I've looked over some information about I-580 and noticed that it is supposed to be complete sometime next year (2011)...is this true? What more needs to be done?
There are two separate projects that are constructing portions of future I-580:
1.) I-580 Extension Project: Mt. Rose Hwy/SR 431 in south Reno (current end of US 395 freeway) through Pleasant Valley to Bowers Mansion Rd/SR 429 (north of Washoe Lake). Most of the bridges are finished, except for one of the two sides of the Galena Creek Bridge. Grading has taken place on other parts of the project, but to my knowledge, no pavement has been placed yet. This project is slated to be completed sometime in 2011.
2.) Carson City Freeway: Phase 1 built the freeway from the north end of Carson City to US 50 east of the city--this opened in 2006. Phase 2A extended the freeway south another mile or so to Fairview Drive--this opened September 2009. Phase 2B will complete the bypass to US 50 west/US 395 south on the south end of town. Although some bridge work on this phase has been brought out as a separate construction contract which should be underway soon (if not so already), the final freeway connection is currently unfunded with an uncertain time frame for completion--earliest estimates seem to be around 2014, although it could be longer than that.
Even with the I-580 extension project wrapping up sometime next year, I doubt NDOT will try to sign any part of I-580 at that time. If they do, it would likely be either down to the current end of the freeway in Reno, or maybe down to the US 50 interchange in Carson City.
If you use the original plans for this, 2003.
Quote from: kaothinterceptor on March 18, 2011, 08:46:59 PM
If you use the original plans for this, 2003.
The first construction package/contract on the I-580 project didn't even start until late 2003. The original completion timeline for this project was projected to have the extension open to traffic sometime in 2008.
The first contractor and NDOT had a dispute in 2005 on the feasibility of the proposed construction methods for the Galena Creek Bridge, which led to mutual termination of the contract. The entire project was shut down for more than a year (through most of 2006) as NDOT settled with the old contractor then repackaged and re-bid the project before the current contractor came on board. The shutdown and repackaging eliminated the ~1.5 year overlap between the original Package A & Package B projects...thus, we're at the point where three years overdue makes a certain amount of sense given the conditions.
Is the I-580 US 395 Corridor the connector for Los Angeles to Reno, or is it I-80 west to I-5 South?
Quote from: Interstate Trav on March 22, 2011, 07:26:28 PM
Is the I-580 US 395 Corridor the connector for Los Angeles to Reno, or is it I-80 west to I-5 South?
I-580 corridor is only from Reno to Carson City.
Quote from: TheStranger on March 22, 2011, 07:39:12 PM
Quote from: Interstate Trav on March 22, 2011, 07:26:28 PM
Is the I-580 US 395 Corridor the connector for Los Angeles to Reno, or is it I-80 west to I-5 South?
I-580 corridor is only from Reno to Carson City.
I'm guessing the original question was intending to ask whether I-580 and US 395 would be the route one would take from Reno to get to Los Angeles... Nevada's I-580 will go no further south than Carson City (and no further north than the current terminus at I-80 in Reno).
If so, that is one plausible route between Reno and LA. Without having made either drive, I would guess that US 395 is probably the most direct route to take, but I-80 to I-5 would likely be the faster way.
That actually was what I meant, was the I-580/395 is the Los Angeles Reno Route, I know I-580 isn't going to get extended, that far south. It would need to be a primary Interstate for that. I just wonder is it a better route to take I-5 I-80 or US 395.
Also this is probably a dumb question but is the reason to put up the I-580 shields just for the funding? Since it's being multiplexed with an existing freeway, and to add Carson City to the interstate system?
Quote from: Interstate Trav on March 22, 2011, 10:35:21 PMAlso this is probably a dumb question but is the reason to put up the I-580 shields just for the funding? Since it's being multiplexed with an existing freeway, and to add Carson City to the interstate system?
I don't think I-580 is chargeable Interstate. If this is correct, the parts of it that opened or received the I-580 designation after 2003 are also ineligible for IM funding for 3R/4R work. It is my understanding that NDOT has been very slow actually to post I-580 shields either as trailblazers or on pull-through signs.
Quote from: roadfro on March 22, 2011, 10:13:33 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on March 22, 2011, 07:39:12 PM
Quote from: Interstate Trav on March 22, 2011, 07:26:28 PM
Is the I-580 US 395 Corridor the connector for Los Angeles to Reno, or is it I-80 west to I-5 South?
I-580 corridor is only from Reno to Carson City.
I'm guessing the original question was intending to ask whether I-580 and US 395 would be the route one would take from Reno to get to Los Angeles... Nevada's I-580 will go no further south than Carson City (and no further north than the current terminus at I-80 in Reno).
If so, that is one plausible route between Reno and LA. Without having made either drive, I would guess that US 395 is probably the most direct route to take, but I-80 to I-5 would likely be the faster way.
Comparing via Google Maps...
80 to 5 is 516 miles
80 to Business 80 to 99 to 5 is 515 miles
395 to 14 to 5 is 470 miles
I think where the 395 route doesn't save time is in towns like Bishop though (with stoplights and such).
So 395 is slightly shorter. I imagine, that the slower speed limit on 395 also wouldn't help with being quicker then I-80 to I-5.
US 395 is shorter mileage-wise (515 vs 472) but 80/Bus 80/99/5 is faster by almost half an hour (8:29 vs 8:54). All information gathered from Google Maps.
Quote from: J N Winkler on March 23, 2011, 10:15:34 AM
Quote from: Interstate Trav on March 22, 2011, 10:35:21 PMAlso this is probably a dumb question but is the reason to put up the I-580 shields just for the funding? Since it's being multiplexed with an existing freeway, and to add Carson City to the interstate system?
I don't think I-580 is chargeable Interstate. If this is correct, the parts of it that opened or received the I-580 designation after 2003 are also ineligible for IM funding for 3R/4R work. It is my understanding that NDOT has been very slow actually to post I-580 shields either as trailblazers or on pull-through signs.
IIRC, the only indication that the new freeway was I-580 were the postmiles.
Quote from: Bickendan on March 23, 2011, 04:31:21 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on March 23, 2011, 10:15:34 AM
Quote from: Interstate Trav on March 22, 2011, 10:35:21 PMAlso this is probably a dumb question but is the reason to put up the I-580 shields just for the funding? Since it's being multiplexed with an existing freeway, and to add Carson City to the interstate system?
I don't think I-580 is chargeable Interstate. If this is correct, the parts of it that opened or received the I-580 designation after 2003 are also ineligible for IM funding for 3R/4R work. It is my understanding that NDOT has been very slow actually to post I-580 shields either as trailblazers or on pull-through signs.
IIRC, the only indication that the new freeway was I-580 were the postmiles.
I-580 is not currently signed anywhere along the mainline or side streets. A few official Nevada state maps in the 1980s put the I-580 shield on the freeway, but there is nothing on any recent maps or signs. There is indication that I-580 used to be signed along the intersecting side streets in the 1980s, but not along the freeway itself.
