Travel Mapping
Highway Data Discussion => Updates to Highway Data => Solved Highway data updates => Topic started by: Markkos1992 on January 05, 2023, 11:23:00 am
-
Should happen right after MLK Day
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4121.msg2804183#msg2804183
I am on the side of removing I-840FutGre and replacing it with I-840 immediately even though NCDOT may be behind on signing it.
-
I am on the side of removing I-840FutGre and replacing it with I-840 immediately even though NCDOT may be behind on signing it.
Agree
-
Agreed once opened.
-
I have made the changes
-
Not directly related, but should we go 1PPI at the I-40/I-85/I-785/I-840 interchange?
The current format has I-840 extended south of I-40/I-85 and I am not a fan of that.
-
Not directly related, but should we go 1PPI at the I-40/I-85/I-785/I-840 interchange?
The current format has I-840 extended south of I-40/I-85 and I am not a fan of that.
I'd say no to that, especially due to how all the exit numbers in that area are.
Especially since the ramps on I-85 are 0.59 miles apart there.
-
I'd say no to that, especially due to how all the exit numbers in that area are.
It's I-85 exit 131, I-40 exit 227, I-840 exit 21. One exit number per route.
Especially since the ramps on I-85 are 0.59 miles apart there.
That is about the only justification for it. The size.
I-40/I-85BL within the interchange is 0.49 mi
I-85 within the interchange is 0.59 mi
I-785/I-840 within the interchange is 0.43 mi
However, I-40/I-73 at the other side of Greensborough is pretty similar, taking up a similar length along each leg but only given one point (because there isn't a third route? was it 1 point when I-40 took the loop and I-40BL existed?).
And the example in the manual (I-97/MD3/MD32) to have as 1PPI is likewise a similar size. Lets break it down the exemplar 1PPI interchange into 3 points like the I-85 ones in Greensboro:
I-97/MD3 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.070163&lon=-76.636806
I-97/MD32 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.061716&lon=-76.639209
MD3/MD32 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.065098&lon=-76.644702
I make that 0.61 mi on I-97, 0.56 mi on MD3 and 0.38 mi on MD32. It's actually a smidge longer on the longest bit than the Greensboro examples where 3 points have been deployed (there's also the three-pointed I-73/I-85/I-85BL interchange: I-73 0.30 mi, I-85 0.58 mi, I-85BL 0.41 mi).
-
Am I correct that, as implemented, the only ways to travel the last segment of I-840 are to travel I-840 to I-85 South or I-85 North to I-840? I would think travelers from I-85 South getting on I-840 would consider themselves to have traveled from that endpoint of I-840.
-
I'd say no to that, especially due to how all the exit numbers in that area are.
It's I-85 exit 131, I-40 exit 227, I-840 exit 21. One exit number per route.
And the example in the manual (I-97/MD3/MD32) to have as 1PPI is likewise a similar size. Lets break it down the exemplar 1PPI interchange into 3 points like the I-85 ones in Greensboro:
Difference here is that I-40 leaves I-85 @ 131B, then has it's own separate exit @ 227. Both MD-3 & MD-32 end @ I-97. That's a huge difference between the two IMO. Why should we go 1PPI here and falsely give I-85 an extra ~.5 miles that it shouldn't have? We're properly showing where the split is currently. I mean, if we call this a '1PPI', who's to say we need to call exits 222 & 223 on I-40 in NC an 1PPI too since it only has 0.26 between them?
As for the I-85/I-73 one, that's because I-73 doesn't technically even join with I-85, and is completely on the C/D roads on the side of I-85.
In closing, I think all interchanges like this need to be looked at fully and determined on an interchange by interchange basis instead. Not all of them are the same, as some can easily justify an extra splitting point.
-
Am I correct that, as implemented, the only ways to travel the last segment of I-840 are to travel I-840 to I-85 South or I-85 North to I-840?
Correct (and don't forget, it's technically signed as only I-785 right now).
I would think travelers from I-85 South getting on I-840 would consider themselves to have traveled from that endpoint of I-840.
I would, especially since all the signage at the interchange says 'TO I-40 West' on it. So, I would need to use that segment to connect to I-40 WB.
Same goes with going the other direction. To get to I-785/840, all signage says 'TO' from where I-40/I-85 split, which IMO, fully justifies the split 131 on I-85's file, since I-40's numbering takes over for the next exit, which is I-785/840.
-
In closing, I think all interchanges like this need to be looked at fully and determined on an interchange by interchange basis instead. Not all of them are the same, as some can easily justify an extra splitting point.
(https://i.imgur.com/3SIX6Yt.png)
-
^ If I were drafting that one, I'd definitely keep separate points on the W & E sides, not a big one in the middle of the whole mess. I might have one point on I-95 for both 64 & 195 to connect w/a graph connection, and add a shaping point to break the false 64/195 concurrency.
