Highways with the same number that intersect

[kphoger]

This is interesting.  I can find signs for Loop-762 in several locations on GSV.  But, in searching the TxDOT website by route number, FM-762 is the only one that contains a file.  The only references to Loop-762 I can find on TxDOT pages are related to improvement studies for US-90-Alt.  Where the heck did this route come from?  Is it even an official highway?

I found this on the Texas Highway Designation File website:

Minute Order 053437, dated 08/27/1963, Adm. Cir. 146-1963, dated 10/01/1963
From US 59 in Richmond, southeastward to Crabb, then southward to FM 1462, with a spur connection of approximately 0.7 mile in Richmond eastward along Austin Street and northward on 2nd Street to US 59, a total distance of approximately 22.0 miles. (Ft. Bend County)  Spur connection in Richmond added.

Apparently it is a spur from FM 762. What is listed as "US 59" is now Alt US 90.

So then, are those Loop-762 signs errors?
Should this road instead be the 4th in Texas to have banner FM shields (Business-762)?

[CNGL-Leudimin]

Since the OP didn't specifically exclude them, any mainline route and its bannered auxiliaries .

In this side of the Atlantic, N-629 and CL-629 are concurrent for a few km. Both inherited different sections of C-629.

[US71]

Linden, TX

No photo, but US 62 intersects Washington County 62 near Prairie Grove, AR

[ilpt4u]

Surprised this one has yet to be mentioned...

I-530 and AR 530 in Pine Bluff, Arkansas

[US71]

Surprised this one has yet to be mentioned...

I-530 and AR 530 in Pine Bluff, Arkansas

Good catch!

[Roadgeekteen]

I-283 and PA 283.

[ilpt4u]

According to Google Maps, MD 695 has an exit off I-695 in Baltimore at the Francis Scott Key Bridge...

However, when I checked GSV, the BGS for Exit 44/Broening Hwy does not reference MD 695 nor did I find reassurance Shields, so I'm not sure if the MD 695 designation is legit. If anyone familiar with Baltimore roads wants to "yeay"  or "nay"  feel free

[cpzilliacus]

According to Google Maps, MD 695 has an exit off I-695 in Baltimore at the Francis Scott Key Bridge...

However, when I checked GSV, the BGS for Exit 44/Broening Hwy does not reference MD 695 nor did I find reassurance Shields, so I'm not sure if the MD 695 designation is legit. If anyone familiar with Baltimore roads wants to "yeay"  or "nay"  feel free

MD-695 was formerly signed as such (a Google search should find some images of MD-695 shields and signs) when the Francis Scott Key Bridge (FSK) opened in about 1977.  The Maryland Transportation Authority (MDTA) and the  Maryland Department of Transportation/State Highway Administration (MDOT/SHA) now sign all of the Baltimore Beltway as I-695, but that is really not correct. 

One reason may be that the approaches to the FSK Bridge were originally Super-2 roads (the bridge itself has always been four lanes divided) but all of MD-695 is now at least 4 lanes with a median strip or median barrier.

The MDOT/SHA Highway Location Reference (HLR) is canon in such things, except in Baltimore City, where MDOT/SHA does not maintain anything (but MDTA does).  MDOT/SHA maintains digital files for numbered routes even in the city, but does not usually publish  them.

In Anne Arundel County (south or west of the bridge), MD-695 is shown as running from the Baltimore City/Anne Arundel County border at Curtis Creek to the I-97 (Glen Burnie Bypass) interchange for about 2.5 miles.

In Baltimore City, where I do not have an HLR (one has been published by MDOT/SHA, but not recently), MD-695 covers about 3 miles from Curtis Bay to the FSK (there's a short section of the FSK that is over waters in Anne Arundel County which I am not including here).

In Baltimore County, MD-695 runs from (roughly) the top of the FSK to the interchange at I-95 for about 13.7 miles.

So MD-695 is part of the state's highway network, and is a little over 19 miles long. Mike Pruett's excellent MDRoads site has it at about 19.37 miles, which seems reasonable to me (and I believe he has a copy of a Baltimore City HLR).

Note also that there are (unsigned) spurs of MD-695 (MD-695A, MD-695B and MD-695C) which I am not including in the discussion (but Mike does mention on his site).