All the mileposts on the current US 395 freeway in Reno indicate "IR 580". These are misleading for various reasons:
- IR 580 mileposts go from SR 431/Mt Rose Hwy (Exit 56) all the way up north of the I-80 interchange to the Panther Valley/SR 430/US 395 Business interchange (Exit 72)--that's a distance of about 16 miles.
- NDOT and FHWA logs only recognize about 5 miles of I-580 from Neil Road (exit 62) to I-80 (exit 68).
- Portions of Virginia Street (old US 395) still have "US 395" milepost stickers on traffic signal poles, despite the fact that much of the old highway is or was SR 430 more recently.
In any event, all recent BGS signs put up either on the mainline or on signs leading to US 395 have been designed without I-580 shield, but leave room for a shield to be added to the sign panel later on.
Although the highway is not signed at all, most locals in Reno will know where I-580 is located (or where it is supposed to be when fully officially designated). This may partly be due to the fact that the freeway extension under construction just south of Reno is almost universally referred to (by NDOT and others) as the "I-580 Freeway Extension". This somewhat leads me to believe that I-580 shields will go up when that project is done, despite the fact that the Carson City Bypass will not be complete until at least 2014.
Quote from: roadfro on March 24, 2011, 10:54:58 PM
In any event, all recent BGS signs put up either on the mainline or on signs leading to US 395 have been designed without I-580 shield, but leave room for a shield to be added to the sign panel later on.
Although the highway is not signed at all, most locals in Reno will know where I-580 is located (or where it is supposed to be when fully officially designated). This may partly be due to the fact that the freeway extension under construction just south of Reno is almost universally referred to (by NDOT and others) as the "I-580 Freeway Extension". This somewhat leads me to believe that I-580 shields will go up when that project is done, despite the fact that the Carson City Bypass will not be complete until at least 2014.
Or it could all end up as one big tease, just as it was with I-595 east of DC. On the Capital Beltway, most, if not all, BGS's directing motorists to US 50 East (Annapolis) have a blank space where an I-595 shield was supposed to go, but somehow this was never done, because everyone already knew it as US 50, and so this is why the BGS's look like that.
NDOT is unlikely to "tease" people with this I-580 designation. Experience with I-515 in Las Vegas/Henderson shows that:
Back when I was growing up in Vegas in the 1980s, there wasn't much talk about the "I-515" designation at all, even though the freeway spur had been in the works since the 70s. The freeway was continually expanded throughout the 80s and early 90s, but only the US 93/US 95 designations were applied to it. As soon as the full extent of the freeway was completed to Railroad Pass in late 1994/early 1995, NDOT had put up new I-515 shields all along the ~20 miles of freeway between there and I-15 as well as on side street approaches. Over 15 years later, the location of I-515 is generally understood by valley residents, yet most locals still refer to that stretch solely as "the 95".
I anticipate the I-580 shields will go up quickly once NDOT reaches some construction milestone--presumably once the I-580 Freeway Extension project is complete. My guess is that NDOT would sign the Interstate from I-80 in Reno south along the current freeway and the extension, through Washoe Valley, and phase 1 of the Carson City Freeway to end at the US 50 interchange in Carson City. This would leave a 1-mile section of freeway in Carson without the I-580 shields, which would probably wait until all of phase 2 of the Carson Freeway was complete sometime around 2014 (or later, depending on construction funding). Many Reno/Sparks/Carson City locals will probably still call it "395" though, despite the new Interstate shields.
I wonder why Nevada uses a 5xx interstate spur for their first interstate spur, i.e. I-515 for US 93/95 and now I-580 for US 395?
Perhaps so it sounds numerically related to 95/395? Similar to the way that "580" seems numerically connected to both I-5 and I-80.
I'd guess it has more to do with the overall numbering system in the state going back to the 1976 renumbering...
The "urban" state routes are numbered in the 500's and 600's. Both I-515 and I-580 were in various planning stages around the renumbering time. My assumption is that since these 3dis would be urban spurs, the 500 numbering makes some sense.
Another plausible explanation is the fact that some of the other possible designations under the 3di numbering rules were already assigned to other routes internally in the 1976 Federal Aid Highway numbering system--off the top of my head: 115, 715 & 780 were used by other state highways, while 315, 380 were likely assigned to FAP routes not on the state highway system. Not sure about 180 though.
Bumping with an update on the project...the Galena Creek Bridge south of Reno, Nevada is nearing completion.
Galena Creek Bridge nears completion as workers overcome obstacles, taggers (http://www.rgj.com/article/20110623/NEWS/110623028/-1/news51/Galena-Creek-Bridge-nears-completion-workers-overcome-obstacles-taggers)
Quote from: story by Jeff DeLong, Reno Gazette-Journal, 6/23/11
It's the last big push.
Workers are swarming over Northern Nevada's largest highway project – construction of a final stretch of freeway linking Reno to Carson City – with the aim of opening the road to traffic about one year from now.
"This is our really big year," Brad Durski, project manager for the Nevada Department of Transportation, said of this summer's construction season.
Work on the project's most striking feature, the massive Galena Creek Bridge, is nearing completion as temporary supporting structures are removed and its huge cathedral arch takes more visible shape.
(See article link for rest of article and 24 project photos)
Once completed, the bridge, at 300 feet high, 1700 feet long with a 700-foot concrete arch supported main span, will be the largest bridge of its type in the world. The bridge is a key component of the Interstate 580 extension project, which is slated to wrap up next summer.
The project is constructing 8.5 miles of new Interstate-standard highway between the current terminus of the US 395 freeway in south Reno and an existing freeway section of US 395 in Washoe Valley (north of Carson City). The new freeway will alleviate traffic along the current four-lane highway in Pleasant Valley--that section of US 395 sees constant speeding and has been one of the highways in Nevada with the highest crash rates over the last several years, due to commuters as well as tourist traffic between Reno and Lake Tahoe.
Quote from: roadfro on June 24, 2011, 10:32:43 PM(See article link for rest of article and 24 project photos)
Article link?
Mod Note: Sorry about that. Link added in original post. --roadfro
Another update: the Galena Creek Bridge is now mostly complete, and paving is underway
Reno-Carson freeway nearing completion (http://www.nevadaappeal.com/article/20110731/NEWS/110739963/1001&parentprofile=1058)
By Geoff Dornan, Nevada Appeal, 7/31/11
An update in today's Reno paper has the completion date as June 2012 (obviously depending on this winter's weather issues).
http://www.rgj.com/article/20111211/NEWS/112070409/Geologic-surprise-boosts-freeway-s-cost-20-million (http://www.rgj.com/article/20111211/NEWS/112070409/Geologic-surprise-boosts-freeway-s-cost-20-million)
Farther south, a couple of smaller overpasses were completed this summer for the future final phase of the Carson City Bypass but there's no grading or anything like that going on, nor has any work been started on the major interchange at the south junction of 50 and 395 where 50 heads up the hill to Lake Tahoe.
