Exit numbering
Damascules
Why do some states number their exits consecutively, while other states
number them based on mile markers? Growing up in New York, where exits are
numbered consecutively, I was traveling and knew I need to get off at exit
4 in Ohio off of I-90. I was shocked when I crossed into Ohio for the
first time and saw it started with Exit 241. I had never seen (at that
time) an exit with such a high number, and it took me a little while to get
used to it. Which method is more standard throughout the U.S.?
J.P.
============================================================================
===
J.P. and Earl - jpn...@dreamscape.com
"Life is such a sweet insanity, the more you learn, the less you know"
J Vincent
Damascules wrote:
>
> Why do some states number their exits consecutively, while other states
> number them based on mile markers? Growing up in New York, where exits are
> numbered consecutively, I was traveling and knew I need to get off at exit
> 4 in Ohio off of I-90. I was shocked when I crossed into Ohio for the
> first time and saw it started with Exit 241. I had never seen (at that
> time) an exit with such a high number, and it took me a little while to get
> used to it. Which method is more standard throughout the U.S.?
New York is in the minority here. The only states that number exits
sequentially on *all* their Interstates are the New England states, New
York, Pennsylvania and Georgia. I'm pretty sure Delaware does, too, but
who cares about Delaware. A couple states (Virginia and Maryland I know
of; maybe there are others) used to use consecutive numbering, but
switched over a few years ago. For the most part, California does not
use exit numbers at all.
After I-90 hooked up with the Ohio Turnpike I hope you noticed the Ohio
Pike used consecutive numbering, unlike the rest of that state's
Interstates. Such is also the case in New Jersey -- the only the NJTP in
NJ has consecutively numbered exits.
--
HEY!!! Spamfilter in use...Reply to: jvincent (at) mcs (dot) net
J Vincent (aka M.V.S.), Chicago, IL 60657
"Computers--The World's Greatest Toy!" - Cover of BYTE, 1975
Jim Ellwanger
In article <332B32...@mcs.net>, jvincent--at--mcs--dot--net wrote:
> ...The only states that number exits
>sequentially on *all* their Interstates are the New England states, New
>York, Pennsylvania and Georgia. I'm pretty sure Delaware does, too, but
>who cares about Delaware. A couple states (Virginia and Maryland I know
>of; maybe there are others) used to use consecutive numbering, but
>switched over a few years ago. For the most part, California does not
>use exit numbers at all.
I think Florida also numbers exits sequentially on all its Interstates.
The only Florida limited-access highway that I'm aware of that has its
exits numbered by milepost is Florida's Turnpike, which switched a few
years ago. (Its old exit numbers went up by 4's in the south and by 5's in
the north.)
--
Jim Ellwanger <trai...@mindspring.com>
<http://www.mindspring.com/~trainman1/>
"You win!" "What do I win?" "You Winn-Dixie!"
Michael Kotler
On Sat, 15 Mar 1997 17:35:00 -0600, J Vincent <NOSPAMj...@mcs.net>
wrote:
>Damascules wrote:
>> Why do some states number their exits consecutively, while other states
>> number them based on mile markers?
>A couple states (Virginia and Maryland I know
>of; maybe there are others) used to use consecutive numbering, but
>switched over a few years ago.
When Virginia renumbered its Interstates to mileages several years
ago, many of the exit signs (the gore signs, I think) had small
supplemental signs on them that read "Formerly Exit X"
Even so, I believe the Dulles Toll Road still uses sequential exit
numbering, with 1 starting at the airport. Don't know about the new
"Greenway" to Leesburg, tho.
Michael Kotler
(please clear "SpamFree" line if replying)
Michael R Natale
Excerpts from netnews.misc.transport.road: 15-Mar-97 Re: Exit numbering
by J Vin...@mcs.net
> sequentially on *all* their Interstates are the New England states, New
> York, Pennsylvania and Georgia. I'm pretty sure Delaware does, too, but
> who cares about Delaware.
Most highways in Delaware are consecutive, except for the new Route 1
Expressway. A year or so ago I got on Rt. 1 at the northern end, and
the first exit south was Exit 100, which corresponded to the mile
marker. About 6 months ago, I got on the highway again at the same
place and Exit 100 had become Exit 160. I looked for the next mile
marker, and it said "Km 159". They resigned the whole road in metric.
The speed limit is still 65 mph, and the signs in advance of an exit
still say "1 mile", but mileposts and exit numbers are all metric.
Eric Scouten
In article <332B32...@mcs.net>, jvincent--at--mcs--dot--net wrote:
> New York is in the minority here. The only states that number exits
> sequentially on *all* their Interstates are the New England states, New
> York, Pennsylvania and Georgia. I'm pretty sure Delaware does, too, but
> who cares about Delaware.
Sequential numbering used to be much more widespread. Many midwestern
states used it until the 1970s, when mile marker numbering became the
standard. Iowa and North Dakota come to mind. ND only completed its
transition a few years ago. There was a rather amusing spot on I-94 in
Fargo where they built a new exit, and assigned it Exit #351, but hadn't
converted the other exits yet. Going eastbound thru Fargo, you passed
exits 74, 75, 351, 76. (I'm making up the numbers because I can't remember
them, but you get the idea.)
As for Delaware, I don't recall what system is used on I-95, but the new
Delaware Turnpike (SR 1) is numbered by km, not miles. The part around
Dover is already built. FWIW, I-19 in Arizona is also numbered by km.
(Anyone know of any other US freeways with metric exit numbers?)
-es
__________________________________________________________________________
Eric Scouten er...@scouten.com
Metrowerks, Inc. (until 03/21/97) http://www.scouten.com
Adobe Systems, Inc. (starting 04/07/97)
PGP public key at <http://www.scouten.com/contact.html>
__________________________________________________________________________
In later systems, such as the Macintosh and Windows, people did
strange things with icons, such as using them to represent an
application program.
-David Liddle, head of Xerox Star development team
bre...@ibm.net
In <01bc3197$a7858760$30b9...@jpnearl.dreamscape.com>, "Damascules" <jpn...@dreamscape.com> writes:
>Why do some states number their exits consecutively, while other states
>numbered consecutively, I was traveling and knew I need to get off at exit
>4 in Ohio off of I-90. I was shocked when I crossed into Ohio for the
>first time and saw it started with Exit 241. I had never seen (at that
>time) an exit with such a high number, and it took me a little while to get
>used to it. Which method is more standard throughout the U.S.?
>
the northeast, as well as the states of Georgia and Florida, but that's it and even
the Fla. Turnpike uses mileage-based numbering.
Damascules
Eric Scouten <er...@scouten.com> wrote in article
<eric-16039...@cosmic-hippo.metrowerks.com>...
> (Anyone know of any other US freeways with metric exit numbers?)
In New York, there aren't any metric exit numbers, but there are two signs
on the NY Thruway, westbound only, for exits 35 and 36 that indicate their
distance in km only, no miles (including the "Next exit xx km" sign).
J.P.
C.C. Slater
In article <eric-16039...@cosmic-hippo.metrowerks.com>, er...@scouten.com (Eric Scouten) writes:
>In article <332B32...@mcs.net>, jvincent--at--mcs--dot--net wrote:
>
>> New York is in the minority here. The only states that number exits
>> sequentially on *all* their Interstates are the New England states, New
>> York, Pennsylvania and Georgia. I'm pretty sure Delaware does, too, but
>> who cares about Delaware.
>
>Sequential numbering used to be much more widespread. Many midwestern
>states used it until the 1970s, when mile marker numbering became the
>standard. Iowa and North Dakota come to mind. ND only completed its
>transition a few years ago. There was a rather amusing spot on I-94 in
>Fargo where they built a new exit, and assigned it Exit #351, but hadn't
>converted the other exits yet. Going eastbound thru Fargo, you passed
>exits 74, 75, 351, 76. (I'm making up the numbers because I can't remember
>them, but you get the idea.)
>
>As for Delaware, I don't recall what system is used on I-95, but the new
>Delaware Turnpike (SR 1) is numbered by km, not miles. The part around
>Dover is already built. FWIW, I-19 in Arizona is also numbered by km.
>
>
>
>__________________________________________________________________________
>Eric Scouten er...@scouten.com
>Metrowerks, Inc. (until 03/21/97) http://www.scouten.com
>Adobe Systems, Inc. (starting 04/07/97)
>
> PGP public key at <http://www.scouten.com/contact.html>
>__________________________________________________________________________
>
>In later systems, such as the Macintosh and Windows, people did
>strange things with icons, such as using them to represent an
>application program.
> -David Liddle, head of Xerox Star development team
see "Exit Milepost" designations on some of the older signs on I-25 south
of Denver
Bob Goudreau
J Vincent (NOSPAMj...@mcs.net) wrote:
: New York is in the minority here. The only states that number exits
: sequentially on *all* their Interstates are the New England states, New
: York, Pennsylvania and Georgia. I'm pretty sure Delaware does, too, but
: who cares about Delaware.
You forgot about Florida.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation
goud...@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive
+1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA
C.C. Slater
In article <trainman1-ya024080...@news.mindspring.com>, trai...@mindspring.com (Jim Ellwanger) writes:
>In article <332B32...@mcs.net>, jvincent--at--mcs--dot--net wrote:
>
>>sequentially on *all* their Interstates are the New England states, New
>>York, Pennsylvania and Georgia. I'm pretty sure Delaware does, too, but
>>of; maybe there are others) used to use consecutive numbering, but
>>use exit numbers at all.
>
>I think Florida also numbers exits sequentially on all its Interstates.
>
>The only Florida limited-access highway that I'm aware of that has its
>exits numbered by milepost is Florida's Turnpike, which switched a few
>years ago. (Its old exit numbers went up by 4's in the south and by 5's in
>the north.)
>
>--
>Jim Ellwanger <trai...@mindspring.com>
><http://www.mindspring.com/~trainman1/>
>"You win!" "What do I win?" "You Winn-Dixie!"
Beltway is still consecutively numbered.
-c/s-
C.C. Slater
In article <In=4p0y00i...@andrew.cmu.edu>, Michael R Natale <mn...@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>Excerpts from netnews.misc.transport.road: 15-Mar-97 Re: Exit numbering
>by J Vin...@mcs.net
>> sequentially on *all* their Interstates are the New England states, New
>> York, Pennsylvania and Georgia. I'm pretty sure Delaware does, too, but
>> who cares about Delaware.
>
>Expressway. A year or so ago I got on Rt. 1 at the northern end, and
>the first exit south was Exit 100, which corresponded to the mile
>marker. About 6 months ago, I got on the highway again at the same
>place and Exit 100 had become Exit 160. I looked for the next mile
>marker, and it said "Km 159". They resigned the whole road in metric.
>The speed limit is still 65 mph, and the signs in advance of an exit
>still say "1 mile", but mileposts and exit numbers are all metric.
-c/s-
David Steinberg
On 17 Mar 1997, Damascules wrote:
>
>
> Eric Scouten <er...@scouten.com> wrote in article
> <eric-16039...@cosmic-hippo.metrowerks.com>...
> > (Anyone know of any other US freeways with metric exit numbers?)
>
> In New York, there aren't any metric exit numbers, but there are two signs
> on the NY Thruway, westbound only, for exits 35 and 36 that indicate their
> distance in km only, no miles (including the "Next exit xx km" sign).
Seeing how far those signs are from Canada, I've always wondered why they
did that...
-David "ZZYZX" Steinberg http://www.ihoz.com TIME FOR TIMER
**************************************************************************
*"What program are you using to *"I can't believe I'm a junior and a *
* dial?" "I don't know." "Well * film major, when all I really *
* what are you clicking on?" * wanted in this life was to marry a *
* "My mouse." -tech support hell. * lobsterman and cook fish." *
*"very strange raving egomaniac" * -a letter from Christie Searing *
**************************************************************************
Jim Ellwanger
>All Florida turnpikes are numbered on the milepost system; and the Baltimore
>Beltway is still consecutively numbered.
"All Florida turnpikes"? There's only one (well, one turnpike and one
Homestead Extension).
If you meant toll roads, the Selmon Crosstown Expressway in Tampa is
consecutively numbered, for one.
--
Jim Ellwanger <trai...@mindspring.com>
<http://www.mindspring.com/~trainman1/>
"Big risk, big reward...in the Twilight Zone."
J.P. and earl
Here's some odd exit numbering. In New York, I-87 has three "Exit 1"'s.
I-87 is a "state route" from I-95 to the New York City line, with
consecutive exit numbering beginning at 1. Unfortunately, I don't know how
high it goes, but I think its around Exit 15.. Then, it becomes the New
York State Thruway, and the exit numbering starts at Exit 1 again. Then,
the New York State Thruway leaves I-87 and goes to I-90 in Albany... I-87
is then once again maintained by NYSDOT and the exit numbers begin at Exit
1 once again.
J.P.
John R. Grout
d2fr...@fre.fsu.umd.edu (C.C. Slater) writes:
> The only comparable situation in that connection is the exit numbering
> scheme in the Netherlands(which is also consecutive), where a sequence
> of numbers continues uninterrupted on BOTH freeways after a split. It's
> all quite confusing.
I believe the Pennsylvania DOT does this also for I-84 and I-380... they begin
together at their junction with I-81, and have the same mile numbers and exit
numbers while they're together. They maintain them (separately) after they
split (I-380 goes southeast toward I-80, I-84 goes east toward NY).
--
John R. Grout j-g...@uiuc.edu
Department of Computer Science University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
C.C. Slater
scheme in the Netherlands(which is also consecutive), where a sequence
of numbers continues uninterrupted on BOTH freeways after a split. It's
all quite confusing.
grandma
j-g...@ehsn5.cen.uiuc.edu (John R. Grout) wrote:
>d2fr...@fre.fsu.umd.edu (C.C. Slater) writes:
>> The only comparable situation in that connection is the exit numbering
>> scheme in the Netherlands(which is also consecutive), where a sequence
>> of numbers continues uninterrupted on BOTH freeways after a split. It's
>> all quite confusing.
>I believe the Pennsylvania DOT does this also for I-84 and I-380... they begin
>together at their junction with I-81, and have the same mile numbers and exit
>numbers while they're together. They maintain them (separately) after they
>split (I-380 goes southeast toward I-80, I-84 goes east toward NY).
I think they do the same thing with I-95 and I-495 (the DC beltway).
IMO it does not make sense to number by miles on an urban beltway
where exits may be less than a mile apart. Consecutive numbering
makes the most sense especially since the road is heavily used by
those who are not used to anything else but consecutive numbering.
OTOH, numbering by mileage conveys some information to the driver on
intra city interstates. (Did I say that right? - I mean limited
access roads between cities.)
Rosalie
rober...@usa.net
> Why do some states number their exits consecutively, while other states
> number them based on mile markers?
US-75 (Central Expressway) through Dallas was one of the first
controlled-access routes ever built in the US, and they did a lot of
experimenting. Many of the experiments turned out to be bad ideas (like
the 6-inch "mountable curb" between the roadway and the right shoulder,
or the black lines on concrete for lane dividers). But I believe Central
Expressway may have been the first roadway with exit numbering when it
was designed and bulit in the '50s (correct me if I'm wrong!).
