http://www.adventurecycling.org/routes/usbrs/
http://www.adventurecycling.org/routes/nbrn/AASHTOPurposePolicy.pdf
In about 1980, AASHTO approved USBR 1 and USBR 76, currently signed only in North Carolina and Virginia (though USBR 76 also officially exists in Kentucky and Illinois). In addition, the Mississippi River Trail (http://www.mississippirivertrail.org/) uses a modified green USBR shield with MRT instead of a number, approved by FHWA in 1996 (http://www.mississippirivertrail.org/about.html#signs).
In the past five or so years, the system has been revived with help from the Adventure Cycling Association (essentially a AAA for long-distance cycling), and recently routes in Alaska, Maine, Michigan, and New Hampshire were approved by AASHTO. The routes are intended mainly for bicycle touring for pleasure, and are designated along existing roads and trails; the only design standard seems to be that the routes should be paved (e.g. in Maine USBR 1 essentially follows the East Coast Greenway (http://www.greenway.org/) except where the ECG uses unpaved roads and trails).
USBR 1 was likely numbered because it parallels US 1, while USBR 76 was the route of the "Bikecentennial" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bikecentennial) ride. In 2008 AASHTO approved a draft numbering, following the same principles as the U.S. Highway System: http://www.adventurecycling.org/routes/nbrn/FrontDesigFly.pdf Note that, except for 1 and 76, most main routes are multiples of 5. Many of the routes follow ACA touring routes (http://www.adventurecycling.org/routes/network.cfm) or combinations thereof, much like the U.S. Highways replaced auto trails. In some states, they also follow existing state bike routes. Some changes and additions have been made since then, resulting in the current map: http://www.adventurecycling.org/default/assets/file/USBRS//USBRSCorridorMap.pdf In particular:
*USBR 3 was renumbered 9
*USBR 14 was created
*USBR 25 was rerouted from Cleveland to Port Huron
*USBR 30 had a gap across Michigan filled
*USBR 36 was created
*USBR 37 was renumbered 66 south of Chicago
*USBR 51 was added
*USBR 66 was created from parts of 80 and 37 (November 2010 (http://www.adventurecycling.org/news/20101122.cfm?use=web))
*USBR 80 was renumbered 66 west of Oklahoma City
*USBR 87 was added
The following routes are planned:
*USBR 1: Key West to Calais paralleling US 1 (ACA Atlantic Coast/East Coast Greenway (http://www.greenway.org/), except going farther inland through the Carolinas)
*USBR 5: Savannah to Williamsburg paralleling US 17 (ACA Atlantic Coast/East Coast Greenway)
*USBR 9: NYC to Rouses Point paralleling US 9
*USBR 15: Miami to Syracuse paralleling US 41-19-220-15
*USBR 25: Mobile to Port Huron paralleling US 45-60-25 (ACA Underground Railroad)
*USBR 35: Natchez to Sault Ste. Marie paralleling NTP-US 45-60-31 (ACA Great Rivers and Northern Lakes)
*USBR 37: Chicago to Escanaba paralleling US 41
*USBR 41: Minneapolis to Grand Portage paralleling US 61
*USBR 45: New Orleans to northern Minnesota paralleling US 61 (Mississippi River Trail (http://www.mississippirivertrail.org/))
*USBR 51: New Orleans to Springfield paralleling US 71
*USBR 55: Rio Grande Valley to Pembina paralleling US 59-75
*USBR 65: Lubbock to northwest North Dakota paralleling US 83
*USBR 75: El Paso to Colorado Springs paralleling US 85
*USBR 79: Phoenix to Reno paralleling US 89-50 (ACA Grand Canyon Connector and Western Express)
*USBR 85: Southern California to north central Washington paralleling US 395-97 (ACA Sierra Cascades)
*USBR 87: Southern California to northwest Washington paralleling US 99; Skagway to Yukon
*USBR 95: San Diego to northwest Washington paralleling US 101 (ACA Pacific Coast); Valdez to Delta Junction
*USBR 97: Seward to Fairbanks
*USBR 8: Fairbanks to Yukon
*USBR 10: northwest Washington to Sault Ste. Marie paralleling US 2 (ACA Northern Tier and North Lakes)
*USBR 14: Seattle to Missoula paralleling US 10
*USBR 20: Astoria to Port Huron paralleling US 30-12-10 (ACA Lewis & Clark and Lake Erie Connector)
*USBR 30: southwest Montana to Portsmouth paralleling US 10-12-16-20
*USBR 36: northwest Illinois to Detroit paralleling US 20-12
*USBR 40: Yellowstone to NYC paralleling US 14-20-24-22
*USBR 50: San Francisco to Washington paralleling US 40-30-40
*USBR 66: Southern California to Chicago paralleling US 66
*USBR 70: Southern California to Colorado Springs paralleling US 91-50
*USBR 76: Florence to Yorktown paralleling US 20-12-287-50-166-60 (ACA TransAmerica Trail)
*USBR 80: Oklahoma City to southeast North Carolina paralleling US 64-70
*USBR 84: El Paso to Charleston paralleling US 62-380-82-278-78
*USBR 90: San Diego to Jacksonville paralleling US 80-90 (ACA Southern Tier)
Surprised you didn't mention that USBR 1 has now been designated in Maine and USBR 20 has been designated in Michigan.
