Travel Mapping

Highway Data Discussion => In-progress Highway Systems & Work => Completed Highway Systems Threads => Topic started by: mapcat on April 10, 2017, 12:48:18 pm

Title: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on April 10, 2017, 12:48:18 pm
I've made some progress on the usapr set and am up to PR400. It appears that there will be approximately 1200 routes in the set when it's finished. Should it be divided into usapr1, usapr2, etc, or should I put them all in one set? Despite having different shields, usapr routes ultimately belong in a single set. PR123, for example, can be found with (at least) three different shields, but all segments are part of the same continuous route, and simply refer to the relative importance of that segment.

Most of the routes >199 are very short (10km or less) and therefore would not require much time for peer review. But I can see how a set of around 1200 of any length might be a little more than someone would want to take on at once.
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: mapcat on May 05, 2017, 03:22:09 pm
This set is in preview now and ready for peer review. A little over 1100 routes total.
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: compdude787 on May 20, 2017, 01:52:52 am
Okay, I am starting my peer review.

PR1: Not sure if the PR25_B waypoint is necessary as it seems to be really close to the one for PR35. These two could be combined. PR18/52 waypoint needs to be adjusted to be more centered on the interchange. Do likewise for the corresponding point in the I-PR1, PR52 and PR18 waypoint files. Need a shaping point about where PR1 crosses a bridge over PR 834. Two NMPs at the north end of Caguas need fixing: PR52(15) and PR30. Those waypoints both need to have their lat/lon coordinates changed to match the waypoints on PR52/I-PR1 and PR 30. According to Google Street View and OSM (very recently updated), it appears that just west of Salinas, the PR1 and PR 701 junction has been moved just SW of the existing location, so that waypoint needs repositioning.

That's all for tonight. PR 2 will have to wait till tomorrow because it's super long (looks longer than PR 1), but hopefully this whole process will go quicker as the routes get shorter.
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: compdude787 on May 21, 2017, 12:24:04 am
Okay, now I'm continuing my peer review.

PR 2: First off, in Ponce, the PR52 waypoint needs to be moved a smidge south (if you look at it in the HDX you'll understand why) as well as the corresponding points on PR 52 and I-PR2. Next, waypoint 213 needs to be moved east just a slight bit (same goes for the corresponding waypoints on I-PR2 and PR 385). A shaping point should be added near where PR 127 crosses over PR 2. At waypoint 181, there's an NMP with PR 102. Just south of the PR109/115 waypoint, there is a shaping point that should be moved southeast to where the road actually curves. In Aguadilla, I'd suggest adding a waypoint at Avenida Las Cascadas, since there is a waterpark and a stadium there, which seem like major destinations. Just east of there, there needs to be a waypoint at the intersection of the road that connects to PR 469 (again, don't forget to add both of these waypoints to the I-PR2 waypoint file). In Arecibo, the waypoints AveCollTos and PR129 need to be recentered.

PR2RPon: No issues found.

Okay, that's all for now...
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: mapcat on May 21, 2017, 11:33:50 am
Thanks for the thorough review!

At waypoint 181, there's an NMP with PR 102. Just south of the PR109/115 waypoint, there is a shaping point that should be moved southeast to where the road actually curves.
That shaping point is actually a placeholder for where PR401 will eventually intersect. Note that in the file it's called +FutPR401. Once the intersection is built, there won't be a need for another shaping point in that segment.

The rest of the changes have been made in my files.
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: compdude787 on May 23, 2017, 12:44:33 am
I'll probably continue reviewing in the next few days, but I noticed that PR 30 was missing from the list of highways in the highway browser, because apparently it wasn't in the usapr.csv file or the usapr_con.csv file. I just did a pull request to add it (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/1271), but you might want to check to see if there are any other errors of this sort.
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: si404 on May 23, 2017, 04:57:30 am
PR30 is in the Select Numbered State Freeways (http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?units=km&sys=usansf&u=si404) currently, as are PR53 and PR66. They need to be removed from there when they are added to usapr, which shouldn't really be until the system is activated.
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: mapcat on May 23, 2017, 08:47:19 am
I'll probably continue reviewing in the next few days, but I noticed that PR 30 was missing from the list of highways in the highway browser, because apparently it wasn't in the usapr.csv file or the usapr_con.csv file. I just did a pull request to add it (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/1271), but you might want to check to see if there are any other errors of this sort.
Since there's sometimes a reason for omissions, I'd appreciate it if you'd just point them out here and let me make the call on whether or not to add them. It doesn't usually take me too long. As Si said, 2 PR53's and PR66 are also in usansf and will stay there until activation.
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: compdude787 on May 23, 2017, 10:05:19 am
I'll probably continue reviewing in the next few days, but I noticed that PR 30 was missing from the list of highways in the highway browser, because apparently it wasn't in the usapr.csv file or the usapr_con.csv file. I just did a pull request to add it (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/1271), but you might want to check to see if there are any other errors of this sort.
Since there's sometimes a reason for omissions, I'd appreciate it if you'd just point them out here and let me make the call on whether or not to add them. It doesn't usually take me too long. As Si said, 2 PR53's and PR66 are also in usansf and will stay there until activation.

Sorry, I forgot that it was in usansf. I just thought I was being helpful...
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: compdude787 on June 03, 2017, 02:02:46 am
Okay, I am now continuing my review.

PR2RMay: According to GSV, PR380 doesn't appear to be signed at its intersection with PR 2R, so it should be removed. The waypoint for CllMenVigo should be centered on the intersection because there is not a one-way couplet here, according to GSV.

PR2RAgu: No problems found.

PR3: CamBal should be changed to CllFer. Just south of Ceiba, there should be a point at PR 53 (the corresponding 6a waypoint on PR 53 doesn't appear to actually be closed per GSV). PR30(28A) should be PR30(28), and the waypoint for PR713 should be moved a few hundred feet west to the actual intersection.

Okay, that's all for now, time to go to bed. Sorry about the slow pace. Hopefully it will go faster as the routes get shorter!
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: mapcat on June 03, 2017, 10:14:09 pm
Thanks for catching those. No worries about the delay. It seems that the rest of them should be easier.

Changes made and submitted, except for the PR30(28) point edit, since it looks like you might have meant that as a change for the PR30 file. In case it is, I'd rather wait to see if you have other suggestions for that file once you get to it.
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: compdude787 on June 03, 2017, 10:56:59 pm
Thanks for catching those. No worries about the delay. It seems that the rest of them should be easier.

Changes made and submitted, except for the PR30(28) point edit, since it looks like you might have meant that as a change for the PR30 file.

I was referring to the waypoint named PR30(28A) in the PR3 file. According to the official PR map you sent me, (and GSV) that exit is numbered just 28. The corresponding waypoint on PR30 is labeled as PR 3, which is weird because I thought we put in exit numbers on freeways where they exist.
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: mapcat on June 04, 2017, 07:42:46 am
I was referring to the waypoint named PR30(28A) in the PR3 file. According to the official PR map you sent me, (and GSV) that exit is numbered just 28. The corresponding waypoint on PR30 is labeled as PR 3, which is weird because I thought we put in exit numbers on freeways where they exist.

Sorry, I'm not finding a point with that label in the PR3 file:

Code: [Select]
PR1_N http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.396821&lon=-66.054590
PR25 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.396627&lon=-66.053195
CllCamSoto http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.395510&lon=-66.049902
PR27 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.395225&lon=-66.042815
PR181_N http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.394950&lon=-66.031303
PR47 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.396477&lon=-66.023868
PR849 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.397204&lon=-66.005543
PR8 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.398127&lon=-65.995490
PR887_W http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.398350&lon=-65.989943
PR190/8887 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.394604&lon=-65.982015
PR26/66 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.391679&lon=-65.978051
PR887_E http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.380246&lon=-65.962547
PR874_W http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.376209&lon=-65.954881
PR853 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.375115&lon=-65.947473
PR857 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.376071&lon=-65.934121
PR874_E http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.377527&lon=-65.921638
PR9959_W http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.376387&lon=-65.907079
PR185 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.374890&lon=-65.899735
PR9959_E http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.378953&lon=-65.891179
PR188 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.379268&lon=-65.885053
PR958 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.377904&lon=-65.862828
PR959 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.378281&lon=-65.856412
PR187R http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.377864&lon=-65.836735
PR66/187 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.375964&lon=-65.827690
PR186 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.375226&lon=-65.822997
PR955_A http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.374462&lon=-65.818094
PR967 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.374275&lon=-65.813288
PR955_B http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.374819&lon=-65.810074
PR955_C http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.375079&lon=-65.808905
PR955_D http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.378357&lon=-65.793273
Cll9 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.377008&lon=-65.788381
PR955_E http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.373613&lon=-65.784025
PR191 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.371892&lon=-65.771520
PR968 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.371974&lon=-65.767523
PR955_F http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.371888&lon=-65.765952
PR992_W http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.373022&lon=-65.761832
PR193_A http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.379513&lon=-65.747165
PR193_B http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.379165&lon=-65.743099
PR193_C http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.379251&lon=-65.739612
CamFer http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.381768&lon=-65.730220
PR193/992 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.371728&lon=-65.716079
PR940_W http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.354932&lon=-65.698253
PR194/940 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.345910&lon=-65.672842
PR985 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.340840&lon=-65.668325
PR195 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.326612&lon=-65.656926
PR53_N http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.314618&lon=-65.650531
PR194_S http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.314739&lon=-65.650145
PR53(2) http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.298225&lon=-65.646669
PR982 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.284709&lon=-65.638670
PR979_N http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.271018&lon=-65.640988
CllIsaRos http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.270192&lon=-65.639878
+X890456 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.258761&lon=-65.646401
PR979_S http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.259719&lon=-65.649169
ToPR53 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.256553&lon=-65.651480
PR974 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.236671&lon=-65.662902
PR53(10) http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.229759&lon=-65.670003
PR973 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.216809&lon=-65.696161
PR31 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.213704&lon=-65.703763
CllCam http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.189357&lon=-65.713601
PR192 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.195320&lon=-65.722968
CllAdu http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.165271&lon=-65.744741
Cll5 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.158104&lon=-65.758614
PR925_N http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.150794&lon=-65.780200
PR53(31) http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.143980&lon=-65.803696
PR925_S http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.143372&lon=-65.805855
PR923 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.144781&lon=-65.810476
PR60 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.146851&lon=-65.814693
PR198 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.149466&lon=-65.825491
PR908_N http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.144002&lon=-65.826736
PR909 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.139210&lon=-65.827337
PR30 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.134989&lon=-65.825438
PR910 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.116982&lon=-65.821812
PR906_N http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.111699&lon=-65.822176
PR906_S http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.090039&lon=-65.847400
PR908_S http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.086613&lon=-65.855253
PR905 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.072742&lon=-65.873235
PR902 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.065052&lon=-65.876840
PR9909/9910 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.054627&lon=-65.875145
PR901 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.044956&lon=-65.869308
PR182 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.040692&lon=-65.877977
SecLaPan http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.035272&lon=-65.906175
PR939 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.010451&lon=-65.896873
CllLMRivera_E http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.007422&lon=-65.899344
PR750 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.008274&lon=-65.901452
PR760 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.005678&lon=-65.903812
PR759 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.004177&lon=-65.905004
+X450413 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.981412&lon=-65.909413
PR7758 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.974667&lon=-65.936342
+X637927 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.971269&lon=-65.954055
PR758 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.978044&lon=-65.972573
+X840267 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.978716&lon=-66.003494
PR53Pat_E http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.982093&lon=-66.003376
PR757 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.996318&lon=-66.009159
PR181_S http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.005042&lon=-66.013418
PR184 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.998869&lon=-66.025445
PR53Pat_W http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.982348&lon=-66.030917
PR178/753 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.974552&lon=-66.058453
PR178_W http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.977628&lon=-66.069106
PR54/748 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.980547&lon=-66.085328
PR748_S http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.980139&lon=-66.086916
PR744 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.979742&lon=-66.110310
PR15 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.985190&lon=-66.113545
PR54_W http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.977685&lon=-66.123845
PR710 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.960162&lon=-66.139069
PR7707 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.957284&lon=-66.154368
PR7710 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.956243&lon=-66.159862
PR707 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.955324&lon=-66.165398
PR713 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.966357&lon=-66.181491
PR706 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.970775&lon=-66.218628
PR705 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.971592&lon=-66.226535
PR703 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.968040&lon=-66.260589
PR180 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.974215&lon=-66.289095
PR1_S http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=17.976202&lon=-66.298542

Here's the PR30 file, which has borh 28 and 28A points (due to two interchanges that have different numbers in different directions):

Code: [Select]
PR52 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.264239&lon=-66.038608
0 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.259400&lon=-66.037145
3 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.248977&lon=-66.017103
4 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.245899&lon=-66.007356
5 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.246735&lon=-65.993843
7 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.249683&lon=-65.975770
8 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.249130&lon=-65.972139
9 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.249812&lon=-65.961485
12 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.236790&lon=-65.926015
13 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.234375&lon=-65.921627
14 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.226518&lon=-65.917196
19 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.184691&lon=-65.888143
21 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.175150&lon=-65.876899
22 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.168626&lon=-65.868423
25 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.155904&lon=-65.841064
26 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.144710&lon=-65.833039
28 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.138491&lon=-65.830164
28A http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.134989&lon=-65.825438
30 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.124919&lon=-65.817300
I can switch PR 30's 28 and 28A labels if you think that would make more sense.
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: compdude787 on June 04, 2017, 03:45:43 pm
Well, that's weird. The HDX, which I'm mainly using for this peer review, shows a different name for the waypoint where PR 3 meets PR30. I guess I should just use the highway browser to review routes.

Anyway....as for PR 30,  the point currently labeled as 28 should be 27, and the point that's currently 28A should be 28.
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: Jim on June 04, 2017, 04:25:07 pm
Well, that's weird. The HDX, which I'm mainly using for this peer review, shows a different name for the waypoint where PR 3 meets PR30. I guess I should just use the highway browser to review routes.

Anyway....as for PR 30,  the point currently labeled as 28 should be 27, and the point that's currently 28A should be 28.

HDX loads graphs, not routes.  There's an extensive process that simplifies labels at intersections and along concurrencies.  Definitely use the HB, not HDX, as the way to see what the labels are for TM purposes.
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: compdude787 on June 04, 2017, 05:07:59 pm
Well, that's weird. The HDX, which I'm mainly using for this peer review, shows a different name for the waypoint where PR 3 meets PR30. I guess I should just use the highway browser to review routes.

Anyway....as for PR 30,  the point currently labeled as 28 should be 27, and the point that's currently 28A should be 28.

HDX loads graphs, not routes.  There's an extensive process that simplifies labels at intersections and along concurrencies.  Definitely use the HB, not HDX, as the way to see what the labels are for TM purposes.

I see. I was using it before so that I could see other routes as well as the one I was reviewing, but now that we have the intersecting routes feature in the HB, I can just stick with that and not need to use the HDX.
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: Jim on June 04, 2017, 07:25:05 pm
I see. I was using it before so that I could see other routes as well as the one I was reviewing, but now that we have the intersecting routes feature in the HB, I can just stick with that and not need to use the HDX.

HDX can still be helpful in finding things like broken concurrencies.  Others might want to comment on how they've used it to help find problems.
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: compdude787 on June 16, 2017, 04:50:29 pm
Now that I am done with school, I can put more time into this peer review. And with the routes shorter, this should go A LOT faster!

