Recent posts

#1

Pacific Southwest / Re: CA 51/I-80 Business Loop

Last post by TheStranger - Today at 11:31:30 PM

I'm just using the names the freeway segments originally had.  I tend to find they are better at describing where things are on CA 51.  But yes, Ben Ali was one of many communities which has been annexed into Sacramento. 

If I'm remembering correctly, the names used were:
29/30 Freeway for the section built as I-80/US 99E in the early 1960s (and likely part of I-305 based on FHWA's mileage count), a local moniker and not an official name I think
Elvas Freeway (IIRC, built first as US 99E in the late 1950s) for the section from E Street across the American River (near Elvas Avenue) to Route 160
North Sacramento Freeway (former US 40/99E)) as continuation of that name from the Route 160 freeway, to Marconi Curve
Ben Ali-Roseville Freeway (former US 40/99E) from Marconi Curve northeast past today's 80/Business 80 interchange, to Roseville itself around the Riverside Avenue left exit

#2

Sports / Re: Arizona Coyotes players ap...

Last post by KeithE4Phx - Today at 11:21:08 PM

Saw this pic on Twitter and really liked it.

Is that an official proposal?  Last I heard, they will be called just "Utah" and will determine their final nickname/logo/trademarks after the 2024-25 season.

#3

Mountain West / Re: US 93 In Arizona Progress

Last post by KeithE4Phx - Today at 11:18:53 PM

The entire US 93 corridor in Arizona goes through some truly desolate land. Outside of a short bypass of Wikieup, both segments of US 93 between the Arizona/Nevada border and Wickenburg could mostly be upgraded into Interstate 11 on its existing alignment.

Most of it north of Wickenburg is being built over the current US 93.  In fact, most of it between I-40 and AZ 89 is done, other than interchanges and ranch turnoffs.  Exceptions include the potential (not yet officially defined) bypass of Wickieup, the Beale Street Bottleneck Bypass in Kingman, and the 2-lane Joshua Forest Highway segment where most of the accidents occur.

#4

Northeast / Re: I-95 and New Jersey Turnpi...

Last post by jeffandnicole - Today at 10:53:03 PM

It is kind of a head scratcher.  Even though cities in the NE corridor were large then (circa 1950), there was not expansive suburbanization then, nor large traffic passenger car demands between NYC and Philly possibly then.   Straight shot US - 1 may have been largely rural then, as well.  95 could have directly overlaid it.   Most likely though, the existence of the NJT (opened early 50's) diluted the "percieved need" for a later parallel route next to it.   Although I-295 exists, alongside the NJT, for a significant portion of it's length.  That's another head scratcher.  Why did they (meaning the turnpike authority) allow the seemingly diplicitous 295 corridor to be built out?!   Meaning that if 295 had never existed, beyond being a strictly Trenton loop, all the traffic, on it's southern length, would have been on the NJT, fattening their coffers even more.   

In a way, 295 & the NJ Turnpike basically serves two different markets, but complements each other nicely.  If there was no 295, with all other things being equal, the Turnpike would need to be 4 - 6 lanes wide in each direction to serve the area, with the interchanges being greatly overrun with heavy traffic.  Would we have seen more interchanges on the Turnpike, or an interchange with 42 long ago if 295 never existed?  Hard to say. 

The Turnpike was always quick to shut down its road at Interchange 4 when backups at Interchange 1 South exceeded about 10 miles before the new plaza was built, and encourage traffic to use 295 instead.

Up north, more than many realize take I-287 to bypass the heavier Turnpike region and the congested GWB. 

Unlike many states, the Turnpike doesn't have a no-compete or no-widening clause, so NJDOT can do what they want to do.

#5

Mid-Atlantic / Re: Francis Scott Key Bridge (...

Last post by cockroachking - Today at 10:52:59 PM

There's always Spiro Agnew...

[/sarcasm]

#6

Great Lakes and Ohio Valley / Re: Illinois: Round Mile Mark...

Last post by ilpt4u - Today at 10:50:27 PM

That is a fine delineation. But for all practical purposes, when state maintained, it at least acts and quacks like a shielded/designated state route

Not really.  You have to define the route for there to be a route.

I was referring more to things like state ROW and permitting requirements, obviously state maintenance, state law enforcement, etc

For navigational and routing purposes, certainly not. Designated/signed routes are such for a reason, even if we sometimes find them ridiculous (the 100% redundant IL 110/336 designation). Unsigned/state-maintained routes are not typically the "major" corridor, more for local and/or business access or "old"/former alignments of realigned highways

#7

Mid-Atlantic / Re: Francis Scott Key Bridge (...

Last post by Rothman - Today at 10:33:40 PM

Thurgood Marshall, the Supreme Court justice, was born in Baltimore.

See airport...

#8

Road Enthusiasts Meetings / Re: SWPA25 Road Enthusiast Mee...

Last post by Rothman - Today at 10:32:02 PM

The bigger question is if Steel Curtain would be running.  There has to be Vegas odds on that bet nowadays...

It won't be running at all this season, and there is now a lawsuit over the closure.

An interesting lawsuit.  Probably will just be settled out of court with most money going to the lawyers.

#9

Great Lakes and Ohio Valley / Re: Illinois: Round Mile Mark...

Last post by Rothman - Today at 10:30:29 PM

That is a fine delineation. But for all practical purposes, when state maintained, it at least acts and quacks like a shielded/designated state route

Not really.  You have to define the route for there to be a route.

#10

Great Lakes and Ohio Valley / Re: Illinois: Round Mile Mark...

Last post by ilpt4u - Today at 10:19:48 PM

That is a fine delineation. But for all practical purposes, when state maintained, it at least acts and quacks like a shielded/designated state route