Right-of-Way Narrowing on Former State Highways

[Brian556]

Finally found a good example of this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.506372,-96.955795,3a,33y,118.78h,81.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3LkRN8FLjH6zHD6URVCF3w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

Not sure why they allow the fences right up against the edge of the pavement, if this indeed a county road as Google says it is.
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.5058727,-96.9530014,3a,75y,69.31h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slwE_F-8288SQ1MoIkquq3A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

[TheHighwayMan3561]

These roads look so lightly used that it's likely no one cares, even if they are actually in the road's ROW. Not sure how a county applies ROW to how a state highway department would; maybe the county sees less need for an expansive ROW as the state would?

[Max Rockatansky]

Really that's pretty common out here in California on older state highway alignments.  Some notable examples that come to mind would be Pozo Road (old SSR 178), Boyd Drive (old SSR 163), and Santa Rosa Creek Road (old SSR 41/46).  There is substantially lesser standards for county maintained roadways in every facet than with Caltrans maintained highways.  The closed in fence lines pushing up to the roadway are a common sight to be sure.

[JREwing78]

That stretch doesn't look like it's received any kind of "maintenance" in about 30 years.

[sparker]

Narrowing of rural facilities post-relinquishment, at least here in CA, is more often than not due to simple maintenance neglect as pertains to shoulders -- once in county hands, they have a tendency to crumble at the edges once regular care ceases.  In a short time this impinges on the carriageway itself; unless county funds are forthcoming, gouges often appear along the sides of such roads.

When it comes to urban ex-state routes, many cities put ex-highways on a "road diet", with narrowed lanes, often placing bike lanes added along the outside of the original lanes.  In San Jose, for example, 13th Street between Santa Clara Ave. and Hedding Ave. is the former (pre -'61) alignment of old CA 17 (LRN 5).  It was and is wider than the paralleling streets, but the streetside parking area has been marked with a white line that narrows the lane itself to approximately 12 feet, leaving the outer parking areas about two cars in width.  Besides the "shrinking" of the travel lanes, there are 4-way stops at least every three blocks; the idea is to simply slow down and discourage through traffic through this very old neighborhood.  OTOH, its "opposite number", so to speak, Race St., which formed part of the south CA 17 egress from central San Jose hasn't changed since it was relinquished circa 1962; it's still the original 2 lanes, but as it was a bit narrower from the start, the city has never elected to change a thing.   

[Max Rockatansky]

Narrowing of rural facilities post-relinquishment, at least here in CA, is more often than not due to simple maintenance neglect as pertains to shoulders -- once in county hands, they have a tendency to crumble at the edges once regular care ceases.  In a short time this impinges on the carriageway itself; unless county funds are forthcoming, gouges often appear along the sides of such roads.

When it comes to urban ex-state routes, many cities put ex-highways on a "road diet", with narrowed lanes, often placing bike lanes added along the outside of the original lanes.  In San Jose, for example, 13th Street between Santa Clara Ave. and Hedding Ave. is the former (pre -'61) alignment of old CA 17 (LRN 5).  It was and is wider than the paralleling streets, but the streetside parking area has been marked with a white line that narrows the lane itself to approximately 12 feet, leaving the outer parking areas about two cars in width.  Besides the "shrinking" of the travel lanes, there are 4-way stops at least every three blocks; the idea is to simply slow down and discourage through traffic through this very old neighborhood.  OTOH, its "opposite number", so to speak, Race St., which formed part of the south CA 17 egress from central San Jose hasn't changed since it was relinquished circa 1962; it's still the original 2 lanes, but as it was a bit narrower from the start, the city has never elected to change a thing.   

Not to make this a California former highway thread but I'll add to that since you just hit urban areas and I did some mountain routes.  There are some decent relinquished highway maintenance in San Joaquin Valley.  Several portions of US 99 are in really good driving condition, in particular south of Bakersfield (CA 99 Business is an example) northward to Bakersfield.  Parts of LRN 135 were in very good shape and had normal lane/should widths you'd expect from a normal highway in the Valley; 56 Avenue and10th Avenue come to mind.  Older sections of 198 get the same treatment in Kings and Tulare county....almost all the older sections of 65 still exist are well maintained local county roads as well.  Even 180 on Dunlap Road east of Fresno despite being mountainous is fairly wide and probably was something done well after it was a state highway, it could use a repaving though.

Some other states I've had a lot of interaction with have had a huge variance in quality when turned over to the county:

Florida:  A lot of times there is very little to no difference between a state road in Florida and a former section which was turned over.  Most of the time the county route actually retains the same route number it did when it was a state road, but with just a standard MUTCD county shield in place of the state.  The more rural you get the obviousness of the older designs seems to stand out given that there might be narrower lanes or little to no shoulder.  Some common examples where this can be problematic on a well traversed road would be CR 41/CR 541 in Polk/Hernando County and most of CR 39 in general.  There are some examples like older sections of FL 50 that really are just falling apart in Sumter County that have the fences closing in like the OP described.

Arizona:  There isn't a ton of specifically "state" highway former alignments but rather a ton of US Routes.  Former sections along I-8 of US 80 are in terrible shape given they haven't been repaved in a long time, but generally retain their width.  Mojave County Route 10 was a former section of US 66 and was in awful shape with the pavement quality until most of it was repaved last year, there are still bad sections south of Oatman...guess the tourism was a hazard.  There is a whole alignment of US 89 north of Flagstaff that has crumbled away almost completely but can be seen from the modern highway along with another south of I-40 south to Prescott.  There are sections of Old US 60 between Superior and Globe that have essentially washed away like near Pinto Creek or aren't even accessibly locally like the Old Queen Creek Tunnel.  Old AZ 87 on the Beeline from Mount Ord is decent shape but isn't a public road through Sun Flower.  Old AZ 279 west of I-17 largely has crumbled away but some of it is decently maintained.  Old AZ 260 is a very maintained section of roadway now known as the Christopher Creek Loop.

[Rick Powell]

One problem with narrowing up former state ROW is the existence of utilities on the edge of the state property. In IL, utilities are on it by permit and there is no cost for occupying the space if the permit is approved, except that they are required to pay to relocate if the state widens the road. It opens up a hornet's nest if the property is now proposed to be in private hands. I remember several excess parcels that were considered for sale that were nixed due to a utility issue.