943.1 Submittals - Revision history

Smithk: updated figure

2013-09-04T14:24:04Z

updated figure

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:24, 4 September 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[image:943.1 ~~submittals~~.jpg\|left\|225px]]		[[image:943.1 2013.jpg\|left\|225px]]
	Changes and revisions to route markings can be the result of new construction, actions of adjoining states or changing conditions in an area. The district must initiate proposed route marking revisions. When considering a route marking change, two items are to be considered:		Changes and revisions to route markings can be the result of new construction, actions of adjoining states or changing conditions in an area. The district must initiate proposed route marking revisions. When considering a route marking change, two items are to be considered:

Smithk at 20:23, 20 August 2012

2012-08-20T20:23:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:23, 20 August 2012
Line 16:		Line 16:
	:::::::::* Any requests involving Interstates or U.S. numbered routes are to have six AASHTO applications completed.		:::::::::* Any requests involving Interstates or U.S. numbered routes are to have six AASHTO applications completed.

	~~:::::::::* Any other supporting information.~~		{\|style="padding: 0.3em; margin-left:20px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:left; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="550px" align="right"
	{\|style="padding: 0.3em; margin-~~right~~:20px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:left; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="~~420px~~" align="right"
	\|-		\|-
	\|<Center>'''[[943.2 Route Marking Criteria#943.2.4 State Lettered Routes.\|Lettered Routes]]'''</center>		\|<Center>'''[[943.2 Route Marking Criteria#943.2.4 State Lettered Routes.\|Lettered Routes]]'''</center>
Line 25:		Line 24:
	\|"G", "I", "L", "Q", "S" and "X" are not used (with the exception of Route AX near Axtell). "R" (except for Route AR south of Bakersfield) is only used on supplemental routes connecting state parks or other recreational facilities. Usually, but not always, double letter routes are farm to market roads that end at county roads or are former alignments of other highways.		\|"G", "I", "L", "Q", "S" and "X" are not used (with the exception of Route AX near Axtell). "R" (except for Route AR south of Bakersfield) is only used on supplemental routes connecting state parks or other recreational facilities. Usually, but not always, double letter routes are farm to market roads that end at county roads or are former alignments of other highways.
	\|}		\|}
			:::::::::* Any other supporting information.

	One to two months should be allowed for a state numbered or lettered route-marking change to be considered and approved. Up to a year is to be allowed for final approval of a [[943.3 AASHTO Policy on Route Marking and Application\|proposed change to U.S. or Interstate routes]] because the AASHTO subcommittee that considers federal route changes only meets twice a year, in the spring and the fall.		One to two months should be allowed for a state numbered or lettered route-marking change to be considered and approved. Up to a year is to be allowed for final approval of a [[943.3 AASHTO Policy on Route Marking and Application\|proposed change to U.S. or Interstate routes]] because the AASHTO subcommittee that considers federal route changes only meets twice a year, in the spring and the fall.

Smithk: article construction

2009-10-19T13:24:02Z

article construction

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:24, 19 October 2009
Line 19:		Line 19:
	{\|style="padding: 0.3em; margin-right:20px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:left; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="420px" align="right"		{\|style="padding: 0.3em; margin-right:20px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:left; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="420px" align="right"
	\|-		\|-
	\|<Center>'''Lettered Routes'''</center>		\|<Center>'''[[943.2 Route Marking Criteria#943.2.4 State Lettered Routes.\|Lettered Routes]]'''</center>
	\|-		\|-
	\|Missouri is the only state to extensively use lettering on its highway system. The 1952 Missouri 10-Year Highway Modernization and Expansion Program (the “Takeover Program”) upgraded 12000 miles of county roads. The roads became known as supplemental routes. The program provided a state-maintained road within 2 miles of 95% of all rural units, such as farm homes, churches, schools, stores, etc. Missouri opted to use letters to label these routes to avoid confusion with the existing numbered routes.		\|Missouri is the only state to extensively use lettering on its highway system. The 1952 Missouri 10-Year Highway Modernization and Expansion Program (the “Takeover Program”) upgraded 12000 miles of county roads. The roads became known as supplemental routes. The program provided a state-maintained road within 2 miles of 95% of all rural units, such as farm homes, churches, schools, stores, etc. Missouri opted to use letters to label these routes to avoid confusion with the existing numbered routes.

