Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

New Mexico Highways Page

3 views
Skip to first unread message

Steve Riner

unread,
Dec 21, 2003, 6:53:38 PM12/21/03
to
Another state now has a highways web page (for more than the U.S. routes) ---

I have posted the first of the Unofficial New Mexico Highways Page. So far, I
have the overview, U.S. and Interstate highways, and State Highways 1-100. Only
6463 state highways to go...

Still have glitches ... the U.S. and Interstates page has some code issues
concerning cell and font color that I'll have to correct manually, and for some
reason you may get an error message on the counter even though it works.

Check it out at http://www.steve-riner.com/nmhighways/nmhome.htm
Steve Riner
Pueblo West, CO
Minnesota and New Mexico Highways
http://www.steve-riner.com/mnhighways/mnhome.htm
http://www.steve-riner.com/nmhighways/nmhome.htm

Tongue-tied and twisted, just an earth-bound misfit, I

Räbid Schnäuzers

unread,
Dec 21, 2003, 8:28:12 PM12/21/03
to
"Steve Riner" <mnhig...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20031221185338...@mb-m20.aol.com...

Nice start. If you have anchors at the Interstate descriptions, I'll link in
from my juction lists.

--
Compañero Señor Yämamøto
http://mryamamoto.50megs.com
The 800 lb Schnäuzer of Road Sites!
http://infoshop.org
"Everybody in this room is wearing a uniform,
don't kid yourself"


Pat OConnell

unread,
Dec 21, 2003, 9:17:07 PM12/21/03
to
Steve Riner wrote:

From a 16 year Albuquerque resident(1985-2001):

Link to the US-Interstate page from your main page is broken (404).
Otherwise, it's a damn good start.

There is a short stretch of non-Interstate freeway on Paseo del Norte (NM
423) between NM 47 (2nd Street) and NM 448 (Coors Blvd). I'm putting the
street names in there because NM doesn't mark its urban state highways very
well.

Suggestion: add a note (and a link, maybe) under US 666 about its renaming
to US 491.

When you get around to writing up NM 337: NM 337 (and NM 55 from the 337
tee on south to north of Carrizozo) is still known as "South 14" to locals.
The 1988 renumbering was sometimes pretty stupid.

--
Pat O'Connell
[note munged EMail address]
Take nothing but pictures, Leave nothing but footprints,
Kill nothing but vandals...

Steve Riner

unread,
Dec 21, 2003, 9:34:56 PM12/21/03
to
>There is a short stretch of non-Interstate freeway on Paseo del Norte (NM
>423) between NM 47 (2nd Street) and NM 448 (Coors Blvd). I'm putting the
>street names in there because NM doesn't mark its urban state highways very
>well.

Thanks. I knew of this road but didn't remember when writing up the main page.
I need to modify my statement about no other freeways. Also, I fixed a couple
of the bugs on the U.S.-interstates page except for the funky column widths on
the interstates list. Especially the title (which nobody apparently caught),
"U.S. and Interstate Highways in Minnesota."

Pat OConnell

unread,
Dec 21, 2003, 9:52:58 PM12/21/03
to
Steve Riner wrote:

>>There is a short stretch of non-Interstate freeway on Paseo del Norte (NM
>>423) between NM 47 (2nd Street) and NM 448 (Coors Blvd). I'm putting the
>>street names in there because NM doesn't mark its urban state highways very
>>well.

The above is not marked as freeway in my Rand McNally; neither is the
following.

There is also a short stretch of freeway and semi-freeway on NM 599 around
Santa Fe, starting at US 285; the rest of the road would be considered an
expressway by this group. Forgot about that one until just after I posted
the tip about Paseo.

> Thanks. I knew of this road but didn't remember when writing up the main page.
> I need to modify my statement about no other freeways. Also, I fixed a couple
> of the bugs on the U.S.-interstates page except for the funky column widths on
> the interstates list. Especially the title (which nobody apparently caught),
> "U.S. and Interstate Highways in Minnesota."
> Steve Riner
> Pueblo West, CO
> Minnesota and New Mexico Highways
> http://www.steve-riner.com/mnhighways/mnhome.htm
> http://www.steve-riner.com/nmhighways/nmhome.htm
>
> Tongue-tied and twisted, just an earth-bound misfit, I

Message has been deleted

Alan Hamilton

unread,
Dec 22, 2003, 1:36:16 AM12/22/03
to
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 18:17:07 -0800, Pat OConnell
<nvcaver.F...@cox.net> wrote:

>Link to the US-Interstate page from your main page is broken (404).
>Otherwise, it's a damn good start.

It's linked as http://www.steve-riner.com/us-interstates.htm but
should be http://www.steve-riner.com/nmhighways/us-interstates.htm

I agree, I like it. It's nice to finally have a page for the Land of
Enchantment.
--
/
/ * / Alan Hamilton
* * al...@arizonaroads.com

Arizona Roads -- http://www.arizonaroads.com

Kevin Flynn

unread,
Dec 22, 2003, 12:27:40 PM12/22/03
to
mnhig...@aol.comnospam (Steve Riner) wrote in message news:<20031221185338...@mb-m20.aol.com>...


