News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered from the forum database changes made in Fall 2023. Let us know if you discover anymore.

Main Menu

Why was US 104?

Started by Alps, October 23, 2020, 11:15:07 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Alps

I've read the history about 104's formation, as much as I could find, and I haven't found anyone explaining the factors that led to its request, numbering, or approval. Am I looking in the wrong place or is this a fun research project?


kurumi

It seems there were a few "oddball" US routes created in 1934/1935 including US 44 and US 202. I wonder if 104 was part of that group, or it was just coincidental timing. Perhaps US 811 would have made more sense.
My first SF/horror short story collection is available: "Young Man, Open Your Winter Eye"

abqtraveler

Quote from: kurumi on October 23, 2020, 12:59:19 PM
It seems there were a few "oddball" US routes created in 1934/1935 including US 44 and US 202. I wonder if 104 was part of that group, or it was just coincidental timing. Perhaps US 811 would have made more sense.

US-202 makes at least some degree of sense, as its northern terminus is at its parent route (US-2) in Bangor, Maine. Personally though, I would have made US-202 a continuation of US-13, as the two routes roughly parallel each other between 13's northern terminus in New Castle, Delaware and US-13's northern terminus near Levittown, Pennsylvania.

US-44 is just way out of the US highway grid. US-28, which was formerly used in Oregon until 1952 could be a possibility for US-44, but it would still fall north of US-22, and out of the normal US highway grid. So another thought, making US-44 a 3-digit spur (maybe US-105 or US-107)? 

US-46 in New Jersey is out of the grid as well, but the story there is that US-46 was added later to the US highway system to connect to I-80 in Pennsylvania while New Jersey's portion of I-80 was still under construction.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

baugh17

Quote from: Alps on October 23, 2020, 11:15:07 AM
I've read the history about 104's formation, as much as I could find, and I haven't found anyone explaining the factors that led to its request, numbering, or approval. Am I looking in the wrong place or is this a fun research project?

I do sometimes wonder if there was a grander plan to extend it eastward across the Adirondacks or Mohawk Valley to meet US 4 at some point.  It did end at US 11 in Maple View, but I could see it extending east via the rest of present day NY 104, NY 13 south to Camden, NY 69 east to Rome, NY 365 east to Barneveld, NY 28 north/east across the Adirondacks to Warrensburg, US 9 south to Queensbury, and NY 149 east to Fort Ann where it would connect with US 4 (I know there are some other viable possibilities, but this was the first one that came to mind).

Alps

US 44 makes no sense as a US highway at all but that's a separate topic. I've never seen any evidence of connecting 104 to 4.

usends

Quote from: Alps on October 23, 2020, 11:15:07 AM
I've read the history about 104's formation, as much as I could find, and I haven't found anyone explaining the factors that led to its request, numbering, or approval. Am I looking in the wrong place or is this a fun research project?
I've wondered about this too; as I state on my US 104 page it seems very out of character for NY to have requested an intra-state US route.

I did a little poking around in the AASHTO database, and while it does not provide answers to all of the questions, it does include a few interesting bits of info.  Here is the link, but if that doesn't work, just search 1934 and choose the one document listed for NY. 

To summarize: it seems apparent that NY requested a US route along "the shore of Lake Ontario".  AASHO obliged, and then further suggested that NY extend US 220 northward to connect with US 104 at Oswego (but NY dismissed that idea).  There is even an AASHO-provided map included in the documentation.  But unfortunately no info about how they arrived at the number 104, nor about why NY -- which was generally opposed to the US route system -- nevertheless wanted US 104.

There is also some interesting correspondence with regard to the creation of US 202.
usends.com - US highway endpoints, photos, maps, and history

dkblake

Quote from: usends on October 23, 2020, 06:27:16 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 23, 2020, 11:15:07 AM
I've read the history about 104's formation, as much as I could find, and I haven't found anyone explaining the factors that led to its request, numbering, or approval. Am I looking in the wrong place or is this a fun research project?
I've wondered about this too; as I state on my US 104 page it seems very out of character for NY to have requested an intra-state US route.

I did a little poking around in the AASHTO database, and while it does not provide answers to all of the questions, it does include a few interesting bits of info.  Here is the link, but if that doesn't work, just search 1934 and choose the one document listed for NY. 

To summarize: it seems apparent that NY requested a US route along "the shore of Lake Ontario".  AASHO obliged, and then further suggested that NY extend US 220 northward to connect with US 104 at Oswego (but NY dismissed that idea).  There is even an AASHO-provided map included in the documentation.  But unfortunately no info about how they arrived at the number 104, nor about why NY -- which was generally opposed to the US route system -- nevertheless wanted US 104.

