Author Topic: NY: Point Concerns from 8/5-8/7/2022 Trip  (Read 627 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2643
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 10:06:18 pm
NY: Point Concerns from 8/5-8/7/2022 Trip
« on: August 12, 2022, 07:36:07 pm »
I-190:
1.   Consider adding a shaping point between 9 and 11 to keep the line west of NY 266.
2.   14B>-NY266?

I-490:  Should 11 be split into two points?

US 9W:
1.   It looks like UlsSt should be UlsSt_S.
2.   NY443>-NY443_W

US 219:   
1.   Consider replacing the shaping point north of NY417_E with a visible point at what OSM shows as CR49.
2.   Consider replacing the shaping point between NY98 and NY242_W with a visible point.
3.   Consider replacing the shaping point south of LinRd with a visible point at CotRd (Cotter Rd).
4.   Consider replacing the shaping point north of LinRd with a visible point.
5.   Consider replacing the shaping point north of CR53 with a visible point.
6.   MilRd>-CR100
7.   PetRd>-CR101

NY 5:
1.   Should the MohDr labels be switched?
2.   It looks like ChaDr should be MainSt_E.
3.   I would love to request a point at Glen Ave/Schonowe Ave by Jumpin Jack’s, but that is not justified even to myself.

NY 5S: 
1.   Should a point be added at Turner St?
2.   Consider making adjustments to I-90 east of 30, west of 29, east of 29, etc., to keep the line north or south of NY 5S as applicable. (and maybe replace visible points with shaping points along NY 5S if possible)
3.   Should ShrRd be a visible point?
4.   Consider replacing the shaping points east of ThaRd with visible point(s).

NY 7:  Should ValRd be VlyRd?

NY 17A:  The NY 94 labels should be W and E instead of S and N.

NY 30:  I could use a point at Northampton Rd north of NY67_E as part of the roadmeet last weekend. (though someone else may need Van Dyke Ave as my vehicle missed that turn)

NY 31: 
1.   NY93_S>-NY93_E
2.   I did not see a shield for CR35.
3.   I think the shaping point east of NY237 may be best left alone.
4.   I am unsure if WestAve is technically correct. 
5.   A point should maybe be added at Manitou Rd (direct connection to NY 531).  There are other direct connections to I-490 that should arguably have points as well.
6.   LyeAve>-LyeAve_E
7.   Consider replacing the shaping point east of NY21_N with a visible point.
8.   AtwSt>-CR7 (I think)
9.   Should CouHouRd be marked as closed?
10.   It looks like SunRd should be relocated.
11.   Consider replacing the shaping point east of NY90 with a visible point.
12.   Consider replacing the shaping point east of NY38_S with a visible point (maybe Maple Ave).
13.   Should the prefixes be removed for the BruSt labels?
14.   RivRd (and many other points) could use a slight relocation.
15.   Consider replacing the shaping point east of NY 31 with visible points.
16.   Consider replacing the shaping point east of NY 298 with a visible point.
17.   Consider replacing the shaping point east of CR3 with a visible point.

NY 32:  AlbAve>-AlbAve_N

NY 61/NY 104:  US62BusNia>-US62Bus

NY 69: A point should be added at River St.  (direct connection to NY 49)

NY 85A:
1.   I think that the NY85 labels should be W and E instead of S and N. (also this route should be flipped)  (also affects labels on NY 85)
2.   Consider replacing the shaping point west of SwiRd with a visible point at Martin Rd.
3.   Consider replacing the shaping point east of NY 155 with a visible point.

NY 89:  ArmRd>-WilRd (so no suffix debate)

NY 94:  Consider replacing the shaping point east of NY208 with a visible point.

NY 155: 
1.   Consider replacing the shaping point north of NY 85A with a visible point.
2.   WatShaRd>-VlyRd

NY 213:
1.   CowHouRd>-DasRd
2.   Consider replacing the shaping point south of CR28 with visible points.
3.   AbeSt>-AbeSt_E?

NY 214:  MainSt>-MainSt_E?

NY 233:
1.   The I-90 label could arguably be changed.
2.   Consider replacing the shaping point south of CR840 with a visible point.

NY 242:  Should WBBucRRd be shortened?

