Oregon

[Dougtone]

Sure, why not take a virtual drive down one of the most scenic stretches of road along the Oregon Coast. At least in my opinion. But yes, the Three Capes Scenic Route in Tillamook County is pretty neat, don't you think.

https://www.gribblenation.org/2023/08/oregons-three-capes-scenic-route.html

[xonhulu]

Thanks for a great feature on one of my favorite coastal drives in Oregon.  In my opinion, in terms of sheer scenery, it is only surpassed by a couple stretches of US 101 itself (Yachats-Florence & Port Orford-Brookings).  However, you're sharing the drive with 101's higher traffic levels on both of those, so the 3 Capes is a much more relaxing drive.  There are some hikes at several of the parks along the route, with the trail to the tip of Cape Lookout being one of my favorites.

I'm happy US 101 was not ultimately shifted to run through Pacific City, as it would have ruined both the 3 Capes drive and the charm of the towns along there.  However, it would be nice to see 101 straightened out on its existing routing between the southern end of 3 Capes and Sandlake Rd through Cloverdale, Hebo & Beaver.  That road is too curvy for the amount of traffic it carries, and I somewhat dread it when I have to drive it.

I'll definitely have to check out the realigned route over Cape Meares when it opens this fall, if all goes as scheduled.  I'll try to post a report on it here when I do.

[xonhulu]

I posted this picture back in December speculating that it appeared OR 542 might be finally posted in the field, as there was a blank space in a new sign assembly just waiting for a 542 shield:



I returned to that intersection again 2 days ago, and I'm happy to report that shields for 542 have been installed.  However . . .





. . . wrong number!  The sign crew undoubtedly confused the hidden hwy number (242) with the route number (542). 

This time, I did drive down 542 all the way to Powers & back, but I saw no other posted shields.

Also on this trip: I had realized awhile back there was a little piece of state-maintained highway I'd missed in Oregon: an unposted, non-contiguous piece of OR 255 called Myers Cr. Road, just south of Gold Beach.  Like the signed portion of OR 255, it's a former alignment of US 101, even still carrying mileposts from that time.  The one acknowledgement of ODOT's jurisdiction was on this bridge over its namesake creek . . .



. . . bearing this bridge inventory sign:



Keeping with the apparent theme of this post, it's the wrong Hwy #: it should read OR 255, not 250.  OR 250 is the (still) unsigned Cape Blanco Hwy several dozen miles north of here.  But note the mileage of 338.33, reflecting what would've been 101's distance from Astoria.

Nothing else new highway-wise from this trip.

However, since this post seems to be all about erroneous signs, here's a fun one I saw in Forest Grove a week ago. Enjoy!

[Bickendan]

I'm glad US 8 and 47 are still in Forest Grove

IIRC, that's been there since before the pandemic, when I had an Oregon Symphonic Band concert out at Pacific University.

[roadman65]

I was noticing how that US 95 in Oregon is 135 miles in one single county.  Malhuer County, OR is a desert region County and has no major cities or towns within its borders.

In addition, the US Route only connects to the rest of the state's Route network via OR 87. Other than that there are no other Route junctions between NV and ID.

Has anyone ever clinched it here? Most of all, are there any traffic signals in Oregon at all on US 95?

[US 89]

I was noticing how that US 95 in Oregon is 135 miles in one single county.  Malhuer County, OR is a desert region County and has no major cities or towns within its borders.

In addition, the US Route only connects to the rest of the state’s Route network via OR 87. Other than that there are no other Route junctions between NV and ID.

Has anyone ever clinched it here? Most of all, are there any traffic signals in Oregon at all on US 95?

Ontario is pretty substantial at 11,600 people. It’s also right across the border from Idaho and pretty close to Boise, which is why most of Malheur County is in the Mountain time zone. The only part that isn’t is the area around McDermitt, which is on the border with the Pacific time zone state of Nevada.

