AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Southeast => Topic started by: codyg1985 on November 02, 2011, 07:44:29 AM

Title: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on November 02, 2011, 07:44:29 AM
I haven't seen a thread that contains general Alabama material outside of Mobile and Huntsville, so I am creating a thread for the rest of Alabama for smaller projects and questions.

Here is an interesting presentation that shows construction of bridges along the relocated AL 13 in Franklin County over Bear Creek: AL 13 is in the slow process of being upgraded to an expressway between Spruce Pine, AL and Eldridge, AL.

http://www.eng.auburn.edu/department/eesv/T2/files/2011_conference/BRIDGES%20OVER%20BEAR%20Creek.pdf
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ttownfeen on November 02, 2011, 07:50:13 PM
I didn't realize that construction of a four-lane expressway from the Shoals to I-22 was already in progress.  That's a pretty big bridge for a lake I'd never heard of before.

Why does it seem like all the highway constructions projects go to North Alabama, while the western part of is constantly left in the cold?  There's no four-lane route between Tuscaloosa and ANY other city in Alabama and Mississippi that's not an interstate. For example, US 82, which is a freeway in large parts of Mississippi, is a two-lane gauntlet between the state university town and the state capital.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: NE2 on November 02, 2011, 08:46:19 PM
That part of SR 13 has been graded for some time with construction stalled. I don't see the point - traffic headed east (Birmingham) can use SR 157 and traffic headed west can use Corridor V once that's completed. Jasper seems to be the largest city connected to Muscle Shoals by SR 13.

South Alabama's getting some construction, such as US 98 (yeah, it's taking forever) and the Georgiana bypass to complete the four lanes from Opp to I-65.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alex on November 02, 2011, 09:32:38 PM
Quote from: NE2 on November 02, 2011, 08:46:19 PM

South Alabama's getting some construction, such as US 98 (yeah, it's taking forever) and the Georgiana bypass to complete the four lanes from Opp to I-65.

They are out of money on it again, no progress has been made since 2009.  :ded:

The one project that is making progress is the Baldwin Beach Express. Money was shifted from the CR 13/I-10 interchange project for the county road. Not much else to report about in Southwest Alabama.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on November 03, 2011, 07:18:07 AM
Quote from: NE2 on November 02, 2011, 08:46:19 PM
That part of SR 13 has been graded for some time with construction stalled. I don't see the point - traffic headed east (Birmingham) can use SR 157 and traffic headed west can use Corridor V once that's completed. Jasper seems to be the largest city connected to Muscle Shoals by SR 13.

AL 13 doesn't quite make it to Jasper. At Natural Bridge, AL 5 runs southeast from there to Jasper, and AL 13 runs due south to Eldridge, Berry, and Tuscaloosa. AL 5 used to continue along AL 13 north from Natural Bridge all the way to Florence, but it has since been truncated to Natural Bridge.

Haleyville, the largest city in Winston County, would be the largest city along a widened AL 13. As of now the widening isn't scheduled to happen south of US 78/I-22.

Traffic volumes along AL 13 in Fayette County are very light.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: NE2 on November 03, 2011, 08:40:29 AM
What I mean is that Jasper is the largest city that would be connected to Muscle Shoals by a four-lane that currently isn't (or won't be via Corridor V).
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: FLRoads on November 08, 2011, 09:20:12 PM
Found a memo from the FHWA site about the ground breaking for the Montgomery Outer Loop. The initial project will encompass 3.5 miles from Interstate 85 south to Alabama 110 and will be the first step in what is suppose to be the eventual extension of Interstate 85 through the western portions of Alabama. No date has been given for completion of the initial phase. Here is the link to the memo:

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pressroom/fhwa1153.htm

Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on November 09, 2011, 07:37:58 AM
^ It will still take decades to finish that road just around Montgomery at the usual rate that ALDOT moves. I guess it will take even longer with reduced federal funding. This stub by itself will not serve much purpose.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: FLRoads on November 09, 2011, 07:59:09 PM
Indeed. They can't finish U.S. 98 near Mobile, it took forever to get the I-65/future I-22 interchange to make progress, and the approaches for the future Montgomery Outer Loop have been sitting there for how long now...?

On a separate note though, I'm wondering if they will keep it as Alabama 108 once it opens or if they will just post "Future I-85 Corridor" signs along it...
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on November 10, 2011, 07:57:54 AM
I recall seeing documentation somewhere within ALDOT about posting either the loop or the old route through town as I-685.  Wish I could remember where I found it.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Grzrd on November 10, 2011, 11:46:01 AM
Quote from: froggie on November 10, 2011, 07:57:54 AM
I recall seeing documentation somewhere within ALDOT about posting either the loop or the old route through town as I-685.  Wish I could remember where I found it.
Here's a link to a February 22, 2011 ALDOT release concerning the Montgomery Outer Loop as the first phase of the I-85 Extension:
http://www.dot.state.al.us/mcrweb/doc/NR/2011/2-22%20Montgomery%20Outer%20Loop.doc

" ... When completed to I-65, the Outer Loop will be designated as I-85. The portion of I-85 into downtown Montgomery will be re-designated as I-685. The Outer Loop from I-85 to I-65 covers 24 miles ..."
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on November 11, 2011, 05:49:11 PM
Alabama Barricade, a common signage and traffic control subcontractor that is used by ALDOT, has an interesting picture on their website: http://alabamabarricade.com/index.php

If you notice the right-hand sign assembly, then you notice that this sign could almost fit in Dothan, AL (if you replaced US 210 with Alabama 210). US 431 used to be US 241. Just thought this was interesting.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: FLRoads on December 04, 2011, 01:19:40 AM
Drove up to Montgomery today to complete some Christmas shopping and while there decided to check out the new multiplex of Interstate 85 and U.S. 80 (as originally and briefly discussed here (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4707.msg110586#msg110586)) out to Exit 16, as well as the initial progress of the Montgomery bypass:

(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/southeast/i-085_nb_exit_011_03.jpg)
Interstate 85 north and U.S. 80 east after the busy interchange of Alabama 271 (Exit 9).

(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/southeast/i-085_nb_exit_011_05.jpg)
Alabama 126 now uses the south frontage road (former U.S. 80) as well as the north frontage road along Interstate 85. Instead of replacing the signage at the interchange, AL 126 shields were slapped on, covering the existing U.S. 80 shield.

(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/southeast/i-085_nb_exit_016_04.jpg)
Trailblazers have been erected to direct eastbound U.S. 80 traffic off of Interstate 85 at Exit 16. I would assume that a future sign replacement project would entail the addition of U.S. 80 onto the sign board.

(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/southeast/us-080_at_al-126.jpg)
U.S. 80 east immediately departs south of Exit 16 onto its current alignment. Alabama 126 is now signed along the former stretch of U.S. 80 between Exit 11 and Exit 16.

(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/southeast/al-126_wb_after_us-080.jpg)
For some reason Alabama 126 is signed as east (as also seen in the previous photo) when one is clearly traveling west...I could not figure out the reasoning for this while there, other than the maintenance crew erected the wrong directional banner. I might have to send an inquiry to ALDOT to see if this is erroneous.

(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/southeast/al-293_sb_at_millies_creek.jpg)
Traveling south along the short Alabama 293, some initial progress is being done along the future Montgomery bypass (future AL 108/future I-85 extension). Some initial realignment of the north frontage road of Interstate 85 is also taking shape in the immediate vicinity of the proposed interchange with the bypass. I would assume once the first phase of the project is open that Alabama 293 mileage (not the number) will transfer to the new bypass and that AL 293 itself will be decommissioned.









Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: lamsalfl on January 14, 2012, 12:47:32 AM
Any update on the I-10 widening west to Mile 14?  How far along is it?  Have they poured any concrete, including for the median barriers?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Grzrd on January 18, 2012, 05:37:30 PM
Governor Robert Bentley is proposing toll roads and a $2 billion road and bridge repair program. (http://www.bizjournals.com/birmingham/news/2012/01/10/bentley-proposes-toll-roads-2b-bonds.html) A bond issue would fund the $2 billion road and bridge repair program, but state officials have not figured out how to repay the debt. Tolls are proposed for the Birmingham Northern Beltline and new toll roads in south Alabama that are being planned for construction by ALDOT.

Does anyone know what toll roads are being planned by ALDOT for south Alabama?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on January 18, 2012, 08:59:15 PM
Well for starters, the Birmingham Northern Beltline (BNB) is held up because of a significant environmental dispute over the routing of the road and how it affects the watershed. There was supposed to be a section to be let in December, but that obviously didn't happen. Second, the BNB is to be funded using APD funding (it is a part of Corridor X-1). Can a road still receive APD funding if it is to also be tolled?

As for other toll roads, there has been the idea thrown around for a Montgomery-Dothan-Panama City toll road and of course the West Alabama toll road.

It could be repaid from oil royalties earned from the Alabama Trust Fund, but oh wait, that measure was defeated by voters in 2010. Plus, it didn't go far enough.

I think a specific listing of projects would be good to see for both toll roads and for road/bridge repair.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on January 23, 2012, 08:49:48 AM
Apparently ALDOT has shuffled around which counties are located in which divisions: http://cpmsweb2.dot.state.al.us/TransPlan/STIP/STIP.aspx
Title: Tuscaloosa East Bypass
Post by: Grzrd on January 25, 2012, 10:49:27 PM
This Dec. 14 article (http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20111214/news/111219907?p=1&tc=pg) discusses a recent public meeting about the Tuscaloosa East Bypass:

Quote
Tuscaloosa County residents on Tuesday looked at plans for the entire route of the Eastern Bypass and commented on the roadway that would loop from U.S. Highway 82 west of Northport back north and east to Interstate 59/20 east of Tuscaloosa.
Alabama Department of Transportation officials answered questions about the proposed route during a public meeting at the Northport Civic Center. Division Engineer Dee Rowe said that the state transportation department must assemble the written and verbal comments and present the environmental impact study to Federal Highway Administration for approval.
The proposed 20-mile, limited access bypass would cost an estimated $235 million and would have 11 interchanges scattered along the route. The route has drawn fire because it crosses the "M Bend"  of Hurricane Creek and would have an on impact the park that is along the creek. But proponents say the bypass is needed to relieve traffic congestion on McFarland Boulevard in Tuscaloosa and Northport ...

The environmentalists are getting ready for battle:

Quote
Sarah Stokes of the Southern Environmental Law Center said federal guidelines require documented proof that the road will have secondary benefits, like relieving traffic congestion and stimulating economic development. ALDOT has not provided that proof, she said ... Hurricane Creekkeeper John Wathen ... called the environmental study flawed. He said that there are threatened and endangered plant and animal species along Hurricane Creek.

ALDOT's Tuscaloosa East Bypass page (http://aldotapps.dot.state.al.us/TEB/TEBhome.html) mentions that the Comment Period ends Jan. 31 and provides contact info for getting more information about the project, in case anyone is interested:

Quote
Written comments may also be submitted by completing the comment sheet during the meeting, submitting comment sheet/comments by mail, delivering comments to the ALDOT Fifth Division address below, faxing comments to the ALDOT number below, and by e-mail to tuscaloosabypass@dot.state.al.us which will become part of the public record.  All comments must be received by 5:00 p.m., Tuesday, January 31, 2012 ... Anyone needing further information before, or after, the meeting may contact:
Ms. L. Dee Rowe, Division Engineer
Alabama Department of Transportation
P. O. Box 70070
Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35407-0070
Phone: (205) 553-7030
Fax: (205) 556-0900
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: SSF on January 28, 2012, 12:34:38 AM
Quote from: lamsalfl on January 14, 2012, 12:47:32 AM
Any update on the I-10 widening west to Mile 14?  How far along is it?  Have they poured any concrete, including for the median barriers?

No median barriers yet, they have the anchor bolts for what looks to be the median wall set.  It looks to be a good 12 months away from completion to me.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rcm195 on February 08, 2012, 07:50:44 PM
Just wondering, any updates on the US 82 project to go around Centreville?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: mcdonaat on April 30, 2012, 04:56:57 AM
Anyone have some information on US 80 Truck route through Selma? Noticed on Street View that one shield collection had three US 80 shields at one place, two pointing along the current US 80, and one on the Truck route
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on May 14, 2012, 09:18:19 PM
Learned two things on a trip to Mobile over the weekend:

1) ALDOT does use shields on the pavement in the Mobile area. Most of them are around the Bankhead Tunnels: http://g.co/maps/6e9vw. I didn't know ALDOT did this anywhere.

2) ALDOT must be experimenting with painting exit numbers on the pavement. I noticed some of the exit numbers painted along I-65 around Prattville: http://g.co/maps/6bxw5
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: NE2 on May 14, 2012, 09:49:31 PM
Quote from: mcdonaat on April 30, 2012, 04:56:57 AM
Anyone have some information on US 80 Truck route through Selma? Noticed on Street View that one shield collection had three US 80 shields at one place, two pointing along the current US 80, and one on the Truck route
I think it's just an alternate way of signing the bypass so trucks don't use 80 Biz.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alex on May 14, 2012, 10:00:46 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on May 14, 2012, 09:18:19 PM
Learned two things on a trip to Mobile over the weekend:

1) ALDOT does use shields on the pavement in the Mobile area. Most of them are around the Bankhead Tunnels: http://g.co/maps/6e9vw. I didn't know ALDOT did this anywhere.


That is the only place I have seen them in the Mobile area, did you note them anywhere else?

I first noticed the pavement based shields in 2007:

(https://www.aaroads.com/southeast/alabama098/us-098_eb_app_conception_st.jpg) (https://www.aaroads.com/southeast/alabama098/us-098_eb_app_conception_st.jpg)

I snapped a photo of the ones exiting the Bankhead last month:

(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/southeast/us-098_eb_at_i-010_us-090_eb.jpg) (//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/southeast/us-098_eb_at_i-010_us-090_eb.jpg)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on May 14, 2012, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on May 14, 2012, 09:18:19 PM
Learned two things on a trip to Mobile over the weekend:


2) ALDOT must be experimenting with painting exit numbers on the pavement. I noticed some of the exit numbers painted along I-65 around Prattville: http://g.co/maps/6bxw5
If you scroll this just to the left of the screen shot on east bound US 82, where there is an I65 SOUTH painted on the second to right lane so you don't accidentally turn into the motel entrance just before the I65-South ramp. http://maps.google.com/?t=h&ie=UTF8&vpsrc=6&ll=32.460316,-86.390553&spn=0.000634,0.000832&z=21
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on May 15, 2012, 07:02:59 AM
Quote from: Alex on May 14, 2012, 10:00:46 PM
That is the only place I have seen them in the Mobile area, did you note them anywhere else?

I noticed one exiting off I-65 north onto US 98. There is a painted shield for the U-turn lane that takes you to the west service road and, ultimately, to I-65 south: http://g.co/maps/gbr9j
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alex on May 15, 2012, 11:55:00 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on May 15, 2012, 07:02:59 AM
Quote from: Alex on May 14, 2012, 10:00:46 PM
That is the only place I have seen them in the Mobile area, did you note them anywhere else?

I noticed one exiting off I-65 north onto US 98. There is a painted shield for the U-turn lane that takes you to the west service road and, ultimately, to I-65 south: http://g.co/maps/gbr9j

Ah yes, forgot about those. :hmm: Once they reconfigured the intersection of I-65 East Service Road and US 98 (Moffett Road) to incorporate a protected right-hand turn, I stopped using that exit. But looking through my photos, there they were before the second right-hand turn lane was configured from November 2008:

(https://www.aaroads.com/southeast/alabama999/e_i-065_service_rd_sb_app_us-098_01.jpg) (https://www.aaroads.com/southeast/alabama999/e_i-065_service_rd_sb_app_us-098_01.jpg)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on May 31, 2012, 03:30:35 PM
Alabama is going to be using GARVEE bonds to perform some maintenance projects across the state.

Governor Bentley Announces More than 100 Road and Bridge Projects as Part of ATRIP Initiative (http://www.governor.alabama.gov/news/news_detail.aspx?ID=6616)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on June 03, 2012, 09:42:08 AM
Not sure that's such a good idea, especially when a state gets to a point where all their Federal highway funding is going to pay back the "GARVEE" bonds.

I also noticed that, except for 2 turn lane projects, all the projects on the list are for county or local roads.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on June 03, 2012, 04:54:15 PM
Quote from: froggie on June 03, 2012, 09:42:08 AM
Not sure that's such a good idea, especially when a state gets to a point where all their Federal highway funding is going to pay back the "GARVEE" bonds.

I also noticed that, except for 2 turn lane projects, all the projects on the list are for county or local roads.

Yeah, I am not that impressed with it myself so far. If they are going to use GARVEE bonds, then at least use them for larger projects that can have more of a return on investment. I also agree that we shouldn't over-rely on these bonds. It isn't a sure thing if that money will ever get here to pay back those bonds.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on June 17, 2012, 08:59:59 PM
Quote from: rcm195 on February 08, 2012, 07:50:44 PM
Just wondering, any updates on the US 82 project to go around Centreville?
Went through Centreville this weekend. Finally some activity showing on the east end of this around county rd 20. For a long time there was only a couple of culverts that had been built but now there are trees being cleared and road bed being graded. Maybe it won't be too long now for this section to open up and shave a few minutes off my trips that go through there.
Title: Memphis-Huntsville-Atlanta Freeway Officially Dead?
Post by: Grzrd on September 12, 2012, 01:31:38 PM
This editiorial (http://blog.al.com/times-views/2012/09/death_of_a_dream_the_memphis-h.html) opines that the project has "died with a whimper":

Quote
The long-proposed Memphis-Huntsville-Atlanta freeway died with a whimper last week when remaining old money from federal highway earmarks was redirected toward regular road work.
Alabama's portion of unused earmarks - $51 million including $14.8 million for the Memphis-Atlanta project - is the highest of any state from $473 million the Obama administration has identified nationally ....
No other highway project in Alabama since the decades-old I-65 project was as grandiose as the proposed Memphis-Atlanta freeway that would cut across North Alabama.
And none fell so hard ....
The completed Memphis-Huntsville-Atlanta freeway would have required $500 million or so in state highway matching money for federal aid projects.
Even with the state match spread out over years, it would have taken considerable clout to route significant money toward the Memphis-Atlanta project with so many other state transportation needs.
Then there was the issue of route approval. Corridor plans finally took shape, including the stretch through Redstone Arsenal known as Patriot Parkway. Heightened security concerns after the 911 terrorist strikes nixed access across Redstone, forcing state highway planners back to the drawing board.
Meanwhile, interest from Georgia and Mississippi waned. Georgia committed to upgrade Georgia 20 and other highways that would be links. But segments near Atlanta hit snags from concerns over ozone issues from increased emissions.
Mississippi didn't have the same motivation as Alabama. Officials there expressed concern over adding projects that would siphon money from existing projects, including the costly four-laning of U.S. 72 linking Huntsville to Memphis.
There were also political pressures down state to keep Memphis-Atlanta traffic along U.S. 78 through Tupelo and via Corridor X. Indeed, Alabama's completion of Corridor X may have been the death knell for the more northern Memphis-Huntsville-Atlanta freeway that needed full political pull across its breadth.
Will this project resurface? Possibly, but we won't predict when.

Oh well, a good US 72/Corridor V/link to Atlanta expressway is still probably feasible.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on September 12, 2012, 02:20:22 PM
Quote from: Grzrd on September 12, 2012, 01:31:38 PM
This editiorial (http://blog.al.com/times-views/2012/09/death_of_a_dream_the_memphis-h.html) opines that the project has "died with a whimper":

Quote
The long-proposed Memphis-Huntsville-Atlanta freeway died with a whimper last week when remaining old money from federal highway earmarks was redirected toward regular road work.
Alabama's portion of unused earmarks - $51 million including $14.8 million for the Memphis-Atlanta project - is the highest of any state from $473 million the Obama administration has identified nationally ....
No other highway project in Alabama since the decades-old I-65 project was as grandiose as the proposed Memphis-Atlanta freeway that would cut across North Alabama.
And none fell so hard ....
The completed Memphis-Huntsville-Atlanta freeway would have required $500 million or so in state highway matching money for federal aid projects.
Even with the state match spread out over years, it would have taken considerable clout to route significant money toward the Memphis-Atlanta project with so many other state transportation needs.
Then there was the issue of route approval. Corridor plans finally took shape, including the stretch through Redstone Arsenal known as Patriot Parkway. Heightened security concerns after the 911 terrorist strikes nixed access across Redstone, forcing state highway planners back to the drawing board.
Meanwhile, interest from Georgia and Mississippi waned. Georgia committed to upgrade Georgia 20 and other highways that would be links. But segments near Atlanta hit snags from concerns over ozone issues from increased emissions.
Mississippi didn't have the same motivation as Alabama. Officials there expressed concern over adding projects that would siphon money from existing projects, including the costly four-laning of U.S. 72 linking Huntsville to Memphis.
There were also political pressures down state to keep Memphis-Atlanta traffic along U.S. 78 through Tupelo and via Corridor X. Indeed, Alabama's completion of Corridor X may have been the death knell for the more northern Memphis-Huntsville-Atlanta freeway that needed full political pull across its breadth.
Will this project resurface? Possibly, but we won't predict when.

Oh well, a good US 72/Corridor V/link to Atlanta expressway is still probably feasible.

That is pretty much done between Memphis and I-24 at South Pittsburg, TN. There are some places where upgrades are needed, but one can drive from Memphis to Atlanta via Huntsville on a four-lane road the entire way, with the exception of a two-lane portion of US 72 in Mississippi southeast of Collierville.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on September 13, 2012, 10:38:35 AM
I was messing around with the traffic function in Google Maps to look at Alabama's four largest cities and their traffic patterns on their freeway system. None of this is by any means as comprehensive as a traffic study; just some observations from patterns that Google Maps shows at different times of the day. These may not be entirely accurate either, or it may be biased towards more recent data, which could skew results. With that said, overall, it seems like Birmingham/Hoover and Mobile have worse traffic than Huntsville/Decatur and Montgomery. Some other observations:

- I would rank Mobile as actually having the worst traffic of all four due to the bottleneck of the Wallace Tunnel on I-10. Remove that, and Mobile's traffic situation would seem to improve. Due to tourist traffic (I assume) I-10 between Tillman's Corner and Daphne has some congested spots during the weekends. Of course, the Wallace Tunnel bottleneck is worse during the weekends because of this.

- Montgomery seems to mostly not have any bottlenecks on its interstate system with the exception of I-65 northbound out of Montgomery towards Prattville on Friday afternoons. Why are we spending all of this money on a bypass of Montgomery where that money could be better used elsewhere?

- Birmingham's largest problem is I-65 from I-20/59 south to US 31 in Alabaster. There seems to also be congestion along I-59 near Trussville from the Clay/Chalkville to I-459. Congestion on I-65 northbound and southbound at I-459 can cause traffic to back up along the ramps in the I-65/459 interchange.

- In Birmingham, there seems to be a backup along Red Mountain Expressway (or Elton B. Stephens Expressway, whatever is your cup of tea) (US 31/280) going north to the ramp to I-20/59 west/southbound. The section between that interchange and I-65 seems to get congested as well.

- In Birmingham, the I-20 westbound to I-20/59 southbound movement gets congested due to the sharpness of the ramp.

- Huntsville/Decatur shows a bottleneck along I-65 at the Tennessee River bridge, but I don't think this is entirely accurate because a lot of the recent data included the lane closures along the bridge for maintenance work.

- Most of Huntsville's problems are at the interchanges themselves (I-565/AL 255/Madison Pike and I-565/Memorial Pkwy/US 72, and yes I consider that one large interchange complex). Memorial Pkwy is quite congested at rush hour between US 72 and Airport Road, but this isn't reflected as much with Google's logged data.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alex on October 29, 2012, 04:34:28 PM
Montgomery Outer Loop Project update (http://www.wsfa.com/story/19919691/m)

The story indicates that the project between Vaughn Road (SR 110) and I-85 is 33% complete. Pier supports and girders are already going up, and the bridge deck over SR 110 is in place. Work continues until December 2014.

The video indicated that there are plans to extend the loop northward to Elmore County (first I have heard of this), but that the current interchange design does not include any ramps for that direction.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on October 29, 2012, 05:25:26 PM
QuoteIt's a clear field now, but this will be the main roadway for the Montgomery Outer Loop. A loop that officials say is on time for construction completion in December of 2014. Then there will be another two years of road paving before the loop is ready for traffic in late 2016.

Badly-worded article...
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alex on October 29, 2012, 05:27:36 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on October 29, 2012, 05:25:26 PM
QuoteIt's a clear field now, but this will be the main roadway for the Montgomery Outer Loop. A loop that officials say is on time for construction completion in December of 2014. Then there will be another two years of road paving before the loop is ready for traffic in late 2016.

Badly-worded article...

The reporter also said it was the I-185 extension.  :-P

From the ALDOT site: http://aldotapps.dot.state.al.us/MOL/

QuoteUnder a $66 million contract awarded by the Alabama Department of Transportation, Bessemer-based R.R. Dawson
Bridge Co. will realign portions of U.S. Highway 80 and State Route 126, make ramp changes at the Waugh Exit on
I-85, and build a series of overpasses and bridges. The project, which began September 28, 2011, is scheduled for
completion in December 2014.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: The High Plains Traveler on October 29, 2012, 10:13:00 PM
As someone from far outside the region who this month for the first time drove U.S. 98 from Mississippi into Alabama, can anyone explain why U.S. 98 goes from an expressway in Mississippi into a cow path in Alabama? Overstatement to be sure, but that was a pretty drastic change in highway quality at the state line, especially when I saw the orphan bridge just inside Mississippi that waits to connect to the other carriageway in Alabama. What is the concept for U.S. 98 into Mobile and connecting to I-65?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alex on October 29, 2012, 11:38:47 PM
Quote from: The High Plains Traveler on October 29, 2012, 10:13:00 PM
As someone from far outside the region who this month for the first time drove U.S. 98 from Mississippi into Alabama, can anyone explain why U.S. 98 goes from an expressway in Mississippi into a cow path in Alabama? Overstatement to be sure, but that was a pretty drastic change in highway quality at the state line, especially when I saw the orphan bridge just inside Mississippi that waits to connect to the other carriageway in Alabama. What is the concept for U.S. 98 into Mobile and connecting to I-65?

A new four-lane alignment is planned to run from that unused second bridge at the Esctawpa River and state line east to bypass Wilmer and Semmes. Grading was completed on a good portion of this project before money ran out in 2009.

Alabama 158 (https://www.aaroads.com/guide.php?page=s0158al), from Schillinger Road east to U.S. 45 was opened in 2008 as a four-lane divided highway with a 65 mph speed limit. The existing road (Industrial Pkwy) was twinned from U.S. 45 east to I-65/Exit 13 as well. Both of these projects were undertaken for the eventual realignment of U.S. 98 away from Moffett Road.

No work has been done on the new U.S. 98 from Schillinger Road west to a point east of Glenwood Road (http://goo.gl/maps/iugzU). This includes a connector from the Wilmer Bypass to Moffett Road at Semmes.

My map of the corridor:

(https://www.aaroads.com/southeast/images/u0098_mobile_map.png) (https://www.aaroads.com/southeast/images/u0098_mobile_map.png)

The project web site (not updated in quite some time):
http://www.safe98.com/
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on October 30, 2012, 10:04:37 AM
I noticed that along the graded portion there are a lot of intersecting roads where the new road wasn't graded in. Are bridges going in at those locations later, or are they going to come back and regrade those as at-grade intersections?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alex on October 30, 2012, 05:00:58 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on October 30, 2012, 10:04:37 AM
I noticed that along the graded portion there are a lot of intersecting roads where the new road wasn't graded in. Are bridges going in at those locations later, or are they going to come back and regrade those as at-grade intersections?

Probably left those alone to reduce disruptions to existing traffic. The only grade separation planned that I am aware of is a one-quadrant interchange at CR-63. This was originally envisioned as a full interchange, but that was scaled back to save on funding. Not sure what the plans are now considering that the main roadway is now unfunded.

Further east, I have seen maps with a diamond interchange at AL-217 and a trumpet for CR-31. Those may have been scaled back.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Ace10 on November 02, 2012, 02:10:05 PM
Quote from: The High Plains Traveler on October 29, 2012, 10:13:00 PM
As someone from far outside the region who this month for the first time drove U.S. 98 from Mississippi into Alabama, can anyone explain why U.S. 98 goes from an expressway in Mississippi into a cow path in Alabama? Overstatement to be sure, but that was a pretty drastic change in highway quality at the state line, especially when I saw the orphan bridge just inside Mississippi that waits to connect to the other carriageway in Alabama. What is the concept for U.S. 98 into Mobile and connecting to I-65?

US 90 does the same thing at the MS-AL state line. US 90 is a four-lane divided highway for most of its length (except for west/south of MS 607, where MS 607 continues westward as a four-lane divided highway) in Mississippi, but squeezes down to two lanes right before you cross into Alabama. I figure the traffic counts are low enough where Alabama doesn't feel the need to expand it to four lanes. US 90 in western Alabama doesn't seem to go through many big commercial or industrial areas that aren't already easily accessible via I-10, whereas in Mississippi it stays very close to the coast (in Harrison county) and goes through Ingalls (or what used to be Ingalls) near Pascagoula and the port of Gulfport.

I can't really speak for US 98. It does seem like a major corridor for Memphis/Jackson/Hattiesburg traffic to Mobile, and if I were traveling that corridor, I'd want it to be four lanes as well, or at least have a parallel freeway next to it.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: NE2 on November 02, 2012, 02:30:55 PM
Quote from: Ace10 on November 02, 2012, 02:10:05 PM
I figure the traffic counts are low enough where Alabama doesn't feel the need to expand it to four lanes.
Or maybe Alabama built their section of I-10 first?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: kendancy66 on November 07, 2012, 11:33:45 PM
Quote from: Ace10 on November 02, 2012, 02:10:05 PM
Quote from: The High Plains Traveler on October 29, 2012, 10:13:00 PM
As someone from far outside the region who this month for the first time drove U.S. 98 from Mississippi into Alabama, can anyone explain why U.S. 98 goes from an expressway in Mississippi into a cow path in Alabama? Overstatement to be sure, but that was a pretty drastic change in highway quality at the state line, especially when I saw the orphan bridge just inside Mississippi that waits to connect to the other carriageway in Alabama. What is the concept for U.S. 98 into Mobile and connecting to I-65?

US 90 does the same thing at the MS-AL state line. US 90 is a four-lane divided highway for most of its length (except for west/south of MS 607, where MS 607 continues westward as a four-lane divided highway) in Mississippi, but squeezes down to two lanes right before you cross into Alabama. I figure the traffic counts are low enough where Alabama doesn't feel the need to expand it to four lanes. US 90 in western Alabama doesn't seem to go through many big commercial or industrial areas that aren't already easily accessible via I-10, whereas in Mississippi it stays very close to the coast (in Harrison county) and goes through Ingalls (or what used to be Ingalls) near Pascagoula and the port of Gulfport.

I can't really speak for US 98. It does seem like a major corridor for Memphis/Jackson/Hattiesburg traffic to Mobile, and if I were traveling that corridor, I'd want it to be four lanes as well, or at least have a parallel freeway next to it.

Also realize that I-10 in AL was built before I-10 in MS. It ended at that same place, the AL/MS border and westbound I-10 traffic transitioned from interstate in AL to US-90 in MS for many years, thus the need for 4 lanes.  I travelled that section many times.  I am sure the earlier existence of I-10 in AL is the reason US-90 in AL is the way it is.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Ace10 on November 08, 2012, 12:32:52 PM
^ That makes much more sense now. Thanks for the background information. I thought it was a bit interesting how US 90 curves toward I-10 right at the state line - I just hadn't made the connection that they were once directly connected.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alps on November 08, 2012, 09:18:13 PM
Quote from: Ace10 on November 08, 2012, 12:32:52 PM
^ That makes much more sense now. Thanks for the background information. I thought it was a bit interesting how US 90 curves toward I-10 right at the state line - I just hadn't made the connection that they were once directly connected.
Well, check out the old road, which is momentarily above I-10 there. It's not as much that 90 was built to curve up that way as that I-10 was built to meet US 90 at Moss Point, and 90 upgraded accordingly.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alex on November 09, 2012, 12:30:25 PM
(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/southeast/us-090_grand_bay_quad_1943.jpg) (//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/southeast/us-090_grand_bay_quad_1943.jpg)

The original alignment of U.S. 90 took the route along Old Stage Road from Orange Grove to Independence Road east directly into Alabama.

(//www.aaroads.com/wp-content/uploads/blog_images/southeast/i-010_al_01.jpg) (//www.aaroads.com/wp-content/uploads/blog_images/southeast/i-010_al_01.jpg)

The four-lane alignment shoots southwest from the state line, where US 90 originally traveled due west. This Alabama official map still shows the old alignment.

(//www.aaroads.com/wp-content/uploads/blog_images/southeast/i-010_al_02.jpg) (//www.aaroads.com/wp-content/uploads/blog_images/southeast/i-010_al_02.jpg)

This Gousha map shows the final configuration.

From what I have researched, County Road 28 (Old Pascagoula Road) is part of the Old Spanish Trail, though I do not believe it was a part of US 90. Only the part from Three Notches (near Theodore on the map) to Mobile was a part of the original US highway. The four-lane tie of US 90 to I-10 is why Pascagoula remains the control city of I-10 west to this day.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: msunat97 on November 17, 2012, 11:12:30 AM
Does anyone have any info on how the US82 bypass is progressing around Centreville, AL?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on November 23, 2012, 05:38:01 PM
Quote from: msunat97 on November 17, 2012, 11:12:30 AM
Does anyone have any info on how the US82 bypass is progressing around Centreville, AL?
Just went through there today. At least at the ends it looks like the base work is done. Not sure when the paving and connecting to current roadway is supposed to take place.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadman65 on November 25, 2012, 07:41:54 PM
Has the proposed freeway from I-10 in Florida to Dothan, AL ever gotten anywhere?  I did read that it was being debated heavily and that there is another chance it could be extended to Panama City as well.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Bamaroadgeek on November 25, 2012, 08:20:51 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 25, 2012, 07:41:54 PM
Has the proposed freeway from I-10 in Florida to Dothan, AL ever gotten anywhere?  I did read that it was being debated heavily and that there is another chance it could be extended to Panama City as well.

It'd take ALDOT a century and a half to build it even if it were making progress.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on November 30, 2012, 12:42:48 PM
The new exit 50 on I-85 opened at some point this week. It is signed as Auburn Technology Parkway which could cause some confusion as the technology park just east of I-85 off US-29 has a street named Technology Parkway that isn't connected to this road.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: SSF on November 30, 2012, 07:39:27 PM
i suspect the speed limit signs on that stretch will still be up for another 2 months so Lee County or whoever can make some money off of it still.

been waiting on that one to open for a while though, glad to see it
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on January 03, 2013, 06:13:49 AM
On July 4, 2012, I drove from Columbus, GA to Nashville via US 280 and I-65, and I noticed that Clearview has gained a toehold in Alabama. There were a few recently replaced signs in B'ham, and new (what are these called?) bridge nameplates on I-65.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on January 10, 2013, 12:06:46 PM
Those bridge nameplates have been getting installed statewide for several years now.  The first of them appeared long before I left Mississippi in 2008.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on January 21, 2013, 10:16:01 PM
Here is a list (http://ceds.alabama.gov/strategic-projects-and-programs/transportation-infrastructure/) of road improvements (mostly) that the Alabama Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy has outlined. The one I find the most interesting is widening I-65 to six lanes to the Tennessee state line. It needs it at least to AL 157 or to I-565, but I don't think it is justified north of I-565 yet. If Huntsville gets its way and develops southeastern Limestone County, however, that could change.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alex on January 22, 2013, 09:52:07 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on January 21, 2013, 10:16:01 PM
Here is a list (http://ceds.alabama.gov/strategic-projects-and-programs/transportation-infrastructure/) of road improvements (mostly) that the Alabama Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy has outlined.

QuoteNorth-South Corridor. Construct North-South Corridor through West Alabama.

Still touting that Pipe dream? Listed separately from:
QuoteCorridor Study for West Alabama Freeway. Complete north-south corridor/environmental study for controlled access highway connecting the Shoals to Mobile.

QuoteU.S. Highway 431. Widen U.S. Highway 431 to four lanes from I-20 to I-85.

Given its indirect path between Opelika and Anniston, I don't see how four-laning this route is needed.

QuoteMontgomery Southern Outer Loop. Complete the outer loop to improve transportation access for communities south of Montgomery.

You should see the progress in the flyovers at I-85 now. Some of the ramps are way up there!

QuoteMacon County Interstate Exit. Develop an additional exit in Macon County along Interstate 85.

From a traffic flow standpoint, I-85 does not need anymore exits right now...

QuoteI-10 Connector. Construct an Interstate Connector to I-10.

Pipe dream #2.

QuoteI-10 Mobile River Bridge. Six lane interstate bridge over the Mobile River and Bayway improvements.

No local news on this in a couple of years now...

QuoteOuter Loop — Northern and Southern Loops. Connector from I-85 to I-65 North and South.

There should be a better connection between I-85 or 65 to Wetumpka. US 231 is fairly developed from East Boulevard northward to the Wetumpka bypass. Have not taken Alabama 14 between Prattville and Wetumpka, but I am sure its loaded with sprawl.

QuoteExit 50 on I-85. Addition of Exit 50 on Interstate I-85 in Auburn AL. The new exit will increase transportation access into and out of three Auburn Technology Parks.

Opened last month.

QuoteU.S. Highway 231 Access Management/4-Lane Vaughn Rd. Access management of Hwy 231 through Troy/4-lane Vaughn Rd from Montgomery to Bullock County.

Seems like a good idea, but $5 million won't cover much.

QuoteCorridor V Memphis to Atlanta Highway. Develop interstate grade highway corridor.

Pipe dream #3.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on March 13, 2013, 10:58:40 AM
ALDOT will soon let a project to widen I-20/59 east of Tuscaloosa from west of Buttermilk Road to east of US 11 in Coaling where the current six lane ends. Last year, ALDOT let a project (http://alletting.dot.state.al.us/Prior%20Lettings/2012%20Prior%20Letting/May_25_2012%20Letting/lb052512.pdf) to raise the bridges for Woodland Road and Clements Road (passes over the segment proposed to be widened in this project). I assume soon after a project will be let to widen farther west to just east of Hargrove Road. The six-lane widening is inching closer to Tuscaloosa.

Preliminary Plans (http://alletting.dot.state.al.us/PrelimPlans/NHF_I059_326_Tuscaloosa_Co.pdf)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: lamsalfl on March 13, 2013, 11:17:22 AM
I'd like to see the I-10 widening make it west to the MS state line.   The current project ends around mile 14.   This stretch of road is always congested as it is the default for all I-65 traffic on top of I-10's. 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: BamaZeus on March 14, 2013, 11:43:26 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on March 13, 2013, 10:58:40 AM
ALDOT will soon let a project to widen I-20/59 east of Tuscaloosa from west of Buttermilk Road to east of US 11 in Coaling where the current six lane ends. Last year, ALDOT let a project (http://alletting.dot.state.al.us/Prior%20Lettings/2012%20Prior%20Letting/May_25_2012%20Letting/lb052512.pdf) to raise the bridges for Woodland Road and Clements Road (passes over the segment proposed to be widened in this project). I assume soon after a project will be let to widen farther west to just east of Hargrove Road. The six-lane widening is inching closer to Tuscaloosa.

Preliminary Plans (http://alletting.dot.state.al.us/PrelimPlans/NHF_I059_326_Tuscaloosa_Co.pdf)

I'm glad this is finally getting underway, as the entire thing was supposed to be complete all the way to the Black Warrior Parkway in about 2001 or so.  One of the only two overpasses west of this phase of the project at Woodland Rd. has already been raised and completed.

Although this also follows in the next phase to get done, the exit/entrance for Skyland is ridiculously dangerous, especially the southbound entrance with the long uphill climb, and not much room to merge with traffic already doing 75-80mph.  That should have been fixed years ago, but instead you get to follow an 18-wheeler up a ramp at 25mph and pray you can accelerate quickly enough to get into line.

I believe a redesign of the 359/59/US11/AL69 interchange is also in the works, but I'll believe it when I see it. 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Ga293 on May 23, 2013, 09:46:13 PM
Is there any news on I-20 east of Birmingham? Is there any chance the construction will be complete sometime within the decade?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Grzrd on May 24, 2013, 11:17:20 AM
Quote from: Ga293 on May 23, 2013, 09:46:13 PM
Is there any news on I-20 east of Birmingham? Is there any chance the construction will be complete sometime within the decade?

ALDOT's PROGRESS 20 (http://aldotapps.dot.state.al.us/progressprojects/Progress20/Progress20.html) webpage provides updates on the work by county.  Estimated project completion dates are included.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: lordsutch on May 24, 2013, 10:40:41 PM
Quote from: Ga293 on May 23, 2013, 09:46:13 PM
Is there any news on I-20 east of Birmingham? Is there any chance the construction will be complete sometime within the decade?

The St. Clair County section is done except for one bridge at the west end of the section being widened (and 3 lanes are open eastbound but not westbound once you get past it, and have been for a few months).  However, the work zone speed limit remains in place, although nobody seems observe it.

The other sections are further behind.  And, of course, the "55 zone because we're too cheap to lay down an asphalt overlay on our crumbling concrete, so please don't sue us when our road surface breaks and flies into your car windshield" is still in effect near the state line with no evidence of any effort to fix the underlying issues.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on May 28, 2013, 07:54:10 AM
^ I'm thinking that the reasoning for going ahead with all of the widening projects in Cleburne County is to address the pavement issue, with widening as an added bonus. Unfortunately, this means that it takes longer and those speed limits will remain in place longer. :(
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: msunat97 on August 07, 2013, 04:17:26 PM
Any news on the Highway 82 bypass around Centreville?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: lordsutch on August 08, 2013, 10:06:25 PM
Quote from: msunat97 on August 07, 2013, 04:17:26 PM
Any news on the Highway 82 bypass around Centreville?

When I was up that way in April, it looked like grading was well in progress at the west end at least.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on August 08, 2013, 10:23:33 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on August 08, 2013, 10:06:25 PM
Quote from: msunat97 on August 07, 2013, 04:17:26 PM
Any news on the Highway 82 bypass around Centreville?

When I was up that way in April, it looked like grading was well in progress at the west end at least.
The grading is done. All it needs is the base/pave. I'm not sure what they are waiting on. Just saw something in the STIP that I don't remember seeing before. A corridor study to relocate US82 from east of the Centreville bypass to I65 north of Clanton. That would be nice but am not confident that I will see that in my lifetime.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: lordsutch on August 08, 2013, 10:38:28 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on August 08, 2013, 10:23:33 PM
The grading is done. All it needs is the base/pave. I'm not sure what they are waiting on. Just saw something in the STIP that I don't remember seeing before. A corridor study to relocate US82 from east of the Centreville bypass to I65 north of Clanton. That would be nice but am not confident that I will see that in my lifetime.

Interesting; it might even be cheaper to build that over new terrain rather than widening the existing route to Prattville.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on August 09, 2013, 09:05:24 AM
Quote from: lordsutch on August 08, 2013, 10:38:28 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on August 08, 2013, 10:23:33 PM
The grading is done. All it needs is the base/pave. I'm not sure what they are waiting on. Just saw something in the STIP that I don't remember seeing before. A corridor study to relocate US82 from east of the Centreville bypass to I65 north of Clanton. That would be nice but am not confident that I will see that in my lifetime.

Interesting; it might even be cheaper to build that over new terrain rather than widening the existing route to Prattville.

That's what I'm thinking. Lots of curves and steep hills between Maplesville and Prattville.

Wouldn't be good for the peach/vegetable stands along 82 in Chilton county though.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on August 09, 2013, 09:10:30 AM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on August 09, 2013, 09:05:24 AM
Quote from: lordsutch on August 08, 2013, 10:38:28 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on August 08, 2013, 10:23:33 PM
The grading is done. All it needs is the base/pave. I'm not sure what they are waiting on. Just saw something in the STIP that I don't remember seeing before. A corridor study to relocate US82 from east of the Centreville bypass to I65 north of Clanton. That would be nice but am not confident that I will see that in my lifetime.

Interesting; it might even be cheaper to build that over new terrain rather than widening the existing route to Prattville.

That's what I'm thinking. Lots of curves and steep hills between Maplesville and Prattville.

Wouldn't be good for the peach/vegetable stands along 82 in Chilton county though.

It would be a whole lot shorter, too. But, it would put more traffic on I-65, which would necessitate widening even more between Montgomery and Birmingham.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: BamaZeus on August 09, 2013, 12:10:12 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on August 08, 2013, 10:38:28 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on August 08, 2013, 10:23:33 PM
The grading is done. All it needs is the base/pave. I'm not sure what they are waiting on. Just saw something in the STIP that I don't remember seeing before. A corridor study to relocate US82 from east of the Centreville bypass to I65 north of Clanton. That would be nice but am not confident that I will see that in my lifetime.

Interesting; it might even be cheaper to build that over new terrain rather than widening the existing route to Prattville.

I agree with that.  That section of road won't lend itself easily to widening to 4 lanes.  They might as well just build a bypass of the current 82.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on August 11, 2013, 03:11:43 AM
QuoteIt would be a whole lot shorter, too. But, it would put more traffic on I-65, which would necessitate widening even more between Montgomery and Birmingham.

Not as much as you'd otherwise think.  IIRC, that stretch of US 82 is well below 10K ADT (only really larger on Crimson Tide game days, which you're only talking a handful of days a year).  And it's safe to say a lot of it is local traffic that would not move to any sort of "US 82 bypass" to Clanton.  So you're ultimately talking minimal impact to I-65.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on August 11, 2013, 05:48:11 PM
I wonder how many drivers going from Montgomery to Tuscaloosa actually take U.S. 82?  Isn't it really quicker to take I-65 to I-459 to I-20/59?  Of course, on game days there's no quick route to get to Tuscaloosa.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on August 11, 2013, 10:48:45 PM
I take US82. According to google maps it is 27 miles longer via I65-I459-I59/20. I've tried it a couple of times and there wasn't really a difference in the time.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: msunat97 on August 23, 2013, 12:40:23 PM
When I travel from Little Rock to Montgomery for Thanksgiving, I usually take 82 through Starkville (Mississippi State alum) & go through Tuscaloosa to Prattville.  I hate the traffic on 65 South of Birmingham.  Easier on me to go 82.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: BamaZeus on August 26, 2013, 11:43:43 AM
I take 82 because there's less traffic.  65 has way too many shutdowns/construction zones to be efficient most of the time.  Yes, there are a slew of traffic lights on South Blvd. in Montgomery, but with the new peripheral road being built, ideally that will go away as well.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on September 05, 2013, 07:43:52 PM
A joint venture between S.T. Bunn Construction and APAC-Mid South was the apparent low bidder for the widening of four miles of I-20/59 from southwest of Buttermilk Road (Exit 77) to east of US 11 (Exit 79) at the end of the current six-lane. The bid came in at $57.3 million. This inches the six lane portion closer to Tuscaloosa proper.

A low bid of $18.5 million from APAC Mid-South also came in for the base and pave along 8.9 miles of AL 24/Corridor V west of Russellville. This section will complete Corridor V in Alabama as it was originally planned.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ShawnP on September 06, 2013, 12:49:28 PM
Was looking on the I-22/I-65 Interchange on Google maps and noticed a lot of trees down to the west of the Interchange. Was this from the 2011 Tornado's?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alex on September 06, 2013, 01:17:45 PM
Quote from: ShawnP on September 06, 2013, 12:49:28 PM
Was looking on the I-22/I-65 Interchange on Google maps and noticed a lot of trees down to the west of the Interchange. Was this from the 2011 Tornado's?

Yes the one on April 27, 2011 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_25%E2%80%9328,_2011_tornado_outbreak#April_27).

The tornado also did this to a high mast light fixtured:

(https://www.aaroads.com/southeast/alabama065/i-065_sb_exit_266_03.jpg)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on September 10, 2013, 08:38:22 AM
The last remaining project to finish the Anniston Eastern Bypass (http://goo.gl/maps/wpy5K) is up for the September ALDOT letting. Internally, the road is known as AL 901. Looking at the signage plans for this project, the road will indeed be signed as AL 901, at least in the vicinity of the AL 21 interchange and where US 431 will turn off of it. Also of note, the signage plans also call for "hidden" AL 1 to be signed along side of US 431.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FRxhPP4Z.png&hash=9e334f594402c7379c0e98cd9707aa646f5f1bd9)

When completed, the bypass will feed directly into US 431 west of the US 431/AL 21 intersection.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on September 10, 2013, 08:37:22 PM
I wonder why Alabama is deviating from its previous practice of creating new state route numbers in cardinal order?  The three most recently designated routes that I know of have been 604 (unsigned in Lee County), 605 (status unknown in Houston County) and now 901.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on September 10, 2013, 10:29:14 PM
I was wondering about it too, I thought this was supposed to be a "county shield upgrade"-error, but apparently not:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/7428/26963071503_eafbf44812_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/H5CMMa)

Edit: Image location

Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Eth on September 11, 2013, 10:11:55 PM
Quote from: Charles2 on September 10, 2013, 08:37:22 PM
I wonder why Alabama is deviating from its previous practice of creating new state route numbers in cardinal order?  The three most recently designated routes that I know of have been 604 (unsigned in Lee County), 605 (status unknown in Houston County) and now 901.

Maybe Alabama has some kind of strange aversion to the 3xx, 4xx, and 5xx series. From what I can tell, every odd number up through 299 has been used (though even numbers as low as 214 are still available, so that wouldn't explain 604).

Was AL 605 formerly CR 203? I was just on that segment of US 231 back in December, but I don't recall seeing any mention of the state route.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alps on September 14, 2013, 12:26:47 AM
Fun challenge: Name all of the states that adhere to numbering rules.

Answer: Hawaii.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: NE2 on September 14, 2013, 12:29:22 AM
Quote from: Steve on September 14, 2013, 12:26:47 AM
Fun challenge: Name all of the states that adhere to numbering rules.

Answer: Hawaii.
Wyoming? Not sure - does 89 fit? Is there a system for the routes not numbered by counties?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alps on September 14, 2013, 12:53:27 AM
Quote from: NE2 on September 14, 2013, 12:29:22 AM
Quote from: Steve on September 14, 2013, 12:26:47 AM
Fun challenge: Name all of the states that adhere to numbering rules.

Answer: Hawaii.
Wyoming? Not sure - does 89 fit? Is there a system for the routes not numbered by counties?
Does Wyoming have any exceptions to the rule?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: NE2 on September 14, 2013, 01:39:30 AM
Quote from: Steve on September 14, 2013, 12:53:27 AM
Does Wyoming have any exceptions to the rule?
I don't think the by-county routes do.

If you consider Alabama to have an actual rule that's being broken by 605, how about Georgia? I think everything there fits the "choose the next number" rule.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on September 14, 2013, 02:12:06 AM
QuoteFun challenge: Name all of the states that adhere to numbering rules.

Answer: Hawaii.

Mississippi.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: NE2 on September 14, 2013, 02:37:00 AM
Quote from: froggie on September 14, 2013, 02:12:06 AM
Mississippi.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_state_highways_in_Mississippi#Exceptions_to_the_numbering_scheme says no.

But what rules does Hawaii have? Is it just first digit means island? Because that's a pretty weak rule. It wouldn't surprise me if they started out with more rules and gradually relaxed them when new routes were added, like basically every other state.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on September 14, 2013, 02:58:01 AM
Leave it to you to find an exception to everything...
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alps on September 14, 2013, 03:44:28 AM
Quote from: NE2 on September 14, 2013, 02:37:00 AM
Quote from: froggie on September 14, 2013, 02:12:06 AM
Mississippi.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_state_highways_in_Mississippi#Exceptions_to_the_numbering_scheme says no.

But what rules does Hawaii have? Is it just first digit means island? Because that's a pretty weak rule. It wouldn't surprise me if they started out with more rules and gradually relaxed them when new routes were added, like basically every other state.
There's that, and there's the "2 digits primary, 3 digits secondary", which Oahu expands to 4 digits because Oahu.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: NE2 on September 14, 2013, 03:48:27 AM
It wouldn't surprise me if Hawaii's numbers match the old federal aid numbers, including four-digit for federal aid urban. Nevada switched to a similar match in about 1980.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on October 30, 2013, 04:22:30 PM
The base and paving of the Centreville bypass is on the letting list in November.
http://alletting.dot.state.al.us/WEBPROPS/2013/NTCNov0813.htm#CALL014
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: NE2 on October 30, 2013, 04:27:50 PM
Quote from: froggie on September 14, 2013, 02:12:06 AM
QuoteFun challenge: Name all of the states that adhere to numbering rules.

Answer: Hawaii.

Mississippi.
No room was left in the grid for expansion, leading to stuff like 30 between 4 and 6. Indiana made a grid several years earlier than Mississippi and left room (though not always enough).
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on October 31, 2013, 06:35:34 AM
Their grid was originally designed that way.  Go through a first round of the PRIMARY highways, then go back through a second route from north to south of slightly less important highways.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: NE2 on October 31, 2013, 06:53:18 AM
Quote from: froggie on October 31, 2013, 06:35:34 AM
Their grid was originally designed that way.  Go through a first round of the PRIMARY highways, then go back through a second route from north to south of slightly less important highways.
You may be right, but what about 50? Why wasn't 10 renumbered something like 36? Answer: they no longer adhered to numbering rules.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: NE2 on November 25, 2013, 04:50:31 AM
Quote from: Eth on September 11, 2013, 10:11:55 PM
Was AL 605 formerly CR 203? I was just on that segment of US 231 back in December, but I don't recall seeing any mention of the state route.
Yes, except that it swings around the west side of Dothan. CR 203 was, incidentally, former SR 203.

Other numbering violations in Alabama:
SR 216 (former CR 116, ex-SR 116) when there's never been a 214
SR 248, numbered because it's near SR 249
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: msunat97 on December 02, 2013, 09:33:17 AM
What is the big interchange East of Montgomery on I-85?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: NE2 on December 02, 2013, 09:45:31 AM
Quote from: msunat97 on December 02, 2013, 09:33:17 AM
What is the big interchange East of Montgomery on I-85?
The Montgomery Outer Loop (future relocated I-85). http://www.montgomerychamber.com/page.aspx?pid=1467
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on December 02, 2013, 11:51:03 PM
...and the former I-85 will be redesignated as I-685.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: SSF on December 03, 2013, 09:54:04 PM
http://blog.al.com/breaking/2013/12/i-565county_line_road_intercha.html

was in town today and saw this setup on the NW side of the interchange.

will add the 2 missing ramps, WB 565 to County Line and County Line to EB 565
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on December 04, 2013, 07:14:45 AM
I'm glad this project is getting started, but I don't like the proposed setup for the ramp from WB I-565 to County Line Road. It will loop around and merge with EB Madison Blvd, forcing drivers to merge across two lanes of traffic to turn left to access County Line Road NB, which is where most of the traffic using that ramp will be headed. Right now it won't be too big of an issue, but in a few years it will be a problem, especially if growth accelerates in the Limestone County portion of the city of Huntsville.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: banished on December 27, 2013, 09:15:42 PM
The Georgiana Bypass (State Rte 55) between State Rte 106 west of Georgiana on the north end, and US-31 south, south of Georgiana, opened on December 21, 2013.  The bypass saves a little over a mile compared to staying on SR-106 eastbound through Georgiana to US-31 southbound.  I have not driven it, yet, so cannot comment on the time saved.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: mwb1848 on December 28, 2013, 11:48:34 AM
Does the new alignment really give as much preference to drivers going from US 31 NB to Alabama 55 NB as this aerial suggests?

http://goo.gl/maps/3nCQl (http://goo.gl/maps/3nCQl)

It looks like you'd have to make a right turn to stay on US 31. It also looks like there's a similiar situation requiring EB traffic on Alabama 106 to make a left turn to continue in their original route.

http://goo.gl/maps/6wrce (http://goo.gl/maps/6wrce)

Neither case should be that surprising, I guess, given the way Alabama 55 and US 31 intersect near McKenzie. It's clear which highway is ADOT's priority.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on March 16, 2014, 10:48:29 PM
Went through Centreville this weekend. It looks like all work currently being done on the bypass is on the east bound lanes so I assume that means that they plan to put two way traffic on one set of lanes then finish the other. I like that idea.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: msunat97 on April 05, 2014, 12:56:28 AM
What's the expected completion date for Centreville?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on April 10, 2014, 09:50:08 PM
I don't know but the Project Letting page at ALDOT has 300 working days so hopefully by Thanksgiving I'll be able to shave a few more minutes off the trip to see family.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on April 11, 2014, 06:09:55 AM
You know, it dawned on me the other day just how much of US 82 in Alabama is only two lanes. Outside of Tuscaloosa, Prattville, and west of Reform, it is two lanes. Hopefully one day US 82 will be four lanes from Prattville west to the Mississippi state line, but I guess we will have to keep dreaming for that day to come.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: msunat97 on April 11, 2014, 09:27:56 AM
Highway 82 thru western Alabama is a shame...it's a great 4-lane drive from Greenville, MS to the Alabama state line...I'm glad that Alabama at least added more lanes for the first few miles entering the state.  It's too bad it can't bypass around Reform & the other small towns along the way to Tuscaloosa.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: BamaZeus on April 11, 2014, 12:01:47 PM
There was a Reform and Gordo bypass planned, but too many people actually complained it would hurt city businesses.  I don't know how Jack's and Dollar General would ever survive this...
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ttownfeen on April 11, 2014, 03:22:13 PM
It makes no sense either.  Tuscaloosa to Montgomery and Tuscaloosa to Columbus are fairly important routes.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ttownfeen on April 17, 2014, 12:41:56 PM
I don't know if it was posted elsewhere but I saw that ALDOT has effectively shelved the 759 extension project in Gadsden.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on April 17, 2014, 02:46:18 PM
Quote from: ttownfeen on April 17, 2014, 12:41:56 PM
I don't know if it was posted elsewhere but I saw that ALDOT has effectively shelved the 759 extension project in Gadsden.

Where did you see that? I am not surprised by that, though.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on April 18, 2014, 12:04:49 PM
According to the Gadsden Times, it was shelved back in January (http://www.gadsdentimes.com/article/20140109/NEWS/140109820).  ALDOT recommended, and FHWA concurred, on the "no-build" option. (disregard the poor editing in the article..."Federal Highway Association...?")

Naturally, the Gadsden City Council was unhappy with the decision (http://www.gadsdentimes.com/article/20140114/NEWS/140119908).  And the local Congressman promised Federal approval (http://www.gadsdentimes.com/article/20140225/NEWS/140229885) if the state would commit to the project.

