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

Will the US 6 Willimantic Bypass get exit numbers at the same time Interstate 384 gets mileage-based exit numbers?

I'd assume so, unless CTDOT jumps the gun and adds them first.  I saw some evidence of that on CT 3; the gore signs for Exit 13 and 11A SB are uncovered (though 11B is blacked out), the new services sign for Exit 13 has its numbers revealed, and the mile markers are in place.

No, they won't.  They just redid the sheet metal signs on the US 6 Expressway in the last year or so and the exit gore signs got replaced with numberless ones.

No one would actually commute from Elizabeth to Midtown paying those tolls, and many people don't in reality either. The NEC runs straight through Elizabeth and drops you at Penn station

A 1.9 mile section of Route 29 in Northern Virginia is getting an upgrade:

https://www.constructionequipmentguide.com/drones-aid-shirley-contracting-vdot-on-route-29-project/62522

Where is Richard Ankrom when we need him?

[He is the guerilla artist who painstakingly painted a very realistic "5" on signage at the northobound Harbor approaching the Four Level.  Signage at the time indicated exiting right for 5 Santa Ana and 10 San Bernardino as well as signage for 101 north, but nothing for 5 north (which you need to stay in the left lane through all of the tunnels for the next 3 miles).  His sign was so heloful that it was later replaced with an official version.  ]

Not so much "painted", but fabricated a shield and "north" placard to spec and then installed it on an existing sign.

Who's gonna erect their own BGS about 2 miles before the 101/405 and 10/405 interchanges saying "405 Right 2 Lanes" so we don't have all these horrendous backups from drivers trying to get over at the last minute? (Let's pool some money together and make this happen)

Interesting, I would have thought the rock barrier would be enough of a deterrent to parking?

Speaking of one lane roads, I had my fill today and got some pretty okay photos out of them.

Drum Valley Road (Tulare County Diagonal Route 152):

0 by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr

Tulare County Route J21 (Dry Creek Road):

0 by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr

And for some reason a surprisingly nice photo of the western beginning of CA 216:

IMG_6659 by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr

This whole issue is really frustrating.

DDOT will eventually change the numbering on the signs.  Good.

Another improvement adding Baltimore and Anacostia as control cities to the sign on the left.  395 to 295/295.  While I wouldn't route traffic from Fairfax County to Baltimore through here, traffic already in DC should certainly use this roadway and seeing a city as far away as Baltimore will guide most of the traffic that this is the thru route.

And the left lanes should no longer be marked as the exit 5.


At the 295/295 split, the signage should read

295 to 495 95             295 to 50
Anacostia                    Baltimore
Alexandria                   Annapolis

https://twitter.com/TomPelissero/status/1704950493687235002

 

Update on the US-43 road and I-65:

https://aldailynews.com/west-alabama-corridor-and-i-65-expansion-equally-important-ivey-and-britt-say/

There are similar transitions for the "straight line forward" for 101 to 134 to 210.

I think if the numbered highway that you're on ends (as with 170S at 101, 134E at 210) the traveler's default would be go keep going straight, because what else would they do. But if the numbered highway "turns" (as with 101N at 170, 101S at 134, even 210N at 134 I suppose) then someone if instructed to follow a numbered road would exit if necessary to stay on that numbered road.

But I've only driven through those intersections sporadically during my life, so I imagine if you are accustomed to the area it might be more natural to think of continuing on the straight road as the default option, regardless of the number change.

Following the number is always the straight option on a freeway, based on current signage practices, including the downplaying of the old freeway names.

[This is different from surface streets, where one would have to physically make a turn and likely the street name doesnt change, even if the highway number follows a turn.]

This even holds with regard to control cities, for the most part, at least in CA.  I-210 has the control of San Fernando (or Sacramento) within Pasadena even east of the 134/210 interchange and does not have 134's control, even though it is straight.  Similarly, US 101 Hollywood Fwy northbound has the control of Ventura, and not Sacramento (except for some signs) and US 101 Ventura Fwy has the control of Los Angeles and not Pasadena. 

So while the numbers have taken precedence and there is less and less use of signing the old freeway names on a regular basis, I do think that using the old freeway name as a control city (obviously in the proper direction) could be helpful.

For the most part, this is already done.  The entire Ventura Fwy (134 and 101) has Ventura as the westbound/northbound control until you reach Ventura.

But this should be done in other cases as well.  There is a trend to remove the Hollywood control over the Hollywood Fwy in favor of Ventura.  I think Hollywood and Ventura (or Hollywood and Los Angeles) should be cosigned at least at the major interchanges with other freeways between 5/170 and the East LA interchange.  At 5/170 I like Hollywood-Los Angeles (170) with Burbank-Los Angeles (5) to let people know that both routes are good ways to get into Downtown generally at that split.

101/134/210 as a straight line concept is great, and those that don't go that way that often probably don't view that as being all the same freeway, even though you generally keep left to stay on this straight line.  For this reason, I think it would be helpful that at 15/210, 215/210, and 10/210 in Redlands that there be supplemental signage directing traffic headed to the San Fernando Valley to use 210.  The Pasadena control is nice, but many travelers would first head into Los Angeles with the knowledge that SFV is part of LA, so if one takes 210, one really has all parts of the Valley at their disposal via 134 to 101 or 118.

Some signage right by the interchange that says "To SF Valley/Ventura use 210" and below that "To Downtown Los Angeles use 10".

I think it was due to a weight restriction. Hell I’d advocate for a widening to 4 lanes each way if it goes underground. If it’s rebuilt as it is they should at least restore it to 3 lanes.