AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions  (Read 25081 times)

rickmastfan67

  • The Invisible One
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2794
  • I want I-67 in PA!!!!

  • Age: 35
  • Location: Pittsburgh, Pa, USA
  • Last Login: July 13, 2020, 09:37:06 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #25 on: November 30, 2012, 07:15:23 PM »

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

Maybe they wanted to make it the second official AASHTO approved Truck route behind US 19 Truck here in Pittsburgh? :bigass:

Pilgrimway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 24
  • Last Login: June 15, 2014, 02:22:18 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #26 on: December 02, 2012, 09:18:15 AM »

That I69C should be an X69 or is that too obvious?
Logged

xonhulu

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1334
  • Location: Salem, OR
  • Last Login: June 14, 2020, 10:33:20 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #27 on: December 02, 2012, 11:02:36 AM »

That I69C should be an X69 or is that too obvious?

It's would be odd for such a long and mostly rural interstate to be a 3di, IMO.  It should really have its own number.  Unfortunately, it would have to violate the grid, as it's mostly between I-35 and I-37 and strangely, there are no available odd numbers between those!  :confused:    I-33 or I-47 would be the closest available numbers, since it looks like I-41 is going to Wisconsin.

But I also understand their desire to designate the branches as all being part of the I-69 system.  Really, suffixed routes of 69 would be the best solution, although I think the "69C" is a little silly, as no one has ever used that suffix to mean "Central.".

But I also think AASHTO should follow its own guidelines, and that means no more suffixed interstates.  So I'm pretty divided on what these branches should be numbered.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2012, 01:25:56 PM by xonhulu »
Logged

oscar

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7830
  • Age: 64
  • Location: Arlington, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 01:00:08 AM
    • my Hot Springs and Highways pages
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #28 on: December 02, 2012, 11:49:43 AM »

I-69 could be assigned to the easternmost branch, then the other two could be assigned unused odd 2di numbers between 35 and 69, given that 69's extension will already be bending the grid out of shape in south Texas.  61 and 63 are available (ignoring for now possible conflicts with Texas state route numbers), with no competing claims for those numbers like with 67.  47, 51, and 53 could work as well. 
Logged
my Hot Springs and Highways pages, with links to my roads sites:
http://www.alaskaroads.com/home.html

xonhulu

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1334
  • Location: Salem, OR
  • Last Login: June 14, 2020, 10:33:20 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #29 on: December 02, 2012, 01:33:01 PM »

I-69 could be assigned to the easternmost branch, then the other two could be assigned unused odd 2di numbers between 35 and 69, given that 69's extension will already be bending the grid out of shape in south Texas.  61 and 63 are available (ignoring for now possible conflicts with Texas state route numbers), with no competing claims for those numbers like with 67.  47, 51, and 53 could work as well.

That's probably the best solution, Oscar.  Besides, we Road Enthusiasts are the only ones who care about the sanctity of the grid.

Texas probably isn't concerned about duplicate numbers; in fact, I think every mainline interstate there has a corresponding state route somewhere.
Logged

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10571
  • Age: 61
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: July 13, 2020, 04:01:32 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #30 on: December 02, 2012, 09:21:56 PM »

Texas probably isn't concerned about duplicate numbers; in fact, I think every mainline interstate there has a corresponding state route somewhere.

Maryland sure as Hades does not care. Here are some overlapping state and Interstate route numbers:

68
70
83 (the state route has been decommissioned)
95 (state route also decommissioned)
97 (the state route is much longer than the Interstate, and unlike the Interstate, crosses three counties)
195
270
295
370
395 (state route also decommissioned)
495
795 (state route unsigned)
895 (state route also decommissioned)
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

bugo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6182
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Oklahoma
  • Last Login: July 11, 2020, 12:10:34 AM
    • No Frills Blog
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #31 on: December 02, 2012, 10:38:33 PM »

Texas 70 crosses US 70.  Georgia 27 crosses US 27.  This, while unusual, isn't unheard of.
Logged

Scott5114

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8856
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Norman, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 02:48:22 AM
    • Denexa 100% Plastic Playing Cards
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #32 on: December 02, 2012, 10:48:41 PM »

That I69C should be an X69 or is that too obvious?

It's would be odd for such a long and mostly rural interstate to be a 3di, IMO.

I-135?
Logged

xonhulu

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1334
  • Location: Salem, OR
  • Last Login: June 14, 2020, 10:33:20 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #33 on: December 02, 2012, 11:28:51 PM »

I-135?

Which was originally numbered I-35W.
Logged

Alps

  • Everybody Obeys the Octagon
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13388
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 37
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 12:03:09 AM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #34 on: December 03, 2012, 06:31:19 PM »

Texas 70 crosses US 70.  Georgia 27 intersects US 27.  This, while unusual, isn't unheard of.
Georgia 23 multiplexes with US 23.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2012, 07:37:31 PM by Steve »
Logged

Big John

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2111
  • Age: 52
  • Last Login: Today at 12:30:14 AM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #35 on: December 03, 2012, 06:52:27 PM »

Texas 70 crosses US 70.  Georgia 27 multiplexes with US 27.  This, while unusual, isn't unheard of.
FTFY.

