Quote from: paulthemapguy on Today at 04:24:27 PMQuote from: Rothman on April 23, 2024, 10:11:47 PMState maintained =/= state route.
Wat.
It's state-maintained and it's a route. It's a state route. It may not be a State Route, but it's a state route. The adjective "state" and the noun "route" are both correct.
IDOT maintains plenty of roads that are not signed routes. Besides signed numerical designations, there is a separate internal set of numerical designations for various roads across Illinois, state-maintained and otherwise (shown as "FAP", "FAU", etc.). But I don't think that's even what appears at the top of these mile markers. The process of deciding these numbers for the top of these mile markers has always been a mystery to me. Such numbers are usually in the 8000s or 900s (though 316 is an oddball).
Bill Burmaster's (rmsandw) site has covered a plethora of these unsigned state highways: https://www.billburmaster.com/rmsandw/illinois/misc/il900.html
Quote from: Rothman on April 23, 2024, 10:11:47 PMState maintained =/= state route.
Quote from: epzik8 on April 20, 2024, 08:49:54 PMQuote from: TheHighwayMan3561 on April 20, 2024, 12:26:17 PMQuote from: JayhawkCO on April 20, 2024, 08:33:59 AMQuote from: epzik8 on April 19, 2024, 05:58:09 PMAll of a sudden, Jayden Daniels doesn't appear headed to Landover after whatever that quarterback visit was.
I think this might end up benefiting the Vikings efforts to trade up. I have a hunch Daniels might fall a bit, perhaps into an easier range for the Vikings to trade into.
I feel it would be a coup for the Vikings. I'm really uninterested in any of the QBs below Drake Maye, so that would have me feeling a lot better.
I just don't want us (Commanders) to trade the second pick to the Raiders as some are suggesting, if it means we have to wait another year for a top prospect who may not be as capable as any of this year's.
Quote from: cowboy_wilhelm on April 23, 2024, 08:20:24 PMThe design year traffic volume is at least 20 years from the time construction is planned to start. The design year is 2040 for this project, which is now the estimated let date. The problem is the final planning document was signed by the FHWA in 2018. Things kind of get etched into stone at that point. The final design plans can't deviate very much from what was complete when the planning document was signed without starting the planning and review process all over again. Design and planning is expensive and lead to further delays. An updated traffic forecast may still happen, but unless the forecast shows the proposed design won't operate at an acceptable level of service in the new design year, the design is unlikely to change. So, unless there are drastic changes to the land use in the area and/or significant increases in traffic volumes, the design probably won't change at this point. Traffic counts at the interchange from the past several years don't really reflect that, but the latest counts are from 2022.
I can think of several other projects off hand that have traffic forecasts that are many years old with no sign of construction starting within the next decade and have wondered if they will remain unchanged or not.
I still don't know why a SPUI wasn't considered for this location and why NCDOT doesn't build them now. They specifically cited the right-of-way limitations at this interchange as a reason for not going with a different design than what was selected. It's been several years (decade?) since a SPUI was constructed in North Carolina, and I only know of one that is still proposed at Glenwood Ave./Brier Creek Pkwy. in Raleigh. Yeah, they're expensive, but it seems like these types of locations would warrant the compact design and associated cost.