Lastly, judging from this news clip (http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1842&dat=19920610&id=KVAeAAAAIBAJ&sjid=YscEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5948,1433589) I found, the proposal to extend I-759 east dates back over 20 years.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on July 09, 2014, 08:58:46 AM
Engineering work is underway to design the additional lanes, access management, and additional signals along Ross Clark Circle between US 231 North and Bauman Drive in Dothan: http://www.dothaneagle.com/news/government/article_27cc595c-0705-11e4-b30d-0017a43b2370.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on July 13, 2014, 09:01:35 AM
This article (http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20140712/NEWS/140719891/1291/TOPIC0205?p=1&tc=pg) discusses the updated timetable for extending the six lane portion of I-20/59 from Mile Marker 81 to McFarland Blvd in Tuscaloosa:

QuoteBut long-term plans to widen and repair this stretch of interstate will have to wait. While an original 8.8-mile construction plan to widen the interstate between Exit 73 at McFarland Boulevard and mile marker 81 near Cottondale was supposed to go to construction in 2013, it was delayed after bids came in above the $29 million cost estimate.

The work is now planned for three stages, with the area between McFarland Boulevard and Exit 77 at Buttermilk Road coming last and expected to go out to bid in December 2017. Construction is expected to get underway between Exit 79 and mile marker 81 in September and between Buttermilk Road and Exit 79 in 2015.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 16, 2014, 10:09:00 PM
There were tons of incandescent traffic lights and strobe beacons (some of which still used filament strobes) along US 231 between Montgomery and the Florida State Line when I went down to Port St. Joe, FL at the end of June. I think a few had been upgraded to LED while I was down there, can someone confirm that there are still incandescent signals down there along US 231?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on August 12, 2014, 08:13:44 AM
Expansion of Highway 167 between the Florida State Line at FL 79 and US 231 in Troy still a strong desire for area officials: http://www.southeastsun.com/news/article_1a009a4a-2172-11e4-97c8-0017a43b2370.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bigdave on August 13, 2014, 02:22:33 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on August 12, 2014, 08:13:44 AM
Expansion of Highway 167 between the Florida State Line at FL 79 and US 231 in Troy still a strong desire for area officials: http://www.southeastsun.com/news/article_1a009a4a-2172-11e4-97c8-0017a43b2370.html

An interesting tidbit in that article (at least to me) is that the Dothan I-10 connector/bypass has stirred somewhat to life. Time to fire up savedothan.com again I guess.  Which BTW, that domain is now available for purchase. Mission accomplished and all that, I guess. :D

http://www.dothaneagle.com/news/article_0d4427a8-aa36-11e3-8b94-001a4bcf6878.html (http://www.dothaneagle.com/news/article_0d4427a8-aa36-11e3-8b94-001a4bcf6878.html)

David
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on September 02, 2014, 10:21:34 PM
Boooooo! Hiss! One less reason to visit Demopolis...

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3924/15123794505_67343d410f_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/p3rpcF)

On the other hand, this one's still up even though the road was repaved!

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3843/14937132640_18832ac910_c.jpg)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on September 02, 2014, 10:54:10 PM
Does Demopolis have a bunch of 4-ways still? Or am I thinking of a different town that starts with the letter D?
EDIT: Yes they do, in fact, they still have this really old one in the downtown too (https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=32.517328,-87.836267&spn=0.000002,0.002064&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=32.517328,-87.836267&panoid=qy0DeiIGZwPY-6L_kiGdKg&cbp=12,271.26,,2,-22.52).

Also, here's a new ramp on I-565 for the County Line Road exit:
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5552/15123712712_c63cbeacc4.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/p3qYTs)
New Ramp (https://flic.kr/p/p3qYTs) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/people/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on September 02, 2014, 10:58:18 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on September 02, 2014, 10:54:10 PM
Does Demopolis have a bunch of 4-ways still? Or am I thinking of a different town that starts with the letter D?
EDIT: Yes they do, in fact, they still have this really old one in the downtown too (https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=32.517328,-87.836267&spn=0.000002,0.002064&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=32.517328,-87.836267&panoid=qy0DeiIGZwPY-6L_kiGdKg&cbp=12,271.26,,2,-22.52).

Yeah, there were at least four signals along US 80.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: cjk374 on September 05, 2014, 09:59:52 PM
Quote from: formulanone on September 02, 2014, 10:21:34 PM
Boooooo! Hiss! One less reason to visit Demopolis...

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3924/15123794505_725b882f38_b.jpg)


I don't get it...was something better here before?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on September 06, 2014, 01:17:39 AM
There used to be ancient button copy signs at this intersection.  The Clearview font signs are a recent change.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on September 06, 2014, 10:53:50 AM
Button copy in all caps, if I remember correctly.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alex on September 06, 2014, 11:02:06 AM
Quote from: formulanone on September 02, 2014, 10:21:34 PM
Boooooo! Hiss! One less reason to visit Demopolis...

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3924/15123794505_725b882f38_b.jpg)


Was thinking this changed awhile ago, and confirmed that looking back at my photos from the day after Cody's Birmingham Road Meet in October 2012. Now that I see my photo, I recall the same reaction you had!
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on September 06, 2014, 12:12:42 PM
From the shield gallery:

(https://www.aaroads.com/shields/img/AL/AL19700801i1.jpg)

Edit: image location in shield gallery
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on September 06, 2014, 02:41:14 PM
IMO, the shield on the sign for US 80 West should be the same size as the shields on the other sign.
Also, I bet this has to do with the recent law stating that all signs have to be the current reflective type (whatever it's called) by 2016.
I still need to get out and get some more photos of the button copy signs here in Huntsville.
Also, does anyone have any photos of the button copy signs that used to be in Decatur for directing traffic to Point Mallard from US 31? They were removed in 2012/2013 IIRC.
Also, according to Google Maps, the old signs in Demopolis have been gone since May of 2014 at the latest.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: mwb1848 on September 07, 2014, 01:14:16 AM
I love Clearview. But I love old-school button copy even more.

This is an unfortunate execution, too. There was something quaint about the old sign leaving off directions for 80/43. But, in the new Clearview application, it just looks lazy.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: cjk374 on September 07, 2014, 09:43:35 AM
Quote from: formulanone on September 06, 2014, 12:12:42 PM
From the shield gallery:

(//www.aaroads.com/shields/img/AL/AL19700801i1.jpg)

Oh now I see.... I'm a fan of old school signage also, especially involving US 80.  It's my favorite highway since I've lived on it all my life.   :sombrero:
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: adventurernumber1 on September 07, 2014, 10:34:58 AM
Since this is an Alabama thread, I have a question. I went on a mission trip to Birmingham in July, and we took I-75 to Chattanooga, then I-24 briefly to I-59, then I-59 to Birmingham. There was a section of I-59 near Gadsden that was concrete and looked very odd. It looked like new white concrete but there was a load of tar or something looking stuff splattered everywhere on the road, and it was like that for a fairly long stretch, too. Has anybody been on this part of I-59, and can anyone tell me what the heck that was?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on September 07, 2014, 05:33:57 PM
Is this south of Gadsden? I think there is a resurfacing project going on around there. Typically, if the underlying pavement is concrete, the road will get an asphalt overlay after the concrete is repaired. It doesn't make much sense to me, honestly.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: adventurernumber1 on September 07, 2014, 07:25:01 PM
Aha. I found it. https://www.google.com/maps/@34.148966,-85.985587,3a,75y,33.37h,80.54t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sakjZJ5kLus_jhW4nYUCq1g!2e0

This is just north of Gadsden.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on September 07, 2014, 08:49:45 PM
Ah, that's one of the many segments north of Gadsden where concrete pavement has been retained but ALDOT has struggled with keeping it from being rough as a washboard from there north to Georgia. Looks like they sealed up cracks in it with tar, similar to what they do with asphalt.

That is just north of where an "unbonded overlay" of concrete was placed on top of the original concrete pavement. Essentially, it is a concrete sandwich with asphalt in the middle. The asphalt is supposed to mitigate reflective cracking from the original concrete pavement underneath, and the thicker overall pavement section means that it is a bit stronger and (hopefully) more durable. We shall see how it holds up.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on September 07, 2014, 08:54:20 PM
Also of note is that for the bridge over US 11 (https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=34.148966,-85.985587&spn=0.18,0.3&cbll=34.148966,-85.985587&layer=c&panoid=akjZJ5kLus_jhW4nYUCq1g&cbp=,33.37,,0,9.459999&output=classic&dg=ntvo), the southbound I-59 bridge was totally rebuilt as part of the concrete pavement project, but the northbound I-59 bridge was raised and I think either the girders were reused and recoated or new girders were put in place. Both bridges have new decks and guardrails.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rcm195 on September 25, 2014, 09:48:22 PM
Just wanted to check up on the progress of several projects in Alabama and there status. The Centerville bypass, Corridor V around Red Bay, and the six laning of Beltline Road in Decatur. Anybody know how they are coming along?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on September 25, 2014, 10:23:58 PM
Quote from: rcm195 on September 25, 2014, 09:48:22 PM
Just wanted to check up on the progress of several projects in Alabama and there status. The Centerville bypass, Corridor V around Red Bay, and the six laning of Beltline Road in Decatur. Anybody know how they are coming along?
IIRC, the beltline is either almost complete or has been completed.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: lordsutch on September 26, 2014, 12:35:31 AM
Quote from: rcm195 on September 25, 2014, 09:48:22 PM
Just wanted to check up on the progress of several projects in Alabama and there status. The Centerville bypass, Corridor V around Red Bay, and the six laning of Beltline Road in Decatur. Anybody know how they are coming along?

Corridor V around Red Bay has been fully open quite a while, although the four-laning east to Russellville is plodding along. On the MS side it's open to Highway 23 (which was actually complete before the AL part), but beyond that (to Highway 25) there's been no work thus far beyond a short stub.

It's been about 18 months since I saw what was going on in Centerville, so I can't update you on that.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on September 26, 2014, 10:10:34 AM
Quote from: rcm195 on September 25, 2014, 09:48:22 PM
Just wanted to check up on the progress of several projects in Alabama and there status. The Centerville bypass, Corridor V around Red Bay, and the six laning of Beltline Road in Decatur. Anybody know how they are coming along?
It's been almost 3 months since I've been through Centreville but there was paving going on when I passed through on July 4th weekend. It will probably be Thanksgiving before I make it back that way but I am hoping it is finished by then.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on October 14, 2014, 01:35:58 PM
Does anyone know what the unfinished highway near Phil Campbell is/was for?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on October 14, 2014, 01:56:19 PM
It is supposed to eventually be a four-lane reroute for AL 13. It will go around the east side of Haleyville and rejoin the present AL 13 alignment between Haleyville and Natural Bridge. Who knows when it will ever be finished, though.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: NE2 on October 14, 2014, 04:56:27 PM
They have been working on that recently; the bridges over Little Bear Creek are fairly new.
http://www.tva.com/environment/reports/upperbear/ea_final.pdf

http://www.nacolg.com/Community_Planning/Documents/HaleyvilleComprehensivePlan_5-16-08.pdf page 89 has some information.

Seems like a major project for a relatively minor corridor. SR 243 is already on good alignment, and a Haleyville bypass beginning near Pebble would not require nearly as much construction.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on October 27, 2014, 01:54:55 PM
Does anyone know what the stub south of Boaz on US 431 was used for?
Here's its location on Google Maps:
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=34.086413,-86.11069&num=1&t=h&z=18
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on October 27, 2014, 02:01:06 PM
^ Not sure. I thought it may be an old alignment, but after looking around the area, I don't think that's the case.

Check out the old US 431 shield not far from there: https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0859934,-86.111051,3a,28.4y,149.12h,83.97t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sp07yHIyZQP5Fu7qnh3rFqA!2e0
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jdb1234 on October 27, 2014, 02:29:06 PM
Went to check out the Anniston Eastern Bypass this morning.  Didn't realize the open portion featured a Runaway Truck Ramp, the second one that I know of in Alabama.  I did take a few photos while I was out there.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: NE2 on October 27, 2014, 08:44:40 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on October 27, 2014, 01:54:55 PM
Does anyone know what the stub south of Boaz on US 431 was used for?
Here's its location on Google Maps:
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=34.086413,-86.11069&num=1&t=h&z=18
It started as a driveway when Rockledge was 431: http://alabamamaps.ua.edu/aerials/Counties/Etowah/Etowah_Rockledge_1950.html
The part that looks like an offramp may have been a temporary connection during construction. Later aerials are unclear.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on November 17, 2014, 01:18:16 PM
Quote from: froggie on April 18, 2014, 12:04:49 PM
According to the Gadsden Times, it was shelved back in January (http://www.gadsdentimes.com/article/20140109/NEWS/140109820).  ALDOT recommended, and FHWA concurred, on the "no-build" option. (disregard the poor editing in the article..."Federal Highway Association...?")

Naturally, the Gadsden City Council was unhappy with the decision (http://www.gadsdentimes.com/article/20140114/NEWS/140119908).  And the local Congressman promised Federal approval (http://www.gadsdentimes.com/article/20140225/NEWS/140229885) if the state would commit to the project.

Lastly, judging from this news clip (http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1842&dat=19920610&id=KVAeAAAAIBAJ&sjid=YscEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5948,1433589) I found, the proposal to extend I-759 east dates back over 20 years.


It looks like local planners aren't ready to give up (http://www.gadsdentimes.com/article/20141116/NEWS/141119800?p=3&tc=pg) on extending I-759 to the east just yet.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on November 18, 2014, 07:52:14 AM
I find it amusing that the article claims there hasn't been "an official statement from either ALDOT or FHWA as to what is really the status of that project".  Looked pretty clear to me that they both agreed on a "no build" back in January.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on November 28, 2014, 08:52:07 AM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on September 26, 2014, 10:10:34 AM
Quote from: rcm195 on September 25, 2014, 09:48:22 PM
Just wanted to check up on the progress of several projects in Alabama and there status. The Centerville bypass, Corridor V around Red Bay, and the six laning of Beltline Road in Decatur. Anybody know how they are coming along?
It's been almost 3 months since I've been through Centreville but there was paving going on when I passed through on July 4th weekend. It will probably be Thanksgiving before I make it back that way but I am hoping it is finished by then.
I thought it was supposed to be done by Thanksgiving but the Centreville bypass isn't finished yet. It looks like all it needs is stripes painted and to finish connecting the pavement on each end. I'm not sure what is holding up the finish. Maybe they will be done by Christmas.

Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on December 26, 2014, 01:45:21 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on November 28, 2014, 08:52:07 AM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on September 26, 2014, 10:10:34 AM
Quote from: rcm195 on September 25, 2014, 09:48:22 PM
Just wanted to check up on the progress of several projects in Alabama and there status. The Centerville bypass, Corridor V around Red Bay, and the six laning of Beltline Road in Decatur. Anybody know how they are coming along?
It's been almost 3 months since I've been through Centreville but there was paving going on when I passed through on July 4th weekend. It will probably be Thanksgiving before I make it back that way but I am hoping it is finished by then.
I thought it was supposed to be done by Thanksgiving but the Centreville bypass isn't finished yet. It looks like all it needs is stripes painted and to finish connecting the pavement on each end. I'm not sure what is holding up the finish. Maybe they will be done by Christmas.


Nope. No progress between Thanksgiving and Christmas.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on March 26, 2015, 02:09:09 PM
I believe that ALDOT's gone back to using Highway Gothic as the new BGSes for exit 8 on I-565 Eastbound use it.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on March 26, 2015, 02:12:03 PM
ALDOT's construction plans still use FHWA for BGSs. The BGSs that go through their maintenance group are Clearview (like some of the recent sign replacements).
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alex on March 26, 2015, 05:28:20 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on March 26, 2015, 02:12:03 PM
ALDOT's construction plans still use FHWA for BGSs. The BGSs that go through their maintenance group are Clearview (like some of the recent sign replacements).

All of the signs on I-10 for the Baldwin Beach Express interchange were designed with Clearview. I think Cody mentioned that the I-65 replacement signs from Evergreen to Montgomery all used Clearview as well. Also new signs posted for U.S. 98 to I-65/165 for Orange Beach use Clearview as well.

Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 26, 2015, 02:09:09 PM
I believe that ALDOT's gone back to using Highway Gothic as the new BGSes for exit 8 on I-565 Eastbound use it.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on March 27, 2015, 07:49:24 AM
Makes a lot of sense now that I think about it. Especially since they just re-did that stretch of I-565 and added an extra lane.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on March 27, 2015, 11:08:57 AM
Quote from: Alex on March 26, 2015, 05:28:20 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on March 26, 2015, 02:12:03 PM
ALDOT's construction plans still use FHWA for BGSs. The BGSs that go through their maintenance group are Clearview (like some of the recent sign replacements).

All of the signs on I-10 for the Baldwin Beach Express interchange were designed with Clearview. I think Cody mentioned that the I-65 replacement signs from Evergreen to Montgomery all used Clearview as well. Also new signs posted for U.S. 98 to I-65/165 for Orange Beach use Clearview as well.

Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 26, 2015, 02:09:09 PM
I believe that ALDOT's gone back to using Highway Gothic as the new BGSes for exit 8 on I-565 Eastbound use it.

Actually, the ones from Evergreen to Prattville use FHWA for some reason. The replacements up this way on I-65 in Morgan and Limestone Counties use mostly Clearview, though.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: cjk374 on April 02, 2015, 06:41:03 PM
There is apparently a project in the works that is going to require a detour of the interstate and (I'm guessing) either a state or US highway.  The signs have plywood covering them up right now...except for one.  It was on an exit ramp, and the quick glance I got of the sign it was the very 1st fractional interstate sign I have ever seen for I-20/59.  Very good looking for contractor signage.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on April 02, 2015, 07:03:52 PM
Quote from: cjk374 on April 02, 2015, 06:41:03 PM
There is apparently a project in the works that is going to require a detour of the interstate and (I'm guessing) either a state or US highway.  The signs have plywood covering them up right now...except for one.  It was on an exit ramp, and the quick glance I got of the sign it was the very 1st fractional interstate sign I have ever seen for I-20/59.  Very good looking for contractor signage.

This is in Greene County along I-20/59 I assume? I looked at the plans, and I think it is actually for one of the connecting roads at the exit instead of the interstate itself.

I saw those signs about a week ago covered up.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on April 02, 2015, 07:11:56 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FYWhhF2d.png&hash=a067babfcf10dfeb98c20fdc0364d104714255ff)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rcm195 on April 28, 2015, 10:15:37 PM
Just wondering about the status of the Centerville bypass?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on April 30, 2015, 11:40:28 AM
Quote from: rcm195 on April 28, 2015, 10:15:37 PM
Just wondering about the status of the Centerville bypass?
I'm probably going through there this weekend. Definitely will be next weekend. I will update.
When we went through in March there was new stuff since Christmas; at the east end there was pavement connecting the new lanes to the old and work to straighten the curve where CR20 runs into the old 82 lanes. Don't know if old 82 will become CR20 between there and AL219 or what.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on May 03, 2015, 11:42:15 PM
I saw nothing new this weekend from when we passed through in March. Only difference was the grading they had previously done at the CR20 and old 82 was grown over with grass.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: msunat97 on May 05, 2015, 09:20:05 AM
Thanks bdmoss!
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: clong on May 28, 2015, 04:34:29 PM
Went thru and saw both ends of the Centerville bypass today. Still not open and looks like it is only missing a few guardrails (possibly) and some final paving where it ties in (that can't be done until it is opening).
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on June 01, 2015, 10:59:56 AM
We went through this weekend too. A little additional work done at the current US82-CR20 intersection since we went through three weeks ago so that's a little progress.

Also a lot of grading work going on between Gordo and Reform for the four-laning of US82 there. Already some houses and old businesses torn down to make way for it so I lost my bearings a little bit with some familiar landmarks gone.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on June 01, 2015, 01:57:00 PM
A couple of bridge projects are currently going on along US 72 and AL 20.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jOnstar1979 on June 01, 2015, 10:26:23 PM
Just wanted to know if anyone had an update on the Anniston Eastern Bypass. I would love to see some pictures if anyone is around the area.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jdb1234 on June 02, 2015, 04:06:44 AM
Quote from: jOnstar1979 on June 01, 2015, 10:26:23 PM
Just wanted to know if anyone had an update on the Anniston Eastern Bypass. I would love to see some pictures if anyone is around the area.

Ironically, I drove the open part of it yesterday, but I did not bring my camera.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on June 02, 2015, 08:10:59 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on June 01, 2015, 10:59:56 AM
We went through this weekend too. A little additional work done at the current US82-CR20 intersection since we went through three weeks ago so that's a little progress.

Also a lot of grading work going on between Gordo and Reform for the four-laning of US82 there. Already some houses and old businesses torn down to make way for it so I lost my bearings a little bit with some familiar landmarks gone.
I also noticed this weekend that AL14 is routed along US82 from their intersection southwest of Prattville to I65(and, I assume, up I65 to exit 181). I don't remember that being there on previous trips.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Stephane Dumas on July 09, 2015, 08:45:32 PM
I spotted this video on Youtube about rethink I-20/59
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeoKt5HBYbw
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: iBallasticwolf2 on July 09, 2015, 08:59:37 PM
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on July 09, 2015, 08:45:32 PM
I spotted this video on Youtube about rethink I-20/59
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeoKt5HBYbw

I find this video to have a very good point and even identifying a good reroute corridor.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on July 09, 2015, 09:50:20 PM
I came up with this (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10598.0) a couple years ago when I first heard of the concept.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 18, 2015, 03:56:38 PM
Went down to Auburn for the past three days and spotted a ton of neutered I-85 shields. Seems that Auburn is using neutered shields for some reason though Opelika and practically everywhere else is using state-name shields.
Also, I-65 in Blount County has some neutered shields. Several of them are on the main line and I spotted one on an overpass at an exit. I'll post photos in a little bit.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 18, 2015, 04:48:11 PM
Here are the photos of the neutered shields I saw.

First are the neutered I-85 shields. The neutered I-85 shields didn't appear outside of the city of Auburn and not all of the shields had the "to" banners above them. Just as a note, none of these photos of them were taken on the interstate itself.
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/258/19800432152_f4a86b0279.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/waGoDf)To I-85 (https://flic.kr/p/waGoDf) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3774/19185276824_e3113e1275.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/vekyoU)To I-85 (https://flic.kr/p/vekyoU) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3684/19185276664_6c18fc8821.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/vekym9)To I-85 (https://flic.kr/p/vekym9) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/307/19781698076_7acfbaeaf7.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/w93nDW)To I-85 (https://flic.kr/p/w93nDW) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr

And here are the neutered I-65 shields in Blount County that I was able to photograph:
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/524/19619737960_04969625cf.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/vTJhy9)I-65 (https://flic.kr/p/vTJhy9) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/296/19781579876_6c4fd0a23c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/w92Lw1)I-65/US 31 (https://flic.kr/p/w92Lw1) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rcm195 on August 15, 2015, 10:50:38 PM
Brother and Sister-in-Law who live in Tuscaloosa were headed on a trip to Savannah Ga. yesterday. They went through Centerville on there way to Montgomery. My sister-in-law text me to say bypass was open both ways around Centerville. She said it looked very recently.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jwolfer on August 15, 2015, 10:55:24 PM
Quote from: rcm195 on August 15, 2015, 10:50:38 PM
Brother and Sister-in-Law who live in Tuscaloosa were headed on a trip to Savannah Ga. yesterday. They went through Centerville on there way to Montgomery. My sister-in-law text me to say bypass was open both ways around Centerville. She said it looked very recently.
I like that she has been recruited into your roadgeekery
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on August 16, 2015, 09:22:47 PM
Went through Centreville this weekend and came here to report it was open but seems that I was beat to the punch.  :rolleyes:
It looks as though the old section is going to be County Rd 20 as the intersection near the east end of the four lane has both east and west County Rd 20 signs. Also AL219 which had crossed US82 just west of the Cahaba River now follows US82 across the river to the AL25 exit. The old part of 219 between 82 and old 82 must have gone over to the city?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: BamaZeus on August 19, 2015, 11:23:19 AM
I found this article this morning from late July, concerning the 20/59 bridge replacement project.  I went back and didn't see it posted, unless I'm completely blind.

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2015/07/aldot_announces_start_of_i-205.html

and the ALDOT page for the project
http://rp.dot.state.al.us/I59_20/
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: The Ghostbuster on August 19, 2015, 02:44:03 PM
How long before the Interstate 85 Montgomery Bypass is completed? It seems to be taking forever.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: lordsutch on August 19, 2015, 03:01:45 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 19, 2015, 02:44:03 PM
How long before the Interstate 85 Montgomery Bypass is completed? It seems to be taking forever.

Decades? As far as I know the only active construction is on the section down to AL 110. Even something vaguely useful like extending it to US 231/82 seems a long way off.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: BamaZeus on September 24, 2015, 05:15:21 PM
A multi-car wreck including an overturned 18-wheeler plowed into one of the sign gantries on 20/59 at Arkadelphia.

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2015/09/at_least_1_dead_in_crash_on_i-.html#incart_river_home

Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Henry on September 25, 2015, 01:02:24 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on August 19, 2015, 03:01:45 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 19, 2015, 02:44:03 PM
How long before the Interstate 85 Montgomery Bypass is completed? It seems to be taking forever.

Decades? As far as I know the only active construction is on the section down to AL 110. Even something vaguely useful like extending it to US 231/82 seems a long way off.
And it might take even longer for the pipe dream that is the I-85 extension to Meridian, which I feel is pointless anyway. If anything, they should've found a way to extend I-16 from Macon, or failing that, made it I-14 or I-18.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: msunat97 on October 09, 2015, 09:36:42 AM
I-85 to Meridian????  They can't get 80 4 laned from Montgomery to the Mississippi State line.  How long has that been under construction?  My parents say they've been working on it since I was very little...I'm 41 now & it's still not done.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on October 09, 2015, 12:06:17 PM
The new exit on I-65 in Cullman is nearing completion.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: mvcg66b3r on October 09, 2015, 02:08:49 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on October 09, 2015, 12:06:17 PM
The new exit on I-65 in Cullman is nearing completion.

What's the exit number?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on October 09, 2015, 09:21:37 PM
I'm guessing it will be either 306 or 307.  SR-69 North is 304, and US 278 is Exit 308.  The new exit is about halfway between the two.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: noelbotevera on October 09, 2015, 09:27:28 PM
If Alabama can finish I-22 and make a new I-65 exit, then when hell freezes over they're STILL working on a stretch of US 80 that's 143 miles long to get 4 laned? Hmm, I now doubt moving to Alabama.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: brownpelican on October 09, 2015, 10:25:50 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 09, 2015, 09:27:28 PM
If Alabama can finish I-22 and make a new I-65 exit, then when hell freezes over they're STILL working on a stretch of US 80 that's 143 miles long to get 4 laned? Hmm, I now doubt moving to Alabama.

East of Selma, it is four lanes...west of there is another story, though Rand McNally does show it four lanes to Demopolis.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: iBallasticwolf2 on October 10, 2015, 08:46:29 AM
Quote from: brownpelican on October 09, 2015, 10:25:50 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 09, 2015, 09:27:28 PM
If Alabama can finish I-22 and make a new I-65 exit, then when hell freezes over they're STILL working on a stretch of US 80 that's 143 miles long to get 4 laned? Hmm, I now doubt moving to Alabama.

East of Selma, it is four lanes...west of there is another story, though Rand McNally does show it four lanes to Demopolis.
Actually it is 4 lanes all the way to 20 but no town bypasses.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on October 10, 2015, 08:35:12 PM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on October 10, 2015, 08:46:29 AM
Quote from: brownpelican on October 09, 2015, 10:25:50 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 09, 2015, 09:27:28 PM
If Alabama can finish I-22 and make a new I-65 exit, then when hell freezes over they're STILL working on a stretch of US 80 that's 143 miles long to get 4 laned? Hmm, I now doubt moving to Alabama.

East of Selma, it is four lanes...west of there is another story, though Rand McNally does show it four lanes to Demopolis.
Actually it is 4 lanes all the way to 20 but no town bypasses.
Uniontown is the only place it isn't four laned.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: cjk374 on October 10, 2015, 10:45:39 PM
Quote from: Charles2 on October 09, 2015, 09:21:37 PM
I'm guessing it will be either 306 or 307.  SR-69 North is 304, and US 278 is Exit 308.  The new exit is about halfway between the two.

Which ever milepost is south of the overpass for the new exit will be the new exit number.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on November 06, 2015, 03:16:35 PM
Carriger Road bridge in Hazel Green to reopen this week
http://whnt.com/2015/11/04/carriger-road-bridge-to-reopen/
Quote
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flocaltvwhnt.files.wordpress.com%2F2015%2F06%2Fcarriger_rd_closed2.jpg%3Fw%3D770&hash=67790e9335de74c91185d19a05810cace90a8a7a)
The bridge on Carriger Road in Hazel Green remains closed, causing a long detour for drivers. (Photo: WHNT News 19)

HAZEL GREEN, Ala. (WHNT) — After months of circuitous driving for commuters in northern Madison County, a change bringing long-awaited relief.

District One Commissioner Roger Jones announced the bridge is set to reopen Thursday afternoon.

A hole in the bridge closed it to traffic over the summer. The Madison County Commission declared it an emergency situation to speed up repairs, but further inspection from state officials delayed its reopening.

County officials say it will be repaved Thursday morning and, should weather permit, the Road Closed signs that have taken up residence will be removed.

Traffic pattern has changed on County Line Road in Madison
http://whnt.com/2015/11/05/traffic-pattern-has-changed-on-county-line-road-in-madison/
Quote
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flocaltvwhnt.files.wordpress.com%2F2015%2F11%2Fcounty-line-road.jpeg%3Fw%3D770&hash=6f4edd891a8306eca277811cde761f1b2d1ccaf4)

MADISON, Ala. — Madison Police want you to be aware of traffic pattern changes on County Line Road. There is no longer a center turn lane in the construction zone.

The change is for the portion of County Line Road between Dock Murphy Drive to the northern city limits.

The change has been implemented to provide adequate lane widths on during construction.

The speed limit in the area is posted as 40 m.p.h. Please observe that posted limit.

If you have any questions or comments, you may contact the City of Madison Engineering Department at 256-772-8431.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on November 12, 2015, 03:36:46 PM
ALDOT has put up new BGS signs at the exit 188 interchange in Oxford.  The big news, the Anniston Eastern Bypass will carry US 431 and be leaving Quintard Ave.  And, US 431 will soon travel Interstate 20 between exits 188 and 191 instead of taking US 78.  The signs have the US 431 covered up for now.  As for the opening of the bypass, the Anniston Star said it would open by the end of 2015, but I am not buying that.

(https://geekalabama.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/stuff-497.jpg?w=584&h=389)
(https://geekalabama.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/stuff-511.jpg?w=584&h=389)
(https://geekalabama.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/stuff-510.jpg?w=584&h=389)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on November 12, 2015, 03:43:33 PM
Those style signs have been going up in Gadsden lately, too.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on November 17, 2015, 07:56:58 AM
The I-759 extension in Gadsden may rise from the dead: http://www.gadsdentimes.com/article/20151116/news/151119845?p=1&tc=pg
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Georgia on November 17, 2015, 04:51:39 PM
I just dont see how the extension would help that much except you would be able to travel from Wallace to Meighan faster without any lights; it's still going to put you out on that busy stretch of Meighan near the Wal-Mart and the new shopping options.  The new bridge on Meighan and additional lanes on 411 from Rainbow City to downtown would be more of a priority to me.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on November 17, 2015, 05:26:01 PM
Quote from: Georgia on November 17, 2015, 04:51:39 PM
I just dont see how the extension would help that much except you would be able to travel from Wallace to Meighan faster without any lights; it's still going to put you out on that busy stretch of Meighan near the Wal-Mart and the new shopping options.  The new bridge on Meighan and additional lanes on 411 from Rainbow City to downtown would be more of a priority to me.

The extension is supposed to go east to end at the US 278/431 intersection. You would, in theory, be able to bypass any stretch of Meighan between I-59 and US 278 east. It would work best for through traffic on US 278 or US 431.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Georgia on November 17, 2015, 05:40:15 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on November 17, 2015, 05:26:01 PM
Quote from: Georgia on November 17, 2015, 04:51:39 PM
I just dont see how the extension would help that much except you would be able to travel from Wallace to Meighan faster without any lights; it's still going to put you out on that busy stretch of Meighan near the Wal-Mart and the new shopping options.  The new bridge on Meighan and additional lanes on 411 from Rainbow City to downtown would be more of a priority to me.

The extension is supposed to go east to end at the US 278/431 intersection. You would, in theory, be able to bypass any stretch of Meighan between I-59 and US 278 east. It would work best for through traffic on US 278 or US 431.

yea, that is what i was looking at too, there is almost no way it can go straight east to the 278/431 split as there will be a lot of environmental justice complaints as that residential neighborhood isn't exactly the best.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on November 18, 2015, 07:33:26 AM
Quote from: Georgia on November 17, 2015, 05:40:15 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on November 17, 2015, 05:26:01 PM
Quote from: Georgia on November 17, 2015, 04:51:39 PM
I just dont see how the extension would help that much except you would be able to travel from Wallace to Meighan faster without any lights; it's still going to put you out on that busy stretch of Meighan near the Wal-Mart and the new shopping options.  The new bridge on Meighan and additional lanes on 411 from Rainbow City to downtown would be more of a priority to me.

The extension is supposed to go east to end at the US 278/431 intersection. You would, in theory, be able to bypass any stretch of Meighan between I-59 and US 278 east. It would work best for through traffic on US 278 or US 431.

yea, that is what i was looking at too, there is almost no way it can go straight east to the 278/431 split as there will be a lot of environmental justice complaints as that residential neighborhood isn't exactly the best.

That, along with weak traffic relief justifications at the time, may have been why the project got canned in the first place.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: The Ghostbuster on November 19, 2015, 04:03:53 PM
What is the likelihood of Interstate 759 being extended in any direction?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on November 20, 2015, 06:46:42 AM
Probably not very high, at this point. The greater push is to extend it east, so that would probably be the top priority.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on November 22, 2015, 11:34:32 AM
Found some more neutered interstate shields along I-20/I-59 back in October:
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/613/22584466644_40459a9c27.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/ApHi6W)I-20/I-59/US 11/AL 5 (https://flic.kr/p/ApHi6W) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5816/22844817399_146ef81f67.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/ANHEj4)I-20/I-59/US 11/AL 5 (https://flic.kr/p/ANHEj4) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ttownfeen on January 06, 2016, 04:18:45 AM
The Anniston eastern bypass/431 realigment went active about two weeks ago. The new exit signs in Oxford reflecting the realignment of 431 have also been unveiled. Google maps shows the bypass as open but doesn't reflect the 431 reroute. I emailed them the correction.

Still think it's weird that signage on I-20 for the 431 S exit (exit 191) gives no control cities, almost as if 431 goes into a black hole south of Oxford. I know Roanoke is not most happenin' place, but still.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ttownfeen on January 06, 2016, 04:23:56 AM
Here's a map showing the eventual routing for the Montgomery Outer Loop (MOP).

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Frp.dot.state.al.us%2FMOL%2FimagesMOL%2FMontgomery%2520Outer%2520Loop.png&hash=457a3a59226a7c8a75a2c0b3cfb52bcb6f1168a3)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ttownfeen on January 06, 2016, 05:57:45 AM
I don't know how I missed this, but ALDOT plans on revamping McFarland Blvd (US 82/SR 6) through the Tuscaloosa-Northport metro.

The project will take place entirely within the existing ROW, so no new lanes, but there will be a massive reduction in median cuts between signalized intersections. The ones that remain will be for turning off McFarland only. All entering traffic between major intersections will be right-turn only. However with the added space, turn lanes at vital crossing will be extended--in some cases widened-- and refited to allow for u-turns.  Some intersections will be outright eliminated.

Also ALDOT plans to install "smarter" traffic lights to manage overall flow of McFarland.

http://rp.dot.state.al.us/US82/

Maps on the site.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on January 06, 2016, 07:05:06 AM
Quote from: ttownfeen on January 06, 2016, 04:18:45 AM
The Anniston eastern bypass/431 realigment went active about two weeks ago. The new exit signs in Oxford reflecting the realignment of 431 have also been unveiled. Google maps shows the bypass as open but doesn't reflect the 431 reroute. I emailed them the correction.

Still think it's weird that signage on I-20 for the 431 S exit (exit 191) gives no control cities, almost as if 431 goes into a black hole south of Oxford. I know Roanoke is not most happenin' place, but still.

I saw the signage plans for the project showing AL 1 shields. Did you happen to see any?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on January 06, 2016, 07:06:33 AM
Quote from: ttownfeen on January 06, 2016, 05:57:45 AM
I don't know how I missed this, but ALDOT plans on revamping McFarland Blvd (US 82/SR 6) through the Tuscaloosa-Northport metro.

The project will take place entirely within the existing ROW, so no new lanes, but there will be a massive reduction in median cuts between signalized intersections. The ones that remain will be for turning off McFarland only. All entering traffic between major intersections will be right-turn only. However with the added space, turn lanes at vital crossing will be extended--in some cases widened-- and refited to allow for u-turns.  Some intersections will be outright eliminated.

Also ALDOT plans to install "smarter" traffic lights to manage overall flow of McFarland.

http://rp.dot.state.al.us/US82/

Maps on the site.

It is similar to what was done for US 280 in Birmingham. I think it is a great idea. There is also a plan to do this treatment for US 72 in Huntsville and Madison.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ttownfeen on January 06, 2016, 12:30:28 PM
No I didn't get a chance to actually drive on the bypass this time. The next time I go through Anniston I will though.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: BamaZeus on January 06, 2016, 12:35:07 PM
Quote from: ttownfeen on January 06, 2016, 05:57:45 AM
I don't know how I missed this, but ALDOT plans on revamping McFarland Blvd (US 82/SR 6) through the Tuscaloosa-Northport metro.

The project will take place entirely within the existing ROW, so no new lanes, but there will be a massive reduction in median cuts between signalized intersections. The ones that remain will be for turning off McFarland only. All entering traffic between major intersections will be right-turn only. However with the added space, turn lanes at vital crossing will be extended--in some cases widened-- and refited to allow for u-turns.  Some intersections will be outright eliminated.

Also ALDOT plans to install "smarter" traffic lights to manage overall flow of McFarland.

http://rp.dot.state.al.us/US82/

Maps on the site.

I work on McFarland in Northport, and my wife works on campus 50 feet from the intersection with McFarland.  Anything to make traffic smoother would be great.  It was fantastic when UA doubled the student population in under 20 years, but the infrastructure to support all those extra cars just isn't there yet.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: lordsutch on January 08, 2016, 05:22:54 PM
Quote from: ttownfeen on January 06, 2016, 04:18:45 AM
The Anniston eastern bypass/431 realigment went active about two weeks ago. The new exit signs in Oxford reflecting the realignment of 431 have also been unveiled. Google maps shows the bypass as open but doesn't reflect the 431 reroute. I emailed them the correction.

Still think it's weird that signage on I-20 for the 431 S exit (exit 191) gives no control cities, almost as if 431 goes into a black hole south of Oxford. I know Roanoke is not most happenin' place, but still.

The road eventually goes to Opelika; that'd be a reasonable alternative control city.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jdb1234 on January 09, 2016, 03:38:09 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on January 06, 2016, 07:05:06 AM
Quote from: ttownfeen on January 06, 2016, 04:18:45 AM
The Anniston eastern bypass/431 realigment went active about two weeks ago. The new exit signs in Oxford reflecting the realignment of 431 have also been unveiled. Google maps shows the bypass as open but doesn't reflect the 431 reroute. I emailed them the correction.

Still think it's weird that signage on I-20 for the 431 S exit (exit 191) gives no control cities, almost as if 431 goes into a black hole south of Oxford. I know Roanoke is not most happenin' place, but still.

I saw the signage plans for the project showing AL 1 shields. Did you happen to see any?

I drove it yesterday.  Did not see any AL 1 shields.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on January 25, 2016, 04:22:30 PM
The first section of the Montgomery Outer Loop opens tomorrow.

http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/story/news/local/2016/01/25/part-montgomery-outer-loop-open-week/79298342/
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 26, 2016, 04:34:15 PM
Maybe it will be another 30 years before the rest of the project is completed.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on January 26, 2016, 08:20:24 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 26, 2016, 04:34:15 PM
Maybe it will be another 30 years before the rest of the projet is completed.

If ALDOT moves as fast to complete the Outer Loop as they have to complete I-22, I'm guessing that it will be 2065. :)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Georgia on January 29, 2016, 09:54:33 AM
Driving out to Mississippi on Tuesday and I saw ALDOT survey crews surveying I-20 just west of the Coosa River bridge, dare i dream of a 3 laned 20 all the way through eastern Bama? 

now if only GDOT D6 would widen from Villa Rica to the state line; then again, they are lucky if they get any money period.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on January 29, 2016, 10:09:25 AM
At one time I think the plan for the I-20 Coosa River Bridge was to build an entirely new set of bridges to the south of the existing ones that would accommodate six lanes in each direction. I am not sure why nor am I sure if that is still the plan. ALDOT hasn't really got any upcoming projects in the next couple of years to widen I-20 elsewhere that I know of.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 29, 2016, 04:59:08 PM
Are there any segments where Interstate 20 should be expanded?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on January 29, 2016, 05:25:27 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 29, 2016, 04:59:08 PM
Are there any segments where Interstate 20 should be expanded?

Almost of I-20 is at least six lanes wide (or under construction to be six lanes wide) from Exit 132 on Birmingham's east side to the Georgia state line, meaning that there is only a two mile segment from the I-59 split that isn't.  As a part of I-59, work is underway adding lanes in each direction between mp 75 and 80, east of Tuscaloosa.  From mp 80 to I-459 (Exit 106) near Bessemer, I-20/59 is already six lanes.

Aside from the two-mile stretch between U.S. 82 and where construction ends in Tuscaloosa, the most glaring need, at least in my opinion, is between I-459 and Exit 118 in Fairfield, a stretch of about 12 miles.  Between Exit 100 and Exit 108, 20/59 was built on top of US 11, converting a four lane expressway to a limited access route.  Between mp 106 and 118, medians are narrow, curves are tight, and merging lanes are inadequate. 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: lordsutch on January 29, 2016, 05:43:19 PM
Quote from: Charles2 on January 29, 2016, 05:25:27 PM
Almost of I-20 is at least six lanes wide (or under construction to be six lanes wide) from Exit 132 on Birmingham's east side to the Georgia state line, meaning that there is only a two mile segment from the I-59 split that isn't.

Patently untrue. In addition to the Coosa River bridge crossing to exit 173 (about 8 miles), which has no evidence of construction at present, there's also the section from exit 188 to exit 205 which has only been resurfaced and isn't being widened. Exit 205-exit 210 is already widened to six lanes with the left lane in each direction blocked off (and has been for months), despite signage and striping being in place for it to be opened last summer.* Exit 210 to the state line is the only actual widening underway today, presumably because they have to replace the pavement anyway before it kills another motorist.

* This was as of three weeks ago. Knowing ALDOT, it will still be that way for at least another year.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jdb1234 on January 29, 2016, 06:04:42 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on January 29, 2016, 05:43:19 PM
. Exit 205-exit 210 is already widened to six lanes with the left lane in each direction blocked off (and has been for months), despite signage and striping being in place for it to be opened last summer.* Exit 210 to the state line is the only actual widening underway today, presumably because they have to replace the pavement anyway before it kills another motorist.

* This was as of three weeks ago. Knowing ALDOT, it will still be that way for at least another year.

All lanes were open on I-20 between Exits 205 and 210 the last time I drove it back on 1/13.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: lordsutch on January 29, 2016, 10:47:44 PM
Quote from: jdb1234 on January 29, 2016, 06:04:42 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on January 29, 2016, 05:43:19 PM
. Exit 205-exit 210 is already widened to six lanes with the left lane in each direction blocked off (and has been for months), despite signage and striping being in place for it to be opened last summer.* Exit 210 to the state line is the only actual widening underway today, presumably because they have to replace the pavement anyway before it kills another motorist.

* This was as of three weeks ago. Knowing ALDOT, it will still be that way for at least another year.

All lanes were open on I-20 between Exits 205 and 210 the last time I drove it back on 1/13.
Nice of ALDOT to wait until after holiday traffic would have benefited from the capacity (and restoring the normal speed limit).
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on January 30, 2016, 12:44:46 AM
Quote from: lordsutch on January 29, 2016, 05:43:19 PM
Quote from: Charles2 on January 29, 2016, 05:25:27 PM
Almost of I-20 is at least six lanes wide (or under construction to be six lanes wide) from Exit 132 on Birmingham's east side to the Georgia state line, meaning that there is only a two mile segment from the I-59 split that isn't.

Patently untrue. In addition to the Coosa River bridge crossing to exit 173 (about 8 miles), which has no evidence of construction at present, there's also the section from exit 188 to exit 205 which has only been resurfaced and isn't being widened. Exit 205-exit 210 is already widened to six lanes with the left lane in each direction blocked off (and has been for months), despite signage and striping being in place for it to be opened last summer.* Exit 210 to the state line is the only actual widening underway today, presumably because they have to replace the pavement anyway before it kills another motorist.

* This was as of three weeks ago. Knowing ALDOT, it will still be that way for at least another year.

"Patently untrue?"  No, just an honest mistake.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on March 11, 2016, 09:05:46 PM
Cullman's bad signage was recently the topic of this post on this blog about bad roadway management:
http://betterroadwaysafety.blogspot.com/2016/03/deficient-safety-standards-spotlight.html

Of course, I was the one who supplied the pictures to them for the post. Just thought I'd share it here if anyone wanted to discuss it.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rcm195 on March 11, 2016, 10:57:12 PM
Uh, most of those pictures you posted, if you can't read and deduct what there meaning is, you don't need to be driving.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on March 12, 2016, 11:49:58 AM
IMO, a far more dangerous aspect of Alabama's roadways is the state's utter inability to do access management.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: davewiecking on March 12, 2016, 02:42:05 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 11, 2016, 09:05:46 PM
Cullman's bad signage was recently the topic of this post on this blog about bad roadway management:
http://betterroadwaysafety.blogspot.com/2016/03/deficient-safety-standards-spotlight.html

Of course, I was the one who supplied the pictures to them for the post. Just thought I'd share it here if anyone wanted to discuss it.
The Sign Salad one about halfway down-is the North31 hanging over the asphalt?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on March 12, 2016, 03:11:12 PM
Quote from: davewiecking on March 12, 2016, 02:42:05 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 11, 2016, 09:05:46 PM
Cullman's bad signage was recently the topic of this post on this blog about bad roadway management:
http://betterroadwaysafety.blogspot.com/2016/03/deficient-safety-standards-spotlight.html

Of course, I was the one who supplied the pictures to them for the post. Just thought I'd share it here if anyone wanted to discuss it.
The Sign Salad one about halfway down-is the North31 hanging over the asphalt?
No, just the sidewalk.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on March 18, 2016, 12:18:39 PM
Lawrence County will be un-paving some of their roads this summer, apparently.

http://whnt.com/2016/03/17/lawrence-county-roads-to-go-back-to-gravel-this-summer/
Quote
MOULTON, Ala. (WHNT) -  Lawrence County leaders rely on gas and oil tax dollars for road maintenance, but gravel roads are making a comeback that no one really wants.

A number of roads are due for repaving this summer.

Problem is, the cost of materials have gone up 300% and revenue for road maintenance has flatlined since the early 1990s, according to county engineer Ben Duncan.

So, their hands are tied and tillers will be coming in to turn currently paved roads into gravel in the coming months.

"When a road comes to the point where it's not safe, and there is no money there to resurface them, then our only option is to reclaim that road back to a gravel road," Duncan explained.

He says  the county road department has a $2 million dollar budget to maintain 900 miles of road.

A third of county roads are due for service:

95 roads are in serious to poor condition
8 roads are in critical condition (could become unsafe for travel very soon)
While gravel is easier and cheaper to maintain, the ideal is to maintain asphalt roads. In fact, it will cost more to change a gravel road back to asphalt.

Duncan explains that a drop in material costs or rise in revenue would prompt the department to look into a long-term resurfacing plan.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on March 18, 2016, 04:40:46 PM
Continuation of a national trend.  Asphalt isn't cheap, so some (especially local) jurisdictions are converting some roads back to gravel in order to save on repaving costs.  It's also possible that some of these roads don't have the traffic volume to make paving cost-effective anyway.  MnDOT did a study on that about a decade ago and came up with an ADT figure of around 200, though I've seen references to other studies suggesting a figure between 170 and 250 ADT.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: D-Dey65 on March 18, 2016, 05:48:40 PM
I don't know if anybody has posted this yet;

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:AlabamaWelcomecenterI10.jpg

But if that's not the Alabama Welcome Center on I-10, where is it?

Also, I discovered a closed rest area across from that in the Westbound Lane.

Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Eth on March 18, 2016, 05:57:25 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on March 18, 2016, 05:48:40 PM
I don't know if anybody has posted this yet;

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:AlabamaWelcomecenterI10.jpg

But if that's not the Alabama Welcome Center on I-10, where is it?

It looks like the South Carolina welcome center on I-85 (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.4868742,-83.0241854,3a,37.5y,282.77h,86.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxRE-VPnNHNDY-QTXOKiKUQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) just across the river from Georgia.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: D-Dey65 on March 20, 2016, 11:04:49 PM
Quote from: Eth on March 18, 2016, 05:57:25 PM
It looks like the South Carolina welcome center on I-85 (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.4868742,-83.0241854,3a,37.5y,282.77h,86.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxRE-VPnNHNDY-QTXOKiKUQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) just across the river from Georgia.
That makes much more sense. Thanks. I have a feeling a big rename is in order.

Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on July 12, 2016, 06:34:34 PM
Speaking of the US 82 bypass in Centreville, ALDOT closed down the AL-219 intersection and requires drivers to turn right and use an interchange on either side to turn around to get back to AL-219.  Pics from @WBRCnews and @JenniferE3340

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CnL_AWYWcAAKlQD.jpg)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CnL87e2W8AA62Ap.jpg)

Anyways, there is an community meeting tonight by the residents to ask ALDOT why they did this and what could be done to fix this problem?

Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on July 12, 2016, 10:29:56 PM
Guessing ALDOT did this because of too many crossover crashes.  Found a TV article on the meeting and just about everyone's clamoring for a traffic signal.  I think a J-turn would be more appropriate.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: lordsutch on July 12, 2016, 11:31:27 PM
Quote from: froggie on July 12, 2016, 10:29:56 PM
Guessing ALDOT did this because of too many crossover crashes.  Found a TV article on the meeting and just about everyone's clamoring for a traffic signal.  I think a J-turn would be more appropriate.

I agree; it seems particularly silly to install a traffic signal between two interchanges.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on July 13, 2016, 08:21:45 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on July 12, 2016, 11:31:27 PM
Quote from: froggie on July 12, 2016, 10:29:56 PM
Guessing ALDOT did this because of too many crossover crashes.  Found a TV article on the meeting and just about everyone's clamoring for a traffic signal.  I think a J-turn would be more appropriate.

I agree; it seems particularly silly to install a traffic signal between two interchanges.
Yep, FINALLY finished the bypass. Now, let's stick a red light in the middle of it. Excellent!
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: lordsutch on July 13, 2016, 09:26:34 PM
Quote from: froggie on July 12, 2016, 10:29:56 PM
Guessing ALDOT did this because of too many crossover crashes.  Found a TV article on the meeting and just about everyone's clamoring for a traffic signal.  I think a J-turn would be more appropriate.

ALDOT to their credit actually wants to put in place a superstreet/J-turn layout (http://www.wbrc.com/story/32431559/bibb-county-residents-asking-aldot-to-install-traffic-light-at-dangerous-centreville-intersection?sf30887351=1). The locals, of course, are having none of it, because they love the prospect of being T-boned by through traffic blowing through the only signal for miles in each direction at 70 miles per hour.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on July 20, 2016, 06:48:04 AM
Odd question about county route signs...Cherokee County has a few that are white, instead of blue:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fc5.staticflickr.com%2F8%2F7323%2F27068104084_6a5aca470c_c.jpg&hash=d1fb34653f877ed3dff1b3686ca9b7c3df8fe9c9) (http://flic.kr/p/HeV7iJ)

And Cullman County has a bunch of them with a white background against the numerals:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fc1.staticflickr.com%2F9%2F8811%2F28146081480_7562344041_c.jpg&hash=55127569203bb6d6cfe1c46dc2e96b41699fcc22) (http://flic.kr/p/JTb2qU)

Does anyone know the reasons for these variations?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on July 20, 2016, 07:22:07 AM
In the case of Cullman County, the county did a massive CR renumbering back in the late 1990's, so instead of installing new county route signs, the county just installed the numbers with the white background over the existing ones.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on July 20, 2016, 08:52:21 AM
The Cullman County examples (which I've also seen in the past) do look like patch jobs.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on July 20, 2016, 11:40:52 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on July 20, 2016, 07:22:07 AM
In the case of Cullman County, the county did a massive CR renumbering back in the late 1990's, so instead of installing new county route signs, the county just installed the numbers with the white background over the existing ones.

Ah, that's what I thought. Thanks, Cody.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 20, 2016, 07:53:54 PM
One could argue that Cullman County has way to many county routes. It honestly seems like any road that's not maintained by a city or town has a county route number assigned to it, and of course, it gets signed. It seems that the road and sign quality suffers, at least a little bit, because of that.
Personally, what I'd do would be to either remove a lot of the county routes, or at least make a number of them unsigned (only signing the most important ones).

IDK how, but the city of Cullman has managed to create some of the worst road signs out there. Talking with a resident there, it seems that the signs are a result of a "money saving" measure done by the city.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on July 24, 2016, 05:57:57 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2Fimage_zpsf2lgk08e.jpeg&hash=c96d27235c1f28105710ea29804e0503142ea17b) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsf2lgk08e.jpeg.html)

Found it odd that ALDOT has gone to the trouble of putting tape over Brompton on all the signs on I-20 in both directions. Even the mileage distance signs had tape over them west of Pell City.
Some of the tape has fallen off on a few of the signs so it looks like it was a rush job. I'm wondering if Moody has asked ALDOT to give them new signs at that exit with their name on them and couldn't wait to shame Brompton as I know it's just a community. The two new truck stops may have had a part of it.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: DJStephens on July 24, 2016, 09:32:48 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on July 13, 2016, 08:21:45 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on July 12, 2016, 11:31:27 PM
Quote from: froggie on July 12, 2016, 10:29:56 PM
Guessing ALDOT did this because of too many crossover crashes.  Found a TV article on the meeting and just about everyone's clamoring for a traffic signal.  I think a J-turn would be more appropriate.

I agree; it seems particularly silly to install a traffic signal between two interchanges.
Yep, FINALLY finished the bypass. Now, let's stick a red light in the middle of it. Excellent!

Something New Mexico would do.  (Alamogordo "relief" route)  A traffic signal was added on a truck heavy corridor (US 54/70).  Just inviting a T-bone fatality.  Should have been an interstate grade facility to begin with.   Thanks Gary Johnson.    And Pete Rahm.   
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jdb1234 on July 25, 2016, 10:02:07 AM
Quote from: Voyager75 on July 24, 2016, 05:57:57 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2Fimage_zpsf2lgk08e.jpeg&hash=c96d27235c1f28105710ea29804e0503142ea17b) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsf2lgk08e.jpeg.html)

Found it odd that ALDOT has gone to the trouble of putting tape over Brompton on all the signs on I-20 in both directions. Even the mileage distance signs had tape over them west of Pell City.
Some of the tape has fallen off on a few of the signs so it looks like it was a rush job. I'm wondering if Moody has asked ALDOT to give them new signs at that exit with their name on them and couldn't wait to shame Brompton as I know it's just a community. The two new truck stops may have had a part of it.

Yes, the plan is to replace Brompton with Moody:

http://www.wvtm13.com/news/brompton-sign-removed-along-i20/39422818
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on July 25, 2016, 04:27:41 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2Fimage_zpsf4gs1rwp.jpeg&hash=335e6d97449a1df2e74ca0509eb2140475a41846) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsf4gs1rwp.jpeg.html)

AL 53 makes a new appearance with US 231 in Harpersville before the new bridge over the CSX rail line. I know it has its solo routings in north and south Alabama but this may be the only appearance with US 231.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on July 25, 2016, 05:53:48 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on July 25, 2016, 04:27:41 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2Fimage_zpsf4gs1rwp.jpeg&hash=335e6d97449a1df2e74ca0509eb2140475a41846) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsf4gs1rwp.jpeg.html)

AL 53 makes a new appearance with US 231 in Harpersville before the new bridge over the CSX rail line. I know it has its solo routings in north and south Alabama but this may be the only appearance with US 231.

AL 53 signs found south of Huntsville and north of Dothan are unusual finds!
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 26, 2016, 02:08:02 AM
Quote from: Voyager75 on July 25, 2016, 04:27:41 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2Fimage_zpsf4gs1rwp.jpeg&hash=335e6d97449a1df2e74ca0509eb2140475a41846) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsf4gs1rwp.jpeg.html)

AL 53 makes a new appearance with US 231 in Harpersville before the new bridge over the CSX rail line. I know it has its solo routings in north and south Alabama but this may be the only appearance with US 231.
It's co-signed with US 231 on Drake Avenue in Huntsville:
(https://c3.staticflickr.com/4/3862/15128068610_b774c1e101_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/p3PiK9)US 231/AL 53 (https://flic.kr/p/p3PiK9) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
Google Maps link. (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7052353,-86.5891122,3a,43.1y,98.17h,87.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sij03Rk0CXejLEN5dOi0_ew!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)

Still a nice find though!
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on July 27, 2016, 10:17:37 PM
Quote from: formulanone on July 20, 2016, 06:48:04 AM
Odd question about county route signs...Cherokee County has a few that are white, instead of blue:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fc5.staticflickr.com%2F8%2F7323%2F27068104084_6a5aca470c_c.jpg&hash=d1fb34653f877ed3dff1b3686ca9b7c3df8fe9c9) (http://flic.kr/p/HeV7iJ)

Does anyone know the reasons for these variations?

When I worked for FedEx and delivered in Cherokee County, the white signs are for roads not maintained by the county, they are just private roads and they were numbered by the county for E-911 purposes.  The standard blue signs are maintained by the county.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 28, 2016, 03:21:41 PM
Does anyone know what this pole in Decatur is for? There's another one on the other side of the intersection.
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.5639835,-86.9732846,3a,25.4y,89.24h,80.14t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s7G2XPA5crAoslTIMbkfAwQ!2e0!5s20160501T000000!7i13312!8i6656

I had thought maybe red light cameras, but the poles in their current condition have been up since 2013 at the latest, so I'm not sure what they're meant to be for.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on July 28, 2016, 08:39:26 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 28, 2016, 03:21:41 PM
Does anyone know what this pole in Decatur is for? There's another one on the other side of the intersection.
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.5639835,-86.9732846,3a,25.4y,89.24h,80.14t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s7G2XPA5crAoslTIMbkfAwQ!2e0!5s20160501T000000!7i13312!8i6656

I had thought maybe red light cameras, but the poles in their current condition have been up since 2013 at the latest, so I'm not sure what they're meant to be for.

