Highway Oddities

[hbelkins]

Screw the roadsigns, I see a Sheetz!!!!!!

Sheetz has existed in Virginia for at least 5 years, if not longer...

Longer, I'm pretty sure. That picture made me hungry for a Sub Burger.   

[Rover_0]

Here's one from Utah - UDOT refuses to recognize concurrencies, whether it be signing them or codifying them into Utah state law. US-89 through the state is really seven separate routes. Concurrencies are very sporadically signed, if at all. US-50 is occasionally recognized while it piggy-backs on I-70, and there is one I-15/US-89 shield near the Salt Lake County/Utah County line. But that's about it.

Actually, UDOT is in the process of discussing Interstate/US concurrencies (as far as signing), though Peter Jager (the main route numbering guy there) has said that State/State or State/US or State/Interstate are not recognised (making UT-30 and UT-48 two separate routes).  The concurrencies (concs.) that seem to be the most inconsistent are I/US concs., though the only I/US concurrencies where only the Interstate is signed are I-15/US-50, I-80/US-189, and, once into Emery County heading east, I-70/US-50.  The US/US seem really well signed (US-6/89, US-89/91, US-89/50, US-6/191, US-6/50, US-40/191, and, hopefully, US-89/160 and US-89A/160  .

There are some I/US concs. that have some US shields on them, though not all (I-15/US-89 in Utah County and Davis County, though not in both directions).  Going north, there are some recent US-89 shields alongside I-15 shields north of Lehi.  I've even caught a glimpse of a recent assembly on a ramp at the Lagoon/Legacy Parkway exit to see some I-15/US-89 onramp signs (or so I thought).  There are a couple of entirely-signed I/US concs., I-15/US-6 between Santaquin and Spanish Fork (onramps may likely differ), and I-70/US-89 in Sevier County (near Richfield, though those awsome cutout US-89 signs are almost all but gone).

I/I concs. are all entirely signed on the route; I-15/84 between Tremonton and Ogden is, as is I-15/80 in Salt Lake City (though those are the only two current I/I concs.

[agentsteel53]

US-89/160 and US-89A/160 

is US-160 being extended along US-89 to Page and US-89A past that?  I had never heard of this.  Where does it end up?  (Can we extend it to the Bay Area and sign it as I-160?  That would be amazing!)

[Rover_0]

US-89/160 and US-89A/160

is US-160 being extended along US-89 to Page and US-89A past that?  I had never heard of this.  Where does it end up?  (Can we extend it to the Bay Area and sign it as I-160?  That would be amazing!)

No, not really.  I've long advocated an reroute/extension to US-160, extension of US-64, renumbering/extension of US-163, or even new US Route created running to I-15 via AZ-98, Page, Kanab, Fredonia, Hurricane (that's along AZ-98, US-89, US-89A, AZ-389/UT-59, and UT-9 with a possible future routing along UT-7).  It's mostly tounge-in-cheek, but at least one person at UDOT finds it interesting.

EDIT:  It hasn't been extended, yet...

[Rover_0]

One highway oddity is that UT-59 is marked E-W, its mileposts are signed in a N-S manner, increasing as you head westbound (northwestbound) into Hurricane and not the other way around, as the directional cards indicate.  Mind you, there's only a handful of UT-59 signs, but UDOT has a tendancy to mark its diagonal routes as E-W.

[City]

The dumbest number assigned to a road of the day... CA 7's current route! (umm hmm... a 1di, supposed to be major, highway signed as a 3 foot expressway to the border.  ) It's weird why CalTrans would pick that number. It isn't really major enough to be signed as CA 7.

[WillWeaverRVA]

The dumbest number assigned to a road of the day... CA 7's current route! (umm hmm... a 1di, supposed to be major, highway signed as a 3 foot expressway to the border.  ) It's weird why CalTrans would pick that number. It isn't really major enough to be signed as CA 7.

Let us hope that CA 99 becomes I-7, in which case CA 7 would need to be renumbered per Caltrans rules. Though even if it becomes I-9, CA 7 needs to have a different number anyway.

