Daily Picture Challenge!

[paulthemapguy]

April 13, 2018:  Big green signs advertising 3 or more numbered streets (using ordinal numbers).  Streets can be listed on distinct signs or on one common sign.


IL-I-94X60CN by Paul Drives, on Flickr

[Eth]

April 13, 2018:  Big green signs advertising 3 or more numbered streets (using ordinal numbers).  Streets can be listed on distinct signs or on one common sign.

How about two on one and one on another?

[US 89]

April 13, 2018:  Big green signs advertising 3 or more numbered streets (using ordinal numbers).  Streets can be listed on distinct signs or on one common sign.

Does this count? The streets would be read "21st South", "13th South", and "9th South".

[MNHighwayMan]

April 13, 2018:  Big green signs advertising 3 or more numbered streets (using ordinal numbers).  Streets can be listed on distinct signs or on one common sign.

Four-for-one on one panel, and a bonus fifth on a different panel! WB I-235 in Des Moines.

[paulthemapguy]

All of those posts yesterday were totally good 

April 14, 2018:  Post the intersection of 2 US Highways in a totally rural area--surrounded by wilderness or farmland. Cannot be in a town or city.

US67 and US136 outside of Macomb, IL


IL-US136-US67EE by Paul Drives, on Flickr

[MNHighwayMan]

April 14, 2018: The intersection of 2 US Highways in a totally rural area--surrounded by wilderness or farmland. Cannot be in a town or city.

The only one I know that I have that for sure qualifies: US-6 and US-151 in the middle of nowhere, Iowa County, Iowa.

[csw]

April 14, 2018: The intersection of 2 US Highways in a totally rural area--surrounded by wilderness or farmland. Cannot be in a town or city.

The southern interchange of US 41 and US 52 in Benton Co., IN, is quite lonely.

[Jim]

April 14, 2018: The intersection of 2 US Highways in a totally rural area--surrounded by wilderness or farmland. Cannot be in a town or city.

This is three, but I figure that's in the spirit of the challenge.  I don't recall any signs of a settlement near the point where US 93 joins US 6 and US 50 in eastern Nevada.  October 4, 2015.

[US 89]

April 14, 2018: The intersection of 2 US Highways in a totally rural area--surrounded by wilderness or farmland. Cannot be in a town or city.

US 160 and US 491, southwest of Cortez CO.

[TBKS1]

It's 12:05 AM CDT on April 15th here, so I apologize if it's too early to suggest anything. lol

Challenge for April 15th: A city who's population is smaller than the elevation.

Menifee, Arkansas has a population of 302 people, the elevation is 322 feet.



I-40 Exit 117 (Arkansas) by TheInstrumentalist, on Flickr

[Jim]

Challenge for April 15th: A city who's population is smaller than the elevation.

How about Kaskaskia, Illinois?  Population 18 (as of this picture, anyway, looks like it might be 13 now) and an elevation of at least a few hundred feet.  July 23, 2005.

[formulanone]

Challenge for April 15th: A city who's population is smaller than the elevation.

Of course Weed, California is higher than its people:

[MNHighwayMan]

April 15, 2018: A city whose population is smaller than its elevation.

Runnells, Iowa: the northern terminus of Iowa 316. Population: 523 (2016 estimate) Elevation: 807 ft above sea level.

[paulthemapguy]

April 15, 2018: A city whose population is smaller than its elevation.

Grand Lake and Estes Park both qualify.  Both are over 7000 ft above sea level. Grand Lake has 500 people; Estes Park has 6,000.


CO-US40-US34N by Paul Drives, on Flickr

[bassoon1986]

Bryceland, LA has a population of 108 and an elevation of 308 ft.




iPhone

[empirestate]

April 15, 2018: A city whose population is smaller than its elevation.

Grand Lake and Estes Park both qualify.  Both are over 7000 ft above sea level. Grand Lake has 500 people; Estes Park has 6,000.

Which brings up the natural question: what is the most populous city that would qualify for this Challenge? Harder than you'd think to find out, since most lists of the world's highest cities seem to include only very large places, or don't list the population.

[TBKS1]

April 15, 2018: A city whose population is smaller than its elevation.

Grand Lake and Estes Park both qualify.  Both are over 7000 ft above sea level. Grand Lake has 500 people; Estes Park has 6,000.

Which brings up the natural question: what is the most populous city that would qualify for this Challenge? Harder than you'd think to find out, since most lists of the world's highest cities seem to include only very large places, or don't list the population.

Hmm... I guess that could also be a side challenge for this. I like that!

I'll probably do some looking up on random small cities and towns along the Rockies. Hopefully I find something there.

[US 89]

April 15, 2018: A city whose population is smaller than its elevation.

Green River, UT: population 952, elevation 4078.
Castle Valley, UT: population 324, elevation 4685.



Kamas, UT: population 1899, elevation 6486.



Park City just barely misses the cut: population 7873, elevation 7000.

[Eth]

April 15, 2018: A city whose population is smaller than its elevation.

Waleska, GA – population 644, elevation 1109 feet:

[Jim]

April 15, 2018: A city whose population is smaller than its elevation.

Not the biggest place, but of the places we've seen so far, it's the highest and the greatest difference between elevation and population.  Brian Head, Utah.  Population 118, Elevation 9800.  Taken on Utah 14.  October 3, 2015.

[Mapmikey]

April 15, 2018: A city whose population is smaller than its elevation.

Grand Lake and Estes Park both qualify.  Both are over 7000 ft above sea level. Grand Lake has 500 people; Estes Park has 6,000.

Which brings up the natural question: what is the most populous city that would qualify for this Challenge? Harder than you'd think to find out, since most lists of the world's highest cities seem to include only very large places, or don't list the population.

It appears a contender would be Aspen CO (population ~6900, elevation ~8000)...

[US71]

April 15, 2018: A city whose population is smaller than its elevation.

Buford, Wymoming

[MCRoads]

Haven’t made a challenge on here in a while:

4/16/17: Traffic control devices seen better days. (i. e. damaged/vandalized signs, flat/deformed cones, those flexible bollard things that always end up missing or bent a month after installation, you get the idea.) If it looks damaged, or if it needs repairs, post it here!

Exit off 280 in SF:

https://goo.gl/maps/ZSXVHS894AQ2

[US71]

4/16/17: Traffic control devices seen better days. (i. e. damaged/vandalized signs, flat/deformed cones, those flexible bollard things that always end up missing or bent a month after installation, you get the idea.) If it looks damaged, or if it needs repairs, post it here!

Old and faded in Birmingham, AL

[paulthemapguy]

4/16/17: Traffic control devices seen better days. (i. e. damaged/vandalized signs, flat/deformed cones, those flexible bollard things that always end up missing or bent a month after installation, you get the idea.) If it looks damaged, or if it needs repairs, post it here!

KY-061-044NX by Paul Drives, on Flickr