AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered at https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=33904.0
Corrected several already and appreciate your patience as we work through the rest.

Author Topic: Virginia State Highways (in development)  (Read 33054 times)

Jim

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6731
  • Check out https://travelmapping.net

  • Location: Amsterdam, NY
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:01:00 PM
    • Travel and Other Pictures
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #50 on: December 03, 2015, 09:11:31 PM »

A batch of changes received by email from Mapmikey is in this pull request:

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/242

If no one notices any problems in a day or so, I'll pull it in.  It has some (seemingly) minor changes in usaus and usausb routes necessitated by usava routes being added.
Logged
Photos I post are my own unless otherwise noted.
Signs: https://www.teresco.org/pics/signs/
Travel Mapping: https://travelmapping.net/user/?u=terescoj
Counties: http://www.mob-rule.com/user/terescoj
Twitter @JimTeresco (roads, travel, skiing, weather, sports)

74/171FAN

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5354
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Harrisburg, PA
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:01:22 PM
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #51 on: December 03, 2015, 10:28:20 PM »

As for how to treat these on TM, the way I would frame it is this:  Suppose this was 1975 instead of 2015.  I can't speak for everywhere, but many locations in the southeast at a city would have a business banner on the route through town and a bypass banner on the route around town, with no unbannered route.  Would we chop up the mainline into a bunch of segments running between cities and have a bunch of Bypass banner routes?  I wouldn't.

So in a 2-route situation I would ignore the bypass banner and have the business designation.  For VA 156 which is actually posted like a normal business route for the most part, I would definitely ignore the bypass banner.

That's how US-21 is dealt with in NC around Elkin.  Doesn't have a 'normal' route, but has a Bypass (on I-77) and a Business route.  We have the main route along the 'Bypass'.

I do remember that NC 55 is bannerless through Holly Springs and that the bypass is on here on its own route.  I clinched the NC 55 Bypass route a couple years ago when I lived in Garner for the summer.  I doubt it matters for the sake of TM, but I did notice that NC 55 Business existed on the NC Roads Annex.
Logged
I am now a PennDOT employee.  My opinions/views do not necessarily reflect the opinions/views of PennDOT.

yakra

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1320
  • Location: Area Code 207, bub!
  • Last Login: February 13, 2024, 06:39:12 PM
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #52 on: December 04, 2015, 03:13:19 PM »

Back when the US Highways were first starting to crawl out of the mud, Tim's instructions for when there's a business/bypass split with no corresponding vanilla route were to include the bypass as part of the mainline. This precedent, combined with the signage in the field, makes me in favor of including the bypasses in the main file and making separate files for the business routes, where applicable. (I forget how it's set up ATM.)
Logged
"Officer, I'm always careful to drive the speed limit no matter where I am and that's what I was doin'." Said "No, you weren't," she said, "Yes, I was." He said, "Madam, I just clocked you at 22 MPH," and she said "That's the speed limit," he said "No ma'am, that's the route numbah!"  - Gary Crocker

oscar

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10936
  • Age: 68
  • Location: Arlington, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 01:35:29 AM
    • my Hot Springs and Highways pages
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #53 on: December 04, 2015, 11:07:36 PM »

FWIW, I agree with folding VA156BypHop into the main route, and making the existing VA 156 route through downtown Hopewell a business route even if it isn't signed as such.

Some nit-picky, OCD stuff I picked up on other routes I traveled (this isn't a thorough peer review, just assembling entries to add to my list file):

VA 337: AdmTasBlvd -> AdmTauBlvd

VA 233, VA 359, and VA 400: Pky -> Pkwy
« Last Edit: December 05, 2015, 03:40:56 PM by oscar »
Logged
my Hot Springs and Highways pages, with links to my roads sites:
http://www.alaskaroads.com/home.html

Mapmikey

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4353
  • Co-curator with Froggie of www.vahighways.com

  • Age: 54
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 08:31:54 PM
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #54 on: December 12, 2015, 08:46:27 PM »

Here are the changes I have sent this evening:

Changed VA 156 in Hopewell to the mainline bypassing town and 156 Bus through town.  This also required waypoint name changes to VA 10 and VA 36 which I include.
Deleted VA 192 as it has not been posted anywhere in several years
Changed the AdmTas->AdmTau on VA 337
VA 83 was already on the 460 Grundy bypass but was missing a shaping point that is on the 460 routing along that bypass, so I added it to VA 83
Added a point on VA 177 at SR 658 south of I-81 as that is where VA 177 actually begins
Made VA 228 Truck a full loop, as is posted in the field

I have not done anything with the "pky" names, as they are in every Blue Ridge Pkwy reference in both Virginia and North Carolina.

