|
I consider the numbers below to be major violations, because 1.) the
routes have never come anywhere close to their implied "parent", nor to
any of their implied "siblings"; and 2.) because logical alternatives
were available, which would've fit within the numbering guidelines.
|
|
US 101
|
Some people don't consider this number to be a violation. In a way, it
kind of makes sense to have US 1 running along the East Coast, and US
101 on the West Coast. But when viewed in the context of all other US
routes, the number implies a branch of US 1 - and in that sense this number
is a major violation. I think the route should've been assigned US 99
or US x99.
|
|
US 163
|
I can't imagine what AASHTO was thinking when they assigned this number,
but I will admit there wasn't an easy solution. Looking at a modern map
of the area, you'd think US x91 would've been a good choice... but keep
in mind that when this route was commissioned in the early 1970's, US
191 hadn't yet been extended through eastern Utah. So the original US
163 went all the way up to Crescent Jct, and connected only with even-numbered
routes: US 160 at its south end, US 666 in the middle, and US 6/50 on
the north. Given that, I guess I would've narrowed it down to either US
x60 (even though it was a north/south route) or US x89 (even though it
didn't connect with US 89). Neither of those is perfect either, but US
163? Where'd that come from?? Anyway, now that it does connect
with US 191, I think it should be changed to US x91. Maybe "391", since
there's already a SR 291 in UT (although it's a very minor, unsigned route).
That would be interesting, too, since "391" is kind of "163" turned upside
down... you can click
here to view a map showing US 163 in that context.
|
(The "4xx series" routes below were commissioned in the 1980's
and 1990's. At least two of them are along "high-priority corridors" and/or
a possible future interstate route. But that doesn't excuse the fact that
they were assigned numbers that are drastically out of sync with the rest
of the system. The links below go to maps [averaging about 100k in size]
that show these routes alongside the indicated route families.)
|
|
US 400
|
Wouldn't one of these options have made more sense?
x50 (its
westernmost 135 miles are co-signed with US 50)
x54 (it's
co-signed with US 54 for 143 miles through KS)
x66 (it connects
with US 166, and it's supposedly the future I-66 corridor)
|
|
US 412
|
What was wrong with these possibilties?
x56 (its
westernmost 135 miles are co-signed with US 56)
x60 (it's
co-signed briefly with US 60 in OK)
x62 (it's
co-signed with US 62 through much of AR)
x64 (it's
co-signed with US 64 through much of OK)
x70 (it meets
US 70 in TN and US 270 in OK)
|
|
US 425
|
Originally this route connected to US 65 on one end, and US 165 on the
other. So why not US 265? [map]
Now that US 425 has been extended south to Natchez, I think the entire
thing should be renumbered as US 65. The current segment of US 65 between
Pine Bluff AR and Clayton LA could be renumbered US 265... and then the
number "425" would be nothing but an infamous historical footnote.
|
|
I consider the numbers below to be "technical violations": these routes
never actually connected with their implied "parent", but they were close
enough that I believe their numbers were acceptable nonetheless.
|
|
US 104
|
Maybe x20 would've been a better choice. But, in its defense, it was
on roughly the same latitude as US 4 [map].
|
| US 121 |
While it does connect with the historic US 21 corridor [map],
this route was created some 30 years after US 21 had been decommissioned
in that area. US x19
would've made the most sense, and US x23
would've worked better, too. |
|
US 164 [II]
|
Today US 64 does connect with the former route of US 164 (at Teec
Nos Pos AZ). But during the brief period when 164 existed, the west end
of US 64 was in Santa Fe NM [map].
US 164 connected with US 66 and US 89 on one end, and US 666 and US 160
on the other... so US x66 probably would've been a better choice. (US
766? Or else US 366 [III] and US 566 were available.) On the other hand,
much of the route lay along what had only recently been designated as
AZ hwy. 64, so maybe the number "164" was intended to minimize
confusion.
|
| US 410 |
It could've been x95, x97, or x99... but it was an east-west route. Playing
off US 730, it could've been US 930 (the only remaining x30 number then
available). But that seems like a stretch. So I think 410 was a pretty good
choice, all things considered [map]. |
|
US 830
|
Ran parallel to (and right across the Columbia River from) its implied
parent, US 30 [map].
|
|
A handful of US routes connect(ed) with a sibling, but never their implied
parent. In other words, they're "branches of branches". So I don't consider
these to be numbering violations - only idiosyncrasies.
|
|
US 701
|
Connects with US 301 and US 501.
|
|
US 309
|
Connected with US 209.
|
|
US 411 [II]
|
Connected with US 311.
|
|
US 217
|
Connected with US 17-1.
|
|
US 220
|
Connected with US 120.
|
| US 566 |
Connected with US 366[I]. |
|
US 187
|
Connected with US 287.
|
|
US 491
|
Connects with US 191.
|
|
US 295
|
Connected with US 195.
|
|
US 395
|
Connects with US 195.
|
|
Several existing US routes no longer connect with their implied parent,
but did historically. For that reason, I don't consider these to be numbering
violations. In fact, some of them are interesting historical relics.
|
|
US 310
|
Connected to US 10 at Laurel MT.
|
|
US 311
|
Connected to US 11 at Roanoke VA.
|
|
US 411
|
Connected to US 11 at Greeneville TN.
|
|
US 212
|
Connected to US 12 at Willmar MN and Miles City MT.
|
|
US 219
|
Connected to US 19 at Princeton WV.
|
|
US 138
|
Connected to US 38 at Sterling CO.
|
|
US 641
|
Connected to US 41 at Evansville IN.
|
| US 158 |
Connected to US 58 at Franklin VA. |
|
US 166
|
Connected to US 66 at Joplin MO.
|
|
US 266
|
Connected to US 66 at Oklahoma City OK.
|
|
US 276
|
Connected to US 76 at Laurens SC.
|
|
US 277
|
Connected to US 77 at Oklahoma City OK.
|
|
US 180
|
Connected to US 80 at Weatherford TX.
|
|
US 380
|
Connected to US 80 at Cisco TX.
|
|
US 181
|
Connected to US 81 at San Antonio TX.
|
|
US 281
|
Connected to US 81 at San Antonio TX.
|
|
US 183
|
Connected to US 83 at Vivian SD and Junction TX.
|
|
US 283
|
Connected to US 83 at Junction TX.
|
|
US 191
|
Connected to US 91 at Idaho Falls ID and Brigham City UT.
|
|
US 199
|
Connected to US 99 at Grants Pass OR.
|