 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / March 2008What's this for?
http://tinyurl.com/3dgv5j Why is this ramp two-way for most of its length, eventually requiring you to turn around and go back?  SignatureCiao, Paul D. DeRocco Paul mailto:pderocco@ix.netcom.com >http://tinyurl.com/3dgv5j > >Why is this ramp two-way for most of its length, eventually requiring you to >turn around and go back? I give up. Why? Signature======================================================================== Michael Kesti | "And like, one and one don't make | two, one and one make one." mrkesti at hotmail dot com | - The Who, Bargain >http://tinyurl.com/3dgv5j > >Why is this ramp two-way for most of its length, eventually requiring you to >turn around and go back? Probably something to do with it being the old routing of US 91/466. > "Mark F" <mkpl@remove2reply.cox.net> wrote > > Probably something to do with it being the old routing of US 91/466. Yes, it was. But one would think they'd just make the whole long ramp one-way. I can't see anything in the aerial imagery that suggests a reason for building a turnaround. I've driven down that ramp (but never up it), and don't recall noticing the turnaround. I'm just wondering if someone knows that spot, and knows there's something there that I can't see in the aerial imagery. SignatureCiao, Paul D. DeRocco Paul mailto:pderocco@ix.netcom.com >http://tinyurl.com/3dgv5j > >Why is this ramp two-way for most of its length, eventually requiring you to >turn around and go back? I'm guessing that "Old CA-58" once kept on going, but when the Interstate was built on top of the former CA-58 ROW they decided to dead-end the road in one direction and make the other direction an off-ramp. The little loop is simply a convenient turn-around for the illiterate fools who missed the "dead end" signs a little further back. Why the didn't end the eastbound lane at the "Y" a few hundred feet farther back is a bit of a mystery, however. > On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 20:31:10 -0800, "Paul D. DeRocco" > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > back. Why the didn't end the eastbound lane at the "Y" a few hundred > feet farther back is a bit of a mystery, however. Wow, Caltrans logic hard at work there; glad I didn't pay for that. Wouldn't it have been cheaper, easier and possibly safer to disallow traffic counter the direction of the ramp? >> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 20:31:10 -0800, "Paul D. DeRocco" >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >Wouldn't it have been cheaper, easier and possibly safer to disallow >traffic counter the direction of the ramp? Even better, they could have nuked Oregon into iridescent slag. Signature"Dave's not here, man!" - Tommy Chong ["Followup-To:" header set to ca.driving.] >>Wow, Caltrans logic hard at work there; glad I didn't pay for that. >>Wouldn't it have been cheaper, easier and possibly safer to disallow >>traffic counter the direction of the ramp? > > Even better, they could have nuked Oregon into iridescent slag. But CA-58 doesn't go to Oregon. :) SignatureSteve Sobol, Victorville, CA PGP:0xE3AE35ED www.SteveSobol.com Geek-for-hire. Details: http://www.linkedin.com/in/stevesobol >["Followup-To:" header set to ca.driving.] > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >But CA-58 doesn't go to Oregon. :) That's a good thing - that way, no Californians will get hurt when Oregon gets nuked. :) >> http://tinyurl.com/3dgv5j >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > back. Why the didn't end the eastbound lane at the "Y" a few hundred > feet farther back is a bit of a mystery, however. Unless they have an idea of adding an outer highway for local development later on down the line. I don't seem to recall that sort of configuration when I was stationed out in Barstow(1979-1980)-when that WAS CA 58. It was a westbound offslip, only. I'm still pissed they replaced the 3-level Y(http://tinyurl.com/2oov6x) with a farking trumpet for the current CA 58. The Latticework for the SB->EB link over westbound IH 15 was maka cool. SignatureComrade Otto The Duke Of Yamamoto http://mryamamoto.50megs.com 'The Quality goes in before the Name goes on' >>> http://tinyurl.com/3dgv5j >>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >configuration when I was stationed out in Barstow(1979-1980)-when that >WAS CA 58. It was a westbound offslip, only. Perhaps something like this? http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=gila+bend,+az&ie=UTF8&ll=32.940 565,-112.752399&spn=0.002274,0.005021&t=h&z=18&iwloc=addr I'm sure there's some interesting history behind that configuration, as well. Signature"Dave's not here, man!" - Tommy Chong > >>http://tinyurl.com/3dgv5j > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > back. Why the didn't end the eastbound lane at the "Y" a few hundred > > feet farther back is a bit of a mystery, however. My guess is that ROW access had to be maintained for privately owned land on the former Route 58... sort of like the frontage roads along Texas interstates. The "turn around loop" I think tries to prevent free flowing "wrong way" traffic onto the I-15 off ramp. I think the old 58 highway has a highway speed limit around 55 MPH. > Unless they have an idea of adding an outer highway for local > development later on down the line. I don't seem to recall that sort of > configuration when I was stationed out in Barstow(1979-1980)-when that > WAS CA 58. It was a westbound offslip, only. I tend to agree with you Comrade. I think a 2-way frontage road will be extended from the I-15 off ramp Jct at some point in the not too distant future. Ralph > I'm still pissed they replaced the 3-level Y(http://tinyurl.com/2oov6x) > with a farking trumpet for the current CA 58. The Latticework for the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Comrade Otto The Duke Of Yamamotohttp://mryamamoto.50megs.com > 'The Quality goes in before the Name goes on' |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.