Interstates 97, 99, and 238: Honestly, who cares?

[NE2]

They exist. They're not changing. Get over it.

[wxfree]

I really don't care.  I like order and planning.  I like that we have national highway numbering grids.  But an exception here and there doesn't break the value of the grid.  It can even (for those who care enough to pay attention) serve as a reminder that nothing is perfect and that little exceptions and variances are a part of life.  (I do tend to try to make everything into some sort of lesson.)

[english si]

There's lots of changes that I'd have made back in the 50s (though a lot would be anachronistic knowledge of future interstates), but its not worth changing road numbers for the niceness of the grid once they exist.

Plus I have no ideological problem with I-97 being short, or CA238(I). I-99 isn't much of a concern of mine either - other numbers bug me more.

[vdeane]

The one I really care about there is I-238.  It completely blows up the 3di numbering system.  Just renumber it to (hidden) I-480 and be done with it.

While I-97 is way too short for a 2di, the only reason I feel strongly about it is because there aren't any numbers available for north-south interstates in that part of the country any more.  If it wasn't using up a valuable number, it would be much less problematic.

Similarly, I don't have strong feelings about I-99 because there isn't any closer 2di number available.  The facts that both it's ends are breezewoods and the US 220 upgrade between I-80 and US 15 (and the I-99/I-80 interchange in State College) seems to be dead are far more annoying.

[Scott5114]

I-99/I-238 are bad but not as much of an abomination as I-69C/I-69W are.

[Big John]

As long as they don't build I-3 on the east coast.

[jeffandnicole]

Vote Rama!

[roadman65]

You know in a way it is interesting, though, to see an interstate get to be built.  The same with I-74 in NC, even though it gives me gas, I am anxious to see it get built for the sake of seeing a brand new interstate just get built. 

Even I-49 does not bother me. although it is shorter, like NE 2 said via another way than the way its planned in AR and LA south of I-10 and built in MO and LA north of I-10.  Just to see history is exciting enough.

[Ga293]

These really don't bother me at all. The only interstate that really bothers me is 180 in Wyoming. There's absolutely no reason it should be an Interstate.

[getemngo]

Disruptions in the numbering pattern make the numbering pattern more interesting. If there were no violations, we'd have a lot less to talk about!

Unless those violations are suffixed I-69 routes in Texas... 

[xonhulu]

I care a little, because they are minor violations of the numbering system.  But not enough to join hands across America about them.

[Alps]

I love the exceptions to the rule. I was so happy to come across I-97 as a kid (whoa, there's something beyond 95!!), and then thrilled to see an I-99 shield in the flesh when we had to get gas. Fun story - I was learning to drive, got the wheel on the PA Tpk., and then forgot to watch the gas gauge. My parents saw this, freaked out, and my dad made me pull over after one of the tunnels. He then coasted down the hill in the right lane all the way to Bedford. In exchange, I demanded a picture of the I-99 shield - this was in the days of film, mind you - that was just outside the gas station along US 220.
I-238 will be added to my clinch list later this year, hopefully, completing the trifecta of routes that I care about in a positive, not negative, sense.

[Duke87]

I don't mind violations to the numbering scheme which exist because no non-violating number is available. I also don't mind "numbers increase from west to east and south to north" being a general trend rather than a hard rule. Just look at the US highway system. I-99 may be out of order, but at least it's on the east coast.

[Zeffy]

The only problem I have with I-99 is how it was signed into law (wtf?) and not assigned traditionally through AASHTO. I-97 and I-238... whatever, no system is perfect.

[Alps]

The only problem I have with I-99 is how it was signed into law (wtf?) and not assigned traditionally through AASHTO. I-97 and I-238... whatever, no system is perfect.

I do agree with that. I have no problem with legislating where Interstates should be (well... I have problems with politics in general, but let's not get into that), but let AASHTO assign the numbers.

[JMoses24]

I never understood the problem with I-97. It's east of I-95, so it doesn't break the grid. If the problem is "it's too short"...okay, I get it there, but the easy solution is to just extend it further south, but that's an idea for Fictional Highways.

99 and 238 are more "what the...?" to me.

[briantroutman]

Three Interstate oddities–three completely different attitudes.

I-97 I've never had a problem with. It fits the grid–so what if it's short? As I mentioned on another thread, that's the kind of thing that always made roadgeeking fun for me. If there was a legitimate I-99 in NJ that was 3/10s of a mile long, I'd celebrate it and make a special trip to clinch it.

