AARoads Forum

Something I thought about last night: freeways that either were once grandfathered into the system OR were built as signed Interstates, only to be signed as a non-Interstate freeway in more recent times.

(Kinda a gray area for routes that have hidden interstate designations, i.e. I-305 in Sacramento or I-124 in Chattanooga)

Some examples:

CALIFORNIA
- Orange Freeway in San Dimas from I-10 to I-210, formerly a part of I-210 until several years ago, but now Route 57's northernmost extension.
- former Route 480 in San Francisco (now demolished), was Interstate until 1968 or so.
- Not sure if this counts: US 101 between I-5 and the San Bernardino Freeway was part of a mid-1960s I-105 designation that as far as I know was never signed
- Route 99 between Stockton and Sacramento was at one point Temp I-5
- The segment of Business 80/Route 51 between Route 99 and E Street in Sacramento was built as I-80 in the mid-1960s (unlike the 1950s segment of what had been US 99E from E Street to Arden Way, and the 1940s portion through the Marconi Curve)
- Although Route 1 in the Presidio and in the southernmost parts of San Francisco were both intended as part of I-280, not sure that was ever signed as such (likewise, Doyle Drive segment of US 101 was planned to be added to I-480)
- The Central Freeway between I-80 and Fell Street in San Francisco was supposed to be part of the I-80 western extension (though built right before the Interstate designations came into being) and was marked as such in mid-1960s Rand McNally insets...not sure if it was signed, though I think it may have been (1980s signage for I-80 west on the San Francisco Skyway were for "I-80/US 101 Civic Center" as opposed to today's "US 101 San Jose/Golden Gate Bridge")

NEW JERSEY
- Route 495 is the former (until 1989) I-495 to the Lincoln Tunnel

PENNSYLVANIA
- I-378 was demoted to Route 378 (but was built as an Interstate) once I-78 was rerouted to bypass Allentown/Bethlehem to the south; concurrently, the US 22 Lehigh Valley Thruway had been I-78 until then.

QuoteOrange Freeway in San Dimas from I-10 to I-210, formerly a part of I-210 until several years ago, but now Route 57's northernmost extension.

I've often wondered about something similar.  Was CA-15 south of I-8 ever part of Interstate 15?  Same with the section of CA-110.  Was it ever part,or intended to eventually be part of I-110?

* US 80 in TX between I-20 and I-30 - formerly part of I-20
* US 75 in Omaha, NE, between I-480 and the interchange with the Storz Expressway - Once signed as I-580?

US-395 between Carson City and Reno was, at one point, signed I-580.  It will be so again.  I believe the first time was an error.

I-75 used to terminate on Florida's gulf coast and followed a route which is now some three-digit state highway.  FL-638 or something equally obscure.

CA-110 and CA-15 were never interstates.  CA-15 might one day get the upgrade, but CA-110 is quaintly substandard, having been built in 1939-40 as the first freeway in California.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 13, 2011, 09:37:11 PM
I-75 used to terminate on Florida's gulf coast and followed a route which is now some three-digit state highway.  FL-638 or something equally obscure.

SR 681, but I'm not sure that it was ever signed.

The SR 13 freeway in Atlanta was once I-85.

Quote from: NE2 on October 13, 2011, 10:24:24 PM

Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 13, 2011, 09:37:11 PM
I-75 used to terminate on Florida's gulf coast and followed a route which is now some three-digit state highway.  FL-638 or something equally obscure.

SR 681, but I'm not sure that it was ever signed.

I-75 never terminated at FL 681, as the interstate opened between the River Road exit (Exit 191) near North Port and U.S. 301 near Ellenton (Exit 224) in 1980. I distinctly remember as a kid that my parents would use this open portion of I-75 and there was never a time that we had to default onto FL 681 when we headed southbound. I also remember when they built the partial interchange of FL 681 and U.S. 41 and I want to say that that was sometime after 1980 (maybe 1981 or 1982), though on this fact I could be a year or two off...

-GA 13 ('Spring Buford Connector'), formerly I-85, now essentially the I-85 'local' lanes between I-75 and GA 400 in Atlanta, GA.

Mike

Sorta kinda counts: what was originally CA-17 between I-280 and US-101 in San Jose was to be the extension of I-280. Was marked as such on maps, not sure if it was signed (although I remember a BGS around First Street that had room for a second shield). Similarly, the same freeway between US-101 and CA-262 was going to be the end of I-680. Those routes were moved off that freeway and it reverted to being CA-17, only to rejoin the Interstate system as I-880 in 1984.

US 6 bypass at Willimantic was signed as I-84 from its opening (1971) to the 84/86 swap in 1984.

I-170 in Baltimore, aka the Highway to Nowhere, was signed but was decommissioned after I-70 through the city was deleted. It doesn't connect to anything important and there have been proposals to rip up the road, re-fill the depressed corridor where it was built, and then either build a park, run a transit line through, or reconstruct houses.

VA-895 near Richmond, also called the Pocahontas Parkway, was once planned as an Interstate, but Interstate status was denied because it was built as a toll road. So it doesn't qualify for this list, but I list it as an honorable mention.

BTW, I assume for purposes of this thread that "temporary Interstates" don't count, given that those markers were used for convenience and were never intended to denote "true" Interstates. Temporary I-95 was once designated on the Baltimore-Washington Parkway until the portion between those cities was constructed, for example.

QuoteI-75 used to terminate on Florida's gulf coast and followed a route which is now some three-digit state highway.  FL-638 or something equally obscure.

Wasn't the route that used to follow what is now I-75 (the east-west segment through the Eveglades) the old US 94?

Quote from: OCGuy81 on October 14, 2011, 09:46:40 AM
Wasn't the route that used to follow what is now I-75 (the east-west segment through the Eveglades) the old US 94?

No. US 94 is now US 41; Alligator Alley was built later as SR 84.

I think SR 315 west of downtown Columbus was once signed as I-70/71.

Quote from: OCGuy81 on October 14, 2011, 09:46:40 AM
Wasn't the route that used to follow what is now I-75 (the east-west segment through the Eveglades) the old US 94?

Actually, it was State Road 84. Now it exists in two distant pieces, since I-75 (Alligator Alley) doesn't even use it as a secret route number. US 94 was the portion of Tamiami Trail between Naples and Miami, and then became part of US 41, when US 94 was deprecated.

(tree'd)

There is also a "CR 94" (Loop Road) that was supposed to be the original alignment of the Tamiami Trail, but when money ran dry, the story goes that Barron Collier footed the bill with the pretext that it remains fully in Collier County (until reaching Dade County). CR 94 is nothing but a bumpy, muddy (but scenic) route through the Everglades. Personally not recommended by me for exploring unless you have an SUV, don't try it by car unless it's been dry for a few weeks. But worth the view...

Quote from: NE2 on October 13, 2011, 10:24:24 PM

Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 13, 2011, 09:37:11 PM
I-75 used to terminate on Florida's gulf coast and followed a route which is now some three-digit state highway.  FL-638 or something equally obscure.

SR 681, but I'm not sure that it was ever signed.

This is the closest thing to signed...on the overpass?

(https://live.staticflickr.com/8049/29012350393_41d8118949_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/LcHSZP)

Thanks for clarifying the old US 94 alignment. 

Quick question on that note.  Are I-75 and US-41 signed as East-West through the Everglades?  I swear I saw a photo on a message board long ago that read "75 West - Fort Meyers)

It's both for I-75: I've seen all four directions in the field.

Southeast Roads to the Rescue: (http://www.southeastroads.com/i-075_fl.html)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.southeastroads.com%2Fflorida050%2Fi-075_shields_at_broward_rest_area_02.jpg&hash=161809f987c38f1a3fe1672408915fb8479df6b9)

The few blurry shots I have show "North" for heading west...love-bug infestations are bad for photos and car finishes. Naturally, the junction between I-75 and I-595 and SR 869 show it in it's "proper" orientation:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wikimapia.org%2Fp%2F00%2F00%2F42%2F22%2F52_big.jpg&hash=b0d7271ed5b62af161d41dff1dfeccf2fb4c0cdd)

Tamiami Trail signs I have on file show US 41 as North/South, it does go gently northward from Miami towards Naples. But like I-75, there's also some East/West tabs as well:

Southeast Roads, again (http://www.southeastroads.com/us-041sn_fl.html)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.southeastroads.com%2Fflorida010%2Fus-041_sb_app_us-001_03.jpg&hash=1e6fa034e6d020a73eccef072256226bef548fc6)

Seems to be a common theme in Florida. US 98 is signed which ever way the wind blows (http://www.flickr.com/photos/formulanone/6243487306/in/photostream).

If only this happened to I-99...nah, that'll never happen!  :spin:

Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 13, 2011, 09:37:11 PM
CA-110 and CA-15 were never interstates.  CA-15 might one day get the upgrade, but CA-110 is quaintly substandard, having been built in 1939-40 as the first freeway in California.

The Harbor Freeway through downtown Los Angeles between 101 and 10 (ostensibly state route 110) IS signed as I-110 starting from the Four-Level Interchange save for two shields southbound.  It's not perfectly standard but it isn't part of the parkway segment and has always allowed truck travel.  I don't know if southbound Harbor Freeway was ever mostly state-route shields prior to the 90s, or if it was always signed as I-110 from 1984 on.

As for Route 15, I recall that the designation upgrade would only occur once some fixes were made to the Route 15/Route 94 junction.  Having said that, I DID see an Interstate 15 shield off of I-5 south - albeit on a temporary orange-background sign - about 11 days ago!  Prior to the early 2000s, the segment between I-805 and I-8 was a city street (40th Street).

Quote from: TheStranger on October 14, 2011, 09:30:12 PMHaving said that, I DID see an Interstate 15 shield off of I-5 south

there is a permanent one at the Adams St. on-ramp. should be CA-15, but is I-15. 

Quote from: NE2 on October 14, 2011, 10:15:32 AM
I think SR 315 west of downtown Columbus was once signed as I-70/71.

Yep, the west innerbelt was signed as I-71. Never had signs on it for I-70 however.

Quote from: Revive 755 on October 13, 2011, 07:50:50 PM
* US 75 in Omaha, NE, between I-480 and the interchange with the Storz Expressway - Once signed as I-580?

The North Freeway in Omaha was apparently signed as I-580 in the late 1970s(although I've never seen any pictures to confirm it-it was marked on maps however), but only about the southernmost 2 miles of it would have been signed as I-580 because the last mile or so that includes the interchange with the Storz Expwy. wasn't finished until the late 1980s, and the I-580 designation was removed in 1980 due to the necessity of converting the I-480 interchange with the North Expwy. to interstate standards.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 14, 2011, 10:28:04 PM

Quote from: TheStranger on October 14, 2011, 09:30:12 PMHaving said that, I DID see an Interstate 15 shield off of I-5 south

there is a permanent one at the Adams St. on-ramp. should be CA-15, but is I-15. 

I remember seeing another one at Harbor Drive/old US 101 back in 1998, I think it's still there but not sure.

Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on October 14, 2011, 10:42:46 PM

Quote from: NE2 on October 14, 2011, 10:15:32 AM
I think SR 315 west of downtown Columbus was once signed as I-70/71.

Yep, the west innerbelt was signed as I-71. Never had signs on it for I-70 however.

Wasn't there a period of a few years when I-70 was planned to be added to the West Innerbelt (and presumably the other three legs as well) before they decided to route it directly to the Mound-Sandusk Interchange?

