http://www.transportation.org/sites/route/docs/Agenda%20USRN%20SM2012%20May%2018.pdf
Alabama: Future I-222 (Establish) USRN Application Future 222 9-27-2011.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=654)
Alabama: Future I-422 (Establish) USRN Application Future I - 422 9-27-11.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=655)
Colorado: US 160 (elimination) US160Application.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=656) [actually US 160 Biz]
Colorado: US 350 (relocation) US350Application.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=657)
Illinois: US 45 Bypass (eliminate)
*Signature Letter - Bypass US 45 - Norris City.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=677)
*Bypass US 45 - Norris City.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=679)
*Bypass US 45 - Norris City app.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=680)
Indiana: U.S. 24 (relocation) AASHTOUSRN_US24_APR2012.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=658)
Michigan: USBRS 35 (establish)
*USBR 35 Application - COMPLETE.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=659)
*Final support letter - INDOT.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=676)
Minnesota: US 63 (relocation) MN US 63 Turnback AASHTO US 63 COMPLETE.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=660)
Minnesota: USBRS 45 (establish) USBRSApplication-2012 April--MnDOT version.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=661)
Missouri: US 63 (relocation)
*AASHT App - Relocation of U.S. 63 - Randolph & Boo.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=662)
*AASHTO Spring 2012 - MO Submittal Ltr with signatu.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=663)
*AASHTO_Map.zip (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=664)
Nevada: US 395 (relocate) AASHTO-App_Relocation US395.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=665)
Nevada: US 395A (establish) US395A-AASHTO APPLICATION.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=666)
New York: US 219 (relocation) US Route 219 Application.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=667)
North Carolina: USBRS 1 (realignment #1) USBRS Electronic Application Form-WakeCo.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=669)
North Carolina: USBRS 1 (realignment #2) USBRS Electronic Application Form_Scotland.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=670)
Oklahoma: US 287 (relocate) Oklahoma US 287 complete.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=671)
Texas: I-69 (extension)
*IH 69_2012_AASHTO_Application.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=672)
*RE_ I-69 Designations.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=673)
*Various_IH69_AASHTOapps_MO_Final.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=681)
*IH69_MOpage.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=682)
Texas: US 377 (establish) US 377_2012_AASHTO_Application.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=674)
Texas: US 377 Business (recognition) BU377_2012_AASHTO_Application.pdf (http://ballot.transportation.org/FileDownload.aspx?attachmentType=Item&ID=675)
Alabama discussion branched off to the Southeast (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?board=7).
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6664.0 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6664.0)
I'm surprised NY didn't apply for I-86 between NY 17K to I-84. They have all those covered-up shields.
Oklahoma DOT's US 287 request included this as the explanation for the request (spelling as in original):
Quote from: ODOTThe new highway consturction bypass Boise City to elimitante the truck trarffic through downtown Boise City.
AASHTO should deny the request just on principle.
I find it interesting that Alabama's applying for a short I-222, while I-422 is going to be the much longer Northern Birmingham Beltway.
Any chance that AASHTO suggests that I-222 be numbered for the beltway, or would they just go ahead and stamp approval on the Interstate numbers as-is?
(Of course, I-222 has the "to 22" play on it, as well.)
Regarding By-pass US 45 in IL, it's about time they ask to get rid of it, since the signs have been gone for 15 years.
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 10, 2012, 03:48:38 AM
Oklahoma DOT's US 287 request included this as the explanation for the request (spelling as in original):
Quote from: ODOTThe new highway consturction bypass Boise City to elimitante the truck trarffic through downtown Boise City.
AASHTO should deny the request just on principle.
"Elimitante the truck trarffic" sounds like a bad Ukrainian attempt to bypass spam filters.
Apparently "consturction" was involved. I don't know what that is, but it sounds painful. :P
Quote from: Steve on May 11, 2012, 07:59:00 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 10, 2012, 03:48:38 AM
Oklahoma DOT's US 287 request included this as the explanation for the request (spelling as in original):
Quote from: ODOTThe new highway consturction bypass Boise City to elimitante the truck trarffic through downtown Boise City.
