Exit numbers on beltways - clockwise vs. counterclockwise

[KCRoadFan]

Recently I noticed that the exit numbers on the Capital Beltway increase counterclockwise, whereas with most other beltways I've driven (435 in KC, 494/694 in Minneapolis, 465 in Indy, 270 in St. Louis), they go clockwise. It seems like clockwise exit numbers are the more common convention - does anyone know of any beltways (aside from DC) where the exit numbers increase going counterclockwise? I would like to know.

[ilpt4u]

I-265/KY 841 in Kentucky increases in the counterclockwise direction. We don't know when IN and KY will sign the East End Crossing as a single I-265 3/4 beltway, but when they do, we also don't know if the bi-state I-265 will keep the Indiana mileage separate from the Kentucky mileage, or if INDOT will continue KYTC's mileage as part of the unified signing of the route project. At present, Indiana's segment of I-265 does count increasing mileage in the clockwise direction

Speaking of St Louis, the I-270 signed segment of the STL Beltway increases clockwise, that is correct. The I-255 signed segment of the STL Beltway increases counterclockwise

Another quirk regarding the STL Beltway: I-270's mileage resets at the Mississippi River.. I-255's does not

[zzcarp]

Denver does-sort of. C-470 begins at US 6 in Golden on the west side of town and numbers ascend south then east to I-25 where mile markers reset and E-470 (toll) begins. E-470 numbers ascend from I-25 south of the city to its terminus at I-25 north, where the numbers continue ascending on the Northwest Parkway to 96th Street in Broomfield where the tollway terminates.

[sprjus4]

I-610 around Houston and I-410 around San Antonio both increase counter-clockwise.

[SeriesE]

Counterclockwise goes with the rule of exit numbers increasing from south to north and from west to east, assuming Exit 1 is approximately at the 6 o'clock position.

[1995hoo]

The Capital Beltway's original exit numbers increased clockwise from Exit 1 (US-1 in Alexandria) to Exit 38 (I-295 in Maryland). The gist of the reason why it changed is because I-95 was assigned to the eastern half of the Beltway and Maryland renumbered exits statewide during that period. That's an oversimplification, of course.

Regarding roads that potentially run exit numbers in the opposite direction, one possibility is Virginia's I-295. I say "possibility" because it is not a complete beltway. It's more like a two-thirds bypass. Its numbers run anticlockwise insofar as the top portion of the road is more east/west, and I assume the reason is that most of the road runs north/south. Exit numbers start at the southern end near Petersburg. (So if you were heading from, say, Charlottesville to Williamsburg and you exit I-64 onto I-295 to bypass Richmond, the exit numbers on I-295 will decrease as you head east, the opposite of what you might expect if you're attuned to such things.)

[Hot Rod Hootenanny]

Counterclockwise goes with the rule of exit numbers increasing from south to north and from west to east, assuming Exit 1 is approximately at the 6 o'clock position.

That would be clockwise.

[SeriesE]

Counterclockwise goes with the rule of exit numbers increasing from south to north and from west to east, assuming Exit 1 is approximately at the 6 o'clock position.

That would be clockwise.

I was thinking this way: counterclockwise from the southernmost point goes east first before heading north.

[CardInLex]

I-265/KY 841 in Kentucky increases in the counterclockwise direction. We don't know when IN and KY will sign the East End Crossing as a single I-265 3/4 beltway, but when they do, we also don't know if the bi-state I-265 will keep the Indiana mileage separate from the Kentucky mileage, or if INDOT will continue KYTC's mileage as part of the unified signing of the route project. At present, Indiana's segment of I-265 does count increasing mileage in the clockwise direction

KYTC is working on a widening project of both 265 & 71 and will build at least one C/D lanes at the interchange. I'm assuming they'll make the sign changes with that project. No clue about INDOT. I doubt they will change their exit numbers. Likely will just stay the same with KY MM 39 being IN MM 13 on the Lewis & Clark bridge.

[vdeane]

I feel like if Indiana was going to change exit numbers and mileage, it would have been when the bridge was done.

