AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions  (Read 24228 times)

Grzrd

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3424
  • Interested Observer

  • Location: Atlanta, GA
  • Last Login: July 31, 2019, 11:24:20 AM
AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« on: November 28, 2012, 10:50:42 AM »

Here is SCOH report:
http://route.transportation.org/Documents/SCOH%20Report%2011-16-2012.pdf

Some interstate actions:
Immediate signage of I-22 in Alabama conditionally approved pending Mississippi application.
US 83 action in south Texas disapproved because no number requested
I-369 approved for Texarkana.
I-69C official designation for US 281.
Logged

Takumi

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3625
  • #yogapantsbutnotstance

  • Age: 33
  • Location: Greater Richmond
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 07:53:13 AM
    • Flashing Lights (blog)
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #1 on: November 28, 2012, 10:53:13 AM »

US 311 is now a multi-state route again.
Logged
Don't pick apart my vision of complete psychotic breakdown, please.  I'm trying to make a point here.

Insta | Kinja

CanesFan27

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1234
  • Last Login: November 05, 2019, 05:55:35 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #2 on: November 28, 2012, 10:55:58 AM »

Here is SCOH report:
http://route.transportation.org/Documents/SCOH%20Report%2011-16-2012.pdf

Some interstate actions:
Immediate signage of I-22 in Alabama conditionally approved pending Mississippi application.
US 83 action in south Texas disapproved because no number requested
I-369 approved for Texarkana.
I-69C official designation for US 281.

I was going to send a message asking if you had information regarding this. I had tweeted to @aashtospeaks and never got a response!

Thanks for sharing!
Logged

Big John

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1960
  • Age: 52
  • Last Login: Today at 08:47:47 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #3 on: November 28, 2012, 11:13:53 AM »

If WisDOT wrote the proposals, they need a proof reader.  It is Fond du Lac, not Fon du Lac.  And is Zoo Interchange, not Zoon Interchange (error done on 2 separate entities).  And Illinois actually submitted the I-41 proposal for the short segment of US 41 concurrent with I-94 in Illinois?
Logged

wxfree

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1106
  • Age: -1
  • Location: Over there
  • Last Login: December 14, 2019, 11:59:13 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #4 on: November 28, 2012, 11:15:45 AM »

This is very interesting.  The designation of the I-69 branches in Texas has been discussed and speculated about quite a bit.  It's also very interesting to me to find out that this information is available.
Logged
All of my posts represent my personal opinions and the official views of any governmental agency that has good sense.

Scott5114

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8313
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Norman, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 02:35:53 PM
    • Denexa 100% Plastic Playing Cards
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #5 on: November 28, 2012, 11:21:56 AM »

I-69C??? Cause why have numbering rules, guys???
Logged

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3760
  • Last Login: Today at 05:08:10 AM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #6 on: November 28, 2012, 11:22:57 AM »

I-69C??? Cause why have numbering rules, guys???

Clearly the folks who were anti-suffix in 1980 aren't around anymore!

Logged
Chris Sampang

oscar

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 7031
  • Age: 63
  • Location: Arlington, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:23:37 PM
    • my Hot Springs and Highways pages
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #7 on: November 28, 2012, 11:36:47 AM »

I-69C??? Cause why have numbering rules, guys???

Clearly the folks who were anti-suffix in 1980 aren't around anymore!

I think a lot of the old concerns were about suffixes like N, S, E, and W, that could cause traveler confusion, e.g., unclear to the most clueless of travelers whether I-80N refers to a northern branch from I-80 (as it did, until it was renumbered as western I-84), or to northbound or north-side lanes on mainline I-80.  I read, in AASHTO files, that the old US 99W and 99E in California caused heartburn for that very reason.

