Author Topic: usaal: Alabama State Routes  (Read 72556 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline froggie

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 810
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 11:28:36 pm
Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
« Reply #120 on: March 18, 2022, 09:17:08 pm »
US 43 is not concurrent with I-359.  It follows the service roads.  This is why I did things the way I did.  Though under 1PPI I could arguably truncate 359 to 15th.

Offline Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3157
  • Last Login:Today at 04:26:27 pm
Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
« Reply #121 on: March 19, 2022, 10:41:58 am »
Yeah I did not think about that, but you are right.  One thing to mention about your last update is that an updates entry is needed for the deletion of US 231 BUS in Ozark.  I presume that you overlooked it due to updates not being needed for the AL Routes since they are still in preview.

Offline mikeandkristie

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
  • Last Login:June 11, 2024, 01:57:05 am
Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
« Reply #122 on: March 19, 2022, 12:54:05 pm »
I think something weird just happened with AL 41.  It looks like the US80_E point got moved causing a weird zigzag through Selma at the northern end.  Attaching a screenshot.  I think it moved from the green arrow up to the red arrow.  So, it shoots up to US 80 going around the north of town and then back down to the next point almost mirroring the business route.  I spotted it when I saw our mileage jump on AL 41.  We went around Selma on US 80 and not through town which is how I spotted it.

Mike


Offline yakra

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4244
  • Last Login:Today at 01:15:49 pm
  • I like C++
Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
« Reply #123 on: March 19, 2022, 01:49:52 pm »
I'm with michih on the 29/80/81 item. The midpoint of the couplet can just be collapsed into a single point with US29_S (that's the one that has the graph connection with AL81 anyway), call it US29/81 maybe, and give it whatever AltLabels it needs.
Sri Syadasti Syadavaktavya Syadasti Syannasti Syadasti Cavaktavyasca Syadasti Syannasti Syadavatavyasca Syadasti Syannasti Syadavaktavyasca

Offline michih

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4618
  • Last Login:Today at 03:23:12 pm
Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
« Reply #124 on: March 19, 2022, 02:59:07 pm »
Quote
  • Are US231, US411 and AL23 wps in Ashville intended? I think so, let me know and I mark it FP.

Yes, this is another crazy situation where the routes follow the long way around the courthouse block.  This should be a FP.

Quote
  • AL176 has two shaping points +x02 and +x03 close together. Is it intended? If so, I can mark it FP.
  • Same at AL25 +x25 and +x26, intended?

Yes.  In both of these cases, I was trying to avoid the "sharp corner" error due to the switchbacks on both routes (especially 176).

Quote
  • AL167 wps AL/FL and CR9 seem to be intended too. Mark FP?

Yes.  Here, the intersection is not at but is just north of the state line...too far away to consider both one-and-the-same.

NMPs marked FP: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/5670/commits/56bee5f8a8e3435d534fbb94b667c407955c1eae

Offline SSOWorld

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 242
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 10:18:47 pm
Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
« Reply #125 on: March 20, 2022, 06:47:26 am »
US 43 is not concurrent with I-359.  It follows the service roads.  This is why I did things the way I did.  Though under 1PPI I could arguably truncate 359 to 15th.
Should we move beltway 8 off the Sam Houston Tollway in Texas then? ???
Completed:
* Systems: DC, WI
* by US State: AK: I; AZ: I; AR: I; DE: I; DC: I, US, DC; HI: I; IL: I; IN: I*; IA: I, KS: I; MD: I, MA: I, MI: I; MN: I; MO: I; NE: I; NJ, I; ND: I; OH: I; OK: I; PA: I; RI: I; SD: I; WA: I; WV: I; WI: I,US,WI;

*Previously completed

Offline mapcat

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1663
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 06:51:36 pm
Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
« Reply #126 on: March 20, 2022, 09:11:28 am »
  • Removed BUSINESS 231 in Ozark.  2019 GMSV shows no more signage along 231.

Premature? I drove it last week, and it's still signed in Ozark, although the signage is still missing along US 231.
Clinched:

Offline formulanone

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 131
  • Last Login:June 12, 2024, 09:41:11 pm
Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
« Reply #127 on: March 20, 2022, 10:04:50 am »
I think something weird just happened with AL 41.  It looks like the US80_E point got moved causing a weird zigzag through Selma at the northern end.  Attaching a screenshot.  I think it moved from the green arrow up to the red arrow.  So, it shoots up to US 80 going around the north of town and then back down to the next point almost mirroring the business route.  I spotted it when I saw our mileage jump on AL 41.  We went around Selma on US 80 and not through town which is how I spotted it.

Mike

I just saw that, too.

https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?units=miles&r=al.al041

Looks like the point was accidentally connected to AL 22 instead of at US 80, as before.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2022, 10:06:51 am by formulanone »

Offline froggie

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 810
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 11:28:36 pm
Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
« Reply #128 on: March 20, 2022, 10:24:11 am »
  • Leaving 80/29/81 as-is.  Someone going from SB 81 to WB 80 would not have that "graph connection" to 29.
  • Fixed the bad coordinate on 41.
  • Clarified the northern endpoint of I-359 as 15th St under 1PPI.
  • Signage isn't "missing" on 231 for the Ozark business route.  Per an upthread commenter, it has been removed.   I interpreted this as the business route no longer exists.  As that commenter also noted, remaining signage in Ozark can be explained by the fact that cities in Alabama are not unlike Tennessee (or Mississippi) when it comes to (lack of) removing old/outdated signage.

