Travel Mapping

Highway Data Discussion => Updates to Highway Data => Solved Highway data updates => Topic started by: Markkos1992 on October 24, 2018, 08:59:13 pm

Title: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on October 24, 2018, 08:59:13 pm
https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=614

Posting this as a reminder that it should be open around 11/19/2018.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: michih on October 25, 2018, 01:11:28 pm
It's just a month ahead. Isn't this board for 6-month+?
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: yakra on October 25, 2018, 01:35:18 pm
In name only. Since the CHM days, that's just been intended as ballpark, never a hard figure.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Jim on October 25, 2018, 02:41:43 pm
I always interpreted it from the CHM days, correctly or not, I don't know, as a place to post things that need attention in the next six months or a bit longer, hence the +.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on October 25, 2018, 04:58:51 pm
The description does state within the next six months or so.

Quote
Post highway system changes expected to be implemented in the next 6 months or so.

Otherwise I do not know what will happen to the current US 219 when the freeway opens.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: michih on October 26, 2018, 10:43:15 am
place to post things that need attention in the next six months or a bit longer, hence the +.

The same applies to issues regarding openings / changes happened where we are just not sure how the old road is signed now. However, they are posted in "Report errors and changes to be made immediately to the highway data." board. I think it's currently more than 50% of the open issues there...

However, it's fine to me. Never mind!
Title: PA: US-219 Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: rickmastfan67 on November 20, 2018, 09:46:43 pm
The brand new expressway will be opening tomorrow (November 21, 2018).  No idea what will happen numbering wise with the old road.
https://wjactv.com/news/local/drone-video-of-us-219-before-it-opens-to-traffic-wednesday-afternoon
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on November 21, 2018, 10:56:31 am
The brand new expressway will be opening tomorrow (November 21, 2018).  No idea what will happen numbering wise with the old road.
https://wjactv.com/news/local/drone-video-of-us-219-before-it-opens-to-traffic-wednesday-afternoon

Yeah I never found any information on the old route.  I will probably put a file with those points somewhere in case something turns up.

Hopefully this will be completed in the HB sometime next week as I recenter all of US 219.  I doubt many of us will be begging for this to be done right away unlike the I-95 changes a couple months ago.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: mapcat on November 21, 2018, 09:50:47 pm
If no one else beats me to it, I can check out the numbering for the old route early next month.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on November 21, 2018, 11:28:54 pm
If no one else beats me to it, I can check out the numbering for the old route early next month.

I doubt I will make it down there any time soon.  US 219 is not currently high up on my clinching priority list.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Wadsteckel on November 22, 2018, 10:39:41 pm
I'll be driving the new roadway when I head back out on the road.  Had a load that I picked up in Thomson GA that is bound for Grantsville MD.  With the holiday, I parked at our yard in Warrendale PA, so that means I'll take the PA Turnpike out to Somerset, then down US 219 to the Pilot on Sunday to be ready for the delivery on Monday.  I'll try to get information (which, as a truck driver, I can't really do more than the route I'm on) and post it via my iPad once I'm parked.

-Ed S
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on November 24, 2018, 04:24:02 pm
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2386

I won't mark this as solved due to the uncertainty over any routing changes on the old US 219.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: cl94 on November 24, 2018, 07:06:35 pm
I can confirm that the new expressway is open. Old route is not signed as anything from now-current 219, but that doesn't mean anything with how inconsistent PennDOT is.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Wadsteckel on November 25, 2018, 01:06:13 pm
Parked in Grantsville MD, here’s what I can confirm...

Berlin Plank Rd (which starts at PA31) is still unsigned.  Once on the new US219, there is only one additional exit for Berlin and Rockwood (East Mud Pike) about 3 miles south of where US219 used to divert onto Berlin Plank Rd.  Mile post is 24, but no exit numbers are on the exits. 

Certainly made for an easier drive with 75,000 lbs 😀

Regards,
-Ed S
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: oscar on November 26, 2018, 07:09:13 pm
Today I both drove the new US 219 segment southbound, and went back northbound to re-drive the bypassed old alignment. No route numbers for the old alignment shown on the Berlin Plank Rd. exit SB, or the US219BusMey_N exit either SB or NB. Moreover, there is no new route number signed on the NB old alignment, just a lot of remnant old US 219 signage (both route markers and reference markers).