Mike
Logged

74/171FAN

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5354
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Harrisburg, PA
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:01:22 PM
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #55 on: December 12, 2015, 10:10:12 PM »

As for how to treat these on TM, the way I would frame it is this:  Suppose this was 1975 instead of 2015.  I can't speak for everywhere, but many locations in the southeast at a city would have a business banner on the route through town and a bypass banner on the route around town, with no unbannered route.  Would we chop up the mainline into a bunch of segments running between cities and have a bunch of Bypass banner routes?  I wouldn't.

So in a 2-route situation I would ignore the bypass banner and have the business designation.  For VA 156 which is actually posted like a normal business route for the most part, I would definitely ignore the bypass banner.

That's how US-21 is dealt with in NC around Elkin.  Doesn't have a 'normal' route, but has a Bypass (on I-77) and a Business route.  We have the main route along the 'Bypass'.

I do remember that NC 55 is bannerless through Holly Springs and that the bypass is on here on its own route.  I clinched the NC 55 Bypass route a couple years ago when I lived in Garner for the summer.  I doubt it matters for the sake of TM, but I did notice that NC 55 Business existed on the NC Roads Annex.

Mike(or anyone that could do it),
Would it be a good idea to go ahead and put NC 55 Bypass on the mainline and 55 Bus through Holly Springs while we are at it?
I do not know offhand who is in charge of NC (considering that system has been around for a while), but I think that we should go ahead and make it a policy throughout TM.

Also last time I checked the NC Roads Annex it said NC 55 Business was dead, I guess that was just an error.
Logged
I am now a PennDOT employee.  My opinions/views do not necessarily reflect the opinions/views of PennDOT.

Mapmikey

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4353
  • Co-curator with Froggie of www.vahighways.com

  • Age: 54
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 08:31:54 PM
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #56 on: December 12, 2015, 10:55:50 PM »

As for how to treat these on TM, the way I would frame it is this:  Suppose this was 1975 instead of 2015.  I can't speak for everywhere, but many locations in the southeast at a city would have a business banner on the route through town and a bypass banner on the route around town, with no unbannered route.  Would we chop up the mainline into a bunch of segments running between cities and have a bunch of Bypass banner routes?  I wouldn't.

So in a 2-route situation I would ignore the bypass banner and have the business designation.  For VA 156 which is actually posted like a normal business route for the most part, I would definitely ignore the bypass banner.

That's how US-21 is dealt with in NC around Elkin.  Doesn't have a 'normal' route, but has a Bypass (on I-77) and a Business route.  We have the main route along the 'Bypass'.

I do remember that NC 55 is bannerless through Holly Springs and that the bypass is on here on its own route.  I clinched the NC 55 Bypass route a couple years ago when I lived in Garner for the summer.  I doubt it matters for the sake of TM, but I did notice that NC 55 Business existed on the NC Roads Annex.

Mike(or anyone that could do it),
Would it be a good idea to go ahead and put NC 55 Bypass on the mainline and 55 Bus through Holly Springs while we are at it?
I do not know offhand who is in charge of NC (considering that system has been around for a while), but I think that we should go ahead and make it a policy throughout TM.

Also last time I checked the NC Roads Annex it said NC 55 Business was dead, I guess that was just an error.

The word "dead" there is an error on my part...

I *think* I am supposed to be inheriting the maintenance of North Carolina...so I will eventually do this swap with NC 55...

