Just wanted to see how any of you would renumber the current interstate grid to fix some of the current issues it faces (i.e. I-99 in PA). How would you number the interstates throughout the country? I would like to hear your inputs on this.
Interstate 99 goes to Delaware
Planned Interstate 49 south of Interstate 10 becomes Interstate 6
Interstate 74 in North Carolina becomes Interstate 38 or 42
Just to name a few suggestions ;D
Just move all the low digits to the west and high digits to the east. I mean how hard is it to just put the numbers in order (don't answer that--logistically I know it is rather difficult).
And remove a number designation from the I-64/I-664 mess, signing it simply as the Hampton Roads Beltway. ;)
I say we just get rid of the way we number than, other than East/West = Even , North/South = Odd
All it does is force interstates to have an out of place number when there is no other numbers available, and everyone complains in some way
I'd also let freeways that overtake the path of a Federal route to carry the number of the federal route, or any numbered route thats no longer in use for that matter. So I-95 would overtake US-1 and therefore be I-1, except US1 is still in use, but you get what i'm trying to say?
Change I-99 to I-81, and present 81 to 83 from Harrisburg to Canada. Between the 99 corridor and Harrisburg, perhaps change this to a spur off of either one?
Make that proposed I-3 another number. 18 comes to mind.
Quote from: Snappyjack on January 19, 2009, 12:26:03 AM
Change I-99 to I-81, and present 81 to 83 from Harrisburg to Canada. Between the 99 corridor and Harrisburg, perhaps change this to a spur off of either one?
Make that proposed I-3 another number. 18 comes to mind.
So would you have I-81 piggyback along I-70 westward into PA to meet up with your new I-81 (former I-99)? I like the idea of extending I-83 northward from its current terminus though.
I-18 wouldn't properly fit into the grid, but if you reverse the numbers and have an additional extension of I-81 on a portion of that route, that could work. Just extend I-81 south along I-40 to Knoxville to meet up with the proposed route, then route it south to meet I-85 in South Carolina. I-81 could then follow current I-85 while rerouting I-85 onto the proposed route. Then the new I-85 would head southeastward to meet I-95 in Savannah. All former I-x85's in the Atlanta area as well as I-185 would have to be renumbered to I-x81's.
Quote from: flaroadgeek on January 19, 2009, 12:52:39 AM
Quote from: Snappyjack on January 19, 2009, 12:26:03 AM
Change I-99 to I-81, and present 81 to 83 from Harrisburg to Canada. Between the 99 corridor and Harrisburg, perhaps change this to a spur off of either one?
Make that proposed I-3 another number. 18 comes to mind.
So would you have I-81 piggyback along I-70 westward into PA to meet up with your new I-81 (former I-99)? I like the idea of extending I-83 northward from its current terminus though.
I-18 wouldn't properly fit into the grid, but if you reverse the numbers and have an additional extension of I-81 on a portion of that route, that could work. Just extend I-81 south along I-40 to Knoxville to meet up with the proposed route, then route it south to meet I-85 in South Carolina. I-81 could then follow current I-85 while rerouting I-85 onto the proposed route. Then the new I-85 would head southeastward to meet I-95 in Savannah. All former I-x85's in the Atlanta area as well as I-185 would have to be renumbered to I-x81's.
Either one of those would work in my opinion.
And that I-3 scenario could work as well. Although you'd still have the numbering issue from Atlanta to Montgomery on 85's route.
Renumber I-84 to I-82 and renumber I-82 to I-7
Quote from: ComputerGuy on January 19, 2009, 11:41:23 AM
Renumber I-84 to I-82 and renumber I-82 to I-7
Interstate 82 originally was correct, sitting between Interstate 80N and 90. I like the idea, though if U.S. 395 is ever upgraded going northeast to Spokane, and the I-7 concept took place southward to Bend, you'd have to come up with a new number for I-82 northwest to Yakima and I-90. :-o
How about renumbering US 101 to I-3 and SR-99 to I-7/I-9?
Quote from: aaroads on January 19, 2009, 03:05:37 PM
Quote from: ComputerGuy on January 19, 2009, 11:41:23 AM
Renumber I-84 to I-82 and renumber I-82 to I-7
Interstate 82 originally was correct, sitting between Interstate 80N and 90. I like the idea, though if U.S. 395 is ever upgraded going northeast to Spokane, and the I-7 concept took place southward to Bend, you'd have to come up with a new number for I-82 northwest to Yakima and I-90. :-o
Here's something I dug up about "I-7":
http://www.angelfire.com/or3/oroads/like2see/i7/index.html
DE 1 could become the new I-99.
Quote from: aaroads on January 18, 2009, 11:40:45 PMPlanned Interstate 49 south of Interstate 10 becomes Interstate 6
Seconded. It just wouldn't work as an odd number.
Also, I'm probably one of the few who would want suffixed routes back, in which case, redesignate I-12 as I-10N and current I-10 between Baton Rouge and Slidell as I-10S.
