Author Topic: WV: US 50 and US 220 Corridors Point Concerns  (Read 566 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2026
  • Last Login:Today at 08:03:09 pm
WV: US 50 and US 220 Corridors Point Concerns
« on: September 07, 2021, 10:55:21 am »
US 50:  (Unsurprisingly, Corridor D is in great shape, not so much east of there, but not much beyond shaping points)
1.  Consider replacing the two shaping points east of I-77 with visible points.  I am not sure where the best locations would be offhand.
2.  Consider replacing the shaping point west of NutFarmRd with a visible point at CR20. (also affects WV 31)
3.  Consider replacing the shaping point west of OldUS50 with a visible point at CR50/7.
4.  OldUS50 should be CR31.
5.  Should BroSt be CheSt?
6.  The shaping point west of WV310 should be replaced by a visible point at CR18/4.
7.  I think that GlaRun should be CR52.
8.  GSV (from 2008) does not show AurPke as such.
9.  Maybe replace the shaping point east of WV24 with a visible point at CR108?
10.  The shaping point west of WV42_S should be replaced with a visible point at Bismarck Rd.
11.  The second shaping point west of US220_S should be replaced by a visible point at Rogers Rd (RogRd). (also affects US 220)
12.  The second and third shaping point west of WV28_N should be replaced by visible points at CR50/53 and CR50/4 respectively. (also affects WV 28)
13.  The shaping points west of HamRd should be replaced with visible points at CR12 and CR50/9.
14.  Should HamRd be HarRd?
15.  It looks like WV29_S should be slightly recentered.
16.  Maybe replace the third shaping point northeast of WV29_N with a visible point at Timber Mountain Rd.   

WV 131:
1. Is DiaCoveRd a worthwhile point?
2. CR73 should be CR73/73.
3. CR13/7 should be CR13/6.

WV 279:  WhiOakBlvd should be WhiOaksBlvd.

WV 892: 
1.  WV68_S could just be WV68.
2.  MalRd should be MelRd.
3.  DupManRd should be IslViewDr (Island View Dr).
« Last Edit: October 20, 2021, 01:46:43 pm by Markkos1992 »

Offline Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2026
  • Last Login:Today at 08:03:09 pm
Re: WV: US 50 and US 220 Corridors Point Concerns
« Reply #1 on: October 20, 2021, 01:53:49 pm »
Adding US 220 to this thread:

1.    The fourth shaping point north of US33_W should be replaced with a visible point at CR10.
2.   I see the Pendleton County Poor Farm on Google Maps, but I do not see a PoorFarmRd anywhere….
3.   Replace the shaping point south of SchRd with a visible point at what the maps shows as CR8.
4.   Both shaping points by Jake Hill Rd should be made visible points.
5.   BetChuRd should be ShoGapRd (Shooks Gap Rd).
6.   Replace the shaping point by Saint Johns Church with a visible point at Middle Mountain Rd (MidMouRd).
7.   The shaping point to the north should become a visible point at Kellers Ridge Rd (KelRidRd).
8.   The shaping point south of WV28/55 should become a visible point at Johnson Run Rd (JohRunRd).
9.   WelKesRd should be RigRd.  (also affects WV 28 and WV 55)
10.   The shaping point north of WelKesRd should be replaced by a visible point at Jenkins Run Rd (JenRunRd).  (also affects WV 28 and WV 55)
11.   I would probably replace the shaping point south of WinAve with a visible point nearby.  (also affects WV 28 and WV 55)
12.   The shaping points north of OldFieRd should be replaced with visible points at Mountain View Rd (MouViewRd) and maybe AJ Kelley Rd.  (also affects WV 28)
13.   I am unable to determine if CR220/8 is correct… (would also affect WV 28)  Maybe just go HufRd (Huffman Rd).
14.   The shaping point north of CR220/8 should be replaced with a visible point at RadaRd.  (also affects WV 28)
15.   Look into replacing the shaping point south of US50_E with a visible point as well.  (also affects WV 28)
16.   See 11 under US 50.
17.   Consider replacing the shaping point south of WV93 with a visible point at CR7/1.
18.   Consider replacing the shaping point north of WV93 with a visible point at Stony Run Rd (StoRunRd).

Offline rickmastfan67

  • TM Collaborator (A)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1243
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 01:07:41 pm
Re: WV: US 50 and US 220 Corridors Point Concerns
« Reply #2 on: November 08, 2021, 10:35:34 pm »
WV 131:
1. Is DiaCoveRd a worthwhile point?
2. CR73 should be CR73/73.
3. CR13/7 should be CR13/6.

1) I could move it to ParDr instead.  Mainly there for shaping reasons.
ParDr http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.318788&lon=-80.217085
2) Fixed.
3) Fixed.

WV 279:  WhiOakBlvd should be WhiOaksBlvd.

