Travel Mapping

Highway Data Discussion => Updates to Highway Data => Solved Highway data updates => Topic started by: Markkos1992 on June 27, 2021, 03:12:00 pm

Title: IL: Minor point concerns
Post by: Markkos1992 on June 27, 2021, 03:12:00 pm: It looks like we can easily make 57B just plain 57 (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7888214,-87.6305578,3a,75y,340.69h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sjdngO9QrUrmvlu4eSBJ7EQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DjdngO9QrUrmvlu4eSBJ7EQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D345.3624%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) now. Looking at the Github files, 57 (or 57(94) in the case of I-90) is not being used in either file.

[Ref to I-90/94. Title lost in thread merge. -Highway63]
Title: IL: US 41 MusCamDr Label
Post by: Markkos1992 on June 27, 2021, 03:36:16 pm: MusCamDr should be 18thDr (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8577931,-87.6170314,3a,75y,158.56h,91.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAmL3bZ__G1fhB60MVQuKfQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
Title: IL: I-290 Exit Numbers
Post by: Markkos1992 on June 27, 2021, 05:06:00 pm: All of these also affect IL 110.

1. A point should be added at 24A (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8717645,-87.7489519,3a,75y,298.01h,97.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smO05-VOyhmw_vsIaTJgMFQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
2. 24 should be 24B (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8713121,-87.7492802,3a,75y,103.8h,89.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8LY3Ag7ooeZ-jViRZulevA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
3. 30 should be I-90/94. I could not find an Exit 30 on any GSV image (past or present).
Title: IL: I-88 Corridor Minor Concerns
Post by: Markkos1992 on June 27, 2021, 06:38:32 pm: I-88: 54 needs to be recentered.

IL 56: The labels along the I-88 concurrency need to be replaced with I-88(113), I-88(114), and I-88(117). Of course, I did not even realize this concurrency was truly a thing until reviewing my notes afterwards. Honestly, while driving I-88 WB, I thought that the references to IL 56 EB and WB were for different exits and had nothing to do with a concurrency.
Title: IA/IL: Quad Cities Point Concerns (not I-74)
Post by: Markkos1992 on June 28, 2021, 06:59:07 pm: US 6:
1.   KimRd should be KimRd_E (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5548678,-90.5272258,3a,75y,142.4h,92.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAs6dkByf2gM3Zg4lKoUUAQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
2.   QuaCitAir should be QuadCityAir.

IL 84: I think ColRd_W should be just ColRd (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4844674,-90.3876523,3a,45y,291.25h,89.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6lFIcYHqulYNQ-VUxv2mJA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).

IL 5:
1.    Should DenRd be HubRd?
2.   Should MilPkwy be RIMilPkwy (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4576771,-90.5373097,3a,75y,182.57h,99.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snPzIhHNNNgp6mLdlIxTcEw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)?

IL 92:
1.   Should DenRd be HubRd?
2.   14thSt should be recentered between the one-way sections.

US 67:
1.   Should 1stAve be AirRd (Airport Rd) (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.453089,-90.5671086,3a,75y,44.02h,93.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s81r6Rl1A5grtAZd6uHt0iA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)?
2.   I recommend adding a point at 31st Ave due to its direct connection to IL 92. 7th Ave is already close to 11thSt.
3.   11thSt should be 11thSt_N.
4.   15thSt should be 15thSt_S.
Title: IL: Minor point concerns
Post by: Highway63 on July 01, 2021, 01:17:10 am: Consolidated thread.
Title: Re: IL: Minor point concerns
Post by: rickmastfan67 on July 02, 2021, 10:34:42 pm: Since you consolidated threads here Highway63, I'll just quickly throw in a few exit number issues I saw on I-94 that need to be addressed.

il.i094:
22 -> 24 (https://goo.gl/maps/pUWuo9oeJPRKErJW9)
25 -> 25A (https://goo.gl/maps/nS2WhwDCYU1HyA8b7)
26 -> 25B (https://goo.gl/maps/nS2WhwDCYU1HyA8b7)

And don't know if you want to tweak this one or not, but you might be able to get away with this change on I-294 if you want to, but I'd understand if you didn't want to do the tweak:

il.i294:
I-94_W -> 52 (https://goo.gl/maps/dkxXcFMMSYsQh3zU7)

Also, one exit on I-90 that needs to be addressed that I spotted too.

il.i090:
100 -> recenter (this one is badly way off from the overpass, might even be able to justify adding a shaping point in the 'old' 100 location too)
Title: Re: IL: Minor point concerns
Post by: Markkos1992 on July 06, 2021, 10:44:26 am: Quote from: Markkos1992 on June 27, 2021, 05:06:00 pm
All of these also affect IL 110.

1. A point should be added at 24A (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8717645,-87.7489519,3a,75y,298.01h,97.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smO05-VOyhmw_vsIaTJgMFQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
2. 24 should be 24B (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8713121,-87.7492802,3a,75y,103.8h,89.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8LY3Ag7ooeZ-jViRZulevA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
3. 30 should be I-90/94. I could not find an Exit 30 on any GSV image (past or present).

I am not sure how the I-290/IL 110 concurrency broke. (For IL 110, I-190(24B) needs to be I-290(24B).)
Title: Re: IL: Minor point concerns
Post by: Highway63 on July 11, 2021, 12:20:28 am: Quote from: rickmastfan67 on July 02, 2021, 10:34:42 pm
Also, one exit on I-90 that needs to be addressed that I spotted too.

il.i090:
100 -> recenter (this one is badly way off from the overpass, might even be able to justify adding a shaping point in the 'old' 100 location too)
This point is intentionally centered at where the half-interchange ramps join/leave the mainline to create some separation between points.

The IL 110 point break is related to the addition of the new exit on I-290. Had a slightly different coordinate.