Why is there an interstate THERE but not one___?

[SeriesE]

The pointless interstate routes are just political brownie points. Sure, build an interstate grade facility over the corridor, but it doesn't need an interstate designation.

I disagree with this.  I think interstate grade highways of significant length should have interstate designations.  That's why the system as a whole is important.

They're typically in-place upgrades of existing highways,  such as US routes. I fail to see how an US route number is less serviceable than an interstate number.

US routes, for better or worse, vary greatly in quality and design standard. Putting interstate shields on portions of US routes that meet interstate guidelines for a decent distance and connect to the rest of the interstate system serves as a reassurance to the public that the road they're about to get on is going to maintain freeway standard.

Take I-22 as an example, which was almost entirely an in-place upgrade of US 78. In Georgia and eastern Alabama, US 78 is largely a slow, winding, rural 2-lane road. If you live in Georgia and have that association with US 78 already, how else are you supposed to know that the Memphis-Birmingham part of 78 is actually a long-distance continuous interstate-grade freeway? If I'm in Birmingham and I get on freeway US 78, if I haven't studied a good map before, for all I know it's going to downgrade back to a typical rural 2-lane once I get out of the greater metro area. (Also note that Google Maps does not count as a "good map" for the purpose of this exercise as their current color scheme makes it rather difficult to distinguish freeways from arterials most of the time.)

The general public just follows whatever the GPS tells them to go.

[US 89]

Even with GPS - Google Maps will usually give you multiple routings. If there are two routes that take more or less the exact same time, and one of them is interstate, all else being equal most drivers are going to take that option.

This also has applications beyond GPS usage though - if I get the sense that my 4-lane road is going to downgrade, I'm going to drive a hell of a lot more aggressively and pass as many trucks as I can... because I don't want to get stuck behind them on the 2-lane portions where passing them is going to be a bitch. If I know the freeway is going to last me all the way through, I can drive a lot more relaxed.

There is always value in giving drivers as much information as possible without being obnoxious. In the US, the interstate shield is a well-recognized marker of high quality freeways.

[SEWIGuy]

I know this is circular logic, but I just feel that it is important to sign interstate grade highways of significant length as interstates. 

[sprjus4]

^ All of this "we shouldn't sign US highways as interstates just because they're freeways"  gives me the sense that the same people saying this believe the interstate system just shouldn't exist then. Because that's exactly what you're saying.

[thspfc]

^ All of this "we shouldn't sign US highways as interstates just because they're freeways"  gives me the sense that the same people saying this believe the interstate system just shouldn't exist then. Because that's exactly what you're saying.

Some people just don't like change. Notice that no one ever has a problem with the "original" Interstates - it's just the ones that have been commissioned since 1980-ish that they have a problem with. It's the same reason why a lot of people on this forum don't like roundabouts, despite the overwhelming evidence that they are a safer and more efficient alternative to signalized intersections.

[hotdogPi]

Notice that no one ever has a problem with the "original" Interstates - it's just the ones that have been commissioned since 1980-ish that they have a problem with.

People on this forum have been calling for I-82 to be renumbered to an odd number.

[thspfc]

Notice that no one ever has a problem with the "original" Interstates - it's just the ones that have been commissioned since 1980-ish that they have a problem with.

People on this forum have been calling for I-82 to be renumbered to an odd number.

That's a completely different discussion. I haven't seen anyone say that I-82's corridor shouldn't be an Interstate because previously existing highways could take on the number of the freeway rather than it having an Interstate designation.

[Tom958]

I always thought it was a mistake to omit Memphis-Birmingham from the original Interstate system. Honestly, the futures of both cities looked significantly brighter in 1956 than they did later on.

As far as why I-22 doesn't connect to the other Interstates at Memphis, the reason is obvious: now, building the part in Tennessee would have to perform better in an alternatives analysis than a slew of more cost-effective alternatives. Back in the day, it wouldn't have: they just built the Interstates as freeways regardless of cost. And, of course, the cost would've been a lot less back then, before the corridor got all built up.

Of course, Memphis is infamous for the failure to complete I-40 through Overton Park and the surrounding neighborhoods. However, it wasn't a shortage of money that caused that. In fact, Tennessee completed the southern part of I-240 and the connections to I-55 and I-40 east very early on, allowing I-40 and I-55 traffic to pass through Memphis without stopping by the early sixties. IMO, if I-22 had been in the original Interstate system, the short segment in Tennessee would've been completed just as expeditiously.

