Oregon Business 99E (Salem)

[sp_redelectric]

The re-birth of the Oregon 208 thread, and a quick look over at the ORoads website, gave me reason to ponder - why is Oregon Business 99E considered a business route of 99E?

A few things:

1.  Chemawa Road, between I-5 and 99E, doesn't appear to be an ODOT jurisdiction road.  Nor is it signed as part of Business 99E - thus there's no northern link between Business 99E and mainline 99E

2.  Typical Oregon practice for business routes is to use a former routing of the mainline that's been relocated.  Business 99E doesn't follow the original 99E routing, which would have involved Portland Road to Fairgrounds Road to Summer/Capitol Streets, then Center/Marion Streets, then Commercial/Liberty Streets south to Ankeny Hill.

3.  The southern end of Business 99E is overlaid with 22 (which continues both west and east) creating a redundant and unnecessary route number.

4.  Whether the Salem Parkway needs a published route number is itself questionable - the Northwest Expressway and Delta Highways in Eugene neither have a published route number; Belt Line Road for many years also lacked a route number.  Same with the Wilsonville-Hubbard Highway.  These roads are in some way similar to the Salem Parkway.

5.  Are Commercial/Liberty North truly within state jurisdiction, or are they some kind of shared jurisdiction roads?  I've seen more ODOT spec signs appearing on those streets, but they are functionally city streets.

It would seem, in my opinion, that the business 99E designation is really not warranted or lives up to its name in Salem - if ODOT insists on giving every state route a numeric designation, it'd make more sense to call it a "Business Spur" off of I-5 (I know, ODOT doesn't do this), or just use the Highway 72 designation.

It's situations like this where I really like WSDOT's route numbering scheme over Oregon's...Oregon 522 has a nice ring to it - 5 at the north, 22 at the south end.

[NE2]

1.  Chemawa Road, between I-5 and 99E, doesn't appear to be an ODOT jurisdiction road.  Nor is it signed as part of Business 99E - thus there's no northern link between Business 99E and mainline 99E

There were some (incorrectly-shaped) shields as of May 2012:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=45.000677,-123.000441&spn=0.027675,0.066047&gl=us&t=m&z=15&layer=c&cbll=45.000775,-123.000256&panoid=3RIFEQB7BlMFfvQtK2pbxA&cbp=12,71.29,,0,5.32
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=45.005229,-122.99499&spn=0.027794,0.066047&gl=us&t=m&z=15&layer=c&cbll=45.005148,-122.995055&panoid=Xz21o18dbn45MOTHcxHTfA&cbp=12,99.18,,0,6.78

[xonhulu]

The re-birth of the Oregon 208 thread, and a quick look over at the ORoads website, gave me reason to ponder - why is Oregon Business 99E considered a business route of 99E?

A few things:

1.  Chemawa Road, between I-5 and 99E, doesn't appear to be an ODOT jurisdiction road.  Nor is it signed as part of Business 99E - thus there's no northern link between Business 99E and mainline 99E

There are signs on the Parkway directing you to take Chemawa Rd to continue on BUS 99E, but none on Chemawa itself, nor at its junction with mainline 99E.

2.  Typical Oregon practice for business routes is to use a former routing of the mainline that's been relocated.  Business 99E doesn't follow the original 99E routing, which would have involved Portland Road to Fairgrounds Road to Summer/Capitol Streets, then Center/Marion Streets, then Commercial/Liberty Streets south to Ankeny Hill.

3.  The southern end of Business 99E is overlaid with 22 (which continues both west and east) creating a redundant and unnecessary route number.

Well, the Parkway is a better route into downtown from the north, so favoring it over the Portland Rd/Summer-Capitol/Center-Marion routing makes a lot of sense.  But I agree with you on the rest of BUS 99E's routing -- the overlap with 22 is unnecessary, and it would've made more sense to keep it on Commercial-Liberty.

However, it was explained to me years ago that ODOT was eager to move BUS 99E because of bad blood between ODOT and the City of Salem.

4.  Whether the Salem Parkway needs a published route number is itself questionable - the Northwest Expressway and Delta Highways in Eugene neither have a published route number; Belt Line Road for many years also lacked a route number.  Same with the Wilsonville-Hubbard Highway.  These roads are in some way similar to the Salem Parkway.