PR5: No issues found.
PR5Toa: No issues found.
PR6: No issues found.
PR8: AveCamRico -> AveRobSanVil (per OSM, the official PR map, and GSV)
PR9: Need waypoint for CamdePon (CamPon? Not sure what to call it), located just south of the PR 10 intersection. Also I'm going to assume that the section of PR9 between PR 123 and PR 500 has opened to traffic and that OSM--which still shows it as under construction--is just out of date. You may want to double check this.
PR10: No issues found.
PR10Pon: No issues found.
PR12: MuePl -> CllA

That's all for now...
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: mapcat on June 16, 2017, 09:06:39 pm
Wow, your school goes late...

Re PR9: that part of PR9 may or may not be open, but since the satellite view shows significant progress, I included it assuming that it would be finished by the time the set is activated.

PR12's waypoint named "MuePl" comes from the DTOP classification log.
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: compdude787 on June 22, 2017, 01:40:54 am
Okay, I see.

Anyway, I will continue:
PR14: PR162_N should be PR162_W, PR162_S should be PR162_E.
PR15: No issues found.
PR16: No issues found.
PR17: No issues found.
PR18: No issues found.
PR19: No issues found.
PR20: No issues found.
PR21: Instead of a shaping point where PR21 turns north and runs parallel to PR20, change it to an actual waypoint for PR20 as there is an offramp from PR 20 NB at that intersection. (and a waypoint on PR20 for PR21 there)
PR22: 37 -> 38
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: mapcat on June 23, 2017, 04:50:49 pm
PR14: PR162_N should be PR162_W, PR162_S should be PR162_E.

Are you sure PR162 is signed as an E-W route? GMSV has no imagery and it's diagonal, so it's not obvious to me that one is preferable to the other.
Title: Re: usapr
Post by: compdude787 on June 23, 2017, 09:50:50 pm
PR14: PR162_N should be PR162_W, PR162_S should be PR162_E.

Are you sure PR162 is signed as an E-W route? GMSV has no imagery and it's diagonal, so it's not obvious to me that one is preferable to the other.

My suggestion didn't have anything to do with whether or not PR 162 is an E-W route, but just the fact that one point was the western intersection of PR 162 and PR14, and the other waypoint is the eastern intersection of PR 162 and 14. It makes more sense to label the waypoints in this way. Anyway, I'll continue reviewing...

PR23: No issues found
PR24: No issues found
PR25: PsoJaiBen -> AveUni
PR26: No issues found
PR27: No issues found
PR28: The point for PR2 should be moved northeast to the same coords for the waypoint for PR 28 on the PR 2 waypoint file. There is no way to get directly from the eastern terminus of PR 28 to PR 22.
PR29: No issues found
PR30: No issues found
PR31: No issues found
PR32: No issues found
PR33: No issues found
PR34: No issues found
PR35: No issues found
PR36: No issues found
PR37: CllPelRod -> CllPro
PR38: No issues found
PR39: No issues found
PR40: No issues found
PR41: No issues found
PR42: No issues found
PR47: No issues found

That's all for now.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on June 24, 2017, 12:03:04 pm
My suggestion didn't have anything to do with whether or not PR 162 is an E-W route, but just the fact that one point was the western intersection of PR 162 and PR14, and the other waypoint is the eastern intersection of PR 162 and 14. It makes more sense to label the waypoints in this way. Anyway, I'll continue reviewing...

Ok, I was going with the CHM guidelines on this:

Quote from: CHM guidelines

For non-exit-numbered routes concurrent with another non-exit-numbered route, use normal waypoint labels for the intermediate points.

For the multiplex splits, add a suffix: an underscore followed by a direction letter. The direction letter should match the signed direction the concurrent route is splitting toward. US80_W in the US25 file means that US 80 heads west from US 25 at that point but is concurrent to the east.

The guidelines are under review, but I don't recall seeing this one being overturned yet.

Quote from: compdude787
PR25: PsoJaiBen -> AveUni

GMSV says otherwise (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4029654,-66.0521278,3a,49.9y,34.97h,99.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVCgxjfZgsawYRt9bu_7-eA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).

Quote from: compdude787
PR37: CllPelRod -> CllPro

Here too. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4494493,-66.0475028,3a,16.2y,243.89h,91.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEhsXEgJ5wSW5yeHqVtDeGQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: yakra on June 24, 2017, 12:50:12 pm
Is "Pso" a standard abbreviation for Paseo"?
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on June 24, 2017, 05:24:21 pm
Is "Pso" a standard abbreviation for Paseo"?

If you consider the USPS Standard Abbreviations for Spanish–Language Addresses (https://pe.usps.com/text/pub28/28aph.htm#ep160520) a legitimate standard, it is.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: compdude787 on June 24, 2017, 08:19:46 pm
My suggestion didn't have anything to do with whether or not PR 162 is an E-W route, but just the fact that one point was the western intersection of PR 162 and PR14, and the other waypoint is the eastern intersection of PR 162 and 14. It makes more sense to label the waypoints in this way. Anyway, I'll continue reviewing...

Ok, I was going with the CHM guidelines on this:

Quote from: CHM guidelines

For non-exit-numbered routes concurrent with another non-exit-numbered route, use normal waypoint labels for the intermediate points.

For the multiplex splits, add a suffix: an underscore followed by a direction letter. The direction letter should match the signed direction the concurrent route is splitting toward. US80_W in the US25 file means that US 80 heads west from US 25 at that point but is concurrent to the east.

The guidelines are under review, but I don't recall seeing this one being overturned yet.

I didn't know such a guideline existed. Seems like a really counter-intuitive way to do it. But since it's been a long-established way of doing things, I suppose we can leave it how it is.

Quote from: compdude787
PR25: PsoJaiBen -> AveUni

GMSV says otherwise (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4029654,-66.0521278,3a,49.9y,34.97h,99.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVCgxjfZgsawYRt9bu_7-eA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).

Quote from: compdude787
PR37: CllPelRod -> CllPro

Here too. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4494493,-66.0475028,3a,16.2y,243.89h,91.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEhsXEgJ5wSW5yeHqVtDeGQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Well...okay then. I guess both Google Maps and OSM were wrong.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on June 24, 2017, 10:18:48 pm
Here is the CHM Instruction Manual. Sorry no one shared the link with you yet.

http://cmap.m-plex.com/tools/manual.php (http://cmap.m-plex.com/tools/manual.php)
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: yakra on June 25, 2017, 01:56:08 am
If you consider the USPS Standard Abbreviations for Spanish–Language Addresses (https://pe.usps.com/text/pub28/28aph.htm#ep160520) a legitimate standard, it is.
Sounds good to me. USPS standard abbrevs have been invoked in the past, albeit for English. Spanish for PR sounds sensible.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: compdude787 on June 26, 2017, 12:06:58 am
Okay thanks for the link to the CHM instruction manual. Now I'm gonna continue this peer review.

PR52: 108 -> PR9 (no exit number shown on GMSV)
PR53: No issues found
PR53Gua: No issues found
PR53Mau: No issues found
PR53Pat: No issues found
PR54: No issues found
PR60: No issues found
PR63: No issues found
PR64: No issues found
PR65: No issues found
PR66: CamClu -> CamCiu
PR100: No issues found
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: compdude787 on July 26, 2017, 12:27:16 am
Finally continuing my review, sorry for the delay.

PR101: fine
PR102: So I'm assuming that this does not actually connect to PR120 or 121, right?
PR103: fine
PR104: fine
PR105: fine
PR106: fine
PR107: fine
PR108: fine
PR109: fine
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on July 26, 2017, 02:21:04 am
PR102: So I'm assuming that this does not actually connect to PR120 or 121, right?

As far as I can tell, yes. The Manual de Descripción de Rutas says that PR102 ends at the intersection of PR120 & PR121, which it describes as Quinoñes & 65 de Infantería, but the descriptions of 120 & 121 show that they end a few blocks away from that intersection. There's no imagery, so I'm assuming that the PR102 description just hasn't been updated to reflect some relinquishments in the other routes.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: compdude787 on October 23, 2017, 08:23:33 pm
Okay, I am finally continuing the review.

PR110: CllAHer -> CllAmeHer (note that there's an accent mark over the "e" in "Ame" according to OSM, but I'd omit that because it'd be fairly difficult for people to type the e with the accent mark). Also, is there a reason why the northern end point is just a hundred feet west of the CliRd waypoint? GMSV doesn't show an End sign there, and I have to wonder if that's the right place to put the End waypoint.
PR110RAgu: Signage for this one is a bit weird. First there's a sign here (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4841468,-67.1109165,3a,27.1y,335.09h,83.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spL-UiJ4VrPLRbkpCYmXXPA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) that says "INT [intersection?] 4010", then a bit further up, you see another sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4843861,-67.1112183,3a,15y,344.2h,86.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szwc6CA9il8lovQQ9jnbhEQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) that says 110R is to the left, and then at the beginning of 110R there's a reassurance shield (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4850725,-67.1117538,3a,15y,288.03h,87.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sS1dsBjDkZx8LeocLswqtUw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) that indicates that the route number is actually PR 4010! So not sure if this route should be changed to PR 4010 or not. (note that all the street view in the area has the same May 2016 date)
PR110RMoc: fine
PR111: PR4128 appears to be unsigned.


That's all for now.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on October 30, 2017, 06:23:27 pm
Thanks for catching 4010. The documentation showed that it had changed, but I only saw the 110R sign at the intersection. The northern end of 110 is listed in the manual and the log as the east gate of the airport, and satellite imagery shows that the gate is just west of that intersection, so that's where I thought it should go. Similar situation with 107 coming into the airport from the SW, although it looks like I placed that endpoint short of the gate. I'll fix 107 in tonight's pull.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: compdude787 on November 04, 2017, 05:36:09 pm
I am now continuing my review.

PR112: fine
PR113: fine
PR114: fine
PR115: fine
PR116: fine
PR117: fine
PR118: fine
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: yakra on November 02, 2018, 11:35:12 pm
Suggest adding a point to PR181 to complement PR876@ToPR181
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on November 03, 2018, 04:17:08 pm
Suggest adding a point to PR181 to complement PR876@ToPR181
Seems like a good idea. I'll add that this weekend.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on November 04, 2018, 05:57:02 pm
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2342
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on November 04, 2018, 08:28:20 pm
Evin (compdude787) told me that he's unable to continue with the peer review, so if anyone would like to help out, I'd appreciate it. He took care of most of the long routes.

I have one DTOP map (sent my other copy to him) so anyone who wants to look at it can PM me and I'll send photos of it. The online version still doesn't work.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: yakra on November 04, 2018, 11:29:10 pm
pr.pr7025;+X145358;;;HIDDEN_TERMINUS;
was a good test case while I was working on the graph generation-based datachecks, but I'm done with it now. :)
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: Markkos1992 on April 21, 2021, 07:51:29 am
Evin (compdude787) told me that he's unable to continue with the peer review, so if anyone would like to help out, I'd appreciate it. He took care of most of the long routes.

I have one DTOP map (sent my other copy to him) so anyone who wants to look at it can PM me and I'll send photos of it. The online version still doesn't work.

I'll go ahead and take over the Puerto Rico peer review as part of my spamming you over KY/OH minor stuff.  You can send me photos of the DTOP map via email. 
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on April 21, 2021, 11:28:04 am
Thank you! I will get that to you later this week.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: Markkos1992 on April 24, 2021, 08:28:10 pm
PR 119:  PR 4119 shows up on OSM as PR 485.  Otherwise no issues as I can tell best using OSM and the Here Maps.  I am slightly confused about the area around PR 124, but I think it is correct.  Also I normally would have mentioned changing the shaping point southwest of PR 486 to a visible point, but there is no road name.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on April 25, 2021, 10:27:21 am
PR 119:  PR 4119 shows up on OSM as PR 485.  Otherwise no issues as I can tell best using OSM and the Here Maps. 

According to the info in the spreadsheet I sent you, there's only one 485, but the route I mapped matches the description of 4119. The document is from 2015, so maybe there has been a change, but unfortunately there's no GMSV available at that intersection (get used to that). I would not trust OSM over other sources, or even my own intuition here honestly.

4-digit routes that *don't* start with a double digit are relatively new, and often renumbered spurs (ramales). So a number like 4119 is often an indication that the route used to be a spur of 119 (ie 119R) in the 4xxx sector. Not saying that happened here, but you'll notice it in other places, and if the numbers don't match, that's one reason.

EDIT 1: The online map is working now: https://dtop.pr.gov/mapa-de-regionales/ (https://dtop.pr.gov/mapa-de-regionales/)

Looks like they changed that road to 485. I will update it.

EDIT 2: Just noticed that the online map is (c) 2011. It looks like it's not been updated recently, since PR 66 is shown as under construction east of 188. So maybe it's not going to be all that helpful after all.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: Markkos1992 on April 25, 2021, 02:59:00 pm
PR 120:  Assuming that this and PA 121 do not reach PR 102. 

1.  A point labeled "ToPR357" would be useful at the "roundabout" north of PR105_E.  Same for "ToPR120" on PR 357 here.
2.  OSM and the Here Maps disagree on the routing north of the point I just mentioned.

PR 121:  I would change PR2 to CllMarVega, but this may be better off left as-is. No other concerns.

PR 122 (Lajas and San German): Fine.

PR 123:
1.  Add a point at Calle Puerto Viejo (CllPueVie).
2.  It seems to me that the one-way split of PR 123 continues all the way to PR 2R. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.0113714,-66.6236988,3a,75y,266.59h,81.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDDpc4cP3fD5__ga50aLQ5g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)  It is practically impossible to follow northbound through Downtown Ponce.
3.  The Ponce inset shows PR 500 extended to PR 123 even though the spreadsheet does not.  (maybe a "ToPR500" or "PR500Con" since I do not see a road name here)
4.  Have there been any updates on PR 9?
5.  I recommend changing PR501_S to PR501 and PR501_N to PR501Pon.  (looking at the route, the latter may be too long)
6.  Is PR 516 at the right location?
7.  Are you sure that there are one-way sections of PR 123 and PR 5516 at PA 521? (Maybe the point here should be relocated??)
8.  Is PR 6111 truly concurrent with PR 123?
9.  I recommend points on PR 10 and PR 123 at the connector north of PR 111.  Note to make sure that PR 123 does not cross PR 10 here in Mapview.
10.  I recommend a shaping point at the turn after PR 6613 to help keep PR 123 for being put on top of it.
 
PR 124: Fine.

PR 125:  Fine.  However, I also saw signs for PR 111R (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.33698,-66.9775985,3a,75y,158.55h,84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sfXi_USnkvzxkPFk8Rc6zJw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) at the eastern end of this route.

PR 127:  I am not sure that PR 398 makes it to PR 127. No other issues.

PR 128:  Should PR 4431 mostly instead be PR 431? 

I also do not like CamGar being there, but there is nothing else viable here.

PR 129: Maybe add a point at AveCollTos near PR 2.  Maybe also add a point on PR 2 at AveJoseCed.  Otherwise no other comments.

PR 130:  OSM and the Here Maps show a PR 130R.  Obviously I cannot prove its existence.  No further comments.

PR 131:  The labels are fine.  I am unsure how you determined where the south end is.

PR 132: 
1.  Is there a segment of PR 383 that should connect to this road?  (or is this PR 3384?)
2.  Is CllNMain correct?

PR 133:  Fine.

PR 134:  Fine.

PR 135:  Fine.

PR 136 (Guayanilla(N)):  Fine.

PR 136 (Guayanilla(S)):  Fine.

PR 137: 
1.  I think that this route should be flipped. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4415525,-66.4242744,3a,75y,210.21h,91.9t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipMwLdFn7-PiaqmO5CIHIHL9QDp08DwFHkdwoKo!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipMwLdFn7-PiaqmO5CIHIHL9QDp08DwFHkdwoKo%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi-1.5269934-ya259.74692-ro3.5396636-fo100!7i5504!8i2752)
2.  I would change PR155_A to PR155_N and PR155_B to PR155_S.

