How come there is no Interstate 1, 2, 3, ....31, 32, 33, 34, etc ?

[oscar]

You're right, CalTrans wouldn't renumber CA-1.  But they might renumber US-101 from L.A. to somewhere in the S.F. Bay Area as I-3.  There's only a few spots left in that part of 101 that don't meet interstate standards.

Surprisingly more spots than one would think of immediately: while there are indeed no stoplights between South Van Ness Avenue/Duboce Avenue in SF and the south terminus, the Prunedale stretch still has quite a few at-grades.  I THINK there's work right now to close the freeway gap between Ventura and Santa Barbara though.

Even some of the freeway sections might be short of Interstate-grade, and hard to fix.  For example, Caltrans had a devil of a time getting rid of the at-grades in Santa Barbara. I suspect (though can't point to specific examples) that Interstate standards fell by the wayside just to upgrade the old divided highway through Santa Barbara to something meeting minimal freeway standards. 

[TheStranger]

I suspect (though can't point to specific examples) that Interstate standards fell by the wayside just to upgrade the old divided highway through Santa Barbara to something meeting minimal freeway standards. 

The left exits off US 101 at old Route 225 (Cabrillo Boulevard) probably are the most obvious spot for substandard design:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Coast+Village+Road,+Santa+Barbara,+CA&hl=en&ll=34.422832,-119.653924&spn=0.006301,0.008014&sll=34.421779,-119.648838&sspn=0.012603,0.016029&oq=Coast+Village+Road,+Sa&t=h&hnear=Coast+Village+Rd,+Santa+Barbara,+California&z=17

[kkt]

I suspect (though can't point to specific examples) that Interstate standards fell by the wayside just to upgrade the old divided highway through Santa Barbara to something meeting minimal freeway standards. 

The left exits off US 101 at old Route 225 (Cabrillo Boulevard) probably are the most obvious spot for substandard design:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Coast+Village+Road,+Santa+Barbara,+CA&hl=en&ll=34.422832,-119.653924&spn=0.006301,0.008014&sll=34.421779,-119.648838&sspn=0.012603,0.016029&oq=Coast+Village+Road,+Sa&t=h&hnear=Coast+Village+Rd,+Santa+Barbara,+California&z=17

Substandard just because it's a left exit?  I wish I had a dollar for every left exit off an interstate I've taken...

It looks like at that exit there would be enough space in the ROW to build a new overpass for the mainline and put the exits to the sides, if that's really necessary.  The exit would have to be closed for a while during construction.

Prunedale would be a bigger challenge.

[bing101]

You're right, CalTrans wouldn't renumber CA-1.  But they might renumber US-101 from L.A. to somewhere in the S.F. Bay Area as I-3.  There's only a few spots left in that part of 101 that don't meet interstate standards.

Surprisingly more spots than one would think of immediately: while there are indeed no stoplights between South Van Ness Avenue/Duboce Avenue in SF and the south terminus, the Prunedale stretch still has quite a few at-grades.  I THINK there's work right now to close the freeway gap between Ventura and Santa Barbara though.

Even some of the freeway sections might be short of Interstate-grade, and hard to fix.  For example, Caltrans had a devil of a time getting rid of the at-grades in Santa Barbara. I suspect (though can't point to specific examples) that Interstate standards fell by the wayside just to upgrade the old divided highway through Santa Barbara to something meeting minimal freeway standards. 

Wait I-3 Cannot exist until Ca-3 is renumbered.
Or I-9 Cannot exist until CA-9 in Los Gatos is made a county route or a new State route number either CA-21 or CA-141.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_State_Route_3

[TheStranger]

Substandard just because it's a left exit?  I wish I had a dollar for every left exit off an interstate I've taken...

How many of those were constructed after 1970 though? 

It looks like at that exit there would be enough space in the ROW to build a new overpass for the mainline and put the exits to the sides, if that's really necessary.  The exit would have to be closed for a while during construction.

I'm not sure the ROW is as big as it looks on paper - the Montecito area is notoriously NIMBY and I recall that contributed to how long (until 1992!) it took for the 101 stoplights to finally be removed in that area.  Seems like one of those "this is the only way we can get it built here" compromises.

Wait I-3 Cannot exist until Ca-3 is renumbered.
Or I-9 Cannot exist until CA-9 in Los Gatos is made a county route or a new State route number either CA-21 or CA-141.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_State_Route_3

California has already bandied about the idea of Route 99 becoming and Interstate, and with 11 accounted for in Nevada/Arizona, 7 and 9 are the only options.  Renumbering to accommodate a future Interstate route is not new (it happened most notably in the 1950s with Route 10/Firestone Boulevard in Inglewood becoming Route 42, and in the 1964 renumbering); at least 7 is a very short border connector in the southern part of the state.

