usafl: Florida State Highways

[rickmastfan67]

FL19 on US441 is a pretty clear implied multiplex.

Still have it in one piece for now.

WShoBlvd, if we strictly apply the manual, would be WestShoBlvd. Necessary directional identifiers are abbreviated "normally": Nor/Sou/East/West. Though, how much do we really care about that rule these days? Not sue how wide it ever came into use in practive; I'm fine with WShoBlvd.

Yeah, sometimes rules need to 'evolve'. lol.

I'm not sure about the FL44 split; the TO shields would be enough to kick it up to implied multiplex level. My canonical example is NS2 via NS102.

But how long is the NS2 one?  This FL-44 one is 10+ miles.  There has to be limits to be honest.

Does usafl have its own standards on when there's an implied multiplex, as some systems do?

Mostly depends on how the signage is.  FDOT can be a tricky beast with all the 'hidden' routes under US/Interstate routes.  Pretty much have to decide on the fly.  Look @ FL-109.  I have it split into two parts.  GIS agrees with that, but there are 'TO' shields between the two parts.  Re-merge the two, or keep separate?  Same deal with FL-267 as it has 'TO' shields along FL-20.

I mean, how far are we going to go with 'implied'?  I mean, I can see it with super short segments sometimes, but the FL-44 one above is 10+ miles of 'TO' signage (which isn't as frequent as the US-441 shields along that 'gap'.  Sure, the GIS shows it being along US-441, but we're getting into dangerous territory here again on what's signed and what's not.  I took FORVER to try to get that all fixed up, and I'm not about to go back and just have to rebuild entire routes again with unsigned segments.

[oscar]

Does usafl have its own standards on when there's an implied multiplex, as some systems do?

usaca has no standard on implied multiplexes, other than that the implied route can follow only one signed route.

CA 1 has several multiplexes with US 101, one of them over 60 miles long, though I don't recall whether that or the others have some CA 1 signage alongside US 101 signage. There are other implied multiplexes here and there in rural areas, some of which are fairly long.

Alaska has one implied multiplex (the state's only multiplex), which is about 14 miles long.

[neroute2]

usaca has no standard on implied multiplexes, other than that the implied route can follow only one signed route.

http://travelmapping.net/hb/index.php?r=ca.ca016
http://travelmapping.net/hb/index.php?r=ca.ca099
Do these need to be split?

[neroute2]

320: MSStaPark -> ManSprSP?
345: CR345 -> CR332/345?
363: FL61A -> GaiAve
363: FL371 -> GaiSt? (still signed on SR 363, but no longer maintained, and no reassurance in the area)
366: FL371 is the new east end, and most signs have been removed (the only ones I can find are this old one on US 27 north and this left turn)
371: FL366 is the new north end. The only signs I can find beyond there are westbound reassurance at SR 61 and a trailblazer on northbound SR 363.
397: EAFBase -> EglAFB?
397eaf: EAFBase -> EglAFB? rename the file to 397egl?
399 is signed at least once, and begin/end state maintenance is posted.

[oscar]

usaca has no standard on implied multiplexes, other than that the implied route can follow only one signed route.

http://travelmapping.net/hb/index.php?r=ca.ca016
http://travelmapping.net/hb/index.php?r=ca.ca099
Do these need to be split?

Maybe 16, whose multiplex follows I-5 and US 50, and is poorly signed if at all.

99, IIRC that multiplex (also over shorter segments of I-5 and US 50) is reasonably well-signed.

I'll copy this over to the usaca thread, as a to-do list item.

[neroute2]

401: where does the name ChrColRd come from? How about CT5-10?
404: CR509 -> WicRd
408: should 11A be an alternate label for 10C?
415 should have a point at CR4162, which connects to I-4.
419/434: GarAve -> EagWindAve
435: I-4 needs recentering
435: CR526 -> OldWinGarRd (CR 526 isn't signed here)
50: CR435 -> HiaRd, CR431 -> PineHilRd (not signed here)

[neroute2]

500atav: FL500 -> US441
508: EddAllSt -> EddAllRd
528: move 4A west to OBT?
528: 20 is closed and 19 is open
540: JacLeeLn is an unposted gated driveway. Change to a shaping point?
540cyp: RegRd -> LegWay
563: HarBlvd_S -> BeaBlvd? or should it be moved farther south to about here per GIS?
566 should be reversed to go from west to east

[neroute2]

686: TerPkwy -> TerBlvd
693: CenAve -> CR150 (reassurance after you turn)
693: 38thAve -> CR184 (ditto)
708: OldDixHwy -> PBObaHwy
710: SilFoxLn -> FoxBroRd (the more major side)
713: TunFeeRd[sic] is a ramp with no street signs.
717: CR880 -> FL880 (it's signed correctly at this end)
732jen: BreDr is an apartment entrance with no sign
739: US41Bus_S -> FL82? I can't find any signage pointing US 41 Bus. along SR 82
776: OldEngd -> OldEngRd
780: extend east to FruRd_E (not CobRd; that's being realigned to the east)

