canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways

[oscar]

QC117 (only going to the end not concurrent with TCH)

 - add point for u-turn GSJ next to railway in St-Laurent

The U-turn roads on both sides of the railway appear to be unnamed, and I didn't see exit numbers in GMSV. Could resort to QC117_U.

- is A15 Spur an actual thing? Could/Should it be added? Would A-15Spur be better as ToA-15?

I would relabel as 46, the posted exit number for QC 117 southbound where it peels away from the southbound connector to A-15.

There's a little more to the story:

-- The connector road between A-15 and QC 117 in St. Jerome is categorized as part of the Autoroute system, in the map set that shows it (it's not shown at all in Transports Quebec's other map set). The route name is "Chemin de Raccordement A15-R117". "Chemin de Raccordement" seems to be literally, in French, "connector road".

-- That connector is not signed with that or any other name, or any route number of its own. At the northbound exit from A-15, the overhead has QC 117 and QC 333 route markers, for the routes it connects to. (In most places, there would be a "To" or "Vers" preceding the route numbers. But Transports Quebec never does that, for some reason. It's been a constant source of confusion, including for Tim who was misled about the east end of A-640 until I found a Fin banner at the actual east end.) Southbound from QC 117 to A-15(45), it's marked as A-15, also sans "To" or "Vers", or any word similar to "Spur".

I would not add the connector as a separate route to the canqc or canqca route sets, since it has no route signage other than that of the routes (A-15, QC 117, QC 333) to which it directly or indirectly connects. The Transport Quebec online map set showing the connector also categorizes ramps from Autoroutes in various other places as part of the Autoroute system, which we've not been treating as separate Autoroutes in the canqca route set.

- is QC329_S off? OSM has it at Rue Demontigny, we have it at roundabout

OSM now has it going to the roundabout, as does Transport Quebec's online map.

I've finished edits to the non-TCH part of QC 117, will pull them in later today.

[oscar]

I've extended QC 382 northwest about two miles, past Belleterre to eastern junction with Ch. Gains-Moore, per one of Transports Quebec's online map sets which identifies the Ch. Gains-Moore intersection as where the route number on Ch. LaForce-Belleterre changes from 00382 to 22791.

The two miles added are unpaved and municipally-maintained. But Transports Quebec still calls that segment part of route 382.

Ch. Gains-Moore is not shown on OSM, but is on ESRI World Street Map, from which the coordinates at both ends of the road were plucked.

[oscar]

QC148

...

 - add point for RuePri in Grenville (leads to point on QC344)

...

 - add point for BoulInd in Saint-Eustache (leads to A-640 exit ?

ISTM that those "leads to" points would be overkill. They aren't for plausible shortcuts to the other routes. The quickest and easiest way to get from QC 148 to those points on QC 344 and A-640 would be to just take QC 344 and A-640.

QC210
 - ChGoy is gated dirt track, replace with hidden point?

The "dirt track" isn't gated, and extends several km south. There is an unpaved private driveway nearby, which is gated, and might've been what you saw. No change, other than to tweak the waypoint location.

This isn't in my pending pull request. I will try to finish off the review changes for QC210, and others in that part of Quebec, in the next few days.

QC143
 
. . .

 - check route stays within red lines

There were a few instances of straying outside the lines, which I've fixed. In addition, the HB's routing north of A-20 follows Transports Quebec's mapping, not OSM's routing through St-Majorique-de-Grantham, so I stuck with what we had.

[oscar]

Also, in my next pull request our mapping of QC 327's north end will be extended about 2.5 miles past Mont-Tremblant-Village, over Ch. du Village and Ch. de la Chapelle, to the south end of Lac Tremblant and near the Tremblant ski area. As with QC 382, the added mileage is municipally-maintained.

Oddly enough, the best route from the TCH to the ski area seems to be via unnumbered (except with internal inventory numbers) but Transports Quebec-maintained Montee Ryan and Ch. Duplessis. And there seems to be no route signage on Ch. de la Chapelle, or at its intersection with Ch. du Village. I guess Transports Quebec decided to keep Mont-Tremblant-Village on QC 327, and have the route continue to the ski area via the Lac Tremblant lakefront. Anyway, I'm just going with Transports Quebec's online mapping here, which is consistent with OSM's mapping (except for Ch. de la Chapelle).

[oscar]

QC131
  - ParcLacTau -> ChStJos (given point is at road junction as well as park boundary, that label should be used instead)

Actually, Transports Quebec's online mapping has QC 131 ending at Rue des Aulnais in St-Michel-des-Saints, rather than at the park boundary, or well into the park as OSM has it. Beyond existing waypoint RueAul, Rue Brassard and Ch. Lac-Trudeau are route 34131 rather than 00131. Truncating to RueAul. 

