AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Author Topic: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents  (Read 92513 times)

Rover_0

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 964
  • Why?

  • Age: -62
  • Location: Utah
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 09:58:27 PM
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #175 on: September 14, 2021, 12:06:51 AM »

US 84 to Oregon would have prevented I-80N from being renumbered to I-84 :sombrero:. And the Interstates were already under construction by the time of that letter (1959).

Ha!

If I were a betting man, I'd say that I-80N would've become I-82 and I-82 something else--maybe I-86 (as this was during the time of the suffixed Interstates)?

US-84 to Oregon is definitely one of the more out-there proposals. Crescent Junction was mentioned in those documents, so I can't help but try to connect the dots for US-84 between there and Bliss; it'd probably go something like this:

US-6 Overlap to Spanish Fork
US-91 Overlap to Brigham City
US-30S Overlap to US-30N/30S split
US-30 Overlap to Bliss

The timing may have worked out as well, given that 91 and 30S were on their way out within 15-20 years, with US-84 possibly supplanting 91 to Brigham City and 30S back to 30 once Interstates 15 and 80N were being built. Of course, US-84 would've been overlapping 80N once it was completed.

Also another tidbit: IIRC part of former US-91, after it was decommissioned south of Brigham City in 1974 and before Utah's 1977 renumbering, was numbered UT-84. (Correct me if I'm wrong, though.)
« Last Edit: September 22, 2021, 05:43:11 PM by Rover_0 »
Logged
Fixing erroneous shields, one at a time...

US 89

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6250
  • Your friendly neighborhood meteorologist

  • Location: Tallahassee, FL
  • Last Login: February 23, 2024, 09:23:28 AM
    • Utah Highways
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #176 on: September 14, 2021, 12:23:26 AM »

Also another tidbit: IIRC part of former US-91, after it was decommissioned south of Brigham City in 1974 and before Utah's 1977 renumbering, was numbered UT-84. (Correct me if I'm wrong, though.)

Yep - specifically the part of old 91 between I-15/Main St in Layton and 1900 West/Riverdale Rd in Roy was part of SR 84. That was renumbered to SR 126 in 1977.

Had I-80N been renumbered to I-84 just a few years earlier, the two 84s would have intersected at Hot Springs Jct.

Bruce

  • [citation needed]
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5612
  • Stuck on I-5

  • Age: 26
  • Location: Snohomish County, WA
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 01:32:08 AM
    • Wikipedia
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #177 on: September 14, 2021, 12:30:32 AM »

If I were a betting man, I'd say that I-80N would've become I-82 and I-82 something else--maybe I-86 (as this was during the time of the suffixed Interstates)?

Until 1958, I-82 in fact was assigned to the Portland-SLC corridor (source), while I-82N was assigned to what is now I-86.
Logged

US20IL64

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 274
  • Location: Elmhurst IL
  • Last Login: March 02, 2024, 03:10:24 PM
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #178 on: September 14, 2021, 08:44:19 PM »

Is cool   :) to see scans of old documents and explanations with approvals, etc. As someone posted "like Christmas".  :popcorn:

I-90 re-routing in Chicago made sense, to make more direct. And remove superfluous route numbers, like IL-194.
Logged

AcE_Wolf_287

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 235
  • Location: Columbia, SC & Latham, NY
  • Last Login: October 28, 2023, 03:40:32 PM
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #179 on: September 21, 2021, 11:03:35 AM »

Merry Christmas, everyone!

I found an early NY 3DI numbering plan. This has some stuff we never knew existed.


Very Interesting that I-87 was planned to end at a 2di instead of its current 3di, i've always made ideas to make I-87 end at a 2di
Logged

Mapmikey

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4353
  • Co-curator with Froggie of www.vahighways.com

  • Age: 54
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 08:31:54 PM
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #180 on: February 25, 2022, 09:47:31 PM »

There is a 1973 document discussing the elimination of (most of them are in here) suffixed interstates.  Some stuff floated in here that was news to me.

Apologies if this is on the forum elsewhere...

Some nuggets...
I-80N out west was supposed to become I-86 (I-11 and I-13 were floated if duplication was not desired)
I-80S to Denver was supposed to be I-78 (or I-23)
I-275 tampa area was supposed to be I-75W or I-175
I-57 to Green Bay was supposed to become I-39
I-30 was supposed to replace I-35E southwest; I-645 was supposed to come into existence...

Go to the AASHO database - https://grmservices.grmims.com/vsearch/portal/public/na4/aashto/default
 search "other" and 1973 (don't select a state).  2 items appear...it is the one that is NOT the DC one. 
Logged

CNGL-Leudimin

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4350
  • When in doubt, US 41

  • Age: 30
  • Location: Across the pond
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 04:34:13 PM
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #181 on: February 26, 2022, 07:32:40 AM »

Also I-31 and I-231 were to be things.

And I-94 on the Crosstown? No way!
Logged
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.

kurumi

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2583
  • Location: Cupertino, CA
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:06:26 PM
    • kurumi.com
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #182 on: February 26, 2022, 01:33:18 PM »

There is a 1973 document discussing the elimination of (most of them are in here) suffixed interstates.  Some stuff floated in here that was news to me.