Quote from: gonealookin on December 11, 2011, 02:16:30 PM
An update in today's Reno paper has the completion date as June 2012 (obviously depending on this winter's weather issues).
http://www.rgj.com/article/20111211/NEWS/112070409/Geologic-surprise-boosts-freeway-s-cost-20-million (http://www.rgj.com/article/20111211/NEWS/112070409/Geologic-surprise-boosts-freeway-s-cost-20-million)
I had been wondering about this, having recalled that previous projections were indicating a 2011 completion.
Discovery of substandard soil thought to be bedrock along a portion of the I-580 project increased the project cost by $20 million and added an additional six months to the construction schedule. Though the project cost increased, NDOT did get a long-term savings because of it--5.5 miles of the project are now going to be paved with PCC instead of asphalt at no additional cost to the state:
http://www.rgj.com/article/20111211/NEWS/112070415/Dispute-led-road-being-concrete (http://www.rgj.com/article/20111211/NEWS/112070415/Dispute-led-road-being-concrete)
Quote from: gonealookin on December 11, 2011, 02:16:30 PM
Farther south, a couple of smaller overpasses were completed this summer for the future final phase of the Carson City Bypass but there's no grading or anything like that going on, nor has any work been started on the major interchange at the south junction of 50 and 395 where 50 heads up the hill to Lake Tahoe.
NDOT took some of the utility relocation and bridge construction from the final phase of the Carson City Bypass (phase 2B) and accelerated it into separate smaller projects. If I recall correctly, NDOT was able to apply some funding for building these bridges utilizing the favorable construction conditions due to the recession--i.e. savings from other projects coming in under budget and lower than usual contractor bids.
Grading and such for the mainline construction, as well as another overpass and the US 50/395 interchange, are still up in the air as funding has not yet been identified. Last I can recall reading, construction on the final segment was being pushed out to at least 2014 at the earliest.
Where will the south end of I-580 be? Will it extend to the end of the freeway, or end somewhere to the north?
NDOT has always referred to the current project between south Reno and the Washoe Valley section of US 395 (north of Carson City) as the "I-580 Freeway Extension". Also, the NDOT website for the Carson City Freeway shows an I-580 shield and the signing plan for the final leg shows BGSs designed to accommodate future I-580 shields. So ultimately, after both projects are done, I-580 will extend from I-80 in Reno to the US 50/US 395 junction at the southern end of Carson City.
When the extension project is completed in June 2012, there will be full freeway from I-80 in Reno through Washoe Valley and much of Carson City. It is certainly feasible that I-580 shields could go up as far south as the US 50 east junction in eastern Carson City in summer/fall of 2012. This is what I would do if I were NDOT--whether or not NDOT decides to sign I-580 at that time remains to be seen. (A related historical comparison: NDOT did not sign I-515 in Las Vegas until the final leg through Henderson was completed in 1994-95, despite much of it being open to traffic in the 1980s as a relocated US 93/US 95.)
Any idea why both interstate spurs in Nevada start with "5" when there are no 1xx or 3xx routes? Was it to avoid conflict with the block of primary state route numbers which extend up through the 400s (not that losing a couple of available routes should have been much of a concern)?
Quote from: The High Plains Traveler on December 11, 2011, 07:28:58 PM
Any idea why both interstate spurs in Nevada start with "5" when there are no 1xx or 3xx routes? Was it to avoid conflict with the block of primary state route numbers which extend up through the 400s (not that losing a couple of available routes should have been much of a concern)?
Short answer: It might have something to do with the 1976 renumbering scheme. 100 and 300 numbers would've been located in rural counties, while the 500 numbers were part of the urban route number series.
Interestingly, 515 fits into the numbering scheme for (former) urban routes in Carson City, while 580 fits into the scheme for the Las Vegas area--obviously, the two highways are located in the opposite areas.
NDOT had an application in to the AASHTO Route Numbering Committee for relocating US 395 between Carson City & Reno along what is known as the I-580 Freeway Extension. There is also an application to make old highways (what is currently SR 429 and the southern segment of SR 430) into a new US 395 Alternate. Both of these were approved by committee.
The US 395 relocation packet indicates the freeway extension should be opening on July 15, 2012. In both applications, it shows I-580 symbols on the new freeway facility--but there wasn't a separate application to extend the I-580 designation. So who knows if I-580 shields will be going up when that opens...
Quote from: roadfro on May 09, 2012, 02:56:56 AM
NDOT had an application in to the AASHTO Route Numbering Committee for relocating US 395 between Carson City & Reno along what is known as the I-580 Freeway Extension. There is also an application to make old highways (what is currently SR 429 and the southern segment of SR 430) into a new US 395 Alternate. Both of these were approved by committee.
The US 395 relocation packet indicates the freeway extension should be opening on July 15, 2012. In both applications, it shows I-580 symbols on the new freeway facility--but there wasn't a separate application to extend the I-580 designation. So who knows if I-580 shields will be going up when that opens...
I'll be in Reno about a week after the "scheduled" opening. Hopefully the freeway will be open by then. Do you think it's possible that NDOT is waiting until the final segment of the Carson City bypass is completed before asking AASHTO for the I-580 designation from Reno to the 50/395 interchange south of Carson City?
Quote from: myosh_tino on May 09, 2012, 04:27:18 AM
I'll be in Reno about a week after the "scheduled" opening. Hopefully the freeway will be open by then. Do you think it's possible that NDOT is waiting until the final segment of the Carson City bypass is completed before asking AASHTO for the I-580 designation from Reno to the 50/395 interchange south of Carson City?
That's what they did with I-515. They didn't sign it until it was complete all the way to the end of Henderson in 1994-95, despite much of it being built in the mid 80s.
Looking over the meeting minutes from the AASHTO Route Numbering Committee, there is background information about the I-580 designation. Apparently, extension of the I-580 designation was approved by FHWA in 1984! FHWA's position seems to be that NDOT can sign I-580 once there is complete freeway clear to US 50 in Carson City and a request for addition to the Interstate system is processed by FHWA. So NDOT could conceivably start adding I-580 shields to US 395 sometime this year.
The full opening of the freeway is now scheduled for late July (http://www.rgj.com/article/20120529/NEWS/305290032/Last-big-push-Galena-Creek-Bridge-will-finish-Reno-Carson-freeway) with the interchange at the south end to be completed a couple months later. I have July 14 or 21 penciled in as the likely dates for the bike ride and fun run.
The pre-opening walk/run/bike event on I-580 has been announced and is set for July 28:
http://www.freewayextension.com/
QuoteRun, Walk, or Bike the New I-580 Freeway
July 28, 2012 7 a.m. - 1 p.m.