Quote from: NE2 on October 13, 2011, 01:18:04 AM
and recently routes in Alaska, Maine, Michigan, and New Hampshire were approved by AASHTO.
I noticed a East Coast Greenway (http://www.greenway.org/index.shtml) sign about a month ago. (It was on Dixie Highway in Broward County.) So that's what it means...
From what I understand, there is an effort to sign 76 in KYTC District 12 in Kentucky.
Quote from: NE2 on October 13, 2011, 01:18:04 AM
...USBR 76, currently signed only in North Carolina and Virginia...
Thought you'd be interested to know that there actually
are a few USBR76 signs in Colorado. Photo below courtesy of Matt Salek, at mesalek.com:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmesalek.com%2Fcolo%2Fpicts%2Fco9bikerte76.jpg&hash=ab9113415f9c32d5e7b4c9cb1d0c883cb279a7a0)
I've actually been seeing these signs for... I don't know, I'd say about 20 years... as I've driven down US 285 (apparently 76 follows SH 9 through this area, around Fairplay). I don't know how this segment came to be signposted, or why the remaining segments in Colorado are not posted.
Quote from: usends on October 13, 2011, 12:26:37 PM
Thought you'd be interested to know that there actually are a few USBR76 signs in Colorado.
Strange. This seems to have not been approved by AASHTO, so it's akin to the US 377 extension in Oklahoma.
USBR 11 (Maryland to NC, probably on Skyline Drive/BRP) and USBR 21 (Cleveland to Atlanta, paralleling I-71 and I-75) were added on March 1, 2012: http://blog.adventurecycling.org/2012/03/update-to-national-corridor-plan-march.html
AASHTO is set to rubber-stamp the detailed routings of USBR 35 in Michigan and USBR 45 south of Hastings in Minnesota at their May 18 meeting: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6658.0
Quote from: hbelkins on October 13, 2011, 10:14:45 AM
From what I understand, there is an effort to sign 76 in KYTC District 12 in Kentucky.
Verified this a few weeks ago. Saw signs for USBR 76 in Floyd and Knott counties.
I wish i knew the existance of Route 50 a couple weeks ago. My brother was cycling from Park City to Joliet via I-80 corridor on some gravel/earth frontage roads when possible. Once he got to Nebraska he was able to stay on US 30 and US 6 the rest of the way.
Quote from: hobsini2 on May 18, 2012, 12:32:41 PM
I wish i knew the existance of Route 50 a couple weeks ago. My brother was cycling from Park City to Joliet via I-80 corridor on some gravel/earth frontage roads when possible. Once he got to Nebraska he was able to stay on US 30 and US 6 the rest of the way.
It doesn't exist yet. But there is the "American Discovery Trail", not marked on the road, and I think you have to buy their guidebooks to get detailed directions: http://www.discoverytrail.org/
Probably the first USBR begin/end sign to be posted (on Water Street in Marine City, Michigan, just north of the ferry to Canada):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-5l-wtIWJ7X4%2FT9ppS9WLP3I%2FAAAAAAAAASI%2FfeW8uZ8XMas%2Fs1600%2FUSBR%2B20%2Bbegins%2Bwestbound%2Bsideway.jpg&hash=1d7ad7d2728f2acad5c4fb9744de9b4bd3f175d7) (http://www.adventurecycling.org/routes/nbrn/usbikewaysystem.cfm)
never seen that shield variant before!
It's a recent addition to the MUTCD.
That signs deviates from the MUTCD standard version though, which is black and white and has both the number and bike symbol in the "acorn". See http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_Bike_1_%28M1-9%29.svg
EDIT: Never mind. The green U.S. Bicycle route sign pictured above (without the outer white border) currently has an Interim Approval (http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interim_approval/ia15/index.htm) through FHWA, and they intend to replace the current black and white sign with this green and white sign in the next edition of the MUTCD.
Quote from: NE2 on July 10, 2012, 10:47:40 PM
Probably the first USBR begin/end sign to be posted (on Water Street in Marine City, Michigan, just north of the ferry to Canada):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-5l-wtIWJ7X4%2FT9ppS9WLP3I%2FAAAAAAAAASI%2FfeW8uZ8XMas%2Fs1600%2FUSBR%2B20%2Bbegins%2Bwestbound%2Bsideway.jpg&hash=1d7ad7d2728f2acad5c4fb9744de9b4bd3f175d7) (http://www.adventurecycling.org/routes/nbrn/usbikewaysystem.cfm)
Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 10, 2012, 10:49:33 PM
never seen that shield variant before!
Quote from: NE2 on July 10, 2012, 10:53:52 PM
It's a recent addition to the MUTCD.
