AASHTO Spring 2021 Meeting

[bob7374]

The 2021 AASHTO Spring Meeting was held virtually this past week from May 10 to 14. Putting this topic up for any news that may have been made at it. Including any decisions by the Special Committee on U.S. Route Numbering such as, will NCDOT have applied for approval of I-885 in Durham this time?

[Sub-Urbanite]

Bump!

[WillWeaverRVA]

Doesn't look like the documents have been posted to the AASHTO site yet.

[Crown Victoria]

Doesn't look like the documents have been posted to the AASHTO site yet.

Nor is there anything concerning the latest meeting on Wikipedia. Sometimes this takes a month or two.

[Scott5114]

Doesn't look like the documents have been posted to the AASHTO site yet.

Nor is there anything concerning the latest meeting on Wikipedia. Sometimes this takes a month or two.

Where do you think Wikipedia gets the information? Their roadgeeks have to wait on AASHTO just like the roadgeeks here...

[Crown Victoria]

Doesn't look like the documents have been posted to the AASHTO site yet.

Nor is there anything concerning the latest meeting on Wikipedia. Sometimes this takes a month or two.

Where do you think Wikipedia gets the information? Their roadgeeks have to wait on AASHTO just like the roadgeeks here...

Ah, but the last time or two, the information was posted on Wikipedia BEFORE it was posted on the AASHTO site. I believe an editor over there obtained the meeting minutes via email.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=27090.0

The results have been posted on Wikipedia at Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Resources/AASHTO minutes. Unfortunately, the copy of the minutes obtained by email and used to post those results didn't have any detail on the individual applications.

Results for November 2020 have been posted on the link above, but there's no citation and no links to the applications (just the Wikipedia entries for each route listed). If the results are accurate, NC has applied for a change for US 70 and US 258, but no application for I-885 or any other interstate. There are also entries for an I-195 in DC, along with I-395. There is no updated listing on the AASHTO USRN website.

*The above quote is from the topic I linked to, concerning the 2020 meetings.

[Scott5114]

Doesn't look like the documents have been posted to the AASHTO site yet.

Nor is there anything concerning the latest meeting on Wikipedia. Sometimes this takes a month or two.

Where do you think Wikipedia gets the information? Their roadgeeks have to wait on AASHTO just like the roadgeeks here...

Ah, but the last time or two, the information was posted on Wikipedia BEFORE it was posted on the AASHTO site. I believe an editor over there obtained the meeting minutes via email.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=27090.0

The results have been posted on Wikipedia at Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Resources/AASHTO minutes. Unfortunately, the copy of the minutes obtained by email and used to post those results didn't have any detail on the individual applications.

Results for November 2020 have been posted on the link above, but there's no citation and no links to the applications (just the Wikipedia entries for each route listed). If the results are accurate, NC has applied for a change for US 70 and US 258, but no application for I-885 or any other interstate. There are also entries for an I-195 in DC, along with I-395. There is no updated listing on the AASHTO USRN website.

*The above quote is from the topic I linked to, concerning the 2020 meetings.

Pffft. That's classic bulldog1979, right there. (Wheedling information out of transportation agencies–especially MDOT–is a talent of his.)

[Rover_0]

Have we heard anything new yet? I thought I recall Adventure Cycling mentioning the release of some decisions on USBR applications come mid- or late June (which I would assume US and Interstate routes being posted wouldn't be too far behind, either.)

[rschen7754]

In the past sometimes it has been available online before it was posted on the AASHTO site, but without going through the specifics, the virtual format shut that down.

So we are stuck with begging them by email to go ahead and post it. From what I heard, they complained about delays with having to work from home or something like that.

[sturmde]

Over the decades it seems like it's going to take a freedom of information Act request to get anything out from the committee. Crazy to think how everything used to get nicely posted and shared by the special committee.  Missing those days...

[zzcarp]

It's pretty inexcusable to not have the report on the website a month after the meeting completed.

[froggie]

^^ Marty Vitale was committee secretary back in those days and was pretty reliable about getting stuff posted.  Since then, it's been lackluster.

[Avalanchez71]

NC was business happy for a while and now they are getting rid of them.

[Crown Victoria]

Two months later, and still we wait...

[CtrlAltDel]

Two months later, and still we wait...

The delay kind of reminds me of this.