Well, the Northwest Expressway and Delta Highways aren't ODOT-maintained, so they aren't exactly comparable.  And ODOT has moved to put route numbers on all state-maintained highways, so even if they hadn't applied a route number to the Salem Parkway back then, they'd probably be signing it now.  Whether it needs a route number is debatable, I guess.

5.  Are Commercial/Liberty North truly within state jurisdiction, or are they some kind of shared jurisdiction roads?  I've seen more ODOT spec signs appearing on those streets, but they are functionally city streets.

I'm pretty sure that ODOT has relinquished all jurisdiction over them now, but there are remnants of their ODOT days still around.  For instance, just 3 blocks from my house is an old sign reading "Property of Oregon Department of Transportation."

It would seem, in my opinion, that the business 99E designation is really not warranted or lives up to its name in Salem - if ODOT insists on giving every state route a numeric designation, it'd make more sense to call it a "Business Spur" off of I-5 (I know, ODOT doesn't do this), or just use the Highway 72 designation.

Agreed.  If they consider it too short for a 2-digit designation, then follow the lead on Beltline and number it 572.

Speaking of 99E, check out this shield I found on the Jefferson Highway yesterday:



This is posted where Ankeny Hill Rd junctions with Jefferson Hwy, about 1 mile south of the North Jefferson exit.  I don't think this means anything; it's probably an error, as the Jefferson Hwy is supposed to be OR 164, not 99E, although you could argue 99E might make more sense.  However, 99E is still signed as concurrent with I-5 through here, and there are no other shields posted anywhere else on the Jefferson Hwy.  Most likely, somebody was confused.

[JasonOfORoads]

The re-birth of the Oregon 208 thread, and a quick look over at the ORoads website, gave me reason to ponder - why is Oregon Business 99E considered a business route of 99E?

My guess?  It's political.  It was probably some sort of trade-off for not having it be called I-305.  It is a road into the state capital, after all.

Also, back when I-5 was being built around Salem, the portion through downtown was known as US-99 Business.  The freeway section that was mainline US-99 was actually called US-99 Bypass, if you can believe it.  Thus, as far as I can tell, there was a gap in unbannered US-99 in Oregon in the mid-to-late-1950s.

1.  Chemawa Road, between I-5 and 99E, doesn't appear to be an ODOT jurisdiction road.  Nor is it signed as part of Business 99E - thus there's no northern link between Business 99E and mainline 99E

Just because ODOT doesn't have jurisdiction over a road, doesn't mean that a designation doesn't extend along that road.  In fact, ODOT's description of OR-99E Business is as such (emph. mine):

Beginning at the junction of Hazelgreen and Chemawa county roads and Pacific Highway East, OR99E, north of Salem; thence westerly over Chemawa Road to its junction with Pacific Highway, I-5, and the Salem Highway;

Thence southerly over the Salem Highway to its junction with the Willamina-Salem Highway in Salem;

Thence southeasterly over the Salem Highway via Front Street, Pringle Parkway, and Mission Street (in common with OR22) to its junction with Pacific Highway, I-5 and OR99E, at the North Santiam Highway Interchange in Salem.

This was the routing as of July 2008 in ODOT's Descriptions of US and OR Routes, with the routing description last modified back in 1992.

2.  Typical Oregon practice for business routes is to use a former routing of the mainline that's been relocated.  Business 99E doesn't follow the original 99E routing, which would have involved Portland Road to Fairgrounds Road to Summer/Capitol Streets, then Center/Marion Streets, then Commercial/Liberty Streets south to Ankeny Hill.

IIRC, OR-99E used to go through Salem before it was re-routed onto I-5.  The last time the description was edited was in 1986.  I don't have my maps in front of me, so I can't be sure.

Nope.  OR-99E never went through downtown Salem.  I'm thinking of US-99E before the Salem Bypass was built.  And the reason that the description was last edited in 1986 was because it was around then that OR-99E Business came into existence.

I've been out of the Oregon roadgeek game too long

That said, it is odd that this is the only business route I can think of that doesn't follow a former routing.  At least the numbering falls in line with other business routes off Interstates, like US-30 Business in Ontario.

