Regional Boards > Mountain West

Utah

<< < (3/54) > >>

SD Mapman:

--- Quote from: Rover_0 on June 01, 2017, 12:07:29 AM ---
--- Quote from: roadguy2 on May 31, 2017, 11:43:32 PM ---
--- Quote from: Rover_0 on May 20, 2017, 07:42:14 PM ---I'm told by UDOT's Engineering Manager that signs have been ordered for US-189 in Wasatch County (in Region 3) for its portion of the concurrency with US-40.

--- End quote ---

Unfortunately, as of today there is still an END 189 sign in Heber, and no 189 signs north of there. Hopefully UDOT gets going on that soon.


--- Quote from: sparker on May 21, 2017, 05:07:56 AM ---I suppose this means that US 189 will remain multiplexed (and actually signed) with US 40 all the way to the I-80 interchange that marks the western end of US 40 rather than departing from the US 40 alignment and subsuming UT 32 via Kamas, the original US 189 alignment.  IIRC, several years ago (after the completion of I-80 in the region) US 189 was actually re-routed and signed for a while over the UT 32 alignment; it would seem that by utilizing this routing US 189's status as a separate designation would be enhanced as opposed to being perceived as simply a series of multiplexes in the area. 

--- End quote ---

So does this mean that there will just be an END 189 sign next to the current END 40 sign? That doesn't seem like much of an improvement over the current situation.

And I agree, 189 should just be signed over the full route of today's SR-32.

--- End quote ---
These things take time...as someone with family in Kanab (and who regularly visits), I can attest that it took 3 years between the legislative restoration of US-89A (or decommissioning of SR-11) in 2008 and the posting of US-89A in Utah in 2011.

As far as "END US-189" being signed at END US-40, I don't see it happening. The I-80/US-189 concurrency is also entirely within Summit County (and hence Region 2). But I do agree with US-189 being (re-)re-routed along its old alignment (currently SR-32).

XT1585

--- End quote ---

Well, apparently Google decided that US 189 was in fact re-routed: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6883639,-111.2896189,11z

Is this real or just Google being ignorant?

US 89:

--- Quote from: SD Mapman on June 18, 2017, 01:19:40 AM ---
--- Quote from: Rover_0 on June 01, 2017, 12:07:29 AM ---
--- Quote from: roadguy2 on May 31, 2017, 11:43:32 PM ---
--- Quote from: Rover_0 on May 20, 2017, 07:42:14 PM ---I'm told by UDOT's Engineering Manager that signs have been ordered for US-189 in Wasatch County (in Region 3) for its portion of the concurrency with US-40.

--- End quote ---

Unfortunately, as of today there is still an END 189 sign in Heber, and no 189 signs north of there. Hopefully UDOT gets going on that soon.


--- Quote from: sparker on May 21, 2017, 05:07:56 AM ---I suppose this means that US 189 will remain multiplexed (and actually signed) with US 40 all the way to the I-80 interchange that marks the western end of US 40 rather than departing from the US 40 alignment and subsuming UT 32 via Kamas, the original US 189 alignment.  IIRC, several years ago (after the completion of I-80 in the region) US 189 was actually re-routed and signed for a while over the UT 32 alignment; it would seem that by utilizing this routing US 189's status as a separate designation would be enhanced as opposed to being perceived as simply a series of multiplexes in the area. 

--- End quote ---

So does this mean that there will just be an END 189 sign next to the current END 40 sign? That doesn't seem like much of an improvement over the current situation.

And I agree, 189 should just be signed over the full route of today's SR-32.

--- End quote ---
These things take time...as someone with family in Kanab (and who regularly visits), I can attest that it took 3 years between the legislative restoration of US-89A (or decommissioning of SR-11) in 2008 and the posting of US-89A in Utah in 2011.

As far as "END US-189" being signed at END US-40, I don't see it happening. The I-80/US-189 concurrency is also entirely within Summit County (and hence Region 2). But I do agree with US-189 being (re-)re-routed along its old alignment (currently SR-32).

XT1585

--- End quote ---

Well, apparently Google decided that US 189 was in fact re-routed: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6883639,-111.2896189,11z

Is this real or just Google being ignorant?

--- End quote ---

That's Google being ignorant, pretty sure. I was up there a few weeks ago and nothing had changed in terms of signage.

Rover_0:

--- Quote from: roadguy2 on June 18, 2017, 10:06:21 AM ---
--- Quote from: SD Mapman on June 18, 2017, 01:19:40 AM ---
--- Quote from: Rover_0 on June 01, 2017, 12:07:29 AM ---
--- Quote from: roadguy2 on May 31, 2017, 11:43:32 PM ---
--- Quote from: Rover_0 on May 20, 2017, 07:42:14 PM ---I'm told by UDOT's Engineering Manager that signs have been ordered for US-189 in Wasatch County (in Region 3) for its portion of the concurrency with US-40.

--- End quote ---

Unfortunately, as of today there is still an END 189 sign in Heber, and no 189 signs north of there. Hopefully UDOT gets going on that soon.


--- Quote from: sparker on May 21, 2017, 05:07:56 AM ---I suppose this means that US 189 will remain multiplexed (and actually signed) with US 40 all the way to the I-80 interchange that marks the western end of US 40 rather than departing from the US 40 alignment and subsuming UT 32 via Kamas, the original US 189 alignment.  IIRC, several years ago (after the completion of I-80 in the region) US 189 was actually re-routed and signed for a while over the UT 32 alignment; it would seem that by utilizing this routing US 189's status as a separate designation would be enhanced as opposed to being perceived as simply a series of multiplexes in the area. 

--- End quote ---

So does this mean that there will just be an END 189 sign next to the current END 40 sign? That doesn't seem like much of an improvement over the current situation.

And I agree, 189 should just be signed over the full route of today's SR-32.

--- End quote ---
These things take time...as someone with family in Kanab (and who regularly visits), I can attest that it took 3 years between the legislative restoration of US-89A (or decommissioning of SR-11) in 2008 and the posting of US-89A in Utah in 2011.

As far as "END US-189" being signed at END US-40, I don't see it happening. The I-80/US-189 concurrency is also entirely within Summit County (and hence Region 2). But I do agree with US-189 being (re-)re-routed along its old alignment (currently SR-32).

XT1585

--- End quote ---

Well, apparently Google decided that US 189 was in fact re-routed: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6883639,-111.2896189,11z

Is this real or just Google being ignorant?

--- End quote ---

That's Google being ignorant, pretty sure. I was up there a few weeks ago and nothing had changed in terms of signage.

--- End quote ---

Given that no changes to SR-32 or US-189 were noted in both the 2017 Utah State Legislative session or in the AASHTO SCOURN meeting, it's a pretty safe bet that it's Google being ignorant. Not that I don't disagree or anything, but it's a Google goof.

The Ghostbuster:
What is the status for the SR-85 freeway project? That's the one I'm most interested in.

US 89:

--- Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 19, 2017, 04:38:31 PM ---What is the status for the SR-85 freeway project? That's the one I'm most interested in.

--- End quote ---

The phase they are working on now is the frontage roads or outside lanes of the future freeway. These are already built on the portion from Porter Rockwell Blvd (15000 S) north to 5400 S, as well as the Lehi 2100 North portion. They're going to open the part from 5400 S to 4100 S sometime in the next few months, and it's funded north to SR-201. In the near future, they will extend the future frontage roads north to I-80 and south to SR-73 and connect it with the 2100 N portion. This phase will function as a high-speed (55-65mph) expressway.

In the far future, they will build the freeway between the frontage roads.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version