Which little details in US/Interstate highway systems really bother you?

[mrpablue]

(exit number inconsistencies, routes facing the opposite direction of the signed, numbers out-of-grid...)

Please, no mention of I-99, I-238, or US-412.

[Scott5114]

Split routes are bad and must be eliminated...unless you're Texas or Minnesota.

[fillup420]

Split routes are bad and must be eliminated...unless you're Texas or Minnesota.

Or Tennessee or North Carolina

[Max Rockatansky]

Duplicate route numbers due to a lack of using stuff like; US 0, I-50, and I-60.

[JasonOfORoads]

(exit number inconsistencies, routes facing the opposite direction of the signed, numbers out-of-grid…)

Please, no mention of I-99, I-238, or US-412.

What about US-400? 

In all seriousness, here are my gripes, in no particular order:

• The I-97 designation being wasted on a freeway that should be I-995 or an extension of I-83
• "The southern I-87"
• Wyoming "Interstate" 180
• All the new Texas Interstates, especially I-14 and I-69C
• Tennessee's letter suffixing policy (first 1, then 1A, 1B, etc.)
• Nevada's letter suffixing policy (Exit _A comes before _B no matter which direction you come from, for the most part)
• Wyoming's letter suffixing policy (whoever decided these setups should be fired... from a cannon)
• Nebraska's letter suffixing and intersecting exit number policy, such as the Jct. of I-80 and I-180 in Lincoln
• I-75 not ending at I-95 in Miami
• I-15 still being CA-15 in San Diego
• CA-210 not being I-210 in Greater Los Angeles
• The states that refuse to switch to mileage-based exits -- get with the 21st century

[roadman65]

I-84 in OR when it should be I-82 and I-82 given either I-7 or I-9 or even I-11 (even if NV and AZ have to had to use a new number for their I-11). I-84 was in PA, NY, and CT long before I-80N got eliminated.

I-88 in IL is a copycat of I-88 in NY.
I-86 in NY is copycat of ID, but ID should have been a 3 digit anyway and NYSDOT given I-86 to fit the grid.

US Routes like US 46 especially as if NJ turned it into NJ 46 no one would care. 
I-676 having a signal at the foot of the Ben Franklin Bridge copying Breezewood on the opposite end of the state.
I-2 and all the I-69's in Texas. 
I-74 in NC especially being WV and OH will never build their parts.
I-78 not ending with the NJ Turnpike as it really should as NJDOT or PANYNJ will never build a freeway  between Boyle Plaza and 12th Street to connect the tunnel with the existing two freeways.

US 52 now in SC signed E-W even though its N-S and originally was signed that.  Now SCDOT wants to please the FHWA.
US 98 in FL between Okeechobee and Sebring should be signed E-W like east of Okeechobee, but that is cause FDOT D-4 takes the even number E-W rule literally and FDOT D-1, D-7, and D-3 could give a rats ass over rules as they do sign it as it runs south of Perry.

[NE2]

What bothers me the most is anal people who'd like to replace a shitload of signs just to make the grid perfect (and then probably waste billions on interchange reconstruction to avoid TOTSOs). It's not like the grid was ever perfect: 6 was south of 20 in the 1925 plans (and 410 never touched 10).

[21stCenturyRoad]

Here are my pet peeves:
-When an overlap ends, one of the splitting routes get an exit number.
-One of the ramps at a terminating Interchange being assigned an exit number.
-Business Interstate Routes: I think they are a waste of signage.

[Roadgeekteen]

I-180 in Wyoming is just stupid
The I-3 proposal in Georgia 

[bing101]

When I-280 in San Francisco cannot touch I-80 even though less than 1 mile from each other or I-980 and I-380 does not touch I-80 in San Francisco area.

When I-105 in Los Angeles area does not touch i-5.

[CNGL-Leudimin]

US 121.

[Roadgeekteen]

US 121.

What about it?

