Author Topic: usaar: Arkansas state highways  (Read 25612 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mapcat

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1023
  • Last Login:October 24, 2020, 06:57:06 pm
Re: usaar: Arkansas state highways
« Reply #90 on: May 14, 2020, 03:43:23 pm »
AR980* "Arpt" labels should be changed
I'd still like to review, if not the routes themselves, the discussion in this thread. Sorry that I've still not gotten around to that. :(

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3870

I'll hold off on activating until you're ready.
Clinched:

Offline jwood.ok

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Last Login:July 18, 2020, 10:33:53 pm
Re: usaar: Arkansas state highways
« Reply #91 on: May 23, 2020, 02:20:23 pm »
I saw there were changes to AR 12 out to the West, but the section from AR45 over to AR23 seems to have disappeared.  Was that intentional?

Offline mapcat

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1023
  • Last Login:October 24, 2020, 06:57:06 pm
Re: usaar: Arkansas state highways
« Reply #92 on: May 23, 2020, 02:42:14 pm »
Nope, that was a copy-paste error on my part. Thanks for catching it. https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3909
Clinched:

Offline yakra

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2851
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 09:32:01 pm
Re: usaar: Arkansas state highways
« Reply #93 on: September 28, 2020, 07:02:35 pm »
Quote
140: the piece east of US 61 doesn't make much sense as part of the same segment, and it's mileposted from south to north, with signs both north (south end) and east (north end); maybe split as 140Osc
I'm almost convinced to go along with you on this one because of the irrational shape of the route, but it goes against the guidelines I set and may or may not be worth making an exception. Anyone else have an opinion?
Worth an exception, IMO.
https://historicaerials.com/location/35.704914/-89.966869/T1984/16
Sure, it's not definitive, but there's an implication that 140 was carried on Semmes Ave, with that segment later downloaded. This would explain the S->N mileposting.
This sort of makes AR140 more of a discontinuous route than something that's concurrent but poorly signed.

AR186: The end at AlixLn checks out per shapefiles. OSM has the road plotted too far north though; see Esri WorldImagery.
AR189Ham: Would also go with HamLim.

94 continues north from AR340
Yes, but it's unsigned.
That seems like splitting hairs, since traffic on 94 itself has no indication the route ends at 340.
I get this argument. I see this sign as another one of these. Like they're just not bothering to sign a lame-duck route that only ends in another 100 yards at the state line. I could go either way on this one.

252/US 71: why the point at BroSt?
@yakra? I have no idea.
blame -> commit
This is a recentering of the original location of the AR252_W waypoint, which per HistoricAerials appears to have been accurate back when usaus was first drafted.

AR310Eno: Coords look a bit off at BayRd, unless there's evidence the jct has been recently reconfigured.

Quote
331: OldAR247 -> Hwy247 or RivRd?
It's signed as "Hwy 247" and since AR 247 probably used that path in the past, OldAR247 seems appropriate.
Confirmed old AR247.
While I normally tend toward "OldUS40" style labels, I think this one could wibble its wobble the other way. The kicker for me is that this road is signed as "Hwy 247" rather than "Old Hwy 247", so the "Old Route 40" scenario doesn't quite kick in. Since the road has a current posted name, we don;t quite make it the the "make up a name using the former name" point.

AR380Ogd: US71 -> US59/71
AR530: OldSCRd_N -> OldSCRd, since only one is included (unless... are we considering this a local-road multiplex?)

With the truncation of AR12, I'd be on the lookout to periodically check GMSV for signage disappearing from US71Bus, I-49 & US62. Though it may not happen soon if it does. In any case, It'd be my problem if I'm resuming maint of AR after usaar goes live. :)