Celebrate the soon-to-open I-580 Freeway by biking, walking or running along the freeway, including the Galena Creek Bridge — the longest concrete cathedral arch bridge in the nation!
FREE JULY 28 "RUSH TO WASHOE" EVENTS
7 a.m. - Self-timed 5 and 10K Fun Run (northbound lanes only)
7:30 a.m. — 1 p.m.: Bike Ride/Walk (northbound lanes only)
8 a.m. — 1 p.m.: Open to Vehicles (southbound lanes only)
For the July 28 event, motorists will have the opportunity to drive on the eight-and-a-half-mile freeway beginning at 8 a.m. and can access the southbound lanes of the new freeway from either the existing southbound I-580 freeway or the Mt. Rose Highway. Signage will direct biking and walking participants to event parking.
The June 2012 update to the Nevada State Maintained Highways Descriptions and Maps shows the planned routing of Alternate U.S. 395, which includes both former U.S. 395 and Nevada 429 along the sections to be bypassed by the new Interstate 580. The maps in the June 2012 update also shows the planned routes of Interstate 580, U.S. 395, and U.S. 395A. See page 4 for the text description and page 7 for the map of I-580 and US 395A:
http://www.nevadadot.com/uploadedFiles/NDOT/About_NDOT/NDOT_Divisions/Planning/Roadway_Systems/DI_2012QTR2.pdf
On another note, the official I-580 webpage (http://www.freewayextension.com/) now states that the "freeway is scheduled to officially open to all traffic by mid-August." There is still no firm date to open the road to traffic, other than the planned walk event on July 28.
Regards,
Andy
^ Interesting... The new route log has been updated with those changes and the addition of US 395 Alt, but has not been updated with new mileage for I-580 (still only showing the proposed mileage, and the ~5 miles existing on the books between I-80 and Neil Road, with nothing for the gap or Washoe Valley & Carson City sections which should be posted with opening of the freeway. However, it appears that new milepost panel requests are in the works for these sections...
I also find the new US 395 Alt routing a little interesting. The alt route did not need to go as far north as it does--I think NDOT was just trying to use it to eliminate the southern portion of SR 430 altogether. The new designation also needlessly overlaps the US 395 Business designation on AASHTO's books (but this is so poorly signed that NDOT probably forgot about it).
It looks like the former Nevada 429 through the Washoe Valley will continue to be primarily referenced this way:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fe6vsANT.jpg&hash=37fc67f0190cc494b8d25539cd647ee1f2b26e61)
Quote from: gonealookin on July 14, 2012, 06:24:45 PM
It looks like the former Nevada 429 through the Washoe Valley will continue to be primarily referenced this way:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi147.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fr302%2Filikeem102%2Faaroads%2FOldUS395.jpg&hash=629ee1c4f33e2374def6f4dc962e3c98a8eece62)
Compare it to this sign on I-15 at Exit 43 in San Diego County:
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images015/i-015_nb_exit_043_05.jpg)
Quote from: gonealookin on July 14, 2012, 06:24:45 PM
It looks like the former Nevada 429 through the Washoe Valley will continue to be primarily referenced this way:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi147.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fr302%2Filikeem102%2Faaroads%2FOldUS395.jpg&hash=629ee1c4f33e2374def6f4dc962e3c98a8eece62)
Very interesting. AASHTO approved changing the current US 395 highway to US 395 Alternate, and that change is now on NDOT's most recent highway log (it basically took over SR 429 and the southern segment of SR 430). So I would have expected to see "US 395 Alternate" signed instead of "Old US 395".
Quote from: roadfro on July 15, 2012, 05:42:02 AM
Quote from: gonealookin on July 14, 2012, 06:24:45 PM
It looks like the former Nevada 429 through the Washoe Valley will continue to be primarily referenced this way:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi147.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fr302%2Filikeem102%2Faaroads%2FOldUS395.jpg&hash=629ee1c4f33e2374def6f4dc962e3c98a8eece62)
Very interesting. AASHTO approved changing the current US 395 highway to US 395 Alternate, and that change is now on NDOT's most recent highway log (it basically took over SR 429 and the southern segment of SR 430). So I would have expected to see "US 395 Alternate" signed instead of "Old US 395".
Is the new freeway opened? Is that part of it, and does it go to Carson City now as well?
Quote from: Interstate Trav on July 15, 2012, 12:39:43 PM
Is the new freeway opened? Is that part of it, and does it go to Carson City now as well?
The photos of the sign above and the two below were taken yesterday, near the south end of the extension project where the freeway enters Washoe Valley.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FkGevj3q.jpg&hash=6b1ba1b125c39dcf41ff4863d813d901a4531a2c)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FUSEzeog.jpg&hash=e5fee5818c45dddb3b08934b355853acf46cd093)
So, there are just a few finishing touches remaining, with the freeway opening planned for about a month from now. At that time US 395 will be a full freeway from the CA-NV border on the north through Reno to its present terminus at Fairview Drive in Carson City. The completion of the bypass around the southeast side of Carson City still hasn't been funded.
Another note on this: With most of the signage installed at Exit 50 it's clear that there is no intent to put up Interstate 580 shields at this time. US 395 shields abound on the "Freeway Entrance" posts and other directional signs, but there's not a hint of red, white and blue.
Quote from: gonealookin on July 15, 2012, 01:32:22 PM
Another note on this: With most of the signage installed at Exit 50 it's clear that there is no intent to put up Interstate 580 shields at this time. US 395 shields abound on the "Freeway Entrance" posts and other directional signs, but there's not a hint of red, white and blue.
I haven't been out to look at this construction in a while. What I find interesting is the lack of I-580 shields. NDOT has gotten the okay from AASHTO to sign I-580 from I-80 in Reno clear to US 50 in Carson City.
I'm guessing the original construction documents for the freeway extension only included US 395 shields in the signage plan, as it appears NDOT may not have known what I-580's status would be at the time of bidding the project. Assuming this, NDOT may have planned to later advertise a signage-only contract (or do an in-house signage job) to post I-580 shields along the entire route all at once.
Quote from: roadfro on July 16, 2012, 04:31:55 AM
I haven't been out to look at this construction in a while. What I find interesting is the lack of I-580 shields. NDOT has gotten the okay from AASHTO to sign I-580 from I-80 in Reno clear to US 50 in Carson City.
I'm guessing the original construction documents for the freeway extension only included US 395 shields in the signage plan, as it appears NDOT may not have known what I-580's status would be at the time of bidding the project. Assuming this, NDOT may have planned to later advertise a signage-only contract (or do an in-house signage job) to post I-580 shields along the entire route all at once.
Could another plausible explanation be NDOT is waiting for the entire route to be constructed before putting up the I-580 shields? Of course, that would mean having to wait until the currently unfunded final segment of the Carson City Bypass is built.