PR 138:  It looks like the south end of PR 138 is at PR 14/PR 153 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.0657746,-66.3670494,3a,75y,277.34h,88.07t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipOu8m2OkiflfY2kbAY4SXMfDFnSNXXAHWfIkvs!2e10!3e11!7i5504!8i2752).  The part from PR 153 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.0532496,-66.3653193,3a,75y,322.21h,90t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipNsw3j8OTxuv990zoype9ZEbDQT1hZD-6TDcr8!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipNsw3j8OTxuv990zoype9ZEbDQT1hZD-6TDcr8%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi-2.7968106-ya325.946-ro2.5136037-fo100!7i5504!8i2752) back to PR 14 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.0823703,-66.3396061,3a,75y,58.37h,85.95t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipPqWTv3dkqqR13mwdCavisYgWISPHFEI4mjgFA!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipPqWTv3dkqqR13mwdCavisYgWISPHFEI4mjgFA%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi-3.0131235-ya167.23773-ro9.24306-fo100!7i5504!8i2752) is now PR 238.

PR 139:
1.  I do not see a road at CamLaRob.
2.  Replace the shaping point after CamLosRob with a visible point at Camilo Tres Palos Ramali.
PR 139R:  Fine.

PR 140:
1.  Is PR528 at the right location?
2.  Are you able to clarify whether the future hidden points for PR routes are still a thing?
3.  A shaping point is needed west of PR141 as it sneaks outside of tolerance.

PR 141:
1.  Is the PR144 point at the southern end at the right location?
2.  Is LomaZar a correct label?

PR 142:  This one looks fine.

PR 143:  Should PR511 instead be PR5011?

PR 144:  No other issues beyond Number 1 under PR 141.

PR 145:  Fine.

PR 146:  Fine.

PR 148:  The route shown is fine, but the spreadsheet seems to indicate that another section exists along PR 156 somewhere.

PR 149: 
1.  The PR149R labels should be edited to be for PR5149.  Also does PR 149 actually intersect PR 589 at PR149R/589?
2.  The northern segment of PR 668 is signed as PR 6668 (at west intersection with PR 149 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4178056,-66.4820329,3a,75y,265.34h,90.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8cjo9jP6cIpCaITNTQ7URQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), at east intersection with PR 149 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4206742,-66.4774029,3a,75y,251.98h,85.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sT7epWclYGOsopsGB7PmkOQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)).

PR 150: 
1.  Maybe add a point between PR5561 and PR557 for shaping purposes.
2.  It looks like PR 5150 should instead be a branch of PR 553.

PR 151:  Fine.

PR 152:
1.  Is the south end of PR 810 at the right location?
2.  Is CamMonGon a continuous route?  I am unsure if it is a useful visible point.
PR 152R:  Fine.

PR 153: 
1.  Google Maps shows the south end of this route as a one-way split.
2.  Does PR 545 still connect just northwest of PR 153?
3.  PR138_E should be PR238. (see PR 138)

PR 154:  Fine.

PR 155:
1.  Is the south end of this route at the right point?  There seems to maybe be a one-way split around PR 14.
2.  Maybe add another shaping point around the Perchas curve.  I added one at the peak that got near tolerance that added over .3 miles to the route.
3.  I would change PR137_D to PR137_S and PR137_E to PR137_N.

PR 156:
1.  Maybe add a shaping point between PR 569 and PR 7772.
2.  Should PA774_W be PA774Bar and PA774_E be just PR774?
3.  The PR7156_E intersection is signed as PR 777 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.2471085,-66.076068,3a,15y,316.9h,91.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2N9-ZMxZ-WKDVFMtHth8Rw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).

PR 157:  Fine.

PR 159:
1.  Should PR6617_W be PR6617Mor and PR6617_E be PR6617?  Also on PR6617Mor, the "M" in the name should be capitalized with PR159_W becoming PR159.
2.  Neither the spreadsheet nor the map show PR 817.

PR 160:  Fine.

PR 161:  Fine.

PR 162: 
1.  I think that the PR 14 labels should be switched.
2.  Is the north end at PR 156 correct?

PR 163:  CllEduRub should be AveEduRub.

PR 164:  A "ToPR164" should be added on PR 5 at the "ToPR5" connector.  Otherwise fine.

PR 165: 
1.  It looks like PR8861 needs to be added.
2.  Should BlvdLev be PR868?  I guess not because I did not see any signage.
3.  I would ignore the exit numbers here.  No visual evidence except for 15A (and that one is completely by itself at PR22(22).
PR 165R:  Is there a concurrency with PR 861 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.3910901,-66.2525673,3a,75y,130.44h,89.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-tHSYAgzYkDRa3L77CDKqA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)?

PR 166:  Fine.

(Quick Note on PR 53:)  6a should be 6A.  (I think this also affects I-PR3.)

PR 167:
1.  The spreadsheet indicates that PR 7780 intersects this route unlike that map.  Even GSV sort of indicates a connection. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.2667499,-66.2073157,3a,75y,47.02h,99.09t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipMlkZfPHP1sMQzSHVAhUeKd8_z2ePjEHr_jFL68!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipMlkZfPHP1sMQzSHVAhUeKd8_z2ePjEHr_jFL68%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi-0-ya107.466156-ro-0-fo100!7i8704!8i4352)
2.  This photo indicates that the southern PR 826 could be PR 8126 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.3035036,-66.2114319,3a,75y,230.34h,90t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipONDf6Fp-PRp-bJkEefaG0RAVdBRQDPl47o4gce!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipONDf6Fp-PRp-bJkEefaG0RAVdBRQDPl47o4gce%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi-0-ya29.39473-ro-0-fo100!7i8704!8i4352).
3.  Is PR 855 completely one-way?

PR 168: Fine.

PR 169:  Is there anything related to Exp834 that I should be aware of for later?  I do not see anything showing this as actual PR 834.  Otherwise fine.

PR 170:  Is CllPer a correct label? (maybe should also be relocated)

PR 171: 
1.  Should "FutPR731" be made a visible point in the area?
2.  The shaping point north of PR733 could be made into a visible point...

PR 172:
1. Is there actually a concurrency with PR 173?  The HERE Maps show PR 173 as one way.
2.  The CllFCHad label seems like is it incorrect (should be CllAntBar).

PR 173:
1.  See number 1 under PR 172.
2.  GSV seems to indicate there is a loop around PR 728. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.1543287,-66.2355035,3a,75y,52.7h,81.06t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipNNwc-Zs4UeCVhqcc790Gm1QFHd-bskiQSzjyA!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipNNwc-Zs4UeCVhqcc790Gm1QFHd-bskiQSzjyA%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi-1.6080601-ya109.659355-ro0.6708572-fo100!7i5504!8i2752)
3.  CllLop should be CamLop I think.

PR 174:
1.  CllSie does not seem to be correct.
2.  PR 832 is not signed looking at GSV.  I would link it if I could prove this from PR 833.

PR 175:  Fine.

PR 176:  Fine.

PR 177:  A point should be added at AveNor due to an interchange there.

PR 178:  PR3_W should be PR3.  (On PR 3, PR178_W should be just PR178.)

PR 179:  The shaping point north of PR748 should be replaced with a nearby visible point.

PR 180:  The shaping point between PR3 and PR701 should be replaced by a visible point at Calle J(OSM)/Calle Villa Sol (HERE Maps).

PR 181: 
1.  Are the south end at PR 3 and the point at PR 757 in the right location?
2.  It looks like the PR980 point needs to be moved south a bit.
3.  I would change PR876_S to PR850/876.
4.  AveParkGar looks like it should be PR877_N making PR877 PR877_S.

PR 182:  Fine.

PR 183: It looks like a point should be added at what may be (or currently is) PR 34 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.2240347,-66.0200033,3a,75y,68.05h,80.59t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipOLvGN4hVS7CXvGA3xK0pVVzsyRSwD3F4SnfqU!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipOLvGN4hVS7CXvGA3xK0pVVzsyRSwD3F4SnfqU%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi2.498511-ya321.47577-ro-4.5968447-fo100!7i5504!8i2752).

PR 184:  Is PR 7184 missing or is there just a graph connection missing there?

PR 185:  Fine, though I am not 100% confident on the existence of PR 9185.

PR 186:  PR 9966 seems to be signed as PR 966 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.3612259,-65.8190182,3a,75y,66.29h,83.14t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipOkL8oeSDLFz0d3Xp9vZ9VwRznPBnroV4ogUkc!2e10!3e11!7i5504!8i2752) for some reason.

PR 187:  Fine.
PR 187R:  Fine.

PR 188:  Fine.

PR 189:  Should PR 9189 be added?  It is signed (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.2459936,-66.0021876,3a,75y,331.7h,82.28t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipPuqUw0h1jUGgjdPdH49gFqEv4vQbBXAmAGKfw!2e10!3e11!7i5504!8i2752).

PR 190:  Should there be points on AveMon (or AvePasGig) around PR26(13)?

PR 191:  What led to this route being split in two?  Otherwise seems fine as I think it goes north of PR 955.

PR 192:  Fine.

PR 193:  I recommend changing PR3_B to PR3_W and PR3_C to PR3_E (presuming the Frontage Rd part is actually not part of PR 193).

PR 194:  It looks like PR3_S should become PR3 and recentered onto the nearby roundabout.  Also is this route concurrent with PR 195?

PR 195:   Is CllPla correct and at the right location?  Also is this route concurrent with PR 194?

PR 196:  PR 34 is shown as signed heading east from PR 1. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.2430542,-66.0353782,3a,75y,26.12h,87.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sw8e1SyMkhaLjvj8dZMAVDg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

PR 198:  PR 204 seems to be signed as PR 9939 here. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.1912923,-65.8817784,3a,75y,47.91h,112.99t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipO-z-x9rty6I4nm9fkyMq5LQ3cZH3q1taL7BVc!2e10!3e11!7i5504!8i2752)  PR 9939 is in the correct spot though. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.177575,-65.8766075,3a,75y,96.57h,91.09t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipMFP0TApwTEPhCLONQUNbxhJtmYGs_iv-TlPRE!2e10!3e11!7i5504!8i2752)  Maybe this is an error.

PR 199 (San Juan):  It looks like a point is needed at PR 837 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.3608082,-66.1145279,3a,75y,100.5h,92.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5L0_X-Rkgomp-XTFosI4aw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  ToPR837 should be AveSanIgn.
PR 199 (Bayamon): Fine.

PR 200: 
1.  Is the western end correct?
2.  Should PR201_E be just PR201? 
PR 200R:
1. CLLPinPet should be CllPinPet.
2.  Does this road really end at the dock?

PR 201:  Should PR200_E be just PR200?
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: Markkos1992 on May 10, 2021, 01:43:40 pm
PR 203:  Fine, presuming that SenGur is the only usable label there.

PR 204:  See PR 198.

PR 205:  Does not seem to be posted from PR 31 or PR 53 (signed as "PR 31" (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.2156318,-65.7442317,3a,75y,118.82h,92.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGfn3uSr6-q31am7SiJQNHg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)).  I am unsure if this should be included.

PR 206:  Fine.

PR 212:  This is signed as part of PR 4494 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4701747,-67.0247482,3a,75y,131.83h,82.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1su9Sgi1BisD7-3BDtiR9nkw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).

PR 250: 
1. Should DewDock be CulFry?
2.  Is it worth replacing the hidden shaping point with a visible point?

PR 251:  Fine.  Google Maps shows a PR 252 that I am pretty sure does not exist.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on June 27, 2021, 08:56:14 am
I saw your post in the grab-bag systems thread and didn't realize you had stopped your review to wait for me to respond. Sorry for the confusion. I'm waiting for the rest of the review before responding, since I intend to make all the changes at once. If you have a general question like "do you want me to keep looking for examples of this" of course I'll answer it before you finish, but I did not see any of those. Thank you for your work on this so far.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: Markkos1992 on June 27, 2021, 09:26:52 am
My thought here was that there would not be much after PR 300, but I can move forward then ASAP if you just want to wait.  My nonwork schedule keeps getting busier so I will probably still put stuff related to personal travel above this for the time being. 
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on June 27, 2021, 12:22:07 pm
I'm not in a big hurry but it would be nice to get this activated by the end of the year.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: Markkos1992 on July 07, 2021, 11:00:43 am
I am trying to at least get through the 300s today.  I am unsure how far I will progress by the end of the month, but we will see.

PR 300:  Fine.
PR 301:  Is MirSal correct and at the right location?
PR 303:  Fine.
PR 304:  Fine.
PR 305:  Should PR116_N just be PR116?
PR 306:  Looks fine.  The Excel spreadsheet indicates that this goes east of PR 101 though.
PR 307:  Fine.
PR 308:  Should CllAgu_E be just CllAgu?
PR 309:  Am I missing something going on between PR 309 and PR 103?
PR 310:  Fine.
PR 311:  Fine.
PR 312:  Fine.
PR 313:  I think that CllSalMae should be CllSalMes.  Also is End at the right location?
PR 314:  Fine.
PR 315:  Is Cll65Inf_S correct?
PR 316:  Fine.
PR 317:  Fine.
PR 318:  Fine.
PR 319:  Fine.
PR 320:  Fine.
PR 321:  Fine.
PR 322:  Fine.
PR 323:  Fine.
PR 324:  Should VilPes be CllVilPes? Should CllRafHer be CllFlo?
PR 325:  Fine.
PR 326:  Fine.
PR 327:  Fine.
PR 328:  Fine.
PR 329:  Seems fine.  I am not 100% sure it goes to PR 117 though based on the map and spreadsheet.
PR 330:  Fine.
PR 331:  Fine.
PR 332:  Fine.
PR 333:  Should the section of PR 116 and PR 4116 be part of PR 4116 instead of PR 333?  What is up with FutPR334?
PR 334:  Fine.
PR 335:  Is PR 3335 missing?
PR 336:  Fine.
PR 337:  Fine.
PR 338:  Fine.
PR 339:  Fine.
PR 341:  Fine.
PR 342:  Replace the shaping point with CllG. 
PR 343:  Is a point missing at PR 345?  (looks like not after looking at PR 345)
PR 344:  Seems fine.
PR 345:  Should these two routes be combined?  (It is signed from PR 2. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.1297864,-67.1047227,3a,75y,7.47h,83.12t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1serBQXpLB85Ig2sZx6fuDZg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DerBQXpLB85Ig2sZx6fuDZg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D75.96295%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656))  Also PR 3330 looks it it should be split on OSM, but it seems correct on Here Hybrid Day.
PR 346:  Fine.
PR 347:  CllReal should be AveReal.  I am not sure if the north end at PR 2 is done correctly.
PR 348:  It looks like CllLic is an incorrect label.  Is PR 380 missing from the HB?  It looks like the shaping point north of PR330 should be replaced with a visible point.
PR 349:  Is there a missing graph connection with PR 105? 
PR 351:  Fine.
PR 352:  Fine.
PR 353:  Is this route and PR 3353 in there correctly?  CamSecRDes may be off too.
PR 354:  I do not think that CllJonCar_E  is correct.
PR 355:  Does this route not extend to PR119?
PR 356:  Seems fine.
PR 357:  PR105_E should be PR105.
PR 358:  Seems fine.
PR 359:  Fine.
PR 360:  Fine.
PR 361:  Fine.
PR 362:  Fine.
PR 363:  Fine.
PR 364:  Seems fine.
PR 365 (Sabana Grande):  Is OSM's routing or the HB right?  I have no idea.
PR 365 (Maricao) :  I am unsure how to describe this one.  I am very much unsure if it is correct.
PR 366:  See PR 365 (Maricao).
PR 367:  Fine.
PR 368:  Fine.
PR 369:  Fine.
PR 370:  Fine.
PR 371:  CjonTor may not be correct.  Otherwise see PR 365.
PR 372:  Seems fine.
PR 373:  Seems fine.
PR 374 (Yauco):  Fine if PR 372 and PR 373 are fine.
PR 374 (Lares):  Fine.
PR 375:  Fine (see PR 377 though)
PR 376:  CjonFra needs to be corrected.  Otherwise seems fine.
PR 377:  Does this extend to PR 375?
PR 378:  Fine.
PR 379:  Fine.
PR 381:  Seems fine.
PR 382:  Fine.
PR 383:  Fine.
PR 384:  Fine.
PR 385:  Fine.
PR 386:  Should CamMar replace the nearby shaping point?
PR 387:  Seems fine.  Could this combine with PR 391 at some point?
PR 388:  Fine.
PR 389:  Should Cll2 be Cll3?
PR 390:  Fine.
PR 391:  Fine.
PR 392:  Seems fine. (unless PR 392 and PR 394 connect)
PR 393:  Seems fine.
PR 394:  Seems fine.    (see PR 392)
PR 396:  Fine.
PR 397:  Seems fine.
PR 398:  Seems fine.
PR 399:  Seems fine.
PR 400:  Fine.
PR 401:  Fine.
PR 402:  Fine.
PR 403:  Fine.
PR 404:  Seems fine.
PR 405:  Seems fine.
PR 406:  West end at PR 109 needs to be recentered.
PR 407:  Fine.
PR 408:  Fine.
PR 409:  Fine.
PR 410:  Fine.
PR 411:  PR115_S should be just PR115.
PR 412:  Are we sure that this route does not extend to PR 115?
PR 413:  Seems fine.
PR 414:  Fine.
PR 415:  Seems fine.