[agentsteel53]

The dumbest number assigned to a road of the day... CA 7's current route! (umm hmm... a 1di, supposed to be major, highway signed as a 3 foot expressway to the border.  ) It's weird why CalTrans would pick that number. It isn't really major enough to be signed as CA 7.

indeed, it is a travesty how CA-7 has been diminished.

originally, in the 1934 signing, CA-7 was actually the longest state route in the system, because the southern half of CA-1 was CA-3.  CA-7 came in from Oregon at Modoc County along what was to be US-395, followed that route to Bishop, where US-6 (also not there yet) was to be multiplexed.  At Brady, what was to be the US-6/395 split, CA-7 went down the US-6 path to Castaic Junction and multiplexed with US-99 (already extant by 1934).  US-99/CA-7 continued to where now I-5 and I-405 split.  CA-7 followed I-405 to Long Beach.

then came US-395 in 1935 and CA-7 was truncated to Brady.  Still a nice long route.  But, good luck finding a CSAA (northern California) bear 7 shield; they were only made in 1934 and early 1935.

then came US-6 in 1937 and CA-7 was truncated to the south end of the 6/99 multiplex, while 6 continued along 99 to the present location of the Four-Level interchange (at the time, just surface streets).  CA-7 was now essentially the I-405 corridor - Sepulveda Blvd and whatnot.

CA-7 existed as a freeway in a few segments before receiving the I-405 label starting in 1958: the very first interstate shields to be put up in California.  When the interstate system was devised, the CA-15 corridor (Atlantic Blvd in the LA area) had to give up its number to I-15, so CA-7 was reassigned to Atlantic Blvd, and then to the newly built Long Beach Freeway.

in 1980, the "let's sign everything with an interstate shield" mania started taking hold, and by 1984 - the time of the Olympics - CA-7 was gone, re-designated I-710.  There are, to this day, a few postmiles left with the number 7 (including one on the northern stub of I-710 in Pasadena!) and a couple of signs show the scraped off 7 shield underneath the 710.

California has a policy of assigning route numbers as needed: the lowest available number is given to a new highway segment.  That is how CA-3 ended up in Norcal in 1963, because the original CA-3 became part of CA-1. 

I have no idea when CA-7 was assigned to that stupid little road and frankly I don't care.  7, 11, 17, 21... all perfectly good road numbers, truncated because Everything Must Receive an Interstate Shield.  (Now 11 is due to be assigned to yet another harebrained border access route.  When will it end??)

[agentsteel53]

speaking of UT-7, what is up with that freeway to nowhere?  I drove it in August and it was pitch black out, and at some point the freeway ends and there is a dirt road that leads down to the Arizona state line.  Very odd. 

[Rover_0]

speaking of UT-7, what is up with that freeway to nowhere?  I drove it in August and it was pitch black out, and at some point the freeway ends and there is a dirt road that leads down to the Arizona state line.  Very odd. 

That's because it isn't finished yet.  It's supposed to run northeast-ish to UT-9 just west of Hurricane, and pass by the new airport.  Knowing St. George, there will be developments soon enough, but right now it's really creepy driving there in the middle of the night.  I've done it too.  For now, it's probably used as a bypass for those coming into St. George from Nevada, California, etc. that need to get to River Road (that road that goes to the AZ line; north of there, it's paved) from I-15.

[agentsteel53]

River Road (that road that goes to the AZ line; north of there, it's paved) from I-15.

yep, I took that road into St. George.  That road is even creepier in a way: seemingly unnecessary suburban Hell.

[myosh_tino]

The dumbest number assigned to a road of the day... CA 7's current route! (umm hmm... a 1di, supposed to be major, highway signed as a 3 foot expressway to the border.  ) It's weird why CalTrans would pick that number. It isn't really major enough to be signed as CA 7.

indeed, it is a travesty how CA-7 has been diminished.

originally, in the 1934 signing, CA-7 was actually the longest state route in the system, because the southern half of CA-1 was CA-3.  CA-7 came in from Oregon at Modoc County along what was to be US-395, followed that route to Bishop, where US-6 (also not there yet) was to be multiplexed.  At Brady, what was to be the US-6/395 split, CA-7 went down the US-6 path to Castaic Junction and multiplexed with US-99 (already extant by 1934).  US-99/CA-7 continued to where now I-5 and I-405 split.  CA-7 followed I-405 to Long Beach.

then came US-395 in 1935 and CA-7 was truncated to Brady.  Still a nice long route.  But, good luck finding a CSAA (northern California) bear 7 shield; they were only made in 1934 and early 1935.

then came US-6 in 1937 and CA-7 was truncated to the south end of the 6/99 multiplex, while 6 continued along 99 to the present location of the Four-Level interchange (at the time, just surface streets).  CA-7 was now essentially the I-405 corridor - Sepulveda Blvd and whatnot.

