Author Topic: FL: I-95 (concurrency with US 1 and US 90 in Jacksonville?(around Exits 348-350)  (Read 2223 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online rickmastfan67

  • TM Collaborator (A)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 698
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Today at 01:24:26 am
I really would have preferred that FDOT used exit numbers on the C/D lanes.  I want to go with the old 349 becoming 348B based on the C/D Road exit NB being 348, but the C/D Road exit SB being 350A really confuses things IMO.

Well, on the '350A' issue, the exit NB was also that number before the conversion (I don't recall there ever being a '350B' going NB, thus no idea why they didn't just do 350 going NB).  With the SB ramp still maintaining that number, I have 0 issues keeping that as-is.

And yes, I fully agree with you that they should have added exit numbers on the C/D lanes.  Stupid that they didn't.  Also, whenever we mark an exit as 'permanently closed' we always keep the exit number, thus you could 'in theory', use that as a justification as well to keep the number as 349 (sans the '*') because of the direct SB offramp to US-90 EB from the mainline being gone, but still having the direct onramp NB.  With that reasoning, I think I'll just keep it as '349' unless something changes in the future on the signage when it comes to exit numbers.

On another note, I guess a new segment of FL 5 in Jacksonville will need to be added to the HB.

Already have that file ready to go once I finish dealing with a big post in the usafl thread so I can have a bulk update for FL. ;)

Offline Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 603
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 09:22:44 pm
I really would have preferred that FDOT used exit numbers on the C/D lanes.  I want to go with the old 349 becoming 348B based on the C/D Road exit NB being 348, but the C/D Road exit SB being 350A really confuses things IMO.

Well, on the '350A' issue, the exit NB was also that number before the conversion (I don't recall there ever being a '350B' going NB, thus no idea why they didn't just do 350 going NB).  With the SB ramp still maintaining that number, I have 0 issues keeping that as-is.

And yes, I fully agree with you that they should have added exit numbers on the C/D lanes.  Stupid that they didn't.  Also, whenever we mark an exit as 'permanently closed' we always keep the exit number, thus you could 'in theory', use that as a justification as well to keep the number as 349 (sans the '*') because of the direct SB offramp to US-90 EB from the mainline being gone, but still having the direct onramp NB.  With that reasoning, I think I'll just keep it as '349' unless something changes in the future on the signage when it comes to exit numbers.

I agree with your justification for leaving it 349.

Online rickmastfan67

  • TM Collaborator (A)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 698
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Today at 01:24:26 am
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2872

Changes have been submitted.  Decided not to add a update entry for US-1 due to the change being technically all within the original interchange footprint.

Will mark as solved once the changes go online.