My only guess would be a pole for a flashing signal with a traffic light ahead sign. Nobody ever got around to finish installing it.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: us43 on July 29, 2016, 11:59:29 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 28, 2016, 03:21:41 PM
Does anyone know what this pole in Decatur is for? There's another one on the other side of the intersection.
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.5639835,-86.9732846,3a,25.4y,89.24h,80.14t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s7G2XPA5crAoslTIMbkfAwQ!2e0!5s20160501T000000!7i13312!8i6656

That looks like part of the sensor for flashing LED raised pavement markers.  There are similar installations at the intersections of AL 36 and CR 81 with AL 157 in Lawrence County:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.4212981,-87.1701975,3a,75y,215.65h,68.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swL2RprgZHtJLAx_SUPhlLQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

The flashing markers have not been working the past couple of times I've been through those intersections and may have been removed.  When they worked, the markers would flash red in the "wrong way" lanes whenever anyone arrived at the intersections.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rel4 on August 13, 2016, 07:58:57 AM
Quote from: us43 on July 29, 2016, 11:59:29 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 28, 2016, 03:21:41 PM
Does anyone know what this pole in Decatur is for? There's another one on the other side of the intersection.
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.5639835,-86.9732846,3a,25.4y,89.24h,80.14t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s7G2XPA5crAoslTIMbkfAwQ!2e0!5s20160501T000000!7i13312!8i6656

That looks like part of the sensor for flashing LED raised pavement markers.  There are similar installations at the intersections of AL 36 and CR 81 with AL 157 in Lawrence County:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.4212981,-87.1701975,3a,75y,215.65h,68.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swL2RprgZHtJLAx_SUPhlLQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

The flashing markers have not been working the past couple of times I've been through those intersections and may have been removed.  When they worked, the markers would flash red in the "wrong way" lanes whenever anyone arrived at the intersections.

For the one in Decatur, it is part of the signal detection system. Two wireless sensors in the asphalt next to the pole detects a vehicle. The unit on top of the pole relays that info to a unit on the signal pole, which sends the info to the signal controller.

For the rural one, it could be a similar detection system for counting vehicles instead of signal detection.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on September 22, 2016, 03:27:14 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on July 25, 2016, 04:27:41 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2Fimage_zpsf4gs1rwp.jpeg&hash=335e6d97449a1df2e74ca0509eb2140475a41846) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsf4gs1rwp.jpeg.html)

AL 53 makes a new appearance with US 231 in Harpersville before the new bridge over the CSX rail line. I know it has its solo routings in north and south Alabama but this may be the only appearance with US 231.

And as of today, the AL 53 signs have been removed in both directions. Back to hidden status. No need for any of them in that area really as they're already reassurance signs for US 231/AL 25 around a 1/2 mile north and south of that area.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: D-Dey65 on December 06, 2016, 11:32:58 AM
Hey, can anybody tell me when US 80 was relocated from the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma?

Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on December 06, 2016, 12:40:18 PM
No later than 1999.  Old ALDOT maps are not helpful here because they show the old designations even after they were changed.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on April 03, 2017, 02:43:06 PM
ALDOT officially announced a fast track to extending Interstate 759 in Gadsden from it's current ending to the US 431 / US 278 split in East Gadsden, it's about time!
http://www.gadsdentimes.com/news/20170403/interstate-759-extension-through-east-gadsden-on-aldots-fast-track

Here's a picture of the route.
https://twitter.com/fox6dixonhayes/status/848908078829490178
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alex on April 03, 2017, 02:54:23 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on April 03, 2017, 02:43:06 PM
ALDOT officially announced a fast track to extending Interstate 759 in Gadsden from it's current ending to the US 431 / US 278 split in East Gadsden, it's about time!
http://www.gadsdentimes.com/news/20170403/interstate-759-extension-through-east-gadsden-on-aldots-fast-track

Here's a picture of the route.
https://twitter.com/fox6dixonhayes/status/848908078829490178

It's an at grade extension with a full intersection at George Wallace Drive and two RIRO's located further east. Appears to be controlled access otherwise. Probably signed as AL 759?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 03, 2017, 03:02:23 PM
So this extension will not be a freeway? Then it probably should be an extension of AL 759.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on April 04, 2017, 08:00:34 AM
That's disappointing and thus a misleading headline. I hope that if it is built this way that strict access control will be implemented so that in the future when funding is available interchanges and bridges can be added. Of course, this is Alabama and that isn't likely.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on April 04, 2017, 09:32:17 AM
QuoteThat's disappointing and thus a misleading headline.

Par for the course in your home state.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on April 04, 2017, 09:58:47 AM
ALDOT has a fast-track? That must be new.  :hmmm:
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on April 04, 2017, 01:10:35 PM
I know it's probably apples and oranges but it takes ALDOT 2 months to begin building a 2 mile section of expressway in a densely populated area and 20 years to build a 1.5 mile section of the Northern Beltline in rural Jefferson County...go figure.

That being said traffic on US 431/278 is atrocious in East Gadsden pretty much all day and it's only going to get worse will all the new development around the Goodyear Plant(The Krispy Kream is horrible in quality and service btw). I wished they would go ahead and put a interchange at the current end by Lowe's since they're curving the extension to the east slightly. It would leave enough room to put in on/off ramps. Other than that, I don't think it would take much effort to go ahead build it to Interstate standards and not mislead people with the "I-759 Extension" headline. Local TV reports flat out said that I-759 would be extended, not AL 759.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on April 04, 2017, 02:03:09 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on April 04, 2017, 01:10:35 PM
I know it's probably apples and oranges but it takes ALDOT 2 months to begin building a 2 mile section of expressway in a densely populated area and 20 years to build a 1.5 mile section of the Northern Beltline in rural Jefferson County...go figure.

That being said traffic on US 431/278 is atrocious in East Gadsden pretty much all day and it's only going to get worse will all the new development around the Goodyear Plant(The Krispy Kream is horrible in quality and service btw). I wished they would go ahead and put a interchange at the current end by Lowe's since they're curving the extension to the east slightly. It would leave enough room to put in on/off ramps. Other than that, I don't think it would take much effort to go ahead build it to Interstate standards and not mislead people with the "I-759 Extension" headline. Local TV reports flat out said that I-759 would be extended, not AL 759.

The zoomed in version (http://www.cityofgadsden.com/DocumentCenter/View/1468) of the graphic calls it the "I-759 connector." The cross section looks more like a boulevard than anything that could be upgraded to interstate standards.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: lordsutch on April 04, 2017, 03:34:56 PM
ALDOT usually can't even spell "access management," and even when they have a good idea (like closing the median breaks on the US 82 Centreville bypass for safety reasons) it gets vetoed, so the odds of them building anything upgradeable to a freeway in the future unless designed that way to begin with is about zero.

And if they were building a freeway, it'd open in 2045 or so after piecemealing the thing to near-death.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on April 04, 2017, 04:33:35 PM
From the article:

"The extension will be about two miles long, and it's expected to impact about 10 houses, city officials said, some of which are now vacant."

That's flat out misinformation or a typo. I see 50-60 homes in that path and a few commercial buildings.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: mwb1848 on April 04, 2017, 11:47:04 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on December 06, 2016, 11:32:58 AM
Hey, can anybody tell me when US 80 was relocated from the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma?

I remember traveling to Selma in the late 80s or early 90s and the mainline designation had been re-routed to the up-stream river crossing.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on April 05, 2017, 11:04:09 AM
Another "fast tracking" of sorts, but older in vintage.  Just stumbled upon this Birmingham Business Journal article (http://www.bizjournals.com/birmingham/news/2016/10/06/alabama-beach-bypass-project-finds-new-life.html) from October that says ALDOT officials are trying to resurrect the dropped-because-of-environmental-impacts US 98 bypass in Mobile County...namely the segment running from the MS line to AL 158/Schillinger Rd.

According to the article, the new plans call for a 2-lane road instead of 4 lanes, with an estimated price tag of $110 million.  $65 million of the cost will apparently come from "BP oil spill money", with the rest from ALDOT's 2019 and 2020 budgets.

The AL.com article (http://www.al.com/news/mobile/index.ssf/2016/10/alabamas_top_priority_road_pro.html), also from October, goes into a little more detail, including how the $65 million in BP oil spill money comes from the $1 billion settlement between BP and the state.  State lawmakers are using most of the settlement to cover debts, but approved $65 million for the bypass project and another $55 million for Baldwin County (which aims to use it for a few widening projects, including on AL 181 near CR 64 and on US 31 in Spanish Fort).
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: capt.ron on April 05, 2017, 02:07:17 PM
Quote from: froggie on April 05, 2017, 11:04:09 AM
Another "fast tracking" of sorts, but older in vintage.  Just stumbled upon this Birmingham Business Journal article (http://www.bizjournals.com/birmingham/news/2016/10/06/alabama-beach-bypass-project-finds-new-life.html) from October that says ALDOT officials are trying to resurrect the dropped-because-of-environmental-impacts US 98 bypass in Mobile County...namely the segment running from the MS line to AL 158/Schillinger Rd.

According to the article, the new plans call for a 2-lane road instead of 4 lanes, with an estimated price tag of $110 million.  $65 million of the cost will apparently come from "BP oil spill money", with the rest from ALDOT's 2019 and 2020 budgets.

The AL.com article (http://www.al.com/news/mobile/index.ssf/2016/10/alabamas_top_priority_road_pro.html), also from October, goes into a little more detail, including how the $65 million in BP oil spill money comes from the $1 billion settlement between BP and the state.  State lawmakers are using most of the settlement to cover debts, but approved $65 million for the bypass project and another $55 million for Baldwin County (which aims to use it for a few widening projects, including on AL 181 near CR 64 and on US 31 in Spanish Fort).

Two lanes instead of 4? Big mistake unless ALDOT secures the ROW for the 2nd set of lanes when the need arises. They might as well bite the bullet and make it 4 lanes since the highway has a lot of spring break traffic coming in from Mississippi and points west. The new 2 lane would clog up just as bad as the old alignment.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on April 05, 2017, 02:41:23 PM
A) they already have the ROW for 4 lanes
B) they don't have the funding to complete 4 lanes...they do for 2, but only just barely

So what would you have them do?  Wait for God-knows-how-long to find the funding to build it as 4 lanes?  Or complete 2 lanes now and find funding later to finish 4?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: lordsutch on April 05, 2017, 03:21:30 PM
What's strange is that looking at the aerials, a lot of the "scrapped" alignment seems to have actually been constructed up to the grading stage without being connected to anything. At the very least I'd hope ALDOT and MDOT would work together to open all four lanes across the state line to the end of where the existing grading is in place for four lanes around Walter Tanner Road north of Wilmer. From there to AL 158, at least some road would be better than no road until the money's there to add the second carriageway.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on April 05, 2017, 07:45:32 PM
So, the 759 Connector will have six lanes where four would make more sense, and the US 98 relocation will have two lanes where four would make more sense.  :clap:
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on April 05, 2017, 08:19:37 PM
Quote from: Tom958 on April 05, 2017, 07:45:32 PM
So, the 759 Connector will have six lanes where four would make more sense, and the US 98 relocation will have two lanes where four would make more sense.  :clap:
Clearly two lanes were taken from the US 98 relocation and given to the 759 Connector. :P
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on April 16, 2017, 08:59:41 PM
I noticed today that the section of old US-82 east of Centreville replaced with the last section of bypass last year is now signed as AL-382.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on April 17, 2017, 08:02:01 AM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on April 16, 2017, 08:59:41 PM
I noticed today that the section of old US-82 east of Centreville replaced with the last section of bypass last year is now signed as AL-382.

Sure enough...it appears on the official route log map. https://aldotgis.dot.state.al.us/MilepostPDF/web/co4mp.pdf
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on April 17, 2017, 09:24:40 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on April 16, 2017, 08:59:41 PM
I noticed today that the section of old US-82 east of Centreville replaced with the last section of bypass last year is now signed as AL-382.

Is it actually signed, or is the route just designated on maps?  Last time I was in Centreville, there was no signage for AL-382.  That said I've not seen any signage for any of the other 3xx state routes that have been created in the state: 378 in Birmingham, 300 in Tuscaloosa County, or 301 in Calhoun County.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on April 18, 2017, 07:27:28 AM
AL 300 and AL 301 are short connector routes which probably won't be signed. Maybe these AL 3xx routes are simply routes that are on the log books indicating that the state maintains them but will not be signed.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on April 21, 2017, 10:06:51 AM
Quote from: Charles2 on April 17, 2017, 09:24:40 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on April 16, 2017, 08:59:41 PM
I noticed today that the section of old US-82 east of Centreville replaced with the last section of bypass last year is now signed as AL-382.

Is it actually signed, or is the route just designated on maps?  Last time I was in Centreville, there was no signage for AL-382.  That said I've not seen any signage for any of the other 3xx state routes that have been created in the state: 378 in Birmingham, 300 in Tuscaloosa County, or 301 in Calhoun County.
It's actually signed. I didn't notice them on the way up on Saturday but did on Sunday coming back.
I may be going back through next weekend. I'll try to remember to stop and get a pic or two unless someone else gets it before then.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on April 29, 2017, 10:47:56 PM
Got a pic of one yesterday.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1290.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fb535%2Fbdmoss88%2F20170428_134815_zpshihm7sdx.jpg&hash=4974faa033e81898ae38ddb56497af3fd7a57995) (http://s1290.photobucket.com/user/bdmoss88/media/20170428_134815_zpshihm7sdx.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on May 08, 2017, 12:27:20 AM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2F8B32867D-E3E0-4A5C-8957-355DFF4090E8_zpsfm5lcjnp.jpg&hash=1e6a270794b70610802f85649ed4b1492b604836) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/8B32867D-E3E0-4A5C-8957-355DFF4090E8_zpsfm5lcjnp.jpg.html)

Went on a quick unexpected trip to Tuscaloosa today and noticed all the AL 215 signs have been covered up for some reason at US 82. Any explanation known? I didn't get a chance to go down onto 82 and see if they were gone from signage there.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on May 08, 2017, 09:01:22 AM
AL 215 has been rerouted onto 15th Street.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on May 08, 2017, 10:00:42 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on May 08, 2017, 09:01:22 AM
AL 215 has been rerouted onto 15th Street.

Thanks. Guess I missed the memo about that...and failed to zoom into Google maps to notice.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on May 08, 2017, 10:02:31 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on May 08, 2017, 09:01:22 AM
AL 215 has been rerouted onto 15th Street.
Didn't they re-route it when they were replacing the University Blvd overpass over Kicker Rd? Are they planning to move it back?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on May 08, 2017, 10:19:27 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on May 08, 2017, 10:02:31 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on May 08, 2017, 09:01:22 AM
AL 215 has been rerouted onto 15th Street.
Didn't they re-route it when they were replacing the University Blvd overpass over Kicker Rd? Are they planning to move it back?

Yeah the state moved it when the bridge was being replaced according to The Tuscaloosa News. Sounds like state and the University both wanted to get non-student drivers out of the campus when traveling thru town so they saw it as a win-win.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on May 08, 2017, 10:22:47 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on May 08, 2017, 10:19:27 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on May 08, 2017, 10:02:31 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on May 08, 2017, 09:01:22 AM
AL 215 has been rerouted onto 15th Street.
Didn't they re-route it when they were replacing the University Blvd overpass over Kicker Rd? Are they planning to move it back?

Yeah the state moved it when the bridge was being replaced according to The Tuscaloosa News. Sounds like state and the University both wanted to get non-student drivers out of the campus when traveling thru town so they saw it as a win-win.
That makes sense.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on May 08, 2017, 10:25:10 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2FDDC967E0-E1D3-4893-89EF-33E8062BE47A_zpsp2gwn4il.jpg&hash=edcf5fc3323b7856cece6ac8ab8c4e7055ddccdf) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/DDC967E0-E1D3-4893-89EF-33E8062BE47A_zpsp2gwn4il.jpg.html)

US 11 has become AL 11 at I-59 Exit 166 in Ashville while temporarily re-routed. Down in Springville the detour signs are of the correct US variety. The contractor caught the mistake I guess.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on May 08, 2017, 10:30:33 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on May 08, 2017, 10:02:31 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on May 08, 2017, 09:01:22 AM
AL 215 has been rerouted onto 15th Street.
Didn't they re-route it when they were replacing the University Blvd overpass over Kicker Rd? Are they planning to move it back?

Rerouting SR-215 onto 15th Street diverts through traffic from driving through the middle of the campus at the University of Alabama.  Work done last summer has created a far more aesthetically pleasing view as one passes through the campus.

Several years ago a similar project was done in Auburn.  First, US-29 North was diverted from College Street onto I-85 at Exit 51 (College Street-Chewacla State Park), and SR-147 was extended along College Street.  This may have been the same time that SR-14 was truncated to end at Shug Jordan Parkway (then SR-267).  Finally, SR-147 was rerouted onto Shug Jordan Parkway and eventually SR-267 was decommissioned.

Obviously, both moves were implemented to reduce through traffic from the campuses of the two largest universities in the state.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on May 12, 2017, 12:42:29 AM
Good news for Shelby County, but this isn't enough:

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2017/05/gov_ivey_i-65_in_north_shelby.html#incart_river_home

I-65 needs to be six lanes wide between Shelby County and Prattville.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on May 13, 2017, 06:48:53 PM
Quote from: Charles2 on May 12, 2017, 12:42:29 AM
Good news for Shelby County, but this isn't enough:

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2017/05/gov_ivey_i-65_in_north_shelby.html#incart_river_home

I-65 needs to be six lanes wide between Shelby County and Prattville.
I-65 could stand to be 6 lanes wide across the whole state, along with I-565 from Exit 9 to I-65.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on May 14, 2017, 07:50:09 AM
Not the whole state.  Lengthy segments south of Montgomery that don't even come close to the traffic demand for 6 lanes.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on May 16, 2017, 01:15:30 PM
Quote from: Charles2 on May 12, 2017, 12:42:29 AM
Good news for Shelby County, but this isn't enough:

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2017/05/gov_ivey_i-65_in_north_shelby.html#incart_river_home

I-65 needs to be six lanes wide between Shelby County and Prattville.

The Shelby County portion should have been done a decade ago. At least then widening efforts could be focused along the rest of I-65 to Montgomery.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on May 16, 2017, 06:40:00 PM
ABC 33/40 reported on their newscast that ALDOT is considering tolling the current George Wallace Tunnel to pay for the new Mobile River Bridge to replace the tunnel and the traffic jams and also 8-laning the I-10 bridge over Mobile Bay.  It was reported on their newscasts, but I have seen nothing online about this.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on May 16, 2017, 08:47:00 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on May 16, 2017, 06:40:00 PM
ABC 33/40 reported on their newscast that ALDOT is considering tolling the current George Wallace Tunnel to pay for the new Mobile River Bridge to replace the tunnel and the traffic jams and also 8-laning the I-10 bridge over Mobile Bay.  It was reported on their newscasts, but I have seen nothing online about this.

Here you go (http://local15tv.com/news/local/aldot-officials-consider-installing-a-toll-at-the-wallace-tunnel)

I honestly don't see why they would toll the tunnel before a bridge is built. To me, a better solution would be a PPP where the eventual bridge is tolled and the existing tunnels reconfigured so that one tube services peds and bikes while the other is a two-lane road. This would better encourage people to take the bridge.

If just the tunnel is tolled without a new bridge, then I could see many folks just taking I-65/165/US 90 to avoid the tunnels. If the new bridge is tolled and the existing Wallace Tunnel was converted as I describe above, at least people will get a nice wide bridge to drive across instead of paying more for what would be the same product.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on May 16, 2017, 10:12:55 PM
From what I read from ALDOT's Mobile River Bridge website.  They could make the Bankhead Tunnel a bike and ped only facility.  And the current George Wallace tunnel would serve for traffic going to downtown Mobile.  The bikes and peds could also go on the new Mobile River bridge or on the Cochrane-Africatown Bridge and down I-165 by taking out one lane.
http://www.mobileriverbridge.com/gallery/bicyclepedestrian-workshop-presentation/ (http://www.mobileriverbridge.com/gallery/bicyclepedestrian-workshop-presentation/)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on May 17, 2017, 07:39:56 AM
I think that any tolling solution would need to include the Bayway as well (tolling existing as well as new and improved). This way it would be harder to shunpike without taking a slower route (US 90/98).
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on May 22, 2017, 05:53:54 PM
Massive project about to begin next year in Tuscaloosa including a cool I-20/59 bridge replacement of its own...


http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/news/20170520/bridge-road-plan-for-south-tuscaloosa-moving-forward

Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on May 23, 2017, 07:36:16 AM
Quote from: Voyager75 on May 22, 2017, 05:53:54 PM
Massive project about to begin next year in Tuscaloosa including a cool I-20/59 bridge replacement of its own...


http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/news/20170520/bridge-road-plan-for-south-tuscaloosa-moving-forward



I am guessing the I-20/59 bridge replacement at McFarland will coincide with the widening to six lanes that has been creeping southwest for all of the years.

I am wondering how traffic will be managed while this bridge is built? It will be much more difficult than a typical bridge widening.

At least from what I can gather the state won't be chipping in much more to build out the new bridge since Tuscaloosa has a sales tax mechanism in place to fund road projects.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on May 23, 2017, 05:05:41 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on May 23, 2017, 07:36:16 AM
Quote from: Voyager75 on May 22, 2017, 05:53:54 PM
Massive project about to begin next year in Tuscaloosa including a cool I-20/59 bridge replacement of its own...


http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/news/20170520/bridge-road-plan-for-south-tuscaloosa-moving-forward



I am guessing the I-20/59 bridge replacement at McFarland will coincide with the widening to six lanes that has been creeping southwest for all of the years.

I am wondering how traffic will be managed while this bridge is built? It will be much more difficult than a typical bridge widening.

At least from what I can gather the state won't be chipping in much more to build out the new bridge since Tuscaloosa has a sales tax mechanism in place to fund road projects.

I guess northbound interstate traffic will be diverted off at I-359/AL 69 and southbound at Exit 76. US 11/Skyland Blvd. will be a nightmare for people who are travelling through town and have no idea how to navigate local streets. Unless the McFarland bridge is past its life span(which is probable) I would have built these Echelon interchanges first to help traffic flow then proceed with the bridge.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on May 23, 2017, 05:11:57 PM
They won't divert Interstate traffic off.  More likely, what you'll see is temporary bridges and ramp closures.

Anyone else notice that, based on the photos in the article, the planned interchange design for 20/59 at 82/McFarland appears to be a SPUI?

Also, since the article mentions it, what's planned for AL 69 at Skyland (http://rp.dot.state.al.us/SR-69/pdf/PI%20Map%20STPAA0069540.pdf) is a tight diamond interchange.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on May 23, 2017, 05:32:15 PM
Quote from: froggie on May 23, 2017, 05:11:57 PM
They won't divert Interstate traffic off.  More likely, what you'll see is temporary bridges and ramp closures.

Anyone else notice that, based on the photos in the article, the planned interchange design for 20/59 at 82/McFarland appears to be a SPUI?

Also, since the article mentions it, what's planned for AL 69 at Skyland (http://rp.dot.state.al.us/SR-69/pdf/PI%20Map%20STPAA0069540.pdf) is a tight diamond interchange.

http://abc3340.com/news/local/new-i-2059-bridge-planned-for-tuscaloosa

This ABC 33/40 article calls it a SPUI via ALDOT
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on May 23, 2017, 06:44:06 PM
Quote from: froggie on May 23, 2017, 05:11:57 PM
They won't divert Interstate traffic off.  More likely, what you'll see is temporary bridges and ramp closures.

Anyone else notice that, based on the photos in the article, the planned interchange design for 20/59 at 82/McFarland appears to be a SPUI?

What is interesting is the Echelon Interchange at McFarland and SKyland. Folks from Skyland wishing to access I-20/59 Westbound have a dedicated lane adjacent to the flyover for McFarland traffic going westbound which would tie into the left turn lanes to access I-20/59 Westbound.

A lot of work looks to be planned along and south of the I-20/59 corridor in Tuscaloosa for sure.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on July 08, 2017, 05:59:28 PM
ALDOT's Anniston Eastern Bypass has now seen several deadly wrecks at the bottom of the mountain with a traffic light and people around where I live are very upset.  I wrote this article about the details and possible solutions and it has gone viral and has been widely shared on Facebook.  https://geekalabama.com/2017/07/07/roadscapes-the-deadly-aldot-mentality-over-the-us-431-anniston-eastern-bypass/
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Gnutella on July 08, 2017, 07:35:45 PM
Oh, joy. Last month I drove the segment of U.S. 431 from Dothan to Oxford, and next month I plan to drive the remainder of U.S. 431 from Oxford to Owensboro, KY. Are these intersections most dangerous driving northbound or southbound? I'll be driving northbound.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on July 08, 2017, 08:11:46 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on July 08, 2017, 07:35:45 PM
Oh, joy. Last month I drove the segment of U.S. 431 from Dothan to Oxford, and next month I plan to drive the remainder of U.S. 431 from Oxford to Owensboro, KY. Are these intersections most dangerous driving northbound or southbound? I'll be driving northbound.

Southbound is more dangerous as it's going down the mountain.  Northbound is going uphill.  From Oxford to Huntsville there are a lot more up and down big hill climbs.  I think the best part of this part of US 431 is going through Guntersville.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 08, 2017, 09:10:27 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on July 08, 2017, 08:11:46 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on July 08, 2017, 07:35:45 PM
Oh, joy. Last month I drove the segment of U.S. 431 from Dothan to Oxford, and next month I plan to drive the remainder of U.S. 431 from Oxford to Owensboro, KY. Are these intersections most dangerous driving northbound or southbound? I'll be driving northbound.

Southbound is more dangerous as it's going down the mountain.  Northbound is going uphill.  From Oxford to Huntsville there are a lot more up and down big hill climbs.  I think the best part of this part of US 431 is going through Guntersville.
It definitely is a very nice drive through Guntersville, though going over Monte Sano Mountain in Huntsville is rather fun.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: cjk374 on July 08, 2017, 09:46:01 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 08, 2017, 09:10:27 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on July 08, 2017, 08:11:46 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on July 08, 2017, 07:35:45 PM
Oh, joy. Last month I drove the segment of U.S. 431 from Dothan to Oxford, and next month I plan to drive the remainder of U.S. 431 from Oxford to Owensboro, KY. Are these intersections most dangerous driving northbound or southbound? I'll be driving northbound.

Southbound is more dangerous as it's going down the mountain.  Northbound is going uphill.  From Oxford to Huntsville there are a lot more up and down big hill climbs.  I think the best part of this part of US 431 is going through Guntersville.
It definitely is a very nice drive through Guntersville, though going over Monte Sano Mountain in Huntsville is rather fun.

My wife is from Guntersville. It really is a beautiful drive through there once you get through Boaz & Albertville  (all 3 towns blend together to make one big city).

At the bottom of "the mountain" going into Guntersville, there is a road on the left. It has on old US 431 JCT assembly, yet the road is not currently a state Road (may have been in the past).
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 08, 2017, 10:25:26 PM
Quote from: cjk374 on July 08, 2017, 09:46:01 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 08, 2017, 09:10:27 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on July 08, 2017, 08:11:46 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on July 08, 2017, 07:35:45 PM
Oh, joy. Last month I drove the segment of U.S. 431 from Dothan to Oxford, and next month I plan to drive the remainder of U.S. 431 from Oxford to Owensboro, KY. Are these intersections most dangerous driving northbound or southbound? I'll be driving northbound.

Southbound is more dangerous as it's going down the mountain.  Northbound is going uphill.  From Oxford to Huntsville there are a lot more up and down big hill climbs.  I think the best part of this part of US 431 is going through Guntersville.
It definitely is a very nice drive through Guntersville, though going over Monte Sano Mountain in Huntsville is rather fun.

My wife is from Guntersville. It really is a beautiful drive through there once you get through Boaz & Albertville  (all 3 towns blend together to make one big city).

At the bottom of "the mountain" going into Guntersville, there is a road on the left. It has on old US 431 JCT assembly, yet the road is not currently a state Road (may have been in the past).
Well, it's entirely possible that during a road project many years ago, the contractor put up the assembly. Do you remember the exact street? Both roads at the bottom of the mountain on the left when you're heading northbound along US 431 don't have shields along them. I did find this (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.3349614,-86.3153143,3a,15y,120.1h,87.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s31hjEqHglqfg-8vZ2esPVw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) though. :ded:
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on July 08, 2017, 11:25:05 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 08, 2017, 10:25:26 PM
Quote from: cjk374 on July 08, 2017, 09:46:01 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 08, 2017, 09:10:27 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on July 08, 2017, 08:11:46 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on July 08, 2017, 07:35:45 PM
Oh, joy. Last month I drove the segment of U.S. 431 from Dothan to Oxford, and next month I plan to drive the remainder of U.S. 431 from Oxford to Owensboro, KY. Are these intersections most dangerous driving northbound or southbound? I'll be driving northbound.

Southbound is more dangerous as it's going down the mountain.  Northbound is going uphill.  From Oxford to Huntsville there are a lot more up and down big hill climbs.  I think the best part of this part of US 431 is going through Guntersville.
It definitely is a very nice drive through Guntersville, though going over Monte Sano Mountain in Huntsville is rather fun.

My wife is from Guntersville. It really is a beautiful drive through there once you get through Boaz & Albertville  (all 3 towns blend together to make one big city).

At the bottom of "the mountain" going into Guntersville, there is a road on the left. It has on old US 431 JCT assembly, yet the road is not currently a state Road (may have been in the past).
Well, it's entirely possible that during a road project many years ago, the contractor put up the assembly. Do you remember the exact street? Both roads at the bottom of the mountain on the left when you're heading northbound along US 431 don't have shields along them. I did find this (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.3349614,-86.3153143,3a,15y,120.1h,87.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s31hjEqHglqfg-8vZ2esPVw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) though. :ded:

Wow, burn that shield, just burn it!  Anyways, fun memories delivering for FedEx in the Guntersville area.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 09, 2017, 03:10:59 AM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on July 08, 2017, 11:25:05 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 08, 2017, 10:25:26 PM
Quote from: cjk374 on July 08, 2017, 09:46:01 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 08, 2017, 09:10:27 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on July 08, 2017, 08:11:46 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on July 08, 2017, 07:35:45 PM
Oh, joy. Last month I drove the segment of U.S. 431 from Dothan to Oxford, and next month I plan to drive the remainder of U.S. 431 from Oxford to Owensboro, KY. Are these intersections most dangerous driving northbound or southbound? I'll be driving northbound.

Southbound is more dangerous as it's going down the mountain.  Northbound is going uphill.  From Oxford to Huntsville there are a lot more up and down big hill climbs.  I think the best part of this part of US 431 is going through Guntersville.
It definitely is a very nice drive through Guntersville, though going over Monte Sano Mountain in Huntsville is rather fun.

My wife is from Guntersville. It really is a beautiful drive through there once you get through Boaz & Albertville  (all 3 towns blend together to make one big city).

At the bottom of "the mountain" going into Guntersville, there is a road on the left. It has on old US 431 JCT assembly, yet the road is not currently a state Road (may have been in the past).
Well, it's entirely possible that during a road project many years ago, the contractor put up the assembly. Do you remember the exact street? Both roads at the bottom of the mountain on the left when you're heading northbound along US 431 don't have shields along them. I did find this (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.3349614,-86.3153143,3a,15y,120.1h,87.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s31hjEqHglqfg-8vZ2esPVw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) though. :ded:

Wow, burn that shield, just burn it!  Anyways, fun memories delivering for FedEx in the Guntersville area.
There's another pair of them for AL 33 in Moulton, and I want to say I saw a few in Montgomery last year. I also once saw some (fortunately covered up and now removed) temporary detour shields for AL 65 that appeared to be the same way.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: cjk374 on July 09, 2017, 12:48:58 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on July 08, 2017, 11:25:05 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 08, 2017, 10:25:26 PM
Quote from: cjk374 on July 08, 2017, 09:46:01 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 08, 2017, 09:10:27 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on July 08, 2017, 08:11:46 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on July 08, 2017, 07:35:45 PM
Oh, joy. Last month I drove the segment of U.S. 431 from Dothan to Oxford, and next month I plan to drive the remainder of U.S. 431 from Oxford to Owensboro, KY. Are these intersections most dangerous driving northbound or southbound? I'll be driving northbound.

Southbound is more dangerous as it's going down the mountain.  Northbound is going uphill.  From Oxford to Huntsville there are a lot more up and down big hill climbs.  I think the best part of this part of US 431 is going through Guntersville.
It definitely is a very nice drive through Guntersville, though going over Monte Sano Mountain in Huntsville is rather fun.

My wife is from Guntersville. It really is a beautiful drive through there once you get through Boaz & Albertville  (all 3 towns blend together to make one big city).

At the bottom of "the mountain" going into Guntersville, there is a road on the left. It has on old US 431 JCT assembly, yet the road is not currently a state Road (may have been in the past).
Well, it's entirely possible that during a road project many years ago, the contractor put up the assembly. Do you remember the exact street? Both roads at the bottom of the mountain on the left when you're heading northbound along US 431 don't have shields along them. I did find this (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.3349614,-86.3153143,3a,15y,120.1h,87.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s31hjEqHglqfg-8vZ2esPVw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) though. :ded:

Wow, burn that shield, just burn it!  Anyways, fun memories delivering for FedEx in the Guntersville area.

That looks like what would happen if AL & GA mated & had a baby.  :-D :ded:

If I gave my wife the right information, she said we turned onto old AL 205 off of US 431.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on July 11, 2017, 09:27:17 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 09, 2017, 03:10:59 AM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on July 08, 2017, 11:25:05 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 08, 2017, 10:25:26 PM
Quote from: cjk374 on July 08, 2017, 09:46:01 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 08, 2017, 09:10:27 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on July 08, 2017, 08:11:46 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on July 08, 2017, 07:35:45 PM
Oh, joy. Last month I drove the segment of U.S. 431 from Dothan to Oxford, and next month I plan to drive the remainder of U.S. 431 from Oxford to Owensboro, KY. Are these intersections most dangerous driving northbound or southbound? I'll be driving northbound.

Southbound is more dangerous as it's going down the mountain.  Northbound is going uphill.  From Oxford to Huntsville there are a lot more up and down big hill climbs.  I think the best part of this part of US 431 is going through Guntersville.
It definitely is a very nice drive through Guntersville, though going over Monte Sano Mountain in Huntsville is rather fun.

My wife is from Guntersville. It really is a beautiful drive through there once you get through Boaz & Albertville  (all 3 towns blend together to make one big city).

At the bottom of "the mountain" going into Guntersville, there is a road on the left. It has on old US 431 JCT assembly, yet the road is not currently a state Road (may have been in the past).
Well, it's entirely possible that during a road project many years ago, the contractor put up the assembly. Do you remember the exact street? Both roads at the bottom of the mountain on the left when you're heading northbound along US 431 don't have shields along them. I did find this (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.3349614,-86.3153143,3a,15y,120.1h,87.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s31hjEqHglqfg-8vZ2esPVw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) though. :ded:

Wow, burn that shield, just burn it!  Anyways, fun memories delivering for FedEx in the Guntersville area.
There's another pair of them for AL 33 in Moulton, and I want to say I saw a few in Montgomery last year. I also once saw some (fortunately covered up and now removed) temporary detour shields for AL 65 that appeared to be the same way.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2F836FF19B-FBA2-4256-B2CF-549CF7031CD8_zpssqvtvvuc.png&hash=88cab7377b415ec174b45eeef8d478f24c3b60d5) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/836FF19B-FBA2-4256-B2CF-549CF7031CD8_zpssqvtvvuc.png.html)

The AL 119 shields at the US 280 intersection in Birmingham are the same way.
They were put up last year after the intersection was expanded.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on July 11, 2017, 09:31:14 AM
Quote from: cjk374 on July 08, 2017, 09:46:01 PM
At the bottom of "the mountain" going into Guntersville, there is a road on the left. It has on old US 431 JCT assembly, yet the road is not currently a state Road (may have been in the past).

I am thinking at one time that road may have been the former alignment of US 431 (or US 241, at it would have been at the time).
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on July 11, 2017, 12:02:21 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on July 11, 2017, 09:27:17 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 09, 2017, 03:10:59 AM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on July 08, 2017, 11:25:05 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 08, 2017, 10:25:26 PM
Quote from: cjk374 on July 08, 2017, 09:46:01 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 08, 2017, 09:10:27 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on July 08, 2017, 08:11:46 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on July 08, 2017, 07:35:45 PM
Oh, joy. Last month I drove the segment of U.S. 431 from Dothan to Oxford, and next month I plan to drive the remainder of U.S. 431 from Oxford to Owensboro, KY. Are these intersections most dangerous driving northbound or southbound? I'll be driving northbound.

Southbound is more dangerous as it's going down the mountain.  Northbound is going uphill.  From Oxford to Huntsville there are a lot more up and down big hill climbs.  I think the best part of this part of US 431 is going through Guntersville.
It definitely is a very nice drive through Guntersville, though going over Monte Sano Mountain in Huntsville is rather fun.

My wife is from Guntersville. It really is a beautiful drive through there once you get through Boaz & Albertville  (all 3 towns blend together to make one big city).

At the bottom of "the mountain" going into Guntersville, there is a road on the left. It has on old US 431 JCT assembly, yet the road is not currently a state Road (may have been in the past).
Well, it's entirely possible that during a road project many years ago, the contractor put up the assembly. Do you remember the exact street? Both roads at the bottom of the mountain on the left when you're heading northbound along US 431 don't have shields along them. I did find this (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.3349614,-86.3153143,3a,15y,120.1h,87.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s31hjEqHglqfg-8vZ2esPVw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) though. :ded:

Wow, burn that shield, just burn it!  Anyways, fun memories delivering for FedEx in the Guntersville area.
There's another pair of them for AL 33 in Moulton, and I want to say I saw a few in Montgomery last year. I also once saw some (fortunately covered up and now removed) temporary detour shields for AL 65 that appeared to be the same way.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2F836FF19B-FBA2-4256-B2CF-549CF7031CD8_zpssqvtvvuc.png&hash=88cab7377b415ec174b45eeef8d478f24c3b60d5) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/836FF19B-FBA2-4256-B2CF-549CF7031CD8_zpssqvtvvuc.png.html)

The AL 119 shields at the US 280 intersection in Birmingham are the same way.
They were put up last year after the intersection was expanded.
Maybe as they have gotten more and more 3 digit state routes above the 100's signed they came up with a wider pattern to fit those and are just using the wider one in all cases whether it's 2 or 3 digits?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on July 11, 2017, 01:48:04 PM
Those are contractor installations and are not what ALDOT typically uses.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on July 12, 2017, 08:49:49 PM
Cullman's well documented use of their own style of signage is on full ??????? display on Co Road 490 from Cullman down to I-65 Exit 299 near Dodge City

Here it is designated as I-65 DETOUR in shield form:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2F6122105B-1D1A-4569-87D4-FB514B61BD99_zps5owaypjf.jpg&hash=91ab4be1a7d2caca9eed50528fcc9d2c4edd3dc9) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/6122105B-1D1A-4569-87D4-FB514B61BD99_zps5owaypjf.jpg.html)

And in case the locals don't know what a interstate shield is, here it is spelled out:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2FF0FB2357-2610-4E13-A9E6-EDC5B6361903_zpszad2hyvz.jpg&hash=7e878a11128f61f45d70c7ff4567e5d739ee588b) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/F0FB2357-2610-4E13-A9E6-EDC5B6361903_zpszad2hyvz.jpg.html)

And instead of putting up a simple shield for Co Road 490, they just put it in sentence format:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2F9B97B620-9815-4571-9E64-CD88A1336468_zpssd8uhc8z.jpg&hash=045f443ae86f0920b9bd27eac896b3a97a1f9591) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/9B97B620-9815-4571-9E64-CD88A1336468_zpssd8uhc8z.jpg.html)

Boggles the mind...
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on July 12, 2017, 09:38:30 PM
Cullman County may have the worst signage in the state.  The decals on their county road shields look like the bought peel-on stickers at Lowe's or Home Depot.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on July 13, 2017, 01:37:06 AM
Quote from: Charles2 on July 12, 2017, 09:38:30 PM
Cullman County may have the worst signage in the state.  The decals on their county road shields look like the bought peel-on stickers at Lowe's or Home Depot.

Yes they do. Some of the stickers are black and white on the blue county shield for extra cheapness.
Here's a better pic of the unofficial I-65 "Detour" route in Cullman's Highway Font (Series Suck)
that also reminds you yet again that you're on Golf Course Road in letters so small that I had to find this sign in Google to actually read it. The "1" is one of the peel-off stickers I believe.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2F57A55FB0-0042-4599-AFFB-87B5F7070F1F_zpsj0wggtqd.png&hash=e16346dd4c68c6503ef78a1c65b735aca00d76a5) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/57A55FB0-0042-4599-AFFB-87B5F7070F1F_zpsj0wggtqd.png.html)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: cjk374 on July 13, 2017, 06:32:43 AM
Quote from: Voyager75 on July 13, 2017, 01:37:06 AM
Quote from: Charles2 on July 12, 2017, 09:38:30 PM
Cullman County may have the worst signage in the state.  The decals on their county road shields look like the bought peel-on stickers at Lowe's or Home Depot.

Yes they do. Some of the stickers are black and white on the blue county shield for extra cheapness.
Here's a better pic of the unofficial I-65 "Detour" route in Cullman's Highway Font (Series Suck)
that also reminds you yet again that you're on Golf Course Road in letters so small that I had to find this sign in Google to actually read it. The "1" is one of the peel-off stickers I believe.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2F57A55FB0-0042-4599-AFFB-87B5F7070F1F_zpsj0wggtqd.png&hash=e16346dd4c68c6503ef78a1c65b735aca00d76a5) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/57A55FB0-0042-4599-AFFB-87B5F7070F1F_zpsj0wggtqd.png.html)

At least the I-65 "shield" is non-neutered.   :) :spin:
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on July 13, 2017, 07:23:35 AM
Too bad this detour only bypasses a small portion of I-65. A great detour route needs to be posted to bypass the section between AL 69 and AL 91.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on July 13, 2017, 10:46:04 AM
More of the Wacky World of Cullman signage...

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2FCE4CF25F-1F20-4665-9AEB-AA2D126BFD3D_zpsjrlawexw.png&hash=7982c747e7e509a11904762ab39decc7ac5d5206) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/CE4CF25F-1F20-4665-9AEB-AA2D126BFD3D_zpsjrlawexw.png.html)

At the other end of I-65 Detour Co Road 490 You Are On Golf Course Road is this
"Bloated AL 31" sign nailed to the side of a pole as you approach US 31. There is no Stop sign much less a Railroad Crossing crossbuck at this spur track btw. Looks to still be in use...


I think we could start a Google Scavenger Hunt thread for Cullman to find the worst of the worst.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on July 13, 2017, 01:22:59 PM
And there is this gem:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FiuVZSXf.jpg&hash=3931720953ea58bdc808bf3cc2fb8bf45788a7f5)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Brian556 on July 13, 2017, 06:26:01 PM
Why is Cullman Co posting I-65 detour signage?

Normally that would be done by the I-65 contractor or their traffic control subcontractor if they are using one.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on July 13, 2017, 06:59:18 PM
Quote from: Brian556 on July 13, 2017, 06:26:01 PM
Why is Cullman Co posting I-65 detour signage?

Normally that would be done by the I-65 contractor or their traffic control subcontractor if they are using one.

I'm taking it as Cullman's take on a Business Spur/Loop. Not a construction detour in this case as I don't remember any I-65 construction that required a detour.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on July 13, 2017, 07:03:50 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on July 13, 2017, 06:59:18 PM
Quote from: Brian556 on July 13, 2017, 06:26:01 PM
Why is Cullman Co posting I-65 detour signage?

Normally that would be done by the I-65 contractor or their traffic control subcontractor if they are using one.

With all the wrecks that happen on Alabama's Interstates, plus congestion, I am surprised ALDOT has not posted emergency Interstate detour signage by now.

I'm taking it as Cullman's take on a Business Spur/Loop. Not a construction detour in this case as I don't remember any I-65 construction that required a detour.

With all the wrecks that happen often on Alabama Interstates, i'm surprised ALDOT does not post emergency Interstate detour signage.  In most cases, it's go to the nearby parallel US route, but that is not always the case in some places.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 14, 2017, 02:37:24 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on July 13, 2017, 10:46:04 AM
More of the Wacky World of Cullman signage...

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2FCE4CF25F-1F20-4665-9AEB-AA2D126BFD3D_zpsjrlawexw.png&hash=7982c747e7e509a11904762ab39decc7ac5d5206) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/CE4CF25F-1F20-4665-9AEB-AA2D126BFD3D_zpsjrlawexw.png.html)

At the other end of I-65 Detour Co Road 490 You Are On Golf Course Road is this
"Bloated AL 31" sign nailed to the side of a pole as you approach US 31. There is no Stop sign much less a Railroad Crossing crossbuck at this spur track btw. Looks to still be in use...
The spur track is actually out of service (pretty much overgrown at that crossing IIRC as well), but CSX hopes to restore service to it someday, from what I understand. I also posted a lot of Cullman's signage on the forum a while back:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=11045.msg2128115#msg2128115

And if you're on Facebook and a member of the State and Local Road Reform group, I post more stuff from Cullman there as well.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on July 19, 2017, 07:08:50 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on July 08, 2017, 05:59:28 PM
ALDOT's Anniston Eastern Bypass has now seen several deadly wrecks at the bottom of the mountain with a traffic light and people around where I live are very upset.  I wrote this article about the details and possible solutions and it has gone viral and has been widely shared on Facebook.  https://geekalabama.com/2017/07/07/roadscapes-the-deadly-aldot-mentality-over-the-us-431-anniston-eastern-bypass/

Anniston and ALDOT have now took action...(subscription may be required)

https://www.annistonstar.com/news/anniston/aldot-to-permanently-close-henry-road-left-turn-lane-onto/article_f5b2a204-6c8d-11e7-b404-073579f1ad24.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on August 09, 2017, 08:45:43 AM
Study Funded by ALDOT & City of Auburn to Look at an Outer Loop Around the City to Alleviate Traffic (http://www.wltz.com/2017/08/08/study-funded-aldot-city-auburn-look-outer-loop-around-city-alleviate-traffic)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: lordsutch on August 09, 2017, 04:25:46 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on August 09, 2017, 08:45:43 AM
Study Funded by ALDOT & City of Auburn to Look at an Outer Loop Around the City to Alleviate Traffic (http://www.wltz.com/2017/08/08/study-funded-aldot-city-auburn-look-outer-loop-around-city-alleviate-traffic)

Great, another ALDOT at-grade special that'll have them back building yet another bypass in 20 years.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on August 17, 2017, 08:53:43 PM
ALDOT is doing a preliminary advertisement for the next segment of I-20/59 to be widened around Tuscaloosa. It is from US 82 to where the current three lane section ends at Buttermilk Road.

What's interesting is that the I-20/59 bridges over McFarland will be replaced with a signature arch bridge over a new SPUI interchange.

Also, ALDOT appears to be going to implement a Smart Work Zone system to announce delays throughout the course of the project.

For those interested, the plans can be found at http://alletting.dot.state.al.us/WEBPROPS/2017/20170929/20170929_Call_004_plans.pdf (warning: Large 700 MB file)
Title: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on November 05, 2017, 08:56:38 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on April 18, 2017, 07:27:28 AM
AL 300 and AL 301 are short connector routes which probably won't be signed. Maybe these AL 3xx routes are simply routes that are on the log books indicating that the state maintains them but will not be signed.


Coming home from the in-laws I noticed that AL-301 is now signed at Exit 191 on I-20. Didn't get to look to see if new signage was posted on the interstate itself.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171106/d4fc46776c01aee21a2537e7938ef37e.jpg)

I snagged a blurry pic
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadman65 on November 13, 2017, 02:39:06 PM
What is the status of that planned I-10 Spur into Dothan?

I remember when one specific congressman or state legislator was running for office in the Dothan area back when I stayed there  back in 2010 overnight at a hotel on the TV, he said if he got elected he would get the much needed road ( I think its a toll road he said was being studied) built.

I also seen someone on here show a proposal of a planned freeway through Downtown Dothan instead of bypassing it, which seems odd, but considering that Missouri built some of I-70 across the state right through some cities like Columbia and Wentzville to a name a couple and so did Texas along I-30 where it dissects one city I drove through, it would not surprise me to cut a city in half. Even if it ends up like Syracuse in NY with them realizing that building an interstate right through town was not good several decades later and want to remove it, they would build the thing anyway. 

However, what is the status there?  Plus would FDOT build another toll road to connect with this to I-10?  Considering that FDOT never considered a freeway spur of I-10 to Panama City, a popular tourist destination, I doubt they would even want to help another state get commerce unless Dothan had something of interest that Florida could use.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on November 14, 2017, 07:12:34 AM
There's basically been no status for the past several years.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bigdave on November 14, 2017, 01:04:05 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 13, 2017, 02:39:06 PM
What is the status of that planned I-10 Spur into Dothan?

I remember when one specific congressman or state legislator was running for office in the Dothan area back when I stayed there  back in 2010 overnight at a hotel on the TV, he said if he got elected he would get the much needed road ( I think its a toll road he said was being studied) built.

I also seen someone on here show a proposal of a planned freeway through Downtown Dothan instead of bypassing it, which seems odd, but considering that Missouri built some of I-70 across the state right through some cities like Columbia and Wentzville to a name a couple and so did Texas along I-30 where it dissects one city I drove through, it would not surprise me to cut a city in half. Even if it ends up like Syracuse in NY with them realizing that building an interstate right through town was not good several decades later and want to remove it, they would build the thing anyway. 

However, what is the status there?  Plus would FDOT build another toll road to connect with this to I-10?  Considering that FDOT never considered a freeway spur of I-10 to Panama City, a popular tourist destination, I doubt they would even want to help another state get commerce unless Dothan had something of interest that Florida could use.

There were many in the city that wanted the connector to run through downtown Dothan:

https://web.archive.org/web/20010201063200/http://www.savedothan.com:80/

In any case, much ado over nothing. I'd personally love to see US 231 upgraded to a freeway at least Montgomery to I-10, but I think it will never happen.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadman65 on November 16, 2017, 01:09:55 PM
It is a principal through route and has merit to become an interstate or even interstate type of roadway. 

IMO it should be one to Panama City in FL.  I always thought I-85 should really go there from Columbus, GA where it would break away from its current alignment and head south along I-185 then build a bridge across the river into AL and follow US 431 to Dothan and then along US 231 to Panama City and terminate.   I-16 could go further west of Macon following US 80 to someplace west of Phenix City, AL while the rest of I-85 in between would make a good x16 or x85 designation.  Heck if I-14 ever makes it east of Texas and goes to Augusta, GA it could use I-85 in AL instead.
Title: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on November 22, 2017, 07:33:16 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on November 05, 2017, 08:56:38 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on April 18, 2017, 07:27:28 AM
AL 300 and AL 301 are short connector routes which probably won't be signed. Maybe these AL 3xx routes are simply routes that are on the log books indicating that the state maintains them but will not be signed.


Coming home from the in-laws I noticed that AL-301 is now signed at Exit 191 on I-20. Didn't get to look to see if new signage was posted on the interstate itself.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171106/d4fc46776c01aee21a2537e7938ef37e.jpg)

I snagged a blurry pic

Went back over to the in-laws today and took a few more pics of now signed 0.2 mile AL-301. There are surprisingly new sign gantries installed on US 78 and South AL-301. Very well done and even a END AL-301 at I-20. No end signage at US-78. Also no mention of AL 301 on I-20 itself other than at the off ramp.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171123/f886f7da16250156bb9ada1f963f058c.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171123/0e9ad84840d11914e90ae584d7f2d827.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171123/c77e520f19e5c615f42ac59faf37c85d.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on November 22, 2017, 07:37:03 PM
So, that means that AL-301 and AL-382 are now signed.  AL-378 isn't signed, but I wonder how much of that is due to the construction at US-78/AL-5 (Arkadelphia Road)?  Not sure if AL-300 is signed in Tuscaloosa County...been about a year since I've been down there.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: mwb1848 on November 26, 2017, 06:17:09 PM
I got my first chance to drive AL-208 between I-85 and AL-110 this weekend. This is the freeway stub which will eventually be part of the Outer Loop around Montgomery.

Does anybody know how the mileposts and exit numbers are being assigned on this roadway? Both I-85 and Vaughn Road (AL-110) are in the 20's. Would that assume a Zero MM at the point west of Montgomery from which the Outer Loop would diverge from US 80 near the Airport?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on December 16, 2017, 02:01:40 PM
Quote from: Charles2 on November 22, 2017, 07:37:03 PM
So, that means that AL-301 and AL-382 are now signed.  AL-378 isn't signed, but I wonder how much of that is due to the construction at US-78/AL-5 (Arkadelphia Road)?  Not sure if AL-300 is signed in Tuscaloosa County...been about a year since I've been down there.

As of yesterday, there are still no AL 300 shields in Fosters.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on April 08, 2018, 09:51:07 AM
Not in Athens, GA, but in Opelika, AL, about ten miles from the edge of Auburn University's campus. This is at US 431, a.k.a. Bulldog Parkway, and former US 29. The Dawgs are those of Opelika High School, not UGA.
(https://i.imgur.com/YzbpwEo.jpg?1)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on May 01, 2018, 02:16:31 PM
I was in west Alabama this past weekend and got a few pictures of grading for the US82 bypass of Gordo which has gotten underway recently.

West of Gordo where the 4 lane will head east from current US82, which runs SE to NW here.
(https://i.imgur.com/jJ7Q66O.jpg)

Looking west from Pickens Co 30/Old 82
(https://i.imgur.com/K3Xcf2I.jpg)

Looking east from Pickens Co 30/Old 82
(https://i.imgur.com/0iX4KgY.jpg)

Bridge supports at Pickens Co 30/old 82 so they are overpassing the road here. I don't know whether there will be direct access to the 4-lane from here or if it is just an overpass.
(https://i.imgur.com/7CjuG7O.jpg)

I didn't get pictures of the grading to the west of AL159 north of Gordo. I didn't see any work happening to the east of AL159 yet or on US82 to the east of Gordo. I would be interested to know if there is going to be direct access from PC30 to the 4-lane. If so then surely they are planning on grade separating AL159 too, which would be nice. I have assumed that they would do the US82-AL159 intersection like they ended up doing US82 and AL219 in Centreville with the U-turns.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on May 01, 2018, 07:14:05 PM
^ I found an Army Corps of Engineers public notice (http://www.sam.usace.army.mil/Portals/46/docs/regulatory/public_notices/SAM-2016-00118-JSC.pdf?ver=2016-04-20-110603-563) on the project dated mid-2016.  There's a map on Page 6 that suggests (but can't tell for sure) access between the bypass and CR 30 would be via Church St.  The map also suggests that AL 159 will be realigned to the east to meet US 82 at a standard (and 90-degree-angle) 4-way intersection.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on May 16, 2018, 07:54:49 AM
Auburn may be getting a roundabout. Page 27 - Cox Rd-Wire Rd intersection improvements.

https://www.auburnalabama.org/budget/FINAL%20FY2017-FY2018%20Presentation.pdf
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on May 16, 2018, 08:48:43 PM
Saw this posted on facebook just now with the caption "What's wrong with this picture?" LOL
(https://i.imgur.com/Ob8xHZt.jpg)

Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on May 16, 2018, 09:44:59 PM
I guess that's the scenic route to Huntsville. :bigass:
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on May 16, 2018, 11:13:00 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on May 16, 2018, 08:48:43 PM
Saw this posted on facebook just now with the caption "What's wrong with this picture?" LOL
(https://i.imgur.com/Ob8xHZt.jpg)

The good news:  https://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2018/05/incorrect_sign_at_i-65_junctio.html

The bad news: The sign should have been thoroughly inspected before it was installed.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on May 16, 2018, 11:53:41 PM
Really, all that would need to be done to fix it would be to mount an I-20 shield and an I-65 shield in the proper spots, either through greenout or by using physical shields.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Henry on May 17, 2018, 09:36:41 AM
I-65 West and I-20 North? Looks like someone was goofing off on the job!

Quote from: freebrickproductions on May 16, 2018, 11:53:41 PM
Really, all that would need to be done to fix it would be to mount an I-20 shield and an I-65 shield in the proper spots, either through greenout or by using physical shields.
I'd simply detach the shields and reposition them to where they should be.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on May 17, 2018, 01:32:41 PM
Quote from: Henry on May 17, 2018, 09:36:41 AM
I-65 West and I-20 North? Looks like someone was goofing off on the job!

Quote from: freebrickproductions on May 16, 2018, 11:53:41 PM
Really, all that would need to be done to fix it would be to mount an I-20 shield and an I-65 shield in the proper spots, either through greenout or by using physical shields.
I'd simply detach the shields and reposition them to where they should be.
They might be printed on, as I don't think I've seen ALDOT using demountable shields in a long time.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: cjk374 on May 17, 2018, 08:11:38 PM
Looks like it's time for them start back using it again.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on May 18, 2018, 05:58:48 AM
Yeah they are printed on. From traffic cams it appears they have temporarily taped black tarps over the shields.

I'd bet the farm that they will have new panels made to mount over the two shields and they will be in a entirely different size and font to officially make it the worst sign in B'Ham.


iPhone
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on May 26, 2018, 09:15:03 PM
It was fixed properly by the time I went through on Saturday morning.  :clap:
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on July 15, 2018, 05:45:00 PM
I think this bad boy may be going away soon. We went through Montgomery yesterday and it looks like a new gantry is being constructed just before it.

https://goo.gl/maps/ni69KZLxoTu
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 18, 2018, 01:50:45 AM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on July 15, 2018, 05:45:00 PM
I think this bad boy may be going away soon. We went through Montgomery yesterday and it looks like a new gantry is being constructed just before it.

https://goo.gl/maps/ni69KZLxoTu
Glad I got a picture of it on my way up from Florida earlier this month. Any signs of replacement for the button-copy on US 31 in the SW corner of the city?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: The Ghostbuster on July 18, 2018, 04:40:13 PM
Will any more of the future Interstate 85 bypass of Montgomery be built anytime soon? Also, is future Interstate 422 between State Highway 75 and State Highway 79 completed yet?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on July 18, 2018, 04:50:22 PM
No. And no.

