Worst interstate ever

[mrsman]

In the large cities most know the freeways and have referred to them by the names rather than the numbers.  LA and SF are notable exceptions.

In Southern California (in general) every numbered highway is referred to as "the 5", "the 2", "the 101", etc. Northern Calif - same, except chop off the "the".

I think it really depends on the individual.  In California, generally the people who have lived in the area longer tend to use the names of the freeways.  "Hollywood Freeway", "Santa Monica Freeway", and some other names get used very frequently, especially on radio traffic reports.  Some freeways are almost never referred to by name: "San Gabriel River Freeway" (too wordy), "Orange Freeway", "Gardena Freeway", "Glenn Anderson Freeway".

Transplants to the area almost exclusively use the numbers.

As Caltrans (especially District 7) gets rid of naming the freeways on BGS's, fewer and fewer people will get to know these names.

In other places, like New York there are many controlled-access highways without numbers (Grand Central Parkway, FDR Drive), so they cannot exclusively be referred by numbers only, so names are very heavily used.

[Brandon]

Tri-State Tollway
Edens Spur
Edens Expressway
Kennedy Expressway
Dan Ryan Expressway
Bishop Ford Freeway
Kingery Expressway

What the f*** is the point of all those names?

These are the names of the freeways and tollways.  They are used heavily by the locals and do appear on the signs.

Examples (caution, photo-heavy):

[TheStranger]

I don't know much in common use it has ever been, but the section of 101 from SJ to Gilroy that was never part of Bayshore Highway IIRC is "South Valley Freeway", while most people consider the James Lick name as one of those honorary monikers and think of 101 to the Central Freeway/80 as the north extent of Bayshore.  (Pretty neat how except for James Lick, all of the names you listed ARE in somewhat common use).

I dunno, I've heard many traffic reporters use the James Lick Freeway quite often in their reports (especially on KCBS (740AM) and on KRON-4 TV).

That's interesting.  Is that just the 101 segment, or all the way to the Bay Bridge?  I think there is exactly one sign for "James Lick" in SF (101 north near Candlestick).

I've heard "Skyway" for 80 in SF every once in a while on traffic reports.

The photo I posted earlier this week of that 480 west signage for Bayshore Freeway does fit in with all of this: 1. that the James Lick and Bayshore identities in SF were for the most part synonymous 2. that the "Bayshore" route is all of what was Legislative Route 68, which continued to the bridge.

Over in Mountain View, I saw a surprising amount of signs pointing to the Bayshore Freeway (with no 101 shield) along Middlefield Road last week.

I-880:
Nimitz Freeway
Cypress Freeway (name not in regular use since 1997, though was in the media constantly during the realignment project)

The name "Cypress Freeway" isn't something I hear very often even back in the 90's.  I know of the "Cypress Structure" which was the double-decked portion of I-880 that collapsed in the 1989 Loma Prieta quake.  I did not know the new alignment of I-880 was named the Cypress Freeway.

The project was often referred to as the Cypress Freeway ca. 1996-1997 when I would hear about it on local news and I think was officially noted as the "Cypress Freeway Replacement".  Completely deprecated though as a name, especially with Cypress Street itself having been given a new identity (Mandela Parkway) around the same time.

I think it really depends on the individual.  In California, generally the people who have lived in the area longer tend to use the names of the freeways.  "Hollywood Freeway", "Santa Monica Freeway", and some other names get used very frequently, especially on radio traffic reports.  Some freeways are almost never referred to by name: "San Gabriel River Freeway" (too wordy), "Orange Freeway", "Gardena Freeway", "Glenn Anderson Freeway".

It seems in general that the names of freeways used commonly in SoCal and NorCal are ones that were established pre-1970:

SoCal - Santa Ana, San Diego, Santa Monica, Hollywood, and especially Harbor and Ventura.  Not sure about Long Beach Freeway or Pomona Freeway or Foothill or Riverside, all of which have existed for years but might be better known by their numbers.

I know the colloquial name for 105 is the Century Freeway (and late-80s news articles noted how the public basically gave it that moniker) but I don't know how commonly that is used at this point.