Quote from: TheStranger on October 13, 2011, 07:38:34 PM
PENNSYLVANIA
- I-378 was demoted to Route 378 (but was built as an Interstate) once I-78 was rerouted to bypass Allentown/Bethlehem to the south; concurrently, the US 22 Lehigh Valley Thruway had been I-78 until then.

I don't think the Lehigh Valley Thruway had ever been signed as I-78...unless maybe in it's first few years of being open?  At least in the early 80's, I-78 just disappeared west of Allentown.  PA 378 though I do believe was numbered in anticipation of the LVT becoming I-78 at some point, which would then change PA 378 to I-378.  The hold up was the Delaware River Crossing and the portion just east of that, and as stated, the eventual southern routing resolved that.

There was also a planned I-178 spur from the LVT into downtown Allentown that was never built.

Quote from: jemacedo9 on October 15, 2011, 10:14:30 AM

Quote from: TheStranger on October 13, 2011, 07:38:34 PM
PENNSYLVANIA
- I-378 was demoted to Route 378 (but was built as an Interstate) once I-78 was rerouted to bypass Allentown/Bethlehem to the south; concurrently, the US 22 Lehigh Valley Thruway had been I-78 until then.

I don't think the Lehigh Valley Thruway had ever been signed as I-78...unless maybe in it's first few years of being open?  At least in the early 80's, I-78 just disappeared west of Allentown.  PA 378 though I do believe was numbered in anticipation of the LVT becoming I-78 at some point, which would then change PA 378 to I-378.  The hold up was the Delaware River Crossing and the portion just east of that, and as stated, the eventual southern routing resolved that.

There was also a planned I-178 spur from the LVT into downtown Allentown that was never built.

I do remember for a long time that US 22 through the Allentown Bethlehem area was only signed "TO I-78" and a guide sign west of PA 100 used to say "END I-78- Follow US 22." It was never signed as I-78 proper and even the section from PA 100 to PA 61 had its ramps only signed US 22 until the section of I-78 was completed.  US 22 was primary with small confirmation I-78 shields to the side of it.

Originally I-78 and US 22 were to split west of the Lehigh Valley Brewery (former Schaefer, I do not know who owns it now) and it was never to be concurrent with PA 309. It was to have its own freeway to the south, and meet up with the current alignment at the I-78, PA 309, and PA 145 interchange.

I-95 Business in Fayetteville was signed as I-95 north of the Cape Fear River where it is a freeway now.  The current north terminus for the business route was constructed when the I-95 Fayetteville Bypass was completed in the mid 80's.  I-95 and I-95 Business were a continuous freeway and there was no interchange there.  I-95 shields were signed all the way along the I-95 Business & US 301 Freeway all the way to the Cape Fear River and a large warning sign was erected on an overhead bridge  southbound saying "END I-95,  Traffic Signals Ahead."

Quote from: roadman65 on October 15, 2011, 01:26:46 PM
I-95 Business in Fayetteville was signed as I-95 north of the Cape Fear River where it is a freeway now.  The current north terminus for the business route was constructed when the I-95 Fayetteville Bypass was completed in the mid 80's.  I-95 and I-95 Business were a continuous freeway and there was no interchange there.  I-95 shields were signed all the way along the I-95 Business & US 301 Freeway all the way to the Cape Fear River and a large warning sign was erected on an overhead bridge  southbound saying "END I-95,  Traffic Signals Ahead."

This is the same situation with I-85 from High Point to Lexington, where what is now I-85 Business was signed as I-85(and later Temp. I-85) until the bypass between Exits 87 and 118 opened. But neither of these are full freeways(except for the last few miles of the south end of I-85 Business.)

Hey, does anyone know if the former US 395 freeway in San Diego - not Route 163, but Kearny Villa Road through MCAS Miramar between Miramar Road and Route 163 - was ever signed as I-15?

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Kearny+Villa+Rd+%26+Miramar+Rd,+San+Diego,+CA&hl=en&ll=32.871874,-117.118549&spn=0.04938,0.104628&sll=32.874037,-117.120609&sspn=0.02469,0.052314&vpsrc=6&hnear=Kearny+Villa+Rd+%26+Miramar+Rd,+San+Diego,+California+92126&t=h&z=14

This would absolutely count if so.

Found two more possibilities in Texas:

1. In Dallas: Old maps show I-45 shields on US 75 (now SH 310), before the current I-45 was built parrallel to that route.
This 1961 TxDOT map, along with the Dallas detail section of several state maps from the time period, show it.
1961 Maphttps://www.tsl.state.tx.us/arc/maps/images/map5105.jpg (https://www.tsl.state.tx.us/arc/maps/images/map5105.jpg)

2. At Hillsboro, It appears that I-35 could have possibly been signed on US 77/81 (now SH 81) on the south side of town. The freeway was built all the way up to the southern edge of town, and part of it was bypassed when I-35 Hillsoboro bypass was completed.

Current Google Maphttp://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=31.980633,-97.120299&spn=0.013269,0.02738&t=h&z=16&vpsrc=6 (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=31.980633,-97.120299&spn=0.013269,0.02738&t=h&z=16&vpsrc=6)
1961 Maphttps://www.tsl.state.tx.us/arc/maps/images/map5174.jpg (https://www.tsl.state.tx.us/arc/maps/images/map5174.jpg)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F07022011slr197.jpg&hash=2f0696a3419e04885fb7f8d32d1ff5d68d04c100)
SH 81 (Old US 77/81)(Old I-35?)south of Hillsboro.

It wasn't an interstate when it was built, but what is up with the short freeway section of PA 309 in Allentown between I-78 and US 22? Where it's located and how it's built (narrow freeway with a narrow Jersey barrier median) looks like it was once an alignment of the Northeast Extension.
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=allentown,+pa&hl=en&ll=40.594403,-75.553064&spn=0.038388,0.077162&sll=40.638967,-75.146484&sspn=1.169204,2.469177&vpsrc=6&hnear=Allentown,+Lehigh,+Pennsylvania&t=h&z=14

Quote from: Brian556 on October 15, 2011, 08:35:45 PM
Found two more possibilities in Texas:

1. In Dallas: Old maps show I-45 shields on US 75 (now SH 310), before the current I-45 was built parrallel to that route.
This 1961 TxDOT map, along with the Dallas detail section of several state maps from the time period, show it.
1961 Maphttps://www.tsl.state.tx.us/arc/maps/images/map5105.jpg (https://www.tsl.state.tx.us/arc/maps/images/map5105.jpg)

And that map also shows one example I had forgotten about: today's US 80 east of Dallas, which was concurrent with I-20 until the 1980s.

Is it just me, or does I-85 seem to have the most section once posted as I-85 but no longer?  In Atlanta, around Greensboro, and around Spartanburg.

Quote from: Brandon on October 15, 2011, 11:03:38 PM
Is it just me, or does I-85 seem to have the most section once posted as I-85 but no longer?  In Atlanta, around Greensboro, and around Spartanburg.

And proposed to relocate from central Montgomery to a new bypass alignment to the south...

Quote from: huskeroadgeek on October 15, 2011, 02:10:23 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on October 15, 2011, 01:26:46 PM
I-95 Business in Fayetteville was signed as I-95 north of the Cape Fear River where it is a freeway now.  The current north terminus for the business route was constructed when the I-95 Fayetteville Bypass was completed in the mid 80's.  I-95 and I-95 Business were a continuous freeway and there was no interchange there.  I-95 shields were signed all the way along the I-95 Business & US 301 Freeway all the way to the Cape Fear River and a large warning sign was erected on an overhead bridge  southbound saying "END I-95,  Traffic Signals Ahead."

This is the same situation with I-85 from High Point to Lexington, where what is now I-85 Business was signed as I-85(and later Temp. I-85) until the bypass between Exits 87 and 118 opened. But neither of these are full freeways(except for the last few miles of the south end of I-85 Business.)

I believe that most of I-95 from Kenly to I-95 Business was mostly not full freeway at one time.  That might explain why there are interchanges almost every mile for that stretch.

Only one I know off is M-39/Southfield Freeway which was signed as TEMP. I-75 south of M-102/8 Mile Road in the 1960's.

I-96 was previously routed along what is now the M-5 freeway in Farmington Hills. When the Jerffries Freeway was completed, I-96 was rerouted down I-275 and east through Livonia on the Jefferies. The freeway in Farmington Hills was first an extension of M-102 and later M-5.

Of course, US 10 and US 27 (now US 127) were TEMP I-75 between Bay City and the Grayling area while M-76 was being converted to a freeway in the 1970s.

Quote from: TheStranger on October 13, 2011, 07:38:34 PM

NEW JERSEY
- Route 495 is the former (until 1989) I-495 to the Lincoln Tunnel

NYCDOT seems to think different - they still have I-495 signed - even after the most recent(?) rebuild of the West Side Hwy (don't remember how recent that was)  They're fairly new signs.

I'd point to my flickr photo, but I have to wait until I get home.

I have this photo from April, 2008 which shows an I-495 shield clearly on the west side of Manhattan

(//www.aaroads.com/shields/img/NY/NY19884952i2.jpg)

I had always thought it was a direct replacement for an older shield that a crew had installed without thinking.

Yes, NY signs I-495 all the way to the state line (and at least formerly along 34th Street).

Quote from: NE2 on October 18, 2011, 02:14:35 PM
Yes, NY signs I-495 all the way to the state line (and at least formerly along 34th Street).

I believe this one is gone.

(//www.aaroads.com/shields/img/NY/NY19724951i1.jpg)

I had also thought that one pre-dated the 1989 formal cancellation of the Cross-Manhattan Expressway.

Was the Lodge in Detroit ever signed as an interstate?

Hmm, I don't think anyone has brought up Kirkersville yet. 

Okay, here's a summary for those who aren't familiar.  In the 60s, a section of I-70 opened in eastern Ohio.  The east end of that section tied directly into US 40 in a town whose name I forget, where the two roads bump today.  The west end was at Kirkersville, but the alignments weren't so close at that point, so a diagonal mile of freeway was built to tie into US 40, which was already 4-laned from there west to Columbus.  The whole length of new Interstate, including this diagonal bit, was signed as both I-70 and US 40 for a few years.

The interchange at I-70 & OH 158 was rebuilt to ignore the diagonal freeway, presumably when the next section of I-70 was built, and the interchange at US 40 was downgraded back to a simple intersection years later. Today, what's left of the eastbound lanes of that diagonal portion of I-70 are carrying two-way traffic as part of OH 158.  The westbound lanes are fenced off and crumbling as vegetation takes over. 

Personally, I think OH 158 should go directly to Kirkersville the way it once did.  The former I-70 could be OH 158C, signed as TO I-70 one way, and TO US 40 WEST the other way. (If anyone wants to discuss that further, I believe there's a suitable thread or two in Fictional Highways...)

QuoteHmm, I don't think anyone has brought up Kirkersville yet. 

Okay, here's a summary for those who aren't familiar.  In the 60s, a section of I-70 opened in eastern Ohio.  The east end of that section tied directly into US 40 in a town whose name I forget, where the two roads bump today.  The west end was at Kirkersville, but the alignments weren't so close at that point, so a diagonal mile of freeway was built to tie into US 40, which was already 4-laned from there west to Columbus.  The whole length of new Interstate, including this diagonal bit, was signed as both I-70 and US 40 for a few years.