Exits were numbered sequentially north from downtown, and the numbering
eventually extended to Sherman/Denison (nearly to the Oklahoma border) by
the '70s. Exit numbers were indicated by a round green sign mounted
below the sign indicating the name of the road... modern exit signs
("gore signs"?) were another concept that didn't exist until after
Central had already been built.
Interestingly, the entrance ramps were also numbered... if I recall, with
a round black sign mounted below the "<-- US-75" sign on the frontage rd.
I think that some of these round signs were still in use up until they
began reconstructing the entire freeway in the '80s. With all the
construction, I can't tell what numbering scheme is in use now... but if
they ever extend the I-45 designation, I'm sure they'd use mile markers
(with the origin in Galveston, TX).
Does anyone know how the exits on South Central Expressway were numbered,
if they were at all? Dallas has never given much consideration to that
section of road... or any other road in South Dallas, for that matter
(don't get me started!).
Robert Brooks
Web: rob...@geocities.com (spam trap at rober...@usa.net)
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/4535/graph.html (Wallpaper Heaven!)
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Mike Wiley
The South Central Expressway never had exit numbers. It was originally
an extension of Holmes Street and was renamed Central Expressway for
consistancy.
--
------------------------------------
Reply addresses are SPAMPROOFED!
Mike Wiley - Genesys
email work: mi...@genesyslab.com email home: mwi...@hooked.net
Bob Goudreau
: > The only comparable situation in that connection is the exit numbering
: > scheme in the Netherlands(which is also consecutive), where a sequence
: > of numbers continues uninterrupted on BOTH freeways after a split. It's
: > all quite confusing.
: I believe the Pennsylvania DOT does this also for I-84 and I-380... they begin
: together at their junction with I-81, and have the same mile numbers and exit
: numbers while they're together. They maintain them (separately) after they
: split (I-380 goes southeast toward I-80, I-84 goes east toward NY).
As I mentioned in my previous article, I can't see how this could
be confusing, as long as the two roads are clearly marked with
different route numbers once they diverge.
Now what *is* confusing is a case where two highways come together
for an interval where it is impossible to coordinate their exit or
milepost numbers. An example of this is I-85/I-40 between Greensboro
and Hillsborough, NC. Since the neither of the two roads begins or
ends in this several-dozen-mile overlap area, there's no way to
coordinate their mileposts (and hence, their exit numbers, as NC hews
to the milepost-based exit numbering standard). So one of the roads
(I-85 in this case) has to "win", while the other road's (I-40's) exit
and milepost numbers become invisible until the two routes split off
again. This means that if you're driving west on I-40, the milepost
and exit numbers suddenly drop from about 260 to somewhere in the high
100s; once past Greensboro, the numbers jump back up to around 200.
Even this isn't the worst possible scenario, as the two roads at least
agreed on the same direction of numbering increase vs. decrease. But
if a northbound interstate (increasing numbers) happened to be
multiplexed onto a *westbound* interstate (decreasing numbers), then
even the direction of increase would be inconsistent!
Bob Goudreau
C.C. Slater (d2fr...@fre.fsu.umd.edu) wrote:
: >
: The only comparable situation in that connection is the exit numbering
: scheme in the Netherlands(which is also consecutive), where a sequence
: of numbers continues uninterrupted on BOTH freeways after a split. It's
: all quite confusing.
What's so confusing about that, as long as the two roads have
different names/numbers? It would be unrealistic to give every exit
in a country its own unique exit number :-).
Bob Goudreau
'grandma' (gmbe...@mindspring.com) wrote:
: IMO it does not make sense to number by miles on an urban beltway
: where exits may be less than a mile apart.
Seems to work for I-440 around Raleigh. Within the only mile that has
multiple interchanges (mile 1), there are exits 1A, 1B, 1C and 1D.
: Consecutive numbering
: makes the most sense especially since the road is heavily used by
: those who are not used to anything else but consecutive numbering.
... Except when people are *not* used to consecutive numbering. Heck,
until a couple of years ago, people in VA and MD were "not used to
anything else but consecutive numbering" on *all* their interstates,
but they seem to have survived the switch pretty well.
: OTOH, numbering by mileage conveys some information to the driver on
: intra city interstates. (Did I say that right? - I mean limited
: access roads between cities.)
You mean "inter-city". "Inter" = "between"; "intra" = "within".
Michael R Natale
Excerpts from netnews.misc.transport.road: 20-Mar-97 Re: Exit numbering
by John R. Gr...@ehsn5.cen.
> > scheme in the Netherlands(which is also consecutive), where a sequence
> > of numbers continues uninterrupted on BOTH freeways after a split. It's
> > all quite confusing.
A similar situation exists on I-95 in Connecticut. Exit numbers go
upward eastbound until exit 76, where I-395 splits off and goes
northward. This used to be the continuous route, when it was the
Connecticut Turnpike, so the exit numbers follow from 95 to 395. So, if
you follow 95, the exit numbers go from 75-76 then a jump to 80-81 etc.
They probably left a few numbers gap to avoid confuision.
John R. Grout
goud...@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) writes:
> But if a northbound interstate (increasing numbers) happened to be
> multiplexed onto a *westbound* interstate (decreasing numbers), then
> even the direction of increase would be inconsistent!
The freeway around the western edge of Bloomington, IL is posted as I-55
North/I-74 West northbound (and I-55 South/I-74 East southbound)... I-55 exit
numbers are used, but I guess I never noticed that they went in opposite
directions from those on I-74... perhaps because the common stretch is so
short (only about 6 miles).
C.C. Slater
In article <5gt0sh$u...@camel4.mindspring.com>, gmbe...@mindspring.com ('grandma') writes:
>>> scheme in the Netherlands(which is also consecutive), where a sequence
>>> of numbers continues uninterrupted on BOTH freeways after a split. It's
>>> all quite confusing.
>
>>together at their junction with I-81, and have the same mile numbers and exit
>>numbers while they're together. They maintain them (separately) after they
>>split (I-380 goes southeast toward I-80, I-84 goes east toward NY).
>
>
>makes the most sense especially since the road is heavily used by
>those who are not used to anything else but consecutive numbering.
>
>intra city interstates. (Did I say that right? - I mean limited
>access roads between cities.)
>
>
>>--
>>John R. Grout j-g...@uiuc.edu
>>Department of Computer Science University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
>
>
back yard, oh well. Personally, I think they should've left the Capitol
Beltway's exit numbers consecutive, as it makes a lot more sense that way.
I've always liked the sign bridge just before you hit the GW Pkwy(MD) just
north of the Cabin John Bridge where exit 41 and 14 appear together.
Colin R. Leech
'grandma' (gmbe...@mindspring.com) writes:
> IMO it does not make sense to number by miles on an urban beltway
> where exits may be less than a mile apart.
Another good reason for switching to kilometres. :-)
Seriously, though, it is possible to cheat on the numbers here and there,
and then make it up later on a longer stretch. You won't find too many
consecutive exits less than a mile apart. If worst comes to worst, you
can always go to adding an A or a B to them.
> OTOH, numbering by mileage conveys some information to the driver on
> intra city interstates. (Did I say that right? - I mean limited
> access roads between cities.)
IntERcity. IntRAcity would be within a city.
--
#### |\^/| Colin R. Leech ag414 or crl...@freenet.carleton.ca
#### _|\| |/|_ Civil engineer by training, transport planner by choice.
#### > < Opinions are my own. You may consider them shareware.
#### >_./|\._< "If you can't return a favour, pass it on." - A.L. Brown
Scott D. Rhodes
>: IMO it does not make sense to number by miles on an urban beltway
>: where exits may be less than a mile apart.
>Seems to work for I-440 around Raleigh. Within the only mile that has
>multiple interchanges (mile 1), there are exits 1A, 1B, 1C and 1D.
Actually, it's slightly over a two-mile stretch. Exit 1D is between Milepost
1 and Milepost 2. Exit 1C I'm not certain about -- I think it's actually
right at Milepost 1. Exit 1B is between Milepost 0 and Milepost 1. Exit 1A,
being the exit you take to get from I-440 to I-40 as a "left turn", is
actually beyond Milepost 0.
Also (you are well aware of this, I'm sure, but the others reading should get
a kick out of it), it's even screwier than that. There are exits 1A, 1B, 1C,
1D, and 1 with no letter. Travelling south on I-440 at that point, you
encounter Exit 1D, 1C, then 1. If you take Exit 1, then *on* *the* *exit* you
will encounter Exit 1B and then 1A. If you stay on I-440/US-1, you never
encounter Exits 1B or 1A.
And of course, the next exit is Exit 406B or something like that, numbered by
US-1's mileage. :-)
>: Consecutive numbering
>: makes the most sense especially since the road is heavily used by
>: those who are not used to anything else but consecutive numbering.
>... Except when people are *not* used to consecutive numbering. Heck,
>until a couple of years ago, people in VA and MD were "not used to
>anything else but consecutive numbering" on *all* their interstates,
>but they seem to have survived the switch pretty well.
>: OTOH, numbering by mileage conveys some information to the driver on
>: intra city interstates. (Did I say that right? - I mean limited
>: access roads between cities.)
>You mean "inter-city". "Inter" = "between"; "intra" = "within".
wkies...@aol.com
In article <Pine.NXT.3.91.970318112032.26498C-100000@kisa>, David Steinberg <zz...@seanet.com> writes:
>> In New York, there aren't any metric exit numbers, but there are two signs
>> on the NY Thruway, westbound only, for exits 35 and 36 that indicate their
>> distance in km only, no miles (including the "Next exit xx km" sign).
>
>
>Seeing how far those signs are from Canada, I've always wondered why they
>did that...
I am guessing a little bit, but I believe these metric signs go back 15 years or so when New York State (and the rest of the country) seriously discussed going metric. I think the Thruway (and the Syracuse Division) wanted to take the lead in NY in the conversion. They also may have wanted to see what kind of reaction the public would have to the conversion. However, when everyone realized the cost and difficulties involved in changing the country, the idea appears to have been dropped. I am kind of surprised those signs are still maintained.
Mike McManus
wkies...@aol.com wrote:
>
> In article <Pine.NXT.3.91.970318112032.26498C-100000@kisa>, David
> Steinberg <zz...@seanet.com> writes:
>
> >> In New York, there aren't any metric exit numbers, but there are
> >> two signs on the NY Thruway, westbound only, for exits 35 and 36
> >> that indicate their distance in km only, no miles (including the
> >> "Next exit xx km" sign).
> >
> >Seeing how far those signs are from Canada, I've always wondered
> >why they did that...
[snip -- my post-quoter can't handle that extra long line! ;-(]
>I am kind of surprised those signs are still maintained.
They probably aren't. It's just cheaper to leave them up than to rip
them down and replace them.
--
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/ Mike McManus _/ home: mmcm...@frontiernet.net _/
_/ Rochester, NY _/ work: mcm...@kodak.com _/
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
wkies...@aol.com
>>Why do some states number their exits consecutively, while other states
>>number them based on mile markers? Growing up in New York, where exits
are
>>numbered consecutively, I was traveling and knew I need to get off at
exit
>>4 in Ohio off of I-90. I was shocked when I crossed into Ohio for the
>>first time and saw it started with Exit 241. I had never seen (at that
>>time) an exit with such a high number, and it took me a little while to
get
>>used to it. Which method is more standard throughout the U.S.?
My guess is that the consecutive numbering goes back to the older roads
when most were not given mileposts or markers to determine locations.
People were not as exacting as they are today and were pretty much content
on looking for route numbers. Although milepost numbering of exits would
seem to give the traveler a better sense of his location, consecutive
numbering seems easier to understand.
The problem with consecutive numbering is when new interchanges are built.
For example, exit 48A, exit 57a, and others on the New York State
Thruway. I would expect to see more roads going to milepost exits over
time.
Bill
John R. Grout
wkies...@aol.com writes:
> My guess is that the consecutive numbering goes back to the older roads
> when most were not given mileposts or markers to determine locations.
I don't buy this... during this thread, and during similar preceding threads,
considerable evidence has been presented that state DOTs have possessed this
information for many years. Even the one major exception to milepost
numbering we've discussed (California) had the information but organized it by
county.
grandma
rho...@ipass.net (Scott D. Rhodes) wrote:
>>: IMO it does not make sense to number by miles on an urban beltway
>>: where exits may be less than a mile apart.
>>Seems to work for I-440 around Raleigh. Within the only mile that has
>>multiple interchanges (mile 1), there are exits 1A, 1B, 1C and 1D.
>Actually, it's slightly over a two-mile stretch. Exit 1D is between Milepost
>1 and Milepost 2. Exit 1C I'm not certain about -- I think it's actually
>right at Milepost 1. Exit 1B is between Milepost 0 and Milepost 1. Exit 1A,
>being the exit you take to get from I-440 to I-40 as a "left turn", is
>actually beyond Milepost 0.
>Also (you are well aware of this, I'm sure, but the others reading should get
>a kick out of it), it's even screwier than that. There are exits 1A, 1B, 1C,
>1D, and 1 with no letter. Travelling south on I-440 at that point, you
>encounter Exit 1D, 1C, then 1. If you take Exit 1, then *on* *the* *exit* you
>will encounter Exit 1B and then 1A. If you stay on I-440/US-1, you never
>encounter Exits 1B or 1A.
>And of course, the next exit is Exit 406B or something like that, numbered by
>US-1's mileage. :-)
This just shows why consecutive numbering is better. Altho there is a
place on the Baltimore beltway (I-695) where exit 2 comes between 3B
and 3A I think.
Rosalie
Bob Goudreau
'grandma' (gmbe...@mindspring.com) wrote:
: rho...@ipass.net (Scott D. Rhodes) wrote:
: >>: IMO it does not make sense to number by miles on an urban beltway
: >>: where exits may be less than a mile apart.
: >>Seems to work for I-440 around Raleigh. Within the only mile that has
: >>multiple interchanges (mile 1), there are exits 1A, 1B, 1C and 1D.
: >Actually, it's slightly over a two-mile stretch. Exit 1D is between Milepost
: >1 and Milepost 2. Exit 1C I'm not certain about -- I think it's actually
: >right at Milepost 1. Exit 1B is between Milepost 0 and Milepost 1. Exit 1A,
: >being the exit you take to get from I-440 to I-40 as a "left turn", is
: >actually beyond Milepost 0.
Yes, I was always a little irked that they didn't see fit to use exit
numbers based on Mile 0, as some other states have done.
: >Also (you are well aware of this, I'm sure, but the others reading should get
: >a kick out of it), it's even screwier than that. There are exits 1A, 1B, 1C,
: >1D, and 1 with no letter. Travelling south on I-440 at that point, you
: >encounter Exit 1D, 1C, then 1. If you take Exit 1, then *on* *the* *exit* you
: >will encounter Exit 1B and then 1A. If you stay on I-440/US-1, you never
: >encounter Exits 1B or 1A.
: >And of course, the next exit is Exit 406B or something like that, numbered by
: >US-1's mileage. :-)
Actually, no, the next exit on US 1 South/US 64 West is Walnut Street
in Cary, which is unnumbered. After that comes the Cary Parkway exit,
also unnumbered. After that comes Exit 128B, which is where US 64 West
gets off US 1, and Exit 128A, which is Tryon Road eastbound. The 406A/B
exits are the US 64 approaches to the same interchange. Only the recent
rebuilding and expansion of this interchange a few years ago seems to
account for the exit numbers there; prior to that, the NC DOT never
numbered exits on non-interstate highways. They're adding exit numbers
and mileposts on such roads now only when they happen to be doing other
sign work, which is why none of the adjacent interchanges were assigned
numbers. I suspect that the current widening of US 1 southward from
the US 1/US 64 interchange will result in the appearance of more mile
posts and numbered exits.
