If federal law allows new toll highways...

[tolbs17]

^ Strawman argument.  Federal law does allow new toll roads (which 540 basically is) to be signed as Interstates.

Then why is NC-540, VA-895, NC-147, (will change to NC-885 soon) not signed as interstate highways? I mean I get the concept that an interstate highway must connect to an interstate on the other end which is what NC-540 will do when the southern extension is complete. The same reason why I-295 was signed as NC-295 and I believe the reason was is because it did not connect to a US or Interstate highway.

I wonder if it goes for VA-168 (yes it's tolled aka the Chesapeake Expressway) not being signed as an interstate highway because it's tolled. Otherwise it can easily become an I-x64 if possible to do so.

I-185 near Greenville SC is an interstate and it's tolled.

So any babbling saying that "This highway cannot be an interstate because of the tolls" is just vague and not true.

[skluth]

Not every limited access highway needs to be an interstate 

[1995hoo]

Not every limited access highway needs to be an interstate 

Take note of where tolbs17 lives. North Carolina's DOT is obsessed with designating Interstates wherever possible.

[Max Rockatansky]

Not every limited access highway needs to be an interstate 

In fact one might argue there is too many three digit Interstates already.  How is a glut of similarly numbered three digit Interstates any better than freeways carrying state highway numbers in terms of navigation?

[Scott5114]

Not every limited access highway needs to be an interstate 

In fact one might argue there is too many three digit Interstates already.  How is a glut of similarly numbered three digit Interstates any better than freeways carrying state highway numbers in terms of navigation?

You know, I never thought about it that way. At least if every state had its own SH-295 the shields would distinguish between them, instead of having the same I-295 shield on several disparate highways.

[sprjus4]

^ Strawman argument.  Federal law does allow new toll roads (which 540 basically is) to be signed as Interstates.

Then why is NC-540, VA-895, NC-147, (will change to NC-885 soon) not signed as interstate highways? I mean I get the concept that an interstate highway must connect to an interstate on the other end which is what NC-540 will do when the southern extension is complete. The same reason why I-295 was signed as NC-295 and I believe the reason was is because it did not connect to a US or Interstate highway.

I wonder if it goes for VA-168 (yes it's tolled aka the Chesapeake Expressway) not being signed as an interstate highway because it's tolled. Otherwise it can easily become an I-x64 if possible to do so.

I-185 near Greenville SC is an interstate and it's tolled.

So any babbling saying that "This highway cannot be an interstate because of the tolls" is just vague and not true.

I believe it specifically has to due with how the highways were funded. If federal dollars were used for its construction, it cannot be designated as an interstate highway if it has tolls. If it's fully state or locally funded, however, it can be incorporated... at least I believe.

VA-895, for example, used some amount of federal dollars which led to it not being eligible.

VA-168 was never intended to be an interstate highway, and does not meet interstate standards and has substandard features. That is one route I believe is reasonable to stay as "168"  given the 168/158 corridor makes a continuous route between I-64 and the Outer Banks. Adding another number to the mix would just add to the confusion.

It's also a locally maintained roadway, not by VDOT.

[triplemultiplex]

In fact one might argue there is too many three digit Interstates already.  How is a glut of similarly numbered three digit Interstates any better than freeways carrying state highway numbers in terms of navigation?

Why number anything then?  Just use names.
(Ad absurdum, baby!)

[jmacswimmer]

Not every limited access highway needs to be an interstate 

In fact one might argue there is too many three digit Interstates already.  How is a glut of similarly numbered three digit Interstates any better than freeways carrying state highway numbers in terms of navigation?

You know, I never thought about it that way. At least if every state had its own SH-295 the shields would distinguish between them, instead of having the same I-295 shield on several disparate highways.

On a related note, I sometimes wonder if locals in some cities (Chicago, for example)  have the right idea referring to their freeways by name rather than number.  There may be 3 I-290's in existence, but there's only one 290 associated with "the Eisenhower".  It can also have the added benefit of indicating which side of town you're talking about...for instance, if someone says "the Dan Ryan" you instantly know it's south of Downtown versus wondering which part of 90/94 is jammed up now.

babbling

Pot, meet kettle.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Not every limited access highway needs to be an interstate 

In fact one might argue there is too many three digit Interstates already.  How is a glut of similarly numbered three digit Interstates any better than freeways carrying state highway numbers in terms of navigation?