US 101 was submitted as a possible Interstate back in the late 1940s/early 1950s (though not accepted), and at one point, I-405 was submitted as I-3 (ca. 1958) which AASHO rejected.  (To be fair, both of those happened while 3 was not in use in the system, the 1934 Route 3 having become Alternate US 101 at that point)

[agentsteel53]

(it happened most notably in the 1950s with Route 10/Firestone Boulevard in Inglewood becoming Route 42, and in the 1964 renumbering)

do you know what year 10 was renumbered?  I know it was definitely renumbered by 1962 as I have a photo from that year of a brand new green sigh with a white 42 shield.

also, what about 5 (Skyline Blvd.) and 15 (Atlantic Ave.)?  I think the 10 swap was expedited because of the proximity of the two routes - were the two 15s considered closeby?  5 and 5 were fairly far apart and likely could have coexisted like 40 and 40, or 80 and 80.

[TheStranger]

(it happened most notably in the 1950s with Route 10/Firestone Boulevard in Inglewood becoming Route 42, and in the 1964 renumbering)

do you know what year 10 was renumbered?  I know it was definitely renumbered by 1962 as I have a photo from that year of a brand new green sigh with a white 42 shield.

I WANT to say ca. 1959 but don't quote me on that.  In 1957 it was still 10:
http://www.historicmapworks.com/Map/US/212948/Page+056/Los+Angeles+County+1957+Street+Atlas/California/

also, what about 5 (Skyline Blvd.) and 15 (Atlantic Ave.)?  I think the 10 swap was expedited because of the proximity of the two routes - were the two 15s considered closeby?  5 and 5 were fairly far apart and likely could have coexisted like 40 and 40, or 80 and 80.

5 and 15 (which was already on the Long Beach Freeway at this point) both were switches made in the 1964 renumbering.

[kkt]

Wait I-3 Cannot exist until Ca-3 is renumbered.

Obviously.  Perhaps CA-333?

Or I-9 Cannot exist until CA-9 in Los Gatos is made a county route or a new State route number either CA-21 or CA-141.

I would suggest CA-239.  CA-239 is a legislative route elsewhere in California, but it's unconstructed and not likely to be constructed in the near future, so I see nothing wrong with using it for CA-9.  CA-239 would make a nice series alongside CA-238 and CA-237, which also began as parts of CA-9 and have had their numbers changed.

[agentsteel53]

Obviously.  Perhaps CA-333?

given the precedent of 330 and 371, the implication is that 3 would be renumbered to 303.

[kkt]

Substandard just because it's a left exit?  I wish I had a dollar for every left exit off an interstate I've taken...

How many of those were constructed after 1970 though? 

Far fewer, true.  Freeway construction in the U.S. generally slowed way down after 1970.

It looks like at that exit there would be enough space in the ROW to build a new overpass for the mainline and put the exits to the sides, if that's really necessary.  The exit would have to be closed for a while during construction.

I'm not sure the ROW is as big as it looks on paper - the Montecito area is notoriously NIMBY and I recall that contributed to how long (until 1992!) it took for the 101 stoplights to finally be removed in that area.  Seems like one of those "this is the only way we can get it built here" compromises.

If there's space for the mainlines on the sides and the exit ramps in the center, there ought to be space for them swapped.  It's just a small matter of constructing it while keeping the road open.   

[Mapmikey]

do you know what year 10 was renumbered?  I know it was definitely renumbered by 1962 as I have a photo from that year of a brand new green sigh with a white 42 shield.

1961 RMcN shows it as CA 10

Mapmikey

[andy3175]

Prunedale would be a bigger challenge.

Agreed. Delving into the details of current efforts to upgrade this section of 101: Some projects are underway now to improve US 101 near Prunedale (a large segment north of Salinas is due for completion in 2015), but even it won't be sufficient to bring 101 up to Interstate standards through Prunedale. And the section of 101-156 leading north from Prunedale through the eucalyptus woodland would require substantial improvements to bring it to Interstate freeway standards. This is not impossible, mind you, but it would cost quite a bit of money.

http://www.tamcmonterey.org/programs/hwyproj/us101_prunedale.html

The Prunedale Improvement Project is constructing three new interchanges / overpasses along US 101 through North Monterey County at: Russell/Espinosa, Blackie/Reese, and Crazy Horse Canyon/Echo Valley Roads. The project will also close the remaining gaps in the concrete median barrier from Crazy Horse Canyon to Russell/Espinosa, resulting in one continuous barrier. Additional Improvements are also being made to the San Miguel flyover and to local roads throughout the corridor to improve access and local circulation.

