Many of us know that I-271/I-480 in Cleveland is the only place where two three-digit Interstates run concurrent. What about 3-digit Interstate and 3-digit US highway? We've generated two so far:
I-277/US 224 Akron
I-295/US 130 southern NJ
How many others are there?
Quote from: AlpsROADS on August 03, 2010, 10:52:47 PM
Many of us know that I-271/I-480 in Cleveland is the only place where two three-digit Interstates run concurrent. What about 3-digit Interstate and 3-digit US highway? We've generated two so far:
I-277/US 224 Akron
I-295/US 130 southern NJ
How many others are there?
I-296/US 131 Grand Rapids
I-595/US 301 btw Bowie and Annapolis
I-465/US 421 Indianapolis
That's what I got off the top of my head.
Oooh, just confirmed it in the Rand McNally that there's I-530/US 167 south of Little Rock, but you didn't say we couldn't cheat. :p
Quote from: AlpsROADS on August 03, 2010, 10:52:47 PM
Many of us know that I-271/I-480 in Cleveland is the only place where two three-digit Interstates run concurrent. What about 3-digit Interstate and 3-digit US highway? We've generated two so far:
I-277/US 224 Akron
I-295/US 130 southern NJ
How many others are there?
I-244/US 412 Tulsa
Quote from: AlpsROADS on August 03, 2010, 10:52:47 PM
Many of us know that I-271/I-480 in Cleveland is the only place where two three-digit Interstates run concurrent.
We have Future I-840 and I-785 in NC.
And for awhile here in Pittsburgh, I-279 and I-376 were co-signed together during the transition on the Parkway West from I-279 to I-376.
Quote from: rawmustard on August 03, 2010, 10:59:51 PM
Quote from: AlpsROADS on August 03, 2010, 10:52:47 PM
Many of us know that I-271/I-480 in Cleveland is the only place where two three-digit Interstates run concurrent. What about 3-digit Interstate and 3-digit US highway? We've generated two so far:
I-277/US 224 Akron
I-295/US 130 southern NJ
How many others are there?
I-296/US 131 Grand Rapids
I-595/US 301 btw Bowie and Annapolis
I-465/US 421 Indianapolis
That's what I got off the top of my head.
All of those are unsigned...
Here's one that is signed.
I-180 and US-220 here in PA.
I-380 and U.S. 218 in the Cedar Rapids area.
I-182/US-395 in the Tri Cities, Washington, which is signed
I-393/US 202/US 4 in Concord, NH.
and a brand new one...
I-376 and US 422 around New Castle, PA
US 422 also multiplexes with I-271 east of Cleveland, OH
IIRC, US 127 and I-496 run together for a brief segment in eastern Lansing.
Another future one: I-580/US 395 between Reno and Carson City
3dus is sort of rare in the West. (Obviosly, US-101 doesn't count, and it's never concurrent with a 3di.)
197, 199, (299), (399), 395
All I can think of right now is Future I-580 and US-395 between Carson City and Reno and I-182/US-395, which was already posted.
Edit: Dammit. And someone just posted the I-580/US-395 deal too. :P
Here's an historical one.
I-485 and US-521 in Charlotte, NC. That one existed till they shortened US-521 to start/end at I-485 just above the SC/NC State Border.
Quote from: AlpsROADS on August 03, 2010, 11:18:18 PM
Quote from: rawmustard on August 03, 2010, 10:59:51 PM
I-296/US 131 Grand Rapids
I-595/US 301 btw Bowie and Annapolis
I-465/US 421 Indianapolis
That's what I got off the top of my head.
All of those are unsigned...
And yet still concurrent! :sombrero:
Quote from: xonhulu on August 04, 2010, 12:20:59 AM
Another future one: I-580/US 395 between Reno and Carson City
All the documentation I've read points to I-580 existing right now. Just because there are no I-580 shields does not mean it isn't a current route.
Quote from: TheStranger on August 04, 2010, 12:17:57 AM
IIRC, US 127 and I-496 run together for a brief segment in eastern Lansing.
Dang, I knew I had brainfarted on one in my own state. :p
Forgot to mention I-410 and US 281 on the south side of San Antonio, between Roosevelt Avenue and I-37.
Here's another one that I just remembered.
I-585 and US-176 in Spartanburg, SC.
Another one I remembered,
I-295 and US 130 in New Jersey.
