AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules to ensure post quality. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: US-191 in northern Arizona  (Read 13948 times)

aboges26

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 170
  • Age: 2017
  • Location: NM
  • Last Login: June 25, 2022, 12:21:14 AM
Re: US-191 in northern Arizona
« Reply #25 on: April 06, 2021, 02:19:35 PM »

Bumping this thread because US 191 is still NOT signed between US 160 and the Utah border other than the "TO" references on US 160, while the US 191 Wikipedia pages act like this gap is non-existent...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Route_191_in_Arizona
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Route_191

I am hoping someone has an update on this situation, or at the very least can get these Wikipedia pages updated so it reflects accurate information.

For context on the state of Arizona Highway pages there was a recent thing someone put on the I-17 page about the exits being remembered (they aren’t).  Basically I wouldn’t trust what Wikipedia says about Arizona highway anything until someone reliable begins to edit those pages.  I would instead refer you to ADOT which doesn’t have it on their 2020 log book as something they maintain but nonetheless has BIA 12 as part of the National Highway System north of US 160:

https://azdot.gov/sites/default/files/media/2020/10/2020-Mapbook.pdf

Now the only other place I can think to refer to you is the AASHTO Database.  In theory you ought to be able to find if the AASHTO considers the local roadway (BIA 12)  north of US 160 as part of US 191 (I’m thinking they probably do).

I saw that I-17 exit renumbering and had to shake my head, I gave up on contributing to Wikipedia awhile ago when my good and factual edits were being rejected.  Too much revisionist activism and denying good content makes that site a joke, but I still went there first to try to find out anything about the US 191 gap before searching here and bumping this thread.

Good to know the gap is official as far as ADOT goes, but it still makes me scratch my head why they would endorse such a gap.  The highway design seems good enough to support a 65 MPH speed limit if they would just resurface that rough road.  Maybe that is the standoff that they think NNDOT or BIA should contribute to such maintenance since it more so serves the Reservation's traffic.

FWIW BIA 12 is part of the 1981 AASHO definition of US 191 which is when it was extended to Chambers.  Regardless of it not being an ADOT maintained road it effectively is part of US 191 despite what the field signage says.  USends had an image snip of the 1981 definition of US 191 here:

https://www.usends.com/191.html

That makes it seem like US 191 should be signed concurrently with BIA 12 and there should be no "TO" reference for US 191 off of US 160 for the sake of clarity in route navigation, regardless of who maintains it.  Maintenance agreements can be relegated to agency files while publicly things stay clear as far as route network completeness and make sense for the motoring public (non-road geeks).

Yes, to the average driver they don’t care who maintains BIA 12.  It seems ADOT and the Bureau of Indian Affairs subscribes to the notion that signage of a US Route indicates state maintenance.    The AASHTO has no such provision that requires US Routes to be under the maintenance of a State DOT.

I never new that!  So how do I search their records to figure out whether there still is a "Bypass US 64" in Farmington, NM along Murray Drive with US 64 still assigned along Broadway?  I was under the impression that the City built Murray Drive and then swapped maintenance responsibility with NMDOT so, effectively, US 64 then ran along Murray Drive.  However, there are overhead assemblies on either side indicating "Bypass US 64" is a thing but there are no US 64 shields or other references along Broadway.
Logged

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14299
  • fuck

  • Age: 14
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: July 01, 2022, 11:47:10 AM
Re: US-191 in northern Arizona
« Reply #26 on: April 07, 2021, 11:25:51 AM »

AASHTO never approved any 64 Bypass in Farmington.
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".

I agree to indemnify Belkin against unauthorized use of its MiniVak vacuum.

oscar

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 9510
  • Age: 66
  • Location: Arlington, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 10:38:22 PM
    • my Hot Springs and Highways pages
Re: US-191 in northern Arizona
« Reply #27 on: April 07, 2021, 11:52:43 AM »

AASHTO never approved any 64 Bypass in Farmington.

NMDOT never sought AASHTO approval for the relocation of US 64 to the Murray Dr. bypass, and redesignation of the old route through downtown as US 64 Business. GMSV shows Murray Dr. signed as US 64, with Broadway signed as Business US 64.