Congratulations, Steve. Looks like you're off to a good start. Keep us
posted on your updates.

arga...@my-deja.com

unread,
Dec 22, 2003, 10:59:39 PM12/22/03
to
[Mr. Riner:]

> I have posted the first of the Unofficial New Mexico Highways Page. So far, I
> have the overview, U.S. and Interstate highways, and State Highways 1-100.
> Only 6463 state highways to go...

It is a good start.

Detailed comments:

ROUTE NUMBERING

* I am almost certain that there is no N.M. 412 at present and
believe that if it is shown on a map, it is an error. There are
numerous errors in all commercial maps of New Mexico, including the
DeLorme atlas. There are two main sources of error--failing to track
the numbering changes made in 1988, and continuing to show roads
removed from the state system in the 1980's as state highways. Even
the current official state highway map, which has not been revised
since 1995, shows itineraries which appear to contradict the
no-concurrency rule adopted at the time of the 1988 renumbering.

* I don't think the 1988 renumbering involved much actual removal of
road mileage from the state highway system; much more mileage was
removed in the six years preceding the renumbering (approximately 1200
miles of deletions statewide between 1982 and 1988, if memory serves).
However, the 1988 renumbering positioned a large number of minor
state routes for what could be called revolving-door membership in the
state highway system. The state could take a certain length of road
into maintenance, make improvements to that road, and then return it
to the county, without disrupting the numbering of other routes. In
terms of public policy, this would be desirable if the state wished to
"derate" poorer counties by taking local roads into state ownership
without going to the trouble of developing a fully fledged secondary
route system with its own numbering. I would also speculate that this
type of derating is politically popular because many of New Mexico's
counties have very cyclical economies and cannot depend on
property-tax revenue for road upkeep.

I suspect that creation of this revolving-door system explains why New
Mexico has such a large number of crossroads on the state highway
system where more than two legs have their own route numbers. Former
U.S. 85, which was split into three or four pieces in 1988, is
probably the most obvious and egregious example of this, but there are
others scattered all over the state The renumbering was not confined
to removing dogleg concurrencies--far from it.

* It would be good to explain the basic rule behind the 1988
renumbering. Generally, each route which was to be renumbered was
assigned a free number out of the first 99 whole numbers greater than
a figure equal to 100 times the number of the maintenance district
where the road was located. For instance, roads in District 1 (Silver
City) received free numbers between 101 and 199, roads in maintenance
District 2 (Roswell) received free numbers between 201 and 299, etc.
As the earlier history of sequential route numbering meant that many
of the lower numbers were already taken, District 1 renumbered routes
tend to be in the high 100's while District 6 renumbered routes are in
the low 600's.

There were many exceptions to this basic rule for choosing the new
numbers, most of which occurred when N.M.S.H.T.D. decided to extend an
existing route over a segment which had formerly been differently
numbered rather than to assign a new number. However, in some
isolated cases, N.M.S.H.T.D. chose numbers radically out of sequence,
probably as a result of lobbying by local interests. Hence the access
road to the Space Museum in Alamogordo is N.M. 2001, which is an
obvious reference to the Arthur C. Clarke novel. The road to the
National Solar Observatory in Sunspot is N.M. 6563--6563 Å being the
wavelength of the Balmer hydrogen transition which is most well
represented in sunlight.

* To highlight the distinctiveness of New Mexico's approach to route
numbering on state highways, you might try making a list of ISOLATED
segments of state highway, i.e., ones which do not intersect or
interchange with any other roads on the system. N.M. 2001 is one
example of such a road. N.M. 543 in Santa Fé, which is one block long
and runs behind N.M.S.H.T.D. headquarters, is another (though it is
just a few hundred feet away from intersecting with Cerrillos Ave.,
which is N.M. 14 at this point).

HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS

* I'd suggest further modifying the statement re. Interstates being
the only freeways of substantial length in the state by noting simply
that there are short lengths of freeway-standard road in Santa Fé,
Albuquerque, Las Cruces (don't forget new U.S. 70, which IS a full
freeway), and other towns of importance in New Mexico. (Alamogordo
may have a Super Two freeway--see discussion below.)

* You should also mention the system of signed "Relief Routes" around
major towns in New Mexico. Santa Fé, Alamogordo, and Roswell are
examples of towns which now have Relief Routes. In the case of
Alamogordo and Roswell, the Relief Routes are two-lane bypasses (west
side of the urbanized area in both cases) with a Super Two cross
section. The Santa Fé Relief Route, N.M. 599, is a four-lane divided
highway its whole length and is also a freeway near its interchange
with U.S. 84-285.

