Iowa Interstate 880

[Henry]

I really didn't understand the need for a renumbering. I especially don't understand why Iowa used up all their even x80's so that no additional ones can be signed in the future. 429, 629, and 829 are all unused!

They could always try duplicating I-280 again (see GRM Barcodes 101277396 and 101277396 from the AASHTO route numbering archive) 

Given that an I-280 already exists in the Quad Cities area, this is not possible. Also, I don't see a problem with I-880, especially since it was I-680 for many years.

[Gnutella]

To me, I-880 can be justified as the shortcut for long-distance traffic from I-80 westbound to I-29 northbound, and I-29 southbound to I-80 eastbound. I would venture that most of the traffic on I-880 uses it for that purpose, rather than bypassing Omaha. Besides, the former I-680 concurrency with I-29 seemed goofy to me, because a 10-mile concurrency between two different 16-mile segments seemed to break the continuity in the route.

[The Ghostbuster]

I didn't mind the Interstate 29/680 overlap. Of course, I've never been along the 680 corridor. It was probably for the best that the former 680 east of Interstate 29 was renumbered to Interstate 880. At least, that was better than renumbering it back to Interstate 80N.

[SEWIGuy]

880 should have been 329.

It doesn't come back to itself and the vast majority of traffic is WB from Des Moines to Sioux City.

880 is fine.

[hotdogPi]

the vast majority of traffic is WB from Des Moines to Sioux City.

Assuming it's true, this is probably the most convincing reason it should have an odd first digit. It's one of those "straight lines" like IL I-155 and KS I-135.

[Rothman]

880 should have been 329.

It doesn't come back to itself and the vast majority of traffic is WB from Des Moines to Sioux City.

880 is fine.

So was 680.

[kphoger]

880 should have been 329.

It doesn't come back to itself and the vast majority of traffic is WB from Des Moines to Sioux City.

880 is fine.

So was 680.

It should be 238.

[The Ghostbuster]

There already is an Interstate 238 in the Bay Area, and that is already one too many.

[kphoger]

There already is an Interstate 238 in the Bay Area

I-680 and I-880 say hi.

[PColumbus73]

There already is an Interstate 238 in the Bay Area

I-680 and I-880 say hi.

I-99 (W) 

[kphoger]

I-99

Yeah, I'd be OK with renaming Iowa Interstate 880 to I-99.  Good suggestion.

[webny99]

I-99

Yeah, I'd be OK with renaming Iowa Interstate 880 to I-99.  Good suggestion.

Good thing I-880 would become available for existing I-99. 

[kphoger]

Good thing I-880 would become available for existing I-99.

The existence of I-880 in Iowa, as it is, has no bearing on the numbering of I-99 in Pennsylvania or New York.

[webny99]

The existence of I-880 in Iowa, as it is, has no bearing on the numbering of I-99 in Pennsylvania or New York.

But it sure would in the hypothetical scenario of I-99 being stolen for I-880 that I was responding to...

[kphoger]

Ah, you're assuming there couldn't be two I-99s.  Gotcha.

[webny99]

Ah, you're assuming there couldn't be two I-99s.  Gotcha.

Well, technically there's *already* two I-99's that will hopefully be connected someday.

But yes, I am operating under the assumption that any duplicate interstate routes are either intended to be connected or could theoretically be connected following a general path in their signed direction.

I-99 is a north/south designation, so having one in Iowa and one in Pennsylvania would be a non-starter for that reason, among, of course, many others.

[Rothman]

880 goes to Jersey Shore.