Since the new segment opened just a few days ago, and there was some uncertainty when it would open (it opened two days later than scheduled), no surprise that no signage changes were done right after a long holiday weekend. Maybe later.

One thing that would make sense for part of old US 219 would be to extend PA 653 southeast of Garrett, to connect to the new US 219 alignment.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on November 26, 2018, 07:51:49 pm
I have kinda decided at this point to just leave this unsolved for about three months.  If nothing else has changed by then (approximately March 1, 2019), I will just mark it as solved and any changes can be posted separately.

Part of me just wonders if there could be a separate contract involved with signing along the old US 219 corridor.  That is why I want to hold out on this despite not seeing any signage on the plans in ECMS.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: yakra on November 26, 2018, 11:54:34 pm
One thing that would make sense for part of old US 219 would be to extend PA 653 southeast of Garrett, to connect to the new US 219 alignment.
Or PA601?
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on November 27, 2018, 07:12:48 am
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2392

I edited the PA 653 file to change US 219 to Mason-Dixon Hwy (MasDixHwy) for the time being.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: yakra on November 27, 2018, 03:35:18 pm
Shaping points along US219 are getting pretty thick. Best practice is to just what's needed to keep the road's centerline within the red boundary lines in wptedit. If necessary, a few more can be added for major mountain switchbacks and the like, to keep mileage accurate, or to differentiate from the traces of other nearby routes to keep things less confusing in mapview. I was able to get US219 down to just 20 hidden points, still within tolerance.

Replacing visible points with hidden points should also be avoided.
Quoth the manual (http://cmap.m-plex.com/tools/manual_includepts.php):
Quote
Prefer an intersection to act as a shaping point location wherever possible. Shaping points that coincide with intersections should be added as normal, visible waypoints labeled in the usual way.
If a point is needed for shaping in a given area, keeping it as a visible point allows users to specify their travels even more precisely.

To pick on the BruRd -> X35A conversion specifically (I didn't look at the others), IMO the shaping is better with the visibile point at the original coords -- the trace north of there more evenly bisects the road's E-W diversions, with a smaller diversion overall on the west, and the trace south of there is closer in to the roadway.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on November 27, 2018, 05:40:22 pm
Part of my concern on mileage came from me removing temporarily a shaping point along I-579 (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2278) that took out about 0.1 miles.  After that, I tried to limit the mileage concern and added some shaping points in areas where the route almost goes out of lateral.  Most everything else is out of intersecting roads not really going anywhere.

I'll relook at US 219 otherwise.

Part 1 in Repository: https://github.com/Markkos1992/HighwayData/pull/107/commits/7b729e1a66c0f324b32b37b727cc1dcb3d541e5a

(Removed all shaping points that reduced mileage by less than 0.05 miles.  Replaced +X20 with Barr Ave.  This puts me at 46 hidden points. 199.12 miles.)

After the relocation and before further changes, the mileage was 198.83 miles.  I guess my question is what gauge should be used for mileage loss by removing shaping points.  For the record, most of the shaping points (certainly in McKean County) seemed to already be there.)

Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Duke87 on November 27, 2018, 09:02:42 pm
Keep in mind that the policy about being as stingy as practical with shaping points came from the old CHM days when there were much more constraint server/processing resources available compared to now, which made it necessary at the time to keep the number of points down.

I see nothing to be gained by expending effort reducing the quantity of shaping points when we're no longer at risk of overtaxing resources if we don't.



Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: oscar on November 27, 2018, 10:04:22 pm
But also let's not overdo it on adding new shaping points, even if that would make minor or even noticeable improvements to distance accuracy, or repositioning existing shaping points that could be removed instead.

For example, the HB estimates HI 360's distance as 26.22 miles. The actual distance is 34.93 miles. With about 600 hairpins on that really curvaceous highway, it would take at least several hundred new shaping points (only the bare minimum 9 shaping points now, plus 14 visible waypoints) for the HB to show something resembling the actual distance. Not gonna happen.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on November 28, 2018, 07:36:42 pm
Part 2:  Removed most other unneeded shaping points (reduced down to 20). Replaced +X4 with Clark Rd (ClaRd). Replaced +X29 with Johnson Rd (JohRd). Replaced +X30 with Camp Corbly Rd (CampCorRd). Replaced +X33 with Old Grade Rd (OldGraRd_A). Replaced +X35A back with Brubaker Rd (BruRd). Replaced +X35B with Walburn Run Rd (WalRunRd).  (Down to 20 hidden points with 196.12 miles)

+X36A stays as I did not see justification to bring back EagSt as I doubt it would almost never get used. 

