"Tinkertoys" in the National Highway System

[Dirt Roads]

The National Highway System is a "loose leaf" listing of freeways and arterial routes of national importance in the United States.  In addition to the Interstate System, it includes the Appalachian Development Highway System and the Department of Defense-designated Strategic Highway Network (STRAHNET).  As you probably know by now, one of my pet peeves is that there is no formal numbering system for those arterial routes.  Many are cobbled together using U.S. Routes and State Routes that have been posed along the way.  Amazingly, there are some little stretches of highways that make up a piece of very important NHS corridors.  I woke up the other morning with the term "tinkertoy highways" rattling around in the brain.

Here's a few instances of "tinkertoys" in the National Highway System:

VA-207 connecting I-95 -to- US-301 at Bowling Green
Corridor L (unposted Connector US-19) connecting the West Virginia Turnpike -to- US-19 (the only segment of the Appalachian Corridor System with a toll booth)

Another example is a cross-connector:

US-258/VA-32 connecting VA-10/VA-32 -to- US-17 between Benns Church and Carrollton

[Rothman]

The National Highway System is a "loose leaf" listing of freeways and arterial routes of national importance in the United States.  In addition to the Interstate System, it includes the Appalachian Development Highway System and the Department of Defense-designated Strategic Highway Network (STRAHNET).  As you probably know by now, one of my pet peeves is that there is no formal numbering system for those arterial routes.  Many are cobbled together using U.S. Routes and State Routes that have been posed along the way.  Amazingly, there are some little stretches of highways that make up a piece of very important NHS corridors.  I woke up the other morning with the term "tinkertoy highways" rattling around in the brain.

Here's a few instances of "tinkertoys" in the National Highway System:

VA-207 connecting I-95 -to- US-301 at Bowling Green
Corridor L (unposted Connector US-19) connecting the West Virginia Turnpike -to- US-19 (the only segment of the Appalachian Corridor System with a toll booth)

Another example is a cross-connector:

US-258/VA-32 connecting VA-10/VA-32 -to- US-17 between Benns Church and Carrollton

You are actually understating the extent of the NHS.  Its current main purpose is to determine eligibility for NHPP funding -- which allows Congress more control over how the transportation system is funded (want more money spent on or off the NHS?  You can now pull those levers).

The designations are quite extensive, including "connectors" -- all managed by FHWA when DOTs request changes to it.

There is mo formal routes of the NHS and there doesn't need to be given its purposes at federal and state levels.

[Hunty2022]

VA-288 connects East I-64 to South I-95 for those who don't want to go through Richmond, where they intersect.

[Dirt Roads]

The National Highway System is a "loose leaf" listing of freeways and arterial routes of national importance in the United States.  In addition to the Interstate System, it includes the Appalachian Development Highway System and the Department of Defense-designated Strategic Highway Network (STRAHNET).  As you probably know by now, one of my pet peeves is that there is no formal numbering system for those arterial routes.  Many are cobbled together using U.S. Routes and State Routes that have been posed along the way.  Amazingly, there are some little stretches of highways that make up a piece of very important NHS corridors.  I woke up the other morning with the term "tinkertoy highways" rattling around in the brain.

You are actually understating the extent of the NHS.  Its current main purpose is to determine eligibility for NHPP funding -- which allows Congress more control over how the transportation system is funded (want more money spent on or off the NHS?  You can now pull those levers).

The designations are quite extensive, including "connectors" -- all managed by FHWA when DOTs request changes to it.

There is mo formal routes of the NHS and there doesn't need to be given its purposes at federal and state levels.

But perhaps there should be some semblance of formal routes.  For instance, the main NHS route across southwest Georgia from Albany -to- Dothan is a cobbled together as such: GA-234, GA-62, US-29, GA-39, GA-62 and AL-52.  GDOT has done us a big favor and posted GA-62 along the entire northern bypass around Blakely such that this route is fairly easy to follow. 

Perhaps a better example is the main NHS route from I-16 south of Statesboro -to- I-20 near Augusta:  the route diverges from US-25 to GA-56 northeast of Waynesboro.  I suspect that your Garmin knows to take GA-56 bypass US-25, but the Average Joe can't be expected to pick something like that off the map.  These should have a continuous route number.

A "single NHS route" that falls into that category includes one of these "tinkertoys":  From I-95 at Carmel Church (Ruther Glen) -to- Baltimore.  This route is cobbled together as VA-207, US-301, MD-3 and I-97.  I know this is going to upset some folks who love the old US-301, but there should be a separate route number for this NHS corridor.  Such a change would likely result in US-301 getting truncated at Bowling Green, but I don't have a preference here.

