Route numbers that don't make sense

[Roadwarriors79]

AZ 24 and AZ 143 don't follow any previous conventions in Arizona.

Neither do AZ 347, AZ 238 (which ends at the Pima/Maricopa County line, becoming County Road 238 between there and Gila Bend), the former AZ 153 (now 44th St. in south Phoenix), and the future AZ 30 (Durango Freeway).  Let's not even talk about AZ 210 in Tucson, which connects to no other numbered highway.  Arizona never numbered any non-Interstate below 60 until recent years. 

Neither did they use 0 thru 5 as the second digit on 3-digit highways, with the exception of AZ 504 in the Navajo Nation, continued from NM 504, in the 1970s.  Now we have/had/will have State Routes 24, 30, ex-50, 143, ex-153, L101, L202, 210, 238, L303, and 347.

My guess is that state routes numbered 12 thru 59 (10 and 11 are/will be Interstates, and there are no single-digit highways in Arizona other than I-8) are to be allocated for non-interstate freeways, although I've never been able to find any documentation on it.

I've always had a question about the Loop 303 (officially, AZ 303L).  It's not a loop, never has been, and never will be one AFAIK.  Why not renumber it as AZ 33 (other than $$$, of course.  )?

IF complete L303 will form a 1/4 Loop from I-8 In Goodyear (yes the south border of Goodyear is I-8) to I-17 In Phoenix

Is it really now?  The last I saw Goodyear annexed land south to Mobile and AZ 238.  No wonder the Sonoran Desert National Monument was created, between Goodyear and Buckeye there wouldn't be very much open desert left at the rate they are land grabbing.

AZ 210 in Tucson was supposed to be a full freeway, connecting to I-10 between Speedway Blvd and Congress St. Whenever it finally connects to I-10, it will be a surface street on its west end. A freeway segment is proposed from the area of Golf Links Rd to I-10 on the SE side of Tucson.

Arizona has changed many state route numbers before they ever got signed in the field. AZ 24 was originally proposed as AZ 802. AZ 30 was first AZ 801. Most of the current loop system was made up of AZ x17 numbers. Loop 303 was first proposed as AZ 517. Part of Loop 202 was proposed as AZ 217. Loop 101 was proposed as AZ 117 and AZ 417.

[Revive 755]

I'm thinking IL starts low and gets higher

I-80: I-180, I-280
I-55: I-155, I-255/IL 255, I-355. Supposedly the FHWA felt I-455 was more appropriate, but ISTHA wanted and felt 355 was more appropriate
I-90: I-190, I-290, IL 390, and soon IL 490
I-94: I-294, IL 394. I-494 was Proposed. IL 194 and IL 594 are no more. A new I-594 is potentially proposed
I-72: I-172
I-70: I-270

I-74 is a bit of an outlier, with I-474 instead of I-274

I-274 had been considered for part of I-80 around Quad Cities, see http://www.kurumi.com/roads/3di/ix74.html#274il. 

Starting low would also not fit with the previously proposed I-870 for part of I-270 from I-255 to I-55/I-70 at Troy (http://www.kurumi.com/roads/3di/i870.html#870il).  There is (was?) the possible I-564 for connecting I-64 from I-55 to the new I-70 bridge if the second phase of the project is every constructed (in which I-70 would branch off of I-55 east of IL 203 instead of having the bump with I-64).


For the original topic:

* IL/MO 110 - IMHO would have been better to have MO/IL 88 extend west of the I-80/I-88 interchange, and then extend I-88 eastward along I-290 to the Circle.  Or make it an MO/IL x36.

* A lot of the out of grid US routes such as US 6, US 24, and US 59

* I-30

* I-41 (I know there are a couple reasons for this one, but I disagree with them)

* I-45

[ilpt4u]

An easier way to get rid of the I-64/I-70 bump would be to reverse/flip I-64 and I-70 from the Bump in East St Louis to the I-64 end @ I-70 in Wentzville.

Resigning the routes (and the child MO 370 and MO 364) -- much cheaper than building new terrain Interstate, even in East St Louis. Would be cheaper even for IL to pay MO to resign, than building new

I like the idea of making the CKC IL/MO 88 instead of IL/MO 110 after the end of I-88. Of course, the CKC should really be signed 55->72/36->35, but Western IL wanted its route

I still don't quite understand why the STL Beltway isn't signed only I-255 or I-270 for the actual belt route all around, with the leg back to I-55/70 being the other not used (if 255 for beltway, 270 for that short E-W spur; if 270 for beltway, 255 for the short spur). IL 255 can be changed to a (odd)55 or (odd)70, depending on the final Beltway number. I believe I read some history of the STL Beltway that part of it was signed I-244 as well at one point, maybe...