(BTW, took only about a minute of Google searching to find both answers)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on July 18, 2018, 04:55:58 PM
This was the extent of I-422 construction as of last December:

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4622/38917179155_29c37e6355_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/22hYHvv)

This was just a ramp from AL 79, heading east.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bigdave on July 18, 2018, 06:00:39 PM
Quote from: formulanone on July 18, 2018, 04:55:58 PM
This was the extent of I-422 construction as of last December:

Looks like they are right on track to finish as scheduled in 2050.  :bigass:
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on August 16, 2018, 06:24:16 PM
One of the few remaining intersections in Auburn without mast arm traffic signals, Shug Jordan Pkwy and Wire Rd. is getting them. Looks like the 'Left Turn Yield on Green' is being replaced with 'Left Turn Yield on Flashing Yellow'. That looks like a yellow circle instead of an arrow though? If it's an arrow it sure isn't very pointy.Never mind, it's an arrow.

(https://i.imgur.com/hqncr8g.jpg)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Georgia on August 28, 2018, 12:07:28 AM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on July 15, 2018, 05:45:00 PM
I think this bad boy may be going away soon. We went through Montgomery yesterday and it looks like a new gantry is being constructed just before it.

https://goo.gl/maps/ni69KZLxoTu

went through MGM 3 weeks ago, it is gone.
new gantry and sign is just sooooo boring
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on August 28, 2018, 05:52:16 AM
Is the new one an APL, or conventional?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: 3467 on August 29, 2018, 11:12:51 AM
The Federal Register has published several  cancellations for projects in Alabama in the last few days.Among them a road from I 10 to Dolthan ,an extend of I 85 and  direct rout from Memphis to Atlanta. To me 22 to 20 seems direct.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Interstate 69 Fan on August 29, 2018, 11:14:08 AM
Quote from: 3467 on August 29, 2018, 11:12:51 AM
The Federal Register has published several  cancellations for projects in Alabama in the last few days.Among them a road from I 10 to Dolthan ,an extend of I 85 and  direct rout from Memphis to Atlanta. To me 22 to 20 seems direct.
You mean extended I-85?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: 3467 on August 29, 2018, 12:02:01 PM
Yes
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on August 29, 2018, 12:08:39 PM
QuoteThe Federal Register has published several  cancellations for projects in Alabama in the last few days.

Do you have a link or website you could share?

Quoteand  direct rout from Memphis to Atlanta.

This was the push from ~20 years ago for an Interstate along the US 72 corridor to around Huntsville, bypass south of Huntsville, then continue to Atlanta via Rome, GA.

Agree that 22 to 20 is more direct, though it would be nice if there were a way to thread through the coal ash and other polluted sites northeast of downtown Birmingham for a more direct connection between the two so one could avoid Malfunction Junction.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bigdave on August 29, 2018, 03:33:23 PM
Quote from: 3467 on August 29, 2018, 11:12:51 AM
The Federal Register has published several  cancellations for projects in Alabama in the last few days.Among them a road from I 10 to Dolthan ,an extend of I 85 and  direct rout from Memphis to Atlanta. To me 22 to 20 seems direct.

Here's a cancellation for the I-759 extension in Gadsden.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/08/29/2018-18669/rescinding-the-notice-of-intent-for-an-environmental-impact-statement-gadsden-etowah-county-alabama

I-85 extension

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/08/29/2018-18670/rescinding-the-notice-of-intent-for-an-environmental-impact-statement-multiple-counties-alabama

MEM-HSV-ATL highway

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/08/29/2018-18668/rescinding-the-notice-of-intent-for-an-environmental-impact-statement-multiple-counties-alabama

Dothan to I-10:

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/08/28/2018-18666/rescinding-the-notice-of-intent-for-an-environmental-impact-statement-multiple-counties-alabama

HSV Southern bypass and Weatherly extension

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/08/28/2018-18665/rescinding-the-notice-of-intent-for-an-environmental-impact-statement-huntsville-madison-county

Road projects are born to noise and publicity and die a quiet death.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: sparker on August 29, 2018, 04:24:17 PM
^^^^^
Interesting to note that the rationale cited for the recission of the Memphis-Huntsville-Atlanta corridor was the objections of the Redstone Arsenal regarding a facility adjacent to their site.  IIRC, that corridor would have overlaid I-565 through Huntsville; it runs along the north side of Redstone and has for decades; unless there was an alternate corridor path of which I'm unaware, that shouldn't have impinged any more on the arsenal than current facilities.  Just surprised they didn't simply cite lack of funding as the rationale as per the other recissions.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: 3467 on August 29, 2018, 06:44:36 PM
I often check the Federal Register and it has not been very interesting until I saw all these Alabama revisions. I was curious why. Illinois has a bunch from that era but they only killed off a couple for local reasons. We have no money either but keep them on life support just in case we find some. I wondered why Alabama threw in the towel.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: 3467 on August 29, 2018, 06:49:54 PM
Also wasn't that 85 extension also supposed to be I 14?
I wondered if they contracted the neighboring states.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on August 29, 2018, 08:13:17 PM
QuoteInteresting to note that the rationale cited for the recission of the Memphis-Huntsville-Atlanta corridor was the objections of the Redstone Arsenal regarding a facility adjacent to their site.  IIRC, that corridor would have overlaid I-565 through Huntsville; it runs along the north side of Redstone and has for decades; unless there was an alternate corridor path of which I'm unaware, that shouldn't have impinged any more on the arsenal than current facilities.

A corridor right through the eastern side of Redstone was recommended, in part because of the cost and issues with bringing Memorial Dr fully up to Interstate standards.  Then 9/11 happened and the Army went on record by 2009 (http://www.apr.org/post/army-rules-out-memphis-atlanta-bypass-across-redstone-arsenal) in opposing a route through Redstone due to security concerns.  It also didn't help promoters that interest from Mississippi and Georgia waned (http://blog.al.com/times-views/2012/09/death_of_a_dream_the_memphis-h.html).
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: sparker on August 29, 2018, 09:32:02 PM
Quote from: 3467 on August 29, 2018, 06:44:36 PM
I often check the Federal Register and it has not been very interesting until I saw all these Alabama revisions. I was curious why. Illinois has a bunch from that era but they only killed off a couple for local reasons. We have no money either but keep them on life support just in case we find some. I wondered why Alabama threw in the towel.

They probably blew their wad on I-22; after that project's completion, along with the present Birmingham revamp, they couldn't even find the funds for the Montgomery bypass, leaving it a stub from I-85.  Besides (and not to get too political here) the current crowd running the state is exceptionally tax-averse; the prospects for raising funds in-state are dim indeed.  At this point ALDOT likely decided that keeping a lot of future projects -- that were just going to be kicked down the road in any case -- on the books wasn't reasonable. 

Quote from: 3467 on August 29, 2018, 06:49:54 PM
Also wasn't that 85 extension also supposed to be I 14?
I wondered if they contracted the neighboring states.

That particular I-14 iteration, essentially following the old I-85 western extension, was only recently revived by a UGA student; unless he and his buddies have the gift of gab to the point of convincing AL interests to not only revive that extension but add new mileage from I-85 east to Columbus, GA, that concept is dead in the water.  Except for that particular effort, there seems to be just no interest in extending I-14 east of Laurel, MS.  And it's probably a certainty that ALDOT did contact GA, FL, and MS regarding their decision to not pursue any of the corridors in the recission list; at this point the reaction was likely no more than a shrug of the shoulders; MS twinned US 72 several years ago and seemingly has no upgrades planned for that route, while the GA segment through Rome has been improved in bits and pieces as bypasses of that town along with an expressway connection to I-75; hardly a massive undertaking.  And FL, while in the past interested in an improved connection from I-10 to the Panama City area, never seemed too enthralled with a Dothan (AL) connection as an extension of that concept. 

For the time being, the new-Interstate era within AL began and ended with I-22 (and maybe its children somewhere down the line).         
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on September 06, 2018, 02:27:49 AM
Almost wonder if some of these project cancellations are to try and clear out some spaces in ALDOT's project list to try and get other (slightly more immediately important, at least regionally) projects pushed up, such as widening I-565 between Madison and I-65.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: sparker on September 06, 2018, 04:57:10 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on September 06, 2018, 02:27:49 AM
Almost wonder if some of these project cancellations are to try and clear out some spaces in ALDOT's project list to try and get other (slightly more immediately important, at least regionally) projects pushed up, such as widening I-565 between Madison and I-65.

More likely it's just the fact that massive levels of federal funding are no longer available for AL to utilize for freeway projects.  Just look at what's out there statewide:  there's only a few "spot" limited-access projects (US 31/280 in Birmingham, the two Huntsville N-S corridors, and less than 10 total miles of anything else) that weren't either part of the original/chargeable Interstate system or built with "Corridor X" funds.  Absent the ability to avail itself of these now-exhausted funds, not much is going to be built in this state.       
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadwarrior on November 22, 2018, 11:16:47 PM
Any word on the Mobile River Bridge project?  plan to fix the I 10 Wallace Tunnel traffic jam? 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadwarrior on November 22, 2018, 11:34:05 PM

More likely it's just the fact that massive levels of federal funding are no longer available for AL to utilize for freeway projects.  Just look at what's out there statewide:  there's only a few "spot" limited-access projects (US 31/280 in Birmingham, the two Huntsville N-S corridors, and less than 10 total miles of anything else) that weren't either part of the original/chargeable Interstate system or built with "Corridor X" funds.  Absent the ability to avail itself of these now-exhausted funds, not much is going to be built in this state.       
[/quote]

Look at the state as a whole.  Low standard of living; many working on week to week salaries.  (relatively) Low growth rates.  Population shrinking.  State likely to lose reps in next census.  And perhaps the most important problem:  Alabamians aren't willing to push an issue that ends up not happening.  They're passive pushovers. 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on November 23, 2018, 12:13:18 AM
Quote from: roadwarrior on November 22, 2018, 11:34:05 PM
Population shrinking.  State likely to lose reps in next census. 
We're still growing population-wise as of the 2017 estimate (likely thanks to Huntsville and the Birmingham Metro), but it has been slowing (likely due urbanization drawing people out of the various towns and small cities across the state):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alabama#Demographics
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadwarrior on November 23, 2018, 12:35:43 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on November 23, 2018, 12:13:18 AM
Quote from: roadwarrior on November 22, 2018, 11:34:05 PM
Population shrinking.  State likely to lose reps in next census. 
We're still growing population-wise as of the 2017 estimate (likely thanks to Huntsville and the Birmingham Metro), but it has been slowing (likely due urbanization drawing people out of the various towns and small cities across the state):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alabama#Demographics

Well, that's why before typing "population shrinking" I put "(relatively) low growth rates".  I live in the Mobile/Baldwin area and it's always growing down here as well but when you really look at it and compare it to other places its pretty slow (should be at least twice as much).  And the truth is it's all a result of culture.  Most of the groupthink involves small town culture and it wears on people and pushes them out.  The people of the state have a tendency to strongly oppose growth. 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: clong on January 17, 2019, 02:42:29 PM
Downtown Birmingham I-20/I-59 bridges are scheduled to close on Monday, 1/21.

Red Mountain Expressway North to I-20/I-59 South ramp is scheduled to close tomorrow (Friday, 1/18) night.

More info available at 5920bridge.com (http://5920bridge.com).
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on January 20, 2019, 08:44:59 PM
I drove on the 20/59 bridge one last time today and noticed that they were already working on dismantling the flyover from Red Mountain Expressway.  They're not messing around!
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tomahawkin on January 20, 2019, 10:19:48 PM
Knowing this shutdown was going to happen, I 65 south of 20/59 should have been widened. 65 from 20/59 to 465 is going to be hell, especially on holiday weekends...
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on January 20, 2019, 11:45:50 PM
$$$$$$$$ (or lack thereof....ALDOT had to scrape together as it was for the 20/59 project...no way they'd have been able to do that and widen 65 as well)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jdb1234 on January 23, 2019, 12:47:28 PM
Quote from: Tomahawkin on January 20, 2019, 10:19:48 PM
Knowing this shutdown was going to happen, I 65 south of 20/59 should have been widened. 65 from 20/59 to 465 is going to be hell, especially on holiday weekends...

I-65 between I-459 and downtown can be hell anyways, but widening I-65 over Shades Mountain won't be cheap.  I rarely go downtown these days.

On another note, I-65 widening between Exits 242 and 238 is progressing along.  Knowing my luck, they still start widening it down to Exit 234 after they are done.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: BamaZeus on February 14, 2019, 05:22:28 PM
Tolls coming to Mobile
https://mynbc15.com/news/local/wallace-tunnel-to-get-new-toll-as-part-of-mobile-river-bridge-project
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadwarrior on February 14, 2019, 08:51:30 PM
Quote from: BamaZeus on February 14, 2019, 05:22:28 PM
Tolls coming to Mobile
https://mynbc15.com/news/local/wallace-tunnel-to-get-new-toll-as-part-of-mobile-river-bridge-project

The bridge should be what gets the tolls.  It would be the more attractive route, avoiding the design flaw issue that causes wrecks every day at the tunnel. 

To me not enough people are trying to think outside the box to solve these issues.  Tolls should only exist on new, more attractive routes but not to pay off the building of that route but future ones.  They should have already temporarily tolled previous new roads.  (ala 158 extension and Nevius rd. extension come to mind)  Maybe even shut down some random roads that would save time for people and convert them to toll.  So a temporary toll on this bridge could build another future project.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: milbfan on March 11, 2019, 12:39:27 AM
Quote from: Georgia on August 28, 2018, 12:07:28 AM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on July 15, 2018, 05:45:00 PM
I think this bad boy may be going away soon. We went through Montgomery yesterday and it looks like a new gantry is being constructed just before it.

https://goo.gl/maps/ni69KZLxoTu

went through MGM 3 weeks ago, it is gone.
new gantry and sign is just sooooo boring

Drove through this evening.  I kinda miss the old signage - it was vintage.  At least there's an Exit 0 out of the deal.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on March 24, 2019, 03:40:16 PM
New .2 mile markers have been installed on I-459. AFAIK this is the first instance of this style of signage to be put up in the area. The southbound side has yet to be signed.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190324/046ef241fc16db384ad352929ae6dfb8.jpg)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190324/610f7a3655e0ec20a02a776cddd52a53.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on March 24, 2019, 04:46:37 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on March 24, 2019, 03:40:16 PM
New .2 mile markers have been installed on I-459. AFAIK this is the first instance of this style of signage to be put up in the area. The southbound side has yet to be signed.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190324/046ef241fc16db384ad352929ae6dfb8.jpg)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190324/610f7a3655e0ec20a02a776cddd52a53.jpg)


iPhone

I don't think I've seen them anywhere else in the state.

Tennessee has them at 0.2 mile intervals.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on March 24, 2019, 09:35:53 PM
A few months ago I was on a road trip, ended up crossing the Tallapoosa River on AL 50 just downstream from the dam at Lake Martin. I like dams, too, and I pulled over and walked out onto the bridge to get a few shots of the dam. What I saw in the river below was better, though: two overlapping sets of piers for abandoned bridges! https://www.google.com/maps/@32.6767784,-85.9090984,112m/data=!3m1!1e3
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on March 31, 2019, 08:00:44 PM
ALDOT has posted portable VMS signs along I-20/59 at near every rest area going northeast from MS warning of the closure of I-20/59 through downtown Birmingham. I was wondering how far upstream warnings would be posted.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on March 31, 2019, 08:53:53 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on March 31, 2019, 08:00:44 PM
ALDOT has posted portable VMS signs along I-20/59 at near every rest area going northeast from MS warning of the closure of I-20/59 through downtown Birmingham. I was wondering how far upstream warnings would be posted.

They had one up at the AL/GA state line on I-59 last week when I came home from Virginia.


iPad
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on April 01, 2019, 06:57:29 PM
There is one also along I-20 westbound after crossing the Georgia state line into Alabama.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Georgia on April 04, 2019, 12:38:08 AM
all the VMS on 65 from Mobile to MGM have the closure on them too.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on April 14, 2019, 12:03:23 PM
Word from our barcncpt44 on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/p/Bv4edVSJv03/) is that the alignment of SR 21 has been shifted on to SR 200 in the town of Piedmont.

This possibly makes the AL 200 designation redundant and/or removed, but I couldn't find any data on it in ALDOT's website.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jOnstar1979 on April 15, 2019, 06:50:52 PM
Quote from: formulanone on April 14, 2019, 12:03:23 PM
Word from our barcncpt44 on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/p/Bv4edVSJv03/) is that the alignment of SR 21 has been shifted on to SR 200 in the town of Piedmont.

This possibly makes the AL 200 designation redundant and/or removed, but I couldn't find any data on it in ALDOT's website.

Just makes sense to remove AL 200. It has been a long time since I have been in Piedmont, but I do remember TO AL-21 signs posted at the US-278/AL 200 JCT and just south along 200. Most truck traffic coming from Jacksonville & Anniston would end up using 200 anyway instead of running the short length of 21 into town. At the same time, I would understand why keeping 21 going into town and ending at AL-9. Smart as well to keep the traffic going through the town and helping the little bit of business left. Last time I was in Piedmont... it was a very dead town. It was sad to see, cause I used to love it as a kid in the 80's, and I used to have family from there.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rcm195 on April 16, 2019, 09:24:18 PM
I was on the east side of Birmingham today, traveling on the old US 78 four lane between the Pro Bass Shop Exit and coming back west bound to the Grants Mills Road intersection. I noticed some new signage had been installed which had 78 on them, but they were state of Alabama logo signs. There seemed to be too many to have been a mistake but I came all the way back into Birmingham on old four lane 78 and eventually they returned to the Federal shield design. Any ideas what's up?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Georgia on April 16, 2019, 11:06:56 PM
ALDOT has seemingly been doing some signage work in that part of B'ham.  I noticed all the button copy signs are going away on 20W inside 459. 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on April 18, 2019, 02:29:35 PM
Quote from: formulanone on April 14, 2019, 12:03:23 PM
Word from our barcncpt44 on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/p/Bv4edVSJv03/) is that the alignment of SR 21 has been shifted on to SR 200 in the town of Piedmont.

This possibly makes the AL 200 designation redundant and/or removed, but I couldn't find any data on it in ALDOT's website.

That is indeed the case.  I also talk about it, plus pictures including redoing the former AL-200 / AL-21 intersection at the link.  https://geekalabama.com/2019/04/11/roadscapes-wednesday-alabama-state-route-200-is-eliminated-in-piedmont/
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on April 18, 2019, 03:13:23 PM
Is there any sort of press release from ALDOT about this?  Would like something official in hand when I address the TM lists.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on April 18, 2019, 08:29:26 PM
Quote from: froggie on April 18, 2019, 03:13:23 PM
Is there any sort of press release from ALDOT about this?  Would like something official in hand when I address the TM lists.


Nope have not seen any.  I was the only one to talk about this.  ALDOT also added a new traffic light at the US 431 / AL-204 / Peeks Hill Road intersection.  This was LONG over do!

https://twitter.com/nvyoung/status/1115367244408721410
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on May 07, 2019, 08:58:49 PM
Found an video along with some slides on the proposed improvements on I-10 east of downtown Mobile...

https://www.fox10tv.com/news/new-animation-renderings-of-proposed-mobile-river-bridge-and-bayway/article_b22a3240-710e-11e9-9181-cb0101299185.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on May 22, 2019, 04:03:16 PM
Looks like ALDOT will be making changes in Talladega.  According to The Daily Home. (Paywall)

The state of Alabama will be repaving Highways 21 and 77 this summer, at the same time the city is undertaking its own paving project.

Once those two state highways are repaved, they will cease to be state highways and will be turned over to the city to maintain.

Looks like AL-275 will soon cease to exist as AL-21 will be put on there.  I am guessing ALDOT will route AL-77 along what is currently AL-21 just north of Talladega and will join the moved AL-21 at the 4-lane.

https://www.annistonstar.com/the_daily_home/motorists-should-expect-slow-going-in-talladega-this-summer-as/article_f1529318-7c30-11e9-86a0-3754fd7abad0.html (https://www.annistonstar.com/the_daily_home/motorists-should-expect-slow-going-in-talladega-this-summer-as/article_f1529318-7c30-11e9-86a0-3754fd7abad0.html)
Title: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on May 22, 2019, 07:16:04 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on May 22, 2019, 04:03:16 PM
Looks like ALDOT will be making changes in Talladega.  According to The Daily Home. (Paywall)

The state of Alabama will be repaving Highways 21 and 77 this summer, at the same time the city is undertaking its own paving project.

Once those two state highways are repaved, they will cease to be state highways and will be turned over to the city to maintain.

Looks like AL-275 will soon cease to exist as AL-21 will be put on there.  I am guessing ALDOT will route AL-77 along what is currently AL-21 just north of Talladega and will join the moved AL-21 at the 4-lane.

https://www.annistonstar.com/the_daily_home/motorists-should-expect-slow-going-in-talladega-this-summer-as/article_f1529318-7c30-11e9-86a0-3754fd7abad0.html (https://www.annistonstar.com/the_daily_home/motorists-should-expect-slow-going-in-talladega-this-summer-as/article_f1529318-7c30-11e9-86a0-3754fd7abad0.html)

I always wondered why ALDOT didn't move AL-21 to the new bypass to begin with. Now hopefully they'll begin the process of expanding the last 2 lane section west of town. I know there's several bridges on that section so I always assumed that's why it hasn't gone to 4 lanes. There is a stub for the expansion. They also have the last part of AL-21 to 4 lane around Munford to make it 4 lanes from Oxford to just north of Sylacauga.


iPhone
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on May 22, 2019, 09:19:15 PM
^^ That's a crapton of backtracking for AL 77.  Unfortunately, given the completely haphazard way the city developed, there's no good routing for it to take.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on July 16, 2019, 09:15:08 PM
ALDOT told media outlets today that a one trip toll on the new bridge and byway will be $6.  They plan on introducing a monthly $90 pass, and more than five trips paying the $6 toll will have a 15% discount.

https://twitter.com/mynbc15/status/1151285856986173442

https://www.al.com/news/mobile/2019/07/90-monthly-pass-highlights-latest-toll-plan-for-i-10-mobile-river-bridge-project.html?fbclid=IwAR1Qp7VyiAMYztUu0ygRm5zWW3-ptZXySYz3pWrJq1hRveFcl132I7QdH18

Also, the Facebook Group Block the Mobile Byway toll is quickly growing with over 26,000 members now.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1276861619188737/
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on July 16, 2019, 09:31:56 PM
Do these people not realize that, without tolls, paying for a new bridge and widened Bayway is HIGHLY UNLIKELY?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on July 16, 2019, 09:36:41 PM
Quote from: froggie on July 16, 2019, 09:31:56 PM
Do these people not realize that, without tolls, paying for a new bridge and widened Bayway is HIGHLY UNLIKELY?

And people on that Facebook group are perfectly happy with the status quo.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jdb1234 on July 17, 2019, 01:47:41 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on July 16, 2019, 09:36:41 PM
Quote from: froggie on July 16, 2019, 09:31:56 PM
Do these people not realize that, without tolls, paying for a new bridge and widened Bayway is HIGHLY UNLIKELY?

And people on that Facebook group are perfectly happy with the status quo.

Exactly.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on July 17, 2019, 09:26:25 PM
Unfortunately, there are a lot of groups on Facebook that make the Flat Earth Society seem forward thinking.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on October 22, 2019, 07:55:58 PM
I didn't get a photo, but "US 20" in the Shoals is no more, as of last weekend. There is now an Alabama 20 patch over this sign's long-time error...

(https://live.staticflickr.com/4908/46285296021_e19d60fabb_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2dw5eXc)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadwarrior on October 29, 2019, 08:44:57 PM
Quote from: jdb1234 on July 17, 2019, 01:47:41 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on July 16, 2019, 09:36:41 PM
Quote from: froggie on July 16, 2019, 09:31:56 PM
Do these people not realize that, without tolls, paying for a new bridge and widened Bayway is HIGHLY UNLIKELY?

And people on that Facebook group are perfectly happy with the status quo.

Exactly.
Quote from: Charles2 on July 17, 2019, 09:26:25 PM
Unfortunately, there are a lot of groups on Facebook that make the Flat Earth Society seem forward thinking.

You guys do realize most people in Mobile can't afford it, right?  That's another bill for most people. 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on October 30, 2019, 08:12:06 AM
^ Most people in Mobile do not need to head east over to Baldwin County or beyond.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Plutonic Panda on October 30, 2019, 02:35:35 PM
Quote from: froggie on July 16, 2019, 09:31:56 PM
Do these people not realize that, without tolls, paying for a new bridge and widened Bayway is HIGHLY UNLIKELY?
Yet other states and cities are able to build projects with no tolls. Alabama can do the same. It will just take longer. The problem is once the project is paid off the tolls will remain. Lumping anti-toll folks and flat earthers together is ridiculous.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadwarrior on October 30, 2019, 08:11:00 PM
Quote from: froggie on October 30, 2019, 08:12:06 AM
^ Most people in Mobile do not need to head east over to Baldwin County or beyond.

That's the problem.  So many people from Mobile moved over to Baldwin but work in Mobile.  There's a perceived higher status of wealth in Baldwin as well (to a degree it's true) and a lot of people are over there trying to fake it. 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadwarrior on October 30, 2019, 08:20:57 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 30, 2019, 02:35:35 PM
Quote from: froggie on July 16, 2019, 09:31:56 PM
Do these people not realize that, without tolls, paying for a new bridge and widened Bayway is HIGHLY UNLIKELY?
Yet other states and cities are able to build projects with no tolls. Alabama can do the same. It will just take longer. The problem is once the project is paid off the tolls will remain. Lumping anti-toll folks and flat earthers together is ridiculous.

Alabama doesn't want to get taken advantage of like New York/New Jersey.  I'm fine with one toll...but that's if it will produce anything.  Tolling both tunnels seems ridiculous.  There's a toll in Orange Beach that doesn't financially support itself.  I'm not so sure we don't need to rethink our approach to the concept of a toll.  Maybe certain taxes (for ex. gas tax) will help.

But it seems ridiculous that the state wasn't able to get any money for the project.  I'm not so sure we shouldn't just start placing temporary tolls on random existing shorter paths/roadways.  Make people go the longer way if they want it for free.  But in this case the free longer way (Cochrane) really won't be possible to travel.  It's already crowded.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on November 02, 2019, 07:53:42 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 30, 2019, 02:35:35 PM
Quote from: froggie on July 16, 2019, 09:31:56 PM
Do these people not realize that, without tolls, paying for a new bridge and widened Bayway is HIGHLY UNLIKELY?
Yet other states and cities are able to build projects with no tolls. Alabama can do the same. It will just take longer. The problem is once the project is paid off the tolls will remain. Lumping anti-toll folks and flat earthers together is ridiculous.

Most projects can be done incrementally, pieces at a time, which spreads the cost out over a longer period.  Not really the case here.  While you could theoretically split the bridge and the Bayway into two separate projects, after that point it's all-or-nothing for each.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 02, 2019, 02:32:44 PM
Quote from: froggie on November 02, 2019, 07:53:42 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 30, 2019, 02:35:35 PM
Quote from: froggie on July 16, 2019, 09:31:56 PM
Do these people not realize that, without tolls, paying for a new bridge and widened Bayway is HIGHLY UNLIKELY?
Yet other states and cities are able to build projects with no tolls. Alabama can do the same. It will just take longer. The problem is once the project is paid off the tolls will remain. Lumping anti-toll folks and flat earthers together is ridiculous.

Most projects can be done incrementally, pieces at a time, which spreads the cost out over a longer period.  Not really the case here.  While you could theoretically split the bridge and the Bayway into two separate projects, after that point it's all-or-nothing for each.
True but the US needs to get off its ass and spend more on infrastructure. People need to be willing to pay a bit more for better infrastructure. If they are unwilling and refuse to do so then I agree tolls are the only option. Hopefully that is the last resort but it's also the easiest way and politicians are too quick to denounce other options.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadwarrior on November 04, 2019, 03:32:38 PM
Quote from: froggie on November 02, 2019, 07:53:42 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 30, 2019, 02:35:35 PM
Quote from: froggie on July 16, 2019, 09:31:56 PM
Do these people not realize that, without tolls, paying for a new bridge and widened Bayway is HIGHLY UNLIKELY?
Yet other states and cities are able to build projects with no tolls. Alabama can do the same. It will just take longer. The problem is once the project is paid off the tolls will remain. Lumping anti-toll folks and flat earthers together is ridiculous.

Most projects can be done incrementally, pieces at a time, which spreads the cost out over a longer period.  Not really the case here.  While you could theoretically split the bridge and the Bayway into two separate projects, after that point it's all-or-nothing for each.

The most important thing is that the Mobile River Bridge gets built.  It's been talked about for decades and it has to happen right now.  You can barely travel in that direction anymore unless it's early morning or night.  We can do something about the Bayway later on.  That was how it was originally supposed to be and not unwisely lumped together and held over residents' heads.  The Bayway can be dealt with separately/later.  It will be easier to deal with.  We just need the hardest part to go through so something can begin to be done.  But the plan to toll everything instead of just one route and lump the bridge in with expansion of the bayway was such an incompetent move and people in the area just don't make enough money to be able to pay everyday.  There would need to be more than one free route.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on November 30, 2019, 08:40:39 PM
http://www.sandmountainreporter.com/free_share/article_819ace9c-12ed-11ea-b4f9-4b4ba8535270.html

The US 431 Issue | Part 1: Tempering heat of nation's most dangerous highway
By TAYLOR BECK The Reporter Nov 29, 2019 Updated Nov 29, 2019

Since the early 2000s, the 353-mile stretch of U.S. Highway 431 that blazes through east Alabama has been known as one of the most dangerous roadways in the world and earned the nickname "Highway to Hell."

With "poor visibility, high speeds and sudden 2-4 lane changes,"  U.S. 431 was determined to be the fourth most deadly road in the country in 2013 by the World Health Organization. The organization presented information on road safety from 182 countries, accounting for almost 99% of the world's population. The report indicated the total number of traffic deaths worldwide at the time was 1.24 million per year – 33,808 in the U.S.

As of October, there have been 310 traffic accidents in Albertville and 48 traffic accidents in Boaz on U.S. 431, according to local police and fire department records. There has only been one fatality – a woman died after suffering severe burns only days after being involved in a collision in Boaz.

No statistics were available for the current year in Guntersville, but as of October, the city's police department has recorded 17 traffic fatalities on U.S. 431 in Guntersville since 2014. Statistics show police worked 239 traffic accidents on U.S. Highway 431 from 2014-2015.

Since study results and statistics have been released, the Alabama Department of Transportation and various municipalities where U.S. 431 is located have worked diligently to create a safer traffic environment and improve road conditions to lower the fatality rate.

What exactly is being done, and is it enough?

The Reporter looks to answer those questions in a five-part analysis of U.S. 431, particularly the stretch of highway spanning from Boaz through Albertville and into Guntersville.

The rest of the series is behind the paywall. I'd like to read it, though.

I can't imagine that anything transformative like a Memorial Parkway-type freeway conversion or a new terrain highway will come out of this. More likely, access management and some r-cuts.  It's fun to think about, though. Apparently a study was done a couple of years ago- - I remember examining some proposed changes to the approach to the 431 causeway heading north from Guntersville. I don't see anything about it on ALDOT's website, though, even though there's the output from an access management study on 431 north of Anniston.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on January 01, 2020, 12:35:23 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on April 18, 2019, 02:29:35 PM
Quote from: formulanone on April 14, 2019, 12:03:23 PM
Word from our barcncpt44 on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/p/Bv4edVSJv03/) is that the alignment of SR 21 has been shifted on to SR 200 in the town of Piedmont.

This possibly makes the AL 200 designation redundant and/or removed, but I couldn't find any data on it in ALDOT's website.

That is indeed the case.  I also talk about it, plus pictures including redoing the former AL-200 / AL-21 intersection at the link.  https://geekalabama.com/2019/04/11/roadscapes-wednesday-alabama-state-route-200-is-eliminated-in-piedmont/

ALDOT confirms that AL Route 200 was deleted in January of 2019, according to the notes on their milepost maps:

https://aldotgis.dot.state.al.us/MilepostPDF/web/co8mp.pdf
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Brian556 on February 04, 2020, 09:30:44 PM
Found a cateye RXR is Talladega: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4370524,-86.103871,3a,15y,7.19h,86.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEfuvF06xxclTZOvRJFZDbg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4370524,-86.103871,3a,15y,7.19h,86.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEfuvF06xxclTZOvRJFZDbg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on February 05, 2020, 09:41:01 AM
Quote from: Brian556 on February 04, 2020, 09:30:44 PM
Found a cateye RXR is Talladega: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4370524,-86.103871,3a,15y,7.19h,86.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEfuvF06xxclTZOvRJFZDbg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4370524,-86.103871,3a,15y,7.19h,86.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEfuvF06xxclTZOvRJFZDbg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

Nice find!
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on February 05, 2020, 08:05:48 PM
Quote from: Brian556 on February 04, 2020, 09:30:44 PM
Found a cateye RXR is Talladega: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4370524,-86.103871,3a,15y,7.19h,86.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEfuvF06xxclTZOvRJFZDbg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4370524,-86.103871,3a,15y,7.19h,86.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEfuvF06xxclTZOvRJFZDbg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

Sadly, it's not there anymore.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: sparker on February 05, 2020, 09:10:51 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on February 05, 2020, 08:05:48 PM
Quote from: Brian556 on February 04, 2020, 09:30:44 PM
Found a cateye RXR is Talladega: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4370524,-86.103871,3a,15y,7.19h,86.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEfuvF06xxclTZOvRJFZDbg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4370524,-86.103871,3a,15y,7.19h,86.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEfuvF06xxclTZOvRJFZDbg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

Sadly, it's not there anymore.

Probably on the garage wall of someone connected to the Talledega street department -- or simply an opportunist with a wrench and some WD-40!  Anything with button-copy -- and relatively small -- tends to be fair game these days for both collectors and the aforementioned opportunists.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on March 11, 2020, 06:56:43 PM
New to me, anyway: Yesterday I drove  US 43, AL 5 and AL 22 from Mobile to Selma. It's not an especially rewarding drive, but I did discover this one-quadrant interchange at AL 5 and AL 28 (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.1930217,-87.4589921,729m/data=!3m1!1e3) at the town of Catherine. I doubt that there was a capacity warrant for it, but both highways (quite a bit of the pavement for old AL 5 is still intact) were/are on steep grades that contributed to drivers running the stop signs or traffic signals there (see this Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.1920143,-87.4602097,3a,75y,10.27h,74.68t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1swussgIjyksOyx_Wc1sFyqA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DwussgIjyksOyx_Wc1sFyqA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D38.803032%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656). Neither end of the connecting ramp has or appears to need traffic control other than minimal stop and yield signs. The interchange bridge was built in 2005.

Also, there's the Grove Hill bypass. The US 43 bypass has five lanes, but with a Jersey barrier through the area of the interchange with US 84. The US 84 interchange was built in 1995, apparently along with a two-mile-long relocation of US 84 as a new four-lane highway with a fifty-foot median. You can see both from here on the interchange bridge (https://www.google.com/maps/@31.6955404,-87.7830576,3a,52.3y,167.88h,80.55t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1strSNjg850fCLSIN2yV9p4A!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DtrSNjg850fCLSIN2yV9p4A%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D169.2561%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656). I was suprised that ALDOT went for a turn lane instead of a proper median on a new-terrain highway that apparently doesn't allow driveways, and more so when I saw the nearby relocation of US 84.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on March 11, 2020, 07:20:52 PM
Quote from: Tom958 on March 11, 2020, 06:56:43 PM
New to me, anyway: Yesterday I drove  US 43, AL 5 and AL 22 from Mobile to Selma. It's not an especially rewarding drive, but I did discover this one-quadrant interchange at AL 5 and AL 28 (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.1930217,-87.4589921,729m/data=!3m1!1e3) at the town of Catherine. I doubt that there was a capacity warrant for it, but both highways (quite a bit of the pavement for old AL 5 is still intact) were/are on steep grades that contributed to drivers running the stop signs or traffic signals there (see this Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.1920143,-87.4602097,3a,75y,10.27h,74.68t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1swussgIjyksOyx_Wc1sFyqA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DwussgIjyksOyx_Wc1sFyqA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D38.803032%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656). Neither end of the connecting ramp has or appears to need traffic control other than minimal stop and yield signs. The interchange bridge was built in 2005.

Also, there's the Grove Hill bypass. The US 43 bypass has five lanes, but with a Jersey barrier through the area of the interchange with US 84. The US 84 interchange was built in 1995, apparently along with a two-mile-long relocation of US 84 as a new four-lane highway with a fifty-foot median. You can see both from here on the interchange bridge (https://www.google.com/maps/@31.6955404,-87.7830576,3a,52.3y,167.88h,80.55t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1strSNjg850fCLSIN2yV9p4A!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DtrSNjg850fCLSIN2yV9p4A%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D169.2561%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656). I was suprised that ALDOT went for a turn lane instead of a proper median on a new-terrain highway that apparently doesn't allow driveways, and more so when I saw the nearby relocation of US 84.

Did you notice that the US 84 Grove Hill bypass had high-numbered mile markers?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on March 11, 2020, 07:37:18 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on March 11, 2020, 07:20:52 PMDid you notice that the US 84 Grove Hill bypass had high-numbered mile markers?

Nope, I didn't drive on it. I didn't even know it existed until I checked it out on Google Maps.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on March 11, 2020, 11:13:41 PM
While the bridge was built in 2005, the AL 5 relocation at AL 28 didn't happen until later in 2006 or early 2007.  The old condition was stop control for AL 28...AL 5 had the right-of-way pre-overpass.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: sturmde on March 13, 2020, 12:19:25 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on March 11, 2020, 07:20:52 PM
Quote from: Tom958 on March 11, 2020, 06:56:43 PM
New to me, anyway: Yesterday I drove  US 43, AL 5 and AL 22 from Mobile to Selma. It's not an especially rewarding drive, but I did discover this one-quadrant interchange at AL 5 and AL 28 (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.1930217,-87.4589921,729m/data=!3m1!1e3) at the town of Catherine. I doubt that there was a capacity warrant for it, but both highways (quite a bit of the pavement for old AL 5 is still intact) were/are on steep grades that contributed to drivers running the stop signs or traffic signals there (see this Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.1920143,-87.4602097,3a,75y,10.27h,74.68t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1swussgIjyksOyx_Wc1sFyqA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DwussgIjyksOyx_Wc1sFyqA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D38.803032%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656). Neither end of the connecting ramp has or appears to need traffic control other than minimal stop and yield signs. The interchange bridge was built in 2005.

Also, there's the Grove Hill bypass. The US 43 bypass has five lanes, but with a Jersey barrier through the area of the interchange with US 84. The US 84 interchange was built in 1995, apparently along with a two-mile-long relocation of US 84 as a new four-lane highway with a fifty-foot median. You can see both from here on the interchange bridge (https://www.google.com/maps/@31.6955404,-87.7830576,3a,52.3y,167.88h,80.55t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1strSNjg850fCLSIN2yV9p4A!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DtrSNjg850fCLSIN2yV9p4A%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D169.2561%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656). I was suprised that ALDOT went for a turn lane instead of a proper median on a new-terrain highway that apparently doesn't allow driveways, and more so when I saw the nearby relocation of US 84.

Did you notice that the US 84 Grove Hill bypass had high-numbered mile markers?

Online there, going just a bit east one sees Mile Marker 542.  In Alabama terms, that equates to Mile 42 on an alternate (+500) new segment of numbering, hence the 542 and so on.

https://aldotgis.dot.state.al.us/MilepostPDF/web/co13mp.pdf
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on May 03, 2020, 06:58:25 PM
The re-routing of AL-77 and AL-21 has been completed in Talladega.  AL-275 no longer exists.
https://aldotgis.dot.state.al.us/MilepostPDF/web/co61mp.pdf
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on May 03, 2020, 07:34:56 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on May 03, 2020, 06:58:25 PM
The re-routing of AL-77 and AL-21 has been completed in Talladega.  AL-275 no longer exists.
https://aldotgis.dot.state.al.us/MilepostPDF/web/co61mp.pdf

And it looks like the AL 21/77 multiplex also eliminates the segment of 21 west of town, and 77 no longer goes though the downtown. Odd to see a city in Alabama with no state routes going through its downtown.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on May 03, 2020, 10:12:05 PM
Quote from: formulanone on May 03, 2020, 07:34:56 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on May 03, 2020, 06:58:25 PM
The re-routing of AL-77 and AL-21 has been completed in Talladega.  AL-275 no longer exists.
https://aldotgis.dot.state.al.us/MilepostPDF/web/co61mp.pdf

And it looks like the AL 21/77 multiplex also eliminates the segment of 21 west of town, and 77 no longer goes though the downtown. Odd to see a city in Alabama with no state routes going through its downtown.

Jasper, AL has no state routes through downtown anymore. AL 69 used to go through there.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on May 04, 2020, 08:21:23 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on May 03, 2020, 10:12:05 PM
Quote from: formulanone on May 03, 2020, 07:34:56 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on May 03, 2020, 06:58:25 PM
The re-routing of AL-77 and AL-21 has been completed in Talladega.  AL-275 no longer exists.
https://aldotgis.dot.state.al.us/MilepostPDF/web/co61mp.pdf

And it looks like the AL 21/77 multiplex also eliminates the segment of 21 west of town, and 77 no longer goes though the downtown. Odd to see a city in Alabama with no state routes going through its downtown.

Jasper, AL has no state routes through downtown anymore. AL 69 used to go through there.

Yeah, it looks like many routes were shifted away - but at least they're in the proximity of its "Main Street". Opp also routed everything away from its center.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on May 15, 2020, 06:48:58 PM
Add Auburn to the list of cities with no signed routes going through the heart of the city.  US-29 has been rerouted onto I-85.  AL-14 was truncated at Shug Jordan Parkway (formerly AL-267, now AL-147).  AL-147 now bypasses the city to the east.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on June 09, 2020, 02:33:26 PM
A petition is now up to rename the George Wallace Tunnel that carries I-10 in Mobile.
https://www.change.org/p/governor-kay-ivey-rename-george-wallace-tunnel-in-mobile-alabama
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadman65 on June 10, 2020, 09:31:38 PM
Alabama pentagon county routes are not numbered to a state system?  If I am not mistaken each county has their own numbers so therefore county road numbers can be duplicated the amount of times equal to the amount of counties.  Unlike Florida where to a point, county route numbers fit into the state numbering scheme minus Volusia, Leon, and Alachua who all have four digit numbers instead of the area's numbering scheme.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: DeaconG on June 11, 2020, 03:59:08 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on June 09, 2020, 02:33:26 PM
A petition is now up to rename the George Wallace Tunnel that carries I-10 in Mobile.
https://www.change.org/p/governor-kay-ivey-rename-george-wallace-tunnel-in-mobile-alabama

Oh, FFS. George Wallace ain't my favorite person, but it's already done. If they really want to change things, why don't we STOP naming every road, every interchange and every bridge for every jabroni that thinks they're important?

Reminds me of a sci-fi story by Daniel Keyes where every public building was named after a senator, congressman or governor. At some point, it just gets old.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadman65 on June 12, 2020, 11:08:00 PM
Well you can't have every road named for a person you like.  All famous people have their critics.  Plus, what about stadiums and arenas which all a business has to do is pay several million dollars and the sporting center is their namesake for ever how long the naming contract lasts.

I agree too many politicians and other folks have their names on everything.   However the Arland Williams Jr. Bridge in DC is not named after a famous person but a heroic passenger aboard the Air Florida Plane that crashed into the Potomac years ago.  He gave his life so another passenger could be saved.  That is the best reason why a road could be named over a typical person.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on June 13, 2020, 09:45:12 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 12, 2020, 11:08:00 PM
I agree too many politicians and other folks have their names on everything.   However the Arland Williams Jr. Bridge in DC is not named after a famous person but a heroic passenger aboard the Air Florida Plane that crashed into the Potomac years ago.  He gave his life so another passenger could be saved.  That is the best reason why a road could be named over a typical person.

Here, here.

Surely most cities have someone semi-famous that invented / wrote / discovered something, made a contribution to society, founded the town, fought in a war...it's nauseating that nearly everything gets named after politicians. If it's their hometown, or maybe if they were the only one to mention that some small town needed a bridge, then fine.

Politicians are mostly a batch of self-absorbed do-nothings; naming things after them is just bitching fodder for 50% of America. There's lot of things people can be famous for and should be recognized.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on July 03, 2020, 09:59:35 AM
Lots of observations over the last two months of driving around.

Cullman County has a lot of downed and damaged signage on I-65.

AL 275 is well and truly history; no signage remains. Also, no AL 200 signs as AL 21 has taken over both.

Selma's US 80 Business routing is haphazardly labeled; though there's plenty of US 80 signage, the BUSINESS banner isn't evenly applied, though the confusing TRUCK banners are consistently used...too much so.

The Joe Mallisham Parkway (among other names) for the western bypass of Tuscaloosa is a decent bypass for $1.50 if you aim to avoid the endless slog through town and head up north on US 43 or AL 69. Almost no mid-day traffic on it, signed for 50/55 mph most of the way.

AL 135 signage doesn't seem to exist anymore near or through Gulf Shores State Park.  There was a bunch of it 2016, but not this time around. Also, it had several 26 mph Speed Limit signs, which makes me think it was also decommissioned.

Standing water pools up a lot along US 231 from Sylacauga to Wetumpka, even though the roadbed is raised generously. Must be a lot of pavement deformation, though it wasn't bumpy.

US 411 has odd signage near the south end in Leeds. A pointless TRUCK banner for the last southbound mile or so.

AL 182 has several U-turn signals with FYA, but with U-turn symbols. The traffic lights along Orange Beach are numbered and include shields.

Found a rare captive county shield in Marion County.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jdb1234 on July 03, 2020, 10:12:22 AM
Quote from: formulanone on July 03, 2020, 09:59:35 AM
Lots of observations over the last two months of driving around.

AL 135 signage doesn't seem to exist anymore near or through Gulf Shores State Park.  There was a bunch of it 2016, but not this time around. Also, it had several 26 mph Speed Limit signs, which makes me think it was also decommissioned

AL 182 has several U-turn signals with FYA, but with U-turn symbols. The traffic lights along Orange Beach are numbered and include shields. 

I went to Orange Beach back in February and noticed both of these.  The signals threw me off when I was driving down there and missed the turn for my hotel.   

One other note down there.  AL 180 has been truncated to AL 161 in Orange Beach.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: MikeTheActuary on July 03, 2020, 03:48:54 PM
Quote from: formulanone on May 04, 2020, 08:21:23 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on May 03, 2020, 10:12:05 PM
Quote from: formulanone on May 03, 2020, 07:34:56 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on May 03, 2020, 06:58:25 PM
The re-routing of AL-77 and AL-21 has been completed in Talladega.  AL-275 no longer exists.
https://aldotgis.dot.state.al.us/MilepostPDF/web/co61mp.pdf

And it looks like the AL 21/77 multiplex also eliminates the segment of 21 west of town, and 77 no longer goes though the downtown. Odd to see a city in Alabama with no state routes going through its downtown.

Jasper, AL has no state routes through downtown anymore. AL 69 used to go through there.

Yeah, it looks like many routes were shifted away - but at least they're in the proximity of its "Main Street". Opp also routed everything away from its center.

I'm waiting to see what happens with Elba, where a 4-lane US84 bypass has been under construction.  It wouldn't take much to completely reroute AL87 and AL189 around the new bypass, and abolish AL203.   However, the DOT seems to have retained AL12 on the old alignment in New Brockton when that town was bypassed, so....?

The town doesn't want its center to shrivel up and die (the current mayor was my boss at my first real job), but flooding has not been kind to the place.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Eth on July 03, 2020, 05:59:17 PM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on July 03, 2020, 03:48:54 PMHowever, the DOT seems to have retained AL12 on the old alignment in New Brockton when that town was bypassed, so....?

It looks like that's signed as AL 302 (https://www.google.com/maps/@31.3981929,-85.9680207,3a,36.3y,117.81h,87.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXqcZ2vu1HtAro9PsK8FfRQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), not AL 12.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alex on July 03, 2020, 06:55:41 PM
Quote from: formulanone on July 03, 2020, 09:59:35 AM
AL 135 signage doesn't seem to exist anymore near or through Gulf Shores State Park.  There was a bunch of it 2016, but not this time around. Also, it had several 26 mph Speed Limit signs, which makes me think it was also decommissioned.

SR 135 is still shown on the most recent Baldwin County Milepost Map (https://aldotgis.dot.state.al.us/MilepostPDF/web/co2mp.pdf) from ALDOT for Baldwin County. Must be a very recent decommision.

Quote from: jdb1234 on July 03, 2020, 10:12:22 AM
Quote from: formulanone on July 03, 2020, 09:59:35 AM
Lots of observations over the last two months of driving around.

AL 135 signage doesn't seem to exist anymore near or through Gulf Shores State Park.  There was a bunch of it 2016, but not this time around. Also, it had several 26 mph Speed Limit signs, which makes me think it was also decommissioned

I went to Orange Beach back in February and noticed both of these.  The signals threw me off when I was driving down there and missed the turn for my hotel.   

One other note down there.  AL 180 has been truncated to AL 161 in Orange Beach.

The Baldwin County Milepost map was revised in January 2019, indicating that the spur east from SR 161 to mile 31.182 was eliminated with maintenance assumed by the city of Orange Beach.

Thanks for posting this, I updated the page for Alabama Route 180 (https://www.aaroads.com/guides/al-180/) accordingly.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: sturmde on July 04, 2020, 02:39:40 PM
Quote from: jdb1234 on July 03, 2020, 10:12:22 AM
Quote from: formulanone on July 03, 2020, 09:59:35 AM
Lots of observations over the last two months of driving around.

AL 135 signage doesn't seem to exist anymore near or through Gulf Shores State Park.  There was a bunch of it 2016, but not this time around. Also, it had several 26 mph Speed Limit signs, which makes me think it was also decommissioned

AL 182 has several U-turn signals with FYA, but with U-turn symbols. The traffic lights along Orange Beach are numbered and include shields. 

I went to Orange Beach back in February and noticed both of these.  The signals threw me off when I was driving down there and missed the turn for my hotel.   

One other note down there.  AL 180 has been truncated to AL 161 in Orange Beach.

Interesting seeing they did that last year.  Perhaps it would make sense to replace AL 161 now and extend AL 180 over it to end at AL 182.  Then there would be a continuous route number for what most traffic on 161 is doing.
.
Could repurpose AL 161 some day to the Beach Express routes from I-10 southward...
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: MikeTheActuary on July 04, 2020, 09:26:20 PM
Quote from: Eth on July 03, 2020, 05:59:17 PM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on July 03, 2020, 03:48:54 PMHowever, the DOT seems to have retained AL12 on the old alignment in New Brockton when that town was bypassed, so....?

It looks like that's signed as AL 302 (https://www.google.com/maps/@31.3981929,-85.9680207,3a,36.3y,117.81h,87.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXqcZ2vu1HtAro9PsK8FfRQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), not AL 12.

Drat.  I missed that sign when I was down there this January.  I guess I was too busy looking for the weirdly-numbered mileposts.
Title: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on July 04, 2020, 09:28:18 PM
Just got back from Gulf Shores yesterday and can confirm the eliminations of said AL-signed routes. I guess the 180 spur from AL-161 eastward didn't meet the traffic count criteria so it was eliminated for budget reasons.

The state is currently repurposing Gulf State Park with the new resort, new pedestrian crosswalks over AL-182, a new boardwalk from the campground to one of the said crosswalks and closing the golf course. State Park Rd. 2 was closed to thru traffic in the past couple of years so if AL-135 was decommissioned as well I'm not sure what ALDOT has in store for the limited routes in the park. They seem to be shifting all the features of the park to the south side of the property along the beach.

Wishful thinking to hope that ALDOT is reserving funds to finally extend the Beach Express from the overpriced and long paid up toll bridge to AL-182. It would make a nice direct shot with a route built from the bridge to the State Park Rd 2/AL-182 intersection. I'll go into fantasy world while I'm at it and push for a I-265 route from around Exit 45 in Perdido to the Baldwin Beach Express exit on I-10. I'm guessing it would save about 30 minutes of drive time and gas wasted at all the traffic lights along AL-59 obviously.


iPad
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: clong on July 07, 2020, 01:22:05 PM
Drove on the new section of I-65 from Exit 238 to Exit 242 last week. Southbound all 4 lanes were open, Northbound the inside of the 4 lanes had construction barrels still in it.

I'm wondering when the 4th lanes will be paved and opened from Exit 242 to Exit 246. It seems they are just missing the top layers and otherwise would be ready to go.
Title: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on July 07, 2020, 01:45:52 PM
Quote from: clong on July 07, 2020, 01:22:05 PM
Drove on the new section of I-65 from Exit 238 to Exit 242 last week. Southbound all 4 lanes were open, Northbound the inside of the 4 lanes had construction barrels still in it.

I'm wondering when the 4th lanes will be paved and opened from Exit 242 to Exit 246. It seems they are just missing the top layers and otherwise would be ready to go.
ALDOT was scheduled to begin resurfacing and laying out new stripes into a new 4 lane configuration on that section this week actually. According to the local news, the project will go up to the Cahaba River bridge between Valleydale Rd and I-459, where I-65 currently expands to 4 lanes. Should be finished by this fall.


iPad
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jdb1234 on July 07, 2020, 02:35:26 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on July 07, 2020, 01:45:52 PM
Quote from: clong on July 07, 2020, 01:22:05 PM
Drove on the new section of I-65 from Exit 238 to Exit 242 last week. Southbound all 4 lanes were open, Northbound the inside of the 4 lanes had construction barrels still in it.

I'm wondering when the 4th lanes will be paved and opened from Exit 242 to Exit 246. It seems they are just missing the top layers and otherwise would be ready to go.
ALDOT was scheduled to begin resurfacing and laying out new stripes into a new 4 lane configuration on that section this week actually. According to the local news, the project will go up to the Cahaba River bridge between Valleydale Rd and I-459, where I-65 currently expands to 4 lanes. Should be finished by this fall.

Makes sense, the original plan years ago was for that stretch to be 8 lanes south of I-459.  At one point, the plan was for one of the lanes to be HOV. 
I will be glad when it is done.  I have been going down to Montevallo 2 or 3 times a week for the past two years.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on September 09, 2020, 01:38:16 PM
The I-20/59 bridge project at McFarland Boulevard in Tuscaloosa is going to last longer.  Twisted arch must be replaced.  https://abc3340.com/news/local/workers-to-replace-faulty-arch-on-new-tuscaloosa-interstate-bridge
Title: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on September 10, 2020, 08:44:15 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on July 07, 2020, 01:45:52 PM
Quote from: clong on July 07, 2020, 01:22:05 PM
Drove on the new section of I-65 from Exit 238 to Exit 242 last week. Southbound all 4 lanes were open, Northbound the inside of the 4 lanes had construction barrels still in it.

I'm wondering when the 4th lanes will be paved and opened from Exit 242 to Exit 246. It seems they are just missing the top layers and otherwise would be ready to go.
ALDOT was scheduled to begin resurfacing and laying out new stripes into a new 4 lane configuration on that section this week actually. According to the local news, the project will go up to the Cahaba River bridge between Valleydale Rd and I-459, where I-65 currently expands to 4 lanes. Should be finished by this fall.


iPad

The lanes have been re-striped and have made a world of difference in the new 4-lane section from Exit 247/Valleydale Rd. to Exit 238/US-31. Not sure if they plan to resurface the original 3 lane part from from Exit 247 to 242.

EDIT: Drove that section today and they are resurfacing the entire roadway. They currently have the left two lanes finished.

Of course ALDOT will now have to turn their attention add lanes from Exit 238 to the newly expanded Exit 231 in Calera sooner than later. Going from 4 lanes to 2 immediately at Exit 238 has been a mess for the Saturday travelers to the beach. Numerous brides in that section will have to be expanded so it may take longer. There was only one in the previous section.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on October 13, 2020, 08:31:16 PM
There is a local amendment on the Baldwin County ballot that would establish a toll authority in Baldwin County to oversee a new $200 million northbound extension to the Baldwin Beach Express.  Honestly, it's likely to be voted down.  https://www.al.com/news/2020/10/toll-opposition-returns-to-baldwin-county-over-ballot-initiative.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on October 14, 2020, 11:28:52 AM
^

TIL....that there's a Buc-ee's where the Express meets I-10...
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Plutonic Panda on October 14, 2020, 12:01:16 PM
Alabama has got to have some of the lowest quality gas stations overall I've ever seen.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Georgia on October 20, 2020, 01:05:59 AM
I agree with the post above, and having visited that Buc-ee's multiple times, it is gloriously welcome on that stretch of 10. 

Cant wait for the next few Buc-ee's to open up in Leeds AL, Calhoun, GA and WR, GA. 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Plutonic Panda on October 20, 2020, 01:17:14 AM
I wish Buc-ee's would open up in Oklahoma. Rumor has it they are going close to SH-9 and I-35 area but nothing solid yet. I'd love one there and one near Ardmore.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on October 20, 2020, 05:53:56 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 14, 2020, 12:01:16 PM
Alabama has got to have some of the lowest quality gas stations overall I've ever seen.

Quote from: Georgia on October 20, 2020, 01:05:59 AM
I agree with the post above, and having visited that Buc-ee's multiple times, it is gloriously welcome on that stretch of 10. 

Cant wait for the next few Buc-ee's to open up in Leeds AL, Calhoun, GA and WR, GA. 

Alabama doesn't have a state-wide chain or a regional brand of branded gas/convenience stores. Maybe pockets of C-stores in a county or two, like Wavaho in the Tennessee Valley, or Jet-Pep in the northern third of the state. Mapco might be one of the few that operates in multiple states (TN and MS), but their presence is usually just in the Huntsville area.

Mostly, it's a mom-and-pop business; I just aim for the bigger brands (usually in high-traffic areas) or whichever looks the least run-down.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: I-55 on October 20, 2020, 09:48:18 PM
Quote from: formulanone on October 20, 2020, 05:53:56 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 14, 2020, 12:01:16 PM
Alabama has got to have some of the lowest quality gas stations overall I've ever seen.

Quote from: Georgia on October 20, 2020, 01:05:59 AM
I agree with the post above, and having visited that Buc-ee's multiple times, it is gloriously welcome on that stretch of 10. 

Cant wait for the next few Buc-ee's to open up in Leeds AL, Calhoun, GA and WR, GA. 

