Why is US 101 all the way to the west coast? It's like a "10" which acts like a 2 digit and it's all the way to the west instead of a spur to US 1.
I think you just answered your own question
This site should lead you to the answer. (http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=Why+is+US-101+numbered+that+way%3F)
Ethanman, I think your homework needs to be to read this (http://www.roadfan.com/mtrfaq.html). Read the entire thing. Memorize it! Everytime you have a question, check there to see if it's answered first
US 101 is "10-1." It was a noted exception to the numbering scheme.
If AASHTO followed their own numbering scheme perfectly, then US-91 should have been right next to the Pacific. That would have wasted US-93, 95, 97 and 99. But then if they made US-99 right alongside the Pacific, it would have violated the numbering scheme because it would have more importance than a x1 route. (Of course, in practice, US-99 was arguably more important than US-101 in the first place.) So, as a compromise, they made US-101 a "primary" route, despite its numbering.
I think that's why the numbering scheme for Interstates was modified, making x5 primary routes, rather than x1. Picking a number somewhere in the middle worked well because then you had room for expansion both west and east. Of course, none of these numbering schemes are followed that religiously. (See: I-99, I-238, proposed I-3, etc.)
US 101 is a spur to I-366.
Something I asked about in another topic was why US-101, if it was supposed to be the main route alongside the Pacific Ocean, was terminated at US-99 in Olympia rather than continue northward into Canada. That never made much sense to me, although looking on a map, the Olympia-Blaine corridor did work better if signed as 99.
QuoteThat never made much sense to me, although looking on a map, the Olympia-Blaine corridor did work better if signed as 99.
I think that's exactly why.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 25, 2011, 06:16:12 PM
US 101 is a spur to I-366.
Only the part where it's 85 MPH.
Quote from: corco on October 25, 2011, 06:19:32 PM
QuoteThat never made much sense to me, although looking on a map, the Olympia-Blaine corridor did work better if signed as 99.
I think that's exactly why.
True, but it seemed to go against the intent of the 1926 numbering scheme, which established that x1 routes were supposed to be the longest and most important. US-101 was supposed to be the West Coast equivalent of US-1, so I don't think it should have terminated in Olympia at US-99.
But it's not really a big deal, and certainly was just one of many, many violations of the original numbering scheme.
I think rule #1 of the numbering scheme that roadgeeks (myself included) sometimes fail to grasp is that it's just a guideline- not a hard and fast rule. If it looks better on the map and makes more sense from a corridor perspective to use one number, even if it is in violation of some arbitrary guidelines, that's the number to use. It would be silly for the LA-SF-Portland-Seattle corridor to change numbers midstream- what actually maintains continuity better? Rigid adherence to an arbitrary system or preserving one number between several major cities? I'd argue the latter.
That doesn't mean I advocate I-3 in SE Georgia or anything like that, but minor rule-breaks in the name of sensibility are certainly reasonable.
Quote from: corco on October 25, 2011, 06:29:42 PM
It would be silly for the LA-SF-Portland-Seattle corridor to change numbers midstream- what actually maintains continuity better?
Interestingly, LA-SF and Portland-Seattle have always ended up as entirely different corridors (101 and 99 in the past, 101 and 5 now) - but that makes sense when the former pairing is out right next to the Pacific (unlike the two Northwest metropolises).
Er, yeah, I guess I meant Sacramento not SF
Quote from: corco on October 25, 2011, 06:11:53 PM
Ethanman, I think your homework needs to be to read this (http://www.roadfan.com/mtrfaq.html). Read the entire thing. Memorize it! Everytime you have a question, check there to see if it's answered first
Thanks corco, good resource of information.(I actually did just read the entire thing, very interesting!)
Quote from: Quillz on October 25, 2011, 06:16:00 PM
If AASHTO followed their own numbering scheme perfectly, then US-91 should have been right next to the Pacific.
Not quite - US 1 is significantly inland through the Southeast. Even in the 1920s, the Pacific Highway was a more major route than the Oregon Coast Highway (look at what was paved in 1926 (http://www.broermapsonline.org/members/NorthAmerica/UnitedStates/Northwest/Oregon/unitedstates1926ra_074.html)) and so US 91 would have made sense along US 101 south of SF and US 99 north of Sacramento. US 99 could have used its current alignment south of Sacramento and present US 101 to the north, and 93 to 97 would be shifted slightly.
Quote from: corco on October 25, 2011, 06:11:53 PM
Ethanman, I think your homework needs to be to read this (http://www.roadfan.com/mtrfaq.html). Read the entire thing. Memorize it! Everytime you have a question, check there to see if it's answered first
And if you have any questions after reading that page, write to sgulya1@cox.net.
Oh heck, just renumber US 101 as I-238 and confuse everyone completely...LOL!