Suffixes are better than interstates going across each other (like I-89/I-91) or having roads way out of place (I-99, US 412, etc)
Quote from: Darkangel on January 19, 2009, 11:37:57 PM
Also, I'm probably one of the few who would want suffixed routes back, in which case, redesignate I-12 as I-10N and current I-10 between Baton Rouge and Slidell as I-10S.
I also think the suffixed routes should come back, barring a complete renumbering of the interstate system. There are a few places they could be used to help free up scare 3di's:
* I-70N over MO 370 and I-270
* I-70S over I-470, I-435, and KS 10 should the latter ever get a freeway bypass around Lawrence
* I-80N/I-80S around Quad Cities
* I-80N replacing I-680 around Omaha
Then there a few cases where splitting a main route might work better:
* I-95E/W in Maine
* I-93E/W in New Hampshire and Massachusetts, with I-93W running over I-293 and US 3
* I-75W providing a Detroit bypass over US 23 and I-475
* I-5E/W in California, with I-5E running over CA 99
* I-70N over I-76, I-376 and the proposed interstate route along US 22 into Ohio
Renumber I-99 to I-480 if it doesn't become a 2di. Renumber PA 283 to I-383.
Renumber VA 288 to I-695. Change VA 895 (yes, I know it's not an interstate) to an extended VA 150.
VA 164 should be I-164, and I-264 from I-64 to Virginia Beach should be I-64. (In other words, I agree with the idea to do that, then make present I-64 from I-264 to its terminus an extended I-664).
US 34 in Illinois between I-74 and Monmouth should become I-174.
Quote from: rawr apples on January 18, 2009, 11:48:27 PM
So I-95 would overtake US-1 and therefore be I-1, except US1 is still in use, but you get what i'm trying to say?
Like what Ontario does with the 400 series.
410 (10), 420 (20), Future 424 (24), 427 (27), 407 (7), 416 (16) and 417 (17) are all ones that were named like that.
I think that they should just re-number all of them, the same way as before. I-5 could become I-1.
-un1
I think I-1 should be the brief freeway section of CA-1 in Orange and LA counties. Then, there could be a branch route of it that heads up all the way to the Bay Area. Yep, none other than I-101. More practically, that corridor could become I-3.
I-7 should be US-97, especially in Oregon. That corridor definitely needs an upgrade.
I-9: if US-99 can't get its old number back, then the freeway section of CA-99 should become I-9 between the Grapevine and Sacramento.
I-11 should be US-395 heading up from Victorville to Reno.
I-13 should be US-95 from Las Vegas on south. Yes, this puts it east of I-15 but there really isn't a better number available, except maybe I-915 (to reflect its old number, similar to how US-53 became I-535 in Duluth/Superior.)
Change I-25 to I-21, then work east from there.
QuoteChange I-25 to I-21, then work east from there.
very sensible, also if we make 3dis out of the single-state short 2dis.
I-25 -> I-21
I-27 -> I-140
I-29 -> I-23
I-35 -> I-25 (perfect!)
I-37 -> I-735
I-39 -> I-27 (it takes up two states, so it can stay)
I-41 -> I-29
I-43 -> I-390 and I-994... split the two halves (to Green Bay and to Beloit)
I-45 -> I-710
I-49 -> I-33 (and I-6 on that Louisiana 'future' section!)
I-55 -> I-35, as it is major
I-57 -> I-37
I-59 -> I-39
I-65 -> I-45
I-69 -> I-47 (Indy to Port Huron), don't get me started on the rest!
I-71 -> I-49
I-73 -> never to be spoken of again
I-75 -> I-55
I-77 -> I-57
I-79 -> I-59
now there is plenty of room at the top.
Yes, I would say that leaves plenty of room.
even if we keep I-25 as a major route, thus leaving I-35 as is, we can take out I-37, I-43, and I-45, and thereby have enough room to make I-55 into I-45 and have still a lot of room at the top.
I have always felt I-45 needed to be longer anyway. A major north-south interstate that never leaves it origin state.
I have no idea how Texas got I-45. Even if it's a legitimate 2di, shouldn't it have been I-39? (this was before the one in Illinois and Wisconsin showed up.)
I was thinking more:
I-25 becomes I-21 (current I-25 is not a true cross-country route)
I-27 becomes I-23 (or I-140 until expanded either to Denver or to I-10)
I-35 from KC south and I-29 from KC north becomes I-25
I-37 becomes I-27
I-45 becomes I-29
I-49 (including unbuilt from Shreveport to KC, not "I-49 South" section) and I-35 from KC north becomes I-35
I-49 "South" from Lafayette, La to New Orleans becomes I-6
I-39 becomes I-37
I-43 becomes I-39
I-69 (when complete) becomes I-41
I-55 becomes I-45
I-57 becomes I-47
I-59 becomes I-49
I-65 becomes I-55
I-85 from Montgomery, AL to Atlanta becomes part of future I-14 corridor (runs west from Montgomery to either Alexandria, La or Austin, Tx)
I-73's planned route is changed from Ohio and Michigan to PA to connect with current I-99 and overtake it
I-71 becomes I-63
I-75 becomes I-65
I-85 from Atlanta north becomes I-69 or something
...And from there, use your imagination.
that's an interesting idea, bouncing I-35/I-29 and I-49/I-35 off each other.