Quote from: roadfro on July 11, 2012, 02:58:00 AM
That signs deviates from the MUTCD standard version though, which is black and white and has both the number and bike symbol in the "acorn". See http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_Bike_1_%28M1-9%29.svg
I thought the shape of the bicycle route shield looked a bit similar to California, Oregon and Hawaii's SR shield. Looks like a guitar plectrum to me.
USBR 23 has been added to the plan, paralleling US 31 between Cullman, AL and Louisville, KY.
I was at a WisDOT PIM a couple of weeks ago and was discussing with a local planner type the idea of applying to AASHTO for designation and marking of a mostly developed east-west corridor through the Appleton metro area (locally called the 'Friendship Trail', including a very impressive and popular re-purposed abandoned major railroad bridge over Little Lake Butte des Morts) as USBR 20. Part of the proposal for the US 10/WI 114 upgrades that were discussed at that PIM includes a trail facility that would, IMHO, be an ideal natural link in that corridor. He appeared to be very interested in that idea.
Although the concept maps linked above show a 'USBR 37' as being proposed to roughly follow US 41 in the Chicago-Escanaba, MI corridor, those maps also show it following I-43 along the Lake Michigan lakeshore between Milwaukee and Green Bay. IMHO, and I did not discuss a north-south corridor through the area, a sweet 'US(I)-41' bicycle corridor is also developing here and might be a good 'reroute' for USBR 37, if not for designation as a separately-numbered route.
:nod:
Mike
I wonder how 3dbrs (you heard it here first :P) will be assigned--more like 3dus' (first digit means little in terms of spur or loop), or like 3dis. I also wonder if these "alternate corridors" will become USBRs in time.
I can see a good route from the approximate intersection of USBRs 70 and 79 (Cedar City, Parowan, or Beaver, UT?) up to USBR 76 near the Jackson Hole/Grand Teton area (USBR 179?).
I'm working on a proposal to submit to Adventure Cycling and VTrans for two USBRs in Vermont: an east-west route across northern Vermont and a north-south route in western Vermont, both tying together some existing and proposed rail trails. Haven't figured out route numbers yet.
Quote from: froggie on May 23, 2013, 03:41:28 AM
I'm working on a proposal to submit to Adventure Cycling and VTrans for two USBRs in Vermont: an east-west route across northern Vermont and a north-south route in western Vermont, both tying together some existing and proposed rail trails. Haven't figured out route numbers yet.
The former could be an extension of 15 (which would replace NYSBR 11). Otherwise any free even number under 30 works.
As for the latter, there's an existing "Champlain Bikeway" signed along roads: http://www.champlainbikeways.org/ http://files.lesmarcheurs.com/200003936-06ddd08565/Bikeways.jpg South of there, I assume you're referring to the Delaware and Hudson Rail Trail through Granville?
Didn't want to use an already-existing/actively planned number, which would rule out 8, 10, 14, and 20 for the east-west route. Though I guess there's precedent with 87 and 95 out west. Could be either 6 or an eastern 10.
Was going to suggest a 3-digit route for the north-south route. Probably 109, since it could tie into USBR 9 where 9 jumps into Connecticut.
For the north-south route, yes I was considering the Delaware and Hudson, though it doesn't exist as a rail trail in New York. Also wanted to work an alternative alignment since the ferry between Colchester and Grand Isle only operates for a month in the summer.
In both cases, I'm working on both an alignment that could be "signed today", and an ultimate alignment that utilizes the planned (but not yet existing) rail trails...the Lamoille Valley Trail being chief among them.
I doubt USBR 9 will actually jog into Connecticut; NYSBR 9 is currently signed to cross the Hudson on the GWB (yes, there are NYSBR 9 signs in New Jersey, though they're really just generic state bike route 9 shields).
Basing that off the national planning map that shows USBR 9 going into Connecticut.
Not sure why, but I prefer Michigan's shield to the standard one!
Quote from: Rover_0 on May 22, 2013, 05:04:03 PM
I wonder how 3dbrs (you heard it here first :P) will be assigned--more like 3dus' (first digit means little in terms of spur or loop), or like 3dis. I also wonder if these "alternate corridors" will become USBRs in time.
I can see a good route from the approximate intersection of USBRs 70 and 79 (Cedar City, Parowan, or Beaver, UT?) up to USBR 76 near the Jackson Hole/Grand Teton area (USBR 179?).
Part of me wishes that they would be more like 3dis or they would at least allow intrastate routes.
Quote from: Molandfreak on May 23, 2013, 10:04:14 AM
Not sure why, but I prefer Michigan's shield to the standard one!
Quote from: Rover_0 on May 22, 2013, 05:04:03 PM
I wonder how 3dbrs (you heard it here first :P) will be assigned--more like 3dus' (first digit means little in terms of spur or loop), or like 3dis. I also wonder if these "alternate corridors" will become USBRs in time.
I can see a good route from the approximate intersection of USBRs 70 and 79 (Cedar City, Parowan, or Beaver, UT?) up to USBR 76 near the Jackson Hole/Grand Teton area (USBR 179?).
