AASHO's attempt to kill off directional suffixes (1934-1952)

[NE2]

This is a continuation of a discussion here: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4543.msg114362#msg114362

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/us11.cfm has some background of the issue. http://www.us-highways.com/usdiv.htm has some details.

Successful changes
*US 10N-S (Minnesota): became 10 and 52
*US 20N-S (Ohio): became 20 and 20A
*US 30S (Nebraska-Iowa): became 30A
*US 40N-S (Colorado-Kansas): became 24 and 40
*US 41W (Georgia-Tennessee): became 411-27
*US 41E-W (Tennessee-Kentucky): became 41 and 41A
*US 50N-S (Ohio-West Virginia): became 50A and 50
*US 73E-W (Kansas): mostly became 69-73 and 59-159 (73 was truncated to Kansas City)
*US 78N-S (Alabama-Georgia): became 78 and 78A
*US 80N (Texas): became 80A
*US 85E (Wyoming-South Dakota): became 85A
*US 87E-W (Wyoming-Montana): became 287-89 and 87
*US 95E (Idaho): became 95A
*US 101E-W (California): became 101A and 101

Unsuccessful changes
*US 11E-W (Tennessee-Virginia): to be 411 and 11
*US 19E-W (North Carolina-Tennessee): to be 19A and 19
*US 25E-W (Tennessee-Kentucky): to be 25 and 129
*US 31E-W (Tennessee-Kentucky): to be 143-37 and 31
*US 41E-W (Tennessee-Kentucky): to be 41 and 43 (instead became 41 and 41A)
*US 45E-W (Tennessee-Kentucky): to be 45 and 45A
*US 49E-W (Mississippi): to be 49 and 49A
*US 73E-W (Nebraska): to be 73 and 77 (77 overlapped 73W north of Oakland; the rest was not a U.S. Highway in AASHO records)
*US 99E-W (California): to be 99A and 99
*US 99E-W (Oregon): to be 99 and 99A
Interestingly, these were all north-south routes. AASHO doesn't seem to have objected to many east-west splits such as US 50N-S (Kansas) and US 70N-S (Tennessee).

New routes and extensions proposed by AASHO were:
*US 411: defined in 1934 as Gadsden-Bristol, replacing 11E; eventually extended that far, but over a different alignment between Maryville and Greeneville
*US 129: extended in 1934 to Corbin, replacing 25W; only actually extended to Knoxville
*US 37: defined in 1934 as Chattanooga-Sellersburg, replacing 31E north of Glasgow; eventually became US 127 south of Albany; still KY 90 from Albany to Glasgow
*US 43: defined in 1934 as Mobile-Hopkinsville, replacing 41W, but only extended to Columbia (41W became 41A)
*US 143: defined in 1934 as Jackson-Glasgow, replacing 31E south of Glasgow and using SR 20 (now US 412) and SR 100 from Jackson to Nashville

[Quillz]

Nice list. I personally would have had no issues with directional suffixes, but I guess the reasoning was it would just lead to motorist confusion.

[Scott5114]

If they were trying to get rid of directional suffixes that early on, why did the original interstate plan have them?

[NE2]

If they were trying to get rid of directional suffixes that early on, why did the original interstate plan have them?

Because it was several years after 1952? Presumably AASHO again saw them as a good thing.

[roadfro]

If they were trying to get rid of directional suffixes that early on, why did the original interstate plan have them?

Perhaps that was a concession made so that they could get all parties involved to buy into the system? I believe that was the case for the US routes.

[Quillz]

If they were trying to get rid of directional suffixes that early on, why did the original interstate plan have them?

Because it was several years after 1952? Presumably AASHO again saw them as a good thing.

Given the dual existences of 35-E and 35-W, it seems AASHTO is okay with relatively short splits that quickly reform outside of the metropolitan areas they travel through. Whereas they were against longer "one-way" splits (such as 80-N eventually becoming 84.)

But I do wonder what the actual threshold was. If they are okay with 35-E and 35-W through the Ft. Worth/Dallas areas, I wonder why were against 5-W, which would have more or less reached the Bay Area. (My guess is the distance was too great.)