The Roswell Relief Route has several intersections at grade, including
one with U.S. 70-380, but interchanges with U.S. 70 and U.S. 285 at
its northern end. I do not believe the Alamogordo Relief Route has
any intersections on the level between its grade-separated
intersection with U.S. 54-70 to the southwest of town and its northern
terminus at U.S. 54-70-82, so it could be considered a freeway,
although I doubt it was explicitly planned as such.

The Alamogordo and Roswell Relief Routes are designed to carry U.S.
highway traffic around their respective cities, but do not themselves
appear to have U.S. highway designations. Business route designations
are not signed on the approaches to the Relief Routes and in the case
of Roswell at least, the U.S. highways continue to follow their
official routings through the built-up area. The signing strategy for
these two cities (borrowed from California) appears to be to get
through traffic to divert onto the Relief Routes without implying that
the Relief Routes themselves are part of the numbered U.S. routes, or
giving numbers for the Routes themselves. The numbering rules
introduced in 1988 require the Relief Routes to have at least book
numbers if they are maintained by N.M.S.H.T.D., but I do not know what
these reference designations might be.

The impetus to construct these Relief Routes probably dates from the
Long Range Transportation Plan of 1995, although environmental
documentation for the Roswell Relief Route dates from 1987 at least
(and is available in the U.N.M. library).

* U.S. 550 from Bernalillo to Aztec is not a four-lane divided
highway. It is an undivided four-lane rural arterial with the lanes
in each direction separated by a painted island consisting of two
double yellow centerlines enclosing a double row of buzz strips.
N.M.S.H.T.D. has moved toward building four-lane undivided rural
arterials similar to this, rather than four-lane divided highways
(expressways), especially in areas where the alignment is constrained.
This design practice allows the existing (compacted) road subgrade to
be recycled and economizes on right-of-way acquisition.

U.S. 70 through the Hondo Valley is also to be an undivided four-lane
arterial with generous turn bays, and I expect a similar cross-section
to be announced in several years for U.S. 491.

The 1995 L.R.T.P. called for all centers of population 5,000 or
greater in New Mexico to be connected by four-lane highways.
Undivided rural arterials allow this ambition to be realized at
relatively low cost both in construction and environmental impact, and
little detriment to safety provided traffic volumes are low. I
suspect U.S. 285 was widened to four-lane divided between Roswell and
I-40, however, because right-of-way was cheap and W.I.P.P. money was
available for that project.

I think New Mexico is ahead of the other Western states in using
four-lane undivided arterials to implement a strategic rural
four-laning program, although there are hints Wyoming wants to follow
suit. Strategic programs of this type have many precedents in Eastern
states (Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina being just three
examples which have recently been cited in M.T.R.), but I believe in
those cases four-lane divided highways were used almost exclusively.

ROUTE MARKINGS

* It should be 'Zía': capital 'Z', accented 'i'. An explanation of
the symbolism (four groups of four symbols each, "all good things come
in fours") would also be in order.

* The Zía symbol was not used on a transitional design of route
marker which I suspect appeared in the 1960's. This was basically the
same as the 'M.U.T.C.D.' default circle marker, but with "N.M." above
the route number digits, and "STATE" below, with both lines of text
curved to conform with the circular arc of the marker outline. There
is at least one longtime N.M.S.H.T.D. employee who uses a
decommissioned marker of this type as office decoration, but I have
never actually seen it installed on the road. (In the case I am
familiar with, the route in question was N.M. 56.)

* New Mexico actually has separate two- and three-digit
independent-mount state route markers, both of which use a square
blank. The design is basically the same for both, except that on one
the Zía symbol encloses a larger portion of the circle (i.e., the gap
between the red circle and the black edge is smaller). It would seem
logical to use the version with the larger Zía for three-digit route
numbers, but I was told by a N.M.S.H.T.D. sign shop employee that the
preferred arrangement is in fact the reverse--smaller Zía for three
digits and larger Zía for two digits.

The default alphabet series for route marker digits is F.H.W.A. Series
D. However, large numbers of route markers have been produced which
use Series E digits shrunk horizontally, or Series C digits compressed
vertically, to imitate the aspect ratio of Series D digits. As many
M.T.R. regulars travelling in New Mexico have noted (Mark Roberts has
pictures on his website), the resulting effect is ugly.

For freeway guide signs, the standard practice is to use a white
circle for two-digit routes and a white oval for three-digit routes.
The Zía symbol is omitted on both. On conventional-road guide signs,
circles are used for both two- and three-digit routes--also without
Zía symbol, in all of the cases I have seen.

NUMBERED ROUTE DESCRIPTIONS (N.M. 1 through N.M. 25 ONLY)

General comment--F.H.W.A.'s website has N.H.S. information:

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep10/nhs/maps/nm/nm_newmexico.pdf

There is also a 'NHS Viewer' available for examination of fine detail.
Among other things, however, the *.PDF cited above pretty much rules
out N.H.S. status for N.M. 14 and other routes you labeled with
question marks.

N.M. 3: What happened to the original 1920's routing out to Texas?
When did that shift to the north?

