AASHTO Numbering Decisions 1967-87

[The High Plains Traveler]

In that vein, while I'm not sure such a plan hapened during the 1967-1987 range, but us-highways.com also mentioned that US-160 was planned to go to California. A California US-160 extension is mentioned twice, leading me to wonder if it may have been planned to go to Long Beach via Bishop (eventually picked up by US-6) in 1937, then maybe considered again in 1970 (???) with its reroute to Tuba City AZ.

I was living in New Mexico when the terminus of U.S. 64 at Santa Fe was eliminated and the route was extended from Taos to Farmington using a new highway over the San Juan Mountains. At that time there was "talk" that the highway would eventually be extended west to California (route not specified). As U.S. 64 now ends at U.S. 160 just inside Arizona, this would be the same extension with a different name.

[bugo]

This borders on the fantasy highway forum, but why not extend US 64 along US 160 and US 89, then replacing AZ 64 to end at I-40 on the west end of Williams.  If this were to happen, US 160 could technically be decommissioned along the US 64 plex but I don't see any reason to do so.

[Rover_0]

In that vein, while I'm not sure such a plan hapened during the 1967-1987 range, but us-highways.com also mentioned that US-160 was planned to go to California. A California US-160 extension is mentioned twice, leading me to wonder if it may have been planned to go to Long Beach via Bishop (eventually picked up by US-6) in 1937, then maybe considered again in 1970 (???) with its reroute to Tuba City AZ.

I was living in New Mexico when the terminus of U.S. 64 at Santa Fe was eliminated and the route was extended from Taos to Farmington using a new highway over the San Juan Mountains. At that time there was "talk" that the highway would eventually be extended west to California (route not specified). As U.S. 64 now ends at U.S. 160 just inside Arizona, this would be the same extension with a different name.

This borders on the fantasy highway forum, but why not extend US 64 along US 160 and US 89, then replacing AZ 64 to end at I-40 on the west end of Williams.  If this were to happen, US 160 could technically be decommissioned along the US 64 plex but I don't see any reason to do so.

If you send US-64 to Williams, why not send 160 back into Utah--this time to I-15 west of Hurricane--or at least to Page?

That's the next big question: Where could've US-160 (or US-64) actually have gone?* I know I've seen some Arizona documents^ that mention efforts (sometime between 1959 and 1964) that were to extend US-64 to US-89 near Tuba City.


*EDIT: I'm thinking US-160/(US-89)/AZ-64/(I-40)/AZ-68/NV-163/(US-95)/NV-164/Nipton Rd to I-15, then maybe along CA-58/(US-101)/CA-41 to Morrow Bay.

^Arizona highway resolutions from this now-nonfunctioning site (even on Internet Explorer), which is also where I got that 164 was being the original proposed number for US-163.

[andy3175]

I think the current US 191 alignment staying east of Flaming Gorge makes sense given the existing road network, but it's possible the planners at the time were considering still non-existent, more direct route to Jackson that could have been achieved if a highway were built alongside the west side of the Green River from the dam north to Big Piney and Bondurant. That alignment would not be possible today, especially with Seedskadee Natl Wildlife Refuge along the route, but it would be interesting to know the planners' thought process.

Isn't this WYO 372?

Yes, the proposal map does show Wyo 372. But I was thinking that a new route, one that hugged more closely to the Green River, would have to be built to make a more direct north-south route without having to travel nearly to Kemmerer. Wyo 240 sort of does this, but in my mind there would need to be even more mileage cut off to make the western alignment work as a viable alternative to the eastern alignment in terms of mileage and directness.

[NE2]

I think the current US 191 alignment staying east of Flaming Gorge makes sense given the existing road network, but it's possible the planners at the time were considering still non-existent, more direct route to Jackson that could have been achieved if a highway were built alongside the west side of the Green River from the dam north to Big Piney and Bondurant. That alignment would not be possible today, especially with Seedskadee Natl Wildlife Refuge along the route, but it would be interesting to know the planners' thought process.

Isn't this WYO 372?

Yes, the proposal map does show Wyo 372. But I was thinking that a new route, one that hugged more closely to the Green River, would have to be built to make a more direct north-south route without having to travel nearly to Kemmerer. Wyo 240 sort of does this, but in my mind there would need to be even more mileage cut off to make the western alignment work as a viable alternative to the eastern alignment in terms of mileage and directness.

372 is 16 miles shorter than 240...

[PHLBOS]

was there ever a RHODE ISLAND I-84 shield posted?  even as part of some FUTURE corridor?  I know there were NEW YORK I-78 shields for a while in Queens.

Not that I am aware of.  The one part that was built, today's US-6 freeway, was originally signed as RI-195 until the early 1990s when 6 was moved from the surface road onto the highway.

Those RI-195 signs, at ones used for trailblazers had I-shield outlines & borders in black and RHODE ISLAND lettering (also in black) where the word INTERSTATE typically goes.

[bugo]

The US 13 extension is odd because it would have ended at a state route, SC 28. It could have been extended to Athens, GA but I am guessing that Georgia didn't want anything to do with it.

[Hot Rod Hootenanny]

- (to answer an earlier question of Brandon's):  I-70A and I-70N redesignated in Columbus, OH.  Here's how they existed:  I-70N was today's I-670 between I-70 and OH 315.  I-70A formed the west and north legs of the loop around downtown Columbus:  OH 315 between I-70/71 and I-670, and I-670 between OH 315 and I-71.  The request and approval specifically mention elimination of a portion of I-70A, which is the section that's now OH 315.  It should be noted that, while the loop around downtown was completed, both old I-70N and mainline I-70 west of I-71/OH 315 were not completed yet at the time.

I'm still a bit puzzled by I-70A in Columbus. To me it would have made more sense as I-71A, as it connected to I-71 at the southwest and northeast corners of the Innerbelt.  Might this be a clerical error of some sort?

I think this is what was done: http://mapsengine.google.com/map/edit?mid=zJ6tKQcwi70c.kAu5RW1YhumM
70A was the entire Innerbelt except the south side. But originally I-70 was on the west and south sides, and I-70A was on the north and east (see original plans, but note that in 1957 all four sides were 70 and 71). Some time in the 1960s, I-70 between Valleyview and the southwest corner was added to the Interstate system, and the bypassed section west of the Innerbelt became I-70N. I-71 was apparently not defined on any of the Innerbelt until 1973.

No! No! No! No!
The original numeral plan for Columbus was...



By the late 60s/early 70s City of Columbus & ODOT realized that having I-70 go into the Spring-Sandusky interchange was not going to work, and I-70 west was rerouted from Harper Rd south to Mound Street and enter the Columbus innerbelt that way.
Work was prioritized to complete I-70 west from 270 west to the (newly) revamped Mound-Sandusky interchange (aka I-70-71 west split) and was completed in 1976.
There were no I-70A or I-70N shields in Columbus/Franklin County because these were only paper designations while the roads got built.
By 1976, I-71 was confined to the current corridor (previously was signed on all 4 sides of the innerbelt), 315 was extended south to the west split (as Columbus was getting the Olentangy Expressway completed) and I-670 was designated along the northern part of the innerbelt (in conjunction with (then) new plans to get a direct route from downtown Columbus to Port Columbus Airport)