[Rothman]

The National Highway System is a "loose leaf" listing of freeways and arterial routes of national importance in the United States.  In addition to the Interstate System, it includes the Appalachian Development Highway System and the Department of Defense-designated Strategic Highway Network (STRAHNET).  As you probably know by now, one of my pet peeves is that there is no formal numbering system for those arterial routes.  Many are cobbled together using U.S. Routes and State Routes that have been posed along the way.  Amazingly, there are some little stretches of highways that make up a piece of very important NHS corridors.  I woke up the other morning with the term "tinkertoy highways" rattling around in the brain.

You are actually understating the extent of the NHS.  Its current main purpose is to determine eligibility for NHPP funding -- which allows Congress more control over how the transportation system is funded (want more money spent on or off the NHS?  You can now pull those levers).

The designations are quite extensive, including "connectors" -- all managed by FHWA when DOTs request changes to it.

There is mo formal routes of the NHS and there doesn't need to be given its purposes at federal and state levels.

But perhaps there should be some semblance of formal routes.  For instance, the main NHS route across southwest Georgia from Albany -to- Dothan is a cobbled together as such: GA-234, GA-62, US-29, GA-39, GA-62 and AL-52.  GDOT has done us a big favor and posted GA-62 along the entire northern bypass around Blakely such that this route is fairly easy to follow. 

Perhaps a better example is the main NHS route from I-16 south of Statesboro -to- I-20 near Augusta:  the route diverges from US-25 to GA-56 northeast of Waynesboro.  I suspect that your Garmin knows to take GA-56 bypass US-25, but the Average Joe can't be expected to pick something like that off the map.  These should have a continuous route number.

A "single NHS route" that falls into that category includes one of these "tinkertoys":  From I-95 at Carmel Church (Ruther Glen) -to- Baltimore.  This route is cobbled together as VA-207, US-301, MD-3 and I-97.  I know this is going to upset some folks who love the old US-301, but there should be a separate route number for this NHS corridor.  Such a change would likely result in US-301 getting truncated at Bowling Green, but I don't have a preference here.

The NHS designations mean nothing to the travelling public, whereas current route numbering does.  Changing around existing route numbering, especially in Georgia with their system, would just cause unnecessary confusion.

[HighwayStar]

I would include these in a renumber of the US highways, and then only designate a list of US highways as being STRAHNET, etc. That would give them each a single route number on a national shield.
If a route is important enough for special funding, it should be important enough to properly sign and present to the public as such.

[Rothman]

I would include these in a renumber of the US highways, and then only designate a list of US highways as being STRAHNET, etc. That would give them each a single route number on a national shield.
If a route is important enough for special funding, it should be important enough to properly sign and present to the public as such.

Someone doesn't know just how many different types of federal funding is available or how the various systems designated by FHWA overlap.  Talk about useless redundancy and enormous signage costs.

[HighwayStar]

I would include these in a renumber of the US highways, and then only designate a list of US highways as being STRAHNET, etc. That would give them each a single route number on a national shield.
If a route is important enough for special funding, it should be important enough to properly sign and present to the public as such.

Someone doesn't know just how many different types of federal funding is available or how the various systems designated by FHWA overlap.  Talk about useless redundancy and enormous signage costs.

It doesn't matter how many types or what overlap there is, take the union of those sets and call it a day. Its not redundant, as no well formed signage system exists for these, so it cannot be redundant of something which does not exist.
As to cost, mandate all US manufacturing and it will be a good stimulus package, far less costly than some of our other recent boondoggles.

[hbelkins]

I've long advocated for some sort of logo signage for the Appalachian corridors. The only states that mark their ADHS routes are Alabama (with the blue markers with text and little mountain graphics) and West Virginia (with the mileposts with the corridor letter designations noted within the state outline). This excludes, of course, Ohio's dabbling with some signage of OH 32 as "Appalachian Highway" (and some error signs denoting "Appalacian Highway" years ago) but not noting the presence of other ADHS corridors in the state.

Some sort of small banner-like plaque (similar to the CKC corridor signage) would be all that's necessary.