N.M. 6: Surely you mean, "This designation was moved OFF the
Albuquerque cutoff and back onto this route after 66 was moved onto
its ultimate alignment . . ."?

N.M. 9: What "remainder" of N.M. 9 was paved in the 1970's, if the
road west of Columbus had been paved by the 1960's and the portion
east of Columbus was paved in late 1999/early 2000? (B.T.W., I'm
still not convinced N.M. 9 has in fact been extended to N.M. 273.
When I was last near the Santa Teresa P.O.E. in the summer of 2002, I
did not see a route marker for N.M. 9 and the guide signs indicated
just a turn TO Columbus and N.M. 9.)

N.M. 14: You might also add that it is known as the Turquoise Trail,
is a designated national scenic byway, and is becoming the test case
for context-sensitive design in New Mexico. Community activists are
pushing John Noland's "making them wider makes them more dangerous"
arguments and at the moment appear to have obtained significant
concessions, such as ochre-colored shoulders and 11' lanes with extra
space between the lanes on curves.

http://www.raintreecounty.com/SavTagre.html

N.M. 22: This route had spurs and was tinkered with well before the
1988 renumbering. In addition to the segments you mention, I think
there was a seventh which extended across and east of I-25. I think
it might help reduce confusion if the points where the spurs left the
main route were noted, so that the spurs aren't taken for parts of the
continuous route. Of the segments which received new numbers in 1988,
I know that N.M. 588 (Agua Fria St.) is no longer on the state highway
system, and suspect the same is true for N.M. 590 and N.M. 592. This
does not prevent Rand McNally from showing N.M. 588 still active in
Santa Fé and DeLorme from showing the Tesuque segments. --While N.M.
22 might have been the public face of New Mexico's route numbering
confusion in the 1980's, it was just one of many factors driving the
route numbering reform. Elimination of concurrencies was necessary in
order to set up consistent mileposting for accident reporting and
rural 911 addressing, which supplied the global motives. Quite a few
other routes also had poorly signed spurs (N.M. 18 is one example off
the top of my head) and N.M. 371 was in three pieces.

Steve Riner

unread,
Dec 24, 2003, 1:07:42 PM12/24/03
to
> I am almost certain that there is no N.M. 412 at present and
>believe that if it is shown on a map, it is an error. There are
>numerous errors in all commercial maps of New Mexico, including the
>DeLorme atlas. There are two main sources of error--failing to track
>the numbering changes made in 1988, and continuing to show roads
>removed from the state system in the 1980's as state highways. Even
>the current official state highway map, which has not been revised
>since 1995, shows itineraries which appear to contradict the
>no-concurrency rule adopted at the time of the 1988 renumbering.

NM-412 is marked at the junction with I-40. Whether the route actually is
marked, I can't tell because I've not exited there.

I have noticed the number clustering, but didn't have a reason for it. This
also explains why the 600 series debuted in 1988 when there were many available
route numbers in the interim.

>There were many exceptions to this basic rule for choosing the new
>numbers, most of which occurred when N.M.S.H.T.D. decided to extend an
>existing route over a segment which had formerly been differently
>numbered rather than to assign a new number. However, in some
>isolated cases, N.M.S.H.T.D. chose numbers radically out of sequence,
>probably as a result of lobbying by local interests. Hence the access
>road to the Space Museum in Alamogordo is N.M. 2001, which is an
>obvious reference to the Arthur C. Clarke novel. The road to the
>National Solar Observatory in Sunspot is N.M. 6563--6563 Å being the
>wavelength of the Balmer hydrogen transition which is most well
>represented in sunlight.

Thanks for that explanation (I was going to posit this question when I put that
page up).

I was going to post a reference to these unique "relief routes" in a subsequent
update. We drove around Roswell last year, and the relief route is marked
"BYPASS U.S. 285/70." The Alamogordo relief route seems to be marked U.S.
54-70 as well as the route through town.

Excellent comments and information. I'll be using this in future updates.

arga...@my-deja.com

unread,
Dec 25, 2003, 11:47:13 AM12/25/03
to
[Mr. Riner:]

> NM-412 is marked at the junction with I-40. Whether the route actually is
> marked, I can't tell because I've not exited there.

Do you happen to remember the approximate milepost number? I'm
leaving for a trip to New Mexico on December 29, and could check this
out if it is on the way.

> We drove around Roswell last year, and the relief route is marked
> "BYPASS U.S. 285/70." The Alamogordo relief route seems to be marked U.S.
> 54-70 as well as the route through town.

I was last in Roswell in September 2002, and don't recall "BYPASS"
signing from that visit. Was the word used on the large guide signs
or on route marker tabs? I also have pictures from the Roswell Relief
Route taken in winter 2001-02, but am not sure what they show since
I'm thousands of miles away from the computer which has them.

I suspect I'm going through Roswell again this year since I want to
check out U.S. 82, which last spring (at the same time the U.S. 666
debate was raging in M.T.R.) became N.M.S.H.T.D.'s very first Safety
Corridor.

