In the northeast, toll roads are normally referred to by name. Is I-44 in OK known as just "I-44" or is it referred too as Turner, Will Rogers, etc, and does the "Kansas Turnpike" name superseded I-35, I-335.
In Oklahoma City, usually the I-44 number predominates. If someone really specifically means the segment between Tulsa and OKC, they'll refer to the Turner Turnpike (especially in terms of a location of an accident). The phrase "the turnpike" is also sometimes used when not ambiguous ("I'm on the turnpike north of Chickasha...").
I'd imagine for a more thorough answer you want a Tulsan to answer.
Who the hell is Wilbur Cross?
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 16, 2020, 06:15:19 PM
In Oklahoma City, usually the I-44 number predominates. If someone really specifically means the segment between Tulsa and OKC, they'll refer to the Turner Turnpike (especially in terms of a location of an accident). The phrase "the turnpike" is also sometimes used when not ambiguous ("I'm on the turnpike north of Chickasha...").
I'd imagine for a more thorough answer you want a Tulsan to answer.
Who the hell is Wilbur Cross?
I'm dumb, confused it with the Will Rogers turnpike.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 16, 2020, 06:08:01 PM
In the northeast, toll roads are normally referred to by name. Is I-44 in OK known as just "I-44" or is it referred too as Turner, Will Rogers, etc, and does the "Kansas Turnpike" name superseded I-35, I-335.
For a Kansas answer:
I've already met someone here in Kansas who thought the Kansas Turnpike started at the Colorado border (um, no, that's just I-70). My general sense is people around here usually go by the Interstate numbers, especially if you're referring to the I-35 and I-70 portions of the Turnpike. If you're talking about I-335, people are probably more likely to say "Follow the Turnpike." The same might go for the Turnpike portion of I-470, but I'm not sure.
Maybe the Kansas Turnpike Authority should do a survey.
This is more of a side note, but I think the state of Kansas generally under-appreciates its Turnpike. The non-tolled portion of I-35 had little reason to be built because the Turnpike already provided an efficient route to downtown Kansas City, MO that's only three miles longer, and Overland Park wasn't a big city in 1956. Which is the better route to downtown KCMO? It depends on the time of day. I-35 in Johnson County gets way more congestion than I-70 in Wyandotte County. But I-35 is the preferred route on paper (and usually on signs) because you're just following one number.
I have a ton of "Fictional Highways" ideas for how to encourage more people to use the Turnpike to get to places like KCK, KCI Airport, or even as a bypass of Johnson County, but in reality, they'd most likely be sign clutter. But on the other hand, if more people DID use the Turnpike as an alternative to I-35, it would relieve pressure to widen I-35--pressure that's so great that they're already thinking of adding toll lanes.
I would imagine you could accomplish a lot of that by just changing the I-335 control to "Topeka/Kansas City" and I-35 to "Emporia/Johnson Co" (or "Olathe" or "Overland Park" if you don't think people know where Johnson County is). But that would probably invite criticism of KTA profiteering.
Indian Nation Turnpike has no numerical designation.
The Muskogee Turnpike is usually Muskogee Turnpike, not 351, from what I have observed.
Biggest benefit of I-35 over I-335 / I-470 / I-70 (Kansas Turnpike) is that I-35 is free, the Turnpike is tolled.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 16, 2020, 09:16:36 PM
Biggest benefit of I-35 over I-335 / I-470 / I-70 (Kansas Turnpike) is that I-35 is free, the Turnpike is tolled.
There is no such thing as a free lunch, nor is there such a thing as a free road to travel to get your lunch.
There is, however, such a thing as a dead horse, and I'm not hungry enough to eat it.
This is neither here nor there (well, maybe a little there), but I really want to drive all of the Oklahoma Turnpikes in their entirety someday. It's a "bucket list" item for me. Actually, I'd love to drive the full length of every turnpike in the U.S., but that would take a while (and quite a lot of travel money, with the tolls probably being the lowest-cost item overall).
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 16, 2020, 09:21:16 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 16, 2020, 09:16:36 PM
Biggest benefit of I-35 over I-335 / I-470 / I-70 (Kansas Turnpike) is that I-35 is free, the Turnpike is tolled.
There is no such thing as a free lunch, nor is there such a thing as a free road to travel to get your lunch.
