Unique Situation with MA's Two Route 8As: What's the Deal?

[PHLBOS]

While replying in another thread regarding MA 8A, it came to my attention that the two segments of Route 8A are not situated in the usual one branch leaves and re-connects to its parent further along and then branches off again (there's usually a silent concurrency between the two branch-offs).

The first (the most southerly) 8A branches off its parent in Dalton and goes for many miles (with some concurrencies along the way but not for the entire route) and heads into Halifax, VT where it meets and ends at VT 112.  While one could argue that there may be a silent concurrency along VT 112 & VT 100 from there to Readsboro (where VT 100 meets VT 8); most people wouldn't think of such.

The second 8A is a shorter, mostly parallel route through North Adams that connects its MA 8 parent at both ends.

Wiki's Write-up on MA Route 8A (both segments)
The above write-up doesn't seem to explain how this particular oddity happened.

Anyone here know the history?

[froggie]

While one could argue that there may be a silent concurrency along VT 112 & VT 100 from there to Readsboro (where VT 100 meets VT 8); most people wouldn't think of such.

I can put the kibbosh on this one fairly quickly.  There is no such silent concurrency anywhere that I can find in my VTrans records/data.  That it isn't even a state-maintained route speaks volumes as to how VTrans considers it.

[kefkafloyd]

All the maps I have all have it as 8A going back to the fifties and I don't have anything older than that.

[PHLBOS]

^^I know it originated during the 50s (the Wiki account reads 1950).  What I meant by the history of it was the what's and whys of it... mainly the longer, nearly 36 mile route that heads into Vermont without returning to its parent route (based on Wiki, MassDOT refers to it as 8A-L (for lower)).

Fictional territory here & IMHO but if there ever was a candidate route for a renumbering & even a truncation between Dalton and Windsor (where it multiplexes with MA 9); 8A-L would be it.  Update: after checking both MA's & VT's route number listings; the lowest number not used by either state is 51.  I nominate MA/VT 51 to replace most of 8A-L.
*Exiting off fictional mode now.*

While one could argue that there may be a silent concurrency along VT 112 & VT 100 from there to Readsboro (where VT 100 meets VT 8); most people wouldn't think of such.

I can put the kibbosh on this one fairly quickly.  There is no such silent concurrency anywhere that I can find in my VTrans records/data.  That it isn't even a state-maintained route speaks volumes as to how VTrans considers it.

I concur.  Having looked through GSV the only VT 8A signage (generic white circle/black background) out there are near/at the VT 112 junction.  At the MA border, GSV circa Oct. 2008 shows there is/was old reassurance marker with the 8A shield missing.  Not sure if this would've been an MA shield or a VT shield given that the sign is located where the pavement changes (as opposed to the location of the MA bookleaf style border sign).  I would assume a rather old VT shield was once on this post.

[Beeper1]

I've always been perplexed by this as well.   MA-8A really isn't useful as a MA-8 alternative.  It's much more meandering of a route and is (especially north of MA-116) a very narrow, windy slow route.   It does deserve to be a numbered route as it provides connections between the main east-west routes across the Berkshires, and is the main route through the towns of Heath and Hawley, but as a "child" route of MA-8, it doesn't make sense.

[Duke87]

It's worth noting that there are no instances of a letter suffix other than A in Massachusetts. So all children of route X are route XA.

If one assumes that is the standard nomenclature, then it fits perfectly that there are multiple instances of 1A, 2A, 3A, 6A, 7A, and 8A. And the two 8As simply happen to have a different topology with respect to each other than the other duplicate A routes.

[Beeper1]

Except that, officially, all of those others are considered to be one single route, with "secret" concurrencies with the parent route connecting the segments. 

The two 8As are, even officially, two independent routes (hence the 8A-L and 8A-U official designations).   And that the long 8A is really it's own thing, and not just an old routing of the mainline.

[RobbieL2415]

There are also technically two 295s in MA, I-295 in North Attleboro and MA 295 in Richmond.

[PHLBOS]

There are also technically two 295s in MA, I-295 in North Attleboro and MA 295 in Richmond.

While true, such is an apples vs. oranges comparison. 

Whereas both 8As relate to and originate from their parent MA 8 route at least once; MA (& NY) 295 are not related to I-95/295 in either state (note: there's also an I-295 (Clearview Expressway) in NYC as well).

[cl94]

The two 295s are also almost as far apart as they can be while still being in Massachusetts. The 8As bypass the same section of 8.

In VT, there are multiple cases of an A route not connecting to its parent within the state. VT 22A is an extension of NY 22A. Heck, VT 22 doesn't even exist. VT 25A is an extension of NH 25.

[froggie]

Heck, VT 22 doesn't even exist.

But used to according to my research.  That said, it wasn't related to VT 22A.  22A is the result of numbering agreements with adjacent states so that every route that crosses the state line retains the same number (except for two cases along the New York line where one route is a NY reference number and the other was never a state highway).

VT 25A is an extension of NH 25A.

FTFY.

[vdeane]

Also VT 9/NY 7 (to avoid duplication with US 7 and US 9) and NY 185/VT 17 (NY 185 was numbered later; it used to be a reference route).

[froggie]

Forgot about those two, but those are also a special case since the 9 and 17 numbers in Vermont predate Vermont's state route system (9 being part of the old New England system, 17 being a 1920s Federal-aid route), and New York was never part of the previous New England route system.

[hotdogPi]

New York was never part of the previous New England route system.

NY 22? While it may not have officially been part of it, the number fits, and 22 was intentionally not put anywhere else because of NY 22.

[froggie]

^ Was not part of the New England system.

[vdeane]

Most of NY 7 also used to be NY 9 prior to 1927.

[Alps]

^ Was not part of the New England system.

That has been debated. The system may have had tendrils east of the Hudson, considering the numbering of NY 2 and (then) 9.

[froggie]

But were those actually part of the New England system?  Or numbered by NYS to match what existed east of the border?  In either case, 22 was most certainly entirely within New York.

[cl94]

But were those actually part of the New England system?  Or numbered by NYS to match what existed east of the border?  In either case, 22 was most certainly entirely within New York.

Officially? No. De-facto? Likely. 21, 22, and 23 were unassigned. 22 and 23 are basically their current routes, 21 is now US 44. I also find it interesting that 27 and 29 were left unassigned, as NY 27 and NY 29 exist(ed) very close to New England. Of course, as mentioned previously, virtually every New England route that ended at the NY line had a matching number in NY.

[Scott5114]

It might be unique to Massachusetts, but Oklahoma has three 9As.