News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

AASHTO Fall 2018

Started by rschen7754, September 19, 2018, 09:35:10 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

PHLBOS

Quote from: ilpt4u on September 24, 2018, 09:13:24 PMIs there precedent for Mile Markers resetting at the state line vs continous in this case? Full Multistate beltways (thinking I-275/Cincy) have continuous Mileage, not resetting, I believe. Not sure about the DC Beltway, and also not sure about the now 3-State I-295 in DE, NJ, and now PA
The VA portion of the Capital Beltway that is both I-95/495 continues with the VA I-95 mileage.  It resets after crossing the Potomac into MD and continues all the way around to the Springfield, VA I-95/395/495 interchange.  Despite the reset(s), the numbering still runs in a counter-clockwise direction.

I-295 in DE/NJ & now PA is as follows:  All mile makers reset at each state border, but 295's interchanges in DE are not numbered. 

The change in PA is more drastic because not only do the numbers reset; the numbering order changes direction (the numbers decrease one moves further from the Scudder Falls Bridge regardless; Exit 10 in PA/Exit 76 in NJ).  Another reason, IMHO, why it would've been better to redesignate the 16-mile stretch of "former I-95" as I-395 or 695 rather than making such a continuation of I-295 (though reset, the order would've continued in the same direction until the I-295/US 1 interchange in Lawrence Township); but such is another topic for another thread.
GPS does NOT equal GOD


WashuOtaku

I wonder if the committee knows that the "fix" North Carolina did at the interchange is a U-turn from northbound I-95 onto southbound Future I-295. There is still also an at-grade cross-over from southbound I-95 onto northbound Future I-295/US 13.

NE2

Quote from: WashuOtaku on September 27, 2018, 12:09:31 PM
I wonder if the committee knows that the "fix" North Carolina did at the interchange is a U-turn from northbound I-95 onto southbound Future I-295.
Do you have any photos of this? It's too new for the Goog.

Quote from: WashuOtaku on September 27, 2018, 12:09:31 PM
There is still also an at-grade cross-over from southbound I-95 onto northbound Future I-295/US 13.
That's only US 13. No I-295 east of I-95.
pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".

froggie

Quote from: WashuOtakuI wonder if the committee knows that the "fix" North Carolina did at the interchange is a U-turn from northbound I-95 onto southbound Future I-295.

IIRC, the "fix" you're referring to wasn't an attempt at Interstate designation but was done in response to crashes at the intersection with the northbound 95 ramps.

QuoteThere is still also an at-grade cross-over from southbound I-95 onto northbound Future I-295/US 13.

Fixing this isn't necessary for Interstate designation, though.

Quote from: NE2Do you have any photos of this? It's too new for the Goog.

Imagery exists in Google Earth.

vdeane

Quote from: froggie on September 27, 2018, 02:06:03 PM
QuoteThere is still also an at-grade cross-over from southbound I-95 onto northbound Future I-295/US 13.

Fixing this isn't necessary for Interstate designation, though.
Agreed.  3/4 of the movements are freeway-freeway, and the one that isn't is a major one.  This will basically come down to whether AASHTO and FHWA care enough about that last movement not being freeway-freeway to delay designation.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

english si

Quote from: vdeane on September 27, 2018, 02:30:53 PMAgreed.  3/4 of the movements are freeway-freeway, and the one that isn't is a major one.  This will basically come down to whether AASHTO and FHWA care enough about that last movement not being freeway-freeway to delay designation.
Given that it's NC, and they sign it like this, the question is also whether they reckon they'd be able to force the construction of a free-flow link. I mean NC really want those interstate designations, but it already has the blue-and-red signs and so the branding job is done...

sparker

Since the primary movements involved in Interstate function -- SB 95 to SB 295 and NB 295 to NB 95 -- are free-flowing -- and there's ample precedent for not providing such movements in a "counterflow" or "oblique" direction ( e.g. I-5/I-710 in CA), then FHWA might just approve the configuration.  I don't think they'll get particularly uptight about the lack of a freeflowing NB 95>SB 295 connection. 

LM117

#32
Even if the interchange isn't a problem, there's still the issue of the two sets of bridges on Future I-295 crossing the Cape Fear River and Carvers Creek. A quick glance on Google Streetview shows that the outside shoulders do not meet interstate standards, despite what NCDOT wants AASHTO to believe.

FWIW, the Google Maps satellite image shows the current interchange configuration on my iPhone.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

CNGL-Leudimin

And as always I-515 isn't being changed to I-11. :sleep:
Supporter of the construction of several running gags, including I-366 with a speed limit of 85 mph (137 km/h) and the Hypotenuse.

Please note that I may mention "invalid" FM channels, i.e. ending in an even number or down to 87.5. These are valid in Europe.

sparker

Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on September 28, 2018, 03:27:56 AM
And as always I-515 isn't being changed to I-11. :sleep:

NDOT's still slogging along with their study re the I-11 routing through Las Vegas; a decision expected sometime next year.  Any SCOURN petitions won't be forthcoming until that study is completed and acted upon by NDOT.