US 27 multiplexes with GA 1 through the state and intersects GA 27 in Lumpkin. https://maps.google.com/maps?q=ga+27&hl=en&ll=32.050389,-84.800377&spn=0.027717,0.038323
Logged

Alps

  • Everybody Obeys the Octagon
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13388
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 37
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 12:03:09 AM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #36 on: December 03, 2012, 07:37:53 PM »

Texas 70 crosses US 70.  Georgia 27 multiplexes with US 27.  This, while unusual, isn't unheard of.
FTFY.

US 27 multiplexes with GA 1 through the state and intersects GA 27 in Lumpkin. https://maps.google.com/maps?q=ga+27&hl=en&ll=32.050389,-84.800377&spn=0.027717,0.038323
Yeah, 23 and 27 are like, the same number, from an astronomical scale, or something.

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13990
  • fuck

  • Age: 12
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: July 13, 2020, 08:06:49 PM
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.

kkt

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4691
  • Location: Seattle, Washington
  • Last Login: July 13, 2020, 10:56:30 AM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #38 on: December 03, 2012, 07:48:03 PM »

They need to pick one of the branches to be I-69 and the other branches to be x69 3dis or different numbers altogether.  So they'd be the longest 3dis around, some route has to be longest, and it makes sense for it to be a big, spread out state like Texas.  If they want them to be part of the I-69 "family," that's the way to do it.  Suffixed routes are confusing in speech and AASHTO was right to remove most of them and ban new ones.
Logged

Scott5114

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8856
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Norman, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 02:48:22 AM
    • Denexa 100% Plastic Playing Cards
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #39 on: December 04, 2012, 11:08:31 AM »

Give them the option: either be 3dis or leave them as state/US route freeways.
Logged

corco

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5029
  • Just Livin' the Dream

  • Age: 31
  • Location: Boise, Idaho
  • Last Login: Today at 12:21:06 AM
    • Corcohighways.org
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #40 on: December 04, 2012, 11:14:17 AM »

Quote
or leave them as state/US route freeways.

Holy shit

A.J. Bertin

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 795
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Grand Rapids, MI
  • Last Login: July 12, 2020, 08:48:12 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #41 on: December 04, 2012, 12:13:09 PM »

It would be fun to be on this committee (or at least attend their meetings).  :D
Logged
-A.J. from Michigan

kkt

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4691
  • Location: Seattle, Washington
  • Last Login: July 13, 2020, 10:56:30 AM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #42 on: December 04, 2012, 01:13:26 PM »

The mayors of Dallas and Ft. Worth should play a game of poker for the right to I-35.  Winner at the end of the evening gets I-35 through his or her city, the other one gets I-435.
Logged

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13045
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: July 13, 2020, 05:29:53 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #43 on: December 04, 2012, 02:44:19 PM »

They need to pick one of the branches to be I-69 and the other branches to be x69 3dis or different numbers altogether.  So they'd be the longest 3dis around, some route has to be longest, and it makes sense for it to be a big, spread out state like Texas.  If they want them to be part of the I-69 "family," that's the way to do it.  Suffixed routes are confusing in speech and AASHTO was right to remove most of them and ban new ones.

Nah, I'd go with I-1 and I-3.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.

Alps

  • Everybody Obeys the Octagon
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13388
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 37
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 12:03:09 AM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #44 on: December 04, 2012, 04:44:05 PM »

The mayors of Dallas and Ft. Worth should play a game of poker for the right to I-35.  Winner at the end of the evening gets I-35 through his or her city, the other one gets I-435.

Or southern I-99.

Scott5114

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8856
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Norman, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 02:48:22 AM
    • Denexa 100% Plastic Playing Cards
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #45 on: December 04, 2012, 06:47:00 PM »

The mayors of Dallas and Ft. Worth should play a game of poker for the right to I-35.  Winner at the end of the evening gets I-35 through his or her city, the other one gets I-435.

I'd prefer 835. It would go nicely with Ft. Worth's 820.
Logged

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13990
  • fuck

  • Age: 12
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: July 13, 2020, 08:06:49 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #46 on: December 04, 2012, 06:54:28 PM »

I-862. It's 35E (hex) in decimal.
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.

mukade

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1167
  • Location: Indiana
  • Last Login: November 12, 2016, 11:37:18 PM
    • Highway Explorer
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #47 on: December 04, 2012, 07:07:59 PM »

and I-3464  (35W in base 33)
Logged

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13045
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: July 13, 2020, 05:29:53 PM
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #48 on: December 04, 2012, 07:24:29 PM »

I-10011 (35 in binary) or I-1000101 (69 in binary)
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.

vtk

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3916
  • she pronouns please

  • Age: -14
  • Location: Columbus
  • Last Login: July 09, 2020, 01:50:27 PM
    • Vid's Space
Re: AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions
« Reply #49 on: December 04, 2012, 10:42:40 PM »

I like the idea of long rural 3dIs instead of short rural 2dIs (suffixed or not).  In my mind, this is what numbers of the form I-1xx should be reserved for.  But doesn't federal law specify the number 69 for all three branches?  I think AASHTO is trying to break the law as little as possible without literally calling all three branches I-69.  And unlike the 69/94 situation in MI, they can't just ignore this problem without non-roadgeeks noticing something's wrong.
Logged
Look, over by the restrooms! It's a girl! It's a boy! No, it's Captain Enby!

…Do you think they're trying to decide which one to use?

 


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.