See commit here:  https://github.com/Markkos1992/HighwayData/pull/107/commits/0d69ab2edf42c2ef4a8f095ebc5c2e049e722e53

Full pull request:  https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2397


Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Duke87 on November 28, 2018, 08:43:22 pm
For example, the HB estimates HI 360's distance as 26.22 miles. The actual distance is 34.93 miles. With about 600 hairpins on that really curvaceous highway, it would take at least several hundred new shaping points (only the bare minimum 9 shaping points now, plus 14 visible waypoints) for the HB to show something resembling the actual distance. Not gonna happen.

Eh - I blame no one for not wanting to go through the painstaking effort of adding all the extra points to do something like that. The way it is can be considered good enough under the circumstances. On the other hand, if someone were to decide to go and do it because they were just that bored or because it really really bothered their OCD that it wasn't done, I certainly wouldn't complain either. I'd be impressed and say A++.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on November 30, 2018, 06:46:26 pm
I added in-use alternate labels from the old US 219 to the endpoints of the new US 219 freeway section.

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2400
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: rickmastfan67 on November 30, 2018, 08:35:14 pm
I added in-use alternate labels from the old US 219 to the endpoints of the new US 219 freeway section.

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2400

I wouldn't do that, as that might falsely give people credit for the new US-219 expressway segment, which is something we don't want to happen.  Let them notice the error in their error log and correct it on their own.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on November 30, 2018, 10:17:01 pm
I added in-use alternate labels from the old US 219 to the endpoints of the new US 219 freeway section.

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2400

I wouldn't do that, as that might falsely give people credit for the new US-219 expressway segment, which is something we don't want to happen.  Let them notice the error in their error log and correct it on their own.

I made sure to search who used the old points in the User Data to make sure that this did not occur.  I based it on the respective list file entries I saw.  I know I saw one person that would still have an error because the entry started at US219BusMey_N and ended on the old US 219.

I did the same thing on I-95 a couple months ago in PA, which is why the "40" label (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2250/files) has a bunch of alternate labels.  The difference there was that I did not even have to look at list files because anyone that had used a number beyond "40" would need to put in a entry for I-295 or would have still lost mileage.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: rickmastfan67 on December 01, 2018, 11:29:27 am
I did the same thing on I-95 a couple months ago in PA, which is why the "40" label (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2250/files) has a bunch of alternate labels.  The difference there was that I did not even have to look at list files because anyone that had used a number beyond "40" would need to put in a entry for I-295 or would have still lost mileage.

But what if somebody had only traveled former exits 40 to 46 (or any of the other former exits sans the NJ border) on 'old' I-95?  That could have caused a possible issue in the database (Jim, mind chiming in here on this possibility) with an entry of '0' for the mileage.

Also, what if said person had only traveled Exit 40 to the NJ border on the old I-95 & never had traveled on I-276 (PA Turnpike)?  Why should they be given credit for that?  This is one reason why breaking people's list files due to a reroute is completely acceptable, & necessary when it's something this big.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: yakra on December 01, 2018, 02:32:38 pm
But what if somebody had only traveled former exits 40 to 46 (or any of the other former exits sans the NJ border) on 'old' I-95?  That could have caused a possible issue in the database (Jim, mind chiming in here on this possibility) with an entry of '0' for the mileage.
I believe zero-length, point-A-to-point-A, segments aren't a problem. Jim, CMIIW...

