AARoads Forum

National Boards => General Highway Talk => Topic started by: Alex on December 29, 2015, 06:14:48 PM

Title: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: Alex on December 29, 2015, 06:14:48 PM
Are there any other 2-digit Interstates that end at their own 3-digit branch route besides Interstate 64? I-64 does this at both I-264 & 664 in Suffolk, VA.

Thinking more on this I-5 and I-805 almost end at one another, but I-5 continues just a bit further to the border crossing.

As a sidebar, two instances that come to mind of a 2di ending at 3di that is not a numbered branch of itself are I-69 @ I-465 at Indy and I-76 @ I-295 near Camden.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: davewiecking on December 29, 2015, 07:09:48 PM
I'm going to go out on a limb and theorize that the southern portion of I-95's current ending at I-295 in the middle of nowhere NJ isn't what you have in mind. But I-97's ending at hidden I-595 might count as a sidebar...as would I-70's ending at I-695.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: Mapmikey on December 29, 2015, 07:33:49 PM
I-45 technically does though may violate the spirit of the question.

I-16 and I-40 come very close but do not...

Mike
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: Kacie Jane on December 29, 2015, 07:54:25 PM
Quote from: davewiecking on December 29, 2015, 07:09:48 PM
I'm going to go out on a limb and theorize that the southern portion of I-95's current ending at I-295 in the middle of nowhere NJ isn't what you have in mind. But I-97's ending at hidden I-595 might count as a sidebar...as would I-70's ending at I-695.

My hunch is that the "sidebars" would be a tad more common, but still pretty rare.  I-87 ends at I-278 in the Bronx... and aren't both of 97's termini at an x95?

But for the life of me I can't come up with another example of a 2di ending at it's own 3di.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: Rothman on December 30, 2015, 07:51:25 AM
Not quite on the dot, but I-72 ends shortly after I-172, doesn't it?
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: davewiecking on December 30, 2015, 08:58:09 AM
Shortly after I-172 peels off, but I-72 does continue across the Mississipi River and enters another state before ending. (And yes, both ends of I-97 are at unrelated 3di's.)
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: PHLBOS on December 30, 2015, 09:14:15 AM
Quote from: davewiecking on December 29, 2015, 07:09:48 PM
I'm going to go out on a limb and theorize that the southern portion of I-95's current ending at I-295 in the middle of nowhere NJ isn't what you have in mind.
That would be a good assumption; especially since that's more of a discontinuity issue (which will finally be resolved in the next few years, see other threads on this matter) rather than an actual terminus.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: Alex on December 30, 2015, 10:54:07 AM
Quote from: Mapmikey on December 29, 2015, 07:33:49 PM
I-45 technically does though may violate the spirit of the question.

Did not think of the IH 45/345 shared end point in Dallas, thank you Mike! Despite IH 345 being unsigned, I would still count it.

Thinking more on this, had I-179 been signed in Erie as shown on the 1963 rand, another example would be in the system.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.interstate-guide.com%2Fmaps%2Ferie_pa_1963.jpg&hash=44d55344802715c359df7618727cfc308f6fbf41)




Feel free to use this thread for any other random Interstate question.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: SteveG1988 on December 30, 2015, 11:31:27 AM
Formerly, interstate 69 ended at I-465. Interstate 72 on the eastern end just stops at a local road, instead of ending at the interstate. MO is intending to make US36 one day be i-72. Interstate 88 ends at both 294 and 290.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: Alex on December 30, 2015, 07:33:58 PM
Thinking a little more on this, would another instance of a 2di ending at its 3di branch have have been I-80's west end had both it and I-480 been completed?

(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/west/california_sf-oakland_1960_640.jpg) (//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/west/california_sf-oakland_1960.jpg)
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: NE2 on December 30, 2015, 07:55:48 PM
Yes, and now FHWA's definition of I-80 ends at the unbuilt connection to I-280.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: Mapmikey on December 30, 2015, 09:24:57 PM
Another one from the past that has since changed would be I-72 and I-172 at Springfield, IL

Mike
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: Grzrd on December 31, 2015, 12:37:59 PM
Quote from: davewiecking on December 29, 2015, 07:09:48 PM
I'm going to go out on a limb and theorize that the southern portion of I-95's current ending at I-295 in the middle of nowhere NJ isn't what you have in mind. But I-97's ending at hidden I-595 might count as a sidebar...as would I-70's ending at I-695.

