x5 & x0

[texaskdog]

I know when the US Hwy system was created, cities demanded to get a road ending in 0 or 5.  Would anyone care anymore?  I would think now they want less traffic in town.  35E in Saint paul should be 135 anyway since they banned trucks and dont want traffic in the neighborhood.  Was thinking about this when I proposed I-10 running to San Diego, that Phoenix & LA would be outraged to not be on I-10

[agentsteel53]

the US highways had x0 and x1 as the primaries.  it is interstates that used x5.

the demand for primary routes was much stronger for US than for interstate.  the most egregious example is routing US-80 in a serpentine fashion so that it passes through Phoenix.

[vdeane]

Tell that to Minneapolis-St. Paul and Dallas-Fort Worth.

[Quillz]

Even the earliest US highways didn't pay much attention to the "primary" numbering, though, at least on the West Coast. US-99 was arguably the most important north-south highway in California, Oregon and Washington, more so than either US-91 or US-101. I also believe the mentality was different: the US highways were designed to pass directly through major cities, the original intent with Interstates was to provide access to them but necessarily through them. (Such as how I-12 exists as a long bypass around New Orleans.)

[texaskdog]

Tell that to Minneapolis-St. Paul and Dallas-Fort Worth.

Saint Paul has a 45-mph stretch of I-35E, where no trucks are allowed.  They don't deserve to be part of 35 anymore.  And does anyone in Dallas really care that thru traffic would go thru Fort Worth?  Does anyone drive through on 35E and say "hey I never knew this beautiful city was here lets spend some time here".   

[texaskdog]

Even the earliest US highways didn't pay much attention to the "primary" numbering, though, at least on the West Coast. US-99 was arguably the most important north-south highway in California, Oregon and Washington, more so than either US-91 or US-101. I also believe the mentality was different: the US highways were designed to pass directly through major cities, the original intent with Interstates was to provide access to them but necessarily through them. (Such as how I-12 exists as a long bypass around New Orleans.)

Maybe in 1926 this was true.  In 2012 it really doesn't mean anything.  Austin would not suffer if I-37 ran thru it instead of I-35

[Grzrd]

At the risk of drifting off-topic, Atlanta has two interstate x5s (75 & 85), and one interstate x0 (20) (Atlanta also has an interstate xx5 (285), but I will not count that).  Are there any cities with a combination of four or more interstate x0s and x5s?

[corco]

Saint Paul has a 45-mph stretch of I-35E, where no trucks are allowed.  They don't deserve to be part of 35 anymore.  And does anyone in Dallas really care that thru traffic would go thru Fort Worth?  Does anyone drive through on 35E and say "hey I never knew this beautiful city was here lets spend some time here".   

I think that does happen, but probably fairly rarely. I became interested in Kansas City only after driving through it on I-70 on my way to somewhere else. I always knew it was there, but never thought of it as "oh hey, I should go there for fun" until I drove through it

[agentsteel53]

Dallas: 20, 30, 35E, 45.

[Alps]

Dallas: 20, 30, 35E, 45.

Close:
Greater LA has 5, 15, 10, 40
Greater Chicago has 55, 65, 80, 90

[hobsini2]

Dallas: 20, 30, 35E, 45.

Close:
Greater LA has 5, 15, 10, 40
Greater Chicago has 55, 65, 80, 90

40 in "Greater Los Angeles" is a real stretch seeing as it is 72 miles from I-40 to get to I-10/I-15 Jct. Barstow to Downtown LA is 113 miles.
I can accept 15 althought the closest that comes to the LA city limits is 38 miles.

[Grzrd]

Dallas: 20, 30, 35E, 45.

Close:
Greater LA has 5, 15, 10, 40
Greater Chicago has 55, 65, 80, 90

40 in "Greater Los Angeles" is a real stretch seeing as it is 72 miles from I-40 to get to I-10/I-15 Jct. Barstow to Downtown LA is 113 miles.
I can accept 15 althought the closest that comes to the LA city limits is 38 miles.

In Chicagoland, I-65 never makes it to Illinois and I believe I-80 doesn't quite make it to the Chicago city limits (although both make Chicago suburbia).

35E has the suffix, but even if you discount it, Dallas has more x0s and x5s within its city limits than Atlanta: 3 1/2? 

Now, to maybe drift further off-topic, is the interchange in Atlanta among the I-75/I-85 overlap and I-20 the only place in a U.S. city where a total of three x0s and x5s meet in one interchange?  Or, does Dallas rise to the challenge where 30, 35E, and 45 come close together?  In other words, can the Dallas "meeting point" be considered a single interchange?

[hobsini2]

Grzrd said: "Now, to maybe drift further off-topic, is the interchange in Atlanta among the I-75/I-85 overlap and I-20 the only place in a U.S. city where a total of three x0s and x5s meet in one interchange?  Or, does Dallas rise to the challenge where 30, 35E, and 45 come close together?  In other words, can the Dallas "meeting point" be considered a single interchange?"

The 3 1/2 in Dallas (20, 30, 45, 35E) do not meet in the same location. I-20 is really a southern Bypass of Dallas.  And I-35E and I-45 never meet.

[Grzrd]

The 3 1/2 in Dallas (20, 30, 45, 35E) do not meet in the same location. I-20 is really a southern Bypass of Dallas.  And I-35E and I-45 never meet.

Agreed.  Also, I'm beginning to think that Atlanta is the only city to have a total of three non-suffixed, non-"intrastate interstate" x0s and x5s within its city limits. 