Sure, but your gas taxes are paying for those free roads. If you choose to take the Turnpike instead, you're paying those same gas taxes plus the cost of the additional toll. And those gas taxes are still paying for I-35 and the other free roads you aren't using.
Turnpike between Emporia and Kansas is $4.65 with a KTag and $6.25 for toll by plate.
For over 100 miles of distance, not a bad price.
However, I-35 is still $0.00 in tolls, and with a similar travel time, would be my preferred option, especially if I did not have a KTag or other compatible pass.
What about the US 412 turnpikes? Do they go by name or US 412?
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 16, 2020, 10:02:24 PM
Turnpike between Emporia and Kansas is $4.65 with a KTag and $6.25 for toll by plate.
For over 100 miles of distance, not a bad price.
However, I-35 is still $0.00 in tolls, and with a similar travel time, would be my preferred option, especially if I did not have a KTag or other compatible pass.
Google says I-35 is 10-15 minutes shorter. I've actually been wondering why it was built, given that it only saves a small amount of time, and doesn't appear to serve anywhere not already served by the Turnpike, and I can't imagine Topeka traffic on the Turnpike is bad. Was it really worth spending all that money to built it, rather than just taking the route that was already there?
Had I-35 followed the Turnpike instead, at least then the exit numbers on I-70 wouldn't jump randomly where the Turnpike ends since it would just theoretically use I-35 numbers until I-35 resumed its real-world route. Speaking of that part of the Turnpike, is there a story behind the interchanges that look like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9937479,-95.2304347,620m/data=!3m1!1e3)? Those trees make me think it used to be a trumpet.
In the Topeka/Lawrence area, the Kansas Turnpike is generally called "The Turnpike" west of Bonner Springs, and I-70 in the KC Metro. I-470 generally refers to the untolled segment west of Topeka Boulevard. I-335 is never refereed to by number, and the only reason it even carries an interstate number was to allow that section of the Turnpike to raise its speed limit from 55 mph to 65 mph alongside the rest of the rural Interstates.
Quote from: vdeane on May 16, 2020, 11:03:32 PM
Google says I-35 is 10-15 minutes shorter. I've actually been wondering why it was built, given that it only saves a small amount of time, and doesn't appear to serve anywhere not already served by the Turnpike...
Ottawa is not a town to sneeze at.
Quote from: vdeane on May 16, 2020, 11:03:32 PM
Speaking of that part of the Turnpike, is there a story behind the interchanges that look like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9937479,-95.2304347,620m/data=!3m1!1e3)? Those trees make me think it used to be a trumpet.
That would be the East Lawrence Interchange. You would be correct in that both it and the West Lawrence interchanges were trumpets. The roundabouts were built as part of the project to replace the Kansas River Bridges back in 2010.
Quote from: vdeane on May 16, 2020, 11:03:32 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 16, 2020, 10:02:24 PM
Turnpike between Emporia and Kansas is $4.65 with a KTag and $6.25 for toll by plate.
For over 100 miles of distance, not a bad price.
However, I-35 is still $0.00 in tolls, and with a similar travel time, would be my preferred option, especially if I did not have a KTag or other compatible pass.
Google says I-35 is 10-15 minutes shorter. I've actually been wondering why it was built, given that it only saves a small amount of time, and doesn't appear to serve anywhere not already served by the Turnpike, and I can't imagine Topeka traffic on the Turnpike is bad. Was it really worth spending all that money to built it, rather than just taking the route that was already there?
Had I-35 followed the Turnpike instead, at least then the exit numbers on I-70 wouldn't jump randomly where the Turnpike ends since it would just theoretically use I-35 numbers until I-35 resumed its real-world route. Speaking of that part of the Turnpike, is there a story behind the interchanges that look like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9937479,-95.2304347,620m/data=!3m1!1e3)? Those trees make me think it used to be a trumpet.
They wanted to keep interstates untolled whenever possible. I think they planned on having I-35 traveling on US 50 to Newton.
Quote from: vdeane on May 16, 2020, 11:03:32 PMSpeaking of that part of the Turnpike, is there a story behind the interchanges that look like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9937479,-95.2304347,620m/data=!3m1!1e3)? Those trees make me think it used to be a trumpet.