Another sidebar involving suffixed routes instead of 3dis would be, depending on the final alignment selected by TxDOT in Victoria, I-69 terminating at I-69E and/or I-69W, which in turn leads to the interesting situation of I-69C terminating at I-69W and never connecting with its I-69 "parent".
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: vdeane on December 31, 2015, 01:22:04 PM
Honestly, I don't consider suffixed interstates (and most suffixed US routes; probably all except US 9W) to be a parent/child situation.  They function more like the split in the NJ Turnpike than a 3di.  That's one of the reasons I don't like them: none of them are the clear "mainline".
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: BakoCondors on December 31, 2015, 03:32:53 PM
Quote from: Alex on December 30, 2015, 07:33:58 PM
Thinking a little more on this, would another instance of a 2di ending at its 3di branch have have been I-80's west end had both it and I-480 been completed?

(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/west/california_sf-oakland_1960_640.jpg) (//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/west/california_sf-oakland_1960.jpg)

This is the first time I've ever seen a map showing 5-W. Thanks for posting  :clap:
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: Pete from Boston on December 31, 2015, 04:50:43 PM

Quote from: vdeane on December 31, 2015, 01:22:04 PM
Honestly, I don't consider suffixed interstates (and most suffixed US routes; probably all except US 9W) to be a parent/child situation.  They function more like the split in the NJ Turnpike than a 3di.  That's one of the reasons I don't like them: none of them are the clear "mainline".

I never thought of 9W as having a complicated relationship with 9.  Like most folks from west of the Hudson, I hardly consider that the two are related at all.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: vtk on December 31, 2015, 07:26:10 PM
Quote from: Grzrd on December 31, 2015, 12:37:59 PM
Quote from: davewiecking on December 29, 2015, 07:09:48 PM
I'm going to go out on a limb and theorize that the southern portion of I-95's current ending at I-295 in the middle of nowhere NJ isn't what you have in mind. But I-97's ending at hidden I-595 might count as a sidebar...as would I-70's ending at I-695.

Another sidebar involving suffixed routes instead of 3dis would be, depending on the final alignment selected by TxDOT in Victoria, I-69 terminating at I-69E and/or I-69W, which in turn leads to the interesting situation of I-69C terminating at I-69W and never connecting with its I-69 "parent".

As I understand it, I-69W and I-69C will end where I-69 will begin. And I would consider I-69W/C/E to be multiple personalities of the same physical person known as I-69. Or, alternatively, the whole I-69 system is a quantum superposition of different, branchless I-69 routes. Either way, suffixed Interstates aren't children.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: Kacie Jane on January 01, 2016, 02:43:45 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on December 31, 2015, 04:50:43 PM

Quote from: vdeane on December 31, 2015, 01:22:04 PM
Honestly, I don't consider suffixed interstates (and most suffixed US routes; probably all except US 9W) to be a parent/child situation.  They function more like the split in the NJ Turnpike than a 3di.  That's one of the reasons I don't like them: none of them are the clear "mainline".

I never thought of 9W as having a complicated relationship with 9.  Like most folks from west of the Hudson, I hardly consider that the two are related at all.

9W has both ends at US 9, so the only thing that makes it different from other suffixed routes is that 9 from Fort Lee to Albany isn't called 9E.

6N would be a much better example of an odd duck.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: Pete from Boston on January 01, 2016, 11:13:32 AM

Quote from: Kacie Jane on January 01, 2016, 02:43:45 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on December 31, 2015, 04:50:43 PM

Quote from: vdeane on December 31, 2015, 01:22:04 PM
Honestly, I don't consider suffixed interstates (and most suffixed US routes; probably all except US 9W) to be a parent/child situation.  They function more like the split in the NJ Turnpike than a 3di.  That's one of the reasons I don't like them: none of them are the clear "mainline".

I never thought of 9W as having a complicated relationship with 9.  Like most folks from west of the Hudson, I hardly consider that the two are related at all.

9W has both ends at US 9, so the only thing that makes it different from other suffixed routes is that 9 from Fort Lee to Albany isn't called 9E.

6N would be a much better example of an odd duck.

I guess my point about 9W is that given the isolation brought about by a very large river with few crossings, 9 is barely on the radar for many regular 9W users.  I would assume the reverse is also true.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: jp the roadgeek on January 01, 2016, 12:20:41 PM
If I-93 is extended down MA 24, it will end at an unrelated 3DI (I-195)
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: vdeane on January 01, 2016, 07:28:37 PM
Quote from: Kacie Jane on January 01, 2016, 02:43:45 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on December 31, 2015, 04:50:43 PM

Quote from: vdeane on December 31, 2015, 01:22:04 PM
Honestly, I don't consider suffixed interstates (and most suffixed US routes; probably all except US 9W) to be a parent/child situation.  They function more like the split in the NJ Turnpike than a 3di.  That's one of the reasons I don't like them: none of them are the clear "mainline".

I never thought of 9W as having a complicated relationship with 9.  Like most folks from west of the Hudson, I hardly consider that the two are related at all.

9W has both ends at US 9, so the only thing that makes it different from other suffixed routes is that 9 from Fort Lee to Albany isn't called 9E.

