Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ARMOURERERIC]

PennDOT has revealed plans for improvements  to Bayfront Parkway in Erie PA: A grade separated interchange with State Street where the ramps will be in the center, all left side exits and entrances, along with 2 lane rotaries at Sassafrass and Holland.  All 3 locations will get pedestrian  bridges over the parkway.

[briantroutman]

This project is now moving closer to construction as the US DOT has just allocated a $21 million BUILD grant to the project—which, coupled with the $30 million already committed by the state, brings available funding to $51 million. Construction is expected to begin in 2022.

[The Ghostbuster]

I know the Bayfront Parkway was never planned to be a freeway, but if it had been, and it was built to Interstate Standards, it could have been numbered Interstate 290 (since the connector is presently PA 290). I'm sure the locals would have gone ballistic if such had been proposed, and it's probably better off the way it is.

[skluth]

Project links

Bayfront Parkway project main page

Map showing improvements

[Roadsguy]

I know the Bayfront Parkway was never planned to be a freeway, but if it had been, and it was built to Interstate Standards, it could have been numbered Interstate 290 (since the connector is presently PA 290). I'm sure the locals would have gone ballistic if such had been proposed, and it's probably better off the way it is.

I'm pretty sure this was actually a proposal at one point, though I have no idea how far along in development it ever got.

[ARMOURERERIC]

When I was in college, I lived on w7 in downtown erie.  City hall had a 1970 mural about the reception lobby showing the downtown of the future.  It showed bayfront as a freeway going over State with a very tight diamond interchange.

[rickmastfan67]

Does anybody know if this also reroutes PA-290 onto it (and off of PA-5)?

Only reason I ask, is because somebody on OSM has put PA-290 onto it, and removed it from PA-5 recently.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89262849

[Roadsguy]

Does anybody know if this also reroutes PA-290 onto it (and off of PA-5)?

Only reason I ask, is because somebody on OSM has put PA-290 onto it, and removed it from PA-5 recently.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89262849

I noticed that too and asked them about it. They replied with a vague statement that didn't answer my question, so I asked for a source. Haven't heard back, and if I don't by the end of the month I'll revert it. A quick Google search (along with checking ECMS for any projects on SR 0290 that may include references to a reroute) turned up nothing. I'm not getting my hopes up since this same user has been making very dubious edits around the Erie area that I've been cleaning up (e.g. mapping center turn lane roads as dual carriageway, replacing bridges with tunnels, deleting and remaking ways with lost history and fewer tags, and paying seemingly no attention to route relations).

[rickmastfan67]

Does anybody know if this also reroutes PA-290 onto it (and off of PA-5)?

Only reason I ask, is because somebody on OSM has put PA-290 onto it, and removed it from PA-5 recently.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89262849

I noticed that too and asked them about it. They replied with a vague statement that didn't answer my question, so I asked for a source. Haven't heard back, and if I don't by the end of the month I'll revert it. A quick Google search (along with checking ECMS for any projects on SR 0290 that may include references to a reroute) turned up nothing. I'm not getting my hopes up since this same user has been making very dubious edits around the Erie area that I've been cleaning up (e.g. mapping center turn lane roads as dual carriageway, replacing bridges with tunnels, deleting and remaking ways with lost history and fewer tags, and paying seemingly no attention to route relations).

If he keeps adding false info, might have to report him then.

[Roadsguy]

Does anybody know if this also reroutes PA-290 onto it (and off of PA-5)?

Only reason I ask, is because somebody on OSM has put PA-290 onto it, and removed it from PA-5 recently.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89262849

I noticed that too and asked them about it. They replied with a vague statement that didn't answer my question, so I asked for a source. Haven't heard back, and if I don't by the end of the month I'll revert it. A quick Google search (along with checking ECMS for any projects on SR 0290 that may include references to a reroute) turned up nothing. I'm not getting my hopes up since this same user has been making very dubious edits around the Erie area that I've been cleaning up (e.g. mapping center turn lane roads as dual carriageway, replacing bridges with tunnels, deleting and remaking ways with lost history and fewer tags, and paying seemingly no attention to route relations).

