News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered at https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=33904.0
Corrected several already and appreciate your patience as we work through the rest.

Main Menu

Which 3DIs get roasted the most/least?

Started by index, April 21, 2018, 09:01:59 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

PHLBOS

#25
One potential to be roasted, at least in terms of direction cardinals, will likely be the I-295 extension (take-over of old I-95) in NJ & PA... particularly the PA stretch.  The latter is clearly a north-south road but it will be resigned as an east-west route (so it doesn't clash with the opposite NJ north-south orientation).

At present, only engineers/DOTs/roadgeeks (including those on this site) are aware of such.  The general public will become more aware later this year when the PA stretch is fully resigned/redesignated.
GPS does NOT equal GOD


roadman

Quote from: 1 on April 23, 2018, 08:45:23 AM
Least roasted: I-295 in Massachusetts/Rhode Island. It ends at an Interstate at both ends, actually connects to its parent at both ends, isn't unused or too congested, isn't too long or short, is numbered correctly, doesn't exit itself (looking at you, I-293), isn't overlapped with other routes for most or all of its length, and hasn't had any proposals to renumber or extend it in Fictional.

Clarified it for you.
"And ninety-five is the route you were on.  It was not the speed limit sign."  - Jim Croce (from Speedball Tucker)

"My life has been a tapestry
Of years of roads and highway signs" (with apologies to Carole King and Tom Rush)

thenetwork

Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on April 23, 2018, 03:12:30 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on April 22, 2018, 10:24:49 PM
I-480N? Never heard of it.

This makes me feel better about saying I had never heard of it either. I was sitting here debating whether I wanted to admit it or not.

I-480N was only revealed when ODOT installed the blue 2/10-mile reference markers.  Prior to that, the route only existed for referring the I-480 spur on paper.

Had the US-422 freeway that would have paralleled OH-14/Broadway toward downtown Cleveland ever been completed, I-480N would not be around as US-422 would've been the true signed route along that stretch.


Beltway

Quote from: 1 on April 23, 2018, 08:45:23 AM
Least roasted: I-295 in Massachusetts/Rhode Island. It ends at an Interstate at both ends, connects to its parent, isn't unused or too congested, isn't too long or short, is numbered correctly, doesn't exit itself (looking at you, I-293), isn't overlapped with other routes for most or all of its length, and hasn't had any proposals to renumber or extend it in Fictional.

Does it need roasting over the fact that its eastern loop was canceled?  Should have been a full beltway.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

sparker

Least likely to be roasted:  any full single-number beltway that avoids TOTSO's or multiplexes on, not necessarily with intersecting routes.  Not too many of those; I'd cite I-270/OH, I-495/VA/MD, I-295/FL, I-610/TX, I-485/NC.  If not for the MPX with I-29, I-435/KS/MO would qualify, as would I-285/GA, except for the combination TOTSO/MPX with I-85 in its SW corner.  Same goes for I-275/OH/KY/IN vis-a-vis I-74.  Also, arcs/partial beltways that terminate at their parent at both ends and thus serve as an alternative route: all iterations of I-405, I-205/OR/WA, I-805, I-294, all I-475 iterations, I-490/NY, I-840/TN, I-235/IA, I-459, I-895/MD, and I-275/FL.  All these simply do their job of providing a somewhat different route than the parent, whether through or around an urban area.  I'd mention I-610/LA, except for the fact that quite a few folks want it to be the I-10 mainline.  And I-215/CA would fit the classic "arc" description except for that nasty TOTSO drop to 1 lane NB in Riverside.  There are probably others I've overlooked or simply missed -- but I avoided citing anything that might provoke controversy, such as belts with dubious Interstate status like I-695/MD -- or 3di's that have been the focus of local controversy, such as I-481, which may or may not eventually be part of the I-81 mainline.   

oscar

Quote from: sparker on April 23, 2018, 01:37:13 PM
Least likely to be roasted:  any full single-number beltway that avoids TOTSO's or multiplexes on, not necessarily with intersecting routes.  Not too many of those; I'd cite I-270/OH, I-495/VA/MD...

