Renumbering of I-74 in the Carolinas

[myriad1973]

I'm sure I'm not the only one who has said anything about this subject before, but wouldn't it make more sense for AASHTO to give in and use one of the "forbidden" numbers in the interstate numbering system? I mean, a designation of I-36 or something similar would fit in the grid so much more than taking I-74 so far out of the grid. It just makes more sense. Is there a way to contact AASHTO concerning this? This crap with just using any ol' number is ridiculous... like I-99.

[NE2]

It's called I-74 because Congress designated it as part of the "I-73/74 High-Priority Corridor" (but didn't actually call it Interstate 74).

On the other hand, I-99 was numbered by Congress.

[hbelkins]

Someone, obviously high on LSD or PCP, envisioned that one day there would be an interstate extending from Cincinnati through southern Ohio, West Virginia and southwestern Virginia, to connect to that route known as I-74 in North Carolina.

[myriad1973]

It's called I-74 because Congress designated it as part of the "I-73/74 High-Priority Corridor" (but didn't actually call it Interstate 74).

On the other hand, I-99 was numbered by Congress.

This is true.... good ol' scholar Bud Schuster.

Someone, obviously high on LSD or PCP, envisioned that one day there would be an interstate extending from Cincinnati through southern Ohio, West Virginia and southwestern Virginia, to connect to that route known as I-74 in North Carolina.

As it stands right now, to my knowledge, Ohio and WV do not plan on having the I-74 extended through their states, so it would be discontinuous. That would be the perfect excuse to renumber it to something that makes more sense.

[Big John]

If the eastern I-74 is renumbered, what excuse will Wisconsin use to get I-41?

[Alps]

If the eastern I-74 is renumbered, what excuse will Wisconsin use to get I-41?

The fact that it fits perfectly in the grid and it's already called 41. Good luck to them.

[amroad17]

Just renumber I-74 to I-34.  For the most part, it would fit the grid.  Better than having an I-74 SOUTH of I-40.

[vtk]

Long diagonal routes are never going to fit the grid.  I-74 in its entirety makes perfect sense as one route, except perhaps for its easternmost part that turns due south or even southwest.

The only problem is the lack of a physically-constructed Interstate in the middle.  But in my mind that's conceptually similar to US 10 crossing Lake Michigan.

[NE2]

I-74 fits the grid better than US 52. Suck it.

[Brandon]

I-74 fits the grid better than US 52. Suck it.

The abuse of the US route numbering system should be a warning of how irrelevant a logical numbering system can become when it is used with reckless abandon.  Diagonal routes will never fit the grid perfectly, and grid system isn't perfect, but it is what we have to deal with.  That said, discontinuous diagonal routes (such as I-74) should have their separate sections as different numbers.  Continuous ones (such as US-52, I-71) make more sense as one number.

As for US-10 (and for that matter, US-2), it makes more sense as it is not a discontinuous diagonal route.  It is a discontinuous route that has both parts fitting into the grid where it is numbered.  Ditto with I-76, ditto with I-86.

[vdeane]

I-74 is not a diagonal.  Were it built, it would be shaped like a flattened S.

[Brandon]

I-74 is not a diagonal.  Were it built, it would be shaped like a flattened S.

However, it is diagonal in the sense that it is an even number crossing north to south across the grid just as I-85 does from west to east.  I-81, I-82, I-44 and others are similar due to geography.

[vtk]

I-74 is not a diagonal.  Were it built, it would be shaped like a flattened S.

It's no curvier than any other long Interstate.  And yes, it's diagonal, because it crosses several I-x0's and I-x5's.

[roadman65]

To the one who started this topic.  I think we all agree that I-74 should be renumbered, but we roadgeeks cannot do anything to influence AASHTO to do the right thing.  In many cases, and in today's hard times, no one wants to spend money as it does cost "millions" of our hard earned tax money to do a simple thing as change a route number.

You, in reality, would need to have input from the locals along the corridor it runs to hold hearings first.  Then petition AASHTO, before finally reaching FHWA for finalizing prior to getting congress and state legislatures to warrant the funding.  Most locals are not road geeks and could care less what number it is given, so I-74 would be okay for them.  In NYC, it cost into the millions (this according to NYSDOT who I once emailed years ago about changing NY Interstates to mile based exits) just to change the name of the Innerborough Parkway to Jackie Robinson Parkway that is a very short freeway in Queens.

