usaush: United States Historic US Routes

[compdude787]

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)

It looks like that this may have caused a duplicate label error on WA 21.

Oops, forgot to check this before submitting that pull request. I've changed the waypoint name: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/4715

[compdude787]

Si, you're okay with me making the changes I identified in a previous post to the historic US routes in Washington, right? Just wanted to check...

I also wanted to ask you about this:

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.

Was there a reason you didn't extend it all the way to I-90 on Silica Road, even though there are signs from the freeway?

[si404]

Si, you're okay with me making the changes I identified in a previous post to the historic US routes in Washington, right? Just wanted to check...

Yes, of course.

Was there a reason you didn't extend it all the way to I-90 on Silica Road, even though there are signs from the freeway?

Almost certainly because I had no imagery of signs from the freeway when drafting, and so couldn't say whether it would diverge from the former US10 alignment to meet I-90, or take the former US10 frontage road, or just end at that junction.

[mapcat]

Historic US 66 in Springfield IL does not follow the I-55 business loop between Spruce St and Lawrence Ave. The routing between 6th/7th and 9th uses Spruce both directions.

6th & Spruce

9th & Spruce

[compdude787]

Si, you're okay with me making the changes I identified in a previous post to the historic US routes in Washington, right? Just wanted to check...

Yes, of course.

Was there a reason you didn't extend it all the way to I-90 on Silica Road, even though there are signs from the freeway?

Almost certainly because I had no imagery of signs from the freeway when drafting, and so couldn't say whether it would diverge from the former US10 alignment to meet I-90, or take the former US10 frontage road, or just end at that junction.

Thanks, I've gone ahead and made the changes to this system that I identified. Pull request here:
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/4781

For those of you who have traveled on US 10 Hist Ritzville, your list file will most likely be broken now because I split the route in two to reflect that there is a gap on the route between Exits 215 and 220 just west of Ritzville. The part west of Exit 215 is a new route named US10HisSch.

[norheim]

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.

I was there yesterday.  Exit 149 off I-90 to SR 281.  S Frontage Road NW, running parallel to and south of the freeway, is signed with a brown "Historic US 10 Route" sign going either direction from the intersection of SR281. Photos attached.

[compdude787]

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.

I was there yesterday.  Exit 149 off I-90 to SR 281.  S Frontage Road NW, running parallel to and south of the freeway, is signed with a brown "Historic US 10 Route" sign going either direction from the intersection of SR281. Photos attached.

Thanks for the reply and for providing photos. I've basically gone ahead and extended US10HisFre along the frontage road southeast of I-90 from Exit 143, then through George, to end at Exit 151. I've also renamed it to US10HisGeo, which would break only my list file since I'm the only traveler on US10HisFre. Beyond Exit 151, I can't imagine Historical US 10 continuing on a frontage road east of that exit towards Moses Lake; this website says that I-90 was built directly on top of old US 10 with the frontage lanes added later.

Anyway, I've created a pull request for this change: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/4822

[Bickendan]

Looks like US 99H Los Angeles needs its CA 118 and CA 110 points fixed.

[Markkos1992]

For IA US6HisDur, it looks like 20Ave>-20thAve, 60Ave>-60thAve, 70Ave>-70thAve.

I guess HicGroRd is fine as-is based on the rules for usash though I guess it should be US6_E?

[yakra]

HicGroRd is US6His itself; it's Kimberly that departs.
I support US6_E, as that refers to a real present-day designation.

[froggie]

My viewpoint on the usaush system is a matter of record.  But if we are going to forge ahead with it, I would be remiss if I didn’t note that Historic US 20 is signed in Iowa, at least Dyersville and Julien.  It was also co-signed with mainline US 20 and US 52 on the stretch they share from east of Dyersville to the west side of Farley.

[michih]

Can we merge the thread with https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=97 ?

[SSOWorld]

My viewpoint on the usaush system is a matter of record.  But if we are going to forge ahead with it, I would be remiss if I didn’t note that Historic US 20 is signed in Iowa, at least Dyersville and Julien.  It was also co-signed with mainline US 20 and US 52 on the stretch they share from east of Dyersville to the west side of Farley.

I offer a counterpoint.  Eventually US 20 H is going to be signed and I can confirm it’s signed in Delaware and Dubuque Counties thoroughly and unthread in the one Michih linked for merge I indicated it’s sparsely signed in Buchanan County as of last winter, but I did not see Black Hawk County’s signage.  I drove no further past Waterloo and realized later I had taken the wrong route.  I will likely be shifting my reading to more local places after this trip to DC/Cleveland (for Sandor’s road meet).  I’d hold off until we can confirm more locations are more thoroughly signed. I also have my reservations about the historic routes being part of the essential to completion but that will be discussed elsewhere. If yakra and Jim manage to modify the site to allow turning off these route systems, I’m more comfortable with it.

[si404]

I also have my reservations about the historic routes being part of the essential to completion

'essential', 'completion'. It is you who have invented and defined those concepts. They aren't concepts of the site, but concepts of the game you want to play using the site. You can easily define them differently.

Sure, the oft-discussed proposal to hide systems users don't want would make it easier to keep score by your rules, and long ago it was decided to hold of with usaush so that it can be simply excluded by looking at the active-only stats rather than the harder (but still not hard) having to open the region stats page which gives you a per-system lowdown.

Should we make it easier for users to play games as part of mapping their travels? Absolutely!

Is the existence of systems you aren't interested in stopping you playing the game you want to play currently? Absolutely not!

[SSOWorld]

You are sure quick to assume that I play games, I do not.