I checked the north end of QC 125, another highway with a dangling end in the middle of nowhere rather than at another highway. Its endpoint is more or less where the HB already has it.

I'm working on the last batch of a half-dozen routes north of Montreal that still need review updates. Once that's done, canqc will be ready for a final pre-activation once-over.

[oscar]

Yesterday, I pulled in the last canqc route files responding to si404's and other peer review comments, and also making other fixes I identified. A followup pull request will fix the one remaining set of NMPs, at A-40 exit 76. All other errors have been fixed or marked as FPs, except for visible distance errors that will be washed away upon activation.

I plan to do some double-checking over the next few days, to make sure I've addressed all the comments, didn't create problems like the misrouting @vdeane spotted for QC 170 and a similar one I created and fixed for QC 249 in Asbestos, and otherwise make sure canqc is ready for activation.

Any help on the double-checking would be appreciated. A few things to keep in mind:

-- As I noted in previous posts, there are some places where the official route (as confirmed by Transport Quebec's online mapping) differs from what OSM shows, either longer or shorter, or following a different alignment. Another one I didn't mention above is that OSM and ESRI have QC 276 following a different routing to St-Odilon-de-Cranborne than does official mapping. If you find any that aren't mentioned here or upthread, they might be errors I need to fix.

--  Online maps often differ with each other, or with signs shown in GMSV, on the names of intersecting routes. I've tried to get the names right, generally following the ones in @mapcat's draft of the canqc system, since he did a lot of GMSV checks to resolve conflicting data. I'm not convinced that any remaining errors will often throw off users, so I would not worry about waypoint labels (especially for the less important intersections).

-- Any comments on how I dealt with the messy A-25/A-440/QC 125 interchange in Laval? Moving the waypoint to the A-25/QC 125 intersection from the middle of the A-25/A-440 triangle better reflects that the interchange serves QC 125 and not just A-25 and A-440, with direct ramp connections from QC 125 to A-25. But I'm not sure about routing QC 125 via A-440(34), when northbound QC 125 traffic goes east of that point (southbound QC 125 traffic has to go through that point, to connect to the QC 125/A-440 concurrency).

-- @yakra, I threw out some questions in various posts that shapefiles could help answer, especially for New York border points, and three remote possible QC 138 segments between Kegaska and Vieux-Fort that might be added to the HB. These issues could be addressed post-activation.

On the latter, as I explain above and over at the aaroads forum, I'm inclined to treat the three "missing" QC 138 segments as "future QC 138" at most, and leave them out of the HB (even the one OSM shows in Chevery) at this time. But shapefile data could change my mind.

I'd like to activate canqc next week, preferably by Thursday 5/21.

[oscar]

QC141
 - exceeds limits between border and first shaping point (I didn't notice this until I saw the more obvious one further north and put the file in the editor. Other routes may have similar relatively small dips outside the red lines - probably worth checking)
 - massively exceeds limits between QC251 and QC147_S
 

Missed these. Fix is in my next cleanup pull request.

- ChGraCou off OSM and is RueGraCou

GMSV shows the street sign starts with "Ch(emin)" rather than "Rue". Don't believe everything you see in OSM! No label change (but the waypoint was repositioned).

QC155
 - check rural points (ChQuaVen, ZEC***, ChGag, etc) locations and names

"ZEC" means "zone d'exploitation contrôlée" (controlled harvesting zone, for hunting or fishing). Where there is no intersecting road, not a useful waypoint. I've been removing ZEC waypoints, or turning them into hidden shaping points, with a possible exception here and there if there's an unnamed road entering a ZEC.

ChQuaVen is one of several roads in that area that show up in HERE mapping and satellite imagery, but not in OSM or ESRI. I pulled the coordinates from HERE, with a little fudging to put them in the OSM route trace. The ChGag waypoint is at the location shown in HERE and ESRI satellite imagery and maps, rather than where OSM puts it.

QC157
 - add point for Rue des Praries (links to A-40 exit 205)

Added, as well as similar one for Ch. du Passage (to A-40 exit 202).

[oscar]

Question: what's going on with QC 125 just south of the northern end of A-25 (sorties 44-46)?  The current route plot appears has it overlap QC 339 to the interchange with A-25 and then following A-25, but somehow not concurrent to it (A-25 has a shaping point while QC 125 does not).