Rick
Quote from: corco on October 25, 2011, 06:11:53 PM
...read this (http://www.roadfan.com/mtrfaq.html). Read the entire thing. Memorize it!
Find a way to sticky that, if you'd please! :nod:
(Used to have that as a bookmark for years, somehow it got lost in having too many desktops/laptops.)
Hey Ethanman, you might want to rephrase the way you question people on this forum. Take it from me, you do not realize it, but you can say something that sounds stupid even when you think it is not! We all have done it at times and I have done it a few times here. Learn from your mistakes! If a person answers his own question, than he must be verifying a hypothysis.
So, you might want to say here this:
As we all know that US 101 is not connected to US 1. Am I to assume, that the 10 in 101 is a one digit number itself making the whole thing a two digit route?
Short and sweet and to the point. That way it shows you want an opinion about your discovery and not making a total fool of yourself. You are very smart and that is why some get irritated so easily. They think you are putting them on or something as we all can see you know what you are talking about. You just do not realize it yourself! So stop and think about what point you are trying to make, and make it. Trust me when you get to college it will make writing so much easier as grammar and proper phrasing in essays is very important.
:pan:
Quote from: Quillz on October 25, 2011, 06:17:50 PM
Something I asked about in another topic was why US-101, if it was supposed to be the main route alongside the Pacific Ocean, was terminated at US-99 in Olympia rather than continue northward into Canada.
This could be possible, if U.S. 101 were "signed" on the Black Ball Ferry from Port Angeles to Victoria, and the section of U.S. 101 from Port Angeles back to Olympia were given another designation (possibly a X99 designation, just as U.S. 199 still exists even though its parent does not.)
Quote from: corco on October 25, 2011, 07:20:19 PM
Er, yeah, I guess I meant Sacramento not SF
It's both, Sacramento and San Francisco
Quote from: ethanman62187 on November 01, 2011, 04:30:56 PM
Quote from: corco on October 25, 2011, 07:20:19 PM
Er, yeah, I guess I meant Sacramento not SF
It's both, Sacramento and San Francisco
US-101 goes to SF, US-99 went to Sac. Read up on the history of US roads over at RVDroz's site.
they should make a us 102 along the gulf coast
Quote from: sr641 on May 06, 2012, 03:30:36 PM
they should make a us 102 along the gulf coast
Stop dredging up old threads, stop posting fictional material in non-fictional threads, and stop having the mental capacity of a Chihuahua.
Quote from: Steve on May 06, 2012, 04:05:37 PM
Chihuahua
US 102 could easily go there in a post-U.S. U.S. Highway system.
Quote from: NE2 on May 06, 2012, 04:26:11 PM
Quote from: Steve on May 06, 2012, 04:05:37 PM
Chihuahua
US 102 could easily go there in a post-U.S. U.S. Highway system.
If US 2 has a theoretical gap through Canada, US 102 could have a theoretical gap through Mexico.
Will the speed limit of US 102 be 85?
^Only when it overlaps I-366.
They're saving US102 for the route from Cape Canaveral to Newt Gingrich's moon base.
Newt Gingrich is a Space Nazi?!
Quote from: realjd on May 07, 2012, 12:58:15 PM
They're saving US102 for the route from Cape Canaveral to Newt Gingrich's moon base.
That will be Interstate ET.
Quote from: Brandon on November 04, 2011, 10:15:54 PM
Quote from: ethanman62187 on November 01, 2011, 04:30:56 PM
Quote from: corco on October 25, 2011, 07:20:19 PM
Er, yeah, I guess I meant Sacramento not SF
It's both, Sacramento and San Francisco
US-101 goes to SF, US-99 went to Sac. Read up on the history of US roads over at RVDroz's site.
If it was before I-5 was built and you were in LA and wanted to get to SF, you probably took 99 to Modesto, then west on 132, north on 33, then west again on 50 to San Francisco. 101 was a prettier but slower route.
I think us 101 should be a spur of us 1. US 641 doesnt touch us 41.
US 641 used to extend along US 60 from Marion, KY to US 41 at Henderson, KY.
Have you not read our earlier posts discussing US 101? Read them first before questioning us.
Quote from: sr641 on May 08, 2012, 04:50:57 PM
I think us 101 should be a spur of us 1. US 641 doesnt touch us 41.
I think US 202 should be a spur of US 202.
Oh, wait.
3 digit US highways can't really be parent highways unless you consider US 231 the parent highway of US 431.
101 isn't a 3dUS.
Quote from: Bickendan on May 09, 2012, 07:39:05 PM
101 isn't a 3dUS.
I imagine CA 1 could have been US 801 if California had been interested. Don't know offhand whether there were any other US Highway-worthy spurs off of 101 - 199 comes closest but already had its parent.
US 901 to Alaska, US 1001 to Hawaii?
No, I-H366 to Hawaii. The speed limit will be 85 for that. :-D
This topic has served its purpose.