Alabama doesn't have a state-wide chain or a regional brand of branded gas/convenience stores. Maybe pockets of C-stores in a county or two, like Wavaho in the Tennessee Valley, or Jet-Pep in the northern third of the state. Mapco might be one of the few that operates in multiple states (TN and MS), but their presence is usually just in the Huntsville area.

Mostly, it's a mom-and-pop business; I just aim for the bigger brands (usually in high-traffic areas) or whichever looks the least run-down.

I tend to always lean for the national chains because when I use local stations I often have to deal with card readers. It happened to me over Labor Day last year at a Break Time in Sikeston, MO.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on October 21, 2020, 12:15:33 AM
Quote from: formulanone on October 20, 2020, 05:53:56 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 14, 2020, 12:01:16 PM
Alabama has got to have some of the lowest quality gas stations overall I've ever seen.

Quote from: Georgia on October 20, 2020, 01:05:59 AM
I agree with the post above, and having visited that Buc-ee's multiple times, it is gloriously welcome on that stretch of 10. 

Cant wait for the next few Buc-ee's to open up in Leeds AL, Calhoun, GA and WR, GA. 

Alabama doesn't have a state-wide chain or a regional brand of branded gas/convenience stores. Maybe pockets of C-stores in a county or two, like Wavaho in the Tennessee Valley, or Jet-Pep in the northern third of the state. Mapco might be one of the few that operates in multiple states (TN and MS), but their presence is usually just in the Huntsville area.

Mostly, it's a mom-and-pop business; I just aim for the bigger brands (usually in high-traffic areas) or whichever looks the least run-down.

It appears that Jet Pep got bought out by Marathon.

I usually stick to Mapco when I am in Huntsville.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Georgia on October 23, 2020, 02:13:26 PM
Yep, I generally do Mapco's if I need gas in NE Alabama. Jet Pep's generally grungy look frankly scare me at most of their locations. 

I have been impressed by that Twice Daily there on the Wall Triana exit in HSV
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on October 23, 2020, 03:54:07 PM
If you're on an interstate in Alabama you are mostly within an hour or two of a Love's.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: I-55 on October 24, 2020, 03:00:21 AM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on October 23, 2020, 03:54:07 PM
If you're on an interstate in Alabama you are mostly within an hour or two of a Love's.

Can be said about a lot of places, in Indiana its more like 30-45 minutes (if you were to pick a direction and drive to the nearest one).

I can say this though, if I'm gonna be on I-20/59 between Meridian and Tuscaloosa, I'm getting off at either Exit 154 in Meridian or Exit 71 in Tuscaloosa, because there is absolutely NOTHING between the two. You could try Exit 17 at Livingston but your options are limited far beyond that of the previous two I mentioned.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on October 24, 2020, 03:06:19 PM
Quote from: I-55 on October 24, 2020, 03:00:21 AM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on October 23, 2020, 03:54:07 PM
If you're on an interstate in Alabama you are mostly within an hour or two of a Love's.

Can be said about a lot of places, in Indiana its more like 30-45 minutes (if you were to pick a direction and drive to the nearest one).

I can say this though, if I'm gonna be on I-20/59 between Meridian and Tuscaloosa, I'm getting off at either Exit 154 in Meridian or Exit 71 in Tuscaloosa, because there is absolutely NOTHING between the two. You could try Exit 17 at Livingston but your options are limited far beyond that of the previous two I mentioned.

A Love's recently opened at Exit 40 off of I-20/59 near Eutaw.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on October 24, 2020, 03:07:29 PM
Quote from: Georgia on October 23, 2020, 02:13:26 PM
Yep, I generally do Mapco's if I need gas in NE Alabama. Jet Pep's generally grungy look frankly scare me at most of their locations. 

I have been impressed by that Twice Daily there on the Wall Triana exit in HSV


Twice Daily is a good brand too. They are based in Nashville, and have lots of locations within Nashville metro.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on October 24, 2020, 03:14:04 PM
Quote from: Georgia on October 20, 2020, 01:05:59 AM
I agree with the post above, and having visited that Buc-ee's multiple times, it is gloriously welcome on that stretch of 10. 

Cant wait for the next few Buc-ee's to open up in Leeds AL, Calhoun, GA and WR, GA. 

A Buc-ees is also coming to I-65 at Exit 347 in Athens.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on October 24, 2020, 08:55:24 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on October 21, 2020, 12:15:33 AM
Quote from: formulanone on October 20, 2020, 05:53:56 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 14, 2020, 12:01:16 PM
Alabama has got to have some of the lowest quality gas stations overall I've ever seen.

Quote from: Georgia on October 20, 2020, 01:05:59 AM
I agree with the post above, and having visited that Buc-ee's multiple times, it is gloriously welcome on that stretch of 10. 

Cant wait for the next few Buc-ee's to open up in Leeds AL, Calhoun, GA and WR, GA. 

Alabama doesn't have a state-wide chain or a regional brand of branded gas/convenience stores. Maybe pockets of C-stores in a county or two, like Wavaho in the Tennessee Valley, or Jet-Pep in the northern third of the state. Mapco might be one of the few that operates in multiple states (TN and MS), but their presence is usually just in the Huntsville area.

Mostly, it's a mom-and-pop business; I just aim for the bigger brands (usually in high-traffic areas) or whichever looks the least run-down.

It appears that Jet Pep got bought out by Marathon.

I usually stick to Mapco when I am in Huntsville.

That would be counter intuitive  because Marathon just sold all their Speedways to 7-11 for $21 billion.  The Marathon board wanted to be out of the convenience  store business.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tomahawkin on October 24, 2020, 09:42:51 PM
Im really suprised that QT has not expanded into Alabama, especially the Anniston area? A lot of people who live there, work in the Atlanta area. They choose so because houses are a hell of a lot cheaper West of Villa Rica and there is less traffic to an extent...
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on October 25, 2020, 08:17:58 PM
Quote from: I-55 on October 24, 2020, 03:00:21 AM
I can say this though, if I'm gonna be on I-20/59 between Meridian and Tuscaloosa, I'm getting off at either Exit 154 in Meridian or Exit 71 in Tuscaloosa, because there is absolutely NOTHING between the two. You could try Exit 17 at Livingston but your options are limited far beyond that of the previous two I mentioned.

Exit 32/Boligee has a Chevron that was a usual stop for me when I was stationed in Meridian, both because it tended to have cheaper gas than Tuscaloosa and because it had an in-station Subway.  Granted, we're talking close to 20 years ago now.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: I-55 on October 25, 2020, 08:26:42 PM
Quote from: froggie on October 25, 2020, 08:17:58 PM
Quote from: I-55 on October 24, 2020, 03:00:21 AM
I can say this though, if I'm gonna be on I-20/59 between Meridian and Tuscaloosa, I'm getting off at either Exit 154 in Meridian or Exit 71 in Tuscaloosa, because there is absolutely NOTHING between the two. You could try Exit 17 at Livingston but your options are limited far beyond that of the previous two I mentioned.

Exit 32/Boligee has a Chevron that was a usual stop for me when I was stationed in Meridian, both because it tended to have cheaper gas than Tuscaloosa and because it had an in-station Subway.  Granted, we're talking close to 20 years ago now.

It did shock me that when I was recently in Meridian the gas prices were actually the cheapest along I-59, usually Meridian is the most expensive gas I see.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: clong on October 26, 2020, 03:11:33 PM
Quote from: Tomahawkin on October 24, 2020, 09:42:51 PM
Im really suprised that QT has not expanded into Alabama, especially the Anniston area? A lot of people who live there, work in the Atlanta area. They choose so because houses are a hell of a lot cheaper West of Villa Rica and there is less traffic to an extent...

I was told QT would be a long time coming (or never) to AL because of:
1. No Lottery Sales
2. No Convenience Store Liquor Sales
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tomahawkin on October 26, 2020, 03:17:00 PM
Oh, wow, that's makes sense though... Thanks for the 411
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: msunat97 on October 29, 2020, 10:19:37 AM
Any news about how the Highway 98 work is proceeding west of Mobile?  There are no new press releases on the Highway 98 website in 2 years.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on October 29, 2020, 12:24:44 PM
Quote from: msunat97 on October 29, 2020, 10:19:37 AM
Any news about how the Highway 98 work is proceeding west of Mobile?  There are no new press releases on the Highway 98 website in 2 years.

The remainder of it is being built in stages as a two-lane facility between the state line and Newburn Road. The other lanes will be built as funding becomes available.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on November 01, 2020, 07:41:32 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on October 29, 2020, 12:24:44 PM
Quote from: msunat97 on October 29, 2020, 10:19:37 AM
Any news about how the Highway 98 work is proceeding west of Mobile?  There are no new press releases on the Highway 98 website in 2 years.

The remainder of it is being built in stages as a two-lane facility between the state line and Newburn Road. The other lanes will be built as funding becomes available.

AL 158, future US 98, over College Parkway (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.8031248,-88.1256138,3a,75y,154.17h,96.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOAsiLgnT2sYmFHbouHQ-9w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), a mile west of I-65. The older bridge was built in 1967, the newer in 2005.  :-/
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: clong on December 11, 2020, 05:29:25 PM
Quote from: clong on October 26, 2020, 03:11:33 PM
Quote from: Tomahawkin on October 24, 2020, 09:42:51 PM
Im really suprised that QT has not expanded into Alabama, especially the Anniston area? A lot of people who live there, work in the Atlanta area. They choose so because houses are a hell of a lot cheaper West of Villa Rica and there is less traffic to an extent...

I was told QT would be a long time coming (or never) to AL because of:
1. No Lottery Sales
2. No Convenience Store Liquor Sales

And apparently 2020 changed this stance as well:
QT to open first Alabama store in Calera
https://www.shelbycountyreporter.com/2020/12/01/quiktrip-expected-to-break-ground-in-december/ (https://www.shelbycountyreporter.com/2020/12/01/quiktrip-expected-to-break-ground-in-december/)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tomahawkin on December 11, 2020, 06:20:21 PM
Yes! QT in Alabama! I so need one in Anniston and in Jasper along the IH 22 Corridor or in Hamilton along the Old US 78 route, those gas stations lost a lot of revenue when 22 was completed
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Georgia on December 14, 2020, 10:48:47 AM
I have seen a lot of ALDOT/ALDOT contractor survey crews along 565 near Wall Triana the last few months, is there a upcoming project in the near future?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on December 14, 2020, 01:11:32 PM
Quote from: Georgia on December 14, 2020, 10:48:47 AM
I have seen a lot of ALDOT/ALDOT contractor survey crews along 565 near Wall Triana the last few months, is there a upcoming project in the near future?

Design work has begun on the project to widen I-565 to six lanes between County Line Road and Wall-Triana Hwy. The project is antici9pated to begin construction in 2024.

There is also a project that's supposed to be built in 2021 to reconfigure the exit ramp from EB I-565 to Wall-Triana Hwy. I am not sure exactly what they are doing, but I think it is to increase right-turning capacity to improve access to the nearby Town Madison development.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tomahawkin on December 28, 2020, 06:25:40 PM
Good to see that Buc'ees will be open in Leeds in a few weeks! Love their pork/brisket BBQ sandwiches and there is everything there! Also Another Whataburger location will open up on the exit from IH 20 in Moody. The Whataburger in Carbondale sucks because everyone and they mama goes there! I wish the locals there would learn to grillout instead of going to fast food joints and spending 60 bucks on a family of 5
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ttownfeen on December 29, 2020, 06:45:47 PM
Quote from: Tomahawkin on October 24, 2020, 09:42:51 PM
Im really suprised that QT has not expanded into Alabama, especially the Anniston area? A lot of people who live there, work in the Atlanta area. They choose so because houses are a hell of a lot cheaper West of Villa Rica and there is less traffic to an extent...

A QT is opening up in Tuscaloosa at Exit 77 (Buttermilk Rd) next year.

https://www.tuscaloosanews.com/news/20200128/tuscaloosa-leaders-clear-way-for-quiktrip-to-begin-construction
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tomahawkin on December 29, 2020, 06:49:56 PM
Nice, hopefully we can get either a QT or a Buc'ees in the Anniston area or near the AL/GA Border sometime in the next 4 years
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on December 29, 2020, 07:12:14 PM
That QT, along with one being built in Alabaster, will be the first two in Alabama. I wonder what their footprint in Alabama will end up being?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jdb1234 on December 30, 2020, 03:26:30 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on December 29, 2020, 07:12:14 PM
That QT, along with one being built in Alabaster, will be the first two in Alabama. I wonder what their footprint in Alabama will end up being?

Alabaster?  I think you mean Calera (it is being built at the recently rebuilt exit 231 if I remember correctly).  Now that I am done with school, I do not have a reason to go down there much anymore.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on December 31, 2020, 11:04:14 PM
Looks like the Montgomery Outer Loop is going to see more progress starting in 2021: in the STIP plan currently there is $9.3 million budgeted for earthworks and drainage from the SR-110 interchange to CR-83, a distance of about 3.8 miles. The construction contract is currently expected to be let sometime in 2021. For the Northern Beltline in Birmingham there is funding in place for preliminary engineering for the base + pave and bridges for the SR-79 to SR-75 section for this fiscal year, with the bridge construction contracts in the same segment being let in 2023.

Several Rebuild Alabama projects have started (US-411 expansion in Elmore County and the I-565 expansion near Huntsville), in fiscal 2021 both of the US-82 projects (Hwy 69 to Rice Mine 6-lane in Tuscaloosa County and the SR-14 to US-31 4 lane in Autauga County around Prattville), and the 6-lane widening of I-10 between exits 10 and 15 in Mobile County will have construction contracts bid out to contractors. In fiscal year 2022, construction contracts to widen and reconstruct I-59 between I-459 and Chalkville Mountain Road (CR-10) will be bid out to contractors.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on January 05, 2021, 11:46:31 AM
A diverging diamond interchange at Lakeshore Parkway and I-65 will begin construction in spring 2021. The project will be bid out in February, and will be the state's second DDI after the completion of the I-10 and AL-181 DDI in Spanish Fort last year: https://www.bizjournals.com/birmingham/news/2021/01/04/construction-on-diverging-diamond-interchange-at.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on January 05, 2021, 01:38:45 PM
Quote from: asdfjkll on December 31, 2020, 11:04:14 PM
Looks like the Montgomery Outer Loop is going to see more progress starting in 2021: in the STIP plan currently there is $9.3 million budgeted for earthworks and drainage from the SR-110 interchange to CR-83, a distance of about 3.8 miles. The construction contract is currently expected to be let sometime in 2021. For the Northern Beltline in Birmingham there is funding in place for preliminary engineering for the base + pave and bridges for the SR-79 to SR-75 section for this fiscal year, with the bridge construction contracts in the same segment being let in 2023.

Several Rebuild Alabama projects have started (US-411 expansion in Elmore County and the I-565 expansion near Huntsville), in fiscal 2021 both of the US-82 projects (Hwy 69 to Rice Mine 6-lane in Tuscaloosa County and the SR-14 to US-31 4 lane in Autauga County around Prattville), and the 6-lane widening of I-10 between exits 10 and 15 in Mobile County will have construction contracts bid out to contractors. In fiscal year 2022, construction contracts to widen and reconstruct I-59 between I-459 and Chalkville Mountain Road (CR-10) will be bid out to contractors.

I am glad to see the state widening I-10 west towards Mississippi. After that widening is complete, there will be a stretch of 10 miles left to finish I-10 in Mobile County, aside from the Mobile River crossing. Then, after the bayway and Mobile River crossing is done, there would be 31 miles in Baldwin County left to widen before all of I-10 in Alabama is at least six lanes. Florida is planning on widening its corresponding section of I-10 to six lanes going into Pensacola.

I wished they would get serious about finishing widening I-20 along the gaps east of Birmingham (between MP 163 and MP 173 and between MP 188 and MP 205). They are so close to having it done, yet except for the Coosa River bridge replacement there aren't any plans in the immediate future to fill those gaps. Surely they can come up with the money to widen 27 miles of I-20.

The small stretch of I-20/59 between I-359 and US 82 should be widened shortly, but I don't think there is a pressing need to widen I-20/59 between Tuscaloosa and the Mississippi state line right now. Maybe in 10 years it could be widened to Exit 68.

Then the state could turn its attention to I-65 between Montgomery and Birmingham. The large gap is between MP 181 and MP 237, a gap of 56 miles. There are immediate plans to widen several bridges south of Exit 238, but no plans to actually widen I-65 within that gap.

It would also be nice to see the state tackle widening I-65 north of its current six lane terminus at MP 290 at the Mulberry Fork of the Black Warrior River. About 15-20 years ago there were plans to widen I-65 north to Exit 299, but those got scrapped due to funding issues (I assume). The narrow median would make it difficult to widen without buying more right of way.

Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: I-55 on January 06, 2021, 07:17:41 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on January 05, 2021, 01:38:45 PM
I wished they would get serious about finishing widening I-20 along the gaps east of Birmingham (between MP 163 and MP 173 and between MP 188 and MP 205). They are so close to having it done, yet except for the Coosa River bridge replacement there aren't any plans in the immediate future to fill those gaps. Surely they can come up with the money to widen 27 miles of I-20.

The small stretch of I-20/59 between I-359 and US 82 should be widened shortly, but I don't think there is a pressing need to widen I-20/59 between Tuscaloosa and the Mississippi state line right now. Maybe in 10 years it could be widened to Exit 68.

I fully support I-20 being 6 lane between Birmingham and Atlanta, and I certainly think it will happen in the near future (on the Alabama end anyways). Widening from I-359 to Joe Mallisham Parkway won't be needed unless JMP explodes with development, as almost all of the Tuscaloosa traffic exits at either McFarland or 359. Needless to say it will be interesting to see where the next projects are in the state when the current ones end.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Georgia on January 07, 2021, 02:56:08 PM
GDOT doesnt have any widening plans west of Villa Rica though, so there is little point in Bama widending the last 17 miles only to again drop back to 2 lanes for 24 miles to VR. 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on January 10, 2021, 05:15:28 PM
Quote from: I-55 on January 06, 2021, 07:17:41 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on January 05, 2021, 01:38:45 PM
I wished they would get serious about finishing widening I-20 along the gaps east of Birmingham (between MP 163 and MP 173 and between MP 188 and MP 205). They are so close to having it done, yet except for the Coosa River bridge replacement there aren't any plans in the immediate future to fill those gaps. Surely they can come up with the money to widen 27 miles of I-20.

The small stretch of I-20/59 between I-359 and US 82 should be widened shortly, but I don't think there is a pressing need to widen I-20/59 between Tuscaloosa and the Mississippi state line right now. Maybe in 10 years it could be widened to Exit 68.

I fully support I-20 being 6 lane between Birmingham and Atlanta, and I certainly think it will happen in the near future (on the Alabama end anyways). Widening from I-359 to Joe Mallisham Parkway won't be needed unless JMP explodes with development, as almost all of the Tuscaloosa traffic exits at either McFarland or 359. Needless to say it will be interesting to see where the next projects are in the state when the current ones end.
The first step in widening I-20 between Bham and Atlanta would be to replace the Coosa River Bridge with a new 6-lane bridge and widening the 4-lane section east of the Coosa River, which would make a seamless 6-lane corridor from I-459 all the way into Oxford. I wouldn't widen east of Oxford until Alabama and Georgia can get into a joint agreement to widen to 6-lanes in their remaining sections that are still just 4 lanes.

In Tuscaloosa some of the projects I would like to see happen in the next round of big projects would be:
-Start building the eastern bypass which has been talked about since the 80's. Ideally the Tuscaloosa East Bypass on its western side would be extended south past US82 on a new toll bridge (the existing toll bridge would then have its tolls removed) connecting to I-20/59 exit 68 by upgrading Joe Malisham to a freeway, and have it signed as I-259 (I-x20's in my opinion should be used for I-20 east of Birmingham, which is why I chose an I-x59 for a possible interstate designation for the East Bypass). There could also freeway-standard links for US 82 from the northwestern corner curve of the bypass to US-82 near Buhl and south of I-20/59 to somewhere east of Duncanville, and move US-82 onto the bypass and sign the old US-82 as US-82 Business.
-Widen AL-69 from 2 lanes to 4 lanes + center two way left turn lane from the Northwood Crossings traffic light to Lary Lake Road. This road is one of the highest volume 2-lane roads in the county. Left turn lanes were recently added at a few intersections in this section over the last couple years to alleviate some congestion.
-Widening US-43 from Mitt Lary to the Lake Tuscaloosa bridge to 4-lanes to support ongoing development in the area. As with SR-69 North, left turning lanes have been added at some intersections over the past few years including a traffic signal at Tierce Patton Road.

Elsewhere in west Alabama they could start widening SR-69 from north of Moundville to SR-60, with a northbound flyover for the north SR-60 to north SR-69 movement (replacing a stop controlled turn onto SR-69), and widening SR-13 from Spruce Pine to I-22, which is partially grade, drain, and bridge but nothing else for the past few years.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: I-55 on January 10, 2021, 05:48:35 PM
Quote from: asdfjkll on January 10, 2021, 05:15:28 PM
Quote from: I-55 on January 06, 2021, 07:17:41 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on January 05, 2021, 01:38:45 PM
I wished they would get serious about finishing widening I-20 along the gaps east of Birmingham (between MP 163 and MP 173 and between MP 188 and MP 205). They are so close to having it done, yet except for the Coosa River bridge replacement there aren't any plans in the immediate future to fill those gaps. Surely they can come up with the money to widen 27 miles of I-20.

The small stretch of I-20/59 between I-359 and US 82 should be widened shortly, but I don't think there is a pressing need to widen I-20/59 between Tuscaloosa and the Mississippi state line right now. Maybe in 10 years it could be widened to Exit 68.

I fully support I-20 being 6 lane between Birmingham and Atlanta, and I certainly think it will happen in the near future (on the Alabama end anyways). Widening from I-359 to Joe Mallisham Parkway won't be needed unless JMP explodes with development, as almost all of the Tuscaloosa traffic exits at either McFarland or 359. Needless to say it will be interesting to see where the next projects are in the state when the current ones end.
The first step in widening I-20 between Bham and Atlanta would be to replace the Coosa River Bridge with a new 6-lane bridge and widening the 4-lane section east of the Coosa River, which would make a seamless 6-lane corridor from I-459 all the way into Oxford. I wouldn't widen east of Oxford until Alabama and Georgia can get into a joint agreement to widen to 6-lanes in their remaining sections that are still just 4 lanes.

In Tuscaloosa some of the projects I would like to see happen in the next round of big projects would be:
-Start building the eastern bypass which has been talked about since the 80's. Ideally the Tuscaloosa East Bypass on its western side would be extended south past US82 on a new toll bridge (the existing toll bridge would then have its tolls removed) connecting to I-20/59 exit 68 by upgrading Joe Malisham to a freeway, and have it signed as I-259 (I-x20's in my opinion should be used for I-20 east of Birmingham, which is why I chose an I-x59 for a possible interstate designation for the East Bypass). There could also freeway-standard links for US 82 from the northwestern corner curve of the bypass to US-82 near Buhl and south of I-20/59 to somewhere east of Duncanville, and move US-82 onto the bypass and sign the old US-82 as US-82 Business.
-Widen AL-69 from 2 lanes to 4 lanes + center two way left turn lane from the Northwood Crossings traffic light to Lary Lake Road. This road is one of the highest volume 2-lane roads in the county. Left turn lanes were recently added at a few intersections in this section over the last couple years to alleviate some congestion.
-Widening US-43 from Mitt Lary to the Lake Tuscaloosa bridge to 4-lanes to support ongoing development in the area. As with SR-69 North, left turning lanes have been added at some intersections over the past few years including a traffic signal at Tierce Patton Road.

Elsewhere in west Alabama they could start widening SR-69 from north of Moundville to SR-60, with a northbound flyover for the north SR-60 to north SR-69 movement (replacing a stop controlled turn onto SR-69), and widening SR-13 from Spruce Pine to I-22, which is partially grade, drain, and bridge but nothing else for the past few years.

The Eastern Bypass certainly should be constructed, though a loop that skewed would look weird as a 3di of I-59 (not that it's a bad thing). Certainly that proposal would be functional for Tuscaloosa and alleviate McFarland and Lurleen B Wallace Blvds.

As for the flyover in Hale County, those words don't belong in the same sentence, especially considering the number of 4 lane junctions in the northern half of the state like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6850837,-87.597744,281m/data=!3m1!1e3).
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rcm195 on January 11, 2021, 03:58:04 PM
Sadly I just don't see any of these projects taking any shape in Alabama. I'll be 61 next month and I'm not sure now I'll ever live to see another major road project take shape, much less finished in my lifetime. 😔
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on January 12, 2021, 08:26:13 AM
Quote from: rcm195 on January 11, 2021, 03:58:04 PM
Sadly I just don't see any of these projects taking any shape in Alabama. I'll be 61 next month and I'm not sure now I'll ever live to see another major road project take shape, much less finished in my lifetime. 😔
Alabama might be able to afford such projects now thanks to the Rebuild Alabama Act (which is bringing in $200-300 million more dollars annually that can only be used for road construction), and a few counties like Tuscaloosa created their own road improvement comissions to fund local highway projects using sales tax dollars. The Rebuild Alabama Act for example pushed up the letting fiscal year for the US-82 widening in Prattville up 2 years form 2023 to 2021, the I-10 widening between exits 10 and 15 moved up 6 years from 2027 to 2021, the widening and reconstruction of I-59 from I-459 to Chalkville Mountain Road moved up 6 years from 2028 to 2022, and the McFarland widening from SR-69 to Rice Mine, grade, drain and bridge of the next piece of the Montgomery Outer Loop, the I-565 widening in Limstone County, and the US-411 widening project in Etowah County wasn't even on the STIP plan back then (looking at a 2019 version of the STIP). It'll be neat to see what will be coming next in the next round of Rebuild Alabama projects.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on January 30, 2021, 12:40:03 PM
A lot of updates for upcoming Alabama roadway projects:

In January's letting (yesterday):

A major bridge replacement project around I-85 Exit 60 in Opelika has been let, and will replace three pairs of narrow bridges at SR-51 (Exit 60), the Norfolk Southern railway tracks just west of Exit 60, and Long Street. It'll also extend the substandard off and on ramp deceleration/acceleration lanes on the west side of the interchange, and with the presence of concrete median barrier in the items list it suggest that the new bridges will be wide enough to accomodate a 6-lane facility for I-85 in the future when funding arrives for that project. The remainder of items in the January letting are just generic resurfacing projects and other small improvements, although US-411 between the south end of the last widening project and Rainbow City will be getting some access management in addition to resurfacing.

In the February 26 letting we have three big projects up for bid plus preparatory work for a fourth project:

Another project for the Future US-98 in Mobile County is coming up for bid where a new bridge for CR-63 (Wilmer-Georgetown Road) will be built over the future US-98 alignment currently under construction (grade and drain on either side of this road is already completed back in the late 2000's). It include a jughandle to allow traffic from CR-63 to hop onto the new US-98 when it opens in a couple years.

The new diverging diamond interchange planned for Lakeshore Parkway and I-65 in Birmingham is also up for bid. This will be the second diverging diamond built in the state of Alabama, after the completion of the SR-181 DDI at I-10 last year.

The long overdue US-82 widening in Prattville between SR-14 and US-31 is up for bid. There is a concrete and asphalt option with this project, as the Rebuild Alabama Act requires ALDOT put up a concrete and asphalt option up for bid for Rebuild Alabama projects. The US-411 widening (a Rebuild AL act project under construction) also had a concrete/asphalt option when it went up for bid last year.

Finally, a demolition contract to remove 24 buildings in the way for the upcoming widening of US-11 between the Mercedes car factory and SR-5 will be up for bid. It is expected that later on in the year the contract to construct the actual roadway widening will be out for bid upon completion of the demolition works.

The remainder of items is another large amount of resurfacing projects/minor improvements and 1 bridge replacement (SR-14 over Lubbub Creek in Pickens County)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: milbfan on February 06, 2021, 11:22:38 PM
Quote from: asdfjkll on January 30, 2021, 12:40:03 PM
A lot of updates for upcoming Alabama roadway projects:

The long overdue US-82 widening in Prattville between SR-14 and US-31 is up for bid. There is a concrete and asphalt option with this project, as the Rebuild Alabama Act requires ALDOT put up a concrete and asphalt option up for bid for Rebuild Alabama projects. The US-411 widening (a Rebuild AL act project under construction) also had a concrete/asphalt option when it went up for bid last year.


Thank goodness.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Plutonic Panda on February 07, 2021, 09:04:56 AM
That is very interesting concrete and asphalt alternatives are required.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on February 07, 2021, 12:22:10 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on February 07, 2021, 09:04:56 AM
That is very interesting concrete and asphalt alternatives are required.

ALDOT offered that for the construction of I-22 as well. Concrete is more expensive in usually most cases, so asphalt won. I figure it will be the same case with these projects as well. The only way they are gonna get concrete is if they only have concrete as an option.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on February 07, 2021, 05:06:46 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on February 07, 2021, 12:22:10 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on February 07, 2021, 09:04:56 AM
That is very interesting concrete and asphalt alternatives are required.

ALDOT offered that for the construction of I-22 as well. Concrete is more expensive in usually most cases, so asphalt won. I figure it will be the same case with these projects as well. The only way they are gonna get concrete is if they only have concrete as an option.

Concrete may be more expensive than asphalt in the short term, but when it comes to long term maintenance throughout the life of the pavement sometimes concrete may be the better option (especially when you count the couple scheduled resurfacings of the asphalt over 30+ years while the concrete won't need maintenance for 25+ years in the ideal situation). There is also the issue of variable pricing of oil, as asphalt is a oil-based product like the gasoline at the gas pumps, so some years asphalt will be more expensive than in other years, just like how one year the price per gallon of gas can be $3 and another year it is 2$.

In other Alabama roadway news: In Governor Kay Ivey's State of the State address last week, she mentioned that later this year she wants to break ground on a 4-lane US-43 between the current end of 4-lane in the middle of Thomasville to Tuscaloosa (although I think it will end at Exit 40 in Eutaw by the new Love's gas station). She also mentions working towards providing a 4-lane access to the interstate from Geneva and Fayette Counties. For Geneva County, a 4-lane access to the interstate already exists on the eastern side by going through Dothan on US-231 from I-10 and going down SR-52 to the end of 4-lane dual carriageway by Malvern. Some possibilities for giving other parts of the county 4-lane access would be continuing the SR-52 widening west past Malvern all the way to Hartford, where another new 4-lane SR-167 will come up from FL-79 at the Florida State line all the way up to the US-84 at grade beltway around Enterprise. For Fayette County, this is the first I've heard about a new 4-lane corridor proposed in this county, I would personally widen AL-13 throughout the entire county and in adjoining counties to form a 4-lane corridor from Tuscaloosa to I-22 by Eldridge. In addition, a new 4-lane dual carriageway alignment for SR-18 east of the Sipsey River intersecting with AL-13 a few miles to the north of the existing all-way stop with SR-18, continuing as a new 2-lane alignment to somewhere northeast of Berry (with 4-lane ROW) which will bypass Bankston, Berry, and Stough, and the very windy and curvy section of SR-18 between AL-13 and Fayette. Preferably the new AL-13/18 intersection will be a diamond interchange or a grade separated jughandle (see SR-5 and SR-28 at Catherine for an example of this) with AL-13 being the main movement.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on February 07, 2021, 06:38:00 PM
Quote from: asdfjkll on February 07, 2021, 05:06:46 PMIn other Alabama roadway news: In Governor Kay Ivey's State of the State address last week, she mentioned that later this year she wants to break ground on a 4-lane US-43 between the current end of 4-lane in the middle of Thomasville to Tuscaloosa (although I think it will end at Exit 40 in Eutaw by the new Love's gas station).

It looks appalling on a map, but a better approach might be to widen US 45 from AL 158 to the MS line instead. Already, Google's journey time from Mobile to Tuscaloosa is identical via US 45 and I-20-59 compared to US 43-AL 69 despite the former being thirty miles longer. While it's true that the Mobile-Tuscaloosa run isn't the only issue that a more direct project would address, it's also true that two-lane US 45 is a problem, and it's good to kill two birds with one stone where possible.

While I'm at it, a decent US 45 project would require a lengthy bypass of Citronelle, a US 43 routing would require a comparable bypass of Demopolis plus a shorter one of Eufaw. Or they could bypass both by sticking to AL 69 and missing Demopolis altogether at the cost of an extra 13 miles of widening plus a bypass of Greenville. Decisions, decisions. 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on February 07, 2021, 06:45:23 PM
A four lane AL 18 from Fayette to Berry shocks me. I don't know if the traffic would justify that. A relocated two lane, sure, but a four lane west of AL 13 would surprise me if it had a large traffic count.

US 43 widening from Thomasville to Tuscaloosa sounds great. Also widen AL 13 between Spruce Pine and Tuscaloosa. While it may not get a heavy traffic count south of Natural Bridge to north of Samantha, the regional connectivity would increase. 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on February 07, 2021, 06:46:11 PM
As for concrete versus asphalt, I don't think they take maintenance costs into the price of concrete, unfortunately. Maybe I am wrong, though.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on February 07, 2021, 10:28:17 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on February 07, 2021, 06:45:23 PM
A four lane AL 18 from Fayette to Berry shocks me. I don't know if the traffic would justify that. A relocated two lane, sure, but a four lane west of AL 13 would surprise me if it had a large traffic count.

US 43 widening from Thomasville to Tuscaloosa sounds great. Also widen AL 13 between Spruce Pine and Tuscaloosa. While it may not get a heavy traffic count south of Natural Bridge to north of Samantha, the regional connectivity would increase.

There are a few heavy industries in Fayette that could benefit from a 4-lane highway up to their doorsteps, hence why I suggested a 4-lane new alignment connector road from Fayette to AL-13. East of AL-13 it is a new 2-lane route for AL-18 to northeast of Berry (barely any traffic beyond that point)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on February 08, 2021, 06:24:02 AM
Quote from: asdfjkll on February 07, 2021, 10:28:17 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on February 07, 2021, 06:45:23 PM
A four lane AL 18 from Fayette to Berry shocks me. I don't know if the traffic would justify that. A relocated two lane, sure, but a four lane west of AL 13 would surprise me if it had a large traffic count.

US 43 widening from Thomasville to Tuscaloosa sounds great. Also widen AL 13 between Spruce Pine and Tuscaloosa. While it may not get a heavy traffic count south of Natural Bridge to north of Samantha, the regional connectivity would increase.

There are a few heavy industries in Fayette that could benefit from a 4-lane highway up to their doorsteps, hence why I suggested a 4-lane new alignment connector road from Fayette to AL-13. East of AL-13 it is a new 2-lane route for AL-18 to northeast of Berry (barely any traffic beyond that point)

They could potentially use the old Norfolk Southern right of way for the new roadway. It even features a bridge at AL 13 where the railroad went under AL 13.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ukfan758 on February 20, 2021, 01:14:30 AM
I wish ALDOT would hurry up and open the third lane on 20/59 up to McFarland Blvd. There's zero reason why they need to keep it at two lanes through the whole project. Make it 3 and then go down to two right before the McFarland Blvd bridge they're working on.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on February 21, 2021, 06:49:36 PM
Quote from: ukfan758 on February 20, 2021, 01:14:30 AM
I wish ALDOT would hurry up and open the third lane on 20/59 up to McFarland Blvd. There's zero reason why they need to keep it at two lanes through the whole project. Make it 3 and then go down to two right before the McFarland Blvd bridge they're working on.

There is still some work to be done on the median barrier around the two bridges and approaching it (where in earlier phases one of the two lanes cross over the median into the other carriageway during the bridge construction), went through there this afternoon to see the new Vance bridge on M-Class Boulevard and they are still pouring the missing sections of median barrier. In both directions all four lanes are back to their pre-construction configuration, and going eastbound the new 3rd lane is already open between Exits 76 and 77 (which is the first section of new lanes to completely open to traffic). I assume when the missing sections of concrete median are finished and cured they'll open the 3rd lane between McFarland and Skyland in both directions. Work zone speed limit is still 45 mph which I believe should be raised up to 60 mph (like with similar widening projects in Florida which are always posted at 60 mph) now that the crossovers/lane shifts and narrow lanes that warranted the 45 mph work zone speed limit are no longer present.

Both arches on the McFarland bridge are now installed, they still have the temporary supporting scaffolding underneath them for now, next thing to do after the arches pass inspection they will begin installing the suspension cables that will hold the bridge up after the temporary supports underneath are removed to start building the McFarland SPUI. In addition, the resurfacing of I-20 west of the current widening project to I-359 (with a short widening up to the 3rd Avenue bridge to make room for a westbound merge ramp for McFarland) should go out to letting soon now that the bridge is getting close to completion. When this is all finished you'll have a seamless 6-lane corridor from I-459 to I-359. Later this year you'll start seeing some work on a new US-82 expansion from Highway 43/69 to Rice Mine Road and a few other non-interstate capacity projects as well, stay tuned for more updates on those upcoming projects.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on February 22, 2021, 05:07:08 AM
Quote from: asdfjkll on February 21, 2021, 06:49:36 PMWork zone speed limit is still 45 mph which I believe should be raised up to 60 mph (like with similar widening projects in Florida which are always posted at 60 mph) now that the crossovers/lane shifts and narrow lanes that warranted the 45 mph work zone speed limit are no longer present.

In all, a good excuse to just take US 11 a few months back. 

I can respect lowered work zone limits for a short stretch, but it's aggravating when everyone else wants to go 10-15 mph faster for work zones over unnecessarily long distances. 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jdb1234 on March 09, 2021, 09:38:39 AM
Found myself taking a trip to Northport last night.  A few notes:

After Exit 6 on I-459 heading southbound, there is a reassurance marker for I-459 that also shows trailblazers for I-65, I-20, and I-59.  Somebody wanting to go to I-65 would not be going this way.  This happens a few times in the other direction where it make sense.  I will try to get a photo later in the week.

A few signs on I-20/59 have had their destinations changed.  Exit 79 now shows Tuscaloosa instead of University Blvd.  Exit 77 is signed for Buttermilk Rd, and Exit 76 is signed for Skyland Blvd.  I have not been to Tuscaloosa in a while, so this is the first time I have seen that.

I have to go back to Tuscaloosa Friday night.  I will try to bring my camera.

It will be nice when the widening is finished.  It has been inching along for nearly 20 years from I-459 to I-359.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on March 09, 2021, 09:52:32 AM
Quote from: jdb1234 on March 09, 2021, 09:38:39 AM
Found myself taking a trip to Northport last night.  A few notes:

After Exit 6 on I-459 heading southbound, there is a reassurance marker for I-459 that also shows trailblazers for I-65, I-20, and I-59.  Somebody wanting to go to I-65 would not be going this way.  This happens a few times in the other direction where it make sense.  I will try to get a photo later in the week.

They added the I-65 trailblazers from Exit 10 west to the end about 3-4 years ago. Like you said it makes no sense as most people just got off/passed I-65 a couple of miles back. They may have added them getting prepared for the 20/59 bridge replacement for the detour around town but even then nobody would use that route with common sense.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jdb1234 on March 09, 2021, 10:34:50 AM
Quote from: Voyager75 on March 09, 2021, 09:52:32 AM
Quote from: jdb1234 on March 09, 2021, 09:38:39 AM
Found myself taking a trip to Northport last night.  A few notes:

After Exit 6 on I-459 heading southbound, there is a reassurance marker for I-459 that also shows trailblazers for I-65, I-20, and I-59.  Somebody wanting to go to I-65 would not be going this way.  This happens a few times in the other direction where it make sense.  I will try to get a photo later in the week.

They added the I-65 trailblazers from Exit 10 west to the end about 3-4 years ago. Like you said it makes no sense as most people just got off/passed I-65 a couple of miles back. They may have added them getting prepared for the 20/59 bridge replacement for the detour around town but even then nobody would use that route with common sense.

It is rare for me to travel on I-459 past Exit 10, figures that signage has been there for a few years.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on March 13, 2021, 10:10:24 AM
Talk of four-laning US43 from Thomasville to Tuscaloosa. I don't think they would four-lane all the way to Tuscaloosa. I would think just to I59/20 around Knoxville and maybe move 43 onto the interstate to Tuscaloosa from there.
https://www.al.com/news/2021/03/in-west-alabama-skepticism-turns-into-optimism-for-a-new-us-43.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on March 14, 2021, 10:11:18 AM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on March 13, 2021, 10:10:24 AM
Talk of four-laning US43 from Thomasville to Tuscaloosa.

This project really bothers me. Traffic volumes are mostly in the 4000 vehicles per day range, without a huge proportion of trucks. I can't imagine that it'd be a cost-effective investment, and there are other more important priorities.

QuoteI don't think they would four-lane all the way to Tuscaloosa. I would think just to I59/20 around Knoxville and maybe move 43 onto the interstate to Tuscaloosa from there.
https://www.al.com/news/2021/03/in-west-alabama-skepticism-turns-into-optimism-for-a-new-us-43.html

Despite my skepticism, I drew some bypass routes for Linden, Demopolis, and Eutaw this morning. I drew a seven-mile route bypassing Eutaw to the west and joining I-59-20 at the AL 14 interchange, and 2 1/2 mile version running east of town, tying into I-59-20 at the Greenetrack interchange. I don't know which would be better, and maybe someone else could think of something better still.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on March 14, 2021, 10:36:42 AM
US 43 north of Tuscaloosa could use widening to four lanes, though perhaps just to Binion Creek/Samantha, and south of town to the Black Warrior River.

Passing lanes every 4-5 miles are also welcome in lieu for four-lanes for the most desolate sections.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Finrod on March 15, 2021, 04:14:08 AM
I find it weird how US 43 does a 1-block u-turn in Eulaw.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on March 16, 2021, 12:57:27 AM
Quote from: Tom958 on March 14, 2021, 10:11:18 AM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on March 13, 2021, 10:10:24 AM
Talk of four-laning US43 from Thomasville to Tuscaloosa.

This project really bothers me. Traffic volumes are mostly in the 4000 vehicles per day range, without a huge proportion of trucks. I can't imagine that it'd be a cost-effective investment, and there are other more important priorities.

QuoteI don't think they would four-lane all the way to Tuscaloosa. I would think just to I59/20 around Knoxville and maybe move 43 onto the interstate to Tuscaloosa from there.
https://www.al.com/news/2021/03/in-west-alabama-skepticism-turns-into-optimism-for-a-new-us-43.html

Despite my skepticism, I drew some bypass routes for Linden, Demopolis, and Eutaw this morning. I drew a seven-mile route bypassing Eutaw to the west and joining I-59-20 at the AL 14 interchange, and 2 1/2 mile version running east of town, tying into I-59-20 at the Greenetrack interchange. I don't know which would be better, and maybe someone else could think of something better still.
Those traffic volumes in the rural areas are pretty as you said above, between 4k-5k per day (the ALDOT GIS site doesn't specify what percentage is truck traffic), with the volumes bumping up 2-3k going through the bigger towns like Demopolis and Linden. My ideas for new deviations around towns are as follows:
Dixon Mills: short 3-4 mile long deviation to the east of the existing route. It's intersection with SR-10 would be a built-in restricted crossing U-Turn intersection (similar to the one that ALDOT recently installed in Faunsdale at the SR-25/US 80 intersection). The portion of US-43 bypassed would tie in at the north and south end with regular T-intersections.
Linden: a much longer deviation going to the east of town roughly 10 miles long. RCUT's or Jughandles (like SR-5/SR28 in Catherine) at SR-28 and SR-69, depending on what grade the new road intersects these two roads. Typical T-junctions at each end of the bypass.
Demopolis: Starts at where US-43 intersects US-80 diagonally in the southeast side of town. After bridging over a pair of railroad tracks, the road veers to the northwest and ties in to existing US-43 prior to crossing the Black Warrior River.
Eutaw: Two options here: Either southwest bypass and tie-in onto SR-14 southeast of Exit 40 or eastern bypass and US-43 ends at Exit 45 by the Greenetrack. A bonus addition to the eastern bypass is to have SR-14 bypass the town to the north, tie in to the eastern bypass then returns to existing SR-14 where the east bypass intersects it, thereby eliminating heavy truck traffic in the center of town.
*Note all new bypasses/deviations I highlighted above will have rail grade separations to eliminate any rail/road traffic conflicts. Mostly no limited access restrictions as well due to low traffic volumes, promote economic development in these towns (i.e. new Walmarts and factories), and most people take the I-65 to go to the north part of the state anyways.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on March 16, 2021, 11:43:11 AM
Quote from: asdfjkll on March 16, 2021, 12:57:27 AM
*Note all new bypasses/deviations I highlighted above will have rail grade separations to eliminate any rail/road traffic conflicts. Mostly no limited access restrictions as well due to low traffic volumes, promote economic development in these towns (i.e. new Walmarts and factories), and most people take the I-65 to go to the north part of the state anyways.

I came up with pretty much the same thing as you did, though mine at Linden was only 4.4 miles long and I didn't bother with Dixon Mills. Then comes the debate/expression of personal prejudices over what new-terrain bypasses should be like. I'd prefer that new-terrain highways with the specific purpose of improving travel times sufficiently to redraw the state map be controlled access, but that's often not realistic, and liting access on an at-grade highway has its limitations, too. Something like this desecration of a recently-built expressway with interchanges every four miles (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.4025464,-88.6973243,1421m/data=!3m1!1e3) pisses me off immensely, but maybe it's not as bad as it looks.

Oh: what's at AL 5 and AL 22 is a single-quadrant interchange. a jughandle is something else: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jughandle
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on March 30, 2021, 06:34:40 PM
Google Maps has updated the imagery along the entire US-98 (SR-158) realignment project west of Mobile. The new imagery shows a completed 2-lane pavement complete with linemarking and signs from east of the Lott Road jughandle (which is really a single quadrant interchange as Tom mentioned above but ALDOT loves to call them jughandles anyways) to the existing west end of SR-158; the only thing separating this new section and the existing SR-158 is a missing culvert that is yet to be constructed. Between Lott and Glenwood Roads a majority of the 2-lane initial paving, bridges, and 4-lane grade/drain has been built, with a bridge being built over Collins Creek. There is still some forest to be cleared between Collins Creek and the late 2000's grade and drain project that stopped a half mile east of Glenwood Road before the grade/drain/base/pave which will complete that section of the project. The contract to build a bridge for Wilmer-Georgetown Road over the new 98 and construct a connecting link "jughandle" similar to at Lott Road was bid to contractors last February. There are two remaining projects yet to be let before US-98 can be moved onto the new alignment/SR-158: A bridge for Glenwood Road to pass over the new US-98 alignment and the completing of the remaining 4-lane grade and drain between MS and Glenwood Rd and paving the eastbound lanes (which will run as 2-way between MS and Schillinger Road before the westbound lanes are built). Speaking of the westbound lanes, they could be starting shortly after the new alignment opens with 2/4 lanes opened: The extension of the westbound bridge over Big Creek like they did with the eastbound bridge a couple years ago (which shows up on the STIP plan but not the US 98 extension website) is scheduled to let in FY 2023.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rcm195 on April 01, 2021, 08:03:46 PM
I think the real issue with potentially upgrading US 43 is two fold. Politics needless to say plays into it. This area of the state of Alabama desperately needs something to help it economically. I think this might be a way of the Governors office at least saying they are trying to do something. I think personally addressing broadband access would be a better choice but that's just me.

Second, one of the fastest growing counties in Alabama is Baldwin. I've chatted with some officials with the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa who feel they need some type of better road access to this area. Even going up I-65 to Montgomery or Clanton, you still have to get off on two lane roads to get to Tuscaloosa.

Just my two cents worth. 😊
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on April 03, 2021, 06:56:01 AM
^ Speaking of better access to Tuscaloosa, there's been talk of widening US 82 to four lanes between Centreville and Prattville since I was stationed in Meridian 20 years ago.  Would certainly be cheaper than widening (or building an Interstate along) 43.  All they've managed to do in that time, though, is finish the Centreville bypass.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on April 04, 2021, 03:41:42 PM
I can't find anything about it on the ALDOT website now and had to go back and find an old post of mine to see when it was, but in 2013 I posted about finding in the STIP about a study to relocate 82 on new alignment from east of Centreville and connecting to I65 near Clanton.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on April 04, 2021, 08:54:46 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on April 04, 2021, 03:41:42 PM
I can't find anything about it on the ALDOT website now and had to go back and find an old post of mine to see when it was, but in 2013 I posted about finding in the STIP about a study to relocate 82 on new alignment from east of Centreville and connecting to I65 near Clanton.

Relocating US-82 between I-65 and the Centreville bypass is pretty much the only way they are going to get a 4-lane from Montgomery to Tuscaloosa with how steep the existing US-82 is in places within Autauga and Chilton Counties, not to mention some pretty sharp curves with gas stations and houses on both sides of the curves. With a AADT east of Centreville dropping to 3k vehicles per day until you reach Prattville, I can see why nothing's been done yet. This realignment can be something that ALDOT can implement in phases like what they are doing on SR 158/US 98 west of Mobile: A new I-65 trumpet interchange exit and connecting 2-lane on 4-lane graded roadway to US-31 as Phase 1, then US-31 to SR-191 as phase 2, SR-191 to SR-139 as phase 3 (SR-139 will soon be home to one of the three new mega jails that the governor wants to build so this phase can help improve delivery access to this pretty remote site), then SR-139 to tie in with existing US-82 east of the Centreville Bypass in phase 4. Future phases after this will progressively duplicate the new single carriageway alignment to dual carriageway with 2 lanes in each direction as funding becomes available. I don't think controlled access is necessary west of US-31 and should only be a thing between US-31 and I-65 solely to stop out of control development and red lights going up right at the new exit when the first couple phases are built. All intersections with state routes/US routes between existing US-82 and I-65 shall be grade separated interchanges in this version.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on April 05, 2021, 10:03:25 PM
The cynic, or is it the realist, in me says that there are only 7-8 days each year that a widened U.S. 43 or a widened U.S. 82 might be needed.  Neither 43 or 82 see a lot of traffic except on Saturdays when Alabama is playing at home.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: sturmde on April 06, 2021, 03:51:29 PM
Practical reason for 82 to Montgomery:  The University underserves South and Central Alabama because of the difficulty in connecting to Montgomery and I-85, 65, and US 231.  It also improves access to the state capital for counties north of Tuscaloosa.
.
Auburn and Auburn University have grown tremendously over the past 20 years because they can connect via I-85 and four-laned US 280 in four "somewhat" cardinal directions, NW, NE, WSW, and ESE.  Tuscaloosa can only go four-lanes in three: WNW, WSW, and NE.
.
Tuscaloosa should have a better connection to the center of state government.  The "new" US 82 routing from S of Centerville to hit I-65 around south of Clanton makes a lot of sense.  It "cuts" a corner.  Put an intersection around MM 203 where CR 431 curves away near where the N and S roadways are separated and there's room for a classic Y intersection with a minimum of interruption.  Do it as full freeway limited access west from there over to current US 82 and it could qualify as a future I-365.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: I-55 on April 06, 2021, 09:58:35 PM
Quote from: sturmde on April 06, 2021, 03:51:29 PM
Practical reason for 82 to Montgomery:  The University underserves South and Central Alabama because of the difficulty in connecting to Montgomery and I-85, 65, and US 231.  It also improves access to the state capital for counties north of Tuscaloosa.
.
Auburn and Auburn University have grown tremendously over the past 20 years because they can connect via I-85 and four-laned US 280 in four "somewhat" cardinal directions, NW, NE, WSW, and ESE.  Tuscaloosa can only go four-lanes in three: WNW, WSW, and NE.
.
Tuscaloosa should have a better connection to the center of state government.  The "new" US 82 routing from S of Centerville to hit I-65 around south of Clanton makes a lot of sense.  It "cuts" a corner.  Put an intersection around MM 203 where CR 431 curves away near where the N and S roadways are separated and there's room for a classic Y intersection with a minimum of interruption.  Do it as full freeway limited access west from there over to current US 82 and it could qualify as a future I-365.

That's pretty close to where I'd put it, my idea is to have it tie into US-31 next to Exit 205 since there's some development akin to most major junctions.

I would only plan on the interstate designation IF and ONLY IF the plan is to upgrade the rest of 82 to freeway. Otherwise it'll look almost as stupid as I-180 in Illinois. I like making new interstates, but not necessarily to the middle of nowhere. I'm sorry, but Maplesville is just not a logical interstate terminus.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: I-55 on April 06, 2021, 11:33:56 PM
Was looking around on Google maps satellite and noticed significant road work in the median of AL-255 (Research Park Blvd) in Huntsville. The work zone stretches from I-565 to US-72. It appears to be a widening project. Can anyone confirm this?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Georgia on April 06, 2021, 11:47:21 PM
Quote from: I-55 on April 06, 2021, 11:33:56 PM
Was looking around on Google maps satellite and noticed significant road work in the median of AL-255 (Research Park Blvd) in Huntsville. The work zone stretches from I-565 to US-72. It appears to be a widening project. Can anyone confirm this?

yep, it is a widening project.

https://www.huntsvilleal.gov/roadworkprojects/research-park-boulevard-sr-255-between-university-drive-u-s-72-and-old-madison-pike/
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ukfan758 on April 10, 2021, 02:48:15 AM
After over 3 years of work, 20/59 is now 3 lanes in both directions east of McFarland Blvd. The small section from the overpass to the current 3 lane section going towards I-359 is still limited to 2 with ongoing bridge construction. Just curious, what's the holdup with installing the supporting cables on that bridge? The arches have been up for over a month now. And once that is complete, what are some ballpark figures for how long the SPUI will take to finish? 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on April 10, 2021, 10:53:35 AM
Quote from: ukfan758 on April 10, 2021, 02:48:15 AM
After over 3 years of work, 20/59 is now 3 lanes in both directions east of McFarland Blvd. The small section from the overpass to the current 3 lane section going towards I-359 is still limited to 2 with ongoing bridge construction. Just curious, what's the holdup with installing the supporting cables on that bridge? The arches have been up for over a month now. And once that is complete, what are some ballpark figures for how long the SPUI will take to finish?
I can confirm that the 3rd lane is now open both directions east of Exit 73 (McFarland Blvd) just from looking at the ALGOtraffic cameras, speaking of the arches one of the previous arches (not the two that are up now) was faulty and they had to refabricate it, maybe they want to make sure these two arches are good before they proceed with installing the suspension cables. There is some widening work going on on McFarland north of the interstate to 31st Street and they already replaced two traffic signals around that area. Most of the SPUI ramps configuration is already grade drain base and paved up to where it ties into the existing McFarland/US82, so whenever the cables are installed the SPUI won't take that long to complete.
EDIT: @ukfan758 is the work zone speed limit still 45mph? About to update OpenStreetMap with the new lane configuration for I-20/59 thru this construction zone.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on April 11, 2021, 10:23:54 AM
Quote from: Georgia on April 06, 2021, 11:47:21 PM
Quote from: I-55 on April 06, 2021, 11:33:56 PM
Was looking around on Google maps satellite and noticed significant road work in the median of AL-255 (Research Park Blvd) in Huntsville. The work zone stretches from I-565 to US-72. It appears to be a widening project. Can anyone confirm this?

yep, it is a widening project.

https://www.huntsvilleal.gov/roadworkprojects/research-park-boulevard-sr-255-between-university-drive-u-s-72-and-old-madison-pike/

It backs up tremendously in the Mornings at Gate 9 for the Redstone Arsenal:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/5693/31170964072_e6b76243a1_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/PutkD3)

Unfortunately, it won't take care of that goofy ramp to westbound I-565, which was pinned too close to the Bradford Road on-ramp.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jdb1234 on April 11, 2021, 01:12:49 PM
Quote from: formulanone on April 11, 2021, 10:23:54 AM
Quote from: Georgia on April 06, 2021, 11:47:21 PM
Quote from: I-55 on April 06, 2021, 11:33:56 PM
Was looking around on Google maps satellite and noticed significant road work in the median of AL-255 (Research Park Blvd) in Huntsville. The work zone stretches from I-565 to US-72. It appears to be a widening project. Can anyone confirm this?

yep, it is a widening project.

https://www.huntsvilleal.gov/roadworkprojects/research-park-boulevard-sr-255-between-university-drive-u-s-72-and-old-madison-pike/

It backs up tremendously in the Mornings at Gate 9 for the Redstone Arsenal:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/5693/31170964072_e6b76243a1_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/PutkD3)

Unfortunately, it won't take care of that goofy ramp to westbound I-565, which was pinned too close to the Bradford Road on-ramp.

You meant the ramp from Madison Pike.  Bradford Drive is the next exit north.

This widening project has been needed for a while.  I have had to use AL 255 (or Rideout Rd) between I-565 and US 72 many times over the years and it can be a pain.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: I-55 on April 11, 2021, 07:49:41 PM
Quote from: jdb1234 on April 11, 2021, 01:12:49 PM
Quote from: formulanone on April 11, 2021, 10:23:54 AM
Quote from: Georgia on April 06, 2021, 11:47:21 PM
Quote from: I-55 on April 06, 2021, 11:33:56 PM
Was looking around on Google maps satellite and noticed significant road work in the median of AL-255 (Research Park Blvd) in Huntsville. The work zone stretches from I-565 to US-72. It appears to be a widening project. Can anyone confirm this?

yep, it is a widening project.

https://www.huntsvilleal.gov/roadworkprojects/research-park-boulevard-sr-255-between-university-drive-u-s-72-and-old-madison-pike/

It backs up tremendously in the Mornings at Gate 9 for the Redstone Arsenal:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/5693/31170964072_e6b76243a1_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/PutkD3)

Unfortunately, it won't take care of that goofy ramp to westbound I-565, which was pinned too close to the Bradford Road on-ramp.

You meant the ramp from Madison Pike.  Bradford Drive is the next exit north.

This widening project has been needed for a while.  I have had to use AL 255 (or Rideout Rd) between I-565 and US 72 many times over the years and it can be a pain.

Are those backups the reason Gate 9 got moved further south or was it the development of the Redstone Gateway area?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jdb1234 on April 12, 2021, 08:47:14 AM
Quote from: I-55 on April 11, 2021, 07:49:41 PM
Quote from: jdb1234 on April 11, 2021, 01:12:49 PM
Quote from: formulanone on April 11, 2021, 10:23:54 AM
Quote from: Georgia on April 06, 2021, 11:47:21 PM
Quote from: I-55 on April 06, 2021, 11:33:56 PM
Was looking around on Google maps satellite and noticed significant road work in the median of AL-255 (Research Park Blvd) in Huntsville. The work zone stretches from I-565 to US-72. It appears to be a widening project. Can anyone confirm this?

yep, it is a widening project.

https://www.huntsvilleal.gov/roadworkprojects/research-park-boulevard-sr-255-between-university-drive-u-s-72-and-old-madison-pike/

It backs up tremendously in the Mornings at Gate 9 for the Redstone Arsenal:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/5693/31170964072_e6b76243a1_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/PutkD3)

Unfortunately, it won't take care of that goofy ramp to westbound I-565, which was pinned too close to the Bradford Road on-ramp.