The interchange at I-70 & OH 158 was rebuilt to ignore the diagonal freeway, presumably when the next section of I-70 was built, and the interchange at US 40 was downgraded back to a simple intersection years later. Today, what's left of the eastbound lanes of that diagonal portion of I-70 are carrying two-way traffic as part of OH 158.  The westbound lanes are fenced off and crumbling as vegetation takes over. 

Personally, I think OH 158 should go directly to Kirkersville the way it once did.  The former I-70 could be OH 158C, signed as TO I-70 one way, and TO US 40 WEST the other way. (If anyone wants to discuss that further, I believe there's a suitable thread or two in Fictional Highways...)

This is an interesting situation. I looked at it on Google maps and it looks cool.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 13, 2011, 09:37:11 PM
US-395 between Carson City and Reno was, at one point, signed I-580.  It will be so again.  I believe the first time was an error.

The I-580 shields were posted on some intersecting side streets in Reno for a short time, to which there is still some evidence in the field here (http://g.co/maps/waf38)--and the I-580 shield did make it onto the Reno inset of a few official Nevada maps produced by NDOT in the mid 1980s. But any websites I've ever seen and old signs in the field (since replaced) have never given any indication that I-580 was signed on the mainline itself--the milepost panels would seem to differ, but those are erroneous in other respects... In this case, 5 miles of I-580 are officially on the books at the federal level, but the route is not signed currently.

All new BGSs on/for US 395 in Reno and Carson City are designed to accommodate an added I-580 shield once the designation becomes official.

Quote from: ftballfan on October 19, 2011, 09:53:14 PM
Was the Lodge in Detroit ever signed as an interstate?

No.  It was BS-696 at one time.

I-895 in Baltimore, MD was signed I-95 up until the Fort McHenry Tunnel opened in 1985.  I know this is still in the system, but the section of I-895 south of I-695 is not technically an interstate according to FHWA.  The pull through signs at US 1 SB along I-895 always showed it as I-95 proper and I believe still do to this day.

Quote from: roadman65 on October 22, 2011, 09:38:29 PM
I-895 in Baltimore, MD was signed I-95 up until the Fort McHenry Tunnel opened in 1985.  I know this is still in the system, but the section of I-895 south of I-695 is not technically an interstate according to FHWA.  The pull through signs at US 1 SB along I-895 always showed it as I-95 proper and I believe still do to this day.

Well, as of fall 2009, you have this:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.millenniumhwy.net%2F2009_Northeast_Day_5%2FImages%2F375.jpg&hash=6a55b934debecc607f6e414048d767db9188755c)

Followed by this:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.millenniumhwy.net%2F2009_Northeast_Day_5%2FImages%2F376.jpg&hash=23466ad354e705c6c08e3ec52f20598516639a32)

Quote from: roadman65 on October 22, 2011, 09:38:29 PM
I-895 in Baltimore, MD was signed I-95 up until the Fort McHenry Tunnel opened in 1985.  I know this is still in the system, but the section of I-895 south of I-695 is not technically an interstate according to FHWA.  The pull through signs at US 1 SB along I-895 always showed it as I-95 proper and I believe still do to this day.

When was it signed as I-95? I seem to remember that when I was a kid it bore no number at all, just the "Harbor Tunnel Thruway" name, and that the I-895 designation was applied a few years before the Fort McHenry Tunnel opened. 

Quote from: 1995hoo on October 22, 2011, 11:20:29 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on October 22, 2011, 09:38:29 PM
I-895 in Baltimore, MD was signed I-95 up until the Fort McHenry Tunnel opened in 1985.  I know this is still in the system, but the section of I-895 south of I-695 is not technically an interstate according to FHWA.  The pull through signs at US 1 SB along I-895 always showed it as I-95 proper and I believe still do to this day.

When was it signed as I-95? I seem to remember that when I was a kid it bore no number at all, just the "Harbor Tunnel Thruway" name, and that the I-895 designation was applied a few years before the Fort McHenry Tunnel opened. 

It was actually signed in a few places. 
The former I-895 & I-95 interchange (North) had I-895 signed as "WASHINGTON VIA I-95" on the sign for Harbor Tunnel Thruway as the I-95 Freeway dead ended before the tunnel opened.  I-95 was signed for East Baltimore and no route.

The former Exit 15 guide (Balt- Wash Expwy) sign used I-95 South on the pull through sign.

The former Exit 17 (US 1) had a ground level sign that read "I-95 South" for pull through there.

The exit for I-895 North off I-95 NB (South) had "I-95 North" signed for I-895 and pull through on I-95 was "TO I-695 Beltway."

I do not know if the ramps to the Thruway were signed I-95, but the road was.  I wish I knew the signing on the MD 295 as I do know it once either had "TO I-95 North" or "I-95 North" there.  I know for sure one of these two pre 1985.

Wikipedia claims the existing segment of NC 147 in Durham, North Carolina was originally built as I-40, but has no sources for it.  Anyone know if this is the case?

Quote from: TheStranger on December 09, 2011, 04:41:09 PM
Wikipedia claims the existing segment of NC 147 in Durham, North Carolina was originally built as I-40, but has no sources for it.  Anyone know if this is the case?

According to http://www.gribblenation.com/ncpics/history/i40.html the routing on NC 147 was approved in 1968, but in the 1970s the alignment was changed.

US 131 In Grand Rapids used to be signed as I 296 back in the the 70's however I'm not sure if it still part of the Interstate system.

I'm pretty sure I-296 is still part of the system, only unsigned. I never thought it was signed at all, but I must be mistaken.

Nassau Expressway signs at Cross Bay Blvd In  On Ramp was signed as I-78 when opened in the early 1970's then resigned as I-878 then resigned as NY 878. (NYSDOT reference markers show 878I)

Quote from: mapman1071 on December 09, 2011, 08:59:28 PM
Nassau Expressway signs at Cross Bay Blvd In  On Ramp was signed as I-78 when opened in the early 1970's then resigned as I-878 then resigned as NY 878. (NYSDOT reference markers show 878I)

This is still in the system as I-878.

Quote from: TheStranger on October 15, 2011, 06:22:07 PM
Hey, does anyone know if the former US 395 freeway in San Diego - not Route 163, but Kearny Villa Road through MCAS Miramar between Miramar Road and Route 163 - was ever signed as I-15?

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Kearny+Villa+Rd+%26+Miramar+Rd,+San+Diego,+CA&hl=en&ll=32.871874,-117.118549&spn=0.04938,0.104628&sll=32.874037,-117.120609&sspn=0.02469,0.052314&vpsrc=6&hnear=Kearny+Villa+Rd+%26+Miramar+Rd,+San+Diego,+California+92126&t=h&z=14

This would absolutely count if so.

It almost certainly was signed as I-15, when I lived in the area and before I-15 was re-routed to the east.  I recall it had regular I-15 signage, while Murphy Canyon Road down to I-8 was just "temporary I-15" (that road was upgraded tp freeway on more or less its old alignment, before getting regular I-15 markers). 

I have my doubts that I-95 was signed on the Harbor Thruway, since from the get-go, the planning was for I-95 to go through downtown along a different routing.  This is one of those cases where I'd want a photo as proof otherwise.

Quote from: PennDOTFan on October 15, 2011, 08:56:04 PM
It wasn't an interstate when it was built, but what is up with the short freeway section of PA 309 in Allentown between I-78 and US 22? Where it's located and how it's built (narrow freeway with a narrow Jersey barrier median) looks like it was once an alignment of the Northeast Extension.
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=allentown,+pa&hl=en&ll=40.594403,-75.553064&spn=0.038388,0.077162&sll=40.638967,-75.146484&sspn=1.169204,2.469177&vpsrc=6&hnear=Allentown,+Lehigh,+Pennsylvania&t=h&z=14

I don't think it was because the section that is now co-signed with I-78 was that way as well before it was rebuilt to handle I-78.

It's always struck me as simply another narrow Pennsylvania freeway.

Quote from: NE2 on December 09, 2011, 04:58:45 PM

Quote from: TheStranger on December 09, 2011, 04:41:09 PM
Wikipedia claims the existing segment of NC 147 in Durham, North Carolina was originally built as I-40, but has no sources for it.  Anyone know if this is the case?

According to http://www.gribblenation.com/ncpics/history/i40.html the routing on NC 147 was approved in 1968, but in the 1970s the alignment was changed.

Thanks for the link!  So it may have never been signed as I-40 but was proposed as such and approved as part of the system.

 Interestingly, the "East End Connector" from NC 147 to US 70 that is slated for construction soon, and the half-freeway/half-expressway US 70 from I-40 to I-95 in Smithfield all seem to have been submitted as well...they probably fit in with TN 840, the 470 beltway in Denver, VA 895 as roads built/to be built as non-Interstates but originally created with the intention of being designated as Interstates.

The freeway that is now NC 147 was shown as a dotted line on the 1962 Durham County map, running from US 70 Bus Hillendale Blvd just west of Erwin southeast through Durham to about Briggs Rd, then cut east (now East end Conn) to end at US 70 near the east end of US 70 Bus.

The 1968 Durham County map shows a second dotted line along today's 147 south of the east end connector down to a dotted line in the general location of I-40, whose dotted line west stops at the NC 54-751 jct area.

No route designations are given to any of the above dotted lines.

The 1972 Durham County Map http://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/ncmaps&CISOPTR=8413&REC=9 (http://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/ncmaps&CISOPTR=8413&REC=9)shows the 147 dotted line's northern end moved to the current NC 147 location where it ties into I-85.  I-40 is labeled on a completed road running from what had been historically the south end of NC 147.  The I-40 dotted line continues west (more southerly route than 1968) to the Orange County Line.  From the 147-40 jct north to past US 15-501 business the map shows a road "under construction" but does not label it as any route number.

The 1980 Durham County Map shows the same except the I-40 dotted line west of 147 curls more northwest as it does now.


No official NC map shows the 147 freeway as I-40


Mapmikey

Quote from: froggie on December 10, 2011, 06:37:34 AM
I have my doubts that I-95 was signed on the Harbor Thruway, since from the get-go, the planning was for I-95 to go through downtown along a different routing.  This is one of those cases where I'd want a photo as proof otherwise.

I drove it many times before I-95 opened, and it did not have a number, but it did have periodic "TO I-95" sign assemblies, the "TO" on a white sign placed over an Interstate shield sign.

Quote from: US12 on December 09, 2011, 07:59:07 PM
US 131 In Grand Rapids used to be signed as I 296 back in the the 70's however I'm not sure if it still part of the Interstate system.

It's still part of the system. MDOT even colored I-296 in Interstate blue on the Physical Reference Finder Application online.

Quote from: pianocello on December 09, 2011, 08:03:27 PM
I'm pretty sure I-296 is still part of the system, only unsigned. I never thought it was signed at all, but I must be mistaken.

It was signed, and marked on state maps through 1979. In fact, I have a copy of an article from December 1962 from The Grand Rapids Press showing the opening of I-296/US 131/M-37, complete with the three markers in a photo.

Quote from: Beltway on December 10, 2011, 08:59:06 PM

Quote from: froggie on December 10, 2011, 06:37:34 AM
I have my doubts that I-95 was signed on the Harbor Thruway, since from the get-go, the planning was for I-95 to go through downtown along a different routing.  This is one of those cases where I'd want a photo as proof otherwise.

I drove it many times before I-95 opened, and it did not have a number, but it did have periodic "TO I-95" sign assemblies, the "TO" on a white sign placed over an Interstate shield sign.

