Kansas DOT interesting contract advertisements

[Scott5114]

Aw, come on. Why?

Because Kansas.

(sighs.)

At least your DOT appears to have mastered basic principles of grammar, spelling, and design...

[Ned Weasel]

Aw, come on. Why?

Because Kansas.

(sighs.)

Just because roundabouts are trendy doesn't mean they're bad.

[apeman33]

Aw, come on. Why?

Because Kansas.

(sighs.)

Just because roundabouts are trendy doesn't mean they're bad.

I'm starting to think Kansas is overusing them. Maybe traffic patterns have changed but I didn't think that U.S. 75 and K-268 was a place that needed a roundabout. If they're truly needed, I don't have a problem with them. F'rinstance, you pretty much need a roundabout at Fredonia because, otherwise, I don't think K-47/Washington Street traffic would ever have a chance to cross (but it was badly designed, IMO).

So how is the traffic at 75 and K-268?

[J N Winkler]

I'm starting to think Kansas is overusing them. Maybe traffic patterns have changed but I didn't think that U.S. 75 and K-268 was a place that needed a roundabout. If they're truly needed, I don't have a problem with them. F'rinstance, you pretty much need a roundabout at Fredonia because, otherwise, I don't think K-47/Washington Street traffic would ever have a chance to cross (but it was badly designed, IMO).

So how is the traffic at 75 and K-268?

I can't comment on this intersection specifically, but the US 50/US 77 roundabout in Florence was justified on the basis of a persistent problem with fatal right-angle crashes which was not addressed by extra-large stop signs, flashing red beacons, and "US-50 DOES NOT STOP" supplementary plates.  I am sure there are other roundabouts on the rural state highway system in Kansas which have been justified on a similar basis.  While it is difficult to object to life-saving measures, this is a clear vector for apparent overuse since each roundabout is a break in (usually) 65-MPH travel.

Edit:  Looking closely at US 75/K-31/K-268, I would expect traffic to form a large part of the justification.  The title sheet quotes 2012 AADT of 6800 and 2032 AADT of 9000.  This is presumably the amount of traffic the roundabout will handle.  The current edition of the state traffic flow map shows traffic volumes in the 6000 range along US 75 and 3000 range along the K-31/K-268 axis.  In comparison, the US 50 and US 77 intersection handles much lower and more evenly balanced volumes of the order of 2000 along US 77 and 3500 along US 50.  With the exception of the bad right-angle crashes, this intersection was handled reasonably well with stop control.

US 75 north of Lyndon handles roughly the same traffic volumes as the US 54 Garden Plain-Pretty Prairie freeway between Cheney and the west end in far western Sedgwick and eastern Kingman counties.  KDOT even has plans on the shelf for a US 54 freeway bypass of Kingman, which will serve similar volumes (still sub-10,000 AADT in the design year).  US 54 gets more attention than US 75, despite the similar traffic, because of the long-standing plan to develop it into a Southern Kansas Corridor; US 75 is freeway for a distance south of Topeka (upgraded from a Super Two freeway built in the 1970's), but I am not sure the 1970's freeway/expressway designation along US 75 extends all the way to I-35, and I am definitely not aware of any plans for expressway upgrades either through or past Lyndon.

[route56]

So how is the traffic at 75 and K-268?

Looking closely at US 75/K-31/K-268, I would expect traffic to form a large part of the justification.  The title sheet quotes 2012 AADT of 6800 and 2032 AADT of 9000.  This is presumably the amount of traffic the roundabout will handle.  The current edition of the state traffic flow map shows traffic volumes in the 6000 range along US 75 and 3000 range along the K-31/K-268 axis.  In comparison, the US 50 and US 77 intersection handles much lower and more evenly balanced volumes of the order of 2000 along US 77 and 3500 along US 50. 

A quick check of traffic volumes near the Fredonia, Galena, Garnett, and Paola roundabouts indicated that volumes on those roads are lighter than at the US 75/K-268/K-31 intersection.

[route56]

October lettings are out:

106 K-5925-13: Sign geeks, prepare to Salivate.  It's time once again to overhaul the freeway guide singage in Kansas City. Although the project number has a "106," suggesting that it goes over multiple counties, almost all the new signage is in Wyandotte County on I-435, I-635, and I-670.

Of note: The exit sequence signage on I-435 will have an actual MO 45 marker instead of "Route 45." (All references to route N-T have already been removed)

470-89 KA-3294-01: Not to be left out, there's also a signage replacement project on I-470 in Topeka.

52 U-1887-01: Esentially, the intersection of 2nd Avenue and Limit Street in Leavenworth will be flipped. Instead of Westbound Limit turning to 2nd Ave north, requiring a left turn to continue on Limit Street westbound; Eastbound Limit will turn toward 2nd Street north, with a *right* turn required to continue east on Limit.

