News:

Needing some php assistance with the script on the main AARoads site. Please contact Alex if you would like to help or provide advice!

Main Menu

I-44 decommissioned between US 50 west and Lindbergh Blvd in the St Louis metr

Started by bugo, March 19, 2014, 03:51:37 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

codyg1985

I asked the MoDOT twitter account about this, and here is the response:

QuoteNew FHWA reqs. Now use markers shown in link for interstates. Removed shields to reduce clutter. http://epg.modot.mo.gov/index.php?title=903.9_General_Information_Signs#903.9.4_Emergency_Reference_Markers_.28D10-5.29

So they are saying that they are using the mile posts to show that the road is indeed I-44.
Cody Goodman
Huntsville, AL, United States


Alex

Quote from: codyg1985 on April 02, 2014, 10:26:06 AM
I asked the MoDOT twitter account about this, and here is the response:

QuoteNew FHWA reqs. Now use markers shown in link for interstates. Removed shields to reduce clutter. http://epg.modot.mo.gov/index.php?title=903.9_General_Information_Signs#903.9.4_Emergency_Reference_Markers_.28D10-5.29

So they are saying that they are using the mile posts to show that the road is indeed I-44.

Reduce clutter but strain eye sight...

corco

I understand the intent but holy crap that is going to confuse people

codyg1985

I don't get it, honestly.

I asked whether this will happen on other interstates that have concurrent state or US routes, and this was the response:

QuoteIt's the new standard for all interstates. As we install new markers, we'll remove shields.

Here is a link to the Twitter thread.
Cody Goodman
Huntsville, AL, United States

Alex

Quote from: codyg1985 on April 02, 2014, 10:38:23 AM
I don't get it, honestly.

I asked whether this will happen on other interstates that have concurrent state or US routes, and this was the response:

QuoteIt's the new standard for all interstates. As we install new markers, we'll remove shields.

Here is a link to the Twitter thread.

Sure hope that policy stays confined to Missouri. Would hate to see it in play on NC's Interstates in places like Greensboro.

Brandon

Quote from: codyg1985 on April 02, 2014, 10:38:23 AM
I don't get it, honestly.

I asked whether this will happen on other interstates that have concurrent state or US routes, and this was the response:

QuoteIt's the new standard for all interstates. As we install new markers, we'll remove shields.

Here is a link to the Twitter thread.

That's fucked.  When ISTHA added the mileposts with the shields, they were white on green and kept the reassurance shields.  IDOT uses them in a few places, but keeps the reassurance shields.  Even InDOT does so.  MoDOT is showing their MoronDOT side here.
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton, "Game of Thrones"

"Symbolic of his struggle against reality." - Reg, "Monty Python's Life of Brian"

corco

I kinda get it on routes with no concurrency, but on concurrent route you're now giving priority to a route Joe Passerthrough doesn't know exist, which is beyond stupid

Alex

So based upon this new found logic, does that mean all of the reassurance markers for I-49 posted on US 71 will now come down? Then you may as well have not even bothered upgrading it to I-49 if you are just going to post it solely as US 71.

getemngo

Quote from: Alex on April 02, 2014, 01:41:34 PM
So based upon this new found logic, does that mean all of the reassurance markers for I-49 posted on US 71 will now come down? Then you may as well have not even bothered upgrading it to I-49 if you are just going to post it solely as US 71.

Would it not get more funding if designated as an Interstate, even if unsigned? Or do I completely not understand how this works?
~ Sam from Michigan

Scott5114

I am pretty sure that this violates the MUTCD. Someone should point MoDOT to the relevant language.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

mcdonaat


signalman

Quote from: corco on March 19, 2014, 03:28:32 PM
I got some when I took 50 across the state on my way home, I'll post them tonight
Not trying to sound demanding in any way, so please don't take it that way.  However, could you please post the pic(s) that you said you were going to of this.  I'm dying to see.

bugo

The small shields on the milemarkers are hard enough for me to see, so they must be really hard for a person with poor eyesight to see.  MoDOT are being moronic as usual.

kharvey10

I would love to see that on I-64, which in Missouri has been known by the locals as "Highway 40" from day one.

english si

Quote from: kharvey10 on April 04, 2014, 11:24:41 PM
I would love to see that on I-64, which in Missouri has been known by the locals as "Highway 40" from day one.
I mentioned it in the I-244 April Fools joke, that I-64 in MO would have been much more believable

apeman33

Just saw this thread. On my trip to Danville, Ill., to cover the local junior college basketball team at the national tournament, I drove up on Mo 110/Not I-35 and came back via U.S. 50/Not I-44.

I'm wondering how many drivers on each, especially on I-44, think they've turned the wrong way somewhere and think they're lost?

kkt

Quote from: codyg1985 on April 02, 2014, 10:38:23 AM
I don't get it, honestly.

I asked whether this will happen on other interstates that have concurrent state or US routes, and this was the response:
QuoteIt's the new standard for all interstates. As we install new markers, we'll remove shields.

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

billtm


Arkansastravelguy


Quote from: billtm on June 25, 2014, 10:15:15 PM
Will this only apply to concurrencies? :confused:
I was in St Louis a few weeks ago and the only place doing it is St Louis County. I found it interesting that 64 is still signed with US40, and so is I255 with US 50


iPhone



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.