: This just shows why consecutive numbering is better. Altho there is a
: place on the Baltimore beltway (I-695) where exit 2 comes between 3B
: and 3A I think.
But how exactly does that show that consecutive numbering is better?
The exit numbers in Raleigh are still in numerical order. The
confusion about Exits 1A and 1B, which are "sub-exits" of Exit 1,
would exist no matter which numbering method is used, simply because
you have to exit to the access road in order to take either of the
subsequent ramps to I-40. The sudden jump in exit numbers as you
travel South on US 1 would also exist under either method, because
I-440 and US 1 part ways there.
Michael Kotler
On Fri, 21 Mar 1997 09:21:25 -0600, rober...@usa.net wrote:
>
>US-75 (Central Expressway) through Dallas ...
<snip>
>Interestingly, the entrance ramps were also numbered... if I recall, with
>a round black sign mounted below the "<-- US-75" sign on the frontage rd.
They do that on the Ohio Turnpike as well, but they call them "gates"
like at the airport. For example, when nearing the turnpike entrance
in Maumee, there's a green sign that reads "Ohio Turnpike, Gate 4",
corresponding to Exit 4.
The Ohio Turnpike uses sequential exit numbers going from west to
east, with several "A"s added in the past 10 years or so (some of
which were for long-overdue direct connections to other Interstates).
All other freeways in Ohio number their exits by miles.
Michael Kotler
mek...@radix.net
(when replying, remove ".spamfree" from header)
grandma
goud...@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) wrote:
If there was consecutive numbering, you wouldn't have to use all those
letters. Just start at 1, and on the northbound side you could have
exit 1 to subexit A and subexit B, and on the southbound side you'd
have exit 1, exit 2 (1C), and exit 3 (1D). And why should the number
of the exit on the interstate reflect the mileage on US 1? Why not
just let the interstate exit numbers keep going for the more important
road (whichever that is). I may be wrong about this, but if so, you
haven't explained it very well, and/or it's even more confusing than
it needs to be. What a mess!!!
Rosalie
Colin R. Leech
Bob Goudreau (goud...@dg-rtp.dg.com) writes:
> Now what *is* confusing is a case where two highways come together
> for an interval where it is impossible to coordinate their exit or
> milepost numbers. An example of this is I-85/I-40 between Greensboro
> and Hillsborough, NC. Since the neither of the two roads begins or
> ends in this several-dozen-mile overlap area, there's no way to
> coordinate their mileposts (and hence, their exit numbers, as NC hews
> to the milepost-based exit numbering standard). So one of the roads
> (I-85 in this case) has to "win", while the other road's (I-40's) exit
> and milepost numbers become invisible until the two routes split off
> again. This means that if you're driving west on I-40, the milepost
> and exit numbers suddenly drop from about 260 to somewhere in the high
> 100s; once past Greensboro, the numbers jump back up to around 200.
>
> Even this isn't the worst possible scenario, as the two roads at least
> agreed on the same direction of numbering increase vs. decrease. But
> if a northbound interstate (increasing numbers) happened to be
> multiplexed onto a *westbound* interstate (decreasing numbers), then
> even the direction of increase would be inconsistent!
You just have to indicate that one highway is joining the other:
"we now join your regularly scheduled highway, already in progress ..." :-)
Bob Goudreau
gmbe...@mindspring.com ('grandma') wrote:
: goud...@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) wrote:
:
: >: >And of course, the next exit is Exit 406B or something like that,
: >: >numbered by US-1's mileage. :-)
:
: >Actually, no, the next exit on US 1 South/US 64 West is Walnut Street
: >in Cary, which is unnumbered. After that comes the Cary Parkway exit,
: >also unnumbered. After that comes Exit 128B, which is where US 64 West
: >gets off US 1, and Exit 128A, which is Tryon Road eastbound. The 406A/B
: >exits are the US 64 approaches to the same interchange. Only the recent
: >rebuilding and expansion of this interchange a few years ago seems to
: >account for the exit numbers there; prior to that, the NC DOT never
: >numbered exits on non-interstate highways. They're adding exit numbers
: >and mileposts on such roads now only when they happen to be doing other
: >sign work, which is why none of the adjacent interchanges were assigned
: >numbers. I suspect that the current widening of US 1 southward from
: >the US 1/US 64 interchange will result in the appearance of more mile
: >posts and numbered exits.
:
: >: This just shows why consecutive numbering is better. Altho there is a
: >: place on the Baltimore beltway (I-695) where exit 2 comes between 3B
: >: and 3A I think.
:
: >But how exactly does that show that consecutive numbering is better?
:
: If there was consecutive numbering, you wouldn't have to use all those
: letters. Just start at 1, and on the northbound side you could have
: exit 1 to subexit A and subexit B, and on the southbound side you'd
: have exit 1, exit 2 (1C), and exit 3 (1D).
I still don't get it -- why is it bad "to use all those letters"?
Milepost-based exit nubmers always let you know, to the nearest mile,
where any given exit is; and it makes it easy to know how many miles
away you are from the exit you seek. Ordinally-numbered exits have
neither of these advantages. And ordinal schemes often end up having
to use extra letters anyway, if a new exit is built between existing
consecutively-numbered exits. For example, both the Massachusetts and
New Jersey Turnpikes had to insert some "<n>A" exits between existing
exits numbered <n> and <n+1>. Whereas, for example, the I-440 Raleigh
Beltline will be able to label the interchange for the new US 64 Bypass
as "Exit 15" (or perhaps it will be 14) when that road is built a few
years from now.
: And why should the number of the exit on the interstate reflect the
: mileage on US 1?
Huh? It shouldn't, and it doesn't. The US 1 exits we're talking about
are *south* of I-440, as US 1 leaves Raleigh.
: Why not just let the interstate exit numbers keep going for the more
: important road (whichever that is).
That's the situation that I described above. When US 1 gets on I-440
for 11 miles, its mileposts and exit numbers are suppressed in favor
of those for I-440, which is the more important road. Likewise for
US 64 when it gets on US 1 for 3 miles; US 1 is the more "major" road,
so its numbers "win".
: I may be wrong about this, but if so, you haven't explained it very
: well, and/or it's even more confusing than it needs to be.
I think you must have missed Scott's earlier point about US 1 getting
on I-440 as it (US 1) passes through Raleigh. There's really not much
one could do (under either numbering scheme) to make it less confusing;
it's simply a matter of some roads running together for a while and
then parting ways again.
: What a mess!!!
It's actually even *more* complex when you look at the rest of the
Beltline. For instance, the southernmost branch of the loop is
simultaneously I-40, I-440 and US 64; I-40's numbers "win", since
it is the more important road. The southeastern portion is just I-440
and US 64, since I-40 branches off at about the 5 o'clock position on
the loop; then US 64 East gets off at about 3 o'clock. We previously
discussed the western and northern branch (which is both I-440 and
US 1), which runs from about 8:00 clockwise up to 1:00. Only the
section between 1:00 and 3:00 is pure I-440, without any additional
designations. And believe it or not, it used to be even *more*
complicated until about 5 years ago, when the I-440 designation was
introduced for the loop and some other roads (US 70, US 401 and NC 50)
were kicked off the Beltline and rerouted through the city.
grandma
OK, I give up. I still think that consecutive numbers for exits that
are close together are better tho. I can't see why it would be any
more confusing to skip numbers than it is in the mileage based scheme
where you skip numbers all the time.
IMO I would think that where two roads that are unrelated join
together they should both keep their exit number scheme, whatever it
is. I'm glad, incidentally, to see that the Balto Wash DC area isn't
the only one with screwed up roads/road signs.
Rosalie
Scott D. Rhodes
gmbe...@mindspring.com ('grandma') wrote:
>>But how exactly does that show that consecutive numbering is better?
>If there was consecutive numbering, you wouldn't have to use all those
>letters. Just start at 1, and on the northbound side you could have
>exit 1 to subexit A and subexit B, and on the southbound side you'd
>have exit 1, exit 2 (1C), and exit 3 (1D).
Consecutive numbering creates its own problems:
* Consider the Melbourne Drive exit off the Raleigh Beltline: Southbound there
is an offramp to Melbourne but no onramp from it; Northbound there is no
offramp but there is an onramp. Therefore, there is an Exit 1D southbound,
but none northbound. If you used consecutive numbers you'd have to pick
between a) having the exits northbound go 1, 2, 4, 5, etc.; or b) having the
Western Boulevard Exits (the next ones north of Melbourne) be Exit 4
southbound but Exit 3 northbound. Having numbers mismatch would be fairly
ridiculous, and having exits numbered 1, 2, 4 would IMO be more confusing than
having 1A, 1B, 1C, 2.
* Exits can get added. It is unlikely that exits will be added to the Raleigh
Beltline, because there's nowhere to put new roads to intersect with the
Beltline and no safe place to insert an exit. But other roads do get exits
inserted, and then the consecutive numbering scheme gets blown to hell. I
know someone who lives in Virginia, and before they switched to mile-based
exit numbering, directions to her house involved taking Exit 7E! With
consecutive numbering, new exits still force lettered exits to exist, except
that they don't make as much sense in consecutive numbering -- in Mile-based
numbering, Exits 7 and 7A will be within a mile of each other; in consecutive
numbering they might be 3 or 4 miles apart, and then 7A and 8 may only be 1
mile apart. The only other option would be to renumber all the exits, which
if you add one at the low end creates confusion all across the state.
(Question: What on earth would they do in a consecutive numbering scheme if
there was already an Exit 7A and 7B, and they stuck an exit between them?
Exit 7A1? Exit 7AA? Exit 7 A 1/2?)
It's true that a new exit can create a little confusion in a Mile-based system
(similar to the above question: Imagine, for example, that Exit 1A and 1B
already exist, and you create a new exit between them). But in this instance
it's a relatively minor fix: You make the new exit 1B, renumber the old 1B as
1C, and the rest of the system remains intact. This can be confusing for
anyone whose directions somewhere involve "Exit 1B", but it's nowhere near the
problem that renumbering Exits 5 through 109 as Exits 6 through 110 would.
>And why should the number
>of the exit on the interstate reflect the mileage on US 1?
It doesn't. I-440 takes Exit 1A and joins I-40. If you don't take Exit 1A,
you can keep going south, but you are no longer on an Interstate. You are on
US-1 South and US-64 West. US-1 takes precedence and the next numbered exit
(Bob Goudreau was correct in pointing out to me that a few unnumbered exits
come between it) is numbered according to US-1's mileage.
I know I didn't explain it too well, but I don't think it's *possible* to
explain this road very well because it just makes no %&@^* sense. You really
have to drive this stretch to truly appreciate it.
rober...@usa.net
> It's actually even *more* complex when you look at the rest of the
> Beltline. For instance, the southernmost branch of the loop is
> simultaneously I-40, I-440 and US 64; I-40's numbers "win", since
> it is the more important road.
> ...
What about the numbering scheme on the last "split" interstate: I-35E/W
in Dallas/Ft. Worth and again in Minneapolis/St. Paul? I believe that
here in D/FW, I-35 mile markers are continued up I-35E through Dallas, so
if you take I-35 to I-35E to I-35, you get consecutive mile markers. But
I-35W, I believe, starts with mile marker 1 at the south end, as though
it were a 3di. (Correct me if I'm wrong.)
What do y'all do in M/SP?
Did any of the former split interstates re-join like I-35 does (twice)?
And how should the total length of I-35 be calculated -- do you count both
branches in the total?
Robert Brooks
Spam Mail: rober...@usa.net
Real Mail: see my home page!
Mike Wiley
rober...@usa.net wrote:
>
> > It's actually even *more* complex when you look at the rest of the
> > Beltline. For instance, the southernmost branch of the loop is
> > simultaneously I-40, I-440 and US 64; I-40's numbers "win", since
> > it is the more important road.
> > ...
>
> What about the numbering scheme on the last "split" interstate: I-35E/W
> in Dallas/Ft. Worth and again in Minneapolis/St. Paul? I believe that
> here in D/FW, I-35 mile markers are continued up I-35E through Dallas, so
> if you take I-35 to I-35E to I-35, you get consecutive mile markers. But
> I-35W, I believe, starts with mile marker 1 at the south end, as though
> it were a 3di. (Correct me if I'm wrong.)
>
> What do y'all do in M/SP?
M/SP is just like D/FW. The mileage markers (and exit numbers) follow
I-35E and are continuous above the rejoining at the North end.
>
> Did any of the former split interstates re-join like I-35 does (twice)?
There was a split of I-15 in Southern California. I-15 followed it's
present route but I-15E followed what is now I-215. In the original
Interstate plan, I-5 was to split into I-5E and I-5W between Tracy and
Dunnigan. I-5E followed the current I-5 alignment and I-5W was to
follow the alignment of I-580, I-80, and I-505. Only a small part of
I-5W was ever signed in the early 1960's through Oakland, but was
changed to I-580 with the California route number realignment in 1964.
Scott D. Rhodes
>I can't see why it would be any
>more confusing to skip numbers than it is in the mileage based scheme
>where you skip numbers all the time.
Just MHO, but skipped numbers in a consecutive system are confusing because
you expect there to be no skipped numbers; they are expected in a mile-based
scheme and hence not as confusing.
>IMO I would think that where two roads that are unrelated join
>together they should both keep their exit number scheme, whatever it
>is.
Do you mean that there should be two exit numbers for every exit on the
combined stretch? That might work on a brief joining, but what about long
stretches like I-40/85 in NC or I-81/77 in Va?
>I'm glad, incidentally, to see that the Balto Wash DC area isn't
>the only one with screwed up roads/road signs.
Nowhere near the only place. :-)
Bob Goudreau
Scott D. Rhodes (rho...@ipass.net) wrote:
: >exits numbered <n> and <n+1>. Whereas, for example, the I-440 Raleigh
: >Beltline will be able to label the interchange for the new US 64 Bypass
: >as "Exit 15" (or perhaps it will be 14) when that road is built a few
: >years from now.
: US-64 Bypass? I hadn't heard about that. I'm not surprised, though.
I'm not sure what the construction schedule is for it, but I believe
that it's supposed to be done sometime in the next 4 or 5 years.
It will be a freeway bypass to the current US 64, passing south of
Knightdale and then connecting to the existing 64 Bypass where it
begins west of Zebulon. When that link is complete, US 64 will be
a continuous freeway for at least 80-90 miles, from Cary east to at
least Tarboro (I don't know if any freeway has been constructed east
of that point over the past few years). More importantly for commuters
in eastern Wake County, it will provide a way to get to Raleigh
without having to sit through all the traffic signals that bog down
the current US 64.
: BTW, it will probably be Exit 14. Exit 13 is the current US-64 and
: Exit 15 is Poole Road.
Yes, thanks. It will definitely be between those two exits, so 14
it is. I just couldn't remember what exit number Poole Road was.
bre...@ibm.net
In <5h7e0f$6...@camel0.mindspring.com>, gmbe...@mindspring.com ('grandma') writes:
>goud...@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) wrote:
>
>>'grandma' (gmbe...@mindspring.com) wrote:
>>: rho...@ipass.net (Scott D. Rhodes) wrote:
>
>>: >>: IMO it does not make sense to number by miles on an urban beltway
>>: >>: where exits may be less than a mile apart.