NorCal - Bayshore, Nimitz, MacArthur Eastshore, Central are the top five easily, with Junipero Serra a very very distant 6th.  When it existed, Embarcadero Freeway was noted a lot (mostly because it was disliked so much). 

[kkt]

The "James Lick Freeway" is 101 from the 101-280 interchange to the 101-80 interchange and 80 from the 101-80 interchange to the Bay Bridge.

For many people, names are easier to remember than numbers.  Also, for a period in the late 50s to early 70s, numbers were being changed all willy-nilly, while the names stayed put.  Even now numbers are more changeable than names; when the Loma Prieta Earthquake knocked down the Cyprus Structure I hadn't been living in the Bay Area since it's number changed from CA 17, and I was very confused.  I-880?  What?  How did an earthquake in the Santa Cruz Mountains knock down a beltway around Sacramento?
I'd like to see names included on the overhead signs along with route numbers when possible, though I know it's a challenge to keep down the amount of information on the signs.

[jakeroot]

In the large cities most know the freeways and have referred to them by the names rather than the numbers.  LA and SF are notable exceptions.

In Southern California (in general) every numbered highway is referred to as "the 5", "the 2", "the 101", etc. Northern Calif - same, except chop off the "the".

I think it really depends on the individual.  In California, generally the people who have lived in the area longer tend to use the names of the freeways.  "Hollywood Freeway", "Santa Monica Freeway", and some other names get used very frequently, especially on radio traffic reports.  Some freeways are almost never referred to by name: "San Gabriel River Freeway" (too wordy), "Orange Freeway", "Gardena Freeway", "Glenn Anderson Freeway".

Transplants to the area almost exclusively use the numbers.

As Caltrans (especially District 7) gets rid of naming the freeways on BGS's, fewer and fewer people will get to know these names.

In other places, like New York there are many controlled-access highways without numbers (Grand Central Parkway, FDR Drive), so they cannot exclusively be referred by numbers only, so names are very heavily used.

My opinion here, but when someone says "The 5" or "The 10", it's not a name like "Santa Ana Freeway", it's just the route number with a definite article. The UK does the same thing ("the A46 towards Cleethorpes"). For example, the "Glenn Anderson Freeway" is the name, but the number is "The 105", regardless if it's with the definite article.

Nevermind. I have once again mis-interpreted the original post. 

Add Saint Louis and Seattle to the list of cities without freeway names.

[TheStranger]

The "James Lick Freeway" is 101 from the 101-280 interchange to the 101-80 interchange and 80 from the 101-80 interchange to the Bay Bridge.

So basically, all of old LRN 68 after all.  It seems the CSAA San Francisco map is where "San Francisco Skyway" tended to be prevalent for the 80 portion, though I know of it mostly as the "Skyway" in practice.

As noted before, there's exactly 1 sign for "James Lick Freeway" in existence.  May have been more in the past, but the one on 101 north between Candlestick and 3rd Street is the only one I'm familiar with.

Along 280 north approaching the Alemany Maze, that portion of 101 is signed for "Bayshore Freeway" (photo noted later in this post).

I'd like to see names included on the overhead signs along with route numbers when possible, though I know it's a challenge to keep down the amount of information on the signs.

I have always liked the Chicago approach of name legend that is larger than cardinal direction and smaller than the control cities. 

Having said that, it's fascinating to see this debate (route names to be mentioned or not to be mentioned) play out earlier in the District 7 resigning plans thread:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=11603.0

Add Saint Louis and Seattle to the list of cities without freeway names.

Not necessarily:

Seattle has the Alaskan Way Viaduct (SR 99), which is being replaced with a tunnel.  St. Louis has US 40 on the Daniel Boone Expressway (and I-70 on the Mark Twain Expressway), though I'm not sure that name is as commonly used as it was in past years. 

I did miss the South Valley portion. It's something like this, right?
El Camino Real ( -> Bus US 101/CA 82)
South Valley Frwy ( -> CA 85)
Bayshore Frwy

Correct!

