I-84 and I-380 in Pennsylvania. Why is this necessary? What is the rationale for this? Why must both routes continue signed on one roadway from their intersection to I-81? Why shouldn't I-380 end at I-84 and I-84 continue as the lone signed route? Why can't it be signed "I-84, To I-380?"
Discuss...
Also ... any others that come to mind, and the rationale for them?
I-95 and I-495 in MD. You would think I-95 wouldn't need its beltway cosigned with it, but as we all know I-495 was there first, and I-95 got shunted there cuz of freeway riots.
Quote from: kj3400 on November 29, 2010, 01:19:55 PM
I-95 and I-495 in MD. You would think I-95 wouldn't need its beltway cosigned with it, but as we all know I-495 was there first, and I-95 got shunted there cuz of freeway riots.
Ah, but the history's more complicated than that: when I was in college in Washington in the 80s, 495 consisted of only the parts of the Beltway that weren't numbered as I-95. (Of course, before 95 was rerouted in the 70s, 495 covered the whole Beltway) The 495 designation was added - superimposed on 95, if you will - later, maybe in the early 90s. I suppose they thought it was reasonable to have a number that applied to the entire Beltway. In other words, the portion of the beltway east of the two interchanges with 95 was numbered first 495, then 95, then 95/495.
So I'll correct myself....I-95 was there first and I-495 intruded cuz it was jealous of I-695 up north :-D
Another example -- I-80 and I-95 in New Jersey. I-80 ends at the NY-NJ state line and I-95 continues.
Also -- WV 97 and WV 16. WV 97 joins WV 54 and both routes run to WV 16. Then WV 54 ends and WV 97 continues with WV 16 and 97 ends at the WV Turnpike interchange.
US 98 and US 319 also qualifies as an example.
The entire state of Wyoming.
Business loops are the worst. In Douglas, for instance, where I-25/US-20/US-26/US-87 all run together, the business loop through town is I-25 Business/US-20 Business/US-26 Business/US-87 Business, with 8 routes signed and signed well. 25/20/26/87 business are concurrent for their entire lengths. Why not just call it I-25 Business or just divert the three US routes to the existing business loops? There's no reason at all to have 8 routes on 2 separate roadways.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Fwy%2F25%2F25douglasto25douglas%2F1.jpg&hash=09c232e2ca7f6034a3bc71e3110f390f9cc5d72a) -on the freeway
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Fwy%2F25douglas%2F59to25%2F3.jpg&hash=5cef89186928e8238a2da5a0c91e99150cae69ee) - in Douglas
Similar situations occur in Evanston (80/189), Green River (80/30), Rock Springs (80/30), Rawlins (80/30), Cheyenne (25/87), Wheatland (25/87), Douglas (25/20/26/87), Casper (25/87 and 20/26), Buffalo (25/87), and Sheridan (90/14)
US-14/16/20 towards Yellowstone. No reason for that to have three separate designations- just call it US-20 and call it good.
US-189 north of Daniel. I have no idea why that needs to run with US-191 to randomly end in Jackson. Nobody navigates by US-189 anymore anyway- especially since it doesn't continue to Yellowstone.
US-18 west of Mule Creek. Nobody navigates by that- it's definitely US-20 to US-85 to US-18 if you asked locals what roads you take to get from Edgemont to Orin Junction
Quote from: Michael in Philly on November 29, 2010, 01:44:43 PM
Quote from: kj3400 on November 29, 2010, 01:19:55 PM
I-95 and I-495 in MD. You would think I-95 wouldn't need its beltway cosigned with it, but as we all know I-495 was there first, and I-95 got shunted there cuz of freeway riots.
Ah, but the history's more complicated than that: when I was in college in Washington in the 80s, 495 consisted of only the parts of the Beltway that weren't numbered as I-95. (Of course, before 95 was rerouted in the 70s, 495 covered the whole Beltway) The 495 designation was added - superimposed on 95, if you will - later, maybe in the early 90s. I suppose they thought it was reasonable to have a number that applied to the entire Beltway. In other words, the portion of the beltway east of the two interchanges with 95 was numbered first 495, then 95, then 95/495.