Great thought though as I-34, I-36, I-38, or even I-28 would all work and eliminate the useless US 74 and I-74 overlap.  In my opinion, all of US 74 from Charlotte to Wilmington should be an interstate of its own, but leave that idea to fictional highways.  Back on subject, it will never happen.  Ohio and West Virginia would build its missing link before someone in Washington would change the number, and the OH- WV link is pretty much dead as you say.  Even Obama changing his mind on his policies would happen before I-74 is completed, so you see. 

Get used to the US numbering scheme to be unfair, just like US 6 being south of US 20, or even US 44 between the 2 and US 46 being a 74 mile short route between US 6 and US 22.

[vdeane]

I-74 is not a diagonal.  Were it built, it would be shaped like a flattened S.

However, it is diagonal in the sense that it is an even number crossing north to south across the grid just as I-85 does from west to east.  I-81, I-82, I-44 and others are similar due to geography.

I-74 is not a diagonal.  Were it built, it would be shaped like a flattened S.

It's no curvier than any other long Interstate.  And yes, it's diagonal, because it crosses several I-x0's and I-x5's.

And almost all of I-74 east of Cincinnati is multiplexed with I-73.

[Alps]

And almost all of I-74 east of Cincinnati is multiplexed with I-73.

No, it's not. There happens to be a N-S multiplex that's currently signed, but most of I-74, even in its current form, is independent.

[SP Cook]

Segment one (I-77 near Mt. Airy to I-40 in Winston-Salem):

option one - renumber as I-177.
option two - renumber the short connector section between I-77 and US 52 at Mt. Airy as US 52, and multiplex US 52 with I-77 south of Exit 8 in Virginia, renumber US 52 from Mt. Airy to Exit 8 as "ALT US 52 or a state route.

Piedmont Triad Metroplex:

Leave US 311 as US 311.
Renumber short segment from I-40 Exit 212 to US 220 as I-840.

South of that:

US 220, US 1, US 74.

IF SC 22 is ever connected all the way to I-95, renumber as I-195. 

End of problem

[Charles2]

I-74 fits the grid better than US 52. Suck it.

And U.S. 52 in Minnesota and North Dakota is no less illogical than U.S. 62 in Pennsylvania and New York, or U.S. 79 in Kentucky.

[Hot Rod Hootenanny]

Is I-74 in the Carolinas (built and proposed) more N-S or E-W?

[Alps]

Is I-74 in the Carolinas (built and proposed) more N-S or E-W?

It's more N-S, but it's parallel to I-26. The grid skews to make the Appalachians the north-south line, sort of how Quebec makes the St. Lawrence River east-west.

[mukade]

If the two sections of I-74 will never be connected, it should not be I-74 in North Carolina.

Is I-74 in the Carolinas (built and proposed) more N-S or E-W?

Assuming 3 options: a) N-S, b) E-W, and, c) diagonal it is option c.

By plan or by accident, the I-2x highways are diagonal so I-28 would fit nicely in that grid, wouldn't it?

Google map of the I-2x highways

[Strider]

I do agree with I-28.. it does fit the grid very well.. (while all I-22, I-24, I-26) could be used in the west coast to match with the grid even more.

but again, NC gets away with numbers for some reason.

[Brandon]

I-28 would work very nicely.  As I said before, the difference between I-74 and US-52 (or US-62 or US-79) is that I-74 is discontinuous and will be permanently unless Ohio, West Virginia, and Virginia build their parts.  I don't see that happening in any foreseeable future.

[rickmastfan67]

I've said this before, and I'll say it again, just make I-74 in NC a Southern I-79.  That way you can multiplex I-79 along I-77 and be done with it.

[myriad1973]

So it seems a lot of people agree with my thoughts about renumbering I-74 in the south.

Now I did put some further thought into it, and its position in the grid, and here's what I was thinking and why. I was thinking I-42 may work better, and here's why: Assuming the freeway is built in West Virginia (and it might), that would put most of the freeway north of I-40. In the US highway grid, US-42 does the same thing in reference to US-40, but only in the opposite direction. And even if it is not built in WV, it would still work.

Any thoughts on the logic of this numbering?

I looked into a southern I-79, but the only issue would be the big loop around the Appalachians, causing people to have to backtrack a couple hundred miles. That would be too inefficient from a travel time perspective.

In any case, if I'm crazy for mentioning I-42, I-28 would be very doable. Now how do we go about petitioning AASHTO to renumber the freeway so it makes sense?