>
>>: >>Seems to work for I-440 around Raleigh. Within the only mile that has
>>: >>multiple interchanges (mile 1), there are exits 1A, 1B, 1C and 1D.
>
>>: >Actually, it's slightly over a two-mile stretch. Exit 1D is between Milepost
>>: >1 and Milepost 2. Exit 1C I'm not certain about -- I think it's actually
>>: >right at Milepost 1. Exit 1B is between Milepost 0 and Milepost 1. Exit 1A,
>>: >being the exit you take to get from I-440 to I-40 as a "left turn", is
>>: >actually beyond Milepost 0.
>
>>Yes, I was always a little irked that they didn't see fit to use exit
>>numbers based on Mile 0, as some other states have done.
>
>>: >Also (you are well aware of this, I'm sure, but the others reading should get
>>: >a kick out of it), it's even screwier than that. There are exits 1A, 1B, 1C,
>>: >1D, and 1 with no letter. Travelling south on I-440 at that point, you
>>: >encounter Exit 1D, 1C, then 1. If you take Exit 1, then *on* *the* *exit* you
>>: >will encounter Exit 1B and then 1A. If you stay on I-440/US-1, you never
>>: >encounter Exits 1B or 1A.
>
>>: >US-1's mileage. :-)
>
>>Actually, no, the next exit on US 1 South/US 64 West is Walnut Street
>>in Cary, which is unnumbered. After that comes the Cary Parkway exit,
>>also unnumbered. After that comes Exit 128B, which is where US 64 West
>>gets off US 1, and Exit 128A, which is Tryon Road eastbound. The 406A/B
>>exits are the US 64 approaches to the same interchange. Only the recent
>>rebuilding and expansion of this interchange a few years ago seems to
>>account for the exit numbers there; prior to that, the NC DOT never
>>numbered exits on non-interstate highways. They're adding exit numbers
>>and mileposts on such roads now only when they happen to be doing other
>>sign work, which is why none of the adjacent interchanges were assigned
>>numbers. I suspect that the current widening of US 1 southward from
>>the US 1/US 64 interchange will result in the appearance of more mile
>>posts and numbered exits.
>
>>: This just shows why consecutive numbering is better. Altho there is a
>>: place on the Baltimore beltway (I-695) where exit 2 comes between 3B
>>: and 3A I think.
>
>
>If there was consecutive numbering, you wouldn't have to use all those
>letters. Just start at 1, and on the northbound side you could have
>exit 1 to subexit A and subexit B, and on the southbound side you'd
>of the exit on the interstate reflect the mileage on US 1? Why not
>just let the interstate exit numbers keep going for the more important
>haven't explained it very well, and/or it's even more confusing than
>
Yeah, but again, what if you stick exits between two exits on the consecutive
number system, which is what they were asking?
>Rosalie
Michael R Natale
Excerpts from netnews.misc.transport.road: 21-Mar-97 Re: Exit numbering
by rober...@usa.net
> But I believe Central
> Expressway may have been the first roadway with exit numbering when it
> was designed and bulit in the '50s (correct me if I'm wrong!).
The Pennsylvania Turnpike had consecutive exit numbers on it when it
opened in 1940. They then had to renumber them all when the road got
extended in 1950-51 (Exit 1- Irwin became Exit 7).
Since a majority of toll roads open prior to 1956 followed the mile 0.0
at the west or south end format, I wonder if they just used that as the
rule for the interstate system, since it was in use already. One
notable exception: the New York Thruway has exits numbered from New
York City, so the I-90 section has miles and exits increasing heading
west. And, the various spurs of the Thruway and NJ Tpk. have mileposts
measuring distance from the mainline, regardless of direction.
Bob Goudreau
Michael R Natale (mn...@andrew.cmu.edu) wrote:
: Since a majority of toll roads open prior to 1956 followed the mile 0.0
: at the west or south end format, I wonder if they just used that as the
: rule for the interstate system, since it was in use already.
I would have guessed that W->E, S->N milepost ordering was a natural
by-product of the W->E, S->N ordering of the Interstate Highway System
itself. The latter plan seems an inevitable consequence of the E->W,
N->S numbering plan used by the older US Highway system; the IHS had
to use a different numbering system in order to minimize "collisions"
between similarly numbered US and Interstate highways all over the
country. By numbering the two systems in the opposite direction, the
"collision zones" are generally confined to the central N/S and E/W
belts of the country.
Mike Wiley
Exile on Market Street wrote:
>
> In article <5holfd$3...@dg-rtp.dg.com>, goud...@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob
> Goudreau) wrote:
>
> > By numbering the two systems in the opposite direction, the
> > "collision zones" are generally confined to the central N/S and E/W
> > belts of the country.
>
> major E-W Interstates, there's no real collision zone in the center of the
> country, either.
>
> Unless I-64 and US 64 run parallel to each other somewhere.
>
US 64 and I-64 never share the same state. But they are pretty close to
each other in the Tidewater section of Virginia.
The only state that has as US route and an Interstate route with the
same number is Illinois, with US24 and I-24. But they are over 200
miles apart from each other. US 64 in NC and I-64 in VA are about 80
miles apart from each other.
Exile on Market Street
> By numbering the two systems in the opposite direction, the
> "collision zones" are generally confined to the central N/S and E/W
> belts of the country.
Actually, thanks to the omission of routes 50 and 60 from the ranks of
major E-W Interstates, there's no real collision zone in the center of the
country, either.
Unless I-64 and US 64 run parallel to each other somewhere.
__________________________________________________________________________
Sandy Smith, Exile on Market Street, Philadelphia smi...@pobox.upenn.edu
University Relations, U. of Pennsylvania 215.898.1423/fax 215.898.1203
I speak for myself here, not for Penn http://pobox.upenn.edu/~smiths/
What would you give the world's 9th oldest subway for its 90th birthday?
How about a new car fleet? (It's getting one.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
J Vincent
Mike Wiley wrote:
> US 64 and I-64 never share the same state. But they are pretty close to
> each other in the Tidewater section of Virginia.
>
> The only state that has as US route and an Interstate route with the
> same number is Illinois, with US24 and I-24. But they are over 200
> miles apart from each other. US 64 in NC and I-64 in VA are about 80
> miles apart from each other.
I wonder what will happen if I-74 is extended southward into North
Carolina as proposed. N.C. does not allow Interstates and U.S. routes to
share numbers, but the state already has U.S. 74.
And U.S. 74 *does* extend into Tennessee nowadays, further complicating
things if the road is renumbered...
--
Reply to jvincent-at-mcs-dot-net..J Vincent, aka M.V.S.
Chicago, Illinois
Scott D. Rhodes
>I wonder what will happen if I-74 is extended southward into North
>Carolina as proposed. N.C. does not allow Interstates and U.S. routes to
>share numbers, but the state already has U.S. 74.
>And U.S. 74 *does* extend into Tennessee nowadays, further complicating
>things if the road is renumbered...
Actually, the policy is that *state* highways don't duplicate Interstate or
U.S. highways. I don't know if there's a set policy about Interstates and
U.S. highways, because until now it's never been an issue.
Unless they can get Tennessee to agree to change the number of U.S. 74, I
don't know that there's much that can be done about it.
Mike Wiley
Per an earlier post, if I-49 is extended into Arkansas, there will be
another state with duplicate US and Interstate route numbers. Not to
mention if I-69 gets extended to Laredo, TX. US 69 and I-69 will cross
somewhere in East Texas.
--
Michael Kotler
On Mon, 07 Apr 1997 21:06:06 GMT, rho...@ipass.net (Scott D. Rhodes)
wrote:
>>I wonder what will happen if I-74 is extended southward into North
>>Carolina as proposed. N.C. does not allow Interstates and U.S. routes to
>>share numbers, but the state already has U.S. 74.
>Actually, the policy is that *state* highways don't duplicate Interstate or
>U.S. highways.
Here in Maryland there is a conflict involving the new I-68.
Going westbound on I-70, there is a MD-68 exit not far from I-68 which
starts in Hancock. Fortunately, a sign was put up that attempts to
clear the conflict. It says something like "This exit is for MD-68
(rectangular shield) <name of destination>. Not I-68 <shield> to
Cambridge.
----------------------------------------------------
Michael E. Kotler
mek...@radix.net
[clear spamfilter before relying]
H.B. Elkins
rho...@ipass.net (Scott D. Rhodes) wrote:
>>I wonder what will happen if I-74 is extended southward into North
>>Carolina as proposed. N.C. does not allow Interstates and U.S. routes to
>>share numbers, but the state already has U.S. 74.
>>And U.S. 74 *does* extend into Tennessee nowadays, further complicating
>>things if the road is renumbered...
>Actually, the policy is that *state* highways don't duplicate Interstate or
>U.S. highways. I don't know if there's a set policy about Interstates and
>U.S. highways, because until now it's never been an issue.
>Unless they can get Tennessee to agree to change the number of U.S. 74, I
>don't know that there's much that can be done about it.
Haven't I read in numerous places that states cannot have a US highway
and an interstate highway with the same number? (Illinois seemingly
being the exception). Is this policy spelled out in the AASHTO manual
or elsewhere?
Some states have the policy that no routes can share numbers (i.e.,
Kentucky with the exception of US/KY 79) but others don't. Tennessee
is an example of that, where all routes except the interstates carry
state designations (i.e., US 25E is also TN 32; US 25W is also TN 9)
and there is duplication of the state and US numbers, and state and
interstate numbers. Isn't there an interchange for I-81 and TN 81?
And what bodies or agencies make decisions on extensions of US routes,
like the extension of US 74 into Tennessee and the extension of US 321
westward from Johnson City, Tenn.? Are those state decisions, AASHTO
decisions, or whose decisions? Can a state choose to extend a US route
within its own borders, as Tennessee did with US 321, or did it have
to get permission?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
H.B. Elkins -- Winchester, KY
"You must have the courage to believe the truth!" -- Rush H. Limbaugh III
Kentucky Wildcats Basketball & #3 Dale Earnhardt -- A Championship Combination
hbel...@mis.net <or> HB...@aol.com
(Please note: there is a spam-buster in my reply-to address.
To reply by E-mail,use one of the addresses above)
http://www.users.mis.net/~hbelkins (site under construction
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bob Goudreau
Scott D. Rhodes (rho...@ipass.net) wrote:
: >I wonder what will happen if I-74 is extended southward into North
: >Carolina as proposed. N.C. does not allow Interstates and U.S. routes to
: >share numbers, but the state already has U.S. 74.
: >And U.S. 74 *does* extend into Tennessee nowadays, further complicating
: >things if the road is renumbered...
: Actually, the policy is that *state* highways don't duplicate Interstate or
: U.S. highways. I don't know if there's a set policy about Interstates and
: U.S. highways, because until now it's never been an issue.
: Unless they can get Tennessee to agree to change the number of U.S. 74, I
: don't know that there's much that can be done about it.
Well, they could simply retire the US 74 route number within NC, and
have US 74 terminate at the TN/NC border. This shouldn't affect things
much, since US 74 is multiplexed atop US 64 for dozens of miles along
both sides of the border anyway. The old 74-only road within NC could
then be given a state route designation. TN might also decide that
it's better to terminate US 74 where it runs into US 64 instead of
right at the border.
James D. Umbach
mek...@radix.spam-free.net (Michael Kotler) wrote:
YOU>Here in Maryland there is a conflict involving the new I-68.
YOU>Going westbound on I-70, there is a MD-68 exit not far from I-68
which
YOU>starts in Hancock. Fortunately, a sign was put up that attempts
to
YOU>clear the conflict. It says something like "This exit is for
MD-68
YOU>(rectangular shield) <name of destination>. Not I-68 <shield> to
YOU>Cambridge.
Would it not be easier to change the numerical designation of either
I-68 ot MD-68? Whoops, bureaucracy doesn't think that way. :-)
JAMES D. UMBACH of CITRUS HEIGHTS, CALIFORNIA
THE LARGEST GENERAL LAW CITY (pop. wise) IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
e-mail : apo...@visionnet.net web : http://www.mother.com/~apostle
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cool Site of the Fortnight (29MAR97-11APR97):
http://groundhog.sprl.umich.edu/
C.C. Slater
In article <334a734a...@news1.radix.net>, mek...@radix.spam-free.net (Michael Kotler) writes:
>On Mon, 07 Apr 1997 21:06:06 GMT, rho...@ipass.net (Scott D. Rhodes)
>
>>>I wonder what will happen if I-74 is extended southward into North
>>>Carolina as proposed. N.C. does not allow Interstates and U.S. routes to
>>>share numbers, but the state already has U.S. 74.
>
>>U.S. highways.
>
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------
>Michael E. Kotler
>mek...@radix.net
>[clear spamfilter before relying]
c/s
Jody L. Aho
C.C. Slater <d2fr...@fre.fsu.umd.edu> wrote in article
<5igmvk$69$1...@hecate.umd.edu>...
In Michigan, there are several interstate highways and state highways which
share numbers. Two of them should not present any confusion due to their
geographical separation. I-94 runs from Port Huron to New Buffalo in the
Lower Peninsula, while M-94 runs from near Skandia, about 14 miles
southeast of Marquette, to Manistique, in the Upper Peninsula. Also, I-69
runs from Port Huron to the Michigan-Indiana border in the Lower Peninsula,
while M-69 extends from near Bark River to Crystal Falls in the Upper
Peninsula. However, the other pair is very close. M-75, a short highway
which passes through Boyne City, is only about 20 miles from I-75.
However, M-75 is not heavily travelled, and both ends of the highway
intersect with US-131.
Also, M-27 extends from the Indian River-Burt Lake area north to Cheboygan,
while US-27 begins 5 miles south of Grayling, or 61 miles south of the
southern end of M-27. However, M-27 used to be US-27 in the days before
the completion of I-75 in the northern Lower Peninsula, and US-27 was
routed to Cheboygan and then together with US-23 to Mackinaw City. Other
duplications include M-45 in the Grand Rapids area and US-45 in the western
Upper Peninsula from Ontonagon south through Bruce Crossing and Watersmeet
and into Wisconsin, although these roads are roughly 475 miles apart.
There's also US-10 from Ludington to Bay City and M-10, the Lodge Freeway,
in the Detroit area, although M-10 used to be US-10 up until the mid-1980s.
Here in Minnesota, we also have some duplications. State highway 61 from
Duluth to the Canadian Border used to be US-61 up until 1991, although
US-61 continues from Forest Lake down to the Minnesota-Iowa border. Also,
before I-94 came to Minnesota, state highway 194 in the Duluth area used to
be state highway 94. US-65 in southern Minnesota shares its number with
state highway 65 from Minneapolis up to near International Falls.
I've travelled at least a short stretch of all of the highways I
mentioned in both Minnesota and Michigan, except for M-75 in Michigan, and
as long as one designates US-27 versus M-27, for instance, it seems
straightforward. Michigan uses this nomenclature well, however here in
Minnesota you hear people referring to "Highway 61" without regard to
whether it is a U.S. or a state highway. I lived in Traverse City,
Michigan for a while, and I personally favor the use of the I-, US-, and
M-designations which Michigan residents use. There could be no doubt
exactly which road is being referred to.
