The Interstate Highways That Don’t Follow the Rules

[dgolub]

Keep in mind that NYCDOT ONLY replaces signs in kind.  I'd go with the signs on I-278 itself, which at least has some NYSDOT influence.  And the I-278 signage says vehicles over 12' 8'', NOT  trucks.  "Truck I-278" (which is actually "Trucks I-278" on NYCDOT's signage, VERY important distinction, as "Truck" functions as a bannered route, while "Trucks" is like a "TO" banner) is actually signed as "Alt to I-278".

Actually, the photos that I have (see http://www.greaternyroads.info/roads/nyinter/i278) show two signs for Truck I-278, one sign for Trucks I-278, and a BGS for Truck Route I-278.  I'd guess that the Trucks I-278 sign was a goof.

[TEG24601]

I-69 always confused me.  The first problem, to me, is the E-W Nature North/East of Lansing, and the second is the trip to Texas from Indy.  The latter could easily be addressed with a different number, and the former could instead just be I-96, and then renumber Lansing to Detroit... or make it I-98 and we can stop having that argument.  Alternatively, I-94 could follow the history of US 10 and US 16 and just end at Lake Michigan on either side, then the portion from Chicago to Port Huron would be I-92 and the portion from Milwaukee to Chicago could be just I-41 or I-43.

[odditude]

I-195 does interchange with I-95 at exit 7A of the NJTP. 95 does extend (albeit unsigned) down the NJTP to Exit 6. The 95 signs start at 7A though.

that's a coincidence of the Somerset Freeway's cancellation. by original design, I-195 was only going to connect to I-295.

[vdeane]

Signage on I-278 is "over 3 axles use Astoria Boulevard". I'll add that there is a "Truck I-278" assembly on the mainline at Exit 44 heading EB and possibly more. It used to be a full truck ban, but they allow buses and small trucks. You still have plenty of trucks (basically anything that needs to deliver to Brooklyn or western Queens) that take the truck route.

I saw one sign in my photos on the Triboro Bridge.  I don't have comprehensive coverage EB on the other side.  I was curious if they ever rebuilt the road to handle full truck weights; guess not.  I expect the "Truck I-278" signage dates to the full truck ban and hasn't been updated.

Actually, the photos that I have (see http://www.greaternyroads.info/roads/nyinter/i278) show two signs for Truck I-278, one sign for Trucks I-278, and a BGS for Truck Route I-278.  I'd guess that the Trucks I-278 sign was a goof.

All on the local road (and the Trucks I-278 sign was on the ramp, which makes it more likely to be legit than the others), which has no ties to NYSDOT.  Given that NYCDOT only replaces in kind when they can be bothered to update signage at all, I don't consider it a smoking gun.  It likely dates back to the days of the full truck ban.

I-195 does interchange with I-95 at exit 7A of the NJTP. 95 does extend (albeit unsigned) down the NJTP to Exit 6. The 95 signs start at 7A though.

that's a coincidence of the Somerset Freeway's cancellation. by original design, I-195 was only going to connect to I-295.

By original design, it wouldn't have existed at all.  NJ traded the unbuilt mileage of I-95 for it.

[The High Plains Traveler]

But still, why make it an interstate in the first place?  Should have just been left as US 50, or better yet, a CA state route.

I-580 was originally intended to be part of a split I-5W. It followed current 580 to I-80 at Oakland, then would have been concurrent with I-80 and then head north on current I-505. I always wondered why I-205 had an even prefix because it looks like it ought to be odd, but it makes sense for a route connecting 5W and 5E.

[jwolfer]

Signage on I-278 is "over 3 axles use Astoria Boulevard". I'll add that there is a "Truck I-278" assembly on the mainline at Exit 44 heading EB and possibly more. It used to be a full truck ban, but they allow buses and small trucks. You still have plenty of trucks (basically anything that needs to deliver to Brooklyn or western Queens) that take the truck route.

I saw one sign in my photos on the Triboro Bridge.  I don't have comprehensive coverage EB on the other side.  I was curious if they ever rebuilt the road to handle full truck weights; guess not.  I expect the "Truck I-278" signage dates to the full truck ban and hasn't been updated.

Actually, the photos that I have (see http://www.greaternyroads.info/roads/nyinter/i278) show two signs for Truck I-278, one sign for Trucks I-278, and a BGS for Truck Route I-278.  I'd guess that the Trucks I-278 sign was a goof.

All on the local road (and the Trucks I-278 sign was on the ramp, which makes it more likely to be legit than the others), which has no ties to NYSDOT.  Given that NYCDOT only replaces in kind when they can be bothered to update signage at all, I don't consider it a smoking gun.  It likely dates back to the days of the full truck ban.

I-195 does interchange with I-95 at exit 7A of the NJTP. 95 does extend (albeit unsigned) down the NJTP to Exit 6. The 95 signs start at 7A though.

that's a coincidence of the Somerset Freeway's cancellation. by original design, I-195 was only going to connect to I-295.

By original design, it wouldn't have existed at all.  NJ traded the unbuilt mileage of I-95 for it.

NJ traded i278 in Union County for 195.

[roadman65]

Of course any highway that was previously a US route prior to becoming interstate.

However, to find a rare case how about San Antonio's Beltway I-410.  It has an unusual way of being complete at its concurrency with I-35.  Instead of building the actual freeway at the north end of the concurrency for through traffic, it exits into a ramp only to double back as the inner 410 defaults to I-35 N Bound for Austin and I-410 outer actually has all of its lanes come from I-35.

Its not the narrowing into ramps, as I-83 in Harrisburg and I-55 in Memphis do that, but the double back scenario there.