[Dirt Roads]

^^^
There are indeed numerous instances of "tinkertoys" in the Appalachian Development Highway System (more than I realized):

• Corridor A includes NC-69 and GA-515 (about 4.7 miles for the "tinkertoy" segment, as GA-515 continues on down US-76)
• Corridor B includes KY-10 and OH-253 (about 1.5 mile)
• Corridor F includes TN-63 (about 29.5 miles, perhaps too long to be a "tinkertoy")
• Corridor G includes unposted CONN US-119 beyond the interchange with I-64 in Charleston (about 0.25 mile)
• Corridor J includes TN-53 (about 8.8 miles), KY-1247 (about 3.9 miles) and KY-914 (about 4.4 miles)
• Corridor L includes unposted ALT US-19 connecting to the West Virginia Turnpike (about 1.5 mile)
• Corridor R includes KY-114 (about 17.5 miles)
• Corridor U will include PA-328/NY-328 (about 19 miles) and NY-14 (full routing unknown, probably tiny)

[hbelkins]

I've long advocated for some sort of logo signage for the Appalachian corridors. The only states that mark their ADHS routes are Alabama (with the blue markers with text and little mountain graphics) and West Virginia (with the mileposts with the corridor letter designations noted within the state outline). This excludes, of course, Ohio's dabbling with some signage of OH 32 as "Appalachian Highway" (and some error signs denoting "Appalacian Highway" years ago) but not noting the presence of other ADHS corridors in the state.

Some sort of small banner-like plaque (similar to the CKC corridor signage) would be all that's necessary.

Need to correct this to add Georgia's special GA 515 signage.

^^^
There are indeed numerous instances of "tinkertoys" in the Appalachian Development Highway System (more than I realized):

• Corridor J includes TN-53 (about 8.8 miles), KY-1247 (about 3.9 miles) and KY-914 (about 4.4 miles)
• Corridor R includes KY-114 (about 17.5 miles)

Corridor J includes an unbuilt segment between TN 53 and Cookeville, which probably will never be completed. There's a Tennessee secondary route that runs between TN 53 and Cookeville that actually has Cookeville listed as the destination, but it's not part of the route. TN 53 is completed as a through improved route all the way south to I-40, which can be used to access where Corridor J joins TN 111 to run south toward Chattanooga.

As for the Kentucky segments of that corridor, I think the original alignment of the corridor was KY 80 and US 27. The Somerset bypass (KY 914) and the spur to the US 27/KY 90 intersection (KY 1247) came later.

As for Corridor R, the Mountain Parkway and the KY 114 extension were already done and were incorporated after the fact into the ADHS (same for the four-lane Mountain Parkway and the KY 15 leg to Whitesburg). With plans underway to extend the four-lane Mountain Parkway from Salyersville to Prestonsburg -- I have to attend a couple of meetings on this next week -- who knows what will happen to the ARC designation for administrative purposes?

[Rothman]

Ugh.  NYSDOT would be annoyed by having to sign its ADHS corridors.

(personal opinion emphasized)

[froggie]

Shocker....NYSDOT gets annoyed at anything that doesn't reflect their narrow world view...

[Rothman]

Shocker....NYSDOT gets annoyed at anything that doesn't reflect their narrow world view...

Because wasting capital funds on superfluous signage when culverts are failing is a great idea?

[Dirt Roads]

Ugh.  NYSDOT would be annoyed by having to sign its ADHS corridors.

(personal opinion emphasized)

I understand the sentiment, but the new corridors require new signage.  Plus, two (and a half!) of New York's corridors already have new signage:  I-99 and the completed sections of I-86.   Unlike many of the other Appalachian Highway Corridors, the NY-328/PA-328 corridor would likely qualify for an upgrade to a U.S. Route since it enters Pennsylvania (insert snide remark about the AASHTO generally discouraging intrastate route number assignments).

Shocker....NYSDOT gets annoyed at anything that doesn't reflect their narrow world view...

Because wasting capital funds on superfluous signage when culverts are failing is a great idea?

But my understanding was that the ARC funds could be (and should be) used for the new signage that comes with the upgrade to ADHS status.  Fortunately, it looks like NYSDOT has already spent that money on the new signage for I-86 and I-99.

On the other hand, as a railroader I completely understand the need to maintain/replace culverts.  I might be a Signal Guy, but almost everyday I hopped out of the truck with a shovel and clear the mess out of a stopped culvert (thus helping out my colleagues in Track Department).  That same mentality would serve DOT supervisors very well.

[Rothman]

Pfft.  ADHS funding ran out a long time ago.  Paying for new signage just to mark routes as specifically ADHS corridors would be a waste of core funding currently.