Interstate 11 alignment, though Vegas and points north

[US 395]

As much fun as an I-711 would be, I would imagine any odd interstate spur in Nevada would be I-511, since NDOT uses 5xx numbers for its urban routes. (This probably explains how I-515 and I-580 got their numbers.)

It could just be coincidence. Both 515 and 580 are out of sequence. 51x routes were Carson City, 58x is Las Vegas. Furthermore, the 5xx/6xx routes are urban secondary. Weirdly, every x15 and x80 below 700 apart from 215, 515, and 580 is unassigned.

Also, since Nevada generally doesn't reuse numbers, 511 is likely out. Former SR 511 was in Carson City, but no x11s are currently in use.

I will also note that there is evidence of 515 and 580 that predates the renumbering. Both received final approval around when the renumbering began. Not to say that the numbers weren't chosen with that in mind (they may have been), but it's possible NDOT was just trying to avoid reusing an x15 from another state or preserve numbers below 499. 215 is a more recent development than both 515 and 580.

Would've been nice if Nevada got a different number than 215 for the beltway. I know that 3di numbers can be repeated in other states and CA and UT also have an I-215 but a bit of variety never hurt anyone...

[US 89]

Utah used to have an I-415, which was the southeast quadrant of what is now the I-215 beltway. It was signed for two years on the short segments that were open at the time before they realized it was dumb to have two numbers for what would effectively be one route.

[US 395]

Utah used to have an I-415, which was the southeast quadrant of what is now the I-215 beltway. It was signed for two years on the short segments that were open at the time before they realized it was dumb to have two numbers for what would effectively be one route.

Yeah. I read up about that. Two numbers would've been fine if they touched 15 in different areas. But then it wouldn't be the loop that it is today.
Since I-15 doesn't really go anywhere major past SLC, different numbers for Vegas and SLC loops wouldn't have been bad choices.

[The Ghostbuster]

Interstate 215 in Nevada and Interstate 215 in Utah are like twin routes. They provide a bypass route for the northwest, southwest, and southeast sides of both Las Vegas and Salt Lake City. Sure, the trajectory of Interstate 15 in Las Vegas causes its Interstate 215 to cover more of the north side and less of the southeast side than Salt Lake City's, but they are the most-similar of any two 3-digit Interstate Highways of the same number in the entire country.

[Alps]

Utah used to have an I-415, which was the southeast quadrant of what is now the I-215 beltway. It was signed for two years on the short segments that were open at the time before they realized it was dumb to have two numbers for what would effectively be one route.

Minneapolis would like a word.

[ilpt4u]

Utah used to have an I-415, which was the southeast quadrant of what is now the I-215 beltway. It was signed for two years on the short segments that were open at the time before they realized it was dumb to have two numbers for what would effectively be one route.

Minneapolis would like a word.

So would Saint Louis (tho it is easier to argue 255 and 270 are actually separate routes that meet twice than form a single beltway)

[US 89]

Utah used to have an I-415, which was the southeast quadrant of what is now the I-215 beltway. It was signed for two years on the short segments that were open at the time before they realized it was dumb to have two numbers for what would effectively be one route.

Minneapolis would like a word.

MSP is different because the physical belt route incorporates some of I-94 - it's not a clear "this is solely a beltway only" type road, the way 215 in Salt Lake is. I-15 doesn't junction 215 twice on the same side of the city center the way I-94 does with 494 and 694. A different situation in my opinion unless you want to sign a 94/494 concurrency, which evidently MnDOT did not want to do.

[DenverBrian]

Utah used to have an I-415, which was the southeast quadrant of what is now the I-215 beltway. It was signed for two years on the short segments that were open at the time before they realized it was dumb to have two numbers for what would effectively be one route.

Minneapolis would like a word.

MSP is different because the physical belt route incorporates some of I-94 - it's not a clear "this is solely a beltway only" type road, the way 215 in Salt Lake is. I-15 doesn't junction 215 twice on the same side of the city center the way I-94 does with 494 and 694. A different situation in my opinion unless you want to sign a 94/494 concurrency, which evidently MnDOT did not want to do.

When CC-215 becomes I-215, then you'll have a double junction with I-15. Probably in the next several months.

[sprjus4]

Utah used to have an I-415, which was the southeast quadrant of what is now the I-215 beltway. It was signed for two years on the short segments that were open at the time before they realized it was dumb to have two numbers for what would effectively be one route.

Minneapolis would like a word.

MSP is different because the physical belt route incorporates some of I-94 - it's not a clear "this is solely a beltway only" type road, the way 215 in Salt Lake is. I-15 doesn't junction 215 twice on the same side of the city center the way I-94 does with 494 and 694. A different situation in my opinion unless you want to sign a 94/494 concurrency, which evidently MnDOT did not want to do.

I-95 around Washington along I-495, I-69 and I-74 around Indianapolis along I-465, I-29 briefly outside Kansas City along I-435, I-35 briefly outside San Antonio along I-410, etc.

[US 89]

Utah used to have an I-415, which was the southeast quadrant of what is now the I-215 beltway. It was signed for two years on the short segments that were open at the time before they realized it was dumb to have two numbers for what would effectively be one route.

Minneapolis would like a word.

MSP is different because the physical belt route incorporates some of I-94 - it's not a clear "this is solely a beltway only" type road, the way 215 in Salt Lake is. I-15 doesn't junction 215 twice on the same side of the city center the way I-94 does with 494 and 694. A different situation in my opinion unless you want to sign a 94/494 concurrency, which evidently MnDOT did not want to do.

