Why are there not 4 digit interstates?

[oscar]

I would see CA-90 being I-705 (since I don't think there is a I-705 or CA-705 either). But if there were no odd 3di route numbers available, why not I-1105?

In that particular case, confusion with the similarly-numbered I-105 nearby. Hard to tell, when someone says "I-1105", whether the speaker meant "I-105" and was just stuttering.

A wide range of other options remain, including I-705 (number not used for any route in California), making the short Marina Freeway (remnant of a much longer proposed freeway largely superseded by I-105) unnumbered, or just leaving it as is. It's not as if Caltrans is hankering to slap Interstate shields on every freeway. If anything, it should be criticized for its glacial pace on converting CA 210 to an I-210 extension, and CA 15 to an I-15 extension in San Diego.

[hotdogPi]

I would see CA-90 being I-705 (since I don't think there is a I-705 or CA-705 either). But if there were no odd 3di route numbers available, why not I-1105?

In that particular case, confusion with the similarly-numbered I-105 nearby. Hard to tell, when someone says "I-1105", whether the speaker meant "I-105" and was just stuttering.

I would think it would be pronounced "eleven oh five".

[cpzilliacus]

I would see CA-90 being I-705 (since I don't think there is a I-705 or CA-705 either). But if there were no odd 3di route numbers available, why not I-1105?

In that particular case, confusion with the similarly-numbered I-105 nearby. Hard to tell, when someone says "I-1105", whether the speaker meant "I-105" and was just stuttering.

As was suggested by 1 nearby, I would assume that I-1105 would be pronounced as "I-1105" (or perhaps in Los Angeles, as the "eleven-oh-five freeway").

A wide range of other options remain, including I-705 (number not used for any route in California), making the short Marina Freeway (remnant of a much longer proposed freeway largely superseded by I-105) unnumbered, or just leaving it as is. It's not as if Caltrans is hankering to slap Interstate shields on every freeway. If anything, it should be criticized for its glacial pace on converting CA 210 to an I-210 extension, and CA 15 to an I-15 extension in San Diego.

Getting to the world of fictional highways, but it would be nice to see that little stump of CA-90 tie into La Cienega Boulevard north of W. Slauson Avenue.

[kphoger]

I would assume that I-1105 would be pronounced as "I-1105"

Oh, dear me.

[michravera]

I would see CA-90 being I-705 (since I don't think there is a I-705 or CA-705 either). But if there were no odd 3di route numbers available, why not I-1105?

In that particular case, confusion with the similarly-numbered I-105 nearby. Hard to tell, when someone says "I-1105", whether the speaker meant "I-105" and was just stuttering.

As was suggested by 1 nearby, I would assume that I-1105 would be pronounced as "I-1105" (or perhaps in Los Angeles, as the "eleven-oh-five freeway").

A wide range of other options remain, including I-705 (number not used for any route in California), making the short Marina Freeway (remnant of a much longer proposed freeway largely superseded by I-105) unnumbered, or just leaving it as is. It's not as if Caltrans is hankering to slap Interstate shields on every freeway. If anything, it should be criticized for its glacial pace on converting CA 210 to an I-210 extension, and CA 15 to an I-15 extension in San Diego.

Getting to the world of fictional highways, but it would be nice to see that little stump of CA-90 tie into La Cienega Boulevard north of W. Slauson Avenue.

I doubt that we would do a 4-di with I-705 available. As it is California apparently has nothing but distain for putting up I-shields. Learn to love the miner's spade. Most of our freeways have them. What we don't have is any consistency in numbering that would lead an outsider to have any reason that they should take CASR-85 to get somewhere and usually avoid CASR-82 or to take CASR-237 and avoid CASR-222.

[vdeane]

As it is California apparently has nothing but distain for putting up I-shields.

If only they could have had that sentiment when they did I-238.

I would like to see them designate I-210 and I-905, but mainly because they had intended to originally and because they have covered up shields more than anything else.  Otherwise I don't care.  CA has so many freeways that making them all interstates is neither necessary nor practical.

[kkt]

California posted original interstates and interstates paid for by interstate funds.  Anything else was leftover US routes (50, 101), or got CA state route numbers.

[paulthemapguy]

There aren't 4-digit numbers for the same reason we separate every three consecutive digits with a comma.  It's harder to remember more than 3 digits at a time.  Of course, it's a debatable choice to make three the number of digits we can reasonably expect a human to retain in one's mind at one time-the Japanese, for example, delimit every group of 4 digits.  I think 3 is a good number of digits to choose as a maximum.  There are ways to tweak the designations given to highways to ensure we don't have to use all digits 1 through 9 for a particular 2di in a particular state.  It would bother me to see 4 digit Interstates--it's hard enough to get people to remember directions as it is, without introducing hard-to-remember colossal numbers to make things more difficult.  This is coming from a guy who's bothered by the existence of 3-digit Illinois 146 when there isn't a simpler Illinois 46 designation that could be used instead.  Efficiency is important in communication (he said after writing an excessively long post)!