NY 260:  Consider replacing the shaping points with visible points.

NY 300:
1.   This route should probably be flipped.
2.   Is the shaping point north of NY32/94 needed?
3.   Should I-87 be marked as closed?
4.   Consider replacing the shaping points west of NY32 with visible points.

NY 317:  Is ValDr a useful point?

NY 370:  NY31>-NY31_E

NY 383:
1.   I did not see shields for CR174 and CR176.
2.   FordSt>-FordSt_W

NY 384: 
1.   RaiBlvd>-RaiBlvd_W
2.   NiaSt>-NiaSt_E

NY 386:  I did not see shields for CR172 (should be slightly relocated) and CR119.

NY 414: 
1.   NY 31 and NY 414 have a brief concurrency on Glasgow St between Park St and Genesee St.
2.   Consider replacing the shaping point between NY31 and NY104 with a visible point.

NY 429: 
1.   OliSt>-OliSt_S   
2.   WardRd>-WardRd_S
3.   The NY31 labels should be W and E instead of S and N.

NY 443:  US9W>-US9W_S

NY 531: 
1.   I did not see a shield for CR208.
2.   A graph connection is missing with I-490.

NY 631: 
1.   WilPkwy>-WilPkwy_N
2.   Signage shows it concurrent with NY 48 west to NY 690. (will also affect labels on NY 48)

NY 890:  Should this route be flipped (and converted to exit numbers minus NY5)?

Offline webny99

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
  • Last Login:November 01, 2022, 09:14:32 am
Re: NY: Point Concerns from 8/5-8/7/2022 Trip
« Reply #1 on: August 12, 2022, 08:55:56 pm »
I-490:  Should 11 be split into two points?

I would support this. Compare to I-390 Exit 11, which has 11 <-> 11A despite 11A not existing.


NY 31: 
4.   I am unsure if WestAve is technically correct.

The other option would be RedRd, which is NY31 south of there.

WestAve is also NY19Trk, which is not in TM but could potentially be added (?)


5.   A point should maybe be added at Manitou Rd (direct connection to NY 531).  There are other direct connections to I-490 that should arguably have points as well.

I would support points at ManRd, somewhere between NY386 and NY390 (preferably LonPonRd) and MtReadBlvd.


NY 383:
1.   I did not see shields for CR174 and CR176.

NY 386:  I did not see shields for CR172 (should be slightly relocated) and CR119.

NY 531: 
1.   I did not see a shield for CR208.

That's because Monroe County does not sign county routes. These should probably be WheCenRd, BowRd, StoRd, WesDr_E and WesDr_W, and ManRd.


Offline vdeane

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 341
  • Gender: Female
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 09:31:35 pm
    • New York State Roads
Re: NY: Point Concerns from 8/5-8/7/2022 Trip
« Reply #2 on: August 12, 2022, 10:31:23 pm »
WestAve is also NY19Trk, which is not in TM but could potentially be added (?)
Ah, the truck routes again!
https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=3426.0
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Offline webny99

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
  • Last Login:November 01, 2022, 09:14:32 am
Re: NY: Point Concerns from 8/5-8/7/2022 Trip
« Reply #3 on: August 13, 2022, 12:25:08 am »
WestAve is also NY19Trk, which is not in TM but could potentially be added (?)
Ah, the truck routes again!
https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=3426.0

I was not aware of the previous discussion on truck routes! I don't have an issue whether they're included or not, but NY19Trk is definitely one of the better-signed ones.

Offline cockroachking

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Today at 12:03:15 am
Re: NY: Point Concerns from 8/5-8/7/2022 Trip
« Reply #4 on: August 18, 2022, 05:11:22 pm »
I-190:
1. Agree
2. Based on the precedent from what I can see here on TM, 14B would be correct.