You are correct. Exits 202 and 204 both used to be trumpets. I have no idea why they changed them to roundabouts and added a conflict point, but I can sure guess. (1) Maybe they wanted longer on-ramps, so you're not entering the Turnpike right off a 30-MPH curve, in which case, they could have just extended the acceleration lanes instead. (2) Maybe they're anticipating a northward extension of the access roads, which would require building a second toll plaza, which is precedented if you look at Exit 33, although conversion to AET whenever that happens would eliminate the need for said toll plaza.
Quote from: US71 on May 16, 2020, 09:15:36 PM
Indian Nation Turnpike has no numerical designation.
The Muskogee Turnpike is usually Muskogee Turnpike, not 351, from what I have observed.
I believe usage for almost of the turnpikes after the 'big 3" is as a name since many weren't numbered until recently. The exception might me the Cimarron (US412). Not sure about the Cherokee. The Chickasaw is still the Chickasaw even though it is now a free road. As said above, whether the I-44 toll roads are names or numbers depends on who's referencing it and for what purpose.
Quote from: rte66man on May 17, 2020, 03:10:09 PM
The Chickasaw is still the Chickasaw even though it is now a free road.
Most of the Chickasaw isn't a free road, just the useful part between SH-7 and US-177. This was given the designation of "SH-7 Spur" (why we have to deal with "spur" designations when we have the stronger precedent of letter suffixes like 7D, I don't know). It would make sense for people to still call it the Chickasaw though.
In Tulsa, I most often here "the turnpike" and "I-44" for the Turner, Creek and Will Rogers turnpikes. Or "the highway". Any freeway is "the highway" to most Tulsans. "Get on the highway and exit at Yale." I hear it far more than I hear any other names.
Quote from: bugo on May 18, 2020, 12:19:57 AM
In Tulsa, I most often here "the turnpike" and "I-44" for the Turner, Creek and Will Rogers turnpikes. Or "the highway". Any freeway is "the highway" to most Tulsans. "Get on the highway and exit at Yale." I hear it far more than I hear any other names.
I trust you on this, as opposed to fake Tulsans who read names on OSM and think they're gospel.
Here in Wichita...
"I-35" refers to two different highways:
A. The Canal Route, which is actually I-135 but used to be I-35W;
B. The Turnpike, which is indeed I-35.
This gets confusing. However, I estimate that at least half the locals refer to them as "the Canal Route" and "the Turnpike", respectively.
Quote from: bugo on May 18, 2020, 12:19:57 AM
In Tulsa, I most often here "the turnpike" and "I-44" for the Turner, Creek and Will Rogers turnpikes. Or "the highway". Any freeway is "the highway" to most Tulsans. "Get on the highway and exit at Yale." I hear it far more than I hear any other names.
There are still a lot of people who refer to I-65 in Kentucky between Elizabethtown and Louisville as "the turnpike" even though it hasn't officially been marked as the Kentucky Turnpike, or carried a toll, for many years.
Quote from: kphoger on May 18, 2020, 01:19:26 PMHere in Wichita...
"I-35" refers to two different highways:
A. The Canal Route, which is actually I-135 but used to be I-35W;
B. The Turnpike, which is indeed I-35.
This gets confusing. However, I estimate that at least half the locals refer to them as "the Canal Route" and "the Turnpike", respectively.
I use the "Canal Route" phrase to sidestep the whole conversation about I-135 being only a child of I-35, which carries less traffic and is basically a blind corridor through southeast Wichita.
As for the Cimarron and Cherokee Turnpikes in Oklahoma, I use the names, but I would say "US 412" if giving directions to someone not familiar with the Oklahoma turnpike system. I know they have US 412 shields; I am less sure that signing by name is available at the critical decision points.
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 17, 2020, 05:33:32 PM
Quote from: rte66man on May 17, 2020, 03:10:09 PM
The Chickasaw is still the Chickasaw even though it is now a free road.
Most of the Chickasaw isn't a free road, just the useful part between SH-7 and US-177. This was given the designation of "SH-7 Spur" (why we have to deal with "spur" designations when we have the stronger precedent of letter suffixes like 7D, I don't know). It would make sense for people to still call it the Chickasaw though.
Did ODOT change the BGS on OK7 approaching the Chickasaw and put a shield on it?
