https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-cent_piece_(United_States)
I want to make sure I'm clear on what you're suggesting here: That not only should the two exits on the segment in question be reopened on I-80,
If one decides to include the express lanes as a legitimate part of I-80 (like NJ I-78), I'd lean toward removing the * and marking the exits as open.
but that the lanes with I-29 NOT be separated? (i.e. have intentionally misaligned coordinates)
If someone follows the Express lanes through, technically they did not use I-29 pavement.
For this reason, I'd separate the alignments, and break the concurrency. Reminds me of all the fun I had with US6 & MA79/138 in Fall River
(speaking of which... oh boy).
This gives the traveler the option of deciding whether or not they've clinched I-29, and .listing it separately.
My usual M.O. is to break concurrencies with hidden points, which leaves the "intersecting/concurrent routes" links in the HB enabled.
Misaligning the coords could work here if you decide I-80 & 29 aren't concurrent here, because officially only on express lanes, and decide to forego the HB links.
Or, if you decide that I-80 & 29
are concurrent because I-80 local, and decide to enable the links, hidden points are the ticket.
But it is a relatively short segment, and there is the one exit to old 192 from westbound 80.
IMO, that merges into I-29 and then leaves from
there to South Expressway.
Ahem, excuse me -- I-80 Local!
![Wink ;)](https://forum.travelmapping.net/Smileys/default/wink.gif)