Starting 7-20-2021:
PR 416:  Signage seems to indicate that PR 416 may be concurrent with PR 417 in some form. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.3761567,-67.1768454,3a,75y,356.49h,95.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2Gj-a0ur90XyDnUhPCdntw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
PR 417:  Does PR 417 actually extend it all the way to PR 411? (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.3780413,-67.1840071,3a,75y,340.15h,75.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFjiL7d9qfVn990zespOajQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
PR 418:  GSV at the northern end seems to indicate that PR 111 extends west of PR 2 to here or even PR 115.  Also could that shaping point be replaced with a visible point?
PR 419:  Fine.
PR 420:  Fine.
PR 421:  Fine.
PR 422:  Fine.
PR 423:  Seems fine.  It is odd that it ends at PR 4423.
PR 424:  Fine.
PR 425:  Fine.
PR 426:  Is the north end of PR 4431 at the right location?  (may require further realignment of PR 4431)
PR 427:  Seems fine.
PR 428:  This route seems like it may have been extended.
PR 429:  Fine.
PR 430:  Fine.
PR 431:  Fine.
PR 432:  Fine.
PR 433:  Fine.
PR 434:  Fine.
PR 435:  Fine.
PR 436:  Fine.
PR 437:  Fine.
PR 438:  Fine.
PR 439:  Fine.
PR 440:  Seems fine.
PR 441:  Seems fine.
PR 442:  Is the northern end at the right location?
PR 443:  Fine.
PR 444:  Fine.
PR 445:  Seems fine at the end of the day.
PR 446:  Should a point be added for an extension of PR 4476?
PR 447:  Fine.
PR 448:  Fine.
PR 449:  Fine.
PR 450:  Seems fine.
PR 451:  I am pretty sure that this should be extended to PR 111. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.3232317,-66.942349,3a,75y,349.2h,95.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7O-Zp2eofoL93XmiRBq5Ww!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
PR 452:  Fine.
PR 453:  Fine.
PR 454:  Fine.
PR 455:  Fine.
PR 456:  Is PR4486 at the right location?
PR 457:  Fine.
PR 458:  Seems fine.
PR 459:  Seems fine with the exception of wondering whether PR 463 makes it here yet.
PR 460:  Seems fine.
PR 461:  Fine.
PR 462:  Fine.
PR 463:  Probably fine beyond whether it makes it to PR 459 or not.
PR 464:  Fine.
PR 465:  Fine.
PR 466:  Is CllDelPena correct? (assuming this does not go to PR 113)
PR 467:  It looks like the PR107 point needs to be relocated.
PR 468:  Fine.
PR 469:  May be fine, could this extend to PR 2 by the baseball stadium?
PR 470:  Fine.
PR 471:  Fine.
PR 472:  Fine.
PR 473:  Seems fine.
PR 474:  Fine.
PR 475:  Fine.
PR 476:  Fine.
PR 477:  Fine.
PR 478:  Fine.
PR 479:  Fine.
PR 480:  Fine.
PR 481:  Fine.
PR 482:  Fine.
PR 483:  Fine.
PR 484:  Fine.
PR 485:  Does this make it to PR 119?  Who knows....
PR 486:  Is PR4486 at the right location?
PR 487:  Fine.
PR 488:  Fine.
PR 489:  Seems fine as long as PR 489R is not a thing.
PR 490:  Fine.
PR 491:  Fine.
PR 492:  Fine.
PR 493:  Seems fine.
PR 494:  Fine.
PR 495:  Is a point missing for PR 4403?
PR 496:  Fine.
PR 497:  Is End at the right location?
PR 498:  Fine.
PR 499:  Seems fine.
PR 500:  Seems fine.
PR 501 (Ponce(S)):  Seems fine.
PR 501 (Ponce(N)):  Seems fine.
PR 502:  Fine.
PR 503 (Adjuntas):  Is End at the right location?
PR 503 (Ponce):  Is the south end at the right location?
PR 504:  Is PR588 missing?
PR 505:  It looks like Cll1 should be CllA. 
PR 506:  Is End at the right location?
PR 508:  Fine.
PR 509:  Fine.
PR 510:  Fine.
PR 511:  Is End at the right location?
PR 512:  Is End at the right location?
PR 513:  Fine.
PR 514:  Does this actually extend north of PR 5514?
PR 515:  Fine.
PR 516:  Seems fine.
PR 517:  Is End at the right location?
PR 518:  Fine.
PR 518R:  Is End at the right location?
PR 519:  Seems fine.
PR 520:  Is LomRayo at the right location?
PR 521:  Fine.
PR 522:  Fine.
PR 523:  Fine.
PR 524:  Fine.
PR 525:  Fine.
PR 526:  CueCap should be slightly relocated.
PR 527:  Seems fine.
PR 528:  Seems fine if the shaping point south of PR 140 is correct.
PR 529:  Is End at the right location?
PR 530:  Is End at the right location?
PR 531:  I am not sure of the status on FutPR607.
PR 532:  Seems fine.
PR 533:  Fine.
PR 535:  It looks like Cll1 is not at a road.
PR 536:  Should PR 5536 be added?
PR 537:  Fine.
PR 538:  Cll3_W should be Cll6.
PR 539:  Fine.
PR 540:  Should this be extended to PR 551?
PR 541:  Fine.
PR 542:  Fine.
PR 543:  Seems fine.
PR 545:  Should the shaping point north of PR 52 be replaced with a visible point at AveJac?
PR 546:  Fine.
PR 547:  Is End at the right location?
PR 548:  Are the shaping point and End at the right location?
PR 549:  Fine.
PR 550:  Seems fine.
PR 551:  See PR 540.  Also does PR 5552 make it to this road?
PR 552:  Fine.
PR 553:  Fine.
PR 554:  Is this route legitimately missing?
PR 555:  Is End at the right location?
PR 556:  Seems fine.
PR 557:  Fine.
PR 558:  Fine.
PR 559:  Is End at the right location?
PR 560:  I think this route is in correctly.
PR 561:  Is End at the right location?
PR 562:  Is End at the right location?
PR 563:  Fine.
PR 564:  Fine.
PR 565:  Fine.
PR 566:  Fine.
PR 567:  Fine.
PR 568:  Replace the shaping point near PR 5155 with a visible one at SalMor.
PR 569:  Fine.
PR 570:  PR149 should be PR149_LomN.
PR 571:  Fine.
PR 572:  Is the south end at the correct location?
PR 573:  Should End be CllLasVer or CllVer?
PR 574:  Is End at the right location?
PR 575:  Seems fine.
PR 576:  Please clarify where PR 576 and PR 702 end.
PR 577:  Fine.
PR 578:  CllMar_E should be AveJoseDie_E.
PR 580:  Fine.
PR 581:  Fine.
PR 583:  Fine.
PR 584:  Fine.
PR 585:  Fine.
PR 586:  Is End at the right location?
PR 589:  The northern end of this word should be rechecked.
PR 590:  Fine.
PR 591:  CamClubTir should be AveLasBri.
PR 592:  Seems fine.  (unsure about PR 14 here and at PR 570 here)
PR 593:  Fine.
PR 595:  Fine.
PR 596:  Fine.
PR 597:  Fine.
PR 599:  Seems fine.
PR 600:  Fine.
PR 602:  Fine. 
PR 603:  Is End at the right location?
PR 604:  Fine.
PR 605:  Fine.
PR 606:  Does this route extend further south (possibly all the way to PR 140)?
PR 607:  See PR 531.
PR 608:  Seems fine.  See PR 614.
PR 610:  Is End at the right location?
PR 611:  Does this extend to PR 140?
PR 612:  Is End at the right location?
PR 613:  Fine.
PR 614:  Does this route extend west of PR 6614?
PR 615:  Seems fine.
PR 616:  Fine.
PR 617:  Seems fine.
PR 618:  Fine.
PR 619:  Fine.
PR 620:  Fine.
PR 621:  Is End at the right location?
PR 622:  Seems fine.
PR 623:  Seems fine.
PR 624:  Seems fine as this seems to sneak in there.
PR 625:  Seems fine.
PR 626:  Fine.
PR 627:  Is this route really concurrent with PR 638?
PR 628:  Seems fine.
PR 629:  Fine.
PR 630:  Seems fine.
PR 631:  Is End at the right location?
PR 632:  Is End at the right location?
PR 633:  Fine.
PR 634:  Fine.
PR 635:  Should PR 4489 connect to this road?  Is there a PR 635R?
PR 636:  Seems fine.
PR 637:  Fine.
PR 638:  See PR 627. Does the east end of PR 658 get to this route?
PR 639:  Fine.
PR 641:  Fine.
PR 642:  Seems fine.
PR 643:  Fine.
PR 644:  Is End at the right location?
PR 645:  Is CllSanVic correct?
PR 646:  Does this actually extend to PR 155 on its west end?
PR 647:  Are the PR 677 and PR 620 intersections that close to each other?
PR 648:  Is End at the right location?
PR 649:  Fine.
PR 650:  Fine.
PR 651:  Fine.
PR 652:  It looks like this may extend slightly east of PR 10. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4416322,-66.7150141,3a,75y,189.99h,89.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6SEFSO1nHgaEs9Ai7QsQig!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
PR 653:  Fine.
PR 655:  Is AreMue correct?
PR 656:  Fine.
PR 657:  Fine.
PR 658:  Seems fine.  It may extend farther south now.
PR 659:  Fine.
PR 660:  Is RmlBarObr_E correct?
PR 661:  Is End at the right location?
PR 662:  Seems fine.
PR 663:  Fine.
PR 664:  Fine.
PR 665:  Fine.
PR 666:  Fine.
PR 667:  Fine.
PR 668 (Manati (C)):  This route needs to be relooked at completely.  This may be PR 6668 and PR 6670 instead.
PR 668 (Manati (S)):  Fine.
PR 669:  Fine.
PR 670:  I am unsure of things west of PR 149. 
PR 671:  Should CllVegaJim be Cll5 if this road makes it that far?
PR 672:  Is end at the right location or does this extend to PR 643?
PR 673:  Seems fine.
PR 674:  Is AveAre correct?
PR 675:  Fine.
PR 676:  Fine.
PR 677 (Vega Alta):  I am unsure of the area around PR 6677.
PR 677 (Dorado):  Is this route in correctly?
PR 677 (Toa Alta):  Seems fine.
PR 678:  Fine.
PR 679:  Fine.
PR 680:  Is this route missing?
PR 681:  Maybe relocate AvePla.
PR 682:  Is BosCam correct?
PR 683:  Fine.
PR 684:  Seems fine.
PR 685:  Fine.
PR 686:  Fine.
PR 687:  Fine.
PR 688:  Fine.
PR 689:  Fine.
PR 690:  Fine.
PR 691:  Fine.
PR 692:  Fine.
PR 693:  Should AveJoseEfr be PR6696?
PR 694:  Fine.
PR 695:  Fine.
PR 696:  See PR 693.
PR 697:  Fine.
PR 698:  Fine.
PR 699:  Fine.
PR 701:  Is PR 7701 missing?
PR 702:  See PR 138.
PR 703:  Fine.
PR 704:  Fine.
PR 705:  Does this road circle around?
PR 706:  Fine.
PR 707:  Is the western end at the right location?
PR 708:  Fine.
PR 709:  Fine.
PR 710:  Fine.
PR 712:  Fine.
PR 713:  A graph connection is needed with PR 3.
PR 714:  Seems fine.
PR 715:  Fine.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: Markkos1992 on July 23, 2021, 11:08:01 am
PR 716:  Fine.
PR 717:  Fine.
PR 718:  Fine.
PR 719:  Fine.
PR 720:  Seems fine.
PR 721:  Fine.
PR 722:  Seems fine.
PR 723:  Fine.
PR 724:  Fine.
PR 725:  Looks like at least part of PR 726 is actually PR 7725 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.1531418,-66.2762731,3a,75y,17.17h,90.08t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipMEGq_F-yLadjA-YwWMey8lY5kZTwOXlkGwmjs!2e10!3e11!7i5504!8i2752).
PR 726:  See PR 725.
PR 727:  Fine.
PR 728:  Is End at the right location?
PR 729:  Seems fine.
PR 730:  Fine.
PR 731:  Seems fine.
PR 733:  Is End at the right location?
PR 734:  Seems fine.
PR 735:  Fine.
PR 738:  Should this be split into two parts?
PR 739:  Fine.
PR 740:  Seems fine.
PR 741:  Is End at the right location?
PR 742:  Is End at the right location?  May extend to PR 743. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.1211258,-66.122257,3a,75y,94.18h,81.99t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipNLGAPOslLdbei3J9ozw9yVwECywFjKuh3VNIQ!2e10!3e11!7i5504!8i2752) (instead of PR 7042?)
PR 743:  Seems fine beyond what I stated for PR 742.
PR 744:  Fine.
PR 745:  Is End at the right location?
PR 746:  Is End at the right location?
PR 747:  Seems fine.
PR 748:  I think this route should maybe be split into two parts.  You cannot follow PR 748 along its PR 3 concurrency at the moment. (https://www.google.com/maps/@17.9801279,-66.087039,3a,75y,60.74h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szqfU9xAE9cDD_0nK4E3A8Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)  Also is End at the right location?
PR 749:  Fine.
PR 750:  Is End at the right location?
PR 751:  Fine.
PR 752:  Is End at the right location?
PR 753:  Is this put in correctly with PR 7754?
PR 754:  Is End at the right location?
PR 755:  I do not think that this extends to PR 3.
PR 757:  I think this whole route should be rechecked.
PR 758:  Fine.
PR 759:  Fine.
PR 760:  It looks like PR 901 has a concurrency with this route. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.005357,-65.8981261,3a,75y,80.2h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sS8Ue3ufSS-aajYHTZ9PHmw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)  (maybe to PR 939)  Is End at the right location?
PR 761:  Seems fine.
PR 762:  Fine.
PR 763:  Fine.
PR 764:  Is End at the right location?
PR 765:  Seems fine.
PR 768:  I think this route should be relooked at.
PR 769:  Fine.
PR 770:  I think this route should be relooked at.
PR 771:  Fine.
PR 772:  Fine.
PR 773:  Fine.
PR 774 (Comerío):  Fine.
PR 774 (Barranquitas):  Is End at the right location?
PR 775:  Fine.
PR 776:  Is End at the right location?
PR 777:  Fine.
PR 778:  It looks like this and PR 7778 may need to switch. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.2207848,-66.2255651,3a,75y,48.02h,96.9t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipNr1E-OzDWlB7MVxgJhvjnr1kiXt5swXXhVl4A!2e10!3e11!7i5504!8i2752)
PR 779:  Fine.
PR 780:  Fine.
PR 781:  Fine.
PR 782:  Does this route go north of PR 156? 
PR 783:  Is End at the right location?
PR 784:  Fine.
PR 785:  Fine.
PR 786:  Is End at the right location?
PR 787:  Fine.
PR 788:  Is PR 766 missing?
PR 789:  See PR 183.
PR 790:  Fine.
PR 791:  Fine.
PR 792:  Fine. (See PR 793)
PR 793:  Seems fine if PR 7793 is correct.
PR 794:  Is End at the right location?
PR 795:  Fine.
PR 796:  Is CamCur correct?
PR 797:  Fine.
PR 798:  Consider redoing the PR1 labels.
PR 799:  Fine.
PR 800:  Is End at the right location?
PR 801:  Is End at the right location?
PR 802:  Fine.
PR 803:  Fine.
PR 804:  Fine.
PR 805:  Fine.
PR 806:  Fine.
PR 807:  Fine.
PR 808:  Fine.
PR 809:  Seems fine.
PR 810:  Fine.
PR 811:  Fine.
PR 812:  Fine.
PR 813:  Is End at the right location?
PR 814:  Is CamDonTito correct?
PR 815:  Seems fine if CamMul is in the correct location.
PR 816:  Fine.
PR 817:  Seems fine, but I do not see this route on the spreadsheet, map, or GSV.
PR 818:  Should Cor/Veg be End?
PR 819:  Fine.
PR 820:  Fine.
PR 821:  It looks like PR 159 has two intersections with this route.
PR 823:  Seems fine.
PR 824:  Seems fine.
PR 825:  Fine.
PR 826 (Lago la Plata):  Is End at the right location?
PR 826 (Naranjito):  Fine.
PR 827:  Fine.
PR 828:  Fine.
PR 829:  Is CllViaRex correct?
PR 830:  Fine.
PR 831:  AveBell should be AveBel.
PR 832:  Seems fine.
PR 833:  Is CllJuanRam correct?  Is there a PR 833R?  AveSanAna should be AveSanAna_N.
PR 834:  Fine if this route is still correct.  OSM shows it relocated onto the Expressway.
PR 835:  Does this make it to PR 834 now?
PR 836:  Fine.
PR 837:  Is CllRafHer correct?  This route should also be rechecked.
PR 838:  Fine.
PR 839:  Does this make it to PR 167 and/or PR 855 somehow?
PR 840:  Fine.
PR 841:  Fine.
PR 842:  Fine.
PR 843:  Fine.
PR 844:  Fine.
PR 845:  Fine.
PR 846:  Fine.
PR 847:  Fine.
PR 848:  See PR 887.
PR 849:  Fine.
PR 850:  Seems fine.
PR 851:  CamPCJLino should be shortened more I think.
PR 852:  PR199 should be PR181.
PR 853:  Seems fine.
PR 854:  Fine.
PR 855:  Seems fine.
PR 856:  Fine.
PR 857:  Fine.
PR 858:  Fine.
PR 859:  Fine.
PR 860:  See PR 867.  Is End at the right location?
PR 861:  Is PR 8861 missing?
PR 862:  Fine.
PR 863:  Is CllNar correct?
PR 864:  Seems fine.
PR 865:  Is PR 865R a thing?
PR 866:  Fine.
PR 867:  Fine.
PR 869:  Fine.
PR 870:  Fine. 
PR 871:  Is the northern end at the right location?
PR 872:  Fine.
PR 873:  Is CllMar correct?
PR 874:  Seems fine.
PR 876:  Seems fine.
PR 877:  Fine.
PR 878:  Fine.
PR 879:  Is this route in there correctly beyond the endpoints?
PR 880:  Is CllRob correct?
PR 882:  Fine.
PR 884:  Fine.
PR 887:  It looks like the PR 860 and PR 848 points are missing.
PR 888:  Seems fine.
PR 889:  Fine.
PR 890:  Is the southern end actually at PR 8855 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4016249,-66.1561705,3a,75y,119.69h,82.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sv08SppLBXmKbn8a5ETtOLA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)?
PR 891:  Fine.
PR 894:  Fine.
PR 900:  Is End at the right location? 
PR 901:  See PR 760.  Is PR 9901 missing? (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.0388739,-65.8450261,3a,75y,178.25h,81.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siK-6yCb9PR-wI3l4-n4r2Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
