Thoughts?
I don't maintain Wyoming, so I don't have any kind of final say here. But it looks pretty well done for the mess we were given to work with.
From the I-25 perspective, the usual practice for "double half interchanges" is
(with a few exceptions) to pick one central point and position the waypoint there. Yes, it's more of a ¾ + ¼ situation here, but close enough; it's more or less in keeping with that guideline, and looks good here IMO.
For US20/26/87, we've got a bit of a couplet situation going on, with one direction taking F Street, and the other taking Beverly and Yellowstone. For couplets, the usual practice is to not favor one direction over the other; we'll often run the route trace down the middle between one-way pairs. Or for shorter couplets, just cut across from one end of it to the other, or even place a waypoint smack in the middle. This looks like a good candidate for the latter. Just move it a bit away from dead center and have the coords match up with I-25, and then you get your
Intersecting/Concurrent Routes listed.
And the business routes' end, we're dealing with the couplet situation again; they don't start & end at the same place, which could make point placement a pain. If we run the route diagonally up between both directions of traffic, we meet the existing waypoint & happily add some more (Intersecting/Concurrent!) routes to the same junction.
Compare the north end of
NJ18.
The only thing I would change is to move the endpoint of US87BusCas to
42.855298°, -106.290107°, to fix the concurrency with the other business routes.