[jp the roadgeek]

Why US 3 suddenly downgrades to MA 3. 

US 5 ending at I-91 and not at US 1

US 9 being signed East-West in DE and US 1 the same in CT on a couple of signs

US 202 existing 400 miles from its parent and being duplexed for more than half of its length north of PA, not to mention directional signage changing then changing back then changing yet again. 

US 206 and US 209 not connecting to their parents.

US 44 and US 46 both existing between US 20 and US 30. 

The many inconsistent directions of US 62

[ilpt4u]

I-355/I-290/IL 53 not being a single North-South Numbered Route/Designation in Chicago's Western/Northwestern Suburbs

I-290 in general -- send I-88 into Downtown Chicago, instead of having the east end at 2 3dis (290, 294). Make the leg between I-294/I-88 and I-355 an x88

The Southern New Jersey Turnpike not having an Interstate designation, when its part of the thru traffic route between DC and NYC

The St Louis Beltway not having a single designation -- pick either I-270 or I-255 for the whole thing

US 66 having been decommissioned -- Why? Put it back!

The signed directions for I-90 and I-94 in IL and (parts of) WI. When the route is clearly North/South, sign it North/South. It is counter-intuitive to have a sign tell me I'm going "West" when driving between Chicago and Milwaukee, or between Rockford, Madison, and Portage

[JasonOfORoads]

Here are my pet peeves:
-When an overlap ends, one of the splitting routes get an exit number.

My pet peeve is when a route that exits itself gets a number, best explained by this interchange. IA-5 east somehow inherits the exit numbers of US-65 before US-65 actually joins the freeway, and US-65 south exits itself on Exit 70A. Logically, the two ramps eastbound should actually be Exits 93B and 93A for IA-5, and the two ramps westbound should be Exit 70B and Left Exit 70A for US-65.

-One of the ramps at a terminating Interchange being assigned an exit number.

IMO all ramps should have exit numbers, even if it's 0A and 0B.

On a related note, I have no clue why the I-91 exit off of I-89 doesn't have a number. It should be Exit 1, and all other exits should be increased by 1. Or better yet, just freaking switch to mileage-based numbers and give it a number then.

[US 89]

Here are my pet peeves:
-When an overlap ends, one of the splitting routes get an exit number.

My pet peeve is when a route that exits itself gets a number, best explained by this interchange. IA-5 east somehow inherits the exit numbers of US-65 before US-65 actually joins the freeway, and US-65 south exits itself on Exit 70A. Logically, the two ramps eastbound should actually be Exits 93B and 93A for IA-5, and the two ramps westbound should be Exit 70B and Left Exit 70A for US-65.

This happens at the north I-15/84 split at Tremonton, UT. The combined route uses I-15 mileage-based numbers, and in advance of the junction the I-84 ramp is posted as left exit 379. But when you actually get up to the split, I-15 takes its own exit 379 to the right.

This problem occurs because I-15 is the more important route (since the combined route uses I-15's mileage) but I-84 is set up as the mainline route at this interchange (which is also one of the widest trumpet interchanges I've ever seen, as there are actually crop fields between the 15 S and 84 E ramps).

At this junction, either there shouldn't be any exit number posted, or the arrow at the gore should point left. The current situation is ambiguous and confusing.

[pianocello]

Long concurrencies between US and Interstate routes when the old alignment is still usable. Looking at Iowa and Michigan in particular here, although other states are guilty of this as well.

[MNHighwayMan]

US 52 now in SC signed E-W even though its N-S and originally was signed that.  Now SCDOT wants to please the FHWA.

I would love to see them try to force Minnesota to sign its section of US-52 E/W... it would make zero sense.

My pet peeve is when a route that exits itself gets a number, best explained by this interchange. IA-5 east somehow inherits the exit numbers of US-65 before US-65 actually joins the freeway, and US-65 south exits itself on Exit 70A. Logically, the two ramps eastbound should actually be Exits 93B and 93A for IA-5, and the two ramps westbound should be Exit 70B and Left Exit 70A for US-65.