PR 902:  Fine.
PR 904:  Seems fine based on the HERE Hybrid Day Maps.
PR 905:  It looks like PR 9905 needs to be checked.  Does this extend to PR 917?
PR 906:  Is SecCan correct?
PR 907:  Fine.
PR 908:  I am unsure if this and PR 909 have been handled right.
PR 909:  See PR 908.  Is PR 9907 missing?
PR 910:  Seems fine.
PR 912:  Is End at the right location?
PR 913:  Seems fine.
PR 914:  Seems fine.
PR 915:  Seems fine.
PR 916:  GSV indicates that this route may extend north of PR 183. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.1838397,-65.9592142,3a,75y,332.27h,92.76t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipPHqxKIi6jJLlvXQs9uM183TJZm0U0CTEH0IJQ!2e10!3e11!7i5504!8i2752)
PR 917:  See PR 905.  Also move PR183_E to the center of the roundabout.
PR 918:  Fine.
PR 919:  Fine.
PR 920:  Is PR 9920 missing?
PR 921:  Fine.
PR 922:  Fine.
PR 923:  Fine.
PR 924:  Fine.
PR 925:  Fine.
PR 926:  Fine.
PR 927:  Is PR 9927 a thing?  PR53 should be ToPR53.
PR 928:  Does PR 9929 make it here?
PR 929:  Is PR 9926 missing? 
PR 930:  Fine.
PR 931:  Fine.
PR 932:  Fine.
PR 933:  Seems fine.
PR 934:  Fine.
PR 935:  Is CllAle correct?
PR 936:  Fine.
PR 937:  Fine.
PR 938:  Fine.
PR 939:  Is End at the right location? See PR 760 and PR 901.
PR 940:  Fine.
PR 941:  Fine.
PR 942:  Is End at the right location?
PR 943:  Fine.
PR 944:  Cll6 should be CllPar.  Is PR 9045 missing?
PR 945:  Is PR 8852 missing?
PR 946:  Is End at the right location?
PR 947:  Is End at the right location?
PR 948:  Seems fine.
PR 949:  Seems fine.
PR 950:  Is this route in there correctly beyond the endpoints?
PR 951:  Fine.
PR 952:  Fine.
PR 953:  Fine.
PR 954:  Fine.
PR 955:  Consider editing the PR 3 points.  Should the east end be put at the PR 3/PR 968 intersection? (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.3719762,-65.7663966,3a,75y,282.17h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIBizG8-aBbpYS-hvxykGUQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
PR 956:  Seems fine.
PR 957:  Fine.
PR 958:  Fine.
PR 959:  Seems fine?
PR 960:  Fine.
PR 961:  Is the south end at the right location?
PR 962:  Fine.
PR 963:  Is this at the right location?
PR 964:  Fine.
PR 965:  Fine.
PR 966:  Seems fine.
PR 967:  Fine.
PR 968:  Seems fine, should maybe be extended.
PR 969:  Fine.
PR 970:  Is PR 9970 missing?
PR 971:  Fine.
PR 972:  Fine.
PR 973:  Fine.
PR 974 (Ceiba):  Fine.
PR 974 (Naguabo):  Seems fine.
PR 975:  Fine.
PR 976:  I am pretty sure this does not make it to PR 195.
PR 977:  Fine.
PR 978:  Fine.
PR 979:  Fine.
PR 980:  See PR 181.  CllDrVeveCal_N should be shortened if it stays. 
PR 981:  Fine.
PR 982:  Fine.
PR 983:  It looks like the southern part of this may be PR 9983... (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.3264452,-65.729598,3a,75y,331.59h,86.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAF1QipO1v-01Kll_NHFYux-tqsp5Bcnko61WiXsCuDs!2e10!7i5504!8i2752)
PR 984:  Fine.
PR 985:  Is there a PR 9985?
PR 986:  Fine.
PR 987:  Is CabSanJuan correct?  I think End is correct.
PR 988:  See PR 983. 
PR 989:  Is End at the right location?
PR 990 (Luquillo):  Fine.
PR 990 (Rio Grande):  Is there a PR 9991 here?
PR 991:  Fine.
PR 992:  PR3_W should just be PR3.
PR 994:  Fine.
PR 995:  Fine.
PR 996:  Fine.
PR 997:  Fine.
PR 1107:  Should AveJuanSan be added to this and PR 2?  The shaping point should become a visible point for ToPR107.  (may affect PR 107 as well)
PR 1111:  A point is needed for PR 1111 at this connector. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.2934815,-66.8833537,3a,75y,137.71h,96.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7K-RPdAN46mcFrOG_DUSDA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)  May need to be added to PR 111 as well.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: Markkos1992 on July 26, 2021, 12:28:30 pm
PR 3101:  CamAlv shoul be CllBlas or CllSanBlas.
PR 3108:  Fine.
PR 3116:  Fine.
PR 3131:  Is End at the right location?
PR 3132:  Seems fine for now.  (may eventually extend to PR 132 on both ends)
PR 3301:  Fine.
PR 3306:  Seems fine presuming the north end is correct.
PR 3311:  Fine.
PR 3312:  Fine.
PR 3330:  This route should be entirely rechecked.  Fine based on the spreadsheet though.
PR 3332:  Fine.
PR 3334:  Fine.
PR 3336:  Should the hidden point be made visible and named ToPR335?
PR 3341:  Fine.
PR 3342:  Change PR102_S to just PR102.
PR 3344:  Should PR 103 be signed in this area? (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.1360746,-67.1256334,3a,15y,11.51h,82.26t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sHgWC5iGYH7r535c84Kvowg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DHgWC5iGYH7r535c84Kvowg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D94.31989%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) Otherwise fine.
PR 3345:  Is this actually part of PR 345? (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.1321148,-67.1098138,3a,15y,136.95h,91.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sItWkK2QjeuXKcIg4kr4Gyw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
PR 3349:  Fine.
PR 3351:  Fine.
PR 3353:  Fine if it does not follow any other route (thanks OSM..)
PR 3362:  Fine.
PR 3363:  I am unsure if this one goes to PR 2 or PR 102...
PR 3365:  Fine.
PR 3366:  Is End at the right location?
PR 3370:  Fine.
PR 3372:  Fine.
PR 3374:  Fine.
PR 3375:  May be fine (based on PR 375 and PR 377).
PR 3376:  Fine.
PR 3378:  Seems fine.
PR 3380:  Seems fine.
PR 3382:  Is End at the right location?
PR 3384:  This route should be rechecked.
PR 3391:  Seems fine.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: Markkos1992 on July 27, 2021, 06:54:09 pm
PR 4010:  Fine.
PR 4020:  Seems fine.
PR 4076:  Seems fine.
PR 4109:  Seems fine.
PR 4110:  Fine.
PR 4111:  Fine.
PR 4116:  Fine.
PR 4119:  See PR 485.  I am also unsure that CllAmaBra_E is correct.
PR 4125:  Seems fine.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: Markkos1992 on August 01, 2021, 08:35:17 am
PR 4401:  Is End at the right location?
PR 4402:  Is End at the right location?
PR 4403:  Wow, this one is weird, it could go to PR 495, but it does not according to the spreadsheet.
PR 4404:  Seems fine.
PR 4405:  Fine.
PR 4406:  Fine.
PR 4409:  Fine.
PR 4411:  Seems fine.
PR 4412:  Fine.
PR 4415:  Fine.
PR 4416:  Fine.
PR 4417:  I just noticed that there may be a PR 417R.
PR 4418:  Fine.
PR 4419:  Seems fine.
PR 4420:  Seems fine.
PR 4421:  Fine.
PR 4423:  Seems fine.  See PR 423.
PR 4428:  Seems fine.
PR 4430:  Fine.
PR 4431:  Should the PR431 point be there?  See PR 426.
PR 4432:  Fine.
PR 4435:  Is End at the right location?
PR 4439:  Fine.
PR 4440:  Seems fine.
PR 4441:  Is End at the right location?
PR 4442:  Seems fine.
PR 4443:  Fine.
PR 4444:  Fine.
PR 4445:  Fine based on PR 445.
PR 4446:  Is End at the right location?
PR 4451:  See PR 451.  PR 451 and PR 4451 could maybe be combined.
PR 4453:  Fine.
PR 4454:  Fine.
PR 4457:  Fine.
PR 4458:  Fine.
PR 4466:  Fine.
PR 4467:  Fine.
PR 4472:  See PR 212.  (I see a sign for PR 212 here. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4928796,-67.0275529,3a,75y,90.12h,90.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXNN_eK7vAriQNILXuF3q-w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656))  CllJuanHer_W should be AveJuanHer_W.
PR 4474:  Fine.
PR 4475:  Seems fine.
PR 4476:  See PR 446.
PR 4484:  Fine.
PR 4485:  Is End at the right location?
PR 4486:  See PR 456.
PR 4488:  Seems fine.
PR 4489:  This one needs to be rechecked. Also is there a PR 489R?
PR 4490:  Should AveOlas be BlvdOlas?
PR 4491:  Fine.
PR 4494:  See PR 212.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: Markkos1992 on August 02, 2021, 01:39:01 pm
PR 5011:  Seems fine.
PR 5139:  Fine.
PR 5141:  Fine.
PR 5144:  Fine.
PR 5149:  Seems fine.
PR 5150:  Seems fine.
PR 5155:  Add a point at SalMor.
PR 5156:  Fine.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: Markkos1992 on August 04, 2021, 01:51:08 pm
PR 5506:  Fine.
PR 5507:  Should this route be split into two parts?
PR 5509:  Seems fine.
PR 5510:  Fine.
PR 5511:  Is End at the right location?
PR 5512:  Is End at the right location?
PR 5513:  I am doubtful that this actually extends to PR 149.
PR 5514:  Seems fine.
PR 5516:  Fine.
PR 5518:  Fine.
PR 5519:  Is End at the right location?
PR 5520:  Is PR 1150 a thing, and either way, is End at the right location?
PR 5521:  Fine.
PR 5523:  Fine.
PR 5525:  This route needs to be relooked at (at least the southern part).
PR 5527:  Fine.
PR 5538:  Fine.
PR 5550 (Juana Díaz):  I am not sure that this route is correct at all.  The segment rest of PR 149 does not seem to even intersect it.
PR 5550 (Villalba):  Just to confuse me more, the HERE Hybrid maps show this going to PR 149.  I do not think it is right though.   :-\
PR 5552:  See PR 551.
PR 5553:  Does this extend to what may be PR 1150?
PR 5556:  Fine.
PR 5557:  Fine.
PR 5558:  Fine.
PR 5559:  Fine.
PR 5561:  Fine.
PR 5562:  Seems fine.
PR 5567:  Is End at the right location?
PR 5568:  Fine.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: Markkos1992 on August 05, 2021, 06:58:49 am
PR 6032:  Probably fine.  This could be part of PR 632, but I doubt it.
PR 6109:  Does this extend south of PR 651?
PR 6111:  Probably fine.  Part of me wants to question the PR 123 concurrency.
PR 6121:  Seems fine.
PR 6123:  Should AccPR10 be ToPR10?  (On PR 10, ToPR123 should be ToPR6123.)  Is End at the right location?
PR 6165:  Fine.
PR 6602:  Fine.
PR 6603:  Is End at the right location?
PR 6609:  Does this extend back to PR 10 on the north end?
PR 6612:  Fine.
PR 6613:  Fine.
PR 6614:  Seems fine.
PR 6615:  Fine.
PR 6616:  Is End at the right location?
PR 6617 (Morovis(C)):  PR159_W should just be PR159.
PR 6617 (Morovis(E)):  PR137_S should just be PR137.  PR159_E should just be PR159.
PR 6618:  Fine.
PR 6619:  Fine.
PR 6620:  Fine.
PR 6621:  Fine.
PR 6622:  Fine.
PR 6623:  Fine.  I wish I could clarify the routing in Moravia better.
PR 6626:  Fine.
PR 6632:  Fine.
PR 6633:  Fine.
PR 6634:  Fine.
PR 6642:  Fine.
PR 6645:  Fine.
PR 6659:  Fine.
PR 6671:  Probably fine.  I am not sure why this shield (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4470184,-66.3980442,3a,15y,133.72h,88.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_onvXc4I50nRQYU4xrdgDw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) only shows it going north of PR 2.
PR 6677:  Is End at the right location?
PR 6678:  Fine presuming that this does not somehow make it to PR 676.
PR 6681:  Fine.
PR 6684:  Fine.
PR 6685:  Fine.
PR 6686:  Fine.
PR 6690:  Fine.
PR 6693:  Fine.
PR 7025:  Only one point is currently shown for this route.
PR 7042:  See PR 742.
PR 7051:  Is End at the right location?
PR 7062:  Is End at the right location?
PR 7090:  Should this be part of PR 782?  (See PR 782)  A graph connection is missing at PR 7790.
PR 7156:  Fine.
PR 7173:  Is End at the right location?
PR 7707:  Fine.
PR 7709:  Is End at the right location?
PR 7710:  Is End at the right location?
PR 7712:  Fine.
PR 7715:  Does this extend to PR 1?
PR 7718:  Fine.
PR 7719:  Fine.
PR 7720:  Seems fine.
PR 7722:  Fine.
PR 7727:  Is End at the right location?
PR 7728:  Is End at the right location?
PR 7729:  Seems fine.
PR 7730:  Does this road extend farther north?
PR 7731:  Fine.
PR 7733:  Fine.
PR 7736:  Fine.
PR 7737:  Fine.
PR 7738:  Is End at the right location?
PR 7740:  Seems fine.
PR 7741:  Fine.
PR 7748:  Is End at the right location?
PR 7752:  Fine.
PR 7753:  Is End at the right location?
PR 7754:  See PR 753.
PR 7755:  Fine.
PR 7756:  See PR 757.  Otherwise fine.
PR 7757:  Fine.
PR 7758:  Fine.
PR 7759:  Is End at the right location?
PR 7760:  Fine.
PR 7761:  Is End at the right location?
PR 7762:  Is End at the right location?
PR 7765:  Fine.
PR 7769:  Is End at the right location?
PR 7772:  Fine.
PR 7773:  Is End at the right location?
PR 7774:  Fine.
PR 7775:  Fine.
PR 7776:  Is the north end at the right location?
PR 7778:  See PR 778.
PR 7780:  Does this extend to PR 167?
PR 7782:  Fine.
PR 7783:  Is this route put in correctly?
PR 7784:  GSV shows this route going in the other direction from PR 172... (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.2119306,-66.058227,3a,75y,113.77h,87.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXqk-pl0YtC9U1yC3HjvKoA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
PR 7786:  Should maybe be extended?
PR 7787:  Is End at the right location?
PR 7788:  Seems fine.
PR 7790:  See PR 7090.
PR 7793:  See PR 793.
PR 8176:  Fine.
PR 8177:  Fine.
PR 8809:  Seems fine.
PR 8811:  A slight recentering of the PR164 point may be useful. 
PR 8825:  CllAme should be CllHacLum.
PR 8826:  Is End at the right location?
PR 8829:  Fine.
PR 8834:  Fine though the PR834 label would need to be fixed if PR 834 is rerouted.
PR 8838:  Seems fine, but why is there a PR 8839 mentioned in the spreadsheet?
PR 8852:  Fine.
PR 8855:  Fine.
PR 8856:  Fine.
PR 8860:  Fine.
PR 8865:  Fine.
PR 8869:  Fine.
PR 8874:  The shaping points should be replaced with visible points.
PR 8887:  Fine.
PR 9030:  Fine.
PR 9045:  Does this extend to PR 8852 or PR 853?
PR 9185:  Fine.
PR 9188:  Is this route missing?
PR 9902:  Is End at the right location?
PR 9904:  See PR 905.
PR 9905:  OSM and HERE Hybrid Maps show a PR 9903 potentially connecting to this somewhere.
PR 9909:  Fine.
PR 9910:  Fine.
PR 9911:  Fine.
PR 9912:  Fine.
PR 9913:  Fine.
PR 9914:  Fine.
PR 9918:  PR918 should be PR182.
PR 9919:  Probably fine.
PR 9920:  Does this extend to PR 920?  PR182 should be PR181.
PR 9921:  Probably fine.
PR 9922:  PR189 should be PR183.
PR 9923:  Is End at the right location?
PR 9929:  Probably fine, based on the status of PR 9926.
PR 9931:  Fine.
PR 9933:  Fine.
PR 9934:  Fine, but is there a PR 189R to account for here?
PR 9935:  Fine.
PR 9936:  Fine.
PR 9937:  Seems fine.
PR 9938:  Fine.
PR 9939:  See PR 198.
PR 9942:  Fine.
PR 9944:  Fine.
PR 9945:  Seems fine.
PR 9948:  Is End at the right location?
PR 9957:  Fine.
PR 9959:  Probably fine.  I am not sure why OSM shows it going on another loop back to PR 3.  (Maybe the spreadsheet indicates such...)
PR 9960:  Is PR 963 related to this somehow?  This may loop back to PR 186.
PR 9966:  Fine.  I believe that this PR 966 posting is an error. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.3618096,-65.8190057,3a,75y,210.9h,99.04t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipOOJluwY2LW5wZ5KMhlKs0Bi8NRsVKj4dDhQBw!2e10!3e11!7i5504!8i2752)
PR 9973:  Fine.
PR 9974:  Probably fine based on seeing no issues with PR 973 and PR 974.
PR 9983:  Fine.
PR 9984:  Does this extend to PR 9988?
PR 9987:  Fine.
PR 9988:  See PR 9984.  Otherwise fine.
PR 9989:  Does this connect back to PR 9988?
PR 9990:  Fine.
PR 9991:  Does this connect to PR 990 (Rio Grande)?  Otherwise fine.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: Markkos1992 on August 09, 2021, 02:56:26 pm
My peer review of Puerto Rico has been completed.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on August 09, 2021, 06:23:46 pm
Thank you! I will sort through your comments and respond later this month.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on September 04, 2021, 09:40:02 pm
As I get started on my response to the review, I have two general questions.
I still can't find my copy of the DTOP map and have reached out to compdude787 to see if he still has the one I sent.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: Markkos1992 on September 05, 2021, 07:07:50 am
Quote
What is the difference between "fine", "seems fine", and "probably fine"?

