News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered at https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=33904.0
Corrected several already and appreciate your patience as we work through the rest.

Main Menu

The Great Interstate 238 Debate

Started by Voyager, January 20, 2009, 01:59:56 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Voyager

What does everyone think Caltrans should do with this freeway? Personally, I think it should be renumbered to Interstate 480, but I guess Caltrans thinks otherwise.
Back From The Dead | AARoads Forum Original


agentsteel53

the main problem with it is that it is signed as north-south while it is almost due east-west.  If it were made the head of CA-238 then it would be a more sensible direction.  I know I always get hideously confused... "okay just gotta take 238 west... which is, screw, which one is it again???"

either call it CA-238, or sign it east-west.  And give it a new number while we're at it, but it's not nearly as hideously malnumbered as I-99.
live from sunny San Diego.

http://shields.aaroads.com

jake@aaroads.com

John

Just change it back to CA-238. Although, everyone hates I-480, so maybe is they call it that, the horrendous traffic problems they always have on it will go away.
They came, they went, they took my image...

Chris

Does the I-238 makes more sense than the also really short I-980 in Oakland? Maybe they should renumber I-980 to SR-24 too... Just a quick thought  :colorful:

agentsteel53

I've never seen the purpose of 980; it just makes it confusing since essentially it's the last mile or so of 24 that is signed as that, as opposed to an independent freeway.

maybe they should sign a quarter-mile of the CA-4 freeway as I-139.  Hey, why the Hell not?
live from sunny San Diego.

http://shields.aaroads.com

jake@aaroads.com

Voyager

They want the Interstate funding though...
Back From The Dead | AARoads Forum Original

agentsteel53

there are plenty of highways with interstate funding and no shields...
live from sunny San Diego.

http://shields.aaroads.com

jake@aaroads.com

Voyager

Ah, I didn't know about that...that's the only reason I had heard that it was originally upgraded to an Interstate.
Back From The Dead | AARoads Forum Original

agentsteel53

I don't know the exact rules; I think you may be on to something with some routes needing shields and others allowed to remain invisible.  For example, US-395 in Reno, NV is I-580 and originally it was signed, but then they took the signs down ...
live from sunny San Diego.

http://shields.aaroads.com

jake@aaroads.com

WillWeaverRVA

Change it back to CA 238. They don't have to have interstate signs up to get funding, just look at I-595 in MD and I-878 in NY.
Will Weaver
WillWeaverRVA Photography | Twitter

"But how will the oxen know where to drown if we renumber the Oregon Trail?" - NE2

vdeane

I think they should change it to I-480 as a secret designation and sign it as CA 238 (actually, it's small enough that they could just sign it a TO: I-580 heading east and TO: I-880 heading west).
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

WillWeaverRVA

Quote from: deanej on January 20, 2009, 07:26:26 PM
I think they should change it to I-480 as a secret designation and sign it as CA 238 (actually, it's small enough that they could just sign it a TO: I-580 heading east and TO: I-880 heading west).

This is a pretty good idea. No one (well, in the general public, anyway) HAS to know the route is an interstate.
Will Weaver
WillWeaverRVA Photography | Twitter

"But how will the oxen know where to drown if we renumber the Oregon Trail?" - NE2

John

Yeah I agree. Hidden interstates are everywhere, just renumber I-238 and end the whole mess.
They came, they went, they took my image...

Voyager

Considering they just finished widening the entire freeway, that would have been a great time to change all the signage on it.
Back From The Dead | AARoads Forum Original

andy3175

For my fictional renumbering, I would renumber I-580 as I-58, then change I-238 to I-258.... as CA 58 would become I-40.

Andy
Regards,
Andy

www.aaroads.com

Voyager

Back From The Dead | AARoads Forum Original

agentsteel53

Quote from: voyager on January 21, 2009, 01:48:40 AM
Now that's a stretch! :-D

it's about right ... if Maryland is allowed I-97 then surely California could be allowed I-58!
live from sunny San Diego.

http://shields.aaroads.com

jake@aaroads.com

Voyager

#17
Well, yeah, but then that would probably anger a bunch of people even more who didn't like the Interstate 238 designation in the first place, so that wouldn't help anything. :ded:
Back From The Dead | AARoads Forum Original

Alex

Interstate 99 and 238 don't bother me anymore.

SimMoonXP

Yeah, Andy.. I-58 is good one but close call. The closest west-east interstate for I-238 is I-80. There are many different interstate options. as could be between I-42 to I-78 as general clue.
Potential alignment between I-42 to I-78 placement
1) I-238 alignment - between I-880 to CA-238 (force I-230 renumber between I-42 to I-78)
2) I-580 alignment - between CA-238 to I-205 (force I-580 renumber between I-42 to I-78)
3) I-205 alignment - between I-580 to I-5 (force I-205 renumber between I-42 to I-78)

mrivera1

Interstate 238...I have no qualms against this freeway number even though it is a serious breach of numbering code.  I think that the AASHTO should consider introducing 4 digit interstate route numbers.  Just make a wider interstate shield, shorten the numbers, and it would be fine.  That way, a given interstate would have 20 auxiliary routes available, perfect for large population centers such as San Francisco, Los Angeles, or the Northeast Corridor.  I-1080 would be better than any unassociated route number (like I-238 or I-58).
Why did Caltrans kill the US highways?  If you're smart, you'll know where you're going.  Too bad we have too many stupid people, and yes, Miss Talking on Cell Phone While Cutting Across the Freeway to Make Her Exit at 85mph, I'm talking about you.

warderjack

Quote from: SyntheticDreamer on January 20, 2009, 07:42:32 PM
Quote from: deanej on January 20, 2009, 07:26:26 PM
I think they should change it to I-480 as a secret designation and sign it as CA 238 (actually, it's small enough that they could just sign it a TO: I-580 heading east and TO: I-880 heading west).

This is a pretty good idea. No one (well, in the general public, anyway) HAS to know the route is an interstate.

I agree with this, having a different designation for such a short stretch of road is probably more confusing to the average motorist than anything else.

Revive 755

#22
Maybe it should be a secret spur 580, like the I-270 spur near DC.

My problem with I-238 is how California is allowed to blatantly violate interstate number rules, but Missouri isn't allowed to for MO 370 (per http://www.kurumi.com/roads/3di/i370.html).  California should have had to use I-180 for I-238, regardless if there's also a CA 180.

FreewayDan

My idea to get rid of I-238 violation would be to realign I-205 onto I-580, starting at I-5 and continuing westward toward CA 238.  Voila, I-238 becomes I-205.  The present-day I-205 could be renumbered to US 6; CA 120 would be replaced by US 6.  The orphan section of US 6 that would go to US 395 in Bishop could become California 306.
LEFT ON GREEN
ARROW ONLY

John

That is a wild plan, but it could work. Of course, that wouldn't happen because the higher ups seem to hate US highways, so creating a new one is a no-no.
They came, they went, they took my image...



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.