The majority of signage appears to have QC 125 follow the local road, but not all of it.  All signs at the QC 125/QC 339 junction have QC 125 on the local road, and there don't appear to be any signs on A-25 indicating an overlap with QC 125 on the segment in question.  That said, there is no signage for QC 125 at the roundabout with QC 158, and A-25 does have this sign indicating a junction with QC 125 and the QC 339 interchange.

Complicating matters further is the official sources.  Données Québec doesn't have any information of the local roads, as they're not proventially maintained, but the older Atlas des transports does.  It shows the local road as route 00125 south of  Chemin du Ruisseau St Jean, and as route 33125 north of it.  As best as I can tell, "officially" QC 125 disappears at Chemin du Ruisseau St Jean and then reappears at the QC 158 interchange on A-25.

I think the upshot of this, and @yakra's reply to that post, is that I need to belatedly add +x12 on A-25 to QC 125 (already in my local copy, but not yet pulled in). Unless I need to pull QC 125 onto the local road north of QC 339, with the concurrency with A-25 beginning at A-25 exit 46 (and possibly a concurrency with QC 158 beginning at the roundabout just west of A-25 where Rang de la Cote-Saint-Louis goes north into Saint-Esprit)? Or even split QC 125 into two segments, with most users traveling the shorter southern Montreal segment but at least one traveling the northern Rawdon segment? The split would have the southern segment ending at Ch. Ruisseau St-Jean, and the northern segment starting at the QC 158 roundabout just west of A-25 exit 46, so we'd be splitting the route to account for an apparent gap of less than a mile.

I'm confused, as is perhaps MTQ.

EDIT: Just reviewed the online provincial road map for Quebec's 511 system. It has QC 125 hopping onto A-25 at exit 44, and concurrent with A-25 until the Autoroute's terminus in Saint-Esprit, at which point QC 125 peels away from QC 158 and continues NW. That's consistent with leaving QC 125 as it is in the HB. OTOH, the 511 interactive map is just using Google's base map, no original cartography unlike the two Transports Quebec online mapping systems. Quebec 511 also has an online version of the official road map, with regional sub-maps and original cartography (even reflecting Quebec's stance in its persistent territorial dispute with Labrador), but not enough detail to show QC 125's routing north of A-25 exit 44.

[oscar]

Bumping this up, so it doesn't get lost in the noise.

I'm done with my double-checking, and I think the system is generally ready for activation. But there is still an unresolved issue about QC 125 discussed in the preceding post, following up on comments by @vdeane and @yakra, as well as others mentioned upthread (some of which could be addressed post-activation). Could I please get some comments on the QC 125 issue, at least, as well as anything else that should be addressed pre-activation?

[oscar]

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3899 implements a split of QC 125, to reflect the ~1 mile route gap shown in Transports Quebec's online mapping and shapefiles. This follows what I outlined above:

Unless I need to pull QC 125 onto the local road north of QC 339, with the concurrency with A-25 beginning at A-25 exit 46 (and possibly a concurrency with QC 158 beginning at the roundabout just west of A-25 where Rang de la Cote-Saint-Louis goes north into Saint-Esprit)? Or even split QC 125 into two segments, with most users traveling the shorter southern Montreal segment but at least one traveling the northern Rawdon segment? The split would have the southern segment ending at Ch. Ruisseau St-Jean, and the northern segment starting at the QC 158 roundabout just west of A-25 exit 46, so we'd be splitting the route to account for an apparent gap of less than a mile.

Note that this will break some list files, including Jim's, since the most heavily-traveled part of QC 125 seems to be the southern Montreal segment, which as the shorter segment gets the route file with the city abbreviation (qc.qc125mon).

@si404, @yakra, @vdeane, any comments (here or on Github)?

Nailing this down will probably be the last step needed before activation, hopefully tomorrow or Friday.

[vdeane]

I agree with splitting the file for QC 125.  No comments on the southern section.  Regarding the end of the northern section, I'll take yakra's word on the shapefiles.  With respect to signage, it's as ambiguous as always (wouldn't it be nice if MTQ used to banners?).  There's no signage of it leaving the roundabout.  Northbound signage would have it begin at the A-25_S point, which southbound signage seems to be supplemental in nature, leaving one to wonder if it's meant to be "to" signage (if so, it would start at the QC158_E point).  Given the ambiguity in the southbound signage, I would probably go with the less ambiguous northbound signage, but there is a case to be made for the roundabout as well if the shapefiles have QC 125 between there and the trumpet.

[oscar]

Tonight's update splits QC 125 in two, to deal with a ~1-mile mystery gap in the route south of Saint-Esprit. The change also moves QC 125 from a small part of QC 339, and A-25 between exits 44 and 46, onto a surface road west of A-25 plus a small part of QC 158. That surface road is QC 125 between QC 339 and Ch. Ruisseau-St-Jean, and Ancienne Route 125 (inventoried route 33125) the rest of the way to QC 158. I have no idea why Anc. Rte. 125 was removed from QC 125.

