Author Topic: MD: some changes in US 40 corridor  (Read 179 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline neroute2

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 522
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 09:30:53 pm
MD: some changes in US 40 corridor
« on: February 12, 2020, 09:18:37 pm »
US 40: WasSt -> WasSt_W
US 40: add a point at EasBlvd east of MD63
US 40: MouLenaRd -> MtLenaRd_E
US 40: move I-70(82) east to the overpass
US 40: MD144 -> MD144Coo?
US 40: add FreRd (leads to MD 144)
US 40: ParDr -> PatValSP and move east to the underpass; delete +X100
US 40: move US40TrkBal_W west to the underpass
US 40: MarLKJBlvd -> MLKJrBlvd
US 40: MD132 -> MD132Abe, add MD132EAb
US 40: MD7Per_E -> MD7Per
US 40: MD7Elk_E -> MD7Elk

US 40altcum: move +X2 east to ZehRd
US 40altcum: move +X3 west to AmiRd
US 40altcum: move +X4 east to ShaHolRd
US 40altcum: move MD546 west to the connector
US 40altcum: KampDr -> KempDr
US 40altcum: add points in Cumberland at MecSt and FreSt
US 40altcum: BalAve_W -> BalSt and move either southwest to the main intersection or to the middle of the circle

US 40althag: MD65 -> BalSt_W
US 40althag: add points at EasBlvd and WilBlvd in Hagerstown?

US 40scepin: move MVSmiRd west
US 40scepin: OrlRd -> OrlRd_N, add OrlRd_S (just as important due to I-68)
US 40scepin: add NatPike_W south of I-68(72)
US 40scepin: NatPike -> NatPike_E

144: add PheRidDr to stay within tolerance

144fli: move I-68(46) southeast to the overpass; add MasRd and ChrRd on either side
144fli: LakeShoDr -> PleValRd
144fli: add SunOrcRd http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.704702&lon=-78.630127 for shaping
144fli: move I-68(56) east to BlaValRd
144fli: add OldCumRd http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.693773&lon=-78.511112 and OldWilRd http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.681033&lon=-78.487122 to stay within tolerance

144fre is still signed west of JefSt, and MD 355 is still signed through Frederick. 144 is questionable, but there are enough 355 signs to extend it back north to 26. If we're only going to include routes that are still state maintained, we should put 144 on only Patrick Street.

There should be some way to clarify that 144 eastbound uses South-Franklin-Patrick, especially because traffic on the Historic National Road is directed left on East to Patrick. Maybe a SouSt_E point halfway along Franklin?

144fre: move I-70(56) west to the underpass

Why is 144hag signed east from MD910?

144han: add WilRd http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.703159&lon=-78.229609 to stay within tolerance

144new: is the end of state maintenance far enough west of RoyOakDr for a separate End point?
144new: ONewMarRd -> OldNMRd?

Offline Duke87

  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 338
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 07:23:33 pm
Re: MD: some changes in US 40 corridor
« Reply #1 on: February 16, 2020, 06:27:34 pm »
Okay, a lot going on here... addressing just the US40 comments first, will circle back to the others.

US 40: WasSt -> WasSt_W
Ah, but US 40 only uses Washington Street eastbound... I'm going to go ahead and just 86 this point since it's so close to US11, no one is using it, and it's not needed for shaping.

US 40: add a point at EasBlvd east of MD63
Where? I'm not seeing any cross street in the vicinity of MD63 whose name matches that form.

US 40: MouLenaRd -> MtLenaRd_E
Directional suffix isn't necessary here since none of US40 uses Mt Lena Rd and it isn't necessary to disambiguate from a point at the other end.

US 40: move I-70(82) east to the overpass
This looks fine as is... the overpass only carries one direction of US 40, the point is pretty much in the middle of the interchange footprint which is appropriate.

US 40: MD144 -> MD144Coo?
The list file name for this section of MD144 is just MD144 so it's fine as is.

US 40: add FreRd (leads to MD 144)
Sure, why not. Added.

US 40: ParDr -> PatValSP and move east to the underpass; delete +X100
Ehhhh... "Park Drive" is the name of the road there so the label is fine. The underpass would certainly be a valid location for the point but it's not wrong per se where it is... I'm leaving it alone.

US 40: move US40TrkBal_W west to the underpass
Agreed, recentering.

US 40: MarLKJBlvd -> MLKJrBlvd
Agreed, relabeling. (not wrong per se as it is, but I definitely like the latter better, it's more intuitive)

US 40: MD132 -> MD132Abe, add MD132EAb
Ooh that's a major missing thing. Gonna have to add that.

