Should Route Number Duplication be Used by a Given State?

[Mr_Northside]

I don't see what's wrong with terminating it at I-180 is Williamsport.  There's really no need for it to go on once I-99 is signed between there and Painted Post (which is itself way more minor than Williamsport is).

I agree.

I can see co-signing for a while... but long term it's pretty dumb.  Maybe PennDOT just meant they weren't going to immediately remove it.  Oh well.

[Scott5114]

OK duplicates routes out the wazoo. Fortunately the state is large enough that chances are you won't run across both routes. US 54 and US 56 are both in the Panhandle, and OK 54 and 56 are in the main body of the state. US 59 runs along the east edge of the state, while OK 59 runs across central Oklahoma. I-35 and OK-35 are distant, with OK-35 being an unsigned park access route.

The only problem is US 270 and OK 270. OK 270 is the route of old US 270...meaning they parallel each other for the entire length. And ODOT has mixed up the shields a few times (fortunately corrected during the cleaverization movement). Good god!

[mapman1071]

AZ95 and US-95 and both Meet In Quartzite, AZ

AZ95 has a hidden status in CA and is part of a Quadruple (I-40, US95, Hidden Us-66 & Hidden AZ95)

[US71]

Arkansas will have US 49 and I-49, but should be far enough apart to avoid any confusion. There used to be an AR 59 near Eudora in the 1930's, but US 59 changed that to AR 159, then part of US 59 became AR 59. That is the only duplication I can think of at the moment.

Missouri used to not duplicate (MO 57 became MO 171), but now has at least 2 (I-72/ Mo 72, I-64/Mo 64)

[bulldog1979]

Michigan duplicates all of the 2dI numbers, and most of the 2dUS numbers. Of course, when US 45 and US 8 are in the Upper Peninsula and M-45 and M-8 are in the SW and SE Lower Peninsula, respectively, it makes things easier. Of course in Michigan, you can tell the tourists because they forget the "M" in the highway numbers.

[huskeroadgeek]

Arkansas will have US 49 and I-49, but should be far enough apart to avoid any confusion. There used to be an AR 59 near Eudora in the 1930's, but US 59 changed that to AR 159, then part of US 59 became AR 59. That is the only duplication I can think of at the moment.

Missouri used to not duplicate (MO 57 became MO 171), but now has at least 2 (I-72/ Mo 72, I-64/Mo 64)

Arkansas does appear to want to avoid most US/state route duplications though because they renumbered AR 371 when US 371 was created. This seemed unnecessary since AR 371 was a fairly short minor route running from AR 267 to AR 367 at McRae, far enough away from US 371 to avoid confusion. And when they changed it, they made it AR 13, thus creating a 3rd discontinuous portion of that highway-which seems more confusing to me than leaving it AR 371. I guess they figured AR 59 and US 59 weren't really a problem since they are far enough apart, and US 59 is multiplexed with either US 270 or US 71 through the state(the state highway map doesn't even show US 59 in Arkansas).

In general, I don't have a problem with duplicating route numbers in the same state, as long as they are far enough apart to avoid confusion. This is especially true of Interstate and US/state routes since most people understand the significance of an interstate highway and are unlikely to confuse one with a more minor US or state route.

[ATLRedSoxFan]

Indiana has a duplicate of SR 11. It meanders through extreme So. Indiana at Maukport from the Ohio River up to New Albany and then gaps, shows back upstate in Central Southern Indiana around Seymore, IN on the other side of I-65.

[papaT10932]

God forbid drivers have to learn the difference between an interstate sign and a state route sign....

[agentsteel53]

God forbid drivers have to learn the difference between an interstate sign and a state route sign....

not drivers.  the Massachusetts highway department.

[agentsteel53]

actually it's not as bad for interstate vs the other two route types, but state and US routes are always mixed up.  Some states are especially bad at it, like Georgia.  I swear, one resigning they'll completely screw things up and they'll have state route 27 intersecting state route 27.

[mightyace]

My home state of Pennsylvania, as most of us know, doesn't duplicate numbers among types.   However there are two "two part route" that I can think of off the top of my head.

The first is well known, the two segments of US 422.  The eastern half starts at Hershey and end at US 202 near King of Prussia.

The western half starts at Ebensburg and heads west into Ohio.

The lesser known one is PA 29.

The southern segment goes from I-78 near Allentown at the north end to Malvern, PA on the south end.
The northern segment starts at I-81 near Ashley and Sugar Notch and passes near  Nanticoke, Harvey's Lake, Tunkhannock and runs up to the New York state line.

[rickmastfan67]

mightyace, we also have two PA-97's.  And then we have 3 parts of PA-43, but PA-43 is going to be joined together.

We also have PA-99 and I-99.  Also I-380/PA-380 & I-86/PA-86.

[mightyace]

^^^

That's why I said "off the top of my head."  I knew there might be others.

And, before I-86 was created, you had two PA 17s as well.

[PAHighways]

The lesser known one is PA 29.

That used to be one continuous route until 1966.

[Troubleshooter]

The problem is the costs involved when a route number is changed to remove a duplication.

As an example, Indiana 64 existed for decades. Then the federal government built Interstate 64 parallel to it, and only about 10 miles away along its entire length.

Government should not have the right to impose costs on individuals by changing the name of the road. Anytime a road name or number is changed, people are required to spend money on the following:

- New business stationery
- Change if address procedures
- Notifying clients, relatives, and friends of the change of address
- Having to pay fees to change driver's licenses, business permits, plats, tax records, and other official government documents.