> Excellent comments and information. I'll be using this in future updates.

Thank you. Another resource which might be of use is the M.T.R.
archives on 'Google Groups'--among other things, I think the number
which was originally proposed for the road to Sunspot (instead of
which N.M. 6563 was chosen) has been posted.

Are you planning to develop a pictures component to your site? There
are a number of unique features of New Mexican signing, many of which
have been borrowed from standard practice south of the border:
black-on-white special-message "NOTICE" signs, route designations on
mileposts, direction signs attached to traffic signals, etc.

Justin Priola

unread,
Dec 25, 2003, 12:13:22 PM12/25/03
to
Cool page. Keep up the good work.

Justin Priola

Harry Sachz

unread,
Dec 25, 2003, 4:36:48 PM12/25/03
to
TV's arga...@my-deja.com wrote:
> I was last in Roswell in September 2002, and don't recall "BYPASS"
> signing from that visit. Was the word used on the large guide signs
> or on route marker tabs? I also have pictures from the Roswell Relief
> Route taken in winter 2001-02, but am not sure what they show since
> I'm thousands of miles away from the computer which has them.

then he wrote:

> Are you planning to develop a pictures component to your site? There
> are a number of unique features of New Mexican signing, many of which
> have been borrowed from standard practice south of the border:
> black-on-white special-message "NOTICE" signs, route designations on
> mileposts, direction signs attached to traffic signals, etc.

When you get back to your computer, you should post your snaps. I, for one,
would be interested in seeing them.

--
Don't waste your touch, you won't feel anything
Or were you sent to save me?
I've thought too much
You won't find anything worthy of redeeming

AFI - The Leaving Song Pt. II


Steve Riner

unread,
Dec 25, 2003, 9:44:34 PM12/25/03
to
>Do you happen to remember the approximate milepost number? I'm
>leaving for a trip to New Mexico on December 29, and could check this
>out if it is on the way.

That is exit 63, according to my Benchmark Maps atlas. (Not from my personal
recollection).

>> We drove around Roswell last year, and the relief route is marked
>> "BYPASS U.S. 285/70." The Alamogordo relief route seems to be marked U.S.
>> 54-70 as well as the route through town.
>
>I was last in Roswell in September 2002, and don't recall "BYPASS"
>signing from that visit. Was the word used on the large guide signs
>or on route marker tabs? I also have pictures from the Roswell Relief
>Route taken in winter 2001-02, but am not sure what they show since
>I'm thousands of miles away from the computer which has them.
>
>I suspect I'm going through Roswell again this year since I want to
>check out U.S. 82, which last spring (at the same time the U.S. 666
>debate was raging in M.T.R.) became N.M.S.H.T.D.'s very first Safety
>Corridor.

By way of clarification, I believe it was marked "Truck Bypass" for 285 and 70.

>> Excellent comments and information. I'll be using this in future updates.
>
>Thank you. Another resource which might be of use is the M.T.R.
>archives on 'Google Groups'--among other things, I think the number
>which was originally proposed for the road to Sunspot (instead of
>which N.M. 6563 was chosen) has been posted.
>
>Are you planning to develop a pictures component to your site? There
>are a number of unique features of New Mexican signing, many of which
>have been borrowed from standard practice south of the border:
>black-on-white special-message "NOTICE" signs, route designations on
>mileposts, direction signs attached to traffic signals, etc.
>

At a minimum, as I take pictures or someone sends them to me I will put them
under the route listing. I don't know yet if I'll develop a separate NM
pictures page like I have for Minnesota.

Ed Wilson

unread,
Dec 25, 2003, 10:30:23 PM12/25/03
to
>arga...@my-deja.com wrote:

>N.M. 9: What "remainder" of N.M. 9 was paved in the 1970's, if the
>road west of Columbus had been paved by the 1960's and the portion
>east of Columbus was paved in late 1999/early 2000? (B.T.W., I'm
>still not convinced N.M. 9 has in fact been extended to N.M. 273.
>When I was last near the Santa Teresa P.O.E. in the summer of 2002, I
>did not see a route marker for N.M. 9 and the guide signs indicated
>just a turn TO Columbus and N.M. 9.)

I can assure you that NM 9 is signed East of Columbus. I was there in October,
and since the official state map is ambiguous on NM 9 east of Columbus, I went
a few miles east of town to see if the state route ended. As I recall, the road
was fully paved, looking recently so, and did not appear to change status on
the section I observed. Of course I would have to take the entire length to
verify if it does indeed go thru. But there you are, for what it's worth.
Ed Wilson

Steve Riner

unread,
Dec 27, 2003, 1:43:21 PM12/27/03
to
>(B.T.W., I'm
>>still not convinced N.M. 9 has in fact been extended to N.M. 273.
>>When I was last near the Santa Teresa P.O.E. in the summer of 2002, I
>>did not see a route marker for N.M. 9 and the guide signs indicated
>>just a turn TO Columbus and N.M. 9.)
>
>I can assure you that NM 9 is signed East of Columbus. I was there in
>October,
>and since the official state map is ambiguous on NM 9 east of Columbus, I
>went
>a few miles east of town to see if the state route ended. As I recall, the
>road
>was fully paved, looking recently so, and did not appear to change status on
>the section I observed. Of course I would have to take the entire length to
>verify if it does indeed go thru. But there you are, for what it's worth.

