AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions

[rickmastfan67]

AZ US 95 Truck already exists. Not sure if they're rerouting it.

Maybe they wanted to make it the second official AASHTO approved Truck route behind US 19 Truck here in Pittsburgh?

[Pilgrimway]

That I69C should be an X69 or is that too obvious?

[xonhulu]

That I69C should be an X69 or is that too obvious?

It's would be odd for such a long and mostly rural interstate to be a 3di, IMO.  It should really have its own number.  Unfortunately, it would have to violate the grid, as it's mostly between I-35 and I-37 and strangely, there are no available odd numbers between those!      I-33 or I-47 would be the closest available numbers, since it looks like I-41 is going to Wisconsin.

But I also understand their desire to designate the branches as all being part of the I-69 system.  Really, suffixed routes of 69 would be the best solution, although I think the "69C" is a little silly, as no one has ever used that suffix to mean "Central.".

But I also think AASHTO should follow its own guidelines, and that means no more suffixed interstates.  So I'm pretty divided on what these branches should be numbered.

[oscar]

I-69 could be assigned to the easternmost branch, then the other two could be assigned unused odd 2di numbers between 35 and 69, given that 69's extension will already be bending the grid out of shape in south Texas.  61 and 63 are available (ignoring for now possible conflicts with Texas state route numbers), with no competing claims for those numbers like with 67.  47, 51, and 53 could work as well. 

[xonhulu]

I-69 could be assigned to the easternmost branch, then the other two could be assigned unused odd 2di numbers between 35 and 69, given that 69's extension will already be bending the grid out of shape in south Texas.  61 and 63 are available (ignoring for now possible conflicts with Texas state route numbers), with no competing claims for those numbers like with 67.  47, 51, and 53 could work as well.

That's probably the best solution, Oscar.  Besides, we Road Enthusiasts are the only ones who care about the sanctity of the grid.

Texas probably isn't concerned about duplicate numbers; in fact, I think every mainline interstate there has a corresponding state route somewhere.

[cpzilliacus]

Texas probably isn't concerned about duplicate numbers; in fact, I think every mainline interstate there has a corresponding state route somewhere.

Maryland sure as Hades does not care. Here are some overlapping state and Interstate route numbers:

68
70
83 (the state route has been decommissioned)
95 (state route also decommissioned)
97 (the state route is much longer than the Interstate, and unlike the Interstate, crosses three counties)
195
270
295
370
395 (state route also decommissioned)
495
795 (state route unsigned)
895 (state route also decommissioned)

[bugo]

Texas 70 crosses US 70.  Georgia 27 crosses US 27.  This, while unusual, isn't unheard of.

[Scott5114]

That I69C should be an X69 or is that too obvious?

It's would be odd for such a long and mostly rural interstate to be a 3di, IMO.

I-135?

[xonhulu]

I-135?

Which was originally numbered I-35W.

[Alps]

Texas 70 crosses US 70.  Georgia 27 intersects US 27.  This, while unusual, isn't unheard of.

Georgia 23 multiplexes with US 23.

[Big John]

Texas 70 crosses US 70.  Georgia 27 multiplexes with US 27.  This, while unusual, isn't unheard of.

FTFY.

US 27 multiplexes with GA 1 through the state and intersects GA 27 in Lumpkin. https://maps.google.com/maps?q=ga+27&hl=en&ll=32.050389,-84.800377&spn=0.027717,0.038323

[Alps]

Texas 70 crosses US 70.  Georgia 27 multiplexes with US 27.  This, while unusual, isn't unheard of.

FTFY.

US 27 multiplexes with GA 1 through the state and intersects GA 27 in Lumpkin. https://maps.google.com/maps?q=ga+27&hl=en&ll=32.050389,-84.800377&spn=0.027717,0.038323

Yeah, 23 and 27 are like, the same number, from an astronomical scale, or something.

[NE2]

from http://www.usends.com/20-29/025/025.html

[kkt]

They need to pick one of the branches to be I-69 and the other branches to be x69 3dis or different numbers altogether.  So they'd be the longest 3dis around, some route has to be longest, and it makes sense for it to be a big, spread out state like Texas.  If they want them to be part of the I-69 "family," that's the way to do it.  Suffixed routes are confusing in speech and AASHTO was right to remove most of them and ban new ones.

[Scott5114]

Give them the option: either be 3dis or leave them as state/US route freeways.

[corco]

or leave them as state/US route freeways.

Holy shit

[A.J. Bertin]

It would be fun to be on this committee (or at least attend their meetings). 

[kkt]

The mayors of Dallas and Ft. Worth should play a game of poker for the right to I-35.  Winner at the end of the evening gets I-35 through his or her city, the other one gets I-435.

[kphoger]

They need to pick one of the branches to be I-69 and the other branches to be x69 3dis or different numbers altogether.  So they'd be the longest 3dis around, some route has to be longest, and it makes sense for it to be a big, spread out state like Texas.  If they want them to be part of the I-69 "family," that's the way to do it.  Suffixed routes are confusing in speech and AASHTO was right to remove most of them and ban new ones.

Nah, I'd go with I-1 and I-3.

[Alps]

The mayors of Dallas and Ft. Worth should play a game of poker for the right to I-35.  Winner at the end of the evening gets I-35 through his or her city, the other one gets I-435.

Or southern I-99.

[Scott5114]

The mayors of Dallas and Ft. Worth should play a game of poker for the right to I-35.  Winner at the end of the evening gets I-35 through his or her city, the other one gets I-435.

I'd prefer 835. It would go nicely with Ft. Worth's 820.

[NE2]

I-862. It's 35E (hex) in decimal.

[mukade]

and I-3464  (35W in base 33)

[kphoger]

I-10011 (35 in binary) or I-1000101 (69 in binary)

[vtk]

I like the idea of long rural 3dIs instead of short rural 2dIs (suffixed or not).  In my mind, this is what numbers of the form I-1xx should be reserved for.  But doesn't federal law specify the number 69 for all three branches?  I think AASHTO is trying to break the law as little as possible without literally calling all three branches I-69.  And unlike the 69/94 situation in MI, they can't just ignore this problem without non-roadgeeks noticing something's wrong.