Travel Mapping
Highway Data Discussion => Updates to Highway Data => Solved Highway data updates => Topic started by: CharlotteAllisonCDTG on October 08, 2019, 07:21:15 pm
-
The portion of Interstate 680 in Iowa, from I-29 to I-80, was recently redesignated as I-880. I'm not sure if I-680 will be truncated out of the state or not.
-
I am not finding any info on this. Can you please provide proof that this indeed happened?
-
?????????????????????????????
-
All I've found is this 'draft' on Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Interstate_880_(Iowa)) talking about it. And I'm not fully trusting it, especially without any press releases. Something this big has to have something online, and I can find nothing.
-
https://s3.amazonaws.com/v3-app_crowdc/assets/b/ba/ba708eca603c86f1/000_USRN_Agenda_and_List_of_Applications__AM_St_Louis__MO-2019_%28nc%29.original.1570033411.pdf?1570033413
I'm not sure if I-680 will be truncated out of the state or not.
If it was truncated to the state line, what would the part west of I-29 become?
-
wtf
(so of course I'd fired off an e-mail to my DOT contact between my first and second posts on this thread...)
next Q: Who is "Fredddie" and how do they have access to AASHTO agendas before they happen?
-
https://s3.amazonaws.com/v3-app_crowdc/assets/b/ba/ba708eca603c86f1/000_USRN_Agenda_and_List_of_Applications__AM_St_Louis__MO-2019_%28nc%29.original.1570033411.pdf?1570033413
Interesting that this is stored on amazon's server. I can't find a link to it on route.transportation.org.
-
It is publicly available online. I don't know how much detail I should go into because I worry that AASHTO might put it under authentication next time.
-
While it does look legit, I can't verify that it is. I'd like to see it linked from an official source, and have something more authoritative than one guy on Wikipedia.
I don't know how much detail I should go into because I worry that AASHTO might put it under authentication next time.
Is this something that's only supposed to be available to those on the inside, and AASHTO's website has yet to be updated for the public?
-
https://s3.amazonaws.com/v3-app_crowdc/assets/b/ba/ba708eca603c86f1/000_USRN_Agenda_and_List_of_Applications__AM_St_Louis__MO-2019_%28nc%29.original.1570033411.pdf?1570033413
Interesting that this is stored on amazon's server. I can't find a link to it on route.transportation.org.
not really. What's interesting is that we found it before the link.
Amazon servers have a load of stuff on them on behalf of others. Governmental bodies tend to use it.
As for the lack of link, we're always waiting some time for it to be posted.
And we can wait - there's no need to change stuff until signed. Normally we put the AASHTO meeting stuff in the 6 month outlook, not the updates.
-
This is the first thing in recent history the Iowa DOT has done in an application to AASHTO that had no obvious prior indicators. Of course, everything else involved active/immediate future construction. This is the first change to interstates in Iowa in 35 years.
The October Iowa DOT letting had no contracts for anything like this. That means any relevant sign contract won't be out until mid-November at the earliest, which then raises the issue of winter.
We're talking about changing basically every BGS on 28 miles of road AND all interchange signs at three diamond exits AND re-mile-marking 13 miles.
The week between Christmas and New Year's at lightning speed, maybe. Next March/April more likely, IMO. I'm not touching anything until there's confirmation in the field. (Unfortunately, it's not going to be me doing that first-hand. I am very glad I took some necessary pictures in summer.)
-
It's not the first change in 35 years. ~35 minutes more like assuming they did the routes in the order listed). :-*
The breaking of the I-29/80 concurrency was the change beforehand.
-
The I-29/I-80 thing is about separating the newly opened dual-divided freeway, which was built over the same place as the existing four-lane, so I wouldn't see it on the same level.
Speaking of, though: Should I handle that in some manner? Right now I-29 and I-80 have a concurrency. The split puts I-80 on the inner "Express" lanes and I-29 with "Local" lanes (also signed as I-80). It can be argued that if one travels I-29 through, they were never "on" I-80, and vice versa.
I can do nothing, mark the two exits in the middle as "closed" on I-80 (since, if you are traveling the Express, you can't take them), or twiddle some coordinates to break the concurrency.
-
Will there be ramps that allow one to approach on one route (i.e. 29), use the other's carriageway through the commons (80), then go back to the original route (29) at the other end?
If so, then my answer would be "do nothing". This would appear to be an example where keeping it simple would be better than maintaining explicit accuracy.
From how it currently appears in mapping and imagery, it looks like the answer going northbound/westbound is "yes". That said, if the answer to my original question is "no" for eastbound/southbound, then "do nothing" may not be a solution.
On the flip side, we do have precedents one state north with 35W/62 and 35W/94 being separated entirely despite their "commons" sections. Though in both of those cases, it is not possible to swap from one route to the other and back through the commons in both directions.
-
The split puts I-80 on the inner "Express" lanes and I-29 with "Local" lanes (also signed as I-80). It can be argued that if one travels I-29 through, they were never "on" I-80, and vice versa.
I will argue such. Methinks, track them separately and give travelers the option to clinch one and not the other should they so choose.
I can do nothing, mark the two exits in the middle as "closed" on I-80 (since, if you are traveling the Express, you can't take them), or twiddle some coordinates to break the concurrency.