Part of me wishes that they would be more like 3dis or they would at least allow intrastate routes.
The Michigan one has been submitted as a replacement for the current black and white sign in the MUTCD.
The thoughts on a '3D' for some routes is interesting, as, right now, we may be looking at a 'US(I)-41 v. I-43' thing between Milwaukee and Green Bay. Both routes have scenic and practical transportation merit with lengthy segments of rail trails and other good usable surface roads that can be fairly easily stitched together into acceptable through routes.
Mike
Quote from: froggie on May 23, 2013, 09:26:18 AM
Basing that off the national planning map that "identifies 50-mile wide corridors both prioritized (numbered) and un-prioritized (faint brown lines)".
Fixed for you.
Quote from: Molandfreak on May 23, 2013, 10:04:14 AM
Part of me wishes that they would be more like 3dis or they would at least allow intrastate routes.
They do... Check Alaska. http://www.adventurecycling.org/routes-and-maps/us-bicycle-route-system/national-corridor-plan/
Quote
Quote from: Molandfreak on May 23, 2013, 10:04:14 AM
Part of me wishes that they would be more like 3dis or they would at least allow intrastate routes.
They do... Check Alaska. http://www.adventurecycling.org/routes-and-maps/us-bicycle-route-system/national-corridor-plan/
Beside the point. Alaska is different, since it can't connect to any other states (unless by ferry)
It's not besides the point when you look at routes that don't connect to Canada, especially 108.
What's going on with BR 208 anyway? That doesn't make any sense.
Quote from: Molandfreak on May 23, 2013, 09:48:27 PM
What's going on with BR 208 anyway? That doesn't make any sense.
It's a spur of 8, if Yukon fills the gap.
Quote from: NE2 on May 23, 2013, 10:11:17 PM
Quote from: Molandfreak on May 23, 2013, 09:48:27 PM
What's going on with BR 208 anyway? That doesn't make any sense.
It's a spur of 8, if Yukon fills the gap.
Trans Canada Bike Route System, anyone? :bigass:
do these routes follow current roads or are they on sidewalks and separate trails?
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 07, 2013, 10:12:19 AM
do these routes follow current roads or are they on sidewalks and separate trails?
Trails and roads with a wide shoulder.
Trails and roads, period. If they have shoulders, they have shoulders.
Quote from: NE2 on June 07, 2013, 11:52:02 AM
Trails and roads, period. If they have shoulders, they have shoulders.
Yes. Here's an example (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=37.868959,-89.948931&spn=0.000034,0.018475&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=37.869028,-89.948843&panoid=leAg834zOtkCar1XPwnEHQ&cbp=12,251.68,,0,6.79) of a bike route with no shoulders.
Quote from: kphoger on June 08, 2013, 12:07:39 PM
Quote from: NE2 on June 07, 2013, 11:52:02 AM
Trails and roads, period. If they have shoulders, they have shoulders.
Yes. Here's an example (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=37.868959,-89.948931&spn=0.000034,0.018475&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=37.869028,-89.948843&panoid=leAg834zOtkCar1XPwnEHQ&cbp=12,251.68,,0,6.79) of a bike route with no shoulders.
Please tell me that road at least gets very little traffic...
yawn
Quote from: NE2 on June 09, 2013, 12:26:37 AM
yawn
I'll take that as a yes. It doesn't look like it has much traffic :D
Where was this discussed before?
Moland: FYI, MnDOT requested and designated several sectons of USBR 45 along county roads that lack shoulders...CSAH 84 near Wabasha is one.
Quote from: froggie on June 09, 2013, 04:12:04 AM
Moland: FYI, MnDOT requested and designated several sectons of USBR 45 along county roads that lack shoulders...CSAH 84 near Wabasha is one.
Thanks for the info, that's fine by me. Most of the county roads along the river don't get any traffic, anyway. ;-)
Quote from: Molandfreak on June 09, 2013, 12:45:26 AM
Quote from: NE2 on June 09, 2013, 12:26:37 AM
yawn
I'll take that as a yes. It doesn't look like it has much traffic :D
Where was this discussed before?
It's US-61. I have no idea what the vehicle count is. The only times I've been on it were as a shortcut between Chester (IL) and northbound I-55; I can't imagine it being the primary route between many other places, though.
But that's not the point. The point is that bicycle routes aren't necessarily on roads with shoulders.
Did some talking to Michael Sanders (Pedestrian/Bicyclist Program) at AzDOT, and here are the routes that they've planned so far:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm3.staticflickr.com%2F2834%2F9028807812_78b66abb4a_o.png&hash=853833a0ae68d437a724e0a534bb59a3cc125f30)
They're tryinig to get USBR-66 established along old US-66, while USBR-70 will follow I-15 and then old US-91 into Utah. USBR-79 is slated to follow US-89A, US-89, AZ-64, I-40, AZ-89, and US-93 at least to Wickenburg. It also looks like USBR-90 is still in the planning stages, but I'd prefer it to run along old US-80. Perhaps USBR-79 could follow one of those USBR-90 alternatives.
