AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: Diagonal Interstates  (Read 1887 times)

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7301
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:39:53 AM
Re: Diagonal Interstates
« Reply #25 on: August 29, 2020, 09:14:29 PM »

The sad thing is, 46 would have been an easy renumber because VA/NC 46 are one corridor and the route doesn’t really go through anywhere significant.

That would have been my first choice for numbering as well; "54" sounds a little too much like "64" and might cause confusion in the Hampton Roads area, particularly with radio traffic reports.  56 would technically be OK, but in terms of pure latitude, a bit south of where it would be optimal (64's that far south in order to serve the HR metro area).  And VA/NC 46 wouldn't be much of a conflict; whereas most of HPC #13 is in NC, most of MSR 46, except for about 5-6 miles, is in VA, well away from the coastal area.  Opportunity missed!
Logged

jeffandnicole

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 11379
  • Age: 45
  • Location: South Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 05:30:00 AM
Re: Diagonal Interstates
« Reply #26 on: August 30, 2020, 03:14:24 PM »

Quote
I-495 was north-south when it was briefly signed, despite being a clear east-west route. The only thing making it north-south would be that it takes Raleigh traffic to I-95 North and vice versa, and the same principal still applies with I-87. Raleigh to I-95 North / vice versa and Hampton Roads to I-95 South / vice versa.

Cardinal direction rules don't apply to 3dis.
Never said they did.

Then what was the point of bringing this up in a thread about diagonal numbering?
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4997
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: October 19, 2020, 11:20:03 PM
Re: Diagonal Interstates
« Reply #27 on: August 30, 2020, 03:47:51 PM »

Quote
I-495 was north-south when it was briefly signed, despite being a clear east-west route. The only thing making it north-south would be that it takes Raleigh traffic to I-95 North and vice versa, and the same principal still applies with I-87. Raleigh to I-95 North / vice versa and Hampton Roads to I-95 South / vice versa.

Cardinal direction rules don't apply to 3dis.
Never said they did.

Then what was the point of bringing this up in a thread about diagonal numbering?
Just noting that I-495 being signed north-south (despite being east-west) may have influenced the decision to make I-87 a north-south route vs. an east-west I-46, I-48, etc.

NCDOT seems to believe that cardinal direction rules do apply to 3dis based on what direction the parent is. This is why I-495 was north-south and Future I-587 (due east-west) will also be north-south.
Logged

WNYroadgeek

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 406
  • Age: 30
  • Last Login: Today at 12:26:11 AM
Re: Diagonal Interstates
« Reply #28 on: August 31, 2020, 12:03:54 AM »

Not really. I-85 is probably more E-W than N-S, and I-26 is definitely more N-S than E-W.

There's a pattern there, though: NE/SW is signed as N-S, and NW/SE is signed as E-W. 22, 24, 26, 71, 81, 85, and the southern 87 follow this rule. However, this does not apply in other parts of the country; 4, 44, and 89 break the pattern.

NY I-88 is another one that breaks the pattern. It's signed E/W and runs NE/SW.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7301
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:39:53 AM
Re: Diagonal Interstates
« Reply #29 on: August 31, 2020, 04:26:28 AM »

Not really. I-85 is probably more E-W than N-S, and I-26 is definitely more N-S than E-W.

There's a pattern there, though: NE/SW is signed as N-S, and NW/SE is signed as E-W. 22, 24, 26, 71, 81, 85, and the southern 87 follow this rule. However, this does not apply in other parts of the country; 4, 44, and 89 break the pattern.

NY I-88 is another one that breaks the pattern. It's signed E/W and runs NE/SW.

In reality, more WSW to ENE; I-90 along the south shore of Lake Erie is more of a "diagonal" than is NY's I-88.  88's actual trajectory is almost identical to I-70 across Illinois, which is rarely if ever considered diagonal.   
Logged

GreenLanternCorps

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 352
  • What's behind me, is not important!

  • Age: 54
  • Location: Ohio
  • Last Login: October 19, 2020, 12:45:30 PM
Re: Diagonal Interstates
« Reply #30 on: September 16, 2020, 06:18:58 AM »

Not really. I-85 is probably more E-W than N-S, and I-26 is definitely more N-S than E-W.

There's a pattern there, though: NE/SW is signed as N-S, and NW/SE is signed as E-W. 22, 24, 26, 71, 81, 85, and the southern 87 follow this rule. However, this does not apply in other parts of the country; 4, 44, and 89 break the pattern.
As I remember it, the initial unofficial proposal for what is now I-87 II: Electric Boogaloo, was originally an eastern I-44.
Which is odd considering I-46 and I-48 are both available.

I'm curious what ultimately switched it from east-west to north-south. While it is technically both, it's more east-west than it is north-south.

I-495 was north-south when it was briefly signed, despite being a clear east-west route. The only thing making it north-south would be that it takes Raleigh traffic to I-95 North and vice versa, and the same principal still applies with I-87. Raleigh to I-95 North / vice versa and Hampton Roads to I-95 South / vice versa.

Similarly, I-85 is more east-west than it is north-south.