Agreed, on both counts. Twiddling exits 49 & 50 on only I-29 by 0.000001° will keep I-80 & US6 concurrent, and break I-29's concurrency with them.
-
The split puts I-80 on the inner "Express" lanes and I-29 with "Local" lanes (also signed as I-80). It can be argued that if one travels I-29 through, they were never "on" I-80, and vice versa.
I will argue such. Methinks, track them separately and give travelers the option to clinch one and not the other should they so choose.
That's what it looked like the last time I was in Omaha, so that makes sense.
The week between Christmas and New Year's at lightning speed, maybe. Next March/April more likely, IMO. I'm not touching anything until there's confirmation in the field. (Unfortunately, it's not going to be me doing that first-hand. I am very glad I took some necessary pictures in summer.)
I'll be sure to go through Omaha/N. Omaha the next time I have to go to Kansas City (probably in January) and see if anything is up yet.
-
Hmm - need help? I could be due for a field check over the next month.
-
For those who didn't see it on the AARoads Facebook: https://www.wowt.com/content/news/Northern-tier-of-I-680-to-be-renamed-I-880-563078321.html
-
Doesn't look like exit numbers will change: https://iowadot.gov/maps/MapParts/Section%206.pdf (https://iowadot.gov/maps/MapParts/Section%206.pdf)
-
Doesn't look like exit numbers will change: https://iowadot.gov/maps/MapParts/Section%206.pdf (https://iowadot.gov/maps/MapParts/Section%206.pdf)
This deal is getting worse all the time!
/lando
In seriousness, it could be related to either 1) the 2019-20 map was released about Memorial Day weekend, and that part hasn't been changed yet or 2) they are going to keep the exit numbers identical for reasons of keeping as much coherence with the previous setup as possible (and, say, GPS's like mine that can't update anymore).
For Council Bluffs, froggie and yakra gave diametrically opposite answers at the end of the previous page, so...that's interesting.
-
The I-29/I-80 thing is about separating the newly opened dual-divided freeway, which was built over the same place as the existing four-lane, so I wouldn't see it on the same level.
Speaking of, though: Should I handle that in some manner? Right now I-29 and I-80 have a concurrency. The split puts I-80 on the inner "Express" lanes and I-29 with "Local" lanes (also signed as I-80). It can be argued that if one travels I-29 through, they were never "on" I-80, and vice versa.
I can do nothing, mark the two exits in the middle as "closed" on I-80 (since, if you are traveling the Express, you can't take them), or twiddle some coordinates to break the concurrency.
The concurrency break of I-29 and I-80 is going in tonight, but I'm not sure if there should be an updates entry.
-
My initial response was going to simply be "Meh!" Although...
I grepped the following travelers from concurrencies.log:
420Traveler 7_8 bm7 cyhighways dfilpus dnthrox epzik8 foresthills93 gman2337 hoopitypoop intelati49 jimvette kubbage lamsalfl mapmikey navigator new_friends_gr ngrier paddy paulthemapguy pnrrth rebelgtp regoarrarr sbeaver44 sfisher ssgtcrusty thehighwayman3561 w9tam wadsteckel
There may be a comparable or even greater number with both already marked.
Any of these people may want to review their 29/80 travels, and mark both routes. Or just one. Or unmark one. Etc.
FWIW, comparing historicaerials in 2016 (https://historicaerials.com/location/41.23200908479828/-95.86256325244904/2016/17) & 2012 (https://historicaerials.com/location/41.23200908479828/-95.86256325244904/2012/17) suggests the former EB 29/80 lanes correspond to the new EB I-29/local lanes, and the former WB lanes correspond to the new EB I-80/express lanes.
I'll leave it to others to decide whether to add an updates entry, or how to word one.
-
FWIW, I plan to not change anything in my list file. I've previously clinched I-29 and I-80 in Iowa from border-to-border. If one or the other or both have shifted alignments a little in Council Bluffs due to their newly-separated adjacent roadways, I would not consider that a de-clinching event.
Ditto I-680 => I-880 when that happens, except I may need to adjust for the new 680 and 880 endpoints.
-
I would add an update entry for this and have it look something like:
IA I-29 Removed from concurrency with I-80 onto new parallel roadways.
IA I-80 Removed from concurrency with I-29 onto new parallel roadways.
And this then notifies anyone who has been through on either to take a look and see what they want to do.
I am also in the camp that I will not count the segment of either route declinched - my reasoning is I already count other cases where one route straddles another the same as if they are concurrent. So from my perspective nothing has meaningfully changed here.
-
I won't de-clinch.
I've traveled old westbound AKA new I-80 / US6,
and traveled old eastbound AKA new I-29.
-
From AARoads (bolded the important part):
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=25812.msg2452248#msg2452248
Given this map (https://iowadot.gov/maps/MapParts/Section%206.pdf), the numbers might not change at all.
I asked the Iowa DOT on Facebook about the exit numbering situation when they made the announcement, and they said the exit numbers were changing.
I'm finally getting around to making site updates today even though signs apparently haven't changed in the field yet.
-
Signage confirmed:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10157640884088608&set=gm.3034992073186402&type=3&theater
-
Highway63 doesn't use Facebook.
-
Highway63 doesn't use Facebook.
Neither do I, but I was able to see a linked photo with an I-880 marker.
-
I-680 is truncated and I-880 is added in tonight's (in progress at the moment) update using files sent by Jeff via email.