I-490: 11 should defintely be split into 11A and 11B

US9W:
1. Agree, but it should be UlsAve_S rather than UlsSt_S
2. Agree

US219:
1. Agree
2. I personally don't see a need here, but then again, I would rather have too many points than not enough.
3. See point 2
4. See point 2
5. See point 2
6. Agree
7. Agree

NY5:
1. Agree
2. Agree
3. If NY50 wasn't right there, I wouldn't be opposed  ;D

NY5S:
1. Agree
2. Agree, since this is a mess, though I'm not sure what good replacing visible points with shaping points would do
3. Given that the Our Lady of Martyrs Shrine is there, I would say it should stay given that it is a long distance travel destination.
4. Add a visible point at one of the county routes in the area, and that should be sufficient

NY7: Agree

NY17A: Agree

NY30: A point at either one of those two would be fair

NY31:
1. Agree
2. County routes are not posted in Orleans County, so CR35 > CulRd
3. Agree
4. Seems to me like it should be BroHolRd, or NY19TrkBro  ;)
5. Agree with ManRd, and I would also suggest adding LongPondRd and MtReadBlvd, as mentioned by webny99
6. Agree
7. No need IMO, but as I mentioned, I am not against any added points
8. Agree
9. Someone with more familiarity with the area should weigh in here
10. I would relocate to WarRd (CR246?)
11. See point 7
12. See point 7
13. Agree
14. Please do so
15. Not sure what you mean here  ;D
16. See point 7
17. Agree. I would place it at CR5

NY32: Agree

NY61/NY104: Agree

NY69: Agree

NY85A:
1. Agree
2. I don't see the need, but again wouldn't personally be against it
3. See point 2

NY89: Agree

NY94: I would move it to CR20

NY155:
1. I don't see the need, but again wouldn't personally be against it
2. Agree

NY213:
1. Agree
2. I would support points at CR24, CR25 or both
3. Agree

NY214: Agree

NY233:
1. Agree, should definitely be CidSt
2.  I don't see the need, but again wouldn't personally be against it

NY242: Possibly WBuckRunRd?

NY260: I would suggest IreRd and BriSchHouRd

NY300:
1. The route is reference marked "west to east," so I would imagine that is why it is the way it is
2. Probably not, but I don't see a reason to remove it
3. Definitely, it has been closed for 15 years or so
4. I would suggest CR23 and LakRd

NY317: Looks pretty useless, so I would move it to MecSt

NY370: Agree

NY383:
1. Agree with webny99
2. Agree

NY384:
1. Agree
2. Agree

NY386: Agree with webny99

NY414:
1. Agree
2. I would suggest WayRd

NY429:
1. Agree
2. Agree, and needs to be adjusted slightly
3. Agree

NY443: Agree

NY531:
1. Agree with webny99
2. Oopsies  ;D That should definitely be fixed

NY631:
1. Agree
2. Traffic Data Viewer disagrees, as does this assembly, and the Touring Route Book is too vague, so I would suggest no-build here

NY890: It is reference marked from south to north, so the direction is fine as is, but I agree that NY5S > 1A and I-890 > 1B

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WestAve is also NY19Trk, which is not in TM but could potentially be added (?)
Ah, the truck routes again!
https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=3426.0

I was not aware of the previous discussion on truck routes! I don't have an issue whether they're included or not, but NY19Trk is definitely one of the better-signed ones.
As for the truck routes, I am 100% in favor of them making a return. The main argument that I saw in that thread was that they are not official, which means that all of the Bannered US Routes in NY except US62BusNia should also be removed based off that criteria, as per this NYSDOT source. Since I don't see the usausb routes being axed anytime soon, I think it's only fair to bring back the usany truck routes.

Offline vdeane

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 341
  • Gender: Female
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 09:31:35 pm
    • New York State Roads
Re: NY: Point Concerns from 8/5-8/7/2022 Trip
« Reply #5 on: August 18, 2022, 08:21:45 pm »
NY890: It is reference marked from south to north, so the direction is fine as is, but I agree that NY5S > 1A and I-890 > 1B
Going by reference markers, I-890 would also be flipped.  Going by the regular mile markers would seem to be more logical.