The project started construction in 2011 and, as of fall 2013, is about 80 percent complete.

The Prunedale Bypass remains a separate project that remains on the table yet is currently unfunded per the project's FAQ page: http://pipinfo.blogspot.com/p/pip-faqs.html

4.       Has the original Prunedale Bypass plan been abandoned?
Funding for the larger Prunedale Freeway Project is a challenge. The Prunedale Freeway Project, which includes the bypass as an alternative, has not been abandoned and has been identified as the next phase of improvements to Route 101 in the Prunedale area.

A separate project that began in 2013 will remove intersections near the red barn area (which is known to anyone who's driven this stretch of 101):

8.       Why doesn't this project extend to the sometimes very heavily congested area near the Red Barn?
Throughout the Route 101 corridor, there are areas where need for improvement has been identified.  The San Juan Road area has a high crash history and very high traffic volumes of over 63,000 vehicles a day. The 101/San Juan Road Interchange Project will remove three at-grade intersections (Dunbarton Road, San Juan Road and Cole Road) and construct one interchange near the Red Barn. The new interchange will help improve safety and reduce the congestion along this heavily traveled stretch of Highway 101. This project is expected to begin construction in 2013.

The San Juan Road interchange is slated for completion in January 2015 (connecting with the Prunedale project to the south) and has its own webpage at: http://www.tamcmonterey.org/programs/hwyproj/us101_SanJuanRd.html

[andy3175]

I THINK there's work right now to close the freeway gap between Ventura and Santa Barbara though.

Yes, you are correct. A carpool lane is being added between these points, and the project will remove the at-grade intersection leading into La Conchita, a small community located just west of Ventura (and site of a large-scale landslide disaster back in 2004-5). The project to expand 101 to six lanes and eliminate at-grade crossings is a long-term project about halfway through its projected 15-year term as noted on the project webpage:

http://sbroads.com/improving_101.html

The good news for motorists and truckers traveling on U.S. 101 is that construction has begun to add northbound and southbound High Occupancy Vehicle (carpool) lanes to the most congested corridor on the Central Coast of California, between Mussel Shoals in Ventura County and the city of Santa Barbara. Upon completion of the project, this 16 mile corridor will be expanded from four to six lanes and be a part of a continuous 40 mile, six lane highway, extending from the city of Ventura in Ventura County to the city of Goleta in Santa Barbara County. The carpool lanes will be the first ever opened on the Central Coast of California.

The bad news for motorists is that construction of the expansion project will take an estimated fifteen years to complete. Because of its length and expense, the sixteen mile widening project will be delivered in four phases, with an estimated total cost of nearly $690 million. The project will be funded by $140 million from Measure A, Santa Barbara County's transportation sales tax, and $550 million in state and federal funding.
The project is a collaborative effort between Caltrans, the owner-operator of the highway, the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG), the primary funding partner, and the local jurisdictions adjacent to the highway including the city of Santa Barbara, city of Carpinteria and County of Santa Barbara.
The eight cities in the county, the County of Santa Barbara, and SBCAG have adopted positions supporting the US 101 HOV widening as our region's highest priority transportation project for federal funding.

[andy3175]

(it happened most notably in the 1950s with Route 10/Firestone Boulevard in Inglewood becoming Route 42, and in the 1964 renumbering)

do you know what year 10 was renumbered?  I know it was definitely renumbered by 1962 as I have a photo from that year of a brand new green sigh with a white 42 shield.

I WANT to say ca. 1959 but don't quote me on that.  In 1957 it was still 10:
http://www.historicmapworks.com/Map/US/212948/Page+056/Los+Angeles+County+1957+Street+Atlas/California/

also, what about 5 (Skyline Blvd.) and 15 (Atlantic Ave.)?  I think the 10 swap was expedited because of the proximity of the two routes - were the two 15s considered closeby?  5 and 5 were fairly far apart and likely could have coexisted like 40 and 40, or 80 and 80.

5 and 15 (which was already on the Long Beach Freeway at this point) both were switches made in the 1964 renumbering.

My understanding is that SR 5, SR 8, and SR 15 were all renumbered to prevent duplication of the Interstate route numbers elsewhere in the state. So SR 5 became SR 35, SR 8 became SR 26, and SR 15 became SR 7 which became I-710.

