PA 65: Lining up with I-79 and other issues between I-79 and I-279

[Markkos1992]

I am debating whether these should be lined up here.  I think that they should as the connections to PA 65 do not seem to truly follow a connection route but longer ramps, but the ramps to Deer Run Rd make me not 100% on this.

I would prefer just one point for the PA 65 TRUCK (McKees Rock) at this interchange, and lining them up would fix that concern.  The I-79 66A point would be unaffected.

The point would be here (via I-79):
66 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.518246&lon=-80.132872

[yakra]

I was unsure of this at first.
When I looked at the awkward end of PA65TrkMcK, that sold me. Simplicity at this endpoint is worthwhile.
Looking at the ramps again, I see a complete set of connections to/from the south (redundant with Kilbuck & Deer Run right in the mix, but free-flowing. If these weren't there, I may be more inclined to treat this differently). A bit of a nonstandard variant on this or this, with the ramps pushed mostly into one quadrant, and an overlapping 1/2 diamond thrown into the mix for fun. I say don't worry about Deer Run Rd; its ramps split from the PA65 ramps after they've already left the I-79 mainline, making it a pretty clear one-point-per-interchange case.

On board with this.

[Wadsteckel]

Since this is my home exit, I'll add my $0.02....

If you look at how PA65TrkMcK would connect back to PA65, the one point concurrent with I-79(66) should be plenty.  (BTW, there are no A/B designations at this exit, in either direction).  Trucks heading north on the truck route come on to the Neville Island Bridge, take exit 66 to PA65, and follow the ramp toward Sewickley.  Trucks heading south onto TruckPA65 would exit PA65 on the left side and follow signs for I-79 South (Washington) to get onto the Neville Island Bridge. 

The ramps to Deer Run are only to provide access to there and to Glendale, the small borough that has some residential locations within the ramps there. 

Hope this helps.   
-Ed S

[yakra]

If you look at how PA65TrkMcK would connect back to PA65, the one point concurrent with I-79(66) should be plenty.

Agreed.

(BTW, there are no A/B designations at this exit, in either direction).

True. Since the Kilbuckl St exit is > 0.5 mi from the other Exit 66 point, it gets a separate point ("double half interchanges"), and gets the 'A' tacked onto the end to differentiate.

[Markkos1992]

I am still planning to do this.  I just moved over to working on the US 219 corridor, which should go in the HB tonight.

[Markkos1992]

I am a little confused about the points on this part of PA 65 (minus the US 19 ones).  This is most specifically with the NorAve point (should maybe be at Juniata St where the frontage roads have U-Turn areas??).

[bejacob]

I just drove this section last weekend. The trouble is how the ramps to/from I-79 which are concurrent with the north end of PA65Trk work. When heading NB on I-79/PA65Trk, the exit ramp goes over PA65 and makes a U-turn to the intersection of PA65. There is signage on the exit ramp https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5186228,-80.1323899,3a,75y,33.33h,86.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZg6N4a_tcxPduB6WpmNPFQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I didn't see any signs for PA65Trk on the ramps entering SB I-79.

Believe it or not, the way it shows currently in the HB is accurate. It looks somewhat strange with that "hook" at the north end, but I'd suggest leaving it alone. Essentially what happens is that to transition from I-79 NB to PA65 or from PA65 to I-79 SB, you have to drive the segment of PA65Trk between I-79(65) and PA65_N which requires a u-turn in both cases.

[Markkos1992]

I merged the topics as bejacob responded in the thread on the other PA 65 points about lining it up with I-79.  That thread was supposed to be about the other points in Pittsburgh as stated in my post last night.

Believe it or not, the way it shows currently in the HB is accurate. It looks somewhat strange with that "hook" at the north end, but I'd suggest leaving it alone. Essentially what happens is that to transition from I-79 NB to PA65 or from PA65 to I-79 SB, you have to drive the segment of PA65Trk between I-79(65) and PA65_N which requires a u-turn in both cases.

I disagree here because you are still on the ramps to/from PA 65 as a longer loop instead of a u-turn.  There is definitely not a true connector route (as in the turnpike double trumpet interchanges) to a separate interchange.

If PA 65 TRUCK was not here, this would be a complete nonissue.  As with many of these other truck routes in PA, it will most likely be deleted after the weight-restricted bridge on PA 65 is replaced.

[bejacob]

If PA 65 TRUCK was not here, this would be a complete nonissue.  As with many of these other truck routes in PA, it will most likely be deleted after the weight-restricted bridge on PA 65 is replaced.

100% agree. If you decide the ramps are not part of PA65Trk, then there no problem. You could have one point where PA65, PA65Trk, and I-79 all intersect, that would be fine. I was just sharing how things are signed today particularly on these ramps. The whole interchange is odd in that it's not just a simple junction between I-79 and PA65. From WB PA65, the exit to I-79 NB requires a left exit which then goes under PA65 before joining I-79 at waypoint 66A. Where you exit I-79 depend on your direction of travel (either 66 or 66A). It's complicated, most likely do to the proximity of the I-79 bridge over the river.

Whatever the eventual solution, we'll be able to figure out how to adjust our list files.

[yakra]

Whatever the eventual solution, we'll be able to figure out how to adjust our list files.

This can most likely be handled with hidden AltLabels , with no changes to .lists necessary.

I am a little confused about the points on this part of PA 65 (minus the US 19 ones).  This is most specifically with the NorAve point (should maybe be at Juniata St where the frontage roads have U-Turn areas??).

Yeah, Juniata St looks better here.
Don't know what else specifically you may be questioning, but I think I'd leave everything else alone.
For example, that southbound onramp form California St? It's within the footprint of US19_N, feeds into the frontage road, and you don't enter the mainline till south of Juniata St. Not worth a new point IMO.

[Markkos1992]

I am a little confused about the points on this part of PA 65 (minus the US 19 ones).  This is most specifically with the NorAve point (should maybe be at Juniata St where the frontage roads have U-Turn areas??).

Yeah, Juniata St looks better here.
Don't know what else specifically you may be questioning, but I think I'd leave everything else alone.
For example, that southbound onramp form California St? It's within the footprint of US19_N, feeds into the frontage road, and you don't enter the mainline till south of Juniata St. Not worth a new point IMO.

I put the point there, but I named it BeaAve (Beaver Ave) for the SB Frontage Rd as the slip ramp back to PA 65 SB comes from there.

The California Ave ramps to the northwest of US 19 are within 0.5 miles so I did not add a point there.

[Markkos1992]

I am unsure when this may be submitted, but below is the current pull request in my branch.

https://github.com/Markkos1992/HighwayData/pull/115

[Markkos1992]

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2411