CA-7 existed as a freeway in a few segments before receiving the I-405 label starting in 1958: the very first interstate shields to be put up in California.  When the interstate system was devised, the CA-15 corridor (Atlantic Blvd in the LA area) had to give up its number to I-15, so CA-7 was reassigned to Atlantic Blvd, and then to the newly built Long Beach Freeway.

in 1980, the "let's sign everything with an interstate shield" mania started taking hold, and by 1984 - the time of the Olympics - CA-7 was gone, re-designated I-710.  There are, to this day, a few postmiles left with the number 7 (including one on the northern stub of I-710 in Pasadena!) and a couple of signs show the scraped off 7 shield underneath the 710.

California has a policy of assigning route numbers as needed: the lowest available number is given to a new highway segment.  That is how CA-3 ended up in Norcal in 1963, because the original CA-3 became part of CA-1. 

I have no idea when CA-7 was assigned to that stupid little road and frankly I don't care.  7, 11, 17, 21... all perfectly good road numbers, truncated because Everything Must Receive an Interstate Shield.  (Now 11 is due to be assigned to yet another harebrained border access route.  When will it end??)

CA-7 may disappear all together.  If CA-99 is upgraded to Interstate standards and is redesignated as I-7, then because of California's policy of no duplicates, CA-7 will have to give up it's number to the newly created Interstate.

[TheStranger]

With the case of Route 21 (which has never been reused), I think that was more continuity than anything else - in that most 680 traffic isn't continuing along the patial beltway (now I-780) into Vallejo, but north to eastbound I-80 via Cordelia.

17 was converted into Interstate north of 280 at the behest of Glenn Anderson (the man who I-105 was named after), specifically to get maintenance funding IIRC, and not simply as a signage ploy.  Having said that, today's I-880 between Route 262 and I-280 was at one point in the early 1960s slated to be part of the 280/680 beltway, before the alignment through downtown San Jose and Alum Rock was used instead.

[myosh_tino]

17 was converted into Interstate north of 280 at the behest of Glenn Anderson (the man who I-105 was named after), specifically to get maintenance funding IIRC, and not simply as a signage ploy.  Having said that, today's I-880 between Route 262 and I-280 was at one point in the early 1960s slated to be part of the 280/680 beltway, before the alignment through downtown San Jose and Alum Rock was used instead.

Regarding the CA-17 conversion to I-880, I think you're 100% correct that the reason for the renumbering was for Federal funding dollars.  I'm not sure if the I-280/I-680 routing along then CA-17 was supposed to be permanent but I had some old maps that marked the I-280/680 routing along CA-17/I-880 as TEMP (temporary).

[vdeane]

CA-7 may disappear all together.  If CA-99 is upgraded to Interstate standards and is redesignated as I-7, then because of California's policy of no duplicates, CA-7 will have to give up it's number to the newly created Interstate.

I think with CA 99, it's going to be I-9 or remain CA 99.  Unless CA has changed their "our numbers trump the interstate numbering rules" policy that caused I-238 (seriously, they could have just renumbered CA 180).

[myosh_tino]

CA-7 may disappear all together.  If CA-99 is upgraded to Interstate standards and is redesignated as I-7, then because of California's policy of no duplicates, CA-7 will have to give up it's number to the newly created Interstate.

I think with CA 99, it's going to be I-9 or remain CA 99.  Unless CA has changed their "our numbers trump the interstate numbering rules" policy that caused I-238 (seriously, they could have just renumbered CA 180).

I-9 is the more logical choice but I think I-7 will be the "more economical" choice.  The CA-9 routing has it going through somewhat populated areas in Santa Clara and Santa Cruz counties (Los Gatos, Saratoga, Boulder Creek, Felton, Scotts Valley and Santa Cruz) where the cost to renumber CA-9 could be very high to businesses and residents along Hwy 9.  CA-7 is new, relatively short route connecting I-8 to the Mexico border which could easily be renumbered without inconveniencing thousands of residents and businesses.

[mapman]

I-9 is the more logical choice but I think I-7 will be the "more economical" choice.  The CA-9 routing has it going through somewhat populated areas in Santa Clara and Santa Cruz counties (Los Gatos, Saratoga, Boulder Creek, Felton, Scotts Valley and Santa Cruz) where the cost to renumber CA-9 could be very high to businesses and residents along Hwy 9.  CA-7 is new, relatively short route connecting I-8 to the Mexico border which could easily be renumbered without inconveniencing thousands of residents and businesses.

That's true.  In fact, the addresses for most properties that front onto CA 9 is "xxx Highway 9" (Ex: 4000 Highway 9, Felton, CA).  If the highway were renumbered to another number, hundreds of properties would have to change their addresses.   