If 95 had a light in Oregon, it’d probably be in Jordan Valley, and that appears to lack any sort of signalization.

[doorknob60]

I was noticing how that US 95 in Oregon is 135 miles in one single county.  Malhuer County, OR is a desert region County and has no major cities or towns within its borders.

In addition, the US Route only connects to the rest of the state's Route network via OR 87. Other than that there are no other Route junctions between NV and ID.

Has anyone ever clinched it here? Most of all, are there any traffic signals in Oregon at all on US 95?

It's a pretty easy clinch. Drive from Boise to Reno or almost anywhere in California, and US-95 is the fastest route. Definitely no signals. It's an easy drive, mostly straight, fairly low traffic, easy sightlines for passing, and now with a 70 MPH speed limit. Last time I drove it, even 80 MPH felt a bit on the slow side haha.

I'm glad I didn't have to drive the whole thing during the 55 MPH days (I don't mean NMSL, it was 55 until 2016). I did drive the segment from OR-78 to the Idaho border pre-2016, though I was probably driving around 70-75 MPH. On these Eastern Oregon highways before 2016, cops usually wouldn't bother you if you kept it under 70 (and definitely wouldn't bother you under 65). My friend got pulled over on US-20 east of Bend going 70 in a 55, and even with Washington plates only got a warning. With Oregon plates, neither me nor my dad ever got pulled over on that drive.

[roadman65]

I think I heard before in thread over a decade ago that in Idaho as well, that US 95 has segments over 200 miles signal free. I assume US 95 in OR is the same way, and most likely US 95 in general is a good N- S non freeway in that part of the US for long haul travelers.

[xonhulu]

ODOT has now corrected the OR 542 signage:

 

I saw no additional OR 542 signage, but I only checked the immediate vicinity of the interchange.

[Bickendan]

Most likely the only other sign will be in Powers for the other direction. But it's good to see ORH 242/OR 542 having a proper shield finally go up!

[pderocco]

I find it stunning that road departments, even state ones, make so many stupid mistakes. "You had one job..."

[nexus73]

542 is a N/S route, not E/W.  Look at the map to see this but that is beyond the ability of ODOT these days.

Rick

[Bickendan]

542 is a N/S route, not E/W.  Look at the map to see this but that is beyond the ability of ODOT these days.

Rick

I wasn't going to care about that detail... but Powers is to the east of the OR 42 junction, so West 542 from the 42 is wrong regardless 

[Amaury]

542 is a N/S route, not E/W.  Look at the map to see this but that is beyond the ability of ODOT these days.

Rick

That's even more weird since they should have used an odd number, but I realize the whole S/N = odd and W/E = even is probably a more of a guideline than an actual rule. Just like people getting worked up over I-82 being north of I-84 and calling it a violation, when that's just a guideline.

[xonhulu]

I find it stunning that road departments, even state ones, make so many stupid mistakes. "You had one job..."

I think you can chalk up some of it to lack of precise directions from the office to the sign crew.  At least, that's what they told me after I pointed out they had mistakenly signed OR 164 as 99E a few years back.

That's even more weird since they should have used an odd number, but I realize the whole S/N = odd and W/E = even is probably a more of a guideline than an actual rule.

Oregon followed the odd/even guideline with the older route numbers.  But since the hidden hwy #'s were probably just assigned sequentially by county, with no notion they'd ever be used as signed routes, they wouldn't have even given parity a thought on those. 

So there are quite a few post-2002 routes that break the parity-direction guideline.  Examples include OR 153, OR 154, OR 528, OR 569, and OR 132, off the top of my head.

[xonhulu]

Most likely the only other sign will be in Powers for the other direction.

I did go out to Powers when I saw the erroneous 242 shields earlier, and there was no 242 or 542 shield installed down there, just the END ODOT MAINTENANCE marker.

But it's good to see ORH 242/OR 542 having a proper shield finally go up!

Always fun to see a new signed route. 