[Max Rockatansky]

AZ 24 and AZ 143 don't follow any previous conventions in Arizona.

Neither do AZ 347, AZ 238 (which ends at the Pima/Maricopa County line, becoming County Road 238 between there and Gila Bend), the former AZ 153 (now 44th St. in south Phoenix), and the future AZ 30 (Durango Freeway).  Let's not even talk about AZ 210 in Tucson, which connects to no other numbered highway.  Arizona never numbered any non-Interstate below 60 until recent years. 

Neither did they use 0 thru 5 as the second digit on 3-digit highways, with the exception of AZ 504 in the Navajo Nation, continued from NM 504, in the 1970s.  Now we have/had/will have State Routes 24, 30, ex-50, 143, ex-153, L101, L202, 210, 238, L303, and 347.

My guess is that state routes numbered 12 thru 59 (10 and 11 are/will be Interstates, and there are no single-digit highways in Arizona other than I-8) are to be allocated for non-interstate freeways, although I've never been able to find any documentation on it.

I've always had a question about the Loop 303 (officially, AZ 303L).  It's not a loop, never has been, and never will be one AFAIK.  Why not renumber it as AZ 33 (other than $$$, of course.  )?

IF complete L303 will form a 1/4 Loop from I-8 In Goodyear (yes the south border of Goodyear is I-8) to I-17 In Phoenix

Is it really now?  The last I saw Goodyear annexed land south to Mobile and AZ 238.  No wonder the Sonoran Desert National Monument was created, between Goodyear and Buckeye there wouldn't be very much open desert left at the rate they are land grabbing.

AZ 210 in Tucson was supposed to be a full freeway, connecting to I-10 between Speedway Blvd and Congress St. Whenever it finally connects to I-10, it will be a surface street on its west end. A freeway segment is proposed from the area of Golf Links Rd to I-10 on the SE side of Tucson.

Arizona has changed many state route numbers before they ever got signed in the field. AZ 24 was originally proposed as AZ 802. AZ 30 was first AZ 801. Most of the current loop system was made up of AZ x17 numbers. Loop 303 was first proposed as AZ 517. Part of Loop 202 was proposed as AZ 217. Loop 101 was proposed as AZ 117 and AZ 417.

Interesting, any planning documents on the 101, 202, and 303?  I've heard of AZ 217 but not 117, 517, and 417

[Revive 755]

An easier way to get rid of the I-64/I-70 bump would be to reverse/flip I-64 and I-70 from the Bump in East St Louis to the I-64 end @ I-70 in Wentzville.

Resigning the routes (and the child MO 370 and MO 364) -- much cheaper than building new terrain Interstate, even in East St Louis. Would be cheaper even for IL to pay MO to resign, than building new

Resigning would not get I-70 traffic to the new Mississippi crossing without going through the interchange with I-64, which was the intent of this cut-off.  A partial view of the older plan is available on Page 3 here.


I like the idea of making the CKC IL/MO 88 instead of IL/MO 110 after the end of I-88. Of course, the CKC should really be signed 55->72/36->35, but Western IL wanted its route

I still don't quite understand why the STL Beltway isn't signed only I-255 or I-270 for the actual belt route all around, with the leg back to I-55/70 being the other not used (if 255 for beltway, 270 for that short E-W spur; if 270 for beltway, 255 for the short spur). IL 255 can be changed to a (odd)55 or (odd)70, depending on the final Beltway number. I believe I read some history of the STL Beltway that part of it was signed I-244 as well at one point, maybe...
[/quote]

[Roadgeekteen]

mass 25 could just be I-495.

[Scott5114]

QEW

OSR

[fillup420]

Not a route number, but more rather exit numbering that doesn't make sense. I-485 in Charlotte is a beltway, and the exit numbers reset at the southern JCT with I-77. Why would they not reset at one of the JCT's with I-85?

[hbelkins]

Not a route number, but more rather exit numbering that doesn't make sense. I-485 in Charlotte is a beltway, and the exit numbers reset at the southern JCT with I-77. Why would they not reset at one of the JCT's with I-85?