I-495 VA/MD (with a tiny piece in DC) gets some grief for its duplex with I-95, and suggestions that I-495 be removed from that duplex. I really like that duplex, since it helps guide (or give directions for) different kinds of travelers, such as long-distance travelers who usually should follow the I-95 signs, or travelers within D.C.'s suburbs who can follow the I-495 signs between places on the duplex and other I-495 destinations.
my Hot Springs and Highways pages, with links to my roads sites:
http://www.alaskaroads.com/home.html

sparker

Quote from: oscar on April 23, 2018, 01:47:02 PM
Quote from: sparker on April 23, 2018, 01:37:13 PM
Least likely to be roasted:  any full single-number beltway that avoids TOTSO's or multiplexes on, not necessarily with intersecting routes.  Not too many of those; I'd cite I-270/OH, I-495/VA/MD...

I-495 VA/MD (with a tiny piece in DC) gets some grief for its duplex with I-95, and suggestions that I-495 be removed from that duplex. I really like that duplex, since it helps guide (or give directions for) different kinds of travelers, such as long-distance travelers who usually should follow the I-95 signs, or travelers within D.C.'s suburbs who can follow the I-495 signs between places on the duplex and other I-495 destinations.

My thought was that I-495 was there first as one of the "class of '56"; it certainly fulfills its function as a beltway/bypass regardless of whether I-95 signs are tacked on to its eastern half.  Any controversy stems from other events affecting other routes; the beltway simply bears the brunt of subsequent decisions. 

Eth

Quote from: sparker on April 23, 2018, 01:37:13 PMI-285/GA, except for the combination TOTSO/MPX with I-85 in its SW corner.

It does neither of those things. I-85 runs in I-285's median for about 1¼ miles, but that's it.

Rough roastability rankings (from a roadgeek perspective, not the general public) for Georgia's 3dis:
1. I-520 — returns to its parent despite having an odd first digit, though that's entirely South Carolina's fault
2. I-516 — fairly short, multiplexes with about a half-dozen other routes
3. I-475 — it's the through route, so why not just make it I-75?
4. I-285 — a "bypass" that does nothing of the sort anymore, way too much traffic
5. I-575 — the entire thing is also signed as GA 5
6. I-985 — nearly the entire thing is also signed as US 23
7. I-675 — pretty good overall, decent length, appropriate capacity; some might say it should use an odd number since it doesn't return to its parent, though I think it's fine since it ends at another Interstate
8. I-185 — nothing at all wrong with this one

index

Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on April 23, 2018, 03:12:30 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on April 22, 2018, 10:24:49 PM
I-480N? Never heard of it.

This makes me feel better about saying I had never heard of it either. I was sitting here debating whether I wanted to admit it or not.


Huh. I had thought more people knew about that one. Guess I was wrong.
I love my 2010 Ford Explorer.



Counties traveled

hotdogPi

I knew about it. Apple Maps shows it as if it's fully signed.
Clinched, minus I-93 (I'm missing a few miles and my file is incorrect)

Traveled, plus US 13, 44, and 50, and several state routes

I will be in Burlington VT for the eclipse.

slorydn1

Quote from: Eth on April 23, 2018, 02:44:05 PM



Rough roastability rankings (from a roadgeek perspective, not the general public) for Georgia's 3dis:
1. I-520 — returns to its parent despite having an odd first digit, though that's entirely South Carolina's fault


I'm not so sure this one is particularly "roastable" if one takes into consideration that 3di's are assigned to each individual state. In this case we have I-520 (GA) and I-520 (SC), both odd numbered spurs that just happen to meet each other at the state line to form a functionally single bypass route. Officially they are 2 separate routes that for ease of navigation operate as one.
Please Note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of any governmental agency, non-governmental agency, quasi-governmental agency or wanna be governmental agency

Counties: Counties Visited

CNGL-Leudimin

Quote from: index on April 21, 2018, 09:01:59 PM
I-480N OH. Auxiliary of an Interstate that no longer exists.

