Thought it would be a good idea to go ahead and start a thread for this since it's happening today. Sad that nobody has posted any of the requests, but hopeful that the actions will be quickly reported.
Quote from: WashuOtaku on May 22, 2018, 11:07:38 AM
Thought it would be a good idea to go ahead and start a thread for this since it's happening today. Sad that nobody has posted any of the requests, but hopeful that the actions will be quickly reported.
I've not been able to find any specifics
Ever since Marty retired, they've been slower with updates and less clear with responses...
In the vein of "things every roadgeek should know" ... Who is Marty?
Quote from: webny99 on May 22, 2018, 02:19:11 PM
In the vein of "things every roadgeek should know" ... Who is Marty?
Marty Vitale, former secretary of the AASHTO Special Committee on Route Numbering.
Quote from: webny99 on May 22, 2018, 02:19:11 PM
In the vein of "things every roadgeek should know" ... Who is Marty?
Corco's latest unavailable crush.
Quote from: NE2 on May 22, 2018, 02:43:23 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 22, 2018, 02:19:11 PM
In the vein of "things every roadgeek should know" ... Who is Marty?
Corco's latest unavailable crush.
Unavailable to corco? or unavailable to everyone else? :bigass:
Quote from: roadman on May 22, 2018, 02:31:06 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 22, 2018, 02:19:11 PM
In the vein of "things every roadgeek should know" ... Who is Marty?
Marty Vitale, former secretary of the AASHTO Special Committee on Route Numbering.
If you study the life of Marty Vitale, you are known as a viatologist.
Quote from: webny99 on May 22, 2018, 03:10:50 PM
Quote from: NE2 on May 22, 2018, 02:43:23 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 22, 2018, 02:19:11 PM
In the vein of "things every roadgeek should know" ... Who is Marty?
Corco's latest unavailable crush.
Unavailable to corco? or unavailable to everyone else? :bigass:
Just unavailable to NE2.
Quote from: kphoger on May 22, 2018, 04:24:39 PM
Quote from: roadman on May 22, 2018, 02:31:06 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 22, 2018, 02:19:11 PM
In the vein of "things every roadgeek should know" ... Who is Marty?
Marty Vitale, former secretary of the AASHTO Special Committee on Route Numbering.
If you study the life of Marty Vitale, you are known as a viatologist.
Or a vitalologist? ;)
What is not happening on this meeting: the removal of I-894. :sleep:
I'm curious if I-5BL in Seattle's a submission.
Quote from: kphoger on May 22, 2018, 04:24:39 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 22, 2018, 03:10:50 PM
Quote from: NE2 on May 22, 2018, 02:43:23 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 22, 2018, 02:19:11 PM
In the vein of "things every roadgeek should know" ... Who is Marty?
Corco's latest unavailable crush.
Unavailable to corco? or unavailable to everyone else? :bigass:
Just unavailable to NE2.
She declined his application on the grounds that the alignment submitted did not meet minimum length requirements.
The ballot is fixed a month before the meeting.
But I'd imagine they wouldn't want the ballot made public before the vote, so as to avoid lobbying. And the SCRN is on the first day of the event (pretty sure it used to be later), so we'd have to wait a little bit before they get back to the office and make the file and upload it.
The decisions from the 2018 Spring Meeting have been posted (Report):
https://route.transportation.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/05/018_Report-to-CHS_USRN-Application-Results.pdf (https://route.transportation.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/05/018_Report-to-CHS_USRN-Application-Results.pdf)
Applications and summary documents can be found here: https://route.transportation.org/committee-notices-actions-and-approvals/past-meetings/ (https://route.transportation.org/committee-notices-actions-and-approvals/past-meetings/)
They include apparently 3 somewhat unclear applications from NCDOT for I-140 (extending it east of I-40), I-285 and the elimination of US 311 between I-73 in Randleman and US 52 in Winston-Salem.