IIRC, it really was a matter of minimizing motorist confusion. Long-distance travelers appreciated the guidance from the 95 route number on how to bypass downtown D.C. and its incomplete freeway network. But suburb-to-suburb travelers were thrown off by having the Beltway change numbers from 95 to 495 or vice versa (such as by having to work the route number change into directions they gave out), and preferred having 495 cover the entire Beltway like it used to. The concurrency lets both types of travelers have their way, and so seems far from "pointless."
Quote from: hbelkins on November 29, 2010, 02:25:30 PM
Another example -- I-80 and I-95 in New Jersey. I-80 ends at the NY-NJ state line and I-95 continues.
Also -- WV 97 and WV 16. WV 97 joins WV 54 and both routes run to WV 16. Then WV 54 ends and WV 97 continues with WV 16 and 97 ends at the WV Turnpike interchange.
US 98 and US 319 also qualifies as an example.
Actually, 80 seems to end where it meets 95.* Although I've heard plenty of New York-area traffic reports talk about "80/95". My general impression - this goes back to my map-obsessed childhood in North Jersey in the 70s and 80s, so I can't provide sources - was always that it ended not at the state line, but about a mile to the west, where the various approaches to the George Washington Bridge - US 1/9/46, I-80/95 (according to this hypothesis), NJ 4, the Palisades Parkway - met; I-95, US 1 and US 9 (I thought) continued across the bridge into New York while I-80, US 46, and NJ 4 ended.
*We went into this on another forum. Discussion starts here: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=65955793&postcount=6178 (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=65955793&postcount=6178)
Photos here: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=66064827&postcount=6188 (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=66064827&postcount=6188)
Quote from: oscar on November 29, 2010, 02:31:33 PM
Quote from: Michael in Philly on November 29, 2010, 01:44:43 PM
Quote from: kj3400 on November 29, 2010, 01:19:55 PM
I-95 and I-495 in MD. You would think I-95 wouldn't need its beltway cosigned with it, but as we all know I-495 was there first, and I-95 got shunted there cuz of freeway riots.
Ah, but the history's more complicated than that: when I was in college in Washington in the 80s, 495 consisted of only the parts of the Beltway that weren't numbered as I-95. (Of course, before 95 was rerouted in the 70s, 495 covered the whole Beltway) The 495 designation was added - superimposed on 95, if you will - later, maybe in the early 90s. I suppose they thought it was reasonable to have a number that applied to the entire Beltway. In other words, the portion of the beltway east of the two interchanges with 95 was numbered first 495, then 95, then 95/495.
IIRC, it really was a matter of minimizing motorist confusion. Long-distance travelers appreciated the guidance from the 95 route number on how to bypass downtown D.C. and its incomplete freeway network. But suburb-to-suburb travelers were thrown off by having the Beltway change numbers from 95 to 495 or vice versa (such as by having to work the route number change into directions they gave out), and preferred having 495 cover the entire Beltway like it used to. The concurrency lets both types of travelers have their way, and so seems far from "pointless."
That, I agree with.
In North Carolina:
US 64/264 west of Zebulon. US 264 ends at I 440 as US 64 joins I 440. This pair used to have another useless concurrency at the east end, where US 64 and 264 were concurrent through Manteo and both ended with US 158 at Whalebone Junction. US 264 was scaled back to Mann's Harbor, eliminating that concurrency.
US 1/US 401 from Norlina to I 85. US 401 ends at I 85 while US 1 continues. US 401 used to end in Norlina, but was extended to I 85, just to add the useless concurrency.
US 15/501 from Durham to Laurinburg and US 1/15/501 through Sanford. Probably the best answer to this is to break US 501 in half, using one number from Durham to US 11 in Virginia and another for Laurinburg to Myrtle Beach.
I 74/US 311 around High Point. Once I 74 is completed to US 220, then it will turn south onto US 220 and US 311 will end. US 311 should be truncated back to where I 74 begins and eventually, all the way back to Winston-Salem.
US 220/I 73/I 74 south of Greensboro. Once the freeway is upgraded to interstate standards, US 220 should be truncated to Greensboro.
Georgia. Period.
There is a concurrency between CA-44 and CA-89 through Lassen Volcanic National Park, but as numbered highways are not locally maintained through national parks, doesn't that make the entire concurrency pointless? (I do believe that CalTRANS actually defines CA-89 as existing in two portions due to the unrecognized concurrency.)