[pianocello]

If they are okay with 35-E and 35-W through the Ft. Worth/Dallas areas, I wonder why were against 5-W, which would have more or less reached the Bay Area. (My guess is the distance was too great.)

I don't think it would be the distance. I-35W in TX is 80 miles and I-35E is almost 100. My guess is because today's I-5 was the obvious choice for the thru route, whereas in DFW it could go either way.

[Quillz]

I bet the width between the split routes, not the length. I don't know off-hand how much mileage exists between the split portions of I-35, but I imagine it's not that much. Whereas I-5W would have gone almost 100 miles west or so (and still not directly hit the Bay Area.)

It seems that AASHTO recommended against split/divided highways without ever giving specific criteria as to why, or why some remained but others didn't.

[TheStranger]

I bet the width between the split routes, not the length. I don't know off-hand how much mileage exists between the split portions of I-35, but I imagine it's not that much. Whereas I-5W would have gone almost 100 miles west or so (and still not directly hit the Bay Area.)

Last time I checked, Oakland, Castro Valley, and Vallejo are all definitely part of the Bay Area!  (Now if you mean San Francisco...that's still not too bad, 5 miles away at its closest point at the MacArthur Maze - Interstate 8 for instance goes to SD but is still 4 miles away from downtown, as a comparison point).

5W probably would have freed up a good amount of 3di numbers in the Bay Area as well, specifically 580.  And it was signed along the MacArthur Freeway as a concurrency with US 50 until 1964.

*US 101E-W (California): became 101A and 101

Actually, if I'm not mistaken, didn't US 101E become part of an extended US 50 (and what was then Route 9, now Route 238/262)?  While US 101A/US 101 refers specifically to the oft-debated Peninsula routings of Bayshore Highway and El Camino Real.

Part of me also wonders if former Route 17 (today's I-880) was US 101E at one point as well.

Given the dual existences of 35-E and 35-W, it seems AASHTO is okay with relatively short splits that quickly reform outside of the metropolitan areas they travel through. Whereas they were against longer "one-way" splits (such as 80-N eventually becoming 84.)

I-15E was retained after the 1980 suffixed-interstate purge as well, though it ultimately became 215. 

Honestly, the one-way suffixed spurs are easy sources for confusion, I think though that they're very useful for split parallel routes that do connect at both ends.

[NE2]

*US 101E-W (California): became 101A and 101

Actually, if I'm not mistaken, didn't US 101E become part of an extended US 50 (and what was then Route 9, now Route 238/262)?  While US 101A/US 101 refers specifically to the oft-debated Peninsula routings of Bayshore Highway and El Camino Real.

http://www.us-highways.com/altus2.htm lists US 101A through the East Bay from 1935 to 1937; it's on a 1936 map. It may have never been posted.

Part of me also wonders if former Route 17 (today's I-880) was US 101E at one point as well.

Only south of Warm Springs.

[vdeane]

It's not that AASHTO was OK with the I-35 splits, it's that none of the cities wanted to lose I-35, so they didn't have much of a choice.  It's just another example of the states mucking up the system.

[TheStranger]

It's not that AASHTO was OK with the I-35 splits, it's that none of the cities wanted to lose I-35, so they didn't have much of a choice.  It's just another example of the states mucking up the system.

This makes me wonder: when the suffixes were first okayed in the 1950s for Interstates...this occurred right after AASHO was forced to back down on its plans to eliminate them from US routes.  Did state DOTs see this as an opportunity to try to get more "major" interstate milage?  (Of course, these days, any 1 or 2 digit Interstate is considered "major" by excited regional developers)

[Duke87]

There's also the half change of 9E/9W in New York and New Jersey. 9E became 9, but 9W stayed 9W.

I must say, this situation I have no issue with. It's when a route splits into E and W or N and S with neither being unsuffixed that's bothersome. Because then you have a permanent gap in the unsuffixed designation.

[Bickendan]

So in cases like OR* 99E/W, which is the mainline and which is the alternate? Should 99W be 99A and 99E just 99? Does it matter, since 99 proper was superceded by I-5 north of Salem?

*You know what I mean.