According to the Wikipedia article, the Thruway was signed as I-895 in 1979, six years before the entire length of I-95 through Maryland was completed!

Quote from: Henry on December 13, 2011, 10:59:10 AM

Quote from: Beltway on December 10, 2011, 08:59:06 PM

Quote from: froggie on December 10, 2011, 06:37:34 AM
I have my doubts that I-95 was signed on the Harbor Thruway, since from the get-go, the planning was for I-95 to go through downtown along a different routing.  This is one of those cases where I'd want a photo as proof otherwise.

I drove it many times before I-95 opened, and it did not have a number, but it did have periodic "TO I-95" sign assemblies, the "TO" on a white sign placed over an Interstate shield sign.

According to the Wikipedia article, the Thruway was signed as I-895 in 1979, six years before the entire length of I-95 through Maryland was completed!

I travelled that road, or else passed it en route to I-695 to avoid the Harbor Tunnel, many times in those years and I do not remember an I-895 designation appearing that early, because when the Fort McHenry Tunnel opened I remember quite a few people I know being surprised to learn that the Harbor Tunnel was not I-895. Had the I-895 signs been there for a longer time, it wouldn't have surprised anyone.

I note the Wikipedia article says it was "designated I-895 in 1979," citing to a Maryland road map from that year. I suppose there's potentially a difference between "designated" and "signed." I've noted various sources that say the number was applied in 1981 or 1983 or thereabouts and that it showed up on signs later. That's about what I recall as well.

For a brief period in the 1960s, the freeway section of what is now US 1 between the Tobin Bridge in Boston and Revere (aka the Northeast Expressway)was signed as I-95.

Quote from: roadman on December 13, 2011, 12:48:32 PM
For a brief period in the 1960s, the freeway section of what is now US 1 between the Tobin Bridge in Boston and Revere (aka the Northeast Expressway)was signed as I-95.

there was a surviving sign well into the 2000s.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 13, 2011, 01:27:46 PM

Quote from: roadman on December 13, 2011, 12:48:32 PM
For a brief period in the 1960s, the freeway section of what is now US 1 between the Tobin Bridge in Boston and Revere (aka the Northeast Expressway)was signed as I-95.

there was a surviving sign well into the 2000s.

Yes.  It was on the northbound Tobin Bridge, and read "TO 95 NORTH".

There may be an I-95 shield under here: http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=42.39215,-71.034636&spn=0.014104,0.033023&gl=us&vpsrc=0&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.392028,-71.038677&panoid=CLeTCHdr_lV-3dr2p__t9g&cbp=12,176.39,,0,-18.52

Quote from: 1995hoo on December 13, 2011, 12:11:14 PM

Quote from: Henry on December 13, 2011, 10:59:10 AM

Quote from: Beltway on December 10, 2011, 08:59:06 PM

Quote from: froggie on December 10, 2011, 06:37:34 AM
I have my doubts that I-95 was signed on the Harbor Thruway, since from the get-go, the planning was for I-95 to go through downtown along a different routing.  This is one of those cases where I'd want a photo as proof otherwise.

I drove it many times before I-95 opened, and it did not have a number, but it did have periodic "TO I-95" sign assemblies, the "TO" on a white sign placed over an Interstate shield sign.

According to the Wikipedia article, the Thruway was signed as I-895 in 1979, six years before the entire length of I-95 through Maryland was completed!

I travelled that road, or else passed it en route to I-695 to avoid the Harbor Tunnel, many times in those years and I do not remember an I-895 designation appearing that early, because when the Fort McHenry Tunnel opened I remember quite a few people I know being surprised to learn that the Harbor Tunnel was not I-895. Had the I-895 signs been there for a longer time, it wouldn't have surprised anyone.

I note the Wikipedia article says it was "designated I-895 in 1979," citing to a Maryland road map from that year. I suppose there's potentially a difference between "designated" and "signed." I've noted various sources that say the number was applied in 1981 or 1983 or thereabouts and that it showed up on signs later. That's about what I recall as well.

I don't recall any I-895 signing before the Fort McHenry Tunnel opened.  It was at least a couple years later.

Was the Wade Avenue Extension in Raleigh ever officially I-40?  Wikipedia notes it was signed as such until the segment connecting US 1/I-440 westward was constructed, and I recall seeing this on maps years ago.

Quote from: TheStranger on October 13, 2011, 07:38:34 PM
PENNSYLVANIA
- I-378 was demoted to Route 378 (but was built as an Interstate) once I-78 was rerouted to bypass Allentown/Bethlehem to the south; concurrently, the US 22 Lehigh Valley Thruway had been I-78 until then.

The I-378 designation stuck around for a couple of years after the decision was made to build 78 as a southern bypass of the Allentown/Bethlehem/Easton area.

Has VT-289 ever been an Interstate?

Quote from: Dr Frankenstein on December 13, 2011, 07:39:54 PM
Has VT-289 ever been an Interstate?

http://www.kurumi.com/roads/3di/ix89.html

Quote from: mightyace on December 10, 2011, 09:13:47 AM

Quote from: PennDOTFan on October 15, 2011, 08:56:04 PM
It wasn't an interstate when it was built, but what is up with the short freeway section of PA 309 in Allentown between I-78 and US 22? Where it's located and how it's built (narrow freeway with a narrow Jersey barrier median) looks like it was once an alignment of the Northeast Extension.
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=allentown,+pa&hl=en&ll=40.594403,-75.553064&spn=0.038388,0.077162&sll=40.638967,-75.146484&sspn=1.169204,2.469177&vpsrc=6&hnear=Allentown,+Lehigh,+Pennsylvania&t=h&z=14

I don't think it was because the section that is now co-signed with I-78 was that way as well before it was rebuilt to handle I-78.

It's always struck me as simply another narrow Pennsylvania freeway.

The short segment of PA 309 from US 22 to I-78 was never an alignment of the Turnpike's Northeast Extension. It was simply a four-lane freeway between US 22 and what is now I-78's Exit 60. From the location of that exit, PA 309 curved to the south as a two- and four-lane rural arterial.

The segment from what is now Exit 53 to Exit 60 was widened and incorporated into I-78 when that interstate was built.

Quote from: bulldog1979 on December 11, 2011, 07:32:53 PM

Quote from: US12 on December 09, 2011, 07:59:07 PM
US 131 In Grand Rapids used to be signed as I 296 back in the the 70's however I'm not sure if it still part of the Interstate system.

It's still part of the system. MDOT even colored I-296 in Interstate blue on the Physical Reference Finder Application online.

Quote from: pianocello on December 09, 2011, 08:03:27 PM
I'm pretty sure I-296 is still part of the system, only unsigned. I never thought it was signed at all, but I must be mistaken.

It was signed, and marked on state maps through 1979. In fact, I have a copy of an article from December 1962 from The Grand Rapids Press showing the opening of I-296/US 131/M-37, complete with the three markers in a photo.

What was the reason for removing the I-296 signs? It seems like most of the hidden interstate designations never have had interstate signs.

Quote from: huskeroadgeek on December 14, 2011, 04:39:52 PM
What was the reason for removing the I-296 signs? It seems like most of the hidden interstate designations never have had interstate signs.

Consensus is that they were removed to avoid driver confusion. Since US 131 is a freeway south of the southern terminus of I-296 and continues north of the split with I-296 as a freeway, it could be confusing to drive along and suddenly gain a designation without a corresponding change in overall road quality. Unlike M-66  which isn't a freeway north and south of the I-194 designation in Battle Creek, US 131 is a freeway for 172 miles in total. Of course something to remember about I-296 is that it not completely concurrent with US 131; what is normally assumed to be the left exit ramp from US 131 NB to I-96 WB is mainline, but unsigned, I-296, as is the ramp from I-96 EB to US 131 SB.

Quote from: bulldog1979 on December 14, 2011, 06:03:47 PM
Consensus is that they were removed to avoid driver confusion.

someone needs to come to the Bay Area and tell I-980 that.

I-980 doesn't overlap anything.

Quote from: NE2 on December 14, 2011, 07:48:51 PM
I-980 doesn't overlap anything.

it used to be CA-24.  it would be a lot less confusing to keep it as CA-24.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 15, 2011, 01:24:41 PM

Quote from: NE2 on December 14, 2011, 07:48:51 PM
I-980 doesn't overlap anything.

it used to be CA-24.  it would be a lot less confusing to keep it as CA-24.

You know, this is something I've genuinely wondered for years:

Was that freeway (980) EVER signed as Route 24?

It was planned as such (not sure if this includes the never-built extension from the Nimitz/Cypress Freeway to the unconstructed Southern Crossing) in the early 1970s, but gained its interstate designation ca. 1976 while still under construction.  Didn't the whole route open in 1982 or so?

Quote from: TheStranger on December 15, 2011, 02:11:24 PM

Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 15, 2011, 01:24:41 PM

Quote from: NE2 on December 14, 2011, 07:48:51 PM
I-980 doesn't overlap anything.

it used to be CA-24.  it would be a lot less confusing to keep it as CA-24.

You know, this is something I've genuinely wondered for years:

Was that freeway (980) EVER signed as Route 24?

It was planned as such (not sure if this includes the never-built extension from the Nimitz/Cypress Freeway to the unconstructed Southern Crossing) in the early 1970s, but gained its interstate designation ca. 1976 while still under construction.  Didn't the whole route open in 1982 or so?

Looking at Daniel Faigin's cahighways.org website, the I-980 designation was approved in 1976.  I'm pretty sure the freeway wasn't completed to I-880 until sometime in the 80's so I'm pretty sure that would mean the segment from 880 to 580 was never signed as CA-24.

With that said, I agree with Agentsteel that I-980 really should have been signed as CA-24.

Quote from: myosh_tino on December 15, 2011, 03:18:14 PMLooking at Daniel Faigin's cahighways.org website, the I-980 designation was approved in 1976.

then what do all those pre-1973 porcelains signs say under the 980 shields?  I had always thought it was 24. 

Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 15, 2011, 03:56:43 PM

Quote from: myosh_tino on December 15, 2011, 03:18:14 PMLooking at Daniel Faigin's cahighways.org website, the I-980 designation was approved in 1976.

then what do all those pre-1973 porcelains signs say under the 980 shields?  I had always thought it was 24. 

Looking at the Caltrans bridge log, the 1970-1973 section ended at 18th Street, so there were only the two offramps coming from the 580/24 stack, and no offramps eastbound on today's 980. 

Thus there's the possibility that 24 mainline signs may have been planned, then greenedout in anticipation of the original designation, but never unveiled once 980 was approved for the stretch of road.

Quote from: TheStranger on December 15, 2011, 05:06:13 PM

Looking at the Caltrans bridge log, the 1970-1973 section ended at 18th Street, so there were only the two offramps coming from the 580/24 stack, and no offramps eastbound on today's 980. 

Thus there's the possibility that 24 mainline signs may have been planned, then greenedout in anticipation of the original designation, but never unveiled once 980 was approved for the stretch of road.

what about the ones on 580 eastbound coming off the Bay Bridge/MacArthur Maze?  those say "980 to 880" but they are on porcelain signs, so I had thought underneath was 24.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 15, 2011, 05:18:27 PM

what about the ones on 580 eastbound coming off the Bay Bridge/MacArthur Maze?  those say "980 to 880" but they are on porcelain signs, so I had thought underneath was 24.

