Regional Boards > Northwest

The (Somewhat) Great Interstate 82 Debate

<< < (8/8)

xonhulu:

--- Quote from: TheStranger on October 15, 2009, 11:41:38 AM ---On the original topic...if I-82 HAD to be renumbered (something I don't feel is necessary), a third I-88 could do. (Of the current split-segment east-west interstates, 88, 76, and 84 each generally can be easily linked together via other east-west interstates; I-86 being a notable exception).

--- End quote ---

I think the new eastern I-86 was unnecessary.  They could've extended I-88 west, and the rest of NY 17 around the Catskills could've been a 3di or just remained NY 17.

To me, the I-82 problem isn't that it's north of I-84 with a smaller number, it's that it should be an odd numbered interstate, as it's more north-south than east-west.  It should be I-7, which preserves the remote, pipe dream, future possibility of extending it through central Oregon.

TheStranger:

--- Quote from: xonhulu on October 15, 2009, 12:07:35 PM ---
--- Quote from: TheStranger on October 15, 2009, 11:41:38 AM ---On the original topic...if I-82 HAD to be renumbered (something I don't feel is necessary), a third I-88 could do. (Of the current split-segment east-west interstates, 88, 76, and 84 each generally can be easily linked together via other east-west interstates; I-86 being a notable exception).

--- End quote ---

I think the new eastern I-86 was unnecessary.  They could've extended I-88 west, and the rest of NY 17 around the Catskills could've been a 3di or just remained NY 17.

--- End quote ---

My guess is that they wanted to replace the NY/PA 17 freeway with one number (I have heard - don't quote me on this, however - that was proposed many decades ago as well, with today's I-390 originally being I-586); in any case, 88 doesn't directly feed into Route 17 in Binghamton.


--- Quote ---
To me, the I-82 problem isn't that it's north of I-84 with a smaller number, it's that it should be an odd numbered interstate, as it's more north-south than east-west.  It should be I-7, which preserves the remote, pipe dream, future possibility of extending it through central Oregon.

--- End quote ---

I was thinking that I-7 would be best for Route 99 in California, with I-9 working better for a US 395-corridor freeway in those environs.  The section northwest of the Tri-Cities is L-shaped and hard to really quantify as a true east-west corridor...if 395 from Spokane southwards was ever upgraded, I could see the remainder being a 3di.

Having said that, I suspect the "east-west" numbering was a result of what Wikipedia says were plans to extend the route west to Tacoma.

TheStranger:

--- Quote from: HighwayMaster on October 31, 2009, 01:22:40 AM ---
--- Quote from: Hellfighter on August 20, 2009, 10:23:44 PM ---I'd do some rearraging...

I-84 become I-82

I-86 becomes I-84

I-82 becomes I-86

--- End quote ---

Copy that, Hellfighter!

--- End quote ---

Honestly, existing I-86 should become a 3di, which would free up that number for use west of the Mississippi...

xonhulu:

--- Quote from: TheStranger on November 04, 2009, 02:26:31 PM ---Honestly, existing I-86 should become a 3di, which would free up that number for use west of the Mississippi...

--- End quote ---

Better yet, bring back 15W!

TheStranger:

--- Quote from: xonhulu on November 04, 2009, 10:30:21 PM ---
--- Quote from: TheStranger on November 04, 2009, 02:26:31 PM ---Honestly, existing I-86 should become a 3di, which would free up that number for use west of the Mississippi...

--- End quote ---

Better yet, bring back 15W!

--- End quote ---

I've always been of the mind that suffixes are best used for loop splits (the three that remained in 1980 certainly were of that variety) rather than odd spurs and stuff; the length of western I-86 isn't unreasonable for a 3di.  (Though it is longer than I-97...)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

Go to full version