Author Topic: NV: Today's updates in Boulder City area  (Read 1727 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online oscar

  • TM Collaborator
  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
  • Last Login:Today at 08:26:08 pm
    • Hot Springs and Highways pages
NV: Today's updates in Boulder City area
« on: August 09, 2018, 11:02:10 pm »
A few things I noticed:

-- South end of US 93 should be AZ/NV (as it was before the updates, and which remains the correct label), not NV/AZ. This broke my list file, including parts of the route outside the Las Vegas area (though I'll have to later fix my list file anyway to account for the Boulder City changes).

-- The Updates table has a bad link to the new US 93 Business (Boulder City), but it looks like the new business route isn't in the HB at all.

-- Looking at the pull request, the route file was named nv.us093busbc.wpt. The Updates table has the suffix as "bou" rather than "bc". "bou" is the correct suffix.

-- The stranded part of US 95, between I-11 and the US 93 business route, is included in the extended NV 172. OSM, and some discussion on the AARoads forum, indicate it's new route NV 173 (unclear whether it's signed), rather than part of NV 172.

Offline Jim

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1318
  • Last Login:Today at 08:16:02 pm
Re: NV: Today's updates in Boulder City area
« Reply #1 on: August 09, 2018, 11:17:12 pm »
I fixed the first three items in Oscar's list and I'm rerunning tonight's site update.  It will take a while since I the changes also generated some incorrect graph data that I'd like to have fixed up.

Offline rickmastfan67

  • TM Collaborator (A)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 583
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:November 13, 2018, 12:17:17 am
Re: NV: Today's updates in Boulder City area
« Reply #2 on: August 09, 2018, 11:39:41 pm »
A few things I noticed:

-- South end of US 93 should be AZ/NV (as it was before the updates, and which remains the correct label), not NV/AZ. This broke my list file, including parts of the route outside the Las Vegas area (though I'll have to later fix my list file anyway to account for the Boulder City changes).

Also, no longer synced with AZ US-93's file on both NV I-11 & US-93's file.

-- I still think that 'exit #15' needs to be split into two separate interchanges for I-11/US-93/US-95 as I mentioned here: http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=2206.msg8016#msg8016
Even more important due to US-93 having a new Business route in the mix that takes over the old US-93 route.  That and anybody that was just going to the Railroad Pass Casino from LV since '15A' is a full movement interchange and can't access it by using '15B' on I-11.

-- I-11 Fut (Hoover Dam, NV) needs to be decommissioned due to the I-11 file taking over that area. http://travelmapping.net/hb/?u=null&r=nv.i011futhoo

-- The 'Exit 2' on both I-11's & US-93's file should be copied from the above I-11 Fut file, as that's a more accurate position.

-- NV US93TrkLau: I'm betting this 'route' now officially ends @ I-11 instead of the new 'Business' route.  If it does go to the Business route still, then the interchange @ I-11 needs to be added at least to fix the broken multiplex with US-95.

-- On NV US-95's file,  the 'SilRd' point needs to be added back, as it's needed to keep the multiplex with the above US-93 Truck.  Also:
I-11_S -> I-11(14)
15 -> I-11(15)
And the base exit numbers along I-11/I-515 in the LV should be using the Interstate labeling style from '56' to '76'.  Sure, they 'may' be US-95's mileage, but that doesn't matter.  The Interstate must be mentioned.  See SC US-176 & I-585 as an example.  The 3 numbered exits are using US-176's mileage, but we have I-585 mentioned there instead.

-- On US-93's file, '2', '14', '15' all need to have the I-11(*) labeling style, as Interstate labeling is needed here as it's the main route.
Also, all the '*(US95)' labels should be either I-11(*) or I-515(*) labels.  Interstate labels should take priority here IMO.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2018, 08:32:47 am by rickmastfan67 »

Offline Jim

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1318
  • Last Login:Today at 08:16:02 pm
Re: NV: Today's updates in Boulder City area
« Reply #3 on: August 09, 2018, 11:54:58 pm »
The second site update for tonight is about done with my first couple of fixes.

Offline Jim

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1318
  • Last Login:Today at 08:16:02 pm
Re: NV: Today's updates in Boulder City area
« Reply #4 on: August 09, 2018, 11:57:22 pm »
Now I also need to figure out what I should have in my .list file today if I last drove US 93 through there in 2003..

Online oscar

  • TM Collaborator
  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
  • Last Login:Today at 08:26:08 pm
    • Hot Springs and Highways pages
Re: NV: Today's updates in Boulder City area
« Reply #5 on: August 10, 2018, 12:31:42 am »
Looking over the updated update:

-- Tying into James' comments above, both ends of the US 93 business route are out of synch with I-11, US 93, and (west end) US 95. James' fixes should address these, but NV 172 might also need a point tweak to keep it in synch with the business route while also synching it with I-11 and US 93.

-- Also, the endpoints of the business route should be US93_S and US93_N, in keeping with our labeling conventions for business routes. This, even though the parent US route is also an Interstate.

-- On the business route and NV 172, points NevWay and NVWay should be, respectively, NevWay_S and NevWay_N. Also, SR166 => LakRd (Lakeshore Rd. appears not to be a signed, numbered highway)?