Nothing really beyond 100% confidence on my end.  For these, I recommend not making any changes.

Quote
"Is End at the right location?" comes up a lot. It would be helpful to know what makes you doubt the location I used.

Mainly general doubt from what I see on OSM/HERE Maps versus your location.

Personally, for this review, I am on the side of "you do what you do" instead of being particular and specific about the changes as I normally am simply because there will not likely ever be 100% certainty with Puerto Rico unless one day someone from there joins the forum.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: Markkos1992 on December 20, 2021, 08:52:19 am
PR 153:  I presume that the breaking of the graph connection with PR 1 was done purposely.  (EDIT:clarifying to note that I believed this due to the odd-setup of the area)

That is the only comment I have at this time.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: Markkos1992 on January 02, 2022, 10:20:03 am
Quote
PR 355:  Does this route not extend to PR119?

For this one, the label for the extension to PR119 was accidentally put in as PR355.  (Magically making a route ends at itself, how can I learn that trick?   ;D   I hope this lightens the load instead of coming off snarky.  Happy New Year!!)
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on January 02, 2022, 02:00:06 pm
Thanks.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on January 16, 2022, 05:58:06 pm
Responses to review through PR 500:

PR 123:
3.  The Ponce inset shows PR 500 extended to PR 123 even though the spreadsheet does not.  (maybe a "ToPR500" or "PR500Con" since I do not see a road name here)

GMSV shows this supposed extension as gated off (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.0163198,-66.6391147,3a,74.2y,152.36h,90.58t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipM3bZubNpW-u9Z7LJY0C105f5ZZ04VNK9Tsd2k!2e10!3e11!7i5504!8i2752) (7/2021).

Quote
4.  Have there been any updates on PR 9?

None that I'm aware of.

Quote
6.  Is PR 516 at the right location?

The DTOP map shows it ending at the municipal boundary.

Quote
7.  Are you sure that there are one-way sections of PR 123 and PR 5516 at PA 521? (Maybe the point here should be relocated??)

The endpoints for 521 & 5516 are at a plaza encircled by one-way traffic.

Quote
PR 128:  Should PR 4431 mostly instead be PR 431? 

According to a note on the map, it's 4431.

Quote
PR 130:  OSM and the Here Maps show a PR 130R.  Obviously I cannot prove its existence.  No further comments.

GMSV near there shows no evidence of it being signed.

Quote
PR 132: 
1.  Is there a segment of PR 383 that should connect to this road?  (or is this PR 3384?)

3384 doesn't go that far per the DTOP map.

Quote
PR 141:
1.  Is the PR144 point at the southern end at the right location?
2.  Is LomaZar a correct label?

The junction with 144 is an oblong one-way loop. Loma de la Zarza is the name of the peak at the end of that road. I don't know of any official name for that road.

Quote
PR 148:  The route shown is fine, but the spreadsheet seems to indicate that another section exists along PR 156 somewhere.

If it did exist, it would be near the 156/781 junction, but I found no evidence of it.

Quote
PR 152:
1.  Is the south end of PR 810 at the right location?
2.  Is CamMonGon a continuous route?  I am unsure if it is a useful visible point.

Per the DTOP map, 814 crosses 152, and 810 loops around to the west. I created a point for CamManGon since a shaping point was needed there, and since another road with that name exists nearby, it's possible they may eventually connect and increase the utility of this point.

Quote
PR 171: 
1.  Should "FutPR731" be made a visible point in the area?
2.  The shaping point north of PR733 could be made into a visible point...

Until PR731 is built, there's no need for a visible point there. The other shaping point is in between points only 1.67 miles apart, so it's fine as-is.

Quote
PR 173:
2.  GSV seems to indicate there is a loop around PR 728. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.1543287,-66.2355035,3a,75y,52.7h,81.06t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipNNwc-Zs4UeCVhqcc790Gm1QFHd-bskiQSzjyA!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipNNwc-Zs4UeCVhqcc790Gm1QFHd-bskiQSzjyA%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi-1.6080601-ya109.659355-ro0.6708572-fo100!7i5504!8i2752)

This isn't clear to me. Google satellite images appear to show 2-way traffic, while ESRI's does not, but I don't know which has newer photos. The GMSV car  is driving against the supposed one-way traffic, but that doesn't necessarily mean anything.

Quote
PR 174:
1.  CllSie does not seem to be correct.
2.  PR 832 is not signed looking at GSV.  I would link it if I could prove this from PR 833.

OSM and Google both call that road Calle Los Sierra. What would you call the point? And since there's no imagery at the other end of 832, I'll leave it in until it's shown to be unsigned.

Quote
PR 178:  PR3_W should be PR3.  (On PR 3, PR178_W should be just PR178.)

It intersects PR 3 at both ends, so calling it PR3_W isn't incorrect.

Quote
PR 179:  The shaping point north of PR748 should be replaced with a nearby visible point.

There's only a little over 2 miles between the visible points there, and only OSM has names for the streets there.

Quote
PR 180:  The shaping point between PR3 and PR701 should be replaced by a visible point at Calle J(OSM)/Calle Villa Sol (HERE Maps).

Again the segment between visible points there is less than a mile long, so there's no need.

Quote
PR 181: 
1.  Are the south end at PR 3 and the point at PR 757 in the right location?
4.  AveParkGar looks like it should be PR877_N making PR877 PR877_S.

I moved the endpoint to PR 3 since that's where the km-post is. 877's km-posts continue north on Av Trujillo Alto past the intersection with Av Park Gardens, so that point is not an intersection with PR 877.

Quote
PR 184:  Is PR 7184 missing or is there just a graph connection missing there?

7184 doesn't appear to be signed.

Quote
PR 186:  PR 9966 seems to be signed as PR 966 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.3612259,-65.8190182,3a,75y,66.29h,83.14t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipOkL8oeSDLFz0d3Xp9vZ9VwRznPBnroV4ogUkc!2e10!3e11!7i5504!8i2752) for some reason.

PR 966 exists somewhere else. PR 9966 is signed on this road at the PR 191 end.

Quote
PR 191:  What led to this route being split in two?

Did you not notice this (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.2958074,-65.7904949,3a,49.8y,190.43h,87.27t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipPec6HPrgSJS01t6GPA7Luj5xmU4suHYMRt4JI!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipPec6HPrgSJS01t6GPA7Luj5xmU4suHYMRt4JI%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi-1.2702422-ya286.03528-ro-3.043994-fo100!7i5504!8i2752) or this (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.2650876,-65.8006407,3a,90y,292.06h,91.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAF1QipNPqimDIFuWa7_kDEdi90MOLWnGK1mR41paCW0!2e10!7i5504!8i2752)?

Quote
PR 198:  PR 204 seems to be signed as PR 9939 here. Maybe this is an error.

I believe that it is.

Quote
PR 199 (San Juan):  It looks like a point is needed at PR 837 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.3608082,-66.1145279,3a,75y,100.5h,92.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5L0_X-Rkgomp-XTFosI4aw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  ToPR837 should be AveSanIgn.

That's not PR 837, so I moved the ToPR837 point to that intersection.

Quote
PR 200: 
1.  Is the western end correct?

Where PR 200 ends and PR 994 begins is unclear. This certainly needs a field check.

PR 205:  Does not seem to be posted from PR 31 or PR 53 (signed as "PR 31" (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.2156318,-65.7442317,3a,75y,118.82h,92.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGfn3uSr6-q31am7SiJQNHg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)).  I am unsure if this should be included.

Hard to say what this (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.2169843,-65.740795,3a,15.8y,114.24h,86.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sIAIS3w_wPxs6K47VQZhF6w!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DIAIS3w_wPxs6K47VQZhF6w%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D43.019184%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) says. Could be 205, could be directing toward 31. Another good spot for a field check.

Quote
PR 212:  This is signed as part of PR 4494 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4701747,-67.0247482,3a,75y,131.83h,82.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1su9Sgi1BisD7-3BDtiR9nkw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).