AASHTO should deny the request just on principle.
"Elimitante the truck trarffic" sounds like a bad Ukrainian attempt to bypass spam filters.
Or a reason we'd get from a prospective member for joining the forum. :P
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 12, 2012, 12:46:52 PM
Quote from: Steve on May 11, 2012, 07:59:00 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 10, 2012, 03:48:38 AM
Oklahoma DOT's US 287 request included this as the explanation for the request (spelling as in original):
Quote from: ODOTThe new highway consturction bypass Boise City to elimitante the truck trarffic through downtown Boise City.
AASHTO should deny the request just on principle.
"Elimitante the truck trarffic" sounds like a bad Ukrainian attempt to bypass spam filters.
Or a reason we'd get from a prospective member for joining the forum. :P
I think AASHTO would have greater leverage in rejecting applications like that from ODOT if they made a better effort at proofreading their own publications and webpages. You would then not see the host city for next week's meeting (Traverse City, MI) listed as 'Travere City' on the USRN front page, or as 'Traversity City' on the Download page. What next 'Travesty City'?
Tapestry City
AASHTO has a news release (http://news.transportation.org/press_release.aspx?Action=ViewNews&NewsID=437) this morning announcing that the US Bike Route requests (USBR 35 in Michigan, USBR 45 in Minnesota, and changes to USBR 1 in North Carolina) were approved at the meeting Friday. No word yet on the highway-related requests.
Here's MnDOT's press release (http://www.dot.state.mn.us/newsrels/12/05/21misstrail.html) on the approval of USBR 45.
The results are out. (http://www.transportation.org/sites/route/docs/Report%20to%20SCOHSM2012%205-19-2012.pdf) All applications where approved, with the three Interstate applications receiving conditional approval pending final approval by FHWA (who has final approval authority for all Interstate route numbering changes).
Of major note: the committee discussed an Interstate route number in Wisconsin (presumably for the US 41 corridor), and coordination with Illinois to get it designated...namely, they were discussing I-55. Here's the specific entry from the meeting minutes:
"The USRN discussed the Interstate 55 through Wisconsin that connects with I-55 in Illinois. It was decided that the committee Secretary, M. Vitale, will coordinate with Wisconsin in sending a letter to Illinois and copying FHWA on the need for I-55 and to support the value of I-55. It is Wisconsin's intent to get this process completed by the AASHTO Annual Meeting 2012 in Pittsburgh, PA."
So, to me, this suggests that I-55 will be the route number for the US 41 corridor between Milwaukee and Green Bay.
Still going on about that replacement for the 23-year-old route log, I see.
57 has been the favorite for most in Illinois for the extension. Chicago is in need of renumbering
55 has a saitfying end at Lake Shore Drive . 57 does not(88 really doesnt ending in a 3di that leads to downtown Chicago )
57 also is more logical directionally if it runs up the Kennedy and Edens. I just cant see using the Stevensons number to double back on the Kennedy /Edens.
Quote from: NE2 on May 22, 2012, 08:48:02 PM
Still going on about that replacement for the 23-year-old route log, I see.
Yes, they asked each state to submit updates for their log a couple years ago. Some states have (MA changed its ending for US 3) and others haven't started. NC revised some of their route logs but many now have typos and there's even an entry for route change that was rejected by the USRN (US 64E and 64W in Brevard). No wonder they're a little impatient.
Quote from: bob7374 on May 22, 2012, 10:20:08 PM
there's even an entry for route change that was rejected by the USRN (US 64E and 64W in Brevard)
To be fair, this was NCDOT being dumb about a one-way pair.
Quote from: NE2 on May 23, 2012, 12:57:25 AM
To be fair, this was NCDOT being dumb about a one-way pair.
you mean they kinda boneheadedly tried signing "64 eastbound" and "64 westbound" as suffixed routes? oopsie.
No, they tried submitting them as such, because apparently that's how they inventory them. Not that a minor rerouting needs to be submitted to AASHTO in the first place.