[neroute2]

800: why is FroRd not east at the underpass?
807 ends at AirCen
811: isn't I-95 part of the FL786 interchange?
814: as of April 2019, it is still signed on US 1 and with a JCT assembly SR A1A; it we want to be consistent we should either restore this or truncate 845
818: NobHillRd -> 100thAve
842efl is gone from GIS, and signage seems to have been removed
845: GIS shows it being removed from Palm Beach County, which apparently happened in 2017, but it's still signed as of April 2019
850: GIS shows it's gone; as of April 2019, signs are still present at the east end, with at least one JCT assembly still at the west end
880 is signed as state at the east end but county at the west end
886: FloWay -> PortBlvd?

[neroute2]

924: 42nd/37thAveCon -> 42nd37thAveCon?
934: 81stSt and BayDr seem useless
944: NorMiaAve -> MiaAve
953: MirMile -> CorWay (more prominent on signs)
953: 42nd/37thAveCon -> 42nd37thAveCon?
986: still signed on US 1
994: CarBlvd -> 200thSt (more prominent on signs)
9336: KroAve -> 177thAve (more prominent on signs)
a1a: AtlAve -> CR4075
a1a: HighBriRd -> HigRd (one word on signs)
a1a: CDMarPkwy -> CamDelMar (Camino is the road type)
a1a: AnaRd -> AnaParkRd
a1a: Google shows that US1Bus_N has been realigned to match SanCarAve; Esri World Imagery shows it under construction but doesn't confirm the configuration
a1a: PerRd -> Gate5?
a1a: MayFry -> StJohRivFry
a1afer: MayFry -> StJohRivFry
a1afer: HugPark -> AlaBoatRamp
a1afer: MagSt -> MagLn
a1afer: PinPl -> PineGroPl
a1afor: FIFerDr -> TerIsle
a1afor: TerDr -> FLHIntAir?
a1afor: FL842 -> LasOlasBlvd
a1afor: CarReal -> CamReal
a1ansb: continue north along the ramps to US 1?
a1aver: SebISPark -> SebInlSP?
a1aver: GeoJKingBlvd -> GeoKingBlvd

[oscar]

Followups on the FL 44 split:

-- For the new FL 44 (DeLand), FLA1A => LiveOakSt, and synch it with the corresponding point in the A1A (New Smyrna Beach) file.

-- In California, I'm treating TO signs as good enough to take us out of "implied multiplex" territory. In response to neroute2's comment here, I kept a 9.6-mile multiplex on CA 99 in Sacramento, with adequate TO signs for travelers to follow the route over US 50 and I-5. CA 16 got split. The lack of any CA 16 signage on the longer supposed multiplex with I-5 and US 50 was just one of the reasons for that split. But if there had been TO CA 16 signage, and no other issues, I would not have split the route.

[rickmastfan67]

-- In California, I'm treating TO signs as good enough to take us out of "implied multiplex" territory.

That's what I'm trying to do as well unless it's insanely short.

[oscar]

-- In California, I'm treating TO signs as good enough to take us out of "implied multiplex" territory.

That's what I'm trying to do as well unless it's insanely short.

What I'm trying to do is for "TO" signs being enough to treat an 'implied multiplex" just like a regular multiplex, no matter how long (unless perhaps the gap between "TO" signs is so long that travelers would forget they were on a multiplex). One such example is I-41/US 41 in Wisconsin. where there are sometimes I-41/US 41 sign assemblies, but other stretches there are just I-41 markers and occasional signs telling US 41 travelers to follow I-41.

[neroute2]

Should Jacksonville's Mathews Expressway be added to usasf? It's got three interchanges.

us001altjac: JesSt has a separate interchange, and HaiSt should be moved north to the underpass.
us001bussta: see a1a for potential combining of SanCarAve and FLA1A_N
us019altstp: OldFL60 -> CleSt, OldUS19Alt -> FtHarAve
us019altstp: AldRd -> CR816 (signed on reassurance here)
us019altstp: FL582 -> TarAve
us027altper: JoshEze -> JoshEzeRd

[neroute2]

us041busbra: remove W suffixes; 8thAveW -> 14thSt?
us041busbra: FL 43 -> 10thSt
us041busfor: PonRd -> CR78A (there's reassurance after you turn)
us041bustam: remove E and W prefixes
us041bustam: is WilAve really important enough?
us041bustam: CR598 -> SliAve
us041bustam: EBirSt -> BirdSt
us041busven: GolDr -> GolfDr
us041busven: VenAveE -> VenAve
us090altpen: I-10(5) -> I-10
us098buspan: remove W prefixes
us098buspan: W11thSt -> CR28
us098buspan: BobLitRd -> Hwy22-A
us098buspan: BoaRacRd_E -> BoatRaceRd
us098buspen: AkcSt_S -> AlcSt_S
us098trkbro: US98_W -> US98_N, US98_E -> US98_S