Also, how would we measure out the James Lick Freeway portion if it is entirely concurrent/synonymous with the northernmost part of the Bayshore Freeway?  (In fact, the latter is the one with the more notable signage today - https://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/4896320571/in/set-72157624531453370 - and in the past - https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=12495.0 )

[kkt]

Also, how would we measure out the James Lick Freeway portion if it is entirely concurrent/synonymous with the northernmost part of the Bayshore Freeway?  (In fact, the latter is the one with the more notable signage today - https://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/4896320571/in/set-72157624531453370 - and in the past - https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=12495.0 )

I personally would call the north end of Bayshore Freeway to be at Caesar Chavez, where old Bayshore Boulevard ends.  But CA Roads says the name Bayshore Freeway extends up to the 101-80 junction, and they're probably right legislatively.

[TheStranger]

Also, how would we measure out the James Lick Freeway portion if it is entirely concurrent/synonymous with the northernmost part of the Bayshore Freeway?  (In fact, the latter is the one with the more notable signage today - https://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/4896320571/in/set-72157624531453370 - and in the past - https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=12495.0 )

I personally would call the north end of Bayshore Freeway to be at Caesar Chavez, where old Bayshore Boulevard ends.  But CA Roads says the name Bayshore Freeway extends up to the 101-80 junction, and they're probably right legislatively.

I think there's also some painted-on bridge markings noting the "Bayshore Viaduct" on the Skyway:

http://infospigot.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451588769e20133f347e817970b-pi

[Legodinodoctor]

For bad Interstates, what about Interstate 595 in its construction stage to make the Tolled Express Lanes? (Now that I think about it, there are a lot of tolled roads in the USA. Why? Because of $$$ Money Money Money )


Edited to remove excess smileys and fix grammar. Please learn capitalization. Do not post excessive smileys. One is plenty. Thank you! ~S

[PColumbus73]

For bad Interstates, what about Interstate 595 in its construction stage to make the Tolled Express Lanes? (Now that I think about it, there are a lot of tolled roads in the USA. Why? Because of $$$ Money Money Money )


Edited to remove excess smileys and fix grammar. Please learn capitalization. Do not post excessive smileys. One is plenty. Thank you! ~S

France has a lot of tolled freeways. If I am correct, all of Japan's freeways are tolled.

[jakeroot]

For bad Interstates, what about Interstate 595 in its construction stage to make the Tolled Express Lanes? (Now that I think about it, there are a lot of tolled roads in the USA. Why? Because of $$$ Money Money Money )

France has a lot of tolled freeways. If I am correct, all of Japan's freeways are tolled.

And they are in immensely better shape in contrast to our freeways.

[ElPanaChevere]

I've been to Cheyenne, so I can attest that the whole I-180 thing is horrendous and makes AASHTO looks like idiots. Horrendous as it may seem, it at least connects to its parent, I-80. So it follows the rules in that regard. Why is it I-238? I don't see the reasoning behind that and it just looks like a huge error that is in dire need of correction. What's wrong with keeping it CA 238? They have CA 85 and 87 in San Jose. 

[TheStranger]

Why is it I-238? I don't see the reasoning behind that and it just looks like a huge error that is in dire need of correction. What's wrong with keeping it CA 238? They have CA 85 and 87 in San Jose. 

Because the upgrade to Interstate standards received Interstate funds, and at the time, CalTrans was unwilling to renumber either former I-480 or 1934-present state route 180 (the only two x80 numbers available in 1984).

Neither Route 85 nor Route 87 received Interstate funding for their construction (though one part of what was proposed as 87's northern extension is now I-280 north of Cesar Chavez (Army) Street in SF).

[hbelkins]

I still haven't seen any rule which prohibits a four-digit interstate, such as I-1080.

[kkt]

I still haven't seen any rule which prohibits a four-digit interstate, such as I-1080.

Have they ever been proposed?  California 1005 or 1080, N.Y. 1095?

[hotdogPi]

N.Y. 1095?

1090, not 1095.

[WillWeaverRVA]

I still haven't seen any rule which prohibits a four-digit interstate, such as I-1080.

I'm sure a four-digit interstate is quite doable given that H201 (without the hyphen) can be made to legibiy fit on a 3di shield.

[ElPanaChevere]

Why is it I-238? I don't see the reasoning behind that and it just looks like a huge error that is in dire need of correction. What's wrong with keeping it CA 238? They have CA 85 and 87 in San Jose. 