This would probably make USBR 79 the first one to charge a (non-water crossing) toll ($12 Grand Canyon entrance fee).
Quote from: Rover_0 on June 12, 2013, 04:42:40 PM
Did some talking to Michael Sanders (Pedestrian/Bicyclist Program) at AzDOT, and here are the routes that they've planned so far:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm3.staticflickr.com%2F2834%2F9028807812_78b66abb4a_o.png&hash=853833a0ae68d437a724e0a534bb59a3cc125f30)
Ahem... nice use of the US Bike Route shield there...
It's a sorta-cutout new-style USBR shield.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-5l-wtIWJ7X4%2FT9ppS9WLP3I%2FAAAAAAAAASI%2FfeW8uZ8XMas%2Fs1600%2FUSBR%2B20%2Bbegins%2Bwestbound%2Bsideway.jpg&hash=1d7ad7d2728f2acad5c4fb9744de9b4bd3f175d7)
that's a pretty darn good-looking shield! when was that introduced?
I definitely like it better than the acorn on black background.
what is the relationship between these two and the green oval on white background?
First page of this thread:
Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 10, 2012, 10:49:33 PM
never seen that shield variant before!
Quote from: NE2 on June 12, 2013, 06:24:49 PM
First page of this thread:
Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 10, 2012, 10:49:33 PM
never seen that shield variant before!
Yeah but it's different than the AZ map, which is blatantly using CA spades.
The bottom's too curved to be a CA (or Hawaii) spade. On the other hand, it's pretty damn close to the specs: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interim_approval/ia15/index.htm and maybe even closer to this rendering: http://www.adventurecycling.org/routes-and-maps/us-bicycle-route-system/implement-a-us-bike-route/sign-a-us-bike-route/
I would not say it is close to the specs at all. the specs are a perfect Reuleaux triangle; the implementation is a ... something else.
Quote from: Molandfreak on May 23, 2013, 10:04:14 AM
Not sure why, but I prefer Michigan's shield to the standard one!
I agree, a sign like that with a green background is less likely than the current design to be confused with highway route markers in most states.
Quote from: Molandfreak on May 23, 2013, 10:04:14 AM
Quote from: Rover_0 on May 22, 2013, 05:04:03 PM
I wonder how 3dbrs (you heard it here first :P) will be assigned--more like 3dus' (first digit means little in terms of spur or loop), or like 3dis. I also wonder if these "alternate corridors" will become USBRs in time.
I can see a good route from the approximate intersection of USBRs 70 and 79 (Cedar City, Parowan, or Beaver, UT?) up to USBR 76 near the Jackson Hole/Grand Teton area (USBR 179?).
Part of me wishes that they would be more like 3dis or they would at least allow intrastate routes.
From what I've seen on ACA's website, it looks like 'intrastate' routes are allowed:
"For a route to receive official designation as a U.S. Bicycle Route, it must connect two or more states, a state and an international border,
or other U.S. Bicycle Routes." (Emphasis added)
(source: http://www.adventurecycling.org/routes-and-maps/us-bicycle-route-system/ )
Also, a video clip on the dedication of USBR 35 in Michigan:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLSMTgR6DMU
And - the latest corridor map:
http://www.adventurecycling.org/default/assets/file/USBRS//USBRSCorridorMap.pdf
Enjoy!
Mike
Can I make a request: don't embed YouTube videos into posts. The embed code wrecks havoc with my forum viewing such as it is...I've already had to disable photos just to get the threads to load with this crappy ship bandwidth. Just post a link to the YouTube vid.
Regarding the sign...shortened version is useful for bike-specific maps...but I think would still need some work to distinguish between it and regular vehicle routes on a regular road map.
Can't you disable Flash?
Froggie, try Flashblock:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/flashblock/
it gives you fine-tuned disabling of Flash.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 19, 2013, 12:27:34 PM
Froggie, try Flashblock:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/flashblock/
it gives you fine-tuned disabling of Flash.
That's what I use!
:cool:
Mike
I'm on a US Navy computer here for the next 4 months (sans the occasional port visit, but not many of those). I cannot disable Flash, nor can I add any add-ons. mgk's earlier embed is wrecking havoc with my being able to read this thread. Only way I've been able to get in is by manually timing a page-load stop so I get the "quick reply" box but not the YouTube embed code.
Back on topic, and regarding an earlier subject, I E-mailed MnDOT's bike unit regarding USBR 45 and MRT concurrencies. The condensed version I got back is that, for those segments where there are parallel MRT routes (north of La Crosse, Hastings to Elk River, through St. Cloud, and Brainerd to Bemidji), *BOTH* branches will be designated as USBR 45. A few segments will need improvements such as trail improvements or shoulder widening first (plus the new I-90 Mississippi River bridge construction that'll shut down the "lowland" trail there for 2 years), but eventually all will be designated USBR 45. I asked about signage, and MnDOT will only be signposting it as the Mississippi River Trail (MRT) for now, citing that "USBR signing is under discussion nationally to identify best practices". Signs will be installed beginning this fall.
