alignment via point control. My question here is, the active profile in this file will be my shared use path profile, correct? I am assuming the point control is only being established so that the cross section view will use the roadway alignment as the "centerline"?
Yes.
I have worked on projects where there were multiple "roads" in one template. One followed the corridor alignment while others followed different alignments. The other alignments needed to be assigned to points in the template using point controls. The tie in between the multiple roads had to be defined within the template. If one of more of the roads ended, the template drop from that point had to reflect that fact.
Sometimes, it makes sense to make the other alignments secondary alignments.
Would I need a null point with a point control to the roadway centerline? If I am building a corridor off of the shared use path alignment, the 0,0 would be off of the shared use path alignment. I have other components coming off of the shared use path including a ditch and tie back slope that will require control points. I am trying to figure out how the template should be built if I want the shared use path to be graded per the profile, but still be tied to the roadway centerline for cross section view purposes. Would it just be easier to make a corridor off the roadway centerline and assign point controls from there?