The Great Interstate 238 Debate

[corco]

My idea is to renumber I-238, I-580 from I-238 to I-205, and then the length of I-205 all as I-705. Renumber the remaining stretch of I-580 from Tracy to I-5 as I-205. Voila. It's fixed.

Or you could even make it simpler and just renumber I-238 and then I-580 from I-238 all the way to I-5 as I-705

[Concrete Bob]

If it was up to me, I would do the following:

(1) Connect SR 4's Brentwood Bypass to the current junction of I-205 and I-580 as a full-fledged freeway (existing planned CA 239). Then, renumber all of SR 4 from Hercules to Tracy as I 480.  Renumber the stretch of 580 from 1-5 to to I-205 as 480 as well. The new 480 would run from I-5 to I-80 and serve as a "Northern Arc" of the East Bay.

(2) Renumber I-205 and the existing I-580 from Tracy to San Lorenzo at I-880 as I -305. Extend the corridor across the San Francisco Bay (Southern Crossing) to connect with the existing I-380.  Extend 380 over to Pacifica as was originally planned. Renumber the entire corridor as I-305 from Pacifica to I-5.

(3) Renumber the stretch of the existing I-580 from I-80 to the newly renumbered I-305 (former I-580/I-238) interchange as I -380. 

(4) I-580 would remained as signed from El Cerrito/Richmond to San Rafael.

Then, the I-205 designation would remain available for a western bypass of Sacramento, connecting from an area south of Elk Grove to the junction of I-80 and SR 113 near Davis.  The existing SR 113 between Davis and Woodland and Davis could be renumbered as I-205. 

Yeah, it will never happen.  But, I can dream !!!  All that just to get rid of an oddly numbered interstate !!!  I-238 only stands out to us roadgeeks !!!   

[Voyager]

Yikes, if that would happen then commuters would never remember where they were going!

[Concrete Bob]

They'd learn.....quickly!!! 

[geoking111]

I also have an idea to fix this horrible I-238. I would create an I-3 and route it mostly along US 101 between the Los Angeles and San Francisco metro areas. In the Bay Area, I-3 would take over I-880's entire route and I-580's route from the Maze to its western terminus.

I would then create an I-503, which would take over all of I-238's route and I-580 between I-238 and I-5. The remainder of I-580 (between the Maze and I-238) could then be renumbered to I-403. This would be a costly option, but at least it would wipe out I-238.

[John]

What about 580 from the Maze to San Rafael?

[geoking111]

What about 580 from the Maze to San Rafael?

I-580 from the Maze to San Rafael would be part of I-3. This could be the northern terminus of I-3. If needed in the future, I-3 could be further extended to the north, possibly all the way back to I-5 at Grants Pass, OR.

[roadfro]

The easiest thing to do would be to resign it as CA 238.  It makes sense, and it isn't an inconvenience to the travelling public as a massive I-x80 renumbering would be.

I don't know the exact rules; I think you may be on to something with some routes needing shields and others allowed to remain invisible.  For example, US-395 in Reno, NV is I-580 and originally it was signed, but then they took the signs down ...

From what I've read, the Interstate shield need not be posted for a highway to be designated an interstate and receive federal funding.  I think posting of shields is up to the discretion of the states, at least as far as 3di's are concerened.  What eventually became I-515 in Las Vegas wasn't actually posted as an Interstate until the entire freeway was completed around 1994, 15-17 years after the first segments were constructed. 

Only part of US 395 in Reno is actually designated as I-580 (according to the NDOT route log), although all of it is mileposted as I-580 (even north of I-80 where it ultimately will not be signed).  From what I've read, I-580 was never actually signed on the interstate itself; however, it did appear on some maps in the 1980s and there is evidence of shields having been posted on some adjacent streets.  Once the extension is complete south of Reno, the I-580 shields are likely to go up.

[Alps]

The easiest thing to do would be to resign it as CA 238.  It makes sense, and it isn't an inconvenience to the travelling public as a massive I-x80 renumbering would be.

I don't know the exact rules; I think you may be on to something with some routes needing shields and others allowed to remain invisible.  For example, US-395 in Reno, NV is I-580 and originally it was signed, but then they took the signs down ...

From what I've read, the Interstate shield need not be posted for a highway to be designated an interstate and receive federal funding.  I think posting of shields is up to the discretion of the states, at least as far as 3di's are concerened.  What eventually became I-515 in Las Vegas wasn't actually posted as an Interstate until the entire freeway was completed around 1994, 15-17 years after the first segments were constructed. 