Users who claimed mileage (km-age?) on QC 125 south of Saint-Esprit will need to adjust their list files. The route north of there remains qc.qc125.wpt (QC125). South of there to Montreal, QC 125 is in the new route file qc.qc125mon.wpt (QC125Mon), since that segment is much shorter than the part north of St-Esprit.

canqc is not yet an active system. It may become one soon, perhaps later this week.

[yakra]

@si404, @yakra, @vdeane, any comments (here or on Github)?

My apologies, I've had a browser tab open for a LONG time and have been meaning to get back to this thread. I there were some items you tagged me on upthread that I never got back to.
I meant to have a look yesterday, and then finishing up a big .list processing enhancements pull request took longer than expected. And then today, got hung up on discussing a recent superior court judgment in which my parents were plaintiffs. But that's all out of the way now, so I guess I'd best get oan it!

[oscar]

@si404, @yakra, @vdeane, any comments (here or on Github)?

My apologies, I've had a browser tab open for a LONG time and have been meaning to get back to this thread. I there were some items you tagged me on upthread that I never got back to.
I meant to have a look yesterday, and then finishing up a big .list processing enhancements pull request took longer than expected. And then today, got hung up on discussing a recent superior court judgment in which my parents were plaintiffs. But that's all out of the way now, so I guess I'd best get oan it!

Thanx. I was going to activate tomorrow, but can wait for you, at least on anything that should be done pre-activation. I think the only thing in that category is the changes I just made to QC 125. Things like NY border points, and whether to add more QC 138 segments in far eastern Quebec, can be addressed post-activation.

[yakra]

Responding to items brought up in this thread, and stuff I noticed in the process. Not doing any full-fledged in-depth review of course.

QC185/TCH
...
 - is the QC185/A-85 point in the right place? Is this one-point-per-interchange

Assuming you mean A-85_S, it's that we decided in CHM days after the painful Arnprior experience with ON 17/ON 417 to end Canadian freeways at the last interchange, unless there is an intersection point where we could place the end (as we did with the other A-85 segment, where there is a Fin A-85 sign at 3e Rang). There is signage indicating that A-85 restarts before sortie (exit) 47 in St-Louis-du-Ha! Ha! But there is no intersection between there and ChSav. ChSav has signage indicating that QC 185 extends east of there, and A-85 doesn't end there, for now.

That all being said, it looks as if Exit 47 would be better served as a "misbehaving parclo" to the west.

QC236: ChStLou_E -> ChStLou_N?
QC309: Is ChLaj semi-important or likely to be used by travelers? If not, Chemin du Rubis to the east would do a better job of shaping.
QC340: The hyphenation at BoulCitJeu_E makes things a little quirky, but I think Si's original recommendation of BoulCiteJeu_E is arguably a better option.
QC342: MteeBStTho -> something else
QC344: add point at BoulGau as leads to A-640 exit 26

QC360
 - QC138_A, QC138_B, QC138_C, QC138_D -> QC138_Que, QC138_W, QC138_E, QC138_Che ?

Despite the change having already been made, IMO with these point all connecting to the same chopped route, _A _B _C _D might be the less ambiguous option.

QC366: *OldA-5_S -> *OldA-5
QC369: RueSei is placed on Avenue Sainte-Therese rather than QC369.

QC395
 - point for 1reAv in Amos (links to QC109/QC111 point)

At first I thought that was a typo, but nope, it's signed that way!
Looks like premier and première have their own suffixes, not unlike English's "st" (& "nd" & "rd") vice the usual "th".

QC138Mon
 - USA/CAN is slightly off (also NY30)

The point is a bit N of the border per OSM, and a bit S per ESRI.
What do NYS shapefiles have to say?
The MilepointRoute2015 and Cities_Towns shapefile sets are at different scales / different levels of precision. Consequently:
• The arc representing NY30 crosses the edge of the Constable polygon here, corresponding to where OSM has the border.
• The northernmost extent of the NY30 arc is here, fairly close to where the current waypoint is, but still a bit south of where ESRI has the border.
In light of all this, I'm fine with going no-build. Or I could change to something closer to OSM if Oscar wants to.

A-20(63) -> 4

Oh dear. And since this qualifies QC138 as a route with its own exit numbers, possibly A-20(64) -> 64(20)?
Does this happen elsewhere in the system?

Add a point in the middle of the rectangle bounded by Rue Notre-Dame Centre, Rue Saint-Georges, Rue Royale, Rue Saint-Roch -- leads to A-40 exit 199 and helps clarify the routing in the area a bit.