Mike
Logged

Jim

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6731
  • Check out https://travelmapping.net

  • Location: Amsterdam, NY
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:01:00 PM
    • Travel and Other Pictures
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #57 on: December 12, 2015, 10:57:00 PM »

Here are the changes I have sent this evening:

Changed VA 156 in Hopewell to the mainline bypassing town and 156 Bus through town.  This also required waypoint name changes to VA 10 and VA 36 which I include.
Deleted VA 192 as it has not been posted anywhere in several years
Changed the AdmTas->AdmTau on VA 337
VA 83 was already on the 460 Grundy bypass but was missing a shaping point that is on the 460 routing along that bypass, so I added it to VA 83
Added a point on VA 177 at SR 658 south of I-81 as that is where VA 177 actually begins
Made VA 228 Truck a full loop, as is posted in the field

I have not done anything with the "pky" names, as they are in every Blue Ridge Pkwy reference in both Virginia and North Carolina.

Mike

These are now live in TM.
Logged
Photos I post are my own unless otherwise noted.
Signs: https://www.teresco.org/pics/signs/
Travel Mapping: https://travelmapping.net/user/?u=terescoj
Counties: http://www.mob-rule.com/user/terescoj
Twitter @JimTeresco (roads, travel, skiing, weather, sports)

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12911
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 11:08:21 PM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #58 on: December 13, 2015, 10:08:01 AM »

My peer review has basically been put on hold due to the end of the semester...finals week coming up this week and I have 4 projects to finish.  I'm sure Jim can relate.

That said, I had compiled several comments for VA 337 specifically that I will list below.  Several involve points on other route lists:

- Railroad Ave in Suffolk does not exist where the point for it is located. Would suggest moving the point either down to S 12th St or across the railroad to Hollywood Ave.

- A point should be added at SR 642/Wilroy Rd.  This is the connection to the US 58 bypass if coming from the north.

- Suggest adding a point at SR 627/Bennetts Pasture Rd.  This is the connection to US 17 in western Suffolk.

- The StaSt point doesn't make any sense as VA 337 does not use that ramp.  I see the desire in keeping 337's routing separate from 464 but the reality is that 337 uses the ramps on either side of the 464 mainline, and technically the ramps for 337/Berkley Ave merge with 464 on both sides before 464 merges/splits with 264 at the Berkley Bridge.  My recommendation is to replace the StaSt point with the 464(6A) point, which itself needs to be moved slightly to be on top of Berkeley Ave.

- Given that Church St in Norfolk is signed (possibly/probably erroneously) as US 460, a point might be worthwhile there.

- The 460/460Alt point should probably be moved to St. Pauls Blvd.  The 2015 shapefiles suggest that Monticello Ave is no longer used for either route.

- The US58_E point should be moved to Duke St.  There is no longer a Duke/Boush split for 58 and hasn't been for some years now.

- Given the urban nature, there should probably be a point somewhere between 247 and 165/Little Creek Rd.  I'd suggest at Jamestown Crescent.
Logged

Mapmikey

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4353
  • Co-curator with Froggie of www.vahighways.com

  • Age: 54
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 08:31:54 PM
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #59 on: December 13, 2015, 01:03:09 PM »

My peer review has basically been put on hold due to the end of the semester...finals week coming up this week and I have 4 projects to finish.  I'm sure Jim can relate.

That said, I had compiled several comments for VA 337 specifically that I will list below.  Several involve points on other route lists:

- Railroad Ave in Suffolk does not exist where the point for it is located. Would suggest moving the point either down to S 12th St or across the railroad to Hollywood Ave.

- A point should be added at SR 642/Wilroy Rd.  This is the connection to the US 58 bypass if coming from the north.

- Suggest adding a point at SR 627/Bennetts Pasture Rd.  This is the connection to US 17 in western Suffolk.

- The StaSt point doesn't make any sense as VA 337 does not use that ramp.  I see the desire in keeping 337's routing separate from 464 but the reality is that 337 uses the ramps on either side of the 464 mainline, and technically the ramps for 337/Berkley Ave merge with 464 on both sides before 464 merges/splits with 264 at the Berkley Bridge.  My recommendation is to replace the StaSt point with the 464(6A) point, which itself needs to be moved slightly to be on top of Berkeley Ave.

- Given that Church St in Norfolk is signed (possibly/probably erroneously) as US 460, a point might be worthwhile there.

- The 460/460Alt point should probably be moved to St. Pauls Blvd.  The 2015 shapefiles suggest that Monticello Ave is no longer used for either route.