I might be completely wrong about this, though.
QuoteSo I'll correct myself....I-95 was there first and I-495 intruded cuz it was jealous of I-695 up north
Still not correct. I-495 was there first. I-95 intruded thanks to DC.
Quote from: dfilpus on November 29, 2010, 04:20:52 PM
I 74/US 311 around High Point. Once I 74 is completed to US 220, then it will turn south onto US 220 and US 311 will end. US 311 should be truncated back to where I 74 begins and eventually, all the way back to Winston-Salem.
US 220/I 73/I 74 south of Greensboro. Once the freeway is upgraded to interstate standards, US 220 should be truncated to Greensboro.
How about just I-73/74 and any other associated concurrencies.
I-94 and 694 northwest of Minneapolis. I'd understand if the Twin Cities' beltway had a single number, like Baltimore or DC, but with two, it makes the concurrency very redundant.
Regarding I-80/95 in NJ: I-80 definitively ends at the I-95 junction (Exit 69). The only reason anyone thinks it goes east from there is because for many years, the Turnpike connection from US 46 to I-80 was incomplete, so anyone heading west from the GWB on the Express/Local freeway would end up on I-80 and anyone heading east on I-80 wouldn't notice an interchange getting in the way. There is absolutely no concurrency.
Other pointless trifles: CR 536/US 322 in NJ. Why are the western dozen-plus miles of a US Highway co-designated with a county route? 536 isn't even signed!
NJ 165. Entire thing is now NJ 29, but 165 fails to unexist.
Many routes in MAss, such as 111/2A, where 111 could just as easily start from 2A and not come back to 2 in a reverse loop. If I weren't so lazy I'd research a couple more.
Quote from: AlpsROADS on November 29, 2010, 07:17:57 PM
Regarding I-80/95 in NJ: I-80 definitively ends at the I-95 junction (Exit 69). The only reason anyone thinks it goes east from there is because for many years, the Turnpike connection from US 46 to I-80 was incomplete, so anyone heading west from the GWB on the Express/Local freeway would end up on I-80 and anyone heading east on I-80 wouldn't notice an interchange getting in the way. There is absolutely no concurrency.
Other pointless trifles: CR 536/US 322 in NJ. Why are the western dozen-plus miles of a US Highway co-designated with a county route? 536 isn't even signed!
NJ 165. Entire thing is now NJ 29, but 165 fails to unexist.
Many routes in MAss, such as 111/2A, where 111 could just as easily start from 2A and not come back to 2 in a reverse loop. If I weren't so lazy I'd research a couple more.
The other thing about 95 between 80 and the GWB that might lead you to think you're on 80 as well is that the exit numbering fits in with 80's. (And not with 95's, except for - if memory serves - exit 68, southbound only, for US 46, because after that you're on the Turnpike and the numbering system changes).
Quote from: dfilpus on November 29, 2010, 04:20:52 PM
US 220/I 73/I 74 south of Greensboro. Once the freeway is upgraded to interstate standards, US 220 should be truncated to Greensboro.
I disagree. 220 is the only number worth keeping.
I-74 is completely superfluous because for most of its length it is multiplexed with US-74, and for the section that is separate, you get 1) a north-south freeway with an east-west number, and 2) a 74/74 split.
I-73 comes out of nowhere, and to nowhere it returns. There is no rationale behind suddenly using this number. While technically it isn't too badly off of the grid (only slightly to the east of I-77), its presence as a number does not aid navigation.
those two numbers should be truncated to oblivion.
How about County Route 530 and Nj Route 70 in burlington and ocean county, the only reason i can think of is the NJ Pinelands comission denying permission for there to be a second road through that area.
Yeah, because it's normal practice to build a separate road for each route number. That's why US 1/9 has local and express lanes through Newark - one is officially US 1 and the other US 9.
Seriously, do you really think they'd build a second road just to eliminate an overlap?
Quote from: NE2 on November 30, 2010, 09:02:15 AM
Seriously, do you really think they'd build a second road just to eliminate an overlap?