I think most of the interstate highway grid needs to remain intact. Many of the existing 2di's are deeply embedded within the states and cities they travel through. I couldn't imagine swapping major routes such as I-55, I-65, and I-75 for other route numbers. However, there are a few interstates that I would change:
I-39 should be changed to I-47, it's current number is too low to be located that far east, plus I-39 is not a major 2di and is relatively new, so changing it wouldn't cause much trouble
I-43 should be changed to I-53, its current number is also too low to be located this far east. It is also a intrastate interstate, so there shouldn't be much trouble. By the way, I wouldn't care at all that there would be a I-53 and a US 53 in the same state!
Currently, the I-6 idea for Louisiana sounds interesting, but I'm a little more in favor of switching I-10 to US 90's path from Lafayette to New Orleans. I would extend I-12 west from Baton Rouge to Lafayette. I would renumber I-10 between Baton Rouge and New Orleans as I-x12. I-110 in Baton Rouge could be renumbered to I-112. Also, I-55 could be extended to the southeast to New Orleans. I know this would involve changing I-10's traditional path and some problems, I still favor this option. I definitely do not support extending I-49 to New Orelans, that would be completely ridiculous.
I-97 should definitely be changed to something else. It is way too short to be a 2di. Since I think I-66 should be extended east of DC to Annapolis, I would renumber it to I-x66.
I'm on the fence about I-99. Some days, I think it should be left alone, other days I think it should be a I-x76. I definitely think I-81 and I-83 should remain intact as they are. It doesn't make sense to change these routes because of this little annoying route.
Quote from: froggie on February 07, 2009, 11:08:41 PM
QuoteI think most of the interstate highway grid needs to remain intact. Many of the existing 2di's are deeply embedded within the states and cities they travel through.
My thoughts exactly. Changing Interstate numbers at this point would cause more confusion than good.
While it's nice to map out a new numbering system as a lesson in creativity/imagination/fantasy, the reality of the situation is that the existing system is well-established and understood.
Well that was all this thread was suppose to be. Kind of like a "what if" scenario to see what others would have numbered the interstate system. I do agree that changing the interstate system now would cause more confusion. But unfortunately AASHTO has already made some changes, such as changing Interstate 181 for Interstate 26 (as discussed in a previous thread). And yes, the current system is well-established, but being well understood, that is something different.
QuoteI-7 should be US-97, especially in Oregon. That corridor definitely needs an upgrade.
I agree with this one...I think an upgrade to US 97 is needed, as it would provide truck traffic with a better alternative between CA and Washington without going over the I-5 Siskiyou Pass.
If I had control, any 'non-mainline' interstate that's not a loop or spur would get a new designation.
Examples, I-17, I-19, I-27, I-45, I-49, I-12/I-10, I-79, I-99, I-376 (when finished), I-476, I-68/I-70/I-76, and I-97.
I'd take I-70 straight through Pennsylvania and stay as the Turnpike until New Jersey. Turn the I-76 in Philadelphia into a 3di spur. Take I-68 from Morgantown into Baltimore. Turn the I-70 Breezewood extension into I-168 or so, or also call it a connector. Take I-76 from the I-80 interchange to the new New Stanton I-70 interchange, and called it an interstate connector. Take I-76 from I-71 to I-80 in Ohio and rename it as an interstate connector.
Any limited access highway (even slightly substandard), that is not considered a 'mainline' for the U.S. that connects to an interstate can be resigned as an "Interstate Connector". The number would simply be in progression from, say, IC-101, to IC-102, IC-103, etc.
My suggeston would be to 'invert' the interstate shield (red with white numbers, blue band at the top that says "Connector".
That would also free up a lot of numbers to be used for other eventual mainline interstates.
That's just my thought.
Sykotyk
Maybe now would be a great time to renumber the US and Interstate systems; think of the jobs that could be created from having to change all the signs . . . yeah, I wish.
Yes, but they do that on a regular basis in Delaware already. Though they aren't changing the numbers, DelDOT repeatedly replaces signs that do not need replacing...
Quote from: Revive 755 on February 09, 2009, 06:37:16 PM
Maybe now would be a great time to renumber the US and Interstate systems; think of the jobs that could be created from having to change all the signs . . . yeah, I wish.
And the money that could be raised by auctioning off the old signs.
Here's my $.02
Reroute I-95 around Richmond along I-295, Extend I-85 North through Richmond along Current I-95. Rename the section of I-95 from I-295 to I-85 in Petersburg to I-485. Renumber I-195 and VA-195 to I-685.
I-85 Ends at I-75 in Atlanta (Brookwood Interchange). I-85 Airport Connector Section is renamed I-875 (leave I-285 As-Is) and Rename I-85 from I-285 SW of the Airport to Montgomery I-14 and extend it west to Meridian, MS.