The chain of events resulting in the southern I-87 more or less went as follows:
(1) NC submitted I-44 because it was a familiar number although obviously duplicative.  AASHTO said "try again" and threw out 46, 54, and 56 as being acceptable in both states served by HPC #13, the corridor to be upgraded.
(2) NC pissed & moaned because of the proximity of same-numbered state highways to the corridor, and because renumbering the state routes would cause internal problems.  Citing the trajectory of I-85, they submitted a southern I-89 as their selection, since that state highway was well to the west, avoiding confusion. 
(3) There was reportedly an open bar at AASHTO's SCOURN meeting in Des Moines in the spring of 2016, which likely led to:  (4) In a fit of deliberate stupidity or dysfunction (see (3) above), SCOURN openly rejected the state-highway conflict argument -- but accepted the odd-number concept, despite the corridor being plainly longer E-W than N-S.
(5) The I-87 designation was arbitrarily substituted for the submitted I-89, with two reasons cited:  the longitudinal position of the southern corridor was closer to that of I-87 than I-89 -- and the "87" number tied in with a few obscure historical aspects pertaining to the served area (IIRC a regional university founding in 1787 was cited as one of these). 
(6) However, the SCOURN delegation regained its senses enough to actually designate a completely appropriate number, I-42, for the US 70 corridor from Raleigh to Morehead City (NC had submitted I-36, an out-of-grid number but not in use within the state).  Ironically, NC 42 actually crosses the new I-42 corridor.   I-42 was the last 2di commissioned in the 5-year period from 2012 through 2016 which saw one new Interstate trunk legislated per year (in chronological order, 11, 2, 41, 14, 42).
(7) Everyone went home, leaving NC and VA with one of the weirdest I-numberings in recent memory.   X-(

This photo of the Route Numbering Committee explains everything...

Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7301
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:39:53 AM
Re: Diagonal Interstates
« Reply #31 on: September 16, 2020, 09:44:09 PM »

Not really. I-85 is probably more E-W than N-S, and I-26 is definitely more N-S than E-W.

There's a pattern there, though: NE/SW is signed as N-S, and NW/SE is signed as E-W. 22, 24, 26, 71, 81, 85, and the southern 87 follow this rule. However, this does not apply in other parts of the country; 4, 44, and 89 break the pattern.
As I remember it, the initial unofficial proposal for what is now I-87 II: Electric Boogaloo, was originally an eastern I-44.
Which is odd considering I-46 and I-48 are both available.

I'm curious what ultimately switched it from east-west to north-south. While it is technically both, it's more east-west than it is north-south.

I-495 was north-south when it was briefly signed, despite being a clear east-west route. The only thing making it north-south would be that it takes Raleigh traffic to I-95 North and vice versa, and the same principal still applies with I-87. Raleigh to I-95 North / vice versa and Hampton Roads to I-95 South / vice versa.

Similarly, I-85 is more east-west than it is north-south.

The chain of events resulting in the southern I-87 more or less went as follows:
(1) NC submitted I-44 because it was a familiar number although obviously duplicative.  AASHTO said "try again" and threw out 46, 54, and 56 as being acceptable in both states served by HPC #13, the corridor to be upgraded.
(2) NC pissed & moaned because of the proximity of same-numbered state highways to the corridor, and because renumbering the state routes would cause internal problems.  Citing the trajectory of I-85, they submitted a southern I-89 as their selection, since that state highway was well to the west, avoiding confusion. 
(3) There was reportedly an open bar at AASHTO's SCOURN meeting in Des Moines in the spring of 2016, which likely led to:  (4) In a fit of deliberate stupidity or dysfunction (see (3) above), SCOURN openly rejected the state-highway conflict argument -- but accepted the odd-number concept, despite the corridor being plainly longer E-W than N-S.
(5) The I-87 designation was arbitrarily substituted for the submitted I-89, with two reasons cited:  the longitudinal position of the southern corridor was closer to that of I-87 than I-89 -- and the "87" number tied in with a few obscure historical aspects pertaining to the served area (IIRC a regional university founding in 1787 was cited as one of these). 
(6) However, the SCOURN delegation regained its senses enough to actually designate a completely appropriate number, I-42, for the US 70 corridor from Raleigh to Morehead City (NC had submitted I-36, an out-of-grid number but not in use within the state).  Ironically, NC 42 actually crosses the new I-42 corridor.   I-42 was the last 2di commissioned in the 5-year period from 2012 through 2016 which saw one new Interstate trunk legislated per year (in chronological order, 11, 2, 41, 14, 42).
(7) Everyone went home, leaving NC and VA with one of the weirdest I-numberings in recent memory.   X-(

This photo of the Route Numbering Committee explains everything...




"Seven years of college down the drain!"  RIP Belushi, Doug Kenney, and the others passing in the meantime.    OTOH, Tim Matheson has had quite a career playing unmitigated villains  (Fletch, Burn Notice's "Dead Larry").  Faber College was supposed to be somewhere in PA; one would hope it's (appropriately) near I-99!
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.