Quote from: mightyace on August 04, 2010, 02:28:16 AM
Another one I remembered,
I-295 and US 130 in New Jersey.
That one was mentioned in the first post. :P
Not sure if it counts or not but US 460 ALT is multiplexed with I-264 through the downtown tunnel and across the Berkeley Bridge between Portsmouth and Norfolk, VA, but is not signed on the interstate
EDIT: Oh and a defunct one: I-795 and US 117 in North Carolina. IIRC 117 was recently moved back to it's original alignment.
The entirety of North Carolina's new I-795 is corouted with 3dus routes! (US 117 for a majority of it, US 264 at the north end)
EDIT: As noted by deathtopumpkins' post above, 117 is now on old US 117A, but that leaves US 264 with I-795 at the north terminus! Not sure if 117 runs with the 795/264 concurrency now.
Interesting timing. You beat me by about a minute.
Another Texas example came to mind just now: I-820 and US 287 between I-20 and I-820 Exit 33A, in southeast Fort Worth.
Isn't all of I-155 in Tennessee corouted with US 412?
I-581 and US 220 are concurrent for I-581's entirety.
US 129 also has a brief concurrency with I-985 in Georgia...
I-530/US 167
Someone beat me to I-581 and US 220.
How about former I-181 and US 19W in Tennessee? No one said one of the digits in the 3dus couldn't be a letter. ;-)
US202/I-395 in Bangor, ME
There are none in Connecticut.
Once I-285 is signed through Winston-Salem, it will run concurrent with a segment of US 311.
Quote from: hbelkins on August 04, 2010, 10:30:59 AM
Someone beat me to I-581 and US 220.
How about former I-181 and US 19W in Tennessee? No one said one of the digits in the 3dus couldn't be a letter. ;-)
In THAT case, that makes US 287 and US 377 with I-35W in Fort Worth count, right? :D Also included in that distinction: US 25W and I-640 in Knoxville...
Quote from: TheStranger on August 04, 2010, 02:56:42 AM
The entirety of North Carolina's new I-795 is corouted with 3dus routes! (US 117 for a majority of it, US 264 at the north end)
EDIT: As noted by deathtopumpkins' post above, 117 is now on old US 117A, but that leaves US 264 with I-795 at the north terminus! Not sure if 117 runs with the 795/264 concurrency now.
US 117 now ends at US 301, so no concurrency with either US 264 or I 795.
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on August 04, 2010, 02:55:48 AM
Not sure if it counts or not but US 460 ALT is multiplexed with I-264 through the downtown tunnel and across the Berkeley Bridge between Portsmouth and Norfolk, VA, but is not signed on the interstate
EDIT: Oh and a defunct one: I-795 and US 117 in North Carolina. IIRC 117 was recently moved back to it's original alignment.
Last I'd heard, the FHWA didn't want to let them move it back because it would be "downgrading" the road from its improved alignment. Of course, that defeats the whole purpose of the Interstate system. Hopefully they saw the error of their ways.
Would I-795 be only the third interstate created simply to avoid freeway-specific traffic restrictions? (The other two being I-88 and I-335)
Quote from: TheStranger on August 04, 2010, 07:03:20 PM
Would I-795 be only the third interstate created simply to avoid freeway-specific traffic restrictions? (The other two being I-88 and I-335)
what does this mean?
Quote from: TheStranger on August 04, 2010, 07:03:20 PM
Would I-795 be only the third interstate created simply to avoid freeway-specific traffic restrictions? (The other two being I-88 and I-335)
Please elaborate. Do you mean speed limit restrictions?
(To elaborate myself: I-678 removed restrictions on the Hutchinson River Parkway north of the Whitestone Bridge to the Bruckner Interchange in NY. I-278 removed restrictions on the former Gowanus Parkway, now Expressway.)
Quote from: AlpsROADS on August 04, 2010, 07:12:53 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on August 04, 2010, 07:03:20 PM
Would I-795 be only the third interstate created simply to avoid freeway-specific traffic restrictions? (The other two being I-88 and I-335)
Please elaborate. Do you mean speed limit restrictions?
Trucks of a specific length couldn't use I-795 when it was only US-117. When it became an Interstate, the restrictions were removed.
