Page:Request for Official AASHTO Approval to Remove I-296 Route Designation from All References While Retaining the Route as Part of the Interstate System.pdf/1

 June 22, 1979

Mr. Henrik R. Stafseth Executive Director American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials 444 North Capitol, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001

Dear Mr. Stafseth:

Request for Official AASHTO Approval to Remove I-296 Route Designations from All References While Retaining the Route as Part of the Interstate System 4em

The Michigan Department of Transportation is currently involved in a FHWA sponsored Positive Guidance Demonstration Project. As part of the project, some major freeway signing modifications were proposed on the eastbound I-96 freeway in advance of the major freeway split (I-96 and US-131/I-296) just east of the I-96/M-37 interchange near the city of Grand Rapids (see map).

In reviewing the proposed Positive Guidance plan with FHWA officials, it was agreed that we should eliminate the I-296 and M-37 route marker shields from the proposed overhead diagrammatic signing. The reasons for this are twofold. First, the length of the proposed diagrammatic signs would be substantially shortened. Second, the I-96 routing would not be confused with I-296. Ground mounted supplemental signs may then be used to guide the few motorists actually utilizing the I-296 and M-37 designations.

Upon further examination of the I-296 routing problem, it was concluded that the I-296 designation might be able to be eliminated completely from all references (signs and road maps). I-296 duals with US-131 for only a 3-mile segment (from I-96 southerly to I-196). The overwhelming majority of motorists using US-131/I-296 identify with US-131 rather than I-296. It is felt that the I-296 designation serves no useful purpose other than to designate an interstate routing.