Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

but at least around here, Über and Lyft drivers have special lighted signs on the dash boards of their cars, so they're not allowed

This is an option for Uber and Lyft drivers, but they're not required to have the lighted signs. I've been in many Uber vehicles without one.

TX Toll 550 → FL not sure which county CR 550

The current population of Columbus is less than 1,000,000 for the city proper and about 1.8 million for the metro area. 

2.2 million for the metro area projected to be 3.15 million by 2050. The way this stuff works, you better get the roads in now because once it's built out, no way will you be able to jam a freeway in there

The source I looked at actually said less than 1.8 million.  I rounded up.  At any rate, an increase of almost 50% by 2050 seems quite unlikely, but 2050 is still about 3 decades away, not 1.  I agree that something needs to be done and the sooner the better, but there's no need to exaggerate or sensationalize the facts and figures, which this writer seems to have done.  I drove through Delaware County 40 years ago and traffic was terrible then.  I'm thinking this should have been addressed in the 1960's or earlier.

https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/22963/columbus/population

Another Thursday, another set of possible severe storms.

Texas has taken more of a go slow approach to I-69/I-369, relying on upgrading sections through major cities (Lufkin/Nacogdoches, Marshall) and upgrading preexisting freeway and near-freeway segments near Shepherd and Cleveland and southwest of Houston. Given their mass of projects statewide, that's no surprise.

An Brownsville/Victoria/Houston/Texarkana freeway along US 59 has been a major goal of Texas officials almost as much as a Laredo/Houston/Texarkana corridor as part of a national I-69 corridor connecting South Texas to the Midwest. The I-69 Colossus simply combined those two distinct corridors into one system. I don't think they would take too kindly to removing Texarkana from the system by diverting US 59 traffic through Shreveport. I do think that US 59 and I-49 are far enough apart from each other and have different enough objectives to warrant them coexisting and meeting at Texarkana.

Until the ICC of I-49 is built through Shreveport, you would have a situation of traffic using I-20/LA 3132/I-220 and I-49 north (or I-49/LA 3132/I-20). Plus, Texarkana has made it clear that they want US 59 upgraded from Loop 151 southward as part of their own access to their downtown area.

^^^

I think they renumbered it because they wanted to 96 to connect to a significant through route. I don't see any analogous thing one could do with routes 190 or 168 on either side of the mountains.

Total aside with CA 232, somehow that the fifth most viewed blog all time on Gribblenation.  I know it’s not a fluke/bot thing because of the analytics and reader comments suggest it got shared somewhere that took it serious.  I have no idea why CA 232 out of all the blogs we’ve done on California took off like it did.  The only California blog ahead of it for views is the San Juan Grade (which is number four).

Well, they could extend 118 down Santa Clara to 101/1, and then turn 232 90 degrees and run it along Los Angeles, relinquishing Vinyard.

The current population of Columbus is less than 1,000,000 for the city proper and about 1.8 million for the metro area. 

2.2 million for the metro area projected to be 3.15 million by 2050. The way this stuff works, you better get the roads in now because once it's built out, no way will you be able to jam a freeway in there

Which is exactly why this should have been done 40 years ago. Delaware County has exploded in development in that time, making the upgrades we're talking about now so difficult.

Actually, In GSV from Oct/Nov, there's no mention of 58 on the BGSes on I-5, but there are 58 signs at the ends of the ramps. That seems really odd.

Yes, signs were replaced as of November 2022 when I was in the area. Old route of 58 has no evidence on the ground of its existence, connection between Westside Parkway and SR 99 is signed via Mohawk St and Rosedale Hwy. Only place where signs had not been updated was along the mainline of I-5.

I would have thought California Ave would have been more efficient than Rosedale Hwy. Or is it just that the latter is already advertised as 58 on the signs along 99?