Overlaps aren't the issue. The issue is pointless overlaps -- such as two routes joining and both route numbers continuing to a common end (such as I-380 and I-84; still waiting for an explanation for that one) or two routes joining and continuing to a certain point where one route ends and the other continues.
Wouldn't US 17 in Winchester, Va. also count as a subject in this thread?
US 71/US 59 from Acorn to Texarkana
US 71/59/371 DeQueen to Lockesburg (why not end 371 at Lockesburg?)
Arkansas also had a 71B/62B concurrency from Fayetteville to Rogers, but got rid of it (and 62B, eventually)
Also US 62/412
Quote from: US71 on November 30, 2010, 09:33:22 AM
US 71/US 59 from Acorn to Texarkana
Also US 62/412
Those don't count because both routes continue on after separating.
Quote from: hbelkins on November 30, 2010, 09:28:51 AM
Quote from: NE2 on November 30, 2010, 09:02:15 AM
Seriously, do you really think they'd build a second road just to eliminate an overlap?
Overlaps aren't the issue. The issue is pointless overlaps -- such as two routes joining and both route numbers continuing to a common end (such as I-380 and I-84; still waiting for an explanation for that one) or two routes joining and continuing to a certain point where one route ends and the other continues.
I know; see SteveG's post. NJ 70 and CR 530 join and later split.
Quote from: NE2 on November 30, 2010, 09:02:15 AM
Yeah, because it's normal practice to build a separate road for each route number. That's why US 1/9 has local and express lanes through Newark - one is officially US 1 and the other US 9.
Seriously, do you really think they'd build a second road just to eliminate an overlap?
Getting NJ to build any highway at all requires NIMBYs and environmentalists to can it, which is a very uncommon occurrence.
Also, for NJ, I am surprised the 40/322 concurrency hasn't come up. 322 should've been truncated back to the 40 junction, not concurrent entirely to Atlantic City.
I've never been to Apalachicola, FL, but I would say the US 98/319 concurrency is pointless.
Staying in New Jersey, how about U.S. 1-9 and U.S. 46? The latter ends at the GW Bridge, but should be truncated to about Broad Street.
Quote from: SteveG1988 on November 30, 2010, 08:42:18 AM
How about County Route 530 and Nj Route 70 in burlington and ocean county, the only reason i can think of is the NJ Pinelands comission denying permission for there to be a second road through that area.
This concurrency predates the Pinelands Commission by decades. Its not a bad concurrency at all. Although I haven't been there in nearly 20 years, I recall it is not sighed very well.. Maybe one ancient White CR sign.
Quote from: OracleUsr on November 30, 2010, 12:38:22 PM
I've never been to Apalachicola, FL, but I would say the US 98/319 concurrency is pointless.
Yes, especially given the exact location where US 319 ends: http://www.usends.com/10-19/319/319.html
Except for a detour along a couple minor roads through Sopchoppy, it overlaps US 98 from Tully to Apalachicola and could easily be truncated to Tully.
Also in Florida: US 23 south of Alma, Georgia. It joins US 1 there and follows it into Jacksonville, where it briefly separates onto the former alignment of US 1 to end at US 1 downtown. A US 1 Business would make a lot more sense.
On the other hand, I don't really see I-84/I-380 as problematic. They're both about equally important (remember that I-380 was I-81E) and if one were cut back it would simply be signed TO in the south/east direction. You'd probably end up with a slight savings from not having to replace both signs in the north/west direction, but not much.
I-96/275 in Michigan is currently pointless given that I-275 was never extended north of the interchange in Farmington Hills/Novi.
US-52/IL-64 in Carroll County, IL. Only reason is for a multistate SR-64.
There seemed to be a lot more in the past such as US-34/66 into Chicago and US-31/33 in SW Michigan.
US 56 & US 412 + US 64
Quote from: ausinterkid on November 30, 2010, 03:46:25 PM
US 56 & US 412 + US 64
US-412, like US-400, is pointless here.
Quote from: hbelkins on November 30, 2010, 09:28:51 AM
Wouldn't US 17 in Winchester, Va. also count as a subject in this thread?
Yes it would, since it's multiplexed with US 522/50 until it's northern terminus.
