Highway Data Discussion > Updates to Highway Data

TN: TN-385 should be split?

(1/1)

rickmastfan67:
I think we need to split TN-385 and removed from the now I-269 segment.  I don't think TN even considers the now I-269 part as TN-385 anymore.

Especially with this signage at the northern end of I-269.

mapcat:
It's not clear what would be gained by this. 385 isn't on the signs or mileposts, but Tennessee often doesn't sign state highway concurrencies. Both segments that are signed 385 are in the same county, only about 17 miles apart.

Markkos1992:
Splitting TN 385 could argue that TN 162 should be split too (because of lack of signage along I-140).

rickmastfan67:

--- Quote from: mapcat on April 18, 2024, 05:40:32 pm ---It's not clear what would be gained by this. 385 isn't on the signs or mileposts, but Tennessee often doesn't sign state highway concurrencies. Both segments that are signed 385 are in the same county, only about 17 miles apart.

--- End quote ---

However, there's clear 'END/BEGIN' signage for TN-385.

I mean, there's no signage saying 'TN-385 follow I-269' signage which could imply a multiplex to be honest.

I would also recommend that the same treatment be done for TN-162, as it also has clear 'END/BEGIN' signage at it's southern junction with I-140.

Navigation

[0] Message Index