Unfortunately, I took a trip to Wallowa Lake two weeks ago, and can't report the same thing about routes 334, 335, 350 and 351 -- they still remain unsigned!

[Bickendan]

I find it stunning that road departments, even state ones, make so many stupid mistakes. "You had one job..."

I think you can chalk up some of it to lack of precise directions from the office to the sign crew.  At least, that's what they told me after I pointed out they had mistakenly signed OR 164 as 99E a few years back.

That's even more weird since they should have used an odd number, but I realize the whole S/N = odd and W/E = even is probably a more of a guideline than an actual rule.

Oregon followed the odd/even guideline with the older route numbers.  But since the hidden hwy #'s were probably just assigned sequentially by county, with no notion they'd ever be used as signed routes, they wouldn't have even given parity a thought on those. 

So there are quite a few post-2002 routes that break the parity-direction guideline.  Examples include OR 153, OR 154, OR 528, OR 569, and OR 132, off the top of my head.

OR 569 was originally OR(H) 69, but ODOT quickly realized they didn't want it signed as 69. That said, even as 69, it wouldn't match the Route guidelines.
132 is an odd case, as it wasn't ever part of the ORH system being a Lane County highway that was only recently adopted by ODOT. It's one of the few Routes that doesn't have a Highway underpinning it (like how OR 8 west of OR 47 in Forest Grove doesn't).

[Amaury]

So there are quite a few post-2002 routes that break the parity-direction guideline.  Examples include OR 153, OR 154, OR 528, OR 569, and OR 132, off the top of my head.

Yeah, I already knew about OR 569 since I went that way coming back from a drive to Eugene last year in May. The west-east designation makes sense since it travels that way more than it does south-north, it's just the number that makes no sense in that regard.

Washington only has one route that doesn't follow the convention. WA 548 is designated as south-north, despite its even number. And there, it's not as easy to tell which way it runs more just by looking at it, as it runs about 7 miles south-north and 6 miles east-west. But the south-north designation does make sense since it does run that way more, even if just a little. Numbers were available, so I don't know why it wasn't numbered as something like WA 549.

But, anyway, yeah, there are more of those in Oregon, and don't get me started on Montana. LOL

[Bruce]

So there are quite a few post-2002 routes that break the parity-direction guideline.  Examples include OR 153, OR 154, OR 528, OR 569, and OR 132, off the top of my head.

Yeah, I already knew about OR 569 since I went that way coming back from a drive to Eugene last year in May. The west-east designation makes sense since it travels that way more than it does south-north, it's just the number that makes no sense in that regard.

Washington only has one route that doesn't follow the convention. WA 548 is designated as south-north, despite its even number. And there, it's not as easy to tell which way it runs more just by looking at it, as it runs about 7 miles south-north and 6 miles east-west. But the south-north designation does make sense since it does run that way more, even if just a little. Numbers were available, so I don't know why it wasn't numbered as something like WA 549.

But, anyway, yeah, there are more of those in Oregon, and don't get me started on Montana. LOL

Washington has several routes that break the convention, including several that were added in 1991 that had to be fit into the existing scheme: SR 523 is east-west on the Seattle/Shoreline city line and SR 531 is east-west as well because there's no available even numbers until you hit 540 (a former route) or 550.

I suspect SR 548 was numbered as such because it was originally intended just to serve the Cherry Point Refinery and was extended up to Blaine after some nudging by local officials during the planning process.

[xonhulu]

132 is an odd case, as it wasn't ever part of the ORH system being a Lane County highway that was only recently adopted by ODOT. It's one of the few Routes that doesn't have a Highway underpinning it (like how OR 8 west of OR 47 in Forest Grove doesn't).

At first, I thought "that couldn't be."  But I searched out this document:  https://www.oregon.gov/odot/planning/pages/jurisdictional-transfers.aspx

. . . and sure enough, no hwy # is listed for the Delta Hwy: it just says "Delta Hwy." 