63-66 KA-2074-01: Bridge Replacement on K-63 north of Seneca. The Detour goes all the way to Nebraska highway 8. At the State Line, the signs are to read: END Detour K-63, BEGIN Detour NE-50.

181-71 KA-2078-01: Bridge Replacement on the west side of Glen Elder Reservoir, just south of the junction with US 24/K-9. Detour via US 24, US 281, and (in a rare move) an Osbourne county road.

31-2 KA-2049-01: Bridge Replacement south of Waverly. Detour via I-35 and US 59.

39-6 KA-2053-01: Bridge Replacement on K-39 of two bridges, one on each side of the K-3 Junction. Detour via K-146, K-47, and K-7. Interestingly, the plans show K-201 and K-277, both of which have recently been turned back.

[Revive 755]

October lettings are out:

106 K-5925-13: Sign geeks, prepare to Salivate.  It's time once again to overhaul the freeway guide singage in Kansas City. Although the project number has a "106," suggesting that it goes over multiple counties, almost all the new signage is in Wyandotte County on I-435, I-635, and I-670.

Lots of dancing arrows for I-635 and I-670.

Doesn't seem quite right having two exit tabs for the diagrams for I-635 at I-70 as shown on Sheet 031; seems like it would be better to have two separate, more standard exit signs.

[Scott5114]

Oh dear. "Sh Mn Pky" is becoming "Sh Msn Pk". This isn't really an improvement, KDOT.

Interesting note on the K-5 and MO-45 median sign: "As a practice, KDOT does not align numerals and fractions. This sign is an exception. We feel appearance is better this way." Thoughtfulness like this is always welcome from a DOT.

"Wyandotte County Lake Park" and "Wyandotte County Park Lake" are both shown here...which is right?

Find the typos on Sheet 74 and 92! Hopefully someone catches that before fabrication, it might be an expensive fix. Someone have a KDOT contact?

[J N Winkler]

Oh dear. "Sh Mn Pky" is becoming "Sh Msn Pk". This isn't really an improvement, KDOT.

Agreed.

Interesting note on the K-5 and MO-45 median sign: "As a practice, KDOT does not align numerals and fractions. This sign is an exception. We feel appearance is better this way." Thoughtfulness like this is always welcome from a DOT.

What they actually mean in this case is that their usual practice is to align whole numbers and fractions to the appropriate side of an implied decimal point, but in this case they have gone for MnDOT-style alignment (fraction directly above whole number), a decision they attribute to an aesthetic value judgment but which the cynic in me suspects has to do with saving sign panel square footage.

"Wyandotte County Lake Park" and "Wyandotte County Park Lake" are both shown here...which is right?

The former, or so this park map would suggest:

http://www.wycokck.org/uploadedFiles/Departments/Parks_and_Recreation/WYCO%20Lake%20Map%20Color.pdf

Find the typos on Sheet 74 and 92! Hopefully someone catches that before fabrication, it might be an expensive fix. Someone have a KDOT contact?

"Donohoo" was subtle (I caught it only by comparing with other sheets in the same set), but "Metrpolitan" is embarrassing.  Speaking for myself, I don't actually have a KDOT contact.  What you could do, since you are the one to spot these errors, is to write directly to Lee Holmes, the State Signing Engineer, at KDOT's Bureau of Traffic Engineering and say that you are expressing concerns about apparent errors in the designs of certain signs included in a sign replacement contract currently under advertisement.  They can then decide whether they want to issue an addendum.

Mr. Holmes' email address (found here) is leeh [at] ksdot.org.  In your email (in the subject line and at least once in the text) you should quote the KDOT project number, which in this case is 106 K-5925-13.

[Scott5114]

Message sent to Mr. Holmes:

Dear Mr. Holmes:
I recently reviewed the signage plans provided for Project 106 K-5925-13, the sign replacement contract for I-435 and I-635 in Wyandotte County. However, while doing so, I noticed the following sign message errors:
On Sheet 074: "Metropolitan Ave" is misspelled as "Metrpolitan".
On Sheet 092: "Wyandotte County Lake Park" appears as "Wyandotte County Park Lake". "Donahoo Road" is also misspelled as "Donohoo".

I wanted to inform you of these errors, in case you weren't aware of them, because it would cause considerable expense to correct them after the signs are fabricated and installed (especially the error with "Metropolitan", which doesn't have the sign panel space to correct the error with an overlay without resorting to narrower fonts). I know KDOT has a very high standard for signage quality, and I am consistently impressed with the quality of your work.

Regards,
Scott Nazelrod

Interesting note on the K-5 and MO-45 median sign: "As a practice, KDOT does not align numerals and fractions. This sign is an exception. We feel appearance is better this way." Thoughtfulness like this is always welcome from a DOT.