GA-316 Becomes I-785
Extend I-185 South to Tallahassee as I-67
Switch I-75 with I-275 around the Tampa-St. Petersburg Area
I know it doesn't jive with everyone elses ideas, after all it's just for fun. Now if we are all in a room getting paid to do this that's a different story.
Quote from: Freewayjim on February 11, 2009, 10:59:25 AM
Switch I-75 with I-275 around the Tampa-St. Petersburg Area
Well, actually at one time I-75 was routed into the St. Petersburg area, during the 1970's. Once the eastern bypass of Tampa was proposed and the I-75E designation was dropped, it was decided to reroute I-75 on the bypass and create I-275 to go through Tampa and St. Pete. Of course before all of that I-4 was the chosen interstate to venture close to the Pinallas County city (back in the 1960's).
Quote from: SyntheticDreamer on January 20, 2009, 01:58:51 AM
Renumber I-99 to I-480 if it doesn't become a 2di. Renumber PA 283 to I-383.
Renumber VA 288 to I-695. Change VA 895 (yes, I know it's not an interstate) to an extended VA 150.
VA 164 should be I-164, and I-264 from I-64 to Virginia Beach should be I-64. (In other words, I agree with the idea to do that, then make present I-64 from I-264 to its terminus an extended I-664).
US 34 in Illinois between I-74 and Monmouth should become I-174.
Actually VA 895 should be I-895 but federal funds for an early phase of the project made AASHTO reject it as an interstate due to some technalities due to federal funds being used in early phases of the project after AASHTO approved the designation 10-15 years before it was even considered to be a toll road. And if you still want it VA 150 you can beg VDOT to secretly assign it like in Florida or Georgia with its interstates. Anyhow I-695 should be cosigned with I-83 on the NE end of the Baltimore Beltway along with I-70 on the southwest side to I-97(which would be replaced by I-70) and I-70 would go from I-97 to Annapolis(being signed with US 50 and US 301. I-595 would end at current I-97) at MD 70 or points east.
If I had the opportunity to renumber the interstates in the Baltimore-Washington area, knowing what we know now, here is what I would do:
Considering that U.S. 50/301 was to be I-68 before it got the secret I-595, I would extend I-68 from Hancock, multiplexing with I-70 to Frederick, then overtake I-270 to Washington (I-370 becomes I-368), multiplex with I-495 (and I-95) to U.S. 50, and veering east to Annapolis, maintaining 2di service to the capital city. I-68 could extend east to the U.S. 50/301 split, though I don't think that section is up to interstate standards.
I-97 would become another spur of I-68, such as I-268 or I-468.
The other thought . . . (shaking the Etch-o-Sketch) . . . is to extend I-97 through Baltimore (along the northern section of I-895), duplex with I-95 up through Wilmington, overtake I-295 in Delaware, cross the Delaware Memorial Bridge, and assume the southern portion of the New Jersey Turnpike to Exit 6. Maybe I-97 gets a bit of respectability as a 2di.
Of course, what is nice about these discussions is that if one idea does not work, shake up the Etch-o-Sketch and try again :-P
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 04, 2009, 11:46:32 AM
Actually VA 895 should be I-895 but federal funds for an early phase of the project made AASHTO reject it as an interstate due to some technalities due to federal funds being used in early phases of the project after AASHTO approved the designation 10-15 years before it was even considered to be a toll road. And if you still want it VA 150 you can beg VDOT to secretly assign it like in Florida or Georgia with its interstates. Anyhow I-695 should be cosigned with I-83 on the NE end of the Baltimore Beltway along with I-70 on the southwest side to I-97(which would be replaced by I-70) and I-70 would go from I-97 to Annapolis(being signed with US 50 and US 301. I-595 would end at current I-97) at MD 70 or points east.
I concur on your statement about Interstate 70. I have always felt that since the original alignment was never completed and never will be, the proper solution would be to extend the transcontinental (well,
almost transcontinental) interstate southwest along Interstate 695
at least to Interstate 95, and even further east and south along Interstate 97. And one can go further to extend Interstate 70 on new alignment to Dover, DE (I believe I have mentioned this before).
I can also see Interstate 83 being rerouted onto Interstate 695 to end at Interstate 95. The original section of Interstate 83 could then be renumbered as an I-x83.
Though these things will never come to fruition, it is nice to dream...
Quote from: flaroadgeek on March 04, 2009, 12:41:35 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 04, 2009, 11:46:32 AM
Actually VA 895 should be I-895 but federal funds for an early phase of the project made AASHTO reject it as an interstate due to some technalities due to federal funds being used in early phases of the project after AASHTO approved the designation 10-15 years before it was even considered to be a toll road. And if you still want it VA 150 you can beg VDOT to secretly assign it like in Florida or Georgia with its interstates. Anyhow I-695 should be cosigned with I-83 on the NE end of the Baltimore Beltway along with I-70 on the southwest side to I-97(which would be replaced by I-70) and I-70 would go from I-97 to Annapolis(being signed with US 50 and US 301. I-595 would end at current I-97) at MD 70 or points east.