Roadsguy

Quote from: english si on September 27, 2018, 03:22:15 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 27, 2018, 02:30:53 PMAgreed.  3/4 of the movements are freeway-freeway, and the one that isn't is a major one.  This will basically come down to whether AASHTO and FHWA care enough about that last movement not being freeway-freeway to delay designation.
Given that it's NC, and they sign it like this, the question is also whether they reckon they'd be able to force the construction of a free-flow link. I mean NC really want those interstate designations, but it already has the blue-and-red signs and so the branding job is done...

Except NCDOT replaced all the Future I-295 signage with NC 295 in 2015 when the Bragg Blvd—Murchison Road section opened. Even the sign you linked was changed, which you can barely tell from the 2015 Street View from I-95.
Mileage-based exit numbering implies the existence of mileage-cringe exit numbering.

vdeane

Quote from: sparker on September 28, 2018, 12:23:17 PM
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on September 28, 2018, 03:27:56 AM
And as always I-515 isn't being changed to I-11. :sleep:

NDOT's still slogging along with their study re the I-11 routing through Las Vegas; a decision expected sometime next year.  Any SCOURN petitions won't be forthcoming until that study is completed and acted upon by NDOT.
My understanding is that they already got AASHTO and/or FHWA approval to renumber south of I-215 and even had a contract for it, but decided to hold off until it was studied because the eastern bypass option wouldn't use this section.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

sparker

Quote from: vdeane on September 28, 2018, 07:51:09 PM
Quote from: sparker on September 28, 2018, 12:23:17 PM
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on September 28, 2018, 03:27:56 AM
And as always I-515 isn't being changed to I-11. :sleep:

NDOT's still slogging along with their study re the I-11 routing through Las Vegas; a decision expected sometime next year.  Any SCOURN petitions won't be forthcoming until that study is completed and acted upon by NDOT.
My understanding is that they already got AASHTO and/or FHWA approval to renumber south of I-215 and even had a contract for it, but decided to hold off until it was studied because the eastern bypass option wouldn't use this section.

That is correct.  Nevertheless, the chances for an eastern option that would out of necessity encroach on NPS territory (Lake Mead Nat'l Recreational Area) are relatively slim.  I-11 will in all likelihood subsume the remainder of I-515 then utilize US 95 for the remainder of the mileage in LV, or be routed over the west side of the multi-designation 215 loop, possibly with a connector north from the loop's NW corner directly to US 95. 

cjk374

Quote from: english si on September 24, 2018, 01:16:26 PM
Quote from: cjk374 on September 24, 2018, 06:42:44 AMThere was always a US 167B in Thorton. I haven't been through there in awhile, so I don't know what "new route" they are referring to.
Last time around, Arkansas had a load of entries to update stuff from the 50s and 60s that was de facto the routes of US highways, but not de jure. US176B was rejected as it didn't meet its parent at both ends.

Half of Arkansas's business routes don't meet the parent at both ends. Damn you ARDOT!!  :pan: :banghead:
Runnin' roads and polishin' rails.

SSR_317

Quote from: cabiness42 on September 25, 2018, 04:23:50 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on September 24, 2018, 12:08:12 PM
Are Indiana and Kentucky going to apply for the I-265 designation for that new segment they built a couple of years ago? Or are they just planning on leaving it the way it is?

I don't know why you would build a road/bridge connecting two sections of I-265 and then not call it I-265.
Gotta remember which two states you're dealing with here (and as a native Hoosier, I can say that).

sparker

Quote from: SSR_317 on October 02, 2018, 04:47:51 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on September 25, 2018, 04:23:50 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on September 24, 2018, 12:08:12 PM
Are Indiana and Kentucky going to apply for the I-265 designation for that new segment they built a couple of years ago? Or are they just planning on leaving it the way it is?

I don't know why you would build a road/bridge connecting two sections of I-265 and then not call it I-265.
Gotta remember which two states you're dealing with here (and as a native Hoosier, I can say that).

So -- who's going to have to blink before something is done re a continuous I-265 designation?  IN or KY?   :confused:

english si

The report of the meeting is up now: https://route.transportation.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/10/018_Report-to-CHS_USRN-Application-Results-AM-2018.pdf

AR US167 Bus is conditionally approved - needs to be double posted with 79 to return to 167.

MO US24 relocation is conditionally approved - they need to dual-sign it with I-70

everything else approved.

txstateends

So, how is US 24 in Kansas City going to be rerouted?  Along I-70 east of downtown, then what?
\/ \/ click for a bigger image \/ \/

US 89

Quote from: txstateends on October 04, 2018, 07:01:17 PM
So, how is US 24 in Kansas City going to be rerouted?  Along I-70 east of downtown, then what?

From what I understand, it'll follow I-70 east to I-435, where it will head north to its current alignment.

I'm not a fan of this reroute, but whatever. It does mean I get a few extra miles on US 24, though.



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.