3.  The southern end of Business 99E is overlaid with 22 (which continues both west and east) creating a redundant and unnecessary route number.

Agreed, though at least it meets with OR-99E at both termini.

4.  Whether the Salem Parkway needs a published route number is itself questionable - the Northwest Expressway and Delta Highways in Eugene neither have a published route number; Belt Line Road for many years also lacked a route number.  Same with the Wilsonville-Hubbard Highway.  These roads are in some way similar to the Salem Parkway.

The Northwest Expressway and Delta Highway are owned by Lane County.  The Belt Line used to be as well until 1978, when ODOT and Lane County swapped the Belt Line for Junction City-Eugene Highway #223 (quoth my OR-569 page from long ago).  Once again, however, I believe the reason for the designation is political in the case of Business OR-99E.

As a side note, the OTC wanted to renumber the Belt Line from OR-69 to OR-14 in January 2007, but decided against it.  I'm not sure why OR-14 was the proposed number, but it was given the designation OR-569 and fully signed by Summer 2007 so as to direct people competing in 2008 Summer Olympics trials.

5.  Are Commercial/Liberty North truly within state jurisdiction, or are they some kind of shared jurisdiction roads?  I've seen more ODOT spec signs appearing on those streets, but they are functionally city streets.

According to the straightline chart, just the portion of Commercial between the mainline highway and Center is in the state system.  It officially is Connection #72AC.  Perhaps ODOT handled the subsequent signage for consistency along the other roads, since none of those other roads are under state maintenance.  Other portions of Commercial and Liberty -- likely as a part of the old designation of OR-99E through Salem -- were relinquished to city control in 1986.  From page 72-1 (or page 505 in the PDF itself) of the History of State Highways in Oregon:

December 18, 1986
SE Commercial/SE Liberty Streets One-way Couplet from SE Ferry St. to SE Oxford St. Section Marion County
The Highway Commission adopted a resolution abandoning a portion of the highway. See Abandonment and Retention Resolution No. 621.

It would seem, in my opinion, that the business 99E designation is really not warranted or lives up to its name in Salem - if ODOT insists on giving every state route a numeric designation, it'd make more sense to call it a "Business Spur" off of I-5 (I know, ODOT doesn't do this), or just use the Highway 72 designation.

I'd have preferred I-305, seeing as how it would've created another Willamette River crossing.  Then again, I'm always a sucker for a new Oregon Interstate.  Guess I'll have to settle for the reveal of I-580 in Reno in late-July.

It's situations like this where I really like WSDOT's route numbering scheme over Oregon's...Oregon 522 has a nice ring to it - 5 at the north, 22 at the south end.

Now that would be an interesting thread on here, reminiscent of the "what if" threads on m.t.r from back in the day.  Renumber Oregon's state routes like Washington's and vice versa.  To start, OR-217 would be OR-526, since it would connect to US-26/Sunset, and the Belt Line would probably be an OR-12x since it technically "branches" off of OR-126.  OR-126 would still be around like WA-410 is now.

I can't get into this now because I'm about to fall asleep.

[JasonOfORoads]

Agreed.  If they consider it too short for a 2-digit designation, then follow the lead on Beltline and number it 572.

That's not the primary reason why the Belt Line wasn't numbered OR-69.  It actually was for about 5 years, but no shields were posted because they were worried about sign theft.  After all, 69 isn't just another innocuous number.  My guess is that it's the same reason why the Mile 69 mileposts over Sexton Summit (hehe, he said "69" and "sex"...) are both on one massive sign as opposed to separate.  If there were no connotations to 69, ODOT would've numbered it as such in 2002.

[xonhulu]

That's not the primary reason why the Belt Line wasn't numbered OR-69.  It actually was for about 5 years, but no shields were posted because they were worried about sign theft.  After all, 69 isn't just another innocuous number.  My guess is that it's the same reason why the Mile 69 mileposts over Sexton Summit (hehe, he said "69" and "sex"...) are both on one massive sign as opposed to separate.  If there were no connotations to 69, ODOT would've numbered it as such in 2002.

No need to mince words: the sexual connotation of the number "69" is exactly the reason they went with 569 -- Eugene and/or ODOT officials were quoted in the papers as saying that. 