I don't care what the motive (and especially the desire to honor some stupid politician), it should be illegal to rename a road. It costs others too much money.

[TheStranger]

I don't care what the motive (and especially the desire to honor some stupid politician), it should be illegal to rename a road. It costs others too much money.

There are plenty of legitimate reasons though to renumber roads - not simply to cut down on duplications, but to create more logical routings, etc. 

Plus road renamings have occurred for decades, not simply something that started in recent years - i.e. when M Street in the downtown/midtown Sacramento grid was renamed "Capitol Avenue" ca. 1942-1943 (some time after 31st Street had become "Alhambra Boulevard.")  All street names are ultimately arbitrary to the jurisdiction that contains them - and each jurisidction has the right to determine what those monikers will be, regardless of how many years that respective name has been used for that road.

[froggie]

For Troubleshooter's "issue", this is where having a streetname for address purposes (i.e. E-911) works.  That way, if the route number changes, the street name will remain the same and the costs he/she complains about simply won't be there.

BTW, "change of address procedures", unless you do it online (in which case USPS charges you one dollar), has *ZERO* cost aside from spending a few minutes at the Post Office filling out the form.  Trust me, I've had to do it several times thanks to the Navy.

Also, all of those costs also apply when businesses move locations...it's just the cost of doing business.

There are plenty of legitimate reasons though to renumber roads - not simply to cut down on duplications, but to create more logical routings, etc.

Concur.

[corco]

Government should not have the right to impose costs on individuals by changing the name of the road. Anytime a road name or number is changed, people are required to spend money on the following:

- New business stationery
- Change if address procedures
- Notifying clients, relatives, and friends of the change of address
- Having to pay fees to change driver's licenses, business permits, plats, tax records, and other official government documents.

I don't care what the motive (and especially the desire to honor some stupid politician), it should be illegal to rename a road. It costs others too much money.

That is absolutely not the case.

We're in the process of renaming several streets at the city I work for. On the 911 side, what happens is we won't re-use the old addresses for several years and the 911 dispatchers know that either the old address or the new address go to the same house.

On the USPS side, nobody has to fill out a change of address form. The Postal Service will continue recognizing either the old address or the new address for something like five years.

Pretty much all government agencies are required to recognize both the old and new addresses for several years into the future. The paperwork change of address within government agencies are done automatically- if I have a business on James St and it is renamed Madison St, the government will change the documents. If I get pulled over and my address is the old address, that will still be a valid address.

It would be far to complicated to instantly void an address every time one is changed, so they allow both addresses to be official ones for whatever location for several years into the future.

Also, since both addresses are recognized for several years, it is likely one would run out of business stationery before the old address becomes void.

But the burden to notify pretty much every government and utility agency falls squarely on our hands, not the people whose addresses are being changed. This includes the county, state, feds (where applicable), DMV, power company, sewer company, water company, telephone company, and whatever other agencies are involved with addresses that I'm forgetting

As far as plat documents, it's not like they go re-survey everytime a road changes names- only if the road geometry is also changing. Completely legal and official to have the city/county clerk take a red sharpie to the plat, cross out the old name, and write in the new name (and maybe initial by it)

At some point people have to be notified about new addresses, but since the old address is still good for several years (and we make this very clear), it is likely the people involved would talk to those folks anyway in that time frame.

The motive is often valid. Our renamings right now are to eliminate duplication- on one side of town we have a Merrywood Ct and on the other a Merrywood Place. A couple years ago, somebody fell and got quite injured and had to call an ambulance. The ambulance went to the wrong Merrywood, on the other side of town. As a result, we're dumping a bunch of duplicate road names. Another of our renamings were brought to us by a group of homeowners who wanted their street name changed because the old one was too hard to spell (in this instance, the residents have to pay for sign changes, but since both addresses are still valid that is the only cost to them).

This is applicable to road numbering because if I'm on highway 3 and they change it to 226, it's highly unlikely they'll put a highway 3 in the same zip code, otherwise why renumber?

I suppose renaming roads after politicians can seem wasteful, but renumbering a road to better fit a grid or renaming a road to keep the ambulance pointed in the right direction serves a greater good that is tangible for all involved.

[Scott5114]

I just bought a roll of address labels. It cost me $7. Then I kicked my roommate out and spent $7 to get another roll of address labels made up without her name.

It's not really a big deal.

[US71]

I just bought a roll of address labels. It cost me $7. Then I kicked my roommate out and spent $7 to get another roll of address labels made up without her name.

It's not really a big deal.

Vista Print is cheaper

[Duke87]

There are definitely legitimate reasons to change the name (or number) of a road.
That said, doing it for the sake of renaming it after someone or just 'cause, I don't like.

One thing I would stipulate in addition is that once a street is renamed or removed, the old name should not be considered available for future use. My own town (Stamford, CT) had a Baker Place that was removed at some point in the 60's or 70's for the construction of an apartment building. In the 90's, completely unrelated and in a different part of town, a developer put in a new street and named it... Baker Place. That shouldn't have been permitted to happen.

[golden eagle]

Whenever I-22 is officially in business, it will duplicate Mississippi 22. I can't think of any other highways in the state that share the same number.

I would not be against duplication as long as they're in different portions of the state, like I-22 (through north Mississippi) and MS 22 (through the central part of the state) will be.

[froggie]

Whenever I-22 is officially in business, it will duplicate Mississippi 22. I can't think of any other highways in the state that share the same number.

69.

[SSOWorld]

Is that a highway or a dirty thought? [/off topic]

[US71]

Is that a highway or a dirty thought? [/off topic]

Just say "no"