Yes, but it's also signed with a pentagon normally used on 2xx routes (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4705022,-67.0238798,3a,65.8y,359.73h,101.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-elHZMV4WkP_9b777BLqIQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

PR 301:  Is MirSal correct and at the right location?

Mirador de las Salinas is a viewing tower (https://www.google.com/maps/@17.9567696,-67.1990696,3a,73.6y,289.11h,68.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAF1QipM3ZQsBo2vK443Zvl3S_w1uCOoCyJhuajfNkevp!2e10!7i5376!8i2688) located by the salt flats. I can replace this with a hidden point if you want.

Quote
PR 306:  Looks fine.  The Excel spreadsheet indicates that this goes east of PR 101 though.

The DTOP map doesn't show anything east of 101.

Quote
PR 309:  Am I missing something going on between PR 309 and PR 103?

AFAIK there's no connection between the two yet.

Quote
PR 315:  Is Cll65Inf_S correct?

Since there's no name on that part of the road, I went with what OSM called it north of there (Calle Regimiento 65 de Infanteria).

Quote
PR 329:  Seems fine.  I am not 100% sure it goes to PR 117 though based on the map and spreadsheet.

The DTOP map shows them connecting.

Quote
PR 333:  Should the section of PR 116 and PR 4116 be part of PR 4116 instead of PR 333?  What is up with FutPR334?

Google & OSM both call this 333. The DTOP map shows a proposed 334 extending to the southwest through the state forest.

Quote
PR 335:  Is PR 3335 missing?

There's no 3335 in the spreadsheet or on the DTOP map.

Quote
PR 345:  Should these two routes be combined?  (It is signed from PR 2. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.1297864,-67.1047227,3a,75y,7.47h,83.12t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1serBQXpLB85Ig2sZx6fuDZg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DerBQXpLB85Ig2sZx6fuDZg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D75.96295%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656))

I split it because there's no way to get from one segment to the other southbound.

Quote
PR 348:  Is PR 380 missing from the HB?

PR 380 is not signed at PR 2.

Quote
PR 349:  Is there a missing graph connection with PR 105?

PR 105 doesn't go that far west.

Quote
PR 365 (Maricao) :  I am unsure how to describe this one.  I am very much unsure if it is correct.
PR 366:  See PR 365 (Maricao).

The DTOP map shows Future 365 meeting 366 there. It's not clear whether 365 and 366 are concurrent to 3366 (which is not on the map), although the DTOP manual says that this entire segment is part of 366.

Quote
PR 371:  CjonTor may not be correct.

What would you call Callejón Tortgo? If you meant that the location is slightly off, there's some discrepancy between OSM and ESRI imagery, and I went with the imagery.

Quote
PR 374 (Yauco):  Fine if PR 372 and PR 373 are fine.
PR 374 (Lares):  Fine.

It appears that the two segments connect now, so I combined the files.

Quote
PR 412:  Are we sure that this route does not extend to PR 115?

GMSV shows a broken old km-post there, but the manual puts the end one block east.

Quote
PR 416:  Signage seems to indicate that PR 416 may be concurrent with PR 417 in some form. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.3761567,-67.1768454,3a,75y,356.49h,95.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2Gj-a0ur90XyDnUhPCdntw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

But there's nothing affirming that in the DTOP manual ot the Excel file.

Quote
PR 418:  GSV at the northern end seems to indicate that PR 111 extends west of PR 2 to here or even PR 115.

I field-checked this area on a trip less than 5 years ago, and this is what made sense then (I did not keep the notes). 111 may be an old name for 1107.

Quote
PR 442:  Is the northern end at the right location?

According to the DTOP map, yes.

Quote
PR 451:  I am pretty sure that this should be extended to PR 111. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.3232317,-66.942349,3a,75y,349.2h,95.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7O-Zp2eofoL93XmiRBq5Ww!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

That's 4451 intersecting 111, not 451 (despite the sign). According to the DTOP manual, both 451 and 4451 end at "end of road". Maybe there is (or was) a plan to connect them, but I don't have any evidence that it's all one route now.

Quote
PR 459:  Seems fine with the exception of wondering whether PR 463 makes it here yet.
PR 463:  Probably fine beyond whether it makes it to PR 459 or not.

There's no road showing up in aerial imagery yet.

Quote
PR 466:  Is CllDelPena correct? (assuming this does not go to PR 113)

The DTOP manual states that the end is "Delfina Peña St" but I don't have a street map of Isabela so I don't know exactly which street this is.

Quote
PR 469:  May be fine, could this extend to PR 2 by the baseball stadium?
PR 485:  Does this make it to PR 119?  Who knows....

Not according to the DTOP manual or the Excel file.

Quote
PR 486:  Is PR4486 at the right location?

The Excel file says that there's around 7 km between the 4486 and 488 junctions, so I think this is closer to the correct location than where OSM has it. It also appears to match the location on the DTOP map.

Quote
PR 495:  Is a point missing for PR 4403?

According to the Excel file and the DTOP manual, 4403 ends at 110.

Quote
PR 497:  Is End at the right location?

The spreadsheet and manual both say the entire route is only 2.2-2.3 km long, so this is my best estimate of the end.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on February 02, 2022, 09:11:27 pm
Responses to review through PR 1000:

PR 503 (Adjuntas):  Is End at the right location?

It's not clear exactly where it ends now since the southern-most segment N of the reservoir appears to no longer be maintained. Moved to end per imagery.

Quote
PR 503 (Ponce):  Is the south end at the right location?

The manual says the end is Calle Salsa.

Quote
PR 505:  It looks like Cll1 should be CllA.

Where did you get that? Lacking other information, I went with OSM.

Quote
PR 506:  Is End at the right location?

GMSV shows it turning into a dirt road south of there. It's proposed to go to PR 1 eventually.

Quote
PR 514:  Does this actually extend north of PR 5514?

According to the manual and the DTOP map, 5514 starts south of the north end of 514.

Quote
PR 518R:  Is End at the right location?

According to the DTOP map it ends within the state forest.

Quote
PR 520:  Is LomRayo at the right location?

OSM doesn't show any road names there so I moved the point to a better spot for shaping and hid it.

Quote
PR 530:  Is End at the right location?

The rest of it hasn't been built yet according to the imagery.

Quote
PR 536:  Should PR 5536 be added?

5536 isn't signed at PR 1 so I renamed the point "OldPR536".

Quote
PR 540:  Should this be extended to PR 551?

Not according to the DTOP map.

Quote
PR 547:  Is End at the right location?

According to the DTOP map it is, and the length is close to the 1.9km length in the manual.

Quote
PR 554:  Is this route legitimately missing?

The manual called it proposed, but since something exists there in the aerials I added it.

Quote
PR 555:  Is End at the right location?

It's impossible to know for sure, but there's a bridge there at a point close to where it should end according to the manual.

Quote
PR 559:  Is End at the right location?

It matches its location on the DTOP map.

Quote
PR 561:  Is End at the right location?

Also matches the map.

Quote
PR 568:  Replace the shaping point near PR 5155 with a visible one at SalMor.

Where did you get that name for the bridge? I added the point but called it "ToPR5155".

Quote
PR 570:  PR149 should be PR149_LomN.

I changed 149 to 149_N and 149_N to 149 so that the concurrency is between _S & _N. Did likewise for PR 149.

Quote
PR 572:  Is the south end at the correct location?

According to the DTOP map it is (0.7 km in the manual).

Quote
PR 574:  Is End at the right location?

I checked the length using GMaps and it matches the length in the manual.

Quote
PR 576:  Please clarify where PR 576 and PR 702 end.

Also used GMaps here to determine the point where the switch happens.

Quote
PR 586:  Is End at the right location?

Seems to be according to GMaps.

Quote
PR 592:  Seems fine.  (unsure about PR 14 here and at PR 570 here)

PR 14 is split here using one-way streets so I adjusted the 570 & 592 points to reflect this.

Quote
PR 610:  Is End at the right location?

Imagery is hard to read but the road doesn't appear to be finished yet.

Quote
PR 614:  Does this route extend west of PR 6614?

Aerials show a paved road there following the proposed route on the DTOP map.

Quote
PR 621:  Is End at the right location?

It's impossible to use GMaps to find the endpoint (the road is missing from their map) so I used my best judgment. The manual and spreadsheet differ in the length (7.5 km vs 9.5).

Quote
PR 635:  Should PR 4489 connect to this road?  Is there a PR 635R?

OSM seems to have 4489 in the wrong place, and there's no indication of a 635R in any of the DTOP sources.

Quote
PR 644:  Is End at the right location?

That's where imagery shows the road ending.

Quote
PR 646:  Does this actually extend to PR 155 on its west end?

Not according to the manual.

Quote
PR 647:  Are the PR 677 and PR 620 intersections that close to each other?

Imagery suggests that they are.

Quote
PR 648:  Is End at the right location?

I used GMaps to verify that the length matches that in the manual/spreadsheet.

Quote
PR 652:  It looks like this may extend slightly east of PR 10. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4416322,-66.7150141,3a,75y,189.99h,89.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6SEFSO1nHgaEs9Ai7QsQig!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

Not according to the manual and spreadsheet.

Quote
PR 655:  Is AreMue correct?

AreMue = Arecibo Muelle (harbor or dock), but I changed it to End to simplify.

Quote
PR 658:  Seems fine.  It may extend farther south now.

I used distance on GMaps again to locate the endpoint.

Quote
PR 660:  Is RmlBarObr_E correct?

The manual calls that road Ramal Barrio Obrero.

Quote
PR 661:  Is End at the right location?

GMaps didn't allow routing here, so I made my best guess for where 2.2 km should be.

Quote
PR 672:  Is end at the right location or does this extend to PR 643?

Used GMaps routing again, which places the end short of 643.

Quote
PR 677 (Vega Alta):  I am unsure of the area around PR 6677.
PR 677 (Dorado):  Is this route in correctly?

I used the routing shown on the DTOP map.

Quote
PR 680:  Is this route missing?

It does not appear to be signed.

Quote
PR 682:  Is BosCam correct?

I don't have any information on the name of the road, but it goes to the Bosque Estatal de Cambalache.

Quote
PR 693:  Should AveJoseEfr be PR6696?
PR 696:  See PR 693.

PR 6696 didn't make it into the manual or the spreadsheet, and the road appears to be unsigned.

Quote
PR 705:  Does this road circle around?

According to the manual it does.

Quote
PR 707:  Is the western end at the right location?

The manual and spreadsheet have different lengths (2.0 km / 2.4 km). I went with 2.0.

PR 725:  Looks like at least part of PR 726 is actually PR 7725 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.1531418,-66.2762731,3a,75y,17.17h,90.08t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipMEGq_F-yLadjA-YwWMey8lY5kZTwOXlkGwmjs!2e10!3e11!7i5504!8i2752).
PR 726:  See PR 725.

Both the manual and spreadsheet call this road 726 and refer to 7725 as unassigned. Since there's no other evidence of 7725 signs, for now I'll consider the sign an error.

Quote
PR 728:  Is End at the right location?

The spreadsheet and manual list it with different lengths (0.5 / 0.8 km) and this is 0.5.

Quote
PR 733:  Is End at the right location?

It measures 1.5 km long per GMaps, which is the length listed for it in the manual.

Quote
PR 742:  Is End at the right location?  May extend to PR 743. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.1211258,-66.122257,3a,75y,94.18h,81.99t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipNLGAPOslLdbei3J9ozw9yVwECywFjKuh3VNIQ!2e10!3e11!7i5504!8i2752) (instead of PR 7042?)

It seems that there's still a short gap at the north end of 742 per the imagery, so despite signage I'll leave 743 alone for now. If you think it would be better to change 7042 to a second 742 segment, I'm willing to do that.

Quote
PR 745:  Is End at the right location?

There are plans to extend it to 7740 but at this point there's no road there in the imagery.

Quote
PR 746:  Is End at the right location?

The manual and spreadsheet say it's supposed to end at the hydroelectric plant, and it does.

Quote
PR 750:  Is End at the right location?

GMaps says this measures 1.5 km as drafted.

Quote
PR 752:  Is End at the right location?

The spreadsheet and manual disagree on the length (4.1 / 4.9 km) and this is 4.1.

Quote
PR 753:  Is this put in correctly with PR 7754?

This follows the only path that appears capable of eventually connecting to PR 762. The manual set the length at 8.0 km so I cut it back to that.

Quote
PR 754:  Is End at the right location?

The manual said it's 1.9 km, and GMaps says that's how long this is.

Quote
PR 755:  I do not think that this extends to PR 3.

I didn't draft it that way, so it's unclear what error you're pointing out.

Quote
PR 760:  It looks like PR 901 has a concurrency with this route. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.005357,-65.8981261,3a,75y,80.2h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sS8Ue3ufSS-aajYHTZ9PHmw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)  (maybe to PR 939)  Is End at the right location?

That sign says "Hacia" (To). The manual says 901 starts at 760.

Quote
PR 764:  Is End at the right location?

GMaps says it's the same length that the manual says (0.5 km).

Quote
PR 768:  I think this route should be relooked at.

It matches the description in the manual and the trace corresponds to what's shown on the DTOP map. What's your concern?

Quote
PR 778:  It looks like this and PR 7778 may need to switch. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.2207848,-66.2255651,3a,75y,48.02h,96.9t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipNr1E-OzDWlB7MVxgJhvjnr1kiXt5swXXhVl4A!2e10!3e11!7i5504!8i2752)

The bridge is PR 7778 according to the manual & spreadsheet. GMSV shows two signs at the junction of 778 & 7778 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.2212455,-66.2235119,3a,17.2y,174.95h,93.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAF1QipM79Y9UP_Mkd9MmbitQJPI5u-UEtIU7rziydbA!2e10!7i5504!8i2752) but one is illegible and the other is facing away from the camera. I can delete 7778 if you're convinced it's not signed as such but I'd prefer to know what's on those signs before doing that.

Quote
PR 782:  Does this route go north of PR 156?

Not according to the manual or the spreadsheet.

Quote
PR 786:  Is End at the right location?

GMaps says it's the right length (0.8 km).

Quote
PR 788:  Is PR 766 missing?

766 is not in the manual or the spreadsheet (or GMSV).

Quote
PR 794:  Is End at the right location?

It measures correctly (4.6 km) in GMaps.

Quote
PR 798:  Consider redoing the PR1 labels.

I chose the order to follow the direction of PR 1 (and the km posts).

Quote
PR 800:  Is End at the right location?

The routing in OSM doesn't match the DTOP map or the manual. The end was determined by measuring a 4.9 km segment on GMaps.

Quote
PR 801:  Is End at the right location?

GMaps used again to establish the endpoint (2.2 km).

Quote
PR 813:  Is End at the right location?

GMaps again.

Quote
PR 814:  Is CamDonTito correct?

OSM & Google call it that. Do you have a better source showing something else?

Quote
PR 817:  Seems fine, but I do not see this route on the spreadsheet, map, or GSV.

The DTOP map and the manual show the route as proposed, but a roadway exists in the aerial imagery.

Quote
PR 818:  Should Cor/Veg be End?

The spot is at a municipio boundary, so why not use that?

Quote
PR 826 (Lago la Plata):  Is End at the right location?

(PR 826 (Lago la Plata) is vanilla PR 826 now) The segment measured 2.4 km on GMaps.

Quote
PR 833:  Is there a PR 833R?

There's no 833R on the DTOP map or in the manual or spreadsheet.

Quote
PR 834:  Fine if this route is still correct.  OSM shows it relocated onto the Expressway.

