Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11
Updates to Highway Data / Re: NM: I-40 issues
« Last post by oscar on Yesterday at 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/
12
Updates to Highway Data / OH: OH 65 in Lima
« Last post by charliezeb on Yesterday at 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.
13
Solved Highway data updates / Re: FL: FL 54 Decomissioned East of FL 56??
« Last post by AARoads on Yesterday at 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...
14
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)
15
Updates to Highway Data / Re: CT: CT 234 point request
« Last post by IMGoph on Yesterday at 08:14:20 am »
Big thank you to Jim for the help and support!

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/8648
16
Updates to Highway Data / Re: ESP-CM: TO-23 missing in HB
« Last post by michih on Yesterday at 08:12:52 am »
Strange but not uncommon. That also happens in Germany.
Thanks for extending.
18
Haven't we had this conversation before?
https://maps.app.goo.gl/VDaLwFkyVSP2driM8

That one belongs in usaohh, not usaush. Or is it usaoho?
19
https://publicdocs.txdot.gov/minord/MinuteOrderDocLib/114383.pdf
This was designated as US 83 Spur back in 2015.

There was some AASHTO funny business back in spring 2016; if I wanna look that up again and remind myself of the full story, where's the best place to go for AASHTO info these days?
Regardless, AASHTO isn't the be-all-end-all for TM purposes. The state calls it US83Spr, so that's what it is.

(clipped)

Even though they're 2 separate systems on TM, from TXDOT's perspective Loops & Spurs are the same system, and numbers aren't duplicated between the two, with one exception where there's a "State Highway Loop and Spur" XXX (I forget the number) with the spur spurring off the loop. Obviously related. There is a TXLp83 in Caldwell, so this is surely not TXSpr83, but US83Spr, and we may be a dealing with a sign-o.

Can you fill me in more in what signage you saw where, how much, what style?

I didn't realize that a thread already existed for this, but as you mentioned with TXLp19 (Montague County) and TXLp108 (Port Bolivar, Galveston County) which both have spur routes, they're in the system as spur routes but are basically loop spurs (if that makes any sense). Similar to FM and RM spur routes which just use the same shield as the rest of the spur routes in Texas (for example, TXSpr3 in Corpus Christi and TXFMSpr3 in Normangee / Leon County). There's two spur routes that directly tie to US Routes in Texas (US 277 Spur in Del Rio and US 281 Spur in Hidalgo), both of which are designated with a SPUR shield (rather than a SPUR banner followed by a US Route shield below it). TXSpr277 already exists in Coupland (Williamson County).

Admittedly I didn't know that TXDOT designated US spur routes that way, even though I knew they designated FM/RM spur routes that way. If it were me, I'd call it US83Spr. I made my initial post (before it was merged with this thread) not knowing that TXDOT did it that way.
20
In-progress Highway Systems & Work / Re: usaush: United States Historic US Routes
« Last post by osu-lsu on October 07, 2025, 10:54:22 pm »
"Old" is just another way of saying "Historic", right?

Haven't we had this conversation before?
https://maps.app.goo.gl/VDaLwFkyVSP2driM8
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10