- The US58_E point should be moved to Duke St.  There is no longer a Duke/Boush split for 58 and hasn't been for some years now.

- Given the urban nature, there should probably be a point somewhere between 247 and 165/Little Creek Rd.  I'd suggest at Jamestown Crescent.


I will drop the Railroad Ave point...nothing actually needed in that area.

Agree about SR 642

I will move the SpoBlvd pt to SR 627

I agree with the I-464 area stuff

Sep2015 GMSV shows US 460 posted on both Church and Monticello from US 58, but only on Church from VA 247; neither is posted at Brambleton to tell you 460 turns left.  Norfolk's postings flat out suck. And apparently 460 ALT just ends at St Pauls/Brambleton (though it would make sense to either use Brambleton to Church or Monticello to Church).  2014 traffic log says 460 uses Monticello.  I will have point at both Church and Monticello and slide the 58 split over to Duke St.

Your last suggestion brings a larger philosophical question which I wrestled with for the S Carolina set:  In urban areas, or in areas where I know probable traffic patterns and short cuts in SC, it was tempting to add points I knew were logical to a local.  But it occurred to me that locals would in the course of being local, would drive the whole state route anyway.  For people from out of the area, they are much more likely to stay on the primary routes all the way.  And in both scenarios one could argue that the local waypoint isn't needed. So I tended to be judicious with these unless they were local connections to freeways.

Mike
Logged

Jim

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6731
  • Check out https://travelmapping.net

  • Location: Amsterdam, NY
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:01:00 PM
    • Travel and Other Pictures
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #60 on: December 26, 2015, 10:15:05 AM »

Regarding the "Pky" vs. "Pkwy" names, I have converted all of them in usava to use the preferred "Pkwy".

In the rest of the data, we currently have 105 lines across all .wpt files that have a "Pky" somewhere (several are in hidden alternate labels).  I am willing to convert all of those to "Pkwy" with the old names retained as hidden alternates.  For comparison, we currently have 1156 lines using the preferred "Pkwy".

Any objections to the conversion?
Logged
Photos I post are my own unless otherwise noted.
Signs: https://www.teresco.org/pics/signs/
Travel Mapping: https://travelmapping.net/user/?u=terescoj
Counties: http://www.mob-rule.com/user/terescoj
Twitter @JimTeresco (roads, travel, skiing, weather, sports)

74/171FAN

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5354
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Harrisburg, PA
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:01:22 PM
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #61 on: December 26, 2015, 12:42:08 PM »

VA 36 and VA 144 should probably both have points added at SR 645/Puddledock Road (due to the development that has increased the importance of the road in the last ten years).  In the case of VA 144, I would also recommend points at SR 725/River Rd (a connection to the ordnance campus at Fort Lee) and at SR 619/Happy Hill Rd(connects directly to US 1/US 301 near SR 620 and SR 746). 

Also, VA 36 could use a point at SR 630(Jefferson Park Rd) as this road indirectly connects to the Prince George County Courthouse (via SR 634/Allin Rd and VA 106).   Would points for Laurel Spring Road(SR 616) make sense for VA 106 and VA 156 in this case?  (VA 156 has a point for SR 616/Pole Run Rd at the moment.)   

In the case of Happy Hill Rd (the point is just north of there at Dudley Dr), this goes back to the case I made earlier to move the point on VA 10 to the Osborne Rd intersection.  Should we go for a policy that as long as a signalized or more important intersection fits the tolerance that we would choose that over a road that goes to a subdivision?

On a side note, while looking at the US 460 file to see if a point was located at the SR 630 intersection (due to Rives Rd connecting to I-95), I saw that the US 460 relocation to Wagner Rd and the extension of US 460 Business was never put into the system.
Logged
I am now a PennDOT employee.  My opinions/views do not necessarily reflect the opinions/views of PennDOT.

yakra

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1320
  • Location: Area Code 207, bub!
  • Last Login: February 13, 2024, 06:39:12 PM
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #62 on: December 26, 2015, 01:28:51 PM »

Should we go for a policy that as long as a signalized or more important intersection fits the tolerance that we would choose that over a road that goes to a subdivision?
For my two cents, I think that's a good idea.
Logged
"Officer, I'm always careful to drive the speed limit no matter where I am and that's what I was doin'." Said "No, you weren't," she said, "Yes, I was." He said, "Madam, I just clocked you at 22 MPH," and she said "That's the speed limit," he said "No ma'am, that's the route numbah!"  - Gary Crocker

