AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 on: Today at 08:24:40 PM 
Started by I-39 - Last post by cwm1276
Found the 88 resurfacing details
Sounds like what they did betweeh Rochelle and Rock Falls with drainage and crash investigation pull offs.

lighting improvements huh?

Wouldn't be a bad idea from sugar grove to dekalb

OK, how did you find the link to the project? They changed around the projects page a bit, but even then, all I could find were the links to the 2017 projects.

Also, I agree that I-88 could use some lighting improvements from Sugar Grove to DeKalb, though I doubt we'll see anything to the extent of what was done on I-90 in the foreseeable future for several reasons. Not to mention that a bigger priority for them would be to extend the continuous median lighting past the IL-59 interchange to at least Orchard Road.
Use the map, the cones are links to new projects.

 on: Today at 08:20:42 PM 
Started by Avalanchez71 - Last post by 3467
They will be on the New 74 bridge in the Quad Cities just like 72 but in general they are banned along with pedestrians on most Illinois interstates.

 on: Today at 08:07:12 PM 
Started by iBallasticwolf2 - Last post by Buck87
Florence, Y'all
That is a misspelling it supposed to say Florence Mall.

Not a misspelling, but rather a deliberate change. Florence was told that their water tower advertisement for the mall was too high to comply with state law, so they made the minor changes to convert "MALL" to "Y'ALL" because it was cheaper than painting over the whole word. 

 on: Today at 08:01:18 PM 
Started by Tom89t - Last post by Signal man619
Nice! Huntsville's removed most of the ones around the city years ago, and many of the remaining ones will be going within the next year or so when the intersection they're at gets redone. There's a fair number in Central Alabama though, especially in Birmingham.

It gets better, I found a few Crouse-Hinds Type Ms that are still in service, I believe those are currently the oldest signals in Philly, next to the art decos in the Naval Base.

And the Marbelite 12in type L.

 on: Today at 07:56:19 PM 
Started by tradephoric - Last post by kalvado
Interior and exterior dash footage released of the fatal crash:
On one hand, pedestrian is not doing anyone a favor by walking across dark road in dark clothes. I am not sure what would be the outcome if I was driving.
On the other hand, this is exactly the situation where electronic driver should be able to perform much  better than a meaty one in avoiding an accident.

 on: Today at 07:54:38 PM 
Started by tradephoric - Last post by Bruce
It's pretty obvious now that the pedestrian did not "dart" into traffic. She was already 2/3rds across and would be clearly visible to a responsible driver. And the driver could have stopped had the roadway been at a lower speed limit or given proper safety treatments (engineered for slower speeds, more lights added, more crosswalks).

Uber really did rush into this. If you read their statements during the Waymo lawsuit a few months ago, it's clear that they were trying to race their competitors and beat them. Highly irresponsible from them (but not unexpected of any car company...they don't care about safety) and from the government of Arizona for ceding public roadways as a test course.

 on: Today at 07:46:00 PM 
Started by Mergingtraffic - Last post by shadyjay
Sometimes it's a contractor error, sometimes its an error that was in the plans issued by ConnDOT.  In this case, the Exit 39-UCONN Health sign shows up as a right-aligned exit tab in the contract plans, with no "LEFT".  The I-84 shields don't delineate color in the plans, so I can't tell whose at fault there.  The earlier-in-the-project exit tab issues (Exits 31,32) look to be a contractor error, as the plans show the correct exit tabs for each sign.

This reminds me of the CT 8 Thomaston to Winsted signing project, where the contract plans showed a square shield for US 202 and that's what was installed.  It's been almost a year since I've traveled that segment, so I'm not sure if it was changed to a US shield, or not. 

 on: Today at 07:42:21 PM 
Started by Alex - Last post by cl94
It is interesting that seicer's map showed the Thruway going down into New Jersey apparently following Route 17 and then probably heading towards the GWB.  How nice it would be to have that direct connexion between the Thruway and the NJ Turnpike now.  Who would have been responsible for this change?

A northern extension of the NJ Turnpike was proposed until the 70s. Would have followed Teaneck Rd, Washington Ave, and NY 303 up to the Thruway with the only intermediate interchange being at the Palisades Parkway. Thing was stopped by NIMBYs and the cost of land.

As to why the Thruway crosses the Hudson at Tarrytown, NYSTA wanted control of the bridge. Any further south and it would have been within the Port Authority's sphere of influence.

 on: Today at 07:40:04 PM 
Started by empirestate - Last post by wanderer2575
March 21, 2018: Diverging diamonds.

University Drive at I-75 in Auburn Hills, MI:

 on: Today at 07:25:35 PM 
Started by Alex - Last post by Beeper1
When the Mass Turnpike opened in 1957, it was 6 lanes from Route 128 west to Framingham (Exit 12) and 4 lanes the rest of the way.  But, the roadway grade and all the bridges/overpasses as far west as Sturbridge (Exit 9) were built to accommodate an added lane.   That lane was added in the late 60s.

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.