Author Topic: usaush (United States Historic US Routes)  (Read 17866 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline yakra

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2129
  • Last Login:Today at 01:22:11 am
Re: usaush (United States Historic US Routes)
« Reply #150 on: September 08, 2019, 11:25:11 pm »
Bypass.

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 06:47:10 pm
Re: usaush (United States Historic US Routes)
« Reply #151 on: September 13, 2019, 05:07:09 am »
Maybe I am confused as to why this page http://travelmapping.net/credits.php has so many governmental sources as references.
It's not the existence and use of Governmental sources for systems on this site that's an issue, but the demand for this system to be as sourced in the same way as them and if it can't be it should be ditched.

Absolutely, where Government sources exist and are helpful, go for it. However, just because something is different shouldn't mean its banishment. The problem with this system has always been the naysayers calling for its removal because it doesn't fit their preconceived notions. It's been far more work to deal with them than to hunt for signs, analysis the sometimes sparse data we have, etc.
Quote
This system won't have official sources. If no one cares, that's fine.
But you and froggie do care - "There's no background system source" is your complaint.

Are you saying you are revoking your objection? If so, great!
Someone remind me not to ask Si to recite his poetry...
My poetry is shite, but not as bad as you reading comprehension - its clear that I'm describing others as Vogons here.

I've found some stuff from official sources to appease the Vogons. I doubt it will be enough, but:
AZ: AZ DOT Map with US66 His and US89A His mapped, US80 His signage discussed by ADOT (with map)
CA: pretty hopeless getting explicitly DOT sources - its just hobbyist/business group sites. There's some legislative designations, but only for US80 (I think US66 in the state has some federal legislation), AFAICS
IA: the DOT site "can't be reached"
IL: US66 His map (a more interactive one here)
MO: MO DOT: Historic Route 66 Scenic Byways
OK: OK DOT: Route 66 Maps
TX: TX THC Route 66 2018 survey

Of course, a lot of stuff is done at the county/city level as well. I can't be bothered to find these as more general sources - wikipedia, tile mapping, etc provided enough information for my (what wikipedia would call) 'original research'. There's perhaps nothing in the above sources that add anything, but I'll cite them anyway. We don't seem to add newspapers as sources for openings, so we shouldn't for announcements about signage being posted - those (and contributor field reports), while invaluable, won't get added to the sources list.

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 06:47:10 pm
Re: usaush (United States Historic US Routes)
« Reply #152 on: September 13, 2019, 07:09:37 am »
From the US6 Historic (Durant) thread. Just because it deals with some general stuff (namely obstacles, banners and along the existing route).
The problem with the McPherson alignment is that there's now an airport runway in the way. Going all the way out on McPherson would result in two dead-ends. Now that 6 has been removed from Broadway in CB, I can creating a segment from I-480 to I-80 - but then does the on-Kanesville off-Broadway segment get included, omitted, or is there a second file? (That is, the piece currently there becomes "US 6 (Historic)(1934-82)"
We're not following what is the actual historic alignment, but what is signed as such (and AFAICS, this bit isn't signed). This isn't a documentation of the past alignment, but a documentation of the present. Certainly with 66 there's cases where the signed route is on the wrong frontage road as the freeway chopped the original roadway in two.

Date banners only should be used if they are on the actual signs (and I've dropped some when including them in a larger route).
Quote
I doubt that Historic 6 signs will be placed in Des Moines, since it's still alive on the post-1934 Hickman/Euclid alignment and this seems ripe for ROW/maintenance issues.
Sure - we're only included signed sections, so if it doesn't get signed, even if designated (I believe US6 in Iowa
Quote
Extension to/past Grinnell: Would completely overlap existing 6. (This is historically accurate, as the River-to-River Route in Grinnell followed 4th Avenue instead but almost certainly was moved to 6th when US 32 was paved in 1928.)

<snip>

Overall, I believe only Cass and Poweshiek counties specifically put up Historic 6 shields where it overlaps the existing route. Everywhere else, it's marked only where current 6 is not. I don't see any Historic 6 shields in West Liberty, for example.

I believe it is best to stick with segments of Historic 6 where it is NOT overlapping the modern route. For example, the Atlantic segment should end at the 71/83 intersection, because right now it's redundant to Oakland.
I agree it is stupid to sign Historic 6 on current 6 (unless for short bits linking sections off US6, such as that brief bit leaving Davenport). But it is signed, so surely we include it?

Also, Pottawattamie County signs it along vanilla US6 (at least partially): 1, 2,3, 4, 5

Offline bejacob

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 137
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 10:24:26 pm
Re: usaush (United States Historic US Routes)
« Reply #153 on: September 13, 2019, 01:08:48 pm »
This system won't have official sources. If no one cares, that's fine.
But you and froggie do care - "There's no background system source" is your complaint.

Are you saying you are revoking your objection? If so, great!

If sources aren't needed, then yes, I revoke my objection.

Do you believe the system is ready for activation?

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 06:47:10 pm
Re: usaush (United States Historic US Routes)
« Reply #154 on: Yesterday at 08:57:48 am »
Do you believe the system is ready for activation?
Not quite - it needs a formal review first, but given the number of reviews ongoing (including of my system), it won't be this month that I ask for it. Not least as I've not finished the checking to make sure it's ready.

I expect we can activate before the end of the year though!

Offline yakra

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2129
  • Last Login:Today at 01:22:11 am
Re: usaush (United States Historic US Routes)
« Reply #155 on: Yesterday at 10:23:13 am »
Nebraska has US6His signs off US6 either end of Gretna (Angus Road, 216th St.
I see you've already got it in the HB. Fair play.
I would have used that same routing, because:
 • the main thru alignment curving around the corner at 216thSt_N and SouSt_E
 • this avoids 2 at-grade RXRs
 • in satellite view, McKenna Ave does look like the business center of town's main street
...but not been 100% confident in it.
I don't see signage in GMSV for any of the turns. (Ecch, this is like, cannss-level lack of clarity...)
Si, do you have any sources on the alignment/turns, or did you just come to pretty much the same conclusions I did?

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 06:47:10 pm
Re: usaush (United States Historic US Routes)
« Reply #156 on: Yesterday at 01:39:25 pm »
Si, do you have any sources on the alignment/turns, or did you just come to pretty much the same conclusions I did?
The latter.