[CardInLex]

New Circle Rd (KY 4) in Lexington, KY is a perfect circle almost. Exit numbers begin at the southernmost point going clockwise. The southern US 27 interchange (Nicholasville Rd) is signed as Exit 19. MM 0 = MM 19.283. The inner loop is the cardinal direction regardless of what direction it's signed as.

[wriddle082]

Denver does-sort of. C-470 begins at US 6 in Golden on the west side of town and numbers ascend south then east to I-25 where mile markers reset and E-470 (toll) begins. E-470 numbers ascend from I-25 south of the city to its terminus at I-25 north, where the numbers continue ascending on the Northwest Parkway to 96th Street in Broomfield where the tollway terminates.

So are most of the exits on C-470 numbered now?  I know for years it seemed like none of them were numbered, and the last time I drove on it a couple of years ago the widening construction was still ongoing so I haven't seen the signage on the finished project.

[bassoon1986]

I-610 around Houston and I-410 around San Antonio both increase counter-clockwise.

But Fort Worth increase clockwise. I wonder what the numbering convention was when 820 also covered the southernmost concurrency with I-20?


iPhone

[ilpt4u]

KYTC is working on a widening project of both 265 & 71 and will build at least one C/D lanes at the interchange. I'm assuming they'll make the sign changes with that project. No clue about INDOT. I doubt they will change their exit numbers. Likely will just stay the same with KY MM 39 being IN MM 13 on the Lewis & Clark bridge.

With multi-state 3DIs, and even beltways, there are precedents for both unified/continuous mileage across state lines and also resets across the state line

That said, a sudden change from counting up to counting down for mileage (putting it another way, where the max mileage from both states meet at one point), does that have precedent, when crossing the state line?

Maybe not so much for navigation purposes these days, with GPS and Smart Phones, but maybe an argument for unified/continuous mileage could be made for 911 Operators and 1st Responders

[zzcarp]

Denver does-sort of. C-470 begins at US 6 in Golden on the west side of town and numbers ascend south then east to I-25 where mile markers reset and E-470 (toll) begins. E-470 numbers ascend from I-25 south of the city to its terminus at I-25 north, where the numbers continue ascending on the Northwest Parkway to 96th Street in Broomfield where the tollway terminates.

So are most of the exits on C-470 numbered now?  I know for years it seemed like none of them were numbered, and the last time I drove on it a couple of years ago the widening construction was still ongoing so I haven't seen the signage on the finished project.

Yes. There are exit numbers posted from I-70 (Exit 1) to Yosemite Street (Exit 25). Neither terminus currently has an exit number posted.

[KCRoadFan]

One thing I've always wondered: why is the Twin Cities beltway both 494 and 694? After all, it's the same set of exit numbers - why not just call it one or the other?

[Henry]

One thing I've always wondered: why is the Twin Cities beltway both 494 and 694? After all, it's the same set of exit numbers - why not just call it one or the other?

That's a great question, but I don't think that will ever get a definitive answer, like the question about I-35's two splits, where the eastern half of both uses the main I-35 exit numbers and the western half its own numbers. Two routes may exist for the Twin Cities beltway (not counting the I-94 concurrency in the NW corner), but it works to perfection, and people could care less what it's called.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

It was done to ease potential confusion. Even though they form a beltway, the two routes serve different interests. 694 is the long distance I-94 bypass route, and 494 is a route used much more heavily by local traffic.

[wxfree]

The rule for Texas is to start at the south and increase clockwise.  I-820 starts at the southwest end, presumably because if you start at the south of the implied loop (along which it originally ran) and move clockwise, the southwest end is the first part that is actually I-820.  Interstates 410 and 610 increase clockwise, but it should be noted that I-410 starts at I-35, which is at the southwest corner, presumably because that's the main intersection on the south side.  Beltway 8 also starts at the south and increases clockwise.  Both it and I-610 start at SH 288.  I guess that's important enough that they start there instead of at I-45, which intersects both of them in the southeast.  SH 99 currently starts at I-69, because that's all that's been built, and increases clockwise.  I-635 is anomalous.  It's a half-loop along the east and north sides of Dallas.  It starts in the southeast and increases counter-clockwise.  State loops 12 (Dallas) and 1604 (San Antonio) follow the rule.

