Why doesn't this highway just end at IL 100? It duplexes with IL 100 for a few miles and ends...at a driveway. IL 100 continues and crosses a drawbridge and comes to a stop in Hardin where one must turn right to continue on the highway. That would be a better ending spot than the actual one. Don't get me wrong, it's cool that the highway has such a stupid endpoint, but I wonder the logic of it.
Beats me. It always struck me as a strange endpoint as well. Maybe to give Calhoun County another state route?
Did SR 16 used to run on Clinton Road northeast of Paris? It would make since, since SR 163 in Indiana ends (turns into) at Paris Road.
Quote from: US 41 on March 17, 2014, 08:42:17 AM
Did SR 16 used to run on Clinton Road northeast of Paris? It would make since, since SR 163 in Indiana ends (turns into) at Paris Road.
As far as I know, no. IL-16, IIRC, ran east along what is now US-150 there.
I never liked those useless multiplexes. It would be better to truncate one or the other, or to turn one route onto another road, giving it a new number.
Quote from: Henry on March 17, 2014, 03:46:13 PM
I never liked those useless multiplexes. It would be better to truncate one or the other, or to turn one route onto another road, giving it a new number.
There's more than a few of them in the state, and I'm not even going to touch on the silliness of IL-110.
- IL-116 is concurrent with IL-94 for 5 miles before ending at US-34. IL-94 continues with US-34 east.
- IL-64 is concurrent with US-52 for about 29 miles just so it can meet IA-64.
- Until it was extended to meet Wis-67, IL-75 used to be concurrent with US-51 for 2 miles to meet I-90.
- When IL-129 used to continue south of Braidwood, it was concurrent with IL-53 for less than a mile to meet I-55.
- IL-48 is concurrent with IL-127 for 3 miles to meet I-55.
- IL-16 isn't just concurrent with IL-100 at an end, but with IL-133 as well. Both IL-16 and IL-133 end at IL-1 in Paris.
- IL-5 ends at I-80 & I-88 concurrent with IL-92 (as does I-88, coincidentally). It's an artifact of when I-88 was IL-5.
- IL-177 ends while concurrent with IL-158 in Belleville at IL-159.
You think Illinois has a problem with ending highways? Ask Wisconsin!
Quote from: Brandon on March 17, 2014, 03:57:14 PM
Quote from: Henry on March 17, 2014, 03:46:13 PM
I never liked those useless multiplexes. It would be better to truncate one or the other, or to turn one route onto another road, giving it a new number.
There's more than a few of them in the state, and I'm not even going to touch on the silliness of IL-110.
- IL-116 is concurrent with IL-94 for 5 miles before ending at US-34. IL-94 continues with US-34 east.
- IL-64 is concurrent with US-52 for about 29 miles just so it can meet IA-64.
- Until it was extended to meet Wis-67, IL-75 used to be concurrent with US-51 for 2 miles to meet I-90.
- When IL-129 used to continue south of Braidwood, it was concurrent with IL-53 for less than a mile to meet I-55.
- IL-48 is concurrent with IL-127 for 3 miles to meet I-55.
- IL-16 isn't just concurrent with IL-100 at an end, but with IL-133 as well. Both IL-16 and IL-133 end at IL-1 in Paris.
- IL-5 ends at I-80 & I-88 concurrent with IL-92 (as does I-88, coincidentally). It's an artifact of when I-88 was IL-5.
- IL-177 ends while concurrent with IL-158 in Belleville at IL-159.
Most of those make sense for route continuity. The IL 16 example is just plain fucked. Ending at a driveway?
Here's a poor quality Street View picture of the sign:
http://goo.gl/maps/4a8yg
Quote from: bugo on March 18, 2014, 10:07:17 AM
Here's a poor quality Street View picture of the sign:
http://goo.gl/maps/4a8yg
No idea why the end sign is there. IL-16 is marked in the other direction with IL-100 from this intersection: https://maps.google.com/maps?q=hardin+illinois&hl=en&ll=39.160439,-90.616243&spn=0.004833,0.010568&sll=35.309049,-98.716558&sspn=4.257852,9.854736&hnear=Hardin,+Calhoun+County,+Illinois&t=h&layer=c&cbll=39.160319,-90.616277&panoid=9FtCT1m-T-0hoC0Y0dp0tQ&cbp=12,215.61,,0,1.37&z=17
Probably for the same reason the end sign is rarely at the precise end: sign overload. They probably figured it would get lost among the truss, and there are already three shields and two directional signs at the end of the bridge. An end sign is of at best secondary importance to a traveler.