Quote from: bob7374 on May 25, 2018, 01:54:41 PM
The decisions from the 2018 Spring Meeting have been posted (Report):
https://route.transportation.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/05/018_Report-to-CHS_USRN-Application-Results.pdf (https://route.transportation.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/05/018_Report-to-CHS_USRN-Application-Results.pdf)
Applications and summary documents can be found here: https://route.transportation.org/committee-notices-actions-and-approvals/past-meetings/ (https://route.transportation.org/committee-notices-actions-and-approvals/past-meetings/)
They include apparently 3 somewhat unclear applications from NCDOT for I-140 (extending it south/west from US 421 to US 421, not though east of I-40), I-285 and the elimination of US 311 between I-73 in Randleman and US 52 in Winston-Salem.
A rerouting of US 29 in Lawrenceville, GA that I didn't know about:
QuoteThe relocation of U.S. Route 29 will provide
the traveling public with a higher capacity route by
avoiding traffic generators and constraints through the
downtown area of Lawrenceville. The relocation will move
from a 4 lane highway and one-way pair operation to a 4
lane divided facility with limited access. The local
governments have been consulted and concur in the
relocation of this route to State Route 316 and the
Lawrenceville Suwanee Road. U.S. Route 29 signs will be
removed from the present-day location when the AASHTO
application is approved by the Committee.
I really feel like it would make far more sense to put US 29 on Sugarloaf Pkwy instead, so I can only assume GDOT's higher priority is reducing mileage. Lawrenceville-Suwanee Road doesn't even have an interchange with 316, so presumably it's making a short hop on GA 120 to get there.
Additionally we have US 341 being moved onto the bypass around Perry, replacing current 341 Bypass. 341 Bypass is signed on the ground, but isn't mentioned from I-75 (indeed, the most recent GMSV run there has the exit still signed as Thompson Rd, which is what was there before the bypass was built).
Regarding I-285 in NC...why did NCDOT need AASHTO's approval to sign it when FHWA had already officially added it to the interstate system back in February? NCDOT never asked AASHTO for permission to sign the entire length of the Knightdale Bypass as I-87, but they did anyway once FHWA signed off on it.
What gives? :confused:
Regarding US84 in Alabama...I drove it when I was down there in February. Not sure when the new alignment opened, but I had the sense that it was very recent event at that point (and a LONG time in coming) -- the stretch east of AL 125 wasn't even up on Google maps.
The signage was confusing -- both the old and new alignments were signed as 84 -- but it was clear which alignment was preferred.
Downtown Elba was already suffering (a couple of major floods will do that!) I expect it'll be extremely desolate before too much longer, and a few businesses in town have already shifted to the new bypass.
My wife and I drove over to Elba to visit the grave of the person who introduced us, who had passed a couple of months before. I was somewhat surprised with the new alignment -- my first job after college was at a company located at the east end of the realignment. My wife slept through most of the drive over from Dothan, and upon waking was extremely confused. ("Are you sure this is Elba?" "Well, dear, we just drove through where your house used to be." "I don't see it". "That's kinda my point.")
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on May 22, 2018, 04:44:06 PM
What is not happening on this meeting: the removal of I-894. :sleep:
I don't know why people need to mention 894 every year. The reasons it was kept are well-documented.
AL US 84 relocation (Elba)
AR US 82 relocation (Montrose)
AR US 82B creation (Montrose) has existed since before 1953
AR US 165 relocation (Gillett)
AR US 165B creation (Gillett) has existed since 1982
AR US 167 relocation (Thornton)
AR US 167B creation (Thornton) denied probably since it doesn't return to US 167; has existed since 1968
GA USBR 15 creation
GA USBR 321 -> 221 renumbering
GA USBR 521 -> 421 renumbering
GA US 29 relocation (Lawrenceville) contingent on signing it as a continuous route
GA US 341 relocation (Perry)
GA US 341 Byp. elimination (Perry)
IN I-69 extension (Bloomington to Martinsville) contingent on signature
IN US 421 relocation (Madison)
KS USBR 66 creation
KS USBR 76 relocation (Great Bend)
MI US 131 Bus. elimination (Grand Rapids)
MI USBR 35 relocation (Charlevoix, Holland?)