Mapmikey

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4353
  • Co-curator with Froggie of www.vahighways.com

  • Age: 54
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 08:31:54 PM
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #63 on: December 28, 2015, 07:22:49 AM »

VA 36 and VA 144 should probably both have points added at SR 645/Puddledock Road (due to the development that has increased the importance of the road in the last ten years).  In the case of VA 144, I would also recommend points at SR 725/River Rd (a connection to the ordnance campus at Fort Lee) and at SR 619/Happy Hill Rd(connects directly to US 1/US 301 near SR 620 and SR 746). 

Also, VA 36 could use a point at SR 630(Jefferson Park Rd) as this road indirectly connects to the Prince George County Courthouse (via SR 634/Allin Rd and VA 106).   Would points for Laurel Spring Road(SR 616) make sense for VA 106 and VA 156 in this case?  (VA 156 has a point for SR 616/Pole Run Rd at the moment.)   

In the case of Happy Hill Rd (the point is just north of there at Dudley Dr), this goes back to the case I made earlier to move the point on VA 10 to the Osborne Rd intersection.  Should we go for a policy that as long as a signalized or more important intersection fits the tolerance that we would choose that over a road that goes to a subdivision?

On a side note, while looking at the US 460 file to see if a point was located at the SR 630 intersection (due to Rives Rd connecting to I-95), I saw that the US 460 relocation to Wagner Rd and the extension of US 460 Business was never put into the system.

I have added a point at US 460 and SR 630 because of direct connection to I-95.  I also changed the 460 and 460buspet files to reflect the current conditions of those routes.  These will be submitted to Jim on my next Virginia update request.

As for the other suggestions, these go back to my earlier post regarding local points.  For people who use short cuts and developed areas locally, they almost certainly have driven all of the primary route in that area in the course of living in that area; for out-of-towners, it is far less likely that they would drive the primary route only to the local points and not drive the whole primary route passing through the area.  In both of these situations it makes having the local points not necessary, other than for shaping reasons.  I do think it makes sense to include local direct connections to freeways as a through traveler could end up doing that in case of traffic problems, etc.

I also agree that a shaping point at a real road is better than a subdivision road and I will look into the example you have regarding Happy Hill Rd.

Mike
Logged

74/171FAN

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5354
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Harrisburg, PA
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:01:22 PM
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #64 on: December 28, 2015, 08:46:04 PM »

Mike, I think I understand what you are going for.  I know I am partially biased towards my home area (I lived near Hopewell most of my life until a couple months ago) when it comes to routes, but I realize that you do need to be realistic on where people are driving to (whether being local or out-of-town).

I also went through the US 1 file and a couple others to check on direct connections to interstates (and other minor stuff) because I noticed at least one was missing.  I will add those to this post when I find the paper I put them on.