And conversely, I-635 TX doesn't actually connect to I-35.
Supporter of the construction of several running gags, including I-366 with a speed limit of 85 mph (137 km/h) and the Hypotenuse.

Please note that I may mention "invalid" FM channels, i.e. ending in an even number or down to 87.5. These are valid in Europe.

TheHighwayMan3561

#37
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on April 23, 2018, 04:27:56 PM
Quote from: index on April 21, 2018, 09:01:59 PM
I-480N OH. Auxiliary of an Interstate that no longer exists.

And conversely, I-635 TX doesn't actually connect to I-35.

It doesn't?  :confused:

Oh, so TXDOT does consider there to be a gap in 35. I don't agree with that approach, but whatever.
self-certified as the dumbest person on this board for 5 years running

froggie

Quote from: Beltway on April 23, 2018, 06:57:32 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on April 23, 2018, 03:12:30 AM
To play devil's advocate, the current setup makes it a foolproof bypass for I-94 because it has a different number than the longer, even-more-traffic-choked I-404. I've long felt that 494 and 694 have different functions and I have never considered them to be one route.

But as I pointed out as a bypass of I-35 the motorist has to use both routes.  Not a good numbering scheme.

Not a big issue because there's far more I-94 traffic trying to bypass the cores than I-35 traffic.

PHLBOS

Quote from: Beltway on April 23, 2018, 10:04:49 AM
Quote from: 1 on April 23, 2018, 08:45:23 AM
Least roasted: I-295 in Massachusetts/Rhode Island. It ends at an Interstate at both ends, connects to its parent, isn't unused or too congested, isn't too long or short, is numbered correctly, doesn't exit itself (looking at you, I-293), isn't overlapped with other routes for most or all of its length, and hasn't had any proposals to renumber or extend it in Fictional.

Does it need roasting over the fact that its eastern loop was canceled?  Should have been a full beltway.
The cancelled eastern loop was to be a separate route number... I-895.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

bing101

I-238 Because some members have mentioned that it was going to be part of the Southern Crossing with I-380 and I-238 was going to be renamed I-380 if that Happened.

I-305 Sacramento is the most roasted freeway too due to I-305 never being signed to the public and most Sacramento area Residents refer to I-305 as simply the West end of US-50 and former western section of Business 80.

Also I-280 due to this freeway's original intent to connect  to I-80 and CA-480 in San Francisco plus CA-480 was going to connect to Presidio Parkway/Doyle Drive at one point though.

Beltway

Quote from: froggie on April 23, 2018, 04:50:46 PM
Quote from: Beltway on April 23, 2018, 06:57:32 AM
But as I pointed out as a bypass of I-35 the motorist has to use both routes.  Not a good numbering scheme.
Not a big issue because there's far more I-94 traffic trying to bypass the cores than I-35 traffic.

I-35 is still a long-distance Interstate route.  Having one beltway number would help.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

Beltway

Quote from: PHLBOS on April 23, 2018, 04:56:36 PM
Quote from: Beltway on April 23, 2018, 10:04:49 AM
Quote from: 1 on April 23, 2018, 08:45:23 AM
Least roasted: I-295 in Massachusetts/Rhode Island. It ends at an Interstate at both ends, connects to its parent, isn't unused or too congested, isn't too long or short, is numbered correctly, doesn't exit itself (looking at you, I-293), isn't overlapped with other routes for most or all of its length, and hasn't had any proposals to renumber or extend it in Fictional.
Does it need roasting over the fact that its eastern loop was canceled?  Should have been a full beltway.
The cancelled eastern loop was to be a separate route number... I-895.

I know.  Also roastable...
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

webny99

Quote from: Beltway on April 21, 2018, 11:11:13 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on April 21, 2018, 09:31:24 PM
I-494/694, only because there's no reason the Twin Cities Interstate beltway needs two numbers. They even share the same reference marker measurement, FFS.