Quote from: J N Winkler on May 18, 2020, 07:59:17 PM
I use the "Canal Route" phrase to sidestep the whole conversation about I-135 being only a child of I-35, which carries less traffic and is basically a blind corridor through southeast Wichita.
Except where it isn't. I remember when we had a cable tech working here from Arkansas on a temporary basis, he got directions from someone that involved taking Kellogg to "I-35", which meant the Canal Route. He called dispatch from clear out by the east Lowe's (just past the actual I-35 interchange) because he couldn't figure out how to follow the directions from there.
Quote from: kphoger on May 19, 2020, 01:48:36 PM
Except where it isn't. I remember when we had a cable tech working here from Arkansas on a temporary basis, he got directions from someone that involved taking Kellogg to "I-35", which meant the Canal Route. He called dispatch from clear out by the east Lowe's (just past the actual I-35 interchange) because he couldn't figure out how to follow the directions from there.
I hear stories on here about people in Wichita misnaming I-135 as "I-35" rather often, and it's kind of fascinating. How did this happen? It was never I-35 in reality. It
was I-35W, but wasn't the Turnpike already I-35 at that point? It was
proposed to be I-35 on paper, when US 50 from Newton to Emporia was proposed to be part of I-35, but that never went anywhere outside of some paper documents, right?
It's always surprised me, because I've spent a lot of time in Wichita, but I suppose I would have been exposed to it IRL by now if I had ever actually
lived in Wichita.
There's gotta be a way to fix this so people don't end up confused about it, but how? Take down the Interstate shields and let it be US 81 (it could be another one of those weird
hidden Interstate designations)? Re-number it (if people already call it "I-35," I doubt changing it to I-33 would help)? Have a public ad campaign?
Does a similar situation happen anywhere else in the U.S.? Do people mistakenly refer to I-476 as "I-76?" Is I-195 or I-295 in New Jersey ever mistaken for I-95? I could honestly understand why people might call I-294/Tri-State Tollway "I-94" by mistake, but does that ever happen?
I feel like the "Mystery of I-35" in Wichita could be a whole documentary.
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 19, 2020, 04:58:48 PM
I could honestly understand why people might call I-294/Tri-State Tollway "I-94" by mistake, but does that ever happen?
That I-35 in Wichita thing is odd. Here, the Tri-State Tollway is more likely to get called "I-294" north of Lake-Cook Road by south suburbanites (who associate the Tri-State with I-294) or non-locals (who don't quite realize it's different). However, around Chicago, names predominate with a few exceptions ("355" being one), thus you're more likely to hear "Tri-State" and "north" or "south" for I-94 (which is actually marked east-west there).
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 19, 2020, 04:58:48 PM
Take down the Interstate shields and let it be US 81 (it could be another one of those weird hidden Interstate designations)
This is what I think should happen to I-135 anyway, because all but a half-mile of it is multiplexed with US-81. That remaining southern bit can simply be signed with [TO] banners.
FWIW... My ex-boss claimed that calling the Canal Route "I-35" is just as correct as calling the local street Ar-kansas rather than Arkan-saw: simply a local variation in pronunciation. So, basically, he says Wichitans "pronounce" I-135 differently.
I was not convinced.
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 19, 2020, 04:58:48 PM
Does a similar situation happen anywhere else in the U.S.? Do people mistakenly refer to I-476 as "I-76?" Is I-195 or I-295 in New Jersey ever mistaken for I-95? I could honestly understand why people might call I-294/Tri-State Tollway "I-94" by mistake, but does that ever happen?
I feel like the "Mystery of I-35" in Wichita could be a whole documentary.
I do occasionally hear people in Boise call I-184 "I-84" (usually "the connector" though - never "I-184") - but it doesn't sound quite as widespread as the I-135 Wichita thing.
Quote from: kphoger on May 20, 2020, 01:51:13 PMFWIW... My ex-boss claimed that calling the Canal Route "I-35" is just as correct as calling the local street Ar-kansas rather than Arkan-saw: simply a local variation in pronunciation. So, basically, he says Wichitans "pronounce" I-135 differently.
I was not convinced.
I wouldn't be either.
I think the confusion occurs because "the Turnpike" is the identifier for the real I-35 that locally predominates. One option might be simply to lift tolls on the Turnpike, so that it is called I-35 instead.