The last time NMDOT went to AASHTO on anything was on rearranging the US route network in Roswell. NMDOT seemed to be frustrated with how AASHTO dealt with that application, and apparently decided not to bother with AASHTO ever again. There are other state DOTs that are at best casual about seeking AASHTO approvals for similar projects. For example, in 2016 Caltrans relocated US 101 to a new freeway bypass around Willits in Mendocino County, with no application to AASHTO.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2021, 12:01:36 PM by oscar »
Logged
my Hot Springs and Highways pages, with links to my roads sites:
http://www.alaskaroads.com/home.html

thenetwork

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2888
  • Age: 2018
  • Location: Grand Junction, Colorado
  • Last Login: Today at 06:00:00 PM
Re: US-191 in northern Arizona
« Reply #28 on: April 08, 2021, 09:59:08 PM »

Bumping this thread because US 191 is still NOT signed between US 160 and the Utah border other than the "TO" references on US 160, while the US 191 Wikipedia pages act like this gap is non-existent...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Route_191_in_Arizona
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Route_191

I am hoping someone has an update on this situation, or at the very least can get these Wikipedia pages updated so it reflects accurate information.

For context on the state of Arizona Highway pages there was a recent thing someone put on the I-17 page about the exits being remembered (they aren’t).  Basically I wouldn’t trust what Wikipedia says about Arizona highway anything until someone reliable begins to edit those pages.  I would instead refer you to ADOT which doesn’t have it on their 2020 log book as something they maintain but nonetheless has BIA 12 as part of the National Highway System north of US 160:

https://azdot.gov/sites/default/files/media/2020/10/2020-Mapbook.pdf

Now the only other place I can think to refer to you is the AASHTO Database.  In theory you ought to be able to find if the AASHTO considers the local roadway (BIA 12)  north of US 160 as part of US 191 (I’m thinking they probably do).

I saw that I-17 exit renumbering and had to shake my head, I gave up on contributing to Wikipedia awhile ago when my good and factual edits were being rejected.  Too much revisionist activism and denying good content makes that site a joke, but I still went there first to try to find out anything about the US 191 gap before searching here and bumping this thread.

Good to know the gap is official as far as ADOT goes, but it still makes me scratch my head why they would endorse such a gap.  The highway design seems good enough to support a 65 MPH speed limit if they would just resurface that rough road.  Maybe that is the standoff that they think NNDOT or BIA should contribute to such maintenance since it more so serves the Reservation's traffic.

FWIW BIA 12 is part of the 1981 AASHO definition of US 191 which is when it was extended to Chambers.  Regardless of it not being an ADOT maintained road it effectively is part of US 191 despite what the field signage says.  USends had an image snip of the 1981 definition of US 191 here:

https://www.usends.com/191.html

That makes it seem like US 191 should be signed concurrently with BIA 12 and there should be no "TO" reference for US 191 off of US 160 for the sake of clarity in route navigation, regardless of who maintains it.  Maintenance agreements can be relegated to agency files while publicly things stay clear as far as route network completeness and make sense for the motoring public (non-road geeks).

Yes, to the average driver they don’t care who maintains BIA 12.  It seems ADOT and the Bureau of Indian Affairs subscribes to the notion that signage of a US Route indicates state maintenance.    The AASHTO has no such provision that requires US Routes to be under the maintenance of a State DOT.

I never new that!  So how do I search their records to figure out whether there still is a "Bypass US 64" in Farmington, NM along Murray Drive with US 64 still assigned along Broadway?  I was under the impression that the City built Murray Drive and then swapped maintenance responsibility with NMDOT so, effectively, US 64 then ran along Murray Drive.  However, there are overhead assemblies on either side indicating "Bypass US 64" is a thing but there are no US 64 shields or other references along Broadway.

The only US-64 references on Broadway in Farmington are the West TRUCK 64 wayfinders from the E. Main Street / San Juan Avenue area. 

I assume these were recently installed when Main Street thru downtown Farmington was being rebuilt last year.  Now trucks are pretty much prohibited along that stretch of Main due to the installion of some tight roundabouts downtown. 

Going the other way on Broadway, I don't recall seeing any East TRUCK NM-516 wayfinders. Next week, I'll be down there and I'll look again.
Logged

aboges26

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 170
  • Age: 2017
  • Location: NM
  • Last Login: June 25, 2022, 12:21:14 AM
Re: US-191 in northern Arizona
« Reply #29 on: April 09, 2021, 11:08:26 AM »

Bumping this thread because US 191 is still NOT signed between US 160 and the Utah border other than the "TO" references on US 160, while the US 191 Wikipedia pages act like this gap is non-existent...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Route_191_in_Arizona
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Route_191

I am hoping someone has an update on this situation, or at the very least can get these Wikipedia pages updated so it reflects accurate information.

For context on the state of Arizona Highway pages there was a recent thing someone put on the I-17 page about the exits being remembered (they aren’t).  Basically I wouldn’t trust what Wikipedia says about Arizona highway anything until someone reliable begins to edit those pages.  I would instead refer you to ADOT which doesn’t have it on their 2020 log book as something they maintain but nonetheless has BIA 12 as part of the National Highway System north of US 160:

https://azdot.gov/sites/default/files/media/2020/10/2020-Mapbook.pdf

Now the only other place I can think to refer to you is the AASHTO Database.  In theory you ought to be able to find if the AASHTO considers the local roadway (BIA 12)  north of US 160 as part of US 191 (I’m thinking they probably do).