What they actually mean in this case is that their usual practice is to align whole numbers and fractions to the appropriate side of an implied decimal point, but in this case they have gone for MnDOT-style alignment (fraction directly above whole number), a decision they attribute to an aesthetic value judgment but which the cynic in me suspects has to do with saving sign panel square footage.

It certainly does have the side effect of saving KDOT money on the sign panel. However, I agree with their stated rationale; it would look pretty weird to have the two numbers offset diagonally like that unless you were familiar with KDOT practice on other signs. I appreciate KDOT having the presence of mind to examine whether their rule makes any sense in the context of that sign and decide to discard it just this once. Adding a note justifying it on the sign plan sheet is a nice touch.

[Scott5114]

The email bounced. Hmm.

[route56]

The email bounced. Hmm.

Try Lee Alvarado, LAlvarado [AT] ksdot [DOT] org. His name is listed on the letting page for questions or concerns.

[Scott5114]

Done.

[J N Winkler]

An addendum has now been issued for 106 K-5925-13:

http://www.ksdot.org/burconsmain/ppreq/513102051a1.pdf

In pertinent part, it reads:

Sheets 74 & 92 have signs with incorrect spelling. Revised plans will be sent out after the letting to correct this.

[route56]

November, 2013

http://www.ksdot.org/burconsmain/contracts/proposal.asp

U024-044 KA 2064-01: Replacement of a bridge on US 24/59 in Jefferson county.
I635-105 KA 2093-01: Replacement of the Gibbs Road bridge over I-635 in Wyandotte County.
106 K 5926-13 and  I135-040 KA 3295-01 -- sign replacement on I-135 in Harvey, McPherson, and Saline counties.
046 C 0364-01: Re-alignment of 206th Street at Metcalf to eliminate a railroad crossing.

Also, if the activity on the KDOT FTP server is anything... sign replacements on K-96 and I-135 in Sedgwick County are forthcoming.

[J N Winkler]

Also, if the activity on the remote resource is anything... sign replacements on K-96 and I-135 in Sedgwick County are forthcoming.

I-235 is in the mix too.  I have my doubts that this work will be processed through the construction letting.  I think it is quite probable that it will instead be handled on the same basis as the district-area small signs replacement jobs, which I think KDOT hands to a term contractor for sign fabrication, the finished signs being erected by KDOT maintenance forces.

At this point the design activity seems oriented at carbon-copying the existing signs, which are then revised at the commenting stage.  Per redline comments, signs on I-135 and K-96 are to receive street type designators (e.g. "Woodlawn Ave" instead of just "Woodlawn").  The latest I-235 draft (I haven't seen redline comments yet) has one interchange sign with a K-2 shield, and another with a gap where a K-2 shield used to go; in both cases these are almost exact duplicates of existing signs for which message revisions have been overdue for more than a decade.  The I-135 draft plans cover all of I-135 in Sedgwick County, including signs north of the I-135/I-235/K-254 interchange complex (which KDOT has taken to calling the "North Junction") which are slated for replacement in project 135-87 KA-0733-01.  I assume the affected signs won't be replaced twice, but I don't know exactly how KDOT proposes to resolve this overlap.

[WichitaRoads]

Also, if the activity on the remote resource is anything... sign replacements on K-96 and I-135 in Sedgwick County are forthcoming.

I-235 is in the mix too.  I have my doubts that this work will be processed through the construction letting.  I think it is quite probable that it will instead be handled on the same basis as the district-area small signs replacement jobs, which I think KDOT hands to a term contractor for sign fabrication, the finished signs being erected by KDOT maintenance forces.

At this point the design activity seems oriented at carbon-copying the existing signs, which are then revised at the commenting stage.  Per redline comments, signs on I-135 and K-96 are to receive street type designators (e.g. "Woodlawn Ave" instead of just "Woodlawn").  The latest I-235 draft (I haven't seen redline comments yet) has one interchange sign with a K-2 shield, and another with a gap where a K-2 shield used to go; in both cases these are almost exact duplicates of existing signs for which message revisions have been overdue for more than a decade.  The I-135 draft plans cover all of I-135 in Sedgwick County, including signs north of the I-135/I-235/K-254 interchange complex (which KDOT has taken to calling the "North Junction") which are slated for replacement in project 135-87 KA-0733-01.  I assume the affected signs won't be replaced twice, but I don't know exactly how KDOT proposes to resolve this overlap.