You meant the ramp from Madison Pike.  Bradford Drive is the next exit north.

This widening project has been needed for a while.  I have had to use AL 255 (or Rideout Rd) between I-565 and US 72 many times over the years and it can be a pain.

Are those backups the reason Gate 9 got moved further south or was it the development of the Redstone Gateway area?

I am pretty sure it was the development of the Redstone Gateway area.  Gate 9 was the only 24/7 open gate into Redstone Arsenal at one point.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on April 20, 2021, 10:14:28 PM
Has anyone else had issues getting to ALDOT's website lately?  I've tried on multiple devices with multiple browsers and had no luck for a number of weeks now.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on April 22, 2021, 07:56:11 PM
Quote from: froggie on April 20, 2021, 10:14:28 PM
Has anyone else had issues getting to ALDOT's website lately?  I've tried on multiple devices with multiple browsers and had no luck for a number of weeks now.
ALDOT's website was recently modernized (long overdue!), and as of right now the site is working properly most of the time, they've fixed most of the bugs that were occurring on mobile browsers but there are a couple minor bugs that still have to be ironed out. Some old links may have to be updated as they are on new pages in the new website.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on April 26, 2021, 12:15:00 AM
It seems to be a problem with my ISP.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jdb1234 on May 04, 2021, 10:40:07 AM
I took a daytrip to Harvest, AL last week, a part of the Huntsville area I had not visited before.  A few notes:

I-65 can be chore to drive north of Birmingham.  I could not tell if it was because of the traffic or the left lane hogs (or both).

I-565 is being 6-laned from I-65 to County Line Road in Madison.  It did not look like it will be finished anytime soon though.

A loop ramp has been added at Exit 3 (Greenbriar Rd.).  I assume that is for the new Toyota-Mazda plant.

The new exit to Town Madison Blvd on I-565 has been opened.  Traffic can only enter or exit eastbound.  A westbound exit is on the drawing board.  The new exit is Exit 10.

I, yet again, nearly missed the ramp to I-565 west from AL 255 south on my back home.

I will be back in the Huntsville area again Friday. 

Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on May 13, 2021, 03:46:19 PM
Quote from: jdb1234 on May 04, 2021, 10:40:07 AM
I took a daytrip to Harvest, AL last week, a part of the Huntsville area I had not visited before.  A few notes:

I-65 can be chore to drive north of Birmingham.  I could not tell if it was because of the traffic or the left lane hogs (or both).

I-565 is being 6-laned from I-65 to County Line Road in Madison.  It did not look like it will be finished anytime soon though.

A loop ramp has been added at Exit 3 (Greenbriar Rd.).  I assume that is for the new Toyota-Mazda plant.

The new exit to Town Madison Blvd on I-565 has been opened.  Traffic can only enter or exit eastbound.  A westbound exit is on the drawing board.  The new exit is Exit 10.

I, yet again, nearly missed the ramp to I-565 west from AL 255 south on my back home.

I will be back in the Huntsville area again Friday. 



ALDOT at least has plans for a 2024 letting of widening the remainder of I-565 between County Line Road/Madison Blvd and Wall-Triana Blvd. That will be nice. Now if they would focus on widening I-65 between Birmingham and Montgomery and between Birmingham and I-565.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on May 27, 2021, 03:38:50 AM
A section of AL 117 that's on Google Maps' preferred route between ATL and Huntsville has been closed by the threat of a landslide.  It's possible to bypass the closure via CR's 89 and 604.
https://www.waaytv.com/content/news/Landslide-forces-closure-of-roadway-in-DeKalb-County-574114911.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jdb1234 on May 27, 2021, 01:49:39 PM
Quote from: Tom958 on May 27, 2021, 03:38:50 AM
A section of AL 117 that's on Google Maps' preferred route between ATL and Huntsville has been closed by the threat of a landslide.  It's possible to bypass the closure via CR's 89 and 604.
https://www.waaytv.com/content/news/Landslide-forces-closure-of-roadway-in-DeKalb-County-574114911.html

I noticed that when I was in Fort Payne a month ago that AL 117 was closed with detour signs posted.
On another note, when I was in Fort Payne, I-59 through town was undergoing reconstruction and was down to one lane each way with traffic using the southbound lanes.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on May 28, 2021, 09:46:33 PM
Work has officially begun on the US-82 widening on the 2-lane section in Prattville between SR-14 and US-31. I went through there today and some of the roadwork signs have been erected and they have begun clearing out trees around Autauga Creek near the entrance to the International Paper plant. Newell Roadbuilders out of Hope Hull is the general contractor for this Rebuild Alabama project; they have done other similar jobs across the state as well such as the eastern half of the US-84 Elba Bypass (which they feature on their Facebook page). When complete, the Prattville bypass will become a full four-lane divided roadway, and the existing bridges at the Autauga Northern RR and Autauga Creek will be replaced, and a pair of new bridges will be built to the north of the existing bridges to carry the westbound lanes. The existing two-lane roadway will become the eastbound lanes (similar to the previous 82 widening project to the west of this current project completed a few years ago).
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: VTGoose on May 31, 2021, 03:19:44 PM
Quote from: jdb1234 on May 27, 2021, 01:49:39 PM
I noticed that when I was in Fort Payne a month ago that AL 117 was closed with detour signs posted.
On another note, when I was in Fort Payne, I-59 through town was undergoing reconstruction and was down to one lane each way with traffic using the southbound lanes.

And not a moment too soon -- the pavement was in pretty poor shape, more potholes with some asphalt between them than the other way around. It looked like they were taking the road down to start over with a new subgrade.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on July 03, 2021, 04:21:41 PM
Last Saturday I stopped at the new AL 117 arch bridge in Mentone. I want to post about this in Bridges, but so far Imgur's let me upload only these two photos. Maybe I'll try for more later.


This is from the southeast end of the bridge. As you can see, the old 1928 bridge and part of the old highway were retained for bike-ped use. If you go there yourself, park on the other side of the bridge. I relocated shortly after taking this because I was parked on the bike path. There's a better spot on the other side.

(https://i.imgur.com/iTAfclh.jpg)


The new bridge is almost all precast, trucked in and erected with cranes- - there's a two-minute video on Facebook (https://fb.watch/6nxEs2P7rk/). The arches were in two pieces, with a closure pour between. Even knowing they were there, I was unable to see the limits of the closure pours in the field due to the excellent workmanship. Hats off to everyone involved!  :clap:

(https://i.imgur.com/HsXbvSs.jpg)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on August 06, 2021, 08:37:10 PM
Spotted an article on I14 this week. Not holding my breath to see any of this around here in my lifetime.

https://www.al.com/politics/2021/08/plans-for-alabamas-newest-interstate-i-14-progress-in-us-senate.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on August 06, 2021, 09:40:08 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on August 06, 2021, 08:37:10 PM
Spotted an article on I14 this week. Not holding my breath to see any of this around here in my lifetime.

https://www.al.com/politics/2021/08/plans-for-alabamas-newest-interstate-i-14-progress-in-us-senate.html

I could see a good deal of the US 80 corridor from I-59/20 to I-65 getting built, a lot of the ROW is available and it's already four lanes across. Selma would need a bypass or some kind.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on August 06, 2021, 11:12:32 PM
^ Not just Selma, but Demopolis and Uniontown as well.  And no, very little of the ROW is "available".  As far as Alabama is concerned, this is basically "I-85 South" in a repackaged format.  Environmental and location studies for that project between Meridian and Montgomery already demonstrated that the vast majority of the route would have to be on new location.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on August 08, 2021, 02:36:36 PM
Quote from: froggie on August 06, 2021, 11:12:32 PM
^ Not just Selma, but Demopolis and Uniontown as well.  And no, very little of the ROW is "available".  As far as Alabama is concerned, this is basically "I-85 South" in a repackaged format.  Environmental and location studies for that project between Meridian and Montgomery already demonstrated that the vast majority of the route would have to be on new location.


Yeah, half of Uniontown would be demolished if not bypassed (or just dodged somewhat). US 80 sort of already bypasses much of Demopolis, but there's still businesses along it.

Personally, I don't think the traffic counts warrant an "upgrade" to controlled access, but if I-14 becomes signed into reality, I don't foresee any other corridor working out.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on August 08, 2021, 07:46:41 PM
Quote from: formulanone on August 08, 2021, 02:36:36 PM
Quote from: froggie on August 06, 2021, 11:12:32 PM
^ Not just Selma, but Demopolis and Uniontown as well.  And no, very little of the ROW is "available".  As far as Alabama is concerned, this is basically "I-85 South" in a repackaged format.  Environmental and location studies for that project between Meridian and Montgomery already demonstrated that the vast majority of the route would have to be on new location.


Yeah, half of Uniontown would be demolished if not bypassed (or just dodged somewhat). US 80 sort of already bypasses much of Demopolis, but there's still businesses along it.

Personally, I don't think the traffic counts warrant an "upgrade" to controlled access, but if I-14 becomes signed into reality, I don't foresee any other corridor working out.

Just because the corridor is written into law doesn't mean money for it will also appear to build it.

I don't see Alabama rushing to build this when there are more pressing needs throughout the state. IMO, the I-10 Mobile River bridge and bayway and widening I-65 across the state should be at the top of the list. I-65 is a death trap here. 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tomahawkin on August 08, 2021, 08:49:01 PM
Yeah, 65 Sucks in the spring and summer because of the Florida traffic. IMO 65 Should be a total of 6 lanes throughout the state, because it's a hurricane evacuation route. The bridge over the mobile river and the following viaduct north of that both need to be renovated or rebuilt? Those bridges are old as dirt! It doesn't cripple a 3 lane road in case of an accident in thr middle of nowhere as opposed to one with 2 lanes where often times the road gets shutdown for over an hour...75 throughout Georgia is 3 lanes in both directions and gets crazy conjested every weekend...That drive sucks!
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: sparker on August 09, 2021, 04:05:26 AM
Quote from: froggie on August 06, 2021, 11:12:32 PM
^ Not just Selma, but Demopolis and Uniontown as well.  And no, very little of the ROW is "available".  As far as Alabama is concerned, this is basically "I-85 South" in a repackaged format.  Environmental and location studies for that project between Meridian and Montgomery already demonstrated that the vast majority of the route would have to be on new location.


Having traveled on that section of US 80 several times, the only section that might be readily included in an Interstate-grade corridor is the Tombigbee River Bridge (Tenn-Tom navigable waterway) and approaches; the remainder is largely conventional 4-lane rural highway with private access.  Either heroic construction (TX-style with continuous frontages) or new-terrain alignment will be required -- the expense of which likely sunk the previous I-85 extension proposal. 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on August 09, 2021, 07:10:28 AM
Quote from: sparker on August 09, 2021, 04:05:26 AM
Quote from: froggie on August 06, 2021, 11:12:32 PM
^ Not just Selma, but Demopolis and Uniontown as well.  And no, very little of the ROW is "available".  As far as Alabama is concerned, this is basically "I-85 South" in a repackaged format.  Environmental and location studies for that project between Meridian and Montgomery already demonstrated that the vast majority of the route would have to be on new location.


Having traveled on that section of US 80 several times, the only section that might be readily included in an Interstate-grade corridor is the Tombigbee River Bridge (Tenn-Tom navigable waterway) and approaches; the remainder is largely conventional 4-lane rural highway with private access.  Either heroic construction (TX-style with continuous frontages) or new-terrain alignment will be required -- the expense of which likely sunk the previous I-85 extension proposal. 

I am not entirely sure what sunk the previous I-85 extension proposal, but I am sure cost was a big factor. I would guess that since most of the route is four-lanes, ALDOT opted to not pursue this further. I would at least consider building limited-access bypasses around the towns as a start, but I stand by my previous comment that this shouldn't be the state's top priority.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rlb2024 on August 10, 2021, 03:57:35 PM
Quote from: Tomahawkin on August 08, 2021, 08:49:01 PM
Yeah, 65 Sucks in the spring and summer because of the Florida traffic. IMO 65 Should be a total of 6 lanes throughout the state, because it's a hurricane evacuation route. The bridge over the mobile river and the following viaduct north of that both need to be renovated or rebuilt? Those bridges are old as dirt! It doesn't cripple a 3 lane road in case of an accident in thr middle of nowhere as opposed to one with 2 lanes where often times the road gets shutdown for over an hour...75 throughout Georgia is 3 lanes in both directions and gets crazy conjested every weekend ...That drive sucks!
The bridges over the Mobile River are actually not that old -- late 70s/early 80s or so.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rcm195 on August 12, 2021, 11:56:00 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on August 09, 2021, 07:10:28 AM
Quote from: sparker on August 09, 2021, 04:05:26 AM
Quote from: froggie on August 06, 2021, 11:12:32 PM
^ Not just Selma, but Demopolis and Uniontown as well.  And no, very little of the ROW is "available".  As far as Alabama is concerned, this is basically "I-85 South" in a repackaged format.  Environmental and location studies for that project between Meridian and Montgomery already demonstrated that the vast majority of the route would have to be on new location.


Having traveled on that section of US 80 several times, the only section that might be readily included in an Interstate-grade corridor is the Tombigbee River Bridge (Tenn-Tom navigable waterway) and approaches; the remainder is largely conventional 4-lane rural highway with private access.  Either heroic construction (TX-style with continuous frontages) or new-terrain alignment will be required -- the expense of which likely sunk the previous I-85 extension proposal. 

I am not entirely sure what sunk the previous I-85 extension proposal, but I am sure cost was a big factor. I would guess that since most of the route is four-lanes, ALDOT opted to not pursue this further. I would at least consider building limited-access bypasses around the towns as a start, but I stand by my previous comment that this shouldn't be the state's top priority.
I must agree with you here. It shouldn't be the state's top priority. Sadly, this whole region is depressed and an Interstate would help, it's just there are more pressing needs at this time.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on October 12, 2021, 10:08:27 PM
I drove over to Hamilton this past Friday and on I-22 at exit 39 the Natural Bridge and Eldridge have been covered with plates that have Haleyville and Tuscaloosa.
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.950805,-87.6099546,3a,75y,314.95h,97.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sk7RtM5QJqUQ3mbxhUfzeGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.950805,-87.6099546,3a,75y,314.95h,97.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sk7RtM5QJqUQ3mbxhUfzeGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on October 13, 2021, 07:22:46 AM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on October 12, 2021, 10:08:27 PM
I drove over to Hamilton this past Friday and on I-22 at exit 39 the Natural Bridge and Eldridge have been covered with plates that have Haleyville and Tuscaloosa.
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.950805,-87.6099546,3a,75y,314.95h,97.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sk7RtM5QJqUQ3mbxhUfzeGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.950805,-87.6099546,3a,75y,314.95h,97.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sk7RtM5QJqUQ3mbxhUfzeGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

Those honestly make more sense for that interchange, with Eldridge and Natural Bridge getting supplemental signage.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rcm195 on October 14, 2021, 11:38:34 PM
May I ask, with respects to exit 39 on I-22, is the changes on both the East and west side of the interchange or just one side?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on October 15, 2021, 08:34:22 PM
Both sides.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on October 20, 2021, 09:49:47 PM
Now, if the distance signs along I-22 could only refer to logical locations like Birmingham, Tupelo and Memphis...
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rcm195 on October 29, 2021, 05:25:27 PM
Agreed. To my knowledge, the first distance sign with Birmingham is not until you reach Carbon Hill.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on November 08, 2021, 10:41:48 AM
ALDOT has public commentary underway for the Linden Bypass, which will form what I assume is the four-lane upgrade of US 43 between Tuscaloosa and Thomasville. Interestingly enough, if you go to the Project Map section, it shows bypasses and upgrades to AL 69 between Moundville and Linden, which tells me that ALDOT eventually intends to relocate US 43 between Tuscaloosa and Linden onto AL 69.

https://volkert.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=d57d4c6975ab4eaabed29f86ec915db4
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on November 08, 2021, 11:25:46 AM
I suspect what they'll do is use that extension of AL 69 South over to the bypass as the connecting piece for both US 43 and AL 69.  Bypass south of that connection is US 43 and bypass north of that connection is AL 69.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on November 08, 2021, 06:35:17 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on November 08, 2021, 10:41:48 AM
ALDOT has public commentary underway for the Linden Bypass, which will form what I assume is the four-lane upgrade of US 43 between Tuscaloosa and Thomasville. Interestingly enough, if you go to the Project Map section, it shows bypasses and upgrades to AL 69 between Moundville and Linden, which tells me that ALDOT eventually intends to relocate US 43 between Tuscaloosa and Linden onto AL 69.

https://volkert.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=d57d4c6975ab4eaabed29f86ec915db4
There is also a bypass planned of Greensboro to the west and a realignment around US-80 so that SR-69 no longer has that weird concurrency with US-80 for about a half mile. I am not sure if there will be a interchange built where US-80 intersects SR-69 by Prairieville (which is where the realignment south of US-80 will tie into). Moundville's bypass will be going around the east side, this was supposed to be built back in the 2000's at the conclusion of the last 4-lane project north of Moundville but there was no funding until now. Another corridor that is planned to be built is a new 4-lane from Fayette to I-22, there's still no news on where it will go. I personally would like to see SR-13 4-laned from Tuscaloosa to Spruce Pine, and now with the new federal infrastructure funding passed it could possibly happen with or without Rebuild Alabama funds.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: cbalducc on November 08, 2021, 07:47:17 PM
What is that unfinished Highway going southeast out of Spruce Pine?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on November 08, 2021, 08:40:11 PM
Quote from: cbalducc on November 08, 2021, 07:47:17 PM
What is that unfinished Highway going southeast out of Spruce Pine?

I believe that's the new alignment for State Route 13. > https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=21151.0

Much of Alabama 13 is a narrow, winding two-lane route that would difficult to widen.

Here's a drone flyover of the unfinished bridges and current state of those alignments:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0utJ5yVZVCA
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on November 08, 2021, 08:53:29 PM
Quote from: asdfjkll on November 08, 2021, 06:35:17 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on November 08, 2021, 10:41:48 AM
ALDOT has public commentary underway for the Linden Bypass, which will form what I assume is the four-lane upgrade of US 43 between Tuscaloosa and Thomasville. Interestingly enough, if you go to the Project Map section, it shows bypasses and upgrades to AL 69 between Moundville and Linden, which tells me that ALDOT eventually intends to relocate US 43 between Tuscaloosa and Linden onto AL 69.

https://volkert.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=d57d4c6975ab4eaabed29f86ec915db4
There is also a bypass planned of Greensboro to the west and a realignment around US-80 so that SR-69 no longer has that weird concurrency with US-80 for about a half mile. I am not sure if there will be an interchange built where US-80 intersects SR-69 by Prairieville (which is where the realignment south of US-80 will tie into). Moundville's bypass will be going around the east side, this was supposed to be built back in the 2000s at the conclusion of the last 4-lane project north of Moundville but there was no funding until now.

The idea of improving AL 69 into part of the primary route between Mobile and Tuscaloosa bothers me. We had some discussion in another forum of Governor Ivey's announcement of the intent to four-lane US 43 and, while I see it as having such a low priority as to ensure it'll never happen, if it did, I'd expect it to pass through the larger town of Demopolis and to enter the Tuscaloosa area via I-59-20, which would also require less widening mileage.

However, the scheme to upgrade AL 69 would make more sense if the idea was to minimize any need to four-lane the whole corridor by improving the performance of the relevant two-lane highways.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: cbalducc on November 09, 2021, 12:50:34 PM
Quote from: formulanone on November 08, 2021, 08:40:11 PM
Quote from: cbalducc on November 08, 2021, 07:47:17 PM
What is that unfinished Highway going southeast out of Spruce Pine?
Why has that gone unfinished?

I believe that's the new alignment for State Route 13. > https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=21151.0

Much of Alabama 13 is a narrow, winding two-lane route that would difficult to widen.

Here's a drone flyover of the unfinished bridges and current state of those alignments:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0utJ5yVZVCA
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on November 09, 2021, 01:27:11 PM
Quote from: cbalducc on November 08, 2021, 07:47:17 PM
Why has that gone unfinished?

No money; that bypass might serve 30,000 people and truck traffic.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: cbalducc on November 09, 2021, 03:49:43 PM
Quote from: formulanone on November 09, 2021, 01:27:11 PM
Quote from: cbalducc on November 08, 2021, 07:47:17 PM
Why has that gone unfinished?

No money; that bypass might serve 30,000 people and truck traffic.
Alabama has a habit of starting highway projects and then abandoning them. How do they fund highway construction?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: BamaZeus on November 11, 2021, 04:43:32 PM
Oops

https://whnt.com/news/huntsville/major-traffic-backup-on-i-565-detours-suggested/

(https://whnt.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2021/11/vlcsnap-2021-11-11-10h46m35s588.jpg?w=876&h=493&crop=1)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rcm195 on November 11, 2021, 10:59:42 PM
Quote from: BamaZeus on November 11, 2021, 04:43:32 PM
Oops

https://whnt.com/news/huntsville/major-traffic-backup-on-i-565-detours-suggested/

(https://whnt.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2021/11/vlcsnap-2021-11-11-10h46m35s588.jpg?w=876&h=493&crop=1)

Does, "˜Sorry, I didn't see the overhead sign', count?😂😂😂
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on November 29, 2021, 11:52:18 PM
Looks like ALDOT will be taking public comments soon for the rest of the proposed Thomasville-Tuscaloosa 4-lane corridor not covered in the Linden bypass scope/meetings. Just noticed today that the new highway was added to the public involvement meeting list at https://www.dot.state.al.us/news/publicinvolvement.html with the "Coming Soon" as the posted date.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on November 30, 2021, 09:33:25 AM
Quote from: cbalducc on November 09, 2021, 03:49:43 PM
Quote from: formulanone on November 09, 2021, 01:27:11 PM
Quote from: cbalducc on November 08, 2021, 07:47:17 PM
Why has that gone unfinished?

No money; that bypass might serve 30,000 people and truck traffic.
Alabama has a habit of starting highway projects and then abandoning them. How do they fund highway construction?

With some of the lowest gas taxes in the southeast, I'm not sure how...though it was bumped up a bit in 2019 (6 more cents/gallon) with 2 more cents each following year, as part of the Rebuild Alabama Act.

After driving through Haleyville and seeing so many closed/abandoned storefronts, I can't help but wonder if locals were concerned the bypass might have a negative impact on local businesses.

Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on December 08, 2021, 05:14:47 PM
H/t to codyg1985 for finding this article

https://www.westalabamawatchman.com/four-lane-project-boon-or-death-knell-for-demopolis/

about the mayor of Demopolis' shock and horror at the supposed US 43 widening actually bypassing Demopolis via AL 69. The article seems to imply that, while engineering studies concluded that the AL 69 route was cheaper, no economic comparison was made between the two corridors. My own first impulse was that it'd be very desirable to reinforce Demopolis as a service center for the area so people could avoid going to Meridian, Selma, or Tuscaloosa for certain needs, and the mayor of Demopolis certainly agrees with that. But is there any analytical evidence for it?

As it stands, the new corridor would cross US 80 near Prarieville, about seven miles from downtown Demopolis, far enough to make it prohibitively expensive to extend water and sewer to the area. However, it appears to me that the corridor could be moved about three miles closer, to Alfalfa, by running the new corridor along US 43 to the north end of the Old Spring Hill bypass, then building eight to twelve miles on new terrain to AL 69 north of Prarieville. This would put the new junction only barely outside the current Demopolis city limits. Something to think about, IMO.

Doing this would also require extending the Linden bypass to meet US 43 north of town instead of forcing US 43 traffic to use the old road through downtown. IMO, that should've been done anyway.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on December 08, 2021, 05:19:21 PM
I think it is a shame that they are going so far away from Demopolis since it seems to be one of the larger cities in the area. It won't do local folks within a 50 mile radius of Demopolis much good to use the new road if it doesn't take them to Demopolis.

This sort of reminds me of the issue with future I-57 in northeast Arkansas potentially completely bypassing Pocahontas. I am not sure a final decision has been made on that corridor yet.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on December 09, 2021, 05:36:04 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on December 08, 2021, 05:19:21 PM
I think it is a shame that they are going so far away from Demopolis since it seems to be one of the larger cities in the area. It won't do local folks within a 50 mile radius of Demopolis much good to use the new road if it doesn't take them to Demopolis.

My idea would make it easier to get to Demopolis from Greensboro and from Linden and points south. It wouldn't help Forkland or Eutaw, but it's not much further to Tuscaloosa from Eutaw, anyway. Nice job, Tom!  :clap:
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on December 12, 2021, 10:31:33 AM
West Alabama Highway Public Involvement map is up and running at https://gismapping.volkert.com/portal/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=0e3d1e3ecd23408ab29298515437cfba !

Some observations from when I looked at it this morning:
Bypasses around Dixons Mills, Moundville to the east, Greensboro to the west, built to dual carriageway standards w/ intersections similar to Linden bypass. Also, a deviation swinging to the northeast at Gallion so it intersects US-80 uninterrupted in a giant 4-way intersection (similar to the giant 4-way stop where US 278 meets SR 13 and SR 5 in Natural Bridge). There is also a railroad overpass planned at the existing at-grade railroad crossing with Norfolk Southern prior to the deviation split from the existing SR 69. I personally would have put the largest roundabout in state history here as an interim intersection to stop folks from getting T-boned if someone blows through the stop sign at 70+ mph. Note how the right of way flares off diagonally from the new 4-lane as it approaches US-80 on both sides, this probably suggests that there are provisions in place to install a diamond interchange in the future as traffic demand grows.

The rest of the road is your typical dual carriageway build with existing US 43 (SR 69 north of Linden) forming one of the two carriageways. Usually there are additional crossovers w/ turn lanes by themselves if there are no side streets for long lengths, but it doesn't show them in most instances on the current map. Also unlike the Linden Bypass ArcGIS map it does not show proposed traffic lane markings and legends.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on December 13, 2021, 09:53:23 PM
Quote from: asdfjkll on December 12, 2021, 10:31:33 AM
West Alabama Highway Public Involvement map is up and running at https://gismapping.volkert.com/portal/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=0e3d1e3ecd23408ab29298515437cfba !

Thanks!

QuoteSome observations from when I looked at it this morning:
Bypasses around Dixons Mills, Moundville to the east, Greensboro to the west, built to dual carriageway standards w/ intersections similar to Linden bypass. Also, a deviation swinging to the northeast at Gallion so it intersects US-80 uninterrupted in a giant 4-way intersection (similar to the giant 4-way stop where US 278 meets SR 13 and SR 5 in Natural Bridge). There is also a railroad overpass planned at the existing at-grade railroad crossing with Norfolk Southern prior to the deviation split from the existing SR 69. I personally would have put the largest roundabout in state history here as an interim intersection to stop folks from getting T-boned if someone blows through the stop sign at 70+ mph. Note how the right of way flares off diagonally from the new 4-lane as it approaches US-80 on both sides, this probably suggests that there are provisions in place to install a diamond interchange in the future as traffic demand grows.

I find it odd that the future interchange is oriented north-south. Unless I-85/14 gets built, surely east-west volumes will be greater. In the meantime, surely a traffic signal will be provided even if the warrant for it is marginal (the 2019 traffic volumes on US 80 are 7000ish to the west of Gallion and 5000ish to the east). I'd actually prefer a roundabout myself if I had more faith in the motoring public.

QuoteThe rest of the road is your typical dual carriageway build with existing US 43 (SR 69 north of Linden) forming one of the two carriageways. Usually there are additional crossovers w/ turn lanes by themselves if there are no side streets for long lengths, but it doesn't show them in most instances on the current map. Also unlike the Linden Bypass ArcGIS map it does not show proposed traffic lane markings and legends.

One of the things I like about Alabama highways is how dualized highways such as this one often have luxuriously wide medians and independent roadway profiles (though the new terrain sections are conservatively designed). I don't see anything but standard 54-foot medians here.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on December 16, 2021, 12:51:56 PM
Double post, days later. Sorry.

I've conducted a cursory examination of the entire corridor, and I have a few observations to make:

Aside from the few new-location segments, most of the corridor consists of a new roadway added a standard median width, likely 54 or 64 feet, away from the existing roadway. The two roadways swap sides a whopping nineteen times! I didn't see any place where the existing roadway was to be reconstructed to eliminate deficiencies in the profile (they do that a lot in Georgia lately, and it strikes me as a huge waste of money in most cases). It'll be interesting to see whether the new roadways will be clones of the old or whether they'll have noticeably smoother vertical alignments.

There are a few places where what I'd call an excessive number of building demolitions are proposed. The worst is just north of the Dixons Mills bypass. Twenty nine structures are marked for demolition; on Streetview, most appear to be well-kept middle class homes, hardly the kind of squalor that might invite the rural equivalent of urban renewal. I have to question why this was done rather than (expensively) extending the bypass for a couple more miles or (cheaply) reducing the cross section through the area. I dunno... maybe conversations with the affected people revealed that they'd prefer selling out to remaining. Or maybe ALDOT is just being lazy.

Actually, at the risk of short-circuiting my narrative, I suspect that ALDOT really doesn't want to do this project due to having other priorities, resents having to pull Governor Ivey's little red wagon on this, and is therefore being passive-aggressive by not putting enough effort into design and development. As it happens, I agree the project should be of extremely low priority, but that's no excuse for not doing a good job with the preliminary work. If that's what's happening. I could be wrong.

I'm already on record as thinking that the corridor should incorporate a ten-to-twelve-mile new terrain segment so it'd pass much closer to Demopolis. Doing this would likely shorten the route by a couple of miles. It pains me to think that the current scheme is largely driven by the simplicity of dualizing existing highways as much as possible.

Whether or not my new-terrain idea comes to pass, I think that the Linden bypass needs to connect to US 43 north of town so US 43 traffic wouldn't be forced to take the old road.

Most of the relatively few intersections are conventional in design, but there are a couple of places with RTOs and implied RCUTs. One of them is on the Greensboro bypass, with four RTOs and three median breaks.

Finally, while I've already expressed my admiration for the wide-median stretches found on many Alabama divided highways, that's not the only way to achieve some variety. In Georgia, after decades of relentlessly sticking with a uniform 44 foot median width on rural highways like this, recently GDOT has gone to 32 feet or even, in at least one case, a 24-foot curbed median. As lightly traveled as this corridor would be, I think this would be a good place to try a narrower median width, especially if it's balanced with greater widths in some areas for variety.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on December 29, 2021, 12:18:38 PM
More info on the "West Alabama Highway..."

It will be a design-build project, the first in ALDOT's history. They are going to solicit the entire 70 mile project as one design-build project (except for the Linden bypass). I find it interesting that they are going at this with one go. A couple of interesting tidbits from this PDF: (https://www.dot.state.al.us/business/pdf/PNAWestAlabamaHighway.pdf)

- The cost of the project, in full, is estimated to be approximately $775,000,000. Funding for this project is secured through state funds only. No federal funds are anticipated for the Project.
- Complete the Project on or before December 31, 2027.

I am honestly surprised they have money set aside for a project of this magnitude.

The RFQ is located here. (https://www.dot.state.al.us/business/pdf/WAH-RFQ.pdf%5B/url)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on December 29, 2021, 12:47:17 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on December 29, 2021, 12:18:38 PM
More info on the "West Alabama Highway..."

I am honestly surprised they have money set aside for a project of this magnitude.

None of this makes any sense. I swear, it's as though the whole of Alabama's government is pulling out all the stops to complete Governor Ivey's pet project before she dies. I don't understand how it's even possible, either politically or from a governmental procedure perspective.

A $775 million state contribution that assured completion of the new Mobile bridge by the end of 2027 would be startling. The same for a project that's utterly suited to phased construction is incomprehensible.

Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on December 29, 2021, 01:05:01 PM
I am just thinking of how the Mobile-Baldwin county folks feel about $775M going to this project instead of the I-10 Mobile River Bridge and Bayway project.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: The Ghostbuster on December 29, 2021, 02:18:53 PM
How many truly know about it outside of us roadgeeks? And do they really care?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on December 29, 2021, 02:30:37 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 29, 2021, 02:18:53 PM
How many truly know about it outside of us roadgeeks? And do they really care?

Word hasn't made it to Jim Ziegler's anti toll Facebook group yet...
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on December 30, 2021, 06:27:36 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on December 29, 2021, 02:30:37 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 29, 2021, 02:18:53 PM
How many truly know about it outside of us roadgeeks? And do they really care?

Word hasn't made it to Jim Ziegler's anti toll Facebook group yet...
Not sure why they dont know about it yet, they made the anti toll FB group private pretty recently for some odd reason. It would be nice though if more Rebuild Alabama money was put towards that new Mobile Bayway to help reduce the proposed tolls/tolling period.
In other news:
Google Streetview is updated to October/December 2021 on I-20/59 westbound through Tuscaloosa showing the completed 6-lanes between McFarland and Exit 77. The eastbound direction has not been updated since 2019, and satellite imagery has not been updated for the whole project since as far back as 2017 (for the east half of it). There is still some construction just west of McFarland to tie the new 6-lane section into the existing 6-lane section between I-359 and McFarland that has been 6-lanes since 359 was built. Pretty good shot of the new arch bridge over the McFarland SPUI at https://www.google.com/maps/@33.1716434,-87.5248049,3a,75y,251.97h,88.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYd1UPJlGKXNucZYsPADAdw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
January 28, 2022 letting project list is up on ALDOT letting website. Pretty much all resurfacing projects with the exception of the SR-185 project in Butler County in Greenville in the I-65 Exit 130 area. Not sure what they will be doing there but that particular exit is the busiest between Mobile and Montgomery in my opinion, especially during holiday/summer travel periods as all the beach-goers from Daulphin Island all the way to Destin are on I-65 by the time they go through Greenville. We'll see what they will do when the plans get posted online in a couple weeks.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadman65 on January 02, 2022, 06:08:44 PM
Why do US 90 and 98 split up at Spanish Fort?  At US 31's south end US 98 is not concurrent with US 90, despite signage.  US 98 uses a cut off-road on the SW part of that city, and US 90 rides solo through there.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 18, 2022, 09:20:18 AM
I have been working on a route plan for the Natchez, MS, Trip, and I noticed that the US 82 Gordo Bypass (I was specifically drawn to Gordo as a result of an elderly woman at church that passed away last week as Gordo was the name of her dog.)  according to the ALDOT website is supposed to be completed this year (https://www.dot.state.al.us/projects/wcregion/GordoBypass.html).

QuoteConstruction is expected to finish in 2022. The project will realign US-82 from west of Gordo to the Tuscaloosa County line and will include Bridge Replacement on Gordo City Dump Road over the tributary of Little Bear Creek.

The first phase of the project cost $46.8 million and is an 80/20 funding split. Eighty percent is paid by the federal government and 20 percent is paid by the state. The second phase is expected for bid in 2021.

However, that last sentence makes me hesitant to post it to the Travel Mapping forum because it makes me question its true status. 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on January 18, 2022, 09:34:47 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 18, 2022, 09:20:18 AM
I have been working on a route plan for the Natchez, MS, Trip, and I noticed that the US 82 Gordo Bypass (I was specifically drawn to Gordo as a result of an elderly woman at church that passed away last week as Gordo was the name of her dog.)  according to the ALDOT website is supposed to be completed this year (https://www.dot.state.al.us/projects/wcregion/GordoBypass.html).

QuoteConstruction is expected to finish in 2022. The project will realign US-82 from west of Gordo to the Tuscaloosa County line and will include Bridge Replacement on Gordo City Dump Road over the tributary of Little Bear Creek.

The first phase of the project cost $46.8 million and is an 80/20 funding split. Eighty percent is paid by the federal government and 20 percent is paid by the state. The second phase is expected for bid in 2021.

However, that last sentence makes me hesitant to post it to the Travel Mapping forum because it makes me question its true status. 

They never bid the base and pave portion of that project in 2021, so it will not be finished. It is scheduled for letting now in 2023 according to the latest STIP.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on January 18, 2022, 09:36:28 AM
I can't access the ALDOT website (a recurring problem for me, have no idea why), but my guess is that the phase "expected to finish in 2022" is the grading, drainage, and bridges, while the "second phase" would be the paving.  This is fairly common in both Mississippi and Alabama, where new alignment projects like this are broken down into two contracts, one for grading, the other for paving.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 18, 2022, 10:29:51 AM
Quote from: froggie on January 18, 2022, 09:36:28 AM
I can't access the ALDOT website (a recurring problem for me, have no idea why), but my guess is that the phase "expected to finish in 2022" is the grading, drainage, and bridges, while the "second phase" would be the paving.  This is fairly common in both Mississippi and Alabama, where new alignment projects like this are broken down into two contracts, one for grading, the other for paving.


That makes sense.  Up here in PA, the northern section of the CSVT was broken into similar contracts the same way.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on January 18, 2022, 10:29:57 AM
US 82 west of Gordo (headed westbound), last month...grading of the lanes are ready but to paving hasn't started.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51810302513_33e6eca490_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2mWikTP)

It's two lanes through Gordo, but four lanes though nearby Reform. There's an old US 82 sign hidden between those two towns...
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: wriddle082 on January 18, 2022, 12:32:25 PM
^
So this stretch of US 82 will be "Virginia twinned"  with the existing two lane alignment utilized as-is for one carriageway?

And if I'm not mistaken it's four lanes undivided through Reform, and I think it needs to be bypassed as well.  Last time I was on US 82 west of Tuscaloosa was nearly 4 years ago and some construction appeared to be ongoing on a bypass alignment somewhere.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on January 18, 2022, 01:08:21 PM
Quote from: wriddle082 on January 18, 2022, 12:32:25 PM
^
So this stretch of US 82 will be "Virginia twinned"  with the existing two lane alignment utilized as-is for one carriageway?

And if I'm not mistaken it's four lanes undivided through Reform, and I think it needs to be bypassed as well.  Last time I was on US 82 west of Tuscaloosa was nearly 4 years ago and some construction appeared to be ongoing on a bypass alignment somewhere.


You are correct in that it is five lanes through Reform. It is four lanes divided west of Reform to the Mississippi state line. That was finished in the late 2000s.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: cbalducc on January 18, 2022, 02:01:02 PM
I would have thought four-landing that Highway would be a priority with Mississippi State and Alabama as football rivals.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: wriddle082 on January 18, 2022, 05:53:09 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on January 18, 2022, 01:08:21 PM
Quote from: wriddle082 on January 18, 2022, 12:32:25 PM
^
So this stretch of US 82 will be "Virginia twinned"  with the existing two lane alignment utilized as-is for one carriageway?

And if I'm not mistaken it's four lanes undivided through Reform, and I think it needs to be bypassed as well.  Last time I was on US 82 west of Tuscaloosa was nearly 4 years ago and some construction appeared to be ongoing on a bypass alignment somewhere.


You are correct in that it is five lanes through Reform. It is four lanes divided west of Reform to the Mississippi state line. That was finished in the late 2000s.

I thought it felt newish when I crossed from MS into AL.  Before 2018 I had travelled it was in the mid-90's and I remember the two- to four-lane transition happening right at the state line, and it was the first time I had seen a small SPEED LIMIT 70 sign in MS.

Quote from: cbalducc on January 18, 2022, 02:01:02 PM
I would have thought four-landing that Highway would be a priority with Mississippi State and Alabama as football rivals.

I thought the same thing, and I believe Mississippi State University and the University of Alabama are the closest two SEC schools to one another at just over 80 miles.  But I guess Crimson Tide fans could care less if the cow bell ringers make it to the games on time or not.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: I-55 on January 19, 2022, 02:14:56 PM
The widened I-565 is now viewable on GSV from exit 7 to I-65 in the westbound direction.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on January 20, 2022, 10:10:39 AM
Brookside, AL has become the "quintessential speed trap town".  Beware if you're traveling through on I-22.

https://www.al.com/news/2022/01/police-in-this-tiny-alabama-town-suck-drivers-into-legal-black-hole.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2022, 12:55:22 AM
Yeah small towns like that should not be allowed to patrol interstates.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: milbfan on January 22, 2022, 12:11:28 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on January 18, 2022, 01:08:21 PM
Quote from: wriddle082 on January 18, 2022, 12:32:25 PM
^
So this stretch of US 82 will be "Virginia twinned"  with the existing two lane alignment utilized as-is for one carriageway?

And if I'm not mistaken it's four lanes undivided through Reform, and I think it needs to be bypassed as well.  Last time I was on US 82 west of Tuscaloosa was nearly 4 years ago and some construction appeared to be ongoing on a bypass alignment somewhere.




You are correct in that it is five lanes through Reform. It is four lanes divided west of Reform to the Mississippi state line. That was finished in the late 2000s.

By June 2007.  I went to a Super-Regional game at Starkville (from Tuscaloosa), and I was blown away that it was finally finished.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on January 22, 2022, 01:52:48 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2022, 12:55:22 AM
Yeah small towns like that should not be allowed to patrol interstates.

That's not the point. This is happening because of widespread corruption involving most or all of the city government and god knows who else. It's caused by criminals, not the size of the town, and the solution is to prosecute the criminals.

I wouldn't be surprised to discover that there are other small towns in Alabama that use their outside-the-city-limits policing authority responsibly. Why punish them for some other town's malfeasance?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 22, 2022, 02:49:37 PM
Quote from: Tom958 on January 22, 2022, 01:52:48 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2022, 12:55:22 AM
Yeah small towns like that should not be allowed to patrol interstates.

That's not the point. This is happening because of widespread corruption involving most or all of the city government and god knows who else. It's caused by criminals, not the size of the town, and the solution is to prosecute the criminals.

I wouldn't be surprised to discover that there are other small towns in Alabama that use their outside-the-city-limits policing authority responsibly. Why punish them for some other town's malfeasance?
No it's caused by police departments who use speeding laws to generate revenue. That is not the point behind laws against exceeding the speed limit.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on January 22, 2022, 05:14:18 PM
Quote from: Tom958 on January 22, 2022, 01:52:48 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2022, 12:55:22 AM
Yeah small towns like that should not be allowed to patrol interstates.

That's not the point. This is happening because of widespread corruption involving most or all of the city government and god knows who else. It's caused by criminals, not the size of the town, and the solution is to prosecute the criminals.

I wouldn't be surprised to discover that there are other small towns in Alabama that use their outside-the-city-limits policing authority responsibly. Why punish them for some other town's malfeasance?

I believe all jurisdictions in Alabama are permitted to patrol a two-mile window beyond their city/town borders, unless it infringes upon an city/town jurisdiction. If I-22 is in their backyard, they get the right to do so. But it's far enough from the actual town limits that it clearly has nothing to do with "public safety".

Honestly, there's not that much of it in most towns; Brookside is a notable exception. No town that small needs eight unmarked police cars and a surplus military vehicle. The problem is that the funds just keep feeding the policing machine to unhealthy proportions. 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on January 22, 2022, 11:03:13 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 22, 2022, 02:49:37 PM
No it's caused by police departments who use speeding laws to generate revenue. That is not the point behind laws against exceeding the speed limit.

I feel like this is a blanket statement you're making, which may be the case in other areas but is not the case here.  Alabama law prohibits smaller towns from writing speeding tickets on Interstate routes.  What Brookside is doing along I-22 is writing tickets for other traffic infractions, NOT speeding.

Quote from: formulanone on January 22, 2022, 05:14:18 PM
I believe all jurisdictions in Alabama are permitted to patrol a two-mile window beyond their city/town borders, unless it infringes upon an city/town jurisdiction.

1.5 miles or 3 miles, depending on which side of 6K population the jurisdiction has.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Georgia on January 26, 2022, 12:16:47 AM
Brookside writes a lot of passing lane violation tickets. 

I noticed on my drive from Mississippi to Atlanta that starting about exit 100 on 20/59 eastbound that ALDOT needs to do some serious work on signage.  Some of the signs are barely legible all the way through the Arkadelphia exit.

Gordo bypass intersection with 159 needs built also, looked like 82 was meant to go over it but there has been no real prep work started on it. 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on January 26, 2022, 02:28:43 PM
Related to Brookside:

https://www.wbrc.com/2022/01/25/brookside-police-chief-resigns/
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: clong on January 26, 2022, 03:17:27 PM
Quote from: ttownfeen on December 29, 2020, 06:45:47 PM
Quote from: Tomahawkin on October 24, 2020, 09:42:51 PM
Im really suprised that QT has not expanded into Alabama, especially the Anniston area? A lot of people who live there, work in the Atlanta area. They choose so because houses are a hell of a lot cheaper West of Villa Rica and there is less traffic to an extent...

A QT is opening up in Tuscaloosa at Exit 77 (Buttermilk Rd) next year.

https://www.tuscaloosanews.com/news/20200128/tuscaloosa-leaders-clear-way-for-quiktrip-to-begin-construction

Got an update last week that the QT in Tuscaloosa is scheduled to open on 2/17.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on January 29, 2022, 11:10:39 AM
Quote from: Georgia on January 26, 2022, 12:16:47 AM

Gordo bypass intersection with 159 needs built also, looked like 82 was meant to go over it but there has been no real prep work started on it. 
It would have been nice if the 82/159 intersection would have been grade separated but it isn't going to be.. I believe it's going to be done like the 82/219 intersection in Centreville with no direct crossing for 159 and U-turn lanes.
The Gordo leaders should have started pushing for the grade separation years ago when the northern route was first chosen but didn't start talking about it until it was being built. I think it was too late at that point for plans to be changed.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on January 29, 2022, 04:50:14 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on January 29, 2022, 11:10:39 AM
Quote from: Georgia on January 26, 2022, 12:16:47 AM

Gordo bypass intersection with 159 needs built also, looked like 82 was meant to go over it but there has been no real prep work started on it. 
It would have been nice if the 82/159 intersection would have been grade separated but it isn't going to be.. I believe it's going to be done like the 82/219 intersection in Centreville with no direct crossing for 159 and U-turn lanes.
The Gordo leaders should have started pushing for the grade separation years ago when the northern route was first chosen but didn't start talking about it until it was being built. I think it was too late at that point for plans to be changed.
The Gordo Bypass/SR159 is indeed going to be at-grade, but as ya'll have mentioned they haven't started building it yet. If it doesn't get done in the grade/drain/bridge job it'll be done in the base/pave job that is coming up. The AADT for SR159 in the vincinity of the Gordo bypass is like 2/3'rds that of the road south of the Centreville 82/219 RCUT (2.4k immediately north of Gordo bypass compared to 4k south of Centreville RCUT and 1.2k north of Centreville RCUT), south of Gordo bypass its like 3.4k but some of that 3.4k will be redirected onto the bypass when it opens. With that being said, traffic volumes are way too low to warrant there being a grade separation there, if any grade separated interchanges are going to be built in that area of the county it'll probably be in the form of a brand new freeway between Tuscaloosa and Columbus (MS), but I'll leave that for a fictional highway thread later on.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on February 26, 2022, 09:04:14 AM
Two giant juicy projects coming in the March 25th Letting:

-The next phase of the Ross Clark Circle expansion from Meadowbrook Drive to North Cherokee Avenue is up for bids. This project will make the loop between 84 west and 231 north 6 lanes (3 in each direction), and the Circle will have 6 lanes from Fortner Street from North Cheokee Avenue once this and the previous expansion project are complete. It also calls for additional lanes on US231 at its intersection with Ross Clark Circle near the Wiregrass Mall.

-The first phase of the West Alabama Highway 4-lane program in Linden is up for bid. It'll create the southern half of the Linden bypass from 1.14 miles south of the southern SR-69 intersection on 43 and SR-28 east of town. The interesting thing about this bypass is that it will be signed as SR-303, instead of rerouting SR-69 onto the bypass. It makes sense that this section was let first as this re-uses the previous Linden bypass project plans and the GIS parcel map already showing the state owning the right of way for this section. The north half of the bypass had to be redone as the previous plans called it to re-join US-43 northwest of Chickasaw State Park, not SR-69 northeast of Providence. Unlike most new alignment projects, each of the two Linden Bypass sections will be built on one single contract instead of splitting up the earthwork/bridges and the paving into separate contracts. The north half of the bypass will be bid out at a later date. The design build sections of the West Alabama Highway will probably each get their own dedicated special letting as these are significant projects funding wise (both combined are almost $750-$800 million). Plans will be posted on alletting within a week or two.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on February 26, 2022, 10:01:42 AM
Quote from: asdfjkll on February 26, 2022, 09:04:14 AM
The north half of the bypass had to be redone as the previous plans called it to re-join US-43 northwest of Chickasaw State Park, not SR-69 northeast of Providence.

Ridiculous. The bypass should still serve traffic headed through Demopolis even if the corridor itself doesn't. Currently, traffic counts (https://aldotgis.dot.state.al.us/TDMPublic/) on US 43 north of Linden are 3500ish, compared to a third of that on AL 69, even though Google Maps routes Thomasville-Tuscaloosa traffic onto AL 69 (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Thomasville,+AL/Tuscaloosa,+AL/@32.5244681,-88.2804205,9.26z/data=!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x888543a11b79985b:0x81b4046446a6f5ff!2m2!1d-87.7358366!2d31.9134859!1m5!1m1!1s0x8888af2e91c24067:0xacabfbfd16892b58!2m2!1d-87.5691735!2d33.2098407!3e0).

Then again, this whole project is ridiculous for a state that can't figure out how to build an adequate crossing of Mobile Bay.   
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on February 27, 2022, 01:00:48 PM
Interesting that the Linden bypass includes both pavement and grading. Usually ALDOT does those in separate lettings. They really are fast tracking that project.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: HemiCRZ on February 28, 2022, 02:52:01 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on February 27, 2022, 01:00:48 PM
Interesting that the Linden bypass includes both pavement and grading. Usually ALDOT does those in separate lettings. They really are fast tracking that project.

If I'm not mistaken, this is a Kay Ivey pet project. That would explain the rush to get it done.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on March 01, 2022, 12:03:19 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on February 27, 2022, 01:00:48 PM
Interesting that the Linden bypass includes both pavement and grading. Usually ALDOT does those in separate lettings. They really are fast tracking that project.
I actually prefer that paving, grading, and bridges on each new road segment should be done in one contract instead of splitting it out into multiple projects. The original Linden bypass project had separate earthwork/bridge and paving phases, and a completely separate phase for the connector linking SR-69 south to the bypass, which are now combined into two separate full-construction contracts on the current iteration. It cuts down on construction time, unnecessary delays, and avoids issues like the SR-13 deviation at Phil Campbell where earthwork and bridges have been done for 10+ years but no paving has been done or is planned. Florida also does new alignment road construction in one contract, regardless on whether it is a toll road or not. Single contract road construction for new alignments and bypasses should be made the standard not just for Alabama but also for Mississippi and Tennessee. The US-82 Gordo Bypass would've been open a year or two ago if the earthwork, bridges, and paving were combined into one single contract when it was let back in 2017.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on March 16, 2022, 09:04:54 AM
Another project has popped up on the Design-Built website for ALDOT. This one is a four-lane highway between Fayette and I-22 north of Winfield. It utilizes US 43/AL 171 to south of Winfield, and then a new alignment to the AL 118/AL 129 intersection, and then AL 129 to I-22.

https://www.dot.state.al.us/business/DesignBuild.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: STLmapboy on March 23, 2022, 12:50:30 PM
Drove through Alabama recently on my way from St. Louis to Seaside, FL. A couple things:

US 31 between Hope Hull and AL-97 was incredibly crowded for a two-lane road on a Sunday afternoon. Now, it may have just been spring break traffic, but has ALDOT considered widening this stretch of 31 at all?

US 331 was not as crowded but still seemed like it could've used some four-laning beyond the Luverne-Brantley stretch, the Opp bypass, and the part from Montgomery to AL-94. The occasional passing lanes are helpful at least (and something I didn't see on 31).

North of Opp on 331 is a bridge that's out for reconstruction. On the signed detour (AL-141 to US-84), AL-9 (a hidden route) is signed as well. Just thought that was notable.

The pavement on I-65 north and south of Birmingham is quite nice asphalt (I particularly liked the widened section between 459 and Alabaster). In between 459 and 20/59, however, it turns to concrete, some of which is quite rough. Are there any projects planned for this portion of 65?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: clong on March 25, 2022, 07:40:07 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on March 23, 2022, 12:50:30 PM
Drove through Alabama recently on my way from St. Louis to Seaside, FL. A couple things:

US 31 between Hope Hull and AL-97 was incredibly crowded for a two-lane road on a Sunday afternoon. Now, it may have just been spring break traffic, but has ALDOT considered widening this stretch of 31 at all?

US 331 was not as crowded but still seemed like it could've used some four-laning beyond the Luverne-Brantley stretch, the Opp bypass, and the part from Montgomery to AL-94. The occasional passing lanes are helpful at least (and something I didn't see on 31).

North of Opp on 331 is a bridge that's out for reconstruction. On the signed detour (AL-141 to US-84), AL-9 (a hidden route) is signed as well. Just thought that was notable.

The pavement on I-65 north and south of Birmingham is quite nice asphalt (I particularly liked the widened section between 459 and Alabaster). In between 459 and 20/59, however, it turns to concrete, some of which is quite rough. Are there any projects planned for this portion of 65?

I don't know of any plans to widen 31 in that area.

I-65 is eventually planned to have an HOV lane inside 459. I would guess the concrete would all be repaired/replaced whenever that project happens - but it is probably a decade away. Just repair as absolutely needed until then would be my guess.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on March 27, 2022, 01:50:39 AM
Quote from: clong on March 25, 2022, 07:40:07 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on March 23, 2022, 12:50:30 PM
Drove through Alabama recently on my way from St. Louis to Seaside, FL. A couple things:

US 31 between Hope Hull and AL-97 was incredibly crowded for a two-lane road on a Sunday afternoon. Now, it may have just been spring break traffic, but has ALDOT considered widening this stretch of 31 at all?

US 331 was not as crowded but still seemed like it could've used some four-laning beyond the Luverne-Brantley stretch, the Opp bypass, and the part from Montgomery to AL-94. The occasional passing lanes are helpful at least (and something I didn't see on 31).

North of Opp on 331 is a bridge that's out for reconstruction. On the signed detour (AL-141 to US-84), AL-9 (a hidden route) is signed as well. Just thought that was notable.

The pavement on I-65 north and south of Birmingham is quite nice asphalt (I particularly liked the widened section between 459 and Alabaster). In between 459 and 20/59, however, it turns to concrete, some of which is quite rough. Are there any projects planned for this portion of 65?

I don't know of any plans to widen 31 in that area.

I-65 is eventually planned to have an HOV lane inside 459. I would guess the concrete would all be repaired/replaced whenever that project happens - but it is probably a decade away. Just repair as absolutely needed until then would be my guess.
If I-65 is getting any sort of HOV or express lane inside the 459 loop it should be built with 2 lanes in each direction with no exits other than the southern terminus (I-459 interchange) and the northern terminus (I-22 interchange area), that way folks heading to/from Montgomery and the beaches down south, and people going between the northern and southern suburbs can bypass rush hour traffic. The way Birmingham is structured and developed makes it difficult to make a decent north/south bypass loop that has similar distance between both ends unlike I-459, so these new "express" lanes would pretty much function similar to one for thru traffic without having to demolish thousands of homes as it could be built mostly within the existing ROW of I-65.

Now regarding the last letting: The Linden Bypass south half came in within the bracket for both accepted bids. W.S. Newell and Sons out of Montgomery, Alabama was the lowest bidder with a $55.7 million bid. The other bidder accepted by ALDOT was W. G. Yates & Sons Construction Company out of Philadelphia, Mississippi with a $58.7 million bid. The bracket, for comparison, was $49.1 million to $60.2 million. The contract should be awarded to the lowest bidder within the next 1-2 months with construction starting shortly afterwards. The north half of the Linden Bypass will be let at a later date.

Public involvement is open for the I-59 expansion from I-459's northern terminus to Chalkville Mountain Road. Looking at the typical section on the project map the plan is to completely remove the existing 4-lane divided (2 lanes each direction) pavement and reconstruct with 6-lane asphalt buildup+OGFC wearing surface (3 lanes in each direction). Notably they are trying to fast track this project (1 year instead of 2-3 years) as there will be long ramp shutdowns lasting months as each side is completely rebuilt from the subgrade up.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on April 04, 2022, 03:37:56 PM
ALDOT has narrowed down to four contractors (https://www.dot.state.al.us/business/pdf/WAHProjectProposerList.pdf) for the design-build project to construct the West Alabama Highway between Thomasville and Moundville. Those are:

Granite Construction Company, Inc.
Kiewit Infrastructure South Company
Venture Construction, Inc.
Brasfield & Gorrie, LLC

Proposals are due to ALDOT (https://www.dot.state.al.us/business/pdf/WAHProcurementSchedule.pdf) by May 20th with an anticipated notice to proceed by August 23rd.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on April 04, 2022, 03:46:46 PM
The only interesting thing this month on ALDOT's project letting is the installation of cameras, DMSs, and vehicle detection along I-65 in Chilton County.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on April 04, 2022, 03:53:41 PM
Quote from: asdfjkll on March 27, 2022, 01:50:39 AM
If I-65 is getting any sort of HOV or express lane inside the 459 loop it should be built with 2 lanes in each direction with no exits other than the southern terminus (I-459 interchange) and the northern terminus (I-22 interchange area), that way folks heading to/from Montgomery and the beaches down south, and people going between the northern and southern suburbs can bypass rush hour traffic. The way Birmingham is structured and developed makes it difficult to make a decent north/south bypass loop that has similar distance between both ends unlike I-459, so these new "express" lanes would pretty much function similar to one for thru traffic without having to demolish thousands of homes as it could be built mostly within the existing ROW of I-65.

I certainly hope that capacity and/or pavement rehab is added to I-65 in some form in the near future between I-459 and I-20/59. A lane addition would be welcome in both directions at a minimum, but that would be expensive since it would have to go to the outside of the current footprint since a great deal of the road already has a jersey barrier.