I saw that I-17 exit renumbering and had to shake my head, I gave up on contributing to Wikipedia awhile ago when my good and factual edits were being rejected.  Too much revisionist activism and denying good content makes that site a joke, but I still went there first to try to find out anything about the US 191 gap before searching here and bumping this thread.

Good to know the gap is official as far as ADOT goes, but it still makes me scratch my head why they would endorse such a gap.  The highway design seems good enough to support a 65 MPH speed limit if they would just resurface that rough road.  Maybe that is the standoff that they think NNDOT or BIA should contribute to such maintenance since it more so serves the Reservation's traffic.

FWIW BIA 12 is part of the 1981 AASHO definition of US 191 which is when it was extended to Chambers.  Regardless of it not being an ADOT maintained road it effectively is part of US 191 despite what the field signage says.  USends had an image snip of the 1981 definition of US 191 here:

https://www.usends.com/191.html

That makes it seem like US 191 should be signed concurrently with BIA 12 and there should be no "TO" reference for US 191 off of US 160 for the sake of clarity in route navigation, regardless of who maintains it.  Maintenance agreements can be relegated to agency files while publicly things stay clear as far as route network completeness and make sense for the motoring public (non-road geeks).

Yes, to the average driver they don’t care who maintains BIA 12.  It seems ADOT and the Bureau of Indian Affairs subscribes to the notion that signage of a US Route indicates state maintenance.    The AASHTO has no such provision that requires US Routes to be under the maintenance of a State DOT.

I never new that!  So how do I search their records to figure out whether there still is a "Bypass US 64" in Farmington, NM along Murray Drive with US 64 still assigned along Broadway?  I was under the impression that the City built Murray Drive and then swapped maintenance responsibility with NMDOT so, effectively, US 64 then ran along Murray Drive.  However, there are overhead assemblies on either side indicating "Bypass US 64" is a thing but there are no US 64 shields or other references along Broadway.

The only US-64 references on Broadway in Farmington are the West TRUCK 64 wayfinders from the E. Main Street / San Juan Avenue area. 

I assume these were recently installed when Main Street thru downtown Farmington was being rebuilt last year.  Now trucks are pretty much prohibited along that stretch of Main due to the installion of some tight roundabouts downtown. 

Going the other way on Broadway, I don't recall seeing any East TRUCK NM-516 wayfinders. Next week, I'll be down there and I'll look again.

Yes trucks are prohibited on Main Street between Butler and the Broadway / West Main intersection. Those "West TRUCK 64" signs were made by City of Farmington are new as of just before the Main Street rebuild to get drivers to adjust to the new traffic pattern.  City of Farmington also did a lane diet via re-striping on East Main between the Hutton / San Juan Blvd intersection and Fairgrounds Road (reducing from 3 lanes each way to 2) to supplement the lane diet from Butler to Auburn (2 lanes each way to 1 with roundabouts and a full rebuild from Miller to Auburn) with the hopes to get motorists aware of the coming situation and overall it seemed to work well.  Only for about a week or two did the section reduced from 3 to 2 lanes each way adversely affect traffic, after that the traffic dispersed, presumably onto Browning and San Juan Blvd.

The Main Street rebuild in downtown I think was a great success, the walkability makes the downtown businesses nicer to visit and I am aware of only one semi-truck ignoring the signs and getting stuck on a roundabout.

But it seems like it must be a "Wild West" thing or something that is going on with route signing in both Arizona and New Mexico.
Logged

oscar

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 9510
  • Age: 66
  • Location: Arlington, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 10:38:22 PM
    • my Hot Springs and Highways pages
Re: US-191 in northern Arizona
« Reply #30 on: April 09, 2021, 11:45:43 AM »

But it seems like it must be a "Wild West" thing or something that is going on with route signing in both Arizona and New Mexico.

New Mexico is famously goofy on route signage, probably the worst in the lower 48. But also going on in Farmington is that, with the business route under city jurisdiction (as is common in California), the city may control any route signage on that route. It might not care about reassurance signage for the business route, in addition to the NMDOT-maintained junction signage on the US 64 mainline, which lets US 64 travelers know how to get to the business district. For such a short city-maintained business route (about three miles long), with no junctions with NMDOT-maintained routes other than the US 64 mainline, the lack of reassurance signage is unsurprising.
Logged
my Hot Springs and Highways pages, with links to my roads sites:
http://www.alaskaroads.com/home.html

thenetwork

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2888
  • Age: 2018
  • Location: Grand Junction, Colorado
  • Last Login: Today at 06:00:00 PM
Re: US-191 in northern Arizona
« Reply #31 on: April 09, 2021, 05:41:04 PM »

But it seems like it must be a "Wild West" thing or something that is going on with route signing in both Arizona and New Mexico.

