AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 1 
 on: Today at 01:25:27 PM 
Started by BigMattFromTexas - Last post by J N Winkler
I'd love to know the letting date on that I-696 contract so I can download the plans myself.  MDOT just replaced signs in 2017 on the western two-thirds of I-696, and the signs on the eastern third in Macomb County aren't that old.  It would be a waste of money to replace them as part of the current freeway reconstruction (unless raised dump truck beds take out half of them).

It is in fact a Macomb County contract--50061-117578, let March 16, 2018, covering I-696 from I-275 to I-94.  The signing plans aren't actually in the main roadway plans set.  Michigan DOT is experimenting with rollplots in construction document packages (not uncommon for construction documents in European countries like France and Germany, but almost unknown in the US and not really encouraged under FAPG 630(b) Supplement), so the signing for this contract is all in one rollplot, with the SignCAD detail for the sign to be replaced (I think there may be just one or two in this contract) off to one side.  Series E Modified is used.

The contract letting date of last year's I-696 signing contract was 01/16/2017 and the signs are in Clearview.  A few new BGSs in Detroit went up last year (southbound M-10 at M-5 Grand River Avenue, and on the ramp from northbound M-39 to I-96) and those signs are in FHWA.  A 10/06/2017 contract to replace a dozen or so signs at various metro Detroit locations (work currently in process) shows those new signs also will be in FHWA.  But contracts let on 12/01/2017 to replace signs on I-96 in Livingston County and on I-196 between Grandville and Grand Rapids show those signs will be in Clearview.  All of which suggests that Michigan very briefly switched back to FHWA but has switched again back to Clearview.

Another data point is a small-signs replacement contract for the Upper Peninsula, 66012-126586, let last May 4, which uses Clearview for all positive-contrast signs.  While it does seem like Michigan DOT has gone back to Clearview and indeed went back before the FHWA reinstatement memo was issued, there are a couple of caveats to keep in mind.  We don't know how long the plans for these projects were sitting on the shelf, and the time from design to fabrication and erection tends to be less for knockdown replacements and other ad hoc jobs.

 2 
 on: Today at 01:22:30 PM 
Started by paulthemapguy - Last post by jp the roadgeek
About 1,000 of me would equal the length of Connecticut Route 125


11 1/2 of me would equal the length of VT 26

 3 
 on: Today at 12:56:37 PM 
Started by BigMattFromTexas - Last post by wanderer2575
"Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me"--although I have been told that VDOT will likely pursue a return to Clearview, TxDOT is the prime mover behind this initiative and may very well remain the only agency using it on a large scale.  It is distantly possible that Michigan DOT could return to using Clearview, but I just downloaded a major I-696 contract and it shows Series E Modified for new installs.  I cannot think of any US state other than Texas for which I have access to pattern-accurate signing construction plans where the typefaces specified are not the FHWA series.

I'd love to know the letting date on that I-696 contract so I can download the plans myself.  MDOT just replaced signs in 2017 on the western two-thirds of I-696, and the signs on the eastern third in Macomb County aren't that old.  It would be a waste of money to replace them as part of the current freeway reconstruction (unless raised dump truck beds take out half of them).

The contract letting date of last year's I-696 signing contract was 01/16/2017 and the signs are in Clearview.  A few new BGSs in Detroit went up last year (southbound M-10 at M-5 Grand River Avenue, and on the ramp from northbound M-39 to I-96) and those signs are in FHWA.  A 10/06/2017 contract to replace a dozen or so signs at various metro Detroit locations (work currently in process) shows those new signs also will be in FHWA.  But contracts let on 12/01/2017 to replace signs on I-96 in Livingston County and on I-196 between Grandville and Grand Rapids show those signs will be in Clearview.  All of which suggests that Michigan very briefly switched back to FHWA but has switched again back to Clearview.

 4 
 on: Today at 12:48:59 PM 
Started by agentsteel53 - Last post by J N Winkler
But then you're deliberately leaving your computer vulnerable to security vulnerabilities, and on an application what is used for accessing the wild west that is the world wide web.  Hope you don't mind a computer infected with malware.  Getting infected is as easy as having the wrong ad load on a site you're browsing.  Don't make it any easier for the bad guys to do more damage by leaving known security holes open.  Malware authors will often write code specifically targeting patched vulnerabilities in the hope of infecting the computers of people like you.

On the other hand, browsers don't cost shit. So not upgrading is really stupid.

I respectfully disagree.  On my primary computer, I keep automatic updating disabled to the extent that I can and drag my feet on updating, since I generally find that with my usage patterns, it is far more likely that essential functionality will be broken than that I will be infected with malware.

