So I finally got the chance this past weekend to get out to Eastern Washington and field check the various Historic US 10 routes. I can say that they are all pretty well signed, with signs at the exits from I-90 where Historic US 10 branches off of I-90 as well as reassurance markers along the routes. So here are my comments.
US10HisFre:Since this is signed from I-90 at Exit 143, I think this route should be extended from the intersection with Silica Road to I-90. The only thing I'm unsure about is whether or not we want to include this part of Silica Road given that it was never part of US 10 in the first place.
US10HisRit:Can confirm that it does indeed start at the exit with Rd Q NE; there is a sign from I-90 EB at Exit 184.
Needs an additional waypoint at the intersection of Baseline Road and Road Q NE (just south of the I-90 interchange).
Also, east of the WA21 waypoint, (I just submitted a
pull request to add a corresponding waypoint to the WA 21 wpt file) there needs to be an additional shaping point so that the line for this doesn't cross over the line for I-90. (or you can just add a visible waypoint at Wahl Road)
The route seems to peter out at Paha Packard Road; there is no sign indicating that it turns south onto this road and then makes a left turn onto Heineman Road. In fact, Heineman Road is a gravel road, which is a clear indication that it was never part of US 10 or it would have been paved years ago! So US10HisRit needs to be split into two; the eastern section would start at I-90 Exit 220 and should still be named US10HisRit, but I'm not totally sure what to call the western section since there are no towns or anything along it. My idea is to call it US10HistSch since it runs on Schrag Road through Adams County, and there's a tiny locality named
Schrag on Google Maps (and OSM) located sort of along the route.
In Ritzville, the route does indeed start up again at exit 220. It is actually signed better than I-90 BL; the business loop has no signage on I-90 (whereas the historical route does), and I would have gotten rid of it except that I saw two signs for it in the town of Ritzville. I know this is unrelated, but I guess this qualifies as being enough signage to keep the business route...what do you guys think?
Also part of my
pull request is for the aforementioned I-90 BL to fix the NMP at the I-90BL_E waypoint at Schoessler Rd.
Finally, this route should extend beyond the western city limits of Sprague; there is a sign for this route in Sprague, and one just east of Sprague (I filmed a dashcam video on this route; I'd be happy to post some stills from my video if you need me to). There should be a waypoint added at B Street in Sprague since it connects to WA 23, and the route should end at I-90 exit 254.
US10HisChe: This route looks good to me; it is indeed signed.
Historic US 10 is signed in George, Washington.
I know I'm quoting an old post, but do you have any proof of this? Do you know what the route would be? I didn't see any signs as I was driving by George on I-90.
Also, I noticed that there are signs for Historic US 10 through Moses Lake; a sign can be seen from
I-90 EB at Exit 176, and GMSV shows signs for this route along the same route as the I-90 BL in Moses Lake. So basically, you can just do a copypasta of the I-90 BL Moses Lake wpt file.
I know this is a lot of things that need to be changed in Washington. Si, do you want to be the one making these changes, or are you okay with me doing these edits? I'm totally fine if you want to do the edits since you're drafting this system.
And finally, I haven't really commented on whether or not to keep or get rid of this system or not. I am totally fine with it staying. I see this as being akin to Interstate business loops, which aren't really officially defined by the state DOT, at least not in Washington, but I'm not sure about other states. In both cases the issue is that with no official governmental source defining where these routes go, it means that you have to have the route be really well signed (i.e. more than just 1-2 signs somewhere along the route). I'd say that these routes just require more signage than an officially defined state or US route, and that if there aren't sufficient signs to enable a driver to follow a historic route, then delete the route from the system.
