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

Here's a South Carolina 403 from I-20.  July 31, 2007.



A North Carolina 403 from I-40.  November 12, 2010.



And of course an Ontario 403, this one near Brantford.  August 4, 2001.

I'd like to see the La Crosse/Winona bridge meet happen. I'll let SSO take first dibs since it's his baby but I'll gladly step in if you don't want to.

I had an idea though for that one which I hadn't discussed yet which was making it a two-day with a day for Rochester material. I suppose that can also be post-meet if we don't feel there's enough but I have a few things in mind.

When Scott first shared his idea about a La Crosse meet, I was very interested - and I still am. I actually have a friend who is in Rochester doing a seminary internship until next August. If this meet happens before next August, I could potentially include a visit with him.

Never too early to start thinking about them. 

I'm glad someone started this thread.

Now, let's start 403.

The 403 at Highway 24 near Paris, ON


SC 403 on I-95

I have to think that this was the “preferred alternative”.

This was indeed the preferred alignment. I was working at PennDOT District 6 at the time and remember it quite well. District 3 had just identified the preferred alignment and was preparing to forge ahead with the remainder of the process of constructing that missing segment of the freeway when Governor Rendell halted the entire project.

Incidentally, this was at the same time that he halted all work on the project to construct the missing freeway segment of US 322 between State College and Potter's Mills—mere weeks prior to that district identifying it's preferred alignment there. It was part of a larger shut-down of projects across the state by the governor.

PennDOT officials in both districts were furious. They were eager to fix the huge safety issues that both roadways represented in their respective districts, but were told to stand down.

Since the preferred alignment for this segment of US 220 was identified, the plans are, as you say, sitting on the shelf and waiting to be dusted off. Of course, that's doing no favors for property values along the north side of the project area.

I believe that's supposed to be a new alignment for the twinning of AL 13, which creates a bypass around Phil Campbell and Haleyville. It's been 10-15 years in the making, and the high hopes for it to connect to I-22 may never happen.

http://www.hbtv.us/news/?story_id=2280

Can someone explain the shape of the VA primary highway shield?  Like CA's, it looks like the blade of a shovel (pointed the opposite way from CA's shield).

ixnay

There had been a project website at susquehannabeltway.com, and though the site was indexed by archive.org, all of the map images are missing. I must have looked at them when they were current (about 13 years ago), but I don’t recall any details now.

I did, however, come across a Lycoming County Planning Commission report on land use that included a map of that area with a strip of land shaded to show Alignment 2a2 of the missing Susquehanna Beltway link. I have to think that this was the “preferred alternative”.

According to the map, the freeway would have veered to the north of the existing alignment at the site of the current at-grade intersection with PA 287. PA 287 would have been realigned to the east to intersect with the freeway at an interchange just east of Larrys Creek. East of there, the new freeway would then generally parallel the existing road to the north, but the new alignment would gradually converge with the old alignment as it approached Quenshuckney Road. Then at that point, the freeway would be built essentially on top of the old road with additional right of way being taken from the south side, leaving the homes on the north side mostly untouched.

The plans also appeared to include an interchange about halfway between PA 287 and Fourth Street. The map’s title refers to a “Pine Run Interchange”, and though there’s a Pine Run Road in the vicinity, the shaded area seems to suggest that the interchange would be a diamond connecting to a new perpendicular access road linking the old and new alignments just east of the Harvest Moon Restaurant and Port Drive-In theater.

Are the plans themselves tentative -- or even shelved for the time being? -- or are they in an "active but awaiting funding ID" mode -- i.e., has a definitive corridor alignment been selected since these maps were published circa 2004 or so?  If the "target year" is 2025 for a 2004 document -- and nothing has progressed since then, it seems like everything would be delayed by the time passage of 13 years -- making the new "target" 2038!  If that is indeed the case, then once I-99 is signed north of Williamsport, if I were PennDOT, I'd simply do the rational (and cheapest) thing and put a bunch of "TO I-99" signs along both I-80 and US 220, along with corresponding signage of all 3 interchanges involved. (the 2 along I-80 and the I-180 interchange in Williamsport).  That should take care of I-99 "virtual" continuity for the next 21 years.

US 341 - US 23 = 318

1. Is the Boulder City bypass open to traffic?
2. Does/will US 93 still go through Boulder City or does/will it follow the bypass south of town?
3. What will happen to the section of US 95 from the bypass to current/former US 93 west of Boulder City? Will it remain US 95 or will US 95 follow the bypass?
4. I-11 should absolutely follow I-515 north of I-215.
5. If you think I-11 will be built north of Vegas in the next 100 years you're high.