EDIT: Points that I found considerable:
US 301-the VA 35 points should be N and S instead of W and E
Note: I am not saying anything specific about US 1 in Petersburg.  I am so used to using Adams St the technical routing on Jefferson St only exists on paper to me.
US 1 AND US 301(all of these are on the duplex):
Dupuy Ave: Mainly debatable due to the presence of VSU and it does connect to VA 36 via E River Rd and Granger St in Ettrick.  VA 36 does have a point at Granger St.
Ellerslie Ave: I would expect the consensus to lean towards "no" here.  Though with the weight limit on VA 144 SB west of I-95, I am somewhat surprised there is not a VA 144 Truck following Ellerslie and Conduit Rd back to VA 144 by Southpark Mall. (I blame the US 30 BUS ALT Truck Route that exists in Downingtown, PA, which partially even uses the US 30 Bypass.)
SR 746(Ruffin Mill Rd): SR 620 has a point already, two here might be unnecessary but worth mentioning since SR 746 is a part of the I-95 interchange there
SR 613(Willis Rd): This was the missing direct connection (I-95 Exit 64) that got me to look a bit more in-depth.  This could have been an oversight due to VA 145 being nearby.
Maury St: Direct connection(I-95 Exit 73).  Looking at GSV, there are no "TO I-95" shields at this intersection or even at US 360 (Hull St).  I guess this would apply more for the non-existent VA 416 (Commerce Rd).
US 11:
(US 460 Business here as well):  Depot St serves as a bypass of downtown Christiansburg that connects to VA 8 and I-81 (to the point where traffic to I-81 is directed to use it from Franklin St (US 460 Business EB).  I would rather this part of Depot St be VA 111 than the actual VA 111.
VA 280: The point here just needs to be added.  It already exists in the VA 280 file that has been created.
It also looks like the route files (US 11, US 17, US 50, US 522, maybe VA 7) in Winchester need to be updated to the latest routings (as of early 2010 as stated on the US 17 entry in the VA Highways Project).
VA 199:
OldYorkRd: Should be moved to either Marquis Pkwy(MarPkwy) or the entrance to Water Country USA, maybe even consider deleting
VA 114:
SR659: Should be changed to reference the Radford Army Ammunition Plant,  SR 659 itself is a loop road that connects to VA 114 on both ends farther east called Vicker Switch Rd (as found in the latest VDOT traffic logs)
US 13:
PitRd: Refers to Pittmantown Rd nearby which does not actually intersect US 13, both Arthur Dr and Boonetown Rd are nearby
VA 314:
SprRd>BeaWay: Spring Road has been renamed Beamer Way after now former Virginia Tech football coach Frank Beamer


Mike, I am trying to understand how the TM system works by looking into this as well.  I am not really sure what the mindset exactly was when some of these files were originally created though I believe you made it clearer to me what points should be there and what should not.  I also added a few more to this post than you originally saw.


Thanks,
Mark



 
« Last Edit: December 30, 2015, 09:24:37 PM by 74/171FAN »
Logged
I am now a PennDOT employee.  My opinions/views do not necessarily reflect the opinions/views of PennDOT.

yakra

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1320
  • Location: Area Code 207, bub!
  • Last Login: February 13, 2024, 06:39:12 PM
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #65 on: December 30, 2015, 01:25:36 AM »

I've made a branch of the HighwayData repository containing the changes suggested in this post. I'm holding off on making an actual pull request pending some peer review of the extended routes. I've only done VA7 so far...

-----

Is there a convention as to whether to use SR### style labels, or just the local street names? I would think SR###, as these are signed in almost every GMSV example I've looked at... Either way, I think consistency in this regard would be good.

VA7:
FirWooDr -> SR656?
SniTpk -> SR734?
delete +x05 (and maybe even +x04)
mark SR643 as closed
LanBlvd -> SR901 or SR901/2400
LouCouPkwy -> SR607
CityCenPkwy -> SR1570 or CityCenBlvd
CasPkwy -> SR1794?
+x10: replace with a point at SR676_N / TowRd (for connection to VA267)
US50: recenter on both routes. Or maybe I'm just being too anal.

-----

VA402:
Why SemRd and not VA420?
« Last Edit: December 30, 2015, 01:30:09 AM by yakra »
Logged
"Officer, I'm always careful to drive the speed limit no matter where I am and that's what I was doin'." Said "No, you weren't," she said, "Yes, I was." He said, "Madam, I just clocked you at 22 MPH," and she said "That's the speed limit," he said "No ma'am, that's the route numbah!"  - Gary Crocker

74/171FAN

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5354
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Harrisburg, PA
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:01:22 PM
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #66 on: December 30, 2015, 02:15:38 AM »

Is there a convention as to whether to use SR### style labels, or just the local street names? I would think SR###, as these are signed in almost every GMSV example I've looked at... Either way, I think consistency in this regard would be good.

I could not find any consistency on this whatsoever.  Either way, we do have to use local street names for intersections not with primary routes in independent cities or towns without posted SRs (Blacksburg, Christiansburg, etc.)
Logged
I am now a PennDOT employee.  My opinions/views do not necessarily reflect the opinions/views of PennDOT.

Mapmikey

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4353
  • Co-curator with Froggie of www.vahighways.com

  • Age: 54
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 08:31:54 PM
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #67 on: December 30, 2015, 06:45:13 AM »

As I created neither the state highway or US route sets in Virginia, I am mostly operating on speculation about why things are the way they are.