[Zzonkmiles]

An I-1 could theoretically exist in Washington and/or Oregon with no input from Caltrans needed.

Even though this may be controversial, I would actually be in favor of I-1 being used instead of I-101 for a potential East Coast highway. I have yet to hear how a 3di spawn of a hypothetical I-101 would be numbered. Of course, the problem would then be similar to that of I-50 and I-60 with US routes of the same number, but I'd really hope that drivers are intelligent enough to know the difference between a road that has a blue/red shield with limited access and a road that has a black/white shield with traffic lights.

[kkt]

An I-1 could theoretically exist in Washington and/or Oregon with no input from Caltrans needed.

Even though this may be controversial, I would actually be in favor of I-1 being used instead of I-101 for a potential East Coast highway. I have yet to hear how a 3di spawn of a hypothetical I-101 would be numbered. Of course, the problem would then be similar to that of I-50 and I-60 with US routes of the same number, but I'd really hope that drivers are intelligent enough to know the difference between a road that has a blue/red shield with limited access and a road that has a black/white shield with traffic lights.

Is there a 2di proposal that might actually be built extending most of the way up and down the east coast, east of I-95?  If it only goes through a few states, a 3di would be a better way to number it.

I-101 as a pretend 2di would have some problems.  As you say, no way to number its 3di branches.

I-1 on the east coast would be completely out of the grid, as well as causing re-use of route number 1, which exists as US-1 in the east coast states.

Reusing a route number for different categories of routes within the same state causes confusion in many different ways.  Sure, when you see the route sign, it's easy to tell.  But just look through the signage errors threads for all the times contractors and even DOTs have been confused enough to post the wrong sign.  Then think about directions given over the phone, and all the times people casually leave out the "I" or "US" and just say "route". 

By the way, there are plenty of US routes with freeway sections.

[froggie]

Is there a 2di proposal that might actually be built extending most of the way up and down the east coast, east of I-95?

No.  Was studied by VDOT in 2006, but the short conclusion was a combination of lack of interest and no money to do it.

[hbelkins]

Is there a 2di proposal that might actually be built extending most of the way up and down the east coast, east of I-95?

No.  Was studied by VDOT in 2006, but the short conclusion was a combination of lack of interest and no money to do it.

You have a lot more experience with US 13 than I do, but during the times I've driven it, I haven't found the traffic lights to be that much of a slowdown so as to necessitate an interstate on the peninsula.

[Zeffy]

Reusing a route number for different categories of routes within the same state causes confusion in many different ways.  Sure, when you see the route sign, it's easy to tell.  But just look through the signage errors threads for all the times contractors and even DOTs have been confused enough to post the wrong sign.  Then think about directions given over the phone, and all the times people casually leave out the "I" or "US" and just say "route". 

Or, as many people in NJ prefer to say it: "<number>". No route, no highway, I, US, whatever. In fact, the only time I've heard "Route" is referring to a US Highway.

[vdeane]

Reusing a route number for different categories of routes within the same state causes confusion in many different ways.  Sure, when you see the route sign, it's easy to tell.  But just look through the signage errors threads for all the times contractors and even DOTs have been confused enough to post the wrong sign.  Then think about directions given over the phone, and all the times people casually leave out the "I" or "US" and just say "route". 

And the fact that the interstate shield has become synonymous with road trips in people's minds, even though most people's idea of a road trip is historic US 66.  Lots of merchandising with I shields next to rural two lane roads for that reason.

[mrsman]

I THINK there's work right now to close the freeway gap between Ventura and Santa Barbara though.

Yes, you are correct. A carpool lane is being added between these points, and the project will remove the at-grade intersection leading into La Conchita, a small community located just west of Ventura (and site of a large-scale landslide disaster back in 2004-5). The project to expand 101 to six lanes and eliminate at-grade crossings is a long-term project about halfway through its projected 15-year term as noted on the project webpage:

http://sbroads.com/improving_101.html

The good news for motorists and truckers traveling on U.S. 101 is that construction has begun to add northbound and southbound High Occupancy Vehicle (carpool) lanes to the most congested corridor on the Central Coast of California, between Mussel Shoals in Ventura County and the city of Santa Barbara. Upon completion of the project, this 16 mile corridor will be expanded from four to six lanes and be a part of a continuous 40 mile, six lane highway, extending from the city of Ventura in Ventura County to the city of Goleta in Santa Barbara County. The carpool lanes will be the first ever opened on the Central Coast of California.