I concur on your statement about Interstate 70. I have always felt that since the original alignment was never completed and never will be, the proper solution would be to extend the transcontinental (well, almost transcontinental) interstate southwest along Interstate 695 at least to Interstate 95, and even further east and south along Interstate 97. And one can go further to extend Interstate 70 on new alignment to Dover, DE (I believe I have mentioned this before).
I can also see Interstate 83 being rerouted onto Interstate 695 to end at Interstate 95. The original section of Interstate 83 could then be renumbered as an I-x83.
Though these things will never come to fruition, it is nice to dream...
I actually had already posted this in the Baltimore thread on the Mid-Atlantic Board as well and if I-83 used the NE section of the Baltimore Beltway that the second(for now until I-785 is assigned after I-840 in Greensboro is finished) 3di multiplex would exist between the x-83 and I-695.
Ideally, I'd like to eliminate the "jump" from I-40 to I-70. I-50 and I-60 would be interesting to see, but would require some massive renumberings, and most likely re-alignments.
Here is an interesting challenge for us all, related to renumbering the Interstate grid.
Q: Can you find alignments for Interstates 1-99, using each number? In other words, could we have 100 interstates?
Well if we could add interstates that are only 50 miles long, than yes. :-P
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 04, 2009, 11:46:32 AM
Quote from: SyntheticDreamer on January 20, 2009, 01:58:51 AM
Renumber I-99 to I-480 if it doesn't become a 2di. Renumber PA 283 to I-383.
Renumber VA 288 to I-695. Change VA 895 (yes, I know it's not an interstate) to an extended VA 150.
VA 164 should be I-164, and I-264 from I-64 to Virginia Beach should be I-64. (In other words, I agree with the idea to do that, then make present I-64 from I-264 to its terminus an extended I-664).
US 34 in Illinois between I-74 and Monmouth should become I-174.
Actually VA 895 should be I-895 but federal funds for an early phase of the project made AASHTO reject it as an interstate due to some technalities due to federal funds being used in early phases of the project after AASHTO approved the designation 10-15 years before it was even considered to be a toll road. And if you still want it VA 150 you can beg VDOT to secretly assign it like in Florida or Georgia with its interstates. Anyhow I-695 should be cosigned with I-83 on the NE end of the Baltimore Beltway along with I-70 on the southwest side to I-97(which would be replaced by I-70) and I-70 would go from I-97 to Annapolis(being signed with US 50 and US 301. I-595 would end at current I-97) at MD 70 or points east.
I knew about the whole I-/VA 895 designation thing, but the main reason for my suggestion is that the mileposts on VA 895 continue on VA 150; they don't reset when VA 895 ends and becomes VA 150. This implies a single continuous route, and not two separate ones.
If for some weird reason VA 895 never becomes I-895, it should become a VA 150 extension.
Quote from: SyntheticDreamer on March 07, 2009, 04:59:24 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 04, 2009, 11:46:32 AM
Quote from: SyntheticDreamer on January 20, 2009, 01:58:51 AM
Renumber I-99 to I-480 if it doesn't become a 2di. Renumber PA 283 to I-383.
Renumber VA 288 to I-695. Change VA 895 (yes, I know it's not an interstate) to an extended VA 150.
VA 164 should be I-164, and I-264 from I-64 to Virginia Beach should be I-64. (In other words, I agree with the idea to do that, then make present I-64 from I-264 to its terminus an extended I-664).
US 34 in Illinois between I-74 and Monmouth should become I-174.
Actually VA 895 should be I-895 but federal funds for an early phase of the project made AASHTO reject it as an interstate due to some technalities due to federal funds being used in early phases of the project after AASHTO approved the designation 10-15 years before it was even considered to be a toll road. And if you still want it VA 150 you can beg VDOT to secretly assign it like in Florida or Georgia with its interstates. Anyhow I-695 should be cosigned with I-83 on the NE end of the Baltimore Beltway along with I-70 on the southwest side to I-97(which would be replaced by I-70) and I-70 would go from I-97 to Annapolis(being signed with US 50 and US 301. I-595 would end at current I-97) at MD 70 or points east.
I knew about the whole I-/VA 895 designation thing, but the main reason for my suggestion is that the mileposts on VA 895 continue on VA 150; they don't reset when VA 895 ends and becomes VA 150. This implies a single continuous route, and not two separate ones.
If for some weird reason VA 895 never becomes I-895, it should become a VA 150 extension.
So if VA 150 was ever upgraded to interstate standards and VA 895 became I-895, I would propose extending the I-895 designation to VA 76 along with making VA 76 I-595 from I-195(which would take over VA 195) to I-895 and then designate VA 76 as I-895 all the way to VA 288(I-695 here). Of course I prefer making VA 150 a full freeway up to interstate standards along with Parham Rd up to I-64 with the I-895 designation. In that case I-595 would extend down VA 76 to VA 288(I-695 again here).