I had a question, who maintains a CR and a SR overlap? Does the county pay for part of it, and the state pay the rest? Also the US-130 and I-295 overlap in NJ looks somewhat pointless as US-130 ends near the delaware memorial bridge.
Quote from: SteveG1988 on November 30, 2010, 05:04:52 PM
I had a question, who maintains a CR and a SR overlap? Does the county pay for part of it, and the state pay the rest? Also the US-130 and I-295 overlap in NJ looks somewhat pointless as US-130 ends near the delaware memorial bridge.
I believe the state maintins it. The CR is more or less for continuation of a route. US-130 could easily be changed to 301... Make it part of an existing multi-state route and have it northern terminus at US-1
Quote from: hbelkins on November 29, 2010, 01:16:40 PM
I-84 and I-380 in Pennsylvania. Why is this necessary? What is the rationale for this? Why must both routes continue signed on one roadway from their intersection to I-81? Why shouldn't I-380 end at I-84 and I-84 continue as the lone signed route? Why can't it be signed "I-84, To I-380?"
Well, IIRC, I-380 (as I-81E) was completed first. For many years, there was a gap in I-84 in the Poconos from it's present junction with 380 to some point in the east.
I'm not 100% sure, but I think that it was signed I-380, TO I-84 back in those days at the junction with I-81.
Plus, IMHO, I don't think it's pointless for the same reason given for 95/495. I-84 is a through route to New York state and New England. I-380 is a connector route between I-80 and I-81 serving the Pocono resorts. So, with the concurrency, you can simply say, take I-380 to exit 00 and get off there to go to ABC ski area. While you'd say, take I-84 East if you're going to Boston.
Quote from: SteveG1988 on November 30, 2010, 05:04:52 PM
I had a question, who maintains a CR and a SR overlap? Does the county pay for part of it, and the state pay the rest?
Depends who maintains the road. Route designations do not always imply maintenance responsibility. For example NJ 347 is county-maintained, and cities such as Trenton maintain their portions of state highways. Overlaps exist solely for the convenience of the public; had the route designations been solely for record-keeping purposes, the part of CR 530 in Ocean County would still be CR 33, CR 55, and CR 19: http://mapmaker.rutgers.edu/Ocean/OceanCo_1971.gif (note: map is actually from 1951). An overlap never indicates some sort of shared maintenance responsibility.
How about I-99 and US 220? Why be both for the entire route?
Quote from: Icodec on November 30, 2010, 09:51:29 PM
How about I-99 and US 220? Why be both for the entire route?
assholes. you voted for 'em ... you got 'em!
Oh 3(-C) with US 22 & US 62 from Cincinnati to Columbus.
I would like to nominate the I-90/SR-2 concurrency east of Elyria &/or Downtown Cleveland.
- Truncate SR-2 at Dead Mans Curve/Innerbelt. You can also argue the point that SR-2 could also be truncated all the way back to it's first junction with I-90 at the Ohio Turnpike in Elyria, since nearly all of SR-2 between Elyria and Cleveland multiplexes with at least one other I-, US- or State Route (The only exception would be the 3-4 miles of the West Shoreway between the Innerbelt and the west end of the Main Avenue Bridge over the Cuyahoga River (W. 25th/W. 28th))
- Renumber the predominantly-Lake County stretch of SR-2 (aka the Lakeland Freeway north & east of I-90) as an I-590 or I-790 to SR-2's current eastern terminus at US-20 in Painesville. It's a full freeway, and the only "interstate-standard" upgrade I can find that might be needed is the Lloyd Road Exit.
Here's one. I-84 and US 30, I-86 and US 30. You could easily truncate I-84 all the way back to the current I-84/86 junction, eliminate I-86, sign the entire freeway as US 30, and make the current non-freeway segments of US 30 into Bus. US 30's :bigass:
Quote from: ausinterkid on November 30, 2010, 03:46:25 PM
US 56 & US 412 + US 64
US 412 could easily have its western endpoint at Woodward, OK-it's multiplexed with at least 1 other route west of there to its terminus at I-25. I would also add that US 270 W. of Oklahoma City is mostly superfluous as well-the only portion W. of Oklahoma City that is not multiplexed with another route is the short portion between I-40 and Geary. It seems to me that could easily be downgraded to a state route, and have US 270's western endpoint moved to its junction with I-40 at Shawnee.