Suffixes like A, B, and C still suck (IMO), but don't suck in that way. 
« Last Edit: November 28, 2012, 12:03:08 PM by oscar »
Logged
my Hot Springs and Highways pages, with links to my roads sites:
http://www.alaskaroads.com/home.html

vdeane

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10602
  • Age: 28
  • Location: Latham, NY
  • Last Login: Today at 09:01:50 PM
    • New York State Roads
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #8 on: November 28, 2012, 11:41:46 AM »

Well, AASHTO just jumped the shark.  I-69C?  I guess we don't have numbering rules any more.  Let's build the rooftop highway as I-400!
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Scott5114

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8313
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Norman, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 02:35:53 PM
    • Denexa 100% Plastic Playing Cards
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #9 on: November 28, 2012, 11:51:46 AM »

What is the purpose of AASHTO anymore, then, if they won't enforce the numbering system? Why not just put the damn signs up? Worked well for ODOT...
Logged

bob7374

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1197
  • Age: 55
  • Location: East Weymouth, Massachusetts
  • Last Login: December 13, 2019, 10:43:33 AM
    • Bob Malme's Road Pages
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #10 on: November 28, 2012, 12:16:13 PM »

If WisDOT wrote the proposals, they need a proof reader.  It is Fond du Lac, not Fon du Lac.  And is Zoo Interchange, not Zoon Interchange (error done on 2 separate entities).  And Illinois actually submitted the I-41 proposal for the short segment of US 41 concurrent with I-94 in Illinois?
Don't know if the misspellings come from the agency applications, or the person putting them together at AASHTO. There typically are a few errors every time and its never from just one state. You would think in either case the SCOH Committee could afford to have an editor look at the document before its published. Hopefully it was corrected before any press release was sent to the mayor of Fond du Loc.

InterstateNG

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 518
  • Last Login: January 03, 2014, 01:12:36 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #11 on: November 28, 2012, 12:21:35 PM »

Perhaps the C stands for "Central" as it would be the central of the three branches?
Logged
I demand an apology.

Sanctimoniously

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 403
  • #instagralan

  • Age: 29
  • Location: Norverbera, Verdana.
  • Last Login: November 07, 2019, 04:12:31 AM
    • From Everywhere and Nowhere. It's parsecs better than the alternative.
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #12 on: November 28, 2012, 12:41:17 PM »

Perhaps the C stands for "Central" as it would be the central of the three branches?

That's exactly what it stands for, but that's not the issue. The issue is that no new suffixed routes are supposed to be created any more.
Logged
wow                 very cringe
        such clearview          must photo
much clinch      so misalign         wow


See it. Live it. Love it. Verdana.

InterstateNG

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 518
  • Last Login: January 03, 2014, 01:12:36 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #13 on: November 28, 2012, 01:23:49 PM »

All as the Mayans foresaw, obviously.
Logged
I demand an apology.

Billy F 1988

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 873
  • NFL Heretic (You're welcome!)

  • Location: Missoula, MT
  • Last Login: Today at 03:26:12 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #14 on: November 28, 2012, 01:24:21 PM »

Which suffixed routes were created and approved by AASHTO if I may ask?
Logged

Grzrd

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3424
  • Interested Observer

  • Location: Atlanta, GA
  • Last Login: July 31, 2019, 11:24:20 AM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #15 on: November 28, 2012, 01:27:03 PM »

Michigan and Illinois are probably breaking Federal law by not posting I-69 signs on those portions of I-94 east of Chicago that are up to Interstate standards :pan:
GREAT observation.  A couple of months ago, I took the liberty of running your observation by FHWA ... FHWA expects to give me their position on the mandatory signage in the near future. I will post as soon as I receive an answer.
If this results in I-69 insanity up there, I'm blaming you, on the ground that the signs wouldn't go up if they don't find out about the issue.
(above 2 quotes from AASHTO and I-69 thread)
Well, AASHTO just jumped the shark.  I-69C?  I guess we don't have numbering rules any more.

I still have not received a reply from FHWA regarding NE2's issue of mandatory dual I-69/ I-94 signage. I think they cannot come up with an artful dodge from NE2's observation. From my end, I'm just allowing them to stonewall and have it disappear.

Above said, wouldn't I-69W in Michigan and Illinois be a wonderful bookend to I-69C in Texas?  :happy:
« Last Edit: November 28, 2012, 01:30:26 PM by Grzrd »
Logged

Alex

  • Webmaster
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4812
  • Location: Tampa, FL
  • Last Login: December 13, 2019, 09:10:32 PM
    • AARoads
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #16 on: November 28, 2012, 01:38:18 PM »

I thought there was to be a decision made for Arkansas regarding redesignating Interstate 540 north from I-40 as I-49. Did not see that covered in the notes document.

