AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications  (Read 48215 times)

Grzrd

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3424
  • Interested Observer

  • Location: Atlanta, GA
  • Last Login: July 31, 2019, 11:24:20 AM
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #50 on: May 10, 2013, 07:10:54 PM »

Any word on when state route 210 becomes I-210 in SoCal?
Rick

I was also disappointed to see that there was neither an application for I-22 in Mississippi nor an application for I-69 through Houston inside of I-610.

The lack of an application(s) for I-49 in Arkansas was expected, but still disappointing.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2013, 07:20:19 PM by Grzrd »
Logged

triplemultiplex

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2208
  • "You read it; you can't unread it!"

  • Location: inside the beltline
  • Last Login: October 18, 2019, 04:40:18 PM
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #51 on: May 10, 2013, 08:35:13 PM »

MN USBR 45 (Elk River-Hastings)

The hell is this?  It makes no sense.
Logged
"That's just like... your opinion, man."

oscar

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6793
  • Age: 63
  • Location: Arlington, VA
  • Last Login: October 19, 2019, 11:56:36 PM
    • my Hot Springs and Highways pages
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #52 on: May 10, 2013, 08:54:22 PM »

MN USBR 45 (Elk River-Hastings)

The hell is this?  It makes no sense.

U.S. Bicycle Route, part of another route network AASHTO oversees.
Logged
my Hot Springs and Highways pages, with links to my roads sites:
http://www.alaskaroads.com/home.html

Speedway99

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 65
  • Last Login: July 22, 2015, 11:23:04 PM
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #53 on: May 10, 2013, 09:05:37 PM »

Why not reroute I-95 through Raleigh, overlapping I-40 from Raleigh to Benson, and sign the current I-95 around Raleigh as I-495? Being in the top 50 in the US by city proper, it deserves another 2di. Also, I've come to think that the 2di's should go through the big cities, and I-95 just doesn't serve enough big cities between Richmond and Jacksonville (Except Fayetteville and Savannah).
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 May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #54 on: May 10, 2013, 09:06:50 PM »

what
Logged
Don't pick apart my vision of complete psychotic breakdown, please.  I'm trying to make a point here.

Insta | Kinja

triplemultiplex

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2208
  • "You read it; you can't unread it!"

  • Location: inside the beltline
  • Last Login: October 18, 2019, 04:40:18 PM
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #55 on: May 10, 2013, 09:43:05 PM »

MN USBR 45 (Elk River-Hastings)

The hell is this?  It makes no sense.

U.S. Bicycle Route, part of another route network AASHTO oversees.

Ah.
I saw "BR" and immediately thought "business route" completely failing to notice the syntax NE2 was using for those in his list.  Derp.
Logged
"That's just like... your opinion, man."

myosh_tino

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2714
  • Silicon Valley Roadgeek

  • Age: 45
  • Location: Cupertino, CA
  • Last Login: September 26, 2019, 03:09:49 AM
    • Silicon Valley Roads @ Markyville.com
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #56 on: May 11, 2013, 03:44:38 AM »

Any word on when state route 210 becomes I-210 in SoCal?

Rick

I've wondered the same thing and have heard nothing. Significant progress has been made at the I-215 and California SR 210 interchange, with several ramps opening recently, but I don't know if all of the planned improvements to 210 in that vicinity are complete yet, nor do I know if those improvements are delaying the process. Perhaps I should email SANBAG (San Bernardino local assoc of governments) and see what the plan is.

Regards,
Andy
If you're going to ask about Route 210, how about 905?  From what I understand, all of 905 is now freeway right?
Logged
Quote from: golden eagle
If I owned a dam and decided to donate it to charity, would I be giving a dam? I'm sure that might be a first because no one really gives a dam.

txstateends

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1081
  • Location: north TX, not far from an interstate interchange and a US terminus
  • Last Login: June 05, 2019, 11:30:28 AM
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #57 on: May 11, 2013, 09:38:22 AM »

Any word on when state route 210 becomes I-210 in SoCal?
Rick

I was also disappointed to see that there was neither an application for I-22 in Mississippi nor an application for I-69 through Houston inside of I-610.