MO USBR 66 creation
MT US 93 Alt. creation (Kalispell)
NV USBR 50 creation
NC I-140 extension contingent on signature
NC I-285 creation contingent on signature
NC US 311 truncation
OH USBR 50 relocation
OK US 270 relocation (Seminole)
PA USBR 30 creation (replacing BicyclePA Z)
PA USBR 36 creation (replacing BicyclePA Y and Y1)
TX US 59 relocation (Nacogdoches)
TX US 59 Bus. extension (Nacogdoches)
WA USBR 97 relocation (Oak Harbor)
WA USBR 10 relocation (Newport)
WA USBR 310 creation
WA USBR 610 creation
WY US 14/87 relocation (Sheridan)
IN US 12 relocation (Gary) no application included
Looks like my majority clinch of US 14 in Wyoming just got hit.
I don't understand the point of USBR 610 WSDOT applied for. I was also hoping for an application of I-5 BL Seattle.
So the seemingly useless southern leg of US 311 is finally being eliminated? Thats great! Does this mean the new southern terminus is at US 52?
Quote from: fillup420 on May 26, 2018, 10:06:31 AM
So the seemingly useless southern leg of US 311 is finally being eliminated? Thats great! Does this mean the new southern terminus is at US 52?
I'm still waiting for US-264 to be truncated back to Zebulon...
Quote from: Bickendan on May 26, 2018, 01:07:13 AM
Looks like my majority clinch of US 14 in Wyoming just got hit.
Whatever. It's just a minor realignment due to interchange reconstruction.
Quote from: NE2 on May 26, 2018, 12:19:45 AM
AR US 167B creation (Thornton) denied probably since it doesn't return to US 167; has existed since 1968
Needs to be 167 Spur, IMO. It's little more than a shortcut between US 167 and US 79B.
Quote from: NE2 on May 26, 2018, 11:34:50 AM
Quote from: Bickendan on May 26, 2018, 01:07:13 AM
Looks like my majority clinch of US 14 in Wyoming just got hit.
Whatever. It's just a minor realignment due to interchange reconstruction.
wait a minute - US 14 and 87 aren't signed through Sheridan; 14B and 87B are. 14 and 87 don't leave I-90 here.
What's going on here, and why did AASHTO approve this?
Quote from: US71 on May 29, 2018, 11:40:45 PMNeeds to be 167 Spur, IMO. It's little more than a shortcut between US 167 and US 79B.
It's been signed as a business route for the past 50 years, AFAICS. Makes little sense to change it. They sign 'To US167' along US79B, so what's the problem for the traveler?
Quote from: Bickendan on May 30, 2018, 04:26:25 AMwait a minute - US 14 and 87 aren't signed through Sheridan; 14B and 87B are. 14 and 87 don't leave I-90 here.
What's going on here, and why did AASHTO approve this?
I'd imagine that, like me, they saw the application and thought it was all above board. Sometimes in WY, US routes go through cities and Interstates form the bypass, other times the US routes use the Interstate to bypass and have bypass routes, so it gets a little muddled if you don't know it intimately.
It took you a while to spot the problem, ditto me (when I check travel mapping to see if changes were needed), I doubt SCRN would realise. Especially as Wyoming's stuff gets dealt with last and they had a lot of missing ones. That said, the comment about WY338 says they did at least look at a map of Sheridan beyond what was submitted.
WY might treat business routes through cities where US routes are signed along interstates as part of the mainline administratively, just not signed as such.
Quote from: english si on May 30, 2018, 04:51:06 AM
Quote from: US71 on May 29, 2018, 11:40:45 PMNeeds to be 167 Spur, IMO. It's little more than a shortcut between US 167 and US 79B.
It's been signed as a business route for the past 50 years, AFAICS. Makes little sense to change it. They sign 'To US167' along US79B, so what's the problem for the traveler?
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4761/40237714192_5a2708d608_z_d.jpg)
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4747/25411552407_4ef8bec151_z_d.jpg)
Nov 2015
My guess is AASHTO is being anal-retentive. Change it to 167
S and be done with it.
Quote from: NE2 on May 26, 2018, 12:19:45 AM
IN US 421 relocation (Madison)
IN US 12 relocation (Gary) no application included
Anybody have any details on these?
Quote from: cabiness42 on May 30, 2018, 09:48:56 AM
Quote from: NE2 on May 26, 2018, 12:19:45 AM
IN US 421 relocation (Madison)
IN US 12 relocation (Gary) no application included
Anybody have any details on these?
Yes. https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=22903.msg2330309#msg2330309