I posted this once on MTR, but for the heck of it, here's my idea to renumber the interstates in base-12, with 'a' for 10 and 'b' for 11 -- I'm assuming other symbols, maybe Greek letters, would actually be used for signing:
* I-95, I-93, and I-91 become I-b5, I-b3, and I-b1.
* I-97 becomes I-9b7 unless it gets extended in the future, in which
case it becomes I-b7.
* I-89 and I-87 become I-a9 and I-a7
* I-81 between the Canadian border and Roanoke, VA, becomes I-a5.
South of Roanoke, I-a5 would follow the proposed I-73 corridor to
Myrtle Beach.
* I-83 becomes I-a3, with a future extension northward to Rochester,
NY.
* I-99 keeps its number.
* I-79 becomes I-97
* I-77 becomes I-95. South of Columbia, SC, I-95 would replace I-26.
* I-26 between Columbia, SC, and the Virginia border becomes I-93.
* I-71 becomes I-89
* The proposed I-73 corridor between Lansing, MI, and Roanoke, VA,
becomes I-91
* I-94 north of Detroit becomes I-87.
* I-75 becomes I-85.
* I-69 becomes I-83 south of Lansing. North of Lansing, I-83 would
use the US 127 freeway.
* I-196 and the US 31 corridor north of Indianapolis becomes I081
* I-43 north of Milwaukee, I-94 between Milwaukee and Gary, and I-65
north of Montgomery become I-75. South of Montgomery, I-75 would
follow the future freeway in the US 231 corridor.
* I-65 between Montgomery and Mobile becomes I-73.
* I-59 between I-24 and I-20 becomes I-79, and would be extended up
the proposed I-175 corridor between Chattanooga and Lexington KY
should such a route be built.
* The western part of I-59 between I-20 and I-10 becomes I-71.
* I-57 becomes I-69
* I-55 becomes I-65.
* I-39 becomes I-63.
* I-59 is reserved for the US 67 corridor in Illinois, with a possible
extension north along US 61 up to Dubuque.
* I-57 is reserved for the Avenue of the Saints corridor.
*I-55 is reserved for any future development of the US 63 corridor
between Waterloo, IA, and I-55.
* I-53 is reserved for the MO 7-MO 13-US 65 corridor between the
Kansas City area and Little Rock
* The I-49 corridor between I-30 and I-10 keeps its number
* I-35 north of KC becomes I-45. South of KC, I-45 follows the
proposed I-49 corridor down to Texarkana, from which it would follow
the proposed spur of the I-69 corridor into Texas and then follow the
main corridor down to the Brownsville, TX.
* I-41 is reserved for a future Sioux City - Minneapolis interstate.
* I-29 becomes I-39
* I-35 between Kansas City and Emporia is replaced by I-37. This I-37
continues up present I-335, and is available for extension from Topeka
to St. Joseph.
* I-35 keeps its current route south of Wichita, but replaces I-135 in
Kansas, with a far-future extension northward.
* I-45 in Texas becomes I-43
* I-37 becomes I-3b
* I-44 west of Oklahoma City becomes I-33
* I-27 and westward stays the same.
* I-90 between I-5 and Billings become I-b0. I-b0 then follows I-94's
route to Milwaukee.
* I-90 between I-25 and Billings becomes part of I-25. The part of
I-90 between I-25 and the western junction with I-94 in Wisconsin
becomes I-a0, and would take any US 12 freeway between Madison and
Chicago.
* I-43 between I-90 and Milwaukee becomes I-9a.
* I-90 between Rockford and Chicago become I-98, and would eventually
be extended west via the US 20 corridor.
* I-86 in Idaho becomes I-96.
* Western I-84 becomes I-94.
* I-82 becomes I-a2.
* I-69 between Lansing and Port Huron becomes I-88.
* I-96 becomes I-86.
* I-94 between Chicago and Detroit becomes I-84.
* I-b0 replaces I-90 between Boston and Buffalo, but heads to Canada
via I-290 and I-190.
* I-90 between Cleveland and Buffalo becomes I-aa
* Eastern I-86 and I-84 become I-a6 and I-84.
* I-80 keeps its number.
* I-238 becomes I-a80.
* Western I-76 becomes I-7a
* I-35 between I-335 and KC becomes I-52.
* I-30 becomes I-34.
* I-81 between I-40 and Roanoke would become I-54
* I-85 between I-65 and its western junction with I-40 becomes I-36.
* I-24 becomes I-38
* The proposed I-22 becomes I-30. I-30 would replace I-20 east of
Birmingham.
* I-20 between Birmingham and the western junction with I-59 becomes
I-26.
* I-20 eventually replaces I-16 and US 80 east of Meridian.
* I-10 replaces I-12.
* I-49 between Lafayette and New Orleans and I-10 between New Orleans
I-59 becomes I-6.
* I-10 between Baton Rouge and I-55 becomes I-610. I-55 replaces I-10
into New Orleans, with I-655 replacing the existing I-610.