The bad news for motorists is that construction of the expansion project will take an estimated fifteen years to complete. Because of its length and expense, the sixteen mile widening project will be delivered in four phases, with an estimated total cost of nearly $690 million. The project will be funded by $140 million from Measure A, Santa Barbara County's transportation sales tax, and $550 million in state and federal funding.
The project is a collaborative effort between Caltrans, the owner-operator of the highway, the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG), the primary funding partner, and the local jurisdictions adjacent to the highway including the city of Santa Barbara, city of Carpinteria and County of Santa Barbara.
The eight cities in the county, the County of Santa Barbara, and SBCAG have adopted positions supporting the US 101 HOV widening as our region's highest priority transportation project for federal funding.

In my mind, it's a bad place for an HOV lane.  It doesn't connect to any other HOV lane.  In LA, the US 101 corridor is one of the few corridors that is not slated to ever have an HOV lane.  Plus, most of the rest of the road through the area, already is 3 lanes.  So this expansion shouldn't be thought of as a mere expansion, it's really a correction of a long-held bottleneck that should have been replaced years ago and should be 3 GPLs.

[1995hoo]

An I-1 could theoretically exist in Washington and/or Oregon with no input from Caltrans needed.

Even though this may be controversial, I would actually be in favor of I-1 being used instead of I-101 for a potential East Coast highway. I have yet to hear how a 3di spawn of a hypothetical I-101 would be numbered. Of course, the problem would then be similar to that of I-50 and I-60 with US routes of the same number, but I'd really hope that drivers are intelligent enough to know the difference between a road that has a blue/red shield with limited access and a road that has a black/white shield with traffic lights.

I'd hope so too, but this sign I've passed many times in Maryland strongly leads me to conclude otherwise:



I'm sure the reason is exactly what others have said: People are given directions along the lines of, "Take 70 west to 68 and follow that to 219." So they see the "68" on the state route shield and assume that's the road they need. Stuff like this is one reason I've always thought when you give directions you should try to include multiple pieces of information, such as "Take I-70 west past Hancock and look for the left-side exit for I-68 towards Cumberland. Take that exit and follow I-68 a really long time beyond Cumberland and Frostburg to the exit for US-219 south towards Oakland." (If I know the exit numbers I will throw those in as well.) In the I-70/I-68 case, since I know about the state route I might add, "You will see an exit for Maryland Route 68 towards Clear Spring. That's the wrong road, so don't exit there."

I think the sign shown above would be more useful if it referred to I-68 west towards Cumberland rather than the unnecessary "National Freeway" reference. The person who gets confused over which "68" he needs won't find the two different shields and "National Freeway" particularly helpful.

[bzakharin]

An I-1 could theoretically exist in Washington and/or Oregon with no input from Caltrans needed.

Even though this may be controversial, I would actually be in favor of I-1 being used instead of I-101 for a potential East Coast highway. I have yet to hear how a 3di spawn of a hypothetical I-101 would be numbered. Of course, the problem would then be similar to that of I-50 and I-60 with US routes of the same number, but I'd really hope that drivers are intelligent enough to know the difference between a road that has a blue/red shield with limited access and a road that has a black/white shield with traffic lights.

US 1 has many freeway segments. In just the area I live, there is the Roosevelt Expressway in Philadelphia, the Trenton Freeway in Trenton, and the Pulaski Skyway in northeast NJ. Other US routes have much longer freeway segments, witness US 30 and US 202.

[bing101]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyeongbu_Expressway

Interstate 1 exists but you have to be in South Korea to drive there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeongdong_Expressway

Interstate 50 does exist too but its in South Korea.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=856391781057037&set=a.856391767723705.1073741929.100000586708549&type=1&theater

Yes I photoshop this via aaroads shield generator


https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=856391791057036&set=a.856391767723705.1073741929.100000586708549&type=1&theater

[flowmotion]

but I'd really hope that drivers are intelligent enough to know the difference between a road that has a blue/red shield with limited access and a road that has a black/white shield with traffic lights.

I'd hope so too, but this sign I've passed many times in Maryland strongly leads me to conclude otherwise:

That is, I think, a good sign patching over a dumb route number. (And I don't think "National Freeway" is unnecessary because it emphasizes that I-68 is a freeway, which is what most people would be looking for.)

If you look at the "Erroneous Road Signs" thread, DOTs and their contractors frequently mess up route classifications. And if they can't keep it straight, it should no be surprise the general public is sometimes confused.

Some states like California have a "one road, one number" system. I-210 and CA-210 are the same road and, as a driver, I really don't care what the bureaucratic limbo reasons are for one shield or another. Then I show up in Maryland and they have a completely different 68? I would have a right to be confused.