[Tom958]

As much as I ignore I-22, I wouldn't say it's useless. But why is there a Slidell-Meridian interstate (I-59) instead of a Gulfport-Jackson interstate (US 49).

New Orleans to points northeast.

I could be wrong, but I believe that much of US 49 between Gulfport and Jackson had already been four-laned by the time the Interstate program was enacted, and thus wasn't in need of replacement by a new freeway. This interchange on US 49 in Hattiesburg was completed in 1946.

I might be cursed and reviled for saying this, but traffic volumes on I-59 north of Gadsden are low enough that they could've been handled by a lesser highway.

[SkyPesos]

As much as I ignore I-22, I wouldn't say it's useless. But why is there a Slidell-Meridian interstate (I-59) instead of a Gulfport-Jackson interstate (US 49).

New Orleans to points northeast.

I could be wrong, but I believe that much of US 49 between Gulfport and Jackson had already been four-laned by the time the Interstate program was enacted, and thus wasn't in need of replacement by a new freeway. This interchange on US 49 in Hattiesburg was completed in 1946.

I might be cursed and reviled for saying this, but traffic volumes on I-59 north of Gadsden are low enough that they could've been handled by a lesser highway.

From what it looks like, there are two parallel SW-NE corridors from New Orleans to the Northeast. One of them is I-59/81, which was mentioned. The other is I-65/85, and can be reached from New Orleans by going a bit east on I-10. Not sure which one is more used, but the 65/85 one hits more major cities like Atlanta and Charlotte, and dumps you at the southern end of the busy I-95 northeast corridor.

[Henry]

The grid is not perfect (in fact, far from it), but there will always be new additions to the system where it's warranted. Like take the Phoenix-Las Vegas gap, for example. That was one of the most notorious missing links, although it's easy to see why, given that neither city was even half the size it is now. Now I-11 will connect to both cities someday, even if it's not going to be a direct routing. We can bitch and moan about the fact that many of these gaps exist, but most of those will never be filled in due to terrain (for example, San Francisco to Vegas would have to deal with Death Valley and/or the Sierra Nevadas), opposition from various groups (the east ends of I-70 and I-270 in Baltimore and Washington, respectively) and cost (I-49 South, with the viaducts to cross over the many bayous). In other words, despite what the feds may tell you, the Interstate system will never be complete.

[Tom958]

How could I forget? The greatest WTF original Interstate in the east had to have been I-16. Sure, it's nice to have, but even now a high-quality four-lane highway with bypasses could handle the traffic on it. Beyond that, it's highly arguable at this point that it would've been better for an Atlanta-Savannah Interstate to branch off of I-20 rather than the hopelessly-crowded I-75.

[Terry Shea]

^ All of this "we shouldn't sign US highways as interstates just because they're freeways"  gives me the sense that the same people saying this believe the interstate system just shouldn't exist then. Because that's exactly what you're saying.

Some people just don't like change. Notice that no one ever has a problem with the "original" Interstates - it's just the ones that have been commissioned since 1980-ish that they have a problem with. It's the same reason why a lot of people on this forum don't like roundabouts, despite the overwhelming evidence that they are a safer and more efficient alternative to signalized intersections.

I hate roundabouts!  Especially ones built for absolutely no reason like this one.  https://roundabouts.kittelson.com/Roundabouts/Details/1198#  There's nothing on the off drive but an employee parking lot which typically has 3 or 4 cars parked in it and and a dumpster further down the drive.  The main road, Pfeiffer Woods Dr., probably has a daily traffic count of no more than a few hundred cars.  OTOH, there's a roundabout north of Detroit on an exit off from M-53 that has cars flying through it at 70 MPH or greater, bumper to bumper!  If roundabouts are indeed safer, it's no doubt because people like me will do whatever is necessary to avoid these idiotic, nightmarish atrocities!

[SEWIGuy]

Counterpoint:  roundabouts are by and large fine.  Though I live in Green Bay so I drive through them pretty regularly.

[Terry Shea]

Counterpoint:  roundabouts are by and large fine.  Though I live in Green Bay so I drive through them pretty regularly.

Thanks for the warning.  I'll avoid Green Bay.  I'll never go back to Carmel, Indiana either!

[US 89]

How could I forget? The greatest WTF original Interstate in the east had to have been I-16. Sure, it's nice to have, but even now a high-quality four-lane highway with bypasses could handle the traffic on it. Beyond that, it's highly arguable at this point that it would've been better for an Atlanta-Savannah Interstate to branch off of I-20 rather than the hopelessly-crowded I-75.

