He seems to be correct, using the (not usable for mapping but usable to inform discussion) G-Streetview, I do indeed see signage as described, which defies commonly understood version of Fed standards. Not just BUSINESS route, not just when cotracking i-94, but actual green, solo "WEST 69 MILE 198" with red white and blue shield.
Do we know if whether there is a Fed exemption, the Feds actually acknowledge that I-69 actually E-W beyond a certain point, and so can be E-W here? Or if the State of Michigan is defying Federal standards in the interest of being understandable? After the Feds threatened to pull our block grant $$ if we didn't renumber our exits their way, I'm amazed they're letting this slide when they could just rename the E-W section I-369 E-W and it'd be a compliant extension of a N-S route. Perhaps the bureaucracy can be reasonable. [I spent a few years with DOT, not in Highway. Nice folks really.] (Probably not the only exception. There are 1xx/2xx/3xx/4xx that don't fit the spur/loop rule too.) (Frankly, I'm surprised any of 69's escutcheon route markers remain unstolen, like the 420 mile markers that keep wandering off.) So back to original question(s) -- - who should fix the E-W section of I-69 to be E-W - how - split relation? relation of relation? - from where ? At what point does signage change to E-W ? [and for mapping purposes no I'm NOT going to suggest we get that from a copyright source like StreeView, that needs free & open ground truth. ] _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
