I'm on a roll tonight. This thread is for child routes that aren't numbered anything like the parent - but it's more than just a random or systematic assignment.
I'll mention NJ 324/US 322 and NJ 139/US 1-9 up front. Those aren't really what I'm looking for, because it's clear in both cases that the numbers are related. The example in the other thread of NJ 167/US 9 doesn't work because 167 was a systematically assigned number.
NJ 143/US 30 is my "seed" example. Although there's no resemblance between the numbers, they are intertwined because in 1952, when construction started on NJ 143, it was being built as NJ 43 and US 30 was overlaid with NJ 43 for its length. Come 1953, NJ deleted its overlap routes, and NJ 43 disappeared. Soon after, NJ 143 was completed, and was numbered NJ 43 until 1988.
So what other cases are there where a "child" route doesn't look anything like its parent route number, but in fact is completely related?
OK 42 is a short spur from OK 152. Not obviously related until you account for OK 152's old designation–OK 41.
Let's see- AZ 266 and 366 are kids of US 191, which used to be US 666
Arizona 186 looks logical next to Arizona 181, but it's a kid of I-10, which used to be AZ 86
Arizonas 189 and 389 are kids of I-19, old US-89
Washington SRs 150, 153, and 155 are kids of US-97, which would be SR 15 if it were a state route. Same with Washington SRs 290, 291, and 292 as kids of US-395, which fits in the grid as SR 29
There are a ton of these in NC, where children of the original NC state highway primaries are still numbered from the pre-US highway days, while the primaries were renumbered to US Highways. For example, NC 751 was a child of NC 75, which was renumbered to US 15 when the US Highway system came to NC. Original NC 10 (now US 70/US 19) had children NC 100, NC 101, NC 102, NC 107, NC 109. All of these still exist with the pre-US highway numbers.
The southern IN 119 is nowhere near IN 19 and should be IN 235 or IN 139.
IN 311 is somewhat near IN 11, but it is actually the former US 31W, so it would have make more sense to call it IN 531.
State Route 107 in California is a short spur off of I-405 - which was originally pre-1964 Route 7, with 107 being the former alignment (1934-1942) before 7 was given a shorter route to LAX, and 107 was created.
US 192 neither ends nor begins at US 92 (27, 1 respectively), although in 1972, US 192 did end at 92.
Quote from: corco on March 23, 2012, 12:24:54 AM
Let's see- AZ 266 and 366 are kids of US 191, which used to be US 666
Arizona 186 looks logical next to Arizona 181, but it's a kid of I-10, which used to be AZ 86
Arizonas 189 and 389 are kids of I-19, old US-89
You mean AZ 289, which is in southern Arizona. AZ 389 meets US 89A near the Utah Border and is connected to UT 59.
The same applies to AZ 179 and AZ 279 (the latter is now AZ 260), which are nowhere near the current AZ 79. The original AZ 79 applied to the southern US 89A from 1934-41, then it became US 89A (that became AZ 89A in 1992), then it got reapplied for a temporary designation for I-17 from AZ 69 to Flagstaff.
The current AZ 79 was created in 1992 following the truncations of US 80 and US 89.
PA 184 and 284 are spurs of former PA 84, and connect modern PA 287 to US 15. PA 287 used to be PA 84, and the 184 and 284 numbers were never changed when 84 was renumbered to 287.
If NJ 24 were to become, lets say, I-478, as it should be an interstate, but will leave that one up to fictional highways; NJ 124 would be orphaned.
Then you have the I-278, I-478, I-678, and I-878 that were numbered to be children of I-78 that never came to be. This could almost count. :-D
OH 421 is the old/through-town route of US 42 through Lodi. Maybe it got the 421 number so it has 42 as part of it? Why not an x42 number? Who knows. Even if not deliberate, it does seem somewhat logical.
WV 152 and WV/OH 527 are another oddball group. 152 is the old route of US 52 but for whatever reason it becomes 527 for the rest of the way in WV, across the river as OH 527 to OH 7. The 527 numbering evokes that it connects 52 to 7, while the 152 is more logical and obvious as a child of US 52. 527 might still be not odd enough for the category though.