You know, I never thought about it that way. At least if every state had its own SH-295 the shields would distinguish between them, instead of having the same I-295 shield on several disparate highways.

On a related note, I sometimes wonder if locals in some cities (Chicago, for example)  have the right idea referring to their freeways by name rather than number.  There may be 3 I-290's in existence, but there's only one 290 associated with "the Eisenhower".  It can also have the added benefit of indicating which side of town you're talking about...for instance, if someone says "the Dan Ryan" you instantly know it's south of Downtown versus wondering which part of 90/94 is jammed up now.

While I am far from an expert on Chicago (and not to say Eisenhower/Ike has fallen into any sort of disuse), I've started to get the impression "290" has grown to be used much more frequently than it once was.

[SEWIGuy]

Not every limited access highway needs to be an interstate 

In fact one might argue there is too many three digit Interstates already.  How is a glut of similarly numbered three digit Interstates any better than freeways carrying state highway numbers in terms of navigation?

You know, I never thought about it that way. At least if every state had its own SH-295 the shields would distinguish between them, instead of having the same I-295 shield on several disparate highways.

On a related note, I sometimes wonder if locals in some cities (Chicago, for example)  have the right idea referring to their freeways by name rather than number.  There may be 3 I-290's in existence, but there's only one 290 associated with "the Eisenhower".  It can also have the added benefit of indicating which side of town you're talking about...for instance, if someone says "the Dan Ryan" you instantly know it's south of Downtown versus wondering which part of 90/94 is jammed up now.

babbling

Pot, meet kettle.

Naming highways is great if you live there or are at least familiar with the area.  But it doesn't help you much if you aren't from there and need to either go to or through Chicago.  Numbers are just easier.

[skluth]

Not every limited access highway needs to be an interstate 

In fact one might argue there is too many three digit Interstates already.  How is a glut of similarly numbered three digit Interstates any better than freeways carrying state highway numbers in terms of navigation?

You know, I never thought about it that way. At least if every state had its own SH-295 the shields would distinguish between them, instead of having the same I-295 shield on several disparate highways.

On a related note, I sometimes wonder if locals in some cities (Chicago, for example)  have the right idea referring to their freeways by name rather than number.  There may be 3 I-290's in existence, but there's only one 290 associated with "the Eisenhower".  It can also have the added benefit of indicating which side of town you're talking about...for instance, if someone says "the Dan Ryan" you instantly know it's south of Downtown versus wondering which part of 90/94 is jammed up now.

babbling

Pot, meet kettle.

Naming highways is great if you live there or are at least familiar with the area.  But it doesn't help you much if you aren't from there and need to either go to or through Chicago.  Numbers are just easier.

I like names better when they're useful. The Ventura Freeway goes to Ventura. The Northwest Tollway (when it was still called that) ran northwest from Chicago. But you're correct that names like Chrysler Freeway and Mark Twain Expressway aren't very helpful to traveling motorists and most highway names don't give any useful info to the driver.

[Max Rockatansky]

In fact one might argue there is too many three digit Interstates already.  How is a glut of similarly numbered three digit Interstates any better than freeways carrying state highway numbers in terms of navigation?

Why number anything then?  Just use names.
(Ad absurdum, baby!)

Okay, explain to me how having almost every single X80 around a single area like San Francisco Bay is superior to having distinct numbers like 17 (I-880) and 21 (I-680)?  This is where I would argue that things like I-238 make sense given the routing has a distinct enough numbering to make it stand out from the other X80s.  I get that Federal Funding went into pretty much all of these but I can't for life of me understand how using so many similar highway numbers is supposed to be useful as a navigational tool?

I'm all for sticking to reserving three digit even numbers for true bypasses and odds for major alternative destinations.  I say stick a State Highway shield (especially red, white and blue) or State Highway Number on all this local stuff that doesn't quite meet the needs of overall grid navigation.  Even things like I-305 segment in Sacramento have US 50 applied to them since it very little sense to sign the Interstate corridor. 

[SEWIGuy]

I've driven all around the San Francisco Bay Area and have never had problems with all the I-x80s.  It's not that hard to figure them out from a map.