When CC-215 becomes I-215, then you'll have a double junction with I-15. Probably in the next several months.

But it won't junction I-215 twice on the same side of the city center. 215 is a clear beltway.

[pderocco]

Does any city with a 360 beltway call the directions CW and CCW on signage?

[The Ghostbuster]

I doubt it. I think full 360-degree beltways should be solely signed as Inner and Outer.

[US 89]

I doubt it. I think full 360-degree beltways should be solely signed as Inner and Outer.

I think they should be kept with just plain old cardinal directions that change depending on where you are. It works fine for 285 in Atlanta. Inner/Outer requires an extra level of mental gymnastics in my experience with 485 in Charlotte and Loop 10 in Athens GA.

[kkt]

I prefer signing one half of the beltway as the through route, such as a 2di, while the other half of the beltway gets a 3di.  Makes it less ambiguous where you are if you need to direct someone to your location.

[The Ghostbuster]

That's the way the Capital Beltway was signposted after Interstate 95 was moved to its present alignment following its cancelation through Washington DC in 1977. I would have kept the 95/495 duplex from the get-go, due to driver confusion that resulted from having two numbers on the beltway. Fortunately, they reversed course and readded the 495 designation to the eastern half of the beltway in 1989.

[Bobby5280]

I don't like the idea of signing the two directions of a beltway highway as "inner" and "outer." Aside from the mental gymnastics motorists have to do regarding those directions it can create other levels of confusion. Some metro areas are big enough to have more than one beltway.

When someone says "outer loop" they might be referring to a second beltway. Houston has two full beltways and a third that is more than halfway complete. Plus there are additional corridors in the Houston region that will have to be upgraded in various ways to function as partial loops and/or relief routes.

[ClassicHasClass]

I had to mentally convert "inner" to clockwise and "outer" to counterclockwise when I was driving GA 10 LOOP in Athens.

[jdbx]

I don't like the idea of signing the two directions of a beltway highway as "inner" and "outer." Aside from the mental gymnastics motorists have to do regarding those directions it can create other levels of confusion. Some metro areas are big enough to have more than one beltway.

When someone says "outer loop" they might be referring to a second beltway. Houston has two full beltways and a third that is more than halfway complete. Plus there are additional corridors in the Houston region that will have to be upgraded in various ways to function as partial loops and/or relief routes.

I think it's probably a lot clearer to simply split the loop hemispherically into 2 routes, and sign each route along whichever the predominant cardinal direction of the axis is.

[nexus73]

The Ultimate I-11....Pt. Barrow AK to Tierra Del Fuego...LOL!

[vdeane]

The Ultimate I-11....Pt. Barrow AK to Tierra Del Fuego...LOL!

The Pan-American Freedomway?

[The Ghostbuster]

Now that's just batshit crazy! How do you plan to bridge the Darién Gap?

[Plutonic Panda]

With a bridge.

[Bobby5280]

I think it's probably a lot clearer to simply split the loop hemispherically into 2 routes, and sign each route along whichever the predominant cardinal direction of the axis is.

That sounds a little like what I wish could happen with the Kilpatrick Turnpike in Oklahoma City. Re-number the portion of the loop North of I-40 as I-440 and apply I-240 to the portion South of I-40. We're going to get this stupid I-344 stuff instead.

[Alps]

I don't like the idea of signing the two directions of a beltway highway as "inner" and "outer." Aside from the mental gymnastics motorists have to do regarding those directions it can create other levels of confusion. Some metro areas are big enough to have more than one beltway.

When someone says "outer loop" they might be referring to a second beltway. Houston has two full beltways and a third that is more than halfway complete. Plus there are additional corridors in the Houston region that will have to be upgraded in various ways to function as partial loops and/or relief routes.

I think it's probably a lot clearer to simply split the loop hemispherically into 2 routes, and sign each route along whichever the predominant cardinal direction of the axis is.

You run into I-295 in Florida (I think), where it's NORTH both ways from I-95! So I do not like that idea. I personally prefer the direction changes in each quadrant to match the way the loop generally runs, but Inner/Outer is fine as well.

[jdbx]

I don't like the idea of signing the two directions of a beltway highway as "inner" and "outer." Aside from the mental gymnastics motorists have to do regarding those directions it can create other levels of confusion. Some metro areas are big enough to have more than one beltway.

When someone says "outer loop" they might be referring to a second beltway. Houston has two full beltways and a third that is more than halfway complete. Plus there are additional corridors in the Houston region that will have to be upgraded in various ways to function as partial loops and/or relief routes.

I think it's probably a lot clearer to simply split the loop hemispherically into 2 routes, and sign each route along whichever the predominant cardinal direction of the axis is.

You run into I-295 in Florida (I think), where it's NORTH both ways from I-95! So I do not like that idea. I personally prefer the direction changes in each quadrant to match the way the loop generally runs, but Inner/Outer is fine as well.

That's why I would split it into two distinct routes.  Right now, I-295 is a loop around Jacksonville.  Instead, sign the half that is to the east of I-95 as I-695.  So if you are traveling from the south along I-95, at the junction you'd see "I-295 North - Orange Pk" and "I-695 North - Jax Bchs"  Maybe even add a "TO I-10" to the I-295 option to make it clear which is the preferred route if you are headed towards that way.