[mapman1071]

US 95 and AZ 95 meet at I-10 in Quartzsite AZ.
[/quote

US 95 and AZ 95 meet at I-10 in Quartzsite AZ.

Also In Arizona 
AZ 68 Meets Mohave County Route 68 North of Bullhead City

[NE2]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned US 1 and A1A.

The road was assigned the number 1 in the 1945 renumbering, mostly replacing the former State Road 140 designation. The number reflected its location in the new grid as the easternmost major north—south road. About a year and a half later, in November 1946, the State Road Board resolved to renumber the route due to confusion with the parallel U.S. Highway 1. The new designation, A1A, was chosen to keep the number 1 in its place in the grid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_State_Road_A1A (researched by me)

[NE2]

This is interesting.  I can find signs for Loop-762 in several locations on GSV.  But, in searching the TxDOT website by route number, FM-762 is the only one that contains a file.  The only references to Loop-762 I can find on TxDOT pages are related to improvement studies for US-90-Alt.  Where the heck did this route come from?  Is it even an official highway?

I found this on the Texas Highway Designation File website:

Minute Order 053437, dated 08/27/1963, Adm. Cir. 146-1963, dated 10/01/1963
From US 59 in Richmond, southeastward to Crabb, then southward to FM 1462, with a spur connection of approximately 0.7 mile in Richmond eastward along Austin Street and northward on 2nd Street to US 59, a total distance of approximately 22.0 miles. (Ft. Bend County)  Spur connection in Richmond added.

Apparently it is a spur from FM 762. What is listed as "US 59" is now Alt US 90.

So then, are those Loop-762 signs errors?
Should this road instead be the 4th in Texas to have banner FM shields (Business-762)?

FM loops and spurs are all deliberately signed using normal loop/spur shields.

[US71]

This may be stretching it, but US 62 intersects Washington County 62 near Prairie Grove, AR

[Roadgeekteen]

This may be stretching it, but US 62 intersects Washington County 62 near Prairie Grove, AR

Why would it be stretching it?

[NWI_Irish96]

This may be stretching it, but US 62 intersects Washington County 62 near Prairie Grove, AR

I didn't think about including county roads.  US 33 intersects CR 33 just south of Goshen, IN, although in Indiana, county roads aren't considered highways so probably does not qualify. 

[adventurernumber1]

This is a little bit more blurry, because Tennessee Highway 27 isn't signed all that well, and the route doesn't even have its own Wikipedia page (at least not yet), but it is marked on Google Maps (and other sites such as Bing Maps). However, I know that from the old, local paper maps I engulfed myself in as a young kid, it showed TN SR 27 as a road that was concurrent with US 27 from the GA Line all the way to north of the Tennessee River, and then it split off with US 127, and then it split off of that as well and headed west and then south, traversing some of the Cumberland Plateau. If this was in fact accurate, then this might count for the purposes of this thread.

A future instance is I-69 and US 69 around Lufkin, TX.

Which is against interstate rules. I remember reading that Interstates and US highways with the same number can't be in the same state. I 69 was amusing enough before but this gives it a little extra value.

It's more what you'd call guidelines than an actual rule.

Is it even a guideline?

Hurricane Rex:  Where did you read that?

I could've sworn that I myself had heard that that was the case multiple times on this forum before. 

[kphoger]

This is interesting.  I can find signs for Loop-762 in several locations on GSV.  But, in searching the TxDOT website by route number, FM-762 is the only one that contains a file.  The only references to Loop-762 I can find on TxDOT pages are related to improvement studies for US-90-Alt.  Where the heck did this route come from?  Is it even an official highway?

I found this on the Texas Highway Designation File website:

Minute Order 053437, dated 08/27/1963, Adm. Cir. 146-1963, dated 10/01/1963
From US 59 in Richmond, southeastward to Crabb, then southward to FM 1462, with a spur connection of approximately 0.7 mile in Richmond eastward along Austin Street and northward on 2nd Street to US 59, a total distance of approximately 22.0 miles. (Ft. Bend County)  Spur connection in Richmond added.

Apparently it is a spur from FM 762. What is listed as "US 59" is now Alt US 90.