Jody Aho
ja...@cp.duluth.mn.us
Bryan R. Stutzman
Atlanta and Georgia definitely don't care if they reuse highway numbers.
As you may know, I75, I85, and I20 go through Atlanta.
Ga20 hits I75 to the NW of the city, continues east past I85, goes south
through I20 until it passes I75 again to the SE of the city. (This is
basically the route of our possible outer perimeter.)
Ga85 starts just SE of the city off of I75 (less than 10 miles away from
where I85 leaves the city) and continues SW until it approaches I-185 in
Columbus. (I am not sure if it hits it or not).
This numbering must have been done on purpose but I cannot figure out what
the purpose is. The purpose could definitely not be to use Ga20 as an
alternate route for I20 or Ga85 for I85.
Bryan Stutzman
--
----------Remove the (2)! from my address to reply.----
Bryan Stutzman bryans -at- caps -dot- com
My opinions do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.
James D. Umbach <apo...@mail.mother.com> wrote in article
<5ih86t$7tm$1...@your.mother.com>...
> mek...@radix.spam-free.net (Michael Kotler) wrote:
>
> YOU>Here in Maryland there is a conflict involving the new I-68.
>
> YOU>Going westbound on I-70, there is a MD-68 exit not far from I-68
> which
> YOU>starts in Hancock. Fortunately, a sign was put up that attempts
> to
> YOU>clear the conflict. It says something like "This exit is for
> MD-68
J Vincent
Bryan R. Stutzman wrote:
>
> Atlanta and Georgia definitely don't care if they reuse highway numbers.
> As you may know, I75, I85, and I20 go through Atlanta.
>
> Ga20 hits I75 to the NW of the city, continues east past I85, goes south
> through I20 until it passes I75 again to the SE of the city. (This is
> basically the route of our possible outer perimeter.)
>
> Ga85 starts just SE of the city off of I75 (less than 10 miles away from
> where I85 leaves the city) and continues SW until it approaches I-185 in
> Columbus. (I am not sure if it hits it or not).
In fact it goes past I-185. See below.
>
> This numbering must have been done on purpose but I cannot figure out what
> the purpose is. The purpose could definitely not be to use Ga20 as an
> alternate route for I20 or Ga85 for I85.
First off, it's nice to see someone posting from the Atlanta area...
The "purpose" you're looking for is that every numbered highway in
Georgia is given a Georgia state route number, even if it is a U.S.
highway or Interstate. On many of these roads, however, the number is
"secret" and not posted.
Some maps, quite possibly the official Georgia state highway map, show
these "hidden" route numbers. The RMcN shows them on all Georgia's U.S.
routes, but not the Interstates. U.S. highways are generally given
one-digit and low two-digit GA numbers, while Interstates/lim-access
roads are given GA numbers above 400. In fact, this is why GA 400, the
toll road through Atlanta, was so named.
This creates *lots* of U.S./Interstate/GA number overlap. For example,
U.S. 25 is Georgia 1 for its entire length, but there's already U.S. 1
on the other side of the state. What we non-GADOT types (<g>) call U.S.
1 is actually parts of Georgia 4 and Georgia 10.
Northwest of Columbus, Georgia 85 becomes the designation for Alternate
U.S. 27. As such, GA-85 continues past I-185 (itself a GA route too)
into the center of Columbus.
It's as if Georgia puts up the U.S. and Interstate markers only as a
convenience to motorists. Looked at this way, Georgia isn't "re-using"
highway numbers at all! In this system, the numerical designations I-85
and I-20 don't matter; to the state they're, say, GA-416 and GA-402. (I
don't know the real 4xx numbers here.)
This must be a Deep South thing; Tenessee and Alabama do this as well,
at least on U.S. routes.
--
J Vincent/MVS - jvincent (at) mcs (dot) net
Moving 5/1/97: New bigger apartment, same great city.
"No matter what your plans are, the result is always a surprise."
The Reaper's Helper
J Vincent wrote:
>
> The "purpose" you're looking for is that every numbered highway in
> Georgia is given a Georgia state route number, even if it is a U.S.
> highway or Interstate. On many of these roads, however, the number is
> "secret" and not posted.
>
> Some maps, quite possibly the official Georgia state highway map, show
> these "hidden" route numbers. The RMcN shows them on all Georgia's U.S.
> routes, but not the Interstates. U.S. highways are generally given
> one-digit and low two-digit GA numbers, while Interstates/lim-access
> roads are given GA numbers above 400. In fact, this is why GA 400, the
> toll road through Atlanta, was so named.
The official Georgia state highway map does show those "hidden" route
numbers. The convention seems to be that if state route markers
are erected along a given road, the state route number (encircled)
is superimposed over the line representing the road on the map.
If the state route number is "hidden" (i.e., markers not erected),
then the state route number (encircled) appears beside (not
touching) the road on the map.
>
> This creates *lots* of U.S./Interstate/GA number overlap. For example,
> U.S. 25 is Georgia 1 for its entire length, but there's already U.S. 1
That's U.S. 27, not 25.
> It's as if Georgia puts up the U.S. and Interstate markers only as a
> convenience to motorists. Looked at this way, Georgia isn't "re-using"
> highway numbers at all! In this system, the numerical designations I-85
> and I-20 don't matter; to the state they're, say, GA-416 and GA-402. (I
> don't know the real 4xx numbers here.
If you get a traffic ticket or have a traffic accident in Georgia,
the ticket or report will most likely reference the Interstate or
U.S. highway by its Georgia route number only, no matter how
obscure. I had a accident on I-85 in suburban Atlanta several
years ago; the ticket and accident report referred to the 10-lane
freeway only as "SR 403," a moniker that would baffle 99.99% of
Atlantans.
At my trial, the state took the liberty of calling it I-85, though.
I don't remember what I was going to call it. Fortunately,
the judge granted my motion for a summary judgment of not guilty
after the state rested. :)
Linda M Jentzen-Bessert
Jody L. Aho wrote:
>
[Duplicate numbering information snipped]
>
> I've travelled at least a short stretch of all of the highways I
> mentioned in both Minnesota and Michigan, except for M-75 in Michigan, and
> as long as one designates US-27 versus M-27, for instance, it seems
> straightforward. Michigan uses this nomenclature well, however here in
> Minnesota you hear people referring to "Highway 61" without regard to
> whether it is a U.S. or a state highway. I lived in Traverse City,
> Michigan for a while, and I personally favor the use of the I-, US-, and
> M-designations which Michigan residents use. There could be no doubt
> exactly which road is being referred to.
>
> Jody Aho
> ja...@cp.duluth.mn.us
Okay, here's something I've been interested in for years. Jody is 100%
correct in the fact that here in Michigan, if it's numbered as M-59, we
_call_ it "M-59." Similarly, US-23 is _called_ "US-23." However, in
other
parts of the country, people refer to "Highway 95" or "Route 33,"
irregard-
less of Interstate, US, State and even County designation.
I believe this is partly due to the fact of the little "M" appearing
inside
the state highway shield here in Michigan. For as long as I know, people
have always referred to Michigan state routes as "M-xx." (Sidelight:
It's
always easy to pick out travel books written by out-of-staters, who
refer
to "Michigan 25" or "State Route 25" instead of "M-25.") In this way,
every
highway has some sort of "letter" preceeding the number. Not so in many
other states, where you could call SR-53 in Illinois, "State Route 53,"
"State Highway 53," "Illinois 53," "State Road 53," "Route 53," and so
on,
ad infinitum.
I'd be interested in hearing what the "locals" in other parts call their
highways in daily useage, whether it be route, highway, road, etc...
Chris
------------------------------------------------
Linda M Jentzen-Bessert -or- Christopher Bessert
Howell, Michigan
http://members.aol.com/Bessert1/homepage.html
------------------------------------------------
C.C. Slater
In article <334DAA...@mcs.net>, J Vincent <NOSPAMj...@mcs.net> writes:
>Bryan R. Stutzman wrote:
>>
>> Atlanta and Georgia definitely don't care if they reuse highway numbers.
>> As you may know, I75, I85, and I20 go through Atlanta.
>>
>> Ga20 hits I75 to the NW of the city, continues east past I85, goes south
>> through I20 until it passes I75 again to the SE of the city. (This is
>> basically the route of our possible outer perimeter.)
>>
>> Ga85 starts just SE of the city off of I75 (less than 10 miles away from
>> where I85 leaves the city) and continues SW until it approaches I-185 in
>> Columbus. (I am not sure if it hits it or not).
>
>In fact it goes past I-185. See below.
>>
>> This numbering must have been done on purpose but I cannot figure out what
>> the purpose is. The purpose could definitely not be to use Ga20 as an
>> alternate route for I20 or Ga85 for I85.
>
>First off, it's nice to see someone posting from the Atlanta area...
>
>Georgia is given a Georgia state route number, even if it is a U.S.
>highway or Interstate. On many of these roads, however, the number is
>"secret" and not posted.
>
>Some maps, quite possibly the official Georgia state highway map, show
>these "hidden" route numbers. The RMcN shows them on all Georgia's U.S.
>routes, but not the Interstates. U.S. highways are generally given
>one-digit and low two-digit GA numbers, while Interstates/lim-access
>roads are given GA numbers above 400. In fact, this is why GA 400, the
>toll road through Atlanta, was so named.
>
>U.S. 25 is Georgia 1 for its entire length, but there's already U.S. 1
>1 is actually parts of Georgia 4 and Georgia 10.
>
>Northwest of Columbus, Georgia 85 becomes the designation for Alternate
>U.S. 27. As such, GA-85 continues past I-185 (itself a GA route too)
>into the center of Columbus.
>
>convenience to motorists. Looked at this way, Georgia isn't "re-using"
>highway numbers at all! In this system, the numerical designations I-85
>and I-20 don't matter; to the state they're, say, GA-416 and GA-402. (I
H.B. Elkins
Linda M Jentzen-Bessert <jent...@pilot.msu.edu> wrote:
>I'd be interested in hearing what the "locals" in other parts call their
>highways in daily useage, whether it be route, highway, road, etc...
For the most part in Kentucky, people just refer to the road by its
number, without any designation: i.e., 11 (for KY 11), 60 (for US 60),
64 (for I-64), although some will refer to "Route XX," People who live
near one of Kentucky's toll roads or former toll roads will often
refer to it as simply "the parkway" or perhaps "the turnpike" if
they're referring to that section of I-65 that was FKA Kentucky
Turnpike.
Sometimes roads are called by name, even if they have numbers. For
instance, KY 4 is called "New Circle," I-265 is called "the Gene
Snyder" and I-264 "the Watterson" because they are New Circle Road,
the Gene Snyder Freeway and Watterson Expressway, respectively. This
is especially true in those towns, and in many other areas, roads are
referred to by formal or common name ("the Cut-Off" which is KY 498 in
Lee County, or "the bypass" which is KY 1958 in Winchester) and
everyone knows where you are talking about. For instance, if you refer
to Versailles Road in Lexington, everyone knows you're talking about
US 60 west.
Mike Wiley
> highways in daily useage, whether it be route, highway, road, etc...
>
In Califonia, we usually just say the number, such as 280 or 101.
Sometimes we add "the" to the front, such as "The 5" or "The 80".
Another variation is using the name of the freeway, such as "The
Bayshore" or "The James Lick".
In Oregon, US and State Routes are simply refered to as "Highway 99" or
"Highway 101". Interstates are always "I" something. I-5, I-84, I-205.
In Texas, they usually are more precise in the route designation in
common conversation. It will be "Loop 12", "Spur 244", "Interstate 35",
"FM 544", "US 80", etc. Freeways are usually calle by name thought,
"LBJ", "Stemmons", "Thorton".
Matthew E. Salek
Jody L. Aho wrote:
[Michigan stuff snipped]
>
> Here in Minnesota, we also have some duplications. State highway 61 from
> Duluth to the Canadian Border used to be US-61 up until 1991, although
> US-61 continues from Forest Lake down to the Minnesota-Iowa border.
Oops! You mean US 61 crosses into Wisconsin at La Crecent.
> Also,
> before I-94 came to Minnesota, state highway 194 in the Duluth area used to
> be state highway 94. US-65 in southern Minnesota shares its number with
> state highway 65 from Minneapolis up to near International Falls.
>
> I've travelled at least a short stretch of all of the highways I
> mentioned in both Minnesota and Michigan, except for M-75 in Michigan, and
> as long as one designates US-27 versus M-27, for instance, it seems
> straightforward. Michigan uses this nomenclature well, however here in
> Minnesota you hear people referring to "Highway 61" without regard to
> whether it is a U.S. or a state highway.
That's because it doesn't really pose all that much confsion. In Winona,
we would say "We're taking Highway 61 up to the Cities." (short for Twin
Cites for you non-Minnesotans) Since there isn't any other 61 along the
way, it didn't matter. And when we were "Taking Highway 61 to the
Canadian border", what was actually meant was 61 to St. Paul, I-35 to
Duluth, and (now) MN 61 to Grand Portage. One must alo remember that for
most Minnesotans, MN 61 is known as the "North Shore Drive."
> I lived in Traverse City,
> Michigan for a while, and I personally favor the use of the I-, US-, and
> M-designations which Michigan residents use. There could be no doubt
> exactly which road is being referred to.
Most make for a mouth-full when you're giving directions. :-)
--
Matthew E. Salek, future civil engineer Colorado State University
http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~mattes
"It would be a good idea to take your bankbook to the fallout shelter
with you."
-Cold War-era Federal Reserve suggestion
Neil Kelly
>I'd be interested in hearing what the "locals" in other parts call their
>highways in daily useage, whether it be route, highway, road, etc...
Fortunately, in Connecticut, there are no duplicated route numbers. So,
usually it's "route 39" for Ct-39, Rt 6 (for US 6), and I-84 (for Interstate
84). But, named roads usually are called by their names. The Merritt (Ct. 15),
Super 7 (US 7 from Danbury to Norwalk, even though it's never going to be
finished). In fact, I'd bet if you asked most people to find Ct 15 on a map,
they couldn't, but they'd find the Merritt just fine.
Bob Goudreau
Linda M Jentzen-Bessert (jent...@pilot.msu.edu) wrote:
: Okay, here's something I've been interested in for years. Jody is 100%
: correct in the fact that here in Michigan, if it's numbered as M-59, we
: _call_ it "M-59." Similarly, US-23 is _called_ "US-23." However, in
: other
: parts of the country, people refer to "Highway 95" or "Route 33,"
: irregard-
: less of Interstate, US, State and even County designation.
: I believe this is partly due to the fact of the little "M" appearing
: inside
: the state highway shield here in Michigan. For as long as I know, people
: have always referred to Michigan state routes as "M-xx." (Sidelight:
: It's
: always easy to pick out travel books written by out-of-staters, who
: refer
: to "Michigan 25" or "State Route 25" instead of "M-25.") In this way,
: every
: highway has some sort of "letter" preceeding the number. Not so in many
: other states, where you could call SR-53 in Illinois, "State Route 53,"
: "State Highway 53," "Illinois 53," "State Road 53," "Route 53," and so
: on, ad infinitum.
: I'd be interested in hearing what the "locals" in other parts call their
: highways in daily useage, whether it be route, highway, road, etc...