I also E-mailed them suggestions for USBR 20 and USBR 30, suggesting that USBR 20 utilize the Central Lakes Trail and Lake Wobegon Trail (currently a continuous rail-trail from Fergus Falls to St. Joseph, with a proposed extension to St. Cloud), and route USBR 30 across the St. Croix at Prescott, along the MRT spur there to Hastings, then along the "west side of the river" to downtown Minneapolis, then west out the Luce Line Trail.
One more note: the wide "loop" that the western leg makes between Hastings and Inver Grove Heights will be fixed in the next couple years. A new trail much closer to the river is being built, and I believe segments are already open...the full trail completion is expected sometime next year.
From what I am aware of here in Wisconsin, WisDOT is currently working on stitching together some rail trails and connecting roads to designate USBR 30 westward from Milwaukee, starting at the Lake Express ferry terminal.
From the ACA's website ( http://www.adventurecycling.org/routes-and-maps/us-bicycle-route-system/national-corridor-plan/ ):
"WISCONSIN
Model: DOT
Phase II: Designation
The state's Bicycle Council with assistance from WisDOT is implementing USBR 30 across Wisconsin. This route is mostly on trails managed by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The portions that are not on trail are being researched by a contractor. The next step is for the DOT to seek agreements from the DNR and the local jurisdictions along the route. The Bike Federation of Wisconsin and the DNR are interested in aiding the WisDOT in efforts to develop other USBRs across the state.
For more information or to volunteer, contact larry(dot)corsi(at)dot(dot)wi(dot)gov"
There is a series of rail trails that extend from the downtown area of Milwaukee, starting with the Hank Aaron State Trail from the Lake Michigan lakefront, westward past Miller Park into the west suburbs, then following the Glacial Drumlin Trail through Waukesha to the Madison area, then other rail trails, including the Elroy-Sparta Trail (the USA's first designated public rail trail), to the La Crosse area. I can then see something put together to have USBR 30 then roughly following the east side of the Mississippi River into Prescott.
-------------------
As for the other USBRs in Wisconsin, first, I have not yet begun pondering USBR 10, except that a series of rail trails does exist in the corridor along US 2 and 63 and that I wonder if it wouldn't be a bad idea to have it cross into Minnesota via the new Stillwater Bridge (OTOH, I'm kind of surprised that it isn't shown going east-west through Superior).
-USBR 20 - Would run westward from the S.S. Badger (US 10) ferry terminal in Manitowoc, roughly following the US 10 corridor across the state.
From Manitowoc to the Appleton area, I would have it follow County 'JJ' and then County 'PP' westward to the Hilbert area, County 'BB' to Sherwood (it would have to use a short segment of WI 57 for now between Hilbert and County 'BB', but the highway is straight, level, has excellent sight lines and paved shoulders, until the paralleling moribund rail line is finally abandoned). From Sherwood, I would have it pass by the entrance to High Cliff State park and then use a couple of yet-to-be-built path segments along WI 114 into Menasha. It would then cross the Appleton metro area using the Friendship State Trail across Menasha (including its long bridge over Little Lake Butte des Morts) and continue westward on the US 10 part of the Friendship Trail. Currently, the Friendship trail ends at County 'N' at Winchester (ROW is preserved for it to Fremont), so it would have to use County 'N' and County 'II' (old WI 110), both low-traffic roads, to Fremont.
At Fremont, trouble begins. With the recent US 10 four lane expressway upgrades, there is no system of through frontage roads between the cities, villages and unincorporated hamlets along the way westward to Amherst and until such can be developed in conjunction with future US 10 freeway upgrades, it will have to temporarily use the paved shoulders of US 10 between several of them and local roads that go well out of the way between the rest. From Amherst to Amherst Junction, it can use the pre-1965 US 10, from where it would then follow the Tomorrow River State Trail to Plover ($4 daily or $20 annual state trail fee/toll required). At Plover, I would then have it follow the Stevens Point 'Green Circle' Hoover Ave and Heartland trails into central Stevens Point.
From there westward, I have not yet really begun to dig into it, except that I would likely have it cross into Minnesota via the path on the I-94 Saint Croix River bridge.
-USBR 37 - Roughly follows the US 41 corridor through the state.
The best that I can come up with north of Jackson, WI uses the Eisenbahn State Trail from West Bend to Eden; County 'V' into Fond du Lac; local trails through the city; US 45 to Oshkosh; County 'A' to Neenah; Park St, Wisconsin Av and Lake St (trail along side of the street) to Fritse Park (junction USBR 20); then local streets into Appleton; the Newberry, County 'CB' and Kankapot Creek trails into Kaukauna; County 'ZZ' through Wrightstown and the Fox River trail through De Pere to downtown Green Bay. North of Green Bay, it would likely follow local roads near the Lake Michigan (bay of Green Bay) shoreline into Marinette.
South of Jackson, it would use undetermined local roads to connect with established trails through Milwaukee County (junction USBR 30) and on southward to the Illinois state line to continue on to Chicago. North of Marinette, it would then likely follow M-35 to Escanaba (junction USBR 10).