My point was, ODOT has now established a precedent for adding the "5" to a highway's internal number for reasons other than the original reason: when a Highway had the same number as an already existing Route.  So they could make the similar argument for Salem Parkway if they felt like it.  I personally hope not; I'd just as soon they number it OR 72.

[JasonOfORoads]

That makes sense.  However, I imagine that now that the number has been established for 25+ years it would likely be viewed as a waste of money to actually do it.  Of course, that's where we come in.

While I was glad in 2002 when Oregon started numbering those other segments of highways.  However, I think they went about numbering them wrong.  Oregon used to have a system where OR-x and OR-1xx numbers are primary routes and OR-2xx numbers are secondary routes, both arranged geographically.  Now, we might as well throw out the whole system.  It would've made more sense, IMO, to apply new highway numbers based on that system by adding tertiary routes numbered OR-3xx and OR-4xx.  Un-numbered highways could also be put in the primary or secondary systems if they have enough traffic.  Since I happen to think that OR-99E Business is a major route, it would likely be OR-45 or (another) OR-215.  The Belt Line could be OR-32 (slightly out-of-sequence), OR-56, or OR-232 (also slightly out-of-sequence).  Another component of this plan could be a policy to either give a highway a route number or relinquish it to cities and counties.  That way, you could give numbers to important connectors like the Wilsonville-Hubbard Highway (as an OR-3xx or another OR-2xx) and drop pointless designations like the constantly shrinking Beaverton-Tualatin Highway (and its three sets of OR-141 termini).

[xonhulu]

I completely agree with you on this.   There was an ordering to the original primary and secondary State Routes, although later deletions/additions somewhat obscured this pattern.  It would've made more sense to either fit the new routes into the existing system, or develop a new level of 3xx and 4xx Routes.

It was stated at the time (2002) that it was to avoid confusion between Highway and Route numbers.  Well, that confusion only existed inside ODOT; we, the traveling public, were barely aware of the hidden Hwy #s.  The logical fix to this problem would've just been to redefine the Hwy #s to match the Route #s, then assign new Hwy/Rte #s to those highways that had no previous Route designation, using a system like you proposed above.  But that would be expecting a lot from the bureaucrats at ODOT!

[xonhulu]

I should add that I think ODOT is partially pursuing the dropping of highways you suggested.  They turned over nearly all of Swift Hwy #120 to Portland (keeping only 1 bridge, IIRC?).  They recently offered to trade the Parma Spur and those other small highways to Malheur County in exchange for Stanton Rd, which the county wants the state to improve.  They are looking to relinquish most or all of Macadam Hwy to the cities.  I have a feeling some of these highways are still under ODOT jurisdiction only because they can't get local road departments to take them off the state's hands.

[bookem]

4.  Whether the Salem Parkway needs a published route number is itself questionable - the Northwest Expressway and Delta Highways in Eugene neither have a published route number; Belt Line Road for many years also lacked a route number.  Same with the Wilsonville-Hubbard Highway.  These roads are in some way similar to the Salem Parkway.

Isn't the Wilsonville-Hubbard Hwy signed as OR 551 now?

If the new Salem River Crossing (http://www.salemrivercrossing.org/) is built as planned to the north of the current bridges, I'm wondering if it'll carry some sort of designation since it'll offer a new link between Bus 99E and OR 22 that bypasses downtown.

[xonhulu]

Isn't the Wilsonville-Hubbard Hwy signed as OR 551 now?

Yes, it has been for a few years.  The BGS overheads on I-5 for it are pretty new, though; they only went up within the past year (I think).

If the new Salem River Crossing (http://www.salemrivercrossing.org/) is built as planned to the north of the current bridges, I'm wondering if it'll carry some sort of designation since it'll offer a new link between Bus 99E and OR 22 that bypasses downtown.

Good question.  Part of its intended purpose is to let Salem Parkway traffic headed west to avoid downtown, so your point is a good one.  I've never heard they would assign a state route to it, and it would be hard to re-route one of the existing highways onto it. 

I guess they could have BUS 99E cross the river and cross back again with 22, but that seems pointlessly stupid.  They could also designate a BUS 22 onto it, or re-route OR 221 to cross there and end on BUS 99E -- I think that would be a first for Oregon, having a mainline route end on a bannered route.