Quote from: myosh_tino on July 16, 2012, 10:55:16 AM
Quote from: roadfro on July 16, 2012, 04:31:55 AM
I haven't been out to look at this construction in a while. What I find interesting is the lack of I-580 shields. NDOT has gotten the okay from AASHTO to sign I-580 from I-80 in Reno clear to US 50 in Carson City.
I'm guessing the original construction documents for the freeway extension only included US 395 shields in the signage plan, as it appears NDOT may not have known what I-580's status would be at the time of bidding the project. Assuming this, NDOT may have planned to later advertise a signage-only contract (or do an in-house signage job) to post I-580 shields along the entire route all at once.
Could another plausible explanation be NDOT is waiting for the entire route to be constructed before putting up the I-580 shields? Of course, that would mean having to wait until the currently unfunded final segment of the Carson City Bypass is built.
That is also certainly plausible. That is what NDOT did with I-515 in Las Vegas/Henderson...it wasn't signed until the ultimate envisioned buildout (at the time) was complete, despite freeway construction having stopped at some logical junctions a couple times previously.
With the amount that NDOT has talked about the I-580 designation (the current project being consistently referred to as the "I-580 Freeway Extension"), it just seems like NDOT would want to get the red and blue shields up sooner rather than later. They've got the OK to sign down to US 50, which is a logical terminus.
Quote from: gonealookin on July 14, 2012, 06:24:45 PM
It looks like the former Nevada 429 through the Washoe Valley will continue to be primarily referenced this way:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi147.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fr302%2Filikeem102%2Faaroads%2FOldUS395.jpg&hash=629ee1c4f33e2374def6f4dc962e3c98a8eece62)
Are these California-style cantilevered gantries with the catwalk and lighting etc. commonplace in Nevada? Seems pretty prevalent on the I-580 project.
Quote from: national highway 1 on July 17, 2012, 03:16:58 AM
Quote from: gonealookin on July 14, 2012, 06:24:45 PM
It looks like the former Nevada 429 through the Washoe Valley will continue to be primarily referenced this way:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi147.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fr302%2Filikeem102%2Faaroads%2FOldUS395.jpg&hash=629ee1c4f33e2374def6f4dc962e3c98a8eece62)
Are these California-style cantilevered gantries with the catwalk and lighting etc. commonplace in Nevada? Seems pretty prevalent on the I-580 project.
From what I've seen, the answer is "yes" however I will defer to Roadfro to confirm or deny.
^ That is pretty much the only sign bridge style NDOT uses, and is the only one in their standard specifications for freeway/expressway use. It has been standard as long as I can remember. The only exception tends to be light-duty overhead signs on urban roads, which use a much smaller truss (although these are fewer and farther between nowadays, in favor of the standard truss.)
One new exception appears to be I-80 design-build project currently underway in Reno. It looks like they're installing mono-tube curved sign poles (similar to California-style) for nearly all overhead sign structures on I-80 in Reno-Sparks--no signs yet but plenty of poles are in place. I've never seen this style used anywhere in Nevada (in person or in pictures)--I'm guessing this is a aesthetic design element they're trying out. I'm also assuming all new signs won't be lit.
Quote from: Kniwt on June 22, 2012, 08:39:50 PM
The pre-opening walk/run/bike event on I-580 has been announced and is set for July 28:
Additional information has been posted by NDOT for the event this weekend: http://www.nevadadot.com/News/Press_Releases/2012/I-580_Freeway_July_28_Public_Walk/Run/Bike_Event.aspx
Driving on the freeway will not be at freeway conditions, but rather vehicles restricted to one southbound lane at 5-25 mph.
I am hoping that I will be able to get out to the event and get some good pictures from on the freeway.
BTW: An official completion date still has not been announced; most media outlets are still reporting that the freeway is expected to open to traffic in mid-August.
Quote from: roadfro on July 17, 2012, 09:39:14 PM
^ That is pretty much the only sign bridge style NDOT uses, and is the only one in their standard specifications for freeway/expressway use. It has been standard as long as I can remember. The only exception tends to be light-duty overhead signs on urban roads, which use a much smaller truss (although these are fewer and farther between nowadays, in favor of the standard truss.)
One new exception appears to be I-80 design-build project currently underway in Reno. It looks like they're installing mono-tube curved sign poles (similar to California-style) for nearly all overhead sign structures on I-80 in Reno-Sparks--no signs yet but plenty of poles are in place. I've never seen this style used anywhere in Nevada (in person or in pictures)--I'm guessing this is a aesthetic design element they're trying out. I'm also assuming all new signs won't be lit.
I'm surprised Nevada has never had any monotube freeway sign poles before. Most of the other western states, as well as a few areas in other parts of the country, have them scattered around.
Quote from: roadfro on July 24, 2012, 02:49:08 AM
Driving on the freeway will not be at freeway conditions, but rather vehicles restricted to one southbound lane at 5-25 mph.
wow. how to build interest in a new high-speed corridor: induce an
intentional traffic jam. someone needs to go back to PR school.
^Sounds like something I could see Portland, Seattle or San Francisco or maybe Vancouver (BC) doing.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 24, 2012, 12:13:54 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 24, 2012, 02:49:08 AM
Driving on the freeway will not be at freeway conditions, but rather vehicles restricted to one southbound lane at 5-25 mph.
wow. how to build interest in a new high-speed corridor: induce an intentional traffic jam. someone needs to go back to PR school.
Man... 1 hour to drive 8 miles. Think of the precious fossil fuels. And California fancies themselves on being "green." Even West Virginia, land of fuel, closes the New River Gorge Bridge once a year.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 24, 2012, 12:13:54 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 24, 2012, 02:49:08 AM
Driving on the freeway will not be at freeway conditions, but rather vehicles restricted to one southbound lane at 5-25 mph.
wow. how to build interest in a new high-speed corridor: induce an intentional traffic jam. someone needs to go back to PR school.
I'm guessing it's for a safety concern. The highway will only be open for 4-5 hours before being closed again. At the same time, the fun walk/bike/run is happening in the opposing northbound lanes. In case somebody were to jump/fall over the center jersey wall, they wouldn't want freeway traffic on the other side.
From the practicality perspective of doing one of these opening events: We're talking about an 8.5-mile stretch of highway. That's a long walk/run/bike ride for most people to see the whole thing. When NDOT opened the Carson City freeway segments, these were 1- or 3-mile portions that are much more manageable, so it was a "check it out under your own power" deal. I'm sure they wanted a way for people to be able to experience the new road without having to walk the whole length (and back).
Quote from: roadfro on July 24, 2012, 10:36:24 PM
From the practicality perspective of doing one of these opening events: We're talking about an 8.5-mile stretch of highway. That's a long walk/run/bike ride for most people to see the whole thing. When NDOT opened the Carson City freeway segments, these were 1- or 3-mile portions that are much more manageable, so it was a "check it out under your own power" deal. I'm sure they wanted a way for people to be able to experience the new road without having to walk the whole length (and back).
but there is something interesting and special about being able to walk (or even bike, in most places) on the freeway. to drive on the freeway in constructions that precisely simulate a traffic jam due to construction ... that's not worth calling a ceremony. you can drive it a day later without any delay!
