Pointless concurrencies

[hbelkins]

I-84 and I-380 in Pennsylvania. Why is this necessary? What is the rationale for this? Why must both routes continue signed on one roadway from their intersection to I-81? Why shouldn't I-380 end at I-84 and I-84 continue as the lone signed route? Why can't it be signed "I-84, To I-380?"

Discuss...

Also ... any others that come to mind, and the rationale for them?

[kj3400]

I-95 and I-495 in MD. You would think I-95 wouldn't need its beltway cosigned with it, but as we all know I-495 was there first, and I-95 got shunted there cuz of freeway riots.

[Michael in Philly]

I-95 and I-495 in MD. You would think I-95 wouldn't need its beltway cosigned with it, but as we all know I-495 was there first, and I-95 got shunted there cuz of freeway riots.

Ah, but the history's more complicated than that:  when I was in college in Washington in the 80s, 495 consisted of only the parts of the Beltway that weren't numbered as I-95.  (Of course, before 95 was rerouted in the 70s, 495 covered the whole Beltway) The 495 designation was added - superimposed on 95, if you will - later, maybe in the early 90s.  I suppose they thought it was reasonable to have a number that applied to the entire Beltway.  In other words, the portion of the beltway east of the two interchanges with 95 was numbered first 495, then 95, then 95/495.

[kj3400]

So I'll correct myself....I-95 was there first and I-495 intruded cuz it was jealous of I-695 up north 

[hbelkins]

Another example -- I-80 and I-95 in New Jersey. I-80 ends at the NY-NJ state line and I-95 continues.

Also -- WV 97 and WV 16.  WV 97 joins WV 54 and both routes run to WV 16. Then WV 54 ends and WV 97 continues with WV 16 and 97 ends at the WV Turnpike interchange.

US 98 and US 319 also qualifies as an example.

[corco]

The entire state of Wyoming.

Business loops are the worst. In Douglas, for instance, where I-25/US-20/US-26/US-87 all run together, the business loop through town is I-25 Business/US-20 Business/US-26 Business/US-87 Business, with 8 routes signed and signed well. 25/20/26/87 business are concurrent for their entire lengths. Why not just call it I-25 Business or just divert the three US routes to the existing business loops?  There's no reason at all to have 8 routes on 2 separate roadways.
-on the freeway
- in Douglas

Similar situations occur in Evanston (80/189), Green River (80/30), Rock Springs (80/30), Rawlins (80/30), Cheyenne (25/87), Wheatland (25/87), Douglas (25/20/26/87), Casper (25/87 and 20/26), Buffalo (25/87), and Sheridan (90/14)

US-14/16/20 towards Yellowstone. No reason for that to have three separate designations- just call it US-20 and call it good.

US-189 north of Daniel. I have no idea why that needs to run with US-191 to randomly end in Jackson. Nobody navigates by US-189 anymore anyway- especially since it doesn't continue to Yellowstone.

US-18 west of Mule Creek. Nobody navigates by that- it's definitely US-20 to US-85 to US-18 if you asked locals what roads you take to get from Edgemont to Orin Junction

[oscar]

I-95 and I-495 in MD. You would think I-95 wouldn't need its beltway cosigned with it, but as we all know I-495 was there first, and I-95 got shunted there cuz of freeway riots.

Ah, but the history's more complicated than that:  when I was in college in Washington in the 80s, 495 consisted of only the parts of the Beltway that weren't numbered as I-95.  (Of course, before 95 was rerouted in the 70s, 495 covered the whole Beltway) The 495 designation was added - superimposed on 95, if you will - later, maybe in the early 90s.  I suppose they thought it was reasonable to have a number that applied to the entire Beltway.  In other words, the portion of the beltway east of the two interchanges with 95 was numbered first 495, then 95, then 95/495.

IIRC, it really was a matter of minimizing motorist confusion.  Long-distance travelers appreciated the guidance from the 95 route number on how to bypass downtown D.C. and its incomplete freeway network.  But suburb-to-suburb travelers were thrown off by having the Beltway change numbers from 95 to 495 or vice versa (such as by having to work the route number change into directions they gave out), and preferred having 495 cover the entire Beltway like it used to.  The concurrency lets both types of travelers have their way, and so seems far from "pointless."  

[Michael in Philly]

Another example -- I-80 and I-95 in New Jersey. I-80 ends at the NY-NJ state line and I-95 continues.