The lack of an application(s) for I-49 in Arkansas was expected, but still disappointing.

So when is the next AASHTO numbering meeting (or however they get together for what they do), November?
Logged
\/ \/ click for a bigger image \/ \/

Grzrd

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3424
  • Interested Observer

  • Location: Atlanta, GA
  • Last Login: July 31, 2019, 11:24:20 AM
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #58 on: May 11, 2013, 09:55:03 AM »

So when is the next AASHTO numbering meeting (or however they get together for what they do), November?

From a recent email from Marty Vitale of AASHTO:

Quote
... the next round of applications that will be due by mid-September.  We shall meet on or before October 17, 2013 in Denver, CO.
Logged

WillWeaverRVA

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1458
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: October 18, 2019, 03:50:53 PM
    • WillWeaverRVA Photography
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #59 on: May 12, 2013, 12:56:47 AM »

what

I-95 should also go through Alanland, and not through Alanland.
Logged
Will Weaver
WillWeaverRVA Photography | Twitter

"But how will the oxen know where to drown if we renumber the Oregon Trail?" - NE2

Interstate275Fla

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10
  • Last Login: November 29, 2017, 10:48:42 PM
    • The website for all things Interstate 275 Florida
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #60 on: May 13, 2013, 07:15:37 PM »

Presently Interstate 4 in Florida is the lowest east-west Interstate route number in the 48 contiguous United States.  Now that AASHTO has given their blessing (with the concurrence of FHWA and TxDOT (Texas Transportation Commission)), Texas will soon be home to the lowest east-west Interstate route number in the United States, Interstate 2.

As a suggestion, here is what I would do with a new Interstate 2 in the Rio Grande Valley, which I understand will replace US 83 as it is Interstate standard and being the terminuses of Interstate 69:

1. Extend Interstate 2 west to Laredo and let it connect with Interstate 35.  At the same time, extend Interstate 35 south to let it become a free flowing Interstate highway straight to the international bridge and to Mexico, much like Interstate 5 in San Ysidro.  Presently Interstate 35 ends in Laredo at Victoria Street (south of Victoria Street, southbound from Interstate 35 is Santa Ursula Avenue and northbound to Interstate 35 is San Dario Avenue) and motorists wanting to head south into Nuevo Laredo and points south in Mexico (i.e., Monterrey) have to go through a couple of traffic signals on Santa Ursula to get to the international bridge.

2.  After Laredo, extend Interstate 2 further west to Del Rio, passing by Eagle Pass on the way.  From Eagle Pass to Del Rio use the right of way of US 277.  Interstate 2 would go around Del Rio using TX Loop 79 in order to meet US 90 northwest of Del Rio.

3.  After Del Rio, extend Interstate 2 yet further west using the right of way of US 90 to Van Horn and Interstate 10.

The only acquisition of right of way in my suggestion would be for the segment of Interstate 2 from Laredo west to Eagle Pass.  That way, right of way acquisition costs can be held down and TxDOT - known for the frontage roads on their Interstate highways - can construct frontage roads on US 277 and US 90 through the more populous areas in order to keep existing roadside businesses going.

I would welcome the Interstate 2 idea for the Rio Grande Valley area of Texas, as long as if there were plans to extend the highway westward towards an eventual connection with Interstate 10 at Van Horn to El Paso and points west.
Logged

DTComposer

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 837
  • Location: San Jose
  • Last Login: Today at 12:19:31 AM
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #61 on: May 13, 2013, 10:07:15 PM »

Why not reroute I-95 through Raleigh, overlapping I-40 from Raleigh to Benson, and sign the current I-95 around Raleigh as I-495? Being in the top 50 in the US by city proper, it deserves another 2di. Also, I've come to think that the 2di's should go through the big cities, and I-95 just doesn't serve enough big cities between Richmond and Jacksonville (Except Fayetteville and Savannah).