New here, but I would extend I-68 west to Columbus via U.S. 33 once it is upgraded.
Quote from: Revive 755 on March 09, 2009, 05:39:38 PM
I posted this once on MTR, but for the heck of it, here's my idea to renumber the interstates in base-12, with 'a' for 10 and 'b' for 11 -- I'm assuming other symbols, maybe Greek letters, would actually be used for signing:
* I-85 between I-65 and its western junction with I-40 becomes I-36.
What about I-85 from the eastern I-40 junction to I-95 in Petersburg?
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 15, 2009, 06:02:43 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on March 09, 2009, 05:39:38 PM
I posted this once on MTR, but for the heck of it, here's my idea to renumber the interstates in base-12, with 'a' for 10 and 'b' for 11 -- I'm assuming other symbols, maybe Greek letters, would actually be used for signing:
* I-85 between I-65 and its western junction with I-40 becomes I-36.
What about I-85 from the eastern I-40 junction to I-95 in Petersburg?
I'd go with I-a1.
I-86 in Idaho. Make it I-284. There is zero justification for that thing being a two digit route. It goes from nowhere to almost nowhere, and it's a measly 63 miles long. All it really is is a shortcut from westward on I-84 to northward on I-15. Sounds like a bypass to me!
And don't get me started on I-97. :-/
I-82: I-7
I-182: I-107
I would come up with a new numbering system that covered all of the National Highway System. This would include all the Interstates as well as the more significant US and state highways. For a generation you could post the old and new numbers, and then maybe phase out some of the old ones. I even put together a shapefile of that network (along with Canada's NHS, and enough roads to tie the two together) but I haven't done much with it yet.
Refining one of my previous ideas based on recent conversations elsewhere . . .
Extend I-97 through Baltimore, overtaking I-895 Spur and the northern section of I-895 proper, then overlapping I-95 to the existing I-95/I-295 split. Redirect I-95 onto the I-295 fork to cross the Delaware Memorial Bridge and take the entire New Jersey Turnpike. Direct I-97 along I-95's current path from the split to U.S. 1 in New Jersey. Keep the Penn Turnpike as I-276, and extend the designation across the river to Exit 6 in New Jersey.
This, in my opinion, would clean up a lot of the mess in SE Pennsylvania and central New Jersey caused by the cancellation of I-95 between Trenton and New Brunswick, while still providing a 2di for Wilmington, Philadelphia and Trenton. The current renumbering idea, arising from the interchange construction, IMO, has some flaws.
I have big beef with Maryland, for some reason. They should renumber I-295 as I-995 since it spurs into Washington, DC, and the B-W Pkwy will never be numbered an interstate. Renumber I-895 to the newly-freed I-295, then, designate an I-895 corridor from Wilmington, DE to Norfolk, VA, west to Emporia, VA. I say this because why is the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel going to be billed as, "Save 90 miles vs. I-95" and "Avoid more than 17 stoplights and save time by using US Route 113. It's only one mile longer than US Route 13!" If you're going to bill it as a way to save time and 'bypass' (my word) I-95, then make it a TRUE bypass route! Number it I-895! It bypasses the metropolitan areas in Maryland AND gives Dover, DE an interstate connection, albeit a 3-di. Wouldn't it also help to have a limited access 100% freeway evacuation route on the Delmarva Peninsula?
Quote from: leifvanderwall on April 30, 2009, 09:16:55 PM
Continuing ...
I-62- TN 33 from Nashville, TN to Tazewell, TN, US 58/ ALT 58 east to Hansonville, VA, US 19 north / US 460 east to Burkeville, VA, and US 360 east to I-87
I-64 extended west - MO 8/68 west to Vienna, MO. , MO. 42/ US 54 west to Mullinville,KS,
On your I-62, I think you meant TN 33 from
Knoxville not Nashville as TN 33 goes through the former and nowhere near the latter.
QuoteI-84 east- extended from both east & west . West: PA 118 from Williamsport to Scranton, PA
I'm not sure that there would be a need for this stretch of highway. I've been on that stretch of PA 118 and can assure you that it's sparsely populated. Plus, it's only 15-25 miles north of I-80. Yes, it would save a few minutes between Williamsport and Wilkes-Barre/Scranton but how many people need to do that?
Here's another idea. It's called "let's eliminate the duplicate numbers in the primary routes."
To de-duplicate I-76:
- let the western route keep the number
- make I-76 from I-71 to exit 18 an extension of I-277
- make the portion between 277 and 77 I-677
- make the portion between 77 and 80 I-477
- make the portion from 80 to 70 either I-880 or I-580.
- move I-70 so it takes over the rest of I-76 through to Bellmawr, NJ. Might as well extend it along the Atlantic City Expressway to Atlantic City while we're at it.
- Accordingly, change 176, 276 376, 476, and 676 to 170, 270, 370, 470, and 670 respectively).
- make I-70 from Breezewood to Hancock I-468.
- make I-70 from Hancock to Baltimore an extension of I-68.
- Accordingly, change 270 and 370 to 268 and 368.