If he keeps adding false info, might have to report him then.

If it proves to be a continuous issue, I'll bring it up in the mailing lists and see what course of action would be recommended. I did also tell them to not map non-physically-divided roads as dual carriageway, so we'll see if they listened.

[rickmastfan67]

I did also tell them to not map non-physically-divided roads as dual carriageway, so we'll see if they listened.

He might be trying to duplicate Google in that aspect then, since Google has a hard-on for doing it that way when they shouldn't be.

[74/171FAN]

Does anybody know if this also reroutes PA-290 onto it (and off of PA-5)?

Only reason I ask, is because somebody on OSM has put PA-290 onto it, and removed it from PA-5 recently.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89262849

I noticed that too and asked them about it. They replied with a vague statement that didn't answer my question, so I asked for a source. Haven't heard back, and if I don't by the end of the month I'll revert it. A quick Google search (along with checking ECMS for any projects on SR 0290 that may include references to a reroute) turned up nothing. I'm not getting my hopes up since this same user has been making very dubious edits around the Erie area that I've been cleaning up (e.g. mapping center turn lane roads as dual carriageway, replacing bridges with tunnels, deleting and remaking ways with lost history and fewer tags, and paying seemingly no attention to route relations).

If he keeps adding false info, might have to report him then.

If it proves to be a continuous issue, I'll bring it up in the mailing lists and see what course of action would be recommended. I did also tell them to not map non-physically-divided roads as dual carriageway, so we'll see if they listened.

I was looking in the Lake City/Girard area today in OSM, and I see three new random PA routes (PA 543, PA 980 (already exists west of Pittsburgh along PA 576), and PA 480) that should not be there.  Also something odd happened in New Castle.  I wonder if this may be the same user as before.
 
Latest update is here:  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2410.msg2679114#msg2679114 

Hopefully, I will remember that this thread exists next time there is an update.

[rickmastfan67]

Does anybody know if this also reroutes PA-290 onto it (and off of PA-5)?

Only reason I ask, is because somebody on OSM has put PA-290 onto it, and removed it from PA-5 recently.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89262849

I noticed that too and asked them about it. They replied with a vague statement that didn't answer my question, so I asked for a source. Haven't heard back, and if I don't by the end of the month I'll revert it. A quick Google search (along with checking ECMS for any projects on SR 0290 that may include references to a reroute) turned up nothing. I'm not getting my hopes up since this same user has been making very dubious edits around the Erie area that I've been cleaning up (e.g. mapping center turn lane roads as dual carriageway, replacing bridges with tunnels, deleting and remaking ways with lost history and fewer tags, and paying seemingly no attention to route relations).

If he keeps adding false info, might have to report him then.

If it proves to be a continuous issue, I'll bring it up in the mailing lists and see what course of action would be recommended. I did also tell them to not map non-physically-divided roads as dual carriageway, so we'll see if they listened.

I was looking in the Lake City/Girard area today in OSM, and I see three new random PA routes (PA 543, PA 980 (already exists west of Pittsburgh along PA 576), and PA 480) that should not be there.  Also something odd happened in New Castle.  I wonder if this may be the same user as before.
 
Latest update is here:  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2410.msg2679114#msg2679114 

Hopefully, I will remember that this thread exists next time there is an update.

I just looked into the PA-980 up there.  Different person.

Just go and fix them if I were you.

[74/171FAN]

PennDOT - District 1 News: Public Invited to Monthly Online Program on the Bayfront Parkway Project in the City of Erie

[74/171FAN]

PennDOT - District 1 News: Monthly Online Program on the Bayfront Parkway Project to Focus on Pedestrian and Bicycle Features

[74/171FAN]

PennDOT - District 1 News: Monthly Online Program on the Bayfront Parkway to Focus Port Authority Projects

[74/171FAN]

(For PA 5/PA 290) PennDOT - District 1 News: 12th Street Corridor Project Expected to Start Next Month