San Jose, Austin, San Francisco, El Paso, Las Vegas, Fresno, Long Beach, Virginia Beach, and Colorado Springs all respectfully ask Raleigh to get in line and wait for them to get their second (...or first) 2di.
Logged

Speedway99

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 65
  • Last Login: July 22, 2015, 11:23:04 PM
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #62 on: May 14, 2013, 10:35:29 PM »

Why not reroute I-95 through Raleigh, overlapping I-40 from Raleigh to Benson, and sign the current I-95 around Raleigh as I-495? Being in the top 50 in the US by city proper, it deserves another 2di. Also, I've come to think that the 2di's should go through the big cities, and I-95 just doesn't serve enough big cities between Richmond and Jacksonville (Except Fayetteville and Savannah).

San Jose, Austin, San Francisco, El Paso, Las Vegas, Fresno, Long Beach, Virginia Beach, and Colorado Springs all respectfully ask Raleigh to get in line and wait for them to get their second (...or first) 2di.

I don't mean to offend you, and I hope I don't, but I consider Long Beach a suburb, since it is part of the metro area of the much bigger Los Angeles, which already has 2 2dis, and I-3 could be a 3rd one for that metro, and it can go through San Jose and San Francisco. They should extend I-80 south on I-280 to end in San Jose at future I-3. Las Vegas is getting I-11 soon, and Houston and Austin need an interstate connecting each other, and when that is built, Austin would become a 2di crossroad. They can extend it to Abilene and Lubbock to I-27, and extend this I-27 to Colorado Springs. I also want an El Paso-Lubbock-Wichita-Topeka highway built, and I-20 and 25 rerouted to El Paso, like how they should've gone in the first place. US 1 can be upgraded from Rockingham at future I-73 to Raleigh, then go to Norfolk and VA Beach as I-38 or I-42. Fresno can get CA 99 upgraded to I-7, then using CA 41, an I-9 to Reno. Bakersfield can have I-5 rerouted to downtown using CA 99 and the future westside parkway, I-40 on CA 58, and another highway to Las Vegas. Those are just my ideas, I think the 2dis should go through the big cities. I also brought up my idea for I-95 through Raleigh since they were discussing a spur/loop at the meeting, I figured, why not route I-95 through the city, making I-495 the bypass? Maybe to avoid an I-40/95 overlap from Raleigh to Benson, I-40 could go to Greenville, giving Wilmington a 3di. Then Wilmington can have an extended I-20, and make a coastal I-97 or 99 when those numbers are freed. Again, just my suggestions, I hope they become real.

EDIT: Maybe this should be moved to Fictional Highways?
Logged

WichitaRoads

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 185
  • It will ALWAYS be 54 to me! Screw 400!

  • Age: 38
  • Location: Wichita
  • Last Login: December 09, 2016, 02:30:29 PM
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #63 on: May 15, 2013, 12:36:04 AM »

Why not reroute I-95 through Raleigh, overlapping I-40 from Raleigh to Benson, and sign the current I-95 around Raleigh as I-495? Being in the top 50 in the US by city proper, it deserves another 2di. Also, I've come to think that the 2di's should go through the big cities, and I-95 just doesn't serve enough big cities between Richmond and Jacksonville (Except Fayetteville and Savannah).

San Jose, Austin, San Francisco, El Paso, Las Vegas, Fresno, Long Beach, Virginia Beach, and Colorado Springs all respectfully ask Raleigh to get in line and wait for them to get their second (...or first) 2di.