Most likely, they would just sign it as "To 22" for westbound traffic and "To BUS 99E/Salem Parkway" for eastbound and not give the bridge and new road a number of its own.

[JasonOfORoads]

I should add that I think ODOT is partially pursuing the dropping of highways you suggested.  They turned over nearly all of Swift Hwy #120 to Portland (keeping only 1 bridge, IIRC?).

Wow, they really did cut back on the Swift.  The straightline chart only shows that bridge over the Columbia Slough and some ROW west of the Expo Center interchange still under state maintenance.  I wonder if they dropped the OR-120 designation from there as well.  (The SL chart is ambiguous, and the route designations haven't been updated in 4 years.  Yay budget cuts and project cost overruns!)  Also of note is the fact that it has a frontage road, #120AA, that is likely the original routing of the Swift before I-5.

I always wondered why the hell the Swift existed anyway.  After digging around in the History of State Highways in Oregon doc, it was designated in December 1931 as running from the intersection of present-day Columbia Blvd. and Portland Rd. to the present-day Expo Center interchange (more or less).  The part from Columbia Blvd. to the southern end of the slough bridge was relinquished in 1966, and the part in between the remaining sections was killed in 2008.  I'm surprised ODOT kept the bridge in their system, but my guess is that won't last too much longer.  They likely have some agreement to maintain it for a decade or so after the recent relinquishment.  By that time, the rest might be changed into an I-5 frontage road, if kept in the system at all.  Good riddance to another pointless highway/route designation.

They recently offered to trade the Parma Spur and those other small highways to Malheur County in exchange for Stanton Rd, which the county wants the state to improve.

Are you talking about Stanton Blvd., the E-W road that hits I-84 at Exit 371 NW of Ontario?  What's so important about that road?  I mean, I get turning over a bunch of small highways to the county.  I think that OR-451, OR-452, OR-453, and OR-454 are all pretty pointless except to connect to Idaho in some fashion (for the last three), and maybe the county can take care of the spurs.  I think a better thing for ODOT to do is improve Succor Creek Rd.  It is, after all, the located line for the unbuilt/unimproved section of the Succor Creek Highway #450.  That way, OR-201 can connect to US-95 and provide a better direct connection with eastern Oregon.

Also, what blew my mind is that each highway spur in the state now has its own highway number as of 2011.  So OR-201 isn't on a spur of #450 anymore... it's Homedale Spur Highway #490 now.  Certainly a boost in status, since they were lower than secondary highways, but pointless IMO.  The Parma Spur is now the Parma Spur Highway #489 -- which is odd, considering it used to be the Adrian-Parma Highway #452 until 1971, hence its designation as OR-452.  Proof-positive that I think I would run ODOT better w/r/t highway and route designations.  (Also, note on the SL chart for #490 that OR-201 erroneously comes up from Succor Creek Rd. and does not come from the north.)

They are looking to relinquish most or all of Macadam Hwy to the cities.  I have a feeling some of these highways are still under ODOT jurisdiction only because they can't get local road departments to take them off the state's hands.

The Oswego Highway relinquishments make me sad for a couple reasons.  I grew up around there, for one.  Another reason is its status as a former routing of US-99 from way way back in the day.  The third is that it's a primary state route.  Then again, that didn't stop relinquishing OR-10... and US-26 through Gresham, even.

Your thoughts on small sections make sense, but it's still strange that a couple sections of some highways exist here and there.  Living in Nevada, I've noticed that some state highways exist only because they abut Interstates (see NV-426/South Meadows Rd. and NV-655/Waltham Way for examples).  I know the same can be said for some Oregon routes.  The sorry state of the Scholls Highway #143 can be explained this way.

Man, all this talk of Oregon highways is starting to reawaken the desire to restart ORoads -- the right way (i.e., not on Angelfire).  Maybe someday...

[sp_redelectric]

Thanks guys, very insightful information here.  (And thanks for correcting me on Delta/Northwest Expressway...I swore they were state...)

As for the Belt Line Road...in my line of work I spoke with a customer in Utah and was having a hard time locating her address.  Well, turns out UDOT had the same problem - she lived on a "Highway 69".  When I finally found her account with the old address, she laughed and explained to me that teenagers were stealing so many of the signs so UDOT renumbered the highway.  We updated her account shortly thereafter.

