Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[agentsteel53]

I-84 was I-82 in the 1947 plan.

I-580 should be I-58, which would make I-80 a good candidate to be I-62, or even I-60.  Hell, if I-30 got a primary number, then I-60 would be okay.

[xonhulu]

Since US 60 no longer makes it to CA and isn't in NV or UT, I-60 would've been a good choice.  And I like your I-58 idea for I-580.

[Hellfighter]

I'd do some rearraging...

I-84 become I-82

I-86 becomes I-84

I-82 becomes I-86

[Bickendan]

Since US 60 no longer makes it to CA and isn't in NV or UT, I-60 would've been a good choice.  And I like your I-58 idea for I-580.

US 60 lives on as CA 60.
And CA 58 challenges I-580 for the 58 designation, even if I-40 grabs the freeway portion of CA 58.

Solution: Renumber I-580 to I-38  

[agentsteel53]

the solution is just to finally build I-40 to I-5.  That is a terrible corridor; I have driven it far too many times.

58 is an extraneous number in any case ... before 1964, the western segment of 58 was the continuation of state route 178, and the eastern was US-466.  US-466 became state route 46 west of 99, so I cannot see why 178 was switched to 58 between Bakersfield and Santa Margarita, and 466 became 46 only halfway ... I'd have called the 58 alignment from Bakersfield to Barstow CA-46 (at least, until I-40 came along) and left 178 well enough alone!

[TheStranger]

the solution is just to finally build I-40 to I-5.  That is a terrible corridor; I have driven it far too many times.

58 is an extraneous number in any case ... before 1964, the western segment of 58 was the continuation of state route 178, and the eastern was US-466.  US-466 became state route 46 west of 99, so I cannot see why 178 was switched to 58 between Bakersfield and Santa Margarita, and 466 became 46 only halfway ... I'd have called the 58 alignment from Bakersfield to Barstow CA-46 (at least, until I-40 came along) and left 178 well enough alone!

My guess for why 46 was only used for the segment of 466 between Route 99 and Route 41...has to do with the old multiplex with 99 between downtown Bakersfield (including today's Route 204) and Famoso; the 58 number (coincidentally?) was the pre-1964 legislative route number for the Bakersfield-Barstow portion of 466.

Not sure if 178 was ever signed that far west of Bakersfield though...

[xonhulu]

I'd do some rearraging...

I-84 become I-82

I-86 becomes I-84

I-82 becomes I-86

There is another possibility:

I-84 still begins in Portland, goes east to Hermiston, but then duplexes up to the Tri-Cities with I-82, where it then duplexes US 395 to I-90 at Ritzville.  I-82 meanwhile takes over the remaining portion of current I-84 to Echo Jct.

Not that I'd like to see this; it's just another possibility.

[agentsteel53]

Not sure if 178 was ever signed that far west of Bakersfield though...

178 was signed all the way out to US-101 at Santa Margarita.

[TheStranger]

Not sure if 178 was ever signed that far west of Bakersfield though...

178 was signed all the way out to US-101 at Santa Margarita.

Any photos of this?

---

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).

[agentsteel53]

Any photos of this?

alas no, but my 1947 Rand McNally map shows it as 178.

[xonhulu]

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).

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]

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).

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.

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.

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.

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]

I'd do some rearraging...

I-84 become I-82

I-86 becomes I-84

I-82 becomes I-86

Copy that, Hellfighter!

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

[xonhulu]

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

Better yet, bring back 15W!

[TheStranger]

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

Better yet, bring back 15W!

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...)