Recent posts

#1

Traffic Control / Re: Unique, Odd, or Interestin...

Last post by GaryA - Today at 01:45:47 PM

One of my favorite "downtown" signs was on I-880 in Hayward, CA:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/UvkRaY93Z5Y2EKuE9

"A Street Downtown" - strikes me as almost poetic. It's since been replaced by signs reading simply "A Street" (well, duh, of course it's a street).

#2

Mid-South / I-610/I-69 interchange

Last post by longhorn - Today at 01:10:38 PM

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7287857,-95.4603706,3a,68.3y,131.84h,105.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSjM7kYtYeFFDcaWJstkYLw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Google maps have updated this area in their maps. Looking at up I-610 what are the inside lanes for? The rest of the bridge supports are complete, so they are ramps for something.

#3

Southeast / Re: Interstate 73/74

Last post by Rothman - Today at 12:53:27 PM

I don't get the need for full access at all 3 interchanges.

I was wondering this as well. Who is going from I-40 westbound to I-74 westbound or eastbound, or I-74 (either direction) to I-40 EB? There are no plans to continue the beltway south/west, right? Seems like a massive interchange for very little traffic.

I agree... I can understand the ramps for redundancy, but 2 lane flyovers seem a bit excessive. Well... at least they will never be congested!

FHWA requires full movement at all Interstate interchanges (with very few exceptions) hence the redundant ramps.

When I-481 is converted to I-81, its connection from I-81 SB to BL-81 NB will no longer be direct as I-481 SB to I-81 NB is now, despite BL-81 still being limited access north of the interchange.

Of course, that will no longer be an interstate/interstate junction at that point.

Butbutbut...it's still an Interstate shield...it's just green...

I honestly would not be surprised if this regulation is the reason why keeping the freeway north of I-690 as a 3di was nixed (along with the plan to build the missing movements at the I-690 interchange).  Still don't know why it couldn't be a state route the whole way, however.  Region 3 just dodged the question when I asked.

Honestly, I think the option for 3dis was overlooked and then when considered, FHWA was already on board with BL-81 and NYSDOT didn't want to go back and fiddle with AASHTO and redrafting whatever documents already drafted.  So, a goof...that caused the federal share to go from 90 to 80...

#4

Southeast / Re: Interstate 73/74

Last post by vdeane - Today at 12:43:24 PM

I don't get the need for full access at all 3 interchanges.

I was wondering this as well. Who is going from I-40 westbound to I-74 westbound or eastbound, or I-74 (either direction) to I-40 EB? There are no plans to continue the beltway south/west, right? Seems like a massive interchange for very little traffic.

I agree... I can understand the ramps for redundancy, but 2 lane flyovers seem a bit excessive. Well... at least they will never be congested!

FHWA requires full movement at all Interstate interchanges (with very few exceptions) hence the redundant ramps.

When I-481 is converted to I-81, its connection from I-81 SB to BL-81 NB will no longer be direct as I-481 SB to I-81 NB is now, despite BL-81 still being limited access north of the interchange.

Of course, that will no longer be an interstate/interstate junction at that point.

I honestly would not be surprised if this regulation is the reason why keeping the freeway north of I-690 as a 3di was nixed (along with the plan to build the missing movements at the I-690 interchange).  Still don't know why it couldn't be a state route the whole way, however.  Region 3 just dodged the question when I asked.

#5

Traffic Control / Re: 1-2-3 Route number Additio...

Last post by hotdogPi - Today at 12:40:50 PM

1465 = VA 895 + US 360 + VA 150 + US 60 by 74/171FAN (I-95 NB at VA 895 EB (Exit 67A) in Richmond, VA)(https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10217882324570271&set=a.10217882434013007)

#6

Traffic Control / Re: Active highway shields tha...

Last post by Hunty2022 - Today at 12:19:37 PM

I've probably touched a couple US 50 shields in the Ocean City, MD area, plus maybe a couple for DE-1 and DE-54 in Fenwick Island.

#7

Sports / Re: Arizona Coyotes players ap...

Last post by JayhawkCO - Today at 12:14:46 PM

Yes, yes, it snows "everywhere" at some point.  You know what I meant.

Not really.

Oh yeah?!?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowball_Earth

Figured something like that was coming. Recorded history works for me as opposed to a hypothesis.

It was just a joke you know.

For sure. I take almost nothing seriously on this site.

#8

Sports / Re: Arizona Coyotes players ap...

Last post by SEWIGuy - Today at 12:09:24 PM

Yes, yes, it snows "everywhere" at some point.  You know what I meant.

Not really.

Oh yeah?!?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowball_Earth

Figured something like that was coming. Recorded history works for me as opposed to a hypothesis.

It was just a joke you know.

#9

Pacific Southwest / Re: CA 203

Last post by heynow415 - Today at 12:07:44 PM

Another advantage of a 108/Sonora Pass tunnel alignment for an I-70 extension is that it would have lined up nicely with passing just south of Stockton (and the Port of) and then as an east/southeast entry to the Bay Area via the Altamont Pass/I-580/I-205/SR 120. 

I always thought it was strange how 108/120 are basically freeways up to the Sonora area and then 108 has sections that keep going as random freeway and expressway in the mountains for it to just go straight into a windy road after Strawberry and Pinecrest Lake.

The Sonora "freeway" section is relatively new in the grand scheme of things but the three short expressway segments east of Knights Landing, through Twain Harte, and at Long Barn have been in place 50+ years.  It is unfortunate that the notion of extending 120 east of 99 as a freeway to Oakdale is basically dead, though Escalon and Oakdale are probably rightly concerned that a freeway bypassing those communities would be a huge hit to them economically.

Four-laning 108(120) from the east end of the Knights Ferry segment to Yosemite Junction would seem like a relatively simple project given the ruralness and terrain; getting from the Junction through Jamestown to the Sonora segment would be a much bigger challenge.  The section from the east end of the Sonora segment to the Twain Harte expressway is supposedly in the works.  It's unlikely that the gap from Twain Harte to Long Barn would ever be built since trying to thread it through Mi-Wuk Village and other hamlets along the way, plus the terrain, is likely not justifiable from a cost, environmental, and constructability standpoint.  And beyond Pinecrest it just isn't needed.

They are making 108/120 a freeway to Oakdale (eventually)

https://northcountycorridorphase1.com/project-overview/#:~:text=The%20ultimate%20North%20County%20Corridor,was%20segmented%20into%20four%20phases.

That's not the original 120 project.  120 was supposed to continue directly east of the current 120 fwy/99 interchnage on a new alignment that would ultimately sweep around the north side of Oakdale.  It's discussed extensively here:  https://www.cahighways.org/ROUTE120.html . 108 to Modesto has its own issues so the North County project is certainly needed as well.

#10

General Highway Talk / Re: Routing Decisions that can...

Last post by 1995hoo - Today at 12:03:15 PM

It's no longer the case, but this thread made me think of the problem of passing through the Baltimore area up until the Fort McHenry Tunnel opened in November 1985. ....

Ah, the Harbor Tunnel! If you think that was bad, you should have seen it before the Key Bridge (RIP) was opened.  ....

I almost certainly experienced the Harbor Tunnel before the bridge opened, but I don't remember any such trips because the bridge opened just over two months before my fourth birthday.