Fixed.

WV 892: 
1.  WV68_S could just be WV68.
2.  MalRd should be MelRd.
3.  DupManRd should be IslViewDr (Island View Dr).

1) Meh, 'WV68' is already a hidden point for this label.  Mainly have it as 'WV68_S' due to WV-892 starting/ending @ WV-68.  Guess I could  flip-flop the two labels.
2) Or, I could make it 'CR36' instead based on that StreetView image.
3) Changed.

All the changes mentioned above, are done locally (except for #1 of WV-131 for now).  Will look at the US route ones later when I have some more time.
« Last Edit: November 08, 2021, 10:38:56 pm by rickmastfan67 »

Offline Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2026
  • Last Login:Today at 08:03:09 pm
Re: WV: US 50 and US 220 Corridors Point Concerns
« Reply #3 on: November 09, 2021, 06:30:41 am »
For #1 of WV 131, I would prefer no-build over relocating it to ParDr.

Offline rickmastfan67

  • TM Collaborator (A)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1243
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 01:07:41 pm
Re: WV: US 50 and US 220 Corridors Point Concerns
« Reply #4 on: November 09, 2021, 09:33:58 pm »
For #1 of WV 131, I would prefer no-build over relocating it to ParDr.

I've changed it to a shaping point south of ParDr, as was able to gain almost .1 miles for the route as it currently stands.  Think this is a better compromise on that.

Offline Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2026
  • Last Login:Today at 08:03:09 pm
Re: WV: US 50 and US 220 Corridors Point Concerns
« Reply #5 on: November 10, 2021, 07:08:01 am »
For #1 of WV 131, I would prefer no-build over relocating it to ParDr.

I've changed it to a shaping point south of ParDr, as was able to gain almost .1 miles for the route as it currently stands.  Think this is a better compromise on that.

I have no issue with that.

Offline rickmastfan67

  • TM Collaborator (A)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1243
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 01:07:41 pm
Re: WV: US 50 and US 220 Corridors Point Concerns
« Reply #6 on: November 11, 2021, 09:14:37 pm »
For #1 of WV 131, I would prefer no-build over relocating it to ParDr.

I've changed it to a shaping point south of ParDr, as was able to gain almost .1 miles for the route as it currently stands.  Think this is a better compromise on that.

I have no issue with that.

I'll push the WV route only changes mentioned above when I push the update to US-35 in the next ~24h.

Offline rickmastfan67

  • TM Collaborator (A)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1243
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 01:07:41 pm
Re: WV: US 50 and US 220 Corridors Point Concerns
« Reply #7 on: November 12, 2021, 07:48:12 am »
For #1 of WV 131, I would prefer no-build over relocating it to ParDr.

I've changed it to a shaping point south of ParDr, as was able to gain almost .1 miles for the route as it currently stands.  Think this is a better compromise on that.

I have no issue with that.

I'll push the WV route only changes mentioned above when I push the update to US-35 in the next ~24h.

These fixes are now submitted.
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/5319

Offline rickmastfan67

  • TM Collaborator (A)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1243
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 01:07:41 pm
Re: WV: US 50 and US 220 Corridors Point Concerns
« Reply #8 on: November 13, 2021, 07:40:53 am »
US 50:  (Unsurprisingly, Corridor D is in great shape, not so much east of there, but not much beyond shaping points)
1.  Consider replacing the two shaping points east of I-77 with visible points.  I am not sure where the best locations would be offhand.
2.  Consider replacing the shaping point west of NutFarmRd with a visible point at CR20. (also affects WV 31)
3.  Consider replacing the shaping point west of OldUS50 with a visible point at CR50/7.
4.  OldUS50 should be CR31.
5.  Should BroSt be CheSt?
6.  The shaping point west of WV310 should be replaced by a visible point at CR18/4.
7.  I think that GlaRun should be CR52.
8.  GSV (from 2008) does not show AurPke as such.
9.  Maybe replace the shaping point east of WV24 with a visible point at CR108?
10.  The shaping point west of WV42_S should be replaced with a visible point at Bismarck Rd.
11.  The second shaping point west of US220_S should be replaced by a visible point at Rogers Rd (RogRd). (also affects US 220)
12.  The second and third shaping point west of WV28_N should be replaced by visible points at CR50/53 and CR50/4 respectively. (also affects WV 28)
13.  The shaping points west of HamRd should be replaced with visible points at CR12 and CR50/9.
14.  Should HamRd be HarRd?
15.  It looks like WV29_S should be slightly recentered.
16.  Maybe replace the third shaping point northeast of WV29_N with a visible point at Timber Mountain Rd.