So then, are those Loop-762 signs errors?
Should this road instead be the 4th in Texas to have banner FM shields (Business-762)?

FM loops and spurs are all deliberately signed using normal loop/spur shields.

Except for the ones that aren't, I guess ? ? ?

Business FM-1187
DOT designation
GSV of a banner FM shield

Business FM-1431
DOT designation
GSV of it not being signed at all, in favor of the county road it leads to

Business FM-1960
DOT designation
GSV of an FM shield with "BUSINESS" in the corner
GSV of a white square with "BUSINESS" at the top

[bugo]

If you're counting county roads, Polk CR 88 ends at AR 88 in Ink, Arkansas.

[webny99]

I-283 and PA 283.

Though SB 283 crosses itself, that's not an intersection. PA 283 is an extension of I-283.

If you're counting county roads, Polk CR 88 ends at AR 88 in Ink, Arkansas.

I was under the impression that at least one of the two had to be a US or interstate route.

A future instance is I-69 and US 69 around Lufkin, TX.

Which is against interstate rules. I remember reading that Interstates and US highways with the same number can't be in the same state. I 69 was amusing enough before but this gives it a little extra value.

It's more what you'd call guidelines than an actual rule.

Is it even a guideline?

Hurricane Rex:  Where did you read that?

I could've sworn that I myself had heard that that was the case multiple times on this forum before. 

I thought that was the reason there is no I-50 or I-60.

[hotdogPi]

A future instance is I-69 and US 69 around Lufkin, TX.

Which is against interstate rules. I remember reading that Interstates and US highways with the same number can't be in the same state. I 69 was amusing enough before but this gives it a little extra value.

It's more what you'd call guidelines than an actual rule.

Is it even a guideline?

Hurricane Rex:  Where did you read that?

I could've sworn that I myself had heard that that was the case multiple times on this forum before. 

I thought that was the reason there is no I-50 or I-60.

I thought it was a rule at first, with the only exception being I-24 and US 24 in Illinois. Then came I-74 and I-41, and now I-69.

[bugo]

I thought it was a rule at first, with the only exception being I-24 and US 24 in Illinois. Then came I-74 and I-41, and now I-69.

And now I-49.

I was under the impression that at least one of the two had to be a US or interstate route.

It was initially, but somebody mentioned a county road.

[webny99]

I was under the impression that at least one of the two had to be a US or interstate route.

It was initially, but somebody mentioned a county road.

Oh. Didn't realize you were actually the OP anyways  Never mind then.

We don't sign county routes around here, so allowing them doesn't really help me come up with any more examples. I-90 and NY 90 has already been mentioned, and there are plenty of Interstates that turn into freeways of the same number, but I think that may be it.

US 20 likely intersects a County Road 20 at some point on its trek across the state, but I'm not one to confirm that.

[PHLBOS]

PA only has 3 duplicates (86, 99, and 380); the first 2 were the result of interstates that came much later, and the last one are routes that are over 300 miles apart.

For the thread subject matter and one that existed prior to those three interstates: Would count I-283 (N-S) & PA 283 (E-W)?

[kphoger]

A future instance is I-69 and US 69 around Lufkin, TX.

Which is against interstate rules. I remember reading that Interstates and US highways with the same number can't be in the same state. I 69 was amusing enough before but this gives it a little extra value.

It's more what you'd call guidelines than an actual rule.

Is it even a guideline?

Hurricane Rex:  Where did you read that?

I could've sworn that I myself had heard that that was the case multiple times on this forum before. 

I thought that was the reason there is no I-50 or I-60.

I thought it was a rule at first, with the only exception being I-24 and US 24 in Illinois. Then came I-74 and I-41, and now I-69.

A reference was given to the rule just a few weeks ago, but now I don't what thread that was in to look it up and link to it.   

[US71]

I thought it was a rule at first, with the only exception being I-24 and US 24 in Illinois. Then came I-74 and I-41, and now I-69.

And now I-49.

I was under the impression that at least one of the two had to be a US or interstate route.

It was initially, but somebody mentioned a county road.

"This may be stretching it, but US 62 intersects Washington County 62 near Prairie Grove, AR"