OH 800 also comes to mind as odd, as it's old OH 8 and they didn't choose an x08 number. (Old US 21 became a much more logical 821.)
Quote from: PurdueBill on April 01, 2012, 12:44:18 AM
OH 421 is the old/through-town route of US 42 through Lodi. Maybe it got the 421 number so it has 42 as part of it? Why not an x42 number? Who knows. Even if not deliberate, it does seem somewhat logical.
WV 152 and WV/OH 527 are another oddball group. 152 is the old route of US 52 but for whatever reason it becomes 527 for the rest of the way in WV, across the river as OH 527 to OH 7. The 527 numbering evokes that it connects 52 to 7, while the 152 is more logical and obvious as a child of US 52. 527 might still be not odd enough for the category though.
OH 800 also comes to mind as odd, as it's old OH 8 and they didn't choose an x08 number. (Old US 21 became a much more logical 821.)
You left out Oh 309 (which was originally US 30S).
Also, the original route number (before) US 21 (now Oh 821) was Oh 8. Then it was moved to the present 8/800 corridor
M-120 is a spur southward from M-20 to Muskegon. The reason that this is odd is that MDOT doesn't do parent-child numbering for its state trunklines. The designation though is logical because M-120 used to be part of M-20.
Route 242 in Concord is the only former-routing road in California that uses the old number in the first two digits (it was built as Route 24, and though designated legislatively as 1964 as Route 242, remained signed as 24 until 1990) - Route 30 (now 210) and Route 71's former segments are 330 and 371, both post-1964 routes.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 23, 2012, 12:46:33 PM
The southern IN 119 is nowhere near IN 19 and should be IN 235 or IN 139.
IN 311 is somewhat near IN 11, but it is actually the former US 31W, so it would have make more sense to call it IN 531.
SR 119 is definitely an Indiana oddity as is SR 152. There is some history to explain SR 152 (so there is some logic to it), but am unsure what the original plan for SR 119 was. Other seemingly odd 3 digit routes like x21, x29, and x34 ones have logic in that the parent route actually existed in the respective vicinities at one point in time.
As for the other routes like SR 311, remember that many children routes never meet the parents route. Most children routes are either parallel to the parent or are spurs off the parent. I would disagree that an x31 number is better because US 31 too long and angles a bit. Somewhat like the x52 and x67 children routes, these child route designations add confusion.
NV 893 comes close, but not quite to the junction of US 93 and US 6/50 near Majors Place, SE of Ely.
SR 883 (now CR 883) is old US 331 (unsigned SR 83) through Freeport, FL. Per the grid it should have been something like SR 283.
Quote from: corco on March 23, 2012, 12:24:54 AM
Let's see- AZ 266 and 366 are kids of US 191, which used to be US 666
Arizona 186 looks logical next to Arizona 181, but it's a kid of I-10, which used to be AZ 86
Arizonas 189 and 389 are kids of I-19, old US-89
AZ-181 is a child of U.S. 191, old 666, but paleozoic AZ-81.
US 400 implies it is a spur of 0... 0 is nothing...400 is a spur of nothing!
Quote from: bulldog1979 on April 01, 2012, 01:38:26 AM
M-120 is a spur southward from M-20 to Muskegon. The reason that this is odd is that MDOT doesn't do parent-child numbering for its state trunklines. The designation though is logical because M-120 used to be part of M-20.
They killed MSR-120 rather pointlessly then. That route that heads northeast out of Muskegon should have been M-x31 or something.
I'm probably leaping to conclusions that could easily be corrected by a trip to Chris Bessert's Michigan Highways site or Wikipedia or something. I don't care; I just want MSR-120 back.
Quote from: vtk on August 10, 2012, 11:19:48 PM
Quote from: bulldog1979 on April 01, 2012, 01:38:26 AM
M-120 is a spur southward from M-20 to Muskegon. The reason that this is odd is that MDOT doesn't do parent-child numbering for its state trunklines. The designation though is logical because M-120 used to be part of M-20.
They killed MSR-120 rather pointlessly then. That route that heads northeast out of Muskegon should have been M-x31 or something. I'm probably leaping to conclusions that could easily be corrected by a trip to Chris Bessert's Michigan Highways site or Wikipedia or something. I don't care; I just want MSR-120 back.