1. Removed both shaping points.  Added visible points @ ForHilRd, DryRunRd, & RedHillRd (southern jct) in return.
2. Doing that, will take the route out of tolerance.  So, to add it, had to add in a replacement shaping point to bring the route back into tolerance in the area.
3. Done.
4. That one is debatable.  Don't know why they don't mention the road on the north side of the intersection (which is the old route of US-50) on any of the signage there.  If I look a little farther to the east, at the CR31 intersection, it is mentioned there as CR11.  Feel better with calling it CR11 instead since I think it's the more important route there.
5. Changed.
6. Done.  Also added a point at CR40 as that looks like a reasonable bypass of town if anybody was trying to hit up SB US-119 in that area, though US-250 itself is better.
7. Meh, done. Weird the intersection has no signage for it.
8. Hmmmm, it looks like it could be 'TerAltaRd' instead.  Hard to tell to be sure, but I think OSM has the correct name for the road here based on the blurry SV.
9. Done.

<< wv.us050rom >>
10. Done.
11. Done.  Also replaced the shaping point to the east of 'CR11_N' as EbeRd.
12. Done.
13. Done.
14. Fixed.
15. Fixed.
16. Done.

The US-50 changes have been now submitted.  Will deal with US-220's post later when I have some more free time.
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/5323

Offline rickmastfan67

  • TM Collaborator (A)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1243
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 01:07:41 pm
Re: WV: US 50 and US 220 Corridors Point Concerns
« Reply #9 on: November 15, 2021, 01:56:46 am »
Adding US 220 to this thread:

1.    The fourth shaping point north of US33_W should be replaced with a visible point at CR10.
2.   I see the Pendleton County Poor Farm on Google Maps, but I do not see a PoorFarmRd anywhere….
3.   Replace the shaping point south of SchRd with a visible point at what the maps shows as CR8.
4.   Both shaping points by Jake Hill Rd should be made visible points.
5.   BetChuRd should be ShoGapRd (Shooks Gap Rd).
6.   Replace the shaping point by Saint Johns Church with a visible point at Middle Mountain Rd (MidMouRd).
7.   The shaping point to the north should become a visible point at Kellers Ridge Rd (KelRidRd).
8.   The shaping point south of WV28/55 should become a visible point at Johnson Run Rd (JohRunRd).
9.   WelKesRd should be RigRd.  (also affects WV 28 and WV 55)
10.   The shaping point north of WelKesRd should be replaced by a visible point at Jenkins Run Rd (JenRunRd).  (also affects WV 28 and WV 55)
11.   I would probably replace the shaping point south of WinAve with a visible point nearby.  (also affects WV 28 and WV 55)
12.   The shaping points north of OldFieRd should be replaced with visible points at Mountain View Rd (MouViewRd) and maybe AJ Kelley Rd.  (also affects WV 28)
13.   I am unable to determine if CR220/8 is correct… (would also affect WV 28)  Maybe just go HufRd (Huffman Rd).
14.   The shaping point north of CR220/8 should be replaced with a visible point at RadaRd.  (also affects WV 28)
15.   Look into replacing the shaping point south of US50_E with a visible point as well.  (also affects WV 28)
16.   See 11 under US 50.
17.   Consider replacing the shaping point south of WV93 with a visible point at CR7/1.
18.   Consider replacing the shaping point north of WV93 with a visible point at Stony Run Rd (StoRunRd).

1. Done.
2. Point deleted.
3. Done.
4. Points added at both ends of Jake Hill Road.
5. Fixed.
6. Done.
7. Done.
8. Done.
9. Fixed in all routes.
10. Done.
11. Added point @ Fisher Road.
12. Both added.
13. Done.
14. Added as CR220/7.
15. Point added @ FleRd.
16. Fixed the other day with the US-50 fixes and is already live.
17. Can't find any signage for any roads in that area on StreetView.  Instead, will shift the shaping point a little bit farther north to make that section look a little bit better.  However, will add a point closer to US-50 @ Tucker Road in addition.
18. Added as CR220/1.

Now submitted and this thread is completed.
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/5330

Offline Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2026
  • Last Login:Today at 08:03:09 pm
Re: WV: US 50 and US 220 Corridors Point Concerns
« Reply #10 on: November 15, 2021, 06:25:55 am »
Quote
4. Points added at both ends of Jake Hill Road.

I am surprised that you did not make JakeHillRd be JakeHillRd_N instead.  Otherwise I am good (pre-website update anyway).

Offline rickmastfan67

  • TM Collaborator (A)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1243
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 01:07:41 pm
Re: WV: US 50 and US 220 Corridors Point Concerns
« Reply #11 on: November 15, 2021, 07:28:45 am »
Quote
4. Points added at both ends of Jake Hill Road.

I am surprised that you did not make JakeHillRd be JakeHillRd_N instead.  Otherwise I am good (pre-website update anyway).

I thought I had.  Fixed since it wasn't pulled in yet.