I've never been sure.  There's always the possibility what was under it wasn't 24, but a reference to the exits that were open pre-1980s, some sort of temporary signage.

Wonder if there are any photos of the construction of 980 in the archives...

Don't those cover a SOUTH, while the 24 signs say EAST?

Quote from: NE2 on December 15, 2011, 05:37:27 PM
Don't those cover a SOUTH, while the 24 signs say EAST?

I think I have figured it out!  see here:

http://g.co/maps/9xhbx

24 east is in the other direction, towards Walnut Creek.  that should be "24 west" if it were up to me, and I had not thought this through until now, but underneath there is actually "17 south"!  the "south" is the original porcelain, so it must correspond to a pre-1973 route.

so if 980 was designated in 1976, and 17 was taken off in the late 80s when 880 was designated and 580 was extended, does this imply that the entirety of 980 was 17 as well for a while?

interestingly, the next gantry has a WEST banner and what appears to be a porcelain original 980?

http://g.co/maps/8jxjf

I really should look up what year that sign gantry is from... if it has a post-1973 date stamp, I would be damned surprised, because I have seen the letter in the Caltrans Library from Cal Div Hwys to Cameo, from April 1973, thanking them for their years of service and issuing their regrets that the contract would have to be terminated as they just could not match federal green with their porcelain colors.

I have never seen a porcelain sign with a date stamp later than 1973 in California.  a 1976 I-980 shield in porcelain would be truly something else.

my guess is it's a button-copy shield and I cannot tell the difference at low resolution.  but then it would be covering up something ... something WEST.  what route appears under there?  24???

Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 15, 2011, 06:03:10 PM

so if 980 was designated in 1976, and 17 was taken off in the late 80s when 880 was designated and 580 was extended, does this imply that the entirety of 980 was 17 as well for a while?

Not at all: what this implies is that CalTrans has been using the "sign for the next route after terminus" philosophy for years!

(i.e. US 101 south as only signage for I-80 west BGSes in SF, since the late 1980s)

880 was first signed in 1984.  I THINK 980 was opened before the 880 designation was signed, but it was a brief one or two year period.

I'd like to know how and when 17 was truncated.  When was 580 extended to San Rafael, knocking off the 17 designation north of the maze? 

Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 15, 2011, 06:24:40 PM
I'd like to know how and when 17 was truncated.  When was 580 extended to San Rafael, knocking off the 17 designation north of the maze?  

http://cahighways.org/017-024.html

QuoteIn 1984, Chapter 409 trunchated the route significantly, leaving Route 17 as only "from Route 1 near Santa Cruz to Route 280 in San Jose." The portion from Route 280 to Route 80 was renumbered as I-880; and the former (b), Route 80 near Albany to Route 101 near San Rafael, was transferred to I-580. Former (c), Route 101 near San Rafael to Route 1 near Point Reyes Station, was added to Route 251. This latter portion was to have been the "Point Reyes" Freeway. The 1984 act also gave high priority to the improvement of the former (b) as part of I-580.

As for I-980...

QuoteIn 1981, Chapter 292 defined this route by transfer from Route 24: "Route 17 in Oakland to Route 580."

In 1986, Chapter 928 changed "Route 17" to "Route 880"

In 1988, Chapter 106 clarified the routing: "Route 880 in Oakland to Route 580 in Oakland".


Approved as 139(a) non-chargeable interstate in July 1976; Freeway.

I think the Richmond segment of 17 as an Interstate slightly predates I-880 being created - it was the proposed I-180 ca. 1981 (before CalTrans chose to extend 580 instead so that Route 180 in Fresno would not have to be renumbered).

Interesting that it took 5 years between Interstate funding and the legislative designation change for 980...

Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 15, 2011, 06:09:32 PM
interestingly, the next gantry has a WEST banner and what appears to be a porcelain original 980?

http://g.co/maps/8jxjf

It's over greenout: http://g.co/maps/c45ge
It's hard to tell, but there may have been SOUTH pulled off under the WEST.

so there indeed was a time when I-980 was a segment of CA-17: 1976 (or 1981, depending on your perspective) to 1984. 

was it ever signed dual?

also, why did it take two years for the 980 definition to change from "580 to 17" to "580 to 880"?  1984 - 17 truncated, 880 established; 1986 - designation changed.  was there a delay of two years in which 980's definition was incorrect?

Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 15, 2011, 06:40:51 PM
so there indeed was a time when I-980 was a segment of CA-17

No. There may have been a time when westbound I-980 was signed only as leading to SR 17 south. SR 17 always went to the Bay Bridge approach.

Quote from: NE2 on December 15, 2011, 06:37:59 PM

It's over greenout: http://g.co/maps/c45ge
It's hard to tell, but there may have been SOUTH pulled off under the WEST.

if SOUTH were part of the original porcelain, it could not have been pulled off, just greened out.  I cannot discern a greenout patch under the WEST, but I am 99% sure that that right sign is a porcelain, not a button copy.

next time I am up there (maybe this Saturday), I will take a look.  I checked briefly to see if I have any photos of that segment of 580, but I cannot find any offhand.  Anyone else got one?

Quote from: NE2 on December 15, 2011, 06:45:06 PM

No. There may have been a time when westbound I-980 was signed only as leading to SR 17 south. SR 17 always went to the Bay Bridge approach.

I should have remembered that.  I have a photo from that approach segment with the 580 patch fallen off, and a 17 revealed!  it's a terrible photo from 10pm; when I went back the next morning, it had been already patched.

There's an abandoned section of I-44 near Newburg, MO. The highway was rerouted.

Also an old section of  I-44 (old 66) near Devil's Elbow that's now Missouri Route Z.

Quote from: bulldog1979 on December 14, 2011, 06:03:47 PM

Quote from: huskeroadgeek on December 14, 2011, 04:39:52 PM
What was the reason for removing the I-296 signs? It seems like most of the hidden interstate designations never have had interstate signs.

Consensus is that they were removed to avoid driver confusion. Since US 131 is a freeway south of the southern terminus of I-296 and continues north of the split with I-296 as a freeway, it could be confusing to drive along and suddenly gain a designation without a corresponding change in overall road quality. Unlike M-66  which isn't a freeway north and south of the I-194 designation in Battle Creek, US 131 is a freeway for 172 miles in total. Of course something to remember about I-296 is that it not completely concurrent with US 131; what is normally assumed to be the left exit ramp from US 131 NB to I-96 WB is mainline, but unsigned, I-296, as is the ramp from I-96 EB to US 131 SB.

Add to that I-305 in Sacramento and I-595 east of Washington, DC, as they are both part of US 50. Also, I-695 in Washington, due to the fact that another I-695 exists around Baltimore, and I-345 in Dallas, which acts as a connector between I-45 and the US 75 freeway that continues further north.

Quote from: Henry on December 15, 2011, 10:28:19 PM
Also, I-695 in Washington, due to the fact that another I-695 exists around Baltimore,

[citation needed]

I-695 is a moot point anyway, because it is signed again now with the new bridge project.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 15, 2011, 06:40:51 PM
so there indeed was a time when I-980 was a segment of CA-17: 1976 (or 1981, depending on your perspective) to 1984. 

I don't think CA-17 was ever routed over what is now I-980 and I think you misunderstood TheStranger's post. 

The quote that refers to Chapter 292 in 1981, Chapter 928 in 1986 and Chapter 106 in 1998 refers to the routing of I-980.  What caught my attention was this statement...

QuoteIn 1981, Chapter 292 defined this route by transfer from Route 24: "Route 17 in Oakland to Route 580."

I think this statement confirms your original suspicions that I-980 used to be CA-24 prior to 1981.

I believe this also explains why there's a WEST banner on the I-980 exit sign. If you look closely at this photo (https://www.aaroads.com/california/images580/i-580_eb_exit_019b_06.jpg) from the AARoads Gallery...
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images580/i-580_eb_exit_019b_06.jpg)
... you can see a greenout patch under the I-980 shield and it appears to be about the same width as a 2-digit California route shield... probably a CA-24 shield!

I also found this on Kurumi's 3-Digit Interstates website for I-980 (http://www.kurumi.com/roads/3di/i980.html#980ca)...

QuoteConstruction began in 1964, but a lawsuit helped delay completion of the freeway until 1985. When it opened, it was signed CA 24 for a few years before I-980 signs went up.

Quote from: US71 on December 15, 2011, 09:52:17 PM

Also an old section of  I-44 (old 66) near Devil's Elbow that's now Missouri Route Z.

Z was I-44, a full freeway?  I had always thought it was a four-lane expressway.  all those at-grade crossings must be more recent, then.

Quote from: myosh_tino on December 16, 2011, 02:40:22 AM

I think this statement confirms your original suspicions that I-980 used to be CA-24 prior to 1981.

What still intrigues me:

1. How did it take 5 years for the legislative definition to be updated, when the interstate funding for the route was already granted in 1976?
2. Assuming the only open section of what is now 980 was from 580 to 30th Street or so...if westbound was signed as "[implied TO] Route 17 South", do we have any idea what eastbound was signed like between there and 580?  I know there are 980 shields out there now in that direction, but not sure about pullthroughs.

I have to admit, it'll be intriguing to see what happens to the route designation (if anything) once the Caldecott becomes a full four-bore setup...

Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 15, 2011, 06:45:26 PM
next time I am up there (maybe this Saturday), I will take a look.  I checked briefly to see if I have any photos of that segment of 580, but I cannot find any offhand.  Anyone else got one?

Just bring a ladder and a crowbar and peek at it yourself :P

Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 16, 2011, 11:52:50 AM

Quote from: US71 on December 15, 2011, 09:52:17 PM

Also an old section of  I-44 (old 66) near Devil's Elbow that's now Missouri Route Z.

Z was I-44, a full freeway?  I had always thought it was a four-lane expressway.  all those at-grade crossings must be more recent, then.

44 on a technicality. It's was Route 66 MK II, but got taken over by 44. The Freeway section on top of the hill was one of the last sections completed in Missouri, but the old section was posted as 44 for a while.

Was not the US 6 Freeway in Willamanic, CT originally I-84 until the state scrapped the second proposed alignment of I-84 that would have taken it to Providence, RI.

Quote from: roadman65 on February 29, 2012, 06:32:14 PM
Was not the US 6 Freeway in Willamanic, CT originally I-84 until the state scrapped the second proposed alignment of I-84 that would have taken it to Providence, RI.

Meant to be, but never signed to my knowledge.

Quote from: roadman65 on February 29, 2012, 06:32:14 PM
Was not the US 6 Freeway in Willimantic, CT originally I-84 until the state scrapped the second proposed alignment of I-84 that would have taken it to Providence, RI.

Yes, and it was signed that way. Willimantic had a signed interstate and lost it ... have any other cities? I can only think of those along US 22 in PA, after I-78 was moved. But the eastern I-84 wasn't moved a few miles away, it was taken away.

Quote from: TheStranger on December 09, 2011, 04:41:09 PM
Wikipedia claims the existing segment of NC 147 in Durham, North Carolina was originally built as I-40, but has no sources for it.  Anyone know if this is the case?