Former M-21 between Grandville and Zeeland is now M-121. Former US 131 in Kalamazoo is the unsigned M-331. M-231 will eventually be upgraded into a full freeway and subsumed as a rerouted US 31 according to plan. There's a tendency to use these "spur" numberings at times to indicate former/future designations, not parent—child relationships.
If you believe Wikipedia, the reason Illinois Route 38 got its number is because it sounded similar to 30-A, its previous designation (as in US 30-A).
Does MA 228 fit this category? It got the number because of its old function as part of old 128, and then 128 was routed onto what is now MA 3 south of the Braintree split, and now 128 ends in Canton. So, 228 which starts at MA 3 and leads to Hull, crossing 53 (old 3) and 3A, might seem to be a relative of MA 3 but got its number logically from its relationship with 128.
Quote from: bulldog1979 on April 01, 2012, 01:38:26 AM
M-120 is a spur southward from M-20 to Muskegon. The reason that this is odd is that MDOT doesn't do parent-child numbering for its state trunklines. The designation though is logical because M-120 used to be part of M-20.
This is the second iteration of M 120. The original was in southern Michigan, connecting IN 120 to OH 120
From the AARoads Blog:
Quote from: agentsteel53As far as I know, the only New Mexico four-digit route which is not named after an astronomically relevant wavelength. This is the continuation of state route 113. the two segments would be connected by a brief section of NM-9, except New Mexico strictly does not believe in multiplexes of state routes, so each segment gets its own number.
okay, there is a two-block long segment of NM-9 which is multiplexed with NM-338 in Animas. Apparently there is a minimum length requirement.
NM 1113 was once part of NM 113, truncated in the 1988 renumbering.
(//www.aaroads.com/shields/blog/photos/DSC_144163A.jpg)
Quote from: PurdueBill on August 11, 2012, 02:29:25 PM
Does MA 228 fit this category? It got the number because of its old function as part of old 128, and then 128 was routed onto what is now MA 3 south of the Braintree split, and now 128 ends in Canton. So, 228 which starts at MA 3 and leads to Hull, crossing 53 (old 3) and 3A, might seem to be a relative of MA 3 but got its number logically from its relationship with 128.
If 228 fits the category, then MA 203 would fit in as well because it was once part of MA 3 until the very early 70s.
Quote from: PHLBOS on August 13, 2012, 08:43:40 AM
Quote from: PurdueBill on August 11, 2012, 02:29:25 PM
Does MA 228 fit this category? It got the number because of its old function as part of old 128, and then 128 was routed onto what is now MA 3 south of the Braintree split, and now 128 ends in Canton. So, 228 which starts at MA 3 and leads to Hull, crossing 53 (old 3) and 3A, might seem to be a relative of MA 3 but got its number logically from its relationship with 128.
If 228 fits the category, then MA 203 would fit in as well because it was once part of MA 3 until the very early 70s.
I guess my thinking for this thread is that 228 seems like a random number at first but its history makes it totally logical (a "child" of 128). 203 still connects to 3 at its east end, right? (It's odd how it now dangles at the western end where it used to end at US 1 but now ends at no other numbered route.)
Quote from: PurdueBill on August 13, 2012, 01:54:37 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on August 13, 2012, 08:43:40 AM
Quote from: PurdueBill on August 11, 2012, 02:29:25 PM
Does MA 228 fit this category? It got the number because of its old function as part of old 128, and then 128 was routed onto what is now MA 3 south of the Braintree split, and now 128 ends in Canton. So, 228 which starts at MA 3 and leads to Hull, crossing 53 (old 3) and 3A, might seem to be a relative of MA 3 but got its number logically from its relationship with 128.
If 228 fits the category, then MA 203 would fit in as well because it was once part of MA 3 until the very early 70s.
I guess my thinking for this thread is that 228 seems like a random number at first but its history makes it totally logical (a "child" of 128). 203 still connects to 3 at its east end, right? (It's odd how it now dangles at the western end where it used to end at US 1 but now ends at no other numbered route.)
Absolutely on target.
Former IL-42A, current IL-43, seems odd until you understand that it meets US-41, former IL-42.