Because the upgrade to Interstate standards received Interstate funds, and at the time, CalTrans was unwilling to renumber either former I-480 or 1934-present state route 180 (the only two x80 numbers available in 1984).

Neither Route 85 nor Route 87 received Interstate funding for their construction (though one part of what was proposed as 87's northern extension is now I-280 north of Cesar Chavez (Army) Street in SF).

I see. It just boggles me as to how CalTrans actually got interstate funding to begin with. But wait, that was then. I understand the 180 (CA 180, Fresno) and avoiding a duplication of numbers in the highway system. Since I-480 was decommissioned, would it be a wiser idea to reuse I-480 over I-238, just for sake of continuity and number violation?

[agentsteel53]

Since I-480 was decommissioned, would it be a wiser idea to reuse I-480 over I-238, just for sake of continuity and number violation?

too confusing to have the new 480 in the same general area.

the 238 number seems to be getting deprecated in the field.  it's mainly signed as "to 880" on 580. 

[Avalanchez71]

What about SPUR I-580?

[Scott5114]

A route numbered 480 was last on the books twenty-three years ago. I doubt any confusion would arise at this point.

[vdeane]

Plus it could just be a hidden designation.  No need to post the number.

[Revive 755]

St. Louis has US 40 on the Daniel Boone Expressway (and I-70 on the Mark Twain Expressway), though I'm not sure that name is as commonly used as it was in past years.

IIRC, in the St. Louis area the only freeway that was more often identified by name over a number was the Inner Belt (I-170).  I wonder though whether MO 364 is more often identified by number or by "Page Avenue," "Page Avenue Extension," or something similar.

[TheStranger]

I see. It just boggles me as to how CalTrans actually got interstate funding to begin with.

Glenn Anderson, whose efforts were honored when I-105/the Century Freeway also was named after him.  He basically campaigned for interstate funds to be used to improve freeways in California in the 1980s, most strongly I-880 (which came about along with 238 and the 580 extension).

180 would not have even been available for 238 as it was the first proposed number (until 1984) for the 580 extension to San Rafael.

But wait, that was then. I understand the 180 (CA 180, Fresno) and avoiding a duplication of numbers in the highway system. Since I-480 was decommissioned, would it be a wiser idea to reuse I-480 over I-238, just for sake of continuity and number violation?

480 was still an active state route number at the time (unlike 880 which was then reused in the Bay Area 2-3 years after being removed from the Sacramento area).  Only time I can think of that California renumbered a route just for the sake of renumbering a route was the change of Route 69 to Route 245 in the early 1970s.

A route numbered 480 was last on the books twenty-three years ago. I doubt any confusion would arise at this point.

I agree, though I think 480 specifically conjures up very negative attitudes to longtime Bay Area residents (given the strong opposition to the Embarcadero Freeway throughout its existence).  I wonder if THAT is why that number never got reused, ultimately. 

At this point most people who were around for the freeway revolts have gotten much older, though I surmise one effect of them is the usage of "Presidio Parkway" for what is clearly a rebuild/upgrade project for the 101 freeway segment in the Presidio (the former Doyle Drive).

What about SPUR I-580?

Funny enough, from 1964-1968, while not a true "SPUR xx" route, the legislative definition of Route 1 between the Junipero Serra Freeway and San Jose Avenue (along what is now 280) basically had a segment that was discontinuous with the actual through route of 1 (which then, as now, continued up the Junipero Serra Freeway to Font Boulevard along what was then-proposed 280).  And in LA, we functionally have a spur of I-10 in that form (the San Bernardino Freeway that was US 60/70/99 west of I-5) to this day!

[ElPanaChevere]

A route numbered 480 was last on the books twenty-three years ago. I doubt any confusion would arise at this point.

This is what I said earlier. I mean, the I-480 that was in San Francisco/the Embarcadero actually required something to be built and for land to be used up. I-238 is already built, so it's just a numbering change. If it had to involve having imminent domain and having a new section of freeway built, then yeah I can see that causing a stir. And you said 1984, so surely after 30 years it wouldn't cause any issue and the attitudes would have changed.