[michravera]

As it is California apparently has nothing but distain for putting up I-shields.

If only they could have had that sentiment when they did I-238.

I would like to see them designate I-210 and I-905, but mainly because they had intended to originally and because they have covered up shields more than anything else.  Otherwise I don't care.  CA has so many freeways that making them all interstates is neither necessary nor practical.

Things were different in 1985 than they are now 30+ years later. In 1985, we were 10 years behind the 1975 completion date of the Interstate system. Now, people want to add and detract from it.

[sparker]

As it is California apparently has nothing but distain for putting up I-shields.

If only they could have had that sentiment when they did I-238.

I would like to see them designate I-210 and I-905, but mainly because they had intended to originally and because they have covered up shields more than anything else.  Otherwise I don't care.  CA has so many freeways that making them all interstates is neither necessary nor practical.

Things were different in 1985 than they are now 30+ years later. In 1985, we were 10 years behind the 1975 completion date of the Interstate system. Now, people want to add and detract from it.

Right now, the only CA interstate route that may be subject to deletion is the unfinished northern portion of 710; all else that's existing is for all intents and purposes safe.  Dragging one's feet in regards to planned and presently state-signed (potential) Interstates such as 210 and 905 seems to be a more recent Caltrans penchant (in the '80's they couldn't wait to get those 110, 710, and 880 signs up -- not to mention the anomaly 238). 

The only really logical Interstate trunk/2di addition in the state is the oft-explored western extension of 40 to I-5 via CA 58, which may yet happen (probably not in my lifetime, however).  And although CA 99 is a federally designated (via the HPC 54 route) future Interstate, no one seems to be in a big hurry to actually fulfill that concept  -- although I am somewhat surprised that something like the Interstate concept -- or perhaps at least something that cleans up a few CA 99 trouble spots -- wasn't pressed as a form of "political blackmail" in order to secure passage of the recent fuel tax increase bill -- instead the one "R" who crossed over to vote for the bill got a parkway in Merced and an extension to the subsidized ACE San Jose-Valley commuter service.  Maybe that with the recent Chowchilla-Merced upgrade, there's no cross traffic remaining on 99 -- the route, at least for the present, is considered a fait accompli -- with attention drawn elsewhere.     

[michravera]

As it is California apparently has nothing but distain for putting up I-shields.

If only they could have had that sentiment when they did I-238.

I would like to see them designate I-210 and I-905, but mainly because they had intended to originally and because they have covered up shields more than anything else.  Otherwise I don't care.  CA has so many freeways that making them all interstates is neither necessary nor practical.

Things were different in 1985 than they are now 30+ years later. In 1985, we were 10 years behind the 1975 completion date of the Interstate system. Now, people want to add and detract from it.

Right now, the only CA interstate route that may be subject to deletion is the unfinished northern portion of 710; all else that's existing is for all intents and purposes safe.  Dragging one's feet in regards to planned and presently state-signed (potential) Interstates such as 210 and 905 seems to be a more recent Caltrans penchant (in the '80's they couldn't wait to get those 110, 710, and 880 signs up -- not to mention the anomaly 238). 

The only really logical Interstate trunk/2di addition in the state is the oft-explored western extension of 40 to I-5 via CA 58, which may yet happen (probably not in my lifetime, however).  And although CA 99 is a federally designated (via the HPC 54 route) future Interstate, no one seems to be in a big hurry to actually fulfill that concept  -- although I am somewhat surprised that something like the Interstate concept -- or perhaps at least something that cleans up a few CA 99 trouble spots -- wasn't pressed as a form of "political blackmail" in order to secure passage of the recent fuel tax increase bill -- instead the one "R" who crossed over to vote for the bill got a parkway in Merced and an extension to the subsidized ACE San Jose-Valley commuter service.  Maybe that with the recent Chowchilla-Merced upgrade, there's no cross traffic remaining on 99 -- the route, at least for the present, is considered a fait accompli -- with attention drawn elsewhere.     

A traversable all freeway route from Las Vegas to US-101 near the center of the state seems like an eventuality (you can already do it on I-15 and I-10). CASR-58 doesn't look like the right routing west of I-5. Perhaps CASR-46? 41? 152?Certainly something south of I-580.