Start here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/hbelkins/8741113455/in/set-72157633487460463) and go forward to see photos of the signage I took when I was there last year.
Quote from: NE2 on March 18, 2014, 10:55:21 AM
Probably for the same reason the end sign is rarely at the precise end: sign overload. They probably figured it would get lost among the truss, and there are already three shields and two directional signs at the end of the bridge. An end sign is of at best secondary importance to a traveler.
The Illinois River road is more important than IL 16?
Following something you're on is more important than knowing what you probably already know: that a route ends.
Quote from: NE2 on March 18, 2014, 11:38:47 AM
Following something you're on is more important than knowing what you probably already know: that a route ends.
How would you know a route ends at a driveway otherwise? Why not end it at IL 100? That would cut down on sign clutter better than not putting an end sign at Hardin.
How do you know it doesn't end at the turn in IL 100? I challenge you to find a route that ends at an intersection and where the end sign is posted at the exact endpoint. I'll give an example where it's not: http://www.okhighways.com/ok1.html
Quote from: bugo on March 18, 2014, 03:16:02 PM
Quote from: NE2 on March 18, 2014, 11:38:47 AM
Following something you're on is more important than knowing what you probably already know: that a route ends.
How would you know a route ends at a driveway otherwise? Why not end it at IL 100? That would cut down on sign clutter better than not putting an end sign at Hardin.
That would be the famously-bad Collinsville District, IDOT District 8. Yes, the same district that merely ripped off the I-70 shields on those signs on I-55/64 before the PSB. District 8 is known for bad signage in the state.
According to Rich Carlson,
Quote
In 1942 it was extended from Litchfield to Hardin, partially on the former IL-38.
Quote
While EB signs at the Joe Page Bridge at Hardin show IL-16 starting at the west side of the bridge, the westbound signage seems to show it starting east of the bridge...
IL-16 runs from IL-100 in Hardin to IL-133 in Paris thru Calhoun, Greene, Jersey, Macoupin, Montgomery, Christian, Shelby, Moultrie, Coles, and Edgar Counties. (122103)
Looking at the general highway map of Calhoun County (available here: http://www.dot.il.gov/maps/generalmaps1.html), FAP-304 (aka IL-16 and IL-100, and IL-96) continues through the county along signed IL-100 and IL-96. It is marked as IL-16 and IL-100 near Hardin, but the end point is hard to tell. IDOT claims IL-16 does indeed enter Calhoun County. As that is the case, then it most certainly crosses the bridge to end at the intersection as the Illinois River is the county line there.
Quote from: NE2 on March 18, 2014, 03:19:32 PM
How do you know it doesn't end at the turn in IL 100? I challenge you to find a route that ends at an intersection and where the end sign is posted at the exact endpoint. I'll give an example where it's not: http://www.okhighways.com/ok1.html
Because the sign was prominently posted at the odd, random location.
Quote from: Brandon on March 18, 2014, 03:19:35 PM
Quote from: bugo on March 18, 2014, 03:16:02 PM
Quote from: NE2 on March 18, 2014, 11:38:47 AM
Following something you're on is more important than knowing what you probably already know: that a route ends.
How would you know a route ends at a driveway otherwise? Why not end it at IL 100? That would cut down on sign clutter better than not putting an end sign at Hardin.
That would be the famously-bad Collinsville District, IDOT District 8. Yes, the same district that merely ripped off the I-70 shields on those signs on I-55/64 before the PSB. District 8 is known for bad signage in the state.
They also took down all the I-44 signs leading up to the PSB, even though westbound I-44 runs along I-55 like it always did.
Quote from: bugo on March 18, 2014, 03:58:47 PM
Because the sign was prominently posted at the odd, random location.
Before that is a vertical clearance sign, also posted at an 'odd, random location'. Or not.
The end sign for I-79 is immediately after the on-ramp from US 119 to southbound 79, probably a good mile from the actual terminus at I-77. No one would argue that the place where the sign is located is the actual physical end point of the route.