[TheStranger]

I-9 is the more logical choice but I think I-7 will be the "more economical" choice.  The CA-9 routing has it going through somewhat populated areas in Santa Clara and Santa Cruz counties (Los Gatos, Saratoga, Boulder Creek, Felton, Scotts Valley and Santa Cruz) where the cost to renumber CA-9 could be very high to businesses and residents along Hwy 9.  CA-7 is new, relatively short route connecting I-8 to the Mexico border which could easily be renumbered without inconveniencing thousands of residents and businesses.

That's true.  In fact, the addresses for most properties that front onto CA 9 is "xxx Highway 9" (Ex: 4000 Highway 9, Felton, CA).  If the highway were renumbered to another number, hundreds of properties would have to change their addresses.   

I think the simple rule as to whether California is willing to give up a duplicate number or not is...the length of the route (9 and 180 are pretty lengthy state routes).  Not sure what would've happened had 101 between Vallejo and Los Angeles become part of the interstate system, as was proposed in 1947.

[algorerhythms]

Screw the roadsigns, I see a Sheetz!!!!!!

Sheetz has existed in Virginia for at least 5 years, if not longer...

If only it existed 'round these parts in Oklahoma...

[City]

The dumbest number assigned to a road of the day... CA 7's current route! (umm hmm... a 1di, supposed to be major, highway signed as a 3 foot expressway to the border.  ) It's weird why CalTrans would pick that number. It isn't really major enough to be signed as CA 7.

CA-7 may disappear all together.  If CA-99 is upgraded to Interstate standards and is redesignated as I-7, then because of California's policy of no duplicates, CA-7 will have to give up it's number to the newly created Interstate.

They could upgrade US-101 to interstate standards, sign it as I-1, and smack those CA-7 shields on CA-1.

[myosh_tino]

The dumbest number assigned to a road of the day... CA 7's current route! (umm hmm... a 1di, supposed to be major, highway signed as a 3 foot expressway to the border.  ) It's weird why CalTrans would pick that number. It isn't really major enough to be signed as CA 7.

CA-7 may disappear all together.  If CA-99 is upgraded to Interstate standards and is redesignated as I-7, then because of California's policy of no duplicates, CA-7 will have to give up it's number to the newly created Interstate.

They could upgrade US-101 to interstate standards, sign it as I-1, and smack those CA-7 shields on CA-1.

If that happens, why not just move US 101 onto CA-1.

[TheStranger]

The dumbest number assigned to a road of the day... CA 7's current route! (umm hmm... a 1di, supposed to be major, highway signed as a 3 foot expressway to the border.  ) It's weird why CalTrans would pick that number. It isn't really major enough to be signed as CA 7.

CA-7 may disappear all together.  If CA-99 is upgraded to Interstate standards and is redesignated as I-7, then because of California's policy of no duplicates, CA-7 will have to give up it's number to the newly created Interstate.

They could upgrade US-101 to interstate standards, sign it as I-1, and smack those CA-7 shields on CA-1.

If that happens, why not just move US 101 onto CA-1.

Sadly, that has never appeared to be California's style of handling US route truncations - witness how Route 99 went from US route to state route, despite being long enough to be allowed as a single-state US highway after the 1964 numbering changes.

[akotchi]

There are some I/US concs. that have some US shields on them, though not all (I-15/US-89 in Utah County and Davis County, though not in both directions).  Going north, there are some recent US-89 shields alongside I-15 shields north of Lehi.  I've even caught a glimpse of a recent assembly on a ramp at the Lagoon/Legacy Parkway exit to see some I-15/US-89 onramp signs (or so I thought).  There are a couple of entirely-signed I/US concs., I-15/US-6 between Santaquin and Spanish Fork (onramps may likely differ), and I-70/US-89 in Sevier County (near Richfield, though those awsome cutout US-89 signs are almost all but gone).

I/I concs. are all entirely signed on the route; I-15/84 between Tremonton and Ogden is, as is I-15/80 in Salt Lake City (though those are the only two current I/I concs.

The ones in the Legacy area came from a signing design I had originally prepared for the Parkway project.  I have always had a pet peeve about making sure concurrencies are fully signed, especially Interstate/U.S. overlaps.

[Bryant5493]

See if you can notice the oddity/error on one of these signs.


Be well,

Bryant

[Scott5114]

A trailblazer for a street? A left tab for a HOV exit, when HOV exits are normally left exits?