On my last trip to the Seattle area, I also noticed that the I-5 milepost 69 (in both directions) is, shall we say, not spec.  But the sign was there.

[sp_redelectric]

Speaking of 99E, check out this shield I found on the Jefferson Highway yesterday:



This is posted where Ankeny Hill Rd junctions with Jefferson Hwy, about 1 mile south of the North Jefferson exit.  I don't think this means anything; it's probably an error, as the Jefferson Hwy is supposed to be OR 164, not 99E, although you could argue 99E might make more sense.  However, 99E is still signed as concurrent with I-5 through here, and there are no other shields posted anywhere else on the Jefferson Hwy.  Most likely, somebody was confused.

I remember seeing some errorneous 99E shields posted around Jefferson a few years ago; they've been since removed.

At my work, addresses along the road are named "Jefferson Highway 99E"...I'm not sure why but that's how they are.  I'm not aware of any other instance where we use addresses like that - I do know in some places we alternate between name/number (in Otis we have some "Salmon River Highway" addresses and some "Highway 18" addresses, but never "Salmon River Highway 18".)

[sp_redelectric]

I'm surprised ODOT kept the bridge in their system, but my guess is that won't last too much longer.  They likely have some agreement to maintain it for a decade or so after the recent relinquishment.  By that time, the rest might be changed into an I-5 frontage road, if kept in the system at all.  Good riddance to another pointless highway/route designation.

What, you don't like the "Highway 1W/91" island in downtown Portland - the center span of the Steel Bridge?  Where the approach spans, and all of the connecting streets, are city jurisdiction?  (However that's an isolated case, because the upper deck of the Steel Bridge is leased to the state of Oregon by Union Pacific - the highway-only approach spans were previously owned by ODOT and now are city property.)

[JasonOfORoads]

It was stated at the time (2002) that it was to avoid confusion between Highway and Route numbers.  Well, that confusion only existed inside ODOT; we, the traveling public, were barely aware of the hidden Hwy #s.  The logical fix to this problem would've just been to redefine the Hwy #s to match the Route #s, then assign new Hwy/Rte #s to those highways that had no previous Route designation, using a system like you proposed above.  But that would be expecting a lot from the bureaucrats at ODOT!

The confusion between the highways and route numbers might have been about the numbers inside ODOT, but to the public, the confusion lay with the mileposts.  There are several highways that, when traveled from one end to the other, would have traffic pass by five different MILE 1 markers.  Also, I'm sure it's at least somewhat confusing when US-730's mileposts start at 168 because they're a continuation of the Columbia River Highway #2's mileage.  That said, due to the rise in use of GPS and computer maps to navigate, correct mileposts are even less a motorist concern than ever.

I agree that a unification between highway and route numbers needs to happen.  Frankly, it should have happened back in the 1930's, when state routes were first introduced.  The latest would have been the 1950's, when Interstates started coming to Oregon.  The problem we have with doing it now is technical.  I work in IT, and I can attest that the number of databases that are needed to change the system over is massive.  They need an entire army of competent IT people to build translation tables to track mileage changes from old to new, convert everything over, test test test test test and re-test, then deploy.  It would take a year, optimistically, to make such a transition if done the right way.  (In fact, the number of databases California had back in 1971 was one of the reasons that the county postmile system still exists today and why exits weren't numbered until Cal-NExUS began in 2002.)  Of course, due to economic downturns, several of the requirements needed likely don't exist at the present time, and won't until Oregon's economy improves.  That said, it likely will never be a better time than now to start.

That's not to say the idea hasn't been floated around before.  I remember emailing ODOT to ask about any sort of initiatives to unify the systems in 2007.  I got a response that they were looking into making OR-140 one single highway across the state.  OR-140 runs across 7 different state highways, 4 of them by itself (3 co-signed), making it an ideal candidate for testing.  I forget what some of the complications were with that specific route (aside from the technical challenges laid out above), but I imagine that one of the reasons was that OR-140 might still connect to I-5 at some point, and they didn't want to screw up mileage.  However, OR-140 was remote enough that a change could be done with little public notice or fanfare.  Also, since there's a Super-2 SE of K-Falls, I did ask about exit numbering, and the contact did mention something about renumbering the exits to match the new mileposts.