But there was a jurisdictional transfer from Lane Co. to ODOT, so one would think it would have been assigned a highway #.  Seems like an odd bureaucratic oversight, unless ODOT just considers it a long off/on-ramp for either Beltline or I-105.

The choice of a Tillamook County number for it is also weird, considering at least one Lane County #, 220, was available.  Maybe nobody bothered to check, or they just don't care about the county-by-county system. 

But then they correctly picked a number in the 120's for Cornelius Pass Rd., so it must be selective amnesia.

[Bickendan]

132 is an odd case, as it wasn't ever part of the ORH system being a Lane County highway that was only recently adopted by ODOT. It's one of the few Routes that doesn't have a Highway underpinning it (like how OR 8 west of OR 47 in Forest Grove doesn't).

At first, I thought "that couldn't be."  But I searched out this document:  https://www.oregon.gov/odot/planning/pages/jurisdictional-transfers.aspx

. . . and sure enough, no hwy # is listed for the Delta Hwy: it just says "Delta Hwy." 

But there was a jurisdictional transfer from Lane Co. to ODOT, so one would think it would have been assigned a highway #.  Seems like an odd bureaucratic oversight, unless ODOT just considers it a long off/on-ramp for either Beltline or I-105.

The choice of a Tillamook County number for it is also weird, considering at least one Lane County #, 220, was available.  Maybe nobody bothered to check, or they just don't care about the county-by-county system. 

But then they correctly picked a number in the 120's for Cornelius Pass Rd., so it must be selective amnesia.

With that document in mind, I'm surprised ODOT assigned an ORH to OR 127 (same number, but still). I was imagining they were content with just the OR number for brand new routes at this point.

[Bickendan]

I'm happy to report that US 8 and US 47 are still signed in Forest Grove.

[JasonOfORoads]

132 is an odd case, as it wasn't ever part of the ORH system being a Lane County highway that was only recently adopted by ODOT. It's one of the few Routes that doesn't have a Highway underpinning it (like how OR 8 west of OR 47 in Forest Grove doesn't).

At first, I thought "that couldn't be."  But I searched out this document:  https://www.oregon.gov/odot/planning/pages/jurisdictional-transfers.aspx

. . . and sure enough, no hwy # is listed for the Delta Hwy: it just says "Delta Hwy." 

But there was a jurisdictional transfer from Lane Co. to ODOT, so one would think it would have been assigned a highway #.  Seems like an odd bureaucratic oversight, unless ODOT just considers it a long off/on-ramp for either Beltline or I-105.

The choice of a Tillamook County number for it is also weird, considering at least one Lane County #, 220, was available.  Maybe nobody bothered to check, or they just don't care about the county-by-county system. 

But then they correctly picked a number in the 120's for Cornelius Pass Rd., so it must be selective amnesia.

With that document in mind, I'm surprised ODOT assigned an ORH to OR 127 (same number, but still). I was imagining they were content with just the OR number for brand new routes at this point.

The Delta Highway/OR-132 is in Oregon's maintenance system as "Delta Highway #132". Like OR-127, the route designation matches the highway designation. However, as was previously mentioned, Lane County highway #220 was available, as is OR-220, and those probably should have been the designation. I'm guessing that it probably has something technical in nature, such as creating a unique number in their database, that prevents them from re-using 220; that was the reason all the spurs got changed from things like "Salmon River Highway #39Y (McMinnville Spur)" to "McMinnville Spur Highway #483" in 2010.

In any event, OR-132 doesn't defy the longstanding convention of state maintained roads having some sort of highway number underneath.

[Amaury]

Why someone would do this is beyond me: https://ktvz.com/news/2024/01/04/oregon-state-police-seek-tips-to-find-whoever-cut-down-discarded-7-odot-road-signs-in-wasco-county/

[pderocco]

Yeah, you'd think they'd keep the signs.