I am not too keen on "hiding" the I-135 designation because of the potential for confusion with I-235, which has been called (and signed) "81 Bypass" within living memory. (The bottom mile or so of I-135 was once marked as I-235, too.)
Here in Virginia, I've heard at least a few people refer to the VA-168 freeway as I-68.
The VA-164 freeway is largely referred to as I-164 - I can understand this one more - a freeway linking I-264 and I-664, logically should be Interstate 164.
I've never heard I-64 used incorrectly though on a spur route.
Quote from: J N Winkler on May 20, 2020, 02:49:21 PM
I think the confusion occurs because "the Turnpike" is the identifier for the real I-35 that locally predominates. One option might be simply to lift tolls on the Turnpike, so that it is called I-35 instead.
Or build I-35 along US 50 from Newton to Emporia, as in the original plan. It's sometimes a preferred route from southbound I-35 to westbound US 54, anyway. This would be a shunpiker's fantasy and the KTA's nightmare.
I'm not convinced, however, that we can keep building new major freeways without user fees, unless we switch from the gas tax to a VMT charge, which has its own set of logistical nightmares. But that's another topic.
Quote
I am not too keen on "hiding" the I-135 designation because of the potential for confusion with I-235, which has been called (and signed) "81 Bypass" within living memory. (The bottom mile or so of I-135 was once marked as I-235, too.)
Bring back named freeways? Sign it as "Canal Route Freeway" and put that at the top of the signs? Maybe KDOT could get an MUTCD variance for that. This option seems just as unlikely as all the others, though.
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 20, 2020, 05:41:07 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on May 20, 2020, 02:49:21 PM
I think the confusion occurs because "the Turnpike" is the identifier for the real I-35 that locally predominates. One option might be simply to lift tolls on the Turnpike, so that it is called I-35 instead.
Or build I-35 along US 50 from Newton to Emporia, as in the original plan. It's sometimes a preferred route from southbound I-35 to westbound US 54, anyway. This would be a shunpiker's fantasy and the KTA's nightmare.
I'm not convinced, however, that we can keep building new major freeways without user fees, unless we switch from the gas tax to a VMT charge, which has its own set of logistical nightmares. But that's another topic.
Quote
I am not too keen on "hiding" the I-135 designation because of the potential for confusion with I-235, which has been called (and signed) "81 Bypass" within living memory. (The bottom mile or so of I-135 was once marked as I-235, too.)
Bring back named freeways? Sign it as "Canal Route Freeway" and put that at the top of the signs? Maybe KDOT could get an MUTCD variance for that. This option seems just as unlikely as all the others, though.
Is I-35 or US 50 clogged enough for a Newton to Emporia freeway to be necessary?
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 20, 2020, 05:48:24 PM
Is I-35 or US 50 clogged enough for a Newton to Emporia freeway to be necessary?
Not that I'm aware of. And I've driven both several times.
Quote from: kphoger on May 20, 2020, 01:48:22 PM
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 19, 2020, 04:58:48 PM
Take down the Interstate shields and let it be US 81 (it could be another one of those weird hidden Interstate designations)
This is what I think should happen to I-135 anyway, because all but a half-mile of it is multiplexed with US-81. That remaining southern bit can simply be signed with [TO] banners.
Or upgrade the rest of U.S. 81 and designate it as Interstate 135.
Quote from: In_Correct on May 20, 2020, 07:13:46 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 20, 2020, 01:48:22 PM
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 19, 2020, 04:58:48 PM
Take down the Interstate shields and let it be US 81 (it could be another one of those weird hidden Interstate designations)
This is what I think should happen to I-135 anyway, because all but a half-mile of it is multiplexed with US-81. That remaining southern bit can simply be signed with [TO] banners.
Or upgrade the rest of U.S. 81 and designate it as Interstate 135.
Drove from I-80 at York, NE down 81 to Salina a few years ago. A surprising amount of traffic and an upgrade would be useful, especially as it would have to include a bypass of Concordia. Also wondered why the diamond interchange with US36 on the south side of Belleville favored 36 over 81.