Smithk: article construction

2009-07-22T20:26:00Z

article construction

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:26, 22 July 2009
Line 17:		Line 17:

	:::::::::* Any other supporting information.		:::::::::* Any other supporting information.
			{\|style="padding: 0.3em; margin-right:20px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:left; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="420px" align="right"
			\|-
			\|<Center>'''Lettered Routes'''</center>
			\|-
			\|Missouri is the only state to extensively use lettering on its highway system. The 1952 Missouri 10-Year Highway Modernization and Expansion Program (the “Takeover Program”) upgraded 12000 miles of county roads. The roads became known as supplemental routes. The program provided a state-maintained road within 2 miles of 95% of all rural units, such as farm homes, churches, schools, stores, etc. Missouri opted to use letters to label these routes to avoid confusion with the existing numbered routes.
			\|-
			\|"G", "I", "L", "Q", "S" and "X" are not used (with the exception of Route AX near Axtell). "R" (except for Route AR south of Bakersfield) is only used on supplemental routes connecting state parks or other recreational facilities. Usually, but not always, double letter routes are farm to market roads that end at county roads or are former alignments of other highways.
			\|}

	One to two months should be allowed for a state numbered or lettered route-marking change to be considered and approved. Up to a year is to be allowed for final approval of a [[943.3 AASHTO Policy on Route Marking and Application\|proposed change to U.S. or Interstate routes]] because the AASHTO subcommittee that considers federal route changes only meets twice a year, in the spring and the fall.		One to two months should be allowed for a state numbered or lettered route-marking change to be considered and approved. Up to a year is to be allowed for final approval of a [[943.3 AASHTO Policy on Route Marking and Application\|proposed change to U.S. or Interstate routes]] because the AASHTO subcommittee that considers federal route changes only meets twice a year, in the spring and the fall.

EPG-Admin: change link to "Asset Management Committee" due to rewrite of 236.5

2009-06-29T13:01:02Z

change link to "Asset Management Committee" due to rewrite of 236.5

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:01, 29 June 2009
Line 6:		Line 6:
	:::::::::* Can the route be signed so it can be easily followed?		:::::::::* Can the route be signed so it can be easily followed?

	The [[236.5 Property Management#236.5.~~1.8~~ Asset Management Committee\|District’s Asset Management Committee]], which is comprised of members from each functional unit within the district, will review all changes in route markings. Once the committee has reviewed the change in route marking and all concerns and issues have been addressed, the change in route marking shall be forwarded to Transportation Planning for further processing. The recommendation is to be electronically transmitted and shall include:		The [[236.5 Property Management#236.5.3 Asset Management Committee\|District’s Asset Management Committee]], which is comprised of members from each functional unit within the district, will review all changes in route markings. Once the committee has reviewed the change in route marking and all concerns and issues have been addressed, the change in route marking shall be forwarded to Transportation Planning for further processing. The recommendation is to be electronically transmitted and shall include:

	:::::::::* Letter of transmittal, submitted by the district engineer.		:::::::::* Letter of transmittal, submitted by the district engineer.

EPG-Admin: revise wording to add Asset Management Committee including a link

2008-07-17T14:28:06Z

revise wording to add Asset Management Committee including a link

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:28, 17 July 2008
Line 6:		Line 6:
	:::::::::* Can the route be signed so it can be easily followed?		:::::::::* Can the route be signed so it can be easily followed?

	The district ~~must then submit a recommendation~~ to ~~the Route Marking Committee Secretary~~ for ~~review and approval~~. The recommendation is to be electronically transmitted and shall include:		The [[236.5 Property Management#236.5.1.8 Asset Management Committee\|District’s Asset Management Committee]], which is comprised of members from each functional unit within the district, will review all changes in route markings. Once the committee has reviewed the change in route marking and all concerns and issues have been addressed, the change in route marking shall be forwarded to Transportation Planning for further processing. The recommendation is to be electronically transmitted and shall include:

	:::::::::* Letter of transmittal, submitted by the district engineer.		:::::::::* Letter of transmittal, submitted by the district engineer.

EPG-Admin: relocate link to 943.3 to thrid paragraph and eliminate last paragraph

2007-08-09T13:23:26Z

relocate link to 943.3 to thrid paragraph and eliminate last paragraph

New page

[[image:943.1 submittals.jpg|left|225px]]
Changes and revisions to route markings can be the result of new construction, actions of adjoining states or changing conditions in an area. The district must initiate proposed route marking revisions. When considering a route marking change, two items are to be considered:

:::::::::* Does the recommended marking fit the criteria for the type of route?

:::::::::* Can the route be signed so it can be easily followed?

The district must then submit a recommendation to the Route Marking Committee Secretary for review and approval. The recommendation is to be electronically transmitted and shall include:

:::::::::* Letter of transmittal, submitted by the district engineer.

:::::::::* Six color copies of an electronic map with symbols showing the proposed marking.

:::::::::* Reason for the change.

:::::::::* Any requests involving Interstates or U.S. numbered routes are to have six AASHTO applications completed.

:::::::::* Any other supporting information.

One to two months should be allowed for a state numbered or lettered route-marking change to be considered and approved. Up to a year is to be allowed for final approval of a [[943.3 AASHTO Policy on Route Marking and Application|proposed change to U.S. or Interstate routes]] because the AASHTO subcommittee that considers federal route changes only meets twice a year, in the spring and the fall.

The transmittal letter should indicate whether the request involves other states. When a federal route change affects another state, the submittals are to be coordinated and presented to AASHTO at the same meeting.

[[category:943 Route Marking]]