I certainly hope they get the street types right. As weird as it is, Woodlawn is not an Avenue, but a Boulevard. (Woodlawn Blvd)

ICTRds

[route56]

plans for the December '13 lettings are out. There's one project I'd consider a "biggie:"

I435-046 KA 2100-01 - I-435 and Roe in Johnson County. IIRC, this will be the 2nd DDI, and first refit, to be let in Kansas.There are plans for other interchanges expected to be constructed or refit as DDIs, but as of now, none are on the table for construction.

[M86]

Oh dear. "Sh Mn Pky" is becoming "Sh Msn Pk". This isn't really an improvement, KDOT.

Want to pull my hair out... Why is it so hard to sign it correctly?

[Scott5114]

Oh dear. "Sh Mn Pky" is becoming "Sh Msn Pk". This isn't really an improvement, KDOT.

Want to pull my hair out... Why is it so hard to sign it correctly?

"Shawnee Mission Pkwy" is 18 characters, disregarding spaces. I can see why they would want to abbreviate it–it's awkward and expensive to design a sign around such a long message. The problem is there is no readily understandable abbreviation.

"S16N Pkwy.", anyone?

[NE2]

KDOT can go to the local governments and say "We're going to call it Shawnee Parkway. If you don't like it, get fucked."

[J N Winkler]

KDOT can go to the local governments and say "We're going to call it Shawnee Parkway. If you don't like it, get fucked."

KDOT did that on various issues back in the Carlson days and has little interest in dealing with the fallout again.

[WichitaRoads]

KDOT can go to the local governments and say "We're going to call it Shawnee Parkway. If you don't like it, get fucked."

KDOT did that on various issues back in the Carlson days and has little interest in dealing with the fallout again.

Which issues? Inquiring minds would like to know!

ICTRds

[J N Winkler]

Which issues? Inquiring minds would like to know!

Some examples (I have to go by memory, so I apologize for the imprecision of some of these):

*  I-135 in Newton--In the early noughties, KDOT converted the 1st St. and Broadway interchanges, which were separate diamond interchanges with unusual geometry (ramps tightly wrapped around embankments), into a single split-diamond interchange with elliptical roundabouts at both 1st and Broadway.  It was reported in the Newton newspaper (I suspect the relevant articles are now either no longer online or behind a paywall) that KDOT had chosen the new layout with little local input.  Carlson was incensed at this coverage and was quoted accusing the Newton paper of rabble-rousing.

*  K-10 South Lawrence Trafficway--Some observers trace the resuscitation of this project, which seemed more or less dead by the late 1990's, to an intervention the lawyer Mike Rees made at a local planning meeting.  Rees claimed to be acting on his own behalf but had a definite conflict of interest since, at the time, he was KDOT chief counsel under Carlson.

*  K-96 expressway between Wichita and Hutchinson--When this project was in the planning stage, there were calls for two grade separations to be provided near Yoder, which has a small Amish community whose members use horse-drawn carriages equipped with slow-hazard placards and battery-operated lights.  KDOT, in the end, elected to provide only one grade separation, which is now part of the Yoder Road diamond interchange.  A few years after the expressway upgrade opened to traffic, there was a serious accident at Obee Road (next north-south section line road east of Yoder Road) when a Wichita-bound minivan struck a horsedrawn carriage at night, killing both the passengers (an Amish couple in their seventies) and the horse.  KDOT later erected special warning signs on K-96, with a horsedrawn carriage graphic, and commissioned a general safety evaluation of the expressway.  The consultants who carried it out noted in their report that KDOT had used minimum criteria throughout, so the design had little "slack" and accidents were therefore more likely than would have been the case with a more generous approach.  Carlson caused the report to be published with an incredibly tone-deaf preface in which he trumpeted the fact that K-96 met all applicable standards.

*  Partnership study--About ten years ago (I can't remember whether Carlson was still KDOT secretary or if he had already been replaced by Deb Miller, who was appointed by Sebelius in 2003), KDOT commissioned a survey to evaluate how it was perceived by its partners, including local governments and the general public.  In the report that was eventually published, several city managers noted that they had difficulty getting information from KDOT as to project status and how to get state aid for eligible local projects.

There is also the Garden City Telegram case, which is a prime example of KDOT bullying a local institution (albeit not a city, county, or regional planning body).  The triggering event was KDOT's denial of the Telegram's open records request for safety data pertaining to railroad crossings in Finney County.  This actually started in 1998, before Carlson became KDOT secretary (as one of Graves' second-term appointments, I think), but once KDOT lost the case in district court and was assessed over $13,000 in attorney fees, it was his decision to appeal, which he justified by saying that KDOT could not possibly have acted in bad faith.  He won at the appellate level but lost before the Kansas Supreme Court, which affirmed the district court's bad-faith finding and split the baby by ruling that the Telegram was entitled to award only of those attorney fees incurred before the case actually went to court.

[NE2]

Huh? What does any of that have to do with abbreviating a street name?