If using the beltway to bypass I-35W or I-35E thru the city, you have to use both I-494 and I-694.

But the entire length does have an I-X94 number... so continuity for traffic bypassing I-35E and I-35W probably isn't the top priority.

I now see that Froggie has said as much  :)

webny99

Quote from: SectorZ on April 22, 2018, 10:07:10 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 22, 2018, 12:07:50 AM
I-595 (MD): So roasted it isn't even signed and 97% of people don't know it exists
(Bolded for emphasis)

Saw what you did there...

Guess this one is over my head... unless it has something to do with proximity to I-97, then I'm (admittedly) confused.  :hmmm:

Beltway

#45
Quote from: webny99 on April 23, 2018, 09:22:41 PM
Quote from: Beltway on April 21, 2018, 11:11:13 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on April 21, 2018, 09:31:24 PM
I-494/694, only because there's no reason the Twin Cities Interstate beltway needs two numbers. They even share the same reference marker measurement, FFS.
If using the beltway to bypass I-35W or I-35E thru the city, you have to use both I-494 and I-694.
But the entire length does have an I-X94 number... so continuity for traffic bypassing I-35E and I-35W probably isn't the top priority.
I now see that Froggie has said as much  :)

It doesn't have to be a "top priority" to be important.

So instead of signing the southerly NB I-35E exit --
I-494 to I-35E Duluth
It would say --
I-494 to I-694 to I-35E Duluth

Overly complicated, IMHO.

Of course I-35E doesn't go to Duluth, so that is another 3DI complication.  Suffixed routes are 3DI, in effect.

How to resolve -- one city would have I-35 and the other would have I-33 or I-39 (and I-39 was unused back then).  The simplest for local and thru traffic would have been I-35 thru St. Paul and I-33 thru Minneapolis.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

webny99

While I see your point, people in the Twin Cities don't seem to think of the two as a beltway. They're separate routes, serving separate corridors, that just happen to have a beltway-type function when you look at the area as a whole.

And it's not really signed as a bypass of I-35E or I-35W, at least from what I've seen. Nor does it really need to be... (that's probably a separate argument though  :))

Beltway

Quote from: webny99 on April 23, 2018, 09:54:56 PM
While I see your point, people in the Twin Cities don't seem to think of the two as a beltway. They're separate routes, serving separate corridors, that just happen to have a beltway-type function when you look at the area as a whole.
And it's not really signed as a bypass of I-35E or I-35W, at least from what I've seen. Nor does it really need to be... (that's probably a separate argument though  :))

But it -is- a beltway, and there are a number of circumferential route pairings that use both 494 and 694.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

MNHighwayMan

#48
Quote from: Beltway on April 23, 2018, 09:46:50 PM
It doesn't have to be a "top priority" to be important.

So instead of signing the southerly NB I-35E exit --
I-494 to I-35E Duluth
It would say --
I-494 to I-694 to I-35E Duluth

Overly complicated, IMHO.

Of course I-35E doesn't go to Duluth, so that is another 3DI complication.  Suffixed routes are 3DI, in effect.

How to resolve -- one city would have I-35 and the other would have I-33 or I-39 (and I-39 was unused back then).  The simplest for local and thru traffic would have been I-35 thru St. Paul and I-33 thru Minneapolis.

Nobody goes that way, though, unless there's particularly bad construction or traffic on I-35E. The beltway is several miles longer and takes longer, to boot, even though you're no longer going through downtown St. Paul. (I prefer I-35W as the 35 through route, anyway, when, for example I'm going from Des Moines to Duluth. That's probably going to change though, with a few new I-35W projects in the works soon.)

The point is, I-494/694 do not make very good bypass routes for I-35 thru traffic.

TheHighwayMan3561

There are signs on 35E advertising 494/694 as the bypass; none such on I-35W because I think MnDOT implies that 35E is the continuation of 35 (and by legal definition, it is).
self-certified as the dumbest person on this board for 5 years running



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.