Beltways tend to reset at intersections with north-south roads that intersect at perpendicular angles. In Charlotte's case, I-77 fits the bill better than I-85 because 77 is closer to a true north-south route there, while 85 runs at an angle.

[Strider]

Not a route number, but more rather exit numbering that doesn't make sense. I-485 in Charlotte is a beltway, and the exit numbers reset at the southern JCT with I-77. Why would they not reset at one of the JCT's with I-85?

I may add to this.. when I-485 was first built, it was built from I-77 east to US 74 after a couple of extensions. It makes sense to have the exit numbers reset at I-77. As of why they chose I-485 is a good question. My assumption is that there is already I-277 and I-85 doesn't have a I-x85 in Charlotte area.

[StogieGuy7]

I-476 in PA doesn't make sense to me, at least not the part that piggybacks on to the PA Turnpike NE Extension.  Shouldn't even number prefixes on 3di interstates either bypass a city/congested area or connect 2 interstates?  For one thing, having a straight line interstate running 160 miles wasn't what they had in mind for the definition of a bypass or connector.  Secondly, I-476 doesn't really connect directly with i-81 (at it's end, at least). 

Had it been numbered I-576, they at least might have gotten away with calling it an extra-long spur.

[Roadwarriors79]

AZ 24 and AZ 143 don't follow any previous conventions in Arizona.

Neither do AZ 347, AZ 238 (which ends at the Pima/Maricopa County line, becoming County Road 238 between there and Gila Bend), the former AZ 153 (now 44th St. in south Phoenix), and the future AZ 30 (Durango Freeway).  Let's not even talk about AZ 210 in Tucson, which connects to no other numbered highway.  Arizona never numbered any non-Interstate below 60 until recent years. 

Neither did they use 0 thru 5 as the second digit on 3-digit highways, with the exception of AZ 504 in the Navajo Nation, continued from NM 504, in the 1970s.  Now we have/had/will have State Routes 24, 30, ex-50, 143, ex-153, L101, L202, 210, 238, L303, and 347.

My guess is that state routes numbered 12 thru 59 (10 and 11 are/will be Interstates, and there are no single-digit highways in Arizona other than I-8) are to be allocated for non-interstate freeways, although I've never been able to find any documentation on it.

I've always had a question about the Loop 303 (officially, AZ 303L).  It's not a loop, never has been, and never will be one AFAIK.  Why not renumber it as AZ 33 (other than $$$, of course.  )?

IF complete L303 will form a 1/4 Loop from I-8 In Goodyear (yes the south border of Goodyear is I-8) to I-17 In Phoenix

Is it really now?  The last I saw Goodyear annexed land south to Mobile and AZ 238.  No wonder the Sonoran Desert National Monument was created, between Goodyear and Buckeye there wouldn't be very much open desert left at the rate they are land grabbing.

AZ 210 in Tucson was supposed to be a full freeway, connecting to I-10 between Speedway Blvd and Congress St. Whenever it finally connects to I-10, it will be a surface street on its west end. A freeway segment is proposed from the area of Golf Links Rd to I-10 on the SE side of Tucson.

Arizona has changed many state route numbers before they ever got signed in the field. AZ 24 was originally proposed as AZ 802. AZ 30 was first AZ 801. Most of the current loop system was made up of AZ x17 numbers. Loop 303 was first proposed as AZ 517. Part of Loop 202 was proposed as AZ 217. Loop 101 was proposed as AZ 117 and AZ 417.

Interesting, any planning documents on the 101, 202, and 303?  I've heard of AZ 217 but not 117, 517, and 417

You would probably have to do a search of the Phoenix Regional Freeway System plans as of 1985 to see if any of these documents still exist. Some info was on the old mtr newsgroup. ADOT used to have some info in regards to the recent conversion of Loop 303 to a freeway.

[Revive 755]

Arizona has changed many state route numbers before they ever got signed in the field. AZ 24 was originally proposed as AZ 802. AZ 30 was first AZ 801. Most of the current loop system was made up of AZ x17 numbers. Loop 303 was first proposed as AZ 517. Part of Loop 202 was proposed as AZ 217. Loop 101 was proposed as AZ 117 and AZ 417.

Arizona once considering some of the routes for future interstates, given the x17 numbers?

