AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 1 
 on: Today at 04:24:37 AM 
Started by epzik8 - Last post by epzik8
First, apologies if this topic has already been covered. That said, I am curious to hear of any two or more traffic signals you know of in close proximity to each other that you believe should have better timing synchronization. My inspiration for this post is a pair of signals in the area of Towson, Maryland, on Route 146 at Pot Spring Road and Seminary Avenue. These lights are pretty close to one another, and it is not uncommon for one of them to be red while the other one in the same direction is green. Thus, cars who should be able to proceed because the first light is green sometimes can't because the second light is red for them.

 2 
 on: Today at 03:46:00 AM 
Started by Scott5114 - Last post by MNHighwayMan
http://www.asphaltplanet.ca/WV/US/48/US48_WV_H_dv_77-7_west_May16_24x16.jpg

Please do tell where that picture was taken, as the road, scenery, and everything looks absolutely, stunningly beautiful!!  :nod:  :hyper:

From the picture and URL we can divine that it's on US-48 westbound in West Virginia, about eleven miles east of Davis. ;-)

 3 
 on: Today at 03:32:42 AM 
Started by bugo - Last post by bugo
I don't remember any audio at all on this station.

 4 
 on: Today at 02:19:59 AM 
Started by agentsteel53 - Last post by jakeroot
Perhaps these new road color schemes are just something that would bug people who are interested in roads?

Almost certainly! Most of the changes to Google Maps, over the last few years, have not favored roadgeeks who simply use it to browse for fun. Ask any resident of the UK. The roads there used to be colored to match the route designation (blue, green, orange, white, etc). Now, all the colors match the rest of the world. This makes looking at maps confusing, especially since A-roads will sometimes be yellow, and sometimes white. Before, they were always green. Bing Maps still colors UK roads properly.

 5 
 on: Today at 02:14:53 AM 
Started by jakeroot - Last post by jakeroot
There's actually an Echo Lake under a mile east of the I-90/ WA 18 interchange. That's where the name "Echo Lake Cutoff" comes from.

So there is. Why the F are there two Echo Lakes? :-D

I think I see where the name comes from now. The 'cutoff' refers to the nature of the road (cutting off the Seattle metro area), and 'Auburn-Echo Lake' refers to the two geographic entities on either end of the highway.

Problem solved. My head kept reading 'Echo Lake Cutoff' as one entity rather than two.

 6 
 on: Today at 02:07:18 AM 
Started by jakeroot - Last post by jakeroot
The discount should only apply to one vehicle, though.

I would agree to one vehicle per person. Therefore, a couple could have two cars free, but any cars above two would be subjected to the charge.

My thought with "one vehicle per person" is that public transit in Downtown Seattle is so good, you really don't need a car at all to begin with. No reason to make it easier to own more than one car.

Until two people have to go two different directions for two different reasons.

Assuming they live downtown because that's where they work, it's safe to assume that going two different directions would be rather rare. And when that does occur, there's almost certainly a bus or train they can take. Public transit in downtown Seattle is by far the best in Washington State. There's a bus heading pretty much anywhere you can think of.

Worst case scenario, it wouldn't be illegal to own two cars. However, it might be difficult even without the toll, simply because not all buildings have parking (and the ones that do often have only one stall per unit). The transit and walking/cycling access is so good downtown, you really don't need to own a car. You can rent a car for the extremely rare occasions you might need one.

I don't understand the need for a congestion charge in Downtown Seattle. It's nowhere near as needed as it is in London.

The congestion charge is simply a way to ensure drivers don't detour from the 99 tunnel. A small congestion charge would probably prevent most detours, but wouldn't deter those that need to go downtown.

 7 
 on: Today at 01:56:06 AM 
Started by jakeroot - Last post by compdude787
I don't understand the need for a congestion charge in Downtown Seattle. It's nowhere near as needed as it is in London.

 8 
 on: Today at 01:54:35 AM 
Started by jakeroot - Last post by compdude787
There's actually an Echo Lake under a mile east of the I-90/ WA 18 interchange. That's where the name "Echo Lake Cutoff" comes from.

 9 
 on: Today at 01:54:02 AM 
Started by Alex - Last post by Beltway
In the NEPA EIS process, the agency is supposed to develop a range of alternatives and go through a scoping process to narrow it down to a preferred alternative.  Some of the alternatives may be of marginal feasibility, but it is still an important process to undergo in order to provide a comprehensive evaluation of a proposed highway project.
https://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/projdev/docueis.asp
No, absolutely. I totally understand how alternatives work. I was just surprised to see this as an alternative, and not something like a SPUI or a dumbell/dogbone (both equally compact).

Alternatives in a Draft EIS can encompass a range of ideas, some of which may at times seem odd or questionable.  It doesn't mean that all of them are things that are all that likely to be built, just to show a range of thinking on the project.

 10 
 on: Today at 01:51:29 AM 
Started by Chris - Last post by jamierazorback
I received this email today from TDOT about I-22 connecting into Memphis and re signing I-269 in Tennessee. The first part was left out for the most part. Here is the email....

Jamie,
 
Thank you for your interest in the transportation system of the state of Tennessee.  The Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) appreciates your concerns regarding the transportation system linking Memphis, TN with Birmingham, AL.  Included in the October 6, 2017 TDOT letting was a project for the installation of signs on the I-269 corridor from the Tennessee/Mississippi state-line to  S.R. 1 (U.S 70/79) north of I-40 in Shelby County, TN. This project will involve resigning existing S.R. 385 along this corridor. The project was awarded to Superior Traffic Control with a bid price of $589,553.30. The work for this project should begin within the next few months.
 
The purpose of the I-69 corridor is to link the US/Mexico border in southern Texas with the US/Canada border in Michigan. I-269 will serve as a  bypass around the east side of Memphis, TN for continuous traffic on I-69. A connection with I-22 will allow for several different traffic routes into and out of Memphis and surrounding areas.
 
If you have any additional questions or concerns, please contact me.  My contact information is listed below.
 
Sincerely,
 
cid:image001.png@01D0ACCA.32B88870
Rachel Webb, P.E. | C.E. Manager 2
TDOT Region 4 Project Development
Building A, First Floor
300 Benchmark Place, Jackson, TN  38301
p.  731-935-0141       f. 731-935-0161


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.