I drove with my friend on Durham Freeway a couple of times in the mid 1970's. This was his route for driving from Winston-Salem to Raleigh via Durham in order to drive on freeways as much as possible.  This was before I-40 was built from I-85 to Raleigh which opened in early 1980's.  He would drive to Durham on I-85, exiting at Gregson Street, and drive south to a entrance ramp to the Durham freeway.  It was so long ago that I can't remember more specific directions, but I am pretty sure the freeway ended just north of this on ramp.  I thought that this Durham freeway was signed as I-40, and specifically recall trailblazers and/or reassurance signs for I-40 in Durham for this freeway.  However after reading the other posts in the thread that said that this freeway wasn't signed as I-40 on maps, makes me wonder if freeway was only signed as To I-40 on the freeway between Durham and Research Triangle Park.

Quote from: kurumi on February 29, 2012, 11:48:42 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on February 29, 2012, 06:32:14 PM
Was not the US 6 Freeway in Willimantic, CT originally I-84 until the state scrapped the second proposed alignment of I-84 that would have taken it to Providence, RI.

Yes, and it was signed that way. Willimantic had a signed interstate and lost it ... have any other cities? I can only think of those along US 22 in PA, after I-78 was moved. But the eastern I-84 wasn't moved a few miles away, it was taken away.

The disconnected piece of I-84 was signed? You of all people would be able to point me to the proof. (:

Quote from: 1995hoo on October 22, 2011, 11:20:29 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on October 22, 2011, 09:38:29 PM
I-895 in Baltimore, MD was signed I-95 up until the Fort McHenry Tunnel opened in 1985.  I know this is still in the system, but the section of I-895 south of I-695 is not technically an interstate according to FHWA.  The pull through signs at US 1 SB along I-895 always showed it as I-95 proper and I believe still do to this day.

When was it signed as I-95? I seem to remember that when I was a kid it bore no number at all, just the "Harbor Tunnel Thruway" name, and that the I-895 designation was applied a few years before the Fort McHenry Tunnel opened. 

I-895 was  always signed as "TO I-95" - even prior to the opening of I-95 between I-495 and I-695 (as Steve Anderson calls it, "Between the Beltways," when the southbound trailblazers directed traffic onto Md. 295 southbound (Baltimore-Washington Parkway).

When I-95 was open between Between the Beltways, northbound I-95 traffic was directed to follow the Outer Loop of I-695 to I-895 and southbound I-895 traffic was directed to the Inner Loop of I-695 to return to I-95.  Then the short extension of I-895 from U.S. 1 to I-95 was completed, which obviated that slightly circuitous route via I-695.

Quote from: roadman on December 13, 2011, 03:23:51 PM

Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 13, 2011, 01:27:46 PM

Quote from: roadman on December 13, 2011, 12:48:32 PM
For a brief period in the 1960s, the freeway section of what is now US 1 between the Tobin Bridge in Boston and Revere (aka the Northeast Expressway)was signed as I-95.

there was a surviving sign well into the 2000s.

Yes.  It was on the northbound Tobin Bridge, and read "TO 95 NORTH".

The Northeast Expressway/Tobin (originally Mystic River or Mystic) Bridge was a common (for the time) case where construction of the roads started BEFORE the Interstate Highway Act became law.  While the road was 'officially' considered to be I-95 from the time the IHA became law in 1956 through 1974-75; 95 signage outside of the "TO 95 NORTH" signage along the northbound Tobin Bridge (which IIRC still remain to this day) was scarce.

In anticipation of the original connection w/I-93 being completed in the early 70s, large signage for I-95 North and South were included.  The then-new signage directing those to the Tobin/Mystic Bridge originally read "95 NORTH-Charlestown-Revere" further north, just before one got on the bridge; there was another pull-through sign that originally read "95 NORTH-Chelsea-Revere".  The I-95 shields on those signs were replaced with US 1 shields in 1975.  Note: the original 1950s era overhead thru-signage at the then-incomplete interchange read "CHARLESTOWN-MYSTIC BRIDGE" with no route number.

At the same interchange, signage directing those to the Central Artery originally read "95 SOUTH-Boston-Cape Cod".  The I-95 shields for those southbound signs were very short-lived.  By the time the I-93 northbound connections actually opened to traffic, the I-95 shields were replaced with MA 3 shields (with wide Series E(?) numerals).  The I-93 shields ultimately replaced the MA 3 shields in 1977.

Further back at the originally configured Charlestown exit (pre-Central Artery North Area (aka CANA) Project) from the southbound Expressway; there was an older-style sign directing through-traffic to the left that read "BOSTON-95 SOUTH".  That 95 South sign remained until the late 80s when the sign was then masked with a board that read "Boston-93 North and South".  Needless to say, this sign was sacrificed during the fore-mentioned CANA Project.  

When much of the Northeast Expressway from Carter Street to Cutler Circle (MA 60) was reconstructed in 1975; all of the then-new steel overhead signs for the the southbound highway did NOT include ANY route number for the road but all the northbound signage originally read "NORTH 95 TO 1 - NH-Maine".  When the switch from I-95 to US 1 became final, many of the northbound signs just had the shields swapped over to read "NORTH 1 TO 95 - NH-Maine"; although one sign was missed at the expressway entrance ramp from eastbound MA 16.  That sign was ultimately knocked down in an accident during the 1980s and was never replaced until all the overhead signs were replaced in the 2000s.

I'm not 100% sure if it's still there today but just before the above-mentioned ramp from 16 East but right after the Expressway overpass; there was a small green sign w/white lettering that read "RTE. 95" with a 45 degree right-turn arrow.  The last time I was at that interchange a few years back, that small sign was still there; nearly 30 years after the changeover from I-95 to US 1.

Quote from: NE2 on December 13, 2011, 04:17:00 PM
There may be an I-95 shield under here: http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=42.39215,-71.034636&spn=0.014104,0.033023&gl=us&vpsrc=0&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.392028,-71.038677&panoid=CLeTCHdr_lV-3dr2p__t9g&cbp=12,176.39,,0,-18.52

There probably was.  It's also worth noting that it appears that the entire sign was masked recently.  The old lettering (for the control destinations) likely orginally read "MYSTIC BRIDGE-BOSTON".

I'm not sure if any of the old signs approaching MA 99 that originally read "95 - City Sq.-Boston" with the 95 shields long gone are still around.

The southern end of I-530 will likely fit this criteria.  They're building an extension to Monticello, and the spur will be orphaned.  It will likely revert to US 63-65-79 or become an I-530 spur.

Quote from: PHLBOS on March 05, 2012, 02:19:31 PM

I'm not 100% sure if it's still there today but just before the above-mentioned ramp from 16 East but right after the Expressway overpass; there was a small green sign w/white lettering that read "RTE. 95" with a 45 degree right-turn arrow.  The last time I was at that interchange a few years back, that small sign was still there; nearly 30 years after the changeover from I-95 to US 1.

I'm not sure if any of the old signs approaching MA 99 that originally read "95 - City Sq.-Boston" with the 95 shields long gone are still around.

#1: I've NEVER seen that sign! Street View is fuzzy. I demand to know more.
#2: Still around as far as I know.

Quote from: cpzilliacus on March 04, 2012, 10:47:37 PM

Quote from: 1995hoo on October 22, 2011, 11:20:29 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on October 22, 2011, 09:38:29 PM
I-895 in Baltimore, MD was signed I-95 up until the Fort McHenry Tunnel opened in 1985.  I know this is still in the system, but the section of I-895 south of I-695 is not technically an interstate according to FHWA.  The pull through signs at US 1 SB along I-895 always showed it as I-95 proper and I believe still do to this day.

When was it signed as I-95? I seem to remember that when I was a kid it bore no number at all, just the "Harbor Tunnel Thruway" name, and that the I-895 designation was applied a few years before the Fort McHenry Tunnel opened. 

I-895 was  always signed as "TO I-95" - even prior to the opening of I-95 between I-495 and I-695 (as Steve Anderson calls it, "Between the Beltways," when the southbound trailblazers directed traffic onto Md. 295 southbound (Baltimore-Washington Parkway).

When I-95 was open between Between the Beltways, northbound I-95 traffic was directed to follow the Outer Loop of I-695 to I-895 and southbound I-895 traffic was directed to the Inner Loop of I-695 to return to I-95.  Then the short extension of I-895 from U.S. 1 to I-95 was completed, which obviated that slightly circuitous route via I-695.

I have to disagree with you on this!  I have been around since 1965 and I saw the Harbor Tunnel Thruway signed as I-95 in a few places with my own eyes.

Quote from: roadman65 on March 05, 2012, 09:17:14 PM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on March 04, 2012, 10:47:37 PM
When I-95 was open between Between the Beltways, northbound I-95 traffic was directed to follow the Outer Loop of I-695 to I-895 and southbound I-895 traffic was directed to the Inner Loop of I-695 to return to I-95.  Then the short extension of I-895 from U.S. 1 to I-95 was completed, which obviated that slightly circuitous route via I-695.

I have to disagree with you on this!  I have been around since 1965 and I saw the Harbor Tunnel Thruway signed as I-95 in a few places with my own eyes.

I've been around the area since 1969, and I agree with cpzilliacas.  It was signed as "TO I-95".  Even before the HTT was opened, I-95 was planned for a different corridor passing in or near the downtown.

Quote from: Steve on March 05, 2012, 08:43:13 PM

Quote from: PHLBOS on March 05, 2012, 02:19:31 PM

I'm not 100% sure if it's still there today but just before the above-mentioned ramp from 16 East but right after the Expressway overpass; there was a small green sign w/white lettering that read "RTE. 95" with a 45 degree right-turn arrow.  The last time I was at that interchange a few years back, that small sign was still there; nearly 30 years after the changeover from I-95 to US 1.

#1: I've NEVER seen that sign! Street View is fuzzy. I demand to know more.

I see nothing on Bing's "streetside" imagery, which is better quality than fuzzy Google.

Quote from: NE2 on March 05, 2012, 10:36:26 PM

Quote from: Steve on March 05, 2012, 08:43:13 PM

Quote from: PHLBOS on March 05, 2012, 02:19:31 PM

I'm not 100% sure if it's still there today but just before the above-mentioned ramp from 16 East but right after the Expressway overpass; there was a small green sign w/white lettering that read "RTE. 95" with a 45 degree right-turn arrow.  The last time I was at that interchange a few years back, that small sign was still there; nearly 30 years after the changeover from I-95 to US 1.

#1: I've NEVER seen that sign! Street View is fuzzy. I demand to know more.

I see nothing on Bing's "streetside" imagery, which is better quality than fuzzy Google.

The sign in question (again, the last time I saw it was about 5 years ago) was a small (18"x24" or 24"x30"), non-standard (likely made by the MDC) rectangular sign (longer side vertical) and was likely located partially inside the overpass.  The "RTE. 95" lettering of the sign was equivalent to MUTCD Series A.  It was one of those signs that if one blinked, they missed it.

Due to its location, for a pic, one would need to set the flash on and snap it at an angle to avoid the glare bleaching out the sign legend.

Ancient thread but decided to revive it specifically after thinking about the example of I-40 in Winston-Salem:

- built in the 1950s originally as a planned reroute of US 158 (which does use part of its mileage), assigned I-40 in 1958 during the opening of the road
- US 421 added as a concurrency in the 1960s
- removed from Interstate system in 1992 as part of I-40 being moved to a southern bypass, and redesignated as Business I-40
- Business I-40 designation completely removed in 2020, so route is now solely US 421 and given the name of Salem Parkway as well

Are there any other examples of existing freeway between 2012-2021 that were removed from the Interstate system but still in use?

Has I-124 in Tennessee been formally removed from the I-system?