Wow, I've gone through that interchange countless times and never noticed that. Now it's going to bother me every time.

[Roadgeekteen]

Long concurrencies between US and Interstate routes when the old alignment is still usable. Looking at Iowa and Michigan in particular here, although other states are guilty of this as well.

Why was us 1 rerouted onto 93  ?

[freebrickproductions]

Long concurrencies between US and Interstate routes when the old alignment is still usable. Looking at Iowa and Michigan in particular here, although other states are guilty of this as well.

Why was us 1 rerouted onto 93  ?

I'm pretty sure that US 78 and I-22 are concurrent for all of I-22, though that may be due to how I-22 was pretty much laid over US 78 for the most part.

[index]

US 66 being decommissioned. It's the country's most historic, symbolic, and well-known route, only for it to be nuked from orbit in 1985. Why couldn't they just revitalize it?

AASHTO's mass decommissioning of intrastate three digit US routes. AASHTO decommissioning things in general. They like doing that. At that, decommissioning in general. Keep the routes!

Decommissionment of suffixed/split routes. I-80N. I-59B. US 30N. All that. I really, really like suffixed routes. It's a gripe of mine to see them go. I'm glad to see that Texas has added some to the system in recent years, those Interstates being I-69W, I-69E, and I-69C. 

[MNHighwayMan]

AASHTO's mass decommissioning of intrastate three digit US routes. AASHTO decommissioning things in general. They like doing that.

Ooh, I'm all for this. Bring back US-210 and the original US-371! The current US-371 can become US-471, or whatever.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

US 66 being decommissioned. It's the country's most historic, symbolic, and well-known route, only for it to be nuked from orbit in 1985. Why couldn't they just revitalize it?

As I understand it, the country's modern love affair with 66 turning it into a national icon didn't really start until after the route was axed. California and Illinois had both done away with their sections long before 1985 and the remaining six states had their section unceremoniously wiped in June of 1985.

[sparker]

1 through 12: The southern I-87 (the designation, not the corridor itself).  SCOURN should be ashamed of itself for allowing that travesty to happen; it should have been I-46,54, or 56.  Period.
13.  I-210/CA 210 in CA.  They built the fucking freeway to I-standards; a good number of the BGS's on approach streets show the CA 210 spade on a greenout plaque over a I-210 shield, so it was planned as such.  If the problem is the remaining chargeable section now signed as CA 57, just designate it I-510 or something and don't sign it, just like what's done with I-305 in Sacramento. 
14.  I-905:  Same thing, but without the chargeability issue.  Just break down and sign it, please -- no excuses about incomplete interchanges (with non-Interstate connecting routes, which shouldn't affect signage or legal status).
15.  The "Swamp Thing" planned I-74 jaunt down NC 211.  In the immortal words of Michael Palin: "what a stupid concept!"  Apparently some parties in NC agree and are trying to do the right thing and take I-74, ill-conceived as that entire corridor might be, to Wilmington (a partial saving grace!). 
16.  US 400.  Pointless.  OK, so the portion east of Wichita delineates HPC #3; BFD!  Make that a re-commissioned US 154; and do something else with former US 154 between Dodge City and Mullinville.  KDOT, surprise us (hopefully pleasantly).
17.  Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission.  If any organization in the country could benefit from a real coup d'etat, this would be the one.  Clear out the parochial politicos and expedite spot projects for direct connectors to US 219, I-99, I-70 @ Breezewood (of course), and I-81. 

It's getting late, SNL is over, and I'm tired.  Probably think of more later.

[Scott5114]

What bothers me the most is anal people who'd like to replace a shitload of signs just to make the grid perfect (and then probably waste billions on interchange reconstruction to avoid TOTSOs).

What planning document is that little detail found in, the Yellow Book?