I don't mean to offend you, and I hope I don't, but I consider Long Beach a suburb, since it is part of the metro area of the much bigger Los Angeles, which already has 2 2dis, and I-3 could be a 3rd one for that metro, and it can go through San Jose and San Francisco. They should extend I-80 south on I-280 to end in San Jose at future I-3. Las Vegas is getting I-11 soon, and Houston and Austin need an interstate connecting each other, and when that is built, Austin would become a 2di crossroad. They can extend it to Abilene and Lubbock to I-27, and extend this I-27 to Colorado Springs. I also want an El Paso-Lubbock-Wichita-Topeka highway built, and I-20 and 25 rerouted to El Paso, like how they should've gone in the first place. US 1 can be upgraded from Rockingham at future I-73 to Raleigh, then go to Norfolk and VA Beach as I-38 or I-42. Fresno can get CA 99 upgraded to I-7, then using CA 41, an I-9 to Reno. Bakersfield can have I-5 rerouted to downtown using CA 99 and the future westside parkway, I-40 on CA 58, and another highway to Las Vegas. Those are just my ideas, I think the 2dis should go through the big cities. I also brought up my idea for I-95 through Raleigh since they were discussing a spur/loop at the meeting, I figured, why not route I-95 through the city, making I-495 the bypass? Maybe to avoid an I-40/95 overlap from Raleigh to Benson, I-40 could go to Greenville, giving Wilmington a 3di. Then Wilmington can have an extended I-20, and make a coastal I-97 or 99 when those numbers are freed. Again, just my suggestions, I hope they become real.

EDIT: Maybe this should be moved to Fictional Highways?

I'm okay with the El Paso to Wichita route along current US 54... there's already sporadic places along the route where you could say it is at standard... that makes sense to me. But, not sure about to Topeka... you can pick up I-35 in Wichita to head to Topeka. What would you propose the route to be numbered?

ICTRds
Logged

Speedway99

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 65
  • Last Login: July 22, 2015, 11:23:04 PM
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #64 on: May 15, 2013, 08:23:21 PM »

Why not reroute I-95 through Raleigh, overlapping I-40 from Raleigh to Benson, and sign the current I-95 around Raleigh as I-495? Being in the top 50 in the US by city proper, it deserves another 2di. Also, I've come to think that the 2di's should go through the big cities, and I-95 just doesn't serve enough big cities between Richmond and Jacksonville (Except Fayetteville and Savannah).

San Jose, Austin, San Francisco, El Paso, Las Vegas, Fresno, Long Beach, Virginia Beach, and Colorado Springs all respectfully ask Raleigh to get in line and wait for them to get their second (...or first) 2di.

I don't mean to offend you, and I hope I don't, but I consider Long Beach a suburb, since it is part of the metro area of the much bigger Los Angeles, which already has 2 2dis, and I-3 could be a 3rd one for that metro, and it can go through San Jose and San Francisco. They should extend I-80 south on I-280 to end in San Jose at future I-3. Las Vegas is getting I-11 soon, and Houston and Austin need an interstate connecting each other, and when that is built, Austin would become a 2di crossroad. They can extend it to Abilene and Lubbock to I-27, and extend this I-27 to Colorado Springs. I also want an El Paso-Lubbock-Wichita-Topeka highway built, and I-20 and 25 rerouted to El Paso, like how they should've gone in the first place. US 1 can be upgraded from Rockingham at future I-73 to Raleigh, then go to Norfolk and VA Beach as I-38 or I-42. Fresno can get CA 99 upgraded to I-7, then using CA 41, an I-9 to Reno. Bakersfield can have I-5 rerouted to downtown using CA 99 and the future westside parkway, I-40 on CA 58, and another highway to Las Vegas. Those are just my ideas, I think the 2dis should go through the big cities. I also brought up my idea for I-95 through Raleigh since they were discussing a spur/loop at the meeting, I figured, why not route I-95 through the city, making I-495 the bypass? Maybe to avoid an I-40/95 overlap from Raleigh to Benson, I-40 could go to Greenville, giving Wilmington a 3di. Then Wilmington can have an extended I-20, and make a coastal I-97 or 99 when those numbers are freed. Again, just my suggestions, I hope they become real.

EDIT: Maybe this should be moved to Fictional Highways?