US 40: MD7Per_E -> MD7Per
Done

US 40: MD7Elk_E -> MD7Elk
Done
« Last Edit: February 16, 2020, 06:44:18 pm by Duke87 »

Offline Duke87

  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 338
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 07:23:33 pm
Re: MD: some changes in US 40 corridor
« Reply #2 on: February 17, 2020, 12:58:48 am »
US 40altcum: move +X2 east to ZehRd
Okay

US 40altcum: move +X3 west to AmiRd
US 40altcum: move +X4 east to ShaHolRd
Ehhhh moving these two makes the route trace notably less anatomically correct by smoothing out those curves. Leaving them where they are.

US 40altcum: move MD546 west to the connector
Hrm... yeah I agree. There is another connector to the east but it has its own (signed) route number.

US 40altcum: KampDr -> KempDr
Done

US 40altcum: add points in Cumberland at MecSt and FreSt
Those are the original US 40 alignment, aren't they. OK added.

US 40altcum: BalAve_W -> BalSt and move either southwest to the main intersection or to the middle of the circle
Done, with waypoint in middle of circle (per SOP to split the difference on one way pairs)

US 40althag: MD65 -> BalSt_W
Done

US 40althag: add points at EasBlvd and WilBlvd in Hagerstown?
Sure, why not

US 40scepin: move MVSmiRd west
Recentered. Probably a case of map drift.

US 40scepin: OrlRd -> OrlRd_N, add OrlRd_S (just as important due to I-68)
Done

US 40scepin: add NatPike_W south of I-68(72)
US 40scepin: NatPike -> NatPike_E
Sure, why not

144: add PheRidDr to stay within tolerance
Done. Also requires adding shaping to I-70 and US 40 to keep route traces from crossing where they shouldn't

144fli: move I-68(46) southeast to the overpass; add MasRd and ChrRd on either side
Hmm. So, eastbound, the exit 46 offramp is the through route for US220 (which in turn means US220 has an unmapped unidirectional concurrency with MD144). And geometrically it's as much a part of the interchange for exit 47 as it is for the interchange for exit 46. Furthermore I don't think adding points for MasRd and ChrRd works practically because both of these points are located between the overpass and the ramp(s) on that side of the interstate. This means if someone came from I-68 westbound and marked a clinch from I-68(46) to MasRd, they'd end up with a segment of road marked clinched that is entirely different from the one they drove on. Meanwhile if someone came from I-68 eastbound they'd drive past ChrRd getting to MasRd, but would not have the I-68(46) ChrRd segment marked clinched,

I'm going to just leave this alone rather than making a topological mess by adding more points to it.


144fli: LakeShoDr -> PleValRd
Relabeled

144fli: add SunOrcRd http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.704702&lon=-78.630127 for shaping
Done

144fli: move I-68(56) east to BlaValRd
*squints* Eh, sure, that makes sense I guess. Moving.

144fli: add OldCumRd http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.693773&lon=-78.511112 and OldWilRd http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.681033&lon=-78.487122 to stay within tolerance
Going to add a bit more shaping here to keep MD144 and I-68/US40 in order



And that's as far as I'm making it through this tonight. To be continued...

Offline neroute2

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 522
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 09:30:53 pm
Re: MD: some changes in US 40 corridor
« Reply #3 on: February 17, 2020, 08:47:42 pm »
US 40: add a point at EasBlvd east of MD63
Where? I'm not seeing any cross street in the vicinity of MD63 whose name matches that form.
Eastern Boulevard, a surface beltway of Hagerstown.

US 40: MouLenaRd -> MtLenaRd_E
Directional suffix isn't necessary here since none of US40 uses Mt Lena Rd and it isn't necessary to disambiguate from a point at the other end.
I guess this is one of those things that different people do differently.

US 40: ParDr -> PatValSP and move east to the underpass; delete +X100
Ehhhh... "Park Drive" is the name of the road there so the label is fine. The underpass would certainly be a valid location for the point but it's not wrong per se where it is... I'm leaving it alone.
Who says that's the name of the road? MDSHA just says "ENT TO PATAPSCO VALLEY STATE PARK". I can't find any street signs in GSV. OSM and Google both got their name from TIGER, which is OK but not particularly accurate, especially for this type of access road that doesn't have any houses.

US 40altcum: add points in Cumberland at MecSt and FreSt
Those are the original US 40 alignment, aren't they. OK added.
And one is a GSJ.

Offline Duke87

  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 338
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 07:23:33 pm
Re: MD: some changes in US 40 corridor
« Reply #4 on: February 24, 2020, 12:59:15 am »
Continuing onward...

US 40: ParDr -> PatValSP and move east to the underpass; delete +X100
Ehhhh... "Park Drive" is the name of the road there so the label is fine. The underpass would certainly be a valid location for the point but it's not wrong per se where it is... I'm leaving it alone.
Who says that's the name of the road? MDSHA just says "ENT TO PATAPSCO VALLEY STATE PARK". I can't find any street signs in GSV. OSM and Google both got their name from TIGER, which is OK but not particularly accurate, especially for this type of access road that doesn't have any houses.
Fair point. Okay, changing the name. Leaving the position alone.

