Recent Posts

11

Updates to Highway Data / Re: TX: Spur 83 (between US 83 (West end I-2) and Bus 83 La Joya

« Last post by TBKS1 on Yesterday at 10:56:50 pm »

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.

12

In-progress Highway Systems & Work / Re: usaush: United States Historic US Routes

« Last post by osu-lsu on Yesterday at 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

13

Updates to Highway Data / Re: TX: Spur 83 (between US 83 (West end I-2) and Bus 83 La Joya

« Last post by rickmastfan67 on Yesterday at 10:20:31 pm »

Route has a single trailblazer going each direction.
WB
EB

14

Updates to Highway Data / Re: NM: I-40 issues

« Last post by rickmastfan67 on Yesterday at 10:13:54 pm »

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.

For NM-333, I responded in the other thread.

15

Updates to Highway Data / Re: NM: NM-333 issues

« Last post by rickmastfan67 on Yesterday at 10:13:45 pm »

missing -> should have a point for the intersection of the I-40(167) interchange ramps just to the east of NM-556.  Would also need to be added to 'NM US66HisAlb'.

See my reply on I-40 issues, which I think covers this topic.

I still think NM-333 deserves a separate point for the other part of the interchange do to that being a trumpet style interchange (and having 3 of the 4 ramp movements to access I-40).  Plus, if you give NM-556 a point that's less than 0.2 between points for I-40 & NM-333 (of course, it was needed for graph connection reasons), NM-333 deserves the same between NM-556 & I-40.  When they built this interchange (looking @ the Historical Aerials of this area), all movements from the trumpet part of the interchange connected to the current day NM-556/333 intersection, and it remained that way till sometime between 1991 & 1996, when they reconfigured it into the current configuration.

If this project had existed back then, we'd would have mapped out that change for sure.

16

Updates to Highway Data / Re: NM: NM-333 issues

« Last post by oscar on Yesterday at 08:58:56 pm »

missing -> should have a point for the intersection of the I-40(167) interchange ramps just to the east of NM-556.  Would also need to be added to 'NM US66HisAlb'.

See my reply on I-40 issues, which I think covers this topic.

17

Updates to Highway Data / Re: NM: I-40 issues

« Last post by oscar on Yesterday at 08:32:12 pm »

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.

18

Updates to Highway Data / TX: TX Spur 83 (Peñitas, TX) (New Route)

« Last post by TBKS1 on Yesterday at 06:20:48 pm »

Since the La Joya/Future I-2 bypass was completed earlier this year, the small section between US 83 Business and US 83/I-2 has been signed as Spur 83 as seen from April 2025 street view imagery. This is a former alignment of US 83 and it's less than a mile long.

(GSV imagery)

~ Ethan

19

In-progress Highway Systems & Work / Re: usaush: United States Historic US Routes

« Last post by pderocco on Yesterday at 06:02:12 pm »

"Old" is just another way of saying "Historic", right?

If so, any thoughts on Old 61 in Minnesota?

Stacy
North Branch
Rush City
Pine City
West of Sandstone
East of Finlayson
North of Moose Lake
Barnum
West of Carlton

Seems to have the same intent as brown Historic US Route signs, unlike many roads that have names like Old Highway 61, which are actual addresses. I wonder why they didn't use the more conventional signage. Maybe they didn't have brown in their palette? Although I've seen lots of black and white Historic signs too.

20

In-progress Railway Systems & Work / Re: PRT: Urbanos changes

« Last post by si404 on Yesterday at 02:51:17 pm »

It's not listed under https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP_Urbanos_de_Lisboa#Rede

Well yes, because, as I said, it's not a CP line. You'll have noticed that all the maps and diagrams on that page include the Linha do Sul urban service.

wikipedia has an article about Linha do Sul: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linha_do_Sul It runs all the way to Algarve....

And the urbanos services with that name don't go anywhere near as far south and the intercity / interregional services on that line don't refer to the line name.

I could make a separate system, but there was a lot of moaning about too many systems, hence why I included it with the CP routes.