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on August 04, 2010, 07:14:15 PM
Quote from: AlpsROADS on August 04, 2010, 07:12:53 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on August 04, 2010, 07:03:20 PM
Would I-795 be only the third interstate created simply to avoid freeway-specific traffic restrictions? (The other two being I-88 and I-335)
Please elaborate. Do you mean speed limit restrictions?
Trucks of a specific length couldn't use I-795 when it was only US-117. When it became an Interstate, the restrictions were removed.
I know in NJ, the 102", double-trailer, and Hazmat networks are assigned based on roadway, not designation. That seems the more intelligent way to do things.
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on August 04, 2010, 07:14:15 PM
Trucks of a specific length couldn't use I-795 when it was only US-117. When it became an Interstate, the restrictions were removed.
wait, what? because the number was changed, the road magically got better??
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 04, 2010, 07:24:24 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on August 04, 2010, 07:14:15 PM
Trucks of a specific length couldn't use I-795 when it was only US-117. When it became an Interstate, the restrictions were removed.
wait, what? because the number was changed, the road magically got better??
It was some weird law in NC that effects highways that aren't on the NHS or something like that.
No longer existing, but from 1988 until ca. 1995, there was an I-494/US 169 duplex in Eden Prairie, MN.
Further south, there's a stretch of I-435/US 169 (with US 50 thrown in too) outside Kansas City.
QuoteLast I'd heard, the FHWA didn't want to let them move it back because it would be "downgrading" the road from its improved alignment. Of course, that defeats the whole purpose of the Interstate system. Hopefully they saw the error of their ways.
Not so much that, but it defeats the purpose of the U.S. highway system, to which AASHTO policy is to place "on the best roads". Following AASHTO policy on US routes, US 117 should remain on the freeway...and not go back to its old alignment.
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on August 04, 2010, 07:57:07 PM
It was some weird law in NC that effects highways that aren't on the NHS or something like that.
so by virtue of it being an interstate, it was automatically added to the NHS, but as a US route, it was not -
despite being the exact same road?the NHS, everybody! your tax dollars at work ...
I found the relevant state statute: Section 20-115.1 (http://www.ncleg.net/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/BySection/Chapter_20/GS_20-115.1.html)
In a nutshell, state law only allows tandem-trailers and semis longer than 53ft along the Interstate system and "those sections of the federal‑aid primary system designated by the United States Secretary of Transportation." Since FAP/FAS (Federal-Aid Primary/Federal-Aid Secondary) was effectively eliminated by ISTEA almost 20 years ago, it stands to reason that NHS routes (which are designated by FHWA) fit the bill of "federal-aid primary system designated by the US Secretary of Transportation". Especially since NHS is, above all else, a funding category.
Quote from: froggie on August 04, 2010, 09:04:25 PM
In a nutshell, state law only allows tandem-trailers and semis longer than 53ft along the Interstate system and "those sections of the federal‑aid primary system designated by the United States Secretary of Transportation." Since FAP/FAS (Federal-Aid Primary/Federal-Aid Secondary) was effectively eliminated by ISTEA almost 20 years ago, it stands to reason that NHS routes (which are designated by FHWA) fit the bill of "federal-aid primary system designated by the US Secretary of Transportation". Especially since NHS is, above all else, a funding category.
why use funding as a criterion for road quality, though? whether or not federal dollars were used is quite the imperfect estimate of whether a road can handle a truck longer than 53 feet.
Tell that to the North Carolina General Assembly...
Quote from: froggie on August 04, 2010, 08:42:39 PM.
Further south, there's a stretch of I-435/US 169 (with US 50 thrown in too) outside Kansas City.
I'd thought about this one too, but then I remembered that it doesn't exist anymore because of a recent rerouting of US 169. Instead of turning to go south down Metcalf Av. through Overland Park and then following I-435 west to I-35, US 169 continues down Shawnee Mission Pkwy. with US 56 and US 69 to I-35 and then multiplexes with I-35 past I-435.
Nevada either has, or will have, a US-395/I-580 concurrency between Carson City and Reno, but the catch is the later is technically unsigned.
Quote from: Quillz on August 31, 2010, 05:10:25 PM
Nevada either has, or will have, a US-395/I-580 concurrency between Carson City and Reno, but the catch is the later is technically unsigned.
From what I recall reading here, 580 is slated to eventually be signed, once the route from Carson City to Reno is all-freeway. It's been on the books though for the last 30-35 years!
I-465 and US 421 in Indianapolis...