Mike

Quote from: mgk920 on June 20, 2021, 02:08:33 AM
Has I-124 in Tennessee been formally removed from the I-system?

FHWA maps say it's still I-124. It just isn't signed as such.

Quote from: myosh_tino on December 16, 2011, 02:40:22 AM

Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 15, 2011, 06:40:51 PM
so there indeed was a time when I-980 was a segment of CA-17: 1976 (or 1981, depending on your perspective) to 1984. 

I don't think CA-17 was ever routed over what is now I-980 and I think you misunderstood TheStranger's post. 

The quote that refers to Chapter 292 in 1981, Chapter 928 in 1986 and Chapter 106 in 1998 refers to the routing of I-980.  What caught my attention was this statement...

QuoteIn 1981, Chapter 292 defined this route by transfer from Route 24: "Route 17 in Oakland to Route 580."

I think this statement confirms your original suspicions that I-980 used to be CA-24 prior to 1981.

I believe this also explains why there's a WEST banner on the I-980 exit sign. If you look closely at this photo (https://www.aaroads.com/california/images580/i-580_eb_exit_019b_06.jpg) from the AARoads Gallery...
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images580/i-580_eb_exit_019b_06.jpg)
... you can see a greenout patch under the I-980 shield and it appears to be about the same width as a 2-digit California route shield... probably a CA-24 shield!

I also found this on Kurumi's 3-Digit Interstates website for I-980 (http://www.kurumi.com/roads/3di/i980.html#980ca)...

QuoteConstruction began in 1964, but a lawsuit helped delay completion of the freeway until 1985. When it opened, it was signed CA 24 for a few years before I-980 signs went up.

I seen maps where I-980 was intended at one point to be part of the Southern crossing an alternate for Bay Bridge and San Mateo bridge but that was called off.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_State_Route_244
CA-244 was initially supposed to be an expanded freeway for I-880 Beltline freeway in Sacramento prior to parts of the Beltline extension being cancelled and I-880 Beltline being renamed at I-80 and Business 80 being renamed as hidden CA-51.

Quote from: bing101 on June 20, 2021, 09:00:46 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_State_Route_244
CA-244 was initially supposed to be an expanded freeway for I-880 Beltline freeway in Sacramento prior to parts of the Beltline extension being cancelled and I-880 Beltline being renamed at I-80 and Business 80 being renamed as hidden CA-51.

244 was never meant to be either I-880 or I-80 though.

For that matter, Business 80 in Sacramento is still debatable whether it can fit in this; the US 50 segment I think is the majority of hidden I-305 and the rest of I-305 covers the 1960s I-80 (US 99E) along 29th/30th, south of E Street.

Quote from: US 89 on June 20, 2021, 02:17:01 AM

Quote from: mgk920 on June 20, 2021, 02:08:33 AM
Has I-124 in Tennessee been formally removed from the I-system?

FHWA maps say it's still I-124. It just isn't signed as such.

They even put exit numbers in.  Makes it fairly obvious where I-124 is and where it's just US 27.

I can think of two places in Texas.

US-80 from west of Terrell to its junction with I-30 was previously I-20.
SH-183 from I-20 north to the end of the freeway segment in south Fort Worth was originally I-820.

I believe that Sam Cooper Boulevard east of the park in Memphis was signed as I-40 initially.

Thought of this thread again (after looking at the North Carolina map in the AAroads mapping system and thinking of US 421 once more) -

- How much of the existing I-81 in Syracuse will be retained as freeway after mainline 81 is moved to 481 and existing 81 gets converted to business route?

- Technically already has happened for this particular road: former I-85 in Greensboro between I-73 and I-40, currently Business I-85 but slated to eventually just become US 29 at some point.

- I-885's extension south past Durham created a situation where a freeway was proposed as Interstate, not built as one (NC 147 south segment) then eventually did receive an Interstate designation about 60 years after first being planned as I-40.

- Looks like enough of Sheridan Boulevard in The Bronx is limited-access that that portion of NY 895 would qualify for this thread.

- There's still one diamond interchange left on Oklahoma City Boulevard (former I-40) just east of I-40 in OKC.

Quote from: TheStranger on April 03, 2024, 09:05:52 PMHow much of the existing I-81 in Syracuse will be retained as freeway after mainline 81 is moved to 481 and existing 81 gets converted to business route?

Everything except the mile and half of viaduct, essentially.

Quote from: bwana39 on June 21, 2021, 12:16:43 PMI can think of two places in Texas.

US-80 from west of Terrell to its junction with I-30 was previously I-20.
SH-183 from I-20 north to the end of the freeway segment in south Fort Worth was originally I-820.

I believe that Sam Cooper Boulevard east of the park in Memphis was signed as I-40 initially.

Related to the Terrell example, I-20 was shifted to the south when the DFW Turnpike became free and was added to I-30. Likewise, a big part of what was then I-20 (but is now US 287) in Fort Worth was shifted south onto I-820.

No way is that segment of 287 interstate-compliant under today's regs, but if somebody wanted to argue a grandfather clause in making an I-route from Ennis to Amarillo, they might have a case.

Quote from: Road Hog on April 08, 2024, 01:21:09 AMRelated to the Terrell example, I-20 was shifted to the south when the DFW Turnpike became free and was added to I-30. Likewise, a big part of what was then I-20 (but is now US 287) in Fort Worth was shifted south onto I-820.

ABIR No part of US-287 was ever I-20. I guess it was possible that the freeway section of US-287 that predated the I-20 shift MIGHT have been labeled as I-20 during the time that 820 still ended at the traffic circle on Camp Bowie, but when 820 was completed to the West Freeway it showed that route (820) even before the Dallas to Terrell and the Benbrook to Aledo segments were completed.

Was PA 378 in Bethlehem,PA ever signed as I-378?

I know the arterial part south of the Hill to Hill bridge was once PA 191 before it got truncated to US 22.  I'm guessing it was I-378 before that, but we never traveled that when I was small.

Came up with a comprehensive list of ex-Interstate freeways/corridors, additions/corrections always welcome:

IN THE SYSTEM BUT UNSIGNED NOW, PREVIOUSLY WAS SIGNED AS INTERSTATE
I-296, Grand Rapids
I-124, Chattanooga
I-110, El Paso?
I-495, Falmouth ME (never has been signed, but was I-95 until 2004)
I-305, Sacramento (never has been signed but was I-80 from around the early 1960s-1982)
Route 57, San Dimas to Glendora (officially I-210 according to FHWA, though (state) route 210 now continues east from Glendora to Redlands on what had been formerly Route 30)

COMPLETELY OFF SYSTEM NOW, WAS NEVER SIGNED
US 75, Omaha (was I-580)
US 101, between I-5 and I-10 in Los Angeles (was I-105)


OFF SYSTEM NOW BUT STILL SIGNED AS INTERSTATE (due to funding technicalities re: mileage for today's I-105 in Los Angeles)
I-80 between US 101 and the Bay Bridge (removed from Interstate system in 1968 along with the canceled Western Freeway segment, but has been signed as I-80 continuously from the late 1950s to present)

COMPLETELY OFF SYSTEM, WAS SIGNED
US 80, Dallas (was I-20)
US 40, Baltimore (was I-170)
Sam Cooper Boulevard, Memphis (was I-40)
Murphy Canyon Road, Miramar MCAS in San Diego (was I-15/US 395)
US 1 north of Boston (was I-95)
Southern portion of NY 895, The Bronx (was I-895)
PA 378, Allentown (was I-378)
NJ 495/NY 495, Weehawken NJ to Manhattan via the Lincoln Tunnel (was I-495)
GA 13, Atlanta (was I-85)
M-5 (former M-102) from I-96 to Purdue Avenue in Farmington Hills (was I-96)
Oklahoma City Boulevard west segment, Oklahoma City (was I-40)
US 29 (Business I-85), Greensboro (was I-85)
Business I-85, Spartanburg (was I-85)
US 6, Wilimantic CT (planned in the mid-1960s as I-82, then was originally built as I-84)
US 421, Winston-Salem (was I-40)
Business 80/unsigned Route 51 between E Street and Watt Avenue/I-80, Sacramento/Arden (was I-80 from 1960-1982)
northern portion of SR 158, Kirkersville, OH (was I-70)

SOON TO BE REMOVED FROM SYSTEM
I-81, Syracuse (most of which will remain as freeway excluding the downtown section, and will be designated as Business I-81)
I-74 just southeast of I-40, Winston-Salem (to become NC 192 - https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?msg=2918794 )

UNCLEAR IF EVER SIGNED
US 101, San Francisco along the Central Freeway (portion of Central Freeway that still exists was planned to also be part of I-80)
NY 878, New York (was this ever signed as I-78? apparently this is hidden I-878 according to FHWA)
SH 310, Dallas (was this the original I-45 or was it just a temporary/emergency routing?)


WAS SIGNED AS ONE INTERSTATE, THEN DEPRECATED, THEN REJOINED THE SYSTEM
I-885 south of US 70, Durham (was part of a proposed I-40 routing?)
I-880 between CA 262 and I-280, was signed as I-280 (south half) and I-680 (north half), then was just Route 17 alone from 1965-1984, then became I-880
I-40/former I-85 in Greensboro (was Business I-40/Business I-85 for several months in 2008, then restored to I-40's routing)
(Not sure about the future routing of I-777 yet)


EXISTING FREEWAY PLANNED AS INTERSTATE BUT NEVER SIGNED
would US 41 along Lake Shore Drive in Chicago count? it was planned as I-494 at one point
US 101 in the Presidio of San Francisco, was part of the planned I-480 routing
Route 1 between I-280 in Daly City and Font Boulevard in San Francisco and between Lake Street and US 101 in San Francisco, was planned as part of the original 1956-1968 I-280
US 30 in northwest Portland, was planned as part of I-505
CT 3 between I-91 and CT 2 in Weathersfield (near Hartford) - was slated to be included in the 1968-1984 I-86, as well as a locally-suggested I-284 https://www.kurumi.com/roads/ct/i284.html - and as part of a I-491 proposal https://www.kurumi.com/roads/ct/hfd-fwy-60s.html
Unsigned CT 598 (Whitehead Highway), Hartford - built in 1945, was slated to be extended as part of a planned I-484 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conland%E2%80%93Whitehead_Highway


FREEWAY PLANNED AS INTERSTATE, BUILT AS FREEWAY UNDER ANOTHER DESIGNATION OR AS A DIFFERENT TYPE OF ROAD
VA 895, Richmond
future CA 262 freeway, Fremont (was planned as I-680 prior to 1965)
CA 132 expressway, Modesto (planned as I-5W originally)
NY 9A (West Side Parkway), Manhattan (planned as I-478)
the 470 beltway around Denver
AZ 51 (planned as I-510 and then AZ 510)
SR 10/Opportunity Corridor, Cleveland (originally proposed as I-290)
US 50, Vincennes (planned as I-64)
M-5 north of I-96/I-275, Farmington (was planned at one point as I-275, then M-275)
CT 9 between I-91 and I-84 near Hartford (portions of which were to be I-291)
Unsigned CT 500, East Hartford (was planned as I-284 - https://www.kurumi.com/roads/ct/i284.html )
US 7, Danbury CT (planned as I-91)
VA 164, Portsmouth (submitted as part of 1968 Interstate program expansion, though not specifically as I-164 or any other interstate number)

NEVER WAS ACTUALLY INTERSTATE, BUT SIGNED AS ONE?
I-695 across the Francis Scott Key Bridge (actually MD 695 but has been signed in the field as I-695 for years)
I-110 in downtown Los Angeles (signed fully on southbound Harbor Freeway between US 101 and I-10)
I-710 spurs into downtown Long Beach (mainline 710 continues west towards Terminal Island)
I-895 south of I-695, Baltimore

---
Edited list to reflect that Wade Avenue in Raleigh was NOT I-40:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?msg=2923040

How can Business I-81 be removed if it doesn't exist now?  :spin:

Quote from: Rothman on April 14, 2024, 11:10:14 PMHow can Business I-81 be removed if it doesn't exist now?  :spin:

I'll edit the list to reflect the route's current (as of April 2024) designation then, hehe. (Since I did list I-74 that way)

Yeah once I-81 is rerouted around Syracuse it will fit the OP for sure. Business I-81 will be old I-81 and not really officially an interstate.