6N would be a much better example of an odd duck.
Well, 9 is the "mainline" as it's not 9E (though it used to be).  The fact that it's in NY also counts, as NY consideres US highways to be NY routes that happen to have a different shield (with the exception of US 2 being inventoried as 2U, I am 100% serious with that comment, and it's not exaggerated at all), and NY uses suffixes for spurs and bypasses.  US 9 and US 9W strike me as being more similar to NY 31 and NY 31A (or NY 5, NY 5A, and NY 5S) than US 11E and US 11W.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: bearcat97 on January 01, 2016, 11:23:49 PM
I-49 ending at I-435 in Kansas City at the Grandview Triangle
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: TravelingBethelite on January 02, 2016, 08:07:48 PM
Another question: was/is there a section of Interstate that doesn't connect to any other? As far as I know, no. This does not include highways that will be as they are constructed. Asking for a friend.  :cool:
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: vdeane on January 02, 2016, 08:52:07 PM
Depending on how pedantic you want to get, there's I-587, though I prefer to think of it as connected through the roundabout and Thruway exit 19.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: NE2 on January 02, 2016, 09:08:58 PM
Quote from: TravelingBethelite on January 02, 2016, 08:07:48 PM
Another question: was/is there a section of Interstate that doesn't connect to any other? As far as I know, no. This does not include highways that will be as they are constructed. Asking for a friend.  :cool:
I-585.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: The Nature Boy on January 02, 2016, 09:33:59 PM
Why hasn't I-585 been decommissioned yet? It really serves no actual purpose at this point.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: noelbotevera on January 02, 2016, 10:04:20 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on January 02, 2016, 09:33:59 PM
Why hasn't I-585 been decommissioned yet? It really serves no actual purpose at this point.
Because SCDOT wants to extend it to I-85.

Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: pianocello on January 03, 2016, 01:45:42 AM
Quote from: TravelingBethelite on January 02, 2016, 08:07:48 PM
Another question: was/is there a section of Interstate that doesn't connect to any other? As far as I know, no. This does not include highways that will be as they are constructed. Asking for a friend.  :cool:

Very recently, I want to say one of the I-69 suffixed routes in South Texas was on its own, so to speak, before I-2 became signed (69C, maybe? Not sure about the chronology of everything down there). Even now, the system of I-2, I-69C, and I-69E is disconnected from the rest, but that's only temporary, and it doesn't really answer your question.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: SteveG1988 on January 03, 2016, 10:07:50 AM
Hawaii interstates.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: NE2 on January 03, 2016, 10:15:03 AM
Quote from: pianocello on January 03, 2016, 01:45:42 AM
Quote from: TravelingBethelite on January 02, 2016, 08:07:48 PM
This does not include highways that will be as they are constructed.
Very recently, I want to say one of the I-69 suffixed routes in South Texas was on its own, so to speak, before I-2 became signed (69C, maybe? Not sure about the chronology of everything down there).
Quote from: SteveG1988 on January 03, 2016, 10:07:50 AM
Hawaii interstates.
Which one doesn't connect to any others? None of them, that's which one.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: The Nature Boy on January 03, 2016, 11:01:02 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on January 02, 2016, 10:04:20 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on January 02, 2016, 09:33:59 PM
Why hasn't I-585 been decommissioned yet? It really serves no actual purpose at this point.
Because SCDOT wants to extend it to I-85.

Decommission it until they actually do that. Let SC call it SC Highway 585 if they want to.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: Mapmikey on January 03, 2016, 03:15:06 PM
I-585 is fully signed in both directions along US 176 from west of I-85 Bus to just short of I-85 (1 at grade intersection adjacent to I-85), including on the ramps from both directions on I-85.

There are also mile markers 1-3 where mile 0 would be at I-85.

On the other end, the I-585 posting on Pine St leaving US 29 now says TO I-585 instead of NORTH I-585, but there is still at least one 585 NORTH posting on Pine St well before the actual freeway begins at the US 221 interchange.

If I-85 Bus were I-685 this would not be an issue and if SCDOT wanted to connect 585 out to 85 they should've had a different interchange design with US 176 which is a simple diamond in a small geographic footprint.

Mike
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: davewiecking on January 03, 2016, 10:03:26 PM
Quote from: TravelingBethelite on January 02, 2016, 08:07:48 PM
Another question: was/is there a section of Interstate that doesn't connect to any other? As far as I know, no. This does not include highways that will be as they are constructed. Asking for a friend.  :cool:
I-170 in Baltimore never connected to another Interstate, and has since been removed from the system.
Title: Re: Interstate Highway Question
Post by: wolfiefrick on January 09, 2016, 10:58:45 AM
I-70 ends at I-695.


iPhone