Quote from: Icodec on November 30, 2010, 09:51:29 PM
How about I-99 and US 220? Why be both for the entire route?
Well, US 220 does continue in both directions beyond the end of the Interstate designation.
Another nomination -- US 43, US 412 and TN 99. US 43 and US 412 join west of Columbia and run together to US 31, where US 43 ends and US 412 continues east to I-65. Then US 412 ends and its hidden Tennessee state route (TN 99) continues.
Quote from: hbelkins on December 01, 2010, 03:07:34 PM
Another nomination -- US 43, US 412 and TN 99. US 43 and US 412 join west of Columbia and run together to US 31, where US 43 ends and US 412 continues east to I-65. Then US 412 ends and its hidden Tennessee state route (TN 99) continues.
It's not that bad, IMHO. The 43/412 concurrency is only 6.7 miles (per Google) and brings US 43 to end at US 31. For ease of directions, that makes a lot of sense to me. (See I-84 and I-380 in PA) And, the 43/412 junction west of town is a quarter diamond pseudo interchange.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=columbia,+tn&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=53.080379,114.169922&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Columbia,+Maury,+Tennessee&ll=35.615285,-87.118535&spn=0.013188,0.012596&t=h&z=16
You'd have mainline 412 jumping off there as it does today but the through, divided-highway route would change from 43 to 412. And, in this region, 43 is a more important route.
The simple solution would be to get rid of the abomination that is US 412.
Of course, I would consider the hidden TN state designations that accompany US highways in TN to be pointless concurrences.
And when I travel through the US 31, 43, 412 intersection (5 - 8 times a month), I look at turning right from 31 South to be US 43.
Quote from: huskeroadgeek on December 01, 2010, 12:45:17 PM
Quote from: ausinterkid on November 30, 2010, 03:46:25 PM
US 56 & US 412 + US 64
US 412 could easily have its western endpoint at Woodward, OK-it's multiplexed with at least 1 other route west of there to its terminus at I-25. I would also add that US 270 W. of Oklahoma City is mostly superfluous as well-the only portion W. of Oklahoma City that is not multiplexed with another route is the short portion between I-40 and Geary. It seems to me that could easily be downgraded to a state route, and have US 270's western endpoint moved to its junction with I-40 at Shawnee.
Interesting story...not too long after EB I-40 picks up US 270, there's a BGS reading "{270} EAST/Follow I-40 EAST/Next 66 Miles".
Quote from: NE2 on November 30, 2010, 07:39:47 PM
Quote from: SteveG1988 on November 30, 2010, 05:04:52 PM
I had a question, who maintains a CR and a SR overlap? Does the county pay for part of it, and the state pay the rest?
Depends who maintains the road. Route designations do not always imply maintenance responsibility. For example NJ 347 is county-maintained, and cities such as Trenton maintain their portions of state highways. Overlaps exist solely for the convenience of the public; had the route designations been solely for record-keeping purposes, the part of CR 530 in Ocean County would still be CR 33, CR 55, and CR 19: http://mapmaker.rutgers.edu/Ocean/OceanCo_1971.gif (note: map is actually from 1951). An overlap never indicates some sort of shared maintenance responsibility.
I grew up in Ocean County. I remember having that map as a kid. Some of the CR numbers are still the same. the State Secondary 500 number are not on there... Brings back memories
Quote from: NE2 on November 30, 2010, 07:39:47 PM
Quote from: SteveG1988 on November 30, 2010, 05:04:52 PM
I had a question, who maintains a CR and a SR overlap? Does the county pay for part of it, and the state pay the rest?
Depends who maintains the road. Route designations do not always imply maintenance responsibility. For example NJ 347 is county-maintained, and cities such as Trenton maintain their portions of state highways. Overlaps exist solely for the convenience of the public; had the route designations been solely for record-keeping purposes, the part of CR 530 in Ocean County would still be CR 33, CR 55, and CR 19: http://mapmaker.rutgers.edu/Ocean/OceanCo_1971.gif (note: map is actually from 1951). An overlap never indicates some sort of shared maintenance responsibility.