144fre is still signed west of JefSt, and MD 355 is still signed through Frederick. 144 is questionable, but there are enough 355 signs to extend it back north to 26. If we're only going to include routes that are still state maintained, we should put 144 on only Patrick Street.
The thing is we have solid documentation of MD 355's truncation:
Quote
MD 355 Transfers: Note - MD 355 north of IS 70 has been transferred to Frederick City, and is now all municipally maintained.  The “MD 355” route ID has been replaced with an appropriate municipal route ID for each named segment.
Signage does annoyingly persist but only because the city of Frederick has expended zero effort removing signs. Note how it is NOT signed from MD 26. I'm inclined to leave this be given the firmly documented history, under the presumption that as time goes on signs will gradually disappear.
As for 144, this is extra complicated by the fact that South St isn't state maintained... but I'm still inclined to leave the route mapped as is rather than presuming a section of it to be one-way.


There should be some way to clarify that 144 eastbound uses South-Franklin-Patrick, especially because traffic on the Historic National Road is directed left on East to Patrick. Maybe a SouSt_E point halfway along Franklin?
I'm gonna go for a FraSt_E point instead, marking the endpoint of the one-way pair.

144fre: move I-70(56) west to the underpass
By ironly followed standards it should be there yes, but I actually kinda like the way it is better. Point is roughly centered within the interchange footprint and this makes the trace follow 144 more closely by not placing the point on the zig where the overpass is.

Why is 144hag signed east from MD910?
Probably just overzealous hyperliteralism. If you look at the HLR, MD 144WA ends 0.01 miles past MD 910C at "end roundabout", and the placement of the "end state maintenance" sign jives with this. That's not enough to treat it as a separate point for our sake, though.

144han: add WilRd http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.703159&lon=-78.229609 to stay within tolerance
Done

144new: is the end of state maintenance far enough west of RoyOakDr for a separate End point?
0.03 miles. Basically at the end of the shoulder taper for the turning lanes for the intersection. I'm going to go ahead and reposition the endpoint to the pavement change, but that's close enough to Royal Oak that it doesn't need a *separate* point there

144new: ONewMarRd -> OldNMRd?
Sure.

Offline neroute2

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 522
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 09:30:53 pm
Re: MD: some changes in US 40 corridor
« Reply #5 on: February 24, 2020, 08:19:33 pm »
144fre is still signed west of JefSt, and MD 355 is still signed through Frederick. 144 is questionable, but there are enough 355 signs to extend it back north to 26. If we're only going to include routes that are still state maintained, we should put 144 on only Patrick Street.
The thing is we have solid documentation of MD 355's truncation:
Quote
MD 355 Transfers: Note - MD 355 north of IS 70 has been transferred to Frederick City, and is now all municipally maintained.  The “MD 355” route ID has been replaced with an appropriate municipal route ID for each named segment.
Signage does annoyingly persist but only because the city of Frederick has expended zero effort removing signs. Note how it is NOT signed from MD 26. I'm inclined to leave this be given the firmly documented history, under the presumption that as time goes on signs will gradually disappear.
As for 144, this is extra complicated by the fact that South St isn't state maintained... but I'm still inclined to leave the route mapped as is rather than presuming a section of it to be one-way.


I don't dispute that Frederick maintains the road. I do dispute that this automatically makes it no longer 355 for our purposes.

Offline Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 822
  • Last Login:Today at 07:04:34 am
Re: MD: some changes in US 40 corridor
« Reply #6 on: Yesterday at 04:43:17 pm »
I do want to note that US 40 SCENIC has a sharp angle error listed.

Offline Duke87

  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 338
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 07:23:33 pm
Re: MD: some changes in US 40 corridor
« Reply #7 on: Yesterday at 06:15:55 pm »
I don't dispute that Frederick maintains the road. I do dispute that this automatically makes it no longer 355 for our purposes.

I understand that.

One precedent comes to mind is TX 180 - another route which was officially truncated in the relatively recent past (2014, MD 355 was 2010), but which remains very consistently signed along its truncated segment. The decision made there was the same: that the official truncation overruled the lack of signage removal.

That said I'm open to treating this otherwise if a consensus to do so emerges. Anyone else care to weigh in?

I do want to note that US 40 SCENIC has a sharp angle error listed.
Ay, where'd that come from? (Edit: okay it's because the waypoint label on one end of the angle was changed)

Anyway it's an FP so I'll go ahead and mark it as such.
« Last Edit: Yesterday at 06:34:59 pm by Duke87 »