Quote from: TheStranger on April 14, 2024, 10:50:47 PMCT 3 15 between I-91 and CT 2 I-84 in Hartford - if I'm not mistaken, at one point this was slated to be the westernmost terminus of the 1968-1984 I-86

FTFY.  Originally planned as I-491, then later I-86.

QuoteCT 9 between I-91 and I-84 near Hartford (portions of which were to be I-291?)

Correct.  Namely, the north-south portion from I-84 south for a few miles.

Additional one for CT:

COMPLETELY OFF SYSTEM NOW, WAS NEVER SIGNED:

I-82, original designation for what is now I-84, from Danbury to East Hartford. Originally intended to lead to Providence

I-284, freeway leading from I-84/CT 2 in East Hartford to I-91 in East Windsor. Only a stub was built, milege was logged as Interstate miles but was never formally signed.

US 7, was considered as a possible alignment for I-91

EXISTING FREEWAY PLANNED AS INTERSTATE BUT NEVER SIGNED:

Whitehead Highway, planned to be extended to I-84 underneath Bushnell Park in Hartford, to be signed I-484.

One for NY:

COMPLETELY OFF SYSTEM, WAS SIGNED:

I-895, the Sheriden Expressway, now Sheriden Boulevard.

Quote from: RobbieL2415 on April 15, 2024, 10:37:41 AMOne for NY:

COMPLETELY OFF SYSTEM, WAS SIGNED:

I-895, the Sheridan Expressway, now Sheridan Boulevard (signed as NY 895).

FTFY.

SOON TO BE REMOVED ROM SYSTEM (?)

I-794 (WI)

Mike

Just updated the list with the Hartford examples from above.

Quote from: mgk920 on April 15, 2024, 11:28:32 AMSOON TO BE REMOVED ROM SYSTEM (?)

I-794 (WI)

Mike

Is 794 going to be entirely demolished, or will a portion of the freeway be retained?  (This is why I did not include Detroit I-375 - the plan for that involves complete removal of the existing road, with no limited-access segment retained.  Kinda like 480 in SF)

Quote from: TheStranger on April 15, 2024, 01:07:57 PMJust updated the list with the Hartford examples from above.

Quote from: mgk920 on April 15, 2024, 11:28:32 AMSOON TO BE REMOVED ROM SYSTEM (?)

I-794 (WI)

Mike

Is 794 going to be entirely demolished, or will a portion of the freeway be retained?  (This is why I did not include Detroit I-375 - the plan for that involves complete removal of the existing road, with no limited-access segment retained.  Kinda like 480 in SF)

The plan that is being pushed by some in the MKE area is to remove the east-west part (WisDOT does say that it is coming due for heavy work, as that elevated structure was opened in the mid-late 1960s, and replace it with a (state highway?) surface boulevard.  My sense is that it also includes downgrading the north-south part to a (state highway?) parkway to match WI 794 to the south.

Mike

FREEWAY PLANNED AS INTERSTATE, BUILT AS FREEWAY UNDER ANOTHER DESIGNATION OR AS A DIFFERENT TYPE OF ROAD

VA 164 (was requested as I-164 but turned down)

EXISTING FREEWAY PLANNED AS INTERSTATE BUT NEVER SIGNED

CO470 (The governor took the federal funding to make the 16th Street Mall instead)

Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on April 16, 2024, 12:38:46 PMFREEWAY PLANNED AS INTERSTATE, BUILT AS FREEWAY UNDER ANOTHER DESIGNATION OR AS A DIFFERENT TYPE OF ROAD

VA 164 (was requested as I-164 but turned down)

Interestingly, the Wikipedia article on VA 164 suggests otherwise, citing AASHTO minutes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_State_Route_164

"Despite its numbering, AASHTO has no record of Virginia ever making a formal application to add SR 164 to the Interstate system from 1968 through the 1978 opening of the Elizabeth River bridge.[6] The still-unbuilt road was first referred to as SR 164 in 1971.[7]"

---

Random thought:

Would that first quarter-mile of OK 66 northeast of I-44 in Fair Oaks, Oklahoma count for this thread?  (Since 44 used to go here and then more directly northeast, before the realignment of the Will Rogers Turnpike to feed into the Creek Turnpike)

https://www.socalregion.com/highways/socal_unsigned/foothill_fwy/

Here is another one I-210 used to be signed on a section now known as Oak Grove Drive and was co-signed with CA-118 in Pasadena, CA. This is prior to the current CA-118 and I-210 freeways being built in Pasadena. 

Quote from: bing101 on April 16, 2024, 05:00:51 PMhttps://www.socalregion.com/highways/socal_unsigned/foothill_fwy/

Here is another one I-210 used to be signed on a section now known as Oak Grove Drive and was co-signed with CA-118 in Pasadena, CA. This is prior to the current CA-118 and I-210 freeways being built in Pasadena.

Other than that 1971 freeway map showing 210 on the route, I don't know if there is any credible evidence that the road was actually signed in-the-field as part of that interstate.

Quote from: TheStranger on April 16, 2024, 04:34:06 PM

Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on April 16, 2024, 12:38:46 PMFREEWAY PLANNED AS INTERSTATE, BUILT AS FREEWAY UNDER ANOTHER DESIGNATION OR AS A DIFFERENT TYPE OF ROAD

VA 164 (was requested as I-164 but turned down)

Interestingly, the Wikipedia article on VA 164 suggests otherwise, citing AASHTO minutes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_State_Route_164

"Despite its numbering, AASHTO has no record of Virginia ever making a formal application to add SR 164 to the Interstate system from 1968 through the 1978 opening of the Elizabeth River bridge.[6] The still-unbuilt road was first referred to as SR 164 in 1971.[7]"

He probably based his comment off of this:

http://www.vahighways.com/route-log/i164.htm

So Will was half-right.  It was never formally requested as "I-164", but VDOT did request mileage for the corridor as part of the 1968 Interstate mileage addition.

For that last category, I-895 south of I-695 was never part of the system.

Quote from: froggie on April 16, 2024, 06:39:01 PM

Quote from: TheStranger on April 16, 2024, 04:34:06 PM

Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on April 16, 2024, 12:38:46 PMFREEWAY PLANNED AS INTERSTATE, BUILT AS FREEWAY UNDER ANOTHER DESIGNATION OR AS A DIFFERENT TYPE OF ROAD

VA 164 (was requested as I-164 but turned down)

Interestingly, the Wikipedia article on VA 164 suggests otherwise, citing AASHTO minutes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_State_Route_164

"Despite its numbering, AASHTO has no record of Virginia ever making a formal application to add SR 164 to the Interstate system from 1968 through the 1978 opening of the Elizabeth River bridge.[6] The still-unbuilt road was first referred to as SR 164 in 1971.[7]"

He probably based his comment off of this:

http://www.vahighways.com/route-log/i164.htm

So Will was half-right.  It was never formally requested as "I-164", but VDOT did request mileage for the corridor as part of the 1968 Interstate mileage addition.

Since I'm usually wrong about things, I'll take it. :-D

Well maybe not formal, but signed in the field, however BL I-95 between its northern terminus and the Cape Fear was signed as I-95 until the Fayetteville Bypass was built.

The current directional interchange at Business I-95's northern end was built with the bypass and had no interchange, but a seamless flow between both freeways. So NCDOT might of signed that for continuity even though I-95 did end where the future I-95 would be built.  It was a de facto temporary signage without the placecards stating it's temporary status.

FREEWAY PLANNED AS INTERSTATE, BUILT AS FREEWAY UNDER ANOTHER DESIGNATION OR AS A DIFFERENT TYPE OF ROAD

NY 17 was going to be requested as I-92.  See the 1974 AAASHO application to truncate US 15.  They defined I-92 to be all of what is to be I-86.

WAS SIGNED AS ONE INTERSTATE, THEN DEPRECATED, THEN REJOINED THE SYSTEM

I-40 through Greensboro

Wasn't I-64 in Hampton, VA signed originally as VA 168 before the interstate mileage was determined?  I distinctly remember someone on here, I believe Froggie mentioned it was built for VA 168 and not for I-64.

I do remember briefly that I-64 did have its own exit numbers that were single digits in the 70's and up to the mid eighties VA 168 was co- signed with I-64 up to Williamsburg where the freeway ended and defaulted into a divided four lane highway with intersections from Williamsburg to Toano signed solely as VA 168.

Quote from: roadman65 on April 16, 2024, 08:52:09 PMWasn't I-64 in Hampton, VA signed originally as VA 168 before the interstate mileage was determined?  I distinctly remember someone on here, I believe Froggie mentioned it was built for VA 168 and not for I-64.

I do remember briefly that I-64 did have its own exit numbers that were single digits in the 70's and up to the mid eighties VA 168 was co- signed with I-64 up to Williamsburg where the freeway ended and defaulted into a divided four lane highway with intersections from Williamsburg to Toano signed solely as VA 168.

Yes...here is a Feb 1958 pic of what is now I-64 at US 258.  I-64 was assigned to VA 168 from here to the HRBT in Feb 1959.  I-64 was fully opened in the Williamsburg area in Aug 1978.  1979 was the last official map to show VA 168 north of the HRBT.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vahighways.com%2Fmapscans%2F168at258-feb58.jpg&hash=158562bb3403e19b60713faea17ed6c8984d3205)
Virginia Hwys Bulletin

Could WI-57 count? No freeway segment exists, but its huge interchange with I-43 is an artifact of the plan to once route I-57 (43) over it.

Quote from: mrose on April 17, 2024, 09:19:54 AMCould WI-57 count? No freeway segment exists, but its huge interchange with I-43 is an artifact of the plan to once route I-57 (43) over it.

The Stadium North freeway from Milwaukee was to end there with a planned bridge to go under the I-43 bridge over WI 57, thus the height of the bridge. Of course, that project was long cancelled.

The WI 57 portion was never signed as an Interstate.

Quote from: Big John on April 17, 2024, 09:26:27 AM

Quote from: mrose on April 17, 2024, 09:19:54 AMCould WI-57 count? No freeway segment exists, but its huge interchange with I-43 is an artifact of the plan to once route I-57 (43) over it.

The Stadium North freeway from Milwaukee was to end there with a planned bridge to go under the I-43 bridge over WI 57, thus the height of the bridge. Of course, that project was long cancelled.

The WI 57 portion was never signed as an Interstate.

IIRC, present-day I-43 south of that interchange was originally intended to be 'I-57' and the stadium freeway south of there and present-day I-43 to the north were never intended to be interstates (a reroute of US 141 to the south?).

Mike