The email and the response are long-gone unfortunately, but I seem to recall there was no timetable for this project, which makes sense considering it's been 5 years and the highways haven't been merged yet.  I wonder if they'll ever kick it around the office again.  I should ask.

[JasonOfORoads]

On my last trip to the Seattle area, I also noticed that the I-5 milepost 69 (in both directions) is, shall we say, not spec.  But the sign was there.

They used to be blank in the 1990s and early 2000s.  But yeah, the MILE 69 posts do look odd.

[JasonOfORoads]

What, you don't like the "Highway 1W/91" island in downtown Portland - the center span of the Steel Bridge?  Where the approach spans, and all of the connecting streets, are city jurisdiction?

What's funny is that the bridge markers technically label that portion as a section of OR-99W.  Those markers are newer than the rollback of the designation to the Barbur interchange (Exit 294) on I-5 back in the 1970s.

[xonhulu]

I wonder if they dropped the OR-120 designation from there as well.

I've never seen any mention of eliminating OR 120 in the Transportation Committee meeting minutes.  My guess is they'll never officially eliminate it or sign it, and just forget it was ever designated.

I always wondered why the hell the Swift existed anyway.  After digging around in the History of State Highways in Oregon doc, it was designated in December 1931 as running from the intersection of present-day Columbia Blvd. and Portland Rd. to the present-day Expo Center interchange (more or less).  The part from Columbia Blvd. to the southern end of the slough bridge was relinquished in 1966, and the part in between the remaining sections was killed in 2008.

The HSHO document is a great resource, but yeah, it lacks a lot of historical commentary explaining why certain highways existed to begin with.  The guess would be ODOT wanted to create a link between BYP 30 and US 99/I-5, but the plan was never followed through. 

Are you talking about Stanton Blvd., the E-W road that hits I-84 at Exit 371 NW of Ontario?  What's so important about that road?

Apparently, it's heavily used by trucks as a connector to OR 201 (there might be some businesses along it that attract a lot of freight traffic, as well), and it needs a major rebuild that the county wants the state to do.

I mean, I get turning over a bunch of small highways to the county.  I think that OR-451, OR-452, OR-453, and OR-454 are all pretty pointless except to connect to Idaho in some fashion (for the last three), and maybe the county can take care of the spurs.  I think a better thing for ODOT to do is improve Succor Creek Rd.  It is, after all, the located line for the unbuilt/unimproved section of the Succor Creek Highway #450.  That way, OR-201 can connect to US-95 and provide a better direct connection with eastern Oregon.

OR 452 would've made more sense if Idaho hadn't removed their state highway that connected it to Parma (ID 18, I think).  Otherwise, yes, those four are pointless as state highways.  Once again, it's pretty odd that they ever became ODOT's responsibility.  And don't hold your breath on the Succor Creek Hwy.

[xonhulu]

What's funny is that the bridge markers technically label that portion as a section of OR-99W.  Those markers are newer than the rollback of the designation to the Barbur interchange (Exit 294) on I-5 back in the 1970s.

We've discussed the endpoint of 99W a number of times.  It was curtailed to exit 294 way back when, but you can barely tell with all the 99W references posted north of there on Barbur and Naito.  And here's a current ODOT project page to rehabilitate the bridges on Barbur south of OR 10; it still refers to Barbur as being OR 99W:

http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/REGION1/pages/vermont_newbury/index.aspx

[JasonOfORoads]

What's funny is that the bridge markers technically label that portion as a section of OR-99W.  Those markers are newer than the rollback of the designation to the Barbur interchange (Exit 294) on I-5 back in the 1970s.

We've discussed the endpoint of 99W a number of times.  It was curtailed to exit 294 way back when, but you can barely tell with all the 99W references posted north of there on Barbur and Naito.  And here's a current ODOT project page to rehabilitate the bridges on Barbur south of OR 10; it still refers to Barbur as being OR 99W:

http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/REGION1/pages/vermont_newbury/index.aspx

No kidding.  99W north of Exit 294 is better signed than most post-2002 Oregon routes -- and it shouldn't even be there!