There is also some interesting correspondence with regard to the creation of US 202.

It's weird to be sure, though a pleasant ride from Rochester to Mexico. Trying to reason it pragmatically: maybe the road was considered too small/intrastate for a 2-digit number. Then it's an east-west route that only intersects north-south routes (or, in the case of US 62, marked north-south there), so x11, x15, or x62 don't make sense. x20 also doesn't make sense since 104 runs parallel and ~25 miles north of 20. So the solution might have been to just draw an imaginary line from the end of US 4 and say "104? Sure."
2dis clinched: 8, 17, 69(original), 71, 72, 78, 81, 84(E), 86(E), 88(E), 89, 91, 93, 97

Mob-rule: http://www.mob-rule.com/user-gifs/USA/dblake.gif

webny99

Quote from: dkblake on October 24, 2020, 10:45:51 PM
It's weird to be sure, though a pleasant ride from Rochester to Mexico.

... as long as it's not a summer weekend. In that case it's an absolute slog and you'll be wishing they built the other half of the super-2, especially from Williamson to Wolcott.

The Ghostbuster


Mapmikey

Quote from: usends on October 23, 2020, 06:27:16 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 23, 2020, 11:15:07 AM
I've read the history about 104's formation, as much as I could find, and I haven't found anyone explaining the factors that led to its request, numbering, or approval. Am I looking in the wrong place or is this a fun research project?
I've wondered about this too; as I state on my US 104 page it seems very out of character for NY to have requested an intra-state US route.

I did a little poking around in the AASHTO database, and while it does not provide answers to all of the questions, it does include a few interesting bits of info.  Here is the link, but if that doesn't work, just search 1934 and choose the one document listed for NY. 

To summarize: it seems apparent that NY requested a US route along "the shore of Lake Ontario".  AASHO obliged, and then further suggested that NY extend US 220 northward to connect with US 104 at Oswego (but NY dismissed that idea).  There is even an AASHO-provided map included in the documentation.  But unfortunately no info about how they arrived at the number 104, nor about why NY -- which was generally opposed to the US route system -- nevertheless wanted US 104.

There is also some interesting correspondence with regard to the creation of US 202.

In the 1933 document, AASHO was questioning why US 4 went south to US 20 on NY maps when Glen Falls was the official endpoint.  In the back and forth, AASHO suggested rerouting US 4 to run Ft. Ann, Northville, Lake Pleasant, Rome, Fulton, Rochester to Niagara Falls.

New York objected but not really for philosophical reasons.  They said a large sections of this routing wasn't ready for prime time and wouldn't be for a number of years.


Alps

Quote from: Mapmikey on October 27, 2020, 08:31:03 PM
Quote from: usends on October 23, 2020, 06:27:16 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 23, 2020, 11:15:07 AM
I've read the history about 104's formation, as much as I could find, and I haven't found anyone explaining the factors that led to its request, numbering, or approval. Am I looking in the wrong place or is this a fun research project?
I've wondered about this too; as I state on my US 104 page it seems very out of character for NY to have requested an intra-state US route.

I did a little poking around in the AASHTO database, and while it does not provide answers to all of the questions, it does include a few interesting bits of info.  Here is the link, but if that doesn't work, just search 1934 and choose the one document listed for NY. 

To summarize: it seems apparent that NY requested a US route along "the shore of Lake Ontario".  AASHO obliged, and then further suggested that NY extend US 220 northward to connect with US 104 at Oswego (but NY dismissed that idea).  There is even an AASHO-provided map included in the documentation.  But unfortunately no info about how they arrived at the number 104, nor about why NY -- which was generally opposed to the US route system -- nevertheless wanted US 104.

There is also some interesting correspondence with regard to the creation of US 202.

In the 1933 document, AASHO was questioning why US 4 went south to US 20 on NY maps when Glen Falls was the official endpoint.  In the back and forth, AASHO suggested rerouting US 4 to run Ft. Ann, Northville, Lake Pleasant, Rome, Fulton, Rochester to Niagara Falls.

New York objected but not really for philosophical reasons.  They said a large sections of this routing wasn't ready for prime time and wouldn't be for a number of years.


Interesting that that was a thing. I feel like NY 29 would have been a much more "ready" corridor if they could have lived with US 4 going south a bit. (29-67-5-49 seems straight.)



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.