Only part of US 395 in Reno is actually designated as I-580 (according to the NDOT route log), although all of it is mileposted as I-580 (even north of I-80 where it ultimately will not be signed).  From what I've read, I-580 was never actually signed on the interstate itself; however, it did appear on some maps in the 1980s and there is evidence of shields having been posted on some adjacent streets.  Once the extension is complete south of Reno, the I-580 shields are likely to go up.

The issue with 238 is nothing but funding.  All the x5's are used, all the x80's are used, and there aren't any other Interstates.  If you want to get rid of the number, call it I-580 SPUR.  New York set that precedent by having I-295 SPUR for decades until they got it renumbered I-695 officially (had already been signed that way).

[Tarkus]

The directional orientation of CA-238 is already screwy.  The freeway portion runs East-West, but the rest of the highway runs north-south.  The non-freeway portion ought to be renumbered as well.

Of course, I-180 and now I-480 are not taken in California--one of those could do the trick, I think.

Also, I-680 is pretty darn long and runs north-south . . . I'd almost think that an Interstate 3 designation for it might make sense.  Then make I-238 into I-103 or something.

-Alex (Tarkus)

[yanksfan6129]

I know, its a violation of the numbering convention, but at this point its become so well established that maybe its just better to leave it alone.

People in the area know its I-238. So what?

[TheStranger]

There's an expensive way to fix this (in the far future) - build an I-380 bridge east from San Bruno to Hayward (as has been proposed not too long ago), and 380 can then be extended east!

[John]

Of course, I-180 and now I-480 are not taken in California--one of those could do the trick, I think.

Also, I-680 is pretty darn long and runs north-south . . . I'd almost think that an Interstate 3 designation for it might make sense.  Then make I-238 into I-103 or something.

-Alex (Tarkus)

I-680 is long, but it is still only 50-60 miles long. Forget interstate, it isn't even interregional. As for 180 and 480, we already have CA-180, although it is way out in the Central Valley, and as I explained, 480 is more hated than 13 or 666 in the Bay Area.

[vdeane]

The designation doesn't have to be signed.  If it's hidden nobody (outside the DOT and roadgeeks) would even know.

And why does CA care so much if an I-180 existed just because of CA 180?  In NY, there are state routes 81, 88, 90, 190, 290, among others, that are unrelated to the interstates with the same number.  NY 90 even crosses I-90 (there is no interchange though).

[Alex]

The designation doesn't have to be signed.  If it's hidden nobody (outside the DOT and roadgeeks) would even know.

And why does CA care so much if an I-180 existed just because of CA 180?  In NY, there are state routes 81, 88, 90, 190, 290, among others, that are unrelated to the interstates with the same number.  NY 90 even crosses I-90 (there is no interchange though).

I believe its written into the state law, wrt the duplicate numbering restriction.

[John]

Yes it is. Either that, or Caltrans is just a huge group of stubburn hard asses.

[travelinmiles]

Why is I-480 hated? Is it because of it being the Embarcadero and the canceled SF Loop?

[Voyager]

Exactly.

[Alex]

Does anyone care about the 480 number anymore? I think its been enough years for that number to be buried in history now.

[Voyager]

You know I was thinking the same thing. Most people in SF now probably don't even remember the Embarcadero Freeway, let alone the number they gave it.

[Alex]

You know I was thinking the same thing. Most people in SF now probably don't even remember the Embarcadero Freeway, let alone the number they gave it.

I saw the Embacardero Freeway in 1991 and it wasn't too long after that that it was torn down. Being so long ago, I wonder if I-238 was renumbered I-480, how much flack Caltrans would get. But to echo the sentiment expresssed above, at this point, I-238, like I-99, has been around so long, I've come to accept it and really don't see a need to change it.

[flowmotion]

Four digit numbers would be the best solution, because there's a number of other places in CA which could use additional x80 routes.

I-1080 -> Replaces Business 80 in Sacto. Singing a full freeway with a green sign is inconsistent, even if the freeway isn't 100% interstate grade.

I-2380 -> Replace I-238. Could be extended down I-880 and over the CA-92 San Mateo Bridge to I-280 even.

I-1580 -> Replace I-580 between Richmond and San Rafael. Get rid of the confusing wrong-way multiplex on I-80.

Potentially CA 85 and CA 237 could also be an I-x80 number too, if San Jose really wanted their own ring route.

[vdeane]

I don't think a 4di number fits on signs.  Perhaps states could instead get to sign I-x00 routes as spurs in emergencies?

[Alex]

I don't think a 4di number fits on signs.  Perhaps states could instead get to sign I-x00 routes as spurs in emergencies?

If one of the numbers is one, it can be done, ala Interstate H201.

[timhomer2009]

What exactly was it about the Embarcadero Freeway that was such an issue?

As for I-3, is it likely that people would confuse it with I-H3 in Hawaii?