AZ: AZ 79 and AZ 186 Dangling Ends

[Markkos1992]

Well another dangling end that ruins what would have otherwise been a clinch...

The state highway map and GSV show AZ 79 actually ending north of US 60 at the next intersection to the north.

EDIT:  It looks like we have a similar issue with AZ 186 ending at Virginia St instead of I-10 (Exit 340)/US 191.  Of course, the BGS on I-10 does not indicate such. 

[rlee]

The last block of AZ 79 goes to Old US 60 as it was before ADOT bypassed the three way junction to build the interchange. When I first traveled to Arizona nearly 20 years ago, US 60 was 2 lanes and went through that junction. The GSV signs show the End AZ 79 at Old 60, but every other sign indicates AZ 79 ends at the newer US 60 interchange.

In reality, ADOT may still maintain AZ 79 up to Old 60 but leaves it unsigned (except for the End sign) to avoid motorist confusion.

My opinion: keep it as is ending at the US 60 interchange. The first sign south of Old 60 says "Junction US 60 / AZ 79 500 Feet".

Well another dangling end that ruins what would have otherwise been a clinch...

The state highway map and GSV show AZ 79 actually ending north of US 60 at the next intersection to the north.

[rickmastfan67]

The last block of AZ 79 goes to Old US 60 as it was before ADOT bypassed the three way junction to build the interchange. When I first traveled to Arizona nearly 20 years ago, US 60 was 2 lanes and went through that junction. The GSV signs show the End AZ 79 at Old 60, but every other sign indicates AZ 79 ends at the newer US 60 interchange.

In reality, ADOT may still maintain AZ 79 up to Old 60 but leaves it unsigned (except for the End sign) to avoid motorist confusion.

It seems ADOT went out of their way to add the 'END' shield @ Old 60.  Looking at historical streetview, it's not there in May '11, but shows up in March '20.  Also, while looking @ May '15 imagery at the US-60 interchange, can't get a clear view to the stop sign there, so, can't narrow the window of the install of the END shield any farther.

However, due to a Historical US-80 shield showing up at the US-60 interchange in the March '20 imagery, I can guess that the END shield for AZ-79 might have been installed at the same time, which could be used to narrow the window to between May '15 & March '20 for it.

Based on this info, I would say yes, extend AZ-79 to Old 60 based on signage and the ADOT map in agreement.

[Duke87]

So, it's helpful to look at this in the context of: it's common in certain western states (UT and NV do this too, not just AZ), when a route ends at an interchange, for state maintenance to continue a few hundred feet past the interchange so as to include any turning lanes, signal detection hardware, etc. And this holds whether or not there is another intersection after those few hundred feet.

The general policy I've been following with UT, and will thus apply to AZ to for consistency, is to not map any of these dangling ends unless there is clear and non-conflicting signage indicating the route extends past the interchange.

In the case of AZ 79, the presence of these TO signs (there's one on each approach) conflicts with the END sign, and there is nothing at the US 60 interchange itself indicating AZ 79 going both ways.

In the case of AZ 186, this JUNCTION sign conflicts with the END sign, and as was previously indicated, signage from I-10 does not indicate AZ 186 going both directions.

Ergo, this looks like a no build on both to me.

[Markkos1992]

Well on this one, I have to selfishly admit that I would prefer no-build just because I want to have AZ 79 clinched.     I am fine with your approach since you are being consistent with other western states.

I get annoyed at myself for not catching these dangling ends in advance resulting in routes almost being clinched but not quite clinched.