New Mexico is famously goofy on route signage, probably the worst in the lower 48. But also going on in Farmington is that, with the business route under city jurisdiction (as is common in California), the city may control any route signage on that route. It might not care about reassurance signage for the business route, in addition to the NMDOT-maintained junction signage on the US 64 mainline, which lets US 64 travelers know how to get to the business district. For such a short city-maintained business route (about three miles long), with no junctions with NMDOT-maintained routes other than the US 64 mainline, the lack of reassurance signage is unsurprising.

I've never seen a town go so far off the "normal fonts" path on road signs than in Farmington.  The recreation wayfinder signs are in one font, the blue Animas River signs in another, and nearly everything else in Clearview -- including STOP SIGNS! 

And just for the hell of it, let's throw in a European KEEP RIGHT arrow at a random intersection:

E 30th St
https://maps.app.goo.gl/iPY7qsy2VdLwQZoy6
Logged

aboges26

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 170
  • Age: 2017
  • Location: NM
  • Last Login: June 25, 2022, 12:21:14 AM
Re: US-191 in northern Arizona
« Reply #32 on: April 09, 2021, 11:56:31 PM »

But it seems like it must be a "Wild West" thing or something that is going on with route signing in both Arizona and New Mexico.

New Mexico is famously goofy on route signage, probably the worst in the lower 48. But also going on in Farmington is that, with the business route under city jurisdiction (as is common in California), the city may control any route signage on that route. It might not care about reassurance signage for the business route, in addition to the NMDOT-maintained junction signage on the US 64 mainline, which lets US 64 travelers know how to get to the business district. For such a short city-maintained business route (about three miles long), with no junctions with NMDOT-maintained routes other than the US 64 mainline, the lack of reassurance signage is unsurprising.

I've never seen a town go so far off the "normal fonts" path on road signs than in Farmington.  The recreation wayfinder signs are in one font, the blue Animas River signs in another, and nearly everything else in Clearview -- including STOP SIGNS! 

And just for the hell of it, let's throw in a European KEEP RIGHT arrow at a random intersection:

E 30th St

https://maps.app.goo.gl/iPY7qsy2VdLwQZoy6

For what it's worth, this one is my favorite; hopefully with the oval-about at Main and Orchard (that is not on any aerial imagery yet I am aware of) Farmington just keeps getting quirkier in the road signage department:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/36°43'44.7%22N+108°12'19.7%22W/@36.729069,-108.2060052,174m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0x0!7e2!8m2!3d36.7290691!4d-108.2054581
Logged

JayhawkCO

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4924
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Aurora, CO
  • Last Login: Today at 05:11:08 PM
Re: US-191 in northern Arizona
« Reply #33 on: June 07, 2021, 04:56:49 PM »

But it seems like it must be a "Wild West" thing or something that is going on with route signing in both Arizona and New Mexico.

New Mexico is famously goofy on route signage, probably the worst in the lower 48. But also going on in Farmington is that, with the business route under city jurisdiction (as is common in California), the city may control any route signage on that route. It might not care about reassurance signage for the business route, in addition to the NMDOT-maintained junction signage on the US 64 mainline, which lets US 64 travelers know how to get to the business district. For such a short city-maintained business route (about three miles long), with no junctions with NMDOT-maintained routes other than the US 64 mainline, the lack of reassurance signage is unsurprising.

I've never seen a town go so far off the "normal fonts" path on road signs than in Farmington.  The recreation wayfinder signs are in one font, the blue Animas River signs in another, and nearly everything else in Clearview -- including STOP SIGNS! 

And just for the hell of it, let's throw in a European KEEP RIGHT arrow at a random intersection:

E 30th St

https://maps.app.goo.gl/iPY7qsy2VdLwQZoy6

For what it's worth, this one is my favorite; hopefully with the oval-about at Main and Orchard (that is not on any aerial imagery yet I am aware of) Farmington just keeps getting quirkier in the road signage department:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/36°43'44.7%22N+108°12'19.7%22W/@36.729069,-108.2060052,174m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0x0!7e2!8m2!3d36.7290691!4d-108.2054581

This thread is funny to me since I just started a thread about the US64 Truck signage over on TravelMapping and didn't know this info. Additionally, the roundabout you just referenced I parked at when I was in Farmington so I could have dinner at Three Rivers.  I thought that roundabout was quite strange.

Chris

 


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.