Author Topic: SD: truncate SD377?  (Read 2267 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline oscar

  • TM Collaborator
  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1545
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 11:42:22 pm
    • Hot Springs and Highways pages
SD: truncate SD377?
« on: April 27, 2024, 02:12:32 am »
I traveled part of SD 44 yesterday, south of the Badlands National Park boundary. I turned north on SD 377, to get back to I-90 via SD 240.

TM has SD 377's south end at SD 44 (fine), and its north end at SD 240. However, GMSV shows, and I saw, an End SD 377 sign at the southern park boundary. Some much older 2013 GMSV imagery has SD 377 signage within the park, at the junction with SD 240. I didn't look back at that junction for whether there is still SD 377 signage there.
« Last Edit: April 27, 2024, 03:10:34 am by oscar »

Offline rickmastfan67

  • TM Collaborator (A)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1869
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:June 12, 2024, 07:26:04 am
Re: SD: truncate SD377?
« Reply #1 on: April 27, 2024, 08:06:17 am »
However, GMSV shows, and I saw, an End SD 377 sign at the southern park boundary.

All the historical GSV shows said 'END' shield there as far back as Oct '08.

Offline oscar

  • TM Collaborator
  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1545
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 11:42:22 pm
    • Hot Springs and Highways pages
Re: SD: truncate SD377?
« Reply #2 on: April 29, 2024, 08:36:17 am »
FWIW, the next day in Fort Pierre, I saw an End sign for SD 1806 at the US 14/SD 34 junction. Then a few blocks east, the sign assembly has SD 1806 continuing south onto US 83. Maybe SDDOT doesn't take END signs as seriously as we do in other jurisdictions?

So leaving SD 377 alone would be defensible, in the absence of other data like official route definitions, and considering that SD 240 is signed within Badlands National Park.

Offline the_spui_ninja

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 742
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 04:13:37 pm
  • THE Western SD Highway Nut
Re: SD: truncate SD377?
« Reply #3 on: April 29, 2024, 09:41:36 am »
FWIW, the next day in Fort Pierre, I saw an End sign for SD 1806 at the US 14/SD 34 junction. Then a few blocks east, the sign assembly has SD 1806 continuing south onto US 83. Maybe SDDOT doesn't take END signs as seriously as we do in other jurisdictions?

So leaving SD 377 alone would be defensible, in the absence of other data like official route definitions, and considering that SD 240 is signed within Badlands National Park.

Route log (https://dot.sd.gov/media/documents/Pierre_Region_Highway_Log.pdf, page 164 of the PDF) has 377 going all the way to 240, plus every single official map of SD that's at that level of detail includes the 0.7 mi park section as 377.

The Fort Pierre "END" signs have always been janky as far back as I can remember (see the south junction of 1806 and 83 as well). Part of the problem is that concurrencies aren't in the official logs (like Colorado) but they are signed (unlike Colorado). There's enough signage for 1806 in Fort Pierre to keep the link along 83 and 14/34 in my opinion.

Hope you didn't get too wet in our neck of the woods haha!
« Last Edit: April 29, 2024, 09:46:16 am by the_spui_ninja »
An adventure is only an inconvenience rightly considered. An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered. - G.K. Chesterton