Here in North Carolina, it's pretty standard to refer to state routes
as "NC xx", even though the shields bear no indication of the state
name or abbreviation (they're just a black number on a white diamond
within a black square). Likewise, "I-xx" and "US xx" are pretty
standard ways of talking about Interstate and US highways. People do
sometimes refer to "Highway xx", but only for US or NC routes, never
for interstates.
Michigan is being slightly parochial in referring to its state highways
as "M-xx", seeing as how there are plenty of states that start with the
letter "M". It would probably be cleaner to use the standard two-
letter abbeviation "MI", like they already do for state tax forms
(e.g., Form MI-1040 is the Michigan equivalent of US Form 1040).
Mike Wiley
Washington State before their massive highway renumbering in 1964 used
to have state route numbers assigned to US highways.
Oregon has a system of assigning different state highways a "Highway
Number" that is different than the "Route Number". This is true of all
Interstate, US , and State "Routes". I've explained this in the past in
a previous post and hope to have a web page with this data someday.
Garrett Wollman
In article <334DD8...@pilot.msu.edu>,
>highways in daily useage, whether it be route, highway, road, etc...
Well, around here:
Generally, routes are known as ``route such-and-so'' or sometimes just
``such-and-so'', with a few exceptions. There are a few odd bits of
local pronunciation: ninety is pronounced ``nonnie''; ``eight'',
``eat''; ``artery'', ``ottery''. Now for the routes with names:
I-93 is ``nonnie-three'' from New Hampshire to Charlestown; the ``Upper
(or Lower) Deck'' from Charlestown to Causeway St.; ``the (Central)
Ottery (or Artery)'' from Causeway to Dewey Square; ``the South
Station Tunnel'' in the Dewey Square Automobile Tunnel; ``the
(Southeast) Expressway'' from the tunnel exit to the ``Braintree Split
(or Merge)''; and ``(route) wun-twun-yeet (or 128)'' from there to its
end in Canton.
I-90 is ``the Turnpike'' or ``the Mass Pike'' or ``the Pike''. People
still can distinguish between the turnpike mainline and the Turnpike
Extension from Weston into downtown Boston, but usually don't.
US 3 is ``route 3'' from New Hampshire to Burlington, and SR 3 is
``route 3'' from Braintree to Bourne. The two are distingushed by the
direction; the remainder of US 3 from Burlington to Boston is rarely
ever mentioned, and then only by name, and similarly SR 3 from
Cambridge to Braintree.
US 1 is ``route 1'' except where co-designated with another highway,
whose identification always takes precedence. I have never heard
anyone say ``Newburyport Turnpike'', but ``Providence Highway'' is
fairly common. The Tobin Bridge (or Mystic-Tobin) and associated City
Square Tunnel are known separately, as are the ramps conecting the
latter with the Upper and Lower Decks.
SR 28 is known by name in the inner suburbs and number elsewhere; the
section in Cambridge and Somerville known as (resp.) Msgr. McGrath
Hwy. and Msgr. O'Brien Hwy. is generally known as the unitary
McGrath-and-O'Brien Highway.
SR 16 is known by name where it coincides with an MDC parkway and
number elsewhere. Most other numbered state routes are known by
number.
-GAWollman
Dave Schul
Linda M Jentzen-Bessert <jent...@pilot.msu.edu> wrote:
>Okay, here's something I've been interested in for years. Jody is 100%
>correct in the fact that here in Michigan, if it's numbered as M-59, we
>_call_ it "M-59." Similarly, US-23 is _called_ "US-23." However, in
>other
>parts of the country, people refer to "Highway 95" or "Route 33,"
>irregard-
>less of Interstate, US, State and even County designation.
>I believe this is partly due to the fact of the little "M" appearing
>inside
>the state highway shield here in Michigan. For as long as I know, people
>have always referred to Michigan state routes as "M-xx." (Sidelight:
>It's
>always easy to pick out travel books written by out-of-staters, who
>refer
>to "Michigan 25" or "State Route 25" instead of "M-25.") In this way,
>every
>highway has some sort of "letter" preceeding the number. Not so in many
>other states, where you could call SR-53 in Illinois, "State Route 53,"
>"State Highway 53," "Illinois 53," "State Road 53," "Route 53," and so
>on,
>ad infinitum.
>I'd be interested in hearing what the "locals" in other parts call their
>highways in daily useage, whether it be route, highway, road, etc...
Here's one to blow your theory. In Kansas, the state highways are
always referred to in terms such as "K-10", even though no "K" appears
anywhere on the sign. In the 60s and earlier, the word "Kansas" was
on it, but now it's just the number in a sunflower. I believe I've
heard Colorado residents refer to their state routes as "C-96" etc.,
and although there is a "C" on the sign, it's part of the flag design.
The odd thing around Kansas City is where the word "highway" is placed
in the spoken name of the road. If someone is giving directions using
US 40, for instance, they will tell you to take "US 40 Highway" or "40
Highway", not "US Highway 40" or "Highway 40." This extends a few
miles into the Kansas side ("K-7 Highway") but by Topeka "Highway 40"
is more common. In KC, to my knowledge, this does not apply to
Interstates. "I-70" or just "70" is typical.
Dave
-----------------------------------------------------
Dave Schul map...@ukans.edu
*** COUNTY COLLECTION UPDATED April 1997 ***
http://falcon.cc.ukans.edu/~dschul/county/county.html
Lawrence, Kansas Home of the Jayhawks
-----------------------------------------------------
Matthew E. Salek
Matthew E. Salek wrote:
>
> Jody L. Aho wrote:
[snip]
> > I've travelled at least a short stretch of all of the highways I
> > mentioned in both Minnesota and Michigan, except for M-75 in Michigan, and
> > as long as one designates US-27 versus M-27, for instance, it seems
> > straightforward. Michigan uses this nomenclature well, however here in
> > Minnesota you hear people referring to "Highway 61" without regard to
> > whether it is a U.S. or a state highway.
>
> That's because it doesn't really pose all that much confsion. In Winona,
> we would say "We're taking Highway 61 up to the Cities." (short for Twin
> Cites for you non-Minnesotans) Since there isn't any other 61 along the
> way, it didn't matter. And when we were "Taking Highway 61 to the
> Canadian border", what was actually meant was 61 to St. Paul, I-35 to
> Duluth, and (now) MN 61 to Grand Portage. One must alo remember that for
> most Minnesotans, MN 61 is known as the "North Shore Drive."
I need to add something to those thoughts. In MN, most, if not all, of the
US/state duplications are due to US decommisionings. So, it's the same number,
and goes through the same towns. If it's only reffered to as "Highway" both
before and after the decommisioning, it's no problem.
Some decommisioned MN routes that retained the same numbers include: 16, 61, 65,
210, 371, and 169
--
Matthew E. Salek, future civil engineer
Colorado State University
http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~mattes
"As the Reagan presidency ends, it is time for the Bush pregnancy to begin."
-Republican Governor Tommy Thompson, Wisconsin
Michael King
In article <334DAA...@mcs.net>, jvincent--at--mcs--dot--net wrote:
> Bryan R. Stutzman wrote:
> >
> > Atlanta and Georgia definitely don't care if they reuse highway numbers.
> > As you may know, I75, I85, and I20 go through Atlanta.
> >
> > Ga20 hits I75 to the NW of the city, continues east past I85, goes south
> > through I20 until it passes I75 again to the SE of the city. (This is
> > basically the route of our possible outer perimeter.)
> >
> > Ga85 starts just SE of the city off of I75 (less than 10 miles away from
> > where I85 leaves the city) and continues SW until it approaches I-185 in
> > Columbus. (I am not sure if it hits it or not).
>
> In fact it goes past I-185. See below.
> >
> > This numbering must have been done on purpose but I cannot figure out what
> > the purpose is. The purpose could definitely not be to use Ga20 as an
> > alternate route for I20 or Ga85 for I85.
>
> First off, it's nice to see someone posting from the Atlanta area...
>
Hey!
What do I look like...chopped liver!?
> The "purpose" you're looking for is that every numbered highway in
> Georgia is given a Georgia state route number, even if it is a U.S.
> highway or Interstate. On many of these roads, however, the number is
> "secret" and not posted.
>
> Some maps, quite possibly the official Georgia state highway map, show
> these "hidden" route numbers. The RMcN shows them on all Georgia's U.S.
> routes, but not the Interstates. U.S. highways are generally given
> one-digit and low two-digit GA numbers, while Interstates/lim-access
> roads are given GA numbers above 400. In fact, this is why GA 400, the
> toll road through Atlanta, was so named.
>
The official DOT map along with quite a few other map companies use the
"hidden" numbers on their maps...the signs are generally not posted on the
highways themselves (at least on the Interstates); but most of the US
highways are co-signed. (i.e., here in Metro Atlanta, US 41 is co-signed
with GA 3; and US 78/278 is co-signed with GA 8).
> This creates *lots* of U.S./Interstate/GA number overlap. For example,
> U.S. 25 is Georgia 1 for its entire length, but there's already U.S. 1
> on the other side of the state. What we non-GADOT types (<g>) call U.S.
> 1 is actually parts of Georgia 4 and Georgia 10.
>
Fascinating...GA 10 here in the Atlanta area runs from I-75/85 downtown
east along Freedom Parkway to Ponce de Leon Ave. and running east along
Ponce and Memorial Dr. to meet with the Stone Mtn. Fwy east of town where
it ends...
> Northwest of Columbus, Georgia 85 becomes the designation for Alternate
> U.S. 27. As such, GA-85 continues past I-185 (itself a GA route too)
> into the center of Columbus.
>
GA 85 parallels I-85 all the way to Columbus, and the locals here refer to
it as "Old 85"...
> It's as if Georgia puts up the U.S. and Interstate markers only as a
> convenience to motorists. Looked at this way, Georgia isn't "re-using"
> highway numbers at all! In this system, the numerical designations I-85
> and I-20 don't matter; to the state they're, say, GA-416 and GA-402. (I
> don't know the real 4xx numbers here.)
>
You're close...I-20 is GA 402, and I-85 is GA 405. The only Interstate that
doesn't follow this convention is I-575 here in Cobb County...it is
co-signed as GA 5 for it's entire length. The only thing that I can think
of is that I-575 was originally GA 5 (which continues both north and south
of the Interstate portion)
> This must be a Deep South thing; Tenessee and Alabama do this as well,
> at least on U.S. routes.
--
Michael King - Atlanta, GA
"Noah, how long can you tread water?"
mic...@ilcnet.com
Michael King
In article <334DE7...@bellsouth.net.REMOVE>, The Reaper's Helper
<dpl...@bellsouth.net.REMOVE> wrote:
>
> If you get a traffic ticket or have a traffic accident in Georgia,
> the ticket or report will most likely reference the Interstate or
> U.S. highway by its Georgia route number only, no matter how
> obscure. I had a accident on I-85 in suburban Atlanta several
> years ago; the ticket and accident report referred to the 10-lane
> freeway only as "SR 403," a moniker that would baffle 99.99% of
> Atlantans.
>
> At my trial, the state took the liberty of calling it I-85, though.
> I don't remember what I was going to call it. Fortunately,
> the judge granted my motion for a summary judgment of not guilty
> after the state rested. :)
Oops...I said 405....it is 403 according to my maps as well...I-75 is 401;
I-285 is 407...US 78 (Stone Mtn. Frwy) is GA 410 (it was originally due to
be an interstate that ran from downtown out to Stone Mountain).
franc...@aol.com
In article <334DD8...@pilot.msu.edu>, jent...@pilot.msu.edu wrote:
>I'd be interested in hearing what the "locals" in other parts call their
>highways in daily useage, whether it be route, highway, road, etc...
In NJ, US, Interstate, and state numbered routes are called by theit number. US 22 is 22, SR 31 is 31, etc.
The GSP is the parkway, the NJTP is the turnpike. Locals never refer to any part of the NJTP as I-95, or even acknowledge that I-95 is there - be careful when asking directions.
Multiplexed routes are handled oddly. US 202 and SR 31 mesh for quite a distance, as do US 202 and US 206. Locals refer to the routes by their own destination. Someone traveling SR 31 from Clinton to
Trenton refer to the multiplexed section as 31. Someone going from Somerville to New Hope, PA will refer to the same multiplexed section as 202.
A major exception is the multiplexed section of US Route 1 and US Route 9 in the Newark Airport region. That road is always called "one and nine" - said that way. Nothing else is acceptable.
County routes are referred to by number in rural areas and by street name in urban even tho' most CR have names. An attenpt 10 years ago to change interstate exit signage to give only the name of the
CR failed. Number designations were re-instated. When a county route is multplexed with a state, it is the SR number used in all cases.
BTW, duplicate numbering of Interstate & state routes happened once before in NJ - in the 1920s when the 1st Federal routes were built. A major SR in NJ was S-9 which followed a stagecoach path
chartered in 1750 and given the 9 designation in 1806. When the Feds built US 9 there was potential conflict since they would be only a few miles apart and may have intersected at a point near
Woodbridge. What saved that day was the Fed decision to number east-west routes even, north-south, odd. NJ relented in 1928 and re-named east-west oriented S-9, S-28. Eventually, it became part of US
22.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Frank A. Curcio = FranC...@aol.com
Local History; Maps; Roads; Pop Culture; Folklore
"Always look happy & cheerful. Enjoy life with the one you love" Ecc 9:8
Scott D. Rhodes
>I'd be interested in hearing what the "locals" in other parts call their
>highways in daily useage, whether it be route, highway, road, etc...
North Carolina is one of the states that tries not to duplicate highway
numbers, so often just the number is given -- "Forty" is Interstate 40,
"Seventy" is US-70, and "Fifty-Four" is NC-54. Occasionally you also hear:
"Eye Forty", "Interstate Forty", "You Ess Seventy", "Highway Seventy", and
"Highway Fifty-Four". Once in a great while you will hear "En See
Fifty-Four", but it's rare in my experience.
Jerry Elya
Growing up in Grand Rapids, Michigan, formal speech was "You Ess 131",
and :Iye 96". Numbered State roads, freeway or not, were called M-
whatever because of the block M on each diamond-shaped sign. Interstates
& other limited access roads were Freeways, and 4-lane divided
w/intersections were divided highways. "Expressway" came up often as an
alternate for freeways, usually by those age-gifted from pre-freeway days.
Mich has no toll roads-- just toll bridges. "The Bridge" (or "Da
Britch" to Yoopers) refers specifically to the Mackinac Bridge
(pronounced MACK in aw) betwixt St. Ignace and Mackinaw City (note the
spelling changes).
Also, I-80/I-90 in Indiana & Ohio is usually called the Indiana/Ohio Toll
Road.
Mike Wiley
Bob Goudreau wrote:
>
> Mike Wiley (yle...@no.spam.please.com) wrote:
>
> : In Califonia, we usually just say the number, such as 280 or 101.
> : Sometimes we add "the" to the front, such as "The 5" or "The 80".
>
> SoCalism, but apparently, it's found in Northern California as
> well. Is it common there, or mostly used by L.A. transplants?
>
Well I did used to live in San Diego. That maybe where I picked up this
habit.
--
Bob Goudreau
Mike Wiley (yle...@no.spam.please.com) wrote:
: In Califonia, we usually just say the number, such as 280 or 101.