-- Also in the NV 172 route file, shouldn't US93 be an alternate label for I-11_S? My list file's NV 172 entry had US93 as one of its endpoints, and my list file was broken by the elimination of that label.

As for Jim's latest post, the Updates item on US 93 should clarify that US 93 was relocated from what is now the business route to the new I-11 freeway. Once the business route is synched to both I-11 and US 93, that should nail down for both of us (I'm in Jim's situation too) how exactly we need to adjust our list files.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2018, 01:29:53 am by oscar »

Offline Jim

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1318
  • Last Login:Today at 08:16:02 pm
Re: NV: Today's updates in Boulder City area
« Reply #6 on: August 10, 2018, 08:10:15 am »
NickCPDX hasn't logged into the forum in 5 months.  I'll put a link to this thread in one of his pull requests in hopes he'll get a notification.  If anyone has an email address for him, it might be good to send a link that way as well.

Edit: I also sent a Twitter DM to Nick from the TravelMapping Twitter account.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2018, 10:58:36 am by Jim »

Offline NickCPDX

  • TM Collaborator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 16
  • Last Login:August 16, 2018, 06:35:48 pm
Re: NV: Today's updates in Boulder City area
« Reply #7 on: August 10, 2018, 11:37:44 am »
Hi folks – As you might have surmised, I've had some time constraints that have made it hard to do updates to my states more than a couple of times a year. I'm happy to cede my areas to anyone else who wants to manage them.

Offline mikeandkristie

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Last Login:Today at 04:05:35 pm
Re: NV: Today's updates in Boulder City area
« Reply #8 on: August 13, 2018, 10:32:07 am »
Are the changes around Boulder City stable or are there more updates coming?  Wondering when it is safe to go in and make updates to get our miles through Boulder City back from when we went to the Hoover Dam.

Mike

Offline rickmastfan67

  • TM Collaborator (A)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 583
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:November 13, 2018, 12:17:17 am
Re: NV: Today's updates in Boulder City area
« Reply #9 on: August 13, 2018, 10:39:39 am »
Are the changes around Boulder City stable or are there more updates coming?

More are coming to fix some issues, trust me.  Nothing new has been pulled in from Oscar yet.

Online oscar

  • TM Collaborator
  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
  • Last Login:Today at 08:26:08 pm
    • Hot Springs and Highways pages
Re: NV: Today's updates in Boulder City area
« Reply #10 on: August 13, 2018, 08:18:34 pm »
Are the changes around Boulder City stable or are there more updates coming?

More are coming to fix some issues, trust me.  Nothing new has been pulled in from Oscar yet.

Safe to use the waypoints in place, which in the I-11 and US 93 files will be 2 and 15 for the new section, and for the new US 93 Business (Boulder City) will be I-11_N and I-11_S. Some of those waypoint labels will change, but those old labels and any others in use will still work.

Offline Highway63

  • TM Collaborator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 184
  • Last Login:November 15, 2018, 11:18:01 am
Re: NV: Today's updates in Boulder City area
« Reply #11 on: August 16, 2018, 02:56:38 am »
FWIW, it looks like anyone who clinched I-515 (like me) has to re-send because it's been truncated to Exit 61. I need to resubmit I-515, US 93, and US 95.

Could that shaping point south of Exit 56 be turned into an active "closed" point for those of us who will not have traveled the new I-11?

Online oscar

  • TM Collaborator
  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
  • Last Login:Today at 08:26:08 pm
    • Hot Springs and Highways pages
Re: NV: Today's updates in Boulder City area
« Reply #12 on: August 16, 2018, 05:10:25 am »
Could that shaping point south of Exit 56 be turned into an active "closed" point for those of us who will not have traveled the new I-11?

So did I-515 once end there? Satellite imagery doesn't seem to indicate a closed exit there, though I might be missing something. (I rechecked TM's update table but didn't see any relevant entry; CHM's updates table seems to be toast.) My offline draft update perhaps prematurely removed that shaping point.

OSM indicates that several exit numbers for I-11 south of exit 61 will need to change, too. But some discussion over at the AARoads forum indicates the new numbers have not yet been posted in the field, so I'm not rushing to make that set of changes.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2018, 09:48:34 pm by oscar »

Offline Highway63

  • TM Collaborator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 184
  • Last Login:November 15, 2018, 11:18:01 am
Re: NV: Today's updates in Boulder City area
« Reply #13 on: August 16, 2018, 02:00:00 pm »
It's not a closed exit, but it's very near the point where the new freeway and (previously) existing four-lane separate. It's more obvious if you use OSM and the dashed lines for the new I-11 are marked. I-515 went to what had been labeled as Exit 56 and now that point doesn't exist on its file, as it starts at Exit 61.

It wouldn't be a point for I-515, but for US 93/95.

Offline mikeandkristie

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Last Login:Today at 04:05:35 pm
Re: NV: Today's updates in Boulder City area
« Reply #14 on: August 16, 2018, 03:27:58 pm »
I was looking at the updates so I can see what I need to change to get my old US 93 (now the business route) miles back.  I did noticed one thing.  NV NV172 has a point self-referencing itself as NV172_S.  It looks like that point name was copied over from the concurrent NV US93BusBou.