11
Updates to Highway Data / CO CO121 point request
« Last post by neroute2 on Yesterday at 03:03:29 am »Can I please have a point at 88th Avenue (between 72ndAve and 92ndAve)? Thanks.
News:
If you have any trouble registering for the forum, please email travmap@teresco.org for help. Email systems often block activation emails sent by the forum.
Recent Posts
12
Updates to Highway Data / Re: NM: NM-124 issues
« Last post by oscar on October 08, 2025, 08:44:28 pm »https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/8654
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/8655 (for concurrent US 66 His Grants)
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/8655 (for concurrent US 66 His Grants)
13
Welcome & Notices / Re: Bots on the server
« Last post by Jim on October 08, 2025, 03:42:52 pm »Chinese bots were bogging things down again today, so I took the time to implement the firewall updates. As far as I can tell, it's working. All traffic to the server from all China IP blocks is being denied. It looks like we're still being crawled by at least one bot in Vietnam but it's not hammering things like the China ones were.
Some other web crawlers look to be loading every single showroute link and loading everyone's user page and following every link there and loading every archived log file...
Some other web crawlers look to be loading every single showroute link and loading everyone's user page and following every link there and loading every archived log file...
14
Updates to Highway Data / Re: NM: NM-333 issues
« Last post by oscar on October 08, 2025, 11:40:33 am »I would instead base our mapping on the current I-40(167) configuration, without diving into former configurations more than a quarter-century old.
Re-marking this as solved.
Re-marking this as solved.
15
Updates to Highway Data / Re: NM: I-40 issues
« Last post by oscar on October 08, 2025, 11:29:52 am »167 -> split into 167/167A. This will allow NM-556 to have a proper location for this interchange. Update the point in NM-556 too.
Rather than splitting the point, into two points only 0.2 mile apart, I would just move I-40(167) to the NM 556 underpass, and rely on 1PPI to have the relocated point cover the entire interchange. This also leaves NM 333 and NM US66HisAlb (per your note on NM 333) unchanged.
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/8649
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/8650
Other changes to I-40 later, to avoid confusion from my trying to follow two baseball playoff games at once.
I can sorta live with a 1PPI here on I-40, but I still think these still work as separate interchanges. With the one that connects to NM-556, you have 2 directions (originally was only an EB off-ramp, but WB on-ramp added in 1982), but with NM-333 there, you have 3 of the 4 movements.
I was drawing on our practice re: half-diamond freeway interchanges, where we don't treat the halves as separate interchanges (with a fake exit number for one of the halves) unless they are at least 0.5 miles apart.
FWIW (given the highway signage quality in NM, worst in the lower 48), both the exit ramp from EB I-40 directly to NM 556, and the ramp from WB I-40 via the trumpet, are signed as parts of exit 167.
===
Pull request addressing the I-40 issues not relating to exit 167:
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/8653/
16
Updates to Highway Data / OH: OH 65 in Lima
« Last post by charliezeb on October 08, 2025, 10:05:58 am »I just drove OH 65 through Lima. It is signed along Main St between Wayne and Grand, not along Elizabeth. Signage is in both directions through that stretch. I was heading southbound and ready to turn from Grand onto Elizabeth, but I saw a straight arrow and then signage to turn on Main instead. ODOT may show it along Elizabeth, but we may want to go with what's actually signed in the field.
17
Solved Highway data updates / Re: FL: FL 54 Decomissioned East of FL 56??
« Last post by AARoads on October 08, 2025, 09:27:14 am »Ok, so I'll just drop the FL-54Zep file for now till we hear about FL-581's signs coming down. We'll do a separate topic on that when it happens.
Also changed the 'FL54' point in US-301's file to 5thAve instead since there was already another CR54 label for the other Pasco 'CR54' route. Best idea I could come up with at this time.
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/8639
Running errands on Monday, I drove on SR 56 east to SR 581/CR 581, and both shields for SR 581 on SR 56 eastbound were removed. I turned onto SR 581 south ahead of SR 56, and SR 581 is still signed on Bruce B. Downs Boulevard northbound.
Honestly, with FL54Zep going away, I would prefer that the rest of FL 54 become FL 56, but that is in fictional territory.
From what Brent told me at FDOT D7, the favored plan is to renumber all of SR 56 as an extension of SR 54. That would leave you with SR 54, CR 54 and CR 54 in Zephyrhills...
18
In-progress Highway Systems & Work / Re: usaush: United States Historic US Routes
« Last post by osu-lsu on October 08, 2025, 08:30:51 am »Haven't we had this conversation before?
https://maps.app.goo.gl/VDaLwFkyVSP2driM8
That one belongs in usaohh, not usaush. Or is it usaoho?
How about usaosu? (tongue firmly in cheek)
19
Updates to Highway Data / Re: CT: CT 234 point request
« Last post by IMGoph on October 08, 2025, 08:14:20 am »Big thank you to Jim for the help and support!
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/8648
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/8648
20
Updates to Highway Data / Re: ESP-CM: TO-23 missing in HB
« Last post by michih on October 08, 2025, 08:12:52 am »Strange but not uncommon. That also happens in Germany.
Thanks for extending.
Thanks for extending.