Also, what if said person had only traveled Exit 40 to the NJ border on the old I-95 & never had traveled on I-276 (PA Turnpike)?  Why should they be given credit for that?  This is one reason why breaking people's list files due to a reroute is completely acceptable, & necessary when it's something this big.
It's possible to search the UserData repo to see if anyone had PA I-95 40 NJ/PA or PA I-95 NJ/PA 40 .listed. I assume from reading Markkos1992's post that he did this.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on December 01, 2018, 05:04:11 pm
I am doing more work on I-95 and I-276, but the list files affected by alternate labels for US 219 were the following:

1.  Beerman- "PA US219 PA653 PA669"  PA669 is south of US219BusMey_N so PA653 is an alternate label for US219BusMey_N.

2.  JamesMD- "PA US219 CinRd US22"  US22 is much farther north of BerPlaRd so CinRd is an alternate label for BerPlaRd.

Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: rickmastfan67 on December 01, 2018, 06:20:29 pm
Also, what if said person had only traveled Exit 40 to the NJ border on the old I-95 & never had traveled on I-276 (PA Turnpike)?  Why should they be given credit for that?  This is one reason why breaking people's list files due to a reroute is completely acceptable, & necessary when it's something this big.
It's possible to search the UserData repo to see if anyone had PA I-95 40 NJ/PA or PA I-95 NJ/PA 40 .listed. I assume from reading Markkos1992's post that he did this.

What I meant was any of the exits north of 40 between there & the state line.  The way Markkos1992 said it above, he just assumed that anyone who had used any label above 40 (which was the following: 46, 48, 51), didn't have the PA/NJ & 999 (would have been the perfect time to get rid of the 999 label finally) labels on the same line with them.  If a user had "51 999" for I-95, now they have credit for the PA Turnpike segment, which they shouldn't, because we shouldn't be assuming this.  This is what I'm trying to get at.

EDIT: Just did a quick search in the list file depository (using "PA I-95"), and found at least one user that this effects.  jpinyan had the following line: "PA I-95 51 PA/NJ".  sneezy & rlee (who according to the list file, never even traveled on I-276, and now falsely has that segent), also have a similar issue.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on December 01, 2018, 08:58:48 pm
Quote
Just did a quick search in the list file depository (using "PA I-95"), and found at least one user that this effects.  jpinyan had the following line: "PA I-95 51 PA/NJ".  sneezy & rlee (who according to the list file, never even traveled on I-276, and now falsely has that segment), also have a similar issue.

Yes I was working on a spreadsheet for both I-95 and I-276 here.  Sneezy actually did travel on I-276 but not east of US 1 (Exit 351).

Otherwise, I am good with removing the 46, 48, and 51 alternate labels from I-95.  I'll post in the old thread on the I-95/I-295/I-276 (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=2321.30) changes those who will need to edit their list files.

Would it be a wise move to consider removing the 0 and 999 labels?  I want to make sure it is emphasized as much as possible for everyone to verify that the right sections of I-95 have been traveled.

Pull Request in Repository: https://github.com/Markkos1992/HighwayData/pull/112
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Jim on December 01, 2018, 10:23:47 pm
I am not aware of any problems that would be caused by 0-length "clinches", but I'd have to look.  If I'm understanding the situation, given that we're talking about alt labels, the lines in question would be interpreted the same as specifying the same start and end point for a segment

ZA I-50 24 24

Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: rickmastfan67 on December 01, 2018, 11:00:04 pm
Would it be a wise move to consider removing the 0 and 999 labels?  I want to make sure it is emphasized as much as possible for everyone to verify that the right sections of I-95 have been traveled.

No for '0', as that point didn't change locations.
Yes to '999' IMO, since it DID change locations.

There are several list files that have the '0' label, but don't use the '999' one.  Thus, only people who are still claiming a 'full' clinch of the old route would be properly effected.  Too bad we can't do anything about the 'PA/NJ' label, but at least we can with that 999 one to alert them to double check their list files and correct if necessary.

=====

I am not aware of any problems that would be caused by 0-length "clinches", but I'd have to look.  If I'm understanding the situation, given that we're talking about alt labels, the lines in question would be interpreted the same as specifying the same start and end point for a segment

ZA I-50 24 24

That's correct Jim.

Original:
PA I-95 46 48

New (because of 'alt' labels):
PA I-95 40 40

That's the issue I'm curious about.  I couldn't find anybody's list files that have this issue per say, but I just want to make sure that something like this couldn't break the site if it did happen.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on December 02, 2018, 08:07:26 am
I-95 Removing of Alternate Labels: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2403
=====
I am not aware of any problems that would be caused by 0-length "clinches", but I'd have to look.  If I'm understanding the situation, given that we're talking about alt labels, the lines in question would be interpreted the same as specifying the same start and end point for a segment

ZA I-50 24 24

That's correct Jim.