A continuous bypass-in-place of I-65 between I-459 and I-20/59 is a great idea, but I imagine it would have to be tolled in order to be built since it would be crazy expensive to build all of the elevated structures as well as build over both Red Mountain and Shades Mountain.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jdb1234 on April 04, 2022, 04:23:58 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on March 16, 2022, 09:04:54 AM
Another project has popped up on the Design-Built website for ALDOT. This one is a four-lane highway between Fayette and I-22 north of Winfield. It utilizes US 43/AL 171 to south of Winfield, and then a new alignment to the AL 118/AL 129 intersection, and then AL 129 to I-22.

https://www.dot.state.al.us/business/DesignBuild.html

Personally, I would much rather see this built than the highway from Tuscaloosa to Linden.   :bigass:

The portion from US 43 south of Winfield to the AL 118/AL 129 intersection is likely the proposed Winfield South Bypass.  Most of AL 129 was improved when I-22 was built (I-22 ended at Exit 30 for years), but only a small portion of it is 4-laned.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on April 20, 2022, 06:51:57 PM
Google updated all the imagery around Tuscaloosa County to Jan 2022, and its showing significant progress on the Gordo grade/drain project. Pretty much all the grading (up to the subgrade level) and bridges are done except in four areas: Floyd Mill Sand Spring Road (though they probably got that done already since its been 3 months since they took that imagery), Gordo City Road and Ben Elmore staggered T intersection with new US-82 (which can probably proceed once the Floyd Mill realignment is done), SR-159 (the realignment to intersect the new 82 perpendicularly is partially graded but not complete and 159 hasn't been moved onto the realignment yet), and the tie-in at both ends (most notably the east end of the project). Design is underway for paving the mainline and getting the tie-in done at both ends of the grade/drain project. Imagery also shows the starts of the US-82 and US-11 widening projects; the median crossover closures for the median drain construction and new turn lane layouts shows up on imagery but not the drainage work currently underway, and the US-11 project shows the clearing the ROW of buildings and trees where new lanes will be going in between the Mercedes plant and the SR-5 intersection in Woodstock. The imagery also shows the completed I-59 widening project from McFarland to Exit 77.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadman65 on April 21, 2022, 09:01:57 AM
Question. Someone posted an article on FB that a 13 feet high trailer tried to enter the 12 feet high Bankhead Tunnel in Mobile.

When I googled it to see when it happened I found no such articles relating to it.

Was there a recent event  of such a crash of of a semi driver hitting the Downtown portal of the tunnel? Or did someone post an article of old not checking the dates as many ( especially myself) have done on here.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on April 21, 2022, 09:30:40 AM
It wasn't a news article...it was from some "Mobile Traffic" FB page.  Either the incident mentioned wasn't newsworthy this week or it's old news from early February (when a truck DID get stuck in the tunnel and created quite a mess when the top sheared off).
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on April 30, 2022, 11:40:13 AM
I noticed this gem yesterday on the exit ramp at I-85 southbound, exit 22 for Shorter. Why would it have Tallassee on this sign? The only way it might make sense is if there was a sign at the other end of the overpass directing you head back north on I-85 to exit 26 which is the Tallassee exit(there isn't one). Was this sign supposed to say Tuskegee?

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.4081189,-85.9585758,3a,44.2y,259.19h,90.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stoquKySQvDkInOU9cOZXww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on April 30, 2022, 08:01:53 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on April 30, 2022, 11:40:13 AM
I noticed this gem yesterday on the exit ramp at I-85 southbound, exit 22 for Shorter. Why would it have Tallassee on this sign? The only way it might make sense is if there was a sign at the other end of the overpass directing you head back north on I-85 to exit 26 which is the Tallassee exit(there isn't one). Was this sign supposed to say Tuskegee?

I guess so, though it's not a very efficient route. How very strange!  :hmmm:
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on April 30, 2022, 08:53:03 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on April 30, 2022, 11:40:13 AM
I noticed this gem yesterday on the exit ramp at I-85 southbound, exit 22 for Shorter. Why would it have Tallassee on this sign? The only way it might make sense is if there was a sign at the other end of the overpass directing you head back north on I-85 to exit 26 which is the Tallassee exit(there isn't one). Was this sign supposed to say Tuskegee?

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.4081189,-85.9585758,3a,44.2y,259.19h,90.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stoquKySQvDkInOU9cOZXww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I think there's an error "Alabama 80" shield near that exit; I wasn't able to snap it while headed elsewhere, but caught it out of the corner of my eye.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jdb1234 on May 01, 2022, 04:44:38 PM
Quote from: formulanone on April 30, 2022, 08:53:03 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on April 30, 2022, 11:40:13 AM
I noticed this gem yesterday on the exit ramp at I-85 southbound, exit 22 for Shorter. Why would it have Tallassee on this sign? The only way it might make sense is if there was a sign at the other end of the overpass directing you head back north on I-85 to exit 26 which is the Tallassee exit(there isn't one). Was this sign supposed to say Tuskegee?

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.4081189,-85.9585758,3a,44.2y,259.19h,90.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stoquKySQvDkInOU9cOZXww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I think there's an error "Alabama 80" shield near that exit; I wasn't able to snap it while headed elsewhere, but caught it out of the corner of my eye.

I know there were/are "Alabama 80" shields at the previous exit.  As for the Tallassee signs, it look like there is a turn on AL 138 just before US 80 that is signed for Tallassee.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rlb2024 on May 02, 2022, 12:33:03 PM
Quote from: jdb1234 on May 01, 2022, 04:44:38 PM
Quote from: formulanone on April 30, 2022, 08:53:03 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on April 30, 2022, 11:40:13 AM
I noticed this gem yesterday on the exit ramp at I-85 southbound, exit 22 for Shorter. Why would it have Tallassee on this sign? The only way it might make sense is if there was a sign at the other end of the overpass directing you head back north on I-85 to exit 26 which is the Tallassee exit(there isn't one). Was this sign supposed to say Tuskegee?

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.4081189,-85.9585758,3a,44.2y,259.19h,90.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stoquKySQvDkInOU9cOZXww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I think there's an error "Alabama 80" shield near that exit; I wasn't able to snap it while headed elsewhere, but caught it out of the corner of my eye.

I know there were/are "Alabama 80" shields at the previous exit.  As for the Tallassee signs, it look like there is a turn on AL 138 just before US 80 that is signed for Tallassee.
It also may be that people think they can turn right and get back toward Tallassee since it is north of I-85, but you can't get there heading north at Shorter.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on May 02, 2022, 10:36:53 PM
Quote from: jdb1234 on May 01, 2022, 04:44:38 PM
Quote from: formulanone on April 30, 2022, 08:53:03 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on April 30, 2022, 11:40:13 AM
I noticed this gem yesterday on the exit ramp at I-85 southbound, exit 22 for Shorter. Why would it have Tallassee on this sign? The only way it might make sense is if there was a sign at the other end of the overpass directing you head back north on I-85 to exit 26 which is the Tallassee exit(there isn't one). Was this sign supposed to say Tuskegee?

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.4081189,-85.9585758,3a,44.2y,259.19h,90.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stoquKySQvDkInOU9cOZXww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I think there's an error "Alabama 80" shield near that exit; I wasn't able to snap it while headed elsewhere, but caught it out of the corner of my eye.

I know there were/are "Alabama 80" shields at the previous exit.  As for the Tallassee signs, it look like there is a turn on AL 138 just before US 80 that is signed for Tallassee.
Ok, I just found that one. I can see that route working if exit 26 wasn't there unless these signs predate exit 26. On street view the exit 26 overpass has the newer solid railings with 1985 etched on them while exit 22 and 32 both have older open styled railings so exit 26 was likely built after the others. I wonder if the Tallassee signs at exit 22 are older than 37 years old or have they just left Tallassee on any replacements since then. Was just looking again to see how they looked and zoomed on the wrong side and see the northbound exit also has Tallassee on it. I'm not sure how I haven't noticed that before as many times as I've taken that exit to stop at the Love's there.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jdb1234 on May 03, 2022, 09:19:49 AM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on May 02, 2022, 10:36:53 PM
Quote from: jdb1234 on May 01, 2022, 04:44:38 PM
Quote from: formulanone on April 30, 2022, 08:53:03 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on April 30, 2022, 11:40:13 AM
I noticed this gem yesterday on the exit ramp at I-85 southbound, exit 22 for Shorter. Why would it have Tallassee on this sign? The only way it might make sense is if there was a sign at the other end of the overpass directing you head back north on I-85 to exit 26 which is the Tallassee exit(there isn't one). Was this sign supposed to say Tuskegee?

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.4081189,-85.9585758,3a,44.2y,259.19h,90.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stoquKySQvDkInOU9cOZXww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I think there's an error "Alabama 80" shield near that exit; I wasn't able to snap it while headed elsewhere, but caught it out of the corner of my eye.

I know there were/are "Alabama 80" shields at the previous exit.  As for the Tallassee signs, it look like there is a turn on AL 138 just before US 80 that is signed for Tallassee.
Ok, I just found that one. I can see that route working if exit 26 wasn't there unless these signs predate exit 26. On street view the exit 26 overpass has the newer solid railings with 1985 etched on them while exit 22 and 32 both have older open styled railings so exit 26 was likely built after the others. I wonder if the Tallassee signs at exit 22 are older than 37 years old or have they just left Tallassee on any replacements since then. Was just looking again to see how they looked and zoomed on the wrong side and see the northbound exit also has Tallassee on it. I'm not sure how I haven't noticed that before as many times as I've taken that exit to stop at the Love's there.

I checked some old Macon County maps here is what I found:
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rlb2024 on May 03, 2022, 10:38:56 AM
Quote from: jdb1234 on May 03, 2022, 09:19:49 AM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on May 02, 2022, 10:36:53 PM
Quote from: jdb1234 on May 01, 2022, 04:44:38 PM
Quote from: formulanone on April 30, 2022, 08:53:03 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on April 30, 2022, 11:40:13 AM
I noticed this gem yesterday on the exit ramp at I-85 southbound, exit 22 for Shorter. Why would it have Tallassee on this sign? The only way it might make sense is if there was a sign at the other end of the overpass directing you head back north on I-85 to exit 26 which is the Tallassee exit(there isn't one). Was this sign supposed to say Tuskegee?

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.4081189,-85.9585758,3a,44.2y,259.19h,90.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stoquKySQvDkInOU9cOZXww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I think there's an error "Alabama 80" shield near that exit; I wasn't able to snap it while headed elsewhere, but caught it out of the corner of my eye.

I know there were/are "Alabama 80" shields at the previous exit.  As for the Tallassee signs, it look like there is a turn on AL 138 just before US 80 that is signed for Tallassee.
Ok, I just found that one. I can see that route working if exit 26 wasn't there unless these signs predate exit 26. On street view the exit 26 overpass has the newer solid railings with 1985 etched on them while exit 22 and 32 both have older open styled railings so exit 26 was likely built after the others. I wonder if the Tallassee signs at exit 22 are older than 37 years old or have they just left Tallassee on any replacements since then. Was just looking again to see how they looked and zoomed on the wrong side and see the northbound exit also has Tallassee on it. I'm not sure how I haven't noticed that before as many times as I've taken that exit to stop at the Love's there.

I checked some old Macon County maps here is what I found:

  • Exit 26 was indeed added later
  • AL 229 as originally commissioned ended in Shorter
I wonder if Exit 26 was added when the E.V. Smith Research Center facility of Auburn University was built right by there.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: route29 on May 04, 2022, 09:01:18 AM
Exit 26 was built in the mid 80s.  Before Exit 26 was opened, Exit 22 was signed for Shorter and Tallassee from the Interstate and had a AL 229 shield posted (may have been "TO AL 229".  Most likely, the sign on the exit ramp was copied in kind from the original sign.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on May 04, 2022, 11:14:16 AM
This old map of the Shorter area does show AL-229 following current CR-40 down to US-80. Mystery solved.  :clap:

https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/img4/ht_icons/overlay/AL/AL_Shorter_305039_1971_24000_geo.jpg
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on May 04, 2022, 03:54:16 PM
Looks like Gadsden will soon be finally getting that I-759 / AL-759 extension.
https://www.al.com/business/2022/05/etowah-county-getting-120-million-in-highway-projects-including-i-759-connector.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on May 05, 2022, 11:24:47 AM
I wouldn't quite call it "soon" since it still won't be let to bid for 2 more years, but still a good sign for those in favor of the project.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: sturmde on May 05, 2022, 12:24:29 PM
Quote from: froggie on May 05, 2022, 11:24:47 AM
I wouldn't quite call it "soon" since it still won't be let to bid for 2 more years, but still a good sign for those in favor of the project.

And wasn't there always a debate about which "complete" project would complete it?  The strange incomplete College Parkway 4-lane marked "BYP 431" on Google that bypasses Paden Rd and then just "ends"... wasn't that another attempt to "complete" 759 (providing a better I-20 to I-59 via 431 bypass of Anniston and Gadsden?).
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on May 05, 2022, 02:50:56 PM
I'm sure its because of politics or environmental reasons but why not just continue the 759 freeway up the section already cleared off and join 431 by the old Goodyear plant? The only things in that path are a roach motel and a Taco Bell. Put a exit at George Wallace Dr. and make it non access the rest of the route to make it a full I-759 and get rid of the pointless AL-759 section.

As for the 431 bypass section I assume that was just a pork barrel build for the Koch Foods plant.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadman65 on May 22, 2022, 11:59:04 PM
Why is AL Freeways having no shoulders on many of its bridges?

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52092583041_7249243ff4_k.jpg)

This one is one of many I have seen on both I-65 and I-10.

Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: cjk374 on May 23, 2022, 06:39:37 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 22, 2022, 11:59:04 PM
Why is AL Freeways having no shoulders on many of its bridges?

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52092583041_7249243ff4_k.jpg)

This one is one of many I have seen on both I-65 and I-10.



All of Louisiana's bridges built before the 80s have no shoulders. Are these Alabama bridges newer or older?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Georgia on May 23, 2022, 07:26:54 AM
Quote from: cjk374 on May 23, 2022, 06:39:37 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 22, 2022, 11:59:04 PM
Why is AL Freeways having no shoulders on many of its bridges?

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52092583041_7249243ff4_k.jpg)

This one is one of many I have seen on both I-65 and I-10.



these are older bridges, that is why the concrete guardrails look so new, Alabama has had a program to pour modern Jersey-style barriers on the older bridges. 

All of Louisiana's bridges built before the 80s have no shoulders. Are these Alabama bridges newer or older?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadman65 on May 23, 2022, 08:42:07 AM
Quote from: cjk374 on May 23, 2022, 06:39:37 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 22, 2022, 11:59:04 PM
Why is AL Freeways having no shoulders on many of its bridges?

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52092583041_7249243ff4_k.jpg)

This one is one of many I have seen on both I-65 and I-10.



All of Louisiana's bridges built before the 80s have no shoulders. Are these Alabama bridges newer or older?

Don't know, but the General WK Wilson Jr. Bridge gets shoulders though. However that might be because the bridge is well over 5 miles in overall length .
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52092616348_1be08cf40f_k.jpg)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F%5Bimg%5D%5Bimg%2520width%3D800%2520height%3D533%5Dhttps%3A%2F%2Flive.staticflickr.com%2F65535%2F52092616348_1be08cf40f_k.jpg&hash=b74da9b0c8ee2f0303c336a42865b0179e249e30)[/img][/img]
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on May 23, 2022, 08:56:37 AM
That's also a newer bridge...one of the last sections of I-65 to be completed.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadman65 on May 23, 2022, 09:29:17 AM
Yeah I remember it took forever to link Mobile to Montgomery with a freeway.  For decades I-65 in Mobile was not used by traffic bound for Montgomery and Birmingham as the interstate ended at US 43 in Creola.   That is why the directional ramp NB to US 43 NB is there as remnants of the segment ending.

I imagine that "Montgomery" was not the control city from I-10 or any freeway ramps in Mobile.  Traffic for points north of the Mobile-Tensaw Delta had to use US 31 from Spanish Fort from US 90 as even the Jubilee Parkway was not yet opened to traffic at that point in history.  So the Bankhead and the Battleship Parkway east from Downtown handled what is now two interstate's worth of traffic pre 1980 plus a coin drop at the Bankhead Tunnel as it was originally tolled.

I am going to guess that long legal battles held up the construction of both the Dolly Parton and Bayway bridges due to the Mobile- Tensaw Delta being sensitive wetlands just as GDOT had long battles with environmental groups to get I-95 done in Glynn County, GA near Brunswick due to the wetlands there as well.  I-95 from US 25/341 to US 17 (and then US 84) was the last of I-95 in the Peach State to open as well.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rlb2024 on May 23, 2022, 09:53:36 AM
Quote from: Georgia on May 23, 2022, 07:26:54 AM
Quote from: cjk374 on May 23, 2022, 06:39:37 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 22, 2022, 11:59:04 PM
Why is AL Freeways having no shoulders on many of its bridges?

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52092583041_7249243ff4_k.jpg)

This one is one of many I have seen on both I-65 and I-10.



these are older bridges, that is why the concrete guardrails look so new, Alabama has had a program to pour modern Jersey-style barriers on the older bridges. 

All of Louisiana's bridges built before the 80s have no shoulders. Are these Alabama bridges newer or older?
Many Southern states built bridges without shoulders.  Probably as a money-saving measure.  Some of the Interstate bridges (particularly in Mississippi) had shoulders added with TIGER grant money several years ago, but nowhere near all of them.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on May 23, 2022, 01:14:58 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 22, 2022, 11:59:04 PM
Why is AL Freeways having no shoulders on many of its bridges?

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52092583041_7249243ff4_k.jpg)

This one is one of many I have seen on both I-65 and I-10.
Many of these narrow bridges were built in the 1960's and 1970's and something like that built today would not meet federal standards; these were all grandfathered in from the original construction. The old bridge railings on the sides also don't meet today's standards, hence why they did a bridge rail retrofit on the bridge pictured above (the newer concrete on the sides of the bridge covering the old bridge rail). When these old bridges eventually get replaced, they will have full width shoulders as you would expect on an interstate highway (in Tuscaloosa County all the old narrow bridges at exits 73, 76, and 79 were all replaced with a single 6-lane bridge with very wide shoulders as part of the I-20/59 widening projects that occurred over the past decade)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadman65 on June 20, 2022, 07:19:45 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/Uh2ZVJUgbNvXZLD26
I've been noticing some things about the overheads on the infamous AL 210 Ross Clark Circle.  The overhead at US 84 and US 84 Business (as seen above) is been removed part of a current intersection improvement. 

The interesting thing is the project is done and the assembly is not been replaced.
https://goo.gl/maps/CLGaktE1wDkdpR118

Then in other parts of AL 210 they removed others that were erected to guide US Route followers due to old age or inspection failing and never got replaced as well.

Plus Florida has been phasing out overheads on arterial routes and just using ground mounts in many locations as well.


What is up with AL DOT and them not keeping overheads at busy intersections along AL 210 and forcing us to read ground mount sine salads instead?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: wriddle082 on June 20, 2022, 09:21:28 AM
Quote from: asdfjkll on May 23, 2022, 01:14:58 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 22, 2022, 11:59:04 PM
Why is AL Freeways having no shoulders on many of its bridges?

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52092583041_7249243ff4_k.jpg)

This one is one of many I have seen on both I-65 and I-10.
Many of these narrow bridges were built in the 1960's and 1970's and something like that built today would not meet federal standards; these were all grandfathered in from the original construction. The old bridge railings on the sides also don't meet today's standards, hence why they did a bridge rail retrofit on the bridge pictured above (the newer concrete on the sides of the bridge covering the old bridge rail). When these old bridges eventually get replaced, they will have full width shoulders as you would expect on an interstate highway (in Tuscaloosa County all the old narrow bridges at exits 73, 76, and 79 were all replaced with a single 6-lane bridge with very wide shoulders as part of the I-20/59 widening projects that occurred over the past decade)

Most of TN's original bridges built in the 60's also lacked shoulders, but nearly all were rehabbed throughout the 80's and 90's and had the shoulders widened with the piers extended out as needed.  Many bridges in KY and WV are also lacking in shoulders, but when most were rehabbed the shoulders weren't added unless the piers were completely rebuilt.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on July 01, 2022, 06:44:44 PM
The northern half of the Linden Bypass project is on the next ALDOT Letting! The plans are even available for viewing, usually it gets posted a few days after the list of projects letting are posted on the website. Like the south half, there are asphalt and concrete alternatives (asphalt will probably be the low bid once again). On page 147/148 on the plan PDF it somehow shows SR-69 having an SR-303 as well after the Linden Bypass ties back into SR-69, but I believe that is probably some sort of error and a flagged revision to remove those extra SR-303 signs will be coming. Bracket estimate for the northern half is between $75 million and $92 million (there are some longer bridges on this section going over large creeks and it is 1.6 miles longer than the southern section). https://alletting.dot.state.al.us/WEBPROPS/2022/20220729/NTC_July_29_2022.html#CALL041
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bigdave on July 08, 2022, 12:02:12 PM
Quote from: wriddle082 on June 20, 2022, 09:21:28 AM
Most of TN’s original bridges built in the 60’s also lacked shoulders, but nearly all were rehabbed throughout the 80’s and 90’s and had the shoulders widened with the piers extended out as needed.  Many bridges in KY and WV are also lacking in shoulders, but when most were rehabbed the shoulders weren’t added unless the piers were completely rebuilt.

I grew up in East Tennessee with a lot of family in Virginia. I noticed that whenever we crossed the state line into Virginia, the roads get better.

Now I live in North Alabama and I notice that when I cross the border into Tennessee, the roads get better.

:bigass:

It doesn't help that our governor likes to spend money on roads to nowhere....
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alps on July 08, 2022, 06:55:16 PM
Quote from: bigdave on July 08, 2022, 12:02:12 PM
Quote from: wriddle082 on June 20, 2022, 09:21:28 AM
Most of TN's original bridges built in the 60's also lacked shoulders, but nearly all were rehabbed throughout the 80's and 90's and had the shoulders widened with the piers extended out as needed.  Many bridges in KY and WV are also lacking in shoulders, but when most were rehabbed the shoulders weren't added unless the piers were completely rebuilt.

I grew up in East Tennessee with a lot of family in Virginia. I noticed that whenever we crossed the state line into Virginia, the roads get better.

Now I live in North Alabama and I notice that when I cross the border into Tennessee, the roads get better.

:bigass:

It doesn't help that our governor likes to spend money on roads to nowhere....
pennsylvania to anywhere
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on July 08, 2022, 08:52:27 PM
ALDOT has put up preliminary plans on it's letting page for the I-59 widening in Trussville between I-459 and Chalkville Road. This also will involve full depth reconstruction of the pavement. The state is seeking input from contractors on how to construct this project with minimal disruption to traffic yet doing so in an abbreviated time frame.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on July 21, 2022, 11:26:38 AM
The mayor of Gulf Shores still wants ALDOT to build a new Intercoastal Waterway bridge near the current Foley Beach Express bridge.  Does he not realize that it will solve nothing about the AL-59 traffic unless the new bridge and road leads to AL-182?
https://www.al.com/news/2022/07/we-cannot-live-like-this-gulf-shores-mayor-renews-call-for-new-coastal-bridge-urges-grassroots-support.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on July 21, 2022, 03:02:51 PM
^ He probably does, but there's a lawsuit settlement relating to construction of The Lodge (which the state used BP oil spill money to help fund) which prohibits the state or any local agency from building a north-south road through Gulf State Park for the next 20 years.  Given that the park stretches almost the entire width from AL 59 to AL 161, any direct connection is basically off the table.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on July 25, 2022, 11:24:08 PM
AL-4 shields have been put up along 3rd Ave N in downtown B'Ham. Didn't know it split off from US-78 when it and US-11 go down 1st Ave N.

https://imgur.com/a/ogrlf5G

Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on July 27, 2022, 04:41:08 PM
Wow and those don't look like contractor installs either.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Alex on July 28, 2022, 11:46:52 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on July 25, 2022, 11:24:08 PM
AL-4 shields have been put up along 3rd Ave N in downtown B'Ham. Didn't know it split off from US-78 when it and US-11 go down 1st Ave N.

https://imgur.com/a/ogrlf5G

And for once not another GSV link, thank you for putting forth the effort to shoot it.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: MoiraPrime on August 03, 2022, 04:49:35 PM
The SR 158 project (AKA the US 98 Semmes bypass) seems to be coming along pretty well. We might see completion of it by 2024... although a large part of it will only be 2 lanes. Regardless, the reduced amount of stop and go traffic and cross traffic should definitely be an improvement over the original alignment of bloody 98.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: capt.ron on August 04, 2022, 04:53:31 PM
Quote from: MoiraPrime on August 03, 2022, 04:49:35 PM
The SR 158 project (AKA the US 98 Semmes bypass) seems to be coming along pretty well. We might see completion of it by 2024... although a large part of it will only be 2 lanes. Regardless, the reduced amount of stop and go traffic and cross traffic should definitely be an improvement over the original alignment of bloody 98.
I'm glad that ALDOT is finally moving forward on the US 98 realignment. Latest Google satellite imagery shows quite a bit of progress along the new corridor. Since there is so much traffic on that corridor (people heading to the beaches to Florida from points northwest / west from there), I'm surprised it has took ALDOT this long to upgrade 98. Mississippi has upgraded their section from Hattiesburg to just short of the state line for a good while now. 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: razorback0308 on August 05, 2022, 12:35:18 PM
Quote from: capt.ron on August 04, 2022, 04:53:31 PM
Quote from: MoiraPrime on August 03, 2022, 04:49:35 PM
The SR 158 project (AKA the US 98 Semmes bypass) seems to be coming along pretty well. We might see completion of it by 2024... although a large part of it will only be 2 lanes. Regardless, the reduced amount of stop and go traffic and cross traffic should definitely be an improvement over the original alignment of bloody 98.
I'm glad that ALDOT is finally moving forward on the US 98 realignment. Latest Google satellite imagery shows quite a bit of progress along the new corridor. Since there is so much traffic on that corridor (people heading to the beaches to Florida from points northwest / west from there), I'm surprised it has took ALDOT this long to upgrade 98. Mississippi has upgraded their section from Hattiesburg to just short of the state line for a good while now.

As someone who lives in Arkansas and vacations every summer in either Gulf Shores or Destin, this is great news. I saw the progress at the Mississippi state line in early June and it appeared to be coming along nicely.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rcm195 on August 08, 2022, 12:51:21 PM
Well it's all about politics, state politics. The state of Alabama does not want to help Mississippi when it comes to traveling to your beach destination. If you live in Arkansas for example, they want you coming down I-22 to Birmingham, then I-65 down to Baldwin County. It's just business and politics.  😊
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: MoiraPrime on August 08, 2022, 06:12:40 PM
Quote from: razorback0308 on August 05, 2022, 12:35:18 PM
Quote from: capt.ron on August 04, 2022, 04:53:31 PM
Quote from: MoiraPrime on August 03, 2022, 04:49:35 PM
The SR 158 project (AKA the US 98 Semmes bypass) seems to be coming along pretty well. We might see completion of it by 2024... although a large part of it will only be 2 lanes. Regardless, the reduced amount of stop and go traffic and cross traffic should definitely be an improvement over the original alignment of bloody 98.
I'm glad that ALDOT is finally moving forward on the US 98 realignment. Latest Google satellite imagery shows quite a bit of progress along the new corridor. Since there is so much traffic on that corridor (people heading to the beaches to Florida from points northwest / west from there), I'm surprised it has took ALDOT this long to upgrade 98. Mississippi has upgraded their section from Hattiesburg to just short of the state line for a good while now.

As someone who lives in Arkansas and vacations every summer in either Gulf Shores or Destin, this is great news. I saw the progress at the Mississippi state line in early June and it appeared to be coming along nicely.

The section you can see behind the clearing has actually been done for over a decade already. It's just been hidden all this time.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on August 09, 2022, 05:54:39 AM
Quote from: Alex on July 28, 2022, 11:46:52 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on July 25, 2022, 11:24:08 PM
AL-4 shields have been put up along 3rd Ave N in downtown B'Ham. Didn't know it split off from US-78 when it and US-11 go down 1st Ave N.

https://imgur.com/a/ogrlf5G

And for once not another GSV link, thank you for putting forth the effort to shoot it.

Great find!

Here's a few more AL 4 shields from a quick jaunt through Birmingham...

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52274032574_3a22a1813e_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2nDh5FG)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52272799167_299966f22a_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2nDaL34)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52273771971_2d58af0df2_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2nDfKdx)

I found one more in my archives; this photo is from 2014, in Jasper.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/4627/39265773274_5e17592a35_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/22PMmoW)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on August 12, 2022, 09:23:39 PM
So, the $64,000 question is, why is SR-4 now signed in downtown Birmingham, since ALDOT hardly ever signs "hidden" state routes?  Is this the foretelling of U.S. 78 being decommissioned in at least part of Alabama?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: I-55 on August 13, 2022, 02:32:46 PM
Quote from: Charles2 on August 12, 2022, 09:23:39 PM
So, the $64,000 question is, why is SR-4 now signed in downtown Birmingham, since ALDOT hardly ever signs "hidden" state routes?  Is this the foretelling of U.S. 78 being decommissioned in at least part of Alabama?

Depends on the $258+ million Lamar Ave project as to when US 78 is upgraded to I-22 between the TN/MS state line and Memphis (even then there's still a couple miles unplanned there). I think what will happen in reality is US 78 gets routed back on its original alignment through AL and MS where the road is still state maintained, effectively replacing AL 118 and MS 178. But, if that were to happen I think parts of that would've been done already.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on September 03, 2022, 11:35:34 PM
 https://gulfcoastmedia.com/stories/aldot-moves-forward-with-intracoastal-bridge-plans,130889 (https://gulfcoastmedia.com/stories/aldot-moves-forward-with-intracoastal-bridge-plans,130889)

So I'm not sure how this new bridge will help traffic alleviation off AL-59. It will slightly improve times getting to Orange Brach and eliminate the toll. Until it goes to the coast (which it appears it won't) it's just a nice diversion. The foreign bridge company laughably offers to eliminate tolls for residents and "improve the span"  but no other bridges could be built over the Waterway for another 50 years! ALDOT told them to take a hike. If the new one is built I imagine the toll bridge will eventually be abandoned and/or torn down to expand The Wharf.

Still think a new bridge over Wolf Bay to connect AL-161 with the Barber Marina property and a new road to spur into the Beach Express is the way to go. I know that's super expensive however. As a resident on the Eastern Shore a expanded AL-181 going over Weeks Bay at Pelican Point and aligned over current CR-12 to AL-59 would be awesome but I know that's fictional beyond belief so forget I mentioned it.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on September 04, 2022, 08:40:53 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on September 03, 2022, 11:35:34 PM
https://gulfcoastmedia.com/stories/aldot-moves-forward-with-intracoastal-bridge-plans,130889 (https://gulfcoastmedia.com/stories/aldot-moves-forward-with-intracoastal-bridge-plans,130889)

So I'm not sure how this new bridge will help traffic alleviation off AL-59....

I'm not, either, since I have no idea where it is.  :hmmm:
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on September 04, 2022, 10:58:39 PM
I believe it's planned to go just west of the toll bridge. A new alignment will split off from the current road just south of the Shell gas station between CR4 and CR-8 and skirt the eastern edge of Jack Edwards Airport.

From ALDOT:

https://www.dot.state.al.us/projects/swregion/pdf/WaterwayBlvd/PublicHearingMap.pdf

https://www.dot.state.al.us/projects/swregion/WaterwayBlvd.html (https://www.dot.state.al.us/projects/swregion/WaterwayBlvd.html)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on September 05, 2022, 07:45:58 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on September 04, 2022, 10:58:39 PM
I believe it's planned to go just west of the toll bridge. A new alignment will split off from the current road just south of the Shell gas station between CR4 and CR-8 and skirt the eastern edge of Jack Edwards Airport.

From ALDOT:

https://www.dot.state.al.us/projects/swregion/pdf/WaterwayBlvd/PublicHearingMap.pdf

https://www.dot.state.al.us/projects/swregion/WaterwayBlvd.html (https://www.dot.state.al.us/projects/swregion/WaterwayBlvd.html)
The new ICW bridge is on the September 30 letting, interesting enough the project prefix changed from "ST" to "RACR" which suggests that the funding source has now been changed to Rebuild Alabama - Congestion Relief funds. Hopefully this time it won't get withdrawn from the letting the day prior to bid opening again like it did last time.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: MikeTheActuary on September 19, 2022, 11:37:21 AM
AL.com has a story that might be of interest:  "Inside Alabama's worst speed traps"

https://www.al.com/news/2022/09/inside-alabamas-worst-speed-traps.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on September 20, 2022, 11:30:36 AM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on September 19, 2022, 11:37:21 AM
AL.com has a story that might be of interest:  "Inside Alabama's worst speed traps"

https://www.al.com/news/2022/09/inside-alabamas-worst-speed-traps.html

Part of me wants to think Hillsboro is Hazzard County in real life with only two cops employed. They sit along AL-20 putting fake speed limit signs up with some contraption like Rosco used to do. With modern day technology stick up a LED sign and change it on a whim with a iPhone as the car speeds by. Nice to see #4 and #6 are only a few miles east of my residence. I've literally never seen a cop car in my many drives through Silverhill unless it's was sitting at the station along AL-104 so I don't know how it's ranked that high. Summerdale is legit along AL-59 getting all the beach traffic coming through.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on September 20, 2022, 05:34:28 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on September 20, 2022, 11:30:36 AMWith modern day technology stick up a LED sign and change it on a whim with a iPhone as the car speeds by.

This is my main fear with variable speed limits.

I can see where they're useful for non-regulatory speed limits due to changing conditions, but I haven't seen them (yet) in use throughout the state.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on October 19, 2022, 09:22:22 PM
ALDOT is about to start construction on that new bridge in Gulf Shores which is going to solve nothing about the traffic in Gulf Shores / Orange Beach, what a waste of taxpayer money.
https://www.al.com/news/2022/10/as-definitive-as-ive-seen-officials-signal-start-for-new-bridge-to-alabamas-beaches.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on October 21, 2022, 01:34:58 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on October 19, 2022, 09:22:22 PM
ALDOT is about to start construction on that new bridge in Gulf Shores which is going to solve nothing about the traffic in Gulf Shores / Orange Beach, what a waste of taxpayer money.
https://www.al.com/news/2022/10/as-definitive-as-ive-seen-officials-signal-start-for-new-bridge-to-alabamas-beaches.html

This is now more about eliminating the toll bridge and raising the middle finger to the foreign bridge owners/mayor of Orange Beach more than traffic alleviation me thinks. There's no way anyone will use the toll bridge once the free one is built only 1 mile west. No one's paying $2.75 just to get to The Wharf two minutes sooner which is all the toll bridge will be good for. The "third hurricane evacuation option"  is BS too since they dump into the same highway a mile north.

There will be the cheapskates that have always used AL-59 no matter what to get to Orange Beach that it will benefit. That's it.

Like I mentioned above, if this bridge is built the tolled one will probably be abandoned or just sit and rot and get 15 gullible cars a day to cross it. That or the foreign company sells over the rights to Orange Beach. Then hopefully the two cities can work together and make the southbound traffic use the new one and northbound traffic use the original so its a 4 lane facility on the Beach Express by default with a giant gap between the two.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on October 21, 2022, 10:26:51 PM
I'm going to reiterate something I said a few months ago (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5555.msg2756584#msg2756584), in that what's needed most isn't another bridge but a more direct connection between any bridge and 182, but the state screwed the pooch on that by using BP oil spill money to build The Lodge.  The resulting lawsuit settlement prohibits the state or any local agency from building a more direct route through Gulf State Park...which coincidentally runs most of the distance between 59 and 161.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on October 23, 2022, 10:38:40 AM
Quote from: froggie on October 21, 2022, 10:26:51 PM
I'm going to reiterate something I said a few months ago (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5555.msg2756584#msg2756584), in that what's needed most isn't another bridge but a more direct connection between any bridge and 182, but the state screwed the pooch on that by using BP oil spill money to build The Lodge.  The resulting lawsuit settlement prohibits the state or any local agency from building a more direct route through Gulf State Park...which coincidentally runs most of the distance between 59 and 161.

They also doubled down on that stupid decision when they shut down State Park Road 2 to vehicular traffic. Since the golf course is shut down now a small connector road between 2 and AL-180 could have been built through there before the settlement. The course struggled for years before it was officially closed so the state would have had a just reason. The north end of the connector would have tied right into the new bridge and the Beach Express would have its direct route to 182 with little disturbance to the area. This would have given the incredibly busy campground a easier way into it as well. The former/hidden AL-135 is not a serious cut through by any means with winding turns, speed bumps and a 26 mph (not a typo) limit.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on October 23, 2022, 04:23:48 PM
And now the toll bridge operators are suing ALDOT.  Yeah, there is no need for this new bridge, this is just 50+ million going down the drain that can be used elsewhere.  As I keep saying, ALDOT is the most corrupt DOT in the nation.
https://www.al.com/news/2022/10/lawsuit-alabama-transportation-director-abused-his-position-and-had-personal-vendetta-against-toll-bridge-operator.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: cbalducc on October 27, 2022, 05:58:55 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on October 23, 2022, 10:38:40 AM
Quote from: froggie on October 21, 2022, 10:26:51 PM
I'm going to reiterate something I said a few months ago (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5555.msg2756584#msg2756584), in that what's needed most isn't another bridge but a more direct connection between any bridge and 182, but the state screwed the pooch on that by using BP oil spill money to build The Lodge.  The resulting lawsuit settlement prohibits the state or any local agency from building a more direct route through Gulf State Park...which coincidentally runs most of the distance between 59 and 161.

They also doubled down on that stupid decision when they shut down State Park Road 2 to vehicular traffic. Since the golf course is shut down now a small connector road between 2 and AL-180 could have been built through there before the settlement. The course struggled for years before it was officially closed so the state would have had a just reason. The north end of the connector would have tied right into the new bridge and the Beach Express would have its direct route to 182 with little disturbance to the area. This would have given the incredibly busy campground a easier way into it as well. The former/hidden AL-135 is not a serious cut through by any means with winding turns, speed bumps and a 26 mph (not a typo) limit.
Was that to placate environmentalists or property owners?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: HemiCRZ on October 28, 2022, 08:38:50 PM
I drove US 98 this morning early and noticed the project to bring SR-158 up to the MS line is going well. ALDOT has been working on the MS side from the end of the four-lane and has paved the eastbound lanes all the way up to the previously unused bridge, put up guardrails for the bridge approaches, and is getting ready to bring four lanes of traffic over to the new alignment. I'm not sure how far those four lanes will travel beyond the clearing before it drops back to two but I'm glad to see Alabama finally put the bridge to use. Of note, either MDOT or ALDOT has removed the two big yellow signs on the MS side that said "FOUR-LANE ENDS 1 MILE" .

Further down 98, it seems a paving project is underway between Wilmer and Semmes. Makes me wonder if they could've just used that money to pave two extra lanes on the new alignment.

Another thing I'm wondering is if ALDOT will apply to have the US 98 route designation moved to the new alignment when the full two-lane facility is constructed, or if they will elect to let it remain SR-158 until the full four lanes is built.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: MoiraPrime on November 03, 2022, 02:59:53 PM
They also updated the official site with more images.

(https://www.dot.state.al.us/projects/swregion/img/US98MSALLine2.PNG)

https://www.dot.state.al.us/projects/swregion/SR158ProjectInfo.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on November 07, 2022, 04:44:09 PM
ALDOT has a project on its December 2022 letting to reconstruct and widen I-59 between I-459 and Chalkville Mountain Road in Trussville, outside of Birmingham. The entire pavement structure will be removed and replaced, which will necessitate long-term lane closures through some phases of the project.

The plans can be found here. (https://alletting.dot.state.al.us/PLANPROP/20221202_Call_028_Plans.pdf)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on December 22, 2022, 10:45:16 AM
While looking for SR 100 shields in Street View though Andalusia, I found some AL 15 shields; normally it's a hidden route number for US 29. This most certainly the old routing of US 29 through Andalusia.

Posted at Sanford Road (AL 100) on Three Notch Road (https://www.google.com/maps/@31.3095204,-86.4687389,3a,73.4y,49.86h,80.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssguK9NcLW10mvF_q-ohxrA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Posted on east-facing AL 55 at Stanley Avenue (https://www.google.com/maps/@31.2781224,-86.4752376,3a,41.9y,104.48h,86.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sO1b5Jpg0oVYNmyoYOoFj0Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Posted on southbound AL 55 (Stanley Road) as a concurrency (?) (https://www.google.com/maps/@31.2788542,-86.4739397,3a,39.2y,186.36h,83.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1savzRMufJhMv6_TRV7dY2uA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Stanley Road at Three Notch, with "To US 29" posted alongside, and a AL 15 South shield on the other side of the road. (https://www.google.com/maps/@31.3074846,-86.4708448,3a,75y,350.23h,90.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srVyQK-GRfcrh87Tf--pCpQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
AL 15 posted on US 29 South at US 84 (https://www.google.com/maps/@31.3190595,-86.4616335,3a,49.2y,207.47h,92.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spG5HRuTIDAsrbitHF4krOg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
AL 15's beginning AL AL 55 from US 29 (https://www.google.com/maps/@31.2769559,-86.5065376,3a,75y,29.75h,89.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4Cc1aFpR98V-foXEwsOYzg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Sure enough, it's on the ALDOT Covington County Milepost map. (https://aldotgis.dot.state.al.us/MilepostPDF/web/co20mp.pdf) SR 100 remains unposted.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/2069_22_12_22_11_16_03.png)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on December 22, 2022, 01:55:51 PM
I wonder what is causing ALDOT to post more of these unsigned state routes? AL 4 in Birmingham, and AL 15 in Andalusia.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on December 24, 2022, 10:31:03 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/woyspBvyey9o3aTU8?g_st=ic

Why is Baldwin CR-27 still posted with AL-181 at the south terminus with US-98? Was this a "let it stay until the new number becomes standard"  and they forgot to take it down? I know CR-27 still exists north of US-31 but is it still secret co-signed with AL-181?

Edit: Answering my own question. It's still secretly co-signed as CR-27 as it still exists south of US-98 as well after a brief jaunt west with US-98 and a turn down Mary Ann Beach Rd. to end at the bay with CR-1.

On a related note, AL-181 got new pavement with slightly wider lanes from the future end of the 4 lane section south of AL-104 down to at least CR-44 so I guess the expansion of AL-181 will cease for the foreseeable future. The current 4 lane project is classic ALDOT taking forever to complete. I think the new Publix at AL-104 is long finished but you can't get to into it along AL-181 due to construction so it still hasn't opened.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on December 26, 2022, 12:55:11 AM
Looks like a 1.5 mile section of the new US-98 opened to traffic a few days ago between Newburn Road and Lott Road as per this tweet from the ALDOT Southwest Region Twitter: https://twitter.com/ALDOT_SW_Region/status/1606074630241820673 . As for the rest of the 2-lane new US-98 it should open by early 2024: All remaining projects not yet completed have been let and are under construction.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on December 26, 2022, 09:37:21 PM
Traveling from Orlando to Birmingham today, I noticed these signs at the US-280/US-231/AL-21 interchange in Sylacauga. My pic today didn't come out good so street view it is

https://maps.app.goo.gl/nGwNBUEPBvPP9QLj7?g_st=ic

I assume the plastered dual shields were from a contractor error as the sign originally just had AL-21 on it. US-231 has always headed south to Montgomery from US-280 at this point correct?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on December 26, 2022, 10:33:09 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on December 26, 2022, 09:37:21 PM
I assume the plastered dual shields were from a contractor error as the sign originally just had AL-21 on it. US-231 has always headed south to Montgomery from US-280 at this point correct?

Post-bypass, yes (which appears to have been completed in the late 1970s per ALDOT maps).  Though it's worth noting that US 231 did not exist north of Montgomery until ca. 1952, and US 280 wasn't created until the following year.  Prior to both, there was a US 241 that existed along a Dothan-Phenix City-Sylacauga-Anniston-Gadsden-Guntersville-Huntsville-north into TN routing.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on December 29, 2022, 01:46:35 PM
Quote from: froggie on December 26, 2022, 10:33:09 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on December 26, 2022, 09:37:21 PM
I assume the plastered dual shields were from a contractor error as the sign originally just had AL-21 on it. US-231 has always headed south to Montgomery from US-280 at this point correct?

Post-bypass, yes (which appears to have been completed in the late 1970s per ALDOT maps).  Though it's worth noting that US 231 did not exist north of Montgomery until ca. 1952, and US 280 wasn't created until the following year.  Prior to both, there was a US 241 that existed along a Dothan-Phenix City-Sylacauga-Anniston-Gadsden-Guntersville-Huntsville-north into TN routing.

Good deal, thanks.

Last note from my traveling, these signs at Exit 100 on I-20/59 have been changed from the old original Abernant/Bucksville which are both ghost communities for all accounts to simply Lake View which was incorporated 10-15 years ago.

Original:missing exit tab
https://maps.app.goo.gl/4JpoTAZbQPCEP5X7A?g_st=ic

New:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/rkhmUpAYDajjXGm77?g_st=ic

Still no mention of AL-216 West beginning here as there would have been room for it. AL-216 is one of the official alternate routes for Alabama home football games and a temporary sign is put up on Saturday's.

New Clearview signage has been put up at Exit 104 and Exit 106/I-459 as well. The ones they replaced were beyond faded so I guess they are a improvement technically.

These had some weird font for the numbers. They were put up when the freeway was expanded to 3 lanes 15 years ago and replaced the original signs that were installed when I-459 was completed.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/GMp8eKL286Fr8YSZ7?g_st=ic

New:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/tmbVkz6MBFiFrtWg9?g_st=ic
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on January 16, 2023, 09:26:49 AM
Noticed a lot of BGS re-signing along I-65, south of Alabaster to Clanton this weekend.

It's Clearview but it looks half decent (shields were the correct font, spacing wasn't wacky).
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: roadman65 on January 30, 2023, 02:24:13 AM
https://www.al.com/news/2023/01/iconic-rocket-at-alabama-rest-stop-to-be-taken-down-nasa-says.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on February 06, 2023, 12:20:24 AM
https://alletting.dot.state.al.us/WEBPROPS/2023/20230224/NTC_February_24_2023_all.html Two bottleneck fixes on this month's letting:
Call #1 Lauderdale county BUILD grant job will add one lane in each direction to US-72/43 on the outside and add a shared use path in the project limits. Currently US-72/43 is 6-lanes from SR-133 to Bailey Springs Road and from Sky Park Road to the US-43 split off from US-72, but is only 4 lanes between those two 6-lane sections. The BUILD grant covers the aformentioned 4-lane section. Unlike the Ross Clark or McFarland projects there does not seem to be any access management done at all, not even J-turns.

Call #33 in Autauga County is the second half of the US-82 duplication to dual carriageway between SR-14 and US-31. Streetview imagery from December 2022 shows the new westbound carriageway ready to traffic to be moved onto it in a temporary 2-lane configuration. This contract shifts traffic onto the new westbound carriageway so the old bridges over Autauga Creek and Autauga Northern Railroad can be demolished and rebuilt to carry eastbound traffic. The old 2-lane road will get shoulder widening and left/right turn lanes and be converted into the new eastbound carriageway. Now I'm not sure why the initial 2-lane sections between Gin Shop Hill Road and US-31 were not duplicated when the southeast section of the Prattville bypass was built in the 90's but at least its getting done now (Gin Shop Hill Road to SR-14 was duplicated around 2013/2014 ish).

Welcome Center replacement on I-65 (the one that made headlines with the upcoming removal of the rocket there) is call #19 on this letting.

Everything else is just routine maintenance across the state, a turn lane here and there, and adding open graded friction course to more of I-459 near Trussville and I-65 near Clanton.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on March 09, 2023, 08:31:21 AM
The decades old bumpy concrete on I-65 between US-31 and University Boulevard is finally being addressed by ALDOT: https://www.wvtm13.com/article/wvtm-13-investigates-busy-section-interstate-65-receiving-facelift/43252943 , basically what they are doing is smoothing out the bumps with diamond grinding until they will place an open graded friction course (OGFC) over the smoothed out surface like most of the other concrete interstates in Birmingham. In the medium term all of the concrete in that area will be completely replaced (which is what's going to happen on I-59 between I-459 and Trussville once a contract's finally awarded for that project)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on March 09, 2023, 08:37:35 AM
Quote from: asdfjkll on March 09, 2023, 08:31:21 AM
The decades old bumpy concrete on I-65 between US-31 and University Boulevard is finally being addressed by ALDOT: https://www.wvtm13.com/article/wvtm-13-investigates-busy-section-interstate-65-receiving-facelift/43252943 , basically what they are doing is smoothing out the bumps with diamond grinding until they will place an open graded friction course (OGFC) over the smoothed out surface like most of the other concrete interstates in Birmingham. In the medium term all of the concrete in that area will be completely replaced (which is what's going to happen on I-59 between I-459 and Trussville once a contract's finally awarded for that project)

They need to add a lane in each direction through there on that stretch, but that would be very costly.

Both of those project will be a mess due to lane closures that would be required to do the work.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on March 12, 2023, 02:44:04 PM
https://alletting.dot.state.al.us/WEBPROPS/2023/20230407/NTC_April_07_2023.html A small letting coming up next month, the flagship project in this letting is a new Memorial Parkway overpass over Mastin Lake Road and related access managment improvements north of there to Winchester Road. The project plan set should be up within a couple days. The US-82 duplication part 2 in Prattville was withdrawn from the previous letting and moved to this letting. Most of the other projects are a mix of bridge replacements, resurfacing, and intersection modifications, with a few of them rebids after they were either withdrawn or had all bids rejected from previous lettings.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on March 14, 2023, 03:59:58 PM
The Gadsden mayor has been talking with ALDOT to reroute US 411 away from the Coosa River for riverfront development.  https://abc3340.com/news/local/gadsden-eyes-western-riverfront-development-could-reroute-highway-411-etowah-county-coosa-river-mayor-craig-ford#
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 14, 2023, 05:37:56 PM
That section of US 411 kept Gadsden from being boring to me...
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on March 28, 2023, 09:58:51 PM
Project Updates:
New Google aerial imagery shows the completed and opened SR-158 extension from Schillinger Road to Lott Road, it also shows the construction progress around Christmas 2022 on the Glenwood Road bridge and the base+pave to the state line, although the new imagery does not go all the way to the state line. Most of the new SR-158 looks like its been paved except where the Glenwood Road overpass is being built and the tie-in at the state line, where multiple traffic diversions/shifts would be required to completely construct the tie-in to the existing US-98 dual carriageways at the state line. Hopefully by Christmas time this year Mobile will get an early Christmas present in the form of the SR-158 extension opened all the way to the state line.

Aerial imagery in Cullman that was updated shows the SR-157 duplication project coming close to an end, with westbound and eastbound traffic on their own carriageways, 1 lane open each direction. Given the imagery was done in November 2022, the 4-lanes are probably open at this point.

Northeast of Gadsden, the US-411 realignment to complete the 4-lanes to Centre is coming along pretty well. Sentinel hub imagery shows almost all the earthwork completed and the paving around 75-80% complete. I'm expecting US-411 to be moved onto this new alignment by the end of the year, and the old road will become a county/local road, as what happened with the US-411 relocation/dual carriageway project to the south completed a few years ago.

West AL Highway's Linden Bypass south section seems to be well underway (as per Sentinel Hub imagery from March 2023), clearing of the ROW is clearly visible in multiple locations (and I believe it is also beginning in the northern half as well). A bridge culvert being built over Sycamore Creek (near where the bypass meets up with US-43 at the south end) is also clearly visible in that satellite imagery. As for the rest of the project being done in design-build delivery, I am not sure when those parts will break ground, but ROW is being acquired across the entire corridor.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on March 31, 2023, 09:07:59 PM
Quote from: asdfjkll on March 28, 2023, 09:58:51 PM
West AL Highway's Linden Bypass south section seems to be well underway (as per Sentinel Hub imagery from March 2023), clearing of the ROW is clearly visible in multiple locations (and I believe it is also beginning in the northern half as well). A bridge culvert being built over Sycamore Creek (near where the bypass meets up with US-43 at the south end) is also clearly visible in that satellite imagery. As for the rest of the project being done in design-build delivery, I am not sure when those parts will break ground, but ROW is being acquired across the entire corridor.

I wonder where the design-build portion of the West Alabama Highway is. Looks like the state's design-build efforts are tied up in the I-10 Mobile River Bridge and Bayway projects.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on April 01, 2023, 12:14:03 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on March 31, 2023, 09:07:59 PM
Quote from: asdfjkll on March 28, 2023, 09:58:51 PM
West AL Highway's Linden Bypass south section seems to be well underway (as per Sentinel Hub imagery from March 2023), clearing of the ROW is clearly visible in multiple locations (and I believe it is also beginning in the northern half as well). A bridge culvert being built over Sycamore Creek (near where the bypass meets up with US-43 at the south end) is also clearly visible in that satellite imagery. As for the rest of the project being done in design-build delivery, I am not sure when those parts will break ground, but ROW is being acquired across the entire corridor.

I wonder where the design-build portion of the West Alabama Highway is. Looks like the state's design-build efforts are tied up in the I-10 Mobile River Bridge and Bayway projects.

ALDOT is intending Design-Build for the entirety of the corridor from Thomasville to Moundville.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Stephane Dumas on April 02, 2023, 06:38:58 PM
Seems there's a new interchange built on ALT US-72 just west of the ALT US-72/I-65/I-565 interchange. https://goo.gl/maps/Ly3495nUSiJ29xfY6
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on April 02, 2023, 08:13:13 PM
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on April 02, 2023, 06:38:58 PM
Seems there's a new interchange built on ALT US-72 just west of the ALT US-72/I-65/I-565 interchange. https://goo.gl/maps/Ly3495nUSiJ29xfY6

Looking at recent GMSV, the geometry suggests that it's moreso going to be an overpass with a couple of RIRO's on each side...not bona-fide interchange ramps.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on April 03, 2023, 07:51:35 AM
Quote from: froggie on April 02, 2023, 08:13:13 PM
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on April 02, 2023, 06:38:58 PM
Seems there's a new interchange built on ALT US-72 just west of the ALT US-72/I-65/I-565 interchange. https://goo.gl/maps/Ly3495nUSiJ29xfY6

Looking at recent GMSV, the geometry suggests that it's moreso going to be an overpass with a couple of RIRO's on each side...not bona-fide interchange ramps.

That overpass is being built to open up land at the northwest and southwest sides of the I-65/565 interchange for development.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 03, 2023, 11:39:37 AM
It looks like the new US 72 Alternate interchange will be a jug-handle interchange, likely due to its proximity to the Interstate 65/565 interchange.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on April 03, 2023, 01:13:08 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 03, 2023, 11:39:37 AM
It looks like the new US 72 Alternate interchange will be a jug-handle interchange, likely due to its proximity to the Interstate 65/565 interchange.
Yep, if the intent was to extend 565 west to US-31 they would've put the interchange more so in the middle between US-31 and I-65 so that it would be at interstate standard spacing for exits. They would've also had to close all median openings and direct property access between 31 and 65 and build the 2-way frontage roads parallel to the roadway.

In other news: April 28th letting list is posted https://alletting.dot.state.al.us/WEBPROPS/2023/20230428/NTC_April_28_2023.html , the typical ATRIP2's and resurfacings/maintenance to include the short-term fix for the I-65 concrete south of Birmingham. Looking at the plan set posted for the I-65 concrete rehab, looks like there will be two layers of asphalt (a wearing surface then open graded friction course above it) instead of just slapping OGFC on top of existing concrete pavement. Speaking of, reflective cracks already started appearing in the OGFC placed 2 years ago to the north of this project.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on April 11, 2023, 03:46:24 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on October 24, 2020, 03:14:04 PM
Quote from: Georgia on October 20, 2020, 01:05:59 AM
I agree with the post above, and having visited that Buc-ee's multiple times, it is gloriously welcome on that stretch of 10. 

Cant wait for the next few Buc-ee's to open up in Leeds AL, Calhoun, GA and WR, GA. 

A Buc-ees is also coming to I-65 at Exit 347 in Athens.

The Auburn Buc-ees opened yesterday, I-85 exit 50.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on April 24, 2023, 11:15:10 AM
I went through Prattville this weekend and westbound traffic has been moved to one lane of the new section of the 4-laning of US82. Eastbound was also one lane. I assume they are getting it ready to shift the one lane of eastbound traffic to the new lanes in order to rebuild/resurface the eastbound side?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on April 24, 2023, 01:43:03 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on April 24, 2023, 11:15:10 AM
I went through Prattville this weekend and westbound traffic has been moved to one lane of the new section of the 4-laning of US82. Eastbound was also one lane. I assume they are getting it ready to shift the one lane of eastbound traffic to the new lanes in order to rebuild/resurface the eastbound side?
Yeah, I assume the eastbound traffic will be moved onto the new westbound carriageway sometime this week or next week so that the contractor doing the eastbound carriageway bridge demo/rebuild and resurfacing/shoulder widening can start their work. The eastbound carriageway rebuild contractor will also pave the final wearing surface on the westbound carriageway once all traffic is in its final configuration. Speaking of, the contract to rebuild the eastbound carriageway let on April 7, so that eastbound rebuild will begin probably in the summer.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on May 15, 2023, 09:45:50 AM
https://imgur.com/a/Z6P4tDK

Lawsuit aside, work is well underway for the new bridge in Gulf Shores. This is the clearing for the new roadway on the northside of the waterway and just east of the airport. Looks like bridge prep has started as well. Powerlines have already been relocated further south of AL-180 to make room for the new flyover terminus of the free section Beach Express.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/961ULkNU35PumxNC6?g_st=ic

Here's the clearing across Cotton Creek Drive for the roadway looking south

I've also seen that Gulf Shores is planning to build a new pedestrian bridge over the waterway between LuLu's and Tacky Jacks to eliminate the walkway on the AL-59 bridge and add a lane for southbound traffic.

https://www.gulfshoresal.gov/1784/Waterway-Village-Pedestrian-Bridge#:~:text=The%20new%20Waterway%20Village%20Pedestrian,area%20to%20East%2020th%20Avenue.

Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on May 17, 2023, 03:25:02 PM
An Alabama judge has ordered ALDOT to stop construction of the new Gulf Shores bridge.  The director of the Alabama Department of Transportation "acted in bad faith"  and attempted to put a "private company out of business"  while pursuing a $120 million alternative bridge in Gulf Shores while concealing his efforts from the public, a Montgomery County judge ruled in a blistering 80-page order released Wednesday.
https://www.al.com/news/2023/05/judge-aldot-director-negotiated-in-bad-faith-and-shocks-the-conscious-over-actions-on-beach-bridges.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Rothman on May 17, 2023, 04:51:48 PM


Quote from: barcncpt44 on May 17, 2023, 03:25:02 PM
An Alabama judge has ordered ALDOT to stop construction of the new Gulf Shores bridge.  The director of the Alabama Department of Transportation "acted in bad faith"  and attempted to put a "private company out of business"  while pursuing a $120 million alternative bridge in Gulf Shores while concealing his efforts from the public, a Montgomery County judge ruled in a blistering 80-page order released Wednesday.
https://www.al.com/news/2023/05/judge-aldot-director-negotiated-in-bad-faith-and-shocks-the-conscious-over-actions-on-beach-bridges.html

Bizarre.  Would be really interesting if overturned on appeal given the language of this ruling.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on May 18, 2023, 10:33:40 AM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on May 17, 2023, 03:25:02 PM
An Alabama judge has ordered ALDOT to stop construction of the new Gulf Shores bridge.  The director of the Alabama Department of Transportation "acted in bad faith"  and attempted to put a "private company out of business"  while pursuing a $120 million alternative bridge in Gulf Shores while concealing his efforts from the public, a Montgomery County judge ruled in a blistering 80-page order released Wednesday.
https://www.al.com/news/2023/05/judge-aldot-director-negotiated-in-bad-faith-and-shocks-the-conscious-over-actions-on-beach-bridges.html

This Judge sounds like he has a stake in the toll bridge's finances. Calling it the  "Cooper bridge"  while the Governor's office has responded that they are behind a new free alternative is going to make this interesting. First I've seen that Orange Beach has the possibility of purchasing the toll bridge in 2033 so I see why they are fighting the new one. It's all petty politics as usual.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bigdave on May 18, 2023, 01:45:41 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on May 18, 2023, 10:33:40 AM
This Judge sounds like he has a stake in the toll bridge's finances. Calling it the  "Cooper bridge"  while the Governor's office has responded that they are behind a new free alternative is going to make this interesting. First I've seen that Orange Beach has the possibility of purchasing the toll bridge in 2033 so I see why they are fighting the new one. It's all petty politics as usual.

Plus the bridge company pays Orange Beach $1.5 million per year. Easy money.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on May 19, 2023, 01:41:33 PM
I've read and assumed that the toll operator plans to build a whole new 2nd bridge if they get their way. But this line taken from the article:

"Pool seemed to believe that BCBC's approach was sensible, saying the company offered to build two new lanes over its bridge, expand the number of toll plazas and make $70 million in additional infrastructure improvements"

Is the Judge implying and been told that they'll just simply add two lanes to the current bridge? Because that's not happening. You can get a third lane if you eliminate the emergency shoulders. Realistically a whole new bridge will have to be constructed and it won't cheap due to the length and height. That cost of a new 2nd bridge will be recouped from increased tolls.


Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on May 23, 2023, 11:17:00 AM
More political pressure is coming to widen I-65 through Alabama, but ALDOT seems to be dragging their feet on it.

https://www.al.com/news/mobile/2023/05/alabama-lawmakers-look-to-prioritize-i-65-widening.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on May 24, 2023, 07:56:13 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on May 23, 2023, 11:17:00 AM
More political pressure is coming to widen I-65 through Alabama, but ALDOT seems to be dragging their feet on it.

https://www.al.com/news/mobile/2023/05/alabama-lawmakers-look-to-prioritize-i-65-widening.html

And Governor Kay Ivey said widening I-65 "Makes for easy headlines."
https://www.al.com/news/2023/05/alabama-gov-kay-ivey-smacks-back-on-ainsworths-i-65-pitches-makes-for-easy-headlines.html?utm_source=pocket_saves
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bigdave on May 25, 2023, 07:17:18 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on May 24, 2023, 07:56:13 PM

And Governor Kay Ivey said widening I-65 "Makes for easy headlines."
https://www.al.com/news/2023/05/alabama-gov-kay-ivey-smacks-back-on-ainsworths-i-65-pitches-makes-for-easy-headlines.html?utm_source=pocket_saves

Well in general it seems that the Governor prefers to builds roads from nowhere to nowhere through nowhere.  :popcorn:
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on May 25, 2023, 10:28:31 PM
Someone should remind the Lieutenant Governor that I-65 is not the entire state.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on May 27, 2023, 04:53:08 PM
Quote from: froggie on May 25, 2023, 10:28:31 PM
Someone should remind the Lieutenant Governor that I-65 is not the entire state.

True enough. We were discussing this in a Facebook group. I went all megageek and looked up the 2021 ADTs for the remaining four-lane sections of I-65:

near Airport Blvd, Mobile: 91-95k
south of I-165: 81k
I-165 to AL 158: 71k

(six lane ends)

south of US 45: 51k -->37k
Dolly Parton Bridges: 24k
north of Baldwin: 27k
north of AL 113: 27k
Lowndes Co: 36k
south of US 80: 54k

(six lanes through Montgomery)

north of AL 14: 59k
Autauga Co: 39k
Chilton Co: 43k-->48k
south of AL 25: 48k
north of US 31 Calera: 57k
south of US 31 Alabaster: 63k

(6-8 lanes through Birmingham)

north of Blount CR 5: 45k
at Cullman: 53k
north Cullman Co: 40k
Tennessee River: 50k
north of I-565: 37k
at Athens: 30k
north of Athens: 26k

This seemed to confirm my opinion that widening of I-65 wasn't needed south of Montgomery. However, a guy whose opinion I respect added, "Yes (widening is needed). Traffic during busy vacation times leads to F grade congestion for over 100 miles."

Having done all of that, I might as well note that traffic drops off significantly south of Montgomery: roughly 90k on I-65 and I-85 north of Montgomery, 70k on I-65, US 231, and US 80 to the south and west.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tom958 on May 28, 2023, 07:47:25 AM
Quote from: bigdave on May 25, 2023, 07:17:18 PMWell in general it seems that the Governor prefers to builds roads from nowhere to nowhere through nowhere.  :popcorn:

I can't believe that it's possible legally or politically for the governor to spend $700 million on a road to nowhere, especially in the face of other urgent priorities. WTF, Alabama?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on May 28, 2023, 08:57:21 AM
Quote from: Tom958 on May 28, 2023, 07:47:25 AM
Quote from: bigdave on May 25, 2023, 07:17:18 PMWell in general it seems that the Governor prefers to builds roads from nowhere to nowhere through nowhere.  :popcorn:

I can't believe that it's possible legally or politically for the governor to spend $700 million on a road to nowhere, especially in the face of other urgent priorities. WTF, Alabama?

I suppose it makes it harder to find the wasteful spending if you hide it in the boonies.

The section of I-65 that probably needs six lanes the most (Blount County line to Hartselle) would be the most expensive to build, so I'm not getting my hopes up.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on May 28, 2023, 10:52:27 AM
Quote from: formulanone on May 28, 2023, 08:57:21 AM
Quote from: Tom958 on May 28, 2023, 07:47:25 AM
Quote from: bigdave on May 25, 2023, 07:17:18 PMWell in general it seems that the Governor prefers to builds roads from nowhere to nowhere through nowhere.  :popcorn:

I can't believe that it's possible legally or politically for the governor to spend $700 million on a road to nowhere, especially in the face of other urgent priorities. WTF, Alabama?

I suppose it makes it harder to find the wasteful spending if you hide it in the boonies.

The section of I-65 that probably needs six lanes the most (Blount County line to Hartselle) would be the most expensive to build, so I'm not getting my hopes up.
Also between Exits 231 and 238 at the minimum. Currently a huge bottleneck forms on I-65 south at exit 238 cause the right 2 lanes in the 8-lane section become exit only and peel off the mainline. Local communities and the state/federal government are working together to put together $200m to make this project happen (much of the cost is bridge work that needs to be completed, 4 pairs of dual carriageway bridges between these aforementioned exits that'll probably be built to accomodate 8 lanes like the 2011 Pelham to Hoover widening, and the extra width inner shoulder elsewhere for that future 4th lane each direction). And if they have some extra Rebuild Alabama money to spend in the congestion relief sector extend the 6-lane to AL-25 (exit 228), and restripe 238 to 231 as a 8 lane.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Charles2 on June 03, 2023, 10:26:28 PM
Quote from: Tom958 on May 28, 2023, 07:47:25 AM
Quote from: bigdave on May 25, 2023, 07:17:18 PMWell in general it seems that the Governor prefers to builds roads from nowhere to nowhere through nowhere.  :popcorn:

I can't believe that it's possible legally or politically for the governor to spend $700 million on a road to nowhere, especially in the face of other urgent priorities. WTF, Alabama?

I wonder if Ivey's motivation to widen U.S. 43 is driven at least in part because she was born and reared in Camden, in Wilcox County?  While 43 doesn't pass through Wilcox County (for that matter, no U.S. route passes through there), this is the closest "major" route to her home turf.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on June 04, 2023, 01:46:36 PM
Quote from: Tom958 on May 28, 2023, 07:47:25 AM
Quote from: bigdave on May 25, 2023, 07:17:18 PMWell in general it seems that the Governor prefers to builds roads from nowhere to nowhere through nowhere.  :popcorn:

I can't believe that it's possible legally or politically for the governor to spend $700 million on a road to nowhere, especially in the face of other urgent priorities. WTF, Alabama?

Well it's Alabama, where political paybacks means certain road projects get done.  Also, with an corrupt ALDOT, the most corrupt DOT in the country, road projects are all about politics and not needs.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Rothman on June 04, 2023, 02:05:54 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on June 04, 2023, 01:46:36 PM
Quote from: Tom958 on May 28, 2023, 07:47:25 AM
Quote from: bigdave on May 25, 2023, 07:17:18 PMWell in general it seems that the Governor prefers to builds roads from nowhere to nowhere through nowhere.  :popcorn:

I can't believe that it's possible legally or politically for the governor to spend $700 million on a road to nowhere, especially in the face of other urgent priorities. WTF, Alabama?

Well it's Alabama, where political paybacks means certain road projects get done.  Also, with an corrupt ALDOT, the most corrupt DOT in the country, road projects are all about politics and not needs.
*citation needed*
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on June 21, 2023, 09:58:19 AM
ALDOT is proposing converting the existing interchange to a diverging diamond at Exit 104 on I-20/59 in southwest Jefferson County. This interchange serves a truck stop and a Norfolk Southern intermodal facility.

https://www.dot.state.al.us/news/opmATRP20372022037.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on June 22, 2023, 11:27:57 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on June 21, 2023, 09:58:19 AM
ALDOT is proposing converting the existing interchange to a diverging diamond at Exit 104 on I-20/59 in southwest Jefferson County. This interchange serves a truck stop and a Norfolk Southern intermodal facility.

https://www.dot.state.al.us/news/opmATRP20372022037.html

As well as the continually growing West Jefferson/McCalla Industrial Park. My folks who live a few miles from there have heard rumors of a new Exit 102 at Lowetown road for the new Smuckers facility which is currently being built right there. They heard about the DDI too so maybe there's some truth to the rumor. Old Tuscaloosa Highway is becoming a completely different environment from 15 years ago. There was another huge facility going in on the SW side of the park along Kimbrell Cutoff Road but it apparently got cancelled a while back.

On a side note I was told years ago by one of the landowners in the area that when the state was looking for new sites for a relocated Birmingham International Airport 30 years ago, the land where the industrial park sits was in fact the first choice. That it was pretty much a done deal but something happened and the Steele and Chilton County sites became the two front runners before it was all scrapped.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on June 23, 2023, 08:36:52 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on June 21, 2023, 09:58:19 AM
ALDOT is proposing converting the existing interchange to a diverging diamond at Exit 104 on I-20/59 in southwest Jefferson County. This interchange serves a truck stop and a Norfolk Southern intermodal facility.

https://www.dot.state.al.us/news/opmATRP20372022037.html
Exit 100 appears to be getting an upgrade as well, an add lanes and replace the bridge over I-20/59 on SR-216 at exit 100 appears in the 2024-2027 STIP for Tuscaloosa County: https://cpmsapps.dot.state.al.us/OfficeEngineer/ProjectReports2/StipRpts/Hwy/63_Hwy.pdf

I would like to see them add an auxillary lane between Exit 104 and I-459 northbound like already exists southbound. As the areas around exits 100 and 104 densify, I can see this area becoming a bottleneck/trouble spot in the future. Speaking of adding auxillary lanes, ALDOT will be doing exactly just that on I-85 south between SR-271 (Taylor Road) and SR-110 (Chantilly Parkway) in Montgomery. Bids for that project will be opened next week as part of the June 30th letting.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ttownfeen on June 27, 2023, 04:52:47 PM
Any word on the progress of the Gordo bypass?

And 43 is more than a road to nowhere. It will connect Tuscaloosa to Mobile.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rlb2024 on June 27, 2023, 05:38:23 PM
Quote from: ttownfeen on June 27, 2023, 04:52:47 PM
Any word on the progress of the Gordo bypass?

And 43 is more than a road to nowhere. It will connect Tuscaloosa to Mobile.
It is also useful as a hurricane evacuation route for the Gulf Coast.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on June 27, 2023, 06:23:59 PM
Quote from: ttownfeen on June 27, 2023, 04:52:47 PM
Any word on the progress of the Gordo bypass?

And 43 is more than a road to nowhere. It will connect Tuscaloosa to Mobile.

In the next six months ALDOT should let the base and pave contract for the Gordo bypass.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tomahawkin on June 27, 2023, 08:10:05 PM
Cody G

Love your posts. What are your top 5 interstate improvements needed in Alabama?

OT a Buc'ees in NW Alabama would do wonders for the local residents up there along IH 22

Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on June 28, 2023, 07:53:24 AM
Quote from: Tomahawkin on June 27, 2023, 08:10:05 PM
Cody G

Love your posts. What are your top 5 interstate improvements needed in Alabama?

OT a Buc'ees in NW Alabama would do wonders for the local residents up there along IH 22

I'd say the top interstate project is a big one but it would be widening I-65 to three lanes at a minimum throughout the state, especially south of Athens to Montgomery.

The I-10 Mobile River Bridge and Bayway would be my second priority.

After that, the next one would be finishing widening I-20 between Birmingham and the Georgia state line.

Then I'd propose a new interstate between Montgomery and I-10 in the Florida panhandle, parallelling US 231.

I'd then say widening I-10 throughout Mobile and Baldwin counties would be my last project.

As for Buc-ees along I-22, I really don't think there is enough traffic along I-22 to justify a Buc-ees there.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Tomahawkin on June 28, 2023, 03:52:52 PM
Good suggestions! 65 south of Birmingham and down past needs a total overhaul with toll lanes if need be, but I'm probably sure that toll roads in the state are outlawed like they are in Arkansas which is the Dumbest #### for states that need the revenue to address road issues. Most money generated through tolls come from vacation goers who are headed to and from Florida. I don't see a interstate from Montgomery, SE to the Florida panhandle happening. I think what is there now is efficient enough but then again, I have avoided peak spring break traffic for years, therefore I never get caught in it...
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on June 28, 2023, 04:06:19 PM
Quote from: Tomahawkin on June 28, 2023, 03:52:52 PM
Good suggestions! 65 south of Birmingham and down past needs a total overhaul with toll lanes if need be, but I'm probably sure that toll roads in the state are outlawed like they are in Arkansas which is the Dumbest #### for states that need the revenue to address road issues. Most money generated through tolls come from vacation goers who are headed to and from Florida. I don't see a interstate from Montgomery, SE to the Florida panhandle happening. I think what is there now is efficient enough but then again, I have avoided peak spring break traffic for years, therefore I never get caught in it...

Alabama has toll facilities already in Tuscaloosa, Montgomery, and at Gulf Shores. To my knowledge I haven't heard of toll lanes being considered in Alabama yet. I would certainly not like there to be toll lanes in rural areas. I could see toll lanes maybe working along I-65 between I-459 and I-20/59, but that would be about it. The current plan is to toll the I-1o Mobile River Bridge. Unfortunately, that is probably the only way that project moves forward.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on July 07, 2023, 08:35:25 AM
https://www.dot.state.al.us/news/opmSTPAA0216(506).html In addition to the DDI happening at exit 104, another DDI is proposed at Exit 100 where Highway 216 meets I-20/59. The DDI designs are nearly identical, with a few differences (extra left turn lane on the northbound exit ramp, 2 thru lanes on both sides instead of just the east side). Also, unlike Exit 104 where a new bridge would be built next to the existing bridge, Exit 100's bridge will be completely replaced as part of this project. Exit 97 would be another exit I would consider converting into a DDI, due to probably higher left turn volumes, especially if there is a major crash downstream between exits 79 and 97 that shuts down all lanes of the interstate.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on July 15, 2023, 12:35:08 AM
https://www.dot.state.al.us/news/opmRACR028759002PE.html SR-759 extension is back in public involvement once again! The alignment hasn't changed, same exact properties being acquired and bulldozed for it, all that was changed since the last time public involvement was done is the following:
- Concrete Median is replaced with Grass Median
- Left and right turns lanes added on East Broad Street where it intersects the 759 extension. The 2022 rendering did not have turn lanes on Broad Street.
- Two bridges added over a tributary to the Coosa River at the west end of the project. The 2022 version did not have such bridges.
- Right turn slip lanes in the project are of the new standard design as depicted in drawing no. 70136 on the 2023 Special and Standard Drawings: https://alletting.dot.state.al.us/Docs/Standard_Drawings/2023%20English/70100.pdf . The 2022 version had the old right turn slip lane designs seen throughout the state. For a live example of the new right turn channelizing/slip lane design see the I-85 westbound exit ramp at Eastern Boulevard in Montgomery.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: The Ghostbuster on July 15, 2023, 09:56:49 PM
Is the AL 759 extension going to be constructed? It seems like a lot of condemnation will need to be done to construct it, and I could easily see strong opposition coming from those who would have to be relocated.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Georgia on July 17, 2023, 03:37:58 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 15, 2023, 09:56:49 PM
Is the AL 759 extension going to be constructed? It seems like a lot of condemnation will need to be done to construct it, and I could easily see strong opposition coming from those who would have to be relocated.

they are mostly poors, they dont matter ;)
also, they probably wont be able to afford good counsel to delay the project.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on August 26, 2023, 06:15:44 PM
https://1819news.com/news/item/aldot-gulf-shores-mayor-craft-applaud-alabama-supreme-court-decision-on-new-intercoastal-waterway-bridge-an-important-victory

Looks like the bridge project in Gulf Shores will be resumed barring appeal.

Went through there yesterday...paying $2.75 to sit in a 20 car deep line at the toll gate is no different than going down AL-59 and sitting in slightly more traffic for free.

On a related note, traffic improvements have begun around the AL-59/AL-180 intersection to eliminate left turns and go with the protected U-turn option.


Also I expect the Beach Express to be useless in the next 5 years anyway as the OWA project looks to grow more and more. Money is the answer but why they didn't put interchanges at US-98, CR-20, CR-12 and CR-8 to plan for future growth is baffling. Eliminating those traffic lights with the new free bridge would make it a 15 minute drive from the Baldwin Beach Express end to AL-180.

Also were there any plans to make the Baldwin/Foley Beach intersection a continuous route instead of a traffic light and left turn for Baldwin Beach traffic? Did Foley not want their portion to be renamed to make the entire route from I-10 to AL-180 be one name or number like AL-whatever?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ttownfeen on August 27, 2023, 10:48:13 PM
This is Alabama, planning for the future is libuhrul thinking.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on August 29, 2023, 10:20:59 AM
If you're going southbound I-85 through Montgomery you're going to need to find an alternate route. Fiery crash this morning has damaged the Perry St. overpass. I can see this screwing up traffic for some time.

https://twitter.com/BamaJD/status/1696511806129213496?s=20

https://www.waka.com/2023/08/29/massive-fire-shuts-down-i-85-at-perry-st-in-montgomery/?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1693315208
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bwana39 on August 29, 2023, 03:29:29 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on August 29, 2023, 10:20:59 AM
If you're going southbound I-85 through Montgomery you're going to need to find an alternate route. Fiery crash this morning has damaged the Perry St. overpass. I can see this screwing up traffic for some time.

https://twitter.com/BamaJD/status/1696511806129213496?s=20

https://www.waka.com/2023/08/29/massive-fire-shuts-down-i-85-at-perry-st-in-montgomery/?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1693315208

I would think remove it completely and then build a replacement in its place. Cut the pavement with a concrete saw and pick the rest off with a forklift or a crane.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on August 29, 2023, 08:51:07 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on August 29, 2023, 03:29:29 PM
Quote from: bdmoss88 on August 29, 2023, 10:20:59 AM
If you're going southbound I-85 through Montgomery you're going to need to find an alternate route. Fiery crash this morning has damaged the Perry St. overpass. I can see this screwing up traffic for some time.

https://twitter.com/BamaJD/status/1696511806129213496?s=20

https://www.waka.com/2023/08/29/massive-fire-shuts-down-i-85-at-perry-st-in-montgomery/?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1693315208

I would think remove it completely and then build a replacement in its place. Cut the pavement with a concrete saw and pick the rest off with a forklift or a crane.

Amazed that the bridge came off worst out of all the injuries.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on August 30, 2023, 04:04:33 PM
And now, calls to finish the Montgomery Southern Loop.

https://www.wsfa.com/2023/08/30/renewed-calls-phase-2-montgomery-county-outer-loop/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=snd&utm_content=wsfa
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: The Ghostbuster on August 30, 2023, 06:19:53 PM
Are these calls likely to be heeded? I have the feeling the Montgomery Outer Loop is as constructed as it is ever going to get.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: barcncpt44 on August 30, 2023, 06:36:32 PM
The Orange Beach toll bridge is doubling its toll rates.  A normal crossing for a car is now $5, they blame ALDOT.
https://www.al.com/news/2023/08/toll-bridge-owner-in-orange-beach-nearly-doubling-rate-following-supreme-court-setback.html
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ttownfeen on August 30, 2023, 06:47:03 PM
>Get upset state is building free toll bridge
>raise fees to remind customers of cost of toll bridge
> ...
>profit???
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on August 31, 2023, 02:27:55 PM
Quote from: barcncpt44 on August 30, 2023, 06:36:32 PM
The Orange Beach toll bridge is doubling its toll rates.  A normal crossing for a car is now $5, they blame ALDOT.
https://www.al.com/news/2023/08/toll-bridge-owner-in-orange-beach-nearly-doubling-rate-following-supreme-court-setback.html


Obviously just a middle finger from the bridge company to the ruling. Already some local online chatter about a boycott of the toll this Labor Day weekend. AL-59 traffic would be horrendous.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: lordsutch on August 31, 2023, 06:04:27 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 30, 2023, 06:19:53 PM
Are these calls likely to be heeded? I have the feeling the Montgomery Outer Loop is as constructed as it is ever going to get.

The STIP has some construction on the next phase of SR 108 (Montgomery Outer Loop) scheduled for FY2025 - see page 10 (https://cpmsapps.dot.state.al.us/OfficeEngineer/ProjectReports2/StipRpts/Hwy/51_Hwy.pdf) of the report for Montgomery County. It doesn't seem to stretch as far as US 231, however, which I think would be the minimum for the route to be useful.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ttownfeen on September 11, 2023, 02:46:14 PM
https://www.wbrc.com/2023/05/24/progress-being-made-gordo-bypass/

Nine whole years to build six miles of highway. Third world countries get sh*t done faster.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: The Ghostbuster on September 11, 2023, 05:46:31 PM
Are there any plans for US 82 to bypass Reform? That way US 82 could be entirely four lanes from the Alabama/Mississippi border to just past Centreville. Although, I doubt it would be built any faster.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on September 11, 2023, 07:06:58 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 11, 2023, 05:46:31 PM
Are there any plans for US 82 to bypass Reform? That way US 82 could be entirely four lanes from the Alabama/Mississippi border to just past Centreville. Although, I doubt it would be built any faster.

It is already widened through Reform, but as a non-divided five lane road.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: lordsutch on September 12, 2023, 01:06:13 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on September 11, 2023, 07:06:58 PM
It is already widened through Reform, but as a non-divided five lane road.

ALDOT is actually planning a road diet on US 82 through Reform (https://www.dot.state.al.us/news/2022/opmNH0006592.html), I crap you not.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on September 12, 2023, 01:09:32 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on September 12, 2023, 01:06:13 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on September 11, 2023, 07:06:58 PM
It is already widened through Reform, but as a non-divided five lane road.

ALDOT is actually planning a road diet on US 82 through Reform (https://www.dot.state.al.us/news/2022/opmNH0006592.html), I crap you not.

I thought I have seen everything, but I've been mistaken. I guess this is for safety reasons. There must not be a center turn lane, which I guess creates a safety issue.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on September 12, 2023, 09:32:03 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on September 12, 2023, 01:06:13 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on September 11, 2023, 07:06:58 PM
It is already widened through Reform, but as a non-divided five lane road.

ALDOT is actually planning a road diet on US 82 through Reform (https://www.dot.state.al.us/news/2022/opmNH0006592.html), I crap you not.

For those of us who can't access ALDOT's website (blame my ISP), what does that site say specifically?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on September 12, 2023, 09:53:48 PM
Quote from: froggie on September 12, 2023, 09:32:03 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on September 12, 2023, 01:06:13 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on September 11, 2023, 07:06:58 PM
It is already widened through Reform, but as a non-divided five lane road.

ALDOT is actually planning a road diet on US 82 through Reform (https://www.dot.state.al.us/news/2022/opmNH0006592.html), I crap you not.

For those of us who can't access ALDOT's website (blame my ISP), what does that site say specifically?





Quote from: ALDOT
The proposed project is located along AL-6 (US-82/1stAve) in the City of Reform, Pickens County, Alabama. AL-6 will be restriped from the existing four (4) lanes to three (3) lanes. This new 3-lane configuration will consist of one through-lane for northbound and southbound traffic and a continuous left-turn lane. This change will help improve traffic operations and efficiency along the route. Additionally, the project will repave AL-6 from one mile east of the Reform City Limits to the George Lewis Bonner Bridge just east of 4th Ave Southeast.

The purpose of this public involvement meeting is to inform the public of the design features for the project. The Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT) is interested in obtaining input from the people who use this route.

The meeting for public input was December 22, 2022.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on September 12, 2023, 11:13:04 PM
Quote from: formulanone on September 12, 2023, 09:53:48 PM
Quote from: froggie on September 12, 2023, 09:32:03 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on September 12, 2023, 01:06:13 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on September 11, 2023, 07:06:58 PM
It is already widened through Reform, but as a non-divided five lane road.

ALDOT is actually planning a road diet on US 82 through Reform (https://www.dot.state.al.us/news/2022/opmNH0006592.html), I crap you not.

For those of us who can't access ALDOT's website (blame my ISP), what does that site say specifically?





Quote from: ALDOT
The proposed project is located along AL-6 (US-82/1stAve) in the City of Reform, Pickens County, Alabama. AL-6 will be restriped from the existing four (4) lanes to three (3) lanes. This new 3-lane configuration will consist of one through-lane for northbound and southbound traffic and a continuous left-turn lane. This change will help improve traffic operations and efficiency along the route. Additionally, the project will repave AL-6 from one mile east of the Reform City Limits to the George Lewis Bonner Bridge just east of 4th Ave Southeast.

The purpose of this public involvement meeting is to inform the public of the design features for the project. The Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT) is interested in obtaining input from the people who use this route.

The meeting for public input was December 22, 2022.

Northbound and southbound?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ttownfeen on September 13, 2023, 01:20:43 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on September 12, 2023, 01:06:13 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on September 11, 2023, 07:06:58 PM
It is already widened through Reform, but as a non-divided five lane road.

ALDOT is actually planning a road diet on US 82 through Reform (https://www.dot.state.al.us/news/2022/opmNH0006592.html), I crap you not.

What a joke.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rte66man on September 15, 2023, 08:04:01 AM
Looks like the West Alabama Corridor is delayed:

from https://aldailynews.com/112-million-in-aldot-projects-remain-on-hold-over-funding-dispute/

Quote
$112 million in ALDOT projects remain on hold over funding dispute

MONTGOMERY, Ala. – More than a dozen Alabama Department of Transportation contracts remain on hold this week as some lawmakers and department officials continue to discuss the funding and future of the high-profile West Alabama Corridor project. Sen. Chris Elliott, R-Josephine, last week delayed a $74.9 million design-build contract on the 75-mile, four-lane highway from Thomasville to Tuscaloosa last week over concerns about financing from the state's 2019 gas tax increase. In response, Rep. Chris England, D-Tuscaloosa, who advocated for the west Alabama project, held about a dozen other ALDOT contracts. The two men are on the Legislative Contract Review Committee, which can delay contracts for 45 days.

On Wednesday, Elliott, England and Sen. Dan Roberts, R-Mountain Brook, met with ALDOT leaders to talk more about the corridor project. "My concerns remain and they largely focus around the fact that I think we're going to have to borrow against the Rebuild Alabama money for the next 20 years to be able to do this project,"  Elliott told Alabama Daily News after the meeting on Wednesday. He did not release the contract and said more discussions are expected.

England described the meeting as "basically just information gathering,"  and told ADN that no agreement was reached and the holds remain on the ALDOT contracts. "They're probably going to be held for a while longer,"  England said.

The west Alabama project would be financed by bonds repaid over time from the 10-cent per gallon gas tax increase approved by lawmakers in 2019. That Rebuild Alabama Act legislation allows for 50% of the state's projected revenue from the tax increase to be committed for bond debt. Elliott and others have asked why no federal funds are being used.

England argues that questions about costs related to the project were brought up far less when compared to projects outside the Black Belt, and that revenue from the gas tax increase is collected under the Rebuild Alabama Act specifically for projects like the West Alabama Corridor project. "That was the purpose of Rebuild Alabama, for Alabama projects; the folks in my district and others in the West Alabama Corridor have been paying the gas tax just like everybody else, and they should get a return on their investment, especially for a project that is as needed as this one,"  he said. "Secondly, the project itself isn't closed off to other alternative means of funding, so in the future, if there's a grant, federal money or other dollars that could come to help pay for it, we are all willing to take advantage of it."

Clay McBrien, ALDOT assistant chief engineer, last week said the planned improvement to Alabama Highway 43, which has been championed by Gov. Kay Ivey, was expected in last year's estimates to cost about $800 million. He also said it could be as high as $1.1 billion.

Tony Harris, a spokesman for ALDOT, said the department was pleased to meet with the trio of lawmakers. "We are prepared to continue discussions and provide any information we can,"  Harris told ADN. "The West Alabama Highway has strong support as it will open up economic development opportunities and connect Alabamians in this under-served part of the state to jobs, medical care and other necessities."

Elliott said he'd be asking the same questions if so much state gas tax money were to be spent in Lee or Madison counties. "At the end of the day, the long-term health of this project would be so much better served by a financing plan that may actually stand the test of time,"  Elliott said. "And that financing plan would have to involve some federal money. But I'm worried that what we end up with is a piece of a project that eventually in the very near future, we realize we can't afford."

Roberts, chair of the contract review committee, said he is coordinating another meeting. "I am very much for the west corridor, it's just the financing where my concern is,"  Roberts said. He'd like to see some federal funding. "The number of legislators who have reached out with concerns about this has definitely increased in the last week, that is for sure,"  Roberts said.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on September 15, 2023, 10:02:03 AM
Quote from: ttownfeen on September 13, 2023, 01:20:43 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on September 12, 2023, 01:06:13 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on September 11, 2023, 07:06:58 PM
It is already widened through Reform, but as a non-divided five lane road.

ALDOT is actually planning a road diet on US 82 through Reform (https://www.dot.state.al.us/news/2022/opmNH0006592.html), I crap you not.

What a joke.

That project's actually believable.  Traffic volumes on US 82 through Reform are well under 10K, definitely in the range of a 4-to-3 conversion.  Despite what Cody noted, US 82 is a 4-lane undivided through Reform, not 5 lanes.  The only left turn lane within the town proper is at AL 17 South.  No idea what left turning counts are through town, but given the number of driveways, this project may well improve operations by getting the left turning traffic out of a through lane.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bwana39 on September 16, 2023, 12:59:53 PM
Here is the comparison of what is there now, versus the proposed restriping.

4 Lanes double yellow in the middle. No median, No shoulders.

Proposed

Is 2 lanes ( 1 each direction) with dedicated continuous single left turn lane and shoulders. With the 45 MPH maximum limit though town, there will not be significant passing anyway. Traffic should move as good or better. Traffic safety should improve.

They should be building a bypass like at Gordo (the next town over.)  Going west the next place that is not at LEAST 4 lane divided is right before I-55. To the east it is four lane divided once you get out of Pickins County to  past Tuscaloosa.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Plutonic Panda on September 21, 2023, 07:16:25 PM
Update on the US-43 road and I-65:

https://aldailynews.com/west-alabama-corridor-and-i-65-expansion-equally-important-ivey-and-britt-say/
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on October 12, 2023, 10:56:06 PM
ALDOT Southwest Region has announced that the SR-158 extension all the way to the Mississippi state line will open on Tuesday, October 17. The existing/old US-98 where it ties into the new SR-158 extension from the southeast will be closed for four weeks starting October 17 to build the new T-intersection tie-in to the new alignment. The construction plans show US-98 being cosigned with SR-158 through the section mentioned above, not sure if this continues all the way to US-43 or not, and what state route number the old US-98 routing will get.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: The Ghostbuster on October 13, 2023, 04:00:28 PM
Maybe old US 98 could have its unsigned co-designation of AL 42 become signposted, at least to its junction with US 45. I would also extend the 45 designation to US 90 at the Government St./S. Broad St. intersection.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Voyager75 on October 15, 2023, 12:57:58 PM
Quote from: asdfjkll on October 12, 2023, 10:56:06 PM
ALDOT Southwest Region has announced that the SR-158 extension all the way to the Mississippi state line will open on Tuesday, October 17. The existing/old US-98 where it ties into the new SR-158 extension from the southeast will be closed for four weeks starting October 17 to build the new T-intersection tie-in to the new alignment. The construction plans show US-98 being cosigned with SR-158 through the section mentioned above, not sure if this continues all the way to US-43 or not, and what state route number the old US-98 routing will get.


Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 13, 2023, 04:00:28 PM
Maybe old US 98 could have its unsigned co-designation of AL 42 become signposted, at least to its junction with US 45. I would also extend the 45 designation to US 90 at the Government St./S. Broad St. intersection.

They should fully reroute US-98 to US-43 and hope they do but I wouldn't be surprised if they just run it to US-45 and co-sign US-45/98 down to the end of US-45. Just make old US-98 Alternate 98. "Less changes" that way especially through Mobile proper. They could truncate US-45 to end at the new US-98. They would keep the short AL-158 portion signed to I-65 and US-43 as it's well established and "locals know it".

ALDOT being ALDOT they may just leave both routes signed as US-98 like they did with US-78 in Birmingham after I-22 was built. Put new US-98 signs up along the new road and they just disappear once it reaches the already built AL-158 portion. Find your own way back to the old alignment.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on October 17, 2023, 07:50:02 PM
The SR-158 extension officially opened today: https://www.fox10tv.com/video/2023/10/17/newly-completed-sr-158-opens-mobile-county/
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on October 17, 2023, 08:01:19 PM
Quote from: Voyager75 on October 15, 2023, 12:57:58 PM
ALDOT being ALDOT they may just leave both routes signed as US-98 like they did with US-78 in Birmingham after I-22 was built. Put new US-98 signs up along the new road and they just disappear once it reaches the already built AL-158 portion. Find your own way back to the old alignment.

The news clip that asdfjkll posted includes two scenes that show the extension is only signed as AL 158.  One scene shows an "EAST AL 158" trailblazer while another shows "TO WEST US 98" and "WEST AL 158".
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: The Ghostbuster on October 17, 2023, 10:06:00 PM
It doesn't look like the AL 158 extension will be four lanes in its entirety, at least not initially. Then again, pre-existing 158 is two lanes west of Newburn Rd., as well as east of Sparta Dr. It looks like the only new interchange will a jug-handle at Wilmer-Georgetown Rd. It will probably be a few years before US 98 is rerouted onto 158's alignment.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jrStudios on November 08, 2023, 01:11:27 PM
(https://i.ibb.co/vs67VDN/Screenshot-2023-11-08-1-04-26-PM.png) (https://imgbb.com/)


So there is this weird version of Highway Gothic. When was this used and when was it no longer used?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Rothman on November 08, 2023, 01:15:54 PM
Quote from: jrStudios on November 08, 2023, 01:11:27 PM
(https://i.ibb.co/vs67VDN/Screenshot-2023-11-08-1-04-26-PM.png) (https://imgbb.com/)


So there is this weird version of Highway Gothic. When was this used and when was it no longer used?
It's used when someone doesn't know how to use the software and fonts and causes this glitch.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: jrStudios on November 08, 2023, 01:20:45 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 08, 2023, 01:15:54 PM
Quote from: jrStudios on November 08, 2023, 01:11:27 PM
(https://i.ibb.co/vs67VDN/Screenshot-2023-11-08-1-04-26-PM.png) (https://imgbb.com/)


So there is this weird version of Highway Gothic. When was this used and when was it no longer used?
It's used when someone doesn't know how to use the software and fonts and causes this glitch.

What do you mean? It also occured in Texas too. Hwever, they were fixed around the time Clearview existed. Could be a prototype or something.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on November 08, 2023, 02:50:52 PM
Quote from: jrStudios on November 08, 2023, 01:20:45 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 08, 2023, 01:15:54 PM
Quote from: jrStudios on November 08, 2023, 01:11:27 PM
(https://i.ibb.co/vs67VDN/Screenshot-2023-11-08-1-04-26-PM.png) (https://imgbb.com/)


So there is this weird version of Highway Gothic. When was this used and when was it no longer used?
It's used when someone doesn't know how to use the software and fonts and causes this glitch.

What do you mean? It also occured in Texas too. Hwever, they were fixed around the time Clearview existed. Could be a prototype or something.

It's not an all-new font, but a misapplication of the rules for matching the x-height of a lowercase letter against the height of the uppercase letters (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=28125.msg2614619#msg2614619) on a sign. We tend to call it the "three-quarters error" or something like that.

Huntsville has an example on Memorial Boulevard (US 231):

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52391001479_640dbbd343_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2nPBzsX)

It's not uncommon, but thankfully not widespread; however, it has been noted in several different states. Here's one from Florida...

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50309966012_d062561c4e_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2jDHJ87)

Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on November 09, 2023, 09:00:05 PM
ALDOT has in its December letting the project to resurface US 82 through Reform, which probably means the road diet is going to happen at that point.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: The Ghostbuster on November 09, 2023, 09:45:58 PM
I dislike road diets. The only way a road diet might work is if they also build a four-lane bypass of Reform. If Gordo can get a bypass constructed, so can Reform.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: lordsutch on November 10, 2023, 01:39:03 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 09, 2023, 09:45:58 PM
I dislike road diets. The only way a road diet might work is if they also build a four-lane bypass of Reform. If Gordo can get a bypass constructed, so can Reform.

Eventually it probably should happen but I think the bigger priority for US 82 is extending the four-lane on US 82 from Centreville (sic) to Prattville, either directly or a new terrain route tying into I-65 near Clanton. It's bizarre that Tuscaloosa still doesn't have a direct four-lane connection to Montgomery.

Theoretically a Reform bypass would be easy but you're either stuck crossing the railroad twice (expensive bridges) or you have to loop way  to the north to bypass the airport.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on November 14, 2023, 04:39:17 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on November 10, 2023, 01:39:03 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 09, 2023, 09:45:58 PM
I dislike road diets. The only way a road diet might work is if they also build a four-lane bypass of Reform. If Gordo can get a bypass constructed, so can Reform.

Eventually it probably should happen but I think the bigger priority for US 82 is extending the four-lane on US 82 from Centreville (sic) to Prattville, either directly or a new terrain route tying into I-65 near Clanton. It's bizarre that Tuscaloosa still doesn't have a direct four-lane connection to Montgomery.

Theoretically a Reform bypass would be easy but you're either stuck crossing the railroad twice (expensive bridges) or you have to loop way  to the north to bypass the airport.
Having to cross the railroad twice via a southern route is why the Gordo bypass ended up going north.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on November 22, 2023, 05:57:28 PM
I have to wonder if Alt. US 72/AL 20 through Town Creek will get a similar treatment in the future, given that it's a four-lane road through there with a 45 MPH speed limit and cops watching drivers like a hawk through it.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on November 23, 2023, 01:57:29 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on November 22, 2023, 05:57:28 PM
I have to wonder if Alt. US 72/AL 20 through Town Creek will get a similar treatment in the future, given that it's a four-lane road through there with a 45 MPH speed limit and cops watching drivers like a hawk through it.
ALDOT has a resurfacing project planned through Town Creek, if a road diet does get proposed there would be a public involvement meeting for it as what happened with Thorsby and Reform in West Central Region. Surprised that they didn't build a bypass around Town Creek like they did with Courtland when the other sections of AL-20 were 4-laned.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on November 23, 2023, 10:14:09 PM
Quote from: asdfjkll on November 23, 2023, 01:57:29 PM
Surprised that they didn't build a bypass around Town Creek like they did with Courtland when the other sections of AL-20 were 4-laned.

I assume it was because it was already 4-lanes through Town Creek, albeit undivided. Wouldn't be too surprised if the residents of Town Creek objected to a bypass as well.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: lordsutch on November 27, 2023, 05:28:41 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on November 22, 2023, 05:57:28 PM
I have to wonder if Alt. US 72/AL 20 through Town Creek will get a similar treatment in the future, given that it's a four-lane road through there with a 45 MPH speed limit and cops watching drivers like a hawk through it.

I figure whatever plans ALDOT had for improving Alt US 72 got shelved along with the rest of the Memphis-Huntsville-Atlanta interstate project. So unless that comes back from the dead, or a truncated version thereof (a counterbalance to I-565 for the Shoals?), I don't expect anything to happen.

Besides which, there's bigger fish to fry than the one traffic signal in Town Creek, like the increasing number of signals on Alt 72 going through Decatur and the annoying slog through the outskirts of the Shoals further west.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on November 28, 2023, 12:35:54 AM
Quote from: lordsutch on November 27, 2023, 05:28:41 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on November 22, 2023, 05:57:28 PM
I have to wonder if Alt. US 72/AL 20 through Town Creek will get a similar treatment in the future, given that it's a four-lane road through there with a 45 MPH speed limit and cops watching drivers like a hawk through it.

I figure whatever plans ALDOT had for improving Alt US 72 got shelved along with the rest of the Memphis-Huntsville-Atlanta interstate project. So unless that comes back from the dead, or a truncated version thereof (a counterbalance to I-565 for the Shoals?), I don't expect anything to happen.

Part of why I figure that, if anything happens, it'd be a road-diet to reduce the number of lanes from four to three through town.

Quote from: lordsutch on November 27, 2023, 05:28:41 PM
Besides which, there's bigger fish to fry than the one traffic signal in Town Creek, like the increasing number of signals on Alt 72 going through Decatur and the annoying slog through the outskirts of the Shoals further west.

Ironically, I don't find those areas to be too bad, at least while chasing trains? Though, with the ever-increasing number of industries along AL 20 in NW Decatur/Trinity, I suppose the increase of traffic lights along that stretch is to be expected...
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: clong on November 28, 2023, 11:42:11 AM
Announcement of US280 road widening - 1 additional lane in each direction between Lakeshore Drive and Perimeter Park (just outside I-459).
https://issuu.com/280living/docs/vv_1223_issuu (https://issuu.com/280living/docs/vv_1223_issuu)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on December 15, 2023, 09:42:53 AM
Alabama 304 is officially posted, though only on the very short stretch from I-65 to Lindsey Lane alongside the Buc-ee's. I believe Cody mentioned it about 2-3 years ago in the ALDOT letting notes. There is also a unisign on the off-ramp from I-65 which points both East and West, but I couldn't get a clear photo of it.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53399854020_d3f8c6060b_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2pmLdbh)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53399420456_b0a208c544_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2pmHZi3)

Construction continues on Huntsville-Brownsferry Road from US 31 to I-65, and traffic has shifted to the new alignment (also not yet signed).

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53399420306_6bb07293d7_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2pmHZfs)

Curiously, Huntsville-Brownsferry Road has a Limestone County Road sign just east of Lindsay Lane, making it the only posted Limestone County road; the other CR24 shield is pointing the way out of Buc-ee's...

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53399742104_97a6aa5633_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2pmKCUG) 
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on December 15, 2023, 02:19:04 PM
Quote from: formulanone on December 15, 2023, 09:42:53 AM
Curiously, Huntsville-Brownsferry Road has a Limestone County Road sign just east of Lindsay Lane, making it the only posted Limestone County road; the other CR24 shield is pointing the way out of Buc-ee's...

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53399742104_97a6aa5633_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2pmKCUG) 

I seem to recall seeing one on the NW side of Athens earlier this year, just south of AL 99.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ttownfeen on January 04, 2024, 01:59:00 PM
I don't think that's an issue limited to Limestone County. It is odd that more country roads are not posted in general.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on January 04, 2024, 06:11:13 PM
Quote from: ttownfeen on January 04, 2024, 01:59:00 PM
I don't think that's an issue limited to Limestone County. It is odd that more country roads are not posted in general.

Off the top of my head, Mobile, Jefferson, and Madison are all bad or non-existent.  Last I checked, Madison doesn't even have county routes. County roads, sure, but if you look at ALDOT's county general map, you'll notice a complete lack of county route shields.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on January 05, 2024, 12:26:51 AM
Quote from: froggie on January 04, 2024, 06:11:13 PM
Quote from: ttownfeen on January 04, 2024, 01:59:00 PM
I don't think that's an issue limited to Limestone County. It is odd that more country roads are not posted in general.

Off the top of my head, Mobile, Jefferson, and Madison are all bad or non-existent.  Last I checked, Madison doesn't even have county routes. County roads, sure, but if you look at ALDOT's county general map, you'll notice a complete lack of county route shields.

I believe there are designated county route numbers, but Madison County does not sign them on any level. When Old Highway 431 in Hampton Cove was closed for bridge work these past few years, the detour was signed with county route shields, a bit unusually, though I believe that was the contractor's doing.

Morgan County used to have county routes, but when they adopted a 911 system in the 90s, as I understand it, the county route numbers were depreciated in favor of road names. The last county route shield I'm aware of in Morgan County was along US 231 in Lacey's Springs, but it was removed sometime a few years back. Marshall County is another one that doesn't post their county routes, in fact, I'm not aware of any county route numbers assigned there. I believe Etowah County is the same way in that they don't sign county routes.

Colbert County still seems to use a mix of County Route shields and street names, though every signed county route also has an associated name for the road.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: sturmde on January 05, 2024, 12:45:41 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on January 05, 2024, 12:26:51 AM
Quote from: froggie on January 04, 2024, 06:11:13 PM
Quote from: ttownfeen on January 04, 2024, 01:59:00 PM
I don't think that's an issue limited to Limestone County. It is odd that more country roads are not posted in general.

Off the top of my head, Mobile, Jefferson, and Madison are all bad or non-existent.  Last I checked, Madison doesn't even have county routes. County roads, sure, but if you look at ALDOT's county general map, you'll notice a complete lack of county route shields.

I believe there are designated county route numbers, but Madison County does not sign them on any level. When Old Highway 431 in Hampton Cove was closed for bridge work these past few years, the detour was signed with county route shields, a bit unusually, though I believe that was the contractor's doing.

Morgan County used to have county routes, but when they adopted a 911 system in the 90s, as I understand it, the county route numbers were depreciated in favor of road names. The last county route shield I'm aware of in Morgan County was along US 231 in Lacey's Springs, but it was removed sometime a few years back. Marshall County is another one that doesn't post their county routes, in fact, I'm not aware of any county route numbers assigned there. I believe Etowah County is the same way in that they don't sign county routes.

Colbert County still seems to use a mix of County Route shields and street names, though every signed county route also has an associated name for the road.

Quite the contrast with nearby Cullman County, and Auburn's Lee County... where every road in the county outside city limits has a County Road number as the address!  Cullman has 4 digit numbers as a result... I think Lee only went into 3 digits.  Reminds me though, Pike County has 4 digit county routes, and a strange quadrant system where many routes have a doubled digit start...
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: froggie on January 05, 2024, 04:17:47 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on January 05, 2024, 12:26:51 AM
Quote from: froggie on January 04, 2024, 06:11:13 PM
Quote from: ttownfeen on January 04, 2024, 01:59:00 PM
I don't think that's an issue limited to Limestone County. It is odd that more country roads are not posted in general.

Off the top of my head, Mobile, Jefferson, and Madison are all bad or non-existent.  Last I checked, Madison doesn't even have county routes. County roads, sure, but if you look at ALDOT's county general map, you'll notice a complete lack of county route shields.

I believe there are designated county route numbers, but Madison County does not sign them on any level.

If you have a source, I'd love to see it.  In 25+ years of looking (dating back to my Meridian days), I have yet to find one...at least at ALDOT's level.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on January 06, 2024, 01:40:04 AM
Quote from: froggie on January 05, 2024, 04:17:47 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on January 05, 2024, 12:26:51 AM
Quote from: froggie on January 04, 2024, 06:11:13 PM
Quote from: ttownfeen on January 04, 2024, 01:59:00 PM
I don't think that's an issue limited to Limestone County. It is odd that more country roads are not posted in general.

Off the top of my head, Mobile, Jefferson, and Madison are all bad or non-existent.  Last I checked, Madison doesn't even have county routes. County roads, sure, but if you look at ALDOT's county general map, you'll notice a complete lack of county route shields.

I believe there are designated county route numbers, but Madison County does not sign them on any level.

If you have a source, I'd love to see it.  In 25+ years of looking (dating back to my Meridian days), I have yet to find one...at least at ALDOT's level.

I've typically found them on FRA inventory reports, and, of course, the county route shields that went-up for the Old Highway 431 detour in Hampton Cove. I'll have to dig out my photos of the latter.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: Avalanchez71 on January 09, 2024, 09:09:19 PM
Quote from: formulanone on December 15, 2023, 09:42:53 AM
Alabama 304 is officially posted, though only on the very short stretch from I-65 to Lindsey Lane alongside the Buc-ee's. I believe Cody mentioned it about 2-3 years ago in the ALDOT letting notes. There is also a unisign on the off-ramp from I-65 which points both East and West, but I couldn't get a clear photo of it.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53399854020_d3f8c6060b_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2pmLdbh)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53399420456_b0a208c544_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2pmHZi3)

Construction continues on Huntsville-Brownsferry Road from US 31 to I-65, and traffic has shifted to the new alignment (also not yet signed).

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53399420306_6bb07293d7_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2pmHZfs)

Curiously, Huntsville-Brownsferry Road has a Limestone County Road sign just east of Lindsay Lane, making it the only posted Limestone County road; the other CR24 shield is pointing the way out of Buc-ee's...

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53399742104_97a6aa5633_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2pmKCUG)

CR 83 says hello off of SR 251, CR 83 is posted.
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.8132434,-86.9303719,3a,15y,64.88h,85.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scxzJKuKWt6uZ1gWVna7khQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.8132434,-86.9303719,3a,15y,64.88h,85.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scxzJKuKWt6uZ1gWVna7khQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu)
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on January 09, 2024, 09:38:28 PM
Quote from: Avalanchez71 on January 09, 2024, 09:09:19 PM
Quote from: formulanone on December 15, 2023, 09:42:53 AM
Alabama 304 is officially posted, though only on the very short stretch from I-65 to Lindsey Lane alongside the Buc-ee's. I believe Cody mentioned it about 2-3 years ago in the ALDOT letting notes. There is also a unisign on the off-ramp from I-65 which points both East and West, but I couldn't get a clear photo of it.

[...]

Curiously, Huntsville-Brownsferry Road has a Limestone County Road sign just east of Lindsay Lane, making it the only posted Limestone County road; the other CR24 shield is pointing the way out of Buc-ee's...

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53399742104_97a6aa5633_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2pmKCUG)

CR 83 says hello off of SR 251, CR 83 is posted.
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.8132434,-86.9303719,3a,15y,64.88h,85.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scxzJKuKWt6uZ1gWVna7khQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.8132434,-86.9303719,3a,15y,64.88h,85.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scxzJKuKWt6uZ1gWVna7khQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu)

Oh, and a 2-digit shield width for a 3 digit route.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on January 19, 2024, 07:49:58 PM
So, within the past year or so, a new turn lane was put in in the median of Alt. US 72 just east of US 43 over in the Shoals, right where this gantry (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7096525,-87.6636954,3a,40.5y,294.17h,96.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQ7lwy81HFGpqoHy7y7ylAQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) was. As a result, ALDOT replaced it with a new gantry and newer signage, but, rather than copying the previous signage, the new signage has left-off the control cities and directional arrows, for some reason.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53474562031_1e4f790128.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2ptn7gr)
IMG_4038 (https://flic.kr/p/2ptn7gr) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53474875519_1b01b83297.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2ptoHsp)
IMG_4039 (https://flic.kr/p/2ptoHsp) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ttownfeen on January 26, 2024, 06:32:01 PM
In west Alabama, you'll see country road signs posted frequently at junctions, but I rarely see them reassurance signs posted. To see one with a direction sign as well is very weird.

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.1572228,-87.5492476,3a,75y,185.87h,89.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJA-ydJyEZPzPP2Pheq3mbQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: freebrickproductions on February 15, 2024, 04:30:04 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on January 06, 2024, 01:40:04 AM
Quote from: froggie on January 05, 2024, 04:17:47 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on January 05, 2024, 12:26:51 AM
Quote from: froggie on January 04, 2024, 06:11:13 PM
Quote from: ttownfeen on January 04, 2024, 01:59:00 PM
I don't think that's an issue limited to Limestone County. It is odd that more country roads are not posted in general.

Off the top of my head, Mobile, Jefferson, and Madison are all bad or non-existent.  Last I checked, Madison doesn't even have county routes. County roads, sure, but if you look at ALDOT's county general map, you'll notice a complete lack of county route shields.

I believe there are designated county route numbers, but Madison County does not sign them on any level.

If you have a source, I'd love to see it.  In 25+ years of looking (dating back to my Meridian days), I have yet to find one...at least at ALDOT's level.

I've typically found them on FRA inventory reports, and, of course, the county route shields that went-up for the Old Highway 431 detour in Hampton Cove. I'll have to dig out my photos of the latter.

Well, I found at least some of my photos of the Old Highway 431 detour shields that were posted along US 431 in Hampton Cove. Apparently the county internally logs Old Highway 431 as CR 242.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53531893730_4272a06119.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2pyqWZ1)
IMG_3899 (https://flic.kr/p/2pyqWZ1) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53531893735_30e01e4fa0.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2pyqWZ6)
IMG_3900 (https://flic.kr/p/2pyqWZ6) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53531779894_e87fec45c1.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2pyqn9j)
IMG_3901 (https://flic.kr/p/2pyqn9j) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: formulanone on February 15, 2024, 04:49:23 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on February 15, 2024, 04:30:04 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on January 06, 2024, 01:40:04 AM
Quote from: froggie on January 05, 2024, 04:17:47 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on January 05, 2024, 12:26:51 AM
Quote from: froggie on January 04, 2024, 06:11:13 PM
Quote from: ttownfeen on January 04, 2024, 01:59:00 PM
I don't think that's an issue limited to Limestone County. It is odd that more country roads are not posted in general.

Off the top of my head, Mobile, Jefferson, and Madison are all bad or non-existent.  Last I checked, Madison doesn't even have county routes. County roads, sure, but if you look at ALDOT's county general map, you'll notice a complete lack of county route shields.

I believe there are designated county route numbers, but Madison County does not sign them on any level.

If you have a source, I'd love to see it.  In 25+ years of looking (dating back to my Meridian days), I have yet to find one...at least at ALDOT's level.

I've typically found them on FRA inventory reports, and, of course, the county route shields that went-up for the Old Highway 431 detour in Hampton Cove. I'll have to dig out my photos of the latter.

Well, I found at least some of my photos of the Old Highway 431 detour shields that were posted along US 431 in Hampton Cove. Apparently the county internally logs Old Highway 431 as CR 242.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53531893730_4272a06119.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2pyqWZ1)
IMG_3899 (https://flic.kr/p/2pyqWZ1) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53531893735_30e01e4fa0.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2pyqWZ6)
IMG_3900 (https://flic.kr/p/2pyqWZ6) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53531779894_e87fec45c1.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2pyqn9j)
IMG_3901 (https://flic.kr/p/2pyqn9j) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr

Good, your photos were better than mine...they were all blurry and dim.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: rcm195 on February 20, 2024, 11:34:35 AM
Has there been any updates on the progress of the US 82 bypass around Gordo?
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 20, 2024, 01:27:01 PM
Google Maps Street View was updated last month. Western end: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.3338219,-87.922922,3a,75y,89.61h,88.88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxN9m5kZ2aCCeSdVfP-gotQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DxN9m5kZ2aCCeSdVfP-gotQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D316.59262%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu. Eastern end: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.2847698,-87.8504205,3a,75y,294.68h,90.68t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sVKx4MvpMZVX_q_5PoVZRNA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DVKx4MvpMZVX_q_5PoVZRNA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D32.93423%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: asdfjkll on March 01, 2024, 10:45:56 PM
https://alletting.dot.state.al.us/WEBPROPS/2024/20240329/NTC_March_29_24.html#CALL001 Birmingham Northern Beltline SR-79 to SR-75 section bridges and paving package has shown up on this month's letting!
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: The Ghostbuster on March 02, 2024, 04:07:09 PM
I didn't think that segment of the BNB would ever be completed, nor any other segment of the BNB would ever be built. For years, this is all that has existed of the Birmingham Northern Beltway: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7406618,-86.6667822,2769m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: ElishaGOtis on March 02, 2024, 07:53:04 PM
Quote from: asdfjkll on March 01, 2024, 10:45:56 PM
https://alletting.dot.state.al.us/WEBPROPS/2024/20240329/NTC_March_29_24.html#CALL001 Birmingham Northern Beltline SR-79 to SR-75 section bridges and paving package has shown up on this month's letting!

From that page:
QuoteThe Bracket Estimate on this project is from $58,338,408 to $71,302,499 .

Goodness me that's expensive, even with the terrain construction completed! :-o Wouldn't as much of a surprise if they're starting from scratch (estimates were showing as much as $100M/mile), but this is mostly cleared...
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: bdmoss88 on March 06, 2024, 11:58:47 AM
Quote from: rcm195 on February 20, 2024, 11:34:35 AM
Has there been any updates on the progress of the US 82 bypass around Gordo?
The last time I was up there was in December and there had been no progress for quite some time.
Title: Re: Alabama
Post by: codyg1985 on March 11, 2024, 09:37:40 AM
Quote from: ElishaGOtis on March 02, 2024, 07:53:04 PM
Quote from: asdfjkll on March 01, 2024, 10:45:56 PM
https://alletting.dot.state.al.us/WEBPROPS/2024/20240329/NTC_March_29_24.html#CALL001 Birmingham Northern Beltline SR-79 to SR-75 section bridges and paving package has shown up on this month's letting!

From that page:
QuoteThe Bracket Estimate on this project is from $58,338,408 to $71,302,499 .

Goodness me that's expensive, even with the terrain construction completed! :-o Wouldn't as much of a surprise if they're starting from scratch (estimates were showing as much as $100M/mile), but this is mostly cleared...

They are building one carriageway but it will be wide enough for two lanes in each direction. It will be concrete pavement. For now, it will be signed as AL 959 (Corridor X-1).