[Max Rockatansky]

Arizona has changed many state route numbers before they ever got signed in the field. AZ 24 was originally proposed as AZ 802. AZ 30 was first AZ 801. Most of the current loop system was made up of AZ x17 numbers. Loop 303 was first proposed as AZ 517. Part of Loop 202 was proposed as AZ 217. Loop 101 was proposed as AZ 117 and AZ 417.

Arizona once considering some of the routes for future interstates, given the x17 numbers?

For what it's worth over the years I've talked to several representatives at ADOT about stuff like that, specifally why the Loop Routes weren't 3ds in addition to AZ 51.  The most I've ever got from anyone was that I-510 was rejected in the initial Interstate planning phase and that Loop designations were thought to be more sensible over 3d Interstate numbers...at least in the last couple decades anyways.  Unfortunately Old highway documentation or anything planning wise is more difficult to come by for Arizona as opposed other states like California.

[Roadwarriors79]

Arizona has changed many state route numbers before they ever got signed in the field. AZ 24 was originally proposed as AZ 802. AZ 30 was first AZ 801. Most of the current loop system was made up of AZ x17 numbers. Loop 303 was first proposed as AZ 517. Part of Loop 202 was proposed as AZ 217. Loop 101 was proposed as AZ 117 and AZ 417.

Arizona once considering some of the routes for future interstates, given the x17 numbers?

I think the freeways around Phoenix may have been set up to be interstates if they had been built before the 1980s. Today I doubt any new interstate (other than I-11) will come into the Phoenix area.

[KeithE4Phx]

Arizona has changed many state route numbers before they ever got signed in the field. AZ 24 was originally proposed as AZ 802. AZ 30 was first AZ 801. Most of the current loop system was made up of AZ x17 numbers. Loop 303 was first proposed as AZ 517. Part of Loop 202 was proposed as AZ 217. Loop 101 was proposed as AZ 117 and AZ 417.

Arizona once considering some of the routes for future interstates, given the x17 numbers?

For what it's worth over the years I've talked to several representatives at ADOT about stuff like that, specifally why the Loop Routes weren't 3ds in addition to AZ 51.  The most I've ever got from anyone was that I-510 was rejected in the initial Interstate planning phase and that Loop designations were thought to be more sensible over 3d Interstate numbers...at least in the last couple decades anyways.  Unfortunately Old highway documentation or anything planning wise is more difficult to come by for Arizona as opposed other states like California.

I thought the reason was that the Loops were financed by a county sales tax, without Federal money, and the latter was required in order for a freeway to be signed as an Interstate.

[Max Rockatansky]

Arizona has changed many state route numbers before they ever got signed in the field. AZ 24 was originally proposed as AZ 802. AZ 30 was first AZ 801. Most of the current loop system was made up of AZ x17 numbers. Loop 303 was first proposed as AZ 517. Part of Loop 202 was proposed as AZ 217. Loop 101 was proposed as AZ 117 and AZ 417.

Arizona once considering some of the routes for future interstates, given the x17 numbers?

For what it's worth over the years I've talked to several representatives at ADOT about stuff like that, specifally why the Loop Routes weren't 3ds in addition to AZ 51.  The most I've ever got from anyone was that I-510 was rejected in the initial Interstate planning phase and that Loop designations were thought to be more sensible over 3d Interstate numbers...at least in the last couple decades anyways.  Unfortunately Old highway documentation or anything planning wise is more difficult to come by for Arizona as opposed other states like California.

I thought the reason was that the Loops were financed by a county sales tax, without Federal money, and the latter was required in order for a freeway to be signed as an Interstate.

Just because Federal money wasn't used doesn't mean that ADOT couldn't apply for an Interstate designation.  My theory is that ADOT views 3ds as worthless especially when no Federal funding goes into them or long term plans back in the initial Interstate building phase were rejected. 

[jwolfer]

Arizona has changed many state route numbers before they ever got signed in the field. AZ 24 was originally proposed as AZ 802. AZ 30 was first AZ 801. Most of the current loop system was made up of AZ x17 numbers. Loop 303 was first proposed as AZ 517. Part of Loop 202 was proposed as AZ 217. Loop 101 was proposed as AZ 117 and AZ 417.

