It's in Seattle this time:
https://web.cvent.com/event/6007ffee-046f-4ce0-99dd-0d33c05301a4/websitePage:33bb36ed-69a1-42a4-85e6-6b25fb660a71
Special Committee on U.S. Route Numbering is Monday, May 15.
One thing I noticed is that apparently there are options for transportation officials from other countries to attend.
https://web.cvent.com/event/6007ffee-046f-4ce0-99dd-0d33c05301a4/regPage:3a09ed22-4212-4fdd-88cf-a3219968675f
QuoteOne thing I noticed is that apparently there are options for transportation officials from other countries to attend.
Finally getting US-97 through Canada?
Quote from: Quillz on April 29, 2023, 01:36:29 PM
QuoteOne thing I noticed is that apparently there are options for transportation officials from other countries to attend.
Finally getting US-97 through Canada?
I'd rather see I-94 thru Ontario to meet back to I-90 outside Buffalo
Quote from: ilpt4u on April 29, 2023, 05:26:48 PM
Quote from: Quillz on April 29, 2023, 01:36:29 PM
QuoteOne thing I noticed is that apparently there are options for transportation officials from other countries to attend.
Finally getting US-97 through Canada?
I'd rather see I-94 thru Ontario to meet back to I-90 outside Buffalo
C'mon, get with the (MMM) program. It's supposed to be I-90 going through Ontario, to eliminate that bootleg duplex in IN and OH.
Quote from: GaryV on April 29, 2023, 06:03:29 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on April 29, 2023, 05:26:48 PM
Quote from: Quillz on April 29, 2023, 01:36:29 PM
QuoteOne thing I noticed is that apparently there are options for transportation officials from other countries to attend.
Finally getting US-97 through Canada?
I'd rather see I-94 thru Ontario to meet back to I-90 outside Buffalo
C'mon, get with the (MMM) program. It's supposed to be I-90 going through Ontario, to eliminate that bootleg duplex in IN and OH.
Exactly!
I want to see I-23 designated on the Spanish A-23, so I can finally drive on an Interstate Highway :sombrero:.
It looks like they've changed their site: https://transportation.org/route/
I don't see the page where they've had their past meeting decisions anymore. Hopefully they put those up again and the decisions from the 2022 meetings.
Quote from: mvak36 on May 02, 2023, 04:18:35 PM
It looks like they've changed their site: https://transportation.org/route/
I don't see the page where they've had their past meeting decisions anymore. Hopefully they put those up again and the decisions from the 2022 meetings.
Interesting. Makes me wonder about the long time it's taken to get notes from the last few meetings. Would make sense, if it was something they no longer planned to post.
Quote from: vdeane on May 02, 2023, 07:44:24 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on May 02, 2023, 04:18:35 PM
It looks like they've changed their site: https://transportation.org/route/
I don't see the page where they've had their past meeting decisions anymore. Hopefully they put those up again and the decisions from the 2022 meetings.
Interesting. Makes me wonder about the long time it's taken to get notes from the last few meetings. Would make sense, if it was something they no longer planned to post.
The person I contacted for last year's decisions back in December said the person that uploaded them to the site took another job internally and they haven't found a replacement. But they did send me the decisions. Hopefully they'll still be posting decisions on their site.
Quote from: mvak36 on May 03, 2023, 01:07:53 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 02, 2023, 07:44:24 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on May 02, 2023, 04:18:35 PM
It looks like they've changed their site: https://transportation.org/route/
I don't see the page where they've had their past meeting decisions anymore. Hopefully they put those up again and the decisions from the 2022 meetings.
Interesting. Makes me wonder about the long time it's taken to get notes from the last few meetings. Would make sense, if it was something they no longer planned to post.
The person I contacted for last year's decisions back in December said the person that uploaded them to the site took another job internally and they haven't found a replacement. But they did send me the decisions. Hopefully they'll still be posting decisions on their site.
For now anyway if you're looking for a website with new route application information, guess you are out of luck. Perhaps they just want more people to attend their meetings in person. :D
I asked AASHTO about 2 months ago for these decisions and they finally sent them to me this morning:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/01c3c1d9wcymnneicavm9/Final-Report-USRN-May-2023-UPDATED-6-9-23-002.pdf?rlkey=fjmtfya01ail7ahuj2m551r69&dl=0
Only 2 interstates for this meeting: I-169 in KY and I-695 in NJ.
