PA: I-70/US 30 Concurrency in Breezewood

[Markkos1992]

My edits from 9/10/2018:  https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2210
Old CHM thread:  http://clinched.s2.bizhat.com/clinched-ftopic2252.html

Posted here for further discussion.

What I Did: (no 147 label)
I-70:
148 >- US30_E
147 >- US30_W

US 30:
I-70(148) >- I-70_E
I-70(147) >- I-70_W

What I Would Do (including 147 Label and breaking list files):
I-70:
147 >- US30_E
148 >- 147

US 30:
I-70(148) >- I-70_E or I-70(147)
I-70(147) >- I-70_W

Rickmastfan67 also mentioned a 147A option to go forward with, but I am not in favor of such an option due to 147 not technically being there.

[rickmastfan67]

verruckte_dan has now removed the '147' point from his list file for I-70.  However, the PIU list still claims it's being used, and found out that 1 other user is using it, jackgaynor.  I'll try to send that user a message via GitHub, as they update their list via it.  If we can get that last instance of 147 cleared, we can then revive '147' in the proper location on I-70's file.  Then work with others to see if we can clear the 'I-70(147)' point in people's files next for US-30 to revive it in the correct location.

Baby steps, but progress on this subject.

[vdeane]

Then work with others to see if we can clear the 'I-70(147)' point in people's files next for US-30 to revive it in the correct location.

Baby steps, but progress on this subject.

It will be removed from mine the next time I upload it (probably Columbus Day or when the I-95/PA Turnpike interchange opens).

[Markkos1992]

Then work with others to see if we can clear the 'I-70(147)' point in people's files next for US-30 to revive it in the correct location.

Baby steps, but progress on this subject.

It will be removed from mine the next time I upload it (probably Columbus Day or when the I-95/PA Turnpike interchange opens).

Of course I forgot that I had to remove it from my own list file. 

[rickmastfan67]

The '147' point for I-70 is now no-more.  mrpoodlepants, was the last user using it and he just updated his list file to remove it.

So, it can now be properly 'revived' in the correct location.

[Markkos1992]

F

The '147' point for I-70 is now no-more.  mrpoodlepants, was the last user using it and he just updated his list file to remove it.

So, it can now be properly 'revived' in the correct location.

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2235

Note that US 30 still needs to be fixed.

[vdeane]

I'll likely be updating my .list file to clear the point when the changes for the I-95/PA Turnpike go live.  But don't worry about me.  If my .list breaks, it won't actually affect anything since that line consists only of the overlap with I-70.

[rickmastfan67]

F

The '147' point for I-70 is now no-more.  mrpoodlepants, was the last user using it and he just updated his list file to remove it.

So, it can now be properly 'revived' in the correct location.

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2235

Note that US 30 still needs to be fixed.

I'll try later today to see how many people are currently using that label and attempt to contact them.

If they are only using it for the multiplex with I-70 there, then they can be safely ignored since I-70 would pick it up even if we break their list files.

[yakra]

I think contacting people for what's essentially a minor point fix is going a bit overboard (Even if I was kinda advocating for such myself upthread  ).
How often do we want to take up time doing this?
I think I-70_E & I-70_W are fine for US30. Heck, the exit number isn't even signed from US30 itself, is it?

[Markkos1992]

I think I-70_E & I-70_W are fine for US30. Heck, the exit number isn't even signed from US30 itself, is it?

No, but I did add a point on US 30 at Breezewood Rd to note the posted way to go to US 30 WB from I-70 (Exit 149).

[Markkos1992]

Did we want to leave this as-is with what I originally did or keep trying to save the exit numbers for US 30?  I just checked this and saw that both I-70(148) and I-70(147) are still in-use.

[yakra]

IMO I-70_W and I-70_E are adequate given the circumstances.

On an unrelated note, I just noticed that the US30 file has a vanilla I-76 point in Irwin, which should probably be relabeled I-76(67).

[rickmastfan67]

IMO I-70_W and I-70_E are adequate given the circumstances.

Yeah, I'm starting to agree with that myself as well.

[dave1693]

On an unrelated note, I just noticed that the US30 file has a vanilla I-76 point in Irwin, which should probably be relabeled I-76(67).

Agreed. I-76(342) and I-76(343) exist.

[Markkos1992]

For I-76(67) on US 30: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2267
 
Otherwise leaving alone and marking as solved.