Offline Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3157
  • Last Login:Today at 04:26:27 pm
Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
« Reply #129 on: March 23, 2022, 08:39:21 am »
I am linking to this post related to AL 59 here since I think it got lost in the shuffle (https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=4817.msg26957#msg26957).

Offline froggie

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 810
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 11:28:36 pm
Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
« Reply #130 on: March 23, 2022, 10:01:00 am »
^ In the queue.  I did lose it in the previous shuffle.  Not a big enough change to where I feel the need to do more than just update the intersection coordinates.

Offline Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3157
  • Last Login:Today at 04:26:27 pm
Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
« Reply #131 on: March 24, 2022, 07:01:27 am »
I'll post any further comments I have for Alabama in this post for now.  It may be a few days (if not longer) until I finish updating everything in my list file.  (I will probably also do a general post for MS later as well, but obviously that is super low priority.)

I-65:  I think that 260A should be 261D.  Also 260 maybe should be 260B.

I-165:  I think that US90/98Trk is a better label for the south end than plain US90.  I try to avoid using truck labels for the most part (especially with how often truck routes appear and disappear in PA), but using plain US90 here implies to my brain that there is no concurrency with I-165.

I-459:  23 needs to be recentered. (added 4/26/2022)

US 11:
1.  BlkWarPkwy>-JoeMalPkwy.  (also affects US 43)
2.  AcadDr>-AcaDr.  (also affects AL 5)
3.  VisLandPkwy>-AlaAvePkwy (also affects AL 5)
4.  CentSt>-CenSt.  (also affects US 78)

US 31: 
1.  I-459(13B)>-I-459.  (added 3/31/2022) 
2.  BroMedCenDr needs to be shortened.
3.  The ALT72 labels should be US72Alt instead.  (added 6/29/2022)

US 43/AL 69:  9thSt should be StiBlvd.  Could UnivBlvd be shortened to UniBlvd?

US 45: 
1.  PleAv>-PleAve 
2.  I-65(8 )>-I-65.
3.  BelRd>-UniBlvd.
4.  AL17_N>-AL17.  (since for TM purposes we are not considering AL 17 as concurrent with US 45)

US 78: 
1.  Should CR12_W and CR12 be merged into one point?  (also affects AL 5)
2.  PrattHwy should be PraHwy.  (also affects AL 5)
3.  8thAveBir>-8thAve (also affects AL 5)
4.  24thSt>-24thSt_S.

US 82: 
1.  CR47_Tus>-CR47.
2.  CR30_Tus should maybe be RiceMineRd as I did not see any CR 30 shields in the area.  I did not look at the other CR 30s.
3.  CampusDr>-CamDr.
4.  I-59(73)>-I-20/59.  (added 3/31/2022)

US 90:  I-65(1)>-I-65.  (added 4/5/2022)

US 278: I-59(183)>-I-59.

US 280: I-459 (19)>-I-459.

US 431:
1.  EBroadSt should at least be shortened.
2.  I-59(183)>-I-59.

AL 5:
1.  FinBlvd>-AL378.
2.  I-22(85)>-I-22 (added 3/31/2022, only one interchange between AL 5 and I-22)

AL 217:  HigBlvd>-UniBlvd.

AL 261:  CR17/52/91 needs to be shortened.

AL 269: 
1.  5PoiWestAve, NewMulLoopRd, AllShoCreRd, and PumCenCutOffRd should be shortened.
2.  AdaEnsRd>-CR65.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2022, 08:11:04 am by Markkos1992 »

Offline ntallyn

  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 332
  • Last Login:June 09, 2024, 11:07:02 am
Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
« Reply #132 on: July 10, 2022, 08:01:47 pm »
I saw some signs for AL4 in downtown Birmingham this weekend. I'm assuming it's not included in the HB because it's completely concurrent with US11 or US78?

Offline formulanone

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 131
  • Last Login:June 12, 2024, 09:41:11 pm
Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
« Reply #133 on: July 12, 2022, 11:50:28 am »
AL 66 All good.

AL 67
US72ALT/20_W -> US72Alt/20_W
US72ALT/20_E -> US72Alt/20_E
CR41-> DanRd (Like Madison County, Morgan County rarely posts county roads, most shields do not exist.)
CR35 -> EvaRd


 

Offline formulanone

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 131
  • Last Login:June 12, 2024, 09:41:11 pm
Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
« Reply #134 on: September 27, 2022, 05:54:52 pm »
AL 14
BUS80/22 -> AL22/80BusSel

AL 68
411BUS -> US411BusCen
...or use US411_N for consistency, because US411_S is in use?

AL 69
US43 -> US43_A
CR20/48 -> CR20 (no CR48 signage visible, only 20)
US43_S -> US43_B
CR44_Mar (I think this is an unnecessary point)
US43_N -> US43_C
5thSt -> RiceMineRd (consistent with AL 297 and with signage on US 82)
Recommend adding a point for MouPkwy, just north of CR50 in Moundville, which is a direct route to a point of interest.

AL 70, AL 71, AL 73
All good.

AL 74
The standalone portion is fine, but do we care about the 165-mile concurrency with US 278?

AL 75
For Albertville: Recommend removing OneCutOffRd, but including nearby Turnpike Road, a busier road.

AL 76
all good

AL 77
CR53 -> CR053 (this might be signed "053", as per most Chambers County signage, but can't tell from GSV)
...otherwise, all good.

AL 79, AL 81
all good.
« Last Edit: September 27, 2022, 07:12:20 pm by formulanone »