My guess about why SR XXX isn't predominant is that the numbers repeat in every county, so there would be some duplicative designations to wrangle with.

My guess about VA 420 being called SemRd is that VA 420 is not posted at all anywhere.

I will evaluate all the suggestions over the weekend and make fixes...

Mike
Logged

Jim

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6731
  • Check out https://travelmapping.net

  • Location: Amsterdam, NY
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:01:00 PM
    • Travel and Other Pictures
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #68 on: December 30, 2015, 09:20:14 AM »

I know that when I created usany, I sometimes used "CRxx" and sometimes used a road's name.  It was entirely a function of how roads were labeled on our mapping sources.  So there's not much consistency there.  I'm sure I could have gone to GMSV for every intersection looking for signed county routes at those, but if I did that, I'd probably never have finished.  I'd say aim for consistency but don't worry if some of the waypoints in Virginia that could be "SRxxx" are instead labeled with route names.

I will evaluate all the suggestions over the weekend and make fixes...

Please coordinate with yakra on any changes to the ones currently being reviewed to become extensions of routes already in the usansf system, since he has a branch with the changes he's made so far.  I'd like to avoid git conflicts if we can.
Logged
Photos I post are my own unless otherwise noted.
Signs: https://www.teresco.org/pics/signs/
Travel Mapping: https://travelmapping.net/user/?u=terescoj
Counties: http://www.mob-rule.com/user/terescoj
Twitter @JimTeresco (roads, travel, skiing, weather, sports)

yakra

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1320
  • Location: Area Code 207, bub!
  • Last Login: February 13, 2024, 06:39:12 PM
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #69 on: December 30, 2015, 11:17:27 AM »

Please coordinate with yakra on any changes to the ones currently being reviewed to become extensions of routes already in the usansf system, since he has a branch with the changes he's made so far.  I'd like to avoid git conflicts if we can.
It would also not be very difficult for me to scrap my branch and recreate it with Mapmikey's changes.

My guess about VA 420 being called SemRd is that VA 420 is not posted at all anywhere.
Ah! Then in that case, on VA7, VA420 -> JanLn
« Last Edit: December 30, 2015, 11:21:29 AM by yakra »
Logged
"Officer, I'm always careful to drive the speed limit no matter where I am and that's what I was doin'." Said "No, you weren't," she said, "Yes, I was." He said, "Madam, I just clocked you at 22 MPH," and she said "That's the speed limit," he said "No ma'am, that's the route numbah!"  - Gary Crocker

Mapmikey

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4353
  • Co-curator with Froggie of www.vahighways.com

  • Age: 54
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 08:31:54 PM
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #70 on: December 31, 2015, 03:34:23 PM »

I've made a branch of the HighwayData repository containing the changes suggested in this post. I'm holding off on making an actual pull request pending some peer review of the extended routes. I've only done VA7 so far...

-----

Is there a convention as to whether to use SR### style labels, or just the local street names? I would think SR###, as these are signed in almost every GMSV example I've looked at... Either way, I think consistency in this regard would be good.

VA7:
FirWooDr -> SR656?
SniTpk -> SR734?
delete +x05 (and maybe even +x04)
mark SR643 as closed
LanBlvd -> SR901 or SR901/2400
LouCouPkwy -> SR607
CityCenPkwy -> SR1570 or CityCenBlvd
CasPkwy -> SR1794?
+x10: replace with a point at SR676_N / TowRd (for connection to VA267)
US50: recenter on both routes. Or maybe I'm just being too anal.

-----

VA402:
Why SemRd and not VA420?

Here are the changes I made related to this post:

VA 7:
Removed its westernmost point (VA 7 now ends at Cameron)
Removed one of the minor Winchester city streets used as a shaping point
Removed one of the shaping points east of purcellville
Changed the shaping point to SR 676
Changed VA420 -> JanLn
Centered the point with US 50 (only because I also had US 50 changes to make)
What does marking SR 643 as closed actually mean in the file?  While there is no longer access, someone could have that as where they accessed VA 7 (and US 15)

US 17:
Added where it is posted to end (where US 50 leaves Cameron)

US 11-50-522:
Moved all the points to directly on Cameron as there are no one way routings, except at the US 522 north split which has a small one-way couplet

US 17-50-522:
Added a point at Jubal Early Dr

US 50:
Changed points in Winchester to reflect posted routing

These will be sent to Jim when I send my next Virginia files update.