Also -- WV 97 and WV 16.  WV 97 joins WV 54 and both routes run to WV 16. Then WV 54 ends and WV 97 continues with WV 16 and 97 ends at the WV Turnpike interchange.

US 98 and US 319 also qualifies as an example.

Actually, 80 seems to end where it meets 95.*  Although I've heard plenty of New York-area traffic reports talk about "80/95".  My general impression - this goes back to my map-obsessed childhood in North Jersey in the 70s and 80s, so I can't provide sources - was always that it ended not at the state line, but about a mile to the west, where the various approaches to the George Washington Bridge - US 1/9/46, I-80/95 (according to this hypothesis), NJ 4, the Palisades Parkway - met; I-95, US 1 and US 9 (I thought) continued across the bridge into New York while I-80, US 46, and NJ 4 ended.

*We went into this on another forum.  Discussion starts here:  http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=65955793&postcount=6178

Photos here:  http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=66064827&postcount=6188

[Michael in Philly]

I-95 and I-495 in MD. You would think I-95 wouldn't need its beltway cosigned with it, but as we all know I-495 was there first, and I-95 got shunted there cuz of freeway riots.

Ah, but the history's more complicated than that:  when I was in college in Washington in the 80s, 495 consisted of only the parts of the Beltway that weren't numbered as I-95.  (Of course, before 95 was rerouted in the 70s, 495 covered the whole Beltway) The 495 designation was added - superimposed on 95, if you will - later, maybe in the early 90s.  I suppose they thought it was reasonable to have a number that applied to the entire Beltway.  In other words, the portion of the beltway east of the two interchanges with 95 was numbered first 495, then 95, then 95/495.

IIRC, it really was a matter of minimizing motorist confusion.  Long-distance travelers appreciated the guidance from the 95 route number on how to bypass downtown D.C. and its incomplete freeway network.  But suburb-to-suburb travelers were thrown off by having the Beltway change numbers from 95 to 495 or vice versa (such as by having to work the route number change into directions they gave out), and preferred having 495 cover the entire Beltway like it used to.  The concurrency lets both types of travelers have their way, and so seems far from "pointless." 

That, I agree with.

[dfilpus]

In North Carolina:

US 64/264 west of Zebulon. US 264 ends at I 440 as US 64 joins I 440. This pair used to have another useless concurrency at the east end, where US 64 and 264 were concurrent through Manteo and both ended with US 158 at Whalebone Junction. US 264 was scaled back to Mann's Harbor, eliminating that concurrency.

US 1/US 401 from Norlina to I 85. US 401 ends at I 85 while US 1 continues. US 401 used to end in Norlina, but was extended to I 85, just to add the useless concurrency.

US 15/501 from Durham to Laurinburg and US 1/15/501 through Sanford. Probably the best answer to this is to break US 501 in half, using one number from Durham to US 11 in Virginia and another for Laurinburg to Myrtle Beach.

I 74/US 311 around High Point. Once I 74 is completed to US 220, then it will turn south onto US 220 and US 311 will end. US 311 should be truncated back to where I 74 begins and eventually, all the way back to Winston-Salem.

US 220/I 73/I 74 south of Greensboro. Once the freeway is upgraded to interstate standards, US 220 should be truncated to Greensboro.

[NE2]

Georgia. Period.

[allniter89]

Georgia. Period.

+1

[Quillz]

There is a concurrency between CA-44 and CA-89 through Lassen Volcanic National Park, but as numbered highways are not locally maintained through national parks, doesn't that make the entire concurrency pointless? (I do believe that CalTRANS actually defines CA-89 as existing in two portions due to the unrecognized concurrency.)

I might be completely wrong about this, though.

[froggie]

So I'll correct myself....I-95 was there first and I-495 intruded cuz it was jealous of I-695 up north

Still not correct.  I-495 was there first.  I-95 intruded thanks to DC.

[njroadhorse]

I 74/US 311 around High Point. Once I 74 is completed to US 220, then it will turn south onto US 220 and US 311 will end. US 311 should be truncated back to where I 74 begins and eventually, all the way back to Winston-Salem.

US 220/I 73/I 74 south of Greensboro. Once the freeway is upgraded to interstate standards, US 220 should be truncated to Greensboro.

How about just I-73/74 and any other associated concurrencies.