My 1999 Benchmark Maps atlas showed the extension of NM-9 east of Columbus as
having a county route designation, and my first draft of that page reflected
that. However, I did some research using on-line maps (yes, I know these are
subject to error but they're probably the only way to find some of NM's short
connecting routes), and both Yahoo and Mapquest showed NM-9 in place near El
Paso. I updated that page to reflect this, and unless I hear or see evidence to
the contrary I'll maintain it.

Thanks for the field reports, gentlemen.

Mark Roberts

unread,
Dec 31, 2003, 12:26:43 AM12/31/03
to
Congratulations -- this is long overdue! I'm glad you're doing it.

Steve Riner <mnhig...@aol.comnospam> had written:


| >Do you happen to remember the approximate milepost number? I'm
| >leaving for a trip to New Mexico on December 29, and could check this
| >out if it is on the way.
|
| That is exit 63, according to my Benchmark Maps atlas. (Not from my personal
| recollection).

By the way, a somewhat less beautiful but possibly more useful
source is "The Roads of New Mexico" (1990, Shearer Publishing). The
maps appear to be NMDOT maps, or at least largely derived from them.
There may be some recent changes, of course. (And relatively few
maps show the Santa Fe relief route, NM 599.)

As one example, it's the only map I've seen that shows the Taos
relief route, NM 585. The Benchmark atlas shows it, but not the
route number.

The "relief route" nomenclature seems to be uniquely New Mexican.
It's been around since at least the 1960s. I remember Lomas
Boulevard in Albuquerque being designated as "Relief US 66" (while
maps showed it as NM 352, a designation that was never on signs),
and that was in 1964.

It's slightly surprising to me that the US 54 bypass to the east of
Tucumcari wasn't designated a relief route but, instead, at least in
1999, was signed as "By-Pass" US 54.

--
"Right here in Minnesota!"
"Bullwinkle, that's Florida!"
"Well, if they're gonna keep adding states all the time, they
can't expect me to keep up!" -- Rocky & Bullwinkle, episode 5, 1960

Harry Sachz

unread,
Dec 31, 2003, 2:27:00 AM12/31/03
to
TV's Mark Roberts wrote:
> Congratulations -- this is long overdue! I'm glad you're doing it.
>
> Steve Riner <mnhig...@aol.comnospam> had written:
>>> Do you happen to remember the approximate milepost number? I'm
>>> leaving for a trip to New Mexico on December 29, and could check
>>> this
>>> out if it is on the way.
>>
>> That is exit 63, according to my Benchmark Maps atlas. (Not from my
>> personal recollection).
>
> By the way, a somewhat less beautiful but possibly more useful
> source is "The Roads of New Mexico" (1990, Shearer Publishing). The
> maps appear to be NMDOT maps, or at least largely derived from them.
> There may be some recent changes, of course. (And relatively few
> maps show the Santa Fe relief route, NM 599.)

I have both "The Roads of Arkansas" and "The Roads of Oklahoma" by the same
company. Both are far superior to the DeLorme maps.


> As one example, it's the only map I've seen that shows the Taos
> relief route, NM 585. The Benchmark atlas shows it, but not the
> route number.
>
> The "relief route" nomenclature seems to be uniquely New Mexican.
> It's been around since at least the 1960s. I remember Lomas
> Boulevard in Albuquerque being designated as "Relief US 66" (while
> maps showed it as NM 352, a designation that was never on signs),
> and that was in 1964.
>
> It's slightly surprising to me that the US 54 bypass to the east of
> Tucumcari wasn't designated a relief route but, instead, at least in
> 1999, was signed as "By-Pass" US 54.

--

Mark Roberts

unread,
Dec 31, 2003, 1:44:12 PM12/31/03
to
Harry Sachz <watuzi...@yahoo.com> had written:


| I have both "The Roads of Arkansas" and "The Roads of Oklahoma" by the same
| company. Both are far superior to the DeLorme maps.

However, by comparison to the Benchmark atlas of New Mexico, just
about anything else falls short as far as design and attractiveness
are concerned. The Benchmark atlas does an especially nice job of
showing terrain.

The Roads of New Mexico maps can be hard to read and there is some
outdated information on them (though it was slightly interesting to
see where the tower for KOAT-TV *used* to be).

I have Goushá maps of NM dating back to the 1950s (my mom was a
teacher in Albuquerque in the early 50s) and it seems to have
always been a state that has not been well mapped. The official
maps of the 1960s have lovely calligraphy but they weren't exactly
what I would have called practical.