Keeping in NJ. I have read that parts of US 202 are maintained by Morris County
How about US 69/96/287 through Beaumont?? You could just as easily make the segment from I-10 to Port Arthur an I-x10/US 69 South and simply sign the northern segment N of the downtown split as US 69 North.
Anthony
Quote from: jwolfer on December 01, 2010, 06:09:32 PM
Keeping in NJ. I have read that parts of US 202 are maintained by Morris County
And Passaic. State maintenance ends at NJ 53, except for the NJ 23 overlap.
If you read the state logs, you find out very interestingly that about a mile of CR 524 is state-maintained in the I-195 area. This was constructed as part of the unbuilt extension of NJ 37. (NJ 37 and 38 were proposed as expressways/freeways, and I-195 would not have been built.) There's a state-built bridge stamped ROUTE 37 on CR 539 east of Fort Dix, too, but that's now county-maintained. In NJ, as far as I know all state-maintained roads are state-numbered except railroad overpasses and airport property roads. Someone will come prove me wrong...
Quote from: Icodec on November 30, 2010, 09:51:29 PM
How about I-99 and US 220? Why be both for the entire route?
I was living in the Altoona area when the I-99 designation was first announced. At that time, the Altoona paper reported that once the highway was completed to I-80, the 220 designation would be removed, according to district 9 of PennDOT. The article didn't say whether it would go back onto the old road (though that could easily be done, as most of it is now signed as either BUS or ALT 220) or be truncated at Bedford with the portion north of I-80 renumbered. Of course, that plan has either been changed or forgotten.
With I-99 scheduled to run all the way north to Corning (maybe even Rochester if it usurps I-390) and NY 15 slated to be truncated to the NY 21 intersection where it departs the interstate, I'd expect US 15 north of Williamsport to be an endangered species. Otherwise it will be a pointless concurrency with I-99 once the construction of the freeway is complete.
I think the whole 80-95 has been beaten to death at this point, but I wanted to drive the final stake in the heart. This is taken from NYCRoads (http://www.nycroads.com/roads/I-80_NJ/ (http://www.nycroads.com/roads/I-80_NJ/)) although the very same Derrick (quoted here) confirmed it for me himself one night when we were hanging out in Richmond (he's actually a dear friend of mine):
QuoteAlthough this section is locally called "80-95," it is not part of I-80, but rather is signed exclusively as part of I-95. Posting in misc.transport.road, Derrick Stuart received the following letter from the NJDOT:
As you know, I-80 ends at I-95. The guidelines for numbering the Interstate routes have been established by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). Officials specifically state that "dual interstate numbering be held to a minimum consistent with proper travel guidance." I-95, a major national north-south Interstate, is the logical terminus of I-80, a major national east-west Interstate highway. Therefore, we have no plans to change the numbering or signing of this section.
Anyway, the most pointless concurrency ever is I-97/MD 3. Don't ask me why, but MD 3 extends onto I-97 for a short distance, only for its disconnected business route to show up as an exit a few miles later. I have no idea why MD 3 doesn't just end at the 97 interchange - there is no reason at all for the concurrency. Maybe it would make sense to have it to connect Business Route 3 with Mainline MD 3, but no, it comes onto 97 and ends completely uselessly.
I-39 and US 51.
In fact, WI has a lot of pointless concurrencies.
As weird as I-97 / MD 3 and the disconnect with its business route, a more pointless concurrency is MD 2-4. Especially since MD 2 has been truncated from its traditional southern terminus at Solomons Island. Even before this, it was 1 mile or so of MD 2 connected by a 27 mile concurrency with 4.
MD 2 officially ends now at the final ramps prior to the MD 4 Thomas Johnson Bridge, ending at the frontage road (signed MD 765). Since Calvert County is now more oriented toward Washington than Baltimore, and MD 4 has the higher capacity (4-lane divided vs. 2-lane), MD 2 should be rolled back to the northern junction with MD 4. If there is a need to sign the former MD 2 in Solomon's Island, then use 765, as it connects directly with the eastern MD 4 frontage.
How about US 412/56 from the panhandle of Oklahoma to Springer NM? US 56 makes sense as the Santa Fe Trail highway, but US 412 serves no purpose, there is no parent highway of US 12 nearby. It meanders all over the south and southwest.