Arizona once considering some of the routes for future interstates, given the x17 numbers? [emoji3]

For what it's worth over the years I've talked to several representatives at ADOT about stuff like that, specifally why the Loop Routes weren't 3ds in addition to AZ 51.  The most I've ever got from anyone was that I-510 was rejected in the initial Interstate planning phase and that Loop designations were thought to be more sensible over 3d Interstate numbers...at least in the last couple decades anyways.  Unfortunately Old highway documentation or anything planning wise is more difficult to come by for Arizona as opposed other states like California.

I thought the reason was that the Loops were financed by a county sales tax, without Federal money, and the latter was required in order for a freeway to be signed as an Interstate.

Just because Federal money wasn't used doesn't mean that ADOT couldn't apply for an Interstate designation.  My theory is that ADOT views 3ds as worthless especially when no Federal funding goes into them or long term plans back in the initial Interstate building phase were rejected.

Same reason Orlando's toll roads are not
I-x04

Z981

[roadfro]

Not a route number, but more rather exit numbering that doesn't make sense. I-485 in Charlotte is a beltway, and the exit numbers reset at the southern JCT with I-77. Why would they not reset at one of the JCT's with I-85?

Beltways tend to reset at intersections with north-south roads that intersect at perpendicular angles. In Charlotte's case, I-77 fits the bill better than I-85 because 77 is closer to a true north-south route there, while 85 runs at an angle.

The MUTCD specifies that mileposting and exit numbers on circumferential routes (i.e. beltways) begin at a location near a southern polar location and proceed clockwise. The beginning point can be a radial freeway or other Interstate [as with this situation], or at an imaginary north-south line that bisects the route, or at some other distinguishable landmark on the south end.

[US71]

AR 128 near Hot Springs runs predominantly N-S, but is posted E-W

[fillup420]

The MUTCD specifies that mileposting and exit numbers on circumferential routes (i.e. beltways) begin at a location near a southern polar location and proceed clockwise. The beginning point can be a radial freeway or other Interstate [as with this situation], or at an imaginary north-south line that bisects the route, or at some other distinguishable landmark on the south end.

This makes a lot more sense than the other reason 

[SteveG1988]

I-476 in PA doesn't make sense to me, at least not the part that piggybacks on to the PA Turnpike NE Extension.  Shouldn't even number prefixes on 3di interstates either bypass a city/congested area or connect 2 interstates?  For one thing, having a straight line interstate running 160 miles wasn't what they had in mind for the definition of a bypass or connector.  Secondly, I-476 doesn't really connect directly with i-81 (at it's end, at least). 

Had it been numbered I-576, they at least might have gotten away with calling it an extra-long spur.

I-476 existed between 276,76,and 95 originally, with PA9 being the Northeast Extension. in 1996 they were able to get it turned into Interstate 476, which was originally (when the Northeast Ext was built) going to visit New York. It got canned to Clarks Summit, where a future direct i-81 connection will be built.

[PHLBOS]

I-476 in PA doesn't make sense to me, at least not the part that piggybacks on to the PA Turnpike NE Extension.  Shouldn't even number prefixes on 3di interstates either bypass a city/congested area or connect 2 interstates?  For one thing, having a straight line interstate running 160 miles wasn't what they had in mind for the definition of a bypass or connector.  Secondly, I-476 doesn't really connect directly with i-81 (at it's end, at least). 

Had it been numbered I-576, they at least might have gotten away with calling it an extra-long spur.

I-476 existed between 276,76,and 95 originally, with PA9 being the Northeast Extension. in 1996 they were able to get it turned into Interstate 476, which was originally (when the Northeast Ext was built) going to visit New York. It got canned to Clarks Summit, where a future direct i-81 connection will be built.

Northeast Extension or no Northeast Extension, the Blue Route portion of I-476 serves as a bypass with respect to Philadelphia; hence the reasoning for the even number prefix. 

Had the proposed 12-mile Loop Expressway been built (such would've located south & parallel to I-276); it could've (not saying it would've) served as an easterly extension of I-476 if it were eligible for Interstate funding.  The short stretch of the Blue Route between the 12 Mile Loop & I-276 could've been designated as an extension of PA 9; but such is fictional territory.

[Roadgeekteen]

AR 128 near Hot Springs runs predominantly N-S, but is posted E-W

I-95 in ct and ri also runs east to west.

[paulthemapguy]

none of the I-x78's in New York connect to their parent route, I-78.  That's really been bothering me lately.

I-82 should be an odd number.