This was a neat find. Other new numbers proposed in the doc:

I-216 Macon, GA
I-230, I-245 Dallas
I-31, I-231 Wichita
I-274 Quad Cities
I-215 Pocatello
Logged
My first SF/horror short story collection is available: "Young Man, Open Your Winter Eye"

TheHighwayMan394

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5933
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Twin Ports/North Shore
  • Last Login: Today at 01:10:29 AM
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #183 on: February 27, 2022, 04:11:22 AM »

One of the suggestions to go in tandem with renumbering 35E/W in the Twin Cities was making 494/694 into one number, possibly as a navigation aid but doesn't specify a reason (something Beltway often complained about when he posted here was its alleged uselessness for I-35 traffic).
Logged
self-certified as the dumbest person on this board for 5 years running

route56

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1179
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Northeast Kansas
  • Last Login: February 24, 2024, 05:23:29 PM
    • route56.com
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #184 on: May 08, 2022, 04:57:04 PM »

I have to wonder if the SHC/KDOT had objections to the proposed I-31/I-231. Had this proposal been implemented, K-31 would need to be renumbered (the change of I-35W to I-135 did result in K-135 being redesignated K-152)
Logged
Peace to you, and... don't drive like my brother.

R.P.K.

Mapmikey

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4353
  • Co-curator with Froggie of www.vahighways.com

  • Age: 54
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 08:31:54 PM
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #185 on: July 06, 2022, 04:48:21 PM »

Don't see this anywhere in here, so...

New York was going to request the Southern Tier Expwy become I-92...

Appears in the 1974 application to truncate US 15.

https://na4.visualvault.com/app/AASHTO/Default/documentviewer?DhID=36c21256-50e6-ea11-a98a-ff9beffbfef8&hidemenu=true

I don't see anything suggesting they actually did.
Logged

Rover_0

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 964
  • Why?

  • Age: -62
  • Location: Utah
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 09:58:27 PM
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #186 on: October 18, 2022, 02:01:39 AM »

In the vein of the proposal by Kentucky and Illinois to extend US-58 to East St. Louis, here’s a document that mentions a plan by a “Mr. Hawks”  to extend 58 all the way to the Pacific Coast. No specific route is mentioned, but it’s interesting to think about. Under “US 58,”  “DC,”  and “1952.”

https://na4.visualvault.com/app/AASHTO/Default/documentviewer?DhID=f7f5fddd-c5d5-ea11-a98a-ff9beffbfef8&hidemenu=true
Logged
Fixing erroneous shields, one at a time...

CNGL-Leudimin

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4350
  • When in doubt, US 41

  • Age: 30
  • Location: Across the pond
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 04:34:13 PM
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #187 on: November 11, 2022, 06:41:39 AM »

US 241 (the second) was proposed to run all the way up to Michigan City. US 131 was proposed to run all the way down to the Gulf coast, although I haven't seen where exactly because the last pages of that discussion failed to load (I suspect down what is now US 231 and US 331 in Alabama and Florida, ending at Santa Rosa Beach). Not bad.

On re-examination of this, I've found out most of this ended up being approved as different routes. The US 241 changes were approved, but the route itself was renumbered to US 431. North of Owensboro, it was taken over by US 231 and US 421 instead. US 231 itself would be extended along the proposed US 131 extension up to Scottsville KY, then northwestwards to rejoin the US 241 proposal at Owensboro; while the southernmost part would be christened as US 331. Only the proposed US 131 route across Indiana, which would have used IN 15, 9, 7 and 3; wasn't approved, and that route would still end abruptly at the Michigan/Indiana state line until 1980 (it would be shifted from IN 15 to IN 13 in 1959).
Logged
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.

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 24921
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 12:44:16 AM
    • Gribblenation
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #188 on: November 11, 2022, 09:18:34 AM »

The California files from 1957 classified under INTERSTATE has the weird numbers California was proposing for their chargeable Interstates.  For example, the Division of Highways wanted I-13 for what is now I-605 and I-3 for what is now I-280.
Logged

usends

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 769
  • usends.com

  • Location: Headwaters Hill, CO
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:24:32 PM
    • US highway endpoints, photos, maps, and history
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #189 on: March 12, 2023, 10:25:39 AM »

I think I may have broken the database.  Today I can't pull up any documents, not even ones that I viewed yesterday.  I just get a weird error message.  Anyone else having the same issue?
Logged
usends.com - US highway endpoints, photos, maps, and history

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 24921
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 12:44:16 AM
    • Gribblenation
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #190 on: March 12, 2023, 10:32:14 AM »

I think I may have broken the database.  Today I can't pull up any documents, not even ones that I viewed yesterday.  I just get a weird error message.  Anyone else having the same issue?

Pulled up for me when I tried it on my phone.
Logged

Rover_0

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 964
  • Why?

  • Age: -62
  • Location: Utah
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 09:58:27 PM
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #191 on: March 15, 2023, 06:17:17 PM »

Works for me, too.
Logged
Fixing erroneous shields, one at a time...

Revive 755

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4789
  • Last Login: March 13, 2024, 10:56:10 PM
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #192 on: June 19, 2023, 10:55:44 PM »

Missouri apparently tried once to renumber I-44 as I-66 per the December 1962 meeting.
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 24921
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 12:44:16 AM
    • Gribblenation
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #193 on: July 24, 2023, 07:08:34 PM »

Something I put together for the poorly planned proposal to extend US Route 90 to Gila Bend, Arizona.  I'm amused that the Arizona State Highway Engineer tried to pull a fast one of the AASHO Executive Secretary using the Interstate system as an excuse/rationale:

https://www.gribblenation.org/2023/07/paper-highways-us-route-90-to-gila-bend.html
Logged

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14423
  • fuck

  • Age: 1
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: March 11, 2024, 12:16:05 AM
Re: AASHTO Route Numbering Database Documents
« Reply #194 on: July 24, 2023, 11:31:13 PM »

It's worth noting that the Interstates were not yet numbered in 1955. So having portions of Interstates not part of the U.S. Route system is a perfectly good rationale when it wasn't yet clear that there would be separate numbering.
Logged
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".

 


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.