Quote
As for the truck routes, I am 100% in favor of them making a return. The main argument that I saw in that thread was that they are not official, which means that all of the Bannered US Routes in NY except US62BusNia should also be removed based off that criteria, as per this NYSDOT source. Since I don't see the usausb routes being axed anytime soon, I think it's only fair to bring back the usany truck routes.
I'd rather get rid of the ones that aren't US 20A or Business US 62 myself if we have to do anything with them, especially since we have no way of knowing where they all are.  The old thread had a decent list, but that doesn't mean there haven't been changes since, and it's not like NYSDOT puts out press releases for these things (or even that they're all consistently signed).  That said, since they're a different system, they might be treated differently (similarly to how unsigned interstates are included and unsigned anything else isn't).
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Offline webny99

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
  • Last Login:November 01, 2022, 09:14:32 am
Re: NY: Point Concerns from 8/5-8/7/2022 Trip
« Reply #6 on: August 18, 2022, 08:51:45 pm »
NY 31:
9.   Should CouHouRd be marked as closed?
9. Someone with more familiarity with the area should weigh in here

I can't tell if it's a Google Maps error or an actual change to the routing that just hasn't been shown in Street View yet. The point location looks correct in TM as confirmed by Street View, so I would say it meets NY 31 about 1/4 mile east of where Google Maps shows unless something has changed more recently,

Offline Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2643
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 10:06:18 pm
Re: NY: Point Concerns from 8/5-8/7/2022 Trip
« Reply #7 on: August 21, 2022, 01:40:33 pm »
Adding a few NJ Point Concerns:

US 9: 
1.  Should EarlDr be marked as closed or removed?
2.  Gar(12)>-Gar(11A)
3.  GosSwaRd seems to potentially be incorrect.

NJ 47: 
1.  GosSwaRd seems to be incorrect.
2.  BeaDamRd>-CHDenRd
3.  ChrRd>-ChrFieRd
4.  CR551>-CR551_S
« Last Edit: August 21, 2022, 04:37:06 pm by Markkos1992 »

Offline webny99

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
  • Last Login:November 01, 2022, 09:14:32 am
Re: NY: Point Concerns from 8/5-8/7/2022 Trip
« Reply #8 on: September 09, 2022, 09:02:51 am »
NY 317:  Is ValDr a useful point?

Just noticed this during my clinch of NY317 yesterday. I would say the point should be at SMaiSt (about 900 feet west, at an actual turn in the route) rather than ValDr.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2022, 09:17:17 am by webny99 »

Offline Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2643
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 10:06:18 pm
Re: NY: Point Concerns from 8/5-8/7/2022 Trip
« Reply #9 on: September 18, 2022, 08:46:35 pm »
Related to hopefully an upcoming trip (with the rental car I get whenever my car makes it in the shop), I would personally like a point on NY 394 at CR 69 (though it is pretty close to NY 474 already).

Offline Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2643
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 10:06:18 pm
Re: NY: Point Concerns from 8/5-8/7/2022 Trip
« Reply #10 on: October 26, 2022, 05:46:46 pm »
Related to hopefully an upcoming trip (with the rental car I get whenever my car makes it in the shop), I would personally like a point on NY 394 at CR 69 (though it is pretty close to NY 474 already).

I actually do not need this point.  I clinched NY 394 from I-86 (Exit 8 ) to NY 60/NY 430.

Anyway a few other NY point concerns:

NY 426:  CR21>-CR2

NY 430: 
1.  CR622>-CR7?
2.  Consider replacing the shaping point east of NY76_S with a visible point.
3.  CR127>-CR54
4.  CR13>-CR44 (and could use a slight recentering)
5.  LakDr>-LakDr_W
6.  BelRd could use a slight recentering.
7.  FluAve>-FluAve_E
« Last Edit: October 26, 2022, 08:27:40 pm by Markkos1992 »

Offline yakra

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3935
  • Last Login:Today at 12:16:57 am
Re: NY: Point Concerns from 8/5-8/7/2022 Trip
« Reply #11 on: October 30, 2022, 07:33:31 pm »
I-190:
1.   Consider adding a shaping point between 9 and 11 to keep the line west of NY 266.
2.   14B>-NY266?

I-490:  Should 11 be split into two points?
Done.

US 9W:
1.   It looks like UlsSt should be UlsSt_S.
There's no waypoint with this label.

2.   NY443>-NY443_W

US 219:   
1.   Consider replacing the shaping point north of NY417_E with a visible point at what OSM shows as CR49.
2.   Consider replacing the shaping point between NY98 and NY242_W with a visible point.
Done.

