Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
The concurrency was posted from US 222 south as late as 2017 per https://www.usends.com/222.html
I'd call this ambiguous given the context though. That was the only MD222 signage at US1 I found in GMSV.

I will note that I believe that posting was there when I drove that part of US 222 SB in December 2017.  I was traveling US 1 NB last Friday.
Combined with the OP, that works for me.
Shall I go ahead & truncate MD222 and delete MD222TrkPor, then?

I drove US 222 SB to US 1 Saturday Morning as I was also finishing up clinching US 1 in PA and NJ as part of my drive beyond the new I-95 /I-276 interchange.

The MD 222 posting is still there, but there were no signs for the MD 222 Truck Route.   Whether we still need to debate about MD 222 or not, I am confident in that MD222TrkPor can be deleted.
22
Updates to Highway Data / Re: PA: Request to add waypoints to PA 413 & 352
« Last post by Markkos1992 on Yesterday at 08:53:36 pm »
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2250

This includes the point at New Falls Rd on PA 413.  Also note that I had to reroute the northern end of PA 413 as well to follow Old Easton Rd and Deep Run Rd to ends at its correct intersection at PA 611.
23
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2250

Marking as solved unless yakra or myself missed something.
24
Updates to Highway Data / Re: GA: US 1 bypass of Oak Park
« Last post by ntallyn on Yesterday at 08:29:59 pm »

First thing you'd want to do is check this topic to see which issues raised in the peer review have been addressed. Many of the items were posted after theFXexpert disappeared.

Will look through it this weekend.
25
Re exit 40, this looks like one of those cases where list files will just be unavoidably broken by a major reroute.

Well I am not seeing myself actually breaking list files as much as them being incorrect. (having 40 now on I-95 instead of 39 would gain a little distance incorrectly)

Some list files in this case may have the line "PA I-95 DE/PA PA/NJ" without having actually traveled the former I-276.  That is one of my biggest concerns here.

I did use alternate labels past the truncation point for I-276 and for I-95 at Exit 40 for its old routing.
When these things happen, the risks are high, but we can't avoid it.  Go with it, the list files can be fixed.
26
Updates to Highway Data / Re: PA: NJ 90 in PA
« Last post by froggie on Yesterday at 12:18:52 pm »
^ Are the "TO" signs (or lack thereof) why you included NH VT105 but not NH VT114?  I'd think those would be examples more akin to the PA NJ90 discussion.
27
In-progress Highway Systems & Work / Re: Italy Strada Statale (itass)
« Last post by michih on Yesterday at 11:19:46 am »
Most of Italian Autostrada routes (active itaa system) do not have numbered exits but use wp label names of crossing routes. Of course, many exits are called "SSxxx". It seems to be right according to OSM and to what's signed in the field but we do not have the SS routes in HB. Just an example: RA13 exit SS14. This SS14 segment is not in HB!

Is it ok or should the wp labels being changed? Or should the SS routes being drafted?
28
Updates to Highway Data / Italy: NMP A4/A57
« Last post by michih on Yesterday at 11:10:02 am »
The western end of A57 doesn't match with corresponding A4/E70 wp. I report it because it's not in ita.nmp.

I also saw A13 and A13Pad not matching but it's listed :)
29
In-progress Highway Systems & Work / Re: usanyp: New York Parkways
« Last post by mapcat on Yesterday at 09:26:27 am »
It may still be legislated as SR 957C, but since it's not driveable (except by bicycle), perhaps its inclusion should be reconsidered.
Being closed to cars isn't always a deal-breaker. M-185 and part of Historic US 66 crossing the Mississippi River, for example.
30
In-progress Highway Systems & Work / Re: usanyp: New York Parkways
« Last post by charliezeb on Yesterday at 08:57:10 am »
New, I suppose, information on West River Parkway (SR 957C) in Grand Island, Erie Co.

I attempted to clinch that road on Saturday, and most of it is now closed. The powers that be (presumably including the governor) have decided to convert the bulk of the parkway into a pedestrian and bicycle linear park. Two very short sections (neither of which is currently marked with a waypoint) remain open: from South Parkway to Park Road and from Bedell Road to I-190. Otherwise, traffic is detoured onto surface streets Oakfield Road and West River Road. From what I could see along the closed section (which was being repaved for a smooth path), there was perhaps one speed limit sign still up along with maybe one reference marker and a leftover PARKING AREA sign.

It may still be legislated as SR 957C, but since it's not driveable (except by bicycle), perhaps its inclusion should be reconsidered.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10