[CardInLex]

Out if curiosity, I looked to see if there are any rules mentioned in the MUTCD about this. Couldn't find language that specified what to do... but the sample diagram does show that you start at the southernmost point and proceed clockwise.

[1995hoo]

Out if curiosity, I looked to see if there are any rules mentioned in the MUTCD about this. Couldn't find language that specified what to do... but the sample diagram does show that you start at the southernmost point and proceed clockwise.

As with everything else, it's subject to exceptions. In the case of the Capital Beltway, for example, the standard convention is trumped by I-95 running along the eastern half of the Beltway, which is why Maryland numbered their portion anticlockwise (I-95 mileposts from the state line up to where I-95 leaves the Beltway to head north to Baltimore, and then continuing that numbering around the rest of the Beltway). Virginia had separate exit numbers for a good 20 years or so, but some people apparently found it confusing and eventually Virginia decided to continue Maryland's numbering with the exception of the seven-mile segment of Virginia's Beltway that's used by I-95.

In other words, if a 2di shares pavement with a 3di, the theory is that the 2di's numbering would trump the 3di's because the 2di is the "primary" route, even when the result is something that's likely to be illogical to the average motorist who has never heard of the MUTCD (such as Virginia's Beltway abruptly jumping from Exit 57 to Exit 173 within three miles). Of course, it's also fair to recognize that a local driver who uses the road on a regular basis should know about the inconsistency and be used to it, but I never underestimate the ignorance of the average motorist based on some of the letters I saw in the Washington Post's "Dr. Gridlock" column over the years.

[NWI_Irish96]

Out if curiosity, I looked to see if there are any rules mentioned in the MUTCD about this. Couldn't find language that specified what to do... but the sample diagram does show that you start at the southernmost point and proceed clockwise.

As with everything else, it's subject to exceptions. In the case of the Capital Beltway, for example, the standard convention is trumped by I-95 running along the eastern half of the Beltway, which is why Maryland numbered their portion anticlockwise (I-95 mileposts from the state line up to where I-95 leaves the Beltway to head north to Baltimore, and then continuing that numbering around the rest of the Beltway). Virginia had separate exit numbers for a good 20 years or so, but some people apparently found it confusing and eventually Virginia decided to continue Maryland's numbering with the exception of the seven-mile segment of Virginia's Beltway that's used by I-95.

In other words, if a 2di shares pavement with a 3di, the theory is that the 2di's numbering would trump the 3di's because the 2di is the "primary" route, even when the result is something that's likely to be illogical to the average motorist who has never heard of the MUTCD (such as Virginia's Beltway abruptly jumping from Exit 57 to Exit 173 within three miles). Of course, it's also fair to recognize that a local driver who uses the road on a regular basis should know about the inconsistency and be used to it, but I never underestimate the ignorance of the average motorist based on some of the letters I saw in the Washington Post's "Dr. Gridlock" column over the years.

I-465 in Indiana does not give way to I-74 (nor will it to I-69 when finished) in mileage markers or exit numbers. In fact, while I-74 is clearly signed during its concurrency with I-465, I've never once in my life heard anybody refer to the road as 74, either along or in conjunction with 465. Everybody just calls it 465. If you polled people who regularly drive on that section of 465, I'd guess that at least half don't even realize that the road is also 74.

[ilpt4u]

In other words, if a 2di shares pavement with a 3di, the theory is that the 2di's numbering would trump the 3di's because the 2di is the "primary" route, even when the result is something that's likely to be illogical to the average motorist who has never heard of the MUTCD

Some Midwest 3di's challenge your notion about this theory that that 2di's numbering trumps the 3di's when multiplexed

I-80/294 uses I-294's Mileage and Exits. I-74/465 uses I-465's Mileage and Exits. I-41/43/894 uses I-894's Mileage and Exits. I-94/694 uses I-494/694's Mileage and Exits

I-74/275 does have I-74's Mileage and Exits take over the Cincy Beltway Mileage for the short multiplex segment, as a case supporting your theory. I-74/280 also has I-74's Mileage and Exits take over the numbering when the multiplex with 280 begins

Then there is the ultimate Odd Duck case of I-88, terminating at Interstates I-290 and I-294, instead of I-290 terminating at the junction and letting the E-W 2di be the main number to Downtown Chicago. I-290's Mileage, Exits, AND Numbering trump I-88's. Even IDOT sees I-290 to the Hillside Strangler Interchange to I-88 is the "thru route"  on some level, as I-290 has a Control of Aurora posted Downtown somewhere

[1995hoo]

Out if curiosity, I looked to see if there are any rules mentioned in the MUTCD about this. Couldn't find language that specified what to do... but the sample diagram does show that you start at the southernmost point and proceed clockwise.