Quote from: rte66man on May 21, 2020, 09:45:47 AM
Quote from: In_Correct on May 20, 2020, 07:13:46 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 20, 2020, 01:48:22 PM
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 19, 2020, 04:58:48 PM
Take down the Interstate shields and let it be US 81 (it could be another one of those weird hidden Interstate designations)
This is what I think should happen to I-135 anyway, because all but a half-mile of it is multiplexed with US-81. That remaining southern bit can simply be signed with [TO] banners.
Or upgrade the rest of U.S. 81 and designate it as Interstate 135.
Drove from I-80 at York, NE down 81 to Salina a few years ago. A surprising amount of traffic and an upgrade would be useful, especially as it would have to include a bypass of Concordia. Also wondered why the diamond interchange with US36 on the south side of Belleville favored 36 over 81.
I've always thought that it should be interstate grade from Salina up to I-80.
This next part is fictional, but I would like the freeway to go further north following US81 up to Norfolk and then the NE-35 corridor up to Sioux City and replacing I-135 with either I-31 or I-33.
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 20, 2020, 05:41:07 PM
US 50 from Newton to Emporia ... It's sometimes a preferred route from southbound I-35 to westbound US 54, anyway.
If I'm only going to KC, then I usually take US-50. If, however, I'm driving the 700 miles to Minnesota, then I stick with the Turnpike.
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 20, 2020, 05:41:07 PM
Bring back named freeways? Sign it as "Canal Route Freeway" and put that at the top of the signs? Maybe KDOT could get an MUTCD variance for that. This option seems just as unlikely as all the others, though.
I-135 should simply be signed as US-81. Locals can still call it the Canal Route, but maybe they'd stop calling it I-35 then.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 20, 2020, 05:48:24 PM
Is I-35 or US 50 clogged enough for a Newton to Emporia freeway to be necessary?
AADT runs between approximately 4000 to 6000 along there. But what you don't realize from those numbers alone is that almost the entire stretch runs 45-60% heavy commercial traffic. It also has a reputation for bad accidents at crossroads.
Quote from: In_Correct on May 20, 2020, 07:13:46 PM
Or upgrade the rest of U.S. 81 and designate it as Interstate 135.
Doesn't solve the problem described, which is Wichitans calling I-135 "I-35".
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 20, 2020, 05:41:07 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on May 20, 2020, 02:49:21 PM
I am not too keen on "hiding" the I-135 designation because of the potential for confusion with I-235, which has been called (and signed) "81 Bypass" within living memory. (The bottom mile or so of I-135 was once marked as I-235, too.)
Bring back named freeways? Sign it as "Canal Route Freeway" and put that at the top of the signs? Maybe KDOT could get an MUTCD variance for that. This option seems just as unlikely as all the others, though.
No need for a variance. Just follow what IDOT does around Chicago: https://goo.gl/maps/Nnj2wkAQQ3FNsJAg9
Quote from: kphoger on May 21, 2020, 12:06:36 PM
AADT runs between approximately 4000 to 6000 along there. But what you don't realize from those numbers alone is that almost the entire stretch runs 45-60% heavy commercial traffic. It also has a reputation for bad accidents at crossroads.
Perhaps 4 lane widening?
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 21, 2020, 12:18:43 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 21, 2020, 12:06:36 PM
AADT runs between approximately 4000 to 6000 along there. But what you don't realize from those numbers alone is that almost the entire stretch runs 45-60% heavy commercial traffic. It also has a reputation for bad accidents at crossroads.
Perhaps 4 lane widening?
There are four-lane spots for passing. I'm not saying the whole thing needs to be four-laned or become an Interstate, but just that traffic is more of a problem on it than first meets the eye.
By way of reference, I-10 between Fort Stockton and I-20 has AADT in roughly the same ballpark.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 21, 2020, 12:18:43 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 21, 2020, 12:06:36 PMAADT runs between approximately 4000 to 6000 along there. But what you don't realize from those numbers alone is that almost the entire stretch runs 45-60% heavy commercial traffic. It also has a reputation for bad accidents at crossroads.
Perhaps 4 lane widening?
We have built flat-country freeway segments with sub-10,000 AADT, but the Newton-Emporia length of US 50 is due to receive only additional passing lanes and an extension of the four-lane segment just west of Emporia.