I do use an ad-blocking HOSTS file, which is very effective at stopping malicious code hosted on ad servers and will not attract "Disable AdBlock Plus" prompts.

My Android phone is not rooted and cannot easily be either rooted or maintained in a rooted state, so I cannot install an ad-blocking HOSTS file on it.  Consequently, I have far more problems with unwanted code execution on it (generally as a result of clicking on the wrong piece of clickbait in Facebook), even though the OS and all apps auto-update.

 5 
 on: Today at 12:44:09 PM 
Started by 1 - Last post by US71
Ah.  I could've sworn there was some kind of Bob Dole/Liberal, KS connection, guess not.

Robert J. Dole VA Medical Center Liberal, KS

Also Dodge City, Hutchinson,  Hays, Parsons, Salina, and Wichita

 6 
 on: Today at 12:42:09 PM 
Started by jakeroot - Last post by roadfro
I'm surprised the sign is not white on green (with maybe a white header showing the restriction). This is not compliant with MUTCD.

Yeah, that's a good point. WashDOT has used black on white HOV and express signage for quite a long time, however, I seem to recall a ruling which prohibits any further use of this style. I'll have to send them an email once I get my hands on a link. Unless you have one? ;-)

I don't recall a "ruling", per se. But the 2007 Bluffton University bus crash (Wikipedia article) in Atlanta was determined to be caused, in part, by the bus driver mistaking a black-on-white HOV only exit for the through lane. (Granted, the HOV exit direction sign in that case looked much more like a regulatory sign than this one.)

The NTSB investigation of that incident led to recommendations for signage treatment for HOV/Preferential Lane guide signage. Those recommendations contributed to the standards present in the 2009 MUTCD Chapter 2G regarding HOV/Preferential Lane signage. See specifically Section 2G.15.
Quote from: 2009 MUTCD
Section 2G.15 Guide Signs for Direct Exits from Preferential Lanes to Another Highway
Standard:
<...>
02 The design of Advance Guide, Exit Direction, and Pull-Through signs for direct exits from preferential lanes shall be distinguished from those applicable to general-purpose lanes by inclusion of an upper section with the applicable black legend on a white background, such as HOV LANE (for Pull-Through signs) or HOV EXIT (for Advance Guide and Exit Direction signs). For preferential lanes that incorporate a vehicle occupancy requirement, the white diamond symbol on a black background shall be displayed at the left-hand edge of this upper section (see Figures 2G-15 and 2G-16).

I'm also noting that the MUTCD chapter also doesn't currently show examples of bus/HOV symbols to define the lane regulation/definitions, as seen in the above pic. But I don't think this is as egregious as the whole white sign (and think we should be moving in this direction).

 7 
 on: Today at 12:37:49 PM 
Started by roadman65 - Last post by US71
The Make Room for Daddy (original name of The Danny Thomas Show) episode "Danny Meets Andy Griffith" essentially was the pilot episode of The Andy Griffith Show.  Andy played the role of Sheriff Andy Taylor, who arrested Danny for running a stop sign while driving through Mayberry.  Ron Howard appeared as Opie Taylor.  Francis Bavier also appeared, but not as Aunt Bee.


and Mayberry RFD was a spin-off of Andy Griffith

 8 
 on: Today at 12:22:24 PM 
Started by adventurernumber1 - Last post by US71
The Pig Trail (Ar 23 from Brashears to Ozark)

21 Scenic Byway north of Clarksville

and, of course, Scenic Hwy 7

 9 
 on: Today at 12:19:40 PM 
Started by roadman65 - Last post by wanderer2575
The Make Room for Daddy (original name of The Danny Thomas Show) episode "Danny Meets Andy Griffith" essentially was the pilot episode of The Andy Griffith Show.  Andy played the role of Sheriff Andy Taylor, who arrested Danny for running a stop sign while driving through Mayberry.  Ron Howard appeared as Opie Taylor.  Francis Bavier also appeared, but not as Aunt Bee.

 10 
 on: Today at 12:15:18 PM 
Started by US71 - Last post by US71

The only I could see an I-555 extension is to build a four lane limited access. Just south of Jonesboro from just north of Bay over to where the new 4 lane AR 226 meets US 49. Then bringing AR -226 up to interstate standard. Basically repeating the senario seen with I -49 and I-549 in Ft. Smith.

Let me get into trouble with the moderator gods,  i'd like to see I -555 and and upgrade of US -412 across northern Arkansas as an extension of I-22 eventually to Tulsa maybe all the way to I-35

I'd like to see a new eastern four lane/divided bypass of Jonesboro's east side up to Paragould.

ARDOT is already talking about 4-Laning 412 across the state. But that costs money... money the state doesn't have.


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.