And I know that the discussions have occurred here before.  Another thread referenced their ODOT contact, who said that 99W for now ends at Exit 294.  I guess this, plus the existence of signs in downtown Portland still signing Clay and Market as US-26, shows how lazy (or maybe disorganized) ODOT Region 1 really is w/r/t proper signage.

And now to work in your other post:

I've never seen any mention of eliminating OR 120 in the Transportation Committee meeting minutes.  My guess is they'll never officially eliminate it or sign it, and just forget it was ever designated.

They may eliminate the highway itself, but the route will forever be hidden until some initiative comes through removing designations from highways that are 100% not on state-maintained roads.  In any event, it should be gone, since it's an absolutely pointless designation, like many that have been left unsigned after their abrupt creation a decade ago.

My plan for the Swift Highway #120 actually follows what happened to a similarly-useless highway closeby: The Vancouver Highway #122, designated in 1934 but not relinquished to Portland until 1986.  However, a small section of Schmeer Rd. was kept in the system as -- you guessed it -- a connector of OR-99E (Connection #081BA, to be exact).  The HSHO says it was 0.03 miles long, but the straightline chart for Pacific Highway East #1E pegs it at 0.14 miles.  Oh well...

The HSHO document is a great resource, but yeah, it lacks a lot of historical commentary explaining why certain highways existed to begin with.  The guess would be ODOT wanted to create a link between BYP 30 and US 99/I-5, but the plan was never followed through.

I actually received a very rough draft of the HSHO about 6-7 years ago when I paid a visit to the ODOT Region 1 office in Portland, I forget who from.  The disc that I received it on also had a number of old straightline charts on it from the 1970s and 1980s in either TIFF or JPG form which provided a wealth of information.  While some of the pieces of information in this document made sense, it was even more confusing and didn't include the helpful maps that the HSHO does.  I know I have that around here somewhere though.  Hopefully it survived the several moves I've made since receiving it...

That said, my guess is that it likely supported some sort of railroad center, seeing as how all that's over there are railroad tracks.  I'm not sure.  That might be a good random question to ODOT.  I was going to say that Columbia Blvd. was a state highway, but I don't think it ever was.

Apparently, it's heavily used by trucks as a connector to OR 201 (there might be some businesses along it that attract a lot of freight traffic, as well), and it needs a major rebuild that the county wants the state to do.

That makes sense.  What threw me is that Google Maps actually doesn't have Stanton Blvd's easterly extension to hit OR-201.  I had to view the aerial maps to see it, so I added it in (which is kinda cool, I admit).  Call it the Ontario Bypass Highway #459 and make it US-30 Truck or OR-201 Truck or something cool... not OR-459 please.

OR 452 would've made more sense if Idaho hadn't removed their state highway that connected it to Parma (ID 18, I think).

Yep, it was ID-18.  I wonder when that got killed.  In any event, it's not there anymore.  Time to kill OR-452.

Otherwise, yes, those four are pointless as state highways.  Once again, it's pretty odd that they ever became ODOT's responsibility.

All of those highways were designated in the 1930's along county market roads.  My guess is that they served the same purpose as Texas' Farm-to-Market and Ranch-to-Market roads do today, though signing them isn't as important to Oregon's lifeblood as it would be to Texas'.  As such, they've served their purpose and now should be laid to rest.

Also, I think it's weird that OR-453 and OR-454 meet at a corner but don't technically intersect with each other.  WTF was ODOT thinking with those designations?

And don't hold your breath on the Succor Creek Hwy.

Figured.  It probably has about as much support as extending MAX light rail into Vancouver (from Vancouverites, anyway).  Still, a man can dream

[sp_redelectric]

Another thread referenced their ODOT contact, who said that 99W for now ends at Exit 294.  I guess this, plus the existence of signs in downtown Portland still signing Clay and Market as US-26, shows how lazy (or maybe disorganized) ODOT Region 1 really is w/r/t proper signage.

I want to say that those signs were installed by PBOT, not ODOT.  I believe that even Harbor Drive north of River Parkway, including that intersection, is now PBOT jurisdiction (notice some newer signs on Harbor and on Naito use Clearview, which ODOT does not.)