- QC360_A /_B /_C /_D -> town suffixes or (B and C could be directional suffixes as concurrency split)?

See above

QC221:
 - NY276 -> USA/CAN

GMSV indicates NY 276 takes a sharp turn east just south of the border, as confirmed by the border monument and fence just north of the road, rather than connecting to QC 221 (you can cross the border at that point, but on about 0.01 mi. of pavement that isn't part of NY 276) . I would rename and relocate the NY276 point, so it doesn't synch with the corresponding QC221 point for NY 276. @yakra, do you agree, and think the QC221 point should be renamed?

I see that you've made the the corresponding changes on the QC side, and marked a FP NMP. The point on NY276 isn't off by much, but can still use a tweak, so it gets one. I can take care of changing the nmpfps.log entry along with. Got some other stuff to flag in NY anyway. Can't find a known road name for this short connector to QC221 -- so with a quick check of the manual, it looks like ToQC221 is the way to to go.
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3914

Also, the points for the north end of US 11/south end of QC 223 look off relative to the border as shown in OSM, and to a lesser extent in ESRI (including its satellite imagery) and HERE. Do shapefile data support leaving the border point as is?

Similar situation to NY30. I get coords here and here.

Ferry names: I'd say, if there's no official name to use, just the unadorned Fry is sufficient.

Speaking of that area, I noticed QC 105 has separate points for A-5(28) and ChValWak.  Shouldn't that be a one point per interchange situation?  Someone traveling northbound on QC 105 wouldn't even drive the road between those points.

For whatever reason (maybe someone who traveled QC 105 before A-5 was extended that far), someone is using the ChValWak waypoint.

If there were another numbered route involved here I might think differently, but... I'd recommend folding ChValWak into A-5(28) as an AltLabel.
The traveler is 7_8, whose clinched segment leads north.

BTW, there are possible isolated segments of QC 138 in La Romaine (at least from the harbor to the airport), Chevery, and Pakuashipi, some of which reportedly are signed and one of which (Chevery) is in OSM. Everything I've seen in MTQ online data shows route numbers for those segments other than 00138, so I'm inclined to treat them as "future 138" at most. @yakra, do the most recent shapefiles say anything more?

Nothing more recent. Still working with data from 2016.
GeoBase seems to have slowed down big time on, if not forgotten entirely, updating the NRN shapefiles. NS & PE were updated in 2018; everything else...
(Maybe I gotta dig up a new link? I've tried occasionally, with little success...)

-- Any comments on how I dealt with the messy A-25/A-440/QC 125 interchange in Laval?

I made sure to have a look in the HDX before reading the rest of your thoughts, to see what solution I'd lean towards without any pre-bias.
Aye Caramba.

Moving the waypoint to the A-25/QC 125 intersection from the middle of the A-25/A-440 triangle better reflects that the interchange serves QC 125 and not just A-25 and A-440, with direct ramp connections from QC 125 to A-25.

My first thoughts were that this might lend itself to a 1PPI solution. The triangle, along with the QC125 at-grade junction thrown into the mix.

But I'm not sure about routing QC 125 via A-440(34),

What struck me was the angle of the final segment of A-440. Judging by a numbered Exit 34 being where it is (I'm not checking GMSV right now) it looks like A-440 heads south on the west leg, from the A-25 split at the N end of the triangle. The route trace looks awkward, but in a sense checks out in that A-440 continues to A-25, and that's where A-25's point is.

when northbound QC 125 traffic goes east of that point (southbound QC 125 traffic has to go through that point, to connect to the QC 125/A-440 concurrency).

Nonetheless I think 1PPI may be the cleanest -- a "correct by way of vagueness" -- solution here.
With the Masson/Marcel-Villeneuve intersection right on one edge of the central triangle, you could let this weight your judgment of where the triangle's center is.
I took the I-97@7 example to extremes, and considered where traffic would go if the thru lanes weren't available, if one were to exit & re-enter the highway. The inside-the-triangle, left-turn-ish movements would pass thru that intersection. The outside-the-triangle, right-turn-ish movements would be a little ways out on each leg.

There's another situation like this in TX, with a central ramp triangle, and a junction of at-grade routes right on one of its legs.
The main difference is there's not the added complication of a surface route joining/leaving a freeway via some funky ramps that QC has. (But there's still access between all the things because frontage roads.)
Here's how I handled it:

ISTR pondering whether to slide the point a bit more SSW, and could just as easily have done so.


I've yet to read http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=2038.msg18656#msg18656 onwards. Done. No further comments.