[Bickendan]

Tell that to Minneapolis-St. Paul and Dallas-Fort Worth.

Saint Paul has a 45-mph stretch of I-35E, where no trucks are allowed.  They don't deserve to be part of 35 anymore.  And does anyone in Dallas really care that thru traffic would go thru Fort Worth?  Does anyone drive through on 35E and say "hey I never knew this beautiful city was here lets spend some time here".   

Remind me not to put you in charge of highway numberings... at any rate, there is a thread in Fictional Highways that deals with the 35 split in the Cities; in the end, the suffixes don't matter.

As far as the the importance of US highways, the Cities do have US 10 and 61. And 12, 52, 169 and 212. And historically 8 and 65.

[bugo]

I know when the US Hwy system was created, cities demanded to get a road ending in 0 or 5.  Would anyone care anymore?  I would think now they want less traffic in town.  35E in Saint paul should be 135 anyway since they banned trucks and dont want traffic in the neighborhood.  Was thinking about this when I proposed I-10 running to San Diego, that Phoenix & LA would be outraged to not be on I-10

What's the point of changing I-8 to I-10?  They have had their current designations for over 50 years now?  All it would do is to cause confusion and make all maps be instantly obsolete.

[bugo]

Saint Paul has a 45-mph stretch of I-35E, where no trucks are allowed.  They don't deserve to be part of 35 anymore.  And does anyone in Dallas really care that thru traffic would go thru Fort Worth?  Does anyone drive through on 35E and say "hey I never knew this beautiful city was here lets spend some time here".   

I think that does happen, but probably fairly rarely. I became interested in Kansas City only after driving through it on I-70 on my way to somewhere else. I always knew it was there, but never thought of it as "oh hey, I should go there for fun" until I drove through it

I used to live in KC.  There's a lot of neat stuff there if you know where to look.

[texaskdog]

Dallas: 20, 30, 35E, 45.

so if Dallas "lost" 35, 45 could still run through on the northern end of the "old" 35E, whereas the southern part could be a freeway extending north on US 75

[texaskdog]

I know when the US Hwy system was created, cities demanded to get a road ending in 0 or 5.  Would anyone care anymore?  I would think now they want less traffic in town.  35E in Saint paul should be 135 anyway since they banned trucks and dont want traffic in the neighborhood.  Was thinking about this when I proposed I-10 running to San Diego, that Phoenix & LA would be outraged to not be on I-10

What's the point of changing I-8 to I-10?  They have had their current designations for over 50 years now?  All it would do is to cause confusion and make all maps be instantly obsolete.

And we American cannot accept change (or everything would be metric)

You must hate the fictional highway posts

[TheStranger]

And we American cannot accept change (or everything would be metric)

It's not that though.

Just like area code splits/overlays, the impact of a major route's renumbering has to be understood from the perspective of maps becoming obsolete, brochures having to be reprinted for local businesses, etc., never mind the cost of signage to the DOT.

If CalTrans made a point of NOT freeing Route 180 in the 1964 renumbering for potential 3di use (as 180 was one of the original 1934 state routes), it makes sense that drastic number changes for long highways are not particularly sought out except as last resort by most jurisdictions.

[agentsteel53]

If CalTrans made a point of NOT freeing Route 180 in the 1964 renumbering for potential 3di use (as 180 was one of the original 1934 state routes), it makes sense that drastic number changes for long highways are not particularly sought out except as last resort by most jurisdictions.

interestingly, they had no problem giving up 5, 10, 15, and they bounced 7 around in the LA area, which had to be more confusing than having 180 end up moderately far away. 

[TheStranger]

If CalTrans made a point of NOT freeing Route 180 in the 1964 renumbering for potential 3di use (as 180 was one of the original 1934 state routes), it makes sense that drastic number changes for long highways are not particularly sought out except as last resort by most jurisdictions.

interestingly, they had no problem giving up 5, 10, 15, and they bounced 7 around in the LA area, which had to be more confusing than having 180 end up moderately far away. 

Trust me, I agree with you 100%.

10 was given up several years before...

8 was given up in Stockton too.  So I don't know why 180 got the special treatment, but not the above numbers listed.

Maybe they simply only thought of the one and two digit numbers and never thought they'd run out of x80 routes?  At 1964, IIRC only 280, 480, 580, 680, and the original 880 existed, whether on the drawing board or in the field - 380 was still State Route 186, 780 had not been conceived (as it was still 680 at the time with 21 running from Benicia to Fairfield) and 980 was still proposed Route 24 extension.

[agentsteel53]

10 was given up several years before...

do you know the exact year?  I've seen a 1961 sign with a 42 outline shield.  (next-3-exits sign in the median on 5 northbound.)

[texaskdog]

And we American cannot accept change (or everything would be metric)

It's not that though.

Just like area code splits/overlays, the impact of a major route's renumbering has to be understood from the perspective of maps becoming obsolete, brochures having to be reprinted for local businesses, etc., never mind the cost of signage to the DOT.

If CalTrans made a point of NOT freeing Route 180 in the 1964 renumbering for potential 3di use (as 180 was one of the original 1934 state routes), it makes sense that drastic number changes for long highways are not particularly sought out except as last resort by most jurisdictions.

Realizing none of us would be confused   and the GPS crowd will do whatever their machines tell them to.

[InterstateNG]

So I guess 90% of this nations drivers would be up shit creek then.

Yet another brilliant idea.