Was it postponed for a future meeting?

hbelkins

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13773
  • It is well, it is well, with my soul.

  • Age: 58
  • Location: Kentucky
  • Last Login: Today at 03:41:10 PM
    • Millennium Highway
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #17 on: November 28, 2012, 01:41:44 PM »

So is the Wisconsin proposal for US 41 taking it off the potential co-routing with I-41?
Logged

Grzrd

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3424
  • Interested Observer

  • Location: Atlanta, GA
  • Last Login: July 31, 2019, 11:24:20 AM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #18 on: November 28, 2012, 01:47:26 PM »

I thought there was to be a decision made for Arkansas regarding redesignating Interstate 540 north from I-40 as I-49. Did not see that covered in the notes document.
Was it postponed for a future meeting?

I received an early August email from AHTD to that effect.  I was surprised that it was not included in the notes document. I will follow up with AHTD.

edit

I recently received an email reply from AHTD.  Part of the reply:

Quote
...  we can’t apply for I-49 designation unless we can get some kind of exceptions ...
For Arkansas to be able to rename I-540 to I-49 (and Arkansas Highway 549 to I‑49), US 49 will have to be either renumbered or changed from a US Highway to a State Highway.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2012, 08:13:32 PM by Grzrd »
Logged

rickmastfan67

  • The Invisible One
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2732
  • I want I-67 in PA!!!!

  • Age: 35
  • Location: Pittsburgh, Pa, USA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:49:29 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #19 on: November 28, 2012, 02:47:10 PM »

Can somebody post the PDF on another site?  For some odd reason, I can't get onto the AASHTO website. :(

EDIT: Never mind, I found an online proxy browser that let me load it.  Really weird that I can't get it to open on my normal connection. :(
« Last Edit: November 28, 2012, 02:49:22 PM by rickmastfan67 »
Logged

english si

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3535
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Buckinghamshire, England
  • Last Login: November 27, 2019, 04:02:44 AM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #20 on: November 28, 2012, 02:59:48 PM »

So is the Wisconsin proposal for US 41 taking it off the potential co-routing with I-41?
It's putting it onto I-41's route.

Very surprised to see IL having their I-94/US41 multiplex as I-41. I'm guessing that from there to Green Bay, US41 will not be signed, effectively making I-41 simply an interstate section of US41.
Logged

rickmastfan67

  • The Invisible One
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2732
  • I want I-67 in PA!!!!

  • Age: 35
  • Location: Pittsburgh, Pa, USA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:49:29 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #21 on: November 28, 2012, 03:01:55 PM »

Has anybody found the PDF that gives the links to all proposals individual PDFs?

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13923
  • fuck

  • Age: 11
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: Today at 08:53:50 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #22 on: November 28, 2012, 05:00:08 PM »

Has anybody found the PDF that gives the links to all proposals individual PDFs?
Yeah, what the fuck.
Logged
Florida route log | pre-1945
I will do my best to not make America hate again.
Global warming denial is barely worse than white privilege denial.

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13923
  • fuck

  • Age: 11
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: Today at 08:53:50 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #23 on: November 28, 2012, 05:15:18 PM »

Going down the list:

AZ US 95 Truck already exists. Not sure if they're rerouting it.

AZ US 93 already bypasses Kingman.

AZ US 89-180 already goes as described.

MD I-370 is a truncation, not a relocation.
Logged
Florida route log | pre-1945
I will do my best to not make America hate again.
Global warming denial is barely worse than white privilege denial.

The High Plains Traveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1132
  • Age: Just an old prairie dog

  • Location: Pueblo West CO
  • Last Login: December 14, 2019, 07:27:51 PM
    • Unofficial Minnesota and New Mexico Highway Pages
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #24 on: November 30, 2012, 07:13:42 PM »

Minnesota's new BL I-35 at Pine City is not on state trunk highways. The routes which it covers are all county state-aid highways. This would not be unique (see I-90 Business at Fairmont) but I wonder if those other routes were AASHTO-approved.
Logged
"Tongue-tied and twisted; just an earth-bound misfit, I."

 


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.