Original:
PA I-95 46 48

New (because of 'alt' labels):
PA I-95 40 40

That's the issue I'm curious about.  I couldn't find anybody's list files that have this issue per say, but I just want to make sure that something like this couldn't break the site if it did happen.

golubcar has the entry "PA I-276 358 PA/NJ", which I believe would apply to this.  I had left 358, PA/NJ, and 999 as alternate labels for I-95 on I-276 due to its truncation.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Jim on December 02, 2018, 08:33:45 am
That's correct Jim.

Original:
PA I-95 46 48

New (because of 'alt' labels):
PA I-95 40 40

That's the issue I'm curious about.  I couldn't find anybody's list files that have this issue per say, but I just want to make sure that something like this couldn't break the site if it did happen.

There's an old GitHub issue related to this:

https://github.com/TravelMapping/DataProcessing/issues/5

I would like to run a test to see if it's still behaving as indicated there.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: vdeane on December 02, 2018, 10:39:13 am
Not sure if this question was covered, but how are the "traveled on" states processed with respect to zero-length segments?  Do they include the route because of the .list entry, or not include it because of the length?
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Jim on December 02, 2018, 12:24:04 pm
Not sure if this question was covered, but how are the "traveled on" states processed with respect to zero-length segments?  Do they include the route because of the .list entry, or not include it because of the length?

No, but this is something I've wanted to support.  There are a number of routes I've only driven at all because I made a gas or food stop right off an exit ramp.  Not nearly enough to "round up" to a nearby TM waypoint.

I just created a GitHub issue to help remember this: https://github.com/TravelMapping/DataProcessing/issues/143
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on December 02, 2018, 01:29:58 pm
Not sure if this question was covered, but how are the "traveled on" states processed with respect to zero-length segments?  Do they include the route because of the .list entry, or not include it because of the length?

No, but this is something I've wanted to support.  There are a number of routes I've only driven at all because I made a gas or food stop right off an exit ramp.  Not nearly enough to "round up" to a nearby TM waypoint.

I just created a GitHub issue to help remember this: https://github.com/TravelMapping/DataProcessing/issues/143

I had never even considered to count these on my personal list file.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: michih on December 02, 2018, 03:30:20 pm
I had never even considered to count these on my personal list file.

Me too. I would not bother...
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: yakra on December 03, 2018, 12:03:25 am
Me three.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: dave1693 on December 12, 2018, 12:25:42 am
Because of the exact segment of old US219 that I had traveled, with the north end at BerPlaRd, I ended up receiving credit for the new piece of US219 bypass before having traveled it. I have fixed that now by traveling it, and extended that segment north by one exit, which will show up in my next update.
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on December 12, 2018, 07:01:56 am
Because of the exact segment of old US219 that I had traveled, with the north end at BerPlaRd, I ended up receiving credit for the new piece of US219 bypass before having traveled it. I have fixed that now by traveling it, and extended that segment north by one exit, which will show up in my next update.

Yeah I had to keep that point label the same so there was nothing I could do about that scenario.  This was also the same with US219BusMey_N and MudPk.  I am thankful that you took care of it though.   :)
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on January 22, 2019, 10:44:43 am
The linked news release below refers to the old US 219 as SR 2047 (with no reference to a business route).  In any case, if this somehow becomes an extended US 219 BUS, there would most likely not be any signs until after this project is completed in April. As a result, I am marking this topic as solved at this time.

https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=639
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on May 08, 2019, 04:13:05 pm
I found out this morning that I broke the PA 770 TRUCK Concurrency during the US 219 Shaping Point Reduction Project.  It should be fixed by the next pull request.

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2827
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on August 17, 2019, 08:49:06 pm
The linked news release below refers to the old US 219 as SR 2047 (with no reference to a business route).  In any case, if this somehow becomes an extended US 219 BUS, there would most likely not be any signs until after this project is completed in April. As a result, I am marking this topic as solved at this time.

https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=639

Just a note, I clinched US 219 BUS (Meyersdale) yesterday while clinching US 219 and saw an END sign for the business route posted just north of the north end of the Meyersdale Bypass along old US 219. 
Title: Re: PA: US 219 Freeway Opening Meyersdale to Somerset
Post by: Markkos1992 on December 02, 2021, 08:56:59 am
I emailed District 9 today on this topic after asking about the US 219 ALT further to the north, and the response was that the Old US 219 will remain as SR 2047.