Snippet for I-695 in NJ:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/12408_12_09_23_9_45_22.png)
It looks like AASHTO has finally approved the realignment of US 87 onto Wyoming 193 around the closed landslide area between Buffalo and Sheridan. It was denied in the 90s because AASHTO wanted to run WYDOT to run 87 concurrent with I-90. Apparently the long tradition of existence of the detour on Wyoming 193 finally won over AASHTO.
So now on my "122 state plan" there are four five conflicting sets: I-195 and I-395 DC (/VA in the case of I-395) and MD (both sets in NWS Baltimore/Washington county warning area), I-291 CT and MA (in NWS Boston/Norton), I-110 LA and MS (in NWS New Orleans/Baton Rouge, for some reason I thought the one in MS was in NWS Mobile...) and now I-695 NJ and NY (in NWS New York/Upton).
Also, the first part of that application is because at one point on the planning of the Somerset Freeway there was to be a short connector from I-95 South to I-287 North called I-695, which later on was added to I-95 itself. Of course as we know that ended up cancelled, leaving I-95 incomplete until 2018.
I'll be watching to see when US 31EX signage in Mt. Washington is pulled from the field.
Quote from: mvak36 on September 12, 2023, 09:50:05 AM
I asked AASHTO about 2 months ago for these decisions and they finally sent them to me this morning:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/01c3c1d9wcymnneicavm9/Final-Report-USRN-May-2023-UPDATED-6-9-23-002.pdf?rlkey=fjmtfya01ail7ahuj2m551r69&dl=0
Only 2 interstates for this meeting: I-169 in KY and I-695 in NJ.
Snippet for I-695 in NJ:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/12408_12_09_23_9_45_22.png)
So the NJTA wants I-695 for the Eastern Spur...
Is this a sign they may want an I-designation between the Delaware Memorial Bridge and I-95/Extension?
Quote from: ilpt4u on September 12, 2023, 04:03:46 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on September 12, 2023, 09:50:05 AM
I asked AASHTO about 2 months ago for these decisions and they finally sent them to me this morning:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/01c3c1d9wcymnneicavm9/Final-Report-USRN-May-2023-UPDATED-6-9-23-002.pdf?rlkey=fjmtfya01ail7ahuj2m551r69&dl=0
Only 2 interstates for this meeting: I-169 in KY and I-695 in NJ.
Snippet for I-695 in NJ:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/12408_12_09_23_9_45_22.png)
So the NJTA wants I-695 for the Eastern Spur...
Is this a sign they may want an I-designation between the Delaware Memorial Bridge and I-95/Extension?
I'm not sure. Maybe they just wanted it up there in the NYC area. Idk what they will do for the southern part but if they do want to make it an interstate, isn't I-895 the only one that would be left (assuming they would choose an even number)?
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on April 30, 2023, 07:54:12 AM
I want to see I-23 designated on the Spanish A-23, so I can finally drive on an Interstate Highway :sombrero:.
I want I-23 in Ohio on the Portsmouth-Columbus-Toledo corridor just to spite grid purists :bigass:
Quote from: SkyPesos on September 12, 2023, 05:39:00 PM
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on April 30, 2023, 07:54:12 AM
I want to see I-23 designated on the Spanish A-23, so I can finally drive on an Interstate Highway :sombrero:.
I want I-23 in Ohio on the Portsmouth-Columbus-Toledo corridor just to spite grid purists :bigass:
Approved. Funding signage is on you though.
Quote from: ilpt4u on September 12, 2023, 04:03:46 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on September 12, 2023, 09:50:05 AM
I asked AASHTO about 2 months ago for these decisions and they finally sent them to me this morning:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/01c3c1d9wcymnneicavm9/Final-Report-USRN-May-2023-UPDATED-6-9-23-002.pdf?rlkey=fjmtfya01ail7ahuj2m551r69&dl=0
Only 2 interstates for this meeting: I-169 in KY and I-695 in NJ.
Snippet for I-695 in NJ:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/12408_12_09_23_9_45_22.png)
So the NJTA wants I-695 for the Eastern Spur...
Is this a sign they may want an I-designation between the Delaware Memorial Bridge and I-95/Extension?
Doubtful. They're quite content with it just being signed with the Turnpike shield south of Exit 6. This is more about ending decades of confusion on the part of motorists about which alignment is actually "95" and how to sign it I would imagine even though both alignments will rejoin and continue as 95.
If they're going to change one alignment to be I-695, then that would mean it should get its own set of exit numbers.
Quote from: ran4sh on February 02, 2024, 06:28:02 PM
If they're going to change one alignment to be I-695, then that would mean it should get its own set of exit numbers.
Not necessarily. It would be handy to use I-95's numbers as a reference, as the majority of the traffic would be passing along to I-95. Lots of through traffic.