: Sometimes we add "the" to the front, such as "The 5" or "The 80".
Interesting -- I'd though that the use of a "the" prefix was a
SoCalism, but apparently, it's found in Northern California as
well. Is it common there, or mostly used by L.A. transplants?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott D. Rhodes
>: Unless they can get Tennessee to agree to change the number of U.S. 74, I
>: don't know that there's much that can be done about it.
>Well, they could simply retire the US 74 route number within NC, and
>have US 74 terminate at the TN/NC border. This shouldn't affect things
>much, since US 74 is multiplexed atop US 64 for dozens of miles along
>both sides of the border anyway. The old 74-only road within NC could
>then be given a state route designation.
That would fairly long state road. There are a few areas where US-74 is
unique, but the longest runs from Charlotte all the way to Chadbourne a bit
east of I-95). I can think of only one NC route which is longer, which is
NC-55 (Durham to Oriental). And almost all of US-74 is divided highway, with
much being freeway. Between the length and the quality, it looks like it
deserves a higher designation than state highway. The only NC highway I can
think of that has such a high percentage of it be divided highway and/or
freeway is NC-147, which is only about 11 miles long.
>TN might also decide that
>it's better to terminate US 74 where it runs into US 64 instead of
>right at the border.
From the looks of it, there isn't a US-74 in Tennesse that isn't multiplexed
with US-64.
Maybe just change the number? Is there an unused 2-digit US highway in that
approximate range? Or perhaps it could be US-x76?
The Reaper's Helper
Michael King wrote:
>
> Fascinating...GA 10 here in the Atlanta area runs from I-75/85 downtown
> east along Freedom Parkway to Ponce de Leon Ave. and running east along
> Ponce and Memorial Dr. to meet with the Stone Mtn. Fwy east of town where
> it ends...
Not quite. GA 10 replaces GA 410 as the state designation for US 78
at that point, and stays with US 78 all the way to South Carolina,
except for a stretch in Athens, where GA 10 carries US 78 Business
through town.
>
> You're close...I-20 is GA 402, and I-85 is GA 405. The only Interstate that
> doesn't follow this convention is I-575 here in Cobb County...it is
> co-signed as GA 5 for it's entire length. The only thing that I can think
> of is that I-575 was originally GA 5 (which continues both north and south
> of the Interstate portion)
The freeway was always I-575. GA 5 was the road (now unnumbered) that
parallels I-575. When I-575 was finished, I believe GA 5 was assigned to
I-575, and the parallel road ("old" GA 5) was renumbered GA 754.
A few years ago, the GA 754 designation was removed north of GA 92.
GA 754 south of GA 92 puzzles me. GaDOT uses temporary 7xx/8xx/9xx
route numbers for proposed and under construction roads. 7xx/8xx/9xx
route markers are never actually erected. Except for GA 754 in Cobb
County. Go figure.
I-985 is GA 365, which preceded the I-985 designation.
I don't think I-516 has a GA 4xx designation. It's GA 21.
I-20, I-75, and I-85 in the city of Atlanta didn't become state
highways until about 1979, but the GaDOT called them GA 402,
GA 401, and GA 403 on their maps anyway.
Eric Scouten
In article <334FFD...@engr.colostate.edu>, mat...@engr.colostate.edu wrote:
> Matthew E. Salek wrote:
> >
> > That's because it doesn't really pose all that much confsion. In Winona,
> > we would say "We're taking Highway 61 up to the Cities." (short for Twin
> > Cites for you non-Minnesotans) Since there isn't any other 61 along the
> > way, it didn't matter. And when we were "Taking Highway 61 to the
> > Canadian border", what was actually meant was 61 to St. Paul, I-35 to
> > Duluth, and (now) MN 61 to Grand Portage. One must alo remember that for
> > most Minnesotans, MN 61 is known as the "North Shore Drive."
>
> I need to add something to those thoughts. In MN, most, if not all, of the
> US/state duplications are due to US decommisionings. So, it's the same
number,
> and goes through the same towns. If it's only reffered to as "Highway" both
> before and after the decommisioning, it's no problem.
>
> Some decommisioned MN routes that retained the same numbers include: 16, 61,
> 65, 210, 371, and 169
Two exceptions to this: 65 north of Minneapolis, and 169 northeast of
Virginia never were US routes. They have always been state routes
considered "extensions" of the US route.
Until a few years ago, the mile markers on MN 65 represented a
continuation of US 65. Some time after US 65 was decommisioned from Albert
Lea to Minneapolis, the state recognized the discontinuity and renumbered
the mile markers on MN 65.
The mile markers on MN 169 from Virginia to Ely (and beyond) are continued
from the US 169 sequence.
-es
__________________________________________________________________________
Eric Scouten er...@scouten.com
Decaffeinated Computer Scientist http://www.scouten.com
Adobe Systems, Inc.
PGP public key at <http://www.scouten.com/contact.html>
__________________________________________________________________________
Oh, love and money almost the same: the less you make, the more
you're to blame.
-John Gorka
Mike Wiley
John R. Grout wrote:
> In addition, a number of urban freeways in California now carrying a
> three-digit Interstate designation used to be California state highways. Two
> which come immediately to mind are the Harbor Freeway (from CA 11 to I-110) in
> the Los Angeles area and the Nimitz Freeway (CA 17 to I-880) in the Bay Area.
>
I-680 north of Benicia used to be CA-21, I-710 used to be CA-7, the
current I-15 around Riverside/San Bernardio used to be CA-31 and CA-71,
the future I-905 used to be CA-117, and of course the infamous I-238
used to be CA-238.
grandma
I've always assumed the 295 in Maryland was I-295. But I don't think
it is an interstate although it is numbered as one. It has the same
number in D.C. as in MD. It is a restricted road (no trucks allowed),
and we always call it the 'BW Parkway' (Baltimore Washington)
Could there also be an I-295 here?
(We've already got I-95, I-195, I-395, I-495, I-695, I-795, and
I-895.)
Bob Goudreau
Scott D. Rhodes (rho...@ipass.net) wrote:
: >: Unless they can get Tennessee to agree to change the number of U.S. 74, I
: >: don't know that there's much that can be done about it.
: >Well, they could simply retire the US 74 route number within NC, and
: >have US 74 terminate at the TN/NC border. This shouldn't affect things
: >much, since US 74 is multiplexed atop US 64 for dozens of miles along
: >both sides of the border anyway. The old 74-only road within NC could
: >then be given a state route designation.
: That would fairly long state road. There are a few areas where US-74 is
: unique, but the longest runs from Charlotte all the way to Chadbourne a bit
: east of I-95).
That run is about 150 miles. On the segment to its west, between
Charlotte and Gastonia, US 29 gets on US 74 for about 30 miles. West of
that, there's another ~60 mile stretch of plain US 74, until it gets on
I-26. All three of these segments together (running about 240 miles)
is what I envision getting a new route designation. Almost all of the
remainder of US 74 in the state is multiplexed onto some other US
highway already, so we could simply decomission the US 74 number.
The exceptions are a ~15 mile stretch in the mountains, between Bryson
City and Dillsbory, and less than 5 miles near the coast, in Wilmington
and Wrightsville Beach. Both of these routes could be given new
distinct NC numbers if necessary. (The mountain stretch deserves it,
but the beach one doesn't, IMHO.)
: I can think of only one NC route which is longer, which is
: NC-55 (Durham to Oriental).
Actually, there are plenty of longer NC routes than the ~150 mile NC
55. The longest ones I can find on a quick scan of a state map are
NC 24, which runs about 250 miles from Charlotte to the coast near
Morehead City; NC 42, which goes about 225 miles from Asheboro to
Colerain (in the northeast corner); and NC 87, whose ~225 mile span
runs from the Virginia line north of Greensboro down to Southport,
below Wilmington. There are also a bunch of ~200 mile routes:
NC 11: Murfreesboro to Freeman
NC 27: Toluca to Benson
NC 49: VA line north of Durham to SC line near Charlotte
NC 58: Warrenton to Atlantic Beach
: And almost all of US-74 is divided highway, with
: much being freeway. Between the length and the quality, it looks like it
: deserves a higher designation than state highway. The only NC highway I can
: think of that has such a high percentage of it be divided highway and/or
: freeway is NC-147, which is only about 11 miles long.
What's so negative about a state highway designation? I don't know of
any implication that US routes are of a "higher" status than NC routes,
but maybe that's an NC DOT policy. It certainly doesn't seem to work
that way in other states, where there are plenty of state route
freeways (consider California alone!). The NC situation may just be
a historical accident; if all the most heavily traveled corridors
got US highway designations way back when (some of course were later
overshadowed by parallel interstate routes), then that didn't leave
many important corridors to be "filled in" with NC routes.
: >TN might also decide that
: >it's better to terminate US 74 where it runs into US 64 instead of
: >right at the border.
: From the looks of it, there isn't a US-74 in Tennesse that isn't multiplexed
: with US-64.
Which begs the question of why it was necessary to extend US 74
westward into TN in the first place! Anybody know the history behind
this? At least this fact would make it easy for TN to retire the
US 74 designation entirely.
John R. Grout
goud...@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) writes:
> It certainly doesn't seem to work that way in other states, where
> there are plenty of state route freeways (consider California
> alone!).
New York has many too, though for some a change of number from I-xxx
to NY-xxx reflects (or precedes) a change of status from freeway to
divided highway.
In addition, a number of urban freeways in California now carrying a
three-digit Interstate designation used to be California state highways. Two
which come immediately to mind are the Harbor Freeway (from CA 11 to I-110) in
the Los Angeles area and the Nimitz Freeway (CA 17 to I-880) in the Bay Area.
--
John R. Grout j-g...@uiuc.edu
Department of Computer Science University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Mike Wiley
Technically, I-295 extends south of the DC-MD border to juction with the
Beltway and MD-210!
Oscar Voss
Bob Goudreau wrote:
[snip]
> : And almost all of US-74 is divided highway, with
> : much being freeway. Between the length and the quality, it looks like it
> : deserves a higher designation than state highway. The only NC highway I can
> : think of that has such a high percentage of it be divided highway and/or
> : freeway is NC-147, which is only about 11 miles long.
>
> What's so negative about a state highway designation? I don't know of
> any implication that US routes are of a "higher" status than NC routes,
> but maybe that's an NC DOT policy. It certainly doesn't seem to work
> that way in other states, where there are plenty of state route
> freeways (consider California alone!).
[snip]
Indeed, California many years ago "downgraded" many of its US routes to
state routes. For example, US 6 now stops in Bishop, used to go into
Los Angeles (most of the stretch in-between is CA 14); old US 466 is now
CA 58 and CA 46; old US 299 is now CA 299; most of old US 99 became CA
99 and CA 86; etc.
Between "downgrades" from US to SR, and "upgrades" from US to
Interstate, there are fewer US routes left in California (US 6, US 50,
US 95, US 97, US 101, US 199, and US 395) than there are in North
Carolina.
Scott D. Rhodes
>: I can think of only one NC route which is longer, which is
>: NC-55 (Durham to Oriental).
>Actually, there are plenty of longer NC routes than the ~150 mile NC
>55. The longest ones I can find on a quick scan of a state map are
>NC 24, which runs about 250 miles from Charlotte to the coast near
>Morehead City; NC 42, which goes about 225 miles from Asheboro to
>Colerain (in the northeast corner); and NC 87, whose ~225 mile span
>runs from the Virginia line north of Greensboro down to Southport,
>below Wilmington.
Okay, you got me on that one. :-) I've always wondered about NC-24, though.
From Charlotte to Johnsonville -- about half of its length -- it's multiplexed
onto NC-27. NC-27 continues beyond the multiplexing in both directions, but
NC-24 does not continue on to the west. Was there really any good reason to
multiplex them together so long? This makes even less sense than the distance
for which US-74 and US-76 are multiplexed.
>What's so negative about a state highway designation? I don't know of
>any implication that US routes are of a "higher" status than NC routes,
>but maybe that's an NC DOT policy.
I don't know if it's policy or not, but it sure seems that way. Most of the
divided highways in North Carolina are US highways. The only freeway NC
highway that isn't multiplexed onto a US Highway or Interstate is the
previously mentioned NC-147 (which is constantly being suggested as a prime
candidate for 3di designation by a lot of people in the Triangle.) Yes, there
are some divided NC highways, and plenty of non-divided US highways, but the
rule does seem to hold with as much consistency as any other rule involving
the highways or North Carolina. :-)
Garrett Wollman
In article <5jb1vs$1eq$2...@news.ipass.net>,
Scott D. Rhodes <rho...@ipass.net> wrote:
>NC-24 does not continue on to the west. Was there really any good reason to
>multiplex them together so long? This makes even less sense than the distance
>for which US-74 and US-76 are multiplexed.
I can't speak for North Carolina, but I do know that in some states,
state route designations are statutory, rather than being determined
by someone with a clue. Thus, even if it would make much more sense
to have SR-x end at its intersection with SR-y rather than following
it for fifteen miles and then ending, it may be politically difficult
to get the state legislature to enact the necessary bill to remove the
spurious designation.
I suspect the usual form of such designations is to require that a
highway start in, pass through, and end in specific named communities,
and leaving it up to the administrators to figure out how to make it
happen.
I don't know, but suspect, that Massachusetts is one of those states,
which would explain the situation with routes 2 and 111, and 2A and
119 (the latter of both end immediately upon entering the town of
Concord after being multiplexed with the former for some distance).
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | O Siem / We are all family / O Siem / We're all the same
wol...@lcs.mit.edu | O Siem / The fires of freedom
Opinions not those of| Dance in the burning flame
MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - Susan Aglukark and Chad Irschick
John Lansford
rho...@ipass.net (Scott D. Rhodes) wrote:
>>What's so negative about a state highway designation? I don't know of
>>any implication that US routes are of a "higher" status than NC routes,
>>but maybe that's an NC DOT policy.
>
>I don't know if it's policy or not, but it sure seems that way. Most of the
>divided highways in North Carolina are US highways. The only freeway NC
>highway that isn't multiplexed onto a US Highway or Interstate is the
>previously mentioned NC-147 (which is constantly being suggested as a prime
>candidate for 3di designation by a lot of people in the Triangle.) Yes, there
>are some divided NC highways, and plenty of non-divided US highways, but the
>rule does seem to hold with as much consistency as any other rule involving
>the highways or North Carolina. :-)
In my work with NCDOT, I use a designation map for the routes all the
time. Nearly all US routes in North Carolina are listed as "arterials"
when it comes to their classification. Some NC routes are designated
that as well, but the US routes are universally classified that way.
An arterial designation means the route would be expected to carry
higher traffic volumes, and there would be a higher level of design
criteria applied to it as well in construction/rehabilitation. That
often would lead to the US routes being turned into freeways or at
least high speed four lane roads.
The classification ratings start at Interstate, and proceed down
through "arterial", "collector", and "local". Each has a different
level of design criteria associated with it, and the designations can
change depending on the traffic volumes it ends up carrying. There are
sublevels for arterial and collector as well, called "major" and
"minor". These are mostly for planning purposes though; no specific
design criteria are included for them.
John Lansford
J Vincent
Scott D. Rhodes wrote:
[snip]
> Okay, you got me on that one. :-) I've always wondered about NC-24, though.