(Whew!)
This fun to ponder :nod: and yes, I will eventually be discussing this with WisDOT.
Mike
Quote from: froggie on June 19, 2013, 04:16:53 AM
Can I make a request: don't embed YouTube videos into posts. The embed code wrecks havoc with my forum viewing such as it is...I've already had to disable photos just to get the threads to load with this crappy ship bandwidth. Just post a link to the YouTube vid.
Does the possibility exist to remove the YouTube embed feature from the forum software? Perhaps that might be the way to go and just have people post links to YouTube videos the same way they do links to web pages.
Quote from: hbelkins on June 20, 2013, 10:23:19 AM
Quote from: froggie on June 19, 2013, 04:16:53 AM
Can I make a request: don't embed YouTube videos into posts. The embed code wrecks havoc with my forum viewing such as it is...I've already had to disable photos just to get the threads to load with this crappy ship bandwidth. Just post a link to the YouTube vid.
Does the possibility exist to remove the YouTube embed feature from the forum software? Perhaps that might be the way to go and just have people post links to YouTube videos the same way they do links to web pages.
On the one hand, you have one user with an isolated issue that's close to unique for this forum, versus hundreds of users who enjoy the videos. While I have been behind some slow computers and firewalls and certainly appreciate where froggie is coming from, the needs of the many outweigh the few.
Right...I'm not asking for the mods to modify the forum software (as this is ultimately a temporary thing and Steve's right...I'm probably the only one affected by this). I'm just asking users to post links instead of embed code for YouTube videos....thank you Mike for changing this one.
Of potential interest to SPUI, mgk, and the Wisconsin folks: on their 2012 application for the northern portion of USBR 45, MnDOT included a map and verbage referencing relocating USBR 10 to pass through Itasca State Park and follow a corridor between Itasca State park and Duluth. The map then shows USBR 10 following USBR 41 down to the Twin Cities, but also includes mention of a possible USBR 10 reroute in Wisconsin to go through the Duluth/Superior area instead of "detouring" down to the Twin Cities. mgk mentioned this sort of routing in an earlier comment.
Quote from: froggie on June 20, 2013, 02:26:54 AM
Back on topic, and regarding an earlier subject, I E-mailed MnDOT's bike unit regarding USBR 45 and MRT concurrencies. The condensed version I got back is that, for those segments where there are parallel MRT routes (north of La Crosse, Hastings to Elk River, through St. Cloud, and Brainerd to Bemidji), *BOTH* branches will be designated as USBR 45. A few segments will need improvements such as trail improvements or shoulder widening first (plus the new I-90 Mississippi River bridge construction that'll shut down the "lowland" trail there for 2 years), but eventually all will be designated USBR 45. I asked about signage, and MnDOT will only be signposting it as the Mississippi River Trail (MRT) for now, citing that "USBR signing is under discussion nationally to identify best practices". Signs will be installed beginning this fall.
45E and 45W?
Quote from: froggie on July 09, 2013, 07:11:17 AM
Of potential interest to SPUI, mgk, and the Wisconsin folks: on their 2012 application for the northern portion of USBR 45, MnDOT included a map and verbage referencing relocating USBR 10 to pass through Itasca State Park and follow a corridor between Itasca State park and Duluth. The map then shows USBR 10 following USBR 41 down to the Twin Cities, but also includes mention of a possible USBR 10 reroute in Wisconsin to go through the Duluth/Superior area instead of "detouring" down to the Twin Cities. mgk mentioned this sort of routing in an earlier comment.
Interesting. I have not yet seen the proposed routing of USBR 41 southwards from Duluth, but does it use the grade of SOO LINE's former MStP-Superior line? If so, then it, too, would enter Wisconsin. For USBR 10 to use that to the MStP area and then back north in Wisconsin would be a lot of backtracking - and especially avoiding a very nice, scenic area in the far northwestern part of the state and in da wesdern Yoo Pee of Michigan.
BTW, IMHO, the path on the Bong Bridge (US 2) followed by all of WI 13 north of US 2 would be an ideal routing for it.
Mike
Some new signs, with a divided acorn-shape shield:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7291%2F9198219918_a214a1fd86_z.jpg&hash=0f53aa74ca2d0ec76ce4fbec0f24738a3f987350) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/94611454@N02/9198219918/)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm6.staticflickr.com%2F5447%2F9198222510_f791deb485_z.jpg&hash=c15814dca24d9cc6a7fb7210f99a3104e88220e9) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/94611454@N02/9198222510/)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8262%2F8633146524_677d5da4b9_z.jpg&hash=90c5caf922980005655e357285f0a16cba252880) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/94611454@N02/8633146524/)
Quote from: Signal on July 09, 2013, 06:03:34 PM
Some new signs, with a divided acorn-shape shield:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7291%2F9198219918_a214a1fd86_z.jpg&hash=0f53aa74ca2d0ec76ce4fbec0f24738a3f987350) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/94611454@N02/9198219918/)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm6.staticflickr.com%2F5447%2F9198222510_f791deb485_z.jpg&hash=c15814dca24d9cc6a7fb7210f99a3104e88220e9) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/94611454@N02/9198222510/)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8262%2F8633146524_677d5da4b9_z.jpg&hash=90c5caf922980005655e357285f0a16cba252880) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/94611454@N02/8633146524/)
Where is this?