Ehh... I just drove I-16 and there was a pretty good amount of traffic on it. I suppose if it were built to a standard like GA 5/515 up north it would be passable, but I can see that getting crowded quickly. There may also be comparison bias at play here - the N/S interstates at either end (75 and 95) are two of the most notoriously crowded interstate highways in the system, so even a moderately-trafficked 16 will feel empty compared to those.

16 is also valuable for the entire GA/SC coast because it can run contraflow and evacuate people much more efficiently if a hurricane threatens the area. As far as I know, you can’t do that with a surface street.

Agreed though that today’s Savannah would have been better served by an interstate coming from 20 at Augusta than 75 at Macon. The population of Florida (and hence I-75 traffic volumes) was a lot lower back in the 50s.

[webny99]

How could I forget? The greatest WTF original Interstate in the east had to have been I-16. Sure, it's nice to have, but even now a high-quality four-lane highway with bypasses could handle the traffic on it. Beyond that, it's highly arguable at this point that it would've been better for an Atlanta-Savannah Interstate to branch off of I-20 rather than the hopelessly-crowded I-75.

Ehh... I just drove I-16 and there was a pretty good amount of traffic on it. I suppose if it were built to a standard like GA 5/515 up north it would be passable, but I can see that getting crowded quickly.  ...

Agreed though that today's Savannah would have been better served by an interstate coming from 20 at Augusta than 75 at Macon. The population of Florida (and hence I-75 traffic volumes) was a lot lower back in the 50s.

An Augusta-Savannah interstate route would be fine for traffic coming from Atlanta, but what about Macon, Columbus, and Montgomery? That would leave all of southern Georgia with no east/west interstates. If anything, you could probably argue for an extension of I-16 westward along the US 80 corridor.

[hotdogPi]

If anything, you could probably argue for an extension of I-16 westward along the US 80 corridor.

The proposed I-14 is doing exactly that, plus Macon-Augusta.

[SeriesE]

^ All of this "we shouldn't sign US highways as interstates just because they're freeways"  gives me the sense that the same people saying this believe the interstate system just shouldn't exist then. Because that's exactly what you're saying.

Frankly, there's no need for two separate national numbering systems. Either discontinue the US highway system, or the US highway numbers should've been moved onto today's interstates and the substandard/not feasible to upgrade routes be downgraded to state highways.

[roadman65]

No, as in the east they are important.  Plus, US 50 in Nevada could never be an interstate without major construction and as a US Highway there it works fine as a US designation.

[US20IL64]

New to this board, but not sure why 'freeway' term is used so much? To me, it is same as expressway, highway, and opposite of 'tollway'. Seen some call tolled Interstates a 'freeway'. Chicago may have Bishop Ford Freeway, but no one calls it that locally.

Depends on Metro area whether limited access highways are called freeway or expressway. Just my 2 cents.

[SkyPesos]

New to this board, but not sure why 'freeway' term is used so much? To me, it is same as expressway, highway, and opposite of 'tollway'. Seen some call tolled Interstates a 'freeway'. Chicago may have Bishop Ford Freeway, but no one calls it that locally.

Depends on Metro area whether limited access highways are called freeway or expressway. Just my 2 cents.

On this forum, a freeway means a completely controlled access highway, while an expressway is also a divided highway, but can also allow for some at grade intersections.

[SeriesE]

New to this board, but not sure why 'freeway' term is used so much? To me, it is same as expressway, highway, and opposite of 'tollway'. Seen some call tolled Interstates a 'freeway'. Chicago may have Bishop Ford Freeway, but no one calls it that locally.

Depends on Metro area whether limited access highways are called freeway or expressway. Just my 2 cents.

Freeway and expressway have distinct definitions per the MUTCD. Freeways are fully limited access (fully grade separated with no driveway access), expressways are partially limited access (at-grade intersections and driveways permitted)

[sprjus4]

^ And will add freeway means free of obstructions, no intersections, etc. It has nothing to do with comparing to whether a road is tolled or not.

[jeffandnicole]

New to this board, but not sure why 'freeway' term is used so much? To me, it is same as expressway, highway, and opposite of 'tollway'. Seen some call tolled Interstates a 'freeway'. Chicago may have Bishop Ford Freeway, but no one calls it that locally.

Depends on Metro area whether limited access highways are called freeway or expressway. Just my 2 cents.

Many people on the forum use the official terms, and in their areas the transportation departments may use them as well. But in various parts of the country, many people will use different terms.