OSM currently shows it following the old route, so maybe someone had jumped the gun when you first looked at this. GMSV shows no km posts or signage on the expressway, so I'm leaving this alone.

Quote
PR 835:  Does this make it to PR 834 now?

I'm not sure but I extended it anyway seeing that there is a roadway there.

Quote
PR 839:  Does this make it to PR 167 and/or PR 855 somehow?

PR 855, yes, so extended there. At the other end, km 0 is at the marginal road, so no change.

Quote
PR 865:  Is PR 865R a thing?

If 865R is a thing, it's not a signed thing, at least at PR 2. GMSV hints that there may be a km post here (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4104247,-66.2329694,3a,29.8y,351.42h,93.13t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1suanrOyDW3sS-0QhKsyoSUQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DuanrOyDW3sS-0QhKsyoSUQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D66.68671%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656), but I think that's just green paint. Regardless, there's nothing about this in any of the DTOP documents.

Quote
PR 871:  Is the northern end at the right location?

Measured 1.0 km with GMaps.

Quote
PR 873:  Is CllMar correct?

The manual states that it ends at "Marginal near Rte 1" instead of PR 1.

Quote
PR 880:  Is CllRob correct?

The manual says it ends at "Robledo Street", and the street where I ended it is closest to where 1.0 km should be.

Quote
PR 890:  Is the southern end actually at PR 8855 (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4016249,-66.1561705,3a,75y,119.69h,82.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sv08SppLBXmKbn8a5ETtOLA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)?

DTOP docs say it ends at PR 855, and that's where km 0 is (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.3993367,-66.1555801,3a,49y,2.77h,88.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSue3c39F6LJjdCZymrcIaA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).

Quote
PR 900:  Is End at the right location?

According to the aerial imagery, yes. There's no road where OSM or GMaps show one.

Quote
PR 901:  See PR 760.  Is PR 9901 missing? (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.0388739,-65.8450261,3a,75y,178.25h,81.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siK-6yCb9PR-wI3l4-n4r2Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

There's no 9901 in any of the DTOP documents, so despite the sign, even if I wanted to include it, I have no idea where it goes or how long it is.

Quote
PR 905:  It looks like PR 9905 needs to be checked.  Does this extend to PR 917?

Imagery shows a gap between the end and PR 917, so I extended it to that gap.

Quote
PR 908:  I am unsure if this and PR 909 have been handled right.

I redid 908 since it seems to have been rerouted to no longer follow the route in the DTOP map near 909. The route on the DTOP map isn't the same length as the route described in the manual, so this routing is consistent with the manual.

Quote
PR 909:  See PR 908.  Is PR 9907 missing?

Besides moving the 908 point, I changed the 9907 point to CamCab since that route appears to be unsigned. The new length is also consistent with the manual's number.

Quote
PR 912:  Is End at the right location?

It measures 5.1 km according to GMaps.

Quote
PR 916:  GSV indicates that this route may extend north of PR 183. (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.1838397,-65.9592142,3a,75y,332.27h,92.76t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipPHqxKIi6jJLlvXQs9uM183TJZm0U0CTEH0IJQ!2e10!3e11!7i5504!8i2752)

The spreadsheet and DTOP map don't agree with the manual, so I went with 2 out of 3.

Quote
PR 927:  Is PR 9927 a thing?  PR53 should be ToPR53.

9927 exists in the manual but not the spreadsheet or DTOP map. The description in the manual doesn't match what's in OSM so I'm choosing to ignore it.

Quote
PR 928:  Does PR 9929 make it here?

9929 is not what OSM says it is.

Quote
PR 929:  Is PR 9926 missing?

9926 added.

Quote
PR 939:  Is End at the right location? See PR 760 and PR 901.

It matches up with the length in the manual.

Quote
PR 942:  Is End at the right location?

This one matches up too.

Quote
PR 945:  Is PR 8852 missing?

PR 8852 is actually a different road, so changed the point to End.

Quote
PR 947:  Is End at the right location?

Measured 2.2 km with GMaps.

Quote
PR 950:  Is this route in there correctly beyond the endpoints?

As drafted it measures 8.3 km. Since the spreadsheet lists it at 8.2 km and the manual 8.4, I'm okay with this length. Moving it to a different routing would make it much longer than 8.4 km.

Quote
PR 955:  Consider editing the PR 3 points.  Should the east end be put at the PR 3/PR 968 intersection? (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.3719762,-65.7663966,3a,75y,282.17h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIBizG8-aBbpYS-hvxykGUQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

The order matches the order on PR 3. Any scheme other than _A, _B, etc would be unnecessarily complicated and solve nothing. The manual says the east end intersects PR 3 at km 32.1, so this is closer (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.3718282,-65.7662262,3a,49y,109.15h,94.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOOZRQPH3pmnQt8BRvHToxA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) than the other intersection.

Quote
PR 961:  Is the south end at the right location?

GMaps says that endpoint makes it 0.6 km long, same as the manual.

Quote
PR 963:  Is this at the right location?

There's a sign of some sort hiding here (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.3388465,-65.8259122,3a,74.6y,79.93h,83.24t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipM91hruXphdMBIvo8UKe04vrfHYoObAGNMB_kA!2e10!3e11!7i5504!8i2752), and this is where the DTOP map places it.

Quote
PR 968:  Seems fine, should maybe be extended.

There's a gate at the end (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.3923909,-65.7835438,3a,75y,296.88h,85.51t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipN7kKm_5NE-UFmZbZgpSB1BtjpEROBOER-LA1Q!2e10!3e11!7i5504!8i2752), and the length of 4.0 km checks out.

Quote
PR 970:  Is PR 9970 missing?

9970 doesn't appear on the DTOP map or in the spreadsheet, only the manual.

Quote
PR 976:  I am pretty sure this does not make it to PR 195.

The end is at Cll Igualdad, not 195. That's how I drafted it, so I'm not sure what you're seeing.

Quote
PR 985:  Is there a PR 9985?

9985 only exists in the manual (and OSM), not on the DTOP map or the spreadsheet. And the manual doesn't put it where OSM does.

Quote
PR 987:  Is CabSanJuan correct?  I think End is correct.

CabSanJuan is the name of the nature reserve with an entrance there (Cabezas de San Juan).

Quote
PR 989:  Is End at the right location?

I turned it into a loop since that's the only solution following the description in the manual (0.85 km, ending at itself) that made any sense.

Quote
PR 990 (Rio Grande):  Is there a PR 9991 here?

No, only the one intersecting the Luquillo segment.

Quote
PR 992:  PR3_W should just be PR3.

PR3_W is the western junction with PR 3, so there's nothing wrong with this point name.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on February 06, 2022, 12:25:17 pm
Responses to the rest of the review:

PR 1107:  Should AveJuanSan be added to this and PR 2?

It's not that far away from an existing point. If someone needs it I'll add it.

PR 3131:  Is End at the right location?

I measured it with GMaps, and it came out to 4.4km, which is the length in the manual and spreadsheet.

Quote
PR 3330:  This route should be entirely rechecked.  Fine based on the spreadsheet though.

It's not in the spreadsheet, but the manual lists the 2017 length as 1.3 km so I cut it back slightly.

Quote
PR 3344:  Should PR 103 be signed in this area? (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.1360746,-67.1256334,3a,15y,11.51h,82.26t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sHgWC5iGYH7r535c84Kvowg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DHgWC5iGYH7r535c84Kvowg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D94.31989%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)

The sign in that image is incorrect, since 103 does not head east from that intersection, but follows the road marked 309. I deleted most of 309 and replaced it with a new PR103Hor, which is in the spreadsheet but not the manual.

Quote
PR 3345:  Is this actually part of PR 345? (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.1321148,-67.1098138,3a,15y,136.95h,91.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sItWkK2QjeuXKcIg4kr4Gyw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

No. PR 345 is drafted according to the manual.

Quote
PR 3363:  I am unsure if this one goes to PR 2 or PR 102...

According to both the manual and the spreadsheet, it ends at 2 even though there's no junction. Truncated.

Quote
PR 3366:  Is End at the right location?

It measures correctly (1.2 km) in GMaps.

Quote
PR 3384:  This route should be rechecked.

It's not in the spreadsheet, but according to the manual only 1.6 km have been built (as of 2017). The west end is described as PR 3383, but that hasn't been built yet.

PR 4119:  I am also unsure that CllAmaBra_E is correct.

Both GMaps and OSM call that road Cll Amador Brall. The manual says 4119 follows something called "Nolla Road" that I can't find on any map.

PR 4401:  Is End at the right location?

The spreadsheet says it's 0.9 km, the manual 0.8 km, so I moved the end to 0.85 km.

Quote
PR 4417:  I just noticed that there may be a PR 417R.

PR 417R doesn't appear in any DTOP documents.

Quote
PR 4435:  Is End at the right location?

I extended it to the end of the road as shown in aerial imagery.

Quote
PR 4441:  Is End at the right location?

There's a gate there and it matches the length in the spreadsheet and manual. What makes you think it might be wrong?

Quote
PR 4446:  Is End at the right location?

The measured lenght checks out.

Quote
PR 4485:  Is End at the right location?

Same.

Quote
PR 4489:  This one needs to be rechecked. Also is there a PR 489R?

It follows the path depicted on the DTOP map. There's no evidence of a 489R in any DTOP docs.

PR 5512:  Is End at the right location?

The length matches what DTOP says it should be.

Quote
PR 5519:  Is End at the right location?

Here too.

Quote
PR 5520:  Is PR 1150 a thing, and either way, is End at the right location?

DTOP doesn't list any 1150, and the length is correct.

Quote
PR 5550 (Juana Díaz):  I am not sure that this route is correct at all.  The segment [w]est of PR 149 does not seem to even intersect it.

The segment or segments in Juana Díaz is/are not signed per recent GMSV, so axing this was an easy solution.

Quote
PR 5553:  Does this extend to what may be PR 1150?

Not according to DTOP.

Quote
PR 5567:  Is End at the right location?

It's 2.2 km long according to the manual, 2.1 in the spreadsheet, so it matches one of those.

PR 6109:  Does this extend south of PR 651?

The manual says no.

Quote
PR 6603:  Is End at the right location?

The length matches up.

Quote
PR 6609:  Does this extend back to PR 10 on the north end?

Not according to GMSV (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.4153471,-66.7040722,3a,52.9y,216.1h,94.3t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipP44Ur3vNjWyE71cEP4BzHbHdNP4xwuEX-341up!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipP44Ur3vNjWyE71cEP4BzHbHdNP4xwuEX-341up%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi-1.4593335-ya104.35449-ro9.789744-fo100!7i5472!8i2736), and the length as drafted matches the manual.

Quote
PR 6616:  Is End at the right location?

It agrees with the length in the manual and spreadsheet.

Quote
PR 6677:  Is End at the right location?

So does this one.

Quote
PR 7062:  Is End at the right location?

The manual says it's 0.5 km long, but the spreadsheet claims it's 0.8. Aerial imagery shows a road with a maximum length of 0.65 km so I went with that.

Quote
PR 7173:  Is End at the right location?

It matches what DTOP says it should be.

Quote
PR 7709:  Is End at the right location?

Honestly, this one is just a guess. It's not in the spreadsheet, and the entry in the manual doesn't list a length. There's only a dashed line on the DTOP map. I'm comfortable deleting if it seems spurious.

Quote
PR 7710:  Is End at the right location?

DTOP docs say it is.

Quote
PR 7715:  Does this extend to PR 1?

Recent GMSV doesn't show a sign anywhere on the route, so I deleted it.

Quote
PR 7727:  Is End at the right location?

The length agrees with what's in the manual and spreadsheet.

Quote
PR 7728:  Is End at the right location?

This one isn't in the spreadsheet, the manual lists the entire length as proposed, and it's all a dashed line on the DTOP map. Gone.

Quote
PR 7738:  Is End at the right location?

Looks like it.

Quote
PR 7748:  Is End at the right location?

The spreadsheet says it's 3.1 km long, the manual 2.6. This is 2.6, and it ends where anything resembling a highway seems to end in aerial imagery (which is not great at this location).

Quote
PR 7759:  Is End at the right location?

It matches the length shown in the manual and spreadsheet.

Quote
PR 7762:  Is End at the right location?

So does this one.

Quote
PR 7769:  Is End at the right location?

This too.

Quote
PR 7780:  Does this extend to PR 167?

The DTOP map and the manual have it ending where I dropped the "End" point. The spreadsheet says it ends at 167. Map & manual win.

Quote
PR 7783:  Is this route put in correctly?

The path I selected matches the DTOP map more closely than the one chosen by the OSM editor.

Quote
PR 7784:  GSV shows this route going in the other direction from PR 172... (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.2119306,-66.058227,3a,75y,113.77h,87.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXqk-pl0YtC9U1yC3HjvKoA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

That sign is wrong (as is OSM). First, there are no km posts north of 172. Second, the manual and DTOP map describe/show it following the route drafted, and the spreadsheet even refers to Calle 7 as an intermediate point.

Quote
PR 7786:  Should maybe be extended?

No, it matches the length in the official documents.

Quote
PR 7787:  Is End at the right location?

The manual says it's 2.4 km long, the spreadsheet 2.5, and this is 2.5.

Quote
PR 8825:  CllAme should be CllHacLum.

What's wrong with naming the waypoint for Calle Amelia? It's not like one of the streets is obviously more important than the other.

Quote
PR 8826:  Is End at the right location?

It matches the official length.

Quote
PR 8838:  Seems fine, but why is there a PR 8839 mentioned in the spreadsheet?

That's probably the unsigned connector to PR 21.

Quote
PR 9045:  Does this extend to PR 8852 or PR 853?

Imagery says not yet.

Quote
PR 9188:  Is this route missing?

Yes, because it's not signed.

Quote
PR 9902:  Is End at the right location?

According to official sources, yes.

Quote
PR 9923:  Is End at the right location?

The manual says it's 1.5 km long, and the spreadsheet lists it at 2.1. Extended to 2.1 since it looks like there may be plans to build more.

Quote
PR 9934:  Fine, but is there a PR 189R to account for here?

PR 189R does not appear to be signed.

Quote
PR 9959:  Probably fine.  I am not sure why OSM shows it going on another loop back to PR 3.  (Maybe the spreadsheet indicates such...)

That eastern loop is officially part of 9959 but it's not signed.

Quote
PR 9960:  Is PR 963 related to this somehow?  This may loop back to PR 186.

This road does not connect to 963. The length matches what official docs say it should be.

Quote
PR 9984:  Does this extend to PR 9988?

The manual says it's 0.9 km, the spreadsheet claims 0.8, and this is 0.8.

Quote
PR 9989:  Does this connect back to PR 9988?

No, it matches the length in the spreadsheet. The manual makes it out to be 0.1 km shorter.

Quote
PR 9991:  Does this connect to PR 990 (Rio Grande)?

No, what's there matches what's in the manual and spreadsheet.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on February 07, 2022, 06:04:38 pm
I have no further comments on what was submitted so you are fine with going through the Datacheck Errors and NMPs.

I did find a few unused alternate labels on the PR interstates that you may as well remove while you are at it.

pr.ipr001(2): 0 15
pr.ipr003(1): 33(PR53)

-Mark


I'll try get to the errors and NMPs and unused alt labels by the end this week. While I work on that I welcome comments on this set from all other users.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: mapcat on February 20, 2022, 09:27:10 am
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/5624 will activate the system. Thanks to all for corrections, suggestions, and other input.
Title: Re: usapr: Puerto Rico Territorial Highways
Post by: Jim on February 20, 2022, 09:45:56 am
Though I've been to or nor do I have any immediate plans to visit PR, it's great to see this one activated.  Thanks to everyone involved.