NJ: NJ 68 label correction and point request in Fort Dix area

[oscar]

The south endpoint, within Fort Dix (now part of a "joint base" with other military facilities), needs a label correction. Fort Dix Rd. was rerouted north of the Fort Dix main gate, and no longer enters the base, so the current FortDixRd label doesn't work. Suggest a rename to GenCir, PemWriRd, or some other road intersecting the circle.

I would like a waypoint for the new intersection of NJ 68 and Fort Dix Rd. (also CR 616, and both are signed at the intersection -- I suggest CR616 as the new waypoint name, so FortDixRd can remain a hidden alt label for the current south endpoint). That is shown in OSM. It is the last chance for travelers to leave NJ 68 before entering the main Fort Dix gate, except a turnoff to the visitor center next to and outside the gate. It also is where I had to turn off NJ 68, since my spur-of-the-moment request for a temporary pass to enter the base was denied (basically, I needed both a reason to visit the base and someone to sponsor my entry -- I've had an easier time with some other Army bases).

There is a milemarker 0.5, north of the relocated Fort Dix Rd., and the main gate. It is only about 0.3 mile north of Fort Dix Rd., so that isn't the south endpoint. Mile 0 might be at or just past the main gate, and could be at General Circle (about 0.25 mile south of Fort Dix Rd.) where we have the south endpoint. There also is no END sign before the main gate (don't know what signage is past the gate -- GMSV imagery stops just a few feet past the gate). I suggest leaving the south endpoint where it is.

[yakra]

Shapefiles have the end at General Circle, so the existing coords are good. Looks like Pemberton Wrightstown Rd is also CR616, so how about CR616_W & CR616_E for the labels?

[froggie]

Mile 0 is at General Circle.

Agree with adding a CR616 point, but keeping the existing southern endpoint.

[Duke87]

The history here, for anyone unfamiliar, is thus:

There used to not be any gates on CR616 or NJ68, the general public was permitted to drive through Fort Dix using these roads. This changed shortly after 9/11 - a gate was placed across NJ 68, and CR616 was rerouted away from the circle in order to force any traffic entering the base to pass through the same gate.

In spite of these physical changes and access restrictions, neither designation has ever officially been truncated or moved, and jurisdiction over these roadways has never been transferred (per the SLDs).

Thus, to clinch NJ 68, one must either turn off/around at the last opportunity outside the gate and call it good (which is what I did), or gain access to Fort Dix. Oscar's experience suggests the latter is likely difficult to achieve for most people, although I do know at least one roadgeek who was successful at non-fudgy clinching NJ 68 by nonchalantly pulling up to the gate and telling the guard "oh I'm just going to the circle and turning around".

[yakra]

In spite of these physical changes and access restrictions, neither designation has ever officially been truncated or moved, and jurisdiction over these roadways has never been transferred (per the SLDs).

I see this in the shapefiles too. Where the relocation peels away from the original alignment, it's no longer flagged as a 6xx-series route.

[yakra]

This one slipped through the cracks.
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3436
Oscar, I see you've preemptively added a couple list lines.
NJ NJ68 CR616_W US206 will be the new line to use.
NJ NJ68 CR616 US206 will still be a .log file error.

[yakra]

Worth noting that the new CR661_E and CR661_W are the first NJ6xx labels in the usanj system (usaus & usanp each had 2).
All other NJ6xx intersections use local road names.
There are ~1100 points that could be potentially renamed, depending on how we do the searching. Many will be false positives, and for many of the true positives the route will be unsigned, necessitating a local road name anyway.
for w in */*.wpt; do clear; grep -H -f ~/TravelMapping/devel/nj6xx_nearby3.urls $w; echo -n $w": "; grep -f ~/TravelMapping/devel/nj6xx_nearby3.urls $w | cut -f1 -d' ' | tr '\n' ' '; echo; echo -n Open $w'? (y/n)'; read p; if [[ $p = y ]]; then pluma $w; fi; done
-> 4
This is pretty close to zero priority, but leaving this topic open.

[michih]

This is pretty close to zero priority, but leaving this topic open.

But the topic was marked solved. By accident?

[oscar]

This is pretty close to zero priority, but leaving this topic open.

But the topic was marked solved. By accident?

By me. since I opened the topic, and my point request has been fulfilled. yakra can reopen, if he wants to do point relabels unrelated to the issues I raised.

[rickmastfan67]

Is this thread fully completed?  Just trying to mark some old threads (2+ years old since last post) as 'solved' so they can be moved to the other section.

[yakra]

Left this open as a reminder to look at the results of the shell script in red text in my last post.
It's not very useful though for those counties that don't use 6xx routes.
Signed, unsigned, yadda yadda... I'll just stick with the existing convention of using local road names.
Looking that the results of that script & trying to GMSV every last jct is just a waste of time. Hell with it.