To de-duplicate I-84:
- make the eastern route I-82, with 384 and 684 becoming 382 and 682
- make the existing I-82 I-284.
To de-duplicate I-86:
- let the eastern route keep the number.
- make the western route part of I-84.
- make I-84 from 86 to 15 I-284.
- make I-84 from 15 to 80 I-280.
To de-duplicate I-88:
- let the western route keep the number
- make the eastern route I-681
Quote from: Duke87
To de-duplicate I-76:
I think Pittsburgh deserves at least two two-digit routes. I would bring I-78 west to replace the eastern I-76. Even though it would involve a multiplex with I-81 and the relocated I-70, it would keep a number available for any future interstate in the US 30 corridor between I-71 and Fort Wayne or west.
Quote from: Duke87To de-duplicate I-86:
- let the eastern route keep the number.
- make the western route part of I-84.
- make I-84 from 86 to 15 I-284.
- make I-84 from 15 to 80 I-280.
I think it would be easier to make the western I-86 the three digit route. But I'd also change the numbering rules so the western I-86 could be I-384 since it's unlikely traffic using it will return to I-84.
Quote from: Duke87
To de-duplicate I-88:
- let the western route keep the number
- make the eastern route I-681
I think the eastern route is a better candidate for keeping it's number since it at least has both ends at two digit routes. The western one is more of a spur off of I-80 and should be I-380 or I-80N.
Another way to replace the eastern route would be to relocate I-90 to the eastern I-86 and I-88 alignments, with the original I-90 becoming I-92. This option could also free up I-86 completely with the remaining I-81 to I-87 stretch becoming I-387.
I posted this on Midwest Roads as well, but here goes.
I'd route I-90 through Milwaukee to Madison (on what is now I-94) since I think Milwaukee should be served by an x0 versus Rockford. I'd then route I-94 along the Northwest Tollway to meet with I-39 in Rockford, and continue to it's current alignment.
QuoteI would bring I-78 west to replace the eastern I-76.
You do realize you're creating another Breezewood by doing that, right? Part of my reason for relocating I-70 was to eliminate that (the other part being that it makes more sense geometrically to have the route continue east rather than making a sudden zigzag to the south).
QuoteI think it would be easier to make the western I-86 the three digit route.
Easier, yes, but still less than optimal. I-86 is an extension of the I-84 mainline to the west, with I-84 to the east accessed by single lane ramps. And again, geometric sense. Let the route continue east rather than cutting south.
QuoteI think the eastern route is a better candidate for keeping it's number since it at least has both ends at two digit routes. The western one is more of a spur off of I-80 and should be I-380 or I-80N.
I axed the eastern one because it's shorter. I suppose it's neither here nor there, really. Both are pretty short as far as primary routes go and neither has any potential secondary benefit in renumbering more than the other.
As for what to make the western one, I-380 could work but I-80N...no. No letter suffixes on interstates.
Unless you're I-35.
Quote from: Duke87
You do realize you're creating another Breezewood by doing that, right? Part of my reason for relocating I-70 was to eliminate that (the other part being that it makes more sense geometrically to have the route continue east rather than making a sudden zigzag to the south).
I agree with keeping I-70 on the Turnpike to Philly, but I think I-76 west of New Stanton deserves a two digit number. Sure I-70 would multiplex with the extended I-78 longer than it does with I-76, but there's plenty of other long multiplexes that could be removed like I-20 and I-59, or I-80 and I-90.
Quote from: Duke87
Easier, yes, but still less than optimal. I-86 is an extension of the I-84 mainline to the west, with I-84 to the east accessed by single lane ramps. And again, geometric sense. Let the route continue east rather than cutting south.
But I-84 is more of a diagonal route between the Columbia River valley and I-80. It also wouldn't be the only place a mainline interstate has a one lane ramp.
Quote from: Duke87As for what to make the western one, I-380 could work but I-80N...no. No letter suffixes on interstates. Unless you're I-35.
Bah, another lousy AASHTO policy; it needs to go if duplication of two digit numbers is to be avoided, especially since many states are low on proper three digit numbers. And I-35E in St. Paul south of Minnesota should be a state route until trucks are allowed on the parkway section, with the northern half becoming another I-235.
Perhaps the roads between Phoenix and Las Vegas (you use US 60 from Phoenix to Wickenburg, Arizona, then US 93 the rest of the way) should be renumbered. I-13 might be the most practical, even if it's out of order. (Since 13 represents bad luck to some people, it would be apropo--how many people have good luck in the casinos in Vegas? :-D) If you wanted to keep the order, then you'd have to number the new interstate I-17, which means the current I-17 would need to be renumbered as an extension of I-19, a stretch of which could either be piggybacked onto I-10 between Phoenix and Tucson. Or a new section of I-19 running up through Florence and Coolidge, then connecting to US 60 at Florence Junction could be built. From there, US 60 westbound through Apache Junction, Mesa and Tempe can be decertified and that stretch becomes I-19. Or the current I-19 could become I-21.