> From Charlotte to Johnsonville -- about half of its length -- it's multiplexed
> onto NC-27. NC-27 continues beyond the multiplexing in both directions, but
> multiplex them together so long? This makes even less sense than the distance
> for which US-74 and US-76 are multiplexed.
There's a good reason for keeping the dual designation of U.S. 74/76:
The roads separate in downtown Wilmington, about five miles from the
coast. Then they get back together for the bridge over the Intracoastal
Waterway, only to separate again at Wrightsville Beach. Wherever they
are separate, U.S. 74 is to the north and 76 to the south, as one would
expect. The RMcN doesn't show this separation too well, but it's quite
clear on a DeLorme (or better yet, spend a weekend down there at the
beach <g>).
But I agree on N.C. 24. Perhaps other readers with old atlases can tell
us whether N.C. 24 ever existed east of U.S. 74/Independence Boulevard
in Charlotte.
>
> >What's so negative about a state highway designation? I don't know of
> >any implication that US routes are of a "higher" status than NC routes,
> >but maybe that's an NC DOT policy.
>
> I don't know if it's policy or not, but it sure seems that way. Most of the
> divided highways in North Carolina are US highways. The only freeway NC
> highway that isn't multiplexed onto a US Highway or Interstate is the
> previously mentioned NC-147 (which is constantly being suggested as a prime
> candidate for 3di designation by a lot of people in the Triangle.)
You're leaving out:
* N.C. 87 in Fayetteville;
* N.C. 68 near Greensboro;
* N.C. 16 north of Charlotte, after the I-277 designation ends, and
* the new N.C. 752 near the Virginia border (I-77 exit 101).
It seems like the policy is to use a U.S. route, or a "bypass" U.S.
designation, whenever possible. In N.C., it usually turns out to be
possible.
I haven't seen 752 discussed anywhere, on or off the Net, and I'm
wondering about it. Was it built to improve the the connection between
Winston-Salem and I-77? Previously, trucks could take U.S. 52 only as
far north as Mount Airy; the mountainous stretches north of the Virginia
state line were off limits. Trucks then took the two-lane N.C. 89 over
to I-77. Will it run only between 52 and 77 or will it be extended
further? Is a numbering change to a 3di or even to I-73 or I-74 looming
in the distance?
> Yes, there
> are some divided NC highways, and plenty of non-divided US highways, but the
> rule does seem to hold with as much consistency as any other rule involving
> the highways or North Carolina. :-)
<rant>
It appalls me that people in this NG have as many complaints as they do
about North Carolina's roads. These people must never do any driving in
N.C. outside of their daily commutes, because statewide, N.C. has one of
the best road systems among the 30-odd states I've been to, and its
roads are only getting better. Especially now that the 1989 gas tax hike
has spurred plenty of projects, the state's many roads -- limited-access
and otherwise -- are remarkably modern, capacious and well-maintained.
Not only that, there is little of the rapacious "tear down anything that
gets on our way" attitude seen in other states (Georgia, Illinois). I
think there are no potholes anywhere in the state. Lots of states don't
have 70 mph yet; in fact I recall Sen. Lauch Faircloth (R-N.C.)
spearheading the repeal of the NMSL in Congress.
Raleigh residents, rather than gripe about quirky exit numbering on the
Beltline, should take pride in being the second-smallest U.S. city to
even *have* a beltway[1]; it'll by far be the smallest city to have
*two* when I-640 is finished.
And as far as quirky signing conventions go, Massachusetts and
Connecticut are light years past N.C.
Anyone who thinks N.C. roads are substandard, or that the state is
behind the times, deserves to live in Pennsylvania and deal with
PennDOT's "screw the motorists" mentality. Live in PA for a year, then
come back and tell me what you think about getting around in North
Carolina.
</rant>
[1] I did some quick research in my RMcN here. Seems the smallest city
to have one is Lubbock, Texas. Before anyone calls me on this, I mean
360-degree, all-limited-access beltline. If I'm wrong, my point is no
less valid.
--
J Vincent/MVS - jvincent (at) mcs (dot) net
"No matter what your plans are, the result is always a surprise."
J Vincent
I foolishly wrote:
>
> But I agree on N.C. 24. Perhaps other readers with old atlases can tell
> us whether N.C. 24 ever existed east of U.S. 74/Independence Boulevard
^^^^
> in Charlotte.
Doh! I meant, has 24 ever existed *west* of U.S. 74?
--
J Vincent/MVS - jvincent (at) mcs (dot) net
Moving 5/1/97: New bigger apartment, same great city.
JDunlop
>Subject: N.C. roads...Stop complaining about them!!
>From: J Vincent <NOSPAMj...@mcs.net>
>Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 20:13:33 -0500
>Message-ID: <335ABF...@mcs.net>
>* N.C. 87 in Fayetteville;
>* N.C. 68 near Greensboro;
>* N.C. 16 north of Charlotte, after the I-277 designation ends, and
>* the new N.C. 752 near the Virginia border (I-77 exit 101).
>It seems like the policy is to use a U.S. route, or a "bypass" U.S.
>designation, whenever possible. In N.C., it usually turns out to be
>possible.
>I haven't seen 752 discussed anywhere, on or off the Net, and I'm
>wondering about it. Was it built to improve the the connection between
>Winston-Salem and I-77? Previously, trucks could take U.S. 52 only as
>far north as Mount Airy; the mountainous stretches north of the Virginia
>state line were off limits. Trucks then took the two-lane N.C. 89 over
>to I-77. Will it run only between 52 and 77 or will it be extended
>further? Is a numbering change to a 3di or even to I-73 or I-74 looming
>in the distance?
It is the future route of I-73 or I-74, whichever one's supposed to go
through Winston-Salem (the other will go through Greensboro.) It is being
built so that there's a freeway between W-S and Virginia, planned well
before the I-73/74 creation. The current "shortcut" along NC 89 is not a
great alternative. This is the first I heard about NC 752, I had assumed
that it would be some form of US 52.
North Carolina is the only state of the ones involved with I-73 (that I
know of) which has almost the entire route completed (some modifications
will be needed to bring some stretches closer to Interstate standards).
West Virginia (the cause of the route, thanks to Sen. Byrd) needs the most
that I can tell, and South Carolina is not very far into the planning
stages.
>It appalls me that people in this NG have as many complaints as they do
>about North Carolina's roads. These people must never do any driving in
>N.C. outside of their daily commutes, because statewide, N.C. has one of
>the best road systems among the 30-odd states I've been to, and its
>roads are only getting better. Especially now that the 1989 gas tax hike
>has spurred plenty of projects, the state's many roads -- limited-access
>and otherwise -- are remarkably modern, capacious and well-maintained.
>Not only that, there is little of the rapacious "tear down anything that
>gets on our way" attitude seen in other states (Georgia, Illinois). I
>think there are no potholes anywhere in the state. Lots of states don't
>have 70 mph yet; in fact I recall Sen. Lauch Faircloth (R-N.C.)
>spearheading the repeal of the NMSL in Congress.
A recent statistical survey ranked NC 30th of the states for its road
network. This included some things like roadway condition that brought
the ranking down. The survey was done by UNC-Charlotte. I only heard
about the survey on the radio, I'm sure I can find a copy of the study
once at work. (I'm guessing it was done ala the Places Rated Almanac,
ranking a number of catagories.) If I find it, I'll post a summary
(including the overall rankings.) I'm puzzled, I didn't think the road
conditions were that bad. Regarding potholes, there are quite a few
around, the winter before last ('95-'96) was pretty bad for the roads. The
paving here leaves something to be desired. (Even the concrete work isn't
great, as an example, the stretch of I-40 between US 15-501 and I-85 in
Chapel Hill is particularly rough.) North Carolina does have the
country's largest STATE maintained road network (by virtue of not having
any county roads, the state maintains all roads that a municipality
doesn't) and a lot of unpaved roads that are maintained by the State. All
of this may have factored into the survey.
I don't take the messages as complaining as much as it is talking about
the local area and its peculiarities (just as there have been plenty from
other states). It's also trying to understand the reason (if any) of what
went into making the decisions that were made. You mentioned in
particular the 1989 bill, I have nothing bad to say about it, since it
pays the bills. :-)
James H. Dunlop, P.E.
Durham, NC
Linda M Jentzen-Bessert
J Vincent wrote:
[snip]
> But I agree on N.C. 24. Perhaps other readers with old atlases can tell
> in Charlotte.
Looking back through my old RMcN's, 1963 is the first year that the
24/27 pairing into Charlotte is present (on the maps, at least). It
doesn't ever seem to have progressed west of US-74/Independence Blvd.
> Raleigh residents, rather than gripe about quirky exit numbering on the
> Beltline, should take pride in being the second-smallest U.S. city to
> even *have* a beltway[1]; it'll by far be the smallest city to have
> *two* when I-640 is finished.
> [...]
> [1] I did some quick research in my RMcN here. Seems the smallest city
> to have one is Lubbock, Texas. Before anyone calls me on this, I mean
> 360-degree, all-limited-access beltline. If I'm wrong, my point is no
> less valid.
To add my two cents...
Here in Michigan, Lansing is completely encircled by all-limited-access
freeways, although they _aren't_ one single "beltline." Clockwise from
12:00, there is I-69/US-127 to 1:00, then US-127 south to 3:00, I-496/
US-127 to 4:30, then I-96 west to 8:00, north on I-96/I-69/US-27 to
10:30, then I-69/US-27 back to 12:00. It's a total of 36 miles of free-
way surrounding a city of ~128,000 people, smaller than Lubbock and
Raleigh. However, the original point is still _quite_ valid, especially
since Lansing being surrounded by freeways is more a circumstance of
being a crossroads for 4 major highways (I-69, U-96, US-27, US-127),
not of specific planning to construct a 360-degree beltway, let along
_two_ beltways...
Chris
------------------------------------------------
Linda M Jentzen-Bessert -or- Christopher Bessert
Howell, Michigan
http://members.aol.com/Bessert1/
------------------------------------------------
Frisc...@msn.com
> It appalls me that people in this NG have as many complaints as they do
> about North Carolina's roads. These people must never do any driving in
> N.C. outside of their daily commutes, because statewide, N.C. has one of
> the best road systems among the 30-odd states I've been to, and its
> roads are only getting better. Especially now that the 1989 gas tax hike
> has spurred plenty of projects, the state's many roads -- limited-access
> and otherwise -- are remarkably modern, capacious and well-maintained.
> Not only that, there is little of the rapacious "tear down anything that
> gets on our way" attitude seen in other states (Georgia, Illinois). I
> think there are no potholes anywhere in the state. Lots of states don't
> have 70 mph yet; in fact I recall Sen. Lauch Faircloth (R-N.C.)
> spearheading the repeal of the NMSL in Congress.
>
> Raleigh residents, rather than gripe about quirky exit numbering on the
> Beltline, should take pride in being the second-smallest U.S. city to
> even *have* a beltway[1]; it'll by far be the smallest city to have
> *two* when I-640 is finished.
>
> [1] I did some quick research in my RMcN here. Seems the smallest city
> to have one is Lubbock, Texas. Before anyone calls me on this, I mean
> 360-degree, all-limited-access beltline. If I'm wrong, my point is no
> less valid.
>
Regarding North Carolina roads: I don't know whose messages you've been
reading, but I've never seen a negative comment regarding NC roads in
this newsgroup. I used to live in NC and I know that there are among the
best. Certainly better than most states.
Now if you want to get me started on your state's reactionary politics,
that is an entirely different affair. But since this isn't a political
bulletin board I will bite my tongue...er...my typing hand I mean.
Before those folks in Raleigh start breaking out the champaign:
Regarding tiny 360 degree beltline cities, there aren't any beltlines
that are truly 360 degrees. Of those that come close the following are
all smaller than Raleigh or Lubbock: Fort Wayne (IN), Ann Arbor (MI),
Green Bay (WI), Davenport (IA) (includes Rock Island & Moline (IL)), or
even nearby Columbia (SC).
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
James Lin
Mike Wiley <yle...@no.spam.please.com> wrote:
>Bob Goudreau wrote:
>>
>> Mike Wiley (yle...@no.spam.please.com) wrote:
>>
>> : In Califonia, we usually just say the number, such as 280 or 101.
>> : Sometimes we add "the" to the front, such as "The 5" or "The 80".
>>
>> Interesting -- I'd though that the use of a "the" prefix was a
>> SoCalism, but apparently, it's found in Northern California as
>> well. Is it common there, or mostly used by L.A. transplants?
>>
>Well I did used to live in San Diego. That maybe where I picked up this
>habit.
I've lived in the Bay Area for almost 8 years, and I've never heard
the "the" prefix used by locals. Sometimes, "Highway" is used before
the number, like Highway 85, regardless of whether it's Interstate,
U.S. or state.
(BTW, being in the L.A. area for college, I get the urge to say "the"
to blend in with the locals. Heck, I get the urge to use freeway
_names_.)
In Connecticut, where I lived for nine years, we said "I" before
Interstates but "route" before U.S. and state highways.
- Jim
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
James Lin | Highway Markers
jl...@ugcs.caltech.edu | http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~jlin/signs/
|
Without computers, it would be | Lincoln Highway
virtually impossible for us to | http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~jlin/lincoln/
accomploiwur xow;gkc,mf(*&( |
-- Dave Barry |
Michael G. Koerner
In article <8616053...@dejanews.com>, Frisc...@msn.com wrote:
>
>
[snip]
>
>Before those folks in Raleigh start breaking out the champaign:
>Regarding tiny 360 degree beltline cities, there aren't any beltlines
>that are truly 360 degrees. Of those that come close the following are
>all smaller than Raleigh or Lubbock: Fort Wayne (IN), Ann Arbor (MI),
>Green Bay (WI), Davenport (IA) (includes Rock Island & Moline (IL)), or
>even nearby Columbia (SC).
Appleton, WI (pop ~70,000) has a complete freeway beltline around it (US
10/US 41/WI 441)
>
>-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenetn
Matthew E. Salek
Michael G. Koerner wrote:
>
> In article <8616053...@dejanews.com>, Frisc...@msn.com wrote:
>
> >
> >
> [snip]
> >
> >Before those folks in Raleigh start breaking out the champaign:
> >Regarding tiny 360 degree beltline cities, there aren't any beltlines
> >that are truly 360 degrees. Of those that come close the following are
> >all smaller than Raleigh or Lubbock: Fort Wayne (IN), Ann Arbor (MI),
> >Green Bay (WI), Davenport (IA) (includes Rock Island & Moline (IL)), or
> >even nearby Columbia (SC).
>
> Appleton, WI (pop ~70,000) has a complete freeway beltline around it (US
> 10/US 41/WI 441)
Wait a minute....Isn't the east side of Appleton up against Lake
Winnebago? Does the freeway go into the lake?
--
Matthew E. Salek, future civil engineer Colorado State University
http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~mattes
J Vincent
Michael G. Koerner wrote:
> Appleton, WI (pop ~70,000) has a complete freeway beltline around it (US
> 10/US 41/WI 441)
But the Appleton pseudo-beltway doesn't have one single number -- it's
just two roads that go around different sides of town. Given this
definition you can concoct a beltway around almost any city. The Raleigh
beltline was designed from the start as a complete beltline, and
although part of I-440 is now co-designated as I-40, the Beltline was
there long before 40 came through.
--
J Vincent/MVS - jvincent (at) mcs (dot) net