I've sent a suggested route to bike groups in Wyoming, Idaho, Utah, Arizona, Nevada, and California suggesting a USBR be routed from Moran Jct. in Grand Teton NP along US-89 to Logan UT, then present US-91/I-15/Historic US-91 down to the junction of USBRs 70 and 79 (presumably in Cedar City UT). I also suggested that USBR-70 from there to USBR-66 at Daggett CA could be a part of this route.
I also suggested that the Garden City-Provo route via Evanston WY be a USBR, probably USBR-177 or USBR-181.
I'd number it USBR-77 or USBR-81.
Quote45E and 45W?
Looking back over the USBR 45 applications, MnDOT proposed signing a 'mainline' USBR 45 and a USBR 45A. Generally, the "western" splits (west side of the river through MSP and St. Cloud, and the Paul Bunyan Trail/Heartland Trail routing between Brainerd and Bemidji) being the designated Alt routes.
QuoteInteresting. I have not yet seen the proposed routing of USBR 41 southwards from Duluth, but does it use the grade of SOO LINE's former MStP-Superior line? If so, then it, too, would enter Wisconsin.
I'd expect USBR 41 to use the routing of the long-established Munger Trail between Duluth and Hinckley, thereby it would not enter Wisconsin.
Quote from: froggie on July 10, 2013, 03:04:10 AM
QuoteInteresting. I have not yet seen the proposed routing of USBR 41 southwards from Duluth, but does it use the grade of SOO LINE's former MStP-Superior line? If so, then it, too, would enter Wisconsin.
I'd expect USBR 41 to use the routing of the long-established Munger Trail between Duluth and Hinckley, thereby it would not enter Wisconsin.
Which it should use anyway.
Since this thread was last touched, a whole bunch of new routes were added.
October 2013: USBR 23, Tennessee; USBR 50, Maryland
May 2014: USBR 1, Massachusetts; USBR 10, Washington; USBR 36 and 37, Illinois; USBR 50, District of Columbia and Ohio
November 2014: USBR 1 and 76, Virginia (realigned); USBR 1, Massachusetts and Florida; USBR 10, Michigan; USBR 11, Maryland; USBR 90, Florida
May 2015: USBR 10, Idaho; USBR 45, Minnesota; USBR 70 and 79, Utah
September 2015: USBR 7, Vermont; USBR 21, Georgia; USBR 35 and 36, Indiana; USBR 50, Indiana; USBR 50A, Ohio; USBR 76, Kansas; USBR 90, Arizona
May 2016: USBR 7, Connecticut and Massachusetts; USBR 10, Idaho (realignment); USBR 176, Virginia; USBR 621, Georgia
What's the status of rt 66 becoming an official USBR at this point? Seems to me like this would be a no-brainer. I see that it's proposed.
I'd like to see the communities along I-55 in Illinois take the old abandoned pavement from the latest alignment and develop these as part of the route.
Quote from: inkyatari on June 29, 2016, 09:20:07 AM
What's the status of rt 66 becoming an official USBR at this point? Seems to me like this would be a no-brainer. I see that it's proposed.
I'd like to see the communities along I-55 in Illinois take the old abandoned pavement from the latest alignment and develop these as part of the route.
I'm also somewhat shocked in that the system of pathways that are being developed along I-70 west of Denver, CO are not on the current USBR route planning map.
Mike
Those are questions to take up with the relevant state DOT's, as they are the ones responsible for siting, routing, and requesting routes.
Kentucky is finally getting around to signing USBR 76 in its entirety.
Quote from: hbelkins on June 29, 2016, 02:20:22 PM
Kentucky is finally getting around to signing USBR 76 in its entirety.
No kidding. I've told you this before, but I can't believe the routing of USBR 76 through Floyd County.
Recently learned that MnDOT is actively developing USBR 41 (http://www.dot.state.mn.us/bike/usbr41/), which will run from St. Paul (connecting to MRT/USBR 45) via Duluth to the Canadian border. Though a draft routing is not due until next month, it will likely utilize completed portions of the Munger Trail, parts of old US 61 (CSAH 30 or CSAH 61 depending on your county), and MN 61 along the North Shore. MnDOT's goal is for approval at this fall's AASHTO committee meeting.
Quote from: Rothman on July 14, 2016, 11:48:41 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on June 29, 2016, 02:20:22 PM
Kentucky is finally getting around to signing USBR 76 in its entirety.
No kidding. I've told you this before, but I can't believe the routing of USBR 76 through Floyd County.
There are also some pretty intense mountain climbs along KY 28 in Perry, Breathitt and Owsley counties.