I live in west Wichita near the I-235/Zoo Boulevard interchange, so I don't use US 50 to shunpike on Wichita-to-Kansas-City trips: that carries a distance penalty of six miles and a time penalty of (usually) ten minutes. The K-254 expressway is also on my way, and that allows me to cut out 21 miles' worth of tolls on the Towanda segment of the Turnpike (total distance from US 54/Exit 50 in Wichita to free I-35/Exit 127 in Emporia is 77 miles).
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 19, 2020, 04:58:48 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 19, 2020, 01:48:36 PM
Except where it isn't. I remember when we had a cable tech working here from Arkansas on a temporary basis, he got directions from someone that involved taking Kellogg to "I-35", which meant the Canal Route. He called dispatch from clear out by the east Lowe's (just past the actual I-35 interchange) because he couldn't figure out how to follow the directions from there.
I hear stories on here about people in Wichita misnaming I-135 as "I-35" rather often, and it's kind of fascinating. How did this happen? It was never I-35 in reality. It was I-35W, but wasn't the Turnpike already I-35 at that point? It was proposed to be I-35 on paper, when US 50 from Newton to Emporia was proposed to be part of I-35, but that never went anywhere outside of some paper documents, right?
It's always surprised me, because I've spent a lot of time in Wichita, but I suppose I would have been exposed to it IRL by now if I had ever actually lived in Wichita.
There's gotta be a way to fix this so people don't end up confused about it, but how? Take down the Interstate shields and let it be US 81 (it could be another one of those weird hidden Interstate designations)? Re-number it (if people already call it "I-35," I doubt changing it to I-33 would help)? Have a public ad campaign?
Does a similar situation happen anywhere else in the U.S.? Do people mistakenly refer to I-476 as "I-76?" Is I-195 or I-295 in New Jersey ever mistaken for I-95? I could honestly understand why people might call I-294/Tri-State Tollway "I-94" by mistake, but does that ever happen?
I feel like the "Mystery of I-35" in Wichita could be a whole documentary.
I-135 through Wichita was Originally I-35W (until some time in the mid-seventies...actually while it still had a downtown gap)). While the routing of I-35 with no qualifier followed the Kansas Turnpike, it was a bypass. For the locals it was just "the Turnpike".
In DFW, the E and W really don't get a bunch of use. (and I admit in Dallas in particular the freeway names (Stemmons & South RLT) get used more than I-35 in any sense.
This said, the letter suffixes don't seem to get used by the locals anywhere. So I-35W would likely be called I-35.
Quote from: J N Winkler on May 21, 2020, 01:09:38 PM
We have built flat-country freeway segments with sub-10,000 AADT, but the Newton-Emporia length of US 50 is due to receive only additional passing lanes and an extension of the four-lane segment just west of Emporia.
Heavy commercial traffic counts on US-50 between Newton and Emporia (two lanes with occasional passing lanes) actually
exceed heavy commercial traffic counts on US-54/400 (divided expressway, partial freeway) between Kingman and Wichita.
Quote from: kphoger on May 21, 2020, 03:19:10 PM
Heavy commercial traffic counts on US-50 between Newton and Emporia (two lanes with occasional passing lanes) actually exceed heavy commercial traffic counts on US-54/400 (divided expressway, partial freeway) between Kingman and Wichita.
Here's one explanation for that--
I'm not sure how standardized trucking companies are across the board in their routing practices, but when I drove for a major trucking company (far from the biggest, but you've probably seen them), we were strongly encouraged, but not required, to use certain routes based on where they wanted us to stop for fuel. We were supposed to meet a certain percentage of assigned fuel stops (although I can no longer remember what the percentage was). Probably most times I had a load that took me from/through Kansas City and through Tucumcari, I would have an assigned fuel stop at the AMBest Newell Truck Plaza at Exit 31 off I-135/US 50 in Newton. My company didn't restrict our use of toll roads (and that Elite Pass sure was nice), but they
did want us to use their assigned fuel stops. So, even though I would have preferred the route that uses the most freeways practical, which would have been I-35/Kansas Turnpike to US 54, stopping at that AMBest in Newton meant I was going to get off I-35 just before the Turnpike and follow US 50 (through Newton) to K-61 to US 54.
This route might be common knowledge to some, but to those who prefer freeways (tolled or un-tolled), it's a bit of a surprise.