Quote from: roadfro on July 24, 2012, 10:36:24 PM
From the practicality perspective of doing one of these opening events: We're talking about an 8.5-mile stretch of highway. That's a long walk/run/bike ride for most people to see the whole thing. When NDOT opened the Carson City freeway segments, these were 1- or 3-mile portions that are much more manageable, so it was a "check it out under your own power" deal. I'm sure they wanted a way for people to be able to experience the new road without having to walk the whole length (and back).
I would guess the majority of people going to an event like this are doing it for the uniqueness of being able to walk on the freeway and are probably turning around after the first mile or so. It's the runners, bicyclists and a few roadgeeks who have any interest in doing the whole 8.5 miles. Most cyclists ought to be able to do 17 miles with a few freeway grades with no problem; for runners and walkers you could provide a shuttle bus along the old highway for $5.
I plan on taking my bicycle and starting from the south end early in the morning. If I run into too many walkers and runners up at the north end I might turn around early.
indeed, a shuttle would be a far more economical alternative than an induced traffic jam. not just the cost of all the private vehicles vs. a smaller quantity of shuttles, but also I'd imagine having absolutely no private motor vehicle access to the highway is a lot easier and cheaper to manage than setting up cones to block off all but one lane.
For what its worth, the NDOT shape file "Major roads in Nevada" already refers to a portion of the new US 395 freeway as Interstate 580:
(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/west/i0580_reno_gis.gif)
Also thanks to gonealookin for posting that photo of future Exit 50, that answers my question as to what the new exit number will be as I am crafting a new Reno-Sparks map for Andy.
A sidebar to today's story in the Reno paper about the walk/bike event (http://www.rgj.com/article/20120726/NEWS/307270003/1459) gives a little more info about the I-580 shields.
QuoteNEW FREEWAY DESIGNATION
Is it I-580 or U.S. 395? It's both, really. When the new 8.5-mile segment of freeway linking south Reno to Washoe Valley opens in mid-August, it will become part of a 30-mile stretch of interstate stretching from Interstate 80 in Reno on the north to the south end of Carson City on the south. The road will be designated as I-580/U.S. 395, with road signs notifying motorists of that fact now on order and expected to be installed by October.
This is typical of the new signage that's out there now:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FS1mEO1Z.jpg&hash=d4122b4a40287c558f9520a35bb9716cbd053f6a)
Thank you for that link--I missed that article. Question about I-580 shields is answered.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 24, 2012, 12:13:54 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 24, 2012, 02:49:08 AM
Driving on the freeway will not be at freeway conditions, but rather vehicles restricted to one southbound lane at 5-25 mph.
wow. how to build interest in a new high-speed corridor: induce an intentional traffic jam. someone needs to go back to PR school.
They did the same thing on PA Turnpike 576 when they had the community day before they officially opened it. So, they might be taking a page from the PA Turnpike handbook for this.
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on July 27, 2012, 05:08:12 AM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 24, 2012, 12:13:54 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 24, 2012, 02:49:08 AM
Driving on the freeway will not be at freeway conditions, but rather vehicles restricted to one southbound lane at 5-25 mph.
wow. how to build interest in a new high-speed corridor: induce an intentional traffic jam. someone needs to go back to PR school.
They did the same thing on PA Turnpike 576 when they had the community day before they officially opened it. So, they might be taking a page from the PA Turnpike handbook for this.
The popularity of the pedestrian and bicycle thing, including an open house weekend, before the Calumet and Outagamie County part of the WI 441 freeway opened here in the Appleton, WI area back in October of 1993 was the catalyst for the continuing development of a comprehensive recreational trail system throughout the metro region, interest in which remains strong to this day.
Mike
Quote from: gonealookin on July 26, 2012, 10:15:16 PM
A sidebar to today's story in the Reno paper about the walk/bike event (http://www.rgj.com/article/20120726/NEWS/307270003/1459) gives a little more info about the I-580 shields.
QuoteNEW FREEWAY DESIGNATION
Is it I-580 or U.S. 395? It's both, really. When the new 8.5-mile segment of freeway linking south Reno to Washoe Valley opens in mid-August, it will become part of a 30-mile stretch of interstate stretching from Interstate 80 in Reno on the north to the south end of Carson City on the south. The road will be designated as I-580/U.S. 395, with road signs notifying motorists of that fact now on order and expected to be installed by October.
Interesting observation from the field today:
Some "Freeway Entrance" signs at interchanges in south Reno are already in the process of receiving I-580 shields. For example, all signage referring to US 395 at the South Meadows Parkway interchange (exit 60) has been replaced with I-580 signs. There's also some new shields at S. Virginia St (exit 61) and at Neil Road (exit 62), but the full interchange signing is not complete yet. Interestingly, the I-580 shields I saw are not dually-signed as I-580/US 395--in Las Vegas, US 93/95 remained co-signed when the I-515 designation was added.
At this time, there are no I-580 shields on the freeway itself. Also, no LGSs or overhead BGSs on intersecting side streets have been changed to show I-580.
Per NDOT's tweet (https://twitter.com/nevadadot/status/235478883590340609), "Looks like the new I-580 southbound lanes will open August 24 and northbound on August 27".
This video (http://www.mynews4.com/news/local/story/New-I-580-s-name-explained/GCi4FBE4iEi7sMYbld3XBw.cspx) shows that the I-580 shield shown on a freeway entrance shield assembly has the state name, and that U.S. 395 is omitted from the freeway entrance assembly (even though I-515 has its companions signed alongside it at many freeway entrances).
Regards,
Andy
Quote from: andy3175 on August 16, 2012, 11:15:35 PM
This video (http://www.mynews4.com/news/local/story/New-I-580-s-name-explained/GCi4FBE4iEi7sMYbld3XBw.cspx) shows that the I-580 shield shown on a freeway entrance shield assembly has the state name, and that U.S. 395 is omitted from the freeway entrance assembly (even though I-515 has its companions signed alongside it at many freeway entrances).
Regards,
Andy
Wow, looks like that people may perceive that US 395 might have a gap as they enter the freeway, pretty much the only thing they will see is an I-580 shield... I do reckon US 395 ought to be signed along with I-580, I mean it does continue beyond both ends of I-580.
Andy, are the I-580 shields posted (in that video you mentioned) '57 spec or '70 spec?
Quote from: national highway 1 on August 17, 2012, 01:28:41 AM
Andy, are the I-580 shields posted (in that video you mentioned) '57 spec or '70 spec?