But that's just, like, my opinion, man. Not that what we have is super inappropriate. Navigating intersecting/connected routes is still easy enough, with just one more click two more clicks along a short hop on I-64. No huge loss for algorithms either IMO.
NC? I'd probably go with 1PPI there.
Full disclosure: I didn't take my own advice on the NE side of Lufkin, TX, and have periodically thought about going back & changing it...
-
^ If I were drafting that one, I'd definitely keep separate points on the W & E sides, not a big one in the middle of the whole mess. I might have one point on I-95 for both 64 & 195 to connect w/a graph connection, and add a shaping point to break the false 64/195 concurrency.
But that's just, like, my opinion, man. Not that what we have is super inappropriate. Navigating intersecting/connected routes is still easy enough, with just one more click two more clicks along a short hop on I-64. No huge loss for algorithms either IMO.
NC? I'd probably go with 1PPI there.
Full disclosure: I didn't take my own advice on the NE side of Lufkin, TX, and have periodically thought about going back & changing it...
For those of us who are not up with the jargon, can someone define "1PPI" please? Thank you!
-
1 Point Per Interchange
-
1 Point Per Interchange
Grazie! :)
-
It seems to me a solution would be to truncate 840 to the I-40 interchange and just have 785 go to I-85.
-
It seems to me a solution would be to truncate 840 to the I-40 interchange and just have 785 go to I-85.
But I bet they'll add I-840 shields to that segment too to be honest.
-
But I bet they'll add I-840 shields to that segment too to be honest.
Looks like they left space for it - the shields are wider apart on a narrower BGS than the one next to it. (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0481059,-79.6870468,3a,15y,18.26h,93.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sw8yf_JyrR8Zhr75fziFl8w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
The 'To' does suggest that we have 2 separate interchanges on I-85 that are both 131, and that the 40/785 junction is a 3rd interchange separate from the 85 ones. I can see using three points is justified on those grounds.
For the first 65 years of the Interstate system, there was only ever 1 concurrency between 3dis: I-271 and I-480 skirting Cleveland. Then NC has added 2 more in less than a year - and both of them are 'useless' concurrencies, where one route doesn't leave the other before terminating. In this case, they will both terminate together...
-
Per this document https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Route%20Changes/2011_09_02.pdf 840 is clearly shown to end at I-40 and does not extend to I-85.
Meanwhile this document https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Route%20Changes/2013_07_31.pdf implies in the drawing that 785 ends at I-85; however the mileage of 2.21 miles is from I-40 to US 70.
if you go to their interactive traffic map, the segment from I-85 NB to I-785/840 is labeled as I-785. If you click on the traffic count on that segment it calls it a ramp from I-85 to I-840. https://ncdot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=964881960f0549de8c3583bf46ef5ed4
on their arcgis map https://ncdot.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=5d3ad78971714a30be7ff97fd580e4d5 they call the segment I-785 with a street name of I-840 ramp.
So i think my solution is OK. If you haven't driven that small piece, you still get all credit for 840. If both designations remain there no particular benefit to that. if you want to consider that piece ramps, than the 1PPI would be better, although in reality you could get all of I-85 without driving between those ramps and I-40.
-
In that case 1PPI sounds like a win in that that level of granularity sidesteps the "is it mainline or ramp" question altogether.
-
Given the signage (https://goo.gl/maps/EDMYkwuU6saCjbz49), I would say that it's clearly mainline and that one would need to clinch that piece to clinch the route.
-
Given the signage (https://goo.gl/maps/EDMYkwuU6saCjbz49), I would say that it's clearly mainline and that one would need to clinch that piece to clinch the route.
No different from the east end of I-240 (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.5674578,-82.5060948,3a,75y,125.4h,96.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swnjcLk9Ho0lgK3ePV8zpSg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
-
Given the signage (https://goo.gl/maps/EDMYkwuU6saCjbz49), I would say that it's clearly mainline and that one would need to clinch that piece to clinch the route.
No different from the east end of I-240 (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.5674578,-82.5060948,3a,75y,125.4h,96.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swnjcLk9Ho0lgK3ePV8zpSg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
And I would say the same for I-240. If you're traveling east on I-40 and head west to I-240 (or east on I-240 to I-40 west), I don't think I'd call it a clinch of the east end of I-240 without a U turn at exit 55.
-
In the meantime, I fixed an error in the I-840 Updates Entry. (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/6292)
-
Given the signage (https://goo.gl/maps/EDMYkwuU6saCjbz49), I would say that it's clearly mainline and that one would need to clinch that piece to clinch the route.
After seeing Exit 21 in the opposite direction (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0597173,-79.686187,3a,75y,355.54h,86.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFrTjXWpVYm2zbPXNNdcFHw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), I am fine with leaving it as-is.