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 21, 2020, 04:41:21 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 21, 2020, 03:19:10 PM
Heavy commercial traffic counts on US-50 between Newton and Emporia (two lanes with occasional passing lanes) actually exceed heavy commercial traffic counts on US-54/400 (divided expressway, partial freeway) between Kingman and Wichita.
Here's one explanation for that--
I'm not sure how standardized trucking companies are across the board in their routing practices, but when I drove for a major trucking company (far from the biggest, but you've probably seen them), we were strongly encouraged, but not required, to use certain routes based on where they wanted us to stop for fuel. We were supposed to meet a certain percentage of assigned fuel stops (although I can no longer remember what the percentage was). Probably most times I had a load that took me from/through Kansas City and through Tucumcari, I would have an assigned fuel stop at the AMBest Newell Truck Plaza at Exit 31 off I-135/US 50 in Newton. My company didn't restrict our use of toll roads (and that Elite Pass sure was nice), but they did want us to use their assigned fuel stops. So, even though I would have preferred the route that uses the most freeways practical, which would have been I-35/Kansas Turnpike to US 54, stopping at that AMBest in Newton meant I was going to get off I-35 just before the Turnpike and follow US 50 (through Newton) to K-61 to US 54.
This route might be common knowledge to some, but to those who prefer freeways (tolled or un-tolled), it's a bit of a surprise.
I'm actually driving from Phoenix to Kansas City in a few weeks and was going to do the US 54 / K-61 / US 50 route.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 20, 2020, 03:01:51 PM
Here in Virginia, I've heard at least a few people refer to the VA-168 freeway as I-68.
The VA-164 freeway is largely referred to as I-164 - I can understand this one more - a freeway linking I-264 and I-664, logically should be Interstate 164.
I've never heard I-64 used incorrectly though on a spur route.
I remember most people calling 164 an interstate instead of a VA state route when I lived in Portsmouth from 2003-07, especially once the Pinner's Point Interchange opened and it became the preferred route from Shea Terrace (my neighborhood) to the MMBT, Richmond, and DC. I think I even referred to it as an interstate on some occasions, probably because VA 164 leads to I-664 and then I-64. I agree that nobody ever confused it with I-64. But calling VA 164 an interstate was very common and is probably more used now that the MLK Freeway has been completed to I-264. I don't know if the newest section is up to interstate standards - the old London Blvd interchange didn't - but I believe everything from Pinner's Point west to I-664 would qualify and I-164 isn't used elsewhere in VA. It should be an interstate.
I don't remember anyone refer to VA 168 as I-68. I don't think we even called it 168. Most of us called it going to the Outer Banks because I-464 to VA 168 to NC 168 to US 158 is essentially one highway, though locals usually shunpiked along Battlefield Blvd to avoid paying the toll in Chesapeake. For example, when a couple I knew bought a place in Grandy, their directions were literally "take the road to the Outer Banks and take the second left after the stoplight in Grandy." VA 168 was called by whatever local name it had, whether it be the Chesapeake Expressway, Battlefield Blvd, or Tidewater Drive. But I left in 2007 and given the high population turnover in Tidewater I wouldn't be surprised if I-68 started being used, however incorrectly.
I see from newer Google imagery that the little farmer's stand at the US 158 intersection is no longer there. I used to stop there every time I drove out that way; they had great produce including locally grown bananas on occasion.
Quote from: skluth on May 23, 2020, 01:43:31 PM
I don't remember anyone refer to VA 168 as I-68. I don't think we even called it 168. Most of us called it going to the Outer Banks because I-464 to VA 168 to NC 168 to US 158 is essentially one highway, though locals usually shunpiked along Battlefield Blvd to avoid paying the toll in Chesapeake. For example, when a couple I knew bought a place in Grandy, their directions were literally "take the road to the Outer Banks and take the second left after the stoplight in Grandy." VA 168 was called by whatever local name it had, whether it be the Chesapeake Expressway, Battlefield Blvd, or Tidewater Drive. But I left in 2007 and given the high population turnover in Tidewater I wouldn't be surprised if I-68 started being used, however incorrectly.
I rarely hear the term "I-68", though I was just pointing out I've heard it a few times. Us locals refer to it usually as the Bypass (despite the only official "bypass" being the Great Bridge Bypass segment), 168, the interstate (usually with no number, just based on its freeway design), or sometimes the toll road (when talking about the southern segment).