By my eye, the I-580 shields are '70 spec judging by the width of the white border...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.markyville.com%2Faaroads%2F580_FHWA.png&hash=1f4b59082a416b61ffd126fbec90d13d219e5ff6) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.markyville.com%2Faaroads%2F580_CA.png&hash=0ac2b00e5c9d26c00a572ebc822cd93e44f78e39)
The shield on the left is the '70-spec shield. The shield on the right is the
'57-spec '61-spec 3-digit shield (thanks Agentsteel for the correction :cool:).
Quote from: andy3175 on August 16, 2012, 11:15:35 PM
This video (http://www.mynews4.com/news/local/story/New-I-580-s-name-explained/GCi4FBE4iEi7sMYbld3XBw.cspx) shows that the I-580 shield shown on a freeway entrance shield assembly has the state name, and that U.S. 395 is omitted from the freeway entrance assembly (even though I-515 has its companions signed alongside it at many freeway entrances).
Regards,
Andy
I just took a trip down to Tahoe from Reno and was making note of I-580 signage. In Reno along existing US 395, NDOT crews have been replacing all post-mounted US 395 sign assemblies on the mainline and ramps with I-580 assemblies. Interestingly, in Carson City, the mainline freeway is being dually signed as I-580/US 395 down to US 50 (using the wrong color of directional banner though). I have not seen any overhead signage with I-580 shields yet.
I am not certain why they are removing US 395 shields from the signs in Reno. I would have expected dual signage, given that US 395 is the "through" route. They also set that precedent with I-515 in Las Vegas/Henderson.
Quote from: myosh_tino on August 17, 2012, 01:53:13 AM
The shield on the left is the '70-spec shield. The shield on the right is the '57-spec shield.
the one on the right is federal '61 spec, introduced by CA around 1959.
'57 spec did not provide for wide shields. they just used a narrower font.
(//www.aaroads.com/shields/img/NE/NE19614801i1.jpg)
Here's another news report, which includes one view that shows the first mainline southbound overhead gantry after the I-80 interchange solely signed as I-580. When I passed through here in late July, it showed US 395 solely. I think they placed the I-580 shield over the spot where US 395 used to be.
http://www.tumtiki.com/videos/2291083/kolo-reno-nv-u-dot-s-395-slash-i-580-confusion
Regards,
Andy
So according to that news story, NDOT will be co-signing US 395 with I-580. Why this isn't all being done at the same time is still a mystery to me. I did a quick check of Google Maps and it looks like they have already added I-580 shields to US 395 south of I-80.
That's right, they plan to cosign the route. However, the overhead sign just south of I-80 on southbound that used to show US 395 alone now shows I-580 alone, and there's no space to add a US 395 sign next to it. It is odd that they decided to remove US 395; it seems like the workers could have had an easier time just adding the one sign to an existing sign post and/or freeway entrance assembly rather than replacing the signs now and coming back later to re-add those US 395 signs. The overhead signs are a different story ... most of the existing overhead signs I'd seen left space for both I-580 and US 395 to be signed side by side. However, that one sign shown in the video is now in Clearview and is an obvious replacement for the old sign. Here's a picture of the old sign, taken from our US 395 series of pages along southbound:
https://www.aaroads.com/west/nevada395/us-395_sb_exit_067_02a.jpg
https://www.aaroads.com/west/us-395sb_nv.html
I don't have a good picture of the new sign with Clearview; when I passed through there earlier this summer, it was twilight and nearly impossible to get a clean photo of it, but the video does show it.
Regards,
Andy
^ That's the part I don't understand now. If they're going to co-sign it, why not put up the I-580 shields and new US 395 shields at the same time--save manpower and money. NDOT seems to typically switches out the entire sign assembly when making any changes to signs...maybe they didn't have the new US 395 signs or brackets in stock. (But then, the argument could be made that the I-580 shields could've waited until all new signs were in.)
Re: The US 395 pull-through sign on SB US 395 just south of I-80: This sign (and all other signs on that gantry) was replaced last year with the northbound US 395 widening project. The new signs on that whole project are Clearview and many have design errors or features that are not exactly best of NDOT signing practice. Every BGS for US 395 that has been installed within the past 5+ years has been designed to add a future I-580 shield *except* that one...
A few off-the-freeway sightings in the Washoe Valley. The first one is the only I-580 reference I saw which wasn't actually on the freeway.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F6MifRBz.jpg&hash=13f6088ffce64d0127398769862c5a26e497fa1e)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fsnkqvic.jpg&hash=db6fe6ab4885fcf05dde7fd85c1e09024a9f11da)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FXMQIIrD.jpg&hash=30bb223158ccafa5edd292920e5f62c1660fb277)
NDOT says the southbound lanes open tomorrow morning at 6 a.m., northbound lanes Monday at 6 a.m. However, the northbound off-ramp to Alternate US 395 at Exit 50 (Bowers Mansion/Washoe City) won't open until October, so there will be no northbound exit between Exit 46 (Bellevue Road) and Exit 56 (Mt. Rose Highway) for several weeks.
Quote from: gonealookin on August 23, 2012, 05:20:07 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi147.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fr302%2Filikeem102%2Faaroads%2FWindRestrictions.jpg&hash=03400c0d097364fd4e293dd7b784cf0ac8d33917)
According to the filename this relates to wind restrictions? It's certainly not obvious what the sign is trying to say.
Quote from: NE2 on August 23, 2012, 05:25:08 PM
According to the filename this relates to wind restrictions? It's certainly not obvious what the sign is trying to say.
The freeway through the Washoe Valley runs through wide-open flatland along the west shore of Washoe Lake and is very exposed to high crosswinds coming off the Carson Range. In these conditions high-profile vehicles are required to exit the freeway at either end of the valley and use Alternate US 395 (old NV 429) which runs closer to the hills and also has a lower speed limit (45 to 55 mph vs. 70 mph on the freeway).
There are weather stations on the Galena Creek Bridge on the new segment of the freeway. That bridge appears to also be exposed to down-canyon crosswinds, so I think at times similar prohibitions may be applied to the new freeway stretch as well.
Quote from: NE2 on August 23, 2012, 05:25:08 PM
Quote from: gonealookin on August 23, 2012, 05:20:07 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi147.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fr302%2Filikeem102%2Faaroads%2FWindRestrictions.jpg&hash=03400c0d097364fd4e293dd7b784cf0ac8d33917)
According to the filename this relates to wind restrictions? It's certainly not obvious what the sign is trying to say.
On the contrary. I think what is says is quite obvious. Trucks, campers, cars towing trailers and buses over 9 ft in length are prohibited from the freeway when such a prohibition is in place. I suspect variable messages signs north of NV-431 and within Carson City will alert drivers when this is the case.
Granted, a better idea would be to add flashing yellow lights to the top of the sign and change the wording in the yellow section to read "WHEN FLASHING" instead of "WHEN PROHIBITED".
yeah, the way the sign is written, it is circular logic. "prohibited things are prohibited".