Harry Sachz

unread,
Dec 31, 2003, 2:07:35 PM12/31/03
to
TV's Mark Roberts wrote:
> Harry Sachz <watuzi...@yahoo.com> had written:
>
>> I have both "The Roads of Arkansas" and "The Roads of Oklahoma" by
>> the same company. Both are far superior to the DeLorme maps.
>
> However, by comparison to the Benchmark atlas of New Mexico, just
> about anything else falls short as far as design and attractiveness
> are concerned. The Benchmark atlas does an especially nice job of
> showing terrain.

Are there Benchmark atlases for other states?

The Roads of Oklahoma has decent cartography, and the Roads of Arkansas uses
AHTD county maps. I've never seen a Roads of Missouri, but the Missouri
Conservation Atlas (MoDOT maps) is excellent.

> The Roads of New Mexico maps can be hard to read and there is some
> outdated information on them (though it was slightly interesting to
> see where the tower for KOAT-TV *used* to be).

Outdated information can sometimes be more revealing than current
information.

> I have Goushá maps of NM dating back to the 1950s (my mom was a
> teacher in Albuquerque in the early 50s) and it seems to have
> always been a state that has not been well mapped. The official
> maps of the 1960s have lovely calligraphy but they weren't exactly
> what I would have called practical.

My mother's side of the family lived in Bosque Farms back in the 60's.

Chris Bessert

unread,
Dec 31, 2003, 4:51:54 PM12/31/03
to
Jeremy Lance wrote:
>
> Are there Benchmark atlases for other states?

Yes, Benchmark current has seven titles in its state road atlas
series: Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah and
Washington. See them at:

http://www.benchmarkmaps.com/home.html

I have the Arizona, Oregon and Washington atlases myself and have
found them more than useful in my trips to those states. On their
website, they claim there are "more titles in production," but I
don't know which state may be next -- although, by looking at the
territory they cover, I'd assume they'd target the likes of Colorado,
Idaho or Wyoming next.

You can get 15% off five of Benchmark's atlases at:

http://www.maps.com/store/benchmark/

> The Roads of Oklahoma has decent cartography, and the Roads of
> Arkansas uses AHTD county maps. I've never seen a Roads of Missouri,
> but the Missouri Conservation Atlas (MoDOT maps) is excellent.

Shearer Publishing has seven state road atlases, although some of
them haven't been updated in several years. The newer ones have been
moving away from using state DOT county maps and use digital mapping
from a GIS. You can see all Shearer Publishing titles here:

http://www.shearerpub.com/travel.htm

Later,
Chris

--
Chris Bessert
Bess...@aol.com
http://www.michiganhighways.org
http://www.wisconsinhighways.org
http://www.ontariohighways.org

Justin Priola

unread,
Dec 31, 2003, 5:55:37 PM12/31/03
to
Concerning the length of time that N.M. has used the present shield as
a state route marker: They date at least as early as 1968, based on
what I saw in a film from that year that I happened to catch on TV
today. Though the scene in the film was fleeting, I'm pretty sure I
saw a present-specs JCT N.M. 4 shield assembly.

Hope this helps!

Justin Priola

Mark Roberts

unread,
Dec 31, 2003, 7:22:53 PM12/31/03
to
Harry Sachz <watuzi...@yahoo.com> had written:
| TV's Mark Roberts wrote:
| > Harry Sachz <watuzi...@yahoo.com> had written:
| >
| >> I have both "The Roads of Arkansas" and "The Roads of Oklahoma" by
| >> the same company. Both are far superior to the DeLorme maps.
| >
| > However, by comparison to the Benchmark atlas of New Mexico, just
| > about anything else falls short as far as design and attractiveness
| > are concerned. The Benchmark atlas does an especially nice job of
| > showing terrain.
|
| Are there Benchmark atlases for other states?

Washington, Oregon, California, Arizona.


|
| The Roads of Oklahoma has decent cartography, and the Roads of Arkansas uses
| AHTD county maps. I've never seen a Roads of Missouri, but the Missouri
| Conservation Atlas (MoDOT maps) is excellent.

However, some of the county maps are substantially out-of-date.
For example, there is no Spur US 65 to Tina in Carroll County.

Mark Roberts

unread,
Dec 31, 2003, 7:25:32 PM12/31/03
to
Justin Priola <jpr...@msn.com> had written:

I can give you a real live personally witnessed data point: 1964.
(Yes, I was noticing those kinds of things at the age of seven --
which drives the parents nuts when you ask "why does it say 352 on
the map and Relief 66 on the street?")