Mike
 
Logged

74/171FAN

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5354
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Harrisburg, PA
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:01:22 PM
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #71 on: December 31, 2015, 04:32:26 PM »

VA7:
mark SR643 as closed
What does marking SR 643 as closed actually mean in the file?  While there is no longer access, someone could have that as where they accessed VA 7 (and US 15)

Does this reasoning have to do with the PA 743_S point still being in the eastern US 422 file? (since now US 422 meets PA 743 at one intersection instead of having a short duplex in Hershey.)
Logged
I am now a PennDOT employee.  My opinions/views do not necessarily reflect the opinions/views of PennDOT.

yakra

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1320
  • Location: Area Code 207, bub!
  • Last Login: February 13, 2024, 06:39:12 PM
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #72 on: December 31, 2015, 07:06:33 PM »

VA7:
mark SR643 as closed
What does marking SR 643 as closed actually mean in the file?  While there is no longer access, someone could have that as where they accessed VA 7 (and US 15)
It means, prefix the label with a *. It's now a grade separation with no access, but was formerly an at-grade intersection, that someone could have used in the past. Any .list file entries without the * will still be processed correctly.

Does this reasoning have to do with the PA 743_S point still being in the eastern US 422 file? (since now US 422 meets PA 743 at one intersection instead of having a short duplex in Hershey.)
I don't know about this personally. Is the label prefixed with an asterisk? I'll go have a look in a little bit.
Edit: Yes, it looks like this was done for exactly that reason.
« Last Edit: December 31, 2015, 07:14:11 PM by yakra »
Logged
"Officer, I'm always careful to drive the speed limit no matter where I am and that's what I was doin'." Said "No, you weren't," she said, "Yes, I was." He said, "Madam, I just clocked you at 22 MPH," and she said "That's the speed limit," he said "No ma'am, that's the route numbah!"  - Gary Crocker

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12911
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 11:08:21 PM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #73 on: January 03, 2016, 09:13:28 AM »

Still going through peer review, but going to mention this one now:

On the VA 100 list, the EggRd point at Staffordsville should be moved or replaced.  As Mike can verify, the old SR 730 bridge over Walker Creek (which, theoretically, whomever built the list intended the EggRd point to connect to) has been closed for many years...since before CHM began state-based sets.  SR 730 should have a point...Mike and I have long theorized that an upgraded SR 730 would have connected two segments of VA 42 (the segments west of VA 100 and east of US 460)...SR 730 is the semi-direct connection between the two.  The twistiness of VA 100 in this area means that additional evaluation should be taken to determine proper shaping points, but at a minimum, the EggRd point should be removed and replaced with a new point at SR 730/Triangle Ln.
Logged

Mapmikey

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4353
  • Co-curator with Froggie of www.vahighways.com

  • Age: 54
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 08:31:54 PM
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: Virginia State Highways (in development)
« Reply #74 on: January 03, 2016, 08:02:26 PM »

Still going through peer review, but going to mention this one now:

On the VA 100 list, the EggRd point at Staffordsville should be moved or replaced.  As Mike can verify, the old SR 730 bridge over Walker Creek (which, theoretically, whomever built the list intended the EggRd point to connect to) has been closed for many years...since before CHM began state-based sets.  SR 730 should have a point...Mike and I have long theorized that an upgraded SR 730 would have connected two segments of VA 42 (the segments west of VA 100 and east of US 460)...SR 730 is the semi-direct connection between the two.  The twistiness of VA 100 in this area means that additional evaluation should be taken to determine proper shaping points, but at a minimum, the EggRd point should be removed and replaced with a new point at SR 730/Triangle Ln.


I have moved the point to Triangle Ln and made sure the shaping is within tolerance...in the queue for next Virginia submission to Jim.

It would take a LOT of work to turn SR 730 back into VA 42 again (full of narrow 20-25 mph curves) and I'm guessing they wouldn't build a new bridge to replace the closed one that VA 100 used to use but instead use Triangle Ln.

Thanks-
Mike
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.