"when flashing" would be a great modification indeed.
Quote from: gonealookin on August 23, 2012, 05:20:07 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi147.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fr302%2Filikeem102%2Faaroads%2F001Begin395A.jpg&hash=3c8db40e35c271f667d0bf5ef8cec4b02dcec195)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi147.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fr302%2Filikeem102%2Faaroads%2FDeathofNV429.jpg&hash=7e0828a4f495aa8f8905c087f79151f25c47ac30)
NDOT says the southbound lanes open tomorrow morning at 6 a.m., northbound lanes Monday at 6 a.m. However, the northbound off-ramp to Alternate US 395 at Exit 50 (Bowers Mansion/Washoe City) won't open until October, so there will be no northbound exit between Exit 46 (Bellevue Road) and Exit 56 (Mt. Rose Highway) for several weeks.
Liking the custom font on those 'NORTH' banners. Also like the triple 'BEGIN, NORTH, ALT' US 395 banners. The new US 395 shields are pretty sharp, too.
I do wonder why Nevada uses the custom font more prevalently on direction banners and "school bus stop ahead" signs, than any other type of sign.
I've seen the custom font used extensively on STOP signs as well as the directional banners. A good example is the four way stop at Silver Springs, where US 50, US 50ALT, and US 95ALT meet (specifically heading east on US 50).
Regards,
Andy
Quote from: myosh_tino on August 23, 2012, 05:57:09 PM
Quote from: NE2 on August 23, 2012, 05:25:08 PM
Quote from: gonealookin on August 23, 2012, 05:20:07 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi147.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fr302%2Filikeem102%2Faaroads%2FWindRestrictions.jpg&hash=03400c0d097364fd4e293dd7b784cf0ac8d33917)
According to the filename this relates to wind restrictions? It's certainly not obvious what the sign is trying to say.
On the contrary. I think what is says is quite obvious. Trucks, campers, cars towing trailers and buses over 9 ft in length are prohibited from the freeway when such a prohibition is in place. I suspect variable messages signs north of NV-431 and within Carson City will alert drivers when this is the case.
Granted, a better idea would be to add flashing yellow lights to the top of the sign and change the wording in the yellow section to read "WHEN FLASHING" instead of "WHEN PROHIBITED".
Not sure I like the design on this sign. I almost want to say this sign is temporary. Note that the sign supports are wood--NDOT (and Nevada agencies in general) rarely, if ever, specifies wood posts for permanent signs.
When NDOT was performing the wind warning system study, I commented that signs should use flashing beacons and signs that say "WHEN FLASHING" to enforce the prohibition--the VMSs don't necessarily carry legal force of law like a static sign. I would also have changed the bottom end to say "MUST EXIT / FOLLOW [US 395] ALT".
Quote from: national highway 1 on August 23, 2012, 08:04:51 PM
Liking the custom font on those 'NORTH' banners. Also like the triple 'BEGIN, NORTH, ALT' US 395 banners. The new US 395 shields are pretty sharp, too.
Quote from: andy3175 on August 23, 2012, 11:24:42 PM
I've seen the custom font used extensively on STOP signs as well as the directional banners. A good example is the four way stop at Silver Springs, where US 50, US 50ALT, and US 95ALT meet (specifically heading east on US 50).
The US route shield appears bloated on these shields. The points appear to go right up to the edge of the sign blank, and I don't know how I feel about that.
Not sure why certain types of NDOT signs have this random custom font. I didn't even notice it really, as I don't know particulars on fonts. I have recognized the font on some NDOT stop signs though, including the ones in Silver Springs--the "S" is the dead giveaway. Most of these I've seen have been in NDOT district 2 (north/west Nevada).
Quote from: andy3175 on August 23, 2012, 11:24:42 PM
I've seen the custom font used extensively on STOP signs as well as the directional banners. A good example is the four way stop at Silver Springs, where US 50, US 50ALT, and US 95ALT meet (specifically heading east on US 50).
Regards,
Andy
you're right, STOP is a common one as well. as mentioned, the letter S is the major giveaway.
the one I always remember is in Beatty where US-95 makes a turn from northbound to eastbound. It is a 48 incher, kinda hard to miss.
We added a few I-580 shield pictures to AARoads ... check out:
https://www.aaroads.com/west/i-580_nv.html
https://www.aaroads.com/west/us-050_nv.html (see Business U.S. 50 east at U.S. 395/Carson City Bypass)
https://www.aaroads.com/west/us-395nb_nv.html (see title photo and reassurance marker after Exit 44)
Most of the route markers along I-580 are state named.
Regards,
Andy
I find it interesting that the freeway is co-signed on the mainline as I-580/US 395, but most of the "Freeway Entrance" assemblies have been signed as solely I-580 (initially, at least). By contrast, I-515 was signed with US 93/95 in all instances simultaneously.
Also interesting with the overhead BGS on William St (old US 50, not signed as business) that they covered up the US 395 shield with an I-580 greenout patch. The original sign was designed to accommodate an added I-580 shield, so there was no reason to cover it.
Quote from: roadfro on October 11, 2012, 06:18:34 AM
Also interesting with the overhead BGS on William St (old US 50, not signed as business) that they covered up the US 395 shield with an I-580 greenout patch. The original sign was designed to accommodate an added I-580 shield, so there was no reason to cover it.
I found it interesting that NDOT used a state-named Interstate shield on that sign. As for the patch, could that be considered a contractor's error? I'm not sure how easy it would be to peel off the greenout (and shield) and move it.
Quote from: myosh_tino on October 11, 2012, 11:49:38 AM
Quote from: roadfro on October 11, 2012, 06:18:34 AM
Also interesting with the overhead BGS on William St (old US 50, not signed as business) that they covered up the US 395 shield with an I-580 greenout patch. The original sign was designed to accommodate an added I-580 shield, so there was no reason to cover it.
I found it interesting that NDOT used a state-named Interstate shield on that sign. As for the patch, could that be considered a contractor's error? I'm not sure how easy it would be to peel off the greenout (and shield) and move it.
NDOT's typical "greenout" is usually an aluminum or other metal plate bolted/riveted directly over the old part of the sign. That's what it looks like in the referred picture. So it should be an easy fix...although it would leave holes in the original sign.
I wonder if the crew put a post-mounted I-580 reassurance shield on top of the green patch...that would help explain why it's a state-named shield...
Intentional BUMP:
Just read something on NDOT website today that says the last stretch of I-580 in Carson City (Fairview Dr to S. Carson St) is now not expected to be advertised for construction until 2015-2016, pending available funding. Construction is estimated to take 2 years once started.
NDOT has been pushing forward with smaller related projects, including relocation of utilities, closing side streets and construction of future freeway overpasses.
Wording on the project page confirms an NDOT intent to extend I-580 through the remaining portion of the Carson City Freeway upon completion.