As with everything else, it's subject to exceptions. In the case of the Capital Beltway, for example, the standard convention is trumped by I-95 running along the eastern half of the Beltway, which is why Maryland numbered their portion anticlockwise (I-95 mileposts from the state line up to where I-95 leaves the Beltway to head north to Baltimore, and then continuing that numbering around the rest of the Beltway). Virginia had separate exit numbers for a good 20 years or so, but some people apparently found it confusing and eventually Virginia decided to continue Maryland's numbering with the exception of the seven-mile segment of Virginia's Beltway that's used by I-95.

In other words, if a 2di shares pavement with a 3di, the theory is that the 2di's numbering would trump the 3di's because the 2di is the "primary" route, even when the result is something that's likely to be illogical to the average motorist who has never heard of the MUTCD (such as Virginia's Beltway abruptly jumping from Exit 57 to Exit 173 within three miles). Of course, it's also fair to recognize that a local driver who uses the road on a regular basis should know about the inconsistency and be used to it, but I never underestimate the ignorance of the average motorist based on some of the letters I saw in the Washington Post's "Dr. Gridlock" column over the years.

I-465 in Indiana does not give way to I-74 (nor will it to I-69 when finished) in mileage markers or exit numbers. In fact, while I-74 is clearly signed during its concurrency with I-465, I've never once in my life heard anybody refer to the road as 74, either along or in conjunction with 465. Everybody just calls it 465. If you polled people who regularly drive on that section of 465, I'd guess that at least half don't even realize that the road is also 74.

You're sort of making my point for me. I said "the theory" is that the 2di should trump, but I don't think most people out on the road view it that way.

In other words, if a 2di shares pavement with a 3di, the theory is that the 2di's numbering would trump the 3di's because the 2di is the "primary" route, even when the result is something that's likely to be illogical to the average motorist who has never heard of the MUTCD

Some Midwest 3di's challenge your notion about this theory that that 2di's numbering trumps the 3di's when multiplexed

I-80/294 uses I-294's Mileage and Exits. I-74/465 uses I-465's Mileage and Exits. I-41/43/894 uses I-894's Mileage and Exits. I-94/694 uses I-494/694's Mileage and Exits

I-74/275 does have I-74's Mileage and Exits take over the Cincy Beltway Mileage for the short multiplex segment, as a case supporting your theory

See above. Again, you're sort of making my point. Certainly we know various highway departments will ignore MUTCD guidance when the guidance doesn't make sense. For example, on the Beltway in Virginia, VDOT signs the straight-thru movement on the Inner Loop (where I-95 splits off and heads south) as an "exit," even though you're staying on the same highway, because they say that's what the MUTCD requires because you have to "exit" I-95 onto I-495. Halfway around the Beltway from there, however, Maryland does not sign the equivalent thru movement on the Outer Loop (where I-95 splits off and heads north) as an "exit" even though the situation is essentially the same. I personally think Maryland's way of doing it makes more sense because it seems to me most motorists will view the road as "the Beltway" regardless of route number (though for years when the eastern Beltway was posted solely as I-95 and the western Beltway was solely I-495, people kept saying that was "confusing").

[sprjus4]

Interestingly enough, North Carolina has two examples that show both scenarios mentioned above, both fairly new.

In Greensboro, I-73 overlaps I-840 for its first three miles, and uses I-73 milemarkers and exit numbers, going from the 100s down to single digits once I-73 exits.

In Raleigh, I-87 overlaps I-440 for its last three miles, and still retains I-440 milemarkers and exit numbers with no intention of changing this.