IA: US52 IA3 IA32 (Southwest Arterial)

[SSOWorld]

https://www.telegraphherald.com/news/breaking/article_4d5f17ca-2bdf-531c-8199-6859e6d0be09.html?utm_source=thonline&utm_medium=click_source&utm_campaign=mostrecent

The road is now open.  @Highway63 - I believe you have the route changes and deletions in a thread in the 6Month+ board?

[SSOWorld]

I went "Dubuquing" yesterday and drove it - at night the two end interchanges have their bridge trusses lit.  The road is signed US-52, as expected.  The visuals of the Jurisdiction transfer have not happened yet, as expected (meaning that the SW Arterial is "segmented" for now.  I do not expect the transfer to take place by this weekend since the lone interchange on the new road is still closed and being completed.  Said exit is numbered 49 and there are no at-grades except the breezewoods at either end.

https://www.cityofdubuque.org/1861/Transfer-of-Jurisdiction

[Highway63]

The good news is, I sent files to Jim on Sunday, in expectation it would soon happen.

The bad news is, I am otherwise preoccupied with an electrical problem you may or may not have heard about.

Many US 52 signs had already been put on IA 136 on a permanent basis because 52/3 is closed east of Luxemburg for construction. So, sort of, part of 52 was rerouted in advance.

[michih]

The good news is, I sent files to Jim on Sunday, in expectation it would soon happen.

The files are still on hold: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/tree/master/hwy_data/IA/_later

[Jim]

The good news is, I sent files to Jim on Sunday, in expectation it would soon happen.

The files are still on hold: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/tree/master/hwy_data/IA/_later

@michih do you want to put these into place to go live?

[michih]

sure, I could but I'm not sure that the files are fine. What's about exit 49?

@Highway63 has changed: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/blob/master/hwy_data/IA/_later/_README.txt

[yakra]

IMO, best practice is to have changes that result in a coherent revision history for the files involved.
So, rather than deleting the existing files and moving the new ones into the folders (git mv), better to copy+paste the data and delete the _later/ file. (Or just replace the file normally, so it looks like a regular revision, rather than using git mv...)

Nearby, I noticed that on US20, CRX49 has been upgraded to an interchange, and could be repositioned slightly.

[michih]

"Please hold the Southwest Arterial stuff in reserve for about a month" means: DON'T replace the files NOW.

[Jim]

Sorry, should have said I got an email from Jeff:

"Sounds like the Southwest Arterial stuff is good to go - it opened a little earlier than expected."

[michih]

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/4123/commits/db2d2ee5e4dbf59825dd0d41a214f2f718b0733a

There is no "exit 49" though. Not marking solved.

[SSOWorld]

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/4123/commits/db2d2ee5e4dbf59825dd0d41a214f2f718b0733a

There is no "exit 49" though. Not marking solved.

Capisce?

You're wondering about whether Exit 49 exists? It does, at NEngRd. Probably depends on Highway63's rules on exit numbers on his data.  I field checked it Monday and Wednesday.  It's signed for Cascade Road/English Mill Road (the two roads that N. English Rd connects to)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/ssoworld/50249842412/ sign capture on Wednesday.

[michih]

You're wondering about whether Exit 49 exists?

Nope! I meant that the data set does not have an exit 49 but it was mentioned that anything is signed as exit 49 now. This needs to be checked by Highway63 and the wpt files might need one more change.

[yakra]

"Please hold the Southwest Arterial stuff in reserve for about a month" means: DON'T replace the files NOW.

If this is in response to my post immediately before, about revision history, what I mean is that, now that we're ready to move the content of the _later file to replace the canonical file, yadda yadda looks like the best way to do it.

Edit: Looks like it was handled properly.

[michih]

[Jim]

You're wondering about whether Exit 49 exists?

Nope! I meant that the data set does not have an exit 49 but it was mentioned that anything is signed as exit 49 now. This needs to be checked by Highway63 and the wpt files might need one more change.

It looks like Iowa is not yet using exit numbers on any of its usaus routes that have them, so this is at least consistent with the status of the remainder of the system within the state.