[Bickendan]

I-94 and 694 northwest of Minneapolis. I'd understand if the Twin Cities' beltway had a single number, like Baltimore or DC, but with two, it makes the concurrency very redundant.

[Alps]

Regarding I-80/95 in NJ:  I-80 definitively ends at the I-95 junction (Exit 69).  The only reason anyone thinks it goes east from there is because for many years, the Turnpike connection from US 46 to I-80 was incomplete, so anyone heading west from the GWB on the Express/Local freeway would end up on I-80 and anyone heading east on I-80 wouldn't notice an interchange getting in the way.  There is absolutely no concurrency.

Other pointless trifles: CR 536/US 322 in NJ.  Why are the western dozen-plus miles of a US Highway co-designated with a county route?  536 isn't even signed!
NJ 165.  Entire thing is now NJ 29, but 165 fails to unexist.
Many routes in MAss, such as 111/2A, where 111 could just as easily start from 2A and not come back to 2 in a reverse loop.  If I weren't so lazy I'd research a couple more.

[Michael in Philly]

Regarding I-80/95 in NJ:  I-80 definitively ends at the I-95 junction (Exit 69).  The only reason anyone thinks it goes east from there is because for many years, the Turnpike connection from US 46 to I-80 was incomplete, so anyone heading west from the GWB on the Express/Local freeway would end up on I-80 and anyone heading east on I-80 wouldn't notice an interchange getting in the way.  There is absolutely no concurrency.

Other pointless trifles: CR 536/US 322 in NJ.  Why are the western dozen-plus miles of a US Highway co-designated with a county route?  536 isn't even signed!
NJ 165.  Entire thing is now NJ 29, but 165 fails to unexist.
Many routes in MAss, such as 111/2A, where 111 could just as easily start from 2A and not come back to 2 in a reverse loop.  If I weren't so lazy I'd research a couple more.

The other thing about 95 between 80 and the GWB that might lead you to think you're on 80 as well is that the exit numbering fits in with 80's.  (And not with 95's, except for - if memory serves - exit 68, southbound only, for US 46, because after that you're on the Turnpike and the numbering system changes).

[agentsteel53]

US 220/I 73/I 74 south of Greensboro. Once the freeway is upgraded to interstate standards, US 220 should be truncated to Greensboro.

I disagree.  220 is the only number worth keeping.

I-74 is completely superfluous because for most of its length it is multiplexed with US-74, and for the section that is separate, you get 1) a north-south freeway with an east-west number, and 2) a 74/74 split.

I-73 comes out of nowhere, and to nowhere it returns.  There is no rationale behind suddenly using this number.  While technically it isn't too badly off of the grid (only slightly to the east of I-77), its presence as a number does not aid navigation.

those two numbers should be truncated to oblivion.

[SteveG1988]

How about County Route 530 and Nj Route 70 in burlington and ocean county, the only reason i can think of is the NJ Pinelands comission denying permission for there to be a second road through that area.

[NE2]

Yeah, because it's normal practice to build a separate road for each route number. That's why US 1/9 has local and express lanes through Newark - one is officially US 1 and the other US 9.

Seriously, do you really think they'd build a second road just to eliminate an overlap?

[hbelkins]

Seriously, do you really think they'd build a second road just to eliminate an overlap?

Overlaps aren't the issue. The issue is pointless overlaps -- such as two routes joining and both route numbers continuing to a common end (such as I-380 and I-84; still waiting for an explanation for that one) or two routes joining and continuing to a certain point where one route ends and the other continues.

Wouldn't US 17 in Winchester, Va. also count as a subject in this thread?

[US71]

US 71/US 59 from Acorn to Texarkana

US 71/59/371 DeQueen to Lockesburg (why not end 371 at Lockesburg?)

Arkansas also had a 71B/62B concurrency from Fayetteville to Rogers, but got rid of it (and 62B, eventually)

Also US 62/412

[hbelkins]

US 71/US 59 from Acorn to Texarkana

Also US 62/412

Those don't count because both routes continue on after separating.

[NE2]

Seriously, do you really think they'd build a second road just to eliminate an overlap?

Overlaps aren't the issue. The issue is pointless overlaps -- such as two routes joining and both route numbers continuing to a common end (such as I-380 and I-84; still waiting for an explanation for that one) or two routes joining and continuing to a certain point where one route ends and the other continues.

I know; see SteveG's post. NJ 70 and CR 530 join and later split.