[Crown Victoria]

Two months later, and still we wait...

The delay kind of reminds me of this.

Ha! This has been a very long five minutes...

[Rover_0]

I've gotten an email from the USRNC contact, and they said that they are in the process of adding the 2016-present USRNC decisions onto the big database sometime later this month.

CORRECTION: The USRNC member emailed me a PDF with the final decisions. Hopefully this link works. Among the changes confirmed are:

Part of I-430 is being eliminated.

I-375 in Michigan and I-481 in New York have been decommissioned.

I-587 in North Carolina has been conditionally approved.

Various USBRs in California, Ohio, Utah, and Washington have been approved.

[NE2]

I've gotten an email from the USRNC contact, and she said that they are in the process of adding the 2016-present USRNC decisions onto the big database sometime later this month.

Awesome. Any chance they can add in the missing L and M states from the 1920s?

[rickmastfan67]

I've gotten an email from the USRNC contact, and they said that they are in the process of adding the 2016-present USRNC decisions onto the big database sometime later this month.

CORRECTION: The USRNC member emailed me a PDF with the final decisions. Hopefully this link works. Among the changes confirmed are:

Part of I-430 is being eliminated.

I-375 in Michigan and I-481 in New York have been decommissioned.

I-587 in North Carolina has been conditionally approved.

Various USBRs in California, Ohio, Utah, and Washington have been approved.

Man, some of those changes are a little confusing.  Hopefully the PDFs of the actual submissions that have the maps will be posted soon.

[US 89]

Man, some of those changes are a little confusing.  Hopefully the PDFs of the actual submissions that have the maps will be posted soon.

It's not a submission PDF, but this interactive map should contain all the USBR changes in Utah:

https://parametrix.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=4da4865207404e75ad6e2b3b0132e81b

[Bruce]

WSDOT's press release on the four new US Bike Route designations in Washington: https://wsdot.wa.gov/news/2021/08/09/washington-adds-four-new-us-bike-routes-its-system

It's a bit silly to sign a 2-mile section of USBR 40 that basically just gets from one town to Idaho, but most of the remaining corridor is in need of work. It'll be one of the longest USBR sections on exclusive ROW, though, if realized.

[CNGL-Leudimin]

I like to see freeway removals in downtown areas. Personally I think downtowns shouldn't be isolated from the nearby areas, through routes should be away.

From now on, I-375 is unambiguously the Northern long ramp from I-275 to Downtown St. Petersburg, Florida.

[Mapmikey]

I am skeptical I-430 is being changed.  The descriptions don't actually describe anything other than US 70 old and new routings, the way I read it.

[LM117]

I've gotten an email from the USRNC contact, and they said that they are in the process of adding the 2016-present USRNC decisions onto the big database sometime later this month.

CORRECTION: The USRNC member emailed me a PDF with the final decisions. Hopefully this link works. Among the changes confirmed are:

I-587 in North Carolina has been conditionally approved.

No doubt Greenville will be celebrating. They spent the last 10 years been pushing hard for an interstate connection to I-95. However, I can't say I'm looking forward to it because of this steaming pile of crap:

Cross-posting from the main North Carolina thread, I obtained the signing plans for the Greenville Southwest Bypass (R-2250) from a public records request. The plans include future signs that will eventually completely replace existing signs for westbound 264 at the cloverleaf. Not only do the plans confirm again what we already knew about 587 ending at the cloverleaf, but they also reveal that the new Interstate will be signed north-south, with northbound following westbound 264. I don't think I ever saw this mentioned anywhere before. It seems... questionable.

https://twitter.com/NCDOT/status/1201971710989414406

On another note, I noticed NCDOT still has not sent a request for I-885 in Durham. The East End Connector is due to open in December.

[english si]

From now on, I-375 is unambiguously the Northern long ramp from I-275 to Downtown St. Petersburg, Florida.

Only when they demolish the Detroit route in 2027 (or sooner). The clarification AASHTO asked for says that MDOT are getting in the paperwork early with AASHTO/FHWA, but the route won't be eliminated until the roadway is also eliminated as a route you can drive on.

I am skeptical I-430 is being changed.  The descriptions don't actually describe anything other than US 70 old and new routings, the way I read it.

Fully concur. Though is it US70, or US70 Business, that's actually being rerouted?