3.   Consider replacing the shaping point south of LinRd with a visible point at CotRd (Cotter Rd).
Deleting both +X04 and +X05 leaves the line (just barely) within tolerance.

4.   Consider replacing the shaping point north of LinRd with a visible point.
5.   Consider replacing the shaping point north of CR53 with a visible point.
6.   MilRd>-CR100
7.   PetRd>-CR101
Done.

NY 5:
1.   Should the MohDr labels be switched?
2.   It looks like ChaDr should be MainSt_E.
1. MohDr_W is in use. Changed to suffixless MohDr & AntRd.
2. Done.

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/6111/commits/628d9ca6e3c39a8cd4553af1686063606fd314a2
« Last Edit: October 30, 2022, 07:37:31 pm by yakra »
Sri Syadasti Syadavaktavya Syadasti Syannasti Syadasti Cavaktavyasca Syadasti Syannasti Syadavatavyasca Syadasti Syannasti Syadavaktavyasca

Offline yakra

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3935
  • Last Login:Today at 12:16:57 am
Re: NY: Point Concerns from 8/5-8/7/2022 Trip
« Reply #12 on: October 31, 2022, 07:56:47 am »
NY 5S: 
1.   Should a point be added at Turner St?
2.   Consider making adjustments to I-90 east of 30, west of 29, east of 29, etc., to keep the line north or south of NY 5S as applicable. (and maybe replace visible points with shaping points along NY 5S if possible)
3.   Should ShrRd be a visible point?
4.   Consider replacing the shaping points east of ThaRd with visible point(s).
1. Probably not? I don't know where Turner St is; I looked over the entire route in the HB and didn't see one; nothing at an obvious place calling out "there should be a waypoint here."
2. Nah, it'll be grand. 5S is N of the Thruway E of Jacksonburg, and N of the Thruway W of Fort Herkimer. It's mostly N of the Thruway here. I don't think we need to record every time two highways cross one another sans access. Especially in a minor case like this with no other routes intersecting or nearby.
I assume you meant "replace shaping points with visible points" rather than vice versa. That's something I generally do when opening up one of these routes in wptedit; you can see some of that in my most recent pull request. I'll do some of that here & see what shakes out.
3. Replaced with a point @ Noeltner Rd. This makes it pretty apparent that AurRd isn't needed for shaping, but some people may use it to cut down to NY30A @ Glen. Leaving it in.
4. Replaced the lot of them with a single point at Bullshead (one word) Rd.
Sri Syadasti Syadavaktavya Syadasti Syannasti Syadasti Cavaktavyasca Syadasti Syannasti Syadavatavyasca Syadasti Syannasti Syadavaktavyasca

Offline Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2643
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 10:06:18 pm
Re: NY: Point Concerns from 8/5-8/7/2022 Trip
« Reply #13 on: November 13, 2022, 04:55:40 pm »
NJ Point Concerns from Yesterday: 

US 9: 
1. MapAve_New>-MapAve (If possible, I did not see another one.)
2.  CoxsAve>-CoxAve
3.  WasRd>-WasAve (also affects NJ 35)

US 202:
1.  NFinAve>-FinAve
2.  NMapAve>-MapAve

NJ 35: Is there a NJ35_U point missing here?

NJ 38: 
1.  FosRd>-MasFosRd
2.  LumRd>-LumAve

NJ 72: 
1.  CR554 should be slightly relocated.
2.  ShoRd>-ShoAve

NJ 124:  Should CR527 be split into two points?
« Last Edit: November 14, 2022, 07:52:09 pm by Markkos1992 »

Offline dave1693

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
  • Last Login:November 16, 2022, 02:41:17 pm
Re: NY: Point Concerns from 8/5-8/7/2022 Trip
« Reply #14 on: November 16, 2022, 02:01:54 pm »
NJ 124:  Should CR527 be split into two points?

I'm originally from the area, and was just on that stretch the first weekend of November. I personally think so. as CR527 westbound follows NJ124 up to the CR512 waypoint. Thus:

CR512 --> CR512/527

CR527 --> CR527_E

This is one occasion that I'm just as happy I don't have to rectify an ideal mapping of CR527 with the mapping of NJ124...