[Max Rockatansky]

I've driven all around the San Francisco Bay Area and have never had problems with all the I-x80s.  It's not that hard to figure them out from a map.

I didn't say it was hard, I said it was unnecessary.  There was a lot of money and signage replacement changing over CA 17 to become I-880 and extension of I-580.  Kind of feels like it is a pointless addition that doesn't have any more value considering CA 17 still exists as through to Santa Cruz.  If showing the segment as an Interstate is so important up some Interstate color CA 17 shields as they need to be replaced.

Worth noting; the California Highway Commission did ask for out of grid numbers in their Interstate plans but were rejected.  Daniel Faigen's page (CAhighways.org) does hit on this with specific routes.

[SeriesE]

Not every limited access highway needs to be an interstate 

Tell that to Texas. They got enough political clout to get more 2dis than they need to renumber perfectly serviceable US/state highway numbers.

[MATraveler128]

Not every limited access highway needs to be an interstate 

Tell that to Texas. They got enough political clout to get more 2dis than they need to renumber perfectly serviceable US/state highway numbers.

Same for Kentucky. They seem to be on a spree with eliminating their parkway system.

[Road Hog]

Not every limited access highway needs to be an interstate 

Tell that to Texas. They got enough political clout to get more 2dis than they need to renumber perfectly serviceable US/state highway numbers.

I agree that is a weird tic with TxDOT. They'll designate a 2di corridor willy-nilly, but when it comes to fully-compliant 3dis they're like, we're good.

[SEWIGuy]

Are we really complaining about the cost of signage?  😂😂😂

[Max Rockatansky]

Are we really complaining about the cost of signage?  😂😂😂

I mean, you're the guy who complains any time someone brings up a "fictional"  scenario or thread you don't agree with. 

[SEWIGuy]

Are we really complaining about the cost of signage?  😂😂😂

I mean, you're the guy who complains any time someone brings up a "fictional"  scenario or thread you don't agree with. 

And that's not changing 

But really...the cost of signage.  Lol.

[Max Rockatansky]

Are we really complaining about the cost of signage?  😂😂😂

I mean, you're the guy who complains any time someone brings up a "fictional"  scenario or thread you don't agree with. 

And that's not changing 

But really...the cost of signage.  Lol.

Hey look, you didn't even need to PM me that this time. 

[jeffandnicole]

I like names better when they're useful. The Ventura Freeway goes to Ventura. The Northwest Tollway (when it was still called that) ran northwest from Chicago.

But these highways go both ways. Is the Ventura Freeway meaningful going away from Ventura? Does the Northwest tollway mean the same thing when headed in a Southeast direction towards Chicago?

Not every limited access highway needs to be an interstate 

Tell that to Texas. They got enough political clout to get more 2dis than they need to renumber perfectly serviceable US/state highway numbers.

Same for Kentucky. They seem to be on a spree with eliminating their parkway system.

Tell that to the numerous people on these very forums that complain NJ 42 and the Atlantic City Expressway aren't part of I-76. 

[kkt]

I think named highways are more distinctive and memorable than just numbers.  Especially if the numbers are all x80.

[achilles765]

Not every limited access highway needs to be an interstate 

Tell that to Texas. They got enough political clout to get more 2dis than they need to renumber perfectly serviceable US/state highway numbers.

I agree that is a weird tic with TxDOT. They'll designate a 2di corridor willy-nilly, but when it comes to fully-compliant 3dis they're like, we're good.

Right! Like I wish my state could/would/did designate more 3dis:
Loop 375 in El Paso could be I-210;
Loop 1604 in San Antonio could be I-637
SH 286 in Corpus Christi could be I-137; SH 358 could be I-337
Texas Toll 130 could be I-235; and SH 45 could be I-435
Beltway 8 in Houston could be I-245; Spur 330 could be I-710; The Emmett F Lowry Expressway (FM..something) could be I-145; Grand Parkway could be I-869; Hardy Toll Road could be I-445

Just a few examples. 

[SEWIGuy]

Are we really complaining about the cost of signage?  😂😂😂

I mean, you're the guy who complains any time someone brings up a "fictional"  scenario or thread you don't agree with. 

And that's not changing 

But really...the cost of signage.  Lol.

Hey look, you didn't even need to PM me that this time. 

Because I don't think it's polite to crowd the board with this nonsense.

But you be you.