I'm okay with the El Paso to Wichita route along current US 54... there's already sporadic places along the route where you could say it is at standard... that makes sense to me. But, not sure about to Topeka... you can pick up I-35 in Wichita to head to Topeka. What would you propose the route to be numbered?

ICTRds

So Topeka gets another 2di. This would eat I-335. I'm thinking of making I-35 south of Wichita I-31, and taking this 31 up into Salina. Current I-35 from Wichita to Emporia and I-335 to Topeka get the El Paso US 54 interstate number, Emporia to Olathe gets a 3di. I want I-35 to go from Brownsville to Dallas via Corpus Christi and Houston, then to Tulsa and Olathe, and replacing I-29 to Omaha, Sioux Falls, Fargo, and Winnipeg. I-35 from KC to Duluth, and I-49 become the new I-45.
Logged

NJRoadfan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1361
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: October 19, 2019, 10:54:56 PM
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #65 on: May 15, 2013, 08:57:30 PM »

Sooo....when is NJDOT going to put in for US-9 to be moved to the Garden State Parkway across Great Egg Harbor?
Logged

WichitaRoads

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 185
  • It will ALWAYS be 54 to me! Screw 400!

  • Age: 38
  • Location: Wichita
  • Last Login: December 09, 2016, 02:30:29 PM
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #66 on: May 16, 2013, 12:31:27 AM »

Why not reroute I-95 through Raleigh, overlapping I-40 from Raleigh to Benson, and sign the current I-95 around Raleigh as I-495? Being in the top 50 in the US by city proper, it deserves another 2di. Also, I've come to think that the 2di's should go through the big cities, and I-95 just doesn't serve enough big cities between Richmond and Jacksonville (Except Fayetteville and Savannah).

San Jose, Austin, San Francisco, El Paso, Las Vegas, Fresno, Long Beach, Virginia Beach, and Colorado Springs all respectfully ask Raleigh to get in line and wait for them to get their second (...or first) 2di.

I don't mean to offend you, and I hope I don't, but I consider Long Beach a suburb, since it is part of the metro area of the much bigger Los Angeles, which already has 2 2dis, and I-3 could be a 3rd one for that metro, and it can go through San Jose and San Francisco. They should extend I-80 south on I-280 to end in San Jose at future I-3. Las Vegas is getting I-11 soon, and Houston and Austin need an interstate connecting each other, and when that is built, Austin would become a 2di crossroad. They can extend it to Abilene and Lubbock to I-27, and extend this I-27 to Colorado Springs. I also want an El Paso-Lubbock-Wichita-Topeka highway built, and I-20 and 25 rerouted to El Paso, like how they should've gone in the first place. US 1 can be upgraded from Rockingham at future I-73 to Raleigh, then go to Norfolk and VA Beach as I-38 or I-42. Fresno can get CA 99 upgraded to I-7, then using CA 41, an I-9 to Reno. Bakersfield can have I-5 rerouted to downtown using CA 99 and the future westside parkway, I-40 on CA 58, and another highway to Las Vegas. Those are just my ideas, I think the 2dis should go through the big cities. I also brought up my idea for I-95 through Raleigh since they were discussing a spur/loop at the meeting, I figured, why not route I-95 through the city, making I-495 the bypass? Maybe to avoid an I-40/95 overlap from Raleigh to Benson, I-40 could go to Greenville, giving Wilmington a 3di. Then Wilmington can have an extended I-20, and make a coastal I-97 or 99 when those numbers are freed. Again, just my suggestions, I hope they become real.

EDIT: Maybe this should be moved to Fictional Highways?

I'm okay with the El Paso to Wichita route along current US 54... there's already sporadic places along the route where you could say it is at standard... that makes sense to me. But, not sure about to Topeka... you can pick up I-35 in Wichita to head to Topeka. What would you propose the route to be numbered?