Harry Sachz

unread,
Jan 2, 2004, 12:22:23 AM1/2/04
to
TV's Mark Roberts wrote:
> Harry Sachz <watuzi...@yahoo.com> had written:
>> TV's Mark Roberts wrote:
>>> Harry Sachz <watuzi...@yahoo.com> had written:
>>>
>>>> I have both "The Roads of Arkansas" and "The Roads of Oklahoma" by
>>>> the same company. Both are far superior to the DeLorme maps.
>>>
>>> However, by comparison to the Benchmark atlas of New Mexico, just
>>> about anything else falls short as far as design and attractiveness
>>> are concerned. The Benchmark atlas does an especially nice job of
>>> showing terrain.
>>
>> Are there Benchmark atlases for other states?
>
> Washington, Oregon, California, Arizona.
>>
>> The Roads of Oklahoma has decent cartography, and the Roads of
>> Arkansas uses AHTD county maps. I've never seen a Roads of
>> Missouri, but the Missouri Conservation Atlas (MoDOT maps) is
>> excellent.
>
> However, some of the county maps are substantially out-of-date.
> For example, there is no Spur US 65 to Tina in Carroll County.

That's part of the fun. You can see how things have changed since it was
published.

road warrior

unread,
Jan 2, 2004, 12:39:47 PM1/2/04
to
> > However, some of the county maps are substantially out-of-date.
> > For example, there is no Spur US 65 to Tina in Carroll County.
>
> That's part of the fun. You can see how things have changed since it was
> published.

I love decommissioned routes. It's always fascinating to see what
artifacts you can find on them like a LWS, old route markers or
heavily deteriorated signage. GA has a whole bunch of 'em and I have
studied them and documented them because so many of them have
interesting things left behind. Even the roads canned in the 1960's
sometimes have something really cool like strips of aluminum sheeting
on concrete posts for guardrails (standard in the 1950's in GA). In
many ways, I think it's sleazy the way the counties keep them up, but
then again I will kind of miss it when the day comes that either all
the artifacts disappear (has happened on several) or they start
keeping up the roads better.

The other day, I went looking for one of the very last LWS to exist in
GA. I noticed it was missing and started looking for it. It was
lying on the ground with the wood post rotted out in remarkably good
condition for a sign that has long lost its reflectivity. I propped
it up against a tree to take a picture. Next thing I'm going to do is
see if the county will repost it or give it to me. I hate to see it
go, because there are several that were in the area that are all gone
now.

Harry Sachz

unread,
Jan 2, 2004, 2:09:18 PM1/2/04
to
TV's road warrior wrote:
>>> However, some of the county maps are substantially out-of-date.
>>> For example, there is no Spur US 65 to Tina in Carroll County.
>>
>> That's part of the fun. You can see how things have changed since
>> it was published.
>
> I love decommissioned routes. It's always fascinating to see what
> artifacts you can find on them like a LWS, old route markers or
> heavily deteriorated signage. GA has a whole bunch of 'em and I have
> studied them and documented them because so many of them have
> interesting things left behind. Even the roads canned in the 1960's
> sometimes have something really cool like strips of aluminum sheeting
> on concrete posts for guardrails (standard in the 1950's in GA). In
> many ways, I think it's sleazy the way the counties keep them up, but
> then again I will kind of miss it when the day comes that either all
> the artifacts disappear (has happened on several) or they start
> keeping up the roads better.

Older routings of highways are like a time capsule, especially if the
pavement and signage are mostly left alone. In my neck o' the woods, most
of the old routings of US 71 were decommissioned in the 1930's and today
these roads look like any other dirt road in the area. I actually prefer
roads that were turned back in the 50's-70's.

> The other day, I went looking for one of the very last LWS to exist in
> GA. I noticed it was missing and started looking for it. It was
> lying on the ground with the wood post rotted out in remarkably good
> condition for a sign that has long lost its reflectivity. I propped
> it up against a tree to take a picture. Next thing I'm going to do is
> see if the county will repost it or give it to me. I hate to see it
> go, because there are several that were in the area that are all gone
> now.

It's easier to beg forgiveness than to ask permission....

road warrior

unread,
Jan 2, 2004, 8:11:53 PM1/2/04
to
> > The other day, I went looking for one of the very last LWS to exist in
> > GA. I noticed it was missing and started looking for it. It was
> > lying on the ground with the wood post rotted out in remarkably good
> > condition for a sign that has long lost its reflectivity. I propped
> > it up against a tree to take a picture. Next thing I'm going to do is
> > see if the county will repost it or give it to me. I hate to see it
> > go, because there are several that were in the area that are all gone
> > now.
>
> It's easier to beg forgiveness than to ask permission....

Well, here's the problem:
(1) There's a house adjacent to the sign
(2) The intersection is kind of busy (Old GA 318 and GA 9). Dawson
County is fast growing.
(3) I will have to remove the sign from the post, which may not be a
good idea in a county where a cop followed me 10 miles for no reason
other than slightly hesitating at a confusing intersection.
(4) Locals in N GA tend to get a thrill out of trying to send you to
the pokey: it almost happened to me once until he found out I was
related. Compare with their lust to use their cars to enforce the
speed limit.

Of course, I could still take the chance, but a 48" x 36" sign would
tend to be pretty obvious. However, I absolutely do not have the
means right now to fight/pay a huge fine for messing with something
they were going to throw away anyway. Any advice besides going out at
night?

0 new messages