That brings us to I-99, which will always give me heartburn–not so much because it doesn't fit the grid (although that's part of it), but more because it was it was the pet project of a real sludge of a politician. He singlehandedly diverted funds from much more deserving projects across my native state, and he embodies some of the worst elements in the American political system.

I-238 (which I tend to see every few weeks) just makes me scratch my head in bewilderment. Why? Why not I-480, now that the number is free? Or for that matter, why not just "TO I-880" going westbound and "TO I-580 headed east?

[formulanone]

They exist. They're not changing. Get over it.

I really don't care.  I like order and planning.  I like that we have national highway numbering grids.  But an exception here and there doesn't break the value of the grid.  It can even (for those who care enough to pay attention) serve as a reminder that nothing is perfect and that little exceptions and variances are a part of life.  (I do tend to try to make everything into some sort of lesson.)

^ Essentially this.

If states have their exceptions (if any grid order at all), what's the big deal? I'll casually mention the basic odd/even basis for directions, and most people say "I didn't know that?" Only a select group of us really care, a tiny handful out of millions.

I get the reasoning: if everything went off the pattern, why bother having it in the first place? Because few folks care there's a pattern in the first place. Folks aren't taking those long cross-country drives like they used to, and they aren't that lost due to GPS and a data signal that appears almost anywhere.

It's a source of amusement, but if any state was allowed to re-sign fifty (or more) miles of interstate, the public would be a little outraged at the wasted expense and trouble doing so. Some five-mile stub, probably not.

[PHLBOS]

Three Interstate oddities–three completely different attitudes.

Agree.

My basic take:

I-97 - Not an issue, and if push came to shove for a longer, and still properly located gridwise 2di, the road's short enough to be re-assigned a 3di (likely I-995) without creating too much heartburn.

I-99 - as others have echoed, this issue w/this road is more of how the US 220 freeway received the I-99 designation rather than the number itself.  Although, if assigning a 2di number within the grid wasn't possible, it would've been better to use a lower number (I-73 prior to its being assigned to its current corridor perhaps) IMHO or just assign it as a 3di.

I-238 - at present, this is the only road I've not had the opportunity to drive on.  Given its short distance, I agree with others here that it should be either reassigned a more proper/fitting 3di (now that I-480 is available) or just have it be a ghost Interstate like I-495 is in Maine.

My 2 cents.

In retrospect, maybe it would'be been better to have applied the same I-X1s & I-X5s standard for the longer north-south routes as in the US highway system as opposed to just the current I-X5s being the longer north-south routes.  Such would've allowed for more major north-south 2dis.

[hbelkins]

He singlehandedly diverted funds from much more deserving projects across my native state

Not true. The same funding that built I-99 built the I-26 portion of US 23 and I-68; is building US 48 and parts of US 460 and I-22, and many more highways in a large number of states.

As to the routes themselves, my decreasing order of heartburn:

1.) I-238. This one's obvious.

2.) I-97. Too short for a two-digit route. People who think I-99 should be a three-digit route lose the legitimacy of their argument if they're OK with I-97. This should either be an I-83 extension or an x95.

3.) I-99. I have no problems with it. The route as originally envisioned was to cover three states, and even now will connect two east-west interstates in two states and intersect a third east-west interstate. It also could and should be extended along I-390 to the Rochester area. It's certainly long enough to be a 2di and no other numbers were available.

[Lytton]

Only interstate I care about is Interstate 180. At least I-238, I-99 and I-97 are freeways. I-180 isn't a freeway.

[english si]

I-180 isn't a freeway.

Nor, save for one short section, are Alaska's interstates, ditto bits of I-PR2 and I-PR3, but no one complains about these.

[SD Mapman]

I-180 isn't a freeway.

Nor, save for one short section, are Alaska's interstates, ditto bits of I-PR2 and I-PR3, but no one complains about these.

But these aren't signed as interstates, though.

[PHLBOS]

Apparently VDOT had proposed a more grid-logical I-99 in a 2006 report:

A thread covering such can be found at
2006 VDOT Report for I-99 Corridor (REAL)

[dgolub]

As long as they don't build I-3 on the east coast.

Amen.  I'm not convinced that the I-99 number itself is so horrible.  At least they didn't put it in California.  However, I'm a bit concerned about the precedent it sets for legislators deciding that they want to number an interstate after something and completely botching the grid.