ICTRds

So Topeka gets another 2di. This would eat I-335. I'm thinking of making I-35 south of Wichita I-31, and taking this 31 up into Salina. Current I-35 from Wichita to Emporia and I-335 to Topeka get the El Paso US 54 interstate number, Emporia to Olathe gets a 3di. I want I-35 to go from Brownsville to Dallas via Corpus Christi and Houston, then to Tulsa and Olathe, and replacing I-29 to Omaha, Sioux Falls, Fargo, and Winnipeg. I-35 from KC to Duluth, and I-49 become the new I-45.

I think I'm following you. I'd continue I-31 past I-70, and run it to I-80 at York, NE. I always thought I-135 should go further north. So, from Dallas, I-35 would follow which route to Tulsa, then to Olathe? US 169? Still, what number would you give this new route overlaying 54? One idea I had was to make that 54 corridor part of the possible I-66 that might follow US 400 from SE KS into East Wichita.

ICTRds
Logged

bugo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6077
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Oklahoma
  • Last Login: October 19, 2019, 08:51:52 PM
    • No Frills Blog
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #67 on: May 16, 2013, 01:32:54 PM »

*cough* Fictional Highways *cough*
Logged
This signature has been censored by the AARoads Bureau of Morality.

texaskdog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2497
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: October 18, 2019, 04:50:30 PM
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #68 on: May 16, 2013, 03:36:02 PM »

I wonder if we had our own "fictional highways aashto" if we'd ever agree on anything.
Logged

DTComposer

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 837
  • Location: San Jose
  • Last Login: Today at 12:19:31 AM
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #69 on: May 16, 2013, 09:00:40 PM »

San Jose, Austin, San Francisco, El Paso, Las Vegas, Fresno, Long Beach, Virginia Beach, and Colorado Springs all respectfully ask Raleigh to get in line and wait for them to get their second (...or first) 2di.

I don't mean to offend you, and I hope I don't, but I consider Long Beach a suburb, since it is part of the metro area of the much bigger Los Angeles...

None taken, and while arguments can be made about Long Beach (it doesn't function like the traditional definition of a suburb, and didn't certainly develop as one), it is indeed now part of the same urban area - but that's all for some other thread.
Logged

Alps

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

  • Posts: 12720
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 36
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 01:40:43 AM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #70 on: May 17, 2013, 12:02:26 AM »

I wonder if we had our own "fictional highways aashto" if we'd ever agree on anything.
There are three camps:
Those who want Interstate designations for everything that's remotely a freeway or could be made one
Those who want to keep everything exactly as it is because state route freeways are exciting
Those who would apply rational judgment

corco

  • *
  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4969
  • Just Livin' the Dream

  • Age: 31
  • Location: Boise, Idaho
  • Last Login: Today at 02:00:59 AM
    • Corcohighways.org
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #71 on: May 17, 2013, 12:10:27 AM »

What about those that would try to annex the rest of North America, or is that the first camp

Molandfreak

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1752
  • Age: 24
  • Last Login: July 17, 2019, 10:11:08 PM
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #72 on: May 17, 2013, 07:56:33 AM »

I wonder if we had our own "fictional highways aashto" if we'd ever agree on anything.
There are three camps:
Those who want Interstate designations for everything that's remotely a freeway or could be made one
Those who want to keep everything exactly as it is because state route freeways are exciting
Those who would apply rational judgment
What about the people who think decades ahead?
Logged

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10807
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: October 19, 2019, 11:57:30 AM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #73 on: May 17, 2013, 08:08:52 AM »

Quote
What about the people who think decades ahead?

Doesn't really apply in this case, plus they tend to be in the first camp anyway.
Logged

Brandon

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10433
  • Mr. Accelerator is our friend; Mr. Brake is not.

  • Age: 42
  • Location: Joliet, IL
  • Last Login: October 19, 2019, 07:13:33 PM
Re: AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications
« Reply #74 on: May 17, 2013, 09:13:21 AM »

Quote
What about the people who think decades ahead?

Doesn't really apply in this case, plus they tend to be in the first camp anyway.


Not always.  Some of us are in the third category.
Logged
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

Illinois: America's own banana republic.

Screw the KSA; Stand with Canada.

 


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.